seriously unfair scratch rule at Parx

[Blue feather]

I recently found out about a scratch rule at Parx that has potentially has cost me dearly. I entered in a turf race at Parx. My backup plan was to enter at Presque Isle 3 days later if race was taken off turf at parx. The race was taken off turf at Parx and I did enter at Presque Isle where I would have been first or second morning line favorite. I w as then made aware that I was given a four day penalty for scratching at Parx. I was then forced to scratch at Presque Isle. Apparently, the rule is if they take race off turf and you scratch, you get 4 days penalty if the first race is listed as a fast dirt track. There are so many things illogical about this rule I don't know where to start.Why
should I be penalized when they took race off turf. Why does rule take effect only if first race is listed as fast on dirt. Since none of these circumstances where a result of my decisions, with the exception of scratching my turf only horse .I feel very powerless.

[ct2346]

You should secretly be thankful that they took the race off. The turf course at Parx should be avoided at all costs.

I know its little consolation, but the ship to PID is also a bear. Hopefully its not a PA bred and you can go to Laurel and a nice turf course?

[wilf]

There is no way you can be prevented from running anywhere by any track unless you are on a "list" such as vet , starter or you are in need of a timed workout. You should simply not have shown up and got a fine .Then you could have run at Presque Isle as you would already have been in the entries. You should have already known about the rules beforehand and played your hand as it unfolded.

[Blue feather]

If I was irresponsible enough not to show up for a race, I likely would not know the rules.
I believe the majority of trainers who have raced at Parx do not know this rule. I think most trainers would never think to ask if they would get days for scratching out of a race that was taken off the turf. Just like they wouldn't ask if they get penalized for scratching for weather related track changes. Its assumed. I challenge anyone to find another track with a similar turf scratch rule.

[TJ]

If I was irresponsible enough not to show up for a race, I likely would not know the rules.
I believe the majority of trainers who have raced at Parx do not know this rule. I think most trainers would never think to ask if they would get days for scratching out of a race that was taken off the turf. Just like they wouldn't ask if they get penalized for scratching for weather related track changes. Its assumed. I challenge anyone to find another track with a similar turf scratch rule.

Hi Blue,
Seems like there may be some competition going on with other venues and they are trying to prevent their horsemen/women from running elsewhere. These rule changes are posted on the Parx overnight. TJ
* * * ATTENTION HORSEMEN * * *
Changes have been made effective immediately: (1) All entries, same and different owner, will be coupled and one will need to be preferred at time of entry. (2) We are now accepting MTO entries in turf races (3) The scratch penalties have been reduced to 7 days and 4 days for track conditional scratches.
* * * ATTENTION HORSEMEN * * *
Effective immediately, anyone looking to run out of town must get permission from the Racing Secretary prior to entering. Horses without permission may be barred from re-entering the stable area.

[ageecee]

I would just enter any horse at Parx and scratch and do that about 15 times just to piss them off. Of course you would need about 10-15 different horses so your not entering the same horse every time.

[Blue feather]

Thanks TJ. I did not see that. It is still a little confusing not to specify "off turf" aspect of rule but, there it is. It is my understanding the rule is there to address short fields if turf is off. I still think it is an unfair rule that doesn't address the issue. It penalizes the horse that is strictly a turf horse. Horses that can run on both have incentive not to scratch because of smaller field. Does 4 day penalty really push a trainer to run in order to avoid it? I'd love to see what the numbers say. Are fields larger after implementation of rule?

[FOS]

hi Blue Feather

Thanks TJ. I did not see that. It is still a little confusing not to specify "off turf" aspect of rule but, there it is. It is my understanding the rule is there to address short fields if turf is off. I still think it is an unfair rule that doesn't address the issue. It penalizes the horse that is strictly a turf horse. Horses that can run on both have incentive not to scratch because of smaller field. Does 4 day penalty really push a trainer to run in order to avoid it? I'd love to see what the numbers say. Are fields larger after implementation of rule?

Horseracing/racetrack ownership/management etc etc etc seem most often to be (to my way of thinking anyway) VERY competitive undertakings.

Might be wise to rethink your use of the word unfair (and/or fair for that matter). For the most isn't this largely a game of competing to exist/be viable, even more so than being profitable? That said, is it fair to suggest that some rules implemented in Pa were to deal with out of staters, often New York trainers/horses, taking a van ride to Pa in an effort to beat-up the locals and grab what some perceived as easy purse money (arguably often a whole lot easier than New York)? Apparently a real concern in Pa.

