COMMENTARY : Horsemen Learning When Less Is More

Joe De Francis, president of Pimlico and Laurel, manages to sound positive and upbeat when he talks about virtually any aspect of his tracks’ operation. But one question about Maryland racing will elicit a muted response from him: Do the tracks have enough horses so they can put on good racing programs throughout the year?

“I think, for the fall season, it’s shaping up pretty good, relative to other tracks,” De Francis said. “Lenny Hale (vice president for racing) has done an excellent job in recruiting horses, given the limited supply. But it’s no secret that our product in the winter will not be as good.”

De Francis knows his customers want competitive, bettable races with full fields, and he wishes he could offer an attractive product year-round. If it is any consolation, even the nation’s most famous and affluent tracks have trouble putting on a consistently good show.

At Saratoga this summer, five- and six-horse fields abounded; with as much as 35 minutes between races, a day at the Spa could be excruciating. At least Saratoga had the excuse that rain and sloppy tracks marred its season; Del Mar has sunshine and fast tracks every day, and a lucrative purse structure as well, yet its cards have been disappointing too.

The explanation for these small fields is well known by now. Owning a racehorse is a bad investment; expenses are too high, purses are too low, tax incentives are minimal. Because fewer and fewer people want to breed or buy thoroughbreds, the number of horses foaled in the United States has been declining steadily since the mid-1980s. The effects of this horse shortage are being felt with full force, yet the number of races run in this country has declined only slightly. There simply aren’t enough horses to go around.

Since it is not possible to increase the horse population instantly, the only way to bolster the size of fields is to run fewer races.

De Francis has often argued for a cutback in the Maryland schedule -- perhaps four-day-a-week racing, or a hiatus during the winter months -- in order to strengthen the quality of the races. He has always been rebuffed by horsemen. But it seems to me this would be the perfect time to make the argument again.

The Maryland tracks have overpaid purses during the last two years, and when Laurel opens Sept. 27 it will cut purses by 8 percent. Horsemen aren’t thrilled about this, of course. So it might seem logical for De Francis to make this offer: Instead of cutting purses, we’ll cut back on the number of races.

Horsemen will receive the same number of total dollars, spread over fewer races. The smaller number of races will produce fuller fields, better racing and more fan interest. All of this will generate more wagering -- which will create more money for purses. Everybody benefits. When I thought of this idea the other day, I felt I deserved to be tabbed the new czar of racing.

When I mentioned it to De Francis, he said: “I’ve suggested something like that on numerous occasions, yet I have yet to receive any positive response. I’ve tried to make the case that by taking a hiatus in the winter we’d be able to put on a much better product and give away more money. But I think when you make that argument you’re dealing with some of the horsemen’s most deep-seated fears.”

What horsemen fear is that intertrack betting, off-track betting and tracks’ embrace of other forms of gambling will make live racing expendable. So they adamantly oppose any cutback in the live product. In Maryland, the horsemen’s deal with the track calls for 47 races a week, and they consider that number to be non-negotiable.

I asked Richard Hoffberger, president of the Maryland Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association, if it wouldn’t make sense to accept fewer races to avert a purse cut and he said, unequivocally, no.

“What everybody is afraid of is that racetracks are going to turn into gambling casinos,” Hoffberger said. “We need that guarantee of the number of live races per week. We never want to get into a deal of eliminating races and setting a precedent. If you close the track for a week, what’s to keep them from closing for two, three or four weeks? Then they put in the (casino) and they don’t need us at all. But if they have those 47 races a week, they will figure out how to card those races.”

Faced with the realities of the horse shortage as well as such pressure from horsemen, tracks from Maryland to California have indeed figured out how to card those races: by offering six-horse fields that their customers don’t want to bet.