Latest H/J Scandal
LucianCephus
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Noh...@ringog.net
I heard they used under age horses.
No Hope
Charles A. Hall
Which clinic?
Diane
LucianCephus <n.pembert...@worldnet.att.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:3318d0b0...@usw-ex0107-050.remarq.com...
Kris Carroll
> Anyone in Florida know first hand what happened at the Morris clinic?
Check the Chronicle of the Horse Between Rounds forums
http://www.chronofhorse.com/ubb-cgi/Ultimate.cgi?
One of the JRJ kids just posted some info, see
http://www.chronofhorse.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/000490.html
These posts indicate fence construction included some piping, the horse
knocked it then was impaled, entry through heart and lungs. What an awful,
awful mess and what a heartbreaking tragedy.
Kris Carroll
Cat
:
:> Anyone in Florida know first hand what happened at the Morris clinic?
kcar...@horse-country.com (Kris Carroll) wrote:
:Check the Chronicle of the Horse Between Rounds forums
:http://www.chronofhorse.com/ubb-cgi/Ultimate.cgi?
Thanks, Kris.
From what I read, the horse kicked the pipe and was thereby impaled.
What's equally nasty, the George continued the clinic. CONTINUED the
clinic! What's up with _that_. Continued schooling this fence, also.
I'm disappointed in him. Gives our sport a real kick in the arse,
things like this.
Cat (and Larry OT)
K.Z.
says...
> From what I read, the horse kicked the pipe and was thereby impaled.
Grrrrr. Since when have people been using metal pipes for jumps?
Is this the latest "improvement" on the poling theory?
Next we'll hear they're giving jumpers cocaine. Oh, right...
never mind.
Kelly & Doc
dok...@frontiernet.net
C.M.Newell
wrote:
>In article <388b65cc.9283132@news>, digiN...@SPAMhome.com
>says...
>> From what I read, the horse kicked the pipe and was thereby impaled.
>
>Grrrrr. Since when have people been using metal pipes for jumps?
Eons. It gives quite a sting when a "careless" horse raps a
metal pole.
--CMN,DVM
"The morning sun shall dawn again, but never more with thee
Shall I gallop o'er the desert paths , where we were wont to be;
Evening shall darken on the earth, and o'er the sandy plain
Some other steed, with slower step, shall bear me home again."
==The Arab's Farewell to His Steed
Sheryl Huckaby
>Eons. It gives quite a sting when a "careless" horse raps a
>metal pole.
>
Under the circumstances, I would consider that an understatement Doc.
Sheryl
Ashland City, Tennessee
If a small thing has the power to make you angry, does that not indicate
something about your size? - Sydney J. Harris
RPM1
> impaled.
Ohfercrissakes! Just train the poor bastards cross
country out in the field over wood, stone and earth
and be done with it.
I hope the person who decided to use pipe carries
around the image of that stuck horse for a good
long time.
Ruth CM
diskers
the stable I am at went said he was really hard core. I haven't ever seen
him in action but it sounds rather disappointing
Cat <digiN...@SPAMhome.com> wrote in message news:388b65cc.9283132@news...
> :LucianCephus <n.pembert...@worldnet.att.com.invalid> wrote:
> :
> :> Anyone in Florida know first hand what happened at the Morris clinic?
>
> kcar...@horse-country.com (Kris Carroll) wrote:
> :Check the Chronicle of the Horse Between Rounds forums
> :http://www.chronofhorse.com/ubb-cgi/Ultimate.cgi?
> Thanks, Kris.
>
>
> clinic! What's up with _that_. Continued schooling this fence, also.
>
> I'm disappointed in him. Gives our sport a real kick in the arse,
> things like this.
>
> Cat (and Larry OT)
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----
RPM1
> Well, maybe he will, but the incident apparently didn't stop
>him from continuing to use the damned thing for the rest of the
>clinic. At least that's what I get from the Chronicle website
>discussion. Charming, if it's true.
Gawd bless the almighty buck!
Ruth CM
Kris Carroll
> Well, maybe he will, but the incident apparently didn't stop
> him from continuing to use the damned thing for the rest of the
> clinic. At least that's what I get from the Chronicle website
> discussion. Charming, if it's true.
<sarcasm alert>
Charming image of someone wiping the pole. Do you think the blood spill
constitutes a legit variation or did they truck in new footing?
And the board gossips say the amateur owner came back the next day on a
new horse. Now there's a fine example of getting back on right away.
My favorite post puts the horse firmly in his place in the larger scheme
of things ....
"Though we can all agree that the death of this animal was horrible, who
is to say that it was any more horrible than the countless deaths suffered
by the cattle that provide the many hides our saddles and bridles and
boots are made of? Or more horrible than the slow death from neglect that
the many horses we all have known in our pasts suffer after they have
passed from hand to hand until old age renders them useless."
"diskers" <bu...@teleport.com> wrote:
evidently he was just out here in Oregon for a clinic, some of the people at
the stable I am at went said he was really hard core. I haven't ever seen
him in action but it sounds rather disappointing
Did Kevin Freeman attend that clinic?
KC
C.M.Newell
<rpm1de...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>> From what I read, the horse kicked the pipe and was thereby
>> impaled.
>
>Ohfercrissakes! Just train the poor bastards cross
>country out in the field over wood, stone and earth
>and be done with it.
>
>I hope the person who decided to use pipe carries
>around the image of that stuck horse for a good
>long time.
>
Well, maybe he will, but the incident apparently didn't stop
him from continuing to use the damned thing for the rest of the
clinic. At least that's what I get from the Chronicle website
discussion. Charming, if it's true.
>
>
--CMN,DVM
Emily Conger
>From what I read, the horse kicked the pipe and was thereby impaled.
How horrible. It was interesting to read that the owner of this horse returned
on the second day, with another horse, and jumped this fence again.
I do understand the "reasoning" behind using metal poles and am now so glad I
left the hunter world...
Emily
Abby Fairchild
were interesting.
Random comments; Ive always felt most people who hate Mr. Morris seem to be
whiners..hes too mean, hes too cold, hes too smug, hes too whatever..which
usually translates into "he didnt tell me/my friend/my trainer what they wanted
to hear.." I have always felt he was just so dead honest and didnt really give
a fuck about the peoples delicate sensibilities..that he was after perfection.
Tough? yes. Wrong? I dont know. I know I have seen him fillet people who
punished their horses undeservedly..
The horror over the death seems legit and understandable. The horror over not
stopping the clinic seems less so. Yes, I can hear some of you now..but while
it might have been hard if not impossible for me to get on another horse and
jump it again..I cant make that judgement for anyone else. What good would
hangwringing, gnashing of teeth, and general malaise have done? reversed the
event? no.
It sounds freakish and horrible. I'll be interested to see what happens
regarding it, and hope to hear more about it.
FWIW, he is being misquoted on the Chronicle boards; he said 'customers are
like trains..' not horses..
Abby
Bethe Blasienz
>But the Chronicle boards sure
>were interesting.
I went and had a look at their BB. It's located at http://www.chronofhorse.com
Some of the comments seemed to come from folks who didn't like him in the 1st
place and now have found the perfect situation to let everyone know just that.
It's almost like "I told you so" sort of thing. Others have posted they are
waiting to hear the facts before making a judgement.
>It sounds freakish and horrible. I'll be interested to see what happens
>regarding it, and hope to hear more about it.>>
It was a tragedy and appeared to be a freak accident which as all horse people
know do happen. I'm watching to see what comes of this, if anything does. I
understand the rider came back with a different horse, according to the
Chronicle BB, so perhaps the rider wasn't too upset maybe? Who knows? I
wasn't there and don't know any real facts except the posts I have read.
I feel terrible for all those involved; they must all be in their own private
hell.
Bethe Blasienz
Bryan, Texas
RPM1
>I have always felt he was just so dead
No, that'd be the horse.
>honest and didn't really give
>a fuck about the peoples delicate sensibilities..
...or horses for that matter it would seem.
>that he was after perfection.
That's a good excuse for abuse and reckless
endangerment?
>Tough? yes. Wrong? I dont know. I know I have seen him fillet people
... and horses too apparently but I suppose it could have
easily happened to a person as well.
>What good would hangwringing, gnashing of teeth, and general
>malaise have done? reversed the event? no.
What good would removing the slaughtering object do?
Keep it from happening again, perhaps? Oh, no! Better
that careless horses know the sting of clipping that pipe!
>It sounds freakish and horrible.
It *IS* horrible.
>FWIW, he is being misquoted on the Chronicle boards; he said 'customers are
>like trains..'
So are bills. There's always another one coming so
get out there and make a buck and fuck the fact that
you've slaughtered an animal before its time and, above
all, don't take any steps to ensure that it doesn't happen
again.
Ruth CM
Abby Fairchild
endangerment?>>
<sigh> Ruth, did I say it was?
>Tough? yes. Wrong? I dont know. I know I have seen him fillet people
>>
>>... and horses too apparently but I suppose it could have
easily happened to a person as well.>>
No. I have never, ever see him behave badly toward a horse. Ever. In clinics,
in a schooling area, ever. Or heard that he did. I have always seen him care
alot more about the horse than than the perhaps sensitive feelings of the
rider.
<<What good would removing the slaughtering object do?>>
Give in to peoples fears? Ruth, I dont know. I wasnt there, neither were you.
<<
Keep it from happening again, perhaps? Oh, no! Better
that careless horses know the sting of clipping that pipe!>>
Oh, you *were* there..Where was the pole? what kind of jump was it? What were
they doing?
<<It *IS* horrible.>>
Sorry, Ruth. I'll be more careful with my wording. It IS horrible.
<<So are bills. There's always another one coming so
get out there and make a buck and fuck the fact that
you've slaughtered an animal before its time and, above
all, don't take any steps to ensure that it doesn't happen
again.>>
I dont think George is concerned about bills. He cant be accused of putting the
dollar before the horse.
I dont think you need to vent your spleen at me, either, but its made you feel
better before, so you might as well again.
Abby
RPM1
><<That's a good excuse for abuse and reckless
>endangerment?>>
Abby Fairchild:
><sigh> Ruth, did I say it was?
No, I did.
>Give in to peoples fears? Ruth, I dont know. I wasnt there, neither were
you.
True. I tell you what tho, if *I* was instructing and
one of my students just happened to *die* on one
of my props I think I'd tend to remove the lethal item.
Correct me of I'm wrong but from what I've read said
item continued to be in use.
Tell me, do you think he at least offered to pay the
cost for replacement of the animal?
>Oh, you *were* there..Where was the pole? what kind of jump was it? What
were
>they doing?
It KILLED a horse! Who gives a flitting fuck what they were
doing or what type of jump it was? A horse got stuck like a
pig and the poor bastard is DEAD.
>I dont think you need to vent your spleen at me, either,
Vent my spleen? Oh dear, I don't think you've yet witnessed
that unless, of course, you were the last telemarketer to
call here while we were sitting down to dinner...
>but its made you feel better before, so you might as well again.
Hey, at least I didn't charge you a clinic fee and your
horse is still alive, eh? ;->
Nothing personal, Abby, but the thought if a fatal horse kabob
occurring at a clinic instructed by one of the so-called best
in the <ahem> business all for the betterment of a bunch of
ribbon chasing weenies who would wet themselves royally
had they ever actually seen REAL hunt field action makes
me a bit pukish. But then again this is just my opinion and,
of course, YMMV.
Ruth CM
CATJA ALEXANDRA PAFORT
>> Anyone in Florida know first hand what happened at the Morris clinic?
>
>Check the Chronicle of the Horse Between Rounds forums
>http://www.chronofhorse.com/ubb-cgi/Ultimate.cgi?
>These posts indicate fence construction included some piping, the horse
>knocked it then was impaled, entry through heart and lungs. What an awful,
>awful mess and what a heartbreaking tragedy.
I'm not a hunter/jumper in any case, but this incident makes me state that *I*
would not spend a penny to clinic with Mr. Morris. He might be the guru of
many, I don't care.
The death sounds like an accident, albeit a preventeable one. Obstacles we jump
should be safe. We owe that to our horses who, by their very nature, do *not*
choose to jump courses. They do it to please us.
Would I have stopped the clinic? As a clinician, probably not. I would not want
the other riders to go home being afraid of jumping their horses. The chances
of a horse dieing in such a manner are pretty slim, *given that proper
equipment is used*. As an organiser, I probably would have wanted to. But I'd
have give the riders the opportunity to scratch the second day, refunding their
money. As a rider, I'd be far too upset to continue.
One thing I would have made sure of, however, as rider, horseowner, organiser,
clinician or gopher: that ALL obstacles jumped after the incident are made as
safe as humanely possible. And then go home and do the same at my barn.
Catja
and the Count
Cat
Abby wrote:
:No. I have never, ever see him behave badly toward a horse. Ever. In clinics,
:in a schooling area, ever. Or heard that he did. I have always seen him care
:alot more about the horse than than the perhaps sensitive feelings of the
:rider.
home. Has done this forever, and never had a bad thing happen. These
pipes are, granted, thin so the horse doesn't see them and gets a rap.
Makes a jumper more careful.
I wasn't at the George's clinic, and don't know how long that pipe
was. David was horrified, and said it sounded like a freak accident to
him.
Ruth wrote:
:<<What good would removing the slaughtering object do?>>
Abby wrote:
:Give in to peoples fears? Ruth, I dont know. I wasnt there, neither were you.
Indeed. But, if the pipe was way too short (and it seems to moi, it
must have been), I would have removed it pronto from further
schooling. That would seem common sense. Keerist, in the old days,
remember bamboo poles?
Cat (and Larry OT)
Cat
Ruth wrote:
:True. I tell you what tho, if *I* was instructing and
:one of my students just happened to *die* on one
:of my props I think I'd tend to remove the lethal item.
:Correct me of I'm wrong but from what I've read said
:item continued to be in use.
:Tell me, do you think he at least offered to pay the
:cost for replacement of the animal?
As if.
<snip>
:Vent my spleen? Oh dear, I don't think you've yet witnessed
:that unless, of course, you were the last telemarketer to
:call here while we were sitting down to dinner...
<snort>
:Nothing personal, Abby, but the thought if a fatal horse kabob
:occurring at a clinic instructed by one of the so-called best
:in the <ahem> business all for the betterment of a bunch of
:ribbon chasing weenies who would wet themselves royally
:had they ever actually seen REAL hunt field action makes
:me a bit pukish. But then again this is just my opinion and,
:of course, YMMV.
-1000 for non-drink alert on funniest black humor. HORSE KABOB? oh
shit that set me up for the week.
Cat (and Larry OT)
Deborah Stevenson
On Mon, 24 Jan 2000, Cat wrote:
> <snip>
> Ruth wrote:
> :True. I tell you what tho, if *I* was instructing and
> :one of my students just happened to *die* on one
> :of my props I think I'd tend to remove the lethal item.
> :Correct me of I'm wrong but from what I've read said
> :item continued to be in use.
> You and me both. Agreed, 1000%.
Well, I guess I'd ask a further question. Is it to be removed because
it's been found dangerous or removed because of the upsetting effect of
its presence on the attendees?
If it's the former, are we then saying that no one should use such
material in jump fences anywhere? I guess in light of your comments about
David using the same material (but no hint that he plans to stop) I'm not
sure what we're driving at--is the argument that the material is dangerous
or that George Morris dealt badly with a freak accident that he wasn't
responsible for? Or are we hanging onto both just in case :-)?
I haven't gotten a chance to look at the Chronicle stuff, so I'm not clear
on what precisely happened, but I'm also not quite clear on some of the
responses, and you all are easier to ask :-).
Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Preferring horses unskewered in Champaign, IL, USA
Krammes61
<snip>
>Indeed. But, if the pipe was way too short >(and it seems to moi, it (must
have been), >I would have removed it pronto from >further schooling. That would
seem >common sense. Keerist, in the old days,
>remember bamboo poles?
I haven't had the chance to get the The Chronicle's BB, so I'm confused what
the pipe was actually being used for. Was it as a "pole" in the jump or was
the horse being "poled"? Yes, I remember bamboo poles, didn't necessarily
agree with it, but people used them anyway. I knew of one trainer that used a
1X1 with nails driven through it, so the sharp end would "encourage" the horse
more. I later encountered a horse from that barn that wouldn't go anywhere
near a jump with someone by the standard.....
