Forum Replies Created
- Posts
It will always be “The Derby” to me. I’m sure what most people call races is heavily influenced by names that have applied for a long time, or what the name was when they first became interested in racing. Similarly I’m rarely a fan of races changing venue; the Rehearsal Chase should be at Chepstow, the Temple Stakes at Sandown etc.
I am interested in who is sponsoring the big events though, and am always pleased to see non-industry sponsors in particular.
One other aspect I’d be interested to know more on is how much impact these sponsorships have on the prizemoney of the race in question.
Seeing as Ascot has the royal procession, perhaps Cazoo could come up with a rival version at Epsom that showcases some of their current offers.
Good to see the Derby has got a new sponsor though; can’t be easy to find them in the current environment. Cazoo certainly seems to be pursuing sports sponsorship as a way of raising their profile as this is following on from forays into football and snooker. Good for them.
Thanks for the replies re my query about the insurance.
I have huge sympathy for Tylicki, but agree with FiftyP that the risk has to be accepted as an inherent part of participation. There’s only a hair’s breadth between bold riding and careless riding, and it’s inevitable that lines will be crossed in the heat of competition. Unless there is a blatantly reckless act such as riding while drunk or pushing an opponent off their horse, I think the risk of competition has to be accepted. That said, this is very easy for me to say as I’m not in Tylicki’s situation, and can see why he is testing the waters.
Freddy Tylicki is suing Graham Gibbons as he’s claiming Gibbons caused the fall that left him wheelchair-bound.
This was the race in question https://www.racingpost.com/results/1079/kempton-aw/2016-10-31/660663
Will be following this one with interest. Does anyone know if jockeys have liability insurance?
There’s more than a grain of truth in that previous comment. To some extent, I think a jockey is giving a good ride if they don’t actually do anything particularly memorable!
Despite having watched racing for a long time, I still couldn’t tell you much about what constitutes a particularly good ride from a stylistic viewpoint. However, with a bit of experience, it’s easier to spot good rides from a strategic viewpoint e.g. where the jockey has judged the pace of the race well or how they have positioned their horse. Some of Rachael Blackmore’s rides at Cheltenham were good examples of this.
VTC, I’m going to defend Alice! I think she’s a good presenter, though her interests are obviously rather more on the equestrian side than the betting side. People seem to hark back to the good old days, but when I compare back to the likes of Willie Carson and Tanya Stevenson who seemed to lose all eloquence when put in front of a TV camera, the current lot seem pretty decent on the whole. Obviously those two I’ve given as examples both really knew their stuff, but that does not always translate to being a natural broadcaster.
Can hardly believe I’m writing this, but I don’t even mind the addition of Chris Hughes! ITV have made a good call to get him involved. A Love Island celeb is far more likely to help attract a wider audience than all of the ex-jocks, and he seems to be genuinely knowledgeable and interested too.
Willie Mullins’ classy mare Elfile has been retired, and is to be covered by Crystal Ocean. Wishing her a happy retirement.
Totally agree MoyenneCorniche. It seems crazy to think that the possibility of a treble Grand National winner could be bad PR for the sport, but it’s almost certainly for the best that Tiger Roll misses the National now.
It’s such a shame, but what’s done is done. I presume the media focus in the build-up will now be on Rachael Blackmore, not that I’m sure she will be overjoyed about that!
I certainly think the dropping of the word “Foxhunters” was a wise move by Cheltenham, and agree that changing from “National Hunt” to “the Jumps” more widely would be sensible too. Aside from the hunting connotations, its meaning is not very clear unless unless you know it already. It’s too obscure.
Saying all that, the sport of course has its roots in hunting, and I don’t think we should be ignoring this or erasing the past. I’m actually in favour of keeping the hunter chase at the Festival. If the name is thought to be too unpalatable nowadays, it could be called the “point-to-pointers’ chase” or something like that.
