​It is National Racehorse week and another opportunity to enter a licenced trainers’ stable or any associated thoroughbred establishment to get close-up and personal with the horses and staff that make our sport unique.
I hope the public understand that a racing environment is a workplace and for them to be allowed access the daily routine must be altered, with, no doubt, an earlier start to the day for the staff and much organising during the preceding weeks to ensure the health and safety of the public and to put on a ‘show’ that both informs them, rights false impressions and offers a day to be remembered.
I am sure Richard Philipps and other will tell me why I am wrong but I do feel that a National Racehorse Month, with stables opening-up to the public over the course of 4 or 5 weekends might draw a larger response as in the main people work a 5-day week, Monday to Friday, making week-days difficult for these people to attend. It is not a criticism, just an observation.
I hope during this week the public are also made aware of the B.H.A.’s ‘Lives Well Lived’ campaign and all the equine activities retired racehorses can move on to after their racing careers have ended. I would like to see donation buckets at every stable open to the public this week, inviting people to donate to the equine charities that either rehome retired racehorses or those like the R.o.R. who retrain racehorses for future careers in show-jumping, eventing, dressage, polo or perhaps even just becoming a hack.
 It is the duty of everyone involved with racehorses, and that includes jockeys, I believe, to keep an eye on the horses who leave the racecourse for lives outside of the sport. The Grand National winner Hallo Dandy was found on a rubbish dump in poor condition and it was his rescue and rehabilitation that kickstarted the need for specific equine charities and has led the way to where we are now with ‘Lives Well Lived’ and all the marvellous charities that help racehorses into other equine activities.
It has been my belief that there should be a levy on every horse, from foal upwards, sold at public auction. Initially, and I still stand by my opinion, I thought this would be an excellent way of siphoning money from the sales ring through to prize-money on the racecourse. But as Lee Mottershead wrote in his column today in the Racing Post, perhaps s similar scheme could be used to fund the aftercare of racehorses.
Either option should be considered, though I would prefer, after a few seconds of thought, that it would help both human and horse if 1 or 2% of sales prices were taken to boost prize money and then a similar percentage of prize-money then gifted to the aftercare of retired racehorses. It remains ludicrous to me that breeders can receive 7-figure numbers for the sale of a yearling, and 6-figures when it comes to store horses and from boutique National Hunt sales, and for not one penny, yes, I know it is not all profit, returns to the racing side of the industry. From ‘birth to death’ should equally apply to breeders as it does to the owners and trainers of racehorses.
Finally, I wrote yesterday how Josephine Gordon winning the valuable mile handicap at Kempton on Saturday warmed my heart, now she has warmed it even warmer by donating her share of the prize-money to the fund set-up for the care of Alice Proctor, the amateur rider who suffered a severe spinal fracture at Cartmel a few months ago. I hope Josephine is not offended if I suggest she is far from the wealthiest jockey in the weighing room and to give away the largest bonus she has achieved in many a season is not, as she described it, ‘a little gesture’, but one of great generosity. It brought a tear to my eye and inspired me to go against my ‘look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves’ attitude and donate to the cause myself. Although her gesture I am sure was without thought of herself, I hope Josephine’s gesture inspires the racing fates to look kindly on her and her career returns to the upward trajectory of a few years ago.

​The cancellation of a race at Newton Abbot on Monday due to only 3-horses being declared, an example of the B.H.A.’s drive towards more competitive racing, has drawn criticism from Henry Daly who had expected to win the race. Daly quite rightly is of the opinion that cancelling races is not a good look for the sport. What is worse, though, is that any one of 3-races might have been cancelled due to also having only 3-declarations, the deciding factor on which one to cancel was based on the class of race. If it were a nine-race card all three would have received the chop as that would still have left the minimum number of races any race-meeting must stage. Small mercies!
This new measure, as well-intended as it is, acts against owners, all of whom deserve an opportunity of winning prize-money occasionally. In my opinion though the new measure makes sense, why not split the prize-money for the cancelled race between the owners of the 3-horses denied a run. When there is a walk-over, for instance, the owner of the horse still receives the prize-money even though there was no race for spectators to watch. We should be doing all we can to encourage owners stay in the sport and at the moment this rule is hurting owners and the B.H.A. should rethink the measure.
Bye-the-bye – on this occasion, given the very watery weather we are experiencing this weekend in Devon, it is odds-on the meeting will be abandoned, something that is prone to happen at Newton Abbot, the reason why they chose a decade or so ago to only race through the warmer, drier summer and autumn months. I think, if Monday’s meeting does not go ahead, it will be the third abandonment of the year at Newton Abbot. 

The name de Rothchild sends a chill down my spine – for reasons unconnected to horse racing – but credit should be extended when it is due. One of the family has suggested a third alternative in the yes or no debate about geldings running in the Prix de L’Arc de Triomphe, to allow geldings to run but to give them a few pounds more weight. As someone who firmly believes the best horses regardless of gender and testicleless should be allowed to run in the top races, I would hope this option wins the argument. In the U.S. they have no such restrictions and history records many of the legends of the track over there were geldings. To me, horse racing exists in the first place for the experience of watching horses race each other, with the interests of the breeding industry only coming a close second. The horse should always go before the cart.

My heart was warmed yesterday watching Josephine Gordon win a nice pot at Kempton and on terrestrial t.v.. Why her career has nose-dived from champion apprentice and a hundred winners in one calendar year to scratching around for a living is an answer I would like to hear. It happens to no end of young jockeys having to traverse the journey from up and coming to full-blown professional and Gordon is not alone in having to work her socks-off just to keep her head above water. I thought when she emerged from her apprenticeship that she would go on achieve a level of success that both Holly and Saffie presently enjoy. I hope her victory on Whitcombe Rockstar will be the lift-off Gordon’s patience and dedication deserves. Fingers crossed.

On the topic of female jockeys. The feature interview in the Racing Post today is Peter Thomas interviewing Saffie Osborne, with insight and interventions from her father, Jamie, plus a contribution from her mum, Katie. It is as good a feature-piece as Peter Thomas has penned, full of wit, family rivalry and affection. Worth the price of the paper on its own. “I am singlehandedly trying to bring up my father. I am 22, he is 18,” is a quote we will be seeing in racing literature for many years to come.

​What is wrong with Irish stewards? It is utterly bizarre that they can impose a lenient sentence for absolute animal cruelty of 3-years to one licenced trainer and then impose what is comparatively a draconian sentence on another licenced trainer of 10-months for what to all extent and purpose is a tarpaulin over the carcass of a horse coming loose in transit. Guilty sentences should be appropriate to the crime and it is something Irish stewards seem not to appreciate.
Shark Hanlon, one of the sport’s great characters, has received a 2,000 euro fine and a suspension of his licence for ten-months, though five of the months may become suspended, for bringing the sport into disrepute by transporting the carcass of a horse on a trailer towed by a horsebox with Shark’s name and logo on it, during which the tarpaulin that covered the carcass came loose, exposing the dead horse to sensitive onlookers, some of whom took the opportunity to take photographs.
As of the report I have read in the Racing Post, we are not informed the name of the horse or the circumstances of how it came to lose its life. The problem with censoring some of the facts of the case is that those opposed to the sport can make wildly inaccurate claims on how the horse died, as happened in the overly-hyped prosecution of Gordon Elliott, who at the end of the day was made a villain for the stupid act of allowing himself to be photographed sat astride a dead horse. Gordon was accused of galloping the horse to death and other stupid accusations. 
Fairness in Shark’s case would have been the 2,000 euro fine and a sharp rap over the knuckles. Perhaps a 5-month suspended sentence at worst. But to deny a man his livelihood for poor judgement is beyond unfair, and worse, it is a starting point for the ignorant few to build yet another erroneous case of animal cruelty against the sport. The Irish stewards, in my opinion, continue to behave irresponsible, with their verdicts maligning the sport to worse effect than the ‘crimes’ they investigate and adjudicate upon.
Yes, to transport the carcass in an open trailer towed by his own horsebox was poor judgement. In fact, he may have left the transportation to the knackery to staff members, I do not know. And if he did not oversee the loading of the carcass and ensuring the body was covered correctly, perhaps he was guilty of a form of neglect of duty. But to lose his livelihood for the best part of a year; to have his reputation stained, is so far beyond reprehensible that those responsible should be removed from their positions.
Shark was certainly guilty of poor judgement, yet I contend the Irish stewards are equally guilty of poor judgement as by making headlines out of a parochial matter they have behaved in a manner likely to bring the sport into disrepute. When that sicko trainer, (Mahon, was it?) received a 3-year ban for an act of cruelty that turned my stomach and roused me to anger, they suggested a longer suspension would cause hardship to his family, and yet to a licenced trainer whose reputation for fun and the right spirit precedes him, no similar kindness was offered.
In banning Shark, they perhaps have banned Hewick from gracing the racecourses of Ireland and Britain, too; they have punched a hole in a fairytale. These people need to be named and shamed for making a mountain out of a molehill, and then left to ‘die’ upon that mountain.
Shark Hanlon intends to appeal. Every trainer in Ireland should stand shoulder-to-shoulder with him as any one of them in the future may also be subject to similar prosecution and sentence.

​To my amazement, and perhaps to her own amazement, in riding a double at Goodwood yesterday, Hollie Doyle racked-up the thousandth winner of her career. Within that one-thousand, she has accumulated 31 Group and listed races. When you consider that it took Hayley Turner until 2024 to achieve one-thousand winners, Hollie’s achievement is quite remarkable.
I cannot be confident but Hollie Doyle must be the most successful female flat jockey of all-time. I know Julie Craze was ultra successful back in the day in the U.S. and Emma-Jayne Wilson equally so in Canada, yet I feel Hollie has surpassed them, and if the stats suggest otherwise, by the end of her career Hollie will have the stats firmly in her favour.
Three-years ago I commented on a Racing Channel (?) film on the career of Willie Carson that he was the most under-rated champion jockey of my lifetime and that the current jockey who reminded me of him was Hollie Doyle. This was three-years ago, remember, and several people thought I was deluded. A few weeks ago, I received an e-mail from one of those people apologising for his comments and admitting that I was, after-all, right in my opinion. Hollie has now silenced the doubters, while winning the hearts of the racing public.
Archie Watson’s support has been vital in getting Hollie to where she is today. No matter how talented a rider is, male or female, to make it to the top sphere of the championship – Hollie is currently eighth, with Saffie Osborne one place above her – dedication has to be grafted to loyalty from trainers and owners and Hollie cannot complain on that score. Not that I can see kind-hearted Holly having many complaints about her life. She will travel to all points of the country to ride a horse trained by Archie Watson, no doubt turning down a book of rides at another meeting. Imad Alsagar, to whom she is retained, comes first, followed by horses trained by Archie Watson.
She deserves her success and I am sure there is more to follow. As I commented many years before Doyle and Osborne came on the scene, the sport can only benefit from having female jockeys given opportunities at the highest level and the two mentioned above have proved themselves amongst the top jockeys in the country. It is good that the perception change brought about by Hayley will now endure down the ages.

It seems likely that in the future geldings may be allowed to run the Arc as the French authorities are to debate the matter, with a lot of support, apparently, for removing the restriction. The Arc, along with the classics, may be races designed for the benefit of breeders, to establish the best of the best, yet if there is a gelding better than the classic crop then it must be more beneficial to everyone to have it proved on the racecourse. Too many times colts go to stud on inflated ratings brought-out by a lack of opposition. If a gelding should go and win three Arcs, for instance, which is more likely than a colt winning the race three-times, beating one or two of the previous classic generation, it will provide a metric for assessing the merit of that classic generation. I am all in favour of allowing geldings into all Group 1’s, including the classics.

Callum Shepherd’s ban is overturned, which is a relief to the jockey and the right result for the sport, even if I do not agree that he lost his balance in the last stride of the race. I suggested his ban would be reduced thoughI did not expect his appeal to be 100% successful, though I am pleased he won the day.

Finally, over-all I like the Gredley family, though I still believe they were wrong to jock-off Callum Shepherd in favour of Rab Havlin, a jockey of the same status as Shepherd. Now Havlin has received the heave-ho in favour of Christophe Soumillion, and they are returning to 12-furlongs, with their thoughts moving back to a possible tilt at the Arc. I believe the horse is a 12-furlong horse; he just is not a genuine Group 1 horse. Winning in France in the coming days will not either prove or disprove my opinion as it is a lesser grade race, though winning the Arc would prove me both right and wrong at the same time.

​For many years now I have vented my displeasure at the tendency of breeders to breed for speed over stamina. Finally, others are now following my lead and warning of the danger this imposes on both the sport and the thoroughbred as a species. And the impact is mighty, believe me.
In the U.S. a 10-furlong race is a test of stamina, with 12-furlong races their equivalent to a marathon in Britain or Ireland. 2-mile flat races are so rare they are dismissed as novelty races. This is the road British and Irish breeders are now set on. Australia on the other hand is wedded to staying races, with, of course, their number 1 race, the Melbourne Cup, run over 2-miles. Which, of course, is why their owners and trainers come to Britain to buy-up any number of stoutly-bred horses with the hope of winning their world-famous race. 
As Lee Mottershead pointed out in his column in the Racing Post today, all the Group 1’s over 12-furlongs in Britain this season have gone to foreign-trained horses, as well as several of our prestige 12-furlong and beyond handicaps. The results from last Saturday is proof if proof were needed. 
It may be a bore that the Doncaster St.Leger is almost certainly bound for Ireland and Coolmore, yet if it were not for ‘the lads’ the staying division and the 12-furlong division would be so weak as to be risible. Due to the ever-lasting, I suspect, genes of Galileo, Aidan O’Brien is sure to rule the roost for as long as he wishes to continue training, with Joseph sitting in the wings to receive the honour of keeping Ballydoyle to the forefront of the sport. So Coolmore cannot be included in any condemnation of the short-sighted and self-indulgent attitude and habits of breeders.
The continuation of the present, and seemingly steadfast, trend for speed, is a threat to the species. Sprinters sprint, though in retirement they become tractable, in the main they have no other purpose in life but to gallop as fast as their legs will carry them over no more 6-furlongs. This trait is pretty well useless for any other aspect of equestrian sport and reduces their appeal and value once removed from a racing stable.
National Hunt trainers will run a mile from sprint-breds at the horses-in-training sales. It can be hard enough to teach a flat horse to jump, let alone to settle and drop the bridle, so sprinters are not worth the bother. Of course, many National Hunt trainers will make the attempt if an owner sends him or her a sprint-bred horse. You may argue, quite reasonably, that Red Rum was sprint-bred through and through and it did not stop him winning three Grand Nationals. He was, though, Red Rum. A god of equines; the rules simply do not apply to the likes of him.
Sprint-bred horses are equally of no use to 3-day Event riders or show jumpers. Or dressage riders. Or hunting people. Or for hobby riders who want a comfortable ride around the lanes and bridleways.
In fact, half the reason competition during the main jumping season is going from bad to worse is that National Hunt trainers have a limited field of ex-flat horses to buy for their owners and that is excluding the number that are bought in the summer by Australian buyers. The fact that we have two exceptional hurdles at the moment, and perhaps half-a-dozen more at Closutton (possibly), in State Man and Constitution Hill, should not hide the fact that compared to the 1960’s 70’s and 80’s when the Champion Hurdle could be as competitive as the County Hurdle, the two already named could easily get to March not only unbeaten but unchallenged. In the eras mentioned, when true champions took each other on, legends of the sport like Sea Pigeon, Night Nurse and Monksfield, to name but three, could be beaten as often as they won due to the competitiveness of the division. All of those three were, to get back to my point, were flat-bred, Sea Pigeon regally so.
The only way to check this imbalance, as I see it, is to reduce prize-money for Group 1 sprints and increase prize-money for Group 1 stayers’ races, with the Ascot Gold Cup elevated to become one of the most valuable races in the calendar. Breeders need both a kick up the ass and an inducement to return to breeding for stamina, with far less kudos for breeding the winner of one of the sprint races at Royal Ascot and greater kudos for breeding the winner of the Ascot Gold Cup or Queens Vase. As things stand, breeding the winner of either of the latter two races is greeted as something of a consolation prize.
It is said that in breeding stamina to stamina has the chance of breeding slow hunters; equally, if sprint-blood is bred to sprint-blood what can be achieved is very fast horses over no more than 4-furlongs. In both examples there will be exceptions and equally singlemindedness to either is a dangerous path to tread. Yet I would contend this world of far fewer horse- aware riders would be better catered-for by the accidental breeding of slow hunters rather than speedballs unfit for anything other than frightening the life out of their new owners.

​Ed Dunlop, an upright and honourable man, I suspect, has had the threat of losing his training licence (his livelihood) hanging over him for the past 12-months, apparently. One of his horses last season was found to have cocaine in its system after a post-race test. After the investigation and enquiry, the said upright and honourable man was found ‘sort of guilty’, ‘though not exactly guilty’ and given a 12-month suspended suspension. This, in my opinion, leaves him open to someone with a gripe about him making a false allegation to the B.H.A., or more dastardly actually putting a banned substance into the mouth of one of his horses due to race in the following days. Easily achieved as all that needs be done is to throw a contaminated apple into the stable of one of his horses or something similar.
It was blatantly obvious that Dunlop had nothing to do with the small amount of cocaine that was found and that the amount was too insignificant to affect the performance of the horse, yet he had to take the rap for it. The rule is unambiguous: when a horse is discovered to have a banned substance in its system the buck always must stop with the trainer.
In days gone by, such scant evidence against a defendant would not be sufficient for a guilty verdict, though in the ‘two-tier’ system of justice initiated by our present Prime Minister, where the law is open to interpretation, perhaps a judge might have swayed the verdict and locked-up poor Ed for several years.
His arm twisted by events, Ed Dunlop will now attempt to bring in random drug tests on his employees and is to recommend to the National Trainers’ Federation that similar impositions become mandatory in every stable. You can understand why he has decided to impose this draconian measure on his staff. Apparently, a groom taking illegal drugs, or prescribed for that matter, only has to pee in a stable for a horse to become contaminated. How is not explained.
As someone who rebelled against mandatory covid vaccinations, it is hypocritical of me to support Ed Dunlop in this matter. But the livelihoods of trainers, and thereby their staff, easily hangs by a thread when the buck, no matter the contrary evidence, stops with the licence holder. Too many trainers in the past had their livelihoods stolen from them when they had done no wrong. Captain Ryan Price, for example. Back in the day of The Jockey Club, the rules where not necessarily applied to dispense justice and to root-out bad apples but as a frightener to others. Captain Price loved his horses and gave many of his old horses a home for life. He was not a bad apple but someone who could be listed beside other great trainers, Winter, Pipe, Dickinson, as a man with a rare gift, one of the greatest of the greatest. Unfortunately, there were people at the Jockey Club who either disliked him or distrusted his training methods. The B.H.A. must remain enlightened and not become as overbearing at their predecessors. 

Callum Shepherd, I am pleased to see, through the Jockeys Association, is to appeal against his 18-day suspension for ‘dropping his hands before the finishing line.’ I cannot say with hand on heart that his horse won that evening. He certainly did not lose and the more I stared at the photo-finish photograph the less I could convince myself that the judge had erred in his verdict. In fairness, I think a dead-heat was a fair judgement. That, though, is no longer the point of conjecture. What is up for debate is whether 18-days is a fair penalty and why James Doyle got away scot-free the previous evening at Chelmsford for a similar transgression.
Let me be clear, I did not think Doyle did anything wrong. He was riding a lightly-raced two-year-old and Doyle had given him an excellent ride until the final couple of yards of the race. He had the race won, he was intent on easing him over the line and his mount sensing the release of pressure skipped sideways. Doyle was fortunate not to fall off. If he had been given a 2-day ban I would have thought it harsh.
Despite his protestations, I do believe Shephard eased-off in a similar manner to Doyle as he approached the finishing line. Unlike at Chelmsford, Shepherd did not lose the whole race, only half of it. To my mind, the race should have been referred for further analysis, with any punishment deferred. 18-days, in this instant, is far too harsh and I suspect on appeal it will be reduced, if the penalty system allows (I am in ignorance here) to %-days or less.

I would like to make clear, after how many years it has existed, that I continue hate and ridicule the concept of the Racing League. It is an abomination that is fun for the likes of Matt Chapman and Leonna Mayor, who captain two of the make-believe teams but a dead donkey for anyone who would who values the heritage of the sport. If the sport’s promoters cannot build an audience from the hard-work and enthusiasm of the I.T.V. racing team or from any of the great racing festivals in the calendar, a made-up parody of the sport will achieve little or nothing of value. Even Saffie Osborne winning the leading jockeys’ title 3-years in a row has brought me no joy. Horse racing, as I continue to remind people, has nothing in common with Formula 1.