Grand National

[nebristolred]

5 hours ago, Red-Robbo said:

The last thing owners and trainers (many of whom are also full or part-owners of horses) want is for their horses to die or be seriously injured. This is not just because of sentiment: they will have invested hundreds of thousands of pounds, sometimes millions, in the animal.  Jockeys too, want above all, for their mount to remain on all four legs. Falls can sometimes be fatal for them too, and serious broken bones or repeat concussions requiring months off work and sometimes ending careers are not unusual. 

Stats say 0.2% of thoroughbreds die in racing accidents in the UK and Ireland. In other racing territories, jump racing is less of a major sport, so probably a smaller percentage there, as flat racing is much safer.

Can the industry improve? Almost certainly. Smaller fields in jump events, lower jumps and wider tracks all help riders ensure their horse approaches each obstacle in stride and with less danger of being pushed or clipped and stumbling into the fence.

However, you'll never be able to make the sport entirely horse-safe.

As much as I think using animals for any 'entertainment' purposes is wrong, I'm pretty pragmatic and I know that it is a) never attainable and b) not really wanted by the public overall. But what is key is the bit in bold. I completely agree there is an element of 'acceptable' risk. I just think we are way, way over that limit at the moment.

The stats speak for themselves, a horse is 7 times more likely to die over jumps racing. As I said before, we could reduce 150 deaths per year to 20 by doing away with jumps - that is what we should be doing, or at least finding a compromise that does not harm them. There absolutely has to be a middle ground here.

No one, and I mean no one, can pretend to abhor animal cruelty or really believe in the morals of the sport, while also supporting the very aspect of a race that ultimately responsible for nearly 90% of all deaths. There is no argument for that in this thread that I have seen that justifies that, other than 'I like horse racing and I like jumps'. If that is really someone's argument, then they don't *really* abhor animal cruelty as much as they pretend to imo.

This compromise would bring the risk down and at least make it far closer to the 'acceptable' moral level. No sport is squeaky clean - but when F1 drivers were killing themselves every week in the 60's they had to change the rules. As a society, we are now valuing the lives of animals a little more (and quite rightly to, but not enough), to necessitate a similar sort of intervention imo.

Edited April 17, 2023 by nebristolred

[nebristolred]

5 minutes ago, Big C said:

Can't really see a moral problem to debate. In the grand scheme of thing its a small percentage of runners that are killed. Yes of course we would like that to be zero but with most things in life there is an element of risk

It's small but not tiny. What's the number, something like 50 this year already isn't it? Removing jumps statistically would bring that down to just 6 or 7 killed at this point. Can anyone tell me a negative towards that, because I'm struggling to find one.

That is an easy and workable solution that would get us 90% of the way there - would you be against that? Surely that is something that no one can be against? Or at least finding a way of making them far, far safer.

Edited April 17, 2023 by nebristolred

[Big C]

4 minutes ago, nebristolred said:

It's small but not tiny. What's the number, something like 50 this year already isn't it? Removing jumps statistically would bring that down to just 6 or 7 killed at this point. Can anyone tell me a negative towards that, because I'm struggling to find one.

That is an easy and workable solution that would get us 90% of the way there - would you be against that? Surely that is something that no one can be against? Or at least finding a way of making them far, far safer.

yes I would be against that. You wouldn't have Mo Farrah running against Usain Bolt. Different horses have different strengths and skills. 

[nebristolred]

6 minutes ago, Big C said:

yes I would be against that. You wouldn't have Mo Farrah running against Usain Bolt. Different horses have different strengths and skills. 

So you don't really give a damn about the welfare of these horses anyway then. On that basis you'd have them running even if there was a 90% chance of dying as those problems would still be there - surely that can't be the case. Why don't you share your perspective?

Edited April 17, 2023 by nebristolred

[Big C]

Just now, nebristolred said:

So you don't really give a **** about the welfare of these horses anyway then. On that basis you'd have them running even if there was a 90% chance of dying as those problems would still be there. Why don't you share your perspective?

but its not 90% is it?

[nebristolred]

3 minutes ago, Big C said:

but its not 90% is it?

I know, but if it was, all of the points you make would still be there, presumably you would think they're not a problem then! 90% would be too high. But you think 150-200 per year is acceptable? Even though we could instantly remove nearly 90% of them by removing jumps?

Edited April 17, 2023 by nebristolred

[Big C]

4 minutes ago, nebristolred said:

I know, but if it was, all of the points you make would still be there, presumably you would think they're not a problem then! 90% would be too high. But you think 150-200 per year is acceptable? Even though we could instantly remove nearly 90% of them by removing jumps?

if it was 90% then we wouldn't be having the conversation because it would be banned but it's closer to 0.09% and those are odds that most people face of surviving the day when they walk out the door

[Slacker]

1 hour ago, Big C said:

if it was 90% then we wouldn't be having the conversation because it would be banned but it's closer to 0.09% and those are odds that most people face of surviving the day when they walk out the door

Apparently  178 horses died on a British track last year.Presumably to yourself.Out of interest, what amount of deaths would you consider unacceptable?

[Big C]

3 minutes ago, Slacker said:

Apparently  178 horses died on a British track last year.Presumably to yourself.Out of interest, what amount of deaths would you consider unacceptable?

That's still less than 1% of the total runners. How many cats die left out to fend for themselves all day but people still do it. Nothing is risk free

[spudski]

35 minutes ago, Big C said:

That's still less than 1% of the total runners. How many cats die left out to fend for themselves all day but people still do it. Nothing is risk free

Your point resonates in this thread. I got accused of ' going off on a tangent'...however the points I made are valid in the bigger picture of animal welfare. Yet are ignored because they don't fit the narrative. 

Approx 8500 races last year across UK and Ireland. Of which the average amount of horses in a race on flat or jumps was 8. 

Less than 1% of horses die in racing each year. 

The horses get 5 star treatment and welfare throughout their racing lives. And are found good homes afterwards to retire. 

People are up in arms, protesting about deaths in racing. And their belief that the horses are mistreated. 

Yet look at the number of deaths, injury and treatment to horses and animals away from horse racing. 

As I posted in a link...67000 deaths a year in UK to pet dogs. 

Is anyone protesting about that?

Across the world animals are used in transportation and production in manufacture, food, farming, military, tourist attractions. 

The welfare, injury and death rate to those animals are far removed from the horse racing fraternity. 

It's a misguided concern in the bigger picture. 

Some good info on here

https://petkeen.com/how-many-horses-are-there-uk-statistics/

 

 

Edited April 17, 2023 by spudski

[frenchred]

Anybody got any good tips for Cheltenham on Wednesday?

[LondonBristolian]

5 hours ago, spudski said:

When they are interviewed at the protest...the protesters are often clueless and have no answers or resolution when questioned why they are there. 

Footballers have media training for a reason. If someone shoves a camera and a microphone in front of someone not used to being on film and asks an inane question, do you genuinely immediately expect them to formulate the best possible response?

[spudski]

1 minute ago, LondonBristolian said:

Footballers have media training for a reason. If someone shoves a camera and a microphone in front of someone not used to being on film and asks an inane question, do you genuinely immediately expect them to formulate the best possible response?

I agree to an extent...but so many don't even have an answer. There are a huge amount of people who follow the protests, and protest for the sake of it.

[nebristolred]

3 hours ago, Big C said:

so are you saying that you would be happy to see these magnificent beasts to disappear for ever?

One thing I'd forgotten to mention, is that we've been told these horses are really looked after. The owners treat them like kings and really, really actually love them. So of course if racing were to stop there would be no issue with regard to them disappearing .

[nebristolred]

46 minutes ago, spudski said:

Your point resonates in this thread. I got accused of ' going off on a tangent'...however the points I made are valid in the bigger picture of animal welfare. Yet are ignored because they don't fit the narrative. 

Approx 8500 races last year across UK and Ireland. Of which the average amount of horses in a race on flat or jumps was 8. 

Less than 1% of horses die in racing each year. 

The horses get 5 star treatment and welfare throughout their racing lives. And are found good homes afterwards to retire. 

People are up in arms, protesting about deaths in racing. And their belief that the horses are mistreated. 

Yet look at the number of deaths, injury and treatment to horses and animals away from horse racing. 

As I posted in a link...67000 deaths a year in UK to pet dogs. 

Is anyone protesting about that?

Across the world animals are used in transportation and production in manufacture, food, farming, military, tourist attractions. 

The welfare, injury and death rate to those animals are far removed from the horse racing fraternity. 

It's a misguided concern in the bigger picture. 

Some good info on here

https://petkeen.com/how-many-horses-are-there-uk-statistics/

 

 

You've made plenty of posts about 'animal welfare' including in the Kurt Zouma thread a while back and yet you eat animals who have been potentially gassed to death or had their throats slit and are therefore complicit in the absolute worst part of the entire idea of animal 'welfare'. That's what I struggle with. And I know I'm in the minority - but how can you post all about apparently caring for animals and then partake in that, and all the while keep a straight face? I've changed subject again and we should probably have another thread on it, but it just screams hypocrite to me.

I just can't see how you conflate those 2 points of view. Apparently loving animals, but also being complicit in their horrible destruction on a weekly basis. And I wish I could understand it, because it would make my life a lot easier!

Edited April 17, 2023 by nebristolred

[Big C]

8 minutes ago, nebristolred said:

One thing I'd forgotten to mention, is that we've been told these horses are really looked after. The owners treat them like kings and really, really actually love them. So of course if racing were to stop there would be no issue with regard to them disappearing .

Not the current crop but they wouldn't breed anymore so they would die out eventually 

[Red-Robbo]

43 minutes ago, frenchred said:

Anybody got any good tips for Cheltenham on Wednesday?

 

Tip Top Cat in the 2:40.

[Slacker]

I think I am done replying on here now,though I will continue to follow what others have to say.I am not really one for debating. I think this is the first time I have ever really done it on OTIB.I have enjoyed it though and have tried to be honest and open.

I think what has struck me most,with the greatest respect to all that have contributed,is that the "pro lobby" are very quick to point out the ignorance of the people questioning them,quite rightly in my case,but are extremely reluctant to actually answer anything directly without  given consent examples of fairly unconnected issues.I think this one is never going to be resolved. 

[Big C]

4 minutes ago, Slacker said:

I think I am done replying on here now,though I will continue to follow what others have to say.I am not really one for debating. I think this is the first time I have ever really done it on OTIB.I have enjoyed it though and have tried to be honest and open.

I think what has struck me most,with the greatest respect to all that have contributed,is that the "pro lobby" are very quick to point out the ignorance of the people questioning them,quite rightly in my case,but are extremely reluctant to actually answer anything directly without  given consent examples of fairly unconnected issues.I think this one is never going to be resolved.

Of course it's never going to be resolved. You've got plenty of people (like me) thinking there is nothing wrong with horse racing and plenty of people who think there is nothing right with it

[Kid in the Riot]

3 hours ago, Big C said:

so are you saying that you would be happy to see these magnificent beasts to disappear for ever?

If they're so magnificent, then why do you enjoy watching them get whipped, seriously injured and, killed? 

[spudski]

19 minutes ago, nebristolred said:

You've made plenty of posts about 'animal welfare' including in the Kurt Zouma thread a while back and yet you eat animals who have been potentially gassed to death or had their throats slit and are therefore complicit in the absolute worst part of the entire idea of animal 'welfare'. That's what I struggle with. And I know I'm in the minority - but how can you post all about apparently caring for animals and then partake in that, and all the while keep a straight face? I've changed subject again and we should probably have another thread on it, but it just screams hypocrite to me.

I just can't see how you conflate those 2 points of view. Apparently loving animals, but also being complicit in their horrible destruction on a weekly basis. And I wish I could understand it, because it would make my life a lot easier!

Yes...I agree, it is a strange when you think about it. 

Imo, in this country we are one of the most caring nations in the world, when it comes to animals. 

We love animals, care for them and dislike them being mistreated or hurt on purpose. 

Yet...the majority eat meat. 

And even those that try vegetarianism, 80 odd% give up and return to eating meat. 

I find it odd that vegetarians eat meat substitutes, that are formed into the shape of meat cuts, and made to taste similar to meat. 

And as I've pointed out...there are many animals being used in the production and transportation of plant food that vegetarians eat, that are tortured, abused, die, not cared for, beaten, whipped daily to provide for the consumption of mankind. Do Vegetarians stop eating those products supplied in such a way?

It's easy to turn a blind eye when we live in a country that supplies us everything. 

It's a lot different for many parts of the world who aren't so fortunate or unfortunate, depending how you view life. 

I guess many humans have a switch that they can use. Farmers often look after their animals, care for them, develop relationships with them...yet slaughter them. 

It's a complicated business. 

[Big C]

7 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

If they're so magnificent, then why do you enjoy watching them get whipped, seriously injured and, killed? 

I don't, I enjoy seeing them race

[TonyTonyTony]

1 hour ago, frenchred said:

Anybody got any good tips for Cheltenham on Wednesday?

Spudskistotaldrivel at the 3:15pm race

15-1, talks a good game and leads by his head. Often falls down and runs off in a different direction entirely. Heavy going and always blinkered. Worth a punt.

[Kid in the Riot]

2 minutes ago, Big C said:

I don't, I enjoy seeing them race

Why don't you enjoy seeing them get whipped? 

[nebristolred]

2 minutes ago, spudski said:

Yes...I agree, it is a strange when you think about it. 

Imo, in this country we are one of the most caring nations in the world, when it comes to animals. 

We love animals, care for them and dislike them being mistreated or hurt on purpose. 

Yet...the majority eat meat. 

And even those that try vegetarianism, 80 odd% give up and return to eating meat. 

Fair play, I thought you'd be more defensive over it but I always respect it when people actually accept that there is an element of hypocrisy or similar to it. For what it's worth, I can bang on about this as being helpful for the environment, but I fly everywhere, as you say, we are all hypocrites in one way or another.

3 minutes ago, spudski said:

 

I find it odd that vegetarians eat meat substitutes, that are formed into the shape of meat cuts, and made to taste similar to meat. 

 

To be fair of all things I'd say this is the most obvious is it not? People like meat, they just want to eat it in a way that doesn't cause as much suffering.

4 minutes ago, spudski said:

 

And as I've pointed out...there are many animals being used in the production and transportation of plant food that vegetarians eat, that are tortured, abused, die, not cared for, beaten, whipped daily to provide for the consumption of mankind. Do Vegetarians stop eating those products supplied in such a way?

And as I've pointed out, vegetarians have to eat *something*. Eating vegetarian food will kill far fewer animals than eating meat, it's as simple as that.

4 minutes ago, spudski said:

 

It's easy to turn a blind eye when we live in a country that supplies us everything. 

To be fair I think it's easy to turn a blind eye not for that reason, but because it's shielded from us. Right from birth, the whole idea that an animal goes through hell both in life and in being killed, that whole notion is hidden from us until we find it or until some vegetarian throws a video in our faces. And it shocks, as it should do.

That doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye. And to be fair, some people think it's okay to eat meat, that's absolutely fine, they're entitled to. But I just struggle to see how they can say they care about animal welfare if they do, that's all. And it's just my perspective, nothing more.

[reddoc]

On 15/04/2023 at 18:32, joe jordans teeth said:

Hope you won £20 on your pick while that horse is made into glue 

I'm not entirely disagreeing with you here, but unfortunately if you stopped all NH racing tomorrow you'd have more glue than you knew what to do with. A large proportion of these horses would be destroyed.

[Big C]

1 minute ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Why don't you enjoy seeing them get whipped? 

Depends if my horse is in front of not

[frenchred]

7 minutes ago, TonyTonyTony said:

Spudskistotaldrivel at the 3:15pm race

15-1, talks a good game and leads by his head. Often falls down and runs off in a different direction entirely. Heavy going and always blinkered. Worth a punt.

I actually agree with him.so will give your tip a swerve!

[Kid in the Riot]

2 minutes ago, Big C said:

Depends if my horse is in front of not

At least you admit to not minding a bit of animal cruelty, I suppose. 

Appreciate the honesty. 

[Big C]

3 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

At least you admit to not minding a bit of animal cruelty, I suppose. 

Appreciate the honesty. 

There are animals treated a lot worse in this country. A few strikes of a soft whip is nothing in comparison 

Edited April 17, 2023 by Big C