Belmont Opening RUMORED to be Memorial Day Weekend

[Secondbest]

FWIW. Anthony Stabile on WfAN radio this morning. He said the big rumor on the backstretch is Belmont will open on Friday
May 22. We shall see.

[PaceAdvantage]

Of course it will be...

Anybody who thinks they won't be racing at Belmont and Saratoga this year is delusional.

[dilanesp]

Of course it will be...

Anybody who thinks they won't be racing at Belmont and Saratoga this year is delusional.

Well you are half right.

[classhandicapper]

Opening Belmont without fans makes WAY more sense to me than going to Saratoga. The horsemen, backstretch workers, and horses are already there. They are already located relatively to close to the center of the outbreak. There won't be much incremental risk or expense to open Belmont with any kind of solid plan for distancing, masks, etc.. for anyone else that is required to go there to put on the show, which I'm sure they have. Bring it on. I have a piece of a couple of horses that will be ready to roll in 4-6 weeks.

[CheckMark]

I'm still thinking a Saratoga at Belmont meet would be cool! Probably in my wildest dreams though :pound:

[dilanesp]

I'm still thinking a Saratoga at Belmont meet would be cool! Probably in my wildest dreams though :pound:

You will very likely get your wish, and/or Saratoga at Aqueduct.

[cj]

Of course it will be...

Anybody who thinks they won't be racing at Belmont and Saratoga this year is delusional.

I added the rumored because it isn't official. The original poster used rumor so I added it in.

[cj]

You will very likely get your wish, and/or Saratoga at Aqueduct.

I suspect you could be right, but you do really need to post it ad nauseum?

[Tom]

NOW, the important questions....

What about the Belmont?

Will Met Mile go back to Memorial Day Card....that would seem to be a card that will a perfect opportunity for BIG day of BIG races.

Will there be enough horses ready to run to fill BIG races?

Gee, talking racing again....whodathinkit? :p

[Secondbest]

Opening Belmont without fans makes WAY more sense to me than going to Saratoga. The horsemen, backstretch workers, and horses are already there. They are already located relatively to close to the center of the outbreak. There won't be much incremental risk or expense to open Belmont with any kind of solid plan for distancing, masks, etc.. for anyone else that is required to go there to put on the show, which I'm sure they have. Bring it on. I have a piece of a couple of horses that will be ready to roll in 4-6 weeks.

Except for a few days a year nobody goes to Belmont anyway.
So they might as well run.

[classhandicapper]

Except for a few days a year nobody goes to Belmont anyway.
So they might as well run.

I hear you. The place is massively underutilized.

I'm one of the guys that still goes on beautiful sunny days.

You can find me near the paddock looking at the horses for the upcoming race or sitting on a bench near the tote board in that area contemplating a bet. For me, a sunny day at Belmont in the back yard is like a brief glimpse of heaven. At 61 and retired last year, I'm not happy about not being able to enjoy this time the way I hoped.

[the little guy]

I suspect you could be right, but you do really need to post it ad nauseum?

You got half of that right:-)

[thaskalos]

Dilanesp's knowledge knows no bounds. It spreads coast to coast. :ThmbUp:

[Publius]

Belmont Park Opening Day on Friday May 22nd will be a breath of fresh air for many. It will be a fantastic start to Memorial Day weekend.

[Boomer]

Belmont Park Opening Day on Friday May 22nd will be a breath of fresh air for many. It will be a fantastic start to Memorial Day weekend.


If people could only go there would be a massive crowd. Maybe they will loosen it up for Memorial Day.


Enough is enough with the mass isolation. I know NY has been hit hard, but still only a specific population. I went swimming in the Atlantic Ocean a few hours ago in Jax Beach......Legally!


Whe I get diagnosed for Corona...I'll let you all know before anyone else.



If Tampa Bay Downs let people in I would be there tomorrow. Starving for live racing!

[dilanesp]

NOW, the important questions....

What about the Belmont?

Will Met Mile go back to Memorial Day Card....that would seem to be a card that will a perfect opportunity for BIG day of BIG races.

Will there be enough horses ready to run to fill BIG races?

Gee, talking racing again....whodathinkit? :p

I would imagine New York Racing, especially at a time when some other big tracks are still closed, is going to be very high quality.

[dilanesp]

Except for a few days a year nobody goes to Belmont anyway.
So they might as well run.

It's sad, really. It's one of most beautiful tracks in the world.

[Secondbest]

I hear you. The place is massively underutilized.

I'm one of the guys that still goes on beautiful sunny days.

You can find me near the paddock looking at the horses for the upcoming race or sitting on a bench near the tote board in that area contemplating a bet. For me, a sunny day at Belmont in the back yard is like a brief glimpse of heaven. At 61 and retired last year, I'm not happy about not being able to enjoy this time the way I hoped.

I know how you feel. When I retired 13 years ago , I'm 72, that was part of my plan. But after a few years no more sun for me. Sitting under those big trees in the shade I could never handicap or bet. I would just nod off. So into into the grandstand. Cheer up as soon as this goes away you'll be back by the paddock. Maybe I'll see you there. I'll be one of the old guys with a big hat.

[Tom]

Dilanesp's knowledge knows no bounds. It spreads coast to coast. :ThmbUp:

The curve that cannot be flattened!

[SaratogaSteve]

The curve that cannot be flattened!

:lol::lol:

[Afleet]

I hear you. The place is massively underutilized.

I'm one of the guys that still goes on beautiful sunny days.

You can find me near the paddock looking at the horses for the upcoming race or sitting on a bench near the tote board in that area contemplating a bet. For me, a sunny day at Belmont in the back yard is like a brief glimpse of heaven. At 61 and retired last year, I'm not happy about not being able to enjoy this time the way I hoped.

that sounds like a good time to me!

[drib]

Running a fan-less Saratoga meet seems very questionable. The only benefit I can see is the possible increase in handle, though I maintain the notion that the exact same race in August at Belmont would draw significantly less $ is shaky. On the negative side, racing at Saratoga would entail moving three to five thousand people (families included) from an area with high virus exposure. Consider that the whole disastrous Italian outbreak has been traced to a small number of travelers from China. Here is another point from a long time NY trainer:


Pinned Tweet
Gary Contessa
@GaryContessa
Ok, right now many trainers are on life support financially. The expenses of moving to Saratoga for two months are staggering. Saratoga is all about the people. If the decision is to race without people, why not stay home and run a Saratoga at Belmont meet? Let everyone heal.

[classhandicapper]

Pinned Tweet
Gary Contessa
@GaryContessa
Ok, right now many trainers are on life support financially. The expenses of moving to Saratoga for two months are staggering. Saratoga is all about the people. If the decision is to race without people, why not stay home and run a Saratoga at Belmont meet? Let everyone heal.

I've been saying this since the start of the discussion. No one has been talking about the incremental expense of shipping and living up there.

Even if there is some benefit to the "Saratoga" brand, (which I personally doubt is significant when it comes to off track wagering) you still have to question whether it's enough to make up for the extra expense and incremental risk. I'm glad someone is actually talking about it. I'm sure he knows the amounts. I was just generalizing.

[GMB@BP]

I've been saying this since the start of the discussion. No one has been talking about the incremental expense of shipping and living up there.

Even if there is some benefit to the "Saratoga" brand, (which I personally doubt is significant when it comes to off track wagering) you still have to question whether it's enough to make up for the extra expense and incremental risk. I'm glad someone is actually talking about it. I'm sure he knows the amounts. I was just generalizing.

may also not be a good idea to bring together the sheer amount of shippers from around the country as different parts of the country are on different paths of peak Covid spread.

[AndyC]

may also not be a good idea to bring together the sheer amount of shippers from around the country as different parts of the country are on different paths of peak Covid spread.

By the time Saratoga is due to start will there be anybody left to infect? It would seem that testing of the shippers would be a logical move, both human and horses.

[RunForTheRoses]

Not sure if this was posted elsewhere but Monmouth opens July 4th.

[Clocker]

Even if there is some benefit to the "Saratoga" brand, (which I personally doubt is significant when it comes to off track wagering)


Agree. With 3-5 tracks racing on any given day, any NY track is going to be the top brand on the market. Especially with the west coast shut down.

P.S. The big brand for tomorrow, Monday, is Will Rogers. :cool:

[NTamm1215]

Why are we even discussing whether there would be a difference in handle between Saratoga and Saratoga at Belmont? This is very basic and VERY simple. Saratoga is the strongest brand in the sport. It commands the most attention from every stakeholder. You can’t run it elsewhere and expect the same results. Look at the off-track handle figs. I took a record Belmont Saturday and compared it with a new Saratoga Saturday and the difference was almost 10%.

And the “Will Rogers and Fonner handle proves people will bet on anything” argument is not applicable. There are two tracks running on those days and everyone is locked at home.

[Redbullsnation]

We hope. God knows what will they do with some of the stake races that were unable to run on Aquaduct (maybe move the Wood Memorial to Belmont for 1 year only?). But yeah. Belmont is coming back soon. Bills need to be paid baby...


Johnny I calling the Belmont is gonna be a weird thought tho

[classhandicapper]

Why are we even discussing whether there would be a difference in handle between Saratoga and Saratoga at Belmont? This is very basic and VERY simple. Saratoga is the strongest brand in the sport. It commands the most attention from every stakeholder. You can’t run it elsewhere and expect the same results. Look at the off-track handle figs. I took a record Belmont Saturday and compared it with a new Saratoga Saturday and the difference was almost 10%.


In terms of revenue, part of the formula is how much you handle on/off track, part of the formula is the quality of the races, and part of it is number of starters.

All those things must be considered, but we are getting bits and pieces of each from people trying to justify the move and not a total analysis that includes COSTS (which has been my point) and RISKS.

Maybe a valid analysis exists at NYRA, but it wasn't in that article that was posted and I surely don't know it.

Saratoga has many of the premier races of the sport each year, the typical card is of much higher quality than Belmont, and there are more starters per race. That's what created the brand over and above the beauty of the track and town (which won't be in play if there are no fans).

Do you think the Travers, Alabama, Whitney, Woodward, and other Grade 1 race cards of that caliber are going to handle a lot less off track if they are at Belmont?

They might handle less, but imo the difference would be a lot less off track than you are implying with quality cards like that compared to what's typically run at Belmont (all else being equal).

So the question is whether all the incremental expenses and possible incremental risk is worth it to move trainers, families, equipment, and other backstretch workers to Saratoga just so they can do none of the things that make Saratoga special when they can run the same races at Belmont from the safety of their own homes and save money.

I don't know all the costs, but Gary Contessa does. He appears to want to stay home. I can't blame him. That's why I brought up the cost side. No one else was. If things turn around enough in the next month or so that having some fans is a consideration, then it's an entirely different story. As is, IMO it's close call.

[Clocker]

This is very basic and VERY simple. Saratoga is the strongest brand in the sport. It commands the most attention from every stakeholder. You can’t run it elsewhere and expect the same results.


I don't know what the brand reference means, or how to measure it. I have been playing horses most days for years, and have no particular feeling about Saratoga superiority. I look at the entries every day and play or don't play Saratoga based on how I feel about that card compared to other tracks.


You can’t run it elsewhere and expect the same results. True. And running it at Saratoga without fans is running it elsewhere, and you can't predict the results. I fail to see how running at Saratoga or running Saratoga at Belmont could have any effect on me as an on-line player. And there are obvious advantages to the horsemen, at a time when they need every advantage they can get to keep the sport alive.

[GMB@BP]

A non-Saratoga Saratoga....who are these people saying it would handle the same?

[dilanesp]

And running it at Saratoga without fans is running it elsewhere, and you can't predict the results.

This seems like a rather obvious point.

The other thing to remember is that everything these days has to meet approval from government officials. Nobody's getting to make pure business decisions. The decisionmakers who will ultimately have to authorize NYRA going up to Saratoga are people who really aren't going to be swayed by arguments about handle and marketing.

[PaceAdvantage]

This seems like a rather obvious point.

The other thing to remember is that everything these days has to meet approval from government officials. Nobody's getting to make pure business decisions. The decisionmakers who will ultimately have to authorize NYRA going up to Saratoga are people who really aren't going to be swayed by arguments about handle and marketing.Curious...at what point, if ever, does this come into effect:

https://www.justice.gov/crt/deprivation-rights-under-color-law

[drib]

Why are we even discussing whether there would be a difference in handle between Saratoga and Saratoga at Belmont? This is very basic and VERY simple. Saratoga is the strongest brand in the sport. It commands the most attention from every stakeholder. You can’t run it elsewhere and expect the same results. Look at the off-track handle figs. I took a record Belmont Saturday and compared it with a new Saratoga Saturday and the difference was almost 10%.

And the “Will Rogers and Fonner handle proves people will bet on anything” argument is not applicable. There are two tracks running on those days and everyone is locked at home.

I find this argument puzzling. You are saying that if everything were identical: date of race (mid July-Aug), horses, race conditions; jockeys, trainers etc., the simulcast horseplayer would bet more if the TV logo said Saratoga. I mentioned on another thread that, while the Saratoga, and Belmont main tracks are fairly comparable (Saratoga offers 2 turn 1 1/8 miles, but Belmont has much greater variety of distances, especially one mile racing), there is no doubt that the Belmont turf courses are better from a competitive viewpoint. It is impossible to simply compare handles (only off track of course) b/c June/July at Belmont not comparable to Saratoga.
Looking past the possible handle differences (even "almost 10%"), how about the trainer Contessa quote? Moving 1500 horses upstate has to cost over half a million, but the expense of relocating everyone involved must cost several million more. Who will foot this bill? Obviously, it all works when Toga rocking with fans, but, now, with trainers and owners wilting (like a lot of society), does it make sense?

[dilanesp]

Curious...at what point, if ever, does this come into effect:

https://www.justice.gov/crt/deprivation-rights-under-color-law

Never. As long as the government has a rational basis for shutting down businesses, which the pandemic provides, and doesn't discriminate against a protected class, there's no due process violations.

I might add that NYRA probably has a second problem. The courts have consistently treated NYRA as part of NY State government for 50 years. NYRA hates this, but it's the law. So how would NYRA have standing to sue the state for violating its due process rights? How would NYRA even have due process rights?

[PaceAdvantage]

Never. As long as the government has a rational basis for shutting down businesses, which the pandemic provides, and doesn't discriminate against a protected class, there's no due process violations.And who, exactly, determines if the government (in this case, the state) has a rational basis for shutting down businesses?

At the beginning of a pandemic, sure, it's tough to make the argument the state is not acting rationally.

How about a couple of months later? How about 5-6 months later?

Who is the arbiter of such conflicts?

I'm thinking that you aren't thinking this through.

You mention precedent a LOT in our discussions about this matter.

However, how much precedent exists for what we are going through today?

When was the last time large swaths of the economy were shut down for extended periods of time by state governors? Can you remember any? Due to a pandemic?

How much precedent REALLY exists for something like this?

[NTamm1215]

I find this argument puzzling. You are saying that if everything were identical: date of race (mid July-Aug), horses, race conditions; jockeys, trainers etc., the simulcast horseplayer would bet more if the TV logo said Saratoga. I mentioned on another thread that, while the Saratoga, and Belmont main tracks are fairly comparable (Saratoga offers 2 turn 1 1/8 miles, but Belmont has much greater variety of distances, especially one mile racing), there is no doubt that the Belmont turf courses are better from a competitive viewpoint. It is impossible to simply compare handles (only off track of course) b/c June/July at Belmont not comparable to Saratoga.
Looking past the possible handle differences (even "almost 10%"), how about the trainer Contessa quote? Moving 1500 horses upstate has to cost over half a million, but the expense of relocating everyone involved must cost several million more. Who will foot this bill? Obviously, it all works when Toga rocking with fans, but, now, with trainers and owners wilting (like a lot of society), does it make sense?

Gary Contessa's opinion matters to NYRA about as much as that of Dilanesp. Hell, they had roughly the same win percentage at Saratoga last year.

First, to answer your question, yes. Put the same field in the gate for the same race at the same distance at Belmont and Saratoga and it is 100% handling more at Saratoga.

More importantly, if you don't run at Saratoga, the racing at Belmont will NEVER be of the same caliber during that time period. Even if you bumped the purses up for the "Saratoga at Belmont" portion of the meet. Kentucky horsemen are not going to ship horses to Belmont for a "Saratoga at Belmont" meet. The prestige and allure of winning at Saratoga is gone. I understand the hang-ups for the virus, but it's ridiculous to conjecture about that in early May when the meet we're talking about is 10 weeks away. We have no idea what the situation will be in six weeks, though many people would like to see us quarantine for the next 4 years.

If you don't think these things are real, then why did Gulfstream destroy Calder handle-wise when they were running the same races in 2013? Why does Del Mar handle more than Santa Anita? Why could you run the exact same race on a Thursday afternoon in late September at CD and it'll get out-handled easily by a comparable race in October at Keeneland?

Certain tracks have appeal that others do not.

[NTamm1215]

I don't know what the brand reference means, or how to measure it. I have been playing horses most days for years, and have no particular feeling about Saratoga superiority. I look at the entries every day and play or don't play Saratoga based on how I feel about that card compared to other tracks.


True. And running it at Saratoga without fans is running it elsewhere, and you can't predict the results. I fail to see how running at Saratoga or running Saratoga at Belmont could have any effect on me as an on-line player. And there are obvious advantages to the horsemen, at a time when they need every advantage they can get to keep the sport alive.

Cool story. You are clearly the exception to the rule.

[classhandicapper]

Gary Contessa's opinion matters to NYRA about as much as that of Dilanesp. Hell, they had roughly the same win percentage at Saratoga last year.

More importantly, if you don't run at Saratoga, the racing at Belmont will NEVER be of the same caliber during that time period. Even if you bumped the purses up for the "Saratoga at Belmont" portion of the meet. Kentucky horsemen are not going to ship horses to Belmont for a "Saratoga at Belmont" meet. The prestige and allure of winning at Saratoga is gone. I understand the hang-ups for the virus,

Gary Contessa's opinion may mean little to NYRA, but the mathematics of moving trainers, horses, their families, backstretch employees, and equipment are 100% certain and apply to virtually everyone going there. That even includes a total non entity like me that might ship two horses up there that I own 10% of.

Unless things change, in all probability I won't be able to see them race, won't be able to attend the races, won't vacation there, and won't be hanging out in town restaurants and bars the way I usually do.

Why spend the extra money to ship to Sataoga?

And my extra expense won't even be close to trainers, their families, and others where the costs are significant.

Because of the Saratoga logo?

If we do it, it will be against our wishes.

I agree that if they ran Saratoga at Belmont the purses would have to be the same, but I see no reason they wouldn't be except for some funky "brand math" that may not even be accurate.

I see no reason people from KY, CA, and elsewhere won't ship in to Belmont to win prestigious races like the Travers, Whitney, Alabama etc.. because of the logo. Those races would have enormous value to whoever wins them no matter where they are run.

There is a 0% chance my handle will be different at Belmont vs Saratoga on the typical day given the same races.

Trainers are shipping top horses to OP from everywhere now because they are seeking out the best opportunity available. Saratoga at Belmont would still be the best game in town in the east and the best game in the entire country on many big race days.

I'm not trying to be a pain in the ass here, but the pro Saratoga people are making branding handle "assumptions" and not thinking about costs and risks which are certain at all.

The better argument in favor of Saratoga is that the Belmont turf courses won't be able to handle the load and will need a break.

[drib]

Gary Contessa's opinion matters to NYRA about as much as that of Dilanesp. Hell, they had roughly the same win percentage at Saratoga last year.

First, to answer your question, yes. Put the same field in the gate for the same race at the same distance at Belmont and Saratoga and it is 100% handling more at Saratoga.

More importantly, if you don't run at Saratoga, the racing at Belmont will NEVER be of the same caliber during that time period. Even if you bumped the purses up for the "Saratoga at Belmont" portion of the meet. Kentucky horsemen are not going to ship horses to Belmont for a "Saratoga at Belmont" meet. The prestige and allure of winning at Saratoga is gone. I understand the hang-ups for the virus, but it's ridiculous to conjecture about that in early May when the meet we're talking about is 10 weeks away. We have no idea what the situation will be in six weeks, though many people would like to see us quarantine for the next 4 years.

If you don't think these things are real, then why did Gulfstream destroy Calder handle-wise when they were running the same races in 2013? Why does Del Mar handle more than Santa Anita? Why could you run the exact same race on a Thursday afternoon in late September at CD and it'll get out-handled easily by a comparable race in October at Keeneland?

Certain tracks have appeal that others do not.

I agree with you about the "prestige and glory" of Saratoga....but not so sure when the stands are a ghost town, and owners/breeders are not even allowed on the backstretch. I am surprised how little you value a trainer like Contessa (74 starters at the Spa last year). I can think of 20-30 similar guys who help fill out cards. You fail to recognize the unusual nature of this coming summer. The industry in NY has now missed 2 months worth of racing, with zero income for owners and trainers. I can easily see many of these type trainers deciding to stay at Belmont, even should racing move upstate, They each would save tens of thousands plus there will be no owners to entertain anyway. You mention Kentucky shippers. Earlier I posted an article from Louisville speculating that Keeneland might run a summer meet; in addition, I doubt anyone is rushing on airplanes to fly into Albany. Consider also that Monmouth has announced a meet starting July 4. With a shortened season, my guess is the purses will be strong, and one no longer has to beat Servis and Navarro. What will happen to Saratoga field size????

[dilanesp]

And who, exactly, determines if the government (in this case, the state) has a rational basis for shutting down businesses?

At the beginning of a pandemic, sure, it's tough to make the argument the state is not acting rationally.

How about a couple of months later? How about 5-6 months later?

Who is the arbiter of such conflicts?

I'm thinking that you aren't thinking this through.

You mention precedent a LOT in our discussions about this matter.

However, how much precedent exists for what we are going through today?

When was the last time large swaths of the economy were shut down for extended periods of time by state governors? Can you remember any? Due to a pandemic?

How much precedent REALLY exists for something like this?

When you are under rational basis review, the government always wins, PA.

Using the courts is a fantasy. If someone has a religion claim, fine, they are open for that. But everyone else is losing their suits. There's really not much constitutional protection for operating a business in a pandemic. These cases are losers.

[Tom]

You sure seem to see no reason to have courts - just follow the law lock-step and everything vill ve fine!

[dilanesp]

You sure seem to see no reason to have courts - just follow the law lock-step and everything vill ve fine!

The courts follow the law. The law, developed in prior epidemics, says the government has this power.

You guys have to convince elected officials of your arguments. And in some places, the elected officials are relaxing restrictions. So there's no denial of access to the political process here.

What has happened here is very simple- 18,000 people have died in New York State. The politicians are listening to scientists because there's a killer virus on the loose. And the polls show the public is on their side.

No court is going to step into that situation. You have to convince your fellow citizens in New York that this is no longer a big deal and the risk to people's lives is worth taking. That's the only way you can have your preferences enacted.

[Secondbest]

Does anyone know if there has actually been a suit in court. State or Federal over lockdown authority.

[Secondbest]

Does anyone know if there has actually been a suit in court. State or Federal over lockdown authority.

Off topic. My bad

[Clocker]

Even if you bumped the purses up for the "Saratoga at Belmont" portion of the meet. Kentucky horsemen are not going to ship horses to Belmont for a "Saratoga at Belmont" meet. The prestige and allure of winning at Saratoga is gone.


Prestige doesn't pay the bills.

[drib]

Prestige doesn't pay the bills.


Especially when absolutely no one is there to watch/enjoy the victories.

[Tom]

The courts follow the law. The law, developed in prior epidemics, says the government has this power.

You guys have to convince elected officials of your arguments. And in some places, the elected officials are relaxing restrictions. So there's no denial of access to the political process here.

What has happened here is very simple- 18,000 people have died in New York State. The politicians are listening to scientists because there's a killer virus on the loose. And the polls show the public is on their side.

No court is going to step into that situation. You have to convince your fellow citizens in New York that this is no longer a big deal and the risk to people's lives is worth taking. That's the only way you can have your preferences enacted.

Of course that is not really true.
If it were, we would never need courts.
Arguments can be made that calling a certain business essential is NOT being done fairly or even accurately.
Many, many other interpretations of the law can be argued. Why we have courts. For example. closing beeches while allowing parks to stay open - perfect argument of fairness.

I'm thinking you may have made a whole lot of BAD plea bargains! :rolleyes:

[dilanesp]

Does anyone know if there has actually been a suit in court. State or Federal over lockdown authority.

We just had one over the weekend with Huntington Beach challenging Gov. Newsom's ruling closing the beaches. The City lost.

As far as I know, the only challenges that have won have been based on religion, which gets special treatment under both the First Amendment and the state Religious Freedom Restoration Acts, which grant religious gatherings an exemption unless the government's actions meet the strictest scrutiny.

But while I am not specifically tracking the lawsuits by businesses, I know there have been several and they have all lost; only the suits based on religious claims have won.

[dilanesp]

Of course that is not really true.
If it were, we would never need courts.
Arguments can be made that calling a certain business essential is NOT being done fairly or even accurately.

So what? Where's the law that says that governmental decisions that affect businesses have to be done fairly or accurately?

The actual law in this area was stated in Williamson v. Lee Optical Co., which held that government may regulate or prohibit business so long as the government's action is rationally related to a legitimate state objective.

This is like basic, 1L, Con Law stuff. It's comparable to the law of supply and demand in economics- literally every lawyer has to learn this. There was a time long ago when the due process clause was held to limit governmental regulations of business. That was known as the "Lochner era" and it led to all sorts of abuse. So the Supreme Court curtailed it.

Under the Lee Optical test, basically everything governors are doing easily passes muster. The pandemic creates a legitimate state interest, and lockdowns have a rational relationship to it. That's it. Plaintiffs lose.

You seem to be proceeding on some notion that I don't know all this stuff. Or that whatever your view of the Constitution "should" be is going to be accepted by some judge somewhere over decades of US Supreme Court precedent. But that isn't how this works.

And to answer your question, we need courts because some folks, in some situations, do have legal rights that the government has violated. That doesn't mean courts insert themselves into every situation, though. There are rules.

[dilanesp]

If you are interested in why businesses don't generally have substantive due process rights enforceable against state action in America, this article is a very nice, short, readable summary of the history:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-14/section-1/the-rise-and-fall-of-economic-substantive-due-process-overview

Note especially the quote from Lee Optical:

The day is gone when this Court uses the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to strike down state laws, regulatory of business and industrial conditions, because they may be unwise, improvident, or out of harmony with a particular school of thought. . . . We emphasize again what Chief Justice Waite said in Munn v. Illinois, 94 U.S. 113, 134, ‘For protection against abuses by legislatures the people must resort to the polls, not to the courts.’

And before anyone jumps in- just about every state has passed a statute authorizing governors to exercise emergency powers. So any due process challenge is a challenge to the work of the legislature.

[Tom]

Except that we have had LIVE racing without fans right along, and that pretty much says that it CAN be done safely.

And it could be argued that in some areas, there IS not emergency based on the numbers.

[the little guy]

Except that we have had LIVE racing without fans right along, and that pretty much says that it CAN be done safely.

Don't tell anyone, Tom, but he has an agenda.

[PaceAdvantage]

The politicians are listening to scientists because there's a killer virus on the loose.Then how come all the states aren't following the exact same procedures?

Are they all listening to different scientists? How come they aren't listening to all the scientists I've posted that say this lockdown is fairly useless in achieving the goal of preventing people from catching this "KILLER VIRUS ON THE LOOSE?"

How come they aren't listening to the increasing number of reports that state there are at least 10x more people out there who have already contracted this disease then is being officially reported? Again, making the lockdowns even less necessary.

How come nobody in power, that I am aware of, looks at this situation logically and embraces ALL of the science? Isn't that what they are supposed to do?

You guys who keep screaming SCIENCE, are only paying attention to the part of the science that is in lockstep with your doctrine. That's not how science works.

[PaceAdvantage]

So what? Where's the law that says that governmental decisions that affect businesses have to be done fairly or accurately?

The actual law in this area was stated in Williamson v. Lee Optical Co., which held that government may regulate or prohibit business so long as the government's action is rationally related to a legitimate state objective.

This is like basic, 1L, Con Law stuff. It's comparable to the law of supply and demand in economics- literally every lawyer has to learn this. There was a time long ago when the due process clause was held to limit governmental regulations of business. That was known as the "Lochner era" and it led to all sorts of abuse. So the Supreme Court curtailed it.

Under the Lee Optical test, basically everything governors are doing easily passes muster. The pandemic creates a legitimate state interest, and lockdowns have a rational relationship to it. That's it. Plaintiffs lose.

You seem to be proceeding on some notion that I don't know all this stuff. Or that whatever your view of the Constitution "should" be is going to be accepted by some judge somewhere over decades of US Supreme Court precedent. But that isn't how this works.

And to answer your question, we need courts because some folks, in some situations, do have legal rights that the government has violated. That doesn't mean courts insert themselves into every situation, though. There are rules.Here's what I think. I think you're operating on ANCIENT HISTORY.

I think there haven't been very many challenges yet, because most people accepted what was happening as necessary.

Now, people aren't as accepting as they were a month ago.

Now, I think you're going to see more lawsuits if this drags out much longer.

And I think you're going to see everything isn't so black and white, because what is happening NOW has NEVER happened before, thus, no precedent.

I know you'll disagree and wave your profession in my face, but you're wrong a lot for a bright, successful lawyer...so I'll take my chances.

[dilanesp]

Don't tell anyone, Tom, but he has an agenda.

I support you guys reopening (without fans). So I am not sure what agenda you think I have.

[dilanesp]

Here's what I think. I think you're operating on ANCIENT HISTORY.

I think there haven't been very many challenges yet, because most people accepted what was happening as necessary.

Now, people aren't as accepting as they were a month ago.

Now, I think you're going to see more lawsuits if this drags out much longer.

And I think you're going to see everything isn't so black and white, because what is happening NOW has NEVER happened before, thus, no precedent.

I know you'll disagree and wave your profession in my face, but you're wrong a lot for a bright, successful lawyer...so I'll take my chances.

I am actually right most of the time here- and my record on the coronavirus and on horse racing related legal issues has been spotless. Yours has not.

[PaceAdvantage]

I am actually right most of the time here- and my record on the coronavirus and on horse racing related legal issues has been spotless. Yours has not.What have I gotten wrong?

[dilanesp]

What have I gotten wrong?

Well let's start with "this is no worse than the flu".

And of course you have gotten the due process clause completely wrong.

Just to be clear, there have been lawsuits and there will continue to be some. But since the standard of review is Lee Optical, absent a religion or protected class issue they will all eventually lose. Governors basically have plenary powers to order businesses closed. Apparently you didn't realize this (and still seem to think the power depends on what stage of the pandemic we are in), but all of this is fully constitutional. If it weren't, there would have already been successful challenges. Business owners' lawyers told them "don't bother, the cases are losers".

[Clocker]

That's not how science works.


Liberal science or conservative science? :confused:

[PaceAdvantage]

Well let's start with "this is no worse than the flu".Oddly enough, I have never once uttered that phrase on here, or even come close to uttering such a phrase. But keep trying.

The flu, however, IS STILL laughing at COVID-19....600,000 deaths in a bad year with the flu, worldwide (and WITH a vaccine), versus 250,000 currently with COVID-19...after 3+ months (and I'm being conservative here) of official tracking. Assuming a 9 month flu season (which never happens), COVID-19 just might catch up with the flu one day.

Your interpretations, counselor, are once again FLAWED.

[classhandicapper]

So I am not sure what agenda you think I have.

You aren't an employee of NYRA or a NYRA lap dog. That gives you free reign to disagree with NYRA management and find faults with the racing in NY publicly - which you seem more than willing to do on occasion. :lol:

That just means your agenda is not the same as some other people that post here. To me, it makes for better balance. Since I'm a natural contrarian, if everyone started arguing for Saratoga to be closed and to run at Belmont, it would probably prompt me to think of reasons for opening . ;)

[Tom]

The courts follow the law. The law, developed in prior epidemics, says the government has this power.

