Fences and hurdles omitted

sunybay

sunybay

At the Start
Joined
May 4, 2003
Messages
4,184
Location
Madrid
This is becoming very annoying
The paranoid is becoming ridiculous, the climate change should have change the sun........
what is the next stage to keep happy the animalist, ecologist and this left wing stupid thinking?
omitting all the fences because the horses can fall?
expropriating all the horses to the rich owners?
banning horse racing of all kind.....

And the problem is not only on national hunt,
the breeders cup this year was simply ridiculous to watch, everyone talking about the safety, well being.......
this is enfuriating
 
The meetings at Aintree and Haydock were ridiculous. Haydock omitted the whole back straight, 2 and half mile race jumping 6 fences.

Unfortunately the way racing is going. The whip will be gone in the next 5 years if not sooner.
 
Is it more a safety issue for jockeys rather than horses? And is it the jockeys who are deciding when the sun is making the fence dangerous?
 
I fully agree with suny and his point here. It is becoming more common in Ireland too. I had a conversation with my brother at Leopardstown the other day wondering if we should invent and market sunglasses for horses.
 
Think there was a tweet recently from Danny Mullins (I think) where he was videoed (helmet cam) schooling down the back at leopardstown, and mentions the effect of the low sun over the fences, there is a small piece of evidence there. I'll try to find the tweet.

https://twitter.com/dan2231/status/1204044593748201473

Whether its enough to persuade that fences should be omitted, I dont know.
 
Last edited:
There was a piece on Paul Nicholls loose schooling horses a few years ago .
There was obvious ly sun on one of the fences but the horses managed to jump no problem so it is for jockeys safety imo.
back in the early 1980s Siberian Sun fell at the fence in front of the stands in Mackeson Gold Cup and jockey Frank Berry blamed the low lying sun though no other horse fell there.
 
How utterly precious must one be to see falling racehorse death rates as a bad thing? Horses are still being asked to jump fences all year round and there are no signs that this is under threat. We just aren't asking them to do so while either they or their riders are blinded by the sun. This is predominantly at the behest of jockeys who risk their lives on a daily basis for the sport and want to go home to their families.

Genuinely being upset because a sport involving other human beings and other people's animals isn't dangerous enough is pure sadism.

Furthermore, the notion that the low sun omissions are part of an overall campaign to eliminate horse racing is a textbook example of paranoid conflation and slippery slope hysteria. The general public doesn't care about horse racing save for the brief annual and instantly forgettable hand-wringing over the Grand National. No party will be elected or ousted due to their stance on the sport and at no point has the matter of horses jumping into low sun been a public discussion.

This kind of thread is far more damaging the perception of horse racing fans than any half-baked campaign by Animal Aid.
 
I think we need to separate the debate about omitting a fence or two due to a low sun and a host of fences due to bad ground.

My own view is that if more than one fence on each circuit is to be omitted then the meeting should be abandoned. For me it kills any interest I might have had in a race.

But I'm probably in a fruitcake minority.
 
Desert Orchid said:
I think we need to separate the debate about omitting a fence or two due to a low sun and a host of fences due to bad ground.

My own view is that if more than one fence on each circuit is to be omitted then the meeting should be abandoned. For me it kills any interest I might have had in a race.

But I'm probably in a fruitcake minority.
Click to expand...

I remember an ex contributor here advocating that every meeting should have a special forces trained sniper on the roof of the grandstand ready to take out any loose horses that looked like they may impede the true progress of the race. I never fully agreed with him.
 
an capall said:
I remember an ex contributor here advocating that every meeting should have a special forces trained sniper on the roof of the grandstand ready to take out any loose horses that looked like they may impede the true progress of the race. I never fully agreed with him.
Click to expand...

This place is rich in history.
 
an capall said:
I remember an ex contributor here advocating that every meeting should have a special forces trained sniper on the roof of the grandstand ready to take out any loose horses that looked like they may impede the true progress of the race. I never fully agreed with him.
Click to expand...

This is one of those ideas which seem great on paper but unravel when you consider the practical implications.

For example, how does one determine the probability of a loose horse impeding in a race? The insurance implications will weigh heavily on every split second decision here. Similarly, is the onus on the sniper to make a correct decision or the trainer to specifically train the loose horse to run away from the race? The biggest problem is that since it is impossible to actually silence the rifle shot, some horses will inevitably spook more than others or likely cause a chain reaction so the true progress of the race will be impeded with irrespective of the sniper's actions.

For me, it's a total non-starter. Nevertheless, with advances in drone technology, it may be possible to have loose horses scooped up in some kind of harness or net and suspended in the air until the race is over.
 
Back
Top