May 13, 2009 - Lexington, KY.
It seems that there are less available thoroughbred horses to race and tracks are cutting back on the number of race days. Why? For example, earlier today local news carried the story that Churchill Downs petitioned the Kentucky Racing Commission to eliminate seven race days from its spring meet schedule. Churchill downs blamed competition from states which use expanded gambling and a reduction of the number of available racehorses. Similar stories have been in the news from other Kentucky and California racetracks. However, this author uncovered additional facts and is now of the opinion that there exist unreported reasons for the decline in the race days.
While public officials and race official blame competition and low purses, few are commenting on all of the reasons for so few racehorses. These include, but may not be limited to: 1) increased costs of ownership driving away new and existing owners; 2) increased injuries at artificial turf racetracks which are either causing longer than normal layoffs due to rehabilitation and / or the early retirement (and sometimes euthanasia) of the racehorses; 3) racetrack policies which discourage racehorses from running on competing tracks; and 4) politics.
Increased Costs: Costs are increasing, especially due to the recession, and thoroughbred owners are finding it more difficult to recover their costs when racetracks lower purses. A race quality thoroughbred will range in cost from a few thousand dollars to several million dollars. For an average thoroughbred racehorse, it costs approximately $30,000 per year for the trainer's services, veterinarian services, stall rent, farrier services, transportation, and miscellaneous expenses to train each racehorse. This figure does not consider the costs of rehabilitation of the injured horse. Out of each purse, the track will typically deduct an amount for horses finishing second, third, and fourth place from the winner's purse. From the remainder of the winnings come deductions for the jockey's commissions, the trainer's commission, miscellaneous track fees, and transportation expenses. The owner will thereafter receive the balance, usually less than 50 percent of the advertised purse. For a race with a purse of $25,000, the owner may receive less than $12,000. This horse would have to win no less than three races in order to show a yearly profit, without considering the purchase price of the horse. Few investors would purchase and train a thoroughbred racehorse considering these figures.
Increased injuries on artificial turf: Trainers who race their horses on synthetic racetracks around the country are happily seeing a reduction of catastrophic injuries, but unhappily are experiencing on some artifical racetrack surfaces an unprecedented increase in the number of injuries which their racehorses had not previously experienced. The racehorses are experiencing fractures, ligament and tendon injuries, and pulmonary problems. Some veterinarians report having more difficulty diagnosing the racehorse's ailments caused by running on the synthetic track surfaces. In some cases it takes longer for the racehorses to recover after racing on the synthetic track materials. Many of the artificial turf related injuries are forcing the racehorses into early retirement from racing. Horses with severe artificial turf related injuries may be euthanized. Furthermore, it appears that speed horses generally do not do well on the synthetic track surfaces. For the foregoing reasons, racehorses able to continue running on synthetic track surfaces will run fewer races. Accordingly, there are fewer available horses to race.
Racetrack Policies: Racetrack policies prevent racehorse trainers from racing their racehorses at certain tracks. In order to encourage a trainer to bring their stable of racehorses to a particular track, many times the track will offer incentives to the trainers, such as free stall rent and free offices. However, the same racetrack may prevent the same horses and trainer from leaving their track to race at a competing racetrack. This reduces the amount of available horses in two ways: first, it prevents racehorses which could compete from competing at competing tracks, and second, it discourages trainers of horses which run at competing tracks and which could race at the local track from transporting their horses to the local track. For example, this author learned that Churchill Downs asked a trainer whose stable was formerly located at Churchill Downs to take all of their racehorses and leave because the trainer desired to race one horse at a competing racetrack. This strategy makes little sense when one considers the fact that Churchill Downs regularly solicits non-resident racehorse trainers to bring their racehorses to race at Churchill Downs.
Politics: A lot of money is at stake surrounding the issue of other forms of gambling at the racetrack which leads to artificial reasons for cutting down the number of races. Local trainers believe that Churchill downs has the money to increase purses. According to the local news, Churchill Downs informed the Kentucky Racing Commission that the reason that they are asking for seven fewer race days and a reduction in the purses is that there is a distinct advantage for those tracks that supplement their purses with alternative gaming. However, according to the official Churchill Downs website, they "expanded beyond its flagship operation in Louisville and to own and operate racetracks and simulcast-wagering operations in Kentucky, Illinois, Florida and Louisiana, while also holding interests in various racing service companies. With its acquisition of Fair Grounds Race Course and its other Louisiana operations in October 2004, Churchill Downs added alternative gaming to its entertainment options." It seems that at least at Churchill Downs, they do not have a good reason to cut the purses, unless one also factors in "politics" and greed.
