​One of the more favoured horses to spoil Tiger Roll’s party in this season’s Grand National is the Ted Walsh trained Any Second Now, a winner at the Cheltenham Festival last year. At Naas quite recently, Any Second Now won a competitive little race over 2-miles, his winning margin undoubtedly would have been greater if he had not fluffed the final fence. He has a similar profile to Ted Walsh’s last fancied runner in the Grand National, Seabass, and like him I expect a bold show at Aintree, though I fear Any Second Now might run out of juice at a similar point to his illustrious former stable-mate.
I mention Any Second Now for two purposes: one to ask if any British trainer would run a lively hope for the Grand National over 2-miles as preparation for a race over 4-miles 2-furlongs (and a bit)? I suspect not. And secondly to pose the question ‘what is so different about the modern-day thoroughbred that unlike their predecessors they must be campaigned at the same distance more or less throughout their careers?
Perhaps the easy answer is that connections have no need to campaign their horses adventurously as the race programme now dictates a tried and tested pathway through the season.
It is as rare as hens teeth for a trainer to think out of the box these days, as if there is no precedent for going up or down in trip. The Irish will run a Gold Cup horse over 2-miles without considering it unusual and it has become fashionable, mainly to protect a favourable mark over fences, to run a chaser in hurdle races prior to a major target. But that is nowhere near the same as happened in the racing’s past.
Even during the wars, when horse racing was more organised and perhaps more professional than in its opening century of competition, it was not uncommon for the winner of the Derby to revert to a mile at Royal Ascot in the St. James’ Palace before running in the Eclipse and then the St. Leger. It was also unremarkable for a filly to run in the Derby and then turn-out again and run creditably in the Oaks. As four-year-olds it was as good as expected for the previous year’s Derby winner to run in the Ascot Gold Cup and many occasions, as Bayardo achieved, winning it like a thorough stayer, before either reverting to shorter distances or mopping up the Goodwood, Doncaster and Jockey Club Cups. It was not unknown for the previous season’s Guineas winners, filly or colt, to run as four-year-olds in races like the City and Suburban at Epsom or even the Cambridgeshire. And they raced frequently and in times when both horses and trainers had to travel by train to race-meetings. Bayardo ran thirteen times as a three-year-old.
The best mare George Lambton trained, Diadem, ran in both a wartime Derby, won by Gay Crusader, and in the Oaks a few days later, being unplaced in the former and second in the latter. She had won the 1,000 Guineas and yet as a four-year-old she ran in the Salford Borough Handicap at Manchester and carrying 9st 12Ibs won in the last strides by a neck, one of her greatest performances according to her illustrious trainer. When was the last occasion a 1,000 Guineas winner ran in a handicap?
In my opinion, the thorough-bred industry is being done no favours by both horses going to stud before their limitations or long-term soundness is determined and by the cotton-wool regime of trainers in keeping them to tried and tested distances.
We’ve had the ‘will he, won’t he’ procrastinations of Nicky Henderson over whether Altior should be tried over distances longer than his usual 2-miles, his anguish and regret more befitting a botched charge on the battlefield than a question of sporting endeavour. How it would have hurt or inconvenienced the horse at the end of last season to have experimented over 2-miles plus I cannot imagine, it’s not as if he had a long and torturous campaign. I find it equally frustrating that his friend and fiercest opponent Paul Nicholls for two seasons now has teased us with the possibility of running Frodon in the Gold Cup only to take the tried and tested, and less adventurous, route to the Ryanair. If he did not have Clan des Obeaux do you think Frodon would be running in the Ryanair?
I remember a good few years ago, Charlie Mann running his beloved 2-mile chaser Celibate in the Grand National. Of course, he had no chance of winning and everyone gave him no chance of finishing. But he did finish; running a more than respectable race and it made me wonder that day how many other horses might be running over distances that though formerly were suitable but are now too short or even too long?
Why is it that Kauto Star and Desert Orchid could go up and down in trip and still win, while lesser horses running in lesser grades are kept to one distance. Surely if Kauto Star could beat top-class opponents over all distances from the Tingle Creek to the Gold Cup, then why can’t the ordinary handicapper do likewise in their grade of race?
But mainly, for purposes of improving the breed, it would be useful and generally more exciting for the betting and racing public if, on occasion, trainers and owners sought to determine the perimeters of their charges ability over varying distances. They are often keen to go back in distance but rarely if ever take the bull by the horns and live dangerously. If great trainers of the past, Alec Taylor, George Lambton, John Porter, etc, were prepared to cast their judgement to the winds of fate, why cannot their present-day equivalents walk in the shadows of their achievements. Horse racing can only benefit from owners and trainers taking a leap of faith once in a while.

