Jump to content
Bit Of A Yarn

Could AWT's lead to more horse fatalities?


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Huey said:

One concern I have  is , what happens if the AWT don't deliver as expected and they have wiped out 70% of the tracks across the country in trying to prove they do?

The acquiring of other tracks assets seems to be the only plan they have to make them viable.  They'll burn through that cash quick enough.

120 race meetings a year on the AWT'S is not only not possible considering the horse numbers but also a punting bore fest.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Dermott Weld's comment that the European horses should be scanned BEFORE they venture south.

For a start it shifts the costs to where they should lay.

This approach is a slippery slope much like the tinkering with whip rules.  I see some online commentators are promoting MRI scanning should be done for ALL horses.  Thats totally impractical and will drive the costs up again for the industry.

I also doubt that statistically it will make any difference.

What am I missing but wasn't Anthony Van Dyck scanned?

Why are we so intent on shooting ourselves in the foot?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said:

  I see some online commentators are promoting MRI scanning should be done for ALL horses.  Thats totally impractical and will drive the costs up again for the industry.

I also doubt that statistically it will make any difference.

I don't agree. I think that bone scanning all horses before their first start each season would make a difference. Whether that should be MRI, CT or scintigraphic I'll leave to the experts. Maybe any of the above. You have to think about that cost in light of the cost to the industry of the catastrophic injuries which in the worst case could be to shut it down completely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, curious said:

I don't agree. I think that bone scanning all horses before their first start each season would make a difference. Whether that should be MRI, CT or scintigraphic I'll leave to the experts. Maybe any of the above. You have to think about that cost in light of the cost to the industry of the catastrophic injuries which in the worst case could be to shut it down completely.

I don't disagree in principle...but how many of the smaller players can/could afford that?  Many are just hanging on by the skin of their teeth as it is.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Freda said:

I don't disagree in principle...but how many of the smaller players can/could afford that?  Many are just hanging on by the skin of their teeth as it is.

Yes. I get your point. It would probably depend how affordably that could be done if it is mass numbers of horses. But a bit of creative thinking (I know that's not common in this game!) would surely make it affordable for most. Maybe NZTR could buy a portable CT scanner and employ a technician to move it round the country and operate it? Then send to their vet for review?  If it could be done for a couple of hundred bucks, I'd probably do it anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, curious said:

Yes. I get your point. It would probably depend how affordably that could be done if it is mass numbers of horses. But a bit of creative thinking (I know that's not common in this game!) would surely make it affordable for most. Maybe NZTR could buy a portable CT scanner and employ a technician to move it round the country and operate it? Then send to their vet for review?  If it could be done for a couple of hundred bucks, I'd probably do it anyway.

But where is the research that shows it makes a difference statistically?  For example more than providing safe tracks?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, curious said:

I don't agree. I think that bone scanning all horses before their first start each season would make a difference. Whether that should be MRI, CT or scintigraphic I'll leave to the experts. Maybe any of the above. You have to think about that cost in light of the cost to the industry of the catastrophic injuries which in the worst case could be to shut it down completely.

It won't eliminate catastrophic injuries.  Drawing attention to what is an inherent weakness in the Thoroughbred is only go to increase the clamour for the ending of the sport.  Geez it won't be long before the activists will start drawing attention to mouth bits and how will blind the horses with blinkers because they are too scared to race!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

But statistically does it make a difference?  Why wasn't Anthony Van Dyck identified?  Wasn't he scanned?  Or for that matter Wichita?

We don't know if he was scanned do we? We don't yet know whether damaged or weak bone structure caused or contributed to that specific injury. I've not seen though any indication that he was scanned. If so, it would have been as a private activity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, curious said:

We don't know if he was scanned do we? We don't yet know whether damaged or weak bone structure caused or contributed to that specific injury. I've not seen though any indication that he was scanned. If so, it would have been as a private activity.

It's not clear if he was or not.  He only exited quarantine hours before his start in the Caulfield cup.  The horses need to be sedated so there would have to be a clear time before starting.

BTW a CT scanner costs $1.3m. and isn't very mobile!

How many past stars would have failed the test?

In my opinion statistically there is probably as much chance of getting galloped on.  For example a CT scan wouldn't have saved Dulcify.

What about the horses that come back to the birdcage with blood flowing from their nostrils?  If we pre-tested for bleeders then we wouldn't have many horses left will we?

Do we see the animal activists jumping up and down when a jockey is injured or killed?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

BTW a CT scanner costs $1.3m. and isn't very mobile!

$1.3m seems like a small price to pay when we are talking about even a single incident in a $5m race. And if you watch that video above you will see that portable scanners are now available and in use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, curious said:

Yes. I get your point. It would probably depend how affordably that could be done if it is mass numbers of horses. But a bit of creative thinking (I know that's not common in this game!) would surely make it affordable for most. Maybe NZTR could buy a portable CT scanner and employ a technician to move it round the country and operate it? Then send to their vet for review?  If it could be done for a couple of hundred bucks, I'd probably do it anyway.

Yes, I think that cost could be acceptable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, curious said:

$1.3m seems like a small price to pay when we are talking about even a single incident in a $5m race. And if you watch that video above you will see that portable scanners are now available and in use.

But it won't eliminate catastrophic injuries and adds costs and barriers to racing a horse.  Physiologically a horse is not designed to race two miles at speed.  Why not ban the Cup?

Ban all horses that weigh over 600 kg as their legs are not designed to carry that weight.  There goes Empire Rose.

Apply the same philosophy to bleeders.  

Where and when does it stop?  Catastrophic injuries are part and parcel of racing and training racehorse.  Partee lashed out in the yard at Ellerslie and broke both back legs.  Ban yards.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said:

But where is the research that shows it makes a difference statistically?  For example more than providing safe tracks?

and thats the real point having good tracks and good staff can help reduce these things. But the personnel running the industry have no idea about it all, they just write policies and pretend , there is just no progress in NZ racing with that in mind.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...