At Fort Erie Today

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Krista Carignan was taken off her mounts for her third or fourth whipping violation of the year. The jockeys got together and refused to pick up her mounts. The horses were just scratched a few minutes ago.

The jockeys are pissed off that their freedoms have been taken away with the whipping violations.

[thespaah]

Is there a link to a story?
Can you give the details of this whipping rule?

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Is there a link to a story?
Can you give the details of this whipping rule?
I'm wondering if this will make news. It should. The whipping rule can be found on the ORC site I think, though I can't find a link to it.
I believe a jockey can whip 3 times in succession but then needs to give the horse a chance to react before it can be whipped again.
The time it has to react can be very subjective I believe. And I'm not sure there is a limit to how much a horse can be whipped.
They already use new feather touch whips. The violations don't seem to make it in print very often, or at least hit and miss.
The Queen's Plate winner this year was whipped 17 times down the lane. Was the jock fined? I don't know. Was it an acceptable amount of times? I don't know.

I don't think it was a good move by the jockeys to not accept the mounts today and stick together like they did. They took it out on the horsemen who had horses ready to run. Since Carignan is the leading jockey, it can be safely assumed a lot of these horses were strong contenders.

Also, they are in revolt of rules that are supposed to make it more humane for horses, which makes public support difficult.

They acted hastily today.

If they have problems with the new rules and how they are dealt with, there were better avenues and are better avenues to use.

As a Horseplayer, I want my jockey to do whatever it takes to win, especially since they use a humane whip. But the way it is now, jockeys are walking on glass, and the worst thing is that violations are not dealt with as DQ's, so a horse can win with the jockey "whipping too much" therefore cheating versus a jockey playing by the rules and losing.

There are fines for the first violation and suspensions for the 3rd (not sure about the 2nd), and apparently this was Carignan's fourth, and she was hit with an indefinite suspension.

[thespaah]

On the outside, this rule looks like a cave in to the PC animal rights wacko crowd.
The rule as it is explained here, looks so vague as to leave it wide open to interpretaion. It's almost subjective. And I am willing to lay a good amount of coin that it is arbitraily enforced.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

On the outside, this rule looks like a cave in to the PC animal rights wacko crowd.
The rule as it is explained here, looks so vague as to leave it wide open to interpretaion. It's almost subjective. And I am willing to lay a good amount of coin that it is arbitraily enforced.
I found the directive: http://www.ontarioracingcommission.ca/uploadedFiles/2009%20Policy%20Directive%203%20-%20Penalty%20Guidelines%20Thoroughbred%20-%20Urging%20the%20Horse%20August%202009.pdf

[thespaah]

I find these to be vague.
Excessive action means unreasonable quantity or degree. For the purposes of Rule 9.27.05 (b), the following are examples of excessive action with respect to inappropriate urging of the horse but does not constitute an exhaustive list:

a. use of the riding crop when a horse is not in contention in a race;

b. use of the riding crop more than 3 times in a row without giving the horse time to respond

Respond? How? "Hey shorty that friggin hurts".....Or "Alright already ,I'm going"....
I'm sorry about the humorous approach to a serious issue. However I think it appropriate to use an absurdity to make my point.

Contention... Ok, how about this. Suppose a rider is 7th near the wire but sees that if he/she urges their mount, they could improve their finish to 5th or even 4th....The horse is hopelessly out of contention for top three or even a win, but could pick up a bigger check for the connections. How do the Stewards see that?

[Horseplayersbet.com]

I find these to be vague.
Excessive action means unreasonable quantity or degree. For the purposes of Rule 9.27.05 (b), the following are examples of excessive action with respect to inappropriate urging of the horse but does not constitute an exhaustive list:

a. use of the riding crop when a horse is not in contention in a race;

b. use of the riding crop more than 3 times in a row without giving the horse time to respond

Respond? How? "Hey shorty that friggin hurts".....Or "Alright already ,I'm going"....
I'm sorry about the humorous approach to a serious issue. However I think it appropriate to use an absurdity to make my point.

Contention... Ok, how about this. Suppose a rider is 7th near the wire but sees that if he/she urges their mount, they could improve their finish to 5th or even 4th....The horse is hopelessly out of contention for top three or even a win, but could pick up a bigger check for the connections. How do the Stewards see that?


I agree. Horse racing needs rules that make it so Stewards can be objective not subjective. This is another rule that opens the door to more subjectivity.

http://cangamble.blogspot.com/2010/07/horse-racing-needs-more-objectivity.html

[thespaah]

Just to clarify before anybody on here gets excited and has an anneurism, I am a big supporter of safety and human treatment of racehorses. I donate to racehorse retirement farms.
I am not a violent person, but if I were to see someone mistreating a horse I would not be responsible for my reaction.
With that in mind, I do not want to see rules that are so broad and so open to interpretation so as to cause a rider to not put forth their best efforts and thus alter the order of finish. Also and just as importantly, to adversely effect competiton. After all, horse racing is a sport and entertainment as well as a wagering activity.