The result will be felt next year, when the erosive effect of the absence of these horses will be reflected in the competition, or lack thereof, in the handicap division, which has suffered this trend for years. What shape and form would the 2007 racing season have taken had the Maktoums elected to keep Bernardini, the leading three-year-old of 2006, in training?
There is nothing easier that casting those who sell top horses to Arab interests in the light of greed, but the criticism comes only from those who have never owned a horse or been presented with an eight-figure proposal.
Criticizing those who seize incredible opportunity is ludicrous. Never been there, never done that does not meet the minimum qualification. In the main, racing horses is not a profitable enterprise and yes, it is always about the money. This is not a philanthropic endeavor.
The Maktoum family and Coolmore, the other mightily armed global force in the breeding industry, have an entirely different set of objectives and sensibilities, more European than American. In Europe, classic winners are retired almost immediately. Since these almost ubiquitous entities have the wherewithal to collect classic winners like ordinary people collect Kentucky Derby glasses, American racing will continue to see its three-year-old stars vanish into the bluegrass before their fourth birthdays.
Still, it is also undeniable that the premature, almost unanimous retirement of the best three-year-olds of every season is detrimental to the sport’s mainstream public appeal.
The core racing audience will turn toward the renewed chase toward the Triple Crown shortly after the holidays. Those with no more than a casual interest will take not take notice until the spring, by which time the new cast of Kentucky Derby contenders will have been defined. This is a large group with a short span of attention. When the three-year-old stars that have become the focus of attention disappear into the esoteric realm of the breeding world, interest wanes, then fades entirely.
The end of this trend is not yet in sight but like all trends dictated by the precepts set forth in Economics 101, this, like all pendulums, will eventually find itself at the other extreme.
Still, when that happens – when the Maktoum family and Coolmore own so many high-end stallions that the market becomes diluted; when the sons of stallions already in service with years of productive life still ahead are the leading figures of their generations and immediate demand for these bloodlines among the most financially capable breeders wanes, then horses will remain in competition for longer periods. That will take awhile. But even then, it will still be about the money.


31 Oct 2007 at 05:21 pm | #
There are two distinct sides to Thoroughbred racing: the first side are owners and trainers, the second side is us bettors who wager on the races.
The first side could care less about the second side, and the second side’s bettors, the hard-core, could careless about the first side.
Us bettors want a race, any race, to have a full field where payoffs are significant. Us bettors don’t give a damn if the purse is $500,000 or $10,000, just give us a full field race to wager on.
Whether all, some, or none of the current three-year-old supposedly class thoroughbreds are retired or are going to return to racing as 4-year olds is of no significance to us bettors. Again, give us a field of horses, ten to twelve, and let us bet. Be it at Delaware, Pennyslvania, or Suffolk.
What do I care if Curlin runs again. I am a gambler and am looking at the next race at several racetracks. It’s about gambling stupid!
When NTRA and the member racetracks start promoting racing as an alternative to casino gambling, things might improve (this will, of course, require a purge of all breeders/owners from ownership and being directors). To continue to believe that a ‘star’ thoroughbred is going to bring the crowds back is ridiculous.
The betting window is the attraction, not the thoroughbred. When will track management get it?
And, how long will the states’ legislature continue to authorize a portion of slot revenue to fund Thoroughbred racing, run before more birds than people?
Again, the attraction is the betting window, not the thoroughbred.
01 Nov 2007 at 02:32 pm | #
I know the hard core gamblers don’t care if the top 3 yr olds come back. But the fans, the people who love the sport because of the horse need to have the stars stay in the game. They understand the economics, but why can’t the economics change.
It should be that if you are an owner, and your horse can compete in allowance races, overnight handicaps even claimers you should be able to make money. It’s a shame that owners think they are ahead of the game if their horses allow them to break even. Purses need to go up. It is a known fact that if you have higher purses you get better horses and the races are competitive.
How to get larger fields? That has been a question throughout the years. I don’t have the answer. I agree that we need larger fields, it is good for the gamblers and it is good for the fans.
One idea to stop the 3 yr olds from going to the breeding shed is a series of races for older horses. With huge purses and longer distances. Make it financial viable to keep these horses running. Also, something along those lines for the lesser older horses. I’m sure that with the right distance and a good purse structure these races would have full fields and the local fans would have older horses to follow.
We have to remember not one entity is responsible for the sport, everyone contributes. The gambler, the breeder, the tracks, the trainers, the owners all are important. But the number one is the horse, without them we have nothing. It is like one big pie, and everyone should be doing their best to protect the pie instead of trying to just take care of their little piece of it.
01 Nov 2007 at 09:05 pm | #
wmcorrow, I realize that to the bettor, it doesn’t matter who they are, “give me a full field and a false favorite and I’m happy.” I play the horses at tracks from Saratoga to Gulfstream to Presque Isle to Philly with several locations and class levels in between.
I also follow “racing” in the sense of retirements, who’s selling what at sales and for how much and what racing administrators are up to. Does wondering if Curlin will ever race help me with the card at Delaware? No! But I want to know what the future of the game is. When overall handle at huge events is down dramatically it is meaningful to the game. When top young racehorses (those with the ability to create new interest) are retired young, it’s meaningful to the game. When sales records are down and breeders are stuck with leftover stock that racing buyers don’t want, it’s meaningful for the game.
I would advise that if you are not interested in these aspects of the game (which are much written about here and elsewhere) that you focus your reading on racing sites with discussions of handicapping method and theory. Many such blogs and discussion groups exist. It’s not nessessary to write an 8 paragraph diatribe explaining to Paul why you don’t even care about the subject of his post. Just skip to one of the handicapping pages.
02 Nov 2007 at 12:43 am | #
Sysonby (#3 above). Thank you for your very polite and well written response to my diatribe.
I have lost all respect for breeders,horse owners and racetrack administrators as they operate in their own little world with absolutely no regard for the bettor, who, at one time, financed racing (now funded primarily by slot revenue); their long-term interest in Thoroughbred racing is nonexistant.
At the most prominent racetracks, money earned from takeout on the cheap claiming races and lower level allowance races, the races that are the meat and potatoes of racing, is virtually stolen and used to fund the six-figure stake races that are usually won by the seven or eight top trainers, with their wealthy clients receiving the largest share of purse money when a meet is concluded; does this procedure seem to you to be in the best interest of promoting racing for all involved, or a select few?
And of course, the retirement every year of the best three-year-olds; is this in the best interest of racing?
As I have said, there are two sides to racing: a) the breeder/owner/trainer/track management, and b) the bettor.
I am no longer interested in the aspects of the ‘a’ side, as they are destroying racing. I am absolutely flummoxed that people who write about racing cannot see the forest for the trees: Thoroughbred racing is about gambling, it is not a sport; and most breeders and owners wouldn’t be found dead at a racetrack on a weekday.
And finally two things: 1) tell me just what is the difference between a $10,000 claiming race and a stake race, other than one might be run a few seconds faster, and 2) as long as there is a racetrack operating, there will be breeders suppling horses.
04 Nov 2007 at 11:18 am | #
Paul, you mentioned that the Forgo was worth 15M to Hard Spuns owner, I think you ment to say The Kings Bishop. If not, please explain.
I note the comment that argues that racing is about betting only, to a certain degree thats true, but on the other hand, it seems to me if racing is only for bettors, its all but doomed. I live near Rockingham Park which now only hosts trotters, now thats about betting, but the handles are very small and can bearly keep the track open. The atmosphere is that of an old smoke filled betting rooms fulled with hapless bettors, its almost sad. At Suffolk, they cancelled the Mass Cap for a number of years because they dont have enough cash to fund regular purses and a marquee event. Every track clamours for slots as a funding mechanism, and casinos are opening everywhere. If
horse racing is for betting, and is not a sport in and of itself, how long will it before racing is replaced by some other method of betting. There has to be something more to racing than just a vehicle for betting if it is to survive. Im not a huge bettor, but havent missed a Travers in 22 years, Ive been to a few Derbys and a BC,as well as a host of historic race tracks around the country, Im drawn to the sport, not because of betting, but because of the excitement and pure athleticism of race horses. I love the history and tradition and the promise of constant renewal of greatness with every new crop of racers. I have 2 young daughters with whom I have watched every major race since they were born, they are drawn to these atheletes just like their father. I brought my youngest home 2 days before Smarty Jones went for the Triple crown, she hasnt missed a triple crown race since. When Barbaro went down, we prayed for him together everynite, and when he was put to sleep we cried together. When George pulled up, she new something was wrong, I turned off the TV before she could hear anymore about it. My little girls dont know that you can bet on horses, so there is more to horse racing than just something to bet on and its this mystique that the officials of racing need to build on to ensure the sports future.
04 Nov 2007 at 11:54 am | #
I agree with Harold. The future of racing doesn’t lie with the gambling end, and I’m not saying it’s not important, it’s what fuels the purses etc. But people have to be fans first and foremost before some breakoff into the gambling mode. Fans is what fuels all sports, whether it be football, baseball, basketball etc. And don’t tell me they aren’t gambling sports, maybe not at the stadiums but gambling is rampant for all sports. Ours is legalized at the venue.
But where would all these sports be without fans? No where. Even NASCAR which is the most absurd sport of them all has a huge fan base, with women being the driving force behind it’s growth. Hmmmmm, should we be taking a lesson here and applying it. How many women do you know that didn’t have a love of horses when they were little girls? Ahem, shouldn’t we use that fact and turn it into a love affair of thoroughbred racing as grown women?
Fans, we need more of them and something drastically needs to be done soon to bring more into our sport.