Whip Offences: A question for those more knowledgeable than I

I'm not claiming to be more knowledgeable than you brigust1, but every time the BHA bring in new whip rules, the incidence of whip offences rise.
this gives more ammo to the folk who pretend to care about animals, while they ignore animal cruelty and target the best looked after animals in the country. 

if the BHA allowed more use of the whip, cases of whip abuse would practically disappear overnight and these people who are trying to ban racing completely because they don't like it, will have less incidences of abuse to fool the public with.

We could also get the murder rates down if we just called murder assault.

'if the BHA allowed more use of the whip, cases of whip abuse would practically disappear overnight'

Yes, and if we could take stuff for free from shops, shoplifting would be reduced dramatically.


Oh and the RSPCA do not 'ignore animal cruelty'.

i could assault a bacon sarnie doesnt have the same ring though feck !!

Feck N. Eejit Joined: 10 Jan 02
   
We could also get the murder rates down if we just called murder assault. 

that sums upo exactly what the BHA should be doing.

real whip "abuse" practically disappeared overnight when the new whips came out.
that was when the BHA should have stood up to the complainers and told them that there was no "abuse" any longer.

by decreasing the amount of hits, they automatically increase the cases of "abuse"
by them still calling it whip abuse, it gives people who don't know any better a chance to complain about the poor horses.

the BHA need to stop calling it MURDER when it's clearly not.

Presumably the bacon would be dead koo but I'm a vegetarian if that's what you're asking.

that was when the BHA should have stood up to the complainers and told them that there was no "abuse" any longer.

And what do they tell the RSPCA when they confront them with videos such as Dettori's recent abuse? If the BHA said there is no such thing as whip abuse such doings would be 10 a day.

I asked the other day has any jockey sought legal advice over this.

I wouldn't like to be labelled an abuser when it come to animals.

Especially when the governing body of my profession agrees with the wording..

Outpost I read somewhere you were the 'stats' man, is this correct.

Is anybody able to answer my question please?

Brigust astonishingly accused me of been a member of some looney animal rights group considering I said on previous posts of his that I didn't agree with the new whip rules and suggested a compromise by extending the amount a times a jockey could hit a horse, now if I was anti whip wouldn't I be suggesting something the total opposite?.
He got a bit of liver because I called Ruby a liar and a hypocrite after Ruby was caught out on live tv telling porkie pies.

Brigust what do you think of this suggestion?, a guy wrote a letter on tuesdays racing post advocating the use of the whip in the backhand position only, eliminating all forehand use, there would be no need for any real restriction on the number of times you can use the whip, if the BHA want to appease the RSPCA they could maybe have a limit of 16 strokes for flat and 20 for jumps to help those jockeys who might want to get a few backhanders into one of the slow mules they're riding.
Bans would be virtually non existent and no jockey is gaining an advantage on the other as they're all riding the same way.
Its seem a sensible suggestion to me, I'm no scientific expert but I'd say 7 strikes in forehand would be the equivalent of about 30 light backhand flicks.
No doubt the jockeys would find something to moan about this suggestion too? if this compromise was introduced, complaining the horse won't give its all if we use it in the backhand blah blah blah, yet they tell us its the noise of the whip not the supposed painless strike that makes the horse run forward, well the whip will still make that noise in the backhand position , problem solved then?.

Not what your looking for b1, but anyone interested here are some stats from chapter 2 of the BHA's whip report http://www.britishhorseracing.com/whip-review/WhipReview.pdf

2.6 Racecourse: Six racecourses had
a significantly high rate of whip
offences to performances – Kelso,Hexham, Carlisle, Cheltenham,
Aintree and Hamilton. Each of these
has characteristics that could at
least partly explain this high rate.

2.7 Type of Racing: Steeplechase
racing had the highest rate
of whip offences – 0.97% of
performances resulted in a whip
offence. This increased to 3.17%
for Steeplechase winners.

2.8 Slow Going: Whip offences were
20% more likely to occur on ground
slower than Good compared to
Good ground. On an all-weather
surface the probability of a whip
offence is twice as likely on slower
going compared to Standard going.

2.9 Winning Chance: 64% of whip
offences involved a horse finishing
in first or second position.

2.10 Close Finish: There is an almost
perfect correlation between close
finishes for placings and the
likelihood of a whip offence.

2.11 Race Quality: The probability of a
whip offence is 1.65 times more
likely in a Group or Graded race.

2.12 In Steeplechase races of 3 1/4
miles or longer, the rate of whip
offences is 1.78 times higher than
Steeplechase races over shorter distances

jump jocks 212 offences from 32728 rides
conditionals 150 from 12152 rides
amateur 94 from 4896 rides
all foreign 31 from 1231

flat jocks 519 from 67818 rides
apprentice 262 from 16847 rides
amateur 38 from 1415 rides
all foreign 14 from 677 rides

11 of the 30 top jump jocks are above avg on whip offenes
4 of the top 30 flat jocks are above the avg for whip offences


i can't find the weald info, i've seen it somewhere but it's tiny, like less that half of 1% over about 8 years

those stats are jan 2010 to jun 2011

Apolgies - it'a there in annex A of the report.

i can't do tables on here otherwise it would be readable can you george?

Thank you George. The reason for my question is that if the numbers are distorted by Amateurs and Apprentices it is like blaming qualified driver for accidents involving learner drivers.

Similarly if the offences includes 'hitting in the wrong place' this has nothing at all to do with the number of hits.

Also if the number includes 'not allowing time to respond' this also does not depend upon the number of hits.

In other words how distorted are these figures. We should be told. After all they are quick to tell us how many offences occured.

And Silver. I enjoy our banter backwards and forwards, and I did see your post in response to my 'animal rights activist' question but it was a bit late so I just smiled and, more importantly, believed you. You can ask me the same question if you wish.
About the 'backhand' idea I think it sounds OK. M Hills often just flicks with the back hand. My problem is, and always has been, can cheat's prosper? There have been some crazy result recently and I can tell no-one can now easily spot a non-trier.

The integrity of our sport is at serious risk and it beggars belief. Anyone who bets significantly must be serious worried where this is going. 
But Silver, please don't start going off on one. You are doing yourself a disservice.

Sorry, elise, haven't tried to before. It's 4.1 of Annex A for anyone who wants to view it in a colourful table.

http://www.britishhorseracing.com/whip-review/WhipReview.pdf

Thank you Elise and George. Excellent work guys.

There have been some crazy result recently and I can tell no-one can now easily spot a non-trier.

There's always crazy results around this time of year. The non-trier comment's hilarious. The stewards don't want to spot non-triers, they just want to punish jockeys who commit what they see as the real crime i.e. making it too obvious. Before the whip rules was everything getting thrashed before the furlong pole except the non-triers?

The integrity of our sport is at serious risk

He's only just noticed.

A good example of racing being rendered less competitive was Spencer inside the last furlong on Riviera Stars yesterday - unable to use his pro cushion because he had used up his 7 encouragements just to try and keep in touch with the winner up the straight.

Surely if 7 is deemed enough for 5f then 10 should be a minimum for a 2 mile race on the Flat.

Living up to your name Feck. Good on yer.

Its actually a very good point that as yet I haven´t heard anyone mention brigust: what is the BHA definition of whip abuse? (in racing obviously, not in their private lives)

Living up to your name Feck.

I think anyone who posts that is living up to my name.