Ugly incident at CT, no contest in Race 4

[Stillriledup]

Route race, horse fell in the lower turn around the 2nd time and then ran the wrong way after she got up, jocks kept riding and the loose horse beelined right thru the field approaching the top of the lane and ran into another horse.

I think the loose horse ran into someone and then another jock #1 got unseated trying to avoid the horse.

Great job by a lot of these jocks to avoid this horse, this could have been a lot worse. Lets hope (somehow) all horses and jocks are ok, but the jock who originally fell hit hard.

[ReplayRandall]

Here's the replay of the incident from Saturday's race#4 at Charles Town:

http://www.hollywoodcasinocharlestown.com/Racing/Racing%20Live%20Video

[OntheRail]

That was horrible...where the heck were the outriders? They should of stop the race on the back stretch and had some way... either beacon lights along the rail or something to alert the jockeys of trouble one the track ahead.

[Some_One]

That was horrible...where the heck were the outriders? They should of stop the race on the back stretch and had some way... either beacon lights along the rail or something to alert the jockeys of trouble one the track ahead.

Well they were listening to SRU after the no contest race a couple of weeks ago where they called it off too early eventhough the jock was off the track.

[jk3521]

Well they were listening to SRU after the no contest race a couple of weeks ago where they called it off too early eventhough the jock was off the track.
Finally, somebody listens to SRU ! :D

[cj]

Here's the replay of the incident from Saturday's race#4 at Charles Town:

http://www.hollywoodcasinocharlestown.com/Racing/Racing%20Live%20Video

The race is no longer available, as are most races that involve spills.

[ronsmac]

The race is no longer available, as are most races that involve spills.That shows you how times have changed, I watched an old Breeders cup on HRTV, and NBC showed a horse breaking down and two horse falling in super slow motion 2 or 3 different times.

[jk3521]

I remember NBC showing the sad sight of Go for Wand struggling to her feet
and trying to get to the finish line with her leg dangling before they quickly pulled the camera away. :(

[dilanesp]

That shows you how times have changed, I watched an old Breeders cup on HRTV, and NBC showed a horse breaking down and two horse falling in super slow motion 2 or 3 different times.

NBC has gotten huge amounts of criticism from the industry for showing spills. They showed Eight Belles quite a few times, and Go for Wand of course. NBC's position, which I think is correct, is "we're journalists, a horse breaking down in a big race is big news, so we are going to cover the story". The people who run the sport would prefer that NBC just unquestionably promote it.

[Saratoga_Mike]

The race is no longer available, as are most races that involve spills.

I wonder if on the advice of legal counsel such replays are removed?

[dilanesp]

I wonder if on the advice of legal counsel such replays are removed?

I can't imagine why any lawyer would advise them to do this. The replays are publicly available. Someone's going to post them on youtube anyway. (I remember that for awhle, the Breeders' Cup didn't want the full replay of the 1990 Breeders Cup Distaff up on the web. That became impossible to maintain once youtube came around.)

But more importantly, in any litigation over this, the replays are fully discoverable. In any regulatory proceeding, the same is true. I'm sure the stewards in West Virginia have copies of them. Indeed, by pulling them off the website, you send the opposite message-- that you have something to hide. That could hurt them in any legal proceeding.

If that replay is staying off their website, I would suspect that is the result of advice from their PR department, not their legal department.

[Saratoga_Mike]

I can't imagine why any lawyer would advise them to do this. The replays are publicly available. Someone's going to post them on youtube anyway. (I remember that for awhle, the Breeders' Cup didn't want the full replay of the 1990 Breeders Cup Distaff up on the web. That became impossible to maintain once youtube came around.)

But more importantly, in any litigation over this, the replays are fully discoverable. In any regulatory proceeding, the same is true. I'm sure the stewards in West Virginia have copies of them. Indeed, by pulling them off the website, you send the opposite message-- that you have something to hide. That could hurt them in any legal proceeding.

If that replay is staying off their website, I would suspect that is the result of advice from their PR department, not their legal department.

All valid points, but I never put anything past the legal community.

[Stillriledup]

I can't imagine why any lawyer would advise them to do this. The replays are publicly available. Someone's going to post them on youtube anyway. (I remember that for awhle, the Breeders' Cup didn't want the full replay of the 1990 Breeders Cup Distaff up on the web. That became impossible to maintain once youtube came around.)

But more importantly, in any litigation over this, the replays are fully discoverable. In any regulatory proceeding, the same is true. I'm sure the stewards in West Virginia have copies of them. Indeed, by pulling them off the website, you send the opposite message-- that you have something to hide. That could hurt them in any legal proceeding.

If that replay is staying off their website, I would suspect that is the result of advice from their PR department, not their legal department.

Its disrespect for the horseplayer. People need to see these replays to make gambling decisions, why they're taken down is a mystery.

[proximity]

I see that the chart isn't even available and this is definitely wrong as the betting public has a right to at least a description as to how the competing horses were performing in the race.

[jballscalls]

Its disrespect for the horseplayer. People need to see these replays to make gambling decisions, why they're taken down is a mystery.

I think you're wrong. I think it's that they don't want video of a nasty accident out there.

[jballscalls]

I see that the chart isn't even available and this is definitely wrong as the betting public has a right to at least a description as to how the competing horses were performing in the race.

