- This topic has 46 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 10 months ago by
.
- Posts
Lee Mottershead makes a case for a review of the rules on employing pacemakers and adopting team tactics in UK racing. What do you think, should the rules be changed?
I think the rules should be changed. First of all you can never be quite sure, if the so called pacemakers will be able to make the running at all. If yes, they’d have to find an elegant way to get out of the race (in the closing stages) without impeding anyone else. In a track and field event you can simply run out without interfering with the remainder of the field, which isn’t that easy in horse racing.
The next thing is, why would you ensure a decent gallop for someone else? If a horse can’t win the race on its own and if it can’t cope with the circumstances that might arise during a race, then you shouldn’t run it.
Where does pacemaking start? I mean at which level? Why does it have to be at Group level? Because that particular horse wouldn’t be good enough to win of a slower pace? Well then it’s not a Group horse.Is it all about the money, especially later at stud?
YES, I think it is. Horse racing would be much more interesting if the winner of the Derby would get one pound for prize money…By the way, I’m still upset about Douglas Macarthur being beaten just under 5 lengths after trying to make all in the Derby. The outcome would have been different if allowed to run on his own. Odds of 25/1 didn’t necessarily suggest pacemaking duties.
When were the rules changed to allow pacemakers anyway, or is it that the rules are not written very well?
I have always understood that every horse should run on it’s own merits. If it is pacemaking it is in my view not trying to win.I've stumbled on the side of twelve misty mountains
I've walked and I crawled on six crooked highwaysI don’t think the rules should be changed and see little wrong with pacemakers as they enhance the probability of the cream coming to the top.
Jockeys are free to ignore them if they wish, and this happens quite often.
I do get annoyed if a ‘good’ horse is used as a pacemaker, most notoriously Treasure Beach in the 2011 Arc. This is my main gripe to be honest.
99% of punters who follow racing will know who a likely pacemaker when they see it in the race card so, so long as the writers in the Post mention that this is the likelihood to stop people betting them, all is fine.
Whilst I don’t particularly like the mob handed approach and sometimes dubious tactics of Aidan O’Brien’s runners in certain big races , I am not against the use of pacemakers . They are often a good thing , especially if a fancied runner requires a true run race and test of stamina .
The use of pacemakers is not new by any means ; Dick Hern used two of them ( Highest and Kinglet ) in the 1975 KG & QE Diamond Stakes as a means of utilising Bustino’s stamina , while trying to negate Grundy’s speed . The plan nearly succeeded in the so called ” race of the century ” In fact , Hern had planned to use three pacemakers in the race , but an injury to Riboson scuppered that plan .
So , do I think they should change the rules for pacemakers . Yes , I do , but limit their use to one pacemaker only .
That would eradicate any nefarious and hindering tactics from the likes of O’Brien’s less fancied , mob handed bully boys .
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
Pacemakers improve these races. I’d much rather see a breakneck pace and conclusive result rather than a frustrating crawl where the winner might not even be the third-best horse in the race.
There have been a few solid examples of ‘good’ horses being used as pacemakers here. Maybe all we need is trainers to have a maximum of 2 per race with PACEMAKER stated at the time of declaration.
Too many races these days are blighted by lack of pace. Quite often they will go off at a million miles and then something will just stack them up leading to trouble in running.
I am all for pacemakers if they actually go a decent pace. Problem is there is no guarantee of that.
Fahey did a great job with a pacemaker in Royal Ascot’s opener. He made sure there was a decent pace and took the draw out of the equation. If only that scenario had been repeated.
Section 57 in the rules of racing states a rider must make no manoeuvre that gives advantage to a horse representing the same owner or stable. The rule goes on to say nothing in that requirement “prohibits pure pacemaking as such”. Understanding what that actually means is tricky.
I’d read the rule, between the lines, as ‘pacemakers are OK, just no argy-bargy please’
Lee Mottershead makes a case for a review of the rules on employing pacemakers and adopting team tactics in UK racing. What do you think, should the rules be changed?
I’ve been saying this for years. Pacemakers going off at a suicidal pace are not being raced on their own merits. They’re non-triers! It’s against the rules of racing! Not that they’re actually doing their supposed job anyway. In the Queen Anne both front runners went off far too fast which meant all other runners ignored them. ie Could be allowed to go clear because there was no possibility of either staying in front/winning.
Couple of years ago 18th July 2015 there were two Hamdan horses in a Newbury race. Main Hamdan hope Intilaaq (Hannagan/Varian) well backed in to 2/1. Second string Mustadeem friendless in the market, 15/2, ridden by Sean Levy and trained by Meehan goes off at 6f pace when racing at 1m2f. Folds in a heap in straight, first string wins. No stewards enquirey, no nothing. I was so angry having watched from the stands. BHA say if you’ve seen something get in touch with them or the stewards, I did. Asked the guy on the door if I could speak to the stewards. He apparently thought I was connected to a stable and let me in. I asked them to hold an enquirey, as the jockey went off 6f speed at 1m2f… I was told in no uncertain terms by the stewards secretary Chris Rutter, if a jockey goes off that fast it is entirely up to connections and “If a trainer is happy with the ride then the stewards are happy”. No enquirey was held.
Timeform Comment:
“A slightly unusual race, in that Mustadeem set a suicidal pace.
MUSTADEEM (IRE) run best ignored, going off far too fast for his own good, though he had a hard race and may take time to recover; forced pace, went clear after 1f, 20 lengths clear halfway, ridden over 2f out, folded completely, headed over 1f out, heavily eased off, finished tired”.If stewrds don’t know the rules of racing, what hope is there?
