​I would not back against Oisin Murphy retaining his title no matter what he says about not prioritising his defence this season. Does he not say it every year? He is not favourite, though, to be champion. He is not even second favourite.
Favourite is Rossa Ryan at 11/10. I admire Rossa’s approach to life. He would like to be champion, he intends giving it a good kick this season, but if should fail to succeed he will not cry about it. I would have him favourite to ride the most winners in a calendar year but I am not as confident he will win enough races during the arbitrary period of the championship to take the crown this season.
Second favourite is Billy Loughnane. I predicted last season (or was it the season before. Time passes so quickly when you reach my age) that within a few years he would become champion jockey, a bold shout as he had not yet succeeded to the throne of champion apprentice. At 9/4 he is too short in the market even though without big-name horses to ride he will doubtless mop-up at the more minor meetings throughout the summer.
Oisin is 11/4, which represents better value than the two ahead of him in the market. Oisin is Oisin. The more I see of him, the more I like him.
Tom Marquand is 11/2. He is handicapped slightly by being stable jockey to a brilliant if cautious trainer in William Haggas, a man who likes to take his time with both 2-year and 3-year-olds. And more so than Ryan and Loughnane, he is also hampered by having to ride abroad on Sundays, as well as Ireland. He deserves to be champion, though I cannot see it happening this season.
William Buick is 14/1 and would doubtless be champion again if he put his mind to it. Quality is Buick’s game, though, and as well as forays to France and Ireland on weekends, Godolphin run plenty of horses in the U.S. and Buick will go where Charlie Appleby sends him.
The most tempting bet, even though I have no expectations of her achieving the fete, is the 100/1 about Hollie Doyle shaking the tree again by becoming champion jockey. 100/1! Given she invariably finishes within single digits numbers of husband Tom each season and he is 11/2, 100/1 is a present for backers. Love to see her as champion jockey as it will be a great boost to the sport, but I just cannot see it happening unless trainers get behind her to make it happen.

Tomorrow at Leopardstown, Jody Townend will achieve an honour that brother Paul must have thought highly unlikely for either of them. Jody rides Reaching High in a Lady Riders handicap for the King and Queen. Yes, Willie Mullins now trains for the British monarchy. I hope the Closutton magic works on the former Sir Michael Stoute trained horse and that Reaching High proves to be a high-class dual-purpose horse.

The She’s Perfect team have chosen to appeal against her demotion in the French 1,000 Guineas. Having seen the camera footage from the rear, I believe they have a sporting chance of winning their case. It is surprising, though, to see how the verdict of the Longchamp stewards has split opinion, with some well-respected commentators giving the Basher Watts team little chance of getting the race back, while others cannot believe there was an enquiry in the first place. I sit on the fence. I believe the Basher Watts syndicate were wronged, while having no faith their appeal will be successful. I cross my fingers on their behalf.

As with the domination of Willie Mullins in National Hunt, which was amusing at first, so it is becoming with Aiden O’Brien on the flat. Both are close to near perfection, though thus far this classic trial period O’Brien has already achieved perfection. Indeed, given he has had runners-up in several trials, he should be marked-up as perfection+.
It is, though, not a good look for the sport, especially when it comes to the classics on the flat. To just take the Epsom Derby and Oaks for example. Not only where are the British-trained opposition going to come from but where are the French-trained horses? Breeders, I believe, are killing the classic races, apart, perhaps, for the 2,000 and 1,000 Guineas, by breeding for speed and ignoring the history and tradition of our sport by treating staying blood like it is a virus that needs to be vaccinated against.
Of course, Ballydoyle will rule supreme – Coolmore are the only breeding organisation 100% committed to breeding for stamina.
My solution to the problem, to stemming the flow of classic riches to O’Brien – pour millions of pounds into the prize-money of the Ascot Gold Cup and the Doncaster and Goodwood Cups and add-on a bonus for any horse that wins the Stayers Triple Crown. And cut the number of Group 1 5 and 6-furlongs races. We have to turn-around the leviathan that is the breeding industry and twist the arms of breeders to persuade them to stop following the trend of the U.S. and remind them that the equine heroes of the ages were always Derby and Gold Cup winners.

​The Global Jockeys Challenge series proposed for next season, though with little detail yet provided above the aspiration for such an event, is flawed and unlikely to achieve what its proponents wish for it.
The reason I say it is flawed, and I believe I said the same about the David Power Cup when it was announced, is that the jockeys are not the stars of our sport, and I defend that point of view by asking readers to say out loud the name of our sport. Horse Racing. It is not Jockey Racing. And any attempt to put the jockey before the horse will be grasped by our opponents as humans making use of a beautiful creature for its own selfish ends.
The G.J.C. is proposed to give us a world champion jockey, in the same way Formula 1 appoints a world champion car driver. Yet the series will not take in any of the established great horse races staged around the world. The best will not be paired with the best. The best, at best, will be paired with handicappers. To return to Formula 1, the equivalent of which would be to take away the high-powered single seaters and ask Verstappen, Norris, Hamilton and others to risk their necks driving road cars around the Grand Prix circuits of the world.
Let us assume for the purposes of argument’s sake that Ryan Moore is the best jockey riding anywhere around the world at the moment. If he were to finish in last place in the G.J.C., which as this series will be draw-based as far as horse allocation is concerned, with ground, stall-position and circumstance leading factors in any race, would this mean that our opinion of Moore would be evidenced as wrong?
This concept is profit-lead, especially as the jockeys must make a contribution both financial and commitment-wise. And this is only going to contribute to an already, in Britain if nowhere else, bloated race programme and smaller field-sizes either side of meetings that stage races for the G.J.C.
Given the prompting behind this concept is to boost jockeys’ profiles, and to promote the sport to a larger public around the world, it would do aeons of good if some of the profit from the series went to rehabilitation and care programmes for retired racehorses. As I said quietly earlier, the sport is named after its main contributor when it comes to effort and sacrifice, the horse.
How this series can be fitted into a race programme that in Britain, if not in the other countries who will host the G.J.C., is literally flat-out from May to November and is an aspect of this proposal I believe the originators have not even addressed in their haste to announce the name of their ‘baby’ to the world. Given the 12-jockeys named for the series will be 12 of the busiest jockeys in the world, with commitments and contracts that all add-up to make them as rich as they already are, it would seem an impossible task to get all of them in 12 different rooms across the world all at the same time.
Also, in a world desperate for diversity, inclusion and equality of the sexes, it was a poor overlook to not include a G.J.C. for the best female jockeys to run parallel to the male G.J.C.. This would be easier to achieve, given that even the very best female flat jockeys are not given the same opportunities afforded to their male colleagues. 
I view the Global Jockeys’ Challenge as more an aspiration than a promise of improvement for the sport to come. Flat racing is not the dominant sport in any country around the world and in Britain and Ireland it is not too far a stretch to say that National Hunt is more popular amongst the public. I doubt if too many non-racing people could name 3 current flat jockeys, though without Rachael Blackmore that might now be said about National Hunt racing, now I come to think about it.
There is no need to promote jockeys as superstars when racing results are narrated by beginning with the name of the horse, followed by the starting odds. Jockeys work seven-days-a-week, working more hours than any other sportsman/woman. With those that work the hardest and longest amongst those who achieve the most meagre of rewards for their dedicated service to the sport. The Global Jockeys’ Challenge will not go a thousand-miles close to addressing the problems of those who operate at the lowest rungs of the sport. Making rich jockeys richer will do very little to help the sport rise higher in the estimations of the sporting and non-sporting public.

​Yes, I am wrong more often than I am right. Which, I suggest, outside of Willie Mulllins and Ryan Moore, is just about average for the whole of the human race. Yet there is something far worse than merely getting your facts wrong – being right when you wish you were wrong.
I predicted a few weeks back that Rachael Blackmore would retire from riding at the end of the Irish season. And that is exactly what she announced yesterday. Little pony-riding girls all over Ireland will be heartbroken this morning.
The void she will leave behind her is unquantifiable. She is Rachael. She is the gleaming star of Irish racing. The face of Irish racing. Paul Townend may outrank her when it comes to championships and Grade 1’s but he was never first on peoples’ lips when asked to name a jockey. And that applies equally to Britain as it does to Ireland.
The sadness is that we shall probably never see her like again.
Oddly, and perhaps this needs explanation, she announced her retirement ‘with immediate effect’, even though she is jocked-up for two-rides at Sligo today. Knowing her from afar, which is perhaps to not know her at all, I suggest she planned her retirement in the way she has done to mitigate any hullabaloo, to go on her way in the same manner in which she arrived. Quietly.
As someone who has championed female jockeys since the days when the gentler sex was few and far between, the bad news keeps on coming. Hayley Turner’s retirement removed the smiley face from British flat racing. In losing Bryony Frost to France was as big a loss to British racing as Rachael’s will be to Irish racing. Emma Smith-Chaston has also recently retired from riding. And as I have said so many times recently, there is no one coming through the ranks to take their place. Yes, Hollie and Saffie are top ten on the flat but the divide between them and the rest of the girls is huge. Apart from Jo Mason being stable jockey to her uncle and grandfather, name another female who holds a stable jockey position?
Now, even if Hollie Doyle agrees with the decision, the Shergar Cup organisers have taken the retrograde step of doing away with an all-female team and this year each team will have one female member. Hollie may be right in believing it is a step forward to treat male and female jockeys the same, and in every other aspect of flat racing that is perhaps the right way forward, even if I believe young female jockeys need an edge in order to persuade owners and trainers to give them opportunities they presently lack. But the Shergar Cup is all about taking sides and I very much doubt I am alone in always supporting the all-female team, even if they are not the underdogs they once were.