I wonder if any race that is a "no contest" has the chart not written. I'm good friends with equibase regional director and will ask her tomorrow. It could be the software won't accept a chart if there's no payout info or something.

Cause I don't think the house could just say "hey don't put that chart up" but maybe they can. be curious to find out

[cj]

I wonder if any race that is a "no contest" has the chart not written. I'm good friends with equibase regional director and will ask her tomorrow. It could be the software won't accept a chart if there's no payout info or something.

Cause I don't think the house could just say "hey don't put that chart up" but maybe they can. be curious to find out

They can do it without payoffs, Ocala Training Center is an example. But if a race isn't finished, not sure. As usual, SRU is grossly exaggerating the value a chart would have to gamblers.

[proximity]

They can do it without payoffs, Ocala Training Center is an example. But if a race isn't finished, not sure. As usual, SRU is grossly exaggerating the value a chart would have to gamblers.

I was actually the one who brought up the non-existent chart.

I've only handicapped with you that one time at Charles town but noticed that your game seemed to place a little more emphasis on the last race than mine did so i'm surprised you don't think this info should be available to help us determine the probability that a horse may be going off or coming into form. especially since we're already behind the eight ball as outsiders as far as stuff like workouts, drugs, and injuries are concerned.

I understand that sru cries wolf a lot and I don't see this as being a "wolf" issue, but contend that both the replay and chart should be available to the betting public.

[Stillriledup]

I think you're wrong. I think it's that they don't want video of a nasty accident out there.

I'm wrong about what?

Do horseplayers need video cameras trained on their computers to record live video in case the people producing the video just decide they're going to bury that video and take it down off the internet? Is that what we're resorting to now?

[jballscalls]

I'm wrong about what?

Do horseplayers need video cameras trained on their computers to record live video in case the people producing the video just decide they're going to bury that video and take it down off the internet? Is that what we're resorting to now?

You're usually wrong about everything.

But here I think you're wrong in your statement "it's disrespect for the horseplayer" They aren't making the decision to disrespect the horseplayer. they're doing it for a reason they think is right. People at the tracks don't sit around and say "hmmmm what could we do to disrespect our customers".

[Stillriledup]

You're usually wrong about everything.

But here I think you're wrong in your statement "it's disrespect for the horseplayer" They aren't making the decision to disrespect the horseplayer. they're doing it for a reason they think is right. People at the tracks don't sit around and say "hmmmm what could we do to disrespect our customers".

That's funny, i don't remember you debating anything i was wrong about in the past, you're certainly welcome to come into any thread that i'm involved in and have some respectful debate on incorrect facts that i've posted. If i'm not right about something, i won't hold it against you to point out the error of my ways, i'm all for correcting my own mistakes and i would appreciate you discussing these "wrong things" at the time rather than just posting this after the fact about things i was supposedly wrong about. I'm not much into blanket statements that are disparaging to my body of work, feel free to debate point by point at the time of my postings, i'd appreciate that approach rather than just telling me i'm 'generally wrong'.

I don't believe you have to consciously decide to disrespect someone for it to be considered disrespect. I agree with you that tracks aren't sitting around trying to consciously disrespect bettors, but if you take the tapes down and a bettor feels disrespected because of it, who's to tell him he's not really disrespected because it wasn't intentional?

Just be a track, have a product, show the horses, show the races and let people decide for themselves if they want to watch a replay with an accident in the tape or not. If you take them down, it looks like you are hiding something where there's really nothing to hide.

[takeout]

I asked one time and if memory serves I believe I was told that they didn't put out a chart of a race if it didn't have a winner.
I think it's crazy that Equibase doesn't at least make a partial chart in these cases. Lots of times much of the race has been run before being called off and the chartcallers have already called that much so why not put out the partial chart? I would think the full comments would be the most important of all and there's also the off odds and other things not found in the pp's.
And then there's the issue of someone looking back on that day at a later date and wondering what happened to that race as no mention of it exist anywhere in the charts for that day.
Then, to put the icing on the cake, someone from the track has the video pulled and now the player is left with no information at all in an information game. :bang:

[Stillriledup]

I asked one time and if memory serves I believe I was told that they didn't put out a chart of a race if it didn't have a winner.
I think it's crazy that Equibase doesn't at least make a partial chart in these cases. Lots of times much of the race has been run before being called off and the chartcallers have already called that much so why not put out the partial chart? I would think the full comments would be the most important of all and there's also the off odds and other things not found in the pp's.
And then there's the issue of someone looking back on that day at a later date and wondering what happened to that race as no mention of it exist anywhere in the charts for that day.
Then, to put the icing on the cake, someone from the track has the video pulled and now the player is left with no information at all in an information game. :bang:

I saw the race live and was watching it when it happened. What struck me odd was the announcer didnt even see the fall for what seemed like a pretty long time considered where it happened, right in his sightlines in the lower turn. He just kept calling the race. He did mention that the horse was running the other way, but i believe he just kept calling, i dont know for sure if the jocks can hear the announcer, i would think that they're focused on the race so i would think his call wasnt a factor in what the jocks on the track were doing.

When the original fall happened, my first thought was that there was going to be in inquiry on someone, the #1 horse was involved in tight quarters, i wasn't able to tell if the 1 caused the spill or the horse who fell crowded the 1 and caused the one to shift out into him and cause the accident, hard to say who was at fault, if anyone.

A lot of the jocks did a great job avoiding the situation, that horse was coming right at the entire field, if the loose horse hit the leading horse, there could have been a massive chain reaction.

[cj]

I was actually the one who brought up the non-existent chart.

I've only handicapped with you that one time at Charles town but noticed that your game seemed to place a little more emphasis on the last race than mine did so i'm surprised you don't think this info should be available to help us determine the probability that a horse may be going off or coming into form. especially since we're already behind the eight ball as outsiders as far as stuff like workouts, drugs, and injuries are concerned.

I understand that sru cries wolf a lot and I don't see this as being a "wolf" issue, but contend that both the replay and chart should be available to the betting public.

I'm more of a pattern and form cycle guy than a "last race" guy, though the last race is obviously a big part of that. That said, I'm not sure how anybody learns much from a portion of a race without seeing how the horses would have finished. Pretty tough for me to evaluate a race if it isn't completed.

I'm not saying a chart or replay of a race like this wouldn't have some value to some players, I'm sure it would. I just don't think it is something to worry much about in a sport that has much bigger problems.

Personally, I think the replays should be made available, just edit out parts where horses go down or are still able to be seen while injured. Would take very little time to do that, no idea why racing doesn't do that.

[FocusWiz]

I saw the race live and was watching it when it happened. What struck me odd was the announcer didnt even see the fall for what seemed like a pretty long time considered where it happened, right in his sightlines in the lower turn. He just kept calling the race. He did mention that the horse was running the other way, but i believe he just kept calling, i dont know for sure if the jocks can hear the announcer, i would think that they're focused on the race so i would think his call wasnt a factor in what the jocks on the track were doing.My take was that at the point of the fall he was calling out the leaders and by the time he got to the rear of the pack, the horse was nowhere to be seen in that part of the backstretch. I assume he was using binoculars for better visibility of colors and numbers which also would have limited his field of vision.

I suspect the jockeys can hear the announcer if they were to listen for him, but it may be very difficult for him to get their attention if they are really focused on the race. I did hear him raise his voice which would not likely have been to notify the crowd (since the horse was running up the stretch at the time and they likely saw it) so my guess was that he was trying to alert the jockeys.

I think the race should have been stopped sooner and agree with OntheRail's comments. I hope the injuries were not serious to those involved.

[Steve 'StatMan']

Wonder too if they pull the replay because having it, and plenty more people wanting to see the replay causes a strain on the replay system and/or website, so they do that to preserve the integrity of the website speed. AQU had a nasty spill with injuries a couple weeks ago, postings were made on PA about it. I looked on Twinspires that night, no replays for that race were available. However, the night of this CT spill, I decided to look up that replay on Twinspires and it was available.

In this CT accident, the loose horse was along the rail, and did trip up an oncoming horse that was about 5th or 6th or slow, and others ahead had to move out from the rail to avoid the loose runner. But the loose horse and horse nearest the rail did go down. I did see the two jockeys get up before the camera drew back significantly.

Yes, not sure what one can draw from the performances. May be nice to know who was up close early and who wasn't, but no way to know if any of them were able to sustain their runs, and who was coming up with late runs.

[v j stauffer]

NBC has gotten huge amounts of criticism from the industry for showing spills. They showed Eight Belles quite a few times, and Go for Wand of course. NBC's position, which I think is correct, is "we're journalists, a horse breaking down in a big race is big news, so we are going to cover the story". The people who run the sport would prefer that NBC just unquestionably promote it.

Journalism goes out the door when forcing the presenters of the event to "buy on" NBC.

[dilanesp]

Journalism goes out the door when forcing the presenters of the event to "buy on" NBC.

Well, it's one thing if it were either presented as an infomercial (one extreme) or the BC had the power that the Masters golf tournament does (other extreme).

But time-buys are very common in network TV, and as far as I know, the practice is that standards of journalism remain even when the time is bought by the event promoters, so long as the telecast is produced and presented by the network or syndicator rather than the promoters.

I remember being told by some industry "experts" back in the 1990's that they had complained to NBC and that if the Go For Wand scenario ever happened again, NBC wasn't going to show it over and over the way they did. And then Eight Belles happened, and NBC covered it exactly the same way they covered Go For Wand.

I think that television networks have a certain view about this issue, and they aren't changing their mind. Note that industry-controlled outlets (TVG and HRTV) are much less journalistic.

[jballscalls]

My take was that at the point of the fall he was calling out the leaders and by the time he got to the rear of the pack, the horse was nowhere to be seen in that part of the backstretch. I assume he was using binoculars for better visibility of colors and numbers which also would have limited his field of vision.

I suspect the jockeys can hear the announcer if they were to listen for him, but it may be very difficult for him to get their attention if they are really focused on the race. I did hear him raise his voice which would not likely have been to notify the crowd (since the horse was running up the stretch at the time and they likely saw it) so my guess was that he was trying to alert the jockeys.

I think the race should have been stopped sooner and agree with OntheRail's comments. I hope the injuries were not serious to those involved.

this is a very good response. When you're calling through binoculars you only see a few lengths, especially going into the first turn on a bullring cause they aren't that far away from you. Same thing happened with Pine Island in the Breeders' Cup, Trevor was at the front of the field and she was 15 lengths back, no way he could see her. The race Rene Douglas was injured in you hear the announcer call the 3/4 time just after the accident happened and doesn't mention the spill, cause he was glancing to the toteboard for a second or so to get the fraction.

