Legit or not??

[Track Phantom]

Wondering if anyone here thinks it is even remotely possible that trainers who have hundreds of starters and win over 30%, 35% is legitimate. A guy like Karl Broberg wins at an insane rate. Any chance at all he is doing it in honest fashion? If so, what is he doing differently?

I just assume everyone knows it is not legit but maybe there are those that really think it is honest.

[castaway01]

You should read one of the 6000 other threads on cheating jockeys, trainers, and stewards and then get back to us with your findings. :bang:

[Donttellmeshowme]

Wondering if anyone here thinks it is even remotely possible that trainers who have hundreds of starters and win over 30%, 35% is legitimate. A guy like Karl Broberg wins at an insane rate. Any chance at all he is doing it in honest fashion? If so, what is he doing differently?

I just assume everyone knows it is not legit but maybe there are those that really think it is honest.




Hasnt been caught but yes im having my doubts. His horses just rebreak down the lane. he improves 99.9% of the horses he claims.

[Track Phantom]

You should read one of the 6000 other threads on cheating jockeys, trainers, and stewards and then get back to us with your findings. :bang:

No need for this pompous response. Just trying to find out what percentage of serious players wholeheartedly believe what "supertrainers" are doing.

[LottaKash]

I am curious how "the whales" view the supertrainer phenomenon...Do they make allowances for it, ignore it, or do they embrace it as part of their analysis and wagering protocols ?

[cj]

Wondering if anyone here thinks it is even remotely possible that trainers who have hundreds of starters and win over 30%, 35% is legitimate. A guy like Karl Broberg wins at an insane rate. Any chance at all he is doing it in honest fashion? If so, what is he doing differently?

I just assume everyone knows it is not legit but maybe there are those that really think it is honest.

Like most, I'm skeptical. But my eyes have been opened somewhat this year at Remington. I've met some guys at both ends of the spectrum. I've met top owners/trainers and I've met run of the mill guys struggling to win a race. All have been very nice and forthcoming.

I'll put this as nicely as I can...it isn't very tough to envision that the top guys are just putting in more work and are better horsemen than the bottom guys. By more work, I mean a lot more work. And by better horsemen, I mean a lot better. They also have a lot more funding.

Do I know for sure it doesn't go beyond that? Of course not. But I have no doubt any longer it is part of it.

[Stillriledup]

I think what would be fair to supertrainers is if we analyzed each one of their starters on an individual basis. Not all of the 30/35 pct is cheating, a lot of it is extensive and 'spare no expense' vet work as well as very aggressively placing the animals.

If a supertrainer wants to be viewed as an honest horseman who is just 'out working' his fellow trainer he (or she) must:

1) not have their new acquisitions show massive overnight improvement.

2) not have the horses they lose via claim fall off the map

3) don't rack up violations.

[cj]

I think what would be fair to supertrainers is if we analyzed each one of their starters on an individual basis. Not all of the 30/35 pct is cheating, a lot of it is extensive and 'spare no expense' vet work as well as very aggressively placing the animals.

If a supertrainer wants to be viewed as an honest horseman who is just 'out working' his fellow trainer he (or she) must:

1) not have their new acquisitions show massive overnight improvement.

2) not have the horses they lose via claim fall off the map

3) don't rack up violations.

1) Isn't that the goal of a 1st time acquisition?

2) Depends who they lose them too.

3) Absolutely.

[Stillriledup]

1) Isn't that the goal of a 1st time acquisition?

2) Depends who they lose them too.

3) Absolutely.

1) it's the goal for them, but my goal as a bettor is to sniff out the people who might make a horse jump up overnight.

2) even if the new trainer is a clown, there shouldn't be a massive drop off overnight if the horse was running on oats, hay and natural ability.

[cj]

1) it's the goal for them, but my goal as a bettor is to sniff out the people who might make a horse jump up overnight.

2) even if the new trainer is a clown, there shouldn't be a massive drop off overnight if the horse was running on oats, hay and natural ability.

It isn't too tough to sniff them out these days. The only real value is if you catch them early before the public does.

2) sounds good in theory, but doesn't really play out in real life and never has, even before the days of "supertrainers".

[thaskalos]

I would readily accept these gaudy winning percentages as being "legitimate"...if only I had HEARD of some of these "supertrainers" before. How do guys step out of total anonymity...to put up stats like that?

[Redboard]

I think some of the supertrainers, Todd Pletcher for instance, just have their pick of the litter and the money and resources to train the horse the way they want. If a trainer has an army of bluebloods to choose from, I would think he’d have a good batting average. A trainer’s winning percentage is important to them and responsible for them to have a successful career. Because they’re not dependent on one owner, or a few owners, they don’t have to start a horse unless he believes the horse can win. A lesser trainer would need the work( I would think) and wouldn’t turn down offers from anybody(for the most part) to train and run their horse.

Now, the high-percentage claiming trainers are a different story. It’s hard to make a case for them being honest, but I’m all ears.

[classhandicapper]

I think the key on the recent acquisitions is who they get the horse from and how long they have it before the horse turns around.

At one extreme, if they get the horse from some future Hall of Fame trainer and move it up 5 lengths 2 weeks later, something is suspect.

If they take it from some low percentage trainer, keep it out of action for 6 weeks, and then move it up a few lengths, that seems fine to me.

[cj]

I think some of the supertrainers, Todd Pletcher for instance, just have their pick of the litter and the money and resources to train the horse the way they want. If a trainer has an army of bluebloods to choose from, I would think he’d have a good batting average. A trainer’s winning percentage is important to them and responsible for them to have a successful career. Because they’re not dependent on one owner, or a few owners, they don’t have to start a horse unless he believes the horse can win. A lesser trainer would need the work( I would think) and wouldn’t turn down offers from anybody(for the most part) to train and run their horse.

Now, the high-percentage claiming trainers are a different story. It’s hard to make a case for them being honest, but I’m all ears.

I don't really think Todd Pletcher is the kind of trainer the original poster is talking about.

[no breathalyzer]

The one thing i notice about super trainers is the know the condition really well.. some of these lower % trainers i swear can't read or something some seem to always miss place their stock . I also notice the super trainer always blast thru the nl1 nl2 nl3 ect. they seem to really empty the tank on the horse to do this. while mom and pop trainer is less likely to do this.

[Kash$]

Vets play a huge role..

[Stillriledup]

Vets play a huge role..

Vets should be in the program. When a horse falls off the map after a claim, I'd love to know what the vet change looked like.

I wonder why this stuff is such a big secret.

[green80]

Broberg has mastered the pharmaceutical side of it. He has the right connections in the veterinary industry. He know what he can use and where he can use it. It will be interesting to see how he does at Delta Downs this meet with the change in medication rules.

[v j stauffer]

Inflated % numbers are very possible without cheating. Here's how it's done.

1. Vet Work. I don't mean using illegal substances. I mean injecting every joint every time they run. A full lube job.

2. Screwing the association and racing office. Only entering or running when you know you're getting the very best of it. Looking at the race after it's been drawn and scratching unless you're totally confident. Bad post? Out. Too slow on numbers? Out. Track off? Out. Couple of sniffles or a cough or two but probably gonna be fine? Out. Too many in field? Out.

3. Having owner who will let you call the shots. Claiming for 10k and run back for 5k when the horse is fine*

4. Forming alliances with a select number of fellow top trainers. You scratch this time for me. I'll scratch next time for you**

5. Knowledge the gaudy % numbers will attract new blood into the game. Thereby allowing the trainer to burn em and churn em.

* No owner is going to just let you lose money for them. This is mitigated by being able to bet on the droppers. The high % trainer will tell his inner circle owners which ones are good and which ones are bad. The good ones on the drop become very reliable gambling investments to offset deficits in purse money.

** Nobody gets hurt. Except of course the tracks who are trying to put up good competitive fields. And the bettors who are forced to bet into those shit races.

30 to 35% TOTALLY doable without a needle.

[ebcorde]

Inflated % numbers are very possible without cheating. Here's how it's done.

1. Vet Work. I don't mean using illegal substances. I mean injecting every joint every time they run. A full lube job.

2. Screwing the association and racing office. Only entering or running when you know you're getting the very best of it. Looking at the race after it's been drawn and scratching unless you're totally confident. Bad post? Out. Too slow on numbers? Out. Track off? Out. Couple of sniffles or a cough or two but probably gonna be fine? Out. Too many in field? Out.

3. Having owner who will let you call the shots. Claiming for 10k and run back for 5k when the horse is fine*

4. Forming alliances with a select number of fellow top trainers. You scratch this time for me. I'll scratch next time for you**

5. Knowledge the gaudy % numbers will attract new blood into the game. Thereby allowing the trainer to burn em and churn em.

* No owner is going to just let you lose money for them. This is mitigated by being able to bet on the droppers. The high % trainer will tell his inner circle owners which ones are good and which ones are bad. The good ones on the drop become very reliable gambling investments to offset deficits in purse money.

** Nobody gets hurt. Except of course the tracks who are trying to put up good competitive fields. And the bettors who are forced to bet into those shit races.

30 to 35% TOTALLY doable without a needle.

wow, excellent post. did not know about points 1&4 Droppers win so much I have reduced the emphasis on Pace. I need to read YOU more.

[v j stauffer]

wow, excellent post. did not know about points 1&4 Droppers win so much I have reduced the emphasis on Pace. I need to read YOU more.

Be careful. You can get in a lot of trouble saying things like that on PA. :rolleyes:

[thaskalos]

Inflated % numbers are very possible without cheating. Here's how it's done.

1. Vet Work. I don't mean using illegal substances. I mean injecting every joint every time they run. A full lube job.

2. Screwing the association and racing office. Only entering or running when you know you're getting the very best of it. Looking at the race after it's been drawn and scratching unless you're totally confident. Bad post? Out. Too slow on numbers? Out. Track off? Out. Couple of sniffles or a cough or two but probably gonna be fine? Out. Too many in field? Out.

3. Having owner who will let you call the shots. Claiming for 10k and run back for 5k when the horse is fine*

4. Forming alliances with a select number of fellow top trainers. You scratch this time for me. I'll scratch next time for you**

5. Knowledge the gaudy % numbers will attract new blood into the game. Thereby allowing the trainer to burn em and churn em.

* No owner is going to just let you lose money for them. This is mitigated by being able to bet on the droppers. The high % trainer will tell his inner circle owners which ones are good and which ones are bad. The good ones on the drop become very reliable gambling investments to offset deficits in purse money.

** Nobody gets hurt. Except of course the tracks who are trying to put up good competitive fields. And the bettors who are forced to bet into those shit races.

30 to 35% TOTALLY doable without a needle.

Competent trainer care also fits into the equation. Just LOOK at those nice flowers that Marcos Zulueta attaches to his horses's tails out at Parx. :ThmbUp:

[HalvOnHorseracing]

In the last year or so I have spent a lot of time on the backside talking to trainers and I am absolutely convinced that there are clear differences between the higher percentage trainers and their less successful bretheren. There are clear differences in diet, feed, supplements, farriers, vet care, stall maintenance, and horsemanship. The super trainers at their best are usually betwen 25% and 30% so it is a legitimate question to ask, how does a trainer get to 35% or 40%? Placing a horse correctly helps. The disadvantage that the Pletchers or Bafferts have is that they are generally racing in higher level, competitive races against top horses, so they don't get many cakewalks. So perhaps if trainers are able to find non-competitive claiming fields that could up the percentage slightly above 25-30%. Trainers like Broberg insist that when they claim a horse that has physical issues they take time to solve the problem before running it back. However, that doesn't explain coming back off a short layoff after the claim and winning at a high percentage.

If running the best horses that get the best of everything only when they are ready to run doesn't yield better than 25-30%, the question of how to exceed that number is a legitimate one. But the corrollary question is, what could a trainer possibly be giving a horse that will produce a super effort AND not be detectable given modern testing equipment? What sort of drug could improve heart/lung function, or mask injury completely and not show up during testing?

Again, I've researched and talked to experts as much as anyone and I haven't yet heard a reasonable answer. If there is a drug it is so effective and so secret that nobody has an idea of its chemical composition (except the cheating trainer) or how to test for it, that would be one valuable drug. But, as I have long argued, I believe the responsibility for investigating falls to the racing commissions. I believe they owe us the effort to find an answer. For once the racing commissions should be proactive instead of just waiting for a bad urine test before they look into a trainer.

[proximity]

No need for this pompous response. Just trying to find out what percentage of serious players wholeheartedly believe what "supertrainers" are doing.

zero percent. but you already know this so castaway is somewhat right. :)

[Tape Reader]

Inflated % numbers are very possible without cheating. Here's how it's done.

1. Vet Work. I don't mean using illegal substances. I mean injecting every joint every time they run. A full lube job.

2. Screwing the association and racing office. Only entering or running when you know you're getting the very best of it. Looking at the race after it's been drawn and scratching unless you're totally confident. Bad post? Out. Too slow on numbers? Out. Track off? Out. Couple of sniffles or a cough or two but probably gonna be fine? Out. Too many in field? Out.

3. Having owner who will let you call the shots. Claiming for 10k and run back for 5k when the horse is fine*

4. Forming alliances with a select number of fellow top trainers. You scratch this time for me. I'll scratch next time for you**

5. Knowledge the gaudy % numbers will attract new blood into the game. Thereby allowing the trainer to burn em and churn em.

* No owner is going to just let you lose money for them. This is mitigated by being able to bet on the droppers. The high % trainer will tell his inner circle owners which ones are good and which ones are bad. The good ones on the drop become very reliable gambling investments to offset deficits in purse money.

** Nobody gets hurt. Except of course the tracks who are trying to put up good competitive fields. And the bettors who are forced to bet into those shit races.

30 to 35% TOTALLY doable without a needle.

Wow! Good stuff v j stauffer. This is going into my market trading notebook. Thank you.

[Track Phantom]

I would love to see a poll that asks just this question:

Do the majority of very high percentage claiming trainers with many horses use anything illegal?

1. Yes, no high percentage trainer can win in this environment without taking an edge of some kind and that edge would be considered something performance enhancing that the public knows nothing about.

2. No, illegal performance enhancing drugs are not the overarching reason for these high win percentages and the insinuation is unfair to these trainers.

For the record, I would select #1. I think it is naive to think these usual suspects that win with anything, especially those recent additions, can possibly be doing this without something performance enhancing. I sure wish I was wrong, or could see these through rose-colored glasses again, as I enjoyed the sporting aspect of the game much more when I believed things were legitimate.

[Stillriledup]

I would love to see 3 lists.

List 1: all the trainers who have had 0 violations in the last 2 years.

List 2: the top 20 trainers in the amount of violations in the last 2 years

List 3: the top 20 trainers in win percentage over the last two years (with at least 200 starts)

If none of these super trainers are cheating, it would be totally random who's name shows up on list 2, it could really be anyone from either of the other lists as well as people who didnt make either list.

Right?

[Track Phantom]

I would love to see 3 lists.

List 1: all the trainers who have had 0 violations in the last 2 years.

List 2: the top 20 trainers in the amount of violations in the last 2 years

List 3: the top 20 trainers in win percentage over the last two years (with at least 200 starts)

If none of these super trainers are cheating, it would be totally random who's name shows up on list 2, it could really be anyone from either of the other lists as well as people who didnt make either list.

Right?

I don't think testing is catching what they're using. Violations mean nothing to me.

[Tall One]

Had to check it out first, but here's a site SRU that might be able to help. Harness, QH, and thoroughbred rulings going back 10 years.

RMTC (http://www.rmtcnet.com/content_recentrulings.asp)

[Stillriledup]

I don't think testing is catching what they're using. Violations mean nothing to me.

If you had an undetectable, wouldn't it be smarter to win 13 pct and lay low and a few times a year load one up and bet your lungs?

The idea that the highest percentage trainers are using something 'undetectable' on every one of their starters would require a large leap of faith.

[Track Phantom]

The idea that the highest percentage trainers are using something 'undetectable' on every one of their starters would require a large leap of faith.

Huh? I don't understand your logic. If a trainer found something undetectable that can enhance performance, why wouldn't they be using it consistently?

[Stillriledup]

Huh? I don't understand your logic. If a trainer found something undetectable that can enhance performance, why wouldn't they be using it consistently?

I guess I'm giving them too much credit to be able to 'cycle' undetectables rather than load up every horse they start.

[pandy]

I don't automatically suspect every trainer who has a high win percentage, just the ones who miraculously improve horses quickly off the claim on a consistent basis, especially if they wheel the horses back quickly. Of course, most of the cheaters have a long rap sheet of drug violations....Jorge Navarro comes to mind.

[proximity]

If you had an undetectable, wouldn't it be smarter to win 13 pct and lay low and a few times a year load one up and bet your lungs?


no. it's smarter not to gamble at all and just collect big slots purses multiple times a week.

[highnote]

Like most, I'm skeptical. But my eyes have been opened somewhat this year at Remington. I've met some guys at both ends of the spectrum. I've met top owners/trainers and I've met run of the mill guys struggling to win a race. All have been very nice and forthcoming.

I'll put this as nicely as I can...it isn't very tough to envision that the top guys are just putting in more work and are better horsemen than the bottom guys. By more work, I mean a lot more work. And by better horsemen, I mean a lot better. They also have a lot more funding.

Do I know for sure it doesn't go beyond that? Of course not. But I have no doubt any longer it is part of it.


Good points. This reminds me of the different types of football or basketball coaches.

1. There are bad coaches with bad players and they rarely win.

2. There are great coaches who improve their teams even when the teams are mediocre. One of D. Wayne Lukas' former players said that Lukas' high school basketball teams weren't very good, but they were always well-prepared.

3. There are coaches who have great teams, but the teams decline.

4. There are coaches who are very good, but not great, but they have great records because they know how to recruit the best players -- they're salesmen.

5. There are the elite coaches who know how to recruit and are brilliant and their teams are always good or great. John Wooden and Bill Belichick, for example.

[Stillriledup]

no. it's smarter not to gamble at all and just collect big slots purses multiple times a week.

But that's the owners money, not the trainer.

[proximity]

But that's the owners money, not the trainer.

what????

you've said so yourself and here's just one example:

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1887450&postcount=2

[thespaah]

Inflated % numbers are very possible without cheating. Here's how it's done.

1. Vet Work. I don't mean using illegal substances. I mean injecting every joint every time they run. A full lube job.

2. Screwing the association and racing office. Only entering or running when you know you're getting the very best of it. Looking at the race after it's been drawn and scratching unless you're totally confident. Bad post? Out. Too slow on numbers? Out. Track off? Out. Couple of sniffles or a cough or two but probably gonna be fine? Out. Too many in field? Out.

3. Having owner who will let you call the shots. Claiming for 10k and run back for 5k when the horse is fine*

4. Forming alliances with a select number of fellow top trainers. You scratch this time for me. I'll scratch next time for you**

5. Knowledge the gaudy % numbers will attract new blood into the game. Thereby allowing the trainer to burn em and churn em.

* No owner is going to just let you lose money for them. This is mitigated by being able to bet on the droppers. The high % trainer will tell his inner circle owners which ones are good and which ones are bad. The good ones on the drop become very reliable gambling investments to offset deficits in purse money.