​I think it was President of the United States Dwight Eisenhower who had a sign on his presidential desk that told everyone who visited him that the buck stopped with him. I very much doubt if anyone who works at British Horse Racing’s high table can make a similar claim.
In today’s Racing Post, Lee Mottershead makes a valiant attempt to explain how British horse racing is run. I am sure some of his readers, those of a higher I.Q. thanI possess, will now be better informed on the complexity of the working structure of the B.H.A.. Not so me, I’m afraid. In fact, that the editor of the Racing Post should think there was a need to commission one of his lead writers to write such an article tells you all you need to know about the B.H.A. and why it can appear so out-of-touch and without a working understanding of the sport it is supposed to govern.
The evidence Lee Mottershead provides illustrates, at least to my way of thinking, that the buck does not stop with one person or department but is passed around until someone is deemed to be ‘it’ and has to deal with whatever situation or crisis the buck represents.
I freely admit that I am an ignoramus when it comes to anything that comes remotely close to ‘big business’ and I accept that horse racing will not thrive in the commercial world in which it must compete without a strong shell of financial competence. But when you have an organisation where no one, seemingly, is the ‘top man’ (or woman), no one with the authority to take a decision without it ‘going upstairs to be voted on by the board’, it is a recipe for delay, indecision and a horse that looks like a camel because it was designed by a committee of the blind since birth.
I would suggest anyone wishing to get a grip on how the B.H.A. operates should go look up Lee Mottershead’s article as I am incapable of giving the matter the clarity it deserves. But when you read such statements as ‘The racecourses and horseman fell out almost immediately and have continued to do so every since’. And: ‘Under the tripartite system the B.H.A. does not, and indeed cannot, run racing overall’, you get a real sense that the B.H.A. is not truly fit for purpose. In fact, at times, as with the equine flu outbreak last season, it seems rather shambolic, taking ideas from anywhere it can find them and then taking an entrenched position even when the ideas they pursue are clearly inadequate or plainly wrong.
When someone as esteemed as Willie Mullins praises the new B.H.A. chair, Annamarie Phelps, she must be showing great potential. I have no view otherwise. My problem with the B.H.A. is that people get parachuted into well-paid executive positions where they have authority over an industry unlike any other without having worked a day within that industry in their working lives. Outside opinions should be sought by those with in-depth knowledge of an industry that has been their life’s work. Yet at the B.H.A. the shoe, in the majority, is on the other foot.
I fully accept that a former champion jockey or trainer or even owner might have little idea on how to secure funding for the sport and be worse than useless at glad-handing people of influence who might fight on the sport’s side in parliamentary debates and in the wider world. But what they possess that no outsider can ever learn is a detailed intimacy with all practical aspects of the sport. In my vision of a governing body for horse racing, people of the calibre of Annamarie Phelps would be employed by a board consisting of genuine racing people; she would not be the head honcho but the expert hired hand, using her expertise to supplement the equine and sporting knowledge of the board.
The B.H.A. have dropped so many clangers over the past few years that I shall no doubt find sleep impossible tonight worrying what Annamarie’s Phelp’s 5-year strategic welfare plan will contain. Though in general the vetting of all runners at Cheltenham and Aintree last season received virtually no criticism as everyone in the sport seemed to determined to ‘toe the line’, I thought it an insult to the training profession, as if Mullins, Henderson, Elliott and so on would knowingly bring a lame or ailing horse to the races. I just hope and prayer the exercise is not repeated this year.
So in conclusion: Lee Mottershead has confirmed my doubtless blinkered opinion that the structure of the B.H.A. is unwieldy, laced-together with far too many people with little or no direct working knowledge of the many hands-on elements that comprise our sport, especially very little awareness of the flesh and blood of the horse, and with no one who with the in a presidential-type capacity to remind everyone that the buck stops with him or her.
On occasion, particularly when that idiot B.H.A. spokesman suggested ‘horses should run of their own free-will’, and you should never wave your arms behind a horse in case it is deemed cruelty by a member of the ignorant public, I dream of staging a coup d’état, rather like what happened in Moscow all those years ago. Except that in my ideology no blood will be spilt and no Royal personage would be harmed.
 
 

​I suspect that this season’s renewal of the Ascot 1965 Chase will become rather infamous for ‘breaking’ the only two runners to take part as I fear Cyrname will no longer be the horse the handicapper thought him to be and if Altior fails to hold on to his 2-mile crown next month he also might be considered ‘not the horse he once was’.
