Talking Horses: bloodstock industry has its traps, even for the BHA

In an early episode of The Simpsons, Homer is enraged when his neighbour buys a smart new mobile home and so heads straight off to “Bob’s RV Round-Up” - where they would “rather make a friend than a profit” - determined to go one better. As Homer strides onto his lot, cowboy Bob peers through his office window, adjusts his bootlace tie and heads out to close the sale, muttering as he does so: “Thank you, God.”

Unfair though it surely is on the overwhelming majority of bloodstock agents, this an image that always springs to mind when the tricky issue of ensuring that bloodstock sales are conducted fairly and honestly bubbles to the surface, as it often does at this time of year.

As it turns out, Homer’s credit rating is so bad that he wouldn’t be able to afford the RV that Bob wants to sell him if he “lived to be a million”. By contrast, prospective racehorse owners, including some for whom a lifelong dream is suddenly within reach, will be heading to the bloodstock sales this autumn, long on cash but short on savvy. For the people who want to help them buy a horse, it is the other way around and so there is the potential, at least, for nods and winks between the insiders to ensure that customers pay as much as they can, and not as much as they need.

Now this is not, by any stretch, news. The process of buying and selling bloodstock has changed very little since Richard Tattersall set up the first thoroughbred auction in the 1760s near Hyde Park Corner (a spot which he chose because the rolling open fields nearby were ideal grazing land for the horses waiting to be sold).

The sales - and the annual yearling sales in the autumn above all - have been an essential part of racing ever since, while also remaining separate from the sport itself. Even today, the British Horseracing Authority’s writ does not run to the sales. Racing’s ruling body has an obvious interest in ensuring that owners are not fleeced on their way into the sport, but it does not licence the individuals and businesses which are doing the buying and selling.

It is a situation which the BHA decided to address in October 2017, when it announced a “review of bloodstock sales” after receiving evidence of what was described at the time as potentially criminal wrongdoing. Justin Felice, recently retired from a senior position after a 40-year career in the police force, was hired to conduct the review, but nearly two years later, his report has yet to see the light of day.

All that has emerged so far has been a leak of Felice’s draft report to the Racing Post, which suggested he had found that while the vast majority of professionals in the bloodstock industry operate honestly, a small minority are engaging in practice that are unscrupulous at best, and potentially illegal at worst.

Felice, according to the Post, makes eight recommendations, the first of which - before the other seven can even be considered - is the formation of a new organisation, the Bloodstock Industry Forum, which includes representatives from both the racing and bloodstock industries.

And this, indeed, has duly happened. The Forum met for the first time last week, bringing together representatives from the Federation of Bloodstock Agents, Goffs, the National Trainers’ Federation, the Racehorse Owners Association, Tattersalls and the Thoroughbred Breeders’ Association.

But not the BHA – even though the Authority is, according to the leak, Felice’s recommendation as the bloodstock industry’s future regulator. Why? Those who were there suggest the BHA did not turn up because the leak was only a draft and it is still trying to track down the leaker. At the BHA, the suggestion seems to be that they felt unable to attend before the official document is out.

It is a minor spat that will be soon forgotten as and when Felice’s findings are finally published – the juicier details of the sharp practices he has uncovered, relatively rare though these might be, should see to that. But while no one at the BHA can ever have imagined that bringing 21st-century rigour to what is essentially an 18th-century industry would be swift or easy, they may have underestimated just how difficult it will prove to be.

Monday’s best bets, by Chris Corrigan

A trainer based near a village named Viper could have the bookies running for cover at Hamilton. Andrew Hughes, whose stables are in Co Kilkenny, has won with three of his last four runners in the UK and he is due to saddle four more at the Scottish track on Monday.

Those winners were Romintheglomin (16-1) at Ffos Las a week ago, followed by Twentysixthstreet (16-1) and Set In Stone (5-2) at Hamilton on Sunday. Twenty-four hours after his Sunday success, Twentysixthstreet is due to run again at the same track. Hughes said on Sunday evening: “If he’s in good heart in the morning, then he’ll run and I’d expect him to put up another good performance.”

Hughes sounded very keen on Carbon Dating (4.10) in the fifth race at Hamilton on Monday. This seven-year-old was beaten a nose into second place over course and distance three weeks ago. “Carbon Dating is a horse I believe can put his head in front this time,” the trainer told the Guardian.

Hughes also saddles two in Hamilton’s opening contest for two-year-olds. “The Triple T needs time and will make a nice handicapper next year. But Krystal Clown is a well-related filly and a very nice one. Whatever happens tomorrow, watch out for her in the future.”

Any market confidence behind Kenny The Captain (4.45) must be heeded. He has not won for all of two years but has fallen to a mark of 56 from his last winning one of 73. He is best in rain-softened ground and Tim Easterby’s in-form yard has often proved its skill at coaxing older sprinters back to form.

Roger Teal is another trainer having a great run on the Flat, but it is his runner over jumps at Warwick on Monday who attracts interest this time. Jonnigraig (4.55) was bought out of Willie Mullins’ stable in the summer of 2018 after running six times, unremarkably, for the the Irish maestro.