** Nobody gets hurt. Except of course the tracks who are trying to put up good competitive fields. And the bettors who are forced to bet into those shit races.

30 to 35% TOTALLY doable without a needle.
The above reasons these guys scratch should be the main focus..
On the harness side, a trainer has to have a VERY good reason to scratch, otherwise they race.
With the exception of judges( who must rule on the scratch) scratches, all horses to be ruled out MUST be examined by the State Vet on duty.
Hence the reason why quite often there can be an entire card with zero scratches.
For example...Last Saturday at The Meadows, they carded 14 races. There were 126 entries. TWO scratches. One "sick" and one "Judges"

[Hambletonian]

Inflated % numbers are very possible without cheating. Here's how it's done.

1. Vet Work. I don't mean using illegal substances. I mean injecting every joint every time they run. A full lube job.

2. Screwing the association and racing office. Only entering or running when you know you're getting the very best of it. Looking at the race after it's been drawn and scratching unless you're totally confident. Bad post? Out. Too slow on numbers? Out. Track off? Out. Couple of sniffles or a cough or two but probably gonna be fine? Out. Too many in field? Out.

3. Having owner who will let you call the shots. Claiming for 10k and run back for 5k when the horse is fine*

4. Forming alliances with a select number of fellow top trainers. You scratch this time for me. I'll scratch next time for you**

5. Knowledge the gaudy % numbers will attract new blood into the game. Thereby allowing the trainer to burn em and churn em.

* No owner is going to just let you lose money for them. This is mitigated by being able to bet on the droppers. The high % trainer will tell his inner circle owners which ones are good and which ones are bad. The good ones on the drop become very reliable gambling investments to offset deficits in purse money.

** Nobody gets hurt. Except of course the tracks who are trying to put up good competitive fields. And the bettors who are forced to bet into those shit races.

30 to 35% TOTALLY doable without a needle.


Not for nothing, but all of these techniques were available 50 years ago too, and it wasn't until OSB spun his magic that the era of the supertrainers began.

I remember reading with amusement how Pancho Martin was so daring running his 50k horses for a 25k tag, and I would think to myself it would be daring if he owned the horses and not Sigmund Sommer. In any case, I don't recall Pancho clicking at 30%.

[thespaah]

I don't think testing is catching what they're using. Violations mean nothing to me.
Violations would mean something if they had some teeth.
For example. For trainers with a drug violation detected on post race, the penalty for first violation should be 25% of the purse earnings with a minimum fine of $500( whichever is greater). The next violation the greater of 50% of purse earnings or $1000 fine and 10 day suspension.
The third violation should be 100% forfeiture of purse earnings or a $2500 fine and 90 days suspension
The 4th violation in less than one calendar year. One year suspension and the greater of 100% of purse earnings and $5000.
All suspensions are to include all signatories to the TRA and NTRA.
The goal is to put the cheaters out of business. And Make the punishments PUBLIC knowledge.
And here's the last thing....All license holders are barred from wagering.

[davew]

win percentages seem to be going up as size of fields decrease

[ronsmac]

what????

you've said so yourself and here's just one example:

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1887450&postcount=2
Nothing gets past Proximity.

[Stillriledup]

what????

you've said so yourself and here's just one example:

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1887450&postcount=2

The owner gets the slots purses, the trainer gets a small cut.

[cj]

Not for nothing, but all of these techniques were available 50 years ago too, and it wasn't until OSB spun his magic that the era of the supertrainers began.

I remember reading with amusement how Pancho Martin was so daring running his 50k horses for a 25k tag, and I would think to myself it would be daring if he owned the horses and not Sigmund Sommer. In any case, I don't recall Pancho clicking at 30%.

There is a lot different now than there was 50 years ago, notably claiming price to purse ratio and the elimination of "jail" for claimed horses.

[GatetoWire]

Inflated % numbers are very possible without cheating. Here's how it's done.

1. Vet Work. I don't mean using illegal substances. I mean injecting every joint every time they run. A full lube job.

2. Screwing the association and racing office. Only entering or running when you know you're getting the very best of it. Looking at the race after it's been drawn and scratching unless you're totally confident. Bad post? Out. Too slow on numbers? Out. Track off? Out. Couple of sniffles or a cough or two but probably gonna be fine? Out. Too many in field? Out.

3. Having owner who will let you call the shots. Claiming for 10k and run back for 5k when the horse is fine*

4. Forming alliances with a select number of fellow top trainers. You scratch this time for me. I'll scratch next time for you**

5. Knowledge the gaudy % numbers will attract new blood into the game. Thereby allowing the trainer to burn em and churn em.

* No owner is going to just let you lose money for them. This is mitigated by being able to bet on the droppers. The high % trainer will tell his inner circle owners which ones are good and which ones are bad. The good ones on the drop become very reliable gambling investments to offset deficits in purse money.

** Nobody gets hurt. Except of course the tracks who are trying to put up good competitive fields. And the bettors who are forced to bet into those shit races.

30 to 35% TOTALLY doable without a needle.

I agree with Vic on these points. The stuff that does not past the smell test is constantly improving with every claim. It's just impossible to hit every time without some chemical aid. Especially if every horse gets magically slower once they leave the barn.
Racing still isn't doing accurate red blood cell count monitoring and I think most likely that Blood doping is the cause of massive form improvement with new acquisitions.

The other thing to watch out for is the races in 72 hr security and extra out of competition testing, particularity the Breeders Cup. Those races are very competitive but over the last 3 years you can see that some of these trainers horses are just slower in these races. There is a small sample size but again when you see 5 or 6 horses from one barn all floundering in these races and running way lower figures it makes you wonder.

[pandy]

Lasix is a key part of the problem. It is a performance enhancing drug that masks other drugs and it's legal, and that sets a bad precedent. The legalization of lasix was a major blunder.

[Ruffian1]

For anyone with an open mind about this , meaning those that want the truth and not a bunch of assumptions, there are some reckless comments being thrown around in here in several posts that are just plain wrong. At least one is correct, post 44 and maybe a few more. I have not read every one. But plenty are not.

If I had hours each day to try and convince whoever of otherwise, I might, as the goal for joining PA was to help customers that had questions and/or didn't understand. Problem is, most of the time, it falls on deaf ears seemingly because plenty here don't really want the truth. Seems like they just want to bitch about it and lament how badly they get screwed. The paranoia is crazy. Kind of a shame but that is not on me.

Horses get pin cushioned every joint every race ? Yet, no needles required ? Top trainers get together and take turns scratching for each other? I was a top trainer at times for years on end and I never did that nor was I ever asked to. Nor did other top trainers that were on top when I was not that I spoke to or watched closely. After all, watching them closely was my friggin job folks. Cough or sniffles but probably be all right? Really. Or maybe ruined or dead, but screw it, it was another horse to bet on, who probably ran terribly, but we can say that the trainer was giving him one to get a better price next time right? While the first accusation was a joke as well as a contradiction, the rest is flat out not true. Not where I came from. Oh, OK , somewhere it happened. Sadly, probably yes, and the vast majority of places it did not an does not. All this crap is not day to day reality with anywhere near a majority of trainers. A few idiots that do not deserve a license? Sure. Just like every other occupation. But to make it sound status quo in the business is reckless at worst and irresponsible at best, especially from someone who has , from what I read, told people he was worn an assortment of hats in the game.
I wore one. All around the east coast in at least seven different states. For many, many years. As few as two horses and as many as 80 horses. So I know of what I speak. And I speak the truth. Oh, and if I assume, I try and state it as such.

Like I said, plenty in this thread is just plain wrong. But if it fuels a paranoia or makes for built in excuses, and that is the necessity you require, well, you have come to the right place.
If it is a truer understanding of the game you want, look elsewhere.

[thaskalos]

For anyone with an open mind about this , meaning those that want the truth and not a bunch of assumptions, there are some reckless comments being thrown around in here in several posts that are just plain wrong. At least one is correct, post 44 and maybe a few more. I have not read every one. But plenty are not.

If I had hours each day to try and convince whoever of otherwise, I might, as the goal for joining PA was to help customers that had questions and/or didn't understand. Problem is, most of the time, it falls on deaf ears seemingly because plenty here don't really want the truth. Seems like they just want to bitch about it and lament how badly they get screwed. The paranoia is crazy. Kind of a shame but that is not on me.

Horses get pin cushioned every joint every race ? Yet, no needles required ? Top trainers get together and take turns scratching for each other? I was a top trainer at times for years on end and I never did that nor was I ever asked to. Nor did other top trainers that were on top when I was not that I spoke to or watched closely. After all, watching them closely was my friggin job folks. Cough or sniffles but probably be all right? Really. Or maybe ruined or dead, but screw it, it was another horse to bet on, who probably ran terribly, but we can say that the trainer was giving him one to get a better price next time right? While the first accusation was a joke as well as a contradiction, the rest is flat out not true. Not where I came from. Oh, OK , somewhere it happened. Sadly, probably yes, and the vast majority of places it did not an does not. All this crap is not day to day reality with anywhere near a majority of trainers. A few idiots that do not deserve a license? Sure. Just like every other occupation. But to make it sound status quo in the business is reckless at worst and irresponsible at best, especially from someone who has , from what I read, told people he was worn an assortment of hats in the game.
I wore one. All around the east coast in at least seven different states. For many, many years. As few as two horses and as many as 80 horses. So I know of what I speak. And I speak the truth. Oh, and if I assume, I try and state it as such.

Like I said, plenty in this thread is just plain wrong. But if it fuels a paranoia or makes for built in excuses, and that is the necessity you require, well, you have come to the right place.
If it is a truer understanding of the game you want, look elsewhere.
But there are so damned many late scratches today, Ruffian...why is that? Don't these trainers see that the fields today are short enough already? Why the obligatory two late scratches...reducing the already short field of seven down to a totally unappetizing FIVE?

Weren't these same trainers telling us that the legalization of lasix and Bute would make the horses more durable? Some of us have been around this game for more than a while...and we remember that it wasn't always like this. We know for a fact that there WAS a time when the late scratch was a rarity...whereas today...it has become an EPIDEMIC!

As an insider, don't just tell us that what we say here is "just plain wrong". Explain to us some of the things that are giving us such a "wrong impression". Why is it virtually IMPOSSIBLE to find a race without a late scratch today? If these trainers aren't doing each other "favors"...then, what the heck are they DOING?

[Ruffian1]

But there are so damned many late scratches today, Ruffian...why is that? Don't these trainers see that the fields today are short enough already? Why the obligatory two late scratches...reducing the already short field of seven down to a totally unappetizing FIVE?

Weren't these same trainers telling us that the legalization of lasix and Bute would make the horses more durable? Some of us have been around this game for more than a while...and we remember that it wasn't always like this. We know for a fact that there WAS a time when the late scratch was a rarity...whereas today...it has become an EPIDEMIC!

As an insider, don't just tell us that what we say here is "just plain wrong". Explain to us some of the things that are giving us such a "wrong impression". Why is it virtually IMPOSSIBLE to find a race without a late scratch today? If these trainers aren't doing each other "favors"...then, what the heck are they DOING?
For you, I will sure try but for some in here, no way. They are a joke and don't want to hear the truth.
The scratch epidemic was running wild when I was still around. It has only gotten worse. If trainers can get away with it they will. Just like coaches or anything else. The Stewards can control this somewhat and management can as well. Not individually but in a joint effort. And that joint effort would help quite a bit.
You have the racing secretary, who allots stalls as well, get on the phone or look the trainer in the eye when the entry is made and say, ok, and this one won't be coughing in 2 days right? , and the message will be clear. Excuse the language but the head racing sec. Needs to take control of this and be a prick for a few months and this would calm waaaay down. Why they don't is beyond me. They control the stalls each meet they have all the power.
Unfortunately , turf racing is a different animal and only so much can be done there. But dirt, not mud, dirt, a crackdown would work immediately. Off track, that's tougher but how hard is it to know who is bowed or has a suspensory? I knew who did when I trained. Make them dry track only like main track only which is used today.
And while I cannot state that trainers don't do the scratch for favor game somewhere,sometime, for what is assumed is a knowledgeable insider to state that this is what is going on like its everyday is complete BS and there is no arguing that. A total sensationalized bunch of assumed crap, with the slight exception somewhere where some a hole is probably doing it as we speak.
But to feed it a the reason is a disgrace and I grow tired of it. It fuels ignorance for the sake of sensationalism. That is plain wrong.
Bute and Lasix Yes sir, plenty of trainers assumed it would do just as you stated. I know I did. And I think it did for awhile. But that assumption proved incorrect in the long term. What it did was to dilute the breeding stock so badly that any better durability gained in the short run was lost ten fold in the long run. That's no easy fix, but it can be. It will be painful though so don't look for it anytime soon.
You are so right, it is an epidemic at some tracks these days. It ruins the card. It helps raise trainers percentages . But it is NOT what has been represented in here as mass collusion.
I have explained how the racing sec. And management can make the majority of this go away. You will always have your scratches but it would be at least 50% less. So here is what you or someone like Hanna or somebody that wants to stand up for it can do. Ask for a sit down with the head racing secretary. Ask them why the pressure can't be put on. Then ask the track GM the same question. In Md. Isn't it Tim Ritvo? Tim trained when I did. He knows the deal. I don't know him well but we bought and sold a horse or two between ourselves back in the day when he was in Fla.
do I have to go to Laurel myself and do this for the customers? You know what, if it stopped all the BS that some float around here, certainly not you, who I have total respect for, I might consider it. Hope that helps and sorry if I missed a question Thas. I am on my phone and can barely see. Lol.
Quick addition, when a trainer says coughing , in this day and age of liability being tossed around for future law suits, Stewards are put in a bad spot. 20 years ago if my scratch said coughing the Steward would say make sure your horse doesn't cough on the other ones because you are running unless the state vet could clearly see the horse was sick, which they were sometimes.

[Ruffian1]

But there are so damned many late scratches today, Ruffian...why is that? Don't these trainers see that the fields today are short enough already? Why the obligatory two late scratches...reducing the already short field of seven down to a totally unappetizing FIVE?

Weren't these same trainers telling us that the legalization of lasix and Bute would make the horses more durable? Some of us have been around this game for more than a while...and we remember that it wasn't always like this. We know for a fact that there WAS a time when the late scratch was a rarity...whereas today...it has become an EPIDEMIC!

As an insider, don't just tell us that what we say here is "just plain wrong". Explain to us some of the things that are giving us such a "wrong impression". Why is it virtually IMPOSSIBLE to find a race without a late scratch today? If these trainers aren't doing each other "favors"...then, what the heck are they DOING?
Are scratches terrible at Laurel these days? I have no idea.

[thaskalos]

Are scratches terrible at Laurel these days? I have no idea.
From Monday to Friday...the late scratches are rampant throughout the land. Not a cloud in the sky...and 2-3 late scratches in almost every race. All the short fields that anyone could want.

But, hey...luckily there is a bright side. With the emergence of the 10-cent superfecta...these fields are a breeze to handicap. I mean...the bet only pays around $11 or so...but that's better than nothing. :)

[cj]

From Monday to Friday...the late scratches are rampant throughout the land. Not a cloud in the sky...and 2-3 late scratches in almost every race. All the short fields that anyone could want.

But, hey...luckily there is a bright side. With the emergence of the 10-cent superfecta...these fields are a breeze to handicap. I mean...the bet only pays around $11 or so...but that's better than nothing. :)

There doesn't even have to be scratches. Keeneland on Friday had a nice 7f allowance race that drew 13 entries, a handicapper's delight. Alas, the track split it into a 7 horse division and a 6 horse division (before scratches, of course) on a 10 race card.

I guess Keeneland think two bad races is better than one good one.

[Stillriledup]

From Monday to Friday...the late scratches are rampant throughout the land. Not a cloud in the sky...and 2-3 late scratches in almost every race. All the short fields that anyone could want.

But, hey...luckily there is a bright side. With the emergence of the 10-cent superfecta...these fields are a breeze to handicap. I mean...the bet only pays around $11 or so...but that's better than nothing. :)

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=80674&page=1&pp=15&highlight=Fake+entries

[Ruffian1]

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=80674&page=1&pp=15&highlight=Fake+entries


Just read it. Did not know. 2,500 is a joke. The penalty was way low and totally out of line.

So, did the racing office know this when they took the entry? Won't be the 1st time that has happened in order to fill a race. That would be another question . Oh, and I read in the link where some one said, yeah, happens all the time everywhere with trainers. Or something like that. That person is wrong and here I am spending my time trying to convince people he or she is. So who do you want to believe?

[Ruffian1]

From Monday to Friday...the late scratches are rampant throughout the land. Not a cloud in the sky...and 2-3 late scratches in almost every race. All the short fields that anyone could want.

But, hey...luckily there is a bright side. With the emergence of the 10-cent superfecta...these fields are a breeze to handicap. I mean...the bet only pays around $11 or so...but that's better than nothing. :)

I ask about Laurel because I know everyone there and I can go there . Can't drive to wherever but I can go there. So, for Laurel, is it still as bad as it has been, which was pretty bad?

[Ruffian1]

There doesn't even have to be scratches. Keeneland on Friday had a nice 7f allowance race that drew 13 entries, a handicapper's delight. Alas, the track split it into a 7 horse division and a 6 horse division (before scratches, of course) on a 10 race card.

I guess Keeneland think two bad races is better than one good one.

This is also a problem. Horse shortage. so you split a 13 into 7 and 6 and it stinks.
The only way to stop this crap in regards to what I wrote, is to stop counting an entry as an entry from certain trainers or specific horses when trying to get to 7 or 8 minimum entrants in a race.
Of course, that means carding 3-5 maiden races that fill because they struggle to fill 3ot or F and M 2ot long dirt, or high claiming or whatever.
The whole thing is a double edged sword. In many cases the racing sec. will get grief no matter which direction they go.
But for me, stopping the scratch game would be priority # 1. And it can sure as hell be fixed to an extent . It can never be completely fixed because they are living beings and sometimes things happen.

[Ruffian1]

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=80674&page=1&pp=15&highlight=Fake+entries


Another thing. This pisses me off to have this brought to my attention like a , see, look at this. Explain this. You trainers...
(If that is not the case, fine, excuse me. although it is more often than it is not around here.)
Well, I saw it. I can explain it, that guy is scum, or at very least was for doing that, unless of course there is collusion with the racing office which makes it a whole lot more as well as different.
And make no mistake, O'Neill is not the poster boy for what most trainers are. But he does come in handy when someone wants to throw dirt on the honest ones, doesn't he.

[Stillriledup]

Just read it. Did not know. 2,500 is a joke. The penalty was way low and totally out of line.

So, did the racing office know this when they took the entry? Won't be the 1st time that has happened in order to fill a race. That would be another question . Oh, and I read in the link where some one said, yeah, happens all the time everywhere with trainers. Or something like that. That person is wrong and here I am spending my time trying to convince people he or she is. So who do you want to believe?