I have no complaints about the Ascot 1965 Chase (the year in the race title a reminder of when Ascot’s National Hunt course held its first meeting, though you knew that, didn’t you?) It is a necessary and important race for the time of the season and its pretty generous of Mr. Christie or his company to sponsor it. And Ascot is a fine racecourse for steeplechasing. And you cannot blame Ascot for Britain’s winters becoming the monsoon season. That’s climate change. Or far too many people on the planet. Or forest fires, volcanic eruptions or the indiscriminate use of plastic. What is important from a racing point of view is that Ascot bears no blame.
The problem this season, and it might prove a one-off, though the laws of averages does suggest it will occur again in the near-future, is that the race programme between October and the middle of November does very little to help trainers get their horses race-fit for the multitude of top-class races that pervade the National Hunt season like an overly-laden Noah’s Ark during the last two months of the year. To assuage public pressure to try Altior over a trip beyond his customary 2-miles Nicky Henderson had little or no choice but to start his star horse in the 1965 Chase and if he had withdrawn the horse on the day of the race, as he now professes he wishes he had done, he would have been forced to go the King George without a prep race.
I have said this before but it bears repetition: there should be a chase in late October/early November over 2-miles 6 or 3-miles for horses that have not won a steeplechase over a similar distance. In fact, there should be a lot more variation in race conditions over both hurdles and fences in the early months of the National Hunt season proper to give trainers of good horses, up and coming horses and the badly handicapped, options that at the moment they are denied. For 3-mile chasers it is almost a case of the Charley Hall at Wetherby or go straight to the Betfair or Ladbrokes Trophy without a prior run.
It handicaps those in the sport who market and publicise the sport to make life difficult for trainers. It’s one thing for it to become fashionable for trainers to try to prove how ‘adept’ they are in getting their charges fit enough on the home gallops to win first time out. It’s another thing entirely for the B.H.A. to force them down this road with unimaginative and bland race-planning.
In Ireland, where admittedly they have an over-supply of good-to-top-class horses, the programme, even during the summer months, has plenty of condition races to help trainers bring their horses to a peak for the winter ahead. There is a window of opportunity here for the smaller courses, as is the case in Ireland, to stage chase and hurdle races with conditions to suit the good-to-top-class horses. At Navan only this week attendance was swelled because they staged a race where the conditions suited Tiger Roll. Couldn’t Ludlow, Chepstow, Newton Abbot, to name but three, stage similar races to the Boyne Hurdle in October or early November? Racecourses these days have the facilities, within the confines of whatever weather the gods believe we deserve, to provide decent jumping ground twelve months of the year. There really isn’t any reason or excuse for every race meeting during the time period I am discussing to have one novice hurdle, one novice chase and four handicaps and a poorly subscribed bumper.
If I were Nick Rust’s successor, my first initiative would be to hold meetings, singularly, with trainers (not their federation but actual trainers), jockeys, owners, racecourse clerks of courses etc, to establish what changes each occupation could suggest to improve both the sport and their place within it.
Nicky Henderson, in my estimation, was not wrong to up Altior in trip. Indeed, I would urge him to try again at Aintree. Subsequent events suggest he should have listened to his gut reaction and have withdrawn Altior from the 1965 Chase, with the abscess he suffered around Christmas a saving grace as it turned out as it forced him to give Altior longer to recover from his Ascot exertions. But he should have had options to race beforehand to ensure Altior was 100% when he went into battle with Cyrname.
To my mind, to my reading of the 1965, Altior stayed the 2-mile 5-furlongs, irrespective of how fit he was. To say he did not stay does a great disservice to Cyrname and to Paul Nicholls. What beat Altior that day was a combination of the heavy ground and the paucity of opportunities the current race programme provided by race-planners to help Nicky Henderson have his horse 100% on the day.
 

​I found myself spontaneously clapping when I.T.V. showed us pictures of Cyrname walking away from the last fence at Ascot. The emotion would be the same for any horse who for a moment or two I thought had suffered the ultimate sacrifice but because on Saturday there was so much more at stake, there were, stifled, I must admit, tears of relief, too.
Cyrname, though I personally never considered his rating as the best chaser in training was anywhere near right, is one of our top horses, the star name at Ascot on Saturday, the media’s build-up to the whole day’s racing centred on him and what was perceived to be a virtual walk in the park. Yet, instead of bad publicity culminating from the near-calamity, the reaction of the crowd when they saw the screens being removed and a heroic horse standing, demonstrated most clearly to the ignorant naysayers that the racing public, along with racing’s professionals, care deeply about the fate of horses. It was also heart-warming and pleasing to see Cyrname’s owner, Johnney De La Hay, trouble himself to go to his horse, to witness for himself the depth of Cyrname’s plight and the efforts of the vets to treat him, and to give Cyrname’s groom a hug and a kind word, acknowledging that his suffering far outweighed his own. Cyrname will race again; I doubt though if he will ever again be as good as he was this time last year.
