OWNERSHIP AND RACING qUESTION

[NY BRED]

iN YESTERDAY'S SEVENTH RACE AT BELMONT THE #6 HORSE WAS
OWNED BOTH BY KLARAVITCH STABLES AND WILLIAM H. LAWRENCE
WHILE THE #10 IS OWNED 100% BY MR. LAWRENCE.

BOTH HORSES ARE TRAINED BY DIFFERENT TRAINERS, AND INCIDENTALLY, FINISHED I/2.

SHOULDN'T THESE HORSES BE COUPLED AS AN ENTRY?

[ryesteve]

Originally Posted by NY BRED

iN YESTERDAY'S SEVENTH RACE AT BELMONT THE #6 HORSE WAS
OWNED BOTH BY KLARAVITCH STABLES AND WILLIAM H. LAWRENCE
WHILE THE #10 IS OWNED 100% BY MR. LAWRENCE.

BOTH HORSES ARE TRAINED BY DIFFERENT TRAINERS, AND INCIDENTALLY, FINISHED I/2.

SHOULDN'T THESE HORSES BE COUPLED AS AN ENTRY?

There must be a threshhold to meet the common ownership requirement. Probably a good idea, especially as partnerships become more and more popular.

[slewis]

I believe the rule in NY is that if there is less than 25% ownership (or maybe 10%, not quite sure) they dont have to run as a coupled entry.

It is a good rule....... Some of the biggest bettors in the country who also own horses will tell you that they make much more when their horse wins than they can make betting in a race, especially in NY.

[andymays]

As long as people can see the ownership in the program and the pp's I'm fine with not coupling entries with the same owner.

[RonTiller]

4025.10. Limitations on entries.

(a) A horse whose managing owner is a partnership cannot be entered or run in the name, whether real or stable, of an individual partner unless that individual's interest or property in the racing qualities of that horse is equal to at least 25 percent.

(b) All horses in common ownership as defined in section 4026.2(e) of this Title (i.e., having any common managing owner) or section 4026.3(c) (i.e., in which there is a 25 percent commonality among nonmanaging owners) must be coupled and run as an entry.

(c) Not more than two horses trained by the same person shall be drawn into any overnight race, or on the also-eligible list, to the exclusion of another horse.

(d) All horses trained by the same trainer must be coupled and run as an entry.

(e) The board steward may require any horses entered in a race to be coupled for betting purposes prior to the commencement of wagering on-track and off-track, if he finds it necessary in the public interest.

(f) All horses trained or ridden by a spouse, parent, issue or member of a jockey's household shall be coupled in the betting with any horse ridden by such jockey.

(g) Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivisions (b) and (d) of this rule, no entry shall be couples by reason of common ownership or training in any race in which the gross purse is $1,000,000 or more, provided however that the provisions of subdivision (e) of this section shall continue to be applicable in any such races. In any race subject to the provisions of this subdivision, the racing secretary shall have the authority to establish a mutuel field and coupled entries in any race with more than 14 starters.

Source = http://www.racing.state.ny.us/about/rls.home.htm

Ron Tiller
HDW

[NY BRED]

THANKS ALL FOR THE RESPONSES, USUALLY i'M LOOKING AT ALL ANGLES
INCLUDING JOCKEY-TRAINER-OWNER SCENARIOS, BUT CANDIDLY, I
CAN'T RECOLLECT EVER WITNESSING THIS SITUATION ...

[Imriledup]

I don't think any horses should be coupled ever. I don't want to be sitting and waiting for a horse to run back and then i'm coupled with a horse i don't want. This happened recently at Del mar with a John Harris owned horse with one horse trained by Carla Gaines and one trained by Sean McCarthy. (i didn't want the Gaines stinker and wanted to bet the McCarthy 'longshot')

Incidentally, with this entry, they dueled each other into defeat, even though they were both owned by John Harris.

I'd much rather see Tyler Baze and Michael Baze coupled (for example) in the wagering than a horse with the same owners.