- This topic has 172 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
First-class post CR
Has this familiar quote appeared somewhere in all these whip threads?
Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men
If not why not? It seems wholly applicable to whip usage.
Every sport has to have rules Drone.
Even motor racing has rules on safety.The determination of the abuse/pain/cruelty – call it what you will – a horse suffers from being whipped cannot possibly be objectified by a hard-and-fast rule – count. To repeat what I’ve repeated
ad nauseam
: it’s the manner in which each individual strike is applied and with what force.
The interpretation of this is of course wholly subjective, and so it should be. "Wise men" viz the Stewards (professional in an ideal world, but that’s another matter) should have at their disposal guidelines from which to work from and refer, from which they can formulate an educated opinion of a ride and act accordingly.
Jockeys objected to the old rules because they wanted to know where they stood. There was too much ambiguity with the "guidelines".
Mention has been made of the ‘no time to respond’ argument regarding rat-a-tat-tat whip usage at the culmination of a race. It seems to be generally agreed that this is always a no-no and always warrants suspension. Again, I would suggest this should also be open to interpretation on a case-by-case basis.
Does it work in practice Drone? Jockeys and media complain whenever one whip "abuse" is stamped on, yet another "similar" offence "not picked up"
.
Rightly, no one today would want to see a Piggott machine-gunning of Roberto and The Minstrel and such heavy-handedness deserves punishment. However is the application of three or four rapid flicks/taps/wafts to a horse’s hindquarters at the end of a race in which it hasn’t felt the whip at all deserving of the same punishment? No in my opinion.
Yes, in my opinion it does, because it is not needed. Whether the horse had been hit before in a race or not, to hit a horse when it is not necessary to do so is wrong.
I’d go further by saying that I would rather see a horse nursed around with hands and heels and given a few rapid light cracks in the shadow of the winning post than I would seeing a horse given a series of stiff reminders at regular ‘time to respond’ intervals throughout the race.
There are already rules in place to stop reminders which are too "stiff", to ensure a jockey does not use the whip with too much force. But again, it all depends on whether the earlier reminders are needed. Sometimes a stiff(er) reminder is needed out in the country. Where as to use the whip without giving the horse time to respond is NOT necessary.
Going further again, I would also suggest a light rat-a-tat-tat at the end of an otherwise whipless race may galvanise a horse more effectively than regular cracks throughout the race. The unexpected startles, the expected doesn’t
If a horse is hit twice in quick succession of a rat-a-tat-tat, it is "expecting" a third or fourth immediately afterwards. So if your theory is correct Drone, does not "startle" or "galvanise" so well. Where as a horse does not know when a "regular" crack is going to happen, so is in fact more random and both "startles" and "galvanises".
Value Is EverythingGinger , just stay quiet , Cav’s brilliant post said it all
If you have no class and want to keep squabbling , then now is your chance to lose even more credibility
For goodness sake absorb the post and leave it , if you want the last word and stay with the bha/rspca view regardless of the consequences , then you are less wise than once perceived
Carry on tipping , you are pretty good at that , racing politics and the bigger picture seem to be lost on you
thanks
Ricky
Stop putting abusive posts up with the XXXXXXX "thanks" XXXXXXXX!How many more times are you going to say exactly the same thing?
If you don’t like what I have to say either don’t read it or say what you disagree with.
At least Cav and Pinza are joining in the debate and not shouting down anyone who disagrees with them.
Suspect you are incapable of discussing the issue, so revert to hurling abuse!
"Thanks"!
Mark
Value Is EverythingI was hoping this might have been the final whip thread but everyone is now simply repeating and re-posting their entrenched position on the new rules. The point of the thread is that evidence is beginning to build that
the NH jocks
are not finding it anywhere near as difficult as many people forecast and the spectacle is not being diluted.
- Total Posts 17716
Ginger
, I’d like to welcome your thoughtful post in response to
Cav
. It speaks of your own passion and love of the sport, which is something none of us should lose sight of.
I’d like to focus on your comments about the importance of the RSPCA in this debate. As you say, their role here has been crucial. They may or may not have "
instigated
" the Review (as
David Muir
claimed in his Press Statement last week); and they may or may not have been "
promised a culture change
" even before the questioned "consultation process" took place. The BHA has denied both these assertions, and who knows whether minutes of the November 2010 meetings exist?
But their dictation of the Recommendations actually implemented is self-evident. All but one of the RSPCA’s demands were fully met, though Muir expressed "
disappointment
" at the dismissal of the other. So they must take much of the responsibility for the PR disaster and internal furore that has crippled racing during the last month.
You say the time to tackle the RSPCA is
"not now"
. Yet Mark Johnson was talked about the "
wedge
" they put into Racing about 20 years ago, and the need to draw a line in the sand now. He has also pointed out politely that the BHA (in Prof. Tim Morris and himself) can boast an expertise in racehorse welfare
which the RSPCA charity simply does not have
, and that it is up to the Sport to police itself.
Because if we don’t, like Oliver Twist they’ll very soon be back for more – "
banging on the door
" was the phrase Muir rather threateningly used – and they will nibble away at the Sport until NH becomes untenable, or too expensive to police and safeguard to make it viable.
The
RSPCA’s charter
nowhere asks British Racing to fulfil any demands for welfare
which are not already in place
. They themselves are under attack for bureaucracy, and for putting politics before the true needs of Animal Welfare. For them, Racing is a "soft option" for attack, in order to draw fire away from the question marks hanging over their own organisation.
That’s why there is no better time than now to call their bluff.
RSPCA have no scientific, moral or social case to come out with Animal Aid and say that our racing is "cruel".
If they are threatening to do so, BHA need to tell us so. If they do have the courage to stand firm, even at this late stage, they’ll rally the support of all the organisations within racing (and vast numbers of punters and lovers of the sport) who feel uncomfortable about what has happened in the name of "
public perception
".
Perhaps therefore we should be lobbying the BHA to stand up against their true foes, rather than savaging them for their weakness towards Racing’s internal interests. It is a bit like kicking a dog when it’s down, and perhaps it’s time to offer them the "incentive" carrot rather than the stick, in their dealings with David Muir and the Charity he so ably represents.
First, times change. Piggott’s whip was an entirely different implement to the lightweight modern version. People did of course criticize Piggott’s severity at the time, but the majority of the racing (and one-bet-a-year
non
-racing) public saw both as great rides – "our hero" once getting the job done where, as they felt, every other jockey would have failed.
Last, was either animal harmed by the experience?
Roberto
‘s most famous and greatest triumph (over
Brigadier Gerard
at York) was still to come.
The Minstrel
went on to bag the
Irish Derby
and the
King George
in the months after his gruelling Derby win.
Whatever the initial physical response, we can say that neither horse was frightened or put off racing by the strong treatment they’d received from Piggott in
The Derby
.
Sometime ago here on TRF I recall describing Piggott’s ride on Roberto as "majestic brutality" or some such and after umpteen viewings I still marvel at it, while still disapproving of it. The Ali/Frazier/Foreman encounters summon-up similar dichotomous feelings. Nasty but nice, essentially
You’re right, of the million housewives who doted on their unlikely hero few I think would have castigated him for being ‘cruel’, and yes as far as can be gleaned from their subsequent runs neither Roberto nor The Minstrel were adversely affected by the experience
Horses, even the young 3yos, are tough beasts and it’s a mistake to believe they of necessity need treating with kid gloves all the time. I am an animal lover and in general have found it rather easier to get on with my succession of dogs, cats and hens than I have my fellow man; but I am neither a sentimentalist nor squeamish, and horse racing I feel is an ideal sport for all animal lovers who share a lack of those mawkish traits
Piggott is largely but unfairly remembered as a ‘hard’ jockey; he could be when necessary of course, but you, I and all those of a similar vintage know that he was capable of the most beautiful and tender hands ‘n’ heels rides, particularly aboard fillies
All this was in that foreign country, the past. No going back, and in this instance rightly so I think
The point of the thread is that evidence is beginning to build that
the NH jocks
are not finding it anywhere near as difficult as many people forecast and the spectacle is not being diluted.
Who are these people steeplechasing? a few names please and don’t think you’re being a tad premature? I’ve heard of superficial stats before.
What about the injustices done to Havlin, Hanagan, De Sousa, Walsh and others etc. and Glassonbury and his horse having a bad fall because he couldn’t use his whip?If a horse is hit twice in quick succession of a rat-a-tat-tat, it is "expecting" a third or fourth immediately afterwards. So if your theory is correct Drone, does not "startle" or "galvanise" so well. Where as a horse does not know when a "regular" crack is going to happen, so is in fact more random and both "startles" and "galvanises".
I don’t understand this Gingernuts, so may I suggest we simply agree to disagree or disagree to agree, if you prefer
- Total Posts 17716
The point of the thread is that evidence is beginning to build that
the NH jocks
are not finding it anywhere near as difficult as many people forecast and the spectacle is not being diluted.
Ah, Carroll’s Humpty Dumpty again. When you use the word "
evidence
" you clearly mean "
my assertion
".
Much though you – and many of the rest of us, believe it or not – would like it to be true, such actual evidence as there is from the weighing room, the trainers, the punters, and (increasingly) owners themselves, is that
our racing is being damaged by this fiasco
, whether or not you personally happen to like the fact, and – crucially – whether or not you agree with these new rules or think they are viable.
Various Forum members have posted many links to articles and statements from professionals within the sport telling us that this trouble is not vanishing away. Aside from intellectual, moral debates on the viability of the whip in modern racing, can you point to any individual jockey, trainer or owner within racing – or even a racing journalist – who has made a statement to support your assertion that
"all’s going to be well"
, since the new rule began to drive a coach and horses through Racing’s public reputation?
I hope you can, as I would be interested to hear your viewpoint supported by a professional within the sport. Meanwhile your attempt to put a button on this tedious debate has met the response you must have expected.
Thanks for your kind words Pinza.
Might come back and answer your other points later when I’ve calmed down a bit.
Just to say, in a way I agree with Johnston the time may come soon that we have to take the RSPCA on if they go any further than they are now. Hopefully, if these new rules (with a few minor alterations) do work (or work reasonably well), it won’t be necessary to take the RSPCA on.
Value Is Everything- Total Posts 17716
Piggott is largely but unfairly remembered as a ‘hard’ jockey; he could be when necessary of course, but you, I and all those of a similar vintage know that he was capable of the most beautiful and tender hands ‘n’ heels rides, particularly aboard fillies
Beautifully put. For me, the finest race memory of all time will be seeing him – in his dotage as far as that legendary strength was concerned – "floating"
Royal Academy
home in the
Breeders Cup Mile
. That was artistry, and a thing of beauty to behold.
We didn’t have to count the number of smacks afterwards, either.
If a horse is hit twice in quick succession of a rat-a-tat-tat, it is "expecting" a third or fourth immediately afterwards. So if your theory is correct Drone, does not "startle" or "galvanise" so well. Where as a horse does not know when a "regular" crack is going to happen, so is in fact more random and both "startles" and "galvanises".
I don’t understand this Gingernuts, so may I suggest we simply agree to disagree or disagree to agree, if you prefer
What I am trying to say is a random hit while out in the country may seem "regular" but one hit now and again comes as a surprise to the horse. Where as, midway through a rat-a-tat-tat finish – after the first two strokes a horse is probably expecting the other two hits.
Therefore, the two final hits of a rat-a-tat-tat finish does not as you say "startle", and so far less likely to "galvanise".
Hopefully that explains better what I am trying to say. Suspect even if you do understand Drone; we’ll have to agree to disagree.
Value Is EverythingPiggott is largely but unfairly remembered as a ‘hard’ jockey; he could be when necessary of course, but you, I and all those of a similar vintage know that he was capable of the most beautiful and tender hands ‘n’ heels rides, particularly aboard fillies
Beautifully put. For me, the finest race memory of all time will be seeing him – in his dotage as far as that legendary strength was concerned – "floating"
Royal Academy
home in the
Breeders Cup Mile
. That was artistry, and a thing of beauty to behold.
We didn’t have to count the number of smacks afterwards, either.
Agree, I certainly didn’t see Piggott as being a hard jockey. And of course he had "beautiful hands" when needed. Although if Piggott the jockey were transported to the present era, it is possible my opinion might have changed. Whether it would or not, we should judge each era by the values and morals that existed in that era anyway, not todays. Piggott was an exceptional jockey.
Value Is EverythingPinza/Yeats,
The evidence for me is two-fold:
1. In all the media which was bristling with complaints direct from Jocks and tales of strikes and ‘something must be done’, everything seems to have gone quiet. Very little other than the odd columnist still making comment in the RP and, notably,the jocks I follow, posting regularly on twitter in very rebellious mood right after the Walsh/Aintree episode, have not mentioned it in recent days. It’s as though nothing happened at all.
