I don't get it. OK, it's sad that Barbaro broke his ankle and may have to be put down. I'm sure it's very painful for the owners and for anyone who had anything to do with the horse. But to the rest of us, it's not that big a deal.
So why did the local "news" programs devote so much time to the story? Four or five minutes as the freaking lead story, then another two or three minutes during sports. That's six to eight minutes out of a 22-minute program. Can you name an injury to any one person that warranted a third of the next day's entire newspaper?
Then there were the "news" people, as well as those that they interviewed, some of who had no connection to the horse, calling it a "tragedy." No, honey, coming home from Iraq in a box is a tragedy. Burying a child who got caught in the crossfire between drug dealers is a tragedy. A horse breaking its ankle isn't even close. -- D.F. Manno | dfma...@mail.com Had enough? Vote Democratic!
"D.F. Manno" <dfma...@mail.com> wrote: > I don't get it. OK, it's sad that Barbaro broke his ankle and may have > to be put down. I'm sure it's very painful for the owners and for > anyone who had anything to do with the horse. But to the rest of us, > it's not that big a deal.
> So why did the local "news" programs devote so much time to the story? > Four or five minutes as the freaking lead story, then another two or > three minutes during sports. That's six to eight minutes out of a > 22-minute program. Can you name an injury to any one person that > warranted a third of the next day's entire newspaper?
> Then there were the "news" people, as well as those that they > interviewed, some of who had no connection to the horse, calling it a > "tragedy." No, honey, coming home from Iraq in a box is a tragedy. > Burying a child who got caught in the crossfire between drug dealers > is a tragedy. A horse breaking its ankle isn't even close.
Hmm. I don't know that I can argue with your premise. I also don't care to defend or even discuss what TV news did or didn't do; either you understand that TV news is 97% pandering, worthless shit or you don't.
But as to whether a Derby-winning race horse, a Triple Crown contender, suffering a career-ending, possibly life-ending injury in such a freakish way is "news" and of interest to those beyond his owners and bettors... well, if it's not to you, then either change the channel or (better yet) turn off the goddamned babblebox.
I'm sure a thousand horses were injured and perhaps put down this week, and the great many were only known to and the concern of those who owned and knew them. But there's a hierarchy in such things, and a pinnacle- champion horse is of much wider and more intense interest than a schoolgirl's horse in Montana. Just as it's sad when a high-school pitcher blows out his elbow, but of much wider interest when Johnny Damon suffers a career-threatening injury. Or when Dale Earnhardt is killed in a potentially survivable crash, vis-a-vis the thousands of people killed that month in car crashes.
Perhaps it's that you're not an animal person, and so don't want four legged furry things cluttering up your "important" news about people and places of no more ultimate effect than Barbaro.
-- |=- James Gifford = FIX SPAMTRAP TO REPLY -=| |=- So... your philosophy fits in a sig, does it? -=|
> "D.F. Manno" <dfma...@mail.com> wrote: >> I don't get it. OK, it's sad that Barbaro broke his ankle and may have >> to be put down. I'm sure it's very painful for the owners and for >> anyone who had anything to do with the horse. But to the rest of us, >> it's not that big a deal.
>> So why did the local "news" programs devote so much time to the story? >> Four or five minutes as the freaking lead story, then another two or >> three minutes during sports. That's six to eight minutes out of a >> 22-minute program. Can you name an injury to any one person that >> warranted a third of the next day's entire newspaper?
>> Then there were the "news" people, as well as those that they >> interviewed, some of who had no connection to the horse, calling it a >> "tragedy." No, honey, coming home from Iraq in a box is a tragedy. >> Burying a child who got caught in the crossfire between drug dealers >> is a tragedy. A horse breaking its ankle isn't even close.
> Hmm. I don't know that I can argue with your premise. I also don't care > to defend or even discuss what TV news did or didn't do; either you > understand that TV news is 97% pandering, worthless shit or you don't.