Having now watched the finish of the French 1,000 Guineas from all angles, I believe the She’s Perfect team have an each-way chance of getting the result reversed in their favour. From the rear-view camera it is clear beyond doubt that Ryan Moore on Exactly bumped the Mikhail Barzelona horse, which caused him to veer from a straight line and the coming together between She’s Perfect and Exactly was minor, no more than a slight brush. Also, though the French whip rules allow a jockey to hit a horse with his hand as many times as the jockey sees fit, Barzelona hit his mount twice with his whip and twelve-times with his hand after losing his whip.
I am convinced She’s Perfect was unlucky to lose the race in the stewards’ room. I am inclined, though, to expect the result to stay the same. In this country, connections would be odds-on to get the race back. In fact, in this country she would not have lost it in the first place. I simply cannot see the French appeals panel over-ruling in favour of a British-trained horse.

NB. (Note Bene) The name of the female jockey considered by John Randall to be the most successful female in the history of racing is Julie Krone, with a total in the 3,000’s. How many of those victories were Grade 1’s or classics John Randall did not disclose. Of course, I should undertake the research myself. Perhaps. Maybe.

​I expressed the wish that Kieran Shoemark had the last laugh over the Gosdens regarding his dismissal from the number one job at Clarehaven. Boy, Kieran must have really pissed-off the racing gods in one way or another. Perhaps in both ways considering the kicking he is experiencing at the moment. He wins the French 1,000 Guineas, no doubt takes joy in having the last laugh, only for the French stewards to take the race off him for interference in the final furlong. I would imagine being demoted from a classic win is infinitely worse than John Gosden summoning him to his office to inform him he is no longer the favoured one. Somebody please give Kieran Shoemark a ride in the Derby because when his luck changes it will doubtless change big time. Unless the racing gods know something about him we do not.

At the weekend, at Ascot, and only a few weeks since Hayley Turner retired, Holly Doyle became the winningmost female jockey in British racing. She is 28. Hayley is 43. Not only is she now the best female flat jockey in British racing history but with 10 Group 1’s and 2 foreign classics to her name, surely she must either be the most successful female jockey currently riding anywhere in the world or at least honing in on being the most successful when it comes to riding Group 1’s and classics. I posed the question poorly to John Randall, Racing Post historian, and his answer was based on individual wins, which places Holly a long way below a former U.S. jockeys, whose name I cannot recall but doubles will do at some time during the day.
The Racing Post published a list of the top ten British female flat jockeys in their piece on Holly Doyle yesterday (Holly also featured in the big article) and it made for unsettling reading. Holly at the time of writing sits on 1,023, with Hayley, obviously, one win in arrears. Then comes Josephine Gorden with 417, Cathy Gannon 344. Alex Greaves 287. Saffie Osborne 258. Kim Tinkler 250. Joanne Mason 247. Nicola Currie 236. In comparison the leading British female jump jockey Bryony Frost has ridden 293 winners in this country.
Despite Holly Doyle being one of top jockeys riding in this country, I still believe that to achieve more female jockeys riding regularly at the top meetings and in the top races, female jockeys who have not ridden more than – this numbers alters every time I give thought to this subject – 200-winners in their careers should receive a 3Ib allowance in all handicaps. They should certainly be allowed to claim 3Ib for a set number of winners after they have ridden ‘out their apprentice claim’. Yes, it is unfair on their male colleagues. But it is also unfair that a good percentage of owners and trainers have a prejudice against female riders.

Royal Ascot 1900 looked quite similar to Royal Ascot 2,000 or any year before the meeting changed to 5-days. As far as the monarchy was concerned, prior to the Prince of Wales, who batted away his mother’s criticism of his involvement with racing with great tact and an iron will, the Royals would only attend the Royal meeting on the two important days, Tuesday and Thursday, the only two days when the public could enjoy the royal procession.
The most valuable race on day one was, appropriately, the Prince of Wales Stakes, worth £2,100 to the winner. On the Wednesday, the Coronation Stakes was the feature race, worth £2,750 to the winner, £259 more than the Royal Hunt Cup. On the Thursday the Ascot Gold Cup, worth £3,360 to the winner, was not only the feature race but after the classics the most important race of the whole season. The Hardwicke Stakes was the feature on the Friday, with £2,421 going to the winning owner.
The first race on the Friday was the Ascot High Weight Stakes over 10-furlongs and worth £565 to the winner. I confess I do not know what is meant by a High Weight race. If it were a conditions race for horses that usually carry high weights in handicaps, I would like to see this sort of race brought back.
Also, Royal Ascot in 1900 also featured either a biennial or triennial race on each day of the meeting. As far as I can ascertain these races were designed for horses to come back year after year from 2-year-old to 3-year-old (biennial) and 2 – 4-year-old (triennial) to compete against the same horses each year. Two of these races were in their 42nd and 43rd years, two others in their 37th and 38th year, with the last race on the fourth day in its 47th year.
Am I the only one to think a similar concept might be tried now, though not at Royal Ascot, obviously. Just the one biennial race each year, as a novelty. In 1900, if the idea were new, it would be a race for stoutly-bred two-year-olds, with the 3-year-old race over 10 or 12-furlongs. But in todays speed-orientated world, sprints would be the best bet for the race (races) to be considered successful. I dare say there was a valid point in biennial and triennial races in 1900, which probably does not exist today. But it would do the sport no harm to revisit the past occasionally.

​Andrew Franklin, former Channel 4 head of racing (head honcho, producer/director, friend of John Francome – something) is correct when he suggests the Racing Post should demand Great British Racing’s Simin Michaelides give an answer to the question ‘what should be expected as a result of the 3.6-million quid marketing campaign funded by the Levy Board. The story seems to be the vast amount of money and not what would constitute success for spending that amount of money. As the money comes from Levy Board resources, it should be remembered, as Mr.Franklin makes clear, that indirectly it is punters’ money being used and the people who have made this grant possible should at the very least be party to the expectations of Great British Racing. As with myself, Mr. Franklin is sceptical that this campaign will be no anymore successful than similar campaigns in the past.

Tony Connell of London tells a tale of how difficult it can be for racegoers travelling to the races by public transport, highlighting a recent journey that comprised of one train and two replacement bus services and asks why the racecourse in question did not hire a coach to take racegoers direct from where the train journey ended to the racecourse. It all about service and going the extra mile to engage with the people who keep the turnstiles turning. It is, perhaps, something Great British Racing might want to chew on before they begin the process of allocating their 3.6-million quid.

Both John Castley of Peterborough and Graham Butler of Romford questions why the trainers’ championship title is decided upon prize-money when the jockeys title is all about winners. It is the same for both codes, made more unreasonable when on the flat the trainers’ title is decided on a 12-month basis, January 1st to New Years Eve. As I have suggested in the past, why not give a trophy to both the jockey and the trainer who win the most races and the most prize-money, and for the same time-period. The flat jockeys’ championship is farcical, based as it is on two arbitrary dates that begin months after the season has started and finishes a month before the turf season ends.

Michael Yarrow of Harpenden makes a very good point with regard to what constitutes perfect ground conditions and why racecourses do not aim to achieve perfect ground when watering. Windsor recently announced they were watering to achieve good-to-firm ground for their meeting this Monday. As Mr. Yarrow comments, why not try to achieve good-ground, and given Windsor has the River Thames flowing by, and I am assuming they take their water from the river, it seems it should not be too difficult a task to achieve good ground.

Mr. Walker of London is harder to agree with, though. As someone with no great bond with children, I should be in his camp. But no. The wider picture must be focused upon. To use a hackneyed and flawed expression, the children are our future. The under eighteens must be allowed in for free as if only a small percentage of them continue to walk through the gates as adults, then the policy has achieved its aim. Also, there must be entertainment for younger children and everything under the sun if it brings new people to the sport. The only events that should not be allowed are those that might frighten the horses. The sport must survive beyond the lives of myself and Mr. Walker. Close your ears to the squeals of little children, Mr. Walker, and visualise them as young Ryan Moores of Holly Doyles. Remember, too, that a lifetime ago, as with me, you too were a yelling child annoying people who then were much like yourself today.

Jimmy Gill of Gravesend reminds readers that the sport is underpinned, as it has been for decade after decade, by those who sweat and toil for the love of the horse and who hope in return for small success, and he highlights a recent winner for Tracey Leeson at Fakenham. By coincidence, to support Mr. Gill’s opinion, James Ewart is reported in today’s Racing Post as retiring as a trainer as his duty to provide a better standard of living for his family must take precedent over his love of training racehorses. It is the flaw in the B.H.A.’s plan to rebuild the sport’s finances from the top down. To build a successful and long-lasting edifice, good foundations are vital. If you build from the top, you have nowhere to go but sidewards or downwards, whereas if you build from the bottom upwards you have the world and all that is in it.

​The ‘stuck together as if glued’ title of what is to follows is representative of how I feel. No one pays me for the thoughts, concerns and ideas that appear on this site. Yes, once the National Hunt season is over, I annually come down with the ‘flat blues’, as I refer to my state of mind at this time of the year. Though this year I am further depressed by the sheer number of jumps fixture we have had since the old season closed and the new one started. 2 and 3-runner fields at Ludlow tomorrow, is that not bone fide evidence that there are far too many meetings for this time of year? Come on, B.H.A., do your job; care for the sport you are licenced to govern, show some pre-emptive spunk and deplete the number of race-meetings in the same way as you have the power to abandon races that are, to your mind, so uncompetitive as to be waste of resources.
Chester did little this week to lift my springtime despondency. It was not always the case. I used to look forward to Chester as the starting gun for the ride towards the only two classics that come with added anticipation. Yet this year Chester was merely a Ballydoyle win-fest, with the maestro not even in attendance. And all we got as far as fact was concerned from his stand-ins was a whole lot of conjecture. Ifs and buts as if they were protecting state information.
Lingfield today is no better. Only 3 turn-out for am Oaks trial that on paper is nothing more than a parade for the O’Brien filly and the Derby trial looks a match between, you guessed it, the two from Ballydoyle, the only point to ponder being has Ryan Moore chosen the right one. 
One element of the flat that has always annoyed me is races with Group 3 status that would have the same number and quality of runners if it were a listed race worth a few thousand quid less to the winner. ‘Black type’ should be consigned to the needless bin. It is a vehicle for breeders to board and means nothing when it comes to the actual ability of horses who attain ‘black type’. It is a falsity, a present that comes in ribbons and bows but holds together an empty box. Third of four in a listed race at Salisbury or Chelmsford should not extoll a filly with some sort of achievement that lofts it above the filly that won five handicaps in a season.
The lack of loyalty in racing also grieves me. I have great respect for John Gosden but his cutting the cord of kindness with Kieran Shoemark, even if the decision was driven by big name owners at Clarehaven, was unforgiveable. There may not have been a written contract between the two but having taken the decision that someone could replace Frankie, and having forgiven him on many occasions down the years, the right decision would have been to have given Shoemark the whole of this season to prove himself. In doing the dirty on Shoemark, it tells everyone that Gosden made a mistake in giving the Shoemark the job in the first place.
It is hard to criticise, as I have done in the past, that the flat is too dominated by so few stables, what with Willie Mullins now virtually owning National Hunt racing, but I do believe the sport would be energised if the smaller flat stables were able to play in the big races. What is worse, and this is more a reflection on the low standard of prize-money in this country, if a horse of classic-winning potential were to emerge from an unlikely source, one the major foreign funded outfits would be quick to snap-up that horse and even if it were to remain with the original trainer it would cease to be an under-dog and with it the sparkle of wonder would be gone.
Even the Swinton Hurdle at Haydock does not inspire me with anticipation this afternoon. It used to be a race where champion hurdle type horses would attempt to give away lumps of weight to good handicappers but like the old Whitbread the race is just an afterthought these days, even if it is now the first big race of the new season.
Anyway, I look forward to the Derby meeting and Royal Ascot. I am presently reading Sean Magee’s mighty tome on the history of Royal Ascot and hope to discover a few forgotten facts to enlighten the day of anyone foolish enough to visit this website.
You know, when I started this website, I thought on days when I had nothing to say, I would upload one of the many horse racing themed short stories I have written down the years. I did do this on one occasion and have refrained ever since. Even though I am not wholly repelled by those stories, I came to the conclusion that if people could not fork out a few quid for the collection I worked so hard to have published, why give people an excuse not to buy the book.
My apologies, I have the wrong head on this morning. And no, I have not forgotten to take my meds. I am not on any meds for any condition. At 71, that is one of the few aspects of my life to be proud about.
My best wishes. Have a good day.

​There is something wrong when a trainer withdraws a horse from a race for no other reason than it is drawn wide, as happens so often at Chester. Firstly, trainers should be fined no matter the reason given if they withdraw a horse that is drawn wide at Chester, other than when a vet on duty at the course issues a certificate confirming the horse is lame or unwell.
Secondly, something should be done to undo the unfairness in the draw at Chester and other racecourses where horses are routinely withdrawn because of an unfavourable stall position. What if horses drawn widest, say the three outside stalls, receive a 2Ib allowance, and those in the next two stalls a 1Ib allowance. Would this incentivise trainers to take their chances?

The Osbornes go big pot hunting at Pimlico next Saturday and I for one will have my fingers crossed that they come home with the laurels. Heart of Honour had a good time of it out in the desert regions of the racing world throughout our winter, finishing 2nd in the U.A.E. Derby. The Preakness Stakes, I suggest, is a whole different kettle of fish and Heart of Honour must raise his game a notch or two to be in the mix, yet I dare say we were all saying the same when Jamie sent Toast of New York to the Breeders Cup Classic, finishing an honourable and perhaps unlucky runner-up. I dare say having a female jockey riding in one of America’s classic races will attract a lot of media attention and I hope that Saffie is interviewed as much after the race as in the preliminaries. 

Rather like a government that can plead poverty when cutting benefits from the elderly and yet can muster twice the amount of money for a pet project, British racing is about to spend £3,600,000 on a marketing campaign to boost the image of horse racing to an apathetic public. In being critical of this initiative, ‘The Going Is Good’, I am not suggesting that all is rosy in the racing sector, only that less money spent more wisely might produce better results. Also, £3-million of the Levy Board funding for this project would be better spent propping-up prize-money or to speed-up the building of separate changing facilities at racecourses for male and female jockeys.
As I have proposed down the years, free entry to people living in the postcode for respective racecourses would be good start. Free bus travel from train stations to the racecourse. Free tickets won on local radio. Family fun days to emphasise that under sixteens get in free. Remind people that there is only one Royal Ascot and the sort of clothes mandated for that meeting do not apply on any other day’s racing. In fact, no restrictions on what clothes are allowed.
I have no more expectations for this marketing campaign as I did for the previous one. Or any that went before it. This is a prime example of the B.H.A. pushing a proposal for the sake of making it look like they are doing something, that they are on the ball.

When I come across a facet of racing history new to me, I like to share it. In reading a large tome entitled ‘Royal Newmarket’, written by R.C. Lyle, the man who wrote the story of the great Brown Jack, and illustrated by Lionel Edwards, R.I., I came across the name of the jockey who took on the mantle of retained jockey to King George VI when Joe Childs retired. John Crouch. He was obviously destined for great success, sadly, though, in 1939 he died in an air crash on his way to Newcastle to ride a horse for the King.
I cannot recall the name of John Crouch before the reference in this book and felt I should pass his name on to people in case his name is the answer to a question in a pub quiz or similar. My next query, of course, is whether Hector Crouch is related to him. Or even Peter Crouch, though that seems less likely.

​Whether the B.H.A.’s ‘Race Deletion Policy’ is good, bad or indifferent, to me, is not the point. I understand the frustration of trainers when a race is abandoned due to only 3-horses being declared as it must be maddening for owners to have good prize-money dangled before their eyes, especially if the horse has failed to earn prize-money all season, only to have the race scuppered by the B.H.A. due to the uncompetitive make-up of the race. Yet in the case of Stratford, the feature of the story in the Racing Post today, to ensure a six-race card a competitive 12-runner handicap hurdle has been divided into two-divisions, neither of which are particularly competitive.
I do not believe the ‘Race Deletion Policy’ is the problem. The problem in need of a solution is too much racing in a month of the year when good-to-firm ground can be expected across the whole of the country. Today there is racing at Huntingdon and Stratford, both of which could be described as Midland racecourses. Yesterday they raced at Newton Abbot, Kelso and Fontwell. Friday there is racing at Hereford and Market Rasen and on Saturday racing is scheduled for Hexham, Warwick and partially at Haydock. Stratford, Warwick and Hereford are within walking distance of a fit and healthy man and their proximity to one another must allow local trainers to pick and choose where to run their horses, whereas if only one of those courses raced this week field sizes would be substantially larger.
At this time of year, jumps meetings need to be scarcer. It is the only method at our disposal to ensure competitive racing. The B.H.A., instead of a ‘Race Deletion Policy’, should have a ‘race planning policy’ to ensure the races scheduled fit the type of horse in training during the next few months of the year. The ‘Race Deletion Policy’ is an acceptance of defeat in many ways and is certainly not pro-active but reactive, a knee-jerk approach to a problem easily solved if racecourses did not have the persuasive power over all other stakeholders that form the governance of our sport.

I believe, and I stand corrected if I am wrong, but I do not believe Racing Post journalists who write-up the in-running reports and analysis of the day’s racing attend racecourses but watch from their London offices on t.v. screens. I often wonder how accurate their summaries are. For instance, the Cheshire Oaks yesterday – Kate O’Riley, ridden by Saffie Osborne, was said to have ‘weakened final furlong’. Yet she was headed by the first three to finish between the 3-furlong and 2-furlong pole and then stayed on like a horse in need of 2-miles. She did not weaken, not to my eyes and I would imagine her connections were far from disappointed by her run.
I often read highly negative comments when in fact a horse has run well for a long way into a race, only to be beaten by superior horses. These reports should not involve flattery, of course, but the words written by journalists enter the form-book and remain racing gospel for ever more. I am quite sure some owners are quite pained by what is written about their horses and at a time when everyone within the sport should be encouraging owners to stick with the sport.

Kieran Shoemark being demoted by the Gosdens’ is not a good look for the sport. From ‘having Shoemark’s back’ only a few weeks ago, John Gosden has humiliated a good young man and hung him out for further ridicule by the losers who frequent social media solely to stick knives into the reputations of people who do the best they can every day of every week at the coalface of life.
Will Mikhail Barzelona get the heave-ho by Godolphin, too. He admitted he should have waited longer on Shadow of Light and might have won if he had done so. Shoemark was defeated in the 2,000 Guineas by circumstance. If Buick had to alter course from the dip, if a horse came across him, if Shadow of Light had been asked to quicken closer to the winning post, Field of Gold might have won the way he was ridden. Beaten jockeys are always wrong, so it is said. But that does not imply they should be persecuted for it. I am quite sure Ryan Moore and Frankie Dettori also make similar decisions in races such as Shoemark made last Saturday. I am sure every beaten jockey comes in after a race wishing they had made different decisions during the race. Shoemark has been hard done by. I hope he has the last laugh at some point this season.

So far underwhelmed by the classic trials. It is a no from me about either Minnie Hauk and Lambourn and will be following the careers of Lazy Grift and Caspi Star with interest. But not in the classics.

​I like quirky. For instance, I use a chamber pot as a fruit bowl and I keep what at some point down the years were important documents in an ammunition case I found on the shore-line of our local river. Which is why Chester is my favourite non-National Hunt racecourse. A few years ago, an enterprising clerk-of-the-course staged trails to see if Chester was suitable for holding hurdle races, which, as that has not yet transpired, suggests the overwhelming answer from the jockeys’ taking part was a unanimous ‘hell no!’
Chester is, as we all know, Britain’s oldest racecourse, with the Romans having held racing back in the days when the sons of Jesus could have attended. Or his grandchildren. The fog of long ago is so dense that no one can know who attended, who backed all the winners and whether racing was as poorly governed as the B.H.A. of today. As a devotee of Time Time, I can report that the Romans did not so much govern the people as govern local people who governed on behalf of Rome. So, the set-up back then for racing thriving or surviving was as unlikely to succeed as racing’s modern-day governance set-up.
To return to topic. Chester is considered a good testing ground for Derby and Oaks types and many an Epsom classic winner has begun their rise to stardom in the Dee Stakes, Vase or Cheshire Oaks. The main race of the 3-days is, of course, the Chester Cup, which for all the world can look like a sprint for stayers, with position, position, position, a mantra equally as persuasive as location, location, location. Usually, the ground is on the soft side for Chester week, though this year it is likely to be on the fast side of good. Strangely, returning to the classic trials, if Chester is such a good place to judge whether a horse is a likely Derby or Oaks type, would anyone be in favour of running the two classics at Chester if Epsom were to be unfit for racing for any reason? I would say no, with Sandown perhaps favourite to step in.
But that is what I like about Chester, along with its history and Roman walls, hand-in-hand quirkiness and hospitality.

Shocked to read that Evan Williams, one of my favourite trainers, was in court yesterday to plead not guilty on a ‘grievous bodily harm’ charge. If he were not of the ‘Christian faith’, if you get my meaning, I would have no cause to worry on his behalf as all he would get is a slap on the wrist and advice by the judge to stop being a naughty boy. My hope for Evan and his loved-ones is that he is found innocent and can continue to head-up his family-run business.
And, of course, this latest shock follows on from the news that a jockey was involved in a serious car accident a week or so ago in which his passenger suffered a ‘life altering injury’ and he (I am supposing it is a male jockey) was subsequently arrested and released on bail. If I was on-the-ball, with a fully functioning brain and with a liking for detective work, through a process of elimination, I might come up with the name of a likely suspect. But I cannot, as they say down here in Devon, ‘be arsed to bother myself’. So, as with anyone who was ‘arsed’ to read this, I will have to wait until the Racing Post next covers this story.

I remain wedded to the proposal that female jockeys, especially female N.H. jockeys, should continue to receive a 3Ib allowance in all handicaps until fifty-winners after they have lost their conditional riders’ claim. I also now believe that they should receive an extra 2Ib added to their usual claim until they have ridden 50-winners. Discriminatory, yes. Unfair on male claimers, yes. But somehow the male/female divide in the jockey ranks must be bridged.
I will give two woolly examples of why I think the sport needs to take a similar path to the French racing authorities that already gives female professionals an allowance, though not in major races. Elizabeth Gale rode a 66/1 winner at Ffos Las yesterday, The Wire Flyer and at Fakenham Tabitha Worsley won on a well-backed favourite. Both these women rarely ride a horse with an obvious winning opportunity, which, at the moment is something, with the exception of Lilly Pinchin, applies to all female National Hunt jockeys. As a collective, females are not getting the rub of the green and all the budding young female riders now and in the future will see the situation and receive the impression that the tide, no matter how hard they try, will always be against them. Rachael Blackmore is an outlier and should not be taken as proof positive that the game is fair to both sexes. She remains the only Irish female professional National Hunt jockey apart from a handful of girls who struggle between them to get more than an occasional single ride per week. When Blackmore is gone from the scene there is no one in either Britain and Ireland likely to replace her. Her success actually muddies the picture for other female riders. Her spectacular success does not inspire owners and trainers to give other females more than fleeting opportunities.
Females must prove their worth the same as their male counterparts, yet it is obvious that owners and some trainers have a bias in favour of the male gender and they must be given an incentive to give female riders the opportunity to prove themselves on better quality horses and at a higher level than the lowest-rated horses in minor races which is their collective lot at the present time.

​There is always the call for the sport to better sell itself, yet Bank Holidays are not seen as prime dates in the calendar to do exactly that. The Bank Holiday just gone was a tame affair, though one would hope the smaller courses that comprised the day’s activity attracted good sized attendance. But why was it not considered to move the Guineas meeting into the Bank Holiday slot, even if the two classics remained on the Saturday and Sunday? Why open the meeting on the Friday when they might conclude the first major meeting of the flat season on Bank Holiday Monday?
When a Bank Holiday coincides with wet weather people will be more likely to stay at home and with terrestrial television offering the same old, same old, these days, here is a great opportunity for I.T.V. to promote the sport. By the same token, why must the Swinton Hurdle be on the Saturday following the Bank Holiday rather than on Bank Holiday Monday, which would make both a great double feature with Newmarket but also would show-off the two divisions of the sport to the couch-bound public.

In his Editor’s Choice feature which comes as an e-mail to subscribers, Tom Ellis bemoaned, quite rightly, the real possibility of betting tax rising to the same level as tax yielded on casinos and alike. He suggested that strong and influential leadership is required to stave-off this latest assault on our sport. Some hope there, Tom, given that the sport does not have the benefit of any form active leadership.
I sent a quick e-mail off in response, suggesting that Tom research the World Economic Forum’s ‘Great Reset’ proposal for reforming and reframing the world and the people in it, of which it only takes a quick glance to realise there will be little room in this new ‘Utopia’ for sporting activities that involve horses as all animals would be looked upon in a similar manner to old age pensioners – uneconomic eaters using up the Earth’s finite resources.

A Global League Challenge has bean announced involving a dozen of the world’s leading jockeys. Unlike other similar ideas, this one does seem to have been well-considered, though the aspiration that the dozen races around the world would not coincide or do damage to the Pattern race programme seems optimistic.
It is hard to imagine this series of races involving horses below classic and Group class can be anything other than valuable handicaps, which seems to be similar to Formula 1 drivers being asked to drive road cars to determine the World Champion. Also, how can they arrange a programme of a dozen races staged on different continents and for one or some of the jockeys not being compromised. Will Buick, for instance, is the retained jockey for Godolphin in Britain – what if he is required by his retained stable to ride in an important classic or Arc trial on the same day as a Global League race is being staged? Given through the summer there are major races, if not every week, on weekends either in Britain, Ireland or France, jockeys like Buick and Moore will have to honour their commitments to their retained stable over races that are, in all truth, all about themselves.
It is an intriguing idea, though I doubt it will succeed easily as ‘commitments’ might prove obstacles that cannot be overcome unless substitutes are worked into the proposal.
Also, though lip-service is paid to including female jockeys sometime in the future in this proposal, why could they not stage a parallel Global League for the top female professional jockeys around the world?

It is good that there is an attempt to draw attention to the Epsom Derby this year, though I suspect a 72-hour declaration stage and a draw for stall position taking place in a cinema will cut the ice and get peoples eyes popping with anticipation. The Epsom Derby may be high on every jockey and trainers wish-list but as a sporting event it has slipped a long way down the ladder as far as the public is concerned. To my way of thinking, the demise was accelerated when the race was moved from the tradition of the first Wednesday in June to a Saturday. So, move it back, give people an excuse to take a Wednesday off work. Also, field sizes are on a gradual descent to single digits and that removes fascination, intrigue and interest, especially if Aidan O’Brien has half the field running for him. Look back to the fifties, sixties and seventies when two-dozen runners were the norm. Yes, many of them were no-hopers but at least it gave the opportunity for office sweepstakes and each-way betting.
The product is not the same as it was in its heyday and that must be admitted before half-baked ideas are put forward as solutions to a race that once was looked-upon as a national institution but is now seen by the majority as an anachronism, a pageant for the top-hat brigade, a parade of unfamiliar and often foreign sounding names.
In the face of wokism and the whims of the ignorant, the sport is slowly but surely destroying its jewels. It has happened to the now less than grand Aintree National, and without malice but with the false belief that the Epsom Derby remains ‘the greatest race in the world’, it too is sliding towards sporting and national irrelevance.