A commentary from editor-in-chief Natalie Voss examining the problems with owners being kept in the dark, either willfully or not, by their trainers prompted a lot of reaction from readers. Here are a few of the letters we received in response.
You can read the original commentary here.
If you'd like to submit a letter to the editor in response to any of the news, features, or commentary you see on our website, you can send it to info@paulickreport.com. Please include your city and state and a contact email in case we have any follow-up questions.
I would like to address Natalie Voss' article in the Paulick Report 1/3, the quote attributed to Charlie Whittingham to “Treat owners like mushrooms. Keep 'em in the dark and feed 'em horse manure.” Voss went on to write that “the implication is they're lying to you, and you're meant to merrily keep writing the checks along the way.”
While a lot of what Voss wrote has merit, the lead-in to the article does not. Let me begin my indignation by pointing out that when Charlie said that, the times were completely different and using Charlie's quote in today's context is a big, fat faux-pas. Charlie did not lie to his owners.
His “Whiticisms” were part of his charm – unrivaled and unmatched, then and now. His owners loved him for it and there wasn't much he wouldn't say to their face. We used to hang around outside his office just to overhear an endearing insult! In his day the only form of communication was the telephone. There was no internet, no cell phones, thus no multi-tasking. His day began at 3:30 a.m. and when he was done training and the set list was ready for the next day by 10:30 a.m. he would make necessary phone calls to his owners. The calls were short, sweet, to the point with a barb or a bit of wit thrown in. He'd go home for a quick nap and be back to the barn for the day's races. What Charlie meant by the 'mushroom' quote was, “Let me do my job that you hired me for and come along and enjoy the results.” That was what he devoted all of his time to.
I'm sorry if the quote never set well with Ms Voss, but I daresay she knew not of what she spoke.
–Laura de Seroux
A proud Charlie's angel
Rancho Santa Fe, Calif.
I loved it! Every word!
I can understand Charlie Whittingham's remark. He was one of the best trainers I can recall and I suppose he didn't want to be bothered by dumb owners telling him how to train a horse.
On the other side of the coin, just because you own a racehorse doesn't mean you should be stupid about what happens to them.
The apparent disconnect between owners and trainers today seems more extreme than when I was a kid. It could just be because in the 1950s and 1960s this subject wasn't brought up that much. Did the owners really care more back then? Were they more knowledgeable and caring? Did they really talk to their trainers more? Who knows?
One thing sticks out in my mind. A lot of owners, “back in the day,” that won Grade 1s actually bred their horses and didn't sell/buy them as much as today. Today it's more buy them at auction or get in on a syndicate.
Racehorses seem to have become more commodities today. They make you money and prestige the same as it used to be. But there is something different today. A big difference also is the good horse can make more money in the breeding shed/auction than it can racing. Hence the commodity thing.
If owners were held more accountable I suppose we would lose a lot of people /money who view the horse as a commodity. Oh well I still think owners should be held accountable.
–Lynn Taylor
La Harpe, Ill.
Regarding your article on mushroom owners: Criticism is made of owners who hire trainers with multiple medication violations in multiple states. The example that comes to mind is Bob Baffert.
I have not met him, but have sat in box seats close enough to hear his conversations with owners (and those who wish to employ him). He turns down owners who don't have good references. He is a gentleman, sitting with the owners during the race, and politely excuses himself to go to the winner's circle when his “other” horse wins.
Although he has had many positives due to contamination or carelessness, they are usually barely detectable quantities of Class 3 and 4 substances. Yet for some reason, many in the horse racing industry want to group him with Class 1 cheaters like Navarro.
How can one expect a novice owner to know the difference when most of the trainers get suspended at some point? Doug O'Neil and Richard Baltas have “done time” for giving vitamin/electrolyte pastes within 24 hours of racing, despite the fact that there is nothing forbidden in them. They are clearly breaking the rules, which is not good, but the rules appear to in place to make it easier to detect milkshakes (which I believe are more useless than the vitamins given). It is like those cities that have high crime rate whose police respond by shaking down regular citizens by enacting zero-tolerance speed monitoring. Their misplaced priorities just annoy people involved.
I think many owners are more likely to blame the state commissions than the trainer they have been with for years. In most cases, they are probably right.
–Richard Neil Braithwaite
Orange, Calif.
The post Letters To The Editor: Whittingham, ‘Whiticisms,’ And Thoroughbred Owners As Mushrooms appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.