Whether it's about owning racehorses, owning racetracks, or whatever...it may be an understatement to suggest it's a VERY competitive game/industry, and racetracks are trying to redefine the envelope (and implement rules accordingly) to favor themselves, and horsemen/women that continue to be loyal to the home court. Simultaneously, many tracks (ala Parx) would like to stave off out of towners who'd like to ship in, run for what may be perceived as relatively easy money, then ship out. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

It's a fluid dynamic, and unfair and/or fair are rarely words of choice used by those playing hardball, who write, implement and enforce the rules.

Those who know and understand the rules, likely have a leg up when it comes to using them to their best advantage. You too can do it.

Best to you re your racing endeavors. May racing luck be with you.

Respectdully

[Jessi P]

FOS I need a "LIKE" button for your post! EXACTLY!

[Sysonby]

Thumbs up to FOS!

[Blue feather]

FOS, interesting view. Let me poke some holes in this viewpoint in this particular incident. I am a breeder/owner/trainer basd in PA. I was unable to run my homebred in PA 3 days after scratching because of this rule. Another horse that shipped in from NY and scratched from the same race ,ran at Belmont yesterday just 2 days after scratching(ran 3rd). If the point of the rule is to deter horses from shipping in thus leaving PA money in PA, it doesn't appear to be working. At least not in this case. Obviously this rule is not enforced consistantly. If "unfair" is an inappropriate discription, how about "inequitable". I welcome contrarian views but this view is illogical, again, in this instance.

[FOS]

hi Blue feather

FOS, interesting view. Let me poke some holes in this viewpoint in this particular incident.

Why try to poke holes in any perspective/viewpoint, when a trip to the racing office may supply you with the information/answers you would like/need to know. This is about your concerns, and your need to get the answers, not opinion/viewpoint, but answers. Who better to get the answers from than those who wrote/enforce the rules.

I am a breeder/owner/trainer basd in PA. I was unable to run my homebred in PA 3 days after scratching because of this rule. Another horse that shipped in from NY and scratched from the same race ,ran at Belmont yesterday just 2 days after scratching(ran 3rd).

If that's the case, and you feel your horse was the equal of, or better than, the one that raced (and finished 3rd) in New York, why not try New York? It may be the deep end of the pool, but why not test the waters? If that's not a Plan A, maybe it could be a Plan B...maybe even a plan C. Often, racing is about options available .

Racing offices know (or at least should know) the horses on the grounds, and are fielding inquiry after inquiry, and question after question from trainers and owners all the time...looking for particular races for particular horses. It's likely not easy trying to satisfy everybody.

Turf, dirt, 2-year-olds, 3-year-olds, 3-year-olds and up, colts, fillies, short, long, etc. Maiden Claiming, MSW, Allowance, Claiming, AOC, stakes. open, state-bred, restricted etc etc etc. Everybody wants/needs want they believe they want/need. Racing offices have to deal with that day in day out...as do trainers/owners. I'm sure it's not easy, not even pretty. Sometimes it can get downright ugly. Often it's like a high traffic two way street, often there seems to be a traffic jam. Sometimes it seems like it's a one way street, and seemingly never the twain shall meet. Then all of a sudden, likely when least expected, ...the twain shall meet....Exhale .

If the point of the rule is to deter horses from shipping in thus leaving PA money in PA, it doesn't appear to be working.

I don't know that it's THE point of the rule, but arguably it's A point of the rule.

I've no doubt that it's sometimes deterred some trainers/owners. Maybe not all the time, but certainly sometimes. Knowing your options, and maybe having a Plan A, a backup Plan B (if/when possible), maybe even a Plan C...may relieve some of your __________ (you fill in the blank) .

Think about it...when a horse is training well, and ready to run...the perfect spot (is anything perfect?) may not be there to be had (for any number of reasons), when you want/need it...and knowing/understanding available options may make the difference, and may save the day (if you will).

At least not in this case. Obviously this rule is not enforced consistantly. If "unfair" is an inappropriate discription, how about "inequitable". I welcome contrarian views but this view is illogical, again, in this instance.

You may be dead on correct in your assessment. Maybe it seems unfair, maybe it is inequitable but why guess/speculate/be upset...that seemingly accomplishes nothing. Why not go into the racing office and have an uninterrupted communication/conversation with the racing secretary/powers that be? If that's easier said than done, why not ask to schedule/set up a meeting with the powers that be/racing secretary? And be prepared with the specific questions you want/need answered. Maybe a quality communication will resolve/answer some, if not all, of your concerns/questions.

It's worked for Nike...Just do it. Maybe it'll work for you...Just do it. I know you can .

Best to ya.

Respectfully