The news that Ceiling Kitty, two dates after her 'personal' third birthday (4th February foal), is to be retired to stud has caused barely a flutter it seems in the racing community. I find that disappointingly predictable as once again the sport apathetically accepts it and moves on, without any attempt to examine the serious questions it raises for the game.

She was a fine two year old. By Red Clubs out of a speedy US Tale of the Cat family, she won three times off the reel in May and June, progressing from a Kempton maiden to taking wins in Listed and then Group Two company at York and Ascot. Later in the season she was beaten less than 3 lengths behind Roshdu Queen at Newmarket at 6f.

She ended the season on a rating of 106 and the decision has been taken to send her to stud rather than racing as a 3yo.

The case for that makes fine commercial sense. I understand that completely. Not many owners, truth be told, make a profit in the sport and every kudos to those who do. Her three wins netted over £60,000 and in her juvenile season that's a splendid effort. Now she will produce foals and her lucky owners, 'A. Black and the Master Bettors' can look forward to further returns in time.

These foals are unlikely, if pedigree means anything, to be three mile chasers, two mile hurdlers or even Guineas contenders. The extent of their futures likely to lie at 5f and 6f, presumably as she will visit her own 'types' in the main.

The arguments are further enhanced by the fact that the progeny of Red Clubs don't tend to 'train on' statistically, including within this closer family, tend to be on the small side physically, and that she is something of a twilight horse, short of the very top but in that area where, at least until Royal Ascot, there are limited opportunities. 

Why wait another year to pay the training fees and find out she can't match the achievements of her first season when the averages suggest she won't?

For connections, then, the arguments are based on sound logic and good commercial sense.

Yet I have several issues with it, more for the sport as a whole, than for the commercial side, because racing needs to address the very issues that created this situation. 

Firstly the programme may be at fault, not catering sufficiently for horses just short of top level but too good for the handicap route. Racing should be able to cater for such situations without too much disruption to the calendar. Is that really the case, though? 

Another look suggests that with Goodwood, York, Ascot again, or Newmarket, perhaps Longchamp and the Breeders Cup it's hardly bereft later in the year. Also the 3yo weight for age allowances, even over sprint distances, give the youngsters a chance against their elders. That is one improvement racing has made in my time in the game.

An 88 rated Irish 3yo (Elleval) picked up a neat enough £36,000 in Meydan the other day (over 7f) but there are also sprint races there. No attempt from connections to let the filly take her chance and see how she went at least, rather than declaring her career over so immediately. "She won't grow, so she'll not get any better" mentality. Oh Dear! You don't know for sure at least until you try. Indeed plenty don't go on in their three year old year after a successful 2yo campaign, and blossom again as a 4 or even 5yo. Do we want to breed a generation of fast juveniles who pack it in after one season? She might be small, however in February of her 3yo season, whose to say the stats will play out? She might infact develop, or simply have a Lochsong style motor that makes her mighty competitive at a high enough level.

I fear it would sound melodramatic at this point to mention the problems racing has with looking after retired horses. Let's say her offspring are not up to her standard, perhaps 60 or 70 rated low grade handicappers, can they expect to be retired after their juvenile season? We could end up with a glut of such cases if too many follow the Ceiling Kitty route. They have 25 years of their lives left potentially. And even if they are decent, the cry of 'off to the paddocks' might come anyway because of the earlier arguments. 

Racing preciously values good flat horses that stay in training, exactly because so few on the flat seem to. Thank heavens for Frankel, Excelebration, Goldikova and company who keep the game rolling, but if the 'grab the money and run' is to become the rule for sprinters, the short term profit for owners it might bring only masks the longer term issues for the sport.

Of course none of these issues are the owners' problem, and in a cash strapped 2013 and beyond, their absolute right to do what is in personal interest understandably comes first. I am not in any way criticizing them, particularly in the current climate.

I wouldn't profess to have ready answers, however racing is all too happy to accept such situations without being willing to at least attempt to provide solutions. The game remains reluctant to face facts, and I expect little change to this situation.

Racing needs to wise up and at the very least add incentives to the calendar for such twilight (approximately 100 rated 3yos) horses. For those prepared to listen, Meydan provides a tremendous benchmark on how to do just that, and, even though the financial 'Kitty' remains a stumbling block elsewhere, at least a framework for others to build on.

If however survival remains the 'ceiling' of racing's ambition, further down the line there will be too many Ceiling Kittys.