Do you think race horses should be trained at a later age than 2?

Question

As many people know, race horses start getting trained and raced at the fragile age of only 2 years old. At this stage the horse is still growing and it's skeletal structure isn't as strong as it is a few years later. As a result, there is a high chance of them getting seriously injured. Most racehorses are retired by the end of their fourth year due to injury, chronic illness or an inability to win in higher classes.

Answer 1

i would have to say no but i do see where ur coming from

Answer 2

Many very well respected vets have done research on this and concluded that it is better for a horse to race while they are young than waiting until they are full grown.  That includes Churchill Downs vet Larry Bramberg (I probably spelled his last name wrong).  Research shows that horses who race as 2 year olds have longer, safer, healthier, sounder careers... they have less injuries, both minor ones and serious life-threatening injuries.  Horses who start racing later in their lives have more chance for injuries, more lameness, more break-downs.

Honestly, I thought it would be a good idea too for horses to wait longer before they start to race, but then I learned that the research and statistics show otherwise.  And it makes sense too... think about it in human terms... we're not fully grown until we're 15-20, but exercise is important for kids and most people are athletes while they're 15-18 (high school)... very few of them continue to be athletes after that (college) and it's only a tiny percent that actually continue after that (professional athletes).  Some people continue to exercise, but they're not athletes anymore.  That corresponds to racehorses who do most of their physical activity at 2 and 3, some continue as 4 year olds, a few continue longer and become the John Henrys or Evening Attires of the world racing as 10 year olds.  It would be absurd to tell someone that their 8 year old child shouldn't be playing sports but because of the misconceptions about horse racing, there's a lot of people campaigning that racehorses shouldn't race as 2 year olds.  Kids and horses must let their muscles and bones adapt to exercise and they can only do that through actually exercising.

It's awful that horses are hurt at the track, but changing the racing age is not the way to fix it.  There's issues about track surfaces, breeding, medication, etc that will have a much more effective change on horse's injuries than changing the racing age will... changing the racing age could actually make the situation worse for the horses.

Yes, thank you Azeri, it's Bramlage.  And you're right... I should have mentioned that moderate exercise helps the horse and that you absolutely can do too much with a young horse and ruin that horse for life.  There is quite a problem with people building up yearlings for the 2 year old sales rings... they're over-feeding and overworking a lot of horses so they can make a lot of money without regard for the horse's well-being later in life.  Thank you for addressing that Azeri because I didn't give a very balanced answer... what I said was true, but incomplete.

Kelli, yes, Reviewer should never have been allowed to breed.  I'm sad that he was put down after breaking the leg again, but at least it stopped him from passing on those bad genes.  I think it's a little unfair to characterize Ruffian's dam the way you did though... Shenanigans had colic surgery and thrashed coming out of anesthetic and that's how she broke her leg... it's not like she broke her leg on the track or even running in the field... if she hadn't had the surgery, she wouldn't have broken the leg, so the real cause of her death was the colic.  She was by Native Dancer though who probably passed her the propensity to be injured, so I know where you're coming from.

Answer 3

I tend to agree with the following statement from a horseracing Vet.

I think there’s probably a much stronger tendency to have two year old racing nowadays than there used to be……and the lure of prize money. There’s a great incentive to race their horses too young too immature. In the old days, you bought your yearlings, you broke them in, you castrated them, you turned them out. You didn’t think about them until late 2 year old and mostly three year olds. The big money came with three-year-old racing. The current owners want two-year-old racing and I think it’s a pity. I think it’s a pity because it certainly does cause the breakdown of a lot of two year olds

Answer 4

Not be raced till 3

Answer 5

What this all comes down to is breeding.

Everyone that's got a problem with the horse racing industry either has it out for the entire sport about the drugs or the breakdowns, and some people blame the breakdowns on the drugs. This is not true at all.

Thoroughbred racehorses are broken as older yearlings. At the age of two, they are training for their very first race and the beginning of their career. Not all of these horses will be retired before they turn four, or even after they turn four. In many of the lower-level races, you will see mares and geldings racing at 6, 7, 8 - I saw a gray 9 year old gelding run a race last month. He got third. It wasn't any kind of stakes race, but he was an old guy and he could still run. Most of these horses that race into their older ages are NOT particularly well-bred. They are not sired by hit stallions. That's what makes a lot of the difference.

I do not see a problem with racing horses as two year olds. These babies usually don't race more than four or five times. A long time ago, they would race upwards of ten times in their two year old year. Why? Because they could. They stayed sound longer. There were less massive injuries. It has nothing to do with the training, these horses are babied more now than ever. They are treated as fragile animals and the times between races are longer than they ever have been, babies are started later.. More owners are choosing not to race their horses until three.

The reason they break down is not because they are young, per se. It is because they were bred from generations of physical unsoundness.

Example: Ruffian. People were shocked. Why shouldn't they be? Horses even then were stronger than they are now. Ruffian's sire, Reviewer, was only retired from the track after be broke his leg 3 times. He broke it a fourth time and was put down. Her dam broke her leg and was put down. You can hardly call Ruffian's death a shock after knowing her parents' fate.

It's all in the genetics, not in the training.

Answer 6

Actually, they are usually started at 1 1/2, and are breezing by the time they're 2.  Especially if they're headed for the 2-yo-in-training sales.  We used to have their knees (carpus) joints x-rayed to see if they were closed, but no one does this anymore.  I don't think they should be doing fast works until late in the 2 year old year, at the earliest, and racing at 3.  Exercise does help them develop, and very short bursts of speed (best if done free, turned out in a field, not with 130 lbs on their back in deep sand) help the horses' bones, ligaments, and tendons develop strength, and is essential for a young horse's development.  I think too much, too fast, too soon is being done with them, and they are spending too much time standing in stalls.  A fact of life in the US TB business.  But the further we get away from the way they were designed to live, the more physical and mental problems show up.  And I'm a big racing fan.  I think it's the most natural and exciting sport for horses.  The good ones love it.

PS It's Larry Bramlage, whom KnMiami was referring to.

I think the conditioning work is good, but the racing is too tough on them.  Some horses mature earlier than others, but I still think more of the research indicates that a conservative approach is better.  In the wild, horses are moving around 20 hours out of the day.  We've changed too much, when we have them standing in a stall for 22 hours, exercising for 20 minutes, getting cooled out and thrown back into the stall.  The work load needs to be more gradually increased, and the weight carried, as well.  More time for the physiological adaptations has got to benefit the young horses' development.  Just MHO.

;- )

Answer 7

no

Answer 8

My answer would be no, but I understand where your coming from. Some horses hit the top of their form while they are 2YO's, this relates more to sprinters then staying types. In australian we have the richest 2yo race in the world the Golden Slipper worth roughly about $3.75m (Aus$) and quite often the horse who displays the most speed wins. But the trend from the 2007 edition was an alarming one, horses who raced in that Slipper didn't go on to win to many more races after there 2YO season (Forensics 2007 winner is an exception). But maybe they had there time in the sun and if they had not started there racing careers until they were 3YO nothings to say they would have brought there 2YO form to the tracks as a 3YO. It's difficult but as long as there is big money up for grabs in 2YO racing there will always be owners willing to test a horses ability at a young age.

Answer 9

many are in training before they turn 2.

unfortunately australian racing caters for 2yo racing with many races and rich prizemoney, and earlier maturing horses shine.The shine fades as the slower maturing horses catch up and they can even turn out better - if they stay sound. The 2yo (and 3yo) racing is geared for quicker returns from yearling sale outlays. On metropolitan saturday meetings, often half the program can be just for 2yo and 3yo. I think horses should not be raced as 2yo (which will not happen) but why not restrict them to so many starts, for example a max of  5  races.