Show them the money
It won't be long until thoroughbred racing will turn the page to a new season, with the same renewed hopes and eager sense of anticipation that greet each new year.
It won't be long until thoroughbred racing will turn the page to a new season, with the same renewed hopes and eager sense of anticipation that greet each new year. There are several horses capable of emerging as the stars of 2004, and perhaps one will even become the type of marquee horse that can grab the headlines and the public's attention. But it won't be Empire Maker or Mineshaft. Arguably the two most talented horses in American racing in 2003, both could have had tremendous and profitable years on the racetrack this year but will instead spend their days in the breeding shed where the real money is to be made.
This may have been the year of Seabiscuit and Funny Cide, Dick Mandella and Bobby Frankel, but it was also the year that racing got its scariest lesson yet in economics.
Not only are young healthy horses being rushed off into retirement, they are no longer certain to show up in the richest races. Seven figure purses suddenly aren't guaranteed to attract horses to Breeders' Cup races or the Preakness. Both the Triple Crown and the Breeders' Cup took some big hits this year and that's a serious problem racing has to fix. The sport can ill afford to have anything erode the only two events that still resonate with the general public.
Fortunately, the answer is quite simple. With so many things, it's all about the money. Racing has to come up with a way to make the Triple Crown and the Breeders' Cup races richer than ever.
The Kentucky Derby is better and bigger than ever and there's nothing wrong with the Belmont Stakes. That race is hot again and a potential Triple Crown winner will lead well more than 100,000 to trek out to Belmont Park on the first Saturday in June. It's the Preakness that is the problem.
Horsemen just don't want to run their horses at two-week intervals anymore or run three times in five weeks. With the Triple Crown schedule apparently set in stone (as it should be), the only way to make the series manageable for a horse is to skip the Preakness.
What's happening is that the Preakness gets the Kentucky Derby winner and little else. Peace Rules was the only legitimate horse to challenge Funny Cide in this year's race and when he failed to deliver the end result was a lopsided win by the New York bred gelding over a bunch of Grade III types. A weakened Preakness means a weakened Triple Crown and that's something the sport can ill afford.
Trainers who ran their horses in the Kentucky Derby will always be reluctant to come back in two weeks, but a sweetened pot would obviously go a long way toward changing their minds. There's no justification for keeping the purses of the Triple Crown races at $1 million, a relatively meager sum in this day and age. The Triple Crown should stand alone as the most important races of the year for 3-year-olds, yet the purses are the same as a bunch of preps, the Travers and even a 2-year-old race at Delta Downs, of all things.
No one is going to be lured into the Preakness because it's a $1 million race. They might, though, come to town for, say, $3 million. The problem is that the Maryland Jockey Club is so strapped for cash it recently cancelled its Christmas party. Then again, there are some smart people out there who can surely figure out a way to hike the purses without causing too much pain.
They gave away a record $14 million in the Breeders' Cup this year, including $4 million for the Classic, which you would figure would be enough money to get everyone that mattered. It wasn't. On the surface, both Mineshaft and Empire Maker missed the Breeders' Cup due to injuries, which, in the case of Mineshaft, may have been a convenient excuse. Owner Will Farish made quite clear his reservations about starting in the Classic well before his horse was injured.
Why turn down the chance to be a heavy favorite in a $4 million race? When a horse is as valuable as a stallion prospect as Mineshaft is, $4 million doesn't seem that enticing. His stud fee has been set at $100,000 and he could cover as many as 120 mares. That means he will earn about $12 million next year as sire, far more than Farish could ever dream of making on the racetrack.
Barring some sort of dramatic market correction in the breeding industry, purses will never be able to keep pace with the type of astronomical money top, well-bred horses can earn as sires. But why can't the playing field be leveled a little bit more?
And what can be done to revive the Breeders' Cup Juvenile? Despite a purse increase to $1.5 million, it attracted a terrible field this year after so many trainers foolishly decided running in the race would compromise their chances of winning the Derby. The answer: more money.
There are plenty of ways the Breeders' Cup could come up with more money. The nominating fees for foals has remained at $500 since the inception of the program. Why not raise them? Do they really need to spend $6.4 million a year to supplement races in the Breeders' Cup Stakes program? Could the NTRA's money be shifted away from some projects and into the Breeders' Cup? Is there any reason not to make the Juvenile, say, $3 million and the Classic $6 million?
The best horses have to run in the best races or else this sport loses much of its credibility. The only way to make that happen is to change the economic landscape. Cough up the money.
