Subscriber Login
Why subscribe?
Log in
Article Search
Winning Owners Profiles
Latest American Articles
Latest European Articles
Shop
North American Edition
European Edition
Digital Downloads
Books
Subscribe
Supplements
Storyboards
Advertise
Advertising - North American Edition
Advertising - European Edition
Contact Us / Other
Sign In
My Account
Trainer Magazine - the horse racing magazine for the training and development of the thoroughbred racehorse. Europe and North America.
0
Jun
30
Jun 30
The Whip Debate
Webmaster
WELFARE
,
INDUSTRY
CLICK ON IMAGE TO READ ARTICLE
(European Trainer - issue 34 - Summer 2011)
Jun 30
Norbert Sauer - happy with life as one of German racing’s elder statesmen
Jun 30
Racing and the social network
0
![AS much as that may be true, it is the horse, fauna-wise at least, that has most defined our culture. Our early reliance on horses for transport, work, and particularly companionship was integral in such a vast land. And at the forefront of that equine influence on Australia is thoroughbred racing. Racing is the sport that was organised before all others and gave hope to so many during the great depression, and it is the only sport that stops this nation. That’s why the heartstrings are tugged for so many involved in the industry when racing’s biggest “perception” issue – the whip debate – is given the attention that, rightly or wrongly, society has demanded. MORE THAN JUST THE WHIP Not that long ago jockeys who were “hard” whip riders were considered as some of the best in the game. They were seen as the men you wanted on your horse when it was fighting out a close finish. In fact, it’s fair to say they were celebrated for their whip skills, most certainly from a punters point of view. Hall of Fame jockey Mick Dittman, winner of almost 90 Group One races throughout the 1970s, 80s and 90s, was nicknamed “The Enforcer” due to his powerful style in the saddle. With his strong whip riding he could literally lift a horse to victory. “Believe me, only the very best horses, champions like Lonhro, will try their very best without the whip. They’re the exception; most horses need the whip,” Dittman says. From that, and Dittman’s riding style, you could assume that Dittman’s certainly not anti whip. Well, that’s true, but illusion was what Dittman was all about during his career. It’s often told that he never marked a horse, never left a welt or a wound. Don’t misunderstand, he did give them a whack often, but it was the “threat” of the whip and Dittman’s vigour that gave the appearance that he was “cutting a horse in half.” One thing’s for certain - it was a successful method, but a method that would not last long in this day and age with Australia’s new whip rules that were introduced in September, 2009. Australian Racing rule 137A has nine sub rules within it. The main changes to the previous rule are with the design of a whip and how many times a jockey can use it in a race. The introduction of the padded whip is really the only change to the specification of a whip design, which naturally must be approved by stewards to their satisfaction. It’s sub rule 5 that perhaps caused the most voices of dissention within the riding and training ranks. It states: 1. The whip shall not be used in a forehand manner in consecutive strides prior to the 100 metre mark; 2. The whip shall not be used in a forehand manner more than on five occasions prior to the 100 metre mark; 3. The rider may at his discretion use the whip with a slapping motion down the shoulder, with whip hand remaining on the reins, or alternatively in a backhand manner, prior to the 100 metre mark; 4. In the final 100 metres, a rider may, subject to the other requirements of this rule, use his whip at his discretion. Prior to when this rule was amended in 2009 there was a complicated set of rules in place that required riders to count their strikes with the whip at several points within the final parts of a race. That caused great uproar, especially amongst jockeys. The amendment somewhat eased riders’ fears that they would forever be counting whip strokes whilst attempting to ride out their mounts in a race. Several Australian Racing Board meetings since have seen those rules remain unchanged, although outside pressures continue to apply just that. The RSPCA Australia (Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) is without doubt the organisation with the biggest “pull” to influence people outside the racing fraternity. In July of 2009 at the International Society for Equitation Science’s annual conference held in Sydney, RSPCA Chief Scientist Dr Bidda Jones asked the question of whether a horse will ever actually enjoy the activities that humans ask of them. “Horses are the basis of a multi-billion dollar industry. In Australia, their use in racing alone generates around 4 billion (Australian) dollars a year and is inextricably linked with gambling and through taxation revenue to government funding. “But ultimately, with the possible exception of police work, the things we make horses do, headed by racing, are all carried out for the same reason. “Horse riding is not a productive, educational, scientific, or useful activity. It is something people do, directly or indirectly, for entertainment, pleasure, or fun. There are some obvious benefits to horses from their domestication and use by humans: the provision of food and shelter, protection from predators, disease prevention and care during illness and injury. “But there is little evidence that horses benefit in any other significant way from our use of them, despite what we might like to think in our more romantic moments. Doing something for pleasure or fun is not an inherently bad thing, but it doesn't provide much moral justification for an activity. “That wouldn't matter, if it wasn't for the fact that the horse has to share the experience. So if that experience is not a good one, it raises the question of whether we should be making them do it at all. If elite competition is to be ethically sustainable, it requires clear action to ensure that welfare impacts are minimised.” Whilst Dr Jones may be correct on several fronts, many would disagree with the statement that racing is purely for “entertainment, pleasure or fun” and “is not a productive activity.” The racing industry within Australia is an employer of some 250,000 people either full or part time. It is only a small percentage of people making a grand living from horseracing; most earn just enough to survive. But that’s just it. They are earning a l iving. Keeping humans fed, putting a roof over their head, generations of families’ livelihood made from what Dr Jones describes as “just fun.” Many would argue that is surely a justification for what happens to a racehorse during its career, including the fact that it may be whipped (under regulation) during a race. Especially when you consider that the vast majority of racing people are more passionate a bout horse welfare than any others that claim the same. In January this year a study, funded by the RSPCA, claimed that racehorses do not perform any better when jockeys use the whip on them in the final stages of a race. A pair of animal behaviour academics from the University of Sydney completed the study, with co-author Paul McGreevy stating that he “hoped it would highlight the fallacy and futility of w hipping.” “We looked at running times in a series of races, how whips were used and whether that whip use influenced the outcome of a race. “What we found was that whipping did not affect the probability of whether or not a horse finished a race in the first three placings. “How a horse ran in the first part of a race, when it wasn't being whipped, was the most critical factor in racing success. So horses are being whipped in the final stages of a race, in the face of muscle fatigue, for no benefit. “The reason for whip use has traditionally been the need to be seen to ride the horse out and the suggestion that you can steer a horse with the whip,” stated McGreevy. “Many horse riders, and certainly these findings, refute that. “Top performance horses have been bred and prepared to give their best. Add to that excellent horsemanship and you’ve got a winning combination. That’s all you need. We have evidence here that great horsemanship does not involve flogging tired horses.” The aforementioned Dr Jones also chimed in: “The results would help end the debate over whether there is a place for whipping in the future of Australian racing. Jockeys may as well save their energy, keep their hands on the reins, and head straight for home. Their horses will be so much better off for it.” The study was met with anger and contempt from high profile members of the thoroughbred industry. Leading bookmaker Robbie Waterhouse, husband of champion trainer Gai Waterhouse, was scathing. “Its faux-statistical nature is laughable. I cringe to think of a statistical study using only 48 horses. To me, nothing less than 20,000 runners is appropriate. To talk of P- values and R2s is to let the paper hide behind a statistician’s respectability coat. To ‘discover’ that horses near the lead at the 400m and 200m do better is puerile and obvious. They’d get an ever better R2 fit if they tried 100m, or 50m, or 10m, or, come to think of it, 1cm positions! What deliberate rubbish.” One leading jockey stated, “Give me a tape of 500 races and I will show you the reason a majority of winners won, and that was from good whip-riding.” The Australian Racing Board’s (ARB) Chief Executive Andrew Harding was slightly less exuberant in his response. “The ARB and its expert advisers will consider the study’s contents. We cooperated with the study because we have a good working relationship with the RSPCA and we are committed to doing everything possible to protect the welfare of racehorses. “But we have never made a secret of the fact that we doubt the scientific worth of applying logistic regression to draw conclusions about the extent of the effect on performance of the use of a padded whip. There are literally myriad variables in every race that will have an effect on the outcome.” IS TWO TOO YOUNG? New South Wales’ (NSW) two most senior racing figures – Chief Steward Ray Murrihy and Racing New South Wales boss Peter V’Landys – are adamant that for the safety of both rider and horse, whips are a necessity, especially in juvenile racing. “There is definitely no plan to ban using whips in two-year-old races in NSW; the issue was raised and quickly declined when the last lot of whip reforms were put before the Australian Racing Board,” V’Landys stated. There was rumour that Victoria had been flirting with the idea of banning whips in two-year-old racing but Murrihy said, “Doing something like that is very difficult one out, as horses travel freely between states, and would need to happen on a national level. I would not be supporting it to be introduced in New South Wales.” But Victorian counterpart Terry Bailey quickly hosed down any suggestion that Victoria was on the brink of introducing a ban of the whip for two-year-olds. “While there is merit in exploring whip-free racing in two-year-olds, there is no definitive move to change those rules. Any changes to the whip rule like that would require a national approach anyway.” Glyn Schofield, champion South African jockey and currently one of Sydney’s leading riders, thinks it “would be laughable if any administration decided to put a stop on using a whip in two-year-old races. “The way the new whips are designed they are not meant to hurt a horse anyway, they are padded. The use of the whip in two-year-old races is a steering tool, you need it to correct green horses and keep them going straight. We definitely don't need any more regulations or modifications.” PERCEPTION AND REALITY Unfortunately for the thoroughbred racing industry the use of the whip on racehorses will forever be frowned upon by certain sections of the wider community. It is a harsh fact that many see it as cruel, although that number is probably swelled by those same sections who may well have you believe that everyone on the planet outside of the racing fraternity thinks the same, whereas in reality much of society have more important everyday concerns within their own lives and this topic would hardly be one that pops up at the dinner table every night. There is a push from within racing that some of the terms associated with whipping during a race don’t aid the view held by others in society. Words like “striking,” “hitting,” or “whip” itself, they say, don’t do the industry any favours. Some would prefer terms like “crop” or “persuader” and “caress” or “flick.” But the cold truth is that those terms currently used are a much better description of what actually happens. And does it really matter? Yes some horses need the whip to get the best out of them. Yes some need it more than others, and some not much at all. It is what it is. But the question is – is that such a blight on the human race? The short answer is that in the scheme of “terrible” things the human race is accountable for, including those against our animal friends, the regulated whipping of horses during a race surely doesn’t get a spot on that list! The racing industry has worked immensely hard of late to govern (for the better) whip use in racing. A whole set of new rules has been implemented. Authorities have cracked down on those who are prepared to flaunt the breaking of those rules. Yes, perhaps it is something that should have been commanded and expected of the racing industry a long time ago. It’s fair to say in the past many racing leaders have not welcomed change, whether they be blinded by their own selfish interests or have just simply not been “brave” enough to take any backlash that may occur because of it. But on this particular issue they are as close as they have ever been in getting it right, perhaps as close as they can be. And at least for the sake of industry participants, the human ones that is, they now need to stand strong in the face of reaction, resistance, and retaliation that comes from parts of society that simply don’t agree with them. He was known as “The Slasher,” a sobriquet that today might suggest homicidal mania or recall scenes from an especially grim horror flick. But no, Ted “The Slasher” Atkinson was neither a maniac nor a celluloid villain, but one of the most successful North American jockeys of his time. He had a place among the postwar era’s elite riders, alongside Eddie Arcaro, Johnny Longden and George Woolfe, who all became household names. And everyone knew Atkinson, the regular rider of the great Tom Fool and the first jockey to win more than $1-million purses in a season, as “The Slasher.” DESCRIPTIVE of a high- winding and liberal use of the whip, the nickname and its attachment to a respected athlete imply much about postwar sensibilities. Atkinson once appeared on the Ed Sullivan Show and by all accounts was a most respected gentleman; he was also known as “The Professor” because of his love of classic literature. But he apparently was best known as “The Slasher.” If there’s a modern uneasiness with the nickname or even a revulsion that, too, could be suggestive: Sensibilities indeed have changed. And horseracing is changing, too. The most traditional of sports is finally confronting modernity in all its ramifications. One of the changes involves the whip. It’s not even called a “whip” anymore, because, of course, that would suggest punishment and cruelty. While people close to the sport know very well that cruelty has no role in it, casual observers, long removed from the farm and from a pastoral culture once infrangibly linked to horses, might depend for an introduction to racing on a few images gleaned from media or on an afternoon’s entertainment at the track, and if their initial impression includes a jockey’s waling away on a hapless favorite -- well, the whip has been replaced by the crop, and increasingly by the soft crop. The change isn’t only to accommodate modern sensibilities, nor is it purely linguistic. If the word with the offensive connotations has been abandoned, it’s because an anachronistic attitude that’s equally offensive also has been left behind, along with the old whips, which could sometimes be as thick as a broom handle and as lethal as a truncheon. Jockeys no longer walk into the paddock carrying a shillelagh, and more and more horsemen, it seems, have taken the position that whipping a horse seldom accomplishes anything but can be extremely detrimental. “I’ve never been an advocate of the whip,” said Hall of Fame trainer D. Wayne Lukas, the sport’s all-time leader in earnings, his stable having amassed more than $247-million over the years. “It actually bothers me to see a jockey reach back and hit a horse who’s opened up four or five lengths on the field.” A jockey needs a crop, Lukas explained, only “to get a horse’s attention” and sometimes to guide a horse. As for encouraging a horse to run faster, Lukas said whipping was ineffective. A whip won’t make a slow horse, or even a tired horse, run faster. But some jockeys, he said, rely on the whip to try to cover up their lack of skill. “I’ve had many horses, a lot of fillies, stop [retreat] because of the whip,” said Lukas. He explained that he supports the use of a standardised crop, one that doesn’t induce pain but nevertheless gets attention with a fillip or a noisy pop. Lukas said his experience basically agreed with the recent conclusions of two University of Sydney veterinarians, David Evans and Paul McGreevy. Studying a small sample of thoroughbred races in Australia, they found that use of the whip did not affect the outcome. Horses ran fastest, of course, during the early stages of the races examined, when they weren’t struck with a crop; when they tired and slowed, use of the crop wouldn’t induce horses to run faster. Using the whip just allowed the jockeys to appear busy, but at the horses’ expense. Horseracing, especially in America, journeyed a long time, some would say too long, in arriving at this clarifying moment. Wasn’t anybody watching when Pat Day and Eddie Delahoussaye won all those races, thousands of races, without relying on a stick but only on their seemingly preternatural gift to communicate through their hands their goals and requests? Watching, yes, but just watching. Nothing grips the popular awareness, and nothing motivates, like tragedy; it was the tragic death of Eight Belles that gave American racing the impetus it needed to change. With fractured sesamoid and cannon bones, Eight Belles collapsed shortly after she finished second to Big Brown in the 2008 Kentucky Derby. She had to be euthanased. A gallant and beautiful filly falling and ultimately dying on the racetrack – it was in every way repellant, and it happened on the sport’s most conspicuous stage, before its largest audience at the climax of its most celebrated moment. Writing in the Washington Post, Sally Jenkins referred to the sport’s “moral crisis.” In the days and weeks that followed, many critics denounced the sport; people whose knowledge of horses and racing couldn’t have filled a thimble alternated in assigning blame for the tragedy, bouncing from jockey to trainer to owner to breeder to virtually everybody in racing. Fillies should never race against colts, three-year-olds shouldn’t race 1 1/4 miles in May, two-year-olds shouldn’t race at all, racetracks remain frighteningly unsafe, pervasive use of medication contributes to fatalities, whips contribute to injuries, racing contributes to the decline of Western civilisation, and so it went, the cultural and social winds riffling the accusations and concerns, most of them not even connected to Eight Belles, but just given voice because, well, it was a time for screaming. Horseracing had entered the Twilight Zone. You could almost hear that eerie music in the background. A traditional and pastoral sport, where the only violence is accidental, horseracing suddenly had become an anathema for a society whose favourite sport is an inherently violent game that nearly was banned in the early 20th century because it left so many dead and that still leaves many young men crippled and that draws much of its language from the worst nightmares and conflagrations of world war (bomb, trenches, blitz). Still, even with the music building allegretto and that inimitable voice “I’ve never been an advocate of the whip. It actually bothers me to see a jockey reach back and hit a horse who’s opened up four or five lengths on the field” D. Wayne Lukas welcoming the sport to the Twilight Zone, horseracing clearly had to step back and look at itself, try to see itself as others saw it and assess itself. That process continues. But much already has been accomplished, it seems, perhaps most notably by The Jockey Club, National Thoroughbred Racing Associations, Association of Racing Commissioners International, Jockeys’ Guild, Racing Medication and Testing Consortium and American Association of Equine Practitioners. Among the accomplishments should be counted a new and fresh attempt to look at use of the whip, or riding crop, and the creation of the “soft” crop. The soft crop differs significantly from the whips the “The Slasher” probably used. It’s not as large as the old whips. The recommended soft crop, according to the sport’s model rules, is no more than 30 inches long and weighs no more than eight ounces. Most important, the intention of the soft crop, which has a padded popper, isn’t to induce pain but to make noise. In fact, a person taking a hard stroke across an arm or hand would feel little discomfort. Quite simply, the soft crop doesn’t hurt. The old whips would sometimes leave welts. And in addition to “The Slasher” – who, by the way, said he didn’t leave welts and used his whip only to put the horse in a serious frame of mind – many jockeys over the years have been known for their use of painful encouragement. Still, only rarely, it would seem, were there injuries resulting from the use of a whip that required veterinary care. Gary Norwood, an equine practitioner who has worked at various racetracks around the country for 40 years, said he could recall only “four or five” times that he had to treat a horse for an injury caused by a whip. Two of those, he said, resulted from the horse’s being hit in an eye. Still, even with few injuries, inflicting pain can’t be accepted. And a safer crop that’s designed to deliver noise, not pain, should largely eliminate injuries associated with the crop. And so the soft crop has gained widespread use throughout the country, according to Terry Meyocks, the national manager for the Jockeys’ Guild. Some racing jurisdictions, such as New Mexico, allow the use of no other whip, or crop. And as a “house” rule, many racetracks, such as those owned by Churchill Downs, allow only a crop that meets the soft-crop specifications. “They’ll eventually be all over,” Meyocks said, pointing out that a new study about riding crops and their use has just been undertaken. John Beech, a former rider and a regional manager with the Jockeys’ Guild, explained that the soft crop “catches a little more air” and can be slightly heavier than a whip of the past. Otherwise, though, this new crop has a similar feel, he said, and once they’ve used it a few times jockeys generally become comfortable with it. Steve Asmussen, the Eclipse Award- winning trainer in 2008 and 2009 who had a brief riding career, explained that a riding crop is useful only to prevent distraction. But when used too much or too fiercely, it becomes the distraction. And so now that jockeys are accustomed to using the new soft crops, Asmussen said, “there isn’t an issue.” But regulating the use of a crop requires balancing three interests: protection of the jockey, protection of the horse and protection of the bettors. As Jerry Burgess, a longtime steward and former jockey, said, the betting public associates an honest, hard- trying riding effort with the use of the crop. And sometimes, he said, “there’s a fine line” between protecting the horse and protecting the public, but it’s a line that’s less problematic with the soft crop. Education it would seem, is needed for jockeys and horsemen and even bettors. Hall of Fame jockey Chris McCarron said he would like to see the stewards “call in” more jockeys, not for disciplinary action, but for education in the use of the crop. Or perhaps McCarron himself could travel around the country speaking to young riders about how they use the riding crop, for what purpose and to what extent. Cer tainly nobody would be better suited for such a role. “When I first started riding,” McCarron said, recalling his early success in Maryland, in 1974, “I thought my job was make a horse run.” And many young jockeys today have the same perspective. McCarron became one of the most accomplished and successful jockeys in the sport’s history, winning more than 7,141 races. But looking back on his early years as a jockey, he said, causes him some embarrassment because, well, he misunderstood so much. He thought he could make a horse run, he said, but his job actually was to allow the horse to run, ask the horse to run. McCarron said it was an illuminating moment when he watched his daughters – Erin, Stephanie, and Kristin – interact with their ponies. The ponies responded to kindness and gentleness. He watched other jockeys, such as Gary Stevens and Day and Delahoussaye and Laffit Pincay Jr., and, he said, he listened to California announcer Trevor Denman extol the hand-ride. And he learned that the best jockey is the one who minimises the burden – in other words, he’s the one who guides but doesn’t get in the way or distract or interfere. Six years ago, McCarron opened the North American Riding Academy in Lexington, K entucky. It’s a school for jockeys. Its graduates have ridden 800 winners. McCarron said the philosophy he embraces and teaches is that of minimising the burden. “One of the things I teach is that you get run out of a horse with your hands,” McCarron said. “When you’re riding, you communicate with the horse through your hands. And so I cringe when I see a rider relying too heavily on a crop. I cringe because I know I was once like that myself.” A member of The Jockey Club Thoroughbred Safety Committee, McCarron advocates the widespread adoption of the soft crop. He also advocates education. And there could be nobody better to speak to jockeys around the country about both.](https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/517636f8e4b0cb4f8c8697ba/1547809187501-F33JK5BI9L5M4ILX1W4C/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kL7jLIppu1IWS04FmZCLl95Zw-zPPgdn4jUwVcJE1ZvWQUxwkmyExglNqGp0IvTJZUJFbgE-7XRK3dMEBRBhUpxCCksT4tO6t4S8EHz7YaaRyXJpgNJoxvuyAXeMWTfq6e6Whr0td26vFv4PLQ6xsxw/the-whip-debate.jpg)