PDA

View Full Version : Belated kudos to NYRA


The Hawk
02-26-2005, 10:17 PM
I don't remember seeing anyone else post about this, so if they did, forgive me, but I think NYRA's decision to ban several offshore sites should be applauded. Those outlets represented a fairly good-sized chunk of their daily handle, and while Hayward's decision was the right one, it was also one that a lot of guys wouldn't have had the nerve to make. I know it was in their best interests but I would like to think they also had the everyday player in mind when this decision was made.

Zaf
02-26-2005, 11:38 PM
Which Sites ???

ZAFONIC

Suff
02-27-2005, 12:08 AM
Which Sites ???

ZAFONIC

http://www1.nyra.com/aqueduct/news.asp?id=1515&track=A
The New York Racing Association announced today that it is terminating its simulcast agreements with the four active sites named in last week's 88-count indictment from the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. They are: Euro Off-Track, located on the Isle of Man in the United Kingdom, International Racing Group, Inc. and Elite Turf Club, both located on Curacao in the Netherlands Antilles and Tonkawa Indian Reservation in Oklahoma.

The four sites were notified in writing and the contracts will terminate effective Monday. The fifth site named, Racing Services, Inc. in North Dakota, is separately under indictment and is no longer in operation.

"In addition to this immediate action, NYRA is undertaking an aggressive and expedited review of a number of selected secondary pari-mutuel organizations," said NYRA President and CEO Charles Hayward. "We will take decisive action in an ongoing effort to ensure that access to our pari-mutuel pools passes the strictest test of transparency and integrity. We fully understand that the economic impact of this decision will be damaging to our bottom line, but the integrity of NYRA's pari-mutuel pools leaves no room for compromise."

Suff
02-27-2005, 12:22 AM
I think they've taken similiar action with a few more sites subsequent to this press release of 1-18-05.

dumpdog
02-27-2005, 01:20 AM
Belated??? I'm sorry but the NYRA has been so screwed up for so long that I cannot give them the benifit of doubt. I love NY racing but the politics of the management have been terrible. The only reason they stopped anything was because of arrests or indictments. I know the racing secretary is beyond reproach. I know none of his people but I have no reason to think they are not upright officials. The thing with the tellers has been a well known scam. The owners/big bettors (Sandy for one) who have profited from rebates etc. and used (rumored ) unethical practices have been so often discussed that its not even a revealation any more. I would hate to see the State take over since they make Enron look ethical. Sorry but the future of racing in NY does not look good.

Tom
02-27-2005, 09:48 AM
Here they come. :eek:

The Hawk
02-27-2005, 10:44 AM
Dumpdog, all of what you say may be true, but whatever the impetus was for this particular decision, it was a good one. If the decision was made with the sole intention of benefiting NYRA it was an odd one, since they effectively shut off sources that accounted for around 10% of their daily handle. Even if that were the case, which I don't believe, the residual effect is that the everyday horseplayer benefits.

aaron
02-27-2005, 10:52 AM
I feel the NYRA is misguided in cutting off their off shore business.The problem is not with the bettors,but with the testing and all other infractions the NYRA has overlooked for years.The bettors who are part of the infractions will find a place to bet.At least,when the were betting off shore there was a paper trail.I bet they won't make that mistake again.

Figman
02-27-2005, 11:09 AM
Dear Aaron,
It is you that is misguided. The problem with offshore betting is that THERE IS NO PAPER TRAIL despite what the offshore provider may tell the customer. There is also NO REGULATION nor protection for the bettor! It IS for someone that likes to "play with fire."

As far as NYRA having a problem with testing, if you are referring to drug testing NYRA is not involved. All drug testing is done at Cornell University under contract to the State regulator and Dr. George Maylin and Cornell University has the best reputation in the world for equine drug testing and also Dr. Maylin has more available tests than any other institution.

aaron
02-27-2005, 12:08 PM
Dear Aaron,
It is you that is misguided. The problem with offshore betting is that THERE IS NO PAPER TRAIL despite what the offshore provider may tell the customer. There is also NO REGULATION nor protection for the bettor! It IS for someone that likes to "play with fire."

As far as NYRA having a problem with testing, if you are referring to drug testing NYRA is not involved. All drug testing is done at Cornell University under contract to the State regulator and Dr. George Maylin and Cornell University has the best reputation in the world for equine drug testing and also Dr. Maylin has more available tests than any other institution.

Figman,
The problem customers have with offshore betting was not what was being questioned.To me that is a "Buyer Beware" circumstance and has nothing to do with the NYRA.The NYRA has turned down business,but not in the interest of its customers.
We are all "big boys" and recognize the dangers of off shore betting.
If you think the NYRA cares about its customers,you are sadly mistaken.
Case in point:Yesterday's 5th race-bettors involved in the early pick four who were alive with the 4/5 favorite were treated with a new and novel way to lose.The horse was declared a non starter and no pick four consolation was paid,even though a pick 3 consolation was paid and all other pools were refunded.
As for drug testing,answer one question for me-Why has it taken over 10 years to institute testing for milk shakes,when the harness races have had horse tested for 10 years.Did NYRA think thoroghbreeds weren't sucepitable to milk shakes.
Figman, To further prove my point,I would like you to spend a day at Aquduct in the winter to see how fan friendly the NYRA is.Use the new betting machines, or try betting with tellers and let me know what you think.

Figman
02-27-2005, 12:45 PM
Why was yesterday's fifth race NYRA's fault? The stewards followed the "national" rule as they are directed to do with the pick four and the superfecta. There is a Pick-3 New York State Racing and Wagering Board rule. There is NO Pick-4 rule nor is there a superfecta thoroughbred rule. When there is no promulgated state rules regarding the newer type wagers, there is a state rule that directs to use the national or ARCI model rule. The national rulemakers are ARCI and NAPRA. The joint ARCI-NAPRA model rules are accessible on the Internet at the ARCI, NAPRA or the University of Arizona Racetrack Industry program websites. For the Pick (n) the rule is a horse removed from the wagering AFTER the wager closes, the money goes to the post time favorite. Why is NYRA at fault?

Suff
02-27-2005, 01:12 PM
Why was yesterday's fifth race NYRA's fault??

In one word. Yes. What was the rulling? "unfair advantage" The following race my horse was pushed 5 wide by a rank horse... that was "unfair" also.

I had Curlys Pride. Bet him at 6-1. After the ruling he paid 9 bucks.

No explanation.. No nothing. And even when NYRA put something up on the site they gave no explanantion. Gate opened fine. The horse dwelt. Happeens all the time? I have'nt checked the NYPOST today.. Probably something in there. Asst Starter have a Hold of him? I watched the reply 5 times. I saw nothing.

NYRA refunded $567,000 at an average take of 18%.... Thats alot of Gross Proceeds NYRA forfieted/ I'm sure Mr Hayward got a Thorough explanation of what happened. But me? Nothing. Aggravates me.

Tom
02-27-2005, 01:25 PM
I agree wtih Suff...there was no apparent fault with he gate, and the horse did eventuially leave and run. Unless the starter impeded his break, I think those betting the winner got hosed. Aqu should have given some explaination.

aaron
02-27-2005, 01:42 PM
Figman,
Is there anything that NYRA should be held responsiable for?
Are they responsible for bringing in betting machines that are barely functional?
Are they responsiable for the piegons that inhabit the 3rd floor?
Are they responsible for having inept stewards?
Are they responsible for not instituting drug testing until now?
Are they responsible for not cleaning up the cocker roaches in their facility?
Are they responsible for only having 4 better windows open with tellers on the third floor?
The NYRA does have very receptive customer service people.The problem with NYRA is that customer service is just a term and the people in charge have no desire to change anything.
Barry Schwartz tried,but you may have noticed he is gone.
Now NYRA blames everything on Elliot Spitzer,its not their fault because they have no responsiability.
The best thing that be said about NYRA is that the racing is still good,but that seems to be the case no matter who is in charge.
One question-Does anyone know why John Imbriale retired?
I'm sure the NYRA was not responsible for his retiring?
By the way Figman,when was the last time you were at Aquduct?

the little guy
02-27-2005, 02:11 PM
I agree wtih Suff...there was no apparent fault with he gate, and the horse did eventuially leave and run. Unless the starter impeded his break, I think those betting the winner got hosed. Aqu should have given some explaination.This absolutely fights in the face of logic. How could NYRA have wanted to refund over a half a million dollars in wagers? Even if, with most money bet at simulcast outlets, their average cut was 5% ( a lowball estimate ), this flat out cost them over $25,000. And, if you look at the overall picture, the money was refunded on a 4-5 shot, so overall, the public was far better served by the refunding.

Truth be told, NYRA should be applauded for protecting the public from gate hishaps, not condemned. They are one of the few tracks I have ever seen do this. First of all, if you watched the head on carefully, as I did, you will see that the assistant starter lifted his hand from that horse after the start, and much later than the other starters did. I am 100% certain they consulted with the gate crew before refunding the money, and if you actually think that specific starter was happy to admit his mistake, you're somewhere near the planet Pluto.

If you want to call this sucking up to NYRA, go right ahead, but all that would show is you're not looking at the situation objectively.

cj
02-27-2005, 02:16 PM
TLG,

Would it be too much to ask to give the public an explanation? Maybe they did, but some here apparently missed it if that happened.

Suff
02-27-2005, 02:20 PM
This absolutely fights in the face of logic. .

My main beef is not explaining the Ruling. I'm horse player. Been playing for 30 years. I have the stomach for DQ's and every other crazy thing that happens in officializing races.

But when you make a rulling that turns a $15.00 horse into a 9 dollar horse, is it to much to ask for a more detailed explanation than "Unfair advantage?"

I'm not suggesting they mishandled the causes of the ruleing e.g Move to fav, conso's and the like.

What aggravates me...is I'm sitting here holding my dick wondering exactly what happened that cost me 80 bucks? ... 4 hours later they give a vauge explanation on the www site.

I made the opinion, not a strong opinion, That had the horse been 45-1 instead of 4/5... the comment woulda been "Dwelt"...

I have no beefs with the way they handled the after effects. The law is the law.

btw... what did happen? Asst. Starter have a hold of the reins when teh gate opened?

the little guy
02-27-2005, 02:22 PM
They absolutely did CJ. First of all, they announced IMMEDIATELY after the race was run there was a steward's inquiry looking into the start of the race. Then, they showed the head on of the start over and over again. Then, when their decision was announced, they clearly said she was not given a fair start.

I realize if you bet a winning 6-1 shot, getting $9 sucks, but if people here are as smart as we pretend to be, that should hardly be surprising considering the events that were transpiring.

the little guy
02-27-2005, 02:23 PM
Believe me, Suff, NYRA would be MUCH happier refunding a 45-1 shot than a 4-5 shot.

the little guy
02-27-2005, 02:27 PM
Let me also add, that anytime a horse breaks ten lengths behind the field, or throws the rider, the same steward's inquiry results ( regardless of price ) and you should be well aware that there is a chance that the horse involved will be declared a non-starter.

Suff
02-27-2005, 02:31 PM
Believe me, Suff, NYRA would be MUCH happier refunding a 45-1 shot than a 4-5 shot.