You guys have to convince elected officials of your arguments. And in some places, the elected officials are relaxing restrictions. So there's no denial of access to the political process here.

What has happened here is very simple- 18,000 people have died in New York State. The politicians are listening to scientists because there's a killer virus on the loose. And the polls show the public is on their side.

No court is going to step into that situation. You have to convince your fellow citizens in New York that this is no longer a big deal and the risk to people's lives is worth taking. That's the only way you can have your preferences enacted.

Big difference between Manhattan and Saratoga.
THAT is what I mean by having an argument.

[dilanesp]

Oddly enough, I have never once uttered that phrase on here, or even come close to uttering such a phrase. But keep trying.

The flu, however, IS STILL laughing at COVID-19....600,000 deaths in a bad year with the flu, worldwide (and WITH a vaccine), versus 250,000 currently with COVID-19...after 3+ months (and I'm being conservative here) of official tracking. Assuming a 9 month flu season (which never happens), COVID-19 just might catch up with the flu one day.

Your interpretations, counselor, are once again FLAWED.

LOL.

"I never once minimized Coronavirus by comparing it with the flu. Now excuse me while I do just that."

[JerryBoyle]

LOL.

"I never once minimized Coronavirus by comparing it with the flu. Now excuse me while I do just that."

Was just gonna type this but no need to repeat

[PaceAdvantage]

Using actual facts is not minimizing. That's all in your head.

Stats are what they are. You can either accept them or deny them.

Maybe they will change. But for now, they are what they are. And we can extrapolate as statisticians are wont to do...

You can try and label me a devil for doing so...it won't change anything.

[dilanesp]

Using actual facts is not minimizing. That's all in your head.

Stats are what they are. You can either accept them or deny them.

Maybe they will change. But for now, they are what they are. And we can extrapolate as statisticians are wont to do...

You can try and label me a devil for doing so...it won't change anything.

I don't think you are a devil. FFS, you run the best horse racing discussion forum on the web!

But you are chronically wrong about this virus, that's all. :)

[PaceAdvantage]

But you are chronically wrong about this virus, that's all. :)Not supported by facts.

I invited you to point out exactly what I've been wrong about.

I know you want another racing thread to be closed...but please, before I do, take me to school...show me the error of my ways.

Bring plenty of false, misinterpreted statements of mine along with you...you're going to need them.

[dilanesp]

Not supported by facts.

I invited you to point out exactly what I've been wrong about.

I know you want another racing thread to be closed...but please, before I do, take me to school...show me the error of my ways.

Bring plenty of false, misinterpreted statements of mine along with you...you're going to need them.

I suspect most reasonable readers of your many posts mentioning the flu would read them the way I do, PA. Plus the due process stuff, which is repeatedly losing in courts. Those were my two examples.

Don't close this thread. We need a place to discuss Belmont's opening day, which is still in flux.

[AndyC]

Why is it that WalMart and Costco can be open everyday and having thousands of people go through their stores without creating a massive increase in infections and deaths? Given that they both sell essential items meaning that many of the customers are in the high-risk category, it seems a little ridiculous to think that a racetrack, out in the fresh air and sunshine, would be such an immense risk. Is the thinking of the government that high-risk people aren't smart enough to refrain from going to malls, restaurants, racetracks or other places where people congregate? People adapt.

[dilanesp]

Why is it that WalMart and Costco can be open everyday and having thousands of people go through their stores without creating a massive increase in infections and deaths? Given that they both sell essential items meaning that many of the customers are in the high-risk category, it seems a little ridiculous to think that a racetrack, out in the fresh air and sunshine, would be such an immense risk. Is the thinking of the government that high-risk people aren't smart enough to refrain from going to malls, restaurants, racetracks or other places where people congregate? People adapt.

At least where I am, yes you can go to Wal-Mart, but they go to a great deal of trouble to force distancing. There's an absolute limit on the number of people in the stores, with lines of people outside, six feet apart. Inside they are constantly sanitizing everything, and requiring one way traffic in aisles. Lines at checkstands are regulated, again, six feet apart. Masks are required on all patrons, and employees wear masks and gloves. Whole departments, such as the cafe and the eyewear department, are closed.

They allow it to stay open because they sell groceries and necessities, and it is worth running a low but nonzero risk of infection despite the precautions in order to ensure people get them. Racetracks don't have that argument.

Bottom line, I think Santa Anita's and Gulfstream's protocols are great, and I'd love to see Belmont reopen ASAP with similar protocols. But racetracks really can't argue they are like Wal-Mart.

[alydar]

Oddly enough, I have never once uttered that phrase on here, or even come close to uttering such a phrase. But keep trying.

The flu, however, IS STILL laughing at COVID-19....600,000 deaths in a bad year with the flu, worldwide (and WITH a vaccine), versus 250,000 currently with COVID-19...after 3+ months (and I'm being conservative here) of official tracking. Assuming a 9 month flu season (which never happens), COVID-19 just might catch up with the flu one day.

Your interpretations, counselor, are once again FLAWED.

Take a look at this article. It helps explain these crazy numbers attributed to the flu every year. IT may also indicate that Covid numbers are understated

.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/05/02/theres-more-accurate-way-compare-coronavirus-deaths-flu/?fbclid=IwAR2GBxP0INfeFWYGPFvB328Z9lOdsmAdBzqDVEhL bqgfNcI6HEC6ZyhQeQ0

[biggestal99]

And who, exactly, determines if the government (in this case, the state) has a rational basis for shutting down businesses?

At the beginning of a pandemic, sure, it's tough to make the argument the state is not acting rationally.

How about a couple of months later? How about 5-6 months later?

Who is the arbiter of such conflicts?

I'm thinking that you aren't thinking this through.

You mention precedent a LOT in our discussions about this matter.

However, how much precedent exists for what we are going through today?

When was the last time large swaths of the economy were shut down for extended periods of time by state governors? Can you remember any? Due to a pandemic?

How much precedent REALLY exists for something like this?

The governor. That’s an easy one, PA.

Allan

[classhandicapper]

IMO, one of the arguments in favor of racetracks eventually is that much of the activity (including in the grandstands) is outdoors. Even in NY masks are only necessary when you are indoors or can't social distance.

I take long walks around my neighborhood every day without a mask. I stay at least 10 feet way from anyone else and usually cross the street to avoid them altogether.

There are probably some scenarios where you could open the outdoor sections of a racetrack to a limited number of people with pretty much zero risk and allow people to bet via their phones, but even SAM machines are an issue because of all the touching. You'd have to keep disinfecting them.

I could see myself in the backyard at Belmont on a beautiful day taking a walk to the grandstand side for the race as long as all the doors were wide open (so the breeze was coming through the indoor sections) and the crowd was very limited and distanced. I'm just not sure it would be worth it.

[classhandicapper]

Take a look at this article. It helps explain these crazy numbers attributed to the flu every year. IT may also indicate that Covid numbers are understated

.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/05/02/theres-more-accurate-way-compare-coronavirus-deaths-flu/?fbclid=IwAR2GBxP0INfeFWYGPFvB328Z9lOdsmAdBzqDVEhL bqgfNcI6HEC6ZyhQeQ0

I think the best course of action is to discuss the issues with respect to Covid-19 in terms of it's normal typical R0, R0 with lockdowns, confirmed deaths, probable deaths, what the antibody tests are indicating about actual infection rate nationally or in NY, what the true death rate is, what the risk groups are etc.. and simply never use the word flu in the same sentence. They are not at all comparable because we never lock down for flu. Just avoid the controversy by never uttering the world flu.

[AndyC]

At least where I am, yes you can go to Wal-Mart, but they go to a great deal of trouble to force distancing. There's an absolute limit on the number of people in the stores, with lines of people outside, six feet apart. Inside they are constantly sanitizing everything, and requiring one way traffic in aisles. Lines at checkstands are regulated, again, six feet apart. Masks are required on all patrons, and employees wear masks and gloves. Whole departments, such as the cafe and the eyewear department, are closed.

They allow it to stay open because they sell groceries and necessities, and it is worth running a low but nonzero risk of infection despite the precautions in order to ensure people get them. Racetracks don't have that argument.

Bottom line, I think Santa Anita's and Gulfstream's protocols are great, and I'd love to see Belmont reopen ASAP with similar protocols. But racetracks really can't argue they are like Wal-Mart.

No they can actually argue that they are far less riskier than Wal-Mart. It is outdoors vs indoors. Because it's not essential high-risk people don't have to go there.

I certainly don't see "constant sanitizing" at either Costco or Wal-Mart. It doesn't sound like you do much shopping.

This isn't about essential vs. non-essential it's about opening businesses without risk.

The stats are really clear as to who is at risk to the virus. The people who are not at risk should be free to carry on with their lives. So my bottom line is that the Santa Anita and Gulfstream protocols go to far.

[PaceAdvantage]

Take a look at this article. It helps explain these crazy numbers attributed to the flu every year. IT may also indicate that Covid numbers are understated

.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/05/02/theres-more-accurate-way-compare-coronavirus-deaths-flu/?fbclid=IwAR2GBxP0INfeFWYGPFvB328Z9lOdsmAdBzqDVEhL bqgfNcI6HEC6ZyhQeQ0I am well aware of all the arguments in this arena.

COVID numbers may be understated. They also may be overstated. A video of two MDs in California stating they have been pressured to add COVID-19 as a cause of death was recently removed from YouTube. Is that evidence of overstated numbers in the USA? I guess it depends on how much stock you put in doctors working in hospitals fighting COVID-19...you know, the ones we applaud every evening at 7pm....apparently, YouTube doesn't respect at least some MDs fighting the virus, because of their rather unique experiences and viewpoints.

Surprisingly, these doctors were willing to commit these statements and opinions to video on YouTube...I'm sure there are other MDs out there with similar experiences/thoughts who wouldn't dare come out like that in public for fear of career retribution.

But I digress....

The bottom line is...these are the only figures I have at my disposal. Maybe the CDC should have thought more about how they report flu figures if they are now going to come out and claim they are useless.

[PaceAdvantage]

I think the best course of action is to discuss the issues with respect to Covid-19 in terms of it's normal typical R0, R0 with lockdowns, confirmed deaths, probable deaths, what the antibody tests are indicating about actual infection rate nationally or in NY, what the true death rate is, what the risk groups are etc.. and simply never use the word flu in the same sentence. They are not at all comparable because we never lock down for flu. Just avoid the controversy by never uttering the world flu.You could say that, of course. Then again, the flu has a vaccine...to mitigate it...maybe that's why we don't lock down, despite the 600,000 or so deaths worldwide during a particularly bad flu season...

But I digress...again....

