Looking Ahead to 2026: Improving Field Size

As Thoroughbred racing heads into a new year, it faces the inevitable challenge of learning from the past 12 months and applying those lessons to a new year. With 2026 at hand, BloodHorse has reprised its online year-end survey to ask some of the sport's leading individuals for their opinions on pertinent issues facing the sport. Through Jan. 2 in the BloodHorse Daily and on www.bloodhorse.com, a select group of panelists will address issues such as the most exciting freshman sire for 2026, what participants tell newcomers they like most about the sport, fixed-odds wagering, foal crop size, the Breeders' Cup, and the Triple Crown. We continue the series today with a question about field size. While realizing there are countless other voices, the hope is that these answers will spark meaningful discussion within the industry. Anyone who would like to offer their opinion is encouraged to submit it in writing to editorial@bloodhorse.com for inclusion in our Letters to the Editor. Longer pieces can be considered for an Industry Voices column. To access our 2023 year-end survey, please click the following link for a pdf version. Responses were edited for style and clarity. Question: What are one or two ideas that should be tried to increase field size? Mark Casse, Hall of Fame trainer: Field size is always going to be a problem. You have to remember the scrutiny we are under with all the commission rules. When I started training 47 or 48 years ago, we could give a horse all kinds of medications. When you had a horse that needed help to run, you could get him help. But that's no longer the case. You had to change the way you trained. Probably the best way to increase field size is to have less races. Surfaces also come into play. Turf races are popular because horses were originally bred to race on grass. It's my belief that only 30% of horses handle dirt while 85% handle grass. Turf is just more natural for them and it's one of the reasons I've pushed so hard for synthetic surfaces because they are so close to turf. Turfway Park's field size with Tapeta is crazy. I am sure the synthetic track at Belmont Park will be huge for them in New York. That's going to be a big game changer. For me, the last 20 years I haven't stabled in New York, but I will probably have 30 to 40 horses there next winter. Some people may be wary, but I've always said, if you stand still, you will get run over and if you don't learn to adapt, you will get left behind. Dirt is a struggle and it's going to continue to be a struggle. You have Oaklawn Park, which is all dirt and they have large fields, but it's a short meet with a lot of money. Eric Hamelback, CEO of the National Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association: Declining field size is often discussed as a numerical or wagering issue, but at its core it is a horsemen's economic issue. Owners and trainers make entry decisions based on risk, opportunity, and the chance to compete for purse money. When those factors become skewed, horses stay in the barn, which leads to shrinking fields. One area where the industry can act immediately is in how races are written. Over time, condition books have become increasingly complex and, in many cases, overly restrictive. Narrow conditions, layered exclusions, and "extras" written to accommodate one or two specific horses may address short-term challenges, but they often limit participation and reduce options for the broader horse population. For horsemen, this can create an inefficiency: horses that are fit and ready have fewer logical places to run, resulting in missed starts, increased costs, and ultimately smaller fields. Simplifying conditions and reducing unnecessary specificity would allow more horses to qualify for more races, giving trainers flexibility and owners more predictable earning opportunities. Fuller fields benefit not only horseplayers but also the people paying the day-to-day expenses of maintaining racehorses. When conditions are written to encourage participation rather than exclusion, horsemen are more likely to enter, even if the race is not a perfect fit. In addition, the industry should seriously consider broader testing of a rating-based system as a complement to our traditional claiming races. A well-designed rating system can group horses based on past performance, helping to avoid the common problem of horses who may be "between conditions" or coming back from a layoff. From a horsemen's perspective, this creates clearer pathways to competition and reduces the economic inefficiency of holding horses out while you are waiting for the right race to appear. Importantly, a rating system does not have to undermine the claiming structure, which remains a critical economic foundation of the sport. Claiming races provide liquidity, opportunity, and risk management for owners. Any rating system should be introduced carefully, through pilot programs or state-bred races, to coexist with claiming rather than replace it. The goal is not to eliminate existing models, but to give horsemen more workable options that create a healthier, more sustainable betting product. Scott Hazelton, FanDuel TV analyst: It is a really tough topic. I