Should horse racing be banned?

Chucky the tree · 15-04-2012 10:11PM

Discodog wrote: »

A friend of mine breaks & trains horses. She jokes that she could go to the Cliffs of Moher, get on the horse & get it to jump over the edge. That is the trust that a good rider builds in their horse.

The horses have no idea what fate or risk awaits them. They rely on humans & they often get let down.

Again all these comparisons between farm animals & racehorses. One is food production & business, the other is entertainment & business. Whatever your dietary desires the cow dies to feed people whereas the race horse dies to provide fun & betting/prize income.

Food is entertainment. I don't know anyone and have never meet anyone who eats a type of meat they enjoy the taste of.

ppink · 15-04-2012 10:15PM

For those who may be interested and speaking about jumps being dangerous etc there were 3 horses killed duing Dubai's Gold Cup last week.........on the flat!

calfmuscle · 15-04-2012 10:17PM

Discodog wrote: »

A friend of mine breaks & trains horses. She jokes that she could go to the Cliffs of Moher, get on the horse & get it to jump over the edge. That is the trust that a good rider builds in their horse.

The horses have no idea what fate or risk awaits them. They rely on humans & they often get let down.

Again all these comparisons between farm animals & racehorses. One is food production & business, the other is entertainment & business. Whatever your dietary desires the cow dies to feed people whereas the race horse dies to provide fun & betting/prize income.

Your friend has an awful sense of humour and inflated ego. Horses are very intelligent and regularly refuse to do things.

The horses know exactly what they are doing and what is going on. They get excited because they are anticipating the race or their dinner or they saw the horse box being hitched.

Why do you think the jockeys show them the first fence???

LH Pathe · 15-04-2012 10:31PM

Yes ban this.. pageantry of grotesque. Nevermind the horses!! without betting it would not survive.. neither would my bum uncles who would then be revealed as good for absolutely nothing, if they couldnt have a flutter

Ban betting - the premise of false sports fans, then horseracing will follow

cardwizzard · 15-04-2012 10:31PM

My name is URL wrote: »

Or at least, should they get rid of jump racing?

Two horses died at the Grand National today. I never actually watch or bet on the sport but just happened to see the race today. Loads of other horses fell while going over the fences. It's a wonder that there were only two fatalities.

Is it worth it? Would the sport not be just as enjoyable if there were no fences? Doesn't make any sense to me to risk the lives of both jockeys and horses by having them jump.

What say you?

OP as he admits has no idea about racing as a whole. Thats like myself starting a thread on brain surgery. Pointless arugement.

Johro · 15-04-2012 10:42PM

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I worked with race horses for many years and in that time I rarely saw cruelty. Over use of the whip gets the jockey a nice fine. These animals are very expensive and are treated in the best possible way.

Horses naturally run and when working them they love to get ahead of the pack. It is sometimes very difficult to hold them back in training. Nobody wants to see horses put down and it's never pleasant to return to your yard with an empty spot in the trailer. But like most sports there is an element of risk and
Nothing can be 100% safe.

As a side point, it was worth noting the grey horse's ears as he entered the winners enclosure. They were pricked up. This would be a sign the animal is content and interested in its environment.

We'll take your word for it.. Though it could easily mean the horse is alert because it's entering a noisy crowd environment with lots of people cheering and shouting.
I appreciate that what you say about the grey horse may be entirely true but I also reckon a lot of this is down to interpretation and I wouldn't think all horses act the same. I'm sure horses have 'tells' just like other animals such as dogs, I'm just aware of peoples ability to excuse almost anything.
By the way, lots of horses don't get treated well, but yeah, the expensive ones do. It is all about money in the end, though not for the people who actually work with the horses, most of them do genuinely care for them.

Johro · 15-04-2012 10:48PM

cardwizzard wrote: »

OP as he admits has no idea about racing as a whole. Thats like myself starting a thread on brain surgery. Pointless arugement.

I think the argument is that in a race where horses fairly frequently end up dead it may be worth debating whether demanding races such as these with very high fences should be held at all, or if at least the fences should be lowered.
That's not rocket science. You don't have to have an idea about 'racing as a whole', just eyes in your head and a bit of sense.

Oscars Well. · 15-04-2012 10:49PM

Johro wrote: »

By the way, lots of horses don't get treated well, but yeah, the expensive ones do. It is all about money in the end, though not for the people who actually work with the horses, most of them do genuinely care for them.

No sensible person buys a racehorse expecting to make money. Look at JP McManus or Michael O'Leary, they don't expect to make enough in prize money to keep their horses in training, they're in it for the love of the game.

My name is URL · 15-04-2012 10:53PM

cardwizzard wrote: »

OP as he admits has no idea about racing as a whole. Thats like myself starting a thread on brain surgery. Pointless arugement.

Yes it's exactly like that.

I didn't say that I have no idea about horse racing ffs! All I said is that I don't watch it.

Do you think that improvements could be made in order to ensure that less fatalities occur in the Grand National?

Johro · 15-04-2012 10:54PM

Cheeky_gal wrote: »

Hilarious thread.

People who have no idea about horse racing hear of two horses having to be destroyed and they log onto boards and talk about how cruel it is and suggest horse racing be banned :rolleyes:

I wonder if these people were sitting at home crying all day about Synchronised and According to Pete? Doubtful

Again, you don't have to have a clue about horse racing to be able to see that a big race where twenty horses have died in ten occasions of this race is probably not a good thing ffs.

Richard Hillman · 15-04-2012 10:58PM

ppink wrote: »

For those who may be interested and speaking about jumps being dangerous etc there were 3 horses killed duing Dubai's Gold Cup last week.........on the flat!

Rubbish example. They were doing what they do naturally, running at high speeds. It could have happened in the wild. Jumping over 5 ft fences 30 times over 4 miles in the space of 12 minutes is not natural.

Johro · 15-04-2012 11:00PM

Oscars Well. wrote: »

No sensible person buys a racehorse expecting to make money. Look at JP McManus or Michael O'Leary, they don't expect to make enough in prize money to keep their horses in training, they're in it for the love of the game.

Fair enough.

Hank Scorpio · 15-04-2012 11:01PM

yeah ban it *munches on KFC chicken*

wonderfulname · 15-04-2012 11:17PM

Johro wrote: »

Again, you don't have to have a clue about horse racing to be able to see that a big race where twenty horses have died in ten occasions of this race is probably not a good thing ffs.

I think the point is that one dangerous and stupid race does not a dangerous and stupid sport make, well, it is dangerous, but not exceptionally so. Of course something should be done about the one race of the season where most fans I know have their fingers crossed, not that their horse wins, but that nothing dies. It's a crazy course, but the organisers recognise this, I wouldn't be surprised if Becher's Brook were modified further after this, it already has undergone serious modification purely out of safety concerns and it's not the only part of the course to have done so. People in the industry really do care.

44leto · 15-04-2012 11:23PM

When Clinton was here I had a fantasy of shining my laser pointer at him to see all the secret service diving across the path.

mr.jingle · 15-04-2012 11:25PM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Rubbish example. They were doing what they do naturally, running at high speeds. It could have happened in the wild. Jumping over 5 ft fences 30 times over 4 miles in the space of 12 minutes is not natural.

The word in that sentence that is the danger is SPEED. It's the speed that kill's not the 5 foot fences jumped 30 times it's known that a horse going to a smaller obstacle will jump it quicker and more fluent but the higher they go the slower they go therefore jumping it with less risk.

The ground for the Grand National and any other steeplechase race should be good/soft going anything better than that and they will have more injuries. The start of the race is the big issue along with the amount of runners, if the first fence was half the distance away from the start than it is now it would give horses less time to charge down the fence.

As was said by former top jockey Mick Fitzgerald the fact that some certain fences have been lowered means a lot of jockeys will bring there horses down a line towards a fence that you wouldn't do beforehand such as Becher's Brook were they lowered the fence but flattened the landing area but now instead of horses going over all across the track they are now trying to come over to the one side and getting in each others way vumping and making contact with each causing a loss of balance.

This thread and the thousand's i'm sure on other forum's won't affect horse racing as much as people seem to think as it is such a huge business in Ireland and the UK it would be detrimental to an already declining economy would lose thousands of jobs across the board thoroughbred's will eventually die out.

I like flat racing but in Ireland NH racing is the king and possibly in the UK too. These horse's are huge physical animals and believe me jumping a 5 foot fence is like years ago when nearly everyone as a kid used to jump along the garden wlals clearing from one side to the next no bother.

I'm not even gonna answer the OP's question as it will never happen anyway.

marty1985 · 15-04-2012 11:25PM

44leto wrote: »

When Clinton was here I had a fantasy of shining my laser pointer at him to see all the secret service diving across the path.

Johro · 15-04-2012 11:26PM

wonderfulname wrote: »

I think the point is that one dangerous and stupid race does not a dangerous and stupid sport make, well, it is dangerous, but not exceptionally so. Of course something should be done about the one race of the season where most fans I know have their fingers crossed, not that their horse wins, but that nothing dies. It's a crazy course, but the organisers recognise this, I wouldn't be surprised if Becher's Brook were modified further after this, it already has undergone serious modification purely out of safety concerns and it's not the only part of the course to have done so. People in the industry really do care.

I agree with that, I'm not one of those calling for a complete ban on horse racing, just that people should take action when a race is so obviously dangerous to both horse and rider.

mr.jingle · 15-04-2012 11:28PM

wonderfulname wrote: »

I think the point is that one dangerous and stupid race does not a dangerous and stupid sport make, well, it is dangerous, but not exceptionally so. Of course something should be done about the one race of the season where most fans I know have their fingers crossed, not that their horse wins, but that nothing dies. It's a crazy course, but the organisers recognise this, I wouldn't be surprised if Becher's Brook were modified further after this, it already has undergone serious modification purely out of safety concerns and it's not the only part of the course to have done so. People in the industry really do care.

