NEWS

Industry News

Most Popular Stories

Most E-mailed Stories

TTimes Q&A: Rick Violette on training, state of racing

Posted: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 4:32 PM

RICK VIOLETTE

Adam Coglianese/NYRA photo

The roiling cauldron that is politics in New York State has never seemed to spare Thoroughbred racing. Over the past decade in particular, disputes have been constant. Attempting to be heard amidst the cacophony of voices, and in the bargain achieve genuine progress, can seem a Sisyphean task at best. 

For many years, one of the most steady and reasoned voices has been that of Richard Violette Jr., who for the last ten years has served as president of the National Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association, and for the past five years as president of the New York Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association. As if that was not enough, Violette is also in his fourth year as a member of the New York Racing Association’s board of directors.

Violette’s voice will never be the loudest. More importantly, he will never lack a reasoned opinion. Especially when it comes to the pre-eminent issue of the moment: whether or not to eliminate race-day medication. To his fellow trainers in New York, who have collectively endured a nerve-racking ten years in the Empire State given the uncertainty of whether video lottery terminals would ever become reality, plus many other sticky problems such as the often shaky financial status of the New York Racing Association and the back-and-forth sniping with now-defunct New York City Off-Track Betting Corp., Violette has proven an effective spokesman on behalf of his colleagues. That kind of often-thankless spade work should not be taken for granted.

Violette’s dedication and steadfastness in his myriad leadership roles in the industry, despite the extra hours involved, is fully in keeping with the reality that his “day job” encompasses operating a public stable with 55 horses. Those chores alone will keep anyone busy. The always agreeable Violette took time away from a typically busy workday to discuss New York racing’s landscape and a host of other concerns with THOROUGHBRED TIMES correspondent Reg Lansberry.

THOROUGHBRED TIMES: You have been a trainer for more three decades now. How did you decide to become a trainer?
Richard Violette: I was showing hunters and jumpers and did that through college. I had a client that also owned racehorses at Suffolk Downs and he took me there. I started galloping horses in the morning. When I got out of school I knew that I wanted to at least try to make a living working with horses. I had to make a decision whether it would be racehorses or show horses, and I went with racehorses. I thought I would have a better shot at getting to the highest level. Actually, I didn’t have a lot of money or the wherewithal to get to the top of the show horse world.

TT: The “business side” of training has gotten tougher in the last decade. What have been some of the changes that have made training more difficult today? 
Violette: Everything is far more complicated now. Whether it’s the Department of Labor, immigration … the business side of training has been ramped up. You can’t be just a fair businessman these days. You have to be a very good businessman because it is too easy to waste money; it’s too easy to wake up one day and realize you can’t make the feed bill or payroll. It’s very, very competitive out there. So it forces everybody that wants to survive to really pay attention to the business side. The complications on that end are just mind-boggling. Literally from the immigration stuff and getting temporary work visas for your help a couple of times a year. Because less and less Americans tend to gravitate to the racetrack we are very dependent on labor from South America and Mexico. It’s an expensive part of it; it’s an incredibly time-consuming necessity in the business of training racehorses today.

The labor laws … nobody in their wildest dreams thought of punching a clock on the backside. Now guys will get literally tens of thousands of dollars in fines if they don’t have accurate payroll records. The ramp up on the “technicality” of the business end has been incredible and that’s taken some of the fun out of the [training] game and certainly made it far more complex.

TT: Along with taking some of the fun out of it, then obviously it has become more frustrating, too.
Violette: No question about it. I mean, we’re going through the issue right now with the Department of Homeland Security and the federal Department of Labor concerning the approval of H-2B visas. It’s gotten very arbitrary. The denials have been far higher than the approvals. It’s really kind of changed the playing field. I still don’t have enough help to bring in more horses. Those are the realities that I don’t think trainers had to face years ago.

Another aspect now is that everybody really “knows your business.” Twenty, 30 years ago … I’ll tell you a little story. [The late Racing Hall of Fame trainer] Ellliott Burch [who died on January 29] was really very good to me. He lent me some money to go on my own early on. He was very generous. I worked for him a little bit; I had a second division for him up in Saratoga. When I went out on my own I stayed in New York for the winter and he went to Florida. He came back and when he saw me sometime during the first few days, he said, “How’re you doing?” I started to whine a little bit. I hadn’t won a race in a few weeks or whatever it was. And he said, “Rick, shut up! If somebody asks you how you’re doing, tell them you’re doing great. They don’t know anything.

Well that’s no longer true! With all the different entities that compile numbers and trends, and the handicappers, the horseplayers … they know what tie you wore when you won two races in a row on the third week of the month. It’s mind-boggling. And few people hire 5% or 10% trainers anymore. Those numbers have changed the game significantly.

TT: Clearly it has affected the number of times a trainer will lead a horse over to the starting gate.
Violette: The way we campaign horses has changed. We don’t run as frequently as we used to. The ‘bounce factor’ is a real deal. If you ignore it you get your butt kicked. I actually think that’s been one of the biggest reasons in the downward spiral in starts per year for a horse. We simply give them more time between races. Every time we lead them over there these days we expect an ‘A’ effort. And then when they give you an ‘A’ effort they need more time to recover. It’s as simple as that. I mean, with a lot of trainers, if their horse is not 4-to-1 or less, they’re out. They don’t run them. If you look at everybody’s win percentages when their odds are 4-to-1 or less they’re significantly higher compared to when they’re 4-to-1 or higher. So it’s … you run fewer horses for the cause. You run fewer horses if they’re not dead fit. There’s a reality: If you don’t bring your horses over there to run on all eight cylinders, you don’t finish second or third. Instead, you finish fifth or sixth. And then you need to wait another four to six weeks to run. That’s why, given the limited opportunities, you need cash in on it and be successful. It’s in everybody’s face what your strike rate is. What it is off of a layoff; second start off of a layoff; first time Lasix [Salix]. The whole nine yards. Everybody now is under a microscope where that wasn’t the case when I first came into the game.

TT: You occupy important leadership positions in racing on behalf of horsemen both nationally and in New York. How much of your time do those responsibilities consume?
Violette: It ebbs and flows. I can pretty much put one hat on and take one off. Certainly the Internet and laptops have made things a whole lot easier and quicker. In general, it depends upon the time of year and the issue, and sometimes it will take up more time than others. I’m stabled over at Aqueduct and that’s one of the big benefits of being stabled over there. I’m a little bit isolated. There’s only about 350 horses over there and ten or 12 trainers. So in the isolation I just do my job. When I want to put my political hat on, or THA hat on over there, I can do it but it doesn’t consume me over there and I think that’s certainly a big benefit. When I was over at Belmont [Park], sometimes you can get swept up because there’s so many people that you’re exposed to, and their issues. At Aqueduct, I can pick and choose when I want to deal with things.

TT: How would you characterize the current state of the racing industry in New York?
Violette: Probably the bluest sky in American racing. The era of crisis and striving for survival is about to end. What the VLTs could offer us in the future is a little bit limitless right now. I feel for a number of other states such as New Jersey, Maryland, Kentucky, and California. Their futures certainly have many more question marks. New York has a real shot to vault ahead and pretty much staunchly establish its preeminence in the country again.

When you look back over the past ten years at the racing industry in New York, it was really crisis mode between the [NYRA] franchise extension, bankruptcy, the three-tiered promises, and VLTs never showing up. We were living from hand-to-mouth and simply trying to keep the ship afloat. And that’s a tough way to go. It wears on people. Hopefully we’re going to turn that corner and we can actually start planning for a fruitful future instead of just surviving.

TT: Is it a valid assumption that New York horsemen have a good relationship with Charles Hayward and NYRA now?
Violette: It’s certainly the best we’ve had with management, I think, in recent memory. The relationship right now is very businesslike. Historically, things would kind of get personal. Basically there was a time when the horsemen were supposed to sit at the children’s table, where the children could speak only when spoken to.

TT: You were consistently critical of New York City Off-Track Betting Corp. But now that they are gone, didn’t the instability in the governor’s office in Albany (two governors) during the prior administration clearly hamstring New York racing?
Violette: There was a time when state government was doing everything they could to chase business, in general, out of New York State. Whether it was the racing industry or every other industry because they were so unstable. I mean, who would [want] to come into New York to do business? But that’s behind us. Governor [Andrew] Cuomo has been pretty tough on NYRA. Basically, he’s done a remarkable job as far as the state budget and somehow avoiding the pitfalls that new governors have had in the past in dealing with leadership in the House and Senate. There has been some uniformity and purpose there that we haven’t seen in quite a while.

TT: Do you think Gov. Cuomo will become more supportive of New York racing compared to his predecessors? 
Violette: I don’t know. I hope so. I don’t know that racing right now is that important to him. I hope it does become important to him. I’m sure he’s going to be very demanding that NYRA runs a tight ship and does the best thing for racing in the state. He’s done that already by getting Bennett Liebman involved [as deputy secretary for gaming and racing]. He’s one of the real brilliant people in the racing industry. Bennett had something to do with most of the statutes that exist for racing. He knows where the skeletons are and certainly is a racing scholar. He’ll be an asset to both Gov. Cuomo and the racing industry as the conduit as we move forward.

TT: Do you think it would be nice if Gov. Cuomo presented the 2012 Belmont Stakes (G1) trophy?  After all, the governors of Kentucky and Maryland did the honors for the other two Triple Crown races this year.
Violette: It would be great. I’d like to get him to Saratoga. You just can’t explain Saratoga to people. They have to come there and experience it. He’s a serious man and has high expectations for the different state entities that are under him, and I’m hoping he’s going to be one of our biggest allies when he realizes that a lot of us are on the same page.

TT: Now that construction for the Genting racino project at Aqueduct is well underway, do you foresee any bumps in the road to it becoming reality?
Violette: No. Being stabled at Aqueduct, I literally see the construction and the work being done every day. It is amazing. They have two, ten-hour crews of 400 to 500 [workers] per crew. They are up and running at 6:30-7 a.m. It is flat out mind-boggling what they’ve accomplished in such a short time. If you miss a couple of days being at Aqueduct when you drive in you go, ‘Wow, where did that come from?’ We’ve gotten very lucky there. Genting might have been one of two entities that had the financial wherewithal just to move ahead and do what they needed to do to get this thing open as quickly as possible. I think that the other entities, with the economy in the shape it’s in, the difference in the wealth of the other entities since 2008 [beginning of the economic downturn], who were more interested in building the casino, would have been cash strapped and wouldn’t have been as far advanced as we are now, or would not have been able to build the facility that we’re hoping to have.

TT: Given how rapacious all state governments are for revenue and any “new sources” of income, do you foresee any possibility that the New York legislature could favor tribal gaming?
Violette: It was actually [New York] Senator [Charles E.] Schumer who basically was pushing for the racing compact and the federal government to approve the casino in the Catskills. We thought it was a serious mistake. We thought it was a significant slap in the face of Genting after they put down $380-million and committed to 25 years of doing business in New York State. It was a horrible way to treat your new business partner. I think that the state would be making a mistake [to allow tribal gaming] because it’s usually a bad deal for the states. If you look at the language in the compact, even the money that the Indians promise to the states, because there’s actually an encroachment in a geographic area, the Indians have the wherewithal to back out of any previous agreements. So a lot of that money that was promised can even evaporate.

I just don’t know the logic of losing control of that gaming revenue, and the jobs, and the tax revenue and all of that. I just don’t see where that’s a wise thing to do. Is it smart to have a casino at Belmont Park? I would think Genting would have the right of first refusal. And if they don’t, there might be some other profit-making entity that would do as good a job, and if not, still offer more revenue to the state than any Indian reservation might offer. 

TT: What are your members (New York trainers) most concerned about right now?
Violette: Purses. And when are they going to start feeling the good effects and the rise in purse money? Certainly retaining current owners and being able to find new ones. Hopefully the economy will turn around, at some point, so that owners who might have disappeared because of the economic downturn might return. And the owners who stripped down their investments or the number of horses they own could re-stock and get more aggressive. I really believe there is a lot of saber-rattling and knashing of teeth and cries of ‘the sky is falling’ for a lot of things in racing right now. The biggest problem with racing is the economy in the U.S., and the rest of the world, too. I mean, we’re certainly not alone.

TT: Did you attend the medication summit at Belmont? And if so, how do you feel about eliminating race-day medication, i.e., Salix?
Violette: Yes I did. I think we’re chasing our tail. For some it’s a well-intentioned initiative that has approached the level of ignoring the facts and proceeding forward.

The science is there. After 20 and 30 years of studying Lasix, the facts show that the overwhelming majority of horses bleed. There’s been no study in the last 30 years that shows less than 50% of horses bleed. Most studies show 70%, 80%, or 90% of horses without Lasix bleed. They are 6.5 times more likely to bleed without it than with it. Lasix is a safe, effective medication. That science is there. It doesn’t obstruct or obscure the testing for other drugs. In the long-and-short of it, horses bleed. Lasix is the best tool we have to combat that and Lasix and a level-playing field are not mutually exclusive. Let’s move on. There are more important issues that we have to deal with.

I could talk for ten hours about Lasix. It’s an easy target. It’s very hard for me to have a logical discussion about Lasix with the international community when you start with the diagnostics that are clearly “different worldly” [worlds apart] by comparison. In this day and age of nuclear scintigraphy and digital ultrasounds, and digital scans … looking for the infancy of injury and illness, in the world of horses bleeding the international group is somehow very comfortable with somehow using a very primitive way of letting a horse bleed out of both nostrils in order to officially determine that a horse is a bleeder. 

TT: So you feel the international community is not only haughty about the issue but somewhat deluded, perhaps?
Violette: I don’t think their approach is humane. It’s primitive and literally just putting your head in the sand. It’s a little bit like saying, ‘Gee, we have too many drunk drivers on the road.’ Instead of having the level set at .05 when you blow in the tube, their thinking is, let’s raise it to 2.0 and there won’t be as many drunk drivers. It’s really just like that. It just makes no sense that somehow we’re supposed to use the most basic level of determining a problem in a horse in a day and age where we’re supposed to be better than that and try to head off these issues. Until they [international community] are able to reconcile that, you can’t have a logical discussion. In the U.S., if your trainer is waiting for a horse to bleed out of its nostrils before dealing with the bleeding issues … if you’re an owner you’re supposed to go find another trainer. Because he’s not doing his job. And that’s just the start.

We have so many maladies and physical problems with our racehorses today for which we have no real remedy. Bleeding, we have a scientifically proven … if not a remedy then a significant aid to controlling it and certainly stopping it in some horses. Why are we even thinking of tinkering with that? Taking away Lasix is not going to stop horses from bleeding.

TT: Given what you’ve just said, can I assume you were quite unhappy with the recent announcement by the Breeders’ Cup that they are going to eliminate race-day medication for their juvenile races in 2012?
Violette: It was incredibly arrogant. And cavalier is too nice a word. There were hundreds of people, internationally, that took a lot out of time out of their busy schedules to attend the summit. For the Breeders’ Cup to arbitrarily just say, ‘We’re going to eliminate race-day medication in our juvenile races in 2012, and these discussions are ongoing’ … whether there is something done or not, totally disregarded the genuine efforts of people who were willing to sit down at the table. I don’t know where that’s [overall initiative] going to go. There are so many hurdles to get there in U.S. racing, including the reality that this all will start and stop with each individual state’s racing regulatory body. If they don’t change the rules, there’s going to be Lasix. And it’s easy to read the rhetoric in newspapers and blogs. In the real world, when you get away from the rhetoric, horses bleed. Lasix helps.

It’s kind of insulting. Horses as a species, it’s not just the Thoroughbred, you’re not going to breed it out of them. There might be some strains of the Thoroughbred that bleed more than others, but as a species they bleed. But just pretending that they don’t bleed or returning to some barbaric standard where the scope is thrown away, and if they don’t bleed out of the nose, ‘Oh cool, they didn’t bleed,’  that’s irresponsible.

TT: As you know, the veterinarians have been very up front and consistent in saying, forget about the rhetoric on both sides, “Let’s keep in mind what is in the best interests of the animal.”
Violette: Well, it’s true. We’re at a very dangerous moment where those proponents who are in favor of eliminating race-day medication are in the, “don’t confuse me with the facts” stage. The Jockey Club and Grayson-[Jockey Club Research] Foundation funded the South African study. It’s the best study done on Lasix. It was a fabulous study; how they got the racing community in South Africa to do it. It was a triple-blind [study] with placebos and everything. It showed that 70% of horses bled and that Lasix was significantly effective in controlling—if not eliminating—it in some horses. You can’t just ignore stuff like that. If it had found that Lasix had no effect on horses and that 10% of horses bled, supporters of eliminating race-day medication would be waiving that study like it was the Holy Grail.

TT: Do you think it’s a plausible argument that eliminating medication completely could revitalize U.S. breeding and sales, and in the process eventually reverse what seems to be the present and continued future shortage of racehorses nationwide?
Violette: It will happen just the opposite way. There’s this myth out there that the Europeans aren’t buying as many horses as they used to at the yearling sales because of medication and everything. Whatever comes out of their mouth—Lasix as the culprit is a safe and easy target. There was a good piece recently in Daily Racing Form, an interview with [British trainer] Mark Johnston. And he was very, very, very up front about it and he was asked those very same questions. He said he didn’t really think it was the medications [as the reason why]. He thought that maybe the U.S.-bred horses weren’t as sound as they used to be. He just thought that with the economy the way it is, the cost of bringing yearlings back overseas from the U.S. upset the applecart. He had a hard time reselling horses that he bought over here because of the cost involved. The fact of the matter is that in Great Britain they’re not breeding their own horses. Their foal crop is down 40% from 2007.
The economy is in the tank. It’s been that way since 2008. A lot of these things will be healed when the economy improves. You’ve got Spain, Portugal, Ireland, and Greece about to go belly up in Europe. The U.S. is about to break the threshold on its debt ceiling. ‘It’s the economy stupid’ is kind of what you want to scream. Getting rid of Lasix isn’t going to change any of that.

On the flip side of it, I think it will hurt breeders. It’s almost like, do you want to put a Surgeon General’s warning label on the yearlings you’re trying to sell that says, ‘The product you’re about to buy has a 70% chance of bleeding the first time it races. The medication previously available to help control that is no longer available. Buy at your own risk.’ What sensible businessman wants to get in a business like that? We have so many different ailments and challenges in racing that we have no remedies for. Bleeders … we have a remedy. But we’re considering looking a gift horse in the mouth and throwing it away. It makes no sense whatsoever.

TT: Do you think that, realistically, the sport of racing in the U.S. has to undergo some kind of consolidation by eliminating a glut of racing days with the eventual “shakeout” resulting in, ideally, a much higher caliber product?
Violette: I think about that subject in two ways. First, we’re looking at a shortage of horses. When you start breeding 10,000 fewer horses a year it quickly adds up to 40,000 to 50,000 horses over a three- or four-year period. That’s a huge shortage.

Second, there’s no question that in the northeast we have a lot of racetracks competing for the same horses. We have three tracks running simultaneously in Pennsylvania. There’s a lot of purse money out there now. There used to be a fairly big separation between the ‘A’ tracks, so to speak, and the others. Now with the advent of casino gambling, that has clearly leveled the playing field. Consolidation of some sort is going to be needed. Some kind of series, or cooperation between racing states … I think all of that will have to be on the table as we go forward.

TT: Can you ever conceive that the Aqueduct winter schedule might be scaled back?
Violette: Yes. I can see us racing four days per week over the winter there. I don’t see us shutting down for the winter. Especially now that we’re moving into the VLT era it’s going to be a new facility over there and I’m sure we’re going to want to give that a shot for two or three years and see what kind of business that might bring us. I could see us racing fewer days over the winter certainly because of the horse shortage. And because it might be the right thing to do.

