Remounting banned

Aldaniti

Aldaniti

At the Start
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
2,360
Location
Wickford
I never realised until reading the story in the RP yesterday that Kauto star missed the best part of a season through an injury possibly caused by remounting,

Don't know what you all think but it does seem to make common sense not to remount a horse if it has fallen
 
If I recall, Kauto fell two out. If a horse tips up at the last and is 20 lengths clear and the jockey feels it is appropriate to remount, I'd be disgusted as an owner if the rules didn't allow him to. I would agree that if a horse falls at any other fence it should not be remounted as it still has a fence to jump and it could be carrying a little injury after its fall. But the last, IMO, is different. If the fall was due to tiredness the horse won't get up or will take a while to remount.
 
AP,Scudamore and most jockeys scathing in their critcism of this new law. As an owner I am with them. No jockey would remount if he felt the horse was injured. AP recalls the time he remounted in the GN and won the owner £55k
 
If he hadn't someone else would have won it. Wheels and roundabouts. If the rules say you're out of the race if you part company with the horse it's no big deal. Sometimes as an owner this will benefit you sometimes it will cost you.

A vet would not give a professional opinion based on the tiime a less qualified jockey would be up away and gone. IMO it's not a big deal but a minor change fort the better.
 
Last edited:
I think Cantoris makes a good suggestion. If it happens at the last the jockey should be allowed use his discretion.
 
Roddy Owen said:
No jockey would remount if he felt the horse was injured.
Click to expand...

I don't think jockeys in that position have enough time to make that decision properly. I suspect a few of them are privately happy that they will no longer be put in that position.
 
Wasn't AP involved in a race a few years ago where all the horses fell including his mount but he remounted & won?
 
What happens if a horse unseats at the last? Can the jock remount then if he still has control of the horse while he's on the ground? It's going to create carnage. Say a horse comes down steep at the last, down on his knees, stumbles along and is almost gone but stays up but unfortunately drops the jock. Is that a fall or an unseat and what happens then?
 
Cantoris said:
What happens if a horse unseats at the last? Can the jock remount then if he still has control of the horse while he's on the ground? It's going to create carnage. Say a horse comes down steep at the last, down on his knees, stumbles along and is almost gone but stays up but unfortunately drops the jock. Is that a fall or an unseat and what happens then?
Click to expand...

And what if your horse falls - jockey decides in a split second to remount - causing the horse further injury that leads him to be put down. This is what could have happened to Kauto Star a few seasons back. The right decision and there are always circumstances when a rule can look silly but the overall point and direction of the rule remains valid.
 
Roddy Owen said:
AP,Scudamore and most jockeys scathing in their critcism of this new law. As an owner I am with them. No jockey would remount if he felt the horse was injured. AP recalls the time he remounted in the GN and won the owner £55k
Click to expand...

I can't agree; it shouldn't be up to the jocks. A horse is running on adrenaline in a race and when it falls; often an injury won't even become apparent for a few minutes due to this adrenaline coursing through the horses system masking the pain. So the jockey may think a horse is sound and well if an injury is not apparent and jump back on board, thus exacerbating the injury and causing further damage.

...and I say that as an owner, rider and all the rest of it!
 
Last edited:
Shadow Leader said:
I can't agree; it shouldn't be up to the jocks. A horse is running on adrenaline in a race and when it falls; often an injury won't even become apparent for a few minutes due to this adrenaline coursing through the horses system masking the pain. So the jockey may think a horse is sound and well if an injury is not apparent and jump back on board.

...and I say that as an owner, rider and all the rest of it!
Click to expand...

Not to mention the adrenaline running through the jockey!
 
indeed....if you see a horse stumbling, sliding 5 yrds on his knees with his back legs splayed...but the jockey stays on......thats OK.... But if the jock falls off he can't carry on.... its yet another metnal rule that the sport doesnt need.
 
Galileo said:
And what if your horse falls - jockey decides in a split second to remount - causing the horse further injury that leads him to be put down. This is what could have happened to Kauto Star a few seasons back. The right decision and there are always circumstances when a rule can look silly but the overall point and direction of the rule remains valid.
Click to expand...

I would completely agree with this rule for a horse that has to jump another fence. It is unfair on a horse that falls to then have to jump another one. Completely agree there.

I'm not so sure it works for a last fence fall. I remember watching Ken Morgan ride one of Anne Duchess of Westminster's horses at Naas years ago. Think it was Mad Tom or something similar. typical of Ken when he was 10 lenghts clear, he pulled the head off the horse going into the last and got far too close into it and too steep coming down. the horse got up fine but by that stage the second had caught up and won the race. Ken got back on board and finished second. It was a graded race and while The Duchess didn't need the money, it could be €5-7k to walk 200 yards, which most horses do anyway if they fall at the last (unless clearly injured in which case the ambulance will arrive). the horse came out a few weeks later and made no mistake at the last and won well. So I do think it is different if you fall at the last.
 
Cannot see what is mental about it OTB. It protects injured horses with little chance of winning being further injured. This shows the sport takes welfare issues seriously and only9 horses were remounted in 2008 winning 7 grand in prize money anyway.
 
I don't think it should be a decision taken by a jockey either. In the 'heat' of a race they cannot possibly make an informed decision as to the condition of a horse even if it appears to be fine, at whatever point in a race the fall/unseating occurs.
 
I fully agree with it think the next step should be banning the stick (other than for corrective purposes).
 
bloodnok said:
Cannot see what is mental about it OTB. It protects injured horses with little chance of winning being further injured. This shows the sport takes welfare issues seriously and only9 horses were remounted in 2008 winning 7 grand in prize money anyway.
Click to expand...

Indeed.....so if only 9 were remounted why do we need a rule....and off those 9 how many were injured as a result of the remount.
 
OTB said:
Indeed.....so if only 9 were remounted why do we need a rule....and off those 9 how many were injured as a result of the remount.
Click to expand...

If only nine were remounted whats your beef !

And if none are remounted, none will be injured! BTW like the poppycock, a much underused word.
 
My point is we dont need the rule, it would appear to serve no purpose. If a horse is 10l clear coming to the 2nd last hurdle....he stumbles and the jock is thrown out...but he doesn't lose the horse....why should he not jump back on? The horse could have stumbled at every other hurdle in the race and he's not told to get off is he? Jockey's are not thugs and should be allowed the do the job owners pay them to do.
 
He should not jump back on because the horse might be injured old boy (I assume you recognise the possibility). I am not suggesting jockeys are thugs but neither are they able to judge a horses condition in a few seconds IMO.
 
Back
Top