Southern California racing | Horse Racing Free Tips

Vocal Two-Circuit Supporters in Cali Come Out Firing in First of Many Expected North/South Skirmishes

The precarious, up-in-the-air future of California racing and whether or not the state can continue to support two geographic year-round circuits was made no clearer after Thursday's California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) meeting. The 3 1/2-hour session was dominated by discussion of competing North-versus-South plans that both tried to carve a sustainable path forward while underscoring the dire circumstances that face the industry with the June 9 closure of Golden Gate Fields looming like an unavoidable asteroid.

Although the CHRB concluded the meeting–which featured testimony that was at times emotional, hopeful, angry, and even ominous–without taking any voting action on the situation, proponents behind ideas that would turn one of the NorCal fairs locations into a venue capable of hosting nearly year-round Thoroughbred racing had a decided edge in turnout and vocal support.

In part, that's because those NorCal-based supporters enjoyed a home-track advantage, because the Jan. 18 CHRB meeting was held at Cal Expo in Sacramento, the preferred location for a year-round venue as outlined in a presentation by the California Authority of Racing Fairs (CARF).

But the locale wasn't the only factor, as much of the back-and-forth debate also came across as a referendum about larger racing entities allegedly trying to trump smaller ones, whether or not 1/ST Racing and Gaming–which owns both Golden Gate and Santa Anita Park–will be good for the state in the long run, and whether or not the Thoroughbred Owners of California (TOC) organization speaks for all the stakeholders in the state or just the higher-end stables based in SoCal.

Yet it was telling that no fewer than 26 industry stakeholders spoke before the board on this wide-ranging, controversial North/South topic during the public commentary period, and not a single one voiced support for an alternate plan proposed by TOC in conjunction with executives from Santa Anita Park and Del Mar Thoroughbred Club.

That TOC-backed concept would consolidate all commercial-track racing in the state at SoCal. The goal would be to maintain level purses there under a simulcast revenue “redirect” plan that would also try 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.

The TOC's takeaway message was that even though it is in support of any “feasible and viable” plan to keep year-round racing afloat in NorCal, a danger exists in the form of increasing economic pressures in the South that, in turn, could contribute to millions of dollars in purse overpayments at Santa Anita and Del Mar that would likely erode the overall California product.

“With the closing of Golden Gate, can we continue to support two full-time circuits? This is a fair question,” said Bill Nader, the TOC's president and chief executive officer.

“We are running out of time,” Nader continued. “If there is agreement on one point, I think it would be that the latest possible decision on the allocation of 2024-25 race dates would be at the CHRB meeting in March. This would help re-establish stability and certainty for the many who are looking for answers.”

Nader's tone was largely somber and straightforward as he discussed the TOC's rationale with executives from 1/ST Racing and Del Mar presenting alongside. But at times his comments were met with derision and catcalls from opponents, who greatly outnumbered the supporters of the TOC's plan.

Many of those same folks also cheered and applauded any mentions of trying to save year-round NorCal racing.

At one point, CHRB chairman Gregory Ferraro, DVM, asked audience members to respect decorum so that the outbursts wouldn't bog down the meeting. But his request to “stop the clapping and the booing” went largely unheeded.

Larry Swartzlander, the executive director for CARF, detailed his organization's work-in-progress plan to install a seven-furlong track inside the current main mile oval at Cal Expo, which for years has largely hosted Standardbred racing outside of the short season that the Thoroughbred fair races in Sacramento.

Swartzlander said Cal Expo would likely race 103 Thoroughbred dates in the future (on the outer oval), with cards scheduled roughly twice weekly when the other NorCal fairs weren't in season.

“We are looking at funding from horsemen, CARF, and potential grants,” Swartzlander said, admitting that his plan is just in its initial stages because horsemen in California have only known since July about 1/ST Racing's plan to close Golden Gate.

As a result, Swartzlander was light on specifics such as firm costs and a timeline.

Swartzlander said next up is a Jan. 26 meeting with the Cal Expo board of directors seeking conceptual approval.

“If the board does decline to approve racing at Cal Expo, we will move to Pleasanton,” as a potential year-round NorCal racing home, Swartzlander said. “The Pleasanton board is very strongly in support of racing, and if I have to make one commitment to you, Pleasanton will race.”

