It is a tricky thing to decide when they should run and shouldn't run. I don't think it should be if one gets loose it has to be withdrawn. I think earlier in the day a horse was loose for all of about 10 seconds which of course had no effect upon it. The Kempton horse though was the other extreme.
On the flip side in France earlier this year, I forget the race but it was a big race, it was a false start but many didnt stop the race was void but they ran it at the end of the card again. This was a sprint race, possibly 5furlongs. Now some of these horses had run a full race and used up heaps of nervous energy and then asked to do it all again. I am in no way suggesting this as an idea of course, just using an example where the stewards etc thought it was okay for all to run again. I think a few were W/D by the trainers.
I think for the 'image' of racing something needs to be done about this issue. As we all know it is the punter that funds racing on the whole and as such they should be much better looked after. I am sure that if you did a poll of the people who backed that horse before it was loose 90%+ would have been happy to have taken their money back after seeing it get loose and smash through the railings.
A lot of the punters yesterday and on other occasions I am sure will have had their impression of racing damaged by the incident and a few will no doubt look to other betting mediums.
One option is the use of outriders - this is used widely in America however in America they race at the same tracks day in day out and the outriding horses are stabled at the track. In the UK that of course is not the case. Perhaps someone could run a service that supplies a horse and an outrider for each track. A good outrider on a good Quarter horse would have had that horse caught yesterday in no time. The cost of such a service would be a reasonable amount but the advantages could be huge - they could be used to catch loose horses when they fall (not of course if the loose horse is running amongst the field but if it is off on its own. We all see loose horses almost everyday going off in all directions, sometimes running back at the field, other times running and falling again and a few killing themselves. The use of outriders would also help reduce delays to a race when a horse is running loose. I think the advantages to racing would far outweigh the disadvantages and the cost of such a service.
What a disgrace!
-
billyford1
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:31 pm
To be honest Seabird i dont think there should be two many options in a case like this,either the trainer should come forward to the stewards and say 'i think my horse has lost any chance of winning'in which case he should be compensated or the the stewards should withdraw him anyway and give him nothing!
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
Can't see that working as you could end up with the ridiculous situation of trainers with no hopers exploiting the system. If the trainer wants to pull his horse then I don't think they should be compensated. I only think they should be compensated if the decision is taken out of their hands, i.e. the horse is W/D by the starter.billyford1 wrote: the trainer should come forward to the stewards and say 'i think my horse has lost any chance of winning'in which case he should be compensated or the the stewards should withdraw him anyway and give him nothing!
-
billyford1
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:31 pm
Hi Andy,
I dont think anyone would bother exploiting this system as at the end of the day all we are talking about in regards to compensation is covering expences [travelling,jockey etc.]
I take your point regarding outriders,you can of course have a horse ponied to the start if you get permisson from the stewards but these come from the same yard.
Trainers over here will never agree to their horses being taken to the start by a horse from a strange yard as they live in constant fear of viruses.
I dont think anyone would bother exploiting this system as at the end of the day all we are talking about in regards to compensation is covering expences [travelling,jockey etc.]
I take your point regarding outriders,you can of course have a horse ponied to the start if you get permisson from the stewards but these come from the same yard.
Trainers over here will never agree to their horses being taken to the start by a horse from a strange yard as they live in constant fear of viruses.
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
I wasn't suggesting they actually pony the horses down to the start, rather that there be an outrider on the track ready for any loose horses to catch them. This is common place in many countries for example Dubai and America on the track in the mornings. Quarter horses are often used due to their speed compared to a normal racing thoroughbred.
-
billyford1
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:31 pm
I can see your point Andy,i suppose it would'nt do any harm to have one or two handy.
Andy
I like your idea of the single outrider. If that was implemented first then it ought to result in a reduction of the cases we are expressing concern about. Maybe even reduce them to the point of them being a welcome rarity.
Failing that I'd be in favour of a vet/starter chain of command with compensation as you suggest for those who are made to withdraw even though the horse is passed fit by the vet.
I guess none of it will happen in a hurry, if ever.
Seabird
I like your idea of the single outrider. If that was implemented first then it ought to result in a reduction of the cases we are expressing concern about. Maybe even reduce them to the point of them being a welcome rarity.
Failing that I'd be in favour of a vet/starter chain of command with compensation as you suggest for those who are made to withdraw even though the horse is passed fit by the vet.
I guess none of it will happen in a hurry, if ever.
Seabird