Questions about Firenze Fire/Jason Servis

[Grits]

I read this Bill Finley piece yesterday. An honest question. Two, actually. And please understand I'm asking because I don't bet every day, and I don't do it to supplement my income.

How does the everyday, at track or at home, bettor continue to put their money into pools, while, before their eyes, they watch such tremendous sums coming in on a horse in the remaining seconds before a race? In this particular case, on a trainer who is alleged to be cheating.

Who is the reliable source that knows these figures, their timing, etc, etc? Why doesn't this source not identify themselves and openly discuss this activity?

Forgive me if my questions are naive. I'm sincere, though, in asking.

[Track Phantom]

Any way you view this it looks bad for horse racing in general. If inside money on a trainer winning at that high percentage, it's not good from one angle. However, if it is computer robotic wagering, it makes the pools unreliable for everyday players.

The common thought used to be that large odds swings wouldn't happen at the bigger tracks and the odds you see close to post time are pretty indicative of what they'll be at when the pools close.

One other thing to consider, if computer robotic wagering is making up that much of a percentage of the overall handle, what is the true growth or decline of wagering in the US if you removed computer betting? If comparing wagering handle from the 1970's, 1980's and so on, it would likely have to be compared without this rather new phenomenon.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Track Phantom

One other thing to consider, if computer robotic wagering is making up that much of a percentage of the overall handle, what is the true growth or decline of wagering in the US if you removed computer betting? If comparing wagering handle from the 1970's, 1980's and so on, it would likely have to be compared without this rather new phenomenon.

CRW has probably saved a lot of tracks.

That's why you won't see it go away any time soon.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Grits

I read this Bill Finley piece yesterday. An honest question. Two, actually. And please understand I'm asking because I don't bet every day, and I don't do it to supplement my income.

How does the everyday, at track or at home, bettor continue to put their money into pools, while, before their eyes, they watch such tremendous sums coming in on a horse in the remaining seconds before a race? In this particular case, on a trainer who is alleged to be cheating.

Who is the reliable source that knows these figures, their timing, etc, etc? Why doesn't this source not identify themselves and openly discuss this activity?

Forgive me if my questions are naive. I'm sincere, though, in asking.

You only look at horses these computer teams WON'T BE TOUCHING. In other words, you become a long shot player.

That's what I have been doing. And I hardly ever notice my horse's odds being hit in the final minute or after the race closes.

Of course, I only win 11-15% of the time...but that's OK if my average mutuel is $20 or over...

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by the little guy

Simply put, no, he isn't. Bill is in Florida for a substantial portion of the year and in Saratoga for pretty much the rest. Leanna is basically always at the NYRA track that is currently racing, except obviously Saratoga, where Bill is. Leanna is taking care of the horses still at Belmont during this period, many of which will ship to race. Anyone that goes to the track and pays attention, or watches the simulcast and does the same, is aware of this.

I apologize. And here I thought Saratoga was part of NYRA. Silly me.

But thanks for skipping over the important part, which is that Mott is on suspension which means zilch when the trainer under suspension can run a horse under his assistant's name.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Thanks for explaining this to those who aren't as aware.

You kiss up to Serling at every chance. Embarrassing for you.

For those unaware, going to Florida for the winter does not equate to Mott not spending most of the year on the NYRA circuit, which includes Saratoga. You'd think Serling would know that.

I think Mott would be offended if he knew Serling was saying that it's his assistant who runs things at the NYRA tracks, not him.

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

I apologize. And here I thought Saratoga was part of NYRA. Silly me.

But thanks for skipping over the important part, which is that Mott is on suspension which means zilch when the trainer under suspension can run a horse under his assistant's name.

I didn't skip over anything. I just explained what you were wrong about. I was trying to help. Sorry if you misunderstood that.


I'm also surprised that you don't understand assistant trainers and the roles they play, especially in barns the size of Bill Mott's. That's one of the great things about this great game....as much as we know, or think we know, we can always learn new things on any and every day. I am just glad I could help you.

Take care.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by the little guy

I didn't skip over anything. I just explained what you were wrong about. I was trying to help. Sorry if you misunderstood that.


I'm also surprised that you don't understand assistant trainers and the roles they play, especially in barns the size of Bill Mott's. That's one of the great things about this great game....as much as we know, or think we know, we can always learn new things on any and every day. I am just glad I could help you.

Take care.

I misunderstood nothing. I talk to Bill fairly frequently. I'll see if he agrees with your assessment that his assistant runs things at the NYRA tracks instead of him. I'll let you know what he says.

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

I think Mott would be offended if he knew Serling was saying that it's his assistant who runs things at the NYRA tracks, not him.

Mott and I are good. I think the world of him. As I said, nothing I said wasn't obvious to anyone that pays even the slightest bit of attention.

I get it, I've read your nonsense here. You want to be the big horseman expert....and can't stand it when people have to constantly correct you. That's going to happen when you frequently act the expert about things you actually aren't well versed in.

[Grits]

Track Phantom and PA, I hope others will add thoughts to my questions, though, I know of course computer wagering is here to stay. Phantom, you pose a great question on growth. Is it actual or is it not?

... I used to handicap and bet each week. Not anymore. Now, only Belmont Week, the Saratoga meet, Derby Day, Breeders Cup and other big stakes days. The majority of the time only NYRA tracks with the exception of Arlington Million Day....and I'm doing that from Saratoga.

PA, you're correct, value in horses deserves close observation. A few weeks ago, not only Gronk's second in the Belmont, but Motion's, Spring Quality winning the Manhattan--both were cause for great celebration.

I love this sport above and beyond all but the questions about drugs, not betting activities, are beginning to come to me from people who haven't any knowledge at all of horses, their care, or their trainers. Those questions are becoming more and more difficult to field. ... I choose my words carefully in response.

[PaceAdvantage]

Fager Fan = never wrong on ANY topic. Horse racing or not. LULZ

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

You kiss up to Serling at every chance. Embarrassing for you.

Not as embarrassing as being wrong about virtually everything you post that is horse racing related.

[jay68802]

Originally Posted by the little guy

Leanna won many races before she worked for Mott. She is a very talented trainer who has been in charge of Mott's horses in NY for going on two decades. Calling her a "paper trainer" is as insulting as it is ignorant, or are you assuming Bill Mott puts incompetent people in charge of his owner's horses?

I never said she was a idiot, incompetent, or insulted her in any way. The simple fact is that the horse was previously trained by Mott William. Was "transfered", to Leanna, because Mott is serving a suspension. The horse did not change barns, or move anywhere, and will go right back to Mott after the suspension. Calling her anything but a "paper trainer" in this situation is being ignorant.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by jay68802

I never said she was a idiot, incompetent, or insulted her in any way. The simple fact is that the horse was previously trained by Mott William. Was "transfered", to Leanna, because Mott is serving a suspension. The horse did not change barns, or move anywhere, and will go right back to Mott after the suspension. Calling her anything but a "paper trainer" in this situation is being ignorant.

If you call her a "paper trainer" it is kind of insulting as you're saying she is doing nothing but putting her name on the paper...when...in fact...it's been pointed out by people with more knowledge that she is crucial to the Bill Mott operation and plays a vital, daily role in the day-to-day training.

Whether one agrees or not that this is the RIGHT thing to do when a trainer is suspended is an entirely different discussion.

[jay68802]

Fine, insert "trainer of record" for "paper trainer". Still just a end run around a suspension.