Saturday at Aintree

[Fred66]

I think, at the very least, they need to reduce the field to 30.
That first couple of fences is often carnage until you lose some horses and it starts to thin out.
Reducing the number of starters would at least show something is being done to reduce the number of falls/possible fatalities, and also keep it safer for the jockeys.

I looked back through the stats of horses killed in the national and number of starters, there doesn’t appear to be a correlation.

However I think starting them further back is probably a good idea as in the last 20 years there does appear to be a higher proportion of deaths at fence 1 than there used to be.

 

[ycbm]

I don't think you can use attrition in this race. Far too many jockeys will see they have 10 good horses in front of them, a number of fences to go and decide it isn't in anyone's interest to finish.

This race isn't used to prepare for another so there's no value in finishing down the order with an exhausted horse.

Good point.

 

[Rowreach]

Derek didn't intentionally pour water into Corach's ears. It wasn't even ment to go over his head, it was go up the top of his neck and flow back down in. Corach just moved his head at the wrong time. We would never, ever do anything to his ears as he has aural plaque and doesn't like them being touched at the best of times.b

But he tipped more than one bucket over his head?

 

[Rowreach]

I don't think you can use attrition in this race. Far too many jockeys will see they have 10 good horses in front of them, a number of fences to go and decide it isn't in anyone's interest to finish.

This race isn't used to prepare for another so there's no value in finishing down the order with an exhausted horse.

Some would certainly pull up for this reason but at least two pulled up with injuries.

 

[Ditchjumper2]

But also it used to be that you sponged and scraped then science showed that throwing large amounts of water on cooled the body quicker I believe? I think it was following research before the 3DE at Atlanta. However I could be wrong.

In which case the change of procedure for cooling down is following research not to appease the viewers!

 

[Rowreach]

But also it used to be that you sponged and scraped then science showed thst throwing large amounts of water on cooled the body quicker I believe? I think it was following research before the 3DE at Atlanta. However I could be wrong.

it's not the science of rapid cooling that's being questioned, it's the using it to assert that racehorse welfare is at the top of everyone's agenda.

 

[Clodagh]

Derek didn't intentionally pour water into Corach's ears. It wasn't even ment to go over his head, it was go up the top of his neck and flow back down in. Corach just moved his head at the wrong time. We would never, ever do anything to his ears as he has aural plaque and doesn't like them being touched at the best of times.b

Fair point, and I’m not meaning to knock him as I think he is a great and careful jockey. But it did happen more than once.

 

[Ditchjumper2]

it's not the science of rapid cooling that's being questioned, it's the using it to assert that racehorse welfare is at the top of everyone's agenda.

I get that, but it does show that they are looked after when they finish. I agree that a few buckets of water don't cover the whole racehorse welfare issue, if indeed there is one. I just think that CR is cooled off and then people are complaining that water was in his ears. EOS said it was unintentional, these things happen.

 

[scats]

Equestrianism is a funny thing. Look how much we love our horse, we are chucking water over it.
It wouldn’t be in anyone’s interests, particularly racing in general, for the winning horse to collapse of heat stroke in the winners enclosure. I recognise the need to cool them down quickly, but the shock to the horses body when his senses are already heightened must be horrid.

 

[palo1]

Whatever we do with and to animals needs to be done as professionally and properly as possible. Yesterday was not. Horses die racing every day but most races are not just a manic stampede with an enormous amount of horses.
The GN was better when it was slower. Elf was saying the fences at Newcastle are much tougher, the Eider doesn’t have the number of fatalities of the GN.
As humans we are always going to exploit other animals for our own ends. But we need to do it properly.

I do see the long delay and the mad scurry to get them started was really bad. I don’t remember the last few years being visually so awful.

