Disappointment On The Downs

Well another Derby weekend comes and goes and I have to admit I’ve come away from the 2013 renewal feeling slightly flat and deflated.

It wasn’t all bad, of course, the horrible weather of the previous few days  finally relented and the sun shone on the Downs. The crowds were healthy, 120,000 on the big day itself but those large crowds bring inherent problems as an annoying minority seem to be unable to control themselves after a few drinks.

Friday didn’t get off to a good start as it finally saw the return of Frankie Dettori after serving a six month ban after being caught with traces of cocaine in his system after a drug test in France last September.

With the delays in the returning of his licence I was beginning to find the whole affair more than tiresome.

Of course when he finally did return the frenzy in certain parts of the media was frankly nauseating and one of the worse offenders was Channel Four.

You would think we were witnessing the return of some long lost hero – we weren’t.

Let’s get this straight Dettori was banned after taking a drug which it is a criminal offence to both possess and use. This is not the action of some immature youngster this is the action of a supposedly mature and responsible 42 year old man, father to five children – what a wonderful example to set to them.

He then moves the Dettori PR machine into overdrive claiming it was a moment of madness, a one of mistake. Towards the end of a ban he agrees to the softest of soft interviews with Clare Balding, who by her own admission has been a friend of his for years – so  no danger of a Paxmanesque interrogation there then?

Also, let's not forget Dettori has previous when it comes to cocaine .... he must be a very unlucky person to have only had the drug twice and to have been caught both times. 

Remember Dettori is a shrewd PR operator – switch on the TV cameras and he is the jolly chirpy Italian jockey, away from the cameras and the big meetings the story is different.

I have witnessed, first hand, the other side of Dettori and frankly I think he is an objectionable, obnoxious individual.

For me, after all the fuss about his return, I was actually two of his three mounts came home last.

One of the biggest smiles about his overblown return actually came courtesy of Channel Four.

Emma Spencer, clearly employed for her supposed good looks rather than her racing knowledge, interviewed Neil Callan the winner of Resurgent  and then proceeded to ask him about his “ride” in the next race on Sri Putra – a ride where he had been jocked off by one L Dettori.

He soon put Ms Spencer in her place but how ironic that one of the star presenters of Channel Four was unaware of the jockey change, when the broadcaster she is employed by were having the broadcasting version of an orgasm over Dettori’s return.      

Racing in Friday was good with the aptly named Talent winning The Oaks giving trainer Ralph Beckett an amazing 1-2 in the race, although not in the order expected and it gave Richard Hughes a second classic win in a few weeks.

Saturday dawned and the two feature races were starkly different.

In the Coronation Cup we had St Nicholas Abbey looking for an unprecedented third consecutive win.

With around £9.5k on offer for finishing fifth it was disappointing to see only five runners, especially when two of the five were simply in the race as pacemakers. With trainers complaining about the lack of prize money you would have thought more would have had a pop, even if it were for the decent place purse.

In the end the script worked out as planned with St Nicholas Abbey coming home, barely breaking sweat, followed home by Dunaden.

He can only beat what is put in front of him but with almost £5m in winnings he has been a credit to connections.

Before I turn to The Derby I must mention The Dash over the fastest five furlong course in the country.

Ryan Moore gave Duke of Firenze a sublime ride. I 9^th place and behind wall of horses a half-a-furlong from home, he weaved through rivals to go on and record a neck victory.

Even more impressive was the run of the runner-up, Smoothtalkinrascal, under  Daniel Tudhope, who was as far back as 14^th at the half furlong pole.

Well in the big race itself we had a well touted favourite in Dawn Approach. I have to admit he is a horse I have long admired and I really wanted him to do well in The Derby – as we now know it wasn’t to be.      

I think it's the worse Derby I can remember, a very messy race and I can't recall the last time there were six stewards inquiries into a single race.

Poor Kevin Manning didn't stand a chance in the race - Dawn Approach ran as if a pot of mustard had been shoved up his backside, he took off like a horse possessed and it would have been no surprise if Manning had not returned with arms six inches longer than when he had set out.

Full credit to Ballydoyle who employed perfect tactics, in not employing a pacesetter  they played on the perceived weaknesses of the favourite. Although looking at Dawn Approach I think he would probably have blown up whatever tactics had been employed.

French raider Ocovango probably would not have won but would have been possibly been placed were it not for him getting mullered twice. I wonder  would a jockey with more experience of Epsom have done better on him?

Mars, fancied in some areas, didn't get the best of runs either.

OK The Derby is always a rough race but this one just didn't seem right at all.

Did the "best" horse win - possibly but even that is open to debate.

It was a fantastic day for Ryan Moore though.

Moore often gets slated for “not having a personality” but I would rather have him ride a horse of mine than the coke snorting showman Dettori.   

Grand National - I Was Wrong

I’m more than happy to shout this from the rooftops  - I WAS WRONG.

After the last two years I was dreading the 2013 National and as I said two blogs ago I had some reservations about the changes bought in ahead of this years renewal.

My fears were wholly unfounded.

Although  I could not face watching the race live my relief was palpable when just after 16:25 on Saturday I received a text which simply said “all seem to be back OK”.

When I later watched a recording of the race I can say, for the first time in years I enjoyed watching the race. The fences certainly looked to be more forgiving and that all the runners were still standing coming to the Canal Turn must be unprecedented.

The race did not look to be any less of a spectacle, so well done to Aintree, the BHA and all those involved in the latest changes – all credit where credit is due.

Let us not get too complacent though, this is but one year, but the signs are good and hopefully the more extreme critics will quieten down now.

I was also wrong in my estimation of the number of viewers who would watch the race on Channel Four. The viewing figures were actually better than those of the BBC in recent years.

I did record the Channel Four coverage and, for me, it was like the Curates Egg.

Some of the background articles were excellent, it was good to see the excellent Gareth O’Brien being used.

There were some oddities though, quite why they went through the runners in reverse order is beyond me.

There was barely any coverage of the runners in the parade ring.

I also found the coverage of the race itself disappointing. It wasn’t their best performance. Too many of the shots were from too far away and it was difficult to identify runners.

It also seems that having gone to the expense of installing a flying camera, it was going to be used to the absolute maximum. To use the camera to show the 14^th fence when the view was blocked by a big screen is absolutely unforgivable.

The shot of The Chair was also poor.

As for the commentary, Richard Hoiles sounded as if he was wearing a muffle and the usually excellent Ian Bartlett just sounded as if he wasn’t really that interested.  Also why did Simon Holt cover the section after Valentines. He clearly had to do it off a monitor, it seems more sense to have had Richard cover Valentines to the Melling Road.

The re-run analysis of the race was unbelievable to the point of embarrassment. It seemed Nick Luck was trying to second guess what was going to happen . At one point he said “We’ll freeze it there” and the VT carried on running.

 
By contrast the RUK coverage with the course commentary was far better. The camera angles were far superior and it was much easier to follow what was happening. The commentary was good and Stewart Machin rose to the occasion was the lead commentator, even resisting his trademark puns.

For Sale - One Poisoned Chalice

Quite a few people have expressed surprise that John Smith’s have decided not to sponsor the Grand National after next year’s renewal.

My only surprise is that people are surprised at the decision.

John Smith’s will have sponsored the race for ten years and it is a sponsorship which does not come cheaply and they cannot deny their association with the race has, generally, been well worth the investment in terms of publicity.

Times, however, are changing and it is very easy to see why pouring so much money into the race is looking to be an investment which makes poor business sense, indeed it is in great danger of becoming a liability.

I don’t always agree with the BBC’s racing correspondent Cornelius Lysaght but in an analysis piece on the BBC Sport website he wrote:-

“With the ex-course boss Julian Thick out after the re-structuring of Aintree's parent company, and the British Horseracing Authority's articulate top vet leaving too, this news just adds to the difficulties facing the home of the Grand National.

"It looks like John Smith's has made what is a surprising decision mainly for commercial reasons, though the public image of the race - in which two horses have died in both of the last two runnings - must have been in the brewer's thinking as well.

"With that in mind, it remains to be seen how easy finding a replacement turns out to be."

Whilst the first paragraph may not be a fundamental reason for the withdrawal it is a consideration. If they have had a good working relationship with Thick a new appointee could well change the dynamics of the relationship between the sponsors and the racecourse. Personal relationships in business should never be underestimated.

The departure of Tim Morris from the BHA is also a bad move for Aintree and the Grand National. Morris has been a credible defender of the race in the face of vociferous and mounting criticism of the Grand National – indeed he is probably the only credible spokesman the BHA has available to field. Yet his services are no longer required.

Now I have been the first to argue that the BHA needs to cutback in the face of diminishing income but I have to say the removal of Morris and before that Paul Scotney does, along with other decisions made this year, seriously call into question the judgement and competency of BHA chief Paul Bittar.

More pertinent in Lysaght’s analysis is the public image of the race. I know this topic has been done to death and I have no intention of rehashing the arguments again here but, like it or not, the Grand National does have a serious perception issue in the eyes of the general public.

Now it is completely and utterly irrelevant if said perception is right or wrong – it is there and, thus far, racing has done little to dispel the perception and with the departure of Morris it looks as though the BHA is giving up on the PR front.

With such a poor perception is it any wonder sponsors are going to look again at committing huge amounts of money to a race which has the potential to alienate so many members of the public? Members of the public who ultimately contribute  to the profitability of the organisation.

It is commercial suicide to be so intrinsically associated with a product which has already alienated many and could well continue to alienate people further.

There was one other factor which Lysaght, understandably, failed to mention.

That is, of course, television coverage of the race moving from the BBC to Channel Four.

Even though the viewing figured on the BBC have plummeted over the past  thirty years, the race still attracted a domestic TV audience of around nine million ….. a tasty prospect for any big name sponsor.

It is highly unlikely the viewing figures when it moves to Channel Four will be even half that number, I predict they may, if they are lucky, attract around 2m viewers. Channel Four’s biggest ever viewing figures are 11.2 million and that was for the Paralympic Opening ceremony which came hot on the heels of the main Olympics (and bear in mind the BBC picked up a record 26.3 million viewers for the Olympic closing ceremony).

Channel Four’s best ever racing audience stands at a relatively paltry 1.4 million.

Also the BBC gave massive advance advertising to the race across its television and radio networks – C4 may well also run trailers but to a far smaller audience. The BBC trailers reminded viewers the race was coming, it bought the race into the public consciousness.

So from a sponsors perspective the move to Channel Four from the BBC is a massive negative.

Aintree and John Smith’s may well reach their aim of a £1m Grand National next year – if they do I suspect it will be a one-off.

I think Aintree will struggle to find a sponsor prepared to commit the same amount of money John Smith’s were, indeed I think they will struggle to find a sponsor who wants to be associated with a potentially damaging product.

My strong suspicion is the new sponsor will come from within the industry and if I was tempted to have a bet (which I’m not) my money would be on the Betfair Grand National in 2014.

Over-Hyped Racing, Noisy Punters and Sanitiseds Channel 4

Apparently there has been some race meeting taking place in California for the past couple of days and judging by my Twitter timeline many, including people who I would normally describe as sensible racing journalists, seem to have fallen hook, line and sinker for the organisers hyperbole that the meeting is the “Worlds Championships” of racing.

It needs to be remembered that Americans have a strange view of the world – everything outside their borders is considered alien. Think that’s an exaggeration, have a look at US immigration, the queues are quite clearly labelled “US Citizens” and “Aliens”.

To them the USA is the world, ergo anything which happens in the United States is, by default, a World Championship.

Even in sports like rounders, sorry baseball, they call their domestic championships the World Series.

I recall watching the main TV news bulletin when I was in the States and after 25 minutes of frankly irrelevant “local” news there was a summary of world news led by a major earthquake in China which had killed tens of thousands. It barely warranted 20 seconds of coverage but the caption over the VT said it all, it read “CHINA (The World)” – I suppose that was for the benefit of any viewers who though China was part of the US.    

Get real, the Breeders Cup isn’t the Worlds Championship of racing, it’s a jumped up artificial surface meeting with a couple of races on wholly unsuitable turf going thrown in for good measure.

You can call a turd anything you like but at the end of the day it is still a turd.

Ah, it’s supporters will argue, if it is an over-hyped meeting then why do the top European trainers keep sending their horses over there?

The simple answer to that is greed. Make the prize money high enough and, like vultures round a carcase, the owners and trainers will send their horses to the races. Even if they are held on dirt or unsuitable turf conditions. More so when the meeting is held in California, where the Europeans don’t usually fare particularly well.

It’s the same greed that attracts owners and trainers to the racing in Dubai …. again the lure of big money but in the case of Dubai it’s worse than the Breeders Cup.

Owners, trainers, journalists, broadcasters all kowtow to the Dubai racing elite, happy to accept the lavish entertainment and vast prize money, conveniently forgetting these self-same people pay lip service to  human rights.

They are proud to show off their gleaming tower blocks, six star hotels, tax free shopping centres but are not so keen to show the shanty towns and slum conditions the labourers who build these great buildings live in. The foreign workers whose passports are held so they cannot return home until their employers / Dubai Government decide they can. Whose wages are frequently withheld and who, if they dare to protest, are imprisoned.

UK journalists are more than happy to go Dubai and extol the virtues of their generous hosts, yet turn a blind eye to the conditions local journalists have to work under. It’s true that journalists can no longer be jailed for publishing anything the government disapproves of but they can be excluded and banned from publishing anything in the country, which still amounts to state censorship.

None of that matters though because Sheikh Mo, his family and cronies are all good eggs, they give a huge amount of money to UK racing, so we can ignore their little foibles. Plus, of course, our Government don’t want to upset these chappies because we need their oil.

It’s all so nauseating.

One recurrent theme on the Twitter timeline these past two days is how much of a punters graveyard the Breeders Cup has been this year. It often is, especially when it’s at Santa Anita. If it is such a graveyard then why bet?

If you want to watch the racing why does it have to be with a financial investment?  

I actually do wonder how many people follow racing because of the sport and competition or just because it is a betting medium.

How many “followers” of the sport are able to enjoy or watch a race in which they have no financial interest? I have a feeling it may be a minority.

Yes I do bet but not in every race I watch, I may even go weeks without having a bet, yet I still generally enjoy watching the racing, even without having a financial investment.

Yes there are some races that are so bad it is impossible to enjoy, with or without an investment, the opening maiden at Newmarket on Friday being a recent prime example.

Of course betting also clouds the judgement of those watching the races, isn’t it amazing how many times a horse loses because the jockey is bad / useless / bent or the trainer has told the jockey not to try today etc. etc..

In other words I really hate the pocket talking whingers who will look for every excuse under the sun as to why their selected horse failed to win – of course they rarely ever come up with the correct answer, namely they just backed the wrong donkey.

Even more irritating though, are those who shout from the rooftops when they have backed a winner. Perhaps it is because it’s such a rare occurrence they feel the need to tell the world. Perhaps it is a form of narcissism. Who knows?

The majority of my betting is just for fun with a few “serious” bets each year. However if you were standing next to me watching a race in which I have had a “serious” bet you would be absolutely none the wiser as to whether I had won or lost. I also take a view that a bet is going to be a loser and if it wins it’s a bonus.

For me punting is a very private matter, I’m surprised the number of people who ask me how much I bet, it’s a question I never answer, not even my close family or friends know how much I bet, how much I win (or lose).  The only person who knows how much I bet with my serious betting is my commissioning agent.

Finally I hope Channel Four Racing yesterday isn’t an example of how things will be when they have all terrestrial racing from January.

Yesterday was meant to be Michael Hills final day as a jockey yet they announced he would not be riding at Newmarket because he was “feeling unwell.”

The truth was he had failed a pre-racing breath test and was suspended from racing by the Stewards.

Why did Channel Four decide to mislead their viewers in not revealing the true reason for Hills not riding?