Talk:Thoroughbred racing

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Thoroughbred racing article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Question[edit]

What means "main", as in "main form of horseracing"? Some quantification would be helpful. Trontonian

The other form of horse racing would be harness racing, which does not mean thoroughbreds.--DThomsen8 (talk) 00:47, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And there is also jump racing such as steeplechasing as well as tons of horse racing on flat tracks but with horse breeds other than Thoroughbreds. Montanabw^(talk) 20:44, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

Why is there this entry as well as "horse racing in the UK"?

I second this. I know Wikipedia is often accused of being American-centric, but I found this entry to be sadly lacking in any information about US horse racing, with the exception of a handful of American horses included in the lists at the bottom. -jett

I also agree. Even the notation of the track condition as the "going" is UK-centric. And I've found ZERO information on the subject that drives the entire industry, for better or worse: Gambling and the art of winner selection. This is a subject I could see myself tackling if you "powers that be" are interested. Mike —Preceding unsigned comment added by Driver3405 (talk • contribs) 20:20, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I suggested in the article that there are 2 codes of racing: flat and NH. Someone changed NH to steeplechasing. I don't think that that is right. The 2 codes are as stated. Within national hunt racing there is (1) steeple chasing, (2) hurdle and (3) bumpers. I have therefore changed it back to flat and NH. I hope that that has not annoyed anyone. Dr Spam (MD) 08:58, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it back to "Steeplechasing", the correct divisions for racing in the UK are "Flat" and "National Hunt" (and possibly Point-to-Point) as stated above. Malc82 18:35, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal[edit]

This article duplicates a great deal of material covered in horse racing and, to a lesser extent, Thoroughbred. I recommend it be merged. Montanabw^(talk) 17:55, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am against the merge. Instead those sections in the other article which are about thoroughbred horse racing should be merged into this article. --Philip Baird Shearer 14:36, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the problem is that this particular article is of terrible quality. While I do admit there are many types of horse racing and Thoroughbreds are used for far more than just racing, so it makes no sense to merge either of them into this one, the problem is that this article needs serious work. And given that I don't even have the time to finish my current rehab article project, I personally sure don't have the time to fix this one.

Arguably, what could happen is that the TB horse racing material in the main TB breed article could go here, as could the TB-specific material in the horse racing article as well, making that article more of a portal or an overview of all types of horse racing.

But the bottom line is that any solution is a LOT of work. Montanabw^(talk) 17:22, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Which is why I put the "This article or section is in need of attention from an expert on the subject." template on the top :-( --Philip Baird Shearer 19:25, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bigger problem is that it is simply redundant. See the other two articles...the problem isn't an expert, it's also just bad writing. But like I say, I have other fish to fry at the moment. Montanabw^(talk) 03:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Merge Tags[edit]

This article is not redundant, it is in fact fundamental. Thoroughbred is a breed, you can't merge Chevrolet into automobile. the Horse racing article should be a disambig page listing the various types of racing. This is about a Thoroughbred race but its title needs changing to segregate it (flat racing]]) from Steeplechase racing. The article needs massive expanion and relative material from the Horse racing article shifted here. It is a huge job but must be done sooner or later. Hoever, I (and probably others) have left it alone until members of the Project have done more work on other subjects which will make this article's expansion a lot, lot, lot, lot easier. And we are getting there! Handicapper 15:21, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One of the problems is that the Thoroughbred article has a lot of horse racing info in it, and the horse racing article is mostly about Thoroughbred flat racing. So there IS a lot of info out there and some rearranging is really, really needed. I am part of the project myself, but like everyone, time is limited and this article is a disaster! But I guess merging isn't the solution...sigh. Montanabw^(talk) 18:08, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to second the proposal to merge the articles. Thoroughbred horse racing should be a section of Horse racing. --AeronM (talk) 03:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree with the proposal to turn Horse racing into some sort of disambig page with links to various other racing articles, such as racing in various breeds (TB, Quarter Horse, Arab, etc), racing in various countries (UK, US, Australia, etc), and various types of racing (steeplechase, flat, harness, etc). There could be short explanations of each thing, with a see:Main Article blurb at the top of each section. Something like the main Horse article? I realize that this will take lots of time that no one has at the moment...but it's my two cents on the subject :) Dana boomer (talk) 12:36, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. That sounds much more organized. --AeronM (talk) 00:56, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Give the average well-informed reader a break[edit]

Use of jargon and slang is not appropriate to an encyclopedia article. Readers will want to know: What is "a gallop"? How do people "lay" horses?

Just a little attention to the argot of the field would be appreciated by the general reader.P0M (talk) 03:29, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

track conditions[edit]

I think it would be good if the various track conditions, (fast, muddy, sloppy, etc.) were explained here. I have been looking for a good source in google, but haven't found it yet. --rogerd (talk) 21:38, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Track condition terms vary depending on country. In some countries Track condition is known as Going. The various terms used in Australia are explained at Track Condition. Hope this helps. Cuddy Wifter (talk) 22:24, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I didn't realize that different terms were used in various English-speaking countries. I was watching the Kentucky Derby today and was curious about definitions of some of the terms they were using, like what is the difference between sloppy and muddy, which are, as you have pointed out, US specific terms. --rogerd (talk) 03:25, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Usually when the term, 'fast' is used, it means that the track is dry. It's is rock hard. Racehorse trainers hope for it always. But it's hard on a horse's legs. Most thoroughbreds prefer it. Sloppy is liquidy track so the horse has to slosh through it. Lot's of horses don't like it. Muddy is where it's slippery but more like paste. There are certain horses that like it. Usually the ones with stronger and thicker legs. Hope that helps. Mhera (talk) 20:18, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question - split of National Hunt[edit]

At the top it states that National Hunt can be further split down into hurdling and steeplechasing. What about National Hunt flat races (or Bumpers) that does not fit into either category and would argue that this is a third split. Anyone else agree? Ishouldcocoa (talk) 09:33, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, although they are a minority of races - most British cards feature one at the most, or often none at all, it's probably worth mentioning. --Bcp67 (talk) 04:47, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 8 August 2018[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: consensus to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 01:11, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thoroughbred horse racing → Thoroughbred racing – The term Thoroughbred only ever refers to a breed of horse, rendering the inclusion of "horse" in the title redundant. This sport is known worlwide as Thoroughbred racing. The origin of this page was as a simple list of races, and it has long since evolved. Ssaco (talk) 22:51, 8 August 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. Dekimasuよ! 21:35, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting comment, since no one has responded to the proposal. Arguably "thoroughbred" is in the title to disambiguate this from other forms of horse racing dealt with at Horse racing. If this is considered a daughter article of Horse racing, the current title is probably fine. If it's independent, perhaps eliminating the extra term is better. Evidence of which is the WP:COMMONNAME would be helpful. Dekimasuよ! 21:38, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Dekimasu, but to be clear the request I made was to remove the "horse" part of "Thoroughbred horse racing", as the term Thoroughbred refers only to a breed of horse, rendering the inclusion of the extra "horse" redundant, as is the common usage "Thoroughbred racing".

Huge can of worms? After going through several pages of similar material, there is an overall poor structure to the entire topic. There is a drift from a world view, irrelevant and unnecessary bloat, duplication and circular references. It wasn't my intention to get into this, but some extra evaluation here would help encyclopedic value.

"Horse racing" would be the overall parent topic. "Thoroughbred racing" is the dominant part of horse racing, for the western world, as an international topic for media, gambling and money. However under horse racing it's categorized as "flat racing" which is true, but within the sport, so application of WP:COMMONNAME must be properly viewed. But there is no mention of "thorougbred racing", so now we have two pages of similar subject. Keep going and you find Horse racing in the United States as its own page, a second duplication, to a substantial extent.

A further subheading is Horse racing#Breeds, each with their own Main article sub pages, with varying relevance to racing, but again potentially duplicating information, and with incorrect or outdated information.

I know thoroughbreds, and I know Arabians, and using wikipedia now as a resource becomes unappetizing.

Before I bore every last person here to tears, I'll summarize like this. Less is going to be more, I would pare down the entire main article horse racing per WP:MOS. A lot of removal work, which will likely be edited back in eventually.

Thanks Dekimasu for your time here, and anyone else with good input. Ssaco (talk) 00:05, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Has the Wikiproject been notified? Johnbod (talk) 14:43, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support. More common and more concise, and the resulting redirect will handle any foreseeable problem, incoming external links especially. Notifying the WikiProject would be good, but not essential, there are automated heads-up tools available to them. I say just go ahead, at this stage. Life is finite. Andrewa (talk) 11:03, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.