dirt | Horse Racing Free Tips

Large Fields, Quality Racing Mark Successful Del Mar Meet

Del Mar marked eight weeks of increased field sizes and high-quality racing that ended Sunday.

“Overall, just a tremendous summer of quality racing,” Racing Secretary David Jerkens says. “Especially Pacific Classic Day. You look back and see how strong of a card that was. I think some of the winners and horses that ran well on that card have bright futures for the Breeders' Cup.”

The talk around the racing industry is the field sizes again this year at Del Mar.

“It was a robust number that I think any track in the country would kill for,” Jerkens says. “We knew last year would be difficult to match but we are very close to what we had last year. I think two years in a row, when you're over or hovering around nine runners a race, that's a pretty strong accomplishment.”

The average field size for the dirt races at Del Mar this summer was 8.47 and for the turf races it was 9.50. Stake races had an AFS of 8.56.

“We had a strong product throughout,” Jerkens notes. “We did have the (one day) weather cancellation but we made up all those races that were canceled.”

Tropical Storm Hilary was the only hiccup all summer. The storm prompted horse evacuations, canceled racing Aug. 20 and eventually dumped two inches of rain on the backside. But from all reports afterward, what little flooding there was in the stable area had no impact on the horses and things were back to normal in just a couple of days.

The “Ship & Win” program was a success once again this summer, contributing to the large field sizes.

“The results were pretty much what we expected,” Jerkens says. “I think we were 14% off the number of starters from last year but that was another expectation we had to curtail a bit because we knew, in reality, it would be hard to match. We may still end up with our second most Ship & Win' runners.”

Heading into the final weekend, 171 “Ship & Win” starters debuted at Del Mar this summer. Twenty three made it to the winner's circle, six last week.

“You can do all these different programs,” Jerkens concedes, “but all that means nothing unless you get the support in the entry box. That's what we had from our horsemen once again.”

So, now we look ahead to the fall meet, something Jerkens has already started planning.

“Hopefully we'll have our stakes schedule released in the upcoming weeks,” Jerkens says. “We're starting to plant seeds for the fall. Generally, if the weather cooperates and we're able to run on the grass we'll have a successful meet. Last year everything went well, knock on wood. We were fortunate in terms of the weather. We had really strong fields our last two weekends and expectations are for more of the same, but a lot is dependent on the rain.”

The four-week Bing Crosby meet kicks off the week after the Breeders' Cup, November 10.

For Jerkens, the end of the summer meet is the end of a very long process that actually goes year round.

“Absolutely,” Jerkens says. “You hear from more people across the country than normal about them taking notice of what Del Mar had to offer this summer. I think we had the strongest day-to-day race product around this summer.”

“My staff worked really hard,” Jerkens continues. “There's a lot of planning that goes into it. You don't just show up Opening Day and here it is. But again, so many owners and trainers really want to be part of Del Mar and they provided tremendous support this summer.”

The post Large Fields, Quality Racing Mark Successful Del Mar Meet 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: It All Begins With Churchill Downs

Horse racing is at an existential moment. Just weeks after a series of breakdowns at Churchill Downs cast a shadow over the Kentucky Derby, a wave of horrifying horse deaths at Saratoga Race Course has once again brought questions about safety to the forefront of public consciousness.

This is a tragedy, as every horse that breaks down also breaks our hearts. However, I believe our sport has reached a tipping point, and I predict there will be a Silver Lining emerging from all these tragedies. In the past week, I have engaged with industry leaders, including the current NYRA Board of Directors as well as Dave O'Rourke, NYRA's President & CEO. They are in the process of analyzing relevant data regarding synthetic surfaces and the potential installation at our NY racetracks.

This is significant. As a reminder, the Stronach Group eliminated synthetic tracks from their California venues due to insufficient industry support. Keeneland was also compelled to remove its synthetic course because too many owners and trainers were unwilling to prepare for major races, such as The Kentucky Derby, on synthetic surfaces.

This is precisely why we need the entire industry to embrace change collectively. The New York Racing Association (NYRA), which operates Saratoga, is already a leader in horse safety. These recent tragedies are serving as a catalyst to advance additional safety initiatives, including an increased commitment to investing in transformational science and technology, including synthetic surfaces.

NYRA is currently installing a Tapeta track at Belmont Park, which will serve as the fourth racing surface. In light of the recent events at Saratoga, NYRA is contemplating an expansion of this commitment. Additionally, NYRA quickly adopted measures to enhance veterinary scrutiny, such as requiring a trainer's attending veterinarian to attest to the horse's soundness prior to entry. NYRA will also be investing in the most advanced PET and CAT scan technology to help detect pre-existing injuries before they become more serious.

Track superintendent Glen Kozak and the NYRA team excel in constructing and maintaining the current racing surfaces at all NYRA facilities. They are leaders in the field, even consulted by competing tracks around the country. However, dirt track safety remains an industry-wide concern. The surface is outdated when compared to newer engineered alternatives.

As trainer Mark Casse, who trains the majority of his stable on the synthetic course at Woodbine, points out, “What if we had kept the Model T? Instead, look at what we've done with automobiles, how we've made them so much safer. We're still using a racetrack that's been around for 125 years, and there's only so much you can do for it.”

A mounting body of evidence indicates that synthetic tracks are safer for horses. A study by the University of Kentucky found that horses were less prone to injuries on synthetic tracks compared to dirt tracks. A University of Pennsylvania study discovered that synthetic tracks were linked to a lower risk of catastrophic injuries. Most recently, data from The Jockey Club Equine Injury Database conclusively demonstrates that synthetic courses were considerably safer than dirt surfaces in every year from 2019 to 2022, over three times safer in 2022.

The future of horse racing hinges on a bold collective effort from the industry. However, achieving this requires industry-wide consensus on necessary steps to enhance safety for both the cherished animals and the brave jockeys risking life and limb. A fragmented endeavor, however well-intentioned, is likely to fail, dooming our sport to historical insignificance.

Past attempts to introduce synthetic surfaces faltered, partly due to the industry's collective reluctance to embrace change. The horse racing industry stands at a pivotal juncture and should move together in a unified way to ensure horse safety and industry survival.

I call upon the country's leading racing organizations to embrace science and technology by quickly moving to adopt synthetic surfaces.

This silver lining all begins with The Kentucky Derby and Churchill Downs Inc. Board.

Earle Mack was a member of the Board of Trustees, New York Racing Association, Chairman of the New York State Racing Commission, Member of the New York State Thoroughbred Racing Capital Investment Fund and a Member, Board of Directors, of the New York State Thoroughbred Breeding and Development Fund Corp. He was honored with the Eclipse Award of Merit in recognition for a lifetime of outstanding achievement last year.

The post Letter To The Editor: It All Begins With Churchill Downs 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: Armen Antonian

The “Quick Fix” of Synthetics is Not the Answer

Horse racing has been down the path of synthetics before at Santa Anita, Del Mar, Keeneland, etc. Much time was lost, approximately a decade ago, with a focus on changing surfaces as a panacea for horse racing breakdowns. We now know there are other causes for horse breakdowns that are more prevailing. The greatest single cause of racing deaths has to do with pre-existing conditions of the horse, and only in particular instances is the surface itself the primary reason for horses breaking down while racing. Synthetics have found a role to play in the Industry but racing on synthetics exclusively means to change the sport itself in a fundamental way: from breeding, to handicapping, to the aesthetic beauty of competition–the reasons we are all fans of horse racing. And, changing to synthetics will not appease the critics if that is the motivation to do so.

But statistics show that horse racing deaths are less on synthetics than either dirt or turf. Surely safety must be the main focus with racing today. Yes, safety must be a central focus but there has to be some perspective. Horses also die in nature. The thoroughbred industry cannot be expected to prevent ALL deaths of horses and a comparison must be made as to how often and how horses die in nature to reach a fair, concise view of horse racing. Such a comparison, of course, is extremely conjectural. There are no thoroughbreds in nature and not many other horse breeds in nature today at all. Experts from many areas would have to weigh in on such a comparison.

In other words, the approach to the issue of horse racing deaths in general, that is, how the question is posed, is false. So too is the case for synthetics falsely stated. Are we to believe that horses somehow have more trouble competing on dirt and turf than fabricated material? Biology and evolution would initially say otherwise. Similarly, are we to suppose that the breeding of thoroughbred horses is inherently producing unsound animals? Again, general evolutionary changes of such a magnitude would take time. To make such an argument, geneticists would have to be consulted to ascertain that thoroughbred breeding practices are actually producing inherently unsound horses. But first things first. Looking mainly into the track surface and or scrutinizing breeding operations are not the places to begin when investigating horse racing breakdowns.

Back to the statistics. Statistics don't lie. More horses break down on dirt or turf than synthetics per Jockey Club figures. But statistics don't always give answers either. Indeed, the overall sample size in the Jockey Club figures in the aggregate is large but the fact that the number of dirt races were about 7 times more than synthetic races is a cause for pause in a comparison. Sample sizes are usually uniform in the scientific method. And when looking at individual tracks per year, the sample size is quite small when considering dirt races only. A track can thus vary markedly from year to year in horse fatalities as the Jockey Club statistics indicate.

And the sample has to be RANDOM. Horses that are selected to compete on synthetics are not randomly chosen. That is, the two populations: horses that run on dirt and horses that run on synthetic are not uniform. So the synthetic numbers for horse fatalities that are generally lower than for dirt fatalities may or may not be because of the surface. The fact that both are samples of thoroughbreds is not rigorous enough to make a valid comparison. The sample population has to be random. A random sample also compensates for genetic variation in a species. The best argument for synthetics in terms of the data comes from Gulfstream Park in 2022. At Gulfstream, there were about 7000 starts on synthetic with one fatality whereas there were about 6000 starts with 8 fatalities on dirt. At least the number of starts were comparable at the same track for each surface but again, horses were selected by trainers for various reasons to race on synthetic rather than dirt. Better comparison of the two surfaces–but still not a random sample of the horse population at Gulfstream and one year is not nearly enough to draw any serious conclusions.

Action at Gulfstream Park in Hallandale Beach, Florida | Bill Denver/EQUI-PHOTO

Any glance at aggregate statistics for analysis would have to consider figures after 2019 after the implementation of new safety protocol stemming from the racing deaths at Santa Anita that year. But even here, with a seemingly logical approach to the data on racing breakdowns, a comparison is problematic. There are inexplicably low dirt rates of fatalities (say below 1 per 1000) before 2019 with dirt racing at various tracks that, in other years, had higher rates of about 2 per 1000. Such variability calls into question any definitive conclusion about track by track breakdowns relating to surface only.

What we do know is that Del Mar, Santa Anita and Keeneland have had remarkably low rates of fatality on dirt the last 2-3 years. For example, Keeneland had 3 deaths from 2020 to 2022 in almost 5000 starts or about 0.6 per 1000. Del Mar had none from 2021 to 2022 with almost 4000 starts. Such figures compare favorably with the lowest synthetic figures. Given these Keeneland and Del Mar figures it is a stretch to say that dirt racing is inherently or significantly more dangerous than synthetic racing. The question does remain: are these rates extendable over time? If the safety reforms in horse racing continue and are enhanced, the chances are they can be.

What we can say with some assurance is that all horse racing death rates are going down from year to year. The average rate of horse death for 2022, in an industry where safety reforms have not been sufficiently generalized, was 1.25 deaths per thousand. Still, it is too early to draw conclusions about horse racing deaths (especially in the wake of the recent spate of breakdowns at Churchill) until the new protocol is agreed to and generalized throughout the industry and a number of years with such protocol in place has passed. The hard work of putting in the safety measures is just beginning.

Horses run slower on synthetics than dirt. Is running fast then a problem? There are many misconceptions here. The issue is not speed but how often a horse is asked to race at high speed. Here the veterinarians can chime in to assist trainers with their training and racing schedules. A dialogue should ensue on best practices. A horse can race more often if it is running easily. A horse in a grade I race cannot race as often as winning at that level usually requires maximum effort. So comparisons by racing fans of one horse's schedule to another are not valid. Each horse is different both in terms of circumstance and genetic variation and trainers must be more in tune with their vets moving forward not just on a horse's ailments and therapeutic medication but on their racing schedule itself.

–Armen Antonian Ph.D

The post Letter to the Editor: Armen Antonian 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: Dirt, Synthetic and Sprints

It is with a lot interest that I read the two Op/Eds from Earl Mack and Bill Finley published this week about the dirt vs. synthetic surfaces, and, although the numbers speak for themselves, I think we should look at another factor.

A lot more sprints are being run on dirt than either turf or synthetic. The composition of the dirt surface makes speed the best asset for horses who compete and it is common to see fractions of sub-22 seconds for a first 1/4 of a mile, and over 24 or 25 seconds on the final portion of a race. Those fractions are even more polarized in dirt route races where lower-caliber horses would sometimes finish their last 1/4 of a mile in 27 or 28 seconds, merely faster than a two-minute pace.

On either turf or synthetic, Jockeys have (usually) enough common sense to rate their mounts early and save something for the end. The kindness of the courses makes it that horses can close late and still prevail if best.

Unfortunately, speed hurts horses, be during training or racing. This is the nature of the beast with dirt racing and I believe that one of the major factors that numbers of fatalities are so much higher on that surface, has a lot to do with the pace that races are run at. Horses finish tired, experience a lack of oxygen in their metabolism and that hypoxia generates injuries, and sometimes fatalities.

The table tells us that rate of fatalities is higher in sprints than two turn races, which could validate the argument that early speed more than distance is a vector to injuries.

Another interesting fact in The Jockey Club numbers is that, for both turf and synthetic surfaces, the rate of fatalities has been steadily decreasing by between 15 and 30% every year for the last four years, mostly due to increased veterinary oversight. But on dirt, the numbers seem to have reached a plateau since it has steadily stayed the same during the same period, despite all the scrutiny it has been under.

–Leonard Powell

Editor's Note:

Southern California trainer Leonard Powell is referring to statistics from the Equine Injury Database which show that since 2009, the fatal injury rate has been 1.93 per thousand starts on races under six furlongs, 1.66 in races from six to eight furlongs, and 1.54 in races over a mile.

The complete table may be seen here.

The post Letter To the Editor: Dirt, Synthetic and Sprints appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post