Jackson Adamant: No Breeders Cup for Rachel

Jackson Adamant: No Breeders' Cup for Rachel | BloodHorse.com

I'll admit to a couple of things here:

1.) I'm thrilled that two of the most exciting horses out there right now are fillies--major kudos to both Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta (and their respective connections) for the class with which I think they handle these two athletes.

2.) I'm fascinated by the turf vs dirt vs poly debate.

Since I've only ridden horses on your general and basic ground (read as dirt, grass, bridle paths) I'm very curious as to the pros and cons of the dirt vs polytrack discussion. I was at the New England Turf Writers banquet a couple of weeks ago and even when querying the most experienced horse people, no one could really say what the benefits of one was over the other or how if really impacts the horses.

Understandably (and just as humans have preferences for various types of tracks/surfaces when they run) some horses are more comfortable or confidant on one surface than another. I get that. What I don't get is what the X-factor is for arguing against the polytrack.

It seems to me (begging the pardon of Monsignor Habiger for the use of his opening line) that the safety and well-being of the horse is paramount. So if polytrack isn't any safer for the horses...what is it for? Did the officials in California jump to conclusions when they put the surface down at their tracks?

There are still catastrophic injuries to horses and jockeys and I haven't seen any evidence that the poly surfaces mitigate that fact at all. Rather, what I do see are the European (especially UK and France) courses being much safer for horse and human alike. In many cases the races themselves are over long distances (albeit on grass) and even in jump-racing the horses seem to fare better over longer hauls then some horses do here in the US.

I'm partial to turf racing, something about the lush green grass and the way the horses move over it. And the sandy, wide turns of Belmont, well, I love 'em.

All this to say that I understand fully Jess Jackson's decision to not run Rachel on the poly track at Santa Anita. Although she's proven she can run on it (she did, after all, win the Kentucky Oaks in great style on the polytrack) he clearly feels it's not her best option. Too boot, I'm thrilled that he wants to keep her running for another season, giving us all more opportunities to see her compete. I fully support (for whatever it may be worth, LOL) the choice to do what's best for the horse. It is after all, about the horse. She's a highly trained, highly skilled athlete and to all appearances that is how she is being looked after. I hope that's the case because she's special, in the same way Ruffian and Regret were special. (Photos at the top are of Regret and Ruffian, respectively.)

I for one will be glued to the television this weekend for The Haskell at Monmouth, not just to see Rachel, but some of her fellow competitors. She'll face Belmont winner Summer Bird as well as Papa Clem and some other talented boys. Should be a wonderful race!

For a little further reading--and really good reading at that--go to Steve Haskin's article on European vs American racing. Even the follow-up comments are educational and interesting.

Take me out to the racetrack...

There's been a lot of talk (maybe too much talk as Bono would say) the last few days about many aspects of the horse racing industry. I'm educating myself as I go here, trying to see all sides and understand why the opponents oppose, etc.

As I've said, I'm not ever going to be the one going to a racetrack to play video poker, or the slot machines. I'm there for the horses, the people, the characters, the atmosphere. I do, however, understand the need to add slot machines or other gaming devices to help make tracks more profitable. The "Racino" as I've seen these called isn't an inherently bad idea. I'm not a prude when it comes to wagering, obviously, and I regularly wager with my boyfriend on just about anything, so clearly I'm not the choir that the anti-slot/Racino lot is preaching to. It seems in many states, Minnesota and Kentucky are the ones I've read most about, it is a partisan issue as opposed to an economic issue. I've got to dig a little deeper to see what the horse industry brings in cash flow-wise, but at some point don't you want to keep this industry and it's workers employed? Don't you want to keep breeders breeding, trainers training, etc? How is this not just as important as keeping studios or other industries in your state? There are seemingly endless tax incentives for other industries (coal, tobacco, film, big-pharma) to stay afloat in their states, why is it different for the horse and racing industry?

Certainly part of the issue is that America has changed and going to the races isn't a part of many people's lives. Where I grew up there were no racetracks to visit, in fact, my first actual race was at a harness track in Montreal (by the way, I won enough on my wagers to buy an adorable stuffed squirrel that I still have...) when I was about 9 years old. Granted, I'd already been utterly infected by horses at that point, but still to be at the racetrack and watch it all happen was wonderful.

I didn't attend any horse races again until I was in my early thirties. I'd just moved to New York City and my boyfriend had scored tickets to the Belmont Stakes. We arrived at Belmont Park and it was magic. Even with the sea of people and the less than perfect weather, it was a great day. After that I often took the Belmont Special out to Jamaica and frequented Suffolk Downs in Boston. Racing had become part of my life again.

It amazed me the first time I went to Belmont Park on a slow day with no big stakes races to see how few people were there. Sure, it was nice not to have a line for the restroom, but it was a rude awakening. How then, to get more people out to the races?

I wish I knew. I think exciting horses and compelling stories like Mine That Bird or Rachel Alexandra certainly help. It's human nature to cheer for underdogs and those who have humble roots like our own, perhaps. We need and want heroes and distractions, as I've said before. I'm not a marketing guru (obviously) but I have to think that there are viable ways to get people out to the track, and I'm hoping I'll see a good crowd out at Belmont on Saturday. The NYRA has stepped up their marketing for the (G1) Mother Goose Stakes and we'll see if it pays off. And night racing at Churchill Downs had a successful first effort, so maybe that's a good option.

I'd welcome comments or a guest blogger to share their thoughts, too, as to how we can make horse racing more viable and more vital in the US. Or if you are one of the opponents of "Racinos" drop me a line and we can have a point/counterpoint discussion. I think good things can come from any productive discussions and ideas cost nothing, right?

In the meantime, I'm headed to NYRA's website to look at the undercard races for Saturday so I can start to plan my little wagers. (And I do mean little...)

Watch here for Rachel's arrival at Big Sandy...

And here for a transcript of Thursday's press conference with Jess Jackson and Calvin Borel. (Is there a better grin anywhere than that of Calvin Borel??? I think not!)