- This topic has 63 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
"…………as she’d probably not have won any races."
Would you like to expand on that statement?!
Bear in mind that the other horses wouldn’t have been touched with the whip either.
Colin
Colin this may come as a suprise to you but there are some genuine animals out there that never need to have anything more than to be shown the whip, if even that. Think before you speak mate ffs.
Good wins for Henry and Spirit today under hands and heels.
Losers were whipping away like fury.It would have a negative effect on my racing, cormack.
You bet on exercise gallops if you like. I’ll find something else.Could you clarify your point on this. If you are saying the whip is used solely or making the horse go faster then fair enough, if you are saying jockeys need it for safety purposes then obviously the hands and heels series is unacceptably dangerous ?
"Think before you speak mate ffs."
Fists, that’s a bit rich coming from you!!!!!
………..and I was only asking underscore to explain his thinking, not saying that he/she was wrong.
Colin
Seabird – i would have thought my opinion was obvious. A whip can be used to make a horse go faster when under pressure. It can also be used to ensure safe passage during a race. Without it i do not believe Pepping Fawn or for that matter many other top class horses whould win many races. If we ban the whip we may as well ban racing….some people on here are going to kill racing…. LEAVE IT ALONE!
Good wins for Henry and Spirit today under hands and heels.
Losers were whipping away like fury.You’d expect that wouldn’t you? Racing would look a bit strange if the winners who always looked like winning were being thrashed while those behind were brought home under tender handling. Jockeys don’t get enough credit for getting it right so much and using the whip only when it’s required as shown in your good example.
aaronizneez, they can carry whips in the hands and heels series and use it for corrective purposes.
"A whip can be used to make a horse go faster when under pressure. It can also be used to ensure safe passage during a race. Without it i do not believe Pepping Fawn or for that matter many other top class horses whould win many races. If we ban the whip we may as well ban racing.."
Flawed logic, surely, underscore.
Whether whips are carried and not used, or banned from being carried altogether (I don’t think many , if any, are advocating that on here) horses will still win races.
Whether the results would be the same can only be a matter for conjecture.
Colin
……………..and why pick on Peeping Fawn, was she the only horse in the races she ran in that was being ‘encouraged’ by her rider?
Do you see why I asked the question in the first place?
Colin
Think before you post Seabird. The person i was answering was called Peeping Fawn. Does that help?
I’m a racing fan I want to see horses pushed to the limit thats what racing is about. There are rules in place to look after any abuse of the whip…i really do not understand why a site called The Racing Forum would have members (and for that matter its Chief Moderator) that are anti-whip. Without the whip its just horses running as fast as they like…..not racing as fast as they can.underscore, I know very well that the OP was Peeping Fawn.
What I don’t know is why you think that that horse benefited more than the others in her race by the use of the whip.
Has she the reputation of being a lazy horse that will only go forward with the application of the persuader?
I need to know?
As I said in my last post, I have no problem with the use of the whip, it is just that some jockeys just don’t have the necessary judgement when it comes to when it should be used and when it should be tucked away.
If we can ensure the situation of whips always being carried and a horse never being abused I will be a very happy chappy.
Colin
" " Sean Rua wrote:
Good wins for Henry and Spirit today under hands and heels.
Losers were whipping away like fury.You’d expect that wouldn’t you?"
yeats).Certainly would ( and did), yeats!
I’m lucky enough to be able to recognise good horses and good jockeys. A very nice double and ne’er a water-jump or whip -mark to be seen!
This debate should only be open to those that actually put their lives on the line for the sport, not by armchair "racing fans".
By that logic, presumably we shouldn’t discuss the Derby over the next few days unless any of us have ridden in it?
And the phrase, ‘put their lives on the line for the sport’ is a little disingenuous. Riding a horse can be dangerous, indeed, but let’s not get carried away. They put their lives on the line in the pursuit of personal glory, enjoyment or earning a living, not selflessly in order that we can all enjoy the sport.
i really do not understand why a site called The Racing Forum would have members (and for that matter its Chief Moderator) that are anti-whip
Because it is, thankfully, a broad church of racing enthusiasts and participants of all backgrounds and varying levels of knowledge and expertise rather than a small group of jockeys or ex-jockeys chatting with one another about things they all agree on.
What is this thread about? Breaking the rules or the welfare of horses? Why is debate on ATR? What next the removal of jumps? Has Sean Boyce ever rode in a race?
A lot people with out the required knowledge or experience talking through their backsides in my opinion. Discussing Derby’s is a far way removed from what a jockey carries to control a horse.
JohnJ.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.