Beyer makes legitimate gripe

[karlskorner]

Grand Hombre makes quick impression

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/sports/columns/beyerandrew

[rrbauer]

Take a look at today's entries at Tampa Bay.
Race 3 has a maiden comebacker, last raced at DMR in July. No works showing. Also, a firster with one work showing at Ocala a month ago.
Race 4 has a maiden firster going 2-turns on the turf with no works showing.

There's only one solution here unless you have inside info: PASS.

Going back to the race last Saturday that is the subject of Beyer's column. Anyone have the tote WPS totals for the race and the amount bet WPS on the subject horse? If so, could you post that info. Might be able to glean some insights as to whether, or not, there was informed money bet on the horse (and not to "place").

[karlskorner]

M/L 12/1, sent off at $14.30/1, hardly a coup. Assuming the trainer or one of his employees clocked the horse, is he really obligated to report this. Suppose the horse ran 3 panels in 35.3 prior to the published w/o, is it his "duty" to make this known to the genral public ?

[takeout]

I've seen more than a few that shouldn't even have been allowed to start. They didn't have a published work within the required time period after a layoff and nothing was announced at the track. They just slipped through the cracks. It's a little trickier to tell whether they are missing a work these days because sometimes the work is in the track program and nowhere else. That's something else that shouldn't be happening. It should either be everywhere, or nowhere and have to be announced.

They must phone them in from these training tracks but then the track sometimes doesn't get the word on to Equibase. Why they don't phone them in directly to EQ in first place (like the tracks do) is beyond me. There was one that won as a firster with no works, ran another race or two, was laid off for about 5 months, and then won again with no works showing. If memory serves, I think one of the works was added to the pps after the fact and the other never was. In that particular example, as in most, I don't think there was any skullduggery in play, rather just more signs of no one being on the same page. I'm afraid this type of thing might get worse as more tracks get slots and the racing becomes less and less significant.

As far as works being misrepresented, that's as old as time and will probably never be corrected. I can recall Beyer columns of long ago about debut steamers, and such, with nothing showing (terrible workouts) except a flood of money on the tote board. When it comes to works it's a bit of a comfort to me just to see SOMETHING down there and hopefully I can have some faith in the date if nothing else. :(

[JustRalph]

I was watching TVG-Mountaineer one night. A horse that used to be in my stable mail was running in the next to last race. I caught the name and watched a little closer just to see what he was going to do. I pulled up the form online and saw that the horse had been driven to Beulah park near Columbus Ohio a few days before, worked out and brought back to Mountaineer? Needless to say I noticed that this supposedly occurred on a day where the weather was very bad (Snow etc) and Beu. had been closed for more than a few days due to snow and very bad track conditions. The horse showed a moderate workout. I thought this was kind of funny. During the between race show the lady who works the show pointed out the work for the horse to the guy on the show. He started laughing and then she looked in the camera and said point blank: "That horse has not been off the grounds in over a year, and I am sure of it. I don't know how the heck they got him up to beulah and ran him on that track? "
they both started laughing, and the guy points out that sometimes "that trainer might get her horses mixed up when it comes to workouts". So I guess it goes both ways.

[Tom]

Originally posted by karlskorner

...Suppose the horse ran 3 panels in 35.3 prior to the published w/o, is it his "duty" to make this known to the genral public ?

Absolutely. Anything less than that is fraud, and in my opinion, trainers and owners and jockeys should not be allowed to bet at any track they are working at. They denied Pete rose his livliehood for something not even close to this.
Any trainer concealing relevant information is cheating.

[linrom1]

In my book Grand Hombre was one of the best-bred horses in that race. I used him, of course. It did not hurt that Edgar Prado was on board. I did note the only three published works, but that was a plus. Prado doesn’t win all the races, but he is not there for a workout either. Besides, Beyer is wrong as this was one weak maiden field.

[JustRalph]

I am not a defender of Beyer........But that said.....

The damn horse ran 1:08.66? I would say that is pretty quick. One undeniable fact in this sport is the clock. Secretariat ran 1:09 1/5 for Six in his world record Belmont stakes race. I understand the pace differences etc for a mile and a half etc. but come on, how often do you see a sub 1:09 6f race? If Secretariat had only been going 6f on that great day, how much faster do you think he could have gone? He would have had to go half a second faster to match the horse in the Beyer article. He probably could have done it. But, 1:08.66 is serious race horse time. You are talking high grade stakes flesh. 2002 Breeders cup sprint winner Orientate: Winning Time: 1:08.89 Come on!!

This trainer pulled it over and Tom is right. He made some big money on the race. He probably collected the majority of the win pool. Or his connections did. The Pete Rose analogy is perfect. This sport is going to keep it up and the Government as in 'Federal' government is going to step in someday. If you really want to screw a sport up, let the Federal Government make the rules.



1973 Secretariat :23 3/5 :46 1/5 1:09 1/5 1:34 1/5 1:59 2:24

[superfecta]

Originally posted by JustRalph
I am not a defender of Beyer........But that said.....

The damn horse ran 1:08.66? I would say that is pretty quick. One undeniable fact in this sport is the clock. Secretariat ran 1:09 1/5 for Six in his world record Belmont stakes race. I understand the pace differences etc for a mile and a half etc. but come on, how often do you see a sub 1:09 6f race? If Secretariat had only been going 6f on that great day, how much faster do you think he could have gone? He would have had to go half a second faster to match the horse in the Beyer article. He probably could have done it. But, 1:08.66 is serious race horse time. You are talking high grade stakes flesh. 2002 Breeders cup sprint winner Orientate: Winning Time: 1:08.89 Come on!!

This trainer pulled it over and Tom is right. He made some big money on the race. He probably collected the majority of the win pool. Or his connections did. The Pete Rose analogy is perfect. This sport is going to keep it up and the Government as in 'Federal' government is going to step in someday. If you really want to screw a sport up, let the Federal Government make the rules.



1973 Secretariat :23 3/5 :46 1/5 1:09 1/5 1:34 1/5 1:59 2:24 Can anyone say Track bias? In the 5th race the winner ran 5.5 furlongs in 103.38.
3yr old fillies winners of one.

In the 10th race that day,7 furlongs, winner Tour of the Cat ran the first six furlongs in 108.43(faster than Grand Hombre)and ran the last furlong in 12.72.So Grand hombre is the second fastest horse in the country,at best.

[azibuck]

Off topic, this isn't remotely close to what Pete Rose did. Rose bet against his team. The equal of that here would have been that trainer taking bets on his horse via Betfair, then having him tank on purpose.

I also don't see how it's fraud if he didn't report the private workout. It's an honor system. No honor does not equal fraud. If I was rich and owned a farm, I might be inclined to build my own training track. And my horses works would be none of your damn business. Isn't that whay Mike Dickinson does? I'm not sure, but I think he's the one who trains his horses on his farm in Maryland.

And if you haven't read the conspiracy theories at clockerbob.com, you should. I'm inclined to believe he did report the 49-and-change work that mysteriously was never published. Why wasn't it published. Because the guy that took the call dummied up, see. Then he made a killin' at the window, see. Myeah, see.

[JustRalph]

I agree the track was fast and I went over and watched the races, and the track was fast as heck. But either way that stakes race was a grade 2. This horse ran a fifth slower. In his first Race? If he improves? What does he run? In relation to Beyers point in the article, I think that stakes race makes his point for him. Those were some pretty damn good horses. Including Burning Roma who is a pretty damn good horse. I am know big fan of Beyer, but I think he has it right on this one.

From the article:
"Racetrack people wasted no time concluding that trainer Dennis Manning had pulled off the betting coup of a lifetime. It was a perfect scenario: He had the fastest 3-year-old maiden in America. He was stabled at a training center, so few people could have known about the colt's ability -- particularly clockers and their clients. And the system for reporting workouts at these facilities is made to order for a trainer who wants to deceive the public. Much of the time there are no clockers present, and the trainer is responsible for reporting his horse's time to the racetrack."

I think Beyers point is well taken in this scenario. He pulled it over pretty good and the system lets him get away with it.

[azibuck]

I just want to clarify two things:

JustRalph is not agreeing with me, we just posted almost simultaneously.

And going to the title of this thread, despite what I wrote, I do also agree the gripe is legitimate. If you're a horseman, your livlihood is supported by the gambler. So one way or another, the folks paying the bills (us) got shafted. It may be legal, it's just not right.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by Netcapperazibuck
Off topic, this isn't remotely close to what Pete Rose did. Rose bet against his team.

where do you get that from? I haven't heard that from any reliable sources. In fact a couple of sources say he bet the Reds to win..........

Either way Rose should be in the hall. If you want to investigate other members of the hall of fame and start pulling them out, then I say only then you can keep Pete out.

Back to the subject of this thread: This guy was supposed to report the workouts accurately. I don't think he did. Based on the facts. Apparently a bunch of people agree or his phone wouldn't be ringing and Beyer wouldn't be writing about it. :cool:

Netcapperazibuck
I just saw your other post.....apparently we are writing at the same time here. It appears we agree on some things and disagree maybe on others. Either way, good debate. I salute you.

[Tom]

Let me clarify what I meant by my Peter Rose example.
He was banned from baseball because what he did jeopardized the integrity of the sport. When a horse shows up with vital information missing, then wins and his owwner/trainer/jockey collect a bet, this is total lack of integrity and it is why the seat next to you at the track is probably empty. You ever see a dealer at Vegas have a hand on the side while he is dealing your blackjack cards out? People who provide the means for a gambling event have no right to participate in the game.
The idea of the first win belonging to the stable is garbage. That is out and out stealing and any trainer/owner that does it is a cheater. I don't care how famous the guy is - he is cheating.
Baseball is so against gambling becasue of the appearance that games will be thrown, but betting on baseball is illegal-horse racing exists for the betting period. Take away the betting and
racing would be redued to dressage. Racing is not a sport-it is gambling.

[superfecta]

But the trainer didn't make any wagers(if he is to be believed)and the owner bet to place.As a rule of thumb the horse should have paid about 10-12 bucks to place.If your lucky.So the fact that the pool was not out of wack,the trainer didn't bet and didn't tip people on this horse was this "good",makes me doubt there was any attempt to fix this race.

[superfecta]

Maybe beyer is one of the "numerous" friends that didn't hear about the horse and he lost his bet in that race??

(You could have said something about the four horse,I may be rich but I could have used the money):cool:

[cj]

I am usually an Andy Beyer fan, but...

get real!!! This happens every day all over the country, with the possible exception of SoCal, where workouts are much more closely monitored. Must have been deadline time and not much else to write about. I haven't been playing horses nearly as long as Andy, but even I know not to take the clockings from anywhere, especially training centers, seriously.

CJ

[oldstuff]

Has anyone looked at Frankel's training patterns lately?

73 DSLR......no works....

Look at them.

[azibuck]

Hey! Hey! Was that a one-finger salute?! Why, I oughtta...

[anotherdave]

Funny, I remember a story in one of Beyer's books about him missing a Pick 6 because he didn't put in a firster. He was alive in the Pick 6 and was talking to the trainer of this horse who told him something like "If I showed the clockers what this horse could really do he'd be 3-5". Now, of course the horse won and Beyer lost the Pick 6 because he asked the trainer too late.

AD

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by Netcapperazibuck
Hey! Hey! Was that a one-finger salute?! Why, I oughtta...

All fingers and a tucked thumb! No malice or disrespect intended.

I agree with CJ, this happens all the time. That is what sucks!

:cool: :cool: :cool: