The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 171
  1. #141
    Join Date
    Sep. 13, 2000
    Location
    Greenville, MI,
    Posts
    11,698

    Thumbs down Again?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glimmerglass View Post
    Never thought I'd see the day that was said about Eric. He was banned twice by Canadian sport officials after testing positive for cocaine before the 1996 Games in Atlanta and then testing positive for ephedrine before the 2000 Sydney Olympics, for which he was handed a lifetime ban. That was revoked later.
    I agree, If that is a class act, we are in serious trouble!
    Amazing what people choose to ignore huh!
    "you can only ride the drama llama so hard before it decides to spit in your face." ?Caffeinated.



  2. #142
    Join Date
    Jul. 5, 2009
    Location
    South of the Tennessee border
    Posts
    188

    Default So Sorry!!!

    I suppose all you Eric Lamaze "downers" are just Miss Perfects.



  3. #143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sannois View Post
    I agree, If that is a class act, we are in serious trouble!
    Amazing what people choose to ignore huh!
    Ok so once again, yes Eric did stupid things yeeeeeeears ago ( OMG so 12 years ago)(said in teenage girl voice). We all know that. It's a class act because he, stood up for a team mate/ student- that's why. This has nothing to do with the past. We'd all be lucky to have a someone who had our backs like that.

    And I'm not naive in thinking he's 100% Mr.InnocentPants these days - but can you really say that any of them are living the life of a nun. But for heaven's sake let the past go!



  4. #144
    Join Date
    May. 6, 2007
    Location
    Napanee ON
    Posts
    3,649

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sannois View Post
    I agree, If that is a class act, we are in serious trouble!
    Amazing what people choose to ignore huh!
    To quote one of my favorite movies

    "the bull's-eye of an easy target. May you be publicly flogged for all of your bad choices, and may your noses be rubbed in all of your mistakes".

    Seriously, the guy is a recovered drug addict from over 10 years ago, turned his life around to win OLYMPIC GOLD not to mention then hundreds of other things he has won and you are going to not forgive the man for his past mistakes that he publicly acknowledges as mistakes?

    Geeze I would love to live in the perfect world you live in.



  5. #145
    Join Date
    Jun. 9, 2006
    Location
    Grand Junction, CO
    Posts
    1,776

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by crackerjack View Post

    And I'm not naive in thinking he's 100% Mr.InnocentPants these days - but can you really say that any of them are living the life of a nun.
    <Raises hand> I am! But that's just because I haven't met Eric yet.



  6. #146
    Join Date
    Feb. 28, 2008
    Location
    missouri
    Posts
    1,156

    Default

    notice that the canadian comment has been "fine tuned" and absolutely believe they would have sat on their hands without the pressure from lamaze ( and i am sure thousands of others).



  7. #147
    Join Date
    Feb. 15, 2004
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    7,449

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sannois View Post
    I agree, If that is a class act, we are in serious trouble!
    Amazing what people choose to ignore huh!
    Jeez... sour grapes or what? May I remind you that (well you must know it since you are so clean and perfect and knowledgeable).. that it was 12 years ago, that the first disqualification was because of an ingredient in a supplement (never happened to any of your athletes of course), the second was because of cocaine at a party (does not make it an "addict" when he was in the dumps because of the dq. He was not dq during competition..
    Also may I remind you of your numerous athletes (in many sports ie T&F, baseball, cycling, etc.) who have been found/have admitted to taking drugs to improve their performances... who have won medals and gold during their competitions (yes we had Ben Johnson...)... still, don't go all holly on us now!
    He made a mistake, was punished by his federation (for once, it took a stand)... and obviously by the public and came back little by little and because he was so good... he proved himself to everyone. Luckily, he had friends and sponsors who believed in him and stuck with him. He is just paying forward and helping Tiffany, just like others did for him (even if her situation is nowhere the same).
    I would love a friend like that.
    People who keep bringing back errors of 12 years ago obviously have never matured and still live 12 years ago.



  8. #148
    Join Date
    Jul. 10, 2001
    Posts
    6,675

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lauriep View Post
    The eventers have a stadium jumping test that can be/is as crucial to their results as to the jumpers. So why is this test only used on jumpers?.


    Because we have a jog up/vet inspection the morning of stadium after XC. The hypersensitivity testing is pointless. If there were more jogs during FEI jumping competitions, that may be an answer. Eventers have 2 jogs and 3 vet inspections over the 3 days.



  9. #149
    Join Date
    Sep. 14, 2000
    Location
    Goochland, VA
    Posts
    8,529

    Default

    Great, RAAYERS, but they don't even couple the test with a jog. And my point is that they are targeting show jumping with this asinine test, when there may be as many or more eventers that are "hypersensitive.". Why only one discipline? If they are now targeting nicks, abrasions, bumps, then why limit it to show jumpers?
    Laurie
    Finding, preparing, showing and training young hunters, in hand and performance.
    www.juniorjohnsontrainingandsales.com



  10. #150
    Join Date
    Jul. 10, 2001
    Posts
    6,675

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lauriep View Post
    Great, RAAYERS, but they don't even couple the test with a jog. And my point is that they are targeting show jumping with this asinine test, when there may be as many or more eventers that are "hypersensitive.". Why only one discipline? If they are now targeting nicks, abrasions, bumps, then why limit it to show jumpers?
    I honestly feel the FEI is one of the most corrupt entities that allows its officials to act with impunity. I think it should be burned to the ground and a new entity formed.

    In this case you can not use eventers as a comparison. It is apples and Audis.

    Deliberate hypersensitization is not a real issue with eventers. It is a normal result of XC for the horses to come off with cuts and scratches (some even needing stitches) given that XC is done on open only partially modified terrain (it is not just the fences, but sticks and rocks and over steps and slips and...). Therefore the test used on jumpers is useless for eventers given every horse, most likely will show reaction. Note that event horses live with ice boots, Game Readys, etc. post XC. We are tying to REMOVE hypersensitization as it is an indicator of inflammation and tissue damage.

    This is why I would simply suggest a jog in front of the veterinary committee everyday prior to competition for the jumpers. Thermography is useless as a medical diagnostic tool (well proven in studies) so that is not viable.

    In terms of LOOKING for DELIBERATE hypersensitization, the rule and test makes GREAT sense. A jog will not elucidate it as it is a skin response. Thus, only the poking will suffice. As for using it to justify elimination, the question is does the wound observed seem to be one commonly caused by jumping or was it inflicted by another means (can be pretty obvious sometimes)? Sadly the verterinary committee is the the only allowed judge in the matter.



  11. #151
    Join Date
    Apr. 28, 2008
    Posts
    6,854

    Default

    I doubt jogs would catch lighting up a horse's front legs. If you apply to both legs the horse is likely to still jog even. So--a jog would not rule out hypersensitivity in eventers, nor would it confirm it in jumpers who have been lit up, in my view. I suppose that is why the poking method is used.

    I do think the application of poking techniques to minor abrasions is ridiculous. If a scratch on one leg is causing problems it would show up in a jog. FEI needs situation-specific techniques, not application of a rule designed to uncover one abuse used across the board in situations where it makes no sense.



  12. #152
    Join Date
    May. 17, 2000
    Location
    Where am I and what am I doing in this handbasket?
    Posts
    23,331

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RAyers View Post
    I honestly feel the FEI is one of the most corrupt entities that allows its officials to act with impunity. I think it should be burned to the ground and a new entity formed.

    In this case you can not use eventers as a comparison. It is apples and Audis.

    Deliberate hypersensitization is not a real issue with eventers. It is a normal result of XC for the horses to come off with cuts and scratches (some even needing stitches) given that XC is done on open only partially modified terrain (it is not just the fences, but sticks and rocks and over steps and slips and...). Therefore the test used on jumpers is useless for eventers given every horse, most likely will show reaction. Note that event horses live with ice boots, Game Readys, etc. post XC. We are tying to REMOVE hypersensitization as it is an indicator of inflammation and tissue damage.

    This is why I would simply suggest a jog in front of the veterinary committee everyday prior to competition for the jumpers. Thermography is useless as a medical diagnostic tool (well proven in studies) so that is not viable.

    In terms of LOOKING for DELIBERATE hypersensitization, the rule and test makes GREAT sense. A jog will not elucidate it as it is a skin response. Thus, only the poking will suffice. As for using it to justify elimination, the question is does the wound observed seem to be one commonly caused by jumping or was it inflicted by another means (can be pretty obvious sometimes)? Sadly the verterinary committee is the the only allowed judge in the matter.
    I don't think LaurieP is saying that eventers should be compared in the real world, but is pointing out that IF part of the standard for a horse to jump around is that a horse not be hypersensitive at all, regardless of reason (intent or accident, deliberate soring or owie from banging a pole in competition), and the reason why the accidental owie cannot compete is based on the welfare of the horse (which is where the FEI is hanging its hat on this matter)... Then how do you defend that process and NOT apply it to event horses who go into day 3 with a lot of unintentional owies?
    Definition of "Horse": a 4 legged mammal looking for an inconvenient place and expensive way to die. Any day they choose not to execute the Master Plan is just more time to perfect it. Be Very Afraid.



