The Last Prince Of Wales At Fort Erie?

There really is no optimism going on regarding a 2013 season at Fort Erie. However, I don't think there is anyone who believes that the fight to stay open is over either. In fact, the whole horse racing industry in Ontario still are clinging on hope that the decision to end the slots at racetrack program will be overturned. It isn't like the current clowns who are running Ontario into the ground haven't done about faces before (but usually for political gain only) Take the cancelled Mississauga power plant, which will cost Ontario tax payers over $180 million for example. That about face was all about saving Liberal Party of Ontario seats, the problem with the slots program is that even if the Liberal Party were to reverse the decision, they would not be able to gain any future votes out of it. They've lost many votes for life over the decision to end slots. I still believe that either way, there are going to be a lot more large embarrassment in store for the Liberal Party when the Ontario Ombudsman starts blowing the whistle.

Back to Fort Erie. The track was already on life support before the announcement to end slots was made. I believe the only hope for The Fort is if a new buyer comes along and without slots or other forms of gambling, the likelihood is very remote. It does have the possibility to become a training centre, but with the anti-horse racing minority government that is in place, there is a major possibility that too much harm will occur and a never go back situation may result.

At this time, I can't see the track being plowed down to rubble either. It costs money to do that, and upon losing its number one employer, Fort Erie industrial or residential land won't be sought after when it comes to new developments. So there is a possibility that Fort Erie will stand empty until the next election, when hopefully, the new government will come in and help reopen the joint.

Anyway, it is a shame that a minority government can come in and kill an industry. It is hard not to blame the other parties for allowing it to happen, but the reality is that neither cared enough to make it a worthwhile issue.

History time:

Did you know that 61 years ago, Fort Erie Racetrack was involved in a huge race fixing scandal? The majority of the jockey colony was either ruled off, suspended or fined. There was even a Lady In Black, a Mr. Fix It, and a Mr. Big Money. Sounds like movie material.

Interesting that back then a jockey, Robert Wankmueller, was arrested for defrauding the public. Imagine that? When did the rules change that defrauding the public by trainers now results in a $300 fine and/or a warning?


Handicapping Time:

I threw some mud against the wall this morning, in an attempt to find the Prince Of Wales winner. I like Dixie Strike. She came back nicely to run a decent troubled and wide third in the Queen's Plate. I think the switch from poly to will not bother her as much as some of the others in the field. My long shot contender is Ultimate Destiny, a horse who seems to be peaking. You can't discount the bottom horse either, Roger Attfield trained Colleen's Sailor. Corey Nakatani must have felt some potential in the Plate for him to take another plane ride and dust off his passport for the Prince of Wales. As for the probable favorite, Irish Mission, her breeding screams out grass and poly, she has also run quite a few good races in a row. Breeding and bounce factor and lack of betting value makes her a very good pitch this afternoon.

ORC's Whipping Rule Needs To Be Tweaked

Due to his stretch ride in the Woodbine Oaks, winning jockey Alex Solis received a $6,000 fine for whipping Oaks winner Irish Mission excessively in the stretch. Sounds like quite a fine for jockey, but the Oaks had a purse of $500,000. The winner's portion was $300,000, of which $30,000 went to the Solis ($7,500 of that most probably went to Solis' jockey agent). Second prize is only a third of these amounts.

First, I want to comment Woodbine and the ORC to have whipping rules in place. They've even made strides when it comes to using less abusive whips. But this whole scenario just doesn't seem right or proper.

Before I go on, watch the race:


You can't see the violation because Solis whipped with his left hand, but I'm sure the head on film left no doubt in the minds of the stewards. The point of watching the race was to show that it was a very close race, and sustained momentum seemed to win it for Irish Mission, probably brought on by constant whipping.

The reason for the ORC rule in the first place was to protect the horse and to help improve the public perception of horse racing. Both are great reasons. Though some have argued that whipping should be banned completely, and some go as far as saying whipping does not make a horse go faster, I think the latter might be true of some horses, but many horses wind up with improved results due to their need to be constantly reminded to keep their mind on business.

Not that I'm against eliminating the whip or just using placebo whips, that is not the issue here, the issue is an equal playing field, whether you are a bettor or horsemen or jockey.

And it is a race like Oaks where my sense of fairness gets carved a new one. If you are a bettor, you want your jockey to excessively hit if it is the difference between cashing or ripping up your ticket. Same thing applies if you are an owner, trainer, or groom. Excessive whipping is not something a horse can get DQed over. Purses aren't redistributed because of it. The fines are in place to act as a deterrent to try to prevent jockeys from slashing too much. And yes, repeated violations can also lead to more income loss down the road via more fines and then suspensions. Solis hasn't been here long enough to have repeat offenses though.

The point here is that the fine wasn't big enough. And for those who wagered on the second place finisher, and those who were involved in the ownership or training of the second place finisher and even the third place finisher have to just feel like suckers if they give this situation any thought at all. It isn't right that a jockey can decide to gamble on a fine in order to win a race, and there should be no incentive to do so.

I don't blame Solis here at all, he was playing by the rules as currently administered. Only unambitious people might say that they don't want to work harder to make more money because they pay a higher tax rate. Solis pulled out all the punches he could to win, and he wound up with more net money than he would have if he decided to not risk getting fined. He didn't do anything illegal either. And that is why jockeys need to lose their entire portion of the purse in the future.