2008 Departures

Status
Not open for further replies.
Taken from a Kim Baily's website, a NH trainer who clearly would have an opinion based on facts and he was reacting to Paul Nicholls request for water jumps to be removed. These people work in the industry and are responsible for the well being of the horses left in their charge not based based on the personal opinion of a work rider. To me it doesn't matter how many times some horses are schooled or where they are schooled. They may perfect it at times but one slip of concentration can result in a fatal injury. It can be an accident waiting to happen. Why do people want to put horses in unnecessary danger as losing even one racehorse at one of these jumps is one horse too many as far as I am concerned.

Paul Nicholls comments about the need for water jumps to be removed is something I totally agree with.

Water jumps might be a spectacle for some, but frankly it is the one fence that when a horse gets it wrong and drags his hind legs in the water, it can easily result in far worse injuries that caused by other fence mistakes.

Not only that, but as it is so small, horses seeing one for the first time can be tempted to hurdle them which can easily be catastrophic; ending up with pulled muscles over their back ends being the least of their injuries.

We must not forget it is perhaps the only fence that a horse will not practice over at home. Lets move on from them, they don't serve a purpose any more.

Spectacle .. hardly Huntingdon's is on the far side as was Ascots. Aintree, Newbury Ludlow are about the only courses that have them in front of the stands and more and more course have removed them
 
No water jumps in Ireland and I dont think there has ever been a clamour for them to be added, nor has there been a clamour to remove open ditches. Was it Ferdy Murphy who lost two horses through water jumps a couple of years back? I think they are pointless.
 
Rags To Riches is retired, reoccurance of her injury. She is due to be bred to Giants Causeway.
 
Originally posted by Headstrong@Mar 24 2008, 12:09 PM
but I try at least to make a general contribution to the forums I belong to... I think that's preferable to using them just for getting tips - or for self-aggrandisement, carrying on personal feuds and slagging off other people.
Click to expand...
You know what, Headstrong? I don’t take any notice of tips posted on forums, nevermind only use them for such. But you’re right – I contribute nothing to such places, no-one is interested in anything I have to say as it is all meaningless. Not to mention that as I am not middle aged or older, everything I have to say is frivolous, not based in fact, formulated without any intelligence whatsoever and readily overlooked since I am so wet behind the ears and know nothing of real life. In case anyone had noticed, I look in less and less often nowadays, care to hazard a guess as to why that is?

I am getting a little tired of constantly having my views rubbished because I am not of an age to warrant an opinion; am not a trainer in which case they must know better (all bar your William Haggas’; Mark Johnstons; Michael Chapmans; Peter Harris or whichever trainer is currently not flavour of the month amongst the self-confessed well-connected forumites amongst us) or simply because someone [yes, that can and does becomes plural!] cannot stand me and has to have a dig at every opportunity.

I am fed up of the same people constantly cutting and pasting articles on subjects about which they do not have sufficient knowledge of to hold a coherent debate; this done simply as a points scoring exercise to try and put down those forumites they do not like so feel they must constantly be on the look out to rubbish the opinions thereof.

Equally, I find it tiresome that despite constantly being accused of slagging people off I often come across unprovoked posts from people running along the lines of “forumitex, Shadow Leader is always rude, is x, y and z, is constantly doing x, y, and z, is evidently doing x, y and z, evidently knows x, y and z, and her opinions are to be ignored as she thinks she knows x, y and z, but she evidently doesn’t”. I haven’t even started on the public (some pretty hysterical, too!) rumours that have done the rounds about me! Not to mention the slagging off PMs that have been flying around, even the public comments on-forum assuming such things as who I hang around with, what I do and what I know – all of which is no more than guesswork!

Plenty of people on here and other forums are capable of holding a coherent debate with – however unfortunately the tiresome few are driving away many people with their constant drivel. Ask yourself how many respected contributors no longer post here or in other places (FF, for example) and then ask yourself who or what the common denominators are.