Your making to much sense. Shut up. :D

Figman
02-27-2005, 02:49 PM
Aaron, here are your answers to your questions,
1)Yes
2)Yes
3)Yes
4)No - NYRA employs only one steward, the Jockey Club and the State employ the others.
5)NO - NYRA is not responsible for ANY drug testing, the State is and they have the best testing available on the market. By the way TCO2 testing is testing for a gas and not a drug.
6)Yes
7)Yes
8)Imbriale was financially able to and has two young children to raise. These were his owns words in replies on both Down the Stretch on Capital OTB television and on the At The Race And Beyond radio interview with John Perrotta in Florida.
9)January 27th when they cancelled after just two races.

aaron
02-27-2005, 02:52 PM
I agree with the little guy and suff.There shouldn't have been a refund.I benifitted from their call because I received a refund on my exacta boxes.That said,the ruling on refunds as pertaining to pick four's is ridiculous.
If you refund or give consolations on pick 3's,why not on pick 4's?Bettors who picked the 1st 3 in the pick four were probably looking at a consolation of about a $1000.00

the little guy
02-27-2005, 02:56 PM
I agree with the little guy and suff.There shouldn't have been a refund.I benifitted from their call because I received a refund on my exacta boxes.That said,the ruling on refunds as pertaining to pick four's is ridiculous.
If you refund or give consolations on pick 3's,why not on pick 4's?Bettors who picked the 1st 3 in the pick four were probably looking at a consolation of about a $1000.00Then you're not agreeing with me, as I believe there should have been a refund ( I was not involved ).

The same situation is ongoing in todays 6th, where #3 Fly With Karakorum broke ten slow. The have announced the inquiry and shown the head on of the start. I think this one dwelt, however. 6-1, by the way.

Suff
02-27-2005, 02:57 PM
I agree with the little guy and suff.

To me it looked like he just dwelt. I have an account at www.racereplays.com... I watched it a 1/2 dozen times. I saw nothing?

Thats why I wanted a more thorough explanation. I'm thinking the stewards called down to the gate and were told that the Horse was tied up somehow...?

Funny... similiar situation just happened in today 6th... we'll see what happens

cj
02-27-2005, 03:02 PM
What are the starters doing down there? Twice in two days is pretty odd I would think.

the little guy
02-27-2005, 03:03 PM
They have declared her a non-starter.

I understand what you're saying, but it hard to announce all the minutia that goes into every decision. I think it is obvious that their decisions are made from both watching the head-on and speaking to the gate crew.

I will never waver from my belief that the over-all good of the betting public is served by these decisions. Anyone who wagers should feel better with the belief that if their horse is not given a fair start, their money will be refunded.

Suff
02-27-2005, 03:10 PM
They have declared her a non-starter.

d.

I want MilkShake test's started on the gate crew...ASAP!

Figman
02-27-2005, 03:17 PM
Suff,
You may be on to something like too much coffee between races resulting in a "caffeine high."

aaron
02-27-2005, 03:32 PM
Little Guy,
I do agree with you there should have been a refund once the horse was declared a non starter.I'm not sure the call was correct,but in the long run I'd rather they refund when there is doubt.

the little guy
02-27-2005, 03:36 PM
Little Guy,
I do agree with you there should have been a refund once the horse was declared a non starter.I'm not sure the call was correct,but in the long run I'd rather they refund when there is doubt.Gotcha....I can agree with all of that.

cj
02-27-2005, 03:37 PM
I would have to think these assistant starters are in for a royal ass chewing.

aaron
02-27-2005, 03:38 PM
Little Guy,
I didn't express my views clearly.I wasn't sure the call was correct,but I'd rather they make that call when they are in doubt.I watched the replay again and am still not sure it was the correct call.
Didn't see today's call-Was it obvious?

the little guy
02-27-2005, 03:51 PM
It didn't look obvious, though you did see the hand of the starter of the 3 go up after the others. Whether or not that is telling I do not know ( that was also the case yesterday ). I imagine the starters' comments are the most telling.

Look, I do think NYRA does some things wrong, and have done many things wrong in the past, and I'm sorry that I always seem like their defender here. But once again, I have a great deal of respect for the starters. Beginning with Bob Duncan, who hand selects his crew ( I realize he is no longer at Aqueduct in the winter ), I can't think of anyone I respect more than Bob around horses ( and I believe if you asked trainers they would feel similarly ). The job of the crew is a much harder one than people realize, as loading those insane beasts into the gate can be pretty hairy, and for the most part, I think they handle the job spectacularly. I also think they need to answer for the incidents of the last two days, as they carry a great responsiblity to everyone involved, and screw ups like this cost everybody.

