DrDawkinstein Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 i just skimmed the thread but a large part of the answer lies in: its a business. breeding and racing is a business. and while everyone loves all the horse-ies, what it comes down to is that the second they put a fake leg on him and cut off his boys, the horse instantly goes from asset(money-maker) to liability(money-taker). owners cant afford to keep every injured horse alive. living out its golden years in a green pasture. they have a business to run and that business is SUCCESSFUL race horses. i dont agree with it, but thats they way it is part of it anyways. plus the horse probably wouldve been miserable in any other outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevewin Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Would you want to be the breeder or the owner of the mare who pays $75,000 for a sample of sperm 'guaranteed' to be Barbaro's? Any thoroughbred racehorse that is put out to stud must impregnate the mare 'naturally.' The breeding rules are strict, and heavily regulated for many reasons. Avoiding incest and in-breeding, and 100% verification of bloodlines are two of the major reasons. No artificial insemination. Not a dumb question- the answer just isn't that well known. That's interesting - I obviously didn't realize it was so regulated. But if you were the owner - wouldn't you be able to keep some for yourself and inseminate your own horses? Even if the bloodline couldn't be officially confirmed, you still might get one or more genetically great race horses out of it(?)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinandjokin Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 That's interesting - I obviously didn't realize it was so regulated. But if you were the owner - wouldn't you be able to keep some for yourself and inseminate your own horses? Even if the bloodline couldn't be officially confirmed, you still might get one genetically great race horse out of it(?)... Barbaro's owners could certainly do that, and inseminate one of their own mares, but the offspring couldn't be registered to race. The breeding is, like Dr.Dank mentioned, a mega-million dollar industry, and is heavily regulated. There would be no way to prove that Barbaro was the sire, other than the breeder actually having him hump the mare. Even if Barbaro's owners would know, the rest of the racing industry wouldn't, and therein lies the problem. But if they did try it....Hmmm....A speedster growing up without a father....Perhaps Run Willis Run as the name? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Would you want to be the breeder or the owner of the mare who pays $75,000 for a sample of sperm 'guaranteed' to be Barbaro's? Any thoroughbred racehorse that is put out to stud must impregnate the mare 'naturally.' The breeding rules are strict, and heavily regulated for many reasons. Avoiding incest and in-breeding, and 100% verification of bloodlines are two of the major reasons. No artificial insemination. Not a dumb question- the answer just isn't that well known. And nobody is corrupt or corruptible in the Horse racing business. Riiiiight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Barbaro's owners could certainly do that, and inseminate one of their own mares, but the offspring couldn't be registered to race. The breeding is, like Dr.Dank mentioned, a mega-million dollar industry, and is heavily regulated. There would be no way to prove that Barbaro was the sire, other than the breeder actually having him hump the mare. Even if Barbaro's owners would know, the rest of the racing industry wouldn't, and therein lies the problem. But if they did try it....Hmmm....A speedster growing up without a father....Perhaps Run Willis Run as the name? Ahhhhhh! You have just created a grassy knoll for Barbaro to be laid to rest under. Why couldn't the owners...ahem...collect sperm from Barbaro and then impregnate one of their very own mares. Assuming that they have a stud or two (which they also own) hanging around they give credit where it isn't due. They do end up with a colt sired by Barbaro and nobody's the wiser. They raise the little guy and then hope he races as well as daddy. Can you say kaching$$$$$. This would obviously fall apart if they do a genetic analysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dwight Drane Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Ahhhhhh! You have just created a grassy knoll for Barbaro to be laid to rest under. Why couldn't the owners...ahem...collect sperm from Barbaro and then impregnate one of their very own mares. Assuming that they have a stud or two (which they also own) hanging around they give credit where it isn't due. They do end up with a colt sired by Barbaro and nobody's the wiser. They raise the little guy and then hope he races as well as daddy. Can you say kaching$$$$$. This would obviously fall apart if they do a genetic analysis. The Jockey Club has more technology than the CIA. They come around and DNA test EVERY horse in order to make sure they are what they sey they are. Blood samples, hair samples....it's pretty crazy. The worst job in racing is being the "Teaser". This is the stud who gets the females all hot and bothered right before the actual daddy gets to do his job. The Teaser has a worse case of Blueballs than Mark Foley at a Canisius High School Choral Concert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 I didn't read the attachments in the other answers, which may include the answer you seek, but here goes without any attachment. They thought they could save the fractured leg. However, within the process, his other legs, specifically his feet, went bad due to laminitis (described above). Maybe if they had cut the leg off to begin with, he might have had a shot, but I doubt it. Chances are the horses you saw were a different breed that were much more docile than a thoroughbred. Thoroughbreds are wound really tight & do not have the demeanor that some more docile breeds have. Chances are almost 100% that it would be impossible to keep a thoroughbred happy & healthy with an artificial leg. Edit: I opened your attachment & noticed the horse with the artificial leg was a filly. Barbaro is a male with a full set. Male thoroughbreds are often so out of control that they have to be gelded just to calm them down enough to race them. Generally, if an owner thinks that a horse has little to no future stud value, they geld him to calm him down. A complete male thoroughbred is one of the toughest horses to keep calm. Putting an artificial leg on one would probably require a prior gelding-defeating the purpose they tried so hard to keep Barbaro alive. Just to add. In thoroughbreds, the bones are very small down around the hoof. There is little muscle mass down close to the hoof and up about 12 inches. So if a break occurs in that area, the blood supply is limited , and healing takes longer. Dogs and cats have more muscle mass along the bone and heal better as a result of this. Also, horses