http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/horse_racing/15328393.stm "The British Horseracing Authority (BHA) is failing to crack down on "non-triers", according to a leading analyst of the sport. Timeform's Chasers & Hurdlers annual claims cheating is rife in jump racing, with stewards "blind" to the practice in which jockeys deliberately limit their horses' chances. Sources within the BHA said it was "disappointed" by the allegations. It comes after a week of controversy surrounding rules on whip use. WHAT IS 'NON-TRYING'?Continue reading the main story â¢Non-trying is cheating - not allowing the horse to gain the best position possible â¢This could be to secure a more lenient weight in a handicap â¢It could also be to increase odds in a future race Every horse which ran under National Hunt rules during the 2010-11 season receives a report and rating in the guide - its latest edition running to 1,112 pages. While saying the latest season "produced a group of outstanding champions" including "tip-top young chaser" Long Run, Timeform's verdict on some other performances is more damning. It declines to name names, but says: "The rules requiring horses to be ridden on their merits are regularly flouted, and transgressions in the jumping game... are arguably as widespread now as they have been for a long time. "Non-triers are rarely picked up by the racecourse stewards... who seem blind to such things. TIMEFORM'S REPUTATIONContinue reading the main story â¢Timeform has been established for 63 years and has built a strong reputation, meaning its influence is considerable within the sport "The main responsibility for seeing that punters are not short-changed rests with the stewards, who must be seen to be imposing the rules with firmness and consistency. "At times nowadays, at some of the more far-flung outposts of jump racing, it seems as if they are hardly imposing them at all." The BHA is racing's regulator and is already facing a series of crises, most recently over the use of the whip, but also regarding its funding and the yet-to-be-published 2012 fixture list. Starting this week four jockeys and one ex-professional rider face hearings for alleged corrupt practices, but all are from Flat racing, and not the jumping world at the centre of the allegations. A spokesman for the BHA said it could not immediately comment. " Views?
Old boy unfortunately where you have a combination of man, gambling and handicapping you will always get people ‘playing the system’ in order, as you say, to get a more lenient perch and better odds in the future. It’s happened from the very dawn of the sport and will continue forevermore, methinks. I’m sure that we could all nominate trainers that we feel are guilty and fall into the category of running ‘non triers’ as it is so widespread a practice (be it giving a horse a ‘gentle introduction’, never putting it in the race with a chance, running it over a totally inadequate trip, etc.). I really can’t see how it can ever be stamped out as a trainer has a multitude of reasons at their disposal to explain a poor run most of which are never, and I do mean never, questioned by the authorities (e.g. immature, didn’t handle the track, sick horse, poor ride, interfered with and the list goes on and on). In an ideal world ‘non triers’ wouldn’t exist or be stamped out but I really don’t see how you can unless stewards start making very big and very subjective calls.
The inconsistency of the stewards is something that can and should be tackled - I would assume the BHA constantly review the performances of their stewards ? It's also disappointing that Timeform chooses to single out NH here when you will witness numerous times daily on the flat horses who miss the break and end up behind a wall of horses and unable to mount a challenge, of course these could carry the tag of 'unlucky in running' or 'gaps never appeared', but how many of them were exactly what Timeform say is rife in NH spheres ? SBC is correct, people will always play the system and you will never prevent it from happening or pick up every occasion when it does....
This is hardly anything new. Some of us have known that National Hunt racing is a huge fiddle for twenty-five years. That is why some of us scarcely ever bet on jumps racing except at the Cheltenham Festival when the prize money is sufficient incentive for the crooked trainers to run their horses on their merits. It will be very interesting to see how many jump jockeys get done under the new whip rules for trying too hard and how many actually get pulled up as “non-triers” because they allowed their charge to coast home ten lengths behind the winner rather than risk whipping it a couple more times on the run-in to obtain a better placing. As racing is governed by the old school tie brigade, do not expect any change any time soon.
Naas,we all no its going on,but as i stated in an earlier post regarding new whip rules, its only going to get worse,How are the stewards going to put a ban on a jockey when his horse does nothing in the last 2f, because the jockey will come back with the reply of " its all i could do,i had used all my whips on the beast before,so all i could do was just sit there on top and hope for the best". In my opinion, the true horse players will be only be investing on the races with good prize money,because its the only way a punter is going to know that the trainor,jockey,and horse combination are really trying to win.. What the BHA should regarding the whip rule, is... 1) Ban the jockey, for period deserved. 2) Take his riding fee + winnings money 3) Take the prize money from owner and trainor (so no brown envelopes will be passed around) 4) Let the winning horse keep its place in the race. ( this is for the benefit of the punter)
This all reminds me of a tale I once heard where two country horses were involved in a match race. They went around the back behind a stand of trees but didn't come back into view. So someone went and had a look. The two jocks were involved in a punch up because neither was supposed to win.
Alot of it is caused by the handicapping mentality which sees a horse shoot up 10 lbs in the weights for winning a handicap hurdle (let's say from 120 to 130). Next race he's upped in grade and runs off 130 and is beaten 35 lengths. The handicapper's reaction? Leaves him at 130 for his next race, where he again finishes well beaten. The following race the handicapper may elect to drop him a couple of pounds to 128 but he will still finish beaten 15-20 lengths. To cut a long story short - if we are talking about "normal handicappers" (i.e. not "good things" / "blots on the handicap" / "future group winner in a handicap" / "highly progressive horses") the rise up the weights is always very quick, and the slide back down is always a slow and painful process. If a 8yo handicap hurdler wins off 120 he is highly unlikely to win his next race off 130 (would love to see some stats on that for seasoned handicappers) and connections will likely face a frustrating series of defeats where the horse has no chance of winning.
OddDog - good point re handicapper not lowering a horses mark as quickly as he raises them, I wonder if anyone knows the average of how many handicaps a horse wins from number of handicap runs in their career ? I know from when I owned greyhounds your average grader would win a race every 17 attempts, which may surprise some, it did me when I was told....
I really think daily statements from trainers like, "Trainer states following are non-triers today:" would surely help?
can't see it happening somehow. At least in National hut you have enough clues. Quite often they'll say "we just want to get a run into him" or if a horse is making a debut over hurdles or fences you know you're taking a big risk because you might be about to be on a public schooling exercise. It's the flat races where you see jockeys run into every obstacle (behave) they can find and the trainer says "we never got the rub of the green today". the next time out you see the horse zig zagging through others as though he's the equine Alberto Tomba - I'll be honest - I get a bit pissed off when that happens.
I agree with you Oddy n Chippy... That 1st run out thing is something of a red flag warning... Some horses are fit for their 1st run out, some need 2/3 races before they are supposed to be up to full rating speed...!!! Which is it, becasue you cant have it both ways can you...???
We've all seen plenty of non-triers in our time, but the most extraordinary one I think I ever saw was in 2004 when this NH jockey just simply stepped-off his mount. No fall, no out-the-side-door, no reasonable UR, just plain stepped-off the horse. Really amazing that was, incredible! The people "in" on this won around 100 grand apparently. http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article85035.ece
Sorry Grizzly you've been done for a hit rate of 1 in 17 that's nonesense in respect of greyhounds. I held an owner trainers licence for 20 years and my handicappers I expected a 1 win in 6 strike rate sometimes for useful dogs maybe 1 in 5. Open racers I wouldn't have put on track for these hit rates! The 1 in 6 most trainers could achieve.
Swanny 100 grand Ardent, would love to hear some of your stories about greyhound racing, I bet you have a good few!
Oh Nass you've no idea I could write a book and have considered so...I started when I was 20 ...first ownership then training.....when I get time I''ll start a little thread if anyone's interested...
cheers Ardent. Catford 1989 Ray Peacock (RIP), maybe 1 in 17 was the norm then ? Our first dog we had 4 wins in 56 then he got injured and retired so the 1 from 17 wasn't unblievable
I was lucky in the beginning Powderhall 1985 won few grand on the dogs then paid £650 for an 18 month old bitch...went A5 to A1 then open class recorded 35 wins from 128 starts. That was me hooked. Since gave up licence due to change in personal circumstances more appeal in the nags for me now.
Ardent my old man worked at Wishaw dog track for about 40 years.I worked there when I was 12, that was about 1958,love "duggie men" talk.
