Do You Agree with Animal Racing?


Do You Agree with Animal Racing?  

35 members have voted

  1. 1. Do You Agree with Animal Racing?

    • Yes
      11
    • No
      13
    • Don't Really Care
      11


Recommended Posts

The Grand National, a famous race in the UK attracts regular betters while many of those bets placed are from people whom will not place another until next year.

After reading an article today on the BBC 'According to Pete', one of the horses, was put down at the scene as the horse fell at one gate breaking it's leg. It also seems there was another horse that died in the race.

My question is this: Is it right to race horses?

I am not exactly an animal lover, I have two cats and they are part of the family. Perhaps it was just the realisation that horses do die in races, whatever it is, I don't really like it. I realise removing obstacles will make it boring perhaps but is the thrill not about who is going to win or who is the fastest?

But then I would ask, what is wrong with dog fighting? Humans have boxing as a sport? We race dogs and horses which carries a risk of death? I am not in agreement with dog fighting, far from it. But for me, it begs the question.

I am also not a better. I don't bet on the lottery, horses, dogs or anything. The odds are rubbish :p

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1070565-do-you-agree-with-animal-racing/
Share on other sites

But then I would ask, what is wrong with dog fighting? Humans have boxing as a sport? We race dogs and horses which carries a risk of death? I am not in agreement with dog fighting, far from it. But for me, it begs the question.

The argument against dog fighting, and c*ck fighting, is that they're trained in a cruel way that gets them to be vicious, and then in the fight they're trained to be vicious and kill each other -- while people boxing are prepping themselves and have self-control in the ring.

Bullfighting is in a little bit of a different category although many people oppose that also.

Yes I agree with it. The horses are cared for and it certainly is not intended for the animal to die, and believe me the last thing the owner wants is to lose their horse. Unfortunately it is an unintended consequence because the prognosis of a broken leg is extremely poor for a horse. If the horse is not put down it will go through a lifetime of suffering.

But then I would ask, what is wrong with dog fighting? Humans have boxing as a sport?

People box because they want to, dogs are tortured and forced to do it.

If people were brought up for the sole purpose of being forced to fight in boxing matches then your comparison might have some value.

I think it's totally wrong to race or fight animals. It's wrong because they don't have a choice and are forced into it. Boxing or general human fighting (MMA etc) is different. The person has a choice to participate and is not forced into anything against their will.

horses were domesticated because of their sheer work ability. To some horses are a machine rather than a pet. I don't know anyone who has a horse for a pet actually.

They ride it, use it for field work, breeding, training, or something along that line.

I don't feel its wrong to race horses, but if you ARE going to race them they should be taken care of.

As you stated one broke its leg and was euthanized - this is basically saying, "Im in it for the money - that horse is lame for racing, so kill it" I don't agree with that at all.

They are animals with compassion and emotion, they require companionship and attention... If you want to spend 8 hours a day with the horse training it for a 5KM long race or something, so be it, just don't forget its a living creature.

As for fighting animals as brought up in the thread - Im against that. I mean, if an animal DON'T want to race, then it just won't move... Im sure people don't continually buy horses and kill them should they not want to run. I can't see how that could be profitable.

Horses also get whipped by jockeys, and in some instances, have tendons in their legs removed to keep them running even though it will eventually kill them. It's a barbaric sport and should be banned. I'm also staunchly against the caging and removal of animals from their natural environments (Zoos).

I see it as OK, as long as a particular animal is willing, and is treated well.

However, I realize there are a lot of abuses.

How would we know that the horse is willing to race? When he is also among the bettors? :D

Though I think, that the only animal sport we should have is, who treats his animal the best!

As you stated one broke its leg and was euthanized - this is basically saying, "Im in it for the money - that horse is lame for racing, so kill it" I don't agree with that at all.

What? No it's not. They're euthanised because there is a small chance of recovery, and during that time the horse will be in pain. See here.

I'm also staunchly against the caging and removal of animals from their natural environments (Zoos).

The first time I read that I thought you were insinuating that an animal's natural environment was a zoo. :laugh:

Nature is much more cruel to animals than this. Domesticated animals generally live blissful lives compared to those in the wild.

Definitely this.

I didn't vote because I'm kind of torn on this issue, I will say that I am neither a race goer or gambler.

It distresses me whenever I see an animal put down for whatever reason.

My question is, what would happen to all the unwanted animals?

It may be barbaric but it's been going on since one bloke challenged another to a race. Probably trying to win the heart of a woman. :)

Race horses do live a pretty good life but when it's over; it's over.

Feel more sorry for all the other animals that get mistreated by their misguided or cruel owners.

Didn't mean to get too deep. :blush:

The Grand National, a famous race in the UK attracts regular betters while many of those bets placed are from people whom will not place another until next year.

After reading an article today on the BBC 'According to Pete', one of the horses, was put down at the scene as the horse fell at one gate breaking it's leg. It also seems there was another horse that died in the race.

My question is this: Is it right to race horses?

I am not exactly an animal lover, I have two cats and they are part of the family. Perhaps it was just the realisation that horses do die in races, whatever it is, I don't really like it. I realise removing obstacles will make it boring perhaps but is the thrill not about who is going to win or who is the fastest?

