There should not be such a law. Barbaro's case was just a very unfortunate and sad accident on the track; they should have checked him out better after he busted out of the gates. As the others have said, he was actually lightly raced. Instead of making them race later, I would just have more vet staff on hand, with more freqent checks. But even that wouldn't prevent all accidents; stuff happens, horses get injured, that's how it is.
2007-01-30 15:27:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by Olivia H 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Most everyone here recognizes PETA for what they are. As an insider on racing, I just wanted to add that Breeders today do little to effect the actual evolutionary genetic change. 99% of the breeding directed at least amount of skeletal to maximum amount of muscle were completed by the mid to late 1800's by religious techniqe that is in NO way rivaled today. Breeding a thoroughbred period with their close genetic make up, offers more chance for indentical chromosome reintroduction then anything we can do to chose here and there. Some thoroughbreds ARE 100% ready @ two years old, This fact stands, has stood, on Many fronts and attempts in the past to prove otherwise, however some bloodlines take a lil longer to reach full skeletal composure. A Program to specifically recoginze and and control the start of those specific lines is the ONLY way to protect those horses who will become injured due to skeletal immaturaty, NO!!!!!! organization has attepmted to approach the issue in this manner. We start EVERYTHING @3 two other barns we know, start at 3. The only time we start one at 2 years old, is if the horse is looking fully mature at 15 to 16 mos, and has a pedegree which contains several 2yo's with record performance, and or triple crowners.
2016-03-29 08:20:57
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well here's an idea, let's change the birth date of horses to be their actual birth date so that they can be foaled in any month and still run in 2yo races and actually be over 2 yrs old!
Also, let's stop tracks from trying to make their tracks faster which means more concussion on the horse's feet and bones.
Barbaro was an 03 baby and did not race first until oct of 05 and was only raced 6 times before the preakness so early racing was probably not the culprit.
2007-02-02 04:50:07
·
answer #3
·
answered by SC 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
You know what Patryk, on that one I have to say yes. Any riding horses, Lipizzans or Paso Fino, 4 years old is the norm when it comes to riding on the back of them and they have much stronger tendons and thicker legs than the throroughbreds, of course they're not made for racing. Older horses make better racers anyway, they haven't yet raced The Green Monkey ($16 M horse), on Feb 4th he'll be 3 yo, I hope they wait even longer.
2007-01-29 07:41:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by At Last WC2010 6
·
3⤊
0⤋
no, he was lightly raced compared to most who compete in the triple crown...if they waited until 4 to run the classics the dynamic of the triple crown would be changed, which probably wont be allowed...but im sure theres a statistic out there that shows that horses run heavily at 2 have shorter careers yearwise, than those that start later (not including somewhat successful horses retired to stud)
2007-01-29 15:49:45
·
answer #5
·
answered by doingitright44 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
No. Barbaro was actually very lightly raced. What happened to him could happen to any horse, even in the field.
2007-01-29 07:12:11
·
answer #6
·
answered by Edward K 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
I firmly believe Barbaro injury is the result of them not properly checking him out when he broke early from the gate.
2007-01-29 07:13:48
·
answer #7
·
answered by gg 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
It is very sad, but I'm sure if the owner found someone who wanted to save it then it could of been done.
2007-01-29 07:14:32
·
answer #8
·
answered by TroubleRose 6
·
1⤊
3⤋
i dont think any horse should race!
2007-01-29 07:28:12
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
yes
2007-01-29 07:12:27
·
answer #10
·
answered by Third 2
·
0⤊
2⤋