As California grapples with a budget deficit in the tens of billions of dollars, the horse industry has grown financially for the state over the last five years; responsible for billions of dollars in economic impact and tens of thousands of jobs, according to a report released by the American Horse Council.

In 2023, the equine ecosystem provided a total value of $11.6 billion to California's economy and a direct contribution of $6.5 billion to state GDP, according to the report. This marks a significant increase from the American Horse Council's previous report in 2018, which found a total value of $8.3 billion to the state economy and a direct contribution of $4.5 billion to state GDP.

Through the care of the state's near-500,000 horses, events and recreation, and the ripple effect on other sectors of the economy, the California equine industry generates 132,496 jobs across the state and directly employs 93,467 workers. Five years ago, those numbers were 115,474 and 77,703, respectively.

Horses remain incredibly popular in the state of California. In total, 30.48% of households – 4.1 million in California – have a “horse enthusiast” in their home. No fewer than 220,000 California residents volunteer their time to horses, and the industry generates $6.2 billion in tourism for California.

“The American Horse Council report confirms what those of us in the industry have always known: Horses hold a special place in the hearts and minds of Californians,” said Bill Nader, President and CEO of Thoroughbred Owners of California. “With over 4 million households participating in horse events and activities across the state – 38% of whom are under the age of 18 – it is clear that the equine industry is more than just an impressive economic driver for the state; it is an integral part of California's culture.”

Racing continues to be the greatest contributor to the state in the industry, with a total economic impact of $2.5 billion and a direct value of $1.5 billion to California GDP.

“These data points show that the horse industry's contributions to California are enormous – and growing,” said Amy Zimmerman, of the California Horse Power Coalition. “Our commitment to supporting California's economy and workforce, preserving our state's beautiful land, providing therapeutic services to Californians who need it, and caring for the horses we love has never been greater. We look forward to seeing our industry grow and evolve in the years to come.”

More information and the 2023 Economic Impact Study can be found on the American Horse Council website: https://horsecouncil.org/economic-impact-study/

The post Horse Industry Drives Huge Economic Gains Across California appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

CAW players constitute a small group of mostly anonymous, high-volume gamblers with an outsized impact on the betting markets–including in California–due to their use of sophisticated wagering technologies and the inducements offered to them in the form of attractive rates and rebates not available to the average punter.

At the time, CAW play was the main source of handle growth in California, which by extension “is contributing the lowest percentage for purses” and thereby presenting “a serious, long-term concern for California and its horsemen,” wrote Cummings.

Cummings's detailed study appears prescient. Since then, several reports have illustrated the extent of California's purse account woes.

To explain the recent 25% purse cuts at Golden Gate Fields, the Thoroughbred Owners of California (TOC) said the track's purse account was over $3 million in the red. Purse cuts at Santa Anita stem from a near $4-million purse account overpayment. During the January California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) meeting, it was explained that Del Mar's purse account was overpaid by $2.1 million.

Pat Cummings | The Jockey Club

A complicated set of factors determine purse revenues. Field sizes, for example, are arguably the biggest architects of how much is wagered on an individual race. But CAW play has grown exponentially as a percentage of overall handle in recent years, giving it a key role in the sport's future in California. Why?

Unlike other states where purses are supplemented from alternative gaming like slot machines and casinos, California is reliant solely on betting to generate purse revenues. In other words, California more than any other major jurisdiction needs to thoughtfully manage its betting revenues–including from CAW–if it's to remain a healthy enterprise long into the future.

The problem with CAW–like so many aspects of the sport–is that it has long been shrouded in ambiguity.

To help peel back this opaque curtain, the TDN sought answers to some basic questions about how leaders in the Golden State manage such an influential part of the industry:

What CAW-related information is shared between whom? What oversight mechanisms are in place? If the state's horsemen and women feel they aren't getting a fair deal, can they leverage what they see as a better one? And where do state regulators fit into the scheme?

What is CAW?

In short, CAW players–frequently registered in offshore tax havens–use sophisticated digital tools and teams of staff to spot exploitable deficiencies in the betting pools, and to scour reams of betting and past performance data to identify winning opportunities at high rates of success.

Even individually, they can bet huge. Indeed, last year the Financial Times estimated that just two individual CAW players each wager “on the order of $1bn a year” on State-side racing alone.

In the U.S., CAW players largely wager through a handful of CAW agents' betting platforms, which in many ways act as glorified ADWs.

The biggest in terms of handle is the Elite Turf Club, majority owned by The Stronach Group (TSG), which also owns the Santa Anita and Golden Gate Fields racetracks in California. The New York Racing Association (NYRA) also owns a portion of Elite Turf Club.

Other key CAW platforms include Racing and Gaming Services (RGS), and Velocity, owned by Churchill Downs.

The bettors who aren't privy to the same rates and rebates as these deep-pocketed gamblers (more on this in a bit) argue that CAW players are driving the average gamblers away from the sport in droves, to the point where it's killing the betting markets and hurting purse revenues. Indeed, if CAW players become too big a percentage of the pools, their impacts become magnified and they essentially “cannibalize” the markets.

TOC president Bill Nader has pinned this tipping point at about 25% of the betting pools. Cummings's June 2023 report found that back then, CAW play in California often surpassed that benchmark.

CAW proponents counter that these well-capitalized gamblers provide vital liquidity and efficiency to the betting pools. Without them, these proponents argue, the sport would be significantly poorer, and that by sheer volume of play, they help prop-up purse accounts.

Indeed, the loss of just one major CAW player could hit a track's handle hard. This also means, however, that the biggest individual CAW players have historically been able to wield no inconsiderable leverage to negotiate their terms of play.

 What Portion of CAW Play Goes to Purses?

To understand what part of the betting dollar goes to purses, there are two terms of note: Host fees and Takeout rates.

“Takeout” is the percentage sliced out of every dollar wagered. This pie is divvied up various ways, including a portion funneled into the purse account. Bets wagered on-track direct the largest slice back into the purse account. Bets wagered through ADW and CAW platforms direct the smallest amounts.

Takeout varies on several things like the host track state and bet type. But takeout is determined by track management and regulators and is non-negotiable. A general rule of thumb is an average 20% blended takeout rate across the different pools.

For CAW play, when the term “rates” are mentioned, what is meant are host fees, and these are negotiable.

Host fees are what any wagering outlet pays to track operators for the contractual right to import a simulcast signal. A wagering outlet could be another racetrack, an ADW platform (like FanDuel) or a CAW platform (like Elite Turf Club).

   TDN spoke with several track and industry executives about the state of CAW play today. These experts said that CAW host fees for the premium tracks typically vary between 6% and 8%.

After breeders' premiums and other minor deductions have been removed, host fees are roughly split 50/50 between the track and the purse account in California.

Therefore, if Santa Anita beamed its signal to a location at a host fee rate of 6%, roughly 3% of the total amount handled on that signal at that location will flow back into Santa Anita's purse account.

Primary Oversight of Agreements

Before the beginning of each meet in California, the tracks present the TOC with a list of individual host fees charged to each location that receives its simulcast signal. For that track's meet to go ahead, the TOC must first sign this document, said Scott Daruty, president of both TSG's Monarch Content Management and of the Elite Turf Club.

“Before the Santa Anita meet opens, we give them a list of every location and price that Santa Anita is sold for,” said Daruty. “They [the TOC] either approve it or they don't.”

The list includes host fees the track charges CAW betting platforms. If the host fee of an individual CAW player deviates from that afforded an overall CAW platform, that too would have to be divulged, said Daruty.

“If there was an individual deal [between a single CAW player and the track], that would have to be disclosed to the TOC,” said Daruty.

Scott Daruty | Horsephotos

TOC president Bill Nader said that he has signed all such agreements since joining the organization in October of 2022.

Nader said he was unable to disclose what the host fees that CAW players receive. All host fees are private (not just for CAW players). But Nader described the negotiation of these fees as a “moving target as to how you get this right and how you get it right across all customer segments.”

Where Do Rebates Come From?

The way Nader and other experts explain it, the amount CAW players are “rebated” can be broadly calculated with this simple equation:

Rebate = Takeout minus Host Fee (plus any other associated minor fees). The smaller the host fee, typically the bigger the rebate.

Let's use the 20% blended takeout rate among the pools. And let's say the host fee (plus other associated fees) that the CAW player pays comes to 5%. The rebated discount for the CAW players, therefore, could be a maximum 15% on every dollar wagered (though more on this in the next section).

It's also important to note that bets with higher takeout rates leave the door open to potentially higher rebates. The seemingly counter-intuitive goal is that this leads to higher overall handle.

Several experts said the most successful CAW players can consistently win at an average rate of around 92%. At that rate, for example, a 15% rebate would see the player enjoy a 7% profit margin. According to Daruty, a 92% win-rate isn't typical.

“That's someone really hitting it out the park,” he said.

The bigger the rebate CAW players receive, therefore, the greater their overall profit. And the greater their overall profit, the more they're likely to wager. As one expert put it, “it's like a high-yield investment account.”

Indeed, former Australian bookmaker Tom Waterhouse recently said he was considering investing venture capital funds into horseracing-focused professional betting syndicates that receive these huge rebates.

“[Gambling] is a three trillion-dollar industry, and most people lose. The edge is against you,” said Waterhouse. “But there are a few groups globally that are able to find an edge.”

These rebates are usually returned daily–typically the following morning, said Scott Finley, former NYRA director of simulcasting with a long career in the pari-mutuel betting industry.

“In some cases, they might be done weekly,” Finley added. “But the general idea is, the quicker you front that money back to the CAW players, they're just going to churn that money and bet more. Remember, there's no credit betting allowed anywhere in the U.S. These are all true advanced deposit wagering accounts.”

The TOC, said Daruty, is not privy to the rebate rates that CAW players receive.

“I'm not sure the TOC has ever made that request,” said Daruty, when asked why this information isn't shared with the organization. “But if they were to make that request, I think our response would be to politely deny it.”

When asked why the TOC hasn't asked Elite for rebate data, Nader said that he can get a “very good idea of what the gross rebate would be” by looking at the takeout on the different bet types. “I can work that out,” he said.

What's in it for Elite?

All of which begs the question: What's in it for a CAW platform like the Elite Turf Club?

According to Finley, CAW platforms typically retain between 0.5% and 1.25% as a commission from the amount their players wager.

“It's all based on individual contracts between the [CAW platform] and their player teams,” Finley explained, about how these commissions are negotiated.

As an idea of what kind of number this commission might generate, Elite Turf Club handled over $180 million on Santa Anita's races during 2022, according to the CHRB's statistical opersion reports. At Del Mar during 2022, Elite handled just over $146 million.

Daruty said he was not at liberty to comment on the Elite Turf Club's commission rate.

When asked how, between the host fee and the CAW commission, it appeared that TSG was essentially double-dipping, Daruty said the company's tracks and Elite Turf Club performed two separate functions.

“It's only double-dipping if you're getting paid twice for doing the same thing. This isn't double-dipping because it's two completely different services. In fact, I think it's to the horsemen's benefit that we're operating Elite because they're getting more visibility and more knowledge,” said Daruty.

“If it was a third-party operator, they might not be getting that, but they'd still be paying the same fee,” Daruty added.

Individual Deals with the Tracks

At last year's Global Symposium on Racing in Arizona, Cummings raised the issue of individual players and their representatives negotiating directly with the tracks to receive favorable host fee rates. Some of these deals were negotiated years ago.

“There is undoubtedly a concern when one or two of the biggest players in the sport go door to door across this country and ask a track operator for a discount. Not a rebate–a discount on the host fee,” said Cummings.

John Woodford, chief executive of GWG Group, a Las Vegas-based LLC that provides domestic and international services to CAW players, said that while GWG does not have any such “bespoke” deals for its individual players, such agreements are unsurprising given the amounts sometimes wagered.

“It's the same for other industries,” explained Woodford, “if you're a significant contributor or participant.”

Last year, the Financial Times reported that just two individual CAW players that wager through the Elite Turf Club–Elite 17 and Elite 2–had significantly increased their wagering on California horse racing over the past 15 years.

Since that story came out, the CHRB stopped publishing wagering data showing individual CAW accounts–which it had done since 2008–and now pools these numbers together under the CAW platform. In fairness to the CHRB, however, no other jurisdiction publicly discloses this individual information either.

In this vacuum of individual player data, however, it begs the question: Are any CAW players still privy to favorable deals directly negotiated with California racetracks? Several sources consulted for this story said that at least one player still enjoys such a deal.

Nader declined to answer the question directly, but said that discussions with the tracks are ongoing, and that over the past year, the TOC had successfully negotiated better rates for its constituents. “Everything is a work in progress,” he said.

TOC Leverage?

If the TOC believes the horsemen and women don't receive a fair deal in these negotiations, it can refuse to sign the document authorizing tracks to send out their signals, essentially causing a simulcasting blackout. Nader calls this threat the “nuclear option.”

When asked if during his time the TOC has considered using this option during CAW negotiations, Nader responded that it should be used only as a “last resort.”

“You never really want to do that. If there's a complete breakdown, perhaps. But it should never come to that,” said Nader.

The TOC has deployed this “nuclear option” before in contentious simulcasting disputes. Back in 2008, the TOC withheld Hollywood Park's signal over multiple weeks to increase the amount ADWs were contributing to the purse account.

Bill Nader | HKIR

The move–which reportedly cost Hollywood Park some $500,000 a day in lost revenues–was deeply unpopular with both the ADW platforms and the tracks.

“It didn't make me the most popular guy in racing to the effect I got death threats against me and my family,” said then TOC president Drew Couto, who explained that during the simulcasting blackout, TVG repeatedly shared on-air his personal and home telephone numbers.

“They encouraged their disgruntled viewers to call and let their disappointment be known,” said Couto. “It also led to several death threats being called into the offices. The TOC had to close down for a few days while we addressed the security issues.”

But the TOC's hard-line stance in 2008 ultimately led to a better rate for the state's horsemen and women.

“They came around because we cut off the signal,” said Couto. “You have to have a strong board that says, 'we will weather the storm. But at the end of that, we will come out with better rates.' And those better rates will help us put on a better product. And that better product will hopefully appeal to players who want to bet eight-horse fields rather than four-horse fields.”

Couto said the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978 gives the TOC the authority to dictate rates and fees.

“The TOC has used that structure in the past to set the rates, to set access, to determine who has access, and to control the use of our product,” said Couto. “It's not the racetrack's product.”

When asked about this authority apparently afforded the TOC through the Act, Nader stressed the ecosystem nature of the industry.

“I would see it more as a 50-50 partnership between the tracks and the horsemen, especially in a state where there's no other purse-enhancing supplements. That's how the tracks get paid as well,” Nader said.

“I think what makes this sport so uniquely spectacular is the competition on the track and the competition on the Tote,” Nader added. “For us, it's more finding the right balance across all segments.”

CHRB'S Role

The TOC isn't the only guardrail to ensure that CAW fee agreements are drafted with horse racing's long-term interests front and center.

While the CHRB does not routinely see those documents, “The CHRB has full legal authority to review any agreement if that were to become warranted,” wrote CHRB spokesperson Mike Marten in written responses to several questions.

The CHRB, wrote Marten, has not yet exercised that legal authority.

In response to questions concerning betting integrity, Marten wrote that, “We understand that Monarch pays special attention to CAW companies (i.e. Elite and RGS) whereby each of the CAW players undergoes repeated, extensive background checks every six months.”

Marten added that the Thoroughbred Racing and Protective Bureau–a subsidiary of the Thoroughbred Racing Associations of North America–has “performed a thorough investigation of many wagering sites, including Elite and RGS, as part of its service to the racing associations.”

The CHRB, Marten wrote, “also has access to those reports if warranted.” And he added how, “sparked by concerns about the individual locations/operators,” the CHRB “some years ago” obtained an unspecified number of these TRPB reports from its client racetracks.

The review resolved any concerns, “so no was action taken,” he added.

Conflicts of Interest?

Eagle-eyed observers of California's racing product and betting markets might have noticed the ownership makeup of recent GII San Pasqual S. winner, Newgrange.

Since at least September of 2022, Newgrange has been owned by a group that includes Little Red Feather, Rockingham Ranch and David Bernsen.

Bernsen is the founder of GWG Group. One part of Bernsen's role at the GWG Group has been to represent individual CAW players in their negotiations with the tracks, but Woodford said that Bernsen hasn't run or managed the company for the past couple of years, and is now focused on industry initiatives “outside of the CAW sector,” including racehorse ownership.  Little Red Feather's managing partner is TOC chairman, Gary Fenton. Bernsen and Fenton, therefore, appear to sit on opposite sides of the CAW table. Does their ownership connection in Newgrange rise to a conflict of interest on the part of the TOC chairman?

Both Nader and Fenton said it doesn't. Nevertheless, Fenton said that he has recused himself from all CAW-related matters before the TOC since April of 2023 to avoid the appearance of any conflict of interest.

“Incidental co-ownership of a horse isn't considered a conflict by the TOC, but I made sure Bill and members of the board were aware. Still, due to the sensitive nature of simulcast rates, and out of an abundance of caution, when a matter connected with David [Bernsen] came up for the first time, I recused myself. Virtually all owners who serve on industry boards face similar instances,” wrote Fenton, in a statement.

Several experts interviewed for this story described TSG's ownership of both Elite Turf Club and two of the state's racetracks as a dynamic that does indeed rise to that level.

Daruty, however, refuted any conflict-of-interest accusations, and pointed to the historical ownership relationship between tracks and wagering outlets.

Though the nature of these “betting platforms” has evolved over the years–from on-track Tote windows to off-track-betting hubs to ADWs–the racetracks have always been part of the ownership mix, he said.

Daruty added, “This is just one more example of that.”

The post Computer Assisted Wagering: 101 for California Stakeholders appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

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

Owner of Harris Farms, Harris was inducted into the California Racing Hall of Fame in 2008 and was honored last year by the Edwin J. Gregson Foundation for his industry service. Harris Farms has been connected to over 50 California divisional champions, including eight California Horses of the Year. He is a former California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) Commissioner and currently serves on the board of the California Thoroughbred Breeders Association (CTBA).

Green, also an owner and breeder, is a current Board Member of the CTBA. The San Luis Obispo-based lawyer has raced under the name of SLO Racing Stable since 2010.

Mathis was the 2021 California Trainer of the Year. He was also leading trainer at the 2023 Golden Gate Fall Meet and finished seventh in the standings during the 2022 Del Mar Summer Meet. Based at Golden Gate Field, the 44-year-old is the winner of just under 800 races in his career. His winners include stakes winners Jimmy Blue Jeans and Give Me The Lute.

All three will serve the TOC Board as representatives of the North. According to TOC president and CEO Bill Nader, board members volunteered names to fill vacancies. “We spoke yesterday and had a productive discussion and will officially ratify the new members in short order,” Nader said.

“We are honored that John, Ty and Andy, well-respected North horsemen, will join our board,” said TOC Chairman Gary Fenton. “We are in a period of great transition and their passion, wisdom and institutional knowledge of California horse racing, in particular the North, will be of tremendous value to the board and our members as we work together to find the right path for the future of California racing.”

The post Harris, Green and Mathis to Join TOC Board appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

The former directors also claim the proposal was submitted without their prior knowledge.

“On January 5th a letter from the TOC and the Southern California racetrack operators was sent to the CHRB requesting the allocation of race dates for late 2024 and 2025. Of course, these race date allocations would pre-empt the opportunity for a racing circuit in the North. The key point here is that this letter was written without our knowledge and despite the fact that the entire board met two days prior,” write Lindsay LaRoche, Johnny Taboada and Ed Moger in a letter to the TOC dated Jan. 12.

“By no means are these the only times the interests of Northern California members have been ignored or subjugated by TOC leadership,” the letter adds. “It is clear to us that the current leadership is not being transparent and not working to represent the entire state of California.”

The resignations come at a fraught time for the California racing industry as it attempts to piece together a revised racing framework in the wake of Golden Gate's impending closure in June and amid declining economic benchmarks.

With the clock ticking, complicating matters is how the California Association of Racing Fairs (CARF) has yet to publicly submit a proposal as to a potential Northern racing circuit beyond its annual fair dates. This year's fair schedule is currently set to close out with a fall fair meet at Fresno from Oct. 2 through the 13.

According to TOC president and CEO, Bill Nader, the board members were indeed informed during its meeting earlier this month that the organization would be submitting a letter to the CHRB ahead of its Thursday board meeting, outlining plans for consolidated racing operations in the South as a contingency “in the event the North does not put forward a viable plan that gains CHRB approval.”

“As far as the details in the packet, I wanted that included for transparency so that everyone had a chance to look at it before the meeting commenced–it's a lot to take in on the spot,” said Nader.

In a joint submission to the CHRB, the TOC, Los Alamitos chairman and CEO Ed Allred, I/ST Racing and Gaming CEO Aidan Butler, and Del Mar president and COO Josh Rubinstein ask the regulator to allocate race dates for the last 14 weeks of 2024 and for 2025 with operations concentrated in the South–beyond the Northern fair meets–citing the tough economics of currently maintaining twin North-South racing circuits.

The submission outlines a set of proposals, including a possible legislative change to permit Los Alamitos to card night Thoroughbred races beyond 4 1/2 furlongs for $5,000 claimers and below, and $8,000 maiden claimers.

Los Alamitos vice president Jack Liebau recently told the TDN that a legislative fix to go into immediate effect–as opposed to the start of January 2025, like most bills passed this year–needs an “urgency clause” requiring a two-thirds vote by the legislature.

Nader said that no decision will be made during this Thursday's CHRB meeting about race-date allocations.

“I personally do not see this discussion on the 18th being contentious,” said Nader, about the upcoming CHRB meeting. “I think it's just stating the facts and opening eyes to where we've been in the last 20 years, where we are now, and where we're going. No decisions will be made–it's only background.”

Nader also said that at the behest of the TOC, track management at Del Mar, Santa Anita and Los Alamitos had pushed back the deadline for the allocation of race-dates–from what would have required an “emergency” CHRB meeting in February to the regular CHRB meeting in March.

“At our board meeting [earlier in January], all three tracks had the opportunity to be present and speak at the beginning of the meeting. We did speak to them and we did get them to relax their position, to say that they were willing to wait until the 21st of March, at the March CHRB meeting,” said Nader, who added that CARF executive director, Larry Swartzlander, declined an offer to attend the TOC meeting.

“So, we were being responsive and respectful to the North,” Nader said. “It's been six months, we still haven't seen a plan [from CARF]. There are people all through the state getting very anxious.”

In their resignation letter, the three former TOC directors also claim TOC leadership “does not represent the interests of Northern California owners,” highlighting the recently announced 25% cut in purses at Golden Gate Fields–a result of a $3-million deficit in the track's purse account.

“Recently, the Northern California Racing Committee unanimously voted to oppose the purse agreement proposal from 1/ST Racing for the final Golden Gate Fields race meets,” the letter states.

“The result of this vote was not deemed important enough by TOC leadership to effect the TOC's approval of the cuts or even to be presented to the TOC Board as a whole for a vote,” the letter adds.

“There are emails and board minutes that would suggest otherwise,” said Nader, when asked about these claims. He added in a follow-up text that the TOC “did discuss the GGF purse cuts” at the January Board Meeting.

“It's a struggle, North and South. It's just a difficult time,” Nader added. “I'm not being critical of anyone. It's just the environment we're in right now. Everybody's just a little teed up–it's unfortunate.”

