- This topic has 84 replies, 31 voices, and was last updated 17 years ago by
.
- Posts
Corm – I’d disagree with your comment that
‘We have to accept the moral argument that the suffering of the horses which are injured or even killed  while training/racing is outweighed by the enjoyment us humans get from the sport ‘
I would say that it is outweighed by the enjoyment that horses get out of being involved in the sport.
fine……just find it strange you wish to voice an opinion on a subject that is actually not being debated………after all your good comments earlier that i took on board……………..not a spin doctor are you?
The subject isnt………….is it……………………and why dont you think i am…………least i have a profile…and you can come and visit me when ever you like and we can debate further
<br>FSL – <br>To stop a horse running out and ensure it follows the direction of the course. Isn’t that what the reins are for – steering. – But the reins don’t always ensure that a horse steers a straight path. What about the horses that starting veering wildly before an obstacle? Should we let it run out and take its jockey through the railings at the side of the fence?
<br>To encourage a horse not to stop and to keep going when it doesn’t fancy another circuit. No whips then horses who want to stop are either kept going hands and heels or stop. So what? The 1/2f is racing lazily at the back of the field and with no whip the jockey has no option but to pull it up as it is digging it heels in ala Orcadian in the Chester Cup (it was only the whip that made the horse pick up again). No problemo because I wouldn’t be backing it anyway.
<br>To encourage a horse to jump a fence that it may not fancy jumping. Does it really help a horse approaching a fence to crack it with the whip? Isn’t that just as likely to force an error? McCoy doesn’t think so! Surely you could argue it keeps the horses mind in the job and makes sure that it jumps it rather than refusing to jump the obstacle?
<br>To make the horse pass another horse that it is quite capable of passing but doesn’t want to. Do we really want to be rewarding horses (and breeding from horses) who are reluctant to pass others. Well I don’t really know much about the breeding side of things, but if a horse is capable if winning it should be encouraged to do so yes. What you do with it when its racing career is over is up to the owner and breeders, but if it is the best horse and the whip is encouraging it to put its best foot forward then yes.
<br>To keep the horse going until the winning post (though obviously how many taps should be allowed is up for debate) The horse will still keep going without the whip – perhaps slower but it will be a level playing field for all. The one that keeps going fast enough will win. But having used the whip for (well how long?) this is the practice that horses are surely used to. By working on your breeding assessment above, all the lazy horses that don’t respond to hands and heels will then not be bred as they are not winning. No horses like Oratorio to enjoy. And what about horses like Gilded and Granny Peel? They are both game fillies, but both need to be shown the whip to pick up as they both know the whip means it is time to run flat out.
For all the horses that would run to the best of their ability without the whip there are many that wouldn’t.<br>The whip can also be flashed at it to cajole it to go faster without actually being used. Ok – let them carry purple silk bandanas to wave at the horse. (lol) . Sorry – previous point applies equally here. – again this helps horses to run to the best of their ability.<br>
(Edited by FlatSeasonLover at 9:50 pm on Feb. 26, 2007)
FSL<br>This argument that a horse need only be shown the whip to improce speed is basically the result of a horse running faster in case it gets whipped becase it was whipped before and didn’t like it. This behaviour is learned by horses. If a horse was taught at an early age that hands and heels meant "pick up speed" then the whip wouldn’t be required at a later stage in it’s career.
Grasshopper<br>I disagree that we shouldn’t ban the whip because animal rights activists will go for the jugular. In fact it is better for horse-racing to put it’s own house in order first rather than be made to do so in the future because the changes made by unknowing factions will be far in excess of those that the sport could have made in the first place, if you know what I mean.
Grass – Ox-bow lake – had to look that one up!
FSL – If we didn’t have Oratorio then we’d be marvelling at another horse(s). The one that won without the whipping. Isn’t he/she the horse we should laud. The one that puts it’s best foot forward willingly rather than the one that needs to be cajoled and cohorted?
Wayward – "Oh flat season go and have a splif you have not got a clue" – Not constructive. Others on the thread have responded positively and debated your arguments in a grown up fashion. Please show others the courtesy you expect yourself. (Sorry if that post was meant as a joke – just the tone of it may have been misleading).
On the meandering threads Wayward – you’ll find, as Grass has pointed out, that one of the joys of this forum is seeing a debate on, say, Martin Pipe, develop into a discussion on  the Dubai World Cup.
Good thread this though – some people would like to sweep some of racing’s more difficult issues under the carpet, the ‘cruelty’ debate being one of those issues. I think the opposite and agree with David Brady’s point about racing attending to it’s own house before someone else does it for us.<br>
Quote: from Grasshopper on 9:59 pm on Feb. 26, 2007[br]<br>
<br>I wish you and your profile well. My own profile is barren, because mere words cannot adequately describe the depth of the shine on my shoe, and the sweetness of the song in my heart.
<br>LOL.
On the whole I’m with Cormack. It may be the thin end of the wedge jimminy but then I think jump racing is essentially doomed as cruel – and soon. (And yes this will no doubt be whilst factory farming ever propsers – progress is never logical or fair.)<br>
I’ll make something clear for you Wayward.
I don’t smoke.
I don’t do drugs.
I don’t drink.
Therefore it is obviously more in your nature judging from your username to "go have a spliff". Glad we cleared that one up.
As for whether I have a clue or not, perhaps you are right, perhaps I don’t have a clue, but that is for the forum as a whole to judge not you. You see if I said you were out of touch with reality and a loudmouthed fool that would just be my opinion so I am not going to say it. You need to show a little respect towards forum members, at least that seems to be the general consensus on here.
Quote: from FlatSeasonLover on 12:53 am on Feb. 27, 2007[br]I’ll make something clear for you Wayward.
I don’t smoke.
I don’t do drugs.
I don’t drink.
FSL, no wonder you post so much!!!
I’m not a big fan of the whip, and I’m glad that the new cushioned versions are now in place.
However, I know from experience that horses can be capricious, easily distracted and sometimes a little bit stupid.  A rider depends on the ‘aids’ to keep in communication with their horse to keep them both safe – whether to stop them ducking out at a fence, throwing themselves under a lorry or rolling over in the middle of an indoor school (and no, I’m not exaggerating, having had experience of all three).
The chief aids to a rider are hands, legs and voice – to provide restraint, encouragement and direction.  However, in the middle of a race these aids are less effective.  Riding short means less communication through the legs and the noise of a race amongst other runners makes the voice unreliable.  The whip should be used to supplement these aids – to replace a encouraging or steering kick signal from the legs and waved instead of using words.  If used correctly it can be very helpful, and does not cause any more distress to a horse than the other aids. I hope that answers your question, Corm!
The important thing is jockey education – hands and heels races are a great idea.  I don’t think Ruby Walsh needs further education. I think the balance of rules and punishment are just about right at the moment.
Why not, as an experiment, extend the excellent initiative of ‘hands and heels’ races to a series for fully fledged jockeys, and to all codes. Perhaps only then will we be able to quantify the question "is the whip necessary".
Personally I don’t have a problem with the whip – though I detest its abuse – providing it is used as a last resort after being ‘shown’, used in the correct manner and above all judiciously. That said there is no better sight than seeing a horse winning without resort to the ‘persuader’.
And having never ridden a horse I’m not in a position to answer or debate the age-old statement "there is only so much a weak 10 stone man can do with his hands to control half a ton of strong fractious horse"
For all jockeys – Flat and NH – it should be mandatory to undergo a course scrutinising Joe Mercer and Steve Cauthen vids.
Just another video to watch……..The day Sea Pidgeon won the champion hurdle, watch and see how many time J Francome hit him, and that horse was a quirky little devil at times
Wayward ..still waiting to hear what the best horse you rode in your 500 career rides was.<br>Would be nice to be proved wrong ..I doubt it somehow.!
Good try Mickie, What do you want to do look it up and see who i am…….as i said good try Bigmickie, must try harder
The best horse i ever rode, and thats not say on the racecourse ,was Fort Vulgan ..well actually it was on the racecourse…….but not in a race…..what a fantastic genuine huge horse….absolute christian ….shame he got bought down in the national                                                                                 work it out from that…..ha ha
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.