|
|
 |
|
#1
03-26-2007, 12:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
The Ultimate "Undisclosed" Change
You have reason to be mad if you lost a bet on the $100,000 John Battaglia Memorial at Turfway Park on Saturday. You probably didn't know that the winner, Laity, a Kentucky Derby hopeful, ran as a first-time gelding.
According to the Daily Racing Form, "Turfway officials said both before and after the Battaglia that they had no information about him having been gelded." In its post-race chart, Equibase, plus other media, still referred to Laity as a colt. Gelding a horse often leads to a much improved performance. When I handicap a race, I look for changes -- whether it's the jockey, equipment, medication, etc. To me, when a horse is gelded, the change is as important as if Pat Valenzuela were replacing an apprentice rider. How important was the change on Laity to a first-time gelding? Just look at the Battaglia prices. Laity paid $15.80 to win. A $2 exacta returned $352; a $2 trifecta was worth $8,880; and a $2 superfecta paid $78,065. A $2 Pick 3, with odds-on favorites winning the first two races before Laity, returned $98. All payoffs were huge overlays. The only handicappers who knew Laity was a first-time gelding were listeners of the "Race Day Las Vegas" radio show. John Asher of Churchill Downs was on Saturday's show with host Ralph Siraco. Asher, in previewing the Battaglia, said "Laity had been gelded since his last start." I'm not trying to beat up on Turfway. If the handlers of Laity don't tell track officials and it's not on the horse's identification papers, Turfway wouldn't know. This sort of nonreporting occurs all too often at racetracks, big and small. When horseplayers don't have complete information, be it first-time geldings or full workouts, it's like stealing money from the betting public. The public must be protected to uphold the integrity of betting. In this case, I suggest either the trainer or the veterinarian who performed the procedure be held responsible. The change can be added to foal papers, or track stewards should be notified. It's absurd that in a $100,000 stakes race, nobody knew one of the favorites had recently been gelded. Richard Eng/Las Vegas Review Journal 
|
|
#2
03-26-2007, 01:01 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Wow, that does suck. I didn't have any money on the race, but it is instances like that that the bettors, who make up the sport, were probably screwed.
I liked the quote I saw in Thoroughbred Times from Indiana, where the public is more important than losing a couple of barns. Not the same, as that quote was linked to drug tests, but still an important statement... ALostTexan
|
|
#3
03-26-2007, 01:04 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I have ranted about this issue for years. How in the world the Jockey Club doesn't require a vet who gelds a horse to submit a report, signed by the vet and the trainer to enter the permanent record with Equibase, I don't know. The report should be mandatory and be faxed within 48 hours of the procedure. Once the change is entered in the data base, a symbol of some sort (insert your own joke here) would appear in the PP's indicating the change. If the PP's differentiate between "Lasix" and First Time Lasix" then they have the technology to designate the ultimate equipment change.
The trainers and vet must be made to report the procedure immediately, or face a fine. It shouldn't be for Jan Rushton to determine and tell us that this horse listed as a "G" in the Form is actually a "1st Time G."
|
|
#4
03-26-2007, 01:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Seems 13 months after the fact is a little late to be worrying about it.
|
|
#5
03-26-2007, 01:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
You figure someone would have the balls to make this information mandatory and readily available to the public.
|
|
#6
03-26-2007, 01:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
How bout implementing what Jerry Brown advocates in making a Vet change public knowledge as well? While it's "full disclosure", most of the betting public wouldn't know what to do with that information. "Did you hear Romance Dance is with Dr Killdare now?"
|
|
#8
03-26-2007, 01:16 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#9
03-26-2007, 01:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
The way that a trainer change can be a huge angle, a vet change I would also expect can make a significant difference.
|
|
#11
03-26-2007, 01:19 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Tod Marks Photo - Daybreak over Oklahoma
|
|
#12
03-26-2007, 01:22 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Well, the PP's clearly say "g." but there's nothing to say he's first-time. How is it possible to get an L but not a G in the form? Somebody has to tell the Jockey Club the horse is on lasix, why shouldn't they also have to tell them the horse was just gelded? Seems perfectly logical to me... and you only have to report it once!!! Not like it's an ongoing thing.
|
|
#13
03-26-2007, 01:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
The issue is with the Jockey Club, if anybody, and racetracks need to be made more responsible for getting this information in a timely manner, like the f'n day it happens, and forwarding that information immediately to the Jockey club who will then disseminate it to Equibase and DRF. If that was done, then these groups could provide information as to when horses are running as new geldings.
Now, for example, when I see a horse listed as a gelding that has been off a month or more I check my pps from the last time it ran to see if it was listed as a colt. That's fine if the horse is in fact LISTED as a gelding, but as is often the case ( like Dominion Saturday ), the horse will be listed as a colt and MAYBE the tracks will get the information and announce it ( NY is pretty good about this and Florida is not ). The bottom line is that it is yet another easily correctable problem in racing that the powers that be, whomever they are, has been dragging their feet on for decades.
|
|
#14
03-26-2007, 01:33 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Good information.
I've only been playing and handicapping horses on a year-round basis for about 4 years, and always wanted to know how you discovered when a horse was a first time gelding. I figured there was something I was missing in the racing form. I agree it should be disclosed more prominently, as it seems to be a huge handicapping angle.
|
|
#15
03-26-2007, 01:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Jerry Brown has raved so much about this. He and his Thorograph followers. I think it's a pipe dream, I don't think he will ever see this information made public to the bettors.
And that's a shame, but I think not. Besides, trainers are always subject to the choice of changing their vets. More detail that may, or may not, improve one's return. Quote:
|
|
#16
03-26-2007, 01:54 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
please use generalizations and non-truths when arguing your side, thank you
|
|
#18
03-26-2007, 05:34 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I have a feeling that if they owner and trainer were required to report it at the time they drop the horse in the box under penalty of forfeiting a purse for failing to do so, there would be compliance. The form really should be reporting 1st time geldings, can't see why they wouldn't include this information.
|
|
#20
03-26-2007, 07:46 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Turfway's Wolfgang Kratzenberg reported it Friday on ATRAB, and today on the show, trainer Darrin Miller explained he ANNOUNCED at entry that Dominican was a first-time gelding.
__________________
All ambitions are lawful except those which climb upward on the miseries or credulities of mankind. ~ Joseph Conrad A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right. ~ Thomas Paine Don't let anyone tell you that your dreams can't come true. They are only afraid that theirs won't and yours will. ~ Robert Evans The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. ~ George Orwell, 1984.
|
Linear Mode
