TIDE TURNING ON RACE RIDING – NO WHIPS NO SPURS? - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK harm-plan

Racehorse TALK



TIDE TURNING ON RACE RIDING – NO WHIPS NO SPURS? - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK

Author Topic: TIDE TURNING ON RACE RIDING – NO WHIPS NO SPURS?  (Read 1891 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5231
O.P. « 2019-Nov-05, 10:02 PM »


TIDE TURNING ON RACE RIDING – NO WHIPS NO SPURS?

It is now 10 years on from the start of some 250,000 comments on the introduction of the then  ‘new whip rules’

             http://www.racehorsetalk.com.au/racing-talk/new-whip-use-rules/new/?topicseen#new

A derby-day weekend for me in rural NSW was enlightening ............. mainly in the company of an 80yro life-time owner, trainer and former track-work rider.

Conversation turned to the pressure building on the racing industry to present itself as humane.

No question about finding and prosecuting ‘doggers’ treating horses with cruel disrespect.

The contentious conversation was about the need for and routine use of a whip (or spurs) to ensure a horse runs to the best of its ability.

On the table also was the credibility of jockeys wielding a ‘padded whip’ which was not ‘harmful’.

The clear advice from the ‘elder’ was that – ‘the whip is not needed’ – nor spurs – that the ‘padded whips’ do cause lasting distress as ‘evident bruising’: not perhaps the once very visible ‘quilting’ that known hard-riders were historically encouraged to inflict on a horse suspected of ‘not trying’, but definitely not harmless either.

..... an option for action

There are presumably objective tests to ‘see’ if the use of whips and spurs is distressing to horses.

There would also be professional opinion – probably divergent -- about the need for whips and spurs to be used in the training and ‘controlled’ riding of horses in races.

Even so, a challenge the industry could accept would provide for the running of one race on a program where the use of a whip (or spurs) would be not allowed.

.......... betting on these one-races may be permitted or not, initially, but with a clear intention to allow normal betting as the trials unfolded.

Complementary rules would allow the carrying of a whip for (explained) use in emergencies but preclude the ‘showing’ and ‘waving’ of a whip in the course of a race (which would encourage conditioning akin to the use of jiggers)

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5231
« 2019-Nov-10, 02:17 PM Reply #1 »


NO-WHIP RACING 

(i) RVL is surveying public opinion


We would like  to understand what Victorian thoroughbred racing fans think about the practice of jockeys using whips during Victorian race meetings. This survey should take no more than five minutes to complete.

Those interested to offer a view may need to register at  https://www.racing-insiders.com.au.

(ii) relevant opinions are being given

Among others Lloyd Williams would support a ban on whips in races.

............ and the question of 'whips hurting' was raised again by Michael Walker -- who also said, after his Cup penalty was imposed, that 'the padded whip does not hurt the horses'.

Is that true or not? : after 10 years the question -- does the padded whip hurt? -- needs to be put and answered afresh -- otherwise the debate is being sidetracked into arena of apparent public-presentation impressions.







Offline Dave

  • Group 2
  • User 2322
  • Posts: 1138
« 2019-Nov-10, 06:24 PM Reply #2 »
Whips and spurs(in particular spurs which are downright cruel and barbaric at any time) are not necessary to get a horse to do it's best for good horsemen and women.........but they (good Horsemen and women)are very few and far between, without whips and/or spurs the difference in horsemanship skills would be a gulf, Horses would know who was boss and would jack up on some (most) jockeys and refuse to try, form reversals would be gigantic and a lot more often......but would settle down soon enough once the deadwood was obvious,
I believe Whips are a necessary safety tool, they should be allowed to be used at the jockeys discretion as many times as they like but never raised above the saddle pommel  height and in more of a flicking action from below the hand, the strength in hitting a horse with a whip has no relevance anyway, same as hitting a child, the harder you hit them the less likely you are to get them to obey, it doesn't work, once you feel that extreme force is necessary you have lost the fight.....
I do agree with the initiatives to curb cruelty in racing but......they need to be educated on how to do it and still maintain the industry, most of what is happening now with the silly whip rules are nothing more than knee jerk reactions that don't work for anyone, least of all the horses, it makes the use of spurs a lot more prevalent.....it upsets and confuses  Punters, Jockeys are getting fined.....and the do gooders(who are good people who just don't know what they are talking about) are still upset, there are no winners...it needs a win/win/win/win solution.....if one loses then we all lose

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5231
« 2019-Nov-10, 08:17 PM Reply #3 »

No-Whip racing -- one race at each Saturday meeting?


