- This topic has 188 replies, 36 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
It’s these silly old codgers who will get our beloved sport banned
Absolutely – out of touch on so many levels.
LD73 – Tizzard didn’t seem to think the fences were a problem for Native River, indeed he said something along the lines that “these old chasers” shouldn’t have a problem with them. Might Bite has always had his own ideas. Who knows what upset him yesterday.
I think the problem was explained perfectly with this comment:
Trainer Phil Kirby, whose Little Bruce was among three fallers in the opening chase at Haydock, had no issue with the fences but said there is a problem with consistency across tracks.
He said: “The biggest problem is the difference from one track to another. You go to one place, they are nice and soft and horses think they can brush through the top of them. Then you go there, they are big and stiff and it catches some out.
“It’s the difference from track to track that catches horses out, rather than them being a problem.”
Kirby’s point is a fair one, but I don’t get it when the likes of Henderson and Nico are complaining about fences frightening their horses. Jeez, its steeplechasing! Might Bite has jumped like that before so it’s unfair to blame Haydock.
God knows what Fred Winter, Fulke Walwyn or Fred Rimell would have thought of Nicky’s comments. What kind of surprise was the landing side of Becher’s Brook to Aintree debutants?
What got me was Tellwright saying that they hadn’t purposely made the fences harder then saying in the same interview that they had packed the jumps thicker this year?!?
I completely agree with most of the comments on here. It was the element of surprise that was wrong rather than the changes.
I do think they had a material effect on yesterday’s big race as three of the runners were continually backing off the jumps.
I would rather they kept the fences as they are rather than have them like Ludlow’s where you could just about run through them. However I’m sure around twenty years ago many trainers were steering clear of Wetherby’s fences as they were perceived to be too hard and I do worry that the bad publicity from yesterday will lead to smaller fields at Haydock.
Looking forward I still think that Thistlecrack ran the best King George trial. If it doesn’t go his way on boxing day then why not go back to the World Hurdle.
As for Native River I would be going to Leopardstown not Kempton at Christmas. I think the track suits him better.
BDM has to chase the triple crown and he’s not going to lose a Gold Cup by going for a race ten weeks in advance.
Might Bite could go either way. He could be great value at Kempton after yesterday’s run but can he bounce back from that effort or is there an internal problem at play.
As said earlier the Betfair has set the season up beautifully.
Reading today’s comments, particularly in the RP, it seems the Betfair is being derailed by a separate debate re. the Haydock fences. Where they come together is in Team SB trying to find an explanation for MB’s below par performance.
On the fences, I agree with everyone else over the need for advance notification of changes in configuration. Courses have reputations vis a vis the stiffness (not) of their fences, and that inevitably shapes which horses are entered where. The problem for Haydock is the mismatch between trainer/jockey expectations (based on fences in recent years) and the wake-up call (for the jockeys) that was clearly the first chase. I don’t know if trainers/jockeys actually looked at these fences before racing but I suspect, from the reported comments, that they didn’t, and that that is the source of the nasty surprise, which has then fuelled an increasingly negative response.
For sure, the current Haydock fences are not an ideal introduction for a novice chaser. Folk needed to know that, beforehand. Good and experienced chasers, or at least those who enjoy jumping, are a different matter though. Most (though not all!) are intelligent beasts. They can usually work out what’s in front of them and adjust their technique accordingly. That’s why, after a couple of fences into the current National course, most of the field are jumping through the fences. In running, I actually thought that, with the exception of Thistlecrack, who did balloon some early on, all five runners were showing the fences the respect they merited. None were taking a chance on them. Yes, they took some jumping – but, as Joe says, ‘this is steeplechasing’! Of course there is a need to be mindful of welfare and how NH racing sits in the public eye but I don’t think this race did anything negative on that front. They all jumped them all; there were no major blunders and everyone that set out finished. It was a great race, a great spectacle and a real advert for NH racing.
To MB … I have watched this race three times now, once ‘live’ and twice on the replay, and tbh to me his jumping looks much like it did last year. Obviously, Nico is the one who will know what he feels like, but all this talk of ‘kid gloves’, lacking confidence and needing to involve Yogi Breisner suggests that he is not a natural chaser – and absolutely not Sprinter. With that in mind, I can’t help but think he would be better off back out in front i.e. dictating matters and using his engine to give him time and space to organise himself in front of the obstacles, not upsides others, like BdM and NR, who can upset his confidence by outjumping him. Ironically, in trying to iron out the quirks of his novice year, they may have put his confidence under more pressure. To my mind though, his problems yesterday started not at the fences but on the turn-in, where he is the first to be ‘bumped along’. Then, when he enters the straight and comes off the bridle his head comes up, and he turns it to the right. To his credit, he doesn’t shirk it (you are right Joe, he never does) – but, we’ve seen this in the KG, the GC and the Betfair now. I think it’s a wind issue. But, if it is, they haven’t got time to sort that out ahead of the KG, which has to be the main target now.
If it was, say, Clan des Obeaux who got rattled by the fences (he didn’t- he made some mistakes but showed a nice attitude and didn’t wet his pants), failed to run up to form and was eased home, we wouldn’t be having a conversation about the fences. We’d have said he was a youngster not up to the big boys.
If it was BdM, we would have said oh, he can’t jump at good ground pace with proper horses, he doesn’t like it up him when challenged for the lead, his jumping goes to bits.
If TC hadn’t run on after jumping carefully rather than prime-TC flamboyantly, we would have said he’s past it and a busted flush, we wouldn’t be blaming the fences.
Ok if Native River had run poorly and Tizz blamed the fences we’d probably have had a second look, but all the chat is really only because it was the golden boy who came unstuck.
Fair point about the unexpected stiffness of the fences but there should be no complaint about the size of them. I assume the rules of racing stipulate maximum size so nobody should whinge if they are within the rules. For a grade 1 open chase the fences should be tough and anyone running a novice chaser that day should account for that. It’s not even as if they were technical like the 3rd last at Cheltenham (which should stay put IMO).
I understand that “train hard, fight easy” doesn’t quite apply and that racehorses (like eventers and showjumpers) are generally schooled over smaller fences than the real thing at home to help confidence and technique but surely you’d keep a few bigger, stiffer fences at home to spin the horse over in the run up to a big race- maybe on its second last turn over fences before the race- so it doesn’t freak out on the big day.
The Tizzard yard lost a horse Watcombe Heights at Exeter on Sunday sadly after he had won his race he collapsed and died of a heart attack, just 8 years old
(see memorials).
Not a mention of this on Racing Post, but if same had happened in this race on Saturday to any of the runners what uproar there would have been, the new fences would be to blame for sure and the whole thing would be all over the front pages of Racing Post and investigations launched.Instead this brilliant servant to racing has paid the ultimate price on a track that he knew well while the headlines hammer on about Henderson trying to find a reason why his horse ran below par.
As green said the fences have to be a a maximum size it’s not like The Puissance at Olympia where they add 4inches every time a horse clears jumps clear, if the horse doesn’t like the look of it he refuses to jump
Considering Bristol De Mai didn’t like the going and the fences were tougher than last year he ran a superb race, the stiffness of the fences made him more focused on his jumping than I have ever seen him.
The debate will go on but we won’t really know why MB underperformed until he turns out again and I hope all is well with him…Jac
Things turn out best for those who make the best of how things turn out...Watched the race 3 times and all I can say is the King George is as clear as mud. Thistlecrack each way at 12s looks the bet
The thing i hate about Haydock as a track + is generally why i wouldn’t bet there very often is, nothing is plain and simple with the course. Ground descriptions wrong all the time + now fences are being made very stiff (no problem with it) without it being known to public. It’s a joke, and i do wonder did the trainers and owners know? I presume not as Henderson checked them before the Betfair.
Clerk of course
Twitter: Jackh1092
Hindsight is 20/20 so make the most of it!Yes, but Steeplechasing, we are not living in the era of Fred Winter, Fulke Walwyn or Fred Rimell are we. We are living in 2018, the era of Henderson, Nicholls and Mullins. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but the world has gone incredibly politically correct over the past ten years or so. If we want too keep the sport we love, we need to act like we live in 2018.
It’s all great harking back to previous era’s of NH, when things were slightly different. The people who would see our beloved sport wiped from the earth, as it might not fit in with their version of 2018, don’t give a hoot. It’s them that we need to be wary of these days if we have our heads screwed on. Stuff like that, on live TV on a Saturday is not clever, in fact it’s down right stupidness. And then racing wonders why it struggles too attract younger race goers, it’s future… Well they don’t like stuff like that, they end up siding with the freaks who want us, and many other sports where animals are involved, gone. Then we are in big trouble. There is simply no need too stiffen the fences, to a stage where horses are visibly having problems with them. That’s what happened Saturday, and no one seemed to know it was coming either. It was okay in the 60’s or 70’s, even the 80’s and 90’s. It’s not okay in 2018, I know that much, not in the greater scheme of things.
I think a bigger issue are the tracks that have the fences that are far too soft that it encourages horse to jump through them instead of over them, sort those out because they simply encourage bad jumping technique that then gets exposed when they go to courses that actually requires a horse to jump over a fence properly.
I watched all the races at Haydock on ITV/RUK and my first reaction wasn’t that the fences were not too big or too stiff and I was shocked when I heard the comment from jockeys/trainers. Didn’t hear Hendo complain about the stiffness of Kempton’s fences when MB had that horrific fall in the Feltham, Tizzard didn’t blame the stiffness when Cue Card fell at the 3rd last in 2 Gold Cups.
The quicker ground was the one major variable that was different for the meeting and as such I think it played a much bigger part in the falls. Most were as a result of the horses getting too deep into the bottom of the fence and not being able to shorten up in time to get their legs out in front of them – had we had the usual soft/heavy ground they would have been going a fair bit slower and thus would have had more time to sort themselves out at the fence.
I am all for the powers that be to make changes when evidence is telling you it is necessary, but to me this wasn’t the case as going to a Grade 1 jumping track you should expect a jumping test and not fence you can gallop through.
Note on the RP that they have alread started to lower and soften the fences for the next meeting and it will be interesting to see what does (or doesn’t) happen as a result, especially if we still have quicker ground than normal.
You may well be right regarding bigger fences at all tracks LD73. That is uniform, and teaches them too jump well. Common sense and a level playing field. Saturday was a big surprise, too all and sundry. I watched horses fall, which would not normally fall IMO. They could not flick the top, if they did, they went down. Lots frightened themselves and jumped poorly afterwards. Too my eyes, when they jump fences the entire time, which they CAN flick through, too give them some mega stiff ones which they CAN’T as a nice surprise, without telling anyone… Pure stupidity, and asking for big trouble. None of the jockeys who went down and looked at the first fence before the first chase, could see that they were mega stiff fences since the last time they had jumped them. Good luck jockeys, don’t worry you’ll learn really fast like the horses. Watch what happens with the form of the chase races going forwards from Sat, I’ll bet it’s hardly worth a jot. Some enjoyed it, others did not.
If there’s no problem, why are they reducing both the size and stiffness of the fences for the next meeting then like you mention? Surely they would just say, we are in the guide lines? There’s a problem LD73, and my previous comment about someone from the JC having a quiet word, and probably lots of trainers and jockeys too… I bet that has happened and that’s why they are going too sort those fences out now. The bloke from Haydock looked so happy about it all on live ITV on Sat… Bet he’s not so chipper now.
Thing is I don’t think there are many (if any) guidelines except maybe a minimum height one (would be interesting to know one way or the other).
One could argue that they are now forced into making alterations (rightly or wrongly) because it is now in the public domain and perception tends to be the be all end all – assuming the JC and/or BHA will have someone to check what they have done but how do they test whether the work done has sorted the problem?
What happens at their next meeting if we have some more fallers in the chase races and god forbid a fatality, easy for the jockeys to go to the fall back position of ‘they are still to stiff’. Do other courses then feel the pressure to soften their fences…….
We could end up on a slippery slope and then you get those who know next to nothing about the sport (but just happened to hear about this) jump on the cruel to horses bandwagon lets ban the sport altogether etc etc
LD73- from a quick internet search it seems you are right. There are minimums- fences must be at least 4’6″ in height and 18″ thick across the top but there are no maximum limits as there are in all grades of showjumping including Grand Prix level and eventing including 4*. How strange.
AFAIK there is no measure of stiffness either- perhaps some sort of guidelines could be drawn up…maybe using tension guages on ropes used to pack the birch…if such a thing could be easily replicated by fence builders and it could be shown to produce fences of uniform stiffness.
The whole thing just seems oddly subjective for a professional sport…weird that they don’t have objective measurements for max height anyway.
Thanks for the info greenasgrass – not overly surprised as we are talking about a sport that starts it races with a piece of elastic stretched across the course.
With each racecourse probably having its own team that builds the fences, you are open to interpretation as to what the person(s) subjectively feel is sufficient in regards to the stiffness/density of the birch used in the fence and unless they write down exactly what they did you could very easily get variances from one year to the next even if the same people(s) are doing the job.
It might well be one of those things that there isn’t a pressing need to have a viable alternative (have trouble recalling whether we have ever had trainers/jockeys complain about this issue before) or it may not be cost effective so the knowledge of how to do it manually is just passed down to the people who get the job.
Sorry if this thread has gone a little off the original topic.
Very strange indeed Green, no maximum sizes. So that bumbling old oath that was on ITV from the course, could of made the fences twice the size that he actually did, and the races would still go ahead. What complete and utter madness NH racing is sometimes. They changed the course, and the times got faster. So they came up with Saturdays fences as a big surprise. With no maximum size limits, I’d say it’s damn lucky that he did not instruct them too go even bigger.
Public perception is everything these days LD73, NH racing needs to sort itself out a little bit with regards to things like this in my opinion. If a horse loses its life at a fence, it’s a very sad thing, the worst in fact, we all know it. If a horse is lost at a fence, which has just been modified into something a little bit different (more extreme lets say), without informing everyone… In 2018, it would be far, far worse. Thank heavens it did not happen on Saturday. A scenario for you. Haydock spokesperson on live TV, grinning about make the fences much tougher. What if one of those star chasers had of been lost in the Betfair not long after. Be honest, what do you think the fallout from that could of been? A bit more than trainers or jockeys moaning maybe? I can have a great guess. It would have been very, very bad indeed.
‘Thank heavens it did not happen on Saturday. A scenario for you. Haydock spokesperson on live TV, grinning about make the fences much tougher. What if one of those star chasers had of been lost in the Betfair not long after. Be honest, what do you think the fallout from that could of been? A bit more than trainers or jockeys moaning maybe? I can have a great guess. It would have been very, very bad indeed’.
Exactly Naus, a point I made earlier in my last post on here and thank goodness they all came back safely. I’ll spend the rest of the season hiding behind the sofa if it carries on like this..Jac
Things turn out best for those who make the best of how things turn out...
(see memorials).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.