There's a top trainer in ny who seems to have two or three 'entries' (entry meaning 1 and 1a) with not planning on running both, there always seems to be one of them that scratches, not all the time, but in many cases.

I think people are allowed to believe whatever they want to believe, I'm not really in the 'believing people' business, the way I work it is that I gather up as much info on a subject as possible and draw my own conclusions.

[Stillriledup]

Another thing. This pisses me off to have this brought to my attention like a , see, look at this. Explain this. You trainers...
(If that is not the case, fine, excuse me. although it is more often than it is not around here.)
Well, I saw it. I can explain it, that guy is scum, or at very least was for doing that, unless of course there is collusion with the racing office which makes it a whole lot more as well as different.
And make no mistake, O'Neill is not the poster boy for what most trainers are. But he does come in handy when someone wants to throw dirt on the honest ones, doesn't he.

I feel sorry for the honest ones that he makes look bad, he should be concerned about that next time he tries to skirt the rules.

The race office is also to blame, maybe more so than the trainers because they permit this to happen.

[Ruffian1]

I feel sorry for the honest ones that he makes look bad, he should be concerned about that next time he tries to skirt the rules.

The race office is also to blame, maybe more so than the trainers because they permit this to happen.


They would not necessarily know about it at time of entry though. So you can't really blame the racing office. But... if the discussion took place between the racing office and Doug of , hey doug, I need a race filled, have anything. And he says, no, that horse is on the shelf and they say, well,... and you know the rest, than that is a bigger problem than dealing with just Doug and his BS that seemingly was all around him then.
It would be crazy if the racing office knew beforehand.

[Stillriledup]

They would not necessarily know about it at time of entry though. So you can't really blame the racing office. But... if the discussion took place between the racing office and Doug of , hey doug, I need a race filled, have anything. And he says, no, that horse is on the shelf and they say, well,... and you know the rest, than that is a bigger problem than dealing with just Doug and his BS that seemingly was all around him then.
It would be crazy if the racing office knew beforehand.

I'm not saying they know beforehand on individual Cases, but if trainer X makes a habit of entering horses he or she doesn't plan on running, the race office can say 'knock it off' and nip it in the bud going forward.

[Ruffian1]

There's a top trainer in ny who seems to have two or three 'entries' (entry meaning 1 and 1a) with not planning on running both, there always seems to be one of them that scratches, not all the time, but in many cases.

I think people are allowed to believe whatever they want to believe, I'm not really in the 'believing people' business, the way I work it is that I gather up as much info on a subject as possible and draw my own conclusions.

I see nothing wrong with having a coupled entry , seeing the race, and scratching one. I did my share of that. But scratching before the windows were open. Certainly not after they were open. That does not drop the number of betting interests.

As for believing, where I am going with that is people tend to believe what they want to believe. And if it is convenient to believe someone that if guessing or assuming , go for it.

Just don't mind me for losing it every now and then when I hold my tongue upon reading totally ignorant, stupid, assumptions that drag my former profession down into the sewer. I read quite a bit of it here, and I get the cynicism that comes with gambling in any form. Remember, I did plenty of that as well prior to making it my profession. However, sometimes, enough is enough.

[Ruffian1]

I'm not saying they know beforehand on individual Cases, but if trainer X makes a habit of entering horses he or she doesn't plan on running, the race office can say 'knock it off' and nip it in the bud going forward.

Damn straight they can. See my post several back about this and how easy it would be to stop it. You wouldn't win too many popularity contests but the scratches would stop, I guarantee you that.

[Ruffian1]

I feel sorry for the honest ones that he makes look bad, he should be concerned about that next time he tries to skirt the rules.

The race office is also to blame, maybe more so than the trainers because they permit this to happen.

Not maybe, definitely. The inmates are running the asylum at the scratch box.

[Ruffian1]

Lasix is a key part of the problem. It is a performance enhancing drug that masks other drugs and it's legal, and that sets a bad precedent. The legalization of lasix was a major blunder.


Don't believe the masking stuff. In the beginning, yes. Not today.

Your last sentence is spot on. It was indeed a major blunder. And at the time, I agreed with it, and helped push for it. I was wrong. It was a mistake. The short term was clear and it made sense. Nobody ever looked at the long term. I admit, I am disappointed in myself for not seeing it. I was really young in the game then. But no excuse. To quote a famous lyric " I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now".
It has really hurt the breeding shed who now turns out bleeders at an alarming rate which leads to running less often and allowing a breeding shed weak link spiral to continue and only worsen.

[Stillriledup]

I see nothing wrong with having a coupled entry , seeing the race, and scratching one. I did my share of that. But scratching before the windows were open. Certainly not after they were open. That does not drop the number of betting interests.

As for believing, where I am going with that is people tend to believe what they want to believe. And if it is convenient to believe someone that if guessing or assuming , go for it.

Just don't mind me for losing it every now and then when I hold my tongue upon reading totally ignorant, stupid, assumptions that drag my former profession down into the sewer. I read quite a bit of it here, and I get the cynicism that comes with gambling in any form. Remember, I did plenty of that as well prior to making it my profession. However, sometimes, enough is enough.

So how does a handicapper who takes betting seriously deal with knowing one of the entry mates is not really going to run?

[Ruffian1]

So how does a handicapper who takes betting seriously deal with knowing one of the entry mates is not really going to run?

Typically , if different riders are named, they will both go because scratch time and naming of riders is the same time. If the same rider on both, it is usually not to tough to assume which one will came out, but, you have to prepare and analyze for both or just either one. That , in most cases, is not that hard and you still have tons of time to know for sure.
I am not condoning a scratch late morning the day of, but the day before, I don't see where there is a problem. Is there?

[Tom]

They both go, but do they both try?

[Ruffian1]

They both go, but do they both try?

All of mine did. Every single one of them. And the vast majority of trainers are trying just like I was. Can't speak for everyone though Tom. But there is no game with wagering that is without it's minority of scum. It is up to the tracks to take care of that.
Again, won't win a popularity contest but can sure as hell call out the scum and tell them they try or they fly. That would mean that track management wants to help the customer. That needs plenty of work doesn't it.

[Stillriledup]

Typically , if different riders are named, they will both go because scratch time and naming of riders is the same time. If the same rider on both, it is usually not to tough to assume which one will came out, but, you have to prepare and analyze for both or just either one. That , in most cases, is not that hard and you still have tons of time to know for sure.
I am not condoning a scratch late morning the day of, but the day before, I don't see where there is a problem. Is there?

You're setting up a large pick 6 carryover bet and one of the entries is stronger, so, which one that comes out might completely alter your ticket.

[Ruffian1]

You're setting up a large pick 6 carryover bet and one of the entries is stronger, so, which one that comes out might completely alter your ticket.


But you have from scratch time until post time, usually 24 hours these days, to work it out. Of all the scratches that screw up cards the last thing I would be upset about or "riledup about" is 1/2 an entry at scratch time. How many days in advance are we setting the ticket up? What about off track, bias, rider changes, excess wind, etc.You have to rethink the ticket after scratch time don't you?

[Track Phantom]

....there are some reckless comments being thrown around in here in several posts that are just plain wrong.

...Seems like they just want to bitch about it and lament how badly they get screwed. The paranoia is crazy. Kind of a shame but that is not on me.

...Like I said, plenty in this thread is just plain wrong. But if it fuels a paranoia or makes for built in excuses, and that is the necessity you require, well, you have come to the right place.

...If it is a truer understanding of the game you want, look elsewhere.

I'm confused by your posts. Are you saying we (bettors) shouldn't question what we see? There are a lot of nefarious things that happen related to this game and all we (bettors) want is proper oversight that protects integrity and gives us (bettors) a level playing field.

Quite honestly, I don't care what a Doug O'Neill does at the entry box to set up a race in which he has a better chance to win. We can unpack that at the handicapping level. What I do care about is when a Doug O'Neill goes to those lengths to set himself up and he and his posse bet into the pools hitting the "repeat bet" button until their fingers bleed. Then it becomes my problem if I choose to bet into these races.

[SuperPickle]

So people ask me about certain trainers all the time and I give them this answer.

Let's take Juan Carlos down at Parx and lets take Jacobson. Juan Carlos was a 10% trainer who suddenly became a 40% trainer. That's very suspicious. Jacobson on the other hand has had much more consistent stats.

I'm not making any statement about Jacobson being clean or dirty but I'll vouch for the fact he has some very clear, legal advantages over others.

First, he owns most of his horses. This allows him to be far more aggressive in spotting them. If he claims a horse for $40K and gets him back to the barn and it turns out he's a $25K horse he will run him back for that. Lots of other guys don't do this. They picked the horse out to claim and aren't honest enough to tell owners who just claimed a horse they paid $40K for something worth $25K.

Jacobson understands over a long enough timeline he will claim horses of value and make some good claims the key is minimizing loses which he does.

Also he's not scared to have horses taken away. One of the number one reasons behind fights, arguments and drama on the back stretch is guys claiming horses from other guys. There's lots of guys out there who don't want to lose their horses because a horse in the barn generates some income. On top of that they need a minimum number of horses to offset things like payroll and insurance. If the lose a horse, even a bad one and they don't have an owner willing to replace it, its a hit. Jacobson worries about none of this.

I'll sum it up this way. If you believe drugs are rampant in the sport than you have to believe there's multiple horses on drugs in races. Therefore winning isn't as simple as drugging horses. Even in this world you need skills.

Even all super trainers are not created equal.

[castaway01]

But you have from scratch time until post time, usually 24 hours these days, to work it out. Of all the scratches that screw up cards the last thing I would be upset about or "riledup about" is 1/2 an entry at scratch time. How many days in advance are we setting the ticket up? What about off track, bias, rider changes, excess wind, etc.You have to rethink the ticket after scratch time don't you?

Thanks for taking the time to answer the questions from a trainer's perspective. You made a lot of good points, at least to me.

[castaway01]

So people ask me about certain trainers all the time and I give them this answer.

.

Even all super trainers are not created equal.

You could have saved yourself the time and said that while the trainer who claims for $10K and jumps them up to 40 and the horse who claims for $40K and drops them to $10K are both suspicious, it's for entirely different reasons.

[Stillriledup]

But you have from scratch time until post time, usually 24 hours these days, to work it out. Of all the scratches that screw up cards the last thing I would be upset about or "riledup about" is 1/2 an entry at scratch time. How many days in advance are we setting the ticket up? What about off track, bias, rider changes, excess wind, etc.You have to rethink the ticket after scratch time don't you?

Is there a way to get the scratches the night before? I must be out of the loop and just haven't looked for them at 2am when I'm setting up pick 6 tickets.

[Ruffian1]

I'm confused by your posts. Are you saying we (bettors) shouldn't question what we see? There are a lot of nefarious things that happen related to this game and all we (bettors) want is proper oversight that protects integrity and gives us (bettors) a level playing field.

Quite honestly, I don't care what a Doug O'Neill does at the entry box to set up a race in which he has a better chance to win. We can unpack that at the handicapping level. What I do care about is when a Doug O'Neill goes to those lengths to set himself up and he and his posse bet into the pools hitting the "repeat bet" button until their fingers bleed. Then it becomes my problem if I choose to bet into these races.

Q. I'm confused by your posts. Are you saying we (bettors) shouldn't question what we see? There are a lot of nefarious things that happen related to this game and all we (bettors) want is proper oversight that protects integrity and gives us (bettors) a level playing field.

A. Absolutely not. You have every right to question. Every ounce of my angst is from the irresponsible BS that shows up in the form of answers with the thought that they are true throughout or commonplace.

Q. Quite honestly, I don't care what a Doug O'Neill does at the entry box to set up a race in which he has a better chance to win. We can unpack that at the handicapping level.

A. Maybe you can but I can't because that speaks to the integrity of my former profession and sheds a poor light on it. That in turn leads to eye rolls about anything someone doesn't understand and of course, more assumed ignorant reckless answers which many believe if read often enough.

Q. What I do care about is when a Doug O'Neill goes to those lengths to set himself up and he and his posse bet into the pools hitting the "repeat bet" button until their fingers bleed. Then it becomes my problem if I choose to bet into these races.

A. This is indeed your problem . And I think you know how I feel about that crap. But can you see that all these problems, the ones you care about and the ones you don't , are all racing's problems. And when it comes to problems, customers only care about theirs, riders theirs, trainers theirs, management theirs, etc. etc.
It's every man or group for themselves. You wonder why racing is so screwed up? Look no further than this.

And yes, I know there is a way to highlight this stuff but I am so friggin irritated at this thread and have now spent 7 hours trying to undue the nonsense others created, I did not have the patience to figure it out.

[Ruffian1]

Thanks for taking the time to answer the questions from a trainer's perspective. You made a lot of good points, at least to me.

If you and others can get something out of this, that makes it worth it too me. Ask me any question, anytime. You will get an honest answer or why I don't know. What you won't get is a bunch of hearsay crap or something that might make me sound intelligent on a subject when I am really not.

With that, you are very welcome castaway.

[Stillriledup]

Q. I'm confused by your posts. Are you saying we (bettors) shouldn't question what we see? There are a lot of nefarious things that happen related to this game and all we (bettors) want is proper oversight that protects integrity and gives us (bettors) a level playing field.

A. Absolutely not. You have every right to question. Every ounce of my angst is from the irresponsible BS that shows up in the form of answers with the thought that they are true throughout or commonplace.

Q. Quite honestly, I don't care what a Doug O'Neill does at the entry box to set up a race in which he has a better chance to win. We can unpack that at the handicapping level.

A. Maybe you can but I can't because that speaks to the integrity of my former profession and sheds a poor light on it. That in turn leads to eye rolls about anything someone doesn't understand and of course, more assumed ignorant reckless answers which many believe if read often enough.

Q. What I do care about is when a Doug O'Neill goes to those lengths to set himself up and he and his posse bet into the pools hitting the "repeat bet" button until their fingers bleed. Then it becomes my problem if I choose to bet into these races.

A. This is indeed your problem . And I think you know how I feel about that crap. But can you see that all these problems, the ones you care about and the ones you don't , are all racing's problems. And when it comes to problems, customers only care about theirs, riders theirs, trainers theirs, management theirs, etc. etc.
It's every man or group for themselves. You wonder why racing is so screwed up? Look no further than this.

And yes, I know there is a way to highlight this stuff but I am so friggin irritated at this thread and have now spent 7 hours trying to undue the nonsense others created, I did not have the patience to figure it out.

If you asked this question to gamblers "are there some honest trainers out there or is every single trainer a cheat" what do you think people would answer?

I'm pretty sure we would all say there are some cheats, but not everyone is dishonest, isn't that what you're essentially arguing?

[Ruffian1]

Is there a way to get the scratches the night before? I must be out of the loop and just haven't looked for them at 2am when I'm setting up pick 6 tickets.

Let's say scratch time is 3pm the day before. It is that way at many tracks.

By about 3:30 the scratches are announced in the racing office. An overnight( list of tomorrows races), is posted with scratches, rider changes, and stuck horses ( horses wanting out but because of field size they are not out until the state vet sees them the next morning). Those are available to the public if you walk into the sec. office and ask where they are posted. Every agent knows them by 3:30 the day before. Where there is a will, there is a way. There will be a big S through the number of the listed horse on the posted overnight.
They are not announced to the public with late scratches until the state vets have seen every horse, running or trying to scratch, reported back to the Stewards with what they saw for those want to be scratches, and the Stewards have decided to let them out or not. That usually takes until about 10:30 am the day of which is why they are not announced until about 11am.
Remember, lasix is given about 4 hours out and if the horse needs to van in, that van left at 6 am or whenever. People know whose out and running way earlier than 11am.
Make it happen, find a source to get the info. It is there. Run into a brick wall trying, let me know and I will try and help find you a way.

[Stillriledup]

Let's say scratch time is 3pm the day before. It is that way at many tracks.

By about 3:30 the scratches are announced in the racing office. An overnight( list of tomorrows races), is posted with scratches, rider changes, and stuck horses ( horses wanting out but because of field size they are not out until the state vet sees them the next morning). Those are available to the public if you walk into the sec. office and ask where they are posted. Every agent knows them by 3:30 the day before. Where there is a will, there is a way. There will be a big S through the number of the listed horse on the posted overnight.
They are not announced to the public with late scratches until the state vets have seen every horse, running or trying to scratch, reported back to the Stewards with what they saw for those want to be scratches, and the Stewards have decided to let them out or not. That usually takes until about 10:30 am the day of which is why they are not announced until about 11am.
Remember, lasix is given about 4 hours out and if the horse needs to van in, that van left at 6 am or whenever. People know whose out and running way earlier than 11am.
Make it happen, find a source to get the info. It is there. Run into a brick wall trying, let me know and I will try and help find you a way.

Is there some reason this info is a secret to those people who don't have access to live racing venues and or backstretch access?

[Track Phantom]

It's every man or group for themselves. You wonder why racing is so screwed up? Look no further than this.
Thanks for the response.

In regards to this comment, I've taken the approach that I do not care about what the industry does any longer. I've spent enough hours trying to offer up suggestions, help out where I can, be an ambassador where I can and so on. In the end, if I feel the racing industry as a whole doesn't really care to improve their product, why should I? Barring some exceptions, I really don't feel the racing industry is concerned about quite a bit that would be fixed in other industries. Since that is my opinion, I'll contract my involvement to the area I care about. Next stop....out the door.

[Stillriledup]

Thanks for the response.

In regards to this comment, I've taken the approach that I do not care about what the industry does any longer. I've spent enough hours trying to offer up suggestions, help out where I can, be an ambassador where I can and so on. In the end, if I feel the racing industry as a whole doesn't really care to improve their product, why should I? Barring some exceptions, I really don't feel the racing industry is concerned about quite a bit that would be fixed in other industries. Since that is my opinion, I'll contract my involvement to the area I care about. Next stop....out the door.

If you come up with a plan that can stuff more money in the pockets of the games elite trainers so they can upgrade their Mercedes on a yearly basis, they'll listen. If your suggestions are based around how you, the player, can be more comfortable, you might have a much tougher time convincing them to lift a finger.

[Ruffian1]

If you asked this question to gamblers "are there some honest trainers out there or is every single trainer a cheat" what do you think people would answer?

I'm pretty sure we would all say there are some cheats, but not everyone is dishonest, isn't that what you're essentially arguing?


Nope. My angst is with irresponsible BS that fuels a fire of distrust with customers.
The large % of trainers are honest. A select few screw it up for all the rest. Happens in every sport or gambling venue. I think we all know that.

[Ruffian1]

Is there some reason this info is a secret to those people who don't have access to live racing venues and or backstretch access?

Because it is an incomplete list of scratches at 3:30 the day before. They could announce the stucks as stuck and the scratched as scratched if they got any push from the customer voice.

[Stillriledup]

Nope. My angst is with irresponsible BS that fuels a fire of distrust with customers.
The large % of trainers are honest. A select few screw it up for all the rest. Happens in every sport or gambling venue. I think we all know that.

