Every single year to 2021 you'd have lost at least 1 frame-maker, including 2 winners. This year no frame-maker over #30 but Becher Chase winner and #31 Snow Leopardess would not have got a tilt.
2013 - Auroras Encore - won at 66/1 2014 - Alvarado - 4th at 33/1 2015 - Alvarado - 4th at 20/1 and Royale Knight - 6th at 25/1 2016 - Vics Canvas - 3rd at 100/1 2017 - Gas Line Boy - 5th at 50/1 2018 - Bless The Wings - 3rd at 40/1 and Milansbar - 5th at 25/1 2019 - Walk In The Mill - 4th at 25/1 (Becher Chase winner) 2021 - Minella Times - won at 11/1 and Farclas - 5th at 16/1 and Blaklion 6th at 50/1
4 of those were model-picks (incl Vics Canvas, who was leading over the last having recovered off the floor at Bechers first time and was very unlucky not to finish better than 3rd). Certainly would end my interest if this happened. Not least because it would be the out and out stayers, that deserve their chance at their ideal trip, that lose out to higher handicap marks gained often gained over much shorter trips. The GN's already struggling to accommodate those that win major staying chases - winners of the Welsh GN don't automatically make the Aintree cut these days. This would put the greatest prize out of reach of most top stayers. Would Secret Reprieve ever get a tilt? He'd have needed OR147+ this year. That's 7lbs more than his revised mark after winning the Welsh GN 15 months ago so impressively.
Based on the adjustments, it does state £5 grand national offer x 3, i did not notice it at the time and its not clear but i assume that means it was applied and maybe got lost in transit with my several National/ Footy bets over the weekend.
Thank you for your help PM
The problem is that unless you know that "Adjustments" is where to find a mention of them, you'd never know from reviewing the specific Bet details that a refund has been made (see 1 of my 2 below. No mention of any part refund of the total £150 stake though I can now see a small footnote saying "bonuses not included", which is presumably on point. But so far as I can see, without a cash balance statement, I still can't verify that there actually was a monetary refund or a simple debit of half the total stake. For obvious reasons, I happen to run a sizeable balance during the run up to the GN rather than fund each bet at the time I make it, so I lost track, like you did. Happy to accept I was only effectively charged 50% of the stake but when you get sent an initial reply that is factually bollox it's a tad disconcerting. Next time, I won't run a balance but fund each individually. Probably end up pissing away fewer £s on opportunistic, losing bets for Cheltenham
Rob Wright, the Times racing pundit is advocating cutting the field on safety grounds to a maximum thirty .. does he have a point ? .. fatalities, fallers bringing down other runners, lots of failures to finish .. on the other hand it's always good to see unfancied outsiders getting in the frame .. though when following Peanut's AI/Human I model, unfancied outsiders are never to be dismissed as no hopers
I think a reduction in field size is the obvious next step. They've modified the fences, changed the start, enhanced the entry criteria to name but a few alterations designed to improve safety. The pressure to go further is only going to grow.
However - is there sufficient evidence that an increased field size directly correlates to lower safety in national hunt racing or more specifically in the Grand National? Aintree is a particularly wide track. The distance is over 4 miles and 30 fences are jumped. The field is often pretty strung out before the first circuit has been completed. I'm not personally convinced a reduction in field size is going to reduce numbers of DNF proportionate to the number of starters. You don't see many fence pile ups like in the old days and a significant proportion of DNFs are Pulled Up. It feels like a token gesture to me.
Side note and related to the post… one of the first things betting companies could do to ensure safer gambling is make it easy to understand all your wins, losses, deposits, adjustments etc in one place with a daily/weekly/monthly sub total rather than separating it out…
Putting my cynical hat on for a second (and this isn’t directed at any operator in particular because they all do it), I’m sure it’s much more profitable for them if you can’t keep track of how many tenners you’re throwing away on your weekend accumulators…
That's the first thing they should do is it? - not deposit limits, time outs, self-exclusion, permanent exclusion, direct contact from the operator when they trigger certain thresholds of potential concern, affordability checks and so on? Ah but they've done all those anyway!
Every element of bet history and deposits/withdrawals is available to view - far more so than pretty much every other e-commerce operation. Bookmakers are not banks or building societies!
Maybe we should just ban it all together - make my life a whole lot fucking easier.
A bit touchier than I expected…
My default position comes from a place of cynicism of not only betting operators but big business in general. Online gambling is a multi-billion pound industry with multi-million pound profits.
Nearly every company across every sector exists to squeeze as much profit as possible out of its customers, without crossing legal or ethical boundaries. If you believe that one betting operator in particular is different to all the rest then that’s ok, you’re in the best position to know it. Just don’t expect that you’ll be easily believed.
KYC, deposit limit settings and exclusion options are all great but IMO are the least that could be done. I won’t start down the path of industry abuse of affordability checks to delay paying out winners, that’s a whole other discussion.
You are right that betting operators are not a bank or building society but my suggestion is not exactly asking them to put a man on the moon, just give the customer one place where they can see all of their transactions with a few statistics so they don’t have to do the maths themselves. The current set up is nearly the same across the industry with multiple views for multiple different transaction types with no option to easily understand what is going where. It’s almost as if it’s deliberate so that the average punter loses track.
Then perhaps the average punter might be quicker to take advantage of the deposit limit or self exclusion features, when they realise how much they’re losing before they rack up four, five, six figure losses.
Article
by Richard Forristal in today's RP sums it up for me:
"Death by a thousand cuts: we can't keep chipping away at the Grand National - We are hastening the National's demise and the sport has to stop flagellating itself. We live in an imperfect world and not everything can be ‘fixed’
A decade ago, officials at Aintree reduced the height of fences and levelled landing side drops around its Grand National course.
Included among the various modifications was the shaving of five inches off Becher’s Brook descent. Following a similar move in 1990, it in effect removed the last remnant of a ditch about the obstacle. It became a brook in name only.
The 2012 changes came following a pair of National fatalities in 2011. Alas, there were two further casualties in 2012 – including that season's Gold Cup winner Synchronised – despite all the modifications.
A year later, the course of history, if you’ll pardon the pun, was altered fundamentally when a forgiving plastic core replaced the immovable timber posts that made the fences the formidable test they were.
As someone who considers an honourable defeat over the old fences a career highlight, I was sorry to see what used to be such a daunting challenge for horse and rider reduced to a pale imitation of itself.
Completing the course used to be a mark of distinction, but David Mullins’ observation this week that “the fences are not as stiff as normal fences” when discussing his cousin Emmet’s plot to target a horse as inexperienced as Noble Yeats at the Grand National was a pertinent reminder of how things have changed. Not as stiff as normal fences. Think on that for a moment.
Nonetheless, given modern sensibilities, at this stage we must accept that retaining such a rigid position on such a rigid structure would have been remiss.
For the most part, the physical constitution of the fences as it is now minimises the number of spectacular looking rotational falls. Along with the end to racing on fast ground, the move from a solid fence core has surely made races over the fences safer.
However, there is a limit to what can be done without losing the unique nature of races over those fences. After all, the Grand National has retained its status as arguably the world’s most compelling standalone sports event because of the thrills and spills.
This is what the Grand National is, and inherent in its captivation is a degree of peril. It's a threat that exists for both human and equine participants, but the essence of a thoroughbred as a half-ton of muscle-bound flesh buttressed by four spindly legs inevitably means the risk for horses is greater.
As long as horses are selectively bred to run and jump, there will be a prospect of jeopardy. It’s an uncomfortable truth that most of us who have worked with these magnificent animals have had to reconcile ourselves with, because without racing thoroughbreds lose the ecosystem that makes them viable. We exist purposefully on this earth alongside each other, and horses are about the only farm animals in the world not raised for slaughter.
The quest to make racing safer is unending, and veterinary advances have clearly also helped, but there is only so much we can do. Two fatalities in Saturday’s Grand National has brought the number of equine lives lost in the race to four in as many runnings, provoking more ruminations on what must be done.
Reducing the field size from 40 to 30 is the latest suggestion to gain traction. The reality is, though, that smaller National fields in years gone by did not eliminate that threat. By the same token, there were also happy clusters of years when the fences were at their most fearsome that no fatalities were recorded.
To continue chipping away at the race in an effort to be seen to be doing something will eventually spell the end for racing itself, as the only way to ensure lives are not lost on the racecourse is to have no racing, or jump racing in particular.
A smaller field might not have prevented any of the recent equine fatalities, unless we are to believe that a 30-runner race would mean the field fanning out across a track that inevitably puts an emphasis on taking the shortest route possible. Let’s not kid ourselves here – this is a competitive sporting environment. That's the whole point.
Aintree's fences have been lowered, softened and bypassed and strict criteria introduced for horses and riders, but this is a rabbit hole that will only hasten the demise of the National. The sport has to stop flagellating itself – we live in an imperfect world and not everything can be ‘fixed’.
For what it’s worth, with the fences the way they are, Aintree should probably consider reintroducing a more significant graded drop at Becher’s, because that is one sure way to discourage bunching towards the inside. It might also be worth adding back the extra couple of inches of birch now that the solid timber structure has been removed.
When you combine lower and softer fences with the increased calibre of horse that has been proactively lured by artificial contraction of elite horses' ratings in recent times, you end up with a faster race that puts horses further down the card on the backfoot. That is not insignificant.
Early in 2019, I warned about the inevitability of future National deaths, but that the sport needed to stand over its welfare record when that day came. At the time, based on a sequence of years without any losses, the modifications to the course were being hailed as having copper-fastened the future of the Grand National.
It was dangerous territory, because where do you then go when that is proved to not have been the case? Concede more ground and teeter closer to the precipice? This is what happens. Moreover, it was a conveniently selective contention as it neglected a number of casualties that had occurred in other races over the National course.
Let’s say for argument’s sake the maximum National field is reduced to 30. What happens then when there are more fatalities? As sure as night follows day there will be, but, if this is the road we are going to keep going down, then the only logical solution is to slash the number further, or take another few inches off the fences, or maybe start removing fences altogether.
What is the Grand National then? It’s over, that’s what it is."
"Not as stiff as normal fences. Think on that for a moment."
It's why, believe it or not, there is now a stronger, more statistically-meaningful correlation between GN success and hurdles RPRs rather than chase RPRs. Bob Champion (while accepting the need for change 10 years ago) described them more like hurdles than fences.
That encourages greater risk taking and speed for those jockies determined to win at any cost, to the extent that some will go beyond what is fair competition and egregiously over-use the whip.
If there's 1 change that should have been made years ago and should be now made without further delay and before anything else is even considered, it's disqualifying cheats which, sadly, both SW-C and Mark Walsh were on Saturday, not imposing paltry fines and (in SW-C's case, totally meaningless) bans for whip abuse (i.e. cheating).
If you really wanted to make a meaningful attempt to further enhance safety my view is that it would relate to a mandatory rule that the GN would have to be run at or above a certain measurement of softness. It would be unfair on horses who would prefer good spring ground and a nightmare to coordinate because you would almost certainly end up closer to heavy by over-watering when there is rain forecast but it is a sure way to slow down the field. Horses at a slower pace tend to jump steadier and jockeys have more time to react.
The race was chaotic on Saturday in the early stages because the field was just going too fast for at least the first few fences and in truth for much of the first lap. The ground was closer to good, the start felt rushed (parade behind schedule and inconsistency around who did/didn't look at the start), they were moving forward relatively quickly and now the gap between the start and the 1st has been lengthened the field got to the 1st at pretty much top speed. There were a lot of keen horses in there. Those who came through to place did so from a starting point of middle or lower. Longhouse Poet (6th) was the only horse from the front end who stayed. The early pace was probably more fitting of a 2-2.5m chase than a 4m+ marathon.
Ground is only one factor in that but to my mind it's a much more realistic starting consideration than field size if there is a drive to implement further changes.
However - risk is still there. Regrettably horses die on the flat from exertion. I'm not sure anyone can evidence that Discorama or Eclair Surf would have survived had the race field been capped at 30, had the ground been soft, etc.
This would typically avoid the watering dilemma, though it would have big repercussions for some of the now-customary prep races as well. Might actually be a win for certain other meetings in Nov-Dec. Yes it would change the character of the race but swing the balance back in favour of proper stayers, many of whom routinely never get into the race currently. From RP's Chris Cook:
A February Grand National? Better that than fewer runners if change is needed
Change is once more being discussed in relation to the Grand National, a natural consequence of the upsetting fact that two popular chasers, Eclair Surf and Discorama, are no longer with us. One of the options mentioned, by Lee Mottershead in these pages and Rob Wright in The Times, is fewer runners, perhaps as few as 30.
Like Battle Group at the start a few years ago, this is the point where I dig my heels in. There is no point trying to save the Grand National if in so doing you turn it into something other than the Grand National and, in my view, a large number of runners is at the heart of the race's appeal.
I'm aware some people regret the move to take timber out of the middle of the fences a decade ago and feel the National stopped being its old self at that point. But it remains as thrilling as ever and the great boon of that change was six consecutive runnings without a single equine fatality, the best period for the race in half a century. Alas, it seems our luck has turned.
While that change was beneficial and plainly did not undermine the race's broader appeal, taking away a quarter of the runners would be much more risky. People who still have no idea the fences are different from Red Rum's day would certainly notice when there are fewer names to go around in the sweepstake and when that spectacle of so many horses lined up to face the starter is replaced by something more sedate.
Fewer runners will make the National more predictable. There will be fewer horses at the big odds that appeal to so many; the most fancied horses will win more often and will be returned at shorter odds. If Gordon Elliott or any other dominant trainer runs seven, they will amount to a quarter of the field rather than a sixth.
All that being said, such a change would be hard to resist if it were sure to work. But a better option, to these eyes, would be softer ground.
Plenty of moisture in the famous turf means less impact on the runners' limbs, or their bodies if they should happen to fall. It means the field goes slower, giving each runner more time to get organised at the next fence and again reducing the impact of any tumbles.
Marathon handicaps on soft ground often end with slow-motion finishes that some find unattractive, but horses recover from fatigue. We wouldn't want every National to look like Red Marauder's year but let's remember that the loose Paddy's Return did much of the damage with his mad charge along the take-off side of the Canal Turn. Thanks to the run-off zones for loose horses, such incidents are less likely.
Soft ground is hard to ensure in mid-April, even with sophisticated watering systems. The forecast at the start of last week would have put any clerk off watering, for fear of creating a quagmire, but the expected rain did not show up.
Instead, how about moving National day to February and letting Mother Nature do the watering? Let's face it, there are a few Saturdays in that month when the racing in Britain could do with enlivening, although a clash with the Dublin Racing Festival would be best avoided.
The TV audience on a February Saturday would be much less vulnerable to being undermined by lovely spring weather dragging people out of doors. And surely the race will still pull people through the gates, even if they have to wear the big coat.
I don't imagine the full three-day affair could be shifted by two months and even if it could attendance would clearly suffer for the first two days. But Aintree could still have two days in early April, with Ladies' day on the Friday and a Saturday built around the Topham and the Bowl.
Lifting out the main event would be a risk but, so long as there was thrilling action over the green fences, it could still be a big weekend out for Liverpool, while the National could be allowed to retain its identity in an earlier slot. It might, at least, be worth experimenting with for a single season.
There would be a certain amount of upheaval but these are changes I would be relatively comfortable with, speaking as a committed Grand National fan these past 38 years. Changing the date seems to me hugely preferable to a reduction of the field size, the sort of change that, once entertained, could never be reversed. I'm certain other enthusiasts must share my misgivings about what that could do to the race and its public support.
Perhaps the sport will decide, having recovered from the raw distress of the weekend and reflected on all the evidence, that no change is necessary. As my colleague Richard Forristal noted this week, we cannot contrive a race that is free of risk and should not allow anyone to labour under the misapprehension that might be possible.
Sometimes, athletes sustain injuries. Our main failing is that we are not yet able to save horses when they suffer injuries from which a human athlete could recover in months. Hope lies in the knowledge that veterinary medicine continues to make advances, thanks in part to the investment that comes from a successful racing industry.
But if we are to make changes to the National, let it not be the kind of change from which the race might not recover.
Decs for Monday's Irish GN made. Only Our Duke won this with 11.00+ since 2000 so no to some admirable and otherwise-well-suited types (including last year's 2nd and 3rd Run Wild Fred and Enjoy D'Allen and Thyestes-runner-up and topweight Franco De Port).
School Boy Hours (14/1) and Death Duty (20/1) both have strong claims if fine after early exits at Aintree last Saturday. Will mull them over a tad more though because it looked a nasty incident when Minella Times jumped into the back of SBH and Death Duty would be first >10yo to win for 25 years if he did so.
So, looking right down the card to those with form at the trip and who'll love the decent ground for the first 2 on the team sheet (aided by a free bet from Boylesports, so no need for a cash balance statement even for this internet-klutz): SMOKING GUN at 33/1 (6 places)
- Winner over course and distance in November’s Porterstown on Good ground. Put up 8lbs (OR138, Monday's mark) but that didn't stop him near-missing (and notching career-high RPR146) back at Fairyhouse on Soft over 3m in Feb - beaten only 1L by Monday's 12/1 shot Full Time Score and now has a 3lb pull on Rachel Blackmore's mount.
- Should be decent ground again on Monday, much to his advantage - won both chases on Gd or Y at 25f+.
- Pedigree ticks some good boxes:
sired by Gold Well (like Yeats, as aforementioned, a sire with strong progeny strike rate at marathon trips and by Sadlers Wells out of a Top Ville dam)
Wild Risk on the dam side
- 9yo, carrying 10.05, very workable stats-wise
MISTER FOGPATCHES at 25/1
- Very genuine, out-and-out stayer, only once out of the frame (when 6th in the Kim Muir) in 7 chases at 3m+
- Versatile as to going but best form on top of the ground. Won/near-missed both chases >26f on Good or Y, including a staying-on 4.25L 3rd in last year's Scottish GN (Monday's pilot, Danny Mullins, rode him on both occasions) - Pedigree positive, with Wild Risk X-Factor (his 4th damsire) - 8yo 2nd season chaser carries 10.06 tomorrow. Small stable hasn't been firing in recent weeks but, if he's Ok and avoids mishaps, should be doing his best work at the finish and should be there or thereabouts.
