Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Sport of Kings discussion thread
Comments
-
16/1 lol0
-
Massive drift. 22s on the exchange at post time.0
-
Sweating heavily and pulling hard. Won't get home if it doesn't settle.0
-
Sweating like a blind lesbian in a fishmongers.0
-
Ran from the front, went odds on round the final turn (1.55 BFEX lowest price in running) but got beat.0
-
Went to 5/6 in running thought he had it. Should of done it e/w.
Cheers for the info anyway @palarsehater3 -
Sorry chaps0
-
He Knows No Fear....
300/1 winner at Leopardstown today becomes the longest price winner in horse racing history.1 -
Ebor on today. Very, very disappointed that ITV Racing decided to show National Anthem breaking down when highlighting Jawwaal's run at Ascot, rather than his more imposing race last time out.
Not sure who made that decision but it wasn't accompanied by any sort of warning nor followed by an apology. Very poor.2 -
ghaiyyath ain't half some horse!2
- Sponsored links:
-
Jamie Moore has suffered a broken back after a fall at Fontwell.
0 -
Jim Crowley on the winner of the first 3 races, Bataash in the next so basically 4/4 and then has good rides for the following 2 races.1
-
My Junkanoo is running today at Goodwood 445pm - as usual I’m hopeful but I don’t like the fact he is now favourite at 2-1 but he should go on the ground - fingers crossed
price is too short though2 -
Six fatalities at Southwell recently:
Elysian Prince, 30th July
Croco Bay, 10th Aug
Lost On You, 10th Aug
Booyakasha, 24th Aug
Swarez, 24th Aug
Avarchie, 24th Aug
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/aug/30/southwells-tight-jumps-track-may-be-adding-to-the-risk-for-fallers
0 -
Weird way to celebrate your Sunday evening. FreakAnna_Kissed said:Six fatalities at Southwell recently:
Elysian Prince, 30th July
Croco Bay, 10th Aug
Lost On You, 10th Aug
Booyakasha, 24th Aug
Swarez, 24th Aug
Avarchie, 24th Aug
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/aug/30/southwells-tight-jumps-track-may-be-adding-to-the-risk-for-fallers2 -
Facts, presented on an open discussion forum.
'Ignore him', you wrote, previously. But you can't, can you?
Your childish insult demeans you.
1 -
Anna - the recent deaths at Southwell are bad and the racecourse and BHA are investigating - there maybe an issue with the ground or the obstacles but they will fix the problem2
-
Racing authorities will never get any credit from the morons and there will always be arguments (with the benefit of hindsight) when a gradualist approach doesn't yield the desired result and necessitates more drastic action but drastic action with immediate effect it is at Southwell.
https://www.racingpost.com/news/latest/jumping-suspended-at-southwell-following-spate-of-equine-fatalities/449126
7 -
So while I completely accept there is blood on my hands as someone who loves horse racing, I've come to terms with it. I'm sure all of us have who contribute to this thread.PeanutsMolloy said:Racing authorities will never get any credit from the morons and there will always be arguments (with the benefit of hindsight) when a gradualist approach doesn't yield the desired result and necessitates more drastic action but drastic action with immediate effect it is at Southwell.
https://www.racingpost.com/news/latest/jumping-suspended-at-southwell-following-spate-of-equine-fatalities/449126
I am not quite sure if Anna_Kissed has grasped this, or feels he must post here rather than on a dedicated horse welfare/Race Horse Death Watch thread, because there are members of this forum who just pile on.
I'm cool with AK's views. They don't impact me and they don't impact my enjoyment of the sport. Fine. I am, however, a bit annoyed that there's no good place for AK to express their views and be ignored, because the discussion then comes onto this thread, and people get annoyed, and we go round in the same old circles, and nothing constructive happens.
I'd like there to be a separate thread. I'd mainly ignore it, of course, and I hope others would too.
Anyway - as for Southwell - there must be something wrong with the course's constitution and it is a great shame that it's taken a spate of fatalities for an investigation to occur. Hindsight is 20/20 of course and I welcome this as an action, and I hope that any shortcomings are revealed swiftly.1 -
There's a big green button headed "New Discussion" that AK could use if he really wanted to make his point on a separate thread and without deliberately attempting to aggravate the CL racing community. In fact I reckon most or all of us are well past being aggravated by his posts.
We all view fatalities with great sadness and take the issue very seriously but AK's posts frankly smack of him relishing any and every fatality as a chance to try to annoy CL's racing enthusiasts. His posts are now just a pathetic yawn and demean the real seriousness of the issue.7 - Sponsored links:
-
Spot on Peanuts.... As regards Southwell considering its a flat oval course it's distance make ups are one of the top in National Hunt racing which to me makes it a very stamina sapping course which is really surprising because of its configuration. I don't know if that is the cause for the current fatalities but I'm pleased they have stopped racing whilst they look into it. As it's certainly something that shouldn't be happening.2
-
You appear unaware of what has happened previously, Mr Peanuts.
A thread I commenced was 'sunk' by Mr Bartram, resulting in it being hidden.
You have the pick of several pro-racing threads in which to participate. The sole place in which a different view could be presented was met with sabotage. How does that sit with you?
And then there's the abuse. All of it one-way.
Moronic freak, or Freaky moron? I can't decide. Can I be both?
1 -
Your grouse about your thread closing is for the moderators, no one else.
Your message about equine welfare is agreed with by every contributor to this and other racing threads - your goal of banning jump racing is not, of course, but most people here are prepared to agree to disagree. You, patently, are not.
So, if you're tired of people being nasty to you, try being a little more prepared to look at things from both sides and less sneeringly sanctimonious every time a racehorse sadly dies.
6 -
Yep, and you are.Anna_Kissed said:You appear unaware of what has happened previously, Mr Peanuts.
A thread I commenced was 'sunk' by Mr Bartram, resulting in it being hidden.
You have the pick of several pro-racing threads in which to participate. The sole place in which a different view could be presented was met with sabotage. How does that sit with you?
And then there's the abuse. All of it one-way.
Moronic freak, or Freaky moron? I can't decide. Can I be both?0 -
PeanutsMolloy said:Your grouse about your thread closing is for the moderators, no one else.
Your message about equine welfare is agreed with by every contributor to this and other racing threads - your goal of banning jump racing is not, of course, but most people here are prepared to agree to disagree. You, patently, are not.
So, if you're tired of people being nasty to you, try being a little more prepared to look at things from both sides and less sneeringly sanctimonious every time a racehorse sadly dies.Well said, Peanuts.AK - I would say that without exception contributors to this thread care for the welfare of horses, and are in awe of the majesty that is the thoroughbred horse. They support changes that increase the safety of the sport for horses and jockeys, but they do not support abolition.You will not change their opinions, as they are unlikely to change yours - consequently every single post you make on this thread is deliberately designed to generate conflict, and you are fully aware that most of us will bite, including me!5 -
...every time a racehorse dies
Were that the case I'd be on here several times a week and on some days more than once. I don't do that and you know it.
As to looking at things from both sides, I've done that. I have written before on here about doubting not that many proponents of racing have the welfare of the racehorse in mind and act in that regard as well as they can. Yet what I saw, too, is an industry fed by those speculating on an outcome that, each and every time, puts an animal's wellbeing at risk. I saw an industry supported by the rich and the powerful. I saw an industry that was resistant to change.
Some change is happening now. That is largely, I think, a result of the attentions of animal advocates who have shone a spotlight on the BHA.
The moderator doesn't want opposition. He wants everything to be nice and fluffy - as it was, I presume, when there was no view presented that was an alternative to that made hitherto.
The horseracing industry becomes ever-more defensive and the confidence of those who oppose it increases. Change is not offered up willingly. It has to be fought for.
It will take time. But come it shall.
2 -
AK advocates the banning of all horse racing, I think, not just jump racing but never answers the question about what is then supposed to happen to the thousands of horses in racing.bobmunro said:PeanutsMolloy said:Your grouse about your thread closing is for the moderators, no one else.
Your message about equine welfare is agreed with by every contributor to this and other racing threads - your goal of banning jump racing is not, of course, but most people here are prepared to agree to disagree. You, patently, are not.
So, if you're tired of people being nasty to you, try being a little more prepared to look at things from both sides and less sneeringly sanctimonious every time a racehorse sadly dies.Well said, Peanuts.AK - I would say that without exception contributors to this thread care for the welfare of horses, and are in awe of the majesty that is the thoroughbred horse. They support changes that increase the safety of the sport for horses and jockeys, but they do not support abolition.You will not change their opinions, as they are unlikely to change yours - consequently every single post you make on this thread is deliberately designed to generate conflict, and you are fully aware that most of us will bite, including me!
2 -
I seem to recall an underhand petition of some sort was posted by Anna Kissed, at some point, of which the ultimate aim was to ban horseracing.3
-
alan dugdale said:I seem to recall an underhand petition of some sort was posted by Anna Kissed, at some point, of which the ultimate aim was to ban horseracing.
You're both absolutely correct.superclive98 said:
AK advocates the banning of all horse racing, I think, not just jump racing but never answers the question about what is then supposed to happen to the thousands of horses in racing.bobmunro said:PeanutsMolloy said:Your grouse about your thread closing is for the moderators, no one else.
Your message about equine welfare is agreed with by every contributor to this and other racing threads - your goal of banning jump racing is not, of course, but most people here are prepared to agree to disagree. You, patently, are not.
So, if you're tired of people being nasty to you, try being a little more prepared to look at things from both sides and less sneeringly sanctimonious every time a racehorse sadly dies.Well said, Peanuts.AK - I would say that without exception contributors to this thread care for the welfare of horses, and are in awe of the majesty that is the thoroughbred horse. They support changes that increase the safety of the sport for horses and jockeys, but they do not support abolition.You will not change their opinions, as they are unlikely to change yours - consequently every single post you make on this thread is deliberately designed to generate conflict, and you are fully aware that most of us will bite, including me!
Same old, same old from the self-righteous and authoritarian one. Quelle surprise.... you can lead a horse to water ......2 -
.....but you can’t make it jump ? Anyway, imo, that misleading petition stripped AK of any credibility he had, regarding this subject.PeanutsMolloy said:alan dugdale said:I seem to recall an underhand petition of some sort was posted by Anna Kissed, at some point, of which the ultimate aim was to ban horseracing.
You're both absolutely correct.superclive98 said:
AK advocates the banning of all horse racing, I think, not just jump racing but never answers the question about what is then supposed to happen to the thousands of horses in racing.bobmunro said:PeanutsMolloy said:Your grouse about your thread closing is for the moderators, no one else.
Your message about equine welfare is agreed with by every contributor to this and other racing threads - your goal of banning jump racing is not, of course, but most people here are prepared to agree to disagree. You, patently, are not.
So, if you're tired of people being nasty to you, try being a little more prepared to look at things from both sides and less sneeringly sanctimonious every time a racehorse sadly dies.Well said, Peanuts.AK - I would say that without exception contributors to this thread care for the welfare of horses, and are in awe of the majesty that is the thoroughbred horse. They support changes that increase the safety of the sport for horses and jockeys, but they do not support abolition.You will not change their opinions, as they are unlikely to change yours - consequently every single post you make on this thread is deliberately designed to generate conflict, and you are fully aware that most of us will bite, including me!
Same old, same old from the self-righteous and authoritarian one. Quelle surprise.... you can lead a horse to water ......2
