What A Carry On

The “Carry On ……..” films are something of an acquired taste and were based on a standard formula where there wass incompetence, misunderstanding and innuendo.

The saga of the 2011 fixture list certainly fulfils the first two of the above criteria.

According to the latest pronouncement from the BHA it looks like being late September before the 2011 fixture list is published – which will not be good news for printers of racing diaries and calendars.

The delay in publishing the new fixture list, normally published in July, is the result in a catastrophic drop in the Levy.

By all accounts those in the industry were expecting a levy yield of £150m, whereas the actual yield will be around the £70m mark.

Talking to individuals closely involved in the negotiations, those in the BHA were so certain of there being a £150m yield they had no “plan B”. Indeed it was actually put to a senior director of the BHA that the yield was not going to be as expected and when asked what the alternative would be, the somewhat worrying response was along the lines “the Levy will yield £150m, we do not need a contingency plan.”

If this assertion is true, and I have no reason to doubt either the reliability or integrity of my source, then it does not auger well for the future of the sport when the “leaders” adopt such an arrogant stance.

The press release detailing the delay in announcing the fixture list had one very telling paragraph in particular.

“…………. meeting of the British Horseracing Authority Board and the subsequent meeting of the Levy Board, together with detailed dialogue with the Racecourse Association and Horsemen's Group.”

Therein lies the problem, there are too many diverse, vested and often contradictory interests involved in the running of the sport.

More fundamentally the Levy is an unfair and anachronistic means of funding the sport.

Why should horse racing alone benefit from a bookmakers levy?

Why shouldn’t soccer, rugby, tennis, golf benefit from a levy as well? Indeed should the BBC not get a Levy payment on the Strictly Come Dancing betting turnover?

When the Levy was introduced almost 50 years ago bookmakers bet almost exclusively on horse racing and the Levy model had some credence.

Now, however, the environment is completely different and horse racing is just one of many sports vying for the punters pound.

Love them or hate them and I have to confess I am no fan of bookmakers, they are canny operators. Most have moved offshore to maximise returns and decrease their Levy liabilities and who can blame them for that. Most are shareholder owned businesses and they have a legal obligation to ensure maximum returns for investors.

To “protect” the Levy they made voluntary payments from the offshore betting and, culpably, racings leaders rolled over without a fight.

If offshoring was not enough to fatally damage the Levy then the introduction of the betting exchanges really threw everything into disarray.

Bookmakers complained because, overnight, their monopoly on laying had disappeared. No longer did they have exclusive access to and were able to utilise insider knowledge to make a killing.

Of course the bookmakers cried foul, saying individuals can benefit from inside knowledge, not known to the public at large.

That complaint is, of course, somewhat disingenuous as bookmakers have for years made use of information not generally available to the general public. Whether the information comes from schmoozing connections or, more sinisterly, overlooking defaulted accounts in return for information.

But of course the real objection the bookmakers have to the exchanges is it has hit their bottom line and profit.

For all their faults bookmakers are run by accountants who know exactly what they are doing.

Unfortunately the same cannot be said of the BHA.

It only needs a quick read through the CV’s of the BHA board of Directors to realise how weak it is and what little grasp of running a multi-million pound business there is.

Far too many of the Executive are racing insiders with no experience of running a major business. With all due respect to the individuals concerned how can a former trainer, formster and TV pundit, Clerk Of the Course and Cop as well as other lifelong racing insiders effectively control a multi-million pound enterprise?

Even those bought in from outside the industry do little to inspire confidence with only Paul Roy boasting any credible experience and that is only in merchant banking.

Even the Finance Director’s only previous experience was effectively as a departmental head of finance within the BBC – not the perfect financial model for horseracing.

With such a weak management structure it is little wonder the wiz kids n the bookmaking fraternity are able to run rings around the BHA.

Of course the lack of significant “real world” business expertise amongst the BHA executive is only part of their problem.

More significant are the other vested interests pulling in different directions. From the Racecourse Association (RCA) representing the racecourses, through to the Horseman’s Group representing trainers and the Racehorse Owners Association (ROA) representing owners. All of whom have differing and often contradictory agendas.

With such a fragmented industry, full of self interested bodies, it is actually a wonder racing has actually survived as long as it has.

Now it is approaching decision time.

The focus on next years fixture list centres around the 250 BHA funded meetings, of which 150 are in doubt.

The 16 fixtures allocated to Ffos Las, as a new course are safe, which is a relief as without them the course would not have been sustainable and it may well have followed that great white elephant Great Leighs although, unlike Great Leighs, Ffos Las is a course which deserves to succeed.

