ZAVATERI, A MORNING OF MOANS & C.H. Versus B.C.R. at K.P.

Zavateri proved himself top-class as a two-year-old and yesterday at Goodwood he proved he had retained his ability as a three-year-old. But has he done enough to warrant a place at stud? Yes, he has achieved more than many colts who are whisked off to stand as a stallion long before neither his limitations nor the ceiling of his ability has been proved. To my mind, no three-year-old should be retired to stud. I say this time and time again; unless the sport is given priority by all sectors of the industry, eventually it is the thoroughbred breed that will suffer. If I had my way, in the same way as there is a European Pattern Committee that decides whether certain races should either be upgraded or downgraded, there should be a licencing committee to determine if a horse has achieved enough on the racecourse to make a contribution to the general gene-pool as a stallion. The standing of stallions should not be solely about making a stack of money for investors but the primary motivation should rest with improving the quality of the breed. Horses who pass on their weaknesses weaken the breed. Speed and stamina and conformation are no more important to the world's breeding stock than soundness in wind and limb, the very attributes that a trainer looks for when buying young stock.

Zavateri has only run three-times in 2026, his season disrupted by an injury in the spring. Was this a tendon injury? Has he needed a wind operation? Doubtless, neither. But an injury is an injury. For me, a horse should have proved its soundness before being allowed to go to stud and certainly no horse that has had breathing operations in his racing career should ever be allowed to pass on its genes. If we were stricter in this matter our racing would bcome more competitive, with more group-winning horses kept in training, with owners having to prove on the racecourse that their colts are worthy in wind, limb and conformation to become stallions, with their ceilings of ability proved or their limitations exposed. And none of those requirements can be known if horses are shuffled off to the stallion shed when they remain immature.

Now, two gripes about the I.T.V. coverage of racing. Number one: when the betting graphics hide the horses either going down to the start or when they are behind the stalls. There may be a technical reason why they cannot always use the ticker tape along the bottom of the screen, which gives the names of horses, jockeys and current odds but it is far more preferable than the method they were using at Goodwood yesterday. If you have bet on a certain horse, you want to see how it is behaving at the start or indeed whether it is already in the stalls. In fact, people who bet late will be even more interested in how horses are behaving behind and in the stalls. I would argue how a horse is behaving is more important to punters than a sixty-second pointless and very often impolite interview with a trainer.

My other moan from I.T.V.'s coverage of Goodwood yesterday, and this may be due to camera angles, was not seeing all the horses passing the winning post. Again, punters who have backed, say, a debutant, will like for future reference to see if that horse is running on past beaten horses or if the jockey has dropped their hands. I would contend there is as much information to be derived from the horses 'out of the picture' as from those in the frame of the creep camera.

The September Stakes at Kempton Park next Saturday is becoming ever more intriguing. Not only is it the next appearance of racing's only true superstar, Constitution Hill, but in the opposition will now be one of Britain's main hopes for the Arc, Bay City Roller. Nicky may now be regretting not taking a chance on the weather and not taking Constitution Hill to Windsor yesterday evening as the ground was soft, just like Nicky would want it for his superstar. For the narrative to remain intriguing, as with most people, I would like to see Constitution Hill continuing his winning sequence. Yet on the other hand I do not want to see the great horse taken halfway across the world in what might be a fruitless shot at the Melbourne Cup, a race that is often run on firmish ground. The horse is a nine-year-old only a few months from becoming an official ten-year-old. He has raced over hurdles for five-years; he might not even pass all the veterinary protocols. He could get to Melbourne only to be spun by the local vets for a blemish or scar. The November Handicap or the 2-mile race on Champions Day or both make far better sense than an overly-ambitious attempt at foreign glory in a country where Constitution Hill will be considered nothing more than a failed jumps horse. His magic has never travelled far from these shores and we should all remember that. I hope he wins next weekend; or I hope he disappoints to the point where Michael Buckley draws a line under the Australian adventure.