Harness: Separating all betting interests randomly is the only fair solution

There comes a time in every sport when human behavior changes and rules need to follow. While much in harness racing has advanced over the last 20 years, there are some rules in place today that tend to benefit a limited number while putting smaller stables at an unfair disadvantage. Like much of the action that goes on today in a fast-paced environment where entries are drawn six days in advance and people lose track of time, the need for horses to be coupled for pari-mutuel betting purposes has pretty much become extinct.

Rules when I entered the sport in the early 1970's were established with the express purpose of separating horses in stakes races so that horses entered by one trainer would be split into different divisions. The same rules applied for individual owners. Should an owner be fortunate enough to have two stakes horses they wouldn't have to race against each other. The purpose for these rules was quite clear; offer the betting public the most number of betting interests if possible, and when not, couple horses with similar owner or trainer interest.

Over the last decade, group ownership and the expansion of some stables has changed the dynamic for those who own racetracks. Forced to accept multiple entries from certain stables just to fill overnight events, tracks have readily abandoned old practices just to survive. That racing commissions throughout North America have rubber-stamped the moves suggests not that they are blind to the potential conflicts but are wise to the need to have full fields and complete race cards.

Perhaps lost in the changes is the continued adherence to old policies that have been attached to stakes races that no longer apply, and when utilized, offer a lopsided advantage to the larger stables while putting those that enter just one at a distinct disadvantage.

► Sign up for our FREE DRF Harness Digest Newsletter

As one trainer asked me this summer, "Why should a trainer that enters six horses in a stakes race be guaranteed that they don't have to race against each other to earn a spot in the final?"

In 2021, given current practices, there really is no reason that any single trainer should have the luxury of entering multiple horses with a certainty that they won't have to compete against their own stablemates. The issue here is the system is weighted in favor of the large trainer because by splitting up his/her horses into three separate divisions more of them have a chance to reach the final. Those trainers that enter just one horse must accept that they could get into a tougher elimination or weaker one by the luck of the draw, but in the case of a trainer with a larger number of entrants there is certainty before the draw that some of their horses will avoid the others.

The recent Red Mile Grand Circuit put some of these trainers in the exact position when races like The Tattersalls and Kentucky Futurity went as single divisions, leaving Ake Svanstedt's five-ply entry in the Futurity racing against each other as well as the other top ones. The Tattersalls was top-weighted with horses from the Ron Burke and Tony Alagna stables but essentially played out fairly as trainer Ron Burke's top sophomores -- Jug winner Lou's Pearlman and Southwind Gendry -- had to battle head-to-head on the turn giving race-winner Abuckabett Hanover the perfect second-over trip. Granted, again the numbers stacked up against Charlie May who not only drew the second tier but was a victim of a slow pace and an even slower outer tier. That the Tattersalls went slower than the Kentucky Futurity is more a reflection on the numbers game working to the advantage of the Burke brigade in race strategy as Tim Tetrick had no reason to push Southwind Gendry hard against his stablemate because it could have cost both in the long run.

As it turns out, despite having five in the Kentucky Futurity, team Svanstedt didn't have the power it needed to have an impact on the final results as they had in the first two legs of the Triple Crown, the Yonkers Trot and Hambletonian, won by Svanstedt stalwarts Johan Palema and Captain Corey, respectively. That paved the way for the two sharpest sophomore trotters Jujubee and Cuatro De Julio to dominate the pace of the race and finish one-two.

The two premier events at The Red Mile are proof that uncoupling can work in some cases but it's not exactly a perfect science. When a dominant horse like Jujubee has to go against an arsenal from one stable he tends to get respect. Charlie May was already compromised by the draw before the Tattersalls. Had driver Brett Miller elected to stay outside and drive up during the second quarter, it's hard to think he would have gotten any favors against multiple tag-teams. It may not be the best when it comes to leveling the playing field but perhaps it's the best we can do in an era where so much power is produced from the same stables.

Of course, those with the power will eagerly point to Jujubee's victory as a reason to keep the old rules in place, but that kind of misses the point. The Kentucky Futurity did not have eliminations and a final. All who entered did in fact have to race against the others. In the coming weeks the Breeders Crown at The Meadowlands will likely separate trainer entries and owner entries with the New Jersey Racing Commission eagerly sanctioning separate betting interests. That said, we'd like to see a change of direction that offers no benefit to large stables and at least puts each owner at the same risk entering the contest. If you're the sixth-best horse in your own stable that's something that should be considered before entering an open stakes event. If your horse truly belongs in the race and deserves a spot in the final, it should be capable of not just beating other horses but your own stablemates as well.