- This topic has 5 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
Saturday’s 100/1 winner at Southwell R Woody had been gelded since his latest outing. The stable hadn’t notified Weatherbys, so this information was missing from all racecards.
The sanction for this, it turns out, is a £100 fine, the smallest the BHA penalties allow for (I think).
If a horse leaves the parade ring without cheekpieces after they have been declared it isn’t allowed to run, but if it leaves without its nuts that’s considered to be a worth only a gentle reprimand.
If you want to know the sex of a horse, who actually owns it, how it has been working recently, how fast it’s been running recently or it’s physical condition then may I suggest you bet on racing in a country that actually cares. Here you’ll be provided with some perfunctory info, of questionable accuracy, and you can take it or leave it.
It is not within any of The Rabble’s remit to check horse’s privates and it would cost too much money. This is money they don’t have, because betting turnover and revenue is a tiny fraction of countries that do provide the punter with decent accurate info, for some reason no-one can quite fathom. Or at least no-one at The Rabble.
Excuse my ignorance but would the presence of the said nuts have affected the result!
Davy
Excuse my ignorance but would the presence of the said nuts have affected the result!
If a gelding operation had no effect it wouldn’t exist. Whether it has a predictable effect is a different matter, and is irrelevant to my point.
The effects of first-time headgear are also unpredictable, and if this is declared and not worn then the horse would be prevented from running.
I would say that the two are equivalent. If a horse has been declared to run as a colt/horse it should be barred from running or subsequently disqualified if it is actually a gelding. A £100 fine is not proportionate to the offence.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.