- This topic has 281 replies, 32 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
- Total Posts 17716
Agreed about the
Velka Pardubicka
, a great epic as ever and which was this year incredibly stirring to watch. What an extraordinary finish, too.
I must praise a beautiful piece of at-a-distance commentary by Mark Johnson too. This was a magical example of everything that is good (or should be) about horse racing.
There are already rules in place KF – trouble is they are largely ignored. Racing needs to have robust penalties in place for those transgressing whip rules and I’m 100% behind any moves to tighten up in this area.
Jockeys (and trainers) need to look at the new rules/penalties and work out how to play the game to best effect. The rules are the same for everyone.
It seems to me that the "emotive characterisation" has been on the other side, by those encouraging the ignorant public perception (only held by about 1/3 of those actually questioned, of course) that the whip – never mind the subtleties of how it is used, correctly or incorrectly, for safety or encouragement – is an evil symbol of man’s arrogant cruelty towards the animal kingdom.
If it is emotive to counter this sort of Disney hogwash, than I’m not ashamed to be accused of such things.
You are something of an exception,
Ginger
, as your support of these rules seems to be on pragmatic rather than moral grounds. But part of the ignorant perception of
"whip cruelty"
is that it marks an urban v. rural divide – and there is a degree of caricature on both sides.
There’s no doubt, having said which, that those urban Disneyites have a greater problem with the whip than most country boys such as yourself.
There are emotive characterisations on both sides, I agree Pinza. But I don’t think it helps the debate. It seems to me the anti-new rules people seem to believe they are the only ones with any knowledge on this subject. And that anyone who dares have another point of view is a tree/horse hugging, Disneyite, ignorant, idiot.
Why is it such a problem for you to believe most of the others who are in favour of these changes are just as pragmatic as I am?
With this name calling no wonder you’re left with nobody else voicing an opinion.
Value Is Everything- Total Posts 17716
Why is it such a problem for you to believe most of the others who are in favour of these changes are just as pragmatic as I am? And just because others might be townies doesn’t mean their opinion is not valid – in exactly the same way as any American / European. Besides, you have no evidence of any urban rural divide.
Some certainly are pragmatists rather than moral crusaders, true. And some (not here) have been saying what they do not feel, because they know which side their bread is buttered.
Nearly all these sort of questions have an urban/rural divide, and there’s no evidence to suggest this is any exception. One of the failures of the BHA Report was that we were not given any breakdown stats on the demographics of respondents, and one of the criticisms of YouGov online polls has been of weighing failures in this very area.
With this name calling no wonder you’re left with nobody else voicing an opinion.
The only serious name-caller on this thread has been
Deep Sensation
. And today we’ve had pertinent contributions from yourself,
Hurdygurdyman, eddie case, Tuffers, Kingfisher
and
Cormack
. And I think you’d agree that all of the above are well able to voice their opinions!
I’m for rules too Cormack,what is blatantly obvious about these new ones regarding whip abuse is the fact those governing have tarred the whole complex picture which is made up of individual races from 5f -21f on the flat and 16f – 36f over jumps with virtually the same brush,7 strokes on the flat and 8 over obstacles,thats a bit like giving a painter a toothbrush to paint one side of a door and a decorator a yard brush to paint the other and telling them thats the way it is get on with it,do you get the picture?It wouldn’t surprise me if someone at the BHA actually proposed to give jockeys an allowance of 40 strikes on the flat per day and 50 over jumps so when a flat jockey rides over 5f he could get away with only using 3 if in contention thereby saving 4 for the ‘big’ race later on over 11/2m so he can get one home if he needs too!Pure stupidity i know but hey we’re talking the BHA here.
Have to agree with GT, Pinza, that sometimes you do tend to use the tactic of personally ridiculing those with opposing views (see, for example, your patronising replies to Steeplechasing’s comments in the other whip thread) to try to bolster your stance.
What I should have said Pinza, was IF this name calling continues you might be left with nobody else.
But you don’t know the motives of anyone in this debate, to dismiss some as Disneyite is wrong in my opinion.
However, by continueing that stem of this situation is perhaps making too much of it. So lets forget about it and get back to the true debate. You are after all Pinza, one of my favourite posters to debate with.
Thumbs up.
Value Is Everything- Total Posts 17716
However, by continueing that stem of this situation is perhaps making too much of it. So lets forget about it and get back to the true debate.
I agree – I was taken aback by your characterisation of Other Nations (!) but the main business now is to evaluate the effects of this new rule once it is brought in.
Only then will be see which hypotheses are proved right, and which wrong.
The Velka Pardubika……Thats how racing used to be in this country,it wont be from tomorrow!
It is a great race, agreed Gord.
But even the Pardubika has changed a lot in the face of criticism about some fences, on safety grounds. The Taxis is nowhere near as formidable as it once was, with its gaping ditch filled in in 1994. A year when every fence on the course was changed. Not disimilar to "in our country" the Grand National fences have been changed over the years.
Value Is EverythingAn emotive interview Pinza,Nick using the term ‘The Idiots ruling racing haven’t a clue’ quote from Trainer David Evans just about sums up the feeling of all of us who actually ‘understand’ how racing works,those who think that as from tomorrow nothings going to change for the worse have their heads up something and its not the clouds,i gave a simple example yesterday of a jockey trying too hard to win and paying dearly for it,here’s another example of what Will happen at some point…Jockey rides his race and is counting the times he uses his whip after a lot of thinking he decides i can get to the run-in with 3 to spare,everything goes to plan but in the last 50yds something is challenging him hard,he’s used his 8 strike allowance and knows 2 more will get him home in front but accepts he will win the race but lose his earnings so he trys hands and heels but gets beaten a head! The outcome is he keeps his riding fee and his percentage for 2nd place as he unsaddles in the enclosure the trainer is fuming and the owner knocks him out for costing him his horses victory! Its coming mark my words!
