 |
Re: [RC] WC Freiheit The Real Winner Not Mack - Joe LongOn Thu, 05 Jan 2006 18:44:28 -0800, Don Huston <donhuston@xxxxxxx> wrote: Hi Dabney, Fred achieved a once-in-a-lifetime feat. I would have been soooo proud of that horse. I would have paid a few extra bucks to board Fred at Hal Hall's or somewhere then ship him back to me where I would have showcased that bad boy for a while then put him back to work. Mack trailered him to Tevis and he could damn well trailer him back a month or 2 later. Mack was more than willing to take all the kudos for winning but refused to accept responsibility for the wellbeing of Fred after the race. Here we have a world renowned endurance vet setting the worst possible example of ego centered riding. Obviously neither Mack nor Hal knew how much damage had been done to Fred so they just threw him into another race to find out. That is a really crappy way to assess the condition of a horse don't you think? What were those 2 thinking about? I would bet my best EasyBoot (I know you need several) that you would never have treated that great champion horse like that. Don Huston This is getting pretty nasty, and filled with unfounded assumptions. Matthew Mackay-Smith liked to bring new horses along and prove them in endurance, then sell them and start another, rather than stay with one horse for many years. That may not be my preference or yours, but it is his and who's to say it is any less deserving of our respect? I gather that MMS made a considerable profit on the horse, considering what the horse had just accomplished. Many others have done the same, selling horses to buyers in the Middle East. Not everyone has the same emotional ties to their horses that some of us do, why should we condemn them for that? This horse was sold to an experienced and successful endurance rider, IOW, he "went to a good home." You say they "threw him into another race" to find out how much "damage" had been done to him. Some pretty heavy assumptions here. First of all, there was no reason to suspect that the horse had been "damaged" at all. Two major 100-mile one-day rides a month apart, even with a long trailer ride in between, are well within a good horse's ability. And I don't believe that Hal Hall would "throw a horse into a ride" to see if he's unsound!!! Apparently, the horse did have problems after those rides, given the results of subsequent races -- but it was not a foregone conclusion just due to the schedule, and I doubt that Hal would have bought him had he shown signs of unsoundness following the Tevis. At any rate, I wasn't there, I didn't see the horse at the Tevis or afterwards. I gather that neither did you. Please let's not have wild claims made without evidence, that trash other people's reputations. -- Joe Long jlong@xxxxxxxx http://www.rnbw.com =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net. Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp Ride Long and Ride Safe!! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|