Grand National so many failed to finish!

I.M.N. said:
Eventing, show jumping, dressage, polo, lunging, putting in the stable, turning out, etc, never begin with "I wonder how many will survive" so I don't think are comparable. If anyone can find a stat that compares to over 20 horses being killed racing in March alone, maybe I'll change my perspective, I don't mean through cruelty, neglect, etc, I mean by another equine activity labeled sport.
Click to expand...

That's the crux of this debate.

While it's true to say (and many people do) that horses can die doing any sport, or standing in the stable, or in the field, the percentage chance of it happening to any individual horse on any given day are very low.

Whereas in the last two years, approximately 5% of horses starting the Grand National have had to be put down. I don't think many equestrian activities come close to that except perhaps other races.

For example, lots of horses are fatally injured in the field, but it would be surprising if it happened to 5% of the turned-out horse population on any single day.

Freak accidents are unavoidable, and you shouldn't try to prevent them because if you do, nobody would do anything with horses.

The issue with the Grand National is that it seems to be that fatal injuries are not freak accidents but a predictable consequence of running a large number of horses of varying abilities around a tough course. That's what makes me uncomfortable about it.
 
Don't want to get into whether this race is right or wrong because there are arguments either way.
What I would say is the people involved with these horse devoted an incredible amount of time/ effort and love with these animals, my sympathy goes out to them all, owners, jockeys and trainers as well of course as to the people who look after and care for them on a daily basis.

it was a very sad day!
 
It depends over what period you measure it; I was estimating it over the last two years only. Obviously that will give a higher figure because they were two particularly bad years.

Even on the official figures, it's still a high percentage figure compared to almost any other equestrian activity.
 
Easy Rider said:
That's the crux of this debate.

While it's true to say (and many people do) that horses can die doing any sport, or standing in the stable, or in the field, the percentage chance of it happening to any individual horse on any given day are very low.

Whereas in the last two years, approximately 5% of horses starting the Grand National have had to be put down. I don't think many equestrian activities come close to that except perhaps other races.

For example, lots of horses are fatally injured in the field, but it would be surprising if it happened to 5% of the turned-out horse population on any single day.

Freak accidents are unavoidable, and you shouldn't try to prevent them because if you do, nobody would do anything with horses.

The issue with the Grand National is that it seems to be that fatal injuries are not freak accidents but a predictable consequence of running a large number of horses of varying abilities around a tough course. That's what makes me uncomfortable about it.
Click to expand...

Therefore it should all be about playing the % game?

In the last two years the National has suffered higher than average fatalities for what ever reason. But on the basis of the last two years 5% of starters meeting their death in this race is too high for you to find acceptable? What if it was 2.5% would that still be too high? Where and who draws the line, is 0%, 2.5%, 5% or 10% acceptable?

How about if a riding school needed to lose 3 of its 40 horses because they weren't paying their way. And these 3 horses were PTS on one day, thats 7 1/2% of the total riding school horses population (in that school), is that acceptable? What happens if that same riding school make the same financial mistakes next year and again have to have 3 horses PTS, is this more or less uncomfortable than horse being killed in the National? its all in the name of entertainment!
 
No, it's not about a % game. I think the percentages are interesting but they're not an answer in themselves - as you say, it's impossible to define a level which is "acceptable".

The key point is when deaths stop being freak accidents and start becoming predictable. E.g. a horse can die of colic out of pure bad luck (i.e. freak accident) or through negligent management (i.e. predictable). The former is sad but acceptable and the latter shouldn't be (although of course it happens).

A fatality rate in the range of 3 to 5% to me suggests predictability, not freak accidents - that's why I mentioned the percentages.
 
Easy Rider said:
No, it's not about a % game. I think the percentages are interesting but they're not an answer in themselves - as you say, it's impossible to define a level which is "acceptable".

