Considering it's such a topical point at the moment thought I'd start a thread to get the opinion of others. For me, it's a joke. An almighty backlash from anyone associated with riding/training/owning is coming in the next few days. It's going to become a farcical spectacle in the near future. Hughes gets a 5 day ban for a correctional slap on the neck - you must be kidding me! Just watching ATR there - if Hughes had used the whip 1 more time he would have missed the Breeders Cup. One of two things is going to happen in the forthcoming weeks: Dettori, Hughes, Queally and other jockeys going over to the BC are either not going to race much at all, or will be so careful they won't be as effective as they should be. William Buick said in an interview "I'd rather come 2nd than get a ban" so that clearly demonstrates jockeys are not in the correct state of mind before a race even starts! If this is the path we're going down we might as well get rid of the whip altogether as it's a total and utter farce. We haven't even got to the jumps yet! The whip is there first and foremost as a safety implement and as seen today, a correctional slap counts as a use of the whip. As a result, jockeys are more than likely going to save their allocated whips for more important parts of the race and a situation is going to arise where a jockey will not use the whip to steady a horse when he normally would and fatalities and serious injuries for horses and jockeys are going to become far more commonplace - the exact opposite of what the whip sets out to achieve. Hopefully the powers that be will rectify their mistake in the near future but unfortunately I cannot see this happening. Racing seems to have turned into a punters' nightmare and a bookies' dream, even if you are for the whip changes. Of course these are only my opinions, but I strongly feel today racing lost a great deal.
I completely agree with everything you had said ROTO, There are so many potential problems which will arise from this change, they should have banned in altogther (which imo would of been even worse than this change) or leave it as it was. how many jockeys are now going to claim they lost in battle up the home straight because they thought they had used thier allocation of whips and therefore couldnt correct their horse to run in a straight line? In NH racing it will get worse, i can imagine many jockeys getting thrown through the running rails next to a jump when a horse decides he wants to jink and the jockey has 'used' his whips, or similarly he doesnt want to waste a whip at an early stage? Its a farce...but thats only my opinion!
ROTO - completely agree. I remember the debate we had a few weeks ago and althought most were in favour I could see there'd be trouble. Choc is the only NH jock I've heard make any negative comments, everyone else quickly came out in support as if they;d been instructed to by the authorities. Betting takes on a different light now, not only have you got to work out the form, ground, weight etc you need to consider what engagements your jockey has upcoming...
I have to say i agree with the wip ban- Horse racing is the only sport/ anything in the world where you can hit something and for it to be alright. Visually it doesn't look good to see a horse being whipped.The whip ban- will increase jockeymanship and will show us true great jockeys, hitting a horse when its going at 100% wont do anything nor I believe it makes any difference when a horse is tired at the end of the race. . I have horses myself and compete, I do use a stick but only when I feel if a horse is going to run out of a jump or will just put the brakes on. But in cross country/showjumping the riders use their stick because they have to and will only use it once or twice. Some jockeys are too whip happy.
this is exactly what i mean, what happens if the jockey has used his quota for the race and approaching the final fence he knows the horse isnt going to give 100%? Bearing in mind this could be a couple of weeks before cheltenham, the jockey is basically risking life and limb as i doubt they would want to get a ban? Either that or he pulls up because he doesnt want to risk his life, and then you open up a whole new can of worms. I dont think the new rule is thorough enough considering how long it took them to come up with these guidelines.
As I said earlier it will show and prove good jockeyship and relationship between the horse and rider; come the end of long 3m chase on heavy ground in a cold december the slap of the stick will not do anything the horse will do absoutley nothing if the horse is not giving 100% because it probably has nothing left in the tank- this is when we will see how good a rider they actually are with the use of thier hands and legs and not a whip!
But I do agree the new rules they have come up with, they have not thought them through! It is like they have tried to go between the 2 sides of the debate
I am still confused as to where the specific number of hits has come from in this rule, and why exactly it was felt necessary to change: some quarters say the old rules lacked clarity and the new rules are much clearer, but to me it seems there was very little consultation with the jockeys themselves, and that the new numbers have simply been mandated (quite possibly by someone who has never sat on a horse). Will the new whip rules make the sport more popular, thereby inducing more people go to the races? I very much doubt it. Do the rules improve the general welfare of racehorses? I have no idea. Is this another example of the British fad for having a rule and a regulation for everything, driven by fear instilled by the "sue for damages culture"? I just spent a week back in blighty and the whole place is full of signs telling you what you can and cannot do. I don't know where it will end.
The jocks on Twitter are not happy one bit. They seem to be arguing that the public perception is what needs changing, not the whip rules. They say there is no way the whips hurt the horses.
I've kept my head low on this topic so far because I just haven't been able to make it out. However, it has suddenly hit a nerve, and a very sensitive one at that. One thing I can not tolerate is quality control by tick boxes and that is effectively what this new rule is encouraging. We have finally reached the stage where, in order to determine if a jockey is being over zealous with the whip, it needs stewards who are qualified in counting up to 7/8. Who the **** is running this show? To avoid me going off on one about tick box management, I'll get straight to my bottom line view. The choices are: 1. Ban the whip altogether (this need not mean the jockey can't carry the whip for purely safety reasons) 2. Allow the whip but stop counting. It is easy enough to spot when the whip is being misused and if this is spotted the jockey should be called up, shown a video of his over zealousness, banned and enrolled on a course of proper use of the whip. Subsequent warnings to result in increased bans and ultimately withdrawal of his/her riding licence. 7 hits in a flat race, 8 in a jumps race (or whatever it is). FFS the imbecile who came up with that can only have the mentality to move on to refinements that will ultimately take account of the distance, pace of the race, SP of the horse involved; who knows where it could stop? Well I say stop right there; thank you very much. And get real. I don't suppose any of the panel that came up with that idea are on the Racing for Change panel?
Its not the fact the whips dont hurt, they dont they changed them due to the Welfare but they dont really do alot as stated previously in posts- look at Big Bucks in the world hurdle Walsh dropping his stick early on the in the race, going over the last with Grand Cru not far behind gaining on him but win he did and jockeyship prevailed that day so it just proves my point! We will prbably see more cheekpieces and blinkers come in to play more now. But visually it does not look very good for a jockey to be slapping a horse time and time again. It will be for the betterment of the sport as a whole, not simply the perception, and that has to be good for everybody.
I give it a month before a pilot is pulled up on a 'failing to ride a finish' charge before the powers re-visit the rule. I'm not suggesting that better horses should be treated differently but it'll only take one Hennessy, King George etc where the jock forgets how many times they've struck his/her mount and fail to ride a proper finish for this to be looked at....
I find this whole debate rather strange. According to the pro whip lobby, there seem to be a number of reasons for why the whip should be used. A lot of it centers around the safety of the rider. I don't think that anyone is going to quibble about keeping a horse's mind on the job in hunt racing, especially if it means that the use of the whip reduces the chances of a fall. But this begs the question, how does the use of the whip affect the animal? Well obviously, if it alerts the horse and gets it to do the right thing, we have an answer. This though is but a small part of the whipping debate. It mostly falls about the driving of a horse to maximise effort, in the run to the post. Whipping for money! So, what is it about the whip that causes this result? Is it the noise the whipping produces, or does it have an effect that goes deeper than this? Putting aside the fear factor, that must accompany the use of the whip, which in itself can be called into question, we are then left with the physical nature of the process. As far as I can see, there has been little or no research into the effect on horse flesh when whipped. So to claim that the animal feels no pain, must be seen as purely a personal point of view. This of course goes for what's written here. But it seems illogical to me to declare that the application of a whip to equine flesh, causes no pain. If it doesn't, then it's noise only. The latter to me doesn't seem to hold too much weight. Until a study supporting the "no pain" theory is produced, I'd rather come down on the side of the horse. How many horses are going to voluntarily come up from the fields for a morning whipping? None. The reason being, that it's not enjoyable. Use the whip for safety, but ban it when it's just about a cash return.