The main reduction will be at weekends with funding for four Saturday and two Sunday meetings each weekend. I agree with the four meetings on a Saturday but would prefer to see three meetings on a Sunday at the cost of having a blank midweek day, say having Mondays (apart from Bank Holidays) as blank days.

Of the surviving BHA funded meetings even some of these are in doubt as most of the meetings are the all-weather twilight meetings and these will only be allowed if the courses can guarantee an average prize fund of £3,000 a race, a sum significantly more than is on offer now. Better still, bearing in mind these meetings are run for the benefit of the bookmakers, perhaps the bookmakers should fully fund them.

In my view a reduction of 150 meetings in 2011is nowhere near enough. This equates to an approximate 10% reduction in fixtures against a drop in predicted revenue of around 50% ….. even a a grasp of basic schoolboy mathematics (or as I believe it is called now – numeracy) will tell you the figures will not add up.

There needs to be a greater drop in the number of fixtures and if that means racecourses having to close or the number of horses in training and the number of trainers operating being reduced then so be it.

Sure there will be posturing saying the industry could not survive such cuts, that is a parochial view. Is it not better to have a smaller more efficient industry than no industry at all, which is what will happen if drastic action is not taken.

In all other industries and walks of life drastic cuts are having to be made, racing should not be an exception. Yet one is left with the strong impression racings rulers think the problems can be addressed with the application of a sticking plaster rather than drastic surgery.

Perhaps it would be a good thing if racing as we currently know it failed. It would be painful but it would also give the opportunity for a new, leaner, better managed sport to emerge.

Personally I would like to see the sport run on the Hong Kong model, where all aspects of the sport are run and controlled centrally. There would be a Tote monopoly with all profits being returned to the sport. Broadcast rights would be managed more efficiently and professionally.

It is absolutely absurd and a damning inditement on the ability of the sports management that the sport actually ends up paying a broadcaster to cover the sport.

In the short term the 2011 fixture list should be cut to a maximum of 1,000 fixtures.

I have just spent a week away from racing and have survived it reasonably well, although the week off was far from relaxing.

It was also bought home the nothing should be taken for granted.

My final days racing before my break was Shergar Cup day at Ascot, another successful renewal of the contest with the atmosphere not even spoiled by the showery weather.

The excitement lasted all afternoon with neither the team, nor jockeys title being decided until the final race.

Indeed, going into the final race, any one of the four teams could, mathematically, win the contest. Although, realistically, it was a two horse (or should that be two team) race with Ireland and Europe battling for the final honours.

Europe won the final contest but with Ireland finishing in three of the points winning positions they ensured sufficient points to claim the title and Fran Berry’s second gave him enough points to win the riders title, prompting him to say “I have never been so pleased to ride a second.”

There was, however, a dark cloud over the meeting and it wasn’t from the weather. Shortly before racing news began to filter through that this years wonder horse, Harbinger, had suffered a career, possibly life, threatening injury.

Here was a horse who had astounded the packed Ascot stands with an awesome performance in the King George VI and Queen Elizabeth Stakes just two week earlier. Now his career was about to end.

In a moment his canon bone suffered a hairline fracture, ending a career in an instant. He left good memories but also left unanswered the question, how much better could he have been.

At least he did not pay the ultimate price and he can, hopefully, look forward to a future at stud.

The fragility of life and how everything can be changed in an instant was re-enforced less than 48 hours later.

On Monday afternoon I received a text from my nephew in Australia saying he and his wife, who is English, would be returning to the UK in the next couple of days as his father-in-law had passed away.

The news was completely unexpected and a shock to all, even worse for my nephews wife being the other side of the world and unable to get back to her family quickly.

Her father was a lovely man, a gentleman in every sense of the word.

He had parked his car opposite his place of work and was about to cross the road when he collapsed and died. No inclinations of ill health, it just happened – he was only sixty.

In a split second his whole families life was turned upside down, never to be the same again.

The above also tie in, loosely, with my week off and that too has an indirect racing connection.

Each August my parents come and stay with us for a week. It gives them a complete change of scenery and it gives my Mum a complete break as she is not allowed to lift a finger or do anything when they are here.

Normally we spend the week going on day trips but these were to be limited this year as my Dad, sadly, is in failing health so long days out were out of the question.

I did have one very special treat in store for him though.

I know we have had glorious weather in the past few weeks and it is easy to forget just how bad the weather was back last January and early February, when racing was decimated.

All-weather racing did come to the rescue but I don’t know about you, there is only so much AW racing I can take so I had to find something else to fill in the time, so I decided to work on my family tree.

I don’t come from a huge family. My mother was an only child and neither her maternal Aunt or Uncle had any children. On Dad’s side he had a elder sister but had lost touch many years ago.

Anyway, to cut a long story short, I managed to trace the family back six generations in the three weeks I worked on the research.

More importantly I actually managed to track down my cousins on my fathers side and, even better, discovered his sister was still alive.

I visited my cousins and met my aunt for the first time since I was a baby (and believe me that was an awful long time ago) – it was before man in space, indeed even before the first satellite had been launched. Before jet passenger aircraft. Dad had not seen his sister for, at least, 44 years.

My cousins and I then decided we needed to get Dad and his sister together again.

Plans were progressing well but then had to be put on hold when Dad became ill. The biggest problem my parents live on the South Coast and his sister and her family live up North.

Anyway we decided to try and aim to arrange the meeting for when my parents were staying with us and we decided the best compromise would be to meet halfway between my house and theirs.

A look at the map showed Wolverhampton to be an almost half-way house.

We seriously considered Horizons Restaurant at Wolverhampton races but the only meeting last week was on Monday afternoon and it did not fit in with everyone’s schedule.

We decided to aim for Wednesday and a well known rose gardens just north of Wolverhampton.

The meeting was in doubt until the actual day but luckily Dad was having one of his good days on Wednesday and we set off.

Neither Dad or his sister, nor indeed my Mother, knew what was in store that day. All they knew is they were going to visit some rose gardens.

We arrived about ten minutes before the northern party, indeed they drove past us as we were walking in from the car park but Dad was oblivious to the discrete wave my wife and I gave them as they drove past.

The meet was contrived by us walking into the gardens then doubling back before “accidentally” bumping into one another in the gardens.

When they finally met it took a few seconds for the penny to drop but there were then soon tears all round and the plan had come to fruition.

All the worries and sleepless nights had been worth it.

We had a table for twelve booked in the restaurant and to see 85-year-old Dad and his 90-year-old sister sitting at the table holding hands, and with huge grins on their faces was absolutely priceless.

I am so pleased we have managed to get Dad and his sister together again after all these years and we all hope we can get them together again soon.

I know I really moaned and complained when all the racing was cancelled back in January and February – now I am so, so glad it was – it has resulted is something very special – something money could not have bought.

Goodwood Glorious?

Well as I mentioned in last weeks epistle I was making my first ever visit to Glorious Goodwood last Tuesday.

Was it worth it? Did it live up to the hype?

Sadly the answer to both was a resounding no.

The one positive is I managed to get to the course avoiding the worse of the traffic, entirely due to Lee McKenzie’s route which he has been using, probably, more years than either of us would care to remember.

In hindsight I should have turned back as soon as I arrived at the course as what laid in wait was evident in the car park. There is usually a large amount of free space in the car park that is assigned for members of the press. When I arrived, over two hours before the first race, it was almost full to capacity.

Indeed I was asked to park towards the outer extremities and was requested to reverse into a parking space with my boot as close to the tree trunk as possible. Sounds easy but the manoeuvre entailed reversing up a somewhat steep slope, which meant a somewhat fast approach, with a rapid stop as the tree trunk loomed. To add drama to the parking there was a distinct burning aroma coming from my clutch as I reversed up the slope.

Walking through the car park I was confronted by a sea of cars with the distinctive blue “P” label in the windscreen, indicating a lady or gentleman of the press being the owner of the car.

My worse fears were realised when I finally arrived in the press room, which at Goodwood is not insignificant in size. Not only was every space taken, people were crammed in almost three to every two places.

Needless to say most of the seats were occupied by people who wouldn’t normally be seen dead at a run of the mill midweek meeting.

Realising how impossible it was going to be, I stopped a bemused (and also deskless) John Hunt and asked to borrow his Racing Post to see if there was another meeting I could get to. Alas the only other meetings were Beverley, Perth and Worcester and even my driving is not that fast.

Just as I was about to slink off, somebody produced some more chairs. Accepting I wasn’t going to get any desk space I found a pitch next to the photocopier, which had the bonus of a spare power socket so I could plug in my laptop, and made my home there for the afternoon.

I managed to grab a few newspapers to rest my laptop on so I didn’t get second degree burns as it rested on my legs. At least I was able to file reports on the racing.

I had always been led to believe that Glorious Goodwood had something of a special atmosphere. To be honest the atmosphere was little different to any other Goodwood meeting.

Now don’t get me wrong, the atmosphere at Goodwood is always pretty special but I was disappointed that the atmosphere at the Glorious meeting wasn’t even better.

Of course one thing which cannot be faulted is the quality of the racing.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

We are coming to the end of the concert season for racecourses. It now seems obligatory for courses to hold at least one post-racing concert a season.

Some like Newmarket, Epsom and Haydock are turning it into a cottage industry.

It used to be that virtually every concert was by a tribute band and, even now, tribute bands form the core of the post racing fare.

Increasingly headline acts are also performing and JLS have performed at more than one post racing concert this season.

There is no doubt the concerts get bums on seats and racecourses will have attendance figures they can only dream of in other circumstances.

But are these concerts actually any good for racing?

When the tribute bands perform admission prices generally remain the same or attract a small premium.

When the “headline” bands perform prices go through the roof. Newmarket have been charging £32 for their Newmarket Nights concerts, Epsom have been charging £32 and Sandown £35. Even children, usually admitted free, are being charged admission.

Well the courses are selling out most concert nights, so from their point of view they will consider the exercise a success, especially when you add on extra bar and food income as well.

However these meetings do nothing to attract those who just want to go for the racing.

In the last week I have been to three meetings with bands performing Sandown (Razorlight) at £35, Epsom (Madness) £32 and Newmarket (James Morrison) £32, yet on all three evenings the actual racing was what can only be described as absolutely dire.

The dedicated racegoers, with no interest in the concert, cannot be expected to pay over £30 for six low grade races.

Also how many of those going to the racing a) actually bother to watch the racing and b) will go racing again in future?

There is also another issue and that concerns horse welfare. I wasn’t at Epsom the week before last when JLS were performing but by all accounts the course was packed with pre-pubescent and teenage girls screaming their heads off, not only during the concerts but during racing.

There were genuine concerns the screaming could have spooked the horses.

If racecourses want to become concert venues as well as racetracks then all well and good – but why not keep the two separate?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

I get very annoyed when the armchair critics start criticising commentators and I am quick to defend the men who call the horses.

Asides from the jockeys they have one of the most difficult jobs at the racecourse.

The quality of commentating in the UK has never been higher and, thankfully, mistakes are few and far between. The trouble is when mistakes are made there is no hiding place for the perpetrator.

Even the best commentator can have a bad race.

At the last Ascot meeting Richard Hoiles, arguably the best current commentator, almost missed Frankie Dettori ploughing a lone furrow against the stands rail …. It wasn’t only Richard who missed it, so did the cameraman, director and those of us watching from the press balcony, so mistakes can happen.

However, occasionally, there are mistakes that commentators make which are inexcusable and that relates to not doing their homework and getting the basic facts right.

At Newmarket on Friday evening the commentator was also doubling up as the course MC, something I thought they were not meant to do. He seemed more concerned about “entertaining” the crowd than concentrating on his commentating duties.

In one of the contests there was an odds-on runner, so very likely to be involved in the contest. Throughout the commentary he referred to the horse as “he” yet the favourite was one of two fillies in the contest.

That is a basic error and an unforgivable one, it almost shows contempt for the listeners …… “I can’t be bothered to do even basic research.”

OK it is not as bad as calling a wrong horse and nobody died but it was sloppy and a very basic mistake.

I know, for example, Richard highlights the fillies in yellow on his racecard and I believe most of the other commentators do the same or something very similar. So it isn't rocket science.

An Almost Perfect Day

When you spend as much time going racing as I do you tend to get into something of a rut, when run race just seems to be like any other, almost a merry-go-round of racing, some ups, some downs and plenty of nondescript stuff in the middle.

Occasionally you will get a race which will make you sit up and pay attention, a promising newcomer, a great turn of foot, a Houdini escape from a seemingly impossible position.

Even more rarely you will get one of those special, “I was there moments.”

Day’s like the first Sunday in October last year, at a racecourse at the top end of a forest in the centre of Paris. The day when Sea The Stars extricated himself, with the assistance of Mick Kinane, from seemingly impossible position to win the Arc. It was an unbelievable performance which had to be seen to be believed, it was a scene that had tears rolling down the cheeks of many a cynical hack, myself included.

You came away privileged at having witnessed such a fantastic race live, coming home knowing you have probably experienced a once in a lifetime race.

If somebody had said to me that day in October that eight months later I would, once again be watching a race in total awe, I would have laughed at them

Yet on Saturday, on a triangular track at the bottom of The Queen’s rather large back garden there was an equine performance which left those who watched it standing there open mouthed, not believing what they had just witnessed.

I am referring, of course, to Harbinger’s demolition of a small but very select field in Ascot’s King George VI and Queen Elizabeth Stakes. He beat two Derby winners but that was not what caught the eye. It was the manner of his victory and the emphatic manner in which he accelerated down the home straight under Olivier Peslier.

To emphasise how good a performance it was he broke the course record for good measure and all this under what was effectively a third choice rider.

Stable Jockey Ryan Moore had the choice of riding Harbinger or Workforce and he settled with the Derby winner.

Moore is not renown for showing his emotions but one look at his face after Saturday’s race said it all …….. he knew he had made a really bad choice.

The ride on Harbinger had also been offered to Frankie Dettori but he opted, instead, to ride at York, so the ride went to Peslier and what a ride he gave the horse.

The race was eloquently summed up by Alistair Down when he said, “I cannot believe what I have just seen.”

Nor could any of us in the press room at Ascot, even the handful of us who had gone against the “perceived wisdom” and had thought Harbinger had the beating of Workforce and backed our belief with hard cash. Even we could not believe the manner of victory.

The near sell out crowd at Ascot also appreciated the performance and horse, rider and trainer all received a rapturous welcome after the race.

It was almost, but not quite, perfect.

So what was wrong?

Well Ascot probably has one of the most stunningly impressive parade rings, not only in this country but in the world and it was packed before the race with racegoers wanting to see the six magnificent horses before the race.

They waited and they waited but the runners did not appear in the parade ring until less than ten minutes before the off, meaning they had barely had the opportunity to do one lap of the parade ring before the bell went for the horses to mount.

This surely is not enough, especially with such a big race. Racegoers have the right to see the horses parading properly in the parade ring, not just a token appearance.

I’m told it was to ensure the race went off on time because of the television coverage. We are talking BBC television coverage here, coverage that has been so decimated one actually wonders why they bother. Yet it seems they can still dictate timings, even if it is to the detriment of the paying punters.

It is a shame racegoers at Ascot were short changed on this one.

Speaking of the BBC it was a pleasant surprise to see Radio Five Live giving top billing to the meeting, even presenting Sport On Five from the course and providing live commentary on all the races.

Clearly they could not find any minor county league football to cover live or there wasn’t a tiddlywinks competition begging for live coverage and I suspect the early finish of the Pakistan / Australia test match helped as they had more time to fill.

Whatever the reason, full marks for giving the meeting prominence, even if it did mean having the inane utterances of Kevin Day, who is allegedly some sort of comedian, rolled out to dumb down the coverage. I can’t remember the exact question but as I was caught in traffic trying to get to the course I remember listening to Day chatting to commentator John Hunt. One of the questions Day asked Hunty was so stupid, so inane, had it been put to me I would not only have told him but I would have provided a practical demonstration as to where he should stick his microphone.

Why do broadcasters feel the need to dumb down to the level of a moron.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Despite it having been my local course for the first thirty odd years of my life, and having been a frequent visitor to the course, I have never actually attended a Glorious Goodwood meeting. Hopefully that will change tomorrow.

I am told the atmosphere is really good (and the racing isn’t that bad either) so I am really looking forward to my first visit to the festival.

This week also sees one of Ireland’s biggest festivals, the Galway Festival. By all accounts you need a very strong liver for this particular as the racing apparently takes second place to the partying. Another Festival I have yet to visit, although I should have perhaps visited a few years ago when I was a drinker.

The Floodgates Open

I suppose it was not the greatest surprise that Harry Findlay’s ban was reduced on appeal but, nonetheless, it is not a good day for the sport.

It seems, sadly, that threatening to throw ones toys out of the pram results in a massive climb down by the disciplinary panel.

I am not going to rake through the details of what Findlay did, they are more than adequately documented elsewhere.

The bottom line is Findlay broke one of the rules which is fundamental to the integrity of the sport. His assertion it was a genuine mistake defies belief …. he is an experienced, professional gambler. These men know the rules inside out and they know the loopholes and they certainly do not make the naïve mistakes Findlay claims to have made.

In my view Findlay thought he could get away with flouting the rules because of who he is – frankly he thinks he is bigger than the sport.

The rule is quite clear, owners cannot lay their own horses – a very simple black and white rule – no ambiguity.

It matters not if Findlay stood to be an overall loser or winner with the lay bet. The bottom line is he fragrantly broke the rule and he should be punished with the full force of the regulation.

Allowing for mitigation in matters of integrity should be a no-go area. Any breach of the rules of racing that impact integrity should automatically have a ban – regardless of who the individual is.

After Findlay received the initial ban he threatened to walk away from the sport in the UK – let’s hope he still sticks to that threat, although I somehow suspect he will not.

Racing does not need the likes of Findlay.

More importantly the findings of the appeal committee have blown a massive hole in the bid to maintain the integrity of racing.

Despite the assertion by the appeal committee that Findlay’s case is unique and a one off, this has set a precedent.

Any half decent lawyer will be able to quote this case as a precedent in any future hearing – thus opening up a massive can of worms.

The decision of the appeal hearing has done racing a great disservice, another nail in the coffin of the sport.

- - - - -

Last week I had a blast at what I called the “spineless cowards” of internet forums, interestingly despite a couple of thousand hits not one individual has contacted me to “defend” their position although I have received many mails supporting my stance.

- - - - -

One of the “marmite” meetings of the year is a mere three weeks away, I refer to Ascot’s Shergar Cup meeting, racings only team competition.

Now I am the first to admit I was the meetings biggest critic when it was first mooted, now I am its biggest fan.

It is a different day out, it may not be a betting medium but there is more to racing than betting. The meeting now attracts a crowd in excess of 50,000 each year as it grows in popularity.

Far too much money has been spent on Racing For Change (RFC), an initiative that has delivered nothing for the money invested. Ascot has done more with the Shergar Cup to involve and attract new racegoers than anything achieved by RFC.

Jockeys are accessible, there is a competitive edge added to the racing with the team competition, which provides fun and entertainment throughout the afternoon.

This year there is a new change, which will be a nightmare for race-readers and commentators, in that jockeys will wear full team colours. Previously runners have worn owners silks with caps and breeches being the distinguishing features.

This year, in consultation with the owners association there will be full team colours worn.

The three jockeys riding for Great Britain will wear red and white, those representing Ireland will sport green and white, jockeys riding for Europe blue and white, while the Rest of the World team will carry black and white silks. In order to differentiate, distinguishing caps and sleeves will be worn.

A good change which will surely enhance the afternoon.

To those who knock the meeting and call it a disgrace the answer is simple - don't watch it, if betting is so important to you then there are another five meetings that day.

Spineless Cowards

I’m returning to one of my regular themes again this week although I promise for the final time, it is the scourge of the internet forum.

The internet has opened up the world, providing information at the touch of a button, it also allows people to have a voice, to express their views and feelings , no matter how outlandish or perverse.

Blogs allow for individual expression and internet forums allow for “discussion”.

Most of the time the discussion, although lively, is generally good natured and harmless.

However there is also a nasty underbelly, which has been highlighted in the past week.

The Racing Forum is, unarguably, the best of the racing related forums on the internet, it bills itself as being the home if intelligent debate and, doubtlessly, it is by far the best of breed, excellently managed and moderated.

Those who post on the forum fall into three categories, a small minority (like myself) post under their real names. Another minority post using a pseudonym but their real identity is obvious. However the majority of posters are totally anonymous.

Now for the majority of threads on the forum this is not a real issue as the content is generally harmless.

However there are also a number of insidious threads which are used to attack racing “personalities”, the majority, of course, being pocket talking so excusable, if not generally pathetic.

Occasionally, however, a thread appears which just goes too far, is just vindictive and were it, for example, to appear in the same form in the printed media would feel the full force of the PCC.

Once such thread has appeared on The Racing Forum in the past week or so …. now I am the first to admit this particular thread it not unique and, compared with what appears on in some other forums or internet sites, is by no means the worse.

However it does clearly illustrate one of the biggest problems with the internet and it highlights why I believe governments need to consider passing legislation to ensure enforceable regulation over internet content.

The thread was simply entitled Peter Naughton. I had a quick look assuming it was going to be another thread picking holes in something a presenter had said on television. Theses types of thread are two a penny, generally ignorant, ill informed comment , almost always coming from an anonymous contributor.

However this one was different, it was attacking Peter Naughton’s tipping line. Now let me say from the outset that tipping lines generally are fair game when it comes to criticism. Very few offer value for money and very few and certainly only the very best survive for any period of time.

On a couple of occasions I have been asked if I wanted to invest in a tipping line. Now whilst I have nothing against tipping lines per-se, close examination of the business model, or more importantly considering questions not addressed in the business plan, show they are not a get rich quick schemes and there is a very real risk of losing money on the investment – but I digress.

It was quickly clear from the first few postings that the thread was going to take a particularly nasty turn.

Needless to say the thread was started by one of our anonymous heroes. It seems he has been following Naughton’s tipping line and has discovered, how shall I put it, inconsistencies in some of Naughton’s claims.

He has been calling Naughton’s tipping line for several minutes each day and editing his findings, alleging several inconsistencies.

Now on the face of it what was being alleged certainly appeared to be in breach of the guidelines for premium rate telephone services, indeed there appeared to be a prima-face case.

So I asked on the thread whether the original complainant had raised the matter with the appropriate regulator? He, of course, refused to respond but one of the “usual (anonymous of course) suspects” came back with a completely irrelevant answer saying it wasn’t necessary.

Anyway, each day the “findings” continued to emerge so I asked another question, one to which I already knew the answer, and that was had the person making the allegations actually put them to Peter Naughton and I also made a comment about the credibility of anonymous posters.

Well the abuse and allegations made against me then had to be seen to be believed and it has made me, once and for all, walk away completely from internet forums.

Let’s look at some of the issues raised by this particular thread.

Let me say from the outset if a tipping line, no matter who it is hosted by, is deliberately setting out to make misleading claims then it deserves to be exposed and, if proven to be in breach, shut down.

However there are ways and means of doing it properly.

Firstly all the allegations being made are being accepted at face value by most of those reading the postings, yet there is no credible substantiation.

First of all the allegations are coming from an anonymous source. Who is he / she? Why is he/she conducting this exposé?

What are they hoping to achieve by posting the findings on an internet forum. It will not lead to the site being shut down as they seem unwilling to present their so called evidence to the regulators.

How do we know this individual does not have some vendetta with Peter Naughton? Why pick on this particular tipping line, when there are plenty worse?

Secondly, how credible is the “evidence” being presented. He claims he calls the tipping line each day and the calls last around seven minutes, yet he only selectively quotes snippets from the call which support his own point of view?

Does he have recordings / transcripts of all the calls? How do we know the quotes he is providing are not being quoted out of context?

Certainly in that very same thread comments I had made were being taken out of context to try to “prove” something I did not actually say.

Thirdly, why have the allegations not been put to Naughton for a response?

If these allegations were being made in the written press the journalist making them would have to make them openly, would have to keep full records and notes and would have to present the evidence to the “accused” to allow a response prior to publication.

Because these allegations are being made online none of those rules have to be followed and that cannot be right.

Indeed more than one individual actually made the point that because it is the Internet then it does not matter if the allegations are made fairly.

Even one of the more sensible contributors to the forum, an established and respected owner, made the comment there are many critical threads on forums and individuals are not given the right to reply. Indeed there are but that does not make it right.

I happen know these allegations had not been put to Naughton because I actually mentioned them to him when I saw him at the races last week. Before I had spoken to him he had never even heard of The Racing Forum, so he had know way of knowing about the allegations, yet alone have an opportunity to respond.

He was concerned by the allegations but interestingly one of the first comments he made to me was “I suppose they being made anonymously?”

When I replied they were he, understandably, seemed to lose any interest in even bothering to look, yet alone respond and, frankly, I cannot blame him.

When I made a point in the forum about allegations coming from anonymous sources lack the credibility of openly made allegations the person making the allegations, predictably, came back with the pathetic argument that what he writes behind a pseudonym is equally valid to something written openly.

What complete and utter rubbish …. the comments, no matter how well intentioned are absolutely worthless.

Then again how can you argue with somebody who has such a misguided, moronic view and perspective.

He is not clever, he is a coward, happy to snipe, make unsubstantiated allegations and conduct a character assassination with what he believes to be impunity.

I will say it openly – he, and his ilk, are spineless cowards, bullies who are “brave” behind a cloak but who do not have the guts or courage of their convictions to openly come out and say what they thing and believe.

The sooner the internet and everyone who contributes to it or publishes content is covered by the same rules and laws which apply to the print media the better. I realise the government have more pressing priorities but this cancer on the internet needs to be excised.

I would have put these points to the individual calling themselves “Armchair Jockey”, so they could respond – but as they choose to remain anonymous how can I?

Of course, in the unlikely event "Armchair Jockey", or any of his ilk are reading this and wish to defend their approach and actions then I am quite happy to give them the space for a response - only one condition though - the response has to be open and not hidden behind some pathetic pseudonym - I won't hold my breath waiting for a reply though.

Sink Or Swim?

These have been quite a few leaks this week about cutbacks in the fixture list for 2011, I’m going to wait until the fixture list is actually published before making any comment on cuts, although it is a subject dear to my heart.

However the speculation has prompted Ffos Las supremo Dai Walters to warn Ffos Las, Britain’s newest, may be forces to close if the reports are true. Actually I hope that isn’t the case but it has made me think, which courses would I not mind seeing close.

I was initially tempted to go through all sixty courses but decided it is too much like hard work for me to do and for you, dear reader, to plough through.

So what I will do is go through the tracks which I feel strongly should remain open or I would be happy to see become a new chapter in Chris Pitt’s, A Long Time Gone, the bible of closed racecourses.

