​John Gosden said of his Lockinge winner Lead Artist that the horse had plenty of stamina as he has already won over 9-furlongs. John Gosden spent his early training years in California where 9-furlong races are indeed spoken of in terms of stamina. In California, I dare say, races over further than 10-furlongs are the equivalent of 2-mile+ races over here.
Flat trainers use the word ‘stamina’ when talking about how far their prize two-year-old might stay when all grown-up and mature, as if they are talking of a potential Ascot Gold Cup winner, rather than the ability of the horse in question to stay seven-furlongs. 
This use of the word ‘stamina’ by flat trainers is annoying. Why will they not adopt the word ‘ability’ when postulating on the furthest distance their horse might be capable of winning at? I fear one day in the future, if horse racing has a long and fruitful future, that trainers will be saying that they are sure their prize horse will have the stamina to stay the speed-requiring distances of six or seven-furlongs. 

Rachael Blackmore continues to be central to our sport, even in retirement. She obviously took everyone by surprise last Monday and it is testament to her place in the sport’s hierarchy that every Racing Post writer is eager to have his or her say on the woman who moved mountains and altered the percentage of prejudice against her sex.
As you would expect, Lee Mottershead’s piece on her is lead by facts and the opinions of the famed and famous in our sport. In fact, and it is no surprise to me, someone who follows the exploits of female riders perhaps a little closer than most, little has changed during the ‘Blackmore Years’. Although more female jockeys are riding now, especially in Britain, the win to ride ratio has hardly altered, and if you took Blackmore’s rides in Ireland out of the equation, I suspect the tide has rolled backwards in her homeland.
Rachael Blackmore was – odd to use the past tense about her – a brilliant jockey, as her career record clearly demonstrates. Her career highs outstrip the achievements of every male jockey who has ever ridden, with the exceptions of the greatest of jockeys, and she is entitled to be in that select band. She did not win the King George at Kempton, yet that is the only ‘classic’ National Hunt race that slipped her grasp. I just hope it cannot be said of her ‘there will never be another like her.’ There has to be or there will not be a Blackmore legacy.

What is required, of course, for there to be another female to follow in the footsteps of Rachael Blackmore is for a trainer or owner to give a female jockey similar opportunities to those given to Rachael.
I am putting Ed Walker on trial when it comes to this subject. No one can say that Hollie Doyle has any need of a Blackmore legacy. She has created her own legacy in the sport. On Saturday, she won on Qilin Queen for Ed Walker. The filly will next be seen in the Epsom Oaks. But will Hollie keep the ride? Husband Tom usually hops into the saddle when Walker has a runner in a big race, when he is not required by William Haggas. Saffie Osborne also rides regularly for Ed Walker.
If trainers and owners do not give opportunities to even our top female riders, and no one can argue that Doyle and Osborne are in the top echelon of riders in this country, what chance is there for the gender-equality playing field to ever become level. Blackmore did not rise to the pinnacle of the sport due to her ability in the saddle, she succeeded because she was given the opportunity to prove herself the equal, and the better in most cases, of her male colleagues. And it does matter if Qilin Queen is 25/1 for the Epsom Oaks, odds which doubtless reflect the likelihood of her winning the race. If Hollie or Saffie cannot be trusted with riding a 25/1 shot, what are the likelihood of trainers turning to them when they have previously ridden a horse that is favourite?

Billy Loughnane is a phenomenon. Only 19 (? They grow up so fast, these days) and he has already ridden a winner at every British racecourse bar 4. It cannot be long before quantity is replaced by quality.

​Sometime today, time-zones confuse me so it may have already happened, Saffie Osborne, in conjunction with her father and comedy partner, Jamie, attempts to become only the second female jockey in U.S. racing history to win a leg of the Triple Crown. Her mount, Heart of Honor, has the most annoying habit any racehorse can have in not liking 1st’s against his name, and preferring to bask in a succession of 2nd’s, which suggests he is either unlucky or does not particularly strain every tissue in the final hundred-yards of a race. Now is the hour Heart of Honor. For Saffie and your country strain every tissue and prove yourself a true warrior. 
I do not follow U.S. racing and apart from viewing a replay of the Kentucky Derby, a race that had more in common with equine mud-wrestling given the underfoot conditions and the mud-pack every horse adorned at the finish, than a classic horse race, I have no insight on the form and quality of the 3-year-old classic crop. If they are an ordinary bunch then Saffie might have an opportunity of attaining the height and glory of Rachael Blackmore. Saffie is a great gal and I have my fingers crossed for her, though crossing my fingers is not going to improve my typing skills. If I left in all the typos I produce, mainly just hitting the i when I intended the o or the h when I was intending to spell gal or glory, for instance, the 200-words thus far would read like a cypher and any reader would need to be a cryptographer to understand my meaning. 
And to think after her first every ride in public Saffie’s mother turned to Jamie and suggested that perhaps race-riding was not for their daughter.

Hewick, along with Monmiral, goes into battle against the best staying hurdlers at Auteuil today. He was a meritorious runner-up in the same race last season and is now 4Ib better off with Losange Blue, though he is also a year older. He is a great little horse and once I know how Saffie gets on in the U.S. I will recross my fingers in hope of Hewick providing Shark Hanlon with more recompense for the injustice done to him by the Irish authorities last year. 

In Sean Magee’s history of Royal Ascot, an entire chapter is devoted to one horse. The horse in question cannot be claimed as the best horse ever to grace the Ascot turf but he remains the most popular horse to have ever graced the Ascot turf. His name: Brown Jack.
An element of horse racing that grieves me is the reuse of famous equine names of the past. Though to the horse its name is of little consequence, to the human element it should be of great importance. I was enraged when Coolmore named a horse Spanish Steps a decade or so back and many people rallied to my cause. To this day, the majority of correspondence I receive is about blogs I have uploaded about perhaps my favourite racehorse of all-time.
A good while back a horse came from France with the name of Brown Jack and I was pretty narked about it and wrote to the racing Post to complain about it. People must be reminded that Brown Jack was the Desert Orchid of his day. He had public houses names after him, as well as a steam locomotive. Away from Ascot, he was the winner of the second Champion Hurdle ever run. He was, I stand to be corrected, the first horse to have a book written about his life. R.C. Lyle. A great book. With what I deem faint praise, Ascot stage a 2-mile handicap named in his honour. He won the Ascot Stakes in 1928, was second in the race the following year, though he won the Alexandra Stakes a couple of days later, and went on to win Alexandra Staes for the next 6-years. Steve Donogue worshipped him and when he was retired on winning the race for a sixth time in 1934, grown men were seen to weep. He deserves a full-size statue at Ascot. He should be honoured, as Seam Magee honoured him, above all other winners at Royal Ascot since 1934, including Frankel.
We all live in the shadow of these great horses. We cannot be seen to allow them to drift into the dark of the unremembered.

I received an e-mail today from someone in New Zealand regarding how to contact the writer Chris Pitt, author of ‘Fearless’, ‘Down to the Beaten’, ‘A Long Time Gone’ and many of the best books ever written about the sport. I have suggested a few routes to discovering Chris Pitt’s contact details and I thought I would extend the enquiry to anyone who might read this blog. I always try to help anyone who gets in touch with a question and query and I am disappointed when I cannot directly provide answers.

​I like David Jennings. I enjoy his style of writing. I enjoy his opinions and his tipping makes me feel better about myself. If I knew him, I suspect I would pinhole him as a ‘good egg’, which is old folks speak for a decent fellow.
He does, though, occasionally, depending on how you view such opinions, either put his head above the parapet unfearing of the bullets that might fly his way or those opinions can be viewed as pretty darn well stupid. Putting in the public domain that only two colts can possibly win the Epsom Derby this season is, to my mind, firmly in the latter category.
Delacroix looks solid; a perfectly reasonable Derby favourite. The Lion In Winter on the other hand, although darn certain to win a clutch of Group 1’s in the future, looks too shaky and flaky at this moment for any one to install him as one of only two colts with the ability to win the 2025 Epsom Derby. He sweated-up quite badly at York yesterday and even proved half-heartedly reluctant to go forward to his stall, an unusual trait for a Ballydoyle horse. And for the first two-furlongs he was a right old handful, as if he was wanting to test if Ryan Moore’s reputation as a great horseman was justified. It was; Ryan won the battle.
If he were not trained by Aidan O’Brien, he would be 20/1 for the Epsom Derby rather than 6/1. Of course, if Aidan tells us The Lion In Winter will improve leaps and bounds for the run, all past evidence dictates we should believe him. I am of the opinion, though, that the Derby razzmatazz is what may defeat him if he goes to Epsom, and I suspect that Aidan, given he has half-a-dozen other Derby candidates, will take the cautionary route of sending the horse to Chantilly and the French Derby.
Pride of Arras looks a nice prospect, though he did not look a Derby winner to me, yet as Epsom will be only his third-run he is as entitled to come on for the run every bit as much as The Lion In Winter.
To return to David Jennings bold prediction that there are only two candidates for Epsom glory this year, I say this – have you forgotten Ruling Court? I also have an instinctive liking for the Dermot Weld-trained Purview.

