Churchill-Ellis Park

[rastajenk]

Originally Posted by Cigar2

Me or Vic?

You, of course.

[sjk]

If all the horses in America were turned out in fields some percentage of them would come to grief. This is because these animals have been bred to be high strung and fragile in many ways. The injury rate might well be above what is typical at a race track.

That line of thinking makes no impression on someone outside the industry where I suppose people think that horses ought to be constantly watched and cared for... and they don't know that that is most likely to happen at a race track.

You would think people that love animals would be thankful that there are people like our trainers and grooms that give care and attention to these fragile animals and to the owners that pay the very substantial bills to enable this. Actually it usually feels like no one likes the horsemen.

Perhaps it would be better if people quit breeding horses so that there would be fewer around to be injured. As the foal crop is half the size it used to be this is already happening.

I don't pretend to know the answer to any of this. But I do enjoy hearing from Vic.

[ScottJ]

Some observations based on the reporting. Honestly, if anyone can follow the logical flow of this decision making other than trying to fix a public relations nightmare, have at it.

[1] Per HISA's Lisa Lazarus, "...we have been so far unable to draw conclusions about the cause of the recent equine fatalities at Churchill Downs". This is either a positive conclusion or negative conclusion, but for the outcome to be that racing is "fine for this weekend and bad for next week" makes no logical sense at all. By next week, more will be known and logical action could possibly be taken.

[2] Per the article, "Diagnostics testing of the racetrack by experts have not raised concerns and the experts have concluded that the surface is consistent with prior measurements from Churchill Downs in past years." Hence, either the testing is invalid or the outcomes are not directly correlated to the surface. Therefore, what organization is reviewing the surface testing process as HISA does not seem to have the expertise in this area?

[3] If the Churchill surface is still the current concern, what testing has been done at Ellis Park to validate that it can host the June 10th to July 3rd meet?

Let me offer a slightly different view. Remember that CDI is a publicly traded corporation (CHDN). The fiduciary responsibility is to the shareholders, not the horsemen and not the wagering public. The current share price ($142) is valuing the company at 30%+ below estimated free cash flow valuations. Churchill purchased Ellis for $79 million last year. [Whew, thank goodness we made that purchase (used that capital) in the "nick of time".] Perhaps we can leverage that facility to keep the Kentucky racing industry rolling while our $200 million investment on the Churchill upgrades can move forward?

[SBD400]

Originally Posted by sjk

If all the horses in America were turned out in fields some percentage of them would come to grief. This is because these animals have been bred to be high strung and fragile in many ways. The injury rate might well be above what is typical at a race track.

That line of thinking makes no impression on someone outside the industry where I suppose people think that horses ought to be constantly watched and cared for... and they don't know that that is most likely to happen at a race track.

You would think people that love animals would be thankful that there are people like our trainers and grooms that give care and attention to these fragile animals and to the owners that pay the very substantial bills to enable this. Actually it usually feels like no one likes the horsemen.

Perhaps it would be better if people quit breeding horses so that there would be fewer around to be injured. As the foal crop is half the size it used to be this is already happening.

I don't pretend to know the answer to any of this. But I do enjoy hearing from Vic.

Great post! Of course racing should try to minimize horse deaths. But with life comes death for humans and animals.They are fragile animals that die in stalls and in the field too. They die for reasons that have nothing to do with racing. These horses get treated better than some humans.

We have a segment of society now that wants to shit on everything in life from their keyboards whether it is rational or not and an establishment that sometimes is afraid to stand up to the fringe.

This game brings great joy to many people and provides economic benefit. The horses do what they love to do, run.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

I'm hoping Churchill track management decides not to mess up the data by having Equibase use track code CAE (Churchill At Ellis.)

Because the races will be run at Ellis:

My preference is that all data (data file names, result file names, running lines, workouts, and compiled stats) bear/be based on track code ELP.


-jp
.

I just posted the same thought on Twitter before I got to this thread.

[lagavulin62]

So let me throw in my contribution. As a total novice but a long time fan I think we need more turf racing and at longer distances. Cut out the excess speed beats all approach and get more stamina, overall development back in the game.

As far as the track being in Texas I can’t bet online because as far as horse racing Texas is a nanny state. So I watch the races via NYRA broadcast and I just stopped paying attention to Churchill because Twin Spires sucks and for whatever reason will not broadcast fractional times during the race. And the only reason you even know the final time is because the camera catches the on track clock at the finish. Its just irritating.

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

I'm hoping Churchill track management decides not to mess up the data by having Equibase use track code CAE (Churchill At Ellis.)

Because the races will be run at Ellis:

My preference is that all data (data file names, result file names, running lines, workouts, and compiled stats) bear/be based on track code ELP.


-jp
.

This is your take on this? Really?

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

I'm hoping Churchill track management decides not to mess up the data by having Equibase use track code CAE (Churchill At Ellis.)

Because the races will be run at Ellis:

My preference is that all data (data file names, result file names, running lines, workouts, and compiled stats) bear/be based on track code ELP.


-jp
.

1000%

BAQ was totally stupid, served no F****** purpse, caused unneccessary work for people, and screwed up databases.
Using Statsmaster, you no longer look a trainer stats for Aqu turf for the last 5 years, because an entie meet is now under an assumed name.

Do the folks who provide the datahave a ckue how people actually use it?


The number of idiots in this industry is mind boggling.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by the little guy

This is your take on this? Really?

You think that's my take on horse deaths?

Wow (just wow.)

International racing jurisdictions have trainers and veterinarians in charge of horses too.

Yet somehow their horse fatality rates are orders of magnitude lower than ours here in the US.

My take?

There's a reason for that.

Maybe we should start by asking:

What are they are doing different than us?


-jp
.

[CryingForTheHorses]

It will not matter what track they race at, If you have bad horses and/or incompetent vets that allow these horses to run, Nothing will change!
This game has turned to letting the vets train the horses!!
I blame them!!!
These vets are making thousands of dollars in this game!
Just go on any backside and you will see vets all over the barn area!!
Also remember, You can ask 10 vets a simple question and you will get 10 different answers!!
Trust me I know!!

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by Tom

1000%

BAQ was totally stupid, served no F****** purpse, caused unneccessary work for people, and screwed up databases.
Using Statsmaster, you no longer look a trainer stats for Aqu turf for the last 5 years, because an entie meet is now under an assumed name.

Do the folks who provide the datahave a ckue how people actually use it?


The number of idiots in this industry is mind boggling.

Tom, with all due respect, it did serve a purpose, and whether you want to acknowledge this or not, there are a TON of moving parts in running a racetrack. Believe it or not, we don't sit around thinking of ways to make people's lives more difficult. In fact, we spend a lot of time thinking how we can continue to move forward in an increasingly more difficult environment. We try to do this so we can continue to provide racing for the many people that depend on it and enjoy it.

[o_crunk]

Originally Posted by the little guy

Tom, with all due respect, it did serve a purpose, and whether you want to acknowledge this or not, there are a TON of moving parts in running a racetrack. Believe it or not, we don't sit around thinking of ways to make people's lives more difficult. In fact, we spend a lot of time thinking how we can continue to move forward in an increasingly more difficult environment. We try to do this so we can continue to provide racing for the many people that depend on it and enjoy it.

Is there a logical explanation in there other than "you guys don't know how to run a race track, so that's why we changed the track code. We know our customers better than you do"?

Honestly, I blame Equibase. They could've handled it better.

[Tom]

With all due respect, how did it benifit your customers?

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by Tom

With all due respect, how did it benifit your customers?

We raced.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by PhantomOnTour

We're not confident our surface is safe. So, out of concern for the horses we are moving to Ellis next week - but first, let's run a few more races here.

Do it looks like the safety of the horses is not at the top of of their list of important things.

If you were an owner, would you allow your horse to race there?

Will be interesting to if anyone has the balls to just say no and scratch.