The key point is when deaths stop being freak accidents and start becoming predictable. E.g. a horse can die of colic out of pure bad luck (i.e. freak accident) or through negligent management (i.e. predictable). The former is sad but acceptable and the latter shouldn't be (although of course it happens).

A fatality rate in the range of 3 to 5% to me suggests predictability, not freak accidents - that's why I mentioned the percentages.
Click to expand...

Sorry i'm not sure how the 3 to 5% range suggests predictability in this case?
 
Just because it seems like a material proportion of the total, and a higher rate than you'd find in most equestrian activities or indeed non-equestrian sports. You're quite right that it's subjective though.
 
Easy Rider said:
Just because it seems like a material proportion of the total, and a higher rate than you'd find in most equestrian activities or indeed non-equestrian sports. You're quite right that it's subjective though.
Click to expand...

Ahhh i see. But doesn't predictability mean that you can foretell something? Thats why the range thing was confusing. If one or more horses die every year, then it could be predicted (if everything stays constant) that next year a horse will die, based on a knowledge of the stats.

But the % range in any one year on its own does not make it predicatable that a horse will die next year.
 
Honestly, the argument that these animals are kept in prime condition until they are killed for sport is the argument used for bullfighting, dogfighting and bearbaiting. What a prestigious company!

And the fact that Point to Point is even worse in relation to horse welfare is not a very convincing defence either.

Shameful. These deaths are utterly unnecessary.
 
Last edited:
Here's a quote from Sky News:

"Winning jockey Daryl Jacob told Sky News the deaths were unfortunate - but that they were part of the sport.

"It's not nice when a couple of horses unfortunately lost their lives," he said.


"But that's sport. It happens every day. It happens every day, it happens to human beings, it happens to animals.

"Unfortunately that's professional sport and, you know, it's going to happen. We love our horses, we don't want it to happen, but unfortunately it does happen sometimes."

Along with finding it acceptable that horses die in the name of "sport", he clearly thinks its okay to whip them excessively too. I saw Neptune Collenges being led to the winners enclosure, and his hindquarters were bloodied because of being whipped!! I tried to find a video clip to back this up, but the only footage I could find was after the horse had been sponged down. What happened to the new whip rules anyway? Oh, that's right, it's still okay to whip a horse as often as you like as there still aren't any serious repercussions for doing so. It is sickening to think that this whip happy jockey is considered a "hero"!!

Also, will you pro-racers please STOP saying the deaths were "accidents"!! They were bloody unavoidable!! The recent fatalities have NOTHING to do with the "safety modifications" as horses have been dying in this wretched race ever since its inception. The ONLY way to avoid any more deaths in the race is to ban it!!

Oh, and will somebody at Horse and Hound please tell me why there has been NO mention of Gottany O's who died during the second race on the first day of the meeting. Thank you.
 
I agree. They were totally avoidable deaths. If the owner of According to Pete is that devastated then why let him do the race? I love my horse to bits which is why I've always said I'd never jump a higher XC course than 2ft 9 because I would say that over that height you'd struggle to get away with hitting a fence hard and I would hate him to injure himself due to my inexperience or his lack of courage. I know hitting the fence hard is not the ultimate reason the fallers fell at the National, but I do believe its the speed of the race and the very fact that without doubt horse will jump flat when they are galloping fast.

I don't think decreasing the height of the fences would make that much difference. I think they said that only 15 of the original 40 that started the race came through the finish line. That speaks for itself.

I am not really a fan of horse racing, but I dislike the National even more because I see it as a really unfair race for the horses that run in it. They have the odds stacked against them due to the distance, the sheer number in the race, the huge unforgiving fences, the fact that loose horses can cause a number of other horses to fall.

Truly horrific in my opinion, but sure I will get shot down by the 'die hard' fraternity.
 
