Indeed, the impediments to horseplayer confidence within voting distance of the President's residence have set new precedents in 2013.
The crime against horseplayers is their inability to wager on-line because elected representatives failed to renew recently expired ADW legislation during the lame duck session.
It's not quite as bad as it is in Arizona where Internet wagering has already been mowed down by shady characters. However, like Arizona tracks, the Illinois tracks will benefit during this period from increased simulcasting host fees while there is no live racing in the state.
The crime of the century impacting Illinois racing actually took place in Kentucky. Recently the Chicago Tribune reported, "Now that Churchill Downs has turned the Illinois Derby into a dead end street on its new Road to the Kentucky Derby series, Hawthorne Race Course is trying to remake it into a superhighway to the Preakness.
Hawthorne has increased the purse of the Chicago circuit's premier main track race for 3-year-olds from $500,000 to $750,000 and will run it April 20, two weeks before the Kentucky Derby and four weeks before the Preakness."
Hawthorne honcho, Tim Carey, said, "... we're looking to get sponsorship so we can increase the purse even more."
During its annual racing dates award meeting back in September, the IRB shifted several hundred thousand dollars worth of simulcast host commissions from Arlington to Hawthorne. "... Carey testified to the IRB that additional money steered Hawthorne's direction could be used to boost the purse of the Illinois Derby to $750,000 or $1 million, but Carey said after the meeting that no specific plans had been formulated."
Hawthorne was granted 19 more such days (17 at Arlington's expense) as "...the Board appeared miffed at the decision of Churchill Downs to leave the Illinois Derby off Churchill's newly devised points system that qualifies horses for the Kentucky Derby..."
The decision to increase the IL Derby purse was supported by the Illinois Thoroughbred Horsemen's Association, "but with a string attached: Hawthorne agreed to reduce purses at its fall meeting by an equal amount and put the money into daily purses at its ... spring meeting." But however they try to spin it, the $250K purse increase comes at the expense of the fall meeting.
I'm on record as being one of those offended by Churchill Down's decision to exclude the IL Derby as a KY Derby qualification race. It was a petty and unnecessary exception to an otherwise sensible strategy that encourages all starters to compete as three-year-olds in open races on dirt and synthetics at a mile and over. More importantly, it funnels most contenders' preparation into a period from 7 to 3 weeks prior to the main event; forcing them to face higher levels of competition in the process.
I believe that this type of purse increase is misuse of funds by Hawthorne. If they want to see a horse come out of the IL Derby and beat the KY Derby winner in the Preakness, then such a horse must actually start in the Preakness. The purse increase accomplishes nothing if nobody goes!
A better strategy might have been to use the money for bonuses (sponsor/insurance paid?) to each IL Derby starter who starts in Preakness, with further incentives for those finishing in the top three.
Even without the purse increase, the IL Derby would still be the most lucrative Preakness prep not called the KY Derby. A "mere" $250K increase wouldn't change that. One can understand Hawthorne's desire to derail the Triple Crown applecart this year, but it's just another example of how the industry cannot cooperate even in an endeavor that should unite it.
In a year that promises to send more competitive performers to the KY Derby, the odds against a horse coming out of the IL Derby winning the Preakness against several KY Derby qualified contestants would seem astronomical.
If Mr. Carey goes ahead with a flawed plan that throws good money after bad, it would effectively reward the vindictive CDI with a double dose of damage to the racing program at Hawthorne.


12 Feb 2013 at 04:48 pm | #
Indy, just tweeted your piece.
12 Feb 2013 at 06:12 pm | #
Andy,
I hope they’ll come back after the text in the 6th and 7th paragraphs is repaired.
12 Feb 2013 at 06:14 pm | #
Don’t worry about nothing. Give me a call.
13 Feb 2013 at 06:19 pm | #
I, great write per usual! THE NIGHT CHICAGO DIED?
I agree with everything you said except the second to last paragraph. IMO it’s possible that a late developing horse like Verrazano or Orb who have zero points now could not qualify for the KY Derby and easily win the Illinois Derby/(Preakness or Belmont) Double. With horses running so infrequently leading up to the Derby one bad trip would be all it takes to not qualify.
Trying to lure horses from the Classics with bonus money has happenned before. Remember when Spend A Buck won the Ky Derby and skipped the Preakness for the bonus money of the Jersey Derby. In this case Hawthorne has the justified right to derail the TC applecart. CDI for their own selfish good has put their agenda in the face of horseplayers and fans of the sport. Hawthorne should try to raise as much bonus money as it can through sponsors. Who knows? Maybe a great rivalry or buzz will be created with the IL Derby winner facing off against the KY Derby winner.
