Archive for the ‘Jockey Club’ Category

MADELEINE PICKENS: A PLAN FOR ALL HORSES

Wednesday, December 3rd, 2008
By Ray Paulick

“How do you corral 30,000 horses, having taken them off the range where they lived, and just say ‘night night’?” asked Madeleine Pickens, the animal-loving wife of billionaire T. Boone Pickens and better known in Thoroughbred racing circles as the former Madeleine Paulson, who with her late husband, Allen Paulson, developed one of the most successful Thoroughbred breeding and racing operations of the 1980s and ‘90s. Allen Paulson died in 2000, and she remarried in 2005.

In recent years, Madeleine Pickens has spent sleepless nights agonizing over the plight of the American West’s wild mustangs, which have been rounded up and held in pens in increasing numbers over the last eight years by cowboys hired by the federal government’s Bureau of Land Management after complaints from cattlemen that the horses were depleting grazing areas. As federal funding for the wild horses was squeezed and the number of people interested in adopting them declined, BLM officials were faced with an unpleasant option: allow the horses to be sent to slaughterhouses or perform mass euthanasia.

The story of these wild horses – “America’s animal” she calls them – hit Madeleine Pickens’ radar screen at a time when she was putting considerable personal resources of time and money into efforts to end the slaughter of all horses. She studied the issue, then hired a polling company to gauge public opinion on the slaughter of horses for human consumption, finding out that seven in 10 Americans oppose the practice. She then paid for anti-slaughter advertisements in the New York Times, lobbied members of Congress and worked with other groups and individuals. Ultimately, however, those efforts ended in frustration because, she said, the pro-slaughter lobby, assisted by the cattle industry, was simply too entrenched with Washington, D.C., powerbrokers. Anti-slaughter bills passed by the U.S House of Representatives were stopped in the Senate. And she was outraged that so many Thoroughbred industry leaders failed to help.

“I would lay in bed, crying, and say, ‘How can we stop this? What can I do?” she told the Paulick Report. “I’m not a religious person, but a spiritual one, and I swear to God that I prayed for an answer.”

One night, she said, the answer came to her. “Why not buy a ranch and give every horse a home?”

Pickens’ plan for a horse sanctuary would be similar to how cattlemen got access to millions of acres of federal land, she said. “This is how the cattlemen got going,” she said. “They got the BLM land attached to their ranches with sweetheart deals. They pay a very low lease for it, and most aren’t even using the land now.”

Pickens has a private foundation in the formative stages, a key to which will be tax credits for donors, she told the Washington Post. She met with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, where half of the wild horses are held. Pickens isn’t prepared to say how much she needs to raise for an endowment to make the plan work, but she is confident she will be able to make it happen. She envisions corporate sponsors, campgrounds and cabins for tourists to come and observe the horses. “There is so much support for this right now,” she said. “It’s amazing the number of calls and emails I’ve received from people who want to help or go to work there.” (Click here to see the official Madeleine Pickens Web site.)

She estimated that she will need upwards of a million acres, and is currently in negotiations on three different properties. She took her plan to BLM officials, who leaked the story to the Washington Post, prematurely, in her opinion. “The story got out way too early while I’m working on the land deal,” she said. “The land people may suddenly say, ‘Ohhh, deep pockets,’ and become unreasonable. I’m trying to  be responsible and do the right thing here. I’m very confident that next year this whole thing will be in place.”

Pickens said she felt like someone who’s been trying to walk through quicksand the last couple of years and can’t seem to get out of it. “Nothing was happening, and you can’t believe the idiocy of it all,” she said. “Why do people not get it?”

She grew weary of trying to work for a solution in Congress. “The people in the racehorse industry weren’t on board and we had all those cattlemen against us,” Pickens said. “We really couldn’t win. I give the people who have been fighting this for so long a lot of credit.

“I think this will work because I came up with a private-sector solution rather than trying to put a bill through Washington where politicians could have their way and destroy it. When the bureaucrats do it, it costs too much and doesn’t work. With private individuals, you’re not indebted to every group or compromised by lobbyists.”

Her proposal has been widely applauded, within the BLM and the general public. While her husband, a well-known corporate raider, oilman and philanthropist, has been a highly visible proponent for a plan to make America energy independent, Madeleine Pickens became an overnight celebrity because of her desire to save the horses. The week her plan went public, ABC’s World News Tonight named her “Person of the Week.” Some outside of the horse business remembered her as the heroine (pictured, left) who rescued hundreds of abandoned cats and dogs in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina.

“I knew people cared, but I was somewhat stunned at the way this story took off like a wildfire,” she said. “It surprised me, but it really shouldn’t have."

A PLACE FOR EX-RACEHORSES, TOO
Pickens said the ranch will not just be a refuge for wild horses. She wants it to be all inclusive for different breeds, and especially ex-Thoroughbred racehorses that often end up unwanted or sold to killer-buyers who send them off for slaughter in Canada or Mexico. There are no remaining horse slaughterhouses in the United States.

“We’re going to have enough land where I don’t know how we can say no to anything,” she said. “It won’t happen overnight. But I want to give the Thoroughbred industry an opportunity to do something here, and to make people feel that they are being responsible for the animals in their sport. I’m going to ask the industry for their support. It’s going to be difficult for the racing industry to change their way of thinking. With this, I hope they can say they have an exit strategy for their horses.”

Pickens is still angry over the National Thoroughbred Racing Association’s refusal to support recent anti-slaughter legislation in Congress. She was one of a large number of major industry participants to sign a letter written by owner-breeder Josephine Abercrombie to members of Congress stating their support of anti-slaughter legislation and their disapproval of the NTRA’s position. “The NTRA had to compromise themselves with Goodlatte (Virginia Rep. Bob Goodlatte, former chairman of the House Agriculture Committee and now ranking member), who has helped them with gambling legislation but has close ties to the cattle industry,” she said. “By getting behind my proposal, they won’t have to worry about the threat of someone like Goodlatte.”

The Jockey Club is another group that has disappointed Pickens. “They register 35,000 horses a year and they say those horses are worth millions and millions of dollars,” she said. “And they come up with some plan where people can give a few dollars when they register a foal and the Jockey Club says they’ll match up to $200,000 a year. This is the same old b.s. — $200,000 is a peanut. How dare they say this is all they’re going to put into a retirement fund for all the horses who don’t make it. It’s all part of what makes the system not work.

“In every business it’s leadership, and we’ve had horrible leadership in racing. Will Farish (vice chairman of the Jockey Club and owner of Lane’s End Farm, where Pickens retired Grade I winner Rock Hard Ten to stud) can be a good guy. He’s head of this and head of that, and people look up to him. But here’s a man who won’t go against slaughter. Why? Is it because he’s from Houston, where so many of the cattlemen are from?”

Pickens, who said she has withdrawn from the racing business largely because of its inaction on this issue, said she thinks the Thoroughbred industry can learn a great deal from how her proposal has been embraced by the public.

“Racing people can learn that they have a chance to endear the public to them,” she said. “They get a few gamblers here and there, but they are in trouble because they seem to have lost sight of the animal who is the athlete. They have too many fatalities and too many injuries that happen in public on national television. When that happens, it exposes the fact they have no exit strategy for the horses.

“Again, there is no leadership. Those who have been in it for a long time have done nothing to endear people to the business. Now they have an opportunity like the BLM has to try and resolve one of their problems.”

I asked Pickens why she is doing all this, what is driving her to take on a project so big?

She told me of how she emigrated to the United States from Iraq in 1969 because she wanted “to come to a new world and do something with my new country.”

But then she confessed to another reason, something that haunted her when she first learned about the horrors of slaughter: “Maybe it’s because I’m ashamed that I was in the industry for years and never knew there was a slaughterhouse for so many horses at the end of the day. I’m so ashamed I never knew. And people who know about it and aren’t doing anything, they should be ashamed, too.”

Copyright © 2008, The Paulick Report

Visit the Paulick Report for all the latest news throughout the racing world

Sign up for our Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick

WILL DERBY FIELD SIZE BE REDUCED?

Friday, November 21st, 2008
By Ray Paulick

Bob Evans, president and chief executive officer of Churchill Downs Inc., said during a Friday morning press conference at the company’s flagship track in Louisville, Ky., that the CDI board of directors discussed the possibility of reducing the field size of the Kentucky Derby during a regularly scheduled meeting in New Orleans last week.

The Derby’s maximum field size of 20 is under scrutiny in the wake of the death of the filly Eight Belles in last year’s Derby, even though her fatal injuries occurred after the finish and apparently were unrelated to the number of runners or trouble she may have encountered in the race. The Derby traditionally has the largest field of any race in the United States. No Derby starter has fallen during the running of the race since 1970, when Holy Land clipped heels and fell going into the far turn.

By contrast, Breeders’ Cup fields are limited to 14 starters.

Maximum field size of 14 horses and the prohibition of fillies running against males were considerations in an original discussion document circulated by the National Thoroughbred Racing Association to industry leaders who formed what ultimately came to be known as the NTRA Safety and Integrity Alliance.

Field size or sex limitations were not part of the final recommendations of the NTRA Safety and Integrity Alliance Pledge, which can be viewed by clicking here.

Evans said CDI has devoted a great deal of time and resources to examine a wide range of safety issues since the death of Eight Belles and has adopted all of the safety recommendations made by committees formed earlier this year by the Jockey Club and Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders Association.

The CDI board discussed the reduction of the field size, Evans said, though he gave no indication whether a change will be made. “For now, it’s the way it’s always been,” he said. Nominations to the Triple Crown races, including the Derby, state that the size of the Derby can be “up to 20 horses.”

A reduction in field size might not be greeted favorably by horse owners and trainers who throughout the winter and spring closely follow whether their 3-year-olds are in the leading 20 contenders, based on money earned in graded or group stakes races. Churchill recently announced a marketing agreement with Kempton racecourse in England that will guarantee one spot in the Derby field to the winner of the Kentucky Derby Challenge Stakes, a 1 1/8-mile race on Polytrack, on March 18.

Handle on the Derby would also decline in the event of a reduction in the field size. Evans said Churchill has researched Derby handle in relationship to field size but would not say how much handle might fall. A reduction from 20 to 14 starters would also cost Churchill Downs $300,000 in lost entry and starting fees ($25,000 to enter and $25,000 to start).

Evans discussed the Derby field size and other safety measures following a media briefing announcing that Oaks and Derby ticket prices, with a few exceptions, would be frozen in 2009. “Our slowing economy is having a pronounced effect, and many of our customers have been affected in various ways as well,” Evans said. “Although the Kentucky Derby occupies an elite spot in the world of sports and tickets are typically in high demand, we want to keep our price points at the same level to help our customers in this challenging economic climate.” Click here to read more about the ticket price freeze.

The only exceptions will be scheduled price increases in the 30-year personal seat license program, which are coming off a three-year price freeze; some luxury suites and Marquee Village accommodations; and reserved seats in the infield.

Churchill Downs is also offering the opportunity for on-track customers to buy Derby reserved seats in a sweepstakes running each day from tomorrow (Saturday, Nov. 22) through Nov. 29. Individuals whose names are drawn will be eligible to buy two Derby tickets ranging in price from $88 to $207. (Derby tickets range in price from $88 for infield reserved seats to $693 on millionaire’s row.) One thousand of the tracks 55,000 seats are being offered in the sweepstakes. For more details, click here.

Copyright © 2008, The Paulick Report

Visit the Paulick Report for all the latest news throughout the racing world

Sign up for our Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick

MONDAY MORNING QUARTERBACK: CHURCHILL VS. HORSEMEN

Monday, September 15th, 2008
Ray Paulick

What in the world is going on inside the Churchill Downs Inc. executive offices? It’s slashed purses at Calder Race Course in South Florida by 17% and whacked almost $1 million from the fall stakes program at its home track in Louisville, Ky. Key management changes have been made at Calder and Fair Grounds in New Orleans, La., and press releases seem to be blaming horsemen for most of the problems.

Investors haven’t been wild about Churchill Downs stock (CHDN), which closed at $46.45 Friday and hasn’t seen $50 a share since May 1. It’s 52-week high, $57.55, was achieved last December.

CEO Bob Evans and the TrackNet Media Group that was formed with Magna Entertainment to broker simulcast deals has refused to talk seriously with the Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Group, which is negotiating account wagering contracts with racetracks on behalf of local horsemen’s groups such as the Kentucky or Florida Horsemen’s Benevolent and Protective Associations. In fact, Churchill has filed anti-trust lawsuits against the organizations. Evans may be hoping that the longer he puts off dealing with the THG, the less resolve the horsemen will have to stick together in attempting to forge a better contract on account wagering.

That strategy doesn’t appear to be working. To the contrary, it looks more like Churchill Downs’ partner in TrackNet Media is bailing. Frank Stronach, the chairman and acting CEO of Magna Entertainment, sent out a press release a couple of weeks ago saying that Magna recognizes the THG as a beneficial national organization and is negotiating with THG.

For too long, horsemen have been losing ground and losing revenue as the percentage of dollars wagered that goes to purses has declined. The growth of simulcasting to non-pari-mutuel entities such as off-shore rebaters and account wagering companies has been at the expense of horsemen. It’s important horsemen understand why the status quo isn’t good enough and why they need to change the simulcast model, something the THG is trying to do.

SPEAKING OF WAGERING, hats off to Bloodhorse editor Dan Liebman for calling out the Jockey Club after it capitulated to Evans and to Churchill Downs’ biggest shareholder, Dick Duchossois, and decided to no longer provide the trade magazine with meet ending pari-mutuel handle figures. Churchill tracks under Evans and Duchossois have said that handle is no longer a meaningful statistic. Oh, really?

The decision by the Jockey Club to no longer provide this key economic indicator was disgraceful, but I wouldn’t hold out any hope the poobahs there will change their mind.

 

NO ONE PREDICTED KEENELAND’S SEPTEMBER YEARLING SALE WOULD BE UP, so it’s not that surprising to see a 13% drop in the gross receipts through the first six sessions of the 15-day marathon. That 13% equates to a $41-million decline in revenue that will not go into the pockets of breeders this year, and that red number only figures to increase as the sale reaches the second half.  The drop in revenue will ripple throughout all kinds of Thoroughbred-related businesses.

The good news from the first four days (Books 1 and 2) was that the median held up fairly well, declining only 10% from $200,000 to $180,000. The home run horses, those selling for a million dollars and up, didn’t materialize as often as they have in recent years, but the middle market was relatively steady. “Most of us survive off the middle,” one breeder told the Paulick Report. “Getting one of the big horses is like hitting the lottery, but it’s not something you really plan on.”

Smart gamblers don’t play the lottery, and intelligent breeders know there are far more people playing in the middle market than at the top. As long as the middle is healthy, so are the breeders. There is just a lot less icing on the cake this year.

Others who are selling throughout the September sale breathed a sigh of relief if their best horses sold well during the first two books out of fear that the bottom of the market may collapse once the sale reaches books five and beyond.

WHO HAS BOUGHT THE MOST HORSES SO FAR IN THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER? It wasn’t John Ferguson, or Shadwell Estate or the newly formed Legends Racing.  Hint: It wasn’t at the Keeneland September yearling sale.

September’s busiest buyer so far (though not biggest spender) is a fellow named Mike Gill, the 2005 Eclipse Award-winning owner who has been on a claiming binge this month at Philadelphia Park. By our count Gill has claimed at least 30 horses in September at Philadelphia Park alone after similar buying sprees in Maryland and Massachusetts earlier in the year.

You remember Gill, don’t you? He’s the fellow who built a huge claiming operation earlier this decade, bought a training center, won a bunch of claiming races and then publicly complained when he led the nation in wins and earnings in 2003 and 2004 but didn’t get voted an Eclipse Award as outstanding owner.

The whining did him some good. When balloting was conducted for the 2005 racing season, Gill was once again the owner with the most wins and purse money won. This time, in what may be the worst decision in the history of the Eclipse Awards, voters representing the National Turf Writers Association, National Thoroughbred Racing Association and Daily Racing Form gave Gill the award as “outstanding owner.”

Why do I say that it was the worst Eclipse Award decision in history? I’ve got nothing against claiming operations and recognize it is the bread and butter portion of nearly every racing program in the country. However, in my mind, the Eclipse Awards are about excellence, whether it’s horses or people. Sheer numbers, especially at the claiming level, should not be misconstrued as excellence. In the category of outstanding owner, breeder, trainer and jockey, the leading candidates should be judged by how they performed at the top level of the sport, not the bottom level.

Gill, who was recently in the news because of some regulatory problems at his mortgage company, said he was getting out of the horse industry in 2006 when he accepted his Eclipse Award as outstanding owner. Many people had two words for him: good riddance.

“I’m going to miss racing, and I think racing is going to miss me, too,” Gill told Bloodhorse magazine.

Actually, Mike, we didn’t.

THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER WON’T BE COVERING GILL’S EXPLOITS since it accepted the early retirement of Turf writer Craig Donnelly only a month after the paper, the nation’s eighth largest, dramatically reduced the space allotted racing in its sports section. At that time, Inquirer editors told the Paulick Report it was keeping Donnelly but obviously they had a change of heart.

Newspapers may be an endangered species in the near future. Turf writers at daily newspapers already are.

Copyright © 2008, The Paulick Report

Visit the Paulick Report for all the latest news throughout the racing world

Sign up for our
Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick

NTRA REFORMS: WHO WILL FOOT THE BILL?

Friday, September 12th, 2008
By Ray Paulick

The change bandwagon is getting pretty crowded, both in presidential politics and in horseracing. Following on the heels of suggestions for reform at the Jockey Club Round Table in August and demands for reform by the Breeders’ Cup and American Graded Stakes Committee, the National Thoroughbred Racing Association is getting into the act. NTRA president and CEO Alex Waldrop is convening a closed-door meeting in Lexington, Ky., today beginning at 9 a.m. to seek support and funding for widespread changes related to medication and horse welfare issues, many of which were detailed in a Paulick Report exclusive in July.

Today’s invitation-only meeting at the Griffin Gate Marriott Hotel will have representation from a broad base throughout the Thoroughbred industry, unlike an earlier small gathering of insiders who met at Keeneland to draft a discussion document in reaction to the June 19 Congressional hearings that threatened federal intervention. The hearings came in the wake of revelations about legal anabolic steroid use and the death of Eight Belles in the Kentucky Derby.

The discussion document outlined reforms related to medication, drug testing, racetrack safety standards, jockey weights and insurance, 2-year-old sales and racing, wagering protocols, Eclipse Awards, and a national placement program for retired racehorses. The confidential document, which has since been amended since published in the Paulick Report, also had suggestions for implementation and enforcement, but no plan for funding, which is expected to be a major topic of discussion.

Waldrop, who has been traveling around the country with NTRA vice president Keith Chamblin to sell the reform platform to different organizations, said today’s meeting would be an “informational session.” At least 50 individuals will attend. The former Churchill Downs executive is expected to seek funding and may propose the hiring of an outside agency to serve as a “monitor” to hold the industry’s feet to the fire so that it will make enough changes to hold Congress at bay.

One invited participant said it would be a “miracle” if the industry supports the proposals but gives Waldrop high marks for his efforts. “Where is the money going to come from?” he asked. “The NTRA doesn’t have it, racetracks are strapped, and state governments are cutting budgets on racing commissions and drug testing labs.” Another said the plan needs to be scaled down and more realistic. “The Jockey Club Round Table made all these proposals about what the industry needs to do, and I said, ‘Hey, what about the proposals you made last year? When are you going to get around to addressing those?’”

Copyright © 2008, The Paulick Report

Support the Paulick Report. Make a donation today.

Visit the Paulick Report for all the latest news throughout the racing world

Sign up for our
Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick

INDIAN CHARLIE AUTHOR MUSSELMAN AVID READER OF PAULICK REPORT

Tuesday, September 9th, 2008
By Ray Paulick

Ed Musselman, the former Churchill Downs tour guide, groom, jockey agent and trainer who publishes the Indian Charlie newsletter that is distributed during some race meetings and Thoroughbred auctions throughout the United States, has proven to be an avid reader of the Paulick Report, which England’s Pacemaker magazine said in its September issue “has become required reading for everyone with an involvement in the U.S. Thoroughbred industry.”

Musselman, in fact, seems almost obsessed with the Paulick Report, based on the number of recent references he’s made in his newsletter, which stands true to its motto: “We never let the truth get in the way of a good story.” The most recent reference to the Paulick Report can be found in today’s Indian Charlie, in which Musselman comments on the Paulick Report’s recent two-part series about Keeneland’s very profitable history (Lexington’s Fort Knox) and current governance and ownership (Who Owns Keeneland?).

Since the June 16 launch of the Paulick Report, Musselman has shown a potential “man crush,” writing six fictional stories about the Paulick Report and its editor and publisher, Ray Paulick. References to the Paulick Report since June 16 can be found here, here, here, here, here and here.

That number puts the Paulick Report in good company with such regular Indian Charlie cast members as Jerry Bailey, Bob Baffert, Cot Campbell, Robert Clay, Christophe Clemente, Terrence Collier, Bob Evans, Terry Finley, Arthur Hancock, Barry Irwin, Ken McPeek, Niall O’Callaghan, and Dallas Stewart.

“We would like to sincerely thank Mr. Musselman and his billionaire Jockey Club member ghostwriters for the free publicity,” Ray Paulick told the Paulick Report in an exclusive interview, “and we encourage all of them to keep up the good work. Of course, we hope his ghostwriters are able to continue doing such a terrific job running the Thoroughbred industry.”

Copyright © 2008, The Paulick Report


Support the Paulick Report. Make a donation today.

Sign up for our Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick.

ROUND TABLE ROUNDUP

Wednesday, August 20th, 2008
By Ray Paulick

What’s different this time, different enough to herd the cats that refuse to be herded?

Speakers at the Jockey Club Round Table on Matters Pertaining to Racing have been calling, encouraging and hoping for change for most of the 50-plus years that this annual gathering has been going on. Whether it’s uniform licensing, uniform medication rules and penalties, uniform marketing, a uniform spirit of cooperation or a uniform approach to fixing an archaic tote system, the disparate groups in this industry refuse to put on the same uniform.

So there was the death in this year’s Kentucky Derby of the filly Eight Belles. There was also the admission by trainer Rick Dutrow that he routinely gave anabolic steroids (legally, it should be added) to his horses, including Kentucky Derby winner Big Brown. (Hell, it wasn’t that long ago that Kentucky allowed bicarbonate loading, or milkshakes, to be given to horses.)  In recent years there have been highly publicized suspensions or positive tests for medication violations of the conditioner who has won the last four Eclipse Awards as outstanding trainer; the trainer of the reigning Horse of the Year; the trainer of the Kentucky Derby winner; and the trainer of the Kentucky Oaks winner. There is scientific data showing that toe grabs can increase the incidence of catastrophic injuries, yet most states still allow these racing plates to be used.

