BRING SOME 'SOUL' BACK TO THE SPORT

The name of Royal Gaye will not mean much to racing fans who have not yet reached the wrong side of fifty. Trained by Fred Rimmell in the 1970's, the gelding was not even a top class performer in his own right, but will go down in history as the winner of what undoubtedly remains the most strongly contested handicap hurdle ever staged.

The way the racing program is now moldered with those in the top band having races 'made to fit', means that the quality of the field assembled for the race Royal Gaye won will never be repeated in a handicap. 

It was May Day 1978 when Haydock Park staged the first running of the Royal Doulton Handicap Hurdle. With a big pot on offer, not having today's wealthier version of the Punchestown Festival to contend with, and in an era without molly coddling conditions races littering the calendar, the event promised to attract some big names.

But the promoters could still not have possibly been expecting the response they received. It would be no exaggeration to describe it as fantasy board game stuff.

Night Nurse, still to this day the highest rated hurdler of all time by Timeform, had just lost his crown to his established adversary Monksfield, who remains the joint second highest ever hurdler on Timeform ratings. Both lined up.So too did the highly popular Sea Pigeon, who would go on and win the 1980 and 1981 running's of the Champion Hurdle, as well as an Ebor to add to his Chester Cups, just for good measure.

The three superstars were joined by the Bob Turnell pair Beacon Light, who had finished third in the Champion Hurdle, and the enigmatic Bird's Nest, the old foe of Night Nurse and widely acknowledged to this day as one of the best hurdlers never to win a Champion Hurdle.

It is outrageous to consider that something was actually missing from the field. For we had just lost the enigma and legend called Golden Cygnet, who for regretfully too short a time blazed across the hurdling scene then left us forever after being fatally injured. His loss was substantial, even in such a vintage era.

Monksfield with Dessie Hughes aboard, and Sea Pigeon, partnered by Jonjo O'Neil both carried 12 stone. Night Nurse, carried 11st 9 lb, Bird's Nest 11st 8 lb, and his stable companion Beacon Light had 11st 6 lb. Further down the field you had Schweppes Hurdle and Imperial Cup winners and the like, receiving shovels of weight. Amazingly,half the twenty runner field carried the minimum 10 stone.

Monksfield was the moral winner, failing by only three quarters of a length to concede a full two stone to the Colin Tinkler ridden winner,who himself had won at Aintree on his previous outing. Close behind was Night Nurse, who rallied gamely to finish just over two lengths further back in third.

Monksfield was arguably the toughest Champion Hurdler ever to look through a bridle. Prior to Cheltenham, he would be campaigned in his homeland, handicap after handicap, shouldering big weights in testing ground. Writing about Monksfield during that season, the Timeform organisation noted, with understatement, that ' his has been a strenuous career '.

In fact nowadays it would be termed a grueling career but, he thrived, incredibly remained an entire, and found a small stallion role when he retired.

He would do it all again the following season, retaining his Champion Hurdle then, after his customary visit to Aintree, returning for the second running of the Royal Doulton where this time, burdening 12st again, he found Beacon Light too good to whom he was conceding 13 lb.

In Ireland there existed no program of regular condition races that the likes of Istabraq and Hurricane Fly would later take in. Small fields, the odd scare, a rare defeat or tussle, but never that buzz when you watch a star tested in the big field handicap scenario, giving away lumps of weight. Neither of these ever ran in a handicap hurdle.There was never any need to.

If someone asked what 'soul' was in racing, then an acceptable answer could well be circumstances when horses are tested in a variety of conditions and who will try their hand giving weight away from the top of the handicap instead of being lovingly campaigned in a program of small field conditions events.

The UK did offer a conditions race program for top flight hurdlers at the time. You could start in the Fighting Fifth, then the Champion Hurdle Trial at Cheltenham, go for either the Christmas Hurdle at Kempton or New Years Day Hurdle at Windsor, then the Oteley at Sandown.

Some did, but some mixed handicaps in too. For example, Sea Pigeon carried top weight to win the Embassy Hurdle at Haydock one year, then attempted the same feat when finding Decent Fellow too good in the same race on a later occasion. This year he gave that event a miss as his season began with a fall on his only ever attempt over fences, in the Colonial Cup, at Camden,South Carolina. That's an event we never hear much of nowadays.

Top class established hurdlers do not appear in handicaps anymore. You'll get a Celtic Shot , Make A Stand or Rooster Booster going through the handicap route on the way up, but once they are established top class horses, connections would never use a handicap as a target in itself or as a warm up for the big one.

It will sometimes happen in the chasing sphere, Arkle, the benchmark for all, was of course was tested in handicaps, mostly when the only one in the handicap proper. Two decades later  Burrough Hill Lad was considered an outstanding Cheltenham Gold Cup winner only because of his weight carrying performance in the Hennessy. And not to forget that one of  the best and most popular chasers ever, Desert Orchid ,also could be said to have had a 'strenuous career' with regular weight defying performances in handicaps over all sorts of distances.

And if this smacks of ignorant rose tinted spectacle stuff, then what about Denman's two winning Hennessy performances, both under under 11st 12lb. They were exhilarating and testament to what the sport is regularly missing out on nowadays.

It would not be wide off the mark to suggest that when Denman won the second of those, in 2009, it was the finest example in the past decade of the sport at its very best. A few minuites that can mesmerize and win over new fans.

Such moments are becoming rarer. National Hunt racing could do with a sponsor with some initiative, ploughing a bundle into the Schweppes, or Befair Hurdle,whatever its called now, so those at the top of the tree will participate and give at least one cuddly conditions race a miss.

The Grand National has become a public relations exercise and the heady money on offer is not consistently pulling in the very best when they are at their zenith. So why not give the Hennessy such a monetary boost that the previous season's Cheltenham Gold Cup winner will take it in as part of his schedule. The Betfair Chase would have to suffer, but the sacrifice would be worth it.

SMOKE AND MIRRORS

The reason we don't answer calls to numbers we don't recognise or fail to answer the doors to curious strangers with clipboards is because we have no wish to engage with some unctuous, guileful character with a forced smile. When trying to picture and hear such a being, Corals mouthpiece Simon Clare could be used as a basis for a caricature.

Some months back a thread was started on the Betfair Forum inviting the posters to name the person they most disliked in racing. The name of Simon Clare littered the responses,though the general gist  was that all of the bookmakers reps are cut of the same cloth and disliked across the board by those with no vested interest in what they stand for.

If  the internet had existed in the 1970's and racing fans had then been asked the same question, it would be inconceivable that someone in the same role would get anywhere near the top of the list. Yarn spinners like  Ron Pollard of Ladbrokes ,and William Hill's Graham Sharpe were indeed 'personalities', but were colourful characters and not despised.

So when a post appeared on the Betfair Forum last Monday evening from a long standing poster by the name of Irish Whisper, announcing that he would be appearing on the televised ATR Sunday Forum with Clare and Paul Kealy of the Racing Post, and whether there were any questions forum members would like him to put to Clare, the response was predictably hot.

Irish Whisper is Kevin Blake. He has various journalistic roles in the industry, states he is a successful punter, and revealed that he also works as an advisor to Joseph O'Brien in the placing of his horses. He does not post on the Betfair Forum as frequently as he once did but appears to have retained his principles.

The ATR Sunday Forum rarely offers much to listen to. Most of us don't bother tuning in, too accustomed to the likes of combinations of John McCririck, Chris Cook, Peter Thomas and Gaye Kellaway going through the motions without rocking any boats.

This time we would be watching, without really knowing what to expect.

It got off to an underwhelming start with the announcement from presenter Sean Boyce that Paul Kealy was under the weather and would be leaving his seat empty. Moreover, the introductions by Boyce took far to long,wasting valuable time, though we did hear that Clare was from a middle class London family and the son of a head shrink.

Even before any awkward questions arose Clare looked visibly uneasy, lots of jestering with his arms, and already defensive in tone. And it was not as though he was in the pressure cooker straight away. There was no flow, issues began to be touched upon but it was not until over half an hour into the programme before Boyce read out a viewers question, apparently from a mysterious, well known journalist, who was getting knocked back with twenty quid bets.

Clare defended the practice by saying that it was wrong to look at the issue in the light of a single twenty quid bet being knocked back, rather we should consider that it could be a thousand punters all wanting individual bets at the top line price.

One very pertinent point raised by Blake here related to the wisdom in bookmakers closing down accounts early on, due to the patterns displayed by the punter predicted as unlikely to be profitable to the bookmaker in the long term.

He brought up the common scenario whereby punters can get in the mode of carefully finding some value wise shrewd bets, giving the impression of being in full control.That is until they hit a bad spell when the willpower quickly dissolves and the rule book goes out the window, and with it an inability to batten down the hatches.

The option of being patient and chipping away in a controlled manner until the tide turns seems less appealing than trying smash out of trouble which often ends up exhausting the whole betting bank and rendering fruitless all the good work previously achieved.

Ninety five per cent of us have all done this.

It can of course become worse for those who succumb to what is presently the most addictive and obtuse habit in gambling, the cancerous FOBTS, which as expected were attacked by Blake and defended by Clare.

These horrible, gaudy looking and gaudy sounding machines bring a new breed of desperadoes into LBO's. To observers the players appear under a spell. These machines offer no pauses to reflect and re-asses finances.

On the day Frankel won the Juddmonte, I left before the final race to catch a train. On the way to the station I popped into an LBO to watch the last race. There existed  two separate communities, a small group of punters, ready for the last event to get under away.A dying breed but visible enough on big race days.

Then there there was the other 'community', though these were made up of individuals who did not interact with one another. Seated, playing the FOBTS, press,press,press, oblivious to all else. I doubt they would have swiveled around for the few minuites it took to run Frankel's race.

The show's schedule was one and a quarter hours, but with it being slow to warm up and with the breaks, it soon approached the late stages and had not even got into full stride. It was regretful that Kiely had not shown, as Blake came out with a couple of late hooks.

He asked why it is left to journalists from outside the sport to report on issues in areas that the racing journalists themselves won't delve into, then suggested it's down to racing writers and broadcasters carrying out paid work for bookmakers, and not wishing to bite the hand that feeds.

In working for ATR Blake himself could be said in a roundabout way to be in paid employment by bookmakers, but his late rally left the viewer in no doubt what he was not frightened to ruffle some important feathers.

Putting him on a similar show alongside Bruce Millington ,Graham Cunningham, with Paul Haigh added to even numbers up, would be pay per view material. We could safely name the two who be most likely to pull sickies at the last moment.

A FREE VOICE FOR ALL

Until the birth of social media no platform was available for racing fans to freely express their views and put the racing world to right.Well, you did have readers letters pages in some racing publications, but nothing that would rock the boat could be uttered. 

Much respected trainer .... no jockey riding better.... charming owner and a benefit to the sport.That's all they wanted to print from you. Most of the time at least. It meant the voiceless thousands could be kept silent.Criticism was only accepted in a gentle way.

This meant a few 'yes people' with their fingers deep in the heavily agendasised pie had freedom of the stage and the microphones to themselves. The nearest the rest of us got to a public platform was airing views in a racecourse bar, or betting office.Nothing that could possibly rile Brough Scott and his like.

The arrival of internet forums changed all that.The gags came off and you were able to express views  that would make many uncomfortable. All of a sudden those who were use to their crowns being polished,often undeservedly, had to now learn to grow a skin.

Those who claimed never to read the Betfair Forum were clearly monitoring it. Never having had to contend with such riff raff before, they would be quick to take exception to any statement concerning themselves which they did not find agreeable.

