Well, this isn't good...
 

Nothing people around the game don't know, but also have done NOTHING to fix.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/30/us...acks.html?_r=1

Davy Jacobsen doesn't think there is a problem?

Given politics here in NYS, I think today's report on the NYRA takeout snafu (http://www.saratogian.com/articles/2...2647033739.txt), may be far more damaging to the sport in New York.

The recommended comments are telling...and frightening. People are overboard with the bleeding heart routine. Bring on the slacktivists.

Don't you think overboard is what is needed now? Tracks and horsemen refuse to change. They have had ample time. Instead, things are getting worse by the day. Slots money is the single worst thing to ever happen to the sport.

The week of the Derby -- and NY Times are doing features that tail-spin into rehashing Mike Gill and about the hopelessly incompetent 1% trainer George Iacovacci?

As brilliantly as they handed the article about Hansen's skin color...this was a laughably botched piece.

I would agree, if it wasn't true and things had changed. Don't you think the very idea that an ass clown like Iacovacci is making a living in the sport says a lot?

If Iacovacci and a guy like Rodeny Moyers really are making a living ... I sure would like to know how. Moyer claims horses left and right for $5,000 and they almost always regress 10 lengths or more in a matter of a week or two.

They can't be making a living. Moyers has to be taken an absolute bath.

I agree with you that Slots have done a whole lot to make the game worse off...but that feature is another poor effort imo and the timing of it makes it look like they have a vandetta against horse racing.

They must be making a living somehow. They seemed to be sucking up those $1000 last place checks. They get stalls for nothing, pay nobody, and collect low checks. I'd have to do the math, but I don't think they are starving.

Of course the timing was done for a reason. That is always a consideration on these types of reports. Regardless of how you feel about that and whether everything in there is exaggerated, it is still pretty damn accurate at portraying what goes on at racinos at the lower end of the claiming ladder. Purses are too high, and the "jail" rule needs to come back. The elimination of it was a slap in the face to bettors...and of course horses.

If they're not...maybe their horses are. I'm sure they're gyping on food and medications.

I'm sure I'm going to be asked to write something about this by an editor when the meet opens here in about 10 days.

They ran 800 races with 6,600 starters at PID last year -- and only had two horses breakdown the entire meet.

It will basically pivot into a piece about how Slots have been welfare for horsemen and racetracks and how none of it anywhere has ever gone to improve the sport and lower takeout rates and rarely does anything ever even go to seriously improve the racing product.

I don't agree on points like the jail rule and the claiming price levels. For the small-fry horse owner...the jail rule is a bitch and the higher claiming levels are raised the worse off you are. I don't think bettors or the racing product benefit much from the jail rule or higher claiming levels either. It just makes it much harder on someone who wants to take a gamble and claim a $5,000 horse in good ole tax free PA. The jail rule is still in play here anyway.

Surely you understand why the jail rule would be good for horses and bettors? First, horses won't be bought for $15 or $20k and run back for $10k to steal a purse, whether they are healthy or not...and really, how many of them are? Second, when that is done, the races are often unbettable. It used to be you could bet against these kind, but not so much any longer. Trainers aren't trying to cash bets any more, they are just trying to suck up slots tokens.

Trying to cater to small time owners is helping to make things worse, not better, because guys like Jacobsen and the Eclipse award winning owner Gill just take advantage of it.

Who are some of the trainers having success abusing the jail rule right now?

A lot of the alchemists trainers normally will give horses a little time off of the claim before they start plunging them.

Having claimed horses for $3,500 - $4,000 - and $5,000 before ... it's very annoying to have to wait out an entire month or run them against open $7,500 horses which is stupid.

My understanding is that NYRA was considering a relaxation of the jail rules early this past winter, as a way to help with field size, but ultimately (and thankfully, in my opinion) decided against it. With all the focus on horse welfare, I was really surprised to see California alter its rule, so that only the winner of a claiming race is stuck in jail for 25 days (as opposed to 30 days in NY).

I'm not sure where it was implemented (California or Arkansas?), but one rule change that I would like to see implemented on a broader basis is one where a claiming horse off more than six months can run "protected" for the first start off the layoff (provided it is running within a certain percentage of the price it ran for before the layoff). The ability to at least get a crack at two purses might encourage more owners to provide a break to a horse that needs one.

I don't follow trainers at the small tracks that closely, just learn the move up guys.

You are missing the point though. Why would you claim a horse for 5k if you didn't think it was better than a 5k horse?

I don't have a problem with that rule. I think both states you mention have it.

If I'm going to claim a horse for $5,000 I want to win as many open 5K claimers with him as possible.

Lets say the horse wins by 3 lengths and runs a figure on par with or faster than par with your typical open $7,500 claiming level winner...and come back fine.

With the jail rule: he's running back in a month or two at open 5K level. Hopefully people will be bluffed but most likely he's getting claimed.

Without the jail rule: he's running back at the open 5K level as soon as possible. Hopefully people will be bluffed but most likely he's getting claimed.

The only difference is that the rule forces the horse to sit out.

Now, lets say the horse runs 4th by 5 lengths and comes out of the race well.

With the jail rule: He's forced to wait out a month before he can enter.

without jail: He's running back for 5k as soon as a race goes that he fits distance wise.


Now lets say the horse comes back bad. You can't drop from the bottom.


I suppose the jail rule is fine as long as it starts a few rungs off the bottom. When you have guys claiming stuff for 15K and running back for 5K two weeks later ... that's not good. That just doesn't happen very often though.

There were a lot of big drops off the claim over the winter. It has slowed considerably, as has the number of breakdowns.

I just read where NY R&W is intituting a rule by which the purse may not be more than two times the claiming tag. Makes sense to me. I know horsemen will bark but if the game is facing massive protests by useful idiots and other assaults, it's small price. Over the winter $7500 horses were running for about $40k. That is simply too much.

When the claim box is so active you can almost assume that if your horse is in form, he'll be claimed. That knowledge can lead some people to not bother to look at a horse's health with an eye to the long view.

As for the NYT, I wonder why they waited for the Monday of Derby week to begin their annual "ramp up the excitement about racing" series? Did the occupiers come back and take up all their happy stories?

I get all this, but that isn't the way the game was supposed to played. You didn't expect to lose 5k horses because they were legitimate $5k horses. People claimed horses because they thought they were undervalued, not valued just right. Slots changed all that, and the horses get the short end of the stick.

This isn't a new thing as you know. The purse/claiming price ratio has been a problem for a decade, but it is mostly at places where nobody notices outside of us diehards. It was never going to fly in New York when horses started breaking down.

The situation this winter at Aqueduct may have just been a run of bad luck (not my view), or a confluence of many factors (some of which NYS and the RWB bear responsiblility for, although you will never get such acknowledgement) that led to a situation with which no one was happy.

$7500 claimers were not running for $40,000 for most of the winter at Aqueduct. They were generally running for $30,000 (and for $40,000 on a few isolated occasions - Gotham Day and Wood Day, when all full fields were boosted by $10,000). It may be too much, but keep in mind that $7500 claimers currently run for $23,000 at Parx, and there is competition among the tracks for horses, especially during the winter. To enact a rule as a knee-jerk reaction without looking at the entire landscape and regulate that NYRA can only run such races for a $15,000 purse next winter likely means that there will be no $7,500 claimers running here next winter. (That might not be a bad thing, as the hope is that the racino money will lead to the bottom rising in NY, but I doubt the RWB considered such things.)

As for the bolded language above, I agree completely.

I hear ya.

But hey, they're about to have legal prostitution over by Fort Erie. http://www.goerieblogs.com/news/writ...on-in-ontario/

We already have slots, table games, even Pai-Gow at Presque Isle Downs ... how long until prostitution becomes the new slots?

The jail rule is really not going to do very much in terms of stopping breakdowns and in some cases actually can be a contributing cause. Lets not forget that a guy dumping a horse off the claim is 1st trying to dump the horse and secondly trying to earn some purse money back. Just delaying that 25 or 30 days doesnt really help the horse unless there is a new 30 day cure that has been developed. What some trainers do when they claim a bad one with a jail rule in place is simply walk the horse for 3 weeks, maybe pony without a rider on it for a few days and then drop the horse in. Because they have been given a short break often the horses start to feel better, act a little less sore and are able to pass the vet exam. Then because they are feeling better, may warm up ok and the jock lets them run. However often the underlying issue wasnt actually healed and as the horse puts forth effort the leg comes apart.

This isnt to say that this wont happen if the rule isnt in place either but relying on rules with little regard to the individuals who are calling the shots is misguided.

I agree that purses for lower level races can be out of whack but lets not forget for those who dont pay the bills that you have to give owners a reasonable chance of getting some return.

Cannon, I don't disagree with any of that. However, the point would be to stop those with the specific intent of flipping a horse quickly for less money and trying to win a purse. It makes it a bigger gamble, less chance for success with more expenses.

No doubt it won't change anything for those that take a horse for more upstanding reasons that comes back bad.

it's an upsetting article, but I had to laugh at the angry commenter who said they were "finding out" who the main sponsor of the Kentucky Derby is so they could "boycott their product." Le sigh.

I've never done this before but went directly to the comments bypassing the article.

Don't forget that at the end of the day the majority of these horses are then sent to slaughter for human consumption

There are so many layers here but the one that makes me sick first off - not having read the piece - is the me-too-ism... the I-can't-think-for-myself-so-will-let-thee-media-do-that-for-me way of nonthinking.

Sometimes people can be so easily manipulated it's frightening.
I keep thinking of the end of this scene...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8IBnfkcrsM

Not happening.

my first snort at the article was when they quoted maggi moss. hell, she acted as one of asmussens lawyers, and then wants to sound like it's all about the horses. anyone can talk the talk.

not sure what the answer is, except, once again, to beat the 'run the trainers at fault' out of town on a rail. tarred and feathered if need be. tracks like to offer higher purses to keep big fields. owners like them because maybe they won't lose as much money this year as last.

They'll find out that the race horses are treated a lot better than the chickens, I'd guess, and then give them another thing to protest.

I understand but we are only talking 25-30 days versus what? 15-20? Perhaps if there were more thorough investigations done when there is a breakdown trainers would be a bit more careful.

Some of the comments so far...

pete who?



'Remember Barbaro? The horse whose hind hoof/fetlock was shattered coming out of the gate? He was at top of the charts based on the stud book, but you could see just by looking at him that his delicate legs and tiny hoofs (almost "en point, like a ballerina)'



good lord. amazing. i can't believe that the people making such posts are smart enough to figure out how to get on the internet to begin with.

I never heard the story about Star Plus and the lenghts that Earle Mack went through to get him back. :tro:

Yes but I believe overboard is what is needed with bigger issues in this country that the "free" press is too chicken s.hit to tackle.

How many times does the Gill incident need to be mentioned? If I were to do a search of the NYT website would articles critical of Goldman Sachs far outnumber criticism of horse racing?

Somehow I doubt it.

They want us to be mad over things that don't really matter in the grand scheme of things. Then when bad things happen on the micro level they hyper focus on it to keep us distracted from the big picture.

what they need to do is fire Campo, Hayward, and the rest of those crooks. Establish some integrity in their product, then work their way down. lasix should be the last of their worries.

As I said in another thread...there is NOTHING in this latest story from the NYT that is new, none of it, and I also get the feeling that some of these quotes have been taken from other comments these people made in the past. The flowery prose is also particularly distasteful, aiming to sensationalize a story that is otherwise stale.

PatCummings hit the nail on the head. I know it was already brought up here, but when the best the NYT can do is bring up ancient Michael Gill stories, I'm not positive there's much of a "news" story there. Moreover, Gill had been causing trouble in the racing world long before PEN ever had a casino, so the tie between Gill's antics and slots, IMHO, is spurious at best.

HBO RealSports, E:60, different stories over YEARS led to this piece...it's just wildly unoriginal. The stories are important, sad, etc, etc...but none of it is new.

The really big, and important stuff, is completely censored.

It is stale for us that follow the game, but nothing has changed, so why not say it again? How many of those outlined in the article have been held accountable for abusing horses other than Gill?

Today's work from the NYT...I have no idea what the hell this writers point is.

http://therail.blogs.nytimes.com/201...to-be-learned/

I think it's supposed to be about how racings leadership can learn a lesson by the sustained populairty of the Derby.