Nr's - Again!!

[yorick]

!.30 Chepstow: 9 runners but now two nr's. So, a R4 of 20p in the pound on winnings and now only first two for places.

Are trainers being paid by the bookies to withdraw runners?

Of course not but why don't the BHA do something to penalise serial nr trainers? The punter is simply not being served.

 

[jinnyj]

I suspect if trainers regularly withdraw their horses with the same reasons they will be asked to explain their actions. It's all to do with being able to self-certify these days. How do you prove the horse didn't eat up that morning?
I doubt they are in bed with the bookies - if they are and are found out then they penalties would mean being warned off. I'm not saying it couldn't happen but they have a lot to lose.

Actually compare to the amount of non-runners today at Dundalk (odd as it's an all-weather track?) and Chepstow with only 3 is light.

 

[yorick]

Thanks for the reply, J.

The trouble is, the BHA will not release NR figures to compare against before the 48 dec rule was introduced. There is a reluctance to have any transparency over this subject.

The new decs rule was introduced in order to be able to get race cards printed in time for the overseas market. The BHA are adamant that the revenue accrued from this benefits racing. It's a moot point though, isn't, when we consider how the punter is ridden over roughshod.

Never mind, eh? The punter only represents the hoi poloi, after all, and who cares about them?

 

[Jayhawk]

!.30 Chepstow: 9 runners but now two nr's. So, a R4 of 20p in the pound on winnings and now only first two for places.

Are trainers being paid by the bookies to withdraw runners?

Of course not but why don't the BHA do something to penalise serial nr trainers? The punter is simply not being served.

Trainers non-runners​

The BHA publishes tables showing individual trainer non-runner rates from the previous 12 months at the end of each quarter. The tables include those trainers that have had at least 100 declarations in the period under review.

The BHA reviews the tables on a quarterly basis. Since the beginning of 2020, where a trainer has a non-runner rate of 12 per cent or above on the Flat, or 9 per cent or above over Jumps, consideration is given to whether that trainer should be suspended from using self-certificates for up to 12 months.

The non-runner rates of trainers with fewer than 100 declarations is also reviewed and, depending on the circumstances, any such trainer may also be suspended from using self-certificates if that was considered appropriate by the BHA.

There are currently no trainers suspended from using self-certificates.

Highest non-runner rates - Flat Trainers​

Trainer
Declarations
Non-Runners
Non-Runner Rate

• David Evans
  529
  78
  14.74%
• Jim & Suzi Best
  147
  21
  14.29%
• Ben Haslam
  179
  23
  12.85%
• George Margarson
  103
  13
  12.62%
• Michael Attwater
  387
  45
  11.63%

• Highest non-runner rates - Jump Trainers​

  
  Trainer
  Declarations
  Non-Runners
  Non-Runner Rate
  • Paul Robson
    116
    11
    9.48%
  • Mickey Bowen
    163
    15
    9.20%
  • D. J. Jeffreys
    145
    13
    8.97%
  • Dianne Sayer
    125
    11
    8.80%
  • Richard Bandey
    106
    9
    8.49%
    There a few trainers on these two lists above the thresholds for consideration for withdrawing the right to self-certificate. I don't know whether the sanction has ever been applied.
    
    

 

[yorick]

Fantastic response there, JH. It shows that the BHA appears to be concerned but what I really would like to see is figures of NR's for five years before 48hr decs and five years after.

Am I right in thinking that, in order to assuage initial trainer resistance, the BHA has shown an undue tolerance?

