Uncouple the couplings
Anyone who was paying attention knew that Music Note was unlikely to return to top form in her 2009 debut, Saturday's Ogden Phipps Handicap at Belmont. In, at least for horse racing, a refreshing display of candor, assistant trainer Rick Mettee all but told horseplayers that Music Note wasn't ready to run her best in the Phipps. Here's what he had to say to Daily Racing Form's David Grening leading up to the race after an important workout:
"Usually she gallops out a lot better. That's unlike her; she's usually pretty consistent. She'd have to come back and work better than that next week to justify running in the Phipps.''
When Music Note, a three-time Grade I winner who finished third in the 2008 Breeders' Cup Ladies' Classic, showed up in the entries for the Ogden Phipps, she became an automatic "bet against."
After savvy handicappers threw out Music Note, they no doubt concluded that the Phipps was a two-horse race between Seventh Street and Seattle Smooth and might have wanted to wager on one or the other to win or box them in an exacta
The problem was that Seventh Street was going off at odds of 1-5. The ridiculously low price was the result of her being coupled in the wagering with Sea Chanter and none other than Music Note. That meant that anyone wanting to bet on Seventh Street was stuck with Music Note and had to accept horrible odds. That made it impossible to bet on her or take advantage of any negative opinions one might have had concerning Music Note. With only five betting interests and a 1-5 entry that shouldn't have been anywhere near 1-5, the Phipps was a terrible betting race.
The root of the problem is racing's insistence on coupling horses in the wagering.
The reasoning behind having entries is to take away any incentive for stables to cheat in order to cash a bet. If horses weren't coupled, there would be a chance that the stable might stiff the more highly regarded of its horses and try to cash a bet on the lightly regarded barn-mates. By running the horses as one betting interests, that option no longer exists.
Now, apply that reasoning to the Odgen Phipps Handicap: The three horses are owned by Sheikh Mohammed, one of the wealthiest men in the world. The purse of the race was $300,000 and a win in a Grade I race like the Phipps Handicap makes a horse considerably more valuable as a broodmare. So, the betting public was being protected against the possibility that a wealthy sheikh might attempt a betting coup in a Grade I race. Anyone can see how preposterous that is.
The same night at the Meadowlands, there was a 10-horse harness race with only five betting interests. Muscle Hill was the dominant horse among the starters in a $200,000 division of the New Jersey Sire Stakes, but it was anyone's guess as to who would finish second. But Muscle Hill was part of a five-horse entry and the race also included a two-horse entry. With parts of the Muscle Hill entry finishing first, second and third, the winning $2 exacta paid $2.80 and Muscle Hill paid $2.10 to win and there was no place or show wagering. Thanks to entries, it was another dreadful betting race.
There should never be entries in any stakes races. No one would be foolish enough to play around in order to cash a bet when there is so much on the line when it comes to purse money, prestige and the impact a win can have on a horse's value as a sire or broodmare.
For that matter, why not get rid of all entries in all races? That's how it's done in Europe, where there's no such thing as coupled entries. There's just not that big a need to babysit the American betting public or protect it from the small handful of unscrupulous owners and trainers who might occasionally try to put one over to cash a bet. Most owners and trainers are far more interested in winning races than setting up betting coups.
Tracks are having an enormously difficult time filling races and having to couple horses from the same stable only makes things worse by limiting the number of betting interests. There's nothing worse for a track's business than a card plagued by race after race with only four, five or six betting interests. And there's nothing more frustrating for the bettor than to like a horse that should be a long shot but have to swallow an unfairly low price because of the entry rules.
Globalization and the increasing concentration of the world's bloodstock in fewer and fewer hands, like those of Sheikh Mohammed, will only serve to increase this type of situation.
I thought Seventh Street was a cinch to win the Phipps. I was wrong. She finished second behind Seattle Smooth, while Music Note, predictably, threw in a clunker and finished fifth. Perhaps I could have boxed Seattle Smooth and the Seventh Street entry in the exacta, which paid $9.60. But it would have returned twice as much had Seventh Street not been in an entry.
I decided to pass the race. I wasn't interested in a race that offered no betting value and a glaring example of the absurdity of having entries in a Grade I stakes event.
Bill Finley is an award-winning racing writer whose work has appeared in The New York Times, USA Today and Sports Illustrated. Contact Bill at wnfinley@aol.com.
