​The winter favourite for the Epsom Derby, The Lion In Winter, is on the drift. You can now have 16/1, apparently, with some bookmakers. Given the reputation of the horse and his trainer’s notable ability to raise the phoenix from the ashes, as he has proved in the previous two Epsom Derbies, 16/1 must be worth the punt.
Now, what if the negativity going the rounds recently – Aidan believing it would be a difficult for Ryan Moore to get off Delacroix in favour of The Lion In Winter, his disappointing run in the Dante and the drift in the betting market – is just a ploy by his canny Coolmore owners to get a good price for the horse. Perhaps lumping big sums on even-money chances has lost its appeal and having smaller amounts on at a poor man’s price is the new excitement for them?
Tabor, Smith and co are known to like a punt and often back Aidan’s judgement with their hard-earned cash. That 16/1 will look pretty juicy if come Wednesday, declaration day for the Derby this year, Ryan Moore’s name appears beside that of The Lion In Winter. He certainly would not be 16/1 for very long afterwards.
Of course, the more likely explanation for the drift is that bookmakers are luring punters in with an unbelievable valuation of the colt’s chance at Epsom. Perhaps they have heard a whisper that the colt will be diverted to an easier option elsewhere or the whispering is chatter that the horse has not progressed since the Dante as Aidan had expected. It is all speculation.
I have nothing but admiration for Aidan O’Brien and the Coolmore organisation but it would be a shot in the arm for the sport if someone else trained and owned the winner this year. Even Godolphin winning the race would be a breath of mildly fresh air. What I would like, though, is a 100/1 winner as that would get the race on the Saturday evening news. Which is not certain to happen if Aidan and Ryan were to win yet again.

The saga of Baron Allen of Kensington and the will he, won’t he, take-up his appointment as chair of the B.H.A, continues, much to chagrin of Tom Kerr, editor of the Racing Post. In his response to the news that the Baron is insisting on continuing private talks with racing’s stakeholders – the bad barons of this long-running saga, I suggest – and will not be in his seat, ‘the chair sitting on a seat’ – it makes no sense, does it? – until some time after June 2nd, the date that was presumably on the contract.
Now then, yesterday I led myself to believe that Baron Allen was to be Julie Harrington’s successor. He is not. He is not Chief Executive but chair of the B.H.A. I am always confused when it comes to the machinations and role-play within the British Horseracing Authority. As I am confused as to whether it should be horse racing or horseracing? The Irish prefer the latter.
Tom Kerr is right, though, to have his arse in his hands about all of this. As he said, it is an embarrassment to have neither a chair of the B.H.A. or a chief executive at a time when so much heavy artillery is coming in our direction. You would think it a good money-saving exercise to combine the positions of chair and C.E.O. and for the lucky incumbent to be expected to work a 40-hour, 5-day week.

To continue with the previous topic. I believe this old sport of ours belongs as much to the punter as the bookmaker, as much to the stewards as the starters, as much to the jockeys as the racecourse owners, as much to the trainers as to the people they employ – you get my drift.
When these positions in the governance offices of the B.H.A. come-up for grabs, I would like to see an end to the ‘jobs for the boys’ charade that has yet to be seen as of any benefit to the sport. Open-up the candidature to include anyone currently or formerly employed in the sport. How can we have any confidence that Baron Allen was the best candidate for the job when his experience of the sport is, at best, minimal. I am not suggesting his knowledge of the worlds of business and politics would not be useful to the sport but in my opinion someone from that background should be employed as an advisor to a chair or chief-executive, someone with a ledger load of knowledge of the sport from the muck-barrow to the top hats of Royal Ascot and everything in between. Would Baron Allen know what a surcingle is? A claiming race?
I would like to have the election of a chair or C.E.O. decided upon by all sectors of the sport and not by the B.H.A. I would like to see 3 or 4 candidates addressing all the relevant stakeholders in turn, with debates on I.T.V. and the racing channels, followed by a public vote, with, as I said, anyone employed in the racing industry, plus racegoers and life-long enthusiasts casting a vote. It is our sport, too, as much as it is those who work on our behalf at the B.H.A.

