Champions Day & Channel Four Presenters

There are, I admit, times when I’m standing in the pouring rain, on a wet Monday afternoon with a couple of hundred other racegoers when I wonder why I bother following this sport of horse racing.

Then again there are days, like last Saturday, when I know there is nowhere in the world I would rather be. 

I’m referring, of course, to British Champion’s Day at Ascot last Saturday, where I experienced one of the best atmospheres at a racecourse ever. For one it seemed over 90% of those present were actually there for the racing.

Although there were five championship races most were there to see the one race, indeed the one horse, the mighty Frankel who was there to make his last appearance on a racecourse.

However it almost didn’t happen as the wet weather threatened the horses participation in the race and was dependent on connections walking the course on Saturday morning.

As Racing For Change’s Rod Street put it to me afterwards it was “squeaky bum time” – imagine the sense of anti-climax has Frankel not run.

Both the pre-parade ring and parade ring were surrounded by massive crowds wanting to get a glimpse of the unbeaten wonder horse, something that added another irony to the day.

Excelebration after winning the QEII

The race before Frankel’s was the Queen Elizabeth Stakes over the mile, the very race Frankel won last year and it was won in devastating style by the horse who has lived in Frankel’s shadow, Excelebration. A brilliant, gutsy horse in his own right who would have been an undoubted superstar had he not been of the same generation as the once in a lifetime horse.

Even on Saturday, the day he wasn’t racing against Frankel he still managed to be overshadowed and many at Ascot missed the brilliant turn of foot, reminiscent of Sea The Stars in his Arc run, which salvaged the race from a seemingly impossible position.

As Frankel entered the parade ring he was greeted by applause, not unprecedented at Ascot, what was unprecedented was the cheers and applause as he came out onto the track, although there was an amusing moment when some racegoers applauded his brother Bullet Train as he led the runners out in the second colours of the owner.

After the parade the runners set off to the start, all apart from Frankel who held back and slowly cantered past the packed stands to milk the appreciation of the fans, it was almost as if he was doing a lap of honour before the race.

Of course the race itself was heart stopping as Frankel almost fell out of the stalls, giving four to five lengths to his rivals and Ian Mongan on Bullet Train, supposedly in as the pacesetter, had to do som quick thinking to drop back and find his stablemate.

Of course the worries were unfounded and the roar of the crowd told you what was happening as he pulled upsides the defending champion Cirrus Des Aigles before edging clear to make it 14 wins from 14 races.

The crowds went mad, looking from my high vantage point you could see people running towards the rails so they could get a glimpse of the superstar.

One thing I really like though was the second and third, Cirrus Des Aigles and Nathaniel were both given a rapturous welcome back from the crowd, who appreciated what good horses they were and their contribution in making it a competitive race.

It was a brilliant atmosphere, it’s a shame it cannot be bottled.

Channel Four have finally announced their presentation team for next year, a mixed bag with some surprises.

It is, of course, no surprise Nick Luck will be there as a main presenter alongside Clare Balding. There were some surprises in the “supporting” team.

The biggest surprise for me was the inclusion of Emma Spencer, who for me is the most lightweight member of the team, both physically and as a presenter. I’m told by many that she is considered pretty and “eye-candy” although that is something I fail to see, as the saying goes beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Graham Cunningham was the surprise inclusion in the team, he’s an astute analyst not afraid to have an opinion and I can envisage some chippy exchanges with Jim McGrath and Mick Fitzgerald who will be the other paddock commentators.

The dropping of John McCririck has sparked some debate but it cannot really be a major surprise, he really is past his sell-by date and, unfortunately he has become a caricature of himself.  His rant at being omitted from the line-up exemplifies why he was omitted.

Three of the other droppings from the team are more questionable.

Alastair Down isn’t everyone’s cup of tea, like an avuncular Uncle, sometimes tetchy he wasn’t really a TV natural but his way with words and his passion for national hunt racing was unsurpassed.

Mike Cattermole is a very accomplished presenter and a very decent chap, as demonstrated by his very graceful reaction to his not being included in the line-up (Take note McCririck) and I think his omission is a mistake especially when Spencer is being retained.

The dropping of Derek Thompson is also something of a mystery, yes he is a Marmite man, but from a TV producers perspective he is an absolute Godsend. He will do the interviews nobody else wants to, he can get across the atmosphere and work the crowd and, most importantly from a TV production perspective if you need somebody to fill for 23 seconds he will give you exactly 23 seconds, not a second more, not a second less.

This brings us onto the other Marmite character, Matt Chapman – who isn’t in the team. This may come as a surprise but I am slightly disappointed by this.

Yes I know I have been Matt’s biggest critic over the years but a “tamed” Matt would have been a good addition to the team.

I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again, when he plays it straight Matt is one of the best interviewers we have in the sport, he can get even the most reluctant of trainers to open up.

However Matt is his own worse enemy in that he tries to be controversial, he always denies this, but he does and it is so frustrating. If he could just calm himself, reign himself in, he would have been a shoe-in for a Channel Four role and a great addition to the team – it’s a terrible waste.

It’s good to see Simon Holt and Richard Hoiles will continue to be in the team, Richard once again showed why he is head and shoulders our best commentator with his excellent call of Frankel’s race as Ascot.

I am also disappointed there is no role for Stewart Machin in the line-up.

Weights, Drugs, Booze and Wrong Calls

There is so much to write about in what has been an eventful week.

There is one story which almost slipped through the net last Thursday and that concerns an appeal by Kieren Fox in relation to a four day ban he received for weighing in 1½lbs light at a Kempton meeting on 19^th September.

Custom and practice has dictated the jockey and the jockey alone is responsible for ensuring he carries the correct weight throughout the race. Yet, as soon as he weighs out the jockey hands his saddle to the trainer or head lad so the horse can be saddled. He will not see the saddle again until he sees the horse in the parade ring.

Aided by his very eloquent boss, John Best, the appeal panel found in Fox’s favour stating, “that there was not motive, opportunity nor evidence that Kieren Fox was responsible for the loss of 1½lb lead which was found to be missing on weighing in.”   

It is a very wise and sensible decision . . . how can a jockey be held responsible when the saddle is out of his direct control?

Let me say there is absolutely no question of nefarious goings on in this case and the likelihood is the weight accidentally dropped out of the saddle cloth as it was being carried from the weighing room to the saddling area.

However this decision of the disciplinary panel must result in a change to presumption that the jockey is presumed responsible, even when the saddle is out of his control.

If not the only solution I can see is the jockey is made to carry the saddle to the saddling area himself and he watches the saddling process himself, somehow I cannot see the likes of Fallon and Dettori doing that.   

When I fly, for example, I am quite happy to accept responsibility for what is in my baggage up until the point I check it in. Thereafter I would not expect to be held responsible for anything added or taken from my bag.

It was a busy day for the disciplinary panel last Thursday as also before them were Jack Mitchell and Franny Norton.

Jack Mitchell was before the panel for having traces of benzoylecgonine, a diagnostic metabolite of cocaine and a banned substance in his urine. In other words it indicated he had taken some cocaine in the previous 48 hours. To his credit Mitchell admitted the offence and was very contrite in his submission to the panel.

Norton was appearing before the panel after he failed a breath test for alcohol at Chester in May, indeed the alcohol reading was at a level higher than the allowed limit for driving.

Mitchell was banned for six months, Norton for 40 days.

Both bans are perverse and wrong.

Yes Mitchell was stupid and I am in no way condoning the taking of illegal drugs and what he did was wrong. Yes there were traces of benzoylecgonine in his urine but the actual taking of the cocaine may well have been 48 hours earlier so his ability to ride would not have been impaired that greatly, if at all. Yes he needs to be punished but a six month ban is excessive. If Mitchell’s assertion that this was a one off is accepted, and there is no reason to doubt what he said, then a shorter ban plus attendance at a drug rehabilitation program at his own expense should be sufficient deterrent.

Jack Mitchell

Mitchell is young and youngsters make mistakes, draconian punishments for such mistakes are excessive. To deny somebody of their livelihood for six months for using seems harsh. Firstly when you consider the police, automatically give a caution for a first offence.

Secondly the dealers, who are far more culpable than the users, receive an average sentence of 3 years 3 months and a £167 fine (of course that means they will 19 months in reality).

Turning to Norton he was about to ride a horse whilst over the permitted limit for alcohol – in other words he was drunk. He judgement must have been impaired and he was potentially a danger to himself, his mounts and to other riders. Especially at a tight turning course like Chester.

Yet he was handed a ban of forty days.

I’m sorry but I consider turning up at a racecourse drunk, potentially endangering other riders to be far more serious than Mitchell’s offence.

Norton does not even have the excuse of youth, he is 41 years old and should know better.

Whilst some mitigation factors can be made for Mitchell, none can be made for Norton.

As a footnote it is worth noting Norton was found guilty of having benzoylecgonine in his urine in 2003 and he only received a four month ban.

Finally the normally dependable Stewart Machin made an uncharacteristic mistake when calling the wrong winner at Warwick on Monday afternoon, Mistaking  Rio’s Girl for the very similarly coloured Straboe.  I was at Warwick and I can say the professional man that he is Stewart was absolutely shocked and devastated at the mistake he made.

The press room can be the cruellest place at times but even the most cynical hacks, and there were some at Warwick yesterday, were so taken aback at Stewart’s reaction that all offered him words of encouragement and not the extreme micky taking I’m sure he was expecting. The reaction from the guys in the press room indicates the respect we have for Stewart’s commentating.

Of course there was the inevitable verbal diarrhoea being spouted on Betfair, although to be fair it wasn’t as bad as it can be when we get the race mistakes from commentators.

Apparently one punter lost some £38k on Rio’s Girl based of Stewart’s call and many posters were rallying to that punters cause.

Sorry I have no sympathy for the punter at all, indeed I would actually go as far as to say he actually deserves to lose the money.

No commentator, no matter how good he is, is infallible and to rely on a third party when risking such sums of money is insanely stupid.

Also is there not a perverse contradiction here. Stewart is being criticised for mis-identifying two horses, yet the defenders of the punter are not criticising him, yet he too clearly failed to identify the two horses.     

No wonder the Betfair forum is considered such a joke.

Cheltenham Preview Evenings

Tis the week before Cheltenham and the racing is quiet.

Yes it is that depressing week, where there is a marked drop in the quality of racing as final preparations are made to the festivals stars and the Racing Premier League gives way, for a week, to the Racing League’s One and Two, with a slight return to some class at the Imperial Cup on Saturday.

Of course as the build up to Cheltenham progresses there is always the diversion of the Cheltenham Preview Evenings and this year there seem to be even more than ever. The events which help fund the summer holidays of countless pundits, not to mention the endless rubber chicken dinners they have to endure.

Are they worthwhile though and with so many taking place the length and breadth of the country how do you decide which one, if any to go to?

So here is The Beasts guide to Cheltenham Preview Evenings.

To Go Or Not To Go

That is indeed the question. Well if you are hoping to find some great “secret” outsider at a very long price to fund your retirement then stay at home, you ain’t going to get it.

If you want what should hopefully be an entertaining evening in which you may find some new approaches to the races, then a carefully selected preview evening will be well worth a visit.

I’m In Charge

That doesn’t mean Bruce Forsyth is going to be there (if you are old enough to remember his catchphrase from the early 1960’s then you should qualify for any OAP discounts available though)

A good chairman (or woman) is important as they need to maintain the flow of the evening, ensure all the panel have a chance to contribute and quell any excesses. If they happen to be pretty knowledgeable themselves then all the better.

Also, and this will be a recurring theme throughout the piece, they should not have massive egos, which will get in the way of debate.

For me the two best exponents come from opposite sides of the racing TV aristocracy, namely (Sir) Robert Cooper and (Lord) Nick Luck. Both can keep the debate flowing and both can interject with pertinent questions and observations themselves.

From The Horses Mouth

It is increasingly common to find a spattering of trainers on these panels.

I have one simple question . . . . what value does it add?

If you are going to a preview evening where there is a trainer on the panel, please ensure you take Lot’s wife with you, as anything they say will invariably need to be taken with a huge pinch of salt.

They are going to talk up their horses, with the amount of spin that would have Alistair Campbell salivating with delight. They are not going to turn round and say “so and so has no hope of winning and is only running to satisfy his owners ego.”

If an opposing trainer has an obviously superior horse they may, through gritted teeth, conceded they “fear so and so’s runner.”

But will they contribute anything meaningful, anything you did not know? Will they give even a scintilla of a stable secret?

Of course not, there would be more chance of Tony Blair and George Bush issuing a joint statement saying they got it totally wrong with Iraq.

Size Matters

The age old question, does size matter? More honest women will tell you it does.

It is the same with preview evenings. I have seen some preview evenings advertised with six, seven, even eight panellists. That is far too many.

With 27 races and a panel of seven or eight people the situation will be races will be skipped through briefly without any meaningful discussion or the preview evening will end up concentrating on just a handful of races.

For me the perfect size panel is four plus the chairman and provided there is the right balance that is enough to give a decent analysis of most of the races.

Beware The Ego

There are plenty of “characters” in racing, we all know who they are. The ones happy to contrive a public image, to play to the cameras and to court controversy.

The marmite men and women of our sport.

Don’t get me wrong we need characters like this in the game and we also need them to liven up these preview evenings. However they need to be chosen with care.

So my two golden rules for the egos are.

Don’t have more than one ego at a preview evening. All that will happen is they will play off against one another and the egos will detract from any substance and from the other panellists.

Secondly make sure there is a strong chairman to keep them under control.

As an example I am the first to admit I am not a member of the Matt Chapman fan club, I don’t particularly like his style.

He can, however, come out with unorthodox and controversial views. When questioned and when he drops his act he is fully capable of producing a sound and rational argument to support his theory and is worth listening to, even if you don’t agree with his view.

What’s In A Name?

A large number of panels consist of “names” – “him off the TV” etc. etc.

However some of the best panellists are those who are not household names and the big stars in the media firmament.

So don’t be put off if you have not heard of all the panellists.

Who’s Best Then?

Obviously a great deal is down to personal preference.   

For me I like the views of commentators, they are invariably good racereaders, they spend most of their time watching racing and they can often point out some different angles.

For me, there are two who stand out head and shoulders above the rest. They are excellent commentators, excellent racereaders and they don’t have egos to get in the way. Please step forward Stewart Machin and Richard Hoiles, two men who I would actually spend my own money to hear their views.

Stats and trends can be controversial. Some dismiss them out of hand, others swear by them. Personally I think they are a very useful too but they are obviously not infallible. “Rules” are made to be broken but where there is a strong trend in a race it is dangerous to ignore.

The undoubted master of stats and trends is Paul Jones, who produces the Weatherbys Cheltenham Festival Betting Guide, which is the bible for trends and stats followers. Paul is a regular contributor to preview evenings and he is worth listening to.

Then there are the TV pundits, with those you pays your money and takes your choice. You generally know what you are going to get with them and if it happens to be a pundit you like then you can hang on their every word. If, by contrast, it is a pundit you do not rate at all, then you can always lay their tips.

Jockeys? Like trainers I question their value as they are going to invariably talk up their rides and runners from their own stables. Retired jockeys are a slightly different proposition as they may be more objective but remember the old adage “jockeys are the worse tipsters.”

Earlier I referred to the lesser known panellists. Three names who I would recommend listening to if they are on a panel are Andrew Mount, Sam Turner and Kieren Packman.

Andrew Mount, he of Trend Horses, fame is one of the most astute analysts in the game and he will often produce an interesting angle.

Sam Turner, of the Daily Mail, has the handicap of being a Wolves fan but ignoring that error of judgement he is one of the best analysis around and is always worth listening to.

Kieran Packman, Timeform, is able to add plenty of flesh to the ubiquitous Timeform ratings.

Beware The Couch

Finally a very personal view, avoid any panel which has Mark Winstanley on it.

No I have no particular view on Winstanley as a pundit, however as a human being he is the most obnoxious individual you could ever wish to meet.

I had the misfortune to witness him at a preview evening and it was the first time I have ever come close to walking out of such an event.

Now don’t get me wrong I am no prude, I am perfectly capable of coming out with rich Anglo Saxon language like the best of them, I also know enough dirty jokes to make even the most broad minded person blush . . .  but there is a time and place for both.

Winstanley’s performance at this particular preview was a constant stream of expletives, so bad it would even make the proverbial London docker blush, coupled with frankly offensive sexist and misogynistic asides. He was an utter disgrace.

My ideal panel?

My ideal panel would have either Bob Cooper or Nick Luck in the chair.

The panel would be Richard Hoiles or Stewart Machin, Matt Chapman, Paul Jones and any one of either Sam Turner, Andrew Mount or Kieran Packman. With Gary Wiltshire around to give a betting perspective.

Whatever your preference may be, if you go to a preview evening I hope you have a good time and I am sure all the winners will be mentioned by someone, sometime during the evening. You still have to identify which ones though.