Op/Ed

I don't think anyone has missed it. On an almost monthly basis there seems to be some sort of fight about signal fees. A signal fee--the amount a home track charges others for showing their races--is negotiated between entities. Currently the Monarch group of companies are fighting with the mid-Atlantic tracks about these fees, and some customers are having a tough time betting, for example, the Gulfstream signal.

I was honored to be elected as chairman of the RMTC–the industry's scientific advisory organization consisting of 23 major racing industry stakeholder organizations – in September of 2013. I chose to accept this expanded role after participating as a board member since the RMTC's inception over a decade ago. I am passionate about RMTC's education and advocacy initiatives, particularly the RMTC's efforts to reform horse racing's national medication policy through the development and advancement of uniform medication rules, a multiple violator penalty system, laboratory accreditation / external quality assurance, and...

I contend that every race day at every major racetrack in North America a trainer cheats by sending out a horse for competition in an illegally enhanced state.

When I worked at The Blood-Horse in the winter of 1970, I remember how excited everybody was about publication of the Experimental Free Handicap. When I edited The Thoroughbred of California in the early 1970s, I remember how excited we were to see how the California-based and -bred juvenile would be treated in the weights

Back in the 1990's when slots started to enter the landscape of North American horse racing, one of the first things racetracks did was spring open the gates, making it free for everyone to enter.

After watching the GII Pennsylvania Derby this weekend, where Will Take Charge once again got the better of Moreno, I felt even more compelled to write about the accusation and ongoing investigation of jockey Luis Saez using a buzzer during his winning ride in this summer's GI Travers S. A buzzer, better known in the business as a “battery” or “machine,” is an outlawed battery-powered electrical shock device.

The publicity and well-deserved outpouring of sympathy going to Ramon Dominguez, who sustained a career-ending injury early this year, is another reminder about how dangerous racing can be, even for one of the world's top jockeys.

I, along with some 300 other invited guests, attended The Jockey Club Round Table last weekend in Saratoga. Many of Thoroughbred racing's stakeholders had a seat at the Round Table.

Eight and a half years ago, I wrote an Op-Ed piece for The Blood-Horse in which I urged the racing industry to strongly consider using the United States Anti-Doping Association as a national watchdog for horse racing.

Does Lasix cause horses to race less often? Forget about racing's image, the weakening of the breed, how Europeans view our sport, should it be part of the Breeders' Cup, even whether or not the drug is effective in treating bleeders. The question that needs to be debated and answered is whether or not the drug has created a horse that cannot race as often as its predecessors from pre-Lasix times. If it has, the economic effects on the sport have been devastating.

When the claiming horse who had been winning for $25,000 is in for $10,000 after a six-month layoff, is the trainer trying to steal a purse or dump damaged goods on another stable? It's like a poker game, only these chips aren't made of plastic. They're horses and it's appalling that the very nature of the claiming game incentivizes trainers to run unsound horses in an attempt to dupe their competitors.

California has become the battleground in the national debate among horsemen, vets and owners over Lasix. Thanks to funding, energy and passion from the Thoroughbred Owners of California (which also has trainers on its board of directors) and Dr. Mark Dedomenico, the debate about whether to continue to use Lasix or ban it is reaching a fever pitch.