Before Rich Tapestry even sets a hoof on to the Santa Anita dirt this weekend, he has already generated more racetrack discussion than most runners at the Breeders' Cup, a two-day mega meeting, an event where there are a multitude of stories to focus on.
The two biggest issues being bandied about behind the scenes over the past few weeks have been Rich Tapestry’s perhaps unfair position as nominated flag bearer for the anti-raceday medication brigade and the other being a lack of suitable options for dirt horses in his home jurisdiction.
Most great political figures probably didn’t choose to be under the intense spotlight of public scrutiny, but the Jockey Club’s push to essentially turn Rich Tapestry into a political pawn might have been jumping the gun and was perhaps a little unfair to his trainer Michael Chang Chun-wai.
Proclaiming Rich Tapestry’s first-up win in the Santa Anita Sprint Championship, in which he raced without Lasix, as an example of all that is good in the land of non-raceday medication could backfire badly if officials’ worse fears are realised this weekend.
The question being asked by many is: “What if Rich Tapestry bleeds?”
As squeamish as that might make people feel, isn’t it as valid a question as: “What if Rich Tapestry wins without Lasix?”
When Rich Tapestry won the Santa Anita Sprint Championship sans Lasix last month, it was used by Jockey Club officials as an example of why racehorses need not race on the diuretic that divides the sport and isolates North America.
“Look, he can win without Lasix,” was the general theme. “And against horses that are using it too,” they trumpeted.
Turning Rich Tapestry into the equine equivalent of Scholarism leader Joshua Wong Chi-fung may have attracted feel good headlines at the time, but in the end, with a switch of scenarios, it could provide equal ammunition for the Lasix lobbyists, the powerful “horsemen” associations that fiercely protect the right to brandish syringes like NRA members feel entitled to bear arms.
We hate to seem like purveyors of doom, but an incident on Sunday with one of Rich Tapestry’s stablemates was an illustration of what could go wrong this weekend – and what plenty of people were saying in private when the Jockey Club’s executive director of racing Bill Nader went on the offensive with regards to Rich Tapestry’s non-use of the drug.
Chang’s Dibayani, a promising veteran of just five starts, fourth in an all-star Derby earlier this year and set for the international day features, bled badly from both nostrils in Sunday’s Oriental Watch Sha Tin Trophy. He won’t race again for at least three months as he serves the mandatory ban.
Triumphant jockey Zac Purton had raced next to Dibayani on Military Attack, and returned with blood-splattered pants. It’s a part of racing, as people seem to say when horrible things happen, but it isn’t a good look either – and it’s the sort of stuff the pro-Lasix groups point to when making their usually lopsided and self-serving arguments.
This isn’t a statement of what is wrong or right either way – Lasix or no Lasix. But if it is good enough to say that when Rich Tapestry wins that the use of Lasix is unnecessary, then if he bleeds in a similar manner to Dibayani in the Breeders’ Cup Sprint, is that not just as strong an argument for the use of Lasix on raceday?
The other area where officials may have jumped the gun is deflecting deserved publicity from Chang and leaving him to carry the can in the lead up to the race.
What should be his moment to shine, a remarkable achievement whatever the result, has been turned – at least in part – into a test case. Hopefully Chang, as affable as they come but with English most definitely his second language, isn’t grilled on “the issue” by media, and reporters can focus on his amazing back story, superb horsemanship and amicable demeanour.
It’s a great story: Chang bravely made a trailblazing decision to take a dirt specialist halfway across the world in search of a payday worthy of his horse’s best talents.
Which brings us to the other topic of racetrack conversation – the lack of a big money dirt race on the local racing calendar.
Look, there’s nothing trainers do better than speak out of self-interest, and if one found a particularly good swimmer among his team, he would probably lobby for an aquatic carnival in the Sha Tin equine pool.
And we can already imagine the punters who loathe the bias-riddled “all-weather track” spitting into their coffees as they read this suggestion: “More racing on the awful weather track? That’s just what we need.”
Sean Woods is setting dirt speedster Lord Sinclair for an overseas campaign on the newly laid dirt track at Meydan – and, all being well, the 100-plus rated grey will likely spend more than a month away from Sha Tin this season.
His only chance to boost the horse’s rating is a 105-80 ratings band 1,200m race this Sunday where he will carry 133 pounds. After that there is nothing until at least next year.
Woods wants a Group race for the best dirt trackers on international day, a chance for the best horses on the surface to push claims for a start in overseas events like the US$2 million Golden Shaheen, a race won by John Moore’s Sterling City when it was held on that funky, kitty litter-like artificial surface, Tapeta, last year. Rich Tapestry finished second.
So racing on the “AWT” is really a way to save the only two turf tracks in town from being destroyed – ground staff walk a fine line in handling the schedule they are set now, as shown by Sunday’s overly firm surface at Sha Tin, which had been recently been re-seeded a week behind normal schedule because of renovation work at Happy Valley.
But still, if it is good enough for horses to race on the dirt and for punters to bet on it (and critics, some of whom might be in the SCMP camp, might suggest that isn’t the case) – then shouldn’t it be good enough to host a race to decide “best dirt tracker in town” with an all-comers match-up?
If we are being fair, it’s either that or separate ratings for turf and dirt – a messy path indeed.
In the tightly handicapped world of Hong Kong racing, there are horses that have far exceeded their top rating on turf with exceptional dirt performances. Lord Sinclair runs a fair race on turf, but a 105 rating? Highly unlikely.
The schedule allows horses to inflate their ratings to uncompetitive levels, but leaves them stranded once they get there and forced to head elsewhere.
Which is where Rich Tapestry finds himself now, and after this weekend, an example for someone to base their argument on.
