YOU SHOULD’VE BELIEVED IN ME, RAY
By Ray Paulick
Prediction: Whoever Calvin Borel rides in the 2011 Kentucky Derby will be a huge underlay. But anyone who bets against this 43-year-old Cajun in the Run for the Roses will be doing so at his or her own risk. The Legend of Calvin, already larger than life after his second Derby win in 2009 aboard outsider Mine That Bird, got a lot bigger after he gave a riding exhibition in Kentucky Derby 136 aboard WinStar Farm’s Super Saver.
If there is any room left on the bandwagon, I’m ready to climb onboard. I passed on Borel when Street Sense won as the betting favorite in 2007, never gave longshot Denis of Cork a second thought when Borel guided him to a nifty third-place finish in 2008, and totally ignored him on Mine That Bird last year. I hate to admit it, but I didn’t even put Super Saver in my final top 10 ranking prior to the Derby.
Shame on me. At least that’s how I felt when an anonymous reader sent me a photograph of a Calvin Borel bobblehead drinking from a Derby glass and scolding me with a caption that said, “You should’ve believed in me, Ray.”
Borel is now 3-for-8 in the Kentucky Derby, and how he’s done it is what is so impressive. It’s not just his rail-skimming style; he is one of those rare jockeys with a clock in his head. His sense of pace is extraordinary.
Super Saver almost beat the gate on Saturday, and the Maria’s Mon colt could have gone on to the lead. Borel quickly steered him to the rail from the No. 4 post, putting the squeeze on Noble’s Promise, who in turn forced Lookin At Lucky to check sharply shortly after the start. Nothing illegal or dirty, but smart race riding on Borel’s part.
Then, in what almost certainly won the Derby for Super Saver, Borel got the colt to settle while Conveyance carved out very quick early fractions. Borel made his winning move on the turn for home and that was it.
I don’t care who Borel is riding next year. He’s on my ticket.
Some other random Derby thoughts…
Doesn’t 1-for-28 sound a whole lot better than 0-for-24? I think so, and I’m sure Todd Pletcher agrees. He can come to the 2011 Kentucky Derby and not have to put up with guys like me asking about his losing streak in America’s biggest race. But over the next couple of weeks is anyone going to have the nerve to ask the Texas native about his record in the Preakness, where he is 0-for-4? No, that’s not a typo, Pletcher has only had four starters in the Triple Crown’s middle jewel. I guess the Preakness doesn’t carry the same cachet as the Kentucky Derby.
If Super Saver wins the Preakness, will Pletcher really try to beat him in the Belmont with some of the other horses in his talent-rich stable and possibly end a Triple Crown bid? First, let’s see if Super Saver gets past the second leg.
Bill Casner is one of the most outspoken supporters of synthetic surfaces, and Saturday’s horribly sloppy conditions could have been averted if Churchill Downs had the kind of track that Casner endorses: a Polytrack like Keeneland or Del Mar has, or a Tapeta surface like Sheikh Mohammed installed at the new Meydan in Dubai. But I’m not so sure Super Saver would have won on a synthetic track. He aired on a sloppy track when he broke his maiden at Belmont Park in September and has never raced on a synthetic surface. Is there some irony here?
Speaking of irony, how about this? Ogden Mills “Dinny” Phipps is the chairman of the Jockey Club, the organization that is responsible for the American Stud Book. Under Phipps’ tenure, the Jockey Club has resisted the idea of changing rules that list the breeder of record as the person or entity that owns a mare when a foal is born. Some breeders feel it would be more appropriate for the breeder of record to be the person who owned the mare when she was bred to the stallion that impregnated her. When a mare sells in foal, it’s the new owner who gets credit as the “breeder,” even though the previous owner did all the heavy lifting.
Phipps and his family planned the mating that produced Super Saver, and owned his dam, Supercharger, through the first six or seven months of her pregnancy. But when a decision was made to put her in the 2006 Keeneland November breeding stock sale, the mare’s new owner, WinStar Farm, became the breeder of record, and now has officially bred its second Kentucky Derby winner, following Funny Cide in 2003.
The Phipps family has bred many outstanding runners over the years, but the closest it’s come to breeding a Kentucky Derby winner was runner-up Easy Goer in 1989. So not only did the Phipps Stable not get credit for breeding a Derby winner, it no longer owns the mare.
Don’t look for the Jockey Club rule to change anytime soon, and, unfortunately, horse breeding isn’t like hockey or basketball: there are no “assists” in the box scores.
The NBC Sports telecast of the Kentucky Derby was a winner, according to the American public, which increased its viewership over previous years (A.C. Nielsen’s overnight ratings say it was the largest TV audience for the Derby in 18 years). Credit Churchill Downs’ CEO Bob Evans for creating more interest through CDI’s deal with NBC to televise prep races on three Saturdays on the road to the Kentucky Derby. Another sign it was a good telecast? Horseplayers hated the show, at least according to the online chatter I’ve read. They can’t get over the fact that entertaining the American public is not the same as giving horseplayers what they want.
The biggest individual winner on the day (aside from Borel, Pletcher and WinStar Farm) was Glen Fullerton, a software programmer from Texas who bet $100,000 to win on Super Saver after winning a contest co-sponsored by Churchill Downs and CNBC, the financial news cable channel. In the prep race telecasts, individuals were given $10,000 to wager on one horse to win, and they were all losers. But Fullerton put the money from the contest on Super Saver’s nose and wound up with $900,000 (taxable, of course). Some bloggers weren’t too kind to Fullerton, suggesting he should take some of his earnings to the nearest hairpiece store for an upgrade (Google “Glen Fullerton” and toupee for a sampling of the remarks). But Fullerton can afford to laugh at them all the way to the bank.
The weekend’s biggest loser was AmTote and the fans around the country who got shut out from betting on the Derby because the tote company had a malfunction at a hub in Oregon, according to published reports. This is just the latest in a series of embarrassing incidents demonstrating how antiquated and undercapitalized the industry’s tote systems are. It is a serious issue, but one that probably will not get the attention it deserves until we have a complete tote meltdown on a major racing day that hits the racetracks in their pocketbooks.
Amazingly, despite the terrible Derby Day weather and the tote malfunctions, combined with the ongoing greater economic problems, Kentucky Derby attendance and handle were both up from 2009. That’s a tribute to the excitement this sport can still produce at the highest level.
Copyright © 2010, Paulick Report
Savvy businesses recognize value. Advertise in the Paulick Report.
Sign up for our Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick
Tags: Bill Casner, bob evans, Calvin Borel, churchill downs, Del Mar, Denis of Cork, Dinny Phipps, dubai, Easy Goer, Glen Fullerton, Jockey Club, Keeneland, kentucky derby, Meydan, mine that bird, Paulick Report, preakness, Ray Paulick, run for the roses, sheikh mohammed, Street Sense, Super Saver, tapeta, todd pletcher, winstar farm
May 4th, 2010 at 7:08 am
Welcome aboard!
May 4th, 2010 at 7:21 am
Amongst KY Derby starters, I thought the FL and AR Derby were the defining preps. No Beyer figs beyond 100 speaks volumes given the pedestrian time of the race.
May 4th, 2010 at 7:48 am
The Phipps irony is quite something. As a monopoly, the Jockey Club has little motivation to change its policies in order to fix inequities, and their practice of identifying the breeder of record as the person owning the mare at time of foaling is one of those silly rules that needs fixing. Maybe when it hits home there will be an incentive to do the right thing.
I have been on both sides when a foal has gone on to big things … not getting “credit” when I have been the breeder and paid the fees, and getting “credit” when I have merely bought the pregnant mare before she foaled. The first is frustrating. The second is embarrassing.
Logic, common sense, and fairness all point to the breeder of record as the person responsible for the mating, the physical breeding and impregnation, and payment of the breeding fee. The person the JC chooses to acknowledge is simply the “foaler of record.”
May 4th, 2010 at 8:19 am
Or maybe Bill Casner would also soapbox for a Sanita Anita style all weather track for Churchhill. Oh wait, then if it rained they’d have to postpone The Derby for a drier day.
May 4th, 2010 at 8:19 am
I knew the surface was an important variable. I knew which jock was the best at knowing CD through all types of races, surfaces and conditions. I can’t read a PP chart intelligently or knowledgeably, but I picked SS based on the FREE PPs I got from DRF…..and I’m a race betting idiot compared to ALL of the posters and contributors on PR.
And this may sound cheezy, but Pletcher was WAAAYYYYY OVERDUE! Doesn’t take rocket science to figure this one out.
As to the breeder of record, did I understand that it’s based on foaling ownership? Well that’s stupid, to a point. Secretariat is a VA bred because he was foaled in VA, but bred in KY. Why would the person that intiated the pairing not get the credit?…because of ownership papers? Isn’t there a spot on the foaling papers for the “owner”, the “breeder” AND the place of birth?
Can’t the JC, in the age of technology accommodate that kind of notation on the papers? Talk about “change” impaired!
May 4th, 2010 at 8:20 am
I believe the harness racing stud book uses the owner at time of mating as the credited breeder.
May 4th, 2010 at 8:31 am
Ray, why would Glenn Fullerton’s winnings be taxable? I can understand the $100,000 he received from CNBC being taxable to an extent. But he received odds of 8 to 1 on his wager. The winnings should not be taxable. And as far as the $100,000 from CNBC is concerned, he was forced to make the wager according to the rules of the contest. I would think CNBC should pick up some, if not all, of the tax on this. Your thoughts Ray, or anyone?
May 4th, 2010 at 8:34 am
The Breeder of record rule should not change. The fact is the Phipps culled this mare, (probably because of her fertility record) if they wanted to be the breeder they should have seen it through all the way. If you had to share being the breeder and/or possible State bred breeders awards infoal mares would not bring as much at auction. The Phipps deserve nothing more than a tip of the hat and a mention in a few articles as they have.
May 4th, 2010 at 8:50 am
Yes, Kerry, you’re right that in the standardbred business, the owner of the dam at time of conception is officially knows as the breeder. Seems the right way to do it since this is the person who made the decision that created the life.
May 4th, 2010 at 9:39 am
I agree with Oliver. Doesn’t the market compensate for the current JC rule? If not then it should…
May 4th, 2010 at 10:00 am
He drinks your milkshake, Ray. He drinks it up.
May 4th, 2010 at 10:04 am
As I understand it, Glenn Fullerton’s winnings on his bet aren’t taxable, but the $100,000 he got from CNBC to make the bet are.
May 4th, 2010 at 10:05 am
Speaking of the standardbred business, I will also say those boys know to a man the shortest way around the track. They love the rail. I often wonder why jocks seem to hate it so? When ever I use to ship to a new track, my one criteria when trying to find a rider to use for my horses was will that boy or girl go to the rail and stay there if need be? I would set up in the stands and find a rider that often would go to the rail and utilize its length saving potentials. Few would. Only a brave few. I suspect most jocks are scared down there with no where to go at times. It is a lot easier to get into trouble and even worse to be criticized by one’s trainer or owner for not having any place to go and losing. I say BS as do my harness horse breathen! There is nothing worse to having a horse on the outside going lengths longer than everyone else and losing confidence! Horses also seem braver and can take advantage of drafting when on the rail and covered up. The jock that sets chilly can often find a hole at the end. If not, I always said to my boys, we will get them next time and we usually did! I actually hope Borel won’t make it too fashionable. I like being the only one wanting the fence.
May 4th, 2010 at 10:28 am
Well here’s a novel idea…let’s acknowledge mating ownership, foaling ownership, geographic location et al on the freakin’ papers. Boy, what a stupid stipulation without acknowledgement of the real world.
Seems some people have a problem with the Phipp’s family…oooh! surprise, surprise.
Who cares!…save for truth, not antiquated technicalities on TB breeding papers because that’s the way it is because of was. What an absolutely stupid issue just because of the way it is and has been.
So culling or business decision to divest a TB from a stable is to be considered a punishement garnering lack of recognition? Hmmmm…not what the IRS mandates in the crap hobby v, biz game.
May 4th, 2010 at 10:33 am
Michael (#12),
So if Glenn Fullerton picks a loser in the Derby he is left with a tax burden on the $100,000? Why would anyone play the contest? I would have to believe that somewhere in the contest rules there is something relating to CNBC picking up the taxes on the $100,000.
May 4th, 2010 at 11:14 am
1. Nice article. Fun race. Second year in a row I bet a hoss ridden by Mr. Borel. Allez, allez, mon cher ami cajun. And thanks for the cash infusion, especially last year’s.
2. So people are bitchin’ about the mud? Ai-yee. It rains, it’s muddy, hosses been runnin’ in the mud since God was in short pants. Me, I plan to change my name to Rosanne Rosannadanna and do a YouTube monologue aimed at dirt-versus-synthetic fanatics starting with, “Sympathetic tracks? Sympathetic tracks? What’s all this fuss about sympathetic tracks…?”
3. Thanks again for the nice article.
May 4th, 2010 at 12:02 pm
The winnings for the bet Mr. Fullerton placed are taxable as income. Ray (#15), you’re right, I would hope CNBC is picking up the tab on at least a portion of the taxes. Even if Mr. Fullerton had not won, he would have owed taxes on the $100,000.
May 4th, 2010 at 12:03 pm
C’est ce bon…mais non? Run on the horse and track you got. Oui? …avec bon chance et BO-RAIL! Avais (avez?) Le Preakness!
God, I love this sport, it’s people and this country. Broussard…you crack me up.
OK…sloppy French, but you get the drift.
May 4th, 2010 at 12:10 pm
While a few here are focussed on the winner of the bet and tax issue, I was under the impression that gaming entities like betting or contests or shows that awarded prizes could not pay an individuals tax, barring non-profit effort or host. And why are you all so interested in this instead of the race, Ray’s post and the racing industry? Maybe you should go buy a lottery ticket or the National Enquirer. What a waste of time to discuss taxes regarding the guy that had the right smarts, luck and chance to bet on SS.
Will the stupid, self-serving special me first crap never cease with humans? I observe not.
May 4th, 2010 at 12:39 pm
Borel whipped Super Saver about 20 times in the stretch. Do great riders really need to do that especially after it was so obvious he was going to win?
May 4th, 2010 at 1:04 pm
Mr. Masters,
The tax question, I thought, was one someone raised seemingly out of curiosity. I for one was not questioning Mr. Fullerton’s luck/smarts/chance to bet.
As for Super Saver’s win, I assure you I am as thrilled as anyone that Mr. Pletcher and WinStar Farm were able to get their first (and well-deserved) Derby win. I hope it is only the first of many for both.
May 4th, 2010 at 1:13 pm
D. Masters I happen to be a huge Phipps fan and well as Shug, I just think the breeding rule is good. It’s not like we don’t know where Super Saver came from. Mr. Phipps great job planning that mating, Win Star great job taking care of that mare through her third trimester, foaling her out safely and raising that boy right.
May 4th, 2010 at 2:08 pm
To…
New Jersey Jake: Absolutely! I thought (not knowing the ride and circumstances) that Mr. B was brutal on the whip. Good observation and been buggin’ me for awhile.
Oliver: I appreciate your points, BUT….the administrative nonsense that excludes the physical breeding from the breeding or.paper legitimacy by virtue of time and ownership is just silly and antiquated outside of geographical drop of foal.
To be honest…the JC should issue papers at each sale and/or race that are updated to include all history and humans(instead of that signature crap on the back sig without enforcement of movement or sale)…good for the good guys…bad for the bad guys. And every gate guard has to see the papers AND an ID that shows ownership before rolling out the backstretch, into the auction, etc. BTW…we are doing that for cars. Why not some of the best animals on the earth?
Seems we have another track that has a zero tolerenace on slaughter and got a straight to kill victim story from a Magna Track. Hmm…just like the judge gave any rights to Stronach to keep his covet on his remaining tracks in the face of finacial disaster. God! This is just sick!
May 4th, 2010 at 4:27 pm
Horses are made to run on dirt, when it rains they run on mud. That is why some horses are bred for grass, dirt, mud, speed, or routes.
The Jockey Club rules have worked for years. If you want credit for the foal keep the mare.
If you want a KY bred, foal in KY.
If you have a jockey riding your horse in a race that is worth over a million dollars and many more dollars in the future in the breeding shed, and your jockey does not keep your horses mind on his business, after all there are 19 horses chasing him and over 100,000 people screaming and jumping and doing stuff he never saw anyone do before. If your jockey does not ride agressively and you lose because he did not use his whip, he could be fined for not riding his mount properly as well as fired for losing the race. He is bringing home his own bacon too you know.
May 4th, 2010 at 5:24 pm
Yeah right, he needs to smack him 20 times in the stretch and keep it up after it’s clear he’s gonna win.
You media types better not whine and moan when the other jockeys “race ride” against Super Saver in the next two races now that you’ve deemed it okay and “smart” for Saint Calvin to race ride.
May 4th, 2010 at 11:19 pm
In my humble opinion, Glen Fullerton has a tax issue that might make the hair stand up on his head:
Topic 419 IRS - Gambling Income and Losses
The following rules apply to casual gamblers. Gambling winnings are fully taxable and must be reported on your tax return. You must file Form 1040 (PDF) and include all of your winnings. Gambling income includes, but is not limited to, winnings from lotteries, raffles, horse races, and casinos. It includes cash winnings and also the fair market value of prizes such as cars and trips. For additional information, refer to Publication 525, Taxable and Nontaxable Income.
A payer is required to issue you a Form W-2G (PDF) if you receive certain gambling winnings or if you have any gambling winnings subject to Federal income tax withholding. All gambling winnings must be reported, including winnings` that are not subject to withholding. In addition, you may be required to pay an estimated tax on your gambling winnings. For information on withholding on gambling winnings, refer to Publication 505, Tax Withholding and Estimated Tax.
You may deduct gambling losses only if you itemize deductions. Claim your gambling losses as a miscellaneous deduction that is not subject to the 2% limit on Form 1040, Schedule A. However, the amount of losses you deduct may not be more than the amount of gambling income reported on your return. It is important to keep an accurate diary or similar record of your gambling winnings and losses. To deduct your losses, you must be able to provide receipts, tickets, statements or other records that show the amount of both your winnings and losses. Refer to Publication 529, Miscellaneous Deductions, for more information.
More Tax Topic Categories
Page Last Reviewed or Updated: March 04, 2010