These euro ban rules have GOT to go

[toussaud]

this is beyond ridiculous

racing_post Racing Post
Soumillon gets five-day ban and loses prize-money for breaking new whip rules as he won Champion Stakes - more soon at


without that ride he loses to so you think.


AND he loses the prize money!

[Some_One]

You'll see a jockey shortage soon there.

[Some_One]

Wow, look how insane this rule is:

"The jockey struck Cirrus Des Aigles six times, one less than the total of seven permitted - but he administered all six strikes inside the final furlong, for which there is a five-strike limit."
(From RP)

[PhantomOnTour]

Hughes already turned in his jocks license

[Some_One]

The lost of prize money appears to be about 80,000 US Dollars. How can crooked (alleged) trainers like Dutrow go on year over year, yet because of one strike of a whip a jock loses 80K, unbelievable.

[Grits]

I listened to this, noting Hughes not riding due to the ruling. Excessive whipping is horrific, but too, its usually obvious when done and readily seen by all. There may be lots of problems with this--its over the top.

Those who are not on a horse's back shouldn't be going so far as to dictate how often, and in what distance/length ridden, a horse can be tapped. This is questionable.

[Robert Fischer]

this is a good rule, and it is great to see them enforcing it.

[gm10]

I don't think that it's a bad rule, except the maximum of five times during the final furlong, that goes a bit far in my opinion. Just limiting it to seven throughout the entire race would be better for everyone.

[Tom]

Just ban whips period.
Then no one has an advantage.

[PhantomOnTour]

Has anyone considered a desintegrating whip? Five whacks and it's in pieces
:lol:

[Tom]

The Mission Impossible whip.

[Bruddah]

Question: At what point, in the final drive to the wire, does it become failure to persevere by the jock, when he can't remember if he has struck the animal three, four or five times and stops using the whip?

I can see this happening and the jockey being penalized by the Stewards, or the animal loses at the wire.

Just more Euro Trash horse sh*t. (JMHO) :lol:

[Grits]

Question: At what point, in the final drive to the wire, does it become failure to persevere by the jock, when he can't remember if he has struck the animal three, four or five times and stops using the whip?

I can see this happening and the jockey being penalized by the Stewards, or the animal loses at the wire.

Just more Euro Trash horse sh*t. (JMHO) :lol:

Bruddah, I thought this same thing.

"How many times? How many times have I popped your butt now? Oh, man, we're in traffic, I got no clue. C'mon, we're almost home, I may be outta hits."

He gets off the horse, only to fine he's got days, and he's out 80K.

Lord have mercy, bless his heart. :faint:

[Robert Goren]

He knew the rules going in. I am not going to cry for him. I think it is a good rule. If you can't get the horse to with 5 whacks, he not going to run with 6 either.

[castaway01]

Question: At what point, in the final drive to the wire, does it become failure to persevere by the jock, when he can't remember if he has struck the animal three, four or five times and stops using the whip?

I can see this happening and the jockey being penalized by the Stewards, or the animal loses at the wire.

Just more Euro Trash horse sh*t. (JMHO) :lol:

Obviously if the limit is five hits, they're not going to penalize someone for failure to persevere if they hit the horse four times instead. At least you got in your witty line though.

[classhandicapper]

Just ban whips period.
Then no one has an advantage.

I agree. It would be a level playing field and go a long way to satisfying some of the animal activists/lovers that try to give the sport a black eye.

Besides, even though I have no stats on it, it seems to me the probability of a horse breaking down could be higher when the horse is being asked for more than it is willing to do on its own.

I don't like this rule. I wouldn't want to have to concentrate on how many times I whipped the horse and when.

[Robert Fischer]

if you need to "steer" the horse a few times with the whip, fine....

if you feel wacking the horse a couple more times helps him "persevere", ok...


why the hell does a jockey need to whip a horse 6+ times in the last furlong ?

[classhandicapper]

if you need to "steer" the horse a few times with the whip, fine....



That's probably the only real reason the is necessary and even that could probably be a few taps on the shoulder (though I'd have to ask a jockey)

[Bruddah]

Obviously if the limit is five hits, they're not going to penalize someone for failure to persevere if they hit the horse four times instead. At least you got in your witty line though.


At least my "witty line" makes sense. If the jock stops persevering, with the whip, and the horse fails to stride out to the wire, the jock can say "I couldn't remember how many times I had struck him". Opens up a can of worms for failure to persevere, with no penalties. In fact failure to persevere disappears from the rule books.

At least you got your narrow minded line in though.

[ByeByeBuck]

Wouldn't the logical thing to do would have been to design and use a more humane whip of some sort if they were so concerned about that? Perhaps something that would get the horses attention and make the horse perform correctly by running as fast as possible, without inflicting scars or marks on the animal.

But I guess horse racing commissions don't always do what's logical.

[FenceBored]

Wouldn't the logical thing to do would have been to design and use a more humane whip of some sort if they were so concerned about that? Perhaps something that would get the horses attention and make the horse perform correctly by running as fast as possible, without inflicting scars or marks on the animal.

But I guess horse racing commissions don't always do what's logical.

They already have designed a humane whip and mandated its use. This does not, however, do anything to satisfy those for whom the problem is the visual image of the jockey using the whip.

[gm10]

He knew the rules going in. I am not going to cry for him. I think it is a good rule. If you can't get the horse to with 5 whacks, he not going to run with 6 either.

The problem is that it's 7 overall, and 5 in the final furlong. I think that the second part is needlessly complicating it for the jockeys.

[Tom]

The rule is stupid.
End of story.

Maybe one jock could hire another one to add a few wacks for him.

[Grits]

The problem is that it's 7 overall, and 5 in the final furlong. I think that the second part is needlessly complicating it for the jockeys.

This was my thought, as well, earlier in the the thread. Foolish ruling due to the counting of pops.

[Bruddah]

The rule is stupid.
End of story.

Maybe one jock could hire another one to add a few wacks for him.

The idiots will probably pass the "carry over" rule. If the jock only used 4 whacks in his last ride, then 3 whacks are carried over for his next ride.

The answer is to do away with the whip completely. Then the animal won't be hit by anything and there won't be a need for a perseverance rule for the judges interpretation. However, when the animals stop running (on their own) in the stretch, all questions will be answered about the need for the whip. (JMHO) :ThmbUp:

What a bunch of Nimrods! :lol:

[toussaud]

things are about to get interesting.

in lieu of what has been going on with the seemingly obsessive suspensions and fines, the jockeys were going to strike today, but decided to talk with the officials and air out their frustrations, were basically told to screw off, we ain't changing nothing.


interesting to see what hte response by the jockeys will be.

[BetCrazyGirl]

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/65603/new-whip-rules-in-britain-to-be-reviewed

[skate]

Wow, look how insane this rule is:

"The jockey struck Cirrus Des Aigles six times, one less than the total of seven permitted - but he administered all six strikes inside the final furlong, for which there is a five-strike limit."
(From RP)


i like the rule.

no need for a whip. cept for an un-inform fan.

put the ban on Lasix, while at it.

[Marlin]

Just ban whips period.
Then no one has an advantage.Just ban the forward pass. Then no one has an advantage. The only good thing about this rule is that it's in Europe.:)
Don't get me wrong, there is no place for hammering a beaten horse. However, I for one loved watching Pincay outfinish other jocks in the stretch while using his whip, most times vigourously. I enjoy watching Ramon Dominguez get more out of a horse than the horse wants to give. Great stuff IMO. If no one has an advantage, what seperates jockeys? The agents? No thanks.

[salty]

nvZPOxk9Klw




:lol: :lol:

[toussaud]

is that a dominatrix in the background :lol: