The grand experiment to revive horse racing in Northern California is coming to an end. On Monday, the board of the California Assn. of Racing Fairs was formalizing its decision to withdraw its application for a racing meeting from Dec. 25 to June 10 at Pleasanton Fairgrounds Racetrack.
Unless the fair board changes its mind, something that is highly unlikely given growing deficits, the decision is expected to be announced later on Monday, according to people with knowledge of the situation but not authorized to speak publicly.
The deadline for a decision was Thursday, when the California Horse Racing Board had two items on the agenda about racing at Pleasanton. Now, those items will be withdrawn.
The formation of Golden State Racing, under the umbrella of CARF, was an effort to keep near-full-time racing in Northern California after the Stronach Group announced and subsequently closed Golden Gate Fields. It left a void in the state for a place where horses not of the quality of Santa Anita and Del Mar could run.
Read more: Golden Gate Fields comes to a close as California racing struggles to exist
This will no doubt have an impact not only on the horsemen in Northern California but also a state breeding industry that will have little reason to extensively breed if there is no place to run the horses. More than a third of the races at Golden Gate Fields were restricted to California-bred horses.
The decision is not currently expected to affect the summer fair circuit of races, but, of course, it will need horses to run those races to succeed. If many of the trainers and horsemen decide to go elsewhere, or retire from the business, it could endanger the fairs.
The move is not unexpected as the racing circuit’s initial foray into fall/winter racing was met with a mutuel handle less than expected and subsequently led to two purse cuts. The 26-day meeting started Oct. 19 and will end Wednesday.
The handle at GSR was 62% lower than Golden Gate and the national market share of wagering slipped from 5% at Golden Gate to 2.1% at GSR.
Purses at GSR were about 30% less than at Golden Gate.
Another disadvantage of Pleasanton is that it didn’t have a turf course; about half the racing in the south was on the grass.
The Stronach Group, the owner of Santa Anita and operating under the moniker of 1/ST Racing, has a proposal to help alleviate the impact on Northern California horsemen. It has offered to fund off-season stabling at Pleasanton and to write races that better fit the makeup of Northern California horses. The proposal would also help pay for the cost of vanning horses and relocation expenses for horsemen, including grooms and trainers.
Read more: California horse racing is at a crossroads. Can it survive?
There may also be a home for some of the horses at Los Alamitos, which had trouble filling fields during its six-day winter thoroughbred meeting, which concluded Sunday. It also runs thoroughbreds at 4 ½ furlongs at night.
This all comes after the Stronach Group, in conjunction with the Thoroughbred Owners of California, hatched the plan to kill off racing in the north in order to help save the south.
The thinking is that simulcast revenue that would normally go to the north would be redirected to the south. Last year, Santa Anita had a $6-million shortfall on purses that was covered by the track. Thoroughbred Owners of California is responsible for the purses, and it is not unusual for the track to cover any shortage, counterintuitively called an “overpayment.”
This alone will only marginally improve the position of racing in Southern California as it needs another form of supplemental income, such as historical horse racing, to compete on the national racing landscape.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
