Racing on 60 Minutes, Sunday, November 12

[Fiesta01]

Based on your input, it’s seems that change won’t begin at the individual trainer level, so it would have to start with the regulatory body, right?

It sounds like there is more research going into track surfaces now, but that might be the easiest thing to change. Track owners can be given new standards and, periodic inspections could be made to ensure compliance.

Permanently barring trainers/owners could be done to show that the industry is serious about zero tolerance of doping.

Stricter veterinary inspections prior to a race may help identify problems in some cases, but having lost two horses to non-racing related leg fractures (one a pasture accident, the other after coming out of colic surgery), I understand that it isn’t possible to prevent all breakdowns.

The two remaining parts of the puzzle that I can think of are breeding and training. I don’t see how the industry can regulate those.

I would think that trying to prevent the breeding of historically unsound lines would be impossible. The only line with a problem that I’m personally familiar with is the Bold Ruler line with the extremely flat feet. (Thousands of dollars of corrective shoeing later ). Have any studies been made into correlation of breeding lines and breakdowns?

Finally, the training end would definitely be impossible to regulate. One can’t have an objective full-time inspector at every barn with the power to ensure that horses are being trained and conditioned with the best interest of the horse as the primary objective.

What am I missing?

ETA: Not trying to be argumentative. I’m just trying to really understand where we as horse people can apply pressure to TPTB to make some changes that will benefit the horses.

ETA2: Thanks for all the knowledge from our racing peeps! It’s kind of you to share your experience. The only experience I have is having been the lucky mom of some lovely OTTBs. I owe the racing industry many wonderful years with them.

[Larksmom]

do they have as many breakdowns in the UK and Europe? They mostly run on grass there. does that make a difference?

[Texarkana]

@Fiesta01

Based on your input, it’s seems that change won’t begin at the individual trainer level, so it would have to start with the regulatory body, right?

It sounds like there is more research going into track surfaces now, but that might be the easiest thing to change. Track owners can be given new standards and, periodic inspections could be made to ensure compliance.

Permanently barring trainers/owners could be done to show that the industry is serious about zero tolerance of doping.

Stricter veterinary inspections prior to a race may help identify problems in some cases, but having lost two horses to non-racing related leg fractures (one a pasture accident, the other after coming out of colic surgery), I understand that it isn’t possible to prevent all breakdowns.

The two remaining parts of the puzzle that I can think of are breeding and training. I don’t see how the industry can regulate those.

I would think that trying to prevent the breeding of historically unsound lines would be impossible. The only line with a problem that I’m personally familiar with is the Bold Ruler line with the extremely flat feet. (Thousands of dollars of corrective shoeing later ). Have any studies been made into correlation of breeding lines and breakdowns?

Finally, the training end would definitely be impossible to regulate. One can’t have an objective full-time inspector at every barn with the power to ensure that horses are being trained and conditioned with the best interest of the horse as the primary objective.

What am I missing?

I agree there needs to be top down regulatory change to be effective.

I agree that “zero tolerance” to weed out the truly bad apples is also necessary.

Personally, I don’t think breeding is our biggest problem. I think it’s any easy scapegoat.

I disagree that we can’t control training. Race horse training is already the most regulated horse training on the planet. The powers that be control who can train, when you train, what direction you train in, how many times you need to train at speed before a race, etc. etc. They also control where your horses live, who can treat your horses, who can shoe your horses… right down to what type of bedding you can use in some cases. A lot of that can be changed for the better. Our urban racetrack backside model made a lot of sense 100 years ago, but not so much these days. Economics force the status quo, but personally, I think there’s a lot we could improve if money were no object. Even if we keep everything else the same, we could at least implement more oversight like out of competition testing and frequent barn inspections.

[Fiesta01]

Thanks for your insight and taking the time to educate others. It is much appreciated!

[Texarkana]

@Larksmom

do they have as many breakdowns in the UK and Europe? They mostly run on grass there. does that make a difference?

I posted an article on this upthread.

In summary, no, they have significantly less breakdowns in flat racing in the UK and Ireland (and the rest of Europe, but really only France has a sizeable racing industry, everything else is very small by comparison).

Racing in Europe is very different than the United States. For starters, there isn’t dirt (in the UK and Ireland). They have turf and all weather tracks. Their turf courses generally aren’t small ovals like we have here. Horses don’t live in the asphalt jungle of the backside. But one of the biggest differences is they don’t have the expansive number of cheap races for low level horses. It’s a weekday in November and a cursory glance at Equibase says there were 7 different tracks in the US with races carded for horses with a $5k or less tag. It’s really hard to create regulation that works for both the richest racing operations and the people literally trying to survive. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try, but it’s a problem most other countries don’t have because they don’t have the same extreme spectrum.

[MHM]

@Fiesta01

but having lost two horses to non-racing related leg fractures (one a pasture accident, the other after coming out of colic surgery), I understand that it isn’t possible to prevent all breakdowns.

Ugh. That stinks. I’m so very sorry.

[Fiesta01]

Thanks. I can still cry thinking of them, and it’s been decades. Two beautiful, much loved mares.

[EventerAJ]

@Texarkana

Personally, I don’t think breeding is our biggest problem. I think it’s any easy scapegoat.

Agreed. Breeders really are trying to breed sound horses-- because frankly unsound ones Do Not Sell. A shadow on an xray can cost a breeder tens of thousands of dollars. A horse that is crooked to a degree that might affect soundness will not sell well. A horse with bad feet will be passed over. It’s very much a buyer’s market right now, and unless your horse checks ALL the boxes, buyers spend money on something else. Breeders must create what buyers want, or they go out of business. I know many breeders who would much rather breed to known, proven, established sires…but they don’t sell for stud fee + cost of raising the horse. So you’re forced to send some mares to the “flavor of the month” hot new first-year sires, that retired after 6 starts, and realistically have a 10% chance of “making it” and not getting shipped off to a foreign country (or Iowa). Because buyers will pay stupid money for those yearlings, more than the average for a legit proven mid-level stallion like Dialed In, Union Rags, Hard Spun, Tonalist, etc.

I don’t think the foals produced are any less durable than they used to be. They are certainly xrayed and vetted to a MUCH higher degree than “back in the day.” They’re still raised outside in big fields. Yes, brought in during the day to keep coats dark in the summer, and older colts typically separated to prevent fights/injuries in turnout. But it is most cost effective to raise them outside, running and playing, eating grass as horses should be. IMO, the training methods and race schedules have changed much more than how the horses are bred and raised. Lightly-raced stallions have been part of the gene pool for a long time, including breed-shaping sires like Danzig, Storm Cat, and Malibu Moon. Europe and Australia is plumb FULL of Danzig; they love their Northern Dancer even more than we do. The pedigrees are similar enough to be comparable; yet the predominant feeling is that Euro horses are “better bred” and “sounder” than American bloodlines. As Texarkana said, racing and training is much different there, from the environment to surface to lack of “hard knocking claimers” in existence. I’d also wager that the average trainer there may have much more horsemanship experience and knowledge than here. Many trainers here (at LL tracks and the bigger ones) couldn’t keep a pet rock sound and happy.

[Texarkana]

Totally agree, @EventerAJ.

What’s the same between the US and the rest of the world?

The bloodlines and the age at which horses begin training and racing. Yet those are the two things people immediately deem problematic about racing, because they seem “obvious.”

Of course breeding to a horse like Danzig would make horses more likely to break down- he couldn’t even stay sound himself! But then here he is, not only the leading sire in US durability metrics, but basically the foundation of modern Australian and European breeding. If genetics were easy to predict, everyone would be filthy rich off breeding.

Same thing with two year olds: well obviously they are just babies who aren’t done maturing. Clearly that’s a huge problem. Except… every piece of science on the subject indicates speed work is necessary at that age for sufficient bone remodeling. And if people still doubt that, I’ll stress that every single racehorse industry in the world begins racehorse training at the same age and writes races for 2 year old horses. Even Germany, who doesn’t have a very large or successful racing industry, but people love to embrace Germany because of their reputation for soundness and their highly selective breeding model.

I’m totally willing to discuss how both areas can be improved, but they are so often blamed as the greatest and most obvious problems that need reformed and they just aren’t IMO.

[Maythehorsebewithme]

@EventerAJ

that retired after 6 starts, and realistically have a 10% chance of “making it” and not getting shipped off to a foreign country (or Iowa).

Ooof! Poor Iowa.

[Maythehorsebewithme]

I am trying to summarize what I have read in this thread, comparing U.S. racing to racing in other countries (“abroad”). See below. I know oversimplified, but just for discussion. Comments from those knowledgeable about TB racing?

[MHM]

@Maythehorsebewithme

@EventerAJ

that retired after 6 starts, and realistically have a 10% chance of “making it” and not getting shipped off to a foreign country (or Iowa).

Ooof! Poor Iowa.

I thought the same thing. Lol.

[Texarkana]

@Maythehorsebewithme

I am trying to summarize what I have read in this thread, comparing U.S. racing to racing in other countries (“abroad”). See below. I know oversimplified, but just for discussion. Comments from those knowledgeable about TB racing?

I think that’s a fair start to a summary. Although the training on rolling surfaces part: I’d reword that to more accurately describe the differences.

I think a better way to describe it is that abroad, there is more variety in how horses are conditioned and raced. Everything here is unidirectional in both racing and conditioning and mostly limited to flat, oval racetracks unless the trainer has made an effort to relocate elsewhere. Places like England have rolling gallops, places like Hong Kong and Japan have massive training centers with multiple tracks and surfaces. And I’m not sure anywhere is as uniformly unidirectional as us, though I could be wrong about that.

[Eclectic_Horseman]

What about the turnout situation?

With sport horses, it is assumed that horses stay sounder when they have the ability to be in near constant slow motion by having a turnout area, preferably with other horses. That’s not what we see at tracks, obviously.

Does this differ in other countries?

[Texarkana]

@Eclectic_Horseman

What about the turnout situation?

With sport horses, it is assumed that horses stay sounder when they have the ability to be in near constant slow motion by having a turnout area, preferably with other horses. That’s not what we see at tracks, obviously.

Does this differ in other countries?

It is not a consistent. There are some countries that turn their horses out more than us, there are some that turn them out way less.

Turnout is definitely important, but it’s not something that other countries always do more than us.

[Mara]

Also in Europe, being a “router” isn’t the kiss of death for a stallion like it is here. Aside from the fact that their Classics are 12+ furlongs, they’ve got a very active National Hunt calendar; there are people who breed specifically for jumps racing and they want the long distance blood. Coolmore, to name one example, has an entire roster of National Hunt stallions like Yeats, who won the Ascot Gold Cup 4 times.

It’s a long game, much moreso than breeding for the flat since most of them are over 3yo when they start over the fences. Of course there are also horses who “failed” on the flat and make the transition.

[EventerAJ]

True, but to a degree the horses on the NH roster are “failed” flat racing stallions. I’m sure Coolmore wishes Yeats (and others) would have been successful producers of G1 flat racers instead of dropping down to the NH level. There is much more money (globally) in flat racing than jumps racing, and ultimately it is a business. Other parts of the world want speed in their sires just as much (perhaps more!) than we do here.

I do wish jump racing was more prevalent here. I feel we have some really good distance & jumping blood in our commercial pedigrees, that is completely untapped; and it would give an alternative place for some out-of-conditions allowance horses to go, vs into the LL claiming pipeline.

[Maythehorsebewithme]

@MHM

It’s always interesting to find out about the intersection of horse related terms and day-to-day language. Like the term hands down winner coming from the idea that a jockey who is winning easily will put his hands down in the stretch instead of urging the horse on to the wire.

Did you ever casually use the phrase, “He broke his maiden” in referring to a first-time winner among non-horse people? The strange looks one gets!

[LaurieB]

@MHM

It’s always interesting to find out about the intersection of horse related terms and day-to-day language. Like the term hands down winner coming from the idea that a jockey who is winning easily will put his hands down in the stretch instead of urging the horse on to the wire.

I never realized that. I imagined it had something to do with a sport like boxing–ie, the opponent was so defeated, maybe down on the mat, so the winner could lower his hands.

[MHM]

I think the one that gets used most widely could be vetting. It’s used for all sorts of things, including checking out political candidates. I would imagine most people don’t know the etymology of it by this time.