HORSEPLOP.COM
General Category => Harness Racing => Topic started by: LUCPARK on March 10, 2024, 04:46:15 PM
-
ANY POSITIVE ..
LEAVE HIM OR HER
STAY WITH TRAINER
GIVE HIM OR HER LIFETIME OF CHANCES ..
SELL YOUR HORSES
OR DEMAND FREE TRAINING TO SUSPENSION IS OVVAH (beard means nothin its trainers suspension)
POSTIVE FEED BACK ONLY PLEASE...
-
Mind you if leave
It wood about a month or so before u can race a horse
Shipping New trainer has to get Acquainted with your animals
Etc etc etc
So it’s not that easy if a decision as you people think it is
And the BILL never stops.
Feeding. Jogging. Etc etc
-
Really depends on what the positive was for.
-
Really depends on what the positive was for.
The point of this thread
Cus people on here some people thinks it’s really easy to just move a horse of horses and if u have many it’s very difficult at best
It’s hard on horse to
And u still have to find another trainer that wood take u
Some People on here make it sound Like it’s no biggie
It is
-
So your going to leave over a bute + or lasix overage just like the little rat you are leave when the going gets tough people know who's getting their horses hell most people give their stock knowing they'll make money because that person has the good shit so just because your a scum bag and look for any reason to jump ship and leave behind a mountain of bills don't mean everyone else does the same
-
So your going to leave over a bute + or lasix overage just like the little rat you are leave when the going gets tough people know who's getting their horses hell most people give their stock knowing they'll make money because that person has the good shit so just because your a scum bag and look for any reason to jump ship and leave behind a mountain of bills don't mean everyone else does the same
This is a WHAT IF THREAD YOU FCKIN IDIOT
LIKE WHAT IF YOUR MOM DIDNT DROP YOU ON YOUR HEAD AT THREE
YOU WOOD PROPERLY HAVE HALF A BRAIN
IM JOT NOT GOING NOWHERE
NITWIT
-
Good point. I agree if you have multiple horses it would be very difficult to leave. Also, if you have multiple owners on those horses everyone might not agree.
-
After you have been in this business for a long time you learn a lot. First I never have more than 5 horses. If not mid level condition or SS stock they are gone as is any horse the vet says needs lasix. All are in partnership but I have controlling interests. Never more than 2 other people on a horse. Pay my bills the day they arrive. Never had a horse get a positive. Probably could tolerate a bute pos but anything beyond that the horses are moved.
-
If you write "wood" instead of "would", I believe you have lost the right to say another was dropped on their head.
-
Probably depends on the positive. Bute overage? No. Some class 1 or 2 that’s not contamination, probably.
-
Depends on how well the trainers doing , if their winning everything in sight stay with um.
Let’s not kid ourselves, we owners are just as big a whores as the trainers and drivers, we go where the money is, myself included!
-
All positives are contamination now
-
It’s a tough call and I thought about this for a minute. Here is what should happen. The racing commissions should have a public “black book” on every trainer who wants to race at their meet. The black book would contain a complete background of the trainers history in the business. It would contain every offense and suspensions they received. Then the commission would have a “watch list” meaning that particular trainer is being monitored open and transparent. If the owner or owners choose that trainer they have been forewarned that said trainer is being monitored and any offense would mean their horses would be suspended for the same amount of time that their trainer received. Say after 60 days the trainer could be removed off the “watch list” and all would be well. The owners deserve some type of warning as well as the trainer that they are being monitored closer than the others. Put it right in the program for complete transparency. If the owner wants to take the chance and stay with the trainer it’s not like they couldn’t deny that the trainer was on that “watch list”. Owners need to be held accountable as everyone involved. The public are risking their hard earned money.
-
Go elsewhere with the horse(s), leave the + trainer in an alley with a large hypodermic needle protruding from their head with a sign hanging from it saying, 11.dt
Yes, far from your "positive" range of multiple choices, but surely a necessary deterrent!
-
Go elsewhere with the horse(s), leave the + trainer in an alley with a large hypodermic needle protruding from their head with a sign hanging from it saying, 11.dt
Yes, far from your "positive" range of multiple choices, but surely a necessary deterrent!
Where u been cock lover blutarsky?
-
If you write "wood" instead of "would", I believe you have lost the right to say another was dropped on their head.
I've been trying to figure out if he really is this retarded or just fucking around thinking he's funny hes always doing stupid shit like that
-
It’s a tough call and I thought about this for a minute. Here is what should happen. The racing commissions should have a public “black book” on every trainer who wants to race at their meet. The black book would contain a complete background of the trainers history in the business. It would contain every offense and suspensions they received. Then the commission would have a “watch list” meaning that particular trainer is being monitored open and transparent. If the owner or owners choose that trainer they have been forewarned that said trainer is being monitored and any offense would mean their horses would be suspended for the same amount of time that their trainer received. Say after 60 days the trainer could be removed off the “watch list” and all would be well. The owners deserve some type of warning as well as the trainer that they are being monitored closer than the others. Put it right in the program for complete transparency. If the owner wants to take the chance and stay with the trainer it’s not like they couldn’t deny that the trainer was on that “watch list”. Owners need to be held accountable as everyone involved. The public are risking their hard earned money.
so by your thinking if a Chicago bear gets a + the owner should also get in trouble that makes no sense if they want to clean up the business which they don't no matter how the horse came up + groom peeing in stall a bad batch of grain whatever if you get let's say 3-4 your done and put on the do not allow list
-
It depends on the trainer. If the guy/gal has 50 in training and some random one tests positive it sounds like it could be environmental then I don’t see an issue. If that same trainer has 2-3 every year then I’m moving my horses.
-
so by your thinking if a Chicago bear gets a + the owner should also get in trouble that makes no sense if they want to clean up the business which they don't no matter how the horse came up + groom peeing in stall a bad batch of grain whatever if you get let's say 3-4 your done and put on the do not allow list
OK...I'll buy this. I completely agree on # 2. However, # 1 has been argued for many years. I hear you, if an owner is going to get punished, penalized to the point that it hurts financially, and so on, sure, what incentive is there. But here's my question: What if the owner is involved with the trainer's transgressions? Duplicitous? It's a very slippery slope. When, where, and how do you hold owners accountable? Steinbrenner never got suspended when a player of his came up positive for steroids. No owner did from what I can remember.
However, what if a team owner was more involved? Directly involved? What if the team owner facilitated making the steroids available. They or their staff searched out, found the known doctors, maybe even paid them some money, not for steroids directly, but they paid them to be available. What if the team owner made the doctors available -- gave them access to the locker room, training staff, and so on -- who were writing the prescriptions? While he wasn't a team owner, and there was no union, didn't Vince McMahon get indicted for this?
My point is that this problem has gotten so egregious, I feel you have to start holding everyone accountable -- trainers, drivers, vets, farm owners, compounders and equine companies, and yes, at a certain point owners. Let's see how this Howard Taylor situation plays out. Remember, there were other owners on the "master" list that was part of the other charges, indictments, trials, etc.
That was exactly my point in the above referenced post, re: Steinbrenner and McMahon. Zero accountability doesn't work. But at the same time, the other end of the extreme doesn't work. No, you can't just make every single owner liable from day one, moment one, 100%. I agree with some sliding-scale and owner's having the ability to make informed -- and not subjective to others -- decisions.
-
Couple things come to mind.
1. value of the investment (horse).
2. level of the trainer under suspension.
If its an expensive horse that's been heavily staked and at the onset or middle of stakes season. Yes, I would move to a barn that might be a better or "more" qualified match for the horse than the later.
If its a top level trainer and the suspension is only 30 days I'd stay. The horse is still being trained down and a schedule is maintained.
And that answer my friends, separates me from XY and Z.