- This topic has 609 replies, 83 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Gladiateur,
Have you heard of judgement and view?
Eddie Case,
Have you heard of avoiding the issue? You still haven’t answered my original question. Even the collective brains trust on Channel 4 Racing would have put up a better defence by now.
There is no defence required, this is a racing forum for people to express their views or in your case not. I have expressed my views, you will have to like it or lump it but there will not be the evidence that you seem to need.
i have expressed my views, you will have to like it or lump it but there will not be the evidence that you seem to need.
The problem is that you have apparently confused your
opinion
with
fact
.
The problem is that you have apparently confused your
opinion
with
fact
.
Not guilty m’laud unless you have evidence to the contrary.
Not guilty m’laud unless you have evidence to the contrary.
Re-read your posts. Anyway, I’m not going to waste any more time arguing with you. Your obstinacy has defeated me.
Safety
I only ride on a recreational basis and have never boarded a highly-tuned thoroughbred at 40 mph, but safety appears to be a cop-out used by those riders who rely on their whip more than actual horsemanship.
Riding many varied, inexperienced and temperamental horses must be totally different to riding the same old hack/s time and time again Gladiateur. I don’t see how riders in Europe can be said to "rely" on the whip.
Value Is EverythingRiding many varied, inexperienced and temperamental horses must be totally different to riding the same old hack/s time and time again Gladiateur. I don’t see how riders in Europe can be said to "rely" on the whip.
Oh, I concur wholeheartedly, Ginge. However, controlling a horse requires balance, dexterity and co-ordination more than mere brute force; it doesn’t matter how much you beat a horse- if it plants its toes, you aren’t moving it. I get the impression that many of those who oppose the banning of the whip would soon be exposed as inferior horsemen.
controlling a horse requires balance, dexterity and co-ordination more than mere brute force; it doesn’t matter how much you beat a horse- if it plants its toes, you aren’t moving it. I get the impression that many of those who oppose the banning of the whip would soon be exposed as inferior horsemen.
I totally agree with your first sentence Gladiateur, totally disagree with the second.
I was/am all in favour of the whip rules being changed (in the latest round) but would not wish for it to be banned entirely. It is in no way cruel.
Got my hands on a current British whip and wanted to know how lethal it was. Hitting my hand with increasing force. Hard as I dared (harder than used by jockeys), could hear it moving through the air, although I obviously felt the result wouldn’t describe it as "hurting". Suspect it is even less on a horse’s skin.
Then again, my dominatrix says I have as high a pain threshold she’s ever known.
Value Is EverythingThen again, my dominatrix says I have as high a pain threshold she’s ever known.
Are you sure that she wasn’t labelling you thick-skinned?
It’s impossible to prove how much whip usage makes horses run more quickly; however, if there were no whips at all in races then we wouldn’t have to worry about either the public
perception
of horses being whipped to death or the
reality
(getting back to the original topic) of jockeys breaking the rules and still keeping the race.
For me it seemed unfair yesterday and always has seemed unfair that if a winner is deemed to have fallen foul of the rules of the sport he is still allowed to keep the prize.
If Rooney handles it into the net the goal is disallowed , maybe if the winner is deemed to have broken a rule it should be thrown out even for the slightest breach ?
If the jockeys knew that they would lose first place they might have a think about how they ride.
The purpose (of the rules) is to protect the horses. That is the intent.
The purpose of the current rule was to head off a full scale revolt by appeasing (some might say caving in to) the jockeys. The horses welfare was just a sideshow. Obviously, you would actually protect by not hitting them at all.
GC did mention yesterday after the race that Joseph had flouted the rules as Jim Mcgrath sat like a shrinking violet.Nick Luck certainly didn’t elaborate on GC’s valid point.Hindsight shows had Ryan Moore ridden ‘Estimate’ the same way Joseph rode the winner then The Queen would have recorded another Gold cup winner.Of course we all know ‘Leading Light’ responded to every urge from his jockey,had Joseph not been so firm on his mount he wouldn’t have got up and thats the problem with Whip rules,yesterdays result didn’t look pretty but it worked and nobodys been hurt.
.. nobodys been hurt.
Except for those who backed Estimate to win, Missunited to win (how much did the cannon effect affect her?) and Brown Panther each-way, as well as the connections of those three horses.
.. nobodys been hurt.
Except for those who backed Estimate to win, Missunited to win (how much did the cannon effect affect her?) and Brown Panther each-way, as well as the connections of those three horses.
Problem is from a punters perspective, had Joseph stopped using his whip after he’d gone through his allowance ‘Leading Light’ wouldn’t have won,he’d have stayed on under hands and heels and those who had backed the horse would be kicking off ‘Non Trier’! and ultimately thats exactly what Joseph would have been accused of and rightly so.What he’s done is only what the horse needs and thats a strong ride,he was at him before the home turn and the horse kept finding.Now had the horse not been running on with the tenacity Leading Light showed then thats the time to put the whip down as its doing nothing the horse has run its race.Yesterdays result proved the best horse won but it didn’t look pretty.I can live with that.
Missunited to win (how much did the cannon effect affect her?)
Jockey received a whip ban on Missunited (fact)
Problem is from a punters perspective, had Joseph stopped using his whip after he’d gone through his allowance ‘Leading Light’ wouldn’t have won,he’d have stayed on under hands and heels and those who had backed the horse would be kicking off ‘Non Trier’! and ultimately thats exactly what Joseph would have been accused of and rightly so.
If Joseph had used up his (legally defined) quota and lost the race, there couldn’t be any reason to complain.
Jockey received a whip ban on Missunited (fact)
Jockey received a whip ban on Leading Light (fact)
This thing some punters have about each tap bringing out more – is wrong.
Some horses are lazy, some are enthusiastic. Had Estimate had the same number of "encouragements" as Leading Light she still would not have won imo. Leading Light is lazy and needs more encouragement, however, the way he rolled around in the closing stages seems to suggest would have done better had Joseph spread the encouragements out a little better.
Anyone know whether Espinoza got a ban earlier on in the week? Gave his mount no time to respond between encouragements. Worse ride than Joseph.
Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.