The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 16 of 58 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 320 of 1150
  1. #301
    Join Date
    May. 6, 2006
    Location
    rapidan,virginia
    Posts
    1,714

    Default

    And the moral of the story is, if you want to erase a horse's past record and change its age, then perhaps you should not agree to an interview with a national magazine about the horse in question. Funny thing about publicity is that it gets people interested in the subject and then they go off and do their own research and come back and talk about it. Darn us amateurs.
    "Can you imagine what I would do if I could do all I can?" Sun Tzu, The Art of War
    Rainy
    Stash


    14 members found this post helpful.

  2. #302
    Join Date
    Mar. 19, 2006
    Location
    VA / NJ
    Posts
    2,561

    Default

    Frankly i wouldn't know off hand how to find a european eventing FEI record because i never had to do it and i have been involved in the horse show biz since 1964. If the seller who was an eventer told me it should be eligible for the second years, i would believe it. If I found out otherwise, then i would stop showing in the second year, which i will assume will be what they do. I do think that ignorance is understandable in this case and if you want to say that is no excuse have at it. This is hardly a heinous crime, happend frequently.Nobody died.
    I have personally shown a horse in the wrong division based on information the seller gave me. When I found out otherwise I took it out of the division.Nobody had a coronary.
    Incase you haven't noticed vf, I often disagree with many of the posters on here. Again usually because of their love of the witch hunt and tar and feathers and the inability to see other viewpoints.
    www.midatlanticeq.com
    Mid-Atlantic Equitation Festival,Scholarships and College Fair
    November 13-15, 2015


    2 members found this post helpful.

  3. #303
    Join Date
    Jan. 18, 2004
    Location
    Western WA
    Posts
    884

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Janet View Post
    Yes, if the horse isn't a stakes winner, or something, the JC does free up the name after a certain number of years.
    Interesting. That does explains how there could be two 'Smokin' Joe's, in difference parts of the country, one chesnut, and one bay, both registered with the Jockey Club! LOL. No wonder the JC names (while awful) aren't as bad as the QH or APHA names! Who knew?

    Also, thanks for the explination on where 'Smokin' Joe' came from. I had that horse for 10 years and never knew that. Just thought it was a terrible name for a hunter, although racehorse people told me they loved it for a horse on the track.
    The truth is always in the middle.



  4. #304
    Join Date
    Jan. 27, 2003
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    11,077

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chunky munky View Post
    But it gets tiresome reading all the comments on these boards about the lying , cheating trainers made by the amateurs and people that haven't been to the ring in 30 years. Its always the bad trainers fault. Sometimes its that they get bad information. And this time it may have come from an event person, heaven forbid.
    Quote Originally Posted by vxf111 View Post
    Please identify for me where I accused ANYONE on this thread of either "lying" or "cheating." Please.

    I can't tell if you're intentionally strawmanning or not reading for comprehension but there's a real disconnect between what most all the other posters are saying on this thread and your responses.
    VXF: YOU, personally, might not have said someone is lying or cheating, etc...but you cannot dismiss chunkymunky's point that many threads go that way...and this one has plenty of it. I, too, get a little tired of the immediate accusations of lying, cheating, drugging, etc.

    CM does have a valid point but there is also wrong-doing here that can't be argued away.

    Quote Originally Posted by vxf111 View Post
    Agree. And the point is that whether you like, love, hate, or want to crucify the person registering the horse... IGNORANCE IS NOT AN EXCUSE. Motive is also irrelevant.
    Agreed. Things were done improperly, no matter motive or intent. The people involved are being called out because the horse is getting a lot of attention, but in normal channels, the infractions would've gone unnoticed by all be a small minority.
    Keith: "Now...let's do something normal fathers and daughters do."
    Veronica: "Buy me a pony?"


    1 members found this post helpful.

  5. #305
    Join Date
    May. 6, 2006
    Location
    rapidan,virginia
    Posts
    1,714

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chunky munky View Post
    Frankly i wouldn't know off hand how to find a european eventing FEI record because i never had to do it and i have been involved in the horse show biz since 1964. If the seller who was an eventer told me it should be eligible for the second years, i would believe it. If I found out otherwise, then i would stop showing in the second year, which i will assume will be what they do. I do think that ignorance is understandable in this case and if you want to say that is no excuse have at it. This is hardly a heinous crime, happend frequently.Nobody died.
    I have personally shown a horse in the wrong division based on information the seller gave me. When I found out otherwise I took it out of the division.Nobody had a coronary.
    Incase you haven't noticed vf, I often disagree with many of the posters on here. Again usually because of their love of the witch hunt and tar and feathers and the inability to see other viewpoints.
    Are you implying that Karen provided erroneous information regarding the horse's eligibility? That's rather ballsy. Considering that KOC certainly knew about the horse's past eventing record.
    "Can you imagine what I would do if I could do all I can?" Sun Tzu, The Art of War
    Rainy
    Stash


    5 members found this post helpful.

  6. #306
    Join Date
    Oct. 6, 2002
    Location
    Philadelphia PA
    Posts
    17,369

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chunky munky View Post
    Frankly i wouldn't know off hand how to find a european eventing FEI record because i never had to do it and i have been involved in the horse show biz since 1964. If the seller who was an eventer told me it should be eligible for the second years, i would believe it. If I found out otherwise, then i would stop showing in the second year, which i will assume will be what they do. I do think that ignorance is understandable in this case and if you want to say that is no excuse have at it. This is hardly a heinous crime, happend frequently.Nobody died.
    Strawman argument. This discussion is not about the IMPACT of showing the horse in the wrong division. No one is even saying it was intentional! No one is saying it was done for a competitive advantage. The discussion is about whether or not the horse is eligible. You're responding to a discussion no one is having and making an argument that is wholly irrelevant. The rule has no provision for which the IMPACT of being in the wrong division affects whether or not the rule was violated.

    Quote Originally Posted by chunky munky View Post
    Incase you haven't noticed vf, I often disagree with many of the posters on here. Again usually because of their love of the witch hunt and tar and feathers and the inability to see other viewpoints.
    Please point out the posts that area "witch hunt" or where anyone is being "tarred and feathered." Please.

    And I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you RugBug that this thread has taken an inappropriate turn. I think things have been civil and about rules/issues and not personal attacks.

    What other view point is there to see? The rule says "you cannot do X." If someone is doing X, the view point/intent doesn't matter. That's what you're missing!
    ~Veronica
    "The Son Dee Times" "Sustained" "Somerset" "Franklin Square"
    http://photobucket.com/albums/y192/vxf111/


    3 members found this post helpful.

  7. #307
    Join Date
    Aug. 12, 2001
    Location
    Trailer Trash Ammy!
    Posts
    19,520

    Default

    Believe it or not, Chunky, I don't actually even necessarily want to see anyone set down for it. I'd be fine with it if USEF quietly took the ribbons away and simply merged the database entries, so that the horse gets to keep her identity and prior show record. THAT is the priority for me.

    However, it is most definitely within the Federation's purview to issue fines/suspensions, because whether deliberately or inadvertently, two USEF rules were broken.

    And of course, if nobody gets fined or set down, the classy thing for the owners to do would certainly be to return the 2nd Year Green ribbons and ask that the points be stricken. But you certainly cannot legislate good manners.
    "The standard you walk by is the standard you accept."--Lt. Gen. David Morrison, Austalian Army Chief


    4 members found this post helpful.

  8. #308
    Join Date
    Mar. 1, 2003
    Location
    Happily in Canada
    Posts
    5,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chunky munky View Post
    If the seller who was an eventer told me it should be eligible for the second years, i would believe it. If I found out otherwise, then i would stop showing in the second year, which i will assume will be what they do. I do think that ignorance is understandable in this case and if you want to say that is no excuse have at it.
    I'm going to say it's no excuse.

    The hunters in question should maybe do a follow up question, such as:

    "Oh hey Karen O'Connor, you're an eventer and you say this horse is eligible second year green?"

    KOC (I want this sale, and that sounds right... what's second year green again? I haven't shown hunters in years...): "Yes."

    Follow-up by hunters: "So, she hasn't shown at 3'6 or over except in 2012?"

    Pretty simple actually.

