Richard Hughes quits over new five-day ban

Txs Suz

So do you think "no whip" or a "soft whip"(if we have one) is better than the current ruling of putting an exact number on the cracks.

Rather do away with the whip then....

owners hit their dogs more times than a jockey whips a horse.....:S

True if they have established that a whip is cruel and makes no difference at the finish why is being hit 5/6 time fine and 7/8 an offence :S
Should rather try banning it.

Horses are into pressure animals. This means that if you push them, they push back (try standing next to a horse and leaning into them exerting strong steady pressure - you will soon feel the horse leaning back into you. Ever seen someone trying to drag a horse forward on a lead and the horse digging its heels in and 'saying no?'. That's that principle at work.

In pleasure riding, the whip is used as a training aid and in theory, it's a substitute (from the ground) or a back up or extension (from the saddle) for your legs. It's not (supposed) to be a punitive piece of kit. The idea is that the horse is taught to move away from your leg (and the whip). So you tap, the horse responds, you stop tapping. The key lies in the release of the pressure. If you didn't stop tapping when the horse responded, then there'd be little pay-off or incentive for the horse to do as you want. So while pressure is a necessary part of the training process, learning actually lies in the release of pressure. This obviously put the onus on you as the trainer to use some intelligence and timing in applying pressure, releasing at the correct moment, and resisting the urge to 'nag'. Simple in theory, but surprisingly hard to get right !

(a good example is a kiddies pony where you've got some kid kicking like mad with the pony going no-where. The reason is that the kid just kicks habitually, there's no pay off or release of pressure for the pony, so it eventually just tunes the kid out and ignores him).

So - you're heading up the straight, your horse is doing it's level best to run and keep up with its mates, but it is tiring (I think studies show that equine muscle fatigue starts setting in after around 800m of maximal capacity output). And now you start hitting the horse. It's kinda hard to see how this makes any sense to the horse whatsoever.

If the whip was intelligently applied (ie smack, horse responds and quickens / lengthens its stride, etc, you don't smack again because you've already achieved the desired result), then OK, I can see that the horse might be able to go along with that. Applied along those lines, I can see the theory behind allowing a limited number of smacks as you're then applying it correctly to ask a horse to quicken to get through a gap, close on a front runner, etc. But the key lies in stopping hitting the horse once it is doing what you want.

The norm is for jockeys in a tight finish to be hitting almost every stride. Can't really see how the horse is being taught or learning anything under those circumstances. There's no reward, because no matter what the horse does, he's going to get hit anyway, so you are (pretty effectively!) removing the incentive for the horse to try (see the kid and the pony example above). It's quite a good way to make horses race sour.

As I've already explained, jockeys have access to a bridle for steering, so I can't see the argument for the whip as a steering device. Science seems to support the fact that the more you use the whip, the slower your horse goes (as explained above), so as a form of encouragement, it seems a pretty poor one as it is too easy to use it incorrectly.

So if it's not used for steering and it doesn't help the horse go faster, then I'm left with very few reasons why someone feels the need to hit a horse. Faced with the most likely answer, any number of hits appears rather unpalatable.

But people are pretty resistant to change and perhaps some sort of compromise is the way forward. I don't think a restricted number of hits is the answer though. To use the Scandinavian example again, they allow whips to be carried in the baby races, so that in the event that you do have a real problem greenie, you can use it for steering in an emergency. I think for the older horses there is an arrangement whereby the jocks are allowed to carry a whip, but have to keep both hands on the reins, which leaves them the option of only being able to smack the horse down the shoulder.

That would seem to satisfy both camps while eliminating that horrid-looking overhand whipping action that is probably at the heart of the problem.

Thanks again for a first class explanation Suz

I dont believe that if being hit 5x in the last 200m doesnt make a horse do his best that 15x would. We also have a lot of apprentices and quite a few jockeys that hit the horses in the flank or even just behind the saddle and that will stop them very quickly.

I'm just regurgitating stuff from people far cleverer than I am, but you're welcome

It's worth remembering that a horse usually weighs in the region of around 500kgs. A jockey weighs somewhere in the region of 50kgs. There is no way that the jockey is ever going to win a battle of strength, so he has to rely on his riding skill (which would include judicious use of pressure and release) and the limited tools at his disposal.

The jockey has to rely on the horse having a reasonable amount of training to respond to the bit, follow a relatively straight line, etc. He has to constantly monitor and assess the horse beneath him and adjust accordingly. Should he go wide? Is the horse brave enough to take a gap? Can he push? If so how hard? How far? Should he ask at the 300m mark? The 200m? And he has to make all these split second calculations and decisions while taking all the rest of the field into consideration. It's actually quite staggering.

Again, the fact that this is such an incredibly demanding sport from so many angles is something that we often overlook and forget to sell to 'newbies'.

Working with horses really is one of the most exciting and challenging things on the the planet

zsuzsanna04 Wrote:

---

>>
> If the whip was intelligently applied (ie smack,
> horse responds and quickens / lengthens its
> stride, etc, you don't smack again because you've
> already achieved the desired result), then OK, I
> can see that the horse might be able to go along
> with that. Applied along those lines, I can see
> the theory behind allowing a limited number of
> smacks as you're then applying it correctly to ask
> a horse to quicken to get through a gap, close on
> a front runner, etc. But the key lies in stopping
> hitting the horse once it is doing what you want.
>


Imo, this sums it up pretty well - I think there are horses who are 'lazy' and will only run to their potential when given a few cracks - the trick as pointed out by szu, is of course to be able to to decide if hitting the horse will encourage it to run faster, or is it already running as fast as it is able to do - not an easy decision to make when travelling at top speed on a beast ten times your own weight. I think jockeys go for the whip almost by default - and that is the problem imo - a real horsemen should (in general) be able to coax the maximum effort out of his mount, without resorting to the whip - just my opinion

It's not as if the whip been banned - five cracks in one furlong is not small potatoes. Still, if the new rule allows real horsemanship to triumph over brute strength more often then I'd call it a step in the right direction.

Just having a whip in your hand can change the behavior of a horse.

Sometimes you will see a jockey pass his whip to the handlers and go down without a stick. Other times just giving a whip to a rider makes the a horse more co-operative. People who have to handle these huge animals know this. Whipping an animal, and especially a sensitive animal like a horse, and more especially high strung thoroughbreds is not the way anyone wants to go.

I understand Hughes'argument that in the heat of battle, where he and the horse are giving everything in what is a matter that comes down to inches at 60km/h for what could be a turning point in a horse's career and the lives of the connections, and now people are going to fine him or ban him for 1 stroke here or there. Clearly he's not wrong.

But Magic makes the point then of how many times should you be allowed whip the animal, and are we now discussing how big the number should be?

20, 15, 10, 7, 5?

I think we are on the right track. The whip is already working by being present, by being shown (the threat of), and at the end an incentive to not stop before the line.

One day we will look back at the beatings horses did receive and wonder "what were we thinking?".

Sorry to digress to an excellent thread but when I was at school we used to wear a book down the back of the trousers in preparation of a "fatal beating" the kids have it easy theses days, so should we not consider leaving the Monty Roberts blanket on the horse?