cancelled, geldings, gordon & OSBORNES.

​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.