Death and Disarray at Americas Racetracks

[appistappis]

A friend of mine owns a cheap 4000 claimer at ft erie. At 9 years old he can no longer run anymore but he has put him on a farm and pays 2 to 300 a month for his upkeep. Funny how you won't ever find a piece on his story.

[nijinski]

Originally Posted by appistappis

A friend of mine owns a cheap 4000 claimer at ft erie. At 9 years old he can no longer run anymore but he has put him on a farm and pays 2 to 300 a month for his upkeep. Funny how you won't ever find a piece on his story.

I like hearing this !

[racingfan378]

same here

the great stories about racing hardly get a second glance or read, but something bad happens and its the end of the world

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by racingfan378

same here

the great stories about racing hardly get a second glance or read, but something bad happens and its the end of the world

The problem lately is that something bad ALWAYS seems to be happening.

Whether it be another trainer busted...another jockey busted...another high profile horse breaks down in a high profile race...another high profile horse ends up in the slaughter house...and on and on and on and on...

Let's face it...the industry itself makes it EASY for the NY Times to write such articles...

That same industry does NOT make it EASY to find the positives...

[racingfan378]

i agree with you 100%

it is going to take a big wig with some balls to make the right choices to preserve this sport but i still dont think it is "dead" like some on here say

I was at AQU on the last day of the inner track where i saw four breakdowns in two races and left after that, i saw enough

doesnt mean i'll turn my back on the sport i love

we shall see how racing plans to clean up their act...

[menifee]

Originally Posted by Marlin

This is some nonsense. The first and last sentences are correct. However, what is in the middle makes it a bull**** sandwich. People chase that money regardless. A guy with a horse at a slot subsidized track is no more likely to enter a "lame or injured" horse than a guy at a track with no slots. In fact, the incentive would be greater with bigger purses to take a more patient approach. Your logic is dangerous because somebody might read it and actually be dumb enough to believe it. Whats next, slot subsidies killed Kennedy?

You are absolutely right = Adam Smith and thousands of other great economists must have had it wrong. Economic incentives and state subsidies have no impact on human behavior. People don't lie and cheat more if there is a greater economic reward subsidized by the state. Health care fraud would be the same if we had medicare or not. I don't know what I was thinking.

[aharon5741]

Soccer (non U.S.) has riots in the stands and people dying at a damn sporting event!

Great point, and way to put things in perspective. Let's not forget that 74 people were killed in a soccer riot in Egypt just last month, an extreme example for sure but people get killed at soccer (the beautiful game) matches every year. Kind of makes racing's problems as a sport seem minuscule in comparison.

http://articles.cnn.com/2012-02-01/a...d?_s=PM:AFRICA

[Robert Goren]

Originally Posted by aharon5741

Great point, and way to put things in perspective. Let's not forget that 74 people were killed in a soccer riot in Egypt just last month, an extreme example for sure but people get killed at soccer (the beautiful game) matches every year. Kind of makes racing's problems as a sport seem minuscule in comparison.

http://articles.cnn.com/2012-02-01/a...d?_s=PM:AFRICA

So that means we should ignore the problems of horse racing because Egypt doesn't know how to control crowds at soccer matches?

[depalma113]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

The problem lately is that something bad ALWAYS seems to be happening.

Whether it be another trainer busted...another jockey busted...another high profile horse breaks down in a high profile race...another high profile horse ends up in the slaughter house...and on and on and on and on...

Let's face it...the industry itself makes it EASY for the NY Times to write such articles...

That same industry does NOT make it EASY to find the positives...

Mine That Bird, Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta were all great stories with a ton of positive press. The problem is that there is a big anti horse racing agenda by a very few in this country and they pounce on every incident and blow it way out of proportion.

Eight Belles broke down on the track. A sad horrible event for racing, but what the media and PETA did to Larry Jones was borderline criminal.

The problem racing has is that it is run by people that grew up on farms or in farming communities. The media is controlled by people who have mostly never stepped on a farm in their life. When you mix that with a population that was raised by this same media to believe that animals have the same rights humans, it's a recipe for disaster.

[Marlin]

Originally Posted by menifee

You are absolutely right = Adam Smith and thousands of other great economists must have had it wrong. Economic incentives and state subsidies have no impact on human behavior. People don't lie and cheat more if there is a greater economic reward subsidized by the state. Health care fraud would be the same if we had medicare or not. I don't know what I was thinking.

No question, I agree here. I also agree with CJ that people buy and sell horses at a higher rate (flip) at tracks with slot infused inflated purses. However it is a large jump to go from there, to the assumption that people are entering a higher percentage of lame and injured horses at slot subsidized tracks. Thats not what I would consider a "lie or cheat". I would consider that something else entirely. People "lie and cheat" for economic reward. Where is the economic reward in entering a lame or injured horse? Possibly at the claim box. However idiots have been dropping unsound horses hoping to have them claimed since the claiming race was invented.(Before Racinos BTW)After all, people can't really think racing a lame or injured horse will result in riches on the track. They probably can't win. And if they cant win, where is the economic reward?

