by Bob Carson

Editor’s Note: The USTA website is pleased to present freelance writer Bob Carson and his popular “Outside the Box” features. This monthly series is a menu of outlandish proposals presented with a wink — but the purpose behind them is serious. The views contained in this column are that of the author alone, and do not necessarily represent the opinions or views of the United States Trotting Association.

“Money is better than poverty, if only for financial reasons.” — Woody Allen

Bob Carson

A wide variety of fish can be found in the pool of customers at a yearling sale. A few of these fish have deep pockets. Breeders love this species. Alas, this species will not last forever. A few of the larger fish have discovered that schooling together is a good strategy. Although these big fish swim in different waters, they are good for our sport and our future.

Smaller fish, like us harness fans who find indulging their hobby to the tune of $50,000 terrifying, are not trophies, but we are a vital part of the food chain. Fish of our stripes cannot afford to be frivolous. We will weigh many factors before we bite. Almost every one of these factors leads to painting a scenario where we can recoup at least a portion of our investment. This is an old story, but as our harness population recedes, perhaps a rebalancing of stakes purses in a manner where more small fish get fed is an idea worth investigation.

Smaller fish know that their chances of racing on the sport’s biggest stages are about as good as a bald man growing dreadlocks. Those massive purses for young horses racing on the Grand Circuit do not cross our addled minds. But there is another consideration that really takes the wind out of many of our sails — many of us believe the odds of our horse racing competitively in an Elite State Sires Stakes program are remote, very remote. The best young horses in a state program go fast, very fast.

Autumn Ryan graphic

So here we sit; thinking about buying a yearling. In our hand is a list of horses where our total investment for one of them will be significant. We know that the Sires Stakes program will send out pacers that will need to race miles in 1:53 to be competitive, maybe 1:51 to be very good. We look at the catalogue page of the horse under consideration. Often there is barely a performer (except the sire) who raced under 1:55. We have already demonstrated a lack of judgment by contemplating buying a yearling; however buying a yearling that will have basically zero chance at a Sires Stakes racing career takes madness to another level. Normally it takes us out of the bidding.

One enticement can, and has, enabled us to raise our hands. Simply stated, my partner and I do not purchase yearlings from a state harness racing program without a mid-level of stakes racing. We need a place to play. For a segment of us, a growing segment, a second tier of racing is a more reasonable goal for our madness.

In Pennsylvania, this additional level of racing is called the Stallion Series. Other states have other names, but basically, these are series of races for horses that cannot compete with the Sires Stakes horses. The suggestion here is that if there are more tiers of stakes racing, the better the odds that small to mid-sized enthusiasts will play.

Personal experiences mold perception.

Six years ago, our annual yearling, like several we have purchased, turned into a decent performer. She qualified, showed promise, but was a couple of precious seconds away from Sires Stakes competition and even farther away from Grand Circuit caliber. We are not, nor will we be, overnight racing people; a fact that was irrelevant because this horse was not going to be a viable overnight horse. We would head for a few fairs with our trotter, grind out a few small checks and then close up our harness racing shop and turn to safer, less costly sports — like skiing off towering glaciers and parachuting into deep ravines while blindfolded.

However, since we had just relocated our harness racing affliction to Pennsylvania, for the first time we had a new circuit where we could race in the Stallion Series. We could race our decent, but not great, filly four times for $20,000 while the top horses raced in the Sires Stakes. What a difference.

We were in the game! The difference between watching from the sidelines and racing competitively is huge. The Stallion Series did not push us into the black, far from it, but we mitigated the financial bleeding and like true owners/dreamers we continued to plow money back into new yearlings.

A Stallion Series level can take the sting out of an owner’s bottom line. This is very important, but equally important was that these four-race series are a lot of fun. We spent hours calculating where our horse ranked, agonizing if we should make the step up to Sires Stakes racing or the step back to Fair racing.

Obviously, Pennsylvania is blessed with casino revenue and can afford a Stallion Series. The popular series has led to large (and no doubt expensive) fields. We once raced a leg of the Stallion Series with eight divisions of eight horses, each division with a $20,000 purse. From our point of view, the money is well spent.

Other slot powered states have similar programs. In my fantasy world the Stallion Series might even be expanded. What if a state like PA had a mini-Stallion division where horses raced for $10,000 per leg? Take a chunk of purse money going to the big fish and dole it out to the minnows. Do the math. See if the supply of stakes horses would support the costs, see if new money flows into the game.

For a state on the cusp of making a comeback, like Ohio, having a Stallion Series level may well make the difference between future yearling sales being good or being spectacular.

Even states in dire straits due to the lack of slots owe it to themselves to investigate an additional level, perhaps get agricultural grants to fund the series using the rationale that even a very moderately expanded stakes program could give farms on the verge of extinction a chance. Perhaps a state like Illinois could try to keep the lights on by creating a “stakes only” program where supply and demand could be favorable and make buying a yearling possible.

Allow another thought.

In the future, slot machine money may disappear. What then? Is it not possible that people remaining in this sport will be racing primarily for their own money? We may need to ask owners to ante up to cover purses for stakes racing. Anteing up is much easier if you know that, while you may not get into the high rollers club, you will be able to find a game with a small pot.

Quantitatively, the dollars and sense of a middle level of stakes racing is hard to measure for breeding farms and state programs.

How do you measure how many potential buyers walk away or do not enter the arena of stakes racing because the number of horses that compete in top tier stakes racing is disheartening? How many potential owners with thin wallets sit down, crunch the numbers and realize that the leap between the sales ring and top tier stakes racing is a bridge too wide?

You may argue that anyone who buys a yearling for financial reasons shows a lack of wisdom; this argument has resonance. However, for those of us who do contemplate the madness, a mid-level of competition can be the difference between buying and not buying a yearling.

In closing, after teetering on the brink of extinction, the middle tier of racing gave us a lifeline. As a result, for five consecutive years we purchased a yearling at public auction. Each of these yearlings was purchased with the goal of racing in the Stallion Series. Without the carrot of this additional tier of racing, we would be lacing up ski boots and folding parachutes.