- This topic has 18 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 4 months ago by
.
- Posts
Another race where a horse ploughs through a fence. No one wants to see horses fall but should they be able to take a fence by the roots and not lose too much ground, like Touch Me Not did in the Henry VIII?
The game is meant to be about jumping! But it looks like fences are being made softer on most tracks now, including on Grade 1 tracks like Sandown.
Just watched Touch Me Not in slow motion the horse took off far too early and his entire being ploughed through the fence but it didn’t really slow him down,
The more I know the less I understand.
It’s pathetic really, proficiency at jumping is no longer essential. Just adds to the decline of the sport as interest will gradually decline.
The BHA has a stated aim to reduce the number of fallers. Making the fences softer, smaller, easier to jump and omitting them at every opportunity is certainly working.
....and you've got to look a long way back for anything else.
In a word
Yes
Some of the mistakes you see especially around Cheltenham, horses just couldn’t make those a few years back and still be standing.
The order has clearly gone out behind closed doors to soften all the fences up,especially in front the stands.
After starting this thread, I suppose it was inevitable there would be two fallers in the Tingle Creek!
But the point still stands. The sort of mistakes made by Touch Me Not are seen quite often now. Jonbon himself made one in the Clarence House at Cheltenham and almost won.
The game is meant to be about jumping. If a horse hits a fence as hard as Touch Me Not did, does he deserve to get away with it? At the very least his chance should be severely compromised.
It looks like the racing authorities have softened fences because they now believe even the concept of a faller is problematic.
I’ve walked the course at Kelso many times over the past 15 years and they haven’t varied much in stiffness over htat time. I give them a good push and prod when I can just to check. There was one occasion at the start of the season after Brian Meikle’s illness when the new head groundsman built the fences way softer than usual for the first meeting of autumn, but stiffness had returned by the next meeting.
It’s been happening for years, think there could be a secret competition between the courses to see who can have the lowest percentage of fallers.
No better example than those upturned dandy brushes that they claim to be National fences at Aintree.I agree with your overall point cork but wouldn’t necessarily say that Touch me not’s chance wasn’t compromised by the mistake.
It knocked the wind out his sails pretty clearly if you ask me.
I think he was extremely fortunate that both of his front hoofs actually went through the fence itself instead of being tucked up underneath him (also because he took off so far from the fence his backend didn’t ever get above the height of the fence which would have tipped him over for sure).
If it hadn’t of been for that bit of luck, the sudden stop in his forward momentum would have likely meant that his backend would have come up well above the fence and he most likely would have landed on his head or neck or even somersaulted completely over and I dread to think of what the outcome of that would have been.
I think it is plainly obvious that fences are now being made to where bigger liberties can be taken with them and I always felt it was unfair to horses to where there is seemingly such a discrepancy in the stiffness of fences from course to course.
A horse may start out novice chasing at a lower level track(s) and end up learning bad habits because the fences are easier/more forgiving and then when they do end up at a bigger graded track where there is more stiffness in the fences they often get found out and hit the deck because they take the exact same liberty with the stiffer fences.
A lot of the time it can be just how the mistake is actually made that can determine whether the horse falls or not as Edwardstone proved in the Tingle Creek, he didn’t make much of an actual jumping mistake but simply wasn’t able to get his front legs (that were tucked under him as the correct jumping technique would require) down and under him quick enough on landing.
A horse may start out novice chasing at a lower level track(s) and end up learning bad habits because the fences are easier/more forgiving and then when they do end up at a bigger graded track where there is more stiffness in the fences they often get found out and hit the deck because they take the exact same liberty with the stiffer fences
Which is more or less what Gordon Richards said when explaining his liking for (old) Haydock as a venue for his novice chasers: teach them to jump over stiff fences and they’ll learn not to take liberties at any fence, soft or stiff
I don’t like seeing horses fall but nor do I enjoy seeing them getting away with poor jumps by ploughing through ‘dandy brushes’. It diminishes the noble art of steeplechasing
Are there any stats to confirm that the percentage of falls has decreased in tandem with the general softening of fences?
This may be of interest. Admittedly it is for the period 2010 to 2020 and how it contrasts with 2016 to 2020. Giving an idea of how some courses changed, some made easier to jump and some – at least at first glance – made “harder”.
Value Is Everything“I’ve walked the course at Kelso many times over the past 15 years and they haven’t varied much in stiffness over htat time. I give them a good push and prod when I can just to check. There was one occasion at the start of the season after Brian Meikle’s illness when the new head groundsman built the fences way softer than usual for the first meeting of autumn, but stiffness had returned by the next meeting.”
5 meetings at Kelso so far this season and a total of 105 runners over fences, of which a total of 2 have fallen/unseated which is just a bit under 2% and way below anything in the tables provided by Gingertipster. Although of course the tables will now be out of date but either the horses are getting better at jumping or the fences are getting softer. I saw horses earlier in the season at Kelso just ploughing through the fences and still winning unhindered.
“I don’t like seeing horses fall but nor do I enjoy seeing them getting away with poor jumps by ploughing through ‘dandy brushes’. It diminishes the noble art of steeplechasing”
—————-I totally agree it “diminishes the noble art of steeplechasing”… and “I don’t like seeing horses fall” either. Trouble is Drone, doesn’t it have to be one thing or the other?
And worse still, I don’t like the greater number of injuries and fatalities resulting from those falls.Therefore, I am personally for the changes that have been made to make fences easier if it means fewer injuries and fatalities – even if it diminishes the noble art of steeplechasing a little.
However, tbh in this particular race I don’t think Touch Me Not diminished it at all. At least in the context of the whole race. Had actually made ground at the vast majority of Sandown’s fences. A lot better than the third Down Memory Lane who did not jump fluently at all. When adding the ground up he’d made at all those other fences, minus the amount he lost at the one obstacle, it would still be a result in the positive for Touch Me Not. So imo he deserved to be second.
“Jumping well” may not quite be the asset it once was, but is still something I take a lot of notice of when choosing who to bet. It’s just that “safe jumping” is not necessarily jumping well anymore. It’s more about being fast and / or accurate. Jumping through the top (or at least not giving the fence too much gap) is what’s needed.
Value Is EverythingI totally agree it “diminishes the noble art of steeplechasing”… and “I don’t like seeing horses fall” either. Trouble is Drone, doesn’t it have to be one thing or the other?
Indeed, I’m quite aware that those are contradictory statements
NH Racing is a pact with the devil: love it/hate it/love it/hate it…with the love always triumphant
Hypocritical or what?
I’ve had a wee google and this article makes it clear that falls, fatalities and injuries have shown a steady decline over the last 20 years or so
The Jump Racing table doesn’t differentiate between hurdles and chases but as the former obstacles have remained – as far as I’m aware – much as they’ve always been, the decline must largely be due to the softening of fences. Improved veterinary care might play a part and possibly better schooling, though IMO the latter is dubious
Guess I’ll have to get used to the sight of chasers with questionable jumping techniques crash, bang, walloping but emerging upright
As you say Ginger, it’s a small price to pay for my enjoyment
It’s impossible to find numbers for the fatality rate of timber racing (and the small sample size would be a confounding factor) but the rate doesn’t seem to be that much worse than UK brush fences? Wooden rails will fall if hit hard enough (they have frangible pins like cross-country eventing jumps) but they aren’t exactly soft.
In the 1.35 at Wetherby, The Four Sixes jumped low and brushed through the top of a few fences. He eventually took one chance too many, barely took off and unseated his rider down the back straight.
I doubt he would have got away with so many mistakes with the old Wetherby fences from the track’s heyday. The mistake which caused the unseat would have seen him do a somersault back in those days.
No one wants to see that: but maybe he would have treated those fences with a bit more respect and realised he had to try to jump them instead of brushing through them?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.