​The person I will feel pity for is the one chosen to replace Aidan O’Brien at Ballymore when Aidan decides to ride off into the sunset with one removal van allocated for all his trophies. If Manchester United have found it impossible to find a worthy successor to Sir Alex Ferguson, how easy will it be for ‘the lads’ to find a similar level of achievement with somebody else?
The ’somebody else’ is easy to predict and all the available evidence suggests that son Joseph will step into his father’s shoes with the ease in which the father has won classic races. Even so, the weight of expectation will be a heavy load to carry even for someone who has thus found it an easy experience to train in the shadow of a father who finds training classic winners as easy as shelling peas.

Of course it should be remembered for all his classic wins, Aidan O’Brien has doubtless trained more also-rans in classics than any other current trainer. He throws more darts at the dart board than most trainers would dare, each one of them with a pedigree to die for and he is not ashamed of doing so. It must be remembered his job description is not so much to roll-out classic winners but to produce stallions, some for Coolmore to keep, others to sell on breeders all around the world. 
Yesterday, Delacroix, for all the trouble that befell him in running, finished only ninth, though even if he were ten-lengths closer to the eventual winner going round Tattenham Corner, I do not believe anyone would be thinking this morning that he would have won the race given a clear passage. And The Lion In Winter is a horse going nowhere. If City of Troy was an example last year of Aidan’s ability to turn water into wine, The Lion In Winter is in need of a much more spectacular conjuring trick by his trainer. But who would bet against the horse winning a Group 1 by seasons end? Aidan is racing’s own David Blaine, where nothing, even making the Statue of Liberty seemingly disappear, is beyond his magical powers. I would love Aidan to train a horse rated in the low 40’s just to witness how much improvement he might eke out of it.
That is the thing, you know. Although all horses, blue-blooded or rag ‘n’ bone bred, go through life in want of making the lives of their trainers as difficult as can be achieved by laming themselves for no apparent reason, as many ‘miracles’ are achieved by trainers in the lesser profitable grounds than were Aidan operates, winning with horses of limited ability, limited enthusiasm for the job, and with limbs unfit for purpose.

Already labelled a ‘stayer’, as if being stoutly-bred is some sort of stigma, Lambourn was a worthy winner of the Epsom Derby. Wayne Lordan had a plan and he executed it to the minutest detail, making virtually every yard of the running and never at any moment in danger of being conquered.
This is the truth, cross my heart and hope to die, when Ruling Court was scratched from the race, I replaced him in my top three with Lambourn, and I had earlier in the week selected him as the best of the Ballymore three.
I think a few good horses will come out of this year’s Derby. Lazy Griff, obviously, and if Lambourn went for the Arc instead of the St. Leger, he would be in with a sound chance of giving Charlie Johnston and Yorkshire a famous classic success. Tennessee Stud got going late and should improve for the run and Stanhope Gardens would have finished third if the camber had not caught him out, ensuring he ran off a straight line in the dying breaths of the race. New Ground behaved appalling on the way to the start, sweating and pulling and almost plunging and in the race was too eager for speed, yet ran on from the back to finish an honourable fourth. And Delacroix is obviously much better than his run yesterday.
And it is always newsworthy and worth celebrating when the second jockey to a powerful stable wins the Derby and Lordan seems a fellow deserving of the laurels. It can often happen at Ballymore, the more workaday riders prospering when the first jockey errs in his choice. 

Thinking on it, the Derby, I mean, apart from those who were on Lambourn who were sitting pretty throughout the race, every other professional punter, racing columnist and racing presenter, were all stuffed a long way out. David Jennings was all in with The Lion In Winter and he must have been hurting for the whole two-minutes of the race. The same with those who put their name to Delacroix as a good thing. Rossa Ryan could not see how the horses that finished behind Pride of Arras at York could finish in front of him at Epsom, yet, with the exception of Damysus, they all did.
Horse racing makes fools of us all, no matter who you are and what success you have achieved in the past. As a sport, it is the greatest leveller. As Dan Skelton, horses and racing puts manners on all us poor human beings. It is why we love the sport, isn’t it?

Oh, and now can Jockey Club Estates revive its problem child? Heavens only knows! They might start by getting rid of the out-dated dress code for the Queens Stand. Men in morning suits at an outdoor sporting event is beyond ridiculous when the women can dress-up in any manner they choose, albeit they too must adhere to some form of dress code. On the Morning Show, messrs Bell, Blake and Persad, dressed in ill-fitting morning dress, and this at 9.30 in the morning, looked like hopeful wedding chasers in need of a wine waiter. Start by making Epsom look fit for all, not just for the aristocracy. And entice the locals to every meeting with free tickets, free travel and entertainment on the hill. Horse racing breaks through all the old social classes and through the television screen the perception can seem the complete opposite. 

​In todays ‘Johnny and D.J.’ column in the Racing Post, Johnny Dineen admits his annoyance of the week was seeing a horse called Meetingofthewaters running at Bangor last week who was not the Meetingofthewaters trained by Willie Mullins that finished fifth in this year’s Aintree National. He is correct to raise this issue, an issue I have pushed and banged-on about for the best part of twenty-years. As Dineen pointed out, the English language is huge. And I would add that there are over 200 other languages that could be utilised to name a racehorse. Meetingofthewaters could be translated into French, Gaelic, Hungarian or Dutch and as long as it does not breach the 18-character rule it would be deemed acceptable by the B.H.A.. Sea The Stars could be translated into Spanish, Brown Jack into Norwegian. Spanish Steps into Italian. 
As I have said many times, it is lazy, ignorant and ‘name two horses of the same name that have won races at the top level on either the flat or National Hunt? To Johnny Dineen this issue is annoying; to me it is exasperating, as vexing as political corruption and the 4-billion quid it is costing the British tax-payer to house and feed illegal immigrants. Yes, it is that exasperating to me!

Johnny Dineen’s foil in his piece in the Racing Post and the ‘Upping the Ante’ podcast, David Jennings, is one of my Racing Post favourites. Occasionally, though, his opinion is at odds with my own. Actually, most of my opinions are at odds with those who earn their living as racing correspondents. But then they are professional and trained, some with a whip and chair, I suspect, and I am unprofessional and untrained since the days of the potty. 
I would prefer it if people of the calibre of David Jennings did not resort to ratings, the opinion of others, when summing-up a race. Even the form-book should be set aside when trying to find winners. I believe, on the day, ground dependency, weight carried and whether the racecourse is left or right-handed, flat or undulating, can be more influential when deciding which horse is more likely to win. It is about feel, instinct, what the heart demands. Going commando, almost.
If ratings are all they are cracked-up to be, the highest rated would win most of the time. Ratings are no more than bollards in the road to either penury or joy. Ratings are a faith that limits freedom of thought, freedom from instinct. Minnie Hauk proved how the faith of ratings can lead the punter down blind alleyways.
For a season, David, Sea The Stars was an unbeatable wonder. He was a nine-month shooting star. Yet people who should know better, who should be doing all in their power to boost our sport, choose to remember a nine-month wonder horse – and I could use Flightline as another example – as one of the greats. Sea The Stars has proved himself a great stallion; if he had been kept in training as a four-year-old he might have proven himself superior to any horse that ever graced a racecourse. He was not kept in training and we will never know where he stands in the pantheon of the greats. What I do know is a nine-month shooting star should not even be nominated for the pantheon.
To me, hard, cold facts, are unpalatable, yet to ‘experts’ they are the ambrosia of their profession.

As a kid, my party piece was to name the last fifty-winners of both the Epsom Derby and the Grand National. It was impressive feat of memory until someone asked me to name the 1958 Derby winner or any single race out of the hundred. I could not do it then and I certainly cannot do it now. Individual years do not register in my memory. I can tell you here and now that Red Rum won the Grand National in 1973 but would have to resort to a book to name the winner of the Epsom Derby of the same year.
I needed my memory jogged to recall that City of Troy won the Derby last year and I had completely forgotten that Continuous won the St.Leger the year before last. Explanation, I suspect, why though bodily I live in the modern age of 2025, my heart, soul and memory live in the days of my youth when life was so much simpler to navigate.

I did not like the Epsom Oaks yesterday. I wanted, nay expected, Desert Flower to win and win like a champion, and whether she did not quite stay the distance, as William Buick seems to believe or whether, as Charlie Appleby suggested, that she did act on either the track or the ground, makes no difference to me. I never have fond memories of races where the horse I wanted to win does not win.

​To let you into a secret, it is two in the morning and I am not snoring. Also, we seem to have a problem with the electricity which is only affecting the lights and an inspection of the fuse box has determined that no switches are in the off-position. I will have to leave it to my other half when she rises from her slumber sometime after the dawn chorus to sort it. So I am operating under torch-light, which is kind of spooky at two in the morning.

Horse racing needs all the good news it can muster and Queen Camilla visiting Hexham yesterday, primarily to open a new stand named in her honour, was definitely good news, especially as she stuck around to ask for views from trainers and racecourse staff on the problems the sport is mired in at this present and pivotal time in its history. It seems both our king and queen have concerns for our sport and though their hands are constitutionally tied, we must hope that behind the scenes they can use their influence in our favour.

It will be disappointing if Elizabeth Gale, who rode her first flat winner yesterday, decides to turn her back on the National Hunt side of the sport to focus on the flat. She is fifteen-winners into her jumps career and though the flat may appear a less hazardous means of earning a living, she is receiving a lot of support from a whole raft of National Hunt trainers at the moment. Perhaps she should consider riding under both codes as Taylor Fisher is doing, though he may be injured as I have not seen him feature in the Racing Post recently. If girls stop hammering at the door, the imbalance between the sexes will never close.

After saying a hundred-times that there will be no Rachael Blackmore legacy if no female jockey is given the opportunity to advance their careers, I have to admit that in Anna McGuiness we might just be seeing the first flowering of Blackmore’s labours. McGuinness is attached, I believe, to Closutton and has already received a couple of rides from the master trainer and quite recently other trainers have started to use her. I also heard Ruby Walsh describe her as a talented rider, which should be endorsement enough for trainers to keep putting her up. And, of course, she will have ridden out with Rachael Blackmore at Closutton and no doubt taken advice from her.
Also in Ireland, a young female by the name of Burns, N Burns – for some reason in the 4-day declarations she is N Burns but on the day of the race she is Nicola Burns – is establishing herself. So perhaps the Rachael Blackmore effect is becoming reality on both codes.

It is a bit of a disappointment to have only 9-runners in the Epsom Oaks today, especially when the Derby has achieved each-way betting with a field of 19, more than enough for an office sweepstake. Why so many of the experts are overlooking Desert Flower on the basis that her pedigree suggests she is a miler I do not understand when Buick’s hardest task when riding her has been to pull her up at the end of a race. Charlie Appleby believes she will stay and so do I. Easy-peasy lemon-squeezy. 

To me, the names of horses are important. Yes, I have a thing about the French and Arabic languages used for naming a racehorse, though that is about being unable to pronounce foreign words and an inability to distinguish one Arab-named horse from another and the same with jumpers with part English part French names. But I am also all assy about names like Bubbles Wonky and Sugarpiehoneybunch, both winners yesterday, the latter at 28/1. There may be reasonable explanations for why these two horses were given the names they have, though I suspect in both cases a 5-year-old granddaughter was asked to choose a name and once she had spoken, there was no going back. I do though wish people would remember that once named, and once the horse has had its first run, that name cannot be changed. It may be fun to name a horse Sugarpiehoneybunch but this is a serious sport and I believe all aspects of it should be taken seriously.

​Did anyone think the draw for the Epsom Derby that took place yesterday at the local cinema was both a bit naff and rather unnecessary? Well, that was my opinion from the moment Rishi Persad thanked the F.A. for lending them their ‘materials’. The sport can afford a £3-million+ advertising budget, yet could not go to the expense of a velvet bag and nineteen numbered balls. Shakes head, moves on. Has a re-think. It was not as embarrassing as last year’s effort which took place in Epsom High Street amongst virtually no on-lookers. If they persist in this no-show and even less interest amongst the non-racing public, do the draw from Racing Post headquarters or the studio of racing broadcaster. The racing enthusiasts may be an interest in which horse comes out of which draw but no one else will give a damn. Shakes head and moves on, again.
As long as all of the nineteen declared runners go to post, which I suspect will not be the case due to the softening ground conditions, but let us hope, the 2025 Epsom Derby will at least be a reminder of days gone by when 20-runners would be the least expected to take part. Nineteen-runners will ensure some kind of jeopardy and jeopardy makes for a more entertaining and newsworthy race.
I also believe this Derby is the most compelling Derby of recent years. It is a proper race, with one of three or four who might yet start favourites, and with at least a dozen of the runners having a legitimate chance of winning and any one of the nineteen having the opportunity to finish in the first four. The arrival of proper rain, of course, throws a spanner into all of the experts previous study of the race as now it is not only about which horses have the form and pedigree to suggest they are likely to engage favourably with the 12-furlong, but also how many will act on the softish ground? They say speed wins the Epsom Derby, not stamina. That might not necessarily be the case in 2025.
Personally, I remain wedded to the idea that Ruling Court has the class, form and pedigree to win from Midak and Stanhope Gardens, with Lambourn being the best betting value of the three O’Brien horses. Colin Keane might be on the best of the three Ballymore runners and he might just cruise past the whole lot of them in the final furlong. The old adage, there, of the speediest and classiest horse always prevailing. On the other hand, if you think back to the Dante on the flatlands of York, Keane might just have a nightmare of a ride if The Lion in Winter behaves as he did then, when even the master of the saddle had the greatest difficulty persuading him to put his head down and be at least a good representation of what an O’Brien racehorse should be. Keane will either wear the crown of victory on Saturday or he will return to the weighing room a man close to breaking point.
Usually when it comes to the races that really matter, and the Derby along with the Ascot Gold Cup are the only two flat races that really matter to me, there is a horse, jockey, trainer or owner, who I want to win, even though form suggest they have no prayer. This time around, even though it will be a delight if Derby glory goes to someone who has never savoured success in the race before, I have no bias. Colin Keane and Wayne Lorden, for instance, even though they are on Coolmore horses, deserve a day in the limelight and if there is any justice in the world Tom Marquand will surely win a Derby during his career. And though they cannot be termed ‘journeyman jockeys’ as they have already tasted big-race successes, it would be a nice touch if David Probert or Luke Morris could triumph, and if Billy Loughnane were to win at his first attempt, there would be echoes of Lester Piggott.
Yet I am suggesting that William Buick will win his second Derby, from Mikhail Barzalona, also a winning Derby jockey.
For once, I am looking forward to a race on the flat.

