- This topic has 45 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
The gurgling is an interesting one, Glenn, we don’t put it in because – as you say – it isn’t possible to verify it by watching a replay.
I would never put anything in the official comment that I didn’t think I was able to verify beyond reasonable doubt. I was alerted to that in my early days as a race-reader when a jockey told me his horse had fallen when quite clearly he had stepped off!
In Zaarmit’s case, to my eyes the incident appeared to occur about 38 seconds into the race and is best viewed frame-by-frame on a high quality monitor, though you can see it in less detail on any TV. The camera is behind the runners, a lump of mud is thrown up, seems to hit Zaarmit and spiral off the left. At that point he goes from travelling enthusiastically to hanging his head to the left, and from then on he’s a goner.
I must admit I wouldn’t have noticed it but for Ryan Moore’s report on the incident. However I was waiting for him to say something because – as I said to my press colleagues in mid-race – something had clearly happened to him around that point. I was expecting Ryan just to reveal that the horse had lost its action, but when the clod explanation came to light I watched it again several times and then several thousand more when I got home!
I can assure all of you that I need to be pretty certain that something has happened before I include it but, as in this case, sometimes you have to work backwards. And, while I concede that my conclusion may be incorrect, I am happy with it.
As for the general feeling on this board that Zaarmit’s poor run may have been due to something other that the clod of earth, that may well be the case. But as Glenn correctly points out, that isn’t the job of the race-reader.
Fair enough Lee, and a good response. The reason I was questioning it is that I got the impression from your initial posts that you didn’t see the incident occur and put it in the comment solely because of what the rider reported afterwards.
Think yourself lucky that you are able to refer to monitors and video recordings to compile your comments. Us poor (insane?) Point-to-Point race-readers aren’t afforded that luxury!!
Looking back HJ, I took a few short cuts in my early posts on this subject because I wasn’t expecting it to take off quite as it did! I admit I didn’t see any clods "live", and the press room TV – while indicating that something had happened – didn’t make it absolutely clear, which is why I studied it more closely when I got home, in time to change the comment if I wasn’t happy with submitting it.
I had to do a similar back-to-front comment for Like For Like in the 2.30 at Brighton the following day, when the horse wandered badly right-handed in the last 150 yards. After Richard Hughes reported that the bit had slipped, replays showed that it had in fact gone very early in the race, so it was a remarkable (and unheralded) ride to get him round that tricky course for so long.
I don’t envy you the job of doing the point-to-point comments without replays HJ – reminds me of my early days with Raceform when we had to do up to 30 runners on one viewing. But do watch out for those clods of earth now they are coming into fashion!
I had to do a similar back-to-front comment for Like For Like in the 2.30 at Brighton the following day, when the horse wandered badly right-handed in the last 150 yards. After Richard Hughes reported that the bit had slipped, replays showed that it had in fact gone very early in the race, so it was a remarkable (and unheralded) ride to get him round that tricky course for so long.
That is something like the second race at Warwick on Friday.
On first impression Luck Redback’s run looked very ugly and nothing like a 1/5 shot should. In the closing stages he spent more time watching the planes on final approach into Birmingham raher than the course.
It was only when the replay was seen that it became apparent he had slipped his bit – which fully explains the very high head carriage.
I have a marked preference for the more descriptive style. That’s partly precisely because it aids the visualising process for me, and partly because it’s just a lot more entertaining to read!
To that end, two days on from Zaarmit’s clod of earth, we got the following write-up of the appalling Redd Ragusa – 59-rated hurdler and full-time mentalist – at Uttoxeter;
“Very reluctant to go down, eventually set off with trainer running behind her for 3f to start, pulled hard, prominent 3rd until 5th, soon hopelessly tailed off”
That tells me all I need to know – the mare hates the job in hand (she’s been at least as reluctant once before, I subsequently read) and races too unkindly in the early fractions to give herself ultimately any sort of chance. The “prominent to 5th, soon tailed off” of yore just doesn’t go far enough in comparison.
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.
The one thing it doesn’t actually tell you is that the mare was reluctant in the race itself, however…
Can anyone remember the name of the horse who in some big race a few years ago was reported to have "swallowed a clod of earth and nearly choked"?
lee. i read the form book.(RACEFORM) like i read a crime thriller.want to know all about the horse .that i’m interested in.even if it say’s that the jock was falling asleep
Thanks for all your comments – will pass them on. It seems you like a bit more detail these days.
You will notice a huge difference between the current format and any Raceform annual from the 60s or 70s, before replays were available. Then, "nd" (never dangerous) and "mns" (made no show) were very popular comments.
Remembering my early days, there should have been another one – "ntr" (never troubled race-reader)!
Maybe you would like to invent a few others never previously used…
A favourite of the point-to-pointing annual’s race-readers is "rfo", for "rider fell off". There are instances where "ur" for "unseated rider" just doesn’t convey the right idea.
I got a few uses out of that this last season, mostly in PPORA or CA novice riders’ races. The intention – mine at least, anyway – is far less to humiliate the rider with this acronym and far more to exonerate the horse if he and rider have parted company after just an innocuous mistake, or indeed after no mistake at all.
"Pbi" for "pasted by idiot" would be an apposite one in a few cases between the flags each year, but as yet that hasn’t progressed from the notepad to the printed page. Maybe one day.
"Tde" for "taken down early" is one you don’t tend to see in Rules comments in running half as much as in the amateur equivalent, and I can’t see how it is any less valid to the former as it is to the latter.
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.
The one thing it doesn’t actually tell you is that the mare was reluctant in the race itself, however…
On reflection probably not – I certainly got that inference from the comments on Redd Ragusa’s run on Wednesday as it stood, although that may have been slightly influenced by my knowing from certain of her previous outings she’s frequently a work of evil on four legs.
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.
Jeremy, I think "tde" (taken down early) is a very good one. Will pass it on, keep them coming – humorous and serious alike
Someone suggested "noay" to me (leave it to you to work it out) but we’d never be able to get it in (even if such a thing ever happened!)
Heh-heh, indeed you wouldn’t, Lee!
The place to look for all the point-to-point abbreviations is page 57 of the current Mackenzie & Harris. Should the Post ever want to report the application of headgear and other aids more comprehensively, this volume has all bases covered, including these;
b4 – bandaged all round
bf – bandaged fore
bh – bandaged hind
bnf – bandaged near-fore (bnh, bof and boh in same manner)
h – hood
martin – martingale
orb – over-reach boots
xnb – cross-nosebandAway from such aids, I also like;
lvw – looked very well
oht – on his / her toes
overj – overjumped
svs – started very slowly
wrs – whipped round startJeremy
(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.
"Met trouble in running" – horse ran into trouble when making his run
"found trouble in running" – jockey actively sort a way of being blocked off.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.