Maybe PETA has a point ...

[Geno_Gino]

... that horse racing is "archaic" and "inhumane" ...

I had an interesting conversation yesterday with a colleague at one of the Mid-Atlantic thoroughbred race tracks, something along the lines of "I've lost interest in the game in the past few years."

Granted, my NYRA BETS account showed I pushed $128K through that platform last year (with an $8K loss), and there was probably another $20K I bet live on-track. Not a major player yet more than a $2 bettor.

Still, the breakdowns, blatant juicing and perhaps my old age have all combined to leave a sour taste in my mouth regarding racing.

I suppose I can still recall the "glory days" -- hearing the crowd gasp when Turkoman accelerated on the turn in the 7F 1986 Forego Handicap, only to fall short of catching the speedy Groovy (I was forever enamored with speed trumps closers after that race); seeing the filly April Run have that "push button" acceleration on the far turn in taking the 1981 D.C. International; and driving from Annapolis to Belmont Park to witness Abby Fuller sweep the 1985 Filly Triple Crown on Mom's Command.

That being said, I have grown tired when work colleagues or friends ask about horse racing, saying they heard on the news that "there were a bunch of horses that died before the Kentucky Derby this year ..."

The standard "these unfortunate accidents could happen to any horse in the wild" ... "thoroughbreds are normally cared for better than any other animal I'm aware of" ... "the sport is a large economic driver for the state" ... grow stale over time.

Who is the sport still catering to at this point? Degenerate gamblers like me; egotistic, smarmy little "know-it-alls" on Twitter or TV that spout their knowledge of an "inside bias" or "faster turn time" as if only they are right; has-beens of the sport that probably couldn't handle a real gig if their life depended on it?

Maybe it is time to move on. Jerry Garcia died in 1995; perhaps it's time to put horse racing to rest as well.

[MJC922]

In a way I do hear where you're coming from but then we both know it's a fantastic game and while some of my passion for it has waned as well it would be a shame to see it all go away. IMO some of the problems have been brought about by the medications that have entrenched themselves into the US sport. They've painted themselves into a corner with too many medications being permitted. Horses tend to need much more recovery time because of it. I mean you probably remember in the 70s if you hadn't raced for a month it was almost a negative. Now it's at the point where if you're say coming off a new top and you're back in two to four weeks you need to be very concerned that it might be asking too much. When there's discussion to change the spacing of the triple crown series that says a lot. Plus you have drugs like clenbuterol in the mix which require being held out for a certain number of weeks so the layoff becomes even more of a positive from that standpoint too. The co-worker thing resonates with me as well, I was going to wear my Woodbine t-shirt to the office tomorrow morning but on second thought after checking out the rest of what happened yesterday, wow.

[Sheffwed]

okay but what about the horses?

the idea that racing is bad, no racing is good does not consider at all the actual future for the horses themselves

What purpose for the horse in the modern world? If we don't answer that question, then where are we on helping truly make things better?

Mankind and horses had a symbiotic relationship since horses first emerged from Arabia. Horses were the means of transportation and agriculture, and now we just discard them?

Its amazing to me how little so many people actually think about the (global) outcome of what they suggest - it is human nature to become uncomfortable about the status quo - the same is true with climate change, and what about other countries? The best case scenario resolutions are always more complicated and need more thought

What do you think the horses would want?

To be raised and treated well in places like Fair Hill and the English countryside for starters, and some are born wanting to run

This isn't boxing - if we really care about horses, then maybe think about the actual resultant outcome of your actions if they were to be successful

[VeryOldMan]

This is getting tough to watch - another catastrophic breakdown in the 4th at Saratoga today.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by VeryOldMan

This is getting tough to watch - another catastrophic breakdown in the 4th at Saratoga today.

Maybe sealing the track because of all the rain has had an impact on the surface?

Maybe the industry should think about slowly accelerating the move towards turf racing and consolidating along those lines.

[Sheffwed]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Maybe sealing the track because of all the rain has had an impact on the surface?

Maybe the industry should think about slowly accelerating the move towards turf racing and consolidating along those lines.

turf was the problem today, you need tapeta for when races have to come off the turf also

and of course, while they bought Colonial, also has no idea how to grow and maintain a turf course

[cj]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Maybe sealing the track because of all the rain has had an impact on the surface?

Maybe the industry should think about slowly accelerating the move towards turf racing and consolidating along those lines.

Off topic a bit, but I wonder if the dirt / turf breakdown numbers are skewed a bit because of how rarely we run on turf that isn't at worse good and mostly firm. In addition, the times the races are moved from turf, it is largely to a less that great dirt surface.

