weight.

​I have a whole lot of sympathy for jockeys who must starve themselves just to make a living at the sport. How they do the job they do on virtually nothing more than a slice of dry toast, a boiled egg and, if they are feeling carefree, an ice-cream or a packet of Haribos at the end of the day, is beyond anything I can imagine. I had to make a pot of tea and raid the biscuit barrel simply to write the ‘less than a thousand words’ which will comprise this piece of thought-extraction.
The ‘but’ that was surely coming is that I am not wholly convinced by the call for minimum weights to rise to accommodate the super-sizing of jockeys. Given the bare fact that those destined to become jockeys are no longer subject to malnutrition and rickets as children and grow-up to be healthy young adults and subsequently struggle to ‘do light’, the case, even to a born cynic like me, for allowing bottom weights to drift upward should be unarguable. I have reservations, though, and believe the powers-that-be should give the subject a good deal of thought before any decision is made.
Firstly, and thank heavens they do, no one compels anyone to become a jockey. They know the pitfalls of the profession as well as the life-enhancing benefits. Though of course if jockeys year on year fail to do the weight allotted to their mounts the sport will suffer and the sport is far more important than any individual aspect of the sport. There would also be a kind of discrimination involved if the minimum weight was to rise two or three pounds. Female jockeys, I would suggest, might find it easier to ride at eight stone than their male counterparts and though their number increases annually very few of them find opportunities to ride in the more important handicaps and if the minimum weight were to rise the limited opportunities available would be reduced further. Also, and again there is a smudge of discrimination, those lightweight jockeys, the Jimmy Quinns of our sport, who at one time made a far living by being able to ride at 7st 7lb, let alone 7st 10lbs, will be pushed even further down the path of subsistence. As is usually the case when change is imposed the beneficiaries are those already making a steady living, with little of no thought given to those who must grasp every straw in hope it might lead to an increase in their living standards.
This issue must be resolved by taking in the whole picture and not favouring one group of riders above another. I would suggest the guideline of a minimum weight should be scrapped altogether and clerks of the courses or whoever frames handicaps should be able to set the minimum weight within a set parameter, with some races having a minimum weight of 7st 10lbs and others ranging up to 8st 4lbs, and I would suggest that in races where the minimum weight is set at the lowest scale the top weight should similarly be reduced to say 9st 7lbs.
As always, the above is simply an example of the idea floating around in my head. I dare say with banded racing and major handicaps like the Royal Hunt Cup, where the bottom weight can be as high as 8st 10lbs, my suggestion is invalid. My concern is for every jockey with a licence to get a fair crack at earning a living, a theme I have written about many times over the past decade.
Also, at what point will the minimum weight stop rising? When flat horses are allotted similar weights to the jumpers? And by increasing the minimum weight a horse can carry those at the top of the handicap must carry more weight than at present. Jumpers are mature horses. In the main their bones are as strong as they will ever be and their muscles fully developed. They are also, in the main, mentally mature. This is not the case with flat horses, with the majority being two and three-years-old. A horse is not considered mature until it reaches the age of five or six.
I realise that if minimum weights were allowed to go down as well as up there will be pressure brought to bear on jockeys struggling to make a living as things stand to eat even less than they do at present to achieve 7st 10lbs as this will allow them greater opportunity to gain more rides and extra income. But I believe fervently that every man and woman who is brave enough and has the dedication to work with and ride racehorses deserves the chance to earn a living from the sport. The likes of Ben Curtis, a jockey who has made his mark this past flat season and who has publicly said minimum weights should rise, is doing alright for himself. He has been given opportunities and he has grasped them with both hands. I just suggest others should also be given similar opportunities. Raising the minimum weight would hurt as many as it would help, I suggest.
But I am at the point of being ‘overweight’. It is easy for the full-of-stomach to suggest the hungry should stay that way. ‘Hope you are hungry’, in our world, is an invitation to eat. In Somalia or the home of a jockey it is an unkindness bordering on cruelty.