My negative inclination was because reporters such as Rhoden jump in an out of thoroughbred racing coverage during the Triple Crown of spring and early summer and could care less bout it the rest of the year.
This is their prerogative, and nobody ever said life was fair.
Given its timing, I could have dismissed the commentary as Rhoden being opportunistic, again injecting himself into the Kentucky Derby storyline as he did last year when invited to appear on national television to lend perspective to the Eight Belles tragedy and talked about the indefensible practice of racing thoroughbreds.
In the piece Rhoden asks: “Are breakdowns the outgrowth of a meat-grinder industry, or evidence of a horse population spread too thin?”
On an intellectual level, this is akin to asking “Have you stopped beating your wife?”
Rhoden’s story talked about the United States House of Representatives Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection hearing last June that on its face wanted to help remedy racing’s problems: the on-track death of horses, over breeding, and over-medicating.
All the Subcommittee did was to effectively put the industry on notice--a good thing--that it must clean its own house over the government will clean it for them. The legislators didn’t seem to be grandstanding, at least not in the same fashion as is being seen today in the AIG scenario.
While it’s true the industry remains culpable with respect to over breeding and over medicating--even after making substantive changes subsequent to last year’s Derby events--the element that seemed disingenuous was there was no recognition of the fact that accidents can happen.
By definition, wrongdoing is determined by intent. Do reasonable people believe that the intent is for horsemen and women to inflict harm on their animals? Indeed, isn’t the opposite true?
Rhoden is right about this: The Thoroughbred Safety Committee and Racing Medication and Testing Consortium has yet to address the practice of giving racehorses the legal drugs that allow them to perform when not physically at one hundred percent.
He rightfully acknowledged, too, that spokespersons for the American Association of Equine Practitioners believe the industry needs to rethink the use of legal drugs for racing and training since they can mask the finding of veterinary inspection, that medicines should be confined for the treatment of diagnosed disease.
Rhoden made the same point that’s always made whenever horses die from something other than natural causes, that human athletes who suffer serious injury or worse voluntarily do so while no one speaks up for horses who cannot speak for themselves.
Actually, there are hundreds of people within the industry that speak for the horses, caring for them while they race and after their racing days are finished, ignoring the fact that racing is the reason they were born in the first place and actually enjoy running.
Horses were bred to carry the early settlers over the most rugged terrain to settle the West. Nobody believed that to be cruel or unusual. Animals have been serving man from the beginning and never was that somehow considered immoral.
Beyond being bred for commerce, they still serve the general public by helping to preserve the green space that enables the planet to survive--and that’s not a stretch.
I agree with Rhoden that watching horses get injured and die is unusual punishment. But the act of racing is not cruel in and of itself. Only the practices that keep them racing unnaturally are, and need to be addressed.
Progress up until the Eight Belles tragedy was mostly non-existent. But changes are being made, albeit slowly. But it takes time to undo the selfish practices of the past as today‘s economists can attest.
I would have been more impressed had Rhoden gone after members of the general public that steal horses, kill them for the meat, or sell them to the horse killers in other countries for the same purpose. This practice currently is epidemic in wide expanses of South Florida.
In recent months, according to a report Wednesday on the local NBC affiliate, hundreds of horses have been stolen from farms or private residences and killed, either sold to horse killers and transported to Mexico or killed on the spot for the meat.
These killers leave the ribbed carcasses, heads, manes and tails in the fields of southwest Dade, or they transport them to the Everglades for disposal. A disproportionate number of those killed have unusual markings or color, indicating there might be a thrill element involved. It was awful.
There was no mention of any well meaning people or organizations that have come along to save these horses. Now that would be a crusade worth fighting, a practice that deserves all the negative publicity it would get. Someone should drop a dime to the New York Times.
21 Mar 2009 at 12:48 am | #
JRP,
One thing is never mentioned in the conversation when the subject, “Who speaks for the horses,” comes up.
That is, you can’t “make” a horse do anything, at least not for a sustained period of time. Horses that don’t want to train or race demonstrate their unwillingness by exhibiting what we call being “sour.”
Anyone who has ever worked with animals for a sustained period of time knows that, for the most part, caretakers succeed best when they get the animal to do what it wants to do naturally. Thoroughbreds have uncounted generations of breeding to run fast. That’s what they want to do. If they don’t, we can’t make them.
That presumes, as Rhoden covered, that we don’t give them medications which mask issues which might trick them into running. And that is where it is incumbent upon humans to defend the animal.
21 Mar 2009 at 03:15 am | #
A racing thoroughbred is nothing more than a piece of paper, a stock certificate. During that time, it is cared for better than many people in the third world. Rhoden is missing the point if he thinks humans will do anything to devalue their possession. Value enhancement is a very difficult thing to regulate; just ask the president of the United States. Severe punishment for those who lie, steal or cheat, invented at the dawn of time, remains the best deterrent available. Racing, like everything else, needs the right rules, and a commissioner to enforce them.
21 Mar 2009 at 07:49 am | #
http://www.clockerbob.com/chapter3.html
The vet and his assistant came strolling down the shed row toward Eddie’s stall. Like a Vegas cigarette girl, the vet’s assistant was carrying a porcelain tray, which contained the vet’s small bottles of medicine. “Eddie!” the vet said. Eddie poked his head from the stall and they shook hands. The vet grabbed a needle and began rattling glass as he searched through the bottles on his portable tray. Eddie’s eyes widen as he said, “Make him a winner, doc.”
21 Mar 2009 at 08:31 am | #
You should know better than that Mr. Pricci!
21 Mar 2009 at 09:23 am | #
My reply to Mr. William Rhoden,
I am a devout fan of horse racing, an active bettor, a columnist and author of several horse racing books. I dearly love to watch the sleek, stunningly beautiful Thoroughbreds as they perform countless feats of speed and endurance.
I love the racetrack because the act of handicapping horse races is the single most intellectually challenging game I have encountered in a lifetime of playing chess, bridge, backgammon, poker, gin rummy and quite a few other games that failed to make the cut.
I bet only on horse races, not on baseball, football, boxing or the stock market; I bet on horse races because 99 and 44/100 percent of the races I witnessed have been conducted without collusion. And, I bet on them because the degree of difficulty to pick winners often is matched by payoffs commensurate with the research and clear headed thinking involved.
But, I hate drugs in racing. I hate them in racing as much as I despise them in baseball, Olympic track and Field, world class cycling and in the locker rooms of our high school and college athletes. At its core, drugs in athletic forums pose dangers to athletes and they corrupt the idea of a level playing field for fans who root for their favorites or have the legal license to wager on a fair and square outcome.
I am not the only member of the so called racing press who feels this way and has expressed it in hundreds of forums. But, we are a dying breed, with minimal influence, thanks to newspaper’s general abdication of the journalistic imperative to cover this mega billion dollar sport/game in favor of using wire service summaries and PR releases written by racing officials who remain blind to the number one cause of breakdowns and the collateral loss of public confidence that has eroded the sport’s standing in America.
I applaud you for putting a clear focus on the issue in the New York Times in a non sensationalistic manner. Your column ably sent a message to racing officials to examine how it is failing to see the need to go beyond its improved safety practices.
Any rational human being has to know that nothing less than an end to legalized drugs for racing purposes will save the sport for the future. Analgesic drugs such as Phenalbutazone (’Bute’) and powerful diuretics such as Furosemide (Lasix) may be beneficial as part of a curative medical regimen. But, they do not belong in the competitive arena.
It is indisputable that Bute can mute a horse’s natural warning system (pain) to a minor hoof or bone injury which can develop into a catastrophic breakdown under the stress of a race. Lasix may flush out excess liquids and dramatically impact the pulmonary system; yet, its long term effects are not fully known by veterinary science 30 years after it first was unethically used to screen detection of illegal drugs in post race urine samples.
At the bottom line, do we need endless commissions or studies to know that drugs can be dangerous to the horses we love to watch compete? Instead of resisting a complete ban on drugs in the game, American racing officials should be in the front lines fighting to get rid of them, if for nothing else, than the survival of a great sport.
Steve Davidowitz
Author of The Best and Worst of Thoroughbred Racing,DRF Press, 2007.
21 Mar 2009 at 10:09 am | #
Well said Mr. Davidowitz and MR. Rhoden. Mr. Pricci wimped out.
Racing powerbrokers need anabolic steroids and the juice which transform claimers into Grade I stakes winners. They need to grow a pair then get severely whipped into action ASAP. Common sense (and balls) would make racing starts this new crop of two year olds completely off drugs. However, it will take years of hand-wringing to get a single crucial reform passed, that is after racing powerbrokers have formed hundreds of committees, sub-committees, study groups, have had meetings behind closed-doors, porky junkets and dinners, ordered scientific research studies because stats (often biased) are far more praised than using basic common sense and knowledge. Racing is excellent at blaming the track surface for a high kill-rate instead of blaming people who control horses and what is done to them (owners, trainers, vets, jockeys, track managers, racing officials, etc.). Humans cause most breakdowns. Racing is paralyzed while its horses get hurt and die each day and while disgusted horse lovers and fans run away from the morbid spectacle.
21 Mar 2009 at 12:21 pm | #
Pricci, Horseracing cannot answer criticism by saying there is something out there worse for horses than racing. Its response must be honesty and clarity. It must include proposals for change, and actual implementation of change. So far, we have seen a lot of proposals. But the implementation has been slow going.
The public has the right to ask questions and recieve answers rather than being dodged. Racing is wrong to believe animal rights activists are its largest critics. Fans, rescues, horse lovers, even those in the industry distressed by what they have seen, are by far the biggest critics of the sport because they see the end results when the horses are not treated as they should be!
Racing needs to mend its own fences before worrying about teenage gangsters in south Florida butchering horses. (lets also remember its recent inaction to support the slaughter bills) Enact a nationwide ban on slaughtering racehorses so horses don’t have to wait for the federal ban. Implement a free public database that tracks TB birth to death. Get rid of these steroids - and not just the anabolics. Protect the claimers. Protect horses from plunging down the ranks with obvious issues. Why is their silence about that issue?
There are a lot of great people in the sport. There are so many wonderful rescues that pick up the pieces when the horses are failed. Those people should know that their efforts are applauded. The best way to award their hard work and honesty is to find and punish those who cause problems.
I love horse racing and have watched for over 26 years now. But I won’t settle for 2nd best when it comes to the horses or the people in the sport. Racing has lost fans and popularity. It can bring them back but the path to that goal will require less talk, more action.
21 Mar 2009 at 04:04 pm | #
Horseplayers have great passion and are among the most sophisticated of all sports fans. Thanks one and all for the posts.
As for criticisms that I might have been too soft on both Mr. Rhoden and the industry itself, apparently those who have taken exception are unfamiliar with the tenor of the body of work that appears here.
But it’s all good and I’m thrilled with the level of dialogue the piece engendered.
My only point was that the commentary made by Mr. Rhoden was as exploitative as it was thought provoking.
The Times piece could have been written when those horses at Santa Anita suffered fatal injuries at the end of 2008, or when the same thing occurred a few weeks ago at Aqueduct.
Instead, it appeared when the Kentucky Derby preps began to heat up, making the Eight Belles lead seem timely and empathetic.
Guess I’ve just taken too many strolls around the course.
Thanks again all, for your well reasoned perspective.
JP
22 Mar 2009 at 04:42 am | #
Actually, I think the timing of Rhoden’s article couldn’t have been better - it’s a year on, and nothing serious has been done. And I think it’s a sad indictment of racing that yes, indeed, he could’ve written that story after the breakdowns at Santa Anita, or after the breakdowns at Aqueduct - and he’ll be able to write it again and again, because the breakdowns will not stop until the legal use of race-day medication is ended. Steve Davidowitz is absolutely right, and I applaud him for taking the strong stance. I’ve been doing it, too, but you start to lose enthusiasm when you feel you’re a voice in the wilderness. Thank you, Steve, for knowing I have company.
22 Mar 2009 at 05:41 am | #
FYIs,
A check of the archives came up with this, from an column written last year: “2008: Racing at a Crossroads...”
“It was a time when synthetic surfaces continued to change the face of the sport and provided the impetus for one of the most aesthetically appealing Breeders’ Cups ever, but did little to provide definitive answers relative to horse safety and jockey health concerns. Better had someone in authority advocated a return to hay, oats and water on race day.”
JP
22 Mar 2009 at 08:28 am | #
horse breakdowns are caused by lasix. it has nothing to do with trainer negligence or the way the horse was trained.
22 Mar 2009 at 03:23 pm | #
I apologize. But Mr. Rhoden is impossible to take seriously.
Then again, but for the exception of a few of its gifted writers, so is the present-day New York Times (A paper that in my youth, I revered).
22 Mar 2009 at 04:59 pm | #
You can take R. Rhoden seriously or otherwise. The article he wrote was excellent, and should be taken seriously. I thought this was what we wanted. Serious interest in horse racing. There is point after point here that Mr. Rhoden seems to have figured out that continue to escape the rest of our press.
22 Mar 2009 at 08:37 pm | #
RCI, are you out there? Come in RCI; RMTC do you get a copy on RCI? RMTC? Hello? NTRA? IS anyone there?
25 Mar 2009 at 09:02 am | #
JP,
I’m reminded of the joke about the drunk who looks for his lost car keys half a block away from where it was parked because the light was better there. Sometimes it makes sense even when not imbibing to deliver one’s message when one thinks more people are listening. Rhoden’s timing can’t be faulted on that basis and, as you acknowledged, that message unfortunately still needs sending.
