Monday, November 17, 2008

Substance was Curlin’s Star Quality

(CHICAGO, IL – November 17, 2008) This past Saturday, Jess Jackson confirmed what everyone expected. Curlin, the 2007 Horse of the Year, would be leaving the racetrack. He would retire as the first star of the sport in over a decade to remain in competition past his 3-year-old year.

The handsome chestnut son of Smart Strike, soon to become a 5-year-old, will begin the routine of servicing mares at one of Kentucky’s brand name stud farms. In addition, Jackson indicated that Stonestreet Farms, where the California wine maker has 20 mares awaiting fermentation, was a possible future domicile for his star.

“I really am eager to see his colts and fillies race and see what he produces,” said Jackson, who earlier this week submitted a sealed bid to the court for the 20 percent ownership in Curlin that was left vacant by a judgment against former partners. Technically, Curlin raced the second half of his career as the part property of a “court-appointed receiver.” The circumstances of his connections never worked to the champion’s advantage.

Jackson came to be majority owner the way many owners latch on to a top runner – by buying into it. Prior to February 2007, the Midnight Cry Stables of prison mates William Gallion and Shirley Cunningham, Jr., who were then free and awaiting a court date, owned the colt entirely. As a matter of fact, it was Cunningham who named Curlin after his great, great grandfather. Charles Curlin was a slave that fought in the Civil War for the Confederate forces.

Midnight Cry’s find didn’t race as a 2-year-old. But he broke his maiden at Gulfstream Park at first asking, prompting Jackson to assemble a group that paid the stable $3.5 million for an 80 percent interest. The purchasing group included Florida software developer Satish Sanan’s Padua Stables and George Bolton, an investment banker from San Francisco. For a brief time, the way these men selected whose silks the horse would race in was an amusement. But just for a brief time.

With four sets of owners, “musical silks” was their process. Curlin’s jockey wore different colors in the colt’s maiden win, in his follow-up Rebel Stakes victory, in his Arkansas Derby triumph and in the Kentucky Derby. But, then, step by step, the partnership disintegrated and Jackson’s gold and maroon silks became vogue. When Gallion and Cunningham went to jail for defrauding their clients, the court ordered that their share in the colt belonged to the 400 people they cheated. Coincidentally, Jackson bought Sanan and Bolton out; sidereal expectations notwithstanding.

None of these ownership upheavals, by the way, played well in the public forum. Curlin, in effect, became trainer Steve Asmussen’s horse. After his Breeders’ Cup Classic victory, there were no cuddly characters to embrace him. Jackson, the sole survivor with ownership papers, was persona non gratis in many places. The events created a situation that was void of a charismatic personality.

Except for Big Brown, it is difficult to recall any other recent equine hero that wasn’t connected to people who fascinated the public. The true crowd pleasers of the last decade were Smarty Jones and Funny Cide. Smarty Jones, a Rocky Balboa speedball with a catchy name, was owned by a Philadelphia Ford dealer in a wheel chair, and the public related to his modest upbringing. Likewise, Funny Cide owed his fashion to external forces. It’s hard to tell if the Sackatoga Stable boys were blue-collar or marketing-savvy. But in personifying small-town America like hayseeds, they became stars on the level of the Partridges, and so did their New York-bred gelding.

Big Brown caused crowds to gather for his races despite a general disdain for his exaggerative owner and loud-mouthed trainer as well as a grudging acceptance of his charm-challenged jockey. He boosted attendance in New Jersey for a meaningless turf stakes and drew 100,000 fans in 90-degree heat on Belmont Stakes day. Undoubtedly, he would have filled those empty $200 seats at Santa Anita on Breeders’ Cup Saturday, had the opportunity presented itself.

On the other hand, Curlin, drew headlines. His failure to mature quickly probably caused him to fall short in America’s only significant race, thereby blunting his stature. His defeat by a filly turned his brief Preakness spotlight in an opposite direction. He became the ultimate Eclipse Award champion under the worst of conditions, flashing by horses that couldn’t handle the muck and one that died trying. Ironically, through this all, he was best of the best. His class was unusually strong.

Curlin caught on because of accomplishment, instead of charisma. A lot of the credit for this development, of course, adduces to Dubai. When the Horse of the Year traveled 6000 miles to win a race against the world’s best competition for a prize of $6 million, he demanded admiration and got it. Topping the $10 million earnings mark in the Jockey Club Gold Cup, he earned legendary status.

In the end, when the horse finished fourth in his finale, the crowd cheered him more than the winner – a bona fide international star that can put more on his resume for his Breeders’ Cup Classic victory than Curlin can. Raven’s Pass traveled from the cool climes of England to win in the heat of Santa Anita on a surface he never faced before and at a distance that was supposed to be beyond his lineage. The applause into which Robby Albarado rode after the Classic proves that stardom is, if nothing else, unscripted.

Granted, Curlin’s adoring Breeders’ Cup crowd was a sport-knowledgeable assemblage, and that mattered. But grant this rare, all-time great full acknowledgment, despite the lack of Main Street’s recognition. Those enabled to segregate substance from style are sure to miss him.

