Trainers in Pune paddock [RWTIC file photo]
This may turn out to be an interesting exercise.
We, the racing people, have one distinct trait that I think no other community has. Each one of us--a punter, horse owner, jockey, trainer or even a Tote ticket seller--has his/her own opinion on EVERYTHING under the sun, and definitely on ANYTHING related to racing.
So imagine you are a trainer based in western India, and you receive this "Note" from the Stipendiary Stewards a month before the Pune season is about to begin. How would you react to it? Feel free to post your reactions (I have given my reactions in bracket against each point, you may just list the relevant number and post your reaction.)
=====
Note from the Stipendiary Stewards
Re: Norms for restricting the number of two-year-old horses into western India and culling out of older horses with effect from January 2010.
The undermentioned criteria will henceforth be followed to restrict the number of two year old horses into training and to cull out the older horses:
1. The number of two-year-olds to be permitted in western India will be restricted to 350.
(I disagree. Two year olds are "potential" champions and racing is all about meritocracy. Unless the connections race babies, they are unlikely to discover how good or bad they are. So putting a ceiling on their number is 'defeating' the raison d'etre of this sport.)
2. QUOTA SYSTEM: Each trainer will be allowed to have 7 (seven) two-year-olds for a season. However, if a trainer intends to get more than seven babies in his charge, he may approach another trainer who may bring less than 7 babies and use his quota with the latter's consent in writing.
(Is this a joke? Are we trying to bring communism to racing? Good trainers (performers) get more babies than bad trainers do, so why should they be asked to "beg" stables from the losers? And how are they going to "settle" that favour? By "paying" them money? Or by letting them "win" some races by going soft against their runners? I have never come across a more absurd idea in my racing days.)
3. The number of horses in a trainer's yard will be restricted to 80 horses--that is 60 older horses and a maximum of 20 two-year-old horses.
(Again, I disagree with the latter part. At least, let the trainer decide the composition of his lot if he cannot have more than 80 horses.)
4. Horses aged seven years and over who are at rating of below 60 points should be compulsorily retired and will not be eligible for a stable.
(I agree.)
5. The rating of all 4 year old & over horses will/may be dropped by 6 points at the end of each Mumbai meeing and after dropping the scales all horses below the rating of 10 points should be compulsorily removed from western India before allotment of stables.
(I agree. In fact, this can be done twice a year, at the end of both Mumbai & Pune seasons.)
6. All horses aged 4 years & over that have not raced for one year should be retired.
(I think this is an excellent suggestion.)
7. Horses declared unfit/unsound for racing by the Club's Sr Veterinary officer should be retired.
(I agree, except if the owner/trainer wants one review of this expulsion, it should be allowed and norms should be put in place how it should be done. Otherwise, there is a danger some decisions of the Sr Vet may be accused as abritrary, high handed or unjust.)
8. Permission to bring in outstation horses by any trainer must be subject to availability of stables. (I think, under reasonable circumstances, graded and other important listed races should be treated as exceptions.)
====
By the way, if you are wondering if this is an imaginary exercise, it is NOT. The stipendiary stewards DID send this letter to trainers last month!