When CHRB executive director Scott Chaney pressed Swartzlander for cost details, Swartzlander gave an estimate for state-owned Cal Expo's overhaul in the $1- to 1.5-million range.

Chaney expressed surprise at such a low figure.

“I'm not going to lie. I think you're very low,” Chaney said.

“One of the things that concerns all of us is uncertainty right now,” Chaney said. “We're, I'm sure, bleeding horses every day because there's no clear plan. We don't know what we're doing in the future [and] I am concerned about timeline and cost at Cal Expo. I just think it's unrealistic. I know it's unrealistic, to be honest.”

Commissioner Wendy Mitchell said she appreciated CARF's efforts at coming up with a plan, but also expressed doubts.

“I don't see how any of this lines up,” Mitchell said. “And I guess my concern from a regulatory or from the industry perspective is I don't want to create false expectations for people that are really unattainable…. I don't mean to be negative or a doubter, but I'm trying to be realistic and pragmatic about what the industry is facing.”

Commissioner Damascus Castellanos said that the time crunch and uncertainty was caused by 1/ST Racing, not CARF.

“The industry was kind of slow to get going on this whole thing,” Castellanos said. “We would be so further along if [1/ST Racing] came to us with proper notice [and] the groups in this room today probably could have gotten together and been done with this plan.”

Ian McLean, an owner and breeder, said during the public commentary session that the CHRB itself is partly to blame.

“If I'm not mistaken, this board works for us. We don't work for you,” McLean said. “The one thing that I've asked this board for years and years is to give us more attention in NorCal. Give us more time. Make us more important. Listen to what we have to say, and make us feel like we matter. And I don't think that's been done.”

McLean said the CHRB's response to CARF's proposal is too focused on negativity and “looking for the holes” in the plan.

“And I agree that you should look for the holes,” McLean continued. “But you should also look for 'How could we patch those holes?'”

Jamey Thomas, a third-generation NorCal trainer, advocated for the CHRB taking a slower approach.

“CARF needs time to get all this situated and done,” Thomas said. “It's kind of been a rush job. They're rushing us, forcing us, to get this stuff done faster than it can be done. Again, if they had let us know a year ago, by now everything could have been in place, we would have had a place to run. And we will have a place to run. The thing is, we just need the time.”

Tom Bachman, who said he's been breeding and selling Thoroughbreds in California for 40 years, underscored that the state's bloodstock industry works on a different timeline.

“My concern as a breeder is that the decisions I make today, the results are three or four years away when I've got to sell,” said Bachman. “So it's very difficult to have faith that three or four years from now there's sustainable racing in California. So my breeding now has moved to Kentucky.”

Johnny Taboada, who was a TOC director until last Sunday, when he was one of three directors to resign in protest over the TOC's proposed statewide consolidation, told the CHRB that the NorCal fairs are in jeopardy without a year-round track in the region.

“If you rush into the decision without giving the chance for the NorCal [entities to come up with an plan for a] circuit, you're going to not only put people out of work, you're going to be closing the fairs as well,” Taboada said. “If we don't have the dates assigned to the North and therefore the money goes to the South, that will be the end of not only NorCal racing, but also the fairs.”

CHRB chairman Ferraro wrapped up the session by saying that this is only the first major discussion on an enormously important topic.

“We needed your information. We need your input,” Ferraro said. “I'm telling you, it's not easy sitting in this chair looking at this situation. It is almost a no-win situation for this board. We're going to do the best we can to do right by everybody. But obviously, we have no decision-making [Thursday], so we will have to end this meeting without a decision, and we'll see what happens over the next couple of months.”

The post Vocal Two-Circuit Supporters in Cali Come Out Firing in First of Many Expected North/South Skirmishes appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Second Stab At Synthetics In California? The Trainers’ View

Under the toughest of spotlights, the industry's collective eyes often turn to the stuff under foot. At least, that's what trainer Mark Casse did in a widely-shared TDN Q&A.

“I think we really, seriously, need to look at more synthetic tracks,” Casse said, triggering yet another cavalcade of commentary on the conceived benefits and blights of synthetic surfaces. “I believe in them. I believe they've got plenty of data to back that up.”

Former TDN writer Lucas Marquardt followed it up with an analysis of race-day fatality data through The Jockey Club's Equine Injury database.

Marquardt calculated how from 2009 through 2022, there were 6,036 fatal injuries from 3,242,505 starts on dirt in North America. That's a rate of 1.86 fatalities per 1000 starts.

On synthetics, there were 534 fatal injuries from 482,169 starts, a rate of 1.11. That's a 68% difference.

“Put another way, had dirt tracks matched the safety of synthetic tracks during that stretch, there would have been 2,437 fewer fatalities,” Marquardt wrote.

The state with arguably the deepest-albeit most contentious-relationship with synthetic surfaces is California, which mandated in 2006 the switch from dirt to synthetic surfaces at its four major tracks.

The state reversed course a few years later in the face of broad dissatisfaction with the decision. It's no easy story to tell, riven by tales of cost-cutting and skirted corners, ill-chosen materials and drainage problems.

Some point the finger, at least in part, at the failure of industry leaders to adequately study the efficacy of different materials before putting the new surfaces down.

Since then, California's relationship with synthetic surfaces has grown even more complicated, thanks to Del Mar's dirt track consistently proving among the most statistically safe nationwide-dirt or synthetic. Nevertheless, Del Mar's experiences haven't been replicated state-wide.

In 2021, California's fatality rate on the dirt (1.51) was more than twice the synthetic rate (0.73), according to Marquardt's calculations. In 2022, it was more than three times larger (1.44 vs. 0.41).

This issue promises to remain a prominent one for the near future. The Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority recently announced that it is establishing a blue-ribbon committee to “work toward the study and ultimate introduction of more synthetic surface options in Thoroughbred racing.”

Among a fleet of promises, The Stronach Group (TSG) announced that it intends to replace the dirt training track at Santa Anita with a synthetic alternative.

Given the state's flip-flopping history with different surfaces, the TDN asked several long-time California-based trainers this question: Given the re-ignited debate on synthetics and all its accompanying arguments, should California mandate once again the replacement of its dirt surfaces with synthetics?

Eoin Harty
“Of course. I don't think they should even have to mandate it. I should think that somebody should show some f*&^ing leadership for a change and do the right thing. Instead of looking down, looking up, looking sideways and dancing around the issue, we need to address the elephant in the room: That we're in a position basically brought on by ourselves.”

“I think the time for hand-wringing and regurgitating old cliches about needing more data, more science, blah, blah, blah-that time has come and gone. No more committees, just do the right thing and put down synthetics. It's time to get on the right side of history. There won't be a Mulligan on this one.”

Note: Harty later explained the curse reflected the gravity of the situation.

John Shirreffs
“I like to tell the story of Tiago, who had won the Santa Anita Derby. In his four-year-old year at Del Mar, I had his exercise rider work him a half [mile]. He breaks off the half mile pole, the horse goes a 16th of a mile and pulls himself up, doesn't want to work.”

Trainer John Shirreffs | Benoit

“I tell the rider, 'don't worry, Mike Smith will be here tomorrow. He gets along with him really well.' Break Tiago off again, goes about a 16th of a mile, pulls himself up and refused to work on that synthetic track.”

“After Zenyatta won the G1 Clement Hearst S., she refused to gallop around the [Del Mar] racetrack. She'd go about two thirds of the way around then just stop and refuse to go. The only thing we could do is walk her to the nearest gap and take her off the track.”

“Zenyatta and Tiago were both big, strong horses that really ran hard. Those type of horses really did not like synthetic tracks. I think that if you just look at how long it takes horses to adjust to the synthetic tracks when they first go in, all you do is find horseshoes on the outside of the track because they're all grabbing themselves. Their feet stop so quickly in it. Synthetic tracks only get bearable as they get older. When they first go in, they're really sticky and tough on horses.”

“As you've seen in the statistics in California, our breakdowns are really reduced. So, I don't think synthetics are the answer. Synthetics are a nice alternative. I mean, it'd be great to have a synthetic track here on the training track because you can't use the main track when it's wet. So, maybe they'd let us use a synthetic track when it was wet.”

Richard Mandella
“I think Santa Anita has the right idea to put it on the training track here to learn more about it, and hopefully it will be waterproof to train through the winter. I would take one step at a time.”

Leonard Powell
“I think the option of having a synthetic track to train on is very good. But to mandate to have all racing on synthetic, I don't think that's a necessity.”