Racing has had high profile fatalities before, anabolic steroids like Winstrol have been  called a therapeutic medication and advertised for years in the trade magazines, and successful trainers have been charged with medication violations. Those incidents were never enough to move the needle; why should it be any different this time?

Maybe, just maybe, it’s the threat of federal intervention. People like Congressman Ed Whitfield of Kentucky are telling the industry “fix your problems or we’ll fix them for you.” That’s a scary thought to many. Perhaps, however, that’s the only way significant change will occur.

Many (but not all) within the industry sense the serious nature of the threat and understand that change is no longer an option if we want to turn the tide of negative publicity, declining popularity and serious economic challenges. Unfortunately, the group responsible for making many of the desired changes in policies related to medication, drug testing and other regulatory matters have the least invested in the industry. These are the state regulators, the “gnomes” as former Churchill Downs CEO Tom Meeker once referred to them. In many cases they are political appointees with little or no knowledge of the racing industry and who fail to see how their myopic maneuverings negatively impact the industry’s big picture.

Let’s look at the establishment of drug testing laboratory standards and the possible creation of a national laboratory (or regional labs), one of the centerpieces of the Jockey Club Safety Committee recommendations announced at Sunday’s Round Table. Which racing commission is going to be the first to jettison it own state college or university lab? California, New York, Florida? Which commissions will redirect funding from labs within their state to out-of-state facilities?

The makeup of the safety committee was strategically formulated by the Jockey Club. Its members include Don Dizney from Florida, John Barr from California, Kentuckians Jimmy Bell, Hiram Polk and Dell Hancock, and chairman Stuart Janney from Maryland. But will those individuals be able to convince regulators in their home states and others around them to support the committee’s various recommendations?

Industry conferences, whether it’s the Jockey Club Round Table, University of Arizona Symposium on Racing, or Thoroughbred Racing Association/Harness Tracks of America Simulcast Conference tend to produced short-lived enthusiasm. Does anyone remember the report Rudy Giuliani delivered on wagering integrity, less than one year after the Breeders’ Cup Pick Six Scandal, at the 2003 Jockey Club Round Table? Several inches of dust have gathered on that report and on Giuliani’s very specific recommendations for fixing a tote system that is hideously outdated.

The industry would not work together to address that problem, and five years later there are racetrack operators who are unconvinced that their pools are not being manipulated by past-post betting. Tote problems represent a giant accident waiting to happen.

I hope I’m wrong. It would be nice to see every state racing commission adopt uniform medication rules, including the abolition of anabolic steroids, and ban toe grabs and other racing plates that lead to catastrophic injuries.  It would be productive for the various laboratories to work together instead of competing with each other. If the industry developed a national laboratory and had the funding for serious research and development, it’s possible we could eradicate some of the designer drugs that are currently undetectable that many in the game feel are prevalent.

The industry has faced crises before, and it’s failed to act on its own accord. What makes this crisis any different?

Copyright © 2008, The Paulick Report

Support the Paulick Report. Make a donation today.
Sign up for our Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick

‘WE ARE STRUGGLING TO ADAPT’

Monday, August 18th, 2008

Alan Foreman, CEO of the Thoroughbred Horesemen’s Association, laid it on the line in discussing the industry’s real and perceived problems regarding medication and drug testing at Sunday’s Jockey Club Round Table in Saratoga Springs, N.Y. Foreman identifies the problems facing the Thoroughbred industry relative to medication and testing and also provides a roadmap for how to address those issues.

 

Foreman’s talk was one of many presentations on a day that focused on medication and safety issues of the racehorse in the wake of the death of Eight Belles in this year’s Kentucky Derby and a subsequent Congressional hearing where the threat of federal intervention was raised. I’ll have my own commentary on these issues in the days to come.

Following are the remarks of Alan Foreman, in their entirety. — Ray Paulick

 

Last year’s Conference focused, in part, on the scandals plaguing other major sports arising from the use of performance enhancing drugs. I was unhappy and a bit perplexed because I thought we had a positive story to tell and that we could distance our sport from the others. I took particular exception, on behalf of the thousands of horsemen who dedicate themselves to the welfare of the horse and the integrity of our sport, to the suggestion that horse racing is consumed by a raging wildfire of illegal drugging.

Unlike the other sports, we do not allow our athletes to medicate themselves for headaches, backaches, joint pains, broken bones and cuts on the day of and during competition to allow them to compete. Our athletes aren’t sent to the sidelines or the locker room for treatment in order to return to competition.

Except for the controlled use of Lasix, we are a sport that does not allow our athletes to compete with drugs in their bodies. We have a supposedly world-class detection system designed to deter anyone who would corrupt our competitions with performance enhancing drugs. 

We spend $30 million annually to support drug testing, more than any other sport. We have dedicated scientists who test thousands of urine and blood samples collected from horses each day and who study the pharmacologic effects of drugs on horses, all in an effort to insure that our sport is clean.

Nonetheless, there was a larger message conveyed here last year. Polling of racing’s core fans, done in the midst of the scandals plaguing other sports, showed that one-third of them believed that racing also had serious integrity problems and that illegal, performance enhancing drugs was the number one problem. 

We were warned that the lack of consumer confidence in the integrity of our product could cause irreparable damage. I dismissed this perception as a reflection of the time.

Not long after last year’s Conference, we moved in a highly publicized and somewhat controversial way, to restrict or prohibit the use of steroids. It was the right thing to do, but it exposed many of our problems. And then there was the EIGHT BELLES tragedy. The ensuing furor unleashed every negative perception and stereotype about our sport. The reaction was visceral. In its wake, recent polling done of casual fans of racing, our core fans and those within our industry has revealed an alarming increase in the negative perceptions reported last year. Of those, the perception of illegal drugging is by far and uniformly their single biggest concern. 

Yes, we are a sport that has and always will be confronted by those few who disregard the well-being and integrity of our sport for short term gain. However, in the court of public opinion, which in today’s world is the only thing that truly matters, the perception is that our sport is not clean. In today’s world, perception is reality no matter how unfair or inaccurate that perception may be.

I wasn’t born yesterday. The negative perceptions of our sport have always been there. But not in the significant numbers that we are now seeing, regardless of how we defend ourselves. The simple fact is, we are living in a different world than we have known. Communication is instantaneous and opinions are formed instantly. Standards and expectations are higher and the margin for error is lower. There are few gray areas anymore. Judgment is no longer reserved. Perceptions are difficult to change. If our brand, our great sport, is to survive this rough patch and restore itself to its previous glory, then we have to substantively address the issues that concern our consumers and our fellow participants. It is expected of us. And, we have to do it now, because we do not have the luxury of time. Anyone who doesn’t believe we are in trouble is in denial. We cannot talk our way out of our problems and we cannot take steps that are perceived as mere window dressing.

Can we reverse the negative perceptions of our sport, particularly as it relates to the perception of rampant and illegal drug use? Can we truly say that our sport is clean? I think we can and I am going to suggest to you how we can do it. But we had better move quickly. 

The first step is to acknowledge the problem.   We spend approximately $30 million annually on drug testing, but that funding is spread among 18 different laboratories servicing 38 racing jurisdictions. The dollars are not spread evenly. 

There is a wide variation among our laboratories in the number and types of tests performed on test samples. Even our best don’t have the resources to do the testing that should be done. 

In 1989, when the industry was far healthier, we spent $27.6 million on drug testing. So we’re basically spending the same amount on drug testing as we did 20 years ago, while much has changed.

This is not new information. Scott Waterman told you this last year. The difference this year, and for the foreseeable future, is that our federal and state governments are in economic free-fall.

Our laboratories operate by virtue of written contracts with state governments, state or land-grant universities or through private companies who bid for our work through a procurement process that rewards the lowest bidder. Budget cuts in the face of enormous deficits mean inevitable cuts for drug testing of race horses. 

What politician would rather allocate money to drug testing of race horses rather than fund health care, education or other taxpayer needs? What laboratory doing drug testing for horse racing right now isn’t facing significant budget cuts?

This, in the face of an industry- imposed steroid policy that requires our laboratories to do a whole new level of mandatory testing without the funds or equipment to do it.   Simply put, our system worked decades ago. It won’t work now if we are intent on restoring consumer confidence without major changes.

We have too many laboratories feeding off the same revenue stream. They are understaffed and lack the necessary equipment that will allow us to do what we need to do.

We have little, if any, research and development underway, nor are we preparing for the “future” generation of drugs, which may, in fact, already be upon us.  For years, we have been consumed with concerns about tranquilizers and therapeutic medications that have been around for decades. 

While we should certainly be chasing all drugs that have the potential to affect performance, there are a new generation of doping agents entering the world of sports unlike anything we have seen before—genetic manipulators—and we are unprepared. We have neither the resources nor the mechanism to address this emerging threat.

This leads me to something that no one has talked about, but which poses a major problem for the future of our sport. The names Maylin, Soma, Tobin, Sams, Stanley, Lomangino, Strug, Hyde, Lorimar, Uboh to name a few, are synonymous with equine drug testing and pharmacology in this industry. They have been our Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps. 

They have been our scientists leading the integrity battle.   They are the unsung heroes of our sport. They would be the first to tell you that they could do better with more money, better equipment and more staff.

However, there is going to come a time when they are no longer available to us. There is no bench. There is no farm system. There is no talent pool waiting in the wings to do our critical work. We are unable to compete with private industry nor do others want to work within the constraints of government or university bureaucracy.

Basically, we are not training the next generation of scientists to do drug testing and be our experts in blood doping, gene manipulation and other emerging threats.

Well, I think you get the picture. Can we truly make the case that our sport is clean, which, by the way, I think it is, or succumb to the perception that we are not, when we can’t forcefully answer the question because our system is flawed?

Does anyone in this room dispute the belief that solving these problems is critical to the future of our sport? If we are going to change the perception of our sport and if we are going to restore consumer confidence in our brand, then we need to take substantive steps and I suggest the following:

1.     
 We need to establish a reference, research and testing laboratory controlled by the racing industry. We can no longer afford to be at the mercy of states and private entities for our testing and research needs. We’ve known of this need. McKinsey told us 20 years ago. The THA called for it 8 years ago. The RMTC has recognized its need. Yet, we’ve done nothing. We must explore the possibility of a public/private partnership or look at the feasibility of joining with our colleagues in the performance horse industry who share our problems, concerns and ideals. Whatever the case, we need to move on this and do it now, with specific and demonstrable timelines for implementation.

2.     
We need to establish strict industry laboratory standards for drug testing in this country and implement them in the quickest and most practical means possible. These standards must address current technology, equipment, staffing, proficiency, number of tests, types of tests, minimum concentration levels and compliance. They should be established by our scientists who know of our needs–not horsemen, breeders, track operators, regulators or the federal government. Our scientists must be directed to create the standards for the best and most effective comprehensive state-of-the-art drug testing system for racing and we need to listen to them by implementing their recommendations. I ask the Jockey Club to support this effort and for the RMTC to begin this process immediately, with specific and demonstrable timelines for implementation.

3.     
We need to consolidate our drug testing laboratory system and significantly reduce the number of laboratories conducting testing for the racing industry. A regional system makes the most sense. We must pool and reallocate the financial resources we now have within a new streamlined, stronger and more efficient system. We can accomplish this in the first instance by requiring any laboratory that intends to conduct drug testing for racing to meet the strict standards that are established for the industry. Those laboratories that cannot meet the standards should look for work elsewhere. I call on the Graded Stakes Committee to condition the grading and running of any graded race, and the Breeders’ Cup to condition the funding and running of any Breeders’ Cup related race, on drug testing being conducted for those races only by a laboratory that has met the new industry standards. Churchill Downs, Magna and NYRA need to do the same for the Triple Crown races. Eventually, this must cover all of our races at all of our tracks.   When appropriate, we will need to publicly identify those racetracks that do not have their testing performed by a laboratory that meets the new industry standards and demand their compliance. We need to require that all positive tests for which confirmation is requested be performed by one of the industry recognized laboratories. We will need the help of our regulators to make this recommendation a reality and we will look to the ARCI for its help.

4.     
We need to invest in research and development now, before it is too late. This presents a perfect opportunity for a new racing research and reference center. We need to begin research into gene doping, gene manipulation and other emerging integrity threats. If laboratory mice can be injected with targeted genes with reported astonishing results, how long will it be before someone attempts to manipulate a race horse? If necessary, we need to contract this work to researchers and universities already studying this emerging problem. We need to look to partner our efforts with other major sports leagues who have begun to devote significant research dollars to doping concerns.

5.     
We need to start developing a new generation of scientists — toxicologists and pharmacologists — who will lead our integrity efforts. On this issue in particular, we do not have the luxury of time. Given the importance of this issue to our overall integrity efforts, I am pleased that the THA will continue to lead by example. Eight years ago, the THA called for the creation of a national drug testing and research consortium that ultimately became the RMTC. We committed permanent funding for it when others were on the fence. Recently, the New York THA, working in partnership with the State of New York, allocated $500,000 from its revenues that would otherwise be dedicated to backstretch programs and equine research, to purchase the state-of-the art equipment necessary for the New York Equine Drug Testing Laboratory to conduct steroid testing and testing for the new generation of drugs. Today, the THA is pleased to announce that it will commit additional funds , and we ask every racetrack and industry organization to match our commitment, to recruit and support post graduate students interested in a career in equine drug testing and research. We will ask our experts and those conducting cutting- edge research to allow us to place interested students to work and learn beside them, and we will pay for it. What better way to invest in the future.

6.     
The THA is going to ask the RMTC to revisit and recommend uniform withdrawal time guidelines based on existing and historic research. We can no longer get by with just publishing each State’s recommendations, which vary. We must eliminate positive tests. They give us a black eye, no matter that they demonstrate our deterrence system at work. Notwithstanding that most of our positive tests are the result of sloppy or errant administrations of therapeutic medications, to the public, a drug is a drug and there is no difference. All horsemen and veterinarians need to do their part by strictly adhering to these guidelines when published. 

7.     
Finally, we need this industry to recognize the importance of, and the significant work performed by, the RMTC. It is the best organization we have ever had in racing on medication issues and policy. It has forged unprecedented and necessary collaboration among our scientific community. It is truly a national voice on medication. And, it is the best response to the threat of federal intervention.

It is always an honor to be invited to speak at this forum. However, I didn’t come here today to give a nice speech that my children and grandchildren can access in the archives of the Jockey Club’s website. I am here because I want to make a difference and encourage change. I thank the Jockey Club Safety Committee for giving me the opportunity over the past few weeks to express my views on this subject. I am encouraged by their strong interest. I am also encouraged by the positive response from horsemen across the country with whom I have shared these recommendations.

Everyone in this room is the steward of a national treasure, a great sport, a great tradition. What began as a sport more than a century ago is now a diverse and dynamic industry that is a part of the history, economy and social fabric of this country. 

But, we’re in the 21st century and the world is a vastly different place. We are clearly struggling to adapt. We have an obligation to preserve and protect this institution for our next generation. We are well known for arguing and disagreeing about everything. If we don’t address this drug testing issue now and let it become a catalyst for what can be a change in the perception of our sport, then we may not have anything left to argue about. I am willing to drop everything I am doing to make these recommendations a reality. I hope you feel the same sense of urgency. – Alan Foreman, CEO, Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association

JOCKEY CLUB: ALL ABOUT CONTROL

Friday, August 15th, 2008
By Ray Paulick

One of the staples of the Jockey Club Round Table Conference on Matters Pertaining to Racing, to be held this Sunday in Saratoga Springs, N.Y., is a report on the activities of the Jockey Club, whose primary responsibility to the industry is registering Thoroughbreds and approving the names horses are given.

Of course, the Jockey Club wants to do much, much more than that, and its executive team, led by president Alan Marzelli, has focused on building the organization’s “family of companies” to include the collection and commercial sales of racing, breeding and auction data, the sale of handicapping information, software development, and technology services to racetracks, farms and other businesses in the industry. Either Marzelli or chief administrative officer James Gagliano will report on Sunday that every branch of the company is doing an outstanding job.

What you won’t hear in the report is how the tentacles of the Jockey Club and some of its individual members strategically reach into various organizations and businesses in an effort to exert control throughout the Thoroughbred industry.

To quote from the book, “The Right Blood: America’s Aristocrats in Thoroughbred Racing,” by Carole Case: “This is a story about money and power, and about a particular group of rich and powerful Americans—the men (and a very few women) of the Jockey Club. With its founding in New York City at the turn of the twentieth century, the Club took the reins of Thoroughbred racing in the United States, and it has never entirely let them go. For more than a century, then, the Jockey Club has dominated horseracing in this country.”

For better or worse, the Jockey Club, which has been ruled since 1982 by chairman Dinny Phipps and vice chairman William S. Farish, has considerable power over the Breeders’ Cup, Keeneland, National Thoroughbred Racing Association, the Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders Association and its American Graded Stakes Committee, Bloodhorse magazine, and the New York Racing Association, among others.

Here’s a quick rundown.

– William Farish’s son, Bill, is the board chairman of the Breeders’ Cup, which before its governance was changed a few years ago, had been tightly controlled by the senior Farish and his longtime friend and horse business partner G. Watts Humphrey. The battle over control of the Breeders’ Cup board has been detailed by previous articles in the Paulick Report..

– The senior Farish replaced Ted Bassett in 2006 as one of the three trustees who oversees Keeneland’s operations. Keeeland’s president, Nick Nicholson, is a former executive with the Jockey Club. There is some speculation that one of the senior Farish’s goals is to expand Keeneland to the point where it can bid to become a permanent host for the Breeders’ Cup, making it the Augusta National of the racing industry.. An expansion is on the drawing board now, with Keeneland making a possible Breeders’ Cup bid as early as 2011.

– The NTRA board is populated by several Jockey Club members, including Humphrey and Robert Clay, plus Jockey Club president Marzelli, and three racetrack executives — Nicholson of Keeneland, Bob Elliston of Turfway Park (owned in part by Keeneland), and Charles Hayward of the New York Racing Association, which has been controlled by Phipps for more than 30 years. At one point, the NTRA and Jockey Club shared office space in New York.

– The Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders Association has had some semblance of independence from the Jockey Club in recent years, through its chairman, Bill Casner, who is not a Jockey Club member but has been asked to speak at Sunday’s Round Table. Casner was recently succeeded by Reynolds Bell, currently a steward of the Jockey Club and a bloodstock agent whose major client is Farish’s Lane’s End Farm. Dell Hancock, whose family’s Claiborne Farm boards the Phipps family mares, served as chair of the American Graded Stakes Committee until recently being succeeded by Peter Willmot. Steve Duncker, currently the board chairman of NYRA, was a previous Graded Stakes Commiteee chair.

– Stuart Janney is chairman of Bloodhorse magazine, whose board also includes Bill Farish, G. Watts Humphrey, D.G. Van Clief, and Antony Beck—all Jockey Club members with the exception of Beck, who is very close friends with Bill Farish. Janney is a Jockey Club steward, a cousin of Dinny Phipps, and chairman of Bessemer Trust, the company founded by Phipps’ great-grandfather. He succeeded Humphrey as chairman, who in turn succeeded Bayard Sharp, Farish’s late father-in-law.

– The New York Racing Association’s close relationship with the Jockey Club is no secret. Its tracks serve as playgrounds for many Jockey Club members, most notably Dinny Phipps, who has the most desired finish line boxes at the NYRA tracks. The Jockey Club even has offices at the New York tracks. The Jockey Club once officially ruled New York racing, but lost its official control when a horseman named Jule Fink went to court after being denied an owner’s license. NYRA’s board is populated with Jockey Club members, and its chairman, Steve Duncker, like most chairman before him, is a member of the Club as well.

The tentacles clearly reach into breed associations, regulatory agencies and other organizations throughout racing and breeding.

What isn’t clear is why the Jockey Club, led by its chairman and vice chairman, wants so desperately to control the industry, and what they plan to do with that control.

Copyright © 2008, The Paulick Report

Support the Paulick Report. Make a donation today.
Visit the Paulick Report for all the latest news throughout the racing world.

Sign up for our Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick.

POPE TO OWNERS: ‘IT’S YOUR GAME’

Thursday, August 14th, 2008
By Ray Paulick

Fred Pope just won’t give up.

For more than 16 years, since he first used advertising space in Bloodhorse magazine to publish an article entitled “Whose Game Is it?” Pope has been trying to convince Thoroughbred owners that they can control their own destiny in racing.

Pope is a Lexington, Ky., advertising agent who for many years was closely associated with Gainesway Farm and its founding owner, John Gaines. Both men loved the power of ideas and both wanted to see Thoroughbred racing grow out of a parochial, tradition-steeped existence that encouraged inertia over creativity. Gaines started the Breeders’ Cup, which he had hoped would become a vehicle to market the sport to a wide audience that currently does not participate in racing. He went to his grave disappointed that his big dream was not fulfilled, even though the Breeders’ Cup has been widely hailed as racing’s best innovation of the 20th century.
 
Pope saw the power of the event, which at the very least gave racing the championship day it never had. The Breeders’ Cup has evolved from a one-day on-track experience with a relatively large television viewing audience to a two-day event in which racing fans throughout the country can participate through simulcast betting at their local track, OTB or via account wagering. The television audience has plunged in numbers over the 25-year history of the Breeders’ Cup, even as handle has grown substantially.

The bottom line is that the Breeders’ Cup may capture the attention of most racing fans for a weekend, but it isn’t creating very many new enthusiasts for the sport.

Pope believed racing needed more than just one big weekend in the fall to help the sport grow, so he began trying to find ways to define a “major leagues” for racing. He kept going back to the fact that the racehorse owners, the people who own the “talent,” should be in control of the game. “Control” means licensing, scheduling of major races, marketing regulations, contractual agreements over distribution and revenue. It’s the kind of control defined by the most successful major league sports, including the National Football League (controlled by the team owners) or the PGA Tour (controlled by the players).

After studying various sports and how the team owners or players exert control, Pope formed the National Thoroughbred Association, which would create a major league for horse racing by, among other things, reversing what he called the upside-down revenue model currently in place for simulcasting, which now accounts for nearly 90% of wagering. The upside-down model, in brief, pays five times more to the business handling a wager (the simulcast outlet or account wagering company where a bet is made) than it pays to the track and horsemen who puts on the race on which the wager is made.

One of the first people Pope convinced that his idea would work was John Gaines, who along with Pope started convincing some of the most powerful owners in the business to get on-board. Eventually more than 100 owners signed up, each contributing $50,000 to the NTA as seed money, and the NTA was off and running in the summer of 1996. A board of directors was formed and Robert Clay was elected president of the NTA.

(Author’s note: In an article on Breeders’ Cup governance published by the Paulick Report in June, I mistakenly credited Gaines with creating the NTA. Pope deserves full credit for its creation.)
Pope brought in two people familiar with the model, Tim Smith and Hamilton Jordan, who had worked together in the Jimmy Carter White House and later on several other projects, including professional tennis, which  had been transformed into a sport controlled by the players – not the tournament sites. Smith also had worked as deputy commissioner on the PGA Tour.

In early 1997, as the NTA’s plans continued to be formulated, Jockey Club chairman Dinny Phipps got involved and called Clay and a few others to a private meeting in Palm Beach, Fla. Neither Phipps nor William S Farish, the Jockey Club’s vice chairman, supported the NTA. Farish was also the chairman of the board of publicly traded Churchill Downs and a major consignor of yearlings at Keeneland. The latter role led Farish to have ambivalent feelings about the NTA, he told Gaines privately, because “I have to sell yearlings” to many of the people who had signed up in support of the NTA or who sat on its board of directors.

Clay was almost breathless in his enthusiasm for the “all hands together” approach that Phipps proposed during the Palm Beach meeting, that called for the Jockey Club, Breeders’ Cup and Keeneland to get involved. Other groups eventually were also brought in, including racetracks, and what had been an owner-driven initiative was now, for lack of a better term, a fustercluck of industry organizations which, by their nature, could never paddle in the same direction.

Phipps effectively killed the NTA, morphing it into the National Thoroughbred Racing Association, which is now a lobbying organization in Washington, D.C. , and a trade association for the industry. The NTRA is not a league office and has not done anything to transform racing into a major league sport.

As Pope said during a talk he gave to a group of equine attorneys last year, “The NTRA looked like the NTA, sounded like the NTA, and promoted itself with the terms such as ‘Commissioner’ and ‘league office’ but without the basic elements of a Major League. It was a fake major league.

“The NTRA could not package, price, or distribute the sport. It did not have the rights from the racehorse owners, it did not have rights from the racetracks, nor did it seek to change simulcast pricing. Instead of the proven Major League sports structure, the NTRA tried to include not just all of Thoroughbred racing, but also included all of the Thoroughbred industry, as well as other horse breeds and dog racing industries.

“Instead of a real Major League structure, the NTRA presented a fantasy structure selling the premise that if everyone would close their eyes, join hands and sing Koombaya, then Thoroughbred racing would be restored The political operators had everyone drinking the NTRA Kool-aid.

“If Mr. Phipps thought stopping the major league NTA, to start another trade association, then in my opinion he is incompetent. If he did it only to stop the NTA, then he and people who helped him are guilty of something more sinister and owe the industry an apology. Although Mr. Phipps is the acknowledged head of the industry, I have never read about his vision for Thoroughbred racing. Every time someone else has put forward an idea, he has moved to stop it. To the point now, no one has offered anything new in the last ten years.”

Pope made those comments in May 2007. Since then, the industry’s prognosis has gone from bad to worse. This year alone we’ve we had the death of Eight Belles at the Kentucky Derby, the admission by trainer Rick Dutrow that Kentucky Derby winner Big Brown raced on anabolic steroids, medication positives for the trainers of the Horse of the Year, the Kentucky Derby winner and the Kentucky Oaks winner, the possible implosion of Magna Entertainment (the largest racetrack owner in the country), ongoing disputes over simulcasting and account wagering, and Congressional hearings that made the industry’s leaders look incompetent.

I think we are right next to a calamity,” Pope told the Paulick Report.

For that reason, he’s not giving up on the same basic premise that started in 1992 with the question “Whose Game Is It?”

Last month, Pope published an op-ed piece in the Thoroughbred Daily News discussing racing’s upside-down distribution model and the need for owners to get involved. That article got a lot of horse owners talking about the need for change.

I’m afraid we are seeing the total collapse of the economic model that’s in place right now,” Pope told the Paulick Report. “The objective of the NTA was to change from a simulcast buyer’s market to a seller’s market. It’s finally coming to fruition in some very bad ways, and it’s only a matter of how much damage has been done.

In the Aug. 16 issue of Bloodhorse magazine, Pope has repeated that message and has called for Congress to change one word in the Interstate Horseracing Act that will empower owners across the nation.

We have a long list of national organizations, but not a national racehorse owners association,” Pope wrote in a magazine that, coincidentally, is owned by the national Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders Association. Several organizations say they speak for racehorse owners; however, they are actually controlled by breeders, tracks, or trainers. It seems everyone wants to speak for racehorse owners, except racehorse owners.

Currently, the Interstate Horseracing Act gives simulcast approval to what it calls “horsemen,” which has been defined as owners and trainers. Pope wants the word “horsemen” to be changed to “racehorse owners,” mandating that the owners step and get involved in key decisions relating to simulcasting contracts.

One problem is that horse owners, to paraphrase what Robert Clay said many years ago, didn’t join the country club to cut the grass. They joined so they could play golf

Jess Jackson is one owner who believes in Pope’s idea, and that can be viewed as a blessing or as a curse. Jackson is a powerful individual whose written testimony before the Congressional hearing in June included a lengthy article written by Pope. He has access to members of Congress that many others might not have. He is respected and appreciated by some in the industry for what he has done in the area of auction reform, but there are others who may automatically get on the other side of the fence from Jackson on any given issue because they don’t like his tactics.

That shouldn’t be the case. This issue is too important. Racing is in far worse shape than it was in 1996 when Pope and more than 100 owners stepped up to make a difference, only to be shot down by Dinny Phipps and his sycophantic followers.

The idea then was to grow the business by having owners take control of the sport and create a new business model for simulcast distribution. The reality today is that the various parties are fighting over scraps. The focus needs to return to growth, and there is only way for that to occur.

Racehorse owners must support change to the status quo.

Copyright © 2008, The Paulick Report

Support the Paulick Report. Make a donation today.

 

CONFUSING WEALTH WITH VISION

Wednesday, August 13th, 2008
By Ray Paulick

This Sunday in Saratoga Springs, N.Y., Ogden Mills Phipps  – better known as Dinny throughout the Thoroughbred world – will preside over the 56th Jockey Club Round Table Conference on Matters Pertaining to Racing.

For those who have never attended, there is no “round table” at this annual throat-clearing exercise for many of the industry poobahs, and there is not really any discussion, either. It’s a precisely orchestrated show that leaves nary a stanza for improvisation, and there is no question about who the conductor is waving the baton. According to several individuals who have spoken at past Round Tables, Dinny Phipps goes over every speech with a fine-tooth comb, cutting out things he doesn’t like and adding points he wants to have made.

The Round Table is one of the projects of the Jockey Club that Phipps has overseen since becoming the breed registry’s chairman in 1982. That same year, William S. Farish became the Jockey Club’s vice chairman. That’s 26 years running as a two-man team, 

But let’s not look ahead to Sunday’s festivities just yet. Let’s go back in time to a day when Dinny Phipps wasn’t trying to save the entire Thoroughbred industry; he was merely applying his business skills, enthusiasm and charisma to New York racing.

Some people who confuse wealth and power with vision and business intelligence might say that Dinny Phipps was born to lead. He is a member of one of America’s wealthiest families. His great-grandfather, Henry Phipps, was Andrew Carnegie’s partner in what became known as U.S. Steel, and he was the founder of Bessemer Trust, for which Dinny Phipps has served as chairman. As if that wasn’t enough, Dinny Phipps’ grandfather, Henry Carnegie Phipps, married into another of America’s wealthiest families, that of Darius Ogden Mills, who struck it rich in the California Gold Rush. At one time, the Phipps family owned roughly one-third of the exclusive island enclave of Palm Beach, Fla., where Dinny Phipps officially resides (Florida has no personal income tax).

Dinny Phipps followed his grandmother (Mrs. Henry Carnegie Phipps of the Wheatley Stable) and his father, Ogden Phipps, into Thoroughbred racing. Phipps and his father also were skilled at “court tennis” (some call it real tennis), a game that also found popularity with royalty in 16th and 17th century France and England. Ogden Phipps was a mover and shaker in New York racing, serving for years as a trustee of the New York Racing Association and also as chairman of the Jockey Club.

Dinny Phipps was made a member of the Jockey Club in 1965, when he was just 24 years old. In 1971, at the age of 30, he was appointed to the board of trustees of the New York Racing Association. It was the same year the first Off-Track Betting shop opened in New York, a development that sent on-track business at the NYRA tracks into a long and steady decline.

Young Phipps wasn’t entirely a chip off the old block. Whitney Tower, writing in Sports Illustrated, said most members of the Phipps family went out of their way to avoid publicity. Tower wrote in 1965: “Until Dinny slightly altered the family pattern by hobnobbing in track press boxes and frequenting Toots Shor’s (a midtown Manhattan bar and grill frequented by celebrities and athletes), none considered the press anything more than a necessary evil of the modern age."

Tower, whose sense of humor could be wicked, also wrote of the young (and still growing) Phipps’ court tennis skills in the 1965 article that featured the Phipps family’s Bold Lad, an early season Kentucky Derby contender. “Dinny, who, like Bold Lad, has never missed an oat in his life (weight, 275 pounds), is defending amateur doubles champ with Northrup Know, after playing No. 2 on both the tennis and squash teams at Yale.”

Phipps was moved up to a newly created position of vice chairman of the NYRA board in 1974. The chairman, Jack Dreyfus, bred and raced under the name Hobeau Farm and was best known as the creator of the mutual fund through his financial company, the Dreyfus Fund. Dreyfus also spoke willingly about his bouts with clinical depression and became a vocal proponent of a drug he was given to treat the problem.

In an extraordinary editorial in the Feb. 16, 1976, Bloodhorse magazine, editor Kent Hollingsworth called for Dreyfus’ ouster as NYRA’s chairman.

‘The roof is leaking,” Hollingsworth wrote of NYRA and its three racetracks, Aqueduct, Belmont Park, and Saratoga. “In other sports when the trend is downward, the coach or manager is fired. … (Dreyfus) has lost the confidence of a growing number of New York owners and trainers and cooperation of management and horsemen is absolutely essential to reverse the downward trend of New York racing.”

Hollingsworth then endorsed Phipps to become the new chairman.

“Young Dinny Phipps, vice chairman of NYRA, has the support of most New York owners and trainers. As chairman, Phipps would be more accessible, and greater cooperation with horsemen could be attained. Also, the vacant slot for a director of racing needs filling now, by a man who has the experience and rapport with both management and New York horsemen. … The NYRA needs new – not just new, but better – direction. It needs it now, for all of racing cannot afford to have New York racing continue downward.”

Five months later, in July 1976 Dreyfus stepped down and Dinny Phipps was appointed NYRA’s chairman. “I hope I can fulfill the duties of this office with the same energy, foresight and creativity displayed by Jack Dreyfus,” Phipps was quoted in the Bloodhorse. “Working under him has been a valuable experience.” The Bloodhorse article gave no professional or business background  on Phipps, only saying that he was the son of Ogden Phipps.

By today’s standards, on-track business looked pretty good when Phipps took over. Aqueduct’s early-season meeting had average on-track attendance of 20,722, Belmont Park’s summer meeting averaged 24,387, and its fall meeting averaged 20,363. Saratoga had a daily average of 18,894.

But there were serious problems, and they would only get worse. By the time Phipps left in 1983, those same numbers were 13,340 at Aqueduct, 19,530 at Belmont summer and 16,735 for Belmont’s fall meeting. Saratoga was the lone bright spot, increasing to 26,644 by 1983.

Phipps spoke before New York legislators after his appointment, saying: “Thoroughbred racing in New York State, once a growth industry, has fallen on evil days, and a period of crisis is clearly upon us. And this has happened, purely and simply, because growth has stopped. … There may be those who will argue that concern for on-track growth is misplaced in the era of OTB and who anticipate the day when tracks will operate primarily to serve off-track clientele. If this day comes, we believe it will mark the end of both OTB and the tracks. We do not believe that OTB can flourish and prosper in a climate of ever-declining interest in on-track racing. The tracks make customers for OTB, not the other way around.”

But under the headline “Better Days Ahead,” a story in Bloodhorse magazine in November 1976 quoted Phipps telling the American Trainers Association that NYRA was going to “make an all-out effort” to improve conditions.  

The efforts went unnoticed by Sports Illustrated the following June after Seattle Slew clinched the Triple Crown with a win in the Belmont Stakes. “The 70,000 people who showed up at Belmont Park Saturday did so despite the best efforts of the New York Racing Association to keep the race a secret,” the Scorecard item read. “No wonder the NYRA is in trouble. … NYRA chairman Dinny Phipps needed a bang-up selling job. So, the week of the Kentucky Derby, just one month before the Belmont, Phipps hired a marketing expert and gave him the title vice-president in charge of marketing. It seemed like a smart move.

"But new VP Ted Demmon admits that the only thing he knew about horses is which end the tail is on. “His previous job was marketing vice-president for Hardee’s, the ‘hurry on down to’ hamburger joints, where he was also in charge of product development. While Phipps hasn’t yet assigned him that job, someone at the NYRA should have told Demmon that a man named Billy Turner has just spent a year developing the hottest product the NYRA could have hoped for. Yet just three days before Seattle Slew was to become the first undefeated Triple Crown winner in the history of racing, the television ads in New York were still inviting people to come out to beautiful Belmont Park, where, just maybe, some afternoon they might see another Secretariat.”

At the end of 1977, his first full year as chairman, Phipps was scarcely mentioned in Bloodhorse’s annual index of articles. The few references included the fact he had commissioned artist Richard Stone Reeves to paint a portrait of Bold Ruler, that he was awarded the P.A.B. Widener Trophy in Kentucky, that he was re-elected as a director of the Grayson Foundation and that he and his wife had a son born in July (sort of like those stud news items that announce when a major stallion’s first foal is born).

But things were happening at NYRA. In September 1977, Thomas FitzGerald was forced out as NYRA president and James Heffernan was brought in to replace him. There were labor problems with mutual clerks, and a TV deal was struck to show some major races on CBS.

The major emphasis after Phipps took over as NYRA chairman was to convince then-Gov. Hugh Carey to push for a reduction in takeout in hopes that it would stimulate handle and on-track attendance. Independent research commissioned by NYRA, the Pugh-Roberts Study, showed business would go up between 12-15%. How hard did Phipps work on this? “We put in two hours every working day just on this one thing,” said Phipps, who even made two trips to the state capital in Albany. Eventually, a 20-month takeout reduction experiment was approved, and Phipps became the toast of racing. 

The New York Turf Writers named him “the man who did the most for New York racing.” In February 1979, Phipps was given the Eclipse Award of Merit by a committee representing Daily Racing Form, the National Turf Writers Association and the Thoroughbred Racing Associations.

Hollingsworth, Bl