Incidentally, for a brief moment on Saturday it looked highly likely that I was going to have a 40/1 winner of a Grade 1 race, that is until Traffic Fluide also took a tired fall.
I thought the star performance on an interesting and informative day’s racing was not Twiston-Davies big race winner but Ballyoptic who, especially in really tiring ground and with top-weight, looked a thorough and impressive stayer and I am seriously considering rejecting Elegant Escape, who I now consider after his tame effort at Haydock to be a little gutless, as my prime Grand National hope and parachuting in Ballyoptic in his place.
I was also impressed by Neil King’s Nordano who looked a good staying prospect in winning the handicap hurdle and might be worth an each-way punt in the Ballymore at Cheltenham, if they choose to go that way. Bryony Frost, who has ridden Nordano all season gained compensation when she rode an equally impressive winner at Haydock on Sir Psycho in the Victor Ludorum Hurdle. It would be interesting to see where Paul Nicholls goes with him next time as he was as impressive a four-year-old winner as I’ve seen this season. Of course, the form will only be dependable as long as the French horse that came second proves useful. Doubtless, though, Harry Cobden will be in the plate if the horse runs next, be it at Cheltenham or Aintree, as Paul Nicholls wouldn’t have a better juvenile hurdler at Ditcheat.
At first, I admit to being disappointed by the run of Yala Enki, another of my Grand National hopefuls for this season, but on reflection, taking into account the weight he carried and the weight he gave away to the horses that finished in front of him, he ran an okay race. His jumping, though, can be a little indecisive on occasions and I fear even if Bryony can get him to the last fence, when he will be running on more stoutly than most, he will have given away too much ground at the fences to feature at the sharp end of the race. Though I have not seen it confirmed, I assume Yala Enki’s owners sent the horse to Ditcheat so that Bryony could work her magic on him. What is interesting, even if he is now a more consistent jumper of a fence, is that the horse has not significantly, if at all, improved for leaving Venetia Williams.
Of course, all talk of the Grand National at the weekend focused on Tiger Roll and his excellent return to the fray at Navan. Of course, due to the lack of foresight and indeed B.H.A.’s knowledge of the sport they govern, the two-time Grand National hero remains, as of the moment, ineligible to run at Aintree come April as he is yet to comply with the condition that all runners have to have taken part in a chase since last season’s race. As long as the Cross-Country race at the Cheltenham Festival is not abandoned due to waterlogging all will be fine. But what if the monsoon season drifts on into March? Cheltenham has one of the finest drainage systems at any racecourse but it does not extend to the Cross-Country course. To have a situation whereby the most popular horse in training, the obviously most qualified horse to contest the race, is denied a chance at racing history for no other reason than the people who drew-up the conditions of the race did not think to ensure that previous Grand National winners were exempt from conditions applying to other horses. If this comes to pass, how embarrassing will it be for the sport? I just hope Gordon Elliott has a plan b to fall back on to ensure his ‘horse of a lifetime’ gets to the start this time around.

​Am I alone in thinking it ridiculous, and in some way embarrassing, that the conditions for horses to run in the Grand National, as of the present moment, actually precludes Tiger Roll from lining-up on April 4th, if that is, of course, the O’Learys relent on their ‘his chances of running are between slim and none’, and concede that in this instant the public and pundits are right in wanting (or should that be demanding) Tiger Roll be given the opportunity to rewrite racing history books and they are not only wrong but talk and act with complete disregard for not only the integrity of the sport but their responsibility toward providing it with good publicity.
And how can the good men and women of Aintree, along with the B.H.A. draw-up conditions, albeit there are perfectly reasonable good intentions to the conditions, that given Tiger Roll’s now time-honoured preparation for the Grand National, that might, if the weather or injury take control of the situation, prevent a two-time Grand National winner from attempting to create history? Barmy. Stupid. Displaying a complete lack of foresight.
The condition that a horse must have run in a 3-mile chase in the twelve-months leading-up to March 16th and been placed 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th in such a steeplechase is good policy as it stops an owner running a 2-mile horse just to have a runner. What is stupid, short-sighted and frankly embarrassing, is that they have attached the condition to a two-time winner of the race. Surely there should be a condition that states previous winners of the race have automatic qualification to be entered for handicapping and need not have run in a steeplechase since the previous year’s race.
The handicapper takes note of previous Aintree and Grand National form when drawing-up the weights, yet the people who determine the conditions for the race totally ignore the great exploits of horses with the courage, jumping ability and stamina to win the race. Because it is the Grand National, using a formula I admit to not understanding, Tiger Roll is assessed to be a 4Ib better horse than the Gold Cup winner Native River, who incidentally is also assessed to be 4Ib inferior to Delta Work. Baffling, at least to me. So, if the handicapper believes it fair and reasonable to take Aintree and Grand National form into account, why oh why is this line of reasoning not used when drawing up the conditions for the race? We all want the right horses running in the race. And most of all we want previous winners running in the race.
If any horse presently in training is known outside of the racing public it is Tiger Roll. Come April 4th anyone who won money on him last year will automatically look for his name when they browse their morning paper come the day of the race. If he is not to be found in the runners and riders and they ask ‘why isn’t Tiger Roll running?’ you and me will have to explain that he wasn’t qualified to run this year and then we will have to give the official explanation, which will make the sport a laughing stock (again) on its biggest, most publicised day of the year.
I know how my annoyance and criticism can be countered – what’s the problem? He’ll run in the Cross-Country at the Cheltenham Festival, doubtless win and he will have met the conditions of the race.
But what if, as has happened at Cheltenham in the past, though admittedly when the ground is on the firm side, that the Cross-Country course is waterlogged and the race has to be abandoned. Gordon Elliott will be a gum-tree without a paddle as there does not appear to be a plan B. If only, we will say, and doubtless the O’Learys will think, if they have made us all happy by then by declaring Tiger Roll Grand National-bound, ‘if only we had entered him in the Gold Cup!’ If only!
In fact, as far as we are aware, apart from an entry for the Betfair Bowl at Aintree, there appears no plan at all for Tiger Roll. He’s staying in training next season. Hurrah. But for what purpose? What would be the point in keeping him in training just to win the Cross-Country at Cheltenham for a third or fourth time? They surely can’t be thinking of him as a Gold Cup horse as an eleven-year-old, can they? And he certainly will not receive less weight next year in the Grand National than this year if he doesn’t run until the Moyne Hurdle next season. And if he wins the Betfair Bowl, or just runs second or third, it is conceivable his rating will actually increase. Life should not be this complicated!
Incidentally, on Racing Post ratings Anibale Fly comes out as the highest rated horse in the entries for this year’s race, one mark above Native River. I was intending to list all the horses entered in the race with a higher rating than Tiger Roll but there are just too many of them. Without doing the math, or simply the counting, I would think over a third of those horses entered have a higher Racing Post mark than Tiger Roll. It’s almost as ridiculous as the O’Learys being unwilling to allow one of the great Aintree horses of all time to run and equally as unbelievable as conditions for the race that on paper actually prevent a two-time winner from running. 

​How difficult is it to start a horse race? Very. It seems, especially when it is an important race, a race that because of its importance draws an above average audience. Now, it has to be admitted that back in olden times, before starting stalls, though after the times of Fred Archer, false starts were commonplace, with races delayed sometimes as long as fifteen or twenty-minutes. We are talking, of course, of races on the flat, where a quick break is a great advantage. In those not-so far-off days horses would veer off at acute angles when the barrier was raised, barging into those closest to them and on occasion, especially when ridden by an apprentice, scattering horses to many of the cardinal points. Thank the Lord, or a change of heart by the Jockey Club, for starting stalls.
In National Hunt races it should be so much simpler, shouldn’t it? Why the starter did not let the Betfair field go first time of asking baffled me. Some, admittedly, were not exactly walking toward the tape, though no one was gaining an advantage or being troublesome. They were all facing forward, yet because a few of the runners were jogging the start was aborted and the farrago that is the standing start, with all the unfairness that comes with it, was ordered by the starter. Of course, the obvious front-runner, Not So Sleepy, was dealt the worst blow as instead of pinging the start he was trapped in behind a wall of horses, his chances ruined, the tactics given to the other jockeys by their trainers thrown to the wind, and  punters with ante-post bets and those who backed him on the day left with the same amount of hope as if they had backed a 100/1 outsider.
If the same scenario occurred in the last race at Warwick, or anywhere other than a big race on a Saturday or at Cheltenham or Aintree, the starter would have let them go. But this was Newbury on a Saturday, in front of the I.T.V. cameras and the starter followed the letter of the law as laid down by his employers. Every false start brings with it references to the nightmare of the Grand National that never was. Shambles then, shambles still.
All that is required to start a horse race over jumps is a designated box of some description laid out ten or fifteen yards in front of the starting tape, marked by broken white lines, piles of sawdust or even beams of red light, in which all the horses should be inside, heads facing in the direction of the tape, walking or jogging, the race started irrespective of whether the jockeys have succeeded in getting the noses of their mounts close to the starting tape. When the starter calls ‘under starters orders’ or whatever the signal is for the jockeys to prepare to race, it would be the jockeys responsibility to be inside the ‘box’, his horse facing in the right direction and under control. It is not rocket science.
Jockeys get blamed for mess-ups at the start, when really it is the procedure that is at fault.
 
The Grand National weights.
In my opinion Colin Tizzard should scratch Native River from the Gold Cup and aim him at the Grand National. How a Gold Cup winner, the winner of both his races this season, can receive weight from the likes of Bristol de Mai and Delta Work, two horses with a high level of form, though neither have won, or looked like going close to winning, a Gold Cup. Native River is now 10, to go to Aintree next year will be a year too late as common-sense dictates that at 11 he will not be the potent force he is now.
Not that Native River is the Tizzards only chance of winning this year’s race. My fancy all season for the Grand National has been Elegant Escape, though I would have liked a couple of pounds less. But he remains at the top of my list.
Three others who took my eye are Talkischeap on 10-11, Yala Enki on the same mark, though I wouldn’t want him to run in bottomless ground at Haydock on Saturday, and Burrows Saint on 10-10.
On my 10-to-follow list I took a chance with Traffic Fluide of Gary Moore’s, a horse I had marked down for last year’s race. Injury robbed him of even being entered last season and he is yet to run this time around, though he is entered at Ascot on Saturday. He might be thrown in on 10-3 and it is a tip in itself that Gary Moore is training him with only the Grand National in mind.
I always pick six on the day the weights are published and I complete my sextuplet of possible winners with Alpha Des Obeaux, set to carry 10-13. Two seasons ago, when ridden by Rachel Blackmore, he was jumping like a bunny until the Chair fence caught him out, and after Tiger Roll, if he runs, of course, which he might or might not, the scandal caused if he doesn’t run seemingly not affecting the O’Leary brothers one small jot,  he seems to be Gordon Elliott’s main hope.
So, in summary: if he runs, though not if he has a hard race in the Gold Cup, Native River will win. I do not expect him to run, though. So, if he doesn’t run, or has a hard race in the Gold Cup, Elegant Escape will win. To be followed home, if he takes to Aintree, by Yala Enki, Burrows Saint, Talkischeap, Traffic Fluide and Alpha Des Obeaux. On the day I hope to back at least three of them. The winner, no doubt, will come from one of the three I reject.

​Apart from not seeing the electricity that Altior, we are told, exudes on the schooling grounds, it has to be said that Nicky Henderson was right, wasn’t he? It does not mean, of course, that those of us who believe the great horse would be equally effective over 4 or 8-furlongs further are wrong, though Nicky would do racing the greatest of favours, now Altior no longer has to defend a long unbeaten record over fences, if after Cheltenham he would go for the 3-mile chase, the Betfair Bowl, isn’t it, at Aintree, if only to put the matter to bed once and for all.
While Altior was ultimately mpressive in the Game Spirit, even if between the third and second last I was convinced he wouldn’t win, as did others, I suspect, he gave the connections of his closest rivals for Champion Chase glory hope that finally at the Festival he can be beaten. I would be astonished, given Altior’s two runs this season, if Philip Hobbs chose not to go for the 2-mile chase with Defi Du Seuil. On soft ground I see no reason why A Plus Tard should miss the race in favour of the Ryanair either. In fact, if all the leading fancies for the Champion Chase turn-up it will hark back to the good old days before the invention of the Ryanair when the race was invariably the most exciting race of the whole Festival. Of course, it might have happened back then when trainers were offered choice but today’s trainers and owners lack balls, putting Festival glory, even in a lesser race, before the true glory of proper prestige.
Although each-way betting is regarded by the purist as chicken-hearted, it might be the order of the meeting this year. I have already flagged up Petite Mouchoir as a lively outsider for the Champion Hurdle and after the Game Spirit I was very taken by the run of Dynamite Dollars. A gross horse, according to his trainer, that needs a lot of work to get fit, he can only come forward for his run on Saturday and, though I would not be certain of him beating Altior, I would put him up as a good each-way tip. Before he got injured last season, he was my banker of the meeting and after the way the Arkle ended-up, with a really quite moderate horse winning, Duc Des Genievres, in my estimation he would have been a good thing.
 
Tomorrow’s Racing Post will be dominated by two items – the weights for the Grand National but more importantly the weight allotted to Tiger Roll. Now, I admit, handicapping is a bit of a mystery to me. For instance, if Native River, Tiger Roll and Bristol De Mai (these short 1,000-word pieces would be written in half the time if I did not have to keep checking the spelling of these damned French-named horses – it’s maddening!) were entered in any other race, given that the former is a Gold Cup winner and the latter a twice winner of the Betfair, while after his exploits at Aintree, apart from his Triumph Hurdle success, the best Tiger Roll has achieved is two cross-country wins and a 4-mile amateur riders chase, I cannot for the life of me see why Tiger Roll should have to give weight to either of the two aforementioned horses as he is clearly third best on career statistics. The point of a handicap is to give every runner an equal chance of winning, yet all the experts are of one voice – Tiger Roll will be top weight. And I find that absurd. Native River is by far and away the best horse to grace the National entries since L’ Escargot. He should shoulder top weight, 11st-10Ib, with Tiger Roll, taking in the Aintree Factor, on 11st-7 or 8, with Bristol Des Mai on a similar mark.
If Native River were trained for the race, he would be my fancy, no matter what weight the handicapper gave him. In every way he looks made for the race. But whether he wins the Gold Cup or simply runs his usual honourable race, he is going to have a hard time of it and three weeks is not long enough to regain his strength and vitality. In fact, if he is spared the Gold Cup, the horse I like at the moment for the National is Elegant Escape and I am not too bothered what weight he gets. He stays, he jumps adequately, without being unnecessarily exuberant, and has a touch of real class.
I do, though, hope that his owners allow Tiger Roll is chance for eternal glory. It would be a scandal if they didn’t. Yes, there is no denying that in Red Rum’s day, and especially before him, that Tiger Roll would most likely not have got as far as the first ditch, given his jumping style, but then in Tiger Roll’s time, as it will be said in decades to come, it is doubtful if Red Rum would have had the speed to win three Grand Nationals. When they changed the fences and the distance, the Grand National became a different type of race to the days of Sergeant Murphy (1923) the last 13-year-old to win the race, Teal (1952), Ayala (1963) or Maori Venture (1987). But it is what it is: the greatest horse race in the world bar none.

​The Dublin Racing Festival is undoubtedly a success. Whether it should be built upon and expanded is another matter, though. Sometimes, as it is said, less can be more. In my eyes, they have just the right mix of races and to develop the meeting further would be to over-dilute the quality. If, and I only say if, they wanted to add a race, I would suggest a mares champion hurdle, though over what distance would be hard to determine. In fact, the impact of mares only races, as good-intentioned and perhaps as required as they are, has only served to dilute the quality of many of our top National Hunt races and any expansion on the initiative should be discouraged. But a champion hurdle for mares in late January at Leopardstown might at least help trainers and owners decide once and for all which race at the Cheltenham Festival to aim their superstar mares, rather than what we have at the moment, which is a lot of head-scratching and the scandalous neglect of what is in the best interests of the sport.
But should a similar Racing Festival be developed on our shores. My gut instinct is to say no. There would be no point clashing with the Dublin Racing Festival and any date afterwards would put it too close to Cheltenham, especially as Aintree follows in quick order. The obvious place in the calendar for such a meeting would be over the Christmas holiday period, making Kempton the racecourse to stage it.
Ireland have taken the major races that were run at the three Leopardstown meetings in the early months of the year and repackaged them, inflating the prize-money. In fact, they have not really invented any new races, just combined the best of three meetings into a two-day jamboree.
Something similar could be achieved at Kempton on Boxing Day and the day after. The problem, though, is this: the majority of the top National Hunt horses are trained in Ireland and they already have a big programme of fixtures that already attract their top chasers and hurdlers. As he did with Footpad this season, Willie Mullins might find opportunities over here for one or two of his horses, Gordon Elliott likewise, but Kempton in December, as is the case with every top British meeting except Cheltenham and the Grand National meeting at Aintree, is very unlikely to attract the best of the Irish, and without them a two-day Winter jamboree would be very thin on competitive and informative racing.
The King George would obviously be the standout race, yet even the second most prestigious staying chase in the British racing calendar regularly fails to attract the best of the Irish. This season it proved to be the most uncompetitive top-class chase for many a long year. I doubt if doubling or trebling the prize-money would make the race more desirable to the Irish. But the King George would be the principle race of any supposed Christmas Festival, and then there are the Christmas Hurdle, Desert Orchid Chase and the Feltham Novice Chase as supporting races. But after that races would need to be invented and that will lead to already established races at other courses being devalued.
The other major race of the Christmas period, the Welsh National, could never be transplanted from Chepstow, though if the Jockey Club Estates are idiotic enough to sell Kempton for housing development all options become open for discussion. And apart from the old Hennessey, there really isn’t another race in the lead-up to Christmas that would sit comfortably within a Dublin Racing Festival type meeting.
It would make more sense to develop Cheltenham’s one-day Trials Day into a more prestigious event, with every race a trial for the blue riband races at the Festival. There is already the Cotswold Chase for Gold Cup pretenders, perhaps one of the 2-mile races, the Game Spirit, for instance, could be transferred to Cheltenham to provide a trial for the 2-mile Champion Chase. And why not trial races for the Stayers Hurdle and two of the novice chases and hurdles, perhaps over 2 and 3-miles. That is seven races, which should be enough, though there might be a shout for a 4-year-old hurdle as well.