The beat goes on…
War Emblem won the race
On the East Side of Chicago
Back in the USA
Back in the good old days
Then in the heat of a summer night
In the land of the dollar bill
When the town of Chicago died
And they talk about it still
When a monopoly called CDI
Tried to destroy the fans of Hawthorne Park
And they called their gang to war
Against the forces of the law
I heard my momma cry
I heard her pray the night Chicago died
Brother, what a night the people saw
Brother, what a fight the people saw
Yes, indeed…
13 Feb 2013 at 08:31 pm | #
Cat,
Your observation is noteworthy, but I think you have to look at the tradeoffs.
How likely is it that a horse that could only run once during the 10-week period preceding the Derby (without winning) would be ready to capture the Triple Crown?
I’m sure there are people even more upset that the 2YO champion doesn’t get a free ticket than I am that no-one can earn a ticket in the IL Derby, but the KY Derby is a race for 3YOs that are hopefully mature and fit enough to handle 10 furlongs, and more down the road.
Getting in is one thing; deserving to be there based on previous accomplishment is another.
IMO there should be a minimum point total that must be accumulated to enter the starting gate. My guesstimate would be 20, but I think we need some iterations of the process to determine a fair one.
13 Feb 2013 at 11:22 pm | #
I,
you might have missed my point, you said:
“In a year that promises to send more competitive performers to the KY Derby, the odds against a horse coming out of the IL Derby winning the Preakness against several KY Derby qualified contestants would seem astronomical”.
This stray Cat says it’s not astronomical with a possible scenario;
Lets say Verrazano who went off the favorite in the first futures pool besides all others, gets squeezed at the start losing all chance in his next race the Tampa Bay Derby. With zero points the connections opt for the easier Illinois Derby/Preakness route with say a 2 mil bonus instead of the harder Wood Memorial/KY Derby route. Verrazano now wins the Illinois Derby impressively. Why can’t Verrazano now beat the KY Derby winner in the Preakness? He would have two more weeks rest I might add and be the fresher horse. This is just one example and I’m sure there are others.
Don’t get me wrong, I like the new point system except the exclusion of the IL Derby. If Hawthorne can get a sponsor to put up a big bonus they could throw a monkey wrench into the TC equation, that’s all.
14 Feb 2013 at 10:09 am | #
Cat,
Meant to express my appreciation for your kind words and somehow managed to exclude it in the process of responding.
A belated Thank You,
Mr. Completely
Seriously, with ten weeks between the Tampa Bay Derby and the KY Derby, what owner of a Derby prospect wouldn’t prefer to take his best shot at getting into the KY Derby?
Spend A Buck’s connections were in a different situation. They had already won their classic, and probably doubted their horse had two more big races in him over the next 5 weeks, especially one at 12 furlongs. Under those circumstances, running for the bonus instead of in the Preakness made a lot of sense.
It wouldn’t bother me to see the IL Derby winner upset the KY Derby winner in the Preakness, but I’d rather see the next TC winner emerge. I suspect that there will be more defections than expected from the CDI qualified races that CDI will have to involve more preps in the future to achieve their objectives.
If Carey can obtain sponsors for bonuses, more power to him. I think the IL Derby is likely to get a full field even without bonuses, and that the winner will likely go to the Preakness, if he stays sound. I just don’t see anybody planning to take that route while they have reasonable options.
In the meantime, robbing Fall Peter to pay Spring Paul won’t put Humpty Dumpty back together again.
14 Feb 2013 at 03:13 pm | #
I think one of the unintended consequences of the new point system is that it’s virtually impossible to bet the Derby Future Pool. At this point anyway, no one has enough points to make the Derby based on the anticipated points that will be required. Most think it will take somewhere between 40 and 50 points. The current leader has, I believe 24 points.
Last year I bet I’ll Have Another in Pool 1 after he won the Lewis. I figured he had enough money from that race and would only need to run well, 3rd or 4th even, in a subsequent prep.
I couldn’t use that strategy this year and will have to wait till Pool 2 at the earliest.
BTW Pool 1 had alower handle this year than last.
14 Feb 2013 at 04:34 pm | #
DM,
Something to keep an eye on for sure! How much lower was it, percentage-wise?
I wonder if the points allocation system itself is responsible, or that there are now fewer opportunities available to accumulate them?
15 Feb 2013 at 11:22 am | #
I,
the difference was not large, perhaps 20 or 30 thousand dollars on pools in excess of 600k (combined win and exacta).
you’ll have to do your own research. I’m just going by memory.
DM
15 Feb 2013 at 02:22 pm | #
Thanks, DM
My favorite futures story is this one by former HRI columnist, Bill Christine:
http://articles.latimes.com/1996-10-28/sports/sp-58802_1_alphabet-soup