REDUCE THE ALPHABET SOUP
By Ray Paulick
What does the departure of Churchill Downs Inc.’s four racetracks—Churchill Downs, Arlington Park, Fair Grounds, and Calder—from membership in the National Thoroughbred Racing Association mean for that organization’s future?
From a budget standpoint, not much, according to published reports. The $375,000 in dues from the CDI tracks represents just 3.75% of the NTRA’s $10-million annual budget. However, it was enough to cover the base salary of the NTRA’s CEO, Alex Waldrop, reported at $302,706 earlier this year when the Paulick Report published a list of salaries paid to executives of some of the horse industry’s non-profit associations.
So the loss of $375,000 means the NTRA will be doing less in the next 12 months than it did in the last 12 months, because I doubt very much Waldrop will be taking a cut in pay.
That begs the question, and it’s one I hear from people all the time: What does the NTRA do?
Let me start by saying what the NTRA does not do.
The NTRA does not promote or market racing as it once did. It no longer buys televise time to showcase the sport. It is not a “league office” in any way, shape or form that the NBA, NFL or MLB professional leagues have a national office. It has no authority over anyone or anything.
It does, however, have some useful functions, though Bob Evans, the bottom line boss of Churchill Downs, does not see them as valuable enough for the money the company was paying the NTRA in dues.
The NTRA and its Political Action Committee do represent the horse racing and breeding industry in Washington, D.C., and in my opinion has done a good job lobbying Congress and other federal officials, often working alongside the American Horse Council, which represents all breeds of horses. Both organizations have been effective on tax matters of interest to owners and breeders, though it would be nice if they could give horseplayers better representation when it comes to changing the law regarding winning bets that require signatures and tax withholding.
NTRA also has a small but hard-working press office that, among other things, spent a great deal of time organizing teleconferences with owners, trainers, and jockeys of horses participating on the road to the Kentucky Derby. Those weekly teleconferences generated needed publicity for a sport that struggles to get coverage in the mainstream media.
The NTRA also has teamed with Daily Racing Form to promote national handicapping tournaments, and has ongoing dialogue with horseplayers.
The NTRA has put a great deal of time and effort into the Safety and Integrity Alliance that was created following a series of events, including the death of Eight Belles in the 2008 Kentucky Derby and a Congressional hearing on horse racing matters in June of that year.
The Safety and Integrity Alliance, which includes accreditation—or something akin to a “good horsekeeping seal of approval”–for tracks that meet certain standards related to horse welfare, has been a superficial approach to a serious public relations problem. But because the NTRA has no authority over anyone or anything, I’m not sure how the alliance could have made a substantive impact on those problems. More than anything else, the Safety and Integrity Alliance can be viewed as the industry’s response to further inquiries from the federal government. If Waldrop is called before Congress again, however, I doubt the Safety and Integrity Alliance will be applauded as something that’s made a significant difference.
Accreditation or lack thereof by the alliance certainly has had no impact on a racetrack’s business. Three tracks that have either not applied for or received accreditation, Tampa Bay Downs, Oaklawn Park, and Hawthorne—are coming off very successful race meetings in comparison to the previous year. One of the goals of the alliance, Waldrop had said, was to build confidence among horseplayers for tracks that have received accreditation. Horseplayers don’t care about that.
So do we really need the NTRA? Churchill Downs apparently doesn’t think so. Neither does Oaklawn Park, Delaware Park, the Penn National Gaming tracks or Philadelphia Park. Will the tracks now owned by MI Developments be next to drop out?
Over the last decade there has been a great deal of consolidation in the industry, with publicly traded companies Churchill Downs, Penn National Gaming, and Magna Entertainment (now part of MI Developments) building their portfolio of racing and gaming properties.
There hasn’t been consolidation when it comes to racing organizations, also known as the alphabet soups. There are more of them today than we’ve ever had before, and with each organization comes the cost of salaries, offices, travel and other expenses.
For the same economies of scale reasons the tracks have consolidated, we need consolidation of these alphabet soups, many of which seem to be increasingly focused on self-survival rather than on industry service. When the NTRA was created, there was a hope that much of the industry would consolidate and work together under a single umbrella. That clearly hasn’t happened. It’s every man (and organization) for himself.
Tags: alex waldrop, churchill downs, delaware park, NTRA, oaklawn park, Paulick Report, Philadelphia park, Ray Paulick
May 12th, 2010 at 6:36 am
The NTRA is, in effect, merely a lobbyist entity, but don’t they have a separate Political Action Committe (PAC) for that?
So, what do they do now? I think Waldrop, deep down, had hoped the Federal government would have forced the issue of a centralized racing authority, then Waldrop or Tommy Thompson could step forward & brag about how they have been the one central “do gooder” of the sport.
I think Waldrop is worried about his job… all of his postings lately are about “explaining” what the NTRA does. If someone has to do that much explaining, then obviously, the organization is not very effective at what they do.
May 12th, 2010 at 6:42 am
The alliance has been making good progress with thoroughbred retirement programs at tracks. While the standards started off weak, the 2010 modifications are much improved and will have accredited tracks up to the levels already in practice at Suffolk Downs and Philadelphia Park. The problem is how we deal with the problem at tracks which have no motivation to be accredited. This process of accreditation in general, if it continues, could help stave off federal intervention in horse racing regulation. If it is abandoned, it gives the feds yet another good reason to intervene.
May 12th, 2010 at 6:47 am
Our Industry has way too many Alphabet Soup organizations. We have too many people who care about their title and standing (and salary) than actually getting anything done. The current state of our industry provides all the necessary evidence needed to prove my case. Decades of failure; ineffective leadership and failed industry structure.
A number of prominent industry participants have recently questioned what any of them accomplish day in and day out. TOBA, TRA, NTRA, ARCI, NHBPA could all go away and be replaced by a single organization that truly represents the industry. And even if this new structure was as ineffective as the others perhaps their ineffectiveness could be accomplished at a small fraction of the current expense to the industry.
May 12th, 2010 at 7:08 am
Caleb takes Ray’s thought almost to its obvious conclusion.
Let’s take it that extra small step and throw in the JC and the RCI and wouldn’t we then have what many of us have wanted for years - a ‘central league office’ that could establish such things as uniform medication rules and penalties, uniform (and generally) lower take-out, standards for track maintenance and safety and a unified promotion/lobbying program etc etc?
If Waldrop could pull that off, then he would earn his sheckels.
May 12th, 2010 at 7:28 am
We need to establish an oversight committee to oversee the other committees. I propose the NTOCNA (National Thoroughbred Oversight Committee of North America).
Mission Statement:
The purpose of NTOCNA is to promote discussion of issues facing the thoroughbred industry and to dictate laws to oversee legal functions within the various state and federal agencies associated with Thoroughbred Horse Racing. This includes issues that affect horsemen and fans, as well as broader issues. The former includes, e.g., oversight of the NTRA, NYRA, Kentucky Horsemen, all various state run organizations, notification of new hire and renewals of contract, general working conditions, such as backstretch working conditions, phone access, etc., time and compensation for research and committee work, funds for medication policy and research including policy for the various organizations both state and national for testing and research, and representation in the local and National Government. The latter might include increased reliance on national, or part-time organizations, part-time consultants that affects the make-up of the various organizations and review of tenure-line positions. The NTOCNA aims to achieve its goals through educating people about the indusrty, working
with public officials to devise fitting policy solutions to problems affecting the industry, including casino and gambling legislation and bettor representation for limiting take-out.
The NTOCNA will also establish the NTOCNA/BSD, the National Thoroughbred Oversight Committee of North America/Breeding and Sales Division to oversee both integrity and best practices that effect this integral part of our industry. State breeding programs and Fund management will be managed by a separate division, part of the
NTOCNA/BSD, called the NTOCNA/BSD Funds Committee.
And of course should be funded by the tracks and owners.
May 12th, 2010 at 7:33 am
The NTRA has always been in a perpetual search for identity. From the very outset the industry that created it changed almost overnight. Ever since a portion of its tax base has been vulnerable as tracks tread water racing in order to sustain licenses to conduct what actually makes money. The reform white papers have been sitting on the shelves for years but there is no Lenin out there worthy enough to overthrow the Romanovs. The beat goes on.
May 12th, 2010 at 8:05 am
Consolidation becomes a mute point if there are not realistic plans to achieve our goals. Our business model needs to be led by someone with Carl Icahn like skills. Plans for sustainability, plans for growth, performance standards and measures, all the components required of a successful business must be incorporated into any national organization if we are to be effective. Base salaries should be commensurate with demonstrated abilities with a bonus/commission structure used as an incentive instead of raises.
We would also need restructuring of membership dues to allow involvement of all horseracing and breeding participants. There is a huge segment of our workforce and small owner/trainers who simply cannot afford membership in the NTRA. The same can be said for racetracks which need to justify their dues by what they are getting in return.
May 12th, 2010 at 8:15 am
Every one of these Alphabet Soup organizations should be disbanded and everyone reapply for their jobs and their funding. The industry could then decide who’s proposal (ie structure, mission, resource planning) is best and only fund that one. All the others could fall by the wayside.
I pray that MID drops out of NTRA. This would provide a further wake-up call to the larger industry and show our failed leaders for what they are.
It’s time for wholesale change in our industry. We desperately need it.
May 12th, 2010 at 8:31 am
Ray, I was under the impression that the NTRA did in fact buy air time for two or three KyDerby preps this year. In any case, it’s difficult to disagree with your central argument. The NTRA just doesn’t have the funding, resources, or vision to lead a meaningful marketing initiative but has a done a few other things well. Didn’t Satish Sanan recently coin the phrase “Alphabet Soup” to describe the various fiefdoms across racing? It seems all but inevitable that a new structure and governance has to be in racing’s future.
May 12th, 2010 at 8:45 am
We all know the accredition, alliance thing, or whatever they call it, is a joke. So why do they waste so much time and money on it? Why pay some old political hack like Tommy Thompson to do absolutely nothing? Wouldn’t that money be better spent by promoting racing on TV and radio, like the NTRA was meant to at the beginning? Ray, I would love to know how much Thompson is being paid and wonder what, if anything, he has done to earn his salary?
May 12th, 2010 at 9:03 am
Ray said:
“….The NTRA and its Political Action Committee do represent the horse racing and breeding industry in Washington, D.C., and in my opinion has done a good job lobbying Congress and other federal officials, often working alongside the American Horse Council, which represents all breeds of horses. Both organizations have been effective on tax matters of interest to owners and breeders, though it would be nice if they could give horseplayers better representation when it comes to changing the law regarding winning bets that require signatures and tax withholding…..”
Mr. Paulick, you’re making a joke, right? Seriously. The AHC has forever supported paid to dump human consumption horse slaughter . Only recently have they paid ANY lip service to rehoming and owner responsibility.
That’s acceptable for our star athletes?! Not only is this an issue of food safety for humans, as equines are not raised, medically treated or documented as food animals, but the production line mass slaughter of equines is inhumane.
NTRA, AAEP, AHC and other breed orgs think it’s just hunky dorey.
If the so-called lead org of this industry can’t recognize the ethical and moral responsibility of humane death for it’s living featured product, just exactly how in the hell can they make effective decisions about anything else? Answer? They can’t.
All supporting entities need to be under one, centralized authority…period! And I’m tired of waiting for this industry to develop a collective, responsible, moral conscience.
Congress wants to have regulation everywhere else (and they stink at enforcement). Why not here, albeit run by industry….make them behave. Hah! Like that is going to happen.
May 12th, 2010 at 9:10 am
The racing industry is NOT like baseball, football, etc., in that racing does not sell franchises to individuals, rather, is a public participation sport for those wishing to get involved. Race tracks DO NOT own the sport but only provide a setting for which to participate. Each state sets the rules of racing for its individual participants, AS IT SHOULD BE. A national organization CANNOT meet the needs of the individual, nor individual states. Guidelines, I said guidelines would be appropriate, BUT, should not be mandatory. If the participating people of a state do not like what is happening in their state, with respect to racing, they can choose NOT TO PARTICIPATE, or, participate in a state to their liking. In the end CHOICE is sustained. The betting public, then, will determine what tracks survive. The racing experience in America is very different than Europe, therefore, the U.S. should remain independent of European rules of racing as has always been. I hear Eight Belles always being brought up as an example for change, BUT, what illicit medications were administered and proved to be at fault with her accident. NONE! What did take place was media sensationalism, and agenda seeking, power driven, control opportunists, using this tragedy to their personal advantage. What did Eight Belles’ tragedy have that Ruffians’ didn’t —- SENSATIONALISM and misinformation, and power grabbers!! The big money people that gouge the American public at every turn of life, similarly, also exist in the racing industry.
May 12th, 2010 at 9:43 am
I used to argue with my partner Jeff Siegel that racing was national and he said it was local. He was right. Like politics, all racing is local. The only events that impact the big picture are the Triple Crown and Breeders’ Cup. Everything else is local. National advertising vs. local: money spent on national is most likely a waste of money, but it can be effective locally.
When I worked for Kent Hollingsworth at The Blood-Horse in 1969, he spent about three-quarters of the year working on national uniform licensing. When he was finished, he thought he had done the job. It is now 41 years later and very little has changed, or is likely to, because of State’s rights.
Local organizations and locally focused promotions are good. National anything is never going to happen unless the Feds step in and I think most folks have come to the conlusion that this is not the way to go.
May 12th, 2010 at 9:48 am
More business as usual.
May 12th, 2010 at 9:52 am
Alex Waldrop should be ashamed to cash his check every two weeks. I have contemplated all morning who is the most worthless person in all of horse racing and for some reason I can’t get Alex Waldrop out of my mind. Alex couldn’t spell M-A-R-K-E-T-I-N-G if you gave him MARKET.
May 12th, 2010 at 10:35 am
Excuse me, BUT….to race thoroughbreds you make a national potential statement by securing those freaking Jockey Club papers; from breeding, to racing, ownership, etc.
That one chooses to ignore to national potential that can been done with those papers is one thing….NOT everything possible.
You want to play in a small or singular or specialized pond? Fine. But if your horse has papers, you are from the onset playing a national game and entitled to all the privelages of National recognition whether you choose to utilize that or not. Don’t screw the animal because of your own limited abilities or prospects.
God…what a bunch of small-minded, selfish brats!
BTW…one of your former equines go to the meatman? Then you become another national issue because you WILL CROSS state lines to accomplish your ease of disposal goal.
May 12th, 2010 at 10:40 am
As long as we think local, we get a local - with all the maddening stops, jerks and red lights along the way. I guess, then, if racing is truly local, then we have what we have and reform is pointless.
If we think otherwise, then Australia, with a multi state compact, could serve as a model.
May 12th, 2010 at 10:41 am
Mr. Irwin:
What happens in a locally considered race frequently becomes national. Let’s start with records, betting, nominations, Gr I, II, II, Futurity race results, champions, breeding shed, auctions, etc.
Local is local by state because of the way it is now; not because it is the way it should be.
May 12th, 2010 at 10:45 am
The folks who are disappointed in the NTRA really do not understand what the NTRA is. Although it may have aspired to be a “league office,” horse racing is not a league. The NTRA never had any authority–legal or otherwise–to command the industry players to act in the best interests of the sport. It was more of an industry association that tried to get everyone to work together on projects of mutual interest and benefit. It aspired to promote the sport to gain new audience, but its efforts to do so –i.e., the Lori Petty go baby go commercials–gained terrific buzz among folks who never thought about going to a track, but was hated by the old guard who ultimately pulled the plug on the NTRA’s marketing efforts. NTRA tried to do TV, but the tracks whose races were not covered balked. The theory behind NTRA was through industry cooperation and working together the sport would grow to the benefit of all of its constituents. The problem, however, is that none of the groups in the industry at any level–local, national, horsemen, tracks, breeders, regulators, etc.–were willing to give up any of their perceived “control” of their own sphere. The NTRA cannot achieve its goals because all of the players in the industry apparently have decided that it is better to have 100% control of their own piece of a shrinking pie rather than have a smaller cut of a much larger pie.
A single national organization cannot succeed in the face of the fact that, as a matter of law, gambling is governed by the individual states, so no one national organization can impose its dictates without jumpingthrough all of the individual state regulations, commissions, etc.
What the NTRA has succeeded at magnificently has been its efforts in Washington. NTRA was instrumental in obtaining help in DC, not all of which is widely recognized. Some of NTRA’s accomplishments cannot be measured in terms of affirmative things it has accomplished as much as successfully keeping potentially disasterous legislation from being enacted. There are many enemies of gambling generally and horseracing particularly who would like to do the sport in.
May 12th, 2010 at 10:53 am
hoist the flag (great horse btw):
The last I saw out of Washington via NTRA was the much acclaimed excelleration of depreciation for the equine athlete.
Oh goody….we can write them off and break/divest/dump faster! Good call.
May 12th, 2010 at 11:53 am
Horse racing is like the Government. The Federal Government is good on a SMALL scale. Does anyone writing here believe in States Rights? The Federal Government was established for limited control. Do you believe in one world government? It’s all the same thing! National control is a scam. What WILL happen is that most of the small tracks will be closed. Centralized racing will be expounded at the expense of the little guy. Only big stables, big tracks, big owners, and big organizations will exist. Now, the big wheels will have all the industry to themselves. It will run much like the Federal government. What we say goes, and we know what IS BEST FOR EVERYONE. Big government never worked, and big national control will never work for the betterment of racing. Big corporations breeds corruption and minute control, as will a national control of racing. The only beneficiaries will be the big breeding farms, big owners, trainers, jockey’s, and race tracks.
A national registry is necessary because one needs a source to start from. Once started, nationalization ceases to exist. States then pick up the ball. Just like individual freedom, once National control becomes a fact — freedom is lost degree by degree, as is evidenced by our loss of freedoms in the U.S. There exists NO NATIONAL race track, therefore no national control is warranted.
May 12th, 2010 at 12:22 pm
Anybody see any hope for NTRA, and what “could” be done through NTRA???
May 12th, 2010 at 12:27 pm
Mr. Lancelotti:
What is local control by states…nothing more than the big guy running riot on a smaller scale.
I said a national authority needs to be mandated by the Feds, but not run by them. The authority for national racing regulatory authority has to be mandated across state lines by Feds, not run by the Feds.
The Constitution protects majority AND individual rights…the courts are in place to protect, but not favor either. Each case is ejudicated because sometimes they are in conflict.
As to one world government, too late. We are already there with treaties for protection and trade on an international level. Does South Dakota and Kentucky know what is best for them independently? Certainly, but that doesn’t mean that what they think is best for them is good for the country or the individuals that they ignore within their jurisdiction.
No sir, once you got that national recognition that is those papers, you can go anywhere.
Government does work and also fails whether big or small. Without it, you have anarchy, no matter your need for as little interference as possible. I recognize their contribution, but get really pissed when I get little to nothing for my tax dollars, invasion of privacy, special interest meddling and aggrevation dealing with stupids (government or private biz).
It is also assumed that within a National Racing Authority, there will be a court/appeal system. Which I hope will be a whole helluva lot better than this sh*t we got now.
Where’s snake venom trainer and sidekick now???? Hmmmm….
May 12th, 2010 at 12:46 pm
#12 Barry Irwin wrote:
Local organizations and locally focused promotions are good. National anything is never going to happen unless the Feds step in and I think most folks have come to the conclusion that this is not the way to go.
____________
Well I am not one of those folks.
I do believe that for thoroughbred racing to turn the corner it will have to be Congressman Whitfield and his co-horts to pick up the fumbled ball and run with it - all the way to the end zone.
It makes little sense to have hearings on Capitol Hill only to let the leaders of thoroughbred racing “off the hook” for two years. Then conduct yet another hearing in the year 2012.
The time is now to draft the playbook that ensures prosperity on a national level.
May 12th, 2010 at 12:47 pm
National Oversight and Control, period.
Sorry, the industry has proven itself unable AND unwilling to make change, unless mandated. Maybe there was potential to improve things 30 yers ago, but they failed to act. Maybe two decades ago some changes could have assured a level playing field, they refused to bend. A decade ago, steroids were in full swing, noone cared. Corruption, unispired leadership, guidelines without enforcement, laughable fines, holding the cheat up as a hero… how long before the slap really stings?
The way it is done now is so lame-assed backwards, it took Dutrow to speak the truth about administration of steroids before our industry said “Oh, hey! Maybe it’s time to change!”. Wonder what owners, what fair-playing trainers were left in the wake of THAT lack of decisiveness. But hey, let’s keep going like we have in the past! Woo-HOO! Dutrow is the Thoroughbred Industry poster child for honor and integrity. At least the man stepped up and spoke the truth. BRAVO.
You all keep barking about how damaging National Governance will be. ITS YOU who need a lesson on the act of government… because the Government I believe in strives to:
Form a More Perfect Union
Establish Justice
Provide for the Common Defense
A MORE PERFECT UNION? Amen.
May 12th, 2010 at 12:47 pm
Ratherrapid:
you said: “…Anybody see any hope for NTRA, and what “could” be done through NTRA???”
CDI doesn’t think so. Maybe they are actually contributing to the demise of same to effect necessary change. I doubt that, but it is a start. What CDI and the other tracks, orgs that decide not to participate are either too cheap, we want change (HAH!) or you are basically not worth the time(or money).
May 12th, 2010 at 1:17 pm
The NTRA, since the day it was formed, should have been called the New-TRA.
The governance has been the same as the TRA. The only difference was the Owners and Breeders have paid for the New-TRA and got to sit on the board in a minority position. When the New-TRA was spending hundreds of millions in advertising and paying its way on television, the tracks were rebated their dues.
In my opinion, now that the owners and breeders are getting tired of footing the bill for the New-TRA, CD and the other tracks will just go back to the TRA and stop the duplication. The key word is dupe. We didn’t need another trade association.
May 12th, 2010 at 1:35 pm
#25–re churchill, might this have been anticipated. is there an inherent conflict between a marketing org. as NTRA,, and an ADW such as Twin Spires? They compete.
There are so many agendas. Pope’s, Irwins, Rod Whitely etc. Who is correct and on the right track. Just this week a Courier Journal Column “is National Org. really what is needed”. Good Q!
The continuing problem possibly the race tracks and their ownership? I think the NTRA should be funded a little by everybody, and commence the process of buying race tracks, forming local ADWs, promoting internet marketing–as someone said, instead of marketing to ourselves, marketing in national media, etc.
Seems to me there needs to be somewhere to sort this all out. Is the NTRA the only org. remotely in position to do this. Why their vanilla, totally unaggressive approach to getting everybody together and knocking heads till something gets done (if anything needs to be done?). Is it incompetence, or something else?????
I
May 12th, 2010 at 1:43 pm
Steroids, snake venom, milkshakes have been around, and used, since the 70’s, when I first came on the track. Steroids have been used in geldings since before the 70’s. All your great geldings — John Henry, Native Diver, Funny Cide, Forego, and yes Lava Man, all raced on steroids. Please, please, understand that the betting public DOES NOT understand what racing IS all about. A gelding has to testicles, therefore, no testosterone. Steroids in geldings IS NOT the same as steroids in humans. Human sports figures are NOT castrated. What you read from “so called” experts is the same BS you get from governmental “so called” experts. The medication violations that the majority trainers receive sanctions on DO NOT affect the result of any race. Research a nanogram to see how much it is. If you are 1 or 2 nanograms over the limit it becomes an infraction because the line has to be drawn somewhere. BUT being over by that amount in no way affects the performance of the horse.
You will never again see great geldings as was seen in the past. Steroids are necessary not only for testosterone, but also for appetite, and mental standardization. Stallions now have a distinct advantage over a gelding, which was the intent in the first place. These same people that wanted the stallion advantage, by falsely promoting the theory that steroids in horses is the same as that in humans, are the same one’s that want to control a national organization for their own exploitation.
And sorry, the Constitution today means very little. Congress steps on constitutional authority every day. Ex. illegal immigration, health care. And for the record, the little man has more say/control at the state level than he will ever have at a national level. That is why the State has to control is own racing venue.
May 12th, 2010 at 2:20 pm
To say we don’t want a national solution is to deny that most of the racing revenue comes via national legislation in the Interstate Horseracing Act. The promise of the IHA was to allow a host track to accept wagers across state lines from other parimutuel states. It needs to be updated to recognize the changes in technology.
The Monmouth experiment will be the first to give us some idea of whether full fields with higher purses will win in the off-track market. I think Monmouth will beat the competition, but not cover the $1 million purse nut each day.
If the IHA were corrected to let Monmouth accept wagers direct and they got $10 million in off-track handle and grossed 20%, they might net $800,000 into the purse account. That combined with on-track revenue could make the experiment sustainable. For every $1 million into the purse account, the Monmouth facility gets the same.
Isn’t that what we want, to have a horse racing product that is economically viable?
May 12th, 2010 at 2:55 pm
I have said this from the beginning. One incredibly valuable thing that the NTRA could have done was simply coordinate post times of major stakes races between 3:30 and 6:00 pm Eastern on Saturdays and Sundays.
I’m not saying that accomplishing this would have justified the existence of the organization, but the NTRA’s inability to identify a frequent occurrence that drives fans/bettors crazy and do something about it tells me that they probably won’t solve any of racing’s more complex issues down the road.
May 12th, 2010 at 4:31 pm
to #30 I’d ask, would Monmouth have any alternatives under present law. Could it form its own ADW such as Twin Spires has done?
I still have yet to read one word about what it wrong with the NTRA, and what it would/could/should do. We do have what NTRA does “not” do. Why? And that it has “some” useful functions.
May 12th, 2010 at 5:28 pm
I would love to see a central licensing agency whereby owners would be fingerprinted only one time, receive a license recognized by each racing jurisdiction and then pay whatever the state license fee is to race in that state without having to go through separate paperwork for each jurisdiction an owner chooses to race in, just merely write a check and enter the horse. The individual jurisdiction could rebate a portion of its license fee to the central licensing authority who would maintain all of the records and each state that is paid by a licensee would have access to that licensee’s information. This would save an unbelievable amount of duplication and expense while insuring each racing jurisdiction its independence.
I would also love to see uniform medication rules so that owners and trainers don’t go from jurisdiction to jurisdiction having to learn new rules. For jurisdictions or tracks that do not want to comply with these rules, let The Jockey Club use its graded stakes committee to bring those parties into line by not grading races at those particular venues and let the Breeders Cup not sponsor any stakes purse additions there as well. Thus, individual jurisdictions would be able to determine if they want to be on the “A” Circuit or the “B” Circuit.
I would not dictate track surfaces on a national level because I think that variety adds a lot of interest to racing. Let each racetrack determine what works best for it and what is the safest surface/surfaces for it to use. Then let the Safety and Integrity Alliance determine if the track is truly safe.
I would like to see lobbying dollars go into one organization that could use a bigger “club”, so to speak, to pound its points home to politicians. This to me would be much more efficient than having the NTRA, Amereican Horse Council, TRA, etc. all duplicating each others efforts. Then, have marketing dollars that could be passed out by this entity on a local level and base it on that area’s population, interest and mutual handle.
I would love to see the people that wager on our sport have some type of say because they are the people that pay for the show. The owners and breeders pay for the product that puts on the show, but racing is driven by purses that are driven by handle. There has to be a happy medium between takeout and handle or else we are costing ourselves purse money because of those that would like to bet or want to bet more that will not do so under the current setup. Uniform takeout percentages for different classes of tracks would be wonderful. The only people that need to be made to step up to the plate are the ADW folks who really don’t want to pay the people who supply the product for the show, the owners.
Now if we could just incorporate this type of organization with these individual subsidiaries for handling the various parts of the sport and incorporate The Jockey Club with it for registration, that would really be something. I don’t care what you call it or what part of the alphabet you use.
We could then do away with a whole lot of duplication and waste and put limited dollars to much better use. The only problem is who will agree to come on board.
May 12th, 2010 at 9:15 pm
#29 - You are a moron. Hopefully, you are not a trainer because you don’t understand how steroids work. I have plenty of geldings how eat up just fine, have the will to race, without pumping them full of Equipoise.
May 12th, 2010 at 10:53 pm
To Alfred Nuckols Jr.:
AMEN!
May 13th, 2010 at 8:04 am
Ratherrapid
Sorry for the overnight delay. Unless NJ has a some reason to not allow it, yes, Monmouth could have an ADW. Del Mar started one that is affiliated with XpressBet and unlike CD/Twin Spires, the rest of the takeout goes back into Del Mar racing.
For someone who wants to support the Monmouth plan, the best way is to go there and bet on-track and Monmouth and the purse account will split the blended takeout of say 20%.
If you bet Monmouth races from any off-track bet taker, the amount going to Monmouth can be as low as:
2%, from casino/otb with no other money going to live racing.
2%, from receiving track with 18% staying at receiving track taking the bet.
7-8% from ADW, with no other money going to say Florida or Texas.
7-8% from ADW, with 1-2% going to state where ADW’s are legal (not FL/TX).
As you can see it is all over the map and the percentage to live racing will fall as the bricks and mortar bet takers give way to phones and computers.
So, if you are in Lexington and want to support Monmouth, more money will go to Monmouth through an ADW bet than if you go out to Keeneland and place it. At Keeneland, the full 20% would stay in live racing, but Monmouth would get maybe 3-4%. That’s a bitch isn’t it.
With the technology available, there is no reason Monmouth cannot take bets direct from all of us and enjoy takeout similar to on-track. The costs of taking those bets would be less than the cost of having tellers at Monmouth taking them. Remember, the costs of taking the bet is the responsibility of the track.
Why should any other entity get anything from Monmouth’s product, unless Monmouth and the owners putting on the show, feels that entity can take the bet cheaper and better.
When the discussion above was about local versus national, letting Monmouth control its own distribution is as local as it gets.
The only way I see to do that is to correct the national law, the IHA, which has not be updated to account for the technology of the day.
May 13th, 2010 at 8:44 am
As we read the comments and complaints of the many disparate groups across these pages we will understand that the “big tent” theory cannot be applied to the resurrection of our sport and industry, in the first instance. Our problems are evident here and magnified by the lack of magnanimity applied by so many complex and superfluous issues. We must examine our heritage and DNA that has been camouflaged by inexperience, lack of understanding and a disproportionate influx of impostors. We have lost our balance! We have tried to apply baseball and football theories of business to the thoroughbred businesses and they won’t work for the obvious differences of simplicity. We must start with a “small tent” revue of our history to understand and then to establish a plan of basic parameters from which to reconstruct a “new model”. But we can’t do it by assembling the “alphabet leaders” as heretofore suggested. Most of them do not understand the game well enough to lead us in the preparation of the basics. Once we reestablish and rethink the basic tenets and graphically design a working plan with all its working parts, we will have the tools to deal with each and every functioning entity with their corresponding successes and problems resulting therefrom. It has to be given “system” before it can gain function. History,breeding, racing, wagering, managing, all have to be understood in their respective sequences of importance and responsibility so that they can interface intelligently and respectfully. Without the application of a formula we remain a monolithic mosaic muddle that can only react but never can act or be understood in entirely!
May 13th, 2010 at 9:06 am
There is no reason to open up the IHA. There are better ways of delivering the proper financials to the Industry through the adoption new (available) technologies.
The failure of the NTRA and it’s contemporaries; TRA, TOBA, NHBPA is that they’ve all been stuck in the status quo for so long as that’s where their salaries are derived. We will never get to where we need to be as long as we have these same organizations with the same, current, failed leadership. Just like in Washington D.C. it’s time to throw all the incumbents out. That goes for the leadership at our failed tote companies as well. The incumbents in all areas of our Industry have failed us miserably (or fantastically!).
Lastly, hoist the flag when you get to your office at the NTRA today tell Alex we all say hi!!
May 13th, 2010 at 10:43 am
The start of the “business” of racing in North America goes to two elements, the facility where the races are held and the racehorse owners. The deal they made of 50-50 on gambling revenue would not be made today, where off-track wagering has changed the economics for each side. The state government regulators role is same, to protect the public.
Today, the owners of the talent would have a business plan based upon what happens where their races are run and distribution channels for all other wagers and revenue streams. The facilities they contract with would be paid to assure a profit on the investment in the facility, or if it made economic sense, the owners organization might own their own facilities. This model is in effect right now in North America, it is called the Breeders’ Cup model.
All the commercial rights in this model are consolidated, meaning the rights to the horses, jockeys, and the facility are in one pot and can be valuable.
There is no sport where the facility owners control the sport like the tracks control it here. There is no racing country, but ours, where the facility owners control the sport. Please repeat over and over, because such a structure takes away all reason, which is why we are having this discussion today.
With the ADW’s now ignoring the state laws prohibiting them from taking bets in states that do not permit ADW’s, it would be good to see a racehorse owners association structured like the Breeders’ Cup, partner with a track owner and racing commission in a friendly state and they go rogue and start accepting bets direct from customers from every state where wagering is legal. This structure is very streamlined, with one group in charge of executing a real world business plan and all the artificial deciders out of the equation.
That might bring the problems in the IHA to a head and get them fixed, and also set precedent for a proper model for racing. One where the people who put on the show control their performance top to bottom.
This is the only country in the world where this can be done. But, it can’t be done by breeders, vets, trainers, horseplayers, or the alphabet soup guys. It can only be done by like-minded racehorse owners. If they don’t do it, nobody can. The owners who are not like-minded can continue to race in other jurisdictions.
I disagree with those who say this sport cannot use the model of other sports. Once you start thinking beyond the current structure where the facilities owners make all the decisions, then the model of other sports makes sense, particularly the PGA Tour, where like-minded golfers join together to decide rules, consolidate their commercial rights, contract with the golf course facilities and control the level of their sport that the public will pay to see.
May 13th, 2010 at 10:44 am
Mr. Nuckols mentions The Jockey Club’s Graded Stakes Committee. Does TJC have such a committee? I thought the TOBA controlled GSC. Maybe this is another example of fief-chiefs overlapping (at our cost) because they have nothing better to do.
May 13th, 2010 at 12:11 pm
# 9 Minker: Those televised races on the road to the Kentucky Derby were arranged and paid for by Churchill Downs.
#40 Garrett Redmond: You are correct that TOBA administers the Graded Stakes program–not The Jockey Club.
May 13th, 2010 at 4:03 pm
Don’t know why I feel compelled to share, but isn’t it ironic that Waldrop is a former President of Churchill Downs yet seems to have curried no favor with its Board of Directors.
May 13th, 2010 at 5:11 pm
The Feds need to step in to institute a legitimate, centralized authority that through similcast/airways, to include phone and internet betting can better dispurse the funds that that specific race generates. The current system, as many have stated is a travesty for the track, the bettors, the trainers, the purses, the horses, the jocks, the backstretch workers and on and on. The gambling end of this game reminds me of the same reckless greed that is Wall Street
The system is so screwed up right now that many interested parties are hanging on by their fingernails (or hooves), while some others are raking it in. It is unfair.
Without a centralized authority to keep a level playing field, the smartasses will continue to rape this industry, while many putting on the races get screwed. We need some quality control here folks.
May 14th, 2010 at 10:31 am
#38 I am just a small fry and glad to read from such as Pope, Nuckhols (i bought a horse from u once), Paulick, Whitely etc., but, agree that there are other ways besides going IHA, and would like to have assurance from Mr. Pope that, if HR does go back to Congress, that we’d be able to avoid cutting off our own noses. Can we rely on John Conyers and his committee to keep the HR gambling monopoly that just barely survived the last session in early 2000s! If so, then do it. If there’s any risk, why?
I’d like to hear a lot more about NTRA than this little thread. Here we have the one “national” organization, and, per everything else, all we can talk about is how little it and useless it is. We have the one sport made to order for the internet. Sure-per Mr. Pope–we can figure out better ways to split the pie, but, seems to me there’s an almost unlimited market, if we’d just figure that out. Glad to read E. Hammonds latest Blood Horse on that.