  13. #153
    Join Date
    Jan. 12, 2000
    Location
    Proud owner of one Lunar acre! (Campanus Crater, The Moon)
    Posts
    14,008

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RAyers View Post
    I honestly feel the FEI is one of the most corrupt entities that allows its officials to act with impunity. I think it should be burned to the ground and a new entity formed.
    Hmm...I'm trying to decide if this should be my new signature line or not. So true!
    "Relinquish your whip!!"



  14. #154
    Join Date
    Jul. 10, 2001
    Posts
    6,675

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DMK View Post
    I don't think LaurieP is saying that eventers should be compared in the real world, but is pointing out that IF part of the standard for a horse to jump around is that a horse not be hypersensitive at all, regardless of reason (intent or accident, deliberate soring or owie from banging a pole in competition), and the reason why the accidental owie cannot compete is based on the welfare of the horse (which is where the FEI is hanging its hat on this matter)... Then how do you defend that process and NOT apply it to event horses who go into day 3 with a lot of unintentional owies?
    I agree with what is being said, hence my comment about FEI officials acting without impunity.

    But, should it be EXPECTED, a horse who does the high jumpers HAVE cuts or such as the result of showing? On XC it is expected. However, in a ring? While cuts are not foreign, I suspect they are a rarity based on my past. Hence, my comment about judging HOW the cut occurred. A vet should be able to make a fairly decent assessment of the cause of a wound (deliberate or otherwise). And that is the gray area of this rule.

    This rule was established ONLY for the jumpers for a valid reason based upon past infractions. The application of the rule is otherwise. To question why the rule is not applied across the board would be the same thing as asking why brushing boots are not allowed in dressage?



  15. #155
    Join Date
    Mar. 26, 2008
    Location
    Alberta Canada
    Posts
    50

    Default Thank you Eric

    Eric showed his true courage and heart. I thank him very much for his stand and his dedication . Gallagher should resign from Equine Canada and make a public apology for his actions. He is a fool and an embarrassment to Canada's equestrian community.
    Richard Holyoak
    Diamond H Carriages
    http://www.diamondhcarriages.com



  16. #156
    Join Date
    Dec. 29, 2007
    Posts
    912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fair judy View Post
    notice that the canadian comment has been "fine tuned" and absolutely believe they would have sat on their hands without the pressure from lamaze ( and i am sure thousands of others).
    Totally agree.
    "Those who know the least often know it the loudest."



  17. #157
    Join Date
    Sep. 14, 2000
    Location
    Goochland, VA
    Posts
    8,529

    Default

    Exactly. The goal of trying to catch people doing this is great, but they cannot have the attitude that anyone innocent person caught in the cross fire is ok, because the goal of horse welfare is so sacred. Instead, they MUST use all due diligence to NOT DQ a horse that they are not 110% convinced is a hyper sensitized horse.

    I would love to hear from ANYONE who was involved with the current protocol as described on the FEI site. RAyers, maybe you can speak to some of these questions. Regarding the thermography piece, which supposedly identifies horses with abnormal heat in the skin: how were baselines established, if indeed they were? Did they use thermography on 100 horses whose legs were known to never have been touched by anything but a brush? Do what we call sensitive skinned horses have a higher reading? Is there a range of normal and who decides what that is? Did they then test 100 horses who HAD been sensitized to get those readings? Over how long a period of time? The actual reaction to the irritant, enough to make them respect the rails, really doesn't last long, so how far out are these readings even applicable? Who is reading the test and making judgements?

    In my opinion, if they get a "positive" reaction, the horse should then be jogged for soundness, allowed to compete so if there truly is no wrong-doing, a once in a lifetime opportunity to compete us not lost forever, and hair samples from they area in question should be taken for analysis. A skin scraping as well, if it can be gotten without further compromising the area. IF the hair tests for any irritant known to be used to "light them up," then the rider is disciplined, any awards are returned and all ribbon winners move up a slot. This has worked in the case of doping, so it should be acceptable here.
    Laurie
    Finding, preparing, showing and training young hunters, in hand and performance.
    www.juniorjohnsontrainingandsales.com



  18. #158
    Join Date
    May. 17, 2000
    Location
    Where am I and what am I doing in this handbasket?
    Posts
    23,331

    Default

    Reed I agree in principle, and the rule absolutely got there for a good reason. But if the standard is "welfare of the horse" and a wee ding is an issue, it's tough to stand by that logic and let a lot of eventers in the ring on Sunday.

    And it appears like that is the stance of the FEI (hence your comments) rather than the bald truth which is more along the lines of "we can't figure the difference between accidental and intentional hypersensitivity and we don't even have a consistent, objective way to test for it so we are just going to screw over a lot of people who have not done anything wrong along the way, so just buck up little beavers and deal with it."

    But I doubt the current process would exist much longer if they "spun" it that way. In other words it's less about eventing and more about poking holes in the FEI's logic. But you knew that.

    But I don't think a ding is entirely out of the realm of possibility for a jumper especially over the course of many days and monster courses like this. I've seen many tiny scrape/ding/owie from a hard rail that would never give me second thought except "well maybe next time you will pick up your feet, fool" - as you know, unlike eventers, jumpers go out of their way to not protect the front of the legs for precisely this reason. Then there is the joys of tent stabling - not always the safest place to be (or the largest, although at this level I'm sure they all have double stalls). But mostly it's horses. Where there's a will, there is a way, isn't there?

    I do like the idea of more jogs though, although there must be some add'l opportunity since horses get held all the time after the initial jog, so it's not like its a free for all after the first one. But a formal presentation and hands on inspection of the legs? Maybe there is some opportunity there?
    Definition of "Horse": a 4 legged mammal looking for an inconvenient place and expensive way to die. Any day they choose not to execute the Master Plan is just more time to perfect it. Be Very Afraid.



  19. #159
    Join Date
    Dec. 22, 2000
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    14,721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lauriep View Post
    In my opinion, if they get a "positive" reaction, the horse should then be jogged for soundness, allowed to compete so if there truly is no wrong-doing, a once in a lifetime opportunity to compete us not lost forever, and hair samples from they area in question should be taken for analysis. A skin scraping as well, if it can be gotten without further compromising the area. IF the hair tests for any irritant known to be used to "light them up," then the rider is disciplined, any awards are returned and all ribbon winners move up a slot. This has worked in the case of doping, so it should be acceptable here.
    I agree.

    If the FEI had used that approach at the World Cup two years ago, Sapphire might have won the whole thing. As it was, she was cleared after the fact when it was too late to do any good.

    You can always remove the medals afterwards. You can't award them the same way.



  20. #160
    Join Date
    Jul. 10, 2001
    Posts
    6,675

    Default

    I think there are some great ideas about the rule, but in the end it is the the lying bastards in the FEI and ALL of the national federations who sold out to the IOC to keep horses in the Olympics. The system has been established that allows non-horsemen to govern and dictate to horsemen allowable conduct all in the name of monetary return (e.g. the aforementioned EC response).

    Eric Lamaze can do all he wants but in the end it will be moot because he has little to no pull with the FEI/IOC.

    As for thermography, it can show soring of a horse given that is a skin tissue irritation. However, is it a test for a larger lameness? I refer to a paper by Weil M, Litzke LF, Fritsch R. in 1998, "Thermography can show and quantitatively prove very well changes in skin temperature in forelimb lameness. It must be emphasized that thermography in lameness diagnosis of horses is only useful in combination with a thorough clinical examination including additional examination procedures." So, thermography is appropriate for detecting intentional soring using some form of skin irritant.

    But, like lauriep states, a better way it to allow competition when there is a question while collection other evidence to be examined later.



Similar Threads

  1. Eric Lamaze is taking a break
    By northerhunter in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: Sep. 13, 2012, 12:36 PM
  2. Hunters Scendex for Eric Lamaze
    By louisem in forum Sport Horse Breeding
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Dec. 10, 2011, 02:29 PM
  3. Eric Lamaze and Herald 3
    By vineyridge in forum Sport Horse Breeding
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Nov. 10, 2011, 03:35 PM
  4. Eric Lamaze Rides Tonight
    By Nes in forum Off Course
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Nov. 8, 2011, 10:04 PM
  5. eric lamaze saddle
    By jillya in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Jul. 4, 2011, 12:56 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •