Whip Restrictions: Day 1 review - | Horse Racing

As soon as a couple of results go against the punters – the people who actually fund much of racing – they will vote with their feet or only bet on Irish/foreign racing.

There is going to be a short-head winner of a big race where either the winning jockey gets banned having just edged out a heavily-backed favourite or the runner-up’s jockey did not give it one more smack and just got caught on the line.

As soon as one of those old plodders that has to be driven from flag fall to winning post goes for a walk in the betting because his jockey will not be allowed anything but hands-and-heels for most of the three miles, folks will quickly realise the folly of political correctness in this sport.

 

I agree Nass, things will be better. Every sport has changed a little bit- cricket have power plays- Football- introduction of goal line technology. everything needs to change to keep up with the timing and horse racing have got this change its start!!

 

Except it's a false start. I'm surprised that you agree with this rule WF. It's a complete nonsense.

 

For me it is simple. If you break the rules to get a horse to win, you reverse the placings.

It is harsh but at least then we can keep everyone in line with the rules, and no one could say a horse 'would have won if this, or would have won if that'.


As for whether they were necessary, I don't know. I've been looking at a lot of views within the business, and they say the whip does not hurt the horse. I would like to know the ins and outs of what a whip brings out in a horse, I would like to find out if it hurts, and I want this played out in the eye of the public on television. We need to see the truth and then from there we can make the right decisions.

You also need to derive how the frequency, number, and amount of time effect a horse when being whipped, again too make sure we can design clear guidelines.

 

I've got to disagree with some of your posts WF. I've been riding for 15 years including show jumping and I think to compare it to racing isn't really comparable. In show jumping the horse is at a controlled canter and is never asked for maximum effort in terms of speed and thus to make the comparison of using a stick in this case to racing when a horse is asked for maximum exertion doesn't really apply.

I also disagree with your point that "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". If this was true then jockeys wouldn't bother to use them! If the whip makes no difference whatsoever than it would be in the best interest of a jockey to concentrate fully on coercing the horse to the line. I'll cite the example of Loki's Revenge yesterday whose speed once the whip was implemented was a huge difference as he appeared to be floundering prior to this. Horse's are pack animals and the use of the whip reminds them of something snapping at their hind quarters and encourages them to go faster. I also think your example of using the Big Bucks/Grand Crus contest as flawed as Big Bucks was clearly the superior animal and although Ruby Walsh is one of the best jockeys in the world Big Bucks won in spite of not having the whip, not purely based on Walsh's ride.

This is my own opinion of course, which doesn't mean I am right.

 

Does the whip hurt ?
I have never ridden but on a recent trip to Vegas I did a days horseback trekking in the mountains, one of our guides stopped the group to point out various animals and plants, when she'd finished she struck her horse what I considered to be ferociously to get the horse walking again.
I took exception to this and asked another guide why she needed to be so brutal, I was told that the horses are lazy and that striking the horse with the whip is merely a 'wake up' call and does then absolutely no harm, there was no mark left by this and I can honestly say the horse was struck far harder than I've ever seen a jockey hit a horse in a race.
I don't come from a horse background (much as I wish I did) so seeing/learning what goes on is a new experience, but I go back to a point I made several posts back (maybe even another thread) that I don't believe there is a single jockey who would deliberately inflict pain and suffering on his/her mount.

I stood by the last hurdle in Witcheta Lineman's novice hurdle win at Cheltenham when Black Harry fell at the last (when in contention), Ruby was flung 30 yards from the horse but knew he was potentially hurt so got up ran over and sat on the horses neck to stop him from getting up and running off. He stayed with the horse, calmed him down until the vets arrived, screens went up and fully 15 mins later the horse got up and was walked back to the stables by Ruby (who was riding Kauto Star in the Gold Cup in the very next race) and received the biggest cheer of the day.
Note, Ruby forewent his own preparations in the biggest race of the year for the sake of comforting a stricken horse, and ultimately saved the horses life.
Jockeys are horseman/women, not butchers....

 

The introduction of Powerplays into cricket was something that the great powers of the sub-continent wanted to try and liven up the games and create more run scoring for their billions of followers.

Where is goal-line technology currently in use in football? Answer: Nowhere. Sepp Blatter’s sole concession on this to date has been the introduction of goal-line additional officials in Champions’ League games. The technology will be introduced as soon as somebody (like the English Premier League) sticks two fingers up at the crook running the World body and just goes ahead and does it.

Both of these examples are the addition of something to their sport, not the removal of an existing element. In that respect, this is a completely flawed argument for kowtowing to the animal rights nutters, who will not be happy until horses are only bred for French restaurants.

I have every expectation that these rule changes will be rapidly reviewed as soon as some jockey gets a ridiculous ban like Richard Hughes received on Day 1 and loses thousands in prize money for “a corrective measure” as he described his sixth use of the whip in the final furlong.

How many jockeys are going to get banned at Cheltenham on Saturday for administering more than five strokes after the last at Cheltenham?

 

I have every expectaton that in six months everyone will be used to it and most people will wonder what the fuss was about.

 

Yeh thats probably true! people will soon adapt! its weather the authorities can ride the storm out that will occur with all the mis-haps and opposition before then though!

 

Or how many sponsors complain that feature events have been tarnished by bans and/or jocks appearing to not give the horse every chance of winning because they'd used up their allocation, or worse thinking they'd used up their allocation of strikes getting beat a short head then being told they still have 1 crack left

 

OddDog - I can't access SL from work and I've been trying to find any media coverage on that incident for years, any chance you could copy and post it in here ?
A friend of mine went to a Dublin Cheltenham preview evening a couple of years back and I asked him to mention this to Ruby if he got the chance, after the Q&A finished he managed to grab Ruby for a minute and it wasn't something that immediately sprang to Rubys mind and when he recalled it he muttered something like 'the horse is well and back racing now' and 'every jockey woudl do the same' - basically he thought nothing of it whereas to me it was a poingant moment in my horseracing life.
If you could get it on here I'd be grateful. Many thanks

 

what amazes me most about this is that people are suggesting that its ok to whip a horse more than 7 (or 8) times in any race. Jockeys need to learn how to use other skills to get the best results and I hope this will lead to more amazing horsemanship rather than the torrid whip use that we have seen in recent years.

 

Ron- I think whip should be not used at all! This law I dont 100% agree with- if you are gonna use it use it, if you not allowed to then dont! Shouldnt be a number of times you are allowed too!

 

OK no worries mate, having witnessed it from 20 yards (and being able to see through the screens) I've been keen to see if there was any media coverage of the incident, I doubt it exists but I'd love someone to come up with a clip of it all - may take a week of you-tube surfing !

 

No no Roto- I respect your views, just at those are mine and your right you cant really compare the two different types, the stick are used for two different completely things. But although he was a superior animal- Grand Cru did still have a leveler of the rider still having a stick- we all know how ever good Big Bucks is- he can be alittle lazy when out in front!

 

I think this debate is slightly off track in places in that this is not about whether jockeys are or are not concerned about the horses. It's about how to determine whether excessive use has been made of the whip. As far as I'm concerned excessive use of the whip means using it when not necessary, and this is best observed by those who can empathise with horses and adopt a common sense approach; NOT by counting 1,2 3 etc.

I'm going to repeat my statement earlier:
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?

It's the mentality of the decision I find intolerable; not whether it should be 5, 6 or 7.

PS (Edit) When I say stop counting I am certainly not implying that hitting the horse more times is OK. I don't like seeing a horse hit at all to be perfectly honest, although I appreciate that sometimes it can be a necessity.

 

"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."


Is it?

Did you spot the Rewilding incident? Ballabriggs in the National? Hayley Turners overhander?


It isn't easy to spot, and what is more its subjective, and that is what we need to rule out. We need the law to say X amount and they have chosen figures that mean that the whip is still important without it being overused. There is no way we could have a sliding scale for distances, I mean we see Jocks ride out finishes a circuit early over jumps!!

Keep it simple, keep it fair and make sure they all stick to the rules. If they don't they should be banned, and if they continue to do it for certain owners/trainers then charges should be brought against those owners/trainers too.

 

For the benefit of those that cannot access the Sporting Life article for which OddDog posted a link:

There is a quick synopsis of the situation starting from the Grand National through to Hughes and Fox getting done on Monday. The author of the piece Nic Doggett then states the following:

This is followed by a look at how the Review Group, who concocted the whip rule changes, commissioned a public opinion poll and drew some of their conclusions from survey participants described as “particularly women and those with no interest in racing”, who stated that the whip should be banned altogether and current punishment for transgression was soft.

This is not the tail wagging the dog, but this is Mrs Miggins’ cat chasing the dog.

A substantial part of the rest of the piece is devoted to discussion of the existing knowledge about psychological and physical effects of the whip on horses, questioning how the BHA and the stewards propose to police this nonsense without watching race video 24/7; and how is this going to improve the integrity of a sport where it is already difficult to clamp down on non-triers but now trying too hard is also punishable.

Mr Doggett is clearly not in the “no interest in racing” group, but he does point out that when asked about racing most members of that group will mention cheating and race fixing before they mention cruelty.

Clearly he will not be on the Christmas card list of Neal Wailing or John McCririck, who both support a total ban.