​Why is it that the Jockey Club’s chair and senior steward is Dido Harding, owner of a Cheltenham Gold Cup winner, former a successful amateur jockey and currently the starter for the Weston and Banwell Harriers point-to-point, while the incoming, if he actually arrives, B.H.A. chief executive, Charles Allen, was unknown to the racing world until he was announced as Julie Harrington’s successor.
To my eyes, a man with no experience or insight into the world of finance and big corporations, would not the former be a better candidate for the B.H.A. job and the latter better suited to the position at the Jockey Club? Perhaps someone might organise a job swap, if Baroness Harding could be persuaded to agree. Not that a swap might be necessary, given that a spat about governance could yet leave Charles Allen turning his back on the B.H.A..
Of course, the mystery is why this uncertainty has erupted, only a few days away from taking up his new appointment, one of several big salary jobs Lord Allen has at his disposal. It is reported in the Racing Post today that his lordship has qualms about governance. Perhaps he was given to understand a whip came with the job, a whip he could crack whenever the lower ranked shareholders (and used to getting their own way) got uppity and without a whip, he considered the B.H.A. job an impossible job to succeed in. At his age, he would not want to be thought-of in his retirement as a failure, when success in business is almost his calling card.
It just shows what a nonsense the B.H.A. is, a governing authority that is all smiles but with dentures that fall out when quick thinking and innovation is called-for. Surely someone within its organisation can see that someone with Dido Harding’s experience and success within the sport would make a far better candidate to lead the B.H.A. than someone whose only attribute is that he is a Labour peer during a period of Labour governance of the British people.
As I said before, the B.H.A. should suffer the same fate as its predecessors, the Jockey Club. It is unfit to lead our sport and if a new organisation cannot be established to guide the sport through the choppy waters ahead, the stakeholders tripartite, or whatever it is called, should be dismantled and a racing czar appointed in its place. The sport needs a dictator, though a kindly and accomplished one.

In the ‘Another View’ column of the Racing Post today, Daniel Hill makes the suggestion that tomorrow’s rather tepid, if top-heavy, race programme could have had life and exposure given to it if the Epsom executive had gone ahead with its plan to rejuvenate the Epsom Derby meeting by running the Oaks this Saturday, followed by the Derby the following Saturday, and the Coronation Cup either next Wednesday or Thursday.
It is an okay idea, except that I believe the order should be Coronation Cup this Saturday, the Derby on the Wednesday, with the draw for stalls position sometime during the Saturday, with the Oaks the following week-end. To facilitate the Derby draw being closer to the actual day of the race, I would like to see a race-day on the Sunday after the Coronation Cup, perhaps a charity day to raise funds for the R.o.R..
I remain wedded to the proposal that the Derby should return to the first Wednesday in June and at the very least Epsom should trial the idea for a period of three-years to determine if there is an appetite for a mid-week Derby by race-goers. If the Cheltenham Gold Cup can be run on a Friday, why is a daft idea to run the Derby on a Wednesday. The Melbourne Cup, a meeting which everyone cites as an example as to how the Derby meeting could be staged, is run on a Tuesday.

‘A Racing Mind’ a film documenting how Lilly Pinchin has overcome, through medication and willpower, A.D.H.D. and, perhaps by coincidence, during a period when she rode out her claim, has now been taken up by Amazon and can be streamed right this moment. Having seen it on YouTube as a 4-parter, now it is an hour-long standalone film, I can honestly say it is one of the best documentaries on the subject of racing I have seen. I hope everyone in racing that has access to Amazon (I do not) streams the film which might pave the way for Amazon to show more racing content.

​I suppose if I were to be a better hearted, kinder, person, I would forgive and forget, and I do believe people, though not murderers, rapists, paedophiles, animal abusers and dopers, should be given a second chance in life if they have proved themselves worthy of a second chance. I do not know Greg Fairley, had forgotten about him until reading the front page of the Racing Post this morning, with my first reaction being that the B.H.A. should not grant him a licence to return to riding as a professional jockey.
Greg Fairley was a rising star as a youngster, having the backing of Mark Johnston and was champion apprentice in his time. For whatever reason, he allowed himself to fall victim to felons who twisted his arm to stop horses on their behalf. He had his riding licence revoked for 12-years and was warned-off all B.H.A. licenced premises. He has served his time, much like someone coming out of prison, and that, apparently, is good enough for some people to think it appropriate to allow him to return to the sport.
Given he is now 39, might even be 40 when he returns to the weighing-room, I believe it might serve as a probationary period, to gauge if he has changed himself from villain to a man of integrity, if he was only allowed to return as an amateur. For someone who was thrown-out of the sport as a cheat, it is as far as forgiveness is concerned that I personally will extend my charity towards him and others like him.