I won't speak for the other announcers, but it's extremely easy to miss spills/accidents watching races through binoculars. I've been at the back of a field and totally missed a spill that happened in the front of the field. it just happens.

And i've asked several riders from multitple tracks and most can't hear the announcer. Hell most fans at the track can't make out what the announcers are saying. the pounding of the hoofs and all the whippin and hollerin in the stretch drowns out most of the sound. And down the backstretch they're really far away and the speakers don't carry that far.

[jballscalls]

I called my friend who is the west coast director for Equibase and she said if no horses finished the race there is no chart. If one horse finishes then apparently they do chart it.

I told her I think the resounding opinion of most horseplayers that I've talked to is they want the information. I mean any horse coming out of that race it should at least be notated they were in that race in the pps.

I certainly would want to know that they were. She said she's going to look into it and get back to me.

[jballscalls]

Personally, I think the replays should be made available, just edit out parts where horses go down or are still able to be seen while injured. Would take very little time to do that, no idea why racing doesn't do that.

I've seen a number of tracks do this on the replays of the previous day before the races start. That's what we do I believe, is just right before the accident happens just pop our logo over the video until it's off the screen.

[OntheRail]

...did not see it. Really!

"We have an alert system," Zimny said. "It's functional, with sirens and lights. It wasn't broken Saturday night. Up until two years ago we only had an audible warning system, but on our own volition installed warning lights on the four corners of the track. Both are activated from the same spot."

The warning system is activated by the clocker—but only if told to do so by the stewards, who are located about 20 feet away in another room on the roof of Charles Town.

"The clocker was told by the stewards (that the signal to activate the warning system) must come from them," Zimny said. "He was just following stewards' orders. Our guys did what they were told."

The stewards apparently didn't see the loose horse run back up the homestretch and into the path of the oncoming horses, or when they did, it was too late. Zimny said a WVRC official indicated the stewards told him they should have been more proactive and have requested Charles Town place a warning-system activation mechanism in their booth.

Read more on BloodHorse.com: http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/89187/warning-system-not-used-before-ct-collision#ixzz3M0jvERdM

[proximity]

a horse is a front runner. did he get out of the gate again in this race? or did he suddenly linger at the start and never make a move? without a final time we'll never have a raceshape or a final timeform number but possibly some other players can use these clues to continue to evaluate the form of some of the competing horses even if we don't?

a more pressing question for the rest of the card or the following day might be what jockeys went down in the race?

so there are some examples. maybe you don't or won't use this information and it's not the biggest deal in the world. like i said, certainly not a "wolf" issue. but still stuff that should be accessible to the players.

[EMD4ME]

I can't tell you how many times I will watch a replay when I see a horse dumped a jock.

Have uncovered many winners or validated prior form by watching how the horse ran without a jock. Yea, I know weight off helps but when a horse is off ten lengths slow, goes 15 wide and dominates, it's a good sign.

So, I'm with those that say the replay should be available and there should be a chart.

[cj]

I've seen a number of tracks do this on the replays of the previous day before the races start. That's what we do I believe, is just right before the accident happens just pop our logo over the video until it's off the screen.

Cool, they should. I can't tell you the last time I've been at a track early enough to see replays, just going by what I've seen online. I'll confess I haven't watched many from Portland.

[martini]

Have uncovered many winners or validated prior form by watching how the horse ran without a jock.

I will always remember Fort Larned dumping his jock in the GP Handicap (G2). Sure, he was a champ before then, but it was impressive to learn about the Trakus data once he ditched his rider:

http://www.americasbestracing.net/en/the-latest/blogs/2013/03/11/so-how-fast-did-fort-larned-run

[ultracapper]

I can't tell you how many times I will watch a replay when I see a horse dumped a jock.

Have uncovered many winners or validated prior form by watching how the horse ran without a jock. Yea, I know weight off helps but when a horse is off ten lengths slow, goes 15 wide and dominates, it's a good sign.

So, I'm with those that say the replay should be available and there should be a chart.

Me too. Tells you a lot about the horse. How (s)he runs without instructions from the jock. Does the horse just drop in with the crowd? Is the horse a big "A" personality and blast to the front and refuse to be headed as long as possible? I've had some very nice hits on horses that have dumped their jock in a previous race and from that race learned what kind a horse he is and then come upon the right race for him to compete in a manner that fits his personality.

There is an Abrams-trained horse named Marina del Heat. Couple years ago she dumped Chantal Sutherland right out of the gate. You can totally tell what kind of a horse she is just watching her run around the track that day. Big "A" personality.

[EMD4ME]

Going off topic but I can't resist.....

I would LOVE to bet a 9 race card with..............NO PINHEADS.

Line em up, open the gate and let's see which horse is not only more talented but more intelligent. :)

No more choking down, no more stupid 5 wide moves into no flow/pace after choking down my lone speed etc.

Would be fun. Just place 15 outriders past the finish line and lasso them back in :cool:

[EMD4ME]

I will always remember Fort Larned dumping his jock in the GP Handicap (G2). Sure, he was a champ before then, but it was impressive to learn about the Trakus data once he ditched his rider:

http://www.americasbestracing.net/en/the-latest/blogs/2013/03/11/so-how-fast-did-fort-larned-run

That was impressive! I remember that race like it was yesterday ! Great point.

