A. Brief Description of the Issue
The current rule governing cancellations due to questionable track or weather conditions does not provide a fair, transparent, or representative decision-making process for all trainers and drivers who are directly affected by the conditions and decision to race or not race. The existing rule relies on a small group of representatives and requires a unanimous agreement to race or not race.
B. Discussion of the Issue and Problem
What specific problems or concerns are involved in this issue?
The current rule presents several operational and safety challenges:
• Lack of broad representation: Decisions hinge on the opinion of a few elected representatives rather than the full group of trainers and drivers actually racing that day.
• Potential for peer pressure or dominance by loud voices: Because decisions are made in open discussion and not by confidential vote, some individuals may feel pressured to agree with others, even if they believe conditions are unsafe.
• Unanimity requirement is impractical and unsafe: Requiring unanimous agreement that the track is safe sets an unreasonably high threshold and does not align with contemporary safety practices.
• Financial penalties are imposed for safety-based scratches: When unanimity is not achieved, trainers must deposit 10% of the purse to scratch a horse—even when the decision to scratch is welfare-based. This discourages responsible decision-making.
• No integrated path for drivers to withdraw services: Drivers cannot independently protect themselves from unsafe conditions without facing repercussions or being viewed as obstructing the card.
Who does the issue affect?
Trainers and Owners:
Benefit from a fair process where they can scratch horses without financial penalty when conditions are questionable.
Gain confidence that decisions are made equitably and with a focus on horse welfare.
Drivers:
Receive a formal mechanism to withdraw services safely without risking penalty or backlash.
Enjoy greater protection under conditions where visibility, footing, or surface integrity pose risks.
Judges:
Benefit from a clearer, more structured framework for evaluating conditions and making decisions.
Reduce exposure to disputes regarding fairness or transparency.
Racetrack Management:
Maintain authority to cancel racing while also participating in the assessment process.
Reduce the risk of public criticism or participant dissatisfaction following cancellations or unsafe starts.
HRA:
Benefits from improved regulatory clarity, alignment with safety principles, and reduced disputes regarding cancellation decisions.
Betting public:
Gains confidence that races proceed only when safe, reducing the occurrence of last-minute cancellations or shortened fields due to penalized scratches.
What existing HRA rules relate to this issue?
418 s Questionable track conditions
If track conditions are questionable, the *judges board must meet with a representative of the association and the duly elected representatives of the *horsemen to consider the matter and the following applies: (a) (b) (c) (d) if the *meeting results in an unanimous decision that track conditions are safe for racing, no withdrawals are allowed; if the meeting results in a decision other than an unanimous decision that track conditions are safe for racing, an *owner or *trainer may *scratch a *horse after depositing an amount equal to 10% of the total purse to be raced for with *Horse Racing Alberta; the money deposited is to be retained by Horse Racing Alberta, or returned to the owner or trainer, at the direction of the judges board; if the number of withdrawals reduces the field to less than 5, the *licensed operator may postpone a *stake or cancel an overnight event.
Policy and procedures for race day cancellations is also applicable.
C. Possible Solutions and Impact
What solution does this proposal provide?
The proposal introduces a fair, structured, confidential voting process where all trainers and drivers scheduled to participate on that program have an equal voice. Key elements of the solution include:
A secret ballot conducted by the representative of drivers and trainers, reducing peer pressure and ensuring honest input.
Clear thresholds for decision-making (50%, 75%) that establish meaningful criteria for racing, cancelling, or offering penalty-free scratches.
Separate safeguards for drivers, allowing them to withdraw their services without penalty if more than 50% vote against racing.
Consistent involvement of the Judges and racetrack management in the assessment of conditions.
Retention of racetrack management’s authority to cancel independently when necessary.
How will the solution fix the problem?
The proposed change addresses every deficiency in the current rule by:
Creating an inclusive process where every affected trainer and driver can express their position confidentially.
Removing the unrealistic unanimity requirement and replacing it with practical, safety-focused thresholds.
Eliminating punitive financial penalties for withdrawing horses when conditions are uncertain.
Reducing opportunities for coercion, pressure, or dominance by a small subset of individuals.
Supporting driver safety, recognizing that drivers face distinct risks when track conditions are uncertain.
Providing clear, predictable governance for judges and racetrack operators, reducing conflict and ambiguity.
How will the change affect any entities or stakeholders?
Trainers and Owners:
Benefit from a fair process where they can scratch horses without financial penalty when conditions are questionable.
Gain confidence that decisions are made equitably and with a focus on horse welfare.
Drivers:
Receive a formal mechanism to withdraw services safely without risking penalty or backlash.
Enjoy greater protection under conditions where visibility, footing, or surface integrity pose risks.
Judges:
Benefit from a clearer, more structured framework for evaluating conditions and making decisions.
Reduce exposure to disputes regarding fairness or transparency.
Racetrack Management:
Maintain authority to cancel racing while also participating in the assessment process.
Reduce the risk of public criticism or participant dissatisfaction following cancellations or unsafe starts.
HRA:
Benefits from improved regulatory clarity, alignment with safety principles, and reduced disputes regarding cancellation decisions.
Betting public:
Gains confidence that races proceed only when safe, reducing the occurrence of last-minute cancellations or shortened fields due to penalized scratches.
How will you or your organization be affected by the proposed change?
What are the benefits of the proposed change?
• Stronger and more equitable safety process
By allowing all affected horsepeople to vote confidentially, the rule enhances fairness and protects welfare.
• Eliminates unnecessary punitive financial deposits
Trainers can act in the best interest of their horses without the fear of financial penalties.
• Reduces conflict and improves transparency
Clear thresholds and a secret ballot eliminate ambiguity and limit disputes.
• Supports better decision-making by judges and management
A structured process produces more reliable, representative information.
• Improves horse and driver welfare
Risk is mitigated through meaningful participant input and the removal of pressure to race under unsafe conditions.
• Strengthens industry trust
Participants feel heard and respected, promoting a safer, more collaborative racing environment.
What are the possible drawbacks of the proposed change?
While the benefits outweigh the drawbacks, potential considerations include:
• Slightly longer decision-making process
A secret ballot may take a few extra minutes compared to an informal discussion, though still quick enough for operational needs.
• Increased responsibility on representatives and judges
Proper administration of the ballot requires organization, but this is manageable and consistent with their oversight duties.
D. Please identify any affected stakeholder groups that expressed support or opposition.
(These stakeholders may include the racetracks, breed registries, owners, trainers, jockeys, veterinarians, or others.)
For those stakeholder groups that have expressed an opinion, please list the points on which they agree or disagree, and the arguments they have expressed.
HRA regulatory was supportive.
Are there any affected stakeholder groups that have not been consulted on this proposal?
Century was consulted but did not comment.
Please attach any formal letters of support or opposition by stakeholder groups. Files must be .pdf, .doc, .docx, or .txt format and under 3072k for the system to accept the submission. You can add a maximum of 3 attachments.
E. Attach the rule language you are proposing. Please show new language in a new paragraph below the current wording. If you are proposing that current rule language be eliminated, please indicate the text to be deleted with [delete: sample deleted copy]
NEW Wording
If the track or weather conditions are questionable for the warming up or racing of horses, including actual temperature, the Judges shall convene a meeting with the representative of the drivers and trainers and a representative of racetrack management. If required by the Judges, the representative of the drivers and trainers shall conduct a secret ballot of the drivers and trainers of horses participating in that program of racing to determine whether racing should be conducted. If the vote of the drivers and trainers determines that more than 50% vote against racing, the card shall be cancelled. If more than 50% and less than 75% vote to race, trainers will be allowed to withdraw horses without penalty. If more than 75% vote to race, the regular rules of withdrawal and scratching of horses will apply. If the drivers vote alone is more than 50% to cancel they should be allowed to withdraw their services without penalty. The foregoing does not prevent racetrack management from canceling the races due to track or weather conditions without consultation with the Judges and the horsepeople’s representative.
OLD Wording
418 s Questionable track conditions If track conditions are questionable, the *judges board must meet with a representative of the association and the duly elected representatives of the *horsemen to consider the matter and the following applies: (a) (b) (c) (d) if the *meeting results in an unanimous decision that track conditions are safe for racing, no withdrawals are allowed; if the meeting results in a decision other than an unanimous decision that track conditions are safe for racing, an *owner or *trainer may *scratch a *horse after depositing an amount equal to 10% of the total purse to be raced for with *Horse Racing Alberta; the money deposited is to be retained by Horse Racing Alberta, or returned to the owner or trainer, at the direction of the judges board; if the number of withdrawals reduces the field to less than 5, the *licensed operator may postpone a *stake or cancel an overnight event.
F. Do any racing jurisdictions currently have a version of this rule in effect? If yes, please attach copies of those rules.
Yes AGGO
21.01 In case of unfavorable weather or other unavoidable cause, Associations with the consent of the Judges shall postpone or cancel races in accordance with this Chapter.
21.01.01 If the track or weather conditions are questionable for the warming up or racing of horses, including actual temperature, the Judges shall convene a meeting with the representative of the drivers and trainers and a representative of racetrack management. If required by the Judges, the representative of the drivers and trainers shall conduct a secret ballot of the drivers and trainers of horses participating in that program of racing to determine whether racing should be conducted. If the vote of the drivers and trainers determines that more than 50% vote against racing, the card shall be cancelled. If more than 50% and less than 75% vote to race, trainers will be allowed to withdraw horses without penalty. If more than 75% vote to race, the regular rules of withdrawal and scratching of horses will apply. If the drivers vote alone is more than 50% to cancel they should be allowed to withdraw their services without penalty. The foregoing does not prevent racetrack management from canceling the races due to track or weather conditions without consultation with the Judges and the horsepeople’s representative.
In the event of a forecasted extreme temperature, the Extreme Temperature Standards at shall be applied.
G. Review the Rules Governing Horse Racing in Alberta and identify any other Rules this change would affect and submit proposed amendments to those rules to comply with changes that would be made by this proposal.
https://thehorses.com/regulatory/policies-and-procedures/136-race-day-cancellation-policy
The same language should be added to the race day cancellation policy
-0-