Derby Trail Forums - conflict of interest

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)

- The Paddock (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)

- - conflict of interest (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30575)

conflict of interest

Being a jockey's agent and a track announcer.

From Wikipedia...

Quote:

More generally, conflict of interests can be defined as any situation in which an individual or corporation (either private or governmental) is in a position to exploit a professional or official capacity in some way for their personal or corporate benefit.
Depending upon the law or rules related to a particular organization, the existence of a conflict of interest may not, in and of itself, be evidence of wrongdoing. In fact, for many professionals, it is virtually impossible to avoid having conflicts of interest from time to time. A conflict of interests can, however, become a legal matter for example when an individual tries (and/or succeeds in) influencing the outcome of a decision, for personal benefit. A director or executive of a corporation will be subject to legal liability if a conflict of interests breaches his Duty of Loyalty.
There often is confusion over these two situations. Someone accused of a conflict of interest may deny that a conflict exists because he/she did not act improperly. In fact, a conflict of interests can exist even if there are no improper acts as a result of it. (One way to understand this is to use the term "conflict of roles". A person with two roles—an individual who owns stock and is also a government official, for example—may experience situations where those two roles conflict. The conflict can be mitigated—see below—but it still exists. In and of itself, having two roles is not illegal, but the differing roles will certainly provide an incentive for improper acts in some circumstances.)

Is there a need for two threads on this?

Quote:

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

Is there a need for two threads on this?

Yes. I want it put to a vote and last time I checked you didn't show up on the mod list.

I say no. Watch any baseball game and the team has its own set of biased announcers. Until his call is impacting the results of the race I couldn't care less if the announcer has a dog in the fight.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

I say no. Watch any baseball game and the team has its own set of biased announcers. Until his call is impacting the results of the race I couldn't care less if the announcer has a dog in the fight.

:zz:

Name an announcer who is an agent.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

:zz:

Name an announcer who is an agent.

Why would that make a difference? The announcer can't impact the results of the race so why would I care what other job the announcer has. This is silly, this is a sport where the owners, trainers, and jockeys are fully allowed to bet AGAINST their own horses. If we want to talk about conflict of interest isn't that the big one?

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

That's news to me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

That's news to me.

What is possibly stopping them?

Jockeys are certainly not legally allowed to bet against the horses they are riding. I believe owners and trainers can bet whoever they want.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

What is possibly stopping them?

http://www.chrb.ca.gov/policies_and_...ules6-2006.pdf

"1971. Wagering by Jockey or Driver.

"No jockeys or drivers shall make any wagers, or have any wagers made in their behalf, in any race in which they participate, except through the owners or trainers on the horses which they ride or drive.
Any owners or trainers wagering for such jockeys or drivers shall maintain records of all such wagers and all other presents or other gratuities given any jockeys or drivers. Such records will be furnished to the stewards or the Board or its investigators upon demand.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

OK, so the jockey has to do it through the owner and trainer. Still you don't think that a trainer can legally bet against his horse isn't a bigger conflict of interest than an announcer also being an agent?

Quote:

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

No because they are gambling.

Vic's getting a set amount of money for calling the races AND a set percentage for each of Rosario's rides with a sliding scale depending on placing. There is no gamble.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Being a jockey's agent and a track announcer.

From Wikipedia...

well I am not suggesting Vic does this at all but since you posted that definition.

You dont think he could go out of his way to make other riders in race decisions sound more poor then they might be, thus in net effect helping his client out?

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Jockeys are certainly not legally allowed to bet against the horses they are riding. I believe owners and trainers can bet whoever they want.

that never happens :rolleyes:

I have yet to see any plausible suggestion of how Vic could "exploit" his racecalling job to benefit Rosario. And note the word "plausible." Go have some hot dogs and beer, please.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diver67

I have yet to see any plausible suggestion of how Vic could "exploit" his racecalling job to benefit Rosario. And note the word "plausible." Go have some hot dogs and beer, please.

You obviously didn't read all of the quote...

Quote:

conflict of interests can exist even if there are no improper acts as a result of it.

And I'll go have some hot dogs after you kindly gfy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Name an announcer who is an agent.

I'm almost positive that Richard Grunder has Willie Martinez's book in Tampa. Bigs can verify.

Conflict of Interest? Would an example of that be when threads about certain people get closed, and threads about others don't get closed?

Wow,

Quite a day for Vic & Joel :tro: