:rolleyes:

I find myself agreeing with you and Blackthroatedwind on this one, I have nothing against Vic or Joel, but the optics are 'strange'(maybe not the best adjective) when an announcer is calling a race where he has an invested interest in it and for us to believe everything is on a level playing field. To me this discussion is not about character or if Vic is being impartial or not, it's the optics that Hollywood Pk would allow this, which frankly I am surprised that they did.

To quote Zito years ago, when asked about Bertrando returning to run after a yr of stud duty to the connections..."If you are going to be stallian be a stallian, if you are going to be a horse be horse". you can't be both.

:tro:

As far as I'm concern the superstars of the races are what we come to see. The ZENYATTA, RACHEL ALEXANDRA of today, EASY GOER and SECRETARIAT of yesterday. These horses are the ones most watched, adored and bet on. They get the most attention not the jockey unless he is going for some type of record accomplishment. Even with that those races are called fairly until the "superstar" or horse to beat makes his move. To call a horse just because a certain jockey to win is in your best interest is a conflict. Thank God Rosario wasn't the regular rider of SECRETARIAT otherwise Joel would be moving like a machine.

Honestly, you dont think this is happening?

In PIck 3's, 4' and Pick 6's adding in additional horses?...probably quite a bit as normal handicapping. As a straight win bet, I doubt that much.

I was thinking about how it would change a call. All I could come up with is when the announcer gives credit to a jock for stealing a race with a "perfect ride" etc. I would think it would change that part of a call. Durkin and Trevor have always done this. If they were jock agents it would really change some stuff in their calls. Don't think Vic has ever talked about it as much as them. So, it hasn't changed his calls nearly as much(if at all) as it would those two announcers.

Your in fantasy land....I have sat with a hall of fame trainer, he had a 25/1 shot in a race but loved a 4/1 shot from another barn, he bet out and cashed good. I placed the bet.

I said "that much"..I didn't say never

I would say it happens every day that races are run at every track....most of these guys are scraping by, not all of course, but at the smaller track especially, if they love someone, they are going to bet....

Ok, so while this thread was most entertaining, I didn't think I needed to listen to the call, just sit back an enjoy the craziness.

I finally did.

And now that I've seen what obvious favoritism sounds like, I have come to the conclusion that John G. Dooley must be the jock agent for at least half the colony here if that's all it takes.

It's funny, I've never met someone who you could tell loved their job so much so fast. Dooley's that guy.

NT

Ha, even when he's walking around and NOT announcing, if you get him talking about something, he's just as positive and upbeat and seemingly thrilled to be a part of it as anyone I've ever met at the track.

LOL

That's cool. You can name one after that "Denman". The only other race caller we will ever hear in So-Cal again :)

Stupid thread? You did vote no.

The no's should have their breeding rights revoked.

Just because you dont like it doesnt make it wrong. Not to mention that jockey agents are rarely considered the idea models of professionalism with a few notable exceptions.

I find it hard to believe that it would be condoned in any jurisdiction. I think everyone should have a big problem with that unlike this inane announcer deal.

How exactly is a race judged to be called 'fairly'? A race call is the callers opinion of what is happening. It has nothing to do with anything.