Who Needs Consultants?

So the racing authorities have instigated a review of racing with a view to making it more attractive to a wider audience – well that is good news.

The bad news is they are spending an inordinate amount of money paying marketeers to provide the answers.

A sure fire recipe for disaster if you ask me. Having worked in the “real world” for many years one thing I have learned is that most marketing people do not reside in the real world.

So to save the BHA a vast fortune here are my suggestions as to how to make racing more attractive to a wider audience:-

1. Clamp down on anti-social behaviour at the courses. It is the most off putting aspect of racing at the moment.
   
   Far too many race meetings are spoiled by drunken boorish behaviour.
   
   Simple - if they are drunk they are ejected if they kick up a stink about being ejected they are arrested for drunk and disorderly.
   
   Most race meetings seem to have a police presence and instead of strolling around chatting (which is what they seem to do) their time would be better spent dealing with those morons who confuse the racecourse with their local high street.
   
   The sooner courses sort out these drunks the sooner more decent racegoers will be attracted back.
   
   Even Newton Abbot last Tuesday evening sounded like a football terrace rather than a racecourse.
   
2. A contentious one but move to an off-course Tote monopoly with profits being fed back into racing.
   
   "Traditional" bookmakers allowed on-course only with the proviso that all betting is carried out via a central computerised system and their "admission" charge is a fixed percentage of their turnover.
   
   
3. Retain the split enclosure system, with one of the main enclosures being completely alcohol free.
   
   This will give racegoers a choice. Single enclosures are all well and good but no fun if you want to avoid the drunks.
   
   This also give a range of price options for those attending, from a cheap day out to that little something extra. i.e. you pays your money and you takes your choice.
   
4. Engage racegoers more.
   
   There is a PA system at the course - use it.
   
   Have paddock commentaries and make preview sessions mandatory at all meetings.
   
   Have the commentators comment as the horses are going down - most are excellent readers of horses condition.
   
   Publish the weight of the horses, it is not rocket science and is an invaluable aid to punters.
   Have two racecards at each meeting - one "traditional" one aimed at the beginner with plenty of information for beginners and a second, more "technical" one with form lines and form data.
   
   
5. Big screens and plenty of TV's in the stands at all meetings. Not all courses have perfect viewing.
   
   If people cannot see what is happening they will not bother coming again. Some courses are victims of their topology – where this is the case it is inexcusable not to have big screens and televisions.
   
   
6. Have plenty of racing related displays at the course, again engaging racegoers.
   
   
7. Have more (or in many cases - some) seating in the stands. My father-in-law is in his 80's and still loves his racing, however he is limited to the courses he can attend as most do not have anywhere where he can sit and watch the racing.
   
   
8. Adoption of point 2 will allow for entrace costs to be subsidised and therefore reduced to a more affordable level. Admission costs should also reflect the quality of the racing on offer.
   
   
9. Stop wasting money on consultants - the money can be better spent elsewhere.
   
   
10. Stewards enquiries should be "open", ideally cameras should be allowed, at the very least the press should be allowed in - the PA or RP could provide pooled coverage to prevent a media scrum.

and finally:-

Stop pussyfooting about and tinkering with the fixture list - just slash it.

All Monday's, apart from Bank Holidays, should be blank days.

We sometimes have bad weather in the winter - if this results in blank days accept it - don't bother putting on low grade betting fodder as a late replacement.

There should be more than three concurrent meetings in the afternoon and no more than two concurrent meetings in the evening.

There should also be a reintroduction of a proper geographical split of meetings.

Fit To Drop

As anyone who knows me will attest I am not exactly a lean mean fighting machine and I definitely have what is kindly described as a “middle age spread”.

It wasn’t always thus, I used to be lean and fit, playing sport most days. Indeed one of my “proudest”, if proudest is indeed apt, moments came about 25 years ago.

I was working on a new computer application for the Royal Navy, based at what is called a concrete battleship, i.e. a land naval base.

Being a military base sports and fitness were considered important and everyone was encouraged to play sports.

Consequently every lunchtime was spent playing some kind of sport, including some more esoteric ones.

Amongst my favourites was ”strong man rounders.” This was basically the same as the rounders you play at school, however instead of playing with a conventional rounders ball, you play with a deflated rugby ball instead.

Sounds easy?

Don’t you believe it!!

Oh yes, hitting the ball is easy enough, however to get the ball to travel any distance needs incredible upper body strength and you need to hit the ball in exactly the right spot – dead centre.

Hit it off centre it goes into an almighty spin. That, of course, adds to the challenge to the fielding side – have you ever tried catching a rugby ball spinning fast the “wrong way”?

For me, the best game of the lot was deck hockey. As the name implies it is normally played on the deck of a ship at sea, where obviously playing with a ball on an open deck is not a good idea.

Basically it is ice hockey without the ice. You play with a puck and sticks which, in size terms, are halfway between a standard hockey stick and an ice hockey stick.

The rules are virtually the same as ice hockey and it is fast and very physical, shoulder charging was not only allowed, it was actively encouraged.

Due to the transient nature of the base the teams tended to change quite regularly. However because we were working on a long term project we had a well established team and we played well together and we developed a reputation for playing hard.

A group of marine commandos turned up for a three month secondment and it wasn’t long before they had a team up and running and they too developed a reputation for being hard.

Inevitably we were destined to meet and come the big day there was a decent size crowd to watch this clash of the Titans. I have to admit some of us were nervous, whilst others were really fired up.

I won’t go into the full details, suffice to say two of the opposition ended up in hospital, one with a broken leg, and after twenty minutes they walked off saying we were too dirty.

So I can proudly say I was one of a team who made the Marine Commandos retreat.

Over the years my participation in sport diminished. Nowadays my “exercise” is limited to walking from the car to wherever I am going.

Last weekend it was hammered home just how unfit I am as I set off to Ayr for the Scottish Grand National.

Coming into land at Prestwick Airport you can see the racecourse, about three miles away as the crow fly’s.

Normally I get a train from the airport into Ayr, then either get a taxi or walk (about a mile) to the course.

I arrived at the station, found I had just missed a train and it was half an hour until the next one.

So I thought “well it is four hours before racing starts - I will walk to the course.”

So I set off through Prestwick Town - a lovely place - a proper High Street with real shops.

By then the sun was out and I was wearing a suit and carrying my computer bag, not an ideal combination.

I knew roughly where the course was - basically it was carry on down the Prestwick - Ayr road then turn left on the outskirts of Ayr.

Although the theory was perfect, I misjudged when to turn left and turned off far too soon.

I did not realise at first of course but after another mile I though "I should be there by now"

Further on I came to a playing field and I could see the Grandstand in the distance but could not see how to get to it.

Another half mile I reached a retail park, swallowed my pride, admitted to being lost and asked a couple in the car park for directions.

"Are you driving?"

"No, walking?"

"Oh!!!"

Anyway they gave me directions and it was another another mile and a half.

So I arrived at the course 1½ hours after leaving the airport, sweating, aching - the computer bag weighed a ton by now. I arrived in the press room bedraggled and shattered and immediately downed a half litre bottle of water.

That's not the end of it though.

I emerged after racing planning to get a taxi back to the airport. When I got outside there must have been about 300 people in the taxi queue and no taxi's there.

So - guess what? Yep I had to start walking again, although I did ask this incredulous police woman for directions for the quickest way to walk back to the airport.

I walked 1¼ miles before I reached the main Ayr - Prestwick road then managed to catch a bus to Prestwick town, from where it was a 3/4 mile walk to the airport.

This morning I checked the route I took on Google Earth - the walk to the racecourse should have been 3¾ miles, - I turned it into a 5¼ mile trek.

I have a big blister on my foot and my legs are still aching – I really am not fit and I am not 25 any more either.

A Matter Of Conscience

The question of horse fatalities has come to the fore again in the last ten days, following the death’s of Exotic Dancer and Wichita Lineman and, of course, the gut wrenching images of Mel

In Blue’s fall in the Foxhunters at Aintree.

Imagine if there was a human sport which had the same ratio of fatalities as racing, especially NH racing. There would be a massive clamour, and quite justifiably so, to have it banned.

Are we saying we value the life of a horse any less than the life of a human? If so should we actually be making such a judgement? What gives homo-sapiens the right to think it is superior to other species?

If we do accept the view the life of a horse is valued less than that of a human at what stage does the loss of life become too high?

A 0.1% attrition rate, 1%, 5%, 10% and if so how do you judge how much is too much? Some will argue, and a quote from a contributor to The Racing Forum, “there would be a helluva lot of people (and horses) out of work if NH racing was banned.”

Is that an argument for doing nothing? People’s livelihoods used to depend on sending children up chimneys or exploiting manual workers in dangerous working conditions. Neither of those, quite rightly so, would be tolerated in this day and age.

Attitudes change and it is possible the attitude of society may well change so that one day in the future racing, especially, national hunt racing, is banned because the cost to the equine contenders is considered too high.

I have posed many questions here – I am not pretending I know all or indeed any of the answers.

I do know I love horse racing, I love NH racing, it does not mean that I do not seriously have to examine my conscience on occasion.

I can see why many consider it cruel and when you see some of the events of the past few weeks it is nigh on impossible to morally justify the sport.

The deaths of high profile horses like Wichita Lineman of Exotic Dancer bring the fatalities more into the headlines, but the death of some 60 rated novice chaser is no less tragic.

I also realise there may well be a time when the sport is considered too cruel and it becomes impossible to justify it on moral grounds and the fact its banning would result in thousands being put out of work would hold now sway whatsoever.

Such an argument did not work when the ban on hunting was being put through Parliament. It would not work if there was a proposal to ban NH racing Racing is not exempt from the court of public opinion and we must not assume our sport is in some way a sacred institution – no matter how much we may love it.

Just because an activity is deemed acceptable now does not mean it will be acceptable in five, ten, fifty, one hundred years time. Public opinion changes.

There of those who say if you feel that strongly about injuries and fatalities then you should not follow the sport. Would that achieve anything?

With the amount of racing I go to I probably seeing more accidents on the track than most and that does not make them any more acceptable. I freely admit I have, more than once, shed a tear.

If I close my eyes I can still see Conny Noble, a beautiful grey, lowly rated, collapsing in front of me at Chepstow a few weeks ago.

Do I walk away from the sport because of that - if I thought, for one moment it would improve things of course I would - without hesitation. But I know it would make no difference at all. I am not at a stage in life where I am getting long in the tooth.

I have seen countless changes over the years which have really improved the safety of our sport.
It is almost impossible to believe now that when I first stated following racing the running rails were made of wood and the posts concrete. They claimed numerous lives both human and equine.

Fences were much more unforgiving and dangerous. Fences are now by-passed if there are stricken horses or riders on the other side. Anyone who remembers racing before fence by-passing will have a story of the field charging over a fence and some ambulance man doing his best to protect a stricken jockey.

The safety of racing has improved beyond recognition over the years - why?

Because of people who had consciences questioning what was wrong having concerns and doing something about it.

Had they decided to walk away from the sport would we still have a sport today?

We will never eliminate the risks and dangers that are inherent in the sport, however I believe it is incumbent upon everyone who follows the sport to still look at ways of making it safer.

Yes Beechers Brook was spectacular in the 1960's but it claimed too many victims. It has been made less dangerous but it is still, nevertheless, spectacular in its own way. As a species we do not like change - sometimes change is necessary.

When they first appeared I hated the fixed brush hurdles with a vengeance - because they are different - having seen them I am coming round to believe they are safer.

Everything in life carries risk.

Do we not get into a car because so many die needlessly in car accidents? Do we avoid having an operation because some people don't recover from an anaesthetic?

Of course not.

Do we expect the authorities to make things safer to reduce the risk?

Of course we do and racing should be no different.

If racing is to survive in the 21st Century it must be seen to be continually reducing the risks to all those who take part - be they human or equine.

Aintree - You Can Keep It

Obviously I am a keen racing fan and am an obsessive National Hunt supporter. Whilst Cheltenham is the pinnacle of the racing year, in terms of racing quality the Aintree Grand National Festival comes a very close runner-up.

However whereas I cannot wait to get back to racing at Cheltenham, I would not have the slightest regret if I were never to attend the Aintree Festival again.

Although the racing is of a high quality the meeting itself encapsulates, for me, much of what is wrong with modern racing.

Call me old fashioned but for me, an afternoon at the races should be a relaxing day out, in a warm friendly relaxed atmosphere in the convivial company of others who enjoy their racing. Sadly you will find none of these at the National meeting.

You realise what you are in for even before you enter the course.

Racegoers are treated as if they are going to be troublemakers, corralled like sheep or cattle.

You actually wonder if you are attending a race meeting or a football match where they are expecting trouble.

Arrive by train and you are greeted by Merseyrail staff who fall into one of two categories. They are either over zealous little Hitler’s who would make members of the Waffen-SS look like meek childminders. Alternatively there are “chippy Scousers” displaying that infamous local “wit”, which I somehow always fail to find totally unfunny. Clearly none of them have ever attended any customer service course.

On arrival at the station at a busy time and you are then corralled into what is effectively a holding pen until they decide you can proceed to the course.

Before entering the course you will then have to go through the so called security screening process. This screening dates from after the 1997 National. This, if you recall, is the meeting which was abandoned due to the IRA bomb threat and which resulted in one of the most embarrassing, incompetent displays of policing ever seen in this country. Basically the Merseyside force panicked big style and over-reacted in their reaction to the threat.

Perhaps Merseyside Police should spend some time with the Thames Valley police who are responsible for policing Royal Ascot, a much more high profile “target” from a security perspective but policed in discreet but effective manner.

Almost as a means to try and justify their actions the “ring of steel” was introduced to “protect” the event.

In reality this security screening is just for show and is a complete and utter waste of money.

This is exemplified by my arrival at the course on Thursday. All racegoers have to pass through airline style security scanners. You are meant to put mobile phones and metal item in a bag for examination. I “forgot” to take my PDA out of my jacket pocket. I went through the scanner, set off the alarm. At which point I was expected to be searched but no – absolutely nothing at all.

Next was the bag “search” – I had a computer bag with me. Four sections. I was asked to open one of them, a quick look inside. That was it.

So we had security screening. I set the alarm off and was not searched, I had a bulging bag which was not searched. What is the point? (This is not a “one off” either – the same happened to me last year. Indeed last year I saw a chap set off the alarm. He was asked to step aside to a search and he just walked off and was not challenged.)

So you are now in the course. Not in a happy mood by the way you have been herded like sheep. Concerned, because the ring of steel is, in reality, a just token mesh, expensive window dressing.
Once inside you wonder where you are. Are you at a racecourse or are you at any UK High Street on a Saturday night?

Sadly, I would say the overwhelming majority of those at the course will not see a horse all afternoon. Most have glasses of alcohol in their hands and seem hell bent on pouring as much alcohol down their throats as possible.

The middle day is “Ladies Day”, although the other two days could easily be described as dress (or perhaps “undress”) rehearsals.

These Ladies days should be a “delight on the eye” and granted some of the outfits are delightful, being worn by attractive women. Sadly, however, these are a minority. The majority, not to put too fine a point on it, are awful.

I was tempted to include the words “mutton” and “lamb” in describing the women, however in doing so I would be insulting sheep.

There is so much fake tan on display I am surprised there is not a world shortage. The trouble is most of the tan is so obviously fake and badly applied it looks comical, especially when combined with high heels, mini skirts, tight tops and size 20 bodies.

If it rains the puddles are orange and the racegoers have “tiger stripes” from the streaks.

As the booze flows the noise gets louder the legs more wobbly.

Earlier I compared Aintree with a UK High Street on a Saturday night. The similarity is most apparent towards the end of the day. Racegoers falling over, vomiting, making even more of an exhibition of themselves.

Of course it isn’t just the women. The lads are out as well – ogling the women, swilling the beer doing very impressive impersonations of wide boys and spivs.

I suppose I should show some balance and say this phenomenon is not unique to Liverpool and Aintree. It is something that is certainly endemic at a number of northern courses. Chester is as bad as Aintree for exhibitionist “ladies”, whilst the loutish lads predominate at York. For balance both sexes attempt out drink one another at Newcastle and Haydock.

Indeed thinking about it, the problem isn’t just a northern problem anymore as this insidious behaviour is now creeping south. Newmarket is attracting more than its fair share of undesirables – look at the problems at the last two Guineas meetings or the July meeting and Sandown has seen a few juicy punch-ups in the last year.

The sale of booze is a cash cow for racecourses so you can see their reluctance to clamp down on sales. However do they not realise they are going to lose the genuine racegoers. I know many people who used to go racing on a regular but now no longer go because of the “atmosphere” at an increasing number of courses.

I’m not sure what the Liverpool version of a Chav or Pikey is – whatever it is they are out in force at Aintree and that is what ruins what should be one of the best meetings of the year and that is why I, regrettably, don’t care if I never go to Aintree again.

He Who Pays The Piper

One of the talking points within racing over the last week has been the decision of journalist and columnist Paul Haigh to leave the Racing Post after 23 years.

“The agenda of Britain's only racing/sports newspaper is now being dictated entirely by its main advertisers," he said in an interview with The Guardian.

"Almost all the racing media is now under the effective editorial control of the bookmakers either because bookmaker advertising is essential to their survival, or because other racing correspondents have been made aware of, er, the side on which their bread is buttered."

The only real surprise is that some are surprised at what Haigh says.

Of course the defensive wagons have been circling at the Post’s headquarters at Canary Wharf and the Post’s editor has been quick to condemn Haigh and the senior hacks have begun a whispering campaign to discredit him. Both of which are to be expected.

After all if editor Bruce Millington were to say the truth and confirm what Haigh said is absolutely true then he would be the next one out of the door at Canary Wharf.

I worked in the IT industry for 20 years, the last twenty in the insurance and banking sector.

For the final half dozen years I worked in what was called a Relationship Management role. The role was an interface between the IT department and the users of the IT systems – i.e. the business areas and, ultimately, the banks customers.

Sounds grand but the job was effectively that of a spin doctor. The usual scenario being IT cocked up and our role was to limit the damage and of course never admit there had been a “cock-up” unless there was no other choice.

Of course the business users were not stupid and able to “read between the lines” and as long as we were honest “off the record” there was a general acceptance these things happen.

Occasionally there would be the occasional senior manager, even Director who would get fed up with the constant cover-ups and speak out. However there bravery came at a price and no matter how good they were it signaled the end of their career in the bank.

There was one exceptionally good Head of Banking, very competent, plenty of good ideas. He had the temerity to question the ability of the IT department to deliver (justifiably so) and he dared raise it at an executive board meeting. The IT director (who was also very close to the Chief Exec and Chairman) took umbrage and within a week it was announce the Head Of Banking was looking to further his career elsewhere. His crime – speaking the truth.

Of course, to the outside world, nothing was ever admitted. Even when a new IT system that had not been completed properly or fully tested was implemented because senior management has decreed it would go live on a certain day - there was never an admission as to what had happened.

So yes I understand Mr. Millington’s public pronouncements that the bookmakers have no editorial control over what happens in the Post or that the Post is “soft” on bookmakers.

However anyone working in the industry knows it is true.

I once heard one of the representatives of a leading bookmaker say, “the Post will not be a problem, we are a major advertiser and have an influence.”

My personal belief is the problem is not the influence of the advertisers per-se, it is the lack of credible competition.

If there was a decent competitor the Post would have to take news gathering much more seriously. Currently it does not need to. It can take the easy option.

It could, if it wanted to, also stand up to the bookmakers. Although the bookmakers may bluster and feel they can dictate if the Post stood up to them what would they do?

Does anybody seriously think a major bookmaker would stop advertising in the paper because the paper did not tow the line?

Of course not. Although the post needs the advertisers the advertisers need the Post just as much.

It is a symbiotic relationship. A parasite and a host, the only area of debate is which one is which?

It is a pity the Post management do not have the desire to produce more (any) investigative journalism. Indeed, if word on the street is to be believed, the Post will actually be reducing the number of journalists it employs and moving towards using input from the PA.

What is really needed is some viable competition to the Post.

Until such time and until there is a strong management at the Post it will be a case of “he who pays the piper, calls the tune” and the only ones who will benefit from that are the pipers.

Going Into Disrepute

Not for the first time I find myself writing about going reports that have a basis more in the realms of fantasy as opposed to the real world.

The latest course to seemingly make a mockery with their going reports is Haydock Park. The feature race of the afternoon had twelve overnight declarations, only five went to post.

I will imagine the race sponsors were mightily impressed.

Had there been some tropical monsoon which turned the ground into a quagmire? Nope

Was there some freaky, unpredictable, microclimate in the Newton La Willows area? Nope

Was it the original Good, Good to soft in places going report given by the course, turned out to be a complete work of fiction? Probably

There was no tropical heatwave at Haydock yet between the first and second race the official going changed from the aforementioned good, good to soft in places to good, good to firm in places. Think about it that, is a significant change.

Did the conditions really change that much in half an hour? Unlikely, as if the ground was drying that fast then surely it would have been something like titanium hard by the final race.

Could it be the course gave a more “favourable” going report to attract bigger fields? Who knows?

If that was the case are they that naive to think they would not be rumbled?

What can be gained by giving inaccurate going reports? Haydock are now coming under attack from all quarters and I have to say the criticism.

If I was an owner or trainer who had sent a runner to Haydock, only to have to withdraw it because of the unsuitable ground then I would be knocking on their door demanding reimbursement of my travelling costs.

