DED Race under investigation...

[GR1@HTR]

http://www.drf.com/news/article/43820.html

[JimG]

Glen,

Thanks for the heads up. I watched the replay twice on racereplays.com and after doing so concluded that they might be looking at Meche's ride on the favorite. The horse swerved coming out of the gate, however, once he got going in this sprint looked to be much the best going around the turn. As they headed into the stretch the horse was really rolling, however Meche never reached for the stick or attempted to swing the horse into the 2 or 3 path for the drive. He sat chilly on the horse as he finished 3rd, behind two other horses.

Jim

[ranchwest]

It's a trial, a heat, a step toward a much bigger race. This happens often. Why is this one different? Why do people bet on these?

[ranchwest]

Better question, why are people allowed to bet on these?

[cj]

This may be a stretch, but I'll throw it out there anywhere. What is the difference of these trial races and horses obviously prepping for the bigger races, such as the Derby and Breeders Cup. Tiznow had two preps like this prior to his second BC win, and bettors were allowed to piss away hundreds of thousands of dollars on him. Since when does the trainer have to reveal his intention to win? There are horses in almost every race using it as a prep for future engagements. If someone is dumb enough to bet on a horse who may not be all out to win, let them bet. I personally wouldn't touch these races, but I don't see the harm offered in letting others do it.

CJ

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by ranchwest
Better question, why are people allowed to bet on these?

As long as they will play these races....they will allow betting. I watched some Quarter horse races from Los Al one night and they ran about 7 trial races. The giant favorites ran 2-3 even 4th without much trying because they just wanted a good enough time to get into the finals a week later. Yet the pools filled up and the favorites took big money? :cool:

[ranchwest]

My question about why people are allowed to wager on trials was somewhat tongue in cheek. I recall seeing (many years ago) a QH trial at DED where a horse finished 3rd and then set a track record in winning the futurity. Suddenly everyone acts like this is something new.

[Tom]

and then ask yourself...how many of these are empty today becasue racing has the image of "fixed?"
Whether or not it is smart to bet these races is not the point. The point is, what is the effect on the popularity of the game?
The last thing we need is a track filled with smart handicappers.
We NEED losers. No other way to put it. We need people to keep winning enough to keep them from going broke and to keep them happy. If we drive them away, they are taking OUR money with them. Some people dream about playing in the World Series of Poker. My dream is to find a back-room bar game with a table full fo drunks. When I play, I "feed the pigeons" enough to keep them playing.

[Derek2U]

Your pessimism surprises me; I want nothing but smart players
because, as a rule, its the smart ones that OutSmart themselfs.

[BillW]

I wouldn't mind seeing quick-pick pick-6 and pick-4 machines scattered around town. Maybe some scratch-off single play cards for a buck also.

[sq764]

I cannot access this article, can someone post the actual article? The link will not work for me.

[Zaf]

I don't this this can be as bad as the Sylvester Carmouche incident. LOL.

ZAFONIC

[tcat]

Ranchwest. I think thoroughbreds should e havqualifying races just like harness horses. What do you think?
I think of yesterday, last race at Aqu...it was apparant that a few of the horses had no business in the race, and It took for ever for them to load.

[Zaf]

Harness horses are very durable , they can run 40 x a year. A Thoroughbred (much more fragile) just has so much stamina. Owners and trainers would never go for that, a qualifyer with no purse money. At some tracks these pitiful animals can bearly run the 3F workout to qualify to run in a race in states that require that.

I think 2 workouts in a reasonable time and reasonable time frame may be the solution for layoff horses and horses who are chronically finishing in the back of the field. The standard should be for all tracks.

ZAFONIC

[Doug]

TOM WROTE,

We NEED losers. No other way to put it. We need people to keep winning enough to keep them from going broke and to keep them happy. If we drive them away, they are taking OUR money with them. Some people dream about playing in the World Series of Poker. My dream is to find a back-room bar game with a table full fo drunks. When I play, I "feed the pigeons" enough to keep them playing.


Remember reading an article a number of years ago by a supposedly professional horse player.

"Not only must I win, but my friends should lose" was the quote.

Doug

[ranchwest]

Originally posted by tcat
Ranchwest. I think thoroughbreds should e havqualifying races just like harness horses. What do you think?
I think of yesterday, last race at Aqu...it was apparant that a few of the horses had no business in the race, and It took for ever for them to load.

I agree with Zafonic that the harness horse is generally far more durable than the thoroughbred.

There are other ways to limit field size, but then the handicappers complain because there's no place for people to throw away their money.

I don't keep up with NYRA too much. Do they require a gate workout? That might help the loading problem if it is a race for young horses.