Poverty Bay Herald PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. GISBORNE, FRIDAY, JANUARY 19, 1899. REFORMS ON THE RACECOURSE.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XXVI, Issue 8414, 13 January 1899, Page 2

Poverty Bay Herald PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. GISBORNE, FRIDAY, JANUARY 19, 1899. REFORMS ON THE RACECOURSE.

The minds of Australian sportsmen are at present exercised about a number of reforms which experience has shown to be very necessary in order to preserve the quality of the Sport of Kings, and as several of the proposed alterations might apply with equal force to thejeonditionsof the rules of racing in this colony, it may not be uninteresting to our many sporting readers if we give a general outline of what is proposed. Of course, opinions greatly differ as to the directions in which changes should be made, and the effects to which they should tend, but briefly these are t!.e principal burning questions agitating the minds of the racing fraternity on the other side :—" Baby racing " probably takes place of first importance. It has been seriously questioned whether it is desirable to encourage the'"baby racer," as the green two-year-old, broken in in its extreme

youth nnd thrashed o< • a five-furlong course, has been described. On the one hand it is argued that early etjuine work of this sort is injurious to the animal's stamina; on the other hand that most horses are old enough and sufficiently developed to try to earn their food at two years, and that in many eases breeders cannot afford to keep them in idleness after that age. Connected with this is a question of " baby jockeys." The small boy jockey who is given a mount because of his very light weight often lacks the physical strength to control his fretful, frightened steed, and much damage is done to young horses by inexperienced handling. This question, which has been met in New Zealand by the clubs compelling all riders to lie registered, has become so serious in New South Wales that the police have lately taken action to prevent boys of under fourteen years of age receiving mounts, to the danger of themselves, the horses, and other riders. Another and equally important reform is the proposal to reduce the number of starters in races. This, unfortunately for the clubs, can hardly be necessary in New Zealand, where large fields are the exception and not the rule, but in Australia the number of contestants in the various races is frequently much larger than is compatible with the interests of honest sport. Many horses are raced with the single view of "running the weight off" They have no chance of winning, and are not expected to win ; they arrive at the winning post with the rear guard, and it is assumed that because they do so handicappers will give them less weight to carry next time. How to avoid the moral damage thus done to horse racing, and the danger to human life possibly contingent on too large fields, is a rather difficult problem. A solution which has been suggested, and will very likely be put into formal shape very soon, is to increase the number of sweepstake races, and compel owners to pay to a club official, before the race, the £2 which is nominally the jockey's fee for a "losing mount." At present, it is said, more than a few owners do not paythat losing-mount fee. It therefore costs them little or nothing to "run the weight off." But if the fee and a sweepstake had to be paid in advance, the trick would be too expensive. Owners who now practice it would refrain from nominating, and there would be smaller fields and truer racing, because, virtually, only "triers" would start. Also, the prizes would be larger, and therefore better worth honestly competing for. Probably the great consultations are largely responsible for the excessive number of starters in many of the races, and in this connection arises another undoubted evil for which it is difficult to find a remedy. It is frequently asserted that when a likely winner is drawn in a £20,000 or £56,000 sweep, the owner, if he is unable to secure from the lucky investor an extensive share in the ticket, deliberately stiffens or scratches bis animal, and prevents it obtaining even a place in the race. Closely associated with this question, of course, is that of minimising the gambling evil, which flourishes to a greater extent in connection with the turf than with any other branch of sport. So intimately has bookmaking become identified with horseracing (remarks the Sydney Daily Telegraph, to which we are indebted for most of the above facts) that it is now generally regarded as an indispensable part of the business. " The great incentive to the breeding of good horses is not mere prize-winning, which, under present conditions, could never bo made pay ; it is the chance of making money by backing the right horse at the right time. ' Stiff running' is therefore practised for other purposes besides that of deceiving the handicapper. The main object is generally to deceive the betting public, and cause a lengthening of odds ; or the horse may have been backed at long odds by outsiders, when the owner, finding himself forestalled, declines to bet, when something happens which causes all the money staked on him to be lost. The people who spoiled his market are thereby punished, and a state of things created under which the ring can afford to show a generous spirit, by which the sting of his disappointment may be somewhat blunted." All this is very interesting to the New Zealand reader, who has frequently before him the proposal to abolish the totalisator in favor of the bookmaker, and who will find these remarks of our Sydney contemporary extremely instructive : — " For mitigating the abuses arising from this betting system, the most generally advocated remedy is the totalisator. In other colonies this method of betting is legalised, and has to a great extent superseded bookmaking. It has certainly eradicated some of the more objectionable practices connected with turf gambliug, and so far has proved a valuable agent of racecourse reform. The contention that it would paralyse the sport has not been borne out by results. It is true that the totalisator does not enable horse owners to make money as they now do by manipulating the odds market, but by placing it in the power of clubs to offer bigger prizes it offers a prospect of more legitimate gain. As a choice between two evils, experience is all in favor of the totalisator as against bookmaking in its present form." The trouble is in New Zealaud that we have the totalisator plut the bookmaking evil, and though the laying of totalisator odds has been made illegal both for those -who bet and those who take the bets, the police seem powerless to enforce the law, and a considerable amount of gambling is fostered in spite of the law, by the gentry with a pocket book and a pencil.