CHRB considering claim voiding

[Imriledup]

Interesting article on Bloodhorse about claim voiding. If a horse breaks down, the new claiming trainer can now refuse the claim, bringing the horse back to his original owner. They said it will prevent owners from drastically dropping problem horses in order to get them claimed.

I think i like this new rule proposal.

[cmoore]

Interesting article on Bloodhorse about claim voiding. If a horse breaks down, the new claiming trainer can now refuse the claim, bringing the horse back to his original owner. They said it will prevent owners from drastically dropping problem horses in order to get them claimed.

I think i like this new rule proposal.

They need to define a drastic drop..Then throw in an additional fine (25% of the claiming price) for a horse breaking down when drastically dropping..So not only do they have to keep the horse..But will get fined for running him.. This horse will not be allowed to run for a certain amount of time..Let the horse heal, like any human who's running a race would..Plus this will keep the jockeys off some of the lame horses. They need to start looking after the horses and jockeys.

But after thinking about it some more..Why are these problem horses given the ok to run in the first place?

[InsideThePylons-MW]

Just more hilarious incompetence from the people in charge of CA racing

How many horses that are being jammed and win easy will not be reurned to be unsaddled as so to give the people that claimed it a very difficult decision on whether to keep the claim or void the claim?

How many horses that are being jammed with the intention of starting just to claimed will now be ridden very very very easy as to not try so they will have no chance of getting hurt?

How many horses that probably should be pulled up and not return to be unsaddled actually will be forced by their jockey to return to be unsaddled as to not void the claim?

It's a joke how stupid these people are.

[Imriledup]

Just more hilarious incompetence from the people in charge of CA racing

How many horses that are being jammed and win easy will not be reurned to be unsaddled as so to give the people that claimed it a very difficult decision on whether to keep the claim or void the claim?

How many horses that are being jammed with the intention of starting just to claimed will now be ridden very very very easy as to not try so they will have no chance of getting hurt?

How many horses that probably should be pulled up and not return to be unsaddled actually will be forced by their jockey to return to be unsaddled as to not void the claim?

It's a joke how stupid these people are.


But, the new owner has the option to void the claim or keep it. So, if the connections who don't want their runner claimed van the horse off, the new owners can still decide if they want to keep the claim.

Now, what i don't know is if the new owners will get to have their own vet check out the horse before they decide yes or no.

You are right, they will force a really lame horse to walk off under his own power just to not void the claim. That is one kink they have to work out.

What they SHOULD do is just do it like they do it in the old days, you have up to 1 hour to submit a claim AFTER THE RACE.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

But, the new owner has the option to void the claim or keep it. So, if the connections who don't want their runner claimed van the horse off, the new owners can still decide if they want to keep the claim.

Now, what i don't know is if the new owners will get to have their own vet check out the horse before they decide yes or no.

You are right, they will force a really lame horse to walk off under his own power just to not void the claim. That is one kink they have to work out.

What they SHOULD do is just do it like they do it in the old days, you have up to 1 hour to submit a claim AFTER THE RACE.
That is an excellent idea. No more stealing. And it would create more owners as well. How about a bidding war if more than one person wants to claim a horse after the race? That could change the game for the good.

[Marlin]

The best thing to do is keep it the way it is. The rest is so flawed it will only create more shenanigans.

[Imriledup]

That is an excellent idea. No more stealing. And it would create more owners as well. How about a bidding war if more than one person wants to claim a horse after the race? That could change the game for the good.

Yes. This will prevent owners from playing poker and dropping perfectly sound 50 claimers in for 20 so they can get the purse, betting money and hopefully 'steal one'. No more 'stealing one'

The bidding wars for the claims after the race would be interesting to see. Also, they can have the bidding wars with sealed bids and you can actually offer MORE than the claiming price.

For example, if a horse wins a 10k claimer and a few people determine he's worth more than 10k, they can put in a claim and state they'll pay 12k for the horse. This way, there's only a shake if more than one connection offers the same exact price.

Im not sure why this WONT work.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Yes. This will prevent owners from playing poker and dropping perfectly sound 50 claimers in for 20 so they can get the purse, betting money and hopefully 'steal one'. No more 'stealing one'

The bidding wars for the claims after the race would be interesting to see. Also, they can have the bidding wars with sealed bids and you can actually offer MORE than the claiming price.

For example, if a horse wins a 10k claimer and a few people determine he's worth more than 10k, they can put in a claim and state they'll pay 12k for the horse. This way, there's only a shake if more than one connection offers the same exact price.

Im not sure why this WONT work.
Of course, anyone willing to claim will have to pay at least the price the horse was in for. The sealed bid is a good idea. If two people compete, the maximum price applies, but if one person bids, they get it for the claiming tag.

The only negative I see is that in conditioned races, if a horse loses by a nose or gets in big trouble and doesn't win, the losing owner gets dirt kicked in his face if they wind up losing the horse this way.

[Imriledup]

Of course, anyone willing to claim will have to pay at least the price the horse was in for. The sealed bid is a good idea. If two people compete, the maximum price applies, but if one person bids, they get it for the claiming tag.

The only negative I see is that in conditioned races, if a horse loses by a nose or gets in big trouble and doesn't win, the losing owner gets dirt kicked in his face if they wind up losing the horse this way.

Good points, at least the claiming price or highest bid whichever is higher.

Another good point about the owner losing a horse that got in big trouble, not sure what you can do with that however.

[Marlin]

Just curious, but why are people against "stealing"? One of the things that attracted me to this game is the challenge of determining intent. Has the horse gone bad? Or are they trying to "steal" this race? I love the puzzle. When you start taking pieces of the puzzle away, it becomes a bit boring IMHO.

Oh BTW, what if a trainer tries something new with a horse? He is at the proper level but now goes on to a lifetime best while winning by ten. So this guy has to wait an hour to see if his horse has been claimed? Ridiculous.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Just curious, but why are people against "stealing"? One of the things that attracted me to this game is the challenge of determining intent. Has the horse gone bad? Or are they trying to "steal" this race? I love the puzzle. When you start taking pieces of the puzzle away, it becomes a bit boring IMHO.

Oh BTW, what if a trainer tries something new with a horse? He is at the proper level but now goes on to a lifetime best while winning by ten. So this guy has to wait an hour to see if his horse has been claimed? Ridiculous.
Lets cut it down to 15 minutes then :) And still, the owner will be rewarded for winning the race, and there is likely to be much higher bids than the price the horse ran for.

[Imriledup]

Just curious, but why are people against "stealing"? One of the things that attracted me to this game is the challenge of determining intent. Has the horse gone bad? Or are they trying to "steal" this race? I love the puzzle. When you start taking pieces of the puzzle away, it becomes a bit boring IMHO.

Oh BTW, what if a trainer tries something new with a horse? He is at the proper level but now goes on to a lifetime best while winning by ten. So this guy has to wait an hour to see if his horse has been claimed? Ridiculous.

What's the difference if he waits an hour or a minute? If you don't want em claimed for a certain price, run them higher.

[Mineshaft]

Interesting article on Bloodhorse about claim voiding. If a horse breaks down, the new claiming trainer can now refuse the claim, bringing the horse back to his original owner. They said it will prevent owners from drastically dropping problem horses in order to get them claimed.

I think i like this new rule proposal.






I hate it its freakin stupid. If you claim on the drop down you better be somewhat leary that this horse has some problems. Claim at your own risk. if you claim a cripple they are rewarding you for claiming a bad horse. Its stupid

[Mineshaft]

The best thing to do is keep it the way it is. The rest is so flawed it will only create more shenanigans.






thank you..

[Mineshaft]

Just curious, but why are people against "stealing"? One of the things that attracted me to this game is the challenge of determining intent. Has the horse gone bad? Or are they trying to "steal" this race? I love the puzzle. When you start taking pieces of the puzzle away, it becomes a bit boring IMHO.

Oh BTW, what if a trainer tries something new with a horse? He is at the proper level but now goes on to a lifetime best while winning by ten. So this guy has to wait an hour to see if his horse has been claimed? Ridiculous.





People that complain about stealing or the people who never drop a horse in fear it might be claimed. So they keep there horse at 20K when the horse should be in for 10K and complain when someone drops in from 40K to 20K and wins the race.



People its part of the game quit crying about trainers and owners stealing a race. They put there horse where it belongs and they know they might lose the horse. Thats the risk they take.

[Imriledup]

I hate it its freakin stupid. If you claim on the drop down you better be somewhat leary that this horse has some problems. Claim at your own risk. if you claim a cripple they are rewarding you for claiming a bad horse. Its stupid

Why not explain in detail why its bad. Change is good.

[Mineshaft]

Why not explain in detail why its bad. Change is good.





Change is good but not in this instance. If your in the claiming game you take the risk every time you drop a claim, thats the way it works. You know the horse might not come back in one piece. If thats not for you then dont claim.


What if i bought a stock at $20 and the next day it went down to $2 do i have the right to get my money back? hell no i dont thats the risk you take when buying a stock.



Do not CLAIM on the drop down if you dont know what your doing. That would solve the problems because if you knew what you were doing then there would be less horses getting claimed on the drop down.

[Imriledup]

Change is good but not in this instance. If your in the claiming game you take the risk every time you drop a claim, thats the way it works. You know the horse might not come back in one piece. If thats not for you then dont claim.


What if i bought a stock at $20 and the next day it went down to $2 do i have the right to get my money back? hell no i dont thats the risk you take when buying a stock.



Do not CLAIM on the drop down if you dont know what your doing. That would solve the problems because if you knew what you were doing then there would be less horses getting claimed on the drop down.

I understand that you are totally fine with the current rules.

The current rules as they are written favor the owners who currently have racing stock and don't favor those looking to get into the game without getting the shaft.

Lets say a new group of owners got together and pooled their money and decided to claim a horse who broke down in the stretch. Under your rules, we lose those owners forever, they don't come back, they are scarred for life.

Under my rules, any new owner gets into the game with a sound and happy horse. That is good for the game.

Why should you have to 'take a risk' every time you claim? Under your analogy, you said that you can't get your money back if your stock went from 20 to 2. But, the problem with your analogy is that when you make the decision to purcase the stock, the stock is actually AT 20. You buy it at 20 and that's the end of it. What happens the next day is totally seperate from the decision you make at that time.

With a claim, you can possibly claim a runner and lose your money if the current connections mess up. Why should you, as a new owner claiming a horse, have to worry if the current owners rider is going to do 'right by your horse'?

Why should a claiming owner have to hold his breath?

Me and a few buddies put in a claim on a horse about 10 or 15 years ago. The horse broke down at the top of the lane. We lost a shake so we didn't actually lose any money, but we never claimed another horse...the experience was too much to take, we never invested one dime as owners in thoroughbred racing. T bred racing lost a potential owner. No way this happens if we are allowed to claim AFTER the race. We claim after and we get a taste and hang around.

[Murph]

I understand that you are totally fine with the current rules.

The current rules as they are written favor the owners who currently have racing stock and don't favor those looking to get into the game without getting the shaft.

Lets say a new group of owners got together and pooled their money and decided to claim a horse who broke down in the stretch. Under your rules, we lose those owners forever, they don't come back, they are scarred for life.

Under my rules, any new owner gets into the game with a sound and happy horse. That is good for the game.

Why should you have to 'take a risk' every time you claim? Under your analogy, you said that you can't get your money back if your stock went from 20 to 2. But, the problem with your analogy is that when you make the decision to purcase the stock, the stock is actually AT 20. You buy it at 20 and that's the end of it. What happens the next day is totally seperate from the decision you make at that time.

With a claim, you can possibly claim a runner and lose your money if the current connections mess up. Why should you, as a new owner claiming a horse, have to worry if the current owners rider is going to do 'right by your horse'?

Why should a claiming owner have to hold his breath?

Me and a few buddies put in a claim on a horse about 10 or 15 years ago. The horse broke down at the top of the lane. We lost a shake so we didn't actually lose any money, but we never claimed another horse...the experience was too much to take, we never invested one dime as owners in thoroughbred racing. T bred racing lost a potential owner. No way this happens if we are allowed to claim AFTER the race. We claim after and we get a taste and hang around.The current rules allow the owners to maintain the true class levels of their horses. It is only right that claiming rules give this opportunity to the ones invested in raising and training and maintaining the runners. They way to protect your stable is to NOT risk them to claim. Otherwise the open claiming purses attract the correct sell price level of runners in relation to the conditions.

The horses aren't used cars and you don't get a test drive on them in the claiming game. The risk you wish to avoid is the essence of the entire experience. Every single race is a potential death match. An extremely risky business. Consider the rules help to protect potential new owners as well or better than hinder them.

The breeders, owners, buyers and caretakers of the horses are the ones who are truly gambling and risking the very most. I feel that many are playing for much more than just the money. The comes from the extensive personal labor and emotional investments they can make. The rewards for these investments are what is celebrated at all levels of the game and carry personal satisfactions beyond the value of money. If ANY owner can't hold his breath whenever his horse is running they may need a friendlier game. ;)

JMO, but I don't think the claiming system is broken beyond inflated purses for the low level runners.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Murph, the point here is to grow the game. If claims were made after the race was run, it might just get a lot more owners into the game and owners bring friends who are potential owners and bettors.

It is extremely expensive to own a horse and it can be very intimidating to a newbie.

As it is right now, many horses are bought privately after races anyway.

But if this new idea of claiming after the race is implemented it could make things exciting again. Maybe more trainers and owners will actually show up at the track to watch potential buys live....inevitably this can increase live handle as well.

Still, buying a horse after a race is a risky proposition. One still doesn't know if the horse had vet work before the race. And because of adrenalin, many horses don't show signs that they are real sore until they get back to the barn.

I say allow claiming to be open until the horse gets off the track after the race. I like the idea.

And lets not forget, that if an owner gets money for their horse, they are on an equal playing field to go get a replacement.

[onefast99]

What's next a warranty like the one GM offers to people, race the horse once under new ownership and if you don't like it then bring it back, no questions asked! This is a huge part of racing, the claiming game cannot have strings attached to it. It is a rarity to find a Lava Man but the people who claimed him took a risk and it paid off.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

What's next a warranty like the one GM offers to people, race the horse once under new ownership and if you don't like it then bring it back, no questions asked! This is a huge part of racing, the claiming game cannot have strings attached to it. It is a rarity to find a Lava Man but the people who claimed him took a risk and it paid off.
Why can't it have strings attached? The game is dying. Changes need to be made.

When you buy a yearling, you get to inspect it first, and sometimes even see it work.

Would you buy a used car without taking it for a test spin just before you wrote the check?

[FenceBored]

What's next a warranty like the one GM offers to people, race the horse once under new ownership and if you don't like it then bring it back, no questions asked! This is a huge part of racing, the claiming game cannot have strings attached to it. It is a rarity to find a Lava Man but the people who claimed him took a risk and it paid off.

The claiming game already has strings attached, from limits on who can claim (must be stabled at the track, or have run at the track this meet) to limits on running the horse elsewhere for a period of time after the claim (60 days or the end of the current meet).

[twindouble]

During my playing career I often thought of claiming horses, it was like a virus that came and went. The idea of gambling on both ends of the game didn't make sense to me, it would have be one or the other. I was doing just fine handicapping them so a smart pill killed the virus. I didn't like idea of putting my money in other peoples hands whereas playing the horses I had control of it. In my mind the claiming business had a lot more risk and it was a much different world than I could perceive off the racing form. I was enjoying what I was doing so why jump into the unknown. Getting my picture taken in the winners circle didn't mean hoot to me. Besides, I always had a good looking lady at my arm.

I have a lot respect for people that take risks with their own money including partnerships with equal risks. Those that just want to risk other people money, that's a different animal. I agree with Murph, if you don't have stomach for it, don't get into it. Like gambling on the horses if your strapped for capital you'll lose in the long run and I'm sure it takes a lot capital to get into the claiming business.

From a handicapper's perspective it's fool hearty to lean to much on the written conditions to determine class, the quality of the runners or soundness to make money. Those conditions vary widely from track to track, it's mixed bag to say the least. Those in the claiming business have their work cut out for them to make any sense of it, so hats to those make money doing it. I'm not one to tell others how to run their business, if they can't figure out what wrong with claiming rules, that's their problem. Let them decide what's fair and what isn't. Players have grips also when it comes to fairness. Don't we?

[Mineshaft]

Why can't it have strings attached? The game is dying. Changes need to be made.

When you buy a yearling, you get to inspect it first, and sometimes even see it work.

Would you buy a used car without taking it for a test spin just before you wrote the check?




The game is not dying. I disagree with that statement. We are just in an economic downturn and some people arent investing in horses right now. People are still buying and claiming though.

[Mineshaft]

During my playing career I often thought of claiming horses, it was like a virus that came and went. The idea of gambling on both ends of the game didn't make sense to me, it would have be one or the other. I was doing just fine handicapping them so a smart pill killed the virus. I didn't like idea of putting my money in other peoples hands whereas playing the horses I had control of it. In my mind the claiming business had a lot more risk and it was a much different world than I could perceive off the racing form. I was enjoying what I was doing so why jump into the unknown. Getting my picture taken in the winners circle didn't mean hoot to me. Besides, I always had a good looking lady at my arm.

I have a lot respect for people that take risks with their own money including partnerships with equal risks. Those that just want to risk other people money, that's a different animal. I agree with Murph, if you don't have stomach for it, don't get into it. Like gambling on the horses if your strapped for capital you'll lose in the long run and I'm sure it takes a lot capital to get into the claiming business.

From a handicapper's perspective it's fool hearty to lean to much on the written conditions to determine class, the quality of the runners or soundness to make money. Those conditions vary widely from track to track, it's mixed bag to say the least. Those in the claiming business have their work cut out for them to make any sense of it, so hats to those make money doing it. I'm not one to tell others how to run their business, if they can't figure out what wrong with claiming rules, that's their problem. Let them decide what's fair and what isn't. Players have grips also when it comes to fairness. Don't we?








Great post...

[Mineshaft]

Murph, the point here is to grow the game. If claims were made after the race was run, it might just get a lot more owners into the game and owners bring friends who are potential owners and bettors.

It is extremely expensive to own a horse and it can be very intimidating to a newbie.

As it is right now, many horses are bought privately after races anyway.

But if this new idea of claiming after the race is implemented it could make things exciting again. Maybe more trainers and owners will actually show up at the track to watch potential buys live....inevitably this can increase live handle as well.

Still, buying a horse after a race is a risky proposition. One still doesn't know if the horse had vet work before the race. And because of adrenalin, many horses don't show signs that they are real sore until they get back to the barn.

I say allow claiming to be open until the horse gets off the track after the race. I like the idea.

And lets not forget, that if an owner gets money for their horse, they are on an equal playing field to go get a replacement.






I would be open to claiming a horse after the race. 5 minutes after the race you claim needs to be in and if you have to shake for the horse then you shake for the horse. But if the horse cant get up the next morning the horse is yours. You dont get your money back. I could live with that.


But if they dont change it then i dont agree that an owner gets his money back when a horse breaks down. What if the horse was sound and stepped in a hole on the track and snapped a leg. How are you going to determine if the horse was sound or not?

[Murph]

Why can't it have strings attached? The game is dying. Changes need to be made.

When you buy a yearling, you get to inspect it first, and sometimes even see it work.

Would you buy a used car without taking it for a test spin just before you wrote the check?You can buy these $4K claimers privately if you like then risk them on the ladder. Once you do that your investment is on the track. Now you can play claims but you have to risk stock to get in and put your own horses up for sale or stakes entries. Even better for a new owner to try a yearling and just try to get one to the races. If you think your 2yo has some snap you'll think twice about entering that mdn claimer 10th race.

I think the claiming rules are fair, you have to own and enter to be allowed to claim.

[illinoisbred]

I wouldn't change the claiming game one bit outside of reinstating the"jail" period at jurisdictions that eliminated it. In my opinion, this lack of "jail" time has caused most of the distrust many have regarding active claiming outfits.

[Mineshaft]

I wouldn't change the claiming game one bit outside of reinstating the"jail" period at jurisdictions that eliminated it. In my opinion, this lack of "jail" time has caused most of the distrust many have regarding active claiming outfits.






I dont like the jail time. I claim a horse and its my horse and now they are going to tell me where i have to run it. Its my horse i should be able to run it at any price i want to.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

I would be open to claiming a horse after the race. 5 minutes after the race you claim needs to be in and if you have to shake for the horse then you shake for the horse. But if the horse cant get up the next morning the horse is yours. You dont get your money back. I could live with that.


But if they dont change it then i dont agree that an owner gets his money back when a horse breaks down. What if the horse was sound and stepped in a hole on the track and snapped a leg. How are you going to determine if the horse was sound or not?
The nature of the rule being proposed is to protect horses from dropping down and running when they are too sore to run but not too sore to get claimed.

Of course a horse can clip heals and break down or step in a hole and break down, but luckily this kind of stuff doesn't happen all that often. Most horses who break down had soundness issues going into the race.

I also like the idea of putting two prices on the claim slip. The price the horse is entered for, and the silent bid price in case others are trying to claim the horse too.

If only one claim is in though, the original claiming price is what the new owner pays.

The old owner can match the silent bid on his horse, with the difference between the claiming price and the higher price being donated to either a horse retirement or a disabled jockey fund. The old owner can only buy back the horse if more than 1 other bid is on the horse.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

You can buy these $4K claimers privately if you like then risk them on the ladder. Once you do that your investment is on the track. Now you can play claims but you have to risk stock to get in and put your own horses up for sale or stakes entries. Even better for a new owner to try a yearling and just try to get one to the races. If you think your 2yo has some snap you'll think twice about entering that mdn claimer 10th race.

I think the claiming rules are fair, you have to own and enter to be allowed to claim.
It isn't really fair. The claim has to come in before the race, but the new owner doesn't really own the horse until the race is official because technically that is when the old owner receives the purse.

Sure, everyone knows the current rules going in, but it doesn't mean they can't be changed in order to grow the game.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

The game is not dying. I disagree with that statement. We are just in an economic downturn and some people arent investing in horses right now. People are still buying and claiming though.
There are less and less bettors and less and less owners. Most are not going to come back when the economy gets good again, I hate to break it to you, until pricing of betting changes.

The game has been dying for a while now. All you have to do is look at wagering versus the CPI. And then when you factor in population growth, horse racing has been in negative growth mode even during the last economic uptick.

[Mineshaft]

There are less and less bettors and less and less owners. Most are not going to come back when the economy gets good again, I hate to break it to you, until pricing of betting changes.

The game has been dying for a while now. All you have to do is look at wagering versus the CPI. And then when you factor in population growth, horse racing has been in negative growth mode even during the last economic uptick.





Wagering is down but i dont think the owners and trainers are getting scarce out there. If anything i think there are more owners and trainers getting into the game. Now as far as wagering goes yes there are less bettors i would agree.

[InsideThePylons-MW]

The old owner can match the silent bid on his horse, with the difference between the claiming price and the higher price being donated to either a horse retirement or a disabled jockey fund. The old owner can only buy back the horse if more than 1 other bid is on the horse.

Oh my!

I didn't think that claiming a horse or racing a claimer would ever result in needing...a bloodstock agent, Andy Beyer, Ragozin, a vet, chartcaller, auctioneer, bidspotter, tax attorney, 2 nuns and a guy in a Santa suit ringing a bell immediately after the race.

To all of you who have owners of claimed horses and owners who are claiming horses making immediate decisions after the race........Maybe you guys don't realize or understand that a lot of owners are not at the track, can't watch the race and are sometimes unaccessable immediately after a race.

I know I would want to make the decision on whether I pay more money to keep my horse or decide to void a claim after watching a race with MY OWN EYES than relying on someone else to do it.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Oh my!

I didn't think that claiming a horse or racing a claimer would ever result in needing...a bloodstock agent, Andy Beyer, Ragozin, a vet, chartcaller, auctioneer, bidspotter, tax attorney, 2 nuns and a guy in a Santa suit ringing a bell immediately after the race.

To all of you who have owners of claimed horses and owners who are claiming horses making immediate decisions after the race........Maybe you guys don't realize or understand that a lot of owners are not at the track, can't watch the race and are sometimes unaccessable immediately after a race.

I know I would want to make the decision on whether I pay more money to keep my horse or decide to void a claim after watching a race with MY OWN EYES than relying on someone else to do it.
Owners will be doing their research ahead of time, just like they do now. But this will give them incentive to go to the track more often, and maybe bring more people with them.
Many claim slips are ripped up upon visible inspection prior to 15 minutes to post. These slips may not get ripped up so readily if the horse runs OK and comes back OK.
Trainers will have incentive to be front side too, cell phone in hand. Owners of course of are buying on the fly, need money in their accounts at all time.

It will change things, but I think it will be good for growth.

[InsideThePylons-MW]

Owners will be doing their research ahead of time, just like they do now. But this will give them incentive to go to the track more often, and maybe bring more people with them.
Many claim slips are ripped up upon visible inspection prior to 15 minutes to post. These slips may not get ripped up so readily if the horse runs OK and comes back OK.
Trainers will have incentive to be front side too, cell phone in hand. Owners of course of are buying on the fly, need money in their accounts at all time.

It will change things, but I think it will be good for growth.

Maybe you aren't understanding what I'm saying based on what you wrote.

If I have a horse in a $50K claimer and I'm not able to attend the race or watch the race......My horse is claimed with the silent bid nonsense for let's say $60K.....now I have to make a $60K decision without seeing the race or let somebody else make it for me? No thanks....I'm out.

Trainers are trainers....not race watchers. I'm sure you, as a bettor, would say you've seen a million things that trainers have missed watching a race. If you think trainers are better off making these decisions than you would be, then why don't you give them your money and let them bet it?

[fmolf]

In my opinion thisis what makes the training game so interesting.I commend a trainer/owner who can drop in and steal a purse.Its our job as handicappers to ferret out these situations.If i were a trainer/owner and was the least bit leary of a horses soundness i would not make the claim.The only thing that this rule might be helpful in is keeping unsound horses off the racetrack.I believe that if the tracks exercised their own due diligence and had vets examine horses regularly this could be accomplished.Change the claiming game....Why do you think the game is in such a shambles in the "land of fruits and Nuts"?....i would not want the chrb to mandate anything else if i were a california player! :D

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Maybe you aren't understanding what I'm saying based on what you wrote.

If I have a horse in a $50K claimer and I'm not able to attend the race or watch the race......My horse is claimed with the silent bid nonsense for let's say $60K.....now I have to make a $60K decision without seeing the race or let somebody else make it for me? No thanks....I'm out.

Trainers are trainers....not race watchers. I'm sure you, as a bettor, would say you've seen a million things that trainers have missed watching a race. If you think trainers are better off making these decisions than you would be, then why don't you give them your money and let them bet it?
If you are in a 50k race, you will be watching it from wherever you are unless you are at a funeral or on a plane. Who are you kidding?

[InsideThePylons-MW]

If you are in a 50k race, you will be watching it from wherever you are unless you are at a funeral or on a plane. Who are you kidding?

Are you serious?

Many owners don't watch their horse race due to work or other obligations.

I watch almost all of my races because thats what I do.

I've won a race while on a plane, in the hospital, and on a jury. None of those times did I see the race or was easily accessable.

I just had a horse who was 2-1 race for 60K and I would have been on the golf course if it didn't get canceled on Wed.

[CBedo]

The nature of the rule being proposed is to protect horses from dropping down and running when they are too sore to run but not too sore to get claimed.This is why the rule and CHRB are ridiculous. Instead of finding better ways to keep trainers from running lame horses in the first place, they put this band-aid rule in place which will possibly create other issues as discussed earlier in the thread.

[Mineshaft]

Interesting to see if the new proposal will catch on in Cali

[fmolf]

This is why the rule and CHRB are ridiculous. Instead of finding better ways to keep trainers from running lame horses in the first place, they put this band-aid rule in place which will possibly create other issues as discussed earlier in the thread.
why not crack down on the drug cheats and employ vets who have enough power to prevent horses from running and training?Perhaps painkillers in horse racing are what is causing a lot of the breakdowns who knows for sure?

[Imriledup]

This is why the rule and CHRB are ridiculous. Instead of finding better ways to keep trainers from running lame horses in the first place, they put this band-aid rule in place which will possibly create other issues as discussed earlier in the thread.

What 'issues' can the new rule create? Sounds like a good rule to me.

[CBedo]

What 'issues' can the new rule create? Sounds like a good rule to me. How many horses that are being jammed with the intention of starting just to claimed will now be ridden very very very easy as to not try so they will have no chance of getting hurt?While I don't have a problem with this financially, since I like to bet against these anyway, I don't like any rule that could incent a jockey to not give a horse his best ride.

[Imriledup]

While I don't have a problem with this financially, since I like to bet against these anyway, I don't like any rule that could incent a jockey to not give a horse his best ride.

But, i think the rule was if a horse returns in distress or vanned off. Are you saying that a jock can feel a horse being sore and pull him up on the backstretch to protect him from going more lame?

I guess anything is possible, i do like that they are at least THINKING about ways to make it safer for the horses. Those are the kinks they're going to have to iron out.

[CBedo]

But, i think the rule was if a horse returns in distress or vanned off. Are you saying that a jock can feel a horse being sore and pull him up on the backstretch to protect him from going more lame?

I guess anything is possible, i do like that they are at least THINKING about ways to make it safer for the horses. Those are the kinks they're going to have to iron out.I would never give a jockey that much credit, but you don't think a trainer might tell a jockey to "take it easy?"

I do agree that it's good they are at least thinking about it, but for some reason, I just don't have a lot of faith in the productivity of many of their decisions.

[fmolf]

I would never give a jockey that much credit, but you don't think a trainer might tell a jockey to "take it easy?"

I do agree that it's good they are at least thinking about it, but for some reason, I just don't have a lot of faith in the productivity of many of their decisions.
Trainers do this all the time send their horses out for conditioning purposes.A sprinter routing to build endurance/p or s type who bursts out of the gate when raised in class to be kept from being claimed,then dropped next race to his rightful level.All of these trainer angles would be removed from the game.
I agree with the others who said their are better ways to keep unsound horses off the track.Vigorous policing of the drug rules...Severe fines for trainers who have been found to run sore horses,escalating with each infraction.This new chrb thinking has to be in response to all the bad ink the poly is getting about breakdowns.So now they do not want to admit they made a mistake so they will blame the trainers in a roundabout way for supposedly running sore horses.Might this be a smokescreen?These guys need to take their heads out of their asses!Bad claims are not the reason why handle,and field size are down in cal.Synthetic tracks are!

[FenceBored]

This is the line that jumped out at me.
He [Dr. Rick Arthur] cited one instance of a trainer and owner at Hollywood Park last fall "high-fiving" in front of the horse ambulance after a horse that had been claimed from them broke down in a race.
-- http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/52996/voiding-claims-possible-under-chrb-proposal

[illinoisbred]

This is the line that jumped out at me.
He [Dr. Rick Arthur] cited one instance of a trainer and owner at Hollywood Park last fall "high-fiving" in front of the horse ambulance after a horse that had been claimed from them broke down in a race.
-- http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/52996/voiding-claims-possible-under-chrb-proposal

That owner and trainer should have their licenses revoked-permanently.

[fmolf]

That owner and trainer should have their licenses revoked-permanently.
No matter what the rules are they acted classlessly and used poor judgement and they should be banned from the game.

[Imriledup]

I'd like to know who that was doing the high fiving. They should be exposed.

[Mineshaft]

I'd like to know who that was doing the high fiving. They should be exposed.




Yep sure would like to know..