- This topic has 84 replies, 31 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
I know nothing about the Flat so can’t comment on that but in NH why don’t we just change the rule so horses can’t be hit after the last.
It would be fair on the horses, the jockeys and punters.
But not fair on the jockeys, how the hell would a jockey be able to keep a horse on a straight line, I suppose they should just let the horse run into the running rail becuase that makes so much sense and forget about their own safety.
Am not sure if this thread is about the welfare of horses or not getting any undue attention from animal rights groups. I would be more worried about the attention from the Grand National, when a horse has to jump fences like the Chair and Bechers brook over a 4m+ course. If it is about welfare of the horses I presume the majority of you will boycott watching the Grand National and will not have a bet in the race. If it is about the undue attention of Animal activists, I am sure you will also address other issues in the sport that are perhaps not beneficial to horses. However, please lets not be hyprocrites.
JohnJ
I know nothing about the Flat so can’t comment on that but in NH why don’t we just change the rule so horses can’t be hit after the last.
It would be fair on the horses, the jockeys and punters.
But not fair on the jockeys, how the hell would a jockey be able to keep a horse on a straight line, I suppose they should just let the horse run into the running rail becuase that makes so much sense and forget about their own safety.
Am not sure if this thread is about the welfare of horses or not getting any undue attention from animal rights groups. I would be more worried about the attention from the Grand National, when a horse has to jump fences like the Chair and Bechers brook over a 4m+ course. If it is about welfare of the horses I presume the majority of you will boycott watching the Grand National and will not have a bet in the race. If it is about the undue attention of Animal activists, I am sure you will also address other issues in the sport that are perhaps not beneficial to horses. However, please lets not be hyprocrites.
JohnJ
Whether purposefully or otherwise you appear to have totally missed the point. The argument is about necessity. Clearly fences of varying degrees of difficulty are a necessity – I don’t believe hitting horses to make them run faster is a necessity. I am not arguing against carrying whips for steering. There was a very good example at the weekend with Richard Johnson on Master Sommerville. He was flailing away on a horse who won by twenty lengths, dropped his whip as a consequence and nearly went through the wing at the last two fences – he was very fortunate but the problems were of his own making.
Wishy-washy piece from Ashforth in today’s Post rubbishing Paul Haigh but unfortunately ruining things by returning to the number of strokes argument. If six or seven strokes is not acceptable why should two or three be, particularly as the severity of three strokes from one jockey may equal seven from another. No strokes would be far easier to administer and the compromise would be to allow the whip to be carried for steering.
What is the point though? You obviously agree that there should be a limit to the number of times a horse should be hit, can you please tell me why you think there should be a limit? Do you think it is unfair to a horse or do you think this is creating undue attention to Animal welfare groups.
Having difficult obstacles at Aintree is not actually a necessity, I am not saying they should be replaced btw, I am just saying they don’t have to be so difficult.
JohnJ.
Until we get down to basics, racing will just be making a rod for its own back, imo.
It is time to consider what is really essential.
Things like strokes per minute and bans etc are secondary issues, especially, if it turns out that carrying the whip is not quite as necessary as we may think.
Sean Rua mate, are you over 100 hundred years old, were you around at the time of Custer and the other western "dudes"? I have ridden horses, and the use of a whip or crop is an essential tool to make sure the horse does what you want. I am not sure any jockey or horseman could do without it…
JohnJ
Sean Rua mate, are you over 100 hundred years old, were you around at the time of Custer and the other western "dudes"? I have ridden horses, and the use of a whip or crop is an essential tool to make sure the horse does what you want. I am not sure any jockey or horseman could do without it…
JohnJ
Of course they could horses aren’t going to stop running because the jockey isn’t carrying a whip. There are some owners who will not have their horse hit at all.
Sean Rua mate, are you over 100 hundred years old, were you around at the time of Custer and the other western "dudes"? I have ridden horses, and the use of a whip or crop is an essential tool to make sure the horse does what you want. I am not sure any jockey or horseman could do without it…
JohnJ
Of course they could horses aren’t going to stop running because the jockey isn’t carrying a whip. There are some owners who will not have their horse hit at all.
And how would you keep them on a straight line Flash, just point I suppose. Oh and can you point why you have such a problem with the whip? I asked this earlier, have yet to here a reply…..
JohnJ.
Sean Rua mate, are you over 100 hundred years old, were you around at the time of Custer and the other western "dudes"? I have ridden horses, and the use of a whip or crop is an essential tool to make sure the horse does what you want. I am not sure any jockey or horseman could do without it…
JohnJ
Of course they could horses aren’t going to stop running because the jockey isn’t carrying a whip. There are some owners who will not have their horse hit at all.
And how would you keep them on a straight line Flash, just point I suppose. Oh and can you point why you have such a problem with the whip? I asked this earlier, have yet to here a reply…..
JohnJ.
How do those horses whos owners instruct jockeys not to hit them stay in a straight line?