[dilanesp]

No they can actually argue that they are far less riskier than Wal-Mart. It is outdoors vs indoors. Because it's not essential high-risk people don't have to go there.

I certainly don't see "constant sanitizing" at either Costco or Wal-Mart. It doesn't sound like you do much shopping.

This isn't about essential vs. non-essential it's about opening businesses without risk.

The stats are really clear as to who is at risk to the virus. The people who are not at risk should be free to carry on with their lives. So my bottom line is that the Santa Anita and Gulfstream protocols go to far.

The governor's rulings that closed racetracks said they were not "essential". Wal-mart is "essential". There are two separate safety standards based on that distinction. You may disagree with that, but I think it makes perfect sense. It's worth risking a small chance of transmission so I can get food and survive. It isn't worth risking it so I can attend the 3rd at Santa Anita.

Now, as a nonessential business, racetracks ought to still be able to open if they can do it safely. Indeed, that should be the standard for any nonessential business. But they have to show a greater margin of safety than essential businesses do.

Finally, what the heck do you mean by "[t]he stats are really clear as to who is at risk to the virus"? We all are at risk. People in major metropolitan areas like New York and Los Angeles are especially at risk. And unless you are very careful, the folks who catch it will then spread it to others, putting them at risk too.

So they can't let up and just say "let's go ahead and let Santa Anita open with spectators". It just opens up a vector for transmission of the disease.

The protocols are good, and horse racing should try to be a good corporate citizen. Especially since right now, our two most important racing circuits are shut down completely.

[AndyC]

The governor's rulings that closed racetracks said they were not "essential". Wal-mart is "essential". There are two separate safety standards based on that distinction. You may disagree with that, but I think it makes perfect sense. It's worth risking a small chance of transmission so I can get food and survive. It isn't worth risking it so I can attend the 3rd at Santa Anita.

Once again it isn't about essential vs. non-essential. It's about living. As for the 3rd at Santa Anita, if it's not worth the risk don't go. QED!

Now, as a nonessential business, racetracks ought to still be able to open if they can do it safely. Indeed, that should be the standard for any nonessential business. But they have to show a greater margin of safety than essential businesses do.

All businesses should have the same standard.

Finally, what the heck do you mean by "[t]he stats are really clear as to who is at risk to the virus"? We all are at risk. People in major metropolitan areas like New York and Los Angeles are especially at risk. And unless you are very careful, the folks who catch it will then spread it to others, putting them at risk too.

Really? Why is it that older people with comorbidities die at at a much larger rate than others? It is extremely rare that healthy younger people who get infected will have an illness that results in death. We may all be at risk of getting the infection but that's not what's important. It's the risk of the consequences of getting the virus. Little risk for some people huge risk for others.

So they can't let up and just say "let's go ahead and let Santa Anita open with spectators". It just opens up a vector for transmission of the disease.

[The protocols are good, and horse racing should try to be a good corporate citizen. Especially since right now, our two most important racing circuits are shut down completely.

Of course they can open up with spectators. Transmission cannot be avoided. The government should be presenting facts to the people so they can make informed decisions about how to protect themselves. Otherwise they will go around in fear and post on forums that everybody is at great risk and should remain locked down.

[dilanesp]

Andy, I think it is crazy to say that if a grocery store is worth the risk, anything is. Some businesses are just obviously more important than others.

And I read obituaries. Plenty of younger people have died from this, and plenty of old people who died got it from younger people. Further, it can damage the lungs of the young people.

We are all in this together. Let's not pretend that "it can't happen to me". It can.

[GMB@BP]

Andy, I think it is crazy to say that if a grocery store is worth the risk, anything is. Some businesses are just obviously more important than others.

And I read obituaries. Plenty of younger people have died from this, and plenty of old people who died got it from younger people. Further, it can damage the lungs of the young people.

We are all in this together. Let's not pretend that "it can't happen to me". It can.

we are not all in this together, some are more disproportionately affected by the current events.

If we are all in this together means we all could die then I suppose so.

[Tom]

Fact is, ALL business are essential.
How many families does racing support statewide?
Risking that segment of the economy to wither and die is NOT responsible. Forcing restaurants to stop serving in house has compromised our food supply line by over-taxing the eat at home segments. Are Walmarts required to rope off all but the food aisles?
Farmers are dumping milk or giving it away - what happens when we force the out of business?

RACING is a section of the economy we cannot afford to lose.
To many other jobs depend on it. If they allow fans to go to the tracks, and not many are willing to go, then what is your problem?
The risk of going should be the individual's, not Big Andy's.
Andrew has pretty much proven to be clueless so far in all of this - good thing to do is ask what would Coumo do? And then do the opposite.

Racing needs to get back up and running.
Everywhere.

[Fred Mertz]

We are all in this together. Let's not pretend that "it can't happen to me". It can.


Criminy, you sound like a Public Service Announcement/PSA. I will say that it won't happen to me although I'm getting sick and tired of following these restrictions.

[AndyC]

Andy, I think it is crazy to say that if a grocery store is worth the risk, anything is. Some businesses are just obviously more important than others.

And I read obituaries. Plenty of younger people have died from this, and plenty of old people who died got it from younger people. Further, it can damage the lungs of the young people.

We are all in this together. Let's not pretend that "it can't happen to me". It can.

Why should we accept risk at a grocery store? I certainly wouldn't act any different there than I would at a racetrack.

So you haven't looked at any stats? Obituaries aren't stats. That's an emotional ploy when the facts aren't on your side.

Don't pretend a car accident can't happen either. Quit driving unless it is for essential purposes. We are only all in because we are forced to be. There is no reason we all have to suffer because some will.

[dilanesp]

PA, you might like what Wisconsin is doing. To be clear, the ruling is going to be that the Governor failed to follow some Byzantine procedure required under state law. The Court is not actually going to hold that due process requires the businesses to be reopened. (If they did, they'd risk a reversal by the US Supreme Court. So the smart play from their standpoint is to rule based on state law technicalities.)

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/05/wisconsin-supreme-court-lift-covid-restrictions-fox-news.html

[dilanesp]

AndyC:

Because I am not an epidemiologist, I rely on scientists to interpret the statistics. But its perfectly clear that plenty of younger people have died. Just because the risk is higher for older people doesn't mean we can just cordon them off and the rest of us all survive.

As I said, we are all in this together. People live or die, together. There's no "we can let them die and we'll live life as normal" here. (And of course, that attitude would be grossly immoral even if it had science to support it. Thankfully, though, it doesn't.)

[AndyC]

........Because I am not an epidemiologist, I rely on scientists to interpret the statistics. But its perfectly clear that plenty of younger people have died. Just because the risk is higher for older people doesn't mean we can just cordon them off and the rest of us all survive.

As I said, we are all in this together. People live or die, together. There's no "we can let them die and we'll live life as normal" here. (And of course, that attitude would be grossly immoral even if it had science to support it. Thankfully, though, it doesn't.)

Your implication is that we cordon them off and then let them die. How about we cordon them off and protect them, pretty simple.

It is not "perfectly clear" that plenty of younger have died. Take NYC for example. 6 children have died under the age of 18 (all with underlying conditions). The percentage of children who have died is less than 1 in 100,000. From 18-44, a total of 549 have died for a percentage of 16.29/100,000. Out of that 549 only 15 died without underlying conditions.

I know you're not an epidemiologist but you really don't have to be to interpret those stats.

[PaceAdvantage]

PA, you might like what Wisconsin is doing. To be clear, the ruling is going to be that the Governor failed to follow some Byzantine procedure required under state law. The Court is not actually going to hold that due process requires the businesses to be reopened. (If they did, they'd risk a reversal by the US Supreme Court. So the smart play from their standpoint is to rule based on state law technicalities.)

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/05/wisconsin-supreme-court-lift-covid-restrictions-fox-news.htmlI'm just trying to still wrap my head around how the following can NEVER come into play during the situation we are in right now...especially as it continues to last longer than it ever was intended to (FLATTEN THE CURVE...SAVE HEALTHCARE):

https://www.justice.gov/crt/deprivation-rights-under-color-law

[dilanesp]

I'm just trying to still wrap my head around how the following can NEVER come into play during the situation we are in right now...especially as it continues to last longer than it ever was intended to (FLATTEN THE CURVE...SAVE HEALTHCARE):

https://www.justice.gov/crt/deprivation-rights-under-color-law

It's a course in law school, and a long story about constitutional history. But ultimately, the legal system decided it was wise not to subject business regulations to constitutional scrutiny

But I think you will like the result in the Wisconsin case, though it won't be based on federal law.

[classhandicapper]

You could say that, of course. Then again, the flu has a vaccine...to mitigate it...maybe that's why we don't lock down, despite the 600,000 or so deaths worldwide during a particularly bad flu season...

But I digress...again....

I think you missed my point.

You can't compare them exactly because we don't have a vaccine and good treatments for this virus so any more people would get infected and die from this than flu if we went about business as usual.

The true death rate is not known yet, but the best and more unbiased sources I can find seem to indicate between .5% and 1%. That's still a large number. It also appears the Ro for this virus is also higher than flu. So it spreads a lot quicker.

So given these realities, you handle them differently.

You can't allow hospitals to get overwhelmed and potentially a million or more people to die while other life saving procedures and treatments are on hold because the hospitals are swamped, causing others to die too.

You try to flatten it and slowly work towards at least partial herd immunity while we learn more about treatments and move towards a vaccine.

The debate is about finding the balance between protecting people from the virus (especially at risk populations) and not absolutely demolishing the economy. I'm not smart enough to know the best way to do it. Admittedly I'm talking out of my ass on intuition and common sense, but imo the word flu is irrelevant to the conversation because it's s different thing.

[classhandicapper]

Why should we accept risk at a grocery store? I certainly wouldn't act any different there than I would at a racetrack.


We are all constantly making risk reward choices. Not all of us are going to make the same choices because we have different priorities an values.

I've gone into a Verizon phone shop because my phone broke, a dollar store for soap and extra masks, and a 7 Eleven for milk and eggs (all masked and gloved while carrying a Lysol wipe :lol:), but there's no way I'd go to a crowded racetrack. I took a minuscule chance for some items I needed, but I wouldn't take the same chance to gamble on horses.

The tricky part is that some people may be willing to take chances I think are totally absurd (like driving at 120mph). The reason we stop them (and even as person with libertarian tendencies I accept that) is because their reckless behavior can impact and kill others. Drawing those lines is sometimes the tough part, but there are lines in this situation also.

[PaceAdvantage]

I think you missed my point.

You can't compare them exactly because we don't have a vaccine and good treatments for this virus so any more people would get infected and die from this than flu if we went about business as usual.

The true death rate is not known yet, but the best and more unbiased sources I can find seem to indicate between .5% and 1%. That's still a large number. It also appears the Ro for this virus is also higher than flu. So it spreads a lot quicker.

So given these realities, you handle them differently.

You can't allow hospitals to get overwhelmed and potentially a million or more people to die while other life saving procedures and treatments are on hold because the hospitals are swamped, causing others to die too.

You try to flatten it and slowly work towards at least partial herd immunity while we learn more about treatments and move towards a vaccine.

The debate is about finding the balance between protecting people from the virus (especially at risk populations) and not absolutely demolishing the economy. I'm not smart enough to know the best way to do it. Admittedly I'm talking out of my ass on intuition and common sense, but imo the word flu is irrelevant to the conversation because it's s different thing.I never said, not once, that COVID-19 should be treated "business as usual" or "same as flu."

I wish people would stop writing this to me. When they do, it's clear they have no interest in actually reading what I write...so why bother replying?

[JerryBoyle]

I never said, not once, that COVID-19 should be treated "business as usual" or "same as flu."

I wish people would stop writing this to me. When they do, it's clear they have no interest in actually reading what I write...so why bother replying?

Haven't read anything in the thread because this is exhausting, but I'm guessing you "tried" to compare covid to the flu, again, in an attempt to minimize covid's severity, and someone called you out on it...again. Shocked...

[classhandicapper]

I never said, not once, that COVID-19 should be treated "business as usual" or "same as flu."

I wish people would stop writing this to me. When they do, it's clear they have no interest in actually reading what I write...so why bother replying?

I mostly understand where you are coming from.

My suggestion is don't ever mention the word flu or point to the number deaths from flu and the problem would go away. Any time the word flu is used people are going to immediately point out why any data or comparison to flu is irrelevant even if you already know that and are trying to make a different point.

Just say the true death rate may be .5% or .6% and most of those are among very old people and people with severe comorbidities. That argues for greater freedom of the masses and a focus on protecting the at risk people so we slowly move towards partial herd immunity without destroying the economy. That seems like a reasonable position for someone to take whether I or others agree or not.

People are afraid because we don't fully understand how at risk we are but we know it spreads very quickly and easily. There's also the matter of reinfection risk or recovering but having damaged lungs and a damaged heart.

[PaceAdvantage]

Haven't read anything in the thread because this is exhausting, but I'm guessing you "tried" to compare covid to the flu, again, in an attempt to minimize covid's severity, and someone called you out on it...again. Shocked...It's called perspective.

People are scared out of their minds because of the death numbers reported 24/7 on COVID-19.

You wouldn't believe the number of people I have encountered (friends, family, etc) over the last few months who were pretty much unaware that the flu is still capable of killing upwards of 600,000 people worldwide in any given year.

So yeah, some perspective is absolutely needed.

Sometimes, dispassionate, rational thought is required when dealing with a highly emotional situation that is clearly capable of not only killing people, but also completely nuking the world economy, which will certainly end up killing a whole bunch more.

[AndyC]

We are all constantly making risk reward choices. Not all of us are going to make the same choices because we have different priorities an values.

I've gone into a Verizon phone shop because my phone broke, a dollar store for soap and extra masks, and a 7 Eleven for milk and eggs (all masked and gloved while carrying a Lysol wipe :lol:), but there's no way I'd go to a crowded racetrack. I took a minuscule chance for some items I needed, but I wouldn't take the same chance to gamble on horses.

The tricky part is that some people may be willing to take chances I think are totally absurd (like driving at 120mph). The reason we stop them (and even as person with libertarian tendencies I accept that) is because their reckless behavior can impact and kill others. Drawing those lines is sometimes the tough part, but there are lines in this situation also.

The problem is most people are so uninformed that they really can't evaluate what the risks are or who exactly is at risk.

Reckless behavior can kill people. Is a healthy person going to a racetrack reckless behavior?

[thaskalos]

I never said, not once, that COVID-19 should be treated "business as usual" or "same as flu."

I wish people would stop writing this to me. When they do, it's clear they have no interest in actually reading what I write...so why bother replying?

But you have repeatedly stated that "the flu is laughing at COVID-19"...which implies that, according to you, this virus is even LESS than the flu. I know that you say this when comparing the death rates of the two viruses...but you can still make your point without outright mocking this new pandemic. And you were mocking this new virus in such a manner even as you yourself had barricaded yourself at home...something which you, no-doubt, had never done in fear of the flu.

We locked ourselves up at home, PA...and you were one of us. And now we walk around in masks...while wearing gloves and carrying lysol baby-wipes. Did we ever do that because of the flu? If not...then, how can the flu be "laughing"?

[jimk849]

I clicked on here because it said Belmont rumored to open Memorial Day Weekend. Any news out there on this possibility?

[Clocker]

I clicked on here because it said Belmont rumored to open Memorial Day Weekend. Any news out there on this possibility?


http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=157832

[Racetrack Playa]

I clicked on here because it said Belmont rumored to open Memorial Day Weekend. Any news out there on this possibility?
:blush:press release /political pitch from theNYRA

https://www.nyra.com/belmont/news/statement-from-the-new-york-racing-association,-inc.-(nyra)-re-2020-spring-and-summer-meets

[PaceAdvantage]

But you have repeatedly stated that "the flu is laughing at COVID-19"...which implies that, according to you, this virus is even LESS than the flu. I know that you say this when comparing the death rates of the two viruses...but you can still make your point without outright mocking this new pandemic. And you were mocking this new virus in such a manner even as you yourself had barricaded yourself at home...something which you, no-doubt, had never done in fear of the flu.

We locked ourselves up at home, PA...and you were one of us. And now we walk around in masks...while wearing gloves and carrying lysol baby-wipes. Did we ever do that because of the flu? If not...then, how can the flu be "laughing"?I don't create the death count for COVID-19 worldwide.

And dead people are dead people. It doesn't matter what the virus is called that killed them...or does it?

What would you like me to do? Cower in fear over a virus that, as of yet, hasn't shown the same killing capacity as the regular flu?

Even if we extrapolate the worldwide current death count for COVID-19 over a similar length flu season...or even longer...it doesn't catch up.

Some say this is due to social distancing, masks and lockdowns. Maybe.

But then again, the flu has a vaccine which mitigates the hell out of it...more or less than current mitigation efforts against COVID? Who's to say...much is still not known.

I'm a stats guy. I like to look at stats to figure out my conclusions. I don't work on emotion.

As for me being in my house...we're all in our houses...I'm forced to be here...where else am I going to be?

You can only spend so much time at 7-11 or Costco.

I know your sister is battling COVID and is or was on a ventilator, as you have posted. Please don't take the above personally. I have nothing but positive thoughts for her and hope she recovers, and I know you must be going through hell.

If a loved one of mine came down with COVID and had serious symptoms, my above views would not change. My views will change when the stats show me they should.

[cj]

Even if we extrapolate the worldwide current death count for COVID-19 over a similar length flu season...or even longer...it doesn't catch up.

Some say this is due to social distancing, masks and lockdowns. Maybe.



https://www.livescience.com/new-coronavirus-compare-with-flu.html

Both COVID-19 and the flu are respiratory illnesses. But COVID-19 is not the flu. Research so far indicates that COVID-19 spreads more easily and has a higher death rate than the flu.

If we didn't take the steps we did there would be many more sick people and more dead people than we get from the flu. How could there not be given the above quote? I don't think anyone would debate that quote, would they?

When do we stop? I don't know. We've started here. I've been going out some, still mostly avoiding people. But then again we have the 8th least cases per capita in the US so it is a risk I'm willing to take.

[jimk849]

Thank you for quick response, nice list fingers crossed for all the tracks.

[AndyC]

https://www.livescience.com/new-coronavirus-compare-with-flu.html



If we didn't take the steps we did there would be many more sick people and more dead people than we get from the flu. How could there not be given the above quote? I don't think anyone would debate that quote, would they?

When do we stop? I don't know. We've started here. I've been going out some, still mostly avoiding people. But then again we have the 8th least cases per capita in the US so it is a risk I'm willing to take.

Was it ever said that the virus could be stopped by taking the measures that have been taken? No, it was all about flattening the curve so as not to overwhelm the hospitals. I don't think it is an all or nothing proposition. Sweden has done an excellent job of balancing safety with keeping their economy open. It's time to open up and treat people like adults.

I assume that most people are like you and will be careful when things are opened up.

[PaceAdvantage]

If we didn't take the steps we did there would be many more sick people and more dead people than we get from the flu. How could there not be given the above quote?Steps definitely were needed to be taken.

Never argued against social distancing or masks or closing schools or even a limited shelter in place to make sure hospitals don't get overwhelmed.

It's clear at this point that nobody knows, or is willing to decide (on a nationwide scale), when to put an end to any of these mitigation factors...so conceivably, this could go on forever. Because there is always a mutation or a "second wave" lurking around the corner.

It seems like a working, fully vetted vaccine is the only thing that will put people at enough ease to get back to anything approaching normal.

And if that's the case, nothing will ever be the same again...because this can't continue for another 12+ months without there being serious, world changing economic repercussions.

[thaskalos]

I don't create the death count for COVID-19 worldwide.

And dead people are dead people. It doesn't matter what the virus is called that killed them...or does it?

What would you like me to do? Cower in fear over a virus that, as of yet, hasn't shown the same killing capacity as the regular flu?

Even if we extrapolate the worldwide current death count for COVID-19 over a similar length flu season...or even longer...it doesn't catch up.

Some say this is due to social distancing, masks and lockdowns. Maybe.

But then again, the flu has a vaccine which mitigates the hell out of it...more or less than current mitigation efforts against COVID? Who's to say...much is still not known.

I'm a stats guy. I like to look at stats to figure out my conclusions. I don't work on emotion.

As for me being in my house...we're all in our houses...I'm forced to be here...where else am I going to be?

You can only spend so much time at 7-11 or Costco.

I know your sister is battling COVID and is or was on a ventilator, as you have posted. Please don't take the above personally. I have nothing but positive thoughts for her and hope she recovers, and I know you must be going through hell.

If a loved one of mine came down with COVID and had serious symptoms, my above views would not change. My views will change when the stats show me they should.

I'm not taking what you've said personally...and I agree with the general sentiment of your argument. But I doubt that you would continue saying that "the flu is laughing at the COVID-19"...if your loved one were struggling against this virus on a ventilator. I could easily be wrong about that, though.

Thank you for your kind wishes concerning my sister.

[PaceAdvantage]

I phrased it like that to make a point. It's a slap to the face, I know...that's why I did it.

[PaceAdvantage]

A lot of people on this forum are in the high risk group. That's just the nature of the beast. Racing caters to an older demographic.

What has happened because of this virus has never, ever, ever been seen before.

Economies shutting down on a worldwide scale.

How many racing-related businesses do you think are going to fall victim to the actions we have taken as a world?

I know...that doesn't seem so important as long as people are still falling victim to coronavirus.

I'm just saying things are happening on a scale never before seen...so nobody knows exactly how this is all going to resolve itself.

I think the economic fallout from this virus is going to be beyond what most people realize or even dare to think. And the longer it goes on, the worse it is going to be...by orders of magnitude.

That's why I write the things I do.

[dilanesp]

Was it ever said that the virus could be stopped by taking the measures that have been taken? No, it was all about flattening the curve so as not to overwhelm the hospitals. I don't think it is an all or nothing proposition. Sweden has done an excellent job of balancing safety with keeping their economy open. It's time to open up and treat people like adults.

I assume that most people are like you and will be careful when things are opened up.

It's worth noting Sweden has less distancing than we do but they still have plenty of distancing. It's not like they are living normal lives over there.

[cj]

Was it ever said that the virus could be stopped by taking the measures that have been taken? No, it was all about flattening the curve so as not to overwhelm the hospitals. I don't think it is an all or nothing proposition. Sweden has done an excellent job of balancing safety with keeping their economy open. It's time to open up and treat people like adults.

I assume that most people are like you and will be careful when things are opened up.

I agree. My point was you can't compare it to the flu.That seems silly to me and is just a waste of words. This virus is way worse than the flu.

[PaceAdvantage]

It's worth noting Sweden has less distancing than we do but they still have plenty of distancing. It's not like they are living normal lives over there.Nobody ever said nothing should have been done.

[cj]

Steps definitely were needed to be taken.

Never argued against social distancing or masks or closing schools or even a limited shelter in place to make sure hospitals don't get overwhelmed.

It's clear at this point that nobody knows, or is willing to decide (on a nationwide scale), when to put an end to any of these mitigation factors...so conceivably, this could go on forever. Because there is always a mutation or a "second wave" lurking around the corner.

It seems like a working, fully vetted vaccine is the only thing that will put people at enough ease to get back to anything approaching normal.

And if that's the case, nothing will ever be the same again...because this can't continue for another 12+ months without there being serious, world changing economic repercussions.

I agree, at some point we need to get on with things. We're probably nearing that point now, if not I'd say by June 1st at worst. I don't mean a free for all but the lockdowns need to stop. Those that need to stay safe should be taken care of like what was done for the masses already.

[dilanesp]

A lot of people on this forum are in the high risk group. That's just the nature of the beast. Racing caters to an older demographic.

What has happened because of this virus has never, ever, ever been seen before.

Economies shutting down on a worldwide scale.

How many racing-related businesses do you think are going to fall victim to the actions we have taken as a world?

I know...that doesn't seem so important as long as people are still falling victim to coronavirus.

I'm just saying things are happening on a scale never before seen...so nobody knows exactly how this is all going to resolve itself.

I think the economic fallout from this virus is going to be beyond what most people realize or even dare to think. And the longer it goes on, the worse it is going to be...by orders of magnitude.

That's why I write the things I do.

I agree we are dealing with years of economic repercussions. But there's nothing that was going to prevent that. The only major country that did was South Korea, and they did it with measures that would have been unimaginable had a US politician proposed them in January.

[classhandicapper]

The problem is most people are so uninformed that they really can't evaluate what the risks are or who exactly is at risk.

Reckless behavior can kill people. Is a healthy person going to a racetrack reckless behavior?

I'm reading everything I can and following the data on spreadsheets. I'm probably more informed than 90% of the people out there without a medical background. I'm still not sure what the hell is going on because so much of the data is incomplete and inaccurate and there's still so much we don't know.

One thing that virtually no one is talking about is that some of the people that get sick but recover have permanent lung and/or heart damage. I don't know what percentage that is, but we don't have a data category like that. For all I know it could be 10%-20% of those that recovered.

How do you know what kind of risk you are taking if you are healthy going to the track?

You don't yet.

Not if you can get sick, recover, but have the lungs and heart of a guy that's been smoking for 20 years at the end of it, but no one told you about that yet.

[classhandicapper]

Was it ever said that the virus could be stopped by taking the measures that have been taken? No, it was all about flattening the curve so as not to overwhelm the hospitals. I don't think it is an all or nothing proposition. Sweden has done an excellent job of balancing safety with keeping their economy open. It's time to open up and treat people like adults.

I assume that most people are like you and will be careful when things are opened up.

I agree.

The idea was to not overwhelm the hospitals, but we surely would have in NYC without doing what we did.

What we are debating now is how to ease back open without increasing the r0 back above 1. If the r0 is above 1, you are eventually screwed. And we know the ro of the virus itself without all the masks, distancing, and closings is WAY above 1. So it has to be done slowly and carefully in phases. Maybe every 2 weeks or so we loosen a little. That way after the incubation period you can see what impact each loosening had on the r0. As it creeps back towards 1, maybe you have stop. If it goes above 1 you have to reverse. All while this is going on perhaps the partial herd immunity in places like NYC where a lot of people have been infected is working towards your benefit. Maybe the treatments improve. Maybe we inch towards a vaccine.

[classhandicapper]

I'm not taking what you've said personally...and I agree with the general sentiment of your argument. But I doubt that you would continue saying that "the flu is laughing at the COVID-19"...if your loved one were struggling against this virus on a ventilator. I could easily be wrong about that, though.

Thank you for your kind wishes concerning my sister.

So far I lost 2 cousins. A life long friend lost his mother. I have other friends that lost people close to them that were never in my circle, but it still feels pretty close to home. When it hits home, they aren't abstract numbers anymore.

[GMB@BP]

When do we stop? I don't know. We've started here. I've been going out some, still mostly avoiding people. But then again we have the 8th least cases per capita in the US so it is a risk I'm willing to take.

I think its an easier decision based on ones own economic situation (retired, already worked from home, job that is not too dependent on the economy) versus the opposite.

[westernmassbob]

A lot of people on this forum are in the high risk group. That's just the nature of the beast. Racing caters to an older demographic.

What has happened because of this virus has never, ever, ever been seen before.

Economies shutting down on a worldwide scale.

How many racing-related businesses do you think are going to fall victim to the actions we have taken as a world?

I know...that doesn't seem so important as long as people are still falling victim to coronavirus.

I'm just saying things are happening on a scale never before seen...so nobody knows exactly how this is all going to resolve itself.

I think the economic fallout from this virus is going to be beyond what most people realize or even dare to think. And the longer it goes on, the worse it is going to be...by orders of magnitude.

That's why I write the things I do.

The older demographic that you may think racing caters to has made a huge exit in the last decade....mostly natural causes of course. On track attendance and OTB’s probably accounts for 90% of the elderly ( defined usually 60 years young or older). Online betting is all the younger people below 60 that make up most of the betting pools. Tracks as you know make a lot less money unless money is bet on site. I suppose going forward percentages will change in favor of the host track. No doubt any attendance salvaged will never be close to what online betting will always bring. Cater to the youth and online betting because that is where all the money is. Rarely will you find 60- 80 year olds tech savvy enough to make bets on a computer...no offense it’s just the reality of it all.

[dilanesp]

So far I lost 2 cousins. A life long friend lost his mother. I have other friends that lost people close to them that were never in my circle, but it still feels pretty close to home. When it hits home, they aren't abstract numbers anymore.

That's awful. I'm sorry.

[cj]

I think its an easier decision based on ones own economic situation (retired, already worked from home, job that is not too dependent on the economy) versus the opposite.

No doubt about it.

I work from home but I'm in a job that has been hit hard by covid19. Greatly reduced racing and no customers on track is terrible for DRF. It has probably been even worse for our parent company.

It would be great for me if every track just went back to normal tomorrow. But we all know that isn't going to happen any time soon. There aren't many jobs that aren't overly dependent on the economy.

[AndyC]

I agree.

The idea was to not overwhelm the hospitals, but we surely would have in NYC without doing what we did.

What we are debating now is how to ease back open without increasing the r0 back above 1. If the r0 is above 1, you are eventually screwed. And we know the ro of the virus itself without all the masks, distancing, and closings is WAY above 1. So it has to be done slowly and carefully in phases. Maybe every 2 weeks or so we loosen a little. That way after the incubation period you can see what impact each loosening had on the r0. As it creeps back towards 1, maybe you have stop. If it goes above 1 you have to reverse. All while this is going on perhaps the partial herd immunity in places like NYC where a lot of people have been infected is working towards your benefit. Maybe the treatments improve. Maybe we inch towards a vaccine.

If the Ro number was 3 and the only people getting infected were healthy people, is that a problem? Wouldn't herd immunity be achieved much quicker? When high-risk people get infected that's a big problem. If everybody was at equal risk of dying from the virus that would be a big problem, but that simply isn't the case.

[GMB@BP]

No doubt about it.

I work from home but I'm in a job that has been hit hard by covid19. Greatly reduced racing and no customers on track is terrible for DRF. It has probably been even worse for our parent company.

It would be great for me if every track just went back to normal tomorrow. But we all know that isn't going to happen any time soon. There aren't many jobs that aren't overly dependent on the economy.

yea, most everyone is screwed.

I will give a good example of what i was saying. We had to furlough most of our drafting staff. I got hit with some extra work and called the most senior guy we had, good worker, about 57. I told him "hey got some work, probably about 2 weeks, thought I would give you first crack to see if you wanted to come into the office and work on it". He said yes.

The day he showed up he told me that even though he is very uncomfortable going out right now, let along into a high rise, he knew in that moment if he said no I would call the next guy and if work continued to come in he would not be first up to call but would maybe not ever get a call. He said he has bills to pay and its really a no win situation.

Sadly we wont have long term work but at least for a couple weeks we were able to help him out. Unemployment is a wreck, who knew the system could not handle 20% of the state asking for it at the same time.

[AndyC]

It's worth noting Sweden has less distancing than we do but they still have plenty of distancing. It's not like they are living normal lives over there.

That's my point! Adults can do the right thing.

[AndyC]

I'm reading everything I can and following the data on spreadsheets. I'm probably more informed than 90% of the people out there without a medical background. I'm still not sure what the hell is going on because so much of the data is incomplete and inaccurate and there's still so much we don't know.

One thing that virtually no one is talking about is that some of the people that get sick but recover have permanent lung and/or heart damage. I don't know what percentage that is, but we don't have a data category like that. For all I know it could be 10%-20% of those that recovered.

How do you know what kind of risk you are taking if you are healthy going to the track?

You don't yet.

Not if you can get sick, recover, but have the lungs and heart of a guy that's been smoking for 20 years at the end of it, but no one told you about that yet.

The obvious question to me would be were the people who had lung and/or heart damage from the high risk groups?

[classhandicapper]

If the Ro number was 3 and the only people getting infected were healthy people, is that a problem? Wouldn't herd immunity be achieved much quicker? When high-risk people get infected that's a big problem. If everybody was at equal risk of dying from the virus that would be a big problem, but that simply isn't the case.

I'm sure I've seen data on hospitalizations by age and heath somewhere along the line, but I don't know those numbers off hand. One of the problems is that healthy people still bring it home to less healthy people.

I have one friend that has a wife, 3 kids, and elderly inlaws living with him. They are all locked down getting grocery deliveries. One problem was that they had an aid coming in to help with the elderly. The aid gave it to him and his mother in law. Fortunately they both recovered. But for every healthy person out there still working, riding public transportation, going to stores, etc.. there are other people at home that maybe aren't as healthy.

I don't see why we need to rush to open everything when the downside is potentially huge (a total reversal of opening up), when we can go slower and start with the lower risk things, measure impacts every couple of weeks, and keep adjusting.

[classhandicapper]

The obvious question to me would be were the people who had lung and/or heart damage from the high risk groups?

They don't even count the people with damaged organs let alone tell us their health prior to getting sick. I think most likely many were people that were not entirely healthy to begin with, but obviously not all. I know of one person (not personally but he was part of discussion on this issue) that was in perfect health (an athlete) and he can't walk up the stairs without being winded now.

[AndyC]

They don't even count the people with damaged organs let alone tell us their health prior to getting sick. I think most likely many were people that were not entirely healthy to begin with, but obviously not all. I know of one person (not personally but he was part of discussion on this issue) that was in perfect health (an athlete) and he can't walk up the stairs without being winded now.

I know that NYC reports cases with underlying conditions so I would guess that the data is available for evaluation if needed.

[AndyC]

I'm sure I've seen data on hospitalizations by age and heath somewhere along the line, but I don't know those numbers off hand. One of the problems is that healthy people still bring it home to less healthy people.

I have one friend that has a wife, 3 kids, and elderly inlaws living with him. They are all locked down getting grocery deliveries. One problem was that they had an aid coming in to help with the elderly. The aid gave it to him and his mother in law. Fortunately they both recovered. But for every healthy person out there still working, riding public transportation, going to stores, etc.. there are other people at home that maybe aren't as healthy. ......

That's not going to change. What needs to change is what a healthy person does when they will be near high-risk people.

[Magician]

That's not going to change. What needs to change is what a healthy person does when they will be near high-risk people.

we lose about 500,000 people a year to smoking. we lose about 650,000 people every year from heart disease. we lose 100,000 a year from alcohol related deaths. we don't stop the sale of cigarettes. we don't require people to eat certain diets. we don't ban the sale of alcohol.

we are on a horse racing board. do you know how many people ruin their lives and other's lives due to gambling. should we shut down all gambling because a certain percentage of people will wind up killing themselves or going bankrupt because of gambling?

you have to be responsible for yourself. if you are high-risk you need to look out for yourself. you can't expect everyone to modify their lives because a certain percentage of people may be at risk for something. if you are at high risk to become an alcoholic you need to be careful. if you are at high risk for anything, you are responsible for looking out for yourself. this virus is not particularly dangerous to young people. i don't expect them to modify their lives for those of use pushing 50 or even older. i wan't them to enjoy their lives, not have their youth stolen from them until a vaccine is available. it is not fair to them.

[AndyC]

we lose about 500,000 people a year to smoking. we lose about 650,000 people every year from heart disease. we lose 100,000 a year from alcohol related deaths. we don't stop the sale of cigarettes. we don't require people to eat certain diets. we don't ban the sale of alcohol.

we are on a horse racing board. do you know how many people ruin their lives and other's lives due to gambling. should we shut down all gambling because a certain percentage of people will wind up killing themselves or going bankrupt because of gambling?

you have to be responsible for yourself. if you are high-risk you need to look out for yourself. you can't expect everyone to modify their lives because a certain percentage of people may be at risk for something. if you are at high risk to become an alcoholic you need to be careful. if you are at high risk for anything, you are responsible for looking out for yourself. this virus is not particularly dangerous to young people. i don't expect them to modify their lives for those of use pushing 50 or even older. i wan't them to enjoy their lives, not have their youth stolen from them until a vaccine is available. it is not fair to them.

My point was that healthy people should be able to live their lives in a semi-normal fashion. And what will surely happen is that some will get infected with the virus. Because most of these people will show no symptoms they should be extra careful when they are around the high-risk vulnerable people. I am in no way excusing the vulnerable from watching out for themselves, if they can. It's part of being human with a heart to help those who need help.

[Magician]

My point was that healthy people should be able to live their lives in a semi-normal fashion. And what will surely happen is that some will get infected with the virus. Because most of these people will show no symptoms they should be extra careful when they are around the high-risk vulnerable people. I am in no way excusing the vulnerable from watching out for themselves, if they can. It's part of being human with a heart to help those who need help.

ok. basically what i am trying to say is that i don't have a problem with an airline not serving me peanuts because some passenger may be allergic. i do have a problem though when we start putting all the peanut farmers out of business because a few people might be allergic to peanuts. hopefully that makes my point.

[Ocala Mike]

Is a healthy person going to a racetrack reckless behavior?





It is for me when I'm in the throes of one of those interminable losing streaks!

[classhandicapper]

I don't want to veer too far off topic, but this thread is already there anyway. I have some pretty strong libertarian leanings, but if I was 21 instead of 61 I would adjust my behavior and make some sacrifices for awhile to help save the lives of the elderly and more vulnerable people without hesitation.

I'm not smart enough to know the answers to all the risk/reward issues we are dealing with. My priorities and values may also be different than some other people, but on some level we are in this together and have to work together.

[AndyC]

ok. basically what i am trying to say is that i don't have a problem with an airline not serving me peanuts because some passenger may be allergic. i do have a problem though when we start putting all the peanut farmers out of business because a few people might be allergic to peanuts. hopefully that makes my point.

I agree.

If you could definitively say that you were virus free at all times I would say that you have no duty to change your actions around anybody. Of course, that's not a possible scenario, so there is a degree of responsibility for all parties to change their actions.

[classhandicapper]

Latest rumor is May 29th.

[cj]

Latest rumor is May 29th.

That is the same rumor that started the thread.

[classhandicapper]

That is the same rumor that started the thread.

I think it's a new old rumor. :lol:

[Tom]

Should be 11 tracks open by that date, so there will be plenty of action starting next week.

[PaceAdvantage]

PA, you might like what Wisconsin is doing. To be clear, the ruling is going to be that the Governor failed to follow some Byzantine procedure required under state law. The Court is not actually going to hold that due process requires the businesses to be reopened. (If they did, they'd risk a reversal by the US Supreme Court. So the smart play from their standpoint is to rule based on state law technicalities.)

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/05/wisconsin-supreme-court-lift-covid-restrictions-fox-news.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/us/coronavirus-wisconsin-supreme-court.html

[dilanesp]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/us/coronavirus-wisconsin-supreme-court.html

They did exactly what I predicted they would do.

[classhandicapper]

I'm still hearing May 29 from sources on the backstretch, but that may be contingent on reaching 7 of 7 of Cuomo's criteria. The timing to reach 7 of 7 seems to be in sync with a 5/29 date if the data keeps improving on hospitalization deaths and new hospitalizations in the Long Island region. (and assuming they use just Long Island because technically part of Belmont Park is in Queens).

[taxicab]

They did exactly what I predicted they would do.

You also predicted the NCAA basketball tournament would be played.

[dilanesp]

You also predicted the NCAA basketball tournament would be played.

No I didn't.

Indeed, I recall a long post where I listed all the events that weren't going to happen this year. Which I was lambasted for.

[Tom]

(and assuming they use just Long Island because technically part of Belmont Park is in Queens).

Sections C and D will remain closed! :D

[PaceAdvantage]

They did exactly what I predicted they would do.It doesn't really matter why or how...just the fact that they did...

You had said all along, religion is the only possible way they could challenge these lockdowns in court....already that has been proven to be false.

[taxicab]

No I didn't.

Indeed, I recall a long post where I listed all the events that weren't going to happen this year. Which I was lambasted for.

See the bump in the coronavirus and the TC thread:

[CheckMark]

I think it's a new old rumor. :lol:

No no no the new new rumor! :lol:

[dilanesp]

See the bump in the coronavirus and the TC thread:

Which was quoting a news report back at a time when that was what the NCAA announced.

And which you took completely out of context.

[dilanesp]

It doesn't really matter why or how...just the fact that they did...

You had said all along, religion is the only possible way they could challenge these lockdowns in court....already that has been proven to be false.

No, I said religion was the only CONSTITUTIONAL claim. That your stuff about due process is BS.

I was, in fact, the person who called your attention to the fact that the Wisconsin case could strike down restrictions, based on technical state law grounds.

[taxicab]

Which was quoting a news report back at a time when that was what the NCAA announced.

And which you took completely out of context.

TLG is right about you.

[classhandicapper]

14 day Hospital Deaths category seems like a real blocker for the Long Island Region. We are back to square 1 on the count to 14. New Hospitalizations also seem like a problem.

https://forward.ny.gov/regional-monitoring-dashboard

[cj]

https://www.drf.com/news/return-racing-new-york-remains-limbo

[classhandicapper]

Some of the criteria for opening a region are pretty bad. A trend down in hospitalizations or deaths can be wildly favorable but if you have a single small 1 day blip up you have to start over to get to 14 straight days. I'd love know who the statistical wizard was that came up with that. At least use a 14 day moving average. There are going to be occasional random variations in things like this. As long as the trend is improving sharply a single day of data can be almost meaningless.

[Tom]

Some of the criteria for opening a region are pretty bad. A trend down in hospitalizations or deaths can be wildly favorable but if you have a single small 1 day blip up you have to start over to get to 14 straight days. I'd love know who the statistical wizard was that came up with that. At least use a 14 day moving average. There are going to be occasional random variations in things like this. As long as the trend is improving sharply a single day of data can be almost meaningless.

Let's use this "scientific" tracing to see how many cases can be traced to Belmont Park.

Funny, the idiot who MADE NYS the worst state for the virus is the one setting the criteria for re-opening.

Had it not been for HIM, we might never have had to lock down.

[classhandicapper]

Let's use this "scientific" tracing to see how many cases can be traced to Belmont Park.

Funny, the idiot who MADE NYS the worst state for the virus is the one setting the criteria for re-opening.

Had it not been for HIM, we might never have had to lock down.

It seems they ARE using a 3 moving average, but imo even that is not good enough to reset you back 14 days if there happens to be a short term blip up in a continuing very favorable long term trend.

It's apparent to me that Belmont is OK to open.

All the data in the region is consistently improving (including at Belmont), virtually nothing will change by running races except for 60 extra employees who will I am sure they have strict protocol to protect, and other tracks are proving it can be done safely.

[Redbullsnation]

https://www.drf.com/news/return-racing-new-york-remains-limbo
Not so fast
https://www.bizjournals.com/newyork/news/2020/05/16/horse-racing-tracks-across-new-york-will-open.html