The BHA have today anounced their planned changes to the whip rules in force in Great Britain. To sumarise the main points: 1. The frequency guidelines have been removed and now there will be a fixed number of times a whip can be used during a race (7 times in a Flat race and 8 times in a jump race, but no more than 5 times in the final furlong/after the last obstacle); 2. The minimum ban for exceeding the freequency rules has been raised to 5 days, previously the minium was a caution. 3. A jockey who receives a ban of 3 days or more will have to forfeit his riding fee and any prize money won. The new rules will come into effect on 10 October. I've tried to find the report in full but it does not appear to have been put on general release. If I can find a link I will put it up here for those that want to read it. Be warned, it is 70 pages long! Taken from Racing Post: Whip review unveils raft of tough new penalties By David Baxter 7:23AM 27 SEP 2011 THE BHA'S review into the use of the whip, which has been published on Tuesday morning,offers a 'clear guide with tough penalties', according to Professor Tim Morris of the BHA. Morris, director of equine sciences and welfare, was speaking on BBC Radio 5 Live, and said that the review had concluded that there is still a place for the whip in racing, but far tougher sanctions for misuse will now be meted out to offenders. Chief among the changes to the use of the whip, is the amount of times a jockey will be able to implement it. A jockey on the Flat will now only be able to use it seven times in the course of the race, while over jumps it can be used eight times. Under both codes, the whip can only be used a maximum of five times after the last obstacle/ in the final furlong. Failure to adhere to the new frequency limits will result in a minimum of a five day suspension, with the previous minimum penalty a caution. Jockeys who pick up a ban exceeding three days can expect to lose their share of the prize money and riding fee. It will also be an offence for any owner or trainer to reimburse the rider from their own share of the prize-money. Should a jockey appear before a BHA disciplinary panel three or more times over use of the whip, then their licence could be reviewed. All the new penalties and guidelines will come into force on Monday October 10. The changes are stringent, and Morris said: "We have set out a very clear guide with tough penalties. Jockeys wanted clarity and there is now a strict guide on when and how the whip can be used and where it can be used." Calls for the use of the whip to be reviewed had been raised after Grand National winning jockey Jason Maguire was handed a five day ban for excessive use of the whip on Ballabriggs, with the debate spreading industry-wide with a host of different opinions. In the wake of the Grand National, Towcester racecourse had proposed that all races at the track would be run under hands and heels rules, however after consulting with the BHA, have decided that next weeks fixture will be staged under normal whip rules. According to research conducted by the BHA, 90 percent of people are not put off by the use of the whip in racing, providing it is used responsibly. When asked why jockeys need the whip, Morris said: "When you have got half a tonne of horse going at 40 miles per hour, you have to be able to steer and position it, and you need to have control. Horses have four big feet and big teeth, they would soon tell you if it was painful [using the whip]." In the wake of the review being released, the RSPCA 'cautiously welcomed' the changes in principle, and will monitor its effects. RSPCA equine consultant David Muir said: "We need to examine the report in detail, but at first sight it would appear the BHA has made some positive changes to which we give a cautious welcome; we will be monitoring their implementation to see if they have made a real difference to horse welfare." The RSPCA made six recommendations to the BHA, five of which were accepted. Muir expressed the group's disappointment that use of the whip in the forehand position had not been outlawed, but added: "Also key are the changes to punishments jockeys receive if they breakthe rules, including much longer suspensions which increase with repeat offences, forfeiture of prize money, and possible licensing implications. "We hope these changes will mean that the few jockeys who have misused the whip will think twice in future. Thoughts and comments?
That will certainly make jockeys think twice. "If I flog it to win not only do I get a ban but I will forfeit prize money and fee. Hmm if I settle for second place I get my fee and my prize money and I don't get a ban". By the time he's figured it out the race will be over and he'll probably get third. Will this affect the betting on the jump championship?
The thing that struck me was the possibility of a horse being hit 7 times in a 5f race, but 8 times in a 4.5 mile race.
Princess thanks for posting this. Without ploughing through the whole 78 pages it would appear that, although the jockey gets banned and loses his race fee and prize money, the race result is allowed to stand? If so, I find that takes away some of the credibility of these changes, and they don't go far enough. Dettori won the Prince of Wales Stakes on Rewilding by striking the horse excessively, more times that the ruling allowed, so basically broke the rules to win (I won't use the word "cheated" as it is fairly emotive). I don't see why the horse should then be allowed to keep the race in that case - surely the horse should be demoted accordingly if the stewards believe that additional use of the persuader was the deciding factor in the result?
I can't see a total ban being on the cards, the statement from Tim Morris indicates, to me at least, that there is no intention to move that way. Racing whips are significantly different to "ordinary" whips. I own a few whips [insert own joke here], and the general riding crops, schooling whips, etc are far harsher than a cushioned racing whip.
OddDog, yes the feeling seems to be that it is unfair to the horse, owner, trainer and stable staff, as well as the punters, to throw the horse out for the jockey's mistake. Cyclonic, yes I also find that a little strange. From personal experience, sometimes a horse needs a tap with the whip coming into a fence to keep his mind on the job. It will be very hard for someone to keep tabs on every single rider in a 20 runner race, counting the number of times the stick is used. I pity the poor sod on "ship count" duty for the Grand National!
They might be well "cushioned" but try standing along the rail in the last furlong, with eyes shut, and listening to the sounds of the whip being used. A bit unnerving.
Had a quick read of the main points but whats in place to stop connections saying do as normal; get him up and we'll sort you out money wise? For the well paid retained jockey's how much of a hit in the pocket will that be? Sorry for me the answer is if you break the whip rules the horse is disqualified! Means there is no comebacks from trainers or owners and they then need to encourage the jockey's to adhere to it! If more re. this is further in the report the apologies in advance?
There is a piece in the report that says owners/trainers will be forbidden to reimburse the jockey from their share of the prize money, but I guess there would be ways round it for a retained jockey with a temporary "pay rise" to make up for the lost income.
PN - Ahh right OK - cheers for that. Like you say though I've no doubt they could get round it somehow.
On the whole a decent attempt to make a difference although the bit about it now becoming an offence for owner or trainer to reimburse a jockey out of their own winnings must be hard to police and without being able to police it it could end up being the difficult part in being effective. If a jockey misses out on £1500 due to just getting up and winning a race how on earth will they stop an envelope of cash being passed to the jockey. I would also have liked the number of smacks between the last fence or furlong to be something like 3 as this is the time its being used as the persuader as they sometimes horribily put it and i dont like the idea of that, 3 is enough in my book easily. I also hope there is power for the stewards to rule that no misuse occured despite the number used if some can be clearly seen to be for steering rather than persuassion, a jockey should not be penalised for using 4 strokes early to prevent a horse running wide or into another horse. On the whole a good attempt to do something which hopefully will have effect. The Jockeys who say we do not want a ban have the responsibility to ensure one does not come in by taking their own whip use seriously and using with restraint.
I doubt I'm alone in welcoming any rule change that protects the horses but I've always questioned the fixed number of times a horse can be struck. In NH racing (and I'm sure on the Flat) there are plenty of lazy sorts who switch off mid race, or go past the stands and pull up because they think their job is done, if these sorts have been struck a few times before the closing stages it's possible one of these difficult characters has been put in a position to win the race by his jockey only for the jockey to ride hands and heels which will hinder his chances of winning. Plenty of horses need a little slap when approaching a fence just to ensure the horse is concentrating. And what of a jockey who thinks he/she has struck their mount the maximum number of times permitted, ride a hands and heels finish and gets beaten a short head only to be told that they miscounted and was allowed one more 'strike' - no doubt they're then ridiculed by the world and potentially banned/fined for failing to ride a finish as well as the usual orregular betting pattern enquiry and doubts cast on their integrity. These are jockeys not accountants, I accept that counting to 7 or 8 shouldn't prove too dofficult for most but in the midst of a 4m chase or even a 2m flat race I imagine it becomes very easy to get caught up in the race itself and forget how many times the whip has been used. I much prefered the rule that stated a jockey mustn't hit a horse with unreasonable frequency, or without allowing the horse time to respond or striking in the wrong position. I appreciate many of these are open to interpretation and inconsistencies could exist up and down the country, but having a set rule on the number of strikes I think will cause more problems than the powers realise. Many in the game refer to the whip as a tickle stick which I believe is in response to the changes manufacturers have been forced to make, but if it's still possible for a horse to sustain injury through being struck then perhaps a furtehr look is needed at how the whips are manufactured. I'd hate to think a championship race is determined by a jockeys failure to remember how many times he/she has applied the pressure
Remember AP on Drill Sergeant when the horse just stopped after a circuit? I would need to watch the replay but I'm pretty sure he gave it a couple of good slaps to get it going again. The whole field had passed it by this time of course but McCoy coaxed Drill Sergeant back into the race and went on to win. Have a look here if you've never seen it, quite amazing: http://horses.sportinglife.com/Video/Racing/0,27770,403084,00.html
Memory playing tricks again - looks like it was just hands and heels to get him going again (I think the horse thought he had won already). But I did count 8 smacks after the last to get hom home.
Cheers for that Oddy, classic bit of watching that for so many reasons. But if you count the amount of whips from AP after the last hurdle he dos in fact whip Drill Sergeant 8 times from there to the post... I would actually say that maybe AP was right to whip Drill Sergeant to get him there but the rules would say that it would be excessive... But he prob used his 'quota' up before hand...!!! How would AP feel if he got a ban for that ride. I think he owners etc would be making up for his 'loss of earnings' shall we say after what really was top jockeymanship...
There will be a course commentary that jockeys can hear clearly and commentaries will now include the number of strikes allowed. "And as they enter the final furlong it's A still in the lead but with only 2 strikes left and B is closing with just 1 stroke remaining. 1,2 that's it! no more left, and B is closing. Photo. Why on earth didn't B use his last strike Jim?" "I don't know John, I can only assume he's deaf".
What about Piggott on Roberto. Thrashing like mad to get the horse up but on checking Roberto back in the stable there was not a mark on him; but Lester's boots had suffered. He was frightening the horse by cracking the whip against his boot. Probably would get banned now despite not touching the horse (allegedly).
