Cooperation, New Lines of Communication and Ignorance

Right now I should be on the road to Chicago but I had to delay my departure to put down some thoughts on the passage of the Horse Racing Purse Enhancement legislation that was passed yesterday by the Minnesota House and now awaits action by the Governor.

While it was an exciting time for Minnesota horse owners and breeders, it was a bit of an uneasy time for me.  I was watching state legislators, folks that we elect to represent us, sound off about things that they obviously knew little about.  Joe Drape’s expose in The New York Times was sourced by one lawmaker who really couldn’t explain how the article relates to Canterbury Park.  She even mentioned several times that “I understand that this isn’t happening in our state”, yet on she yammered.  As a point of reference, the Times piece cited $7,500 claiming horses racing for $40,000 (now a thing of the past since emergency regulations just went into effect in New York capping a purse at two times the claiming price) and unsound horses being pushed just to get a piece of the pot. 

The reality in Minnesota is that this season $7,500 claimers will race for a purse of $10,000.  At maximum impact of 40% (a guesstimate, of course), the purse will “skyrocket” to $14,000.  This is a far cry from $40,000, still under the new New York threshold and certainly nowhere near enough money to encourage any kind of chicanery or animal mistreatment.

Another representative was screaming foul because this potentially “controversial” legislation wasn’t screened by the hearing process.  I can understand that a thorough vetting process of any legislation is ideal, however the last minute compromise struck by the Native Americans and the racetrack was a bit late in the process for that.  Additionally, amendments are passed all the time that impact legislation and are debated openly on the floor of the State House chambers – this is nothing new.  Finally, the two major combatants were on the same side on this one!  What became apparent was that this rep viewed the amendment as an “expansion of gambling”.  I wonder if she feels the same way when Native casinos knock down a wall to add 250 more slot machines or a new bar gets a pull-tab license or a new convenience store registers to sell lottery tickets?  The state has already authorized table games and gambling at the race tracks and their expansions should be treated the same way.  Hell, even the local community was supportive of the measure.  This was an example of a local business expanding what it is already legally doing – and gaining the support of its detractors before doing it.  It looked to me that there was more personal agenda than policy concerns at work with this rep.

Another rep, from what I understand a longtime opponent of gambling, wanted to know how the non-racehorse breeder’s in her district were to benefit from this “bonus” that was being given to the racetracks.  Uh, the racino legislation proposal provided money for all horse breeds in the state. She was adamantly opposed to that as well.  It was completely disingenuous for her to claim she was just looking out for her poor constituents who were going to be burned by this “bonus” when she didn’t want a proposal that would help them see the light of day.

Finally, and I’ve saved the best for last.  This was so incredulous to me that I literally laughed out loud in my living room watching the hearing last night.  Our friend, the New York Times aficionado mentioned above, told the House that she has some experience with racehorses because some young girls in Oregon that she knows have a great-grand-daughter of Secretariat.  I thought she was kidding at first, but she followed that up with the statement that she didn’t think that any other member of the body had ever been so close to racing greatness.  But wait!  There’s more!  When a representative arose to counter her expertise by saying that his first job was a horse ranch manager that included quarter horses among other breeds and not only does he understand racing, but all the economics that go along with it, she actually stood up and re-established her claim of expertise over him because she touched the progeny of the progeny of the progeny of one of the greatest racehorses that ever lived. I swear to you that this is true – and I’m embarrassed to say that it happened here.

For this rep’s edification, Secretariat sired approximately 600 foals.  Let’s assume that between mares and horses those children produced another 1800 animals.  Triple again for one more generation and then you have over 5,000 potential great-grandchildren of Secretariat.  You go back one more generation on her dam’s side and our very own Tabby Lane is a descendant of Secretariat!  My point is, dear representative, your experience is NOT a unique one NOR does it make you an expert.  Quite frankly, you look ill-informed when you make such ludicrous claims.

Eventually, after all the brouhaha calmed down, the measure passed overwhelmingly and was sent to Governor Mark Dayton for signature.  Since he started the process of the track and tribes working together I find it highly unlikely that he’ll veto it and finally, for the first time in a long time, a racing season begins with hope rather than angst.

Congratulations to both the tracks and Tribes for sitting down together and getting a deal done.  I hope that the lines of communication stay open for a long time to come – more can be done working together than pulling apart.

Of course the lawyers and lobbyists may feel differently…

Zenyatta - The Aftermath

I know that the last 36 hours were an emotional time for all of Zenyatta’s supports and a lot of talk comes out of your mouth in times of stress and great emotion. Here are some random thoughts on the gnashing of teeth by some of Zenyatta’s strongest supporters the last 24 hours.

“She’ll always be my champion” – Damn right she will. She spotted one the best race fields in decades about a mile and managed to only lose by a nose. It was a stellar performance by a remarkable mare. She SHOULD always be your champion – as well as one for everyone else!

“Mike Smith screwed her” – Hardly. She got pinched at the break and wasn’t thrilled about the surface early on. Even to those of us watching her on TV could tell that she just wasn’t moving the same way early in the race. Contrary to the vilification, he didn’t ‘weave her through traffic’ but he made one move up the inside and then angled out and had a straight shot to the finish. He worked hard to get her in gear and once she did she ran like she always did in the style that she always utilized. Give some credit to Blame – that’s NOT a bad horse folks.

“Secretariat lost 5 times!” – Now we’re starting to slide into sour grapes territory here. Though there was no Breeder’s Cup back in the day, there was a Triple Crown. There was a complete devastation of a field in the final leg of a Triple Crown. The final time of the mile and a quarter at Churchill Downs yesterday was 2:02.1, almost 3 seconds slower than Secretariat’s track record time in his Derby. Secretariat beat the best horses of his time all over the map. While stirring, Zenyatta’s wins were not on par with record shattering performances. Is she in the discussion as one of the best all time? Of course she is, she is absolutely amazing, but her conservative “regular season” schedule over the past two seasons will haunt her in the greatest of all time discussions.

“She lost once, by a nose, she’s still Horse of the Year” – This is a debate I’m not getting involved in yet. Zenyatta finished the season 5-1. Blame finished his season at 4-1. They raced once head to head. He won, she didn’t. If Switch or Rinterval had picked up a win on Friday, it would have flattered Zenyatta immensely. In her defense, if they ran the Classic five more times, she may win them all. Also, I don’t think another horse in training could have left that much to do and come that close to overcoming it. Does Zenyatta win horse of the decade? By a landslide. Does she beat Blame over a two year period? Absolutely. I’m not convinced yet that she doesn’t deserve it this year anyhow, but stop the talk like Blame was a huge upset winner that shouldn’t even be in the conversation.

“She just got beat. She’s still amazing.” Amen. Yes she is.

If she returned next year I think she would still be one of the best horses in training but, eventually, she will lose a step. It has to happen, it happens to all of us! I would rather she retire now, as one of the greatest ever. She was a shining star when we needed one the most. She drew attention to a noble and classic sport that was in dire need of positive attention. She stirred emotions and made people care about racing again, or at least about a racehorse, giving the sport something to try and build off of for the future. Whether the ‘powers that be’ can capitalize on that remains to be seen, but that is a long and sordid argument for another time.

Let’s just enjoy the celebration that was Thoroughbred racing this weekend and the great champions that competed before we start trashing each other again.

We Own A Piece of Secretariat!

Tabby Lane

Secretariat

It's true. Our very own Tabby Lane is a decedent on her dam's side to the great Triple Crown winner and star of the big screen. The lineage goes:

Secretariat was the sire of Secrettame, dam of Gone West, sire of Rodeo, sire of Keeley Chay, dam of our very own Tabby Lane.

Sure, it's a stretch, but he's there and while watching the film yesterday I thought of the connection to Big Red, hero of my youth, and I teared up a little. I wonder if Secretariat hated peppermints, too?

You've Got to Say SOMETHING!

I had really no intention of writing a Rachel Alexandra post. None. What I saw on Saturday really spoke for itself. To rate like she did relatively close to a quick early pace and simply find another gear to win going away was one of the most impressive efforts I have seen in years. But as I was rousting myself at no o'clock this morning for a quick trip to Battle Creek, MI (and no o'clock tomorrow morning to go home), I found myself with some random thoughts and felt that I had to say something!

- A friend mentioned to me that this must have been what it was like to watch Secretariat. I can't vouch for that as I was only 8 when he was blazing his Triple Crown. But the buzz around her races and the clinical precision in which she wins is very reminiscent of the replays that I have seen and the period pieces I have read. She was discussed on the ESPN show PTI for crying out loud. THAT is good for racing.

- Frank Vespe makes the case on why Rachel should go West and meet Zenyatta in the Breeder's Cup. I think his case has merit. I have come to the conclusion that horse racing is a three surface sport now: dirt, grass and synthetics (and then you have the various incarnations of THAT for crying out loud). They play different. I'm not going to debate the pros and cons of synthetic and dirt, I will say that horses have preferences now for that type of surface just as they do for dirt and turf and I wouldn't want to run my filly in the biggest race of her career over her non-preferred surface. I think there is a big difference between allowance company at Keeneland (where Rachel won over the synthetic) and the Breeder's Cup Distaff (Ladies Classic?) - especially against an opponent who clearly prefers that surface. Same in reverse, by the way, regarding taking Zenyatta East to the dirt.

- How do you choose Horse of the Year if they don't meet? Well...if the season ended today, how do you NOT choose Rachel? She ran HUGE out of her division in racetracks all over the East and nailed down a Triple Crown Race as well as the Haskell. I don't really give a rat's ass about girls versus the boys - a big, talented filly or mare can give the boys all they can handle anywhere in the world. We saw that in last year's Breeder's Cup. I did see a Facebook comment who said they couldn't give it to Rachel unless she beat older males. I'm not sure that is fair or not as I'm sure we have had a male HOTY or two that have won big 3-year old races and not raced, or at least faltered, against older. (I could look this up, but see paragraph one...I'm WAY too bleary). Besides, the season ISN'T over yet and the possibility exists that Quality Road could face and beat both of these females and we'll be singing a different tune come December (possible...not probable, in my humble opinion). Besides, how can you give HOTY to a 'homer', if you will, as opposed to an opponent with an equally impressive record but has done it in several states rather than in just one?

- Back to buzz. Love her or not, this kind of buzz is great for racing. We need a horse that can capture the public imagination in a positive way. She's not a panacea and racing's ills are too long to get into here, but anything that promotes a healthy discussion about our sport from those 'outside' of it, is welcome and should be cultivated. Maybe we can start watching some racing on weekends on one of the myriad of ESPN stations rather than non-stop reruns of the 2008 World Series of Poker...

While this is the kind of exposure our sport needs in the black nothingness (to the rest of the non-racing sports world) that is the time between the Triple Crown and the Breeder's Cup unfortunately it will end in letdown when these two leading ladies of the American turf don't square off in the Breeder's Cup. I understand the reason why, but the (hopefully) millions of Americans that have come to follow Rachel since the Preakness and are just being exposed to racing will be left scratching their heads and saying, "Some championship. The best horses don't even run in it." Could this end up being a public example of how racing can't get out of it's own way when virtually handed what it claims it wants most - the chance to earn new fans to reinvigorate the sport?