11 years since 6yo Organisedconfusion, unraced over fences at further than 21f, took a quick ground Irish GN and, though it's highly speculative, there's an interesting candidate IMHO who could do likewise on similar ground on Monday.
8yo LIEUTENANT COMMAND (25/1) will be having only his 5th run over fences but has already won over the course - on chase debut in November on Good ground, giving 7lbs and a 2L defeat to Max Flamingo (10/1 2nd fav on Monday) over 21f. He'll receive 4lbs from Max by OR and a claimer takes off another 5lbs so, on paper, has an 18lb pull. Also has a 9lb pull with Floueur - 3rd in the same race - but obviously the jury's out over a mile further.
He's not gone on from that promising start in 3 runs on Soft and Heavy but was very unfortunate on his last run (had his heels clipped and UR'd at 2nd last when looking a serious contender, under Monday's claimer), and he's inexperienced in big fields but, as a half-brother to (the sadly late) Some Neck (a expensively-bought chaser whose career finally took off over 30f as a XC specialist), there's a definite possibility that an extreme trip on decent ground could be right up his street.
50 days since his last run (3 wins from 4 Under Rules when 50 days+).
Trained by Noel Meade (73% RTF) and will have 10.03 on his back - if he's capable of it there's a lot going for him.
- 7yo 1st season chaser, the latest of 5 runs (2 wins, 2 near-misses) being his best to date, notching RPR148, when close 4th (4L) in the Kim Muir on Soft at The Festival (first chase >21f) but should be more effective on a sound surface. - 1lb lower mark (OR143) on Monday but same amateur jockey takes off 7lbs to put him on only 10.04. - best hurdles RPRs came at furthest trips tried (extended 24f) and on Good ground (only PTP run, a win on Gd/Y) and an interesting pedigree hints at 29f being well within range on decent ground:
from the "D'Alene family" - Triolo D'Alene winning a quick ground Hennessy and, though he failed in 2 GNs, more intriguing from the perspective of stamina, Arpege D'Alene who died as a 7yo was never out of the frame in 5 chases 25~32f other than when fatally injured in the Scot GN, including 6L 4th to Tiger Roll in the 4m NH Chase on decent ground at the 2017 Festival
damsire Network is unproven as a broodmare sire but sired several top stayers (Saint Are, Delta Work and Enjoy D'Allen)
2nd of Elliott's battalion to make my team. Likes to race handy, which could pay dividends on the ground.
So, though Ronald Pump and Floueur were serious contenders, my final each-way 4 are:
SMOKING GUN at 33/1 but now 40/1 Paddy Power (6 places)
OK, OK, as it pays 6~7 places and it's the penultimate staying handicap of the season, make it final each-way 5:
Bet365 going 20/1 for RONALD PUMP (16/1 elsewhere) and kindly offering 7 places and another free bet (definitely credited, cheers @bobmunro ) - it'd be rude not to IMHO
- High class hurdler, runner up in the Stayers at the 2020 Festival and twice 2nd to Honeysuckle at Fairyhouse on a sound surface, the 9yo has been a part-time fencer to date with only 4 chases since a debut victory in a highly competitive 21f Beginners Chase at Fairyhouse in Nov 2019, beating Galvin.
- Last run, on handicap chase debut, a powerfully
staying on close 2nd in March’s Leinster National over 3m on Heavy under
Monday’s 7lb claimer. He’ll have 5lbs in hand of winner Diol Ker and 4th Franco De Port on Monday
- Stamina for further indicated by both Hurdles (158) and Chase (157) career-high RPRs coming on testing ground at the near-furthest trips attempted (24-24.5f) but strong hurdles form over 3m on decent ground promises that the stamina test he appears to relish may not be ground-dependent.
- Pedigree also points to stamina:
Sired
by German bred G1 winner at 12f (G2 at 2m) Schiaparelli, whose breeding (by Monsun out of an Old Vic dam, himself a powerful representation of Saddlers Wells x Wild Risk) presents a German parallel to the Yeats/Gold Hill combo of Saddlers Wells x Top Ville, whose progeny have relatively high strike rates over marathon trips
Damsire
Hernando sired GN stalwart State Of Play and dam-sired GN close 2nd and XC-champion, Balthazar King
- Mark raised 5lbs after his Leinster National near-miss but he loves Fairyhouse and crucially drops to a 10.13 burden with the claim - the "outer bull" as regards stat-target.
More than half of tomorrow's Irish National 30 strong field are owned by O'Leary or JPM. So, by definition, any other owner is limited to less than a 50% chance of having a horse in the race.
Lieutenant Command (sadly, was really looking forward to him tackling an extended trip for the first time) and Samcro both non-runners in the Irish GN at 5pm.
Who would be your "next best" to fill the Lieutenant Command-sized hole @PeanutsMolloy?
Such an open race, at the prices I'm going to add DEATH DUTY (33/1 Bet365 7 places) who doesn't need soft over a trip like this. Stats say an 11yo won't win it but it's not a red-line (12 yo Isleofhopendreams was close 2nd to Burrows Saint in 2019) and 33s is decent e/w value IMHO. He's run creditably all season (finishing well but just outside the frames in the PP Hdcp and Ultima, both on quick ground, having refound his mojo and same reasons to fancy him now as last weekend. The UR at the Canal Turn was pretty soft reviewing it - going nicely enough in midfield and he looked in real good order, loving running loose with the leaders for the rest of the circuit (rounded up at the 20th - without the jock I wouldn't worry he did too much). Maybe I'm missing something but I'm a bit mystified by the jockey booking - Gainford fell off him at Aintree and now pilots Floueur. Today's jock has never ridden him in a race before yet this was Elliott's #1 pick for the Irish before surprisingly declaring him for Aintree. Seemingly Farclas thus became the #1 choice today but while it's tempting to put 2 and 2 together and think that Elliott now reckons DD's chance has gone ("He's not too badly handicapped and has a chance." is quite a different tune to earlier thoughts) I got bitten by that logic with Bless The Wings in 2018, when he surprisingly ran him at Fairyhouse (PU on Heavy) 5 days before the original GN target. Scrapped him from my team because I thought he'd lost his chance, missed a nice place payout. So I'm going to give Death Duty another chance. His strong pedigree + hasn't changed (Bold Ruler & Wild Risk combo). Was tempted by School Boy Hours, who similarly has the same great stats to go well as he did last week (and has weight in favour vs Death Duty based on the PP Hdcp). HOWEVER he pulled up rapidly after the 9th last weekend, after initially trying to go on when badly hampered by Minella Times jumping into his rear-end. He has even stronger pedigree ++ (related to Bonanza Boy) and 22/1 could look a great price by 5.10pm today. But that incident is a worry for me in a big field race situation so soon again and I'll side with Death Duty.
Lieutenant Command (sadly, was really looking forward to him tackling an extended trip for the first time) and Samcro both non-runners in the Irish GN at 5pm.
There is a thought that a touch of skulduggery has been going on with these two - not that I would ever think that Elliot or O'Leary were capable of that. Samcro and Lieutenant Commander, trained and owned by these two "gentlemen", were declared NRs this morning whereas the cut off time for Reserves to run was 10.00am yesterday. So the connections of two other horses have been denied a run because horses were entered in the race that were never going to run anyway. The owner of the 1st Reserve, Scoir Meire, is JP McManus and these are the thoughts of Tony Mullins, the brother of its trainer Thomas:
I'm no expert on these things, but what on earth was going on at the start?
Absolute joke. Fakir was fucked when the Starter panicked and let them go when he'd just shouted "no". BD really rubbed salt in the wounds for Swan Jnr after he rode such a good race on him at Cheltenham. Thought it looked promising for Death Duty for a long way - disappointing not to make the first 7 but maybe he was just short after last weekend. Foggy never got a blow in sadly. Really hope Ronald's OK. Sorry guys.
Pretty sure I heard the starter say something like "Ah you've gone then" after saying "No". Seemed to me as if he wanted them back again but couldn't be arsed with the hassle of making it happen!
Pretty sure I heard the starter say something like "Ah you've gone then" after saying "No". Seemed to me as if he wanted them back again but couldn't be arsed with the hassle of making it happen!
Pretty sure I heard the starter say something like "Ah you've gone then" after saying "No". Seemed to me as if he wanted them back again but couldn't be arsed with the hassle of making it happen!
The bloke was at the bottom of the steps as they came up to the line.
Why?
No idea if that made much of a difference or not, but it was all pretty comical. Was like watching a funfair carousel at some points with horses all going in different directions.
Comments
This year no frame-maker over #30 but Becher Chase winner and #31 Snow Leopardess would not have got a tilt.
2013 - Auroras Encore - won at 66/1
2014 - Alvarado - 4th at 33/1
2015 - Alvarado - 4th at 20/1 and Royale Knight - 6th at 25/1
2016 - Vics Canvas - 3rd at 100/1
2017 - Gas Line Boy - 5th at 50/1
2018 - Bless The Wings - 3rd at 40/1 and Milansbar - 5th at 25/1
2019 - Walk In The Mill - 4th at 25/1 (Becher Chase winner)
2021 - Minella Times - won at 11/1 and Farclas - 5th at 16/1 and Blaklion 6th at 50/1
4 of those were model-picks (incl Vics Canvas, who was leading over the last having recovered off the floor at Bechers first time and was very unlucky not to finish better than 3rd).
Certainly would end my interest if this happened. Not least because it would be the out and out stayers, that deserve their chance at their ideal trip, that lose out to higher handicap marks gained often gained over much shorter trips.
The GN's already struggling to accommodate those that win major staying chases - winners of the Welsh GN don't automatically make the Aintree cut these days. This would put the greatest prize out of reach of most top stayers.
Would Secret Reprieve ever get a tilt? He'd have needed OR147+ this year. That's 7lbs more than his revised mark after winning the Welsh GN 15 months ago so impressively.
For obvious reasons, I happen to run a sizeable balance during the run up to the GN rather than fund each bet at the time I make it, so I lost track, like you did.
Happy to accept I was only effectively charged 50% of the stake but when you get sent an initial reply that is factually bollox it's a tad disconcerting.
Next time, I won't run a balance but fund each individually.
Probably end up pissing away fewer £s on opportunistic, losing bets for Cheltenham
However - is there sufficient evidence that an increased field size directly correlates to lower safety in national hunt racing or more specifically in the Grand National? Aintree is a particularly wide track. The distance is over 4 miles and 30 fences are jumped. The field is often pretty strung out before the first circuit has been completed. I'm not personally convinced a reduction in field size is going to reduce numbers of DNF proportionate to the number of starters. You don't see many fence pile ups like in the old days and a significant proportion of DNFs are Pulled Up. It feels like a token gesture to me.
My default position comes from a place of cynicism of not only betting operators but big business in general. Online gambling is a multi-billion pound industry with multi-million pound profits.
Nearly every company across every sector exists to squeeze as much profit as possible out of its customers, without crossing legal or ethical boundaries. If you believe that one betting operator in particular is different to all the rest then that’s ok, you’re in the best position to know it. Just don’t expect that you’ll be easily believed.
KYC, deposit limit settings and exclusion options are all great but IMO are the least that could be done. I won’t start down the path of industry abuse of affordability checks to delay paying out winners, that’s a whole other discussion.
You are right that betting operators are not a bank or building society but my suggestion is not exactly asking them to put a man on the moon, just give the customer one place where they can see all of their transactions with a few statistics so they don’t have to do the maths themselves. The current set up is nearly the same across the industry with multiple views for multiple different transaction types with no option to easily understand what is going where. It’s almost as if it’s deliberate so that the average punter loses track.
Then perhaps the average punter might be quicker to take advantage of the deposit limit or self exclusion features, when they realise how much they’re losing before they rack up four, five, six figure losses.
Article by Richard Forristal in today's RP sums it up for me:"Death by a thousand cuts: we can't keep chipping away at the Grand National - We are hastening the National's demise and the sport has to stop flagellating itself. We live in an imperfect world and not everything can be ‘fixed’
A decade ago, officials at Aintree reduced the height of fences and levelled landing side drops around its Grand National course.
Included among the various modifications was the shaving of five inches off Becher’s Brook descent. Following a similar move in 1990, it in effect removed the last remnant of a ditch about the obstacle. It became a brook in name only.
The 2012 changes came following a pair of National fatalities in 2011. Alas, there were two further casualties in 2012 – including that season's Gold Cup winner Synchronised – despite all the modifications.
A year later, the course of history, if you’ll pardon the pun, was altered fundamentally when a forgiving plastic core replaced the immovable timber posts that made the fences the formidable test they were.
As someone who considers an honourable defeat over the old fences a career highlight, I was sorry to see what used to be such a daunting challenge for horse and rider reduced to a pale imitation of itself.
Completing the course used to be a mark of distinction, but David Mullins’ observation this week that “the fences are not as stiff as normal fences” when discussing his cousin Emmet’s plot to target a horse as inexperienced as Noble Yeats at the Grand National was a pertinent reminder of how things have changed. Not as stiff as normal fences. Think on that for a moment.
Nonetheless, given modern sensibilities, at this stage we must accept that retaining such a rigid position on such a rigid structure would have been remiss.
For the most part, the physical constitution of the fences as it is now minimises the number of spectacular looking rotational falls. Along with the end to racing on fast ground, the move from a solid fence core has surely made races over the fences safer.
However, there is a limit to what can be done without losing the unique nature of races over those fences. After all, the Grand National has retained its status as arguably the world’s most compelling standalone sports event because of the thrills and spills.
This is what the Grand National is, and inherent in its captivation is a degree of peril. It's a threat that exists for both human and equine participants, but the essence of a thoroughbred as a half-ton of muscle-bound flesh buttressed by four spindly legs inevitably means the risk for horses is greater.
As long as horses are selectively bred to run and jump, there will be a prospect of jeopardy. It’s an uncomfortable truth that most of us who have worked with these magnificent animals have had to reconcile ourselves with, because without racing thoroughbreds lose the ecosystem that makes them viable. We exist purposefully on this earth alongside each other, and horses are about the only farm animals in the world not raised for slaughter.
The quest to make racing safer is unending, and veterinary advances have clearly also helped, but there is only so much we can do. Two fatalities in Saturday’s Grand National has brought the number of equine lives lost in the race to four in as many runnings, provoking more ruminations on what must be done.
Reducing the field size from 40 to 30 is the latest suggestion to gain traction. The reality is, though, that smaller National fields in years gone by did not eliminate that threat. By the same token, there were also happy clusters of years when the fences were at their most fearsome that no fatalities were recorded.
To continue chipping away at the race in an effort to be seen to be doing something will eventually spell the end for racing itself, as the only way to ensure lives are not lost on the racecourse is to have no racing, or jump racing in particular.
A smaller field might not have prevented any of the recent equine fatalities, unless we are to believe that a 30-runner race would mean the field fanning out across a track that inevitably puts an emphasis on taking the shortest route possible. Let’s not kid ourselves here – this is a competitive sporting environment. That's the whole point.
Aintree's fences have been lowered, softened and bypassed and strict criteria introduced for horses and riders, but this is a rabbit hole that will only hasten the demise of the National. The sport has to stop flagellating itself – we live in an imperfect world and not everything can be ‘fixed’.
For what it’s worth, with the fences the way they are, Aintree should probably consider reintroducing a more significant graded drop at Becher’s, because that is one sure way to discourage bunching towards the inside. It might also be worth adding back the extra couple of inches of birch now that the solid timber structure has been removed.
When you combine lower and softer fences with the increased calibre of horse that has been proactively lured by artificial contraction of elite horses' ratings in recent times, you end up with a faster race that puts horses further down the card on the backfoot. That is not insignificant.
Early in 2019, I warned about the inevitability of future National deaths, but that the sport needed to stand over its welfare record when that day came. At the time, based on a sequence of years without any losses, the modifications to the course were being hailed as having copper-fastened the future of the Grand National.
It was dangerous territory, because where do you then go when that is proved to not have been the case? Concede more ground and teeter closer to the precipice? This is what happens. Moreover, it was a conveniently selective contention as it neglected a number of casualties that had occurred in other races over the National course.
Let’s say for argument’s sake the maximum National field is reduced to 30. What happens then when there are more fatalities? As sure as night follows day there will be, but, if this is the road we are going to keep going down, then the only logical solution is to slash the number further, or take another few inches off the fences, or maybe start removing fences altogether.
What is the Grand National then? It’s over, that’s what it is."
"Not as stiff as normal fences. Think on that for a moment."
It's why, believe it or not, there is now a stronger, more statistically-meaningful correlation between GN success and hurdles RPRs rather than chase RPRs. Bob Champion (while accepting the need for change 10 years ago) described them more like hurdles than fences.
That encourages greater risk taking and speed for those jockies determined to win at any cost, to the extent that some will go beyond what is fair competition and egregiously over-use the whip.
If there's 1 change that should have been made years ago and should be now made without further delay and before anything else is even considered, it's disqualifying cheats which, sadly, both SW-C and Mark Walsh were on Saturday, not imposing paltry fines and (in SW-C's case, totally meaningless) bans for whip abuse (i.e. cheating).
The race was chaotic on Saturday in the early stages because the field was just going too fast for at least the first few fences and in truth for much of the first lap. The ground was closer to good, the start felt rushed (parade behind schedule and inconsistency around who did/didn't look at the start), they were moving forward relatively quickly and now the gap between the start and the 1st has been lengthened the field got to the 1st at pretty much top speed. There were a lot of keen horses in there. Those who came through to place did so from a starting point of middle or lower. Longhouse Poet (6th) was the only horse from the front end who stayed. The early pace was probably more fitting of a 2-2.5m chase than a 4m+ marathon.
Ground is only one factor in that but to my mind it's a much more realistic starting consideration than field size if there is a drive to implement further changes.
However - risk is still there. Regrettably horses die on the flat from exertion. I'm not sure anyone can evidence that Discorama or Eclair Surf would have survived had the race field been capped at 30, had the ground been soft, etc.
From RP's Chris Cook:
A February Grand National? Better that than fewer runners if change is needed
Change is once more being discussed in relation to the Grand National, a natural consequence of the upsetting fact that two popular chasers, Eclair Surf and Discorama, are no longer with us. One of the options mentioned, by Lee Mottershead in these pages and Rob Wright in The Times, is fewer runners, perhaps as few as 30.
Like Battle Group at the start a few years ago, this is the point where I dig my heels in. There is no point trying to save the Grand National if in so doing you turn it into something other than the Grand National and, in my view, a large number of runners is at the heart of the race's appeal.
I'm aware some people regret the move to take timber out of the middle of the fences a decade ago and feel the National stopped being its old self at that point. But it remains as thrilling as ever and the great boon of that change was six consecutive runnings without a single equine fatality, the best period for the race in half a century. Alas, it seems our luck has turned.
While that change was beneficial and plainly did not undermine the race's broader appeal, taking away a quarter of the runners would be much more risky. People who still have no idea the fences are different from Red Rum's day would certainly notice when there are fewer names to go around in the sweepstake and when that spectacle of so many horses lined up to face the starter is replaced by something more sedate.
Fewer runners will make the National more predictable. There will be fewer horses at the big odds that appeal to so many; the most fancied horses will win more often and will be returned at shorter odds. If Gordon Elliott or any other dominant trainer runs seven, they will amount to a quarter of the field rather than a sixth.
All that being said, such a change would be hard to resist if it were sure to work. But a better option, to these eyes, would be softer ground.
Plenty of moisture in the famous turf means less impact on the runners' limbs, or their bodies if they should happen to fall. It means the field goes slower, giving each runner more time to get organised at the next fence and again reducing the impact of any tumbles.
Marathon handicaps on soft ground often end with slow-motion finishes that some find unattractive, but horses recover from fatigue. We wouldn't want every National to look like Red Marauder's year but let's remember that the loose Paddy's Return did much of the damage with his mad charge along the take-off side of the Canal Turn. Thanks to the run-off zones for loose horses, such incidents are less likely.
Soft ground is hard to ensure in mid-April, even with sophisticated watering systems. The forecast at the start of last week would have put any clerk off watering, for fear of creating a quagmire, but the expected rain did not show up.
Instead, how about moving National day to February and letting Mother Nature do the watering? Let's face it, there are a few Saturdays in that month when the racing in Britain could do with enlivening, although a clash with the Dublin Racing Festival would be best avoided.
The TV audience on a February Saturday would be much less vulnerable to being undermined by lovely spring weather dragging people out of doors. And surely the race will still pull people through the gates, even if they have to wear the big coat.
I don't imagine the full three-day affair could be shifted by two months and even if it could attendance would clearly suffer for the first two days. But Aintree could still have two days in early April, with Ladies' day on the Friday and a Saturday built around the Topham and the Bowl.
Lifting out the main event would be a risk but, so long as there was thrilling action over the green fences, it could still be a big weekend out for Liverpool, while the National could be allowed to retain its identity in an earlier slot. It might, at least, be worth experimenting with for a single season.
There would be a certain amount of upheaval but these are changes I would be relatively comfortable with, speaking as a committed Grand National fan these past 38 years. Changing the date seems to me hugely preferable to a reduction of the field size, the sort of change that, once entertained, could never be reversed. I'm certain other enthusiasts must share my misgivings about what that could do to the race and its public support.
Perhaps the sport will decide, having recovered from the raw distress of the weekend and reflected on all the evidence, that no change is necessary. As my colleague Richard Forristal noted this week, we cannot contrive a race that is free of risk and should not allow anyone to labour under the misapprehension that might be possible.
Sometimes, athletes sustain injuries. Our main failing is that we are not yet able to save horses when they suffer injuries from which a human athlete could recover in months. Hope lies in the knowledge that veterinary medicine continues to make advances, thanks in part to the investment that comes from a successful racing industry.
But if we are to make changes to the National, let it not be the kind of change from which the race might not recover.
School Boy Hours (14/1) and Death Duty (20/1) both have strong claims if fine after early exits at Aintree last Saturday. Will mull them over a tad more though because it looked a nasty incident when Minella Times jumped into the back of SBH and Death Duty would be first >10yo to win for 25 years if he did so.
So, looking right down the card to those with form at the trip and who'll love the decent ground for the first 2 on the team sheet (aided by a free bet from Boylesports, so no need for a cash balance statement even for this internet-klutz):
SMOKING GUN at 33/1 (6 places)
- Winner over course and distance in November’s Porterstown on Good ground. Put up 8lbs (OR138, Monday's mark) but that didn't stop him near-missing (and notching career-high RPR146) back at Fairyhouse on Soft over 3m in Feb - beaten only 1L by Monday's 12/1 shot Full Time Score and now has a 3lb pull on Rachel Blackmore's mount.
- Should be decent ground again on Monday, much to his advantage - won both chases on Gd or Y at 25f+.
- Pedigree ticks some good boxes:
- sired by Gold Well (like Yeats, as aforementioned, a sire with strong progeny strike rate at marathon trips and by Sadlers Wells out of a Top Ville dam)
- Wild Risk on the dam side
- 9yo, carrying 10.05, very workable stats-wiseMISTER FOGPATCHES at 25/1
- Very genuine, out-and-out stayer, only once out of the frame (when 6th in the Kim Muir) in 7 chases at 3m+
- Versatile as to going but best form on top of the ground. Won/near-missed both chases >26f on Good or Y, including a staying-on 4.25L 3rd in last year's Scottish GN (Monday's pilot, Danny Mullins, rode him on both occasions)
- Pedigree positive, with Wild Risk X-Factor (his 4th damsire)
- 8yo 2nd season chaser carries 10.06 tomorrow. Small stable hasn't been firing in recent weeks but, if he's Ok and avoids mishaps, should be doing his best work at the finish and should be there or thereabouts.
More anon
8yo LIEUTENANT COMMAND (25/1) will be having only his 5th run over fences but has already won over the course - on chase debut in November on Good ground, giving 7lbs and a 2L defeat to Max Flamingo (10/1 2nd fav on Monday) over 21f. He'll receive 4lbs from Max by OR and a claimer takes off another 5lbs so, on paper, has an 18lb pull. Also has a 9lb pull with Floueur - 3rd in the same race - but obviously the jury's out over a mile further.
He's not gone on from that promising start in 3 runs on Soft and Heavy but was very unfortunate on his last run (had his heels clipped and UR'd at 2nd last when looking a serious contender, under Monday's claimer), and he's inexperienced in big fields but, as a half-brother to (the sadly late) Some Neck (a expensively-bought chaser whose career finally took off over 30f as a XC specialist), there's a definite possibility that an extreme trip on decent ground could be right up his street.
50 days since his last run (3 wins from 4 Under Rules when 50 days+).
Trained by Noel Meade (73% RTF) and will have 10.03 on his back - if he's capable of it there's a lot going for him.
FAKIR D'ALENE 25/1
- 7yo 1st season chaser, the latest of 5 runs (2 wins, 2 near-misses) being his best to date, notching RPR148, when close 4th (4L) in the Kim Muir on Soft at The Festival (first chase >21f) but should be more effective on a sound surface.
- 1lb lower mark (OR143) on Monday but same amateur jockey takes off 7lbs to put him on only 10.04.
- best hurdles RPRs came at furthest trips tried (extended 24f) and on Good ground (only PTP run, a win on Gd/Y) and an interesting pedigree hints at 29f being well within range on decent ground:
- from the "D'Alene family" - Triolo D'Alene winning a quick ground Hennessy and, though he failed in 2 GNs, more intriguing from the perspective of stamina, Arpege D'Alene who died as a 7yo was never out of the frame in 5 chases 25~32f other than when fatally injured in the Scot GN, including 6L 4th to Tiger Roll in the 4m NH Chase on decent ground at the 2017 Festival
- damsire Network is unproven as a broodmare sire but sired several top stayers (Saint Are, Delta Work and Enjoy D'Allen)
2nd of Elliott's battalion to make my team. Likes to race handy, which could pay dividends on the ground.So, though Ronald Pump and Floueur were serious contenders, my final each-way 4 are:
- SMOKING GUN at 33/1 but now 40/1 Paddy Power (6 places)
- MISTER FOGPATCHES at 25/1
- LIEUTENANT COMMAND at 25/1 but now 28/1
- FAKIR D'ALENE at 25/1
Bet365, SkyBet and WH now going 7 placesBet365 going 20/1 for RONALD PUMP (16/1 elsewhere) and kindly offering 7 places and another free bet (definitely credited, cheers @bobmunro ) - it'd be rude not to IMHO
- High class hurdler, runner up in the Stayers at the 2020 Festival and twice 2nd to Honeysuckle at Fairyhouse on a sound surface, the 9yo has been a part-time fencer to date with only 4 chases since a debut victory in a highly competitive 21f Beginners Chase at Fairyhouse in Nov 2019, beating Galvin.
- Last run, on handicap chase debut, a powerfully staying on close 2nd in March’s Leinster National over 3m on Heavy under Monday’s 7lb claimer. He’ll have 5lbs in hand of winner Diol Ker and 4th Franco De Port on Monday
- Stamina for further indicated by both Hurdles (158) and Chase (157) career-high RPRs coming on testing ground at the near-furthest trips attempted (24-24.5f) but strong hurdles form over 3m on decent ground promises that the stamina test he appears to relish may not be ground-dependent.
- Pedigree also points to stamina:
- Sired
by German bred G1 winner at 12f (G2 at 2m) Schiaparelli, whose breeding (by Monsun out of an Old Vic dam, himself a powerful representation of Saddlers Wells x Wild Risk) presents a German parallel to the Yeats/Gold Hill combo of Saddlers Wells x Top Ville, whose progeny have relatively high strike rates over marathon trips
- Damsire
Hernando sired GN stalwart State Of Play and dam-sired GN close 2nd and XC-champion, Balthazar King
- Mark raised 5lbs after his Leinster National near-miss but he loves Fairyhouse and crucially drops to a 10.13 burden with the claim - the "outer bull" as regards stat-target.Cásca sásta and go n-eirí an t-ádh leat
enjoy dallen
death duty
my 3 small stakes and for a bit of interest.
Stats say an 11yo won't win it but it's not a red-line (12 yo Isleofhopendreams was close 2nd to Burrows Saint in 2019) and 33s is decent e/w value IMHO. He's run creditably all season (finishing well but just outside the frames in the PP Hdcp and Ultima, both on quick ground, having refound his mojo and same reasons to fancy him now as last weekend. The UR at the Canal Turn was pretty soft reviewing it - going nicely enough in midfield and he looked in real good order, loving running loose with the leaders for the rest of the circuit (rounded up at the 20th - without the jock I wouldn't worry he did too much).
Maybe I'm missing something but I'm a bit mystified by the jockey booking - Gainford fell off him at Aintree and now pilots Floueur. Today's jock has never ridden him in a race before yet this was Elliott's #1 pick for the Irish before surprisingly declaring him for Aintree.
Seemingly Farclas thus became the #1 choice today but while it's tempting to put 2 and 2 together and think that Elliott now reckons DD's chance has gone ("He's not too badly handicapped and has a chance." is quite a different tune to earlier thoughts) I got bitten by that logic with Bless The Wings in 2018, when he surprisingly ran him at Fairyhouse (PU on Heavy) 5 days before the original GN target. Scrapped him from my team because I thought he'd lost his chance, missed a nice place payout.
So I'm going to give Death Duty another chance. His strong pedigree + hasn't changed (Bold Ruler & Wild Risk combo).
Was tempted by School Boy Hours, who similarly has the same great stats to go well as he did last week (and has weight in favour vs Death Duty based on the PP Hdcp).
HOWEVER he pulled up rapidly after the 9th last weekend, after initially trying to go on when badly hampered by Minella Times jumping into his rear-end. He has even stronger pedigree ++ (related to Bonanza Boy) and 22/1 could look a great price by 5.10pm today. But that incident is a worry for me in a big field race situation so soon again and I'll side with Death Duty.
Sorry guys, bit of a pisser for 1 to bring another down at the 1st.
Sadly Ronald took a nasty fall at the last - fingers crossed he's just tired.
Thought it looked promising for Death Duty for a long way - disappointing not to make the first 7 but maybe he was just short after last weekend.
Foggy never got a blow in sadly. Really hope Ronald's OK.
Sorry guys.
Why?
No idea if that made much of a difference or not, but it was all pretty comical. Was like watching a funfair carousel at some points with horses all going in different directions.