Sunday, November 09, 2008

Voting for the Eclipse Awards “From-the-Bottom-Up”

(CHICAGO, IL – November 10, 2008) Walking home from Grant Park on election night, with an uncharacteristically warm November breeze at my back, I couldn’t help but think how everything blew right with Barack Obama’s campaign and that, if there’s even a bit of a favorable wind on his side, things might change for the better.

The morning’s newspapers – excluding those you couldn’t find at your street corner dispensing machine, the Seven-Eleven or the Shell filling station – were all about the president-elect’s victory speech; the people in attendance including Spike Lee and Oprah Winfrey; the whiff of a new puppy for the White House and, to a greater extent, the past. By the past is meant how African-Americans have longed for this day, not so much about what they might do after it.

Oh, sure. There were the clichés about providing our country’s youth with proof that even the most prejudiced among us can be president. Lovey Smith, the Bears’ coach, surrendered his predictably stoic demeanor and the Rev. Jesse Jackson let tears of joy run down his face. “You don’t know exactly how to act because you’ve never been in that situation,” explained Smith to reporters. “When you have a first like that, it’s just big,” the humbled man said.

At first it seemed strange to me how all of a sudden Obama’s race became the central story of the election results. Obama’s bi-racial ancestry didn’t seem such a factor when inexperience, sordid colleagues and his liberal leanings were getting pounded on. Perhaps it’s because I’m a white man and the McCain/Palin slurs were veiled insults that closeted racists get, but not the rest of us. Or maybe I, like the millions of enraptured voters in blue states, had had enough of being neglected.

Obama’s from-the-bottom-up strategy for turning the economy around and making government a functioning service for the taxpayer, instead of a money pit, was a message that sounded sound to me. As a former CEO of a $250 million company and now an owner of a small manufacturing business, I know “trickle down” occurs only at Flomax moments. You can’t kid a kidder, in other words.

In the past year or two, there has been a smattering of well-intended fresh efforts to allow horse racing fans to participate more in the sport. A few individuals, such as Michael Amo of Thoroughbred Racing Fan Association (Thorofan) and Jeff Platt of Horseplayers Association of North America (HANA), are pioneers in the grass roots movement. Thorofan is attempting to rein members in by offering a mish-mash of meaningless benefits in return for a double-sawbuck. Membership in Platt’s organization, more aimed at the serious bettor, is, ironically, free. The enrollment process isn’t reaping the results either man expected.

Both entities have struggled to organize a membership of consequence. Collectively, the two groups account for fewer than 500 members, which is hardly representative of the 29 million Americans that identify themselves as horse racing fans. The meager results may be caused by the groups’ fuzzy agendas. There is no tangible benefit which stands out among the platitudinous campaign promises expressed by their recruiters. Moreover, it’s likely the audience considers the sport hard of listening.

“It would seem to me that if we can get a critical mass together, a solid voice (in the industry) can be gained,” said Amo, who concedes that attracting members hasn’t been as easy as getting encouragement. “I went to Keeneland, met with the folks there, met with TOBA (Thoroughbred Breeders and Owners Association), and they seem to think the idea is a good one,” he said, failing to identify the idea. “We’re going to continue to talk,” Amo said. Talk, of course, is how the establishment defines progress.

Well, one idea that might move some people toward membership, as well as toward the belief that they can be part of something, has to do with one of the sport’s end-of-the-year traditions. Amo and Platt should call for the National Thoroughbred Racing Association (NTRA) to shift its Eclipse Awards voting rights to fans. The NTRA is one of three entities called upon each fall to cast ballots. The others are the Daily Racing Form (DRF) and the National Turf Writers Association (NTWA). Both the DRF and the NTWA have a legitimate claim to the vote; the NTRA does not.

Long ago, the NTRA became a legislative force instead of a unified marketing arm of the industry. Unlike the fans, whose primary focus is on what’s happening on the racetracks, the NTRA is concerned with what’s happening in the backrooms of Congress and the bowels of the Breeders’ Cup. Recently, NTRA president Alex Waldrop went on record stating that his organization cares about what the fans think. Toward creating a stronger bond with the public, he began asking for feedback and forming his own fan-based advisory team.

I’m not suggesting a frivolous hand-over of the Eclipse Award voting rights, although I see nothing wrong with an Internet election without prejudice to anyone. On the other hand, for the sake of moving slowly (the preferred pace at which the sport operates), voters could be made to qualify for the ballot by holding bona fide membership in one of the organized fan groups. The groups would have to prove that they have the support of their members. The eligibility requirement for any fan-based group to participate in the vote would include proving it had a sizable registered representation that was worthy of casting the public’s opinion.

Granted, bestowing Eclipse Award voting rights to its members is not a priority that groups such as Thorofan or HANA have considered. But if the organizers of these groups are serious about giving their members a voice in the industry, this is one way to begin. At the same time, this simple accommodation - almost a meaningless perk to the NTRA - would enable the sport to prove it’s hip to the “from-the-bottom-up” movement.

Sunday, November 02, 2008

Three Horse Racing Issues on Election Eve

(CHICAGO, IL – November 3, 2008) Tomorrow, the rest of America goes to the polls. I write “the rest of America” because early voting in many states, including my own – Illinois, has represented as much as 25 percent of the electorate. It took 90 minutes of standing in line to cast a ballot, and during the wait, nobody in front of me left without voting.

The deep troubles facing America as a result of the past eight tough years has put people on edge and prompted them to act. The expectations that a change in the White House will enable someone new to wave a magic wand over the nation’s financial crisis, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, reduced respect around the world, an escalating deficit, complicated energy supply problems, environmental tragedies, an unaffordable health care system, a declining education system and a crumbling infrastructure may be unrealistic, but they are nonetheless, fueling hope.

Hope is a powerful agent. In fact, it’s the virtue behind horse racing’s existence. Nothing happens in the sport without someone believing he can do something and then putting his money where his mind is. That’s why it’s crucial for horse racing’s leaders to provide the sport’s myriad electorate with evidence that they realize the issues, the severe nature of their bearing on the future and that they’re up to the challenges facing them. I believe that they are. They have only to focus on the issues.

Issue One – Equine Safety. It was the Eight Belles accident immediately following the filly’s second place finish in the Kentucky Derby that caused the industry to wake up to the fact that it had real troubles. Threatened by the prospect of Congressional intervention, the National Thoroughbred Racing Association (NTRA) organized its Safety and Integrity Alliance and hired former four-time Wisconsin governor Tommy Thompson to be its figurehead. Thompson and the Alliance will now try to bring the states’ racing jurisdictions and the industry’s racetracks to ban steroids, enact uniform medication rules and levy standardized penalties to abusers of the policy.

The sad metamorphosis of the NTRA from a marketing arm to its current description as a legislation facilitator came about when the industry couldn’t unite behind the concept of a “czar.” But organizing this effort in the short span of fewer than six months (the Alliance was announced on October 15) reveals admirable effort on its part and The Jockey Club’s. The Breeders’ Cup, held for the first time on a synthetic racing surface, survived without incident, which, in itself, represented a milestone. With organizations such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) lurking with lips smacking, horse racing must repeatedly prove it’s aware of the dangers inherent. The work on this issue has just begun.

Issue Two – Declining Attendance. Horse racing used to take pride in the statistics that identified it as the sport with the largest number of spectators. It’s been decades since those attendance charts have received notice, and a quarter-century since horse racing attendance would be in the top tier reported. In fact, racetracks have begun keeping attendance figures to themselves, claiming, with some nonsensical logic, that handle is a more appropriate measure of the sport’s health.

The argument, of course, is that the convenience of newly-developed technology, namely simulcast wagering and Internet betting has rendered a trip to the racetrack an inconvenience. But this argument approaches an admission that the sport isn’t worth watching – that it is, in fact, merely a gambling device. At this point, of course, horse racing loses more than a following; it loses a personality.

Admittedly, Keeneland, the Arkansas Derby, the Kentucky Derby, the Preakness Stakes, the Belmont (with a Triple Crown on the line), the Arlington Million, and the Saratoga and Del Mar boutique meets produce interest beyond the core audience. But the Breeders’ Cup doesn’t, for the most part, and a weekend almost anywhere is without fans. Without fans, the sport isn’t worth covering in the media or supporting with tax dollars. A sport with a fan base will be viewed as a hobby of the rich and the vice of the Proletariat. As either of these choices, it just isn’t in the public’s interest.

Issue Three – The future. As changes occur to make the sport safer and more noticed, changes must be made also to the sport per se. If the definition of crazy is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result, horse racing isn’t crazy. Because doing the same thing has brought about a similar result – continued decline.

Horse racing is a sport in need of seismic adjustment. Such innovative ideas as reducing the number of fan-attended racing days drastically, adjusting the traditional calendar to provide incentive to owners for keeping the best horses on the track through their 4-year-old seasons and making races safer for 3-year-olds, and further integration in the world community beyond the breeding industry shouldn’t be thought of as impossible. The recent upheaval in the rules of hockey by the National Hockey League proves that sacrosanct is not beyond alteration.

On the periphery of these three big issues are smaller matters. They’re the ones that cause constant irritation to current fans. Yes, race results can be made easier to predict by greater transparency. An even playing field can be organized by regulating the veterinarian’s function. All racetracks can be made to favor a style of running or a genetic predisposition, but what good would that really do? Those are issues, like immigration policy or prisoner abuse, that resonate with an insignificant constituency. Stop giving people a reason to criticize the sport and to start liking it – those are the first steps to take.

Unlike tomorrow’s election, in which voters decide who gets to frame our reality, horse racing provides no direct referendum for fans to acknowledge their acceptance or rejection of the abilities, policies and philosophies of the industry’s leaders other than through the turnstile or betting window. The recent feigned respect paid by the establishment to fan-based organizations, while new, is superficial. This is still, and will ever be, the “Sport of Kings,” which by definition excludes subjects. Luckily, current royalty appears to be issue-oriented, insightful and capable.

“We can choose hope over fear, unity over division, the promise of change over the power of the status quo,” said a presidential candidate along the campaign trail. His is a message appropriate to horse racing.