Trainer John Mullins is firmly against a proposed GBGB change in relation to open racing – but he has a novel solution to resolve the latest potential division between trainers and the Board.
Earlier this week, Peter Harnden called for feedback from trainers over the proposed change in rules which would require all open race entries to have form around the track on which they are planning to race.
John said: “I am absolutely against the idea. In my view it is totally unnecessary and will bring additional workload on trainers and cost on owners. All of us want the best for welfare, but this isn’t the way to go about it.
“So, I would suggest it should be decided on facts. We have already had a lengthy period where ARC and Entain tracks have enforced the rule at their own tracks. I suggest that the Board should look at the injury statistics to see if there is any level of improvement.
“If there isn’t, not only should the Board not bring in the new rule, it should ask ARC and Entain to reconsider their local rules on it.
“The Board should stick to running the industry and allow trainers to train. Yes we all know that certain tracks are trickier than others, but dogs vary too. There are some dogs who can run a track first time; some go slower the more times they see it.
“I appreciate that mistakes have been made but that is greyhound racing. Look at the track who allowed the inexperienced dog to race and let them explain themselves. They didn’t have to accept the entry if they weren’t sure. The trainer doesn’t get off the hook, let them explain why they entered a dog to run wasn’t suitable. It maybe they were just unlucky, it could happen to any of us.
“Besides, on many occasions when I want to trial a dog, the track won’t let me have a solo. I may not have another couple of my own dogs to trial against so the track put my dog against two other dogs, who may not know the track either.
“It is practically the same as a race, so what have you gained?”
John is also asking the Board to revisit the ‘Four day’ rule – sometimes called the ‘three day rule’ as a greyhound must have three clear days between track appearances (to include races and trials).
John acknowledges that the intention of the rule was good – to prevent tracks over-racing – and it came to a head following an incident at Towcester where a marathon dog ran twice in three days.
But in combination with the proposed mandatory trial rule, it could actually have a detrimental affect on welfare.
He said: “The responsibility for how often a dog races should always rest with the trainer. I’m not interested whether they feel under pressure or not. If you are prepared to let a dog run when it shouldn’t be, you shouldn’t have a licence. It is really that simple.
“Even within the last week I have been asked if a track can use a dog and I’ver had to say ‘no’. I’m not saying it to be difficult, but for that particular dog in those circumstances, definitely not. In other cases, of course I will try to help.
“So what happens if both these rules are running side by side? You might have a dog that needs a run, but you can’t trial it because you won’t have three clear days before the race.
“So you enter the dog and the race doesn’t fill. It might then be two weeks since the dog last raced and if you want injuries, you start racing them just once a fortnight.
“If I want advice on how to train, I don’t go to the Greyhound Board. There are two vets on there, but I wouldn’t ask either of them to check my dogs over. I would probably go to Drakey (George Drake). If I still wasn’t sure, I might phone Charlie Lister or ask Mark Wallis for their opinion.
“I’m not saying that the Board shouldn’t look at ways of ensuring dogs aren’t over-raced, but this wasn’t thought through.
“I was told that they bought this in because a vet had some evidence about recovery times against bodyweight. Was he talking about greyhounds? Were they sprint greyhounds? Were they marathon dogs? How were they fed? Were they massaged in between? How many tens of thousands of racing greyhounds were in the study?
“I’ll take advice from someone who gets up in a morning and works with dogs all day, because nothing I have heard relates to what I have learned in my lifetime working with dogs.
“As for recovery times, how does that work? If you are preparing to run a marathon, you don’t train every four days, you go out running every single day. It makes no sense to me whatsoever.”
John was among those who were critical of Towcester when the track ran -20 slow in the second round. He went public with the views and has now moved on.
He said: “They cocked up. They dug the track up on Saturday afternoon and it didn’t have time to settle. I told Kevin (Boothby) exactly what I thought of the decision. He has accepted it – we shook hands – that’s it!
“It ran really well last week and I have no problems with it. I like the track and I love racing there. We’re had very few injuries and if we have to slow the track down to keep it safe – just do it.”
There have been some complaints that dogs have found it very difficult to recover from the testing conditions.
John said: “My dogs haven’t. If I was a trainer and my dogs were struggling and others weren’t I would be looking closer to home.
“Having said that, it is a tough track and much as I used to like the Saturday-Tuesday-Saturday format between the third round and semi finals, I’m glad it isn’t in place at Towcester.”
Signet Goofy, who was reared by John and bred by Kevin Hutton, is the only unbeaten runner still in the Derby – an event that many thought might be beyond him in terms of race distance. His previous eight races, prior to a Derby Trialstake had all been sprints opens. He had won seven and been beaten a short head by Crossfield Dusty in the other.
John said: “I never had any doubt he would stay as I said to Chris (Waters) and Lee (Calcutt) before it started. He had previously shown good form over 500 at Towcester and Hove and was always going to be a Derby dog. He has come out of his last race well and we are looking forward to Saturday.”
