Year-round racing: Small fields, big problem?

[Al Gobbi]

http://espn.go.com/horse-racing/story/_/id/9416170/small-fields-big-problem

[Stillriledup]

Small fields are 'horseman's races' and not bettors races. But, then again, why would racing put the bettor's needs above that of what owners and trainers want?

[Augenj]

http://espn.go.com/horse-racing/story/_/id/9416170/small-fields-big-problem
Great article by a great writer and spot on. :ThmbUp:

[thaskalos]

How many times have I said this?

The industry must think that the horseplayer is out there just trying to win "coffee money"...

"Come right in folks...and pay a 20%+ exacta fee in order to bet on a 5-horse field!"

[Stillriledup]

How many times have I said this?

The industry must think that the horseplayer is out there just trying to win "coffee money"...

"Come right in folks...and pay a 20%+ exacta fee in order to bet on a 5-horse field!"

The win takeout remains constant whether its a 2 horse field or a 20 horse field. People can bet NFL at 5%, but horse racing wants their customers to bet at 17% into a 2 horse field?

[DeltaLover]

We need less racing.

Most of the small Mickey Mouse tracks should be closed immediately as they are hurting the game from any prospective you see it, depriving the betting dollar day in and out, in their desperate struggle to survive even when it is clear that they need the injection of the State or the casino money in order to extend their lifespan.

Take as an example the NYC - NJ - PA area. Do why we really need Belmont, Philly, Monmouth, Pen National to run simultaneously? Can all of the survive and prosper without the casino money? Is the only purpose of the game to maintain the horsemen employer while completely ignoring for its future?

For the bettor, who is actually the one who fuels the industry, it would had been way better if we only had one track running at the time.

Had the game been limited to three - four circuits running a track per season the game would had been revived in a period of a few years.

[Longshot6977]

I think Finley hit the nail on the head, (but unfortunately didn't expand on it) when he said today's horses get too much rest due to meds which keeps field sizes small. If they came back every 2 weeks like the old days, the fields would be much larger. Of course, less racing days helps, but that just masks the real underlying problem IMO.

[taxicab]

Everybody who put up a post on this thread so far is correct.
Which doesn't bode well for racing.
To take it one step further, I would guess that a smaller track that currently has their purses supplemented by slot money would close down if the slot money were to be removed.

[thespaah]

I get barked at all the time for maintaining that there is a dire need for a contraction in horse racing.
I stand by this statement: Less is more.

[iwearpurple]

We need less racing.

Most of the small Mickey Mouse tracks should be closed immediately as they are hurting the game from any prospective you see it, depriving the betting dollar day in and out, in their desperate struggle to survive even when it is clear that they need the injection of the State or the casino money in order to extend their lifespan.

Take as an example the NYC - NJ - PA area. Do why we really need Belmont, Philly, Monmouth, Pen National to run simultaneously? Can all of the survive and prosper without the casino money? Is the only purpose of the game to maintain the horsemen employer while completely ignoring for its future?

For the bettor, who is actually the one who fuels the industry, it would had been way better if we only had one track running at the time.

Had the game been limited to three - four circuits running a track per season the game would had been revived in a period of a few years.

I disagree.

Not all horses are good enough to race at the best tracks. If only 3 or 4 tracks (1 track per circuit) are running at any given time the number of horses would not increase significantly because the majority of horses simply could not compete, and would not race.

Horses that I own, which race at presumably what you call Mickey Mouse tracks (Canterbury, Turf Paradise), cannot compete with top quality horses, and I am certainly not willing to pay higher day rates to watch them finish 12th of a 13 horse field in New York or California.

We need what I would rather refer to as Minor League tracks to support these not so well bred horses, who CAN race competitively at them.

The problem as I see it is the writing of the races. 15-20 years ago, you raced in a 10,000 claiming race. If you did well, you would move up to 12,500, 16,000, and so on. Today you race in a 10,000 NW2L, then 10,000 NW3L, and so on, then 12500 NW2, 12500 NW3, etc.

Other ideas are:
Track offer incentives (higher purses based on number of entries) for higher horse fields. I believe that some tracks are actually doing this. And if a horse is entered, it must run unless determined to be unsound by the vet. No scratching because 6 horses entered, and they might not finish high enough to win a purse. In other words, no reducing of 9 horse fields to 4, for various and sundry reasons.

Cut down the number or races on a card. Do we really need 12, 13 or more races on a card? There are plenty of simulcasting races available to bet on.

[PoloUK6108]

I'm lucky because I live between Churchill and Keeneland, which will be two of the last tracks to evr close. But as others have said, I too think many of the trash tracks should be closed. In my area, I think Turfway, Beulah, Thistledown, Charles Town and unfortunately Ellis Park should be done away with asap. Would be awesome to have Kentucky Downs expanded, hold a prestigious meeting to attract worldwide turf talent. Calder and maybe Tampa, Fairmount, Hawthorne, again unfortunately becuase like Ellis they're old and have much tradition..Prsque isle should never have been built IMO. I'd hate for my home track to close, but it needs to happen in many spots on the East coast and in the Midwest.

[duncan04]

So a sport that needs new fans, you want to close the smaller tracks so you take live racing away from a section of people. If there is no live racing around, how do you get new fans???

[JustRalph]

So a sport that needs new fans, you want to close the smaller tracks so you take live racing away from a section of people. If there is no live racing around, how do you get new fans???

There are no new fans.........it's a myth..........their like Unicorns. Everybody talks about them, but nobody has ever seen one..........

[rastajenk]

That is simply not right, but it's articulated so frequently around here it might as well be true.

But it never ceases to amaze me that many of you people, the ones that claim to so passionately care about the game more than normal people, continue to support the quickest path to extinction.

[bobbyb]

I disagree.

Not all horses are good enough to race at the best tracks. If only 3 or 4 tracks (1 track per circuit) are running at any given time the number of horses would not increase significantly because the majority of horses simply could not compete, and would not race.

Horses that I own, which race at presumably what you call Mickey Mouse tracks (Canterbury, Turf Paradise), cannot compete with top quality horses, and I am certainly not willing to pay higher day rates to watch them finish 12th of a 13 horse field in New York or California.

We need what I would rather refer to as Minor League tracks to support these not so well bred horses, who CAN race competitively at them.

The problem as I see it is the writing of the races. 15-20 years ago, you raced in a 10,000 claiming race. If you did well, you would move up to 12,500, 16,000, and so on. Today you race in a 10,000 NW2L, then 10,000 NW3L, and so on, then 12500 NW2, 12500 NW3, etc.

Other ideas are:
Track offer incentives (higher purses based on number of entries) for higher horse fields. I believe that some tracks are actually doing this. And if a horse is entered, it must run unless determined to be unsound by the vet. No scratching because 6 horses entered, and they might not finish high enough to win a purse. In other words, no reducing of 9 horse fields to 4, for various and sundry reasons.

Cut down the number or races on a card. Do we really need 12, 13 or more races on a card? There are plenty of simulcasting races available to bet on.

Excellent point :ThmbUp: .
A trainer friend spends more time trying to find a "fit" for his horses than he does training - :confused: - and his demeanor at times becomes ugly :eek: .
A good example was a horse entered at Parx yesterday (Race 2 #6) - which had to be scratched because he did not meet the date eligibilty, reducing the field down to 5........duh

I do welcome the incentative program you mentioned. That and simpler conditions may have a positive effect going forward.

bobby

[wisconsin]

I'm lucky because I live between Churchill and Keeneland, which will be two of the last tracks to evr close. But as others have said, I too think many of the trash tracks should be closed. In my area, I think Turfway, Beulah, Thistledown, Charles Town and unfortunately Ellis Park should be done away with asap. Would be awesome to have Kentucky Downs expanded, hold a prestigious meeting to attract worldwide turf talent. Calder and maybe Tampa, Fairmount, Hawthorne, again unfortunately becuase like Ellis they're old and have much tradition..Prsque isle should never have been built IMO. I'd hate for my home track to close, but it needs to happen in many spots on the East coast and in the Midwest.


It's easy to say tracks should simply close, but who makes that call? You can't just assume track owners are going to chuck it in because someone says they ought to.

[dnlgfnk]

I'm lucky because I live between Churchill and Keeneland, which will be two of the last tracks to evr close. But as others have said, I too think many of the trash tracks should be closed. In my area, I think Turfway, Beulah, Thistledown, Charles Town and unfortunately Ellis Park should be done away with asap. Would be awesome to have Kentucky Downs expanded, hold a prestigious meeting to attract worldwide turf talent. Calder and maybe Tampa, Fairmount, Hawthorne, again unfortunately becuase like Ellis they're old and have much tradition..Prsque isle should never have been built IMO. I'd hate for my home track to close, but it needs to happen in many spots on the East coast and in the Midwest.

Won't happen. Duccossois? already tried the international thing. They won't come inland to the midwest.

[PoloUK6108]

Of course I know nearly none of what I suggested will actually happen. Simply sharing my fantasy of jumpstarting this awesome sport..wish I was around to see the 60s to the early 90s, was only 8 years old in 1999 when I first got hooked.

[PoloUK6108]

Also, notice most of the tracks I mentioned have few to zero relevant stakes scheduled at any time of the year. Stakes attract fans

[thaskalos]

I have a very simple solution to the short field problem that we are facing today. I proposed this here a couple of years ago...when I first realized that this problem had the potential of spreading throughout the country...leaving us with full fields for only the weekends.

The tracks should set the purse values with a 12-horse field in mind...and should reduce the purses if the 12-horse field doesn't materialize.

The purse values should be set as follows:

12 horses....100% of the purse
11 horses.....95%
10 horses.....90%
09 horses.....80%
08 horses.....70%
07 horses.....60%
06 horses.....50%
05 horses.....40%
04 horses.....30%
03 horses.....20%
02 horses.....10%
01 horse........0

Let's see if the trainers decide to change their training methods then.

[iwearpurple]

I have a very simple solution to the short field problem that we are facing today. I proposed this here a couple of years ago...when I first realized that this problem had the potential of spreading throughout the country...leaving us with full fields for only the weekends.

The tracks should set the purse values with a 12-horse field in mind...and should reduce the purses if the 12-horse field doesn't materialize.

The purse values should be set as follows:

12 horses....100% of the purse
11 horses.....95%
10 horses.....90%
09 horses.....80%
08 horses.....70%
07 horses.....60%
06 horses.....50%
05 horses.....40%
04 horses.....30%
03 horses.....20%
02 horses.....10%
01 horse........0

Let's see if the trainers decide to change their training methods then.

Excellent suggestion

[JustRalph]

That is simply not right, but it's articulated so frequently around here it might as well be true.

But it never ceases to amaze me that many of you people, the ones that claim to so passionately care about the game more than normal people, continue to support the quickest path to extinction.

Let me put it this way. There are so few, they might as well be invisible.

[Robert Goren]

The problem as I see is not the small tracks although there is probably too many of them. The problem is at the big tracks. Closing CT is not going get us full fields at Belmont. Something got to give at the highest level. Maybe combining the NYRA and S.Cal circuits. Delmar in the fall, SA in the winter, Belmont in the spring and SAR in the summer. But that makes too much sense to happen. I don't think there are enough good horses to keep to two major circuits going. Then you have the big races at smaller tracks pulling away more stars. Then there is half good tracks GP, CD, and KEE. They have a ton of small track quality races, but a few good ones each week pulling good horses from NY and S.Cal. What a mess!

[wisconsin]

I have a very simple solution to the short field problem that we are facing today. I proposed this here a couple of years ago...when I first realized that this problem had the potential of spreading throughout the country...leaving us with full fields for only the weekends.

The tracks should set the purse values with a 12-horse field in mind...and should reduce the purses if the 12-horse field doesn't materialize.

The purse values should be set as follows:

12 horses....100% of the purse
11 horses.....95%
10 horses.....90%
09 horses.....80%
08 horses.....70%
07 horses.....60%
06 horses.....50%
05 horses.....40%
04 horses.....30%
03 horses.....20%
02 horses.....10%
01 horse........0

Let's see if the trainers decide to change their training methods then.


That would certainly work, but then again, you have tracks like Gulfstream who are paying $1100 minimum to all starters this summer.

[duncan04]

The problem as I see is not the small tracks although there is probably too many of them. The problem is at the big tracks. Closing CT is not going get us full fields at Belmont. Something got to give at the highest level. Maybe combining the NYRA and S.Cal circuits. Delmar in the fall, SA in the winter, Belmont in the spring and SAR in the summer. But that makes too much sense to happen. I don't think there are enough good horses to keep to two major circuits going. Then you have the big races at smaller tracks pulling away more stars. Then there is half good tracks GP, CD, and KEE. They have a ton of small track quality races, but a few good ones each week pulling good horses from NY and S.Cal. What a mess!


Have to agree with you here. If you close the smaller tracks, the fields of the bigger tracks won't get bigger. The smaller track horses would get trounced and what would be the point racing them then? Its a shame the bigger tracks won't work together to try and get better fields.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Might have to excuse my French on this one.If the game is so f**kin smart these days and it's shark vs shark with a whole lotta whale going on,why the hell are these races even being bet?Cutting my teeth at a place like River Downs I could tolerate it as long as I was playing 1 way exactas and getting 40% winners at 5/2.Other tracks I turn the page.The author also f**ked up by mentioning a race where Dreaming of Julia was upset at 1-5.And California has been posting these type of fields even when Quinn was bitching about it in his books in the late 80's/early 90's.The only thing different is the supposed "Smart" crowd still pumps money into this bull$hit.Stop betting it or shut the hole in your face.It's pretty simple to me.You burn about 0.000007999 calories taking your finger and turning the page.

Overall?Foal crops shrinking scares me.Contraction is necessity.

Pace I'll shut up after this post.Sorry.

[iceknight]

There are no new fans.........it's a myth..........their like Unicorns. Everybody talks about them, but nobody has ever seen one.......... yes, I did notice a horn growing on my head as well as this other guy I took with me to penn national...

[BIG49010]

If we could somehow remove the casino possibility from racetracks, you would see the likes of Fairmont, Hawthorne, close. Until we do that, your going to see piss poor racing, because that helps sell their case to the state governments.

[Cannon shell]

I have a very simple solution to the short field problem that we are facing today. I proposed this here a couple of years ago...when I first realized that this problem had the potential of spreading throughout the country...leaving us with full fields for only the weekends.

The tracks should set the purse values with a 12-horse field in mind...and should reduce the purses if the 12-horse field doesn't materialize.

The purse values should be set as follows:

12 horses....100% of the purse
11 horses.....95%
10 horses.....90%
09 horses.....80%
08 horses.....70%
07 horses.....60%
06 horses.....50%
05 horses.....40%
04 horses.....30%
03 horses.....20%
02 horses.....10%
01 horse........0

Let's see if the trainers decide to change their training methods then.
This is the kind of nonsensical idea I was speaking of when I said that the tracks have tricked you guys into believing that short fields are the horsemans fault. If you took two minutes to think about it we have no idea how many horses are going to enter a race when we make the entry. This idea will lead to shorter fields as I will definitely scratch if I draw into a short field as to not blow a condition for 1/2 of the purse.

[Tom]

Then how about this - weight based on recency.
A horse who has run in the last 14 days gets 10 pounds off, 21 days, 7 pounds, 31 days, 4 pounds.....

[Cannon shell]

Then how about this - weight based on recency.
A horse who has run in the last 14 days gets 10 pounds off, 21 days, 7 pounds, 31 days, 4 pounds.....
I just don't think you can gimmick it into better racing. IMO you need to examine the foundation of the racing program and fix that. No one in racing even wants to discuss what that would take. Pretty discouraging.

[thaskalos]

I just don't think you can gimmick it into better racing. IMO you need to examine the foundation of the racing program and fix that. No one in racing even wants to discuss what that would take. Pretty discouraging.
It's hard to convince the horsemen that something needs fixing, when there are $50,000-$75,000 purses out there waiting to be won...and all you have to do to win them is beat four other horses.

[Cannon shell]

It's hard to convince the horsemen that something needs fixing, when there are $50,000-$75,000 purses out there waiting to be won...and all you have to do to win them is beat four other horses.
Yeah at 1 track.

Horsemen only have control over their horse not everyone elses.

[OCF]

How about takeout on a sliding scale - the smaller the field, the smaller the takeout %?

[Tom]

I just don't think you can gimmick it into better racing. IMO you need to examine the foundation of the racing program and fix that. No one in racing even wants to discuss what that would take. Pretty discouraging.

What would it take?
Why own a race horse and not race it?

[thespaah]

This is the kind of nonsensical idea I was speaking of when I said that the tracks have tricked you guys into believing that short fields are the horsemans fault. If you took two minutes to think about it we have no idea how many horses are going to enter a race when we make the entry. This idea will lead to shorter fields as I will definitely scratch if I draw into a short field as to not blow a condition for 1/2 of the purse.
I am not tricked.
I will stand by my view that in many instances it it just too simple and easy for a trainer to say "I'm not running today"..
There should be rules. Rules that have teeth because those rules will be heeded with no exceptions.
For example. Flat tire on the horse trailer? Tough nuts. Not the track's problem. Should have checked the tires before you left and then you should have departed earlier.
Traffic jam? Tough nuts. Not the track's problem. Should have left earlier.
It rained two days ago? Tough nuts. Not the track's problem.
The horse was carrying heat in a leg but the trainer failed to call in the track vet? Fine. Go ahead and scratch, but the horse doesn't run for 30 days AND the trainer cannot take the horse off the grounds to race elsewhere.
Oh yeah. If I am in the driver's seat at the track du jour, you race. If you don't, you had better have a very good reason.
Oh, I would work with anyone. In fact, before I make the new rules, I will ask all horsemen to address the issue anonymously in writing. We then come up with a consensus and then the rules are published. Everyone from the two stall $5k claimer guy to the "Suit" with 60 horses on the grounds.
And no coming back to me and crying "do over"..
Deal?

[thespaah]

Yeah at 1 track.

Horsemen only have control over their horse not everyone elses.
OH?
AP 6/26 9 races 64 went to post with 21 scratches...11 by trainer. The remainder vet or stewards.
BEL 6/26..9 races 76 went to post. Just FOUR scratches with ZERO by trainer.
There were 3 Stewards scratches and 1 vet scratch...
I threw out MTO's for obvious reasons.

The issue here is a difference in the rules and the method by which the rules are enforced.
BHP, GG stand out as having issues with short fields.
Del has issues as well.
So it's not just one track.

[Cannon shell]

What would it take?
Why own a race horse and not race it?
It is a complicated situation that can't be surmised in one sentence or with some magic bullet fix.

Trainers get selected by win %. To believe that they are not aware of this is silly. It is incredibly stupid to choose your trainer because of his win percentage unless it is consistently bad. However most owners/agents/racing managers don't seem to understand that so we have the situation that we have. Trainers are rewarded by running in races where they have an above average chance to win and are penalized by running in races too often where they dont have a above average chance. Until this is altered it will be hard to believe that this will change much.

[thespaah]

What would it take?
Why own a race horse and not race it?
Good question...

[Stillriledup]

It is a complicated situation that can't be surmised in one sentence or with some magic bullet fix.

Trainers get selected by win %. To believe that they are not aware of this is silly. It is incredibly stupid to choose your trainer because of his win percentage unless it is consistently bad. However most owners/agents/racing managers don't seem to understand that so we have the situation that we have. Trainers are rewarded by running in races where they have an above average chance to win and are penalized by running in races too often where they dont have a above average chance. Until this is altered it will be hard to believe that this will change much.

So, you're saying that owners, for the most part, open up the newspaper, see who is ahead in the standings and that's how they pick a trainer? Is that really the way someone decides is the best way to entrust a trainer with a racehorse that could cost tens of thosands of dollars? Just random dart throwing?

[Cannon shell]

I am not tricked.
I will stand by my view that in many instances it it just too simple and easy for a trainer to say "I'm not running today"..
There should be rules. Rules that have teeth because those rules will be heeded with no exceptions.
For example. Flat tire on the horse trailer? Tough nuts. Not the track's problem. Should have checked the tires before you left and then you should have departed earlier.
Traffic jam? Tough nuts. Not the track's problem. Should have left earlier.
It rained two days ago? Tough nuts. Not the track's problem.
The horse was carrying heat in a leg but the trainer failed to call in the track vet? Fine. Go ahead and scratch, but the horse doesn't run for 30 days AND the trainer cannot take the horse off the grounds to race elsewhere.
Oh yeah. If I am in the driver's seat at the track du jour, you race. If you don't, you had better have a very good reason.
Oh, I would work with anyone. In fact, before I make the new rules, I will ask all horsemen to address the issue anonymously in writing. We then come up with a consensus and then the rules are published. Everyone from the two stall $5k claimer guy to the "Suit" with 60 horses on the grounds.
And no coming back to me and crying "do over"..
Deal?
When you have a huge surplus of horses you can play dictator. That isnt the case at virtually any circuit in the country.

[Cannon shell]

OH?
AP 6/26 9 races 64 went to post with 21 scratches...11 by trainer. The remainder vet or stewards.
BEL 6/26..9 races 76 went to post. Just FOUR scratches with ZERO by trainer.
There were 3 Stewards scratches and 1 vet scratch...
I threw out MTO's for obvious reasons.

The issue here is a difference in the rules and the method by which the rules are enforced.
BHP, GG stand out as having issues with short fields.
Del has issues as well.
So it's not just one track.
This is your "evidence"?

BHP, GG and Del also have very small horse populations for various reasons. If you hit powerball, bought 200 horses and wanted to stable them at one track I know Delaware Park could accommodate you

[magwell]

When did Skiffington pass ?

[Cannon shell]

So, you're saying that owners, for the most part, open up the newspaper, see who is ahead in the standings and that's how they pick a trainer? Is that really the way someone decides is the best way to entrust a trainer with a racehorse that could cost tens of thosands of dollars? Just random dart throwing?
Yeah pretty much. Or they are 'advised' by someone who did the same thing.

[Cannon shell]

When did Skiffington pass ?
He is still above ground but is closer to a zombie than alive

Was wondering if someone would catch that

[Stillriledup]

Yeah pretty much. Or they are 'advised' by someone who did the same thing.

Wow, that's pretty wild.

[cordep17]

The little tracks are not taking away from the larger tracks. The larger tracks take away for each other and the smaller tracks take away from each other. They should work better between themselves to make for schedules that make more sense.

Frankly, some of the best bred horses need to run at a lower level to compete. owners own horses because they know that, assuming they are sound, that there will be a place for them to run. If you remove the small to middle-sized tracks, owners will flee the game.

In regards to the long layoffs after every race, I agree. People say the breed has seriously worsened, but I disagree. I just think that trainers are often times not even horsemen. I bet a lot of great horses didn't meet expectations because of trainer malpractice. Trainers who know what they are doing and avoid the use of medication and actually give their horses time to recover when things go wrong instead of just masking the pain can run their horses every two weeks. If we can change the methods and people on the backstretch, small field sizes wouldn't be a problem. The problem is the acceptance of trainers using unnecessary medications and the lack of enforcement of the medication rules that there are. Trainers out there know that the guy In the opposite barn is trying to get an edge, so they do it. It doesn't have to be that way.

Train these horses right and they can go forever. Nowadays, horses only average around 20 starts for a career. Evolution does not happen that fast. The trainers have changed, not the horse.

[magwell]

He is still above ground but is closer to a zombie than alive

Was wondering if someone would catch that lot of people ask about him I knew him when he trained for Ernie

[cordep17]

Yeah pretty much. Or they are 'advised' by someone who did the same thing.

In Brad Free's book, I remember it said that horseman today fret a lot about the placement of their horses, because prospective owners care about win percentage so much. I can see how that can be turned into trainers looking for an edge too.

[ronsmac]

The little tracks are not taking away from the larger tracks. The larger tracks take away for each other and the smaller tracks take away from each other. They should work better between themselves to make for schedules that make more sense.

Frankly, some of the best bred horses need to run at a lower level to compete. owners own horses because they know that, assuming they are sound, that there will be a place for them to run. If you remove the small to middle-sized tracks, owners will flee the game.

In regards to the long layoffs after every race, I agree. People say the breed has seriously worsened, but I disagree. I just think that trainers are often times not even horsemen. I bet a lot of great horses didn't meet expectations because of trainer malpractice. Trainers who know what they are doing and avoid the use of medication and actually give their horses time to recover when things go wrong instead of just masking the pain can run their horses every two weeks. If we can change the methods and people on the backstretch, small field sizes wouldn't be a problem. The problem is the acceptance of trainers using unnecessary medications and the lack of enforcement of the medication rules that there are. Trainers out there know that the guy In the opposite barn is trying to get an edge, so they do it. It doesn't have to be that way.

Train these horses right and they can go forever. Nowadays, horses only average around 20 starts for a career. Evolution does not happen that fast. The trainers have changed, not the horse.
Maybe it's drugs, because though evolution shouldn't happen that fast, offensive lineman that were 250 35 or 40 years ago are 325 today.100 meter world record which was 9.95 25 yrs ago is 9. 58 i think today and basketball players who were barely dunking , with the exception of the truly gifted, are swooping a foot and a half above the rim with regularity today, I'm just saying.

[cordep17]

Maybe it's drugs, because though evolution shouldn't happen that fast, offensive lineman that were 250 35 or 40 years ago are 325 today.100 meter world record which was 9.95 25 yrs ago is 9. 58 i think today and basketball players who were barely dunking , with the exception of the truly gifted, are swooping a foot and a half above the rim with regularity today, I'm just saying.

:ThmbUp: Really good point.

[rastajenk]

The problem is the acceptance of trainers using unnecessary medications and the lack of enforcement of the medication rules that there are.
What do you base this on?

[cordep17]

With such miniscule slaps on the wrist for medical infractions, cheating seems to be more financially beneficial for those who do it in comparison to those who don't.

[Stillriledup]

With such miniscule slaps on the wrist for medical infractions, cheating seems to be more financially beneficial for those who do it in comparison to those who don't.

If you're going to cheat, its important to cheat in moderation, you dont want to shove your success in the faces of the racing gestapo because that can be viewed as embarrassing, so you just cheat in small amounts and stay under the radar and its all good.

know what i'm sayin, babe? ;)

[cordep17]

Sort of, but not really.

[rastajenk]

racing gestapo

Second time in a month you've used this term, yet no one on this board is more of a racing Nazi than you. You have a wrought-iron template for the way you think things should be run, and things that happen contrary to your view should result in harsh penalties for all concerned, or are somehow detrimental to the game, like your obsession with dime supers.

So who is the racing gestapo?

[Stillriledup]

Second time in a month you've used this term, yet no one on this board is more of a racing Nazi than you. You have a wrought-iron template for the way you think things should be run, and things that happen contrary to your view should result in harsh penalties for all concerned, or are somehow detrimental to the game, like your obsession with dime supers.

So who is the racing gestapo?

I love me some "racing gestapo" i think i'm going to use that term as much as i can from now on. Thanks for letting me know you like that term, i like it too! ;)

[Nets]

Ellis Park runs only 29 days a year. Ron Geary is a pro-bettor owner and handicapper himself. I just don't see how punishing such a track owner, by closing Ellis, would make any sense. He's one of the very few who "gets it" as it relates to what we horseplayers want.

[PaceAdvantage]

I love me some "racing gestapo" i think i'm going to use that term as much as i can from now on.I strongly advise against that...at least on this website...

[GMB@BP]

:ThmbUp: Really good point.

Evolution must have already happened with the horse population because they are all getting slower according to the Beyer figures, even with all those drugs.

[GMB@BP]

Yes Gastapo is definitely the wrong word, maybe racing NKVD?

[cordep17]

Evolution must have already happened with the horse population because they are all getting slower according to the Beyer figures, even with all those drugs.

I don't think it is out of the question that these horses are no longer trained as well, and even the best horses out there are not fully reaching their potential.

[GMB@BP]

Its a mechanical issue within the figures, I think horses are at least as fast as they always have been.