    ETA: plus the new USEF registration really makes me think it was done on purpose, and you can't blame "bad eventer information" for that.
    Blugal

    You never know what kind of obsessive compulsive crazy person you are until another person imitates your behaviour at a three-day. --Gry2Yng


    4 members found this post helpful.

  9. #309
    Join Date
    Jan. 19, 2005
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    13,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chunky munky View Post
    Frankly i wouldn't know off hand how to find a european eventing FEI record because i never had to do it and i have been involved in the horse show biz since 1964..


    Honestly...it isn't hard. You pick up the phone and call the USEF. They have great staffers who can help you find out all the information and walk you through what the horse is and isn't qualified for...and if the person you call can't, they find some one who can. Our fees pay for all of this and it is one of the things the USEF is very good about.

    There is really no excuse. It just takes someone who wants to do things right and cares about the rules.

    It takes seconds to find out a horse's existing USEF number if you know their name. And the time it takes to file a change of owner or name change is also really easy.

    I don't really want to see sanctions either....I'd rather see the mistake corrected and let them carry on. But these are not hard things to do correctly in the first place....and I don't understand why someone would get a new USEF number on a horse that clearly already has a life time number (you have to have that to have a passport).
    Last edited by bornfreenowexpensive; Jun. 7, 2013 at 11:59 AM.
    ** The difference between genius and stupidity is genius has its limits. -- Albert Einstein **


    9 members found this post helpful.

  10. #310
    Join Date
    Aug. 14, 2000
    Location
    Clarksdale, MS--the golden buckle on the cotton belt
    Posts
    19,796

    Default

    This whole Brouhaha is why the USEF needs to mandate Microchipping as the FEI does now. With chips, horses can't lose their identities and show records.

    And buyers and sellers can't plead ignorance, which is normally no excuse anyway.
    "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
    Thread killer Extraordinaire


    5 members found this post helpful.

  11. #311
    Join Date
    Mar. 19, 2006
    Location
    VA / NJ
    Posts
    2,561

    Default

    @ War Admiral, actually i blocked you from my FB page :-) But its fun to see all your indignity here. You are absolutely wrong that i don't believe in enforcing the rules. But i do have an opinion that I think would be agreed with by most stewards in the US. If someone has information that a horse is in the wrong division its best to have a chat with the exhibitor and let them know about its record. Then they can make the effort to check to see if they have been misinformed. If so, they can stop showing in that division. If they don't and you know for a fact about its ineligibility, go to the show steward. Then the steward will talk to the exhibitor. The exhibitor will either stop showing in that division or the informant may choose to file a protest. That is the usual and civil way to handle that type of complaintThat is how most normal people enforce rules of this nature, and how i believe in enforcing the rules. Not with crucifiction on the internet by people who are not showing at that show and have no entitlement to protest.

    And @ War, after you kept posting about some of the best child riders that" know" they are riding drugged horses and aren't any good if their trainers ride their horses, it was time to block you on FB. That stuff is just downright offensive. By the way, you friended me. i didn't know who you were. I asked a mutual friend of ours and i can't say you would want to see what she wrote
    .
    So do not say i don't believe in enforcing rules. I do, but in the proper channels. I am not condoning that a horse shoud ever be shown in the divivion for which it is not qualified. Just because you don't like me is no reason to put words in my mouth.
    This is horse showing folks, not solving world hunger.To get your panties in a wad over a mistake of a horse in the wrong division that can easily be fixed is the sign of needing something better to do.
    Last edited by chunky munky; Jun. 7, 2013 at 11:53 AM.
    www.midatlanticeq.com
    Mid-Atlantic Equitation Festival,Scholarships and College Fair
    November 13-15, 2015


    2 members found this post helpful.

  12. #312
    Join Date
    Jan. 19, 2005
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    13,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vineyridge View Post
    This whole Brouhaha is why the USEF needs to mandate Microchipping as the FEI does now. With chips, horses can't lose their identities and show records.

    And I bet this mare already has a microchip.
    ** The difference between genius and stupidity is genius has its limits. -- Albert Einstein **


    2 members found this post helpful.

  13. #313
    Join Date
    Aug. 14, 2000
    Location
    Clarksdale, MS--the golden buckle on the cotton belt
    Posts
    19,796

    Default

    And, guess what. The USEF charges $200 for a competitor protest, when it should be the steward's job to act on its behalf.

    Another argument in favor of chipping. Scanners cost less than $200 these days.
    They could be required equipment for Stewards. Actually they should be required equipment for shows as well.


    It would seem that many owners/trainers just don't do well on an honor system.
    "I'm a lumberjack, and I'm okay."
    Thread killer Extraordinaire


    1 members found this post helpful.

  14. #314
    Join Date
    Jan. 24, 2000
    Location
    Bath, PA, USA
    Posts
    469

    Default

    The solution is rather simple. Put your 200 bucks down and file a protest if the horse is showing in a division for which you believe it is ineligible. Do your homework and show up for the hearing. The horse's record is available - you likely won't lose your money. It will probably end up a wrist lap and forfeiture of all prize money and points earned in that division. If you want to see this practice end (and I know its not the first time an experienced horse from Europe "lost" its identity) then you're going to have to do something about it. Not just kvetch on COTH.
    "Horsemanship is not merely a matter of bodily skills, but is based on scholarship and, therefore, is a matter of the mind and intellect." Charles de Kunffy

    http://www.equiimages.com


    1 members found this post helpful.

  15. #315
    Join Date
    Jan. 27, 2003
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    11,077

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vxf111 View Post
    Strawman argument. This discussion is not about the IMPACT of showing the horse in the wrong division. No one is even saying it was intentional! No one is saying it was done for a competitive advantage. The discussion is about whether or not the horse is eligible. You're responding to a discussion no one is having and making an argument that is wholly irrelevant. The rule has no provision for which the IMPACT of being in the wrong division affects whether or not the rule was violated.



    Please point out the posts that area "witch hunt" or where anyone is being "tarred and feathered." Please.

    What other view point is there to see? The rule says "you cannot do X." If someone is doing X, the view point/intent doesn't matter. That's what you're missing!
    So, I'm all about facts. But if threads on this board had to stick to facts...well, there would be little discussion. We have some facts: horse isn't eligible for classes it competed in, horse has a brand new record with the USEF. Most the rest of this thread is speculation. If CM is putting forth ideas as to why, well, that is not out of the norm for COTH....and this thread in particular.

    CM's comments about witch hunts are tar and feathering are not confined to this thread (and it looks like not even COTH, but expands to other social media) I feel like you are intentionally overlooking that so you can dismiss CM. I don't always agree with CM and I often find her abrassive and even rude. But that doesn't mean that everything she types is wrong. I find other posters to be obnoxious and klassy (calling someone out for FB posts. REAllY? Why is this person even your "friend.") but that doesn't mean everything that person types is wrong either.

    There are plenty of legitmate reasons why things could've been done...but it doesn't excuse the action at all. Discussing ways the situation could be rectified is a valid topic of discussion...and par for the course on COTH. If we could only stick to facts, there would be about 5 posts on the entire forum, it's much more fun to read invoices and put forth ideas what each line item is for or why a certain thing was done a certain way, etc....and that is what makes COTH tick.
    Keith: "Now...let's do something normal fathers and daughters do."
    Veronica: "Buy me a pony?"



  16. #316
    Join Date
    Aug. 12, 2001
    Location
    Trailer Trash Ammy!
    Posts
    19,520

    Default

    Thing is, though, this type of issue impacts many MORE members than just those competing against the horse.

    It impacts BREEDERS b/c every time another horse loses its identity and show record, that's one more horse that the breeder will never be able to find again once it leaves their hands, and one more horse (in this case a truly spectacular one) that a breeder who would like to breed something similar will never be able to do pedigree and show record research on, and a TRAINER who is interested in acquiring something similar will never be able to go back to the breeder and ask whether they "have anything else like that".

    It impacts MEMBERS who may sympathize w/ the BREEDERS about not having a mechanism to track their horses' performance records, but who also think it is extremely important to preserve the right of owners to change a horse's name.

    Among all those issues it probably impacts at least HALF of the USEF membership.
    "The standard you walk by is the standard you accept."--Lt. Gen. David Morrison, Austalian Army Chief


    2 members found this post helpful.

  17. #317
    Join Date
    Oct. 6, 2002
    Location
    Philadelphia PA
    Posts
    17,369

    Default

    I don't read all the threads CM posts on and actually, aside from 2-3 threads that are active that I do post on-- I don't really read most other threads on this board. I use the control panel and really only go back and read threads I've already posted on. I don't generally scroll through the boards and open threads. I read a couple (mainly about Devon), posted on them, and go back to them. I don't read other threads. So I don't really have any input on what's happening on threads I don't read. What's happening on other threads really isn't directly relevant to this thread either. If CM wants to call someone out for a "witch hunt" on the boards, maybe she should do it on the threads where that's actually happening?!

    She called ME out for having some sort of animus against Kelley Farmer. Which is why I kept asking for CM to point out where I called anyone a liar/cheat. I think, if CM pulls up my old posts, she'll find some where I had very complimentary things to say about Kelley Farmer, ironically enough. I don't have anything for/against her as I've never met her!

    I'm all for discussion too. The point I am making about facts is that when a rule is a strict liability rule, the intent is irrelevant. So we can talk about the intent until we're blue in the face, it doesn't really matter. There are other situations where intent might be relevant (like, for example, a discussion of the Heritage lawsuit where there have been allegations of fraud) but going on and on about how the re-recording and showing in 2nd year greens could have been an accident is irrelevant because the intent has nothing to do with whether the rule was violated.
    ~Veronica
    "The Son Dee Times" "Sustained" "Somerset" "Franklin Square"
    http://photobucket.com/albums/y192/vxf111/


    1 members found this post helpful.

  18. #318
    Join Date
    Nov. 22, 2010
    Location
    Where they've got all Hell for a basement
    Posts
    1,154

    Default

    And to think I was naive enough to assume that this thread would be a happy little one-pager when I started it...


    2 members found this post helpful.

  19. #319
    Join Date
    Jan. 24, 2000
    Location
    Bath, PA, USA
    Posts
    469

    Default

    If your protest is upheld you get your 200 bucks back, IIRC. That $200 is there to help prevent people from filing a protest because they hate you. Or you beat Dobbin. That sort of thing. If you want hang, ya gotta stop just saying "This sucks."
    "Horsemanship is not merely a matter of bodily skills, but is based on scholarship and, therefore, is a matter of the mind and intellect." Charles de Kunffy

    http://www.equiimages.com


    1 members found this post helpful.

  20. #320
    Join Date
    Jan. 27, 2003
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    11,077

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vxf111 View Post
    If CM wants to call someone out for a "witch hunt" on the boards, maybe she should do it on the threads where that's actually happening?!
    There has been a little of it on this thread.

    She called ME out for having some sort of animus against Kelley Farmer. Which is why I kept asking for CM to point out where I called anyone a liar/cheat. I think, if CM pulls up my old posts, she'll find some where I had very complimentary things to say about Kelley Farmer, ironically enough. I don't have anything for/against her as I've never met her!
    See, I didn't think she was calling you specifically, out. Just making a general statement that there is a general quickness these days to jump on the liar/cheat/drugger bandwagon. And sadly, it's true and even legitimate as people lose more and more faith in the upper echelons of this sport.

    I'm all for discussion too. The point I am making about facts is that when a rule is a strict liability rule, the intent is irrelevant. So we can talk about the intent until we're blue in the face, it doesn't really matter.
    Yep. But while intent does not matter one iota in this situation...it is what 11 or more pages of this thread are full of. Why might that have done this, why that, etc.
    Keith: "Now...let's do something normal fathers and daughters do."
    Veronica: "Buy me a pony?"


    1 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. I AM LOOKING FOR IMA AMBER DEER APHC
    By ILOVEMYLORD in forum Missing Horses
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Jan. 30, 2012, 11:08 AM
  2. Amber Alert
    By Brookes in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: May. 31, 2011, 07:18 PM
  3. Foal Eyes...Is it possible for eyes to go from dark to blue??...
    By CrossWinds81 in forum Sport Horse Breeding
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Sep. 5, 2009, 05:58 PM

Posting Permissions

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