Richard Hughes or Ferdy Murphy.

I know it seems as though there are quite a few of the opposing view the vast majority are supporting Richard Hughes.

Agree Bilbobaggins of which you are one of the more eloquent.The best defence i have read is in the Darren Lamb thread,succinct and to the point.

Eloquent and contradictory - bilbo's the forumite who just keeps giving....

bilbobaggins 14 Oct 11 12:04 
parispike - the whip does not hurt the horse - you have obviously never seen a whip up close or you would retract that immediately. Half ton animals are not humans. It's not like Mo Farah putting in a superhuman effort on the last lap to try and win a gold medal. They need coercion for the last few seconds of a race to get the utmost out of the animal before they go back to their 5 star lifestyles. If a horse doesn't want to do something it won't do it , whip or no whip.

I dont see anything contradictory in that post,he stated they need coercion which is true and it doesn`t always work also true.

Gerry - you're like a stalker who insults on one thread then when you know you should apologise but can't bring yourself to you move on to another thread and continue those insults. What a sad little man you are.

Thanks wildman.

Thanks wildman.

He's saying that a horse needs to be forced (coerced) to do something against its will (forcing against will is what coercion means) yet in the same paragraph he's saying that a horse cannot be forced to do something against its will - whip or no whip.

How can you not see the contradiction in that?

I wouldn't stalk you bilbo - you're not interesting enough.

It seems I am because you won't leave me alone. By the way it would help if you actually read the post to understand it's meaning rather than picking a word and rushing to the dictionary to see what it means.

Okay bilbo - no fool like an old fool (1.01 you're at least 70 imo)

Ferdy nose [;)]

Gerry Gallbladder its not contradictory at all,he states a horse needs to be forced sometimes,we all agree there,but if the same horse does not want to do something you won`t make him.
I actually like your posts but think you are trying to live up to your name on this one.

Do you not think that by saying that, bilbo makes a strong case for banning the whip altogether rather than using it on the off-chance that it might coerce the horse into running faster?

Maybe but i think the whole debate is heading that way,The counting is a nonsense and not practical so you could make a cogent argument for saying if you can`t get reasonable rules on the whip scrap it altogether.

Murphy's horses don't even see the whip until their handicap ratings plummet and they're on a going day.