The forum is indeed a place for debate Bonanzaboy, which is why I wanted to emphasise it was not me who had reported any previous posts. I’m just not sure that regularly assuming the worst about connections’ motives or to want horses to be retired for the reasons I gave previously is helpful. I struggle to see how anyone could really enjoy racing if they held the sport in such poor esteem.
I know a lot of the comments that are made come from a good place, and it’s lovely to see that people care about the horses; the horses are the aspect of the sport that I am passionate about. That’s probably why I find some of the comments I see on here quite upsetting when I don’t think they are justified, and they paint the sport in such a bad light.
There are some bad owners of course, and the treatment of ex-racehorses is a huge welfare issue. However, I think that’s a bit separate from the topic of which horses should be “allowed” to race or be bred from. Also if we started disallowing horses from racing for all kinds of reasons then we would have a lot more ex-racehorses to find new careers and homes for.
Had best mention it’s not me who has reported any of the previous posts for inappropriate content! Have had my say and would prefer to debate differing views
I would:
– Get rid of all the mares’ races as they take away from the championship events.
– Bring back the handicap for novice chasers.
– Make the National Hunt Chase an event for professional jockeys.Wouldn’t change much else and am happy with the four days. I never get the fuss about the four days! The Flat manages to sustain a number of decent festivals of this length, and the Jumps can more than hold its own in this regard. Calling some of the existing races “crap” truly baffles me. I would love to own a horse that was “crap” enough to be competitive in any of them!
Re the mares, I have no objection with having some championship mares’ events at some other point of these season, just not at the Festival!
I’m also in the camp that water jumps are a trappy obstacle that creates particularly ugly looking mistakes and falls, and they introduce too high a risk of injury. I believe the main problem is that they have a “lip” on them which, if a horse catches its legs on, creates a particularly hard and jolting impact.
Perhaps there is something to be learned from steeplechases in human athletics here. In these, the water jump has a gradual slope up exiting the water, so there is no lip to catch yourself or trip on. This is why we rarely see similar issues at the Olympics!
I’m not sure how easy it is from a ground maintenance point of view to have a slope rather than a lip but, if water jumps must be persisted with on racecourses, this would seem an obvious improvement.
Edit – Have just seen apracing’s earlier post about the water jump at Huntingdon, which is along similar lines to what I am suggesting. Clearly something can be done, so either make them safer or scrap them!
There could be all manner of reasons why they wanted to breed from Time For Champers. Unless there were any specific welfare concerns, of which there is no evidence, I can’t see why anyone should be intervening to prevent her being raced or bred from.
I agree with your comments Patriot. Some of the comments on these memorial posts that seem to imply greed or a lack of care by connections must be very distressing for them to read. There are definitely welfare issues that the industry needs to address, but calling for the retirement of every horse just because they are not very good, have had a couple of bad runs, or their age has reached double figures is not the answer. Tiger Roll is a very good recent example of why this is so, and there are countless others.
Tonge, I understand what you were getting at in that when it is announced it is a horse’s last run it sometimes seems to tempt fate into a disaster happening. I’d prefer they just ran the horse as usual and announced the happy event of their retirement afterwards.
Sad to hear of Finian’s Rainbow’s passing, he was a great horse at the height of his powers. I always felt he was a little underappreciated as his stablemate Sprinter Sacre became a superstar in the same division the following season, and Finian’s then seemed to become somewhat of a forgotten horse. Glad to hear he was clearly loved though and had a good retirement. RIP Finian’s Rainbow
I think you are being a bit harsh here Ruby. Time For Champers finished 3rd of 11 beaten only 1 and a quarter lengths as recently as November 2020. Should the 8 horses that she beat that day not be allowed to race either? Where do we draw the line at which horses are and aren’t allowed to race? As you say, she was not overraced, and she had never fallen before. I can’t see any welfare concerns here. What happened to her was very sad indeed though. RIP Time For Champers
