MJC President Sal Sinatra Talks Cleaning Up Racing On TDN Writers’ Room

In a sport crying out for more strict, no-nonsense regulators and administrators, Maryland Jockey Club president Sal Sinatra fits the bill. Just in the past week and a half, Sinatra has made major waves in the industry, first by calling for the eventual end to claiming races at The Jockey Club Round Table and then by busting Wayne Potts for “paper training” for a banned trainer in Maryland. Wednesday, Sinatra joined the TDN Writers’ Room presented by Keeneland as the Green Group Guest of the Week to discuss an array of issues plaguing racing and the steps, big and small, that can be taken to clean up the game for good.

“When I see forged health certificates, when I have repeated claims for not paying bills, when there’s theft, when I’m watching horses race and return and run under others’ names, [situations] that everybody’s aware of, action should’ve been before it gets to my desk,” Sinatra said of the challenges he faces as a head regulator. “Unfortunately, since I’ve been in Maryland, [Potts] is the sixth person I’ve actually tossed. And I don’t know why I seem to be the only one doing it.”

Sinatra went on to say that one of the reasons cheating trainers aren’t more severely punished is that they fill races, a byproduct of there being too much racing on the whole in America and specifically too much cheap claiming races.

“Coming from the racing secretary side, we’ve got too many races,” he said. “Most of these [cheating] guys run their horses a lot. They help you when you call them. So they’re kind of racing office favorites, and the gray area becomes not so gray when you need the horse to make six or seven to fill the entries and close.”

Sinatra added that while racing is making strides in certain areas of correcting itself, there remains one more basic long-term problem it hasn’t addressed: the morality of its participants.

“We’re all trying to make a living. We’re trying to be proud. We’re trying to clean our image as best as we can,” he said. “We have to make ourselves look better. We’re trying with the breakdowns. We’re trying with the medications. But there’s a character flaw. There has become a real character issue. There’s people in the game right now that–I hate to say it–but they shouldn’t be around animals, let alone horses.”

Sinatra caused a stir when he suggested at the Round Table that America should move toward a future without claiming races. He expounded on how a transition to that future could look.

“For one, we have too many categories for horses to enter into,” he said. “You got non-two, non-three, non-four, one win in six months, two wins in six months. I think a ratings system reduces that, so if you put two horses at a rating of 80, maybe a horse that only has three wins runs against a horse with nine wins. You could hypothetically replace starter allowances with these ratings races. There may be a way of combining claiming and letting people who don’t want to lose their horse run their horse against like horses.”

Sinatra further lamented the lack of growth in the worth of claimers over the years, despite inflation and higher purses, leading inevitably to animal welfare issues.

“We’ve created this arena, and especially with the [revenue from] slots, we never valued the horse part of it. When I worked at Monmouth in the mid-80s, the last race was always a Jersey-bred nickel [claimer]. And today the bottom is a Jersey-bred nickel. We’re talking 35 years later. That horse has to be worth a little more than that. But we keep it low so people can get in the game, and then the poor horse gets chewed up. We have to fix it.”

Sinatra said that a lot of racing’s ills come back to the core issue that has been discussed at length on the Writers’ Room in the past: an oversupply of races that exists despite the realities of declining foal crops and horses who run less frequently overall.

“A lot of things got broken down over time because we have too much racing, there’s too many opportunities and we’re trying to fill all this stuff with no supply,” he said. “That’s really the biggest problem. A horse used to run eight or nine times a year. And you have the same amount of stalls that aren’t filled as much. You do the math. Most of the tracks now are propped up by slot machines. Companies can afford to lose $5-10 million on racing when they’re printing money across the parking lot. It’s not good for our sport. So we need to clean it up. We need to look at the whole model and reboot or it’s going to go away.”

Elsewhere on the show, the writers recapped the weekend’s Grade I action and, in the West Point Thoroughbreds news segment, applauded Churchill Downs for making the decision to race without spectators for the GI Kentucky Derby and broke down the Karl Broberg situation at Remington. Click here to watch the podcast, click here for the audio-only version.

The post MJC President Sal Sinatra Talks Cleaning Up Racing On TDN Writers’ Room appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Letter to the Editor: Bentley Combs

Over the last few days an idea has been floated to replace the current American claiming system with that of a rating system. With a list of concerns and questions in my head, two things jump out immediately as being stifled by a rating system: Ease of access to horses and the possibility of growth for both potential new owners and smaller trainers. In my opinion these are two things American racing does better than anywhere in the world.  Why do we want to change this to be more like other countries?

Love it or hate it, the claiming game is the closest thing to instant gratification we as an industry can offer in the arena of ownership. There are rules to this game just like any other.  There are jail rules, void rules, waiver rules all of which are in place to protect the buyer, the seller, and the horse.

For those only familiar with the stakes and allowance portions of your condition books, let’s break down how a claim is made. Person calls a trainer, puts money in a horsemen’s account, picks out a horse, drops a slip, and now that person owns a new horse. It is a very egalitarian system. The seller knew the deal when they entered the horse for the tag and the buyer knew the deal when they dropped the slip. Both have agreed upon the value of the horse.

A horse breaks its maiden in a maiden special weight. Now the horse enters allowance company only to find that the horse can only consistently beat the water truck across the line.  Doing this repeatedly so the horse won’t be “devalued” by entering the claiming ranks is an example of a sunk cost fallacy.

What was paid for the horse or what the horse cost in stud fees, board bills and training does not equal the horse’s skill or worth. If this were true, The Green Monkey would have won the Triple Crown and a horse that was bought for $40,000 should’ve never won the Breeders’ Cup Juvenile Fillies last year. Sales price and cost does not denote talent. The claiming system allows owners to sell a horse quickly and possibly reinvest that money almost immediately. In contrast, a rating system would seem to slow down sales or possibly prevent them, along with additional costs to the owner if they go through the auction process.

This notion of “devaluing” also does not consider the possibility of the horse getting claimed and going on to win stakes; some trainers have made a name for themselves doing just that.

Let’s look at the trainer angle. Smaller trainers must have access to horses to grow and get noticed by other owners. The claiming system is the quickest way for these smaller trainers to grow and showcase their horsemanship abilities. Auctions have been mentioned as a way within this rating system idea to disperse stock to smaller barns. Take a poll and see how many of the 81 horses sold in July at Fasig went to a barn with 15 horses or less, my guess would be not many, if any.

A total of 9,885 trainers made a start in 2000; that number declined to 4,959 in 2019. This roughly 49% drop can be attributed to a number of things, including the rise of “mega trainers” and a focus of owners on the almighty win percentage. Limiting the growth of smaller trainers or new trainers who do not have huge backing in the first place, as a rating system would do, would only further this drop over the next 20 years.

There are other concerns. Such as does anyone think state legislatures are going to look favorably on racing after racing eliminates their tax revenue from claimed horses? Ask Oaklawn Park, the state of Arkansas and the city of Hot Springs how much money was made from taxes during the meet strictly through the claim box. Also, who would be doing the rating and how would it translate from track to track? In a claiming system the owner and trainer do the rating as to whether their horse who won for $10,000 at one track could win for $10,000 at a different track. Handcuffing owners and trainers in a subjective rating system, plus limiting the ease of access to horses for potential new owners, plus the further shrinking of an already rapidly shrinking trainer pool, is the start to a bad algebraic equation for American horse racing.

Kentucky-based Bentley Combs began training horses in late 2017 after serving as assistant trainer to Dallas Stewart. The Lexington native graduated from the University of Louisville’s Equine Industry Program in the College of Business and received an MBA from the University of Mississippi.

The post Letter to the Editor: Bentley Combs appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Verified by MonsterInsights