Do You See the Racing and Ownership Cup as Half Full or Half Empty Post-Lockdown? More Storm Clouds are Building and we Desperately Need a Racing Recovery Plan

Did Royal Ascot work for you? I doubt if there’s ever been a stranger race meeting there since 1711, but full marks to everyone involved in staging the meeting behind closed doors, and there were certainly lots of innovations to keep everyone engaged and (relatively) amused. Of course, there was no Queen, no royal procession, no fancy hats or frocks (so no dress codes), no overseas jockeys, no owners and no bookmakers. There were a few trainers present, who privately were probably thinking that this was ideal racing with no pesky owners to cause problems and a completely uninterrupted focus on their steeds. They may well have bemoaned the slashing of prize-money that was halved to a total of £3.7m, spread over 36 races and the five days of the meeting, but it’s definitely worth emphasising that this huge reduction in pots had zero impact on the quality of horses that raced across Ascot Heath, nor on the total number of entries or runners. It was very much “business as usual” – if you can say that about the bizarre world of lockdown racing.

The TV channels tried ever so hard to make the meeting engaging for owners and racing fans at home, as did Ascot itself. There were virtual racecards, 360 degree parade-ring cameras, Zoom interviews with owners at home, racing tips aplenty, recipes and cocktail recommendations for drinks such as Absolut Passion, colouring pages (???) and even virtual singing around the bandstand. It was encouraging that ITV was rewarded with its highest viewing figures for terrestrial TV since 2012, with an average for its 20 hours of broadcasting of 1.2 million viewers, and they had even more than that to watch Stradivarius romp home in the Gold Cup. What a fabulous horse he is – and I’m hoping that one day Scented Lily, the broodmare we own with friends and who is currently in foal to Getaway, will have a date with this superstar.

Unfortunately though, half-way through the month, normal hostilities were resumed again between the Horsemen’s Group and the Racecourse Association over the vexed subject of prize-money – or rather, the lack of executive contribution by some racecourses towards prize-money since racing resumed on 1st June. The collaborative spirit of the Resumption of Racing Group that so impressed us all will struggle to survive threats of legal action and accusations of anti-competitive collusion by horsemen against the tracks. This breakdown in working relations is one of the reasons that I fear storm clouds are building, as it will be absolutely vital that from today onwards – National Hunt has finally resumed – the Resumption of Racing Group is transformed into a Recovery of Racing Group to address the inevitable contraction of ownership that is coming, and the huge knock-on effect of that across the whole industry.

Why is my cup half-empty? Back in 2016 the BHA and ROA commissioned an excellent National Racehorse Owners Survey from a specialist sports consultancy, Two Circles. I reported on their findings in this blog on 15th August and 1st September that year. Their analysis and findings were well presented, and although they didn’t frame them in the way that I am about to do, I certainly agreed with their conclusions.

At university, where I studied social psychology, I was impressed by the concept of “expectation theory” to explain the motivation of individuals. Sociologists and psychologists never make anything simple, of course, but the basic concept was that each individual has a complex set of their own expectations, and whether these are or are not met directly influences their motivation to do something. It is also a two-factor theory, which means that the factors that prompt you to do something are not necessarily the same as those that might dissuade you. Anyway, I applied that approach to ownership and, as you can see in the diagram, I concluded that the factors that bring owners into the sport are to do with the emotional return that they receive on their ownership (excitement, glamour, status, close contact with their beautiful horse etc.), whereas those that drive them out are directly connected with poor financial return (bad prize-money, high costs, irritating fees and charges etc.) I was hoping that after 2016, racing’s leadership would develop a whole set of strategies to boost owner acquisition (bringing new owners and their money into the sport), together with another set to foster owner retention (reducing the churn rate of owners). I was tolerant about the relative lack of action, and then encouraged again in 2018 when the ROA announced that they were leading the development and implementation of a new Ownership Strategy. After three years without sight of it, my tolerance is just about exhausted. Does anyone know where it is, what it says, what it is designed to achieve and how it will be implemented?

If you look over your shoulder, though, all you can see o4n the ownership front is storm clouds. When racing resumed on 1st June, it was clumsily stated that owners would not be able to go racing as they were not deemed to be “essential”. That was terribly received. Owners are funding the sport and, using my two-factor model, the emotional return has been massively reduced (as until recently they could neither see their horses in the stables nor go racing) while the financial return has similarly contracted (with reduced prize-money, not least because of the reluctance of racecourses to make their executive contribution). Owner frustration has certainly increased, and this has been acknowledged by the BHA, ROA and RCA. Indeed, as I write this blog I’ve just seen a letter from the chief executive of the ROA, Charlie Liverton, explaining that “Owners contribute so much to the sport and it has been frustrating not to be on the track to see their horses run. Their patience and loyalty have been very much appreciated during this challenging period.” Much appreciated, Mr. Liverton, and I look forward to hearing what racing is now going to do, going forward, to persuade me and co-owners to expand our involvement in the sport, or as a minimum, maintain it at current levels.

Without that, racing is heading for deep trouble. In the period after the last financial crisis of 2008/09, owners and horses in training declined in a straight line for seven years. Is there any reason why this won’t happen again? Actually, and filling the cup to the brim, I believe that a Recovery of Racing Group could implement a set of initiatives to have a hugely beneficial impact on racing and ownership, and significantly mitigate this contraction. Such is the level of enthusiasm for this approach that I’ve persuaded a friend and fellow owner, Ged Shields, to work with me on the development of a blueprint for a recovery programme. We intend to release it after the Derby, and it will be detailed in the next blog.

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

Around the World with Three Horses – From the Sublime to the Ridiculous. Melbourne, Kentucky and Market Rasen.

I’m sure many readers of the blog were absorbed in watching the tremendous global racing at Flemington, Australia, and Churchill Downs in Kentucky. However I suspect not many of you were watching closely an amusing result at Market Rasen recently. More on that to follow.

First a personal recollection. Back in my consulting days I worked for one of the big global pharmaceutical companies and went out to Australia as part of a merger integration exercise. That had me visiting a manufacturing facility just outside Melbourne when the iconic Cup was on. Although it’s a public holiday in Australia, and much as I pleaded to be given time off to go to the race, the client insisted that I took part in a riveting workshop on procurement, the supply chain and the interfaces with MRP systems. I never forgave them! One of the most amusing features though was that the hotel where we were staying was “party central”. I’ve never seen so many people dressed to the nines, taking part in lunchtime revelries. None had any intention of actually going to watch the race, which was just an excuse for a big party. I was even warned to take care walking around the hotel corridors, as a Melbourne Cup tradition is for riotous Australian lovelies to be on the prowl and if they find a man they fancy, who is wearing a tie, they cut it in half. All other details will remain confidential; what happens on consulting assignments, stays on consulting assignments!

Anyway, this year’s win by Cross Counter was, I thought, an absolute belter with the European raiders dominating. It always surprises me that so many horses are taken over, as apparently it costs £70k and our record has been pretty mixed since Vintage Crop won it 25 years ago for Dermot Weld. I’m not quite sure how many of us in Owners for Owners would be persuaded to go, although I suppose that if we had a magnificent horse capable of racing in the Cup, we’d give it a go. Charlie Appleby and Sheikh Mohamed must have been thrilled with the result, and it capped a magnificent season with Godolphin globally winning 30 Gr.1s. Ian Williams was certainly enormously impressed by the whole experience (with or without his tie?), and commented about the event that: “It is huge. You don’t feel it until you get here and feel the enthusiasm, not only from the people of Melbourne but of Australia. It’s a bigger event than you can ever imagine. They keep raising the bar. It is a wonderful experience.” And as for the prize-money - £2,456,647 to the winner, £578,034 to the 2nd, £173,410 to the 3rd, and even the 12th placed horse picked up £86,785. Rapid re-think: OfO would definitely send a horse there!

On the other side of the world, Enable duly showed her typical brilliance and determination to win the Breeders’ Cup Turf at Churchill Downs as she made history by becoming the first Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe winner to win the Breeders’ Cup in the same season. Frankie Dettori’s ride was right from the top drawer, being prepared to bring her wide on the home turn in search of the quicker fresh ground. What a top-class filly Enable has become.

As ever there were a few controversies. In both Melbourne and Churchill Downs there were whip issues: Christophe Soumillon made outrageous use of it in the Breeders’ Cup Classic and Hugh Bowman was no better in Australia. This was shocking for racing, and unfortunately very topical, as South Africa are currently experimenting with a race ban on jockeys whipping their mounts as part of the growing concern of animal rights activists and younger race spectators. On the welfare front there was also a disaster in Melbourne when The Cliffsofmoher suffered a fatal injury. Alas, Flemington has a bad record and they clearly need to address this as a priority in the same way that Aintree did for the Grand National.

So what happened at Market Rasen? Without making light of the seriousness of the whip issue, a horse called L’es Fremantle probably needed a bomb under him to win. As a 7yo with 55 defeats and not a win to his name, he appeared to have no chance whatsoever in a handicap chase on 8th November. In 41 of his previous races he had been 100/1+ and once started at the ludicrous odds of 300/1. He was bought for £600 at the Ascot sales in October 2012, so had enjoyed six years of luxurious living at Michael Chapman’s yard at the course, without feeling any need to repay their generosity. Michael wryly commented after the race that: “He is not very good-looking, he’s a bit of an ugly duckling, though everybody loves him. He likes to bite people, but he’s not vicious.” He was initially named by his owners (surprise, surprise) after their friend, Les, who lived in Fremantle, Australia. But on that marvellous day of 8th November he stayed on strongly to win his race, after one of the longest losing runs ever in UK racing history. I love results like this, and I suspect connections weren’t particularly bothered that the miserly prize was £3,898. I doubt they will be booking his flight to Melbourne. Racing Post signed off their report by saying: “History suggests he’s unlikely to follow up.” Bless him!

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

Feast and Famine in the Fixture List: Programme Planning will be a Major Test for the BHA’s Collaborative Tripartite Board

If you’re keen on racing as well as other sports, then last weekend was positively exhausting. You can have multiple TVs on around the house and still have no chance of keeping up with Wimbledon, the Tour de France, first Ashes Test and Scottish Open as well as the onslaught of a totally Flat-dominated Saturday of Ascot, Chester, Hamilton, Newmarket, Salisbury, York and over in Ireland, Tipperary. Hardly surprising that the pundits had an alliterative field day, calling it all “Midsummer Madness”, “Feast and Famine”, “Surfeit of Stuff” and “Clearly Crackers”. Ladbrokes termed it “Groundhog Day”.

And then, incredibly, on Sunday there wasn’t a single Flat turf meeting in either Ireland or the UK. You scratch your head as to why, in mid-July, the choice is really moderate NH racing at Perth, Sligo, Southwell, Stratford or, if you’re really desperate, the all-weather at Dundalk.

As always at the moment in racing, it seems as though some stakeholders gain but others definitely lose. Such is the support at some of the tracks that York on their Magnet Cup day (which, full credit to them, they’ve been running now for over half a century on this day) had 40,000 attendees, Chester (with a pretty ordinary card) 28,000, Ascot 20,000 and yet the top meeting, with the July Cup, at Newmarket had a paltry 14,000 and only 37,000 over all three days of their top midsummer fixture.

We all know that Saturday betting turnover matters enormously, as it drives the levy and is ultimately such a big contributor to prize-money. All the betting operators were extremely critical of the weekend clashes, which led to many punters giving up due to racing overload. Some of the sponsors such as Bet 365, who had supported the Bunbury Cup at Newmarket, were naturally disappointed with the turnover. Trainers and jockeys faced a logistical nightmare. All in all, an indictment of the way the current fixture list and programme plan operate.

Tactically, although not necessarily as simple as it sounds, the obvious short-term requirement is to separate some of these meetings. In particular, the Newmarket July meeting over recent years has moved to the weekend and it should go back to a mid-week slot. John Smiths day, with its huge support and tradition, should be the anchor Saturday meeting. And then it is important to look at the weekends either side and see whether they can be strengthened. In fact when you look at this weekend’s fare, it is certainly not particularly impressive and again illustrates the need to balance the fixture list.

Strategically though, it is not sufficient just to tinker around with a few race days and a few meetings. The whole of the programme, end to end across the year, needs significant review. Indeed if I put my former management consultancy hat on, it is a classic for data analysis of meetings, racecourse attendances, betting turnover and the needs of the racehorse population in the context of the total amount of racing in both in the UK and near neighbours. Mathematically it is possible to work out the absolutely optimal pattern that maximises the total revenue and margin of British racing. That can be compared against the current arrangement and a migration plan determined to move the current, inherently ineffective system towards the optimal one ….. and yes, I can already hear the sound of pigs taking off from the runway.

As always this is not just a logical exercise. If you’re generous it involves give and take on the part of racecourses, and if you’re not, it is at the heart of the need for the BHA to take more control over British racing from certain stakeholders and, in this example, specifically the racecourses. The tracks need to give up power, in other words. I’m sure that is an implicit assumption behind the behavioural dynamics of the new tripartite board representing the BHA, the Horsemen’s Group and the Racecourse Association. Success or otherwise will certainly be one of the prime tests of how well the collaborative model can work in practice.

It could be harder to solve than the Greek debt crisis!?! We wish everyone well around the negotiating table.

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

Will 2015 be the Year when Racing’s Turnaround and Transformation Begins?

Last summer I was a member of one of the BHA’s strategy pillar teams: “Horse Population, Ownership and Breeding”. It certainly made me think more deeply about the huge challenges and opportunities facing racing. If you are of an optimistic nature, there are lots of positives around: a new CEO at the BHA, a big shake-up of the Board, record levels of prize-money for 2015, top-end bloodstock very strong, the 10-year sponsorship deal at Goodwood, contractual prize-money agreements in place with most racecourses and growth in media rights revenue. However, the glass can also look more than half-empty on occasions with racing in a fairly precarious position – big declines in owners, horses in training and numbers of runners with the consequent blight of small fields. So as Nick Rust, the new CEO (ex-Ladbrokes), goes on the road to meet the industry, here is the Owners for Owners’ “Strategic Starter for 10”.


1. Finalise and communicate racing’s turnaround growth strategy
Throughout January there have been the inevitable, platitudinous expressions of goodwill towards the new CEO, and in turn from him to the superficially supportive stakeholders. The reality of course is completely different. As the Australian commentator Jim McGrath said on a recent ATR Forum, “Racing’s stakeholders are like cats in a sack, and most of its leaders could start a row in an empty house”. Racing desperately needs clarity on its strategic vision around a small number of critical issues that the industry commits to supporting. The analytical piece (the “what” of strategy) then needs to be backed up by the behavioural piece (the “how” of operationalisation). A fundamental element of course is whether the strategy will be about growth or managed contraction, or a combination of the two.

2. Adopt a different leadership and governance model
Ever since the BHB was launched 20 years ago, the centre has lacked any real authority or control over the industry apart from regulation and integrity. The various factions have operated dysfunctionally and extremely inefficiently. For too long the bookmakers and racecourses have had the power in British racing, while the levy board has held the purse-strings. There are now proposals for a tripartite board representing the BHA, racecourses and the Horsemen’s Group. The challenge is whether the stakeholders will relinquish authority to the BHA within such a structure so that it can actually take control over key decisions. Without that it will be just about impossible to roll out a meaningful strategy for change. No matter how strong an organisation’s change management skills may be, it is just about impossible to do that purely through nudge, fudge and facilitation. It is time for a much more authoritative lead from the centre with a redefinition of the BHA’s role and the injection of resources and funds to drive the necessary changes.

3. Overhaul racing’s funding system and secure long-term income streams
Almost since its inception the levy scheme has not really been fit for purpose. More recently, as levy payments were avoided by offshore bookmaking, it was obvious that there had to be a replacement, together with the introduction of a “racing right” and new funding model. Encouragingly this appears to have found favour with the Government, but an obvious challenge is to maintain momentum through the inevitable disruption of the election. However it would be equally wrong to assume that modernisation and / or replacement of the levy is an automatic panacea for all racing’s ills. Bookmakers are already bemoaning the “increasing cost of content”, and any changes in fixture lists could easily dilute existing media rights payments. So as well as reforming the levy, it is vital that racing finds other income streams, particularly drawing on the export of racing media abroad.

4. Reshape and resize British racing
In the short term, there is simply too much racing and not enough horses. Everyone wants competitive, tightly-contested action, with more races having 8+ runners. That cannot be achieved at the moment, so changes needed include the removal of some fixtures, optimisation of race planning, restriction on the number of races programmed per fixture, removal of some races of four or fewer runners, reduction in field sizes in excess of 16, introduction of greater incentivisation to run through increases in prize- and place-money, and race innovation through, for example, making more handicaps into claimers. But all these are really just tinkering with the problem. The real need is longer-term remedial action.

5. Reverse the decline in both the horse and owner population
The average number of horses in training for both Flat and NH peaked in 2008, and has subsequently declined by over 1,600, coinciding with 650 races being added to the race programme. There has been a similar decline in the number of owners while their average age has increased from 57 to 63. There doesn’t seem to have been a corresponding inflow of younger owners. This is a spiral of decline: fewer runners, higher costs, more small-field races, poor prize-money particularly at the lower end, lower betting activity; and therefore reduced return on the levy. If there is going to be a growth strategy, then increasing the number of horses / owners must be central to it.

6. Dramatically transform the owner experience
Owners are the largest investors in racing, injecting hundreds of millions of pounds a year and over £20,000 for each of their horses in training. And yet they are still treated almost as “a necessary evil”. The whole racing mind-set should change. As a single example, compare the check-in desk and lounge for first and business-class passengers with the reception and hospitality that owners receive on the racecourse. Racing just doesn’t understand that owners are buyers of luxury goods and services, and there is a need here for multiple interventions across the whole industry. There are also very few proper metrics and assessment of service levels given to owners. We would like to see a Good Trainer Guide, a Good Racecourse Guide and more transparency in trainer charges, syndicate costs, agents’ commissions and the exposure of the corrupt practices and market distortions that occur in the bloodstock industry. Time for a radical re-think, and in parallel we recommend an industry-wide initiative to take costs out of the system, particularly through adoption of best-in-class procurement practices and a dramatic simplification in the process costs of racing administration. The complexity of administration is in itself one of the barriers preventing many people from becoming owners. All savings could be reinvested in owner-related benefits.

7. Set explicit goals for the return on ownership and prize-money This clearly follows naturally from the section above. At the moment the return on ownership is around 20%, so for every £ invested by owners they lose on average 80p. That is rock-bottom for the industry worldwide. Notwithstanding the record-breaking prize-money of £130.8m being provided in 2015 (a very welcome bounce back from the low of £94m in 2011), minimum values of races below Listed class are generally lower now than they were in 2005. Place-money is often derisory. We would like to see two clear targets: no place-money to be lower than the average cost of entering a horse and transporting it to the race; and for the return on ownership to increase from 20% to 50% by 2020.

8. Foster innovation in betting and bookmaking
Bookmakers definitely feel that they are being squeezed on all sides, with declining turnover, increased regulation and the high cost of the racing product. Racing appears to be losing market share to other sports and betting products. There is doubtless a need for joint initiatives to boost racing’s attractiveness to punters while ensuring that the sport receives a fair return from this betting activity. The key question is whether that can be done through the existing bookmaking structures, or whether there is a much broader need for both betting and technological innovation. This is an area for active research and business development to identify radically different betting platforms – “Betfair 2.0”.

9. Boost attendance at racecourses and improve terrestrial TV coverage of racing
At their worst some racecourse operators, particularly those under the ARC banner, see racing purely as a commercial activity and a cash cow to be milked. They suffer from dreadful media relations and fail to deliver an enjoyable racegoer experience, their facilities are a disgrace and they don’t act on their commitments to racing over prize-money. If a new governance regime led to much greater control over the fixture list, then a system of much greater incentives and penalties should be introduced with those courses. The best races and the most valuable fixtures should naturally go to those courses that demonstrate the greatest commitment to British racing. It is also vital for the terrestrial TV coverage of racing to be kept firmly in the mainstream. It would be severely damaging if anything happened to reduce this, as has been seen with the reluctance of many daily newspapers to cover the sport. Another area for collaborative action between key stakeholders is to ensure that TV coverage is revitalised and relevant for the modern viewer across a broad range of media platforms.

10. Stop the own goals
Unfortunately over the last few months we have seen a number of incidents in racing that have damaged the perception of the sport. For instance if a whip rule is introduced, based on the number of hits, and then stewards are expected to follow the rules without flexibility (although there is discretion), then poor outcomes are inevitable, as seen in the Aidan Coleman ban. But there have been other amateurish examples to do with flag waving, and removal of hurdles due to low sun even after sunset. Racecourse executives and stewards need to raise their game significantly here. Indeed there is probably a case for professionalisation of stewards.

Well that’s the longest blog that I’ve ever written. I said at the beginning that it was a “starter for 10” and there is a lot more detail that could be covered. I’m just hoping that Nick Rust demonstrates by his actions that he is a good appointment, and we’ll all be following what happens throughout this year with real interest.

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

Is there a Purpose to All-Weather Racing, and Does Chelmsford City Meet It?

My three least favourite tracks in the whole of the country are Wolverhampton, Lingfield and then Kempton. All of them are all-weather tracks, and every time I’ve been there as an owner I’ve vowed never to return. Standing on the green rubberised concrete of the parade ring at Wolverhampton, with the scent of stale Balti wafting across from the grim bar and restaurant overlooking the crowd-absent terraces, definitely doesn’t count as an enjoyable owner experience in my book. I know I’m exaggerating, and doubtless if one of our Flat horses stormed home, head in his chest, to win going away, I’d probably feel different. But that hasn’t happened either, and invariably you go to the A/W out of necessity rather than pleasure.

And yet the last decade has seen an exponential increase in the amount of all-weather racing in the UK as a percentage of the overall fixture list, so it clearly is meeting a number of objectives: first and foremost, it generates betting turnover and therefore levy to help fund racing; the crowd-free business and commercial model clearly works for the course operators, particularly ARC; unfortunately there are large numbers of moderate horses who have a better chance of winning in the winter on the all-weather than they ever would do on turf in the summer; and finally it provides viewing fodder for TV channels, even if a lot of it is as dull as ditch-water.

So, reluctantly, I have to admit that there is a purpose to all-weather racing. Some of the key questions though are to do with the quantity, distribution and quality of the A/W fixtures and racecourse experiences. Back in this blog on 1st March 2013, I also raised the concerning issue of integrity since many of the ethical breaches have involved this form of racing.

Therefore when Chelmsford City (the former Great Leighs track that closed down almost six years ago) held its first fixture last Sunday, 11th January, I wondered whether we were just going to get more of the same or, ever the optimist, whether a new operator with much deeper pockets could use this racecourse to launch what hopefully could become a new era for all-weather racing.

Very rarely for me, I sat down and watched the racing on TV. I also had a side interest because a horse that I formerly had a share in, Lunar Deity, took part in one of the races, going for a hat-trick, and almost succeeded – only beaten a short head. Lunar was by Medicean, a stallion that I really like, and it is great that we now have another by this sire, with Karl Burke. He looks a late-maturing type (as was Lunar Deity), but hopefully he will be out as a two-year-old in late summer.

First impressions were pretty positive. Prize-money was high in comparison with other similar fixtures; the facilities had a plushness that I probably hadn’t expected; entrances, bars, restaurants etc. appeared to be massively superior to the other A/W tracks, and the track itself has been well regarded since its original construction. True, the grandstand is in the wrong position and apparently over the next three or four years they are going to build one where it needs to be, and the track rode quite deep and slow but will doubtless bed down over the next few months. Personally I wish the track every success and it is bound to be very well supported particularly by the Newmarket trainers, presumably at the expense of the other courses.

But the main reason why I wish it success is that I hope it applies leverage and competition to drive improvement generally in this poor relation of our sport. There is no inherent reason why all-weather racing has to be so abysmal. Better management, prize-money and facilities, and much greater collaboration with other racing stakeholders, ought to be capable of dramatically raising overall standards. Furthermore I would like to see a quantum improvement of this sort both stimulated and reinforced by the allocation of fixtures. Racing needs more incentives and penalties in the system, with a stronger BHA being prepared to apply them in a way that genuinely rewards the improvers and penalises the laggards. Let’s hope good progress is made.

I am always interested to hear your views so please do leave a comment. If you can't see the comment box at the bottom of this post then navigate to the post using the right hand navigation or click here > and scroll to the bottom of the page. Look forward to hearing your views. Thanks very much for sharing them.

Nonsense at Newbury, Part 2 – While The New Management Relents on the Dress Code, They Now Need to Take Stock of Broader Initiatives to Improve Racegoer Behaviour

Firstly, Happy New Year to all our owners, regular readers and anyone else who finds the time to read our blog. As always the resolutions remain the same – eat and drink less, exercise more, blah, blah, blah. The key one though is to go racing as often as possible and enjoy everything that’s fantastic about our sport.

In the last blog of 2013, I discussed the nonsense of Newbury’s dress code and the PR disaster that it turned out to be at the Hennessy meeting. My wife and I were personally involved in this, with a highly embarrassing incident to do with a brand new and ultra-modern blue cotton coat with leather flashings that was deemed to be flouting the rule against denim, despite Newbury having declared in their advance marketing publicity that “Racegoers are invited to prove that Britain knows best when it comes to Autumnal fashion, with fabulous hats and coats”. Nonsensically that came to be translated as “Newbury’s stewards know best when it comes to applying inflexible and arbitrary rules on dress”.

The following week I had a lengthy discussion with the then joint managing director Stephen Higgins, who did everything possible to deal with our criticism and actually impressed with his commitment to “rebuild trust with the racecourse”. I am going to have a face-to-face meeting with the Newbury management fairly soon, and they have also invited my wife and me to lunch in the Royal Box – that should definitely see a couple of the New Year resolutions kicked into touch.

Encouragingly, on Tuesday, 17th December (a couple of days after I posted the last blog), the new Chief Executive, Julian Thick, announced that the controversial dress code, designed to encourage racegoers to “embrace a stylish but relaxed approach”, was being reviewed. The rules that caused the controversy on Hennessy day decreed that in the Premier Enclosure “smart trousers (no denim) are the order of the day for gentlemen, with a jacket preferred”, while women were required to wear “dresses or skirts of modest length, or smart trousers”. Jeans were banned. They now intend temporarily to relax the strictly enforced criteria and “smart jeans” will be tolerated while the overall policy is reviewed. As I said in the last blog, it is barely credible that a mature woman wearing a new blue trilby (bought at Haydock Park), a similarly new, ultra-modern blue cotton and leather coat (bought at Cheltenham Racecourse) and equally brand-new black trousers, could be deemed by the Newbury style police to be in breach of the rules. My wife was most definitely not alone in all of this, and the adverse publicity in both national and trade press must have seriously damaged the new branding that “The Racecourse, Newbury” appears to be trying to develop.

Let’s look at some of the broader implications. Everyone wants to ensure that more people come racing, and that they thoroughly enjoy the experience, so that our sport can build increasingly self-sustaining revenues while broadening the overall customer base, particularly so that it appeals to the next generation of racegoers. Alas, there have been a number of unpleasant incidents involving drunken oafs fighting on racecourses over the last year or two, and a particularly unpleasant episode occurred at Newbury between two competing groups of football supporters. Therefore initiatives designed to improve, modify or change behaviour in some defined way are all to the good. But this is obviously extremely challenging, whereas framing and applying inflexibly a dress code is relatively easy to enforce, even if it does nothing at all to change the offensive behaviour. As one of the TV commentators stated, “a drunken oaf in a shiny black suit is still an oaf”.

Very few, if any, racecourses in the winter apply such rules as Newbury was trying to introduce. Clearly a number of Flat meetings, notably Royal Ascot and Glorious Goodwood, apply very strict dress codes in designated enclosures. According to Steve Higgins, Newbury had taken soundings from racegoers before introducing the rules and there appeared to be enthusiasm for “raising standards”. I suspect the question should have been framed much more tightly, such as: “Do you feel that it is more important for Newbury to reduce the incidence of unpleasant and intrusive drunken behaviour, or that we should impose a dress code and ban denim?” While this may be an artificial forced choice, I think we all know what people’s preferences would be. It is reducing boorish, drunken behaviour on racetracks that really matters, rather than antagonising denim-wearers, many of whom have spent a considerable amount of money on designer clothes.

Equally, there is nothing wrong with trying to encourage people to wear smarter clothes, but the challenge for Newbury is how best to do that if, indeed, it is deemed to be a critical branding and customer relationship initiative.

So what should Newbury, and other racecourses, do next – if anything? Do let me hear your views and I’ll continue with this theme in the next blog.

Derby Day – Everything Crossed for the Burkes and Libertarian

By the time you read this, the result of the Derby may already be known. It is always one of my favourite races of the year, and it is great to have something to cheer about, after all the doping and corruption revelations of the last couple of weeks. It has had a special place in my heart ever since, as a student, I backed Morston at 25/1 just after completing Finals. I think I probably have fonder memories of that betting slip than I do of my degree certificate. It certainly guaranteed an enjoyable summer, with student days behind me. 33 years later, I ended up living alongside the Woolley Down gallops where Morston and Blakeney were trained – so, happy memories.

This year, I suppose everything depends on whether you believe Dawn Approach will stay, or not. With a few exceptions such as Sea The Stars, not many Guineas winners have done so; I think he may be a doubtful stayer, and definitely far too short a price. The Aidan O’Brien runners are bound to test him. Battle Of Marengo may be his best, but he seems quite exposed. Are Ocavango and Chopin any good? I liked the way Ruler Of The World won at Chester, and he is on my shortlist, but without any doubt the Owners for Owners community is bound to be behind Libertarian.

We had our final “Meet the Trainer” morning at Elaine and Karl Burke’s stables the day after the Dante. Most of us had backed Libertarian at 33/1, so it was a real privilege to be able to stand alongside the horse at Spigot Lodge. There may only have been a few of us there, but we had a terrific morning. I hope everyone else was forming an orderly queue outside various bookies, lumping on at 20/1+ for the Derby. We saw our horses Paradise Spectre and Aran Sky up on the High Moor gallops, did the posing with Libertarian and then took Karl and Elaine off to the Wensleydale Heifer for a good lunch. Amazingly, it was Karl’s 50th birthday as well, so there was a lot to celebrate. When we expressed amazement, he came out with the great line: “You don’t think I’m 60, do you?”

Anoraks like me love stats and history. Libertarian is the first Yorkshire-trained horse to have won the Dante since Dante, so it was a fabulous achievement by the Burkes. They bought him out of a breeze-up for 40,000gns. Despite having done the slowest time at the sales, he is a lovely, strapping son of New Approach and no matter what happens today he can only improve this season, and into next. Elsewhere on the web site I have sung the praises of Karl Burke and Lars Kelp in spotting high-potential horses. Look no further for proof. By the way, Spigot Lodge is named after Jack Spigot, the 1821 St. Leger winner, and The Flying Dutchman won the 1849 Derby from these stables, before his famous match against Voltigeur on the Knavesmire at York in front of a crowd of 100,000. But I bet you knew that anyway. The BHA’s Great British Racing campaigns have got a bit of catching up to do!

However, the main reason I’ll be cheering Libertarian home today is that it signals the return to the top flight of training for the whole Burke yard. Back in the dark days of 2009, when Karl was warned off for a year for passing information to a very dodgy character, Miles Rogers, there was a possibility that all their hard work and endeavour would have been in vain, with their whole livelihood falling apart. Karl had just won his first Group 1 with Lord Shanakill at Chantilly, and was on the point of breaking through to the top ranks of training. Within weeks the number of horses in the yard had dropped from 90 to 25, and most of the staff were laid off. It was an agonisingly sad time for everyone. We kept our faith in and support for the yard, and nothing will give me greater pleasure than seeing a good run today from Libertarian. Everything crossed. As a horse who will only mature with time, there is always a risk that he may not have the necessary luck in running at Epsom. Let’s hope that he breaks well and William Buick is able to have him in a forward position at the top of the hill. If not, never mind - his day is bound to come. I’m already on for the Leger!

Hats off to Karl, Elaine, Kelly and Lucy Burke and all the crew up at Spigot Lodge. As Derek Thompson would doubtless say: “Enjoy the moment.”

Great British Racing ... but Compare Dismal Doncaster to Dynamic Dubai

I’ve been very interested in the way Racing for Change has morphed into Great British Racing. On balance I’m definitely in favour, and their web site, www.greatbritishracing.com, gives all the details of what they are trying to do, as the marketing and promotional arm of British horseracing. Encouragingly, they have been really specific about their role, which is to widen the sport’s fan base, help grow revenue streams and maintain British racing’s position internationally. They have a clear mission statement about broadening the appeal of British horseracing at every level and have mapped out seven clear aims and objectives. Not everyone will like the marketing-speak, but if they meet their goals it will be a job well done.

So in this blog I thought I’d have a look at two of the aims and objectives, in the context of the start of the Flat at Doncaster. Let’s evaluate it in terms of aim #4, “Improve the production and delivery of the raceday experience .... Give customers a reason to visit and return”; and aim #5, “Market the thrill of ownership .... Attract, reward and retain existing racehorse owners”.

I don’t think the racing authorities could have kicked off the Flat in such a dismal manner as Doncaster on Friday, 22nd March. A seven-race card with total win prize money of less than £50,000; one Class 2, one Class 3, three Class 4s and two Class 5s, one of which was a very modest race for amateur riders. All run on very testing conditions in front of a minute crowd, and absolutely no atmosphere whatsoever. No evidence here of “the thrill of ownership” or “a compelling story”, and no incentive to “widen racing’s exposure across all media platforms” as the Great British Racing web site describes it. A total damp squib, followed by fits and starts over the next few weeks. What an absolutely pathetic way to kick off the Flat, and as the marketers would say, “bookend the season”.

In comparison, what about Dubai’s World Cup Saturday? Total win prize money of a whisker under £10m, and with fabulous prize money all the way down to 6th place. Indeed the lowest place prize money in any race was £12,269, which is only £700 below the top win prize money of the Class 2 at Doncaster.

Now obviously there is no way at all that Doncaster on a wet Friday in March is going to compare with Meydan in all its pomp and glory. But surely the collective racing industry can do something to kick off our Flat season with a much greater sense of style and excitement. Some ideas:

•   Change the start date of the Flat. Put it back until after the Grand National. Build up a real
    sense of back-to-back weekends of fabulous racing.
•   Dramatically increase the prize money for the first day of the Flat, and have it on a 
    Saturday.
•   Aim for £1m of prize money, with money all the way down to 6th place.
•   Frame the races in a way that really incentivises trainers to get their horses to Doncaster 
    for this kick-off meeting.
•   Make sure that the meeting doesn’t clash with another “showcase” event.
•   Have a proper PR and social media campaign well ahead of the meeting, to build buzz 
    and excitement.
•   Actively involve top jockeys and key sporting personalities in the whole event.

One of the races I’d like to see in this card would be the start of a “Syndicate Series”, say with a value of £50,000, that is open only to horses in joint ownerships, partnerships and syndicates with at least four owners per horse. Run this series throughout the season (and have a similar one over jumps). Have prize money down to 6th. It would guarantee maximum fields and big crowds with all the co-owners and their friends.

This seems such a good idea I think I’ll even send it to Great British Racing.