CHRB Considers Disqualification Changes

While disputes over contested 2016 racing dates in Northern and Southern California were again pushed back as expected, the California Horse Racing Board took a step toward modifying its disqualification standards July 17 at Del Mar.



Late in the nearly four-hour meeting, the CHRB discussed a proposal that alters large portions of the wording in the state's riding rules and approved a 45-day public comment period on the modifications.



Arguably the most significant change in the proposed amendment to is the definition of "interference," which would be described as "bumping, impeding, forcing or floating in or out, or otherwise causing any horse to lose stride, ground, momentum, or position."



Another change is altering the current rule, which calls for disqualification of a runner if the fouled horse "loses opportunity to place where it might, in the opinion of the stewards, be reasonably expected to finish." The proposed amendment would allow for disqualification if the fouled horse was cost a placing "according to the distribution of the purse," which essentially covers the top five spots in any race.



Some board members disagreed with the rule, however, even as it stands now.



Alex Solis, the CHRB's newest member—along with being an active jockey and a member of the Hall of Fame—said he preferred the practice of "a foul is a foul" enforcement, which would disqualify a violator regardless of circumstances regarding the placing of the fouled party.



"To be honest, I liked it the way it was before," Solis said. "A foul is a foul... It's easy."



Fellow member Jesse Choper agreed.



"There's too much discretion," Choper said of the current rule. "But I want to be clear. A foul isn't when you sneeze on another horse. A foul is one that meets the definition of interference. That's what we're talking about. Take them down and that's the end of it."



Support of the amendment came from CHRB executive director Rick Baedeker and chairman Chuck Winner.



"The overriding issue is fairness to the betting public," Baedeker said before giving an example of a clear winner being disqualified for interfering with a horse that had no chance of placing.



"I can assure you, not one steward supports 'a foul is a foul,'" Winner added, before saying at the end of the discussion "We'll never get it completely right, because it's subjective, but we'll get it as close to right as we possibly can."



Although the planned talks regarding disputed 2016 racing dates in Northern and Southern California were limited because of ongoing negotiations between the parties involved, an unplanned statement on dates came during a discussion about the San Joaquin County Fair's application for racing in September.



BALAN: CHRB Continues to Discuss 2016 Dates



The application was approved by the board, as were applications for fall meets at Los Alamitos Race Course and Santa Anita Park, but San Joaquin County Fair board member Chris Flaherty took the opportunity to comment emphatically on next year's dates.



"We were asked, four years ago, to consider moving our dates to September," Flaherty said. "We did so, at the request of the racehorse community, and we went broke. We were $300,000 in the hole and that was my first year on the fair board. The following year, we chose not to have our fair (because) we could not afford to do so... We have righted the ship and we're much healthier than we've ever been, and we've repetitively asked for our June dates back. It was huge mistake and we want them back."



The meeting also took a contentious turn during talks about converting the state's tote system to AmTote, a subsidiary of The Stronach Group, which also owns Golden Gate Fields and Santa Anita.



California's current tote system is operated by Sportech, but AmTote is seeking a license from the CHRB and has already been taking steps to take over those responsibilities by Oct. 26.



CHRB member George Krikorian called into question the potential conflict of interest in employing AmTote, because of The Stronach Group's foothold in California.



"There's a very serious incestuous relationship here, with a potential conflict arising in the future," Krikorian said. "That's why we're trying to address some of those things here. In my opinion, AmTote is probably a very fine company, but for those reasons, I think we should look somewhere else for a company to provide a tote service for California, to avoid any conflicts."



AmTote officials said the company is investing $16 million in steps to take over California's tote operations and that Sportech is already planning on removing its equipment for the switch.



"We're well down the path, (having spent the $16 million), so we can make these dates," AmTote vice president Jeff True said. "There's a gigantic amount of planning and exercises going on as we speak so we can make these dates."



"I'm hearing a lot of discussion today about whether this is the right commercial arrangement for California racetracks to enter into," Stronach Group representative Scott Daruty added. "I don't believe that's necessarily an appropriate item to discuss, in connection to AmTote's license. I would just like to know, so we can prepare properly for next month, is the item on the agenda next month about whether AmTote meets the licensing requirements or is it whether or not the California industry should have entered into a transaction with AmTote? Those are two very different things."



The CHRB, with a 4-3 vote, eventually decided to table the decision over AmTote's license for another month, which didn't sit well with some members.

"I don't know why we've got to wait until next month to vote," said CHRB member Steve Beneto, who brought up his frustrations with the board's delays multiple times. "Everything is always 'next month' and I'm getting kinda sick of it."