Roses in April?

Did you know?

“Every two seconds someone in the U.S. needs blood.”(1) “This results in the need for more than 38,000 blood donations every day.”(2)

“On any given day, more than 6,000 men, women and children desperately search the National Marrow Donor Program (NMDP) Registry for a matching bone marrow donor. These patients have leukemia, lymphoma and other life-threatening diseases that can be treated by a bone marrow transplant.”(3)

After the breakdown and euthanasia of Eight Belles in the shadow of the Kentucky Derby, the sport, “…has come under heightened public scrutiny…” and “…needs to take drastic action to reverse a very disturbing trend toward open criticism of horse racing for our perceived cruelty,” according to NTRA CEO Alex Waldrop.(4) His blog entry concerning the aftermath of Eight Belles received 803 unique comments.

These statements made up the opening paragraph to a proposal that went out today to Santa Anita Park and the NTRA about preforming a blood drive and bone marrow registry during next year's Santa Anita Derby. The proposal already received initial approval after a phone conversation with the track's marketing department. The idea behind the program is pretty simple. Make horse racing look good and help a lot of people while doing it. Its a direct response to the last two pages of the NTRA Online Task Force's 48 page document released in September at this year's NTRA Marketing Summit. The document is available in its entirety here.

Recently horse racing has been upping the ante in showing that its more than what some call a "cruel sport". Pat Day will be auctioning an autographed saddle at Ellis Park on the 13th to raise aid for the horsemen who were involved in the November 20th fire at Riverside Downs that killed 30 horses. Late in November, Churchill Downs put on a food drive for the Thanksgiving holiday. Events like this should be a staple in our sport because every one of them that happens improves our sport's public image.

Do we need to improve our image? Very much so. While attending the NTRA Marketing Summit in Las Vegas there was a quietly held meeting where the impact of Eight Belles was discussed in the way of statistics. The numbers are frightening. Of people surveyed following the 2008 Kentucky Derby, only 27% gave the sport a "favorable" rating. The NFL received a 74% favorable rating. Illegal dog fighting anyone? The MLB received a 57% rating. Steroids? Clemens fiasco? The NBA was given a 43%.

So where does a 27% rating place us? According to the speaker thoroughbred horse racing is equivalent in approval rating to boxing and ultimate fighting. For those unfamiliar with the recent explosion in ultimate fighting, the 'sport' involves putting two men in a wire cage and watching them beat one another senseless until one goes unconscious or submits. From the few minutes I've seen during a lecture in grad school, the two roll around in their own blood in body locks trying to punch one another in the kidneys. To think that horse racing is considered on the same level of this 'sport' is troubling.

Other notes taken from the meeting include the following: 33% surveyed believe our sport has integrity. Of a similar survey conducted in 2007, this number was 41%. The speaker said that an 8 point drop of integrity has never been seen in any sport before. He continued to say that in the last two months (July-August) 25% of core racing fans think the sport has gotten worse. For those who are concerned only with handle, the speaker reported that the impact of Eight Belles has been a 5% decrease in wagering, or $1.1 billion dollars.

I won't belabor the point. Rather I'll just say we need to start doing something fast to improve our sport's image or we won't have a sport left. Will "Roses in April" do that? I'll give you 100-1 that it will.

Perseverance!

Under Exposed

After great internal deliberation I decided to not run for a position on the board of directors for the Thoroughbred Owners of California. I was really considering it because I thought I could make a real difference for the game. I was willing to go above and beyond but the reality is I am "under exposed" and would have "no chance" in the voting process, or so I was told. Here's the skinny (pun intended):

In doing due diligence for the position I spoke to and emailed a lot of different people ranging from owners, trainers, to an industry leader (NTRA CEO Alex Waldrop: Yes, he answers his e-mail). Pretty much everyone said the same thing, I didn't have enough "exposure". And they all said, "you would not win". Period. Final answer? Final answer, Regis. I spoke to them about some ideas I had in getting more votes but they all where quite firm. No chance. Nada.

As they explained voting for the TOC Board of Directors "primarily involves name recognition". Well when you look at the incumbents and their accomplishments you see things like, "owner of Grade-1 horse X" then its pretty hard to compete. As one owner explained to me voters (CHRB licensed individuals) assume that because someone owned a Grade-1 horse then they must know how the business works. Do they? Just because someone purchased or claimed a horse that turned out great doesn't mean they are good for a management position. Maybe the horse won because the trainer did something amazing? Or maybe the horse just had a once in a lifetime performance? We all know the game is a lot of luck.

What the sport really needs are people who are willing to put the time in and make the effort to improve things. The old roll up your selves type who make compromises on major issues, push for change, and put the the sport's welfare first over personal issues. Right now I feel like the board is a "Who's Who" not a "Does Do" group of individuals. Why should someone who wants to really make a difference have to be locked out because they aren't well do to horse wise?

Fortunately positions come available every year. So maybe in twelve months things will be different concerning my amount of "exposure". It's a quirky game; so you never know.

As always... PERSEVERANCE!

Image IS Everything

Image is nothing.
Thirst is everything.
Obey your thirst.

Actually Sprite guys, image is everything. Turn on the television and you'll see that such a statement is an absolute truth in American culture. There are shows on television such as "What Not To Wear" and "How To Look Good Naked" that are devoted to nothing but appearances. Of course there are all sorts of fashion magazines such as Cosmopolitan, Elle, and Vogue devoted to splashing huge glam shots in an attempt to sell appearances. In 2007 Americans spent 50 billion on cosmetics and another 13 billion more on cosmetic surgery. Meanwhile approximately 15 billion was wagered on thoroughbred racing.

Why is image so important? Because many people do "judge a book by its cover". When Eight Belles broke down the industry took a huge black eye on the world's stage. People who do not pay any attention to thoroughbred racing 364 days of the year watch one race and one race only. And what did they see? A horse that ran 2nd in the nation's most popular race break down on the track. What else do they see during the Triple Crown season? Well during the Preakness there is drunken revelry in the infield. Also, do you remember that one zany "fortune teller" who predicted Brother Derek to win because he saw a peacock in his dreams. He had a tent, ball, robes... the whole enchilada. Seeing images likes this it makes sense when the casual follower of racing begins to wonder if those involved in the sport are degenerates of one degree or another.

Well the state of Louisiana took a step in the direction of "image" by banning steroids starting in January (here). While they are not the first, this is another movement in the right direction for the sport. Eventually if we can eliminate steroids in all juristictions then the next step would be to crack down on more medications, eventually eliminating them all together.

I would love for every state to ban all medications. Primarily because of "image". The general public is not familiar with nor can distinguish between useful drugs such as Lasix and harmful ones like cobra venom. To them a drug is a drug and the term drug usually is cast in a negative light. Also there is a lot of conflict over whether medications are beneficial to horses. Years ago the equine population did without and during those times we had some great horses with long careers. These days it seems that horses are very fragile. Opponents of medications such as Lasix point out that horses that would have failed on the track years ago are now winning major races and are becoming breeding magnets thanks to modern veterinary medicine. Consequently all their offspring are prone to be in need of drugs as well. This "weakening of the breed" argument makes a lot of sense to this scientist.

Most trainers I have spoken with say that if they had to go to an oats and water only regime they would be perfectly fine with that. I think most handicappers would as well. Who hasn't wondered when a 20-1 comes up and blows the rest of the field away if something going on. I have spoken to Del Mar's customer relations and they indicated that a lot of negative mail comes through when longshots score huge. Also what images the term "Supertrainer" bring to mind? Aren't drugs usually used in reference to Supertrainers? Most other racing countries such as Japan, the UAE, and Europe have very strict medication rules. Why are we as a racing nation so far behind the curve?

Perseverance!