WWTBAM Bored

Not the first to report but if you take second in the Kentucky Derby, you deserve your own thread.

How horrible for the jockey, trainer, and owners as well.

I wonder if this would have happened if she had run the Kentucky Oaks instead.

NASCAR would be a very different game if we shot the losing driver every week.

That was my first thought after I got over my initial outrage at Eight Belles’ death Saturday, after she finished the Kentucky Derby in second place. I wondered why it’s not a horrible tragedy for a horse to die.

As soon as they said she’d been euthanized due to her untreatable broken ankles, I yelled at the TV, “This sport sucks!” I know most of the horses genuinely want to run. I know they are well cared-for, better than they would be if they were not racing.

I also believe if they were not racing, they would not break ankles and have to be put down. Not so often, anyway.

Over the centuries, horses are the animals closest to humans. We domesticated them for plowing and war, and then later we asked them to run for our entertainment. More than any other animal, except maybe some cats, horses have kept their dignity around us. They have done what we asked, but never in a subservient way.

They are the noblest of creatures, and when one of them dies, it is worse to me than when some people die. People have choices about their lives, but horses don’t. They are told to run, and they do it. They like it, most of them, but they might like something else better.

I’ll be honest. I don’t follow this sport. I’d never heard of Eight Belles before Wednesday. But I feel her loss more than I would if any car driver announced he or she was leaving the sport. Eight Belles was noble in a way that humans may never be.

I hope she knew she placed.

Ritterskoop wrote:NASCAR would be a very different game if we shot the losing driver every week.

That was my first thought after I got over my initial outrage at Eight Belles’ death Saturday, after she finished the Kentucky Derby in second place. I wondered why it’s not a horrible tragedy for a horse to die.

As soon as they said she’d been euthanized due to her untreatable broken ankles, I yelled at the TV, “This sport sucks!” I know most of the horses genuinely want to run. I know they are well cared-for, better than they would be if they were not racing.

I also believe if they were not racing, they would not break ankles and have to be put down. Not so often, anyway.

Over the centuries, horses are the animals closest to humans. We domesticated them for plowing and war, and then later we asked them to run for our entertainment. More than any other animal, except maybe some cats, horses have kept their dignity around us. They have done what we asked, but never in a subservient way.

They are the noblest of creatures, and when one of them dies, it is worse to me than when some people die. People have choices about their lives, but horses don’t. They are told to run, and they do it. They like it, most of them, but they might like something else better.

I’ll be honest. I don’t follow this sport. I’d never heard of Eight Belles before Wednesday. But I feel her loss more than I would if any car driver announced he or she was leaving the sport. Eight Belles was noble in a way that humans may never be.

I hope she knew she placed.

Ellyn, what you wrote is beautiful.

Thank you, Skoop.

When I was a kid, I loved horse racing. My sister and I would watch the races from Aqueduct on TV every Saturday afternoon.

But now I think I hate it.

My son and I had chosen her as our horse to root for.
I was so glad he was napping during the race. I had recorded it for him but then erased it. Some things you shouldn't see or know about when you're five. I hope he doesn't remember to ask me about the race.
I am so proud of her and so very sad.
I did not "have a good Derby".

Ritterskoop wrote:
They are the noblest of creatures, and when one of them dies, it is worse to me than when some people die. People have choices about their lives, but horses don’t. They are told to run, and they do it. They like it, most of them, but they might like something else better.

I'm with you.

I hope she knew she placed.

She knew. She literally gave everything she had to try to keep up with the winner.

Since Barbaro's terrible injury and subsequent death at the Kentucky Derby, many tracks around the country have resurfaced with Polyturf, which is supposed to be far easier on the horses. Now we have another horse that has been destroyed in this country's most prominent race on a track that has kept its old surface for the sake of "tradition." The time has come for the installation of a new surface at Churchill Downs. Correction: a new track is overdue.

silvercamaro wrote: Since Barbaro's terrible injury and subsequent death at the Kentucky Derby, many tracks around the country have resurfaced with Polyturf, which is supposed to be far easier on the horses. Now we have another horse that has been destroyed in this country's most prominent race on a track that has kept its old surface for the sake of "tradition." The time has come for the installation of a new surface at Churchill Downs. Correction: a new track is overdue.

That might seem like a good argument, except that Barbaro won the Kentucky Derby then got injured at The Preakness.

I had to leave shortly after it was announced that she was gone.

I know it's great to win, and maybe they didn't know about it, but it hard to see the big celebration knowing what had happened. It just didn't seem right. I only saw a minute or two, if that, but it just left me with a bad feeling altogether.

Such a sad, sad day for everyone who loved and cared for her.

That might seem like a good argument, except that Barbaro won the Kentucky Derby then got injured at The Preakness.

Yep. That was an April sploofus question for me.

I"m not a horse-type person, but I did wonder, when I heard the news, how much the sloppy track might have factored in.

A hundred years of inbreeding horses for certain traits that are not conducive to skeletal strength can't have helped, either.

TheConfessor wrote:
That might seem like a good argument, except that Barbaro won the Kentucky Derby then got injured at The Preakness.

Yes. I wrong. I am pleased for you.

PlacentiaSoccerMom wrote:I wonder if this would have happened if she had run the Kentucky Oaks instead.

Now that I can read some of the stories, my sense is that it has to do with the track rather than the competition. But I gather it could have happened yesterday just as well, so it may be the skeletal structure and not the track or the competition.

5LD wrote:My son and I had chosen her as our horse to root for.
I was so glad he was napping during the race. I had recorded it for him but then erased it. Some things you shouldn't see or know about when you're five. I hope he doesn't remember to ask me about the race.
I am so proud of her and so very sad.
I did not "have a good Derby".

If he remembers to ask, you can tell him she was second place, which is nearly as good as first.

mrkelley23 wrote:I"m not a horse-type person, but I did wonder, when I heard the news, how much the sloppy track might have factored in.

It wasn't a sloppy track. It had plenty of time to drain and was rated fast.

Like everyone else I'm saddened by today's Derby. Thanks Skoop for your commentary. Just after the race I was thinking of the broken ankles and other limbs that people suffer in sports and that we can recover and are not 'put down'. NASCAR has many crashes but (cross fingers) rarely any deaths or serious injuries.









.

Ritterskoop wrote:NASCAR would be a very different game if we shot the losing driver every week.

I'd say the death rate for NASCAR drivers is higher than for stakes horses.

This whole thing is just tragic. I think they euthanize horses in severe situations like this because with two broken ankles she wouldn't have been able to stand for any lenght of time, right? And don't horses basically drown if they lay about for extended intervals? It doesn't make the whole thing any better, but I'm sure they don't just willy nilly kill a horse because it's convenient.

The comparison between horses and humans vis a vis "putting someone/thing down with an injury" is not strong in my opinion. And does a disservice to those who truly care and love these magnificent beings. Horses, that is. One should not watch, participate nor give importance to any sport then that involves potential injury to animals or humans if that's how you feel.

I disagree with some of you alls.

Bob Juch wrote:

Ritterskoop wrote:NASCAR would be a very different game if we shot the losing driver every week.

I'd say the death rate for NASCAR drivers is higher than for stakes horses.

Since 1990, there have been 408 racing-related deaths at U.S. tracks, according to an ongoing Charlotte Observer tally. This includes dirt tracks, trucks races, and all that, not just NASCAR. That's 23-24 people per year, roughly, depending on whether 1990 is included in the count.

I find several sources saying many more horses die each year than that, though not many I find reliable enough to cite (I have to get some work done, too). I am interested in Animal Aid's listing of 193 thoroughbreds who died on-course...in 2007..in Britain...alone. I doubt they have made up all these horses and tracks.

http://www.horsedeathwatch.com/

TheConfessor wrote:

mrkelley23 wrote:I"m not a horse-type person, but I did wonder, when I heard the news, how much the sloppy track might have factored in.

It wasn't a sloppy track. It had plenty of time to drain and was rated fast.

My apologies. Since I'm within a 150 miles or so of the track, I ASSumed they would be dealing with the same sloppy conditions we are here after the previous night's rain. I didn't take into account the kind of drainage system that would be in place for the world's premiere race.

I did listen to the race on the radio, since I happened to be on my way to pick up my son from his job. It was an exciting couple of minutes, followed by shock. Brent Musberger was actually touching and believable when he talked about Eight Belles.

This prompted me to find out more on the Web. Per Wikipedia, there has been no driver deaths on NASCAR itself since 2002. A couple of other articles r/e how they improved safety in the past few years since Dale Earnhardt's death:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASCAR_rul ... ons#Safety

http://www.howstuffworks.com/nascar-safety.htm

http://www.popularmechanics.com/automot ... 49470.html

Ritterskoop wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:

Ritterskoop wrote:NASCAR would be a very different game if we shot the losing driver every week.

I'd say the death rate for NASCAR drivers is higher than for stakes horses.

Since 1990, there have been 408 racing-related deaths at U.S. tracks, according to an ongoing Charlotte Observer tally. This includes dirt tracks, trucks races, and all that, not just NASCAR. That's 23-24 people per year, roughly, depending on whether 1990 is included in the count.

I find several sources saying many more horses die each year than that, though not many I find reliable enough to cite (I have to get some work done, too). I am interested in Animal Aid's listing of 193 thoroughbreds who died on-course...in 2007..in Britain...alone. I doubt they have made up all these horses and tracks.

http://www.horsedeathwatch.com/

I don't know a thing about horses, their breeding or their racing lives, but wouldn't it make sense if breeding for speed to also breed for sturdy bones? I wonder if it comes into play at all? Or is the stress put on them when they run like that going to cause issues sometimes no matter the bone structure? Anyone with more knowledge than I that would care to inform me?

Or is the stress put on them when they run like that going to cause issues sometimes no matter the bone structure? Anyone with more knowledge than I that would care to inform me?

A horses hoof is actually its middle finger. The other digits are vestigial. That is the sum total of what I know about horses anatomy -- Except for the horses patoots that linger around here.

NTTAWWT

5LD wrote:I don't know a thing about horses, their breeding or their racing lives, but wouldn't it make sense if breeding for speed to also breed for sturdy bones? I wonder if it comes into play at all? Or is the stress put on them when they run like that going to cause issues sometimes no matter the bone structure? Anyone with more knowledge than I that would care to inform me?

I am guessing that breeding for speed involves breeding for larger muscles and lighter bones. I suspect that's the tradeoff that came into play today.

Here are two articles about problems with Breeding and unsound horses - the first is old - it is about Ruffian. The second is written after today's race. Native Dancer and Reviewer are two of the dominant forces in thoroughbreds today. THe cross has increased unsound horses. I know Eight Belles had Native Dancer on both sides of her pedigree.


http://www.reines-de-course.com/ruffian.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... id=topnews


I've been a horse racing fan for much of my life - I sense the problem is getting worse, but I've never seen an injury like today's.