Makes too much sense.

[Silver florin]

http://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/shared_content.cfm?From_the_Publisher&id=255

[Stillriledup]

Certain changes that are being proposed in the article you posted cost money as well as can cost tracks betting handle (tighter drug rules = shorter fields = smaller betting handles)

Its all well and good and a noble thing to want to propose stuff that makes the game safer, cleaner as well as possibly helping reputation, but the money has to come from somewhere....and people who are proposing the ideas arent going to dip into their own pockets to pay for it, ideas are good, but if they cost money, you have to find someone who wants to foot the bill.

[Grits]

Silver florin, welcome to P.A. Enjoy!

[thespaah]

http://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/shared_content.cfm?From_the_Publisher&id=255
Welcome.....Glad you found us!

[Stillriledup]

Welcome.....Glad you found us!

Yes, welcome SF. :ThmbUp:

[Silver florin]

Thanks everybody :)

[Robert Goren]

Certain changes that are being proposed in the article you posted cost money as well as can cost tracks betting handle (tighter drug rules = shorter fields = smaller betting handles)

Its all well and good and a noble thing to want to propose stuff that makes the game safer, cleaner as well as possibly helping reputation, but the money has to come from somewhere....and people who are proposing the ideas arent going to dip into their own pockets to pay for it, ideas are good, but if they cost money, you have to find someone who wants to foot the bill.Have you looked at the yearling sale prices lately? If they have the money to pay those prices, they have money to make the game safer and better.

[Delawaretrainer]

Guys, I just want to bring some reality to the situation. The drug rules are already strict and have become a lot more strict recently. People bring up the LASIX debate when saying the u.s. Drugs are horses. The use of LASIX is debate able even between respected vets. PETA made the LASIX injection seem like doping which is dumb.

Therapeutic meds are not permissible in any amount that would be performance enhancing on race day. That is why there are withdrawal times. The exception is joint injections which can be helpful for months. Used properly, they are an important tool in keeping an athlete happy and sound. Used improperly and overused is problematic especially when horses go from barn to barn. Withdrawal periods have been pushed back in an attempt to avoid difficulties in a prerace exam. Nothing in the tapes indicates whether the horses getting joint injections were being done properly or improperly.

Joint injections can also be diagnostic. Horses can be sound with good X-rays and the horses joint fluid can be ugly indicating the joint is not keeping up with stress. A trainer may decide to back off on a horse when he sees murky, thin or bloody fluid. The fluid coming out of a horses hock in the video was surprising because it was a hock. Hocks don't have the same joint space as like an ankle. I've had horses build up pressure in their joints where fluid flies out that were perfectly sound, it is something to discuss with your vet but does not mean they are being cruel.

There are some guys that are sick, they want to give the horses everything they can even if they are just wasting money.

Tougher drug rules are not the answer, but they have to fill the cracks. they are missing things. The thyroid medicine thing is new and it won't test. Although there are rules pertaining to substances that effect the horses metabolism how do they catch this? It is also totally possible that other things can be used with anabolic effects during training as long as they are withdrawn properly. They will not stop this without testing between races. This explains high percentages and they will not change this testing just post race.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

The one thing I disagree with is D. Horse owners need the option of year round racing these days to try to keep up with the bills. Horses need layoffs, but it is on an individual basis usually (many get hot and then get cold, maybe due to a slight injury,etc.).
Also, the idea of quality isn't that important to those who gamble the most. High field size is a bigger factor, I believe studies back me up here. Also, many horses lose lengths the older they get and if they are going to continue racing, cheaper races are needed. By lowering the amount of cheaper races, it becomes even less attractive to be an owner because if their horse can't compete at higher levels, where do they go?
Owners are a good source for newbies, you want more owners, not less. And many owners are not only motivated by potentially making money, they like the action, and they like getting in a win picture, even if they lose money over time.
I don't know for sure, but my guess is that higher end horses have much higher vet bills per year than cheaper horses who run more often. So if there is a big movement towards hay, water and oats, it will most likely be easier for the cheaper horses to be able to adapt than those who run in higher class races.
Also, another reason why year round racing is needed, is because there is a lot more gambling competition in North America and I don't think it is wise to tell a horseplayer to take a forced break, because there is a chance they won't come back. They might find something else while on hiatus.

[Tom]

Pay or it by taking 2-3% out the owner's share of all purses.

[cordep17]

It seems most have acknowledged on this board that horse racing is a sinking ship.

It's time to flip the game on its head to see what happens.

Sure, there will be short term consequences, but when you know what lies ahead long term if the racing world keeps doing the same things over and over again, then what is there to lose?

For individuals: I guess everything if you operate in the gray and don't think you can operate on a level playing field where actually being a real trainer matters

For the game: There is a chance to reinvigorate it. I've got a pretty clear picture in my head as to what could happen if they started showing the public the backstretch (after they clean it up) and catering to the player. Short term loss for long term, stable gains.

[Stillriledup]

It seems most have acknowledged on this board that horse racing is a sinking ship.

It's time to flip the game on its head to see what happens.

Sure, there will be short term consequences, but when you know what lies ahead long term if the racing world keeps doing the same things over and over again, then what is there to lose?

For individuals: I guess everything if you operate in the gray and don't think you can operate on a level playing field where actually being a real trainer matters

For the game: There is a chance to reinvigorate it. I've got a pretty clear picture in my head as to what could happen if they started showing the public the backstretch (after they clean it up) and catering to the player. Short term loss for long term, stable gains.

The "sinking ship" theory.

Do you know why some think racing is a sinking ship? Because they're looking at betting handles from "yesteryear" when things were completely different. When you are the "only game in town" than yeah, you are going to do fairly well. Some people are comparing handles of "only game in town" to a game where there is tremendous competition for the dollar, we have the internet, there was no internet a few decades ago, people have WAY more ways to entertain themselves, and that's why the betting handles are lower than they used to be.

Just because the pre-internet era betting came FIRST, its wrong to assume that first means norm. First does not mean "norm". NOW is the norm and the previous era was an outlier....we got used to the pre-internet handles and because the post-internet handles are lower, we figure that something must be wrong but there's really nothing wrong, its just a "Correction" in the market, those monster handles of decades ago were a fluke and what we see now is the "norm".

Can racing make some more money and get the handles up a bit? Sure, there must be a few things they can do to get more people betting, but the genie is out of the bottle, we're not going back to the way it "used to be" the industry needs to understand where they are and know that they're not going back, they need to move forward and try new things to get customers to bet more money.....where there's a will, there's a way....but, racing industry higher ups don't seem to have much of a "will" to get better and attract more customers, they just open up the doors, turn on the lights and underachieve badly, like they've been doing for decades.

[cordep17]

The bottom line for me is:

How can you expect a kid (where it seems the majority of casual and serious players come from) to fall in love with a game that has 24 horses dying a week.

The spotlight on deplorable treatment of the animals that are the focus of the "sport of kings" is only going to get brighter.

Fix it now or lose the game forever.

[Stillriledup]

The bottom line for me is:

How can you expect a kid (where it seems the majority of casual and serious players come from) to fall in love with a game that has 24 horses dying a week.

The spotlight on deplorable treatment of the animals that are the focus of the "sport of kings" is only going to get brighter.

Fix it now or lose the game forever.

People fall in love with WINNING. I know when i started following the game, i just thought about how i was going to cash my next ticket and pick the winner of the next race, the rest of that stuff never even entered my mind. If you have a person who is winning money or at least THINKS he can win money, he's not going to turn his back on this game no matter how 'seedy' the underbelly is. People use the seedy underbelly excuse if they're losing, they blame this and they blame that and all of a sudden, losing horseplayers have bleeding hearts for the "poor animals" but the bottom line is that they "closed out their accounts" because they arent winners. Winners don't close out accounts because they're sad about underbelly stuff.

[Robert Goren]

A word of warning to some posters. When you start defending the use of Lasix, I and a lot of other people stop reading. We have heard of the arguments for Lasix before and we are not buying into them anymore. That debate is over.

[thaskalos]

People fall in love with WINNING. I know when i started following the game, i just thought about how i was going to cash my next ticket and pick the winner of the next race, the rest of that stuff never even entered my mind. If you have a person who is winning money or at least THINKS he can win money, he's not going to turn his back on this game no matter how 'seedy' the underbelly is. People use the seedy underbelly excuse if they're losing, they blame this and they blame that and all of a sudden, losing horseplayers have bleeding hearts for the "poor animals" but the bottom line is that they "closed out their accounts" because they arent winners. Winners don't close out accounts because they're sad about underbelly stuff.
You are being short-sighted here in my opinion, SRU. The game can't survive unless the LOSERS keep playing too...so, there is a big problem if the "losers" start closing their accounts because of the game's "seedy underbelly".

Think of it this way:

If you are a winner, then you will continue playing no matter what...but hardly anybody WINS in this game. About 98-99% of the players are NON-WINNERS...and it is only logical that this group will soon start blaming the game's seedy underbelly for their LOSSES. I know I would. A horseplayer is playing this game for many years with the hope that he will finally "figure it all out", and join the elusive ranks of the winners. He sees this "seedy underbelly" even in the barns of the most successful trainers...so he naturally assumes that this will eventually become widespread...even if it hasn't become widespread already. I mean...let's be honest here. I know that there are people who claim that most of the trainers are "honest", and that the "bad apples" are relatively few...but how do we KNOW that? It could easily be that most of the trainers are DISHONEST...and the GOOD APPLES are the ones that are relatively few. Let's face it: For how long are the "honest" trainers supposed to remain honest...when they see that the DISHONEST ones are winning at such an elevated rate?

So, the non-winning 98-99% think of all this...and they become ENRAGED. They used to blame THEMSELVES for their losses...but now they start blaming the game's "seedy underbelly". Every horseplayer loves a good excuse...even if it doesn't necessarily apply.

NOW do you see the problem?

There are too many LOSERS in this game...and the only way to keep the losers playing is to avoid pissing them off. And you piss them off when you play them for suckers.

You play the WINNER for a sucker...and he goes to the corner and counts his profits.

But the loser? What's the loser supposed to do? Keep pissing away his money?

[Delawaretrainer]

A word of warning to some posters. When you start defending the use of Lasix, I and a lot of other people stop reading. We have heard of the arguments for Lasix before and we are not buying into them anymore. That debate is over.

Well you and a lot of other people are in the minority, the reasons for its use have not changed. Ever wonder why the people closest to the horses overwhelmingly agree to keep it? It's not to cheat or have an advantage cause all the horses run on it, so where is the edge?

In most cases trainers wouldn't care as long as it's an even playing field. But the horses that need it will have NO JOB. People whining should be calling for more research so we can have alternatives if LASIX is such a problem. Until then, let us help our horses. People need to put themselves in our shoes. We have a responsibility to protect our horses. In Europe they train on it to protect from damage. Why do they do this? Do you think people aren't doing other things where they can't use LASIX? Ever heard of "drawing" a horse?

[Robert Goren]

Well you and a lot of other people are in the minority, the reasons for its use have not changed. Ever wonder why the people closest to the horses overwhelmingly agree to keep it? It's not to cheat or have an advantage cause all the horses run on it, so where is the edge?

In most cases trainers wouldn't care as long as it's an even playing field. But the horses that need it will have NO JOB. People whining should be calling for more research so we can have alternatives if LASIX is such a problem. Until then, let us help our horses. People need to put themselves in our shoes. We have a responsibility to protect our horses. In Europe they train on it to protect from damage. Why do they do this? Do you think people aren't doing other things where they can't use LASIX? Ever heard of "drawing" a horse? I am not so sure that we are among the bettors. You run on it because if you don't, you are at a disadvantage. I been betting long enough to remember when not all horses ran on it, even when none ran on it. I also remember that horses who started it improved. Betting European horses getting it here is a very profitable angle for me in the Breeders Cup. I also remember when horse ran a lot more often. I can see a very strong correlation between the use of Lasix and increase in the average number of days between races. I am not convinced that is a coincidence.
I think most bettors are sick of faster racehorses through chemistry. We are not convinced that Lasix is part of that. Until the game is cleaned up, we are sick of the excuses. Racing doesn't need better drugs, it needs less drugs.

[Tom]

I think our Detective is on the money here.:ThmbUp::ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

[Delawaretrainer]

Being pro LASIx does not mean anyone is for cheating or excessive drug use. For those of us in the trenches it is a non issue . We all know who is up to stuff and it has nothing to do with LASIx. Massive form reversals post claim etc are the issues. These guys are not doing anything that testing will pick up. Steroids can be used if withdrawn properly and now we know some idiots are messing with thyroid meds. So.... If you keep harping on LASIx it is very frustrating as it is such a non issue. To us, the downside from a humane and financial perspective far outweigh the negatives. But somebody has to educate the betting public. It is our fault off not doing this. If you took out a trainers license I guarantee the first horse you had that bled you would be asking "what can I do to keep this from happening again and ruining my horse?" . The only legal answer is LASIx. Ok, you can think your better and call the herb company, good luck.

As far as timing between races it has nothing to do with that. Most horses run every couple of weeks. How much more do you want them to run? There are even idiots that run them every week on LASIx. Very rarely you will get a filly that needs more time because of LASIx but those are the ones you give the minimum if you can. If you are talking stakes horses, they run less often but LASIx has nothing to do with it. In the age of constant data analysis these guys have to pick their spots to keep their win percentage up. They are expected to be over 20% now when low teens used to be the norm. If cheap horses are running less often they probably need the time or the trainer is doing something else that requires a 3-4 week withdrawal that is not LASIx!

So please please stop it. Don't kill the messenger but it's not that big a deal.

[Stillriledup]

You are being short-sighted here in my opinion, SRU. The game can't survive unless the LOSERS keep playing too...so, there is a big problem if the "losers" start closing their accounts because of the game's "seedy underbelly".

Think of it this way:

If you are a winner, then you will continue playing no matter what...but hardly anybody WINS in this game. About 98-99% of the players are NON-WINNERS...and it is only logical that this group will soon start blaming the game's seedy underbelly for their LOSSES. I know I would. A horseplayer is playing this game for many years with the hope that he will finally "figure it all out", and join the elusive ranks of the winners. He sees this "seedy underbelly" even in the barns of the most successful trainers...so he naturally assumes that this will eventually become widespread...even if it hasn't become widespread already. I mean...let's be honest here. I know that there are people who claim that most of the trainers are "honest", and that the "bad apples" are relatively few...but how do we KNOW that? It could easily be that most of the trainers are DISHONEST...and the GOOD APPLES are the ones that are relatively few. Let's face it: For how long are the "honest" trainers supposed to remain honest...when they see that the DISHONEST ones are winning at such an elevated rate?

So, the non-winning 98-99% think of all this...and they become ENRAGED. They used to blame THEMSELVES for their losses...but now they start blaming the game's "seedy underbelly". Every horseplayer loves a good excuse...even if it doesn't necessarily apply.

NOW do you see the problem?

There are too many LOSERS in this game...and the only way to keep the losers playing is to avoid pissing them off. And you piss them off when you play them for suckers.

You play the WINNER for a sucker...and he goes to the corner and counts his profits.

But the loser? What's the loser supposed to do? Keep pissing away his money?

I agree with you but that's not what i'm saying. I'm saying that for all the people who close their accounts and use the reasoning that its because of the abuse of the beautiful animals, the real reason, imo, is that they're losing and they're using the animal abuse as an excuse.

[Dave Schwartz]

The whole "sinking ship" idea is not too far fetched. However, it appears to me that things have stabilized a little in the last couple of years.

The problems that horse racing faces today are primarily monetary, but the cause of those problems go to the very core.

The bottom line is that the customer is viewed as a ever-renewable resource and this is just not true.

Consider a hunting lodge that derives 100% of its revenue from (logically) hunters. Technically, the animals that are hunted in the nearby wilderness are its true revenue source in the sense of "no deer = no hunters = no income."

If it were not for state and federal game regulations, it is likely that some of the hunting lodge owners would push for year round hunting to boost revenue. Of course, without proper management, eventually the herds would diminish and then we'd get to "no deer = no hunters = no income."

Well, in the racing world the customer is the deer.

The problem is that nobody is in charge or even seems to care about the survival of the herd.


If you ask any of the movers and shakers in racing, they will tell you that the "stakeholders" in the game are tracks and horsemen. And they are right. Customers are not stakeholders any more than the deer are stakeholders in the hunting lodge.

That does not mean that "customer conservation" is not necessary.

Until the industry gets this part, it is doomed to a mediocre future (at best).

[Stillriledup]

Great analogy Dave, good stuff. :ThmbUp: