Better cut those purses……..

[Not4Love]

Another breakdown in NY. For $10,000 cl , purse $23,000 . The 2/5 Favorite Bojan pulls up bad after leading inside the 1/16th pole looking like a winner. David Jacobsen is the trainer. (Wonder if anyone claimed it). Race 1 Aqueduct, today 4/6

[cj]

Shocking David Jacobsen is involved.

[Robert Fischer]

Another breakdown in NY. For $10,000 cl , purse $23,000 . The 2/5 Favorite Bojan pulls up bad after leading inside the 1/16th pole looking like a winner. David Jacobsen is the trainer. (Wonder if anyone claimed it). Race 1 Aqueduct, today 4/6

What are the pros/cons of cutting purses vs. raising the tag ?

[cj]

What are the pros/cons of cutting purses vs. raising the tag ?

The current conditions are allowing unscrupulous types to play an equine version of "flip men". They claim a horse with issues and just run the horse at the bottom until it falls apart, hoping it will be claimed before that happens. If they win one race, the won't lose money. They couldn't do that if claiming prices were in line with purses, or even close.

[Not4Love]

It was a big issue recently in NY . NYRA felt horses were less likely too breakdown if they lowered the purses. I can only be blunt. It was discussed quite a bit here and on other forums. Too me, it was complete insanity to think that they could prevent breakdowns by lowering the purses. By the way, the horse WAS claimed (Juan Serey) and VANNED OFF.


IRONIC?? Yesterday at Aqueduct. David Jacobsen claim one off of Juan Serey for $30,000. PULLED UP. VANNED OFF.

[cj]

It was a big issue recently in NY . NYRA felt horses were less likely too breakdown if they lowered the purses. I can only be blunt. It was discussed quite a bit here and on other forums. Too me, it was complete insanity to think that they could prevent breakdowns by lowering the purses. By the way, the horse WAS claimed (Juan Serey) and VANNED OFF.


IRONIC?? Yesterday at Aqueduct. David Jacobsen claim one off of Juan Serey for $30,000. PULLED UP. VANNED OFF.

I think you are distorting the reason for the purse decrease. It isn't just the purses alone, it is the relationship to claiming price.

[Not4Love]

I understand the point you are making. BUT, I need proof. So far, they are still breaking down. The idea behind the drop in purses was simply based on a theory. Why are they still breaking down?. Not too argue your point. I just get very upset watching them breakdown.

[cj]

I understand the point you are making. BUT, I need proof. So far, they are still breaking down. The idea behind the drop in purses was simply based on a theory. Why are they still breaking down?. Not too argue your point. I just get very upset watching them breakdown.

Well, my opinion is they didn't do enough. They need to raise the minimum claiming price a bit more too. To be fair though, any change can't be expected to fix things overnight.

I have no problem with horsemen getting better purses as owners certainly could use the help. But, we don't need horses that can be bought for 10,000 racing for a winning purse of almost 14,000, and that is even after this latest change. A horse that can win that kind of money should be worth more than 10,000.

[Not4Love]

Two more eased today. Third race another big favorite eased and claimed.

[cj]

For the record, the horse in the 1st did not break down.

[5k-claim]

What are the pros/cons of cutting purses vs. raising the tag ?I like raising the claiming prices.

Actually, I have felt that since they know (roughly) what the purse values are going to be going into a meet they should start with those values and work backwards toward coming up with the claiming prices. I don't even know whey they can't just tie the claiming price directly to the purses, like for example make the claiming price 85% of whatever the purse is, or whatever number works out best.

Other ideas and policies that I like are the "no claim if the horse is fatally injured" rule, and also buyer's choice if the horse fails the post-race drug test policy. To this I would add that all horses that are claimed should be sent to the test barn for that post-race test, no matter how many horses are claimed out of the race. If the whole field is claimed, then it should just have to be a crowded test barn after the race.

.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Pros and Cons of increasing lower end claiming purses:

Pros: It costs the same to train a bottom claimer as it does an allowance horse at a specific track. It is good for the owner's mindset that they don't have to win 3 times (twice maybe) to break even for the year in training and drug bills. Small ownes able to stay in the game longer makes for more owners down the road and smaller owners will tend to have larger operations and perhaps even get into breeding.

Cons: Bottom level races attract all kinds of droppers (tough to figure out if a horse is dropping because of soreness, or dropping to scoop the purse and maybe even try to steal). That is from a handicapping viewpoint.

Realistically it shouldn't matter what the bottom purse is when it comes to breakdowns. A sore horse is a sore horse, and it shouldn't pass the vet whether it running for 7500 or 50000. But what appears to be coming into play is dropping coupled with a lot of masking (which means the horses soreness may not be readily detectable), hoping to win get a nice purse and get claimed.

I think NYRA addressed the situation well regarding the claiming and also by making it a little less tempting by lowering the purses to aggressively run a sore horse that might have one or two left in them, without proper rest.

The masking problem is something that affects all of horse racing right now.

FYI, Woodbine has increased the bottom level purses. Should make it better for the claiming game, and I'm not anticipating a lot of breakdowns because of it because they are supposedly really clamping down on cheating.
http://xwebapp.ustrotting.com/absolutenm/templates/article.aspx?articleid=47337&zoneid=63

[5k-claim]

Pros: It costs the same to train a bottom claimer as it does an allowance horse at a specific track. It is good for the owner's mindset that they don't have to win 3 times (twice maybe) to break even for the year in training and drug bills. Small ownes able to stay in the game longer makes for more owners down the road and smaller owners will tend to have larger operations and perhaps even get into breeding.
Exactly. This is a huge "Pro" in my opinion.

Owners with horses that are racing competitively and contributing to fields that horseplayers are gambling on should have a chance to keep their heads above water. As you said, the costs of ownership are relatively fixed (known).

So if we give those owners a chance to keep their heads above water, but also recognize that when the claiming prices and purses are out-of-whack with each other a dangerous environment for horses arises, a solution is somewhere in the direction of raising the claiming prices. Just lowering the purses gets the purses and claiming prices back more in line, but also pushes the owners' heads back under the water every month.

.

[aaron]

I don't know if anyone has noticed,but most of the scratches each day at NYRA have been vet scratches,with a few stewards scratches and fewer trainer scratches. This has only been happening since the main track opened.
What this tells me is that previously someone wasn't doing their job. At least now,they seem to be trying to protect the animals.

[cj]

Exactly. This is a huge "Pro" in my opinion.

Owners with horses that are racing competitively and contributing to fields that horseplayers are gambling on should have a chance to keep their heads above water. As you said, the costs of ownership are relatively fixed (known).

So if we give those owners a chance to keep their heads above water, but also recognize that when the claiming prices and purses are out-of-whack with each other a dangerous environment for horses arises, a solution is somewhere in the direction of raising the claiming prices. Just lowering the purses gets the purses and claiming prices back more in line, but also pushes the owners' heads back under the water every month.

.

This is what I was saying, and I also think those small owners would appreciate higher claiming prices. Who exactly do these low claiming prices benefit besides hatchet men like Jacobsen? Sure, it makes it easier to get into the game...for about one start.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

This is what I was saying, and I also think those small owners would appreciate higher claiming prices. Who exactly do these low claiming prices benefit besides hatchet men like Jacobsen? Sure, it makes it easier to get into the game...for about one start.
Sometimes you get a lot of owners, and new owners/partnerships playing the bottom looking for a steal. If you have a lot of shakes in the claim box, it means that there could be a supply demand situation that favors the seller collectively, and this trickles down to breeding as well.
I've always maintained that an outfits ability to make money or break even with a $5,000 or $7,500 horse helps push up the price of the breed in that jurisdiction.
The fact is that a really good sound horse most likely isn't going to run for bottoms when the competition isn't that much different when running for $15,000 or $20,000 unless the outfit is looking to steal a purse by playing poker properly.

CJ, have you noticed much of a difference in speed or pace figs at the 7,500 level versus 15 or 20k? I haven't researched it, but it probably isn't much of a difference.

[cj]

Sometimes you get a lot of owners, and new owners/partnerships playing the bottom looking for a steal. If you have a lot of shakes in the claim box, it means that there could be a supply demand situation that favors the seller collectively, and this trickles down to breeding as well.
I've always maintained that an outfits ability to make money or break even with a $5,000 or $7,500 horse helps push up the price of the breed in that jurisdiction.
The fact is that a really good sound horse most likely isn't going to run for bottoms when the competition isn't that much different when running for $15,000 or $20,000 unless the outfit is looking to steal a purse by playing poker properly.

CJ, have you noticed much of a difference in speed or pace figs at the 7,500 level versus 15 or 20k? I haven't researched it, but it probably isn't much of a difference.

It may draw a few more owners, but in my opinion the negatives of the current claiming price to purse relationship far outweigh the positives. The current setup is bad for horses, and it also doesn't help field size one bit. It is bad enough when stakes horses rarely run because the purses are so big, do we really need picky cheap claimers?

If a new owner can afford $10,000 for a claim and $60,000 a year in expenses, with an individual or an owner, they can afford $25,000 and $60,000 a year in expenses or they shouldn't be owners. We want owners that actually care about the horses and want to keep them, not more that are in the game to make a fast buck of an unsound horse.

As for your figure question, yes, there is still a big difference between 7.5k and 20k claimers.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

It may draw a few more owners, but in my opinion the negatives of the current claiming price to purse relationship far outweigh the positives. The current setup is bad for horses, and it also doesn't help field size one bit. It is bad enough when stakes horses rarely run because the purses are so big, do we really need picky cheap claimers?

If a new owner can afford $10,000 for a claim and $60,000 a year in expenses, with an individual or an owner, they can afford $25,000 and $60,000 a year in expenses or they shouldn't be owners. We want owners that actually care about the horses and want to keep them, not more that are in the game to make a fast buck of an unsound horse.

As for your figure question, yes, there is still a big difference between 7.5k and 20k claimers.
In theory, higher purses for bottoms should increase field size, as it should attract horses from other tracks. Many times stall space is the issue as to why bottom races don't attract more runners.
As for the bottom prices, if the good majority aren't being claimed for bottoms, then they aren't even perceived to be worth the bottom price they are running for. So they belong there.
And as far as owner's mentality regarding paying 10k or 25k for the same horse, the difference is huge regardless of whether it costs 30k or 50k to keep it for the year. Almost every claim needs an element of short term quick gain, or it diminishes the value of the horse even more. And every horse is one bad step away from either being retired or running for 2500, so free market prices are important.

I really think that because there isn't a lot of claiming at higher levels especially, the vast majority of horses generally run for over inflated prices to begin with.

Interesting that there is a big difference between 7.5K and 20k at Aqueduct. I thought it would only be a couple of lengths tops.

[BlueShoe]

For the record, the horse in the 1st did not break down.

The chart says that he took a bad step and was vanned off. If we examine Bojan's recent record it indicates that he may very likely be unsound and should be avoided. After racing for much higher last summer and fall he plunges and shows up for 7500 on 12-30 and stays at that level until his last at 10k. He does not race for nearly two months between 1-14 and 3-7, and then does not come back untill 4-6, another month. The clincher is his lack of published recent workouts, the last on 2-12. Runners that only show one slow work between races two months apart and then no works in 30 days since their last raises a huge red caution flag for this 'capper. Not trying to redboard, but any time a runner that looks like Bojan shows up it is never ever played or used in any manner. Will try to find something to beat the shaky chalk, if unable to do so the race is passed.

[tbwinner]

I do not follow NYRA on a regular basis outside of occasionally playing Saratoga. I know there have been issues with breakdowns and the purse/claim level disparity.

Can someone tell me what's up with this David Jacobson guy? I don't know much about him.

[Robert Fischer]

Can someone tell me what's up with this David Jacobson guy? I don't know much about him.
He's a good trainer who starts a lot of horses.

A fair amount happen to be claimers.

For 2012 at Aqueduct he is first in wins, 2nd in earnings and 3rd in starts.

[Not4Love]

My take on David Jacobsen. Yes, he is a good trainer. But what does that mean. Allen jerkins and bill Mott are good. This won't help if you are playing the races. David jacobsens numbers are at a different level than these two Hall of Fame trainers. Once these guys start getting above 25% you should proceed with caution. Why? Because their horse tend to run better than what you see on paper. GL

[Not4Love]

The chart says that he took a bad step and was vanned off. If we examine Bojan's recent record it indicates that he may very likely be unsound and should be avoided. After racing for much higher last summer and fall he plunges and shows up for 7500 on 12-30 and stays at that level until his last at 10k. He does not race for nearly two months between 1-14 and 3-7, and then does not come back untill 4-6, another month. The clincher is his lack of published recent workouts, the last on 2-12. Runners that only show one slow work between races two months apart and then no works in 30 days since their last raises a huge red caution flag for this 'capper. Not trying to redboard, but any time a runner that looks like Bojan shows up it is never ever played or used in any manner. Will try to find something to beat the shaky chalk, if unable to do so the race is passed.

I agree. BUT. The horse was 2/5 in a small field. I did not look at the race, but that is a lot of money suggesting otherwise. He was also out of the money.

[5k-claim]

It may draw a few more owners, but in my opinion the negatives of the current claiming price to purse relationship far outweigh the positives. The current setup is bad for horses, and it also doesn't help field size one bit. It is bad enough when stakes horses rarely run because the purses are so big, do we really need picky cheap claimers?

If a new owner can afford $10,000 for a claim and $60,000 a year in expenses, with an individual or an owner, they can afford $25,000 and $60,000 a year in expenses or they shouldn't be owners. We want owners that actually care about the horses and want to keep them, not more that are in the game to make a fast buck of an unsound horse.

As for your figure question, yes, there is still a big difference between 7.5k and 20k claimers.I agree with you completely on this issue. A very active claim box at a low claiming price with too high purses is not what I would call a safe environment for horses. Not from those looking to dump them, or those looking to "get in cheap and turn a quick profit." It is not good on either end of that. Horses are not houses.

I can't figure out if HorsePlayers is also on the same page because I am having a really hard time deciphering exactly what he is saying, but I do think you have described things quite well.

Achieving the perfect balance of claim price to purse is of course not easy, but is something racing should always be refining and working towards. From both ends.

.

[RunForTheRoses]

What is strange is that until fairly recently (3 years? maybe more 10 years tops) the bottom claiming price was $10 or $12.5K. You would think with inflation it would be time to hike that up.

[RunForTheRoses]

What is strange is that until fairly recently (3 years? maybe more 10 years tops) the bottom claiming price was $10 or $12.5K. You would think with inflation it would be time to hike that up.

And personally when I see a $7500 race at NYRA or a MCL20K I cringe, I might play if I'm involved in a mult-irace wager but this is not what I seek out. A competitive $35K-$45K yes but not a guessing game re: soundness and trainer intent.

[cj]

What is strange is that until fairly recently (3 years? maybe more 10 years tops) the bottom claiming price was $10 or $12.5K. You would think with inflation it would be time to hike that up.

It wasn't that long ago that the bottom was 14k, and purses weren't near what they are now. They should be higher now, not lower.

[affirmedny]

It wasn't that long ago that the bottom was 14k, and purses weren't near what they are now. They should be higher now, not lower.

I'm all for the higher bottom, but where are the horses going to come from? Today's last race was a 10,000 claimer. The 2nd finisher won a nw2l 5,000 claimer at Mountaineer 3 starts ago and the 4th place finisher was a 5,000 NJ bred claimer last fall. In the days when NY had a 14K(I seem to recall in the 70s it was 20K) minimum these horses would not have been allowed to compete. Hopefully now that Gulf is closed we may get some better better horses shipping in and they won't have to run this many bottom claimers to fill cards.

By the way there was another fatality in this race when a horse fell over another horse who fell after clipping heels which I would put in the "breakdown but not necessarily due to unsoundness" category.

[cj]

They can be the same horses for now. Who cares if claims are cut down right now? It will fix itself over time.

[depalma113]

If the horse can't walk back to the barn on it's own after the race, all claims are void.

That's an easy fix.

[Tom]

Agree - no claim if the horse doesn't finish.
After a claim, horse is in jail for 60 days.

[Not4Love]

Another one gone. GARY SCIACCA - Fatal injury 4/14. Race 4.

[Shankapotamus]

I would think the disparity between claiming price and purse size would work against the smaller stables.

The large outfits can claim a horse, drop it next race to steal a purse, and if it's claimed still make out on the deal. They basically are "borrowing" the horse for a month and putting a few bucks in the account. I feel for the hard working small stable trainer that's getting his horse in shape to win and then see's it grabbed and dropped.

I remember recently when the Monmouth meet had those crazy big purses. Half the field or more were being claimed out of the $5000 or $7500 races.

Also, a question for anybody who might know. Why the disparity between claiming rules from state to state? Specifically, the jail rule. I would think having to race at a higher level for a month (or even better, 60 days as Tom suggests) would protect the integrity of the claiming game. The situation I mention above is really abused without it, and as a handicapper it doesn't help either when one of those good race, claimed, dropped 10 days later, win at 2-5 happens.

[FiveWide]

After a claim, horse is in jail for 60 days.


What exactly does this mean? I've heard various answers.


Thanks in advance.
-Five

[cnollfan]

"Jail" means a claimed horse can't run for the price it was claimed at or less, for a certain amount of time after the claim. The horse must step up in claiming price after a claim while it is still in jail.

[LRL Racing]

Been in the horse business for thirteen years and absolutely cannot figure out how one could make money with a claimer. You might break even with a 30,000 claimer and possibly could do better with a 50,000 but regardless I will not do claimers.

[lamboguy]

Been in the horse business for thirteen years and absolutely cannot figure out how one could make money with a claimer. You might break even with a 30,000 claimer and possibly could do better with a 50,000 but regardless I will not do claimers.the purses are worth more than the horses.

when you pay big money to train horses and pay vet bills, its impossible to make money at the game.

but if you are an operation like MIDWEST THOROUGHBRED CORPORATION, you make millions every year with cheap claiming horses.

[BlueShoe]

After a claim, horse is in jail for 60 days.
Two level in jail claiming rule. Must race above its claim price for 30 days. At that point may race for its claim price but not below that price until 60 days or longer after the claim. No more claim, come back quickly, drop sharply. No more guessing if the dropper is sound or dropping to steal an easy purse. Smaller stables can run their horses where they are competitive with less fear of the super trainer huge horse factorys of claiming them away.

[mountainman]

At tracks lacking leeway as to purse expenditures, the structure is based on a comprehensive series of dry runs that matches which races fill, and how fequently, with target distribution. Consequently (and this would not apply much to nyra, I'm sure), our own bottom pots here at Mnr were set more than three times higher than minimum tag back at our apex six years ago. Since even then our cards were made up mostly of btm claimers, we had no choice but to configure our purse structure that way. Otherwise, we could not have reached our alloted distribution. Also bear in mind that HBPA reps have a say in how purse structures are configured, and they usually lobby for big pots in btm events-that's the populist approach.

Such imperatives are one reason btm purse levels are a poor gauge of overall track class. Instead, I look at two other things to form a rough estimate of a track's place in the pecking order: 1) What percentage of total races are carded at minimum tag? and, 2) What percentage of avg daily distribution is expended in a single MSW purse? (forward thinking tracks, with an eye towards future features and a desire to attract the kind of classy outfits that churn out good young prospects, fight to set MSW pots as high as possible and realize those races are the foundation of a good program.

[Not4Love]

Another one breaks down yesterday at Belmont. Race 1 , trained by Joe Signore, Jr. .