[EMD4ME]

Me too. Tells you a lot about the horse. How (s)he runs without instructions from the jock. Does the horse just drop in with the crowd? Is the horse a big "A" personality and blast to the front and refuse to be headed as long as possible? I've had some very nice hits on horses that have dumped their jock in a previous race and from that race learned what kind a horse he is and then come upon the right race for him to compete in a manner that fits his personality.

There is an Abrams-trained horse named Marina del Heat. Couple years ago she dumped Chantal Sutherland right out of the gate. You can totally tell what kind of a horse she is just watching her run around the track that day. Big "A" personality.

You're 1000% right. One of the few nuggets left..... that no computer program, sheet # or fig maker can quantify.

[LAP_520]

Entries for Charles Town Race 4 on December 13, 2014

http://www.equibase.com/static/entry/CT121314USA-EQB.html#RACE4


Follow up story on the accident in Paulick Report.

http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/near-disaster-at-charles-town/

[cj]

That was impressive! I remember that race like it was yesterday ! Great point.

If memory serves, he ran poorly next out.

[EMD4ME]

Maybe he bounced off that over the top effort? (reason to play against next out)

Nevertheless, it just validated what a ceiling this horse had, which he validated over the course of his career.

[therussmeister]

Going off topic but I can't resist.....

I would LOVE to bet a 9 race card with..............NO PINHEADS.

Line em up, open the gate and let's see which horse is not only more talented but more intelligent. :)

No more choking down, no more stupid 5 wide moves into no flow/pace after choking down my lone speed etc.

Would be fun. Just place 15 outriders past the finish line and lasso them back in :cool:
The problem is all horses are pinheads.

[Stillriledup]

Going off topic but I can't resist.....

I would LOVE to bet a 9 race card with..............NO PINHEADS.

Line em up, open the gate and let's see which horse is not only more talented but more intelligent. :)

No more choking down, no more stupid 5 wide moves into no flow/pace after choking down my lone speed etc.

Would be fun. Just place 15 outriders past the finish line and lasso them back in :cool:

Here's more ways the jock hurts the bettor.

1) "Giving" horses races, its random when a jock decides to give them education and when the jock rides like he has 10k to win.

2) Without the weight of the pinhead on the back of the horse, horses would stay more sound, there would be very few if any breakdowns or catastrophic injuries, horses wouldn't snap legs if they were running free without a pinhead hitting them, pushing them and banging on them with 120 lbs right on the small of the horse's back. we would have a LOT more large fields, plus, owners would have more money as the percentage of what the jock made would go back into the pockets of the owners and thus, be reinvested into the game.....they wouldn't go for cuban cigars, high priced hookers and new cars for jocks.

3) you would never get disqualified, they would just pay off the results like they do in dog racing.

Any questions? :D

[OTM Al]

Going off topic but I can't resist.....

I would LOVE to bet a 9 race card with..............NO PINHEADS.

Line em up, open the gate and let's see which horse is not only more talented but more intelligent. :)

No more choking down, no more stupid 5 wide moves into no flow/pace after choking down my lone speed etc.

Would be fun. Just place 15 outriders past the finish line and lasso them back in :cool:

You do all realize that the male horses will do their best to kill each other don't you? Stallions are not warm and cuddly creatures.

[Tom]

People at the tracks don't sit around and say "hmmmm what could we do to disrespect our customers".

.....really?

[andtheyreoff]

Here's more ways the jock hurts the bettor.

1) "Giving" horses races, its random when a jock decides to give them education and when the jock rides like he has 10k to win.

2) Without the weight of the pinhead on the back of the horse, horses would stay more sound, there would be very few if any breakdowns or catastrophic injuries, horses wouldn't snap legs if they were running free without a pinhead hitting them, pushing them and banging on them with 120 lbs right on the small of the horse's back. we would have a LOT more large fields, plus, owners would have more money as the percentage of what the jock made would go back into the pockets of the owners and thus, be reinvested into the game.....they wouldn't go for cuban cigars, high priced hookers and new cars for jocks.

3) you would never get disqualified, they would just pay off the results like they do in dog racing.

Any questions? :D

The daily question: is Stillriledup sarcastic, or is he a genuine moron?

[LAP_520]

Entries for Charles Town Race 4 on December 13, 2014

http://www.equibase.com/static/entry/CT121314USA-EQB.html#RACE4


Follow up story on the accident in Paulick Report.

http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/near-disaster-at-charles-town/





12/15/2014
The on-off switch for a warning system to jockeys at Hollywood Casino at Charles Town racetrack was not triggered in the fourth race on Saturday night because it was not located in the stewards room, but down the hallway with the track’s official clocker, said Danny Wright, chief steward for the West Virginia Racing Commission.

http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/charles-town-accident-warning-system-switch-not-in-stewards-room/

[Stillriledup]

So, its coming to light that the stewards were watching the race on the track feed......which means they heard the announcer unless the race was on mute.

There has been debate here at PA over this issue, some have been adamant that judges don't hear the announcers.

Would they specifically have the sound on mute while watching on the track feed?

Also, even if they were NOT watching on the track feed instead of "out the window" wouldn't they hear the announcer out the window?

[OTM Al]

So, its coming to light that the stewards were watching the race on the track feed......which means they heard the announcer unless the race was on mute

You sure like making uninformed assumptions don't you? Before you ask such a question, you might want to find out how many in house feeds this track has. For instance, at NYRA tracks they have several. Only one looks and sounds like what goes out. Some feeds have no sound. Your practical experience of racing is not that of track employees.

[Stillriledup]

You sure like making uninformed assumptions don't you? Before you ask such a question, you might want to find out how many in house feeds this track has. For instance, at NYRA tracks they have several. Only one looks and sounds like what goes out. Some feeds have no sound. Your practical experience of racing is not that of track employees.

What assumption am i making? I'm confused as to what you mean.

Also, by your post, is it fair of me to assume that you believe no judge has ever heard the announcer during a live racecall?

[iceknight]

Wonder too if they pull the replay because having it, and plenty more people wanting to see the replay causes a strain on the replay system and/or website, so they do that to preserve the integrity of the website speed. Tough yo buy this theory. Good races also would get the same fate.

[Ruffian1]

So, its coming to light that the stewards were watching the race on the track feed......which means they heard the announcer unless the race was on mute.

There has been debate here at PA over this issue, some have been adamant that judges don't hear the announcers.

Would they specifically have the sound on mute while watching on the track feed?

Also, even if they were NOT watching on the track feed instead of "out the window" wouldn't they hear the announcer out the window?

I cannot speak to what they do at C.T.

Danny Wright was in Md. for years as an official after he stopped riding though. I can only assume that he was shown how it used to be done at the time in Md. Here is what I saw in my probably 10 different visits to the Stewards box when a race was running over the years.

There are 3 Stewards. One would always watch a large TV with the standard feed everyone sees. One would watch a head on version . The 3rd one would watch from the window with binoculars and a radio ( ear piece or headset if I recall, but not positive. ) That radio was allowing him to communicate with the patrol judges that are stationed in about 4 different poles outside. They give an all clear or discuss a possible hold if they see something from their pole just inside the inside fence at various locations around the track. That is what that car is doing when it drives away from the paddock just before each post parade starts if you ever noticed. It's taking the officials to their stands around the track.( It's that way in Md., not sure about other places). So the sound could be down but I would think that they tune it out mentally even if they can hear it so as to talk between themselves or on the radio.

Really hard to say , but maybe that helps shed some light on the process.

There is a racing official in here I am pretty sure. Is it Mountainman? Still trying to learn whose who here. If so, he would maybe have more updated insight on how they do it where he works.

Hope that helps but again, that's how they used to do it in Md. So I cannot say for sure how C.T. does it.

[Stillriledup]

I cannot speak to what they do at C.T.

Danny Wright was in Md. for years as an official after he stopped riding though. I can only assume that he was shown how it used to be done at the time in Md. Here is what I saw in my probably 10 different visits to the Stewards box when a race was running over the years.

There are 3 Stewards. One would always watch a large TV with the standard feed everyone sees. One would watch a head on version . The 3rd one would watch from the window with binoculars and a radio ( ear piece or headset if I recall, but not positive. ) That radio was allowing him to communicate with the patrol judges that are stationed in about 4 different poles outside. They give an all clear or discuss a possible hold if they see something from there pole just inside the inside fence at various locations around the track. That is what that car is doing when it drives away from the paddock just before each post parade starts if you ever noticed.( It's that way in Md., not sure about other places). So the sound could be down but I would think that they tune it out mentally even if they can hear it so as to talk between themselves or on the radio.

Really hard to say , but maybe that helps shed some light on the process.

There is a racing official in here I am pretty sure. Is it Mountainman? Still trying to learn whose who here. If so, he would maybe have more updated insight on how they do it where he works.

Hope that helps but again, that's how they used to do it in Md. So I cannot say for sure how C.T. does it.

Mountainman is Mark Patterson, he's the guy on the signal who does the commentary between races and their announcer Peter Berry also pops in here on occasion.

The reason i bring up if stewards could hear the calls is because there was a discussion here a while back about judges and if they can hear the announcer and if hearing the call might, at least subconsciously, affect an inquiry. I think some of us were saying that announcers shouldnt be making DQs and if they embellish their call to make it sound like something really bad happened, it could be a factor, however slight.

Thanks for that info, good stuff!

[Ruffian1]

Mountainman is Mark Patterson, he's the guy on the signal who does the commentary between races and their announcer Peter Berry also pops in here on occasion.

The reason i bring up if stewards could hear the calls is because there was a discussion here a while back about judges and if they can hear the announcer and if hearing the call might, at least subconsciously, affect an inquiry. I think some of us were saying that announcers shouldnt be making DQs and if they embellish their call to make it sound like something really bad happened, it could be a factor, however slight.

Thanks for that info, good stuff!

You are welcome. Anytime.

I think someone in here works in the racing office but I am not sure.

Honestly, I would be floored if they listened to the commentary of the race and it skewed their judgement on an inquiry or not. Because I can only rely on past experience , I go back to the Stewards from the 70's, 80's and 90's and from the ones I interacted with, I don't think ANY of them would even consider it. But.. times change and ... I have been floored before.

[OTM Al]

What assumption am i making? I'm confused as to what you mean.

Also, by your post, is it fair of me to assume that you believe no judge has ever heard the announcer during a live racecall?

You are assuming they watch the same feed as you. I doubt they do. I doubt there is sound on the feed they see. If you don't want sound on the feed, why would you listed to what the announcer says? You don't even understand the procedures in place at the track you are talking about, but you are commenting and complaining about them. One uninformed assumption after another.

[castaway01]

You are assuming they watch the same feed as you. I doubt they do. I doubt there is sound on the feed they see. If you don't want sound on the feed, why would you listed to what the announcer says? You don't even understand the procedures in place at the track you are talking about, but you are commenting and complaining about them. One uninformed assumption after another.

Good points as usual. I'm always conflicted if SRU is just trolling or if he genuinely is clueless. Like he thinks the guys in the NFL replay review center are watching all the games with the sound turned up. Or, for that matter, as if track announcers usually make a big deal out of a possible foul in mid-race. It's like he's from some other universe, I don't get it and never have.

[OTM Al]

Good points as usual. I'm always conflicted if SRU is just trolling or if he genuinely is clueless. Like he thinks the guys in the NFL replay review center are watching all the games with the sound turned up. Or, for that matter, as if track announcers usually make a big deal out of a possible foul in mid-race. It's like he's from some other universe, I don't get it and never have.

Genuinely clueless has always been my working basis. No thought about the consequences, no thought about any other effects the actions he wants would cause. Just knee-jerk complaints that are neither thought out nor logically formed. He has been quite consistent in that. No malice though that I can see, so not a troll. Guess I'm getting tired of seeing his complaint thread every time I log on. It get old. If I ever quit the game it won't be from takeout or meds or any of the other crap constantly discussed, it will be from the baseless, constant whining. Most of the real problems get missed completely because people are too wrapped up in whining about things that aren't problems IMO.

[Stillriledup]

Good points as usual. I'm always conflicted if SRU is just trolling or if he genuinely is clueless. Like he thinks the guys in the NFL replay review center are watching all the games with the sound turned up. Or, for that matter, as if track announcers usually make a big deal out of a possible foul in mid-race. It's like he's from some other universe, I don't get it and never have.

To know that i have fans here who run thru their house at breakneck speed at sunrise to see what i said the night before warms the cochleae cordis of my heart, it really does, i appreciate you being one of my biggest fans.

Happy Holidays Castaway, keep being you, don't change for anyone! *emoticon of Santa Claus waving to Castaway01*

[Stillriledup]

Genuinely clueless has always been my working basis. No thought about the consequences, no thought about any other effects the actions he wants would cause. Just knee-jerk complaints that are neither thought out nor logically formed. He has been quite consistent in that. No malice though that I can see, so not a troll. Guess I'm getting tired of seeing his complaint thread every time I log on. It get old. If I ever quit the game it won't be from takeout or meds or any of the other crap constantly discussed, it will be from the baseless, constant whining. Most of the real problems get missed completely because people are too wrapped up in whining about things that aren't problems IMO.

Its funny how my "complaints" about racing are somehow worse than your complaints about me. Board members don't want to hear dead air and wasted space with one poster complaining about another, especially since there's plenty of time to respond to my posts when they happen, And, not to mention, PA has a perfectly working ignore feature.

Your pal Castaway says "i don't get it and never have" but both of you continue to read my posts and then complain about them afterwards. :D

Pretty funny if you ask me.

[OTM Al]

Its funny how my "complaints" about racing are somehow worse than your complaints about me. Board members don't want to hear dead air and wasted space with one poster complaining about another, especially since there's plenty of time to respond to my posts when they happen, And, not to mention, PA has a perfectly working ignore feature.

Your pal Castaway says "i don't get it and never have" but both of you continue to read my posts and then complain about them afterwards. :D

Pretty funny if you ask me.

You post on EVERY THREAD. Talk about wasted space.

[Stillriledup]

You post on EVERY THREAD. Talk about wasted space.

I'm a know it all, what do you want. :D

Message boards are to post messages and complain. I do both very well. ;)

Merry X Mas Al.

[OTM Al]

I'm a know it all, what do you want. :D

Message boards are to post messages and complain. I do both very well. ;)

Clearly not.

[Stillriledup]

Clearly not.

You coulda said Merry X Mas SRU, i'll give you a do over. :)

[EMD4ME]

Like it or not, SRU is good for business. Agree or disagree with him, he creates conflict/conversation/arguments LOL/action.

I for one, look forward to his passionate posts whether I agree or not.

[PaceAdvantage]

Like it or not, SRU is good for business.This is highly debatable. In fact, I would argue he's probably the opposite.

[OTM Al]

Like it or not, SRU is good for business. Agree or disagree with him, he creates conflict/conversation/arguments LOL/action.

I for one, look forward to his passionate posts whether I agree or not.

It's not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing with a passionate argument. Were it that, there would be no issue. It is a matter of someone who consistently creates controversy on baseless assumption. If he argued from fact, then the content he provides would be worthwhile, but instead he propagates false information which too many take as fact. He's quite good at the common sense/ aw shucks approach which is appealing as it seems like the right answer. Unfortunately so called common sense is often dead wrong.

[OTM Al]

You coulda said Merry X Mas SRU, i'll give you a do over. :)

The terms of service of this site precluded me from responding as I wished.

[Stillriledup]

It's not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing with a passionate argument. Were it that, there would be no issue. It is a matter of someone who consistently creates controversy on baseless assumption. If he argued from fact, then the content he provides would be worthwhile, but instead he propagates false information which too many take as fact. He's quite good at the common sense/ aw shucks approach which is appealing as it seems like the right answer. Unfortunately so called common sense is often dead wrong.


Aren't most posts here just horseplayers offering up opinions?

If there's something that i've posted that's factually wrong, please point it out to me so i can correct it (and no, you disagreeing with my opinion doesn't count as an incorrect FACT on my part).

[Hambletonian]

It's not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing with a passionate argument. Were it that, there would be no issue. It is a matter of someone who consistently creates controversy on baseless assumption. If he argued from fact, then the content he provides would be worthwhile, but instead he propagates false information which too many take as fact. He's quite good at the common sense/ aw shucks approach which is appealing as it seems like the right answer. Unfortunately so called common sense is often dead wrong.

truer words were never posted...

I think it is clear that SRU's biggest fan is...wait for it...SRU.

One of the banes of the new age is the number of people who have crawled out of the woodwork to serve as forum provocateurs. doesn't matter what the site is, politics, horse racing or tiddlywinks, these folks live for the reaction/attention.

Normal people would not have the time to craft so many useless posts, he is either completely clueless or just a dime store instigator. I go for the latter.

[Stillriledup]

truer words were never posted...

I think it is clear that SRU's biggest fan is...wait for it...SRU.

One of the banes of the new age is the number of people who have crawled out of the woodwork to serve as forum provocateurs. doesn't matter what the site is, politics, horse racing or tiddlywinks, these folks live for the reaction/attention.

Normal people would not have the time to craft so many useless posts, he is either completely clueless or just a dime store instigator. I go for the latter.

Just remember, the "Reaction" is on you, not me. I post what i post, and you either react, or you don't.....but if you react, that speaks about you, not me. Your reaction, if its not respectful debate, is what starts the "provocateur" stuff.

I've never one time called someone here clueless or an instigator and here you are, using those words. Cmon, you're better than that.

[OTM Al]

truer words were never posted...

I think it is clear that SRU's biggest fan is...wait for it...SRU.

One of the banes of the new age is the number of people who have crawled out of the woodwork to serve as forum provocateurs. doesn't matter what the site is, politics, horse racing or tiddlywinks, these folks live for the reaction/attention.

Normal people would not have the time to craft so many useless posts, he is either completely clueless or just a dime store instigator. I go for the latter.

He does have the technique down pretty well for that. His response to you is classic in that vein

[thaskalos]

truer words were never posted...

I think it is clear that SRU's biggest fan is...wait for it...SRU.

One of the banes of the new age is the number of people who have crawled out of the woodwork to serve as forum provocateurs. doesn't matter what the site is, politics, horse racing or tiddlywinks, these folks live for the reaction/attention.

Normal people would not have the time to craft so many useless posts, he is either completely clueless or just a dime store instigator. I go for the latter.

I say he is NEITHER. To me, he seems like a carefree guy who loves this game...and who doesn't tire of talking about it. He doesn't take himself -- or the game -- seriously...and I think that's a very healthy outlook to have. No, I don't agree with everything that he posts here...but I am certain that people here say the same about me -- or about anybody else.

I don't know if anyone remembers this...but SRU was intimidated off this board some time ago...and he stayed away for quite a long time. Maybe it was only me...but I didn't notice an improvement in the content of this board during his absence. I have never met SRU, nor have I ever talked to him one on one...but I like him. And I happen to think that there is a spot for him on this board. As far as I am concerned...his participation here makes this a better place.

PS...

Yes, he DOES seem to have a lot of time on his hands...but that's hardly a bad thing. I wish I had a little more time on my hands too...

[Stillriledup]

He does have the technique down pretty well for that. His response to you is classic in that vein

There wouldn't be much controversy if people knew how to be respectful of other people's opinions and post like adults. The controversy starts when someone decides they're going to go "5th grade" and start hurling insults.

[Stillriledup]

I say he is NEITHER. To me, he seems like a carefree guy who loves this game...and who doesn't tire of talking about it. He doesn't take himself -- or the game -- seriously...and I think that's a very healthy outlook to have. No, I don't agree with everything that he posts here...but I am certain that people here say the same about me -- or about anybody else.

I don't know if anyone remembers this...but SRU was intimidated off this board some time ago...and he stayed away for quite a long time. Maybe it was only me...but I didn't notice an improvement in the content of this board during his absence. I have never met SRU, nor have I ever talked to him one on one...but I like him. And I happen to think that there is a spot for him on this board. As far as I am concerned...his participation here makes this a better place.

PS...

Yes, he DOES seem to have a lot of time on his hands...but that's hardly a bad thing. I wish I had a little more time on my hands too...

5XcKBmdfpWs

[OTM Al]

There wouldn't be much controversy if people knew how to be respectful of other people's opinions and post like adults. The controversy starts when someone decides they're going to go "5th grade" and start hurling insults.

Classic victim move.

There wouldn't be as much controversy if you actually spent time thinking about what you want to say rather than constantly posting. If I think you've said something ridiculous, I'll say so and I think you have.

[proximity]

He doesn't take himself -- or the game -- seriously...and I think that's a very healthy outlook to have....

this.

on the other hand, spending Christmas ripping each other's guts out on a Charles town thread..... best gambling site on the internet!! :)

[Stillriledup]

this.

on the other hand, spending Christmas ripping each other's guts out on a Charles town thread..... best gambling site on the internet!! :)

Mans game. :D