Taraz...

Ziggypop
Posts: 561
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 9:45 pm

Tue Feb 18, 2020 10:14 am

MySaladDays wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 4:13 am
Squeaky wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 6:13 pm
So so terribly sad. 4 breakdowns since Sat at Oaklawn is very concerning.
First of all, training accidents are not the same as racing breakdowns.

As for track safety, few people know that EVERY YEAR, Oaklawn digs out its entire racing surface of dirt, sand and silt to the base, and replaces portions of each of the components to make it safest for racing. This is a huge process, and is done annually. If you go to the track during off season you see the huge mounds piled up and all the work being done.

They bring in fresh material, mix, mix, mix for months. Then they test it to see if it's right.........then they bring it back onto the track and spread it, an inch at a time. That takes a month or 2. Then, after that, they test it again, work it a little more, then put it to bed for another month. Then, right before the horses arrive for the met, they re-work it yet again, test the mixture........most tracks do not do an entire re-surface annually.

They do out of competition testing, as well as random testing for TCO2. Oaklawn has an inside safety rail, has adopted the guidelines of the Racing Medication and Testing Consortium, prohibits steroids, prohibits the use of toe grabs, conducts drug "super testing, ----- including the expansion of super-testing to non-stakes races.

In addition, Oaklawn Park is among a coalition of United States racetracks and horse racing organizations to have announced an incremental plan to ban the use of the anti-bleeding medication furosemide, commonly known as Lasix, under two specific circumstances beginning in 2020. This won't effect anything until 2021....A ban on race-day use of Lasix for 2-year-old horses will begin in 2020. (Oaklawn does not have races for 2-year-olds, but the race-day ban extends to all stakes races in 2021, which includes all Triple Crown races and Kentucky Derby preps.)

SOme of you may even remember that they offered a lasix free bonus to on top of the first-place purse value to horses who win without Lasix in their systems......to test the theory of what lasix does. There was a $60,000 bonus for a Lasix-free victory in the GI Arkansas Derby in 2015.......they were quite ahead of their time in this. (at the time there was only one other track in the nation that offered medication free bonuses!).

Also if any of you followed OP in the 70s and 80s, you would know that they were actually one of the last tracks to allow lasix to be given to horses AT ALL.

And I've experienced the days when they close the track, and cancel all the races, when the track has not thawed completely after temperatures hit record lows down here in winter.



"Where does Oaklawn stand in its record of racehorse injuries? According to a New York Times analysis in 2012 of the frequency of breakdowns or injuries at 62 tracks around the country with data from more than 150,000 race results from 2009 through 2011, Oaklawn’s rate was a low 3.2, below the average of 5.2 of all tracks."


AT ANY RATE, this wasn't a racing accident......it was a training accident.........
And she is still dead.
stark
Posts: 5887
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:55 am
Location: SoCal

Tue Feb 18, 2020 11:17 am

MySaladDays wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 4:13 am

First of all, training accidents are not the same as racing breakdowns.

......

AT ANY RATE, this wasn't a racing accident......it was a training accident.........
That doesn't matter to the PETA folks who have worked endlessly to extinguish racing in California.
Hoping they can't read a map and figure out the way to Oaklawn!
I've found it easier to tear up tickets at 8/1 instead of 8/5.
Catalina
Posts: 3693
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:08 pm
Location: South Texas

Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:30 pm

Ziggypop wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 10:14 am
MySaladDays wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 4:13 am
Squeaky wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 6:13 pm
So so terribly sad. 4 breakdowns since Sat at Oaklawn is very concerning.
First of all, training accidents are not the same as racing breakdowns.

As for track safety, few people know that EVERY YEAR, Oaklawn digs out its entire racing surface of dirt, sand and silt to the base, and replaces portions of each of the components to make it safest for racing. This is a huge process, and is done annually. If you go to the track during off season you see the huge mounds piled up and all the work being done.

They bring in fresh material, mix, mix, mix for months. Then they test it to see if it's right.........then they bring it back onto the track and spread it, an inch at a time. That takes a month or 2. Then, after that, they test it again, work it a little more, then put it to bed for another month. Then, right before the horses arrive for the met, they re-work it yet again, test the mixture........most tracks do not do an entire re-surface annually.

