Well, this isn't good...

[cmorioles]

Nothing people around the game don't know, but also have done NOTHING to fix.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/30/us...acks.html?_r=1

[freddymo]

Davy Jacobsen doesn't think there is a problem?

[parsixfarms]

Given politics here in NYS, I think today's report on the NYRA takeout snafu (http://www.saratogian.com/articles/2...2647033739.txt), may be far more damaging to the sport in New York.

The recommended comments are telling...and frightening. People are overboard with the bleeding heart routine. Bring on the slacktivists.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

The recommended comments are telling...and frightening. People are overboard with the bleeding heart routine. Bring on the slacktivists.

Don't you think overboard is what is needed now? Tracks and horsemen refuse to change. They have had ample time. Instead, things are getting worse by the day. Slots money is the single worst thing to ever happen to the sport.

[Calzone Lord]

The week of the Derby -- and NY Times are doing features that tail-spin into rehashing Mike Gill and about the hopelessly incompetent 1% trainer George Iacovacci?

As brilliantly as they handed the article about Hansen's skin color...this was a laughably botched piece.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

The week of the Derby -- and NY Times are doing features that tail-spin into rehashing Mike Gill and about the hopelessly incompetent 1% trainer George Iacovacci?

As brilliantly as they handed the article about Hansen's skin color...this was a laughably botched piece.

I would agree, if it wasn't true and things had changed. Don't you think the very idea that an ass clown like Iacovacci is making a living in the sport says a lot?

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I would agree, if it wasn't true and things had changed. Don't you think the very idea that an ass clown like Iacovacci is making a living in the sport says a lot?

If Iacovacci and a guy like Rodeny Moyers really are making a living ... I sure would like to know how. Moyer claims horses left and right for $5,000 and they almost always regress 10 lengths or more in a matter of a week or two.

They can't be making a living. Moyers has to be taken an absolute bath.

I agree with you that Slots have done a whole lot to make the game worse off...but that feature is another poor effort imo and the timing of it makes it look like they have a vandetta against horse racing.

[cmorioles]

They must be making a living somehow. They seemed to be sucking up those $1000 last place checks. They get stalls for nothing, pay nobody, and collect low checks. I'd have to do the math, but I don't think they are starving.

Of course the timing was done for a reason. That is always a consideration on these types of reports. Regardless of how you feel about that and whether everything in there is exaggerated, it is still pretty damn accurate at portraying what goes on at racinos at the lower end of the claiming ladder. Purses are too high, and the "jail" rule needs to come back. The elimination of it was a slap in the face to bettors...and of course horses.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

They must be making a living somehow. They seemed to be sucking up those $1000 last place checks. They get stalls for nothing, pay nobody, and collect low checks. I'd have to do the math, but I don't think they are starving.

If they're not...maybe their horses are. I'm sure they're gyping on food and medications.

I'm sure I'm going to be asked to write something about this by an editor when the meet opens here in about 10 days.

They ran 800 races with 6,600 starters at PID last year -- and only had two horses breakdown the entire meet.

It will basically pivot into a piece about how Slots have been welfare for horsemen and racetracks and how none of it anywhere has ever gone to improve the sport and lower takeout rates and rarely does anything ever even go to seriously improve the racing product.

I don't agree on points like the jail rule and the claiming price levels. For the small-fry horse owner...the jail rule is a bitch and the higher claiming levels are raised the worse off you are. I don't think bettors or the racing product benefit much from the jail rule or higher claiming levels either. It just makes it much harder on someone who wants to take a gamble and claim a $5,000 horse in good ole tax free PA. The jail rule is still in play here anyway.

[cmorioles]

Surely you understand why the jail rule would be good for horses and bettors? First, horses won't be bought for $15 or $20k and run back for $10k to steal a purse, whether they are healthy or not...and really, how many of them are? Second, when that is done, the races are often unbettable. It used to be you could bet against these kind, but not so much any longer. Trainers aren't trying to cash bets any more, they are just trying to suck up slots tokens.

Trying to cater to small time owners is helping to make things worse, not better, because guys like Jacobsen and the Eclipse award winning owner Gill just take advantage of it.

[Calzone Lord]

Who are some of the trainers having success abusing the jail rule right now?

A lot of the alchemists trainers normally will give horses a little time off of the claim before they start plunging them.

Having claimed horses for $3,500 - $4,000 - and $5,000 before ... it's very annoying to have to wait out an entire month or run them against open $7,500 horses which is stupid.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Surely you understand why the jail rule would be good for horses and bettors? First, horses won't be bought for $15 or $20k and run back for $10k to steal a purse, whether they are healthy or not...and really, how many of them are? Second, when that is done, the races are often unbettable. It used to be you could bet against these kind, but not so much any longer. Trainers aren't trying to cash bets any more, they are just trying to suck up slots tokens.

Trying to cater to small time owners is helping to make things worse, not better, because guys like Jacobsen and the Eclipse award winning owner Gill just take advantage of it.

My understanding is that NYRA was considering a relaxation of the jail rules early this past winter, as a way to help with field size, but ultimately (and thankfully, in my opinion) decided against it. With all the focus on horse welfare, I was really surprised to see California alter its rule, so that only the winner of a claiming race is stuck in jail for 25 days (as opposed to 30 days in NY).

I'm not sure where it was implemented (California or Arkansas?), but one rule change that I would like to see implemented on a broader basis is one where a claiming horse off more than six months can run "protected" for the first start off the layoff (provided it is running within a certain percentage of the price it ran for before the layoff). The ability to at least get a crack at two purses might encourage more owners to provide a break to a horse that needs one.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

Who are some of the trainers having success abusing the jail rule right now?

