Eight Belles

Did anyone watch the Kentucky Derby yesterday? The only philly (female horse) in the race - Eight Belles - beat 18 of the colts (male horses) and finished second! Tragically, she collapsed shortly after the race due to two badly fractured ankles and had to be put down on the track. It made me so sad...

On the other hand ....Here is Jack Houghton talking about novices reaction to the use of the whip and it's cruelty:

I would love to be able to tell them that it's not, that the horse doesn't really feel anything, or that horses have "a very thick hide" (or whatever dross most whip proponents come out with), but unfortunately, even though they know nothing about racing, they know that the logic of those responses just don't stack up.

If a horse "doesn't really feel it" then why do it in the first place? Is it like that gymnastic thing you see at the Olympics with a girl twirling a ribbon around her head? Do the jockeys receive extra points for artistic use of the whip? When we whip a horse, we trigger their flight reactions. Whip a horse and it thinks, "something is chasing me and trying to take a bite out of my arse."

This has potentially serious health implications for horses. "It is almost certain that this increases the injuries to horses," explains David McDowel, an equine vet at the RSPCA. "The adrenalin released when a horse is whipped acts as a pain killer, meaning that they run in spite of any injuries they may have. In many cases, this is likely to lead to further injury or even death."

The rules of racing in the UK present a strange paradox. Horses are not allowed to run when under the influence of pain killers such as Bute and Morphine, because they are thought to endanger the well being of the horse. Yet we allow jockeys to administer their own brand of pain killer, just at the time when horses are at their most vulnerable.

Every year, racehorses are dying and seriously injuring themselves as a result of the current whip regulations. But as well as the immediate harm that whipping a horse can inflict, the long-term psychological damage may be more difficult to assess. How many horses that are reluctant to go into the stalls, reluctant to start, or reluctant to put their full effort in, are that way because they associate a day at the races with pain and fear?

Luckily, a solution to the whip issue exists. Introduce a rule that a jockey must never take their hands off the reins in order to use their whip - effectively meaning that the strongest "encouragement" a jockey could administer would be a tap down the shoulder.

With one simple ruling, the Jockey Club would end every future negative headline regarding the whip. Perhaps more importantly, it would give racing the opportunity to take a moral stand against genuine animal cruelty.

Many people believe that full whip use should be retained to "motivate", "galvanize", "persuade" (or whatever increasingly ridiculous euphemism racing commentators are using for "whipping" this week) recalcitrant horses that just don't seem to want to put it all in when racing. Their argument usually goes along the lines of, "a horse is treated like royalty for 360 days of the year. What's wrong with giving it a few smacks across the backside to make it earn its keep for the other few days?"

The above argument used to be trotted out for the infamous Royal Rebel, who seemingly could not win a race unless it was over 2 ½ miles, at Royal Ascot, he was whipped about 2 dozen times in the process, and Russell Grant said that Venus was in line with Uranus.

Reframing the whip guidelines as I suggest would have deprived Royal Rebel's connections of enjoying a victory on those rare occasions and, the argument goes, this is unfair.

I don't accept that it is unfair. At its heart, racing is about the athletic ability of horses, just as it is with any human sporting endeavor. For a human to be successful at any sport, talent has to be matched with an unrelenting desire to succeed, so why don't we expect the same from our equine athletes?

But the material point is that on the whole, horses want to run. When they jump out of the stalls, they run. They are not whipped at this stage and yet run their hearts out. They don't all suddenly stop and start eating grass. They lock-up and run together in exciting duels. There is no real reason to believe that hitting them with a whip encourages them more when they reach the closing stages.

What it does do is artificially push them beyond where they naturally want to go. And what's the point? Is there anyone in the stands on any day at Newmarket or Cheltenham that could tell the difference? Would the racing be any less exciting? Make it an even playing field where whip use is limited to a tap down the shoulder and the sport will not suffer.

The current regulations regarding the use of the whip in racing are morally wrong. But even if you don't see this as being the case, then you should take more seriously the fact that they are slowly killing the public perception of the sport. For those outsiders who are new to racing, those people who are not part of the club, the use of the whip is an unnecessary and cruel aspect of the sport. Of the 20 or so first-timers that I have taken racing over the last couple of years, they have all expressed concern at the whipping of horses. Most of them subsequently make the choice that horse racing isn't a sport that they wish to patronize. In short, the current whip regulations are alienating potential race goers.

The problem is, that as members of the club, we don't appreciate that this is happening to the sport and jeopardizing its future. We're too insular and introspective, unable to stand back and appreciate the wider public perception. As they say in America, this is a no-brainer. By giving up the whip, we lose nothing. Racing is safer, the horses enjoy it more and the racing is still exciting. What's more, we ensure that people new to the sport will keep coming racing - new punters, new owners, new audiences to listen to my theories on novice chases...

~Jack Houghton