- This topic has 135 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 10 months ago by
.
- Posts
“It could be a very different sport altogether tactically if use of, or even carrying, a whip is completely banned.”
So what if it is? Jockeys will surely eventually latch on to the fact that horses need to be racing at a faster pace earlier and adapt.
“I made no comment at all on whether or not the nine was a coincidence”. No one said you did. Not every comment on the forum has you as its focus Ian.
It was merely an observation, David.
And apologies, the “you” in your posting was obviously directed at someone else or was a French “vous.”
I’d be interested to see stats on other jurisdictions where the whip has been abolished as Miss Woodford alludes to.
Apparently it’s been quite a pronounced trend in the UK since the latest whip rules were brought in – various jockeys don’t seem to have been quick to adapt thus far.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"‘Quite apart from drawing adverse attention to racing from the wider world, many are now saying Westover might have won had his jockey broken the rules to the extent Hukum’s rider did.’
That’s one of the problems. In racing, as in life, there are those who are prepared to cheat and those who are not. Jockeys and connections are hardly likely to tell us that they’ll deliberately break the rules to win. A total ban on whip use would level that particular playing field.
May as well start planning for it because it’ll happen one day. Doesn’t matter if they hurt less than Ken Dodd’s tickling stick, it’s an argument that will eventually be lost.
Racing certainly needs to be careful to avoid creating negative publicity with whip bans and the like, but allowing unlimited whip use would create a different type of negative attention, regardless of what types of monitoring mechanism were put in place.
I have long wanted to get rid of the whip entirely. The fact that a horse may recover from a horrendous thrashing does not justify it in the slightest (I know nobody is saying that it does!).
The following gives a bit more detail on the Scandinavian experience https://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/in-sweden-a-seamless-transition-whip-less-racing/.
Crowley hasn’t broken the rules for the horse to be DQ
He has broken the rules for a fine and suspension
That’s not cheating, it’s in the rules
The rules are too tough, the rules are too weak. The rules are the rules
Richard Hughes got the rules changed with his one man strike
Banning the whip because a jockey followed the rules enough so his horse kept the race isn’t the whips fault it’s the rules
Its like complaining about VAR when all VAR does is provided a replayGaelic Warrior Gold Cup Winner 2026
There used to be rules about when the death penalty applied in the UK. In the end it was decided that these were irrelevant as the death penalty did not fit in with modern society.
We are on the same path with the whip in horseracing – the rules will end up being irrelevant. We might well be on a similar trajectory with horseracing in general, though I believe this is less of a foregone conclusion if we get rid of the whip.
Riding crops, paddles, cuffs, blindfolds all fit in more with modern society than fences and starting stalls
Gaelic Warrior Gold Cup Winner 2026
I’m rather pleased with how this thread is turning out.
Just a reminder that the original premise was the utter absurdity in a BHA representative saying there was “very little justification” for the use of the whip by Crowley in the closing stages.
Well, the existing (insane) rules allowed him to do what he did and for Hukum to keep the race.
My guess is Crowley and connections considered that ample justification.
Some tremendous responses, my personal favourite being the ever-reasonable Marlingford likening the current situation with the whip to the phasing out of the death penalty.
And that could well be on the money in the long term.
But in the interim, it seems clearer to me every week that the BHA has lost the plot, if they ever had it.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"“Riding crops, paddles, cuffs, blindfolds all fit in more with modern society than fences and starting stalls”
Erm, are we still on the racecourse here Nathan?!
“But in the interim, it seems clearer to me every week that the BHA has lost the plot, if they ever had it.”
On that we can all agree Ian!
We always find common ground eventually, Marlingford!
Regarding Nathan’s latest contribution, one shudders to think what the eventual meme fall out from all this will be in the Lounge.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"“The whip will go eventually, and it can’t come soon enough.”
That will be racing gone. It will just be horse riding left in its place.
Does anyone think the animal rights activists will say “that’s OK, we are happy now?”
I don’t get any joy out of watching a horse get a beating, but I do think the present rules are not suitable.
They are there to appease a vocal minority, and that minority will only be appeased when horse racing is completely banned………….so why appease them?
