CTT | Horse Racing Free Tips

CHRB Unanimously Approves Plan to Make Pleasanton New Center of NorCal Circuit

The California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) voted 6-0 on Thursday to approve a dates package for the back half of 2024 that will establish the current fairs-meet-only track at Pleasanton as the new crux of a Northern California circuit.

The entire state has been trying to come to grips with the looming June 9 closure of Golden Gate Fields, the lone commercial track in the region, and the Mar. 21 vote by the CHRB was viewed as a NorCal racing lifeline by the estimated 250 supporters in attendance.

Those very vocal and at times emotional NorCal racing advocates greatly outnumbered proponents of a plan that would have instead consolidated all commercial-track racing in the state in Southern California.

The NorCal supporters consisted of horsemen who have called the circuit home for decades, plus a contingent of statewide breeding interests.

Those individuals had the group backing of the California Authority of Racing Fairs (CARF), which will operate the expanded Oct. 16-Dec. 25 Pleasanton meet under the auspices of a new management entity called Golden State Racing.

The California Thoroughbred Trainers (CTT), whose board of directors had unanimously voted to back the initiative that also calls for three other fairs venues to pick up other dates that will be abandoned by Golden Gate's closure, was also behind the Pleasanton idea.

1/ST Racing and Gaming–which owns both the closing Golden Gate and the financially struggling Santa Anita Park–had teamed with Del Mar Thoroughbred Club and the Thoroughbred Owners of California (TOC) to try an convince the CHRB that its alternate plan would be in the best long-term interests of the state as a whole.

That SoCal concept instead focused on redirecting simulcast revenue from the northern circuit to the southern tracks. It was further based on a premise that would have attempted to accommodate displaced Golden Gate outfits by creating more opportunities for lower-level horses to race at Los Alamitos Race Course, dropping the “claiming floors” at both Santa Anita and Del Mar, and establishing “relocation allowances” for stables that had to pack up and move while only short summer fairs meets were conducted in NorCal.

In the middle were the CHRB commissioners, who repeatedly expressed frustrations during the Mar. 21 meeting that because the NorCal and SoCal factions couldn't cooperate to come up with a joint plan, they had been placed in the unenviable position of having to choose one option over the other while knowing that they'd be making some constituents unhappy no matter how they voted on the measure.

Yet while the CHRB did ask pointed questions about CARF's plans for Pleasanton and how the new operation would be funded, commissioners saved their most barbed criticisms for 1/ST Racing's executive vice-chairman Craig Fravel, who only 48 hours before the meeting had penned an open letter that warned of potential consequences that might occur if the CHRB voted against the SoCal plan.

In his Mar. 19 letter–which backers of the Pleasanton plan clearly took as an ultimatum–Fravel had written that “should the Board allocate dates in the north per the CARF proposal Santa Anita will immediately meet with the TOC to implement purse cuts for the balance of 2024.”

Fravel also wrote that “Further planned investments in capital projects at Santa Anita will be reevaluated [and] further operation of Santa Anita and San Luis Rey [Downs] as training and stabling facilities may be in jeopardy.”

In response, CHRB commissioner Damascus Castellanos openly called out 1/ST Racing during Thursday's meeting for being too coercively demanding and for making an already complicated situation more difficult. Castellanos said over the past two days since Fravel's letter was made public, the CHRB has been inundated with calls from concerned constituents.

“I'm not upset because of the calls,” Castellanos told Fravel. “I'm upset because I don't do well with bullies. That's the problem. I'm upset that you [put this burden on] the CHRB. And that's not right. But, if that's the way you felt [you needed to] play the game, then that's what you're going to do…. You want to be the bully? You want to take your ball and run? Then that's up to you. I'm not advocating that. But what I'm saying is don't put that burden on us…. Everybody in this room has a responsibility to take care of themselves and each other. And I believe that that hasn't been done.”

CHRB commissioner Wendy Mitchell told Fravel that she was bothered by 1/ST Racing announcing Golden Gate's closure, not working constructively with NorCal interests to present a workable alternative, then responding with threats of closure when 1/ST Racing didn't like the concept that CARF came up with.

“That's not fair and that's not right,” Mitchell said. “And that's not a good business strategy…. You can't just throw out all these threats to us and say the industry is going to collapse in California [if you don't get your way].”

Mitchell continued: “We're expected, as regulators, to pick sides. To pick north against south. To pick fairs, versus, you know, the Southern California tracks. I don't like the way this was handled. I don't appreciate it. I think we need to have a different attitude and strategy for how to save horse racing in the state of California versus what we have seen so far.”

