Another Year Over

Well as we slowly skid our way towards the end of another year it is traditional to look back at another year and I am going to be no different.

I suppose if we are going to be pedantic I could say it is a look back at ten months of racing as both the January and December fixture lists ended up being decimated by the weather.

Indeed it could be argued that Mother Nature is doing what the BHA have singularly failed to do, namely cut back the fixture list.

2010 saw an embarrassing dithering and the exemplification of how divided racing is, with the 2011 fixture list farrago.

With a realisation there would be a massive reduction in the Levy yield it soon became clear the BHA board had no plan B in terms of funding or how to manage the situation.

Out came noises that the 2011 fixture list would face a massive pruning, not before time said many of us. Yet when the fixture list was finally published the reduction was minimal, so small it would hardly be noticed.

What would be noticeable would the a massive reduction in prize money with minimum prize values being reduced or even scrapped.

All the fiasco did was underline how impotent the BHA is when it comes to running the sport and it again underlined how much power the bookmakers have as they continue to leech the sport.

The situation at the BHA is not helped by the attitude of its Chairman Paul Ray, a man with a such a massive ego he has, himself, become the story to the detriment of the sport. Indeed Roy must be the biggest single obstacle to a meaningful Levy replacement being negotiated, yet he somehow manages to remain in post.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

At the beginning of the flat season it was being asked if 2010 could surpass the excitement of 2009 where Sea The Stars became the 21st century’s first flat equine superstar.

The atmosphere was quite low on Epsom Downs the first Saturday in June as we gathered to view, what looked on paper, to be a sub-standard Derby.

Even as Ryan Moore crossed the line seven lengths clear on Workforce the initial reaction amongst us media cynics was “impressive, but what has he beaten.”

It was only when judge Nick Bostock announced he had won in a course record time that we suddenly began to ask were we watching another equine superstar?

The illusion was shattered at in the King George VI at Ascot when he put in woeful performance, coming home fifth of sixth, even his handled Sir Michael Stoute was at a loss to explain the drop in form.

His next appearance was at Longchamp where Stoute was bullish about his prospects although many, myself included, had our doubts.

It is, of course, dangerous to question Sir Michael as was shown as he returned to take the Arc, winning what was a very rough renewal.

Stoute admitted after the victory he had managed to get the horses training wrong earlier in the season.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Over the sticks we had another round of the Kauto Star / Denman battle as we headed towards the Gold Cup.

Again the weather has some say as after three and a half days of lovely weather the rain arrived just before the big race. However it could not dampen the spirits of the sell out crowd, many of whom were adorned in either Denman or Kauto colours.

The burning question was which of Paul Nicholls stars would prevail.

Of course the joy of racing is the horses do not read the script. Kauto Star had one of his bad jumping days, eventually falling four out, having blundered earlier on.

Denman was prominent and finished best of the Nicholls four but offered no challenge to Imperial Commander who came home an impressive seven length winner although he still has his detractors.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Another case of the script not being read came at Churchill Downs when the wonder horse Zenyatta attempted to end her career undefeated and ensure her place in racing folklore. She will still remain in the hearts and minds of many but Blame came and spoiled the party and her immortality was denied.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

When you have been champion jockey for 15 years where else do you go?

Well AP McCoy showed us this year as he finally overcame his Grand National hoodoo and, in the process, proving wrong those who said he was unemotional.

His year was crowned, literally, by becoming the first jockey to win the BBC’s Sports Personality Of The Year.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

On a negative note Racing For Change continued to be a waste of money and resources.

The few excellent ideas it has had have not been followed up, whilst they continue to pursue pointless exercises and, worse of all, take the credit for things they have not achieved.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

On a personal note I, once again, set myself the target of visiting every UK racecourse in 2010.

Due to a combination of bad weather, volcanic ash clouds and family problems I failed by five courses.

Is it worth trying again in 2011?

Probably not, this is the third year I have attempted to achieve the “full set” in a calendar year and the third time I have failed.

This year being the most spectacular failure of all, the previous two years I failed by one and two respectively …. perhaps if I don’t deliberately set out to achieve it in 2011 I may end up doing it.

Some Common Sense Please

As I write, Sedgefield is the only surviving turf fixture before Christmas and it must be 1.01 that will also suffer the same fate as the other, already abandoned, turf meetings.

There are the ubiquitous “all weather” meetings still planned, indeed extra meetings are being scheduled.

With roads in most of the country being, often at best, treacherous and with most police forces advising drivers to make journeys only if absolutely essential, is there not a case to be made for cancelling all racing for Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday this week, extending the Christmas break by three days?

There will be those who will undoubtedly express profound disagreements with this proposal.

Bookmakers will protest about the loss of turnover, simple answer just show more of your silly cartoon racing .

Racecourses will protest but will, of course, deny it is anything to do with loss of revenue due to lost hospitality and booze takings.

Trainers will argue they should have the choice as to whether they decide to send runners to the races in the current conditions. Of course it is easy for them to say that as, invariably, it will not be them who will be driving the horsebox on icy roads.

Jockeys will protest at the loss of earnings.

All of those objections should be ignored and common sense should prevail.

Silly me, I have uttered the magic words “common sense” ….. there is little chance that prevailing is there?

Whilst on the subject of dangerous road conditions, the folly of driving in bad weather was hammered home on Friday after an abortive visit to Ascot.

It is 56 miles from the course to home and on a good day it takes about 1¼ hours on Friday it took 4½ hours.

Primarily this was due to people being out on the roads who do not have the slightest idea how to drive in the snowy conditions and in doing so they actually make the roads worse. Either by having accidents because they cannot control their vehicles properly or by driving in a manner which actually makes the road conditions more dangerous than they need be, especially on hills.

So, turning back to horseboxes travelling to the races, it does not matter if the driver of the horsebox is capable of driving in poor conditions, the impact of the idiots who should not be on the road also needs to be considered.

Twice in the last week I have arrived at a racecourse, only for racing to be called off after my arrival. Now I accept it is an occupational hazard when the weather conditions are poor, however I do wonder if, on occasion, courses are extracting the urine.

I appreciate it is a fine line in deciding if a meeting should go ahead and it can be a difficult call.

The first of my abortive meetings was Huntingdon last Sunday, the first attempt to rearrange the Peterborough Cup.

The course was perfectly raceable on Saturday and overnight temperatures of plus one were forecast. The forecast turned out to be very wrong and the mercury dropped to minus five

This clearly caught officials out and an early inspection was called. At this time the forecast was predicting plus temperatures and some sunshine. So a second inspection was called for 10:00.

Now the temperatures did reach plus three and the sun did come out but it turned out to be too little too late and racing had to be called off. When called off the decision was communicated quickly so the media could let the public know immediately.

In these circumstances I can see why Huntingdon held the second inspection.

Ascot on Friday was a different story.

Frost covers had been laid but the temperatures were so low frost still managing to get into the ground. Again an early inspection was called which proved to be inconclusive and a second inspection was called for 11:00, just 55 minutes before the first race was due off.

Now I am no expert but when I arrived at the course just before 10:00 it was patently obvious racing would not be possible. The covers themselves were frozen and there were frozen patches where the covers had been lifted, more significantly the temperature was still below zero and showed no sign of rising.

Trainers and jockeys who had been on the course were as one in saying racing would not go ahead.

Yet, despite there being an inevitability, officials still waited until the prescribed time of 11:00 before carrying an inspection.

Once they had a look officials were asked about the prospects of racing yet, unlike at other courses where an opinion would be given, an official, who could only be described as arrogant in the extreme (the sort of old fashioned pompous twit who should have been thrown out of racing years ago) simply said “you know the rules, the Stewards have to meet first”.

The meeting was eventually called off just after 11:15, less than 40 minutes before the opening race.

As one cynic commented, “late enough to make sure the most of the hospitality guests arrived.”

I do also appreciate the job of Clerk Of Course is a tricky one and there is a fine line between being a hero or villain.

For example for Barry Johnson at Exeter the other week holding out and having late inspections paid off and racing was able to go ahead, albeit only getting the go-ahead less than 30 minutes before the first race.

In this case it paid off but what if the course had not recovered sufficiently and racing had to be abandoned, Johnson would, probably rightly, have been vilified.

Should the decision as to whether to race not be left with the Clerks, who after all are under pressure from racecourse executives, who pay their wages, to race if at all possible?

The decision should be handed to the BHA’s course inspectorate and there should be a rule that if a course is not raceable two hours before the scheduled off time of the first race then racing should be abandoned.

Yes some meetings may be lost where conditions improve late on, however this should be weighed against the reputational damage which is caused when decisions to cancel are made at the last minute.

Instead of tinkering with what does not need to be changed, Racing For Change should be looking at some of these more fundamental issues.

AW, Bouquets and McCoy

As the cold weather shows no sign of abating it is time to ride one of my perennial hobby-horses, the misleading epithet that is “all weather” racing.

As we all know “all weather” racing was introduced to reduce the decimation of the racing program when the weather, as now, was inclement.

From the outset these fixtures have proved to be anything but “all weather” with fog, rain, frost and snow all conspiring to prevent racing at various times.

As I write this today’s “all weather meeting” at Lingfield has been abandoned due to snow and they are currently inspecting at Wolverhampton.

Now I freely accept I am not a great fan of “all weather” racing, so I may be jaundiced in my view, however I do accept it does have a place alongside the more traditional forms of racing.

What really irritates me though is the insistence that it is still called “all weather” racing, when it clearly is not.

Indeed one could go as far as to say it is positively misleading and to persist in calling it “all weather” racing when it is patently is not is not only disingenuous, it is positively misleading.

Indeed it would be interesting if there was an advertisement somewhere which emphasised the fact the racing was “all weather” and said advertisement was referred to the Advertising Standards Authority. I would suggest it would be 1.01 the complaint would be upheld.

Now I realise the BHA have bigger fish to fry but how about putting to rest, once and for all, the fallacious epithet “all weather” to be finally but to bed and replaced with something like “artificial surface” or “synthetic surface”.

I am surprised such a suggestion has not come from Racing For Change (RFC), then again expecting anything half decent from RFC is asking too much – “half-cocked” probably best describes most of their suggestions.

I am starting my own one-man campaign to get this change and henceforth the fixtures information on my web-site will no longer refer to AW fixtures but to AS fixtures, a small gesture I know but a stand nonetheless.

However it is not all criticism for the BHA. They are far more proactive than their predecessors in adverse weather conditions.

Last weekend saw a rapid rescheduling of the Fighting Fifth when Newcastle was lost to the adverse weather and there has been a rapid attempt to reschedule Friday’s lost Exeter meeting from Friday to Sunday.

There has also been the provisional of additional all-weather fixtures and, at least they have not been marketed as “replacement” fixtures because replacement fixtures they are not.

Although, again in defence of the BHA, it is hoped we will once again see some additional NH meetings

Apart from Southwell switching their NH meeting to an AW fixture the courses losing the NH fixture do not benefit.

The trainers of the NH horses unable to run do not benefit, nor do the horses themselves or the NH jockeys who lose out on riding fees and win percentages.

So who does benefit?

Well trainers of generally low grade all weather horses benefit, however it is a moot point if there should be more races staged for the benefit of such low grade runners.

Flat jockeys who should now be on holiday will benefit, albeit at the expense of their NH cousins.

However a clue to the biggest beneficiaries of these additional meetings can be found in the race titles.

Is it simply coincidence the additional fixtures invariably end up being sponsored by bookmakers?

Actually I don’t really know why I put a question mark at the end of the preceding paragraph as it was, in reality, a rhetorical question.

Perhaps that explains why Paul Roy is so often railing against the bookmakers – is it a form of envy as he realises his role is actually meaningless. He has actually realised the tail of racing (aka The Bookmakers) actually wags the dog (the BHA).

If all NH racing is called off due to adverse weather conditions then why do extra fixtures need to be staged?

At last AP McCoy has finally made it to the shortlist for Sports Personality Of The Year (SPOTY) and not before time.

How ironic, therefore, having finally reached the shortlist he hits the headlines for the wrong reasons. Instead of acting like the consummate professional he usually is, he decides to have an attack of petulance and throw his toys out of the pram and not speak to Racing UK (RUK).

McCoy’s “justification” for the boycott is, and I quote from his own blog, “ It was the accusations made by two of their TV presenters who in my opinion were very persistent in insinuating I was allegedly cheating on ‘Get Me Out Of Here’.”

I’m sorry AP but, excuse the vernacular, that is an absolute load of bollocks.

Anybody who reads my race reports will know I am one of AP McCoy’s greatest fans and time and time again I have commented on rides where only he could have got the winner home.

However it is almost universally accepted, even implied by McCoy himself, that he was gentle on Get Me Out Of Here.

It was a ride which was worthy of being questioned and has been throughout the racing media, often in terms a great deal stronger than those expressed on RUK.

I have watched the replays of the comments McCoy has taken exception too and I found them to be neither persistent and, more importantly, at no point did they suggest or insinuate McCoy cheated.

I’m not sure if McCoy has some other agenda with the presenters involved, however his behaviour is unedifying and it does nothing to enhance his reputation.

I was going to chivvy up as much support at possible for McCoy in the SPOTY voting, now I am tempted to encourage others not to vote for him.

Do I really want a such a petulant person winning a top award?

I have always held McCoy in the highest esteem, however in this latest episode he has done little to endear himself. Perhaps during his current enforced break he will take some time out to view a recording of the race in question, then reflect on what he has said since the Get Me Out Of Here Ride ….. which was a shocker.

Then, maybe, he can eat a portion of ‘umble pie and apologise to those he has himself defamed and stop behaving like some spoiled prima donna.

In truth I do not think McCoy is guilty of anything more than a “bad day at the office” when he rode Get me Out Of Here. He cites welfare concerns for his ride yet he seemingly neglected to report these to the appropriate authorities on the day.

It also has to be said the Stewards at Ascot on the day did little to assist the situation in failing to look into the run on the day. This is not the first time the actions, or in this case inactions, of the Ascot stewards have been called into question. I will not start banging my “professional stewards” drum again today.

So until McCoy admits he has overreacted I will not be voting for him in SPOTY and I would actively encourage others to vote for one of the other candidates as well, as long as it is not Phil Taylor as there is no way darts can be considered a sport.