Windsor is to revert to a figure-of-eight circuit for its National Hunt racing from next season. I dare say they must have received more negative comments after its two-meetings last season than they let on and for Windsor to continue as a jumps course the figure-of-eight was the only way to proceed. Personally, I am pleased by the return to the old set-up as along with Fontwell it gives the course a distinction that takes it out-of-the-ordinary. We need more variation in racecourses, especially over jumps, and would like to have a racecourse in mimicry of Auteuil, with all its different design of obstacle that makes it more akin to a 3-Day event than a run-of-the-mill British steeplechase course. We could learn so much to our benefit from the French and the Irish, and it pains me to say it.

The Curragh is ‘dead as a door-nail’, apparently and no one alive or dead can resurrect it from the stillness of its attendees, at least that is Richard Forristal’s opinion and he would know far better than me or you. 
I do have an idea they might follow for their poorly attended Guineas meeting. Instead of going from 3-days to 2, go from 3-days to 1. Have a 9-race jamboree (The World Pool insists on 9-races) featuring both Guineas races, the Group races and the most valuable handicap. If that does not pack them in perhaps my next idea might lead to bigger crowds in the near future. Construct a National Hunt course. Get in the real fans of the sport and perhaps they will return for a flat fixture. Leopardstown, Fairyhouse, Galway and Punchestown have no problems when it comes to packing out the stadia. It is not as if there is not the room for a National Hunt course at the wide-open spaces of The Curragh.

At Fairyhouse today there is an Optional Claiming race. If you look-up the career history of Golden Miller you will discover that towards the end of his career that he twice ran in the Optional Selling Chase at Birmingham (1937 & 1938) winning both times. Given that the conditions of the race at Fairyhouse allow horses to run in the race without the risk of being claimed, though horses can also run and be claimed for no more than 12,000 Euros, I only assume the race run at Birmingham allowed horses to run without the threat of being put up for auction if they were to win or be claimed if they did not win.
I am not sure I like claimers that can also not be claimers. It is akin to’ is it foul-play or is not foul-play’. It is not neither one thing or the other but both things at the same time. That Golden Miller was eligible for that Birmingham race slants me toward being critical of such races and hope they do not blossom.

​Tom Marquand, to give him his due, is taking the struggle to achieve decent facilities for jockeys at racecourses in this country straight to those who might be doing more to takeaway Tom’s need to take photographs of the conditions he and his colleagues must endure. Redcar is the latest racecourse to deserve his wrath. It must be galling to arrive back in Britain after a 14-hour flight from Hong Kong, where racecourse facilities are of a standard that would do justice to a five-star hotel, drive straight from London to Redcar and then find unsanitary conditions to warm-up, with a mat squeezed between two rows of benches and the exercise bike in the laundry room.
There is an opportunity here for an enterprising jockey with a need for a second income. While it is the responsibility of the racecourse to provide changing areas, showers, perhaps saunas and ice-baths, and space for the valets to undertake their work, perhaps the warm-up areas could be out-sourced. Warm-up areas could be achieved with pop-up arenas housed in a moderately sized marquee. 
I realise there is considerable expense in setting-up a business supplying exercise bikes, perhaps weights and other gym equipment, as well as the marquee and lorry to transport everything to the racecourse, and there would be a question-mark over how much a racecourse would pay to hire the marquee and equipment per day, with perhaps, just a suggestion, you understand, the jockeys themselves putting a few quid in the kitty to defray cost of transportation. Yet I am surprised no one has thought this might be a ready-made solution to the rumbling problem.
Perhaps Tom might be persuaded to loan someone the money to set-up the business.

