Grand National to be made 'safer'

I believe that any alterations to make the grand national "safer " will have exactly the opposite effect. The fact is that it is the very improvements that have caused the problems. If you study the grand national of for example 1925 and compare it with last year the contrast is amazing. The fences then were huge and solid blackthorn hedges. Every horse had to jump up and big. This contrasts with now where half the field are jumping well below the top and the other half are jumping high. This is a very bad thing because it confuses horses (Half lengthing them). In the old footage you will see that nobody is "racing"they are just trying to give their horses the best view of the fences and the best chance.
Canal turn is a classic example of the change for the worse. In those days there was none of the crowding for the racing line round the corner. In those older races it was mostly the jockeys getting unseated that ended their race. Sure ,horses fell and were sometimes killed but the comparison would be closer to an unfortunate event horse being killed.
The grand national course was not built for this modern fast racing with all the field trying to take the same line. I love the Grand National with a passion,but I think that if we have to make it "softer" and therefore faster ,I would rather see it stopped,because it will degenerate further into a dangerous farce.
 
Keep on making the fences smaller, and the horses will go faster. On dry ground, the number of fatalities could be horrific.

I do think the numbers should be cut - get rid of the chancers and make qualifying more difficult. And water the course properly, as fast ground is a killer.

The 2001 GN was a complete mud fest, and there was public outrage that the race was allowed to go ahead in such dreadful conditions.

All but two of the runners fell. Another two were re-mounted and finished, so only four finished in total. Yet there were no fatalities.
 
Last edited:
I always enjoyed watching the GN but for the last couple of years I have become increasingly uncomfortable when watching it.
I have no idea whether the changes proposed will make any difference. But from an uneducated (in terms of NH racing) point of view I do agree that there are too many runners in the race and that they appear to be going too fast.
Do you think there should be strict rules and briefings given to the jockeys about speed? And maybe some sort of optimum timing or time check points given to them so they don't go too fast?

The style of race riding has changed so much even in the last 5 years, and the horses appear to be less substantial than they used to be so it stands to reason that fences which were suitable for the horses and style of the past aren't suitable any more.
That said though, how far can it be updated before it is no longer the grand national?

I would agree that some sort of trial for the entrants would be a good idea before the race to check they can cope with the style of the fences.
 
No need to cut the numbers down if the fences were bigger and stiffer. The problem now is that everyone is fighting to be on the same bit of turf at the same moment.Its also worth remembering that in those old races ,a lot of riders were amateurs.
 
Agree absolutely Mike. Speed kills. I don't think the number of runners is significant any more, the fences are so wide.
 
Mike007 said:
No need to cut the numbers down if the fences were bigger and stiffer. The problem now is that everyone is fighting to be on the same bit of turf at the same moment.Its also worth remembering that in those old races ,a lot of riders were amateurs.
Click to expand...

I love you! Those were the days, I too had a gelding by Spartan General!
 
Roody2 said:
I always enjoyed watching the GN but for the last couple of years I have become increasingly uncomfortable when watching it.
I have no idea whether the changes proposed will make any difference. But from an uneducated (in terms of NH racing) point of view I do agree that there are too many runners in the race and that they appear to be going too fast.
Do you think there should be strict rules and briefings given to the jockeys about speed? And maybe some sort of optimum timing or time check points given to them so they don't go too fast?

The style of race riding has changed so much even in the last 5 years, and the horses appear to be less substantial than they used to be so it stands to reason that fences which were suitable for the horses and style of the past aren't suitable any more.
That said though, how far can it be updated before it is no longer the grand national?

I would agree that some sort of trial for the entrants would be a good idea before the race to check they can cope with the style of the fences.
Click to expand...

Jockey of 85 years ago were just as keen to win,but they knew that their best chance was to "save "the horse as much as possible give him a clear line into a fence and jump big and clean. This kept the speed down and spread the field out. There always has been a stewards briefing to the jockeys to go slow,but that has become a joke now.On the otherhand as for example in 1925 ,the problem was the amateur who sshould have pulled up but wanted to finnish even though well beaten. You will see two horses fall likke that towards the end of the race .http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5Rr5Pvf6c0
 
Changes said:
Agree absolutely Mike. Speed kills. I don't think the number of runners is significant any more, the fences are so wide.
Click to expand...

I think possibly you misunderstood my point. The problem is that although the fences are wide ,if you are taking the fences like hurdles ,there is only one racing line and everyone wants to be on it ,so even 25 horses becomes crowded ,let alone some of the old fields of say ,47 runners. Put the fences back up and make them stiffer and they would spread out ,they would have to!
 
Mike007 said:
I think possibly you misunderstood my point. The problem is that although the fences are wide ,if you are taking the fences like hurdles ,there is only one racing line and everyone wants to be on it ,so even 25 horses becomes crowded ,let alone some of the old fields of say ,47 runners. Put the fences back up and make them stiffer and they would spread out ,they would have to!
Click to expand...

Sorry, Mike, I wasn't clear. I've trotted out the same argument for so long that I forget what I have and haven't written, especially as I was discussing this on FB at the same time! I think the fences should have been left alone height-wise. They have widened the fences and reduced the fields sufficiently for that not to need to be addressed, but as you say, lowering the fences allows the jockeys to head for the inner on such a tight track, hence the chances taken now at Bechers and the like.
It's such a shame that the deaths of the two horses last year were not looked at properly, because the announced changes wouldn't have altered what happened to them.
 
images



When horsemen hunted round.



images



When Jockeys race round.
 
Just to throw you something else to chew on - 2 horses died in the Grand National this year. They were covered by tarps and could be clearly seen on tv as the horses went round the fences.

2 horses also died in a bog standard 2m4f chase at Sedgefield a couple of months ago. Both identical yet seperate falls at the same fence. Both landed wrong and snapped their necks. They were dead before they had fully hit the ground.

The mistake that was made in this years National was not removing the dead horses. They were making a point of showing that you could now bypass every single fence. Every single other year those horses would have been removed off of the track before the runner came round again. No fuss would have been made as it wasn' there for the whole world to see.

Once again - racing is far too open to public scrutiny. Would you prefer if we closed shop, hid things from you and left you summing up your own conclusions about what really goes on off screen?
 
Changes said:
Yet another muppet that plucks figures out the air and then can't sustain an argument......... seriously, why don't you go after the REAL cruelty in the UK, the P ikeys that harness unfit yearlings to drive, that dump young foals over fences, that tether animals with no hay or water at the side of the road? Or are you too spineless to attack them?
Click to expand...

You may like you have to grapple in online forums all night to feel like you've won an argument. I however, don't.

And what sort of argument have you just presented there? I have an opinion on horse racing, therefor I have no opinion on any other kind of cruelty?

Yet another muppet who makes an assumption based on nothing.
 
BeBopTalulah said:
You may like you have to grapple in online forums all night to feel like you've won an argument. I however, don't.

And what sort of argument have you just presented there? I have an opinion on horse racing, therefor I have no opinion on any other kind of cruelty?

Yet another muppet who makes an assumption based on nothing.
Click to expand...

I'm waiting for the figures you quoted?

ETA, as far as your opinions on other cruelty, that goes on all the time, yet you don't appear to comment on that?
 
Little Squirrel said:
images



When horsemen hunted round.
Click to expand...

That is exactly it! You used to HUNT for the first circuit. If you made it round the first circuit then you were pretty much going to finish the race. The first circuit was always about survival. The second circuit was when the real race began. You'd carved away the lesser horses and you were left with those clearly capable of the challenge.
 
I can't help but feel that by making the jumps smaller, there is more risk of accidents as there will be more speed involved.
I don't think the size of the jumps is the problem - plenty of horses break their legs doing hurdles as the hurdle snaps back, so size isn't the issue. Horses die every day at race meetings but because it isn't high profile, the general public don't find out and if they don't find out, they dont cry ""cruelty" about it
I would like to see the number of runners reduced to 30. I have two ex-racers and I would like to see a little more done for ex-racers, after their life in training, regarding re-homing them, but as already said there are plenty of other horses in a similar predicament in this country, but once again, the general public don't hear about them so if they dont' hear about it, they can't create an outcry over it.
 
Changes said:
I'm waiting for the figures you quoted?

ETA, as far as your opinions on other cruelty, that goes on all the time, yet you don't appear to comment on that?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I thought this was a thread on the Grand National? If you want to have a discussion about other types of cruelty I suggest you start a new thread. I'll be happy to join in.
 
BeBopTalulah said:
You may like you have to grapple in online forums all night to feel like you've won an argument. I however, don't.

And what sort of argument have you just presented there? I have an opinion on horse racing, therefor I have no opinion on any other kind of cruelty?

Yet another muppet who makes an assumption based on nothing.
Click to expand...

BeBop I think your the one making assumptions and following hear say. Horses die, fact. We all die, fact. It's part of life, people get killed every day driving a car. Doesn't mean that we should all be banned from driving. Racehorses love what they do, especially the good ones, it's awful when something happens but thay have an exceptional life and are so well looked after. Riding school ponies have a **** life, are filthy dirty have screaming brats yanking out their back teeth every day, do the same thing day in day out but I bet you don't think that riding schools are cruel do you? No of course not because the bandwagon hasn't jumped on board. I bet if they did you would follow.
Open your eyes, if you think the racing industry is so cruel what about every other equestrian sport out there? Or about the people who own horses who don't know it's head from it's arse?
 