Im sure there was a spell when there were less fatal falls at Aintree.
I don t like the horse racing world... it s no place for a softie like me.
One of the owners talked about his wishes for the race and said he would just be relieved to see his horse back safely.
That is the acknowledgement of an owner that he knows the risk he is taking with his horse and for whatever reason still goes ahead.
There are people who can do that and other people who cant.
Im one of the folk who can t.
 
vickyb said:
When Synchronised fell I looked back at Beechers and couldn't see him, so assumed he was okay (i.e.galloped off). Then I am sure I saw him following the field loose - perhaps I have mixed him up with another loose horse? He wasn't at Beecher's when they came round the second time. Does anyone know what actually happened?
Click to expand...

Apparently he was perfectly fine after his fall with Tony onboard. He carried on for 5 fences on his own and fell again, thats when he broke his leg.
 
Over2You said:
I saw Neptune Collenges being led to the winners enclosure, and his hindquarters were bloodied because of being whipped!!
Click to expand...

That's proven fact is it?
Because I would suggest that a) as Daryl didn't receive a ban, he didn't strike the horse more than 9 times in the entire race b) it is virtually impossible to beat a horse to bleeding with a racing whip such is the cushioning
and
c) the most likely cause of the blood was from the nostril of another horse in the field.

Please stop making a fool of yourself with such stupid (and groundless) accusations.
 
Baggybreeches said:
That's proven fact is it?
Because I would suggest that a) as Daryl didn't receive a ban, he didn't strike the horse more than 9 times in the entire race b) it is virtually impossible to beat a horse to bleeding with a racing whip such is the cushioning
and
c) the most likely cause of the blood was from the nostril of another horse in the field.

Please stop making a fool of yourself with such stupid (and groundless) accusations.
Click to expand...

I've just registered on here as i've been reading this forum since Saturday .. most people talk a lot of sense but a few are saying ridiculous stuff. Re the above quote, have you actually watched the final run from Saturday coz i think maybe you should. Seabass was being hit with every stride & so was Neptune Collonges, Sunnyhillboys jockey kept both hands on the reins the whole time !!!
 
amandat said:
I've just registered on here as i've been reading this forum since Saturday .. most people talk a lot of sense but a few are saying ridiculous stuff. Re the above quote, have you actually watched the final run from Saturday coz i think maybe you should. Seabass was being hit with every stride & so was Neptune Collonges, Sunnyhillboys jockey kept both hands on the reins the whole time !!!
Click to expand...

It might be worthwhile going back to the clip and see if for both of the horses you mention, whether the whip actually makes contact with the horse. Often the jockey will wave the whip (along the side of the horse) and to an untrained eye, it can look as through the horse is being whipped, when in fact the whip is just making a noise and not making contact.

It can be used in this manor (waving) to keep the horse straight or encourage a little more speed!
 
Ok point taken & my eye is untrained. I love the National, i look forward to it every year, i'm still thinking that Synchronised didn't want to run that race & when i saw his reaction to seeing the first jump before the start i thought he didn't want to do it, then the whole mess up with the start shouldn't have happened - the whole race for me woz ruined before it started.
 
amandat said:
I've just registered on here as i've been reading this forum since Saturday .. most people talk a lot of sense but a few are saying ridiculous stuff. Re the above quote, have you actually watched the final run from Saturday coz i think maybe you should. Seabass was being hit with every stride & so was Neptune Collonges, Sunnyhillboys jockey kept both hands on the reins the whole time !!!
Click to expand...

I think you will find that I did watch the entire race on Saturday and as someone with a very keen interest I did watch the finish particularly closely. I suggest that all of you armchair critics get yourself on an equicisor session at one of the racing colleges so you can actually understand the way the jockeys ride a finish. And something that is taught throughout, is that the last man to draw his whip usually wins the race, so I don't think jockeys can be accused of being whip happy.
 
I saw Neptune Collenges being led to the winners enclosure, and his hindquarters were bloodied because of being whipped!!
Click to expand...

Highly unlikely due to the structure of the whip.

The marks you saw were probably to do with cuts from the fences.

Edt:

In fact, just having found a picture of him finishing the race - the blood on his quarters was no where near where the whip could reach - so they would definitely have been as a result of scraping through a fence.
 
Last edited:
amymay said:
Highly unlikely due to the structure of the whip.

The marks you saw were probably to do with cuts from the fences.

Edt:

In fact, just having found a picture of him finishing the race - the blood on his quarters was no where near where the whip could reach - so they would definitely have been as a result of scraping through a fence.
Click to expand...

I have already explained that is was most likely off another horse (nosebleed, bitten tongue etc).
I said virtually impossible with a racing whip (would say impossible but someone somewhere will try to prove me wrong ;) )
 
Sorry i don't mean to offend anyone & i've riden all my life - my grandad was a brilliant Trainer. I've had 2 cousins ride in the National, i'm not anti racing & i know that the horses live for what they do but sadly they also die for it. I was a bit peeved after reading the comment made by the winning Jockey, i'm also happy that Neptunes was retired immediately after the race :)
 
amandat said:
Sorry i don't mean to offend anyone & i've riden all my life - my grandad was a brilliant Trainer. I've had 2 cousins ride in the National, i'm not anti racing & i know that the horses live for what they do but sadly they also die for it. I was a bit peeved after reading the comment made by the winning Jockey, i'm also happy that Neptunes was retired immediately after the race :)
Click to expand...

Who was your Grand Dad?

On the subject of whipping I have seen ponies bleeding after Pony Club hunter Trials & rallies but never on a racehorse after a race & they have finer skins than most ponies.
 
My grandad moved up from the South to Northern Ireland my nan wouldnt leave Ireland so neither would he ... my cousins rode Kilkilowen & Monanore in the 86 National
 
TBF, racing whips can leave marks or red weals if used excessively. One reason why horses are examined without rugs covering them post race by the vet.
 
horserider said:
TBF, racing whips can leave marks or red weals if used excessively. One reason why horses are examined without rugs covering them post race by the vet.
Click to expand...

Indeed, but you'd have to do some pretty excessive (and I mean excessive) beating to get blood. And in the example used by Over2You is inaccurate.
 
Over2You said:
Also, will you pro-racers please STOP saying the deaths were "accidents"!! They were bloody unavoidable!!
Click to expand...

One was brought down by another horse falling so that was an accident. The other fell, got up jumped a few more fences alone and fell again all by himself, so that was an accident too.
I think you'll find that yes, they were both unavoidable accidents although if Synchronised had not followed the field and allowed himself to be caught he might still have been here but that's horses for you.
 
amandat said:
Ok point taken & my eye is untrained. I love the National, i look forward to it every year, i'm still thinking that Synchronised didn't want to run that race & when i saw his reaction to seeing the first jump before the start i thought he didn't want to do it, then the whole mess up with the start shouldn't have happened - the whole race for me woz ruined before it started.
Click to expand...

It might also be suggested that Synchronised reaction to being shown the first fence was not *bugger that* but could be more *let me get back to the others*.

Often a reason why SJ course builders make a few fences more difficult is by building them going away from the entrance gate, it is because they know that alot of horses will want to get back to 'their mates'. Hence a similiar type of reaction from Synchronised.
 
millitiger said:
I love racing but still struggle to see why they allow 40 horses in the GN?

It is far too many and imo the sheer number of horses NOT the fences is what causes so many falls.

Poor According To Pete who was PTS was brought down by another horse.

Why not limit it to a more sensible number of runners like 20?
Click to expand...

I totally agree with the comment above ... these recurring fatalities are caused by the crowding of way too many runners jostling for position.
The course & the jumps are no more dangerous than a grade 1 event course.
Reducing the height of the fences (as has been done in recent years) simply means that more runners are going to get further in the race instead of refusing or pulling up, so getting in each other's way for longer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top