The Good Old Days?

It is strange how your perceptions change as you grow older.

I am of an age where I can clearly remember the “winter of ’63” a winter where, for a primary school child life was bliss – it snowed on Boxing Day and the snow remained for almost three months.

I didn’t care a jot that we had no running water due to frozen pipes, in fact queuing at the water bowser with my parents was part of the adventure.

I also recall us becoming very popular with the neighbours as, later in the freeze, we were the first house in our road to actually have the water company come out and thaw our pipes – the reason being my mother was expecting my sister at the time.

I had to say having a sister was a disappointment – I wanted a puppy instead.

However the best part was playing out in the snow day after day. For adults it was probably three months of hell, for me it was three months of sheer delight.

Now roll the clock forward 47 years.

On the television we see children enjoying the snowfall, yet instead of feeling happy for them as they experience the delight I did all those years ago, my reaction is to snarl and revert to Victor Meldrew mode.

Whilst the snow may be fun to play in it is no fun whatsoever to drive in – even more importantly it has led to the decimation of turf racing. Indeed the snow has been so bad it has even led to the curtailment of some, so called, all weather race meetings.

Speaking of which when are we going to get rid of the wholly inappropriate “all weather” description, let’s just call it artificial surface racing.

I am one of those who blithely says I can get by without racing – you know what I can’t. I have been going stir crazy these past few weeks.

It became so bad I actually looked forward to going to an artificial surface meeting.

I have to say at this point that I have been very impressed with the racing authorities in the way they have handled the recent bad weather. From being an intransigent, inflexible beast a few years ago the authorities have been both reactive, proactive and, dare I say, innovative.

Last weeks all-bumper card at Southwell would never have even been considered previously. In the end it attracted good field, although small crowds. However the crowds may have been reduced by the bad weather – I tried to attend the meeting but had to turn back home after “progressing” a mile in the first hour.

Even when the snow cleared we were still kept on tenterhooks.

My racing of choice last Saturday, Huntingdon, had to survive a couple of inspections. Nothing to do with the snow but a thread of flooding from the nearby brook, the level of which was slowly rising.

This week should have been a return to normal and it started OK.

Yesterday was a turf meeting at Southwell, although as I drove through some dense fog patches near the course I did wonder if the weather was going to thwart me again.

Today the weather Gods have conspired to bite me on the bum yet again. All ready to go to Newbury, I checked early and the reports were it was raining.

By the time I emerged from the shower they had announced it was snowing and they were going to inspect at 9:00.

Sure enough racing was abandoned by 9:25 – another meeting bites the dust.

Please – no more snow – it looks pretty but it really is disrupting my life.

On the subject of life being disrupted, it has been bought home to me this last week just how much we do take things for granted.

As you will have gathered from my earlier comments I am no spring chicken and have been round the block a few times.

I can vaguely remember the very early days of cash machines where you were given a card by the bank which you could insert in a machine in return for an envelope of ten £1 notes, the card was retained after use.

Nowadays we take ATM’s and debit cards for granted. I know I rarely use cash any more, until this last week.

My debit card runs out the end of this month and normally my bank is usually very good at sending out new cards, usually about eight weeks before they run out.

So when I had not received my new card by the beginning of last week I rang them up. After going through seemingly endless phone options, then security checks, I finally managed to speak to a human who confirmed my new card had been processed on the 4th December.

We I had not received it.

No problem she says, I will cancel the card and order you a new one, which will arrive within the next ten working days.

Later that day I went to my local cash and carry, which only accepts debit cards and cash, no credit cards.

I went to pay for my goods with my debit card to be faced with the dreaded words “card declined” – I was saved further embarrassment by having sufficient cash on me to pay for the goods.

My immediate reaction was somebody had gotten hold of my new card and was milking my account. As soon as I was back home I checked my account and all was OK.

So it was a case of Mr Angry getting onto the phone to the bank again.

Well, to cut a long story short, when the replacement card was cancelled it also meant my current card was also automatically cancelled as it has the same card number – something the young lady neglected to mention in the morning.

This means, for the last week and a half, I have not had a debit card and boy oh boy do I miss it.

Shopping online is a no-no. I have to make sure I have enough cash on me whenever I go out and if I want to actually get some cash out then it is literally half an hour in the branch queuing, then having to prove who I am before I am allowed to have any of my money.

I had not realised just how much we take a little bit of plastic for granted.

Round one of the Racing For Change (RFC) proposals came out yesterday. Ten innocuous recommendations, nothing earth shattering, you could almost call it a “starter for 10”.

However the reaction to some of the changes, especially the recommendation to trial decimal SP’s, has been greeted with derision and outrage in some quarters.

Reading some of the "I'm all right Jack", "I can understand it, so anyone who doesn't is a moron" , "we've always done it that way" type postings on the various forums really make me despair.

With attitudes like that, it is no wonder newcomers find the sport unwelcoming and alien.

These are probably the same people who in the 19th century would have argued against the abolition of sending children up chimneys - "we've always done that".

In the last century they would have objected to women having the vote - "we can't change things, we understand the current system, we don't want newcomers upsetting out comfortable little world".

Or the move from £sd to decimalisation - "I know how pounds shilling and pence work, it’s what I am used to, so why should I change?"

Presumably those opposing the move to decimal odds are those who still yearn for pounds shillings and pence, farthings even groats. Yes the old currency was comfortable, traditional and had been around for years but did it make it better.

Only a time entrenched, myopic fool would argue that calculations post-decimalisation are not easier and simpler than they were pre-decimalisation.

It will be the same with odds – to the uninitiated odds like 85/40, 8/13, 15/8 are meaningless gobbledygook, the same odds expressed as decimals are easy and simple to understand.

They work absolutely fine on Betfair and I don’t see mass protests or petitions for them to revert to “traditional” odds.

Most of the complaints are coming from selfish people in their own little cocoons, happy to be in their comfort zone and sod anybody else.

Goodness knows how they would react if Racing For Change dared to suggest something radical - would they arm themselves with pitch forks and barricade themselves inside Southwell?

So some people say they will walk away from the sport if the changes are implemented - well they can't care much about the sport if something so petty will drive them away, good riddance to them I say, does the sport really want these whingers.

Would it be a bad thing if they left the sport anyway? The dinosaurs are past their sell-by date anyway so perhaps it is about time they died out.

Sure nobody likes change, we all like to be in our comfort zones but the world changes and racing should be no exception.

It is no longer the 19th century gentleman’s club it used to be, however it is still stuck in the mid 20th century and it needs to be dragged screaming into the 21st century.

Yes “tradition” is nice but it is not sacrosanct. If a tradition stands in the way of progress there should be no compunction in sweeping it aside.

It is no surprise one of the primary whingers is that well known self-publicist bookmaker Barry Dennis.

If Barry “Stegosaurus” Dennis doesn’t want to use decimal odds then, as far as I am concerned, he can take his ego and his pitch elsewhere.

Let’s face it all Barry Dennis really seems to care about is his own self publicity, his ego and of course making money, I personally don’t believe for one minute he cares at all about the greater good of racing, all he seems to care about is the greater good of Barry Dennis.

Anyone who saw the fly on the wall television documentary about him could clearly see for themselves what an obnoxious, sexist boor he is – is he really the sort of person we want as a public face of racing?

The initial RFC recommendations are no doubt weak and bland but a step in the right direction.

The concept of using decimal odds is what racing needs, but a one weekend trial will prove nothing, one way or the other.

If people care about racing more than they care about themselves then change must not only be embraced but actively encouraged.

These initial ten proposals are not going to make any radical difference – there are more important issues like admission costs, catering costs, developing a clear pattern to the racing seasons in order to engage the wider public.

However if those who go racing cannot even embrace simple innocuous changes what hope is there of ever implementing something more radical?

I sometimes wonder if the sport deserves to survive?

TV Cannot Attract Many New Racegoers

There has been a decent debate on one of the racing forums in recent days about coverage of racing on terrestrial television. In particular Channel Four’s coverage on Saturday afternoon.

The gist of some of the complaints is the standard of coverage, coupled with the BBC’s reduction of racing coverage, will not attract new followers to the sport.

I would contend no matter how slick the presentation is on television, very few new racegoers will be attracted via the medium, unlike in the “good old days” when many of my generation found the sport via television.

The trouble is society has changed.

I certainly got my love of racing from watching it on television on Saturday afternoons, in black and white as well. With “The Voice” on BBC and Tony Cook on ITV - along with John Rickman, Clive Graham et al. Initially though I watched it not out of choice but because there was little else to do as an alternative.

In those days there was little competition for the leisure time – people didn’t go out much at weekends, most families didn’t even have cars – we never had one.

There were only two television channels for goodness sake and both of those had sport on Saturday afternoons – probably racing on both channels at the same time – a monopoly.

Nowadays there are so many other attractions – it is only events like the Grand National and, to a lesser extent, The Derby and Royal Ascot that will probably attract the casual viewer.

Nowadays I think it will be more luck than anything else if somebody is converted to the sport via television – the two opportunities we have are the National because it is so popular and possibly Royal Ascot where we may just catch a few of those tuning in to watch the fashions.

So, although it grieves me to say it, no matter how slick the presentation - I don’t think terrestrial coverage in 2010 will draw in as many newcomers to the sport as we need – which is why, heaven help us, Racing For Change is going to be so critical to the future of our sport.

A Question Of Timing

We are, once again, at the time of year when the racing program is controlled as much by the weather than by the BHA Planning Department.

The recent cold spell has resulted in a spate of abandonments as are result of sub zero temperatures.

In many cases the decision not to race is clear cut, however on other occasions the decision is not so clear cut and we face the dilemma of Clerks Of The Course playing a game of brinkmanship.

Now it is fully understandable that a course be given every chance to race, however there also needs to be a point by which time a final decision to race has to be made.

Making a final decision half an hour or an hour before the start of racing is unfair on racegoers, who seem to be the last stakeholder considered when it comes to making the decision to race.

Why should racegoers be expected to make sometimes long journeys to the course only to find it is called off at the last minute?

If a racegoer has already bought their ticket should they still take the risk and travel to the course? If they do and racing is off then they have wasted their journey, if they don’t go and racing goes ahead they loose their, not insignificant, admission costs. Either way the racegoer is the loser.

However there was a very telling comment during yesterdays deliberations at Cheltenham.

Cheltenham’s PR manager went on BBC Radio Five Live at 10:11 and made a comment along the lines that if racing was called off then racegoers could still come along and use the bars. That, to me, says it all.

We also have the vexed issue of consistency of information when these protracted inspections take place and in the last week the differences have been well highlighted.

Last Monday was the Welsh National meeting at Chepstow. Clerk of the course Tim Long was open and frank throughout the day, telling the issues exactly as they were. Even going into the final inspection he openly said it was “touch and go”.

Racing did go ahead and it was a late decision, however with the honesty and openness those thinking of going racing were making an informed decision as to whether to set off or not. Having said that the decision was still made far too late.

Now move forward five days and Cheltenham. All the pronouncements coming from the course were positive, nothing negative.

Yet those who were at the course were almost universally of the opinion that it was more likely racing would not go ahead.

This belief was even reflected by the Betfair odds.

As it happened racing went ahead, however it was a very close decision and the overly optimistic pronouncements were not a true reflection of the real situation.

There are also questions being asked about the pressures being applied to ensure racing went ahead. Especially amongst the jockeys.

At 11:00 a significant number of jockeys were expressing concerns about the safety of the track yet we are told at 11:45 there had been a straw poll in the weighing room and only two riders had expressed dissent regarding racing going ahead.

There was no significant change in the ground conditions in those 45 minutes.

So why the volte-face from the jockeys?

Unsurprisingly none were prepared to say anything “on the record” so we are left to form our own conclusions.

After the first race further concerns were expressed about ground conditions and a further inspection was held, delaying proceedings and adding to the uncertainty.

In the end racing went ahead but with 30 non-runners.

Is what happened at Cheltenham on Saturday good for the image of racing?

I would suggest not.

Racing wants to attract new racegoers – how will we attract them if we have uncertainty like we have had the past few days? With racegoers not knowing if racing is going to go ahead or not?

Is “put racing on at all costs if possible” the right ethos?

If racegoers are messed about like this they will turn their backs on the sport. Treating racegoers with contempt will only serve to alienate them.

We almost had a third “will it, won’t it” scenario today with a second inspection called at Sandown at 10:00. At least on this occasion the decision was made at that time and racing was called off.

Now I think three hours before the first race is a good time to make a final call as to whether a meeting goes ahead.

If a course is not fit to race three hours before the first race it should be called off. Yes there will be some occasions when a meeting is called off when it may have been raceable come the off time of the opening race.

There is a more fundamental issue and that is who makes the decision to race. Should it be left to the courses who, let’s face it, have a vested financial interest in racing going ahead?

How big a say should the jockeys have, yes they are the ones who will be riding but they also have a vested financial interest in the meeting going ahead – no rides, no pay.

I have said this many times before but I believe the decision as to whether a race meeting goes ahead should be taken away from the courses and be put in the hands of an independent team under the auspices of the BHA.

By all means take soundings from the courses, jockeys, trainers and owners but also consider the impact on the racegoers as well. However the key aspect is the decision should not take into account the financial impact of cancellation but should be wholly on safety grounds.

A few more comments on the issue of cancellations.

There are some who believe more effort should be made to run a meeting like Cheltanham on a Bank Holiday than a low grade midweek meeting at somewhere Plumpton.

Why?

A course is either raceable or it isn’t – the quality of racing is irrelevant.

A prime example of a meeting being run for financial expediency was the Plumpton meeting where Tony McCoy rode his 3,000th winner.

Conditions were atrocious that day – can the BHA and officials at Plumpton put their hands on their hearts and say the meeting would still have gone ahead had McCoy’s landmark not been looming. I would suggest not.

One final observation - when there are a spate of abandonments why do the BHA feel compelled to add additional all-weather fixtures?

Invariably the cancelled meetings are turf national-hunt cards. By replacing them with all-weather fixtures there is not a “like-for-like” replacement. So what is the motive.

Who, apart from the bookmakers, do these low grade meetings help?

They don’t help the horses, trainers or jockeys who are missing out as a result of the abandoned meeting.

They are unlikely to attract the same racegoers as the abandoned meetings.

A Symmetrical Year

In terms of racing there has been a certain symmetry to 2009.

The year began with the racing program being decimated by bad weather and the year is ending the same way.

Both the flat and National Hunt scenes have been dominated, literally, by stars.

We have seen the 25th anniversary of all-weather racing in the UK and continued decline of racing coverage on the BBC.

Also the sport is having to face the realisation of the wider economic slump.

It is ironic with all the talk of global warming racing has been badly hit by freezing conditions in 2009. January and February saw the loss of 52 meetings, whilst December is also seeing a spate of weather related cancellations.

Racing authorities responded to the spate of cancellations by scheduling extra all weather meetings, mainly – or is that exclusively – at the behest of the bookmakers, who seem to be champions of the sandpit racing. Presumably because it is fodder for the mug punters.

Indeed the bookmakers have again been flexing their muscles in 2009. To the extent one seriously has to ask who actually runs racing – is it the BHA or is it the bookmakers. One sometimes wonders.

Hindsight is wonderful but I must confess if I could turn the clock back to 1961 when betting offices were “legitimised” I would fight the bill tooth and nail. Looking back I do not believe the bookmaking industry has been good for racing and racing would have been better served has we had a Tote monopoly with a fixed percentage going back into the sport. With such provision the sport would, I believe, be in a better financial situation than it currently is.

We are now faced with the situation where the industry basically has to go “cap in hand” to the Levey negotiations to try and get money from the bookmakers, most of whom are now based offshore.

Indeed the Levy is archaic. With racing accounting for only a small percentage of bookmakers turnover it seems incongruous the industry should be treated as a special case. If racing receives a levy then why shouldn’t football, rugby, tennis, golf or cricket?

On the track we have been treated to two super stars, one in either code. This year it is impossible to claim the two champions are not stars as it is in their name. In the yellow corner, for the flat team we have Sea The Stars and for National Hunt, in the green and yellow corner, we have Kauto Star.

John Oxx’s Sea The Stars is the undisputed star of the flat in 2009. He overcame a training setback to win the 2,000 Guineas at Newmarket.