​When it was announced that sixty-races per year would be restricted to trainers outside of the top four stables I thought it a sensible proposal to help the less successful yet hard-working stables to survive. The holy four cried foul, threatened legal action and the proposal was quickly scuttled. To be fair, though, Irish racing has come-up with perhaps a better scheme, one the holy four do not object to. 60-races are to used as a sort of championship for the lesser Irish stables, though the holy four will be eligible to run horses in these races, they do not qualify for the ‘championship’ bonus. Points will be awarded for the first five places in these 60-races, though not necessarily, as I understand it, the first five past the post. At the end of the series, 120,000 euros will be divided-up to the top owner, trainer and jockey. Not David Power Cup millions territory but an applaudable effort to find compromise nonetheless. 

There is something about the family Bryne that excites the Dick Francis in us all. The Bryne family might believe that we are all out to get them, and they might be right. But that unseat at Wexford by Phillip Bryne had intrigue written all over it. The favourite back in second going to the last, the drifter in the market about to trot-up, the jockey falling off like a drunken man from a bar-stool – comedy or a thriller, make-up your own mind.
Equally bereft were, again, the Wexford stewards. Having falsely accused Ted Walsh of pulling fast one at their last meeting, the 3,000 euro fine they imposed quickly quashed a week later, now they decided there was nothing untoward in a jockey falling off like a fool from a horse who should have been favourite but a huge drifter in the betting, allowing the favourite to cruise to victory. We all await with baited breath the result of the I.H.R.B. inquiry into the incident. I just hope if Brynes is should be found guilty of whatever rule he might be complicit in breaking that the Wexford stewards are punished equally as hard. They have brought the sport into disrepute, whatever the findings of the official inquiry.
The always impressive Adam Macnamara said in Brynes defence, if he fell-off with intent, why leave it to the last hurdle? Mick Fitzgerald on the other hand made the arguable defence of Bryne that no jockey wants to fall-off for risk of injury. Yet history will tell you that a jockey will fall off deliberately if there is money in it for him.

In a letter in the Racing Post today, Mr. John McDonald bemoaned the number of class 5 and 6-races last Friday, suggesting ‘it was not exactly a feast for the racing connoisseur.’ I would contend that no one intended those races to be a feast for the ‘racing connoisseur’. That sector of the sport has their feast this weekend and at Royal Ascot ten-days later. As I have said many times, you can have as exciting a race at a point-to-point as you can at Royal Ascot. A seller at Wolverhampton can have as close a finish as you might have at the Ebor meeting. You can win just as much on a 20/1 winner at Southwell on the all-weather as you can on a 20/1 winner at the July meeting at Newmarket. It is all about personal perception and the need to provide races for the type of horses in the racing pool. Of course, that puts to one side the fact that there is too much racing at this time of year, both on the flat and over jumps. And certainly, too much all-weather racing during the period of now and until the end of high summer.

I have no real interest in U.S. racing. I am only interested in the Belmont Stakes, third and final leg of the U.S. triple crown, as Saffie and Jamie Osborne are attempting to win the race with Heart of Honor. What startles me, though, is that the Belmont historically is run over 12-furlongs, yet this season and last, due to Belmont racecourse being redeveloped, the third leg of the U.S. triple crown, a holy of holies, one would think, of U.S. racing, has been run over 10-furlongs due to it being held at Saratoga. Can you imagine if Epsom were unable to stage the Derby due to redevelopment or any other reason and it were staged at Newmarket, as during the 2nd world war, yet run over 2-furlongs shorter than tradition? True fans of the sport would be up in arms about it, yet in the U.S., apparently, they shrug their shoulders as if it is a matter of no concern. 
No wonder I shrug my shoulders at U.S. horse racing as if it is a matter of no concern.
Go on, Saffie, get that numbskull of a ride out of the gate like a rocket is tied to its tail and stun U.S. racing!

​Imagine a 2-mile 4-furlong chase labelled as either a ‘Grand National or a National of some kind’. Stupid, it would go against all we expect a ‘National’ should be. In Ireland, a country that should know better, they have at least two local nationals run over a distance short of 3-miles. Nationals should have a precise definition in the racing vocabulary and that should include ‘a test of stamina’.
Likewise: if the question in a quiz night is ‘what is the distance of a Derby’, the answer on the page would be 12-furlongs. That is the traditional Derby distance. In the precise definition of what can be termed a ‘Derby’, the distance of 12-furlongs should be the first requisite. Hence, I do not regard the French Derby as a proper Derby, which is why I have scant regard for it. It is one of the prime examples of why the thoroughbred breed is becoming weaker and weaker, when speed is given priority over stamina.

I viewed film footage of Midak, supplemented for the Derby, working on the Les Aigles gallops and was impressed by him. He strode away with the look and appearance of a horse who wanted to gallop, looking every bit a horse of stamina and not pure speed, which may be a factor if the ground turns soft. I was taken by him and though it would be Disney if a horse owned by the Aga Khan’s daughter should win a Derby named for the year in honour of her late father, if first impressions are to be believed, it might happen. My three for Saturday’s race are now Ruling Court, Stanhope Gardens and Midak.

Peter Thomas, the Racing Post’s senior contributor, David Ashforth excluded, is a busy bee in today’s paper. He authors both the ‘Another View’ column and the feature-piece on the clash of The Flying Dutchman and Voltigeur at York in 1851.
In his first piece, Peter Thomas, who claims to be a recreational punter even though he mixes with most of the country’s leading betting analysts, makes the false claim that Tom Segal, the legendary Pricewise at the Racing Post, puts food on the table for his family through money bet on horses. It is as if Segal works for the Racing Post as a kindness to the bosses and draws no salary, when I suspect he is paid a very healthy salary, with his winnings from his exchanges with bookmakers merely paying for holidays and picnic hampers from Fortnum and Mason.

Peter Thomas’ main contribution to the Racing Post today is his piece on the match race between The Flying Dutchman, Derby winner in 1849 and Voltigeur who triumphed at Epsom in 1850. It is great example of Thomas on best form, beginning with the regret that public hangings are no longer a spectacle on the Knavesmire. It is a thought when ideas are bandied about when comparisons are made between the numbers who attended Epsom in the past against the fewer numbers who will grace the Downs next Saturday. There are a good number of bad people I would willingly watch in chains in or from a gibbet.
What is remarkable is not that The Flying Dutchman won the race known historically as ‘The Great Match’ and the 1,000 sovereigns put up by the losing owner but that Peter Thomas neither blanched nor commented on the fact that the victor went on to win the Ascot Gold Cup and then a race at Goodwood (Goodwood Cup?) over 3-miles 5-furlongs. There was no spearing the rod in those days. Modern-day trainers would go weak at the knees if it were suggested a horse should run twice in a week. After his defeat over 2-miles in The Great Match, Voltigeur was asked to run again the following day. He was beaten, giving 37Ibs to a mare who went on to win both the Goodwood Cup and the Ebor. Proof alone, if proof were needed, that the past was indeed a different country.
When Voltigeur won the St.Leger, which he dead-heated for, only taking the prize in a re-run, he was also asked to run in the Doncaster Cup 2-days later, with a supposed run in a handicap in between. Fortunately, no other horse was declared and the handicap became a walk-over.
I recommend you search out today’s racing Post, if only to read the full account of ‘The Great Match’. Those perhaps were not the good old days but then we would be happy to see one third the number of people who witnessed The Flying Dutchman V Voltigeur at Epsom on Saturday.
 

​In his usual expertly way, Lee Mottershead in a double-page spread in today’s paper on the appointment of Jim Mullen as the Jockey Club’s group chief executive, he lays before his readers all the troubles and pitfalls awaiting him when he takes up his position this week.
Also in today’s Racing Post, trainer Stuart Williams makes clear his discontent with the delay to Baron Allen taking-up his position as chairman of the B.H.A., although many are of the opinion that it is a good thing that the Baron is spending time attempting to understand how racing’s governance works, or does not work, before committing himself to the job. As I wrote the other day, it seems Baron Allen does not have the whip he was promised that he feels needs to sort out the mess that is racing’s governance policy.
As with myself, the casual observer to this on-going pile of nonsense might think that the knot that needs untangling in British racing is that it has far too many chiefs in need of briefing and not enough knowledgeable and experienced Indians.

In a fulsome and attack-minded letter in the Racing Post today, David Catlow, managing director of the charity R.o.R., makes clear the policy of grants awarded and why some equine charities receive more while others only receive advice. I found it comforting that virtually all the different communities of the sport from jockeys to owners, trainers to auction houses, now contribute to R.o.R. funds.

In another letter to the Racing Post, Julian Richmond-Watson, chairman of the Thoroughbred Group (yet another Chief in a sport with no shortage of Chiefs) sets out what his members expect from Baron Allen if and when he takes up office.
Horse racing is awash with political agendas, chairman and chief executives manoeuvring their strategies to be considered of most relevance to the welfare of the sport. If only the sport could agree on one diehard racing man or woman to become a friendly and yet forceful dictator.

An aspect of the decision by Ascot to have no female-only team this year that has been given no credence is the removal of the once-a-year opportunity some female jockeys have had to put their heads above the parapet. The Shergar Cup has given many female riders the opportunity to a) ride a better-class of horse and b) to prove their ability to rise to the occasion.
Would this decision have been taken if Hayley Turner had not retired? I think not. And it is all very well Hollie Doyle favouring the decision on the grounds that she is a successful jockey and not simply a female jockey but, with the possible exception of Saffie Osborne, she is alone at dining at British racing’s high table and she should give a thought to the sisterhood that must ride 50/1 outsiders far more often then they ride horses with half a chance and think on the opportunity she has helped to be taken from them.
Today, for instance, Joanne Mason has a ride for William Haggas, a ride brought about by riding him a winner at the Shergar Cup a couple of seasons back. At the time Haggas expressed his surprise at how well Jo Mason rode the horse and said he would be using her in the future. Her appearance in the Shergar Cup may not have changed Jo Mason’s career to any extent, and there is little likelihood she will ever challenge Tom Marquand for his role as first jockey to Haggas, but that day has had an influence on her career, even if Haggas was the only trainer present that day who recognised what a talented jockey she is.
The likes of Nicola Currie, Josephine Gordon, Gina Mangan and all the up-and-coming female jockeys, are now deprived of the one day in the year when opportunity might have knocked for them. 
Also, now the female attendees at the Shergar Cup will not have an obvious team to support and that, I predict, will have a deflating effect on the atmosphere. The Shergar Cup is not a world jockey championship and should not be treated as if it is more than just a popular though novel event. It is a lamentable decision by the Ascot authorities and one they will come to regret.

​The winter favourite for the Epsom Derby, The Lion In Winter, is on the drift. You can now have 16/1, apparently, with some bookmakers. Given the reputation of the horse and his trainer’s notable ability to raise the phoenix from the ashes, as he has proved in the previous two Epsom Derbies, 16/1 must be worth the punt.
Now, what if the negativity going the rounds recently – Aidan believing it would be a difficult for Ryan Moore to get off Delacroix in favour of The Lion In Winter, his disappointing run in the Dante and the drift in the betting market – is just a ploy by his canny Coolmore owners to get a good price for the horse. Perhaps lumping big sums on even-money chances has lost its appeal and having smaller amounts on at a poor man’s price is the new excitement for them?
Tabor, Smith and co are known to like a punt and often back Aidan’s judgement with their hard-earned cash. That 16/1 will look pretty juicy if come Wednesday, declaration day for the Derby this year, Ryan Moore’s name appears beside that of The Lion In Winter. He certainly would not be 16/1 for very long afterwards.
Of course, the more likely explanation for the drift is that bookmakers are luring punters in with an unbelievable valuation of the colt’s chance at Epsom. Perhaps they have heard a whisper that the colt will be diverted to an easier option elsewhere or the whispering is chatter that the horse has not progressed since the Dante as Aidan had expected. It is all speculation.
I have nothing but admiration for Aidan O’Brien and the Coolmore organisation but it would be a shot in the arm for the sport if someone else trained and owned the winner this year. Even Godolphin winning the race would be a breath of mildly fresh air. What I would like, though, is a 100/1 winner as that would get the race on the Saturday evening news. Which is not certain to happen if Aidan and Ryan were to win yet again.

The saga of Baron Allen of Kensington and the will he, won’t he, take-up his appointment as chair of the B.H.A, continues, much to chagrin of Tom Kerr, editor of the Racing Post. In his response to the news that the Baron is insisting on continuing private talks with racing’s stakeholders – the bad barons of this long-running saga, I suggest – and will not be in his seat, ‘the chair sitting on a seat’ – it makes no sense, does it? – until some time after June 2nd, the date that was presumably on the contract.
Now then, yesterday I led myself to believe that Baron Allen was to be Julie Harrington’s successor. He is not. He is not Chief Executive but chair of the B.H.A. I am always confused when it comes to the machinations and role-play within the British Horseracing Authority. As I am confused as to whether it should be horse racing or horseracing? The Irish prefer the latter.
Tom Kerr is right, though, to have his arse in his hands about all of this. As he said, it is an embarrassment to have neither a chair of the B.H.A. or a chief executive at a time when so much heavy artillery is coming in our direction. You would think it a good money-saving exercise to combine the positions of chair and C.E.O. and for the lucky incumbent to be expected to work a 40-hour, 5-day week.

To continue with the previous topic. I believe this old sport of ours belongs as much to the punter as the bookmaker, as much to the stewards as the starters, as much to the jockeys as the racecourse owners, as much to the trainers as to the people they employ – you get my drift.
When these positions in the governance offices of the B.H.A. come-up for grabs, I would like to see an end to the ‘jobs for the boys’ charade that has yet to be seen as of any benefit to the sport. Open-up the candidature to include anyone currently or formerly employed in the sport. How can we have any confidence that Baron Allen was the best candidate for the job when his experience of the sport is, at best, minimal. I am not suggesting his knowledge of the worlds of business and politics would not be useful to the sport but in my opinion someone from that background should be employed as an advisor to a chair or chief-executive, someone with a ledger load of knowledge of the sport from the muck-barrow to the top hats of Royal Ascot and everything in between. Would Baron Allen know what a surcingle is? A claiming race?
I would like to have the election of a chair or C.E.O. decided upon by all sectors of the sport and not by the B.H.A. I would like to see 3 or 4 candidates addressing all the relevant stakeholders in turn, with debates on I.T.V. and the racing channels, followed by a public vote, with, as I said, anyone employed in the racing industry, plus racegoers and life-long enthusiasts casting a vote. It is our sport, too, as much as it is those who work on our behalf at the B.H.A.

​Why is it that the Jockey Club’s chair and senior steward is Dido Harding, owner of a Cheltenham Gold Cup winner, former a successful amateur jockey and currently the starter for the Weston and Banwell Harriers point-to-point, while the incoming, if he actually arrives, B.H.A. chief executive, Charles Allen, was unknown to the racing world until he was announced as Julie Harrington’s successor.
To my eyes, a man with no experience or insight into the world of finance and big corporations, would not the former be a better candidate for the B.H.A. job and the latter better suited to the position at the Jockey Club? Perhaps someone might organise a job swap, if Baroness Harding could be persuaded to agree. Not that a swap might be necessary, given that a spat about governance could yet leave Charles Allen turning his back on the B.H.A..
Of course, the mystery is why this uncertainty has erupted, only a few days away from taking up his new appointment, one of several big salary jobs Lord Allen has at his disposal. It is reported in the Racing Post today that his lordship has qualms about governance. Perhaps he was given to understand a whip came with the job, a whip he could crack whenever the lower ranked shareholders (and used to getting their own way) got uppity and without a whip, he considered the B.H.A. job an impossible job to succeed in. At his age, he would not want to be thought-of in his retirement as a failure, when success in business is almost his calling card.
It just shows what a nonsense the B.H.A. is, a governing authority that is all smiles but with dentures that fall out when quick thinking and innovation is called-for. Surely someone within its organisation can see that someone with Dido Harding’s experience and success within the sport would make a far better candidate to lead the B.H.A. than someone whose only attribute is that he is a Labour peer during a period of Labour governance of the British people.
As I said before, the B.H.A. should suffer the same fate as its predecessors, the Jockey Club. It is unfit to lead our sport and if a new organisation cannot be established to guide the sport through the choppy waters ahead, the stakeholders tripartite, or whatever it is called, should be dismantled and a racing czar appointed in its place. The sport needs a dictator, though a kindly and accomplished one.

In the ‘Another View’ column of the Racing Post today, Daniel Hill makes the suggestion that tomorrow’s rather tepid, if top-heavy, race programme could have had life and exposure given to it if the Epsom executive had gone ahead with its plan to rejuvenate the Epsom Derby meeting by running the Oaks this Saturday, followed by the Derby the following Saturday, and the Coronation Cup either next Wednesday or Thursday.
It is an okay idea, except that I believe the order should be Coronation Cup this Saturday, the Derby on the Wednesday, with the draw for stalls position sometime during the Saturday, with the Oaks the following week-end. To facilitate the Derby draw being closer to the actual day of the race, I would like to see a race-day on the Sunday after the Coronation Cup, perhaps a charity day to raise funds for the R.o.R..
I remain wedded to the proposal that the Derby should return to the first Wednesday in June and at the very least Epsom should trial the idea for a period of three-years to determine if there is an appetite for a mid-week Derby by race-goers. If the Cheltenham Gold Cup can be run on a Friday, why is a daft idea to run the Derby on a Wednesday. The Melbourne Cup, a meeting which everyone cites as an example as to how the Derby meeting could be staged, is run on a Tuesday.

‘A Racing Mind’ a film documenting how Lilly Pinchin has overcome, through medication and willpower, A.D.H.D. and, perhaps by coincidence, during a period when she rode out her claim, has now been taken up by Amazon and can be streamed right this moment. Having seen it on YouTube as a 4-parter, now it is an hour-long standalone film, I can honestly say it is one of the best documentaries on the subject of racing I have seen. I hope everyone in racing that has access to Amazon (I do not) streams the film which might pave the way for Amazon to show more racing content.

​I suppose if I were to be a better hearted, kinder, person, I would forgive and forget, and I do believe people, though not murderers, rapists, paedophiles, animal abusers and dopers, should be given a second chance in life if they have proved themselves worthy of a second chance. I do not know Greg Fairley, had forgotten about him until reading the front page of the Racing Post this morning, with my first reaction being that the B.H.A. should not grant him a licence to return to riding as a professional jockey.
Greg Fairley was a rising star as a youngster, having the backing of Mark Johnston and was champion apprentice in his time. For whatever reason, he allowed himself to fall victim to felons who twisted his arm to stop horses on their behalf. He had his riding licence revoked for 12-years and was warned-off all B.H.A. licenced premises. He has served his time, much like someone coming out of prison, and that, apparently, is good enough for some people to think it appropriate to allow him to return to the sport.
Given he is now 39, might even be 40 when he returns to the weighing-room, I believe it might serve as a probationary period, to gauge if he has changed himself from villain to a man of integrity, if he was only allowed to return as an amateur. For someone who was thrown-out of the sport as a cheat, it is as far as forgiveness is concerned that I personally will extend my charity towards him and others like him.

Windsor is to revert to a figure-of-eight circuit for its National Hunt racing from next season. I dare say they must have received more negative comments after its two-meetings last season than they let on and for Windsor to continue as a jumps course the figure-of-eight was the only way to proceed. Personally, I am pleased by the return to the old set-up as along with Fontwell it gives the course a distinction that takes it out-of-the-ordinary. We need more variation in racecourses, especially over jumps, and would like to have a racecourse in mimicry of Auteuil, with all its different design of obstacle that makes it more akin to a 3-Day event than a run-of-the-mill British steeplechase course. We could learn so much to our benefit from the French and the Irish, and it pains me to say it.

The Curragh is ‘dead as a door-nail’, apparently and no one alive or dead can resurrect it from the stillness of its attendees, at least that is Richard Forristal’s opinion and he would know far better than me or you. 
I do have an idea they might follow for their poorly attended Guineas meeting. Instead of going from 3-days to 2, go from 3-days to 1. Have a 9-race jamboree (The World Pool insists on 9-races) featuring both Guineas races, the Group races and the most valuable handicap. If that does not pack them in perhaps my next idea might lead to bigger crowds in the near future. Construct a National Hunt course. Get in the real fans of the sport and perhaps they will return for a flat fixture. Leopardstown, Fairyhouse, Galway and Punchestown have no problems when it comes to packing out the stadia. It is not as if there is not the room for a National Hunt course at the wide-open spaces of The Curragh.

At Fairyhouse today there is an Optional Claiming race. If you look-up the career history of Golden Miller you will discover that towards the end of his career that he twice ran in the Optional Selling Chase at Birmingham (1937 & 1938) winning both times. Given that the conditions of the race at Fairyhouse allow horses to run in the race without the risk of being claimed, though horses can also run and be claimed for no more than 12,000 Euros, I only assume the race run at Birmingham allowed horses to run without the threat of being put up for auction if they were to win or be claimed if they did not win.
I am not sure I like claimers that can also not be claimers. It is akin to’ is it foul-play or is not foul-play’. It is not neither one thing or the other but both things at the same time. That Golden Miller was eligible for that Birmingham race slants me toward being critical of such races and hope they do not blossom.