NYRA racing in trouble?

[jeebus1083]

All Belmont meet, NYRA bettors have been served Northern California-sized fields of 5, 6, or even 7 horses at a time. This is a phenomenon that I have never witnessed in my years of playing NY racing. Sure there were days where you'd have a short card of bad horses, but that was usually followed up by a better day at the entry box and better fields. This trend does not seem to be happening this year. There seem to be many variables that might be responsible for this drastic shift in racing quality at Belmont. First, you have that Mare Reproductive Loss Syndrome (whatever it's called) that killed many horses a few years back, many of which would be racing as 3YOs this year. You had the outbreak of strangles and other things at racetracks on the East Coast. Finally, there is this new addition to NY racing, which I feel is the likely cause of these short fields: the security detention barn area. Shippers have not come in with much regularity at all, and it seems that many barns are not running as many horses than in other meet's past. Result? Short fields that depending on the race, are left void of much, or if any value. NYRA in response raises claiming purses AND through state law changes get the Lasix laws relaxed. Nonetheless, this weekend's racing along with the Wednesday card are still awfully short on horses. I am becoming convinced that many outside horsemen, as well as some horsemen stabled in NY are boycotting the entry box in response to this detention barn. From what I understand through some people, the stalls at both Belmont and Aqueduct are as full as ever. If that's the case, WHY ARE THESE HORSES NOT RUNNING?

Thoughts? Opinions? Comments?

[Figman]

The "some people" you reference don't know what they are talking about.
There are hundreds of empty stalls at NYRA. The real test will be Saratoga where annually there are well over 3,000 horses trying to get into about 1,600 stalls.

[Bubbles]

I think the people that say NY racing is dying are the same people saying that all racetracks without slots will be out of business sooner or later. I watch the recap shows of Belmont racing, and I haven't seen too much of a difference as opposed to past years.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Thanks Bubbles; I don't feel so old now! LOL!
Play place bets in short fiels.

[Tom]

Makes getting the field down to 5 contenders a snap! LOL!

[PaceAdvantage]

AND through state law changes get the Lasix laws relaxed.

Relaxed? Go back and read the change. They are LOWERING the allowable amount....that doesn't sound like RELAXING to me....

[Macdiarmadillo]

You're being generous about N. Cal. It's more like fields of 4,5,6 there and that's BEFORE scratches. This last GGF meet has been relatively respectable, but a lot of those horses will once again leave the state. I'm old enough to remember multiple fields of 12 a day with AEs you'd be wanting to get into a race, either on the current day or on following days. Dirt and turf, too.

[jeebus1083]

Relaxed? Go back and read the change. They are LOWERING the allowable amount....that doesn't sound like RELAXING to me....

http://www.drf.com/news/article/65970.html

I did. Along with the lowering of the allowable amount, in order to receive Lasix in NY now, you DON'T need an endoscopic exam to determine if you are a bleeder. So, PA, the rule WAS relaxed. Any horse who races in NY may now receive Lasix on demand, regardless of whether they really need it or not. The integrity of administering the drug is gone now. NY was the final frontier when it came down to allowing Lasix at its racetracks before finally giving in. Now, the administration of Lasix is as unlimited as simulcasting. I almost have to believe that NYRA twisted the state's arm to get the Lasix exam law changed. I truly believe that many trainers (particularly from smaller tracks w/smaller purses) are boycotting NYRA because of this barn and are choosing to stay at home to race for smaller, even if they have raced in NY with success before. I give credit for raising purses a bit, but this change in drug administration from you need an exam to you can shoot up Lasix on any horse seems to be NYRA's arm twisting at Albany. A way to bend over backwards to trainers in an attempt to encourage them to race in NY again and to balance out the entry box a little bit more.

[PaceAdvantage]

Really? I can't access your DRF article, but the article I read cited no change to any endoscopic requirement.

Here is the article I relied on:

http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/todaysnews/newsview.asp?recno=55430&subsec=1

It doesn't mention anything at all regarding any change to "bleeder verification"

I apologize for my source being incomplete.....

