Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post (embed) your favorite videos from your favorite video hosting sites: YouTube, MetaCafe, etc.
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

Jockeys locked in horse whipping row back down on strike threat | Mail Online

The whipping row continue's.

The new regulations are nothing more than a move to appease rabid animal rights protesters who happen to know diddly squat about correcting a horse at speeds In excess of 35 mph.

Many disasters at the jumps have been avoided by the use of the whip to correct the horse at speed and avoid him veering Into other runners and bringing them down.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

And many a race has been won by thrashing a horse the final furlong, too.

The ability to control matters goes far further back than the horse/jockey relationship. In this day and age the trainer could have radio-controlled electrodes in the stirrups and be allowed seven jolts of up to 200 volts into the jockey to force him higher along the last straight. The owner could have a mallet and stand behind the trainer, whispering about the size of his blasted bills and where's this promised place he drove 200 miles to see. The bookies could go round with large knives getting the owners to put their money where their mouth is. And so on. It's all about incentivising the workforce to greater efforts.

The use of the whip to avoid dangerous collisions is laudable. All that's needed is a rule that the horse is disqualified if the jockey's applied the whip, he can then use it as often as safety demands. Where's the problem? As for "did it touch the horse", add an insert that makes an LED turn red on the handle if the whip end discharges to earth, they weigh a half an ounce and they've been available in various forms since the 1760s.

Should I see a headline saying "Jockey Strike Enters Fifth Year" I'll bump the thread and ask whose arm they're trying to twist.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

spot;1372658 wrote: And many a race has been won by thrashing a horse the final furlong, too.

The ability to control matters goes far further back than the horse/jockey relationship. In this day and age the trainer could have radio-controlled electrodes in the stirrups and be allowed seven jolts of up to 200 volts into the jockey to force him higher along the last straight. The owner could have a mallet and stand behind the trainer, whispering about the size of his blasted bills and where's this promised place he drove 200 miles to see. The bookies could go round with large knives getting the owners to put their money where their mouth is. And so on. It's all about incentivising the workforce to greater efforts.

The use of the whip to avoid dangerous collisions is laudable. All that's needed is a rule that the horse is disqualified if the jockey's applied the whip, he can then use it as often as safety demands. Where's the problem?

Should I see a headline saying "Jockey Strike Enters Fifth Year" I'll bump the thread and ask whose arm they're trying to twist.


Laudable? And exactly how many races have you witnessed Spot ? Have you worked In the schooling of Thoroughbred race-horses? I doubt either.

The example I gave above was merely one example to open the thread. Most use of the whip Is a signal for the horse and why the rules are In place that the Jockey give the horse time to respond between each whip. Otherwise the 'misuse of the whip' ban will be enforce on the Jockey.

Almost any horse, In the heat of a race, will allow you to whip it and will usually respond to the whip by giving a little more. There is nothing wrong with that as long as the whipping is confined to the saddle blanket or rump, where most whipping occurs. Horses are tough as old boots especially on the rump. If It bothered them that much, they wouldn't run faster.

If you do something to a horse that It doesn't like, It will react in a negative way. It may run a little faster but will also balk, jump, veer and do many things that would make It too dangerous In a race. Why else do you think some race-horses are blinkered ?

There are jockeys who know exactly how to whip a horse and how much to whip a horse to encourage It to race as hard as it can, without damaging the horse's psyche. Any good trainer will tell you that they want the rider to use the whip enough to encourage but not to discourage or abuse the animal.

Horses that do not respond well to the whip, who slow down or act up in the stretch, have either had a bad experience with a whip or are just too contrary to be good racers. There may be some exceptions, but I haven't seen them.

Horses who race without a whip rarely last long at the race track and racing without a whip Is a last ditch effort to work out what It is that Is keeping the horse from winning. If you don't believe It, ask yourself how many times any horse you have seen race without a whip has won and how many more times It raced with or without a whip.

Some Jockey's have such close relationships with their mounts that they form their own brand of signalling.

Two examples of that Is Ruby Walsh with Kauto Star where Ruby would give a slap on the shoulder In the final stages. The other was Tony McCoy and Exotic Dancer where he would apply three taps to the neck to let him know what he wanted In the final stages but In the main, the whip Is used as a signal hence the rule to allow the horse to respond,
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

I don't see any acknowledgement of "All that's needed is a rule that the horse is disqualified if the jockey's applied the whip, he can then use it as often as safety demands. Where's the problem?". or are you advancing a position that the horse actively wants to be whipped?

My notion boils down to if it doesn't get pleasure from being whipped then it shouldn't be obliged. If safety's an overriding concern then by all means let it override. Safety can override winning too, that's all I said. That way there's an adequate disincentive to whip the horse. Unless it's a consenting adult horse.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

spot;1372662 wrote: I don't see any acknowledgement of "All that's needed is a rule that the horse is disqualified if the jockey's applied the whip, he can then use it as often as safety demands. Where's the problem?". or are you advancing a position that the horse actively wants to be whipped?

My notion boils down to if it doesn't get pleasure from being whipped then it shouldn't be obliged. If safety's an overriding concern then by all means let it override. Safety can override winning too, that's all I said. That way there's an adequate disincentive to whip the horse. Unless it's a consenting adult horse.


The horse Is not thrashed Spot. There Is a world of difference between a slap on the rump and thrashing a horse leaving a weal.

The problem Is far more complex than one can Imagine due to horses reacting differently to different measures. Some horses will respond at the mere sight of the whip being brought down past his eyes and others won't and a slap with the whip Is the signal required by that particular horse.

Very often In racing, what looks like a horse being thrashed In the final stages Is often down to bad camera angles where the Jockey Is not actually striking the horse.

Please not number 6 here In the rules and guidelines of the whip which states the whip can be used to keep a horse running straight.

I believe that bolsters my claim that the whip Is sometimes used to correct a horse when veering dangerously.

Disciplinary: Whip use

However, some Jockey's In the past have taken advantage of this when they have exceeded the use of the whip by stating that they needed to use the whip to stop the horse from veering after they have used their quota.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

I said nothing about leaving a weal - you're continually putting words into other peoples' mouths, oscar. I stand by what I wrote. Thrashing is an arm movement, not a pain level. Many a race has been won by thrashing a horse the final furlong. Ask a jockey.

They need no quota whatever if they're prepared to change from quota to disqualified from the race. What's wrong with disqualification? It leaves all the safety requirements completely untouched. I agree that an exceeded quota would be a danger, if there's a safety reason for whipping as you suggest. If whipping corrects a horse when veering dangerously then by all means whip it as much as safety demands. Scrap quotas entirely. Disqualify the horse from the race the moment it's touched by the safety-only whip. Problem solved.

And "what looks like a horse being thrashed In the final stages Is often down to bad camera angles where the Jockey Is not actually striking the horse"? That's what the LED would fix. No contact, no red light on the whip, no disqualification. Your problem is that you don't make your actual real point, which is that exciting a horse to greater efforts adds to the thrill of the race. It does so at the horse's expense. Any reasonable horse would prefer my rules to yours.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

spot;1372667 wrote: I said nothing about leaving a weal - you're continually putting words into other peoples' mouths, oscar. I stand by what I wrote. Thrashing is an arm movement, not a pain level. Many a race has been won by thrashing a horse the final furlong. Ask a jockey.

They need no quota whatever if they're prepared to change from quota to disqualified from the race. What's wrong with disqualification? It leaves all the safety requirements completely untouched. I agree that an exceeded quota would be a danger, if there's a safety reason for whipping as you suggest. If whipping corrects a horse when veering dangerously then by all means whip it as much as safety demands. Scrap quotas entirely. Disqualify the horse from the race the moment it's touched by the safety-only whip. Problem solved.

And "what looks like a horse being thrashed In the final stages Is often down to bad camera angles where the Jockey Is not actually striking the horse"? That's what the LED would fix. No contact, no red light on the whip, no disqualification. Your problem is that you don't make your actual real point, which is that exciting a horse to greater efforts adds to the thrill of the race. It does so at the horse's expense. Any reasonable horse would prefer my rules to yours.


The Issue of the whip In racing has surfaced following this year’s Grand National won by Ballabriggs. The horse’s jockey, Jason Maguire was banned for five days after the race for excessive use of the whip. The RSPCA went Into overdrive due to the fact that the horse near collapsed at the finish. Nothing more than sensationalist reporting as It was the extraordinary weather conditions that led to the horse's collapse and not the whipping. I was all for the Grand National being postponed that day due to the heat and the four mile plus distance. They chose to go ahead and the result of Ballariggs collapse was due to heat stroke and not the whip but It gave the RSPCA fuel for the fire.

Only recently an animal rights campaigner wrote In a national newspaper that the whip used In horse racing is a 'medieval-style flogging instrument'. At best, this statement is downright ridiculous, at worst; It Is ludicrous sensationalism. If you examine a modern day whip, It is not a cat o nine tails, merely a persuader.

Visit any tack shop and you will find that a riding whip costs about £30. The 'flogging Instrument' weighs less than 160 grams, the same as a wheel pump attached to a mountain bike. It certainly does not resemble any type of torture Implement. It has a leather handle and the rules of racing state the whip must not exceed 70cm in length. The whip Is heavily padded and has through-out a shock-absorbing material which helps to protect horses from Injury or discomfort. The notion that jockeys relentlessly beat a horse with an Indiana-Jones style bullwhip is nonsensical and untrue. The specification of modern-day whips has been set in place following on-going consultation with animal welfare groups, Including the RSPCA.

These feather-weight Instruments are used for safety, correction and encouragement, nothing more. And they don’t work all of the time. When Denman ran in the Punchestown Gold Cup last year, he simply didn’t want to know about it. Punchestown Is a right-handed track, Denman prefers left. The greatest jockey of all time tried to cajole him around Punchestown but not even Tony McCoy or his whip could encourage Denman. He just said no.

A horse’s skin is a quarter of an Inch thick in places, over twice that of a human. Horses are hardy animals, yes they have delicate areas, weak points, like any animal but horses cannot be reasoned with and need a gentle reminder here and there.

Jockeys cannot hit horses with their whip above shoulder height, they cannot use excessive force and they cannot whip horses who are either clearly winning or out of contention.

TV shots of Jockeys using their whips on horses looks worse than It Is. The reality is that jockeys have trouble using their whips In high winds and will gladly demonstrate to you how little discomfort the whip emits. This fact has not stopped some quarters from taking excessive measures and in England, Towcester racecourse had planned to ban jockeys from using the whip in races at the track. This decision was overruled by the British Horseracing Authority.

I am satisfied that the rules In place do not amount to any form of animal abuse and the regulations do not need any adjustment.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

It's like talking to a radio tuned to a local station one would would normally pass by without a second thought.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

spot;1372682 wrote: It's like talking to a radio tuned to a local station one would would normally pass by without a second thought.


How disappointing ?

I have put forward a reasonable, Informative and factual case.

Your first post chose to state that my claim that one of the reasons for the use of the whip was to correct horses from veering, was laudable. I posted a link where It clearly stated that the Racing Association allowed the use of the whip to straighten a horse.

On that case In point you were wrong.

Now, It appears that you have to result to Insults simply because you have no knowledge to dispute what I have said.

As It happens Spot, I do bow to your greater wisdom on many subjects on this forum but on this subject, you know bugger all. You are buying Into some Irrational sensationalism that the loony animal rights protesters have whipped up.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

oscar;1372687 wrote: Your first post chose to state that my claim that one of the reasons for the use of the whip was to correct horses from veering, was laudable. I posted a link where It clearly stated that the Racing Association allowed the use of the whip to straighten a horse.

On that case In point you were wrong.I'll tell you what. You look up laudable in a dictionary, and then come back to the thread. We'll make more progress that way.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

spot;1372690 wrote: I'll tell you what. You look up laudable in a dictionary, and then come back to the thread. We'll make more progress that way.


Would you like to show me any factual documented evidence that whipping under UK Racing regulations harms the horse In any way? Then maybe we can progress further.

Are you aware of the racing term ' Pulled up' ?

In some cases this Is where the Jockey recognises that all is not well with the horse as the case In the 2009 King George Stakes. Two Jockeys pulled their horses up. One, 'Racing Demon' was pulled up because the Jockey realised he had not fully recovered from his Injury the previous year and the other ' Deep Purple' was due to the Jockey realising that all was not well and It was later revealed the horse had suffered a burst blood vessel. However, In the main, horses are pulled up because they simply refuse to run and no amount of whipping will encourage him.

Are you aware of the racing term ' Refused' ? Most often In the Grand National where any horse sensing danger will refuse to take a jump and again no amount of whipping will force him.

The whip simply can not force a horse to do anything he doesn't want to and even If Jockey's thrashed the horse within an Inch of It's life as the loony animal rights campaigners claimed, the horse would still refuse to co-operate because that Is just the nature of horses.

Yet, most horses will respond to encouragement In the final stages by the use of the whip signalling the Jockey's desire for the horse to speed up.

Most top racehorses have their own style and the whip Is not always used to encourage speed. In National Hunt where the distance Is over 3 miles, Jockey's do not want their mounts racing ahead and burning out before the line. They keep them at cruising speeds and will use the whip to correct the horse should take up too far a pace In the early stages.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

The bit about being like a radio is your utter unwillingness to ever listen. This isn't a conversation, it's a monologue.

Nowhere at all in this thread have I disagreed with anything you've written.

I've agreed whips are needed for safety reasons.

I've noted that whips have, in the past, made the difference between winning a race and losing it. You completely ignore that.

I've said that it's entirely possible to carry whips for safety reasons but to disqualify riders who resort to using it. That way the safety aspects are fully covered but the enthusing of horses to victory by whipping carries no advantage to any rider. I've noted that it's easily testable by the use of the LED I described.

That's it - no attempt to fight, no attempt to contradict, just plain conversation about the use of whips during a horse race. You've not addressed a single point among those I've just summarised other than apparently to confuse "laudable" with "laughable". Laudable means "Deserving praise and commendation". What I wrote was "The use of the whip to avoid dangerous collisions deserves praise and commendation". It's not disagreement.

Your problem is that you don't make your actual real point, which is that exciting a horse to greater efforts adds to the thrill of the race. It does so at the horse's expense. Any reasonable horse would prefer my rules to yours. If all horses run on the same terms then it's a level fair race, removing whipping as a tactic to win makes no difference to the fact that there will be a winner, it just removes the additional effort which leaves too many horses knackered. There's even a bloody word for the state they're brought to - knackered: fit only for the knackers' yard. There'd not be a word for it if it hadn't played a large part in the lives of horses.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

spot;1372695 wrote: The bit about being like a radio is your utter unwillingness to ever listen. This isn't a conversation, it's a monologue.

Nowhere at all in this thread have I disagreed with anything you've written.

I've agreed whips are needed for safety reasons.

I've noted that whips have, in the past, made the difference between winning a race and losing it. You completely ignore that.

I've said that it's entirely possible to carry whips for safety reasons but to disqualify riders who resort to using it. That way the safety aspects are fully covered but the enthusing of horses to victory by whipping carries no advantage to any rider. I've noted that it's easily testable by the use of the LED I described.

That's it - no attempt to fight, no attempt to contradict, just plain conversation about the use of whips during a horse race. You've not addressed a single point among those I've just summarised other than apparently to confuse "laudable" with "laughable". Laudable means "Deserving praise and commendation". What I wrote was "The use of the whip to avoid dangerous collisions deserves praise and commendation". It's not disagreement.

Your problem is that you don't make your actual real point, which is that exciting a horse to greater efforts adds to the thrill of the race. It does so at the horse's expense. Any reasonable horse would prefer my rules to yours. If all horses run on the same terms then it's a level fair race, removing whipping as a tactic to win makes no difference to the fact that there will be a winner, it just removes the additional effort which leaves too many horses knackered. There's even a bloody word for the state they're brought to - knackered: fit only for the knackers' yard. There'd not be a word for it if it hadn't played a large part in the lives of horses.


Spot...I've said that it's entirely possible to carry whips for safety reasons but to disqualify riders who resort to using it."

The problem there Spot Is the contradiction of your sentence. Some Jockey's are devious little gits who use the use of the whip for safety as a get out when In breach of misuse of the whip. This rarely happens In Jockeys such as Tony McCoy or Ruby Walsh who tend to have the same mount for several years and knows the horse Inside out. More up and coming novice Jockey's who need the wins to upgrade.

You would then be entering a minefield of complications as to weather the Jockey did Indeed use the whip In the case of safety or just misused It. Unfortunately even Channel Four racing Is notoriously bad at getting exact footage of who did what In a race especially In conditions where for eg, The Grand National, you have 40 tightly grouped horses all approaching a hurdle together.

If you begin to disqualify the horse from winning, the entire minefield of the grading system becomes unmanageable. It would also not go down as a win meaning a higher price next time out and then you would have the bookie's up In arms. There are circumstances of course where horses are disqualified from a win, usually for Interfering or hampering the field.

Disqualifying the rider serves no purpose either. It Is the horse that has run the race, not the Jockey. There would be constant Stewards enquire's Into how the whip was used and this could be open to abuse as much as It already is. The present regulations are acceptable as they are which results In a riding ban for the Jockey In misuse of the whip. For example, no good Jockey lined up to ride say, Kauto Star In the Gold Cup Is going to risk losing the ride by misuse of the whip In a another race prior and getting a riding ban.

You say any reasonable horse would prefer your rules? I disagree. The use of the whip In the final stages Is merely encouragement and the horse can only give what he Is worth. I have given you examples of how horses can refuse to comply with or without whip. In fact, I remember Paul Barbers quote just prior to the 2009 Gold Cup In which he said... " Denman Is so moody, he may refuse to start, he may pull up half way round, he may throw his Jockey or he could beat Kauto Star by 10 lengths, we just don't know" and I think that sums up exactly the arguement that the whip Is used to heighten the excitement of a race,
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

So. Summarise. What would horse racing lose if the use of the whip disqualified the horse and jockey from completing a given race?

I've made it entirely clear throughout that I've no wish to distinguish between safety reasons and any other reasons for its use.

The single test for disqualification which I propose is whether the tip of the whip has come into contact with the horse between the start and end of the race, and the proposed LED device will do exactly that for a minimal expense.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

spot;1372699 wrote: So. Summarise. What would horse racing lose if the use of the whip disqualified the horse and jockey from completing a given race?

I've made it entirely clear throughout that I've no wish to distinguish between safety reasons and any other reasons for its use.

The single test for disqualification which I propose is whether the tip of the whip has come into contact with the horse between the start and end of the race, and the proposed LED device will do exactly that for a minimal expense.


As I said... to disqualify the horse would make the grading system unmanageable. It Is not the horses problem If the whip has been misused. It Is not the owners fault nor the trainers. Disqualifying the horse would enter as a no win or not placed on his track record and that would open a minefield of complications when setting starting prices next time out. The present system Is acceptable where Jockey's face riding ban for misuse.

The LED device on the tip of the whip Is a fairly good Idea but then again, unmanageable. The device could Indeed prove the whip had come Into contact with the horse and how many times. This could serve a purpose If a Jockey uses the whip above the required standard, however, you would still have the Jockey dispute how hard the horse was hit and If It was for safety reasons. In high winds, the Jockey could even argue the difficulty In using the whip and that contact was accidental. It's still open to abuse.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

So - let me get it straight - if jockeys can't whip horses without getting disqualified then the betting system collapses?

On the contrary. If the jockeys can't whip horses without getting disqualified then the only reason they'll use a whip is for safety reasons. It would be a minority of races where it would occur. The betting system survives horses falling, jockeys getting thrown, horses refusing to complete the course, horses running the course the wrong way round or taking the wrong route - all those situations result in disqualifying the horse from the results table. Does it stop the betting system? No, it doesn't stop the betting system. Neither would adding one more reason for disqualification, the use of the whip.

"How hard the horse was hit and If It was for safety reasons" doesn't figure at all in what I've written. Contact between the whip and the horse during the race is the sole test. Nobody's going to ask "was it for safety", I think that would be assumed since there would be no other justification for whipping. Well done jockey, you did the right thing, you saved the day, you're disqualified, it's the rule. It's like a pilot pulling the eject lever.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

spot;1372702 wrote: So - let me get it straight - if jockeys can't whip horses without getting disqualified then the betting system collapses?

On the contrary. If the jockeys can't whip horses without getting disqualified then the only reason they'll use a whip is for safety reasons. It would be a minority of races where it would occur. The betting system survives horses falling, jockeys getting thrown, horses refusing to complete the course, horses running the course the wrong way round or taking the wrong route - all those situations result in disqualifying the horse from the results table. Does it stop the betting system? No, it doesn't stop the betting system. Neither would adding one more reason for disqualification, the use of the whip.

"How hard the horse was hit and If It was for safety reasons" doesn't figure at all in what I've written. Contact between the whip and the horse during the race is the sole test. Nobody's going to ask "was it for safety", I think that would be assumed since there would be no other justification for whipping. Well done jockey, you did the right thing, you saved the day, you're disqualified, it's the rule. It's like a pilot pulling the eject lever. Yes, the betting system does survive refusals, pulling up and falling but the odds on that horse are adjusted fairly and accordingly next time out. Horses winning by a mile but being disqualified under present rules, would go down as a no win, no place on his track record. Starting prices on horses are usually determined my anti-post betting before the day and betting on the track which Is relayed back to high street chains. If you have a horse capable of winning the race gone down as a blank last time out, It will deter your ordinary punter from betting there-fore pushing the price on the day right out.

All of the problems with the dispute over use of the whip In the final stages can not be determined simply because horses are not all the same. Some need no encouragement whatsoever, some need a little, some need to be pushed to the line.

What Is the point of any race If the horse Is not giving his maximum potential? What determines the winner Is what the horse Is capable of and some horses are capable but just bloody lazy and need a reminder and encouragement. If you are sitting second and third on a horse In the final stages, you are hoping the one In front Is going to tire. Encouraging your horse to keep on Is the difference between a win and a place especially on a course like Cheltenham where the runners tire very quickly on the long hill to the line. If you are going to let a horse dictate his pace on the run In, and not achieve his full potential, you may as well not bother.

For example... This Is the best example I can give you... Scroll through to the last three fences If you don't want to see the whole race. Coming up to the last fence, the horse who came second, would have stopped off for a horsey chat approaching the last If he had his way. Bloody right he needed a slap and encouragement after that fence.

Newbury - Hennessy Gold Cup 2009 - YouTube
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

The way to encourage your horse to keep on is to put a pig-ignorant parasitic midget on his back with instructions to hump away as though given the run of a brothel and to continually scream obscenities into the horse's ears. The use of a whip is academic at that point.

Without the whip, perhaps horse breeders will focus more on the creation of noble self-motivating creatures rather than bone-idle beggars that slow down if not whipped.

As far as the sport's concerned, whipping is as optional as death was in the Colosseum. It incites the plebs in the stands to a frenzy and forms an addiction to bring them back for more. Bad form, in my book.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

spot;1372706 wrote: The way to encourage your horse to keep on is to put a pig-ignorant parasitic midget on his back with instructions to hump away as though given the run of a brothel and to continually scream obscenities into the horse's ears. The use of a whip is academic at that point.

Without the whip, perhaps horse breeders will focus more on the creation of noble self-motivating creatures rather than bone-idle beggars that slow down if not whipped.

As far as the sport's concerned, whipping is as optional as death was in the Colosseum. It incites the plebs in the stands to a frenzy and forms an addiction to bring them back for more. Bad form, in my book.


As It happens I almost agree with your second paragraph. Over the decades, blood stocks have been refined to Indeed produce horses that are more self motivated. The case In point Is the Kauto Relko French blood stock lineage and why two year old off springs will set you back £250,000 Euros with no track record. Second to that I would say the Irish bloodstock of sire 'Presenting'. Unfortunately, I have rarely seen an English bloodstock as refined. If ever I was lucky enough to buy a steeple chaser, I would settle for nothing less than French blood stock.

As for your last paragraph.... Pray tell, how many times have you actually been on a track Spot?

The whipping of the horse In the final stages does not create an addiction to racing. That Is absurd.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

oscar;1372708 wrote: The whipping of the horse In the final stages does not create an addiction to racing. That Is absurd.I'd be interested in your reaction to a comparative scene. A one furlong course in front of the same grandstands and a field of a dozen octogenarians with mobility walkers and the ability to get to the finish line in around four minutes. The punters have the same betting opportunities and form notices. And they're off... tell me how much the crowd reaction would differ when compared to your normal race.

Now have the participants whipped down the course by rabid jockeys. Will the crowd reaction differ? Damn right it will. Just tell them beforehand that they're all convicted psychos out of Broadmoor just so there's no social queasiness about the whipping, which is equivalent to telling the Colosseum crowd that the fighters were all bona-fide slaves or criminals.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

oscar;1372708 wrote: [quote=spot]As far as the sport's concerned, whipping is as optional as death was in the Colosseum. It incites the plebs in the stands to a frenzy and forms an addiction to bring them back for more. Bad form, in my book.As for your last paragraph.... Pray tell, how many times have you actually been on a track Spot?[/QUOTE]As many times as I've seen death in an amphitheatre. I'm not sure how my last paragraph gave rise to your question. My evidence for the plebs being incited to a frenzy is the final twenty minutes of National Velvet, the crowd scenes in the stand having been filmed at an authentic Grand National.

As for the addictive aspect, this is Saint Augustine in his Confessions:Nor was he now the man he came, but one of the throng he came unto, yea, a true associate of theirs that brought him thither. Why say more? He beheld, shouted, kindled, carried thence with him the madness which should goad him to return not only with them who first drew him thither, but also before them, yea and to draw in others.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

spot;1372709 wrote: I'd be interested in your reaction to a comparative scene. A one furlong course in front of the same grandstands and a field of a dozen octogenarians with mobility walkers and the ability to get to the finish line in around four minutes. The punters have the same betting opportunities and form notices. And they're off... tell me how much the crowd reaction would differ when compared to your normal race.

Now have the participants whipped down the course. Will the crowd reaction differ? Damn right it will. Just tell them beforehand that they're all convicted psychos out of Broadmoor just so there's no social queasiness about the whipping, which is equivalent to telling the Colosseum crowd that the fighters were all bona-fide slaves or criminals.
Your comparison would be arguable should you not be missing one very Important detail of horse racing. Go back to the link I posted In my previous post of Denman winning the Hennessy.... go right to end where the commentator says, " People are running to the winners enclosure from all over the ground.. They want to get a sight of Denman" and that Is what you are missing. Why after the race, after the build up and the excitement of the finish would people run from all around the ground to get a sight of the horse In the winners enclosure? I was on the track that day and I can confirm a stampede took place to get to the winners enclosure AFTER the horse had run.

Many people who go to the races here and there tend to be your bores on some office party. You will find them In the main hanging around the bars In the grandstand.

Serious race goer's like myself are there for the horses not just the race. In the case of the King George In recent years, many people who would not normally bother turned out just for one horse. This was proved when for the first time In history In 2009, Kempton Park was on the verge of putting up signs saying 'Full ' after record numbers turned out to see Kauto Star.

Some of the top chasers such as Kauts, Denman, Big Bucks, Master Minded have massive fan bases and those people will go to see the horse before and above any racing. For many people, It Is their only chance to get up close the finest thoroughbreds of their generation.

If It was all about racing, I doubt the track Industry would survive on that alone. The geezer In your high street bookie's betting on a name Is a far cry from serious lovers of the horses and the sport.

Yes, of course there Is some frenzied excitement on the day. Serious race goer's plan their racing calenders anything up to two years In advance as I do.... For example.... I strongly urge you to place a bet on Big Bucks In the World Hurdle at Cheltenham next year. The build up when you have waited maybe a year for a particular race to be run with some young young pretenders challenging your bet of course creates a build of excitement.

Paul Nicholls was Inundated with gifts and get well cards for a horse called Tricky Trickster when he broke his neck after falling at Uttoxeter. It's not always about the race
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
Snooz
Posts: 4786
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 7:05 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Snooz »

User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

SnoozeAgain;1372714 wrote:


Good Idea.

Perhaps we need this one as a replacement for the artificial hare at the Dog track ?
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

It took me a while to find this clip from the racecourse but thought Spot might like to see exactly what a horse can do to his Jockey when the horse Is feeling a little contrary.

Horse throws off jockey - YouTube

The horse had already Injured another Jockey prior to this race,
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

Don't look at me for sympathy - I'd make sitting on a horse illegal regardless of why. A horse is incapable of giving informed consent.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

spot;1373026 wrote: Don't look at me for sympathy - I'd make sitting on a horse illegal regardless of why. A horse is incapable of giving informed consent.


Who said I was looking for sympathy? As the horse was un-harmed, I actually thought It was bloody hilarious.

This one Is better.

Angry Horse Vs Irish Raptor - YouTube

The Jockey was The Queens rider Paddy Brennan.... smug git.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

The same applies. He was doing what he ought not to have been doing. There should be a law against it.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

spot;1373037 wrote: The same applies. He was doing what he ought not to have been doing. There should be a law against it.


So, out of Interest, do you apply the same logic to all use of horses?

My perspective Is this.... Horses are herd animals who's very nature It is, to take flight. You only have to look at the behaviour of the wild Mustang on the plains of North America. One takes flight, they all do and that Is In the psyche of all horses. Look at the fallers In a horse race and see them get on their feet and continue the race riderless.