FWIW - I Dont think its fair to be jumping all over a poster because they have a different viewpoint to yourselves.
We all have an opinion on this subject amongst others, lets respect each others viewpoints.
 
BeBopTalulah said:
I'm sorry, I thought this was a thread on the Grand National? If you want to have a discussion about other types of cruelty I suggest you start a new thread. I'll be happy to join in.
Click to expand...

BeBopTalulah said:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/oct/01/horseracing.sport

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/06/racehorse-slaughter-animal-welfare

Here are my sources from this evening. I had an opinion a long time before I read these. I feel that animal rights groups tend to push things too far, and I don't always support their arguments, but I think these articles are more balanced.
Click to expand...

Make your mind up? Is it a thread about the GN or the amount of horses that go for slaughter each year?

FWIW, both those articles contain biased journalistic slant. The real figures for horse slaughter annually in the UK are around the 20,000 mark, but I'd say more in the last couple of years as the abattoirs are at maximum production for horses. Less that 15% will be TBs. Indeed, your initial article figures that - 'There are more than a million horses in Britain with only about 20,000 in racing.

By those records every horse in the UK that races every year is killed? :rolleyes:

If you want to help horses, do something about the real welfare instead of spouting a load of nonsense from a keyboard.
 
I have never once made reference to Horse Racing as an activity being cruel. Not once. My objection is to the the huge numbers of horse which die because they didn't meet the grade, and the fact that little is done to ensure their welfare of the horse for the rest of it's life. I object to someone choosing to bring an animal into this world, with no thought of it's future welfare, but only how to line their own pockets. For the record, I'd feel the same under any circumstances, this just happens to be a racing thread.

If you think you can bully people into seeing your point of view, you're wrong.
 
BeBopTalulah said:
I have never once made reference to Horse Racing as an activity being cruel. Not once. My objection is to the the huge numbers of horse which die because they didn't meet the grade, and the fact that little is done to ensure their welfare of the horse for the rest of it's life. I object to someone choosing to bring an animal into this world, with no thought of it's future welfare, but only how to line their own pockets. For the record, I'd feel the same under any circumstances, this just happens to be a racing thread.

If you think you can bully people into seeing your point of view, you're wrong.
Click to expand...

So why attack racing when they're not the most culpable?

ETA - disagreeing with you is not bullying - sustain your argument.
 
Last edited:
BeBopTalulah said:
I have never once made reference to Horse Racing as an activity being cruel. Not once. .
Click to expand...
Really ,so who is the other BeBopTalulah who said QUOTE"
Sorry if I'm being controversial, but I think horse racing is a cruel sport. I don't think changing the Grand National is going to make any difference at all. We've come to EXPECT fatalities at big races now, and it's a disgrace."
Does your selective amnesia extend to your own comments?
 
BeBopTalulah said:
My objection is to the the huge numbers of horse which die because they didn't meet the grade, and the fact that little is done to ensure their welfare of the horse for the rest of it's life.
Click to expand...

Back in the day, yes this did happen to an extent. Many, many moons ago, if a horse didn't make the grade it went hunting.

The next phase of racing came along. Horses that were useless, injured themselves and the likes were disposed of - yes, mostly to the hunt kennels or the slaughter houses.

Racing today - You would be surprised at just how many owners and trainers have a concience and a REPUTATION to look after! It wouldn't do for a major owner to just dump his horses or slaughter them for no reason. They would quickly lose friends and possible business deals. Trainers also have a reputation o uphold. It wouldn't look very good on their cv to have their horses vanish off the face of the planet for no apparent reason. With the amount of exhileration and heart break that goes into owning a racehorse, their owners becone very affectionate of their horses and would rather know they are living a happy life somewhere than have the knowledge that the source of much of their emotion is in a dog food can.
 
BeBopTalulah said:
I have never once made reference to Horse Racing as an activity being cruel. Not once. My objection is to the the huge numbers of horse which die because they didn't meet the grade, and the fact that little is done to ensure their welfare of the horse for the rest of it's life. I object to someone choosing to bring an animal into this world, with no thought of it's future welfare, but only how to line their own pockets. For the record, I'd feel the same under any circumstances, this just happens to be a racing thread.

If you think you can bully people into seeing your point of view, you're wrong.
Click to expand...

You have focused your point on horse racing, please look at the bigger picture, horses are bred wholesale in this country, they often dont have the slaughter house as an end to their lives, they are used as a commodity, going to sale to sale. They are in limbo. It is a hard life out there for all horses, I for one am re homing racehorses, without fuss, asking for money. It is just something that I want to do. Tell me, other than reading the Guardian, what are you doing?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top