© Photo Healy Racing
There was an interesting comment posted below my blog last week in relation to the Grand National protest that got me thinking about the whole whip issue and if it’s about time the industry did a proper study into its merits.
The comment read:
“In my view racing has been hamstrung in its defence due to the continued use of the whip. There seems to be a group think in the sport that says because the whip has been there since the year dot it must be OK. But in the year dot they were probably still burning witches and you could legally beat your wife with a stick as long as it wasn't thicker than your thumb! Thankfully society and the sports that reflect it have evolved, but racing slower than most.
The whip will go and it should go now so that we can robustly defend racing for what it is, horses competing because they enjoy it, with accepted risks being mitigated against to the highest possible degree.
Then we can expose these protests for what they really are anti-livestock farming protests. These people want a meat and dairy product free society and they are cherry picking their protests for maximum exposure”
From my own point of view I have to agree that the use of the whip to encourage horses to run faster is very difficult to defend. It may be a foam covered feather duster these days, but it’s still not a good look for the sport.
Of course the whip is not just used for encouragement, it’s also carried for corrective purposes. Jockeys need the whip for those moments when a horse starts to hang or wander off a straight line as this can be extremely dangerous for all the competitors during a race.
But, isn’t it about time the sport adopted a more scientific approach to the whip when it’s used for encouragement? A starting point would be to understand exactly what benefit the whip gives to a jockey in terms of increased performance from the horse.
In horse racing we equate everything back to weight. We use the weight carried by a horse to reflect the rider’s experience or lack of it (apprentice jockeys are allowed to claim a weight allowance depending on how many winners they have ridden). We use weight to differentiate between horses of different ages and sex. And when a horse wins or loses in a race it’s handicap rating (weight) is adjusted to reflect its current ability.
So, how many pounds is a whip worth to a jockey in a race?
Obviously some horses respond more to the whip than others, but there must be an average amount of lengths that the average horse will finish ahead of another horse if one is whipped
and the other isn’t.
We already have a detailed weight for age scale in horse racing that determines how much superior an average four-old-year is compared to a three-year-old or two-year-old in each month of the year over every racing distance.
If the sport had a measurable scale relating to the benefits of the whip when used for encouragement it would help standardise its use across all racing jurisdictions. This would not only aid in the education of riders regarding its use but also underpin all regulatory changes to the rules relating to the whip.
There are currently so many different interpretations within racing of what constitutes acceptable use of the whip. Even between Ireland and the UK where almost every facet of the sport is aligned, there are different rules as to how many times a jockey can use their whip during a race.
The law of diminishing returns must also come into play when a jockey uses the whip. The benefits gained by each strike of the whip cannot be the same. In other words, the horse increases its speed when it is first struck with the whip, but as the rider continues to strike the horse it cannot keep increasing its speed, or maintain its current speed indefinitely, and there must come a point where another strike of the whip will have no positive bearing on performance at all.
Then there is the impact the whip has on the horse itself. We are told the modern whip doesn’t hurt the horse, but it would be great to see data that backed this up. It would also be immensely helpful to know exactly how a horse reacts to the whip - seeing it, hearing it, feeling it. Do all three stimuli increase performance or is it simply getting hit with the whip that has the effect.
With the sport under increasing pressure to defend itself, and with the use of the whip invariably at the forefront, it would be really useful to have factual evidence as to precisely how the whip works and what added benefit it brings to performance.
Away from the whip, racing is an environment where conspiracy theorists thrive. I had two calls last week from punters telling me that Pat Cosgrave should have been banned for six months, or even permanently, for his ride on Concorde at Chelmsford on Thursday. The rider was cruising to victory on the odds-on favourite when he heavily eased his mount close to the finish and was nabbed on the line.
I have zero doubt that this was simply an error of judgement on the part of the rider and there was no malice involved, but it’s not straightforward explaining that to people that are already convinced that the game is corrupt and every one is bent.
You would think that wherever there is gambling there is going to be suspicion of corruption, but other sports don’t seem to be affected in the same way as horse racing. That is not to say that there isn’t corruption in other sports, we know there is, but it isn’t the first conclusion reached when something goes wrong.
I don’t think anyone, not even my two callers, would ever suspect that the Brighton player that missed the deciding penalty in the FA Cup semi-final with Man Utd on Sunday did so on purpose. But if he was a jockey there’d be plenty saying he was paid off by the bookies.