So a horse In a horse race Is doing what Is natural especially In flat racing.

What Is not natural Is forced behaviour In Police horses, war horses, horses used In farming even show jumping, Gymkhana and dressage.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

oscar;1373043 wrote: So a horse In a horse race Is doing what Is natural especially In flat racing.I beg to differ. No horse has ever been in the wild with a pig-ignorant parasitic midget on his back.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

spot;1373044 wrote: I beg to differ. No horse has ever been in the wild with a pig-ignorant parasitic midget on his back.
Then you have never witnessed the joys of Tibetan horse racing.

Spot.... Are you suffering from some sort of dwarf aversion?
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

oscar;1373049 wrote: Then you have never witnessed the joys of Tibetan horse racing.

Spot.... Are you suffering from some sort of dwarf aversion?


A jockey aversion. What the atavistic behaviour of Mongols has to do with the laws of England I'm not sure.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

spot;1373052 wrote: A jockey aversion. What the atavistic behaviour of Mongols has to do with the laws of England I'm not sure.


Laws of England? Where In UK law does It state that you can not use or race horses?
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

oscar;1373054 wrote: Laws of England? Where In UK law does It state that you can not use or race horses?


You're failing to follow your own thread here. It's in reference to "There should be a law against it".
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

spot;1373057 wrote: You're failing to follow your own thread here. It's in reference to "There should be a law against it".


Should ?

So should there be a law against horses being used In riot control for the police, farming, War horses etc etc?

Horse racing Is harnessing what a horse would do In the wild.... Take flight with the herd.

I am Interested In you theory as to why faller's In a horse race continue riderless.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

oscar;1373101 wrote: I am Interested In you theory as to why faller's In a horse race continue riderless.I'm no expert in equine psychology but I'd guess that after a hundred practices at going round a race track or a training version of a race track, it's conditioned into running when it finds itself on one regardless of whether it retains its rider or not. You can do the same thing with rats and mazes.

I have no opinion about a horse's alleged flight instinct but if you're right in attributing its behaviour to an activated flight reflex, I'm strongly of the view that humans ever deliberately activating it should be frowned on just as much as scaring one bird of a flock into panic flight. Competent twitchers never do that.

My proposed law, if you look back, is to make sitting on a horse illegal. I've no problem with getting it to pull a plough because it so rarely happens but if you want to be completist, let's make it illegal to sit on a horse or put a collar on it.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

spot;1373105 wrote: I'm no expert in equine psychology but I'd guess that after a hundred practices at going round a race track or a training version of a race track, it's conditioned into running when it finds itself on one regardless of whether it retains its rider or not. You can do the same thing with rats and mazes.

I have no opinion about a horse's alleged flight instinct but if you're right in attributing its behaviour to an activated flight reflex, I'm strongly of the view that humans ever deliberately activating it should be frowned on just as much as scaring one bird of a flock into panic flight. Competent twitchers never do that.

My proposed law, if you look back, is to make sitting on a horse illegal. I've no problem with getting it to pull a plough because it so rarely happens but if you want to be completist, let's make it illegal to sit on a horse or put a collar on it.


First paragraph, being conditioned Into running after a hundred practices. The best example I can give you to disprove this Is The 1967 Grand National of which Is to this day named ' Disaster at the 23rd',. It also resulted In the Aintree course renaming one of the hurdles as 'The Foinavon fence'. All runners In any Grand National are grade 3 Steeplechasers, over 5 years old and would have hundred's of practice runs and other races under their belt by the time they are entered.

Foinavon was placed at odds of 100/1 despite being grade 3 and there was so little faith In his ability that on the day, even his owner didn't bother turning out to see him run.

The race past without Incident until at the 22nd fence 28 of the 44 runners were over safely. Foinavon was miles behind them. One of the horses ( Popham Down ) had unseated his Jockey at the first hurdle and began to veer dangerously at the approach of the 23rd, slamming Into another horse, knocking his Jockey out of the saddle. What ensued at the 23rd was a mass pile up. Other horses behind the pile up sensed danger at the 23rd ( and that Is the key Issue here, the horses sensing danger.) and not only did they all refuse to jump, but sensing mortal danger, began running backwards and across the course to get away. This In effect, Immediately brought the race to a stop.

17 of the fallers at the 23rd remounted but by the time they had mounted to give chase, Foinavon jumped wide enough to avoid the pile up and went on to win.

It was reminiscent of the 1928 Grand National when Tipperary Tim was the only horse to finish the race without being remounted.

In the Foinavon Grand National, the horses began running the wrong way because they sensed danger. If they were so conditioned to running on a track that they continued the race regardless, these horses would never have acted the way they did.

Most faller's that you see In Steeple chasing continue the race when although they have fallen at a hurdle, they do not sense any danger and their natural psyche Is to continue to take flight with the rest of the herd. However, If they fell and for some reason, the horse had a sense of danger, he would run the other way, away from the danger, not towards It as In the example I have given you. So, however pre-conditioned a horse Is at racing around a track, the sense of danger In front of him or no sense of danger, determines how that horse will behave.

Sometimes, a horse just doesn't like his Jockey and the horse can have a certain feeling of mistrust In his rider and again, this Is consistent with a horse being able to sense danger.I remember when Jockey AP McCoy replaced Denman's regular Jockey Sam Thomas In the Betfair Chase. The disgruntled Denman unceremoniously dumped McCoy In the ditch half way round but continued the race and finished without rider. It's often the reason many a Steeple Chaser will Unseat the rider. The horse simply does not have maximum faith In his Jockey to take him over the hurdles safely yet he will continue alone because he feels safe with the rest of the herd.

So, What Is the difference between putting a rider on the back of a horse and a harness for farming? By your reasoning, the horse has not given permission for either.



Edit... Took me a while to find this race. This was a 10 furlong flat race with no hurdles.

At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

oscar;1373122 wrote: So, What Is the difference between putting a rider on the back of a horse and a harness for farming? By your reasoning, the horse has not given permission for either.Nothing at all, it's why I wrote "if you want to be completist, let's make it illegal to sit on a horse or put a collar on it".
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

spot;1373123 wrote: Nothing at all, it's why I wrote "if you want to be completist, let's make it illegal to sit on a horse or put a collar on it".


Taken from your previous post



"My proposed law, if you look back, is to make sitting on a horse illegal. I've no problem with getting it to pull a plough"

How do you propose a horse pulls a plough without It being attached to his body In some way with a harness, collar, or some other method?
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

Just stop selectively quoting and you'll avoid embarrassing yourself, eh? The answer's the bit you left out.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

spot;1373129 wrote: Just stop selectively quoting and you'll avoid embarrassing yourself, eh? The answer's the bit you left out. You said 'rarely happens'. The use of the word 'rarely ' Indicates that It Is possible so again I ask, how does a horse pull a plough without a collar or harness, even rarely ?

National Hunt races are started with a tape. As It happens, although I have a passion for horse-racing, I would like to see starting gates, used on the flat, totally abolished.

It Is not natural to put a horse In a starting gate. National Hunt proves that there Is no need for It although the pundits will argue that over a 5 furlong sprint depending solely on speed, flats need to be In an exact line.

This Is just one of many, many examples of horrible, unnecessary stress, anxiety and possible Injury placed on the horses before they have even started racing and one of the reasons I refuse to attend a flat racing track.



Starting Gate Wreck at Yavapai Downs - YouTube
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38199
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by spot »

oscar;1373212 wrote: You said 'rarely happens'. The use of the word 'rarely ' Indicates that It Is possible so again I ask, how does a horse pull a plough without a collar or harness, even rarely ?
It doesn't. Are you playing dim or is it real?

I've no problem with getting it to pull a plough because it so rarely happens.

That's from the full quote you keep selectively avoiding. You see the "because"? It's the reason I'm uninterested in it compared to people sitting on their backs, which happens a lot. The one's insignificant, the other's significant but by all means add wearing collars if you want to cover all the bases.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

It took some searching but I actually found colour footage from the race In 1967, the biggest disaster In racing history and I hope to god we never see again.

The footage shows It as I described It.... Scroll through to 21st race If you don't want to see the whole race,

1967 GRAND NATIONAL IN COLOUR,GREAT FOOTAGE,MUST SEE - YouTube

Things have Improved. Exits were Installed around the course for the fallers to escape.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

Oh dear. The rabid animal rights brigade will go Into over-drive.

Far from making the penalties more severe The Racing Board has actually lessened the penalties for over-use of the whip. I must say, even I am surprised at this turn about.

BBC Sport - British Horseracing Authority to cut penalties for excessive whip use
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Gentle Brother
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 8:46 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Gentle Brother »

Profit before horse welfare! The threat of disruption and loss of income, and morals go out of the window! Shabby.
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

Gentle Brother;1380395 wrote: Profit before horse welfare! The threat of disruption and loss of income, and morals go out of the window! Shabby.


Profit ?????

For whom exactly ????

Please elaborate.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

Now this Is an Interesting point to argue the use of the whip.

Appeal falls on deaf ears but Ruby Walsh gets Hennessy reprieve - Racing, Sport - Belfasttelegraph.co.uk

Kauto Star's jockey Ruby Walsh appealed a three day ban for careless riding after his horse had bumped Into the runner up.....

So what Is It to be then protesters of the whip? Uncontrollable horses or the whip to correct them?

You can't have It both ways can you ?
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
peleus
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:59 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by peleus »

From what I know, the new whip would be good for the business since horses will tend to run faster but it would cost them more pain doing this.
Never quit.
User avatar
Oscar Namechange
Posts: 31842
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am

Jockeys threaten strike over new whip regs.

Post by Oscar Namechange »

peleus;1440053 wrote: From what I know, the new whip would be good for the business since horses will tend to run faster but it would cost them more pain doing this.


What new whip ???

There are no new whips. It's amendment to the whip usage.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon

Return to “Sports”