Observer
02-27-2005, 04:25 PM
...The job of the crew is a much harder one than people realize, as loading those insane beasts ...

They're not all insane .. and chances are if they are, there's good reason for it.

As for the gate crew at NYRA, I agree with you that Duncan is very well regarded throughout the industry. And I'm a big fan of Monty Roberts (The Real Horse Whisperer), and if I recall correctly, Duncan follows that same line of thinking.

When you have someone or some group that does an excellent job at something, it gives the impression it's an easy job. I think Duncan helps to make it look easy, and his absence is clearly felt, especially on weekends like this.

Tom
02-27-2005, 06:11 PM
Litttle Guy wrote:

"Truth be told, NYRA should be applauded for protecting the public from gate hishaps, not condemned. They are one of the few tracks I have ever seen do this. First of all, if you watched the head on carefully, as I did, you will see that the assistant starter lifted his hand from that horse after the start, and much later than the other starters did. I am 100% certain they consulted with the gate crew before refunding the money, and if you actually think that specific starter was happy to admit his mistake, you're somewhere near the planet Pluto."

If you read my post carefully, which you obvoiously neglected to do in your haste to chastize me for my opinion, you would have seen that I wrote unless the horses was impeded by the started, which apparently it was. Therefore, noting I wrote "flew in the face" of whatever your words were.
And I am not oput there near Pluto becaseu I never suggested that NRA wanted to refund money. But I still say the ones who bet the winner got screwed by the lower payoff. You are WAAAAAAY to defensive about NYRA, to the point where you are defending attacks that are not happening. Chill out, dude.

the little guy
02-27-2005, 07:07 PM
I apologize Tom, as I was responding to Suff as much, if not more, than you, and because I used your quote it looked like I was calling you out, and for that I apologize.

I actually don't think I was being defensive as much as simply trying to explain the situation rationally to Suff ( which it seems he understood ). NYRA DID in fact explain what happened, and I thought not only did they make it clear, I thought I did as well. What more can they do than say there is a stewards inquiry looking into the start, show the head on repeatedly, and then say such and such a horse is being declared a non-starter because he wasn't given a fair start?

I guess you could say those that bet the winner got " screwed ", but I don't think you can argue that the ultimate result was not the most fair. The winner paid the price he would have if the non-starter hadn't been in the race. I understand one could argue they wouldn't have taken 7-2 on Curly's Pride, but the exact same argument would logically say if he was 12% to win with the 4-5 shot in the race ( the true percentage of a 6-1 shot in a 14% takeout pool ) would also agree that she was 19% to win without her.

Tom
02-27-2005, 08:06 PM
No problem. It wasn't made clear to those of us playing at home, so I had no real idea what went wrong. But I'll tell, ya, I have bet and lost on more horses like that one than I ever got a refund on. Come to think of it, I never got a refund on anyting :mad:
At Aqu, they call that a non sarter. At Finger Lakes, they call it tough shot!

GeTydOn
02-28-2005, 09:58 AM
Doesn't seem fair to me that if a horse is not given a fair start because the assistant starter is holding it, the jockey had his feet out of the irons, etc. that the horse should NOT be considered a non-starter. So the expected win-price on the winner changes. But is it fair to leave those who wagered on the tough-luck horse hanging in the wind? NO! Odds sometimes change after the gates close anyway. It's part of the game. And aren't refunds and conso payoffs deteremined by Racing & Wagering rules?

dumpdog
03-02-2005, 03:51 PM
I saw that race via simulcast. When they took the start the horse had his head turned to the left and buried in the assistant starter's chest. I would assume (because of the refund) that the assistant and the horse got tangled and the assistant couldn't release the horse's head (which I have seen before). However I WAS surprised not to see any explanation and I did not understand the refunds.