2. We’ve had the best quality Saturday’s NH racing so far – competitive for big prizes – no bans.
Yesterday we had Carlisle (one of the ‘worst’ six tracks for offenders, on softish ground,) – no bans, no complaints from jocks/trainers or punters/racegoers about a poor spectacle.
OK statistically, it is, of course too early to draw conclusions but bear in mind that I had posted last week that my feeling was that things would settle very quickly. It would have been easy to wait three months and then come back and say ‘I told you so’ or indeed to slink away and say nothing had it gone the other way.
What I’m doing is continuing to keep my head above the parapet to back my theory: I might well yet be shot down but so far, what little evidence there is seems to support my early postings.
Should there be further bans for ‘over-the-eight’ I will also highlight them.
- Total Posts 17716
We’re simply in the calm eye of the storm.
The amount of trouble on the flat has increased, not decreased, and with the House of Commons meeting still (as far as I’m aware) scheduled for tomorrow, the jockeys – like everyone else – are expecting concessions.
Whether they get them is a different matter, of course. BHA are seemingly intent on digging in for a Last Stand.
Kempton
today has been interesting viewing, though not remotely exciting. I see
Paulostermeyer
has just tweeted that the main race on the card was a
"schooling session"
and that sums up the feeling of the afternoon, lovely though if was to see
Somersby
jumping so gracefully – though
Dougie Costello
has already had a weird 4-day ban for hitting his horse in the wrong place.
Oh, and
Conor O’Farrell
got a 2-day ban and fine for not riding out for 6th place in the 2:40. How many strokes had he administered to his horse before giving up, I wonder?
(I mention those, as
Steeplechasing
has decreed that bans other than for frequency somehow "don’t count" towards his statistics. Hmm. As the alleged aim of these new rules is to get the total number of bans down, that’s what we should be looking at, rather than picking and choosing selectively.)
I also see that the new
"whip-flick"
(hits with the hands still on the reins) is coming into universal use as a way round the stroke count, from those clever NH jockeys keen to keep their horses going a little longer without recourse to heels – flat jockeys can’t use the tactic of course because of their shorter rein length.
It looks absolutely awful to the eye, but certainly isn’t against the rules and (unless BHA are minded to close this loop hole) it is doubtless here to stay. Not an advance aesthetically or practically, and another negative side effect of the current fiasco.
In my opinion the absence of National Hunt bans this week end probably reflects jocks riding well within the arbitrary hit limits in order to avoid a ban at the November Cheltenham meeting.
As Pinza has pointed out these guys and gals are not as dumb as someone would portray them. I am sure they will try and adjust in order minimise the potential injustice that these new rules can deliver.
In the meantime the "unintended consequences" of this include impacts on the " integrity of the race " ,competitiveness, and as Pinza has again highlighted the welfare of the horse or worse again the welfare of the jockeys.
As for the general level of noise falling I am hopeful some kind of resolution process is happening in the background.
In my opinion the absence of National Hunt bans this week end probably reflects jocks riding well within the arbitrary hit limits in order to avoid a ban at the November Cheltenham meeting.
As Pinza has pointed out these guys and gals are not as dumb as someone would portray them. I am sure they will try and adjust in order minimise the potential injustice that these new rules can deliver.
In the meantime the "unintended consequences" of this include impacts on the " integrity of the race " ,competitiveness, and as Pinza has again highlighted the welfare of the horse or worse again the welfare of the jockeys.
As for the general level of noise falling I am hopeful some kind of resolution process is happening in the background.
You might well be correct. Maybe the jocks are wary of Cheltenham bans or perhaps are reacting to behind-the-scenes promises or hopes of some ‘resolution’.
Whatever the reasons, we’ve now had a few quiet days where the heat has unquestionably died down. During this period – on the NH front at least, the only difference I’ve noticed in riding styles are fewer ‘chastisement’ smacks after an error (no bad thing imo) and, perhaps, not so many ‘lost causes’ being given a few smacks by way of illustrating (to owner/punters/stewards) how hard someone is ‘trying’.
I’ve been watching racing since the 60s and nothing I’ve seen in the past few days has diluted my enjoyment. In fact it has been enhanced by some artful rides from the front and a few jockeys counting horses in, hands and heels, with admirable verve and accuracy.
Another few days of this and I think it’s going to be kind of hard for the jumps boys to revert to the ‘something must be done – this is ruining the sport’ approach.
I’ve not yet checked – were there any bans today for exceeding the number of strokes?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.