TRAINERS, AND WHY SOME ARE GENIUSES AND SOME NOT.

​As with all the other ‘experts’, I had not considered Frodon a Cheltenham Gold Cup horse until Paul Nicholls threw a spanner into my internal workings by entering him in the Gold Cup and testing his theory by running him in, and winning, the Cotswold Chase. Now, of course, I dream of him winning the Gold Cup and, rather like a public announcement in the local paper of upcoming nuptials, making official the racing public’s love affair with Miss Frost. Most likely it will not pan out as in a dream. He’ll no doubt lead those not toiling in his wake into the straight only to be out-powered by horses with greater reserves of stamina. It will be a fun-ride, mind you, until the point in the race when the feared inevitability becomes reality.
While there are no ‘geniuses’ (a greatly overused description, especially of people who are no more than exceptionally good at their job) in the field of journalism or the B.H.B., there are a few candidates in the training ranks worthy of consideration. In proving all of us wrong yet again, Paul Nicholls must now be thought of as a ‘bit of a genius’.
Who else can we belabour with such a distinction? Aidan O’Brien, it goes without saying. His namesake and predecessor at Ballydoyle Vincent O’Brien and possibly Henry Cecil, though do genuine geniuses go through barren spells as he did for a few years? Over jumps we are blessed to have amongst us Willie Mullins and Nicky Henderson, two trainers who make inspired decisions based on gut instinct that confound us when, as they often do, they come good. I also suspect that Gordon Elliott is a genius in waiting, though I think the superlative must be earned over a sustained period of time before it can be sensibly applied.
I must admit it bothers me that I cannot add a female trainer to the list. There are a hundred top-notch female trainers over jumps and on the flat and because she is so consistently good over both codes, I am tempted to nominate Jessie Harrington. But a list of geniuses can only be short as no Tom, Dick or Harry should be summoned for the honour simply because they are a personal favourite. So I will keep the list short and male-dominated.
I am sure in decades past there were others who were regarded by their peers and the public as a notch beyond the mere normal members of their craft. But they were before my time and as such my ignorance of their achievements is too great for me to comment on them.
No trainer can assume the rank of ‘genius’ without good, loyal staff, above average facilities, owners prepared to pay large amounts for the best young horses, strength of mind and purpose, and a smidgen of good luck along the way.
What is also required, and something that cannot be acquired as in most cases it is in-bred in the individual, is humility. ‘Big I am’s’ never become successful. In all walks of life, the most successful at their jobs accept that along the way mistakes will be made and lessons to be learned. Geniuses are geniuses because they are fully aware that their staff can only add to the collective knowledge and their concerns and in-put is never tossed aside as unworthy of consideration. I would imagine the trainers at the top of the trainers’ table learn something every day from their staff.
In my own experience I have seen horses’ breakdown on the gallops for no other reason than the trainer refused to investigate a concern of the person who knew the horse best, the rider.
I doubt, if truth be known, if any racehorse trainer can be a true genius, not in the Einstein or Hawking way as too many of their decisions are intuitive. I suspect the ‘genius’ comes not from the mind of one man but from the collective wisdom of the ‘team’ working with and for the man or woman whose name is on the training licence, who must collate the facts and advice and make the final decision on behalf of everyone involved, as Paul Nicholls did in deciding against the judgement of others that Frodon is more likely to win the Gold Cup than the Ryanair. I hope he is right.
 
There is a growing amount of evidence that there is an epidemic of madness sweeping through the B.H.B. at present. It started when they decided that flat racing, as it is and as it has been for centuries, is old hat and in need of a reboot, putting their faith in madcap hullabaloos such as City Street Racing and Formula 1 style Thursday-night-outs. Then, just to prove they were only getting started with bonkers decision-making, they decided that trainers must run their horses with four shoes on, without once, seemingly, giving any real regard for tendons and over-reaches.
Sadly, proving that madness is now an unstoppable force within the headquarters of the B.H.B., they have now backed the decision of the Uttoxeter stewards to fine Henry Oliver for, and this is so silly it might be a Monty Python sketch, waving his arms at one of his horses who was reluctant to go down to the start, citing, as if it was a reasonable defence, that ‘horses must be seen to be willing to race’. Now, of course, taking this stupidity to its logical conclusion, the assistant starter must not crack his whip at the start of a race, stalls handlers will be made redundant as leading or heaving a reluctant horse into the stalls will be deemed ‘forcing it to race’ and jockeys will be unable to kick a horse into its bridle when the tapes go up. Talk about opening up a can of worms. Not to mention bringing the sport into disrepute.