In his column today Chris Cook put up a lively defence of the decision by the French stewards to kick-out She’s Perfect and to promote Zarigana as the winner of the French 1,000 Guineas. He almost persuaded me that She’s Perfect was legitimately disqualified due to Shoemark being unable to keep his mount running in a straight line. He made a persuasive argument for the principle that all races should be run fairly. I would argue that not one of the first three kept to a straight line and when push came to shove the two contenders did not touch.
In our desperately annoying present-day wokish environment, though I accept that Barzalona caused his filly no harm, fourteen-hits (2 with the whip, 12 with his hand) was unsightly and not a good look for the sport. How hand-slapping is any different to using the reins as a substitute whip as Rachael Blackmore chose to do at Cheltenham the season before last, and was cautioned for it, is hard to defend.
But the main reason why Chris Cook did not win me to his side of the fence was that he made no mention of the view of the incident from the patrol camera following the runners. It is as clear as a cloudless sky that the coming together with Exactly by She’s Perfect was nothing more substantial than a brush, while Exactly went sideways for some distance to collide with Zarigana and was this incident that cost Barzelona the opportunity to win the race, though losing his whip must also have contributed.
On the balance of the evidence, I believe the appeal should succeed, though I doubt it will. Fairness, I suggest, is how you wish to define it.

On a day when Jody Townend will don the Royal silks at Leopardstown in a Ladies only handicap, in the preceding apprentice race there are 8 females slated to ride in the race, though two of them are on possible substitutes and will need withdrawals to be able to take part. I suspect that 6 female riders in an unrestricted gender race in Ireland must constitute both a record and a significant step forward for female jockeys in Ireland. Perhaps the Rachael Blackmore legacy will be on the flat for females and not over the jumps.

​I would not back against Oisin Murphy retaining his title no matter what he says about not prioritising his defence this season. Does he not say it every year? He is not favourite, though, to be champion. He is not even second favourite.
Favourite is Rossa Ryan at 11/10. I admire Rossa’s approach to life. He would like to be champion, he intends giving it a good kick this season, but if should fail to succeed he will not cry about it. I would have him favourite to ride the most winners in a calendar year but I am not as confident he will win enough races during the arbitrary period of the championship to take the crown this season.
Second favourite is Billy Loughnane. I predicted last season (or was it the season before. Time passes so quickly when you reach my age) that within a few years he would become champion jockey, a bold shout as he had not yet succeeded to the throne of champion apprentice. At 9/4 he is too short in the market even though without big-name horses to ride he will doubtless mop-up at the more minor meetings throughout the summer.
Oisin is 11/4, which represents better value than the two ahead of him in the market. Oisin is Oisin. The more I see of him, the more I like him.
Tom Marquand is 11/2. He is handicapped slightly by being stable jockey to a brilliant if cautious trainer in William Haggas, a man who likes to take his time with both 2-year and 3-year-olds. And more so than Ryan and Loughnane, he is also hampered by having to ride abroad on Sundays, as well as Ireland. He deserves to be champion, though I cannot see it happening this season.
William Buick is 14/1 and would doubtless be champion again if he put his mind to it. Quality is Buick’s game, though, and as well as forays to France and Ireland on weekends, Godolphin run plenty of horses in the U.S. and Buick will go where Charlie Appleby sends him.
The most tempting bet, even though I have no expectations of her achieving the fete, is the 100/1 about Hollie Doyle shaking the tree again by becoming champion jockey. 100/1! Given she invariably finishes within single digits numbers of husband Tom each season and he is 11/2, 100/1 is a present for backers. Love to see her as champion jockey as it will be a great boost to the sport, but I just cannot see it happening unless trainers get behind her to make it happen.

Tomorrow at Leopardstown, Jody Townend will achieve an honour that brother Paul must have thought highly unlikely for either of them. Jody rides Reaching High in a Lady Riders handicap for the King and Queen. Yes, Willie Mullins now trains for the British monarchy. I hope the Closutton magic works on the former Sir Michael Stoute trained horse and that Reaching High proves to be a high-class dual-purpose horse.

The She’s Perfect team have chosen to appeal against her demotion in the French 1,000 Guineas. Having seen the camera footage from the rear, I believe they have a sporting chance of winning their case. It is surprising, though, to see how the verdict of the Longchamp stewards has split opinion, with some well-respected commentators giving the Basher Watts team little chance of getting the race back, while others cannot believe there was an enquiry in the first place. I sit on the fence. I believe the Basher Watts syndicate were wronged, while having no faith their appeal will be successful. I cross my fingers on their behalf.

As with the domination of Willie Mullins in National Hunt, which was amusing at first, so it is becoming with Aiden O’Brien on the flat. Both are close to near perfection, though thus far this classic trial period O’Brien has already achieved perfection. Indeed, given he has had runners-up in several trials, he should be marked-up as perfection+.
It is, though, not a good look for the sport, especially when it comes to the classics on the flat. To just take the Epsom Derby and Oaks for example. Not only where are the British-trained opposition going to come from but where are the French-trained horses? Breeders, I believe, are killing the classic races, apart, perhaps, for the 2,000 and 1,000 Guineas, by breeding for speed and ignoring the history and tradition of our sport by treating staying blood like it is a virus that needs to be vaccinated against.
Of course, Ballydoyle will rule supreme – Coolmore are the only breeding organisation 100% committed to breeding for stamina.
My solution to the problem, to stemming the flow of classic riches to O’Brien – pour millions of pounds into the prize-money of the Ascot Gold Cup and the Doncaster and Goodwood Cups and add-on a bonus for any horse that wins the Stayers Triple Crown. And cut the number of Group 1 5 and 6-furlongs races. We have to turn-around the leviathan that is the breeding industry and twist the arms of breeders to persuade them to stop following the trend of the U.S. and remind them that the equine heroes of the ages were always Derby and Gold Cup winners.

​The Global Jockeys Challenge series proposed for next season, though with little detail yet provided above the aspiration for such an event, is flawed and unlikely to achieve what its proponents wish for it.
The reason I say it is flawed, and I believe I said the same about the David Power Cup when it was announced, is that the jockeys are not the stars of our sport, and I defend that point of view by asking readers to say out loud the name of our sport. Horse Racing. It is not Jockey Racing. And any attempt to put the jockey before the horse will be grasped by our opponents as humans making use of a beautiful creature for its own selfish ends.
The G.J.C. is proposed to give us a world champion jockey, in the same way Formula 1 appoints a world champion car driver. Yet the series will not take in any of the established great horse races staged around the world. The best will not be paired with the best. The best, at best, will be paired with handicappers. To return to Formula 1, the equivalent of which would be to take away the high-powered single seaters and ask Verstappen, Norris, Hamilton and others to risk their necks driving road cars around the Grand Prix circuits of the world.
Let us assume for the purposes of argument’s sake that Ryan Moore is the best jockey riding anywhere around the world at the moment. If he were to finish in last place in the G.J.C., which as this series will be draw-based as far as horse allocation is concerned, with ground, stall-position and circumstance leading factors in any race, would this mean that our opinion of Moore would be evidenced as wrong?
This concept is profit-lead, especially as the jockeys must make a contribution both financial and commitment-wise. And this is only going to contribute to an already, in Britain if nowhere else, bloated race programme and smaller field-sizes either side of meetings that stage races for the G.J.C.
Given the prompting behind this concept is to boost jockeys’ profiles, and to promote the sport to a larger public around the world, it would do aeons of good if some of the profit from the series went to rehabilitation and care programmes for retired racehorses. As I said quietly earlier, the sport is named after its main contributor when it comes to effort and sacrifice, the horse.
How this series can be fitted into a race programme that in Britain, if not in the other countries who will host the G.J.C., is literally flat-out from May to November and is an aspect of this proposal I believe the originators have not even addressed in their haste to announce the name of their ‘baby’ to the world. Given the 12-jockeys named for the series will be 12 of the busiest jockeys in the world, with commitments and contracts that all add-up to make them as rich as they already are, it would seem an impossible task to get all of them in 12 different rooms across the world all at the same time.
Also, in a world desperate for diversity, inclusion and equality of the sexes, it was a poor overlook to not include a G.J.C. for the best female jockeys to run parallel to the male G.J.C.. This would be easier to achieve, given that even the very best female flat jockeys are not given the same opportunities afforded to their male colleagues. 
I view the Global Jockeys’ Challenge as more an aspiration than a promise of improvement for the sport to come. Flat racing is not the dominant sport in any country around the world and in Britain and Ireland it is not too far a stretch to say that National Hunt is more popular amongst the public. I doubt if too many non-racing people could name 3 current flat jockeys, though without Rachael Blackmore that might now be said about National Hunt racing, now I come to think about it.
There is no need to promote jockeys as superstars when racing results are narrated by beginning with the name of the horse, followed by the starting odds. Jockeys work seven-days-a-week, working more hours than any other sportsman/woman. With those that work the hardest and longest amongst those who achieve the most meagre of rewards for their dedicated service to the sport. The Global Jockeys’ Challenge will not go a thousand-miles close to addressing the problems of those who operate at the lowest rungs of the sport. Making rich jockeys richer will do very little to help the sport rise higher in the estimations of the sporting and non-sporting public.