So how do we resolve this situation?

The first thing we must do is take away provision of the going reports away from the courses themselves. They re not in a position to look at the situation objectively.

Now I am not saying all courses are liberal with their going descriptions but there are many courses where going reports are taking with a huge pinch of salt. Many Clerks Of Courses are refreshingly honest, however too many come under pressure from course management to give, how shall I put it, favourable reports.

The provision of going reports should be taken out of the hands of the individual courses and handed over to a central BHA team. All going reports should be based entirely on going stick reports and the going stick readings should be made in an approved manner, supervised by an independent observer.

I recall being told of one going stick demonstration where attendees were actually told how to use the stick in such a way as to obtain a “favourable” reading, including actually seeking out false patches of ground.

If racing carries on producing such inaccurate going reports and nothing is done about it then, once again, the credibility of our sport will be called into question.

Another Fine Festival

For most of us who love the jumping game the pinnacle of the racing year takes place over four days each March is a delightful corner of Gloucestershire, near a small village called Prestbury - the meeting more widely known after the name of the nearby town – Cheltenham.

It is a recent innovation to move the Festival to four days, some still wish it was spread over three days and that having the extra day dilutes the Festival. I don’t think it does, the extra races are competitive handicaps and they give an opportunity for decent horses to run at Cheltenham, who would not otherwise get a run.

Indeed it could be argued, over the years, some of the lowest rated horses to have run at Cheltenham have run in the Championship races. Races in which they have no chance of winning, but are entered solely for the vanity of their owners.

Anyway that is by the by, we have a four day festival and I have relished every moment of it – well almost all.

On the equine front we have seen more than out fair share of shocks with some very fancied runners being turned over – even in the Championship races in which Binocular and Kasbah Bliss were turned over in the Smurfit Kappa Champion and Ladbrokes World Hurdles respectively. Being beaten fairly and squarely by Punjabi and Big Bucks respectively.

Of course the other two championship races went to the stars, with Master Minded winning the Seasons Holidays Queen Mother Champion Chase, albeit with a below par performance but still winning by seven lengths. The runner-up’s performance was also a particularly emotional one with ten-year-old Well Chief overcoming a near two year absence.

The Totesport Gold Cup also produced an emotional 1-2. Kauto Star put in a near faultless performance to become the first horse to regain the Cup. Equally emotional was Denman coming home in second place, finally showing he has seemingly recovered from his cardiac problems and his dire performance at Kempton was a one off.

After the race it was one of those occasions where the runner-up received as many cheers as the winner.

Of course looking ahead it raises, assuming trouble free preparations, the potential of a decider between Denman and Kauto Star – what a prospect?

Away from the Championship races there were some inspirational performances.

Tony McCoy getting Wichita Lineman home on Tuesday showed why he is the greatest jockey – no other jockey would have got the horse home.

In the preceding race Forpaddydeplasterer received one of those welcomes that only the Irish can provide and you would have to have a heart of stone not to have been pleased for connections.

Appropriately on Thursday, Ladies Day, Venetia Williams had a magnificent 277/1 double with Kayf Aramis and Something Wells and , for good measure, she also trained the runner-up of Something Wells race.

We also saw some future stars – Dunquib was a very impressive winner of the Bumper, arguably the best performance of the four days.

The Queen made a rare visit to Cheltenham on Friday mainly to see her runner Barbers Shop compete in the Gold Cup. Of course there was not a Royal winner – imagine the response had there been one!!

Despite the credit crunch the crowds were not down that much and betting turnover was pretty much as expected.

The Cheltenham crowds are legendary with a massive Irish invasion. The black stuff flows – literally most of the puddles in the village were spilled stout as opposed to water.

The good aspect is although the beer flows the atmosphere is still pretty good, somewhat noisy though.

There was a band performing in the Guinness Village – they were situated pretty close to the media centre and I have to say their set was pretty good – first time around. However when you hear the set about six times a day over four days it does lose its attraction.

The queues, of course are legendary, especially for the toilets – the golden rule don’t drink too much and have excellent bladder control!!!

One improvement this year is the traffic control seemed a great deal better than in previous years – it only took 40 minutes to get away from Cheltenham on the Friday!!!

Now, of course, life returns to normal – it doesn’t mean, of course, we can’t start discussing next years Festival.

So, who will win the 2010 Gold Cup?