- This topic has 108 replies, 33 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
Surely the bottom line is, does the use of the whip cause any long-term physical and/or psychological harm to the horse? I doubt it.
Or is it about the public perception of horse racing that causes some to be opposed to the whip? To my knowledge the use of the whip does not deter massive crowds attending the likes of Badminton Horse Trials or Wembley Arena. I have never heard anyone say that they didn’t want to go racing because of the whip argument, whereas I have heard them mention, "I don’t like horses" or "I don’t bet". I have also known a few people who have enjoyed their first experience of a ‘day at the races’ and never referred to the whip but have enjoyed the spectacle of seeing the horses, having a little flutter whilst soaking up the sunshine and picnic atmosphere (i.e.Cartmel). Incidentally, to the BHA, get more courses creating a Cartmel atmosphere and you’ll solve a lot of your problems. Only trouble is, you can’t change the British weather!
Or is it a question of animal abuse/cruelty? In which case, perhaps someone, e.g. the RSPCA, needs to bring a test case to the Courts to determine whether or not the whip should be outlawed in any equestrian setting.Ginger – sorry didn’t respond just logged back in.
The difference between the obstacles and the whip is that removing the obstacles fundamentally alters the sport. You couldn’t have National Hunt racing without having fences for horses to jump.
On the other hand not having the whip would have no fundamental impact. Sure, certain horses need the whip to either start or perform but all that would happen is that other horses would win those races. The horse most able to run from A to B in the fastest time without needing to be hurt to do so.
McGrath was not his usual confident self in that mini-debate with Francome I thought. His argument that whips aren’t meant to hurt horses was met with incredulity by Francome, and rightly so. The point of whipping a horse is to give him a sting that makes him want to run away, you’re trying to elicit an instinctive fleeing response.
I took my two young daughters (10 and 6) to Musselburgh last family day there. We parked along between the one and two furlong pole and were making our way from car to stands when the runners in the first went by, pressure on, business end of the race. Whips were flying and when you hear the whip crack against the horse away from the crowd noise it makes a fair old smack. The first thing my daughter said wasn’t ‘look at those wonderful horses dad’ or ‘what an exciting race Dad’. Her first comment was ‘Why are they hitting the horses dad?’.
Hard to answer that.
Maybe we should have a rule that if we keep the whip every jockey has to sign up to agree that every time they hit a horse in the race they have to take one good whack on the behind when they get back to the weighing room. That’d even things up (although the problem with that is a few of them might enjoy it!!)
Other than any possible safety concerns, there is absolutely no need for the whip.
My earlier post might infer that I’m in favour of the whip but the question leaves me struggling with my conscience. Many times I’ve shouted at the screen, "whip it!" "hit it!" "kick it!" "harder!". When the money is down, my feelings of empathy with the horse are greatly lessened.
And yet, minutes later I can be watching a documentary on the box of some backward rural community in Outer Mongolia and feeling great resentment towards the owners of pack horses weighed down with huge panniers and being hit with a stick to make them stand up and walk.
Moral dilemmas, don’t we just detest them?
KI have been lucky enough to be involved with ownership in a very small way because i love horse racing, and i have to say i dont like the sound of whips cracking against horses in a race i am all for a jockey carrying them to control an unruly animal, but it would be interesting to have a trial without using them in a race,a poll off racing forum members might be quite interesting.
Most tracks in the US have instituted cushioned whips, which basically feel like a slight tap. Jocks actually don;t like it because the horse can hardly feel it, so they have to tap the horse more often to get a response. When used correctly the whip is just an aid, no different than the hands or the voice.
- Total Posts 17716
I took my two young daughters (10 and 6) to Musselburgh last family day there. We parked along between the one and two furlong pole and were making our way from car to stands when the runners in the first went by, pressure on, business end of the race. Whips were flying and when you hear the whip crack against the horse away from the crowd noise it makes a fair old smack. The first thing my daughter said wasn’t ‘look at those wonderful horses dad’ or ‘what an exciting race Dad’. Her first comment was ‘Why are they hitting the horses dad?’.
Hard to answer that.
Far be it from me to stick my nose into your family life, but I hope you did answer that!
Might it not be that your daughter has been healthily disabused of a Walt-Disney-Sentimental-Kittens-and-Acrylic-Fur attitude to life? if – and I say if because you don’t say – she was upset by the sight and sound of what she saw.
I hope you answered her, correctly, by saying that it doesn’t hurt the horses and makes them run faster.
I did Piza but I didn’t tell her (the 10 year old btw) it didn’t hurt. I told her it had no lasting effect and likened it to a nip in humans.
She’s been racing since at Musselburgh and Kelso, witnessing one or two falls at the latter, and is fairly pragmatic about life so it’d be wrong to say it’s either traumatised her in any way or that it’s put her off racing.
I wish people would stop saying the whip doesn’t hurt the horse. Take a whip to a horse standing in the yard and smack it full force (and the jockeys do use full force)in the a**e and see what happens. I do accept though that, except for extreme circumstances, it has no physical lasting effect. Enough horses are soured of racing to lead me to believe that there might be a case for suggesting that there may sometimes be psychological damage though.
All that said I don’t believe that it’s any kind of major welfare issue. I just think there is no need for the whip, that it is one bad bit of PR we could eliminate.
Would that be the thin end of the wedge? The anti-racing brigade might see it as a victory and move to the next step but racing should be able to defend itself, I’m not sure it can defend this particular aspect robustly.
Why have whips? Why have jockeys for that matter? In fact why race horses at all? Running that fast is very dangerous and horses might hurt themselves. It would be better if horse fans just came to the track and watched the horses in a large paddock, eating grass. That would really bring the fans out to the track.
Does anyone remember, as a kid, running along the road imagining yourself to be Roy Rogers and slapping your backside with the palm of your hand pretending to make yourself run faster? Maybe that’s why I’ve been traumatised most of my life!
KHorses are trained to aids, the whip is just one of many. It could just as easily as be a finger tip, a tug on the ear or even a whistle.
We have all seen horses fall, lose their rider and yet still run and jump the obstacles just for the fun of it.
If a horse need so much encouragement as the whip to take part in the spectacle then perhaps its either poorly trained or hasn’t the correct temperament for the sport.
I wonder what jockeys would have to say on the matter
If the whips are completely unnessecary then why did Ruby Walsh feel the need to slap Lochan Lacha with his hand in a handicap hurdle earlier this season
Jim McGrath looked as if he’d seen a ghost when John Francome asked him how many times he had ridden a horse ?
Maybe a bit indelicate of Francome do do so; akin to the footballers’ riposte, "show’s your medals", but Jim McGrath needs to appreciate that others’ opinions are just as valid as his. There is no right or wrong answer on the matter.
Myself; I’d go along with Francome on this one.
With Francome’s comment about McGrath’s riding experience; I would say it was Francome who was showing the arrogance of "your opinion is not as valid as mine" ; not McGrath.
Value Is EverythingThe difference between the obstacles and the whip is that removing the obstacles fundamentally alters the sport. You couldn’t have National Hunt racing without having fences for horses to jump.
Cormack,
If I’ve got your meaning right, I find that amazing.
You SEEM to be saying jumping obstacles is just as cruel or even more so than the whip. Yet this does not matter because it is necessary for jump racing to exist.Something is either cruel or not.
If jump racing is at least equally as cruel as the whip (which you believe should be banned) then jump racing should be banned too.
You can have jump racing without obstacles, it’s called flat racing.
Value Is EverythingOn the other hand not having the whip would have no fundamental impact. Sure, certain horses need the whip to either start or perform but all that would happen is that other horses would win those races. The horse most able to run from A to B in the fastest time without needing to be hurt to do so.
McGrath was not his usual confident self in that mini-debate with Francome I thought. His argument that whips aren’t meant to hurt horses was met with incredulity by Francome, and rightly so. The point of whipping a horse is to give him a sting that makes him want to run away, you’re trying to elicit an instinctive fleeing response.
I took my two young daughters (10 and 6) to Musselburgh last family day there. We parked along between the one and two furlong pole and were making our way from car to stands when the runners in the first went by, pressure on, business end of the race. Whips were flying and when you hear the whip crack against the horse away from the crowd noise it makes a fair old smack. The first thing my daughter said wasn’t ‘look at those wonderful horses dad’ or ‘what an exciting race Dad’. Her first comment was ‘Why are they hitting the horses dad?’.
Hard to answer that.
Maybe we should have a rule that if we keep the whip every jockey has to sign up to agree that every time they hit a horse in the race they have to take one good whack on the behind when they get back to the weighing room. That’d even things up (although the problem with that is a few of them might enjoy it!!)
Other than any possible safety concerns, there is absolutely no need for the whip.
NO whip would fundamentally change racing.
In jump racing there’d be horses refusing to race with regularity. Possibly on average one per race, may be more; with punters as angry as ever "not getting a run for their money".
A bigger advantage in racing prominently, being more difficult to make ground would change tactical riding forever.
Connections trying to find ways of scareing their horses to run faster.
Jockeys may try to do things to make their horse wander, with an excuse to use the whip.The RACING whip is NOT meant to hurt, a cushioned whip used correctly does not "hurt", it encourages. If the whip is banned then jockeys may find other ways to "encourage" their mounts.
Value Is EverythingGood jockeys can win races without resorting to the whip.
I remember Tom Grantham winning on Barge Boy in a big handicap hurdle without hitting him once …a joy to watch.I remember Sir Peter commenting about it too at the time .
If the whips are completely unnessecary then why did Ruby Walsh feel the need to slap Lochan Lacha with his hand in a handicap hurdle earlier this season
Actually, I thought that this race was an excellent example of the whip NOT being necessary.
Ruby’s slaps, if they even made contact, really wouldn’t have been felt by the horse – have you tried hitting something behind you at that angle? There is no way you can put any force into it. The horse, in this case, as galvanised by the movement, the shifts in the jockey’s weight (to the extent that changing the imaginary whip hand influenced the direction in which the horse was tending to hang) and the other aids that are used in a finish – i.e. kicking, squeezing, possibly shouting. Much of the effect of the whip is psychological.
Maybe we should have a rule that if we keep the whip every jockey has to sign up to agree that every time they hit a horse in the race they have to take one good whack on the behind when they get back to the weighing room. That’d even things up (although the problem with that is a few of them might enjoy it!!)
Please welcome 2011 Champion Jockey… Max Mosely!
I’ve been thinking about the whole whip issue at various times today. I remembered being at Wolves just before Christmas & hearing a jockey absolutely screaming at his mount & I found it quite unsavoury. Far more than any whip incident I’ve seen.
On reflection, I don’t know enough about the mechanics of getting a horse to run to really know whether it’s a good idea or not.
Jim McGrath was bang out of order on the Morning Line though. Was it my imagination or did he come right out & call Big Mac an idiot? And it wasn’t in the manner of ‘banter’, he fairly spat it at him.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.