- Total Posts 17716
Gingertipster
21 Mar 2010, 01:21
by Gingertipster on 21 Mar 2010, 01:21
Joncol,
We have never said you’d be "happy" to see anything run.
But you do say you can "understand" an owner running a horse who has not won much. Yet do NOT understand why an owner would allow a horse who’s won a lot of money run.
That is double standards.
Just because a horse has not won as much as the next, does not mean he should be treated differently. Every horse’s life should be worth as much as the next.value is everything
Ginger – The scenario where I "understand" an owner running a horse who has not won much is where they can no longer personally afford training fees i.e the only other option is to sell the horse and possibly putting his future at risk i.e note Desert Quest
I dont see how it is double stanards
1) If a horse has won enough money to secure its future then I would not run
2) If a horse has not won enough money to secure its future but I can still maitain training fees then I also would not run
3) Where a horse has not won enough money to secure its future and I cannot maintain its training fees anymore than I can justify running to try maintain its future.
This is not double standards.
Each scenarios makes every attempt to keep the horses welfare first.
The option where I "understand" why owners running their horses is in my view a last resorts before you have to sell horse and put in the hands of god knows who, where anything can happen to him.
I do realise that all runners in the National are not running there as a last resorts and therefore I cannot justify their participation but I do understand those who run in an attempt to secure its future.
It is not double standards, If It appears that way than I am very poor at getting my point across moreso than being guilty of double standards for a horses welfare