Get ready for smaller field sizes
 

It's been inevitable.

Smaller foal crops + more time between starts = fewer races and smaller field sizes.

As is, we have too many Grade 1's, too many Graded Stakes, and way too many stakes races in general.

The late 1980's had almost double the foal crop and horses racing with greater frequency ... yet the stakes schedule has only expanded since then.

You can only water down the soup so much. At some point the customers will spit it out and say "What is this SH|t?"

6 horses per race...average. Not looking good, to be a serious player just must be able to play from all the races so you can pick and chose spots with actual horses in the race. Circuit play will almost assuredly die in the face of those stats.

I gotta read it when I get home - DRF blocked here at work. I hope it turns around since it seems that some tracks had a good year this year. If attendance and/or handle creeps up even locally it might give some hope to the horsemen.

Yea but you cant create a race horse overnight, good years now would only affect future crops of horses.

Of course you are right - I guess I should say I hope that this downturn is a local minimum from which we can progressively rise.

Inevitable.

I am always amazed at the lack of detail in virtually everything racing does. Yeah there are a lot fewer foals being born and it will certainly impact racing but everyone acts as though this will affect all circuits the same and this just isn't so. Taken as a whole the foal crop has huge disparities within in regards to quality and regional makeup. If the state of Washington loses 50% of its foal crop it isn't going to affect racing in NY at all because no horses racing in NY come from there and any horses imported to Washington from other areas to make up the difference would be of a lesser quality. The foal crop reduction should in theory affect the smaller tracks worst because there isn't that much of a reduction in the top of the line stock, no one stopped breeding quality mares to good stallions. However it is far easier to find cheap stock and lower quality horses race more often and horses from the top part of the food chain that aren't breeding caliber (virtually all male horses) eventually make their way down the ladder. So the top tier tracks shouldn't take that big of a hit (though they should address the other reasons why fields are smaller and in a lot of cases crappy-too many stakes, too few trainer with too many horses, etc) and the bottom level tracks should be ok too. The real danger is the middle tier tracks like Monmouth and Arlington and Delaware whose purses aren't nearly as good as the upper crust but who don't offer a steady stream of 5000 claimers like the lower tier tracks.

One sentiment that is always given that puts horsemen in a negative light is that most groups resist a reduction in dates and on the face of it, it seems like logical reasoning. However life doesn't operate in a vacuum and far too often date reductions come with a catch especially at tracks that are already hinting at hopes of eliminating racing even if the general public doesn't interpret those hints correctly.

Truer words were never spoken. And that really gets me pissed.

Just out of curiosity, anybody know what percentage of the annual foal crop makes it too the races? The only thing I see happening, is that animals that would have been culls for racing, are going to end up in training to feed the racing shortage. In turn diluting the quality of racing even more.

This was discussed at the conference in the same presentation, and while I don't recall the exact numbers, the trends showed across all age groups, the percentages of horses within a foal crop racing at ages three through nine was down 10-20% since 2003.

It's not just the change in how much racing there is, or field size, but that fewer horses within each crop are making it to races, and actually hanging around.

Fewer foals doesn't have to mean smaller fields.

That really has nothing to do with what I'm saying was identified. Just a fact...fewer percentages from foal crops are racing relative to ten years ago.

Got you. I just replied to your quote...wasn't meant to be on your take....Seeing you quoted in lots of articles. Don't get overexposed like Miley. :)

See what would be interesting to see, is what level is the foal crop historically speaking? Is it declining because we had a peak, or it been steady, and we now have a down turn. I still think, that the same number of horses will make the races. It just means that animals, that were relatively too slow to run, will make there way into the cycle, and all the other class levels will be artifically rased to fill the void. If tracks are not closing, and there are. Purses to be won, people will dress up donkeys to participate and get the money. It is just human greed.

Some decent points made on this, going to be interesting to follow.

it all has to do with supply and demand. i expect foal crops to start rising again, since the last few sales seem to have exhibited strength that hasn't been there in a while.
farms have been cutting back on mares bred, since the buyers weren't there. the climate is changing. of course in this business it takes several years to get things turned around, but it will turn around.
that said, there are too many stakes, too many races, and too many commerical breeders.

Horses who cant run, cant run. They don't make it. There isn't some sub section of potential maiden 10 claimers that isn't racing now that will be raced because of a shortage.

I'm not sure about this. Yes top shelf stock is demanding higher prices this year, but that does not necessarily transcend throughout the entire crop.

Without an influx of new owners, or at least a majority of the owners that we forced out of the game due to the economy collapse, the foal crop will remain stagnant. By and large it cost just as much to keep a 10 claimer as it does to keep a G1 winner. We need a sustainable model to makes owning low tier horses viable, and the syndicates to come back and buy them.

The question that is hard to answer is how much have economics played a role in this trend? Surely owners were more likely to pull the plug on non or low earners the last 6 or 7 years than in years past and what role does the reduction in number of races offered play? I have no way of proving it but from conversations with other trainers in various parts of the country, the % of owners not paying or being severely tardy paying bills has increased quite a bit in 10 years. The amount of owners asking for 50/50 deals with no bills is crazy compared to 15 years ago. I'd say that 75% of inquires from owners in the last 3 or 4 years for me personally are from people wanting to cut a deal and pay a severely reduced or no day rate. In theory the ones that make the races on a deal would race more in order to make up the lack of expense money but lets be honest, no one is asking for deals on good horses, it the unraced ones with issues that are offered.

I think that supply and demand is in full effect this year. The most recent FT Timonium sale was almost 1/3rd smaller this year than 2011 and the prices were very strong for less than stellar horses. The lower tier horses aren't quite as bad as they used to be because the bad and old mares were taken out of production. Younger mares without great credentials weren't bred. Stallion owners did less filling out of books. Those horses kept the prices overall down but there were always a few low priced gems that came out of the sale. This year and at the end of keeneland those horses that I used to scoop up for 5k are selling for 20k. There is money out there looking to get in because the stock market is riding high.

If you solve this issue, a lot of dominos would fall in place. The answer remains elusive though.

The irony of the foal crop reduction talk is that soon stallion fees for 2014 will be released and I'd be surprised if there weren't a whole lot of increases based on the strong showing in the sales ring this year.

with increases in purses, you'd think you'd have more viability with making a business work. but on the other side of that, there are people who are against the higher purses, because they're afraid owners and trainers will run less than healthy stock to try to get some of the money. it's a difficult situation.
then again, making money can't be the main goal of a horse owner. he's got to be able to stand alone. it'd be nice if the horses could pay their own way, but if someone is facing needing money that badly, what's the chance of a horse getting a break if he needs one, if the owner is in financial trouble?
personally, i'm glad to know the foal crops are getting smaller. the demand is for good horses, that can run. if they're producing less of the low end horses, that's a good move.

Owning horses is like owning a boat. You aren't going to make money.

One day we will only be betting Kittens.

I think this is my favorite post of the year. :D :tro:

War Front's stud fee jumps to $150,000 for 2014