"You don't throw a whole life away just cause it's banged up a little"

[my miss storm cat]

I have a question about jockeys.....

It seems like people are quick to take sides when jockeys get nailed for drugs, alcohol, etc.

After being on any given forum for a while, you have a sense of what's coming and who will be vocal either for or against the latest episiode of Jocks In Trouble.

I'm not being sanctimonious here. Personally I do always try to back up someone who is troubled or self-destructive. I believe in one last chance and one last chance after that. I know others are the same way.

That said, i can understand the other point of view too. I don't agree with the ban-their-ass(es) mentality but sure, I can understand it.

It's really easy for me to have an opinion not being an owner. Maybe if i were I'd have the opposite view and i acknowledge that.


Fallon, PVal, all these stories.....

Here's the latest one.

Gold Edition jockey to face charges 3 Feb 2008

By Greg Irvine - www.virtualformguide.com

Stathi Katsidis, who rode Gold Edition to her swansong fourth placing in Saturday's Group I Lightning Stakes at Flemington, has had a run in with police.

The Queenslander will front court on February 19 after being pulled over by police late on Saturday in Towoomba.

Katsidis blew 0.19 when breath tested not long after 10pm (Qld time) - just hours after riding Gold Edition.

Police report they found steroids and ecstacy when his vehicle was searched.

Katsidis was breath tested and cleared to ride at Sunday's Sunshine Coast meeting in Queensland.

http://www.thoroughbrednews.co.nz/sp...cing/?id=33377

Part of the problem though is the reason for the drugs.

I can't imagine the lifestyle, the wasting, the mental stress that it must cause, the whole idea of being an athlete but never really treated as other athletes are, never on the same level, the emotional roller-coaster, the thought of a horse breaking down and having to change silks and go right back out onto the track for the next race....

Someone once posted that it's the only job in the world where you have an ambulance follow you all day and of course there IS that.

So my question is is anybody out there looking at the big picture? Are there or have there been studies done on jockeys and depression?

If not, should there be or rather shouldn't there be?

If they don't have people in their lives who are there for them, who will listen, do they have somewhere to turn to?

I know, I know... a fun forum pastime making fun of them and disrespecting them. I'm guilty of it too. I've done it too.

I'm just starting to feel like along with the bannings or days, the fines, etc., some help should be given or offered (or possibly mandatory?) and i have no idea whether or not it is.

Some overcome their problems (GoGo), some keep slipping, and then there are those like the poor kid who jumped off the 19th floor of the Hong Kong Jockey Club offices (Harry Tsang), Brian Long, Hector Ventura, this poor kid...

http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19628

Thoughts?

[Danzig]

i always was under the impression that people (not just jocks) do drugs as a way of avoiding reality. of course reality is still there, it just becomes distorted due to whatever it is the person puts into their system.
thing is, until someone is ready to admit a problem and chooses to fix it, no rehab in the world will get them straight. you can intervene, talk, yell, threaten, cajole....you're wasting your time until the person with the problem recognizes there is a problem.
offering repeat 'second' chances imo will only exacerbate the problem. anyone banned should have to be clean, sober, for at least a year before re-instatement. otherwise you have situations such as pvals.

[fpsoxfan]

Tough one to solve here Storm Cat. I've had my share of habits, but thankfully never drugs. I'm the way you are in that I like to give second and third chances. Many people don't look at it the same way. I was always a Chris Antley fan. I didn't know him personally but I thought he was good for the game. He had it all...Talent, personality, and looks(my wife thought he was cute) He just couldn't overcome his personal issues. As far as P-Val, this is one instance where he's just been given chance after chance and has just blown it. At this point, I have a hard time feeling sorry for him. I just hope he can somehow get his life in order.

[GenuineRisk]

It's a interesting thread, MMSC.

I think it's easy for those of us who don't have addictive personalities to wave our fingers and say, "Well, they just need to realize they have a problem and get help." And easy for us to get frustrated at an apparent unwillingness from repeat offenders to not get their acts together and want them punished until they get their acts together.

BUT-I think addictive personalities really are different from non-addictive personalities, and within those addictions there are all kinds of different levels- some manage to address it and some never do. And they address it in different ways- I am seldom surprised when a former drug user turns to God- in my own opinion, that person is trading one addiction for another. (Though, fortunately, the religious addiction is less likely to make them get behind the wheel of a car when they are physically impaired) Our culture wants easy fixes and addiction just doesn't have one.

