Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
18 Oct 11
13:50
Joined:
Date Joined:
05 Jan 10
It looks so cool and only £50k
Racewood launches new jumping simulator
Amy Mathieson, H&H news writer
Fancy learning to jump — without the risk of a horse refusing and you making an unscheduled exit out the side door?
A new jumping simulator has been produced by Racewood — which already produces dressage, polo and racing simulators — on which to practise cross-country and showjumping.
“It’s the first jumping simulator on the market,” said Bill Greenwood from Racewood, who explained the machine was developed due to popular demand.
“It has leg sensors, which respond to pressure — like on a real horse — as well as sensors on the bit, saddle and stirrups.”
The “horse” will do a perfect jump every time — but will show on screen if your balance is off or you’re relying on a “neckstrap”.
“It’s about building confidence, and eliminating faults,” Mr Greenwood added.
“It’s a great tool for assessing people before putting them on an actual horse and there are levels from novice to advanced.”
The simulator costs from £50,000 and will be on sale from Christmas.
For more information visit www.racewood.com
To watch the simulator in action visit http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCrDkl4YOzs
Racewood launches new jumping simulator
Amy Mathieson, H&H news writer
Fancy learning to jump — without the risk of a horse refusing and you making an unscheduled exit out the side door?
A new jumping simulator has been produced by Racewood — which already produces dressage, polo and racing simulators — on which to practise cross-country and showjumping.
“It’s the first jumping simulator on the market,” said Bill Greenwood from Racewood, who explained the machine was developed due to popular demand.
“It has leg sensors, which respond to pressure — like on a real horse — as well as sensors on the bit, saddle and stirrups.”
The “horse” will do a perfect jump every time — but will show on screen if your balance is off or you’re relying on a “neckstrap”.
“It’s about building confidence, and eliminating faults,” Mr Greenwood added.
“It’s a great tool for assessing people before putting them on an actual horse and there are levels from novice to advanced.”
The simulator costs from £50,000 and will be on sale from Christmas.
For more information visit www.racewood.com
To watch the simulator in action visit http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCrDkl4YOzs
Show More
.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cz6qb6E0BFI&NR=1
this one is just sex toy in disguise
this one is just sex toy in disguise
I'd hazard a guess that's not the steeple chase course. . If i say it looks cool it looks cool...comprende.
I'll tell you where the money should go....Back to the man they stole...sorry..took it from..Christophe Smoullin
A bigger fine than anyone has recieved for doping or stopping a horse. What the f u c k is going on with our sport?
Chemical Nicky got fined £43,500 for Drugging 2 Horses up to the eyeballs and a 3 month ban
Christophe Soumillion fined £53,000 for hitting a horse once over the limit and a five-day ban
Christophe Soumillion fined £53,000 for hitting a horse once over the limit and a five-day ban
Chemical Nicky got fined £43,500 for Drugging 2 Horses up to the eyeballs and a 3 month ban
Christophe Soumillion fined £53,000 for hitting a horse once over the limit and a five-day ban
LOVE IT
Christophe Soumillion fined £53,000 for hitting a horse once over the limit and a five-day ban
LOVE IT
Don't forget that Henderson got his ban during the summer when he never runs horses anyway.
Yet again people use the wrong benchmark against which to measure these things. Imo Henderson would still have been treated leniently if he'd been fined £250k - he was lucky not to be warned off for a few years.
Gerry, Doping and stopping horses is the WRONG BENCHMARK. Are you drunk?
brigust
No - but you are so thick that I have to explain every feckin' point... the benchmark in this instance is Henderson's fine - £43,500. OBVIOUSLY pitched against this, Soumillon's fine of £53,000 will seem harsh. My point is that if Henderson had been fined £250k or more (still lenient imo), Soumillon's treatment would not have appeared so severe.
p.s. I refuse to explain myself to you again thicko; if you don't understand simple points, don't feckin' enter the debate.
No - but you are so thick that I have to explain every feckin' point... the benchmark in this instance is Henderson's fine - £43,500. OBVIOUSLY pitched against this, Soumillon's fine of £53,000 will seem harsh. My point is that if Henderson had been fined £250k or more (still lenient imo), Soumillon's treatment would not have appeared so severe.
p.s. I refuse to explain myself to you again thicko; if you don't understand simple points, don't feckin' enter the debate.
This is the benchmark.
Australian Jockey Nick Hall was fined $5000 for using the whip in a forehand manner seven more times than allowed before the 100m mark when he rode Green Moon to second place in Saturday's BMW Caulfield Cup.
Christophe.Soumillion $75,000 for hitting it once over the limit and a 5 day ban
Australian Jockey Nick Hall was fined $5000 for using the whip in a forehand manner seven more times than allowed before the 100m mark when he rode Green Moon to second place in Saturday's BMW Caulfield Cup.
Christophe.Soumillion $75,000 for hitting it once over the limit and a 5 day ban
No AD - you can't compare benchmarks across different racing authorities. The benchmarks for British racing are set by the BHA. They got Henderson's fine more wrong than they got Soumillon's imo.
do the sponsors get a cut of the withheld prize money back? they put a large chunk of the prize money up didn't they?
They should pay Soumillion back and apologise profusely , imbecilic fat fools .
Imo all they need to do is put a cap on the fine e.g. The jockey's winning percentage will be withheld up to a maximum of £10,000 (personally, I'd be happy to see the cap at £20,000)
Not sure that would be fair, Gerry. Frankie, Christophe and Fallon might be able to cope with that, but not sure about the boys further down the earnings scale.
Besides aren't jockeys being punished twice, losing their % + being banned?
What is the total cost of Christophe's ban - £50K + 5 days earnings in France - nearer £75K?
Besides aren't jockeys being punished twice, losing their % + being banned?
What is the total cost of Christophe's ban - £50K + 5 days earnings in France - nearer £75K?
I'm not thick Gallbladder. OK.
Just because you are anti whip you get some kind of gratification from the punishments jockeys are getting. You seem to be totally unable to understand the damage this will do and the extent to which this sport can be abused.
If you watched the races at Yarmouth the vast majority of jockeys are deciding when they approach the furlong pole whether they have a chance and then stop riding effectively. If this worked before the ban there would never be a 1.01 defeated. When in reality many 1.01s do get beaten by horses otherwise not given a chance.
Think about it and stop losing your temper mid afternoon ffs.
Just because you are anti whip you get some kind of gratification from the punishments jockeys are getting. You seem to be totally unable to understand the damage this will do and the extent to which this sport can be abused.
If you watched the races at Yarmouth the vast majority of jockeys are deciding when they approach the furlong pole whether they have a chance and then stop riding effectively. If this worked before the ban there would never be a 1.01 defeated. When in reality many 1.01s do get beaten by horses otherwise not given a chance.
Think about it and stop losing your temper mid afternoon ffs.
surely if you want to cap the fine it has to be a percentage. most jocks will never see 10k in one go.
It's wonderful to watch..Not...If two horses are fighting out a finish and there's a gap back to a group fighting for 3rd watch how hard they try to get 3rd 
It will be awkward when one of Paul Roy`s horses ( I think they are actually in his wife`s name ) wins and the jockey is banned. Jock loses prize-money. Ms Roy keeps hers. Hmmmmm.
In the last race at Yarmouth surely the favourite would have won given a proper ride. Winston again. The problem here is no-one knows. The form book is useless and you really don't know how hard the jockey is trying.
I bet the clocks are a lot slower now on the AW
George
Points taken but surely it's not beyond the wit of man (even those at the BHA) to devise a simple sliding scale of capped fines? For example lose winning percentage up to a max of £20k for class 1, lose winning percentage up to a max of £5k for class 2 etc. You could apply a similar sliding scale in terms of the accompanying bans.
When deciding on the penalties (fines and bans) two abiding principles must always apply imo; firstly that the objective of the penalties is to ensure that jockeys ride within the rules (so the penalties need to be stiff), and second, the more you stand to gain from breaking the rules the more you should lose via the penalties.
Points taken but surely it's not beyond the wit of man (even those at the BHA) to devise a simple sliding scale of capped fines? For example lose winning percentage up to a max of £20k for class 1, lose winning percentage up to a max of £5k for class 2 etc. You could apply a similar sliding scale in terms of the accompanying bans.
When deciding on the penalties (fines and bans) two abiding principles must always apply imo; firstly that the objective of the penalties is to ensure that jockeys ride within the rules (so the penalties need to be stiff), and second, the more you stand to gain from breaking the rules the more you should lose via the penalties.
By that reasoning Gerry the horse has to be disqualified.
Jump jockey Mattie Batchelor has been fined £600 after breaking rules relating to contact with the banned Brighton-based punter John McCracken.
Trainer Jamie Osborne was fined £4,000 by the Jockey Club for bringing racing into disrepute
Trainer Jamie Osborne was fined £4,000 by the Jockey Club for bringing racing into disrepute
they have inadvertently made it easier for the stoppers and cheaters to stop horses..i couldnt hit it anymore a i was at the limit..a great and legit excuse?what a shambles..i dont see that oaf mccririck spouting lately..must be muzzled id say..
SS
Why? The penalties should be directed squarely at the rule breakers imo. So in the case of whip infringements it can only be the jockey.
Why? The penalties should be directed squarely at the rule breakers imo. So in the case of whip infringements it can only be the jockey.
" the more you stand to gain from breaking the rules the more you should lose via the penalties ". The owner employs the jockey and surely takes some responsibility for his actions. He could after all instruct him to break the rules.
Are the rule breakers the 'stoppers' or the 'triers'. That is the first thing the BHA should get into its head.
SS - anyone could ask or 'encourage' a jockey to break the rules not just owners. At some point you have to trust the integrity of the jockeys..... and back it up with some robust penalties!
Sorry Gerry. Logically if the horse wins because it`s pilot has broken the rules it should be disqualified. Of course they won`t do that but it`s for reasons of expediency not integrity.
SS - I disagree. Logically, if a horse wins because its jockey has broken the rules then the jockey should be fined (severely). If a horse wins because it is proven that a trainer (or owner or someone else) has broken the rules (or has instructed the jockey to break the rules) then the horse should be disqualified.
*Substitute "the jockey should be fined" with "the jockey should be penalised"
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539