Stauffer's call of the 6th tonight.

[PPerfectfan]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

I know it's the internet and all and we all get a little more brave - but would you speak to a customer at the track like that? I'd like to think that Hollywood expects a bit more professionalism.

I honestly dont see that talking to somone in a chat room has anything to do with his job. He replied to somone that obviously wants to take a jab at him for some unknown reason. If someone is offended by someone saying "bite me" on a message board, maybe they should just not be on the internet. jmvhfo of course! I dont know Vic, but I have seen him respond to every question asked of him, both good and bad with a level head and answering from his heart. I think it says alot that he post under his own name knowing that there are going to be those that take a jab at him for really no other reason that arm chair race calling or just to take a jab at a public figure. I am sure there are tons of other trainers, owners, jocks, HRTV and TVG personalities that come here, but dang sure make sure they dont let anyone know who they are for fear of getting bombarded with cheap shots. So I say "Geauxxxxx Vic" U tha Man!

[stonegossard]

Originally Posted by Bobby Fischer

i just went back and deleted some of my posts here. my childish emotional responses aren't warrented either, and are unneeded saved up annoyance with former stonegossard trolling. heres an attempt to be mature -

It is NOT calm or relaxed when you say:

"What was by far the most biased call of a race occurred..."
"Hollywood Park really needs to sit down with Vic S "
"either you are a jockey agent or our announcer....not both"
"It's really an embarassment to Hollywood Park"
"Hopefully whatever track picks up the dates has an announcer who isn't also a jock's agent"

These are NOT BEGGING A COURTEOUS PROFESSIONAL RESPONSE. these are attacks directly on a man's livelyhood. Get ****ing real. there is no debate whatsoever. read the above quotes again and forget how cool a guy Pete is or how long you've been buds. SG Came right out and challenged a man's livelyhood.

Does he have the right to?? YES 100% Steve Byk has been awesome in that he tends to allow posts like that. But don't fool yourself gossard made serious allegations and said directly that Stauffer should lose his job.

Whether Stauffer should write out a canned response is pretty much his choice. Anywhere from ignoring the post, to a canned response, to a FUKC YOU would have been appropriate.

Robert,

If someone isn't doing their job correctly then yes, they should be fired. If Stauffer continues to give biased calls because of the conflict of interest, then yes....he should choose one job or have the racetrack make that decision for him.

His F#ck off response to me is not acceptable. I think it's great that a track announcer wants to come on a public board and chat. That being said if he can't handle criticism then stay the heck outta here.

Good luck at the track today.

Your Friend,

Pete

[Duvalier]

Originally Posted by stonegossard

Robert,

If someone isn't doing their job correctly then yes, they should be fired. If Stauffer continues to give biased calls because of the conflict of interest, then yes....he should choose one job or have the racetrack make that decision for him.

His F#ck off response to me is not acceptable. I think it's great that a track announcer wants to come on a public board and chat. That being said if he can't handle criticism then stay the heck outta here.

Good luck at the track today.

Your Friend,

Pete

Wow...and you talk about hitting a nerve. Classic stuff.

At least he didn't invite others to suck his ****.

[JerseyJ]

Originally Posted by Duvalier

Wow...and you talk about hitting a nerve. Classic stuff.

Do you ever actually have anything of value to add to any conversation here?

[MaTH716]

Hypothetically, if he wasn't Rosario's agent. How much different do you think his call of the race would have been? The horse made a major move coming from last 10 lengths back within an 1/8 of a mile. What do you think, he would have mentioned it once and then went back to the front of the pack where 3 out of the 4 horses looked like they were done anyway. There would have probably been people around here bashing him for missing such a big move. But the point is that Rosario's horse was the only one who looked like a contender coming into the top of the stretch. That's not his fault and I want to believe that Vic would have called it the same way whether it was Rosario or Garcia aboard.
As far as the comment. I laughed it off as a guy who's in the buisness that takes his share (some warrented and mostly non warrented) abuse around here. He does take alot. In my opinion (which I know doen't mean anything to anyone else) this one goes into the non warrented category. Obviously I think the call was fine.

[stonegossard]

Originally Posted by docicu3

Whoa sunshine!!!

Is it possible that perhaps he doesn't agree and like I said is just sick of hearing this every time Rosario is part of the race. I would be a little less content with your assessment of peoples thoughts and motivations that youhave no basis for as your not in their head's.

The guy is probably just getting up and has no idea what has gone on here over night....I have no idea what you do for a living but if somebody told you that what you were doing was unethical and that you should check it out with your bosses (CRB not track officials in this case) and you did so but people just can't stay out of your personal business....at some point you tell them to take a hike!! Vic doesn't affect the outcomes of races, has done his due diligence and unless I am missing something, has done nothing wrong so enough with your insistence that HE thinks your right.

The tone here oscillates between scholarly and bar room brawl depending on the winds of the day. You take what you need and leave the rest IMO. TFM actually has his moments of contributing usefull info, a little gruff but bothsome only if you let him get to you. I too am a member of IggyU.

I hear what you are saying....but what it comes down to is he is in the public eye. People in the public eye need to be able to handle criticism without wigging out.

[stonegossard]

Originally Posted by 2Hot4TV

Plain and simple, YOU attacked his work and now you expect him to be polite and say thank you very much. This is a message board and our opinions really dont count on a higher level. Well except BTW , Morty and DeHoss.

I criticized his work. I didn't attack him. I attacked the fatman. Big difference.

And yes.....as a public figure he shouldn't act like a 6 year old. If he disagrees with me then say it in a professional manner. If he can't handle it then don't make yourself available on a public message board.

[Hickory Hill Hoff]

Can see this thread being very soon

[CSC]

Here's a different perspective, if Tom Durkin 'the king of hyperbole' in my opinion represented a jockey, he would get far more critiques for his racecalling, but he doesn't, so all is well. Saying that I think there is a conflict of interest that a racecaller is so closely associated with a jockey he is calling the race for, if anything because it is constantly brought up here for discussion whether it is true or not.

What's funny to me is a few of you are questioning his professionalism. There is none.

A professional would've picked one job and dropped the other due to a conflict of interest. And don't delude yourself into thinking it isn't a conflict of interest. If it wasn't you would be seeing head coaches calling their teams game for a network and coaching at the same time.

[stonegossard]

Originally Posted by Duvalier

Are you really that thick?

No, he didn't fail Reading Comprehension 101 in grade school like you and some others.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by stonegossard

Shocking reply Vic..really. You are a true professional. .

Regarding your original post here, I doubt you'd have the balls to walk up to Vic's face in person and say that nonsense to him.

Vic gave you exactly the internet reply you deserved

Originally Posted by Riot

Regarding your original post here, I doubt you'd have the balls to walk up to Vic's face in person and say that nonsense to him.

Vic gave you exactly the internet reply you deserved

Are you alluding to the fact that Vic would physically attack him? Hell I would be a little more blunt in person in hopes of that.

[stonegossard]

Originally Posted by Duvalier

Wow...and you talk about hitting a nerve. Classic stuff.

I see you got an A+ in Trolling 101. Congrats.

[stonegossard]

Originally Posted by CSC

Here's a different perspective, if Tom Durkin 'the king of hyperbole' in my opinion represented a jockey, he would get far more critiques for his racecalling, but he doesn't, so all is well. Saying that I think there is a conflict of interest that a racecaller is so closely associated with a jockey he is calling the race for, if anything because it is constantly brought up here for discussion whether it is true or not.

I believe this is the first time I have brought this up. If others have been also saying the same thing time and time again, then call me crazy....but maybe ...just maybe it's true...or has some validation ?

[stonegossard]

Originally Posted by Riot

Regarding your original post here, I doubt you'd have the balls to walk up to Vic's face in person and say that nonsense to him.

Vic gave you exactly the internet reply you deserved

You obviously don't know me. If Vic is down at CRC/GP and wants to discuss my comment I would be more than welcome to oblige. Or next time I am at Hollywood and he has a problem with my comment would have no problem him addressing it with me.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by stonegossard

I hear what you are saying....but what it comes down to is he is in the public eye. People in the public eye need to be able to handle criticism without wigging out.

So your position is that every whack job on the internet is free to defame or attack those "in the public eye" any way they want, without what they say being called out as nothing more than a flaming bag of dog shiat.

That about right?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by stonegossard

You obviously don't know me. .

I don't have to know you. I just am reading what you post on an internet discussion board, forming an opinion about what you say, and expressing it.

Originally Posted by Riot

So your position is that every whack job on the internet is free to defame or attack those "in the public eye" any way they want, without what they say being called out as nothing more than a flaming bag of dog shiat.

That about right?

So what you're saying is that a guy that has a huge conflict of interest and has a developing pattern of having enemies in the sport (firing by e-mail) is better than other people?