They do out of competition testing, as well as random testing for TCO2. Oaklawn has an inside safety rail, has adopted the guidelines of the Racing Medication and Testing Consortium, prohibits steroids, prohibits the use of toe grabs, conducts drug "super testing, ----- including the expansion of super-testing to non-stakes races.

In addition, Oaklawn Park is among a coalition of United States racetracks and horse racing organizations to have announced an incremental plan to ban the use of the anti-bleeding medication furosemide, commonly known as Lasix, under two specific circumstances beginning in 2020. This won't effect anything until 2021....A ban on race-day use of Lasix for 2-year-old horses will begin in 2020. (Oaklawn does not have races for 2-year-olds, but the race-day ban extends to all stakes races in 2021, which includes all Triple Crown races and Kentucky Derby preps.)

SOme of you may even remember that they offered a lasix free bonus to on top of the first-place purse value to horses who win without Lasix in their systems......to test the theory of what lasix does. There was a $60,000 bonus for a Lasix-free victory in the GI Arkansas Derby in 2015.......they were quite ahead of their time in this. (at the time there was only one other track in the nation that offered medication free bonuses!).

Also if any of you followed OP in the 70s and 80s, you would know that they were actually one of the last tracks to allow lasix to be given to horses AT ALL.

And I've experienced the days when they close the track, and cancel all the races, when the track has not thawed completely after temperatures hit record lows down here in winter.



"Where does Oaklawn stand in its record of racehorse injuries? According to a New York Times analysis in 2012 of the frequency of breakdowns or injuries at 62 tracks around the country with data from more than 150,000 race results from 2009 through 2011, Oaklawn’s rate was a low 3.2, below the average of 5.2 of all tracks."


AT ANY RATE, this wasn't a racing accident......it was a training accident.........
And she is still dead.
Exactly. Not a friend of PETA, but training accidents still need to get counted (finally) and not just get swept under the rug with the magic "get out of jail free" card of being "just" a training accident.
KatieK101
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 2:23 pm

Tue Feb 18, 2020 2:53 pm

Agree with everything that's been said here. While I appreciate how much work goes into Oaklawn's track (I didn't know they took such great care of it, and so often, too), Taraz is still dead and that's all that matters to some folk.

She was at the top of my list this year. Such a talented filly who had a promising career in front of her. It only hurts worse that Brad Cox seems to be a genuinely nice dude and clearly loves his horses.
User avatar
Squeaky
Posts: 962
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2013 12:29 pm

Tue Feb 18, 2020 4:09 pm

Catalina wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:30 pm
Ziggypop wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 10:14 am
MySaladDays wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 4:13 am


First of all, training accidents are not the same as racing breakdowns.

As for track safety, few people know that EVERY YEAR, Oaklawn digs out its entire racing surface of dirt, sand and silt to the base, and replaces portions of each of the components to make it safest for racing. This is a huge process, and is done annually. If you go to the track during off season you see the huge mounds piled up and all the work being done.

They bring in fresh material, mix, mix, mix for months. Then they test it to see if it's right.........then they bring it back onto the track and spread it, an inch at a time. That takes a month or 2. Then, after that, they test it again, work it a little more, then put it to bed for another month. Then, right before the horses arrive for the met, they re-work it yet again, test the mixture........most tracks do not do an entire re-surface annually.

They do out of competition testing, as well as random testing for TCO2. Oaklawn has an inside safety rail, has adopted the guidelines of the Racing Medication and Testing Consortium, prohibits steroids, prohibits the use of toe grabs, conducts drug "super testing, ----- including the expansion of super-testing to non-stakes races.

In addition, Oaklawn Park is among a coalition of United States racetracks and horse racing organizations to have announced an incremental plan to ban the use of the anti-bleeding medication furosemide, commonly known as Lasix, under two specific circumstances beginning in 2020. This won't effect anything until 2021....A ban on race-day use of Lasix for 2-year-old horses will begin in 2020. (Oaklawn does not have races for 2-year-olds, but the race-day ban extends to all stakes races in 2021, which includes all Triple Crown races and Kentucky Derby preps.)

SOme of you may even remember that they offered a lasix free bonus to on top of the first-place purse value to horses who win without Lasix in their systems......to test the theory of what lasix does. There was a $60,000 bonus for a Lasix-free victory in the GI Arkansas Derby in 2015.......they were quite ahead of their time in this. (at the time there was only one other track in the nation that offered medication free bonuses!).

Also if any of you followed OP in the 70s and 80s, you would know that they were actually one of the last tracks to allow lasix to be given to horses AT ALL.

And I've experienced the days when they close the track, and cancel all the races, when the track has not thawed completely after temperatures hit record lows down here in winter.



"Where does Oaklawn stand in its record of racehorse injuries? According to a New York Times analysis in 2012 of the frequency of breakdowns or injuries at 62 tracks around the country with data from more than 150,000 race results from 2009 through 2011, Oaklawn’s rate was a low 3.2, below the average of 5.2 of all tracks."


AT ANY RATE, this wasn't a racing accident......it was a training accident.........
And she is still dead.
Exactly. Not a friend of PETA, but training accidents still need to get counted (finally) and not just get swept under the rug with the magic "get out of jail free" card of being "just" a training accident.
Thank you. My thoughts exactly. I wonder if there will be an autopsy done on her legs to see if there were pre-existing stress fractures like what they found in Mongolian Groom. With TARAZ being such a big filly, wonder if the extra weight made bone micro fractures/ bruising more problematic. I know we are not there yet, but once those portable PET scans become more widely used and validated for accuracy, regular use such before and after works and races may help with early detection before catastrophic injuries occur.
MySaladDays
Posts: 1121
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2014 3:16 am

Tue Feb 18, 2020 7:30 pm

Ziggypop wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 10:14 am

And she is still dead.
Perhaps you, and others, missed the reason for my post. Someone posted that breakdowns were "very concerning" and seemed to be singling out Oaklawn. I was merely posting what I know about that particular track in terms of safety.

That breakdowns are "very concerning" is not a disagreement.

It's not a disagreement with the PETA folks, nor many racing fans who apparently take euthanizations quite to heart (which they should) and wish to know the surrounding details about how these things happen.

Best way to amerliorate these things is to get involved w/efforts supporting the horse racing integrity act, and other such efforts to make racing better.

The recent DRF article about joe sharp having 8 horses testing positive for a banned raceday med (and one that he apparently buys at tractor supply or somewhere and not vet administered) and gets only a small slap on the wrist tells you what needs to be fixed in our sport.
MySaladDays
Posts: 1121
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2014 3:16 am

Tue Feb 18, 2020 7:38 pm

Catalina wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:30 pm

Exactly. Not a friend of PETA, but training accidents still need to get counted (finally) and not just get swept under the rug with the magic "get out of jail free" card of being "just" a training accident.
The word "just" wasn't used anywhere in my post. Nor was there anything about "sweeping stuff under the rug". How you got that out of my post is some kind of projection on your part. Which I don't appreciate, by the way.

There is, however, a huge difference between a training accident and a racing breakdown, just in terms of simple bio-mechanics. Understanding also that training accidents include horses colliding with each other, jumping over a track rail, and/or sustaining life threatening inuries during paddock or gate training exercises........having nothing whatsoever to do with their bones or confirmation........when a large 1000 lb + animal who is freaking out and collding with inanimate objects, all bets are off.

So yes, it IS an important distinction..........but no "just" was attached to this anywhere in anything I wrote. And yes, all accidents, whether sustained in training or during racing should be noted and followed up on.

Its also too bad that the topic of injured and/or euthanized horses in the racing sport only seems to get noticed when the horses is a "somebody"......is there a topic on the forum where every horse, at every track, who has broken down and/or had an accident, noted? Seems like there should be, given the outrage over this incident.......
Catalina
Posts: 3693
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:08 pm
Location: South Texas

Sat Feb 22, 2020 3:33 pm

MySaladDays wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 7:38 pm
Catalina wrote:
Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:30 pm

Exactly. Not a friend of PETA, but training accidents still need to get counted (finally) and not just get swept under the rug with the magic "get out of jail free" card of being "just" a training accident.
The word "just" wasn't used anywhere in my post. Nor was there anything about "sweeping stuff under the rug". How you got that out of my post is some kind of projection on your part. Which I don't appreciate, by the way.

There is, however, a huge difference between a training accident and a racing breakdown, just in terms of simple bio-mechanics. Understanding also that training accidents include horses colliding with each other, jumping over a track rail, and/or sustaining life threatening inuries during paddock or gate training exercises........having nothing whatsoever to do with their bones or confirmation........when a large 1000 lb + animal who is freaking out and colliding with inanimate objects, all bets are off.

So yes, it IS an important distinction..........but no "just" was attached to this anywhere in anything I wrote. And yes, all accidents, whether sustained in training or during racing should be noted and followed up on.

Its also too bad that the topic of injured and/or euthanized horses in the racing sport only seems to get noticed when the horses is a "somebody"......is there a topic on the forum where every horse, at every track, who has broken down and/or had an accident, noted? Seems like there should be, given the outrage over this incident.......
The word "just" wasn't used anywhere in your post??? What happened??? Did we get a new rule that replies must limit themselves to the same words that were contained in the message being replied to??

You essentially want training accidents excluded from the count? Even though quite a few do result from/in the very same injuries as injuries incurred during racing? That seems to me like you are counting training injuries as less... important? As "just" being training accidents. They aren't all caused by young horses unseating their riders and colliding with other horses, nor by crashing into the rails, and similar incidents. There are horses - of all ages - shattering bones, suffering major soft-tissue injuries, suffering cardiac events. And so on.

It makes more sense to count all fatalities, and then whittle down that number by subtracting the incidents that should not be included.

As to outrage over Taraz' death? It seemed more like sadness to me that she was rushed forward in her training, forward too quickly for her bones to keep up with the weight of all that extra muscle.
MySaladDays
Posts: 1121
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2014 3:16 am

Sat Feb 22, 2020 8:05 pm

Catalina wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 3:33 pm
You essentially want training accidents excluded from the count?
Nowhere in my post did I say that, either. This "very odd" idea that anyone wants to sweep stuff under the rug is certainly not in any of my posts. I'm not the CHRB. :)

ALL incidents involving injuries and/or deaths should of course, be counted.

But yes, training accidents and racing accidents should be kept separately, and presented in that manner. As should horses injuring themselves in a paddock by kicking down walls, etc.

Done here. Take it up w/the Jockey Club how they record and separate data. It should be done honestly and completely.
Tessablue
Posts: 4181
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2019 7:05 pm

Sat Feb 22, 2020 8:55 pm

Catalina wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 3:33 pm
As to outrage over Taraz' death? It seemed more like sadness to me that she was rushed forward in her training, forward too quickly for her bones to keep up with the weight of all that extra muscle.
That's not how it works. Deaths in this sport WILL increase if we demonize early training every time a big-name horse breaks down. Besides, she debuted in November.

It's terribly sad, it shouldn't have happened, clearly something was amiss for her to break down in the first place and it needs to be fully evaluated- but I don't know how many times it needs to be said that bones require work to strengthen, and it's incredibly irresponsible to speculate that "rushing" in any way contributed to her death. Not just because we have no evidence to support it, but also because so-called "rushing" is one of the only reliable predictors of bone healthiness in racehorses.

I'm sorry to sound so harsh, but I'm seeing this sentiment pop up everywhere and it's just getting so frustrating to witness.
User avatar
Flanders
Posts: 3606
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:01 pm

Sat Feb 22, 2020 9:18 pm

Racing horses at 2 isn't bad for them. I don't know which site it was but recently they published a report that showed that horses that raced at 2 breakdown LESS than horses who start later in their careers.
Catalina
Posts: 3693
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:08 pm
Location: South Texas

Sat Feb 22, 2020 11:11 pm

Flanders wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 9:18 pm
Racing horses at 2 isn't bad for them. I don't know which site it was but recently they published a report that showed that horses that raced at 2 breakdown LESS than horses who start later in their careers.
Then again, some large frame horses (Zenyatta for one) have done quite well with being given more time to develop. And so, I like Shirreff's take on the subject.
carole
Posts: 2689
Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2013 4:57 pm

Sun Feb 23, 2020 9:22 am

Catalina wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 11:11 pm
Flanders wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 9:18 pm
Racing horses at 2 isn't bad for them. I don't know which site it was but recently they published a report that showed that horses that raced at 2 breakdown LESS than horses who start later in their careers.
Then again, some large frame horses (Zenyatta for one) have done quite well with being given more time to develop. And so, I like Shirreff's take on the subject.
But you also have horses like Dortmund who ended up being fairly precocious and he was huge.
Catalina
Posts: 3693
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:08 pm
Location: South Texas

Sun Feb 23, 2020 3:13 pm

carole wrote:
Sun Feb 23, 2020 9:22 am
Catalina wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 11:11 pm
Flanders wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 9:18 pm
Racing horses at 2 isn't bad for them. I don't know which site it was but recently they published a report that showed that horses that raced at 2 breakdown LESS than horses who start later in their careers.
Then again, some large frame horses (Zenyatta for one) have done quite well with being given more time to develop. And so, I like Shirreff's take on the subject.
But you also have horses like Dortmund who ended up being fairly precocious and he was huge.
Correct. I don't know the answer. Maybe it's like growth spurts and different parts of a horse develop at different rates, and not all of them at the same rate
User avatar
Flanders
Posts: 3606
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:01 pm

Sun Feb 23, 2020 4:28 pm

Catalina wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 11:11 pm
Flanders wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 9:18 pm
Racing horses at 2 isn't bad for them. I don't know which site it was but recently they published a report that showed that horses that raced at 2 breakdown LESS than horses who start later in their careers.
Then again, some large frame horses (Zenyatta for one) have done quite well with being given more time to develop. And so, I like Shirreff's take on the subject.
Sure she wasn't raced at 2 but she was still putting in workouts since she was 2. Its not like they said, Hey lets not start her with the trainer until 3.
User avatar
Northport
Posts: 2431
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 12:13 pm
Location: probably near the food

Sun Feb 23, 2020 8:26 pm

carole wrote:
Sun Feb 23, 2020 9:22 am
Catalina wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 11:11 pm
Flanders wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 9:18 pm
Racing horses at 2 isn't bad for them. I don't know which site it was but recently they published a report that showed that horses that raced at 2 breakdown LESS than horses who start later in their careers.
Then again, some large frame horses (Zenyatta for one) have done quite well with being given more time to develop. And so, I like Shirreff's take on the subject.
But you also have horses like Dortmund who ended up being fairly precocious and he was huge.
He wasn't really the soundest, though. He had constant hoof issues.
weeeeeeeee
Green Desert
Posts: 109
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2020 5:10 pm

Sun Feb 23, 2020 10:45 pm

Catalina wrote:
Sun Feb 23, 2020 3:13 pm
carole wrote:
Sun Feb 23, 2020 9:22 am
Catalina wrote:
Sat Feb 22, 2020 11:11 pm


Then again, some large frame horses (Zenyatta for one) have done quite well with being given more time to develop. And so, I like Shirreff's take on the subject.
But you also have horses like Dortmund who ended up being fairly precocious and he was huge.
Correct. I don't know the answer. Maybe it's like growth spurts and different parts of a horse develop at different rates, and not all of them at the same rate
I think the problem is that it is a multi faceted answer. Genetics, diet, training/ non training (which affects bone modeling, amongst other things), environment etc.
Tessablue
Posts: 4181
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2019 7:05 pm

Mon Feb 24, 2020 2:30 pm

There's always going to be some variation from horse to horse, and certainly it makes sense that larger horses would take time to mature mentally and into their frames. But there's a difference between easing a larger horse from works to races and just keeping a larger horse on the shelf until later. It's just a fact of biology that work makes bones strengthen and young bones are more plastic (in both strength and, importantly, shape). Bone development is a dynamic process that does not really "catch up" to the animal on a timed program. 2yos break down at a lower rate than other ages, and there are plenty of counter-anecdotes of large precocious horses (for example, Point Given).

Moreover, the fact that Taraz did not start serious training until September indicates that she was anything but rushed. In fact, it was a bit of a red flag. Was it because they didn't want to "rush" a larger-framed filly, or was it because of injury or lingering concerns of unsoundness? I have no idea. She broke down for a reason, that much is clear, but I just have to oppose the demonization of early work in these horses because it's going to ultimately result in more deaths and more injuries if the industry follows suit. And there are already indications that it is.
Post Reply