French Galop’s 20% reduction in prize-money, though chastening, is an idea that should spread. It is my understanding that Group I’s, classics and the workaday racing would be protected from the cuts, with Group 2’ and 3’s suffering the most.
Although I agree classic races and the more important and historic Group 1’s should be worth high six-figure purses, chucking an added £100,000 at these races never makes them a better race or entices a better quality of horse. If a sponsor decides to, or is persuaded to, increase their donation to the prize-money fund, that money would achieve greater all-round benefit to the sport, if it were diverted to bolster prize-money at the lowest levels of the sport, with the sponsor given in return ‘free publicity at the lesser racecourses to benefit from the ‘enforced’ revenue stream.
In this vein, I suggest 20% be diverted from the lesser Group 1’s and all Group 2 and 3 races, and listed races, to ensure there is one race per card with £10,000 going to the winning owner. Even if only 10% were diverted in this manner it would help where help is most needed.
It makes my blood boil to read that a race with a high six-figure prize pot to the winner is to have its value increased by another £50,000 or some such amount, especially when there is racing on the same day where no race is worth more than £5,000 to the winner. It is no wonder we cannot attract owners from Ireland and France when there is absolutely no hope of them even breaking even on their training fees.

Not so sure I approve of the Racing Post featuring all week the unholy goodness of French racing. There are already too many British-based owners with horses trained in France and Ireland and here is the industry newspaper giving Scott Burton free rein to big-up French racing, French-based English and Irish trainers and the huge prize-pots just waiting to be hoovered-up by any British-based owner pissed-off with the disparity between prize-money won and training fees paid out.

Sad to read the announcement of the retirement of Kyprios, perhaps the best, though not the most popular, stayer of recent times. I was of the opinion that Yeat’s record of 4 Ascot Gold Cups was there for the taking. But it is not to be. The injury he picked-up recently is not severe but as always Coolmore is putting the welfare and future happiness of the horse first, and doubtless there is a covering shed waiting for him in the Coolmore organisation. I dare say Ryan Moore is going to miss him as it could be guessed that he is one of Ryan’s favourites.
Incidentally, my favourites stayers of all-time are: Trelawney, Persian Punch Stradivarious and Trueshan. Let us all pray for a wet Royal Ascot to give the old horse at least one chance of running in the Gold Cup.

​In his contribution to the Racing Post’s ‘The Story of Horse Racing in 20 Races’, Lee Mottershead brings into some sort of context the distant age in which seeded the future of National Hunt racing. In 1836, the year of William Lynne’s great invention, the siege of the Alamo was in its seventh day. I can also add that 1836 was the year of Queen Victoria’s coronation. 1836 was undoubtedly a different age and Britain a totally different country to one we suffer nowadays.
William Lynne’s invention was that before his Grand Liverpool Steeplechase, the few and far between National Hunt meetings were staged in open countryside, where viewers had neither the benefit of a grandstand nor the facility to be able to witness the start and finish of a race, the winning post being anywhere up to 5-miles from where the race started. The enclosed National Hunt racecourse was wholly William Lynne’s idea and I believe Aintree should memorialise his name with a race run annually in his honour.
It is argued, and it is a fact I have never queried, that when the question is asked ‘Which horse won the first Grand National’, Lottery is not necessarily the correct answer. Some would contest The Duke is the right answer as he won the first two runnings of the Grand Liverpool Steeplechase, the race that three-years later morphed into the Grand National. Both races, it appears, were run over the same course and distance and the same fences. So, is the correct answer Lottery or The Duke? I would suggest the former as he won a race named the Grand National. The Duke won two stagings of a race with a completely different name, even if the two races are twins born of the same father.
There are many books on the origin and history of the Grand National, though my favourite, and I wish someone would go to the trouble of writing and publishing a second volume, is Reg Green’s ‘A Race Apart’, which for the years covered by the author – the book covers every renewal of the race up to and including Mauri Venture’s win in 1987, was, no doubt, a labour of love. It is a book I will never part with until death, and I am still considering having it sealed in a plastic wallet and having it consigned to my grave as part of the grave goods I will ask my other half to gather-together on the joyous day of my internment.

The thinking of both the Irish stewards and the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board never fails to baffle me. Ted Walsh has had his 3,000 euro fine rescinded after his accusers cleared him of any wrong-doing resulting in the riding of Ta Na La at Wexford last week. Bizarrely, though, the horse remains banned for sixty-days, which means obviously that the mare’s owner also suffer from the riding of the horse even though his name was never on the charge-sheet. The rider, Shane O’Callaghan chose not to appeal and remains suspended for 14-days. So, this is the question I am asking myself, was there foul-play or not. How can Ted Walsh be found on appeal to be innocent of all charges, yet the horse, jockey and owner have black marks against their name?

As I have said before, as far as summer jumping is concerned, Britain should copy, at least in part, the Irish model of festival meetings, though when it comes to the rest of the year Britain should study closely the way the French do jump racing. And it starts with our trainers, owners, breeders, if there is anyone still breeding jumpers in this country, followed by consultations with the B.H.A. 
In France, they start their jumpers earlier than in Britain and Ireland. Horses we would refer to as ‘store horses’ are broken as two-year-olds and by age three they are jumping some form of obstacles. Hence there is great emphasis on three and four-year-old hurdle races. Also, the French hurdle is a smaller version of a normal French steeplechase fence and I just wish we could abandon our traditional hurdle and begin to introduce the French hurdle to our racecourses.
I do not suggest all our racecourses adopt the French system of eight (?) different types of fences on each circuit as I feel the plain and open ditch is enough variety, though one racecourse changing to the Auteuil way of doing things might become beneficial to the sport. French racing has more in common with the origins of National Hunt than the two countries that pioneered racing over obstacles and that in a small measure should be addressed.
The French have overtaken the Irish, and left British breeders’ miles in arrears, when it comes to breeding hardy jumpers, jumpers that in the main jump and stay and have an abundance of class. When will we next have a British-bred winner of the Cheltenham Gold Cup or Aintree National? Never, I suggest, unless some radical consideration is given to the race programme in Britain.

​To return to the Newmarket 2,000 Guineas and the criticism of Kieran Shoemark’s ride on Field of Gold. Having the data provided to him by both the form book and Kieran Shoemark’s own critique of the ride he gave Field of Gold, Colin Keane produced a copybook ride to win the Irish 2,000 Guineas. John Gosden described the ride as ‘brilliant’ yet when a jockey is on by far the best horse in the race and there are no bumps in the road from stalls to winning post, ‘brilliance’ is not required, even if ‘keeping it simple’ is perhaps a possible definition of ‘brilliance’.
Now let us look at the Tattershall Gold Cup on Sunday. To use modern parlance, Colin Keane on White Birch was all dressed-up with nowhere to go in the final furlong, trapped on the rails and last in line to free himself of the queue in front of him. Circumstances played against him, I agree. But why was his ride not judged to be as ‘poor’ as the ride Shoemark supposedly gave Field of Gold at Newmarket? Explain to me what defines a poor ride? Colin Keane had more than one bullet in the barrel and yet due to making a wrong decision during the race his gun went unfired. Whether he would have won with a clear run cannot proved one way or the other, in the same way no one can say with any degree of certainty that Ruling Court would not have pulled out more if Field of Gold had headed him at any stage in the 2,000 Guineas.
Colin Keane is, I have no doubt, one of the best jockeys riding in the world today. My point is this: Kieran Shoemark is not one of the worst and his ride at Newmarket did not deserve the humiliation of being removed from his position as first jockey at Clarehaven.

In his column today, Lee Mottershead makes the argument for returning to the days when jump racing finished in May and started again in August. I have long complained that there was a) too much summer jumping and that b) what summer jumping there is during the hotter months should be structured around ‘local festivals’, as is the case in Ireland. I also believe there should be far less all-weather racing through the summer and autumn months, thereby freeing up horses to run on the turf to bolster field sizes and allowing prize-money saved to bolster prize-money on the turf.
Lee Mottershead makes use of the ‘oceans are boiling and the ice-shelfs are melting’ narrative -neither of which is true by the way (Heartland Institute. Look them up) – and that water preservation will become a huge fact of life going into the future, which is perhaps true, though more due to the number of illegal migrants in the country than a lack of adequate rainfall.
It is all too easy to say ‘I am not interested in jumping through the summer months so let’s just get rid of it’ as too many people earn a living from jump racing in the summer months. The problem is the jumps season (proper) ends too early and begins too early. Let the jumps season go to the end of May, allowing our smaller courses to benefit from the two bank holidays and begin again in late September when, crossed-fingers, there is less likelihood of firm ground. In between June and the August bank holiday, which is where I would end the ‘summer jumping programme’, there should be a limited number of jumps meeting based around, as they do in Ireland, around festivals, with ‘festival meetings’ with a valuable handicap as the major race of the two, three or four-day meeting. It works to great effect in Ireland, why would it not work in Britain?