I wonder, too, if being a jockey makes one more likely to be an addict, or if addictive personalities are more likely to become jockeys- you need to be an adrenaline junkie, at least, to do a job like that. Seems like they can function when they're living at that higher level that riding a race is; it's real life they can't handle. And I wonder, is that an unwillingness or an inability?

I also, am not sure what is accomplished by banning them from riding races. Are owners who are caught using drugs banned from owning? Are trainers caught driving under the influence banned from training (honest question; I don't know what the rules are for the other careers in racing and drug use)? If the wish is to get the person off substance abuse, the banning from riding doesn't seem to be working.

I don't know the answer. I do think jockeys are a smaller picture of our society as a whole- Gov. Huckabee quoted a prison official in his book that we don't have a crime problem in the US so much as we have a drug and alcohol problem. And clearly how we address addiction right now is not very successful.

Good topic, MMSC, and good thoughts, everyone.

[GPK]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i always was under the impression that people (not just jocks) do drugs as a way of avoiding reality. of course reality is still there, it just becomes distorted due to whatever it is the person puts into their system.
thing is, until someone is ready to admit a problem and chooses to fix it, no rehab in the world will get them straight. you can intervene, talk, yell, threaten, cajole....you're wasting your time until the person with the problem recognizes there is a problem.
offering repeat 'second' chances imo will only exacerbate the problem. anyone banned should have to be clean, sober, for at least a year before re-instatement. otherwise you have situations such as pvals.

Son
Of a
Bitch
Everythings
Real

[Rileyoriley]

Originally Posted by GPK

Son
Of a
Bitch
Everythings
Real

So true.

[AeWingnut]

I get accused of having an addictive personality just because I enjoy wagering on the horses, cards and sports.

I don't see why there should be 3rd and 4th chances for anyone. There are plenty of people who don't do drugs.

I also don't know why owners want trainers that cheat.

Is it right for people that play by the rules?

Think of it this way... your significant other cheats on you
you forgive them and then they cheat on you again
you forgive them again because they obviously have an addictive personality



Now how long before no one has any respect for you and they don't want to wager their dollars on your game?

[westcoastinvader]

Originally Posted by my miss storm cat

I have a question about jockeys.....

It seems like people are quick to take sides when jockeys get nailed for drugs, alcohol, etc.

After being on any given forum for a while, you have a sense of what's coming and who will be vocal either for or against the latest episiode of Jocks In Trouble.

I'm not being sanctimonious here. Personally I do always try to back up someone who is troubled or self-destructive. I believe in one last chance and one last chance after that. I know others are the same way.

That said, i can understand the other point of view too. I don't agree with the ban-their-ass(es) mentality but sure, I can understand it.

It's really easy for me to have an opinion not being an owner. Maybe if i were I'd have the opposite view and i acknowledge that.


Fallon, PVal, all these stories.....

Here's the latest one.

Gold Edition jockey to face charges 3 Feb 2008

By Greg Irvine - www.virtualformguide.com

Stathi Katsidis, who rode Gold Edition to her swansong fourth placing in Saturday's Group I Lightning Stakes at Flemington, has had a run in with police.

The Queenslander will front court on February 19 after being pulled over by police late on Saturday in Towoomba.

Katsidis blew 0.19 when breath tested not long after 10pm (Qld time) - just hours after riding Gold Edition.

Police report they found steroids and ecstacy when his vehicle was searched.

Katsidis was breath tested and cleared to ride at Sunday's Sunshine Coast meeting in Queensland.

http://www.thoroughbrednews.co.nz/sp...cing/?id=33377

Part of the problem though is the reason for the drugs.

I can't imagine the lifestyle, the wasting, the mental stress that it must cause, the whole idea of being an athlete but never really treated as other athletes are, never on the same level, the emotional roller-coaster, the thought of a horse breaking down and having to change silks and go right back out onto the track for the next race....

Someone once posted that it's the only job in the world where you have an ambulance follow you all day and of course there IS that.

So my question is is anybody out there looking at the big picture? Are there or have there been studies done on jockeys and depression?

If not, should there be or rather shouldn't there be?

If they don't have people in their lives who are there for them, who will listen, do they have somewhere to turn to?

I know, I know... a fun forum pastime making fun of them and disrespecting them. I'm guilty of it too. I've done it too.

I'm just starting to feel like along with the bannings or days, the fines, etc., some help should be given or offered (or possibly mandatory?) and i have no idea whether or not it is.

Some overcome their problems (GoGo), some keep slipping, and then there are those like the poor kid who jumped off the 19th floor of the Hong Kong Jockey Club offices (Harry Tsang), Brian Long, Hector Ventura, this poor kid...

http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19628

Thoughts?

My first thought is the oft referenced Sara Silverman quote on Britney Spears.

"Isn't it great she's already accomplished everything she will in life, and she's only 25 years old?"


My second thought, is that most people deserve at least a couple chances.


My 3rd thought is that our jockeys have an amazingly hard job keeping weight below 115 pounds, or less. And keeping the edge of competition and "fun at work" around them.

I've been around people
who do drugs to get away from life.
They want to be dead for various reasons.

So I really try hard not to pass judgment.
I am sure there are those that got addicted
because of recreational use. Sympathy is
hard for them. But those who are just self
medicating because they are depressed...

I would not be surprised if Pval tries to off
himself.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

The Cocaine (or whatever) PVAL was using didn't bother me nearly as much as the D.U.I......As long as he was being tested,then I think it was enough of a safeguard.The D.U.I. is more of a crime against others though.I really don't have sympathy for somebody driving when they are so drunk they can't avoid still objects.It's totally irresponsible,and it needs to become taboo.

[cakes44]

Alcoholism and anorexia... the only "diseases" where someone is "cured" by choice.

[GPK]

Originally Posted by cakes44

Alcoholism and anorexia... the only "diseases" where someone is "cured" by choice.

You not think they are diseases?

[cakes44]

Mental defects or just plain mental weakness maybe. However, I'm definitely not going to lump them in with those who have to suffer through something like cancer through no fault of their own.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by cakes44

Mental defects or just plain mental weakness maybe. However, I'm definitely not going to lump them in with those who have to suffer through something like cancer through no fault of their own.

alcholism has been proven to be gene based and hereditery. Not to say that it's easier to get help for that than cancer, but if you smoke for 30 years or lay in the sun every summer, there has to be some level of ownership if you get cancer.

[cakes44]

I'll give you that. Some forms of cancer are definitely the result of poor choices. I should have used a different disease as an example I guess.

In this case, the idea of heredity and genes means nothing to me. Intelligence is also passed on through genes.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cakes44

Mental defects or just plain mental weakness maybe. However, I'm definitely not going to lump them in with those who have to suffer through something like cancer through no fault of their own.

You have the same outlook as many people who simply dont understand. Disease is disease whether it is physical, mental or both. Comparing diseases is folly.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cakes44

I'll give you that. Some forms of cancer are definitely the result of poor choices. I should have used a different disease as an example I guess.

In this case, the idea of heredity and genes means nothing to me. Intelligence is also passed on through genes.

Sorry you missed out on these

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by cakes44

I'll give you that. Some forms of cancer are definitely the result of poor choices. I should have used a different disease as an example I guess.

In this case, the idea of heredity and genes means nothing to me. Intelligence is also passed on through genes.

I don't think we are disagreeing on cancer....look..I lost both parents to a type of cancer they certainly didn't "deserve"..

but you are dismissing alcoholism as a weakness or lack of intelligence when that is simply not true and is a diservice to anyone who has ever struggled with this DISEASE...yes..DISEASE. I got a DUI in 2000, something i am certainly not proud of..part of my sentence was to spend 30 days community service at a home for alcoholics who were in a very bad way. These were succesful, intelligent people for the most part who had lost everything to this sickness...family, homes, all money, etc...They did not suffer from a weakness...they suffer from a disease

[GPK]

Originally Posted by GBBob

I don't think we are disagreeing on cancer....look..I lost both parents to a type of cancer they certainly didn't "deserve"..

but you are dismissing alcoholism as a weakness or lack of intelligence when that is simply not true and is a diservice to anyone who has ever struggled with this DISEASE...yes..DISEASE. I got a DUI in 2000, something i am certainly not proud of..part of my sentence was to spend 30 days community service at a home for alcoholics who were in a very bad way. These were succesful, intelligent people for the most part who had lost everything to this sickness...family, homes, all money, etc...They did not suffer from a weakness...they suffer from a disease

Well said Bob.

[cakes44]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Sorry you missed out on these

And I'm sorry you feel the need to insult me because my opinion is different than yours. If you want to use the dictionary definition for disease, than sure alcoholism is a disease. Under that definition, all wife-beaters also have a "disease", and I disagree. I try to narrow it down some because when think of the word "disease", I don't think of people who wouldn't be "diseased" if they decide to act differently.