Maybe they should have upped the cocaine dosage.....
Cindy
Bamboo
<rpm1de...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>RPM1:
>><<That's a good excuse for abuse and reckless
>>endangerment?>>
>
>Abby Fairchild:
>><sigh> Ruth, did I say it was?
>
>No, I did.
>
>>Give in to peoples fears? Ruth, I dont know. I wasnt there, neither were
>you.
>
>True. I tell you what tho, if *I* was instructing and
>one of my students just happened to *die* on one
>of my props I think I'd tend to remove the lethal item.
>Correct me of I'm wrong but from what I've read said
>item continued to be in use.
>
>Tell me, do you think he at least offered to pay the
>cost for replacement of the animal?
>
>>Oh, you *were* there..Where was the pole? what kind of jump was it? What
>were
>>they doing?
>
>It KILLED a horse! Who gives a flitting fuck what they were
>doing or what type of jump it was? A horse got stuck like a
>pig and the poor bastard is DEAD.
>
>>I dont think you need to vent your spleen at me, either,
>
>Vent my spleen? Oh dear, I don't think you've yet witnessed
>that unless, of course, you were the last telemarketer to
>call here while we were sitting down to dinner...
>
>>but its made you feel better before, so you might as well again.
>
>Hey, at least I didn't charge you a clinic fee and your
>horse is still alive, eh? ;->
>
>Nothing personal, Abby, but the thought if a fatal horse kabob
>occurring at a clinic instructed by one of the so-called best
>in the <ahem> business all for the betterment of a bunch of
>ribbon chasing weenies who would wet themselves royally
>had they ever actually seen REAL hunt field action makes
>me a bit pukish. But then again this is just my opinion and,
>of course, YMMV.
>
>Ruth CM
>
>
>
>
You killed your horse?
+--------------------------------+
| PLEASE FEED |
| ALL THE TROLLS |
| THANK YOU |
| -troll feed 59 cents |
+---------------------------------+
| |
| | ...Bamboo
Bamboo
<stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
>On Mon, 24 Jan 2000, Cat wrote:
>
>> <snip>
>> Ruth wrote:
>> :True. I tell you what tho, if *I* was instructing and
>> :one of my students just happened to *die* on one
>> :of my props I think I'd tend to remove the lethal item.
>> :Correct me of I'm wrong but from what I've read said
>> :item continued to be in use.
>
>> You and me both. Agreed, 1000%.
>
>Well, I guess I'd ask a further question. Is it to be removed because
>it's been found dangerous or removed because of the upsetting effect of
>its presence on the attendees?
>
>If it's the former, are we then saying that no one should use such
>material in jump fences anywhere? I guess in light of your comments about
>David using the same material (but no hint that he plans to stop) I'm not
>sure what we're driving at--is the argument that the material is dangerous
>or that George Morris dealt badly with a freak accident that he wasn't
>responsible for? Or are we hanging onto both just in case :-)?
>
>I haven't gotten a chance to look at the Chronicle stuff, so I'm not clear
>on what precisely happened, but I'm also not quite clear on some of the
>responses, and you all are easier to ask :-).
>
>Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
>Preferring horses unskewered in Champaign, IL, USA
I'm not clear on what you're saying.
Bamboo
><snip>
>Ruth wrote:
>:True. I tell you what tho, if *I* was instructing and
>:one of my students just happened to *die* on one
>:of my props I think I'd tend to remove the lethal item.
>:Correct me of I'm wrong but from what I've read said
>:item continued to be in use.
>You and me both. Agreed, 1000%.
>
>:Tell me, do you think he at least offered to pay the
>:cost for replacement of the animal?
>As if.
>
><snip>
>:Vent my spleen? Oh dear, I don't think you've yet witnessed
>:that unless, of course, you were the last telemarketer to
>:call here while we were sitting down to dinner...
><snort>
>
>:Nothing personal, Abby, but the thought if a fatal horse kabob
>:occurring at a clinic instructed by one of the so-called best
>:in the <ahem> business all for the betterment of a bunch of
>:ribbon chasing weenies who would wet themselves royally
>:had they ever actually seen REAL hunt field action makes
>:me a bit pukish. But then again this is just my opinion and,
>:of course, YMMV.
>-1000 for non-drink alert on funniest black humor. HORSE KABOB? oh
>shit that set me up for the week.
>
>Cat (and Larry OT)
dark
Cat
:> :True. I tell you what tho, if *I* was instructing and
:> :one of my students just happened to *die* on one
:> :of my props I think I'd tend to remove the lethal item.
:> :Correct me of I'm wrong but from what I've read said
:> :item continued to be in use.
Cat wrote:
:> You and me both. Agreed, 1000%.
Deborah Stevenson <stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> wrote:
:Well, I guess I'd ask a further question. Is it to be removed because
:it's been found dangerous or removed because of the upsetting effect of
:its presence on the attendees?
Both, but primarily because it was found to be dangerous. If a thing
has already killed a horse, logic indicates it no longer be used. Or
use a different (in this case, LONGER) pipe, at the very least.
The attendees at these clinics are young for the most part. Seeing
something like that will undoubtedly have a not-good effect. It seems
a stupid thing indeed to continue to school over a fence which, freak
accident or no, caused a death. I'm no youngster, but I would have
been afraid to face that fence.
:If it's the former, are we then saying that no one should use such
:material in jump fences anywhere? I guess in light of your comments about
:David using the same material (but no hint that he plans to stop) I'm not
:sure what we're driving at--is the argument that the material is dangerous
:or that George Morris dealt badly with a freak accident that he wasn't
:responsible for?
The latter. He might have approached it with the point of view "Force
them to face it, don't let them be afraid". But at what possible
cost? Both in terms of rider fear and horse safety? IMHO he dealt with
it badly.
:Or are we hanging onto both just in case :-)?
Nope. Use the material _correctly_. Proper length. I forget now the
length of David's pipe (dammit Tracy, don't you DARE! roflmao). And
David has gone skiing for the week, so I can't ask him.
:I haven't gotten a chance to look at the Chronicle stuff, so I'm not clear
:on what precisely happened, but I'm also not quite clear on some of the
:responses, and you all are easier to ask :-).
I read through a lot of it. Folks venting, and other folks backing up
the George. No venting here, but it could have been badly used
materials, and IMHO it was badly handled after the fact.
Cat (and Larry OT, who also prefers not to be a Larry kabob)
Kris Carroll
> Oh, you *were* there..Where was the pole? what kind of jump was it? What were
> they doing?
Abby, the posts on the Chronicle board that detail the events seems pretty
honest, though until there is an independent news report or a public
statement to the press, it's hard to be certain. But have you read the
board?
A metal pole used as top rail seems to be a fairly common practice - a
fixed form of bamboo poling. And bamboo has caused more than a few messes.
But if the Argentine's practice of adding tacks (Atlanta) was condemned,
what's acceptable about this trick of the trade? And, as someone on the
Chronicle board pointed out, why no tennis balls stuck on the end of the
pole? Wonder if even that would be enough to prevent this accident?
Kris C
Bamboo
please VENT already
TrinityApp
I forget now the
> length of David's pipe (dammit Tracy, don't you DARE! roflmao
Too late. So tell us, our little plumberette, just how big is David's pipe?
And is it copper or PVC?
No venting here, but it could have been badly used
> materials, and IMHO it was badly handled after the fact.
>
Badly handling a pipe can cause problems. 1) wear gloves, nothing can make a
pipe bend like cold hands. 2) Never run with a pipe in hand, you might fall
and then what a mess. 3) Always wear goggles when handling pipes, you don't
want to put an eye out.
ObHorsey: The pipes haven't frozen so watering hasn't been a problem.
Tracy Meisenbach
Trinity Appaloosa Farm
http://www.trinityapp.com
http://www.divineequines.com
Horse Diary latest entry 1-23-00
recequestri...@onelist.com
Mary J. McHugh
> A metal pole used as top rail seems to be a fairly common practice - a
> fixed form of bamboo poling. And bamboo has caused more than a few messes.
> But if the Argentine's practice of adding tacks (Atlanta) was condemned,
> what's acceptable about this trick of the trade? And, as someone on the
> Chronicle board pointed out, why no tennis balls stuck on the end of the
> pole? Wonder if even that would be enough to prevent this accident?
>
> Kris C
I would venture a guess that a tennis ball is less tough than the skin of a horse
so it probably wouldn't have had much effect. But, if one finds that it's
acceptable to jump over such a 'rail', there are much more effective methods for
padding the ends. For example, take a 2 short lengths of 6x6 and drill a hole of
suitable diameter in the center, 1/2 down the length and stick them on the ends.
In this case, I believe that I read on the Chronicle's BB that it was a skinny jump
which made it easier to impale the horse. It would have been much harder (but not
impossible) to spear the horse or rider with a 12' pole as opposed to a 6' or 8'
pole.
I also wouldn't underestimate the ability of lesser materials such as bamboo to
spear a horse just as, I hate to use this word, effectively. It has been proven
that a 2x4 could pierce a concrete wall given the right conditions (tornado
research). Murphy is always happy to provide those just right conditions,
unfortunately.
Mary
K.Z.
ip38.nwnexus.net>, kcar...@horse-country.com says...
> A metal pole used as top rail seems to be a fairly common practice - a
> fixed form of bamboo poling.>>
That's what I'm thinking. If you can't pole them, put something
sharp on the jump. If you can't do that, put something sharp in
their boots. If you can't do that, find another way to smack at
your horse's legs in some harebrained attempt at getting it to
jump higher, cleaner or prettier through fear or pain. Sounds
ducky.
> <snip> why no tennis balls stuck on the end of the
> pole? Wonder if even that would be enough to prevent this accident?
I doubt it. Fling a metal pole at arena footing at the right
angle, it's going to pierce the ground. Fling a horse at the
opposite fixed end, and it will pierce the horse. A couple of
tennis balls plugging the ends isn't going to change those facts,
methinks.
Didn't they used to use raised stakes to stop cavalry charges? A
horse can impale itself on wood or plastic (usual pole materials)
just as easily as metal. I think the point is that wood or
plastic jump poles bounce out of the way when hit, whereas metal
has a propensity to drop hard, fast, and be in the way. I
wouldn't want to jump a metal pole for that reason alone. Knock
that sucker out of its cups, and it will be right there waiting
on the ground when the horse lands from the jump. No thanks.
Kelly & Doc
dok...@frontiernet.net
Abby Fairchild
<<
Abby, the posts on the Chronicle board that detail the events seems pretty
honest, though until there is an independent news report or a public
statement to the press, it's hard to be certain. But have you read the
board?
>>
Not since I first saw your post yesterday..there wasnt much information then,
just lots of horror, jumping to conclusions, and the usual whining about George
"not liking fat people" or whatever.
I thought the Argentines were using wires..? was it tacks?
I bet people think this is 'acceptable' cause the pole probably *does* just
fall to the ground 9999 times out of 1000. I have a feeling this is something
alot of people do..and that it caught up with the people at this clinic.
Abby
Abby Fairchild
Ruth:<<Nothing personal, Abby, but the thought if a fatal horse kabob
:occurring at a clinic instructed by one of the so-called best
:in the <ahem> business all for the betterment of a bunch of
:ribbon chasing weenies who would wet themselves royally
:had they ever actually seen REAL hunt field action makes
:me a bit pukish. But then again this is just my opinion and,
:of course, YMMV.>>
Not every body who shows, or takes a clinic with George Morris, is a ribbon
chasing weinie, and some of us are quite capable of all the real hunt action
you would like to throw our way without any case of the vapors at all.
And FWIW, hunt horses can be some of the most abused animals on this earth. Our
local hunt has some reeeeal assholes, plenty of rider caused injuries, and the
occasional death.
What bothers you most? The death? or the ribbon chasing weenies to which you
feel so superior?
Abby
Abby
Kris Carroll
> believe that I read on the Chronicle's BB that it was a skinny jump
> which made it easier to impale the horse.
Skinny jumps seem to be common these days too. I've seen kids schooling
very narrow set ups that seem a little intense for novice-intermediate.
There's not enough margin for error and run outs usually originate from
the rider not the horse. MO.
Thoughts on skinny fences?
(Abby Fairchild) wrote:
> I thought the Argentines were using wires..? was it tacks?
That's my memory, tho I saw someone on the Chronicle board said wire. I
think I'm correct, but will check my JRJ archives after lunch.
Kris
Mary J. McHugh
> I bet people think this is 'acceptable' cause the pole probably *does* just
> fall to the ground 9999 times out of 1000.
>
Not to make light of such a serious situation.... but I'd take those odds. :-)
I'd go farther and suggest that most people don't even think about whether it's
safe or not. The thought that the pole might impale the horse just simply never
enters their minds.
Mary
Mary J. McHugh
> mch...@attglobal.net wrote:
> > believe that I read on the Chronicle's BB that it was a skinny jump
> > which made it easier to impale the horse.
>
> Skinny jumps seem to be common these days too. I've seen kids schooling
> very narrow set ups that seem a little intense for novice-intermediate.
> There's not enough margin for error and run outs usually originate from
> the rider not the horse. MO.
>
> Thoughts on skinny fences?
>
It's a legitimate fence (IOW, in the rulebook) for eq and jumpers. For as
long as I've been riding H/J, I've seen them at nearly every decent show or
stable. Most often, and this is probably just a regional thing, they were
almost always plank fences painted with diagonal stripes, like a railroad
gate. I don't have one at Rancho McHugh but I was planning on building
one. Not with pipes, though.
I feel it's more of a rider bug-a-boo than a horse issue.
>
> (Abby Fairchild) wrote:
> > I thought the Argentines were using wires..? was it tacks?
>
> That's my memory, tho I saw someone on the Chronicle board said wire. I
> think I'm correct, but will check my JRJ archives after lunch.
I thought it was wire too but I wouldn't bet a hot fudge sundae on it.
Mary
Kris Carroll
> It's a legitimate fence (IOW, in the rulebook) for eq and jumpers. For as
At all levels?
> long as I've been riding H/J, I've seen them at nearly every decent show or
> stable. Most often, and this is probably just a regional thing, they were
> almost always plank fences painted with diagonal stripes, like a railroad
> gate. I don't have one at Rancho McHugh but I was planning on building
> one. Not with pipes, though.
Out here, schooling at home barns, it's a couple of little blue barrels
stood up, with a plank on top. At a 45 degree angle from another fence so
you're coming in at an angle off the long side. Usually there's a trainer
and a stall cleaner standing either side of the fence. And the kids run
over them anyway. Personally, I'll ask at anything but a picket. I hate
pickets - see below.
> I'd go farther and suggest that most people don't even think about whether
> it's safe or not. The thought that the pole might impale the horse just
> simply never enters their minds.
Then they're brain dead. I've had an impalement phobia since I was 11 yrs old.
> > > I thought the Argentines were using wires..? was it tacks?
> >
> > That's my memory, tho I saw someone on the Chronicle board said wire. I
> > think I'm correct, but will check my JRJ archives after lunch.
>
> I thought it was wire too but I wouldn't bet a hot fudge sundae on it.
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 18:35:12 -0800 (PST)
From: Kristine Carroll <kcar...@horse-country.com>
To: jri...@u.washington.edu
Subject: Arg show jumpers found guilty
this info is from 10/25/96 issue of the Chronicle
FEI found the Argentine show jumping team guilty of illegal and cruel training
at Atlanta. Photos and eye witness testimony proved the team built an oxer
with front top pole higher than the back and the jump had a wire stretched
across the jump above the back pole. Also a number of other jumps, including a
combination, had a strip of wood studded with nails attached to them. FEI
disqualified the team from the Olympics (big deal, they placed 17th), and
suspended four riders for six months. They must also pay "court" costs.
Looks like we're both right. I remembered tacks (nails) because I've seen
that done up close and personal out of sight behind show stalls eons ago.
Disgusted then, disgusted now.
Ain't the grand life grand...
Kris C.
MJ McHugh
> mch...@attglobal.net wrote:
> > It's a legitimate fence (IOW, in the rulebook) for eq and jumpers. For as
>
> At all levels?
>
There's no prohibition in the jumper division that I could find, just that rails
must be at least 6' wide.
In eq, it doesn't appear to be prohibited at any level and when you reach Open or
the Medal classes:
(Article 2211 Course Requirements:)
> 10. In Open Equitation classes for riders 12 years of age and older and all AHSA
> Medal classes, the course must include at least one change of lead, a combination
> including an oxer and 1/3 of the obstacles must be oxers. In addition, all courses
> must include three of the following which may not be combined:
>
> Bending Line
>
> Narrow Jump (6'-8')
>
> Roll-back Turn
>
> Fence at the end of the ring
>
> Long approach to a single jump.
>
>
> Out here, schooling at home barns, it's a couple of little blue barrels
> stood up, with a plank on top. At a 45 degree angle from another fence so
> you're coming in at an angle off the long side. Usually there's a trainer
> and a stall cleaner standing either side of the fence. And the kids run
> over them anyway. Personally, I'll ask at anything but a picket. I hate
> pickets - see below.
>
When I was boarding, it was at a fairly successful hunter/eq barn and since there
were a lot of kids doing the Maclay & Medal, courses and fences that might be seen
at the regionals and finals were duplicated. Hence, we always had the skinny fence
set up. We hunter people would have to jump it in lessons anyway just for the
skill. The few years I attended the regionals (as an adult cheerleader for our
kids), there always was a skinny fence.
>
> > I'd go farther and suggest that most people don't even think about whether
> > it's safe or not. The thought that the pole might impale the horse just
> > simply never enters their minds.
>
> Then they're brain dead. I've had an impalement phobia since I was 11 yrs old.
>
I don't think I'd argue with you over that observation. Look at what gets posted
here.
>
> > I thought it was wire too but I wouldn't bet a hot fudge sundae on it.
>
...snip of article which indicates both wire & tacks were used...
Never seen tacks myself (thankfully) but the wire is done a lot. I'll buy you the
sundae anyway if you're ever back this way or I go out there (fat chance).
Mary
Hillary Jipson
on the topic of dangerous materials and endangering our horses...... why is it
that we all force (well m ost horses ) to jump over objects...thre is always
the possiblility that the horse wil break a leg on landing..or will hit the
"wooden rail" wrong and do damage....the wooden rail can split and gorge a
horse (freak..just like the metal.. but it's very much a
possibility)...heck..even plastic pipes are dangerous. i've seen horses get
stuck in them..cut by them..ect. your even submitting your horse to a rider
comming down on their back (i don't care how good a rider you are you still
put undue stress on the back just from the momentum). i am curious to know
as deborah asked.....what is everyone trying to argue about??we've all made
stupid mistakes..and used things that may not be safe (horse world or
not).....i can understand from both veiw points..that if they s topped jumping
that day..people could have lingering effects and be scared to (although the
trauma from that will last in their minds forever ...i don't think by
finishing the clinic would truly help..because if they are like me... i would
always wonder which jump would get my partner and I). however i think it would
have been only right to have shown some sympathy and also to allow people to
choose if they want to go on.. and if no give them refunds. On my part i
would be heart b roken and wouldn't have returned with another horse... but
that was the choice of the rider..... maybe he should think twice about using
the jumps still.. but shouldn't we all think twice about jumping in general if
the case is danger?? freak things happen.. we justhave to deal with them and
live with them.
Deborah Stevenson wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jan 2000, Cat wrote:
>
> > <snip>
> > Ruth wrote:
> > :True. I tell you what tho, if *I* was instructing and
> > :one of my students just happened to *die* on one
> > :of my props I think I'd tend to remove the lethal item.
> > :Correct me of I'm wrong but from what I've read said
> > :item continued to be in use.
>
> > You and me both. Agreed, 1000%.
>
> Well, I guess I'd ask a further question. Is it to be removed because
> it's been found dangerous or removed because of the upsetting effect of
> its presence on the attendees?
>
> If it's the former, are we then saying that no one should use such
> material in jump fences anywhere? I guess in light of your comments about
> David using the same material (but no hint that he plans to stop) I'm not
> sure what we're driving at--is the argument that the material is dangerous
> or that George Morris dealt badly with a freak accident that he wasn't
> responsible for? Or are we hanging onto both just in case :-)?
>
> I haven't gotten a chance to look at the Chronicle stuff, so I'm not clear
> on what precisely happened, but I'm also not quite clear on some of the
> responses, and you all are easier to ask :-).
>
Hillary Jipson
plastic barrels..which i don't dissagree with. all together..but i sort of have a
phobia of them now..because if they aren't properly cared for (left outside alot)
they biodegrate and get brittle. i had my jumper nick one with her back foot and
get it caught in it (breifly...good thing it didnt' do any damage but it broke in
jagged edges so i was very fortunate in this situation).... now i'm a bit timid to
jump them unless i know they are new and unabused.
(just some food for thoughts to an yone that hasn't thought about that problem
before.. this can also happen with pvc if it's not stored properly)
Kris Carroll wrote:
> mch...@attglobal.net wrote:
> > It's a legitimate fence (IOW, in the rulebook) for eq and jumpers. For as
>
> At all levels?
>
> > long as I've been riding H/J, I've seen them at nearly every decent show or
> > stable. Most often, and this is probably just a regional thing, they were
> > almost always plank fences painted with diagonal stripes, like a railroad
> > gate. I don't have one at Rancho McHugh but I was planning on building
> > one. Not with pipes, though.
>
> Out here, schooling at home barns, it's a couple of little blue barrels
> stood up, with a plank on top. At a 45 degree angle from another fence so
> you're coming in at an angle off the long side. Usually there's a trainer
> and a stall cleaner standing either side of the fence. And the kids run
> over them anyway. Personally, I'll ask at anything but a picket. I hate
> pickets - see below.
>
> > I'd go farther and suggest that most people don't even think about whether
> > it's safe or not. The thought that the pole might impale the horse just
> > simply never enters their minds.
>
> Then they're brain dead. I've had an impalement phobia since I was 11 yrs old.
>
> > > > I thought the Argentines were using wires..? was it tacks?
> > >
> > > That's my memory, tho I saw someone on the Chronicle board said wire. I
> > > think I'm correct, but will check my JRJ archives after lunch.
> >
> > I thought it was wire too but I wouldn't bet a hot fudge sundae on it.
>
CATJA ALEXANDRA PAFORT
>David Wright also uses said pipes (very, very long) in schooling at
>home. Has done this forever, and never had a bad thing happen. These
>pipes are, granted, thin so the horse doesn't see them and gets a rap.
>Makes a jumper more careful.
Yes, but it makes him more careful in the wrong way - he's learning NOT to
trust his judgement.
I say there's something wrong with your jumper training and the way you pick
your jumpers is you have to resort to tricks like that to make the horse jump
well. Not every horse with jumping ability will make a 'jumper', just as not
every horse with good gaits makes a 'dressage horse.' It's not just ability,
it's attitude as well.
I've learned to jump and train jumpers in a good old-fashioned manner. Give the
the chance to work it out for themselves. They will. No horse LIKES to hit
poles. Solid wooden poles are, IMHO, enough to remind a truly careless horse
(which I find to be rare) - they won't fall when the horse only brushes through
them, but WILL fall when the horse honestly gets the jump wrong. Why anyone
needs any more, I don't know. Why anyone wants to disturb the horse's
judgement, I really don't know. Horses 'corrected' in that manner tend to
overjump - which, in my book, is a mistake. A good jumper will clear the jump,
not leave several feet of air between him and the jump.
Catja
and the Count (not too fond of jumping, either)
Susan Dangar
Deborah Stevenson <stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.SGI.4.10.100012...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu...
>
> On Mon, 24 Jan 2000, Cat wrote:
>
> > <snip>
> > Ruth wrote:
> > :True. I tell you what tho, if *I* was instructing and
> > :one of my students just happened to *die* on one
> > :of my props I think I'd tend to remove the lethal item.
> > :Correct me of I'm wrong but from what I've read said
> > :item continued to be in use.
>
> > You and me both. Agreed, 1000%.
>
> Well, I guess I'd ask a further question. Is it to be removed because
> it's been found dangerous or removed because of the upsetting effect of
> its presence on the attendees?
I read all of the responses on the Chronicle's site and IMO it shouldn't
have been used at all. Evidently its only purpose was to rap the legs of
horses referred to as "careless" jumpers.
> If it's the former, are we then saying that no one should use such
> material in jump fences anywhere?
My understanding is that use of metal bars violates the rules of FEI and/or
AHSA but the excuse is that it occurred in a "privately" owned arena so it
was okay.
Or the old saw...everybody does it. Grrrrr!
I guess in light of your comments about
> David using the same material (but no hint that he plans to stop) I'm not
> sure what we're driving at--is the argument that the material is dangerous
> or that George Morris dealt badly with a freak accident that he wasn't
> responsible for? Or are we hanging onto both just in case :-)?
Don't know who David is, but this pole was nothing more than a training
gimmick that backfired on a trainer in a horrendous fashion.
> I haven't gotten a chance to look at the Chronicle stuff, so I'm not clear
> on what precisely happened, but I'm also not quite clear on some of the
> responses, and you all are easier to ask :-).
The reports, most of which are second and third hand, indicate that a metal
pipe was used as an offset jump rail used to teach horses not to hit jumps.
The horse and rider were participating in a lesson/clinic and the horse hit
the pole with his front feet, one end lodged in the ground and the other end
impaled the horse through the chest. It was apparently an amateur rider
taking the lesson.
I think it's sad enough that a well-known and respected trainer feels the
need to use such equipment at all, let alone to use it in lessons.
Evidently though the "Gods of Horsedom" must be obeyed. The owner of the
horse that died came back the next day with another horse and rode the same
jump again.
Susan Dangar
RPM1
>IMO it shouldn't have been used at all.
Ta-da!
>I think it's sad enough that a well-known and respected
I will NOT have the 'R' word used to describe anyone who
willfully endangers the lives of 4 and 2 footed beasts. ;-)
>Evidently though the "Gods of Horsedom" must be obeyed. The owner of the
>horse that died came back the next day with another horse and rode the
>same jump again.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
On yet ANOTHER "careless" jumper? Hmmm, interesting...
Now, if a trainer were REALLY good the term "careless jumper"
wouldn't exist, eh?
Ruth CM
Cat
:
:>David Wright also uses said pipes (very, very long) in schooling at
:>home. Has done this forever, and never had a bad thing happen. These
:>pipes are, granted, thin so the horse doesn't see them and gets a rap.
:>Makes a jumper more careful.
Catja wrote:
:Yes, but it makes him more careful in the wrong way - he's learning NOT to
:trust his judgement.
That's not the idea at all.
He's learning to pick his feet up a bit more, from a small rap.
:I say there's something wrong with your jumper training and the way you pick
:your jumpers is you have to resort to tricks like that to make the horse jump
:well. Not every horse with jumping ability will make a 'jumper', just as not
:every horse with good gaits makes a 'dressage horse.' It's not just ability,
:it's attitude as well.
We're talking made jumpers here, for the most part. This is a small
(in diameter) pipe, which gives a sharp rap. Nothing like the solid
whack from a solid wood pole.
:I've learned to jump and train jumpers in a good old-fashioned manner. Give the
:the chance to work it out for themselves. They will. No horse LIKES to hit
:poles. Solid wooden poles are, IMHO, enough to remind a truly careless horse
:(which I find to be rare) - they won't fall when the horse only brushes through
:them, but WILL fall when the horse honestly gets the jump wrong. Why anyone
:needs any more, I don't know. Why anyone wants to disturb the horse's
:judgement, I really don't know. Horses 'corrected' in that manner tend to
:overjump - which, in my book, is a mistake. A good jumper will clear the jump,
:not leave several feet of air between him and the jump.
I'd like to see the horse who can clear 5'3" by several feet :)
It's a way of reminding them, when they get sloppy, that picking up
their feet is a good thing. The pipe is placed slightly in front of
the first element.
I need David back to respond further, here! ROFL He _would_ be off
skiing. And then he heads to Gulfport (large series of shows down
south.)
Cat (and Larry OT, who lives to jump)
RPM1
>It's a way of reminding them, when they get sloppy, that picking up
>their feet is a good thing.
Sort of like what they do to gaited horses with chains?
>The pipe is placed slightly in front of the first element.
How sweet.
So, would you whack your horse in the puss with a
shank?
Ruth CM
C.M.Newell
horse in an amateur clinic, vs. one particular horse in a specific
situation.
Not that I think the practice is safe, period, but it would be
a bit more understandable under some circumstances than others.
I, of course, lost a horse to a shattered pastern while he
was standing around in the backyard.
--CMN,DVM
"The morning sun shall dawn again, but never more with thee
Shall I gallop o'er the desert paths , where we were wont to be;
Evening shall darken on the earth, and o'er the sandy plain
Some other steed, with slower step, shall bear me home again."
==The Arab's Farewell to His Steed
Cat
: Please ask David if he would employ such a device for *every*
:horse in an amateur clinic, vs. one particular horse in a specific
:situation.
In his absence, I'll give what I'm sure will be his response.
When he gives clinics, he concentrates on the individual. Not every
horse will require such a device.
I attended the last clinic he gave several months ago. Specifically,
the advanced rider section. For equitation, he had a very skinny fence
set up at the end of a triple combination. There was one horse too
green to face such a thing, and when that horse went, he quickly
rearranged the jump.
That pipe is a tool intended for a specific, right-now kind of
problem. Dobbin is sloppy today, school _Dobbin_ with the pipe.
One of David's favorite sayings is "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
When he gets back from skiing, I'll ask him if my guess was right.
: Not that I think the practice is safe, period, but it would be
:a bit more understandable under some circumstances than others.
It can be made safer, by using a pipe of sufficient length. I've
ridden with David for many years, and personally I've never jumped
one. I'm not sure that it isn't the "jumpers" who make use of this
device more than the hunters, although I can see it's use there also.
: I, of course, lost a horse to a shattered pastern while he
:was standing around in the backyard.
Yes, I heard about that. A nightmare, complete and absolute.
Cat (and Larry OT)
Cat
:>It's a way of reminding them, when they get sloppy, that picking up
:>their feet is a good thing.
Ruth wrote:
:Sort of like what they do to gaited horses with chains?
No. That is not a logical comparison. One or two raps cannot compare
with the consistant wearing of chains.
Cat wrote:
:>The pipe is placed slightly in front of the first element.
Ruth wrote:
:How sweet.
:So, would you whack your horse in the puss with a
:shank?
No. The only "puss" on my horse that ever gets whacked is Cat herself,
who has been known to fall off simply from leaning over to pick a
bottle of Gatorade off a fence.
Mind you, Larry is far too green to be near needing such a device.
David, along with many other trainers I've used, leaves well enough
alone until Dobbin is mostly made.
This isn't an every-day type thing. It's used perhaps before a show,
while schooling. Or in clinics, obviously. Although, at David's last
clinic, it wasn't used. I didn't attend the previous ones last year,
so I dunno.
I believe it's a fairly rare occurence, as I have _never_ seen it
used. Then again, I don't ride nearly as often as I should.
Cat (and Larry OT)
Mary Healey
>...I know I have seen him fillet people who
> punished their horses undeservedly..
Seems to me that a horse getting impaled qualifies as undeserved
punishment. OTOH, it's unlikely the dead animal will ever kick a pole
again...
> ...What good would
> hangwringing, gnashing of teeth, and general malaise have done? reversed the
> event? no.
True, what's done is done. Are metal poles really necessary, or an
added risk? I mean, there are risks to jumping and those who jump
accept that. Would it have been prudent to remove the offending object?
> FWIW, he is being misquoted on the Chronicle boards; he said 'customers are
> like trains..' not horses..
In the sense that there'll be another one along if you miss this one?
Or in the sense that damaged cars aren't worth repairing, and remain
sidelined with minor problems because there's more financial incentive
to build new ones? Or possibly both?
M.
Hillary Jipson
having problems judging.. i have only used this trick once..and that was with a
friends very careful jumper who would get upset if he nicked fences normally..
however he started ticking.... so i just used my regular light weight pvc jump and
lifted it just a little when he went over so he go the idea that he needed to jump
a little bigger... just a little brush was all it took.. i don't think you should
need to actually RAP a horse to get it to do it.. if it can't do it without the RAP
(aka pain) then it's not cut out for that height or dissapline!
CATJA ALEXANDRA PAFORT wrote:
> Cat wrote:
>
> >David Wright also uses said pipes (very, very long) in schooling at
> >home. Has done this forever, and never had a bad thing happen. These
> >pipes are, granted, thin so the horse doesn't see them and gets a rap.
> >Makes a jumper more careful.
>
> Yes, but it makes him more careful in the wrong way - he's learning NOT to
> trust his judgement.
>
> I say there's something wrong with your jumper training and the way you pick
> your jumpers is you have to resort to tricks like that to make the horse jump
> well. Not every horse with jumping ability will make a 'jumper', just as not
> every horse with good gaits makes a 'dressage horse.' It's not just ability,
> it's attitude as well.
>
> I've learned to jump and train jumpers in a good old-fashioned manner. Give the
> the chance to work it out for themselves. They will. No horse LIKES to hit
> poles. Solid wooden poles are, IMHO, enough to remind a truly careless horse
> (which I find to be rare) - they won't fall when the horse only brushes through
> them, but WILL fall when the horse honestly gets the jump wrong. Why anyone
> needs any more, I don't know. Why anyone wants to disturb the horse's
> judgement, I really don't know. Horses 'corrected' in that manner tend to
> overjump - which, in my book, is a mistake. A good jumper will clear the jump,
> not leave several feet of air between him and the jump.
>
RPM1
>No. That is not a logical comparison. One or two raps cannot compare
>with the consistant wearing of chains.
Well, now the object is to get the horse to pick up
his feet, no? The picking up of the feet occurs out
of pain, no? I know it's a stretch but not by that much
since horses aren't really meant to jump repeatedly
(career) and at heights that would cause a horse to
become "careless" in the first place.
>No. The only "puss" on my horse that ever gets whacked is Cat herself,
>who has been known to fall off simply from leaning over to pick a
>bottle of Gatorade off a fence.
Yeow! Now, if you wouldn't hit your horse in the gob what
makes it okay for it to be set up that the horse hits another
part of his body?
>Mind you, Larry is far too green to be near needing such a device.
Why should he EVER need it? Would he get to a point
where his mind/body is beginning to say, "I'm reaching
my limit..." At what point do you stop trying to tweak just a
wee bit more out of the animal? When his body breaks
down? When he gets stuck on the end of a pole like a fat
pig? Is it okay to cause the animal pain in the process of
trying to coax out a bit more juice? Why? Horses aren't
deer. They're not race cars. They have natural born limits
so why can't we just be happy with them just the way they
are? I'll tell you why. Because people feel compelled to
use them for competition and <sigh> money. Here's a thought.
Let's leave the poor bastards out of our twisted desire for
bigger, better, more and faster. Just love them for what they
are, dammit!
<rant off>
I've got to go shovel snow so I can give my beauties some
more warm water.
Ruth CM
Emily Conger
>I've learned to jump and train jumpers in a good old-fashioned manner. Give
>the
>the chance to work it out for themselves. They will. No horse LIKES to hit
>poles. Solid wooden poles are, IMHO, enough to remind a truly careless horse
>(which I find to be rare) - they won't fall when the horse only brushes
>through
>them, but WILL fall when the horse honestly gets the jump wrong. Why anyone
>needs any more, I don't know. Why anyone wants to disturb the horse's
>judgement, I really don't know.
This is what I have done with my own as well and everything worked itself out.
I didn't expect him to hop over the thing perfectly the very first time, and
figured he would eventually either get it, or I just wouldn't persue it. He
did eventually take one very hard knock and since then he jumps wonderfully(he
was previously a leg dangler, which is how he knocked himself). I cannot
understand the logic behind "poling" them or putting tacks on the jumps, or
using materials that will hurt even more than a regular wooden pole does. All
that demonstrates is a lack of patience and ability to train the horse
correctly. I also wonder how many of the horses that are treated in the manner
become stoppers or become afraid to jump. It only seems logical anyway.
Emily
Abby Fairchild
<<Seems to me that a horse getting impaled qualifies as undeserved
punishment. OTOH, it's unlikely the dead animal will ever kick a pole
again...>>
Are you taking me out of context? Are you determined to misunderstand me? If
so, let me know, and I wont bother to reply.
I was pointing out that he has a reputation for caring more about the horses
then the feelings and egos of the customers. I was pointing this out in
response to posters who said he didnt give a shit about horses, that horses
were expendable, that they were mere vehicles to ribbons/glory. He is more
known for being rough on riders who are rough on horses, than he has ever being
for rough on the horses.
<<True, what's done is done. Are metal poles really necessary, or an
added risk? I mean, there are risks to jumping and those who jump
accept that. Would it have been prudent to remove the offending object?>>
I dont know. I do know that people jump poles all the time. I wasnt there. I
dont know what he *should* have done. I dont know how the riders there felt. I
dont know how *the* rider felt. She came back the next day.
(Abby)> FWIW, he is being misquoted on the Chronicle boards; he said 'customers
are
> like trains..' not horses..>>
(Mary) <<In the sense that there'll be another one along if you miss this one?
Or in the sense that damaged cars aren't worth repairing, and remain
sidelined with minor problems because there's more financial incentive
to build new ones? Or possibly both?>>
Neither. Are you disappointed?
In the sense that if a customer didnt like his methodical program, his
attention to detail, or his putting the horse first, they could find someone
else to work with.
Abby
Deborah Stevenson
On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Mary Healey wrote:
> True, what's done is done. Are metal poles really necessary, or an
> added risk? I mean, there are risks to jumping and those who jump
> accept that. Would it have been prudent to remove the offending object?
And for what values of "prudent"? Is it prudent, after all, to ask a
half-ton of limited intellectual capacity to hurl itself over a solid
object?
I'm still trying to nail down my unease about aspects of this discussion;
I'm not there but I'm closer, and I think that I'm troubled by at least
some of the phraseology about risk assessment and some of the unexamined
customs that live unmolested alongside the issues.
Principles that I'm working with:
1. I think it's largely if not universally accepted that shit happens, and
that an accident doesn't necessarily require negligence or bad judgment
for its occurrence.
2. I think it's largely if not universally accepted that we use horses in
ways that expose them to greater risks than if they were standing around
in the pasture, and that that's morally okay. (I mean, for all your "love
them for what they are" plea, Ruth, "what they are" doesn't actually mean
"tacked up and going over fences in the hunt field," either, so you're
stretching that point yourself :-).)
3. I think it's even more largely (if not universally) accepted that there
is such a thing as a risk too great to ask a horse to run.
Cool. But how are we drawing the line between the acceptable risks of 2
and the unacceptable risk of 3, and the "shit happens" accidents of 1?
And here people seem to be finding rather different places to stand :-).
Obviously one question is avoidability. Of course, *all* jumping
accidents are avoidable by avoiding jumping, and full safety within
jumping isn't possible. All we can look for is relative safety in
relationship to the benefits accrued.
I'll join folks in having some reservations about this exercise from a
training point of view before we get to the issue of its safety. (Though
again, if we're going to compare it to a smack in the mouth with a lead
shank I think it's fair also to compare it to a smack with a crop, whether
it be in "the lesson of the leg" or another situation.) It sounds like
it's motivated along the same lines as poling, with the idea that the
horse is deliberately set up to be surprised by the impact that he could
not have precluded by judging a fence correctly.
Yet we've got two people mentioned in this thread, George Morris and Cat's
trainer, who practice it, which means doubtless many more in the world.
There's been some suggestion that it can be *situationally*
appropriate--but if that's so, I don't know that we've got enough info to
say that Morris's employment of the process was incorrect for the horse in
question (if he'd used longer poles, as some support, for instance)--the
issue in that case has to be his methodology.
I've thought there were some decent points made about the problems of
metal per se (though while I see that longer poles might be comparatively
safer, it seems to me that we're already talking a freak accident and that
longer poles don't actually preclude that, merely require it to be
"freaker"). I think here is where I approach one of my nagging
feelings--if the fatality had been caused by a regular wooden pole (which,
ISTR, have managed a few over the years) would the condemnations have been
withheld? Is Morris becoming a lightning rod for criticism regardless of
his individual culpability, and does that make it difficult to separate
distaste for an individual's reputation from some genuine ground for
requesting change?
The comment along the lines of "ask Kevin Freeman" was the one closest to
my concern here--that there's a possibility of a genuine pattern of
underattention to safety in Morris' clinics. But I don't know what
accident rates tend to be in clinics in general, so I don't know how he
stacks up, or whether the Freeman fatality is considered to be something
that any fall could have turned into (and I doubt that Morris is the only
one to have had falls at clinics). I also had some sympathy at the time of
Freeman's death for the view that he was an adult and made his own
decision about his fitness for the jump. But what about the rider in this
case--does s/he have no responsibility for the actions s/he takes? Is the
ultimate responsibility for the horse's safety the rider's or the
clinician's, or a mix of both? Is there also a possibility that people
aren't exercising as much independent judgment under clinicians as they
ought to be, and that that's a source of trouble as well?
I think my current view is that while I don't think this situation is
blame-free, I also don't find it as uniquely worthy of single-individual
condemnation as some of the responses seem to suggest. For me, the
questions it raises are questions that involve a lot of equestrian
practice.
Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Still mulling it over in Champaign, IL, USA
Cat
:>No. That is not a logical comparison. One or two raps cannot compare
:>with the consistant wearing of chains.
Ruth wrote:
:Well, now the object is to get the horse to pick up
:his feet, no? The picking up of the feet occurs out
:of pain, no? I know it's a stretch but not by that much
:since horses aren't really meant to jump repeatedly
:(career) and at heights that would cause a horse to
:become "careless" in the first place.
Cat wrote:
:>No. The only "puss" on my horse that ever gets whacked is Cat herself,
:>who has been known to fall off simply from leaning over to pick a
:>bottle of Gatorade off a fence.
Ruth wrote:
:Yeow! Now, if you wouldn't hit your horse in the gob what
:makes it okay for it to be set up that the horse hits another
:part of his body?
"Hit" isn't exactly so. "Knock" is closer to the mark.
Cat wrote:
:>Mind you, Larry is far too green to be near needing such a device.
Ruth wrote:
:Why should he EVER need it? Would he get to a point
:where his mind/body is beginning to say, "I'm reaching
:my limit..."
It's not a question of reaching a limit. Dobbin, who already has a lot
of talent, gets lazy. He has no issue with height or width: he just,
say, hangs a hoof every now and then.
He is corrected, the behavior stops.
:At what point do you stop trying to tweak just a
:wee bit more out of the animal? When his body breaks
:down? When he gets stuck on the end of a pole like a fat
:pig? Is it okay to cause the animal pain in the process of
:trying to coax out a bit more juice? Why? Horses aren't
:deer. They're not race cars. They have natural born limits
:so why can't we just be happy with them just the way they
:are? I'll tell you why. Because people feel compelled to
:use them for competition and <sigh> money.
Gawwd ferbid we "use" them, eh? <SEG> This point of view is an
argument for pasture ornaments.
:Here's a thought.
:Let's leave the poor bastards out of our twisted desire for
:bigger, better, more and faster. Just love them for what they
:are, dammit!
Or another point of view: let's love them and make use of them, also.
Let those who wish to compete, do so.
If the worst thing that happens to these highly-pampered fellows in a
slight rap on a very occasional basis, I'd say they're much better off
than many, if not most, of their fellow Dobbins.
Cat (and Larry OT)
RPM1
>(I mean, for all your "love
>them for what they are" plea, Ruth, "what they are" doesn't actually mean
>"tacked up and going over fences in the hunt field," either, so you're
>stretching that point yourself :-).)
Granted. However, I jump to hunt. If I can get around
something without fucking things up too much I'm there.
I'm not going to push. I KNOW that there are only so
many jumps in every horse. Given a choice, a horse
would rather run around the countryside with 40-50 of
his best buddies over just about anything any day (at
least mine would).
My beef is with pushing, pushing, PUSHING... A horse
will tell you in no uncertain terms when he's reaching
his limit and you're an ass to not recognize this and a
bastard for completely ignoring it. This not only goes
for jumping but you can throw dressage, gymkhana...
(take your pick) into the soup.
Ruth CM
CATJA ALEXANDRA PAFORT
>:>David Wright also uses said pipes (very, very long) in schooling at
>:>home. Has done this forever, and never had a bad thing happen. These
>:>pipes are, granted, thin so the horse doesn't see them and gets a rap.
>:>Makes a jumper more careful.
>
>Catja wrote:
>:Yes, but it makes him more careful in the wrong way - he's learning NOT to
>:trust his judgement.
>That's not the idea at all.
*MY* idea of a jumper is one that knows exactly where the jump is, and clears
it.
Further down you wrote:
>It's a way of reminding them, when they get sloppy, that picking up
>their feet is a good thing. The pipe is placed slightly in front of
>the first element.
Being small in diameter and probably not very visible to the horse, it works
exactly like the bamboo cane raised by an 'attendant' - the horse jumps where
he *thinks* the jump is, but there's something that will hit him anyway, so
next time he'll jump higher to avoid it.
Which proves that you are teaching the horse not to use his judgement.
I like to play fair. If he clears the jumps, he's clear, if he hits it, he'll
hit it. No moving targets, no sneaking in of invisible traps.
Catja
and the Count
RPM1
>It's not a question of reaching a limit. Dobbin, who already has a lot
>of talent, gets lazy.
Now why might he get "lazy"? Do you think the horse
actively wakes up and decides, "Y'know, today is a
good day to try out my lazy routine!"
>Gawwd ferbid we "use" them, eh? <SEG> This point of view is an
>argument for pasture ornaments.
There's a BIG difference between pasture ornament and
*pushed too far*. But hey, go ahead, push away. I'll look
forward to seeing posts from you asking advice about
your horse's mystery physical or mental lameness.
>If the worst thing that happens to these highly-pampered fellows in a
>slight rap
From a hit to a knock to a rap, eh? Yeah, I'm hip. From
here we can go to a brush, a poke and a tickle! Before
you know it the horse will be practically begging you for
the honor to be whacked in the leg and possibly skewered
like an oversized Ball Park frank!
>on a very occasional basis,
Sort of like slapping the wife around but only on
paydays, eh? ;->
Ruth CM reaching her limit of snow in upstate NY
Kris Carroll
> Principles that I'm working with:
> 1. I think it's largely if not universally accepted that shit happens, and
> that an accident doesn't necessarily require negligence or bad judgment
> for its occurrence.
In theory perhaps, but most of the time someone screwed up.
> 2. I think it's largely if not universally accepted that we use horses in
> ways that expose them to greater risks than if they were standing around
> in the pasture, and that that's morally okay.
Faulty premise. Plenty of fatal accidents happen in the pasture.
> Yet we've got two people mentioned in this thread, George Morris and Cat's
> trainer, who practice it, which means doubtless many more in the world.
> There's been some suggestion that it can be *situationally*
> appropriate--but if that's so, I don't know that we've got enough info to
> say that Morris's employment of the process was incorrect for the horse in
> question (if he'd used longer poles, as some support, for instance)--the
> issue in that case has to be his methodology.
Anything can seem *situationally* appropriate. Poling with wire tackes can
be *situationally* appropriate. It's wrong, they're illegal.
> "freaker"). I think here is where I approach one of my nagging
> feelings--if the fatality had been caused by a regular wooden pole (which,
> ISTR, have managed a few over the years) would the condemnations have been
> withheld?
Those poles have been field tested for a long, long time.
> decision about his fitness for the jump. But what about the rider in this
> case--does s/he have no responsibility for the actions s/he takes? Is the
> ultimate responsibility for the horse's safety the rider's or the
> clinician's, or a mix of both?
The clinician set up the training exercise and sent the rider out to jump
the fence. The horse died. A few weeks earlier a horse didn't die jumping
feed bucket he could have tangled his foot in. A month or so ago, a sick
horse was brought to a show untreated and died. A year or so ago rider did
end up in the hospital. Same clinician involved. Do all clinicians do this
sort of thing regularly?
> I think my current view is that while I don't think this situation is
> blame-free, I also don't find it as uniquely worthy of single-individual
> condemnation as some of the responses seem to suggest. For me, the
> questions it raises are questions that involve a lot of equestrian
> practice.
The uniquely grusome nature of the death marks it worthy of special
condemnation. Just like Ruffian's. :(
Kris C.
Deborah Stevenson
On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Kris Carroll wrote:
> Deborah Stevenson <stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
> > Principles that I'm working with:
> > 1. I think it's largely if not universally accepted that shit happens, and
> > that an accident doesn't necessarily require negligence or bad judgment
> > for its occurrence.
>
> In theory perhaps, but most of the time someone screwed up.
But some of the time nobody did. Hence "not necessarily."
> > 2. I think it's largely if not universally accepted that we use horses in
> > ways that expose them to greater risks than if they were standing around
> > in the pasture, and that that's morally okay.
>
> Faulty premise. Plenty of fatal accidents happen in the pasture.
The premise isn't dependent on no fatal accidents happening in the
pasture. The existence of pasture accidents doesn't make the pasture into
a greater risk, however, especially when the relative time is factored
into the number of incidents in either place (sort of like most
auto accidents happen near home because most driving happens near home, not
because driving near home is more dangerous). I'm willing to rephrase it
as "specific risks," or to acknowledge that this view might not be as
widely held as I thought, but I believe jumping involves a concomitant
raise of risk for horse and rider. That doesn't make it uncontrollable
risk or unacceptable risk, it doesn't make it the only risky activity, but
I think if you're offering a counter premise that there's more safety over
fences I'll consider your premise faulty in turn.
> Anything can seem *situationally* appropriate. Poling with wire tackes can
> be *situationally* appropriate. It's wrong, they're illegal.
Well, and frankly I'd take a hefty cue from the fact that this isn't legal
by the FEI either, but some people here are putting forward a view that
it's an acceptable method of training but just not the way it was done
here. I'm not sure I'm convinced that works, but I'm still thinking :-).
> > "freaker"). I think here is where I approach one of my nagging
> > feelings--if the fatality had been caused by a regular wooden pole (which,
> > ISTR, have managed a few over the years) would the condemnations have been
> > withheld?
>
> Those poles have been field tested for a long, long time.
And have taken some horses with them. If we're calling them "safe" (which
I think is fair), we've got a definition of "safe" that includes "have
killed occasionally." I think that there's a discomfort with that fact
that leads to its denial. The definition of "safe" isn't "hasn't ever
killed anybody." That's why it's so hard to determine unacceptable
risk--it gets into the how many and how often question.
> > decision about his fitness for the jump. But what about the rider in this
> > case--does s/he have no responsibility for the actions s/he takes? Is the
> > ultimate responsibility for the horse's safety the rider's or the
> > clinician's, or a mix of both?
>
> The clinician set up the training exercise and sent the rider out to jump
> the fence. The horse died. A few weeks earlier a horse didn't die jumping
> feed bucket he could have tangled his foot in. A month or so ago, a sick
> horse was brought to a show untreated and died. A year or so ago rider did
> end up in the hospital. Same clinician involved. Do all clinicians do this
> sort of thing regularly?
I don't know, Kris. That's part of what I'm asking; I hadn't heard about
any other incident than the Kevin Freeman one with George Morris, and I
certainly don't hear about many clinics in general.
I'm also asking if all people do what clinicians tell them regularly. I
think there's more than one safety measure that can be enacted here--one
is the clinician making sure that the requests are safe, and the other is
the rider considering safety independently of the clinician. I know that
there are issues about instructors/clinicians being autocratic, but I'm
not sure a system that would require a rider to surrender all adult
responsibility to the clinician is one I'm prepared to support. The
option of saying "No" remains, and I don't like the implications I hear
that it's impossible/unbearable/inappropriate to say that in a clinic.
That's not good.
> > I think my current view is that while I don't think this situation is
> > blame-free, I also don't find it as uniquely worthy of single-individual
> > condemnation as some of the responses seem to suggest. For me, the
> > questions it raises are questions that involve a lot of equestrian
> > practice.
>
> The uniquely grusome nature of the death marks it worthy of special
> condemnation. Just like Ruffian's. :(
Specially worthy of condemnation, I dunno (I'd say starving a horse is a
lot more mundane and also more worthy of condemnation, for instance,
since the cause and effect are a lot more reliably correlated).
Specially memorable, that's for sure.
Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Rather glad she wasn't there in Champaign, IL, USA
Cat
:>It's not a question of reaching a limit. Dobbin, who already has a lot
:>of talent, gets lazy.
Ruth wrote:
:Now why might he get "lazy"? Do you think the horse
:actively wakes up and decides, "Y'know, today is a
:good day to try out my lazy routine!"
"Lazy" is H/J lingo (perhaps others, also). Simply means that Dobbin
is not as sharp as usual.
Cat wrote:
:>Gawwd ferbid we "use" them, eh? <SEG> This point of view is an
:>argument for pasture ornaments.
"RPM1" <rpm1de...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
:There's a BIG difference between pasture ornament and
:*pushed too far*.
Errm, who said anything about "pushing"? There is a large difference
between pushing and a quick rap/knock/.
:But hey, go ahead, push away. I'll look
:forward to seeing posts from you asking advice about
:your horse's mystery physical or mental lameness.
No, you'll look forward to increasingly wonderful posts about my horse
and the top-quality training he is receiving. You'll also read <gasp!>
about him showing.
Cat wrote:
:>If the worst thing that happens to these highly-pampered fellows in a
:>slight rap
:
:From a hit to a knock to a rap, eh? Yeah, I'm hip.
No you ain't, but you're sure having fun!
:From
:here we can go to a brush, a poke and a tickle!
Errrm, I could use a poke and a... never mind.
:Before
:you know it the horse will be practically begging you for
:the honor to be whacked in the leg and possibly skewered
:like an oversized Ball Park frank!
pfffffft.
:>on a very occasional basis,
:
:Sort of like slapping the wife around but only on
:paydays, eh? ;->
You treat your wife like that? <SEG>
Cat (and Larry OT)
K.Z.
100...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu>, stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu says...
<snip>
> Freeman's death for the view that he was an adult and made his own
> decision about his fitness for the jump. >>
I thought Kevin Freeman had just split his pelvis or some such,
but was still alive. Did I miss something?
> Is the
> ultimate responsibility for the horse's safety the rider's or the
> clinician's, or a mix of both?
IMHO, the rider has the ultimate responsibility to their horse.
Who else knows the horse better (presumably), and specifics as to
greenness over certain obstacles, fitness level, or any other
pertinent information that may or may not have been passed along
to the clinician? A clinician only knows what is in front of
them... they have the responsibility towards keeping things
relatively safe for everyone involved, both horse and rider. For
the record, metal jump poles are not on my list of "relatively
safe".
> Is there also a possibility that people
> aren't exercising as much independent judgment under clinicians as they
> ought to be, and that that's a source of trouble as well?
Yes, I think so. Someone riding with a "big name" may well
believe that the big name knows so much more than they, that they
wouldn't want to second guess. I've certainly seen it happen.
("We've never jumped [choose 1: a combination; that big of an
oxer; a liverpool; the barn dog], but I guess that ____ knows
what s/he's doing." <crash>)
> I think my current view is that while I don't think this situation is
> blame-free, I also don't find it as uniquely worthy of single-individual
> condemnation as some of the responses seem to suggest.
Agreed. IMHO, George made a safety error in using a metal pole
as part of a jump. Did the rider make an error for choosing to
go over an (again IMHO) unsafe element that was presented to her?
I don't know, I wasn't there.
Here's another thought. Most H/J riders that I've known (sorry,
folks) spend an unwarranted amount of time jumping the same
fences around the arena over and over. They jump to school for
shows, they jump at shows, they jump to practice after shows,
they jump in clinics, they jump in lessons, they jump on their
own. And they wonder why Mr. Horsey becomes so bored / sore /
sour that he just doesn't jump like he used to. So they jump
more to get him back where he used to be. That doesn't work, so
they introduce gimmicks (I count metal poles in this category) to
make him jump prettier, more carefully, or more enthusiastically.
How about better flatwork? A vacation? LESS jumping (heaven
forfend)? Jumping outside of the arena? Riders that do these
things seem to be the exception to the rule (and this is not
limited to the H/J world). Frankly, if a horse is hitting fences
enough for a major correction device to be employed, then he 1)
needs to learn to use himself better... can we say flatwork or
gymnastics 2) may be sore of bored out of his skull from too much
of the same or 3) just may not have been cut out to be a jumper.
Just stirring the pot,
Kelly & Doc
dok...@frontiernet.net
RPM1
>Errm, who said anything about "pushing"? There is a large difference
>between pushing and a quick rap/knock/.
A "lazy" horse that needs to be rapped IS being
pushed.
>No, you'll look forward to increasingly wonderful posts about my horse
>and the top-quality training he is receiving.
Sure sounds good to me.
>You'll also read <gasp!> about him showing.
Nothing wrong with a LITTLE showing just don't
go do a Benny the Bookie on him when he's given
you all he's got to give that's all.
>No you ain't, but you're sure having fun!
More than you know.
Take care & good luck with your horse!
Ruth CM
C.M.Newell
wrote:
>Here's another thought. Most H/J riders that I've known (sorry,
>folks) spend an unwarranted amount of time jumping the same
>fences around the arena over and over. They jump to school for
>shows, they jump at shows, they jump to practice after shows,
>they jump in clinics, they jump in lessons, they jump on their
>own. And they wonder why Mr. Horsey becomes so bored / sore /
>sour that he just doesn't jump like he used to. So they jump
>more to get him back where he used to be. That doesn't work, so
>they introduce gimmicks (I count metal poles in this category) to
>make him jump prettier, more carefully, or more enthusiastically.
>How about better flatwork? A vacation? LESS jumping (heaven
>forfend)? Jumping outside of the arena? Riders that do these
>things seem to be the exception to the rule (and this is not
>limited to the H/J world). Frankly, if a horse is hitting fences
>enough for a major correction device to be employed, then he 1)
>needs to learn to use himself better... can we say flatwork or
>gymnastics 2) may be sore of bored out of his skull from too much
>of the same or 3) just may not have been cut out to be a jumper.
>
You'd think that might occur to the h/j masses, wouldn't you?
One of the things I liked about the hunter trainer I used to work with
was that she'd sometimes turn to one of her juniors who'd just showed
up for a lesson and say, "Your horse needs a break. Take her for a
trail ride."
Abby Fairchild
<<Here's another thought. Most H/J riders that I've known (sorry, folks)
spend an unwarranted amount of time jumping the same fences around the arena
over and over. They jump to school for
shows, they jump at shows, they jump to practice after shows, they jump in
clinics, they jump in lessons, they jump on their
own. And they wonder why Mr. Horsey becomes so bored / sore / sour that he
just doesn't jump like he used to. So they jump more to get him back where he
used to be. That doesn't work, so
they introduce gimmicks (I count metal poles in this category) to
make him jump prettier, more carefully, or more enthusiastically.
How about better flatwork? A vacation? LESS jumping (heaven
forfend)? Jumping outside of the arena? Riders that do these
things seem to be the exception to the rule (and this is not
limited to the H/J world). Frankly, if a horse is hitting fences
enough for a major correction device to be employed, then he 1)
needs to learn to use himself better... can we say flatwork or
gymnastics 2) may be sore of bored out of his skull from too much
of the same or 3) just may not have been cut out to be a jumper.>>
Truer words were never spoken.
Its the mark of someone who doesnt get the big picture..jump and jump and jump.
And Kel is exactly right; this makes more careless jumpers than any lack of
talent.
Abby
Kris Carroll
> But some of the time nobody did. Hence "not necessarily."
Show me an accident where nobody screwed up. I've never seen that.
> I believe jumping involves a concomitant
> raise of risk for horse and rider.
Why? What's so dangerous about popping over something if you've trained
the horse and rider properly and schooled consistently? Unless you hang
out with Irish hunts who pop over barbed wire on stone walls as a matter
of course. Or get out the bamboo, wire and tacks. Or use a metal rod (the
nature of whose ends are unknown, jagged perhaps?) that can be knocked
into position to impale the chest?
> Well, and frankly I'd take a hefty cue from the fact that this isn't legal
> by the FEI either, but some people here are putting forward a view that
> it's an acceptable method of training but just not the way it was done
> here. I'm not sure I'm convinced that works, but I'm still thinking :-).
Who doesn't know legal only applies at sanctioned events; what anyone does
at home isn't governable? You can even electrocute your horse in the
comfort of your own barn and still compete, as long as you don't get
convicted for ins. fraud.
> I don't know, Kris. That's part of what I'm asking; I hadn't heard about
> any other incident than the Kevin Freeman one with George Morris, and I
> certainly don't hear about many clinics in general.
My big problem is clinics is M. Name shows up, meets you and your horse
for 5 mins and hands you answers in the next 40. On any given day, what
kind of temperament would you expect from someone on the road meeting
everything from the sublime to the dispicable? Will you conceed variable?
I can't bring myself to place any blame on the rider yet. Though Young
Riders (18-25yos) think the A/O should have known better then to try the
fence. OTOH, you should hear the stories they tell about having
obscenities screamed at them in clinics. Names bigger than George. Tears
is the common response.
> I'm also asking if all people do what clinicians tell them regularly.
I have and I ain't no shrinking violet. Measure my riding against this
man's professional experience and I'll trust his judgement first. The
trainer who told me to sign up for the clinic later told me if I ever rode
any horse of hers like that she'd kick me out of the barn. Though I've
seen her pocket her better judgement with her own horse at a clinic or
two. And kick herself afterwards.
> think there's more than one safety measure that can be enacted here--one
> is the clinician making sure that the requests are safe, and the other is
> the rider considering safety independently of the clinician.
If anything, shouldn't the visiting clinician be even more cautious?
> Specially worthy of condemnation, I dunno (I'd say starving a horse is a
> lot more mundane and also more worthy of condemnation, for instance,
> since the cause and effect are a lot more reliably correlated).
> Specially memorable, that's for sure.
Wiping blood off a pole and putting it back in use has to top any mundane
act of omission.
Kris
Meghan Noecker
I remember watching a program where they interviewed a grand prix
level jumper and took some footage of his training.
It's been a couple years, so I don't remember which rider.
Anyway, he spent only 2-3 days a week jumping. Other days, they did
some dressage work, or they'd go out hacking. He said he did it that
way because it gave better exercise and stimulation than just repeated
jumps.
It's too bad that showing has turned more into a profession than
having fun. Everything has to be rushed, corners cut, repitition until
the horse dies of boredom or gets sold for being sour.
On 25 Jan 2000 23:15:02 GMT, ekq...@aol.comhatespam (Abby Fairchild)
wrote:
Meghan
Friesians in the Northwest
http://www.zoocrewphoto.com/friesian.htm
Joyce Reynolds-Ward
<stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> wrote:
snip
>The comment along the lines of "ask Kevin Freeman" was the one closest to
>my concern here--that there's a possibility of a genuine pattern of
>underattention to safety in Morris' clinics.
Okay. (btw, Freeman's still alive, methinks I saw him riding at a
December Jumpernite).
What happened with Kevin Freeman is that he took a series of
challenging jumps w/out stirrups in a Morris clinic, came down bad and
broke his pelvis.
*However.* Morris had explicitly told him he *didn't* need to do this
exercise, and had discouraged him from it.
At least that's what *I* heard from someone who was at that particular
clinic.
jrw
Kris Carroll
> The comment along the lines of "ask Kevin Freeman" was the one closest to
> my concern here--that there's a possibility of a genuine pattern of
> underattention to safety in Morris' clinics. But I don't know what
> accident rates tend to be in clinics in general, so I don't know how he
> stacks up, or whether the Freeman fatality is considered to be something
> that any fall could have turned into (and I doubt that Morris is the only
> one to have had falls at clinics). I also had some sympathy at the time of
> Freeman's death for the view that he was an adult and made his own
> decision about his fitness for the jump.
I can't find this info in my archives, so someone correct me if I mess up
on any facts here.
Kevin Freeman spent about 3 weeks? or so in a Portland Or hospital, and is
still alive. Though I don't know what kind of shape he's in. I haven't
seen him up here giving clinics since. IIRC they were schooling some
pretty big fences without stirrups. Whose idea was it? Did he trust
George's judgment over his own? I don't know. Kevin is not only an adult,
he's a pro and a medalist.
Kris
Deborah Stevenson
On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Kris Carroll wrote:
> Deborah Stevenson <stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> wrote:
> > But some of the time nobody did. Hence "not necessarily."
>
> Show me an accident where nobody screwed up. I've never seen that.
There have been several accidents to horses in rec.equestrian that haven't
sounded like they were due to any particular screwup to me. However, we
may be hitting on a larger ideological difference here if you mean that
statement generally. I do not believe all harm results from culpability
:-).
> > I believe jumping involves a concomitant
> > raise of risk for horse and rider.
>
> Why? What's so dangerous about popping over something if you've trained
> the horse and rider properly and schooled consistently? Unless you hang
> out with Irish hunts who pop over barbed wire on stone walls as a matter
> of course. Or get out the bamboo, wire and tacks. Or use a metal rod (the
> nature of whose ends are unknown, jagged perhaps?) that can be knocked
> into position to impale the chest?
But your response here doesn't quite match my statement, and that's part
of what I mean here. I said "raise of risk"--you responded with
"dangerous." Different levels of risk don't have to be divided into
"dangerous" and "safe," and in fact I think that's a bad idea. I'm not
arguing it's impossible to jump and keep the risks reasonable, just
pointing out that we're talking an activity that involves greater ground
impact and more possibilities for foreign object entanglements at
speed than other equestrian pastimes and therefore brings with it a
certain amount of risk. As does *all* riding--but there's different
levels of exposure in different situations and different pastimes.
> > Well, and frankly I'd take a hefty cue from the fact that this isn't legal
> > by the FEI either, but some people here are putting forward a view that
> > it's an acceptable method of training but just not the way it was done
> > here. I'm not sure I'm convinced that works, but I'm still thinking :-).
>
> Who doesn't know legal only applies at sanctioned events; what anyone does
> at home isn't governable? You can even electrocute your horse in the
> comfort of your own barn and still compete, as long as you don't get
> convicted for ins. fraud.
>
> > I don't know, Kris. That's part of what I'm asking; I hadn't heard about
> > any other incident than the Kevin Freeman one with George Morris, and I
> > certainly don't hear about many clinics in general.
>
> My big problem is clinics is M. Name shows up, meets you and your horse
> for 5 mins and hands you answers in the next 40. On any given day, what
> kind of temperament would you expect from someone on the road meeting
> everything from the sublime to the dispicable? Will you conceed variable?
Oh, absolutely. I don't think you've heard me arguing for anybody's
beatification :-). But maybe this is also something riders need to keep
in mind when they're processing information.
> I can't bring myself to place any blame on the rider yet. Though Young
> Riders (18-25yos) think the A/O should have known better then to try the
> fence. OTOH, you should hear the stories they tell about having
> obscenities screamed at them in clinics. Names bigger than George. Tears
> is the common response.
This is part of my "maybe something's rotten in Denmark" feeling. Perhaps
this is the legacy of an old and problematically autocratic tradition. I
understand that people will come to clinics reluctant to change and that
the clinician is going to want you to work with him/her or else you're
wasting time. But if it's got to translate into parking one's independent
judgment at the door, that's asking for trouble. I have a vaguely
rebellious notion that if a clinician insists I forego all independent
thought upon attending, then s/he accepts full responsibility for
everything that happens and promises to replace any dead horses.
Basically, you can have me ride at my own risk or you can have me promise
to follow your every judgment, not both.
> > I'm also asking if all people do what clinicians tell them regularly.
>
> I have and I ain't no shrinking violet. Measure my riding against this
> man's professional experience and I'll trust his judgement first. The
> trainer who told me to sign up for the clinic later told me if I ever rode
> any horse of hers like that she'd kick me out of the barn. Though I've
> seen her pocket her better judgement with her own horse at a clinic or
> two. And kick herself afterwards.
I can understand that. So let's play this out further. Say you (or
anybody, this isn't just a Kris-specific question) were also attending
this clinic (I'm not even hypothetically going to get anybody's horse
shafted; you're another attendee). You look at that metal pole and see
its dangers. Do you say something to George Morris or do you keep jumping
and letting other people jump? Do you figure that nothing would happen if
you said anything and that it wouldn't therefore be worth it, is the
likely unpleasantness going to be too great on what was a long-budgeted
for outing?
And if the answer is no, you keep jumping, because you decide that the
authority knows better than you and the authority says it's not unsafe,
what do you then say to the kid who's only fifteen and who kept doing what
authorities told her was okay for *her* horse and nerved her and rode her
in shows? Haven't we, in the latter case, been demanding just this kind
of questioning of authority?
> If anything, shouldn't the visiting clinician be even more cautious?
I would hope so, yes. But I don't think it's a good idea for riders to
leave the safety up to somebody else no matter *how* cautious the
clinician is. I'm thinking of a partnership of safety--both sides have
obligations.
> Wiping blood off a pole and putting it back in use has to top any mundane
> act of omission.
I'm thinking from the treatment of the horse point of view. From the Good
God! point of view that one's pretty much impossible to top.
Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Wondering afresh about this clinic idea in Champaign, IL, USA
Deborah Stevenson
On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Joyce Reynolds-Ward wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Jan 2000 13:14:23 -0600, Deborah Stevenson
> <stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
> snip
>
> >The comment along the lines of "ask Kevin Freeman" was the one closest to
> >my concern here--that there's a possibility of a genuine pattern of
> >underattention to safety in Morris' clinics.
> Okay. (btw, Freeman's still alive, methinks I saw him riding at a
> December Jumpernite).
Yikes. I guess there's a pattern of underattention here at home, too.
That's a big difference. Thanks for the clarification, and my apologies
to everybody I misled (and to Kevin Freeman).
I'm happy to use my faulty memory as an example of the problems inherent
in judging from afar :-).
Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Getting CRAFTy in Champaign, IL, USA
Madeline Rockwell
K.Z. <dok...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.12f7e42be...@news.frontiernet.net...
> In article <Pine.SGI.4.10.10001251138280.71057-
> 100...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu>, stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu says...
> <snip>
> > Freeman's death for the view that he was an adult and made his own
> > decision about his fitness for the jump. >>
>
> but was still alive. Did I miss something?
I missed the whole Kevin Freeman thing as well. But in fact Kevin has been
to the Olympics himself as an eventer at least once, and can hardly be put
in the same class as some hapless amateur.
madeline
Kris Carroll
> > > I believe jumping involves a concomitant
> > > raise of risk for horse and rider.
Kris Carroll wrote:
> > Why? What's so dangerous about popping over something if you've trained
> > the horse and rider properly and schooled consistently? Unless you hang
> > out with Irish hunts who pop over barbed wire on stone walls as a matter
> > of course. Or get out the bamboo, wire and tacks. Or use a metal rod (the
> > nature of whose ends are unknown, jagged perhaps?) that can be knocked
> > into position to impale the chest?
Deborah Stevenson <stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> wrote:
> But your response here doesn't quite match my statement, and that's part
> of what I mean here. I said "raise of risk"--you responded with
> "dangerous." Different levels of risk don't have to be divided into
> "dangerous" and "safe," and in fact I think that's a bad idea.
Raising the risk doesn't imply an increase in danger? What's your baseline?
Get ready for some heresy. I don't agree Riding is Risky, any more than
life is risky. The kids talk about the old saw - you're not a real rider
until you've fallen off X times. Beginners don't ever need to fall off.
They should be supervised until they have skills and balance, taught to
take a fall gracefully in the event, wear the right gear and stay awake.
Most falls are unsuitable horses, screwing around, poor training, bad
manners. The risk is really quite minimal and the danger of injury pretty
low. The ones really getting hurt are the pros, wannabe pros, kids and a/o
under supervion of incompetent pros and the odd suicidal moron.
> This is part of my "maybe something's rotten in Denmark" feeling. Perhaps
> this is the legacy of an old and problematically autocratic tradition.
Don't think so. Young fools and even women scream. I think the factors are
insecurity and inability to inarticulate. The read my mind crowd who know
they don't really know what the hell they're talking about. They might be
able to do it themselves, but teach? Except it's such easy money.
> I have a vaguely
> rebellious notion that if a clinician insists I forego all independent
> thought upon attending, then s/he accepts full responsibility for
> everything that happens and promises to replace any dead horses.
Which is probably why George told the Chronicle "he's not able to comment
due to the possiblity of litigation. But he's not avoiding the issue. He's
very upset about the incident and says he will comment upon the situation
as soon as he is able."
> You look at that metal pole and see
> its dangers. Do you say something to George Morris or do you keep jumping
> and letting other people jump? Do you figure that nothing would happen if
> you said anything and that it wouldn't therefore be worth it, is the
> likely unpleasantness going to be too great on what was a long-budgeted
> for outing?
Ah. This is why my grandmother used to say I was born guilty. Not only do
I not jump, I say so and why, loud enough to scare everyone. Historically,
the person in charge would amend the problem, hate my guts and so would
everyone else who made uncomfortable by the tension. I'd take comfort in
my grandfather assuring me that some people were born to be offended and
that sometimes it's better to be right than to be loved. BUT the tricky
part is knowing for sure.
> And if the answer is no, you keep jumping, because you decide that the
> authority knows better than you and the authority says it's not unsafe,
> what do you then say to the kid who's only fifteen and who kept doing what
> authorities told her was okay for *her* horse and nerved her and rode her
> in shows? Haven't we, in the latter case, been demanding just this kind
> of questioning of authority?
Ignorance gets a pass until it learns better. I believe people here have
been chastised for standing by and doing nothing, while reporting the sins
of others.
Kris
Deborah Stevenson
On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Madeline Rockwell wrote:
> I missed the whole Kevin Freeman thing as well. But in fact Kevin has been
> to the Olympics himself as an eventer at least once, and can hardly be put
> in the same class as some hapless amateur.
I wasn't actually thinking that they were on a par :-). However, if the
difference in classes is that one is responsible for his accident in a
clinic and the other is not, where's the line drawn between rider
responsibility and the absence thereof? I'm asking this seriously, not
snottily: How far away from the Olympics do you have to be before it's
not your fault if you do something with bad results in a clinic? How
advanced a rider do you have to be teaching in a clinic before his safety
stops being your responsibility?
Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Wondering about the continuum in Champaign, IL, USA
Kirsty
Emily Conger wrote:
>
> This is what I have done with my own as well and everything worked itself out.
> I didn't expect him to hop over the thing perfectly the very first time, and
> figured he would eventually either get it, or I just wouldn't persue it. He
> did eventually take one very hard knock and since then he jumps wonderfully(he
> was previously a leg dangler, which is how he knocked himself). I cannot
> understand the logic behind "poling" them or putting tacks on the jumps, or
> using materials that will hurt even more than a regular wooden pole does. All
> that demonstrates is a lack of patience and ability to train the horse
> correctly. I also wonder how many of the horses that are treated in the manner
> become stoppers or become afraid to jump. It only seems logical anyway.
>
> Emily
>
> Emily
> http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Rapids/5758
I totally agree. One poster mentioned that a horse they had heard of had
had such bad experiences with rapping that he wouldn't even approach a
fence that had a person standing next to the standard. If thats not
training fear into the animal, what is?
Hitting the poles, as you mentioned, is enough. If a horse consistently
knocks a rail down at a metre 20, but sails over a metre 15, then he's
overfaced or being pushed past his abilities. He sure as hell won't be
hitting that rail repeatedly on purpose.
Kirsty (and Jack, who hates touching rails.)
"If, in your heart, you truly believe that any small effort - anything
that is a little better - is cause for celebration, you will ALWAYS have
a good ride."
- Jane Savoie
CATJA ALEXANDRA PAFORT
>How advanced a rider do you have to be teaching in a clinic before his safety
>stops being your responsibility?
Riders go to clinics to get advice, and unless they've got the brains and skill
to see that the advice is bad for the horse and themself, they are likely to
take it. Depending on who they are, and who the clinician is, they might feel
that BigName knows better than they do, and show at least the willingness to
try what is suggested. In fact, they are positively encouraged to do so.
The last time I rode in a lesson, I was doing exercises I wasn't wholly
conviced off, and in a sequence I wasn't completely convinced off. It was an
evaluation lesson and we were a bit hampered by frozen ground. I didn't do
anything that would HARM the horse, but I played around with a few things that
I feel would set him back when done regularly. (I've got to say, Crumble is
a very forgiving horse. I probably woudn't have done it with Billy) It's a fine
line to thread. You don't want to come into a lesson and state 'this is what
I'll do, I won't listen if you say differently', nor do you want to hand your
brain in at the door. Most of the time, clinicians want to try a certain
approach with a horse. They *think* it will work, and they want to know whether
it works or not. Now. And like everybody else, they can be wrong and can make
honest mistakes.
That was the general answer. Every beginner should, however, learn that only
safe obstacles should be jumped; and the unsafety of the metal pole was proven
beyond reproach.
Catja
and the Count
CATJA ALEXANDRA PAFORT
>Say you (or
>anybody, this isn't just a Kris-specific question) were also attending
>this clinic (I'm not even hypothetically going to get anybody's horse
>shafted; you're another attendee). You look at that metal pole and see
>its dangers. Do you say something to George Morris or do you keep jumping
>and letting other people jump?
I would speak to the clinician and the organiser. Naive as I am, I would
probably think it an honest mistake that a metal pole has landed among the
jumping equipment. I'd also mention it to my fellow riders. This is the first
instance that I've heard anyone condone jumping metal poles. The last time I
heard about it was when someone brought back her pony who was out on loan
*because* he'd been jumping metal poles and the parent didn't think anything
off it. I can honestly say that I haven't seen a metal pole in any barn I've
been to, and I've been around a few.
>Do you figure that nothing would happen if
>you said anything and that it wouldn't therefore be worth it, is the
>likely unpleasantness going to be too great on what was a long-budgeted
>for outing?
I'd take a quick look at the cost of the clinic versus the cost that a single
vet visit would cost me and do my sums accordingly. I don't give a damn about
the unpleasantness - I'd think that getting injured, causing injury to my
horse, or neglecting to warn others who might not have realised the
implications of the equipment is a lot less pleasant than risking the wrath of
a clinican. (I don't show. If I did, I'd take my chances with a well-prepared
and well-ridden horse. Not all the big names stick together.) Face it. Unless
you are an employee of BigName there is nothing he can do to you if you say 'I
think this is unsafe, I don't want to jump it.' He can throw you out of the
clinic, he can ridicule you, he can ignore you for the rest of the day. But he
can't get to you in any way. (If you are an employee, this is the right time to
leave, methinks.) He, on the other hand, has a reputation to loose. Which means
that you've got him by the balls (if he's male, that is).
Catja
and Billy (off to a clinic on Saturday, albeit a Dressage one)
cdhoward
>
> >Say you (or
> >anybody, this isn't just a Kris-specific question) were also attending
> >this clinic (I'm not even hypothetically going to get anybody's horse
> >shafted; you're another attendee). You look at that metal pole and see
> >its dangers. Do you say something to George Morris or do you keep jumping
> >and letting other people jump?
well...If I went to a clinic for something I was interested in
...(reining...driving...gaited) and the clinician asked us to to
something completly stupid that I did'nt like ...I would refuse...
now would I have the gumption to come out and say..." you're a damn
idiot" maybe not...manners would probably prevent it...unless it was
WAYYYYYYY off...(which this pole thing may or may not have been amongst
this crowd of folks)
more likely I would have begged off and told them I'd just don't think
that's for me thank you
but like Bill K is fond of saying "Tamara...??? she don't like
anybody<G> "
Tamara in TN
Laura Friedman
> The comment along the lines of "ask Kevin Freeman" was the one closest to
> my concern here--that there's a possibility of a genuine pattern of
> underattention to safety in Morris' clinics. But I don't know what
> accident rates tend to be in clinics in general, so I don't know how he
> stacks up, or whether the Freeman fatality is considered to be something
> that any fall could have turned into (and I doubt that Morris is the only
> one to have had falls at clinics). I also had some sympathy at the time of
> Freeman's death for the view that he was an adult and made his own
> decision about his fitness for the jump. But what about the rider in this
> case--does s/he have no responsibility for the actions s/he takes? Is the
> ultimate responsibility for the horse's safety the rider's or the
> clinician's, or a mix of both? Is there also a possibility that people
> aren't exercising as much independent judgment under clinicians as they
> ought to be, and that that's a source of trouble as well?
It's an interesting question, and one that doesn't have a clear cut answer.
I think the judgement calls that riders make almost should happen *before* the
clinic, because once your in the clinic enviroment you are going to almost
certainly be asked to do things that might go against your better judgement.
That initial judgement call I refer to is whether or not one is to ride in the
clinic at all, and how much trust one is going to put in the clinician (and by
the way this also applies to lessons).
For example, I'd be willing to bet that the nervous riders I saw in Mark
Rashid's clinic were afraid, and I mean *really* afraid, that they were
putting their lives at risk by following his instructions to loosen their
reins, etc. Even though he put much effort into relaxing them, bringing them
along slowly, putting them in a small safe arena, and if they needed it
getting on their horses and demonstrating to them, two days of riding isn't
going to erase all the fear that's inside someone who has had a big spill.
So would those people have been doing the prudent thing to ignore Rashid or
give up on the clinic? Well, in some extreme cases that might be the right
thing to do. But I was glad to see those riders ignore their fear, trust the
clinician, and give his methods a try. Every one of them was better off for
it.
So the issue of responsibility and trust is a tough one. Sometimes we don't
do our horses or ourselves a favor by listing to our own concerns and fears.
Sometimes we have to trust in another person's experience, even if it runs
contrary to our own instincts.
So I have every sympathy for the rider in the GM event, because I can imagine
how horrible, guilty, and confused I'd feel if someone so experienced and well
respected got me into such a situation. I'd bet that they'll always wonder if
they did the right thing, or were responsible for their horses' death.
Laura & Squiggles (lumps almost gone - her old owner now tells me she is
allergic to yellow jackets, so I suspect that's the problem)
Mary Healey
> Mary wrote:
> <<Seems to me that a horse getting impaled qualifies as undeserved
> punishment. OTOH, it's unlikely the dead animal will ever kick a pole
> again...>>
>
> Are you taking me out of context?
Not intentionally.
> Are you determined to misunderstand me?
Certainly not.
> If so, let me know, and I wont bother to reply.
>
> I was pointing out that he has a reputation for caring more about the horses
> then the feelings and egos of the customers.
Can you point out where this reputation is applicable to the situation
under discussion?
> <<True, what's done is done. Are metal poles really necessary, or an
> added risk? I mean, there are risks to jumping and those who jump
> accept that. Would it have been prudent to remove the offending object?>>
>
> I dont know. I do know that people jump poles all the time.
I know people who do all sorts of things I consider to be unacceptably
risky. I guess my question was, is jumping metal poles, or using metal
poles to 'rap' jumpers, a known risk or was this a complete surprise?
(I'm familiar with the litany 'gee, THAT's never happened before' from
other venues. Sometimes it's a genuine shock, unforseen and
unforseeable. Other times, the risk is known but considered
acceptable.)
> (Abby)> FWIW, he is being misquoted on the Chronicle boards; he said 'customers are
> > like trains..' not horses..>>
>
> (Mary) <<In the sense that there'll be another one along if you miss this one?
> Or in the sense that damaged cars aren't worth repairing, and remain
> sidelined with minor problems because there's more financial incentive
> to build new ones? Or possibly both?>>
>
> Neither. Are you disappointed?
Nope. Are you?
> In the sense that if a customer didnt like his methodical program, his
> attention to detail, or his putting the horse first, they could find someone
> else to work with.
How exactly is using a gimmick like a metal pole (no matter how
acceptable or widespread the practice, it's still an attempt to 'trick'
the horse) putting the horse first? What alternative would have
indicated putting something else first?
I suspect Mr. Morris and I would not get on for many, many reasons.
None of which include a methodical program, attention to detail, or
putting the horse first.
M.
Kris Carroll
> I know people who do all sorts of things I consider to be unacceptably
> risky. I guess my question was, is jumping metal poles, or using metal
> poles to 'rap' jumpers, a known risk or was this a complete surprise?
If you regularly send students over triple bars backwards with a metal rod
as an invisable offset you intend the horse to rap, then why would a
serious accident be a complete surprise?
True, it's probably an unlucky set of circumstances that might allow a
horse to knock it just so it set up in the ground like a stake, piercing
the horse through the chest, heart, lungs as he landed. But a complete
surprise? That's not the phrase I'd use.
Kris Carroll
Kris Carroll
> :> I know people who do all sorts of things I consider to be unacceptably
> :> risky. I guess my question was, is jumping metal poles, or using metal
> :> poles to 'rap' jumpers, a known risk or was this a complete surprise?
>
> :If you regularly send students over triple bars backwards with a metal rod
> :as an invisable offset you intend the horse to rap, then why would a
> :serious accident be a complete surprise?
digiN...@SPAMhome.com (Cat) wrote:
> BACKwards? For real??
I don't know if this was the set up at the Fl accident* but a post about
that brought this clearly into focus for me. I have seen this with hand
held bamboo ambush. I never heard the term offset before. But trainers I
knew didn't send students at these fences, they said get off, I'll do it.
Most of the time. I do seem to recall taking a few fences backwards as a
wakeup call - maybe when no one was looking. But I was older then, I'm
younger than that now.
* Someone insinuated it was, but s/he also insinuated that the dead horse
was left in the ring while the clinic continued - which is nearly
impossible to believe. Someone else posted tbis: I talked briefly with a
trainer friend who is in WPB and SAW this thing happen. She saw about 90%
of the incident and confirmed that the horse died quickly, and that indeed
the pole bounced right back up at the horse. More importantly that the
Pole was not an offset or placed on top of the top rail, but that the
WHOLE jump was made of metal rails. I forgot to ask her how long the horse
remained in the ring. Yup, that's more hearsay, but I feel that she is a
reliable person. She's pretty upset by the whole thing.
I don't know what to believe. The Chronicle board has brought out a few
nutcases with agendas of their own. And maybe a few GM supporters with
agendas. It is a *very* interesting net event. And kudos to staffer Erin
Harty for holding up with grace under pressure.
Kris C
Cat
:> I know people who do all sorts of things I consider to be unacceptably
:> risky. I guess my question was, is jumping metal poles, or using metal
:> poles to 'rap' jumpers, a known risk or was this a complete surprise?
kcar...@horse-country.com (Kris Carroll) wrote:
:If you regularly send students over triple bars backwards with a metal rod
:as an invisable offset you intend the horse to rap, then why would a
:serious accident be a complete surprise?
BACKwards? For real??
Cat (and Larry OT)
Mary Healey
> It's not a question of reaching a limit. Dobbin, who already has a lot
> of talent, gets lazy.
No. Horses don't get lazy.
> If the worst thing that happens to these highly-pampered fellows in a
> slight rap on a very occasional basis,
If the worst thing that happens to a horse is anything other than the
best its humans can provide, then shame on the humans. Arbitrary whacks
for percieved faults doesn't make a whole lot of sense, fashion or
other.
M.
Scrutinizing Inquisitor
>... repitition until
>the horse dies of boredom ...
Your substantiation for that would be _?_
Injury and fatigue and the association of
such with work, are not any kind of ennui.
This is to entertain and not for those who want to be abused/harassed.
This is to encourage at most only lawful/legal and pragmatic actions.
This is to respond to/on a precedent topic not advertise commerce.
This is to expect only appropriate resource use in response.
This is to add that if you don't like that, well, tough shit.
Scrutinizing Inquisitor
>Kris Carroll wrote:
>> Deborah Stevenson wrote:
[re: KC's comment "most of the time someone screwed up"]
>> > But some of the time nobody did. Hence "not necessarily."
>> Show me an accident where nobody screwed up. I've never seen that.
>
>There have been several accidents to horses in rec.equestrian that haven't
>sounded like they were due to any particular screwup to me.
Every accident I've ever had with a horse has been my screwup.
Never once did the horse do it, or God do it, or the Devil do it.
I'm the one who chose the horse, chose what to do with the horse,
and chose exactly how to do whatever was done with the horse. If
I didn't figure out what I'd done wrong first, as I should have,
I made the effort to do so afterward, so as not to repeat it.
This is not to say that it's always possible for a human to be
infallible, as it's at times difficult to judge conditions. The
fact remains, however, that human fallibility causes wrecks with
horses, of severity proportional to the dearth of consideration.
> However, we
>may be hitting on a larger ideological difference here if you mean that
>statement generally. I do not believe all harm results from culpability
>:-).
I know that riding involves inherent risks, specifically that
the humans will underestimate the equids' variabilities under
diverse circumstances, but also that those inherent risks can
be thoroughly addressed and effectively minimized.
>> > I believe jumping involves a concomitant
>> > raise of risk for horse and rider.
>>
>> Why? What's so dangerous about popping over something if you've trained
>> the horse and rider properly and schooled consistently? Unless you hang
>> out with Irish hunts who pop over barbed wire on stone walls as a matter
>> of course. Or get out the bamboo, wire and tacks. Or use a metal rod (the
>> nature of whose ends are unknown, jagged perhaps?) that can be knocked
>> into position to impale the chest?
>
>But your response here doesn't quite match my statement, and that's part
>of what I mean here. I said "raise of risk"--you responded with
>"dangerous." Different levels of risk don't have to be divided into
>"dangerous" and "safe," and in fact I think that's a bad idea.
It'd be inaccurate.
A highly trained top-level rider could fall off at a
standstill and get seriously or fatally injured, and
the awareness of faster tougher activities actually
seems to be correlated to compensations therefor.
An unskilled beginner could try to take too much jump
and perhaps even get away with it, too, but that isn't
something on which any clinician with sense would count.
> I'm not
>arguing it's impossible to jump and keep the risks reasonable, just
>pointing out that we're talking an activity that involves greater ground
>impact and more possibilities for foreign object entanglements at
>speed than other equestrian pastimes and therefore brings with it a
>certain amount of risk.
Is the risk really greater, if the likelihood is more
that people expecting too much - or too little - of
plodders end up having more of the accidents?
> As does *all* riding--but there's different
>levels of exposure in different situations and different pastimes.
If one weren't trained for gymnastics, a mere tumble
could do damage, much less attempts at major moves.
If one is thoroughly trained for gymnastics, major
moves can become automized, and more safe than the
mere tumbles might be for the uninitiated or those
who'd become complacent about their relative ease.
>> > Well, and frankly I'd take a hefty cue from the fact that this isn't legal
>> > by the FEI either, but some people here are putting forward a view that
>> > it's an acceptable method of training but just not the way it was done
>> > here. I'm not sure I'm convinced that works, but I'm still thinking :-).
>>
>> Who doesn't know legal only applies at sanctioned events; what anyone does
>> at home isn't governable? You can even electrocute your horse in the
>> comfort of your own barn and still compete, as long as you don't get
>> convicted for ins. fraud.
The princesses throw away their ponies, as the
militias did theirs in previous generations.
A rabid idealist could wish that humane, gentle,
empathetic horsemanship could be brought to more
of the masses, but the harsh reality is that the
classes capable of horse ownership may be easily
able to see them as disposable, instead.
>> > I don't know, Kris. That's part of what I'm asking; I hadn't heard about
>> > any other incident than the Kevin Freeman one with George Morris, and I
>> > certainly don't hear about many clinics in general.
>>
>> My big problem is clinics is M. Name shows up, meets you and your horse
>> for 5 mins and hands you answers in the next 40. On any given day, what
>> kind of temperament would you expect from someone on the road meeting
>> everything from the sublime to the dispicable? Will you concede variable?
>
>Oh, absolutely. I don't think you've heard me arguing for anybody's
>beatification :-). But maybe this is also something riders need to keep
>in mind when they're processing information.
The clinician is in charge, and there remains a
pressure, an authority, that could be abused.
Even when questions are asked obviously, there
will be those who don't understand why.
>> I can't bring myself to place any blame on the rider yet. Though Young
>> Riders (18-25yos) think the A/O should have known better then to try the
>> fence. OTOH, you should hear the stories they tell about having
>> obscenities screamed at them in clinics. Names bigger than George. Tears
>> is the common response.
>
>This is part of my "maybe something's rotten in Denmark" feeling. Perhaps
>this is the legacy of an old and problematically autocratic tradition. I
>understand that people will come to clinics reluctant to change and that
>the clinician is going to want you to work with him/her or else you're
>wasting time. But if it's got to translate into parking one's independent
>judgment at the door, that's asking for trouble. I have a vaguely
>rebellious notion that if a clinician insists I forego all independent
>thought upon attending, then s/he accepts full responsibility for
>everything that happens and promises to replace any dead horses.
Some participants misrepresent themselves by the
same unwillingness to question the clinician.
The conscientious instructor can never ignore the
bravado factor, and it increases with the prestige
of the conditions, real or imagined.
>Basically, you can have me ride at my own risk or you can have me promise
>to follow your every judgment, not both.
Follow someone else's every judgement at your own risk.
>> > I'm also asking if all people do what clinicians tell them regularly.
>>
>> I have and I ain't no shrinking violet. Measure my riding against this
>> man's professional experience and I'll trust his judgement first. The
>> trainer who told me to sign up for the clinic later told me if I ever rode
>> any horse of hers like that she'd kick me out of the barn. Though I've
>> seen her pocket her better judgement with her own horse at a clinic or
>> two. And kick herself afterwards.
>
>I can understand that. So let's play this out further. Say you (or
>anybody, this isn't just a Kris-specific question) were also attending
>this clinic (I'm not even hypothetically going to get anybody's horse
>shafted; you're another attendee). You look at that metal pole and see
>its dangers. Do you say something to George Morris or do you keep jumping
>and letting other people jump? Do you figure that nothing would happen if
>you said anything and that it wouldn't therefore be worth it, is the
>likely unpleasantness going to be too great on what was a long-budgeted
>for outing?
I'd ask a question, at least, and without a satisfactory
answer forthcoming, I'd trust my own judgement. (BTDT.)
Lord George used to preach unquestioned the dismount from
a stirrup, until it cost him a broken femur. One can only
hope that he subsequently switched to the vault dismount.
>And if the answer is no, you keep jumping, because you decide that the
>authority knows better than you and the authority says it's not unsafe,
>what do you then say to the kid who's only fifteen and who kept doing what
>authorities told her was okay for *her* horse and nerved her and rode her
>in shows? Haven't we, in the latter case, been demanding just this kind
>of questioning of authority?
Yep.
>> If anything, shouldn't the visiting clinician be even more cautious?
>
>I would hope so, yes. But I don't think it's a good idea for riders to
>leave the safety up to somebody else no matter *how* cautious the
>clinician is. I'm thinking of a partnership of safety--both sides have
>obligations.
Exactly.
>> Wiping blood off a pole and putting it back in use has to top any mundane
>> act of omission.
>
>I'm thinking from the treatment of the horse point of view. From the Good
>God! point of view that one's pretty much impossible to top.
>
>Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
>Wondering afresh about this clinic idea in Champaign, IL, USA
Victory at =every= expense to the horse has been the
status quo for longer than any of us has been alive,
in far too many human enterprises besides showing.
It may well become quite the leverage for the ARAs.
Kris Carroll
> The conscientious instructor can never ignore the
> bravado factor, and it increases with the prestige
> of the conditions, real or imagined.
Ah that's what it's called. When I was a kid, I only knew it was better to
die than chicken out. OTOH, bringing a positive attitude into your riding
is a big plus. Hopefully, the instuctor or trainer is the one who inserts
the good judgement calls so the rider survives long enough to learn some
sense.
> Lord George used to preach unquestioned the dismount from
> a stirrup, until it cost him a broken femur. One can only
> hope that he subsequently switched to the vault dismount.
Intestingly, in this morning's email, American Medical Equestrian
Association (AMEA) editor, Doris Bixby Hammett, MD mentioned George Morris
has been a leader of public opinion against ASTM SEI approved helmets.
(AMEA NEWS February 1998)
http://www.law.utexas.edu/dawson/amea/feb98nws.htm
<quote> This fall's (1998) horse press has also given some terrible
examples to our young--and not so young--riders. George Morris in the
September SPUR says he prefers "Any Good old-fashioned hard hat!" which to
me (and to him if his pictures do not lie) means an unharnessed "item of
apparel" hat. In the same article steeplechase trainer Gerald Oxley
prefers the "old-style Callente", helmets without the crushable liners
which make helmets effective in absorbing energy. Other steeplechasers
voted for the "New-style Champion jockeys' skullcap" (EN1384, used by 70%
of steeplechase riders) and "old-style Champion jockeys' skullcap"
(BS4472).</endquote>
Except it isn't these old guys who are dying off in the accidents. Maybe
they could ride in a beret and still be safe, but kids need more
protection!
Kris C
Cat
:> It's not a question of reaching a limit. Dobbin, who already has a lot
:> of talent, gets lazy.
Mary wrote:
:No. Horses don't get lazy.
Oh no? Then they never get energetic either.
Of course they get "lazy" or "sloppy" from time to time. They cannot
always be sharp. They have off days, and on days.
Cat wrote:
:> If the worst thing that happens to these highly-pampered fellows in a
:> slight rap on a very occasional basis,
:
:If the worst thing that happens to a horse is anything other than the
:best its humans can provide, then shame on the humans.
Agreed.
:Arbitrary whacks
:for percieved faults doesn't make a whole lot of sense, fashion or
:other.
Fashion has nothing to do with this issue. The whacks are _not_
arbitrary: they are used as correction only. When one compares (dare I
even go here) all the other myriad disciplines out there, I would say
that the very rare occasion where this method is used is harmless by
comparison. It's harmless, at any rate. One small knock and that's it.
Mission accomplished.
In the (highly, highly unlikely) event that I reach the standard of
riding to compete Grand Prix, I can see using this method at home
prior to a show. This, from she who would like to wrap her horse in
cotton to never have him hurt by anyone or anything.
Are there no circumstances under which you administer a sharp pop with
a crop? How is that different?
Cat (and Larry OT)
CATJA ALEXANDRA PAFORT
>It may well become quite the leverage for the ARAs.
And my question is, would that be a bad thing? Not that I have any sympathy for
ARAs, who tend to rate fellow humans less than their imagined picture of
animals, but for some outside agency to step in and rap a few knuckles.
I wouldn't have a problem if the people inside the scene were unanimously
speaking out against jumping unsafe jumps, knowingly placing riders in danger,
and riders too stupid and too caught up in their hunt for ribbons and praise to
withdraw from a clinic in which these practices are used.
If the people within the industry allow themselves to be brainwashed into
believing that 'this is ok, because a) it works or b) everybody does it' then
someone else has to speak out. EVERY branch of equestrianism, even just keeping
horses in a field has it's own problems that need tackling. Methinks the h/j
world has just been shown one of theirs.
Catja
and the Count
K.Z.
says...
<snip>
> It's harmless, at any rate. One small knock and that's it.>>
Personally, I've never considered any kind of "knock" or "whack"
harmless. Even if the physical effect is minimal or nonexistent,
the psychological effect may be otherwise. It's punishment,
Dobbin is told he's wrong. Is Dobbin guaranteed to know why he
was punished and form the "correct" response? I say no. Whack a
horse for jumping a fence and *if* he tries it again at all,
he'll jump higher through fear ("it BIT me!"). I'd rather ride a
horse that had learned to trust his judgement for any given
obstacle, and would give a 100% honest effort over it. If you
want to talk safety, that latter horse is the safer jumper.
Besides, rap a horse in any manner enough times and you get the
opposite effect. Desensitization. And THAT I've seen a lot of
in the jumping community.
> In the (highly, highly unlikely) event that I reach the standard of
> riding to compete Grand Prix, I can see using this method at home
> prior to a show. >>
Why would you want to??? I'm presuming as a "tune up". Myself,
I'd rather not break it... then you don't have to fix it. :-)
I dunno. My feelings are that every jumper would prefer to clear
every fence. It's when we riders start messing with them that
they have trouble. If the horse needs an obvious tune up before
a show, perhaps the rider has been making some errors along the
way. Perhaps the horse doesn't need to go in that show :-)
Back to the books.
Kelly & Doc
dok...@frontiernet.net
Cat
:<snip>
:> It's harmless, at any rate. One small knock and that's it.>>
Kelly wrote:
:Personally, I've never considered any kind of "knock" or "whack"
:harmless.
In that case, we should not use spurs, either. And if a horse stops at
a fence, we should simply put him back in the barn.
:Even if the physical effect is minimal or nonexistent,
:the psychological effect may be otherwise. It's punishment,
:Dobbin is told he's wrong.
Not punishment. The pole is there to make the horse perceive the jump
as something to be more careful of as opposed to when they learn that
a rub is "comfortable". The alternative is to let the horse hit a
_solid_ fence like a cross country fence, where the results are many
times worse. And far more frequent.
:Is Dobbin guaranteed to know why he
:was punished and form the "correct" response?
When Dobbin stops in front of a fence and one pops him with a bat or
jabs spurs into him (neither of which I advocate), do you then think
he knows he's done wrong? And not stop the next time?
:I say no. Whack a
:horse for jumping a fence and *if* he tries it again at all,
:he'll jump higher through fear ("it BIT me!"). I'd rather ride a
:horse that had learned to trust his judgement for any given
:obstacle, and would give a 100% honest effort over it. If you
:want to talk safety, that latter horse is the safer jumper.
Again, the poling method isn't for every Dobbin. For the most part, I
agree with you. There are always mitigating circumstances, as above,
when a jumper has learned that a "rub" isn't a bad thing. It might not
be, at the lower levels, but it can cause bad problems over large
fences and possibly a bad accident. So, how do you choose the action
to take? Given a horse has been competing with success, enjoys his
job, and is simply getting sloppy?
:Besides, rap a horse in any manner enough times and you get the
:opposite effect. Desensitization. And THAT I've seen a lot of
:in the jumping community.
"Enough times" is where this falls over. This practice is used perhaps
once or twice in any given session. Period. And such sessions are rare
indeed. Given a horse which rubs habitually, this is not a fix. That
animal doesn't need to be jumping fences at the current level.
Cat wrote:
:> In the (highly, highly unlikely) event that I reach the standard of
:> riding to compete Grand Prix, I can see using this method at home
:> prior to a show. >>
Kelly wrote:
:Why would you want to??? I'm presuming as a "tune up". Myself,
:I'd rather not break it... then you don't have to fix it. :-)
Want to use the method or do Grand Prix? <SEG>
Tune up is the correct terminolgy. You don't tune a car up every week;
neither do you tune a jumper that often.
Kelly wrote:
:I dunno. My feelings are that every jumper would prefer to clear
:every fence. It's when we riders start messing with them that
:they have trouble. If the horse needs an obvious tune up before
:a show,
"A" show. Not every show, nor _most_ shows.
:perhaps the rider has been making some errors along the
:way. Perhaps the horse doesn't need to go in that show :-)
I have been referring to a pro, all this time. A BTDT type. And I'm
not just being loyal, he is incredibly talented. He cares more about
the _horse_ than any other trainer I've known, and man have I known a
few. Even rode with the George ages ago in a clinic. (So damn long
ago, I remember nothing!)
Cat (and Larry OT)
Hmmm. If he ever DOES make it to the Grand Prix level, would I go
there? If I had a year to tune my own damn self back up, yes indeedy.
Deborah Stevenson
On Thu, 27 Jan 2000, Cat wrote:
> Not punishment. The pole is there to make the horse perceive the jump
> as something to be more careful of as opposed to when they learn that
> a rub is "comfortable". The alternative is to let the horse hit a
> _solid_ fence like a cross country fence, where the results are many
> times worse. And far more frequent.
That sounds like a big jump, if you'll pardon the pun, to me. Surely
there's something intermediate between a thin metal pole deliberately
placed so the horse doesn't see it and a cross country jump? Maybe
something of wide circumference, painted visibly, made of wood but capable
of being knocked down without too much difficulty :-)?
Deborah Stevenson (stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu)
Adhering to the standard in Champaign, IL, USA
K.Z.
> :Personally, I've never considered any kind of "knock" or "whack"
> :harmless.
Cat wrote:
> In that case, we should not use spurs, either. And if a horse stops at
> a fence, we should simply put him back in the barn.
Kelly writes:
Actually, I can't recall the last time I used spurs or a crop
(that could just be related to the % of OTT TBs I've ridden)
:-) As for a horse stopping at a fence, why did he stop? He
sure as heck isn't going back to the barn unless he's hurt. And
if it's rider error, I'm not a fan of hauling off and smacking
the horse for it. If it was an outright dirty refusal on the
horse's part, I'd still want to know what caused it... but he'd
get one heck of a strong ride going in the second time. And a
strong ride does not need to involve crops or spurs. Honest :-)
Kelly wrote:
> :Even if the physical effect is minimal or nonexistent,
> :the psychological effect may be otherwise. It's punishment,
> :Dobbin is told he's wrong.
Cat wrote:
> Not punishment. >>
Kelly writes:
It's not a reward. Take it for what it's worth, but here's my
opinion:
Dobbin does something.
He gets positive feedback --> that's a reward.
He gets no feedback whatsoever --> that's as good as a reward
He gets negative feedback --> that's punishment
All of those cover fairly wide areas, granted. Punishment can be
an out and out beating or in the vein of a correction. Toddlers
know this more as "That's a no-no!". It's telling the horse he's
wrong, one way or another.
Cat wrote:
> The alternative is to let the horse hit a
> _solid_ fence like a cross country fence, where the results are many
> times worse. >>
Kelly writes:
Oy! Flipping a horse over cross country fences is not an
acceptable alternative to metal poles on stadium fences. ;-)
Cat wrote:
> When Dobbin stops in front of a fence and one pops him with a bat or
> jabs spurs into him (neither of which I advocate), do you then think
> he knows he's done wrong? >>
Kelly:
Not necessarily. I'm not convinced horses know right from
wrong. What he does know is that stopping and standing in front
of the fence has become decidedly unpleasant and he'll be
more likely to look for another option the next time around.
'Course Round 2 can result in ducking out to one side instead...
Cat wrote:
> So, how do you choose the action
> to take? Given a horse has been competing with success, enjoys his
> job, and is simply getting sloppy?
Depends on the horse. A vacation. Gymnastics. Less jumping on
a regular basis. Tough bending lines. Cavaletti. More
interesting fences (instead of schooling 500 regular oxers, how
about the occasional swedish oxer or liverpool?). Cross country
schooling. Did I mention gymnastics? I'm just not seeing where
anyone should ever have to resort to metal poles.
Cat wrote:
> Want to use the method or do Grand Prix? <SEG>
Just Grand Prix works for me ;-)
Cat wrote:
> I have been referring to a pro, all this time. A BTDT type. >>
I'm glad for him, but that doesn't make anyone perfect. :-) I
long since passed the point where credentials impress me, after
seeing very big names do very stupid to moderately
thoughtless things.
> Cat (and Larry OT)
> Hmmm. If he ever DOES make it to the Grand Prix level, would I go
> there? If I had a year to tune my own damn self back up, yes indeedy.
You go, girl! Larry says "I'm gettin' there, ma!"
Kelly & Doc (not a GP horse)
dok...@frontiernet.net
Madeline Rockwell
Deborah Stevenson <stev...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:Pine.SGI.4.10.1000125...@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu...
>
> On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Madeline Rockwell wrote:
>
> > I missed the whole Kevin Freeman thing as well. But in fact Kevin has
been
> > to the Olympics himself as an eventer at least once, and can hardly be
put
> > in the same class as some hapless amateur.
>
> I wasn't actually thinking that they were on a par :-). However, if the
> difference in classes is that one is responsible for his accident in a
> clinic and the other is not, where's the line drawn between rider
> responsibility and the absence thereof? I'm asking this seriously, not
> snottily: How far away from the Olympics do you have to be before it's
> advanced a rider do you have to be teaching in a clinic before his safety
> stops being your responsibility?
That's a really good question. I would hold the clinician far more
responsible when they are dealing with an amateur. It is like ski lessons..
the standard of care varies inversely with the competence of the student.
Due to his own ability, I would charge Kevin Freeman with a great deal of
responsibility for his own well-being. My guess is that the KF incident was
a case of * happens.
madeline
Madeline Rockwell
Kris Carroll <kcar...@horse-country.com> wrote in message
news:kcarroll-270...@blv-pm406-ip52.nwnexus.net...
...> Intestingly, in this morning's email, American Medical Equestrian
> Association (AMEA) editor, Doris Bixby Hammett, MD mentioned George Morris
> has been a leader of public opinion against ASTM SEI approved helmets.
> (AMEA NEWS February 1998)
> http://www.law.utexas.edu/dawson/amea/feb98nws.htm
> prefers the "old-style Callente", helmets without the crushable liners
> which make helmets effective in absorbing energy. Other steeplechasers
> voted for the "New-style Champion jockeys' skullcap" (EN1384, used by 70%
> of steeplechase riders) and "old-style Champion jockeys' skullcap"
> (BS4472).</endquote>
The NSA ( National Steeplechase Association) requires the new helmet. And
they'll buy you one if you can't afford it. That's putting your money where
your mouth is.
madeline
Cat
<a very good, succint post!>
One last thought:
According to David, the pipe is indeed visible to the horse. I had no
clue, or we wouldn't have been having this discussion.
Anyway, I forwarded him Kelly's and Deborah's well-written posts, and
my bumbling attempts to keep up.
He returned a novella on the subject (ROFLMAO!) and I duly posted it
as a new thread.
So my response is: what HE said!
I was kind of doing the Devil's Advocate thing up to now, I'm sure you
might have guessed (being as how my first post was as outraged as any
other.) After reading David's thoughts, I am closer to feeling that
poling is not such a bad thing for the horse.
Truth be known, I would have to see the damn jump for myself before I
really could give an opinion. It doesn't _sound_ good, but what do I
know?
Cat (and Larry OT)
Laura Friedman
> Every accident I've ever had with a horse has been my screwup.
>
> Never once did the horse do it, or God do it, or the Devil do it.
> I'm the one who chose the horse, chose what to do with the horse,
> and chose exactly how to do whatever was done with the horse. If
> I didn't figure out what I'd done wrong first, as I should have,
> I made the effort to do so afterward, so as not to repeat it.
What about an accident that involves something like a horse stumbling and falling,
or stepping into a hidden hole in the ground? Or as happened to a friend lately,
an old and well used trail section sheered off into the canyon below?
These are the most frequent kinds of wrecks I've seen lately, and I'd argue that
they do indeed fall into the "acts of god" category.
Laura & Squiggles (who was as "good" tonight as "regressive" as she was last week.
She was attentive, responsive, focused, energetic, sweet, and cute)
Sheryl Huckaby
>Intestingly, in this morning's email, American Medical Equestrian
>Association (AMEA) editor, Doris Bixby Hammett, MD mentioned George Morris
>has been a leader of public opinion against ASTM SEI approved helmets.
It is an entire way of thinking espoused by a different generation. My father
had a cow when they put seat belts in cars (now he uses one). He had a cow
when they started using mouthpieces in sports. Knee protectors, elbow
protectors, and tennis shoes with ankle supports were out as they made you
weak. Donny Gaye (bullriding champion) thought that the protective vests were
poopoo (until he got the endorsement revenues). I think it was kind of a trial
by fire or fatalist type attitude that they had. If you thought you were
protected, you were sloppier/not as careful as you should be & didn't learn how
to do it right with all of the protective gear and gimmicks. Also, if you were
supposed to die or get injured, so be it, you shouldn't be out there doing it
if you weren't capable of it.
Sheryl
Ashland City, Tennessee
If a small thing has the power to make you angry, does that not indicate
something about your size? - Sydney J. Harris