New York Gaming Commission suspends clocker for altering work distance
 

https://www.drf.com/news/nyra-suspen...-work-distance

Excerpt

The New York Gaming Commission suspended New York Racing Association clocker Richie Gazer for 30 calendar days and fined him $2,500 for altering a published work of a horse to make the horse eligible to race, according a ruling on the commission website.

Gazer has appealed the penalty and a stay has been granted, meaning Gazer may continue to work until a hearing is held.

The horse in question is Papi On Ice, who on May 1 was initially credited with a five-furlong work in 1:04.60 over the Belmont Park training track for trainer Randi Persaud. The work now reads a half-mile in 51.33 seconds.

Papi On Ice, who was pulled up soon after the start of his debut for maiden $20,000 claiming, was being entered for a race in the early part of May. The horse needed a workout in order to get off NYRA’s poor-performance list.

Clockers pulling some shenanigans at NYRA is nothing new. What’s next Sam the Bugler gets himself into trouble ? Oh yeah that already happened. You can’t make this stuff up.

Falsefying records is serious.
If he did it, 30 days is a joke.
Being a liar is bad enough, but violating a procedure for horse safety is intolerable. :ThmbDown:

One has to wonder if other works were fudged for personal gain?
Big hit on track integrity.

I'm pretty sure it's not that rare for certain trainers to call in bogus workouts to make horses eligible to race. That's obviously not a good practice, but it happens.

What happened? Your dad get fired from NYRA years ago or something?

Sam the Bugler? Seriously?

Why would they stay the suspension, and why is this person (presumably) still working for NYRA? I assume that he also misled NYRA, his employer, and misled the gambling public about this work. He was messing with the integrity of the betting pools as well as helping his buddy get a possibly unsound horse into a race.

The slap on the wrist treatment of stuff like this doesn't send a good message to the gambling public about the integrity of the sport.

You have to wonder if you read the entire article and gave it some thought. The PA mob is always ready to sharpen their pitchforks at the literal drop of a hat.

I don't know the whole story either, and if rules were broken, punishment is understandable. I also have known Richie Gazer for over 30 years and if he's a bad guy, then I don't know who the good guys are.

It must be hard to go through life always assuming the worst about people with the most minimal of information.

This is actually kinda laughable in the grand scheme of things.

Horse works 5f in 1:04.60

Rules say you need a 4f work and not one inch more...lmao

They give the 4f time and that is somehow devastatingly rule-breaking.

OK.

Whatever.

I'd appeal it also.

But hey...everything NYRA bad, right? :lol::lol::lol:

If he's your friend, that's fine and I understand why you are loyal to him, but licensed legal gambling operations demand total honesty from those who work in the enterprise. There are people I know and like personally who should not hold positions of public trust.

It is not in any sense a "mob" that someone who is willing to falsify information provided to handicappers should not work in the sport of horse racing.

Beyond the rank dishonesty, this is also an incredibly stupid thing to do and does, by the way, show a terrible character. If Richie was such a great guy, why wasn't he able to say "no" to what was obviously and illegal and scandalous request? Indeed, why did he not report the request to his employer and the racing authorities so the proper punishment could be imposed on the horseman for attempting to run an ineligible horse?

This entire thing stinks to high heaven.

Are you kidding?

Assuming his version of events are true...what exactly was the falsification, technically?

If the horse ran 4f in the time recorded...as part of an overall 5f move...what was falsified?

So it wasn't actually a 4f work because he also ran an additional furlong?

You're right, the whole thing does stink, but possibly for reasons completely unrelated to your feigned righteousness.

Maybe we wait until all facts are known before we go on another NYRA lynching...I know it's the favorite pastime of TLG-haters and guys out west with penis-envy (excuse me, NYRA-envy)....but that little speech above this reply of mine is not only telling, but Oscar-worthy. Bravo good sir! Bravo!

Is his job to lie about the distance of workouts? Is someone who is willing to lie about this willing to do other dishonest stutf for his buddies?

I don't give a hoot about TLG one way or the other, except to say that he nailed the Preakness in a way few public handicappers ever do. But there are no little white lies when it comes to clockers- handicappers depend on these people and helping their buddies get into the race should end one's career as an official clocker.

Again, if what he says is true (and until all the facts come out, we really can't say one way or another), it wasn't a lie if the reported time for 4f is true, as part of the overall 5f work.

Sounds like some sort of technicality. If anything.

But not a lie. Unless what was reported publicly wasn't true.

If the horse worked 4f in that time, how is it a lie?

Don't horses work out further all the time past the actual reported workout? Worked 6f in 112 and galloped out 7f in 125...or something like that? Happens all the time, right? This case is kind of the opposite of that. But again, not a lie until proven otherwise.

Do all lawyers jump to conclusions without all the facts or just the self-appointed PaceAdvantage lawyer?

maybe the dumbest rule ever...i get getting some kind of punishment but in the grand scheme of people breaking rules this seems pretty petty.

The NCAA is so mad at Kentucky they're going to give Cleveland State another year of probation....Jerry Tarkanian.

i am going to guarantee you that Richie didn't falsify a damn fxxxing thing. you should see what this man goes through at 7:15 a.m. in the stands where he clocks those horses and the telephone constantly ringing and 5 guys screaming in his ear all at once.

the guys at the wagering board need to be relieved of their jobs for impersonating humans that claim to do work.

he merely shortened a 5f work to 4f for rule purposes. (stupid rule imho) to make a horse eligible to enter.

i could tell you stories about real falsification of works but thats for another day, kiddies.

Allan

issue getting some buzz, but another that falls into the "IDK" category for me.


this is much the same as my take

If he simply ran a 13.27 fifth furlong, and four furlongs are acceptable, it should be fine.

The more important issue is that presumably in NY, the stewards ultimately control the entries and the "poor performance" list.

If the racing office identified a horse that was ineligible on a technicality that could easily be rectified, it would have behooved them to notify the stewards of the issue first so they could sign off on it before having the clocker make a revision.

It sounds like the rules should be reworded to say "at least 4F" and include a list of satisfactory times for each distance.

If 53 is satisfactory for 4F, then the official 5f time of 104 3/5 is CLEARY good enough because the difference between 53 and 104 3/5 is 11 3/5. He almost certainly beat 4F in 53 because I doubt this horse came home in 11 3/5. And if he did, he should be off the list anyway.

This horse was good to go and everyone knew it. Using the 51.33 that the clocker reported was no big deal and makes perfect sense given the official 5F time. Just tweak the rules so something like this won't happen again.

More important is the risk I brought up where the clockers miss a work and/or a trainer calls one in that may not have occurred.

Having both worked as an official clocker and been involved on a higher level than that in dealing with situations similar to the one at issue, I do sympathize with the sanctioned official.

In my opinion, things should just never have progressed to the point at which a fictionalized increment came into play. And I suspect the devil is in the details.

I'd love to know who caught the initial problem, who, if anyone, higher up was consulted before refusing the entry, and who exposed and balked at the alteration.

Look, rules are rules in officialdom-except when they aren't. The book far from covers every contingency and situation, which means that at some point somebody in authority must step up, stick their neck out a bit, and make the right call for all involved.

And the right thing, again, just in my opinion, would have been for the clocker, entry clerk, and perhaps even the racing sec to cover themselves by seeking an ok from the stewards or state vet (nowadays being put on the steward's list is tantamount to making the vet's list) for the 5/8 work to suffice. In virtually any similar predicament I have witnessed, that ok would quickly have been issued.

One unfortunate aspect of working as a racing official is that trouble is ALWAYS coming and usually first appears in an innocuous seeming manner. In fact, I routinely advise my crew of that: Trouble is ALWAYS COMING, and it will find you.

And please, just a note to the sticklers and theorists on this board: Don't kill the messenger here. I'm just expounding about how these things generally get handled behind the scenes.

NYRA thought it serious enough to issue a 30 day suspension, so there's that.

Doesn't mean they are right for doing it. There are many infractions under NYRA that warrant a suspension that get nothing.

Tom, you need to read the article. NYRA did NOT issue a suspension ( or fine ). It was the Gaming Commission.

Bogus works exist. But a trainer can't just call one in. There would have to be other people involved. Not saying who. Could be any of several others.

They would issue you a stay because of a pesky little thing called due process.

Are we sure the rule reads a horse must work "exactly" a 1/2 mile. I've never seen a jurisdiction who's rules read that way. I have seen said horse must work "at least" a 1/2 mile.

Perhaps NYRA is different. I don't know for sure. But I'd be surprised.

In many jurisdictions horses working off the poor performance list must work at a prescribed time and be witnessed by an association or State Vet. They also can be subject to post work testing. Just as if they had raced.

From the underlying article:

In order to get off the poor performance list, a horse must work a half-mile in 53 seconds or faster. The rule, oddly, does not allow for a workout farther than a half-mile whereas rules governing horses returning from extended layoffs indicate a horse must have three workouts within 90 days of their start date and one of those works must be “at least” a half-mile.

From later in the article re the workout:

Gazer said he was told by the clocker who timed Papi On Ice that the horse did work a half-mile in 51.33 as part of the five-furlong move in 1:04.60.

If this had been recorded initially as a 4f work in 51.33 and the horse "galloped out" an extra furlong and was caught in 1:04.60, would this ever have seen the light of day as an "altered" (per the headline) workout? Seems like more of a technical or administrative issue coupled with a trainer brain-freeze re the need for the recorded work to be exactly 4f.

Again don't know specifically about NYRA. However there are many places that will accept an entry knowing full well a horse needs a work. But since many places enter as far as a week in advance or sometimes more. The trainer will be allowed to fulfill the working requirement and be eligible to compete.

Thanks for that.

Wow! Regulators, rule writers deciding how trainers should train their horses is not something I'd be comfortable with.

What if the horse needs the air of a farther workout and will again perform poorly because of not being fit?

If trainers have to deal with absolute insurer rules. They IMO should have absolute say as to what they feel is best for their horse. Saying "at least" a 1/2 mile would give them that latitude.

Makes sense.

And such entries are not first approved by the stewards?

When a horse needs a work but is not on a steward's or vet's list, I always accept the entry without consulting the stews. Common practice. Failure to comply results in a scratch. And long gone are the days when required drills were routinely invented by official clockers.

The rules in West Virginia allow a horse to be entered so long as it is eligible to run at the "time of starting" of the race in which it is entered. According to the rules, even a horse on the veterinarians' list can enter so long as it does not exclude another horse from the race.

That rule is interpreted differently by different state vets, and in practical usage only applies to horses scheduled to remain on the list just for a pre-specified period of time. It's always about how they translate their policies and paperwork to the RTO system and count the days, which I could write a book about.

I've probably checked about 1.5 million entries for eligibility and have dealt with these issues and instances thousands of times. While many rules in racing are sacred and inviolate, others get contorted a bit and morph into flexible policies.

I could explain this much further, but it's late and I need to get home.

And, btw, I didn't state that I've never accepted an entry on a horse still on a vet's (or steward's) list, but rather that entries on horses NOT on the list but needing works are always accepted in my office. There is a distinction. And a critical one , at that.

Reviewed rough estimate..more like just under a million. Hard to say, since we ran year round, 10 races per card 5 or even 6 cards per week for much of my career.

clearly the horse is not unsound and common sense needs to prevail.

if not a go fund me should be established as the punishment greatly exceeds the "crime" and this is no way to treat a 40 year employee.

good luck to mr gazer.

Here is the bottom line. It is not the clocker's job to get a horse qualified to enter. It is his job to record the workouts.

The TRAINER's job is know the rules and act/train in a way the gets his horse entered.

This is not as bad as it sounded at first, but, the way to "fix" rules that are not right is NOT to oignore them or circumvent them.

Stay in your lane, bro. :)

Was no doubt ill advised to "extrapolate" the half-split. At that point it becomes work of fiction. Somebody higher should have signed off on the actual 5/8 work.

Sometimes common sense must over-ride verbatim rules. But that does require some stones. The production of horse races is not always a smooth, risk-free process. Tough calls and trouble tend to pop up.

I think you meant interpolate.
I agree with Tom here.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
If a rule is too rigid or doesn't make sense you don't circumvent the rule.
And why was it such a problem to schedule an additional workout to qualify this horse? Was there a fear that the horse would not qualify again? What important motive was there to not simply report the facts and instead tamper with one's integrity?