Efforts to consolidate racing operations in the South were given a major fillip in September of last year, when California lawmakers passed legislation that means if Golden Gate Fields is not licensed to operate beyond July 1 this year, proceeds from simulcast wagering in the north are funnelled south when there is no live racing in the northern half of the state after that date.

Moger did not respond to a request for comment prior to publication.

The post Moger, LaRoche, and Taboada Resign from TOC appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

The Bay Area racetrack is scheduled to race from Dec. 26 through June 9, 2024, after which, the facility is set to close permanently.

The purse account, said Nader, is overpaid by some $3.1 million.

“There's a pretty big overpayment that's been building,” said Nader. “They're looking to claw some of it back, but not all of it.”

While the TOC is still in negotiations with 1/ST Racing and Gaming, which operates Golden Gate Fields, about the proposed cuts, such a decrease in overnight purses was a “distinct possibility,” said Nader. He added that further details should be available Tuesday or Wednesday, when the condition book would be issued.

“You can increase and decrease purses pending purse generation at any point in any year, so, they're within their rights,” said Nader, who added that, as an example, Maiden Special Weights would drop from $30,000 to $22,500 under the proposed structure.

“But this thing's blown out to a big number,” he said, of the purse overpayment. “Handle was down in 2023. They haven't really cut purses at all. Frankly, they wanted to cut purses last fall—we told them no, and they didn't.”

Dave Duggan, Golden Gate vice president and general manager, confirmed that the track had been in discussions with the TOC to cut purses there “for quite some time.”

Santa Anita's overnight purses are also scheduled to be cut around 5% for its upcoming Winter/Spring meet, underway Dec. 26, with $2 million cut from the track's stakes schedule, said Nader.

Ed Moger is currently leading trainer at Golden Gate, with around 40 horses stabled there. The anticipated cuts to Golden Gates' purses could lead to some Northern California trainers relocating elsewhere, he said.

Officials for Arizona's Turf Paradise recently announced they hoped to operate a meet there from Jan. 29 through May 4, pending approval from the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority.

If the 25% purse cut is enacted at Golden Gate, “there would probably be some barns that move there,” Moger said, about Turf Paradise, adding that while he would not relocate to Arizona, such a purse decrease could see him shift a significant portion of his horses south to Santa Anita.

“But it's tougher to win a race at Santa Anita,” said Moger. “I'll have to play it by ear.”

When asked about the allure from other tracks to Golden Gate's current trainer colony, Nader suggested that even with a 25% cut, Golden Gate's purses would still compare favorably with Turf Paradise.

The Stronach Group (TSG) announced in July that it was closing Golden Gate Fields at the end of December with the goal of increasing field size and adding another day of racing a week at Santa Anita.

After pushback from industry stakeholders who argued that such an abrupt closure would pose an existential threat to the future of racing in Northern California, TSG officials left the door open to delaying the track's closure another six months. But they appeared to make such a deal incumbent upon a reshaping of the way simulcasting proceeds are allocated in the state.

The rule of thumb is that proceeds from wagers made in the “northern zone” stay in Northern California to pay for purses and operational expenses, while the proceeds from wagers made in the “southern zone” stay in Southern California for the same purposes.

Initially, various stakeholders in Northern California—including representatives of the California Authority of Racing Fairs (CARF)—voiced resistance to TSG's idea of moving these proceeds south.

In September, however, California lawmakers sought enough buy-in to pass legislation that meant if Golden Gate Fields is not licensed to operate beyond July 1 next year, proceeds from simulcast wagering in the north are funneled south when there is no live racing in the northern half of the state after that date.

When asked about recent turn of events involving Golden Gate Fields, Moger appeared resigned to the situation.

“I've been here for almost 50 years,” said Moger. “I'm not too happy about it.”

The post Final Golden Gate Fields Meet Potentially Set For 25% Purse Cut appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

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

TOC bylaws require three Board members be from Northern California. Taboada, Moger, and LaRoche fill those seats. TOC bylaws also require at least two owner-trainers, who are Hanson and Moger on this Board.

For more information, including a complete vote tally, visit toconline.com.

The post New Board Members for TOC appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

When he founded his mortgage lending company, he did so in the middle of the global financial meltdown when homebuying was as popular as volcano surfing.

When he purchased his first horses at the sales, he eschewed sage counsel from agent and trainer and picked 'em largely himself. Didn't do too bad, either. The Cal-bred Guy Code, who he snagged for $63,000, ended up winning nearly a quarter-million.

And when he announced his bid earlier this year for a seat on the Thoroughbred Owners of California (TOC) board of directors, he did so as the only non-incumbent running and after a last-place finish in the prior elections–oh, and after a bit of a rocky road through the whole electoral process, which closed this past Thursday (more on this in a bit).

As befits someone who disdains silly little things called obstacles, Dohman, 41, appears high on his chances.

“This time, I've tried to be a little bit more vocal in the things that I'd like to see changed in California racing,” said Dohman, about his electoral approach. “Last year, I felt maybe I didn't say enough.”

Dohman's campaign trail included an email blast to TOC subscribers outlining his wish list, including increased minimum participation purses and a minimum per-start payment for trainers.

It also listed a proposal to increase female participation in the saddle by giving female jockeys a weight break, as well as a proposition to publish trainer contact information and training day-rates in the horsemen section of a racetrack's website.

Dohman knows some of his ideas can appear out of left field. But the way he describes the racing industry makes it resemble a time capsule that needs dusting off and opening up to let in needed sunlight and fresh air.

The TOC, “They've developed a bit of a good old boys' club and they don't want people from the outside in,” Dohman said, with the sort of dismissive laugh that cautions the listener not to take it entirely as jest.

If, as Dohman suspects, he'll be made a TOC board member when the election results come in (perhaps as soon as the start of the week), what exactly will he bring to the board table?

For one, an origins story ripped from the pages of Horatio Alger–one told from the spotless, sleek and modern trimmings of a pad perched on the lapping waters of Huntington Beach. The kind of place you'd expect the Property Brothers to suddenly jump out of.

No nepo baby talk here. His father was a custodian, mother a bartender. He grew up across town in a one-bedroom apartment. “I slept on the couch bed in the living room.”

How did Dohman hopscotch his way from a sofa-bed to a stable of 22 horses? The journey included stepping-stone stints for grocery chain Pavillions and for electronics store Fry's.

“But my goal was to open my own mortgage company,” he said. “I turned 20, got my real estate license and I went and worked for my cousin in the mortgage business.”

In 2009, amid the wreckage of a global financial collapse and with the whole mortgage industry doing its best to emulate the Hindenburg, Dohman decided to go all in, open his own company. Optimum First Mortgage. “I had one employee, someone who had done loans with me before.”

Soon after, his business partner Robert Drenk joined the fold. Bit by bit the company grew, until 14 years later, “we have like 50 people that work for us,” he said. “And I also have 25 people that have worked for me for over 10 years.”

The racing connection began with Dohman's father, who took his son to the races–Santa Anita, Del Mar, Hollywood Park–when junior was still knee high to an outrider's pony. “He taught me how to read the Racing Form, would put in little bets for me.”

A little more than 10 years ago, when the livin' was getting decidedly easier, Dohman made the move into the owners' ranks. “I didn't really know how you go about getting into horse racing, so I started looking up trainers online. I reached out to a few trainers, but nobody contacted me back.”

In a roundabout fashion, Dohman ended up at the door of trainer Hector Palma, who claimed two horses for him and Drenk out of a nondescript allowance optional claiming at Santa Anita in October of 2012.

Both horses finished down the field that day. But one of them, Unstopper Topper, won next time out at Hollywood Park. The other, Floating Feather, finished second in his next start. “I was like, 'Holy shit, this stuff's easy,'” Dohman said, with the ironic wonder of someone well and truly disabused of such notions in the intervening years.

It's this experience–the lack of a useful roadmap for new recruits at a time when many trainers complain of the difficulty of finding owners–that partly guides Dohman's proposal to publish trainer contact information and training rates through the TOC or the horsemen's section of a racetrack website.

“I feel like half of these trainers don't have websites,” he said. “They're not modern in terms of communication. How do people contact them?”

The more Dohman ponders the idea, the more he sees other avenues for initiating the uninitiated. On these same websites, for example, he sees the need for a variety of tutorials. How do you claim a horse? How do you get involved in partnerships?

“If you want to try to buy a horse at the sales, here's a list of bloodstock agents to help you,” he added, riffing on the idea. “I mean, it should be like shopping for a store or something on Google.”

His own syndicate, California Racing Partners–which he manages in partnership with Joe Ciaglia–has more than 32 partners. Twenty-two horses, 12 of them 2-year-olds, are spread between the likes of Ryan Hanson, Leonard Powell, George Papaprodromou, Matthew Troy and Doug O'Neill.

Asked if the reason for casting a wide net was in part to help field sizes at a time of encroaching impacts from big-numbered barns, Dohman demurred. It's more that some of the “recognizable names” among the training ranks help bring new partners to the fold.

“Doug O'Neill has a lot of owners,” Dohman added. “He might put new owners in with us too and broaden my owner base.”

That's not to say Dohman appears blind to some of the effects from more numerically dominant stables. He doesn't agree with the reinstitution of a stall cap for a single trainer at a facility–what was once 32 in California. “It doesn't make sense,” he said, calling the concept anti-capitalist. Rather, he raised the idea of tacking a fee onto stables that exceed a certain threshold.

It was a topic that led to the punishing economics of the game, hindered by rising costs for both owner and trainer. Blame inflation. Blame, too, the more stringent safety protocols put in place in California, and now roundly adopted by the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA) across the country.

“I agree with HISA and everything it's doing for the image of the sport and helping improve and clean it up. But it does make it harder for horses to stay on the track. [That's why] I think the participation purses should be higher,” he said.

“I think if we brought up the participation purses where if your horse ran fifth or sixth, it would help some owners out, help them stay in the game,” he said.

Optics are part of the reason Dohman believes the industry needs to incentivize greater female participation, especially in the jockey ranks–something that could help cultivate what he deems a “softer image” for the sport.

“When people go to the races and they see a woman's name in the program, it's different. Women have a different image than men,” he said. “It's a good one.”

And the way to do it, he said, is to give female jockeys a weight allowance.

“Just look at Jessica Pyfer and Emily Ellingwood,” he said. “After they lost their weight break, they've been relegated to only a few mounts a month. A weight break would help, maybe make it a little bit fairer for them, give them more opportunities.”

Increased female participation, he said, would be one way to help reshape the sport's broad narrative, which has taken more slings and arrows in recent years than the French did at Agincourt.

“We have the aftercare programs. We have the injury jockey fund. But besides things like that, what are we contributing to the rest of society through the money that's generated through horses racing?”

What's missing right now, he said, is a clearer philanthropic approach that extends beyond the four shrinking walls of the sport.

“We should be able to say we've raised this much money towards cancer research. We've raised this much money for animal shelters or the ASPCA,” he added. “We could let the owners elect to give money to a charity out their purses. Or give free advertising space, maybe on track or in the program, to a major charity or two.”

Dohman knows some of his views will land in some quarters of the sport with all the subtlety of an anvil dropped from the top of the Chrysler Building. Not that he seems to care. Racing neophyte is a role he seems to relish.

“Michelle tries to correct me all the time,” he said, of Michelle Hanson, TV personality and wife of trainer Ryan, who is apparently quick with the scold every time he calls a horse sale “an auction.”

He also seems to relish the idea of giving the establishment cage a bit of a rattle. Mailers he sent out as part of his campaign, for example, included information about his partnership, like minimum share percentages. “The TOC said it was advertising and I shouldn't have done that,” Dohman said.

“I defended myself by just saying people can research my stable and what I've contributed to horse racing. Plus, you know, the wording on the email was pre-approved by the TOC.”

A bigger kerfuffle concerned the fact that the TOC mailed out ballots failing to identify which of the individuals running were incumbents, as was standard protocol. Nor was it apparently a simple deal to remail corrected ballots. As Dohman describes it, for that to happen, the whole electoral process needed to start anew, setting the whole costly process back months.

Instead, TOC leadership asked Dohman to step down from the race, he said, arguing that it was unfair to the other nominees as they hadn't sent out similar campaign mailers under the expectation of being identified on the ballot as an incumbent.

As Dohman sees it, the overwhelming rate at which incumbent board members are reappointed nullifies any sense of unfairness to this whole affair. “My reply to them was, 'if the people vote me in, they vote me in,'” he said. “It's still a fair election.”

[Note: TOC President Bill Nader confirmed to the TDN the ballot errors. He added, however, that there were a “number of things” that led to the TOC asking Dohman to step down from the race, including fairness to the other nominees.

For one, Nader said the TOC offered Dohman a seat on a committee in lieu of running. Furthermore, Nader said the mailer Dohman sent out included information not okayed by the TOC, and that it went well over a designated word-count. Nader added that these irregularities potentially raise questions about the validity of the election results.]

Still, if Dohman indeed proves successful in claiming a spot on the board–and then holds onto it–what can industry stakeholders in California expect from his contribution?

“I might not be as smart as that guy. I might not be as good as that guy. But there's one thing I can always do–I can always outwork that person. That helps bring me to the top of what I need to do and accomplish,” he said. “One thing I am always willing to do is work hard enough to make a valuable contribution to horse racing.”

The post Matthew Dohman Looking to Shake Up ‘Old Boys’ Club’ appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

“Mike is an exceptional leader who continues to make a lasting impact on both this organization and California racing,” said TOC Chairman Gary Fenton. “His dedication, hard work, and commitment are an inspiration to all of us, and we are proud to honor him with this well-deserved award.”

Pegram is probably best known throughout the industry for his many top runners, both individually and in partnership, including champions Real Quiet, Silverbulletday, Midnight Lute, and Lookin At Lucky. He served on the TOC board from 2010 to 2019 and was Chairman from 2012 to 2016. During his tenure, he was instrumental in protecting SB 1072 purse contributions, which provided for a takeout increase with all of the additional revenue going to California purses.

Among the former Chairman's Award recipients Pegram joins are Mace Siegel, John Harris, Bob and Beverly Lewis, Jerry and Ann Moss, and Clement Hirsch.

The post TOC to Honor Mike Pegram appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post