Ralph Beckett – Classic winning trainer
My view is that early-closing races are a racket that suit the racecourses and nobody else.
Royal Ascot this year ditched a number of races that used to be early closers – the four Group 2 races, so the Hardwicke, Ribblesdale, King Edward VII and Duke of Cambridge Stakes – and I think they were all the better for it. It made for very competitive racing.
Will Aitkinhead – Ascot’s Head of Corporate & Industry Affairs
Increasing prize-money in the current climate is challenging, so at Ascot we have looked at ways to save owners money. Dropping early-closing conditions for the four three-year-old Group 2s at Royal Ascot was an initiative we tried for the first time this year to help connections be able to make more informed decisions closer to the races.
It’s hard to tell how well it has worked after just one year’s figures, but although numbers at the six-day stage (entries this year and confirmations last year) were actually down, I think that over time it will definitely help improve competitiveness and quality, especially with the King Edward VII and the Ribblesdale.
I guess you could say the difference between entries and then decs was tighter, so those entering at the six-day stage were probably more certain to run at that point than those just confirming, but in this first year it didn’t help total field sizes. That’s not the main reason for doing it though – we wanted to make things easier for trainers and owners, especially with those developing three-year-olds, giving them more time to make decisions. Hopefully, it was well received from that perspective. It has required us to put in more executive contribution to meet the shortfall in entry fees.
The only other races we’ve changed recently are our jumps Grade 1s, which are no longer early closers. It’s probably a similar story in terms of effectiveness, but we want to maximise our ability to attract runners.
Sam Hoskins – Syndicate Manager to Kennet Valley Thoroughbreds and Hot To Trot Racing
The short answer is ‘yes’, but in trying to see it from the perspective of racecourses and sponsors as well as owners I do accept that early closers have some value.
I can see the argument from a funding perspective, and also as a trigger for publicity in the press, as well as for stimulating ante-post betting and building a race up. The problem is that races like the Eclipse or Coronation Cup and some of the two-year-old races close so early.
A lot can change in a couple of months and once you are not in, the cost of supplementary entry is prohibitive to many owners. If your horse is going to be a stallion or you are owned by a millionaire, then the £50,000 or whatever it might be is fine. But if you are mere mortals then you have to pick and choose your entries carefully.
With Sir Busker in the year that Baaeed was around, the early-closing system worked to our advantage, as he’d scare off a lot of the opposition and Sir Busker could pick up quite a lot of money for finishing third or fourth. That doesn’t make it right, though. A more flexible system would give races like the Eclipse and Coronation Cup the best possible chance of getting to the golden eight
runners, which would be a positive in so many respects, especially now that World Pool is so important.
The early-closing system is particularly exposed when there are changing ground conditions, when the original entries were perhaps made on the presumption of decent ground but then the forecast is for a lot of rain. Would Here Comes When have been entered for the 2017 Sussex Stakes if he wasn’t owned by Mrs Hay? He had just won a Listed handicap off 103 before the original entries came out that year. An inspired entry, but would smaller owners have opted to aim a little lower?
The current system lacks flexibility and encourages small fields. Perhaps a second entry stage such as they have in France might be desirable, or else a more affordable supplementary entry stage for horses rated between x and y, as they do in some valuable handicaps.
Rod Millman – Trainer of three winners of the Weatherbys Super Sprint
As a relatively small stable we don’t tend to make a lot of entries in early-closing races, but that’s partly because it’s so expensive and we tend to train mainly for smaller owners.
The Weatherbys Super Sprint is an exception; we put five in it this year as the first entry stage at the end of February comes before you’ve done anything with them, and you have to go on your gut feeling.
With four stages the cost mounts up, but we’ve had a lot of luck in it in the past.
It’s like buying a lottery ticket, and it’s where the prize-money comes from to a large extent. From an owner’s point of view, it’s a chance of a big payout with a relatively cheap horse. It’s self-funding, I guess, but while I’ve bought a lot of tickets in the lottery I’ve had a good return, with three winners – including the latest renewal with Anthelia for Middleham Park Racing – and plenty of others in the money over the years.
So far as the early-closing system as a whole goes, if you are lucky enough to have horses bordering on Group class, it can get very expensive making early-closing entries for them. Take Adaay In Devon – if she’d had an Arab owner, we’d have entered her in all the Group sprints, but we didn’t because it’s too expensive. Those races tend to be dominated by the likes of Coolmore or Godolphin.
I did enter one in York’s Lowther Stakes early in July – I think it cost me £875. She’s a Havana Grey filly, already Listed-placed and so worth a lot of money, and she was heading for the Princess Margaret at Ascot first. If she’d won that I’d look silly if she wasn’t in the Lowther, but if she didn’t it was £875 down the drain.
It’s a tough one, and I don’t know what the answer is.
Gail Brown – Syndicate manager of Goodwood Racehorse Owners Group
There are far fewer early-closing races than there used to be, but as a manager of partnerships and syndicates, I can see arguments both for and against.
I must admit that I enjoy watching the fluctuating market of a big handicap. Taking a price about a horse in one of the season’s coveted heritage handicaps is fun, and it would be a shame to lose the build-up to the Hunt Cup for example. Additionally, there is the added excitement of whether you will get into a race or not.
There is also a certain skill in placing horses well in advance of a race, and I would not wish to lose a tradition that tests a trainer’s foresight. Furthermore, it is difficult to argue that if multiple entry fees from early-closing contests are a boost to prize-money, there seems no need to break the tradition. Similarly, if ante-post betting supports the levy, this is another plus for the owner.
Traditionally, most bluebloods hold entries in the Classics, which as we know offer forfeit stages. It is important, however, that we continue to enable owners to pay the high supplementation fees for a progressive horse for Classic and Group races, to ensure that the best of a generation can contest the top races.
In terms of my role as a racing manager, I no longer make multiple entries in early-closing races, particularly two-year-old races. I would far rather allow a young horse to demonstrate ability before investing in smart entries. You can argue that early closing entries allow the owner to dream, but the reality is that you can spend several thousands of pounds in entry fees without ever participating in these races. Surely it is better to protect your budget, wait for a horse to prove itself, and then spend your money on race entries for which you have a good chance of taking part.
Should we do away with early-closing entries? The answer would have to be ‘no’, but I would confine them to contests of wide interest. It is then up to an owner or manager to be selective and realistic about entries.