A lot of the alchemists trainers normally will give horses a little time off of the claim before they start plunging them.

Having claimed horses for $3,500 - $4,000 - and $5,000 before ... it's very annoying to have to wait out an entire month or run them against open $7,500 horses which is stupid.

I don't follow trainers at the small tracks that closely, just learn the move up guys.

You are missing the point though. Why would you claim a horse for 5k if you didn't think it was better than a 5k horse?

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

My understanding is that NYRA was considering a relaxation of the jail rules early this past winter, as a way to help with field size, but ultimately (and thankfully, in my opinion) decided against it. With all the focus on horse welfare, I was really surprised to see California alter its rule, so that only the winner of a claiming race is stuck in jail for 25 days (as opposed to 30 days in NY).

I'm not sure where it was implemented (California or Arkansas?), but one rule change that I would like to see implemented on a broader basis is one where a claiming horse off more than six months can run "protected" for the first start off the layoff (provided it is running within a certain percentage of the price it ran for before the layoff). The ability to at least get a crack at two purses might encourage more owners to provide a break to a horse that needs one.

I don't have a problem with that rule. I think both states you mention have it.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

You are missing the point though. Why would you claim a horse for 5k if you didn't think it was better than a 5k horse?

If I'm going to claim a horse for $5,000 I want to win as many open 5K claimers with him as possible.

Lets say the horse wins by 3 lengths and runs a figure on par with or faster than par with your typical open $7,500 claiming level winner...and come back fine.

With the jail rule: he's running back in a month or two at open 5K level. Hopefully people will be bluffed but most likely he's getting claimed.

Without the jail rule: he's running back at the open 5K level as soon as possible. Hopefully people will be bluffed but most likely he's getting claimed.

The only difference is that the rule forces the horse to sit out.

Now, lets say the horse runs 4th by 5 lengths and comes out of the race well.

With the jail rule: He's forced to wait out a month before he can enter.

without jail: He's running back for 5k as soon as a race goes that he fits distance wise.


Now lets say the horse comes back bad. You can't drop from the bottom.


I suppose the jail rule is fine as long as it starts a few rungs off the bottom. When you have guys claiming stuff for 15K and running back for 5K two weeks later ... that's not good. That just doesn't happen very often though.

[Linny]

There were a lot of big drops off the claim over the winter. It has slowed considerably, as has the number of breakdowns.

I just read where NY R&W is intituting a rule by which the purse may not be more than two times the claiming tag. Makes sense to me. I know horsemen will bark but if the game is facing massive protests by useful idiots and other assaults, it's small price. Over the winter $7500 horses were running for about $40k. That is simply too much.

When the claim box is so active you can almost assume that if your horse is in form, he'll be claimed. That knowledge can lead some people to not bother to look at a horse's health with an eye to the long view.

As for the NYT, I wonder why they waited for the Monday of Derby week to begin their annual "ramp up the excitement about racing" series? Did the occupiers come back and take up all their happy stories?

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

If I'm going to claim a horse for $5,000 I want to win as many open 5K claimers with him as possible...

I get all this, but that isn't the way the game was supposed to played. You didn't expect to lose 5k horses because they were legitimate $5k horses. People claimed horses because they thought they were undervalued, not valued just right. Slots changed all that, and the horses get the short end of the stick.

This isn't a new thing as you know. The purse/claiming price ratio has been a problem for a decade, but it is mostly at places where nobody notices outside of us diehards. It was never going to fly in New York when horses started breaking down.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by Linny

There were a lot of big drops off the claim over the winter. It has slowed considerably, as has the number of breakdowns.

I just read where NY R&W is intituting a rule by which the purse may not be more than two times the claiming tag. Makes sense to me. I know horsemen will bark but if the game is facing massive protests by useful idiots and other assaults, it's small price. Over the winter $7500 horses were running for about $40k. That is simply too much.

When the claim box is so active you can almost assume that if your horse is in form, he'll be claimed. That knowledge can lead some people to not bother to look at a horse's health with an eye to the long view.

The situation this winter at Aqueduct may have just been a run of bad luck (not my view), or a confluence of many factors (some of which NYS and the RWB bear responsiblility for, although you will never get such acknowledgement) that led to a situation with which no one was happy.

$7500 claimers were not running for $40,000 for most of the winter at Aqueduct. They were generally running for $30,000 (and for $40,000 on a few isolated occasions - Gotham Day and Wood Day, when all full fields were boosted by $10,000). It may be too much, but keep in mind that $7500 claimers currently run for $23,000 at Parx, and there is competition among the tracks for horses, especially during the winter. To enact a rule as a knee-jerk reaction without looking at the entire landscape and regulate that NYRA can only run such races for a $15,000 purse next winter likely means that there will be no $7,500 claimers running here next winter. (That might not be a bad thing, as the hope is that the racino money will lead to the bottom rising in NY, but I doubt the RWB considered such things.)

As for the bolded language above, I agree completely.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I get all this, but that isn't the way the game was supposed to played. You didn't expect to lose 5k horses because they were legitimate $5k horses. People claimed horses because they thought they were undervalued, not valued just right. Slots changed all that, and the horses get the short end of the stick.

This isn't a new thing as you know. The purse/claiming price ratio has been a problem for a decade, but it is mostly at places where nobody notices outside of us diehards. It was never going to fly in New York when horses started breaking down.

I hear ya.

But hey, they're about to have legal prostitution over by Fort Erie. http://www.goerieblogs.com/news/writ...on-in-ontario/

We already have slots, table games, even Pai-Gow at Presque Isle Downs ... how long until prostitution becomes the new slots?