Pope: Racing’s artificial economy slowly killing the sport

  • click above & share!
    X
  • click above & share!
    X


  • click above & share!
    X
  • click above & share!
    X

At Horse Racing Business, Fred Pope follows up on his column last week about creating a central wagering platform for Thoroughbred racing.  Pope says such a national betting “trust” could address what he calls an “evil cauldron” – the artificial funding of bad racing instead of quality races with integrity:

“This underbelly of racing is growing every day as 20,000-30,000 horses, with fleeting attachments to owners, are in service to fill races increasingly fueled by artificial means.”

“Slots are not the only artificial way purses are funded. Bet-taking on other tracks’ races also artificially funds races that are now written for all the wrong reasons.”


Pope says under a central betting system, tracks would have to write races that appeal to the bettors in the off-track market:

“The Horseplayers Association of North America says more than 74% of its horseplayers favor a ban on drugs. That research provides the path to revenue. For example, if the host event writes conditions without medication and that race competes against seven other races at the same time, the race without medication has a huge advantage. That race becomes a “brand name” in a generic market.”

“It will not take long for racing secretaries to figure out what sells and what doesn’t in the off-track market. It will be a positive, free market solution for both partners in the sport, but the big winners will be our current and new customers.”

» Read more at Horse Racing Business
New to the Paulick Report? Click here to sign up for our daily email newsletter to keep up on this and other stories happening in the Thoroughbred industry
  • stillriledup

    Claiming races are really hurting the sport, horses are bought and sold and transferred to owners who know that they will only have the horse for a short while, thus, all systems are go, at any cost, to get that horse onto the track and hopefully into the winners circle.

    If an owner goes thru the process of purchasing a yearling, raising that yearling, spending time and money and TLC on getting that young horse to the races, they might not want to sell that horse….BUT, the way the races are written these days, once you ‘lose your conditions’ most horses are forced to be put up for sale whether the owner wants to or not. Im not sure that’s a great way to keep new owners coming back for more.

    I think Pope is suggesting that some tracks might want to consider writing ‘no lasix’ as part of the race conditions. That might be a good idea, something to certainly consider.

    One of my suggestions would be to write a race where no ‘supertrainers’ are allowed into the race. If you’re winning at .20 percent or more at a current meet, your horse is not eligible to certain races. Call it the oats and hay purse, special races for owners who don’t want to have to compete against Mr 48 percent.

  • Wabstat

    Love the no “super” trainer idea. 

  • stillriledup

     Thanks. You don’t ‘single out’ any
    particular person, you just say if your win percentage is above 20
    percent at time of entry (with a caveat of 10 starters at the meet or more), you can’t enter this particular race. They can tweak the rules and just give some owners who don’t win as much a break. With conditions like this, owners won’t be so quick to give their horses to “Mr 48 Percent”, they’ll be able to actually compete with the trainer they currently use.

  • ManuelB

    Many countries have racing systems other than one based on claiming races. Some countries maintain a handicap system and horses compete in certain ranges depending on where they are on the table. Horses that win move up the table, horses that lose go the other way. I was brought up in Peru and that’s the way the system worked there. Australia has a similar system. In France, which also has a handicap table, claiming races are rare and it’s usually only the horse that wins that is up for sale. The owner can buy the horse back by outbidding others. I’m sure others on this blog will know about systems in other countries. Of course, most North Americans will say that the claiming system has been around for ages and it can’t be improved.

  • FourCats

    Fully agree about the claiming races.  And there are alternatives.  One that I like is what I used to see at the harness tracks.  They would card a race with a condition like “non-winners of $5,000 in last 6 races”.  These were essentially non-claiming races for lower caliber horses.  (With lower purses of course.)  Top level horses couldn’t get in because they didn’t meet the conditions so the races stayed competitive and gave owners of horses with lesser ability a place to race without having to offer their horse for sale.

    What types of non-claiming races are usually offered now by the thoroughbred tracks?  1) Optional claimers:  These are often dominated by horses that have won 10 or more races because they enter for the claiming price.  Or 2) Non-winners of 2 or 3 or 4 allowance races.  But these races are often dominated by stakes horses that just haven’t won their stakes races.  And, once these “conditions” are fillled, then what?  Or 3)  Allowance races that limit the amount won since a given date.  But these races are often dominated by top level horses that have just been given some time off.

  • FourCats

    As you say, claiming races have been around for ages, but it’s really a very poor system of holding racing.  The topic doesn’t get a lot of press because the only people who are adversely affected are the small-time owners and those who get upset when a sore horse is entered just to get it claimed.
     
    For unethical people, it encourages running sore horses so that the horse can be unloaded onto someone else; thus relieving the original owner of the responsibility of taking care of that horse.
     
    And as mentioned above by stillriledup, it makes it very difficult for responsible owners to take care of their horse and still race the horse where he/she can be competitive without having that horse bought out from under them.
     
    The original idea was that claiming races would keep the races competitive since horses would stay at their proper class level; otherwise they would be either claimed if running below their ability or uncompetitive if running above their ability.  However, that is not true anymore (if it ever was).  First because of the megastables where any win is more important than keeping the horse.  And second, because the claiming prices are not consistent with the purse money; particular at the tracks with slots.  I saw a $7,500 claiming racing in NY that had a $27,000 purse ($16,200 to the winner).  Are people really going to race only $7,500 horses for that purse?

  • dh

    Problem with Pope’s theory is they are not catching the cheats now, even when the cheat is running against other cheats or honest trainers just trying anything (bute, clem, lasix, etc.) within the rules to compete. If they write non-medication races the only ones who will suffer are the honest trainers, because the cheats have already figured out how to beat the test. The Dutrows, Beatties, Kobiskies, Ness, will have an even bigger edge in these non-medication races as their “juice” is undectable now and that won’t change just because of a new race condition. STILLRILED up has a better idea, exclude trainers over 20 percent, and watch the guilty dogs start barking!

  • jack

    the handicap system is ridiculous….As an owner, I want to decide where my horse runs….furthermore, the handicap system opens the door to “non-triers”……stiff your horse a few times, lower the handicap mark then drop the hammer…..classic tactics in England and Ireland

  • http://Bellwether4u.com James Staples

    WHATS REALLY HURT N “THE GAME” IS “THE CHEATERS/REPETERS” & NOT A LICK OF EXPOSURE…EXPOSURE…EXPOSURE!!!…TO MANY WANNA BEES RUN N @ THE MOUTH DOESN’T HELP EITHER…ty…

  • http://Bellwether4u.com James Staples

    AGAIN…U CAN’T KILL IT…GOT IT???…SSTFU!!!…ty…

  • Aunt Bea

    Brilliant idea! While we’re at it, lets ban folks from the sales that have, say, more than 2 million dollars to spend, it’s unfair to the little guys!

  • Hossracergp

    What flavor Kool-aide are you people drinking? Time to check back in to reality folks. There is a reason those trainers are winning at high percentages and it’s not drug related. Writing races for idiot trainers who can’t teach a mouse to eat cheese? Really? There are races called optional claimers for those who can’t stand the thought of losing a horse in the claiming ranks. Crack and meth are drugs….asprin is not a drug it’s a medication. Bute and lasix are medications not drugs. If you think the game is rigged, find another game to play.

  • Frank L.

    Finally someone with a
    BRAIN.

    Hossracergp, you DO
    understand!! What is “really” hurting the game is that GAMBLERS,
    who encompass most who comment here, are trying to interject their
    worthless “opinions”as solutions to their losing at the track.
    As losers they still fail to realize that as gamblers they will
    “NEVER” win — you may win once in a while, BUT, never with any
    regularity. The one world anything, including horse racing, is what
    is ruining civilization, as we know it here in the USA. There is an
    old saying that is as true as true can be — “A little knowledge
    can be a dangerous thing” (a little knowledge is all that can be
    stored in “SMALL” minds). This site is proof positive of that
    true saying!!!

    That’s all,
    PERIOD………

  • Gfpowell

    I agree with Pope. If it is centralized then easier 2 catch cheats. As an industry, we need 2 seriously address the issue if racetrack owners owning & racing TB’s @ the tracks they own, and owning the wagering. This is conflict if interest in the least and needs 2 to be investigated by an outside source such as the Dept. of Justice, Dept. of Commerce, and others.

  • s/s

    Write sale races in place of claiming races. Optional Claiming races are rare and it is difficult to have a horse ready for those few races. Sale races will allow an owner to choose to enter their horse to be sold or kept. If a horse does not finish the sale does not take place. Pope has a good idea however we cannot catch the cheats now and when we do we do not enforce rules to ban them so there will be cheats in sale races as well.

  • Simon Cooper

    The handicap system is the one used in most racing countries. With regard to ‘non-triers’ have a look at the penalties handed out by Stewards or Judicial Control Authorities (depending upon the jurisdiction, particularly in Australia and Hong Kong.

  • Bhope

    to have a Ky Derby winner run in an optional CLAIMING race and carry 2 lbs less than his claiming counterparts is ludicrous and a perfect example of how the claiming connotation is adverse to quality racing!  Animal Kingdom is rated 3rd on the BetFair Timeform experimental weight classification.  Where is the sense in this business ?

  • Ridindirty3

    When you pick up a Racing Form or look at Equibase entries…..you will notice that more than half of the races run per day…..at every track….. are claiming races. The fact that condition books are written….and have always been written….. this way should tell you much of what you need to know about this game. If racetracks were to run only a couple of days per week….sure they could up the quality! If sales companies only cataloged the top 10 – 20% of the foal crop…..sure the quality would be top shelf! Unfortunately, these things have never happened & are not going to happen because the financial models of the people who are actually involved in producing these products are not geared that way. It would be great if pro football owners could assemble their fantasy team…..but that’s not happening either! That’s why they call it FANTASY football!

  • 2hoursfromsaratoga

    The first 14 comments, written into the Luck show: reality tv

Twitter