Grand National controversy

[moonlitoaksranch]

It looks like the animal rights groups are getting more aggressive.

I’ve read about how many horses are killed or permanently injured at the Nationals. I’ve also read how they’ve made it safer. I have very little jumping experience myself. It does seem like jumping horses, at least the ones that are good at it, are wired differently. I rode a truly talented babysitter over some jumps overseas when I took lessons from an amazing trainer (she was Grand Prix level). Yeah, I didn’t have the heart or talent, but I did feel the rush and I respect the heck out of the horses that seem to really have a knack for getting to the other side of those obstacles.

However, here we are in an age where so few understand anything about horses. We don’t have cavalry horses anymore and really, isn’t some of this based on the military training horses required when used on battlefields? How do we translate this in the modern world? Can we still justify the most hazardous equine pursuits? Are we doomed to estrange ourselves even further from the public when races like the Grand National have high casualties?

I don’t have a strong opinion either way. There is always a danger in cancelling this longer, more difficult race, and then having that same fervor spill over into show jumping and eventing.

What is your opinion? Should the Grand National continue as an ultimate testament to the athleticism and willingness of horses? Should the race be modified? Should the number of entries be limited? Should there be more stringent fitness tests for the entries? Or, should it be allowed to pass away as a relic?

[moonlitoaksranch]

An article on this year’s protests.

Grand National: Police to deal 'robustly' with any protest

[NancyM]

A good question. I have been involved with both flat racing and show jumping for a number of decades. I will watch the Grand National race, if I can. But yes, it can be hard to watch. Bad things happen to good horses and talented people. The courage and strength of both horse and rider is stunning.

Do we start to make things easier? Safer? Less demanding, because of risk? If we do not ask HARD questions of horses, do we not select for more mediocre breeding stock? If so, do TB horses just become like every other breed of horse, bred on a whim, for colour or physical appearance, or a judge’s or inspector’s opinion? Or gain notoriety through trotting around a riding ring? What breed of horse would we then use to breed in soundness, courage, trainablity, athleticism and heart into our sport and riding horses if thoroughbreds simply become like every other type of horse? Appreciate my slanted view lol?

I guess I feel it’s important to take risks, to push the limits of what is physically possible, to avoid mediocrity. But when things go wrong at speed and with groups of horses and huge jumps, they can go very wrong in a hurry.

I do wish that they would use outriders, have them stationed between the jumps where possible, to pick up loose horses to avoid them getting mixed up with competitive horses, and causing more accidents than are already present. That would make me happy.

[OverandOnward]

Like you OP, I know just enough to know that I don’t know enough. About what is fair to ask of horses, and where the Grand National falls on that scale.

In younger years I was thrilled with the great tales of the Grand National. BUT that changed as I learned more about the terrible accidents, the horses injured, maimed and killed. Every year !!! At the time. Totally unacceptable.

Riders as well have been at excessive risk. Some may relish the edge nature of the race, others may feel pressured to ride to keep up their credentials.

The other side of that is that I am SHOCKED at the owners, trainers and riders who participate in a race that can bring such risk and havoc to their horses. And the riders!

The questions are not new in any risk sport. What is now 5* eventing has gone through its evolution of changing mindsets from “whatever it takes” to “what is reasonable for an afternoon of high-endeavor sport”. The Grand National has also been down that road, has it traveled far enough?

What is the POINT of having a high-risk endeavor as the test of greatness? Can we test just as well in a way that is brings horses and riders home safely, with serious accidents being rare?

Sometimes sport - any sport - can fall into a do-or-die mindset that is more appropriate in an actual war fighting for one’s homeland, or something that momentous. With no pyschological qualifications behind the opinion, I speculate that this feeling can spill over into vigorous sport with high achievements on the line.

I’m not looking for a no-accidents-ever standard because people can suffer injury doing absolutely anything. Even piano-players can get carpal tunnel to the point of disability. I don’t know why we live in a world where risk is unavoidably connected with achievement in absolutely any endeavor, but it is.

The design of a sporting contest must follow the highest principals of the sport. We have to determine what those are to get it right. Some sports have never really done that, even though individual participants have their own ideas.

Testing the best skills is only part of it. The task must be a fair ask. There should be a reasonable expectation that qualified competitors, who are ready on the day, can accomplish the contest while showing their best, and complete it undamaged. Not their ultimate abilities, but their best performance.

I can accept a few tumbles but accidents that cause injury should be rare.

That standard would work for me.

[OverandOnward]

@NancyM

If we do not ask HARD questions of horses, do we not select for more mediocre breeding stock?

This is a great question because it is at the heart of every high-endeavor sport. From the Grand National to international football/soccer to whatever is your sport of choice.

If we aren’t asking the big questions, are we making the sport less? Are we diluting everyone’s expectations of everything?

Because sport does influence culture, even in a culture where most people don’t follow sport. Values endemic to high-level sport are carried over into business and even expectations of our government’s performance in our service … even what we expect of our nation’s place in the world.

I think this is where the (general) discussion can get stuck. People are not on the same page re the values and principals behind the sport. Behind life, really.

Some nations are known to pursue Olympic medals with a ‘rules be damned, do whatever it takes’ attitude. Even to expendable athletes left without much at the end of their athletic careers. And that attitude has absolutely been seen in the conduct of those nations in international relations and commerce.

Anyway … Personally I believe that we first have to define what high achievement, what demonstrating one’s best, actually entails. What IS the big question that we want to ask?

Do or die? That means that athletes are expendable. The hard realities of the sport if they irreparably break something in the attempt.

Or some value that is more talent-directed, skill-measured, where athletes are less expendable?

I think that until we answer questions like that, it is hard to assess what a contest should even be, before we even get to the tasks that are included.

[Rackonteur]

@moonlitoaksranch

Should the race be modified?

The jumps have been modified, over the years, but I don’t remember how much or how often. I do know it is not like any other race in the world (which is why it has been called the “greatest” race in the world – whatever was/is/will be meant by that), e.g., it makes the Gold Cup look like a Pony Club race by comparison and even the Maryland Hunt Cup pales in comparison.

I don’t know how I feel about it at my current time of life. When I was a child I wanted to ride in it. I still thrill to see the field canter down to the start, but I can’t see that live because it isn’t shown on any channel I can get.

I remember one year contrasting it with the Kentucky Derby, the “biggie” race over here, when Derby hopefuls were “favored to win,” while 'National horses were “likely to get round the course” at all.

I feel guilty whenever I watch any horse race nowadays.
Yet I still thrill to see the 'National, even if I have to wait 'til the day after to watch it.
And I do admire a horse who can go 4 1/2 miles over 30 fences, and do it year after year (in some cases) more than a baby 3yo who can go 1 1/4 miles on the flat and be retired after 2 seasons. I think the Grand National is less of a waste.

[Rackonteur]

Grand National Fences

[Rackonteur]

https://www.grand-national-guide.co.uk/articles/world-greatest-steeplechase

I love this quote: The first fence is a 4 foot 6 inch fence and is of no real consequence .…

---

“Steeplechasing has about it rather more glamour and excitement than the flat, a trace of chivalry, a spice of danger, and a refreshing vigor that the smooth urbanity of flat-racing lacks. The atmosphere is less restrained, more friendly, more intimate and more sympathetic. It gives the impression of being a sport and not primarily a business, for though it seems impossible to preserve any present-day pastime from the tarnishing influence of
Mammon, the majority of those who patronize steeplechasing do so from a true love of its qualities, rather from what it yields materially.”

–John Hislop, ca 1951

https://nationalsteeplechase.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/NSA-History-of-Jump-Racing.pdf

---

Safety changes to the Grand National fences

Following safety reviews after both the 2011 and 2012 renewals, a number of changes were made to the course. This included some reductions in Grand National fences or the drop after fences, plus the levelling of landing zones.

https://www.grandnational.org.uk/fences.php

[McGurk]

I am involved in steeplechasing at the local level and it’s hard at times. Lots of thought and effort is being put in to making the sport safer. Lots of changes in the construction of the fences, and concerns about ground conditions. But horses do still get injured, horses do still die and riders do still get injured, sometimes very seriously.

There’s a couple of easier fixes that would make the GN safer. The first and most obvious one is to limit the size of the field, currently 40 entries. The start looks like a cavalry charge, and lots of good horses get taken out earlier by other horses jumping poorly. And I think it encourages horseman to enter any horse with half a chance because of the “last one standing” nature of the race. (It’s not necessary to be the fastest or the best jumper to win, you just have to still be on your feet after the last fence to have a shot.)

On the local Point to Point circuit, races are split into divisions when they’re more than 12 entries.

I don’t know enough about British jump racing to make intelligent commentary about how horses qualify for the race, and if there’s anything that can be changed in the jump construction without changing the essential quality of the race. (Most timber races in the US, excepting the Maryland Hunt Cup, have ground lines in front of the timber fences, some are angled slightly instead of strictly vertical, and the top rails do break. Lots of changes have been made in the construction of hurdles to make them safer as well.)

There was a comment about about outriders above. In the 2022 race, out of 40 entries, 12 horses fell, 11 were pulled up and 2 lost riders. That left 15 horses to actually contest the race and 14 loose horses to catch. I can’t imagine putting enough outriders out on course to make a difference.

ETA to correct stats.

[endlessclimb]

Watching video of this, the horses seem to jump in to instead of over the fence. I understand that a horse running flat has a harder time lifting up and over, but some of the horses fell because the brush slowed their front end down so much they couldn’t get their landing gear down.

I admit, I had a hard time watching last years. Yikes.

[NancyM]

One good outrider, with a quick and agile pony (usually QH), stationed between each jump on the course would make a huge difference, If more than one loose horse after a jump, they could only catch one, but if that loose horse did continue with the field and jump the next jump, the next outrider, after the next jump could maybe get the loose one. These racehorses are not going “fast”, they are going at a fairly slow gallop to go that distance, pretty easy to nip in there and catch one with a good pony, as long as the loose horse still has it’s bridle on. Get the loose ones captured and removed from the field asap.

Obviously, the lead pony rider would not attempt to catch a loose one in such a way as to bother or impede those horses still in the race, just extract those who ARE able to be caught. IMO, it would help. Yes, it would mean having to hire some skilled riders with good ponies. But really… wouldn’t it be worth the cost? To save some lives? The loose horses cutting across the path of those who are still in the race while on final approach to the next jump is a huge risk.

[Willesdon]

There is controversy every year. The introduction of qualification requirements mean better horses now run in it than ever did in the past. The training of NH horses has improved such that the unschooled, hard pulling nutter is now a very rare animal, in any races. Good jumping technique wins races: it just took some trainers a bit too long to work that out. The vet work, nutrition, body work etc all much improved. The National fences have been greatly modified to make them “easier” such as reducing the big drop after Becher’s and filling in the brook. There are now other Aintree races over similar fences to ensure the unique National fences are not a complete surprise to horse and rider. Run-outs are now built beside many fences which makes dealing with loose horses easier. There are horses than run in the race on multiple years and many loose ones carry on jumping, which suggests horses can enjoy the experience. There are also multiple refusals when horses just say “enough!” but they aren’t so obvious on TV because the cameras are on the leaders. Jump racing is a tactical game and is never flat out pace from the gate, in the American style. Running in heavy ground is probably safer than on faster ground, judging by the statistics. Indeed, there are no starting gates in jump racing because when running over 2.5, 3, or even longer than 4 miles, the start is not a big influence. National Hunt racing is built on a fox hunting tradition so big, hairy fences and long gallops are within the experience of participants. Personally, I think the Pardubice race in the Czech Republic is now far more dangerous.

[Bogie]

From what I’ve read, the modifications made to the course definitely make it safer. I hope they continue in that vein. I do think outriders to help catch the loose horses would help as the unmounted horses can cause chaos in the remaining field.

I watch the race when/if I know the horses all got back safely.

[Rackonteur]

@Willesdon

Personally, I think the Pardubice race in the Czech Republic is now far more dangerous.

Looks like a speeded-up hunter pace to me. Without the woods and their hazards.

[anon68314200]

Something will always be ‘that thing’ that is ‘the’ most dangerous. Ban the National, and the activists will move to their next target. Their organizations get them power, they are not going to give up and say ‘problem solved.’

This is part of the issue with the BLM and TRans movements. They are largely products of inertia. There is no end to their ‘issues’. There are no solutions. They are only going to move on to their next target.

[Impractical_Horsewoman]

That was a really helpful explanation! Although I will have to say (to use another example of a high-risk equestrian sport), one thing that always surprises me when watching 5* level events in the UK is how “easy” Michael Jung and the best of the best make it look to sail over some of the most challenging combinations of Badminton and Burghley, and how difficult it looks when even the best of the rest attempt it. While the Grand National, even by the winner, always looks difficult.

Like many Americans, I grew up less familiar with jump racing, but I have a lot of sentimental fondness for the Grand National from reading National Velvet and Free Rein. Those brush fences, although theoretically more forgiving than timber, look very hard to read from a ground’s eye view. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPRMxTVDOHo

[aregard]

As we have seen in eventing, when you dumb down the challenge, you get lesser horses competing, and a different set of injuries.

So, there’s that.

[moonlitoaksranch]

I was watching some old videos of the Nationals and it seems like many of the injuries are due to not being able to see what’s happening on the other side of the fence. So many times, it seems like a horse and rider jump into chaos in the form of other downed riders and horses just on the other side. There’s no way to move down the fence line if you don’t know what you’re jumping into. Brush is the traditional type of fence, I know. Perhaps less riders will make the odds better, but I don’t think that talent and fitness matter when your landing isn’t clear. Unless you’re out in front, it’s just luck whether or not you jump into a wreck.

[Mara]

Becher’s was the worst kind of fence before it got extensively modified, a cruel joke played on good honest horses.

A 20-horse field would be both safer and fairer.

As a side note: there’s a good horse named Velvet Elvis entered, with a decent chance. I would love to see that name ensconced in National lore.

[Willesdon]

There are three ways, apparently, to run in the National. Aim for the front flight and try to stay there. Hang around at the back and stay out of trouble until the path clears. Hope for the best. The variable is the addition of luck or chance. The very first fence used to result in multiple refusals but most horses jump it these days. As they go twice round, the fences get so knocked around they tend to decrease in size. And tired horses pull up or refuse. Any jump racing involves falls and refusals so handling the traffic is part of the jockeys skill set. Most horses are also good at avoiding disaster unless they are physically knocked off their feet.

Badminton and Burghley, like all 5*, are only 1.20 high (measured at the point where the horse jumps from). It is the speed, the unrelenting questions and technical nature of each fence, combined with the long distance and the optimum time, that makes the 5* the ultimate test. It is the job of the Course Designer to make the rider think but allow the horse to read the question easily - the reason why there are so few people able to design xc at 5* level.