- This topic has 3 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Looking at the the runners in today’s Veterans Hurdle at Newbury I see that the majority of the runners (11 out of 16) are aged only 8 or 9. How can this be right?
Most good jump horses are generally considered to be at their best between 7 and 10, so how fair can it be to class them as veterans? Puts the genuine older horse at an unfair disadvantage and makes this race no different to any other normal hurdle race.
Surely a Veterans race should be limited to horses of 11 years and over? Many of this age can still run a very good race against their peers but not with 8 y-olds in the mix!Totally agree Nighthorse,I know a lot of hurdlers and some chasers come from the flat and are in those circles considered to be old horses at 4 and 5, but in National Hunt breeding horses are not broken until they are 4 and so by the time they are 8 they have only raced for 4 years,so would not be classed as veterans until they were 11 or 12.
I believe that the qualifying age for Veterans races for the hurdlers is 8 whereas for chasers it is 10. I think it should be 10 for both.
I know it’s a different sphere, but when you have 18 y-o eventers still competing at international level, 8 is a ridiculously low age limit. And, surprise, the first 4 horses home in that “Veterans” Hurdle were only 8.
Fantastic to see Wayward Prince wiping the floor with the youngsters in the Grimthorpe Chase at Doncaster!
And a mention for lovely old Tranquil Sea, at 13, running into a close 5th in the Newbury Veterans Chase! (and West End Rocker, also 13, for getting round.It does your heart good to see them still loving it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.