How Sammy Spratt CHEATS

[Thomass]

Great personality and fantastic person for the game but let's not mince words like the fawning Commos at ENTAIN 'media' do

"wow, what an amazing last few years she's had"

Here's how and a very simple case of cheating that the Magoo's at the RIB turn a blind eye to

It's the continuous use of the whip while pretending to 'show the whip' which gives the horse a constant reminder  of what they're there for...in consecutive strikes 

One could call them 'half strikes' but nevertheless, if not against the RIB's idea of the 'rules', it's certainly against the spirit of @10 strikes allowed

Watch the head on below off the trail and in Chris Wood's stable yellow colours and you'll count @30 constant contacts, largely on the horse's highly sensitive flank...soon to be outlawed...BUT not Spratt's consecutive strikes

Joe Doyle is another one albeit a different method with a very strong flex that also strikes in consecutive strikes

It's CHEATING, but not as the RIB MAGOO's knows it

 

Edited December 17 by Thomass

[curious]

As I've said, it should be hands on reins between strikes. Not only stop the cheating but also significantly improve the public perception.

[Murray Fish]

7 minutes ago, curious said:

As I've said, it should be hands on reins between strikes. Not only stop the cheating but also significantly improve the public perception.

can you show video of this sort of thing happening as you suggest?

[Tragedy Beat]

8 minutes ago, curious said:

As I've said, it should be hands on reins between strikes. Not only stop the cheating but also significantly improve the public perception.

And the actual riding.

[curious]

6 minutes ago, Murray Fish said:

can you show video of this sort of thing happening as you suggest?

Do you mean with hands returned to reins between strikes?

 

[Thomass]

19 minutes ago, curious said:

As I've said, it should be hands on reins between strikes. Not only stop the cheating but also significantly improve the public perception.

Exactly, but it looks like it's going to a continuation of the same minus the flank whipping

Which they got embarrassed into ...finally accepting after signing up four lonnnnggg years ago and declined to initially adopt

Horses being continuously hit for 30 strikes, no matter how hard, is a constant unfair reminder to try harder

No wonder Sammy is having a super last 4 years since the new whip rules of non compliance were actioned

[curious]

22 minutes ago, Thomass said:

Which they got embarrassed into ...finally accepting after signing up four lonnnnggg years ago and declined to initially adopt

They also say they don't think there is a problem with the public perception. I wonder if they've bothered to do any surveys. Wouldn't that be a reasonable task for the new welfare department? This is from the latest British (BHA) one:

The latest polling report shows:

• 39% of adults state that concerns about horse welfare discourage them from engaging with racing.
• The biggest welfare concerns are (in order of impact) deaths and injuries, perception of cruelty/use of the whip, and what happens to horses when they finish racing. of these:
• 74% say it has, or will, impact their engagement with the sport.
• 42% say they have either stopped engaging with racing or will stop in the future. This is not just a barrier to our future audiences, but our existing one as well.
• When asked what would improve their opinion, the public response cited limiting use of the whip (35%) and ensuring strong penalties are in place (35%) as the top two requirements.

The most negative perceptions of the whip come from younger audiences, particularly those aged 18-34.

[Chief Stipe]

So why don't you all retire from the game?

Have you raised your concerns with Spratts rides to the RIB seeking and explanation?

[Chief Stipe]

9 minutes ago, curious said:

39% of adults state that concerns about horse welfare discourage them from engaging with racing.

So what about the other 61%of us?

[curious]

10 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

So what about the other 61%of us?

Many of those aren't interested anyway.

And did you miss this bit?

74% say it has, or will, impact their engagement with the sport.

That's about the same level of public perception that got greyhounds shut down.

Edited December 17 by curious

[curious]

An earlier study in Australia found similar results.

Of the 1,533 respondents from across the country, only 25% (113 women and 271 men) supported the whipping of racehorses.

Edited December 17 by curious

[Thomass]

1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said:

So why don't you all retire from the game?

Have you raised your concerns with Spratts rides to the RIB seeking and explanation?

Au contaire mon ami

it's because WE CARE

Old school types like yourself may want to continue the olde boys network but we have years ahead and as Curious points out

The young generation can see through the b/s and the nod and wink 'judicial' process that goes on

[Chief Stipe]

1 hour ago, curious said:

74% say it has, or will, impact their engagement with the sport.

Bullshit surveys.  

[Chief Stipe]

6 minutes ago, Thomass said:

The young generation can see through the b/s and the nod and wink 'judicial' process that goes on

Actually they don't care that much from what I seen and heard when speaking to them.  When was the last time you were on a race course?

The young folk on course during Cup Week in Christchurch didn't seem to fussed.  

99.9% of them would have never read a judicial report and are not likely to.  

[Chief Stipe]

1 hour ago, curious said:

An earlier study in Australia found similar results.

Of the 1,533 respondents from across the country, only 25% (113 women and 271 men) supported the whipping of racehorses.

What was the question?  Where is the cite to the survey?  Still seems there are enough to make up 91,000 attendees oncourse Melbourne Cup Day.

[curious]

13 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

What was the question?  Where is the cite to the survey?  Still seems there are enough to make up 91,000 attendees oncourse Melbourne Cup Day.

McGreevy, P. D., Griffiths, M. D., Ascione, F. R., & Wilson, B. (2018). Flogging tired horses: Who wants whipping and who would walk away if whipping horses were withheld?. PloS one, 13(2), e0192843.

[Chief Stipe]

51 minutes ago, curious said:

McGreevy, P. D., Griffiths, M. D., Ascione, F. R., & Wilson, B. (2018). Flogging tired horses: Who wants whipping and who would walk away if whipping horses were withheld?. PloS one, 13(2), e0192843.

Yes well Professoe P. D. McGreevy has a history with regard to these subjects.

Tell me why bother being involved in race horses for decades if you have such strong opinions against many aspects of it?  

[curious]

1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said:

Actually they don't care that much from what I seen and heard when speaking to them.  When was the last time you were on a race course?

The young folk on course during Cup Week in Christchurch didn't seem to fussed.  

99.9% of them would have never read a judicial report and are not likely to.  

A lot of them probably didn't watch a race or have a bet either. They were there for an event, not the horse racing.

[curious]

15 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Yes well Professoe P. D. McGreevy has a history with regard to these subjects.

Tell me why bother being involved in race horses for decades if you have such strong opinions against many aspects of it?  

Because I love horses and the people involved with them, and want to not only do the best for them but what I can to preserve the game that both the horses and the humans involved also love. Ignoring human and animal welfare issues and the public acceptance of those will mean it won't survive here in the longer term. Did you listen to the interview with Mr Engelbrecht-Bresges the other day? He and those in other jurisdictions get it. NZ authorities don't yet, and by the time they do it may be too late.

Edited December 17 by curious

[Gammalite]

1 hour ago, curious said:

Because I love horses and the people involved with them, and want to not only do the best for them but what I can to preserve the game that both the horses and the humans involved also love. Ignoring human and animal welfare issues and the public acceptance of those will mean it won't survive here in the longer term. Did you listen to the interview with Mr Engelbrecht-Bresges the other day? He and those in other jurisdictions get it. NZ authorities don't yet, and by the time they do it may be too late.

good on you curious. Horses are great and love to run. ( I think greys do too, and is a shame what happening there.

Chief  doesn't like your surveys, but that polling report is quite damning.  but I have felt it myself in recent times,  and believe that it is the case. My 2 children and their mates (in their 20's)  won't support racing as they have ethical issues regarding the horses and greyhounds.  even though they know I was/am fond of it and been heavily involved in lifetime. Is quite 'on the Nose' with that generation. they just avoid it.  like a BIG chunk of the younger gen's. 

As for Thomass issue here with half strikes and full strikes of whip . why not go with No strikes ? 

Just do what the trotting/harness  blokes do !! . Their horses have had zero strikes for quite some time now. 

THE Main Whip rule these days being = BOTH HANDS on THE REINS at all times . (whip carried in one rein hand) 

all the trotters get is a little flick tickle lol 😂

AND that would equate to zero flank/body  strikes on thoroughbreds . and just a bit of shoulder slapping. 

It's so obvious ? horse gets no strikes then , but the good jockeys can still get a shoulder slap (for noise with the whip flap) and wave the thing sideways outside the blinkers a little bit if they're talented enough  (while whip is still in a Rein hand) to scare them (the horse)  on that bit extra for a  few metres to win in that photo finish 👍🏇. excellent stuff. 

Problems solved again by Gamma .   

 

[Trojan]

10 hours ago, curious said:

A lot of them probably didn't watch a race or have a bet either. They were there for an event, not the horse racing.

They were there.  How do you know they weren't there for the racing did you take another one of your surveys?

 

[curious]

3 minutes ago, Trojan said:

They were there.  How do you know they weren't there for the racing did you take another one of your surveys?

 

Nope. More subjective observation. Pretty sure the ones I had to step over trying to get to the rail to watch a race didn't see many races though. I doubt they would have been in a fit state to fill out a formal survey.

[Thomass]

19 hours ago, Murray Fish said:

can you show video of this sort of thing happening as you suggest?

The whip and learning theory

• If use of the whip is to be effective and ethical, and if jockeys are going to hit a horse and have it produce the desired response, jockeys and trainers need to have an understanding of learning theory (Evans and McGreevy, 2011; McGreevy et al., 2018)
•  
  • Without such understanding, the potential for abuse is heightened
  •  
• Use of the whip can be viewed as negative reinforcement or positive punishment, depending on how it is used; both are aversive, the extent to which they are aversive being related to the manner and force with which the whip is used
•  
• The BHA cite the ‘sight, sound and sensation of the whip’ and induction of the flight response as potential reasons for its effectiveness, without causing pain (BHA, 2021). This raises three questions:
•  
  • What valid rationale is there for the whip being effective in ‘encouraging’ the horse if it is not aversive in some way?
  •  
  • If waving/using a whip is not aversive, why do horses not habituate to it, making its use ineffective?
  •  
  • If inducing the flight response (i.e., eliciting fear) is the mechanism by which use of the whip is effective, is this ethical?
  •  
• BHA rules state that the horse must be given enough time to respond before being whipped again
•  
  • If the horse does not respond to the whip because it cannot (e.g., because it is too fatigued), then it has no way of escaping being whipped again; the horse is now being whipped for galloping as fast as it can
  •  
• The fact that a horse does not display any apparent reaction to a whip strike does not mean that it does not feel pain – if it cannot control whether it is whipped (e.g., if, when it responds, the whipping does not stop, or if the whipping is applied when the horse is too fatigued to respond), the whipping becomes positive punishment
•  
• For a horse that is already putting in maximum effort, this is abuse
• There is also the possibility that the horse may enter a state of learned helplessness in which it does not even try to respond

[Trojan]

8 hours ago, curious said:

Nope. More subjective observation. Pretty sure the ones I had to step over trying to get to the rail to watch a race didn't see many races though. I doubt they would have been in a fit state to fill out a formal survey.

So you attended the Melbourne Spring carnival this year?  So you subjectively make up nonsense about the reason 97k people turn up to the races?

You're just creating a problem where there isn't one? 

If you have had some late life epiphany about horse racing which you've obviously been an active participant in for a long time then go have a cathartic experience and accept that the attendances at the spring carnival dont support your crap biased surveys!

[curious]

18 minutes ago, Trojan said:

So you attended the Melbourne Spring carnival this year?  So you subjectively make up nonsense about the reason 97k people turn up to the races?

You're just creating a problem where there isn't one? 

If you have had some late life epiphany about horse racing which you've obviously been an active participant in for a long time then go have a cathartic experience and accept that the attendances at the spring carnival dont support your crap biased surveys!

I didn't say that no-one supported whip use or racing that includes whip use, but by way of perspective and reality 97,000 is about 0.4% of the population of Australia. What do the other 99.6% think. If you want to use biased data to support your fallacious argument, then good luck to you. I'll stick with mine.