TT: New York racing has seemingly been immune from the debate about dirt versus synthetic racing surfaces. Do you have any concerns about racing on dirt in New York?
Violette: In New York, no. I think by and large our surfaces are pretty safe surfaces. They all have their issues. Synthetic racetracks certainly have not been the panacea that we were all hoping for. To racing’s credit, it was tried and millions of dollars have been spent trying to find a safer surface to take care of our athlete. Some synthetic surfaces are better than others. Some are flat out nightmares. But I don’t think we should ever stop searching for that perfect surface, if it exists. Right now, I wouldn’t mind maybe seeing a synthetic surface at our training track at Belmont. I’m not sold that we should have one to race on in New York right now, though.

TT: How would you describe the differences, if any, between the surfaces at Aqueduct, Belmont, and Saratoga?
Violette: They are much more similar than they used to be. At one time, Saratoga’s was the most criticized racetrack for being maybe harder on horses, and faster during hot periods. That’s changed significantly over the last ten years. The main track at Aqueduct I flat out love. I think it might be our best surface. It has been for a long time. The main track at Belmont is always a challenge. Its 1 1/2 miles, sandy, it’s a very wide racetrack and very sensitive and susceptible to humidity changes and dry weather. As far as the inner track at Aqueduct, it isn’t what it used to be years ago. It’s now actually closer to the surfaces of the other three main tracks.

Right now, if Glen Kozak [NYRA’s director of racing surfaces] is not the best in the country, then I need to be introduced to his counterparts. Glen does a terrific job. He’s got an open-door-policy, and he’s always available to listen to criticism and suggestions. He’s always got a reason for whatever he does. We’ve got the right man in the right position and if something new comes along that will be safer for the horses, he’ll be one of the first ones to jump right on it.

TT: Do you think if Saratoga is to remain a truly elite and “boutique” meeting that, in all seriousness, it has definitely reached the current maximum of 40 racing days?
Violette: Oh, I think so. I don’t think anybody is thinking of extending it by even half a racing card. I think we’re there [the present 40 racing days]. Again, there’s such a fine balance between the ethereal and the business of running racing. NYRA’s got to do everything they can on the business side to make ends meet. Remember, Saratoga’s worst Monday is still better than any day at Belmont with the exception of Belmont Stakes (G1) day. It’s certainly understandable why they lengthened the Saratoga meeting to 40 days. But I don’t think there’s anybody on the NYRA board or anybody in management that in their wildest dreams would think of expanding the current meeting beyond that.

TT: Finally, if you had the chance to recruit new owners and new fans, what would you tell them are the most compelling reasons to either go to the racetrack or own racehorses?
Violette: There’s simply no feeling like owning a horse or winning a race at Saratoga. There’s nothing like it! When you’re jumping up and down rooting one of your own home to the finish line, it gets the heart pumping. It’s like seeing one of your children win. It’s hard to explain to some people. I have a significant owner who is established very highly on the social ladder. His racing activity wasn’t necessarily understood by a lot of his friends. When the movie Seabiscuit came out a lot of his friends went to see it. He had a number of them come up to him later and say, ‘I hope that you finally get your Seabiscuit.’

It’s a humbling game and an incredibly challenging game. The social aspects are unique.  You can rub elbows with kings and queens or the shoeshine boy. It can happen. Good things can happen to the one-horse owner or someone who owns 100 horses.

Richard A. Violette, Jr.
Profession: Trainer
Birthdate: January 30, 1953
Birthplace: Worcester, Massachusetts
Residence: Mineola, New York
Education: B.S. in political science, Lowell University
Industry positions: President, National Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association Inc., 2002 to present; president and board member, New York Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Association Inc., 2007 to present; board member, New York Racing Association Inc., 2008 to present; chairman, New York Jockey Injury Compensation Fund, 1992-present.
Stakes winners trained: Citadeed, Coosaraga, Dream Rush, Fenway Faithful, Free of Love, High Finance, Kate Winslet, Laken, Man from Wicklow, March Magic, Marquette, Miss Huff n’ Puff, Opus A, Read the Footnotes, Nijinsky’s Gold, Outperformance, Princess J.V., Queen’s Harbor, Rough Rogue, Savedbythelight, Summer Doldrums, Sweet Envoy, Tall Glass o’ Water, Upon My Soul, Worstcasescenario