 

[Jayhawk]

The British Horseracing Authority has informed 13 Flat trainers they will have their right to withdraw horses via self-certificate suspended for 12 months from April 16 as a consequence of their non-runner rates operating above a set threshold for the last year.
Trainers were warned in August 2017 they had until April 1 2018 to ensure their non-runner rates were below prescribed thresholds - which were set at 50 per cent above the average non-runner rate - or they would have their right to self-certify removed.
At present the thresholds stand at 14 per cent on the Flat and 12 per cent over jumps. No National Hunt trainers are operating above the current threshold, which will fall to 10 per cent from the end of June.
This was a recommendation of the recent non-runners review, which had the objective of decreasing non-runner rates in British racing, and included extensive data analysis and consultation with various bodies.
It was agreed by all parties the measures to reduce the number of non-runners should target those trainers with relatively high non-runner rates. The trainers involved are Ben Haslam, Steph Hollinshead, Nikki Evans, Patrick Morris, Noel Wilson, David Brown, John O'Shea, Sylvester Kirk, Phil McEntee, George Baker, Harry Dunlop, Richard Whitaker and Richard Guest.
Richard Wayman, chief operating officer for the BHA, said: "It is essential that we take these steps to reduce the number of non-runners. They are not good for our sport, its fans or its participants.
"All of the bodies who took part in the recent review agreed that we should do this by targeting those trainers who are consistently generating a high rate of non-runners, rather than putting in place measures that unfairly affect or restrict those trainers who operate within the spirit of the rules.
"What the data has shown is that the vast majority of trainers are able to operate well beneath the thresholds without any issue.
"We accept there are a number of unavoidable and valid reasons for horses not being able to run but it is very pleasing to see the non-runner rate within both codes has fallen so far this year."
The trainers are still able to withdraw horses for valid reasons via a vet's certificate without penalty, in the same manner as they were prior to the introduction of self-certification 10 years ago.
Wayman added: "Of course the welfare of horses must continue to come first and we fully expect that, if a horse is not fit to run, the affected trainers would withdraw it via a vet's certificate with no penalty."
The BHA said the affected trainers have 14 days in which to query the data, but added "this is not a formal appeal process and the sanctions will only be removed if the data is shown to be inaccurate".

I found the above on the Racing TV website dated 5/12/2023 so at least some action was taken since the rate of non-runners has been monitored.




https://www.racingtv.com/news/the-2025-grand-sefton-chase-five-to-note-and-a-33-1-tip
https://www.racingtv.com/news/paul-nicholls-my-team-for-badger-beer-ladies-day
https://www.racingtv.com/news/sam-thomas-my-leading-lights-and-newcomers-to-note-for-2025-26
https://www.racingtv.com/news/wednesday-tips-dave-nevison-best-bets-at-musselburgh
https://www.racingtv.com/news/tuesday-tips-dave-nevison-is-sweet-on-a-trio-at-warwick

 

[yorick]

Very informative, mate. Thanks for that.

I still have a not inconsiderable qualm and that involves the declaration of 'Going' as a reason for withdrawal.

The trouble is that trainers are having to guess at what the going will be like for a race. With trainers having to declare a day earlier, they are forced to 'guess' about the going. Thus, come the day of the race, trainers are then citing 'going' as the reason for withdrawal.

Yes, in the 'old days', there were still nr's citing 'going' but, inevitably there was less room for error on that score.

At any rate, it would be informative indeed if the BHA were to publish comparisons between pre and post 48 hour decs. I've asked for appropriate figures on three occasions now but have received no replies on any of them. In my opinion they should publish such info. There seems to be no debate at present.

 

[archie]

Recently, the going at Bangor went from 6.3 on the stick at 7am to 6.6 at 1pm. At this stage of the season, you'd think twice about giving a novice it's first run of the season on ground drying that quickly. It's a long season and you hope that NH horses will have lengthy careers.

 

[jinnyj]

I was on a zoom call last night about pointing and we had one of our senior stewards on it who is also a course inspector and he said part of the problem at the moment was that because of the very hot dry summer, the recent rain has only gone in so far. Which means you have a few inches of reasonable ground followed by much firmer underneath. It's probably not so much of a problem with Rules racing as they can water more consistently but many courses ran out of their water supply so could well be feeling it.