Jorge Navarro has the yankee cap on

[luisbe]

Mike Watchmaker:
"It’s going to take a long time to get over that video taken at Monmouth of trainer Jorge Navarro and one of his owners, the incredibly offensive one that has led to fines and Navarro being barred from racing at a few tracks. Many might never forget it, and I get that. In the meantime, the whole sordid affair is a good illustration of why you sometimes have to completely separate your feelings for a horse from your feelings for the people behind that horse.

Enter Sharp Azteca. He is a brilliant, top-class miler who can go a little shorter or a little longer when circumstances require it, and he was sensational again on Saturday in winning the Grade 2 Kelso Handicap at Belmont.

At times, Sharp Azteca has done some legitimately monstrous things. On his day, I think Sharp Azteca can win any race from seven furlongs to 1 1/16 miles, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he could excel at six furlongs, too, if that ever became his focus.

Sharp Azteca is trained by Jorge Navarro. I am a big fan of Sharp Azteca, the horse."

[onefast99]

Originally Posted by MonmouthParkJoe

Curious to see the stance that the Breeders Cup takes on this. Looks like Sharp Azteca will point towards the dirt mile.

If I was the owner of this horse and there was any thought of Navarro not being allowed to participate I would be looking to move him asap. We are too close to the BC race for a change in trainer to really affect the horse in any way shape or form.

[Track Phantom]

It's hard for me to believe horseplayers are not more outraged by this. Not what Navarro and his owner said but how flippantly Monmouth (and any other track that always either of these two on their grounds) dealt with it.

Yes, you can minimize that video with their comments as nothing more than a couple of blowhards spouting off. I don't look at it that way. I look at it as validation of their widespread cheating. They took money right out of the horseplayers' pockets (since they also bet down to the nub) and have little regard for the industry and those who keep it going with their financial investments.

Integrity matters more in horse racing than just about any other sport. Those who jeopardize integrity (or perception thereof) should be dealt with in the absolute most harsh way possible.

The way Monmouth brushed off the commentary leads me to believe they either care so little about protecting other trainers and horseplayers or someone is getting a cut of the action in order to keep it "business-as-usual".

If horse racing is interested in changing the perception the public has then they need to start with rodeo clowns like these. If they're not interested in dealing with integrity issues then they get what they deserve when the public is highly critical of any protective oversight (stewarding, wagering pool/toteboard security, drugs and on and on).

[onefast99]

Originally Posted by Track Phantom

It's hard for me to believe horseplayers are not more outraged by this. Not what Navarro and his owner said but how flippantly Monmouth (and any other track that always either of these two on their grounds) dealt with it.

Yes, you can minimize that video with their comments as nothing more than a couple of blowhards spouting off. I don't look at it that way. I look at it as validation of their widespread cheating. They took money right out of the horseplayers' pockets (since they also bet down to the nub) and have little regard for the industry and those who keep it going with their financial investments.

Integrity matters more in horse racing than just about any other sport. Those who jeopardize integrity (or perception thereof) should be dealt with in the absolute most harsh way possible.

The way Monmouth brushed off the commentary leads me to believe they either care so little about protecting other trainers and horseplayers or someone is getting a cut of the action in order to keep it "business-as-usual".

If horse racing is interested in changing the perception the public has then they need to start with rodeo clowns like these. If they're not interested in dealing with integrity issues then they get what they deserve when the public is highly critical of any protective oversight (stewarding, wagering pool/toteboard security, drugs and on and on).

You got it right, Dennis Drazin is in the middle of the spider web on this one, he is sure Navarro will never do it again. He also is the representative of the horseman who most believe he will do it again. So we have a real stand off here, and if I was a betting man I would say Drazin isn't going to make any rulings that would deter Navarro from running his horses at MP.

[Track Phantom]

Originally Posted by onefast99

You got it right, Dennis Drazin is in the middle of the spider web on this one, he is sure Navarro will never do it again. He also is the representative of the horseman who most believe he will do it again. So we have a real stand off here, and if I was a betting man I would say Drazin isn't going to make any rulings that would deter Navarro from running his horses at MP.

This part makes no sense to me. Does Drazin think that having Navarro horses win at 2-5 in 8 horse fields result in a better product than having a fairly run 6 or 7 horse field? Is the desperation for horses at any cost? Pulling out the Navarro runners would certainly have an impact to field size but would likely produce a higher overall mutual payout.

Let me ask this question out loud. If the pools weren't parimutuel but rather fixed odds that the track was accountable for (like a bookie), do you think Navarro would still be training there? There isn't a doubt in my mind that the guy would have been banished long before he became a household rotten egg. The tracks get their cut off the top and, by doing so, have absolutely zero incentive to care how the remaining monies are divided.

