Worst DQ ever?

[linrom1]

It never fails to disappoint how racing insiders continue to disparage and ridicule handicappers' concerns about integrity of the game!

We all should assume that racing industry has our backs? What a joke! On the contrary, everything that this industry does should be scrutinized by handicappers.

[v j stauffer]

Originally Posted by linrom1

It never fails to disappoint how racing insiders continue to disparage and ridicule handicappers' concerns about integrity of the game!

We all should assume that racing industry has our backs? What a joke! On the contrary, everything that this industry does should be scrutinized by handicappers.

Since I'm a child of both worlds I will tell you personally I try to do whatever I can to promote the best possible treatment of the players.

I would suppose The Little Guy who is in a very similar position to mine would echo those sentiments.

If you had an insiders link to the upper management of a major racing facility. What would you want to see done? What would you like for them to consider? What changes would you want?

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

If you had an insiders link to the upper management of a major racing facility. What would you want to see done? What would you like for them to consider? What changes would you want?

To consider improving public perception.

Brand integrity damn it.

For a modest fee, I would produce a few brief 'segments' with an On-Air Talent and a highly-qualified Senior Steward to replay, comment, and then 'rule' on a few commonly controversial scenarios.

Broadcast through already mature online and social media channels, this would significantly increase the public's view of stewards as an 'authority figure', thus increasing the perception of integrity.

[v j stauffer]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

To consider improving public perception.

Brand integrity damn it.

For a modest fee, I would produce a few brief 'segments' with an On-Air Talent and a highly-qualified Senior Steward to replay, comment, and then 'rule' on a few commonly controversial scenarios.

Broadcast through already mature online and social media channels, this would significantly increase the public's view of stewards as an 'authority figure', thus increasing the perception of integrity.

I'll be involved in pre-meet discussions regarding TV content at Oaklawn. I'll bring up this idea. Remember the judges are employed by the State not the association.

[linrom1]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

Since I'm a child of both worlds I will tell you personally I try to do whatever I can to promote the best possible treatment of the players.

I would suppose The Little Guy who is in a very similar position to mine would echo those sentiments.

If you had an insiders link to the upper management of a major racing facility. What would you want to see done? What would you like for them to consider? What changes would you want?

I understand that you do, it's very obvious to see. On the other hand, I do not believe that others do.

The relationship between players and racing management is adversarial. Management is always seeking to extract more revenue from the players while at same time disproportionally shifting costs to non computer and non high volume players. In a parimutuel betting this should never happen!

What we have now is some hybrid version of parimutuel wagering where some players are getting kickbacks under the table.

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by linrom1

I understand that you do, it's very obvious to see. On the other hand, I do not believe that others do.

The relationship between players and racing management is adversarial. Management is always seeking to extract more revenue from the players while at same time disproportionally shifting costs to non computer and non high volume players. In a parimutuel betting this should never happen!

What we have now is some hybrid version of parimutuel wagering where some players are getting kickbacks under the table.

You don't get a lot right, including this one.

Maybe if I blew my own horn, more people ( not you, of course ), would get it. But that's never going to happen.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

If you had an insiders link to the upper management of a major racing facility. What would you want to see done? What would you like for them to consider? What changes would you want?

I would try to convince upper management that the 6-horse field -- while lucrative for the horsemen -- is an awful betting prospect for the wagering customer...especially when it carries with it a 24+% blended parimutuel takeout.

[v j stauffer]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I would try to convince upper management that the 6-horse field -- while lucrative for the horsemen -- is an awful betting prospect for the wagering customer...especially when it carries with it a 24+% blended parimutuel takeout.

I understand it's frustrating. However, that six horse field may be a prep for several horses that might end up in a 12 horse Graded Stakes three weeks later. The LAST thing a racing office wants to do is card a short field. They know exactly how much every single entry means to the bottom line. Sometimes though it is a necessary evil.

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I would try to convince upper management that the 6-horse field -- while lucrative for the horsemen -- is an awful betting prospect for the wagering customer...especially when it carries with it a 24+% blended parimutuel takeout.

With all due respect, the notion that anyone in track management, at any level, wants to run small fields is absurd. If it were possible to run nine 12 horse fields every day, we would surely do it. There is a gigantic disconnect between any player that actually thinks like your above post and reality.

Don't get me wrong, I don't always agree with "management" decisions, in racing or really anywhere, but any suggestion that management wants small fields is ludicrous.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by v j stauffer

I understand it's frustrating. However, that six horse field may be a prep for several horses that might end up in a 12 horse Graded Stakes three weeks later. The LAST thing a racing office wants to do is card a short field. They know exactly how much every single entry means to the bottom line. Sometimes though it is a necessary evil.

I can't agree with you, Vic. If indeed the short field is the "LAST thing" that a racing office wants...then, would this sad development reach such epidemic levels? Don't you see what has been happening out there...especially on the weekdays? Are all these late scratches that we see being primed for upcoming Stakes races?

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by the little guy

With all due respect, the notion that anyone in track management, at any level, wants to run small fields is absurd. If it were possible to run nine 12 horse fields every day, we would surely do it. There is a gigantic disconnect between any player that actually thinks like your above post and reality.

Don't get me wrong, I don't always agree with "management" decisions, in racing or really anywhere, but any suggestion that management wants small fields is ludicrous.

I am not saying that the management prefers the short fields. I contend that the HORSEMEN want the short fields...and that the management chooses to appease the horsemen's wishes. These rampant late scratches are killing the game, IMO...and the sad truth is that the "track management" is doing nothing to stop this lamentable scenario which is being played out nationwide to the utter dismay of the wagering customer.

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I am not saying that the management prefers the short fields. I contend that the HORSEMEN want the short fields...and that the management chooses to appease the horsemen's wishes. These rampant late scratches are killing the game, IMO...and the sad truth is that the "track management" is doing nothing to stop this lamentable scenario which is being played out nationwide to the utter dismay of the wagering customer.

You are incorrect and, frankly, it's nonsensical. Nobody in management is running small fields to appease horsemen. You are making this up as you go along.

You assert that management is "doing nothing" yet have no idea whether that is true or not. I'm with you that the abundance of late scratches, in races without a surface change, is an issue. However, to suggest that management is happy with it not only makes no sense, it's untrue.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by the little guy

You are incorrect and, frankly, it's nonsensical. Nobody in management is running small fields to appease horsemen. You are making this up as you go along.

You assert that management is "doing nothing" yet have no idea whether that is true or not. I'm with you that the abundance of late scratches, in races without a surface change, is an issue. However, to suggest that management is happy with it not only makes no sense, it's untrue.

I am trying to understand you here, TLG...and I want you to try and understand ME. What exactly am I "making up as I go along"? Am I "making up" the fact that the racing industry nationwide was touting that the casino-infused purses would subsequently improve the quality and the competitiveness of the fields that were already in decline as far as "quality and competitiveness" were concerned? When an original field of 8 horses is reduced to 5 or 6 by the obligatory 2 or 3 late scratches, without a drop of moisture on the track or a cloud in the sky...then, how long should this shameful practice be allowed to go on without having management play a hand in rectifying this sad scenario? I have been talking about this for YEARS here...and the situation is only getting worse and worse...NATIONWIDE!

You insinuate that the management isn't "doing nothing"; if they were indeed "doing something"...would we see what we are currently seeing with the weekday dirt races nationwide?

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I am trying to understand you here, TLG...and I want you to try and understand ME. What exactly am I "making up as I go along"? Am I "making up" the fact that the racing industry nationwide was touting that the casino-infused purses would subsequently improve the quality and the competitiveness of the fields that were already in decline as far as "quality and competitiveness" were concerned? When an original field of 8 horses is reduced to 5 or 6 by the obligatory 2 or 3 late scratches, without a drop of moisture on the track or a cloud in the sky...then, how long should this shameful practice be allowed to go on without having management play a hand in rectifying this sad scenario? I have been talking about this for YEARS here...and the situation is only getting worse and worse...NATIONWIDE!

You insinuate that the management isn't "doing nothing"; if they were indeed "doing something"...would we see what we are currently seeing with the weekday dirt races nationwide?

im not interested in playing the conversation twisting game. Maybe when I'm home and not trying to type on my iPad. My responses logically followed your posts....and you know that.

as my responses clearly stated, your inferences that management of racetracks in any way are complicit with anyone that may benefit from small fields, is incorrect. How anyone could actually believe this is beyond me. I never said I didn't wish something could be done about the situation, nor would I, I was pretty simply trying to dissuade you from that line of thinking, specifically and in general.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by the little guy

im not interested in playing the conversation twisting game. Maybe when I'm home and not trying to type on my iPad. My responses logically followed your posts....and you know that.

as my responses clearly stated, your inferences that management of racetracks in any way are complicit with anyone that may benefit from small fields, is incorrect. How anyone could actually believe this is beyond me. I never said I didn't wish something could be done about the situation, nor would I, I was pretty simply trying to dissuade you from that line of thinking, specifically and in general.

I don't presume to have spent any time talking to track management, but other respectable members here have...and to a man, they testify that the tracks only consider the HORSEMEN to be their customers, while casually ignoring the needs of the common horseplayer. Speaking strictly for myself...I can't, for the life of me, see how this late-scratch problem cannot be effectively handled by track management...if they realize how unappetizing a situation it is from a betting standpoint. Could it be that tracks are under the impression that the bettors LIKE these short fields? I read somewhere where some track executive said that he couldn't understand why the horseplayers were complaining about the short fields...because the tiny field sizes were bound to help the horseplayers' win percentage.