Groups debate who should monitor bets

Fresh from the symposium comes the report by matt hegarty that there is a failure to communicate between the ARCI and the Thoroughbred Racing Protective Bureau, an investigation arm of a racetrack trade group called the Thoroughbred Racing Associations.

It's so nice that there are so many concerned groups to protect us, that they have taken it uponn themselves to agree to disagree over us.

"According to Ed Martin, the executive director of the RCI, ...

"We've put the tools on the table to get the job done, and we fully anticipate that a number of jurisdictions will move forward to get that job done," Martin said, in an interview after the panel discussion. "We'd love to do it as a joint venture with the industry, but those discussions have not gone anywhere."

" Paul Bowlinger, the executive vice president of the RCI, said that adoption of the RCI's system was crucial to soothing horseplayers who have grown suspicious about the role played by relatively new technological innovations in the racing industry, particularly the use of computerized robotic wagering systems, which analyze betting pools and then pour hundreds of wagers into the pools just before post.

Having racetracks monitor wagering pools "doesn't pass the smell test," Bowlinger said, citing his concerns as a horseplayer about late odds changes. "If you want to tell the public that the regulators have turned over the monitoring of the industry's betting data to the industry, it's like telling them that the [Securities and Exchange Commission] has turned over regulation to Wall Street. You'd be laughed out of the room."


http://www.drf.com/news/article/81024.html

[DiscreetCat=Monster]

My Wife monitors my gambling, that is enough for me!!