By Matt Hegarty

Anyone with even a passing interest in horseracing has read over the past few months that the sport is facing an existential crisis brought about by a spate of deaths this winter at Santa Anita Park in Southern California. You wouldn’t even have to care a whit about the sport to hear that the sport is doomed. It’s been everywhere, especially in the lead-up to the Kentucky Derby.

So what to make of Kentucky Oaks day, when handle on the full card at Churchill Downs spiked 8 percent to a record, and handle on the Oaks itself jumped 10.4 percent?

Let’s get something out of the way right off the bat. The following analysis in no way attempts to minimize the threat facing racing. The sport is in jeopardy. A significant, very vocal set of the population, armed with the megaphone of social media, has leveraged the deaths in Southern California to raise existential alarms about the sport in an era in which animal-welfare issues consistently poll among the highest topics of concern. If racing cannot find a way to reduce horse deaths both in the short term and the long term, its days are numbered.

So let’s get to the bottom of the handle jump.

First of all, let’s focus on the sources of the most strident criticism of racing. Again, this in no way minimizes the concerns. But the most vocal critics – organizations like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals – were not betting on racing in the first place. Racing has a small fan base (as do many other sports), and it’s not likely that the bankrolls of the sport’s core group of bettors were impacted significantly by the controversy over the deaths. I’m sure that statement will be challenged on social media; it’s also true that all the bettors I know are still gravely concerned about the sport’s animals. But how many have stopped betting?

Second, the Derby and the Oaks are somewhat isolated from the larger trends facing racing. The event remains on the bucket list of a large number of people, and that’s not entirely because of the horses racing below the ever-pricier seats in the increasingly stratified grandstand at Churchill. It’s a cultural event that transcends the race itself. Year-after-year, Churchill posts higher revenue numbers for the Derby than the year before (ticket sales are a big part of that gain), a result of its strategy to market the event beyond the race. It also helps that the top 20 percent of earners in the U.S. and the idle wealthy are doing very well in this boutique economy – and those are the groups that are filling those luxury areas at Churchill.

Wagering on the Derby card topped $200 million in 2017, the first time any North American card had reached that number. Last year, it jumped another 8 percent to $224 million. While some of that handle gain last year was undoubtedly due to favorable tax changes affecting horseplayers that went into effect after the 2017 Derby, the stacked Triple Crown and big-event cards have become must-plays for bettors. The Oaks card this year was no exception.

If the sport is truly being impacted by the controversy over the deaths at Santa Anita, it’s not likely to show up in the handle figures for Churchill’s big cards this weekend. It may show up in attendance figures, on the margins, among those people who may have considered an $80 ticket to get in the door but are now disturbed too much by the deaths to attend a racing event. Attendance was down on Oaks day, but the weather this year was not nearly as amenable to walk-ups as last year. With heavy rain in the forecast again today (last year’s Derby was the wettest on record), it may not be possible to use attendance as a good metric.

Where the impact of the controversy is most likely to show up this year is in the television ratings. The Derby is annually one of the most broadly watched events in sports, drawing viewers from all walks of life. But last year, the Derby overnight rating was down 13 percent compared to the 2017 broadcast, the lowest since 2012, so there’s a downward trend already in place for this year’s comparison. Still, a sharp drop-off this year would cause intense worry among the Triple Crown properties.

Handle-wise, though, the sport will not gain much insight from the numbers for the Derby or Oaks this year (absent a steep decline that contradicts the Oaks numbers). Those drop-offs will instead show up for the sport’s everyday races, in markets already struggling to stay relevant. To determine the impact of the controversy on the racing industry as a whole, the sport will likely need to wait until after the Triple Crown is over.