Bejarano

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Hmmm...I thought I read that in this thread.

Then why do you think they are "withholding" this info?

I don't think they're withholding the info on purpose, i think they're just too stupid to think the customers might want to know. Now, the theory
that they don't want to talk about a serious injury or death over the public address system could have an effect on current and future business, i don't think that's a terrible theory, but i don't think they're smart enough to know to even do that.

[Dark Horse]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

My last reply on the subject.

Do you two (thask and dark) think that if a jockey were to die on track or even an hour later in the hospital (and the track was informed as much) that they wouldn't immediately call off the rest of the races?

Name one time that actually happened...jock dies during racing day due to a spill and they continued to race....never happened yet AFAIK.

So rest assured, if a jock is killed during a race card, you'll know about it.

If a man speaks in the forest and there is no woman around to hear it, is he still wrong?

[affirmedny]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

I don't have Dish Network so i don't ever see one second of HRTV, but i do see the SA "Feed" and due to that feed, i couldn't tell you one person who works at HRTV. Now, i happen to know who works there because i pay attention to the industry and hear stuff thru the grapevine on occasion, but i wouldn't know who works at HRTV just by watching the SA "Feed".

Let me help you out then, they ALL work for HRTV as well as being on the track feed. And it would not make sense that they would be allowed to announce Bejarano's condition on HRTV and be banned from mentioning it on the track feed.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by affirmedny

Let me help you out then, they ALL work for HRTV as well as being on the track feed. And it would not make sense that they would be allowed to announce Bejarano's condition on HRTV and be banned from mentioning it on the track feed.

I havent seen them at all on the track feed, maybe Jon White's voice comes across, but if there's an interview, you only see that on HRTV. Being employed by HRTV and hearing their voices on the in house feed are 2 different things.

As far as being "allowed" to announce his condition, i don't have HRTV, so i don't know what they do or what they're allowed to say.

[Dark Horse]

Originally Posted by affirmedny

And it would not make sense that they would be allowed to announce Bejarano's condition on HRTV and be banned from mentioning it on the track feed.

Follow the money. People watching HRTV are playing multiple tracks. People watching the track feed are primarily betting SA.

Don't you think it strange they never mentioned him? Not even a "Man, I hope he's ok." Nothing. After watching a spill like that... Could it be any more obvious? It's standard practice after a horse breaks down. And here they extended it to the jockey. Same reason as with a horse. Money.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Dark Horse

Follow the money. People watching HRTV are playing multiple tracks. People watching the track feed are primarily betting SA.

Don't you think it strange they never mentioned him? Not even a "Man, I hope he's ok." Nothing. After watching a spill like that... Could it be any more obvious? It's standard practice after a horse breaks down. And here they extended it to the jockey. Same reason as with a horse. Money.

So it's you who thinks the tracks don't broadcast this type of thing because they fear people will stop betting?

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

So it's you who thinks the tracks don't broadcast this type of thing because they fear people will stop betting?

I think the bottom line is that they don't broadcast it. TVG is a great example of this, whenever a horse falls, the host always says "we will get more information on that and pass it along" yet, they rarely, if ever, do. I'm not sure what their reasoning would be, but i think in a nutshell, this is kind of how the industry deals with injuries..if its a non descript horse or any jockey, they don't want to talk about it because, lets face it, discussing horses who got euthanized or jocks who broke bones isn't going to get people to bet more. It might not cause them to bet less, but its not going to get them to bet more, so TVG's theory might be to just ignore it and hope you forget.

Or, maybe there's another reason, do you have any idea why TVG would SAY "we will update you on the condition of the fallen runner" and they never do?

With the modern era of twitter and such, its quite possible that "word" would get back to the customers that a jock died on the track, but i have to admit, the racing industry has let a lot of people down over the years, i wouldn't trust them to dispense important info over the P.A. system as far as i could throw them.

Why they wouldn't announce death and injury is anyone's guess, you seem to be adamant that it would NOT be because of lost business, but don't you think injury and death COULD have a damper on business?

[Dark Horse]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

So it's you who thinks the tracks don't broadcast this type of thing because they fear people will stop betting?

Why do you think the track never tells the public when a horse was euthanized?

Once you turn that corner, we can go on to jockey info. But if you can't or are unwilling to see the connection between negative news and the business interest in a positive betting mood, even when it comes to horses, we really have nothing to talk about in this regard.

Actually, I have nothing more to add. This is too slow. You either see it or you don't. I have no interest in educating you, or listening to you telling me what an idiot I am.

[Grits]

Originally Posted by Dark Horse

Why do you think the track never tells the public when a horse was euthanized?

Once you turn that corner, we can go on to jockey info. But if you can't or are unwilling to see the connection between negative news and the business interest in a positive betting mood, even when it comes to horses, we really have nothing to talk about in this regard.

Actually, I have nothing more to add. This is too slow. You either see it or you don't. I have no interest in educating you, or listening to you telling me what an idiot I am.

Dark Horse, this stuff simply is not true. At some point, we need to realize our accusations are seldom absolutes and we all are capable of being wrong. You refuse, and carry on and on.

Larry Collmus and NBC?

http://www.nbcsports.com/horse-racin...s-cup-accident

They were really concerned about the BETTING and about what it would do to the Breeders' Cup events this particular afternoon. In the live track feed, I don't think Denman commented, or so I've read. But no, not so on the nationwide live coverage. Collmus was all over this, the moment Secret Compass and Johnny V went down.

You may say, "Its BC, everyone's watching." This isn't an excuse as I've heard Tom Durkin do the same on a quiet afternoon at Belmont.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Dark Horse

Why do you think the track never tells the public when a horse was euthanized?

Once you turn that corner, we can go on to jockey info. But if you can't or are unwilling to see the connection between negative news and the business interest in a positive betting mood, even when it comes to horses, we really have nothing to talk about in this regard.

Actually, I have nothing more to add. This is too slow. You either see it or you don't. I have no interest in educating you, or listening to you telling me what an idiot I am.

So on the one hand, there are threads where people characterize horseplayers who will keep betting no matter how high the takeout goes, tracks know they can get away with basically anything and keep rates high because they know nobody is going to stop betting...but on the other hand, if tracks start releasing immediately the condition of both horse and rider after a bad spill, THAT'S the thing that will make horseplayers stop betting, cowering in the corner, shaken to their core?

This makes no sense to me. We agree to vehemently disagree.

[garyoz]

Not to sidetrack this debate, but it would illegal for an organization such as CDI to release information concerning a medical condition under HIPAA unless they received the consent of the individual. It would be considered Protected Health Information (PHI).

[Stillriledup]

Raffy is home from the hospital.

Hurry back RB.