REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do much without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view all discussions - and most importantly, you haven't joined our community. What are you waiting for? Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Join Talking Horses here!

Reply to thread

Message

It's perfectly acceptable to have own, joint or syndicate colours (you don't even necessarily need to have a horse in training).

Down To The Woods and Enchanted Ocean for example used to carry the colours of the legendary Miller/Richards partnership. Others prefer to have their own set(s): Sue Magnier (separate first and second colours), Tabor and Smith for example, even when the horses are joint owned (when the majority-holder's colours take precedence).

In a 50:50 partnership the horse can either run in partnership colours or alternate between the two different sets of individual colours (as decided by those owners, from race to race, season to season, championship race to championship race). If Denman runs in the Gold Cup
again for example he is certain to be in purple (opposite to last year).

[QUOTE="SteveM, post: 2176033, member: 64943"] It's perfectly acceptable to have own, joint or syndicate colours (you don't even necessarily need to have a horse in training). Down To The Woods and Enchanted Ocean for example used to carry the colours of the legendary Miller/Richards partnership. Others prefer to have their own set(s): Sue Magnier (separate first and second colours), Tabor and Smith for example, even when the horses are joint owned (when the majority-holder's colours take precedence). In a 50:50 partnership the horse can either run in partnership colours or alternate between the two different sets of individual colours (as decided by those owners, from race to race, season to season, championship race to championship race). If Denman runs in the Gold Cup again for example he is certain to be in purple (opposite to last year). [/QUOTE]

Verification: 5 + 3 = ?