Adios Juan Vazquez

[Cholly]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

Here's the problem w due process. The problem is that bettors don't get due process. Bettors can't recover lost funds if they ran 2nd and the winner came up juiced. so if I can't get due process as a bettor why should cheats get due process as trainers?

what SRU says

and double up on the "transparency" Mr. H referred to; trainers are supposed to get all of that they want but bettors get none.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Cholly

what SRU says

He just copied me again.

[proximity]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

Training beside you
Here in the dark
Hiding workouts at 4am

Softly you whisper
You're so sincere
How could the judges be so blind

Penn national comes to Juan
With Oooooooopen Aaaaarms
Please come train at out track

SING IT TO THEM SHEMP!!

speaking of racing songs, i hear pen is in negotiations with a former super trainer to sing a special edition of alicia keys' girl on fire that will be called clothes on fire:

oh, o,o,o she's got his clothes on the ground
and she's burning them down
o, ohhh, o-o win percents in the clouds
but they're now coming down....

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by cj

I agree the public should be told why. The problem with due process in racing is that it takes too long. In many cases it will allow bettors to continue to be fleeced for months on end. If a track thinks a trainer is bad for business, I have no problem with said trainer being banned.

I couldn't agree more that things take too long. Samples should be back in five business days max, and depending on the severity of the violation hearings should be held from two weeks to a month after notification. Part of the problem is that racing commissions are part time, with many jurisdictions not meeting more than once a month. They have other jobs and cannot devote much time to the commission. It is also a problem that the lawyers want time to prepare, which is true in regular criminal cases too. I also have no issue with a trainer being banned for being bad for business as long as the commission has a documented case. I am just as scared of people like Joe Gorajec who runs Indiana like Pol Pot ran Cambodia (a little hyperbole but not much). Like any powerful despot, bringing things to the light makes it harder for them to be arbitrary.

As for the bettors getting screwed, perhaps the fines levied should go to the bettors instead of the commission, or maybe to more backstretch cameras, or hiring better investigative staff. Even so you don't solve that problem by denying the trainer due process, especially since due process in horseracing is close to a joke anyway.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

Here's the problem w due process. The problem is that bettors don't get due process. Bettors can't recover lost funds if they ran 2nd and the winner came up juiced. so if I can't get due process as a bettor why should cheats get due process as trainers?

I'm guessing deep down you already know the answer.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by Cholly

what SRU says

and double up on the "transparency" Mr. H referred to; trainers are supposed to get all of that they want but bettors get none.

The public is supposed to get the transparancy. We're the mushrooms in this drama.

[Cholly]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

The public is supposed to get the transparancy. We're the mushrooms in this drama.

You got that right, Brother!

[Millpond68]

You don't push security guards, and ask if they know who you are.This was the last episode for Fasey

[Stillriledup]

This guy is running a horse at Parx?

[Valuist]

Originally Posted by GatetoWire

Poor Pincus

LOL. Someone said earlier the name Pincus rang a bell. I guess only hardcore Seinfeld fans would know.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFtjgfaYqRE

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

This guy is running a horse at Parx?

he ran one on june 29 (day of this thread), and has run 26 times after that at parx since 6/29.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

he ran one on june 29 (day of this thread), and has run 26 times after that at parx since 6/29.

The DRF has dashes next to his name, so according to that, these are his first entrants at Parx.

[Robert Fischer]

I've got him as (62 7-8-10 11% 40%) for the Parx meet with 26 starts since being banned from Delaware Park or 6/29/15.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

I've got him as (62 7-8-10 11% 40%) for the Parx meet with 26 starts since being banned from Delaware Park or 6/29/15.

We've got nothing for him, sure it is the same guy?

[no breathalyzer]

maybe beard trainer?