- This topic has 63 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
Because races in which horses can do more or less what they like don’t appeal to me as betting mediums, Seabird. And I doubt I would be alone in that view.
The whip, by the way, does NOT make horses go faster as some on here have suggested. It encourages them not to slow down when they feel a bit tired.There is a place for the whip in controlling and, yes, "encouraging" horses.
The rules defining the use of the whip are fairly clear.
What is required is a more rigorous enforcement of the rules with stronger penalties for a breach.
If a jockey injures or marks a horse they should face a significant ban and by significant I mean between four weeks and six months with an entry point of six weeks. (Some will say some horses mark more easily than others – tough. Trainers should know which horses mark easily and the whip use for that particular horse should be adjusted accordingly. i.e. if a horse marks or wheals easily then the whip is not used)
If a horse wins or is placed in a race through misuse of the whip it should be disqualified – no argument. Excessive whip, use outside the rules, is cheating and if a rider cheats he should be disqualified. If punters lose out as a result then tough – that’s racing – it is no different than a horse being disqualified for other serious offences.
A clear definition of whip usage coupled with severe penalties for misuse will soon “educateâ€
"Because races in which horses can do more or less what they like don’t appeal to me as betting mediums, Seabird."
Does that statement stand up to scrutiny, Paul?
Generally (there will always be exceptions) horses break from the stalls and race without recourse to the whip. The whip normally (and again there will be exceptions) is used at the ‘business end’ of the race, as you rightly say, to keep the horse going rather than make them run faster. I feel that your suggestion that the horse will be more or less able to do what they want if jockeys don’t carry whips just a touch disingenuous and certainly exaggerated.
Colin
That’s a nice measured response, John!
Colin
Well it would be measured if somebody actually clarified were they stood….Is this about animal welfare or breaking the rules of racing. Btw, John McCririck is the biggest self publicist in the history of racing and the biggest hyprocrite. Moral issues, if we are oh so moral, we should not be involved in the sport….
JohnJ
"Is this about animal welfare or breaking the rules of racing."
Surely the two are inseparable in this argument.
The rules of racing should hold the welfare of horses as of paramount importance.
If you are happy that the present rules satisfy that factor then it is all about the desire of the authorities to ensure that riders adhere to those rules and this is where the argument arises.
Are the penalties in place severe enough to stop the jocks from breaking the rules?
Colin
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.
Nonsense. It is precisely the same thing. No-one should have to present their racing credentials before putting forward an argument or discussing a racing issue. Most people here have never trained a racehourse or ridden in a race but that does mean they can’t discuss the merits of trainers aiming their horses at certain races nor the rides that were given to certain horses. This is a forum in which everyone is free to discuss racing issues, regardless of previous experience or depth of knowledge. The only restriction should be that they do so with courtesy. If their arguments are wrong, then explain why. Play the ball not the man.
takings john’s argument one step further, to show it’s extremism, the only people who should have a vote are those who have been an mp before – perhaps our profile should show what we do for a living and therefore define the limit of what we can have an opinion on ?
i would imagine 99% of the general public couldn’t give a toss about technical details within sports, such as length of studs, cues, size of golf clubs, or any such details of any particular sport, but where the detail involves hitting animals, most ordinary people suddenly become concerned about the issue and have opinions and it’s because of this that racing has to be careful about the subject, not just throw up some elitist bollocks about nobody having a right to an opinion unless they’ve done it before as they don’t know what they’re on about
racing is not the best sport at public relations, imo
Because races in which horses can do more or less what they like don’t appeal to me as betting mediums, Seabird. And I doubt I would be alone in that view.
The whip, by the way, does NOT make horses go faster as some on here have suggested. It encourages them not to slow down when they feel a bit tired.So in other words the whip is used to make horses go faster than they would naturally want to.
aaronizneez, they can carry whips in the hands and heels series and use it for corrective purposes.
Does that include smacking it behind the saddle ?
"So on that basis Colin you are not for a total ban of the whip?"
Quite right, John, and I don’t think I have ever advocated a total ban, as I have said above, it is not the use of the whip I find offensive, it is the misuse of the object in question that worries me.
Colin
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.
Nonsense. It is precisely the same thing. No-one should have to present their racing credentials before putting forward an argument or discussing a racing issue. Most people here have never trained a racehourse or ridden in a race but that does mean they can’t discuss the merits of trainers aiming their horses at certain races nor the rides that were given to certain horses. This is a forum in which everyone is free to discuss racing issues, regardless of previous experience or depth of knowledge. The only restriction should be that they do so with courtesy. If their arguments are wrong, then explain why. Play the ball not the man.
Its actually not. We can all have an informed opinion on ground, trips, etc.. however some people on this forum are suggesting that there alternative ways of controlling a horse other than a whip, yet they have never sat on horse at all, let alone in a race, makes this statement even more ludicrous. Horses are broken in using a whip, its the only method the horse understands from a disciplinary method.
As for the moral high ground, its a disgrace that people on this forum are taking this stand, I am not sure if you took a straw poll of two year old thouroughbread horses and asked them if they would like to be particiapting in a Maiden race in Redcar, they would be totally enthused by this option, I think most of them would prefer to be havin a pick of grass in an open field…..
This thread sounds like a bunch of vegetarians having a egg salad….
JohnJ.
This thread sounds like a bunch of vegetarians having a egg salad
I wasn’t aware that this thread was available as an audio file. You must let me have the link. But in any case, I’m not entirely sure what you’re getting at here, unless it is to suggest that vegetarians are particularly noisy eaters, in which case I think you are doing a great disservice to our lentil boiling friends.
As for the moral high ground, its a disgrace that people on this forum are taking this stand
I wasn’t aware that anyone was, in particular, but since you’ve raised it, I’d be intrigued to know why you feel it is a disgrace. Is horseracing a morality free zone? Is it an intrinsically immoral sport?
if you took a straw poll of two year old thouroughbread horses
I must admit I chuckled at the ‘straw poll’. Very good. I’m picturing Derek Thompson with a clipboard stopping horses in the parade ring.
We can all have an informed opinion on ground, trips, etc..
Can we? You’re saying that we can’t have an informed opinion on how to control a horse if we haven’t sat on one or ridden one in a race. Your logic would surely also state we can’t have an informed opinion on any other specialist area of racing if we aren’t similarly on the inside. And in any case, why are we required to have an ‘informed’ opinion? If an opinion is, in your case, ill-founded or incorrect, then spell out why. If they are so ill-informed then surely it would be no problem whatsoever to expose their lack of knowledge. As I said in my previous post, play the man, not the ball.
Andrew – I’ll spell out why. You are not a jockey. There are no jockeys in favour of a whip ban.
I can tell you by looking at form whether a horse likes soft going. But unless you have ridden a horse in race conditions then your opinion on the use of the whip is pointless.
If i was debating on the best kind of shoes to wear to climb everest…..I’d expect to be shot down in flames. I’m pretty sure some people on here are just "debating" for the sake of it.
and with that i’m out fo this thread for good.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.