Question BHA summary

W

Warbler

At the Start
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
8,493
Just in the process of constructing the thread scissors and paste etc (merging posts is too difficult although I did manage it one!!!)

Posted by Coiln Phillips

Robin,

Why do the horse-racing authorities have such little confidence in their product?

We have Sky paying a small fortune for the rights to show football, yet racing, I believe, pays Channel 4 to show horse-racing. And then allows Channel 4 to dictate the racecard order!?!?

Why do we have such a plethora of mediocre to downright awful racing. Each season the fixture list seems to expand. Is it at the behest of the bookmakers to enable them to show wall-to-wall racing? No doubt their argument would be that this increases their profits which then benefits the levy and therefor racing. Another case of the 'tail wagging the dog'.

Racing should have much more confidence in the product they have. If courses put on good racing the crowds will come.

Has the BHA ever given thought to the idea of asking (or instructing) courses to reduce entrace fees?

Has the BHA ever considered insisting that courses always have the 'BIG SCREEN' at meetings?

I'd better leave it there for now.


Posted by Garteh Flynn

Chris Cook writes in The Guardian:

Quote:
The British Horseracing Authority should be embarrassed that the [Racing] Post's site, and not its own, is likely to be the first port of call for internet users. The BHA site offers racecards but no form, despite the fact that career form for all runners is available free on a number of sites.

Are there any plans to remedy this? I think it would be fantastic for the BHA to run it's own - free - database of British racing complete with official ratings for every run (not just the master ratings).


Posted by Grey

I have a question based on recent discussion on here. What is the exact brief given to the BHA handicappers? Are they expected to rate a horse strictly on its achievements or are they also expected to draw conclusions about potential?

For example, Hi Jinks wins with its head in its chest on its seasonal debut. We all know the handicapper is entitled, expected even, to assume the horse could have won by more and to factor that into their rating.

On the other hand My Favourite Marmalade runs well on its seasonal debut having looked a bit tubby beforehand. Does the handicapper's brief allow them to increase their rating to take likely future improvement, when the horse is fitter, into account?


Posted by Melendez

Is the BHA satisfied with the dominant position Cheltenham holds in the jumping calendar?

Personally I find it a little galling to see trainers, after winning (or losing) top class races in January and February, smiling from ear to ear more in the knowlege that they still have plenty left to work on to improve for Cheltenham, than actually winning the race. With one or two notable exceptions, in terms of races and trainers, top class racing tends to get reduced to a series of trials pre cheltenham and consolation prizes (or Brucey Bonuses) post Cheltenham. Admittedly this has a s much to do with my own perception, widely held among the racing media, as it does to the trainers' methods, but it is undoubtedly a factor.

The Flat racing guru's tend to get races that are important in their own right in some sphere or other on a near weekly basis, whereas us jump fans end up with a beanfeast in March before which we're dribbling wrecks from anticipation and after which totally depressed at the prospect of another 12 month wait before it happens again.


I guess there might be others to follow in due course and perhaps the best thing to do would be bump this back up every month, and see if we can make it a regular feature as doubtless topical things will come to the fore etc
 
Last edited:
Rob, my related questions are as follows:

Do the BHA, as custodians of the great sport of Jumps Racing, consider the removal by RUK and the racecourses of historical race content from online facilities such as YouTube, a good and/or appropriate move?

Given the BHA's remit to promote the sport as widely as possible, do you believe that the decision of RUK and the courses is short-sighted, given the popularity and reach of such facilities?

And would the BHA ever consider petitioning RUK and the racecourses to allow such content to be repositioned on these outlets, in an effort to promote the sport as widely as possible?

Kind regards
Grasshopper
 
This was posted by Alan Potts on trf but with his kind permission I've copied it over here to hopefully get an official response on the matter.

I'm hoping that everybody will agree with the basic premise that the program of Pattern races should be designed to bring together the better horses and identify the best of them. But in three Grade 2 races over the last eight days, all the winners have had the benefit of a weight concession and, arguably, may not have been the best horse in the race.

At Sandown today over hurdles, the unpenalised maiden Junior beat On Raglan Road, who carried a 4lb penalty for winning a novice hurdle at Hexham that earned him less than three grand.

At Newbury last Friday, the unpenalised maiden The Market Man beat Kicks For Free, who carried a 7lb penalty for his previous win at Aintree.

Also at Newbury the day before, Gone To Lunch had a 3lbs smaller penalty for his win at Hereford than the runner-up Tartak had for his wins at Newton Abbot and Huntingdon.

Maybe all three races would have produced the same result if they'd been run at level weights, but at the very least, we'd have had three closer finishes.

I simply cannot see the logic that dictates that a horse running in a Class 1, Grade 2 race should be penalised for winning a Class 4 contest at a gaff track. This never happens on the flat - horses running in Group races are never penalised for wins below Group company. So why doesn't jumping follow the same process?

The only horse that should carry a penalty in a Grade 2 novice race is one that has already won an identical class of race. To me, that statement seems logical, sensible and obvious.

But this is the wacky world of National Hunt racing, where in a situation that beggars belief, in the Fred Winter Hurdle at the festival last March, the winner of the Imperial Cup (Ashkazar) carried no extra weight at all, but the winner of a Plumpton maiden hurdle (Harry Tricker) after the weights had been published had a 7lb penalty!

If there's anybody at the BHA who can spare an hour or two from website design and marketing initiatives, could you sort this out and let's have the best horse on the day getting the prize money and the prestige in pattern races.
 
Hello, in relation to the looming recession facing the country, does the BHA have anyone (or any department) overseeing how this is affecting racing? If it is more likely be the smaller owners who won't have the spare money to get involved, and if these people cannot get sufficient credit to finance their interests in racing, then perhaps this will trickle down and affect the numbers and class of horses in races? In short, as the home secretary hinted at, will the recession lead to more crime in society (and therefore racing), and is this being anticipated by the BHA?ps, I hear Fallon's on his way back aswell.
 
And just for clarification, that would be Fallon who was found not guilty when the charges were dropped against him; yer honour
 
Should the BHA encourage trainers, like the Government have instructed the banks, to allow owners a six month amnesty period if we, sorry, if they can't pay their dues?
 
Following on from some of the points in the Racing Replays thread:

How hard would it be for the BHA to license footage of classic old races from the respective rights-owners and put them up on YouTube for promotional purposes? Older races have no value from a form perspective, which is the model for the RP/RUK video replay service, so I can't see how they would be losing out. Whoever owns the rights wouldn't be making any money out of the footage otherwise.

Think about it - the easiest way to convince a non-believing friend or colleague that horse racing can be the most exciting sport around would be to send them a link to a video of one of the great races.
 
Hello all,

I just thought I would let you know that we haven't forgotten this thread- the various stakeholders are looking into it this week and we will have a repsonse by the end of the week.

Thanks

Robin.
 
Just an update on this.

The BHA are having informal, internal discussions with regard to foming a sub-committee to determine how best to distribute these questions among their executive. It is anticipated that the first sitting of this sub committee should take place before June 2009.
 
Dear BHA,

Did you deliberately rescheduele Wolver to this afternoon so that the stands would be more empty and the Lord Donoughue-inspired bookie heist on the fav in the last race would be more easily excuted?

Any chance of an apology to those who had booked a romantic evening with their better halves at said track tonight and were road roughshod over in the desire to rob betting shop punters and pay Donoughue's gargantuan bribes?

Love

R Hills is God
 
bump...

Better to reply with promised answers than publicising another waste of money at the BHA ...
 
Before answering questions on how to make racing more popular, the BHA should say why they're interested.
It's not obvious to me & if the responses are to be valuable, the respondees should be informed of the reason: we could guess, but there's no need to.

If the BHA's agenda is to protect the racing industry's income, they should say as much. Nothing wrong with such an agenda. What needs to be clear is that the BHA has a cogent reason for whatever it's up to .... and can express it.
:)
 
Dear Talking Horses,

My sincerest apologies, and genuinely meant, about not responding to the thread of Q&A for the BHA previously to this.

I must be honest it took a LOT of chasing up of various sources in order to get responses from the individuals involved. The logistics of this task have proved very difficult.

However, I have recently revisited and now compiled all the answers to the original questions.

It would be very interesting to get your feedback on this- some of the questions may have been answered better than others, this is down to individuals responding in different ways!

I hope this helps and look forward to your feedback.




Posted by Coiln Phillips

Robin,

Why do the horse-racing authorities have such little confidence in their product?
We don’t.

We have Sky paying a small fortune for the rights to show football, yet racing, I believe, pays Channel 4 to show horse-racing. And then allows Channel 4 to dictate the racecard order!?!?
If racing wants to get the best coverage of the sport that it can, then surely it is perfectly fair to work with broadcasting partners to get the most competitive or best races into a slot where they can be shown to the largest number of viewers?

Why do we have such a plethora of mediocre to downright awful racing. Each season the fixture list seems to expand. Is it at the behest of the bookmakers to enable them to show wall-to-wall racing? No doubt their argument would be that this increases their profits which then benefits the levy and therefor racing. Another case of the 'tail wagging the dog'.
I think you should read our Fixture List Review, completed earlier in the year. http://www.britishhorseracing.com/inside_horseracing/media/releaseDetail.asp?item=086034
We’re limiting opportunities for the lowest rated horses and much more.
And here’s some information from the 2009 Fixture List which you tell us is expanding, but isn’t.
The Key features of the 2009 fixture list are:
• 1480 programmed fixtures, down 24 on 2008
• 357 evening fixtures, down from 372 in 2008
• 140 fixtures on 48 Sundays during the year, down from 148 on all 52 Sundays in 2008
• 109 Flat fixtures to be run under floodlights outside of the core Evening Racing Period, down from 127 in 2009.
• 567 Jump fixtures, a record and increase of 11 on 2008

Racing should have much more confidence in the product they have. If courses put on good racing the crowds will come.
The horse population aren’t all Group class runners. You have to put races on to cater for the horse population, which has differing levels of ability.

Has the BHA ever given thought to the idea of asking (or instructing) courses to reduce entrace fees?
The British Horseracing Authority doesn’t own racecourses and does not have the power to set what courses can or cannot charge.

Has the BHA ever considered insisting that courses always have the 'BIG SCREEN' at meetings?
No. Much like ticket prices, courses make a commercial decision, and of course racegoers vote with their feet.



Posted by Garteh Flynn

Chris Cook writes in The Guardian:

Quote:
The British Horseracing Authority should be embarrassed that the [Racing] Post's site, and not its own, is likely to be the first port of call for internet users. The BHA site offers racecards but no form, despite the fact that career form for all runners is available free on a number of sites.

Are there any plans to remedy this? I think it would be fantastic for the BHA to run it's own - free - database of British racing complete with official ratings for every run (not just the master ratings).

Absolutely, it is a project I hope to be commencing as soon as possible. Factors which are making this difficult are the very limited budget we run off, and also the fact that the racing rebranding initiative may include the building of a new web portal, in which case expensive development initiatives at this moment may be poorly timed

The short and honest answer is yes, absolutely 100% yes, but I just cannot promise when this will be. It is a personal goal of mine to make sure that this happens asap as I agree it is essential


Posted by Grey

I have a question based on recent discussion on here. What is the exact brief given to the BHA handicappers? Are they expected to rate a horse strictly on its achievements or are they also expected to draw conclusions about potential?

For example, Hi Jinks wins with its head in its chest on its seasonal debut. We all know the handicapper is entitled, expected even, to assume the horse could have won by more and to factor that into their rating.

On the other hand My Favourite Marmalade runs well on its seasonal debut having looked a bit tubby beforehand. Does the handicapper's brief allow them to increase their rating to take likely future improvement, when the horse is fitter, into account?

More on handicapping here: http://www.britishhorseracing.com/inside_horseracing/about/whatwedo/handicapping.asp

Handicappers can take into account the manner of a horse’s victory, rather than simply the finishing distances.


Posted by Melendez

Is the BHA satisfied with the dominant position Cheltenham holds in the jumping calendar?

Personally I find it a little galling to see trainers, after winning (or losing) top class races in January and February, smiling from ear to ear more in the knowlege that they still have plenty left to work on to improve for Cheltenham, than actually winning the race. With one or two notable exceptions, in terms of races and trainers, top class racing tends to get reduced to a series of trials pre cheltenham and consolation prizes (or Brucey Bonuses) post Cheltenham. Admittedly this has a s much to do with my own perception, widely held among the racing media, as it does to the trainers' methods, but it is undoubtedly a factor.

The Flat racing guru's tend to get races that are important in their own right in some sphere or other on a near weekly basis, whereas us jump fans end up with a beanfeast in March before which we're dribbling wrecks from anticipation and after which totally depressed at the prospect of another 12 month wait before it happens again.

Melendez – you need to switch to Flat racing. I fear us jumping fans have lost you. If you see every race pre-March as a warm up for the Festival then there’s something wrong!

The BHA is happy with the Jumps Season and the Pattern of races that underpins it. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but the Jumps season has a narrative of its own. There are plenty of group 1 races throughout the season which trainers target in their own right, and plenty of decent handicaps to set punters clues every Saturday.





I hope this helps in some way, and thanks all for your questions. Based on how this is received we could possibly discuss how to move forward with it. Personally I think interaction with users like this is a great step, if the logistics can be managed.

Regards

BHA
 
Posted by Garteh Flynn

Chris Cook writes in The Guardian:

Quote:
The British Horseracing Authority should be embarrassed that the [Racing] Post's site, and not its own, is likely to be the first port of call for internet users. The BHA site offers racecards but no form, despite the fact that career form for all runners is available free on a number of sites.

Are there any plans to remedy this? I think it would be fantastic for the BHA to run it's own - free - database of British racing complete with official ratings for every run (not just the master ratings).

Absolutely, it is a project I hope to be commencing as soon as possible. Factors which are making this difficult are the very limited budget we run off, and also the fact that the racing rebranding initiative may include the building of a new web portal, in which case expensive development initiatives at this moment may be poorly timed

The short and honest answer is yes, absolutely 100% yes, but I just cannot promise when this will be. It is a personal goal of mine to make sure that this happens asap as I agree it is essential
Click to expand...

Good news. The recent switch to weekly publishing of the current ORs of *every* horse in training (previously it was just those who had raced the previous week) on the BHA website, was very welcome.
 
At least they answered your question, Colin!

Or is there more on the way?
 
Last edited:
Reading between the lines Colin, I'd suggest that the BHA aren't massively different to any governing organisation or authority (be they civil servants or local government). Different members of staff, will have a different level of enthusiasm shall we say, and this depends how you catch them at any given time. Some will give it a bit more thought, others will be dismissive and see such engagement as an irritant which they're potentially too good to deal with :) The only thing I would suggest is that if you tried to engage with the FA Premiership thus, you wouldn't even get a reply. Well in fairness, you wouldn't even get the channel in the first place.

I must say that I'm encouraged by the idea of the BHA setting up an alternative website to the RP's. Many of us have registered a concern about the detrimental effect that racing would incur in terms of lost betting revenue, racecourse attendance, and reduction in interest when the RP start charging.

I don't know how typical I am, but I wouldn't pay a subscription. Racing isn't that important to me, and I can live life without it. If i found myself forced into paying for an on-line service thus, I'd be much more inclined to simply turn my back on the sport, as indeed will other casual supporters, not to mention those who'd never get involved in the first place
 
The E. Dead Group would like the names and addresses of anyone involved in the sovereign series and also of Bill and Ben the rebranding consultants.
Icon_eek.gif
 
Colin- thanks for your feedback. I'm sorry that the answers that were given didn't satisfy you.

Martin- I didn't see your question in the collated list of questions we were requested to answer. This was agreed on to provide some structure to the exercise as we cant answer every question that is thrown at us on a forum.

It would seem that you aren't satisified with this exercise and the responses we have give, for which I can only apologise.

Regards.
 
Gareth Flynn said:
Good news. The recent switch to weekly publishing of the current ORs of *every* horse in training (previously it was just those who had raced the previous week) on the BHA website, was very welcome.
Click to expand...

That's good, but I had a bit of difficulty in finding the Ratings section in the first place. Then I had to scroll through 70+ pages before I came to the horse I was interested in. I couldn't find a way of doing this more efficiently......it's possible I may have missed something obvious.

If this website is to be the first port of call for racing enthusiasts, I think the site navigation needs to be improved.
 
http://www.britishhorseracing.com/resources/media/ratings/

"To search by horse name, you can simply hover the cursor over the 'Name' tab, click the arrow that appears on the right and then select 'Filters'. Simply enter the horse name you require and hit 'Enter'. The relevant horse will then be shown. You can also sort by rating."

Or you can just download the whole list and open it up in Excel.
 
Back
Top