If I don’t mention a racecourse here it means I have no strong feeling either way.

Aintree: now on “normal” race days Aintree can be one of the most desolate courses imaginable, empty and soulless, However for three days in April it hosts one of the greatest jumps meetings in the world, including arguably the most famous steeplechase of all the Grand National and for that reason alone Aintree has to survive.

Ascot: the building of the new stand was nothing if not controversial and I was one of its greatest critics. However Ascot listened to the feedback and addressed the issues. Now I love the place and Ascot has to rank amongst the best racecourses in the world, it stays.

Ayr: It calls itself Scotland’s Premier Racecourse – it ain’t. Although millions have been spent improving the inside of the stands, externally they still look tired and jaded. The track itself is beset with problems, they regularly seem to have unsafe or false ground. One I would shed no tears for were it to close.

Bath: It has the distinction of being the UK’s highest racecourse and therein lies a problem in that it is built on a free draining hill, yet it has no watering system. This invariably results in firm going and resultant small fields. Weekend meetings are a nightmare attracting beer swilling hoards. Another that would not be missed.

Brighton: The course has long had a sordid reputation, although this has improved in recent years. The place still does have a seedy, tatty feel and the stand could do with being replaced. On the plus side the views are fantastic but this also results in major problems in that a sea fret frequently rolls in, obscuring visibility of the racing. As Sir Alan, now Lord, Sugar would say, “reluctantly, you’re fired.”

Cartmel: A perfect example of “less is more.” Only racing seven days a year this is a gem of a course. It should be an abject failure as viewing is terrible but this is more than compensated by the idyllic setting and fantastic atmosphere. This is a course I would dip into my own pocket to save.

Chester: One of two controversial inclusions in this list I suspect. As this would be the first course I would close down. I dislike the place with a vengeance. It may well be the oldest course in the country but it is not fit for purpose. Viewing is terrible, it is cramped and ram packed solid with racegoers at every meeting. Now some would take the latter to be a positive and it would be if they were there to watch the racing. Chester is a drinkers course, where the object seems to be to pour as much alcohol as possible down ones throat then become as obnoxious as possible. Chester could stage three legged donkey racing and most of those attending would be none the wiser. If you have ever wondered what it is like to attend a Chav’s convention then may I suggest a day at Chester races.

Fakenham and Ffos Las: I am going to lump these two together as they have similar issues.

Unless you happen to live locally both are absolute sods to get to. In the case of Fakenham it is located in a part of the country where dual carriageways have not yet been invented and whichever way you go you will be on bendy, single carriageway roads. Add to that the local farmers seem to use driving their tractors at 20mph on raceday as being some sort of mating ritual you will arrive exasperated.

With Ffos Las it just seems a long way from anywhere, look at the map and it simply seems to be a case of popping across the Severn Bridge and then a quick hop down the M4. It isn’t it is a very long drag down the M4 and when you finally escape the motorway the local signposting to the course takes you a very pretty way indeed.

However both should be saved.

With Fakenham the journey is vindicated by one of the friendliest tracks you are ever likely to visit. Small, compact, good viewing and some decent arcing.

With Ffos Las you get one of the best, if not the best, racing surfaces in the country.

Fontwell: Well I am biased here but this is the very first course I visited and I love the place.

You have never properly experienced National Hunt racing unless you have watched a Fontwell chase from the intersection in the centre of the course.

Haydock: This was a once great course which has been emasculated by constant tinkering to the National Hunt course. The ground has been bear ruined and the going reports frequently border on fantasy. Worse of all the priority of the executive seems to be more focused on attracting Chester’s boozers and Chavs than providing decent racing. So another for which no tears would be shed.

Kempton: London could easily afford to lose one course and it would have to be Kempton. Granted it is home of the King George and it does still host some half decent jump meetings. However its sell out to AW racing is unforgivable.

Redcar: OK some personal prejudice here. If the wind is in the wrong direction you get the fumes from the nearby chemical plant so you go home with a sore throat and streaming eyes. It is a real pain to get through and driving through the bleak industrial wasteland to reach the course is depressing and to add to the depression, to reach the car park you then have to drive through the middle of a cemetery. That just about suns it up.

York: And we end with another controversial decision. Yes it is a great track, yes the racing can be high quality. However it is another course ruined by its clientele. The mid-week non Festival meetings are just about bearable but for the festivals and weekend meetings, it turns into a drink fest and a not very pleasant one either. By late afternoon there is invariably an edge to the place as the alcohol begins to take effect. A shame but for me it ruins a good afternoons racing and like Chester is one of the courses I invariably leave thinking I would not be at all perturbed if I was never to go there again.