Decoupling’s slow erosion of our sport demands our attention and action
While I was serving as a panelist at Albany Law School’s Saratoga Institute of Racing and Gaming some years ago, a fellow panelist boasted about his successful 10-year mission to slowly engineer the decoupling of gaming revenue from racing at Pompano Park. Needless to say, I was extremely upset at the pride he took in annihilating harness racing in Florida. His remarks were, however, very enlightening. His presentation was a primer on how track and/or alternative gaming operators can cause decoupling. It involves small, bite-sized but cumulative reductions in racing amenities that scarcely exposes the real intent.
Obviously, the primary concern of horsepeople is, and should be, to get their steed to the winner’s circle in the next race. Still, many horsepeople seem too naïve to discern the decoupling game plan that is slowly being implemented. The plan the operative panelist proudly bragged about involved small changes in customer comforts over the course of time along with the active removal of anything that could make racing at the venue a more pleasant experience for horsepeople and patrons.
What, specifically, is evidence of the commencement of such a plan? Take for example the beginning of limited availability of dining facilities at a racetrack or the complete elimination of such convenience for people who want to enjoy a night out at the track. No one can make dinner plans where there is very limited availability of a dining facility, and no one will if the price point is out of reach for the quality of food provided.
Another example is the reduction of race days. It is no accident that this is a move by many — again, not all — alternative gaming operation beneficiaries at racetracks. That makes defending minimum race days absolutely essential. Consider another move, when the number of races on a card are reduced or field sizes are being reduced by a failure to hunt down entries or horsepeople ignoring condition sheet opportunities.
Think about a management’s request to remove a training track, jog track, eliminate a barn area, or remove or not aggressively pursue a television or social media presence.
What is the effect of a track’s failure to promote the racing product? It is designed to discourage interest in the sport altogether. Such a track operator then may lobby to get rid of an industry that fails to attract new on-site fans because of their active aggression towards the sport.
Moreover, it’s not just the enemy from within that is concerning. When it comes to entities like PETA and others looking to disparage our game, many horsepeople are in denial. We fool ourselves when we think that our industry’s earnest internal public relations activity and marketing tools targeted exclusively to our fading fan base — with rebates, promotion of our star horses and humans, and so on — will cause members of the general public to acquire the level of adoration for our sport that we have.
Further, it is of paramount importance that we collectively reject unrealistic therapeutic medication rules that result in an unwarranted public opinion against our sport. The truth is we are gratuitously assisting others in making it appear that our sport is rampant with people who are cruel to horses and overmedicating them. This industry does itself and individual licensees a disservice by publicizing punishment of horsepeople whose only crime is carrying out their duty to do what is best for the horses under their care, custody and control.
What, then, is to be done to resist the enemy from within? Simply, we must foster a strong, unified horsepeople’s advocacy plan to counter the decoupling efforts that are a well-orchestrated scheme. The latest disgrace we witnessed was the effort at Gulfstream Park to entice Thoroughbred horsepeople to voluntarily agree to decoupling so the track owner could get the money due the horsepeople and put that money into the track owner’s pocket. The internal strife among the horsepeople regarding the approach to dealing with this edict was a welcome event for management.
Luckily, we are not alone in this fight. After the Pompano Park decoupling scheme succeeded, the Indiana Racing Commission gave notice that what was done at Pompano was going to be aggressively scrutinized and that tactics to achieve decoupling in Indiana would not be tolerated. That was in line with the Ohio commission that, witnessing the deterioration of the grandstand at Eldorado Scioto Downs, ordered its rebuilding. Commissions can and should act to prevent these destructive schemes when they initially surface.
For the enemy from without, the Standardbred racing associations of New York, collectively ESHHA, recognizes, as we all should, that the general public needs to know more about our sport. We have our warts, like every other industry and profession, but overall, we have an industry populated with many more good people than not.
In sum, we must unapologetically get positive messages out to the mainstream.
To this end, we in New York have retained a professional public relations and marketing firm to carry that message — not internally, but to legislative decision makers and the public at large. Our core message is that our industry is overwhelmingly good, with caring people devoted to the horse; has significant economic value; and is a valued partner with the state’s critical agriculture industry that supports tens of thousands of jobs.
We are proud of our horsepeople who care greatly about their horses, people who most often put the needs of these magnificent animals before their own. It’s high time that we, as the guardians of this great sport, invest in a targeted campaign to champion these folks and halt the assault on this game from whatever the source.
This column appears in the September 2025 issue of Hoof Beats, the official magazine of the USTA. To learn more, or to become a subscriber to harness racing’s premier monthly publication, click here.