[The Judge]

Baymeadows and Golden Gate are my home tracks and I use to love it you got good prices shippers with form Washington and Arizona that could run and paid well. Lowest claiming price was $6,250 and you got to see some good horses that were either stabled here are were shipped in from Southrn California. Now I play out of state tracks and don't even watch the live races at the track. I saw Jonh Henry , Brown Bess, Chrismatic, A.P Indy, Cigar, and many many more. Those days are gone. If you (at least Me) bet on a 20-1 shot and he pulls up to the leaders who are 8/5 and 9/5 and losses in a photo you still get sort of a victorious feeling anyway .I don't get that same feeling when this same horse goes of at 7-2 because there are only 5 horses running and is in the photo. At 20-1 you know your handicapping is right on at 7-2 well how can you be sure.

[jeebus1083]

That's OK. NYRA racing has just been discouraging to bet on this spring. I don't mind 65-70 entries in the box one day a week or once every few weeks, but when that's the case every day and you have 9 races to fill, it puts the pick players in a bind. If chalk chalk and chalk come in every race, a $1 investment for $18 (3x3x2) for a short payout is poorhouse potential, yet trying to beat the favorite in every short field can be a poorhouse proposition as well. Pick players live for large fields... more chance that a longshot will come in on the ticket to make the payout sweeter. That's just not happening at NYRA nowadays (save for maybe a few days and Belmont weekend).

[toetoe]

Judge,

I'm not kidding when I say the fairs are much more enticing than GGF right now. The class of horse (straight 3200 cl. vs. nw2____, fill it in) is equal or better, the mixed breeds can be strung into pick-threes, why, we even had a bridgejumper special at Stockton the other day. A Hollendorfer horse ran last in an 8-horse field, and the show prices were something like $30, $30 and $70. Probably the least amount bet on a fave that still triggered a bridge-jump. Anyway, in two weeks the fair moves on, and the switch itself offers some plays.

[Dr. Carter]

http://www.drf.com/news/article/65970.html

I did. Along with the lowering of the allowable amount, in order to receive Lasix in NY now, you DON'T need an endoscopic exam to determine if you are a bleeder. So, PA, the rule WAS relaxed. Any horse who races in NY may now receive Lasix on demand, regardless of whether they really need it or not. The integrity of administering the drug is gone now. NY was the final frontier when it came down to allowing Lasix at its racetracks before finally giving in. Now, the administration of Lasix is as unlimited as simulcasting. I almost have to believe that NYRA twisted the state's arm to get the Lasix exam law changed. I truly believe that many trainers (particularly from smaller tracks w/smaller purses) are boycotting NYRA because of this barn and are choosing to stay at home to race for smaller, even if they have raced in NY with success before. I give credit for raising purses a bit, but this change in drug administration from you need an exam to you can shoot up Lasix on any horse seems to be NYRA's arm twisting at Albany. A way to bend over backwards to trainers in an attempt to encourage them to race in NY again and to balance out the entry box a little bit more.


The truth is that vets were just putting the paperwork through without actually scoping the horses. It is an administrative move that eliminates a lot of paperwork and gets around the 14 day rule that a horse could not run for 14 days following "bleeding". The NTRA's vaunted medication consortium actually suggested this move in its findings. This will have no effect on racing or form, it is really meaningless unless you are a trainer or vet.

The problem with NYRA's racing is one that was created by NYRA unwittingly. There used to be limits on the amount of stalls that one could have at NYRA. But when NYRA started to allow some trainers to have unlimited access at Saratoga's Oklahoma track in the offseason, Todd Pletcher was created. He along with Hennig, Zito, Mott, McLaughin, etc. were allowed to expand their stables unfettered. They never had to say no to an owner or turn down a horse. In the process they created a monopoly on most all of the talented horses at NYRA. The smaller trainers seeing that they and the clients that they had left could not compete either left or started to concentrate on NY breds, where they could run for big money and only occasionally be beaten up by the big boys. So what you have is 8% of the trainers controlling 80 % of the good horses. If Pletcher has 60 2yo maidens on NYRA grounds at what rate will we see them? One or two at a time, and rarely will he run 2 good ones against each other. If you split his maidens between 5 or 6 non supertrainers, you would see an increase in quality right away because the good ones would be running against each other. Multiply that out with a few more huge trainers and your field size in those races will increase and the quality wil be there too.
The second problem is one that NYRA has inadvertently helped too. That is that the competition has gotten tougher. Monmouth Park and Delaware both are running for roughly the same purses that NYRA does. Why run against Pletchers first string when you can race against the 2nd or 3rd string for the same money?
So how did NRYA help that cause? Well they finally figured out that problem #1 existed. So they put in some rules concerning stall limits this year. But Pletcher is so big that he just took the 40 or so horses that the stall limits displaced and sent them to Delaware where they were welcomed with open arms. Hennig, Dutrow, Clement, and Levine all have sizable strings at Monmouth and guys like Weaver and Donk have divisions at Delaware too.

