YOU’VE GOT OPINIONS!
“It’s hard to get half the people in this industry to agree on what day it is,” a Central Kentucky breeder said to me a couple of weeks ago, shortly after the Breeders’ Cup announced suspension of the stakes supplement program for 2009. “I can’t believe 83% of the people voting in your poll agreed that the Breeders’ Cup board made the wrong decision.”
The day after the results of the Daily Paulick Poll were reported (83% opposed the decision by the board of directors not to use cash reserves to fund the program, 10% supported it and 7% were unsure), the Breeders’ Cup reversed field, reinstating the stakes supplements – at least for 2009. Breeders’ Cup president Greg Avioli said he did not “anticipate the fervor of the response” to the original decision to suspend the program. Apparently, the poll results reflected the response Avioli and board members received in the way of telephone calls and emails from nominators to the Breeders’ Cup from around the country.
This wasn’t the first time judgments ran strong on an issue on which readers of the Paulick Report were asked to vote. The polls are not scientific, but the results are quite interesting and we are flattered by the daily response. This much we’ve learned: You’ve got opinions.
The most recent results, in fact, represent the strongest sentiment of any of the 40 polls we have conducted since just before the Breeders’ Cup World Championships in late October. (Click
here to see archives of all the Daily Paulick Poll results.) We asked, “Does the National Thoroughbred Racing Association provide a strong central organization to move racing forward in the future?” The results have been stunning, with 94% saying “no” and only 6% answering “yes.”In some ways, the question about the NTRA mirrored the results of earlier polls regarding the state of the industry and thoughts about some of the organizations that lead it. In mid-November, we asked, “In general, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the way things are going in the Thoroughbred industry in the United States at this time.” The question was parallel to the right track/wrong track question the Gallup organization periodically asks of American citizens about the state of the nation.
According to our poll, 91% answered “dissatisfied,” suggesting the industry is currently on the wrong track. Of the remainder, 4% said they were satisfied and 5% were unsure. One e-mailer suggested that the 4% who said they were satisfied must not have understood the question.
Along those same lines, in early December we asked, “Are you confident the individuals in charge of the most prominent racing and breeding organizations in the United States are adequately addressing the problems the industry is currently facing?” That resulted in an 85% no confidence vote, with 10% saying they are confident in our industry leaders and 5% unsure.
Poll responses to questions about how to improve the economics of racing were less conclusive. For example, we asked which of three areas of growth were most important to the future success of racing: reinvigorating on-track business, expanding account wagering through TV or on-line video streaming, or getting subsidies from slot machines or other forms of gaming. Reinvigorating on-track business got the most votes, 45% of respondents, barely ahead of the 41% who believe account wagering is the industry’s best hope. Only 14% believe growth from slots/alternative gaming is the answer. A more specific question about slot machines ended with a four-way dead heat, with each of the following answers getting 25% of the votes: 1) slots are a short-term fix to boost revenue; 2) they are a long-term necessity for racing to be competitive; 3) they are a necessary evil; and 4) I oppose slot machines at tracks.
On the issue of simulcast revenue, the poll run in conjunction with an article by Fred Pope on what he calls “
Priority 1: Racing’s Business Model” found 63% agreeing with Pope that host tracks and owners where the live race is run should get the lion’s share of takeout revenue. Another 29% believe it should be divided equally between the host site and where the bet is taken, and only 7% support the current model that leaves most of the revenue from simulcast wagers with the bet takers.The level of takeout has been hotly debated in the comment sections of Pope’s article and several other related pieces. Our only poll question on the subject came after the
Kentucky Horse Racing Task Force recommended an increase in takeout to help fund additional staff for the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission. Only 17% agreed with that recommendation, with 83% opposed to an increase in takeout to fund the commission.We’ve touched on many other areas in our polls. For example, 55% of voters opposed Breeders’ Cup putting all of the filly and mare races on the Friday program of the two-day championships, with 18% in support and 27% taking a “wait and see” approach; 49% opposed having the Breeders’ Cup dirt races run on a synthetic track, while 39% supported it and 12% unsure. In the breeding world, in mid-December, 65% of voters said stud fees had not been reduced enough, 31% said the reductions were “about right,” and 4% felt they had been lowered too much. A comparison of the three highest-priced new stallions of 2009 found that Henrythenavigator offered greater value and opportunity for success to breeders than Curlin and Big Brown. The votes were 52% for Henrythenavigator, 44% for Curlin and 4% for Big Brown.
Finally, in light of the depressed bloodstock markets and a downward trend in pari-mutuel handle in 2008, a year-end poll asked readers if they believe 2009 will be a better year. Only 24% said they feel 2009 will be improved from 2008, with 52% saying it will be worse and 24% believing it will be the same.
Naturally, we hope our readers will be proven wrong and that 2009 will be a year that the industry addresses some of its biggest issues: organizational structure, leadership and a new business model that reflects the reality that roughly 10% of wagers are taken on-track where a race is being run. It’s clear there is a high level of discontent currently running throughout the industry, but it’s just as obvious that the passion to have racing stage a comeback is equally strong.
Copyright © 2009, The Paulick ReportVisit 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.
Tags: Account Wagering, advance deposit wagering, ADW, Big Brown, Breeders' Cup, Breeders' Cup World Championships, Curlin, daily paulick poll, filly friday, fred pope, gallup poll, Greg Avioli, henrythenavigator, Horse Racing, kentucky horse racing task force, National Thoroughbred Racing Association, NTRA, ntra safety and integrity alliance, Paulick Report, priority 1: racing's business model, racing's business model, Ray Paulick, right track/wrong track, Simulcasting, stud fees, synthetic racetracks, takeout, Thoroughbred breeding, thoroughbreds
January 5th, 2009 at 9:00 am
A Federal Agency to control racing? Forget it! We can’t even agree to a “Non” Federal Agency that can control and regulate racing. Can you imagine a business, struggling with corruption and greed as we have for the past three decades, still unable to regulate itself? We are worse than boxing, the leadership of our sport has condemned us to a slow, agonizing slide. And worst of all, it’s the horses themselves that suffer.
But by all means, let’s continue on with business as usual: The laughable fines for cheating, lack of a harmonized rules and regulations, limited enforcement, over-breeding and over-medicating our horses. We are staring at the tipping point, and our leadership is fiddling. And now… after we are hit with the perfect storm (add in the financial crisis and those PETA extremists) we are simply reaping what we have sown.
You speak of discontent? I ask you: Is there any room for an honest/responsible thoroughbred owner in this business?
January 5th, 2009 at 9:23 am
Plenty of room for an honest/responsible owner. Maybe just not in the United States. Longchamp in the spring is mighty nice…
January 5th, 2009 at 9:33 am
Polytrack stinks! Literally!!
I’ve been a lifelong horse racing enthusiast and worked on the track for 10+ years. I’m sick of watching horses break down, but don’t think polytrack is the cure for that — unless the soft tissue injuries it causes keeps horses from making it to the races in the first place.
Injuries aside, the wax and trash odor of Polytrack is horrendous. I don’t know the stats, but I do know people in this country spend billions of dollars a year on ‘aromatherpy’, candles, and the like! Before you write this nonsense off and ignore the odious fact, don’t discount the turn-off Polytrack will cause to all the casual race fans who bring the family out to sit on a bench on the apron and watch the pretty horses go by, but don’t make a habit of it because it stinks! I had the misfortune of sitting at a table above the tunnel at Del Mar when I visited there for the first time, and my main recollection of the visit was how much I hated sitting at the table and smelling the stench in the warm air…the sun only serves to heat up the wax…and turn up the odor as well.
January 5th, 2009 at 10:08 am
Don’t worry amfcf, American Racing will find a whole slew of new ways to shoot itself in the foot besides Poly.
January 5th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
Racing is worse than boxing? Ouch, that hurts — but at least we only have one world champion at the end of the year.
As for the NTRA, one of the things that organization is charged with is increasing mainstream media coverage of racing. Are we sure we really want to do this? This is like making a deal with the devil.
I work in the industry, and I’m still suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder from the last time we had a lot of mainstream media coverage. After the Eight Belles incident in the Derby, I’d rather tell people I meet that I work for the IRS.
After the Eight Belles incident, we had mainstream media practitioners — most of whom couldn’t tell the difference between a zebra and a horse if it didn’t have stripes:
*Comparing horse racing to bullfighting;
*Saying that it’s “cruel” for a filly to be racing against colts, even though a filly had beaten colts a few months earlier in the Belmont Stakes;
*Saying that whips should be banned, even though jockeys claim whips help them control their horses by keeping them from lugging in or out;
*Saying that steroids should be banned, even though many vets claim that — when used properly — steroids have beneficial therapeutic effects on horses recovering from injuries;
*Saying that 2-year-old racing should be banned, even though many vets say that horses that race as 2-year-olds develop stronger bones and better stamina later in their careers.
I could go on and on, but I think I’ve made my point. The mainstream media ALWAYS focuses on the negative — not just in horse racing, but in EVERYTHING.
Honestly, I think I’ve had enough mainstream media coverage. Now, when I watch a Triple Crown or high-profile race on network television, I don’t care who wins. I don’t care if we ever have another Triple Crown winner. I just don’t want any catastrophic injuries.
After all, “if it bleeds it leads.”
January 5th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
Ah! The rancid-fat odor of Eau de Polytrack… Will these fumes be found to be toxic one of these day? I am stunned that they were installed in CA where the use of leaf-blowers, lawn-mowers, BBQs and hair spray is challenged or banned.
Racing insiders call horses “the product”, thus avoiding thoughts of them as live animals in need of major protection, if anything to make horse racing more palatable to the outside world. Horsemen, vets, officials and track executives excel at blaming the racing surface for the high injury and kill-rate instead of themselves, their greed and numbness toward horse abuse.
It is interesting that stinky pieces of rubber, carpet and wires mixed with waxed sand were chosen as the best solution against injuries over grass, the oldest, most basic, most known and safest surface –best smelling too! But I am outraged that sweeping equine protective measures were not implemented before installing synthetic tracks. As long as greed, lack of moral, compassion and protection of horses, drug abuse (too many horses are dropping dead around the country, including two year olds), an indigestion of cheap races, a giant, seedy claiming game… As long as racinos waste precious slot money on purses three, four and five times bigger than claiming prices thus tempting evil doing… As long as pre-race exams, drug testing are not good enough, as long as fines, suspensions and bans are a joke and racing dreads transparency, including offering publicly disclosed electronic equine medical records, any surface, including a foot deep yummy smelling marshmallows will fail to reduce catastrophic injuries.
Installing synthetic tracks before drastically reforming racing is like tsunami tracking without an evacuation plan. The industry needs to use basic common sense and compassion, and implement difficult but inevitable reforms to thoroughly protect horses in order to enhance the business and future of racing. What is sound for horses is sound for the financial health of racing.
Though they probably don’t exist, it would be so interesting to compare complete injury and fatality figures on synthetic and dirt before dirt was removed at any one track. Fatality numbers on synthetic (and dirt) tracks should include all dead horses within 6 months on track and after they left the tract injured, including horses sent to the killers. The Jockey Club should help track all dead and “retired” horses for up to 6 months after they leave the track . Ignorance is no longer bliss with an increasingly informed public.
January 5th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
This article makes me think of a spot in Hyde Park, London. It is called “Spouters’ Corner”. There, anyone can get on a soapbox and say anything they wish. It is the epitome of free speech. Often, the audience is annoyed, but cannot do anything because speakers are protected by London police.
It was explained to me all that is allowed because the people can “Have their say” , let off steam, and the Government can safely ignore them and do nothing.
Can you see the similarity I see in the Paulick polls?
The people are overwhelmingly dissatisfied with the various branches of “government” of the Thoroughbred business. The “government” ignores the results.
Here is the difference between the British public’s situation and ours.
The British get a chance to “Throw the bums OUT”. We do not. A remedy? A suggestion:
Do not try to change the presents “governments”. There is not a way to do it because all their elections are private (The Jockey Club) or rigged (Breeders’ Cup). They ignore us; why don’t we IGNORE them?
Each of the “governments” had a beginning. Some bunch got together and formed them.
Why can’t the people who are democratically inclined, get together and form a new organization ?? There is nothing to stop a new movement except fear, laziness or lack of an inspirational leader.
My choice for the role is Fred Pope. Can we use Ray Paulick’s forum to ask, by acclamation , Mr. Pope to take the job?
January 5th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
There are many things about racing that smell far, far worse than polytrack. And it’s really too bad that somebody like Michael, who says he works in the industry, seems to prefer to sweep Eight Belles under the rug and hope the outside world again turns on to other things. As for “it bleeds, it leads,” well, then that would make the entire U.S. racing industry the lead story every day, since apparently every thoroughbred in the country is such a bleeder that it NEEDS lasix (which doesn’t solve the problem, but never mind).
It’s a shame the powers that be (whoever and how many there are) have chosen to focus on synthetic tracks and a steroid ban as the fixes for the horse breakdown problem. These are two of the tiniest band-aids. If there was a ban on ALL race-day medication (especially lasix!) and a redesign of dirt tracks to avoid the tight turns most U.S. tracks feature, plus a return to longer races (a mile and a half should be middle distance, not a stayer’s race), you could go ahead and run on dirt ’til the cows come home and probably have a breakdown rate a fraction of what it is today.
January 5th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
A national racing league should be created by the visionary, honorable and many great but overwhelmed racing people who would welcome uniform rules and oversight, transparency, equine protection and would only breed the healthiest, soundest, chemical-free horses with genuine race records to improve the Thoroughbred.
January 5th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Paulick report provides, finally, a forum where all this can be discussed.
i think we should limit issues. when you discuss everything in one article–particle polution with polytrack, take out, people’s view of what racing should become as just today Cot Campbell issues yet another edict that racing should be limited to a few tracks controlled by rich owners (scary for most of us), the NTRA, ADWs, etc. etc. we wind up with verbal gobblygoock regardless how intelligent each post is expressed.
stick to the sublect, or, Paulick maybe can figure out some way to promote this. OPTIMISM!!!! the obvious stuff has yet to be tried!
January 5th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Thanks for the polls, very interesting…
Let’s hope the racing industry execs are looking at these polls..Well, at least the ones that can read.
January 5th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
Ratherrapid:
Optimism will be warranted once the foundation and engineering of racing are sound. As long as they are both rotten to the core, denial must end and a new racing league must be created on firm ground. There should always be room for smaller owners as well as slower but healthy horses racing without drugs.
January 5th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
your agenda noted martha, and, should be discuissed. my point, why bring your idea of anti-slaughter, a small racing league without lasix into a general discussion about opinions. it is unnecessary to push one’s agenda in every single post. stick to the subject!
January 5th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
Racing doesn’t need a seven year fix. It doesn’t need more of the same. And it doesn’t need a flurry of activity masking real action. What racing needs is a beacon of honor and integrity. Hold everything beautiful about our sport as guidance, all that is ugly, corrupt and unfair as cancer.
January 6th, 2009 at 11:20 am
Ratherrapid:
Ouch! I considered the “You’ve Got Opinions” as a wider forum as others apparently did.
My passion is racehorse welfare and safety. Because everything in the racing industry is related to its horses, it is easy for me to slip into my “agenda” which is the need to improve equine welfare and safety in order to improve the whole of racing. Me bad.