Timeform: NH Racing As Bent As A Nine Bob Note

Stewards accused by Timeform of turning a blind eye to cheating in races

At least thirty years after the fact – and several years after the non-triers rules were introduced – Timeform has decided to take a dig at the British Racing Authority (BHA) for turning a blind eye to the blatant schooling in public that goes on every day of the week. For legal reasons, Timeform are a little reticent to name names.

Or is this the first time this has come to their attention? It did not take much looking to find that Chasers And Hurdlers 2011 contained a similar accusation, also reported by the BBC. Cornelius Lysaght obviously forgot that as it was five years ago.

Curiously, the BHA was unable to supply the BBC with any comment on Sports Week this morning and could only manage a bland written statement in the sport’s defence.

Discuss...

 

Yep it's bent but still love it.

 

Why is it bent to have a horse "not trying"?

It's pretty obvious that if a horse is being aimed at a big race it doesn't make sense to force it to run its heart out in a minor race, especially as it probably won't be 100%. Also, if it is being aimed at a major handicap why try to get its weight as high as possible by going all out to win a minor race.

What is totally wrong is that people are allowed to make money by laying horses that aren't necessarily out to win.

Maybe trainers should be made to declare if their horse has been trained to win the race being contested. However, if they say it hasn't and it wins they would be accused of all sorts of things. They seem to freely declare such info in interviews before the race but those who aren't aware of the interviews are betting in the dark.

It is why it only really makes sense to bet in non handicap races that have high value, when you know the best horse should win.

It is even more obvious in flat races where it doesn't make sense for a 2yo with long term prospects to be pushed to the limit on début or early on in the season when it is barely 2 years old

 

The British rules of the sport state that all horses must be ridden to obtain the best possible placing.

In practise the only time that the rules are actually enforced is when it becomes obvious that a jockey has dropped his hands in the last fifty yards and been run out of a better placing that could have been obtained by just nudging the horse along; or when a jockey has a seemingly unassailable lead, eases his mount and gets caught.

It is very easy to place a horse in a race where it has no realistic chance if you are just looking to give it a run to get it fit rather than having any competitive chance but too many trainers are not smart enough to fiddle their charges and keep within the rules.

The horse racing authorities are not responsible for the conduct of betting activities, so if they suspect that some form of illegal betting activity is taking place that should be investigated by the relevant betting authority, who can report to them any racing persons (trainers, owners, jockeys) that are involved in corrupt practise.

Horse racing needs to enforce its own rules because without betting the sport would not exist and once the public perceives a lack of integrity, they will stop betting. Those of us that would go racing just for the sport are a very small minority; and the betting does provide a significant proportion of the prize money and general media coverage.

 

I'm fully aware of that rule QM. Don't agree with it though if it means the horse should be pushed to its limit. I suspect the BHA agree with my view which is why they turn a blind eye to anything but blatant stopping, which is a different matter

 

Not surprised there's been no BHA inquiry as the ongoing one into British trainers non trying in Group One races all season must be taking up an awful lot of time one would imagine...

 

Haha, and they are spending the rest of the time investigating Best because he wins money from the bookmakers!! That's racing at the minute, run by bookies for the bookies and turn a blind eye if bookies aren't being taken for a few £

 

Is NH Racing ‘bent’?!? I think we all know the answer to that don’t we regular readers. Nudge, nudge, wink, wink, say no more…

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again I doubt there are many heats in the Isle, run in the NH sphere, under £10k where at least one set of connections aren’t ‘up to something’. Be it schooling in public, giving an animal a gentle introduction, having a ‘quiet’ run in order to shave a few pounds off a handicap mark, etc. But when a sport is dependent on the triumvirate of man, handicapping and betting what the bally well ‘eck do you expect?!? Also, the ridiculously small prizemoney in the sport gives connections little alternative but to ‘fiddle’ should they wish to survive financially. Cause and effect and all that.

The golden rule to remember re NH racing, people. Is that not all trainers are like Mr Henderson. You follow?!?

 

"The golden rule..... is that not all trainers are like Mr Henderson. You follow."
That's not a golden rule, Barney. That's obsequiousness.
Let's face it. Laws have historically been made by the rich- to protect the rich. Since the rich legislate and adminstrate horse racing, it would be naive to reject their culpability since the sport first began.
"Quis custodies ipsos custodiet? " The answer is nobody!
And, as Oddy says.." Life is bent. Full stop. Let it go. "
I can't disagree with that. Horses don't run for the benefit of Joe Public.
Personally I shouldn't like my life to depend on the dignity and beyond reproach character of any owner or trainer in racing- Henderson included!

 

Hear, hear! I sometimes wanted to tell him that he was being slightly obsequious, but I couldn't spell it.............

 

I think its definitely a bit camp but couldnt agree with it being bent!