JIMMIE SAYS … Divest or else Horse racing needs legislative, wider gambling market support

Sitting among the audience at Sunday evening’s Jamaica Thoroughbred Horsemen’s Foundation’s (JTHF) Third Anniversary Fundraiser and Award Event, Nancy Holthus, paddock analyst at Oaklawn Park, Arkansas, was hooked on every word, taking in an overarching presentation detailing how horse racing thrives in varying jurisdictions through direct legislative support for purse money.

After the function, which recognised racing personalities who had passed within the last year as well as stalwarts still alive and kicking, Holthus was the first to acknowledge, having first-hand experience of the issues affecting thoroughbred racing anywhere in the United States where casino money does not support purses by way of legislation.

Holthus expressed[JA1] that not only does Oaklawn Park have a casino, which has a direct revenue-sharing agreement that enabled the Hot Springs racetrack to have offered the highest stakes purses for both fillies and colts on the road to Kentucky for the 2025-26 racing season,[JA2] it also has Advance Deposit Wagering (Oaklawn Anywhere), restricted to Arkansas residents, a service that allows users to wager on live horse racing at Oaklawn and tracks across the country using their smartphones, tablets, and computers.

Similar to its casino, Oaklawn’s ADW is a major contributor to the racetrack’s purses, specifically designed for Arkansas residents and the only one of its kind, nationally, that remits taxes directly to the state of Arkansas, which, in turn, redirects significant amounts to Oaklawn Park, which is owned by the Cella family through their privately held company, the Oaklawn Jockey Club Inc.

Holthus pointed to the slow death of thoroughbred racing in California, the last major racing state without a secondary source of gaming income, as a perfect example of dying North American racing jurisdictions with no casino revenue or historical horse-racing terminals, which is a cute method of mimicking slot machines.

Even with this reality staring in the face of local horsemen who should know way better, there continues to be an aversion to having the Government of Jamaica legislate proceeds directly from the taxation of betting back to purses.

Local horsemen, somehow, possess the knack of shooting themselves in the foot. When then finance minister Nigel Clarke had summoned racing interests to a meeting at his office to quell disputes, which had caused a disruption in racing a few years ago, the matter of purses being legislated by way of a percentage of taxes being turned over to the Jamaica Racing Commission was raised but quickly swept under the carpet by a prominent owner and breeder seated two chairs from the minister.

Clarke, at the time, seemed quite receptive to the concept, saying that issue, among others, was likely and would be explored by the JRC, whose chairman, Clovis Metcalfe, was sitting to his immediate left.

Clarke instructed horsemen to return within three weeks with a workable structure but sternly advised against returning with anything that would be detrimental to the viability of the promoting company.

Since then, not one member from the expansive gathering has taken favour to dissect the 20.5 per cent of gross profit from horse-racing sales, local and overseas, taxation that goes directly to the JRC and Betting Gaming and Lotteries Commission.

Among the ridiculous arguments posited is a fear of one administration legislating monies from the JRC/BGLC directly to purses and an incoming government reversing same.

Well, if any administration wants to shut down the racing industry by even conceiving of any such move, were such legislation enacted by its predecessor, that would be the equivalent of ushering in its removal from office.