Fairmont Park Fix

[randallscott35]

But it was for history?

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...e-being-probed

[Scav]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

But it was for history?

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...e-being-probed

First off, racing at Fairmount is horrid. Its probably the worst racing out there except for the unrecognized track in Michigan. Mount Pleasant or something.

When you watch the race, its really bad, but nothing will happen because Lopez's explanation. I personally don't think the race was fixed, but I can see why people are having questions. He might get a fine but no days.

[Port Conway Lane]

Originally Posted by Scav

First off, racing at Fairmount is horrid. Its probably the worst racing out there except for the unrecognized track in Michigan. Mount Pleasant or something.

When you watch the race, its really bad, but nothing will happen because Lopez's explanation. I personally don't think the race was fixed, but I can see why people are having questions. He might get a fine but no days.

The old man was riding a horse that defeated the 3rd place finisher in their previous race. He had the highest last out beyer and second highest beyer in the chart. I agree, nothing fishy here except the 70 year old guy.

When my namesake won his 50th race at Laurel he was 1/5 in a 5k claimer.
Rumor had it a Washington Post reporter had attended a few of his previous races to cover the rare occasion but was tiring of the horse losing and told management (or whoever) "The horse better win today because I won't be back next time" or something to that effect. A horse he defeated that day came back to air by 8 lengths and Port ran a valiant 2nd or 3rd.

I don't know if this Fairmount race was fixed. Besides the horse lost. I say move on.

[ADJMK]

http://www.fairmountpark.com/racing/live-racing-replays

race 2

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Port Conway Lane

The old man was riding a horse that defeated the 3rd place finisher in their previous race. He had the highest last out beyer and second highest beyer in the chart. I agree, nothing fishy here except the 70 year old guy.

When my namesake won his 50th race at Laurel he was 1/5 in a 5k claimer.
Rumor had it a Washington Post reporter had attended a few of his previous races to cover the rare occasion but was tiring of the horse losing and told management (or whoever) "The horse better win today because I won't be back next time" or something to that effect. A horse he defeated that day came back to air by 8 lengths and Port ran a valiant 2nd or 3rd.

I don't know if this Fairmount race was fixed. Besides the horse lost. I say move on.

This may be the most uninformed post I've seen in a long time. Why should we just "move on" from an attempted race fix? I can't think of anything more serious than that to the integrity of the game.

Yes, the horse lost, but clearly the 3rd place finisher was better on that day than the 2nd horse. It isn't even debatable to anyone that has taken two minutes to watch the race. People bet that race knowing a pitiful jockey was on the favorite. Anybody that bet that horse not being in the exacta, or in the top two spots in the tri, or the 4 horse to place, or whatever, had their money stolen by jockeys.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

This may be the most uninformed post I've seen in a long time. Why should we just "move on" from an attempted race fix? I can't think of anything more serious than that to the integrity of the game.

Yes, the horse lost, but clearly the 3rd place finisher was better on that day than the 2nd horse. It isn't even debatable to anyone that has taken two minutes to watch the race. People bet that race knowing a pitiful jockey was on the favorite. Anybody that bet that horse not being in the exacta, or in the top two spots in the tri, or the 4 horse to place, or whatever, had their money stolen by jockeys.

[Port Conway Lane]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

This may be the most uninformed post I've seen in a long time. Why should we just "move on" from an attempted race fix? I can't think of anything more serious than that to the integrity of the game.

Yes, the horse lost, but clearly the 3rd place finisher was better on that day than the 2nd horse. It isn't even debatable to anyone that has taken two minutes to watch the race. People bet that race knowing a pitiful jockey was on the favorite. Anybody that bet that horse not being in the exacta, or in the top two spots in the tri, or the 4 horse to place, or whatever, had their money stolen by jockeys.

You're right. I'm not a good judge of watching races. I looked at it once, evidently not well enough. I see similar runs down the lane periodically where it appears as though a particular jockey may not be putting forth his best effort and nothing ever comes of it. I've been groomed to accept the fact that the powers that be let things slide.

So I'll recant and let the judges decide how flagrant this race was and hang them if they're found guilty.

[Revidere]

It looked like a race on "Luck".