> But as to whether a Derby-winning race horse, a Triple Crown contender, > suffering a career-ending, possibly life-ending injury in such a freakish > way is "news" and of interest to those beyond his owners and bettors... > well, if it's not to you, then either change the channel or (better yet) > turn off the goddamned babblebox.
> I'm sure a thousand horses were injured and perhaps put down this week, > and the great many were only known to and the concern of those who owned > and knew them. But there's a hierarchy in such things, and a pinnacle- > champion horse is of much wider and more intense interest than a > schoolgirl's horse in Montana. Just as it's sad when a high-school > pitcher blows out his elbow, but of much wider interest when Johnny Damon > suffers a career-threatening injury. Or when Dale Earnhardt is killed in > a potentially survivable crash, vis-a-vis the thousands of people killed > that month in car crashes.
> Perhaps it's that you're not an animal person, and so don't want four > legged furry things cluttering up your "important" news about people and > places of no more ultimate effect than Barbaro.
I don't quite know why you want to be so miserly in your sympathy with fellow living creatures, DF. Feeling sad about Barbaro doesn't mean I can't feel as much (or more) sadness too about the needless deaths of so many US soldiers. I haven't used up my full allotment of sadness yet. And I'll admit I'm a bit surprised that you feel humanoids to be so superior as to be the only ones worthy of your commiseration. I'd expect that of a Republican, but not you. Interesting.
I have never quite understood why a broken leg is so utterly life-threatening for a horse as it is. From an interview with a vet in the paper today, he was gravely worried about Barbaro for two reasons: a) that a horse can't undergo six weeks of bed rest like we can to let the fractures heal; and b) he said that there was a big potential problem with getting enough blood to circulate down to the fracture site.
Regarding the first issue, it's just hard to believe that some kind of approach could be taken to allow a horse to keep from putting weight on the leg while it heals. Like some kind of sling or something. Or just sedating the horse so completely that it can't stand up. I dunno, something. A cast so strong it can fully hold the weight. A wheeled cart like Porgy used in Porgy and Bess. I dunno. Something.
I hadn't heard the second issue raised, and it made me wonder if a horse's leg has ever been amputated. I've seen a number of three-legged dogs and they seemed to get along OK. Is a three-legged horse some kind of physical impossibility (i.e., because of the way they walk they can't get along on only three legs)?
-- M C Hamster "Big Wheel Keep on Turnin'" -- Creedence Clearwater Revival
D.F. Manno wrote: >I don't get it. OK, it's sad that Barbaro broke his ankle and may have to be put >down. I'm sure it's very painful for the owners and for anyone who had anything >to do with the horse. But to the rest of us, it's not that big a deal.
>So why did the local "news" programs devote so much time to the story? Four or >five minutes as the freaking lead story, then another two or three minutes >during sports. That's six to eight minutes out of a 22-minute program. Can you >name an injury to any one person that warranted a third of the next day's entire >newspaper?
Harry Whittington's gunshot wound. Ronald Reagan's gunshot wound.
-- Ulo Melton http://www.sewergator.com - Your Pipeline To Adventure "Show me a man who is not afraid of being eaten by an alligator in a sewer, and I'll show you a fool." -Roger Ebert
D.F. Manno wrote: > I don't get it. OK, it's sad that Barbaro broke his ankle and may have to be put > down. I'm sure it's very painful for the owners and for anyone who had anything > to do with the horse. But to the rest of us, it's not that big a deal.
Speak for yourself. You sound like one of those "compassionate conservatives" the right natters on about.
> So why did the local "news" programs devote so much time to the story? Four or > five minutes as the freaking lead story, then another two or three minutes > during sports. That's six to eight minutes out of a 22-minute program. Can you > name an injury to any one person that warranted a third of the next day's entire > newspaper?
I'm sure there are humans that may have warranted similar amounts of newstime, but none of them happened to have sustained life-threatening injuries yesterday.
> Then there were the "news" people, as well as those that they interviewed, some > of who had no connection to the horse, calling it a "tragedy." No, honey, coming > home from Iraq in a box is a tragedy. Burying a child who got caught in the > crossfire between drug dealers is a tragedy. A horse breaking its ankle isn't > even close.
I'd say the opposite, actually. Barbaro is a national figure, whereas a soldier or child, while individually very important, isn't. I think "tragedy" has been way overused to indicate terrible events that impact very few people. Barbaro's breaking his leg has affected the hopes and dreams of many, many people as well as changed the course an entire racing season and potentially the course of the breed, given that a Kentucky Derby winner (not to mention a Triple Crown winner) has a chance to affect the thoroughbred gene pool in an extraordinary way.
Michelle wrote: > On Sun, 21 May 2006, M C Hamster wrote:
> > I hadn't heard the second issue raised, and it made me wonder if a horse's > > leg has ever been amputated. I've seen a number of three-legged dogs and > > they seemed to get along OK. Is a three-legged horse some kind of physical > > impossibility (i.e., because of the way they walk they can't get along on > > only three legs)?
> I don't think they can compensate for the loss - look at the weight of the > body and how thin and delicate the legs are. The balance probably wouldn't > work, or not without injuring the other legs.
> I'm not sure about the lack of prosthetics, but (SWAG) doesn't amputation > happen a significant amount of time before the fitting, leaving the horse > with no means to stand while it waits?
Yes, there are a (very few) cases of leg amputation in horses, with compensating prosthetics. The issue is of course supporting the horse's weight during healing, and whether the animal will be able to compensate with an artificial limb without reinjuring itself.
Generally speaking, horses need all four legs to support themselves. Often, an injury preventing weight bearing on one leg will result in another injury on the compensating leg from the stress. Horses have to be supported in slings, and horses are generally not very good at tolerating long-term immobility or relative immobility.
However one may feel about a horse getting this much news coverage, we have to be grateful for quotes like this one: <http://www.usatoday.com/sports/horses/2006-05-21-barbaro-focus_x.htm?...> <q> "The Triple Crown is special because it is just so hard to win," said Hendricks, whose Brother Derek finished fourth in each of the first two legs. "Change it and it won't be the same." </q>
It's tough to argue with that.
-- Ulo Melton http://www.sewergator.com - Your Pipeline To Adventure "Show me a man who is not afraid of being eaten by an alligator in a sewer, and I'll show you a fool." -Roger Ebert
Veronique wrote: > Yes, there are a (very few) cases of leg amputation in horses, with > compensating prosthetics. The issue is of course supporting the horse's > weight during healing, and whether the animal will be able to > compensate with an artificial limb without reinjuring itself.
That's what I was wondering. Thoroughbreds especially are bred to have such fine bones and small feet that I was thinking (without any knowledge of horses at all, just guessing) that they wouldn't be able to support their weight on three legs. It's probably the same for deer, no?
> Generally speaking, horses need all four legs to support themselves. > Often, an injury preventing weight bearing on one leg will result in > another injury on the compensating leg from the stress. Horses have to > be supported in slings, and horses are generally not very good at > tolerating long-term immobility or relative immobility.
I think that's probably true of a lot of animals. I have a three-legged cat, and he pounced one of the other cats the night he came home from the veterinary hospital. Sitting still and healing just didn't cross his teeny little feline mind.
On 21 May 2006 15:06:15 -0500, "M C Hamster" <davol...@speakeasy.nononanet>wrote:
>Regarding the first issue, it's just hard to believe that some kind of >approach could be taken to allow a horse to keep from putting weight on the >leg while it heals. Like some kind of sling or something. Or just sedating >the horse so completely that it can't stand up. I dunno, something. A cast >so strong it can fully hold the weight. A wheeled cart like Porgy used in >Porgy and Bess. I dunno. Something.
>I hadn't heard the second issue raised, and it made me wonder if a horse's >leg has ever been amputated. I've seen a number of three-legged dogs and >they seemed to get along OK. Is a three-legged horse some kind of physical >impossibility (i.e., because of the way they walk they can't get along on >only three legs)?
Pretty much. An injury that takes one leg completely out of action, or partially so for a long time will seriously mess up the horsies other legs. I have seen footage of a horse who had a successful foot amputation with prosthetic attachment, but I think it's extremely uncommon and maybe not a possibility with a racehorse due to physique and temperment.
nj"high bred"m
-- "Aha, Mr. Bond! You have arrived just in time to witness the triumph of the trilobites, and the end of the human race."
On Mon, 22 May 2006 02:46:00 GMT, Mary <mrfeath...@aol.com>wrote:
>I think that's probably true of a lot of animals. I have a three-legged >cat, and he pounced one of the other cats the night he came home from >the veterinary hospital. Sitting still and healing just didn't cross >his teeny little feline mind.
The Best Beloved's young cat had simultaneous bilateral femoral head and neck ostectomies on Easter Monday. (This means that he had the tops of both his femurs removed - he just has the long straight part of his thigh bones left - no angled bits or hip joint.) He was walking reasonably well within 24 hours of the surgery, and while he's not jumping on anything (yet) he is perfectly mobile and can climb well.
nj"the cat came back"m
-- "Aha, Mr. Bond! You have arrived just in time to witness the triumph of the trilobites, and the end of the human race."
>> I have never quite understood why a broken leg is so utterly >> life-threatening for a horse as it is. From an interview with a vet in >> the >> paper today, he was gravely worried about Barbaro for two reasons: a) >> that >> a horse can't undergo six weeks of bed rest like we can to let the >> fractures >> heal; and b) he said that there was a big potential problem with getting >> enough blood to circulate down to the fracture site.
>> Regarding the first issue, it's just hard to believe that some kind of >> approach could be taken to allow a horse to keep from putting weight on >> the >> leg while it heals. Like some kind of sling or something. Or just >> sedating >> the horse so completely that it can't stand up. I dunno, something. A >> cast >> so strong it can fully hold the weight. A wheeled cart like Porgy used >> in >> Porgy and Bess. I dunno. Something.
> They can be put the horse in a sling, but he might start to fight and > struggle. That depends on the horse and the surgeon's decision. And > sedation for that amount of time would also be problematic. Horses that > spend too long lying down develop other internal problems.
> FWIW, he'll be in a sling in a pool when he comes out of anesthesia, to > keep him from thrashing around and injuring himself more as he come to. > (That's what happened to Ruffian, before they used slings and pools).
"When a horse like Ruffian breaks a leg, that horse needs to be cared for from the moment the horse comes out of the anesthesia by hoisting the horse up by a huge crane and lowering the horse into a pool of water while sedated. When the horse realizes his situation, nature kicks in and the horse will be cognizant of his injury. By keeping the horse in the pool of water by a hoisted crane, the horse will be able to kick and move the bandaged leg without any furthur injury to the leg. Slowly, with medication, proper diet and plenty of vegetable/mineral oil to prevent colic, a horse may, I said may, recover from a broken leg.
"The operation on Ruffian was successful. It was the reaction after the operation, that caused the horse to try and stand that caused the broken leg to be challenged. Had Ruffian been sedated and rushed to a full equine clinic with full operating facilities and aftercare, that horse would have had a fair chance at recovery after ninety days and after three or four years, may have been broodmared out to Secretariat. What a progeny that would have been. Carried by Ruffian and sired by Secretariat. the bidding would have started at $10 million and who knows what that foal would have accomplished."
****
I've found a few references to horses with amputations, but they seem to involve relatively minor amputations, i.e., the very lower part of the foot, rather than a broken leg.
-- M C Hamster "Big Wheel Keep on Turnin'" -- Creedence Clearwater Revival
>. . .Had Ruffian been sedated and rushed to a full equine >clinic with full operating facilities and aftercare, that horse would have >had a fair chance at recovery after ninety days and after three or four >years, may have been broodmared out to Secretariat. What a progeny that >would have been. Carried by Ruffian and sired by Secretariat. the bidding >would have started at $10 million and who knows what that foal would have >accomplished."
How certain is this last part? That is, do two splendid horses always yield an equal foal? I'd think not, given the quirks of genetics. It's obviously what they are hoping for, and often get, but what percentage of the time? I would think it isn't high else, the world would be full of wonder horses. And, we wouldn't have accounts of no-account horses being loved by a little girl, trained by a crusty, over-the-hill trainer going on to win the Cup.
On Mon, 22 May 2006 15:38:47 GMT, ctbis...@earthlink.netttt (Charles Bishop)wrote:
>[snip previous portion of article to get to-]
>>. . .Had Ruffian been sedated and rushed to a full equine >>clinic with full operating facilities and aftercare, that horse would have >>had a fair chance at recovery after ninety days and after three or four >>years, may have been broodmared out to Secretariat. What a progeny that >>would have been. Carried by Ruffian and sired by Secretariat. the bidding >>would have started at $10 million and who knows what that foal would have >>accomplished."
>How certain is this last part?
Completely certain. Who knows what the foal would have accomplished? No one. Great racehorses can be indifferent breeders, and even great breeders don't produce sure things. And great horses can be produced by unexpected bloodlines.
A great horse like Northern Dancer (who I don't think was initially expected to be as good as he was) became one of the most successful sires of the century, and I think his foals still hold price records. However in the 1980s it was still possible to come by a Dancer-bloodlined horse for a reasonable price, I knew two people who had them, as not all the foals came out with what was needed
nj"shorty and jazz"m
-- "Aha, Mr. Bond! You have arrived just in time to witness the triumph of the trilobites, and the end of the human race."
"M C Hamster" <davol...@speakeasy.nononanet> wrote:
>I hadn't heard the second issue raised, and it made me wonder if a horse's >leg has ever been amputated. I've seen a number of three-legged dogs and >they seemed to get along OK. Is a three-legged horse some kind of physical >impossibility (i.e., because of the way they walk they can't get along on >only three legs)?
A month or so back, I posted a link to a film clip of a two legged dog -- one born without front legs at all. It was a fully functional biped. Someone responded with a link to articles about a dog that lost both back legs in an accident. -- Tomorrow is today already. Greg Goss, 1989-01-27
> > I don't get it. OK, it's sad that Barbaro broke his ankle and > > may have to be put down. I'm sure it's very painful for the > > owners and for anyone who had anything to do with the horse. > > But to the rest of us, it's not that big a deal.
> Speak for yourself. You sound like one of those "compassionate > conservatives" the right natters on about.
So that makes two people who have decided to insult me because I think the story is being overplayed and some people are overreacting. Humpf! -- D.F. Manno | dfma...@mail.com Had enough? Vote Democratic!
> In article <1148251963.095552.177...@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > "Veronique" <veroniqueuni...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> D.F. Manno wrote:
>> > I don't get it. OK, it's sad that Barbaro broke his ankle and >> > may have to be put down. I'm sure it's very painful for the >> > owners and for anyone who had anything to do with the horse. >> > But to the rest of us, it's not that big a deal.
>> Speak for yourself. You sound like one of those "compassionate >> conservatives" the right natters on about.
> So that makes two people who have decided to insult me because I think the > story > is being overplayed and some people are overreacting. Humpf!
Now it's my turn to be a bit contrite and say that, had I really seen them devoting vast amounts of time to this story, that I might have reacted as you did. I only saw a little bit of news on this, but what I read made me quite sad... so it seemed wrong for you to be so cold-hearted about this, when we know you're a caring person in general, unlike all of those hard-hearted Republican creepbums.
-- M C Hamster "Big Wheel Keep on Turnin'" -- Creedence Clearwater Revival
In article <dco3729gsgguc1jkq9g0fvdr3lp8428...@4ax.com>, njma...@storm.ca wrote: >On Mon, 22 May 2006 15:38:47 GMT, ctbis...@earthlink.netttt (Charles >Bishop)wrote:
>>[snip previous portion of article to get to-]
>>>. . .Had Ruffian been sedated and rushed to a full equine >>>clinic with full operating facilities and aftercare, that horse would have >>>had a fair chance at recovery after ninety days and after three or four >>>years, may have been broodmared out to Secretariat. What a progeny that >>>would have been. Carried by Ruffian and sired by Secretariat. the bidding >>>would have started at $10 million and who knows what that foal would have >>>accomplished."
>>How certain is this last part?
>Completely certain. Who knows what the foal would have accomplished? >No one. Great racehorses can be indifferent breeders, and even great >breeders don't produce sure things. And great horses can be produced >by unexpected bloodlines.
Sorry. English Idiom alert. I took the phrase to mean that it was certain the foal would have done great things, not that there was doubt that it might. Do you not read it that way?
>A great horse like Northern Dancer (who I don't think was initially >expected to be as good as he was) became one of the most successful >sires of the century, and I think his foals still hold price records. >However in the 1980s it was still possible to come by a >Dancer-bloodlined horse for a reasonable price, I knew two people who >had them, as not all the foals came out with what was needed
And that was my point, kinda because it left the dam side of the equation unnamed. Still, while choosing the parents makes the foal's chances much better, is there a guarantee that it will be great?
>nj"shorty and jazz"m
charles, I beg of you, annotate these for those less educated, bishop
>> > I don't get it. OK, it's sad that Barbaro broke his ankle and >> > may have to be put down. I'm sure it's very painful for the >> > owners and for anyone who had anything to do with the horse. >> > But to the rest of us, it's not that big a deal.
>> Speak for yourself. You sound like one of those "compassionate >> conservatives" the right natters on about.
>So that makes two people who have decided to insult me because I think the story >is being overplayed and some people are overreacting. Humpf!
And yet you are so kind to others when they disagree. There's no justice, I tell ya.
> I don't quite know why you want to be so miserly in your sympathy with > fellow living creatures, DF. Feeling sad about Barbaro doesn't mean I can't > feel as much (or more) sadness too about the needless deaths of so many US > soldiers.
If the deaths of Americans "needlessly" were so important to you, you'd be in a fret about the 40,000 Americans who die each year in car accidents. But you are not, are you?
> I haven't used up my full allotment of sadness yet. And I'll > admit I'm a bit surprised that you feel humanoids to be so superior as to be > the only ones worthy of your commiseration. I'd expect that of a > Republican, but not you. Interesting.
Do you really think that Republicans don't care about anything but cold Vulcan logic? (Of course I expect you also believe that it is Democrats who believe in logic as well, Republicans being just "idiots".)
> I have never quite understood why a broken leg is so utterly > life-threatening for a horse as it is. From an interview with a vet in the > paper today, he was gravely worried about Barbaro for two reasons: a) that > a horse can't undergo six weeks of bed rest like we can to let the fractures > heal; and b) he said that there was a big potential problem with getting > enough blood to circulate down to the fracture site.
If you watch the film "Dreamer" 2005 ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0487897/ ), it's clear that the reproductive value of a winning race horse can make these efforts worth it, even if you coldly don't see the value in giving back to an animal that gave its all for sport.
-- "And the first rude sketch that the world had seen was joy to his mighty heart, 'til the Devil whispered behind the leaves 'It's pretty, but is it Art?'."
> In article <dco3729gsgguc1jkq9g0fvdr3lp8428...@4ax.com>, njma...@storm.ca > wrote:
>>On Mon, 22 May 2006 15:38:47 GMT, ctbis...@earthlink.netttt (Charles >>Bishop)wrote:
>>>[snip previous portion of article to get to-]
>>>>. . .Had Ruffian been sedated and rushed to a full equine >>>>clinic with full operating facilities and aftercare, that horse would >>>>have >>>>had a fair chance at recovery after ninety days and after three or four >>>>years, may have been broodmared out to Secretariat. What a progeny that >>>>would have been. Carried by Ruffian and sired by Secretariat. the >>>>bidding >>>>would have started at $10 million and who knows what that foal would >>>>have >>>>accomplished."
>>>How certain is this last part?
>>Completely certain. Who knows what the foal would have accomplished? >>No one. Great racehorses can be indifferent breeders, and even great >>breeders don't produce sure things. And great horses can be produced >>by unexpected bloodlines.
> Sorry. English Idiom alert. I took the phrase to mean that it was certain > the foal would have done great things, not that there was doubt that it > might. Do you not read it that way?
>>A great horse like Northern Dancer (who I don't think was initially >>expected to be as good as he was) became one of the most successful >>sires of the century, and I think his foals still hold price records. >>However in the 1980s it was still possible to come by a >>Dancer-bloodlined horse for a reasonable price, I knew two people who >>had them, as not all the foals came out with what was needed
> And that was my point, kinda because it left the dam side of the equation > unnamed. Still, while choosing the parents makes the foal's chances much > better, is there a guarantee that it will be great?
>>nj"shorty and jazz"m
> charles, I beg of you, annotate these for those less educated, bishop
I don't know about Jill, but it seems pretty clear that the author of that article was musing on the possibilities of what an offspring of Secretariat and Ruffian would have been like, both on the track and on the market. He says "who knows what that foal would have accomplished?", which is merely a dreamy speculation. Obviously he's merely stating an opinion too about the $10 million pricetag, and I obviously can't judge if that is a WAG, or based on some more specific knowledge about what topflight racehorses cost. I think it's pretty well-established that bloodlines count quite a lot in the performance of a racehorse, though certainly it's far from a guarantee. I'm sure that author would totally agree with this assertion.
When he says "what a progeny that would have been", that would still be true even if it proved to ultimately be a flop on the racecourse, so I don't think that statement implies 100% certainty that it would have performed great on the track. It will would have been an amazing progeny, simply given its parentage, and the pricetag for that potential would have confirmed how amazing it was.
-- M C Hamster "Big Wheel Keep on Turnin'" -- Creedence Clearwater Revival
> >>>[snip previous portion of article to get to-]
> >>>>. . .Had Ruffian been sedated and rushed to a full equine > >>>>clinic with full operating facilities and aftercare, that horse would > >>>>have > >>>>had a fair chance at recovery after ninety days and after three or four > >>>>years, may have been broodmared out to Secretariat. What a progeny that > >>>>would have been. Carried by Ruffian and sired by Secretariat. the > >>>>bidding > >>>>would have started at $10 million and who knows what that foal would > >>>>have > >>>>accomplished."
> >>>How certain is this last part?
> >>Completely certain. Who knows what the foal would have accomplished? > >>No one. Great racehorses can be indifferent breeders, and even great > >>breeders don't produce sure things. And great horses can be produced > >>by unexpected bloodlines.
> > Sorry. English Idiom alert. I took the phrase to mean that it was certain > > the foal would have done great things, not that there was doubt that it > > might. Do you not read it that way?
> >>A great horse like Northern Dancer (who I don't think was initially > >>expected to be as good as he was) became one of the most successful > >>sires of the century, and I think his foals still hold price records. > >>However in the 1980s it was still possible to come by a > >>Dancer-bloodlined horse for a reasonable price, I knew two people who > >>had them, as not all the foals came out with what was needed
> > And that was my point, kinda because it left the dam side of the equation > > unnamed. Still, while choosing the parents makes the foal's chances much > > better, is there a guarantee that it will be great?
> >>nj"shorty and jazz"m
> > charles, I beg of you, annotate these for those less educated, bishop
> I don't know about Jill, but it seems pretty clear that the author of that > article was musing on the possibilities of what an offspring of Secretariat > and Ruffian would have been like, both on the track and on the market. He > says "who knows what that foal would have accomplished?", which is merely a > dreamy speculation. Obviously he's merely stating an opinion too about the > $10 million pricetag, and I obviously can't judge if that is a WAG, or based > on some more specific knowledge about what topflight racehorses cost. I > think it's pretty well-established that bloodlines count quite a lot in the > performance of a racehorse, though certainly it's far from a guarantee. I'm > sure that author would totally agree with this assertion.
> When he says "what a progeny that would have been", that would still be true > even if it proved to ultimately be a flop on the racecourse, so I don't > think that statement implies 100% certainty that it would have performed > great on the track. It will would have been an amazing progeny, simply > given its parentage, and the pricetag for that potential would have > confirmed how amazing it was.
The $10 million pricetag could very well have been truthy. Heaven knows, there have been numbers of high-priced yearlings with glowing bloodlines who sold for much and returned little (not even getting to the track in some cases.)
As far as the potential of a Secretariat-Ruffian baby? Secretariat didn't produce anything near his equivalent directly, although his daughters have produced some quite good horses.
> > > I don't get it. OK, it's sad that Barbaro broke his ankle and > > > may have to be put down. I'm sure it's very painful for the > > > owners and for anyone who had anything to do with the horse. > > > But to the rest of us, it's not that big a deal.
> > Speak for yourself. You sound like one of those "compassionate > > conservatives" the right natters on about.
> So that makes two people who have decided to insult me because I think the story > is being overplayed and some people are overreacting. Humpf!
For whatever it is worth, I don't doubt that you are right about the story being overplayed. This sort of thing is a big part of why I rarely watch television news. It is an inferior medium for the vast majority of stories, even when done in good faith by persons trying to present the important issues of the day.
> I've found a few references to horses with amputations, but they seem to > involve relatively minor amputations, i.e., the very lower part of the foot, > rather than a broken leg.
There are people who know a lot more about horses than me, but I've been around them all my life (working, rather than recreational types) and can say they definitely have a different way of thinking. They think like prey animals, and they key in on things that might make them vulnerable. Minor changes in their surroundings that we would think are insignificant can make them nervous. The loss of mobility, which would basically assign them the status of dead meat in the wild, has got to be one of the most distressing things that could happen to them. So I'm not surprised that these injuries still have bad outcomes.
I wasn't surprised at the amount of media coverage. It had all the factors the news likes these days: a dramatic narrative, shocking video, rich people...
>>Completely certain. Who knows what the foal would have accomplished? >>No one. Great racehorses can be indifferent breeders, and even great >>breeders don't produce sure things. And great horses can be produced >>by unexpected bloodlines.
>Sorry. English Idiom alert. I took the phrase to mean that it was certain >the foal would have done great things, not that there was doubt that it >might. Do you not read it that way?
Yes, I do, but I'm interpreting it to mean what it should have meant, that is, no one knows.
>And that was my point, kinda because it left the dam side of the equation >unnamed. Still, while choosing the parents makes the foal's chances much >better, is there a guarantee that it will be great?
None. Not with the greatest damn/sire combination in history. Not even if that combination had previously produced a great horse. They don't race them just for fun, you know.
>>nj"shorty and jazz"m
>charles, I beg of you, annotate these for those less educated, bishop
You should stop fretting about the internyms, those are the two Dancer foals I have known.
nj"something very abtruse for charles here"m
-- "Aha, Mr. Bond! You have arrived just in time to witness the triumph of the trilobites, and the end of the human race."
>> I've found a few references to horses with amputations, but they seem to >> involve relatively minor amputations, i.e., the very lower part of the >> foot, >> rather than a broken leg.
> There are people who know a lot more about horses than me, but I've > been around them all my life (working, rather than recreational types) > and can say they definitely have a different way of thinking. They > think like prey animals, and they key in on things that might make them > vulnerable. Minor changes in their surroundings that we would think > are insignificant can make them nervous. The loss of mobility, which > would basically assign them the status of dead meat in the wild, has > got to be one of the most distressing things that could happen to them. > So I'm not surprised that these injuries still have bad outcomes.
> I wasn't surprised at the amount of media coverage. It had all the > factors the news likes these days: a dramatic narrative, shocking > video, rich people...
And certainly one can view it pretty directly in terms akin to classic Greek tragedy. And it cuts across the traditional political boundaries which are so wearying in today's rhetoric as well.
So far the reports seem pretty upbeat. I do hope that this animal can make it.
I enjoyed your description of the psyche of horses. I've not had the pleasure of working around them. Have you seen any horse whisperers in your dealings with the horsey crowd? Do you think there might be something to all that?
-- M C Hamster "Big Wheel Keep on Turnin'" -- Creedence Clearwater Revival
|
