got a kick out of this...

[Dudley]

dannyboy135 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I along with a group of horsemen tried to
> syndicate Old Fashioned and bring him to
> Louisiana.  fortunately or unfortunately, the deal
> couldn\'t be put together. Louisiana breeders need
> not only a credential ed stallion but one whose
> foals will remain sound and produce breeders
> awards. While at the time I was tremendously
> disappointed it may have been a blessing to miss
> the Old Fashioned opportunity.
 

Two other talented USong\'s of recent note- Midshipman and Eight Belles. I think you should thank your lucky stars Danny. Seems the good & fast ones don\'t have the limbs to handle the stress.

[TGJB]

Mike-- among the terms of the bet was that I spotted you a couple, so if it is indeed random you have the best bet of all time.

You would not believe how many good buys I have had killed because of vets who wouldn\'t pass them. Xtra Heat (250k) and Magic Wiener (100k) were turned down by the same vet as 2yos. Glitter Woman, the list goes on and on...

With the exception of something like an obvious existing chip, vetting is completely random. What I do is not-- percentages, yes, random, no. And I have 25 years of proof.

[miff]

JB,

I will remind you that Rachel Alexandra and Summer Bird both failed vetting and purchases were not made(IEAH both times).Look how these two turned out(Rachel operated on). I would guess that a sufficient number of todays stakes winners would fail vetting tomorrow,for sale purposes.

With todays nuke scan,it\'s a different game.If your vets are failing horses solely based on TG figs/beliefs,and not on soundness or conformation issues,they should lose their license.


Mike

[magicnight]

Although I like your name better think you meant Magic Weisner.

[HP]

Why on earth would vets fail horses based on TG figs/beliefs?  That\'s not what he\'s saying at all.

[TGJB]

Mike-- I luvya, but you are a very bad listener.

[miff]

JB,

Read you again,got it. You deferred to the vets opinion but the horseS you picked still went on to do big things.

Mike

[TGJB]

Yes. Except it wasn\'t my call to defer, never is. And if an advisor ever did go against a vet who wanted to turn down a horse and the horse broke down, there could be real trouble (lawsuit). So you just have to take it.

Biggest problem with vets, as Barry I\'m sure will attest, is that their first responsibility is to cover their asses. Another they killed for me was Brass Hat as a maiden (for 60k), in that case it wasn\'t the vet\'s fault, it was the client, who decided to talk to the vet directly rather than let the trainer do it. He didn\'t understand that vets will tell you everything they see whether it\'s significant or not, to protect themelves, and you have to weed it out. The vet in that case (Bill Baker, great vet) was shocked to learn the client did not proceed. That was 4 days later, when the horse won the Rushaway as a maiden.

A couple of million bucks later...

[trackjohn]

TGJB:

 For what its worth...

 As an imaging professional > 25 years in Nuclear Medicine/Nuclear Cardiology (also served as a consultant on more that one equine \'nuclear scintigraphy\' facility),  I agree with you as regards the help that the nuclear scans provide.

BUT (a big but!) it depends on the facility, the equipment (nuclear cameras, particularly the age of the units), the sophistication of both the vet performing the exam as well as the interpreting vet, etc...  The quality of exam (and obviously the result) varies widely.

Also, I doubt that there will be any nuclear scans performed on horses over the next 6 months...there is a critical worldwide shortage of the radioactive material that is used.  This shortage is seriously impacting imaging in humans as well (specifically Nuclear Cardiology)

John

[jumpnthefire]

my bad, always thought he was

[sighthound]

>>Biggest problem with vets, as Barry I\'m sure will attest, is that their first responsibility is to cover their asses.

Interesting.  I think my biggest responsibility is being advocate for the horse.

[sighthound]

TGJB Wrote:
 > You would not believe how many good buys I have
> had killed because of vets who wouldn\'t pass them.
> Xtra Heat (250k) and Magic Wiener (100k) were
> turned down by the same vet as 2yos. Glitter
> Woman, the list goes on and on...

Didn\'t he end up a shuttle stallion, 250 mares/year?

[TGJB]

Sight-- The discussion was about vetting horses for purchase, where by definition you are only analyzing the situation for the buyer-- not working for the current owner of the horse, or doing any work on the horse.

[TGJB]

Sight-- That one almost went over my head. Pretty funny.

If I remember correctly, Magic Wiesner (okay, I got his name wrong the first time) was a gelding. I had him bought for 100k, the top vet in Maryland turned him down, he immediately won something like 6 in a row including a stake or two, then ran second in the Preakness. Same guy killed the deal on Xtra Heat, had her bought for Win Star after her second start.

This game will try your patience. Years ago there was a completely concealed maiden running at Calder, big figures. I got my client to make an offer (I think 100k), they said they would take it, but he was entered and they wanted to run him. The owner said they would sell him for the same price no matter what happened in the race. He figured to win by ten, I told my client that, and that he had to get the horse bought before the race, no matter what they said, if he won off they would get bombarded with offers. He said no, he trusted them, they gave him their word.

Anyway, he won by ten, Barry swooped in and offered them twice as much and got him bought before he even cooled out, we never had a chance. Horse by the name of Prized, won the BC Turf the same year.

[Rick B.]

TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Horse by the name of Prized, won the BC Turf the
> same year.

Somehow, \"ouch\" doesn\'t seem to suffice here.