Are we being entertained? The spectacle of the Super Bowl is unmatched in society today. To call it just a sporting event would diminish its goal in reaching both sporting fans and those unfamiliar with the gridiron. Though already exceedingly popular, the NFL never seems to stop in its attempt to broaden its market. The game of football is a part, and though it hasn't been altered dramatically over time, changes have been made to help make it more entertaining. Anyone who took notice of the 2025 regular season couldn't help but see a flurry of action in the final two minutes where often both teams would score points. Late-game heroics make the game more exciting and recognizing that there's always a chance your team can come back insures maximum interest. Harness racing is not football, but it too has survived a long time and continues to be played out across North America and in other locations worldwide that the NFL is currently in the process of mining. Is their audience our audience? Perhaps at one time there could have been crossover when harness racing was a spectator sport. As football gained popularity through television exposure, harness racing's closed-circuit network provided a vehicle for those unable to go to the track but was limited in its reach. It's hard to say what those limitations cost the sport since attendance became something that couldn't be measured, and there were no television ratings to capture how much of the audience was retained or lost. Yet, as we move forward, hopefully in 2026 the world has changed and perhaps harness racing hasn't changed enough. I marvel to see the nuances the NFL adds to its production, never resting on its laurels and thinking that its popularity is assured. Harness racing hasn't made many, if any, modifications to its product in the years I've been associated with it, and that's a long time! The races are still conducted at the same distance. The times of the races are faster, but it's hard to quantify if that's positive to the experience or negative. The races are run differently, and in that sense, has that change been better or worse for the sport? The way races are contested has evolved over time, and therefore one can't say there was any plan in mind when sulkies changed and driving styles changed. The evolution of Standardbred horses is also said to have been a factor in how fast and far our horses can go without apparently slowing down. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the time I first went to a racetrack, horses traveled slower than they do today, but did anybody watching the races notice or care in the least? The answer is likely no because world records were lower and time was relevant to those standards. As we have theoretically evolved over time and adapted to new equipment and perhaps a different quality of genetically improved Standardbred, the changes on the racetrack have led down a road that continues to struggle for attention in a world that seeks more eyeballs every day. Why are people outside of this sport not paying attention to what we are providing? ► Sign up for our FREE DRF Harness Digest Newsletter It would be easy to say we don't spend enough on marketing. It would be easy to say there are other forms of gambling that have overwhelmed the population. It would be easy to say that racetracks are more interested in alternate forms of gambling as their main form of business and therefore haven't the interest. While all of those play a part in where we are today, I feel the loss of focus on providing a product that is captivating and entertaining is at the head of the list. As someone that truly loves the sport and has been willing to accept its flaws along the way from that affection, it's hard to witness what we put out these days and not believe we haven't shot ourselves in the hoof. It's not lost on me that drivers have one obligation to the trainers and owners they provide service for and that is to win races. In today's sport that means drivers take horses to the front and keep going. Fields get stretched to the point that cameras must pan out to squeeze the last horses into focus. That imagery alone should have been enough for someone to recognize how badly the product looks when horses shrink right in front of our eyes. There's plenty of better technology available today that could help make the action appear more intense on the screen, but it would be a wasted investment if the product itself wasn't altered in a major way first. The speed-favoring, stretched-out field, lack of movement races we are being force fed today can't be made to look better without some serious modifications put in place. Perhaps the mile distance in 99 percent of our races needs to be adjusted. That script is old and is due for a rewrite. From my perspective the game has changed because horses on the front-end no longer tire in the final quarter. The ability of horses to close and make up ground in the stretch is what has been compromised by that over time and tipped the balance of winners to the speed. A healthy sport provides close finishes and duels in the final stages for the fans to enjoy. The basis for a great event is a final two minutes or 10 seconds of action, with most of the audience having an interest in the outcome. It's the part of the event that has people cheering on the edge of their seats. While many other sports still provide that with regularity, in harness racing it happens way too infrequently. I never watched Bad Bunny until last Sunday, and that his show was incredibly entertaining sparked a memory of mine. I recalled a time when a "rabbit" was part of some races. I remember watching a few track and field events and witnessing a runner going extremely fast leading a field in a middle-distance race. I was confused at first why anyone would employ this strategy, only to find out that the runner was only in the race to assure a fast pace and would drop out midway in the event, allowing the other runners to compete to the finish. A "rabbit" or pacesetter, if you will, might be a better answer for our sport if we want to shed the image of no action in a race. Certainly, there would be no need to try to implore drivers to not slow down during the second quarter if in fact they had to try to keep pace with a runaway leader. The idea would be to have one horse designated with the letter "X" to start from inside the starting gate ahead of the field at the outset. This horse would go as fast as it could for the first half-mile of a race that was contested at a mile and a quarter and then leave the track to the inside. At worst the fast pace would help change the dynamics in the final three-quarters of the race. It wouldn't give luxury to the front-end horses. The longer distance could do its part in helping horses chasing the speed get tired in the final quarter, and thus allowing those reserved from well off-the-pace to make up ground and produce an exciting finish. I, for one, would like to see our racing product look more appealing on a regular basis. I would love to see more wagering variables that realistically could help increase the payoffs so that we can at least compete for the gambling dollar. It is not possible to stay the course if change doesn't occur.