HOT STUFF

Richard Forristal’s brilliant account of the Irish 2000 Guineas (Racing Post, Friday, 12^th June) should be read in full and cherished indefinitely.

I quote Mr Forristal:

“Social distancing rules in Ireland  provide for gatherings of no more than six people and Aidan O’Brien had sought to make full use of that quota with half a dozen soldiers sent over the top in his quest for a 12th win in the race….

“Two furlongs out, Fort Myers and Royal Lytham were in front of Siskin (the favourite) and Armory was on his outer. Then Seamie Heffernan on Lope Y Fernandez came around them all to tighten matters further.” [End of quote. Hereafter I paraphrase.]

There you have the deployment of four of the Ballydoyle contingent. However Siskin (trained by Ger Lyons and ridden by Colin Keane) proved more than a match for all of them.

Keane forced Armory aside, and consequently Rebel Tale was impeded. Keane took a serious chance, but the only alternative was to resign himself to certain defeat. Instead he went on to win easily.

I imagine that the subsequent stewards’ inquiry was by no means an open and shut case, but justice was done; the placings remained unaltered, confirming a famous triumph.

“Full credit to Colin Keane, because he was out there on his own today against a football team,” commented trainer Lyons.

That seems rather unfair on the great game. Up against a football team, there is at least a possibility that your opponents will try to beat you fair and square, rather than by resorting to the black arts. But Mr Lyons had every right to complain.

Justice was done in the Irish 2,000 Guineas, but the elephant is still in the room. In the future there will be occasions where justice will clearly recommend one logic and the rule book will be found to endorse another. Stewards should not be required to wrestle with that sort of impasse.  It is time something was done.

Like what?

Let us assume that this is at present a purely Irish problem. I would like to see a study by the Irish authorities of “football team” tactics, coupled with an examination of their Rules, to ascertain whether they are robust enough to police what may turn out to be a very grey area with plenty of black about it.

If such a study suggests that changes are called for, “football” could be brought to the attention of the international forum of racing authorities for further consideration.

There is no need to over-complicate the situation. It might be worth remembering that the great Vincent O’Brien never needed a football team to facilitate his pursuit of success.

LOCKDOWN LESSONS?

Here’s a thought… Since racing resumed in England, the list of winning trainers is headed by the big battalions, as one would expect, but also includes names that I for one have never heard of.

Here’s a suggestion for those who have yet to make their names in the Sport of Kings. See if any of your lockdown winners are complete surprises to you as well as to the rest of the world. If you find one, put it under the microscope, and see if Coronavirus made you do anything different in your preparation for that particular surprise. If you can identify any “innovation” you have been forced to employ, you may be about to stumble on a “new normal” that is better than your  previous idea of how the job should be done.

To a certain extent a horse’s work is graduated so as to produce full fitness on a certain day. It is largely a matter of how much a horse is asked to do in a gallop, and how much time is given for recovery between gallops. If getting those two calculations right makes your horse faster, getting them wrong will make him slower.

Applying my suggestion, a trainer might find that he has been solemnly preparing horses to peak not on race day, but on final gallop day. What a disaster! But also, what a revelation! One or two deft alterations to his training process and he might become a championship “contender”. “Might” is an operative word, and I am a student rather than an expert.

My own feeling, after decades of study over the best part of 200 years (I am old, but not that old) is that the really good trainers adapted their work plan to suit the individual horse rather than vice versa. If I remember rightly John Porter, who trained the unbeaten Ormonde and six other Derby winners,  on occasions would give a horse his “trial” nine days before his race, whereas his normal habit was four or five days.

KINGSCLERE

This year’s 2000 Guineas was won by Kameko, trained by Andrew Balding and ridden by Oisin Murphy (champion jockey 2019, and a graduate from the Kingsclere Academy). Congratulations to them and to all concerned.

I still cannot believe that Nick Rust, CEO of the BHA, has pulled the plug on the formula that underpinned the Kingsclere Academy, one of the few absolutely superb aspects of British Racing. Unless I am mad, this change needs to be reviewed, and the sooner the better. Perhaps Mr Rust might like to think again. If not, perhaps the attention of his successor might be drawn to the matter by Mrs Phelps, or by the Horsemens Group, or by the National Trainers Federation, which I understand was involved in the formulation of this lunacy.

