- This topic has 110 replies, 41 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
I’m sorry to strike a discordant note here.
Alan, and others, do you really want to see the Old Course emasculated? The second-last fence, IMO, is the epitome of what Cheltenham is all about. The fence has been signicantly modified in recent years, as Simon Claisse has said, and now is actually an uphill fence. If you want to see Cheltenham retain its position as the home of the "equine Olympics", then you must accept some unique challenges for horses and jockeys alike. And the second-last on the Old Course, without question, provides such a challenge.
I think the comments of AP McCoy, Philip Hobbs and Nicky Henderson provide some thankful perspective.
I am astounded that you think that this fence is the epitome of what Cheltenham is all about. Cheltenham is not the home of the equine olympics because of one fence and I don’t believe for one minute that racegoers will stop flocking to Cheltenham if the second last fence was removed or repositioned. I realise that the fence is uphill but the statistics quoted on this thread show that this fence has become a real problem and is now dangerous imo ( probably because of the change in the style of racing as mentioned by Venusuan). The welfare of the horses and jockeys comes first and we can provide fair tests for horses and jockeys without this type of fence.
I’ll be more than happy to see the old course change if it means better and fairer racing and AP’s suggestion to change the courses does not mean that the old course will be emasculated.To quote P Brennan
“What happened on Saturday is not good for racing, for jockeys, for horses or for the public.
The sooner people take those wise words on board the better and if this means altering a course configuration, be it Cheltenham or any other race course, then so be it.
If it saves one horse from injury, it is worth it, if it saves one jockey a broken bone , it is worth it, if it brings in more newbies to the sport, it is worth it
Yes SwallowCottage, I’ll say it again. To the vast majority of racegoers, the downhill fences and hurdles are what makes Cheltenham Cheltenham.
I attach much more weight to the measured responses of McCoy, Hobbs and Henderson than the often knee-jerk reactions that I read on this and other internet forums.
I attach more to what i think than what someone else thinks, be it trainer, jockey, CoC or course inspector
And that includes PJ Brennan, who I know and like, but would never consider his responses as measured.
I wouldn’t state the fence was the ‘epitome’ of Cheltenham, but I understand the area you are coming from. When the horses are hurtling down to that second last at Cheltenham, I must say I have a rush of excitement; who knows what’s going to happen.
However, the problem occurs when the statistics show a disproportionate number of horses are falling there resulting in fatalities. It’s certainly detrimental to the image horse racing presents to the public and I would therefore have to agree some alteration needs to occur to prevent such a disproportionate amount of fallers.
Yes SwallowCottage, I’ll say it again. To the vast majority of racegoers, the downhill fences and hurdles are what makes Cheltenham Cheltenham.
You’re entitled to your opinion highflyer but I think this is absolute rubbish.
Why do you think that this fence is the epitome of what Cheltenham is all about? Is it because the horses make mistakes or fall or slip? There is nothing knee-jerk about this situation as it has been causing concern for a while and the problem needs to be sorted out. It gives ammunition to the animal rights organisations etc who want National Hunt racing banned. If we don’t give priority to the welfare of the horse then we are causing our own problems.
I saw the human side of "the fall" tonight as Ruby Walsh was going up the steps of the plane back to Dublin in front of me. He was obviously in considerable discomfort with his arm in a sling and was having a job on negotiating the steps. He’s so thin it’s scary and his face was a pale shade of grey. What these guys go through for glory and for our entertainment is unbelievable. I’m totally with Alan on this one- let’s hope the campaign gets some legs.
Regarding Latalomne in the QM, it wasn’t just Latalomne. Seebald came down in identical fashion alongside Latalomne.
Regarding it not being a downhill, that is just double speak. No, the take-off isn’t on a downhill, but the approach to the fence is downhill for a whole furlong or so. Leveling off the landing doesn’t mean that the field are not approaching the fence like bats out of hell!
It’s at the foot of a hill.I’m sorry to strike a discordant note here.
Alan, and others, do you really want to see the Old Course emasculated? The second-last fence, IMO, is the epitome of what Cheltenham is all about. The fence has been signicantly modified in recent years, as Simon Claisse has said, and now is actually an uphill fence. If you want to see Cheltenham retain its position as the home of the "equine Olympics", then you must accept some unique challenges for horses and jockeys alike. And the second-last on the Old Course, without question, provides such a challenge.
I think the comments of AP McCoy, Philip Hobbs and Nicky Henderson provide some thankful perspective.
I fully agree with highflyer 1 and AP McCoy, the fences are key parts of the races at Cheltenham and should be kept as they are. Without them you may as well stop the race at the second or third last and give the race to the horse travelling best.
I look forward to Simon Claisse taking control of the Winter Olympics, when he’ll be able to sell the idea of uphill ski-ing, uphill toboggan racing and uphill ski jumping.
To deal with some of the more serious points raised – I am not suggesting we ’emasculate’ the Old Course, but eliminate it and use the New Course instead. Since that is the one used for the Gold Cup, presumably it equally qualifies as a proper test, a spectacle, or whatever other phrase you wish to employ to describe Cheltenham.
There have been repeated references to fallers, but my main point is that this fence is not just producing a disproportionate number of fallers, but also too many horses are put out of the race without falling – some by sprawling on landing, others brought down or hampered.
I would refute the idea that any fence on any course should be designed or intended to produce fallers – that is surely not the purpose of steeplechasing. The winner should be the horse that jumps the most fluently and cleanly throughout the race, but this problem fence sometimes penalises horses that jump it well. If there was no alternative to the Old Course, then I would only support further work to reduce the problems with this fence – but there is an alternative and it’s one that is already considered good enough to stage the majority of chases run at Cheltenham.
The Gold Cup, Ryanair, Grand Annual, Foxhunters, Racing Post Plate, Kim Muir and the Jewsons Novice are held on the New Course, along with several valuable 2M 5F handicap and the Cotswold (PIllar) Chase. Have those races been ’emasculated’ by not being held on the Old Course?
AP
Clearly, the majority appear to want to make this fence safer, be it by changing course or omitting it altogether.
As most have pointed out, the attrition rate at the 2nd last is unacceptable. This fence comes at a point in the race where runners are jostling for position to make their final run for home, so taking a pull is not going to be a priority. If changing the course is not a viable option, I don’t think omitting it is either, since, as others have stated, there will be too long a run without jumping a fence. If it were left up to me, I would replace the current fence with a smaller one, similar to a French style hurdle. This way the best jumpers will be at an advantage if they ‘wing’ it, and since they will be able to jump it flatter, are less likely to topple over as a result.
I know this isn’t an ideal solution for a high class steeplechase but it should reduce the casualties whilst maintaining the spectacle.
- Total Posts 17716
Totally agree, AP.
If any Grand National fence had the same % attrition rate, it would have been altered long ago, spectacle or not.Hats off to Alan if he manages to bring about some changes.
We cannot simply let the carnage continue.However you may note that the Nicky Henderson horses rarely fall at this obstacle.
When I went to the very first Lambourn open day Nick Henderson’s head lad was showing visitors some of the obstacles Mr Henderson had in one of his fields and he has more or less got the 3rd last and the 2nd last and the final obstacle exactly the same as Cheltenham and he had it designed the second last as an uphill fence.
David Nicholson also built some fences the same as Cheltenham have and they were maintained well so horses got used to actually jumping them rather than brushing through them.
I beleive Jonjo O’ Neil has also followed this idea at Jackdaws Castle.The Nicholls horses did have a very poor record of jumping the second last at Wincanton as well until a few years ago.
On the same subject Barry Hills has a layout in one of his fields with the same configuration as Chester Racecourse so his horses had run around very tight turns at home so maybe that is the clue why his runners always do well there and why Nicky Henderson has few that fall in chases at Cheltenham.
However you may note that the Nicky Henderson horses rarely fall at this obstacle.
When I went to the very first Lambourn open day Nick Henderson’s head lad was showing visitors some of the obstacles Mr Henderson had in one of his fields and he has more or less got the 3rd last and the 2nd last and the final obstacle exactly the same as Cheltenham and he had it designed the second last as an uphill fence.
David Nicholson also built some fences the same as Cheltenham have and they were maintained well so horses got used to actually jumping them rather than brushing through them.
I believe Jonjo O’ Neil has also followed this idea at Jackdaws Castle.A very pertinent point, and having seen some of the contours of Nicholls’ gallops I’d struggle to imagine that he couldn’t concoct something similar at his place.
In fact, if the view is taken that having an uphill gallop is seen as such a prerequisite of any even halfway serious jumps operation nowadays, and that all uphill stretches come with a downhill stretch chucked in at no extra cost (that’s how hills work the last time I checked
), it is surely in all those top trainers’ best interests to have a "Cheltenham downhill" simulation permanently in situ.I’d have to disagree respectfully with Naps’ suggestion of replacing two out with a smaller obstacle, if the maxim of "speed kills" is held to be true. I’d proffer that there are far more terrible accidents at this fence compared to the fence at the bottom of Plumpton’s not insubstantial downhill run. That particular obstacle isn’t especially tricky in and of itself, granted, but even if it were a bit stiffer I would not expect the attrition rate to rise that much, simply due to the near-total lack of animals tanking along at Championship pace at the Sussex venue. Conversely, anything which could permit horses travelling down the whole of Cheltenham’s hill even faster than they already do really runs the risk of inviting yet further high-speed, potentially lethal, spillages.
I don’t think that two out at Cheltenham has become any more of less intrinsically dangerous overnight, any more than, say, the old Bechers Brook had the night before two horses were killed there in the 1989 National. What has changed, however, and continues to change, is the public sensitivity towards what high-profile, conspicuous fatalities do occur at that obstacle. What still needs to change is how connections condition the animals in their care thought good enough to go to Cheltenham to actually cope with anything that Prestbury Park can throw at them. The aforementioned simulation conditions would be a major step towards that. If constructing spruce fences to practice on at home is accepted behaviour for any Grand National aspirant, why shouldn’t other provisions be put in place pertinent to other target contests, merely because they are contests run over conventional fences at park courses?
Jeremy
(graysonscolumn)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.
"However you may note that the Nicky Henderson horses rarely fall at this obstacle."
Looks like Papini has been skipping his lessons then Seagull !
AP
), it is surely in all those top trainers’ best interests to have a "Cheltenham downhill" simulation permanently in situ.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.