- This topic has 118 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Pinza,
What is the point in the BHA producing a survey that deliberately failed to give the general public’s opinion? It is surely in the BHA’s interests to know their opinion? No point at all in a survey manufactured to tell them what they wanted. Problem with totally random surveys is you might not get a true demographic. This survey has been produced for the BHA to find out what sections of the population think. There is nothing wrong with that.
Does seem as though you’re looking to find fault.
Value Is EverythingAgree about potential bias in Yougov data Pinza – If you ask 2,000 children what they think about Christmas you are likely to get a different answer than if you were to ak 2,000 turkeys. I was just responding to the comments about the sample size really rather than commenting on the validity of the data from the poll.
They are ruining the game, you wont see many better rides all year than Dettori’s on Rewilding yet they saw fit to ban him for 9 days and it was ludicrous that they took no account of how he used his whip at all.
Tim Morris has repeatedly said horses feel no pain from whip use, so what are the whip rules for but when Nick Luck put exactly that question to him today he came out with a wishy washy reply and change of stance that horses suffer no pain as long it’s not used too much.
They’re even being economical with the truth now.Could not disagree with you more Eddie.
The whip does not "hurt" if used in the correct manner. If any instrument is used wrongly it will cause pain. A farrier has many tools that could hurt used irresponsibly or wrongly. Doesn’t mean they should be banned from being used on horses. The whip is an instrument that should have strict rules. Tim Morris made perfect sense to me.The widely held view that the more often a horse is hit makes it run faster is in my opinion wrong. OK they weren’t hard hits, but Frankie did not need to hit Rewilding as many times to get the horse home. It can also have the opposite effect to what’s wanted, with horses becoming unbalanced and faltering. I don’t want to see rat-a-tat-tat actions on the racecourse.
Value Is EverythingHow do you think these changes will impact upon your betting. I have been reviewing some jumps meetings from last year and these rule changes are going to have a big impact on the shape or races, how jockey’s ride and the tactics employed.
As a punter the only logical thing seems to be wait a few months to see what impact this has on results and the way in which I bet. One initial thought is that I might look to concentrate more on laying horses. Would be interesting to see if betting turnover falls further over the coming months as people sit back and analyse the impact of these changes.
- Total Posts 17716
Does seem as though you’re looking to find fault.
I am,
Ginger
. The depressing thing is, one doesn’t need to look too far to find it – whether in the methodology, or the likely repercussions of the report’s accepted conclusions.
- Total Posts 17716
The widely held view that the more often a horse is hit makes it run faster is in my opinion wrong.
You’re in good company. BHA’s report stresses this too:
Speed and use of the whip
1.21
A common misconception is that the main reason jockeys use the whip is simply to make the horse go faster – as the public opinion research conducted by SMG/YouGov (see Chapter Five) shows. The opinion research demonstrates a general lack of understanding amongst the general public with regard to whip use. This is further compounded by the lack of scientific information on the issue.
This is perhaps one of the most astounding paragraphs in the report.
"Misconception…", "lack of understanding…", "lack of scientific information…"
. Yet despite this they’ve pandered to prejudice about the whip and its usage. I’d love to know what the Authorities in Ireland and France are thinking about the BHA’s spineless retreat in the face of ignorance.
They are ruining the game, you wont see many better rides all year than Dettori’s on Rewilding yet they saw fit to ban him for 9 days and it was ludicrous that they took no account of how he used his whip at all.
Tim Morris has repeatedly said horses feel no pain from whip use, so what are the whip rules for but when Nick Luck put exactly that question to him today he came out with a wishy washy reply and change of stance that horses suffer no pain as long it’s not used too much.
They’re even being economical with the truth now.Although I disagree with your overall stance you make a very fair point. How can anyone say that eight hits is acceptable and nine is excessive? Quite clearly it is not possible, any figure is just a fudge – you may as well just stick numbers in a hat and draw one out. The only thing that anyone knows for sure is that a horse feels no pain if it isn’t struck at all.
Difference between 8 and 15 "encouragements", one is acceptable and the other excessive. Obviously the difference between 8 and 9 isn’t so solid a judgement Stilvi. It is not ideal and without a cut off point jockeys can easily make the excuse of not knowing whether another encouragement is allowed or not. With current rules what accounts for acceptable and excessive is a grey area, they weren’t working. Jockeys
need
to know where they stand, so there has to be a cut off point that everyone knows about.
Value Is Everything- Total Posts 17716
The only thing that anyone knows for sure is that a horse feels no pain if it isn’t struck at all.
The horse feels pain whenever it runs through the "pain barrier", against its will, whether or not it is flicked once or twice with a cushioned whip. "Riding out" (i.e. pushing at its neck and booting it in the belly) have much the same effect, or hadn’t you noticed these things going on?
Your argument is the one proposed by anthropomorphic-minded people in order to ban racing, not to ban the whip. I suggest you’ve swallowed the Animal Welfare bait.
Does seem as though you’re looking to find fault.
I am,
Ginger
. The depressing thing is, one doesn’t need to look too far to find it – whether in the methodology, or the likely repercussions of the report’s accepted conclusions.
Fair enough Pinza.
Any set of rules can be picked holes in.I myself am not fully convinced it is going to stop jockeys winning "at (almost) all costs" in Group 1 races. For a stable jockey, he can be pretty sure in the end he’ll get a reward for winning. Even if it is a gradual thing over time. eg A whole lorry load of presents; one for winning each minor race after minor race in the months afterwards. Though undoubtedly it will be better than today.
I just hope all the threats of what’s going to happen to offending jockeys are followed through.
Also, hope jockeys are threatened with NO WHIPS, if they don’t keep within this new set of rules.
I do however believe we should all give these new rules a chance.
I do believe these changes should be given a chance by everyone.
No doubt in my mind that no jockey will want their "misuse" to lead to no whips. Any jockey will never be forgiven by his pals.
Value Is EverythingI’ve ridden horses for a large part of my life and make no mitake the whip is a very necessary tool without which racing would become a very dangerous sport.
Horses are like people, some are nice, some are downright nasty, some obedient are are simply pig ignorant, lazy good for nothing sods.
So thought of a complete ban is sheer nonsense.
However there has to be rules but I am not so sure number crunching is the way to improve the sport.
There’s a saying between jockeys. If they won’t go for 2 then they won’t go for 10 which is true in a lot of cases but there are plent horses out there who will extract the urine from their pilot given the chance and have a laugh while they are doing it.
These very difficult rides are where these whip laws fall down in my opinion. They are not hard to spot and even the worst armchair judge could spot them
Stewards used to be employed to make judgement and decide on what they saw. Now they have to judge by numbers and that must be wrong.
Even if they said any jockey who hits a horse more than X amount of times
may
be banned if the Stewards deem it as having been uncalled for that would be something.
To say if you hit a horse x amount you
will
be banned is like saying the Stewards don’t have the ability to make judgements.
I can just imagine Keiren Fallon being a 100 yds from the winning post in a group 1 and his whip quota being up. A win could mean $millions to connection and @thousands to him but KF being the gentleman he is would keep his whip firmly tucked under his knee.
Is this really the best the BHA can come up with. If we had better trained, well paid stewards who could spot abuse when they see it there would be no need for this new rule.
Would you ban Spencer for his winning ride on Cape Blanco last Saturday?He gave as many slaps as necessary to win.
- Total Posts 17716
Would you ban Spencer for his winning ride on Cape Blanco last Saturday?He gave as many slaps as necessary to win.
Certainly not. Well within USA, French or Irish guidelines on whip usage – and, as you know, I am convinced that the adult attitude of these countries to the question, and to the professionals involved, shows infinitely more wisdom and maturity than the kindergarten-appeasement mentality adopted in the self-defeating, illogical and unscientific BHA rules.
Presumably the jockeys voicing concerns about the new whip rules simply don’t realise that the BHA have ignored considerable pressure to even allow them to carry on hitting horses.
If the likes of chief soundpieces, Thornton and Moore, find the rules so upsetting then they have the option of doing something else.
Read the piece in today’s Post but when Moore starts talking about punter’s interests you have to wonder if it is April Fool’s Day.
The BHA must have been pleased to hear the initial reaction of McCoy and Dettori, I wonder what they are thinking now?
- Total Posts 17716
Presumably the jockeys voicing concerns about the new whip rules simply don’t realise that the BHA have ignored considerable pressure to even allow them to carry on hitting horses.
They "realise" that the BHA has ignored professional opinion within the sport in favour of appeasing the 45% of the population who don’t give a cuss about Racing (survey says) and who are completely ignorant about the whip (survey says). What’s more, they are prepared to be honest about the disastrous effect of the nonsensical, illogical new rules.
If the likes of chief soundpieces, Thornton and Moore, find the rules so upsetting then they have the option of doing something else.
Why should our top jockeys "do something else" with their lives, because of a unilateral rule change which goes clean against what the civilised racing nations in France, Ireland, Hong Kong et. al. would be prepared to tolerate. Indeed, many top jockeys will now think hard about going abroad to make their careers.
Read the piece in today’s Post but when Moore starts talking about punter’s interests you have to wonder if it is April Fool’s Day.
April Fools Day happened on the 27th September, when these unscientific and arbitrary new rules were introduced. The rest of the civilised Racing world is laughing at the BHA, and I’m glad a jockey of Mr Moore’s intelligence and integrity has stood up to be counted. He is voicing what
all
his colleagues think, whatever they might say in public.
The BHA must have been pleased to hear the initial reaction of McCoy and Dettori, I wonder what they are thinking now?
I hope they are thinking they’ve made a terrible mistake, in ignoring professional and scientific advice in favour of kow-towing to the ignorance and prejudice of an uninterested populace. Roy et. al. should resign, and leave wiser heads to revoke the changes swiftly before any more damage is done.
Presumably the jockeys voicing concerns about the new whip rules simply don’t realise that the BHA have ignored considerable pressure to even allow them to carry on hitting horses.
Either that or they didn’t bother to attend any of the jockey seminars that certainly took place immediately before the new rules went public (or else did attend, but deigned not to take any of the message on board).
I can’t remember which of the northern jockeys alluded to the existence of these briefings when asked for a quote the other week (it may have been Richie McGrath – I’ll check the press cuttings I kept later), but his comment echoed yours almost word for word, i.e. that the BHA speaker let the attendees know in no uncertain terms that they had come within a whisker of losing use of the whip outright.
Message to messrs Thornton and Moore – for better or for worse,
this is actually happening
.
Should it interest, and because I don’t think I’ve seen it linked to on here up until now, note that it is also the intention for Point-to-Point riders to tow the same line regarding whip use from the forthcoming season;
http://www.pointtopoint.co.uk/go/news/whip_regs_2012.html
More details should follow from that source in the coming weeks. That commonality of practice between the codes seems to be in the best interests of any Pointing riders that gain rides around Rules circuits as 2012 progresses, either in hunter chases or – in some cases – upon turning conditional. I can also think of one or two particularly notorious thrashers in the Pointing sphere who are going to have rather more to worry about hereafter than the two aforementioned professionals!
gc
Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
Fair enough Pinza.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.