STARTING

What did the winning jockey report to the press after the Cheltenham Gold Cup?

“I thought the start was a bit of a joke, to be honest, for a gold cup, and we were on the back foot then. Horses were jumping left and right and jumping into me, so all credit to him (Galopin Des Champs) to get a rhythm after that.”

The best moment of Mister Townend’s life and he doesn’t want to spoil it for anyone, but the horrors of the start were so extreme that in all conscience he felt the need to mention that fact.

It just so happens that there are numerous people in positions of power, starting with Mrs Harrington (CEO of the BHA) and working upwards to include chairman Mr Saumarez Smith(Chairman); people who know that the starting process is a vital element as regards the sport’s integrity and reputation, and that anything less than the highest standards restricts the practitioners concerned to the dregs of the world of sport. Mrs Harrington knows it, and so does Mr Saumarez Smith They know it, and they do nothing.

Up to now I have always associated False Starts with big fields, but not any more: in addition to the Gold Cup drama, there were at least five False Starts at Cheltenham. In addition, on the 25^th of March the third race at Kelso false-started (9 runners), as did Race 7 at Newbury (7 runners). So the epidemic is spreading. Is that not a cause for concern?

The owners, trainers and jockeys have spokespersons contracted to speak on their behalf.  The owners have Mr Liverton, the jockeys have Mr Ian McMahon, the National Trainers Federation have three representatives, Ralph Beckett, Nicholas Alexander and Hugo Palmer. Have any of them protested about the starts? Every time there is a bad start, a number of owners, trainers and jockeys are being robbed of their just desserts.

The fiasco began in 2011 when Mr Stier (Regulator) created a starting process that immediately encouraged false starts, and he refused to change it. He ordered the starters to pack the runners as tight as the compartment of a tube train in the rush hour, and then to aim that compartment at the starting gate. That treatment is something that horses resent. Besides, if you get the runners to go through the starting gate in that formation, the front will be advantaged and the rear will be disadvantaged, whereas the process is meant to give every competitor the same chance of a level break.

When the present Regulator took office he was warned that changes needed to be made. Sadly he has ignored those warnings and things have clearly gone from bad to worse. What is equally sad is that nobody at the top of the BHA has had a friendly word with him. That’s rather worrying, isn’t it? What’s worrying? The thought that nobody at the sharp end of the BHA knows the basic principles of Starting.

THE WHIP

The whip problem (is the racing whip a bad thing?) was solved over twenty years ago by research on the part of the top brass of British Racing, with the help of the late Jim Mahon, who invented the padded whip and improved it to such an extent that it has been compared to a feather duster. As a result this whip is now mandatory all over the world, and has been welcomed all over the world.

Would that this were the end of the story, but it isn’t. There are people who think a whip cannot be anything other than a sign of cruelty, and they complain. That is not a problem. The problem is that the BHA has decided that, if anybody criticises the padded whip, racing must take it as a sign of public opinion which must be respected. It is not public opinion, it is simply the opinion of a very tiny and very ignorant minority, and it must not be respected because the whip is an essential part of the horseman’s equipment and a padded whip is harmless – not cruel.

I would suggest that the tiny minority arranges to inspect horses immediately after hard races and looks for signs that the animals have been harmed, physically or mentally. Build up a dossier on that basis and I am sure the racing community will take it seriously. It is simply a question of put up or shut up, or it should be, were it not for the fact that the BHA is far too easily frightened. It has nothing to fear if it sticks to the truth about the feather duster. Here we have another odd facet of the BHA’s leadership. The late Mr Mahon created a near miracle in the padded whip, and the BHA seems to be ashamed of it. Isn’t that odd, and sad?

GAMBLING REVIEW

I hardly dare to express an opinion because I don’t understand the facts of life in the world of gambling. However I have been impressed by two phenomena.

First, whatever the bookmakers may say, they never stop encouraging the punter to keep betting. Look at any bookmaker’s website and the screen will feature a large number of exhortations to bet responsibly and an even larger number of exhortations to keep betting, and when a punter decides to leave the site they beg him or her to stay. They seem to be in two minds, which spells confusion, which is not entirely reassuring.

Second, I was amazed to find that in Hong Kong the racing industry controls all betting and its contribution to the wealth and wellbeing of the community is second to none. I will say that again: betting under the management of the horseracing industry provides more to the wealth of the community than any other section of the vibrant financial powerhouse that is Hong Kong. I also suspect that the kind of betting that is encouraged is “pool betting”, which encourages millions of punters to have tiny bets. This suggests a gambling ethos which encourages moderation. Isn’t that the ideal?

So if I was asked how I would like to see this gambling debate pan out, I would suggest to the Gambling Review that Britain would be well advised to look closely at the Hong Kong model. What difference would it make for the NHS, for example.

Best wishes,

Donec