the becher chase. the irish 'ride of the year' award. levy on the sale of horses sold at public auction.

​The Becher Chase was won in fine style yesterday by Chambard, a first winning ride in the race for a female jockey, Lucy Turner. 
The Becher is an old established race that during Aintree’s troubled times was lost to the calendar, to be reinstated in the 1990’s, mainly to give Grand National type horses a try over the big fences prior to running in the big race in April. Yet, year in, year on, it fails to be a significant Grand National trial and has become just a race over the National fences, albeit an important and valuable race. But what is the point of the Becher Chase if it is not a true trial for the Grand National, a reflection of what is to come in April?
The owners of Chambard spoke in the aftermath of their success of their ambition to have a runner in the Grand National, yet, even though he looked every inch a National-horse, there is no certainty, with the field now reduced to 34, that Chambard will have a high enough rating to make the cut. He might, of course, get in, especially as the type of horse Aintree aspires to running in the race rarely get to line-up, but it is easily envisaged, as Chambard was nowhere near top-weight on Saturday, that come the five-day declaration date, he’ll be No. 40 in wait of seven-withdrawals for the chance to compete.
For the Becher to remain relevant as a Grand National trial, it must become a win and you are in race. It’s a no-brainer, even if the B.H.A. and Aintree are against the idea as it might allow a horse to run in the race with an official rating well below their arbitrary cut-off point of 144, is it? Venetia Williams should be allowed to train Chambard specifically for the Grand National, certain in the knowledge that if the horse is fit and well, he’ll get a run. It’s time Suleka Varma and her bosses at Aintree woke-up to the fact that for the survival of the Grand National the race needs to attract the right horses, not those with high ratings but out-of-form or out of love with the game.

At the I.H.A. awards ceremony last week something extraordinary happened that did not raise much of an eyebrow this side of the pond. The Ride of the Year award was given to a 7lb female apprentice with very few wins on the board. The name Amy-Jo Hayes would not strike a loud chord with people outside of Irish racing. She rides infrequently when compared to Siobhan Routledge, the only female flat rider in Ireland even close to losing her claim. Routledge is down to claiming 3lbs, with no other female apprentice anywhere close to her achievement.
I cannot comment on Amy-Jo Hayes’ ability in the saddle or whether her weight is an obstacle to achieving a greater number of rides. What I do know about her is that in a country with many top-class jockeys and with Ryan Moore a regular figure in Irish weigh-rooms, she won the ‘ride of the year award’. So why aren’t trainers in Ireland giving her the opportunities she needs to be able demonstrate her skills? 
As we know, the Irish racing calendar makes it a competitive environment for jockeys, all jockeys, not only female riders and the female shouldn’t be given opportunities unobtainable for their male colleagues. Yet given that through the jumps season in Ireland there are quite a number of female only races, isn’t it time a few female-restricted flat races were added to the race programme? It’s tough for young male riders trying to come up through the ranks; it seems as an outsider that it is a hundred-times more difficult for females. And one final thing; it is unfair on the young female apprentice, in the small number of ‘ladies’ races, to have to take on the experienced, older, female amateur riders, many of whom will have experience of riding at the big festival meetings, including Cheltenham and Aintree and who long connections to the larger stables.

The M.P. George Eustice, no doubt in search of making a point that was not exactly in support of horse racing, made the reasonable assumption in a parliamentary debate the other day that the racing industry should be responsible for the support and care of racehorses retired from the sport. His ideas to support his speech were off-beam, of course, believing owners should race their horses for trophies but no prize-money and that sponsorship alone should be enough to keep horse-racing afloat. Idiotic ideas from a man with an agenda, I suspect.
But his point is valid and here is my suggestion for fulfilling his aim. A tax-cum-levy on the sale of all horses sold at public auction. Half-a-percent should do it, I would think. Yearlings and broodmares can fetch 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5-million +, and half-a-percent going towards the care and support of retired racehorses would be insignificant to both the vendor or purchaser and yet would snap in two a stick that Animal Aid and others constantly beat us with. It seems to me highly appropriate that the sale of foals, yearlings and broodmares, especially, should provide the finance to ensure retired racehorses are cared-for in their lives outside of the racing industry. This is a racing industry problem, not a racing alone problem. Breeders make money from the sale of the product; they make a good living and achieve fame from their success; they should be involved in the solution to a problem they kick-start.