And by doing so they have made Becher's Brook (where the two horse's were fatally injured) more dangerous with there modifications as was said at the time by certain trainers that they would cause.

cardwizzard · 15-04-2012 11:29PM

Johro wrote: »

I think the argument is that in a race where horses fairly frequently end up dead it may be worth debating whether demanding races such as these with very high fences should be held at all, or if at least the fences should be lowered.
That's not rocket science. You don't have to have an idea about 'racing as a whole', just eyes in your head and a bit of sense.

The fences have being lowered, alot in fact. Speed is the cause, lower fences equals greater speed.

Johro · 15-04-2012 11:31PM

44leto wrote: »

When Clinton was here I had a fantasy of shining my laser pointer at him to see all the secret service diving across the path.

I think Clinton should be banned.

My name is URL · 15-04-2012 11:37PM

mr.jingle wrote: »

The word in that sentence that is the danger is SPEED. It's the speed that kill's not the 5 foot fences jumped 30 times it's known that a horse going to a smaller obstacle will jump it quicker and more fluent but the higher they go the slower they go therefore jumping it with less risk.

I don't want to dwell on this point too much, but.. isn't that why the jockey is there? To control the horse and guide it at an ideal speed and in an ideal position to win or at least finish the race?

37% finished yesterday.. that's absurd.

Johro · 15-04-2012 11:38PM

cardwizzard wrote: »

The fences have being lowered, alot in fact. Speed is the cause, lower fences equals greater speed.

Not enough. Yeah of course speed is also a factor, plus the number of jumps, plus the number of riders.

wonderfulname · 15-04-2012 11:46PM

mr.jingle wrote: »

And by doing so they have made Becher's Brook (where the two horse's were fatally injured) more dangerous with there modifications as was said at the time by certain trainers that they would cause.

Synchronised wasn't injured at Becher's Brook, he went down there, he was injured running loose afterwards.

Some modifications are questionable, some are no brainers, they've done a serious amount to that jump over the years, you can't complain about letting horses bypass the thing for example. I was referring more to the intent of the moves though, part of the argument that horse racing should be banned is that it's some form of cruel game where people intentionally profit from harming animals, that really couldn't be further from the truth.

mr.jingle · 15-04-2012 11:47PM

My name is URL wrote: »

I don't want to dwell on this point too much, but.. isn't that why the jockey is there? To control the horse and guide it at an ideal speed and in an ideal position to win or at least finish the race?

37% finished yesterday.. that's absurd.

Have a look at some racing not exactly a national but look at certain horses and they will be pulling for there heads trying to go faster but the jockey will be pulling him up trying to slow him down. It's very hard to try this especially with such a long run up to the first fence and the roars of the crowd and the anticipation of the race beginning. The jockey's also like to let the horse stride and get into a rhythm and try and get the right judge on the upcoming fence and get the best stride possible before jumping the fence. They don't just sit on them and let the horse do all the work it's one of the toughest and one of the most unrewarding jobs out there with terrible prizemoney, win and your praised make one mistake and your lambasted and I have nothing but respect for any man or woman willing to get on a horse in any race never mind a national.

Imagine in 1929, 66 horses took part in the National! Now that is crazy

calfmuscle · 15-04-2012 11:48PM

My name is URL wrote: »

I don't want to dwell on this point too much, but.. isn't that why the jockey is there? To control the horse and guide it at an ideal speed and in an ideal position to win or at least finish the race?

37% finished yesterday.. that's absurd.

No jockey is going to interfere with a horse that is a couple of strides off a fence. Once the horse has the fence in sight you want to position them to meet it correctly, but there is only so much you can do. You have to go with the horse, especially when they are riding in such short stirrups. The horse will respond to the obstacle in front of them. The bigger the fence the more they stand off. You can do other things to help the horse such putting those big orange ground poles in front of the fence etc.

Sorry if people don't quite get what Im saying I don't know how to explain it without putting you on a horse lol!

mr.jingle · 15-04-2012 11:48PM

wonderfulname wrote: »

Synchronised wasn't injured at Becher's Brook, he went down there, he was injured running loose afterwards.

Some modifications are questionable, some are no brainers, they've done a serious amount to that jump over the years, you can't complain about letting horses bypass the thing for example. I was referring more to the intent of the moves though, part of the argument that horse racing should be banned is that it's some form of cruel game where people intentionally profit from harming animals, that really couldn't be further from the truth.

My apologies he did come down there it was when he went loose he got fatally injured

Sheeps · 15-04-2012 11:49PM

Horses should be banned.

wonderfulname · 15-04-2012 11:52PM

Sheeps wrote: »

Horses should be banned.

Sheeps should be banned.

DEFTLEFTHAND · 15-04-2012 11:52PM

Sheeps wrote: »

Horses should be banned.

Sheeps should be banned.

Should horse racing be banned?

Comments