Foxton Trials Heat 25

[Special Agent]

Remind me how much money was up.

[Chief Stipe]

 

 

[Chief Stipe]

Obviously no Stipes there to cancel it and the Jockeys needed the riding fees!!!  Would have been cancelled if a race meeting because the Stipes couldn't see the number of whip strikes!!!  What ya reckon @curious?

[curious]

42 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Obviously no Stipes there to cancel it and the Jockeys needed the riding fees!!!  Would have been cancelled if a race meeting because the Stipes couldn't see the number of whip strikes!!!  What ya reckon @curious?

They can't see the whip infringements on the clearest of days, so they'd love that to give them another excuse to allow the abuse and cheating to continue.

[Chief Stipe]

22 minutes ago, curious said:

They can't see the whip infringements on the clearest of days, so they'd love that to give them another excuse to allow the abuse and cheating to continue.

Bollocks.  It's only "abuse" based on a flawed definition and "cheating" based on an artificial construct!  But I'm sure the team on NZ'S Premier Anti-racing Forum agree with you.  

[curious]

14 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Bollocks.  It's only "abuse" based on a flawed definition and "cheating" based on an artificial construct!  But I'm sure the team on NZ'S Premier Anti-racing Forum agree with you.  

It's only NOT "abuse" and "cheating" based on flawed definitions. You asked and that's my opinion.

[Chief Stipe]

1 hour ago, curious said:

It's only NOT "abuse" and "cheating" based on flawed definitions. You asked and that's my opinion.

Why is it not?  FFS take up a different sport  like Rugby.

[Gammalite]

15 hours ago, curious said:

They can't see the whip infringements on the clearest of days, so they'd love that to give them another excuse to allow the abuse and cheating to continue.

Why are the Stipes constantly in the sights as the problem here. ? Allowing abuse and cheating ?

why not the horses Owners and Trainers ? they are employing a jockey on race-day to get the best out of their steed, and if all the casual observers of a race on the sidelines like on forums , are speaking out about  and spotting this so-called 'abuse and cheating' then why are the owners and trainers Allowing these jockeys to drive their pride and joy horse home in a race finish ? . 

If things are that bad with alleged 'abuse' surely the On the Spot participants of owners and trainers would be standing up to protect their horse (and not condone cheating ) ??  and remove this said cheat ? 

Stipes are employed to keep racing fair and safe. NZ racing has had a lot of accidents in recent years with jockeys 'changing lanes' when not clear of rivals and all sorts of things .there's a lot to think about in most races. they're very competitive lol.  Perhaps they need some help from other participants who are actually PART of the Horses connections to say something ? to help avoid all this cheating ?

funny footnote: I lost the drive on a regular horse once because the owners decided I didn't drive it hard enough with the whip and was running 3rds when could of been running 2nd etc. I laugh thinking about it now. reading all the whip complaints lol 😎😁

[Chief Stipe]

2 hours ago, Gammalite said:

Why are the Stipes constantly in the sights as the problem here. ? Allowing abuse and cheating ?

why not the horses Owners and Trainers ? they are employing a jockey on race-day to get the best out of their steed, and if all the casual observers of a race on the sidelines like on forums , are speaking out about  and spotting this so-called 'abuse and cheating' then why are the owners and trainers Allowing these jockeys to drive their pride and joy horse home in a race finish ? . 

If things are that bad with alleged 'abuse' surely the On the Spot participants of owners and trainers would be standing up to protect their horse (and not condone cheating ) ??  and remove this said cheat ? 

Stipes are employed to keep racing fair and safe. NZ racing has had a lot of accidents in recent years with jockeys 'changing lanes' when not clear of rivals and all sorts of things .there's a lot to think about in most races. they're very competitive lol.  Perhaps they need some help from other participants who are actually PART of the Horses connections to say something ? to help avoid all this cheating ?

funny footnote: I lost the drive on a regular horse once because the owners decided I didn't drive it hard enough with the whip and was running 3rds when could of been running 2nd etc. I laugh thinking about it now. reading all the whip complaints lol 😎😁

Yes I think some of those owners protesting doth protest too much.  How many have asked the trainer not to put a particular Jockey on because of their whip use?

There are two separate issues with the whip rules - 1.  Abuse and 2. Cheating.

The exaggerated accusations of abuse on all based on where and how hard the horse is whipped.  Does it cause lasting damage or real pain to the horse?  The science looks dubious to me.  Plus there are any number of horses training activities that cause pain to a horse but are not classed as abuse.  Breaking in for instance is not without pain.  So hypocricsy abounds.

With regard to cheating the again exaggerated accusations are based on the premise that whipping a horse makes it go faster.  Again in my opinion the data supporting that contention is very weak.  Whipping a horse may make a lazy horse try harder or signal a horse to sprint.  So the cheating allegation is based on the assumption that if you hit a horse 11 times instead of the arbitrary 10 in rules then you have gained an advantage.

As for the "social license" argument well that is just a social science construct that is quite frankly bullshit.  Having unworkable whip rules and enforcing them will have zero impact on the views of the Anti-racing mob.  Supposedly Pro-racing people subjectively highlighting whip indiscretions is shoot the industry in the foot for no good reason.  The biggest issue facing racing is capital investment and the economics of racing.

 

[Chief Stipe]

17 hours ago, curious said:

It's only NOT "abuse" and "cheating" based on flawed definitions. You asked and that's my opinion.

Then why the hell did you bother being a part of the industry for decades?  Can't have been just because you wanted to own a pony!

18 hours ago, curious said:

They can't see the whip infringements on the clearest of days, so they'd love that to give them another excuse to allow the abuse and cheating to continue.

A very good point.  Why have rules that are next to impossible to enforce equitably and accurately?  The only way is to sit in the replay bunker for a very long time with a team of people counting whip strikes and observing where the horse is hit.  Assuming of course that you have access to every angle of vision.

All right for you and @Thomass sitting there at home going over every replay in slow motion looking for indiscretions and then posting them online.  The fact is your family and friends would know there was a problem unless you told them!!  "See that whip action there?  It is in a place that hurts the horse and isn't allowed.  The BLOODY Stipes won't do anything about it!  It's abuse and cheating!"  They then say - "I didn't know that.  Thanks for pointing it out.  I won't watch again!"

Your days at the races must be quite miserable given your propensity to train spot!

[curious]

5 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

Yes I think some of those owners protesting doth protest too much.  How many have asked the trainer not to put a particular Jockey on because of their whip use?

There are two separate issues with the whip rules - 1.  Abuse and 2. Cheating.

The exaggerated accusations of abuse on all based on where and how hard the horse is whipped.  Does it cause lasting damage or real pain to the horse?  The science looks dubious to me.  Plus there are any number of horses training activities that cause pain to a horse but are not classed as abuse.  Breaking in for instance is not without pain.  So hypocricsy abounds.

With regard to cheating the again exaggerated accusations are based on the premise that whipping a horse makes it go faster.  Again in my opinion the data supporting that contention is very weak.  Whipping a horse may make a lazy horse try harder or signal a horse to sprint.  So the cheating allegation is based on the assumption that if you hit a horse 11 times instead of the arbitrary 10 in rules then you have gained an advantage.

As for the "social license" argument well that is just a social science construct that is quite frankly bullshit.  Having unworkable whip rules and enforcing them will have zero impact on the views of the Anti-racing mob.  Supposedly Pro-racing people subjectively highlighting whip indiscretions is shoot the industry in the foot for no good reason.  The biggest issue facing racing is capital investment and the economics of racing.

 

 

[curious]

Just now, curious said:

The exaggerated accusations of abuse on all based on where and how hard the horse is whipped.  Does it cause lasting damage or real pain to the horse?  The science looks dubious to me.  Plus there are any number of horses training activities that cause pain to a horse but are not classed as abuse.  Breaking in for instance is not without pain.  So hypocricsy abounds.

I have hardly heard the term "breaking in" for decades. Most of us now talk about starting horses. And I've no idea where or when in that process any pain to the horse would usually occur. That idea is about as foreign and antiquated as the one that says whip use for encouragement is OK.

[curious]

5 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

Supposedly Pro-racing people subjectively highlighting whip indiscretions is shoot the industry in the foot for no good reason.  The biggest issue facing racing is capital investment and the economics of racing.

I agree with your last sentence and that's the whole point isn't it? The failure to address the whip use problem is contributing to the economic issues.

As to the highlighting of whip indiscretions, some of us first took the matter up with the RIB and NZTR, to no avail. Highlighting them on racing oriented social media was the next step which has also failed to date, at least as far as any visible action is concerned. Unfortunately, it seems the only way forward now is the wider media and the politicians. That is underway. 

[curious]

6 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

Then why the hell did you bother being a part of the industry for decades?  Can't have been just because you wanted to own a pony!

Sure was exactly that got me back into racing in NZ after a 10 year hiatus.

[curious]

18 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

Yes I think some of those owners protesting doth protest too much.  How many have asked the trainer not to put a particular Jockey on because of their whip use?

Some I know have. Or, made sure that the jockeys were instructed not to violate the rules under any circumstances. However, I'm pretty sure all would if we had a DQ penalty similar to that in more enlightened jurisdictions.

[Freda]

I know Dave Kerr was very explicit with instructions re. whip use.  Mind you, in those days there was a lot of rider choice.!  He used my apprentice Andre Gillett and the boy was always told very firmly not to hit his mount.   He also patronized Damian Browne wherever possible because ' he was kind '.

My partner, R.J.( Mouse ) McCann was told by his boss, Ned Thistoll, that the whip was for saluting the judge.

There were enlightened people even back then - and further -  in the remarkable Golden Souvenir - Soneri match race neither of those superb riders went for the stick.  Bill Broughton and Jim Ellis...I think..Doomed will correct me I'm sure if I have that wrong.

[curious]

On 21/10/2025 at 7:18 PM, Chief Stipe said:

Why is it not?  FFS take up a different sport  like Rugby.

Here is the US (HISA) definition of abuse. I agree with that.

Definition of Abuse in Whip Use (HISA Rule Series 2000)

Abuse includes, but is not limited to:

1. Exceeding the Strike Limit:

   • Jockeys are limited to six strikes per race.
   • More than six strikes may trigger penalties, especially if deemed excessive or unnecessary.

2. Striking the Horse in Prohibited Areas:

   • Whip use is restricted to the shoulder or hindquarters.
   • Striking the horse on the head, neck, or belly is considered abusive.

3. Using the Whip with Excessive Force:

   • Whips must be used in a controlled, non-aggressive manner.
   • Excessive force or repeated striking that causes visible injury or distress is classified as abuse.

4. Using the Whip After the Horse Has Clearly Won:

   • Continued use of the whip after the outcome is obvious is considered unnecessary and abusive.

5. Failure to Give the Horse Time to Respond:

   • Jockeys must allow the horse time to react between strikes.
   • Rapid-fire whipping is discouraged and may be penalized.