We just do not know the answers.

What Dave is saying reflects what most are thinking.

Spurs are 'out' -- the need for whips is the lingering whip-hand debate.

Most would not like to think they had been hoodwinked by either the 'it is needed' or the 'no its not' camps -- nor the possible views of the administrator ring-masters, chasing the buck, being wary of any 'yes -- or not' bias in emerging industry and community opinion.

The issue can be put in a broader context.

Any dramatic and immediate change would likely be disruptive -- trainers and jockeys need time to adapt.

A possible deal on the table is 'one race' on a Saturday program to be whip-free-- and, if an incentive is needed for jockeys and trainers to get one ready, a $10,000 bonus on the winning  purse would be one option.




Offline Dave

  • Group 2
  • User 2322
  • Posts: 1138
« 2019-Nov-12, 10:31 AM Reply #4 »
The whip "is needed" but the cruelty is "not needed", you can have both, restricting whip use i.e. the number of hits with the whip,  is stupid in the extreme and has no chance of ever working, to expect all Jockeys to keep count in the heat of battle defies logic, We will get to the point where correct weight will be held up until beaten jockeys count the whip strokes of every jockey who finishes in front of them, if it is against the rules then it must be grounds for a protest and a change of race result........then to allow unrestricted whip use in the last 100 metres is also stupid beyond belief, that is when it looks at it's worse, an extra couple of strokes with the whip at the 600 ain't as obvious as unrestricted punishment in the last 100 metres.....Punters want horses bashed but if they lost a result because of a protest that may change.......
The only answer that would satisfy everyone is not how many times a Jockey uses the whip.....but HOW a Jockey uses the whip..........Never overhand, that is a terrible look to animal lovers, using the whip by restricting arm movement to saddle height, or even elbow height, would be a lot easier for Jockeys to remember and they wouldn't get fined or risk losing a race on protest, no one would be disadvantaged, it would not look like cruelty, you would still get the best out of the horse, Jockeys win, Punters win, connections win, Animal lovers win............
If they don't change, change will be forced upon them.....and it will be change that no one wants.....,no whips at all....dangerous for Jockeys, bad for punters, bad for owners/trainers......
I am an atheist but I do try to think of the serenity prayer as a way to live life quote "grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, Courage to change the things I can, And wisdom to know the difference"
We cannot change the fact that change is a coming, that is something we must accept, we must have the courage to change first so we get something we can live with........we must have the wisdom  to know that if we don't it will be forced on us anyway

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5231
« 2019-Nov-12, 05:16 PM Reply #5 »


Marketing semantics -- is the 'whip' to be called a 'crop'?

That was one line of thought in the media this morning -- with no meaning unless, whatever it is called,  its capacity to be painful is minimal.

There is still no consensus on whether the so-called 'padded whip' is capable of being fairly labeled 'cruel'.

The administrators and stewards might like to address that key question -- possibly with a practical application to themselves by a jockey just suspended for overuse.


Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5231
« 2019-Nov-13, 05:59 PM Reply #6 »


Not much interest so far  -- the question goes to the heart of the industry


The idea of 'no whip' racing has hardly captured the attention of the industry.

10 years ago I bought the story that the 'new-padded-whip' was primarily for the 'show' and 'noise' that might encourage a horse to do its best.

I talked then to a leading jockey, after giving myself a couple of 'did-not-hurts' on a visit to the jockeys' room --  his response was 'let me give you a couple' and see what you think!

The question is not an idle one -- but no one is prepared to say clearly that the 'padded whip' does not do lingering damage.

A competent vet would be able to find evidence of the difference between a 'hard ride' and a 'soft ride'.

That distinction goes to the heart of the problem with stewards 'counting numbers' but not measuring 'force of delivery'.

Accordingly, the tide is running in favour of those who would outlaw the use of these whips in races -- and, by implication, training.

The reluctance to agree to 'no whips' (bar emergencies) may well be about the different skills need to ride horses trained to win anyway.

...... no particular urgency perhaps, but, if 'no whip' racing is on the cards, for renewing the social license, the more quickly the training culture needs to accept the need for change.

 

Offline Dave

  • Group 2
  • User 2322
  • Posts: 1138
« 2019-Nov-19, 01:26 PM Reply #7 »
My major gripe is the hypocrisy involved, changing whip rules, looking after retired horses etc is all great but it is surface water, it is what the public can see and relate too, The Public can't see spurs, so we allow unrestricted use of spurs......we are talking sharp pieces of steel being used on the feet of a jockey(the jockey's legs are a lot stronger than a Jockeys arm and a whip is only used by one arm at a time, spurs are on both feet) I find it appalling and it makes me sick when I see it and hear the bleatings about how the racing industry really cares about the animals.....to put bluntly....they don't give a damn, with all the things they do that do benefit the horses(and I applaud what they do) it ain't because they care about the welfare of horses....it's always to protect their own arse!
In saying that most people on the ground in horse racing are real animal lovers and have my total respect......but the real animal lovers are so far down the Totem pole that what they think doesn't matter,
When I owned racehorses I never allowed the use of spurs and neither did the trainer I used!

Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 16662
« 2019-Nov-19, 06:44 PM Reply #8 »
I'm in favour of spurs  being banned....... as a kid  I remember seeing this horse Comforter going for afternoon exercise on the footpath .....its hide extensively marked by spurs...great slices of hide exposed ...very cruel IMO and that was many years ago..... whips have had restrictions placed on their use while spurs are still being worn ...not by everyone fortunately.....possibly the toe in the irons style doesn't lend itself to the old style of hands and heels.

Giddy Up  :beer:

Offline nemisis

  • Group 2
  • User 2461
  • Posts: 1088
« 2019-Nov-21, 05:44 AM Reply #9 »
https://horsesandpeople.com.au/whip-welts-on-melbourne-cup-winner/

Racing under so much fire.

When the camera is put on horses after the race on Racing.com there are welt marks there many times.

Offline Dave

  • Group 2
  • User 2322
  • Posts: 1138
« 2019-Nov-21, 12:11 PM Reply #10 »
Arsenal there are a lot more using spurs since the silly whip rules came into being, there are a few riders that I have never seen wearing spurs, mainly Glen Boss, Hugh Bowman and Craig Williams have never worn spurs or at least I have never seen them wear spurs, in the past you would be lucky to find 2 or 3 on a whole day now you would find more than that in every race.......
I have backed a lot of winners by observing the use of spurs in the past so I was very aware of how many riders used spurs on any given day, what very few understand is a horse has to be in a certain condition or spurs are ineffective anyway
Even the whip use is way over rated, Punters are as dumb as a box of rocks, they seem to think that the harder you hit the horse and the longer you hit the horse, the faster it goes, simply not true!....it is more the threat and the shock value that gets the most response, the first couple of hits with the whip are the most effective, why G Moore tried to wait till he was within the shadows of the post before using it.....but he was a Horseman......very few if any of today's Jockeys are Horsemen

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5231
« 2019-Nov-21, 07:25 PM Reply #11 »

Well found 'nemisis'

........  objective evidence in the link should influence the discussion.

                                  https://horsesandpeople.com.au/whip-welts-on-melbourne-cup-winner/

Offline Dave

  • Group 2
  • User 2322
  • Posts: 1138
« 2019-Nov-21, 08:27 PM Reply #12 »
There are no welts on Vow and Declare, bloody idiots haven't got a freakin' clue what they are talking about, a "welt" is where the skin is raised i.e. a lump, swelling etc...........these morons are pointing to where the muscle flexes in, a whip doesn't make a "dent" in the skin.....can't you see that?? Christ it is hard to make any decent headway with horse welfare when Morons(not talking about you Pete but whoever wrote that garbage) try to sensationalize what they think when they obviously don't know what they are talking about

Offline nemisis

  • Group 2
  • User 2461
  • Posts: 1088
« 2019-Nov-21, 09:17 PM Reply #13 »
I had a bit of a quick google about the author, just in case she was labelled ......greenie, hand wringer or leftard......wasn't expecting moron  :what:

International level equestrian rider, magazine editor and horse lover......what's your qualification Dave apart from punter?

I can remember when Lester Piggott came out to ride Sailing Home, the top NZ staying mare in an International race.
As well as being extraordinarily tall for a jockey, his whip looked to be twice as long as everyone else's.
She did win and Piggott hit her twice and left 2 of the biggest welt marks on the mare's hindquarter.

It was pointed out to me by a very experienced eye!
I have a bit of a look ever since.

Absolute welt marks to my eye and on her Facebook page these is a closer up which shows they could hardly be anything else.

Offline Dave

  • Group 2
  • User 2322
  • Posts: 1138
« 2019-Nov-22, 02:23 PM Reply #14 »
nemesis do you know what a welt mark even is? Do you know what it looks like?? go and get a pic of the Piggott mount and it would show a whoile different type of mark to Vow and Declare, a Welt a swelling, there is no, nil, ZERO signs of swelling in that Pic.....did you get that?? ....there was zero signs of swelling in that picture.....only the blind and the profoundly stupid would believe this story, of course she is a Horse lover there is no denying that, she is dead set against Horse racing and it is Human nature to find what you are looking for....even if it ain't even there! She found welt marks because she wanted to find welt marks
The same reason stupid Liberal Voters believed the Children Overboard story, there was absolutely no chance that it was ever True.....but they are all Racists and wanted it to be true to Justify their evil minds in thinking refugees were bad people just because they were refugees.....
It is the same reason greedy people are conned, they want to believe in something for nothing....
It is the same reason the insanely gullible believe there is a Man in the sky that loves them and promises them eternal life
now the questions is are you blind??

Offline Dave

  • Group 2
  • User 2322
  • Posts: 1138
« 2019-Nov-22, 02:55 PM Reply #15 »
By the way I have been in the racing industry and around horses all my life(which I doubt the author ever was) I know what cruelty is and I want it stamped out as much as anyone....but when you start telling porkies you lose all credibility.......I am sure she believes she is telling the truth....but she isn't!
When I was a young strapper many years ago I led a horse in ridden by Jimmy Johnson (Of Rain Lover and Tobin Bronze fame)....it came back to scale covered in welts, even down the side of it's head back to it's tail( as well as cuts from the spurs) he was one savage son of a bitch.....and it didn't win, I was shocked at the cruelty then and still am today when I see it.....this woman's objective would be to get Racing stamped out as a way of stopping cruelty, throw the baby out with the bath water!
I have gone to the RSPCA (and other so called Animal protection groups) protesting to them about spurs and those bloody hypocrites don't give a damn, their protests are about raising money, not stopping cruelty....

Offline nemisis

  • Group 2
  • User 2461
  • Posts: 1088
« 2019-Nov-22, 03:26 PM Reply #16 »
One scrap a day is enough for me here Dave.

If I feel the need to investigate the author further I'll get back to you .......otherwise we might agree to disagree. 8-)

Offline PoisonPen7

  • Group 1
  • User 55
  • Posts: 21607
« 2019-Nov-22, 04:43 PM Reply #17 »
nemesis do you know what a welt mark even is? Do you know what it looks like?? go and get a pic of the Piggott mount and it would show a whoile different type of mark to Vow and Declare, a Welt a swelling, there is no, nil, ZERO signs of swelling in that Pic.....did you get that?? ....there was zero signs of swelling in that picture.....only the blind and the profoundly stupid would believe this story, of course she is a Horse lover there is no denying that, she is dead set against Horse racing and it is Human nature to find what you are looking for....even if it ain't even there! She found welt marks because she wanted to find welt marks
The same reason stupid Liberal Voters believed the Children Overboard story, there was absolutely no chance that it was ever True.....but they are all Racists and wanted it to be true to Justify their evil minds in thinking refugees were bad people just because they were refugees.....
It is the same reason greedy people are conned, they want to believe in something for nothing....
It is the same reason the insanely gullible believe there is a Man in the sky that loves them and promises them eternal life
now the questions is are you blind??

He's having trouble seeing lately Dave.

Peter V'Landys gets him worked up to the point he is frothing from the mouth so some form of temporary blindness is a very real possibility.

Offline wily ole dog

  • Group 1
  • User 218
  • Posts: 27207
« 2019-Nov-22, 08:05 PM Reply #18 »
I have gone to the RSPCA (and other so called Animal protection groups) protesting to them about spurs and those bloody hypocrites don't give a damn, their protests are about raising money, not stopping cruelty....


 :clap2:

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 1
  • User 326
  • Posts: 5231
« 2019-Dec-13, 11:35 AM Reply #19 »

One low and one high tide

A video circulating of a UK jockey wielding a padded whip on audience members to show it  'does not hurt' is a low point in a debate where the tide is turning   -- as noted before, a leading jockey I trust would like to give a demo which would change his tune.

On the brighter side is a report on Racenet today

American racing body introduces ground breaking whip restrictions

The California Horse Racing Board is introducing restricted whip rules which an administrator has described as “the most restrictive whip rule in North America and maybe the world”.

The new rule, which will undergo a 45 day trial, limits jockeys to a maximum of six strikes during a race with no more than two consecutive.

The rule is modelled off the British Horse Racing Authority whip rules which limits a jockey to hit their mount a maximum of seven times.


BACK TO ALL TOPICS
Sitemap