Should racing two year olds be banned?

cptrayes

cptrayes

Well-Known Member
Joined
4 March 2008
Messages
14,748
Visit site
I don't know of a single non-racing horse person who believes that it is right to back racing thoroughbreds at 18 months and race them from 24 months old.

Is there any reason why this should not stop? It started way back in the days when horses were the machines of the day, and surely we have moved on from that?

Would the racing industry be much affected by the delay of a year in being able to race young TBs?

Would there be some benefits? Perhaps less of a desperate need to get them all born as close to January 1st as they can? Better resale values of failed racers because they have not been started so terribly young?

I have no idea if it would seriously impact flat racing. Obviously there would be some economic impact, but would it be disastrous?
 
I do enjoy racing but i don't actually see why they feel they have to race horses so young. The only reason is money I guess. I think if they could race until 3 or 4 yos then there wouldn't be so much sad wastage of young horses- ie horses being destroyed because they are a "failed racehorse" before they are even 3 yo :(

I actually think it is the real disgusting side of racing that is kept nice and quiet, away from the public eye. I don't see the need to start horses so young at all. Why not wait until they are actually developed?
 
Go cptrayes. :D Great idea to look at the consequences of later starting. Hat off to you.

I can't see how it couldn't work once the first cycle was established and I see no reason why a look at management wouldn't do any harm either. ;) The only downside I can see is having to keep and fund up to 2-3 times as many youngsters whilst they were growing older. That comes down to money of course.
 
I actually agree with you, even though I am pro-racing. I think moving it back one year to 3 year old would be better. I work in jump racing, and a lot are not even backed as 4 year olds! So you can't tar everyone with the same brush.
Also the French are far worse than the British and Irish, jumping horses as 2/3 year olds which is disgusting.
Also quite a few horse which were useless as 2 year olds, make very good horses as 4/5/6 year olds, when they are a lot stronger. We have had a few which were weak gangly things as 2 year olds, and big strapping horses as 5 year olds and go on to win.
 
dominobrown said:
I actually agree with you, even though I am pro-racing. I think moving it back one year to 3 year old would be better. I work in jump racing, and a lot are not even backed as 4 year olds! So you can't tar everyone with the same brush.
Also the French are far worse than the British and Irish, jumping horses as 2/3 year olds which is disgusting.
Also quite a few horse which were useless as 2 year olds, make very good horses as 4/5/6 year olds, when they are a lot stronger. We have had a few which were weak gangly things as 2 year olds, and big strapping horses as 5 year olds and go on to win.
Click to expand...

Interesting thankyou. I know store NH horses can be 6 or even older.

Does anyone out there have any idea about the economics of waiting a year?
 
dominobrown said:
I actually agree with you, even though I am pro-racing. I think moving it back one year to 3 year old would be better. I work in jump racing, and a lot are not even backed as 4 year olds! So you can't tar everyone with the same brush.
Also the French are far worse than the British and Irish, jumping horses as 2/3 year olds which is disgusting.
Also quite a few horse which were useless as 2 year olds, make very good horses as 4/5/6 year olds, when they are a lot stronger. We have had a few which were weak gangly things as 2 year olds, and big strapping horses as 5 year olds and go on to win.
Click to expand...

I prefer jump racing for the very reason it seems to be much less about the money (of course money's part of it) but more about the prestige and you get to 'know' the horses as they are around for a lot longer and owners and trainers alike have more of an attachment I feel. Of course there are terrible accidents (as there are in flat racing and in fact general day to day horse life) but I think horses in jump racing have a more normal 'horse life' and aren't seen so much as just a commodity.
 
I don't know about the economics but even if a campaign could move it from 24 months to say 30 months I think it would not a have a huge economic effect and might receive more support. Just an example. When the industry is used to 30 months then a campaign for 36 months could be introduced.
 
I love watching racing but yes I totally agree, in fact I think 2 and 3 yr old racing should be banned but I would settle for 2 yr olds as a start.

I used to work for an nh yard and we used to back our jumpers as 4 yr olds but they generally didnt race until 5 or 6 yr olds
 
dominobrown said:
I don't know about the economics but even if a campaign could move it from 24 months to say 30 months I think it would not a have a huge economic effect and might receive more support. Just an example. When the industry is used to 30 months then a campaign for 36 months could be introduced.
Click to expand...
I don't know anything about the economics either but if NH manage much older starting I can't really see much more costs to starting at six months to a year later in flat. I assume they're just turned away?
I think it would definitely have to be a staged increase.
 
I know the people who breed near me just have all the youngstock out in fields, sometimes with access to barns in winter (all jumping bred). They live quite a natural lifestyle. Also out of the ex-racers I have re-schooled the jumping horses are sooo much easier. They are generally more laid back and have more 'common sense'.
 
Another one who loves racing (and I work in the breeding side of it) who would like to postpone the starting of them from 24 - 36 months. They are such babies, poor things!

I'm not sure how to go about it, as their are many many £££ orientated people involved who have the power to over power this proposal. BUT, I can't see how it would effect the racing industry once the 'new rule' is in place, I just feel it will be a battle just getting there. Maybe someone should write this up, with findings and general public thoughts on it? Maybe someone will find a link between injury/sickness/temperamental issues in those young as opposed to those who start racing later?

Should add, that we have a now 3 yr filly, who although went to the trainers last summer, she has yet to even canter as she is immature, growing and being allowed to!
 
Yes, I think that training and racing 2 year olds is terrible. The twin factors of fast return and early speed advantage are the reason this practice continues.
 
Yes, it should, NH manage to wait til they are 4 year olds to race, so why should 2 year olds still be raced? There is so much more info available now to show how starting horse too young negatively affects them, where is the benefit for continuing this?
 
Surely unless this was a global rule then the British trainers would lose out with some of the Arab race horse trainers sending horses to European trainers meaning that we would lose some of the best 3 year olds? I would prefer them to start far later personally though. Also on a breeding front, surely a filly good as a 2 yr old and sent to stud at 3yrs would benefit from an extra year but from an economic point of view a year equals a foal so that's one less foal from that mare in her lifetime, potential to make money gone. That's where the problem will be.
 
Fools Motto said:
Maybe someone will find a link between injury/sickness/temperamental issues in those young as opposed to those who start racing later?
Click to expand...
There's a big red flag in DB's comment re NH horses below which I have heard a few times before.

dominobrown said:
They are generally more laid back and have more 'common sense'.
Click to expand...

Re injuries, ill health etc. there are some figures/research for ulcers, leg injuries etc. but how accurate they are across the whole of flat racing I don't know. There's also the 'wastage' and reasons they don't make the grade I doubt are documented publicly.
 
My grandfather trained (NH), they used to back them soon as they turned 4, turn them away and bring them back in that summer, usually running towards the end of that year.

When I see 2yr old running I just think they look like babies....because they ARE babies. I love flat racing but I can't see why it would hurt to leave them another year, if anything their careers might last longer.
 
Just a though re flat v NH.

Flat racing is all based around breeding, identifying the fastest as quickly as possible and getting them to stud after their 3 yo season which is where the money is made. Everything else is gelded and either stays on flat racing, some they try over jumps and some get rehomed/retrained. Both flat and jump racing rely on this process as in the UK and Ireland NH stallions are horses who won flat races but produce jumpers.

NH horses are gelded, not sure at what age store horses get gelded but you haven't got 4 and 5 year old stallions coming into work and having to be managed.

As said different in France where they often race their jump horses on the flat at 2 and hurdle them at 3. As a result they are kept entire and some go to stud at 4. There are a few french jump sires who have jumped doing well over here (including my boy's dad).

I just wonder if some of it is based around not having to manage fully mature tb stallions working with mares. I know other horse sports manage it but I wonder if they work together as closely as racehorses and have the quantities of horses all working together in an open space.
 
I don't agree with backing & racing 2yos but money speaks volumes so doubt they would wait another year. Clearly the horses welfare comes second to money
 
No it shouldn't.

From working in racing very few of the 2 year olds make it to the track in their first year. Bear in mind the trainer earns a living through them so it would be in his best interest to take the welfare of the animals to heart.
 
There's no escaping the fact that the situation at the moment is part of a business which has to make the money add up, or the employment of a considerable number of people would be at stake. The economics that I can see are as follows:

one extra year, kept as a free range herd £500 to £1000 but probably only applicable to the fillies, what could they do with the colts without great expenditure?

loss of one year's foal from good breeding fillies? How many retire to stud and what's the average profit from one foal? Would another filly simply take her place instead of being taken out of racing by slaughter or rehoming to another job?

assuming 2 year olds would still run in France/Hong Kong/US etc, loss to UK trainers of the year's training fees and follow on losses if they are not transferred to the UK as 3 year olds?

So many questions and no answers, but nobody feels happy with the situation as it stands. I wonder if there is an answer, and if so what it is - a global campaign to make 3 the youngest age to race? Who's volunteering to run that then?

What a muddle we are in, with modern knowledge stymied by hundreds of years of custom and practice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top