Yes, I agree about yesterday. Considering how professional racing works usually - regardless of the ethics of horse sport of any other animal based sport, the GN looked distinctly chaotic. I don't think the protesters remotely helped the situation and possibly misjudged the possible impact of the protest on the race. It felt really unfair to the horses to me; they know what the job is and the whole system is engineered to their understanding and experience of that. To muck about, delay and disrupt the process is bound to be unsettling at the very least; I think everyone working with horses knows how important it is to have routine in place for horses. That doesn't help at all with the questions about our relationships with animals for leisure and sport and I would ordinarily see myself as a supporter of racing generally. I have had syndicated horses and enjoyed those experiences and felt pretty confident about the welfare of those horses, the quality of their care and consideration for them when racing and when finishing their careers. I get that accidents happen too. Those happen in the field for leisure horses or where fields have hazards, poor management, lack of veterinary care etc etc. Racing and other high profile, wealth led sports (like shooting too) are in the spotlight though so they do make us really think about what we are doing with animals. I agree that humans are going to find it impossible to remove ourselves from relationships with animals (and I don't think that would be of benefit actually) so yeah, exploitation is likely/inevitable. How do you justify that though in the mind-frame of not wanting to exploit animals?

 

[Sandstone1]

The very blinkered attitude of some of racings professionals on tv yesterday did little to show the sport in a good light. The way they were talking about the protesters was so narrow minded and condescending. Going on and on about how well the horses are looked after and other human sports just showed how little they understand about the public perception of the sport. The big question is as ever, is it ethical for any animal to be used and abused in the name of sport.

 

[palo1]

it's not the science of rapid cooling that's being questioned, it's the using it to assert that racehorse welfare is at the top of everyone's agenda.

Well, yes but using science led information about health and welfare does demonstrate levels of care and is usually presented quite simplistically because not all race goers/watchers know much about horses. Racing really has contributed to improved equine welfare as the money in racing allows for technological and other developments which the wider equestrian world benefit from; the use of water treadmills and a whole host of complementary therapies and practices and veterinary practices. The welfare of racehorses IS at the top of most yards' agendas but the driver for that is likely to be money/success rather than the single focus on the experience of the animal under their care but that is how that industry works I think. In my own situation, my cob mare has benefitted from research and developments coming from racing in terms of respiratory health; I know that and am grateful that there has been money and incentive in racing to allow my leisure horse to have the benefit of those things.

 

[palo1]

The very blinkered attitude of some of racings professionals on tv yesterday did little to show the sport in a good light. The way they were talking about the protesters was so narrow minded and condescending. Going on and on about how well the horses are looked after and other human sports just showed how little they understand about the public perception of the sport. The big question is as ever, is it ethical for any animal to be used and abused in the name of sport.

I agree that some of the commentary was really poor but those commentators are entrenched in racing so their views are not really unexpected. And, the vast majority of the crowd were not sympathetic to the protest; those people are 'the public' too. The public perception of racing is very, very varied and it isn't a huge and successful industry without massive public support.

 

[sakura]

I agree that some of the commentary was really poor but those commentators are entrenched in racing so their views are not really unexpected. And, the vast majority of the crowd were not sympathetic to the protest; those people are 'the public' too. The public perception of racing is very, very varied and it isn't a huge and successful industry without massive public support.

To be fair, of course the crowd weren’t going to be sympathetic to the protestors. They are on literal opposite sides. I spoke to several non horse people yesterday, all consider the grand national uniquely cruel. A few thought the same of all racing. One considered all equestrian sport “inappropriate in 2023”. None have ever had anything to do with horses, but they are friends of mine, so perhaps therefore more aligned to my own views by nature.

Blaming the protesters seems a bit scapegoating to me. It was up to the organisers to delay or call of the race in order to protect the horses and jockeys if the situation had become too chaotic.

 

[Sandstone1]

I agree that some of the commentary was really poor but those commentators are entrenched in racing so their views are not really unexpected. And, the vast majority of the crowd were not sympathetic to the protest; those people are 'the public' too. The public perception of racing is very, very varied and it isn't a huge and successful industry without massive public support.

The very frequent fatalities in racing in general and the Grand national in particular are certainly a concern for the general public. Yesterday the commentary was very one sided and blinkered. The protesters were not protesting about how the horses are cared for. They were protesting about the danger the horses are put in for our entertainment. comparing racing to formula one was really not helpful. Horses do not have a choice in being involved. The huge wastage of horses as well is pretty disturbing. Dont try and tell me all the hundreds of horses that are bred and turn out to be too slow or not sound enough or just do not want to race all get lovely homes. Some do I know. They are the lucky ones.

 

[Sandstone1]

Of course the crowd was not sympathetic to the protesters. You would assume that if they were at the meeting they were in favour of racing.

 

[Supertrooper]

It also however never fails to surprise me that I work in the veterinary industry where so many of my colleagues watch and enjoy I’m a celebrity get me out of here, which has awful ways of using animals etc for so called entertainment but because they are animals/insects that are lower down in the human/animal bond is seen to be ok

 

[palo1]

To be fair, of course the crowd weren’t going to be sympathetic to the protestors. They are on literal opposite sides. I spoke to several non horse people yesterday, all consider the grand national uniquely cruel. A few thought the same of all racing. One considered all equestrian sport “inappropriate in 2023”. None have ever had anything to do with horses, but they are friends of mine, so perhaps therefore more aligned to my own views by nature.

The protesting seems a bit scapegoating to me. It was up to the organisers to delay or call of the race in order to protect the horses and jockeys if the situation had become too chaotic.

Of course some people feel that any horse racing is inappropriate and the GN is a unique and controversial event so that isn't at all surprising. I think it is really unrealistic to think that a longer delay to the start of the race or calling it off were sensible or fair. The race was already delayed by 15 minutes which is more than enough for some of the horses to boil over; I think most people would get that. The horses and jockeys are there for a particular job, prepared for that and expecting to run through a sequence of events. Politically/in terms of the media, calling one of the biggest and most popular races off because of protesters would have been a total no-go for Aintree. Horses and jockeys were being used by both sides in that game and I think it was much fairer to the horses to run; the protesters disrupted what the horses and jockeys had prepared for and I think most horse people would understand that. Possibly the protesters don't understand the race horse experience or don't care but their actions seemed really unfair to the horses to me.

 

[ycbm]

Mmm. The horses boiled over because of a15 minute delay at the start. It's a good job they don't go eventing.
.

 

[sakura]

Of course some people feel that any horse racing is inappropriate and the GN is a unique and controversial event so that isn't at all surprising. I think it is really unrealistic to think that a longer delay to the start of the race or calling it off were sensible or fair. The race was already delayed by 15 minutes which is more than enough for some of the horses to boil over; I think most people would get that. The horses and jockeys are there for a particular job, prepared for that and expecting to run through a sequence of events. Politically/in terms of the media, calling one of the biggest and most popular races off because of protesters would have been a total no-go for Aintree. Horses and jockeys were being used by both sides in that game and I think it was much fairer to the horses to run; the protesters disrupted what the horses and jockeys had prepared for and I think most horse people would understand that. Possibly the protesters don't understand the race horse experience or don't care but their actions seemed really unfair to the horses to me.

Why would it have been worse and unrealistic for the sport to call off the race for the safety and well being of the horses and jockeys than to continue and then blame the protestors for a horse fatality?

It would have made me respect Aintree more to see them prioritise the well being of horses and jockeys over the money.

 

[Sandstone1]

Of course some people feel that any horse racing is inappropriate and the GN is a unique and controversial event so that isn't at all surprising. I think it is really unrealistic to think that a longer delay to the start of the race or calling it off were sensible or fair. The race was already delayed by 15 minutes which is more than enough for some of the horses to boil over; I think most people would get that. The horses and jockeys are there for a particular job, prepared for that and expecting to run through a sequence of events. Politically/in terms of the media, calling one of the biggest and most popular races off because of protesters would have been a total no-go for Aintree. Horses and jockeys were being used by both sides in that game and I think it was much fairer to the horses to run; the protesters disrupted what the horses and jockeys had prepared for and I think most horse people would understand that. Possibly the protesters don't understand the race horse experience or don't care but their actions seemed really unfair to the horses to me.

The delay probably did effect the horses and jockeys but had any of the horses been so upset by it that they were not fit to run they should have been pulled from the race. The whole point of a protest is to bring these things to the notice of the public. I am a horse person by the way! You really can not blame the protesters as there are fatalities at most meetings. Was not a horse killed in a previous race yesterday? The start to that race was not delayed.

 

[fetlock]

This report following the 2011 race is an interesting read, with a lot of stats within. If there’s a more recent report I haven’t found it yet.

The recommendation to move the start closer to the first fence wasn’t a popular one with jockeys, but was implemented regardless in 2013.

The fence with the greatest number of falls is fence one (21%) or up till the time of this report. Mention is also given to the proximity of the grandstand to the start, and associated noise.

What surprised (shocked) me was the comment that not all of the runners had ever been schooled over Aintree style fences before attempting the race.

The report also covers and provides stats for other races over some of the National fences.

The majority of fences also had a drop of at least four inches in the landing side.

Those consulted (jockeys/trainers ) weren’t keen on fences being bypassed due to fallers, believing instead that the ‘obstacles’ should be swiftly removed so the fence could be jumped a second time, and reason being due to public perception. Quite a staggering one this one so please read for yourself rather than rely on my own wording as I read it last night and memory already sketchy.

https://www.britishhorseracing.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/grand-national-review.pdf

There may well be a better link than this one but a link here to the fences and mention of some which have been altered/ground levelled in 2013, presumably on the back of that report (fence one levelling was also recommended but if it was there’s no mention of it here.

Grand National Fences, How Many & How High | The Grand National

The Grand National is renowned as one of the most challenging jump racing fixtures in the world. Find out about the famous Grand National fences here.

www.thejockeyclub.co.uk

Edited to add this link.

Historically 60 fallers at the first fence to date. The fence with the second most falls (40) is fence six (Bechers)

Grand National Fallers | Fallen Horses in the Aintree Grand National

With 40 runners and riders lining up in the iconic Aintree Grand National, not all the runners will make it around and finish the demanding Grand National course.

www.britishracecourses.org

 

[Rowreach]

Just to clarify, I do not agree with this person. Nor do I find their sarcasm amusing. But it interests me that LRR would share this post on their page.

 

[Sandstone1]

View attachment 111567

Horses are herd animals and will continue to run and jump to be part of the herd. Thats why loose horses continue to run. They enjoy galloping that is not the issue but if they loved racing that much would jockeys need whips?

 

[palo1]

The delay probably did effect the horses and jockeys but had any of the horses been so upset by it that they were not fit to run they should have been pulled from the race. The whole point of a protest is to bring these things to the notice of the public. I am a horse person by the way! You really can not blame the protesters as there are fatalities at most meetings. Was not a horse killed in a previous race yesterday? The start to that race was not delayed.

I understand about the fatalities in racing and I get the protesters wanting to disrupt and bring attention to that; I support the right to peaceful protest but the disruption meant that at the point the horses and jockeys were ready to run, decisions had to be made. Some people would have had concerns but the situation was quite dynamic. There is no way the Aintree organisation would have pulled the race completely; that would have absolutely played into the protesters hands and whilst I get the point you are making, do you really think that was ever really possible? There would have been an equally HUGE outcry from racing supporters and waves of other consequences that Aintree and racing could not and would not sanction. Not least that disruption of legal activities would be seen as a really effective strategy for pushing an agenda...that isn't democracy or the rule of law. It is completely naive in my view to think that would be sensible.

 

[Sandstone1]

It also however never fails to surprise me that I work in the veterinary industry where so many of my colleagues watch and enjoy I’m a celebrity get me out of here, which has awful ways of using animals etc for so called entertainment but because they are animals/insects that are lower down in the human/animal bond is seen to be ok

I always find it very odd when vets go hunting. They spend years of their lives saving animals but then go out to happily kill others. Its very very odd.

 

[sakura]

I don’t doubt that many horses enjoy racing, but they don’t know the risks and cannot agree to their participation.

 

[sakura]

There is no way the Aintree organisation would have pulled the race completely; that would have absolutely played into the protesters hands

Saying “I’m sorry but the situation has escalated and it’s too dangerous to run these horses” would be “playing into” the protestors hands? The protestors were there to demonstrate how horses are unnecessarily put at risk, so yes, Aintree did prove their point by allowing the race to go ahead despite safety concerns.

 

[OrangeAndLemon]

Updates this morning on twitter from Nick Luck that Johnny Burke has a broken arm. Wishing him a full and speedy recovery.

 

[Sandstone1]

Dark Raven was killed in a race before the national before protester were involved.