The BHA should build a solid sport to oppose them and not pussy foot around them because they are vocal on that cesspit of social media.
Today’s whip is not really comparable with yesteryear, which is a good thing, but I believe the present day whip doesn’t hurt a horse, so to me, the whip rule is simply aesthetics.
I play football and I appear to have a lovely large purple bruise on the inside of my knee from last Friday evening. I have no recollection of how I got it.
In the heat of battle, adrenalin pumping, I don’t think a 1200lb horse feels or knows the difference as to whether it is six smacks or twelve from a modern whip. Horse welfare isn’t the issue here, it’s appeasement to people with an agenda to end horse racing.
I see where you are coming from griff11, but think this issue is broader than appeasing a vocal minority.
One of the things that the range of comments on this thread emphasises is that the pressure to get rid of the whip does not come solely from those who wish to ban racing. I am pro-racing, but do not wish to see animals being hit in the name of sport full stop. That’s still the case even if it doesn’t hurt them significantly.
I believe there are plenty of people who are pro-racing or generally indifferent to it who have concerns about the whip. I think these are concerns that can be reasonably addressed, and we should not equate them with the demands of extremists who would never be happy.
“One of the things that the range of comments on this thread emphasises is that the pressure to get rid of the whip does not come solely from those who wish to ban racing.”
You are spot on @Marlingford.
As somebody who has been around horses my whole life, ridden recreationally/ competitively and worked in horseracing, I am not entirely comfortable with the use of a whip on tired horses at the end of a race.
I believe other horseracing jurisdictions, such as France (and Germany?) are gradually reducing the strike limit. So the BHA is hardly an outlier from a regulatory perspective.
You’ll never appease those who are at the most extreme end of being pro-amimal rights, that is true. Nothing less than a total ban on equestrian sport will be enough. They are however a small minority, if a vocal one.
The whip is an issue that I tend to look at from the angle of your average member of the public. I see my opinion as almost worthless.
Why? Ask yourself ‘what is the public’s overall opinion of racing?’ The answer is total and utter indifference. Using the oft cited metric of walking into work and trying to strike up a conversation about racing, I doubt many would have a clue what you were talking about if you go in today and try to discuss Goodwood with them, at best they’d know it’s a race meeting. But equally, you wouldn’t be met with much, if any, hostility either.
Now, let’s ask ourselves, what would that indifferent public say if you asked them ‘should the whip be banned in horse racing?’ and ‘should horse racing be banned?’. I am obviously guessing but I think you’d get rather a lot more ‘yes’ answers to the first question than the second.
Most people are reasonable and do not want to spoil other people’s fun altogether, or of course put many thousands out of jobs. They may however draw the line at causing harm, real or perceived, to animals in order for racing to continue.
Difficult isn’t it? We can’t even come to a consensus amongst ourselves, and we are quite a small group, just like those at the other end.
I make it long odds on that whip use disappear in racing at some point in the next 10-20 years, and long odds against that the sport will be banned in the next 50.
I’m not sure I can even reach a consensus on this in my own head, actually.
Extreme example but, considering Roberto did put up one of the one-off all-time great performances two months after being the vehicle for Piggott’s most brutal ever Derby-winning ride, how can anyone not just emotively acting on the visuals assert with conviction it did the horse any lasting harm?
Ditto The Minstrel who went on to win at The Curragh and Ascot after Epsom.
And that was with a different type of whip.
Clearly, though, many in racing aren’t comfortable with the whip any more and tbh that’s nothing new as the late John McCririck wanted it banned.
And I can see the various arguments for this and have alluded to them.
But endless appeasement feels like the wrong strategy too – it invites more attacks on the game.
In the end, though, what will save racing is the same thing that is now threatening to derail a lot of environmental policy.
Money over morality – and votes.
Banning racing altogether would cause a not insignificant rise in unemployment in a future world where AI may leave society struggling to find jobs for increasing numbers of the population.
In the meantime, this halfway house where you can use more force than a rival, break the rules, but keep the race, is absurd on just about every level you can think of, not least positively inviting bad publicity for the game.
The BHA is at an all-time low.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.