crunk_o Twitter thread about the Santa Anita breakdown problem....

[GMB@BP]

I dont see how racing in general can survive without California. It would be a big crush on stakes fields around the country and at the sales in Ky. Not to mention that affect on handle nationwide.

people act like this is a california issue but its really a issue for the entire industry.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

Santa Anita may not have the BC this year.....Inquiries have already been made and serious options are on the table. Santa Anita racing is a shell of it's former self, more so than any premier track anywhere.....They've been in a death spiral for years, and Ritvo was sent there as a last ditch effort to pull it up out of it's nosedive.

Ritvo has failed and must do what is best for his employer, The Stronach Group, and unfortunately might cease operations and put the land up for sale.

I hope I'm wrong, as I never thought they would close Hollywood Park either, but it would take a miracle at this point to save it from it's own demise.

I haven't heard anything specific on the BC, but I would be shocked if they didn't at least have a line of communication open with Churchill and/or Del Mar right now to move it.

[JimG]

I played greyhounds in FL all the time in the late 70's and early 80's. It was a heyday for greyhound racing. Never did an end seem in sight. However, other forms of gambling started eroding greyhound betting. But something else did as well, drugs and poor treatment of the greyhounds by some kennels/trainers which resulted in deaths and bad press. As it stands now, greyhound racing in FL will end at the end of 2020.

Horse racing seemed untouchable at one time but has seen some betting erosion over the last 20 years. Now, a large number of horses dying in a relatively short time in CA is seeing major mainstream press. The next step could be to put the banning of horse racing on state ballots if big changes are not made to make the sport safer for the animal. No longer will it be sufficient to just say "that's the way the game goes" and expect animal activists to go away. They won't.

I love parimutuel racing of all kinds. Not sure if it will happen during my lifetime, but it could become extinct one day in the US.

Just my thoughts.

Jim

[ronsmac]

I was reading an article on nyup.com whatever that is. It said 19 horses died during the 6 week Saratoga meeting of 2017 and 15 the year before. 34 dead during 12 weeks of racing sounded pretty bad , yet it didn't seem to get the coverage Santa Anita is getting. Maybe I'm wrong and this was given national coverage. If not, why is it a much bigger story now? 21 dead in 10 weeks does seem high but so did 19 in 6 weeks a couple of years ago. Maybe SI and Usa Today covered the story and I wasn't paying attention.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Lemon Drop Husker

Life support?

Good grief. Quit with the drama.

Yes, Santa has been crap this winter with small fields and not all that good racing. It is a single year. With extremely crappy weather.

Can't wait to get to my seat for this year's Breeder's Cup at the Great Race Place.

Bear in mind, it isn't as though we have had extremely wonderful racing product prior to this year. We already had a lot of problems, then on top of that came the weather, which made a bad situation worse (and which is not a complete fluke-- a rainy season in Southern California is something that can happen any year), and then on top of that over 20 horse deaths.


Don't treat any of these things as if they some isolated event that will never recur. When racing was healthy, Santa Anita NEVER had significant problems even when there was a rainy season. Do you realize that between 1934 and 1989, the first FIFTY-FIVE YEARS of the existence of the track, the shortest field Santa Anita ever saw was 4 horses? Despite plenty of rainy seasons and plenty of scratches and races moved off the grass (the turf course was installed in 1954), etc.


There's just so much wrong with Santa Anita. The track's signature race was postponed, but the truth is, the Santa Anita Handicap is no longer a race of any importance whatsoever anyway. Attendance is of course way, way down.


I don't know what the conversations are at Santa Anita right now. But they would be fools if they aren't considering the option of using this as a great opportunity to get out of a business that is dying anyway.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by ronsmac

I was reading an article on nyup.com whatever that is. It said 19 horses died during the 6 week Saratoga meeting of 2017 and 15 the year before. 34 dead during 12 weeks of racing sounded pretty bad , yet it didn't seem to get the coverage Santa Anita is getting. Maybe I'm wrong and this was given national coverage. If not, why is it a much bigger story now? 21 dead in 10 weeks does seem high but so did 19 in 6 weeks a couple of years ago. Maybe SI and Usa Today covered the story and I wasn't paying attention.

