Qualifying races, especially for 2-year-olds, are in full swing right now, and this year they seem to be getting even more attention than usual -- not just for the babies, but for sophomores and older horses as well. Atlanta qualified for the second time last week and Hambletonian hopeful Venerate is a perfect two-for-two in what cynics used to call "Dummy Derbies." Speaking of perfect, Perfect Sting going gate-to-wire in 1:48 4/5 in a qualifier? Really? My question is, "What does a qualifier even mean these days?" Back when I raced horses the qualifying time meant something -- it was a legitimate standard and not all horses could attain it. In 1979 at Northfield, pacers needed to go 2:06 and trotters had to go 2:08 to qualify during the summer. Today, that standard is 2:04 for pacers and 2:07 for trotters. Back then, Green Speed and Doc McBean shared the trotting track record at 2:00 1/5. Today the trotting track record is 1:52, set by Guardian Angel As in 2019. Can anybody remember a pacing race timed in over 2:00 at Northfield over a fast track? The qualifying times should be two to three seconds faster; probably more. Instead of qualifiers, why not go to a clocking system like the Thoroughbreds. Does Perfect Sting really need to qualify in a sub 1:50 mile? Why not just clock him and make sure he is good to go? Every trainer has a different opinion and a different preparation strategy, but to be ready to race at the top of his game, yes, Perfect Sting needed to go that fast, as trainer Joe Holloway graciously pointed out after being called out on social media recently. A friend posted info on Perfect Sting's speedy qualifier on Facebook and the first comment under the post was: "And they'll wonder why he goes lame in five starts." Holloway immediately replied, stating, "He is the soundest horse I have ever trained." But more telling was a later response. Perfect Sting did not have to qualify. He had raced in a Pennsylvania Sires Stake in mid-May and then scratched sick in late May. Most jurisdictions have a 45-day rule (up from the traditional 30-day rule back in the day) and Perfect Sting was well within that timeframe. On Facebook, Holloway explained (not that he was obligated to), "There were two entries (in the 3-year-old Open). We have had one start, we needed a good mile to stretch him out. Hopefully the M fills at least two Opens before Pace elims." Speaking of that 45-day rule, for many years I have railed against it as unfair to bettors. The idea of being able to race a horse, especially off a sick or lame scratch nearly a month and a half later with no indication of his fitness, seemed wrong. The traditional 30-day rule has always made far more sense. But with meaningless qualifying times that any horse can achieve, qualifiers in those situations have probably outlived their usefulness. Back in 2015, Ray Schnittker proposed a 120-day rule for qualifying, citing the expense (with many more horses racing from training centers, as opposed to being stabled at tracks) and lost racing time. I have come full circle. I am not sure I agree with the 120-day rule, but I think something like "first start of a calendar year off a layoff of 60 days or more," probably makes sense. Is a trainer going to drop into the box if their horse is not ready to at least earn a check? That is also an expense. Even this old dog can be convinced of the need for change. Meanwhile, on June 14 at Gaitway Farm, the green 3-year-old trotting filly Relentless Jackie was scheduled to make her first start behind the gate, attempting to qualify and ultimately race for money. She found herself in a "soft" qualifying field that featured Hambletonian winners Atlanta and Ramona Hill, among others. On the one hand, we used to love qualifiers like this, so our cheap (and usually slow) horses could get dragged along and get qualified. Relentless Jackie scratched out of a mile that Atlanta won in 1:56 3/5, possibly costing her a week of racing. Green horses should qualify against green horses, stakes horses against stakes horses. It is not always possible, but that should be the goal. Qualifiers? More like quagmires. Other than for a break off of the qualifier, no horse should be returned to "the list" following one poor start off a qualifier. That rule forces a "safe" or conservative drive and is unfair to bettors. Even worse is the policy at many racetracks that puts a horse on the qualifying list for any performance over the qualifying standard. Parked every step of the mile and got tired late, tough stuff. You are on the list. Again, we discourage an aggressive drive, giving our horse a chance to win. It's a bad rule and tracks that have it need to change it. Besides being a great place to grab a bagel and coffee and shoot the breeze with friends, qualifiers are a great place to see young provisional drivers (Ps) ply their trade. Often the top guys are not at qualifiers, so these younger drivers get a shot, and you can get a look at the future. That has certainly been the case for Harness Horse Youth Foundation alum Justin Irvine, a 19-year-old P-driver who posted a six-bagger at Northville Downs on June 4. If the name sounds familiar, he is the son of Don Irvine Jr, with nearly 7,500 career wins.  That's it for now. Now go cash. Perhaps on a horse just off a fast qualifier driven by a provisional driver. See you next month.