Equine Retirements, Long Term Injuries and Departures

I wouldn't change anything because I really don't see what difference it'll make. The issue was the landing side of the fencw. We've never seen this problem before, and now there are suggestions things should be moved around. The same number of races would have been run on the same courses so the ground would have been an issue anyway.
 
The first circuit pile-up in the Grand Annual was caused by too many runners and too many gung ho jockeys. There is no 'tradition' argument for the last race being the Grand Annual and, if the bumper is so unpopular, it will result in a much more ordered exit from the course for spectators. It's a no brainer if it keeps the RSPCA onside.
 
wilsonl said:
Bumper used to be the last race, as I'm sure you know Archie, but it's bordering on a novelty race as it is and runs the risk of attracting little interest if moved to the very last. I'd imagine that's one of the reasons for the move in the first place.

I'd put the Gold Cup last personally. There's a real "after the lord mayor's show" feel about the course for the last three races on Friday at present and this would eliminate that immediately. I'm not sure what the chances of a low winter sun are in this month - as that would completely scupper the idea - but I don't ever recall it causing a problem with the County or Grand Annual.

Something quite fitting about saving the best to last as well - in an Arc type way.
Click to expand...

I agree: make the GC the last race. Start earlier that day if the sun is a concern. Very much an anti-climax feeling for the races after it. It would make getting out of the course/car parks more of an effort, but so what? I personally love the bumper and always stay for all the races anyway so makes no difference to me what order they are in, but think the GC would 'sit better' as the last race.
 
Can' see them ever running the CGC as last race on the card, There's normally fresh turf railed off for it, and the furore over the over the ground for the last race, this year, would be magnified tenfold.
 
reet hard said:
Can' see them ever running the CGC as last race on the card, There's normally fresh turf railed off for it, and the furore over the over the ground for the last race, this year, would be magnified tenfold.
Click to expand...

This isn't the Breeders Cup for heaven's sake . The CGC would never be the last race for the reasons reet identifies. After the 2008 gales blew away the Wednesday card for some reason Edward Gillespie decided that it was better for the feature race to be the fourth rather than the third race on the card . That was and always has been an error as it means that on every day except the Thursday there is a drop off in quality for the third race on the card before the fourth .

In my view , the feature race should return to being the third - we would get that Big Bang of the Supreme, Arkle Champion again for a start . On the Friday that would allow the County Hurdle to return to its traditional spot as the last race on the card . I would shove the Martin Pipe up the card to follow the Gold Cup so everyone could have a drink or a cup of tea , then end Foxhunters, the Plate and the County Hurdle and move the Grand Annual to Thursdays card which has too many 2m 5f chases already.
 
Last edited:
Does anyone now what's happening with Satanic Beat? He moved to France but was then sold on and doesn't appear to be racing any more. We saw him at Jedd O'Keefs a few years ago and I've tried to follow him ever since. I do hope he's ok.
 
reet hard said:
Can' see them ever running the CGC as last race on the card, There's normally fresh turf railed off for it, and the furore over the over the ground for the last race, this year, would be magnified tenfold.
Click to expand...

If they use fresh turf for it, what difference would it make if it was run as the last race? They would still have fresh turf surely?
 
Grade A arse article from Bruce Millington in the RP whinging about people after timing re the dangerousness of the Grand Annual.

Clearly unfair nonsense - how many of the people being asked for a view had ever been asked before ? I recall quite a lot of complaint when the County was moved including about the GA being a rough race . Indeed, year on year it is a very rough race. I would quite like to ban novices from it for a start.
 
There is scarcely any difference on numbers of fallers, unseats etc between the ten years in which the Grand Annual has been the last race and the previous ten years when it wasn't.
 
Well said DG. All these people that are quick to point fingers and want radical change never seem to let the facts get in the way of the position or stance they take. We just get the same old reactionary nonsense.
 
Last edited:
Cheltenham is becoming more and more the be all and end all for NH racing- so it is unlikely that the GA will get less dangerous. As for the old reactionary nonsense - included amongst those who thought it might be the wrong choice and that the race was becoming rougher were the ancient pair of Nico de Boinville and Lizzie Kelly on Luck on Sunday .

If the jockeys riding in the race think it is becoming more dangerous and perhaps should be moved their views should be treated with respect.
 
Ardross said:
Cheltenham is becoming more and more the be all and end all for NH racing- so it is unlikely that the GA will get less dangerous. As for the old reactionary nonsense - included amongst those who thought it might be the wrong choice and that the race was becoming rougher were the ancient pair of Nico de Boinville and Lizzie Kelly on Luck on Sunday .

If the jockeys riding in the race think it is becoming more dangerous and perhaps should be moved their views should be treated with respect.
Click to expand...
Thanks Ardross. I didn't see it, so on what basis were they suggesting the race needed to be moved? On what's suggested from your post de Boinville and Kelly think it's because it's the last race? But how do they suggest the race would be less rough if it were the first race of the day for example? Am I missing something here that everyone else is seeing?
 
Maruco said:
Thanks Ardross. I didn't see it, so on what basis were they suggesting the race needed to be moved? On what's suggested from your post de Boinville and Kelly think it's because it's the last race? But how do they suggest the race would be less rough if it were the first race of the day for example? Am I missing something here that everyone else is seeing?
Click to expand...

They both suggested that by the time of the GA which is of its nature a hectic race there were sometimes jockeys and trainers who were desperate for a winner and that risks were taken that might not be if the race was not the last chance saloon.
 
Ardross said:
They both suggested that by the time of the GA which is of its nature a hectic race there were sometimes jockeys and trainers who were desperate for a winner and that risks were taken that might not be if the race was not the last chance saloon.
Click to expand...
I know it's not necessarily your own opinion Ardross, and you 're posting up what was said, but surely the same would apply to the County Hurdle if it were run as the last race as has been suggested.

I'm not getting this at all. I see no logic. The issue was because of wet and damaged ground on the landing side of a fence, so surely the issue here is that the fence wasn't inspected properly, and if it had been it would have been dolled off. To be proposing changes to the race schedule seems ridiculous when the same races are going to be run and the same ground will be used irrespective of what order. What needs to be discussed are measures to ensure a proper inspection of the turf takes place.
 
Back
Top