Passero
Met Passero at the first running of the Colonial Downs meeting in 1997.
During the course of the meet, the track went from a conveyor belt that spaced them 15 lengths apart to a dead rail surface that saw the top five five finishers finish within two lengths of each other. Watched this pattern shift between extremes the remainder of the meet.
Confronted in the pressbox one day and asked what he had been doing to the surface, Passero responded that he didn't know because he had been home in Maryland the last few days but I got the distinct impression he didn't think anyone in the pressbox had the right to question him about what he was doing to the track - An attitude seemingly shared universally by other track maintenance supervisors. (Acknowledging that a track maintenance supervisor has to stay on budget and keep the backstretch critics happy before worrying about what some weenie in the pressbox thinks.)
There certainly is a reason Passero isn't working for the MJC anymore. I always wondered why I never read a Beyer rant about the constantly changing profile of the surfaces at Laurel and Pimlico. I do not play Maryland regularly but I would think a player who kept track of the bias shifts during Passero's tenure could have profited handsomely.
Watching the Belmont meet this summer made me think of that meeting at Colonial ten years ago. I thought the main track surface at Belmont this summer was more biased to front speed than I can ever remember. There were certainly some rumblings from the backstretch that suggested I am not the only one who thinks Passero is not doing a good job.
DMM
|