“The notion of a bad step has been proven incorrect. We've found out through a lot of studies, when it comes to injuries, it's not a one-day, one-time thing. It's an accumulation of the pounding from the training, day-in, day-out. So, having the option to have a synthetic to train on would help that, and would lessen the number of catastrophic injuries on dirt on race-day. And it could be very useful on rainy days.”

“However, synthetics are always called all-weather tracks. But they're not really all-weather tracks. They're bad-weather tracks-they're good tracks in bad weather. In Europe, they've had problems with them in the summer months, like we had here. When it's hot and sunny, those tracks are not that good.”

John Sadler
“If you put synthetic tracks back in here, you have to have all the tracks in the country on synthetics. You can't go half and half. That doesn't work. You can't train on synthetic and expect to do well on dirt. You can't train on dirt and expect to do well on synthetic.”

John Sadler | Benoit

“If you go back to when we had synthetics in California, I did very well on it. I could live with one surface nationwide. But because I can train on what you give me, it doesn't mean I prefer that. Not necessarily.”

“I would prefer good dirt. I think it's preferable for these horses. Why? Well, for one, they need a lot of upkeep. They need to be replaced. They need to be refreshed. They're expensive to maintain. And anybody that tells you they're not expensive to maintain is–I don't think they're being truthful.”

“There are other arguments. Are there really fewer fatalities [on synthetics]? Stats probably show that. But is that the real number, if you also look at [career ending] injuries? You don't know, right? It's hard for me to just take one study number and say, 'okay, that's all there is.' It doesn't work like that.”

“What I'm trying to say it's very nuanced. You'd have to give time for the breeders to adjust. You'd have to give time for people to purchase the right horses to adjust. A lot of what we did here wasn't well planned out. We did it and then lived with the consequences.”

Carla Gaines
“Let me start by saying I am not that well-educated on the various types of synthetic tracks. I know there have been improvements on them since they were mandated here in California in 2006.”

“Santa Anita is installing a synthetic surface here on our training track this fall and with the expected increase in rainfall this winter that would give us an alternative place to train the horses when the main track is sealed. It would also be a nice option for our grass horses as we do not have grass workouts here.”

“But for racing, I would have no interest in it. We as trainers are held responsible for every single injury. The spotlight is on us-rarely the surfaces we train on and race over. Instead of getting rid of dirt tracks, let's keep a closer eye on them, and try very hard to improve them. As one old timer told me once, 'we can put a man on the moon, why can't we figure out dirt?'”

Doug O'Neill
“I love the fact they're putting it on the training track. At Santa Anita you'll have all three surfaces. And when we get the rainy weather, you can train on a synthetic. If we had weeks of crazy weather, you could potentially run on synthetic.”

“But to replace the main track dirt for synthetic, I would be anti that. Just wouldn't want to replace the dirt.”

“We've had a pretty good sampling with Hollywood Park and Santa Anita and Del Mar all being synthetic at one time. It had its little perks during rainy season. But all in all, not a good experience for me.”

“They're really good in inclement weather, which a lot of the world has, as opposed to Southern California. So, I just don't think they're good for Southern California tracks.”

The post Second Stab At Synthetics In California? The Trainers’ View appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Stronach Group Outlines Plans for Southern California

Two weeks after an initial company announcement on the closure of Golden Gate Fields at the end of the year, The Stronach Group (TSG) issued details Friday on their plans for consolidating racing operations at its Southern California racing and training facilities, Santa Anita and San Luis Rey Downs.

The plan–shared via Zoom during a press briefing lasting about 30 minutes–appeared large on big-ticket promises though short on specifics in other key areas, including the broader industry impacts from the closure of Golden Gate Fields.

The following details were divulged in the form of a press release:

Over $1 million to support the relocation of horses, trainers, jockeys, backstretch employees and caregivers from Golden Gate Fields to Santa Anita Park as part of the consolidation of racing in Southern California, and to support the California breeding program.
A $4.5 million, brand-new all-weather synthetic track that will replace the existing training track at Santa Anita Park. This change will not only allow for the seamless transition of horses used to running on the synthetic track at Golden Gate Fields but will serve to improve the overall safety environment at Santa Anita Park.
A commitment to fund a portion of 2024 heath care premiums for Golden Gate Field employees.
The creation of a job board accessible to backside employees to support the transition to Santa Anita Park.
An investment of $500,000+ (over two years) toward building a state-of-the-art equine pool for hydrotherapy and horse exerciser, accessible to trainers at Santa Anita Park, that will help horses more easily recover from injury.
$23.2 million toward a backside barn improvement program.
In addition to returning a fourth day of weekly racing to Santa Anita Park resulting in 26 extra race days, 1/ST RACING will invest $2.5 million into building a turf chute at the track.

During the course of the press conference, CEO of 1/ST Racing and Gaming Aidan Butler and Craig Fravel, executive vice-chairman of 1/ST Racing and Gaming, expanded upon some of these details.

The biggest ticket item concerns the $23 million toward backstretch improvements. “The initial piece of work is to replace every single roof and outer extremity of the barns,” said Butler.

“This is a huge undertaking. We have 2,000 stalls on the backside of Santa Anita. To quickly carve into that answer, there's not a lot of room at Santa Anita to add extra stalls. But the job when completed should have a very modern-looking and -feeling backside.

“The larger plan which we'll touch upon at a different time is that we have future proofed what would happen if we needed more stalls. Some would argue that's a great problem to have. We do have quite a few answers for that, but nothing that would be wise to announce today,” said Butler.

When asked to expand upon what he meant by cutting edge, Butler described it as an overarching theme, meaning “we're going to try to be best in class and cutting edge in everything we do.”

TSG aims to begin work on the synthetic replacement to the training track at the end of the fall meet in November. “The hope…would be to get this ready and operational by opening day,” said Butler.

The new one-turn turf chute at Santa Anita would start in the north parking lot, said Butler, who explained that the idea sprung from the growing inventory of turf horses in Southern California.

“We appreciate and understand that the ecosystem currently in California is quite turf heavy from a racehorse perspective, so, adding new turf options and turf distances and starts is going to be hugely beneficial,” said Butler.

As to the economics behind these proposals, Fravel appeared to leave the door open to the possibility that proceeds from simulcasting handle in Northern California could be diverted south.

“We will be meeting with other stakeholders and looking at gaps in the calendar and looking at how we can reconfigure the economics of California racing,” said Fravel.

In its initial statement, TSG explained that a key “goal” of the consolidation was to increase field sizes at Santa Anita and add “another day of racing to the weekly racing calendar at Santa Anita Park, come January 2024.”

When asked how long Santa Anita could remain financially viable if that extra day of racing doesn't materialize, both Fravel and Butler described the proposed investments as spurs of economic activity.

“I think with an influx of horses from the north, along with the positive impact these changes would have, we have a very realistic chance of making that happen,” said Fravel, who said contingency plans were in place in case the four-day race week didn't materialize, but declined to say what they were.

In answer to concerns that the horses in Northern California will become swamped in the Southern California circuit at the entry box, Butler discussed bringing staff from Golden Gate Fields to help smooth the acclimatization process.

“I think the intent over time is that it will become one population,” said Butler. “We've had some experience in other parts of the country where we can, during bigger meets, run higher quality from a purse perspective, and then middle tier racing on the same card.”

The paddock at Santa Anita | Benoit

Butler added: “There is another Thursday. Really the intent is to not completely load that day up with horses from Golden Gate, but to mix them across the whole four days' racing.”

In tune with Butler's comments, Fravel discussed the possibility for the “creative” carding of races with an expanded horse population.

“We fully expect that we'll be able to write condition books, racing conditions, be creative in terms of making sure that, not only the current population at Golden Gate has a place to run, but also that we'll be able to support additional racing hopefully at Los Alamitos,” Fravel said.

In terms of a totally reconstituted Southern California racing product, Butler raised the possibility of additional 'Ship & Win' incentives.

“There are lots of plans in the works to not only attract international runners, but keep up the good work that's been done,” said Butler.

As for the Golden Gate diaspora, the number of trainers and horses that can be accommodated at Santa Anita and San Luis Rey Downs is limited, admitted Butler–a restriction dictated by limited stall space in Southern California, he added.

“We're going to give every trainer and every horse as much as we can to get down here,” said Butler, pointing to the proposed industry support fund.

“Not only a stipend per horse that comes down, but also stipends for jockeys to try to integrate down in the south. There is a separate piece that covers the trainers themselves, humans as they're moving around, and their employees,” Butler added.

After the meeting concluded, TDN asked if the relocation funds would also be used to help those trainers, backstretch staff and horses who are unable to relocate south to Santa Anita or San Luis Rey Downs.

“Yes, if there is any left,” wrote a TSG spokesperson.

One enormous question stemming from TSG's plans is how the closure of Golden Gate Fields will impact the state breeding industry, which has been contracting for years.

As a sign of just how integral Cal-breds remain to the state racing product, however, during Santa Anita's recently concluded six-month meet, Cal-breds made up about 37% of all individual starts, according to DRF chart data. Cal-bred races constituted more than 20% of the overall races.

At Golden Gate Fields, Cal-breds made up nearly 70% of all starts last year, according to DRF chart data–a number that had grown from 60% of all starts at the track in 2013.

TSG has proposed hosting the annual Cal-bred sale at Santa Anita. When asked if TSG has run the numbers on the impacts on the state breeding industry from the closure of Golden Gate fields, Fravel admitted the company had not made such calculations, but pointed toward the additional funds earmarked for the breeding industry.

“We have had breeders who have said to us they're very encouraged with the prospects for Santa Anita, and increased purse money that should be available to them,” said Fravel.

“We're going to sit down with the leadership of the CTBA [California Thoroughbred Breeders Association]. They have some ideas in terms of how they can promote additional breeding, and support the existing program,” Fravel added.

In Friday's press releases, TSG wove in remarks from the Thoroughbred Owners of California (TOC) and from prominent California breeder Terry Lovingier.

“While we continue to work diligently on what the north might look like in 2024, today's announcement answers important short-term questions about the future of California racing and Santa Anita Park,” said Bill Nader, TOC president and CEO. “This represents both an investment and a commitment by Belinda Stronach and her team to not only stabilize but likely improve California racing for stakeholders, horsemen/women, backstretch workers and the betting public. These initiatives will provide a much better environment for our horses and make our overall racing stronger for the immediate future.”

“With these renovations and the commitment to California-bred racing, I see the opportunities for Cal-breds greatly increasing and providing more value for those horses because of it. I'm going to breed more mares to take advantage of it. This is going to benefit the entire industry in the state,” said Lovingier.

“We're a racing company,” said Fravel during Friday's press conference. “We love racing, and we want it to succeed. Hopefully the breeders will share that optimism with us.”

“We are confident that this comprehensive package of important measures will not only bolster the racing, training, owner and fan experience at Santa Anita Park, 'The Great Race Place', but also support Northern California stakeholders through a challenging transition period, and lead the way with state and industrywide changes that will result in a healthier, competitive and sustainable future for Thoroughbred racing in Southern California,” said Belinda Stronach, TSG chairwoman, CEO and president.

On Thursday, news broke that Stronach has been in talks over the last year to become an investor in the Sacramento Republic Football Club.

The post Stronach Group Outlines Plans for Southern California appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Del Mar Boosts Maiden Allowance Purses

Del Mar will once again offer a bonus package for maidens competing at the highest levels on dirt throughout its upcoming 84th summer season, the track said in a release on Wednesday.

The move adds 25% in purse earnings to runners who fit the simple specifications of the program, is available to all dirt competitors in maiden allowance races, all California-bred maiden allowance races or any maiden-claiming race at the $62,500 level or above. The maiden must come from the barn of a trainer who has no more than 60 horses stabled in Southern California.

“It is simply a monetary incentive for owners and trainers to run in essential races that help solidify our racing cards throughout the meet,” said Tom Robbins, Del Mar's executive vice president for racing.

The track has also raised its maiden allowance purses for '23 to a California record $82,000. Its 25% maiden bonus elevates that purse to $102,500. The other races that qualify for the maiden bonus program are maiden-claiming $150,000 ($57,000 purse, that rises to $71,250 with the bonus), maiden-claiming $80,000 ($50,000 purse, that climbs to $62,500) and maiden-claiming $62,500 ($46,000 purse, that goes up to $57,500). The bonuses apply to horses that earn purse money for finishes from first through fifth.

The post Del Mar Boosts Maiden Allowance Purses appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post