Why do certain riders in Thoroughbred horse racing defy regulations regarding whip usage?
Our team's analysis of recorded whip rule violations suggests that the desire to avoid finishing in second or last place may be a contributing factor. In our study, recently published in the open-access journal Animals, we examined the official Stewards Reports and Race Diaries from New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory. In 2013, there were a total of 56,456 starts in 5,604 races across 785 race meetings held on 122 different tracks. Out of these starts, 348 instances were reported as breaches of the whip rules defined by the Australian Rules of Racing at that time, and among them, 37 instances involved a second breach. It is worth noting that not all race rules were violated, so it is intriguing to examine the specific types of breaches and when they occurred during the races.
Out of the 139 riders who participated in 348 races where whip rules were violated, 51.08% were riders who had previously committed more than one breach of the whip rule in 2013. In total, the fines imposed accounted for approximately 2.29% of the total prize money earned by the horses involved.
The whip rules were modified on December 1, 2015, to incorporate backhand whip strikes in addition to the existing limitations on forehand usage. For the precise wording of the rules, please refer to www.racingnsw.com.au.
Race Rankings
The information indicates that riders of horses who finished in the top three positions had a noticeably higher occurrence of rule violations, implying that a desire to win may drive them to breach whip regulations, potentially impacting race results and betting outcomes.
Additionally, the data reveals that horses finishing last had the next highest percentage of rule violations, suggesting that the motivation to avoid last place may also prompt riders to misuse the whip. Furthermore, the data demonstrates that breaches of racing rules were more prevalent in metropolitan areas compared to the country or provincial locations.
Although country tracks accounted for 67.34% of race starts, they only documented 57.47% of starts where a breach or several breaches occurred. In contrast, metropolitan tracks, which hosted only 14.53% of starts, recorded 22.13% of starts with a breach or several breaches. This difference could suggest that the motivation to win might be exceptionally strong at the esteemed city race tracks, while also raising concerns about the effectiveness of surveillance in non-metropolitan areas.
Racing without the use of whips
What does the future hold for the use of whips in Thoroughbred horse racing in Australia? In 2016, Harness Racing Australia made history by becoming the first racing authority worldwide to abandon the use of whips for steering or encouraging horses to race. Racing Australia CEO Barry O'Farrell faces unprecedented challenges as he tries to balance the increasing demand for horse welfare with the expectations of bettors and the traditions of the industry. In 2015, O'Farrell's predecessor, Peter McGauran, controversially claimed that whips do not cause pain to horses and that he would have no involvement if there was any cruelty associated with them. The following year, Ray Murrihy, the outgoing chief steward in New South Wales, acknowledged that the future use of whips looked uncertain, emphasising the importance of prioritising horse welfare. He warned that failing to address these concerns would have serious consequences for the racing industry. In 2017, prominent racing commentator Steve Moran predicted that a ban on whips in Thoroughbred racing was inevitable and offered advice to bettors, jockeys, and trainers on adapting to this transition. Moran suggested that the only valid argument for keeping the whip in racing was for the safety of the riders. In his recent commentary, he proposed a gradual shift towards using whips solely for safety purposes. This signifies a significant turning point, with the RSPCA Australia consistently supporting this stance and advocating for the introduction of hands-and-heels racing, where whips are no longer used for performance but can be carried out for safety reasons when deemed necessary.
Racing and well-being
The whip issue continues to persist, indicating the ongoing concern for maintaining the integrity of horse racing while prioritising the welfare of horses. The rules of racing aim to protect horse welfare and ensure that riders take appropriate measures during races to give their horses a fair chance to win or achieve a favourable position. However, the effectiveness of these rules depends on their enforcement.
Our study raises several important questions that must be addressed. For instance, we need to determine if the number of rule violations reported by stewards accurately reflects the actual number of whip rule breaches at various racing locations. Additionally, we should explore the factors related to stewards and surveillance that may influence whether a breach is documented or not. It is concerning that in 2013, a small number of whip rule violations dominated the statistics, while 15 out of 24 whip rules had no recorded breaches.
Our findings reveal that over half of the initial rule, breaches occurred before the 100-meter mark and involved two specific whip rules: raising the whip above the jockey's shoulder height and using the forehand whip more than five times before the 100-meter mark. It's important to note that some changes have been made to the whip rules since 2013, particularly regarding the counting of both forehand and backhand whip strikes.
Furthermore, the rules during our study allowed jockeys to use the whip at their discretion after the 100-meter mark, which is when horses are typically fatigued and may require additional protection. This provision remains unchanged in the latest set of rules introduced on 1 January 2017. However, interpreting these rules can be challenging, as they state that the whip should not be used more than five times, except in cases of minor infractions where the overall whip use throughout the race is within the permitted limits and considers the race's circumstances, such as distance and context.
Our report recommends that racing compliance data be analysed annually to inform policy, education, and regulatory changes, with a focus on ensuring the welfare of racehorses and maintaining the integrity of the sport. Consequently, it is now the responsibility of the Thoroughbred racing industry to invest more in surveillance or, following the example of Harness Racing Australia, review the existing rules.
Advocates for horse welfare will closely monitor O'Farrell's actions regarding the whip issue, hoping that he will lead the industry towards a future without the use of whips. If it is possible to ensure racing integrity without the use of whips, as proposed by Harness Racing Australia, the RSPCA, and Steve Moran, among others, O'Farrell can streamline the administration of Thoroughbred racing by eliminating the need for complex whip rules. This would be a significant step forward in terms of efficiency and animal welfare.