​Yes, I am wrong more often than I am right. Which, I suggest, outside of Willie Mulllins and Ryan Moore, is just about average for the whole of the human race. Yet there is something far worse than merely getting your facts wrong – being right when you wish you were wrong.
I predicted a few weeks back that Rachael Blackmore would retire from riding at the end of the Irish season. And that is exactly what she announced yesterday. Little pony-riding girls all over Ireland will be heartbroken this morning.
The void she will leave behind her is unquantifiable. She is Rachael. She is the gleaming star of Irish racing. The face of Irish racing. Paul Townend may outrank her when it comes to championships and Grade 1’s but he was never first on peoples’ lips when asked to name a jockey. And that applies equally to Britain as it does to Ireland.
The sadness is that we shall probably never see her like again.
Oddly, and perhaps this needs explanation, she announced her retirement ‘with immediate effect’, even though she is jocked-up for two-rides at Sligo today. Knowing her from afar, which is perhaps to not know her at all, I suggest she planned her retirement in the way she has done to mitigate any hullabaloo, to go on her way in the same manner in which she arrived. Quietly.
As someone who has championed female jockeys since the days when the gentler sex was few and far between, the bad news keeps on coming. Hayley Turner’s retirement removed the smiley face from British flat racing. In losing Bryony Frost to France was as big a loss to British racing as Rachael’s will be to Irish racing. Emma Smith-Chaston has also recently retired from riding. And as I have said so many times recently, there is no one coming through the ranks to take their place. Yes, Hollie and Saffie are top ten on the flat but the divide between them and the rest of the girls is huge. Apart from Jo Mason being stable jockey to her uncle and grandfather, name another female who holds a stable jockey position?
Now, even if Hollie Doyle agrees with the decision, the Shergar Cup organisers have taken the retrograde step of doing away with an all-female team and this year each team will have one female member. Hollie may be right in believing it is a step forward to treat male and female jockeys the same, and in every other aspect of flat racing that is perhaps the right way forward, even if I believe young female jockeys need an edge in order to persuade owners and trainers to give them opportunities they presently lack. But the Shergar Cup is all about taking sides and I very much doubt I am alone in always supporting the all-female team, even if they are not the underdogs they once were.

Having now watched the finish of the French 1,000 Guineas from all angles, I believe the She’s Perfect team have an each-way chance of getting the result reversed in their favour. From the rear-view camera it is clear beyond doubt that Ryan Moore on Exactly bumped the Mikhail Barzelona horse, which caused him to veer from a straight line and the coming together between She’s Perfect and Exactly was minor, no more than a slight brush. Also, though the French whip rules allow a jockey to hit a horse with his hand as many times as the jockey sees fit, Barzelona hit his mount twice with his whip and twelve-times with his hand after losing his whip.
I am convinced She’s Perfect was unlucky to lose the race in the stewards’ room. I am inclined, though, to expect the result to stay the same. In this country, connections would be odds-on to get the race back. In fact, in this country she would not have lost it in the first place. I simply cannot see the French appeals panel over-ruling in favour of a British-trained horse.

NB. (Note Bene) The name of the female jockey considered by John Randall to be the most successful female in the history of racing is Julie Krone, with a total in the 3,000’s. How many of those victories were Grade 1’s or classics John Randall did not disclose. Of course, I should undertake the research myself. Perhaps. Maybe.

​I expressed the wish that Kieran Shoemark had the last laugh over the Gosdens regarding his dismissal from the number one job at Clarehaven. Boy, Kieran must have really pissed-off the racing gods in one way or another. Perhaps in both ways considering the kicking he is experiencing at the moment. He wins the French 1,000 Guineas, no doubt takes joy in having the last laugh, only for the French stewards to take the race off him for interference in the final furlong. I would imagine being demoted from a classic win is infinitely worse than John Gosden summoning him to his office to inform him he is no longer the favoured one. Somebody please give Kieran Shoemark a ride in the Derby because when his luck changes it will doubtless change big time. Unless the racing gods know something about him we do not.

At the weekend, at Ascot, and only a few weeks since Hayley Turner retired, Holly Doyle became the winningmost female jockey in British racing. She is 28. Hayley is 43. Not only is she now the best female flat jockey in British racing history but with 10 Group 1’s and 2 foreign classics to her name, surely she must either be the most successful female jockey currently riding anywhere in the world or at least honing in on being the most successful when it comes to riding Group 1’s and classics. I posed the question poorly to John Randall, Racing Post historian, and his answer was based on individual wins, which places Holly a long way below a former U.S. jockeys, whose name I cannot recall but doubles will do at some time during the day.
The Racing Post published a list of the top ten British female flat jockeys in their piece on Holly Doyle yesterday (Holly also featured in the big article) and it made for unsettling reading. Holly at the time of writing sits on 1,023, with Hayley, obviously, one win in arrears. Then comes Josephine Gorden with 417, Cathy Gannon 344. Alex Greaves 287. Saffie Osborne 258. Kim Tinkler 250. Joanne Mason 247. Nicola Currie 236. In comparison the leading British female jump jockey Bryony Frost has ridden 293 winners in this country.
Despite Holly Doyle being one of top jockeys riding in this country, I still believe that to achieve more female jockeys riding regularly at the top meetings and in the top races, female jockeys who have not ridden more than – this numbers alters every time I give thought to this subject – 200-winners in their careers should receive a 3Ib allowance in all handicaps. They should certainly be allowed to claim 3Ib for a set number of winners after they have ridden ‘out their apprentice claim’. Yes, it is unfair on their male colleagues. But it is also unfair that a good percentage of owners and trainers have a prejudice against female riders.

Royal Ascot 1900 looked quite similar to Royal Ascot 2,000 or any year before the meeting changed to 5-days. As far as the monarchy was concerned, prior to the Prince of Wales, who batted away his mother’s criticism of his involvement with racing with great tact and an iron will, the Royals would only attend the Royal meeting on the two important days, Tuesday and Thursday, the only two days when the public could enjoy the royal procession.
The most valuable race on day one was, appropriately, the Prince of Wales Stakes, worth £2,100 to the winner. On the Wednesday, the Coronation Stakes was the feature race, worth £2,750 to the winner, £259 more than the Royal Hunt Cup. On the Thursday the Ascot Gold Cup, worth £3,360 to the winner, was not only the feature race but after the classics the most important race of the whole season. The Hardwicke Stakes was the feature on the Friday, with £2,421 going to the winning owner.
The first race on the Friday was the Ascot High Weight Stakes over 10-furlongs and worth £565 to the winner. I confess I do not know what is meant by a High Weight race. If it were a conditions race for horses that usually carry high weights in handicaps, I would like to see this sort of race brought back.
Also, Royal Ascot in 1900 also featured either a biennial or triennial race on each day of the meeting. As far as I can ascertain these races were designed for horses to come back year after year from 2-year-old to 3-year-old (biennial) and 2 – 4-year-old (triennial) to compete against the same horses each year. Two of these races were in their 42nd and 43rd years, two others in their 37th and 38th year, with the last race on the fourth day in its 47th year.
Am I the only one to think a similar concept might be tried now, though not at Royal Ascot, obviously. Just the one biennial race each year, as a novelty. In 1900, if the idea were new, it would be a race for stoutly-bred two-year-olds, with the 3-year-old race over 10 or 12-furlongs. But in todays speed-orientated world, sprints would be the best bet for the race (races) to be considered successful. I dare say there was a valid point in biennial and triennial races in 1900, which probably does not exist today. But it would do the sport no harm to revisit the past occasionally.

​Andrew Franklin, former Channel 4 head of racing (head honcho, producer/director, friend of John Francome – something) is correct when he suggests the Racing Post should demand Great British Racing’s Simin Michaelides give an answer to the question ‘what should be expected as a result of the 3.6-million quid marketing campaign funded by the Levy Board. The story seems to be the vast amount of money and not what would constitute success for spending that amount of money. As the money comes from Levy Board resources, it should be remembered, as Mr.Franklin makes clear, that indirectly it is punters’ money being used and the people who have made this grant possible should at the very least be party to the expectations of Great British Racing. As with myself, Mr. Franklin is sceptical that this campaign will be no anymore successful than similar campaigns in the past.

Tony Connell of London tells a tale of how difficult it can be for racegoers travelling to the races by public transport, highlighting a recent journey that comprised of one train and two replacement bus services and asks why the racecourse in question did not hire a coach to take racegoers direct from where the train journey ended to the racecourse. It all about service and going the extra mile to engage with the people who keep the turnstiles turning. It is, perhaps, something Great British Racing might want to chew on before they begin the process of allocating their 3.6-million quid.

Both John Castley of Peterborough and Graham Butler of Romford questions why the trainers’ championship title is decided upon prize-money when the jockeys title is all about winners. It is the same for both codes, made more unreasonable when on the flat the trainers’ title is decided on a 12-month basis, January 1st to New Years Eve. As I have suggested in the past, why not give a trophy to both the jockey and the trainer who win the most races and the most prize-money, and for the same time-period. The flat jockeys’ championship is farcical, based as it is on two arbitrary dates that begin months after the season has started and finishes a month before the turf season ends.

Michael Yarrow of Harpenden makes a very good point with regard to what constitutes perfect ground conditions and why racecourses do not aim to achieve perfect ground when watering. Windsor recently announced they were watering to achieve good-to-firm ground for their meeting this Monday. As Mr. Yarrow comments, why not try to achieve good-ground, and given Windsor has the River Thames flowing by, and I am assuming they take their water from the river, it seems it should not be too difficult a task to achieve good ground.

Mr. Walker of London is harder to agree with, though. As someone with no great bond with children, I should be in his camp. But no. The wider picture must be focused upon. To use a hackneyed and flawed expression, the children are our future. The under eighteens must be allowed in for free as if only a small percentage of them continue to walk through the gates as adults, then the policy has achieved its aim. Also, there must be entertainment for younger children and everything under the sun if it brings new people to the sport. The only events that should not be allowed are those that might frighten the horses. The sport must survive beyond the lives of myself and Mr. Walker. Close your ears to the squeals of little children, Mr. Walker, and visualise them as young Ryan Moores of Holly Doyles. Remember, too, that a lifetime ago, as with me, you too were a yelling child annoying people who then were much like yourself today.

Jimmy Gill of Gravesend reminds readers that the sport is underpinned, as it has been for decade after decade, by those who sweat and toil for the love of the horse and who hope in return for small success, and he highlights a recent winner for Tracey Leeson at Fakenham. By coincidence, to support Mr. Gill’s opinion, James Ewart is reported in today’s Racing Post as retiring as a trainer as his duty to provide a better standard of living for his family must take precedent over his love of training racehorses. It is the flaw in the B.H.A.’s plan to rebuild the sport’s finances from the top down. To build a successful and long-lasting edifice, good foundations are vital. If you build from the top, you have nowhere to go but sidewards or downwards, whereas if you build from the bottom upwards you have the world and all that is in it.

​The ‘stuck together as if glued’ title of what is to follows is representative of how I feel. No one pays me for the thoughts, concerns and ideas that appear on this site. Yes, once the National Hunt season is over, I annually come down with the ‘flat blues’, as I refer to my state of mind at this time of the year. Though this year I am further depressed by the sheer number of jumps fixture we have had since the old season closed and the new one started. 2 and 3-runner fields at Ludlow tomorrow, is that not bone fide evidence that there are far too many meetings for this time of year? Come on, B.H.A., do your job; care for the sport you are licenced to govern, show some pre-emptive spunk and deplete the number of race-meetings in the same way as you have the power to abandon races that are, to your mind, so uncompetitive as to be waste of resources.
Chester did little this week to lift my springtime despondency. It was not always the case. I used to look forward to Chester as the starting gun for the ride towards the only two classics that come with added anticipation. Yet this year Chester was merely a Ballydoyle win-fest, with the maestro not even in attendance. And all we got as far as fact was concerned from his stand-ins was a whole lot of conjecture. Ifs and buts as if they were protecting state information.
Lingfield today is no better. Only 3 turn-out for am Oaks trial that on paper is nothing more than a parade for the O’Brien filly and the Derby trial looks a match between, you guessed it, the two from Ballydoyle, the only point to ponder being has Ryan Moore chosen the right one. 
One element of the flat that has always annoyed me is races with Group 3 status that would have the same number and quality of runners if it were a listed race worth a few thousand quid less to the winner. ‘Black type’ should be consigned to the needless bin. It is a vehicle for breeders to board and means nothing when it comes to the actual ability of horses who attain ‘black type’. It is a falsity, a present that comes in ribbons and bows but holds together an empty box. Third of four in a listed race at Salisbury or Chelmsford should not extoll a filly with some sort of achievement that lofts it above the filly that won five handicaps in a season.
The lack of loyalty in racing also grieves me. I have great respect for John Gosden but his cutting the cord of kindness with Kieran Shoemark, even if the decision was driven by big name owners at Clarehaven, was unforgiveable. There may not have been a written contract between the two but having taken the decision that someone could replace Frankie, and having forgiven him on many occasions down the years, the right decision would have been to have given Shoemark the whole of this season to prove himself. In doing the dirty on Shoemark, it tells everyone that Gosden made a mistake in giving the Shoemark the job in the first place.
It is hard to criticise, as I have done in the past, that the flat is too dominated by so few stables, what with Willie Mullins now virtually owning National Hunt racing, but I do believe the sport would be energised if the smaller flat stables were able to play in the big races. What is worse, and this is more a reflection on the low standard of prize-money in this country, if a horse of classic-winning potential were to emerge from an unlikely source, one the major foreign funded outfits would be quick to snap-up that horse and even if it were to remain with the original trainer it would cease to be an under-dog and with it the sparkle of wonder would be gone.
Even the Swinton Hurdle at Haydock does not inspire me with anticipation this afternoon. It used to be a race where champion hurdle type horses would attempt to give away lumps of weight to good handicappers but like the old Whitbread the race is just an afterthought these days, even if it is now the first big race of the new season.
Anyway, I look forward to the Derby meeting and Royal Ascot. I am presently reading Sean Magee’s mighty tome on the history of Royal Ascot and hope to discover a few forgotten facts to enlighten the day of anyone foolish enough to visit this website.
You know, when I started this website, I thought on days when I had nothing to say, I would upload one of the many horse racing themed short stories I have written down the years. I did do this on one occasion and have refrained ever since. Even though I am not wholly repelled by those stories, I came to the conclusion that if people could not fork out a few quid for the collection I worked so hard to have published, why give people an excuse not to buy the book.
My apologies, I have the wrong head on this morning. And no, I have not forgotten to take my meds. I am not on any meds for any condition. At 71, that is one of the few aspects of my life to be proud about.
My best wishes. Have a good day.

