Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cj
What do you mean "might" he have penned a column? He didn't, not that I can find. I've never seen any indication that he doesn't like the P5, especially if it is at a low takeout which seems to be the current trend.
Anything is possible, but I find it very hard to believe that even a comment to a NYRA employee would have much effect, and a comment to the R&WB even less relevant. How hard is it to read between the lines? It seems to me the bet was asked for, and approval wasn't given. I'd be shocked if I'm wrong on that.
|
I wrote originally: "Why is it crazy to think
he'd try to influence the process..."
Note the tense of the highlighted phrase - I'm was suggesting Crist might in some way try to shape the debate (IF the debate even exists). Where did I say he did? He's written numerous columns on betting and different types of wagers over the years, correct? I've seen lobbying firsthand and trust me conservations, formal or otherwise, matter. To think otherwise is true "get real" material. And I'm not even suggesting it would be improper for Crist to make his view heard, publicly or privately.
With all that said, why must I read between the lines? Why not have an open debate on the issue? Perhaps it's a horrible idea. Maybe it's a great idea. Let's get everyone on record. You spend much more time on racing matters than myself, so do you think it's a good or bad idea?
