What Will New York's PETA Investigation Say?

Good day everyone!

New York's PETA report is due out very soon. Will it point to the future or just deal with the present?

New York is in an interesting position, and to change racing (hopefully for the better) they are a jurisdiction that can certainly, and probably has to, lead. The Aqueduct issues, politics; things are very real in New York State. It's an opportunity to move forward.

Here are a couple of things I hope happens:

The first thing I did after the Kentucky Report was published was congratulate Steve Asmussen's lawyer on twitter. As has been my opinion from the beginning (and as much as I am flamed for it at times), this episode has nothing to do with Steve Asmussen. He does not need to be "made an example of" and it's an injustice if he even serves one day for being the fall guy for the sport. He's had to hire lawyers, go on TV (where he was clearly not at home), and some owners have questioned him. All for a video where you have to extrapolate, guess, or nitpick to find a violation. Enough is enough. Take down the Horse Racing Most Wanted posters and let him go back to work.

The Life At Ten episode was something this sport had to go through. It's brutal that a 110 pound jock has to make a decision about a horse on the track, with no consultation with a trainer and the horse's owners, while readying for a $2M race. It's a situation that there was no SOP, in need of an SOP. That investigation was not about "convicting" anyone, but about the future, and that made the investigation worthwhile. I hope we see that here.

As for new policies, with vets, meds and all the rest, I suppose that is left for another day. But in this report it is a fine time to springboard towards discussion of that kind of reform. New York has some fair minded, smart people - vets legislators and others - who are clearly capable of navigating the minefield of reform. I hope this is not the end, but the beginning of the discussion of new policy to make this better for our owners, investors, and most importantly the horses.

I fear not long after the report is released the focus will be on Steve Asmussen, because, after all, that's what the report is dealing with. But I think that's missing the entire point. The last six months were about horse racing, not one man. How the sport moves forward - beginning with this New York report, which I hope deals with big issues, not micro-issues - will tell us a lot about the sport itself.

What Kind of a Game Does Horse Racing Want?

PETA has filed an appeal request of the KHRC's report in Kentucky today. As I noted before, the whole "exoneration thing" is troubling on a couple of counts, i) exonerated of what exactly? Asmussen was not jacking horses with rocket fuel or beating them with a stick; he did nothing wrong, and was just playing the horse racing game and ii) the giddiness inside the sport with the "exoneration" was so short sighted and so horse racing, it was once again an excuse to embrace the status quo.

It's the latter that most of us seem most concerned with.

Case in point, which I have not heard from anyone is untrue (although, that might not matter, this could be in almost any stable. Regardless, please let me know if this is challenged and I missed it): Teardrop (it's on page 6).

Teardrop was an Asmussen trained two year old filly who seemed to be having lameness issues. June 18th, Blasi says the filly is lame. June 20th, she is walked the shedrow and lameness seems to be there too on video.  Despite that, she's put in the Debutante Stakes at Churchill, and two days later passes (Kentucky) vet inspection and comes 7th by 25 as the 2-1 race favorite. You don't have to have a phd in animal science to surmise she raced lame.

That, according to the KHRC, is some sort of "exoneration".

The horseplayers who bet her down to favorite, don't feel they had a fair shake. In fact, the "she's trained nice since her maiden win" quote in the DRF would've told them everything is hunky-dory.

Teardrop, presumably raced lame, probably doesn't feel like she had a fair shake.

If she broke down, it would've been an "unfortunate occurrence" and someone would've filed several stories about how polytrack might've saved her.

If it was in Hong Kong, it would've never even happened.

With the Kentucky report filed (and New York report pending), this business needs to understand that this has nothing to do with someone's Hall of Fame ballot, or if they should be working with horses, or in turn get some massive suspension. This has absolutely nothing to do with Steve Asmussen. This is about what kind of game horse racing wants moving forward. It's about the way horse racing always has done business versus what it needs to do in modern society to remain relevant (and to keep the slot money rolling in). It's about the horses, the people who work with them, and the future of the sport itself.

Hey Bartender, When Even Necessary, Losing History is a Bad Thing

"How are the kids", Mr Black Box?

It was reported today (h/t to the Paulick Report), that Churchill Downs is stocking 16 owners suites with a contraption that serves mixed drinks. Its name is not Phil or Patti, but, well I don't really know. It's a big black box, that (presumably) doesn't talk.  There's no word if this spring the owners will be watching Trakus chiclets underneath hologram Twin Spires while sipping their gin and tonics. But maybe that's in the works.

I am a bit of an enigma when it comes to history. I think we lose it far too fast, and it's not a good thing, yet I work and admire disruptive technologies that make our lives better, more cost-effective, and our society more efficient. I think we might've gone too far, and forgot where we came from.

Sure it's only the age-old bartender-customer relationship that's no more at Churchill, but it's just one example of many. The scenes between Richard Dreyfuss and Robbie Coltraine in Let it Ride which exemplified the customer-bet taker relationship are now replaced with a chat with your computer screen, mobile phone, or a machine at the track that our tickets get jammed into. Hell, most of us don't even go to the track any more.

The racetracks themselves are becoming newer and have lost a lot of what they were. Downtown racetracks like Greenwood in Toronto, where you jumped off a jammed streetcar with hundreds of others, getting yelled at by tip sheet sellers is long gone. Greenwood Raceway is a housing development now. Beantown is one of the US's great cities. Working class, true, and historical. Their racetrack is gone. These tracks are summarily replaced with "racino's", some in places where racing has about as much history as a One Direction fan.

Many of the racetracks that have no history, are trouble with the fan or bettor, too. I don't know too many that even look at Chester (I think they changed the name) in harness racing, which once gave away over $2 million in purses in one day, yet barely cracked $300,000 in handle. It's more than just their awful takeout rates that fans are not embracing.

This is an age where the venerable and historical Maple Leaf Gardens was closed and renamed after an airline. The Forum in Montreal, where my Bruins would get throttled throughout most of my childhood in the playoffs, is now the "Bell Centre". That's named after a media conglomerate, one which I was on the phone with for hours last year - to a guy I think in Costa Rica - because they could not get the horse racing channel on my TV menu.

If they rename Fenway Park to Yum! Brands stadium in the coming years, it's probably time to call it a day.

In the big picture, Churchill Downs and other gaming companies have to run their businesses for their immediate shareholders. End of year bonuses, stock options and everything else rule the day. That's the way the world works and they don't run a charity. But in horse racing, when we lose history, we lose a little bit of who we were, and are. And to me anyway, it just doesn't feel very good.