The Derby was the next target, a race he approached with doubts about his stamina over 1½ miles. As he demonstrated his fantastic turn of foot The Derby was won without even breaking into a sweat. His detractors claimed he was lucky in the race was run to suit him


Next up was the Coral Eclipse at Sandown, down to 1¼ miles but taking on his elders for the first time. This time he had to work hard for victory but victorious he was beating fellow three-year-old Rip Van Winkle by a length with their elders four lengths plus in arrears.


Then the Juddmonte at York, only three rivals all from the O’Brien yard with Mastercraftsman his only serious rival. Riding a waiting race jockey Mick Kinane asked for an effort a furlong out and Sea The Stars eased into the lead for another length victory.

It was back to home territory in September as he lined up in the Irish Champion Stakes at Leopardstown. Once again his main challengers came from the O’Brien yard and although O’Brien runners took 2nd, 3rd and 4th places the winner was invariably Sea The Stars with a comfortable 2½ length victory.

His swan son was in, arguably, Europe’s greatest middle distance race the Prix De l’Arc De Triomphe at Longchamp. Two furlongs out it looked as though he was going to blot his copy book. However his veteran rider Mick Kinane did not panic and when a gap appeared he weaved his way through, the horse showing fantastic acceleration and a furlong out he was in front.

The rest, as they say, is history.

I was privileged to be in Paris that afternoon. I have never seen or felt such raw emotion at a racetrack. Standing in the press viewing area, surrounded by wizened and hardened hacks I wasn’t the only one to have tears running down my cheeks.

The brilliant horse, having achieved the unique Guineas / Derby / Arc treble has been retired to stud. Hopefully next year he will cover Zarkava , the 2008 Arc winner.

His rider Mick Kinane also decided to hang up his boots – not sure if he is off to stud as well – after a brilliant career and a season it would be impossible to better.

Also on the flat Ryan Moore was, once again, champion jockey.

Kieran Fallon finally returned to the saddle to show what a good rider he can be and he can put his demons behind him he could be the one to give Moore most to worry about next season.

On the jumps it was the other star Kauto Star who has taken most of the plaudits.

Having won last years King George for the third time his 2009 debut was in the Blue Riband Cheltenham Gold Cup, where he faced stablemate Denman (returning after a heart scare) and his old rival Exotic Dancer.


The race was over three from home when he hit the front and powered clear to record a 13 length victory over Denman with Exotic Dancer a further 2½ lengths back in third. In winning the race he became the first horse to regain the Gold Cup.

After his summer break her returned to Haydock for the Betfair Chase, where last year he unseated Sam Thomas at the last. He put in a clear round this year but his backers had a fright as Imperial Commander made him fight all the way to the line, with many observers thinking the champion had been beaten. After what seemed ages Kauto Star was awarded the race by a nose.


His final appearance this year was his attempt to win a fourth consecutive King George. Lining up against a high class field he put in what can only be described as the perfect performance.

His jumping was sublime and foot perfect. Taking the lead turning for home the judge needed binoculars not a camera to determine the winning distance as he came home 36 lengths clear of his rivals.

Of course his stablemate Denman cannot be ignored. Coming back from his heart scare he had an easy introduction back, coming second to Madison du Berlais at Kempton.

Next up was the Gold Cup, where he was arguably still not fully fit, and his second to Kauto Star.

He reappeared quickly in the Totepool Bowl at Aintree where he took a crashing fall two out. The screens went up and he was taken away in a horse ambulance but luckily the worse he suffered was a bad cut. The news was not so good for Exotic Dancer, runner-up in the contest, who sadly collapsed and died in the stables after the race.

After a summer break Denman was back at Newbury for the Hennessy. Burdened with a top weight of 11st 12lbs he was giving 17lbs plus to his rivals.

Despite this welter burden he came home a convincing 3½ length winner.

Elsewhere Venetia Williams became only the second woman to train a Grand National winner as 100/1 outsider Mon Mome took the Aintree showpiece.

It is hard to believe 2009 saw the 25th anniversary of all-weather racing. To some a great racing format to others the spawn of the devil.

It was mixed news for racecourses in 2009. Attendances seemed to buck the recession with a slight year on year rise on 2008.

January saw the demise of the ill-fated Great Leighs a course seemingly fated from the outset, late opening and seemingly dragged down by poor management.

By contrast the UK’s newest course Ffos Las opened to near universal acclaim. Its well drained racing surface attracting praise from some of the toughest critics – the top trainers.

Mixed news for those who rely of terrestrial for the television coverage. The BBC announcing they are greatly reducing their 2010 coverage on television.

BBC Radio has fared little better with their plumbing the depths and turning their racing coverage into a pantomime farce on the Friday of Royal Ascot.

A new agreement has been reached with Channel Four, however at a cost to racing where the industry is paying C4 to cover the sport – another case of the tail wagging the dog?

As in the real world the recession has hit the sport. The Levy being reduced with a consequential drop in prize money. Even the top owners are cutting back, some reducing their strings others leaving the sport entirely.

It will be interesting to see what impact the financial crisis in Dubai has on the Arab involvement in the sport. They are saying the funding issues are separate and unconnected. However I fail to see how, morally, the rulers of Dubai can continue to inject such huge funds into the sport when their country is verging on bankruptcy.

All in all 2009 has been an eventful year – I wonder what 2010 has in store for us?

BBC Contempt For Racing

Once again the BBC has clearly illustrated the contempt in which it holds racing.

In the BBC Sports Personality Of The Year, racing was given a derisory 45 seconds, plus a surreal item on Sea The Stars by that well known racing personality Professor Robert Winston – I cannot recall the last time I saw him on a race course!!

Yet BBC Radio’s erstwhile racing correspondent, Cornelius Lysaght, says in a Twitter posting “Racing industry loves to knock this prog but decent coverage length.”

Decent length?

A 45 second summary in a two hour program – decent?

Plus a meaningless item about, arguably the greatest horse of this generation, fronted by a fertility expert with no active involvement in racing. Why couldn’t Jim McGrath have presented an item about the horse?

Even gymnastics and cycling had a greater air time in the program.

Can you imagine the outcry if Football was dismissed in such an offhand manner? There would be questions in The House.

Then there was the award itself … Ryan Giggs, in defence of his victory Lysaght says, “here is a 36 year old decent guy still playing that you cant fail to admire.”

What about AP McCoy? He has been around almost as long as Giggs, has made a greater contribution to his sport than Giggs has ever made to his, yet he never, ever makes the shortlist.

Racing on BBC Television will be almost non-existent next year as they “cherry pick” the big races, Grand National, Derby, Royal Ascot and a couple of other meetings. Remember the days when Grandstand always had racing almost every week, sometimes two meetings in an afternoon.

It isn’t much better on BBC Radio Football, sorry Radio Five Live.

If there is a goal somewhere in some obscure game in the Blue Square Conference that will invariably take precedence over a live race commentary.

Even when there is live commentary it risks becoming a pantomime farce, literally.

BBC Radio has one of the best commentators in the business in the shape of John Hunt, yet even he ends up playing the stooge in a pantomime farce, a criminal waste of his talent.

Cast your mind back to the Friday of Royal Ascot 2009.

Instead of dedicated coverage of the Royal Meeting, coverage was interspersed with the Simon Mayo show (a broadcaster who makes no secret of his dislike of racing). On this particular afternoon he was performing a double act, in front of an audience, with some character called Mark Kermode, or listening to what he spouts he should perhaps be called Mark Commode.

Two races, the Albany and Coronation Stakes were to be broadcast during this sequence.

What happened, with both races, was that Cornelius Lysaght came up with 3 fancied horses and allocated them to the left hand, middle and right hand sections of the audience back in the studio.

They were instructed to cheer every time that horse was mentioned. During the race John Hunt would pause every time he mentioned one of these horses and they'd cut to the studio audience cheering.

Granted it was an extreme example and has, fortunately, never been repeated.

However the coverage was crass, embarrassing and should never have been broadcast in the first place.

What were Lysaght and Hunt thinking of agreeing to take part in such a farce?

Surely they are not that desperate to get the racing broadcast that they would stoop to any level?

If I were the racing correspondent, I would have refused point blank to play along with the charade and if it meant the races not being broadcast then so be it. I would, however, have made damned sure the public knew why the races had not been broadcast.

Even ignoring this extreme example there are still plenty of unnecessary interruptions in commentaries, especially in national hunt races, to serve as a distraction.

People generally listen to racing commentaries on the radio because they are unable to watch the race live or on television. They need the commentator to paint the picture of what is happening, developing the scene.

What they don’t want is to hear the views of Luke Harvey or anybody else, as the horses cross the Melling Roadback onto the main course at Aintree, they want to hear John Hunt describing the action.

Racing is not like football or golf, where commentators can be whimsical or engage in chit-chat. The action is relatively short and sharp and nothing should detract from the action on the track.

Since the late Peter Bromley retired the diminution of racing coverage on BBC Radio has been palpable.

No more classified racing results, no more results in sports bulletins. No more morning or evening racing bulletins.

One of the “justifications” for dropping the racing results was the information is available on Teletext or the internet. Not if you are driving and want to hear the results it isn’t!! Anyway the same argument could be applied to any sports results or sports news. Why not drop the classified football results, after all they are available on text and online?

I remember, a couple of years ago, when Alan Lee in The Times broke the story that BBC Radio were to drop the morning racing bulletins, it was contemptuously and arrogantly denied by John Myers in that mornings racing bulletin. Yet everything Lee predicted has come about.

It is conspicuous that neither Clare Balding nor Cornelius Lysaght have publicly come out to criticise the BBC’s approach to racing. Perhaps they are more interested in protecting their careers than the sport they follow, only they can answer that.

Do they really think what the BBC is doing in relation to the sport is acceptable?

If so then I would respectfully suggest they should make way for others who will fight, and fight publicly, for racing to have the air time it deserves.

If they do not agree then they should have the moral courage to fight their corner and fight it publicly, they would have a great deal of support from both inside and outside the sport.

It is an absolute disgrace that the BBC is being allowed to marginalise racing, a sport which has attracted almost 5.5 million live spectators in the first 11 months of 2009.

Had these changes been proposed under Peter Bromley's watch, the foundations of Broadcasting House would be shaking as a result of his explosive reaction. In these PC days it seems the acceptable thing is to roll over and accept the cuts.

Peter Bromley must be turning in his grave.

Not That Bad ........

Love them or loath them, bookmakers are an integral part of racing both in the UK and Ireland.



They add to the atmosphere on course, they contribute a significant amount to prize money both via the Levy and through sponsorship. Although it is interesting the Government has hinted they want to completely review the Levy and probably not before time as it was designed before exchanges, the internet and offshore bookmakers were even thought about.



To their supporters they are an essential element of the sport without whom the sport would not survive. To their detractors they are seen as parasites, keen to make as much money from the sport and only paying lip service to supporting the sport and doing all they can to fleece punters.



The truth, of course, is somewhere between the two.



One criticism of bookmakers, especially at all-weather meetings where the markets are inherently weak, is the over rounds are poor and it is almost impossible for punters to get any value. Indeed the ring at some meetings is so weak it is effectively controlled by the high street bookmakers.



Punters rightly complain at books in the mid 100’s for small field contests.



I, however, have made a discovery that makes the bookmakers, even at the all weather meetings, appear positively generous.



Having now done every UK track at least three times I am now aiming my sights higher. My new quest is to go racing in as many different countries as possible.



Latest in the quest is Malta, home to two courses one just south of Valletta on the main island and one on the adjacent island of Gozo.



Last Sunday I visited Marsa racecourse, the islands principal course. Staging mainly trotting with some flat racing, this meeting was an eight race trotting meeting, although meetings with ten race cards are not uncommon.



For punters there is a choice of the Tote or betting with bookmakers.



At the meeting five races had 16 runners, two 15 and one 13. Yet with such large fields the biggest price I ever saw on offer from the bookies was 6/1 and that was only on one horse in a single race. The over rounds were appalling, there wasn’t a single race where the book was below 300%. In one race it was a staggering 391%.



Despite the terrible odds, there were crowds six deep around the bookmakers kiosks, clearly the locals in Malta have no concept of percentages or value.



The Tote prices seemed to be more realistic, with some runners showing indicative odds of 33/1 for example.



Can you imagine the outcry in the UK or Ireland if bookmakers priced up a 300% plus race – the forums would melt with the heated comments and their pitches would probably be overturned.



I cannot see even the most ardent supporter of bookmakers trying to defend such a book.



So although our bookmakers have many faults we, in the UK and Ireland, should be grateful we don’t have Maltese bookmakers.