I think there is more going on here. Is it too far fetched to think those who might intervene in these things are provided "kick-backs" to look the other way? It might be tinfoil-hat thinking but it happens in many walks of life. This industry is absolutely ripe for it.

[onefast99]

Originally Posted by Track Phantom

This part makes no sense to me. Does Drazin think that having Navarro horses win at 2-5 in 8 horse fields result in a better product than having a fairly run 6 or 7 horse field? Is the desperation for horses at any cost? Pulling out the Navarro runners would certainly have an impact to field size but would likely produce a higher overall mutual payout.

Let me ask this question out loud. If the pools weren't parimutuel but rather fixed odds that the track was accountable for (like a bookie), do you think Navarro would still be training there? There isn't a doubt in my mind that the guy would have been banished long before he became a household rotten egg. The tracks get their cut off the top and, by doing so, have absolutely zero incentive to care how the remaining monies are divided.

I think there is more going on here. Is it too far fetched to think those who might intervene in these things are provided "kick-backs" to look the other way? It might be tinfoil-hat thinking but it happens in many walks of life. This industry is absolutely ripe for it.

You don't have to sell me on why Navarro should be banned from racing at MP. This year I have finished 2nd to his horses 3 times. All three times his horses who beat me went on to win at a higher level claiming wise. One went from a 5k nw 3l to a 7500 open and won for fun(8 lengths). No one knows what he is doing, he isn't a super trainer by any means, his track record shows that. I hope that other tracks say he cant race at their facility and finally Drazin wakes up and sees the damage this one trainer is doing and bans him as well.

[cj]

Will be interesting to see how the ex-Navarro does as the 8-5 ML favorite in the opener at Belmont. He tanked bad first time out of the barn but that was at a much higher class. In today for 25k after getting claimed from Jorge for 20.

[Franco Santiago]

Originally Posted by cj

Will be interesting to see how the ex-Navarro does as the 8-5 ML favorite in the opener at Belmont. He tanked bad first time out of the barn but that was at a much higher class. In today for 25k after getting claimed from Jorge for 20.

It's like that one Arby's commerical where the narrator says, "We have the MEAT!!" (or something like that).

Well, JN says, "We have the JUICE!!".

[onefast99]

Originally Posted by cj

Will be interesting to see how the ex-Navarro does as the 8-5 ML favorite in the opener at Belmont. He tanked bad first time out of the barn but that was at a much higher class. In today for 25k after getting claimed from Jorge for 20.

Sacco knows what he is doing. I see a win today...

[magwell]

That must be some serious "magic juice" Sharp Azteca had to be at Belmont 3 days out from the race and was under 24 hour security watch was tested before and after the race and nothing showed yet. But Navarro should be banned because he wins too many races with mostly claiming horses ? Now other trainers don't want to run against him if he's in the race, that's unbelievable .......SMH

[Racetrack Playa]

Being filmed rooting for your brothers horse(diff. track) and hamming it up for the haters,big deal, I say 2 fun

If this guy is cheating why/how is he still racing ?
Don't hate the player hate the game

maybe its time for the horseplayers to "take a knee" with our wallets, until the RACING INDUSTRY cleans itself up.its a hot mess isn't it

YouTube

[Racetrack Playa]

XYJet and Private Zone 2015

YouTube

[onefast99]

Originally Posted by onefast99

Sacco knows what he is doing. I see a win today...

3rd and claimed, looked as if taking dirt in the face wasn't helping him run!

[alhattab]

http://www.drf.com/news/navarro-agre...-delaware-meet

The agreement runs for the rest of the Delaware meeting, and they will reassess next year based on Navarro's record over the Winter/Spring. A fitting response in my view. I realize this ban doesn't hurt Navarro at all, but it is illustrative of the punishment fitting the crime. This is the action I would have taken at Monmouth/Meadowlands as well.

[onefast99]

Originally Posted by alhattab

http://www.drf.com/news/navarro-agre...-delaware-meet

The agreement runs for the rest of the Delaware meeting, and they will reassess next year based on Navarro's record over the Winter/Spring. A fitting response in my view. I realize this ban doesn't hurt Navarro at all, but it is illustrative of the punishment fitting the crime. This is the action I would have taken at Monmouth/Meadowlands as well.

They felt the product they offer would have been tarnished. That is the argument every track needs to use against this guy and I am not basing it solely on the video but a combination of positives clearly showing a poor track record as well.