'One member of the bookmaking fraternity suggested taking an axe to it'

It's a great time of year for us fans of jump racing, which, with the passing of the Breeders' Cup and the November Handicap, has finally, indisputably taken over. But it's also a time when those who have no natural love for the winter code tend to pick up a number of fairly obvious sticks and indulge in some casual violence against it.

The sticks I have in mind are: big names out for the season, small fields, low sun. Others will probably occur to you.

There's some validity to these criticisms, of course; I would solve all three problems right now, if I could. But I can no more do that than I can make water flow uphill.

Can I suggest we all take a deep breath and accept that some things are simply never going to be perfect? Great, big horses with thin, little legs will sometimes acquire injuries. When you're running towards a low sun, it can be hard to see obstacles in front of you.

There are definitely things the sport can do about small fields and executives should get on with doing some of them. But not every instance is worth crying over and Sandown's intermediate chase staged on Sunday is in my mind when I say that.

As you're probably aware, it attracted a mere two runners this year, resulting in a certain amount of wailing, gnashing of teeth and rending of garments. One member of the bookmaking fraternity suggested taking an axe to the jumps programme – which, in fairness, could be the start of quite a creative process. But I don't think you could justify sweeping action by reference only to a very minor stepping-stone race before the core season has even begun.

That race has had three or four runners every year since 2011, when there were five. Andrew Cooper, Sandown's clerk of the course, gave a measured defence on Racing TV in which he noted the equivalent race had also had two runners in 1993, when Barton Bank easily beat Cab On Target.

Chantry House clears the final fence under Nico de Boinville before winning by 37 lengthsCredit: Alan Crowhurst (Getty Images)

So this has never been a race likely to draw a big field, for reasons that are not hard to divine. Its conditions mean highly rated horses are going to be well in at the weights, so other runners approach it with trepidation; victory is unlikely but there's that fear you'll finish closer to the winner than you should and get hiked in the ratings while being beaten, perhaps even while finishing last.

The ground isn't soft yet, but it will be soon and there are plenty of other prizes on the horizon for horses good enough for a race like this. So there is no compelling reason to push the button now if you're feeling uncertain.

As Nicky Henderson tells us, these races may offer little in the way of spectacle but they are very helpful in getting the season started for a certain type of horse. It does slightly feel like we're running the Sandown race for Seven Barrows, which has housed the winner in four of the last five years, but then very few other yards would have the quality of horse required.

Yes, you could torpedo the race and hope Chantry House lends his lustre to a more competitive contest somewhere. But perhaps connections would then choose to wait weeks for another inviting opportunity, so it ends up as a run missed.

Chantry House is going to be a significant contributor to the jumps season, we can be fairly sure. Unless something goes wrong, he will be in high-profile races in December, March and April. Is it the worst thing in the world if he gets a fairly easy reintroduction on a low-key Sunday? Not every race can be a Ladbrokes Trophy.

By all means, tinker with the conditions to see if you can warm it up a bit. But it's hard to justify killing off a race that is doing the same modest job it has always done, particularly when you can't be sure of the consequences.

I'm sure there are loads of things we can do to improve our sport. But if we're going to identify them and give them our full attention, we need to avoid wasting energy on problems that cannot be solved or which are not actually problems at all.