[Blenheim]

The mob clamored for speed and the breeders produced a fast horse - breeders couldn't have known that a fast horse would possess lighter, fragile bones. http://www.jockeyclub.com/factbook.asp?section=10 Breeders are now producing a fast fragile horse required to run more often - a deadly recipe, not only for the horse but for the rider. As they breed for more and more speed the likelihood of catastrophic incidences will also increase - we are witnessing a runaway effect that can only be reversed by breeding a stouter horse, a horse better able to withstand the rigors of more and more racing.

Most everyone is focused on the problem, few are focused on providing solutions.

[Cardus]

[QUOTE=Marlin]This is some nonsense. The first and last sentences are correct. However, what is in the middle makes it a bull**** sandwich. People chase that money regardless. A guy with a horse at a slot subsidized track is no more likely to enter a "lame or injured" horse than a guy at a track with no slots. In fact, the incentive would be greater with bigger purses to take a more patient approach. Your logic is dangerous because somebody might read it and actually be dumb enough to believe it. Whats next, slot subsidies killed Kennedy?[/QUOTE]

Very funny.

[Kirbyjrt]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

The problem lately is that something bad ALWAYS seems to be happening.

Whether it be another trainer busted...another jockey busted...another high profile horse breaks down in a high profile race...another high profile horse ends up in the slaughter house...and on and on and on and on...

Let's face it...the industry itself makes it EASY for the NY Times to write such articles...

That same industry does NOT make it EASY to find the positives...

You are exactly right. This is an industry problem. I don't know how to fix it. People can say what they want about me pulling my $100.00 on a Saturday from this industry. Good riddance to me I suppose. My choice, as it is theirs to continue to bet. I don't think I am going to put any tracks out of business, but as a consumer, I have to choose where to spend my entertainment dollars. I may not be out forever, but I would certainly like to read some things in the future on what the sport is doing to minimize the number of breakdowns.

Let the criticisms begin.

By the way, what is this basketball someone referred to? The day I spend $70 on a basketball game is the day h&&l freezes over.

[turninforhome10]

Originally Posted by Blenheim

The mob clamored for speed and the breeders produced a fast horse - breeders couldn't have known that a fast horse would possess lighter, fragile bones. http://www.jockeyclub.com/factbook.asp?section=10 Breeders are now producing a fast fragile horse required to run more often - a deadly recipe, not only for the horse but for the rider. As they breed for more and more speed the likelihood of catastrophic incidences will also increase - we are witnessing a runaway effect that can only be reversed by breeding a stouter horse, a horse better able to withstand the rigors of more and more racing.

Most everyone is focused on the problem, few are focused on providing solutions.

I am going out on limb here, but we have one of the only industry's where the only requirment for inclusion into a breeding program is four legs and a heartbeat. How much has the commercial market changed the way people breed? Is it more important for the breeder to produce a 9 and change 2yo or a horse that will remain sound? Get em to the sale and after that the horse is someone else's problem. How many sons of Storm Cat that never made the races do we need. The breedding book needs qualifications. Would like to see the data on the decline of the owner-breeder since the commercial markets started pushing out the million dollar babies.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

....

Let's face it...the industry itself makes it EASY for the NY Times to write such articles...

March 18, Summers at Delmar, pulled up, vanned off at Santa Anita.

http://www.equibase.com/static/chart...031812USA6.pdf

Six days later, March 24, Summers at Delmar, pulled up, vanned off at Turf Paradise.

http://www.equibase.com/static/chart...032412USA2.pdf

No work between races. Entered at a different track just two days after being vanned off.

You can change medication rules, breeding requirements, necropsy protocol, retirement accomodations... but as long as you have every person responsible for safeguarding the animal and the public at every stop between point A and point B just completely indifferent to, if nothing else, the perception problem that accompanies such a ridiculous scenario - racing will continue to shoot itself in the foot.

I've looked around and couldn't find this horse on a vet's list from California. Hard to imagine that he wasn't, but this is the type of failure arising from a horse moving between jurisdictions that makes me see the light on the need for centralization.

Maybe it was a total fluke occurence and the horse wasn't put on a vet's list for a good reason and nobody could have realistically thought that he would be entered right back and be vanned off again. But in 2012, with every lapse in judgement scrutinized when things go haywire and are used against you, there was almost no good outcome that could have happened in a race with a horse vanned off, back in less than a week later elsewhere, showing no work. Perception and manipulation of circumstances to tell a story are what is doing the sport in - this is just an example of many situations outside the parameters of what we usually blame for perception problems - things that needn't happen at all if those that rely on the sport for a paycheck would step up and recognize the "power of perception" and intervene before they add to the avalanche.