Kentucky tries to reduce fatalities

[second_glance]

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...#ixzz23lksGZIA

[islandgirl45]

Out of curiosity, does anyone know the "venue of interest?"

[Rick1323]

Dr. Mary Scollay, KHRC equine medical director, said the staff also looked closely at the types of horses that died at Churchill in May and noticed a "commonality to that population of horses in that they had participated in racing at a specific venue before coming to Churchill."

Scollay said it was possible the venue (which she declined to name) where the horses raced previously might not have had the same level of pre- and post-race scrutiny of its horse population that exists in Kentucky.

"The venue we felt was of interest; we are working with them and assisting them with their regulatory activities, like the pre-race exam process," Scollay said. "It's a small world and when they improve, we benefit, and when we improve, they benefit."


Read more on BloodHorse.com: http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...#ixzz23locbLfP

-----------------------

Well, who are the 8 horses who died, and then let's look at where they raced prior to Churchill........

What? They raced somewhere else first......and because that "somewhere else" doesn't do pre race checks as well as Churchill.....they broke down later AT Churchill? Doesn't sound like Churchill's pre race exam does much good......in fact the entire thing sounds like passing the buck. No wonder they won't "name names"...they would get thier asses sued.....

[TapitsGal]

At least they're attempting to start to look into this but they could be doing more to prevent it.

[Catalina]

What? They raced somewhere else first......and because that "somewhere else" doesn't do pre race checks as well as Churchill.....they broke down later AT Churchill? Doesn't sound like Churchill's pre race exam does much good......in fact the entire thing sounds like passing the buck. No wonder they won't "name names"...they would get thier asses sued.....

With not all tracks being open at the same time, it would stand to reason that "regional" horses (and I use that term losely) would move from one meet to the next. So while what, eight horses from that other unnamed track broke down during their subsequent race at Churchill Downs, how many from that "other" track went on to race at CD without any problem? The two May casualties that I looked up were at track A prior to racing at CD, both at track B prior to racing at track A. So, does the problem lie with track A, or with track B - or did I by chance look at the only two oddballs that don't fit the pattern? I'm all in favor of making things safer, but shouldn't there to be more to this than merely where they had run previously?

[Catalina]

What 2 horses did you look up?

Bulldog Legend and Woodbourne

[gravano]

I don't think they were talking about Keeneland given the following quote:

it was possible the venue (which she declined to name) where the horses raced previously might not have had the same level of pre- and post-race scrutiny of its horse population that exists in Kentucky

Read more on BloodHorse.com: http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...#ixzz23qS3UZ6k

[Catalina]

I don't think they were talking about Keeneland given the following quote:

it was possible the venue (which she declined to name) where the horses raced previously might not have had the same level of pre- and post-race scrutiny of its horse population that exists in Kentucky

Even if not, were the horses that came from whatever the track was the only horses that came from that track? How many came from "that track" and ran at CD and didn't suffer a fatal injury?

[gravano]

Even if not, were the horses that came from whatever the track was the only horses that came from that track? How many came from "that track" and ran at CD and didn't suffer a fatal injury?

Yeah. I didn't like the way the responsibility seemed shirked on some nameless track. Seemed like an incredibly half baked assessment.

[gravano]

I agree. The conclusion is startlingly dubious, arrogant and demonstrates the serious continual problem racing has with accountability in general. At the same time I'm glad to see steps taken to improve the safety. So I walk away with mixed feelings.

[Rick1323]

I agree. The conclusion is startlingly dubious, arrogant and demonstrates the serious continual problem racing has with accountability in general. At the same time I'm glad to see steps taken to improve the safety. So I walk away with mixed feelings.

I agree. In general how can anything Churchill says be trusted?

[Catalina]

It sort of begs the question of where this attempt to reduce fatalities is headed next. Forbidding horses from "that track" to come in and race at CD?

[Rick1323]

It's the Ky Horse Racing Commission, not Churchill, though. Specifically Scollay, working for the commission, who says the only thing in the article that makes no sense. Particularly on the heels of them implementing measures at Churchill which they stated reduced the deaths from 8 in May to 2 in June.

I was always suspicious of how much infulence CDI had over both Scollay and the KHRC.....now I don't have be suspicious. How else could Scollay come to such and irrational conclusion unless CDI was either infulencing her or paying her outright for such nonsense.

[5k-claim]

I was always suspicious of how much infulence CDI had over both Scollay and the KHRC.....now I don't have be suspicious. How else could Scollay come to such and irrational conclusion unless CDI was either infulencing her or paying her outright for such nonsense.

It is hard to disagree with this.

It appears that members of the KHRC are now outfitted with little tags for their collars in the event of getting lost that read, "If found, please contact Churchill Downs Incorporated."

Did this little skit pass the buck away from CDI and deflect criticism? If so, then (corporate) mission accomplished.

.

[gravano]

I thought it was poor that CDI sent in their emissary to award the Arlington Million trophy rather than Jessica Pacheko, but whatever.

[Indychase]

I agree that the above quote indicates that the track is NOT Keeneland, but frankly, Keeneland is basically the only track that makes sense.

And then the two that Catalina was able to dig up came from Keeneland.

Why Keeneland? Because the horse population from Keeneland heads over to Churchill for the Derby and at least the early part of that meet. And the horses are going from a synthetic surface to a dirt one.

So the logic when looking at a commonality of a horse population coming from a particular track to Churchill wouldn't have anything at all to do with any pre-race inspections at the OTHER track -- that ball's totally in Churchill's court to have done before those horses took their last races over Churchill's surface. What's logical is that horsemen had a difficult time adjusting their horses to handle going from one surface to the other without injury.

Which wouldn't make this issue any kind of "blame" issue for the tracks or even the horsemen, but instead working to see what training methods were successful and unsuccessful in transitioning the horses over without injury.

Someone would have to explain to me how Scollay's comments make any sense at all. As I see it, I can only think it was intentionally misleading the reader into thinking it was another track instead of one in Kentucky (specifically Keeneland).

You're jumping to conclusions. First of all, since we don't know the names of all those who broke down you don't know if these two are in the subset she's talking about. Also, she didn't say she was referring to the most recent race before the breakdown -- Bulldog Legend and Woodbourne also both raced at Gulfstream before arriving in Kentucky. Another who was vanned off was Laconic, who took the same path -- GP - KEE - CD

Auspicious Risk, Whistlin Sam, Big Cal, and Saratoga Red, who were all vanned off without expressly saying they broke down, had run at OP prior to running at CD (none ran at KEE). None have returned to the worktab, so they may have been put down for all we know.

These are also only the van offs in the afternoon -- we don't know who broke down in the morning.

[Indychase]

No, she says that it was at the track immediately prior to racing at Churchill. Unless you think this could mean where they raced 2 races/meets prior to the fatal race/meet, which makes even less sense?

"commonality to that population of horses in that they had participated in racing at a specific venue before coming to Churchill."

Regardless, how would pre-race inspections at any other track be responsible for horses breaking down two races later at Churchill?

As for knowing the other 6 horses, we just need to find out some more names.

Interestingly, I found another article where Scollay says there were 6 fatalities -- not 8 -- at Churchill in May: http://horsesinthesouth.com/blog/ind...sk-racehorses/

You are inserting immediately into her statement. No where does she say she's referring to their most recent race -- just that they all ran at the same place before coming to race (and dying) at CD. That could be Oaklawn, where those 4 horses I listed ran before shipping in to CD, or GP, where the two bad breakdown/known fatalities ran. We're only guessing from her statement, but it seems pretty clear it's not KEE, no matter how much you may want to blame Polytrack.

[Indychase]

The only 4 confirmed fatalities for the CD meet are Woodbourne, Bulldog Legend, TTutti Buona Gente (last raced at FG before CD) and Mr Producer, so we're all just guessing, and since CD/Kentucky are not forthcoming with any more information, there's not point in talking about it further, I guess.

[Rick1323]

We don't know enough to make any sense of the claim. If there is something concrete, let's hope she has at least let the Trainer population know so that they might make some changes in how they transition horses from the offending track to CD. As it stands now, it provides nothing positive to anyone.

[Indychase]

I was right -- she was referring to Oaklawn.

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...ld-be-enhanced