CULTURE CONFLICT? - The Alan Balch Column

WORDS - ALAN BALCH

We've all been hearing about "culture" for the last ten years or more - "culture wars" politically, for example. But I pricked up my ears when I heard the leaders of the California Horse Racing Board refer to changing the "backstretch culture" at their last meeting.

To begin with, that word originated around "cultivation," in the agricultural sense. Growing and nurturing. Over the centuries, obviously, it took on many nuances. I remember when "cultured" people were those who appreciated fine art or attended the philharmonic orchestra, or had advanced, sophisticated education. They had been or were "cultivated," I suppose, with some worthwhile objectives in mind, I venture to guess. Aristocratic? And then there are cults, but let's not go there. Please. Even though all those related words come from the same origins. My own professional lifespan in racing management and observation is now over half a century. Plenty of time to develop opinions, many fervently held before changing, or evolving, or changing back again. Age supposedly brings wisdom. Artificial Intelligence claims Ernest Hemingway "famously" observed, "The wisdom of old men. They do not grow wise. They grow careful." So famously that I couldn't find where he said it. But it seems true to me. In what follows, however, this old man is throwing that out the window.

Our California regulator was taking up the issue, for the zillionth time, of racetrack safety, and the ways and means of protecting our horses. That's as it should be, because nothing is more important. If only laws and rules and regulations could do the whole job! Nobody doubts that they can help... but many doubt their overall efficacy. Why else do we keep returning endlessly to their additions and refinements?

It was in this context that we were publicly advised that the training and veterinary culture on the backstretch must continue to change: from treatment to a preference for diagnostics before treatment. Personally, I thought it had always been that way. So, what that really means, I think, is that diagnostic methods have improved magnificently (and expensively) from what they once were, and must all be employed. Before treatment. Any treatment?

I was taught, beginning about 70 years back, that no individual mammal (including horses and humans) is 100% healthy. Mother Nature just doesn't make them that way. And they're all at risk of injury. Or worse. Thus, preventive care is born. And so is animal husbandry. Along with veterinary medicine. Checking the feed tub and temperature, and jogging a horse for soundness, start the diagnosis. But in racing, and other equestrian sport, sadly, even a relatively sound horse might perform better if he just feels better! And so were born the infinite variety of lotions and potions, pills and injections. Human health "enhancement" mirrors the equine evolution, does it not? And almost certainly preceded the use of all kinds of "enhancing" in the equine world. After all, we humans are responsible for what we receive or ingest. Our horses are not. They rely on our integrity. That awareness and commitment, I believe, is what has been changing, and what must backstretch and training and veterinary culture.

The fundamental culture of American breeding must change, too. That's even more important, because that's where horsemanship begins. And it will be enormously difficult, probably far more difficult than changing the behavior of a relative few in the backstretch community who have brought ill repute to their peers. Breeding more sound, substantial racehorses, it seems to me, rather than breeding for ever more expensive breeding stock, as the circular end in itself, must somehow be incentivized. That's exceptionally difficult in our increasingly libertarian capitalistic America. The short-term goals of astronomically high prices in the auction ring and for syndicating retiring three-year-olds is, to put it politely, inconsistent with developing both greater substance in our racehorses and drawing greater public interest in our most important races. Racing success was heretofore supposed to be the proof of breeding.

In the 1970s, the late Frank E. "Jimmy" Kilroe, a Pillar of the Turf, widely admired throughout racing, was telling everyone who would listen what was coming. What we have now. And reminding us all of the importance of box office, which relied on racing's great equine stars, so many of which he knew firsthand, and which by and large were geldings! According to The Blood-Horse, these were the top: Kelso, Forego, John Henry, Armed, Roman Brother, Fort Marcy, Best Pal, Native Diver, Lava Man, and Ancient Title. Six of the ten were largely responsible for massive crowds attending the Santa Anita Handicap, beginning with Armed in 1947.

I got to thinking about all this again when thrilling to the Breeders' Cup Turf just run at Del Mar (pictured). Amazing, exciting race and look at the result. A parade of great international geldings: Ethical Diamond, Rebel's Romance, El Cordobes, Amiloc, Californian Gold Phoenix, the filly Minnie Hauk, Redistricting, before we got to the first entire horse, Rebel Red. All Irish or British-bred. In fact, only two of the fourteen starters were bred in the USA. Yes, let's change the culture ... and breed for racing. Not breeding.