Over fifty or sixty years Kingsclere has produced a steady stream of excellent jockeys who have turned out to be excellent members of the racing community as well. What’s wrong with that? During that time the system that developed was available to any trainer who wished to follow suit. What’s wrong with that? Now Mr Rust has created a desert out of an oasis. Is that what racing needs?

I admire Andrew Balding’s reaction. He seems to think that if British racing disapproves of his jockey school he will not waste time arguing about it.  He clearly has other things to keep him occupied, one of which is Kameko. However I am delighted to point out that it is not the racing community which is turning its back on the Kingsclere enterprise; it is the BHA, which in recent years has won prizes for getting things wrong.

Is there nobody at the top of British racing who thinks that this is a mistake serious enough to deserve a re-think?

WHEN IS A MILE NOT A MILE?

I am concluding, after much head scratching, that the Rowley Mile at Newmarket (over which the two Guineas races have recently been run), has been guilty of false pretences for the best part of three centuries.

The fairly flat first five furlongs (that’s alliteration) encourage the foolhardy (equine and human) to go too fast, especially if the field is a big one.  Inevitably, the foolhardy seldom feature at the finish, unless they are Frankel or Tudor Minstrel.

I would suggest that, when the gates open on the so-called Rowley Mile, a jockey’s priority should be to ensure that his mount sets off at a pace which he (the jockey) chooses. Wherever he finds himself among the runners after ten paces, if he and his horse are running sweetly at a sensible pace the jockey is entitled to feel pleased with his situation. There is still a long way to go and much to do, and he is well placed and comfortable. This cannot be said for most of the field, which will indubitably pay a fine for speeding.

Is it at the six furlong pole that the field reaches The Bushes and the track dips downwards for half a furlong? If so, an extra chore is added to the work in progress of both horse and rider, the need to ensure that the combination stays balanced and keeps straight. An impossible task if the horse is beginning to weaken and wobble.

Finally the track rises towards the finish and the script requires all contenders to produce their best work. An impossibility for the over-impetuous majority  – for them the writing has been on the wall since very soon after the word “Go”.

Doesn’t that sound more like a mile-and-a-quarter race than a mile? I haven’t seen any replays, but my recollection of the One Thousand Guineas suggests that Ryan Moore on the winner took his time, went at exactly the right pace from the start and passed the post full of running. Behind him, over by the rails, a dozen or so bridesmaids were toiling more than somewhat – or did my eyes deceive me? I think not.

Once again the Rowley Mile has made fools of all but the brightest, as has been happening ever since Charles the Second was on the throne. Rowley Mile? No way: Rowley Ten Furlongs, unless you are riding those two that I mentioned earlier.

ROYAL ASCOT

Sunday 21^st June, and I am striding out on the downs. The sun is shining and a passing rain cloud only manages to deposit three lukewarm drops on my head. Then it runs away towards Newbury.

I start thinking about Royal Ascot, which had ended the previous day. In particular, the New Tote. It sounds like it had a good result, but the accountants have yet to report. I am impatient to hear that the bottom line on the week’s trading shows that British Racing has earned a fortune, and can throw away the begging bowl for ever.

One possibility is that the New Tote is going to revert to the role for which Winston Churchill created it in 1928 – its object being to provide money for racing generated by the sport itself, which would in due course enable the sport to thrive and to grow until its contribution to the nation’s wealth was maximised.

If that outcome is to become a reality, is it not absolutely vital that the next CEO of the BHA should be significantly better than every incumbent of that position (bar one) selected since 2004?

This brings us back to last week’s Royal Ascot. The BHA buckled down and did a superb job, something quite different from its normal ponderous negativity. Why? Because it was in harness with the Jockey Club and Weatherbys, two magnificent examples of how top managements should perform and behave. Is that not so?

Hence I declare that the Jockey Club and Weatherbys should be closely involved in the selection process of the BHA’s next CEO.  The suggestion (and it has been voiced) that it is none of their business is so stupid, in my opinion. This is a great opportunity, and mustn’t be wasted!

Next: if the New Tote is a resounding success for Racing, I suggest that Alex Frost, who will have been responsible for that resounding success, should also be invited to advise and assist with the future of what I hope will turn out to be a “new” BHA.

Am I mad?

 

Best wishes,

DONEC