Chief Stipe

Jamie Kah's blast at 'backward' British racing Jamie Kah. Photo: News Limited. Article Author Ben Dorries9:48AM09 August 2019 58 Comments Jamie Kah has created headlines in her first trip to England as she described it as "backward" in the opportunities it offers female jockeys. Group I-winning rider Kah is in the UK to compete against some of the world’s best riders in the Shergar Cup on Sunday, riding as part of Hayley Turner’s Girls team. But the Victorian-based hoop didn't mince words when talking to the British press about her dismay over talk of a weight allowance being given to female riders in Britain. “I think that’s absolutely ridiculous,” Kah told The Guardian. “I’ve come from Australia, where the trainers have come around to females many years ago, so we’ve all been given a really fair shout. "It’s as fair as it’s ever been. If you’re good, if you put in the time and work, you’ll get rides. “Here, it’s very different. They’re very backward, I reckon, with the times. "They’re not as accepting of female riders and there are some brilliant riders here. I’ve watched Hayley (Turner) and I think she rides as good as any of the boys here. “I can’t get over how backwards it is. "If you ask females back home, they’ll all blow up about the idea of getting a three-kilo allowance. But maybe something does need to happen here. Watching these riders, there’s nothing separating them in my opinion, besides opportunities.” Kah was backed by fellow Aussie rider Mark Zahra, who will ride for the Rest Of The World team in the Shergar Cup. Zahra said, “The way Jamie’s riding in Australia at the moment, I don’t want to be giving her any weight. "On Saturday at Moonee Valley, women won five (races) on an eight-race card. "They’re going quite well. I would say at the moment they’re doing well enough without it.”

Jamie Kah's blast at 'backward' British racing Jamie Kah. Photo: News Limited. Article Author Ben Dorries9:48AM09 August 2019 58 Comments Jamie Kah has created headlines in her first trip to England as she described it as "backward" in the opportunities it offers female jockeys. Group I-winning rider Kah is in the UK to compete against some of the world’s best riders in the Shergar Cup on Sunday, riding as part of Hayley Turner’s Girls team. But the Victorian-based hoop didn't mince words when talking to the British press about her dismay over talk of a weight allowance being given to female riders in Britain. “I think that’s absolutely ridiculous,” Kah told The Guardian. “I’ve come from Australia, where the trainers have come around to females many years ago, so we’ve all been given a really fair shout. "It’s as fair as it’s ever been. If you’re good, if you put in the time and work, you’ll get rides. “Here, it’s very different. They’re very backward, I reckon, with the times. "They’re not as accepting of female riders and there are some brilliant riders here. I’ve watched Hayley (Turner) and I think she rides as good as any of the boys here. “I can’t get over how backwards it is. "If you ask females back home, they’ll all blow up about the idea of getting a three-kilo allowance. But maybe something does need to happen here. Watching these riders, there’s nothing separating them in my opinion, besides opportunities.” Kah was backed by fellow Aussie rider Mark Zahra, who will ride for the Rest Of The World team in the Shergar Cup. Zahra said, “The way Jamie’s riding in Australia at the moment, I don’t want to be giving her any weight. "On Saturday at Moonee Valley, women won five (races) on an eight-race card. "They’re going quite well. I would say at the moment they’re doing well enough without it.”

Show some contrition - they fixed it!

It doesn't - as the handicapping guide says "1 point may not equal 0.5kg."

Cur's Kerr?

Rule Number(s): 638 (3) (b) (ii)Following the running of Race 5, the Nautical Boat Insurance Grand National Amateur Championship, an information was filed by Chief Stipendiary Steward, Mr J Oatham, against Licensed Class E Amateur Rider, Mr D Frye, alleging that as the rider of MRS GEE EYE in the race, used his whip excessively prior ...View the full article

You have a warped sense of perspective.

Yeah so what? Only 3 female jockey's won half the 2019 wins. Dare you to tell Lisa Allpress she isn't strong enough!

Get back on topic thanks.

FFS isn't the issue with money laundering not the amount of the collect but the amount of money punted to collect a return! For example if someone takes a $3 easy bet and collects $2,500 (I know someone who did that) they only laundered $3 NOT $2,500!

Of course there are other factors such as declining stakes. However if what you have copied (again no original thought from you) is correct and the changes have worked then why hasn't the average number of starts by females increased cf with males? Doesn't that suggest that there are other factors in play? If you accept that fact then someone with your self proclaimed experience may well enlighten us all on what those factors are?

And Grimshaw wouldn't know the front end of a horse from the back end let alone have the capacity to understand feed regime's. In relative terms of cost the JCA cost little compared to the RIU.

FFS before you start arguing for the sake of arguing can you stop, count to 10 (that's the digits on each hand minus two of your four thumbs) and attempt to comprehend what other folk write. The point being that owners and trainers are more likely to perservere with a gelding and take the risks of further injury than they are with a well bred filly. That's one of the reasons why females have a lower average of starts than geldings. The latter were the bread and butter of the New Zealand racing industry and provided lots of punting revenue. Now that the handicapping system and other incentives are against them we see a decline in the quality of our punting fields.

Well in Morty's case I wasn't impressed at all with the RIU's key witness!

Heaven help us if they get rid of the JCA. It may not be perfect but it certainly provides checks and balances. Curious you would agree that if it wasn't for the JCA and its process Morty would have been hung.

Yeah I remember when I was about 12 or 14 leading a horse that had just won its race around to cool down after washing it. While Dad and the Trainer were in the bar having quite a few and counting a fair wad of $20 bills. They forgot about me and I think the horse and I walked about 10km in a circle! On another occasion much much later in life I was left to mind our horse who was being swabbed after running a place in a Grp race. I was tanked up on Heineken and would have failed a test. Mind you the horse was too tired to cause any havoc!

Just as any well bred filly or mare who struggles with injury or form is retired to stud.

"Pure" World Handicapping isn't as "pure" as you suggest. That aside a handicapping system is supposed to equalise every horse's chances in a particular race by using weight. Given that every jurisdiction is different in terms of horse composition and racing environment one size cannot fit all. Curious has provided some analysis that show females are at an advantage over males with the 2kg allowance. Before it was increased he shows that there was little significant difference. When the 2kg allowance was first mooted the objective was to increase "fillies and mares participation" as well as the other non handicapping objectives stated earlier in this post. There was also discussion around that fact that females have less average starts than males. In my opinon having looked at the analysis increasing the allowance would NOT achieve the objectives but would distort the handicap to the detriment of fair and equal racing. Not surprising the average start per female has not increased. I also doubt that female participation has increased. Although Mr Saundry has stopped providing us with regular data as Mr Purcell did.

Pot Kettle.

Perhaps he did post a shyte load of figures but the analysis was WRONG! The things that he was trying to fix and gone in reverse. Now there is an inequitable bias towards females! To the detriment of all other participants AND good competitive ("Punter Attractive") handicap racing!

Read what? The section you selectively quoted? The bit you need quote has F-all quantitative evidence to back it up and is purely subjective speculation no doubt paid for by the big breeders.

Perhaps but to the detriment of fair and equal handicap races!

Exactly a decision made to support the breeders but with unintended consequences i.e. it hasn't stopped the declining foal crop and declining broodmare numbers primarily because it has made it harder to make any money racing a gelding!

There has been debate previously that low hurdles actually are more dangerous. A higher hurdle and the horse is more likely to sight it and put in.

Where is your quantitative analysis to support this "theory"?