Blog Post | 114 KY. L. J. ONLINE | February 27, 2026
Legal Labels and Digital Reels: The Rise of Historical Horse Racing in Kentucky
By: Jay McCormick, Staff Editor, Vol. 114
The average patron who walks into a Kentucky racetrack might expect extravagant outfits, mint juleps, and rows of live thoroughbreds charging down the track. Those seeking this quintessential horse racing experience often come to the Commonwealth for precisely that reason—after all, Kentucky is widely regarded as the horse capital of the world.[1] That traditional image still exists. Yet, it is no longer the only defining feature of Kentucky’s racing landscape.[2]
Walk into the Red Mile in Lexington on a typical day, and the most prominent form of wagering is not on live racing, but on a large gaming floor filled with electronic terminals.[3] These machines flash, spin, and accept rapid wagers in a manner closely resembling traditional slot machines.[4] But despite these similarities, Kentucky law does not classify these devices as casino games.[5] Rather, they are treated as wagers placed on previously run horse races—known as Historical Horse Racing (“HHR”).[6] This distinction, grounded in legal classification rather than technological design, has proven central to the machines’ legality and to the rapid expansion of HHR across the Commonwealth.[7] The rise of HHR thus illustrates a broader feature of modern gambling regulation: Whether a new wagering technology is permissible often turns less on how it functions and more on how the law chooses to define it.
HHR machines began appearing in Kentucky racetracks and gaming halls in the early 2010s as the racing industry searched for new revenue streams in the face of increasing competition from casinos in neighboring states.[8] These machines allowed patrons to wager on anonymized previously run races, while ostensibly maintaining the pooled, pari-mutuel structure traditionally associated with horse racing wagers.[9]
In practice, HHR terminals operate in a manner that closely resembles traditional electronic gaming machines.[10] After choosing a wager size, the patron presses a button and animated reels begin to rotate while an easily overlooked video or simulated graphic of a previously run race is displayed somewhere on the screen.[11] Some machines permit the user to review limited past performance data and select a horse, while others allow the selection to be randomized, allowing the user to bet much faster.[12] Although the interface mirrors slot-style gaming, the outcome is determined by the results of the underlying historical race rather than a random number generator.[13]
From the outset, however, HHR machines faced significant legal scrutiny.[14] Critics argued that the machines were functionally indistinguishable from slot machines and that they therefore fell outside the constitutional exception permitting pari-mutuel wagering.[15] Unsurprisingly, anti-gambling activists were a major party in the legal battle against HHR,[16] especially considering that—outside of horse racing—traditional methods of gambling are outlawed in Kentucky.[17] The controversy ultimately reached the Kentucky Supreme Court, where the central question became whether the wagering systems used by HHR genuinely preserved the pari-mutuel structure required under Kentucky law.[18]
The legal battle over HHR reached its boiling point in 2020 with the landmark case Family Trust Foundation of Kentucky, Inc. v. Kentucky Horse Racing Commission.[19] In a unanimous decision, the Kentucky Supreme Court delivered a crushing blow to the industry, ruling that HHR machines did not qualify as pari-mutuel wagering.[20] The Court’s reasoning largely aligned with what an average onlooker might intuitively suspect: that HHR wagering did not resemble traditional horse race betting in which patrons wager against one another into a shared pool and ultimately win other bettors’ stakes.[21] Instead, the systems suggested that payouts were effectively drawn from the operator’s funds—so-called “house money”—a hallmark of traditional casino-style gaming.[22]
In response to this decision, which threatened the continued operation of HHR machines across the Commonwealth, the Kentucky General Assembly enacted Senate Bill 120 in 2021.[23] Rather than requiring a fundamental redesign of the machines, the legislature amended the statutory definition to encompass the existing HHR model.[24] By amending KRS 230.210, they expanded the definition of "pari-mutuel wagering" to explicitly include "previously run" races, effectively making the briefly illegal HHR system a protected form of horse racing.[25]
The impact of this reclassification has been substantial.[26] The expansion of HHR has dramatically increased wagering activity, with reports indicating that approximately $10.5 billion was wagered on HHR machines in Kentucky during the 2025 fiscal year—roughly five times greater than the annual numbers prior to formal legalization in 2021.[27] These revenues have, in turn, contributed to larger race purses and increased investment in Kentucky’s racing industry, reinforcing HHR’s growing economic centrality.[28]
It bears noting that the new statutory definition of pari-mutuel wagering adopted in KRS 230.210 diverges from the commonly understood meaning, which typically involves wagering on a live, identifiable race with a single determined wagering pool.[29] By broadening the definition to encompass wagering on previously run races through electronic systems and permitting wagers to be pooled and settled on a rolling basis, the legislature preserved HHR’s legality while departing from the hallmark features of traditional pari-mutuel wagering.[30]
To a casual observer at a venue like the Red Mile, it may be difficult to discern a “horse race” in a digital terminal that chooses whether one wins or loses in seconds. Yet by tethering these machines to Kentucky’s longstanding tradition of horse race gambling, the Commonwealth has effectively permitted slot-like gaming without formally adopting a casino model. Whether viewed as a pragmatic adaptation to sustain the racing industry or as a notable expansion of permissible wagering through statutory definition, HHR demonstrates that the future of Kentucky’s racing landscape is being shaped not only on the track, but also in the text of the law.
[1] Rebecca Berry, Why Kentucky Is the Horse Capital of the World, Horse Network (Apr. 26, 2022), https://horsenetwork.com/2022/04/why-kentucky-is-the-horse-capital-of-the-world/.
[2] See Historical Horse Racing, Ky. Travel Indus. Ass'n, https://www.ktia.com/historical-horse-racing (last visited Feb. 24, 2026).
[3] See Featured Games, Red Mile Gaming & Racing, https://redmileky.com/gaming/featured-games (last visited Feb. 15, 2026) (illustrating that many of the featured games at Red Mile are electric terminal-based games).
[4] See Frank Legato, Historical Horse Racing Constitutes a Growing Segment of the Gaming Machine Market-But Legal Challenges Persist, CasinoCenter (Feb. 12, 2026), https://www.casinocenter.com/hhr-and-the-law/.
[5] See Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 230.210 (West 2026); see also Edward Rosenthal, Racing Around the World: Kentucky Purses Soar on the Back of Historical Gaming Bill, Owner Breeder (Aug. 21, 2025), https://theownerbreeder.com/stories/racing-around-the-world-kentucky-purses-soar-on-the-back-of-historical-gaming-bill/ (explaining that Kentucky law does not consider these types of betting machines as illegal casino games).
[6] Rosenthal, supra note 5.
[7] Id.
[8] Barrett W. Kerr, Gambling on Growth: An Analysis of the Early Impact of Historical Horse Racing on Kentucky’s Thoroughbred Industry 5–6 (Apr. 25, 2023) (M.S. thesis, University of Kentucky) (UKnowledge).
[9] Id.
[10] Fantini Rsch., Historical Horse Racing; Examining the Potential of an Emerging Sector of the Gaming Industry (2019), https://archive.legmt.gov/bills/2019/Minutes/Senate/Exhibits/bus30a06.pdf.
[11] Id.
[12] Id.
[13] Id.
[14] See, e.g., Appalachian Racing, LLC v. Fam. Tr. Found. of Ky., Inc., 423 S.W.3d 726, 735 (Ky. 2014).
[15] See id.; see also Commonwealth v. Kentucky Jockey Club, 38 S.W.2d 987 (Ky. 1931) (holding that the Kentucky Constitution’s ban on lotteries was not understood to prohibit pari-mutuel wagering on horse races and explaining that regulation of wagering generally lies within the Legislature’s power, including the ability to permit limited racetrack pool betting while prohibiting other forms of gambling).
[16] Kerr, supra note 8, at 6.
[17] Rosenthal, supra note 5.
[18] Fam. Tr. Found. of Ky., Inc. v. Kentucky Horse Racing Comm'n, 620 S.W.3d 595, 597 (Ky. 2020).
[19] Id.
[20] Kentucky Supreme Court Rules Historical Horse Racing Gambling Devices Unlawful, Not ‘Pari-Mutuel', Lex18 (Sept. 24, 2020, at 19:08 EST), https://www.lex18.com/news/covering-kentucky/kentucky-supreme-court-rules-historical-horse-racing-gambling-devices-unlawful-not-pari-mutuel.
[21] Ryan Roark, Not So Lucky in Kentucky: Constitutionality of Kentucky’s Slot Machines, Ky. L. J. Online at 1, 5 (Jan. 24, 2023), https://www.kentuckylawjournal.org/online-originals/not-so-lucky-in-kentucky-constitutionality-of-kentuckys-slot-machines.
[22] See Fam. Tr. Found. of Kentucky, Inc., 620 S.W.3d at 601.
[23] Patience Martin & Pam Thomas, Kentucky Is Now a Casino State: Slot Machine Gambling Surpasses $10 Billion Annually, But at What Cost?, Ky. Ctr. Econ. Pol’y (Sept. 15, 2025), https://kypolicy.org/kentucky-is-now-a-casino-state-slot-machine-gambling-surpasses-10-billion-annually-but-at-what-cost/.
[24] See id.
[25] Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 230.210 (West 2026).
[26] Martin & Thomas, supra note 23.
[27] Id.
[28] HHR Bill Signed into Law by Kentucky Governor, Bloodhorse (Feb. 22, 2021), https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/246343/hhr-bill-signed-into-law-by-kentucky-governor.
[29] Martin & Thomas, supra note 23.
[30] Id.