[Figman]

Dr.Carter & Jeebus - you're both wrong!

The only rule that has been changed is the amount of furosemide on raceday can now be 3-10 ccs formerly 5-10 ccs. This is an emergency rule good for 90 days and able to be renewed.

There is a proposal to qualfiy for the NY furosemide program other than using an endoscope but it is not a rule change at this time. A vet must sign off as a trainer cannot do it alone in all cases.

There is no proposal nor rule change for the waiting period after being diagnosed as a bleeder. First time - 10 days wait; 2nd time - 30 days wait; third time - 90 days wait; after that - a one year wait.

Here is my source.
http://tinyurl.com/84dyq

[jeebus1083]

In one of the the most significant changes, an endoscopic examination will no longer be necessary in order to determine whether a horse can receive the diuretic Lasix, used to treat bleeding in the lungs.

That is what DRF said. All a trainer has to say is, "I want Lasix" on my horse and the vet will do so.

[westny]

The problem with NYRA's racing is one that was created by NYRA unwittingly. There used to be limits on the amount of stalls that one could have at NYRA. .. So what you have is 8% of the trainers controlling 80 % of the good horses. If Pletcher has 60 2yo maidens on NYRA grounds at what rate will we see them?
"....The second problem is one that NYRA has inadvertently helped too. That is that the competition has gotten tougher. Monmouth Park and Delaware both are running for roughly the same purses that NYRA does. Why run against Pletchers first string when you can race against the 2nd or 3rd string for the same money?
.

That is the best explanation I've read for the "short fields" at NYRA.
And you are 100% correct...even A. Jerkens had a horse entered at Delaware in a "little" 55k race before the cancellation of racing the last 2 days.

[PaceAdvantage]

That is what DRF said. All a trainer has to say is, "I want Lasix" on my horse and the vet will do so.

Perhaps the DRF got its facts wrong....wouldn't be the first time.....

For quite some time "Correction" used to be a regular column in the DRF....

[RonTiller]

Here's some interesting stats regarding lasix use, since we're on the subject:

% of starts in 2005 in North America where horse was on lasix: 92%

By Track (the ones over 95% usage)
Track %
GG 0.99
BM 0.99
LNN 0.98
RUI 0.98
EMD 0.97
HOL 0.97
CD 0.97
LRL 0.97
FON 0.97
SUF 0.97
SA 0.97
ATL 0.97
OP 0.97
TP 0.96
PHA 0.96
PIM 0.96
AP 0.96
KEE 0.96
FG 0.96
CT 0.96
LS 0.96
HAW 0.96
STK 0.96

For Belmont, By year (notice the steady rise):
Track Year %
BEL 2002 0.86
BEL 2003 0.88
BEL 2004 0.91
BEL 2005 0.93

Same steady rise to 93% (a little over the national average) at Aqueduct:
Track Year %
AQU 2002 0.89
AQU 2003 0.90
AQU 2004 0.93
AQU 2005 0.93

Ditto Saratoga:
Track Year %
SAR 2002 0.86
SAR 2003 0.88
SAR 2004 0.91
SAR 2005 (I'll stick my neck out and predict, uh, 93%)

Finger Lakes has been ahead of the curve for awhile:
Track Year %
FL 2002 0.92
FL 2003 0.93
FL 2004 0.93
FL 2005 0.93

