Declaration time – anomalies around the world
Just when I thought that things in the administrative world could not get any worse, they did, though it took a trip to South Africa to discover the elements of an entry and declaration system that, at face value, makes any problems faced by European racehorse owners and trainers look like a little local difficulty.
Howard Wright (European Trainer - issue 14 - Summer 2006)
JUST when I thought that things in the administrative world could not get any worse, they did, though it took a trip to South Africa to discover the elements of an entry and declaration system that, at face value, makes any problems faced by European racehorse owners and trainers look like a little local difficulty.
Having researched the major European racing nations, and thrown in a smattering of the topmost events in North America, Asia and Australia, I thought I had a handle on where the best and worst value was to be had, from an entry and declaration perspective.
Then I met Mike Wankling, who recently relocated from Singapore to his native South Africa to take up the newly created post as manager of handicapping and race planning for the country’s National Horseracing Authority.
“You think there are some early closers around the world, but what about having most of the biggest races wrapped up ten days ahead of the race,” he says. That’s everything done: final declarations, jockeys and draw, the lot. And that’s for the whole programme, usually of eight races, on the particular big-raceday.
“We have about ten big days around the country, and every one has an early declaration for the entire card,” Wankling explains. “The only reason for a horse to be withdrawn after that stage is on veterinary grounds, and perhaps surprisingly we have very few of those. Maybe it’s because the horse can’t then run for a period of 14 days, except with the stewards’ permission.
“I’ve heard the complaints from British trainers, about changes to the going, over the proposed introduction of 48-hour declarations, but we don’t have a culture of people taking out their horses over ground conditions in South Africa.”
With race conditions for major handicaps that allow Wankling to add discretionary weight penalties for winners – but not for other horses that might show improved form – he is happy with his part of the bargain. But while he accepts the need to market and promote the big events, he is not happy with such a length of time between declaration and race day.
“In Hong Kong, for instance, they declare on the Thursday for their international races on the Sunday,” he says. “In Singapore they do the same for the Singapore Airlines Cup, and having declared in the morning, they print the race cards, with owners’ colours, by four o’clock in the afternoon. I’d certainly like to see us cut down the declaration time in South Africa.”
Strange as it may seem, the reason for South Africa’s uncommonly early system for major events can be traced to the country’s printing industry, though the original decision was taken back in the 1970s, with the introduction of exotic bets such as the four-race jackpot.
Derek Wiid, now business development executive for South Africa’s racing and betting company Phumelela, recalls the time when jockeys were not declared until the day of racing, and punters would laboriously enter the names against horses that had been declared two days previously.
Wiid explains: “When the exotic bets were brought in, punters objected to the late changes. They said they wanted extra time to think about their bets, because they were more difficult than straight win bets. So that began the process for earlier declarations.”
However, the big driver came from the demands of the printing and distribution business, which still also explains why South Africa’s everyday races are declared on Tuesdays (for racing on the following Friday, Saturday, Sunday and Monday) and Thursdays (for Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday hence), to produce an array of time lapses that vary between three and seven days.
The relevant information about runners, draw and jockeys is generated by the National Racing Bureau, which takes entries in the way that Weatherbys does in Britain and France-Galop in France, for publication in the official race card and the main form guide, Computaform.
Without a very early declaration stage, it would be impossible to get the information to punters, on and off course, in time to generate appropriate levels of betting turnover, Wiid says.
He explains: “Both Computaform and the race card have small print runs, which are handled individually in each city for racing in Johannesburg and Durban, and sent between the two, which is a five-hour journey by car, while Cape Town does its own printing, and sends them eight hours to the other main cities.
“But on top of that, we have to send the race books from Johannesburg to the rest of Gauteng province, which can be 350km away on difficult farm roads. Distribution is a nightmare.”
The form guide might be Computaform, but transmission and distribution of the printed word has yet to reach the computer age in South Africa – and several other places around the world, come to that.
North America might have had men on the moon, and the declaration system is the shortest on the planet – usually 48 or 72 hours from entry to race, as individual racing secretaries ring trainers to fill races and write substitute events if the original comes up short - but US race fans generally have to go to the track to pick up copies of Daily Racing Form, so vast is the distribution area.
At the other end of the entry and declaration spectrum is Scandinavia, which has much less racing than South Africa, but Norway and Sweden still get their full lists of runners, riders and draw in the bag six days before racing, so that race cards can be printed and distributed to faraway places in good time for punters to pore over their exotic bets.
Denmark manages to get by on a five-day declaration system, but throughout Scandinavia there are generally only a minimal number of absentees from the published cards.
Elsewhere, among the main racing nations of Europe, the time-lag between entry, declaration and running is usually shorter, except – and there always seem to be an exception in this topic – for Group and Listed races.
Yet there are as many systems as there are countries, and the reasons for the differences are often more to do with working practice within the relevant racing authority than practicality within the racing community.
Outside the Pattern system – but sometimes within it – Britain revolves round a five-day entry system, which, like most changes now taken for granted, caused consternation and furore among the training fraternity when it was introduced.
But – yes, there has to be a but – entries for races on Fridays and Sundays are made six days ahead, because Weatherbys only takes overnight declarations on a Sunday, so entries for Friday racing are made the previous Saturday, and Sunday racing involves a 48-hour declaration stage, so entries are made on a Monday.
Weatherbys takes no entries on Tuesdays or Sundays. On the other hand, the Irish Turf Club office is closed on a Saturday, takes no entries on a Sunday, and runs an entry system covering four, five and six days.
As for declarations, British owners, trainers and punters have had to keep on their toes. The general overnight declaration stage, which enables the runners, riders and draw to be printed in newspapers on the day of racing, has been gradually extended to 48 hours for Group 1 races, Sunday race meetings, all-weather track racing during the winter period, and some of the major handicaps, such as the Grand National.
Group 1 races, Sundays and ‘heritage’ handicaps were brought forward to provide extra time for marketing and promotion, either through the media or by way of ante-post betting.
But all this could soon be academic, if Britain introduces a universal 48-hour declaration from July 1, as has been accepted in principle. Universal, that is, for Flat racing. Jump racing will be the exception. There had to be an exception.
France does things differently. France takes no entries on a Saturday or a Sunday, which means the entry cycle varies between seven, eight and nine days. However, there is a 72-hour declaration stage, followed by a 48-hour cancellation, which enables Paris-Turf to print the French race cards at all manner of times through the week, to the confusion of those infrequent overseas visitors used to seeing the day’s events laid out before them.
Germany does things even more differently than Britain, Ireland and France, since it runs a five-day declaration system, with a four-day cancellation stage that produces the final fields.
However, the Direktorium operates a very strict entry system – all regular races close on a Tuesday, so that its official racing calendar can be printed the same day, even though it is dated two days later. Very easy to remember, but it does produce a variable period from entry to race day of between eight and 14 days.
Of course, that’s not counting Group and Listed anomalies piled on normal anomalies, such as Cologne’s Winterfavoriten for two-year-olds, which will be run late this autumn for horses entered in November 2005, and a Krafeld juvenile race that closed in March for a September renewal. The racecourses and the Direktorium make the rules.
And so to Italy, which has taken the single-day entry stage to even greater lengths than Germany. Italy’s chosen day of the week is Thursday, when there is generally no racing.
This means that the time-lag between putting a horse into a race and getting it to the races, after the universal 48-hour declaration, can be as short as nine days and as long as 15. Why? Please ask UNIRE, though history suggests that the answer may not be immediately forthcoming.
As if this catalogue of differences is not confusing enough, no mention has yet been made of supplementary entries and the Pattern-race system, which throws up a myriad of dates, as some countries seek to boost prize-money from early cash contributions from breeders and owners, and others strive to bring entry as close as possible to the day of racing, so as to ensure that the best possible field gathers.
Mindblowing is a word that comes to mind, especially when you factor in the need to verify entries, which means that Irish horses running in Britain have to be notified a day ahead of the home contingent, and vice versa, and that France-Galop asks for details of intended runners from overseas to be dispatched to the Paris HQ eight days before entry, so that the information can be loaded on to the main database and race weights checked.
Mindblowing, that is, until you speak to James Fry, who heads the trainers’ service at the International Racing Bureau in Newmarket.
The IRB and Weatherbys are authorised to take and make entries from Britain, but the commercial enterprise that Fry oversees has the added value of leading their clients by the hand through the minefield of entry and declaration, with a service of going reports and form guides generally pointing clients farther in the right direction.
How does Fry cope with the plethora of variations on a theme?
“I keep it up here,” he says, knowingly, tapping the back of his head. “I always try to instil self discipline. I start a job and will see it through. Perhaps I don’t delegate enough, but it comes from years and years of practice, though I still wake up in the middle of the night and think, ‘Did I do that?’ or ‘I must remember to do that tomorrow.’
“We get a lot of help from the trainers and particularly their secretaries. Some of them leave things a little late, but that’s why the clock in the office is always five minutes fast!”
So that’s the secret, which explains why former trainer Toby Balding sums up: “Weatherbys and the IRB do a great job, if you leave it to them.
“The people who get into trouble are usually the ones who try to do overseas entries and declarations themselves, and don’t read the small print.”
The growing pattern - how and why new races have been added
Very few ideas for radical change in horseracing are either universally popular or accepted at the first time of asking. And that’s if a single authority is involved. When a group of nations, some of which have a history of antipathy, bordering on hostility, towards each other’s proposals, come together to examine a programme of alterations, the chances of a speedy and amicable resolution are even slimmer.
Howard Wright (European Trainer - issue 7 - Spring 2004)
Very few ideas for radical change in horseracing are either universally popular or accepted at the first time of asking. And that’s if a single authority is involved. When a group of nations, some of which have a history of antipathy, bordering on hostility, towards each other’s proposals, come together to examine a programme of alterations, the chances of a speedy and amicable resolution are even slimmer.
Something rare happened, therefore, over the last quarter of 2003, which led to January’s announcement by the European Pattern Committee of a greatly expanded programme of Group 1 and 2 races for fillies in 2004. The bare facts are that three separate layers of opportunity confined to higher-grade fillies of three years and upwards have been created and will be contested this year.
As far as the top two Pattern groups are concerned, they break down into three distance categories - a mile, ten furlongs and a mile and a half. Furthermore, the aim has been achieved to provide a steady flow of opportunities, approximately one a month, across Europe from the end of May to the beginning or end of October in the shorter-distance brackets, and from the beginning of July in the longest. In addition, the authorities in Britain and Ireland have sought to build on the framework by enhancing opportunities just below the very highest grade, so that Ireland will have two more Group 3 races, and Britain will have five, in keeping with the overall strength of its current horse population. Behind the creation of what amounts to a pattern within the Pattern, confined solely to fillies and mares, lies an unprecedented intent to do something about a growing European problem, and a remarkable determination to do it quickly.
No time to let the grass grow here, seemed to be the underlying thought, even though caution was raised in some quarters. The ultimate objective was simple: to produce a programme of races throughout the year that would act as encouragement to owners of higher-grade older fillies to keep them in training in Europe. The lure of the US dollar has grown ever more powerful, and with prize-money stacking up high, turf horses have exited Europe with damaging regularity. Cash led the call for colts; lack of suitable opportunities appeared to be a more dominant force for taking away fillies. It didn’t take a genius to fire the European Pattern Committee into thinking that something had to be done. But what? Give the fillies something to aim at, that’s what. And the 2004 programme is the resulting magnet.
Already the radical steps appear to have had an effect. Russian Rhythm, Soviet Song and Favourable Terms in Britain; Six Perfections and Nebraska Tornado in France; Echoes In Eternity from Godolphin: they have all stayed in training as four-year-olds, and the new programme has been cited as part of the persuasion. Each one is out of the top drawer, but in any other year, it is doubtful if all six would have been kept for another season.
But 2004 will not be ‘any other year.’ Jason Morris, racing director at Horse Racing Ireland, is understandably delighted at the response. “This was precisely the aim of the initiative,” he says, adding that the newly elevated Irish races should draw the horses, and bring in the crowds. The reasoning of Godolphin racing manager Simon Crisford is impossible to fault. “It’s good news for owners of fillies that have sufficient quality to compete against each other in the top class,” he says. “It has certainly encouraged us to keep Echoes In Eternity in Europe rather than send her to the US, because it makes it easier to plan her programme. She can go to America later in the season.” Favourable Terms is perhaps the least well known of the six named here, but her career lends as much credibility to the new programme as any other. Owner-bred by Maktoum Al Maktoum, she did not race until May last year, and ended the season having won three out of five starts for Sir Michael Stoute, including the Group 2 Matron Stakes at Leopardstown. She would have been a prime candidate for the paddocks in any other year, but it bears repeating that this is not ‘any other year.’ For one thing, the Matron Stakes now has Group 1 status, and who would bet against Favourable Terms attempting a follow-up, now that the opportunities are there to test her rate of improvement? The decision that Six Perfections, for one, would stay in training as a four-year-old was made public within hours of her winning the Breeders Cup Mile.
The European Pattern Committee had set the late-October international meeting at Santa Anita as its first deadline to tell the bloodstock world the bare bones at least of its plan for fillies. They reasoned that owners of the fillies they were targeting, especially those with permanent racing and breeding careers in the US in mind, would be making their own plans by then. Their urgency apparently worked, for trainer Pascal Bary said at the time: “It’s wonderful news for me, my staff and the racing public that the Niarchos family has decided to keep Six Perfections in training, and no doubt the changes to the programme were taken into consideration.” That the framework for the changes was announced in October at all was a departure from normal practice. The European Pattern Committee usually gets its individual thoughts together in the autumn, to be crystallised at the annual meeting in December or early-January. Last year, the committee decided in July that it would set up a sub-group to look at the fillies’ programme, with a view to reporting to the annual meeting in January 2004. They thought there was room for improvement, especially among the older age bracket and particularly in the early part of the season. The sub-group met within two months, and suddenly the mood for change picked up a head of steam, with the French and Irish teams leading the charge, and Britain erring on the side of caution with a plea for a phased introduction of the radical alterations. By the middle of September it had been decided that tinkering with a few races was not enough; there should be a greatly enhanced programme, especially in Groups 1 and 2, and that it if it was to happen at all, it should happen immediately.
The European Pattern Committee met in London a month later, just ahead of the Breeders Cup meeting, and a raft of changes were agreed, taking in all three groups and the trio of distance categories. The Group 1 and 2 details were made public in the second week of December, and the die was cast. In less than six months the mood of the committee had gone from exploratory to explosion. The new races and upgrades have been given three years to prove their worth. If any race does not meet the required ratings parameters, it will be downgraded, without the warning that is given to other Pattern races under the ground rules. Ruth Quinn, the BHB’s director of racing, who played a full part in the process, believes the overall benefits could take that long to work through. “It’s fantastic that the new programme already seems to be having an effect,” she says, “but it has been created with the longer term in mind, and we need to build up a pool of better-class fillies in Europe.” Quinn also believes the outstanding fillies will still take on the colts in the traditional Group 1 races, particularly those over a mile, such as the Prix Jacques le Marois and Queen Elizabeth II Stakes. “We didn’t want to create a complete mirror image of the colts’ programme, as they have in the US,” she says, “but we had to make a great deal of improvement in the fillies’ programme if we want to stem the constant flow to the States.”
Philip Freedman, owner of the Cliveden Stud and chairman of the BHB’s Flat Race Advisory Panel, which feeds its thoughts and expertise into the European Pattern Committee, has already seen evidence that the ploy is working. His US trainer Christophe Clement has received fewer European-trained older fillies this winter, and has jokingly suggested he is being put out of business. Freedman, who acknowledges the efforts of a Thoroughbred Breeders Association group chaired by Bill Paton-Smith in first bringing the fillies’ cause to attention, accepts there could be a downside to the enhancements, as owners face greater temptation to keep the best to the company of their own sex. However, he looks to the bigger picture. “We may have to face up to a slightly less competitive Queen Elizabeth II Stakes, for instance, but if the changes to the programme were going to work, it had to be done as a big project,” he reasons. “Adding one or two races wouldn’t have had the same impact. “While I would have been equally happy if, say, the Sun Chariot Stakes had not gone up to Group 1, if we accept that we are running the fillies’ programme as a separate entitity to the colts’, it makes sense for the Sun Chariot to be upgraded. There had to be a logical programme.” The next three years will determine how successful the original logic was. Howard Wright is a member of the BHB Flat Race Advisory Panel.
Howard Wright (European Trainer - issue 7 - Spring 2004)