For thirty seconds I stood and believed that i'd finally won the Grand National.
No I wasn't in the saddle, nor was I watching years worth of training compete in the field. I'd simply wandered down the local bookies, placed my bet and joined the rest of the nation in watching it on the box.
Clutched in my hand was a ticket backing Sunnyhill boy each way with an £8 stake, set to give me an £88 return and it was looking good. He'd timed his race to perfection, survived Becher's Brook and Foinaven, evaded the fallen and the falling and stormed through with 3 jumps to go. Surely this year was his year.
Up comes Neptunes Collanges - practically unheard of, by the punters at least, at 40/1 - and pips Sunnyhill Boy by a nose at the post, a photo finish is required to discern the winner in the closest finish in the history of the National and, once again, i'm on the losing side. Just as with Black Apalachi and Oscar Time in the two previous races, i've managed to back the runner up. Admittedly this year i've learnt my lesson and taken the meagre returns of an each way bet but still, gutted.
Once again the 4.15 at Aintree has come up trumps and provided a stormer of an event - the coverage is grand, the winner undisputed and the nation enthralled by the greatest betting event. What dominates the papers the next day? The death of two horses, According to Pete and Synchronised.
Now I am not 'anti animal' in any way, shape of form. Admittedly I am not as obsessed with horses as many of my country dwelling friends are but I still appreciate the tragedy behind their deaths. Could it be avoided? Probably. Should every step be taken to avoid their deaths? Yes. Should the event as a whole suffer to avoid the deaths of two of its participants? No.
I am sorry horse lovers, but i don't buy that. 2 horses out of 40 is a 5% death toll. This may seem far too high but it is a result of the toughest horse race in the world for those competing. If you like, count the number of people who die doing the Paris to Dakkar rally, the Marathon des Sables or some other endurance event. Sure we could make the National safer by lowering Becher's Brook, limiting the number of participants or indulging in a lunacy like introducing a 'safety horse' that runs at an acceptable pace for 28 of the fences before unleashing the participants in an all out sprint for the line.
We could conquer all the risks in all the events whilst we're at it. Why not race from Paris to Lyon instead? Much safer that way. Because if there is no risk, there is no reward. Synchronised won the Gold Cup and was a fantastic horse, loved by its rider and treasured by its owner. I am in no way saying that we should rejoice in its death. I don't look for horses to die in the race but I, like the riders, trainers and jockeys, accept it as a risk that must be taken.
People are comparing the National to some sort of animal cruelty - like testing out dangerous chemicals or putting them through damaging experiments. I find this ludicrous. Looking back through history and I still reckon it's a better time for horses everywhere. We don't plough fields with them, we don't take them to war and we don't eat them anymore. All in all that's a considerable upswing in their living conditions. Race horses have, probably, the best existance out of all their species. They are fed a lot of good horse food and get exercised regularly. They are the professional atheletes of their world. I imagine other horses look at them in the same manner that we look on professional rugby players. Women horses want them, men horses want to be them etc etc.
Win the National and they become instant celebrities, not just in their own insular world, but in the eyes of the masses. Like when Rhona et al won the Gold Medal in Curling and suddenly found herself a sporting celebrity. Ask anyone of a certain age if they've heard of Red Rum and they're bound to say yes and probably launch into reminiscing about his three National wins.
McCoy and McManus will both be devastated both personally and financially to lose such a special animal. But let us not devalue his loss. There is no guarantee that similar deaths won't occur at any race. Two horses died in the Dubai Gold Cup which is a flat race with lesser pressures - a sure sign that making a course safer is no guarantee to eliminate the possiblity of fatalities.
By all means take a look at the pressures put on vets by punters and bookies to force unfit horses to race and by all means have inquests galore to make sure that nothing untoward is happening. If someone somewhere could come up with an acceptable risk strategy - a percentage of horses per ten years that suffer fatal injuries and work to keep it at a minimum. But please, whatever else, try to keep the 4.15 at Aintree as it is - the greatest spectacle for anything on four legs.
No comments:
Post a Comment