In the third part our new series asking key questions about horse racing’s future, Daniel Ross speaks to trainers’ representative Tina Bond, president of the New York Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association (NYTHA)
Few would argue against the proposition that economic realities have made training that much more difficult. Indeed, a common refrain from trainers quitting the sport in recent years has been concern over the rising costs of everything from workers’ compensation to hay, straw and feed.
Without the financial gains from training improving uniformly across the board, what does the future hold for the nation’s horsemen and women?
In part two of our series, breeder Craig Bernick said that rapid consolidation towards the top might be combatted through a revision to the racing calendar, including a pared-back stakes program, and the imposition of a stallion cap.
Now our series continues with trainers’ representative Tina Bond.
As president of the New York Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association (NYTHA), Tina Bond (left) has roots reaching far into the sport. Her husband is trainer James Bond, and together, they own and manage Song Hill Thoroughbreds, a 100-acre farm in upstate New York where they keep broodmares, weanlings, yearlings and layups.
While many of Tina Bond’s remarks had a New York flavour, they are far from parochial. When she describes the economic climate as tough for all the nation’s trainers but especially so for the smaller operators, for example, few anywhere would disagree.
“To do it right, the costs keep growing every year and it’s probably close to $80,000 a year to keep a horse in New York,” Bond said.
“That’s a lot. You’ve got to find the owners who can support that, and the smaller trainers have a harder problem with that. It’s a numbers game.”
More recently, Bond says she has seen HISA’s financial costs – New York currently contributes around $4m from purses and another $4m from the tracks, she said – as a disproportionate burden on the minnows of the training ranks.
Huge impact
“It’s a federally mandated program, but it’s not federally funded,” said Bond. “That has a huge impact on what we can offer in terms of purses.”
But where are the answers? Unlike some who see purse supplements as an Achilles heel of the sport’s funding structure, Bond sees them as necessary to the “racing ecosystem,” and a lifeline to the smaller struggling tracks that provide a vital venue for middle to lower-grade horses.
While the industry would be wise to focus more on becoming self-sufficient, “it’s not going to be an easy thing to do,” she said.
“I think maybe the industry could stand on its own. But I think the way it’s set up right now just in New York, there’s no way we could do without the [video lottery terminal] VLT monies,” she added.
Genuine self-sufficiency would require tracks to become more industrious and more aggressive about maintaining a healthy and busy racing schedule. “When they choose to cut days or they choose to minimize their schedules, that impacts the owners and the trainers greatly,” said Bond. “The tracks have to give trainers enough opportunities to make money to go forward.”
Bigger slice
That, and a redistribution of signal monies, to provide a bigger slice to a region’s horsemen and women, she added. “It would be great if we could wave a magic wand and could reconfigure what we could get from the ADWs.”
Rather than a magic wand, however, such a fix might take legislative intervention either at the state or federal level.
Consolidation of horses among the top trainers is another of racing’s banes, said Bond. But although Wayne Lukas may have been the pioneer of this style of operating, Bond does not criticise the legendary trainer.
“He didn’t hurt the game,” she said. “He had 40 horses at a track; he didn’t have 200 horses at a track. That’s why he had so many assistant trainers that went on and did so well.
Harder for smaller trainer
“The way it’s set up today, it’s harder for the smaller trainer,” she added. “First of all, they don’t have the opportunities that bigger trainers have, and if you look at it, the super trainers are the ones winning all the purse money. So, if you look at it economically, what are the little guys supposed to do?”
Stall limits would certainly help, said Bond. “You’d definitely see an increase in field size which would lead to an increase in handle.”
But for that system to work, she added, it would need to be strictly enforced nationwide at all tracks, probably even training centers.
More broadly, Bond sees all sorts of innovations and opportunities for the sport to raise revenues that would trickle down into the trainer’s wallet. “It just costs so much [to train], somehow we’ve got to figure a revenue stream that goes back to the owners, so that they can continue with us going forward,” she said. “So that maybe they can buy more horses.”
Owners being able to show advertisements on their silks is one idea. Corporate sponsorship of races would be another – provided a good portion of these revenues go back to the purses.
“I always think of revenue streams that we can do to bring more economic stimulation to the game,” Bond said. “And that’s what we need to do, to tell you the truth. Innovate.”
• In part four of this series, TRC speaks to Corey Johnsen
• Visit the NYTHA website
Part 2: ‘Greed is a bad word, but that’s kind of what it is’ – Craig Bernick (breeder)
Part 1: ‘Right now, there are way too many Grade 1 races’ – Marshall Gramm (owner)
View the latest TRC Global Rankings for horses / jockeys / trainers / sires