Tevis Post Clarification

["Nancy Mitts" <mitts_n@hotmail.com>]

Let me clarify my previous post.
My point is that "deals gone bad" have 2 sides, usually with credible 
"witnesses" on each side. Such arguements generally have no place on 
ridecamp.
In this case, the implication was made that this horse was knowingly 
trashed. IMO there was no indication during the course of the ride this 
horse was being over ridden.

Nancy Mitts


>From: "Nancy Mitts" <mitts_n@hotmail.com>
>To: ridecamp@endurance.net
>CC: msofen@pacbell.net
>Subject: RC:  Re: 2001 Tevis Cup Ride
>Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:39:33 +0000
>
>I'm not the seller or a party to this deal in any way. I am however
>aquainted with the situation, because a large group from our organization
>went to Tevis that year.
>I have no idea how the horse looked the next day, since he was at a private
>farm, not the fairgrounds.
>I DO know the horse looked good & strong at ForestHill. He ate good & was
>quite willing to go at the end of the hold. I was also present at the
>finish, where he still looked quite good. Trotted bright eyed, tail up
>around the victory lap. Certainly needed no prodding at the vet check.
>The rider is also a runner, who spent a lot of time running himself to get
>in shape for the event.
>If I remember correctly, the people were so concerned after the vet's
>pre-purchase report they had another vet examine the horse, who came to a
>rather different opinion.
>
>Nancy Mitts
>

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp