The British Horseracing Authority’s review (http://www.britishhorsera... ) of the use of the whips it specifies gave as key findings:

“Scientific Evidence Base – Summary of Key Findings
• When used properly, the whip stimulates a horse and should not cause pain. Inappropriate use of the whip during a race may be counterproductive and may not produce a positive response from a horse. A horse in pain will not perform at its best and is likely to underperform.
• The effect of whip use must be viewed in the context of a horse’s physiological state during a race. Controlled use of an energy absorbing whip during a race when a horse is in a physiological state of excitement is different to using a whip on a resting horse. Controlled use of a specific whip does not cause pain and should not be viewed in the same way as the effect on a resting horse.
• Jockeys have stated clearly that the whip is essential for safety, citing steering and rebalancing the horse as important uses. The role of the whip in motivating and focusing the horse to encourage it to perform to its potential is also seen as important.”

and stated

“This whip was introduced in 2004 for Jump racing and in 2007 for Flat racing”

Therefore is some very specific misinterpretation

“Previous research has indicated that such binding (which in itself cannot be padded) can increase the damage potential of whips [10]. This is an extremely important finding given the racing industry’s description of the padded whip as the pain-free whip (11)”

that should be corrected in this current publication.

The study (10) referred to was performed on 1996 on an unspecified range of whip designs that should not be so conclusively related to the current design. Furthermore the British Horseracing Authority does not describe the current design of the whip it specifies as pain-free, but “When used properly, the whip stimulates a horse and should not cause pain” (as above). This Review then discusses many of the points of science also discussed in this current publication, recognising the risks and uncertainties as they inform the science that should be used to inform “Responsible Regulation”.

It would be important that I acknowledge the work of the McGreevy group in providing a considerable part of the literature to support this important debate.

Professor Tim Morris, Director of Equine Science and Welfare, British Horseracing Authority. (Interests - one of the authors of the report Responsible Regulation: A Review of the use of the whip in Horseracing, September 2011. London: British Horseracing Authority)