The 'Grand' National?

Goldenstar said:
Racing is dangerous ,eventing is dangerous ( and more so to people than racing ) some people take the view that it's a price worth paying for the 'sport' others do not those who don't should be able to express their views ,they don't have to put up and shut up.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
Goldenstar said:
Racing is dangerous ,eventing is dangerous ( and more so to people than racing ) some people take the view that it's a price worth paying for the 'sport' others do not those who don't should be able to express their views ,they don't have to put up and shut up.
Click to expand...

Of course they should be able to express their views, as are the pro racing. I just wish the antis could be a little more informed before they put fingers to keyboard. Then it would be a little less irritating.
 
justabob said:
Glad to hear that you agree to the veterinary research, I am sure Newmarket will be relieved to hear that! As for money spent on rehab I think you should do more research, money is taken out for this cause, hence the promotion of ROR classes and the numerous rehab centres around the country. There will always be the ones that will not be suitable to be moved on to another life outside the industry, they are normally put down, and rightly so.
Click to expand...

Do you know how much is given, and what percentage of horses get a life outside the industry vs percentage of on course fatalities, pts for injuries sustained during racing/training, pts due to simply being unwanted and there is no alternative home for them, or being deemed 'unsuitable' for a life after racing? Not to mention the ones that fall into neglect.

ROR classes are, I suspect, at least in part a PR exercise, based on the concern expressed by numpties like me as to what happens to horses when their racing life is finished.

I'm sure Newmarket wouldn't give two hoots about my opinions ... but that doesn't mean I'm not entitled to them.
 
Goldenstar said:
Racing is dangerous ,eventing is dangerous ( and more so to people than racing ) some people take the view that it's a price worth paying for the 'sport' others do not those who don't should be able to express their views ,they don't have to put up and shut up.
Click to expand...

It would be good though if people had more informed views instead of posting once a year based on their knowledge of one race. I didn't see Moomin or the others posting after the Hennessy about how tired Many Moons looked. It all gets a bit out of hand and band wagon jumping and I think distracts from what was a good race with a brilliant winner. He deserves some credit for his achievement. Luckily he can't read and will go out for a summer at grass non the wiser !!
 
justabob said:
Of course they should be able to express their views, as are the pro racing. I just wish the antis could be a little more informed before they put fingers to keyboard. Then it would be a little less irritating.
Click to expand...


What information would you like us to have? Shall we discuss the myth that horses in racing yards are treated like royalty? Or shall we discuss the incidence of ulcers and stereotypies.
 
bonny said:
It would be good though if people had more informed views instead of posting once a year based on their knowledge of one race. I didn't see Moomin or the others posting after the Hennessy about how tired Many Moons looked. It all gets a bit out of hand and band wagon jumping and I think distracts from what was a good race with a brilliant winner. He deserves some credit for his achievement. Luckily he can't read and will go out for a summer at grass non the wiser !!
Click to expand...

You mean like my knowledge of the Hennessy where Aspell received a seven day ban and a fine for inappropriate whip use on Many Clouds ...

You're right ... the horse can't read and he doesn't worry about 'credit' and he's blissfully unaware of how close he came to collapse on prime time television .. what a PR disaster that would have been ... let's hope they make sure there's no chance of that next year if someone is daft enough to run a horse that is prone to over-heating in something as tough as the National - even if it has been modified.
 
tess1 said:
What information would you like us to have? Shall we discuss the myth that horses in racing yards are treated like royalty? Or shall we discuss the incidence of ulcers and stereotypies.
Click to expand...

Of course we should, racehorses are not kept like royalty, they are kept as atheletes by staff that understand them, they are trained and they are fit to do the job required. Should we discuss the laminitics and obese cobs, or should we discuss the many ponies and horses that owners acquire that their owners can't manage? Plenty of them on this forum that end up god knows where. I know comparisons are not really allowed, but sometimes they are necessary.
 
bonny said:
It would be good though if people had more informed views instead of posting once a year based on their knowledge of one race. I didn't see Moomin or the others posting after the Hennessy about how tired Many Moons looked. It all gets a bit out of hand and band wagon jumping and I think distracts from what was a good race with a brilliant winner. He deserves some credit for his achievement. Luckily he can't read and will go out for a summer at grass non the wiser !!
Click to expand...