I don't know about 2017, but NYRA got a bunch of bad publicity on horse deaths a few years ago.


Something to remember here is that California is a cradle of the animal rights movement. A lot of celebrities are involved in PETA. So are a lot of Silicon Valley types. We have many more vegetarians here, and because it doesn't get that cold, fur coats never really became a fashion statement. And PETA protesters have been a fixture in front of Southern California tracks ever since they removed the artificial surfaces.


Plus we have a ballot initiative system where it is really easy to get measures on the ballot.


This state's horse racing is the absolutely perfect target for animal rights types. This was already true. But it is especially true when horses are dying, attendance is down, races aren't bettable anyway, and not a lot of money is being brought in.


I think it's pretty easy to see the future of California horse racing unless the sport gets its act together really, really quickly.

[cutchemist42]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

I don't know about 2017, but NYRA got a bunch of bad publicity on horse deaths a few years ago.


Something to remember here is that California is a cradle of the animal rights movement. A lot of celebrities are involved in PETA. So are a lot of Silicon Valley types. We have many more vegetarians here, and because it doesn't get that cold, fur coats never really became a fashion statement. And PETA protesters have been a fixture in front of Southern California tracks ever since they removed the artificial surfaces.


Plus we have a ballot initiative system where it is really easy to get measures on the ballot.


This state's horse racing is the absolutely perfect target for animal rights types. This was already true. But it is especially true when horses are dying, attendance is down, races aren't bettable anyway, and not a lot of money is being brought in.


I think it's pretty easy to see the future of California horse racing unless the sport gets its act together really, really quickly.

Thats the thing, its easy an easy target that no politcian will stick their neck out to save as its not really that important. TSG likely knows how valuable the property is for development anyway.

I mean, Caroline Betts who is the economist that has handled horse racing topics before was just tweeting recreational horse activites is worth more for GDP than horse racing.

[Hambletonian]

It is a different world now, for a lot of endeavors. Football is changing due to CTE, the NFL is changing the way the game is played, insurance for youth sports and up is going to skyrocket, and many folks are not going to allow their children to play now that they know the risk.

Horse racing has always been about gambling. Gambling, not handicapping. It used to be the only form of gambling allowed, until it was swallowed whole by a plethora of other avenues. The recent spread of sports betting will be an additional nail in the coffin.

You wanna have some fun? Do you take your girl or guy to a racetrack built a million years ago that is mostly empty, or go to a casino? Used to be you could go reserve a table in a trackside restaurant, have a nice meal and watch the races without leaving your table. Try pulling that off now at the average track. Hell, try getting any amenity now at a live racing event during the middle of the week.

Horse racing appeals to old guys like most of us who cut our teeth on the sport and have a long history with it. It is like the last few seasons of a hit show that has long since jumped the shark. You watch it of habit and nostalgia, nothing more, nothing less.

The only others are the rebate whales who have found a way to win while losing.

The issue today is not necessarily that injuries have risen, it is that people are paying attention. And the industry cannot point to much of anything as to the measures being taken to protect the equine athletes. The US is awash in vet work and medications now, pretty low on rest. The average horse runs until it can no longer compete anywhere. When was the last time you saw a cheap claimer being laid up for some R & R? it was relatively common when I first started reading the DRF...not so much anymore. Nobody wants to feed a horse that is not working apparently. Race it until it can't compete anymore and hope it is claimed and becomes somebody else's problem.

Very, very, very few horses exit the game the way they entered it. The ones that survive are beaten up, and awash with chronic injuries that will require constant medical monitoring. And thoroughbreds, as a group, are not exactly known as the easy going, mellow denizens of the equine world. Providing after care is not just providing a run in shed and a pasture.