That though is the only reservation I would have about totally removing the whip – the saftey issue particularly on the flat, particularly concerning two year olds.
It doesn’t have to be all or nothing though the whip doesn’t have to go completely the authorities just have get their house in order and make jockeys stop offending. They’re not going to do that by issuing bans, its inneffective, it just doesn’t work.
Flash,
Not all horses have the same temperament, if you saw The Tother one go completey off a line at Cheltenham.
What is the safety issue about two year olds? This I am unaware of.
Has it been proven that excessive use of the whip is harmful to horses?
JohnJ.
Flash,
Not all horses have the same temperament, if you saw The Tother one go completey off a line at Cheltenham.
What is the safety issue about two year olds? This I am unaware of.
Has it been proven that excessive use of the whip is harmful to horses?
JohnJ.
Two year olds are babies they’re more entitled to run green / hang / run off a straight line. I would worry about big field 2yo races where there were no whips carried.
The whip issue isn’t just about harm to horses its also about public perception, irritating animal rights activists and ensuring that racing remains responsible for running its own sport rather than the state taking that right away.
JJ, you’ve raised a couple of interesting and important points.
With regard to safety I view this as a simple matter of commonsense prevailing. Clearly it would be for the Stewards to ensure that any action taken to correct a horse by the jockey was appropriate but I really don’t see this being a problem. The model of racing I’m thinking of would be along the lines of the current Hands and Heels Series.
With regard to me being a hypocrite – your right, I’m am. My only response to that is so-what? It’s between me and my conscience. Anyway being a hypocrite is the least of my vices
Flash,
Not all horses have the same temperament, if you saw The Tother one go completey off a line at Cheltenham.
What is the safety issue about two year olds? This I am unaware of.
Has it been proven that excessive use of the whip is harmful to horses?
JohnJ.
JJ
I think The Tother One went completely off line at Cheltenham because of the jockey using the whip. Smacks it with his right hand, horse goes left, changes hands and smacks it with his left hand, horse goes right. Take another look and the horse doesn’t veer until its hit
Johnj,
Yes, I rode them without whip, saddle or reins, but I don’t suppose they went as fast as thoroughbred racehorses.
So, are you saying that the whip is essential for steering purposes?
Btw, any views on those verbal commands I asked about?
Johnj,
Yes, I rode them without whip, saddle or reins, but I don’t suppose they went as fast as thoroughbred racehorses.
So, are you saying that the whip is essential for steering purposes?
Btw, any views on those verbal commands I asked about?
Its essential element of mastering a horse. Unless you have Robert Redford on the back I doubt it would work.
Flash, just so you are aware, Animal Rights activists are totally opposed to Horse Racing as a sport, not sure removing the whip would keep them happy.
JohnJ.
I’m afraid I haven’t understood your reply, johnj.
Do you mean that without carrying the whip it is impossible to "master a horse" and, therefore, it cannot be steered properly?
One thing that most horsemen will agree on is that, in the case of a runaway or a bolter, the whip is of little practical use. This must be the most extreme situation that a horseman will ever face, I’d say.
Btw, any headway with those verbal commands yet?
Still not really sure where I stand on this whole debate?
One thing I will add though, is I was quite disturbed watching a horse I’d backed earlier on today being hit relentlessly with the whip when it was clear the horse was beaten.
The horse was Nevada Red in the 4.45 at Haydock, and as I say I thought the treatment it got from It’s jockey was pretty disturbing IMO.
I think Donald McCain is lucky they young jockey didn’t get off and shoot him
That horse wasn’t going a yard in the ground, why the hell McCain even ran him is beyond me. A young kid thrown in at the deepend on a haorse with bno chance IMO. He’s out there trying his best and the horse won’t go for him so has two choices……either ride him hands and heels and the horse will simply stop on him or he keeps at him and does his best to finish as close as he can.
He does the former and McCain would be barking his head of asking why he never got at the horse…..catch 22 situation and the Jockey not always to blame…but don’t believe every thing you see….very difficult to say how hard the lad was hitting the horse from a camera view…. winner who look a real lazy piece of work aand he got more than a few smacks to keep him up to his work……..he would have finished last if he had his own way.
The Stewards don’t let these things go unoticed you can be sure if they horse came back marked badly they would come down on the lads like a ton of bricks..
They say of good horses "If they wont go for one they wont go for a dozen" Unfortunately that does not apply to all horses……….some need more excouragement than others. Some horse you could smack across the backside all day and they wouldn’t give a hoot and just laugh at you….they are some real tough cookies running out there.
I do not condone cruelty in any shape or form but who does? that is why the stewards have guidelines
On the whole do what they can to control the use of the whip but they make allowances if the horse is taking the piss and rightly so.
The whip is a very neccessary tool and anyone who thinks different has never sat on racehorse in their lives….if you want to see a few jockeys and horses killed, plus pile ups every other day go ahead and campaign to ban it.
or let the Stewards get on with their job,
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.