Grand National - will changes make a difference?

mandwhy said:
Those changes are good but don't sound very helpful really, there are just too many horses running for the width of the track I think. Safer jumps would help but its the crowding together that makes it so hazardous.
Click to expand...


Yeah, and altering the width of the course to accommodate the 'run out' area, has, in my view not helped. I will of course take that back if the original course width is the same, and they have added it.
I love watching the old replays - the Red Rum era - that is what is still should be in my opinion.
 
Not read all of the replies but a couple of things to note.

In a 60runner previous National there were 2 fatalities.

In a 10runner novice handicap chase at Wetherby last week 4 fell, 2 were brought down, 4 finished. Of the 4 fallers 2 died.

Reducing numbers wont change the 'carnage' rate.
 
criso said:
When this last came up I found a link to number of fatalities year by year and it seemed to bear out the above.

Found it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equine_fatalities_in_the_Grand_National
Click to expand...

I read through that list, and I must say that I'm not sure that I would blame all the deaths on the race.

McKelvey (2008) was riderless when he jumped the next fence on the course "stumbled on landing which made him fall under the barrier. As he got up, still under the barrier, he fractured his back and was euthanised".
Do Rightly (1998) "suffered a heart attack".
Griffins Bar (1998) "incurred a shoulder fracture while running riderless".
Ballyhane (1991) "suffered a haemorrhage after completing the race and died."
Hungary Hur (1990) "incurred a leg fracture" between fences.
Earthstopper (1984) "collapsed and died after finishing the race."
Rag Trade (1978) was "pulled up lame" between fences "and later euthanised."
Land Lark (1975) "suffered a heart attack".
Dominick's Bar (1954) "suffered a heart attack".
The Emperor (1891) was pulled up and "fell and broke his back while running back to the stables."
Chimney Sweep (1868) "collided with barrier on the Melling Road and had to be euthanised."
Dictator (1839) "burst blood vessel."

There probably was one or two more that I could have written on my list, but anyhow, even though it is horrible, for example horses can die from heart attacks at home in their stable or anywhere else.
If a horse collaps and dies after the race, admittedly I don't know why the horse collapsed, but hypothetically maybe it didn't have the needed stamina or maybe it got too dehydrated, and I don't know if it is Grand Nationals fault if a horse does not have the required stamina, did not drink enough water, gets an electrolyte imbalance or whatever else it could have been causing the collaps.
If a horse with a jockey or riderless gets a fracture or injury either between the fences, by colliding with barriers or after being pulled up (presumably without an injury) they fall while running back to the stable, does it really have to be Grand Nationals fault?

It is terrible that race horses dies, but with or without money involved, it is hardly a new phenomenon that many people are fascinated by who can run the fastest and longest, manage this or that difficulty in the best way etc., and I hope that the Grand National tradition is going to continue for a few more years, hopefully with a lucky outcome for all involved.
 
FL another to add to your list is Tyneandtyneagain from a few years back. He fell at the first and deposited his jockey. Carried on riderless. Fell at either the 6th or 8th (can't remember which) got up but side on to the fence and got colided into breaking his back. Not rider error or course problem he simply ended up in the wrong place at the wrong time facing the wrong way.
 
Also has anyone looked at the times between Nationals now and in years past? They are roughly the same. The difference now is that the first circuit goes much much quicker than the second where as before it was a pretty even split.

Someone mentioned the 2000 race that Red Marauder won in the mud. There were 4 finishers but 2 were remounts (which thankfully isnt allowed.to happen anymore!) but the main reason so few finished? Carl Llewellyns horse too a dislike to Canal Turn whilst near the front, stopped and spun sideways wiping out 20+horses in one fell swoop. Some hopped back on and some just turned around and headed to the outside to juml the clear part of the fence but they were so far behind.the leaders at this stage that they just plugged away to see if anyone was fallining infront so they could.pick up place money, if not then they pulled up.
 
lachlanandmarcus said:
Personally I think some of the changes make it more dangerous not less. They have made it easier for the horses to go faster by lowering the fences and speed is what kills along with faster ground. Also as the race has become 'better' ie higher rated horses the speed has increased too, making it riskier.

The Grand national would be safer with huge fences, steeplechasing specialist horses who weren't very fast and ground watered to be soft.

The race a few years back when all but 2 fell, none of them were seriously hurt, because it was so muddy it was a slow race and soft landing.

I do think the orange markers and softer middles and removing adverse slopes is good tho and making the ditches less deep.

I think those who have asked for lower fences are pretty much responsible for making the race more and more dangerous rather than less.
Click to expand...

Here Here. Low fences=fast pace fast pace= fallers
 
No the changes won't make a difference.
Too many runners in the field and the fact that the horses are not bred like they used to be.
I think they are only making these "changes" so it looks to appear like they have done something.
I enjoy the race, accidents happen but I don't think they can seriuously get over the incidents unless they cut the field, you only have to look at last years beecher chase to see thw difference.
 
I don't think it will make any difference at all. They need to reduce the number of runners and not have those entries which are so far out of the handicap- the no hopers.
 
I agree that reducing the height of the fences makes the race faster. Faster races = more fatalities. We see this at Cheltenham. No one sends off a racehorse with any other intention that it should get round in one piece. The only way to stop racehorse deaths is to stop racing.

No one mentions the 5 horses that broke a leg at Hereford racecourse, on the flat.
 
In respect of the lower end of the handicap being no hopers they could well indeed jump much better.

I would rather that the horses had to prove themselves over the fences twice before they are allowed in the National.
 
lachlanandmarcus said:
Personally I think some of the changes make it more dangerous not less. They have made it easier for the horses to go faster by lowering the fences and speed is what kills along with faster ground. Also as the race has become 'better' ie higher rated horses the speed has increased too, making it riskier.

The Grand national would be safer with huge fences, steeplechasing specialist horses who weren't very fast and ground watered to be soft.

The race a few years back when all but 2 fell, none of them were seriously hurt, because it was so muddy it was a slow race and soft landing.

I do think the orange markers and softer middles and removing adverse slopes is good tho and making the ditches less deep.

I think those who have asked for lower fences are pretty much responsible for making the race more and more dangerous rather than less.
Click to expand...

I do agree with you and imagine that it is the best solution but it's never going to happen.
I really know nothing about racing and wouldn't pretend to, I can't give an expert opinion but do try and see both points of view for and against. My conclusion is that it shouldn't be run.
To sit with my young family and be totally focused on the back of the field seeing how many horses pick themselves back up, then having my son ask why someone would put up a tent in the middle of the racetrack the second time around. Well I felt physically sick.
The nostalgia of watching Red Rum as a kid and us all sitting round to watch the Greatest Horse Race on Earth is an era past and it seems so different now. There probably were fatalities but I don't remember them.
The thought of having no GN is hard when its so steeped in our culture and tradition as one of the great sporting events however I could not bear to sit through another race like last year and even if I don't watch it I cannot escape the tragic news that there will probably be more fatalities. To me it just seems downright cruel to push these magnificent animals beyond their limits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top