A model like in the UK, where racing is a hobby and not a business for most of the occupants, is utilized in the steeplechase community in the US. But that is the horsey set, folks who ride for pleasure, own their own farms and have multiple generations who are deeply involved in the game. These folks have reputations to protect, and you can tell by the very low level of miscreants participating...and what happens to the ones who cross the line. The horses race and are used as pleasure horses, often simultaneously, and have a far easier retirement. They are only raced a handful of times a year, and many keep racing until old age. There are no form reversals, super trainers or betting coups. It is a sport first and foremost.

While thoroughbred racing is far better off than quarter horse racing or the cesspool that is harness racing, that aura of old money and history makes it a more likely target for activists.

I truly have no idea how this is going to shake out, but I am guessing business as usual is not going to be the standard 5 or 10 years out. I agree with many here that transparency concerning medical records would be a start, but I have a feeling the issue would be that what is revealed is too horrific to be of much help.While it may cut down on racing fatalities, it will not change the fact that there is very little market for a physically compromised race horse. Whether they die on the racetrack, are sold into slaughter directly or just end up suffering until they are euthanized is probably not going to matter to PETA.

We should immediately require stewards to provide Hong Kong-like racing reports. This transparency can only help the game, especially with handicappers. The second avenue is cradle to grave tracking of racehorses from the moment they are registered to the day they leave the sport one way or another, with a detailed "retirement" page. And a requirement that all injuries are reported and noted at the time of occurrence. Since racehorses are now microchipped, a requirement that all auctions and slaughter houses scan for microchips to keep the database updated should be implemented. Make it a crime to remove the microchips.

Taking measures like these will go a long way to showing that racing does care about it's equine athletes. It may not stop the protests that are becoming more prevalent, but it would at least provide an objective assessment of where the industry stands and what may still need to be done.

[castaway01]

Hambletonian, I think that is an excellent post and a great summary of the situation racing is in.

[Redboard]

Originally Posted by Hambletonian

……………………………...
The issue today is not necessarily that injuries have risen, it is that people are paying attention.
………………

I disagree with this statement. Maybe in the lower-claiming ranks this might be true, but most of the old-timers (I heard) say that in “big” races, breakdowns were virtually unknown. The fact that eight Belles was the first breakdown at the Kentucky derby in it’s entire over 130 year history, has to tell you something.

[Redboard]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

I haven't heard anything specific on the BC, but I would be shocked if they didn't at least have a line of communication open with Churchill and/or Del Mar right now to move it.

The BC isn't for six months. Calm down.

[Redboard]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

Second article from yesterday --

APNews.com | By PAUL NEWBERRY | Friday March 8, 2019
Column: Horse racing needs to clean up its act _ or go away:
https://apnews.com/ecd8fa29fdfd4da68...ign=SocialFlow




Reading between the lines of these two articles--

As news of this spreads, I wouldn't be surprised if in the not too distant future, tracks were forced into scanning horses for microfractures.


-jp

.

I think Dr Lyons makes a lot of sense. It’s all about the value of the horse vs. the cost of what it takes to make sure the animal is healthy enough to endure these 2-minute grinds. Drug testing is very expensive and needs constant updating, to keep up with the cheaters. The $300,000 CT machine she mentions would be another expense. Then there’s the cost of analyzing the CT scans. What if they added these measures and the vets start scratching half the field? Add to the fact that there’s no guarantee that this system is going to work. Remember, CA tracks don’t get purse supplements.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Redboard

The BC isn't for six months. Calm down.

The BC takes a couple of years to prepare. Of course they have a Plan B.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by Redboard

The BC isn't for six months. Calm down.

Thanks for your asinine post.....Relax.

[Someday Silent]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

I think this is very possible. Del Mar has had breakdown problems when the tides shift, and Santa Anita's synthetic surface was undermined by problems underneath.

I never knew that about Del Mar... but it makes sense.