On balance I would call for Trials Day to be developed into a proper day of trials for the marquee events at the Festival. That to me would be the sensible way to go and would perhaps compliment the Dublin Racing Festival rather than be in competition with it.
 

​Those of us who are blessed to be big time players in our sport have, in my opinion, not only a duty of care to their horses but also a duty of care to the sport. When an unbeaten horse, the winner of the Irish Champion Hurdle, and a mare to boot, is not immediately declared an intended runner in the Champion Hurdle at Cheltenham, it is nothing short of scandalous. The problem lies, as we all know, no matter how well intentioned the initiative, is the OLGB Mares Hurdle at the Festival, which if it were a handicap would solve a problem or two.
Two of the most talented horses in the sport at the moment are Honeysuckle and Benie Des Dieux, yet neither, seemingly, will run in the race at the Festival that will crown them a champion. There is no championship hurdle run over 2-miles-4-furlongs, as there is no chase equivalent. And the OLBG Hurdle crowns no mare a champion. The OLBG should be a consolation for the connections of mares that are not quite championship class, yet the temptation to win a minor race at the Festival is slowly but surely devaluing two of its most prestigious races.
The Stayers Hurdle becomes a race to whet the appetite if Benie Des Dieux takes on Paisley Park; without the potentially great mare the latter becomes everyone’s banker of the meeting. It is the same with Honeysuckle. With her in the race, the Champion Hurdle has the potential to put our sport on the front pages of the national newspapers once more. The mare herself is newsworthy, at least to those of us wedded to the historical narrative of our sport, but with Rachael Blackmore added to the equation a victory for Honeysuckle will transcend our parochial world. Which is, is it not, exactly the wish of everyone within the sport from the B.H.A. to the really minor people like you or me?
I’m sorry great men that you are, but Mullins and de Bromhead need to strap a pair on and put the sport before personal ambition. You are both great trainers, with plenty of success at the Festival to fortify your present and future years, and if you both run your best horse in what is in effect a race of minority importance just to lessen your chance of going home without a winner, shame on you. And Henry de Bromhead, if you want to boast a Champion Hurdler in your career statistics, you’ll never have a better chance than this year. Yes Honeysuckle is not the slickest of jumpers but to my eyes she jumps plenty well enough to win a fairly ordinary, if competitive, renewal of the race and she will positively flourish when she reaches the home straight, where it becomes more about stamina than speed. It will be the dumbest, most chicken-hearted, decision if between them Mr.Alexander and Mr. de Bromhead choose to forego a crack at the Champion Hurdle this March.
In my opinion, and I’ll eat a sausage raw if I am proved wrong, Epatante will not win the Champion Hurdle this or any year. I’m not saying Honeysuckle will win the race but she is a better prospect than the current favourite. In fact, if I was to suggest an ante-post bet I would go each-way on the other de Bromhead horse, Petit Mouchoir, as honest a horse to look through a bridle, a horse sure to be in with a shout come the final hurdle and probably the final furlong.
Having watched the Gold Cup trial at Leopardstown, I am convinced there is but a few pounds between the horses at the forefront of the Gold Cup market at the moment and that any one of them is a likely winner. Why Santini is as short as 5/1 baffles me, especially when a proven top-class horse like Clan Des Obeaux is as long as 8/1. If the two ran in a match over a distance beyond 3-miles would you prefer the Henderson horse over the Nicholls horse. In a bog, yes, on decent ground, no way Charlie Brown. Bristol de Mai is as long as 40/1 in places and yet Santini was all out to beat him in the Cotswold Chase. And you can get 8/1, could possibly be favourite come the day, about Delta Work, a horse that can boast Grade 1 wins by the bagful.
As things stand, given half-decent ground, I still favour Frodon to jump the opposition into submission and to hold his ever-diminishing lead to the winning post. And again, I urge his connections to put the sport before the personal ambition of winning a race they have already won. Our sport provides great, and sometime inspiring stories, Frodon was one such story last year and if he prevails over Native River this Saturday at Newbury, it would be nothing short of disrespectful to shy away from the blue riband of steeplechasing come March. If anyone is in any doubt about his stamina, watch how he soared over the last fence in the Cotswold Chase last season.
Incidentally, given his status as this season’s second coming, I suppose his unflexing position at the head of the Ballymore market is to be expected but if I was a betting man, which I am not (I lack the courage of my convictions) I would shy away from Envoi Allen and fairly lump on the Mullins horse, The Big Getaway (not the Tizzard horse The Big Breakaway) – these horse names are getting bloody confusing – who I thought a mighty winner over the weekend.
Hold still my beating heart, for March 10th has never been closer.