​There is something wrong when a trainer withdraws a horse from a race for no other reason than it is drawn wide, as happens so often at Chester. Firstly, trainers should be fined no matter the reason given if they withdraw a horse that is drawn wide at Chester, other than when a vet on duty at the course issues a certificate confirming the horse is lame or unwell.
Secondly, something should be done to undo the unfairness in the draw at Chester and other racecourses where horses are routinely withdrawn because of an unfavourable stall position. What if horses drawn widest, say the three outside stalls, receive a 2Ib allowance, and those in the next two stalls a 1Ib allowance. Would this incentivise trainers to take their chances?

The Osbornes go big pot hunting at Pimlico next Saturday and I for one will have my fingers crossed that they come home with the laurels. Heart of Honour had a good time of it out in the desert regions of the racing world throughout our winter, finishing 2nd in the U.A.E. Derby. The Preakness Stakes, I suggest, is a whole different kettle of fish and Heart of Honour must raise his game a notch or two to be in the mix, yet I dare say we were all saying the same when Jamie sent Toast of New York to the Breeders Cup Classic, finishing an honourable and perhaps unlucky runner-up. I dare say having a female jockey riding in one of America’s classic races will attract a lot of media attention and I hope that Saffie is interviewed as much after the race as in the preliminaries. 

Rather like a government that can plead poverty when cutting benefits from the elderly and yet can muster twice the amount of money for a pet project, British racing is about to spend £3,600,000 on a marketing campaign to boost the image of horse racing to an apathetic public. In being critical of this initiative, ‘The Going Is Good’, I am not suggesting that all is rosy in the racing sector, only that less money spent more wisely might produce better results. Also, £3-million of the Levy Board funding for this project would be better spent propping-up prize-money or to speed-up the building of separate changing facilities at racecourses for male and female jockeys.
As I have proposed down the years, free entry to people living in the postcode for respective racecourses would be good start. Free bus travel from train stations to the racecourse. Free tickets won on local radio. Family fun days to emphasise that under sixteens get in free. Remind people that there is only one Royal Ascot and the sort of clothes mandated for that meeting do not apply on any other day’s racing. In fact, no restrictions on what clothes are allowed.
I have no more expectations for this marketing campaign as I did for the previous one. Or any that went before it. This is a prime example of the B.H.A. pushing a proposal for the sake of making it look like they are doing something, that they are on the ball.

When I come across a facet of racing history new to me, I like to share it. In reading a large tome entitled ‘Royal Newmarket’, written by R.C. Lyle, the man who wrote the story of the great Brown Jack, and illustrated by Lionel Edwards, R.I., I came across the name of the jockey who took on the mantle of retained jockey to King George VI when Joe Childs retired. John Crouch. He was obviously destined for great success, sadly, though, in 1939 he died in an air crash on his way to Newcastle to ride a horse for the King.
I cannot recall the name of John Crouch before the reference in this book and felt I should pass his name on to people in case his name is the answer to a question in a pub quiz or similar. My next query, of course, is whether Hector Crouch is related to him. Or even Peter Crouch, though that seems less likely.