Hells Bells for someone of my age and experience it is annoying when a craven youth of 23 writes a piece for the ‘Another View’ column in the Racing Post that nails an argument to the wall of which there is no comeback. His name is Oliver Barnard and he pours scorn on Great Britain Racing’s first advertisement in its ‘Going is Good’ campaign. My criticism could be defined as it was largely ‘inoffensive’. I think I used the word ‘fluffy’. Young Oliver, backed-up by the opinion of his non-racing mates, was more decisive and on point. ‘Crap’ or words to that effect was how he chose to underline his feelings on the subject. G.B.R. take notice and get your act together. 
Good on you, Oliver, you young scamp.

​I intended yesterday evening to listen to the Arsenal-Barcelona match on the radio. No, I do not have access to satellite television. Forgetting personal important matters I have yet to become reduced to, though I do occasionally forget matters I have planned to do. Aide memoires are a help, though I have to remember to write the aide memoires and place them where my eyes focus on the most, the kettle, for instance. 
Yes, I enjoy the female version of football, and I am annoyed with myself for watching the second-half of the Scottish Cup Final for no other reason than finding it listed when searching for the day’s racing results on the B.B.C. CeeFax Red Button service. The upside is that my day today has started with the remarkable news that the Arsenal girls achieved what all the commentators considered to be an impossible task. The result last night should put all the England squad members who play for Arsenal in great form for the upcoming Nations League matches and more importantly the defence of their Euro Championship Trophy. I am happy for me and happy for them.
Odd, is it not, that despite all the millions and billions thrown at the English men’s game, it is the female teams that are delivering the trophies.

What perhaps holds me back as both a punter and a commentator on horse racing is that bias and prejudice affect my judgement. Take Field of Gold, for example. Because I believe Kieran Shoemark to be unfairly treated by the Gosdens, though, I suspect, John Gosden’s actions, contrary to the narrative that they had Shoemark’s back, was perhaps orchestrated by what some of Clarehaven’s more influential clients were saying privately, I did not want Field of Gold to win yesterday’s Irish 2,000 Guineas at the Curragh. I accept that Colin Keane is one of the best jockeys in Europe and his experience of the Curragh was to his distinct advantage when the Gosdens’ were weighing up who should succeed Shoemark, a large part of me still wanted something to go wrong, for Keane to ease down and be nabbed on the line or for the horse to simply not perform. 
I also accept that Field of Gold is a rattling good horse, though whether he is, or will become, the top 3-year-old miler in Europe is of little interest to me. As I have said on many other occasions, only time will tell how potent the of any race will turn out to be. The beaten horses all finished in a bit of a heap, which suggests they may well be much of a muchness. Time will tell, you see. Remember, Frankel looked to be the most impressive classic winner of all-time when he won the 2,000 Guineas at Newmarket, yet it turned out he beat a field of donkeys, comparatively speaking.
I really dislike to read about horses that are bigged-up at this time of the year. I just wish the racing media would live in the now and not propel their prophecies long into the future. Only if Field of Gold suffers a training mishap and cannot run again this season will it be likely he will stay in training as a 4-year-old, the age when we can really begin to determine the very good from the 3-year-old shooting stars. It is the single-most aspect of racing that chills my heart against the flat – the speed at which colts are retired to the stallion sheds as that is where the big money is to made. How can comparisons be calculated between the generations when the leading 3-year-olds are whizzed-off to stud?
If I could rule the sport, I would not allow any horse to stand as a stallion until it is 5-years-old as encouragement to owners to keep their horses in training as 4-year-olds. The sport is called horse racing and because of that undeniable truth the racing of horses should have priority over the breeding side of the industry. Whereas National Hunt exists as a pure sporting endeavour, it seems to me that the flat only exists to boost the income of breeders. To me, a cynic, the flat puts the cart before the horse and it is a poorer spectacle because of it.

​Caring about an issue is not the same as knowledge of the issue. I am indebted to a letter by Mr. Mark Albon in the Racing Post today on the subject of the R.o.R. charity, owners’ contributions and how the charity dispenses its grant money.
Since 2023, the year Mr. Albon chooses to use as the centrepiece of his letter, three of the big auction houses now contribute £12 per horse sold by them to R.o.R. Not that this new source of funding diminishes Mr. Albon’s point.
I was not aware that until recently owners contributed £1. 25 per race to R.o.R. and this has now been increased to £3 per race. Mr. Albon might have mentioned that owners were being ‘forced’, his word not mine, to pay an increase to R.o.R. at the same time as the charity will be receiving a huge boost to their funds.
To return to the year 2023. In that year, R.o.R. accounts stated the charity had a little over £4-million, of which £1.3-million came from owners’ contributions. The balance came from the Levy Board. Mr. Albon is not happy by the way R.o.R. funds is dispensed. According to Mr. Albon fifteen charities shared the majority of the grants, with one charity receiving £250,000. Leaving, again according to Mr. Albon, only £50,000 to be shared by other equine charities, many of whom are in desperate need of funding and yet received nothing.
Mr. Albon obviously has an axe to grind, though I do believe this issue should be investigated, if not by the B.H.A., then the Racing Post, as the industry newspaper, should take an interest in the matter. Mr. Albon has his own proposal to remedy the conflict and I will leave readers to go on the Racing Post website to read his letter to form an opinion on whether his ideas for reform are better than the present set-up.
My stance is that equine charities can never have enough funds and this sport should enable that by any way possible. I do not know whether jockeys mandatorily contribute to R.o.R. but I believe they should, if only a small percentage of either their riding fee or prize percentage is taken from them. I just hope there is no malpractice at play here and that going forward R.o.R. will consider helping all the smaller equine charities in this country. If the sport has a social licence for its continued existence, that licence must be doubly important when it comes to the aftercare of racehorses when they are removed from the racing environment.

When Kingman was defeated in the 2,000 Guineas, was his jockey sacked because of it? I believe James Doyle was the jockey that day and every day after the horse won the Irish 2,000 Guineas. Here is my point: Shoemark may, and it is only may as no one can say for sure what might have happened if the horse had been ridden differently, well regret the ride he gave Field of Gold that day, yet the man who will benefit from his mistake, if mistake it was, will be Colin Keane. He will not give Field of Gold a similar ride to the one Shoemark gave him, as indeed Shoemark would not do today at the Curragh, if he had been given a second chance. James Doyle became a great rider after winning the Irish 2,000 Guineas, sadly Shoemark is denied that opportunity.

Hayley Turner is correct. In not having an all-girls team in the Shergar Cup this season a whole lot of the fun of the competition will be squeezed out of it. I am sure I am not the only fan of the Shergar Cup who supported the girls’ team due to them being the ‘underdogs’ and the not so small consideration that some of them were on a better quality of horse than was normal for them. I wonder if Ascot would have taken the same decision if Hayley were still riding?

​In a recent edition of ‘Who Do You Think You Are’, a heavily pregnant Aisling Bea, an Irish female comedian, for the uninitiated, said one of her close relatives, I think it may have been one of her grandmothers, was the first Irish professional female jockey. My ears lit-up at this revelation, as doubtless you would expect. Unfortunately, the topic did not prove part of the programme, so I was left unenlightened. Intrigued, I googled in search of an answer and, of course, was not helped one little bit. ‘Who was Ireland’s first female professional jockey’ was met with I.T. silliness, beginning with Charlotte Brew, then Holly Doyle and then Nina Carberry.
I have now contacted the Horse Racing Ireland and they will be getting back to me soon. In case anyone cares about this wee fact, I will relay the information as soon as possible, not that I can relay it any quicker than that. If you already know the answer to Aisling Bea’s famous ancestor, please keep it to yourself now, please. 

