The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 25 of 58 FirstFirst ... 15232425262735 ... LastLast
Results 481 to 500 of 1150
  1. #481
    Join Date
    Sep. 27, 2000
    Location
    Southern California - on a freeway someplace
    Posts
    10,013

    Default

    Isn't there something about it being bad luck to change a horse's name?

    Kidding aside, I don't care that they changed her name. Their horse. Their choice. It's the changing of the factual data at the same time that bothers me.
    The Evil Chem Prof


    9 members found this post helpful.

  2. #482
    Join Date
    Dec. 22, 2000
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    15,240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PonyPenny View Post
    Curiosity got the best of me, so I looked up RF Amber Eyes show record on USEF. It shows the mare did several jumper classes at WEF this year up to 1.35 meters. Wouldn't that alone make her ineligible for 2nd Year Green classes regardless of her eventing career?
    No. A horse is eligible for the respective Green division for the entire horse show year, regardless of the height it shows over that year. Some horses might do the Greens and the High Performance at the same show. The higher jumps don't make the horse ineligible for the Greens if it is otherwise eligible.



  3. #483
    Join Date
    Sep. 27, 2000
    Location
    Southern California - on a freeway someplace
    Posts
    10,013

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PonyPenny View Post
    Curiosity got the best of me, so I looked up RF Amber Eyes show record on USEF. It shows the mare did several jumper classes at WEF this year up to 1.35 meters. Wouldn't that alone make her ineligible for 2nd Year Green classes regardless of her eventing career?
    No because the rule is 3'6" or higher. So, once you've broken a horse's green status by jumping 3'6" it doesn't matter how much higher you jump.

    Once upon a time, in a galaxy far far away, jumping in combined training/eventing didn't count towards green status, but we're talking 80's.
    The Evil Chem Prof


    1 members found this post helpful.

  4. #484
    Join Date
    Dec. 13, 2005
    Location
    Carolinas
    Posts
    202

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by magicteetango View Post

    You know one thing I never understood? Who buys these horses where they just pop up out of nowhere one day and go like gang busters with no history? You really don't care about their existence before this sale barn? Odd odd odd. But people continue to do it which continues to make this a common practice. Until that stops I doubt this issue will ever be resolved.
    It's been going on since the 80's or earlier. It was more of the jumpers. Buying an experienced horse and showing in the lower jumper classes and taking all the money. I guess hunter derbies have made it worth it for hunters.



  5. #485
    Join Date
    Dec. 25, 2005
    Posts
    1,979

    Default

    I don't think its so much the "clerical error" that is rousing people up--I honestly don't care what class the horse competes in or if they change her name (although I think she should keep the same USEF number). Its more the total apathy by the owners to follow the rules and how easily they justify breaking them. You know, it may be a really stupid rule that everyone agrees should be changed. And honestly, it really doesn't hurt anyone that it was broken. But if they so easily disregard these rules, who is to say they won't justify a little Dex (or Mag) to take the edge off their hunter? And considering that they are at the top of their sport, and are thus role models for everyone else, the fact that they are OK with cheating is even more concerning.

    Isn't this part of the "cultural change" that was talked about in the last town hall meeting? Basically getting people to follow the rules even if they could break them without getting caught, because it is the right thing to do?


    11 members found this post helpful.

  6. #486
    Join Date
    Feb. 22, 2000
    Location
    Keswick, VA
    Posts
    7,871

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skydy View Post
    So, let's assume for the sake of argument, that it's inadvertent cheating (incompetence, clerical error, whatever). It's NOT all about them and their potential punishment. This error does affect other people.

    My sympathies lie with competitors who showed that day and placed behind the ineligible horse. Their time, money, and experience on that day can't be replaced.
    Actually, they can. It's not that serious or uncommon a mistake. If the horse is later found to be ineligible, points just get redistributed. Not difficult.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  7. #487
    Join Date
    Jul. 21, 2011
    Location
    Co
    Posts
    5,094

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eventer13 View Post

    Isn't this part of the "cultural change" that was talked about in the last town hall meeting? Basically getting people to follow the rules even if they could break them without getting caught, because it is the right thing to do?
    Yes! Isn't it special?
    Now that "collapse" has been mentioned publicly, everyone in H.J. land is on the honor system to report the collapse of their horse. Well, Christ on a raft!
    Don't you know,everyone will now be making sure the clerical details and eligibility are in order as well?
    The USEA has been quite a bit more pro-active than USEF has, in the horses dropping dead issue, and during the webcast you refer to , DOC seemed to me to say, "hey guys it's your division, you can make the rules".
    If the USHJA decides to clean up a bit, won't that be nice? (having watched the webcast, I'm not holding my breath).

    Until then, I wouldn't expect any uproar about eligibility rules.



  8. #488
    Join Date
    Jul. 21, 2011
    Location
    Co
    Posts
    5,094

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CBoylen View Post
    Actually, they can. It's not that serious or uncommon a mistake. If the horse is later found to be ineligible, points just get redistributed. Not difficult.
    I said "time , money and experience on that day" I was not speaking of points. For some people it's not all about points, and those are the people with whom I sympathize.


    8 members found this post helpful.

  9. #489
    Join Date
    Dec. 22, 2000
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    15,240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skydy View Post
    I said "time , money and experience on that day" I was not speaking of points. For some people it's not all about points, and those are the people with whom I sympathize.
    I believe the prize money gets redistributed in such a case. The exhibitors spent the same amount of time whether they pinned first or last, and the experience of going around the ring was the same. Only the jog would have been different with one less horse in the class.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  10. #490
    Join Date
    Jul. 21, 2011
    Location
    Co
    Posts
    5,094

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MHM View Post
    I believe the prize money gets redistributed in such a case. The exhibitors spent the same amount of time whether they pinned first or last, and the experience of going around the ring was the same. Only the jog would have been different with one less horse in the class.
    I wasn't commenting so much on the prize money as I was on the entry fees, stabling, shipping etc.. paid by people who had, perhaps, brought their excellent homebred to show. I know they are few and far between, but they do exist. For some people , it would matter.

    Isn't that why there are rules? A level playing field?

    "The experience of going around the ring" would not necessarily be the same if you felt that your horse had the best trip of his life and came in second, only to find out later that you were beaten by an ineligible horse.


    7 members found this post helpful.

  11. #491
    Join Date
    Dec. 22, 2000
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    15,240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skydy View Post
    I wasn't commenting so much on the prize money as I was on the entry fees, stabling, shipping etc.. paid by people who had, perhaps, brought their excellent homebred to show. I know they are few and far between, but they do exist. For some people , it would matter.
    Those exhibitors still spent the same amount on entries, stabling, shipping, etc. whether or not there was a horse in the class who turned out to be ineligible. They had the same experience in the ring, they spent the same amount of time. Once the points and prize money get redistributed, life goes on.


    1 members found this post helpful.

  12. #492
    Join Date
    Jul. 21, 2011
    Location
    Co
    Posts
    5,094

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MHM View Post
    Those exhibitors still spent the same amount on entries, stabling, shipping, etc. whether or not there was a horse in the class who turned out to be ineligible. They had the same experience in the ring, they spent the same amount of time. Once the points and prize money get redistributed, life goes on.
    Yes life does go on. That is no excuse for professionals being incompetent at the expense of others. It is unprofessional and poor sportsmanship.


    15 members found this post helpful.

  13. #493
    Join Date
    Sep. 27, 2000
    Location
    Southern California - on a freeway someplace
    Posts
    10,013

    Default

    I am still trying to recover from the "Christ on a raft" comment. I am also (more or less) grading lab reports online and I started to highlight that comment as if I was still in Turnitin. Back to lab reports...
    The Evil Chem Prof


    1 members found this post helpful.

  14. #494
    Join Date
    Oct. 9, 2007
    Posts
    41

    Default

    For those that mentioned Kelley Farmer's "unblemished reputation": in 2007 she was suspended for 5 months and fined $5,000 for showing a horse on reserpine.


    30 members found this post helpful.

  15. #495
    Join Date
    May. 6, 2006
    Location
    rapidan,virginia
    Posts
    1,714

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Martha Drum View Post
    Thank you for the clarification.

    I would like to gently weigh in, as a non-USEF member who is a beginner-to-2'6 riding instructor. About ten years ago I had a student place well in a Special Hunter Classic at Head of the Bay, so I've set foot at an AA show, but frankly I'm as nobody as it gets.

    I do not feel I have any standing to complain about USEF fees, who the members of various committees are, where they hold their annual meeting, or other internal issues of an organization to which I do not belong.

    However, I do make my living in the horse business.

    Like I said, I'm a nobody. NBC isn't covering whether little Tina finally learns her diagonals this week. No one wants to livestream the first time a lesson student actually gets the bridle on all by himself. Alas, the Chronicle doesn't have a monthly questionnaire for those who have just learned to canter out of a tiny crossrail line.

    But the whole world is watching when a horse breaks down in a major stakes race. Joe Q Public, in areas where there are Tennessee Walkers, has the soring issue on his radar. There is increasingly a non-horsey audience aware of rotational falls in eventing, and thanks to a goofy lawsuit, everyone who follows PETA has learned about something called rollkur. And while hunter riders may think our discipline doesn't deserve to be lumped in with those others, it's already happened. When an issue involving horses and children is on the front page of the New York Times, that's a very, very bright spotlight.

    The reason I care whether or not the USEF follows its own rules (and I am perfectly content to assume ignorance/haphazard carelessness regarding the motive for re-recording/age change of this horse, until proven otherwise) is this: When the non-horsey Joe Schmoe does a google search, he's going to find that USEF is the national federation for equestrian sports in this country. And if USEF can't get its act together, on this tiny detail, or in other really big hot button areas, and enforce its own rules, that looks really bad.

    I'm not hysterically suggesting that the general public cares a woodchuck's patootie about this particular situation; I'm sure it doesn't. But the principle is the thing.

    If we, the equestrian community, can't police ourselves on something as small as a name/age change, how can we be trusted (in the non-horsey public's mind) to police ourselves on the big things? The answer is that the non-horsey public/legislators/special interest groups will do it for us. And they are not going to discern a difference between a BNT and myself when they impose weird restrictions or impossible standards of care.

    Each of us working in the horse business is just one upload of a fatal or serious incident away, seen by just one state or national legislator, with just one wealthy individual's support, filing proposed legislation regulating horse activities that would be really stupid, kneejerk, ignorant, suck for all of us, but might just get passed because we didn't solve the problem first.

    Respectfully submitted from The World of Rubber Boots and Little Up-Down Riders.

    And, y'all are welcome to call me Martha
    For those who are stuck on the "what is the big deal??!!" argument, I suggest you read this excellent post.

    In a nutshell, if we don't take responsibility and police ourselves, on the big things and the small, then don't be surprised when someone else starts to do the policing to the detriment of us all.
    "Can you imagine what I would do if I could do all I can?" Sun Tzu, The Art of War
    Rainy
    Stash


    9 members found this post helpful.

  16. #496
    Join Date
    Dec. 28, 2001
    Location
    over yonder
    Posts
    3,049

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MHM View Post
    Those exhibitors still spent the same amount on entries, stabling, shipping, etc. whether or not there was a horse in the class who turned out to be ineligible. They had the same experience in the ring, they spent the same amount of time. Once the points and prize money get redistributed, life goes on.
    Except they might have missed out on win or championship pictures, which for me is the best part!
    Auventera Two:Some women would eat their own offspring if they had some dipping sauce.


    6 members found this post helpful.

  17. #497
    Join Date
    Dec. 28, 2001
    Location
    over yonder
    Posts
    3,049

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sunshinestate View Post
    Then you breeders are pissed because they didn't record the sire and dam. Who cares? It is not my business to pass on your breeding name.
    Then don't be upset when breeders can not continue to breed the kind of horses that you want since they won't have good data on past matches to go by.
    Auventera Two:Some women would eat their own offspring if they had some dipping sauce.


    11 members found this post helpful.

  18. #498
    Join Date
    Sep. 14, 2000
    Location
    Goochland, VA
    Posts
    8,577

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MistyPony View Post
    I don't really have a problem with someone changing a horse's name (to each his own), but I really wish USEF would leave "aliases" on the online database of show records. At the very least it would be helpful for past owners who like to follow the careers of their old horses and would be interested in offering a retirement home somewhere down the line!
    Absolutely! It would make tracking horses SOOOO much easier. But that makes too much sense.
    Laurie
    Finding, preparing, showing and training young hunters, in hand and performance.
    www.juniorjohnsontrainingandsales.com


    6 members found this post helpful.

  19. #499
    Join Date
    Dec. 7, 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    593

    Default

    By far the most disturbing part of this thread is the number of people who think its just no big deal to cheat and everyone should just get over it. That's the problem in the h/j industry in a nutshell.

    In the last Chronicle article Larry blamed the bad registration on the following:
    1. Kelley
    2. Gosh, we're so busy!
    3. Gosh, we're in a rush!
    4. They register eventers? Really?
    You just bought a horse from a top international competitor. You really think she didn't get around to registering the horse? I mean she can't possibly be as busy as you, since at the time she was competing internationally, running a big training/coaching business, buying and selling horses, sitting on committees...

    And then, because things weren't bad enough, Larry blatantly admits that he (and other trainers) regularly ignore horses' international experience. In clear violation of the rules, and show them green when they're not eligible.

    But the thing that's keeping the thread going is the whole crowd that thinks it's no big deal to cheat. That's the point. Cheating's bad. For those of you getting ridiculously defensive, thAts why the h/j world has some big problems. People just don't get that cheating's bad.


    33 members found this post helpful.

  20. #500
    Join Date
    Aug. 12, 2001
    Location
    Trailer Trash Ammy!
    Posts
    19,520

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RockinHorse View Post
    Then don't be upset when breeders can not continue to breed the kind of horses that you want since they won't have good data on past matches to go by.
    Exactly. And it IS your job, assuming you are a professional, to present to your horse-hunting clients the very BEST quality horses available. How on earth do you do that without a good, if not excellent, knowledge of conformation and pedigree and the individual background and history of each horse?

    I do support our breeders wanting to be able to track their horses. This helps our American breeders develop BETTER horses. But I also wish to preserve competitors' right to change their horses' names if they see fit. USEF came up with an admirable solution which should have satisfied both requirements.

    The fact that the system is broken is NOT the fault of the Federation, it's the fault of those who flagrantly (or idiotically, take your pick) choose to violate the rules.

    The "keep the owners stupid" mentality really is approaching critical mass. Plenty of people see that even if you don't.

    Been thinking a lot over the weekend about what it would take to change this mentality, and really I think what it boils down to is that trainers have to start educating students about the importance of pedigree and conformation as they affect performance at a VERY young age. I was fortunate enough to be the beneficiary of such training early on and I value it highly. I certainly wish others in the sport could be so fortunate. As one European breeder pointed out, we will always be less successful than Europe internationally until we come to grips with this situation. Until then, we really *are*, as equestrians, no better than the Saudis - perennial also-rans b/c all we have is money to throw at a problem, we don't have the knowledge, skills, background, backbone, or intellectual capacity to actually solve it.
    "The standard you walk by is the standard you accept."--Lt. Gen. David Morrison, Austalian Army Chief


    4 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
  •  
randomness