The hearing started last Thurs. Time ran out and it will be continued on Dec. 3. Privman wrote about the first day of testimony in the Sun. DRF.

Not talking about the hearing or Rosario. Talking about yours and Privman's posts on Paulick's blog. He basically destroyed your argument. Your tribute, while a nice gesture, was factually wrong and should have been fixed. Then you go into his radio show, and he crushes our argument once again. Basically Vic, you are wrong on all counts.

Or journalist

I know right? I've been having trouble sleeping at night because Steve doesn't have an Eclipse award.

Its very interesting that this all was aired on a blog.

Its a pretty egregious error, and while I appreciate that this was a tribute that was prepared around a birthday the error should not have resulted in an Eclipse for the very best of writing, especially given Privman told them of the error before it was broadcast. It should have been removed from consideration.

The fact Privman, a journalist (I use the term lightly) tried to stand up for the Eclipse Awards as President of the NTWA does not seem like a vindictive act.

The problem here is Stauffer had incorrect info and didn't fix it. Then he whines that it was Privman holding a grudge against him. Whether Privman doesn't like him has nothing to do with it. Vic made a mistake...end of story. You can't have a piece with wrong info, especially something of that nature (a tragedy in Pincay's life), and expect not be to called on it. Vic needs to own up to it. He made a mistake. Enough bellyaching. If Vic had done the proper research none of this would have happened. As far as the accusations of Privman's radio show? Privman pretty much shut Vic up. Again Vic had wrong information. He seems like a sore loser and needs to move on.

Speaking of needing to move on.

Amen

hallelujah

Praise Jeebus

Glory... glory...

We never tried to hide there was a mistake. We made no claims that there wasn't a mistake when we submitted it for consideration. The biggest thread in the piece was Laffit's birthday and as I stated before it would have been silly to re-air it several weeks after the fact. The tribute was produced as entertainment. We feel it did that. While I respect that journalistic accuracy is important to Jay. It was less so for us. As for motivation or my whining you're certainly enititled to your opinion. I probably wouldn't feel that way if this was my only encounter with Jay. We all know that's not the case. As for being a sore loser. ???. Kip and I won! We were and remain very proud of our tribute and Eclipse.Thanks for your contributions to this thread. V J S

Accuracy is not important? That's ridiculous. Even more so considering what you were saying about Pincay regarding the timing of his Derby win and the tragedy in his life. How can you create a documentary and not care if the facts are straight?

Stick to announcing races as obviously you have zero clue about writing/producing a documentary.

Damn, I have no horse in this race but to keep using the reason that "it would be silly to re-air it" for not at least putting a disclaimer on a MAJOR FACTUAL ERROR insults my limited intelligence. All we get on TVG, HRTV, and everywhere else are constant replays, reruns and re-airs. Sorry.

hell, al gore won an oscar for his documentary.

Where did I say accuracy wasn't important? Of course it's important. Where did I say we didn't care? We made a mistake. We wish we hadn't. The piece was over 11 minutes. It was aired the first time by Mike Willman the day before Laffit's Birthday. There is no way I would have asked him to re-air it weeks after. I didn't have my own show. Any piece cannot be submitted without being presented on an over the air radio station. This isn't espionage. It's entertainment. Say hi to Jay when you see him at the plant!

I must have SOME clue because there are two Eclipse awards sitting on my mantle. They look really nice over the fireplace. They're not going anywhere.

I take it they are on both sides of the Liberace painting on the wall?

You just don't get it Vic. You never will. If you can't see how bad you come off in that Paulick blog then so be it. But hey....if you want to continue to post on the internet and make a jackass out of yourself go for it.

While I respect that journalistic accuracy is important to Jay. It was less so for us.


Make up your mind Vic.

If anyone hasn't, it's a very entertaining read on Paullick's blog. Just pass over the article and head straight to the comments section. It's not often the comments section is a better read than the article itself.

Has the error now been corrected for future airings?

How did you know that?

No Pete. It was almost five years ago and we haven't re-aired it. Perhaps when Laffit is approaching another birthday. Believe me. It will be fixed if we do. Hey maybe we'll submit it and try to win again. Or would that be "unseemly" ?

Listen Mister. This was a multi-media award. I'm not limiting myself to making a jackass of myself ONLY on the internet!!

Vic, good to hear you today while watching the TVG telecast.

We had my mother in law over and I was able to say "Hey, I 'know' that guy from a horse racing board!" while we flipped through television events and conversation through the day.

While he was on TVG today I also was able to point out to my mother in law that I had "met" Frank Mirahmadi a couple times as he did the morning events before California fair racing meets (he handed me a t-shirt once or twice or something....:-)....)

I'm pretty sure I didn't score points with my mother in law for my racing and gambling references today. But she's put up with my exposing her daughter to my love of horse racing and gambling for many years now.

And this year she has decided to donate money to race horse rescue.

Sometimes good things DO happen in strange ways.

:-)

Of course not! As long as you air it on a different band.

CHRB refuses to dismiss Rosario case
 

FULL: http://www.drf.com/news/article/109334.html

INGLEWOOD, Calif. - Three California Horse Racing Board stewards denied a request from jockey Joel Rosario's attorney on Thursday to dismiss a case alleging that the jockey failed to put forth his best effort in a turf race at Del Mar on Sept. 6.

The case will resume Dec. 11, with defense testimony from Rosario and others. Rosario, the leading rider at the Del Mar meeting, could face a fine or suspension if he is found in violation of the rules.

have any of you guys seen the race? i'm just wondering because i have not. is there anything to this?

It looked odd, but you see odd stuff all the time.......frankly if the story about Vic asking if he the horse was for sale had not come out I wonder how this story plays out.

I agree and the problem is that if you hear about that first then watch the race it seems easy to get suspicious.

Personally, I think it was a pretty strange ride. I don't know if this wild goose chase is worth it but it's easy to get a little skeptical watching it.

NT

Does Vic share in 1/4 of the attorney fees?

thats what i'm wondering. the actions after the fact brought on suspicion or is the ride that bad? it was maidens so the horses themselves sometimes run weird. green , stop and go. i gotta see that replay.

:tro::tro:

Where there's smoke?

There are other threads that have beaten this one into the polytrack.....

It looked bad, though not illegal, when Vic inquired about the horse being available for sale after Rosario came in 4th in that turf race the trainer believed the horse was a lock for only the day before.

Why the CHRB is choosing this ride to get tough seems a bit much for a horse who led a race during the initial stages is caught and then at best could have possibly challenged for a hotly contested third.

If they are going to discipline Rosario for this they better be consistent about this standard going forward. Hopefully Steve will ask the West Coast connection about this today.

I dont see what the crime was , was he supposed to send his horse when the other two charged him at the half mile pole? Would have the gamblers seen something they would have thought was on the sly if he would have stayed 8 wide and got beat? If the trainer thought his horse was so much the best then why hadnt he won before this day or after ? What would Joel have to gain by stiffing a maiden ? I dont know but Im sure Im about to be enlightened. Maybe the trainer was just mad because he got beat by a long shot who had been off for almost 6 months who really isnt that great of a horse?
Seems to me there are alot more suspect rides around than this , like a guy standing up before the wire for third ( like Kent D ).

For whatever reason, how many times have you seen a horse that was claimed get a lame ride? Seems to happen a lot.