I think most reasonable people know this, however, if you're an outsider, how do you know which trainer is cheating and which ones are honest? As a handicapper it's vital for me to try and make my best guess as to who the cheats are, that way, if a horse is claimed by an 'honest trainer' from the bam of a cheat, I know there's a good chance the horse will magically lose 40 Beyer points off his last race, and that's something I need to consider.

[Ruffian1]

Thanks for the response.

In regards to this comment, I've taken the approach that I do not care about what the industry does any longer. I've spent enough hours trying to offer up suggestions, help out where I can, be an ambassador where I can and so on. In the end, if I feel the racing industry as a whole doesn't really care to improve their product, why should I? Barring some exceptions, I really don't feel the racing industry is concerned about quite a bit that would be fixed in other industries. Since that is my opinion, I'll contract my involvement to the area I care about. Next stop....out the door.

Sadly Valento, many people in all these groups feel the same way. But can't the same be said for just about every problem in this field, politics, race relations or whatever? It's a vicious cycle and it can wear the best of us out.

[Stillriledup]

Because it is an incomplete list of scratches at 3:30 the day before. They could announce the stucks as stuck and the scratched as scratched if they got any push from the customer voice.

Bob ike tweets stuck horses for so cal racing, it's extremely helpful.

Www.twitter.com/bobike1

[Ruffian1]

I think most reasonable people know this, however, if you're an outsider, how do you know which trainer is cheating and which ones are honest? As a handicapper it's vital for me to try and make my best guess as to who the cheats are, that way, if a horse is claimed by an 'honest trainer' from the bam of a cheat, I know there's a good chance the horse will magically lose 40 Beyer points off his last race, and that's something I need to consider.

Well, I think those types are pretty obvious. Honestly , I never dealt with that while training. I knew which trainers were real good and why and the answer was not drugs. Now I did see some of bad trainers using them. And a wake up race pissed me off if they beat me, but I figured out why, and who, and when after a while.

[Ruffian1]

Bob ike tweets stuck horses for so cal racing, it's extremely helpful.

Www.twitter.com/bobike1 (http://Www.twitter.com/bobike1)

Sure. So after a few months you have a solid idea of who is getting out or not right?
Probably happens everywhere. Just need to find out the who, what and where.

[Stillriledup]

Well, I think those types are pretty obvious. Honestly , I never dealt with that while training. I knew which trainers were real good and why and the answer was not drugs. Now I did see some of bad trainers using them. And a wake up race pissed me off if they beat me, but I figured out why, and who, and when after a while.

I do get your gripes, most gamblers will explain away bad gambling results by convincing themselves that they were somehow cheated out of the money rather than just getting outplayed by better horseplayers, it is tough for honest trainers to have to get lumped in with a bad stereotype, but look at it this way, you could theoretically make the case that honest trainers benefit from the stereotype because think of how many gamblers would quit if they thought they were just losing fair and square? Pools would be smaller and thus purses would suffer (which means less cash for trainers)

I know that's a stretch, but I do believe a lot of gamblers stick around due to their belief that they're being cheated out of the cash vs losing fair n square.

[Track Phantom]

So, circling back to the original point of this thread.

Does anyone here think there are any honest trainers of those very high percentage "claiming" trainers. We all know who these people are. No need to name them here.

I'm seriously interested to know if anyone here believes the guys at the top of this list are winning with absolutely clean and honest methods.

[Ruffian1]

I do get your gripes, most gamblers will explain away bad gambling results by convincing themselves that they were somehow cheated out of the money rather than just getting outplayed by better horseplayers, it is tough for honest trainers to have to get lumped in with a bad stereotype, but look at it this way, you could theoretically make the case that honest trainers benefit from the stereotype because think of how many gamblers would quit if they thought they were just losing fair and square? Pools would be smaller and thus purses would suffer (which means less cash for trainers)

I know that's a stretch, but I do believe a lot of gamblers stick around due to their belief that they're being cheated out of the cash vs losing fair n square.


Lololololol. I mean it. I really did.:lol:

I have to admit, I never looked at it that way.

[Stillriledup]

Lololololol. I mean it. I really did.:lol:

I have to admit, I never looked at it that way.

You see, there's always a silver lining :D

[Ruffian1]

So, circling back to the original point of this thread.

Does anyone here think there are any honest trainers of those very high percentage "claiming" trainers. We all know who these people are. No need to name them here.

I'm seriously interested to know if anyone here believes the guys at the top of this list are winning with absolutely clean and honest methods.

IMO, high % trainers that move horses up and or run back quickly, as I saw in here earlier, are not the problem. Those trainers that do that, but can also be claimed off of and the horse , in at least 1/2 the cases, be about the same but maybe tail off after a few months, are not the problem. What they are is real good.

Those that have wonder form and when they lose them , the vast majority of horses tail drastically right away, are using.
Now, let's slow down. Not if it happens now and then. And not if it happens because a bad trainer with a lifetime low % took the horse.
But if it happens no matter who takes the horse, and that includes plenty of otherwise competent trainers who do fine and are in the teens % wise or better and have been doing it for a sustained period of time, that trainer that lost the horse, is in my mind , almost assuredly cheating. That is probably unfair to somebody, but not to the vast majority. Again, IMO.
Hope that helps.

[Stillriledup]

IMO, high % trainers that move horses up and or run back quickly, as I saw in here earlier, are not the problem. Those trainers that do that, but can also be claimed off of and the horse , in at least 1/2 the cases, be about the same but maybe tail off after a few months, are not the problem. What they are is real good.

Those that have wonder form and when they lose them , the vast majority of horses tail drastically right away, are using.
Now, let's slow down. Not if it happens now and then. And not if it happens because a bad trainer with a lifetime low % took the horse.
But if it happens no matter who takes the horse, and that includes plenty of otherwise competent trainers who do fine and are in the teens % wise or better and have been doing it for a sustained period of time, that trainer that lost the horse, is in my mind , almost assuredly cheating. That is probably unfair to somebody, but not to the vast majority. Again, IMO.
Hope that helps.

Ill add a caveat to the horses who fall off the map overnight and that is when the huge money bets the race like they know the PPs are rendered moot because of the trainer change, that's when the gamblers are taking a bath, horse is running 80s for supertrainer and winning consistently but now the horse is being bet today like he's going to run a 40.....and then does.

[thaskalos]

I have no reason to doubt that the thieving trainers and jockeys are relatively few...and that the vast majority of them are honest, hard-working individuals. But in a serious, heavily-taxed gambling game...even the INFREQUENT cheating cannot be tolerated.

Let's say that we are poker players instead of horseplayers...and we go to an unknown poker room looking for a game. We ask a couple of the people there for some information about the games offered in the place...and we are told not to worry...because "only a few of the players there are cheating". Would we ever consider actually taking a seat...or would we make a beeline for the door?

Yes...there is bound to be chicanery WHEREVER there is serious money at stake...but the industries which regulate these gambling games should take serious steps to remedy this regrettable situation. And the horse racing industry DOES'T.

[Stillriledup]

I have no reason to doubt that the thieving trainers and jockeys are relatively few...and that the vast majority of them are honest, hard-working individuals. But in a serious, heavily-taxed gambling game...even the INFREQUENT cheating cannot be tolerated.

Let's say that we are poker players instead of horseplayers...and we go to an unknown poker room looking for a game. We ask a couple of the people there for some information about the games offered in the place...and we are told not to worry...because "only a few of the players there are cheating". Would we ever consider actually taking a seat...or would we make a beel;ine for the door?

Yes...there is bound to be chicanery WHEREVER there is serious money at stake...but the industries which regulate these gambling games should take serious steps to remedy this regrettable situation. And the horse racing industry DOES'T.

Exactly, we make a beeline. In fact, we make a beeline even if we are told 'everyone in the poker game is honest except this one guy who's promised that he will never do it again"

[thespaah]

win percentages seem to be going up as size of fields decrease
Hence the reason why horsemen like small, unbettable fields.
Not only do trainers stand a better chance of getting a percentage of the purse other than also ran money, they also have a shot at cashing a winning bet and wining the top purse percentage as well.
If I were running a racing jurisdiction or track, along with the stall application would be a notice.
That notice would say something to the effect that ...
We are here for you AND our customers. Without them, none of us have jobs.
With that in mind, the following policies will be put into place.
Purse reductions will be implemented when the number of starters going to the gate is less than eight. For each starter from 7 and fewer, 25% of the purse will be rescinded down to a minimum of 50% of the original purse. . Exceptions will be made for scratched horses by the Stewards or the Attending STATE veterinarian. The track Veterinarian will no longer have the authority to determine if a horse may be scratched. (That is to prevent any "deal making" between trainers and vets). With that in effect, there WILL be a STATE vet on the grounds a minimum of two hours before first race post time.
If a race does not fill to a minimum of 8 entrants, it will be replaced with a substitute race. Same conditions apply."
Now I know I will get feedback such as "good luck with that"...or "the horsemen would start a rebellion resembling the Boston Tea Party"....Or some such.
But I believe some of you frustrated with fields with 5 horses that offer little value for you betting dollar are at least thinking along these lines.
So, instead of commenting in counter with replies such as I mentioned above, lets see some of your ideas.

[Track Phantom]

Purse reductions will be implemented when the number of starters going to the gate is less than eight. For each starter from 7 and fewer, 25% of the purse will be rescinded down to a minimum of 50% of the original purse. .

I like the out of the box thinking but I think it would penalize those who are shipping in, etc. I would approach it differently. I would add a bump on the purse when there are 10 or more runners, or something like that.

Incentive the behavior you want to change instead of penalizing the behavior you don't want.

[castaway01]

Hence the reason why horsemen like small, unbettable fields.
Not only do trainers stand a better chance of getting a percentage of the purse other than also ran money, they also have a shot at cashing a winning bet and wining the top purse percentage as well.
If I were running a racing jurisdiction or track, along with the stall application would be a notice.
That notice would say something to the effect that ...
We are here for you AND our customers. Without them, none of us have jobs.
With that in mind, the following policies will be put into place.
Purse reductions will be implemented when the number of starters going to the gate is less than eight. For each starter from 7 and fewer, 25% of the purse will be rescinded down to a minimum of 50% of the original purse. . Exceptions will be made for scratched horses by the Stewards or the Attending STATE veterinarian. The track Veterinarian will no longer have the authority to determine if a horse may be scratched. (That is to prevent any "deal making" between trainers and vets). With that in effect, there WILL be a STATE vet on the grounds a minimum of two hours before first race post time.
If a race does not fill to a minimum of 8 entrants, it will be replaced with a substitute race. Same conditions apply."
Now I know I will get feedback such as "good luck with that"...or "the horsemen would start a rebellion resembling the Boston Tea Party"....Or some such.
But I believe some of you frustrated with fields with 5 horses that offer little value for you betting dollar are at least thinking along these lines.
So, instead of commenting in counter with replies such as I mentioned above, lets see some of your ideas.

You can post the same idea as many times as you want, but explain how punishing the trainers that DON'T SCRATCH makes any sense. Why aren't you punishing those who scratch rather than the ones who don't? You keep posting the same thing in numerous threads but your idea is ass-backward, as my father used to say.

[Ruffian1]

I have no reason to doubt that the thieving trainers and jockeys are relatively few...and that the vast majority of them are honest, hard-working individuals. But in a serious, heavily-taxed gambling game...even the INFREQUENT cheating cannot be tolerated.

Let's say that we are poker players instead of horseplayers...and we go to an unknown poker room looking for a game. We ask a couple of the people there for some information about the games offered in the place...and we are told not to worry...because "only a few of the players there are cheating". Would we ever consider actually taking a seat...or would we make a beeline for the door?

Yes...there is bound to be chicanery WHEREVER there is serious money at stake...but the industries which regulate these gambling games should take serious steps to remedy this regrettable situation. And the horse racing industry DOES'T.

Sadly, you are right. It's one of a few reasons I left the game. not reason # 1 but it was in the top 4.
Although, a poker room can have 8 at a table and how many tables. In racing, a jerk off in Cal. hurts the guy in N.Y. so it's not quite that, but I sure do understand.

[Ruffian1]

Hence the reason why horsemen like small, unbettable fields.
Not only do trainers stand a better chance of getting a percentage of the purse other than also ran money, they also have a shot at cashing a winning bet and wining the top purse percentage as well.
If I were running a racing jurisdiction or track, along with the stall application would be a notice.
That notice would say something to the effect that ...
We are here for you AND our customers. Without them, none of us have jobs.
With that in mind, the following policies will be put into place.
Purse reductions will be implemented when the number of starters going to the gate is less than eight. For each starter from 7 and fewer, 25% of the purse will be rescinded down to a minimum of 50% of the original purse. . Exceptions will be made for scratched horses by the Stewards or the Attending STATE veterinarian. The track Veterinarian will no longer have the authority to determine if a horse may be scratched. (That is to prevent any "deal making" between trainers and vets). With that in effect, there WILL be a STATE vet on the grounds a minimum of two hours before first race post time.
If a race does not fill to a minimum of 8 entrants, it will be replaced with a substitute race. Same conditions apply."
Now I know I will get feedback such as "good luck with that"...or "the horsemen would start a rebellion resembling the Boston Tea Party"....Or some such.
But I believe some of you frustrated with fields with 5 horses that offer little value for you betting dollar are at least thinking along these lines.
So, instead of commenting in counter with replies such as I mentioned above, lets see some of your ideas.

Q. The track Veterinarian will no longer have the authority to determine if a horse may be scratched. (That is to prevent any "deal making" between trainers and vets). With that in effect, there WILL be a STATE vet on the grounds a minimum of two hours before first race post time.

A. This is indeed exactly how it was in my racing experience for decades. And the decision was made at least 4 hours prior. The Stewards are busy dealing with riders infractions, and daily cases that they oversee from 11 am until postime.

Hope that helps.

[Ruffian1]

You can post the same idea as many times as you want, but explain how punishing the trainers that DON'T SCRATCH makes any sense. Why aren't you punishing those who scratch rather than the ones who don't? You keep posting the same thing in numerous threads but your idea is ass-backward, as my father used to say.

Exactly. And as previously stated, it is not hard at all. Happened every day when I was a young trainer. Yep, everyday.

[Ruffian1]

Hence the reason why horsemen like small, unbettable fields.
Not only do trainers stand a better chance of getting a percentage of the purse other than also ran money, they also have a shot at cashing a winning bet and wining the top purse percentage as well.
If I were running a racing jurisdiction or track, along with the stall application would be a notice.
That notice would say something to the effect that ...
We are here for you AND our customers. Without them, none of us have jobs.
With that in mind, the following policies will be put into place.
Purse reductions will be implemented when the number of starters going to the gate is less than eight. For each starter from 7 and fewer, 25% of the purse will be rescinded down to a minimum of 50% of the original purse. . Exceptions will be made for scratched horses by the Stewards or the Attending STATE veterinarian. The track Veterinarian will no longer have the authority to determine if a horse may be scratched. (That is to prevent any "deal making" between trainers and vets). With that in effect, there WILL be a STATE vet on the grounds a minimum of two hours before first race post time.
If a race does not fill to a minimum of 8 entrants, it will be replaced with a substitute race. Same conditions apply."
Now I know I will get feedback such as "good luck with that"...or "the horsemen would start a rebellion resembling the Boston Tea Party"....Or some such.
But I believe some of you frustrated with fields with 5 horses that offer little value for you betting dollar are at least thinking along these lines.
So, instead of commenting in counter with replies such as I mentioned above, lets see some of your ideas.

And of course they like small fields. The racing sec. splits a 13 horse field and I land in a six horse split. sure. So would you. But they have no control over it so don't make it sound like they "love it" like they shouldn't. Wouldn't you if you owned one of 6 in a race instead of one of 13?

Sorry, but too me, you make it sound like they should not like it or had something to do with it. Or they enjoy screwing the customer.

[Ruffian1]

You can post the same idea as many times as you want, but explain how punishing the trainers that DON'T SCRATCH makes any sense. Why aren't you punishing those who scratch rather than the ones who don't? You keep posting the same thing in numerous threads but your idea is ass-backward, as my father used to say.

Thank you !

[Stillriledup]

Exactly. And as previously stated, it is not hard at all. Happened every day when I was a young trainer. Yep, everyday.

Exactly?

It's been explained to him much more than one time but he refuses to listen.

[Ruffian1]

Exactly?

It's been explained to him much more than one time but he refuses to listen.

Did not know that.

[chadk66]

For anyone with an open mind about this , meaning those that want the truth and not a bunch of assumptions, there are some reckless comments being thrown around in here in several posts that are just plain wrong. At least one is correct, post 44 and maybe a few more. I have not read every one. But plenty are not.

If I had hours each day to try and convince whoever of otherwise, I might, as the goal for joining PA was to help customers that had questions and/or didn't understand. Problem is, most of the time, it falls on deaf ears seemingly because plenty here don't really want the truth. Seems like they just want to bitch about it and lament how badly they get screwed. The paranoia is crazy. Kind of a shame but that is not on me.

Horses get pin cushioned every joint every race ? Yet, no needles required ? Top trainers get together and take turns scratching for each other? I was a top trainer at times for years on end and I never did that nor was I ever asked to. Nor did other top trainers that were on top when I was not that I spoke to or watched closely. After all, watching them closely was my friggin job folks. Cough or sniffles but probably be all right? Really. Or maybe ruined or dead, but screw it, it was another horse to bet on, who probably ran terribly, but we can say that the trainer was giving him one to get a better price next time right? While the first accusation was a joke as well as a contradiction, the rest is flat out not true. Not where I came from. Oh, OK , somewhere it happened. Sadly, probably yes, and the vast majority of places it did not an does not. All this crap is not day to day reality with anywhere near a majority of trainers. A few idiots that do not deserve a license? Sure. Just like every other occupation. But to make it sound status quo in the business is reckless at worst and irresponsible at best, especially from someone who has , from what I read, told people he was worn an assortment of hats in the game.
I wore one. All around the east coast in at least seven different states. For many, many years. As few as two horses and as many as 80 horses. So I know of what I speak. And I speak the truth. Oh, and if I assume, I try and state it as such.

Like I said, plenty in this thread is just plain wrong. But if it fuels a paranoia or makes for built in excuses, and that is the necessity you require, well, you have come to the right place.
If it is a truer understanding of the game you want, look elsewhere.perfectly stated. while reading all these posts I go from ROTFLMAO to scratching my head in total disbelief. As you stated there were a couple fair statements/guesses.

[Stillriledup]

Did not know that.

He's concerned that purse reductions due to scratches would hurt people who entered in good faith and I suggested that tracks let horsemen know in advance that the rules of how purse distribution changes if field size changes, this way they won't have it sprung on them after the fact.

[thespaah]

And of course they like small fields. The racing sec. splits a 13 horse field and I land in a six horse split. sure. So would you. But they have no control over it so don't make it sound like they "love it" like they shouldn't. Wouldn't you if you owned one of 6 in a race instead of one of 13?