Posters received suspensions or even lifetime bans for voicing opinions that did not even border on being libelous. As an example, a frequent but intelligent and coherent poster on the Betfair Forum, received a life ban for airing the view that a particular racecourse commentator was rubbish. It was nothing more or nothing less than this.

Another thin skinned writer and television journalist, himself a forum member, would lose it on the keyboards and has even invited posters to meet him for a physical fight.

Some challenged characters in the racing media are so precious that their names are starred out when you attempt to type them.There are rumours that lawyers scan the forum for potentially libelous comments. What is strange is that a post can be pulled for a comment that says very little about some jockeys, while others are accused of strangling a mount or purposely finding trouble in running, and the comments stand unchallenged.

Racing Post editor Bruce Millington once wrote that Betfair Forum members were not fit to be let loose with a set of crayons. He also suggested that some mental home residents must be getting access to computers.

While it was easy to conjure up a freaky image in the mind's eye of Gremlin like characters on keyboards up and down the country, cackling away and making mischief, there were and still are some excellently stated threads criticising how the Racing Post has fallen from grace, and that the publication exists to serve the bookmaking industry.

Some of these threads disappear. So do most that mention Millington's name.This is a court were career journalists are too scared to tread.

The most celebrated thread on the Forum was the one titled 'Clerkwatch', which began in April 2008. This was set up to build evidence that the going descriptions issued by clerks of the courses were on the scale of inaccurate to downright false.

There was an underlying allegation that confusing the playing arena for the punter would lead to more unpredictable results, increased profits for the bookmakers, which in turn would benefit racing through the Gross Profits Tax structure, used to determine the levy collected.

It was an open thread based on the trust that if you contributed, then you knew what you were talking about. Each day race times were studied against the standard times, then discussed in the context of the going descriptions and stick readings.

Patterns emerged where some racecourse clerks grew reputations for taking more liberties with going descriptions than others.The problem was with it being a free for all it would only take one or two to undermine the whole thread.

An owner who has had some decent animals with both Roger Charlton, and the Hannons, contributed to the thread making some interesting observations. He eventually left due to the views of one or two headstrong individuals who would not consider valid and well constructed views that challenged their own.

Furthermore, a popular racecourse commentator who is a member of the forum was dismayed when a poster accused Ascot of selective watering during the middle of the Royal meeting one year, in order to switch the bias of the draw and confuse the punting public.

The thread reached its high point when its two main engineers, Londoner Nick Davies who posted as 'Zilzal' , and a person from the Middlesbrough area who posted as 'Jonjo', were invited to a preliminary meeting with some clerks of courses organised by the BHA. They were led to believe that the meeting would be a precursor to a larger gathering, with the possibility of television cameras being present.

Nothing from the meeting was taken any further.They never heard from the BHA again.Not long after the thread went silent, hope abandoned.

The thread received recognition from Guardian journalist Greg Wood.The rest of the scribes, too snug and settled to risk biting the hands that feed, did not wish to turn any of their mutually beneficial friendships sour. Besides, they could  not contemplate giving recognition to a forum that may have fired arrows at them in the past.

When assessing the Betfair Forum in general, it has to be said that the number of intelligent and enthusiastic posters has declined in recent years.There are a handful of good ones but many have disappeared.

The other popular forum  is 'The Racing Forum' . Posters are generally more respectful to one another than the Betfair Forum, the pace is more sedate, but worryingly there are a few regulars who seem to work for major bookmaking firms,thus may have an agenda. Put it this way, a certain bookmaking firm appears to have more influence on the forum than Betfair do on theirs.

Hopefully there will be a resurgence in the Betfair Forum, an increased intensity ( without the introductions of tools if possible) on The Racing Forum, or even the birth of a new forum..

That we can only hope could be less of a sign that many genuine, articulate members were fed up with the idiots aboard the ship and more to do with the fact that interest in the sport of horse racing overall is declining. And that is a suspicion that should make every racing enthusiast uneasy.

Picture licensed by Creative Commons