|
Howard,
Clearly, your world and my world do not intersect on any
level. When I say never - not once - that actually means NEVER. Do
you understand the concept of "never"? That means, FOR ME, in MY
experience, my pulls at a vet check always were a just cause, that NEVER did a
vet capriciously pull me. You just want target to point your finger at
when something doesn't go your way. Your posts are filled with "Why ME?"
statements. I'd say that you might want to start looking internally for a
change.
You are right - horses do not have to be perfect to continue
on. But if they have a flaw that the vet feels will lead to something more
significant, then they are going to pull the horse. As someone who has
nearly killed a horse through blind aggressive riding, I'm kind of stunned that
you still don't get it. YOU are responsible for managing your horse, and
if vets feel you aren't doing a good job at that, they will pull the horse to
protect them from YOU.
Lastly, why does nearly every post of yours have to include
profanity or a mention of sex? Just in case you've forgotten, there are
JUNIORS reading ridecamp. Time to clean up your act.
Mike Sofen
I'd like to discuss this
particular paragraph, except for the first sentence (we all know this
to be true, and it's a separate topic entirely). I think that it is
rare when a person can say "I've never-not once," as part of a statement of
opinion and be objective or, even, factual. When I was 14
years old I could honestly say, "I've never-not once-had sex with a female,"
but, does that mean that sex didn't exist or wasn't around? No, it
just meant that I hadn't experienced it, and eventually, thank God, I
did.
A horse does not have to be
perfect to be fit to continue. You may feel that way, Mike,
and you always have that option of pulling your horse at any time, if
that is the case. But, I do believe most of us other riders would like
to "see" what the problem is that the vet is telling us about, if for no
other reason than to clearly decide on what course of action to take, as far
as the horse's health is concerned.
When Jim stated that he
didn't see anything wrong with his horse, during the pre ride trot out,
where his horse almost got pulled, I do think Jim might have a reason to be
concerned, especially if they did pull Sunny. And, I don't think Jim
and I are the only two endurance riders who have had this experience.
A grade three lameness call should not be something that most folks cannot
see; it should be quite evident to others, not just to the vet making the
call.
Look, I'm not advocating
that they "loosen" the standards, not at all. I'm just asking that
they make the standards "standard;" in other words, they follow the rules as
written down by AERC, not their own personal interpretation of what
"fit to continue" actually means.
Endurance is evolving,
which means it's changing, constantly. If your world has stayed the
same, as far as endurance vet checks go, for the last 6 years, than things
must truly be different out west and I need to get out there. I, for
one, have noticed changes, in interpretation, and, quite recently, in the
use of CRI's. This recent revelation of a high percentage of endurance
horses having ulcers (if it's accurate) is most likely gonna make
some changes in how the game is played. Since its all for the
good of the horse, I won't argue with the vets about their call; I'm just
trying to understand what the criteria is, because I'd like to know exactly
what the rules of the sport are before I play.
cya,
Howard (this is an
interesting topic and one that affects all of us)
|