Sorry, but too me, you make it sound like they should not like it or had something to do with it. Or they enjoy screwing the customer.
Well, then lets do this...Put in place a rule that bars the racing secretary from splitting a race that has drawn fewer than gate capacity.
I leave open a door here for turf races where the temp rail is out so far as to not permit more than 8-10 starters.
The whole idea here is not to punish anyone.
The idea is to put a good competitive bettable product on the track.
Look, it is highly likely there are all kinds of shenanigans going on.
Look at Vic's list. Some of the things are infuriating. Those should be done away with. Especially anything resembling collusion among the Barns.
In my estimation trainers who collude on scratches may as well go ahead and bet on each others horses using inside information.

[thespaah]

I like the out of the box thinking but I think it would penalize those who are shipping in, etc. I would approach it differently. I would add a bump on the purse when there are 10 or more runners, or something like that.

Incentive the behavior you want to change instead of penalizing the behavior you don't want.
I agree with your second point.
What do you as a former horsemen think of this...
Would it not be more prudent to first eliminate the behavior that is creating the problem, at the same time put into place the reward program you mentioned above?
I ask this because I think certain outfits would dismiss anything that upsets the apple cart.
So if say half the trainers like the idea of the purse bump and do their best to make it happen. Meanwhile the other half resists the idea and decides that things are fine just the way they are and thus feel "safe" with 3/4's of a loaf of bread rather than taking the opportunity to get the whole thing.
Better stated. To those types being good enough is good enough.
Thoughts?

[luisbe]

Wondering if anyone here thinks it is even remotely possible that trainers who have hundreds of starters and win over 30%, 35% is legitimate. A guy like Karl Broberg wins at an insane rate. Any chance at all he is doing it in honest fashion? If so, what is he doing differently?

I just assume everyone knows it is not legit but maybe there are those that really think it is honest.

One thing is for sure: as the horses are climbing in class the % should diminish unless you have top horses/barns.

[Ruffian1]

He's concerned that purse reductions due to scratches would hurt people who entered in good faith and I suggested that tracks let horsemen know in advance that the rules of how purse distribution changes if field size changes, this way they won't have it sprung on them after the fact.


Because I know of no such rule, discussing it, for me, is a waste of time.

If it exists, tell me all about it and I will give you my opinion.

[Stillriledup]

Because I know of no such rule, discussing it, for me, is a waste of time.

If it exists, tell me all about it and I will give you my opinion.

It's something intelligent that has been discussed here, tracks are obviously not smart enough to have thought of it yet. Maybe one day the blind squirrels who run racing will stumble across it.

[Ruffian1]

Well, then lets do this...Put in place a rule that bars the racing secretary from splitting a race that has drawn fewer than gate capacity.
I leave open a door here for turf races where the temp rail is out so far as to not permit more than 8-10 starters.
The whole idea here is not to punish anyone.
The idea is to put a good competitive bettable product on the track.
Look, it is highly likely there are all kinds of shenanigans going on.
Look at Vic's list. Some of the things are infuriating. Those should be done away with. Especially anything resembling collusion among the Barns.
In my estimation trainers who collude on scratches may as well go ahead and bet on each others horses using inside information.

The sec. splits races in order to make the card. No sec. would split races if they were not forced to, do to the number of horses entered.

Yeah, vic's list. Haven't you read anything I have said about that bogus,phony,sensationalized list. You are choosing to believe his list because it feeds you rage. His list is crap. Big time race track insider. He can fool you, but he can't fool me. It is what I did for a living and this guy puts out a list and you treat it like it's the way it is. I say it's not and you tell me to look at his list. You enjoy that list and use it to blame everybody and everything you need to blame . That list is perfect for people like you.

[Stillriledup]

The sec. splits races in order to make the card. No sec. would split races if they were not forced to, do to the number of horses entered.

Yeah, vic's list. Haven't you read anything I have said about that bogus,phony,sensationalized list. You are choosing to believe his list because it feeds you rage. His list is crap. Big time race track insider. He can fool you, but he can't fool me. It is what I did for a living and this guy puts out a list and you treat it like it's the way it is. I say it's not and you tell me to look at his list. You enjoy that list and use it to blame everybody and everything you need to blame . That list is perfect for people like you.

I know you don't like Vic's list, I just reread it, what's in there that's not correct?

[Ruffian1]

It's something intelligent that has been discussed here, tracks are obviously not smart enough to have thought of it yet. Maybe one day the blind squirrels who run racing will stumble across it.

That would be management , not trainers.

And before somebody flies in here and says the trainers will stop entering, just stop.
That is also outdated crap.

[Ruffian1]

I know you don't like Vic's list, I just reread it, what's in there that's not correct?

Reread my first and or second response to this thread. I could go point by point but what is the use.

[Stillriledup]

Reread my first and or second response to this thread. I could go point by point but what is the use.

Ok, I just went back n read it.

Seems like Vic's experience is different from yours, he must have seen and lived what he wrote, why is what he wrote wrong if his personal experiences in the game don't match yours? He's just speaking his own truth and his own experiences I'm assuming.

[Ruffian1]

I know you don't like Vic's list, I just reread it, what's in there that's not correct?

And let's be very clear about my feelings of that "list".

It's not that I don't like it.

It is inflammatory B.S.

But because the vast majority of people in here do not know the truth, they read it and assume it is because after all, he was a jocks agent, or whatever the hell he was. Wow, I'm impressed.
It is almost as impressive as the film study where he said he could not tell which lead the horse was on because the horse was fat, or a rat, or whatever the hell the excuse was. Well, too me, stop right there. If you can't see that, hop off the bus Gus. Your knowledge of race running is limited. Period. And there is nothing wrong with that, unless you are trying to portray yourself as Ben friggin Jones. When you do that, and bash trainers, I have a problem with that. I hold my tongue and let it go but enough becomes enough after a while.
As you said, for many, it feels good to know that if they lose, it is because they are getting screwed. Problem is, I get sick and tired of having my former profession bashed by someone that is full of crap.
My former occupation is full of problems as it is. It sure as hell does not need a phony list used as ,the way it is, to customers that would not no otherwise.
What a joke. A bad joke.

[Ruffian1]

Ok, I just went back n read it.

Seems like Vic's experience is different from yours, he must have seen and lived what he wrote, why is what he wrote wrong if his personal experiences in the game don't match yours? He's just speaking his own truth and his own experiences I'm assuming.

You can defend his list all you want.

You know my position on it.

Yeah, he MUST have seen and lived it or he never would have written it.

Sure.

He wrote it, it must be the truth.

Good luck with that.

[Stillriledup]

I'm pretty sure people are bashing individual criminals who call themselves trainers and not bashing the profession itself.

As far as Vic's list being phony and to discuss the specific point of scratching as a favor to someone else, if Vic had never seen or heard of that practice, would he have typed it ? Hopefully he will come in and clear it up, but if his experiences are what he typed, shouldn't you respect that he's telling the truth as far as his experiences go?

[Stillriledup]

You can defend his list all you want.

You know my position on it.

Yeah, he MUST have seen and lived it or he never would have written it.

Sure.

He wrote it, it must be the truth.

Good luck with that.

I'm not defending the list per se, I'm just defending the idea that its possible Vic has different experiences than you do and posted the truth as he knows it to be. If Vic is lying that's another completely different discussion, but isn't it possible he has different experiences?

[Ruffian1]

I'm pretty sure people are bashing individual criminals who call themselves trainers and not bashing the profession itself.

As far as Vic's list being phony and to discuss the specific point of scratching as a favor to someone else, if Vic had never seen or heard of that practice, would he have typed it ? Hopefully he will come in and clear it up, but if his experiences are what he typed, shouldn't you respect that he's telling the truth as far as his experiences go?

When he says they were, that's it. Must be true.

I say B.S.

Don't care what anybody says.

Somewhere once? Ok. It's a crappy world we live in.

All the time, as portrayed.

No.

Respect is something I try and show everyone until they give me reason to no longer do so.

That is what has happened here. So , no, I won't . Not when it comes to that list.

[Stillriledup]

When he says they were, that's it. Must be true.

I say B.S.

Don't care what anybody says.

Somewhere once? Ok. It's a crappy world we live in.

All the time, as portrayed.

No.

Respect is something I try and show everyone until they give me reason to no longer do so.

That is what has happened here. So , no, I won't . Not when it comes to that list.

But it is true if he lived it and saw it happen. Or, he's lying, its one or the other.

[completebill]

ALL the supertrainers use drugs!! Sure some work VERY hard, and some are superior horsemen.

The key to high % trainer analysis is to find out which trainers use which vets. Handicap the vet AND the trainer.

I have some knowledge of what I speak. My son was an assistant to Jerry Hollendorfer for some time. As far as he could EVER tell, he never used drugs (on his horses!). He, however, is without fail the 1st to arrive in the a.m., and last to leave in the p.m.. Even with large barns, wherever he is personally present, he spends time looking at each horse, every day.

My son moved on and trained for some years. He now has a full-time job in the horse-transportation industry (aircraft), but still, since he has a lot of job flexibility, fills in saddling horses for Steve Rasmussen, when Steve is running a horse elsewhere.He also is close with most of the prominent trainers around the country, since, in his job, he is in constant contact with them, booking flights for "shippers.

My son has never said anything about Rasmussen's use of drugs, although, when asked, he just won't comment. I do know that Rasmussen's win %s went down quite a bit after the PETA scandal!

My son, who really is an insider has never given me any specific information about drug use by any specifically-named trainers. All I can say is that after years of talking to him, I'll again make the GENERAL statement that all the supertrainers use drugs!

[cj]

ALL the supertrainers use drugs!! Sure some work VERY hard, and some are superior horsemen.

The key to high % trainer analysis is to find out which trainers use which vets. Handicap the vet AND the trainer.

I have some knowledge of what I speak. My son was an assistant to Jerry Hollendorfer for some time. As far as he could EVER tell, he never used drugs (on his horses!). He, however, is without fail the 1st to arrive in the a.m., and last to leave in the p.m.. Even with large barns, wherever he is personally present, he spends time looking at each horse, every day.

My son moved on and trained for some years. He now has a full-time job in the horse-transportation industry (aircraft), but still, since he has a lot of job flexibility, fills in saddling horses for Steve Rasmussen, when Steve is running a horse elsewhere.He also is close with most of the prominent trainers around the country, since, in his job, he is in constant contact with them, booking flights for "shippers.

My son has never said anything about Rasmussen's use of drugs, although, when asked, he just won't comment. I do know that Rasmussen's win %s went down quite a bit after the PETA scandal!

My son, who really is an insider has never given me any specific information about drug use by any specifically-named trainers. All I can say is that after years of talking to him, I'll again make the GENERAL statement that all the supertrainers use drugs!

It is Asmussen, not Rasmussen.

All trainers use drugs period. Lasix, bute, plenty of legal ones out there.

[highnote]

All trainers use drugs period. Lasix, bute, plenty of legal ones out there.

The use of steroids on race horses used to be legal. I think they might be banned, now, but I am not sure.

I managed a racing partnership a dozen or so years ago and our first winner was on the anabolic steroid Equipoise. https://www.steroid.com/Equipoise.php

Our trainer said our horse would get some treatments to make him run better, but it would be expensive. At the time, I didn't know what the drug was, but when I got the bill and looked it up I found out it was an anabolic steroid. I see in the article at the link above that Equipoise helps increase red blood cell production. This is probably the main reason our horse won that night -- if it was actually because of steroids. But it should be noted that I would have bet our horse to win that night regardless of the drugs he was being given. I told my wife that if there was ever a night our horse would win it was that night because the field he faced was extremely weak. So it's hard to say how much our horse benefitted. He never won again and was sold as a hunter/jumper.

I used to see D. Wayne Lukas horses a lot in the paddock at Belmont. He had a lot of Storm Cat offspring. They all looked alike and they all looked like the equine equivalent of human body builders -- always more mature and muscled than the competition. I always assumed they were on steroids because of the way they looked, but I do not know if they actually were on them.

[v j stauffer]

When he says they were, that's it. Must be true.

I say B.S.

Don't care what anybody says.

Somewhere once? Ok. It's a crappy world we live in.

All the time, as portrayed.

No.

Respect is something I try and show everyone until they give me reason to no longer do so.

That is what has happened here. So , no, I won't . Not when it comes to that list.

So people are sure horses are hopped out of their skulls. That's easy to believe but what I suggested causes you to lose respect for me?

Ok you now have no respect for me. There are greater tragedies in the world.

I stand by my post and assure you I've seen it happen and it continues to happen.

Another thing I forgot to tell you is entries are also for sale. A trainer that is really struggling. Paying the feed man day to day. Will let it be known for the right price he will enter a horse that's not ready to run, just to make the race go, then scratch. No skin off his nose. He scratches (sick, didn't eat up) and goes on the list for 10 days. What does he care? The horse is three weeks away from a race? Put $200-$500 in his pocket now his horses and sometimes his family eat for a few more days.

As for proving to you Ruff I'm qualified to have witnessed and make these assertions. Why should I do that? Nobody cares. If you'd like me to list the things I've done and been around for the past 40 years. I suppose I could. However, I'm not likely to because I don't give a shit if you feel I'm qualified or not.

[NorCalGreg]

You can defend his list all you want.

You know my position on it.

Yeah, he MUST have seen and lived it or he never would have written it.

Sure.

He wrote it, it must be the truth.

Good luck with that.

Have a cup of coffee, Ruff....relax. Step down off that cosmic soap-box, man. Everyone here seems to know Vic and his credentials in the industry, and apparently he DID wear several hats. LOL and also some don't care much for him.
In your ranting and railing against anyone and anything that goes against the exact way YOU saw it ..did it occur to you someone could have seen it differently?
Okay...maybe you once hot-walked Cannonero, I'll give you that. But so far, you're just some mysterious, unknown, unidentified man behind the curtain...talking a little crazy.
Now it seems you're on the verge of bashing other posters who dare question the mighty RUFFIAN. Well, sir...this is the internet---I'm just a guy that bets horses, posts on this site, and honestly had no idea who Vic was/is until recently. If you can talk in a controlled way...I'd be interested in anything you'd care to post. But not page after page of this.
No hard feelings here Ruff

-NCG

[ManU918]

Have a cup of coffee, Ruff....relax. Step down off that cosmic soap-box, man. Everyone here seems to know Vic and his credentials in the industry, and apparently he DID wear several hats. LOL and also some don't care much for him.
In your ranting and railing against anyone and anything that goes against the exact way YOU saw it ..did it occur to you someone could have seen it differently?
Okay...maybe you once hot-walked Cannonero, I'll give you that. But so far, you're just some mysterious, unknown, unidentified man behind the curtain...talking a little crazy.
Now it seems you're on the verge of bashing other posters who dare question the mighty RUFFIAN. Well, sir...this is the internet---I'm just a guy that bets horses, posts on this site, and honestly had no idea who Vic was/is until recently. If you can talk in a controlled way...I'd be interested in anything you'd care to post. But not page after page of this.
No hard feelings here Ruff

-NCG

That's very hard to believe. You know the whole, "I had no idea who Vic was until recently" line. Anytime a poster gives their opinion that doesn't align with Vic's, you're there telling them how wrong they are. Or that all of the users who don't agree with him are actually only one person with multiple usernames. You do know there is a thing called an IP address, right? Any admin on this site can look at where the posters here are posting from at any given time to verify if in fact someone is multi-accounting.

This guy is saying he's a trainer and you're accusing him of being a mysterious, unknown, unidentified man behind a curtain....No shit... This is an internet forum. That's the idea. If we all had to login using our SS#, DOB and mothers maiden name this place would be a ghost town. If the guy had a user name that was Joe Sharp would you believe him more? It's your choice to think what you want of Vic or any other poster here but you're being a complete nincompoop by discrediting people because their username isn't that of a known resource in the horse racing industry. Believe me there are many well known people in the industry that post here using usernames that don't connect them to who they are in real life. Sooner or later you'll figure that out but only if you can securely pull your head out of Vic's ass.

[Ruffian1]

So people are sure horses are hopped out of their skulls. That's easy to believe but what I suggested causes you to lose respect for me?

Ok you now have no respect for me. There are greater tragedies in the world.

I stand by my post and assure you I've seen it happen and it continues to happen.

Another thing I forgot to tell you is entries are also for sale. A trainer that is really struggling. Paying the feed man day to day. Will let it be known for the right price he will enter a horse that's not ready to run, just to make the race go, then scratch. No skin off his nose. He scratches (sick, didn't eat up) and goes on the list for 10 days. What does he care? The horse is three weeks away from a race? Put $200-$500 in his pocket now his horses and sometimes his family eat for a few more days.

As for proving to you Ruff I'm qualified to have witnessed and make these assertions. Why should I do that? Nobody cares. If you'd like me to list the things I've done and been around for the past 40 years. I suppose I could. However, I'm not likely to because I don't give a shit if you feel I'm qualified or not.

You did not suggest it. You stated it and said you witnessed it. There in lies the problem.

And now another juicy tidbit about more racetrack scandal. Lol. Oh please, tell us more.

[Ruffian1]

Have a cup of coffee, Ruff....relax. Step down off that cosmic soap-box, man. Everyone here seems to know Vic and his credentials in the industry, and apparently he DID wear several hats. LOL and also some don't care much for him.
In your ranting and railing against anyone and anything that goes against the exact way YOU saw it ..did it occur to you someone could have seen it differently?
Okay...maybe you once hot-walked Cannonero, I'll give you that. But so far, you're just some mysterious, unknown, unidentified man behind the curtain...talking a little crazy.
Now it seems you're on the verge of bashing other posters who dare question the mighty RUFFIAN. Well, sir...this is the internet---I'm just a guy that bets horses, posts on this site, and honestly had no idea who Vic was/is until recently. If you can talk in a controlled way...I'd be interested in anything you'd care to post. But not page after page of this.
No hard feelings here Ruff

-NCG

I don't know his credentials and please, I do not want to know them. I already know all I need to know.
I never walked Canonero II. So don't give me that.
As for talking a little crazy, I explained in detail how frustrating it gets with the constant bogus allegations cast and how I hold my tongue because I do realize that most in here are customers and it is hard not to want to believe stories of dirt on trainers passed around. Comes with the territory. Not that some are not true. Sadly, plenty are.
But, I also explained that it is one thing to have people say things that don't really have the opportunity to see for themselves how the game works from the inside, but it is quite another when someone says that they are an insider and then proceeds to sensationalize stories for whatever gain they are looking for. That is what irritated me. I hope that is OK with you. As for hiding behind a curtain, that is ridiculous. Shall I blast my name all over the internet ? I think not, Greg. I grew real tired of being know by too many long time ago.
My frustration is not that it was things "the way I saw it". That is muddying the waters that are crystal clear too me. Things are not the way I "saw" it. Things are what they are. There is no view it differently in the things he said. It either is that way, or it's not. And it's not. And he knows it, and I know it. Again, somewhere, sometime, someplace? Sure. It's a crappy world we live in. But commonplace, every day? No sir.
As for being on the verge of anything, how would you know what I was on the verge of ? Answer, you wouldn't . Is this a childish attempt for me to tell you how great I am? Sounds like it too me. Well, I am far from great . All I am is a former trainer that played the game as honestly and fairly and as hard, as I could, for a long time. With that comes decades of first hand experience that I have no problem sharing with others in the form of answers to serious questions that most others cannot answer. When I read the fairy tales about my former occupation, I had had enough. I hope that's OK with you.
I also hope this post passed your "controlled" test.
No hard feelings ...Greg.

[v j stauffer]

You did not suggest it. You stated it and said you witnessed it. There in lies the problem.

And now another juicy tidbit about more racetrack scandal. Lol. Oh please, tell us more.

I did witness it. Many times.

What else would you like to know?

Ask a question and I'll try to answer it to the best of my ability.

[Stillriledup]

The 'training profession' is treated fairly here and everywhere. Crooks get called out, nobody thinks EVERYONE is dishonest, no need to be steaming mad at outsiders, you should be mad at all the trainers who tried to game the system.

Why hurl anger at the gamblers and paying customers? As long as you know the truth about the 'training profession' what does it matter what outsiders think?

[v j stauffer]

I don't know his credentials and please, I do not want to know them. I already know all I need to know.
I never walked Canonero II. So don't give me that.
As for talking a little crazy, I explained in detail how frustrating it gets with the constant bogus allegations cast and how I hold my tongue because I do realize that most in here are customers and it is hard not to want to believe stories of dirt on trainers passed around. Comes with the territory. Not that some are not true. Sadly, plenty are.
But, I also explained that it is one thing to have people say things that don't really have the opportunity to see for themselves how the game works from the inside, but it is quite another when someone says that they are an insider and then proceeds to sensationalize stories for whatever gain they are looking for. That is what irritated me. I hope that is OK with you. As for hiding behind a curtain, that is ridiculous. Shall I blast my name all over the internet ? I think not, Greg. I grew real tired of being know by too many long time ago.
My frustration is not that it was things "the way I saw it". That is muddying the waters that are crystal clear too me. Things are not the way I "saw" it. Things are what they are. There is no view it differently in the things he said. It either is that way, or it's not. And it's not. And he knows it, and I know it. Again, somewhere, sometime, someplace? Sure. It's a crappy world we live in. But commonplace, every day? No sir.
As for being on the verge of anything, how would you know what I was on the verge of ? Answer, you wouldn't . Is this a childish attempt for me to tell you how great I am? Sounds like it too me. Well, I am far from great . All I am is a former trainer that played the game as honestly and fairly and as hard, as I could, for a long time. With that comes decades of first hand experience that I have no problem sharing with others in the form of answers to serious questions that most others cannot answer. When I read the fairy tales about my former occupation, I had had enough. I hope that's OK with you.
I also hope this post passed your "controlled" test.
No hard feelings ...Greg.

I never used the words commonplace or everyday. Didn't imply anything like that. A poster wondered if a trainer could put up gaudy percentage numbers without relying solely on illegal substances. I explained it could be done and listed some ways how those numbers could be inflated.

The places you've taken that message is truly dizzying.

[Ruffian1]

The 'training profession' is treated fairly here and everywhere. Crooks get called out, nobody thinks EVERYONE is dishonest, no need to be steaming mad at outsiders, you should be mad at all the trainers who tried to game the system.

Why hurl anger at the gamblers and paying customers? As long as you know the truth about the 'training profession' what does it matter what outsiders think?

Won't play that game with you.

I am not steaming mad at outsiders. And I hate cheating trainers. Well documented in my posts and you know that, don't you.

Where do I "hurl anger" at gamblers( your words not mine)and paying customers?

Stop with the false accusations please.

For the 100th time SRU. I am only here to try and tell the truth, good or bad, about the profession for those that care to try and find out more about it.
If you have a need in that, fine with me. If you don't , that is fine also. It matters not too me.

But please don't mind me if I call BS on something written by someone that says he does know, when it is clear to me that he does not know of what he speaks, OK?

[Ruffian1]

I never used the words commonplace or everyday. Didn't imply anything like that. A poster wondered if a trainer could put up gaudy percentage numbers without relying solely on illegal substances. I explained it could be done and listed some ways how those numbers could be inflated.

The places you've taken that message is truly dizzying.

Oh, now it's could. And three of them. Like a hypothetical. Sure, I get it.

You know what, that's all I needed Vic. Thank you. I rest my case.

And yeah, cut me down on the way out just to continue to try and deflect what all this really is. I get that as well.

[Stillriledup]

Won't play that game with you.

I am not steaming mad at outsiders. And I hate cheating trainers. Well documented in my posts and you know that, don't you.

Where do I "hurl anger" at gamblers( your words not mine)and paying customers?

Stop with the false accusations please.

For the 100th time SRU. I am only here to try and tell the truth, good or bad, about the profession for those that care to try and find out more about it.
If you have a need in that, fine with me. If you don't , that is fine also. It matters not too me.

But please don't mind me if I call BS on something written by someone that says he does know, when it is clear to me that he does not know of what he speaks, OK?

But Calling BS is disrespectful, can't you just respectfully disagree?

[v j stauffer]

Oh, now it's could. And three of them. Like a hypothetical. Sure, I get it.

You know what, that's all I needed Vic. Thank you. I rest my case.

And yeah, cut me down on the way out just to continue to try and deflect what all this really is. I get that as well.

Cut you down? What the hell are you talking about? You've just spent 8 pages explaining how as an insider you know things the rest of us can't. And that I'm a zero knowledge windbag that makes things up to garner attention.

Now you're reaching for semantics. Ok we'll change could to have. Better?

This isn't about you or me. I haven't said you know nothing and questioned your credentials for the basis of your opinion. How could I?

All you've said is you used to train and now you don't. Frankly you sound like a guy that the game passed by. You couldn't keep up and now you're bitter at the world. Especially those of us who are still in the middle of it everyday and willing to contribute.

I enjoy reading some of your perspectives. But is this about sharing and contributing? Or your resume, or lack of, because people don't blindly accept your takes as gospel. The one and only truth.

Every track kitchen in America has 100 guys like you. Fun to listen to for a few minutes over coffee. But after the renovation break everybody has to get back to work.

[no breathalyzer]

Hey and Oats mfer , hey and oats! :lol: You don't need to be a trainer to know whats going on. It's 2015 and Google is loaded with wonderful information, its all out there for you to take in provided the person consuming the information has the smarts to filter out the facts from bs. Horses don't eat a better feed for weeks and jump up 20 lengths ect. Like its been stated here the best vets know how to stay under the threshold levels set to trigger a positive. Most drugs are for therapeutic reasons anyway. Take away all drugs and you would see 5 horse fields in all races. I'm all for uniformed drug policy. What would happen if everyone had to use the same 3rd party vet?

[cbp]

Why I'm looking into moving my tack to Hong Kong full time

[JimmyQ]

Frankly you sound like a guy that the game passed by. You couldn't keep up and now you're bitter at the world.

Hmmmm.....Sounds familiar doesn't it?

JimmyQ

[v j stauffer]

Hmmmm.....Sounds familiar doesn't it?

JimmyQ

Trolling anyone?

[Saratoga_Mike]

Not for nothing, but all of these techniques were available 50 years ago too, and it wasn't until OSB spun his magic that the era of the supertrainers began.

I remember reading with amusement how Pancho Martin was so daring running his 50k horses for a 25k tag, and I would think to myself it would be daring if he owned the horses and not Sigmund Sommer. In any case, I don't recall Pancho clicking at 30%.

Exactly right - I think Vic's suggestions may get a trainer in the 20% to 25% range, but not Jamie-Ness-at-Tampa type numbers.

[upthecreek]

http://youtu.be/EmzEtu2Yktc

Listen to what Joe Orseno has to say

[v j stauffer]

Exactly right - I think Vic's suggestions may get a trainer in the 20% to 25% range, but not Jamie-Ness-at-Tampa type numbers.

Now factor in circuits that are notoriously bad for having short fields. Can you now see the possibility at 30%?

[proximity]

guerrero, beattie/wells, prime lake, ness, broberg..... how much scratching did (do) they really do? they've won plenty of races from bad posts, on off tracks, in "big" fields, and yes even with slow numbers. and they're routinely scratching fit horses because of agreements with other trainers?? wouldn't both parties be better off running 1-2 with the place horse even saving the condition??? :confused:

[v j stauffer]

guerrero, beattie/wells, prime lake, ness, broberg..... how much scratching did (do) they really do? they've won plenty of races from bad posts, on off tracks, in "big" fields, and yes even with slow numbers. and they're routinely scratching fit horses because of agreements with other trainers?? wouldn't both parties be better off running 1-2 with the place horse even saving the condition??? :confused:

Why are arguing as if it's either or? Those trainers have huge percentages. Why? That's for each player and racing commissions to decide.

What I said was it's has been done without using illegal drugs.

[v j stauffer]

guerrero, beattie/wells, prime lake, ness, broberg..... how much scratching did (do) they really do? they've won plenty of races from bad posts, on off tracks, in "big" fields, and yes even with slow numbers. and they're routinely scratching fit horses because of agreements with other trainers?? wouldn't both parties be better off running 1-2 with the place horse even saving the condition??? :confused:

Saving the condition means absolutely ZERO when trying to retain or cultivate owners.

All they care about is win %. Period.

[Ruffian1]

But Calling BS is disrespectful, can't you just respectfully disagree?

Oh, then sure, I respectfully disagree.

Now please follow me down to my next post. Thanks.

[proximity]

Why are arguing as if it's either or? Those trainers have huge percentages. Why? That's for each player and racing commissions to decide.

What I said was it's has been done without using illegal drugs.

with the possible exception of juan carlos guerrero the supers I've listed have also had huge win percentages at multiple tracks running at the same time. they have these scratching agreements at all the tracks?

also we're not just talking raw percentages here but trainers who routinely move horses up to new tops and keep them there. and a lot of these are older horses with extensive racing experience. and of course almost every trainer who ever hit 35% + for an extended period of time fits in this category.

i'd have a better chance at winning a weightlifting competition if the Bulgarian national team suddenly scratched out but would that explain my power clean suddenly jumping up by 50 kg?

[Ruffian1]

Hey and Oats mfer , hey and oats! :lol: You don't need to be a trainer to know whats going on. It's 2015 and Google is loaded with wonderful information, its all out there for you to take in provided the person consuming the information has the smarts to filter out the facts from bs. Horses don't eat a better feed for weeks and jump up 20 lengths ect. Like its been stated here the best vets know how to stay under the threshold levels set to trigger a positive. Most drugs are for therapeutic reasons anyway. Take away all drugs and you would see 5 horse fields in all races. I'm all for uniformed drug policy. What would happen if everyone had to use the same 3rd party vet?

MF'er. Now that is respect isn't it SRU.

I guess it's a one way street.


Anyway, my quote below shows you that I said that cannot show respect when it comes to that list. See the last 2 paragraph's.


QUOTE:

When he says they were, that's it. Must be true.

I say B.S.

Don't care what anybody says.

Somewhere once? Ok. It's a crappy world we live in.

All the time, as portrayed.

No.

Respect is something I try and show everyone until they give me reason to no longer do so.

That is what has happened here. So , no, I won't . Not when it comes to that list.
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/images/statusicon/user_online.gif http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/images/buttons/green/quote.gif (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=1888513)

[Stillriledup]

MF'er. Now that is respect isn't it SRU.

I guess it's a one way street.


Anyway, my quote below shows you that I said that cannot show respect when it comes to that list. See the last 2 paragraph's.


QUOTE:

When he says they were, that's it. Must be true.

I say B.S.

Don't care what anybody says.

Somewhere once? Ok. It's a crappy world we live in.

All the time, as portrayed.

No.

Respect is something I try and show everyone until they give me reason to no longer do so.

That is what has happened here. So , no, I won't . Not when it comes to that list.
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/images/statusicon/user_online.gif http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/images/buttons/green/quote.gif (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=1888513)

Two wrongs don't make a right. You can either be a respectful poster or not, the choice is yours, but I'm pretty sure you're better than this.

[proximity]

Saving the condition means absolutely ZERO when trying to retain or cultivate owners.


in the mid-atlantic at least in a lot of cases we need to ask if super-trainers cultivated owners..... or if owners cultivated THEM.

[v j stauffer]

with the possible exception of juan carlos guerrero the supers I've listed have also had huge win percentages at multiple tracks running at the same time. they have these scratching agreements at all the tracks?

also we're not just talking raw percentages here but trainers who routinely move horses up to new tops and keep them there. and a lot of these are older horses with extensive racing experience. and of course almost every trainer who ever hit 35% + for an extended period of time fits in this category.

i'd have a better chance at winning a weightlifting competition if the Bulgarian national team suddenly scratched out but would that explain my power clean suddenly jumping up by 50 kg?

MY GOD!!!! Why can't you grasp that I'm not arguing whether Juan Carlos Guerrero does anything with scratches or not.

Maybe he sold his soul to the devil? I don't know. I SIMPLY STATED A WAY SOME TRAINERS CAN PAD THEIR PERCENTAGES!!

Jesus!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[no breathalyzer]

MF'er. Now that is respect isn't it SRU.

I guess it's a one way street.


Anyway, my quote below shows you that I said that cannot show respect when it comes to that list. See the last 2 paragraph's.


QUOTE:

When he says they were, that's it. Must be true.

I say B.S.

Don't care what anybody says.

Somewhere once? Ok. It's a crappy world we live in.

All the time, as portrayed.

No.

Respect is something I try and show everyone until they give me reason to no longer do so.

That is what has happened here. So , no, I won't . Not when it comes to that list.
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/images/statusicon/user_online.gif http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/images/buttons/green/quote.gif (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=1888513)




whoooooa dude chill out .. was not anything said there directly towards any one of your post. and its just a well know saying it gets floated around.. if PA WANTS TO EDIT IT THEY CAN. Didn't know it was so sensitive around here now

[Ruffian1]

Cut you down? What the hell are you talking about? You've just spent 8 pages explaining how as an insider you know things the rest of us can't. And that I'm a zero knowledge windbag that makes things up to garner attention.

Now you're reaching for semantics. Ok we'll change could to have. Better?

This isn't about you or me. I haven't said you know nothing and questioned your credentials for the basis of your opinion. How could I?

All you've said is you used to train and now you don't. Frankly you sound like a guy that the game passed by. You couldn't keep up and now you're bitter at the world. Especially those of us who are still in the middle of it everyday and willing to contribute.

I enjoy reading some of your perspectives. But is this about sharing and contributing? Or your resume, or lack of, because people don't blindly accept your takes as gospel. The one and only truth.

Every track kitchen in America has 100 guys like you. Fun to listen to for a few minutes over coffee. But after the renovation break everybody has to get back to work.



I have enjoyed some of your posts as well, but that list was not one of them Vic.

I felt that stuff like that would be taken as everyday occurrences, for every trainer with a high %. I felt it would only incite anger within customers that already feel taken by the system. And it has, Vic. Look at some of the responses. At the end of the day, all they are is more bitter , if that is possible. How can that help them?
Has it happened somewhere, sometime? Probably. But we both know it is not everyday racing practice for the vast majority of races run.It just plain isn't.
I am not the internet argue guy many in here are. You obviously are. Congrats on that.
I stated my position and got insulted by multiple people for it. And your latest round of cuts might hurt if any of it was reality. Thankfully, they are not. So nice job of throwing insults at me instead of actually breaking down " the list".
If indeed you have been around 40 years , anywhere near the east coast, you certainly would recognize my name in the industry. Most people from the 70's, 80's, 90's do. I prefer to stay anonymous. Hope that's OK. I was no star, but I did just fine thanks.
Again, thanks for the bitter, track kitchen, lack of resume references. Really appreciate that Vic.

[Ruffian1]

I asked a question in post 50 to thaskalos about scratches at Laurel. I guess he did not know about that track for sure. If you do Thas, please let me know.
Because I do not follow the game that much these days, are 5 horse fields and a crazy amount of late scratches still going on at Laurel like they used too? I am well aware of what it was up to several years ago. Has it improved with Tim there?
I would need to know for sure so I don't look like a clown if I went there and met with Tim Ritvo and or Georganne Hale. But I could go there and have a conversation about scratches if I knew the actual data.
Anybody?

[Saratoga_Mike]

Now factor in circuits that are notoriously bad for having short fields. Can you now see the possibility at 30%?

What circuits are you referencing? It's important. If your answer is California, my answer is no. Why? Because I think the trainers are sharp in Cali and aggressive with their placements. Ditto at NYRA tracks. Could a trainer attain high 20s at MNR legitimately? Perhaps.

[magwell]

Hey Ruff and Vic as someone who has spent more time in a track kitchen then most people have been around, and probably one of the 100 Vic was talking about. Both of you guys understand the game and I agree with you guys, I've watched this game evolve over the years and the only thing that stayed the same is the horses, only the names have changed, try to chill out it's not worth the aggravation ......:cool:

[Ruffian1]

Hey Ruff and Vic as someone who has spent more time in a track kitchen then most people have been around, and probably one of the 100 Vic was talking about. Both of you guys understand the game and I agree with you guys, I've watched this game evolve over the years and the only thing that stayed the same is the horses, only the name,s have changed, try to chill out it's not worth the aggravation ......:cool:

Thanks Magwell. Going to do just that.:cool:

[proximity]

MY GOD!!!! Why can't you grasp that I'm not arguing whether Juan Carlos Guerrero does anything with scratches or not.

Maybe he sold his soul to the devil? I don't know. I SIMPLY STATED A WAY SOME TRAINERS CAN PAD THEIR PERCENTAGES!!

Jesus!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I interpreted your first post in the thread to mean that someone could be a long term 35% trainer without also being a move up trainer.

now maybe somebody has done this but off the top of my head I couldn't name one and this certainly isn't the case with 99% of the trainers valento is talking about.

if my interpretation of the post is unreasonable I apologize to the forum.

[thaskalos]

I asked a question in post 50 to thaskalos about scratches at Laurel. I guess he did not know about that track for sure. If you do Thas, please let me know.
Because I do not follow the game that much these days, are 5 horse fields and a crazy amount of late scratches still going on at Laurel like they used too? I am well aware of what it was up to several years ago. Has it improved with Tim there?
I would need to know for sure so I don't look like a clown if I went there and met with Tim Ritvo and or Georganne Hale. But I could go there and have a conversation about scratches if I knew the actual data.
Anybody?
I apologize for not giving you a prompt answer, Ruffian...I guess I got caught up in the interesting discussion generated by this thread...and I forgot the question that you originally asked me.

You are right...I don't have the "actual data" for the Maryland circuit. In fact...I haven't wagered on a Maryland race for at least a couple of years. But I would hazard to guess that their late scratch problem persists...because, as I recall, that was the main reason for my dissatisfaction with the racing there. With the trend that I am observing nationwide...it's hard to imagine that things would be any different at Laurel.

[Ruffian1]

I apologize for not giving you a prompt answer, Ruffian...I guess I got caught up in the interesting discussion generated by this thread...and I forgot the question that you originally asked me.

You are right...I don't have the "actual data" for the Maryland circuit. In fact...I haven't wagered on a Maryland race for at least a couple of years. But I would hazard to guess that their late scratch problem persists...because, as I recall, that was the main reason for my dissatisfaction with the racing there. With the trend that I am observing nationwide...it's hard to imagine that things would be any different at Laurel.

No problem Thas. I almost forgot as well.
Yes, it was terrible there a few years ago. 3-5 shot every race and 5 horses so it seemed. Unbetable.
If you or anyone wants , lets put a few questions together about that and I will go to Laurel and ask them. They need to be appropriate but not soft balls either. Maybe we can get some insight as to why it persists and if they have any plans to curtail it. Like I said before , there are ways to combat it and Tim used to train so he knows that for sure.
Think about it and let me know. And that is open to anyone else as well.
The topic is getting and holding together larger fields to attract customers and generate handle.

[NorCalGreg]

LOL...funny how these things start. Manu thanks for your feedback, Ruff, we're still cool,right :ThmbUp: hang in there, Vic---back to 'capping for me-
later dudes
-NCG

[Track Phantom]

Nothing to see here, right? Just one example of millions.

Anyone think this is just harder working? Knowing where to place them? Friendly trainers scratching for him? Give me a break.

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/Secret%20Lies_zpsfyz75wal.png

[cj]

Nothing to see here, right? Just one example of millions.

Anyone think this is just harder working? Knowing where to place them? Friendly trainers scratching for him? Give me a break.

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/Secret%20Lies_zpsfyz75wal.png

I don't even think that is a great example. Surely there are better out there for Ness. The improvement wasn't that much figure wise even right away, and none at all based on tops from the recent past.

How was this horse able to move up the class ladder and keep winning despite running the same figures?

[Stillriledup]

Nothing to see here, right? Just one example of millions.

Anyone think this is just harder working? Knowing where to place them? Friendly trainers scratching for him? Give me a break.

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/Secret%20Lies_zpsfyz75wal.png

Post the PPs of:

El Botas

Evolution Rocks

Crazy About Me

All Jorge 'the legend' Navarro runners who 'got faster' in his barn.

[NorCalGreg]

I see a very mediocre trainer who refused to drop his horse down to a level and surface where he could win....when he finally did, a sharp trainer claimed him out from under him and you can see the results.
I bet the Walker family is delighted with Trainer Mello.

[thaskalos]

Post the PPs of:

El Botas

Evolution Rocks

Crazy About Me

All Jorge 'the legend' Navarro runners who 'got faster' in his barn.

Is Jamie Ness suspected of being an honest trainer now? I didn't know that.

[proximity]

I don't even think that is a great example. Surely there are better out there for Ness. The improvement wasn't that much figure wise even right away, and none at all based on tops from the recent past.


I agree with your first two sentences but although we don't have a lot to go on I see a 52 median dirt beyer for mello and a 71 median dirt beyer for ness.

[Stillriledup]

Is Jamie Ness suspected of being an honest trainer now? I didn't know that.

I'm not sure what he's suspected of to be quite honest.

[Stillriledup]

Trouble Kid racing today at Parx in the 8th.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Do we not believe the stewards or racing commission are falling down on the job by not investigating, or at least calling in any trainer that regularly improves horses substantially off a claim? If they did, they should publish the results of their investigation so the public at least has an idea of what is going on. Those entitities are the first line of defense against unscrupulous activities.

Carping about the loss of public confidence without making a full effort to get on top of the activities that create that loss and making things transparent can only reinforce negative views of racing.

Even those things Vic Stauffer suggested can only happen if the stewards ignore them. As handicappers, one of the things we are good at is seeing patterns. I would offer it isn't that hard to see the patterns that might suggest something untoward.

As far as I could tell, not once in the thread do we point out that if the administrators are not part of the solution, they are part of the problem.

All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.

[thaskalos]

Do we not believe the stewards or racing commission are falling down on the job by not investigating, or at least calling in any trainer that regularly improves horses substantially off a claim? If they did, they should publish the results of their investigation so the public at least has an idea of what is going on. Those entitities are the first line of defense against unscrupulous activities.

Carping about the loss of public confidence without making a full effort to get on top of the activities that create that loss and making things transparent can only reinforce negative views of racing.

Even those things Vic Stauffer suggested can only happen if the stewards ignore them. As handicappers, one of the things we are good at is seeing patterns. I would offer it isn't that hard to see the patterns that might suggest something untoward.

As far as I could tell, not once in the thread do we point out that if the administrators are not part of the solution, they are part of the problem.

All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.

We have covered this many times before. OF COURSE the administrators are part of the problem; in fact...the administrators are the MAIN problem. But...being the "administrators"...they are free to behave and react in any way that they please. Who can tell the "administrators" how to conduct their business?

Of course...The CUSTOMERS have a hand to play in this sad scenario too. If the customers object to the way a business is run...then they could easily refrain from patronizing such a business. Isn't that what is being done in the world of "normal" business? Don't the dissatisfied customers throughout the world show their discontent by "voting with their feet"?

If we are to start assessing blame for horse racing's current state...then, WHO deserves the lion's share of the blame? The "administrators", who pretend to be in the "entertainment business"...or the "customers", who have somehow managed to delude themselves into believing that they remain "entertained"?

[v j stauffer]

Do we not believe the stewards or racing commission are falling down on the job by not investigating, or at least calling in any trainer that regularly improves horses substantially off a claim? If they did, they should publish the results of their investigation so the public at least has an idea of what is going on. Those entitities are the first line of defense against unscrupulous activities.

Carping about the loss of public confidence without making a full effort to get on top of the activities that create that loss and making things transparent can only reinforce negative views of racing.

Even those things Vic Stauffer suggested can only happen if the stewards ignore them. As handicappers, one of the things we are good at is seeing patterns. I would offer it isn't that hard to see the patterns that might suggest something untoward.

As far as I could tell, not once in the thread do we point out that if the administrators are not part of the solution, they are part of the problem.

All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.

The Stewards can only do so much. In fact the policing of these things has nothing to do with the Stewards. That's the job of the investigators. Stewards are finders of fact when a complaint has been filed and a licensee is brought to hearing.

As for what I've seen happen in many cases there is no violation. Is it a dark, dirty secret this takes place? Sure.

But try proving collusion. Good luck with that.

There's no rule banning excessive " legal " vet work.

Scratching a horse is very simple. Have your vet say he didn't eat his dinner the night before and spiked a temp when checked at 5:00am. There's not a state vet in the world and never will be that's is going to say. Nah, sounds fishy to me. You have to run him. Will never happen.

In fact to be perfectly honest. The stewards actually have no real interest in whether a field is 3 or 12 horses. That is a track operators problem. Do they know the trainers are manipulating things. Of course. It's the bane of the existence of any good racing secretary. However he desperately needs the very people he's so pissed at.

On many circuits the Secretary does have some leverage in the form of stall allocation. But at venues where short fields are a huge problem that goes out the window. The horsemen have the upper hand and they take full advantage of it.

[magwell]

People just want to gamble and complaining isn't going to change that, just look at the fantasy football scandal it doesn't matter that the player knows he is at a big disadvantage, they want the action and that's the bottom line, we horse players would still bet if the take was 30% on all bets .......:D

[Greyfox]

we horse players would still bet if the take was 30% on all bets .......:D

Only a few idiots would do that.

[Stillriledup]

People just want to gamble and complaining isn't going to change that, just look at the fantasy football scandal it doesn't matter that the player knows he is at a big disadvantage, they want the action and that's the bottom line, we horse players would still bet if the take was 30% on all bets .......:D

This is right, most people are in this gambling thing for action, they never harbor hopes of actually winning, so they don't get worked up over perceived injustices. It's the very small and mostly unvocal minority that seethes at the criminal behavior while chalking it up to a 'business expense'.

[castaway01]

Only a few idiots would do that.

Lottery has a 40%-plus take and people line up to play it.

[thespaah]

The sec. splits races in order to make the card. No sec. would split races if they were not forced to, do to the number of horses entered.

Yeah, vic's list. Haven't you read anything I have said about that bogus,phony,sensationalized list. You are choosing to believe his list because it feeds you rage. His list is crap. Big time race track insider. He can fool you, but he can't fool me. It is what I did for a living and this guy puts out a list and you treat it like it's the way it is. I say it's not and you tell me to look at his list. You enjoy that list and use it to blame everybody and everything you need to blame . That list is perfect for people like you.
Look....You were on the backstretch in the business. I am not discounting your input at all.
If you want to accuse me of anything it would be that I'm a bit cynical.
What I mean is I take things for what they are but always add in a good healthy dose of cynicism.
Please don't take this in a manner in which is not intended.
But, is it not possible there are things going on that you had no knowledge?
Or does the possibility exist that there were things of the nature which described are possible at all?
Anyway...My only issue is dealing with the apparent ease at which trainers can scratch.....
I wish to focus on that point.

[thespaah]

Nothing to see here, right? Just one example of millions.

Anyone think this is just harder working? Knowing where to place them? Friendly trainers scratching for him? Give me a break.

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/Secret%20Lies_zpsfyz75wal.png
the only blip on this horse's radar is Ness put him in a starter handicap and a surface change. Obviously over the head of the horse's ability. And she didn't like the turf( apparently)...

[thespaah]

The Stewards can only do so much. In fact the policing of these things has nothing to do with the Stewards. That's the job of the investigators. Stewards are finders of fact when a complaint has been filed and a licensee is brought to hearing.

As for what I've seen happen in many cases there is no violation. Is it a dark, dirty secret this takes place? Sure.

But try proving collusion. Good luck with that.

There's no rule banning excessive " legal " vet work.

Scratching a horse is very simple. Have your vet say he didn't eat his dinner the night before and spiked a temp when checked at 5:00am. There's not a state vet in the world and never will be that's is going to say. Nah, sounds fishy to me. You have to run him. Will never happen.

In fact to be perfectly honest. The stewards actually have no real interest in whether a field is 3 or 12 horses. That is a track operators problem. Do they know the trainers are manipulating things. Of course. It's the bane of the existence of any good racing secretary. However he desperately needs the very people he's so pissed at.

On many circuits the Secretary does have some leverage in the form of stall allocation. But at venues where short fields are a huge problem that goes out the window. The horsemen have the upper hand and they take full advantage of it.
Ok.. I have a question...Why doesn't the vet take the horse's temperature right then?.....And why not stroll over to the horse's stall and check for feces?
Reason for that is if there was nothing for the horse to digest( because he allegedly did not eat) there would be no "matter" in the stall. Plus, horses who are not eating typically drink less water. So an empty water bucket is a sign that horse did indeed eat up...
Of course slick people can easily change the conditions...
Anyway.....
There is one poster on here that insists nothing of what you suggest is going on or has ever occurred.

[v j stauffer]

Ok.. I have a question...Why doesn't the vet take the horse's temperature right then?.....And why not stroll over to the horse's stall and check for feces?
Reason for that is if there was nothing for the horse to digest( because he allegedly did not eat) there would be no "matter" in the stall. Plus, horses who are not eating typically drink less water. So an empty water bucket is a sign that horse did indeed eat up...
Of course slick people can easily change the conditions...
Anyway.....
There is one poster on here that insists nothing of what you suggest is going on or has ever occurred.

The state veterinarian checks every in today horse every morning. Most of those are to verify racing soundness with a jog and or flexing joints. What I think you guys are losing sight of is any trainer can scratch his horse anytime he chooses.

Whether the reason is true or contrived. The worst thing that will happen is the horse will be placed on the vet's list for 10 days. Some places have recently cut back to five days on the list before being eligible to re-enter.

Nobody is going to launch an investigation and start looking for clues as to whether the animal did or did not eat his dinner. There's no man power for that. It would be a wild goose chase.

The secretary knows that many of the scratches are BS. But there's really nothing he can do about it. A racetrack doesn't have to accept an entry so theoretically I suppose you could tell a guy to hit the road. But that's just cutting off one's nose to spite their face.

As for taking the horses temp right then. Again there's no time for that. Also if the horse was legitimately sick the personal vet will have already treated him several hours earlier with meds that are illegal on race day. Maybe an antibiotic if he suspects a possible infection and certainly a NASID ( non steroidal anti inflammatory drug) if the horse has spiked a temp. Those typically are Bute, Banamine or naproxen (aleve). All three are effective at reducing a fever.

[magwell]

Vic couldn't have explained that any better than he just did.......:ThmbUp::ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

[thespaah]

The state veterinarian checks every in today horse every morning. Most of those are to verify racing soundness with a jog and or flexing joints. What I think you guys are losing sight of is any trainer can scratch his horse anytime he chooses.

Whether the reason is true or contrived. The worst thing that will happen is the horse will be placed on the vet's list for 10 days. Some places have recently cut back to five days on the list before being eligible to re-enter.

Nobody is going to launch an investigation and start looking for clues as to whether the animal did or did not eat his dinner. There's no man power for that. It would be a wild goose chase.

The secretary knows that many of the scratches are BS. But there's really nothing he can do about it. A racetrack doesn't have to accept an entry so theoretically I suppose you could tell a guy to hit the road. But that's just cutting off one's nose to spite their face.

As for taking the horses temp right then. Again there's no time for that. Also if the horse was legitimately sick the personal vet will have already treated him several hours earlier with meds that are illegal on race day. Maybe an antibiotic if he suspects a possible infection and certainly a NASID ( non steroidal anti inflammatory drug) if the horse has spiked a temp. Those typically are Bute, Banamine or naproxen (aleve). All three are effective at reducing a fever.
Appreciate the explanation.....
So, right back to square one.
"Any trainer can scratch anytime he chooses."
That's the basis of my argument.
Why the rules permit this.
Once again( ad nauseum) I refer back to the rules in Harness racing. Generally, in order for a trainer to scratch, there must be a legitimate reason. And the acceptable reasons are few. Hence the reason why a typical 10-13 race card might have just one or two scratches through the card.
Now, there are some things that do not apply. One is there is no turf racing.
However, no one is questioning off the turf scratches.....
Perhaps the rules require adjustment.

[v j stauffer]

Appreciate the explanation.....
So, right back to square one.
"Any trainer can scratch anytime he chooses."
That's the basis of my argument.
Why the rules permit this.
Once again( ad nauseum) I refer back to the rules in Harness racing. Generally, in order for a trainer to scratch, there must be a legitimate reason. And the acceptable reasons are few. Hence the reason why a typical 10-13 race card might have just one or two scratches through the card.
Now, there are some things that do not apply. One is there is no turf racing.
However, no one is questioning off the turf scratches.....
Perhaps the rules require adjustment.

What's more legitimate than being sick?

[Saratoga_Mike]

What's more legitimate than being sick?

But he raises a good point: harness racing has far, far fewer scr's than t'bred racing. I understand t'breds are much more prone to issues, but that can't explain it all. Perhaps t'bred tracks could learn something from harness tracks on this front?

[Stillriledup]

But he raises a good point: harness racing has far, far fewer scr's than t'bred racing. I understand t'breds are much more prone to issues, but that can't explain it all. Perhaps t'bred tracks could learn something from harness tracks on this front?

They could learn, problem is that they're running races for the horsemen and not the bettors, so putting restrictions and or punishments for scratching is anti horsemen and that's not something tracks are interested in doing.

[cj]

They could learn, problem is that they're running races for the horsemen and not the bettors, so putting restrictions and or punishments for scratching is anti horsemen and that's not something tracks are interested in doing.

Serious question...how does a track punish the horsemen when they are already plagued by short fields? It is tough to get a decent field and people want to further restrict horses from running? How is that going to work?

Of course the best answer is only run races that you can fill and cut out those with small fields. But tracks are obligated by contract to run a certain amount of races. Until that changes, there isn't much I can see working.

[Stillriledup]

Serious question...how does a track punish the horsemen when they are already plagued by short fields? It is tough to get a decent field and people want to further restrict horses from running? How is that going to work?

Of course the best answer is only run races that you can fill and cut out those with small fields. But tracks are obligated by contract to run a certain amount of races. Until that changes, there isn't much I can see working.

That's not what I meant, let me clarify, I'm not suggesting horses get restricted from running, I'm just talking about entering horses that have no intention of running.

[cj]

That's not what I meant, let me clarify, I'm not suggesting horses get restricted from running, I'm just talking about entering horses that have no intention of running.


So what do you do? How do you stop that from happening? What is the punishment?

[cj]

So what do you do? How do you stop that from happening? What is the punishment?

Still holding on this one SRU. What do you do?

[v j stauffer]

Still holding on this one SRU. What do you do?

You're holding because there is no good answer. Not even from the fertile (izer) mind of the great SRU.

[Stillriledup]

So what do you do? How do you stop that from happening? What is the punishment?

There's lots of ways to stop fake entries, problem is that this is a horsemans game so tracks let these guys do what they want, they don't care if you enter horses who aren't going to run.

[thespaah]

What's more legitimate than being sick?
Nothing. But Saratoga Mike has a very good observation....

[cj]

There's lots of ways to stop fake entries, problem is that this is a horsemans game so tracks let these guys do what they want, they don't care if you enter horses who aren't going to run.

How do you stop it? "A lot of ways" isn't an answer. What would you do that is actually possible in the real world?

[Stillriledup]

How do you stop it? "A lot of ways" isn't an answer. What would you do that is actually possible in the real world?

You could fine an owner, fine a trainer, suspend the horse from re entering for 2 weeks, require a vet work to run again, etc.

[thespaah]

How do you stop it? "A lot of ways" isn't an answer. What would you do that is actually possible in the real world?
In evry group there are always individuals who take advantage of certain situations which benefit them.
My one idea to keep stats on scratches, find the "frequent scratcher" trainers. Once found out, first call them into the office of the person who is capable of putting the "fear of God" into that individual. Let them know that they are being watched. And if they keep it up, their hall pass from racing may become involuntary.

[Stillriledup]

In evry group there are always individuals who take advantage of certain situations which benefit them.
My one idea to keep stats on scratches, find the "frequent scratcher" trainers. Once found out, first call them into the office of the person who is capable of putting the "fear of God" into that individual. Let them know that they are being watched. And if they keep it up, their hall pass from racing may become involuntary.

Exactly. Like I said, there's lots of ways to deter this behavior if they wanted to.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Serious question...how does a track punish the horsemen when they are already plagued by short fields? It is tough to get a decent field and people want to further restrict horses from running? How is that going to work?

Of course the best answer is only run races that you can fill and cut out those with small fields. But tracks are obligated by contract to run a certain amount of races. Until that changes, there isn't much I can see working.

If every track in the country conducted business like a harness track (maybe Vic can call some of his harness friends and figure this matter out), then the problem would end. Why wouldn't it? Set the expectation (requirements) low and the outcome is whimsical scratches. Set the expectations (requirements) high and we end up with far fewer scratches--ala harness racing.

[cj]

If every track in the country conducted business like a harness track (maybe Vic can call some of his harness friends and figure this matter out), then the problem would end. Why wouldn't it? Set the expectation (requirements) low and the outcome is whimsical scratches. Set the expectations (requirements) high and we end up with far fewer scratches--ala harness racing.

I haven't followed harness racing much in years, but don't they pretty much race every week? What good does it do to scratch a horse that draws a bad post or tough field if you are just going to turn around and race it again next week?

[Stillriledup]

I haven't followed harness racing much in years, but don't they pretty much race every week? What good does it do to scratch a horse that draws a bad post or tough field if you are just going to turn around and race it again next week?

They won't scratch because if they don't race, they don't get money off the card. I think some harness tracks punish owners if they scratch from post 8, but I don't know the specific punishment offhand.

[cj]

In evry group there are always individuals who take advantage of certain situations which benefit them.
My one idea to keep stats on scratches, find the "frequent scratcher" trainers. Once found out, first call them into the office of the person who is capable of putting the "fear of God" into that individual. Let them know that they are being watched. And if they keep it up, their hall pass from racing may become involuntary.

Fair enough. It is pretty easy, for example, to identify Linda Rice as a frequent scratcher. But what good does it do the track to punish her? She just won't enter much and the same small fields result just without lines through horse's names.

So what next, take away stall allotments for her horses? How does that benefit NYRA when she has lots of horses?

[Track Phantom]

Fair enough. It is pretty easy, for example, to identify Linda Rice as a frequent scratcher. But what good does it do the track to punish her? She just won't enter much and the same small fields result just without lines through horse's names.

So what next, take away stall allotments for her horses? How does that benefit NYRA when she has lots of horses?

At some point, there has to be a good faith agreement with the trainers and the track. I don't think you can penalize every behavior.

If some trainers are consistently gaming the system, the track should reduce stalls but not until there are conversations and warnings to the situation. The trainer should know their behavior hurts the product and should have a chance to adjust. If they don't, then they aren't acting in good faith, and they should be phased out.

[Stillriledup]

Fair enough. It is pretty easy, for example, to identify Linda Rice as a frequent scratcher. But what good does it do the track to punish her? She just won't enter much and the same small fields result just without lines through horse's names.

So what next, take away stall allotments for her horses? How does that benefit NYRA when she has lots of horses?

If nothing changes, why not disallow entering horses that aren't going to run to help the horseplayer not have to waste time watching tapes on horses who aren't going to run? There's not an endless amount of time for people to Handicap, cappers can spend their handicapping time more productively.

[v j stauffer]

In evry group there are always individuals who take advantage of certain situations which benefit them.
My one idea to keep stats on scratches, find the "frequent scratcher" trainers. Once found out, first call them into the office of the person who is capable of putting the "fear of God" into that individual. Let them know that they are being watched. And if they keep it up, their hall pass from racing may become involuntary.

That happens. Carries a lot more weight at tracks that don't have to scratch and claw for every entry.

[mountainman]

At Mountaineer, we refer to unscrupulous manipulations on the part of trainers and agents as "reindeer games." And I have obsessed over them, been humiliated by them, struck blows against them, and testified about them.

As my archived blog "Superman Never Scratches" affirms, I've long considered this a serious cancer with the potential to rot our game from the inside out. With the blog I had hoped to spotlight the issue, rattle cages, and perhaps even offend and draw out some perpetrators. No chance. I'm not that widely read or important.

But, make no mistake, this problem continues to escalate EVERYWHERE, and sooner or later, the industry will be forced to confront and act on it. And this useful discussion is at least a start.

Way to go guys. Ponder it, debate it, complain about it, and don't let it drop. At least not for long. Unless you want to continue spending more and more time forming an opinion on entrants never intended to run, value that can never exist, and pace-scenarios that can never take shape. The faking MUST stop.

[thespaah]

Fair enough. It is pretty easy, for example, to identify Linda Rice as a frequent scratcher. But what good does it do the track to punish her? She just won't enter much and the same small fields result just without lines through horse's names.

So what next, take away stall allotments for her horses? How does that benefit NYRA when she has lots of horses?
Well, the track management can make examples out of those who scratch an inordinate or disproportional percentage of the time.
The other barns get the message that indiscriminately scratching horses will not be tolerated.

[cj]

Well, the track management can make examples out of those who scratch an inordinate or disproportional percentage of the time.
The other barns get the message that indiscriminately scratching horses will not be tolerated.


How do they make an example of her? About the only way I could think that would not hurt the track also is by steep fines, but is that even in the tracks power? I don't think so.

[castaway01]

How do they make an example of her? About the only way I could think that would not hurt the track also is by steep fines, but is that even in the tracks power? I don't think so.

Right---and if they could and did fine her, as long as other racetracks exist, she would just move to another track and run there. It's a very fine line to walk, where some sort of "persuasion" by the track not to scratch could help a bit, but any sort of heavier pressure/fines/punishment will only hurt the track (and field size, which after all was the start of this discussion). Like in the example of Linda Rice, who has literally run hundreds of horses at NYRA this year, how is bullying her off the grounds at all beneficial to NY racing? It's not.

[mountainman]

Joe and I have once or twice built reasonable cases against conspirators, but absolute proof is required, and our evidence didn't quite pass muster.

And let's be real, these people aren't going to walk in and confess. And the clever ways they come at you are sometimes incredible. Some agents, in particular, are just diabolical at planning this stuff and then covering their tracks.

Look, I'm not theorizing, I've dealt for real with these manipulations for a long time, and they STILL confound me. I will go to my GRAVE, for instance, never quite understanding why certain trainers undertake such cost and inconvenience just to appease and play ball with mere jocks agents.

And BELEVE me, these machinations have changed the balance of power among agents. At one time, obtaining live mounts already out there was enough to secure an agent's job. But it's my firm belief that certain riders NOW expect an agent to make races "go." And that's a service most honest agents simply can't provide.

[Donttellmeshowme]

Inflated % numbers are very possible without cheating. Here's how it's done.

1. Vet Work. I don't mean using illegal substances. I mean injecting every joint every time they run. A full lube job.

2. Screwing the association and racing office. Only entering or running when you know you're getting the very best of it. Looking at the race after it's been drawn and scratching unless you're totally confident. Bad post? Out. Too slow on numbers? Out. Track off? Out. Couple of sniffles or a cough or two but probably gonna be fine? Out. Too many in field? Out.

3. Having owner who will let you call the shots. Claiming for 10k and run back for 5k when the horse is fine*

4. Forming alliances with a select number of fellow top trainers. You scratch this time for me. I'll scratch next time for you**

5. Knowledge the gaudy % numbers will attract new blood into the game. Thereby allowing the trainer to burn em and churn em.

* No owner is going to just let you lose money for them. This is mitigated by being able to bet on the droppers. The high % trainer will tell his inner circle owners which ones are good and which ones are bad. The good ones on the drop become very reliable gambling investments to offset deficits in purse money.

** Nobody gets hurt. Except of course the tracks who are trying to put up good competitive fields. And the bettors who are forced to bet into those shit races.

30 to 35% TOTALLY doable without a needle.





And bingo we now have a winner.

[Donttellmeshowme]

Broberg has mastered the pharmaceutical side of it. He has the right connections in the veterinary industry. He know what he can use and where he can use it. It will be interesting to see how he does at Delta Downs this meet with the change in medication rules.




Business as usual. he will win the training title

[johnhannibalsmith]

Joe and I have once or twice built reasonable cases against conspirators, but absolute proof is required, and our evidence didn't quite pass muster.

And let's be real, these people aren't going to walk in and confess. And the clever ways they come at you are sometimes incredible. Some agents, in particular, are just diabolical at planning this stuff and then covering their tracks.

Look, I'm not theorizing, I've dealt for real with these manipulations for a long time, and they STILL confound me. I will go to my GRAVE, for instance, never quite understanding why certain trainers undertake such cost and inconvenience just to appease and play ball with mere jocks agents.

And BELEVE me, these machinations have changed the balance of power among agents. At one time, obtaining live mounts already out there was enough to secure an agent's job. But it's my firm belief that certain riders NOW expect an agent to make races "go." And that's a service most honest agents simply can't provide.

Sharp post.

[v j stauffer]

How do they make an example of her? About the only way I could think that would not hurt the track also is by steep fines, but is that even in the tracks power? I don't think so.

It's not. Fines can be levied by the stewards only.

[v j stauffer]

Broberg has mastered the pharmaceutical side of it. He has the right connections in the veterinary industry. He know what he can use and where he can use it. It will be interesting to see how he does at Delta Downs this meet with the change in medication rules.

Interesting post. Written as though you have first hand knowledge on this matter.

You involved many people in these allegations.

Do you have proof of these claims or is it simply your opinion?

Pretty volatile stuff.

[PaceAdvantage]

Interesting post. Written as though you have first hand knowledge on this matter.

You involved many people in these allegations.

Do you have proof of these claims or is it simply your opinion?

Pretty volatile stuff.In truth, he could have easily been talking about perfectly 100% legal medications, which is why I left the reply up.

[Hoofless_Wonder]

Joe and I have once or twice built reasonable cases against conspirators, but absolute proof is required, and our evidence didn't quite pass muster.

And let's be real, these people aren't going to walk in and confess. And the clever ways they come at you are sometimes incredible. Some agents, in particular, are just diabolical at planning this stuff and then covering their tracks.

Look, I'm not theorizing, I've dealt for real with these manipulations for a long time, and they STILL confound me. I will go to my GRAVE, for instance, never quite understanding why certain trainers undertake such cost and inconvenience just to appease and play ball with mere jocks agents.

And BELEVE me, these machinations have changed the balance of power among agents. At one time, obtaining live mounts already out there was enough to secure an agent's job. But it's my firm belief that certain riders NOW expect an agent to make races "go." And that's a service most honest agents simply can't provide.

This is rather sobering. Doesn't the old adage "follow the money" apply to understand what's going on?

Almost seems like the results are as random as World Wrestling Federation..... :confused:

[v j stauffer]

In truth, he could have easily been talking about perfectly 100% legal medications, which is why I left the reply up.

You're right. Good point.

[Track Phantom]

This is almost laughable.

How does this trainer accept the trophy and the check with a straight face?

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/Trouble%20Kid_1900x457_zpszpnge1az.jpg

[cj]

Would be interesting to see this horse ship out to a real track, but it probably won't happen.

[Jeff P]

Inflated % numbers are very possible without cheating. Here's how it's done.

1. Vet Work. I don't mean using illegal substances. I mean injecting every joint every time they run. A full lube job.

2. Screwing the association and racing office. Only entering or running when you know you're getting the very best of it. Looking at the race after it's been drawn and scratching unless you're totally confident. Bad post? Out. Too slow on numbers? Out. Track off? Out. Couple of sniffles or a cough or two but probably gonna be fine? Out. Too many in field? Out.

3. Having owner who will let you call the shots. Claiming for 10k and run back for 5k when the horse is fine*

4. Forming alliances with a select number of fellow top trainers. You scratch this time for me. I'll scratch next time for you**

5. Knowledge the gaudy % numbers will attract new blood into the game. Thereby allowing the trainer to burn em and churn em.

* No owner is going to just let you lose money for them. This is mitigated by being able to bet on the droppers. The high % trainer will tell his inner circle owners which ones are good and which ones are bad. The good ones on the drop become very reliable gambling investments to offset deficits in purse money.

** Nobody gets hurt. Except of course the tracks who are trying to put up good competitive fields. And the bettors who are forced to bet into those shit races.

30 to 35% TOTALLY doable without a needle.I agree that 30 to 35% is possible using the above.


That said, I wanted to touch on the following:1. Vet Work. I don't mean using illegal substances. I mean injecting every joint every time they run. A full lube job.Isn't this practice detrimental to the horse? (I've been told by vets that you can only tap a joint so many times before you do damage to it.)

If this is true, shouldn't state racing commissions be more aggressive about working to curtail this practice?

If state racing commissions are going to allow this practice, instead of turning a blind eye to it like they do now - shouldn't they (from a welfare of the horse and from an integrity of the game standpoint) be working to get rules in place to (at the very least) disclose this practice to the betting public much like they have for 'reported gelded since last start' or '1st time lasix?'



-jp

.

[Tom]

This is almost laughable.

How does this trainer accept the trophy and the check with a straight face?



Holy Shifty Sheik, Batman! :eek:

[Kash$]

Holy Shifty Sheik, Batman! :eek:

Holy King Swan,Batman!

[no breathalyzer]

This is almost laughable.

How does this trainer accept the trophy and the check with a straight face?

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/Trouble%20Kid_1900x457_zpszpnge1az.jpg


Seems legit :lol:

[Stillriledup]

This is almost laughable.

How does this trainer accept the trophy and the check with a straight face?

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/Trouble%20Kid_1900x457_zpszpnge1az.jpg

One of 2 things should happen here.

1) have authorities show up at the guys barn w handcuffs and lead him off to jail.

2) immediately induct him into the hall of fame.

[thaskalos]

This is almost laughable.

How does this trainer accept the trophy and the check with a straight face?

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/Trouble%20Kid_1900x457_zpszpnge1az.jpg
And how do the horse's previous trainers keep quiet in cases like these? What do they do...just shrug their shoulders and say: "Well...that's how it goes."?

[Stillriledup]

And how do the horse's previous trainers keep quiet in cases like these? What do they do...just shrug their shoulders and say: "Well...that's how it goes."?

They keep quiet because they're hoping 'Ohhhh' Ramon will mention them in his HOF speech as 'driving forces' in his induction. you can't ever underestimate the joy one might receive at getting your name mentioned in 'Cooperstown' by an all time great trainer during his induction.

[cj]

Maybe the 1st trainer isn't any good? It isn't like this is the first time a trainer has claimed a horse and turned it into stakes winner, been going on for many decades.

[Track Phantom]

Maybe the 1st trainer isn't any good? It isn't like this is the first time a trainer has claimed a horse and turned it into stakes winner, been going on for many decades.
He claimed a multiple beaten maiden claimer and within 20 days moved this horse up 30 lengths. Within 7 weeks set the track record at Delaware. Within 10 weeks was a graded stakes winner.

I know there have been many claims that turned into superstars (John Henry, Lava Man, etc) but how many made this dramatic improvement so quickly? If there are some that made this dramatic improvement, how many came pre-1998 (drug era) and how many came after?

[cj]

He claimed a multiple beaten maiden claimer and within 20 days moved this horse up 30 lengths. Within 7 weeks set the track record at Delaware. Within 10 weeks was a graded stakes winner.

I know there have been many claims that turned into superstars (John Henry, Lava Man, etc) but how many made this dramatic improvement so quickly? If there are some that made this dramatic improvement, how many came pre-1998 (drug era) and how many came after?

I would argue that I don't think there is anyway any illegal drug alone could move a horse up like that. There had to be more to it than medication.

[Track Phantom]

I would argue that I don't think there is anyway any illegal drug alone could move a horse up like that. There had to be more to it than medication.
This is likely very true. And I would concede for the sake of argument that the trainer is a top horseman that used his expertise to improve the horse in very legal ways.

However, I think the overarching reason for this horse moving up so dramatically is a PED of some kind. Since we don't know what he did with the horse, we cannot know for sure. But if you lined up everything he did with this horse since he took him over and pulled just one of those things out of the equation, there would be just ONE that would revert him back to his former self (if that makes any sense).

[Stillriledup]

This is likely very true. And I would concede for the sake of argument that the trainer is a top horseman that used his expertise to improve the horse in very legal ways.

However, I think the overarching reason for this horse moving up so dramatically is a PED of some kind. Since we don't know what he did with the horse, we cannot know for sure. But if you lined up everything he did with this horse since he took him over and pulled just one of those things out of the equation, there would be just ONE that would revert him back to his former self (if that makes any sense).

It makes sense because there are plenty of examples of horses who go from the supertrainer to someone mortal and lose 30 or 40 Beyer pts overnight.

[cj]

There are horses that don't change trainers at all that lose 30-40 Beyer points overnight.

[thaskalos]

Consistently? Where?

[EMD4ME]

This is almost laughable.

How does this trainer accept the trophy and the check with a straight face?

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/Trouble%20Kid_1900x457_zpszpnge1az.jpg

Simply amazing that anyone could defend this...

Really? Really? Really? Really? Really? Really? Really? Really?

[Stillriledup]

Simply amazing that anyone could defend this...

Really? Really? Really? Really? Really? Really? Really? Really?

Really.

Parx has a zero tolerance slaughter policy which is admirable, unfortunately, this is where admirable ends for them.

[EMD4ME]

Really.

Parx has a zero tolerance slaughter policy which is admirable, unfortunately, this is where admirable ends for them.


No one here is new to this game or naive. One look and you know what the deal is with this horse.

Odds are, it's not deja vu, where Mott realized the horse needed a surface change and voila, Cigar occurred.

It's not like the new trainer saw a 5th leg and said, let's cut it off.

We all know how and why this amazing improvement occurred.

[Stillriledup]

'The Legend' Navarro hitting 55 pct at 'Calder'

[Hambletonian]

we are the ones to blame for all of this. we accept it, the big bettors couldn't give a crap as long as it is quantifiable.

we make excuses, constant excuses of "you have no proof, positive test, etc, nothing untoward is going on" etc. just good horsemanship.

i am a probability guy. i want my return to exceed the risk I am taking. the pps of that horse defy rational explanation. the probability that everything is on the up and up is practically nil.

its like Pena on the harness side, improving a horse 3 seconds in a week. it would be like an Olympic miler taking 10 seconds off his best time.

but we just accept it.

there has always been chicanery in horse racing, like every other pursuit involving money. but what goes on now is just absurd.

i am still a fan, still watch races, but my betting has gone from 50k or more a year to practically nothing. between supertrainers and the guys who get to use a computer program to make a thousand bets straight into the mainframe a millisecond before post time, you would have to be an idiot to invest one dime you really don't want lose in this game now.

it is really depressing, I started attending the races when I was 6, handicapping when i was 10, but I have a sinking suspicion I wont be depressed for long because horse racing has virtually no utility without slots revenue. once that plug is pulled, the end will be quick and painless.

[Stillriledup]

we are the ones to blame for all of this. we accept it, the big bettors couldn't give a crap as long as it is quantifiable.

we make excuses, constant excuses of "you have no proof, positive test, etc, nothing untoward is going on" etc. just good horsemanship.

i am a probability guy. i want my return to exceed the risk I am taking. the pps of that horse defy rational explanation. the probability that everything is on the up and up is practically nil.

its like Pena on the harness side, improving a horse 3 seconds in a week. it would be like an Olympic miler taking 10 seconds off his best time.

but we just accept it.

there has always been chicanery in horse racing, like every other pursuit involving money. but what goes on now is just absurd.

i am still a fan, still watch races, but my betting has gone from 50k or more a year to practically nothing. between supertrainers and the guys who get to use a computer program to make a thousand bets straight into the mainframe a millisecond before post time, you would have to be an idiot to invest one dime you really don't want lose in this game now.

it is really depressing, I started attending the races when I was 6, handicapping when i was 10, but I have a sinking suspicion I wont be depressed for long because horse racing has virtually no utility without slots revenue. once that plug is pulled, the end will be quick and painless.

Exactly, we accept it. Nobody who has the power to do anything about it ever does.

[PaceAdvantage]

Oh look...more of the same after I just finished writing in the Broberg thread... :rolleyes:

Thanks for catching this one too fellas...where would we be without ya'll posting about the same thing all the time, then congratulating yourselves for watching the backs of the uninformed player... :lol: