Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National?

[BillyHills]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National? I was hoping this thread wouldnt come back to haunt me, unfortunately synchronised paid the full price for going for the national. I feel awful for racing as well as the connections, we didn't need this. it really does spoil the thrill of seeing one of my favourite horses win in superb fashion. RIP Synchronised and According To Pete.

[Jimmy2shoes]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National? What a real shame, he was a class horse and was taken away from the racing world much too early. Sometimes this game can be oh' so cruel, sad news.

[Aykay1]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National? Its terrible news and a shame after all the safety precautions they have made this last year. Dreading the Daily Mail headlines tomorrow

[erhaab1965]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National? Synchronised jumped well throughout but it was what happened afterwards which caused the injury. It is only highlighted twice a year , at Cheltenham and Aintree , when infact injuries and fatalities happen everyday. Its all part of racing , lets move on. If I owned a horse I would rather see it race round Aintree with plenty safety measures and medical help at hand then some races in Europe where the horses have to jump fences made from stone !!!!

[Aidymac]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National? Too many horses line up in the National in my opinion. It is complete carnage.

[Bathtime For Rupert]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National? I though we were gonna have a right old pile-up at the Canal Turn for a moment. I love the spectacle and think it's a great race but it's obviously a tragedy to lose such great horses and it leads to a debate every year, often bringing out the ignorant.

[bowles10]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National? there were some poor fencing out there today i must admit, just watch sunnyhillboy, jumped impeccably at every fence yet horses were trying to outjump some of the fences and landing too far forward on the landing side causing them to struggle to pick up thier legs. Those that were brought down were unfortunate and i never like to see that but it cant be avoided. would a safety limit of 30 make any difference? Not sure but i would support it for one

[Eatyourwords]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National? I think it's the number of runners that add to the spectacle as well though. I was at Cheltenham on Gold Cup day and had a decent bet on Synchronised so shouted him home, my mate then asked me if I thought he would run in the National, I personally thought that he had done enough this season for the connections to be over the moon with him so why risk him over these National fences as he struggled over Cheltenhams. The daily rags will probably have a field day with it again tomorrow. Gutted though, was growing quite fond of Synchronised.

[cantspell]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National? Awful, but there did seem to be some poor fencing today as a poster said earlier. According to Pete didn't even fall he was brought down and I am not sure if Synchronised didn't get up run loose and fall on the 11th (I think), I just watched the reply there is a lose horse that jumps that badly and lands on or close to that fence and appears to damage its leg. I have always enjoyed the National, but the start was mayhem full of nerves. I don't believe there are enough escapes on the course, but some loose horses will jump on regardless. The race seems to be run at a far faster pace than it was a number of years back. Not sure what the answer is, but sadly I can see the day when it is no longer run

[erhaab1965]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National? When I first started out in punting somebody told me they used to have more than 40 runners , don't know when that was but a reduction in numbers would reduce the uniqueness of what is known as the worlds greatest horse race.

[Aidymac]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National?

When I first started out in punting somebody told me they used to have more than 40 runners ' date=' don't know when that was but a reduction in numbers would reduce the uniqueness of what is known as the worlds greatest horse race.[/quote'] But a decision has to be made. Do we leave the race as it is and watch horses die every year, and possibly a jockey the way things are going? Or can we find a new safer solution that decreases the risk in the race? 15 of the 40 runners finished the course yesterday, so 63% of the field did not even manage to finish the course. If this percentage continues, there are going to be fatalaties every year. Do we want to watch animals die for our own pleasure? Not me. I feel so sorry for According To Pete's connections, all they wanted was for the horse to come back safe and sound.... I think Jonjo on the other hand was a bit greedy and would not feel the same sympathy for him..

[Tedthewolf]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National?

I feel so sorry for According To Pete's connections' date=' all they wanted was for the horse to come back safe and sound.... I think Jonjo on the other hand was a bit greedy and would not feel the same sympathy for him..[/quote'] I feel exactly the same and would through JP into the greedy equation.

[BillyHills]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National?

When I first started out in punting somebody told me they used to have more than 40 runners ' date=' don't know when that was but a reduction in numbers would reduce the uniqueness of what is known as the worlds greatest horse race.[/quote'] 66 runners in 1929 and plenty of years over 40 runners. I believe reducing the field is the answer, many horses don't finish due to being brought down or hampered by loose horses and this year everyone wanted to be on the inside for some reason which caused chaos at the Canal Turn. A limit on 30 would be a good start.

[Tedthewolf]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National?

66 runners in 1929 and plenty of years over 40 runners. I believe reducing the field is the answer, many horses don't finish due to being brought down or hampered by loose horses and this year everyone wanted to be on the inside for some reason which caused chaos at the Canal Turn. A limit on 30 would be a good start.

...and maybe change Friday's Topham to the same distance/course as the national and the ones that don't make the cut upto another 30 could go in that....not sure just a thought.

[ExpectTheUnexpected]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National? Not to be too controversial, but perhaps it is because of the safety precautions that we're getting more fatalities in recent years. When the fences were larger, during the 80's, there were no fatalities. Jockey's had to approach more slowly and could take less chances. By contrast, since beginning to take caution and make fences smaller, we've had more fatalities. I think this is because jockey's are prepared to take more risks over a smaller obstacle and others must follow suit and go faster on horses that aren't the soundest of jumpers to try and stay competitive. Is the safest way, in an odd sense, actually the most dangerous?

[Bathtime For Rupert]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National? As someone who isn't clued up about racing in the 70s and 80s, was the course a lot different between the two decades? Or is it just coincidence that there were 8 fatalities in the 70s and barely any in the 80s? Were the fences at their highest in the 80s, then?

[The Saint]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National? It's a spectacle to watch and that's the whole point of the race for me... That having been said, I do not want to see Horse Racing affected for the worse and would have no issue with a consolation race being run - as they do with the Lincoln now and the Ayr Gold, Silver, Bronze Cups. Even 20 runners would be spectacular and at least half of yesterdays incidents would have been avoided. It would be a completely different race, but you would also end up with alot of really top class horses being aimed at the race on a regular basis. Probably stupid idea - just the ramblings of someone getting more and more pissed off with Ashley Young cheating/diving.

[mowgli77]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National?

Not to be too controversial, but perhaps it is because of the safety precautions that we're getting more fatalities in recent years. When the fences were larger, during the 80's, there were no fatalities. Jockey's had to approach more slowly and could take less chances. By contrast, since beginning to take caution and make fences smaller, we've had more fatalities. I think this is because jockey's are prepared to take more risks over a smaller obstacle and others must follow suit and go faster on horses that aren't the soundest of jumpers to try and stay competitive. Is the safest way, in an odd sense, actually the most dangerous?

This was mentioned last year. By making the fences slightly smaller the horses are jumping them at speed and make a different shape over the fences than if they were higher. if you see the shape a horse makes in eventing/horse shows they make a very arched shape, getting high over a fence and landing without much fuss. The main issue seems to be Bechers Brook and I think it's this fence that has a lower level on landing than when taking off and seems to be where most deaths have occurred over the years. Travelling at speed over these fences on good ground is going to be dangerous for horses and jockeys. A slower and safer Grand National could be the way forward with a reduced field resulting in (hopefully) more finishers.

[Haystacks]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National?

The main issue seems to be Bechers Brook and I think it's this fence that has a lower level on landing than when taking off and seems to be where most deaths have occurred over the years.

Yes, Beechers (jumped twice as fence 6 & 22) and also fence 4 (also jumped as fence 20) appear to be the main causes of recent fatalities. According to Wikipedia they have combined to take 6 of the last 7 lives (if you count the fence where the horse actually fell if it later perished riderless), with the only other fatality since 2007 occuring on the run-in: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equine_fatalities_in_the_Grand_National Surely it can't be beyond the racing industry to resolve the issues with these two fences.

[ExpectTheUnexpected]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National?

Yes, Beechers (jumped twice as fence 6 & 22) and also fence 4 (also jumped as fence 20) appear to be the main causes of recent fatalities. According to Wikipedia they have combined to take 6 of the last 7 lives (if you count the fence where the horse actually fell if it later perished riderless), with the only other fatality since 2007 occuring on the run-in: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equine_fatalities_in_the_Grand_National Surely it can't be beyond the racing industry to resolve the issues with these two fences.

Trouble with the 4th and first Beechers is that the horses have yet to really find a rhythm and there's still a lot to go wrong among the less sound jumpers, especially if spooked. Would be interesting to see how many have fell the 2nd time around once into a sound rhythm. Perhaps removing fence 3 and spacing out fence 1,2 and 4 would be a practical solution without ruining the spectacle. Alternatively, move fence 5 closer to Beecher's, preventing speed being built up on approach to it. Also can't understand why they've made a slope at the back of it akin to a crown bowling green. Looks like a botched effort at best. Regardless of what the BHA do, people will still not be satisfied. Either they must have courage in their convictions and stand by the current course, or if they make changes, do so for a final time. Set the goalposts, then its pay your money take your chances. If its not a risk owners are willing to take, dont run the bloody thing.

[who?me?]

Re: Synchronised ~ Would you run him in the National? I read somewhere that levelling the drops at fences makes them all want to take the inside (now flatter) route so this could well have increased risk of injuries. On Twitter Brough Scott says he would start with 30 runners provided “no-hopers” were excluded.