Letter to the Editor: Bentley Combs

Over the last few days an idea has been floated to replace the current American claiming system with that of a rating system. With a list of concerns and questions in my head, two things jump out immediately as being stifled by a rating system: Ease of access to horses and the possibility of growth for both potential new owners and smaller trainers. In my opinion these are two things American racing does better than anywhere in the world.  Why do we want to change this to be more like other countries?

Love it or hate it, the claiming game is the closest thing to instant gratification we as an industry can offer in the arena of ownership. There are rules to this game just like any other.  There are jail rules, void rules, waiver rules all of which are in place to protect the buyer, the seller, and the horse.

For those only familiar with the stakes and allowance portions of your condition books, let's break down how a claim is made. Person calls a trainer, puts money in a horsemen's account, picks out a horse, drops a slip, and now that person owns a new horse. It is a very egalitarian system. The seller knew the deal when they entered the horse for the tag and the buyer knew the deal when they dropped the slip. Both have agreed upon the value of the horse.

A horse breaks its maiden in a maiden special weight. Now the horse enters allowance company only to find that the horse can only consistently beat the water truck across the line.  Doing this repeatedly so the horse won't be “devalued” by entering the claiming ranks is an example of a sunk cost fallacy.

What was paid for the horse or what the horse cost in stud fees, board bills and training does not equal the horse's skill or worth. If this were true, The Green Monkey would have won the Triple Crown and a horse that was bought for $40,000 should've never won the Breeders' Cup Juvenile Fillies last year. Sales price and cost does not denote talent. The claiming system allows owners to sell a horse quickly and possibly reinvest that money almost immediately. In contrast, a rating system would seem to slow down sales or possibly prevent them, along with additional costs to the owner if they go through the auction process.

This notion of “devaluing” also does not consider the possibility of the horse getting claimed and going on to win stakes; some trainers have made a name for themselves doing just that.

Let's look at the trainer angle. Smaller trainers must have access to horses to grow and get noticed by other owners. The claiming system is the quickest way for these smaller trainers to grow and showcase their horsemanship abilities. Auctions have been mentioned as a way within this rating system idea to disperse stock to smaller barns. Take a poll and see how many of the 81 horses sold in July at Fasig went to a barn with 15 horses or less, my guess would be not many, if any.

A total of 9,885 trainers made a start in 2000; that number declined to 4,959 in 2019. This roughly 49% drop can be attributed to a number of things, including the rise of “mega trainers” and a focus of owners on the almighty win percentage. Limiting the growth of smaller trainers or new trainers who do not have huge backing in the first place, as a rating system would do, would only further this drop over the next 20 years.

There are other concerns. Such as does anyone think state legislatures are going to look favorably on racing after racing eliminates their tax revenue from claimed horses? Ask Oaklawn Park, the state of Arkansas and the city of Hot Springs how much money was made from taxes during the meet strictly through the claim box. Also, who would be doing the rating and how would it translate from track to track? In a claiming system the owner and trainer do the rating as to whether their horse who won for $10,000 at one track could win for $10,000 at a different track. Handcuffing owners and trainers in a subjective rating system, plus limiting the ease of access to horses for potential new owners, plus the further shrinking of an already rapidly shrinking trainer pool, is the start to a bad algebraic equation for American horse racing.

Kentucky-based Bentley Combs began training horses in late 2017 after serving as assistant trainer to Dallas Stewart. The Lexington native graduated from the University of Louisville's Equine Industry Program in the College of Business and received an MBA from the University of Mississippi.