June 2010 newsletter
The June newsletter begins every year by stating that it is less than 4 weeks until Derby Day, which this year will be Sunday June 27th. It then regularly goes on to say that few of the contenders have yet run a major race over more than 1600 metres, and it is therefore premature to discuss the race. The same is true this year. Shamalgan, trained at Mimon by Arslangirej Savujev, sensationally took 3rd place in the French Two Thousand Guineas. He appears to say, and will be a hot favourite for the Czech Derby, if he runs. The first Derby trial at Velka Chuchle is on Sunday, June 6th.
The Czech steeplechasing season is now in full flow. Mandarino, which finished 4th in the 2009 Velka Pardubicka, won the First of May Steeplechase at Lysa and then won the first Velka Pardubicka qualification race at Pardubice on May 22nd. At the same meeting, Amant Gris, unfortunate to be - quite correctly - disqualified after being first past the post in VP 2008, won a Category IV race. This was not an impressive performance by Amant Gris, but it was good to see him back on the track and winning.
The weather in May has been cool and wet. Heavy rains have caused flooding, especially in Moravia. I hope the weather forecast, which predicts more rain in June, especially for Moravia, turns out to be wrong. Racing has been affected by the rain. The meetings in May at Benesov, south of Prague, and at Slusovice, in eastern Moravia, were postponed and will be run later in the year. A number of trainers have been quite badly affected by flooding.
An article in the May edition of Paddock Revue magazine caught my attention. It was by Vlastimil Weiner, who is well known to several regular readers of this newsletter, and who was commemorated by Diane Hill’s horse Vlasta Weiner, which won half a dozen races in the UK a few years ago. The article appeared under the title “Is this the End of Racing in the Czech Republic?”
This question is raised by the Inkasentka Affair, which I have not dealt with in earlier newsletters. Inkasentka was, in 2008, a promising 6-y-o mare. In her career, she won 6 of her 13 races, including wins on the flat, over hurdles and over fences. She won a Category III crosscountry steeplechase at Pardubice in May 2008, and was beginning to be spoken of as a potential Velka Pardubicka horse. However, in June 2008 she fell in a Category II race at Pardubice. Running loose, she collided with the rail of the bridge over the stream of the right side of the course (where the water jumps are). She injured herself badly, and had to be put down.
Inkasentka’s owner and trainer claimed that her injuries were due to negligence on the part of Pardubice racecourse. There is no doubt that she struck a metal rail with most regrettable consequences. However, the racecourse took the view that the course was as safe as it could be, it had been passed as safe by the commission charged with inspecting it, and that owners of horses running in a cross-country chase know that there is some danger involved. In short, that the racecourse was not at fault. It seems that the racecourse was intransigent, and the owner and trainer, upset at losing a promising horse and unable to get any satisfaction, decided to take the racecourse to court.
Czech justice and the Czech courts are consistently part of the problem, and never part of the solution, and this case has now been spiraling downwards for two years. (If you have occasion to make a contract with a Czech company, always specify that disputes will be dealt with under non-Czech jurisdiction or, perhaps better, that they will be resolved by the Czech Court of Arbitration, where quick, evenhanded and acceptable solutions are often reached.)
The judge in the Regional Court, Miroslava Fuksova, found in favour of Inkasentka’s owner, Hubert Zdarsky. The horse’s jockey, Jan Faltejsek, and trainer, Jiri Janda, gave evidence which generally helped the owner’s case against Pardubice racecourse. Their evidence that impressed the judge was was to the effect that the water jumps at Pardubice are a bit dangerous, but that the racecourse had never issued warnings about them. Owner, trainer and jockey have been subjected to some bad feeling in the racing community for what they said in court. The judge decided that the racecourse, and not the commission, was responsible for the state of the course, and that it was guilty of not protecting animals from danger. That is, that the racecourse had broken the law on cruelty to animals.
Illogically, it seems to me, the sentence, when it is finally issued, will probably award damages to the owner of the horse, who has asked for over 750 000 Czech Crown (Euro 30 000). Should “cruelty” to a valuable horse be punished more severely than cruelty to a useless horse? Pardubice racecourse will presumably take the case to the Supreme Court.
It is regrettable for Czech steeplechasing that this case was not settled out of court. We have to accept that our sport is tough and dangerous, and that it involves animals. There may be occasional cases of cruel trainers and jockeys, but the racing authorities in no way condone their acts. Cruelty to animals is specifically against the rules of racing. The judge’s verdict states that Pardubice Racecourse acted in a cruel manner. It raises questions of i) whether the sport itself is, from the point of view of Czech law, cruel to animals, and ii) whether anyone will take on the risk of organizing racing in the Czech Republic and being held responsible for the consequences every time a horse runs loose on a racecourse and injures itself, or for that matter puts a foot in a hole and breaks a leg.
The general view in Czech racing is that judge Fuksova knows little about the sport and has reached a decision that should be overturned by the Supreme Court. However, Vlastimir Weiner concluded his article with the words “It had never occurred to me that the future of racing would be decided on like this, in a courtroom.”
I hope there will still be a sport to write about next month.