conflict of interest

[JerseyJ]

Originally Posted by Bobby Fischer

having multiple roles does not constitute a "conflict of roles" in a vacuum.

It has to be "possible" for improper acts to occur.

i'm not picking a sidde one way or the other (aside from bashing SG's ridiculous post in that other thread), but in order to make allegations like this, a legal definition of the ACTS themselves has to be formulated.

PROMOTING HIS JOCKEY WHILE ANNOUNCING

WARNING/ADVISING HIS JOCKEY DURING THE RACE

those are just 2 that i could come up with feel free to add more. Then you have to prove that they are at least possible and significant acts.

IF they aren't possible and significant then there is no case whatsoever.

gossard, I am with you on calling the posting stewards...can we get a 7 day suspension or something for nonsense like this...

It's very possible for Stauffer to cross the line as an announcer. I am not saying he has blatantly done it or that he ever will, however, the potential is there for him to cross the line. As fans and patrons of this sport, we are expecting a neutral call of the races each day. Vic, having an interest in how Joel Rosario performs, certainly can be compromised in his role as track announcer. He needs to accurately call the race, and there definately is the potential in say a race like the 750K Hollywood Gold Cup, and let's say that Rosario is riding a horse who is head and head for the lead in the stretch with another horse, and there is bumping going on, or should Rosario's horse be potentially interfered with, and as I said, it's not about whether Vic has done or if he would do it because as a professional, I would hope that would not even be an issue, but don't tell me that there isn't the potential to embellish a call to the way of his jock in a big race, because let's say Rosario wins the Hollywood Gold Cup, winning horse gets 420K, Rosario gets 10% which is 42K, and if the jock agent gets let's say 10%, that's 4.2K for Vic. If Rosario comes in 2nd he gets 140K, Rosario gets 14K, and Vic gets 1.4K...you can't tell me that's not a big issue. No one is making allegations, just that there's clearly the potential for acts to occur because of the conflict of interest because of the positions that Vic holds.

[-BT-]

now it all makes sense, had no clue vic and joel were connected like that.

for the record i voted "yes"

vic is a great announcer, joel is a great jock. But i've never seen/heard a jock get so much pub. each and every ride he has from an announcer. it makes perfect sense that he's his agent now.

-bt-

Originally Posted by -BT-

now it all makes sense, had no clue vic and joel were connected like that.

for the record i voted "yes"

vic is a great announcer, joel is a great jock. But i've never seen/heard a jock get so much pub. each and every ride he has from an announcer. it makes perfect sense that he's his agent now.

-bt-

" So much pub each and every ride" !
Are you high? I've had Joel 7 months and until this past Saturday I've NEVER ONCE said one word about him either during or after a race call. That was the request of my bosses at Hollywood Park and I adhered to it.

[Cannon Shell]

Of all the conflicts of interests in the sport of horseracing or the world in general I would have to believe the track announcer/jockey agent conflict would be among the least relevant or important. Does anyone really believe that a jockey will get more or better mounts because of a race call?

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Of all the conflicts of interests in the sport of horseracing or the world in general I would have to believe the track announcer/jockey agent conflict would be among the least relevant or important. Does anyone really believe that a jockey will get more or better mounts because of a race call?

Let me get this straight, since there are other conflicts of interest in the game, this one therefore isn't one? And, as to your final question, why is that relevent?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Let me get this straight, since there are other conflicts of interest in the game, this one therefore isn't one? And, as to your final question, why is that relevent?

No. I dont see the relevance of the conflict of interest here. I used the fact that there are far greater actual conflicts of interests in the sport that no one complains about. It is relevant because it is relevant.

[stonegossard]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Of all the conflicts of interests in the sport of horseracing or the world in general I would have to believe the track announcer/jockey agent conflict would be among the least relevant or important. Does anyone really believe that a jockey will get more or better mounts because of a race call?

Jeez Chuck......you seem like a sharp guy. Figured you would have gotten it. It's not about Vic magically making his guy's horse win by calling the horse as others on here seem to believe. Nor is it about him getting his guy better mounts. It's about race fans having to listen to a race caller/jock agent who at times is biased calling his guy's horse. Not sure why all of the confusion.

[Diver67]

So now its the race fans who are being injured? You mean you place your bets based on Vic's calls? Isn't that illegal? Or are you just upset when it turns out Joel's horse isn't doing as well as Vic made it sound? Now I'm really confused. I'm also completely done with these inane threads.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Diver67

I'm also completely done with these inane threads.

That's an odd announcement to make along with the rest of your post. I'll take the over.

I do find people's interpretations here extremely interesting. Apparently points of fact are distorted by peoples' misinterpretations.

Vic being a terrific racecaller, that's an opinion....my opinion, is not relevent, for instance, to the conversation. People's personal feelings about him aren't relevent either.

[fpsoxfan]

Originally Posted by stonegossard

Jeez Chuck......you seem like a sharp guy. Figured you would have gotten it. It's not about Vic magically making his guy's horse win by calling the horse as others on here seem to believe. Nor is it about him getting his guy better mounts. It's about race fans having to listen to a race caller/jock agent who at times is biased calling his guy's horse. Not sure why all of the confusion.

I've been reading this for a few days and for the most part tried to stay out of it, but this is really getting petty. The last I looked and even though it's not a scientific poll most people inluding myself don't really see this as a conflict of interest. Now, I very seldom wager on Hollywood and I wouldn't know Vic if I walked right into him, but before this past weekend I had no idea the guy was an agent for Rosario. Now that I know, I could care less.
I can understand why some might think it's a problem and you've made your points, but for you to accuse others of "not getting it" or being "shortsighted" or even "Vic Stauffer groupies" is childish. Why can't you act more like an adult and just agree to disagree and move on.

[rpncaine]

Originally Posted by fpsoxfan

I've been reading this for a few days and for the most part tried to stay out of it, but this is really getting petty. The last I looked and even though it's not a scientific poll most people inluding myself don't really see this as a conflict of interest. Now, I very seldom wager on Hollywood and I wouldn't know Vic if I walked right into him, but before this past weekend I had no idea the guy was an agent for Rosario. Now that I know, I could care less.
I can understand why some might think it's a problem and you've made your points, but for you to accuse others of "not getting it" or being "shortsighted" or even "Vic Stauffer groupies" is childish. Why can't you act more like an adult and just agree to disagree and move on.

[my miss storm cat]

Originally Posted by fpsoxfan

Why can't you act more like an adult and just agree to disagree and move on.

Excuse me for butting in but for the record he did just that back on page 6 of the other thread...

http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/sho...ree#post544268

After that he was simply addressing comments directed toward him.

(Sorry for interrupting. Carry on).

[stonegossard]

Originally Posted by fpsoxfan

I've been reading this for a few days and for the most part tried to stay out of it, but this is really getting petty. The last I looked and even though it's not a scientific poll most people inluding myself don't really see this as a conflict of interest. Now, I very seldom wager on Hollywood and I wouldn't know Vic if I walked right into him, but before this past weekend I had no idea the guy was an agent for Rosario. Now that I know, I could care less.
I can understand why some might think it's a problem and you've made your points, but for you to accuse others of "not getting it" or being "shortsighted" or even "Vic Stauffer groupies" is childish. Why can't you act more like an adult and just agree to disagree and move on.

When people say that I am implying that Vic's calls actually effect the race's outcome, well..............they aren't getting it. Pretty cut and dry there.


Bite Me.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

I don't notice any bias from him in the race calls I've heard of his regarding Rosario.

And he's a sometimes over the top announcer who has shown a clear rooting bias in a few of his major race calls before... not that other announcers don't.

His call of Hal Hope's Florida Derby win, Lava Man's 3rd Gold Cup win, and one of Azeri's HP wins as extreme examples ... though the first two were great races won by very likeable horses ... in the latter one, he was dropping the best traits of greats like Ruffian, Personal Ensign, and Lady's Secret while Azeri was beating Tropical Blossom in fairly workmanlike fashion.

[stonegossard]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

I don't notice any bias from him in the race calls I've heard of his regarding Rosario.

And he's a sometimes over the top announcer who has shown a clear rooting bias in a few of his major race calls before... not that other announcers don't.

His call of Hal Hope's Florida Derby win, Lava Man's 3rd Gold Cup win, and one of Azeri's HP wins as extreme examples ... though the first two were great races won by very likeable horses ... in the latter one, he was dropping the best traits of greats like Ruffian, Personal Ensign, and Lady's Secret while Azeri was beating Tropical Blossom in fairly workmanlike fashion.

Hey amigo.

How are your eyes doing. I am very concerned.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by stonegossard

Jeez Chuck......you seem like a sharp guy. Figured you would have gotten it. It's not about Vic magically making his guy's horse win by calling the horse as others on here seem to believe. Nor is it about him getting his guy better mounts. It's about race fans having to listen to a race caller/jock agent who at times is biased calling his guy's horse. Not sure why all of the confusion.

Since when are announcers supposed to be free of "bias"? Ever hear Marshall Cassidy call an Easy Goer race? Or really any announcer call a race in which a "big star" is involved with? Exactly what effect on anything does a "biased" racecall have on anything? If you bet on the winner will you not still cash? Are you forced to listen? Luke K was a close friend of mine who always added a little emphasis when I had a winner or when my horses were making a move in a race. Who exactly does it hurt?

[stonegossard]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Since when are announcers supposed to be free of "bias"? Ever hear Marshall Cassidy call an Easy Goer race? Or really any announcer call a race in which a "big star" is involved with? Exactly what effect on anything does a "biased" racecall have on anything? If you bet on the winner will you not still cash? Are you forced to listen? Luke K was a close friend of mine who always added a little emphasis when I had a winner or when my horses were making a move in a race. Who exactly does it hurt?

It's annoying an unprofessional when a guy who represents a jockey does this kind of thing. It's one thing to do it during a race with Easy Goer....Zenyatta...or a "big star " involved. But to pander to a claimer being ridden by his guy is a bit much.

[HaloWishingwell]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Since when are announcers supposed to be free of "bias"? Ever hear Marshall Cassidy call an Easy Goer race? Or really any announcer call a race in which a "big star" is involved with? Exactly what effect on anything does a "biased" racecall have on anything? If you bet on the winner will you not still cash? Are you forced to listen? Luke K was a close friend of mine who always added a little emphasis when I had a winner or when my horses were making a move in a race. Who exactly does it hurt?

As far as I'm concern the superstars of the races are what we come to see. The ZENYATTA, RACHEL ALEXANDRA of today, EASY GOER and SECRETARIAT of yesterday. These horses are the ones most watched, adored and bet on. They get the most attention not the jockey unless he is going for some type of record accomplishment. Even with that those races are called fairly until the "superstar" or horse to beat makes his move. To call a horse just because a certain jockey to win is in your best interest is a conflict. Thank God Rosario wasn't the regular rider of SECRETARIAT otherwise Joel would be moving like a machine.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Since when are announcers supposed to be free of "bias"? Ever hear Marshall Cassidy call an Easy Goer race? Or really any announcer call a race in which a "big star" is involved with? Exactly what effect on anything does a "biased" racecall have on anything? If you bet on the winner will you not still cash? Are you forced to listen? Luke K was a close friend of mine who always added a little emphasis when I had a winner or when my horses were making a move in a race. Who exactly does it hurt?

I was thinking about how it would change a call. All I could come up with is when the announcer gives credit to a jock for stealing a race with a "perfect ride" etc. I would think it would change that part of a call. Durkin and Trevor have always done this. If they were jock agents it would really change some stuff in their calls. Don't think Vic has ever talked about it as much as them. So, it hasn't changed his calls nearly as much(if at all) as it would those two announcers.