Horse gets free and does a complete circuit of the jumps course at Kempton in the first race, crashes through the railings then is promptly loaded and made to run a 5 furlong sprint!
And they say racing doesn't have an image problem - unreal!
What a disgrace!
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
Yup fully agree - I traded the initial drift when it was first loose and made a decent amount from it but then when it went off out on the jumps course I thought no chance this runs so just left it. Can't believe it was allowed to run.
-
billyford1
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:31 pm
Yes Peter, jockeys are guaranteed to be paid as soon as they weigh out. ultimately it is up to the stewards or trainer to withdraw the horse.
-
billyford1
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:31 pm
They still have to ask the stewards permission.
This is going to sound contentious. I didn't see the race just the race reports and comments in running.
The vet is the first port of call I believe. If he/she fails the horse it is withdrawn. If it passes then it is up to the trainer/jockey or stewards.
Running loose for about a mile and then taking part in a 5f race is neither here nor there. I've seen many a horse win after running further than that. So the only issue is whether it injured itself/was distressed or not. As I said, the vet is the first port of call here. I'm not saying vets (or anyone else) are infallible but the horse finished a creditable 2.25 lengths behind the second who was 6 lengths back from the runaway winner. Sounds like the vet was probably right.
So the horse is OK, that's the important bit, so why shouldn't it run? Granted, running a mile beforehand is not ideal for the potential success of the horse in this race but not necessarily a bad thing. Some people say it is at least warmed up. It did run well enough and I'm sure it'll run better next time now it has a nice handicap mark.
Are we into the question of 'for whose benefit does racing take place, the punters, bookmakers and traders or the people who pay the bills?' BTW my answer is 'Both'.
Do you think it should have been withdrawn on the following grounds:
1, because it was injured?
2, because it was tired?
3, because it had a worse chance of winning and you feel sorry for the people who backed it?
4, some other reason?
My own view on such matters is that if the horse is fine by the vet and no one else withdraws it then I accept that, even if my money is on it. I can easily minimise any losses if I want to or just let it ride.
Interested in your views.
Seabird.
The vet is the first port of call I believe. If he/she fails the horse it is withdrawn. If it passes then it is up to the trainer/jockey or stewards.
Running loose for about a mile and then taking part in a 5f race is neither here nor there. I've seen many a horse win after running further than that. So the only issue is whether it injured itself/was distressed or not. As I said, the vet is the first port of call here. I'm not saying vets (or anyone else) are infallible but the horse finished a creditable 2.25 lengths behind the second who was 6 lengths back from the runaway winner. Sounds like the vet was probably right.
So the horse is OK, that's the important bit, so why shouldn't it run? Granted, running a mile beforehand is not ideal for the potential success of the horse in this race but not necessarily a bad thing. Some people say it is at least warmed up. It did run well enough and I'm sure it'll run better next time now it has a nice handicap mark.
Are we into the question of 'for whose benefit does racing take place, the punters, bookmakers and traders or the people who pay the bills?' BTW my answer is 'Both'.
Do you think it should have been withdrawn on the following grounds:
1, because it was injured?
2, because it was tired?
3, because it had a worse chance of winning and you feel sorry for the people who backed it?
4, some other reason?
My own view on such matters is that if the horse is fine by the vet and no one else withdraws it then I accept that, even if my money is on it. I can easily minimise any losses if I want to or just let it ride.
Interested in your views.
Seabird.
I don't buy the line that the horse will do OK if it has run loose. If it is bred as a sprinter but has run loose, its like asking Usain Bolt to run a 1500m race before the start of the 100m? You would do that for a number of reasons but also it's likely an injury would occur.
I have to yeild to the vet on condition as I don't know enough about horses to make a judgement, but my guess was as it was a low quality race with low quality horses so nobody really cared that much?
I have to yeild to the vet on condition as I don't know enough about horses to make a judgement, but my guess was as it was a low quality race with low quality horses so nobody really cared that much?
Hi Seabird
Whilst you table so good counter arguments I think you are missing the point.
The perception that racing has with the wider public would have been tarnished for anyone visiting Kempton or watching this on TV yesterday.
It seems strange that the Jockey club bring in a dictum that no horse can be remounted after a fall (to protect racings image) but in these cases there are no clear rules apart from the Vet/trainer (or rep) making a quick decision.
The horse may well not have been injured physically but surely mentally the horse was not 100%. Not convinced that any professional human athlete would participate in a race if they had gone through a similar ordeal 5mins prior to their race.
Another point you miss is that of the poor punter -he has placed his bet prior to the horses going to start. He has a ticket that displays 5/1 about his charge but before the race he knows the ticket is worthless and 14/1 is now available! Many of these punters back to small stakes and don't use an exchange, but some will have had larger wagers - you may say tough luck to these people but they are the mainstay of the betting shop industry and help influence the market we trade in.
I traded the race and like Andy, got to a point where I stopped because I thought it was going to be withdrawn. Whilst I made a good profit on it I don't think it was in the best interests of the sport
Whilst you table so good counter arguments I think you are missing the point.
The perception that racing has with the wider public would have been tarnished for anyone visiting Kempton or watching this on TV yesterday.
It seems strange that the Jockey club bring in a dictum that no horse can be remounted after a fall (to protect racings image) but in these cases there are no clear rules apart from the Vet/trainer (or rep) making a quick decision.
The horse may well not have been injured physically but surely mentally the horse was not 100%. Not convinced that any professional human athlete would participate in a race if they had gone through a similar ordeal 5mins prior to their race.
