Indeed the announced partnering of Frank Stronach with Keith Brackpool was not greeted with enthusiasm by many of the latter’s detractors who would have preferred that the sometimes abrasive and frequently dismissive former Chairman of the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) have little influence and no control over California racing once he stepped down from the board.
Brackpool told the Daily Racing Form that 'he has taken an "equity share" in the Stronach Group of racetracks and horse racing-related entities' and 'he will direct Stronach's West Coast operations...'
'"I'm a huge fan of the sport," Brackpool said. "We can do amazing things with the sport or I wouldn't put my money where my mouth is."'
What some horseplayers found amazing was the arrogance with which he put their money in the mouths of the California horse owning and training elite by raising takeout on exotic wagers to increase purses.
According to the Blood Horse, 'Keith Brackpool has entered into an agreement to acquire a minor stake in The Stronach Group. The company's Racing and Gaming Group announced Jan. 19 that Brackpool has joined the group's board of directors and has been appointed chairman of its operations in California.
"I have had a chance to interface with Keith over the past few years and have been extremely impressed with his knowledge and commitment to horseracing in California. We look forward to our future partnership," said Frank Stronach, co-chairman and founder of The Stronach Group.'
Still another viewpoint appeared in a public email to Andy Asaro's industry distribution list, in which columnist/handicapper Richard Eng wrote, "These moves deserve an explanation.
In Nevada, when a commissioner leaves the Gaming Control Board, there is a 1-year grace period before he or she can take a job in the gaming industry. This is to avoid any hint of impropriety while serving as a board member in charge of overseeing the gaming industry."
Eng followed up with, "I find it interesting there has been no reaction to the movement among Mr. Brackpool, the CHRB and the Stronach Group.
This type of maneuvering would not be allowed in the Gaming Industry in Nevada."
The "revolving door" policy was addressed at the Paulick Report: "Brackpool, …, is prohibited from lobbying the horse racing board for one year under regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, Title 2, Division 6, California Code of Regulations."
"There is a very strict one-year policy, and we are completely in adherence to that law," Brackpool told the Paulick Report. "It will be completely respected."
The benefits of Brackpool’s contacts to the Stronach Group may well have already accrued. How many "interactions" between the regulator and the regulated were required (and how much time) to lay the groundwork for their becoming "one?"
Interestingly, Brackpool’s New York State counterpart, recently retired Racing and Wagering Board chairman, John Sabini, said, "… he left before that [agency’s closing] date because he isn’t allowed by state ethics law to pursue other jobs while still chairman."
Too bad no equity opportunity opened up for him overnight!
The DRF article mentioned that "Brackpool owns the Manhattan Beach (Calif.) Country Club and is a close associate of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa." The B-H noted that "Brackpool was appointed to the racing board by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger Sept. 24, 2009. He became chairman in January 2010. His appointment was through July 26, 2013."
How does one get so close to both a Republican governor and a mayor who's a Democrat? One can only speculate as to the roles of campaign contributions, country club comforts, and charismatic companionship in establishing the connections with the two enablers
Only one aspect of this union is predictable: if and when Stronach decides he's had enough -- equity position or not -- the egress will be Brackpool's.
Now that the head horseplayer alienator us gone, the sometime seemingly headless one is now in charge as CHRB Vice Chairman David Israel assumed the duties of chairman. Prior to his announcement, Brackpool was noticeably if not conveniently absent from the previous day's CHRB meeting at which Hollywood Park President, Jack Liebau, became the first California racing stakeholder to publicly, albeit belatedly, challenge the Brackpool-spearheaded takeout increase.
To a man, every horseplayer I know was motivated by this now classic 2010 editorial by former HRI blogger, Bill Christine, "Get Out the Lifeboats" in advance f the Players' Boycott. He wrote, "... it's definitely time for Brackpool and David Israel, ..., to move on. They are supposed to lead racing out of the wilderness, but they can't see the thickets for the shrubs."
The preceding and many other articles justifying the boycott can be found here, including one of my own in response to a symposium speech of Mr. Israel's. My passion at that time has been partially re-ignited by Mr. Liebau's remarks. Hopefully other horseplayer advocates will also see them as the vanguard of customer representation at the CHRB.
Perhaps outside of Brackpool's shadow, Mr. Israel will more equitably deal with horseplayer interests. That would be more likely if the appointed replacement is someone who already has that perspective. An excellent choice would be the above-referenced veteran turf writer, Mr. Christine, who's seen and heard it all before, and isn't afraid to tell it the way it really is.
Raw ambition and ruthlessness are said to run rampant in racing. The expansion of exotic wagering reflects the fortune seeking nature of the game's participants. Those who run racing tend to be existing fortune holders seeking greater fortunes. The term "fortune hunter" is an unflattering one applied to seekers of wealth through marriage. The more formidable the fortune focused upon, the further the hunter must be prepared to go with fewer restraints. While it's not clear who is exploiting whom in this marriage of financial and political resources, it's safe to say that racing's customers will be paying for the wedding … and its aftermath.
31 Jan 2013 at 10:30 am | #
Brackpool is the guy who thought the low takeout California Pick 5 wouldn’t handle 20k and be gone in a few months. I guess Frank thinks we need more people in charge who don’t know what they’re talking about when it comes to the gambling part of the game. WoW!
31 Jan 2013 at 04:50 pm | #
I dunno. I read the above slowly, twice, and I don’t feel that the commentary has helped me pick winners. Why do I go to the track every day (for over fifty years)? To make money! Is there another reason? What do I care about someone called Blackpool, or even Frank? They are into their own thing, I am into trying to pick winners.
What do I care about NYRA’s board of directors or their management? Whoever they are, are they going to make it easier for me to pick winners?
I dunno about you readers at this site, but let me ask you a question: why do you go to a track or OTB? Duh?
What interests you more, you readers at HRI, a) who will lead NYRA’s board, b) who is heading Frank’s organization, or 3) who the winner is of the first race at Aqueduct, Laurel, Gulfstream, et cetera tomorrow?
31 Jan 2013 at 09:25 pm | #
wmc,
Thanks for making the effort to read the entire editorial enough times to ensure that any errant entertainment or enlightenment it may have contained escaped you completely.
31 Jan 2013 at 09:59 pm | #
As I have written numerous times at HRI, the attraction of the ‘game’ is GAMBLING! I find myself wondering, just about everyday, if the commentators at this site even bet; or just want to write about frivolous subjects having nothing to do with what 99.9% of people who are attracted to racing want to do: GAMBLE. The frivolous subjects? Well, what does what horse is going to win the Horse of the Year have to do with me cashing tickets? or who (human or horse) is going to be elected to the Hall of Fame? or what horse is going to win the Florida Derby? or what jockey is going to win the Saratoga meet title? or who is going to lead NYRA’s board of directors? or what trainer will win a meet’s trainer title? or who the favorites for the Derby are? or .....
I guess I am an excellent example of the saying, ‘ignorance is bliss’. My interest in Thoroughbred racing, at this very moment, does not extend beyond the early double at a couple of tracks tomorrow.
Thoroughbred racing desperately needs more ignorant people like me. Lowlifes, like me, who only know how to say ‘psst, who do ya like in the next race?’, and then ‘who’s turn to buy the beers?’.
01 Feb 2013 at 05:00 am | #
Racing needs more customers of all stripes, wmc. Diversity of opinion is what drives the game, but its tilted playing fields are driving some participants from it, and reducing the enthusiasm for—and level of participation by—some others. Obviously that does not include people like you who appear impervious to the effects of such factors as well as those who benefit from them.
I imagine there are some who envy your professed contentment with how the game has evolved. What I don’t understand is your insistence that others share your lowered expectations.
I too still experience the joy of handicapping and wagering on thoroughbred races; predominantly stakes races. As my play has become more selective over time, my results have improved to my satisfaction. No-one objects to your choice of playable races. Why are you so disturbed by those of others here?
Frankly I don’t see in you either ignorance or bliss; rather stubbornness and misdirected hostility.
01 Feb 2013 at 06:21 am | #
Your assessment of me is probably correct. I am obviously frustrated at the direction Thoroughbred racing is going, and how IMO turf writers comment on subjects that have nothing to do with increasing attendance and handle (ie: Cuomo and NYRAS’s board; breakdowns on inner dirt; Pletcher this and Pletcher that; Hall of Fame selections).
Your cell-phone: do you care who the directors of the company who made it are, the officers, who programmed it, who assembled it? All you want is the cell-phone to work. All I want are races to bet on and turf writers to encourage people to get involved gambling on them, thus handle increases.
01 Feb 2013 at 12:57 pm | #
So let’s see, WMC, you want independent turf writers to be the Fox News of Thoroughbred Racing?
You’ll first have to rip the computer from my cold, dead hands.
We try our best to serve all enthusiasts here; fans and bettors alike.
If you don’t get that, the Fosters just might have reached the tipping point.
01 Feb 2013 at 03:11 pm | #
If I may babble a bit more, it seems to me that contributors at HRI are ashamed to mention that Thoroughbred racing’s success involves gambling.
Today’s contributor, no doubt a fine gentleman, writes about Gulfstream Park, the mall next door, and a possible conflict with Calder. Fine, but what to hell does this have to do with creating new ‘fans’ to gambling on the ponies?
Much commentary and comments at HRI have been about artificial surfaces, lasix, track management, board of directors, et cetera. Fine, but what to hell ....
When are turf writers going to get it? Stake races, with their obscene six figure purses, are certainly fodder for turf writers, but unless a person cashes on the race they lose interest fast; but they remember, in detail, when they cashed on a claiming race. It’s about gambling, about making money.
Stake races only benefit owners, trainers, and jockeys and provide turf writers with something to write about (sort of a clique, you rub my back and I will ....), and do not benefit the racetrack, as the stake race is unsupportable from handle, but supportable thanks to the casino dole. And, since the six figure purse comes out of the horsemen’s purse account, numerous claiming trainers are deprived of increased purses.
Ask a lowlife (one who contributes to handle everyday) what nag won the Derby, the Travers, et cetera, and he/she will be stumped; but that person remembers, in detail, the names of the plodders that delivered a score, be it yesterday or five years ago - it’s about gambling, about making money.
So, here we are today. Thoroughbred racing on life-support, being kept alive by casino dole. In the meantime racetracks across the country are scheduling stake races with six figure purses that are absolute financial disasters for reasons that escape me.
Why is it a concern of turf writers and bettors if a racetrack elects to go with artificial turf, that is their decision; they are a corporation that, to survive, must be profitable. You don’t like it, don’t bet
No racing organization, no turf writer, no advertising agency is promoting Thoroughbred racing’s unique draw: gambling! What is thrown in front of the public is stake races, trainers, and jockeys, while casinos, coast-to-coast, are doing high-fives.
And the beat goes on, thanks to casino dole.
01 Feb 2013 at 03:20 pm | #
If only the racing industry functioned as well as cell-phone service providers!
If only my internet service provider functioned as well as the racing industry!
If only my Windows operating system functioned as well as my ISP!
If only someone would respond on-topic to one of my blog pieces!
01 Feb 2013 at 04:28 pm | #
Indulto, stop chewing the corner of the rug. Try writing about what Thoroughbred racing’s attraction is (and it ain’t who is or was chairman of some racing organization, what track surface is best, what takeout rates are, or what plodder is go’in to win da next stake race). Try suggesting that readers look at, say, the nags in the fifth at Parx tomorrow, or the first at Laurel, or the sixth at Aqueduct, et cetera. I will certainly respond to your commentary, and will be on topic!
The topic being GAMBLING!
01 Feb 2013 at 05:45 pm | #
Woof!
Well, wmc, maybe you do have a sense of humor after all.
But echoing JP’s sentiments, ... my cold dead paws ...