Open Letter To the Industry: In Response To Scott Leeds

By J. Keith Desormeaux

As owners and trainers, because of our day-to-day direct involvement with our horses, we have the most at stake, both personally and monetarily, in the success of racing in the State of Kentucky. Because of this, I, with the support of my clients and colleagues are strongly requesting an improvement to the raceday scratch procedure.

As much as anyone, we understand the unpredictable nature of Thoroughbred soundness.

It should be clearly understood that we are not seeking to end vet checks on race day, but we do vehemently ask for an arbitration process if a horse is determined (by one individual's observation) to be unfit to race. It is incomprehensible (and unfair to the regulatory/state vet), that he/she alone can wield this much power concerning raceday participation.

Trainers, owners and attending vets spend their lives with these animals on a daily basis, nt only in an effort to get them to peak health, but to also be able to diagnose lameness and other potential issues. This is why the attending vet and trainer sign off (by regulatory mandate) on soundness before a horse is entered. The attending vet or practice must be respected and counseled if the state/regulatory vet deems it necessary to scratch a horse. Especially given that the state/reg vet has spent basically only a rushed five minutes examining a horse versus the days, weeks and months of observation and care under the attending vet and his or her trainer.

Proposed Procedural Changes:

• Before a scratch can occur, the state or regulatory vet must consult said horse's personal vet in order to review its medical history which may include x-rays and any other vet care performed by the attending vet. It must be reiterated, that the attending vet's personal and professional knowledge of said horse is crucial to any final decision;

• If a scratch is still deemed necessary, a third-party vet must be consulted and a vote of these three vets take place in order to determine if scratch is necessary. This would now provide total agreement and buy-in from all related parties;

• The wording of what constitutes a raceday vet scratch must be clarified and clearly defined. In general, it is not the state/regulatory vet's job to determine if he/she thinks the horse is capable of running. They cannot merely have an opinion of a horse's health or ability to run. Their job is not to determine fitness, general health or general diagnostics. Their only job must be to determine if the horse is at risk of a catastrophic breakdown and nothing more. To solely have the ability to wield such power to scratch a horse without a well-substantiated reason or proof rather than a generic statement that “they just don't like the horse today” is not acceptable.

We also know that this arbitration could be time consuming if multiple horses are required to be reviewed on race day. I would think that the tracks' potential loss of handle and the parties involved would happily be patient and back up post times if necessary. Or if a rash of potential vet scratches are becoming common, make a 2-3 o'clock post the norm.

Thanks for your attention to this important matter. If enough voices are heard concerning this subject, a change for the better surely can be made.

Click here to read Scott Leeds's Letter to the Editor