Sporting Review. THURSDAY, JUNE 18, 1891.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume I, Issue 47, 18 June 1891, Page 3

Sporting Review. THURSDAY, JUNE 18, 1891.

A CONTRIBUTOR to the Canterbury Times still Maintains that the rule proposing to raise the ' weights in handicaps when the highest weight hdeepting is less than Bst. izlb. would be injurious to racing. We would like to discuss the matter with him, as the racing season is now nearly at a finish. The rule of raising the weights in handicaps was first, if we remember right, introduced into the Newmarket rules some forty-five years ago by the late Admiral ' Rous, who, everyone will admit, was the best ■handicapper and judge of racing known during ’ the present century. It was found to work so ; well that it has never been rescinded. Our Contemporary goes on to say, “ But we rqpeat that the intentions of a handicapper may be upset by raising the weights all round or zolb.” Supposing, for instance, that ''the .highest weight accepting should be yst. ! 61b. and the lowest 6st., would our contemporary "contend that the addition of 2olb. ;i t9‘the former would be of no more account than zoH?. to the latter? We will take

these remarks as follows: —In the first place, that a handicapper is not fit for his position if the highest weight accepting be as low as yst 61b. He would certainly commence his handicap at 9St. or gst. ylb.; therefore, if the highest weight accepting was only yst. 61b., it must be a precious bad handicap. The late Admiral Rous, as a rule, commenced his handicap on the weight-for-age scale, which would be in. New Zealand gst. ylb., and if a horse was entered that had never run he would get about weight for age. With regard to the 2olb on the yst. 61b. being no more than on to 6st., we contend that it would be no more difference, also that many horses would run better under the increased weight. For confirmation of this, let our contemporary look through the time test, on which so many in the Colonies pin their faith in, and it will be found that horses have done quicker time with Bst. 1 zlb. on their backs than with 6st. izlb — notably on the Riccarton course. Then again, it is well known that most horses run better with a man on their backs than a child. Let our contemporary look through his valuable library and he will see that such is the case. Our collection of racing records is not large at present, and we have to trust to memory, but if one is required let our contemporary look up Blinkhoolie’s and Bromielaw’s running in 1866, ’6y, ’6B, cum multis alis — even at Riccarton — and he will see that we are correct in our theory. One must remember there are no Kitcheners, Carrols, Grimshaws, Kenyons, and others in the Colonies. In conclusion, we venture to say that if a plebiscite of .owners, trainers, and jockeys was taken they would be in favour of the rule being adopted. We are willing to discuss this matter further.

It appears from the following statement in the Canterbury Times that the distressed jockeys’ fund of the Canterbury Jockey Club remains in a very unsatisfactory condition :—“ At a meeting of the committee of the Club, held on June 9th, an application was read from Mr. E. Cutts for a grant to the lad Ross, who was injured at one of the Napier meetings, and the committee resolved that the jockey did not meet with his accident on the Riccarton course be could receive no allowance from the funds.” This is a repetition of a rather melancholy farce which has been enacted more than once during the last two or three years. The members of the committee may be right from a legal point of view in refusing assistance to jockeys who suffer injuries on other courses; but the persistent refusal has created a'most unpleasant feeling among members of the profession. If the custodians of the fund wish to do the right thing—and we presume they do —they should at once separate the money from their general account and publish the rules and regulations under which it should be available to the persons for whom it was intended. Some years ago Mr. John Marshall introduced the same fund into the A.R.C., but on his return from his travels he found that the fund had not been kept from the general account, and had been drawn upon for other purposes. These two cases point more than ever to the necessity of having a New Zealand Jockey Club for the whole Colony, so that all these kind of funds, as well as other matters, be invested under one general management, and that the whole racing rules, etc., should be assimilated to the Newmarket Jockey Club. Until this is done there will be no encouragement or satisfaction to either owners, breeders, trainers or jockeys in racing here. Not a week passes but we hear of horses and jockeys leaving for Australia. In fact, New Zealand is simply a nursery to supply them with materials. In conclusion, let us ask where Australia obtains its best light weight jockeys and horses from ?

We notice that some of our Southern contemporaries are making remarks of the bad practice indulged in by many New Zealand Clubs in advertising their races, especially . steeplechases, as about so many miles. Many courses to our knowledge have never been properly measured, and that instead of three miles and a half they are nearer four miles, and those at three miles are nearer three miles and a half. We should very much like to see the Ellerslie course measured by a practical surveyor who understands chaining a racecourse, and we have no hesitation in staying that the

distances, both flat and over country, will not be found correct, thus accounting for the fast times thatjhave been made at different metings. It makes a great difference to a horse running three miles and a half, or nearly four, over a country. Some years ago the. Liverpool Grand National Steeplechase was called about four miles and a half, and it was accepted as such. Recently it was found out to be a little, short of five miles, The only reason that one can ac count for such a practice is that it protects the starter if he should make, a mistake, also protects the Club from being proceeded against. In some instances it has been known that owners have used their influence to get the races, especially jumping ones, to be run over distances to suit themselves. The Grand National Hunt Club (England) ‘have a rule that no races shall be advertised in the racing calendar unless the distance is correctly stated, and clerks of the courses will be held responsible for any infringement of the N.H.O. rules, which state that no hurdle race, or steeplechase shall be under two miles.

The stewards of the Town and Suburban Racing Club have made the following recommendation, which might, in their opinion, be adopted by the next Conference shortly to be held at Wellington :—“ That the Metropolitan Clubs should make a rule giving power io the stewards of any club to seize any horse that may be suspected of running under a false name until an inquiry has been held; and in the event of its being proved, that the animal should be branded in some conspicuous place with a large brand supplied by the Metropolitan Clubs.” This application, has some sense in it, but it is carrying the thing too far, also giving too much power to the stewards of a country meeting, who really have, as a rule, little knowledge of racing. At the same time it appears odd to us that when a horse has once run that they cannot identify him, either by his marks, action, or otherwise, so we consider that it would be inadvisable for Metropolitan Club to pass a rule as requested, and there are many other obvious reasons for not making it law.