Penn National arrests

[Payson Dave]

Originally Posted by Duvalier

That's not my point though. How accurate do you think those works are when they show up in the PP's the next time the horse runs? The work which was just announced over the loudspeaker prior to the horse running, in order for him to be eligible that day. The workouts in the program are not near always accurate.

I wont question your assertion regarding announced late works...I also do not say program works are "always" accurate...I will maintain my assertion that the vast vast majority of program workout final times (while of limited value) are in fact accurate.

lol...btw was just listening to the churchill preview...they announced that a runner that last raced as an announced gelding is running today as a colt not a gelding...wonder if he got his back or someone else's...lol

[PatCummings]

The ultimate value of the information should not be in question. Value is always in the eye of the interpreter. But there is an official keeper of the data

I'm no lawyer, but I highly recommend everyone read the indictments, specifically of the clocker, if you haven't already. The federal involvement is made pretty clear. Here is my understanding...

1. The ability to bet on races from out of state is an exercise in interstate commerce, a power overseen by the federal government. This came through in the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978

2. The distribution of the signal across state lines is, essentially, a wire.

3. The feds allege, in the indictments, that attempting to or actually being caught injecting a horse with a substance that is prohibited, or at a time that is prohibited, is an act or an attempt to manipulate the outcome of the race.

4. As the race is distributed over "wire" across state lines, attempting to manipulate the outcome (or provide purposely incorrect information which is offered in the official record of the race and details of each horse, used by the bettors to draw their own conclusions), is deemed fraudulent - again, by the allegations put forth in the indictment.

Does it seem that hundreds of trainers or some number of clockers could be identified as in violation of the law, as it is attempting to be applied now? Yes.

Does it seem this is an attempt to set a new precedent, and thereby presumably clean-up the sport? Yes, absolutely...at least in someone's mind.

Paulick has the link to the indictments in his story:
http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ra...penn-national/

[Duvalier]

Originally Posted by PatCummings

The ultimate value of the information should not be in question. Value is always in the eye of the interpreter. But there is an official keeper of the data

I'm no lawyer, but I highly recommend everyone read the indictments, specifically of the clocker, if you haven't already. The federal involvement is made pretty clear. Here is my understanding...

1. The ability to bet on races from out of state is an exercise in interstate commerce, a power overseen by the federal government. This came through in the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978

2. The distribution of the signal across state lines is, essentially, a wire.

3. The feds allege, in the indictments, that attempting to or actually being caught injecting a horse with a substance that is prohibited, or at a time that is prohibited, is an act or an attempt to manipulate the outcome of the race.

4. As the race is distributed over "wire" across state lines, attempting to manipulate the outcome (or provide purposely incorrect information which is offered in the official record of the race and details of each horse, used by the bettors to draw their own conclusions), is deemed fraudulent - again, by the allegations put forth in the indictment.

Does it seem that hundreds of trainers or some number of clockers could be identified as in violation of the law, as it is attempting to be applied now? Yes.

Does it seem this is an attempt to set a new precedent, and thereby presumably clean-up the sport? Yes, absolutely...at least in someone's mind.

Paulick has the link to the indictments in his story:
http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ra...penn-national/

So then...how about the horse Payson Dave just mentioned? Running as a colt today but last time was run under the listing that he was gelded? Where would that fall in all this?

[PatCummings]

Originally Posted by Duvalier

So then...how about the horse Payson Dave just mentioned? Running as a colt today but last time was run under the listing that he was gelded? Where would that fall in all this?

It seems clear - what is intentional, what is accidental. Someone somewhere has to prove it. Which, to me, is why the allegation of paying the clocker to put wrong times in is the hook.

[Payson Dave]

Originally Posted by PatCummings

The ultimate value of the information should not be in question. Value is always in the eye of the interpreter. But there is an official keeper of the data
...
...
Paulick has the link to the indictments in his story:
http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ra...penn-national/

Agree that value is in the eye of the interpreter...and that everyone has a right to their own opinion...I just don't share the opinion that published final times of workouts are frequently of little value because of malicious inaccuracy...rather imho published final times are of little value because they tell so little about the quality of the work.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Payson Dave

Agree that value is in the eye of the interpreter...and that everyone has a right to their own opinion...I just don't share the opinion that published final times of workouts are frequently of little value because of malicious inaccuracy...rather imho published final times are of little value because they tell so little about the quality of the work.

I completely agree with this.

Using workout times in the paper is, IMO, a futile exercise. Looking at dates of works, frequency, or gaps in timing, makes sense to me, but the actual times used tell perhaps the least ( I'm being generous here ) important story.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I completely agree with this.

Using workout times in the paper is, IMO, a futile exercise. Looking at dates of works, frequency, or gaps in timing, makes sense to me, but the actual times used tell perhaps the least ( I'm being generous here ) important story.

The only time I can use times for much or anything is if its a certain barn and I know that something stands out about the time and distance. This is not something a casual observer would catch but if you follow a circuit close enough I am sure it would be useful knowledge.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by PatCummings

The ultimate value of the information should not be in question. Value is always in the eye of the interpreter. But there is an official keeper of the data

I'm no lawyer, but I highly recommend everyone read the indictments, specifically of the clocker, if you haven't already. The federal involvement is made pretty clear. Here is my understanding...

1. The ability to bet on races from out of state is an exercise in interstate commerce, a power overseen by the federal government. This came through in the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978

2. The distribution of the signal across state lines is, essentially, a wire.

3. The feds allege, in the indictments, that attempting to or actually being caught injecting a horse with a substance that is prohibited, or at a time that is prohibited, is an act or an attempt to manipulate the outcome of the race.

4. As the race is distributed over "wire" across state lines, attempting to manipulate the outcome (or provide purposely incorrect information which is offered in the official record of the race and details of each horse, used by the bettors to draw their own conclusions), is deemed fraudulent - again, by the allegations put forth in the indictment.

Does it seem that hundreds of trainers or some number of clockers could be identified as in violation of the law, as it is attempting to be applied now? Yes.

Does it seem this is an attempt to set a new precedent, and thereby presumably clean-up the sport? Yes, absolutely...at least in someone's mind.

Paulick has the link to the indictments in his story:
http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ra...penn-national/

What they are claiming is pretty clear. My question is do these acts constitute felonies? Obviously they believe they can make these cases but I have doubts especially in the case of Rogers that the timing and person delivering a legal medication constitutes criminal manipulation other than in the broadest of definitions. Does the supposed personal monetary gain matter because the trainer of record (of which Rogers isnt) doesnt make a whole lot of money winning a race at Penn National.
In other words no one "manipulates" a race for the hell of it but the monetary gain here involving simply the trainers % of the purse is a pretty paltry sum for a case in Federal Court. I don't recall what class level her race was but the largest purse at Penn is generally 35k which would make the trainers % worth about 2000 which is less than the limit of small claims court. I understand that there are people who are betting on the race but as in every race in the parimutual system, the same amount was paid out to betters regardless of who wins.

I am not defending the accused here because they did in fact break the rules. My question is are these really felonies, should taxpayer money be spent trying cases in which the publics interest is only marginally affected (only the losing bettors could claim harm) and how broad are these interpretation going to be?

We have legal wagering on sporting events in 4 states I believe. Are pro sports next? Isn't a player who takes a PED doing the same thing?

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

What they are claiming is pretty clear. My question is do these acts constitute felonies? Obviously they believe they can make these cases but I have doubts especially in the case of Rogers that the timing and person delivering a legal medication constitutes criminal manipulation other than in the broadest of definitions. Does the supposed personal monetary gain matter because the trainer of record (of which Rogers isnt) doesnt make a whole lot of money winning a race at Penn National.
In other words no one "manipulates" a race for the hell of it but the monetary gain here involving simply the trainers % of the purse is a pretty paltry sum for a case in Federal Court. I don't recall what class level her race was but the largest purse at Penn is generally 35k which would make the trainers % worth about 2000 which is less than the limit of small claims court. I understand that there are people who are betting on the race but as in every race in the parimutual system, the same amount was paid out to betters regardless of who wins.

I am not defending the accused here because they did in fact break the rules. My question is are these really felonies, should taxpayer money be spent trying cases in which the publics interest is only marginally affected (only the losing bettors could claim harm) and how broad are these interpretation going to be?

We have legal wagering on sporting events in 4 states I believe. Are pro sports next? Isn't a player who takes a PED doing the same thing?

You are overlooking the part that the participants may well be betting too. So it isn't just the purse amount that matters. It may very well be that some of those bettors are the people charged.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

You are overlooking the part that the participants may well be betting too. So it isn't just the purse amount that matters. It may very well be that some of those bettors are the people charged.

Webb and Rogers horses were scratched.

[Cannon Shell]

Let me be clear, I don't want to make it out as though I am defending any of these people because they are all guilty of serious transgressions. Personally I have no problem with intervention from authorities if the rules/law and penalties are clear and applied across the board, not just cherry picking bit players at a C level track. However I have little confidence that this will be the case as there is no reason to expect that Federal prosecutors in other jurisdictions will have any desire to get involved with horseracing regulation. My other concern is that the broad interpretation concerning wire acts makes non-intentional medication violations into criminal acts, perhaps not felonies but misdemeanors and that will more or less kill off most of racing. Trainers will simply not be able to accept the risk under the current system of testing and oversight.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Let me be clear, I don't want to make it out as though I am defending any of these people because they are all guilty of serious transgressions. Personally I have no problem with intervention from authorities if the rules/law and penalties are clear and applied across the board, not just cherry picking bit players at a C level track. However I have little confidence that this will be the case as there is no reason to expect that Federal prosecutors in other jurisdictions will have any desire to get involved with horseracing regulation. My other concern is that the broad interpretation concerning wire acts makes non-intentional medication violations into criminal acts, perhaps not felonies but misdemeanors and that will more or less kill off most of racing. Trainers will simply not be able to accept the risk under the current system of testing and oversight.

Maybe to combat the risk is to eliminate some of the medicating that is happening?

Do you think there is any link between the recent House panel on medication and the willingness to look into what happened at Penn?

and yes your post sure seem to suggest there is some sort of witch hunt going on.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

You are overlooking the part that the participants may well be betting too. So it isn't just the purse amount that matters. It may very well be that some of those bettors are the people charged.

true. manipulating odds....could have been something else they were doing.