• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

Equine Canada Statement and backlash from Eric Lamaze

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Again?

    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!

    Comment


    • So Sorry!!!

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

      Comment


      • 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!

        Comment


        • 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.
          Boss Mare Eventing Blog
          https://www.youtube.com/user/jealoushe

          Comment


          • 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.

            Comment


            • 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).

              Comment


              • 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.

                Comment


                • 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.

                  Comment


                  • 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

                    Comment


                    • 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.

                      Comment


                      • 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.

                        Comment


                        • 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?
                          Your crazy is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.

                          Comment


                          • 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!
                            "And I'm thinking you weren't burdened with an overabundance of schooling." - Capt Reynolds "Firefly"

                            Comment


                            • 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?

                              Comment


                              • 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

                                Comment


                                • 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."

                                  Comment


                                  • 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

                                    Comment


                                    • 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?
                                      Your crazy is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.

                                      Comment


                                      • 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.

                                        Comment


                                        • 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.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X