CHRB Votes for Less Restrictive Whip Rule

One year after enacting the country's most comprehensive set of regulations regarding the use of the whip, the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) voted 4-3 on Thursday to loosen part of Rule 1688. Pending another vote that could officially adopt the change after it goes out for a 45-day public comment period, jockeys will be allowed to administer one additional strike to their mounts in the final half a furlong before the finish.

The previous standard–and the standard that will remain in place for other sections of the racecourse–prohibited riders from hitting horses “more than three times in succession without giving the horse a chance to respond before using the crop again.”

The new language that was voted in tacks on the phrase “except in the last sixteenth of a mile in a Thoroughbred race, at which time a jockey is prohibited from using a riding crop more than four times in succession without giving the horse a chance to respond before using the riding crop again.”

Four strikes versus three doesn't seem like that big of a change, but it generated considerable debate among commissioners and stakeholders. The majority of the discussion centered on the topic of abuse–both actual and perceived–and whether or not the rule needed to be tweaked at all considering the time and effort that went into drawing it up, and testimony from two state stewards that it seems to be working well as is.

CHRB chairman Chuck Winner and commissioners Madeline Auerbach, Alex Solis and Richard Rosenberg voted in favor of going from three to four strikes. Commissioners George Krikorian, Jesse Choper and Steve Beneto voted against making any change.

Solis, the only active jockey in the nation currently serving on a state racing commission, was able to offer unique testimony in favor of the change considering his dual roles as both rider and regulator. In his capacity as the chairman of the CHRB's Jockey and Driver Welfare Committee, Solis had spoken in favor of the original rule almost exactly one year ago, at a May 27, 2015, CHRB meeting. But since Rule 1688 went into effect last July, Solis has been fined three separate times for violating the “three strikes” portion of it.

“I think it's a good change, just from experience. The last sixteenth of a mile is when you really need more help; more help with your horse and using your crop. The horses are getting tired, and you try to encourage them without getting anybody in danger,” Solis said. “I have to be very honest, I got in trouble a month ago because that [last] sixteenth of a mile, my horse got very tired, and that was her first race back. [I hit her a fourth time, resulting in a fine] right at the wire… She won by a nose, and I know if I wouldn't have done that, it would have cost me the winner.”

But Beneto was quick to counter: “That's what upsets me, is a horse is tiring and giving out, and we're sitting here encouraging them with a whip, and I think that's cruel. I'd rather [see a jockey] lose the race than have somebody abuse the horse.”

“Yeah, but I don't know if the bettor is going to feel that way. We have to do a job,” Solis replied.

“Well, the hell with the bettors,” Beneto scoffed.

Darrell Haire, a retired jockey who is the western regional manager of the Jockeys' Guild, said the guild's position is that the rule has worked quite well as written, but that a change to four cracks of the crop is reasonable considering it would only apply to the final drive in deep stretch.

“It's not abuse,” Haire emphasized. “There's no excuse for abusing a horse, we know that. And it's up to the stewards, if they see that–anything that looks close to [abuse]–then the rider should be called in, fined, or suspended… What we're asking for is just for the jockeys to get the most out of their mounts, and [for] the bettors too.”

Scott Chaney, a steward who has presided at Santa Anita, Del Mar and Los Alamitos, testified that last summer's adoption of Rule 1688 was “a little rocky” at first and that not all stewards in the state were in favor of it. He explained that California stewards collectively “decreased the penalty structure” last autumn to try to mitigate jockeys' complaints, and said the reduced whipping rule has turned into a “resounding success.” Because of that, he cautioned against making changes in the last sixteenth of a mile, because it is “the most dangerous part” of the race.

“As for me, it is complete animal abuse to use the stick more often when the horse is getting tired,” Chaney said. “From the stewards' perspective, we love the three strikes. We'd actually like to see it decreased, but four is not an option for us.”

Regulatory implications aside, Chaney related a story that he said represented the importance of public perception. In successive weekends last February, he said, he was invited to lecture in front of two different groups where California's whipping rule was a topic.

The first group was a continuing education course for racing officials based in the Southwest. “They looked at me like I was an alien,” Chaney said. “They were super polite, but they didn't understand why you couldn't just hit a horse as much as you wanted to.”

The second speaking engagement was before a group of students in the University of Arizona's Race Track Industry Program.

“They had two basic comments,” Chaney recalled. “'Three [strikes] is way too many,' and 'Why are the penalty structures so small?”

Chaney said the contrasting views of the veteran officials versus those of the next generation of industry participants represents “the past and the future of racing.”

Just prior to her vote in favor of advancing the rule change to the public comment period, Auerbach said she took umbrage with Chaney's comment about abuse.

“I want this on the record: We do not abuse our horses,” Auerbach said emphatically. “We are so careful with our horses, and I speak from the high ground here. I rescue a lot of horses, I save horses, I love horses. And any characterization that there is any kind of abuse going on, I think is not fair.”

Auerbach continued: “Do I like whipping? No. Would I be much happier if you don't have to touch them? Absolutely. But the reality is the reality, and unless and until we are not only careful with our horses and careful with all parts of our community that want to feel that they're getting their best shake… I don't want us to do anything that interferes with the outcome of the race. Or which hurts the horse. So I just want to go on record that no matter how anybody votes here, either for this or against this, I don't think any of us have the intent of anything that resembles animal abuse. I don't want to hear that.” –@thorntontd