The heart of harness racing may be the caretakers and trainers who spend their time making sure each horse is ready to compete on race day. The brain is perhaps the owners, who make the decisions to purchase the horses and sometimes assist the trainers in deciding where the horse will race. The drivers can be reflected in the arms and legs as they make the motions which signal to the horses when to go. So where do the bettors come into play? One could argue that they are the circulatory system, the network which transports what the body needs in order to survive. Without the $1.8 billion wagered in North America in 2025, it is hard to make a case that the industry is a vital cog in society. The need to keep the current group of bettors and level of wagering as well as potentially growing those numbers is why I'm so perplexed by the number of USTA Districts which rejected a rule change to provide more information to our core audience. The proposal, which was made by Hambletonian Society Executive Vice President Tom Charters, outlined the need to include shoeing information in the past performance program for previous races, as well as the coming race. This would basically upgrade the information provided to the betting public so they are aware how the shoeing of a horse may've been changing from start to start. Why is this information important? This is perhaps a bit hazier question to answer because there are those that argue that horses racing without shoes (front or hind) doesn't help very much, while others say it can make a horse seconds faster. The facts are that some horses (not all) do indeed improve when racing without shoes. M-M's Dream is a horse that comes to mind who easily became a second faster when racing barefoot. I can recall a number of races at The Red Mile where a trainer was interviewed in the winner's circle after an upset win by their horse only to announce that they pulled the shoes without the knowledge of the public. Don't get me wrong, they weren't trying to be sneaky...no one asked them. Getting back to the actual proposal, it comes in multiple parts: 6.15 (b)(14) Clerk of the Course/Charter.- Standardized symbols for shoeing information to include front shoes off, hind shoes off, all shoes off, any of the first time changes from the previous race's shoeing. 7.02 (o) A trainer has the option: to pull the shoes on their horse, or replace shoes (if previously raced without shoes) which must be indicated at the time of entry; changes after initial entries may be made by scratch time with drivers' changes in order to be printed in the official program. No further changes will be allowed unless approved by the judges for reasons such as adverse weather or track conditions. Furthermore: 1.) Failure to comply with any part of this Rule or to make the aforementioned declarations in a legible, clear and accurate fashion may subject the trainer and/or track member to a fine and/or suspension. 2.) Any excessive injury to the horse's feet because of pulling shoes may subject the trainer to a fine and/or suspension, depending on the degree of injury to the horse. [The sponsor states: "By next year's Hambletonian, we can give the public a program that not only tells them which horses that day would be racing without shoes (no shoes, only front shoes, only hind shoes, and whether this is the first time shoes have come off) AND also if they have worn shoes, or not, in their 2026 races to date. The time has come for regulating pulling shoes, or 'shoes off.' Horsemen have been doing it for at least four decades both on trotters & pacers. We're more than two decades behind Europe.  Announcing it the day of the race at the track or on the simulcast is no longer adequate. Our wagering customers deserve it. Other horsemen should have access to this shoeing history, if they're considering claiming horse, trotter or pacer. And equally if not most important, the data should be collected in the interest of safety for our horses.] ► Sign up for our FREE DRF Harness Digest Newsletter Of the 13 district meetings held over the last few months, the rule was rejected by seven, approved by two, partially approved by two (agreed to part one – recording of the shoes in the program after the race but not having shoe information for the current race listed) and tabled by two. While these decisions don't necessarily state the direction that the USTA Board of Directors will take when they gather for their annual meetings in Ohio this weekend (March 6-8), it certainly isn't a good start that so many entities don't feel the information is necessary. There is precedent that shoeing information is important information needed by the betting public. France and Sweden both supply the information for the current race and previous races to their patrons. Multiple tracks in the U.S. have taken it on their own to announce shoeing, with the Meadowlands listing any changes via its scroll on the bottom of the simulcast feed and The Red Mile announcing the changes during its Grand Circuit meet. While Yonkers Raceway doesn't typically supply the information to its customers, they do go out of their way to inform people of any shoeing changes in the MGM Yonkers International Trot, thus proving that the information is important to some bettors. In some respects I can understand the hesitancy of certain districts to adopt the rule as submitted. First, including the information isn't as easy as saying "we are going to do it." The USTA must make space for it in the program and handle the coding. Secondly, each track must make arrangements to acquire the information each racing day and ensure its accuracy. This is easier said than done as often information is reported inaccurately. I can recall a race at the Meadowlands in 2025 where the scroll said a horse was racing without shoes but the trainer said it wasn't the case. As it relates to trainers, I can see the hesitancy to commit to pulling the shoes what could be two, four or even six days prior to an actual race. While the rule allows for changes due to weather or track conditions, who makes that final decision whether it should be permitted? What if the track is fast but the trainer thinks it is too hard? Do the Judges just take the trainer's word for it or deny the change? I would argue that the trainer should have the final word in all situations and should be allowed to change course without a reason up to five races (or 90 minutes if not in the middle of the card) before the horse is scheduled to compete. Providing the ability to make a late change should alleviate any hesitation by a trainer to submit a shoeing designation days before the event. While some trainers argued that they don't know whether they will pull the shoes days before a race, it is rare that I speak with a trainer to do a preview story where they are completely undecided. The typical answer to "will you pull the shoes?" is either "yes" or "as long as the weather and track are good." Admittedly, on the surface, this may not be the most pressing issue facing harness racing in 2026. But it goes to the deeper issue of declining handle. In 2023 U.S. handle on the sport was $1.58 billion. In 2025 it was $1.35 billion. That is more than a 14% decline in two years. Shouldn't we be doing everything possible to make bettors happy? Wouldn't more information - like shoeing - help the industry take a step in the right direction?