A Historical Evolutionary Perspective on China’s Open Horse Racing Problems and Choice Strategies

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 3)

see the attachement

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 4)

I would like to thank the efforts by the authors of the manuscript and congratulate them on the work. I recognize that they have considered almost all considerations of the Reviewers. Clearly, all the comments from Reviewers have contributed to a better quality of the manuscript. I have checked in the revised manuscript are corrected the most of errors found by the reviewers, both formally and content.

Considering the changes made to the manuscript by the authors and the new suggestion, I consider that the manuscript can continue with the review process, considering the opinion and suggestions of other Reviewers.

Best wishes for Authors.

 

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for you appreciation. We focused on the English editing revision and wanted to make it easy to understand.

Reviewer 3 Report (Previous Reviewer 5)

I am satisfied with the amendments made. After a thorough revision, the article has gained more value and can be published in its current form.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for you appreciation.

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. The topic is not appropriate for this journal.

2. Not a standard article for this journal of high impact factor.

3. Wrong referencing style used.

4. The writting would be appropriate for a news paper article.

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper presents some interesting details about the development of horse racing in China, a topic that is understudied. At the moment the paper lacks purpose and theoretical underpinning, meaning it is largely descriptive and the wider implications are not well developed.

Abstract – it mentions that the study focuses on the “interaction between horse racing and gambling from the viewpoint of morality.” – but there is no explanation offered of how ‘morality’ is being used and conceptualised here. In what ways is horse racing being seen as a moral problem? Is it the racing, the gambling, or both? In what moral terms? This then seems to get lost in the paper so that the abstract does not really reflect the content of the paper.

 

How will/can the horse racing industry in China become “an important pillar of socio-economic development and symbolic and cultural aspects” if it does not develop as a mass spectator sport and without some form of gambling? It would need to take a very different line to how the sport has developed in other countries and globally. I am not suggesting this is impossible, but wonder how the authors think this might happen in the Chinese context.

 

The brief introduction sets out some context, but does not provide a conceptual framework for the analysis. What concepts and/or theories are being used here? The issue of ‘morality’ mentioned in the abstract, is not introduced or defined.

 

It would also be helpful for the reader to have some kind of analytical discussion of gambling in the Chinese context. Has it always been forbidden? On what grounds? Does the PRC ban all gambling? How does this fit with Chinese culture and values?

 

Methods – what is meant by the sentence “In China, horse culture has a long history as a standard culture”? standard in what ways? Selection of documents for analysis – how were they selected? Using what criteria? Did you use a database? Was it only government official sources? What does this tell us and potentially not tell us about the development of horse racing in China? If thematic analysis was deployed, how were themes developed? There has been no theoretical framework presented in the paper, and no discussion of relevant concepts, so it is very difficult for the reader to understand how themes were developed for analysis.

 

Results: why were those four phases identified? What was special about that time period? Was it done purely for descriptive reasons, or for analytical ones? The absence of any theoretical framing makes this very difficult to judge. For example, the first phase goes from 1844, why that date? The short description that follows appears to start in 1884 with the founding of the Hong Kong Jockey Club, why say it started in 1844? There is also minimal information given for the first two phases.

I wonder if some sort of visual for the timeline would be helpful, to show when key developments (or even setbacks) occurred?

 

Discussion – why mention figures in Canada – is Canada in any way comparable to China for the purposes of this discussion?

Lines 293-5 – I don’t follow the reasoning for why “horse racing is likely to cause a collective addiction to horse betting” – the case has not been made that there is a strong horse racing culture in China, or that there is anything in Chinese culture, history and/or society that makes Chinese people more likely than others to become addicted to betting. This seems like an unsubstantiated and sweeping statement.

The discussion in general is rather thin, due to a lack of underpinning theory, as mentioned above. What ideas are being used to inform the analysis? At the moment, it is quite descriptive and selective. A theoretical framework would help direct the analysis and make a stronger contribution.

 

Conclusions – these are again rather descriptive and lack theoretical contribution. What does this paper tell us, more generally, about (for example) the development of sports/horse racing? Changing attitudes to gambling? The role of the state in regulating these activities? The purpose of the paper needs greater clarification to draw these points out so the reader has a clearer sense of what the authors are trying to achieve here and how this discussion contributes to the development of knowledge.

Reviewer 3 Report

The topic of the manuscript is of interest.  However, overall I found it did not provide the thematic analysis as described.  There were a number of errors in information presented  and In parts there appears to be confusion re horse racing per see and other forms of racing – eg line 27 – mentions horse racing and then motor car racing.  Subsequently in the manuscript there appears to be some confusion between equestrian sport (i.e. equestrian sport disciplines in the Olympics – Show jumping, dressage, and eventing) and horse racing There are many sentences that appear incomplete, or do not make sense eg line 23-24 (the first sentence in the introduction).

I identified some errors in chronological sequence of equestrian sport development (lines 102-112).  These may be related to translation errors but they did raise a question about the accuracy of the information presented. 

Reviewer 4 Report

 

Thank you for the opportunity to review the manuscript. Overall, the writing is clear, the goals are well described, the introduction should explain the objectives of the study based on the review of the previous literature and the conclusions are properly made and presented. I consider that the constructs proposed in the abstract of the work are quite well explained. Therefore, the manuscript brings significant knowledge of the scientific literature so and still covers existing gaps in the field. On a formal level, the manuscript complies with the requirements of the Journal and references must be written in accordance with the regulations of the Journal. Finally, considering the changes made to the manuscript by the authors and the new suggestion, I consider that the manuscript can continue with the review process, considering the opinion and suggestions of other Reviewers.

Best wishes for Authors.

Reviewer 5 Report

It was a pleasure to read the article on horse racing in China. It is a perfect combination of cultural, ethical and zootechnical aspects. Additionally, supported by legal regulations of both national and local self-governments.
As for the political aspects - I will not comment.
The authors very clearly raised the issues related to the ethics of easy earning money on bookmakers and a very delicate border between legality and the crime zone.
I am happy to take up the topic of using horses for racing. It is a species of animals which, despite the history of economic use, today becomes a companion animal like a dog or a cat.
However, in my opinion, the topic related to horse breeding and their welfare should be expanded. I have not found aspects of racehorse health control as well as the implementation of anti-doping procedures in both horses and jockeys.
 This article, with minor revisions, is a valuable review to be published in the journal "Sustainability"