​It is, of course, commendable that the York executive have announced increased prize-money at the jewel-of-the-north next season. It’s grand. Whether it is necessary is another thing altogether.
    In the premier league of British racecourses there must lay hidden an innate competitiveness to persuade connections to run the best horses in their most prestigious and valuable races. Yet I contend that the Juddmonte International or the Nunthorpe this season will in no way be better races this year just because York have thrown an increase in prize-money at them.
At the Ebor meeting, for instance, no race will be worth less than £100,000 and every race throughout the season, and I find this the more admirable, will be worth no less than £20,000 to the winner, up from £15,000 last season. The 18-days of racing at York next year will have in total £10.75-million in prize-money, an increase of £750,000 on last year. The City of York Stakes will, at £500,000, be the most valuable Group 2 in Europe. 126 races in 2023 will offer a prize-fund of six-figures and every card will be have £200,000 to be won by lucky connections.
Although it is hooray for York, my problem with this largess is three-fold: the pressure this increase will exert on our other ‘premier’ racecourses’ to follow suit; that the racing at York this season will be just as excellent as in all previous years as York never fails to provide great racing; and the small yet withering fact that at the bottom end of racing’s pyramid we continue to race for paltry amounts that offers no hope to owners to either cover training fees, or, as importantly, entice new owners to the sport.
York caters for the elite and I would contend the elite, despite the cost-of-living crisis that, I accept, affects everyone, are not going to bed starving or thirsty.
The great achievement this sport should aspire to is not six-figure prize-funds for races that already attract the best horses but the bolstering of prize-money at the bottom tier. The York handicaps will be just as competitive whether there is a £100,000 pot to be won or if they are run for £75,000 and the majority of handicaps will still be won by the ‘big guns’, the elite who will also be winning the Group races.
I’ve said it before and I’ll be saying again and again and again. You do not construct pyramids from the top down. You build houses with solid foundations. If you throw a new wing on your house you do not neglect the foundations. If you put a new bedroom on your house you might build across a garage but you do not construct it straight out in mid-air from the second-floor without some form of support underneath. I firmly believe that the strategy employed by the B.H.A. and racecourses should be to reconstruct from the bottom-up as this will allow everyone in the sport the opportunity to make ends meet and attract new owners.
I only wish the B.H.A. had the aspiration to have at least one race at each meeting every day worth a five-figure sum to the winner. A small aspiration and not, on its own, enough to right the ship. But it would be a start, a new beginning. A clear indication that the powers-that-be are giving the problem some thought. If York can afford an increase of £750,000 in prize-money, and this is, I admit, the thinking of a fantasist, why could they donate £50,000 to its fellow Yorkshire racecourses to help increase the value of their bottom-end races. That small gesture would be of far greater help to the sport than a £500,000 Group 2.
This sport will only survive and perhaps thrive if all the diverse elements that comprise its whole come together to work together to make the sport attractive to the majority, not the few. York is arguably the best flat course in the country. It’s success should be the sport’s success. It does not exist in isolation.

​The horse racing industry comprises the equally important racing and breeding sides of the sport. Although the glory of winning classis races, both jump and flat, and major graded or Group races, go to the racing aspect of the sport, I would argue that at the loftier sphere of the sport it is the breeders who take home more of the bacon.
Breeders, I must admit, have the liability of financial investment before they scoop any reward. The major studs that send their mares to the likes of Frankel or Dubawi are paying, perhaps, millions of pounds in stallion fees, not always with the safety-net of no-foal no-fee or with any guarantee that the subsequent foal will be strong and healthy and will mature into a yearling worthy in stature to its blue-blooded ancestry. It is a bit of a gamble and I am quite certain that the balance sheets at the end of the financial year are not as champagne-popping as many of us imagine.
It has to be said that the breeding industry work with a world-wide canvas these days, with their product, even as yearlings, sought by owners and trainers in racing jurisdictions from South America to the Far East. With Juddmonte, Coolmore, Godolphin etc, able to sell their home-breds to foreign countries as older horses. Yet, I would contend, horse racing in this country benefits little from the sale of thoroughbreds. Neither from public sales nor private.
I am neither quick-witted or intelligent enough to undertake the math, yet instinct screams at me that British racing has no tangible access to the goldmine that is million-pound yearlings and £400,000 sale of jumping stock.
I propose a study be established by the B.H.A. into the possibility of a levy or small tax be applied to the sale of all thoroughbred racehorses sold for above £2,000. Controversial, yes. But insuperable problems require both radical solutions and compromise. If I have one overarching criticism of the B.H.A. – I have so much criticism or the B.H.A. So very much. – it is they are only reactive to situation. Is there a department at the B.H.A. with its members noses to the grindstone attempting to formulate a grand plan to get British horse racing out of its generally recognised nose-ward dive towards oblivion? Thought not!
My hazy, not even hastily thought-out on the back of a fag-packet, idea is that the owner of any horse bred for the racecourse and subsequently sold either privately or at public auction pay a small tax on any sale price over £2,000 which would go towards funding prize-money at British racecourses. I am not suggesting double-digit percentages but only ½ a percentage. If that. It is not my intention to frighten breeders away from British sales-rings but to unify the industry, to have both sides rowing the same boat. The greatest benefit to both divides of the industry would be a massive increase in prize-money.
An article in ‘The Economist’ magazine suggested that British horse racing was in ‘deep trouble’. It is, I would hope, not at the precipice of ‘deep trouble’ but unless we can get beyond our present troubles ‘deep’ might become an appropriate description in the near-future. A long-lasting solution is needed and it is needed today not tomorrow. A sales percentage tax may not be the entire answer and to future-proof prize-money other inventive ideas might need to be sourced to bolster the sport’s finances and, indeed, to allow the sport a future.
Look, unlike journalists and proper writers, I lack the patience to conduct research to establish the data and numbers that would give this piece the overlook of expertise or even normal competence, yet my instinct assures me that a hundred-thousand or more horses are sold annually in this country and a small tax on those sales would substantially help finance horse racing to the point of sustainability. 
It would be foolish for any tax on sales to be so high it drives breeders to the auction houses of Europe and yet equally foolish not to explore the possibility of a sales tax that would help the sport prosper. The tax (V.A.T.?) on sales that goes into the Government Exchequer would be far higher than the half-percent I propose. I also admit I have little idea of how cumbersome it would be for this money to travel from the sales houses to the coffers of the B.H.A. and on to racecourses. There is always expense in even the most compelling of solutions that escape the solutionist. 
What I do know is that something radical is required to halt the nosedive toward stupefaction and it is needed now. NOW! It is simply humiliating that a sport with its formative roots and history embedded in the soil of this country has been allowed to become the poor relation in the family of world horse racing.

​Fewer people attending this year’s Cheltenham Festival do not concern me as those of us who live in the real world can testify as to how much the ‘cost-of-living crisis’ is affecting day-to-day life. Added to which, the rail strike was also bound to affect attendance numbers. Fewer people in the enclosed space of a racecourse, though, would have allowed a better experience for those who attended, especially those on a first visit to the Festival. On the credit side, I.T.V. racing achieved good viewing figures, giving anecdotal evidence that those who chose not to attend in person watched the racing on t.v., allowing us to believe that the appeal of the Cheltenham Festival is not diminished.
Therefore, it is a shame bordering on embarrassment that the starts of so many races, including the Gold Cup, were at time shambolic. How difficult can it be to start a horse race?
The problem, as far I can interpret, is that jockeys are lining-up so far from the tapes. Horses are not machines and with the atmosphere rolling off the stands often described as ‘electric’, coupled with the nerves and excitement of jockeys in want of achieving ambitions, the equine blood is up, also wanting to ‘get on with things’. It might be difficult for ‘antis’ and those watching horse racing for the first time to comprehend but a good number of racehorses actually enjoy their racecourse experience and share the thrill of their riders. Quite naturally they want to get into gallop-mode as quickly as possible as experience assures them that is the quickest method of getting to the finish-line. To expect all the runners in a handicap to walk what seems like half-a-furlong from where jockeys habitually line-up for the major races to the starting tape is a recipe for what continually happened last week and on many other occasions.
My solutions to the problem can be as high-tech or basic as required. Firstly, a square or oblong of ten or fifteen yards, made of sawdust or perhaps laser beams, should be set out two-yards from the starting tape. The jockeys have their girths checked outside of the ‘box.’ When the starter raises the flag jockeys line-up and then walk forward into the ‘box’, with the responsibility falling on their shoulders to have their horses pointing toward the tape. Once all the horses are in the ‘starting box’, the starter flips the tape and the race is off.
This suggestion, I accept, is not fool-proof. No starting procedure where horses are concerned can be. Yet it will prevent to a large extent the problem of horses getting out-of-control which is what causes virtually all aborted starts. I also suggest it places greater responsibility on the jockeys for fair and even starts. At the moment the starters’ instruction to walk-in is what is at the centre of the present dilemma. ‘The Box Method’, will not jeopardise the chances of a good break for those horses walking forward by those horses standing still, jig-jogging or cantering; ‘crimes’ which I believe are just natural equine responses and, on most occasions, out of the control of jockeys. Once all horses are in the ‘box’ they are under orders and the starter can flip the tape.

Though it had no impact on the racing, in general the assembling of so many good horses in so few stables is, and will continue to be, detrimental to the sport. No one can argue that Willie Mullins is a genius of his profession. Yet before him the same could be said of Michael Dickenson, Martin Pipe, Fred Winter and so on. They, though, did not have 200-horses to call on and if you go to the form books of yesteryear you will discover the winners of major races were spread across far more trainers than is the case nowadays. It says a great deal when a trainer has six-winners at the Cheltenham Festival and some will see that as a disappointing haul in consideration of previous years. Whether the Closutton maestro thinks it a ‘disappointment’ only he will know.
The advantage in limiting the number of horses a trainer can have at his or her command is that the limited supply of top-class staff will naturally become more available to other trainers. Fifty, for example, less horses require less staff and the people ‘let go’ will hardly be out-of-work for more than a day given the shortage of staff reported by nearly every trainer in Britain and Ireland. Of course, the likes of Mullins, Elliott, Nicholls and Henderson, will easily get around any cap on the horses they are allowed to train at any one time by setting-up satellite yards for horses not due to run until months into the future and this might not prevent situations like we had in the Triumph this year when Mullins had over half the field.
But at this moment in racing’s history, when so many trainers are finding it financially impossible to make a living at the sport, for the future, and for the integrity of the sport as a whole, a cap, to me, makes very good sense. It will spread more horses, owners and staff, around far more trainers, will allow the smaller and middle-band trainers greater opportunity to make a living, keep them in the sport and allow them to offer better salaries and incentives to keep younger and the more experienced staff working in the industry. Tough times require tough solutions that may inconvenience the few. Tough times also call for everyone in the sport to pull together.

​We will draw a veil over my inadequate and quite frankly embarrassing attempt at finding winners this Cheltenham Festival. It’s over. We move on. There is still Aintree to look forward to, after all, and there I might redeem myself. If I can bare face the challenge again.
I believe the best horse won the Cheltenham Gold Cup. We cannot be 100% certain of the obvious as Ahoy Senor fell when travelling bold and well, badly impeding A Plus Tard who, according to his jockey, was equally travelling within himself. Yet, the Cheltenham Gold Cup is a steeplechase and the fences are there to be jumped and Galopin Des Champs did that better than all the rest.
Keeping up my fine record of being wrong throughout the week, Galopin Des Champs did not falter up the hill, as my instinct-driven mind’s eye kept assuring me, but stayed on stoutly as all Gold Cup winners must do. I would not yet, though, hang the mantle of greatness on him as this year’s Gold Cup might have appeared to have a great depth of quality about it, the race fell apart a wee bit with Minella Indo running so poorly (some of de Bromhead’s horses were withdrawn earlier in the week due to coughing, so that might explain his lethargic run), Noble Yeats was out-paced and then ran on like a horse in need of 4-miles, Ahoy Senor fell when looking full of running and A Plus Tard was virtually taken out of the race by the melee that also robbed the race of Sounds Russian. The less said about Stattler the better.
Unless Willie Mullins has one waiting in the wings that the public know nothing about, apart from Bravemansgame I cannot see any credible opposition around to prevent Galopin Des Champs equalling Closutton’s A Boum Photo’s haul of 2 Gold Cups. Of course, ill-tempered fate is always the main combatant that steeplechasers must overcome during their short careers as racehorses and hopefully luck will be on his side as the sport is in short supply of his quality of horse.
I boldly predicted that home-based trainers would do better this year than in previous few years. 18-10 suggests I was as equally wrong as I was with all other selections this week. Yet, I will contend, the Champion Hurdle was won by a British trainer and ‘we’ had the runner-up in the Gold Cup, a marked improvement on previous years. And, thanks to Paul Nicholls, one of the Grade 1 novice chases and one of the novice hurdles, was not won by an Irish-trained horses. Again, a marked improvement on previous years. ‘We’ even kept the Foxhunters at home, and won by a genuine point-to-point outfit. It is always comforting to see ‘an amateur set-up’ get one over the professionals.
It was galling that the Irish were more successful in the handicaps than in the past, though Dan Skelton took two of the most competitive handicaps and the Greenall/Guerrieo partnership announced their arrival in the big-time by winning the Martin Pipe. As a keen supporter of the female jockey, it was especially pleasing to see Bridget Andrews win the County Hurdle for a second-time, fending off in a photo-finish none other than Davy Russell.
I suspect we have seen the last of Russell on a racecourse. His ‘contract’ with Gordon Elliott was, I believe, only due to extend until Cheltenham and with racing going a bit quiet until Easter and, with Jack Kennedy to be back riding in the period between now and Aintree, there seems no reason for him to carry on.
Finally, if there is one aspect of Cheltenham that can legitimately be criticised, it is starts. This nonsense of horses lining-up so far away from the tapes must end. Where is the sense in giving revved-up horses and competitive jockeys such a long distance to keep to a walk? My solution is this: a yard or two before the tapes set out, using sawdust or even a laser line, a box ten to fifteen yards square. Set the horses slightly behind this box and then raise the flag. As long as every horse is in the box, no matter which way they are facing (that will be the jockeys responsibility) and whether they are walking, jogging or in canter-mode, the tapes are flipped. At the moment the starter has too much say in how horses are ridden before the race has even begun. Give jockeys more responsibility to achieve a fair start and stop thinking horses are machines that can be controlled when their blood is up. It is just so embarrassing that in this day and age we cannot start a race at first-time of asking!

​Is Shishkin a naughty horse that spits the dummy out when he doesn’t get his own way? Is there an ailment that prevents him jumping his fences as accurately as in the past? Does he need 3-miles? Does he need blinkers or side-pieces? Has he taken against Cheltenham? Does he need a flat track? Questions. Questions. Questions.
My thoughts on his disappointing failure to win the Ryanair are thus: the bad mistake he made at the 3rd-last fence (?) was mighty and many a horse and jockey would have ended up on the floor. Great sit by Nico and, I believe, great courage from the horse to battle on from it. The major plus, I believe, Nicky Henderson will take from yesterday was the abundance of stamina Shishkin displayed for all to see to be only fourth jumping the last fence and yet to finish a running on second. The horse clearly needs 3-miles in my opinion and, if he has suffered no injury after yesterday’s efforts, Aintree will be the best place to prove him a King George horse for next season, if not a player in the 2024 Cheltenham Gold Cup.
The biggest shock yesterday was that Closutton failed to have a winner. Yes, Willie Mullins did not train a winner and Paul Townend also did not ride a winner. In fact, at no stage yesterday did a Closutton horse look like winning. Doubtless, Willie Mullins will go through the card today.
Ireland still, though, won 5-more Festival races. The rout continues.
And it started so well for the home-runners in the Golden Miller, sponsored by Turners - that, by the way, is how Festival races should be referred to, race-name first, sponsor second – with Paul Nicholl’s winning and Laura Morgan finishing second. I might have preferred it the other way round, though no one can deny Nicholls and Cobden deserved a Festival winner. I suspect Mighty Potter needs further and Appreciate It is not the monster they hoped he would be.
To use an Irish term, it is bollocks that the Irish are now winning all the handicaps as well as the Grade 1’s. Enough said.
In a letter published in the Racing Post several weeks ago, I argued my case for Honeysuckle running in the Champion Hurdle by reminding people that the form-book makes it plain that the de Bromhead horses always hit peak form at the Cheltenham Festival. Quite rightly, as it turned out, my argument was ignored by Henry, though my point has already been vindicated with 3 winners for Henry, with A Plus Tard and Minella Indo to come. Envoi Allen has now won 15-races, 4 Grade 1’s and 3 races at the Cheltenham Festival, a haul made-up by the Bumper, the Ballymore and now the Ryanair. Not bad for a horse generally considered ‘a bit of a disappointment’.
I felt so sorry for Jeremy Scott and his owners. Dashel Drasher is one of the sport’s great triers and even aged 10 he continues to run his heart out. He led over the last only to be collared close home and then had second-place taken off him in the stewards’ room for interference made far worse that it appeared by canny Davy Russell switching from outside Rex Dingle to inside.
Today: Gold Cup Day.
I am a man of opinions. Usually, though not always, my opinions stray way off target. But I have many an opinion and rarely waver. The Cheltenham Gold Cup this year has me in tangles. The only strong opinion I have is that Galopin Des Champs will not win as my instincts say he’ll not get up the hill and that Stattler is too much about stamina to win a Gold Cup. I can’t have Conflated as I doubt his will for a fight. Hewick, if we believe his trainer, will hate the soft ground and might be pulled out of the race. Noble Yeats might, though when did a Grand National winner win a Gold Cup?
Unbelievably, and going wholly against the theme of Irish domination, what instincts I have about the race lead me to the conclusion that the Cheltenham Gold Cup will either go to Scotland or England (or de Bromhead. I fear de Bromhead).
Since the Cotswold Chase, I have thought if the ground is soft and his jumping holds together, Ahoy Senor could win the race. And this was my fixed position until hearing Harry Cobden’s wide-eyed confidence that not only will Bravemansgame get every yard of the Gold Cup trip but he also has no fears about his ability to act on soft-ground. I am conflicted and a bit bamboozled.
And then there is the return to form of the de Bromhead horses and the memory of Minella Indo winning two-years ago on softish ground and A Plus Tard running away with the race on softish ground. And yet ….
Bravemansgame to win, though my heart hopes Ahoy Senor wins. It would be a boost for the sport if the Gold Cup goes up to Lucinda Russell.
Mullins will win the Triumph. But which horse? He runs seven. Zenta is my choice. Hunter’s Yarn for the County, another for Mullins. The Spa Hurdle, sponsored by Albert Bartlett, is a cracker, with a future Gold Cup horses no doubt lurking even amongst the also-rans. Three Card Brag is my tentative selection. In the Hunters Chase I am going out on a limb, not unusual for me, and suggest Rocky’s Howya, a horse on an upward curve, winning Irish point-to-points by long distances. I’m with Magic Daze in the Libertines Mares Chase, sponsored by Paddy Power, to bring down the Mullins hotpot. Though I am with Mullins in the Martin Pipe and the Noel Fehily Racing Syndicate with Haxo.
Long live the Cheltenham Festival.

​The rout continues. I honestly believed the British-trained horses would improve on the lamentable efforts of the past few years. I am wrong. It can only get worse. Our only hope to salvage a shred of dignity from the embarrassment of another huge deficit is for Shishkin to win the Ryanair and for one of the British-trained runners to take the Gold Cup, which is no forlorn hope due to the prevailing ground conditions. I cannot, though, find any hope of either of the two British-trained runners in the Stayers Hurdle, Paisley Park and Dashel Drasher, the former 11-years-of-age and the latter 10, figuring in the finish.
Yesterday was particularly disappointing for the home-trained runners. Hermes Allen was made to look ordinary, when going into the Festival he was our bright hope to land a devastating blow on the Mullins Academy of Excellence. Oh, praise be to the sporting gods for The Real Whacker holding on in driving finish with Gerri Columbe. God-bless Patrick Neville and Sam Twiston-Davies. I doubt if The Real Whacker is a genuine Gold Cup horse but, for now, who cares about next season. The Irish were defeated, though it took an Irishman to deliver the blow.
And then Langer Dan gave the Skeltons another Festival winner. We were 2-1 up on the day, with genuine chances of making it 3-1 in the Champion Chase. Woe is me! Again, as it was last year, the British challenge fell apart at the seams, perhaps due to the ever-softening ground, though it has to be said that Energumene was an emphatic winner and is the top 2-mile chaser around.
Unless the cross-country race returns to being a handicap it will become ever-increasingly less competitive and a race for fading heroes. As with the Mares Hurdle, the quality of the first 3 home was a good-bit higher than the entire field for the Ultima on the first day of the meeting. And the only light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel from the Bumper was the encouraging run from Captain Teague, It is always nice, though, when J.P. McManus has a Festival winner. A Dream To Share. Such a nice name, isn’t it?
The following selections for Thursday’s card come with a wealth warning and a heart-felt plea for any fool seeking punting solace here, that you go to my recent blogs to get a full understanding of why I am ‘the poorest tipster’. At Cheltenham, anyway.
The Turners Golden Miller Chase – the race is named after Golden Miller, the winner of 5 Cheltenham Gold Cups and a Grand National, calling the race ‘the Turners’ does a huge disservice to the history of the sport and the memory of one of our greatest steeplechasers. Mighty Potter is a good thing. Go on Davy!
The Pertemps is a minefield, with the only certainty being Willie Mullins will not be winning it. I tentatively put forward Level Neverending to give Gordon Elliott a quick double.
I cannot see Shishkin being beaten in the Ryanair, though if he is it will be by Willie Mullins.
The Stayers Hurdle will not stay at home, that’s for sure. I suggest Teahupoo to give Gordon Elliott a third winner on the day. I am wary of the French horse, though, Gold Tweet.
I have hope that Fugitif might keep the Plate at home and give Sean Bowen a deserved Cheltenham winner.
If there is a rainbow in the sky come 4-50, give a thought to backing one of the Henry de Bromhead runners in the Jack de Bromhead Mares Novice Hurdle, registered as the Dawn Run Mares Novice Hurdle. Again, as with the Golden Miller! Be aware, Henry runs Magical Zoe in the race, so don’t mix her up with Princess Zoe, my selection for the race. Class, they say, will usually prevail.
The Kim Muir will be won by Henry with Royal Thief, formerly near top class and only set to carry 11st 2Ibs.

​Sure, look, Henry was right. And for a reason less obvious than his horse winning yet again at Cheltenham. Because Henry knows his horses and trade better than most, because he paid no heed to the ignorant disparagement and vituperation of numbskulls like me and Matt Chapman, he man-managed to shine a spotlight to the world on the connection and love racing people have for the horses that are the cynosure, magnet, focal point or fulcrum of lives which would be lessened without their equine majesty and willingness to run, jump and strain every sinew for us, mere mortals, for the meagre reward of three square meals a day.
Yes, I will continue to berate Cheltenham for allowing a race on the undercard to out-shine one of National Hunt’s classic races, and I will continue to desire to have the conditions of the Mares Hurdle altered so that either mares of the calibre of Honeysuckle and Epatante, the winners of the three previous Champion Hurdles, remember, either cannot be entered in the race or if they are allowed, they must carry a 7 or 10Ib penalty. Also, why isn’t there a genuine 2-Mile Champion Hurdle for mares at either the Dublin Racing Festival or Cheltenham’s Trial Day or Newbury around the same time of year? Of course, we might never see a mare the likes of Honeysuckle for another twenty-years and a mares Champion Hurdle might on many occasions turn out to be a damp squib but if the top mares are allowed the easier option of a lesser race at the Cheltenham Festival over the next few years, Constitution Hill will have no credible opposition for as long as he continues as a hurdler.
For what its worth, on her performance yesterday, it is perfectly possible that Honeysuckle would have finished in front of State Man if she had run in the Champion Hurdle, winning for her connections an extra £20,000. But as Henry knew full well, yesterday was not about prize-money. It was about ‘Honey’ retiring in the blaze of glory she had earned for herself over the years of her endeavours. The blaze of glory, thankfully, she received. And I do not think for one moment Honeysuckle was in decline this season. Racehorses, as the form-book makes clear, are not machines; occasionally the greats can be beaten, occasionally, for reasons never apparent to a layman or vet, they can under-perform and yet still salvage victory when defeat seemed more likely, as Honeysuckle achieved yesterday.
Yesterday, Love Envoi ran a magnificent race under an equally magnificent ride by Johnnie Burke. They should have won; they deserved to win - look how far behind the likes of Epatante and Marie’s Rock finished – yet they were outgunned up that telling hill by a mare who would run through walls for the jockey on her back.
Let us all pray that the powers beyond human control allow Honeysuckle a long life, easy births of her offspring and that her sons and daughters go on to reflect even more glory on her.
Of course, the other highlight of the day, other than the Irish highlight of the Green Country winning the day 5-2, the reverse of what I suggested, was Constitution Hill doing what we all suspect he will be doing at Cheltenham for the next, pray to the powers beyond human control, three, four, five years. He was totally magnificent, never at any point could you fool yourself, even State Man supporters, into believing an upset might occur. He is, in the manner of his enthusiasm, the hurdling equivalent of Frodon, in that he jumps for fun, with an accuracy of a gold-medal winning Olympic archer.
He is magnificent. Yet, let’s not get carried away. The 2023 Champion Hurdle was far from vintage. He beat State Man who beat the rest as easily as Constitution Hill beat him. Appearances suggest he can be one of the great National Hunt horses, yet a horse as good as him will always make lesser beings appear second-rate.
In my opinion, though, to be a great horse, a horse must beat either horses that have won the major hurdle prizes or that of a similar form-level. The 2-mile hurdling division is weak and has been for many decades. The previous great hurdler was Istabraq whose last Cheltenham success was in 2000, though he would have undoubtedly added the 2001 race if it were not for the Foot and Mouth outbreak. Though the same argument as I am now putting forward about Constitution Hill could equally be applied to Istabraq.
Go back to the days of Night Nurse, Monksfield, Sea Pigeon, etc, and for the years thereafter, and the calibre of hurdlers taking each other was of a magnitude that far excels the depth of the past twenty-years and more.
The hope must be that Marine Nationale keeps on improving and proves superior to, at least, State Man, then, perhaps, there might be a credible opponent to take on Constitution Hill next season.

​(This is part 1, with part 2, if I remember, on Thursday)
The aspect of horse racing that should be known to all is it is a sport not a science. Horses can improve for soft ground, for firm ground, for a change in distance or tactics, for a different jockey, for climatic conditions (some horses hate the rain, for instance) and for a faster or slower pace. The more times a horse runs, the easier it is to get a handle on individual preferences.
For instance, Inthepocket, in today’s Supreme Hurdle, should, according to the form-book, have little chance of reversing form after a 9-length defeat to Il Etait Temps at the Dublin Racing Festival. Yet Leopardstown and Cheltenham have little in common except they are both left-handed tracks. Il Etait Temps may not travel down the hill as well as Inthepocket or finish as strongly up the hill to the winning post. And to add to the dilemma the Mullins stable jockey, Paul Townend, has chosen to stick with Facile Vega who was beaten 20-lenths or more by both horses in that race.
Horse racing is about opinions, not science. Here, briefly, are my opinions.
I have a fancy for Doctor Bravo in the Supreme, though my eye keeps being drawn to Strong Leader.
I cannot get away from Jonbon in the Arkle as I am uncertain of El Fabiolo’s jumping.
The Ultima is tricky, as you would expect from a Cheltenham handicap. Three of my Grand National hopefuls run in this, though on this occasion I do not fancy Happygolucky, Remastered (ridden by David Noonan, perhaps a clue as to who will replace Tom Scudamore as David Pipe’s stable jockey next season) or The Big Breakaway. My fancy is Oscar Elite, with Glamorgan Duke as a big odds each-way shout.
Constitution Hill will win the Champion Hurdle
The Mares Hurdle has no right to be more competitive than the Champion Hurdle and the conditions of the race must be changed to prevent this disagreeable state of affairs to ever happen again. My heart wants Honeysuckle to win, though my head suggests Marie’s Rock.
The Boodles has oodles of horses with chances. Bad might turn out to be better than good and the booking of Rachel Blackmore could be significant and the bottom weight Romancero Le Dun might be thrown in off 10-st 3-Ilbs but I will side with Sir Allen and Danny Mullins.
Gaillard Du Mesnil should be a shoo-in in the National Hunt chase but a few times, even though he is yet to beat anything of this class, I have been impressed by Coolvalla and I’ll stick with him to bring Britain 5-2 in the lead over the old enemy, Willie Mullins. 
Obviously, making tips for Wednesday requires a wee bit of guesswork as declarations are not made until mid-day today, Tuesday. So that’s my excuse for any lamentable suggestions.
In my opinion the Ballymore is the better quality race for novices at the meeting. I want Hermes Allen to win but all season I have been mightily impressed with Gaelic Warrior and I will stay with him
The 3-mile novice chase looks a match between Gerri Colombe and Thyme Hill, with the former edging it for me.
The Coral Cup is a nightmare for amateur tipsters like myself. I literally haven’t a clue and will suggest Scaramanga for Willie Mullins even though he hasn’t seen a racecourse for 326-days, a mere trifle for someone of the genius of Mullins.
The 2-Mile Champion Chase is, in my opinion, the race of the meeting, with 5 perfectly predictable winners. After the Tingle Creek my instincts shouted out at me that Edwardstone would win the Champion Chase. After the Clarence House I edged over to Editeur Du Gite and remain in his camp, though this may be a case of wanting the Moores to have another big race winner sideswiping common-sense.
I like the change of pace the Glenfarclas brings to the Festival; a chance to unwind a little, to take a breather and watch a race of novelty and expertise. Gin On Lime interests me as I have a fancy for her in the Grand National. Whether she will run here is doubtful, I suspect, as she is a good ground horse, whereas Delta Work will love the ground and I expect him to out-stay his stable companion Galvin. Snow Leopardess is the only possible place hope for Britain.
I suggest Shakem Up’arry for the Grand Annual, more in hope than expectation, I admit.
And any of the eleven possible Closutton runners in the Bumper? This is such a competitive affair I will go for Fact to File to come home in front of Favour and Fortune and A Dream To Share.
5-2 to Ireland. 7-7 each overall.

​I expect, as, I dare say, the majority expect, that Constitution Hill will win the 2023 Champion Hurdle with his head in his chest. Can’t see any other outcome, can you? Yet even if he wins by 20-lengths, which is entirely possible, I will not be joining the chorus of ‘could he be the best we have ever seen’. Or whatever hyperbole spews from Ed Chamberlain’s mouth after the race. Oh, I have deliberately missed out the ? as Ed will not be posing a question but delivering his firm belief.
At this moment, Constitution Hill has run 5-times in his life and though in time he will perhaps run-up a sequence of victories to equal Istabraq, or be considered his superior, Constitution Hill has a lot of running to do. One swallow doth not make a summer and 5 or 6 strolls in the park against the quality of opposition he has thus far raced against doth not make a legendary superstar.
Younger people must be educated on the golden years of Champion Hurdlers, back when multiple champions met in race after race leading up to the Festival. For example, let’s dwell for a moment on Monksfield. He was not a shooting star. He had to work for his corn, his legendary status. He had run in 4 handicap hurdles before he went to Cheltenham for the first time, finishing second in the Triumph Hurdle behind Peterhof. He then returned to handicaps and was regularly beaten before he won the Irish Benson & Hedges Handicap at Fairyhouse, from where he finished fourth in the Sweeps Hurdle, also a handicap. In fact, handicaps were his staple running up to his 1977 clash with Night Nurse, the reigning Champion Hurdler, finishing second to the horse John Randall considers the greatest hurdler of all-time.
In fact, Monksfield continued to get beaten in handicaps and didn’t win a race the following year until getting his revenge on Night Nurse in the 1978 Champion Hurdle and again at Liverpool, before failing to give 2-stone to Royal Gaye in the Royal Doulton on firm ground in May of that year.
Of course, the great horse won a second Champion Hurdle the following season beating the legendary Sea Pigeon in a pulsating finish. Monksfield was a scrapper, never having an easy race.
I am making two points here. One, Monksfield ran a lot. Yes, it was a different time, when trainers did not have access to all-weather gallops, when the majority of the top hurdle races were handicaps and if Nicky Henderson had to prepare a horse for Cheltenham in a similar manner he would be a hell of a lot slimmer. And two, in the ‘golden era’ there were so many great hurdlers it is not an easy task to remember all their names. Here goes: Monksfield, Night Nurse, Comedy of Errors, Lanzarote, Bula, Beacon Light, Birds Nest and the horse John Francome described as ‘undoubtedly the best horse he ever rode, Sea Pigeon.
Even in, perhaps, the weakest Champion Hurdle Sea Pigeon ever ran in – a masterclass of a ride, by the way, from Francome – he beat the likes of Pollardstown, Daring Run, Celtic Ryde, Birds Nest, Badsworth Boy and Heighlin, multiple winners of multiple big races.
Istabraq, to set the record straight, won 25-races, 14 Grade 1’s, plus 3 Champion Hurdles and would have won 4 if not for the Foot and Mouth outbreak.
This is why it is sheer folly to anoint the head of Constitution Hill with greatness after only 5 starts, 6 come this time tomorrow. His potential is boundless. He could be anything from better than Istabraq to another Bob Olinger. Remember Bob Olinger and all that was said of him by the same people who are now bestowing similar sentiments on Constitutional Hill? Tomorrow his task is to beat State Man, the other 5 hardly count as serious rivals. Get my drift?

​In today’s Racing Post (08/03/23), Bill Barber, the excellent industry editor, gives a technical analysis of the present situation vis-à-vis the disgraceful, and, I suspect, illegal imposition (at least bordering on) of affordability checks on punters, those who are perhaps the backbone of British horse-racing.
I am not a gambler. Nor can I described as a bettor as I infrequently visit my local bookmaker and do not, and never have had, a betting account. For this reason, I have shied well-clear of the debate believing I had no justifiable foot to stand on to air my opinions. Yet, affordability checks do affect me, as indeed they may well in the near present intrude on the lives of people who have no interest in betting and horse racing.
Affordability checks are somewhat similar to the tactics of gangs in the East End of London post the 2nd World War, and the mobsters of New York that threatened shop, club and dance hall owners that if they ‘didn’t pay’ for protection, from whom it was rarely stated, they would find their premises raised to the ground. In this instance, the protection racket is organised by the Gambling Commission, its whispered threat of ‘do as we say or we will take away your licence and throw you out on the street’ as bone-chilling as the knuckleduster or sawn-off shotgun. The bookmakers, as would be expected, are too frightened to stand their ground and without apology pass on the ‘wishes’ of the Gambling Commission by way of imposing outrageous affordability checks on their customers, demanding evidence that they can afford to bet without sending their families into poverty, with the outraged punter having to hand-over to strangers details of their savings, investments, pensions, salaries, mortgages, etc etc. An unholy state of affairs that has all the hallmarks of draconian overreach.
All the while, racing, bookmakers and punters await the long-awaited publication of the government’s white paper setting out rules that must be applied by bookmakers to protect, largely from themselves, vulnerable gamblers and to, no doubt, lend them a helping hand towards counselling and a new life well away from the temptations of betting shops.
My fear is this: what is being enacted by government through the auspices of the Gambling Commission is a trial run with the objective of applying similar tactics and strategies on drinkers of alcohol, smokers and addicts of cream cakes, which will be easily achieved at the advent of the cashless society, which is already being prepared to be rolled out in 2025. Go to the World Economic Forum’s website if you believe me to be a tin-foil hat-wearer.
It sounds dystopian, doesn’t it? A plot lifted from a science fiction B-movie or second-rate novel. Yet, the Dutch government have legislation in place to throw farmers off their land and to return farmland to nature by 2050. A country famous for the vegetable and flowers it produces and sells around the world! Protesting farmers have been shot at by Dutch police, had their tractors overturned and the government have used propaganda and downright lies to vilify them and turn the public against them. Farmers: the enemy! Unbelievable!
It is my belief, though, that the delays in publication of the white paper is a sign that knowing itself to be as unpopular with the British people as the Dutch government is with farmers, the government are desperately seeking compromise, realising the threat to racing’s finances – the Gambling Commission deny advising bookmakers to impose affordability checks – is a threat to the £4-billion bonanza that goes to the Exchequer annually from horse racing and betting. They want to help stop people gambling away their savings but realise that the Gambling Commission are taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
Bookmakers could help themselves by voluntarily removing online slot machines from their premises. I suspect this whole debate began with the installation of slot machines in betting shops, with bookmakers looking away while vulnerable people gambled their lives away feeding coins into these money-making machines. Get rid of these damn bookmakers games of chance money pits and the betting shop will overnight become more wholesome, more acceptable for the awful new world being constructed behind our backs.
One more thing: does anyone truly believe that bookmakers would willingly close the accounts of loyal customers, reducing their annual profits, if they were not told to do so, were not intimidated with the threat of unspeakable reprisals if they failed to do as they were asked? 
Someone should take one of the big bookmaking companies to court to seek legal opinion if the scope of affordability checks is fair, just and legal.