1. Monday, 3rd October 2005 Presented by Louis ROMANET Chairman of ICSC Chairman of IRPAC IMPLEMENTATION OF QUALITY CONTROL ON RACING

2.  STRUCTURES  RULES AND CRITERIA APPLIED  RESULTS

3. STRUCTURESInternational INTERNATIONAL CATALOGUING STANDARDS COMMITTEE ICSC INTERNATIONAL GRADING AND RACE PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE IRPAC

4. ICSC 17 MEMBERS 4 founding countries : GB, IRE, FR, USA  Racing Authorities  Sales Companies  Breeders Associations OSAF Asian Racing Federation Canada IRPAC 16 MEMBERS European Pattern Committee US & Canadian Graded Stakes Committee Executive Council of OSAF ARF Grading and Race Planning Committee SITA Breeders Associations Membership

5. ICSC to achieve uniformity of cataloguing standards throughout the world to make recommendations to SITA to publish annually an international list of Black Type races IRPAC to implement quality control on existing Pattern or Grading systems to appoint the World Ranking Supervisory Committee and ratify its terms of reference to make recommendations to ICSC and SITA Principal Missions In June 2006, ICSC will review the situation after 3 years of IRPAC and decide of its future

6. STRUCTURESRegional Europe   European Pattern Committee North America   American Graded Stakes Committee   Canadian Grades Stakes Committee

7. REGIONAL STRUCTURES South America   Race Planning and Grading Committee of OSAF ARGENTINA BRAZIL CHILE PERU

8. REGIONAL STRUCTURES Asia   Race Planning and Grading Committee of Asian Racing Federation AUSTRALIA INDIA HONG KONG JAPAN NEW ZEALAND SINGAPORE SOUTH AFRICA UAE

9. RULES AND CRITERIA New Article 1 of International Agreement (ratified in October 2004)

10.   Granting Group/Graded races status or upgrading a race to a higher Group/Grade must be justified by the quality of the runners   Listed Race status must be justified by the quality of the runners or by published National standards to ensure quality runners Principles

11. Principles   Group/Graded races must be downgraded or lose their status if the quality of the runners does not justify it.   Listed Races must lose their status if the quality of the runners does not justify it or if they do not adhere to published National standards that ensure quality runners.

12.   l ast performances   points assigned for best performance   ratings assessed by handicappers Quality of the runners assessed by

13. Ratings assessed by World Rankings Supervisory Committee Composition 3 from Asia, including Co-Chairman, nominated by ARF 3 from Europe, including Co-Chairman, nominated by EPC 3 from Americas nominated by North America (2) and by OSAF (1)

14.   Group/Grade 1 : 115   Group/Grade 2 : 110   Group/Grade 3 : 105 5 pounds less for races restricted to 2 y.o. International ratings

15. NORTH-AMERICA : USA and Canada  Annual review of all races based on a combined system by points and ratings  Statisticals prepared by the JCIS based on the performances of the runners of the last 5 runnings of the race How quality is currently assessed ?

16. SOUTH-AMERICA : Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Peru  Individual review of races based on the performances of runners How quality is currently assessed ?

17. ASIA : Australia : ratings (endorsed by Australian Pattern Committee in 2004) India : currently working towards a system based on ratings Hong Kong : ratings How quality is currently assessed ?

18. ASIA : New Zealand : point system Singapore : ratings (since 2001) South-Africa : ratings UAE : ratings How quality is currently assessed ?

19. EUROPE : France, Germany, Great Britain, Ireland, Italy, Scandinavian countries Annual review of all races based on the Pattern Race Ratings (average of the annual race rating achieved by a race over a 3-year period) How quality is currently assessed ?

20. RESULTS AUSTRALIA Major review proposed by the Australian Pattern Committee in 2004 : Objectives :   bring into line Australia’s Black Type listings with the current makeup of Australian Racing   conform Australian Black Type races to International Pattern structures

21. RESULTS AUSTRALIA Recommendations :   identify minimum benchmark quality levels   adopt ratings as reference tool to classify Group & Listed Races   alter list of Group & Listed Races Proposals adopted by Australian Racing Board for introduction at the beginning of the 2005/2006 season.

22. RESULTS RESULTS JAPAN 2005 ICS BOOK PART II 202, including 46 races open to foreign trained horses PART I 12 international races including : Group 1 : 4 Group 2 : 6 Group 3 : 2 TOTAL : 58 RACES OPEN TO FOREIGN TRAINED HORSES

23. RESULTS RESULTS JAPAN Objective : open progressively part of Black Type races open to foreign trained horses 2005: 58 RACES 2006: 85 RACES 2007 : 110 RACES i.e. 50% of Black Type races

24. RESULTS SOUTH AMERICA Creation of Grading Committees in Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Peru in 2004 Missions :   assign Group and Listed qualifications to races   monitor the quality of existing Black Type races on the basis of ratings

25. ICSC 2004ICSC 2005 G1G2G3LTOTALG1G2G3LTOTAL  2005/2004 ARGENTINA4855616022444516063218-2,60% BRAZIL3337506918929324270173-8,40% CHILE222425711101822236396-12,70% 20052006 G1G2G3LTOTALG1G2G3LTOTAL  2006/2005 PERU1114173476811152054-28,90%

26. RESULTS EUROPE January 2004 : Decision of the European Pattern Committee to strengthen the female programme Creation of 3 new Group 2 races October 2004 : IRPAC approved guidelines Any race granted Group/Graded status under exceptional circumstances must be reviewed every year by the relevant regional committee in charge of controlling quality in the existing Group/Graded system, and automatically downgraded after three runnings if the quality of the runners does not comply with the criteria enforced.

27. SUMMARY Significant progress has been achieved over three years Rankings must be implemented overall in Asia in South America (adjustment of scales) in Asia Quality of races must be assessed by quality of runners all over the world Races must be downgraded if the quality does not justify it.