But those of use who read these pages regularly know that when your gut tells you that something seems amiss, maybe we ought to pay attention. What I’d like to hear from Rhoden, and now Drape, are suggestions as to how to create a centralized racing authority. Perhaps they could be more useful by debating the pros and cons of the government’s getting involved to various extents.
wmc,
When do we get to read your reaction to NK’s provocative piece, “Is racing a sport?”
25 Mar 2009 at 09:14 am | #
Indulto, your post takes the cart before the horse. First (I’d) like to hear from Rhoden and Drape how and why we’d need a centralized racing authority (instead of how one should be created, as your post suggests.) What are the advantages and disadvantages of centralization for horse racing. Before jumping off the cliff, I’d like to know. Additionally, there’s the question whether the Drapes and Rhodens should be moving parties in controlling opinion. Rhoden wrote a nice article. Unfortunatly it also plays into the hands of those misguided who think every problem in horse racing relates to drugs, slaughter, whip size, lasix, too much breeding and any of the other many straw men that seem to capture the attention of the public as opposed e.g. to the real causes of racing breakdowns, which primarily involve trainer negligence.
25 Mar 2009 at 09:51 am | #
FB - you raise good points about breakdowns, many times the warning signs are clear when horses drop or continue to underperform their ability..when there is noone to step in and say “enough is enough” the horses have no choice but to continue on. A good retirement plan is in dire need for horses. I’ve seen some come off the track with ankles the size of melons..that is unacceptable as is sending these poor souls off to slaughter.
I do think cortisone needs to go, especially the act of injecting into the joints. That should be reserved for sick horses who are not going to be asked to run anytime soon. They also waste calcium and decrease bone density - geldings often have lower bone density because they have been desexed. They also tend to have more starts. Could be a recipe for trouble, microfractures like we see in orthoporitic people?
A national body could implement the recommendations set forth by the Welfare and Safety Summit - track specs, shoeing etc..that could be a good step forward.
Los Al loses 50 a year. TB running all out on that tiny bull ring track, and for these horses it is the bottom of the line 2K Claiming. Just helped one out of there last month who had not hit the board in nearly a year at the bottom. He once was a 6F record holder at GGF. Finger Lakes also has low level claiming, but an exceptional retirement program. I don’t know their numbers, but I am quite certain they are a lot lower than Los Al.
Racing knows where its problem areas are, the options are to fix them or continue to lose its fans. Certainly the last few months have shown that shredded rubber tracks do not solve all the issues!
A lot of people believe that without external pressure the sport would stagnate and not implement the neccessary changes. Hopefully now they realize the public is not going to let up and they will step up and take this sport back to its glory days.
25 Mar 2009 at 12:32 pm | #
FB - Actually, I guess I’m one of the misguided. The list of problems in your post does pretty much sum up what’s wrong with U.S. racing. But I’m only a trainer, so I guess I would be one to put lasix, other drugs and overbreeding (of horses who all ran on lasix) as the primary problems. Sounds like you need a new trainer.
25 Mar 2009 at 12:54 pm | #
Hey G! How’s France? We can have a lasix debate some time. Although I’d win, but, maybe you’ll surprise me. Seriously though, if we’re going to talk about breakdowns at hardened U.S. tracks, do we do our horses a disservice by confusing the real causes. The poster who noted cortico steroids, and of course pre-race bute--those obviously are concerns. But, it’s fairly well known by trainers this side of the Atlantic that the break down/injury rate has specific causes involving lack of appropriate training. Take Beethoven as one recent e.g.. Three weeks of zero breezing and they send him out to do a :59 and change. Ooops. Injured. This is the sort of mindlessness that is inflicted on horses every single day. Invite anyone to take a close look at the training programs of 8 Belles and Barbaro. There is research that 95% of catastrophic breakdowns have pre-existing and undiscovered causes. This basic problem, which is systemic, has little to nothing to do with the list of my prior post, and also is what should be getting the attention. Rhoden inferred the injury summit recommends missed their mark. I agree.
26 Mar 2009 at 06:20 am | #
fb0252,
I like to learn, so maybe you can educate me, and others as well.
1) Lasix is supposed to mask other drugs in a horse’s system. True or false, and if true, isn’t that a problem?
2) Race-day lasix use allows stressed horses to run back more quickly. True or false. If race-day lasix was not allowed, wouldn’t rest be the alternative treatment, with it’s ultimate benefit to the horse?
3) In-breeding lasix horses creates an animal more prone to bleeding and respiratory weakness. True or false.
4) Why does Germany ban lasix horses from standing as stallions, as I have been told is done there?
5) Why do horses bred in Europe, South America, Australia, and other foreign countries where race day medication is disallowed, perform at a much higher level in longer distance races than American-bred and trained animals? Why do some of those horses dominate the few distance races left on the American racing schedule, winning a much higher percentage per horse started than American-bred stock?
Thanks for your help.
26 Mar 2009 at 07:37 am | #
fb,
The horse in front of your proverbial cart is named Eight Belles and she has been pulling it since last year’s Kentucky Derby. Apparently all the press coverage and commentary regarding the Congressional Hearings on racing somehow escaped you.
26 Mar 2009 at 09:44 am | #
Indulto, reference ur post, the only thing I suggested is to avoid the untested “assumption” that national control in some form will benefit racing compared to the regional, state racing commission model that we have at the moment. Horse welfare exemplified by 8 Belles is one important issue. We can all agree this issue is crucial to avoid in the future even while the NTRA puts out a bunch of garbage that completely avoids the probable root cause of the 8 Belles tragedy, which is the way in which that horse was handled pre-race. But, there are other equally crucial issues in terms of nationalization. Some of us are aware of a small cabal of rich owners that seek to use nationalization to NASCARize the sport.
In this regard it becomes a question whether the strength of horse racing as an ubiquitous, democratic sport that most of us can particpate in at some level should become a smaller national fiefdom of a 30-40 rich owners putting on Nascar like horse meets here and there to the exclusion of the rest of us now on the horse side of the business. The first part of this debate is “awareness” by those of us in the under $100,000 horse category, which would be most of us on the horse side. Safefy for horses has little to nothing imo to do with nationalization. As to the lasix debate, Nick Kling most of your questions are answered false, with some hedging. The lasix research has been done. YOu can find it on line. I find in general that lasix opponents tend to engage in selective reading of this research. You have to read it all, every word, and, if you are a reasonably logical person approaching the issue scientifically instead of with an agenda, you’ll decide that lasix is a necessary therapeutic drug for most horses. I like to put it another way. You can be anti-lasix till your first horse bleeds. Then you change your stripes.
26 Mar 2009 at 10:46 am | #
fb0252,
Thanks for your response to the questions you answered. I’ll return to the research for a closer reading.
A couple of additional questions—the first being an answer to the Germany query. Are they misinformed, or just dumb Krauts? By the way, Kling is a German name, so I’m not using Kraut as a slur.
The other is this. Since New York implemented race-day lasix, the percentage of juvenile first-time starters on the medication has jumped from zero to more than 80 percent. Does that make theraputic sense?
Thanks again.
26 Mar 2009 at 11:05 am | #
Nick, I’m unfamiliar with the need for lasix on softer grass surfaces as in Deutschland. I suspect grass horses bleed to a certain extent and I’ve actually received emails from a German assistant trainer requesting to know what legal anti-bleeding medications are available, such as e.g. xantex past. Lung bleeding can be slowed and sometimes prevented in many ways including level of fitness, drawing the horse seems to have some effect including withdrawal of legume based hay. Every trainer is faced with possible bleeding every time a horse breezes. Most have their non-lasix remedies. You have to keep in mind that use of lasix is both therapeutic and “preventative”. Once the bleeding lesion in the lung develops it only tends to get worse. Thus, most trainers use lasix as soon as the rules allow to prevent the situation from cropping up in the first place. There are several possible abuses of lasix, some of which you mentioned. But, is the question really whether we are going to force horses into speed without doing everything possible to prevent lung damage in the process. There is an argument to be made for clenbuterol, but, I’ll stop there.
26 Mar 2009 at 04:08 pm | #
fb,
I don’t think the establishment and enforcement nationwide of a Federally-mandated, uniform set of rules of racing is the same thing as nationalizing the racing industry, but then my nose starts bleeding every time I try running across a wet lawn after drinking a bottle of Heineken.
NK,
Your multiple accusations of my being too logical had convinced me your name was actually shortened from Klingon, but lately it’s you who’s been writing more like a Vulcan. Now I’ll always think of you whenever I have sauerkraut with my knockwurst.
26 Mar 2009 at 11:39 pm | #
Indulto,
Live long and prosper.
...and to take the analogy to its ridiculous conclusion...consider this.
Perhaps if asked by someone to treat a Thoroughbred in a manner at odds with the horse’s health, vets should reply, “I’m a doctor, not a bricklayer.”