Worth a read...why our horses don't race

[cj]

http://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/restricted/pdf/magazine/RidingthePine-1005-distilled.pdf

[classhandicapper]

Good read.

I always thought that once you get a horse really fit, it doesn't make much sense to work him really hard in the morning while waiting 6 weeks to run.

Why not work less often (or at least not as fast and hard) and run more frequently?

When people have these discussions, most of it about the frequency of the races, but I think working horses in 45 and change, 57 and change, and 110 change etc... between races matters also.

I saw one study like that on the Thorograph forum years back. The author looked at both frequency of races AND frequency and distance of works and it seemed to matter.

[chadk66]

it's all about training methods. there'll be some that will disagree with me and some that will agree. Europeans train their horses in a much different manner. They believe in training them daily if not near daily. They also believe in galloping horses much further and more frequently. Building a solid foundation that allows them to race more frequently without suffering injuries as frequently. If you could follow the training regiment of the majority of U.S trainers you'd be amazed at how little they actually send their horses to the track and how short of a time they spend there.

[Hoofless_Wonder]

It's all about drugs, breeding and the prevalent racing surface (dirt) here in North America taking more out of the horse.

Of course that doesn't quite explain the South American horses which race on dirt, and many of them have over 100 lifetime starts.

Interesting article, though focused on the top horses, which I understand can require different training than cheap claimers. Don't know about that - my knowledge ends with "hay in one end, manure out the other..."

[Robert Fischer]

The energy distribution contrasts (of euro turf vs. US dirt) and the lasix weight loss, both seem like really good points.

[JustRalph]

http://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/restricted/pdf/magazine/RidingthePine-1005-distilled.pdf

Great piece Craig. Thanks for posting it.

As a side, that is one professional looking PDF

Works and looks fantastic on the Ipad.

[thespaah]

it's all about training methods. there'll be some that will disagree with me and some that will agree. Europeans train their horses in a much different manner. They believe in training them daily if not near daily. They also believe in galloping horses much further and more frequently. Building a solid foundation that allows them to race more frequently without suffering injuries as frequently. If you could follow the training regiment of the majority of U.S trainers you'd be amazed at how little they actually send their horses to the track and how short of a time they spend there.
I concur. Training methods in Europe have few if any similarities to US based stables.
In the article Shug Mc Gaughey explains that year round racing plus the wide availability of events allows stables to 'miss a few".
In my view there are three factors which set up the US system.
One, permitting of race day medication.
Two, For higher end performers, the wide availability of graded stakes and non graded stakes with large mostly slots induced purses. This permits connections to pick which events in which to enter because many of these stakes races are scheduled the same week or even on the same day.
The result is these horses get more rest than they do actual work.
I could be off base in my theories, but at the end of the day I would prefer to see highly competitive fields a bit more frequently.
I guess I was spoiled from the 70's and 80's when I got to see the same horses battle it out for 6 months. I got to see Forego and John Henry take on the best horses who's connections wanted to be there to see if they could beat "the Big Horse"...Now it's almost as if the connections have as their first priority, "Duck"...
I am in no way impugning trainers or owners. I realize there are things done differently now. But I guess I just miss the way things used to be done.

[PaceAdvantage]

Over the past 20 years or so, the training/racing game has changed radically.

The "don't squeeze the lemon dry" methodology has been taken to dizzying heights since the day Horatio Luro first uttered those words to his young protege, Charlie Whittingham back in the 1930s.

And since trainers/owners are looking to conserve their charges as much as possible, the sportsmanship that once existed in this sport has all but been eradicated except on the biggest of big racing days (Triple Crown...Breeders' Cup, etc), when trainers are forced to run the best against the best.

Until trainers/owners stop believing their horses are made out of glass, this will continue with no end in sight. And the national schedule of races along with a multitude of slot-infused purses with easy-pickin fields will only serve to continue this vicious cycle.

[DeltaLover]

the sportsmanship that once existed in this sport has all but been eradicated except on the biggest of big racing days


Until trainers/owners stop believing their horses are made out of glass, this will continue with no end in sight.



:ThmbUp:

Excellent points!

Most of us, horse betting addicts can see the absolute truth in PA's statements, how come that the industry as a whole fails to realize them??

[Robert Goren]

The sad thing is that 10k claimers are trained the same way and 40k claimers are shipped around like they are stakes horses. A couple of years ago we had starter handicap horse going from minor track to minor track looking for easy wins. There is no way this is good for the game.

[DeltaLover]

The sad thing is that 10k claimers are trained the same way and 40k claimers are shipped around like they are stakes horses. A couple of years ago we had starter handicap horse going from minor track to minor track looking for easy wins. There is no way this is good for the game.

Do we really need 10K claimers (or even any claimer) at all?

[cj]

Do we really need 10K claimers (or even any claimer) at all?

Better races these days are VERY tough to fill.

[DeltaLover]

Better races these days are VERY tough to fill.

Sure.

But this is an immediate consequence of having so much racing? I think this is the case. Cutting down in race tracks will certainly result to better quality racing, better regulations, better monitoring etc.

[Robert Goren]

Do we really need 10K claimers (or even any claimer) at all? I actually prefer a 10k 6F dirt claimer to a turf route stakes race. So does my wallet.

[the little guy]

Better races these days are VERY tough to fill.

"Better races" didn't fill 30 years ago either.

There are many myths about racing, none more than the apparent "quality racing" that once existed but is gone now. This is just not true. Stakes have been watered down for obvious reasons, but big fields of "quality horses" dominating cards never existed.

[cj]

"Better races" didn't fill 30 years ago either.

There are many myths about racing, none more than the apparent "quality racing" that once existed but is gone now. This is just not true. Stakes have been watered down for obvious reasons, but big fields of "quality horses" dominating cards never existed.

By better, I'm even talking allowance races. This is why we rarely even have straight NW2 other than allowance races any longer. I never said these races dominated cards.

[Robert Goren]

"Better races" didn't fill 30 years ago either.

There are many myths about racing, none more than the apparent "quality racing" that once existed but is gone now. This is just not true. Stakes have been watered down for obvious reasons, but big fields of "quality horses" dominating cards never existed. You are right about big fields of "quality horses". But today we can't even get big fields of bad horses.

[the little guy]

By better, I'm even talking allowance races. This is why we rarely even have straight NW2 other than allowance races any longer. I never said these races dominated cards.


I was speaking in general.

There are too many Stakes options, overnight or otherwise, these days for NW2X, or better, races to find an abundance of horses.

[the little guy]

You are right about big fields of "quality horses". But today we can't even get big fields of bad horses.


That's not true. There are plenty of big fields of bad horses running in this country.

[onefast99]

QUOTE=Robert Goren]You are right about big fields of "quality horses". But today we can't even get big fields of bad horses.[/QUOTE]
In the end, all business operations can be reduced to three words: people, product, and profits.

Lee Iacocca (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/l/lee_iacocca.html)

[DeltaLover]

"Better races" didn't fill 30 years ago either.

There are many myths about racing, none more than the apparent "quality racing" that once existed but is gone now. This is just not true. Stakes have been watered down for obvious reasons, but big fields of "quality horses" dominating cards never existed.

I am not sure about quality racing that "once existed" but certainly, I am sure about quality racing that currently exists (see Hong Kong for example).

[the little guy]

I am not sure about quality racing that "once existed" but certainly, I am sure about quality racing that currently exists (see Hong Kong for example).


Hong Kong has two days of racing a week. How do you think racing in this country would look if there were 20 races a week?

[classhandicapper]

IMO we'd be WAY better off if all the marginal tracks currently supported by casino money closed and we had way fewer tracks and races at any given time. We probably only need about 10-15 tracks in this country, with only 3-5 open at any given time.

IMO, much, if not most of the handle would simply switch from the closed tracks to the remaining open tracks due to easy access to internet/phone wagering and simulcasting facilities. And the remaining tracks would become more profitable due to better operating leverage.

IMO we would continue to breed the best horses to the best horses because it would still make sense. In fact, it would probably make even more sense with higher handles and purses at the remaining high quality tracks. There would also be fewer tracks competing for top horses. Therefore, the quality of the major races would remain high or get even higher. With fewer tracks there would also be less of an issue with what to do with lower quality horses after their racing career is over.

Sure, the breeding industry would shrink, there would be fewer jobs for trainers, jockeys, agents, vets etc... and that would hurt some people in the short term. But we never should have been subsidizing of lot of the state bred programs we subsidize now to begin with. When you subsidize something, you are guaranteed to get more of it and that's not always a good thing.

Consolidation always hurts some people in the short term. But racing acts like it's the only industry on earth (besides government) that doesn't need to consolidate when times change, when there's excess capacity, not enough revenue and profit etc... to keep everyone afloat.

I'm sure politics is standing in the way of rational economic behavior, but IMO this industry desperately needs fewer tracks and less racing.

[Robert Goren]

That's not true. There are plenty of big fields of bad horses running in this country.Where? certainly not at the NYRA tracks I bet. Those 10-15k dirt 6F claimers never seem to have 12 starters. 7 or 8, maybe. 6 was very common last winter at AQU.

[dilanesp]

Of course that doesn't quite explain the South American horses which race on dirt, and many of them have over 100 lifetime starts.

It actually has a lot to do with the value of the horses. The breeding industry is such a big moneymaker that it's better not to race once the horse's value is established.

Horses who don't have that value (claimers, geldings, minor stakes horses) don't race as much as they used to, but plenty of them still race a LOT (and despite infirmities that would result in the instant retirement of a 3 year old star).

[cj]

Where? certainly not at the NYRA tracks I bet. Those 10-15k dirt 6F claimers never seem to have 12 starters. 7 or 8, maybe. 6 was very common last winter at AQU.

He said around the country, not around Nyra. Relatively speaking, NYRA doesn't have "bad" horses, though of course that is obviously comparatively speaking.

[dilanesp]

"Better races" didn't fill 30 years ago either.

There are many myths about racing, none more than the apparent "quality racing" that once existed but is gone now. This is just not true. Stakes have been watered down for obvious reasons, but big fields of "quality horses" dominating cards never existed.

I agree with this. Actually, the race cards on big race days are much better. If you go to the track on Santa Anita Handicap day (to use my local track as an example), nowadays you are likely to see 3 or 4 stakes races and a card full of full fields. That wasn't necessarily true in the past.

Also, a lot of stakes back in the day, especially in New York, were pretty bad betting races. If you actually look at youtube videos, you will see that plenty of those races had very small fields. Kelso ran against a lot of 6 horse fields, and moving forward to my lifetime, New York had a plethora of 5 and 6 horse Grade I races in the 1970's and 1980's.

There's lots of aspects of the sport that are worse today. But this isn't one of them.

[dilanesp]

IMO we'd be WAY better off if all the marginal tracks currently supported by casino money closed and we had way fewer tracks and races at any given time. We probably only need about 10-15 tracks in this country, with only 3-5 open at any given time.

We are moving slowly in this direction. Lots of tracks are closing and few are opening.

The basic economics of simulcasting are eventually going to lead to a situation where there are a handful of circuits providing signals to the rest of the country which are responsible for 95 percent or more of the total betting handle, along with some boutique meets. Simulcast betting creates huge network externalities, because bettors will want to bet in the biggest pools and will not want to bet on racing circuits with small betting pools.

But it's going to take a long time to get to this point and the horsemen and breeders are going to be incredibly resistant to the process, for obvious reasons.

[the little guy]

Where? certainly not at the NYRA tracks I bet. Those 10-15k dirt 6F claimers never seem to have 12 starters. 7 or 8, maybe. 6 was very common last winter at AQU.


I know you like to make things up. It's almost endearing. But you are really silly.

[Robert Goren]

He said around the country, not around Nyra. Relatively speaking, NYRA doesn't have "bad" horses, though of course that is obviously comparatively speaking. I still haven't heard a where. I know there is some track in Louisiana that has a lot of them, but where else?

[Robert Goren]

I know you like to make things up. It's almost endearing. But you are really silly. I think I bet every day at AQU last winter except one weekend when I was in the hospital. I don't remember a 12 horse field on the dirt, maybe a md claimer. Of this I am sure, there was a lot more 6 horse fields than 12 horse ones. I love betting the AQU inner because of the many biases that pop up there.

[classhandicapper]

We are moving slowly in this direction. Lots of tracks are closing and few are opening.

