- This topic has 25 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 15 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The more you watch this sport the more you get attached to the animals that make it all happen, at least I do anyway. I have absolutely no doubt that 99% of the time the horses best interest and safety is paramount but some days its just plain stomach churning watching National Hunt racing.
I backed Killfinnan Castle at Huntingdon today so I tracked him carefully on his journey ’round. As with most of what I’m backing at the moment the distress signals were being sent half way down the back straight, another bet bites the dust, fair enough we move on. The effort of clambering over the second last seemed to bottom Killfinnan Castle completely, he was almost legless between the second last and last, plodding up and down, a spent force. The horse was asked to jump the last but the energy to take off was just not there, he crashed right through the obstacle and took an awful looking fall. Thought he was a gonner, thankfully the poor horse got up after a few minutes, visually well and truly shaken up.
Killfinnan Castle literally dodged a bullet today, totally unnecessarily in my view.
I’m not a jockey and will happily defer to more expert opinion on this, but why oh why do some jockeys risk the lives of steeplechasers by asking them to jump an obstacle during a race when it is physically beyond the capability of the poor animal to do so.
I’d imagine I’d have been livid with the jockey today if that was my horse.
PULL THEM UP PLEASE.
I’m completely dispassionate about my betting marb, never get carried away or to disappointed whatever way it goes as long as I’m ahead over the longer term. One bet means almost nothing. Perhaps I shouldn’t have even mentioned it, it not really relevant.
I’m raising this as something I perceive to be a welfare and not betting issue.
Any opinions you have on the welfare issue would be welcome.
I felt the same way about that Peter Bowen horse that died the other year..was it Blue Splash? Couldn’t understand why the jockey was pushing him along when the horse was going nowhere. The horses wellbeing is paramount; not only that but surely it sours them mentally as well as physically.
I very rarely bet nowadays but, obviously, watch an awful lot of racing on-course.
I am with Cav on this one – I feel there are too many occasions when jockeys carry on too far – I do believe the situation is better than it was many years ago but I still see horses carrying on being ridden where it is obvious they are knackered and they have no chance of picking up any prize money (although the latter should never be a consideration in making a decision to pull a horse up).
There are still too many “tired falls” in the latter stages of races.
Even the top jockeys can be guilty of not pulling up sooner – e.g. Ruby Walsh on Sanglote at Ascot yesterday – the horse was tiring between the final two fences – had dropped back to last place. He just did not take off properly – had he been pulled up the horse would still be alive.
There need to be severe penalties for riders who do not pull horses up soon enough.
There need to be severe penalties for riders who do not pull horses up soon enough.
I agree that beaten horses who have no more to give should not be asked to jump fences for teh sake of finishing but the above proposal is unworkable isn’t it? Who would judge these instances and what would the criteria be?
There need to be severe penalties for riders who do not pull horses up soon enough.
I agree that beaten horses who have no more to give should not be asked to jump fences for teh sake of finishing but the above proposal is unworkable isn’t it? Who would judge these instances and what would the criteria be?
Any half decent race reader can spot a tired horse, not to mention the vets – it should not be too difficult to implement at all.
Having said that I would not trust some local stewards panels to enforce the rule properly – but I think my views on the need for professional stewards panels are well known.
Agree with a lot of what has been said so far.
Jockeys do sometimes carry on when their mounts are clearly exhausted. They must be encouraged not to do so. Problem is: A horse may be out of the money before the last fence (or two; but the jockey knows two or five could fall in front of him. So it is difficult to say whether it has no chance. Jockeys are no doubt worried about what trainer and owner might say if they pull up too soon. That’s without the each way punter / RUK / ATR judge and jury. Paul is right it should not matter if the horse is exhausted, but in practice we know it does. Can’t see it is possible to fine jockeys in anything but the worst cases, which I believe already happens.
Value Is EverythingThere need to be severe penalties for riders who do not pull horses up soon enough.
Would that not already be covered by Rule 153 (iii) / Instruction H18, perhaps?
a) Failure to dismount from a lame or injured horse,
b) Continuing on an exhausted horse.
The Band or Entry Point for the offence is eight days, the range for the offence five to 12 days (or referral).
I must say I’ve never been particularly comfortable with a weighting of tariffs that can see riding a horse literally to death penalied less stringently than taking the wrong course, dropping hands, etc., but that’s probably a whole other argument…
gc
Adoptive father of two. The patron saint of lower-grade fare. A gently critical friend of point-to-pointing. Kindness is a political act.
There need to be severe penalties for riders who do not pull horses up soon enough.
Would that not already be covered by Rule 153 (iii) / Instruction H18, perhaps?
a) Failure to dismount from a lame or injured horse,
b) Continuing on an exhausted horse.
The Band or Entry Point for the offence is eight days, the range for the offence five to 12 days (or referral).
I must say I’ve never been particularly comfortable with a weighting of tariffs that can see riding a horse literally to death penalied less stringently than taking the wrong course, dropping hands, etc., but that’s probably a whole other argument…
gc
Agree with both points – perhaps I should have said the current rules should be more rigourously enforced.
But as I said you cannot trust a large number of Stewards panels – the panel at Ascot yesterday couldn’t even work out what fences had been omitted.
Paul,
If you allow me to be a right xxxx.
Why are you so against amateur stewards?
As there are no professional stewards to judge them by. Also, you yourself are not a professional steward, judging these amateur stewards. Therefore, you as an amateur steward believe amateur stewards are no good. So you must be no good yourself as a steward. So your opinion is in your own opinion worthless.
Are there not good and bad stewards? To my mind they usually make the right decision. Then again, we are all in a sense amateur stewards. So may be my opinion is wrong too.
Value Is EverythingPaul,
If you allow me to be a right xxxx.
Why are you so against amateur stewards?
As there are no professional stewards to judge them by. Also, you yourself are not a professional steward, judging these amateur stewards. Therefore, you as an amateur steward believe amateur stewards are no good. So you must be no good yourself as a steward. So your opinion is in your own opinion worthless. Are there not good and bad stewards? To my mind they usually make the right decision. Then again, we are all in a sense amateur stewards. So may be my opinion is wrong too.
Bl**dy hell – what are you on?
Yes in a way we are all amateur stewards and we all have views – however it is not our role to enforce the rules.
There are too many inconsistencies and far too many stewards get the job because they happen to be pals of the course MD.
Admittedly the situation has improved with the introduction of the Stipes.
One problem is at courses like Cartmel, for example, with no more than half a dozen meetings a year the local stewards ain’t going to get much practice.
Having a team of professional stewards will give a team who do the job day in, day out who gain experience and it should make for more consistent decisions.
We can all cite cases where we have expressed dismay at seemingly pervese decisions.
I have to say I think your being very harsh in this case. Kilfinnan Castle was only 2 or 3 lengths off third when jumping the last. Yes he was plodding, but if you look at the video again, so were those just in front of him. He jumped the second last well enough, and I think a lot of people would have been asking questions if he’d pulled the horse up before the last.
I do agree that too many horse are asked to complete when they are out on their feet and it’s a lost cause, just not sure this was one of those.One problem is at courses like Cartmel, for example, with no more than half a dozen meetings a year the local stewards ain’t going to get much practice.
And yet at the same time we get pockets of enlightened thinking in the
genuinely
amateur sport of point-to-pointing, where some areas deploy the same stewards at more than one track.
If memory serves, some or all of the excellent stewards I work with at Hackwood Park do the same duty at Tweseldown. The net total of meetings presided over during the season probably only amounts to as many (or as few!) as Cartmel, but that’s not really the point – it’s more of an indication of what can be achieved.
gc
Adoptive father of two. The patron saint of lower-grade fare. A gently critical friend of point-to-pointing. Kindness is a political act.
I think there are likely to be a few isolated incidents where this a problem but in the main the jockeys do things right on this subject.
I think jockeys giving up too soon on horses with more to give is a far bigger issue.
On the subject of Stewards, there is always a professional "stipendary" steward at every meeting. He or she is the professional, and is expected to be the rules expert. The amateur stewards make the subective judgements.
I’m sure if a jockey genuinely thought he/she had no chance of finishing in the money, they’d pull the thing up rather than put their career or life on the line by asking for too much? – we have to afford them
that
much sense, at least.
If one can think it cruel to flog a horse when seemingly out of the money, would the reward of £150 to Mr Owner make it any more worthwhile or acceptable?
We don’t get nearly as much of this sport in the USA as you do but the ones we do get are attended very well and there is for the most part no parimutual betting for the jump races. One more reason it’s probably not as fashionable as flat racing. A lot of racing fans that I know love the sport of racing. However I would say the majority don’t watch this type of racing and there are some that outright dispise it because they feel it’s too much of a risk and we have enough breakdowns already without obsticles involved. I can understand their reasonings but I have to say that the horses that go over jumps that I’ve seen anyway are far fitter than those that race on the flat. Especially the timber horses. They will race at a slower pace, but have to be precise jumpers and a lot of those races are 2-4 miles long. Sometimes with fences between 3-5ft (The Maryland Hunt Cup has one this tall). I’ve made the case before that if a horse in a timber or hurdle race is in distress or just not fit enough to make it around the jockey will ease the horse. If they did this in flat races they would be ridiculed for it not only by the owner and trainer but also the bettors. I think for the most part the jockeys I’ve seen do right by the mount. Again we don’t usually have the parimutuals too. Even the meets that do have it they still do right by them. One thing that I do have to say is that these horses by far are looked on (at least here) as family and treated very well. That is far more than I can say for a lot of flat racers.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.