What’s the point in trying to do anything?I used not to mind about pacemakers as long as they set correct even fractions for that distance and ground conditions. In theory keeping to this allows the horse to produce its best whilst helping its owner/stable companion/s. However, imo Coolmore seem to be increasingly disrespecting pacemaker rules. As I said immediately after the Commonwealth Cup – did Mottershead read it?… Harry Angel is a horse that can be a little free in his races. Heffernan seemed to ride his Coolmore mount Intelligence Cross as a spoiler, encouraging Harry Angel (Coolmore’s Caravaggio’s main opposition) to go faster than ideal… and faster than ideal for Intelligence Cross. ie Team tactics. Increasing Coolmore’s chance of winning with its main chance, Caravaggio – who’d been conveniently held up.
We saw it again in the very next race. Despite being a filly where a mile is an absolute maximum, whose chance would be best suited by a slowly run (speed test) – Roly Poly was chased up by Heffernan to the leader Percieuse (one of Coolmore’s (Winter’s) main opposition). It does not matter to Coolmore whether Roly Poly’s chance has been reduced provided it also reduced one of Winter’s main rivals. ie Significantly increasesing Coolmore’s chances of winning it with its best horse. Team tactics.
If a horse with a good chance of winning leads a Coolmore second, third or eighth string is likely to go up to compromise its chance… which means good horses don’t bother going to the front. Coolmore are then able to make the running to the advantage of their main runner. One of the reasons for some Coolmore horses being so short in the market is not just that particular horse’s ability, it’s also that other Coolmore horses chances will be sacrificed to enhnce its chance. Team tactics mean Coolmore’s best horse will not only get the race run to its advantage, stable companions seemingly help ensure rivals are at a disadvantage. Owners with just one horse are at a significant disadvantage because they have to put up with whatever the pace is; unale to do anything about it.
Trouble is a single yard can have many horses worthy of a particular race, you can’t stop them running. I do think a warning should be given that “team tactics” are not allowed and ANY runner must not do anything intentionally that will lessen that particular horse’s chance of winning.
Value Is EverythingAs Himself mentions above, the use of pacemakers in the 1975 King George ensured a great race between Grundy and Bustino (with the likes of Dahlia and Star Appeal well behind).
That said the use of team tactics can ruin races and perhaps even careers. The tactics used by the Pitman yard “against” Carvills Hill in the Gold Cup were , in my view , questionable to say the least.
In a nutshell then, I don’t know !Is it all about the money, especially later at stud?
YES, I think it is. Horse racing would be much more interesting if the winner of the Derby would get one pound for prize money…Hang your head in shame! If all those sweaty gobby Galileo dodgepots couldn’t race each other (and other sweaty dodgepots from the Sadler’s Wells line) for millions, Aidan might have to kick Joseph off the hill at Piltown! The Racing Post would have to find the real Tony Morris from wherever he’s been hiding these last 15 years, and the bloodstock world would totally have to re-evaluate its treatment of stallions as fashion accessories. Bloody hell!
If you’re horse likes to lead and another comes up alongside to try and force the pace (as happened in the Commonwealth) then let that horse go on and take a lead. Moore did on Highland Reel when Scottish was used to take him on.
There’s so much at stake at the top level in horse racing now that connections will take every measure possible to gain an advantage.
If you must allow it then surely it’s only fair to everybody that it is very clearly declared beforehand that a horse is running as a pacemaker.
Don’t really understand the comment about it being ok if it helps the cream rise to the top. Just because a horse is considered good doesn’t give it some divine right to win. If a horse is good enough on the day it will win, right?
How does the coupling system they have in France amongst other places affect the use of pacemakers? The article says it’s established in Europe but doesn’t elaborate.
Well, now I’m starting to enjoy this discussion.
Can someone please tell me why the 1000-1 shot (who got “injured” prior to the race) was/would have been denied a run in the Derby? I mean he was going to run a true race no matter how good he was compared to the Coolmore pacemakers who became official non-triers. So why is it okay to try and ban a horse from the Derby which runs on his own merits, but not the pacemakers who just to try help the stable star become a future stallion?
No way this is okay and this isn’t the way top competitions should be run. Take athletics for an example, how many times is there a pacemakers at Olympic Games or World Championships? Never…. Everybody runs HIS/HER own race.If you want to see something funny about pacemakers, then watch the Queen Anne Stakes of 2017 again. With about a furlong or so to go you see how the pacemaker stands in the way of Ribchester and forces him to drift to his left. I think the horse would have won a lot easier had Toscanini not interfered with him.
Let’s say we accept pacemakers – for whatever reasons – then they should be declared pre-race as pacemakers and there should be a ruling how they have to get out of the way once their duties are finished. In case that a drifting pacemakers starts to impede the opposition, then there should be a stewards enquiry with the required actions being taken.
If Harry Angel has a weakness and Coolmore are clued up enough to exploit it within the rules then more genius to O’Brien. If it’s classed as ‘non trier’ it will not make a difference as it’s taking one for the team in the same as the whip rule gaining an unfair advantage by an extra smack to win a big race, the rewards outweigh the downfall so nothing will change in that regard.
Gaelic Warrior Gold Cup Winner 2026
Ruby, there is use of pacemakers in Athletics (also controversial) but I think more for the purpose of record setting etc. I believe they are banned in the events you mention such as the Olympics and World Champs. But either way they can safely remove themselves from the race, something which I fail to see is possible in racing.
Intelligence Cross was in Stall 1, Harry Angel in Stall 7. Intelligence Cross broke quickly and kept a straight line right down the track. Harry Angel was switched across the track to run alongside Intelligence Cross, so Harry Angel came to Intelligence Cross, not the other way around. No doubt Intelligence Cross was in there to ensure a strong pace for Caravaggio whose optimum trip is 6f. But so what? Frankel needed a pacemaker, who was a pretty good horse in his own right.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.