Kevin Stott's brutal fine in Telegraph

[Chief Stipe]

23 minutes ago, curious said:

Did he breach the current whip rules?

Why does it matter?  The principle is the same regardless.  What rule date are you working by?

[curious]

2 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Why does it matter?  The principle is the same regardless.  What rule date are you working by?

The current rules are the strictest we've had here, if still largely ineffective.

[Chief Stipe]

10 minutes ago, Wingman said:

Why did you lock then unlock?

To give @Thomass 's milk enough time to get hot enough to add to his Horlicks give it was his bed time.

[Chief Stipe]

9 minutes ago, curious said:

The current rules are the strictest we've had here, if still largely ineffective.

From what date?

Regardless rules are rules aren't they?

[Wingman]

Just to add to what I posted earlier I am fairly sure Kelly Myers lost her whip well before the 200m on Titicaca in the Remutaka AND STILL WON.

[curious]

3 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

From what date?

Regardless rules are rules aren't they?

1 September 2021 for the rules. Penalties were updated last year though.

Yes. Rules are rules, if breaches are enforced. I don't recall CWJ having any major issues with the rules prior to that in recent years. Did he, as you inferred? I can 't recall him ever taking his hands off the reins on one of mine though it's hard to tell with a left-hander without looking at the head on.

[curious]

3 hours ago, Wingman said:

Just to add to what I posted earlier I am fairly sure Kelly Myers lost her whip well before the 200m on Titicaca in the Remutaka AND STILL WON.

Correct. TITICACA (K Myers) - Rider dropped her whip near the 350 metres.

[curious]

4 hours ago, Wingman said:

Why did you lock then unlock? Answer because it is like an atheist and a Christian going head to head in a debate. Neither of you are going to win and but at some point you both reluctantly agree on some vague point then start the same shit fight on a different piece of ground. The whips are softer, the rules tougher than they used to be so right there is a concession to the anti whip people but to say there shall be no whip when dealing with animals combined with the competitive element is nonsense. The real issue is the weak administrator's who come up with half baked rules and then quarter enforce. The reality is that most horses that are in contention are obviously so,  once into the straight. Why do you need to whip them in the last 200m when they are trying? My opinion is that if a jockey wants the horse to try harder or press 'accelerate' (if they indeed can ) then the time for that is between the 400m and 200m. After that no whip. That also means a lot less bad press because there are no 'whips a crackin' the last 200m.

I agree. Assuming the no strikes on the flank rule comes in in due course, it is only the last 200 that remains a significant problem.

The jumps racing review identified a similar issue. "Even those who supported the continuation of jumps identified a concern about use of the whip during the races, especially at the end of the races after the last jump."  So, I don't think that it's just Thomas and I that notice as has been suggested here.