With the shortage of horses these days, is it the end of the world if we cancel on bad weather days? I know all the arguments against, but there are plenty for as well, namely safety of horse and rider.

[Al Gobbi]

Originally Posted by cj

Off topic a bit, but I wonder if the dirt / turf breakdown numbers are skewed a bit because of how rarely we run on turf that isn't at worse good and mostly firm. In addition, the times the races are moved from turf, it is largely to a less that great dirt surface.

With the shortage of horses these days, is it the end of the world if we cancel on bad weather days? I know all the arguments against, but there are plenty for as well, namely safety of horse and rider.

It would be tough to do at the places that get good/great crowds daily (SAR, DMR, OP, KEE) but why not at the other venue that are essentially empty most live racing days? If a random Thursday card at Belmont in June or October has six of nine races scheduled for grass and weather results in them not being able to run them on it, why not just outright cancel that card?

[PaceAdvantage]

I wish we could go back to the age when people didn't freak out so much when a horse broke down. I know that's cold to say...but...look where it's lead us...

Trainers rarely work their horses hard (there are still some who do, but it's now very much the exception)...and they certainly don't race their horses hard like they did back when I was getting into the game (30+ years now)...

Does this "babying" of racehorses (especially the superstars) lead to more fragile racehorses? Well it's certainly not leading to more stout racehorse, that's for sure.

It's also lead to smaller fields...fewer horses being raced because trainers now space them out in terms of weeks instead of days...

None of this has been beneficial to racing...and I dare say it hasn't been beneficial to the horses either.

Plus, when you face reality, the only way to prevent another racehorse from breaking down on the track is to eliminate racing in its entirety. That's another cold thing to say, but it's brutally honest.

So where does that leave us?

Nowhere good.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Al Gobbi

It would be tough to do at the places that get good/great crowds daily (SAR, DMR, OP, KEE) but why not at the other venue that are essentially empty most live racing days? If a random Thursday card at Belmont in June or October has six of nine races scheduled for grass and weather results in them not being able to run them on it, why not just outright cancel that card?

If they cancel baseball games and other outdoor sporting events due to weather, they can cancel horse racing due to weather. Of course it isn't ideal and it sucks in many cases, but life isn't always fair. It is undeniable that more breakdowns occur on "off" tracks be it dirt or turf.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by cj

Off topic a bit, but I wonder if the dirt / turf breakdown numbers are skewed a bit because of how rarely we run on turf that isn't at worse good and mostly firm. In addition, the times the races are moved from turf, it is largely to a less that great dirt surface.

With the shortage of horses these days, is it the end of the world if we cancel on bad weather days? I know all the arguments against, but there are plenty for as well, namely safety of horse and rider.

I never considered looking at data like that, but I would hope someone involved in horse safety has.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Sheffwed

turf was the problem today, you need tapeta for when races have to come off the turf also

Thanks. I didn't even realize that. I wasn't playing today. I was on the road until late in the card.

[cj]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

I wish we could go back to the age when people didn't freak out so much when a horse broke down. I know that's cold to say...but...look where it's lead us...

Trainers rarely work their horses hard (there are still some who do, but it's now very much the exception)...and they certainly don't race their horses hard like they did back when I was getting into the game (30+ years now)...

Does this "babying" of racehorses (especially the superstars) lead to more fragile racehorses? We'll it's certainly not leading to more stout racehorse, that's for sure.

It's also lead to smaller fields...fewer horses being raced because trainers now space them out in terms of weeks instead of days...

None of this has been beneficial to racing...and I dare say it hasn't been beneficial to the horses either.

Plus, when you face reality, the only way to prevent another racehorse from breaking down on the track is to eliminate racing in its entirety. That's another cold thing to say, but it's brutally honest.

So where does that leave us?

Nowhere good.

I don't think people freaking out about breakdowns is what has led it to where we are now with horses being lightly trained and lightly raced. It is way more about the trainers and how horses are handled, and even more so because so few trainers actually have most of the stakes horses these days. It has become a self-fulfilling prophecy when most of the top trainers don't trainer hard or race often. This started happening way before breakdowns became a talking point for those that want to destroy horse racing.

[PaceAdvantage]

Now we have jurisdictions moving entire meets to another locale (CD -> ELP) because a perfectly rational statistical probability occurred.

Did they ever find out the REASON for the cluster of breakdowns at CD?

I don't recall seeing any...so it's going to happen again someday...for no reason at all.

[affirmedny]

I never see anyone mention that horses don't warm up as long as they used to. It used to be close to 10 mins, now often less than 5, often just 2 or 3. Does it make a difference? I don't know, but it sure seems that there were less of these incidents when they warmed up longer.