So what, if there is a different winner? Just because a race might be won by a different horse than would’ve been the case with the old rules. Doesn’t mean it is somehow the wrong result. A jockey
today
doesn’t say "had I been able to thrash it like they do in America I’d have won". In the same way
tomorrow
they shouldn’t say "had I been able to hit him three more times I’d have won". Makes no difference, rules is rules. It’s up to each jockey to use his whip allowance in the way he/she sees fit. If the jockey does not use his quota in the right way for his horse to win, then it is the jockey who has "cost himself victory". To think only your side of the arguement Gord "actually understand how racing works" is….. well, don’t want to enflame the situation further.
Value Is EverythingThere isn’t a lot I can say as Ginger and Cormack seem to have said everything I would want to on the matter.
I have got to say that I did expect opposition to the new rules but I am suprised at the vehmenence of some of the opposition. It’s not as if the whip has been banned completely.
I don’t think we can say that just because other administrations allow different rules so should we, someone has to take the lead. In fact I can see other countries fall in line with us. I would hate to see us falling in line with America and see things like Jamie Spencer did on Cape Blanco.
I for one am not worried if one horse doesn’t win because it can’t be hit with the whip because another will.
So what, if there is a different winner? Just because a race might be won by a different horse than would’ve been the case with the old rules. Doesn’t mean it is somehow the wrong result.
Ginge,are you after the Nobel peace prize or something? Of course it matters that its seen that the ‘Best’ horse in the race is actually trying to win,if it has been ridden to achieve the best possible placing and still gets beat fair and square so be it,thats racing,to suggest that its Ok for any other result is ludicrous,its blatantly obvious that on occassions the new rules will see the wrong result because a jockey HAS to stop riding with the whip because he has reached his quota.Your mates at Timeform will have fun re-assessing what did win and what should have won because jockey reached maximum allowance,thats how things will have to be reported to maintain accurate records.
As I see it, this whole issue has precipitated from
ONE RACE
that was broadcast on the horse racing unfriendly
BBC
(Channel 4 knockers take note).
Unfortunately, instead of ignoring the do-gooders, the spineless cretins in charge of our great sport have decreed to make these ridiculous and completely unnecessary amendments to the already adequate rules in place.
- Total Posts 17716
I for one am not worried if one horse doesn’t win because it can’t be hit with the whip because another will.
Aren’t you worried about the Jockey Strikes forecast by
David Evans
(with
Nick Luck
an unwilling interlocutor) this afternoon?
When you insult people’s professionalism and push them into a corner, banning and fining them like naughty children for doing what they’ve been applauded for doing over centuries – and still are applauded for doing throughout the rest of the Racing world (except Norway) – will you be surprised if they refuse to do as they are told, by an obviously incompetent and spineless administration? Would you smile whilst they took your hard-earned winnings?
Like many other people here, I feel that the Sport has been betrayed by its Rulemakers in many respects, and it could be that this is the straw that breaks the camel’s back.
As I’ve say, though, it’s probably time to be quiet and wait for the problems to begin before saying too much more…
So what, if there is a different winner? Just because a race might be won by a different horse than would’ve been the case with the old rules. Doesn’t mean it is somehow the wrong result.
its blatantly obvious that on occassions the new rules will see the wrong result because a jockey HAS to stop riding with the whip because he has reached his quota.
It is indeed blatantly obvious a jockey will need to stop using the whip once his quota is used up. But that is now all part of "jockeyship", it will be the jockey’s fault.
We don’t blame the "rules" if a jockey chooses the wrong path and fails to win; we blame the jockey instead. So if a jockey makes the wrong decision about when to use the whip, he is the one at fault, not the rules. Not that in that situation it will always be the case of jockey error. Sometimes the only reason a jockey will be in that position is with a good ride. When he’s used his quota up before others.
I expect judgement of pace to be more relevent under the new rules, with prominent runners usually having a slight advantage, at least until jockeys get used to the new rules.
I do however, believe that just the use of a whip is usually enough, the
number
of strokes means
less
than some punters think (imo). Sometimes with existing rules, a jockey has got a ban for over-use. Some punters and/or jockey / trainer / connections have said "had he not stroked the horse as many times it would not have won". This is wrong (imo), in
most
cases the horse would
still
have won without
AS MANY
strokes.
Value Is EverythingAs I see it, this whole issue has precipitated from
ONE RACE
that was broadcast on the horse racing unfriendly
BBC
(Channel 4 knockers take note).
The existing rules were "adequate", had the jockeys kept within those rules in valuable races. Unfortunately they didn’t, jockeys had a total disregard for them.
Value Is EverythingUnfortunately, instead of ignoring the
do-gooders, the spineless cretins
in charge of our great sport
Unfortunately those in charge of our great sport have to put up with people calling them silly names.
Whether people are for against these rules, I wish they’d accept those in charge have made a decision they’ve agonised over. A decision they’ve made with the best of intentions.
Unfortunately, whatever the people in charge came up with, they were on a hiding to nothing.
Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.