Gleneagles winning at Newmarket© Photo Healy Racing
One grizzled Irish racing veteran surveyed Willie Mullins's dominance of last week's Punchestown festival and summed it up with a single phrase - "Ballydoyle-stuff." Except an argument can be made that this is singular stuff for which even comparison to flat racing's powerhouse isn't sufficient: Mullins's dominance of Irish jump racing is freakish by any standard.
When almost a third of a season's Grade 1 prizes are lumped into a single week, it can be dangerous to draw overall conclusions but neither can it be claimed that Mullins winning ten of the dozen top-flight prizes up for grabs at Punchestown came out of nowhere.
Punchestown brought his overall Grade 1 tally for the season to 30. Mullins had an overall prizemoney tally for the season which was in another league to his rivals and the strength in depth at Closutton is such he has acknowledged he may have to overcome a natural reluctance to travel and organise early raids on the UK in order to simply find opportunities. Messrs Nicholls and Henderson must be thrilled at that prospect.
In terms of Ballydoyle comparisons, to an extent we're talking apples and oranges here. It has to be said though our pal wasn't differentiating too subtly in his lack of enthusiasm. And there's no point shying away from querying whether or not such overwhelming domination is a problem, just as there's no point ignoring that such considerations aren't a problem for Mullins himself. He has enough to think about without pondering such big-picture competition issues.
But the Ballydoyle comparison isn't strictly correct. The flat has turned into a rarefied battle between a handful of big ownership guns, of which Coolmore is consistently the biggest and most successful. Ballydoyle is strictly a solo ownership show, with select but still significant competition elsewhere.
Mullins however is involved with practically every major owner over jumps. Success is a perpetuating thing and Mullins has basically got himself into a position where he has first pick of the best young talent around with an assortment of the most powerful chequebooks fighting each other for his nod to sign.
These owners are competitive amongst themselves but there's one single overwhelming common denominator and that's the trainer. Even Aidan O'Brien isn't in that position.
As for competing owners, one can imagine the collective shudder going through European racing after a Newmarket Guineas weekend where Coolmore brought off a classic double in tandem with Ryan Moore. It looks a very comfortable fit between the world's top rated jockey and the world's most powerful bloodstock operation and it will be a surprise if there isn't much more to come.
Gleneagles it has to be said looked in a different league in the 2,000 Guineas but what will be interesting now is who emerges as Balldyoyle's top Derby hope. It looks a fluid situation at the moment considering Ol' Man River's Newmarket flop, but let's not forget how Ruler Of The World needed just six weeks to go from a maiden to Epsom glory.
Sympathy for stewards is about as plentiful as it is for cops, referees and other branches of authority. But sometimes you'd have to wonder why anybody with any serious intent bothers with the gig at all.
The eternal crib is that racecourse stewards don't do enough. But even when they do act it's starting to look like only the first step in a process.
Maybe hard statistics don't back this up but a trend appears to be developing where action on the day is becoming a precursor to an appeal process where a tone of 'mature reflection' is seemingly being employed, a tone that many stewards working at the coalface feel is undermining them because it implies they aren't capable of sizing up a situation quickly and properly.
No one can argue the appeal process shouldn't be used. But any half-awake racecourse steward could be forgiven for wondering why they should bother acting at all if the near-automatic response to a penalty is an appeal which, it seems, more often than not, can result in either penalties being lifted entirely or significantly reduced.
In such circumstances, it would be a wonder if a trainer or a jockey didn't work the system if they can afford to? The odds about getting some joy from the Referrals Committee appear to be pretty good. At the moment, an appeal is pretty much a bet to nothing: if you lose, it's the status quo: win and you get off. Who wouldn't make the most of the system in such circumstances?
And if you're a racecourse steward, why would you stick your head above the parapet? In fact the temptation might even be to go easy penalty-wise in the hope of making at least something stick, which is a very slippery slope.
Countering this isn't straight-forward considering how quickly the great and the good can reach for their solicitor. But one step might be to make any frivolous appeals costly. When's the last time someone had a penalty increased by the Referrals Committee?
The option is there, so why not use it: it would send out a message to everyone - not least to racecourse stewards - that first impressions really do count, and can even be on the money.
The British flat jockeys championship has started. You might have missed that amid the classic focus. But for the next six months, you can catch up before another arbitrary date signifies the whole thing is over and irrelevant stuff like the Racing Post Trophy can take its second-division place in the calendar.
This is a silly solution to a non-problem. Like it or not, the jockey's championship in this part of the world is about winners, not quality. Yes, it's ridiculous that a Derby counts for the same as a seller but that's the system that forged the legend of one AP McCoy. How many championships would he have won on money, or on half-campaigns? Or is that apples and oranges too.
Finally another eagle-eyed pal spotted this scrawled on a pole on the road to Punchestown - "Frankel wasn't the offspring of two colts: Vote No." Bananas anyone?