truly think it starts with foal crop rebounding and why I think there is hope for that is because the demand for horses is at a height I don't think we've seen in a decade-plus. So, perhaps with the demand breeders or potential breeders hopefully see this and help to increase the supply. Joe Orseno, trainer and Florida Horsemen's Benevolent and Protective Association board member: First and foremost, look at the tracks that have high purse structures. There are no complaints about field size at Turfway Park or Kentucky Downs. If you can raise purses, you will get more horses. It's much akin to "you build it and they will come." Even with dirt racing. At Oaklawn Park, they only offer dirt racing and they have no problems with their cards. Sometimes there could be bad weather, but people are running because of the purses. Tracks also have to do a better job when they allot stalls. They have to allot more stalls to the trainers who run their horses. Here at Gulfstream Park, big trainers will bring a large outfit down here and only half their string or a third of it runs at the meet. All they want to do is freshen up their horses until they can get back to Kentucky or New York and run for bigger purses. They need to give more stalls to the trainers that will run their horses instead of the ones that are here for the sunshine. Ramiro Restrepo, bloodstock agent and owner: In Hong Kong, the class handicap system is phenomenal; every race has a full field and the races are super competitive. I went to Happy Valley Racecourse and saw 10 races, 14-horse fields in every race, and every finish was a blanket finish, because the horses are super competitive in terms of how they're rated. There's less spotting of a horse and it's more like, "This is our slot." We're constantly spotting horses for the best opportunity to win, and when you're that careful of where you're going to run, it sometimes leads to fewer starts because you're just trying to hit that bull's eye every time. With this class system, you're set. If you're rated, you know, blank to blank, that's where you're going. It doesn't afford you the opportunity to overthink yourself—you're going in that spot. I've always wanted to switch to that, rather than the claiming game. If I were the head of a racetrack where you do the class system, you can join forces with a sales company and do end-of-the-month digital sales or paddock sales. That way it could be open trade on rated horses if they're not black-type material. Instead of the claiming game, you can still create trade. … The horses could be worked out right from the paddock. Tom Robbins, executive vice president of racing and industry relations at Del Mar: The calculation of field size is the metric most commonly used to measure a track's program/product. Its relevance to wagering is important. However, field size review deserves a greater in-depth analysis to determine a track's trend. My response is specifically tailored to Del Mar, addressing our experience in both dirt and turf racing. It is worth noting that California racing does not have additional sources of income to support purse structures and other initiatives that other jurisdictions may have. Managing expectations: As the national Thoroughbred population declines, it's imperative to understand one's local horse inventory and the history of those numbers. At Del Mar, our racing department works closely with our management team and the Thoroughbred Owners of California to design a balanced and well-considered program. The realities of our challenges are understood. Incentive programs: We have aided our racing programs for years (supported by Del Mar and Thoroughbred Owners of California) by offering horsemen incentives/programs designed to bolster horse inventory. Balance is essential. For example, over-reliance on turf racing (tracks with turf courses understand the temptation) can lead to an imbalance and overuse of a turf course. Not every horse in a track's inventory wants to run on turf! Condition book programming is vitally important. Filling a high percentage of condition book races is critical to support a stronger field size. State-bred programs: California-breds represent nearly 50% of our starts. We have worked closely with the California Thoroughbred Breeders Association and TOC over the years to offer multiple racing incentives to reward those who own and breed California-breds. Communication with veterinarians (attending/regulatory) and track/turf superintendents: Learn all you can from those who prepare and maintain the tracks, and regularly communicate with your veterinary teams. The racing department is the conduit between horsemen and management and needs to be well educated about those processes and results. The importance of a consistent training/racing surface can't be overstated—we ALL benefit from producing a more raceable sound population which should lead to better fields. The above represents a back-to-basics viewpoint, which requires long hours and a supportive management team with the desired goal of achieving a better product. There are no shortcuts. We are fortunate to have a racing secretary, David Jerkens, and racing staff, who understand and exemplify all the above qualities.