This seems unfortunate.
I will admit I let out an audible gasp when I got to the part about the amount of the fine.
It reminds me of a friend of mine who does the jumpers who used to have a tendency to be the fastest one in the jump off with a rail down.
Then he would often refer to it as the $15,000 rail, or whatever the difference was in prize money between the winner and wherever he ended up in the ribbons.
The owners will likely pay the fine for him, and call it a win.
I’m all about welfare, but this seems like a heaping load of BS.
I believe the Brits only allow 3 strikes and fine on the fourth. Don’t know what the penalties are.
I wondered about that possibility.
Unpopular opinion: this was the right call to make.
My heart breaks for Junior over this but as someone said—the likely scenario is that the owners will cover the fine.
But this is the example that has to be set: it’s black and white with no exceptions. It reflects better on the sport to see HISA in action even at the highest levels.
If only USEF would have the nerve to hold true to this vs looking the other way despite video evidence, but I digress…
It is the right call to make. Whip rules are in place for a reason. But at the same time, it’s kind of like getting a huge speeding ticket for going 1 mph over the speed limit.
I think Junior handle it fine. Because what else can you say but, “yup I guess I did it.” 
Whoever pays the fine, I think when he looks back at the whole thing down the road, he will be thinking more about winning the Derby than about this aspect of it.
I’m glad they’re standing firm on the whip rule. I’ll never forget the beating Gabby’s Golden Girl took when she lost the lead to Rachel Alexandra in the 2009 Oaks. And as horse after horse passed her the jockey continued to hit her. Maybe the whip is made of a material so that the strikes didn’t hurt her, but it made me sick.
So yeah, hold the jockeys accountable for whip strikes.
I knew there was a new whip rule in effect, but I did not know the details of the punishment.
I would think that any jockey who overdid it to the extent that the owner lost the prize money for the race would find himself unemployed in a hurry.
It is much more enjoyable to watch racing without all of the whip use. Watching older races, it was often over the top.
I wonder if a jockey will go beyond 6 strikes if they believe they need it to win. Hit the horse, win the race, take the suspension and pay the fine. It’s worth it to win such a big race.
I agree.
The 2009 Oaks
Dunno about 2009 but todays whips are foam core and flexible, you can see them bend even when no contact is made if you blow up the image and go to slow motion. Not the whips of old.
Agree the stewards correctly assessed the fine, even for one strike over, we cannot go back to where we were.
I wonder if the one being hit would agree.
I meant that trainers and jockeys may agree it’s worth the fine, I do not. Even a “soft” whip is still a whip. We’ve all seen horses that respond to just the sight of a whip.
I don’t think it was overtly excessive. there were long gaps in between. Don’t think the last hit was needed. it certainly was not the all out beating that Victor Espinosa gave American Pharoah in the stretch.
that may be the case but they are like solid reeds. I noticed this year with all the upgraded sound around the track for live broadcast, the audible sound of the horses being hit with the whips was clearly visible on a recent live broadcast. Some horses even come back with welts on their sides
Do the stewards or track vets intervene when horse come back with welts? Are any records kept besides how many times the jockey hit the horse? Would think visible welts would count as much as more then 6 flat smacks.
The newer racing whips, which have been in use for about five years, don’t leave welts.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
