- This topic has 70 replies, 31 voices, and was last updated 1 month, 1 week ago by
.
- Posts
I wonder if the reason Windsor is going ‘squashed oval’ instead of a figure-8 is because of potential low sun problems. I believe the new configuration means that the runners will not be running South West into the direction of the setting sun. As for the stands’ bend, it’s about the same radius as the far bend at Taunton and I don’t know of any objections to that.
Water jumps? I would happily see the back of them. Many have removed them and some now have a low fence with a mat behind it and I don’t think they add anything to jump races.
Based on the racecourse maps in the RTV app, it looks like most National Hunt courses have already removed their water jumps. It used to be mandatory to have one but I believe that requirement ceased in the early 1990s.
The courses without a water jump are:
22: Bangor On Dee, Carlisle, Catterick, Chepstow, Fakenham, Ffos Las, Fontwell, Haydock, Kelso, Kempton, Lingfield*, Market Rasen, Musselburgh, Newcastle, Plumpton, Sedgefield, Southwell, Taunton, Uttoxeter, Warwick, Wetherby, Worcester.
Courses which retain a water jump:
18: Aintree (on the Grand National course), Ascot, Cartmel, Cheltenham, Doncaster, Exeter, Hereford, Hexham, Huntingdon, Leicester, Ludlow, Newbury, Newton Abbot, Perth, Sandown, Stratford, Wincanton, Windsor.
Of those 18, only 5 are in front of the stands to provide a “spectacle”:
Aintree, Ludlow, Newbury, Perth and Stratford.
Hexham’s water jump is in the home straight but not really in front of the stands.
Given most tracks have got rid of their water jumps, it is time the rest followed suit. Especially those courses with water jumps out in the country.
*There was no course map for Lingfield, so I have assumed it has no water jump. I cannot recall seeing one.
Lingfield and Ayr removed their water jumps in the late 80s, while Hereford also removed theirs a few years back. Aintree’s is now only used as part of the Grand National course.
Stratford removed then reinstated their water jump as the straight was too short for 2 fences before the winning line.
Don’t waste your time looking at online racecourse maps.
Ascot replaced their water jump with a plain fence years ago.
Doncaster no longer has any water in it, so not a water jump.
Huntingdon has blue astroturf, so not a water jump.
Newton Abbot removed the water years ago, it’s just a smaller fence.
Sandown has no water in it anymore, so not a water jump.
Stratford just has painted blue earth, so not a water jump.
Wincanton doesn’t have any water in it either these days.Will be interesting to see if Windsor’s actually has any water, if it doesn’t what’s the point?
I imagine the figure of 8 concept was refused due to safety concerns. It would be too easy for any loose horse to run in the opposite direction to the field and meet head-on.
....and you've got to look a long way back for anything else.
I’d be in favour of a ban, but what would be the alternative at racecourses with a water jump in front of the stands? Like Newbury and Aintree. Would a normal plain fence ok?
…And if a ban on water jumps then what about open ditches?
How many injuries occur (per jump) at open ditches compared to water jumps?Value Is EverythingWhat was going through people’s minds when they removed the water and replaced it with blue AstroTurf or blue painted soil?
The more I know the less I understand.
” imagine the figure of 8 concept was refused due to safety concerns. It would be too easy for any loose horse to run in the opposite direction to the field and meet head-on”.
—————–I can remember a similar thing happening at Fontwell in March 2009, esp.
I was there and had backed a horse called Myson, he was cruising over 3 out and I was just about to shout those immortal words…
“Go on My Son”!
When a loose horse came at right angles and knocked the jockey off.It may be worse at Windsor though if the sun is in their eyes.
Value Is EverythingAnnoyingly hard to find which courses in the US have water jumps. I know that the Maryland Hunt Cup’s water jump is over an actual creek. The horses are already used to seeing such things from foxhunting or at least hacking in the offseason so it doesn’t seem to take any by surprise.
The cross-country (excuse me, “Steeplethon”) course at Great Meadow is known for its “Swan Lake” water feature that is a popular subject of photographs. It’s not really a jump as the horses just run through the 120-foot-long infield pond.
And it has a “normal” water jump also
“I can remember a similar thing happening at Fontwell in March 2009”
It was in fact 2005, here’s the painful memory one more time: https://youtu.be/ERagf3VOKco
....and you've got to look a long way back for anything else.
Would entirely agree with the above, water jumps are not dangerous, especially as their width was drastically reduced many years ago.
We will of course get the usual knee jerk reactions of “ban it” when an unfortunate incident occurs, but without sound evidence and facts to back them up, they should not be given serious consideration.
Personally, I would not mind mind whether water jumps remain or not as, since their reduction, they are no longer a test. However, if courses are going to retain them, they should actually be water jumps, not these pathetic imitation water jumps with blue astroturf/matting or painted surface on the landing side.
As the 2017 article states Sandown did retain theirs. However, a couple of years ago ITV reported at one of the meetings that Sandown had considered the options and (unfortunately) went for the fake no-water choice.
In my opinion, if real water jumps are removed, they should be replaced by a full size plain fence, as Ascot, Bangor, Chepstow, Fakenham and others did many years ago.
On a related point, as fences have been constructed and re-modelled to be easier to jump, the BHA should at least force courses to maintain the number of obstacles per circuit.
Over the years it has been particularly disappointing to see obstacles permanently removed at courses such as Market Rasen, Taunton, Worcester and more recently Newcastle and Sedgefield.
....and you've got to look a long way back for anything else.
I think Newcastle took out the fence away from the stands because it was the one obstacle on the course affected by low sun.
It was regrettable when Sedgefield took out the fence before the home straight. I think that has had a negative effect on the course.
Aside from the safety aspect, my issue with water jumps is horses are in effect penalised for a mistake after they have cleared the fence. I think that is unfair. It also looks ugly.
If a horse falls at a conventional fence or ditch as a result of not jumping the fence cleanly, that is part and parcel of the game. But hitting their legs on the edge of something after the fence has been jumped cleanly doesn’t seem right somehow.
“I think Newcastle took out the fence away from the stands because it was the one obstacle on the course affected by low sun.”
That is not a valid reason for permanently removing an obstacle.
Is it sunny at every Newcastle NH meeting? – Clearly not.
By that logic Aintree should remove all their fences in the home straight on the Mildmay course.
....and you've got to look a long way back for anything else.
I didn’t say it was but I doubt it is a coincidence that the one fence which has been removed is the only fence on the course ever affected by low sun.
No, the comment was directed at the weak authorities that allowed it to happen.
Fully aware it was removed for this reason, the same reason the other fence that used to be located on that stretch of track was moved to the back straight several years ago.
....and you've got to look a long way back for anything else.
That brought back memories. Maybe Myson winning wasn’t as much of a foregone conclusion as I thought. I was watching it with Binns almost head on at the time. Did win his next race off the same mark by 7 lengths though – without my money on him. Good also to see an old favourite of mine, the Fontwell specialist Walcot Lad.
Thanks esp.
Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.