This same upward trend of Lasix use is going strong at non NYRA tracks too:

Track Year %
CRC 2002 0.87
CRC 2003 0.88
CRC 2004 0.91
CRC 2005 0.91

KEE 2002 0.94
KEE 2003 0.95
KEE 2004 0.96
KEE 2005 0.96

LS 2002 0.90
LS 2003 0.91
LS 2004 0.93
LS 2005 0.96

OP 2002 0.94
OP 2003 0.93
OP 2004 0.96
OP 2005 0.97

Surprisingly, although most trainers at Belmont I looked at have 100% Lasix use for their horses at Belmont, quite a few with a fair number of starters are below 90%, a few well below.

Ron Tiller
HDW

[Dancer's Image]

In one of the the most significant changes, an endoscopic examination will no longer be necessary in order to determine whether a horse can receive the diuretic Lasix, used to treat bleeding in the lungs.

That is what DRF said. All a trainer has to say is, "I want Lasix" on my horse and the vet will do so.

And that's the way it should be! I'm shocked to learn that the law was different before. Either Lasix should be legal and allowed for all horses in the race, or it should not be legal and no horse should be able to use it! This business of making endoscopic exams mandatory before prescribing Lasix/Salix just opens up another can of worms, ie. trainers and vets falsifying the paperwork or exagerrating the endoscopic findings.
Why should anyone be against the use of Lasix/Salix on horses? It doesn't make them run faster, it only helps them if they are prone to bleeding. And why a mandatory time off after bleeding? Trainers should have the responsibility of running their horses when and if they're ready. Period! Likewise trainers should have the responsibility of using Lasix/Salix or not using it. I applaud NYRA for finally getting it right!

[Figman]

And that's the way it should be! I'm shocked to learn that the law was different before. Either Lasix should be legal and allowed for all horses in the race, or it should not be legal and no horse should be able to use it! This business of making endoscopic exams mandatory before prescribing Lasix/Salix just opens up another can of worms, ie. trainers and vets falsifying the paperwork or exagerrating the endoscopic findings.
Why should anyone be against the use of Lasix/Salix on horses? It doesn't make them run faster, it only helps them if they are prone to bleeding. And why a mandatory time off after bleeding? Trainers should have the responsibility of running their horses when and if they're ready. Period! Likewise trainers should have the responsibility of using Lasix/Salix or not using it. I applaud NYRA for finally getting it right!

Lasix (human) or salix (animal) is furosemide. Furosemide is a prescription drug. As such, it must be prescribed by a doctor which mean a veterinarian NOT a trainer.

You say "it doesn't make them run faster." Maybe you'll change your mind when you the second link I've attached that is a scientific study from a major university.

You say "it only helps them if they are prone to bleeding." There is no scientific evidence that furosemide accomplishes "stop bleeding."

http://tinyurl.com/8nvuo

http://tinyurl.com/as239

[Dancer's Image]

Lasix (human) or salix (animal) is furosemide. Furosemide is a prescription drug. As such, it must be prescribed by a doctor which mean a veterinarian NOT a trainer.

You say "it doesn't make them run faster." Maybe you'll change your mind when you the second link I've attached that is a scientific study from a major university.

You say "it only helps them if they are prone to bleeding." There is no scientific evidence that furosemide accomplishes "stop bleeding."

http://tinyurl.com/8nvuo

http://tinyurl.com/as239

Duh, of course I knew that. That doesn't make the law right; I stand by my statement that it should be up to the trainer to decide whether to use Salix or not!

Your scientific study proves nothing! Salix does NOT make a horse run faster!

[Figman]

Prove it!

[Dancer's Image]

Okay, from the first article you linked...

"The role of Lasix.

The medication Furosemide, sold under the trade name, "Lasix", is a powerful diuretic that causes fluids locked up in the horse's body tissues to be released and expelled in the urine. This has the effect of lowering the horse's blood pressure, particularly in the aorta and pulmonary artery. The lower blood pressure in the capillaries mitigates the problem of EIPH; thus, the horse's performance returns to a normal level. Lasix is treatment of choice for EIPH, though studies of its effectiveness vary."

[Dr. Carter]

Lasix (human) or salix (animal) is furosemide. Furosemide is a prescription drug. As such, it must be prescribed by a doctor which mean a veterinarian NOT a trainer.

You say "it doesn't make them run faster." Maybe you'll change your mind when you the second link I've attached that is a scientific study from a major university.

You say "it only helps them if they are prone to bleeding." There is no scientific evidence that furosemide accomplishes "stop bleeding."

http://tinyurl.com/8nvuo

http://tinyurl.com/as239


I was wondering how they came up with some of their conclusions in the one article that you linked to. There was a statemant about horses performing faster times after being on Lasix. But do these researchers take into consideration relative speed of the track each day, track condition, surface, distance, etc.? Have they any clue to what they are looking at? I seriously doubt it. I mean wouldn't the logical assumption that a horse that bleeds should run slower than a horse that doesn't bleed? If that is so then why are we suprised when said horse improves when put on Lasix? Obviously Lasix helps bleeding. All the other crap about losing 20 lbs. before a race is stupid. Wouldn't you just look for skinny horses and bet them ? And if 97% of horses are using it where is the advantage?

[Dr. Carter]

Another thing concerning performance enhancers. I find that Edgar Prado should be illegal because my horses seem to run much better with him riding.

[jeebus1083]

LOL! That's hilarious!

[The Judge]

I'll keep my eye on the fairs I have'nt been playing as much as I use to. I remeber (some years back) it seeemed as if all the horses were winning from the inside post, so they went to Sant Rosa and I just started to box the "outside" horses in Pic 3's I got some real good prices and made some money. No handicapping at all. I don't know if they had trifecta's then and think the pic 3 was only races 6,7 and 8.

[toetoe]

Thank you. I fear we may have a couple of threads knotted at this point. A bifurcated double-half-hitch with bowline tendencies. Please no replies to the effect of "'fraid not."

[jeebus1083]

I think Bossert's dig about "slow" horses refers to the large quantity of NY bred races heaped upon us. Here's a quote:

"TRIPPED UP: The racing lately at Belmont in terms of quality and quantity has been bad with small fields of slow horses. It is time for the New York Racing Association to consider cutting back to eight races a day during the week with nine on the weekends until Saratoga begins and more horses become available."

[GeTydOn]

Someone must've heard the complaints. Fields are looking much bigger over the next couple of days.

[jeebus1083]

There are some increases, but trainers are scratching like wildfire... there were I believe 10 scratches after the AEs and MTOs were eliminated, and this was on a Fast/Firm day. I find it hard to believe that they were all not feeling well. Me thinks that the Racing Secretary is pleading for them just to enter, and then scratch out so that there is an appearance of a fuller field before the card actually starts. Pathetic!

[GeTydOn]

If what you say is true, that Racing Secretary must be a magician than to have pulled Saturday's card out of his hat or he's a damn good salesman.

[jeebus1083]

There have been times this meet where the entry box would have about 90 horses or so counting AEs and MTOs. Then race day comes and with the fast/firm surface, the AEs and MTOs scratch out. Leaves about 80 horses. Then 10-12 other horses scratch out. Card busted. WHAT IS GOING ON HERE? Example, happened today. The card looked good until scratches decimated it. Not that many horses get sick at once. If so, test the friggin barns for something.

[GeTydOn]

Before scratches were announced for Thursday's card there was gonna be 9 that had to come out. AEs + MTOs + one of the Rice runners in the 9th Race.

After that, there were 8 others. 2 of those scratches came from entries: the Ferraro entry in the 2nd and the Rodriguez entry in the 3rd.

That is what bugs me. I hate it when trainers put two runners in a race with different riders named and one scratches out anyway.

[Nickle]

I wish a private group bought out NYRA

They talked about it for a while

[Lasix1]

Lasix (human) or salix (animal) is furosemide. Furosemide is a prescription drug. As such, it must be prescribed by a doctor which mean a veterinarian NOT a trainer.
http://tinyurl.com/8nvuo

http://tinyurl.com/as239
Sure would be interesting to know how many Vets are on the take to barns who want a bleeder certification.

Lee Russo used to say that there was a Northern California trainer who put every single horse he claimed on Lasix the next time he ran. He either only claimed bleeders or he slipped the vet a few bucks to certify his claims as in need of Lasix.

I doubt that NYRA has figured out a way around the problem of corrupt vets.

[twindouble]

Good thread; Don't think I can add much to what's said on Belmont or Lasix. To me the big draw for horses is the purce structure along with the conditions that are written for stake or handicap races. It seems to me there's a lot more State Bred races today than there was in the past. Maybe that a factor as well, keep the money in the same loop. How the number of horses available play out here on the east coast is unknown to me or how the new rules inacted has effected where trainers take their horses. I do know I'm just as disappointed as others with the short fields.

As far as Lasix goes there's not many horses today running without it as posted. Not much of a factor overall in my handicapping.

[trickey]

i posted some time ago towards the end of the aqu meet wondering where all the horses in ny went....

all of a sudden we went from full aqu inner track fields to 5 and 6 horse aqu spring and bel summer meet fields...

the answer to my post was wait until keenland ends....the horses will return...

i am still waiting........

then someone posted that ny was the best racing in the country....

i missed something then and i miss it now....and i still have the same question
which no one seems to know the answer to.......

WHERE ARE ALL THE HORSES IN NEW YORK..........

[Figman]

Frank Stronach has them in a corral?????? :blush: :blush:

[PaceAdvantage]

Well, I guess the actions by NYRA CEO Charlie Hayward today are meant to rectify this situation somewhat, but I can't help but wonder how the assistant racing secretary (now racing secretary) is going to do a better job filling races than the man he replaces, Mike Lakow.

I won't use Saratoga as a judge, because it's ridiculously easy to fill cards at the Spa. It will be interesting to see if things really do get better once the Belmont fall meet kicks into gear....

[Nickle]

NY volume/handles just keep getting lower

Something has to change

Maybe slots??

Works everywhere else

[PaceAdvantage]

NY volume/handles just keep getting lower

That's what happens when you shut out the high volume off-shore rebate shops....damned if you do, and damned if you don't.....

[Observer]

Like Saratoga, Belmont's Fall Meet might be an unfair indicator, too .. since the Breeders' Cup will be run there this year.

As for slots in NY .. they have been held up for years .. they should have been in already .. but with all the legal struggles in NY .. have been delayed, delayed, delayed. Apparently, last I read .. I think they're supposed to be up and running sometime in 2006.

[DerbyTrail]

Well, I guess the actions by NYRA CEO Charlie Hayward today are meant to rectify this situation somewhat, but I can't help but wonder how the assistant racing secretary (now racing secretary) is going to do a better job filling races than the man he replaces, Mike Lakow.

I won't use Saratoga as a judge, because it's ridiculously easy to fill cards at the Spa. It will be interesting to see if things really do get better once the Belmont fall meet kicks into gear....

PA..

This discussion is way off the mark. Today's dismissal has little to do with filling races..

[PaceAdvantage]

PA..

This discussion is way off the mark. Today's dismissal has little to do with filling races..

Exactly, which is why I wrote what I wrote.

BTW, what was the major cause of today's dismissal?

[Suff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by DerbyTrail
PA..

This discussion is way off the mark. Today's dismissal has little to do with filling races..




Posted by PA
Exactly, which is why I wrote what I wrote.

BTW, what was the major cause of today's dismissal?




yes please..

Nobody has to get naked... but a bread crumb or two would be nice.

[Figman]

I notice that there are 114 horses entered Saturday at Saratoga. Must be the detention barn was not the earlier NYRA problem causing short fields as some on this board opined.

[andicap]

Bill Nader says in today's newspapers that ALL tracks are having trouble with field sizes.
Could this be a result of that foal problem a few years ago.

[aaron]

It looks like NYRA has saved all their horses for the weekend.Friday's card could be the "new" worst card ever.1st 5 races 4 maiden races and a 5 horse 2 yr old alw race.
At least Saturday's card looks good.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Has the stats on field size FYI. Look it up!
I see some tracks have turfers for younger horses- maybe to preserve the legs a little longer?