There will be changes to the Epsom Derby meeting but not for two seasons. Why the wait? Because the two people formerly employed by the Jockey Club who were most vocal about the Derby meeting requiring change, have departed for more tranquil waters and no one else in the organisation has yet picked-up the baton. Present thinking on the matter, which stopped when Nevin Truesdale want on his way, is that the Derby and Oaks will be run on consecutive Saturdays, with the Coronation Cup staged on the intervening Wednesday. This will, obviously, be a mistake. The Epsom Derby began its nose-dive to ordinariness amongst the British public when the race was moved from its traditional spot in the calendar, the first Wednesday in June. It may well never again re-establish itself no matter what changes are wrung. But the Epsom Derby should return to its traditional date, if only for the point of experimentation. If it works as a stimulus to the media and the public, then that is a positive. If it fails, then we shall know that more drastic measures are required to save the race from becoming just another race as far as the public is concerned. If the Cheltenham Gold Cup can attract both betting revenue and the gaze of the sporting public on a Friday, then can’t the Epsom Derby be as equally successful with the public and the media when run on a Wednesday?

In today’s Racing Post, Tom George makes a very good point about the race programme for National Hunt in this country being unfit for purpose and that we should be looking to Ireland and France for inspiration. Horse racing, especially over jumps, is first and foremost an equine discipline in the way Three-Day-Evening and Show Jumping is. Betting should only be considered of secondary importance, as important as it is to the financial welfare of the sport. If there is not a programme of races befitting the education and potential of the young horse, we are guilty of putting revenue before welfare and that is a sin for a sport which claims ‘welfare to be of vital importance’. Someone from the B.H.A. should contact Tom George and ask him to put meat on the bones of his complaint and then act on his advice.

​I visited the ‘Find a Racecourse Near Me’ portion of the Great British Racing website yesterday and unsurprisingly my nearest racecourse is Exeter, which is 38-miles from where I live, with the next meeting being held on Thursday October 9th and the lowest ticket price is £15. I can get into Wincanton on the other hand for £11, it is though 78-miles from where I live and the next meeting is on Sunday October 26th. If it were not for my growing aversion for being more than 10-miles from home if in a car or an hour when cycling, I would put the dates in my social calendar. And yes, I do not possess a social calendar, those afflicted with a liking for ante-socialism have no need of one.
As someone who was born cynical, it is easy to criticise the efforts of G.B.R. to promote the sport, especially in age of multiple competing sports and other entertainments all of which are doing all they can to expand their reach, but I thought the first ad was o.k. and the website easy to negotiate. We are not alone in the uphill struggle to remain relevant, French racing is also having steer a way through the doldrums and France Galop has had to sheer 20-millions euros off their prize-money budget.

As expected, the She’s Perfect team were unsuccessful in their appeal against her disqualification in the French 1,000 Guineas.  Personally, I think it was the wrong decision, though I am not surprised the stewards could not bring themselves to take a race off a leading French owner and give it to a loud and lovely syndicate from England. Hopefully Charlie Fellows can return to France with his filly and put the record straight in the French Oaks. If only life would be like that.

With B.H.A. approval there will be a charity race at Newmarket on Saturday September 20th, in aid of Newmarket Housing Trust and Racing Welfare, restricted to trainers located in Newmarket. But no jockeys will be involved. They can stand, watch, criticise and laugh, as the people who they usually ride for, trainers, become jockeys for the day. Such fun!

I remembered a horse Peter Harris used own – he who now has horses trained by Jane Chapple-Hyam – called Bee Sting. He won a couple of bumpers back in the day, trained by Peter Cundall, and was considered the likely next best thing, with Cheltenham options a’plenty. He did not, though, progress as they say and no doubt ended his day as a brilliant hunter. Anyway, the reason his name came to the forefront of my mind was the day before I was stung on the leg, just above where I broke it many moons ago, and as I type that left leg looks like it has been subjected to a pharmaceutical trial of a drug that has been rushed through its laboratory tests. I saw the bee responsible, and it was one of those small, quite cute varieties that give the appearance that honey would not melt in their mouths. And to think I try to have a majority of plants in the garden that are bee-friendly. The bargain is not being kept by the bee side, I suggest, and adds further evidence to my theory that nature dedicated to annoying everyone of us.