Another point you miss is that of the poor punter -he has placed his bet prior to the horses going to start. He has a ticket that displays 5/1 about his charge but before the race he knows the ticket is worthless and 14/1 is now available! Many of these punters back to small stakes and don't use an exchange, but some will have had larger wagers - you may say tough luck to these people but they are the mainstay of the betting shop industry and help influence the market we trade in.
I traded the race and like Andy, got to a point where I stopped because I thought it was going to be withdrawn. Whilst I made a good profit on it I don't think it was in the best interests of the sport
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
It is also important to remember that not only did the horse run loose it also crashed through the rails. Once the horse arrived at the start it was freely sweating and was blowing like a horse that had just run a race.
Obviously I wasn't there and didn't listen to the horses heart but I am sure it was beating nothing like the other runners in the race.
A horse running a 5 furlong race requires a sharp burst of speed and energy - there is no way at all that running for over a mile before the race was in anyway beneficial for the horse.
As for punters being able to minimise losses that is not possible for the vast majority of people who would have been betting on the race. However, Seabird may have been able to.
The horse ran and earn't no money in prize money, however, it would have been much better for racign had it been withdrawn by the officials and therefore be paid a fee. This currently isn't in place but in my opinion it should be.
Racing is in a dire state and incidents like that last night do racing no favours and it is no surprise that more and more people betting are looking at other betting opportunities. Until people in racing get their head out of the sand and start doing things this sport will continue to go into decline and will struggle more and more to survive in its present form.
Obviously I wasn't there and didn't listen to the horses heart but I am sure it was beating nothing like the other runners in the race.
A horse running a 5 furlong race requires a sharp burst of speed and energy - there is no way at all that running for over a mile before the race was in anyway beneficial for the horse.
As for punters being able to minimise losses that is not possible for the vast majority of people who would have been betting on the race. However, Seabird may have been able to.
The horse ran and earn't no money in prize money, however, it would have been much better for racign had it been withdrawn by the officials and therefore be paid a fee. This currently isn't in place but in my opinion it should be.
Racing is in a dire state and incidents like that last night do racing no favours and it is no surprise that more and more people betting are looking at other betting opportunities. Until people in racing get their head out of the sand and start doing things this sport will continue to go into decline and will struggle more and more to survive in its present form.
-
billyford1
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:31 pm
The bottom line is that the horse had no chance of winning the race.Sprinters are highly strung creatures anyway and live on their nerves at the best of times and losing nervous enegy before a race is far more detrimental to a horses chance than any physical effort.AS for the fact that he was only beaten 8 1/2 lenths, in the context of a 5f race that might as well be 28 lenths!
There have of couse been horses who have got loose and then proceeded to amble their way down to the start none the worse for it but sprinters just don't do this,they usually have just two gears,stop and go!
There have of couse been horses who have got loose and then proceeded to amble their way down to the start none the worse for it but sprinters just don't do this,they usually have just two gears,stop and go!
I accept all the points you make as being correct to some degree at some time or other. But... you all seem to be saying in a round about way that the vet was wrong to give the horse the go ahead.
That's a pretty serious accusation.
So how should the rules of racing be changed to stop such circumstances? Are you suggesting that all horses that get loose should be withdrawn? If not, who is best positioned to decide? The vet, I think, which puts us back to square one. Was the vet wrong last night?
Seabird
That's a pretty serious accusation.
So how should the rules of racing be changed to stop such circumstances? Are you suggesting that all horses that get loose should be withdrawn? If not, who is best positioned to decide? The vet, I think, which puts us back to square one. Was the vet wrong last night?
Seabird
-
billyford1
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:31 pm
Hi seabird,
I don't see how the vet could be blamed as he can only advise the starter as to whether the animal is sound or not. The stewards really should have steped in on this occasion.
I was going to excuse the trainer on the grounds that training is a tough business to be in at the moment and he might have been under pressure from the owners only to find out that he owns it himself!
Still i think Andys idea that a fee should be paid to connections for horses withdrawn in this manner is a excellent one as i suspect that if such a system was in place he would not have run.
I don't see how the vet could be blamed as he can only advise the starter as to whether the animal is sound or not. The stewards really should have steped in on this occasion.
I was going to excuse the trainer on the grounds that training is a tough business to be in at the moment and he might have been under pressure from the owners only to find out that he owns it himself!
Still i think Andys idea that a fee should be paid to connections for horses withdrawn in this manner is a excellent one as i suspect that if such a system was in place he would not have run.
Hi BillyFord1
Thanks for that.
I think there is some merit in Andy's suggestion too but I wouldn't be keen on the decision being by the stewards.
Perhaps the vet could adjudicate on two levels of incident. 1, the minor digression which could just be a check out of the horse and if OK, run it or 2, incidents like we are talking about when the vet could say the horse is OK but also advised the stewards that the trainer could withdraw it and be compensated.
That way it would rest with the most expert to decide the severity and the connections could have an option to run or be compensated.
Not too sure of punters' reactions to horses being withdrawn this way when there are 16 runners in a handicap race!
Seabird.
Thanks for that.
I think there is some merit in Andy's suggestion too but I wouldn't be keen on the decision being by the stewards.
Perhaps the vet could adjudicate on two levels of incident. 1, the minor digression which could just be a check out of the horse and if OK, run it or 2, incidents like we are talking about when the vet could say the horse is OK but also advised the stewards that the trainer could withdraw it and be compensated.
That way it would rest with the most expert to decide the severity and the connections could have an option to run or be compensated.
Not too sure of punters' reactions to horses being withdrawn this way when there are 16 runners in a handicap race!
Seabird.