[QUOTE=WinterTriangle;4576662]
I think that’s a good analogy. Except I think the % of totally good is way higher than 10%.
It’s what makes that totally bad 10% stand out even more. As has been mentioned, it’s the sensationalistic stuff that gets attention, and they provide most of it. When a mere 10% accounts for almost 100% of the “black eye” racing gets, it seems it should be rather motivating to all, to see they are stamped out.
In essence, their existence is 100% negative, there are no positives, from any viewpoint or perspective.
A few tweaks here and there, within the industry, make it a priority, I see them going away. Not a real hard undertaking, is it?
I guess there’s something about the dynamic that I’m not pinpointing or not seeing…if such a small % can’t be eradicated? Even the simplest set of rules and consequences would seem adequate…so, how many must “look the other way” for it to continue? Must be a huge number then, or a small number, with a lot of power?[/QUOTE]
Well…where do we begin?
How does a decent or ethical trainer work for the likes of Mr Gill? Or people of his ilk? Most racehorse owners are the farthest thing from horsemen you’ll ever meet. Majority if they visit the backside at all need to ask which horse is theirs.
What they do want more than anything though is to win. They want a winners circle picture to put in their office and really don’t care how they get it. The guys who have the best medicine do the most winning and are always about three steps ahead of the testing. Thus, they get the most owners.
Add to this a track management who has races to fill. If you’re a trainer with horses on the grounds they need to be running. As much as possible. If you got a horse that needs a rest they’ll very strongly suggest you do what you gotta do to get the beast running sooner than you should or lose your stalls. Who then gets the stalls they take from the ethical trainer? You got it the one who injects, blocks, etc etc.
As these outfits grow bigger and bigger they gain more muscle and not only aren’t messed with by track management but more often than not get to the point of having stewards, secretaries, stall men etc in their pockets.
They then become leading trainers and pretty much own and operate a track. Especially a small time gyp track. Owners all want their horses in their barns and the cycle perpetuates.
I believe major strides could be taken to clean up racing by knocking these big outfits down to size. Years ago it was rare for an outfit to have more than 20 or so horses in their barn. This business of running a stable like Corporate America needs to end and it can very easily by doing as follows: Trainer saddles the horse That’s it. Period. No assistants. No authorized agents of. No flunkies of any kind. The trainer of record must show up in person to saddle any and every horse they have entered. No substitutions any time for any reason ever.
If this was done no trainer would take on any more than they could personally handle. It would keep stables smaller and give other trainers a fighting chance.
Will this ever happen? No. Why not? Because it is owners that finance and bankroll the industry. Owners like it the way it is. Mr Gill is not unique. There is plenty of owner avarice to go around.