Note: This is an open letter sent by a concerned racing enthusiast to all ESPN.com racing columnists and others. It is posted here as a contribution of the ongoing dialogue in the wake of Eight Belle’s death resulting from injuries suffered in Saturday’s Kentucky Derby.To whom it may concern:
Attached is a letter below on the current state of the horseracing industry and what, in my view, should be done to fix it. Hopefully you will find this useful and it is my earnest hope that this letter will foster discussion on implementation of the recommendations, or similar ones, to those provided below. I have sent copies to Horseplayer Magazine, BloodHorse, The Thoroughbred Times, The Daily Racing Form, NYRA, NTRA, Churchill Downs, Inc., Penn National Gaming, Magna Entertainment Inc., and the Grayson Foundation. I would appreciate your forwarding of this letter to Mr. Moss as well as anyone else in the industry not included in the above for whom you deem appropriate. Continued Inaction is Inexcusable
By way of introduction I have been a horseracing fan for thirty of my thirty-four years, ever since I watch Affirmed and Alydar battle it out in 1978 at the tender age of four.. Have been going to the track since I was six or seven and a serious handicapper and bettor since I was about fourteen. I have been saddened by the continued decline of the sport for the last three decades.
And now, once again racing as an industry will suffer bad publicity, and for every fan excited by Big Brown's victory, many more will be turned off to the sport forever by Eight Belles death on the racetrack, just as they were by Barbaro's catastrophic injury, and by Ruffian's tragic match race so many years ago. In the Derby’s aftermath there are letters from PETA, and an editorial in the NY Times by William C. Rhoden which compares the sport to bullfighting, defines it as animal cruelty, and pretty much implicitly calls for an outright ban on the sport itself. Far more people will be reading the NY Times sports pages than the defenses of what happened in the various industry publications. Is there any real defense? What defenses have been laid out, in my view have been woefully inadequate, as if everyone has closed ranks to call this a "freak accident". Maybe, in Eight Belles' case it was a freak circumstance and I'm not here to lay blame at the feet of either Trainer Larry Jones or Jockey Saez.
What I am concerned about as a horseplayer and a fan of the game, is the industry will once again either completely ignore the issue of racehorse injury, or even worse, go about fixing the wrong problems, such as PETA's letter which calls for the use of synthetic surfaces on a nationwide basis. Handle on the Derby, the signature event in racingwas down for the second consecutive year, and handle is everything in horseracing - it is the revenue source that supports the entire racing industry. Why was handle down, even while on track attendance was extremely high? Because big money bettors have deemed synthetic surfaces to be, if not impossible to handicap, at the least very difficult. Handle on the Breeder's Cup is likely to be lower as well when it is run at Santa Anita later this year.
There are three key questions to ask ourselves in the synthetic surface debate and safety debate: Are synthetic surfaces safer than dirt surfaces? If they are safer based on limited evidence so far, will they be safer in the long term? How do we satisfy both the safety concerns that will help prevent catastrophic injuries and satisfy the big money bettors who drive a high percentage of the handle, the lifeblood on which the industry depends? While I don't have hard core data (and it
would be interesting to me if someone who does have data could prove my anecdotal conclusions right or wrong) I do have my anecdotal observations from watching racing over the last thirty years of my life upon which I draw the conclusions below. I will take each of these questions in turn, and then address other issues in the game today before I conclude.
(1) Are synthetic surfaces inherently safer than dirt surfaces? Based upon the early evidence this should be a short discussion. The early evidence based upon injuries per starters shows that these surfaces, at least in the short term and on the limited data available are indeed safer. However, I would argue that synthetic surfaces are safer than dirt surfaces, as they are managed by track superintendents
in today's game. Historically speaking dirt surfaces are very safe. Back in the '60s horses could run every 7 to 14 days without any issues. In fact horses had run, up to the 1970's/80's for the better part of a century on dirt in relative safety. Now they are more likely to takebreaks of 28 to 40 days on a regular basis. To understand why this is so, we need to examine what has changed in the game snce then. The 1970's changed the game forever and it has created a slippery slope since the 1980's that has dragged horseracing on a perpetually downhill trajectory. These, are above and beyond the stock excuse of wider competition for gambling dollars, and include: inflation and the advent of year round racing, introduction of drugs into sports (the 1970's marked the beginning of the steroids era of football), and a change to the racing surfaces, which is my focus now.
There is no doubt that when one looks at race times, on average, that tracks are faster surfaces than they were historically. Why? Better drainage, lack of an adequate "cushion" on the surface, and track superintendents who "seal" the track and then squeeze and compress the dirt to oblivion to get all the water out so they can have a fast track (no doubt at the behest of track management). This then turns the track into a rock hard super highway, as was done on Derby Day. Anyone watching the early races, as I did, saw fractions that were very fast and knew inherently that the track had been pressed into a superhighway for the big day. All I remember fearing at the time was, someone's going to break down on this.
The best anecdotal evidence I have of this is a couple of years ago at Saratoga, as that is the one track I travel to in person for two weeks every year for the last twenty. They added a deeper cushion layer to the track throughout the meet, and injuries were indeed lower. Then the morning of Travers Day they were out scraping down the surface and making sure the track was "supped-up" for the big day. And what happened on the under card or on Sunday? (the memory fails). That's right; a cheaper horse got pulled up in the stretch after suffering a life ending injury.
So what can be done? Superintendents need to add a deep cushion layer to all dirt tracks and when it rains, do not seal the track, do not stamp it down into nearly cement hard fastness, just let it be as used to be done historically, because repeatedly doing that no doubt makes the course harder over time and compresses the cushion layer that needs to be maintained. When's the last time you saw a dirt course in the United States rated "muddy" that really wasn't rock hard fast nderneath surface water? How about a track rated "heavy", or "slow"?
Such track conditions were far more common historically, now they are virtually unheard of. In fact, the new track condition of "wet-fast" needed to be created because of how surfaces are managed differently today. What about the concern of trainers scratching en masse from non-fast track conditions? Well, track managements that actually enforce the scratch rules would be a start; but I say, let them cratch, it's far less a problem than letting horses compete on unsafe tracks. Lastly, for anyone who believes synthetics are safer than an adequately cushioned irt track that is left alone in weather, witness the issues with the Santa Anita surface this winter that caused closure of racing days it was so unsafe.
(2) Will synthetic surfaces be safer in the long term? Like the answer above, this touches on many inherent problems in today's game. We have to remember that adequately managed dirt surfaces were once safe as well. While poorly managed dirt surfaces are no doubt one of the reasons for catastrophic injuries, there are others. The fear is that these other factors, over time, will inherently lead to
catastrophic injuries being just as, or nearly as, prevalent over synthetic surfaces as they currently are over mismanaged dirt surfaces. There are two core problems that need to be addressed, otherwise I fear that outcome. First, legal and illegal drugs, and second, continuing refinement of breeding for ever greater speed.
When Ocala two year olds in training start breaking the 11 second barrier per furlong, I don't think there is any doubt that the successive generations of racehorses are being bred too fine for speed and not enough for stamina. This is no doubt driven by the need of the breeding industry for a quick monetary return on investment in two year old racing and the long term health of the horse be damned. This also creates a situation where horses retire after an 18 month career when
they've run 8-12 times, at the end of their three year old season, and there can be no long term sports fan identification with the stars of the sport to attract new ans to the game. Safer surfaces would no doubt help with horse longevity, but the economics of racing to breeding needs to change if racing is to survive. One of the more radical thoughts I've had for years is to make what is currently 2 year old racing for 3 year olds, and what is currently 3 year old racing for 4 year olds. I'm glad to see such influential individuals as Curlin's ownership also champion this ause.
So what can be done? Racing horses at 2 is probably the one area where I actually agree with the PETA types. Any astute horseman knows that horses at 2 are undeveloped and morelikely than not racing on knees that have not even closed yet. This cannot be conducive to the long term health of the animal. By starting racing when three year olds are in the spring of their three year old year, breeders would miss out on one year of quicker ROI, but then the whole economics would reasonably shift out. Of course, racing on safer surfaces as pointed out above would help. Racetracks actively shifting purses away from young horse racing would help, too,thoughI don't see managements actively doing this without being mandated to do so.
The drug problem is no doubt prevalent. When certain trainers were good "off the claim" historically it meant they got win percentages in the high teens, maybe twenty percent, first time with a new horse in a barn. Now trainers who are recognized by handicappers for this angle routinely get percentages in the thirties. It doesn't take much of a logical leap to know that something fishy is going on.
When prominent trainers such as Todd Pletcher, Steve Asmussen, and Big Brown's own Rick Dutrow, Jr. have all served suspensions of varying lengths for the illegal drugging of horses in their care, it's not much of a further leap to know that it
is extremely widespread. The drug problem is significant not only because it threatens the very integrity of the game from a betting perspective, but also because it threatens the long term health of the animal. Without horses and bettors there is no horse racing. It also threatens the long term health of successive generations of thoroughbreds as drugs are used to cover over various infirmities and
the "great" horses most sought after for breeding purposes breed those infirmities into the next generation, and so on, until the breed invariably thins out.
So what can be done? First and foremost, the banning of all drugs, including legal ones such as Lasix and Bute as they can be used as masking agents for other illegal drugging methods. Second, the testing of every horse, in every race for every known performance enhancing substance, via a sampling of urine and blood. The key industry
opposition to this in the past has been cost. I would gladly pay a 1% higher takeout on all bets made to cover the cost of such an endeavor that would assure the integrity of the game. I would gladly also pay a further 1% designated to equine health research. Third, if drug cheats are found, they should not be slapped with meaningless suspension and miniscule fines, as is current practice. If the steroid debacle in baseball has proven anything it is that the sport needs to clean itself
up. Any proven drug cheats should be banned from every race track in the United States for at least two full years. (although something more like five might be preferable), and upon reinstatement of their trainer's license should serve under a strict probation for five years, where they are even more closely monitored for any illegal activity. The punishment must fit the heinousness of this crime and the disregard it shows to the well being of the horse. Not only that but, criminal authorities should be allowed to get involved for repeated offenders and jail time should not be out of the question given animal protection laws already on the
books in many states.
(3) Is there a way to please both the bettors and insure safety? I've already half answered this question above by advocating for safer management of dirt tracks. The fact that handle is down at nearly all synthetic surface meets demonstrates the lack of form over this surface. Lack of form leads to lack of predictability, and lack of predictability will cause the big money players to walk and apply their gambling
intellect to either solely turf racing or, to the poker rooms at casino's around the world. Racing is a unique speculative endeavor, along with poker that is an intellectual pursuit and is beatable by some even after the track take. If such fans walk away, there is no more industry
So, what can be done? I would advocate for the mandated availability of the use of synthetic surfaces for training at all tracks, and of fully cushioned and properly maintained, as outlined above, dirt surfaces for racing. Since main tracks would be safer dirt, those course would be available for training as well if desired. Not only does this protect against declines in handle, but it also will keep horses significantly safer than otherwise, and should please horsemen, horse players, and
race track executives.
There is a last problem which needs to be fully addressed and that is the lack of a centralized regulatory authority to mandate all the recommendations, or even similar recommendations as those outlined above. Since racing is run unlike any other sport and "regulated" at the state level you get varying standards and procedures from track to track. I would urge the major racing operators: NYRA, Churchill Downs
Inc., Magna Entertainment Corp., Penn National Gaming, and others to work together via the NTRA not only to market the sport but create a national regulatory body, somewhat like a commissioner’s office in other sports that could mandate changes necessary for the long term health of the sport we all love, and the safety of the animals we enjoy watching compete like nothing else in life. This would also include the dismantling of year-round racing, requiring all equine competitors to be
turned out once a season for a minimum of ten weeks or bared from further competition.
The racing industry is well past the time for action on these issues of drugs, safety of surfaces, length of racing careers, and catastrophic injuries. The tragic fate of Eight Belles may not have been prevented by the changes outlined above, for nothing will be a 100% perfect But her tragedy should nonetheless, on the back of Barbaro's also tragic fate, be a call to action for the broader industry to pull itself out of decline. If there is blame to be assigned for Eight Belles and similar
incidents the racing industry need do no more than collectively look in the mirror. Imagine how popular baseball would be if players every so often died when rounding third base and turning for home? Imagine the same for football if players did likewise after touchdowns? Imagine that, and it is suddenly not so hard to understand why the game has lost popularity since the 1970's and has found it so hard to compete for both sports fans and gambling dollars. I would urge bettors, if current practices do not change, to allocate your handle dollars away from two year old racing and synthetic surfaces, and to not bet on dirt races at tracks where superintendents and managements mismanage the surface. Fix it, and fix it now, or we'll all be gone, or close enough to it, within the next three decades.
Sincerely,
Ross A. Fowler
Lifelong Racing Fan
ramf007@yahoo.com