But it's going to take a long time to get to this point and the horsemen and breeders are going to be incredibly resistant to the process, for obvious reasons.

Well, so far I have been saying this for about 10 years and we're probably another 20 years away. If this was Wall st, we be through a consolidation, a new round of IPOs, and another consolidation already. :rolleyes:

[cj]

I still haven't heard a where. I know there is some track in Louisiana that has a lot of them, but where else?

CT, Ind, EvD, DeD, FL, Mnr...just off the top of my head.

[outofthebox]

Back in the 70's-80's you could get a nw2 other than mdn ,claimer in California and hope for a 6-8 horse field. Now the the secretaries have to be creative and write something like nw2 other than mdn, claiming, starter, state bred or trial, or which have not won a race since May 13, 2013 or which have never won 3 races or claiming price 40,000.
I find it very frustrating today training horses. Here in Louisiana i might get lucky to run a horse once every six or seven weeks. There are conditions that are saturated with so many backyard breds that you don't know when your going to get to run again. I would love to run the cheaper horses every 21-30 days apart so you wouldn't have to train them as much. Our better state breeds on average will race 6-8 times a year if you run in the right spots. That's just not enough racing.

[FantasticDan]

I know you like to make things up. It's almost endearing. But you are really silly.It's silly and making things up to assert that field size and horse pop. was down last year at AQU?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/01/sports/aqueduct-horse-racing-schedule-is-reduced-by-nyra.html

[cj]

It's silly and making things up to assert that field size and horse pop. was down last year at AQU?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/01/sports/aqueduct-horse-racing-schedule-is-reduced-by-nyra.html

Where did Andy say this? Talk about leaping to conclusions...

[BlueShoe]

I actually prefer a 10k 6F dirt claimer to a turf route stakes race. So does my wallet.
So does mine. Do not care for stakes races as a general rule, and am more likely to stay home on those big day Saturdays with an almost all stake race card. Give me a mid level open claiming race on the dirt for older males every time rather than a graded stake. Problem is, there are fewer of these races than there used to be. The fields at nearly every track, even on many weekends, is cluttered by races for conditioned claimers, usually filled with professional losers, or else bottom level maiden claimers, often worse still, awful state bred races.

[Stillriledup]

Over the past 20 years or so, the training/racing game has changed radically.

The "don't squeeze the lemon dry" methodology has been taken to dizzying heights since the day Horatio Luro first uttered those words to his young protege, Charlie Whittingham back in the 1930s.

And since trainers/owners are looking to conserve their charges as much as possible, the sportsmanship that once existed in this sport has all but been eradicated except on the biggest of big racing days (Triple Crown...Breeders' Cup, etc), when trainers are forced to run the best against the best.

Until trainers/owners stop believing their horses are made out of glass, this will continue with no end in sight. And the national schedule of races along with a multitude of slot-infused purses with easy-pickin fields will only serve to continue this vicious cycle.

This mindset has also crept into Baseball with pitch counts. They don't make em like Cy Young anymore!

[Robert Goren]

CT, Ind, EvD, DeD, FL, Mnr...just off the top of my head.Evd and DED are pretty good. CT has those dashes with full fields. I looked at FL and Mnr and haven't found very many. A lot of 8 horse fields, but not many 12 horse ones. I haven't look at Ind in a while, so maybe they had some. I know they shared a lot of their horse with Kentucky circuit. I can get full fields if I wanted to bet turf races. I just don't like them nor do I do well with them. Why do turf races fill everywhere and dirt races don't?

[Stillriledup]

CT, Ind, EvD, DeD, FL, Mnr...just off the top of my head.

Colonial too, seems like every race there is at least 12.

[elhelmete]

I still haven't heard a where. I know there is some track in Louisiana that has a lot of them, but where else?

PID
MNR
CT
SUF
LA
EVG

[outofthebox]

DD fields are limited to 10 starters per race. Evd 5- 51/2 12 horses. 6f-7f 14 horses. The two turn races are limited to 12 horses.

[FantasticDan]

Where did Andy say this? Talk about leaping to conclusions...Why is it jumping to conclusions? Goren's comment in post #29 ended by mentioning the short fields at AQU, to which Andy responded with what I quoted back. Where does the leap come in?

[cj]

Why is it jumping to conclusions? Goren's comment in post #29 ended by mentioning the short fields at AQU, to which Andy responded with what I quoted back. Where does the leap come in?

Saying fields sizes decreased and that 6 horse fields where "very common" are two different things, vastly different. It also isn't true that 10-15k claimers routinely had 12 horse fields in the past as Goren implies. Those are the things I thought Andy meant because they were silly.

[NTamm1215]

I'm wondering how many people, aside from CJ, who have posted in this thread actually read the article that the thread is about.

[Robert Goren]

I'm wondering how many people, aside from CJ, who have posted in this thread actually read the article that the thread is about.I read it. So what. I am tired of hearing the excuses for short fields or that they are a figment of my imagination. What is sad is that bettors have been complaining about them for years and the tracks have done very little if anything about them.

[Segwin]

Horses overseas do not get Lasix?

[cordep17]

There is way too much sitting hot horses.

Seems to be way too much emphasis on speed rather than foundation during the early stages of training

So many drugs, especially Lasix, make it harder to wheel them back soon after.

[nearco]

Horses overseas do not get Lasix?

???

They get a couple of gallons every day for breakfast, with a bottle of Guinness mixed in.

[cj]

Horses overseas do not get Lasix?

Some use it to train, but as the article states, they can't use it within 72 or 96 hours of the race, I forget which.

[nearco]

Some use it to train, but as the article states, they can't use it within 72 or 96 hours of the race, I forget which.

They can't have it in their system at the time of race.
The 72 - 96 hours etc are just general guidelines. If your horse tests positive, it tests positive, whether you gave it 240 hours out or 24 hours out.

Btw, horses in Argentina also race on Lasix. However it's use has recently been outlawed in Graded Stakes races by Argentinian authorities.

[Stillriledup]

Lasix questions for the American trainers (or, anyone else who happens to know). When a horse in America is listed as NOT having lasix, is that horse tested for lasix? Also, when a horse has an L listed next to its name, we don't know the exact amount of lasix, is there a maximum amount of lasix a horse is allowed to have? Also, if a horse has a small amout of lasix and bleeds thru the lasix and gets more lasix for the next start, how do bettors know which horses are getting a higher dose of lasix?

[outofthebox]

Lasix questions for the American trainers (or, anyone else who happens to know). When a horse in America is listed as NOT having lasix, is that horse tested for lasix? Also, when a horse has an L listed next to its name, we don't know the exact amount of lasix, is there a maximum amount of lasix a horse is allowed to have? Also, if a horse has a small amout of lasix and bleeds thru the lasix and gets more lasix for the next start, how do bettors know which horses are getting a higher dose of lasix?Very good questions that will never be answered for the wagering public. Yes lasix is part of the testing procedure, it will test with no threshold level in most jurisdictions. You can also test for to much lasix. Different levels in different jurisdictions. A horse can also be racing on lasix and not receive any as long as he is on one of the adjunct approved alternatives, crazy but true. I run all my horses usually on 3 cc of lasix unless they have a history of bleeding, then i will up it to 5c along with some additional meds that seem to help.

[classhandicapper]

This mindset has also crept into Baseball with pitch counts. They don't make em like Cy Young anymore!

Yea, I like to point to that one also.

[OTM Al]

Yea, I like to point to that one also.
It's wrong though. Those were days of different strategies, equipment and conditioning. A guy tried to pitch that way today with a modern ball facing modern hitters in a modern ball park, he wouldn't last long. Likewise, the horses could run as they used to, but if all the others one is facing are on lasix and have more rest, then he isn't going to have much success. Sort of like the classic prisoner's dilemma problem in that no one really has the incentive to do the "right" thing.

[NTamm1215]

I read it. So what. I am tired of hearing the excuses for short fields or that they are a figment of my imagination. What is sad is that bettors have been complaining about them for years and the tracks have done very little if anything about them.

I expected that you would turn it in your own direction and allow yourself to continue to bloviate on the 5 topics to which you unfailingly adhere.

The article was about how our horses don't run while "theirs" do. That's simply untrue.

[dilanesp]

It's wrong though. Those were days of different strategies, equipment and conditioning. A guy tried to pitch that way today with a modern ball facing modern hitters in a modern ball park, he wouldn't last long. Likewise, the horses could run as they used to, but if all the others one is facing are on lasix and have more rest, then he isn't going to have much success. Sort of like the classic prisoner's dilemma problem in that no one really has the incentive to do the "right" thing.

I think the difference between pitching and racehorse training is that with pitching, the pitchers have learned how to throw harder, but it wears out their arms when they do it. Everyone would have a short career like Sandy Koufax did if managers didn't regulate pitch counts.

Whereas I don't think the issue with horse racing is that the horses have learned how to run harder races. It's external things, whether it is lasix / PED's or breeding value.

[chadk66]

Lasix questions for the American trainers (or, anyone else who happens to know). When a horse in America is listed as NOT having lasix, is that horse tested for lasix? Also, when a horse has an L listed next to its name, we don't know the exact amount of lasix, is there a maximum amount of lasix a horse is allowed to have? Also, if a horse has a small amout of lasix and bleeds thru the lasix and gets more lasix for the next start, how do bettors know which horses are getting a higher dose of lasix?whether they test for lasix for a horse listed as not receiving lasix is totally up to the state racing commission. With todays testing methods it would probably show up in their spectrum of tests I'd guess. As well as quantity. The dosage is determined by the state racing commission. and can vary from state to state.

[classhandicapper]

I think the difference between pitching and racehorse training is that with pitching, the pitchers have learned how to throw harder, but it wears out their arms when they do it. Everyone would have a short career like Sandy Koufax did if managers didn't regulate pitch counts.



Tell that to Nolan Ryan, Bob Feller, and Walter Johnson. ;)

Seriously, I'm sure there's some validity to pitch count stats the same way there is some validity to spacing horses' races, but I don't think either species has changed much. It's an individual thing.

[dilanesp]

Tell that to Nolan Ryan, Bob Feller, and Walter Johnson. ;)

Seriously, I'm sure there's some validity to pitch count stats the same way there is some validity to spacing horses' races, but I don't think either species has changed much. It's an individual thing.

No comment on Feller and Johnson, but Ryan was one of the first pitchers to have a restricted pitch count. Bill Virdon installed it at Houston and every manager he had after that limited his pitching. That probably helped extend his career.

Look, as a fan, I hate the pitch count. It has eliminated the complete game, and turned almost every game into a parade of cringe inducing middle relief pitching through the late innings until the team can get the closer on the mound. But it seems plausible to me that it works-- lots of pitchers have long careers now and that wasn't always the case.

[Hoofless_Wonder]

Hong Kong has two days of racing a week. How do you think racing in this country would look if there were 20 races a week?

Better. Much better. Hong Kong races two days per week, takes the summer off, and offers a far superior product (at least for the bettors) than any other venue on the planet.

Racing in the U.S. would improve dramatically if each circuit reduced the number of racing days to one, two or three days a week - whatever the local horse population could support in terms of fuller fields and competitive races. This of course would require a big change in the current "model" in place, but with the six horse fields coming down the pike, maybe one or two states will figure this out and try the Hong Kong way.

NYRA is my favorite circuit in the U.S. by far, but I'd trade 18-20 days of NYRA racing per month for four days of commingled Sha Tin in a heartbeat....

[Stillriledup]

Better. Much better. Hong Kong races two days per week, takes the summer off, and offers a far superior product (at least for the bettors) than any other venue on the planet.

Racing in the U.S. would improve dramatically if each circuit reduced the number of racing days to one, two or three days a week - whatever the local horse population could support in terms of fuller fields and competitive races. This of course would require a big change in the current "model" in place, but with the six horse fields coming down the pike, maybe one or two states will figure this out and try the Hong Kong way.

NYRA is my favorite circuit in the U.S. by far, but I'd trade 18-20 days of NYRA racing per month for four days of commingled Sha Tin in a heartbeat....

Comingled Sha Tin would be ideal, and the reason would be that the pools are SO big that just by definition, there's a ton of sucker money in there, you dont have that in America, you're betting against serious players for the most part, there isnt much meat on the bone, with Sha Tin, the meat would be there for sure.