But then I would ask, what is wrong with dog fighting? Humans have boxing as a sport? We race dogs and horses which carries a risk of death? I am not in agreement with dog fighting, far from it. But for me, it begs the question.

I am also not a better. I don't bet on the lottery, horses, dogs or anything. The odds are rubbish :p

Yes, the odds are rubbish, because all the rules are made by rich men and all the animals are pwned by rich men, for making poor men give what little money they have to the rich men in the way of betting.

Gambling on animals is for lamers

[. . .] Minnows are BORN to race.

It didn't seem like that in the video. The video depicted them being forced down the aisle with sticks, and during the times they weren't being forced, they were probably swimming forward because they had no idea what was happening and that's all they saw in front of them.

It didn't seem like that in the video. The video depicted them being forced down the aisle with sticks, and during the times they weren't being forced, they were probably swimming forward because they had no idea what was happening and that's all they saw in front of them.

I love you Calum -- but I think the sarcasm flew over your head buddy. :)

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • The laptop in the bedroom is an Acer with i7-10510U CPU. Acer's website states they will not be upgrading it so I had little choice other than disable secure boot. I know next to nothing on these matters so hopefully it will be fine.
    • GitHub removes manual model selection from Copilot free and student plans by Karthik Mudaliar GitHub is removing the ability to manually select an AI model from its Copilot Free and Student plans, making its automatic routing system the default and only way to choose a model. This means users on these tiers will no longer be able to deliberately select a particular OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, or Microsoft model for a task. In its announcement, GitHub said Copilot Auto will dynamically choose what it considers the best model for each request. Free and Student accounts will retain access to models from multiple families, although the available selection will continue to depend on the restrictions attached to each plan. GitHub did not identify a fixed pool of models that Auto will always use, and its documentation warns that model availability can change over time. GitHub describes Auto as more than a random fallback system. On supported surfaces, its task-optimization technology evaluates the complexity of a request alongside real-time information about model health and availability. Straightforward prompts can be routed to faster and less expensive models, while more demanding coding tasks may be sent to higher-cost reasoning models. The company says this approach should reduce rate limiting, latency, and failed requests. Auto generally selects one model along natural prompt-caching boundaries rather than repeatedly switching models during a session, as GitHub found that mid-session changes increased costs without producing sufficient improvements in output quality. Users can still check which model generated a response. In Copilot Chat, the information appears when hovering over an answer, while Copilot CLI and the Copilot cloud agent display the selected model alongside their output. Auto is available in Copilot Chat, Copilot CLI, and the cloud agent, with the exact implementation and release status varying between supported development environments. The latest restriction follows several months of adjustments to Copilot’s individual plans. GitHub temporarily halted new Pro, Pro+, and Student subscriptions in April as it sought to manage demand and service reliability. It later introduced token-based billing and began gradually reopening individual-plan registrations on June 17. Alongside the picker change, GitHub is retiring the “Preview” label from Microsoft-developed models. It argues that the label is no longer necessary because Auto handles model routing and models are continuously updated behind the scenes.
    • Look up 'inflation' kid. Ask an AI for the numbers between both games.
    • Google reportedly set to lose two key Gemini and DeepMind researchers to Anthropic by Karthik Mudaliar Google is reportedly preparing to lose two more prominent artificial intelligence researchers, with Gemini contributors Jonas Adler and Alexander Pritzel planning to join rival AI developer Anthropic. According to a report from Bloomberg, both researchers are viewed internally as important contributors to Google’s flagship Gemini model family. Adler worked on Google’s AI coding efforts, while Pritzel was involved in the process used to train AI systems. Neither company has publicly confirmed the moves. The report also does not say when the researchers will formally leave Google or what positions they will hold at Anthropic. Training a large AI model requires decisions covering its architecture, data preparation, distributed computing infrastructure, and post-training methods that shape how the finished system behaves. Researchers with experience operating at the scale of Gemini are consequently difficult to replace quickly. Both Adler and Pritzel have previously contributed to Google DeepMind’s scientific research as well. They are listed among the authors of the company’s work on expanding AlphaFold protein-structure predictions across entire proteomes, alongside AlphaFold researchers including John Jumper. The reported departures arrive shortly after another important change within Google’s Gemini organization. Gemini co-lead Noam Shazeer is leaving Google for OpenAI, after returning to the search company in 2024 through its deal with Character.AI. Shazeer is particularly well known as one of the authors of the Transformer paper, whose architecture became the foundation for most modern large language models. Anthropic, meanwhile, has been recruiting recognizable figures from other leading laboratories. OpenAI co-founder and former Tesla AI director Andrej Karpathy joined Anthropic’s pre-training team in May. His move, followed by the reported recruitment of several Google researchers, suggests Anthropic is strengthening the research teams responsible for the core capabilities of future Claude models rather than concentrating solely on product and enterprise sales. The competition is complicated by the companies’ extensive commercial relationships. Anthropic competes directly with Google’s Gemini models, but it also relies on Google as an infrastructure partner. In April, Anthropic announced an expanded agreement with Google and Broadcom covering multiple gigawatts of next-generation Tensor Processing Unit capacity. TPUs are Google-designed accelerators used to train and run large AI models. via Bloomberg
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      461
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      79
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!