are very heavy being support by these narrow bones, take one leg out of the equation and the other legs give out as well. Hope it helps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted January 30, 2007 Share Posted January 30, 2007 Ahhhhhh! You have just created a grassy knoll for Barbaro to be laid to rest under. Why couldn't the owners...ahem...collect sperm from Barbaro and then impregnate one of their very own mares. Assuming that they have a stud or two (which they also own) hanging around they give credit where it isn't due. They do end up with a colt sired by Barbaro and nobody's the wiser. They raise the little guy and then hope he races as well as daddy. Can you say kaching$$$$$. This would obviously fall apart if they do a genetic analysis. Sorry, they do artificial insemination all the time. Insemination the old fashion way risks injury to both parties involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinandjokin Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 Sorry, they do artificial insemination all the time. Insemination the old fashion way risks injury to both parties involved. Sorry, but that statement is 100% false when pertaining to thoroughbred horse racing. They do it all the time for other horse breeds, but not thoroughbreds. There are many reasons the Jockey Club does not allow a horse to be registered as a thoroughbred unless a sire and mare are witnessed 'doing the deed.' Some of those: -Artificial insemination does not guarantee that you are getting the sperm of the horse you assume you are paying for to sire -Thoroughbred breeding records are meticulous, and there would be no way to verify the bloodlines with 100% accuracy -For betting purposes, it is important to know a horse's bloodline, and be certain of the sire and mare -If artificial insemination was allowed, everyone would want to breed with Secretariat and the other select few top horses, because there would be ready access to the sperm. That would introduce in-breeding in future generations which would cause endless problems. -By allowing a stallion to only cover a couple hundred mares a year rather than the couple thousand possible with AI, it also preserves the high prices paid for horses of the finest or most popular lineages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 Thanks - SNJ - that answered a lot of questions I had right there. Could it not be said that the owners were taking a risk by going thru all this? Could he have lived, and them not got paid the insurance money, yet not be healed enough to breed? If you followed this story closely, and I was on the Penn website for every update as well as other sites, these owners really loved this horse. And, so did a lot of other people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinandjokin Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 Thanks - SNJ - that answered a lot of questions I had right there. Could it not be said that the owners were taking a risk by going thru all this? Could he have lived, and them not got paid the insurance money, yet not be healed enough to breed? If you followed this story closely, and I was on the Penn website for every update as well as other sites, these owners really loved this horse. And, so did a lot of other people. Yes, definitely a huge financial risk for the owners. Barbaro could've lived, but it was probably always a longshot that he would be able to support himself on his hind legs to mount a mare. Not that the owners were in financial hardship by any means, but they certainly could've lost out on many millions had that been the case. I think that fact alone shows that the horse was truly a gift to them, and they wanted to give him every chance to survive and live a normal and pain-free life. They always said if Barbaro wasn't comfortable, they would end things. He had two setbacks in a week, including one very painful night, and they made the decision the next morning. They handled the whole thing very admirably, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevewin Posted January 31, 2007 Share Posted January 31, 2007 Sorry, but that statement is 100% false when pertaining to thoroughbred horse racing. They do it all the time for other horse breeds, but not thoroughbreds. There are many reasons the Jockey Club does not allow a horse to be registered as a thoroughbred unless a sire and mare are witnessed 'doing the deed.' Some of those: -Artificial insemination does not guarantee that you are getting the sperm of the horse you assume you are paying for to sire -Thoroughbred breeding records are meticulous, and there would be no way to verify the bloodlines with 100% accuracy -For betting purposes, it is important to know a horse's bloodline, and be certain of the sire and mare -If artificial insemination was allowed, everyone would want to breed with Secretariat and the other select few top horses, because there would be ready access to the sperm. That would introduce in-breeding in future generations which would cause endless problems. -By allowing a stallion to only cover a couple hundred mares a year rather than the couple thousand possible with AI, it also preserves the high prices paid for horses of the finest or most popular lineages. Thanks for the great explanation - makes sense now to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 1, 2007 Share Posted February 1, 2007 Sorry, but that statement is 100% false when pertaining to thoroughbred horse racing. They do it all the time for other horse breeds, but not thoroughbreds. There are many reasons the Jockey Club does not allow a horse to be registered as a thoroughbred unless a sire and mare are witnessed 'doing the deed.' Some of those: -Artificial insemination does not guarantee that you are getting the sperm of the horse you assume you are paying for to sire -Thoroughbred breeding records are meticulous, and there would be no way to verify the bloodlines with 100% accuracy -For betting purposes, it is important to know a horse's bloodline, and be certain of the sire and mare -If artificial insemination was allowed, everyone would want to breed with Secretariat and the other select few top horses, because there would be ready access to the sperm. That would introduce in-breeding in future generations which would cause endless problems. -By allowing a stallion to only cover a couple hundred mares a year rather than the couple thousand possible with AI, it also preserves the high prices paid for horses of the finest or most popular lineages. Thanks for that info, because I had the nasty image of his handlers feverishly jerking him off ever since the Preakness and thought that might have contributed to his demise. I'll disabuse myself of that notion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted February 1, 2007 Author Share Posted February 1, 2007 Thanx for the input fellas. At least a guy has something to mull over now when considering whether that horse was killed for love or money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts