The Ethics of an Owner bagging their Trainer on Social Media

[Chief Stipe]

From time to time I've seen Racehorse Owners bag their Trainer(s) on social media for what they often perceive to be poor performance of their horse caused by the Trainer.  I've never really understood why they do that but racing seems to bring the best and the worst out of people.  Personally I consider it unethical and very poor form for an Owner to bag their Trainer online.  If it was me I would always talk to the Trainer directly rather than thrash the issue out online.

Recently I was on the receiving end of a prolonged rant by an Owner who was questioning the decisions their Trainer had made regarding the horses programme.  Now this horse has had niggly issues that have had to be managed carefully but the first time Owner has had the luck to win a number of Grp races.  No amount of reasoning with that Owner could change their mind.  I suggested they ask their Trainer politely why certain actions were taken with the aim of learning a bit more about racing.  I did point out to them that they had been very very lucky to have experienced the sucess they had had so far.

Which brings me back to those who don't take the polite path but openly trash their Trainer online.  A recent example is a classic which seems to be ongoing.  The horse in question was accepted to race at Waipukurau last Sunday.  The horse was to travel from Matamata to Waipukurau - a 7.5 hour float trip.  I believe the horse was scratched the day before due to the prevailing track conditions at the time a Soft 6 and the forecast, as we all know, was horrendous for the day.  The weather bomb was forecast to really hit the Hawkes Bay.  The track was a Soft 7 in the morning and downgraded to a Heavy 8 after race 4.  The horse in question was accepted for Race 6.

Now I'm surprised that those joining the Owner in debating the scratching decision online, all of whom profess to have extensive racing knowledge, ignored the facts completely. . @nomates @Joe Bloggs @Comic Dog . All of the following facts are available online:

1. The horse in question has won 4 races.  Its maiden on a G4 track over 1100m and its other three wins over 970m on the Cambridge Synthetic;  
2. After its maiden race the horse had a Laryngeal tie-forward (LTF) operation due to a breathing issue (reported in the Stewards report).  It didn't race again for about 20 weeks;
3. Its next 6 races returned 3 wins and 3 seconds all over 970m on the Cambridge Synthetic.  This form and its maiden win would point to the horse preferring a firm surface;
4. The race at Waipukurau was to be over 1200m.  A step up from 970m;
5. When scratched the track was in the Soft 7 range and was downgraded on the day to a Heavy 8 - arguably going on previous form it wasn't a suitable surface for the horse;
6. When scratched the forecast was for a substantial amount of rain for the day which didn't eventuate until after the meeting.

So the Trainer has a horse that was racing first up over a distance it hadn't performed at before (never raced beyond 1100m) on a track that was soft heading towards heavy facing a 7.5 hour float trip in atrocious weather conditions.  In my opinion any reasonable person with a reasonable racing knowledge would have agreed that scratching was the right decision to make.

Of course any Trainer with a similar type of horse has other challenges to work with e.g. patternless programming and the weather this season.  There are very very few sprinting races available for lower to mid rated horses especially for fillies and mares.  

Such is the trials and tribulations of racing a horse with limitations.  No doubt the trainer will be trying to place the horse to grab a good win or even a bit of black type.  The debate wouldn't normally be anyone elses business but then if you debate your perceived grievances online.... 

[Chief Stipe]

It never ceases to amaze me how some industry participants have no idea what the costs of racing a horse are.  Nor the fact that they will pick their most expensive bill for the year and promote it as the average cost.

I've seen a number of syndication contracts from a number of syndicators and the majority of them make it quite clear what the expected cost will be.  No surprises.  Some even make it clear that the odds are heavily in favour of your investment being a loss making one.  Particullarly if you buy into a stallion making syndicate where the odds are that your investment is going to lose its prime money making parts.  Fillies are a little different because they will have some residual value if well bred and they perform even moderately on the track.

So if you buy into a syndicate you know what you are buying into.  Especially those that buy again!  Essentially you are rolling the dice that you are going to get a good horse and when you do get lucky for a time you have a fantastic experience albeit with often extreme highs and sometimes lows.  Horses are like that.  The point is it is all transparent and you bought into it.  Why complain afterwards?

I've had a number of people ask me about buying a share in a horse.  My advice has been don't spend your life savings and kiss the money goodbye from the get go.  Don't get envious of successful owners or Syndicators, Trainers and Jockeys who are making money.  The latter it is their livelihood.  BUT if you are lucky to get a good one enjoy every aspect of the ride because the odds of getting another as good are very very small. 

Which brings me back to that most expensive bill of the year.  It could include a vet bill - horses are live animals and sometimes they do stupid things or they have issues that require attention.  It could include an insurance bill or a large nomination fee for a big race.  If the bill includes these last two costs then you are in an elite group.  One your horse is worth insuring and two you are good enough to be in a Black Type race.  So for example if your horse is in full training and in the top drawer of horses then in that month you have $6k in training and other costs, a $1,500 big race nomination fee and an insurance cost.  The latter will be the biggest expense as the insurance fee is worked out at 3.5% of the horses valuation.  So lets say the filly was valued at $400k then your total bill will be $22k for the month ($14,500 for insurance).  But the smart owner has spread their risk and bought into a number of horses at 2.5%. So for this filly they are paying $550 for the month.  The odds are that in this scenario you are in credit anyway given the big race nomination and the insurance valuation.

. @nomates @Joe Bloggs @Comic Dog .