You're posts are hilarious. Every one of them shows exactly how some people just focus on the 'win factor' rather than the actual bare bones welfare of the horse. I am not privy to what happened in the Hennessy. I don't follow racing. It doesn't interest me. However, I do not remotely need to follow it to form an opinion on the situation involving one horse in one particular race. Again, you are insinuating that for any person to make a judgement on a welfare concern, they have to know the ins and outs of the particular industry that horse is involved in. Rubbish.

Your posts are always centred around 'how good the race was', or 'the achievement'. And you are correct - the horse can't read..he also doesn't give a monkeys about 'winning' or being paraded.
 
I had a very educational chat to a random person I met out hacking, who asked me in passing ,what I thought about the grand national. I told him that I believed the fences needed to be put back up and made more solid ,to deter the speed merchants. I also said that my own limited research suggested that less horses were killed when the fences were bigger. I refered him to the 1925 grand national , where (apart from some very bad amateur riding in the later stages of the race which would be absolutely banned now) the race was scarey but safe . At Beecher s every one was spread out and taking the safe hunting line rather than a racing line. My anonymous friend then told me that he was in fact on the committee considering the safety of the GN . It transpires that they do know that making the fences smaller is dangerous ,but that is what the great ignorant public want , and we all know that they must be right......The best that could be done was to try to slow up the field by bringing the first fence nearer the start. The truth is that the doo gooders and supposed animal lovers have turned the race more dangerous, yet any attempt to make it safer and slower ,by making it tougher ,could lead to its banning.
 
Mike007 said:
I had a very educational chat to a random person I met out hacking, who asked me in passing ,what I thought about the grand national. I told him that I believed the fences needed to be put back up and made more solid ,to deter the speed merchants. I also said that my own limited research suggested that less horses were killed when the fences were bigger. I refered him to the 1925 grand national , where (apart from some very bad amateur riding in the later stages of the race which would be absolutely banned now) the race was scarey but safe . At Beecher s every one was spread out and taking the safe hunting line rather than a racing line. My anonymous friend then told me that he was in fact on the committee considering the safety of the GN . It transpires that they do know that making the fences smaller is dangerous ,but that is what the great ignorant public want , and we all know that they must be right......The best that could be done was to try to slow up the field by bringing the first fence nearer the start. The truth is that the doo gooders and supposed animal lovers have turned the race more dangerous, yet any attempt to make it safer and slower ,by making it tougher ,could lead to its banning.
Click to expand...

What's the evidence the race is more dangerous now .
 
justabob said:
Of course we should, racehorses are not kept like royalty, they are kept as atheletes by staff that understand them, they are trained and they are fit to do the job required.
Click to expand...

To the detriment of their physiological and ethological needs. Yes, they are thoroughbreds ... they are also horses. They are not so specialised that they do not have the social/ethological and dietry requirements of any other kind of horse. And yet these are frequently overlooked in the priority to create horses that are 'fit to do the job'. Again, the needs of the racing industry take priority over the welfare of the animals the industry is based on.
 
Mike007 I so agree with you, but times have changed, we no longer have the old fashioned big boned chaser bred horses any more, those horses were not trained over hurdles to prepare them for the national. I think some were given a prep race over hurdles. Those old fashioned horses could almost show jump round. Now I think there would be carnage if the course was left as it was before.
 
Mike007 said:
I had a very educational chat to a random person I met out hacking, who asked me in passing ,what I thought about the grand national. I told him that I believed the fences needed to be put back up and made more solid ,to deter the speed merchants. I also said that my own limited research suggested that less horses were killed when the fences were bigger. I refered him to the 1925 grand national , where (apart from some very bad amateur riding in the later stages of the race which would be absolutely banned now) the race was scarey but safe . At Beecher s every one was spread out and taking the safe hunting line rather than a racing line. My anonymous friend then told me that he was in fact on the committee considering the safety of the GN . It transpires that they do know that making the fences smaller is dangerous ,but that is what the great ignorant public want , and we all know that they must be right......The best that could be done was to try to slow up the field by bringing the first fence nearer the start. The truth is that the doo gooders and supposed animal lovers have turned the race more dangerous, yet any attempt to make it safer and slower ,by making it tougher ,could lead to its banning.
Click to expand...

I have heard this anecdotally as well ... and yet fence 1/17 accounts for 4 fatalities, vs around 45 on the other fences.

And the last three years have had no fatalities - assuming (God willing) BK recovers.
 
All you anti grand national peeps need to do is vote Green. Their utterly useless leader announced today she intends to ban the GN if they get a sniff of power.
 
whiteroom said:
Having enjoyed this for years I feel saddened today, the winner looked so tired it was saddening, Channel 4's coverage of his recovery was just too much for me.

Wish we could hear of Balthazar King's condition too.

Will I watch again, probably yes but not on Channel 4
Click to expand...

Would it not be safer for the horses if the course was shortened to avoid this over exertion?
 
justabob said:
Of course we should, racehorses are not kept like royalty, they are kept as atheletes by staff that understand them, they are trained and they are fit to do the job required. Should we discuss the laminitics and obese cobs, or should we discuss the many ponies and horses that owners acquire that their owners can't manage? Plenty of them on this forum that end up god knows where. I know comparisons are not really allowed, but sometimes they are necessary.
Click to expand...

I had ducked out of this thread because it was getting typically rabid, but this makes me laugh.

I should say that I won a few quid on Saturday, enjoyed most of the race and apologise to more rabid supporters of horseracing for being upset by watching a horse get repeatedly hit till it was near collapse.

I know virtually none of the livery yard owners described above. Most people I know are sufficiently knowledgeable and caring to keep their horses/ponies in excellent conditions.

I DO know a bit about racing tho (bizarre isn't it) and I generally am content to support NH, and feel the horses are really well looked after.

Life for many Flat horses is an entirely different matter. They are not cared for by staff who understand them and treated by royalty. They are cared for by staff from the Indian subcontinent who are clueless about horses, and by and large indifferent to their welfare. These lads are on minimum wage and recruited for that reason and because they are lightweight. These hundreds of 2 year olds are kept in pretty appalling conditions IMO, isolated in a stable 23 hours a day, galloped once a day, fed grains & limited roughage etc etc. They are ancient horses by the time they are 5 year olds, and that's if they are one of the few who live that long.

You may think that's fine. I don't. Simples.
 
Copied from Philip Hobbs' Facebook page this morning for anyone who is interested...

'Balthazar King has had a good 24 hours and making steady progress. He has broken a couple of ribs and is very sore but is eating and seems bright in himself. Thank you for all your kind messages of support we will keep you updated.'
 
TelH said:
Copied from Philip Hobbs' Facebook page this morning for anyone who is interested...

'Balthazar King has had a good 24 hours and making steady progress. He has broken a couple of ribs and is very sore but is eating and seems bright in himself. Thank you for all your kind messages of support we will keep you updated.'
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting its good he's going on ok .
 
madmav said:
All you anti grand national peeps need to do is vote Green. Their utterly useless leader announced today she intends to ban the GN if they get a sniff of power.
Click to expand...
This is one of the Greens' policies I do not support. Luckily there is no chance of them forming the next government and it will take more than a sniff of power to jeopardize the GN.
 
madmav said:
All you anti grand national peeps need to do is vote Green. Their utterly useless leader announced today she intends to ban the GN if they get a sniff of power.
Click to expand...

Jesus! I see they've failed to actually research and think that policy through (like the majority of their policies, but lets not get political).

Whether people like the GN or not the racing industry is such a huge economic earner that without it we'd be stuffed. If anyone wants to do anything about it they need to look towards making it safer (which has been done and to great effect) not banning it entirely. Its unrealistic to expect it to be banned, efforts to campaign for it to be so would be better placed elsewhere in my opinion. I will worry if the Greens get a shred of power...
 
fburton said:
As a matter of interest, are euthanasias due to race injuries that are performed off-course counted in the official stats?
Click to expand...

There's a few where it says later or a few days later but there will be gaps I would think where the horse was given time but didn't come right.

It may not represent the total number of horses but I posted it as the discussion had turned to whether the course alterations had helped or not so it seemed relevant to compare years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top