Clearly my opinions on water jumps are worthless ~ as, it appears, are my opinions on other related subjects of which I do at the very least, unlike my constant detractors, have a good working knowledge of ~ so there is little point in continuing to post any opinions on matters about which – shock, horror! – I do actually know something about. Not that the small fact that I do have that experience matters a jot.

So there’s not really a lot of point in repeating my one basic premise, that seems to have been pretty much ignored, that if JUMPS racehorses could JUMP properly in the first place, there wouldn’t be as much as a problem as there is. The idea that horses should only have to jump what they have already jumped at home is daft, nonsensical and ridiculous – have all eventers vast experience of jumping a vicarage vee or a ha-ha before completing Badminton for the first time? Are all event riders supplied with the layout of all fences on an Olympic event course in the months beforehand so they can practice over mocked up fences beforehand? Have all first time hunters jumped 5ft hedges or 4ft drops, some with no landing side in sight until they are airborne, all exact replicas of what they see on each particular hunt, before they go?

So please explain to me why it is so unfair that waterjumps are featured on courses because “the horses won’t have seen them before”? They won’t have seen open ditches before going onto a racecourse either!

The fences on racecourses are absolute childsplay compared to what will be jumped on an average hunt – and by kids’ ponies as well! If the horses are decent jumpers ~ as they should be ~ I myself see little problem in them jumping waterjumps. I would not be worried about running my horse at a track with a waterjump, mainly because – hells bells!!!! – he can actually jump, and jump very well, and will have had plenty of practise over all sorts of obstacles, including out hunting, by the time he comes to run over timber. In my opinion the only way to deal with a NH racehorse is to teach it to jump early, get it jumping often and give it loads of practice over all sorts of obstacles, poles, cross country fences, logs, ditches, anything – and if it is at all possible, taking them hunting is invaluable.

Colin, a rider would have a lot of input in the way they ride in the approach to any fence – be it a waterjump, ditch, plain fence, drop, or tiny cross pole. Horses can sense any trepidation from the rider and tend to act upon it – therefore if the rider is tense, nervous or hesitant that will give the horse cause to pause. As for the jockeys having experience riding over waterjumps it should be much the same as riding over any fence – and in my opinion any rider going over obstacles should be an experienced jumper. That is precisely why the Irish jockeys are so successful – they are born and raised in the hunting field and are on a horse’s back before they can walk.
 
No point getting into it on a public forum though.

My opposition to water fences stems from the fact that their size can deceive horses into hurdling them, with potentially disastrous effects. A test of jumping maybe, but not a fair one in my view.
 
Ah, but horses aren't as stupid as it is thought they are, trackside. Horses are well able to judge a spread on a fence - otherwise explain how they clear trakheners/spreads/oxers/pickup trucks/haystacks/hedges/open ditches/streams/banks, judge water troughs, yada yada. They don't automatically see a smaller fence and think "ah - hurdle!" Nor do they think rationally (let's try not to anthropomorphise!) in terms of "ah, hurdle - 3'6", nothing in front, nothing behind"!
 
Doesn't a statement like that involve making some serious generalisations though?

Not all horses will make that realization, nor will all have the athleticism to clear the water if they make the realization close to the obstacle.

No wonder your horses have no fear of water jumps if you have them jumping pick-up trucks ffs! :D
 
:D

If they are good jumpers, they tend to make enough of a conscious decision to clear whatever obstacle is in their path.

Crikey moses, I know of at least two babies (who have never jumped, or rather been taught to jump in their life!) who leap over 4 foot of puddle on the track down to the gallops on instinct alone!! It's a natural reaction - horses cannot/will not fight, they are not predators in any way. Ergo they will either take flight away from or jump whatever is in their way or that which they are frightened or worried about - hence why they make good gallopers and/or jumpers.
 
Must say Star has been out hunting and he loves it. A 15hh 3"" Gelding and he can pop almost anything. He loves his jumping and enjoys his hunting. His problem would be a bit keen to go hurdling and possibly stamina.

The horse has jumped hedges nearly 3/4 as big as him and has been well taught over trotting poles, before logs and a show jumping obstacles. Then hurdles, baby fences and even timber rails.

Its a horses natural instinct to jump, but as Dom says some don't jump well enough. Some horses are just clumsy, others aren't really taught well enough. In this day and age trainers need to be flexible with their horses, change routines and get them to enjoy other things. We used to do it at channons with the old dogs, take them over some poles and some logs. It gets them to think about other things and gets them using muscles they don't normally use.

I would be surprised if the majority of west country trainers didn't send their horses hunting as the option down here to do so is quite big. Bill had sent about 5 or 6 out hunting on Boxing Day and on many other days with a couple of owners coming in to ride their horses and a couple of the girls in the yard going out with them.

Maybe the trainers need to be looked at in this case, are they doing enough to make sure their horses are well taught before racing. I think the latest incident involving East Tycoon is just one of those things, the horse had run in plenty of races and jumped many water jumps, he just met one wrong and paid the price.

Same with any fence really you can make a mistake at any fence. I sort of agree with Dom about all these trainers saying this fences needs lowering, and blah blah blah and thats if you can't get the horse to jump run it on the flat, either that or get your owners to send it to someone that will educate it properly.
 
Thanks for the input, Shads and Chris.

I was thinking back to the distant days when I used to watch show-jumping on the box, and as I recall the horses tended to be ridden much faster into water-jumps, and again from memory some horses took a dislike to jumping water.
 
<< Plenty of people on here and other forums are capable of holding a coherent debate with – however unfortunately the tiresome few are driving away many people with their constant drivel. Ask yourself how many respected contributors no longer post here or in other places (FF, for example) and then ask yourself who or what the common denominators are. >>

Try looking in the mirror. Maybe one common demoninator is a person who is banned from one forum and under a severe warning of expulsion on another

If you could read my pms whenever you take a pop at me it might surprise you
:rolleyes:
 
Please revert to more tasteful posting about which horses suffered grotesque deaths, which is the purpose of this thread.
 
Interesting comments from Jimmy Lindley AND an RSPCA spokesman today in the RP that waterjumps are the safest obstacles on the course.........


......but I'm full of shite, aren't I?!
 
I believe that only about half a dozen horses have been killed at water jumps in the UK since 2001 - that's one a year.

Allowing for those courses which no longer have water jumps, chasers jump these fences maybe around one out of twelve "leaps" on average? If deaths in steeplechases could be reduced to about dozen a year that would be a sensational result for racehorse welfare, not to mention for the sport's image.

If water jumps are replaced by plain fences or open ditches, rather than modified, then fatalities will increase, not decrease.
 
It is worth remembering that water jumps do not kill horses, they cause serious injuries which ultimately end careers or lead to horses being put down. It is a silent killer and won't show up on TV screens. It is only owners and trainers that will know how many horses careers are finished by minor jumping errors at water jumps so using statistics to prove this one is pointless, unless trainers keep records and these get consolidated.
 
That's fair coment, Cantoris, but isn't it still likely that the chance of getting an injury, whether life-threatening or not, from a plain fence is higher than from a water jump?
 
I don't know but my I suggest that if this was the case, then trainers would be mad to get rid of the jump. If they are so vocal about it, they clearly think it is less likely to caus injury. I don't train horses and only have anecdotal info but I would have thought trainer were in the best poition to tell a story on this. Neither yourself not myself will really know the answer.
 
Just out of interest:

BHA unmoved as O'Neill joins call to axe water jumps

by Lee Mottershead RP 2.19 25 Mar 2008



JONJO O'NEILL on Tuesday became the latest high-profile trainer to call for the abolition of water jumps, but his wish seems unlikely to be realised after both the BHA and RSPCA came out in support of the controversial obstacles.

O'Neill's East Tycoon became the second horse in the space of four weeks to be killed at a water jump when suffering a fatal fall at Ludlow last Thursday, the previous casualty having been the Nigel Twiston-Davies-trained Miss Shakira at Huntingdon on February 21.

BHA figures show that, since the specifications of water jumps were changed in 2000, six horses have been killed at the fences, making them, according to BHA chief course inspector Richard Linley, “the safest obstacle on a racecourse”.

However, that argument cuts little ice with O'Neill, who on Tuesday followed the lead of champion trainer Paul Nicholls, who, in his Racing Post column earlier this year, described the water jump as “the worst jump in racing”.

“I'd demolish them and replace them all with ordinary fences,” said O'Neill.

“Some might say they are less dangerous, but I don't think so. I've never been a fan of them, even when I was a jockey. Nobody has them at home and I don't see why racecourses need them.

“Water jumps are trap fences. A horse approaches the fence thinking that it's only a little jump but then sees the water and suddenly changes its mind and puts in extra effort by stretching, and I think that's why they break their backs.”

Linley on Tuesday night said the BHA is “open to constructive comment” about water jumps butmade clear there were no plans to follow the lead of Ireland, where the last water was negotiated in 1966. Ascot, Kempton and Wetherby are among the tracks to have removed water jumps in Britain, but Stratford and Newton Abbot have both reintroduced theirs after previously replacing them.

Linley said: “It is most unfortunate to have had two fatalities in the last four weeks at water jumps, but, overall, it is a fact that the water jump is the safest obstacle on a racecourse.

“When we have canvassed jockeys, they have always told us that they don't want water jumps scrapped if that means another plain fence is introduced, as there is an inherently greater risk of injuries and fatalities at plain fences.”

In similar vein, RSPCA equineconsultant David Muir said: “I am not against water jumps. I just want to see them modified. They are the safest fences on racecourses, and if you replace them with normal fences, the number of fatalities will rise.

“What we need to do is find a way to stop horses slipping back when landing in the water. I think we need to increase the size of the actual fence by two or three inches and the water area needs to have an effective non-slip landing zone.”

That suggestion is already being taken up by Haydock, whose rebuilt water jump will feature a coarse non-slip rubber mat beneath the water.


What is a water jump?

A fence with a minimum height of 3ft is followed by an expanse of water that, from the landing side of the fence to the end of the water, measures 9ft, a width that had been 12ft before specifications made in 2000.

In total, the expanse of the obstacle can vary between 11.5ft and 12ft.

The water's depth is a uniform 3 inches, with the water's base made of sand, pea gravel or matting. Haydock, which, alongside Aintree, uses a fence made of privet, is introducing a non-slip rubber mat for the base of its new water jump.
 
Senior, well respected NH trainers, would not be calling for certain types of jumps to be removed form any racetrack unless they had good reason to.

As Cantoris has said, it's the injuries we don't possibly hear about that may be their biggest gripe. The trainer's responsibility is firstly to the safety of the horse and of course the jockey. If individual trainers want to go and school their horses over cross country fences, absolutely no problem with that. That doesn't mean the jockey riding the horse will know how to ride the fence, and the two really need to be 100% on these fences. If the horses are going to have all this extra schooling, then the jockey who will ride the horse will also have to have had as much additional schooling too. There is no point the horse knowing how to clear a water jump safely if the problems are cometimes caused by the jockey.

As for the RSPCA knowing anything about racehorses and what fences are deemed the safest - well, most of us know exactly how much the RSPCA know about horse welfare don't we. :suspect:

It's not always about how many fatalities should decide if a fence should remain or not, it's listening to the experts (ie trainers) and their professional opinion. As a horse lover saving one horse a year from death would be one very good reason to remove them. It's a shame the RSPCA don't see it like that as well?
 
I understand that both the RSPCA and jockeys are keen for (suitably modified) water jumps to be retained. They don't want them to be replaced by plain fences, beacuse of the increased risk of falls.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top