I think this will cause so many problems that the rule will be changed in a couple of months! I didn't think there was anything wrong with the ruling as it was!! if people see using the whip as harmful then the rule should be to have the whip banned completely rather than limiting the amount of times its used!
For info. Copy of email sent to Racing For Change. "Good morning I emailed some views to you a while back and I wondered if it was your intention to acknowledge these. May I also point you to some comments on an article (with comments) on NewsNow. The original article was initiated on Not 606 and here is a direct link to it: http://www.not606.com/showthread.php/93052-Whip-Restrictions-Day-1-review-Horse-Racing#post1467447 As you will see, it discusses the controversial whip ruling which is a complete farce and is confidently predicted to not last very long. I don't know if your panel had any input to this but it certainly will not aid your cause. Maybe you could use your influence to get this ruling re-visited by a body with at least some common sense. Thank you."
Didnt Hughes get criticised on this forum not so long ago (ive forgotten what race it was but he rode the fav, i think at York...) for not trying to get his ride up to the finishing line. He, shall we say, didnt use the tool of his trade to get the horse to pull that bit extra out and get up to the line... But when you watch the race back i honestly thought that Hughes himself made his mind up he couldnt get anymore out of his mount and let the race run its race and he finished 4th. He knew he couldnt win but i suppose the fact he didnt push all out for a place made some punters mad... I agree with some that the talent of these jockeys should now come more to the front and they will have to 'think on their feet' as it were, while the race is going on. But i think it is different to a 6f sprint to a 3m marathon slog so where do we draw the line... Jockeys can and will get done for 'failing to ride a finish', and that wont change, so why the need for this extra law... It seems we all dont like the over excessive use of the whip but on the other hand we all acknowledge that you need a whip for the correctional purposes of just ridng a horse. Its a can of worms that will not go away, and i dont think the law will be changed or reversed for sometime now... Lets see what is going on with the bans in another 6 months... We may have seen improvements or its become a law thats unworkable...
I don’t suppose it is possible for anyone to get hold of the text of Richard Hughes column from Saturday’s Racing Post, where he summed up quite well the problems that the jockeys see with these new whip rules. I fully expect that in the week before Royal Ascot or any other big meeting next season you will see some of the top jockeys taking the week off in order to avoid the possibility of picking up a ban that rules them out of the big rides. If the new whip rules had applied at Newmarket and York last Saturday, half the jockeys would have picked up bans; especially in the sprint races at York where several of the horses involved in the finishes got more than a couple of taps in the final furlong. This Saturday at Cheltenham the bookies should be betting on who will be the first to get banned for persuading their reluctant charge to jump the fences or hurdles going up the hill. Personally I do not think of boxing as a sport, but if a boxer counts as “something” then that plus wrestling and martial arts all allow hitting. Under the old rules, jockeys flogging a horse for no good reason could see them hauled before the stewards. Nobody will disagree with that but the new rules are completely impractical and are a nonsensical attempt to placate the “animal rights” brigade after what happened in this year’s Grand National.
Isn't it ironic and also hilarious that Richard Hughes (who more or less welcomed the new whip guidelines a few weeks ago because he said he doesn't use his whip very often!) should be one of the first jockeys to fall foul of the new rules?! The next few months ahead are going to be really entertaining as we see jockeys being banned and fined left, right and centre for what, in the world of comon sense and rational thought, would be deemed very minor offences (or actually not offences at all), and when the National Hunt season gets going properly, then the sparks will really start flying. At least if the NH season is a little bit dull to begin with, this whip rule debacle should keep us well entertained!
I've been racking my brains trying to think of something positive to say about the rules. As it took so long to come up with one thing I'm going to unload that one now. Just think of those young jockeys who have been dying to ride a good horse.
I don't see a problem with the rules. The jockeys just need to be professional and learn to ride within them. A big storm which will blow over and things will be better because of the new rules.
