- This topic has 39 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Personally, I’m very sanguine about our set-up re horses running on their merits (drugs, that’s another matter all together), which is not to say that I’m not incandescent when ‘my’ horse is guided by his jockey into a pocket, as often happens on the flat.
But I see it as ‘kind of necessary’, since horses tend necessarily to be aimed to follow some sort of programme. I might profit from noticing it, in his next race or some later one.
Put it another way: How do Olympic athletes train? At every meeting, the athlete has to be in peak condition? I don’t think so.
Personally, I’m very sanguine about our set-up re horses running on their merits (drugs, that’s another matter all together), which is not to say that I’m not incandescent when ‘my’ horse is guided by his jockey into a pocket, as often happens on the flat.
But I see it as ‘kind of necessary’, since horses tend necessarily to be aimed to follow some sort of programme. I might profit from noticing it, in his next race or some later one.
Put it another way: How do Olympic athletes train? At every meeting, the athlete has to be in peak condition? I don’t think so.
Athletics is hugely different in that participants do not have to race on their merits. They are also not running for the main purpose of betting. They also fully control their own actions during a race.
For horse racing, BHA make the rule and the OP is highlighting that BHA do not enforce their own rules. Other countries with similar rules do enforce them and very strictly. It can be done, but isn’t, is the issue.
Aiming horses to be schooled in public for some far off target is against BHA rules (not that they take any notice). If the horse has G1 potential, say, then it should be fit enough to win its trial races in weaker company and fit enough not to injure itself in the process.
Stewards only have to look at the form book for its past races and compare with today’s "surprise" win in a top class field to have proof that the horse has been schooled in public. As others have pointed out, the fitness of a horse can be scientifically proved at entry stage by modern training methods. All that data can be passed over at entry stage.
Expecting horses to bit 100% fit for every race is not only naive but arguably unreasonable.
Grimes made a very good analogy to comparable human athletes. They follow a structured campaign where they aim to peak at certain big events.
I think people are forgetting the sheer physical demands of the training required to get horses to the racecourse. The amount of work it takes to get them 100% fit is not something that you can maintain for 6 months of the year. Thoroughbreds are fragile creatures and care needs to be taken to not over stress their limbs through long periods of high intensity training.
I have experience of getting a horse fit for three day eventing. The season runs for 6 months of the year. You come out at the first few one day events and the horse definitely "needs the run" and comes on for it fitness-wise. My horse definitely benefits from a couple of runs back-to-back (ie. consecutive weekends) but then I would back off and do lighter work before building up for the next one.
Usually I have one big target for the season, a three day event. These involve a 10 minute cross country course (often up hills) at a fast gallop and the horse has to be as fit as a racehorse to be able to do it. The level of fitness required for the three day event is far higher than for general one days. Therefore I would increase the fitness routine to 2x weekly interval and hill work for the month before the three day event to get to absolute peak fitness.
I would never consider maintaining the increased three day training for the entire 6 month season. This would placed heightened strain on the horse and increase the risk of injury and concussion. In addition, if you overwork a horse for a long period of time they actually perform worse because they burn out. Equine athletes like their human counterparts need to be built up to high intensity work and then have periods of lower intensity work.
So really the rule that some are suggesting, that horses should be 100% every time out is completely infeasible and unfair on the horses.
Personally, I’m very sanguine about our set-up re horses running on their merits (drugs, that’s another matter all together), which is not to say that I’m not incandescent when ‘my’ horse is guided by his jockey into a pocket, as often happens on the flat.
But I see it as ‘kind of necessary’, since horses tend necessarily to be aimed to follow some sort of programme. I might profit from noticing it, in his next race or some later one.
Put it another way: How do Olympic athletes train? At every meeting, the athlete has to be in peak condition? I don’t think so.
Athletics is hugely different in that participants do not have to race on their merits. They are also not running for the main purpose of betting. They also fully control their own actions during a race.
For horse racing, BHA make the rule and the OP is highlighting that BHA do not enforce their own rules. Other countries with similar rules do enforce them and very strictly. It can be done, but isn’t, is the issue.
Aiming horses to be schooled in public for some far off target is against BHA rules (not that they take any notice). If the horse has G1 potential, say, then it should be fit enough to win its trial races in weaker company and fit enough not to injure itself in the process.
Stewards only have to look at the form book for its past races and compare with today’s "surprise" win in a top class field to have proof that the horse has been schooled in public. As others have pointed out, the fitness of a horse can be scientifically proved at entry stage by modern training methods. All that data can be passed over at entry stage.
It can never be an exact science in a million years, Robert. Most of the time trainers don’t overdo it, as they know they’ll cop it. It’s also no doubt why they try to get it out to the public that their horse ‘might not yet be at his peak.’
And yes, you can argue that the rules are already laid down and that’s what counts – which seems to me to be the current situation, given the imponderables which would make it extremely problematic to punish trainers of horses adjudged to be not at the top of heir form.
Expecting horses to bit 100% fit for every race is not only naive but arguably unreasonable.
Grimes made a very good analogy to comparable human athletes. They follow a structured campaign where they aim to peak at certain big events.
I think people are forgetting the sheer physical demands of the training required to get horses to the racecourse. The amount of work it takes to get them 100% fit is not something that you can maintain for 6 months of the year. Thoroughbreds are fragile creatures and care needs to be taken to not over stress their limbs through long periods of high intensity training.
I have experience of getting a horse fit for three day eventing. The season runs for 6 months of the year. You come out at the first few one day events and the horse definitely "needs the run" and comes on for it fitness-wise. My horse definitely benefits from a couple of runs back-to-back (ie. consecutive weekends) but then I would back off and do lighter work before building up for the next one.
Usually I have one big target for the season, a three day event. These involve a 10 minute cross country course (often up hills) at a fast gallop and the horse has to be as fit as a racehorse to be able to do it. The level of fitness required for the three day event is far higher than for general one days. Therefore I would increase the fitness routine to 2x weekly interval and hill work for the month before the three day event to get to absolute peak fitness.
I would never consider maintaining the increased three day training for the entire 6 month season. This would placed heightened strain on the horse and increase the risk of injury and concussion. In addition, if you overwork a horse for a long period of time they actually perform worse because they burn out. Equine athletes like their human counterparts need to be built up to high intensity work and then have periods of lower intensity work.
So really the rule that some are suggesting, that horses should be 100% every time out is completely infeasible and unfair on the horses.
That’s interesting, Admiralofthefleet, as I’ve sensed that, particularly after an arduous season, many horses are given a kind of ‘fallow’ year, in which they routinely underperform in the few races they run in. Sometimes, no doubt, to prevent souring them psychologically, if it’s obvious they’ve had enough for a while.
Maybe the solution is for the horses to be weighed within say 3 days of racing and this weight would be included on the racecards together with the fully fit weight of the horse, to prevent cheating all horses would be weighed at the racecourse on the day of racing and any major deviances from the weight on the card would be relayed to the punters
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.