Fravel then attempted to explain what he meant in the letter using a more moderate tone while underscoring that 1/ST Racing's chairwoman and chief executive officer, Belinda Stronach, remains fully committed to making sure Santa Anita doesn't suffer the same going-out-of-business fate as Golden Gate.

Racing at Santa Anita | Benoit

“The letter didn't say we're shutting down,” Fravel said. “The letter said we have to sit down and figure out what we're going to be able to invest with the prospect of continuing to lose money. I can say one thing: I was on the phone with Belinda yesterday. She does not want to close Santa Anita. We've had offers over and over again from people wanting to [buy it], but [upper management's response has consistently been] 'not for sale.' So the commitment is to continue racing. To make racing thrive at Santa Anita, and to try and reinvest our efforts in this product.”

According to plans for the Pleasanton proposal submitted by CARF that were included in the CHRB meeting packet, “In order to provide for the additional horses expected to run at this meet, more than 300 portable stalls will be moved to [Pleasanton's] Alameda County Fairgrounds. No other improvements to the facilities are needed at this time. However, future investments could include additional permanent stalls, improvements to the grandstand and the installation of a turf course.”

Larry Swartzlander, the executive director for CARF, later put an approximate $7-million projected price tag on the turf course, noting that it wouldn't be undertaken until at least year two of the Pleasanton phase-in.

CARF's plan further called for other dates formerly run at Golden Gate to be reallocated this year between Sonoma County Fair (July 31-Aug. 20), Humboldt County Fair (Aug. 21-Sept. 17) and the Big Fresno Fair (Sept. 18-Oct. 15).

CARF and Alameda County Fair have drafted a licensing agreement that will cover five years, the written materials stated.

Back in January, the TOC had previously articulated in front of the CHRB that even though it was in support of any “feasible and viable” plan to keep year-round racing afloat in NorCal, a danger existed in the form of that move increasing economic pressures in the south that the TOC believes would erode the overall California product.

On Thursday, Bill Nader, the TOC's president and chief executive officer, said that while agreement among its board members wasn't unanimous about not backing the Pleasanton plan, “in terms viability, there just wasn't enough assurance that this was a viable plan.”

Nader said the TOC had difficulty with the extended Pleasanton meet using the higher California takeout structure that applies to fairs (instead of the lower commercial takeout scheme that Golden Gate would have been required to use), because, he explained, that form of bet pricing would be burdensome to horseplayers.

Nader also said that he wasn't sure CARF's proposed daily purses (which are still a work in progress) reflected an accurate projection, because Pleasanton would basically have to match what the better-established, lower-takeout Golden Gate meet generated in betting handle to achieve it. The TOC, he said, has come up with slightly different and lower figures.

Nader made it clear that he wasn't arguing which projection was right and which was wrong. But he did state concerns that within a few months, the CHRB will have to make decisions on 2025 dates allocations, and that even then, the Pleasanton meet won't yet be completed, so no one will have “the real truth” on whether the numbers make sense or not.

“The TOC does represent the north. It does represent the south,” Nader said, which elicited catcalls and boos from many in attendance who have accused the TOC of not being representative of the NorCal interests. “What we want is just reliable, accurate information to understand what puts California in the best position going forward.”

Nader continued: “No matter what we do, no matter what decisions are made, there's going to be some pain, and there's going to be some who are going to walk away disappointed. And unfortunately, that's inevitable. I don't care what decision is made–no matter what we do, it's going to have impact to the detriment of some. Frankly, I just think it's unavoidable.”

Alan Balch, the executive director of the CTT, explained prior to the CHRB's vote why his organization backed the NorCal plan.

“Our board, nine people south and north, are unanimous in supporting the effort to keep Northern California racing going,” Balch said. “We believe that racing is California is not going to survive in any meaningful, important way without California breeding, [and] we just need to have a chance to keep breeders interested and motivated to breed, and to provide hope for the future.

“We can all disagree about the viability of any particular northern plan,” Balch said. “But with no plan and no racing in the north, there is very little incentive for California breeders to continue.”

Balch said that his constituents have heard too much rhetoric from the TOC and 1/ST Racing along the lines of, “If this northern money doesn't come to the south, we'll have to cut purses in the south.”

But, Balch postulated, “Do these people realize that if there is no Northern California racing, the Northern California purses will be cut to zero? Does that make sense? Not if we're all in the same state. We have to work together.”

Prior to the CHRB's unanimous vote in favor of the NorCal plan, CHRB chairman Gregory Ferraro, DVM, pointed out that, “This is a serious fiduciary responsibility that the board is taking on here, [and] it's increasingly clear to me that if racing is going to survive in California at all, we can't make two circuits. We have to make one circuit [in which tracks] are not conflicting with each other, where you're benefitting each other.”

CHRB vice-chair Oscar Gonzales added that even if the NorCal interests get what they want out of the vote, they, too, must realize that SoCal does need some form of cooperation and financial help.

“I believe that this [vote] should be an opportunity to reset, [and] the start of mending fences,” Gonzales said. “And [then] let's get on with making California racing the best in the nation.”

Castellanos concurred.

“We need to work together. We need to figure out how to keep racing in California. Not just northern, not just southern–in California. Because if we keep on going at this rate, we're going to implode. There's no reason for us to cannibalize each other,” Castellanos said.

The post CHRB Unanimously Approves Plan to Make Pleasanton New Center of NorCal Circuit appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

California Horse Racing Board Accepts Trainers’ Plan For Accident Prevention Task Force

During the California Horse Racing Board's regularly scheduled meeting on Oct. 20, the board accepted a plan to handle catastrophic breakdowns without the implementation of mandatory trainer penalties, reports bloodhorse.com. The plan, which includes an accident prevention task force, was presented by the California Thoroughbred Trainers during yesterday's teleconference committee meeting.

“Since our tracks and regulator now conduct reviews of the most serious accidents with those professionals and connections involved, what may be missing is a way to systemize these findings,” CTT executive director Alan Balch said in the committee meeting. “To evaluate them all together, and take definitive action where indicated, including not only the possibility of referrals or penalties for any licensees who might be found to be responsible, but more important, recommendations for improved conditions, safety, or regulation that may arise.”

CHRB commissioner Wendy Mitchell expressed her gratitude for the CTT's proposal.

“I just want to say that I'm really appreciative that the trainers came forward with constructive ideas and suggestions instead of bringing lawyers and trying to counter the work that we're doing,” Mitchell said. “So I'm really impressed and excited about that and other folks should take a lesson from that.”

Taskforce Not Penalties for Equine Fatalities, Said CTT at CHRB Meeting

If reception is any guide, the main takeaway by far from Tuesday's California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) Medication, Safety, and Welfare Committee meeting was the suggestion of an accident prevention taskforce to systematically study the myriad factors behind fatal equine injury.

The primary discussion on the meeting agenda was a highly anticipated one, concerning the possibility of penalizing trainers for injuries and fatalities for horses in their care.

During the meeting introduction, CHRB executive director, Scott Chaney, and CHRB chairman, Gregory Ferraro, explained that while California has witnessed a sharp decline in equine fatalities over the last two years, the discussion was to stimulate suggestions on maintaining that trend going forward.

Both made pointed reference to trainers with multiple fatalities in their care each year.

“If you look at the numbers over the last few years, by far the vast majority of trainers have no more than one breakdown in any given year,” Ferraro said.

“But there's a handful, just a handful of trainers who have multiple violations, multiple breakdowns, year after year after year. And those individuals are endangering the welfare and health of the industry,” said Ferraro.

There were 72 equine fatalities at CHRB-regulated facilities during the past fiscal year. “Of the 72 fatalities during the past fiscal years, all but 14 were one-off events for trainers. Of those 14 trainers, 12 had two [fatalities], one had three, and one had four,” Chaney explained.

“To be put in context, a musculoskeletal death is exceedingly rare at a CHRB regulated facility,” Chaney said, citing the following statistics: During the last fiscal year, there were 30 racing-related deaths from nearly 31,000 starts, and 22 training-related deaths from over 73,000 workouts.

“To be clear, writing a regulation that penalizes trainers for preventable or predictable catastrophic injuries has due process, logistical and fairness challenges, all of which may be difficult to overcome,” said Chaney.

After a preamble detailing the complex set of variables factoring into equine injury, California Thoroughbred Trainers (CTT) executive director, Alan Balch, outlined the organization's thinking behind a possible accident prevention taskforce comprising industry stakeholders and academics.

The taskforce, Balch explained, would systemize the extensive information already collected within the sport, as well as canvas professional input into some of the more subtle and intractable problems underpinning equine injury, like horses coming back from a lay-off.

“Some body could be formed that would look specifically at all of the data involved in repeated accidents,” said Balch.

“When accidents do occur, the basics pieces are already in place for a more formal fact-finding mechanism, since our tracks and regulator conduct reviews of the most serious accidents with those professionals and connections involved,” he said.

“What may be missing is a way to systemize these findings to evaluate them all together, and take definitive action where indicated, including not only the possibility of referrals or penalties for any licensees who might be found responsible, but more important, recommendations for improved conditions, safety, or regulation that may arise,” said Balch.

Balch then outlined a set of other related issues that the taskforce could formally address, including:

– Improving the “scope, accuracy and detail” of the national Equine Injury Database.

– Determining the true statistical safety of synthetic surfaces, versus dirt and turf, “and reconsidering whether to once again mandate synthetic surfaces for either training or racing.”

– Developing an “agreement on best practices” when it comes to horses returning to racing following a lay-off.

– Further investment into, and enhancement of, all continuing education programs, “for any professional, including management, trainer, official or veterinarian or jockey, who might demonstrate the need from the formal accident review process.”

– New rule making processes for weeding out potential or perceived conflicts of interest in the sport.

– Consideration that official regulatory veterinarians be only state veterinarians, “answerable only to the regulator, and properly compensated by a CHRB assessment.”

– A modernization process to streamline existing CHRB statutes and regulations.

– Establishing consistent and uniform “oversight and surveillance practices” at all regulated training and racing facilities.

– And consideration that all contemporary diagnostic and rehabilitative practices and equipment are made uniformly available across the state.

“Obviously I could go on and on, and the taskforce could develop a great many more of these ideas,” said Balch.

“Mobilizing all of California's constituent groups to assess these and other ideas could begin immediately, without any cumbersome rule making process, it seems to us,” Balch added.

“It can expedite the charge that the CHRB has put forward to improve safety and reduce accidents still more, and do so on an inclusive basis with all constituent members,” Balch said.

In response to the potential taskforce presentation, the CHRB Medication, Safety, and Welfare Committee appeared largely favorable to the idea, with members asking fairly perfunctory questions.

Ferraro asked, for example, if the taskforce would be populated with all relevant constituents.

In response, Balch bemoaned the siloed nature of current stakeholder organizations, and said the taskforce could be a way to knit together the industry's fractured ranks.

“This could be a way to get us back on track” considering the shared interest in “reducing injuries and accidents further,” said Balch.

Ferraro also asked if the taskforce would address the CHRB directly with recommendations.

“Absolutely,” said Balch. He added that while there might be legal issues concerning the working practicalities between the taskforce and the CHRB, “I think participation and observation by the CHRB is very important in something like this, because the regulator is neutral.”

The CHRB chief veterinary officer, Jeff Blea, called the taskforce a “very thoughtful, progressive suggestion,” and discussed some of the ways in which some existing academic research into injury prevention could be woven into the possible program.

“There are currently procedures in place that go on under the radar that people aren't aware of that I think could apply or be applicable to a body of work that you're talking about,” said Blea.

As an example, Blea pointed to the necropsy review process, conducted at UC Davis, through which studies are conducted on cause, effect and prevention, as well as the state's broader mortality review program.

“Hand in hand, that program could help you better define the taskforce,” said Blea.

Blea also discussed the work being done at UC Davis on a predictive model to look at proximal sesamoid bone fractures, the number one cause of musculoskeletal breakdown.

“As far as the taskforce, I think from my position I'd be happy to be a part of that,” said Blea. “And I could bring what the university has to offer to lend a scientific arm in addition to the practical aspect of that program.”

The post Taskforce Not Penalties for Equine Fatalities, Said CTT at CHRB Meeting appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Horsemen’s Groups Partner On Horsemen U Continuing Education Platform

The California Thoroughbred Trainers (CTT), Maryland Thoroughbred Horsemen's Association (MTHA) and New York Thoroughbred Horsemen's Association (NYTHA) have teamed up to provide a Continuing Education platform for Thoroughbred trainers and assistant trainers called Horsemen U, which offers approved online CE webinars and issues CE certificates after a course and a short quiz have been completed. Trainers and assistant trainers can register, free of charge, and maintain their CE records in their account at www.HorsemenU.com.

Continuing education has been adopted as one of the core Best Practices developed by the stakeholders involved in the Mid-Atlantic Strategic Plan to Reduce Equine Fatalities. CE requirements have been implemented in California, Delaware, Maryland, New York, and West Virginia. Pennsylvania and Virginia are in the process of adopting CE regulations.

All licensed trainers and assistant trainers in the U.S. are eligible to register for a Horsemen U account. There are currently 12 webinars offered on the platform, on topics ranging from “Diagnostic Imaging of the Racehorse Fetlock” to “Equine Drug Testing” to “Equine Welfare, Horse Racing and the Social License to Operate.” The webinars have been hosted by the California Horse Racing Board, the Grayson-Jockey Club Research Foundation's Welfare and Safety of the Racehorse Summit and the Thoroughbred Horsemen's Association.

The post Horsemen’s Groups Partner On Horsemen U Continuing Education Platform appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post