NYRA "safety steps"

[Tom]

Over 900 horse in m y study ran back in 14 days or less.
How many DAYS of full cards lost does that come out to?

[taxicab]

Originally Posted by GatetoWire

Make sure and read all of those rulings - especially the Chris Englehart one.
Almost all of the recent ones are not med violations.

Make sure you learn how to count.
Englehart has at least 10 medication violations showing in the allotted time frame.
It looks like the site goes back 10 years or so(perhaps Englehart has some older hot tests on his jacket).
The chemical trainers are well above the norm when it comes to catastrophic injuries.
Truth be told I was growing tired of cluttering up my post with individual violations........so I just put the blocks up for Chemical Chris & Bruce Juice.
BTW......CE second most recent was this Doozy:


https://www.thoroughbredrulings.com/...learsearch=YES

[nijinski]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

Who was the trainer?

The first Hizo the second one Persaud .

[mountainman]

I'd need proof of some correlation between recent activity and catastrophic breakdown. My intuition says given a large sampling of starters, horses that have been AWAY from the races pose the bigger risk factor for jocks.

I would assume dropping to 8 races is a compensatory measure intended to maintain current field size? Even so, both the 14-day and 25-length rules will make it harder to close entries. So I sympathize with the racing office.

Also, there is a certain mystique in wintertime about quick turnarounds that speak to trainer intent and produce explosive efforts. And aren't such instances part of the history and lore of cold weather racing in New York?

One thing is certain: these new rules make it harder for owners to stay afloat.

[davew]

I guess the good old days of watching the likes of Oscar Barrera run a claimer 6 times a month are over at Aqueduct.

[Stillriledup]

Quick turnarounds are mostly done because the horse is feeling so good, the trainer wants to get him or her back on the track....so, those horses aren't likely to break down. The rule is probably to prevent mismanagement of horses that the connections know the won't own after the race or they can get rid of easily.....so, the rule, while unfair to the ones who are legitimately sound and back in because they're sharp, is made to help the horses who are being rushed back recklessly.

If there was no claiming races and the connections knew they would own that runner unless she was sold privately, might not be as eager to rush them back, those horses would get managed like "good horses" and not like disposable commodities.

[cj]

The thing I'd like to see is claiming tags increased at least 50% for the purse levels, probably more. That would cut down on a lot of the crap we are seeing right now with horses being dropped right off the claim. The purse to claiming tag ratio is out of whack and it isn't good for horses or bettors.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by davew

I guess the good old days of watching the likes of Oscar Barrera run a claimer 6 times a month are over at Aqueduct.

Cracking up here. He's a guy I was thinking of. I haven't followed New York much lately, so I'm mired in the past.

[Robert Fischer]

There are well-meant quick turnarounds, and then there are barns who just run 'em till they drop.

A look at the odds offers a rough guess.

[Robert Goren]

So much for the statistical aberration theory. Even NYRA is not going with that anymore.

[GatetoWire]

Originally Posted by taxicab

Make sure you learn how to count.
Englehart has at least 10 medication violations showing in the allotted time frame.
It looks like the site goes back 10 years or so(perhaps Englehart has some older hot tests on his jacket).
The chemical trainers are well above the norm when it comes to catastrophic injuries.
Truth be told I was growing tired of cluttering up my post with individual violations........so I just put the blocks up for Chemical Chris & Bruce Juice.
BTW......CE second most recent was this Doozy:


https://www.thoroughbredrulings.com/...learsearch=YES

Why is it a doozy? Based on what I'm hearing he's choir boy if that is all he got caught for.
Many, Many others using way crazier stuff.

[Robert Fischer]

I'm going to be unpopular and a bit of a d-bag here, and offer my opinion on several posts.

I DO NOT want to discourage anyone from venting and posting their opinions,

I want to encourage debate. Feel free to reply and disagree.

First - My own opinion that(in spite of the mild 'uproar') these rules are very minor.

Originally Posted by GatetoWire

These new rules will do nothing to curb breakdowns. It's all PR.
NYRA can't be responsible for every horse running.
The trainer, vets and owners are the ones responsible. The trainer is the one in the stall everyday.
Tell me how any of these new rules will prevent a patched up horse from going to the gate?

I agree with you in general, and commend you for seeing it for what it is. PR is very important however, and when it comes to racing, a good PR move is worth praise. (Most corporations are automatic with PR and it is a bit slimey, but racing is so inept with using the media, that even PR is a good sign).
I also think it sets a good precedent, however minor.


They do not affect a large number of horses or trainers and the things they do affect aren't even necessarily correlated to what we are trying to reduce.

I do like that "safeguards" have been incorporated in the screening process and love the potential of the step, but this is very superficial, and it's biggest effect is the ability to publicly say "We care, and we have taken steps.."

I see 2 fundamental things regarding our due diligence

• Maintain the Track
• Screen the horses for Soundness

I've also stated that in addition to MUCH MUCH better screening of the horses, we should

• Incorporate 'Safeguards' into the Screening process

This means using subjective common sense or incorporating basic, common-sense related objective rules

25 lengths back is pretty much on the right track. 7days is debatable as being nonsense, but it sounds good, and is well-meant, and most importantly it sets a precedent for 'incorporating safeguards'.


Now on to the d-baggery by me:

Originally Posted by jross0108

I saw this post and saw a couple entries by a stable that seemed to run their horses back after less than 14-16 days so I got curious and decided to look up the stable (Reyana Racing) and their horses to see if their was a trend. Unfortunately there was...

There's nothing wrong with bringing a horse back after less than 14-16 days. (Well now there is, due to it being a rule)
I think you had the right intentions and feelings, but it would be very easy to read your post and come away with the idea that running horses back on short rest is somehow unethical or inherently bad. That simply isn't true. I don't mean to defend the specific barn you bring up, but details bother me. I'm a nerd. We could find a ton of horses brought back <14 days. The vast vast majority would be ethical. The unethical ones would be due to lousy creepy trainers whose quick turnarounds were part of a comprehensive unethical process.

Originally Posted by taxicab

How about the Elephant in the room.....
... [multiple overage links to trainers the OP felt were prominent]

Again your post is in the right frame of heart, but medication overages are hardly the elephant in the room.
We have a system. The system allows a certain amount of overages at a certain level of punishment. Most trainers are willing to take that punishment level for what they feel are necessary vet medications.
That isn't to say that PED use isn't a real problem. It certainly is. Every athlete with money behind them is using or has used at some time or has considered using - including equine. The cat is out of the bag, and racing's regulations are clearly not catching the explosive form reversals. I'm going to assume that the PED stuff was where your heart was in this post, excuse my nerd response concerning the multiple links on overages that you posted. Feel free to correct me.

Originally Posted by RXB

If they installed a synthetic surface on the inner track, they'd almost certainly reduce the fatality rate without having to resort to all of these rules and regulations, some of which are curious to say the least.

I deleted my original response, but since I'm being a jerk about the details and accuracy, I'll give this another go.
Your post makes no sense because you a saying that a radical surface change would somehow be less complicated and easier solution than the very minor rule changes.
We have yet to correlate the breakdowns on the inner to the surface itself, and many believe that it has more to do with cheap horses being treated as commodities than it does the surface. Not only does your contrast to "resorting to all these rules" make no sense as being more convenient than changing the surface to synthetic, it arguably wouldn't address the fundamentals behind the problem. That is before even considering all of the negative perception toward a synthetic surface.

[chadk66]

If the track vet was doing his/her job senseless rules like this wouldn't have to be put in place. But what would completely nullify any inclining for a rule like this would be a national drug policy with some serious teeth.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by chadk66

If the track vet was doing his/her job senseless rules like this wouldn't have to be put in place. But what would completely nullify any inclining for a rule like this would be a national drug policy with some serious teeth.

That's a tricky call, because if the jock says he or she is "good to go" why would the vet override them?

What's your experience with vets and scratching horses that the jock said they were willing to ride?

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by mountainman

Cracking up here. He's a guy I was thinking of. I haven't followed New York much lately, so I'm mired in the past.

Oscar was before my time but I remember Rick Dutrow with a Riccio NY-bred named WILLY BEAMIN

• 6/20/2012 WINS a 64K optional claimer @ 6-1
• 4 DAYS later WINS MIKE LEE NY stakes
• 2 months rest
• 8/22 WINS ALBANY Stakes
• 3 DAYS later 8/25 WINs KINGS BISHOP! @ 11-1 w/ a perfect trip. My best day betting in '12.
• Month off
• 9/30 2ND in Oklahoma Derby
• Month and a half off
• 11/17 2nd in G3 Discovery
• 5 DAYS later 11/22 last in FALL HIGHWEIGHT carrying top weight (133lbs)

These were well-meant entries where the guy trained his butt off.