OCTAVE-the-RAVE

With exactly five racing days left in 2007, the current national trainer standings look like this:

What are the odds of THAT? 

What you may not know is the extent to which both Asmussen and Lake are keenly aware of each other's total, of what the other guy is doing, and what each must do over the next five days to win this coveted title.  (Even though Asmussen's $$$ win total dwarfs Lake's; even though Asmussen has the Eclipse Award locked up; both are of minor significance compared to the Holy Grail of total number of wins.)

Here's the point.  Both Asmussen and Lake will be dropping horses out of the clouds over the next five days.  Normally, this is a giant red flag, and an indication that they're looking to unload a cripple.  For the next five days, that will not be the case.  Instead, they'll be looking for the "W."

Rave

"The FG past posting incident has been discussed on this site and I'll try to clarify the issue."

Mike Maloney - Comment to OtR on HPdaily.com - December 25, 2007

******************************************************************

Captioned above is the opening salvo to an open response to all bloggers on this site about the past posting incident, presumably penned by the person who initiated the controversy, Mike Maloney.  (The comment is unsigned.)

Before proceeding, I suggest you read the entire response at http://horseplayerdaily.21publish.com/OCTAVE-the-RAVE/archive/2007/12/21/a-heads-up-for-jp.htm#weblogEntries_weblogEntryEdit_commentsOnEntry.

First, let me commend Mr. X-loney for taking the time to respond.  That said, his comment, for me anyway, raises more questions than it answers.  Since Mr. Maloney by his own hand paints for all the portrait of a player-saint concerned only about the integrity of his avocation, I hope he will be good enough to return, and explain/answer the following anamolies:

"For the last couple of years when I've noticed wagers being accepted after the gate has opened I've tried to contact the tracks to alert them to the problem."

Short of sitting in a room with a number of networked computers such that the live video feed for a subject track is on one screen while the betting platform for that same track is on another, how exactly does one "notice wagers being accepted after the gate has opened?"

"I've tried to contact the tracks. After speaking with various track employees and officials I made very little progress. Most often I was treated as if I were reporting a UFO sighting."

"Tracks" clearly means more than one.  The dictionary puts "various" at two or more.  Most folks, I think we'd agree, use the word various when speaking of a minimum of three.  That, indeed, paints an ominous picture, one of widespread mismanagement and/or carelessness at best, and wholesale deception or criminal activity, at worst.  Assuming this incident will be thoroughly investigated, at some point in time Mr. Maloney will be forced to name names.  For an accusation of such magnitude, if your intent, sir, truly is to "clarify," at the very least you should name the subject race tracks to which you refer.

"Fed up with the situation I became even more upset as I noticed the windows were open after the start of race 3 @ FG on Nov.25."

How?  How exactly does one "notice" the windows staying open?  I know how to discover windows staying open: by placing bets that are accepted after the gates open.  By past posting.  But how does one otherwise "notice" such a phenomenon? 

"Even as I watched the horses run over 55 seconds into the race ..."

How?  How can you pinpoint so accurately the amount of time the windows stayed open?  Like everyone else, I'm sure, I'm simply trying to understand the mechanics involved that would allow you to state in writing such critical time factors to the exact second!

"I limited my bets during the race to repeating 4 of the bets I had made BEFORE the race. All of my bets in this race were losers. My goal was not to profit from past posting, my goal was to have my in-race bets prove that the wagering pools were not closed after the gate opened."

Wonderful!  You planned it.  To "prove" beyond all doubt these extraordinary allegations.  Fantastic.  Surely, then, you printed your past posted wagers?  The indisputable smoking gun, since the subject internet service provider need only reference the number on the betting ticket(s), go into its archives, and find the exact time stamp(s) in their records.  This, of course, you did, right?

If you did, X-man, you have 'em by the proverbial nads ... and deserve, as well, giant kudos from all of us who pursue this avocation for fun and profit.

I'm sure I speak for the entire industry when I say, "I can't wait for your response."

Thank you.

Octave-the-Rave

I just did a thorough perusal @ DRF.com of Dan Illman's blog activity from the past two days re the Maloney controversy.  Here was my consensus finding v. the Illman/DRF blog community:

"Huh?  Who's Maloney?"

Not a solitary word on the subject could I find.  Not from Mr. Illman himself, nor even a mention from his constituency.  Nothing, save the samo-lamo banter between Mr. Illman and his slew of public-handicapper wannabes.

I'd ask, "How can that be?" of the only active, public weblog ascribed to America's Turf Authority about an allegation as electrifying as Mr. Maloney's, but at this juncture the question would be cosmically redundant.  Here's THE point: if someone in management at a race track or simulcast outlet whose product was, or stood to be, adversely affected by this controversy, or even just the average, every day player, wanted to check the reaction of "the industry" to Mr. Maloney's extraordinary public revelation, where would he go?  Today?  This instant?

Personally, I think it's much ado about nothing.  I think the guy's full of crap, and will continue to think so until I see the time stamp on his four, supposed 1-minute-plus-past-race-start wagers.  Still, I am in the overwhelming minority on here.  Clearly, the prevailing sentiment of my peers is one of outrage, and a firm demand for a full-fledged investigation.

It will be interesting to see in the coming weeks what, if anything, the powers-that-be in the game do about Mr. Maloney's stunning allegations.

Octave-the-Rave

One of my closest and best-informed racing buddies called shortly after ready Thoroughbred Times' coverage of the Maloney past-posting controversy.  He was utterly miffed by an observation in the article made by FG's Director of Simulcasting Lenny Van Gelder on the order of, "It's possible the Stewards got sidetracked and forgot to close the machines!"  Like me, he was under the impression that the lock-out switch was fully automated to coincide with the start of the race.  In fact, it is not.  It is automated to coincide with the subject track's published post time, and herein lies the monkey in the wrench.

Can you say, "Circle the wagons!"

Here's how CLOCKER 1 explained it to me.  Every subject track's Mutuals Department has first-line responsibility for shutting-down and locking-out the betting windows based on the upcoming race's published posttime.  As well, every simulcast outlet uses the published posttime for shutting-down its activity.  It is the subject track's Stewards who have the responsibility for monitoring the activity leading-up to post.  That responsibility kicks in whenever something out of the ordinary occurs to delay the running of the race.  Some of the more common examples include horses getting loose during warm-ups; equipment problems; late scratches by the on-track veterinarian; and -- as was the case just this past week at Turfway and Aqueduct, and only today at FG -- sudden, severe weather.  At that point, it is the Stewards' job to send-out an alert to all simulcasting outlets to allow activity to continue beyond the published posttime.  As well, they're supposed to send the lock-out signal as the field begins loading into the gate.

Notwithstanding the fact that FG three Stewards are all considerably older gentlemen, CLOCKER 1 found it virtually inconceivable that they could forget to send-out the lock-out signal for even two consecutive races, much less four.  Beyond that, CLOCKER 1 raised a point that no one, to date, even has touched on, TO WIT: how in the hell did this guy Maloney happen to know the exact four races the FG Stewards were going to screw-up?  When I reminded CLOCKER 1 that it was Maloney's contention that it happened "quite often," CLOCKER 1 opined that the only way he could know that was "if he had been past posting for months!"

This thing needs to be investigated, alright.  Thoroughly investigated, if you catch my baloney!

Rave

Frankly, I was more than a bit taken aback by the Boy Scout naïveté I had read on here about late wagering even before my good friend, fellow Bridge Master, and anything-but-Boy Scout Frankie the Q. chimed in.  Surely there is one among us other than CLOCKER 1 who can confirm by first-hand knowledge that there was a time when past posting in the sport was wide-open and common place. 

It certainly was at the Fair Grounds.

Each year when the 4.5F baby races would roll around at the FG, the past posting boys would be at their duty stations. Because of FG's unusually long stretch, the baby race starting gate was damn near on the far turn.  Do a mental video of such a race and you'll quickly realize that the baby who pops the gate and makes the early lead has a HUGE advantage on the rest of the field.

In those days, every betting window at every race track in America was a product of a company called American Totalizator.  If you want to read a fascinating article penned in 1932 (!) about these "new fangled" betting devices and how they work - right up to today - I suggest you copy the following to your browser: http://members.ozemail.com.au/~bconlon/american.htm.  Here's the opening line that introduces the piece:

"This is one of several history only, non-commercial pages relating to the history of the automatic totalizator, its invention in 1913, the inventor George Julius, and the Australian company he founded in 1917 -- which became a monopoly in this field."

Then, as now, the Stewards controlled the device that locked-up the machines.  Today, because of our modern, lightning-fast technology, the lock-out is instantaneous.  Not so back then.  Typically it took as long as 10 seconds for the signal to travel from the stewards to the machines, and for the lock-out mechanisms to activate, which was plenty enough time for the past posting boys to do their thing. 

And here's how they did it.

Each PP crew worked in 3-man teams.  The most important member stood dead center in the walkway that led from the inside mezzanine area where the betting windows were located to the covered but outside box seating area.  He stood with binoculars trained on the starting gate, his back to his two teammates who could see him quite clearly, since they were only 50-60 feet apart.

The second member of the team stood in the betting window, awaiting instructions for the third team member, the ticket seller!  The reason the PP boys had to be in cahoots with a ticket seller is because of the critical amount of time it takes to punch-in the wager.  In this case, the ticket seller in bed with the PP'ers pre-punched the wager - typically $500WP - then held-open the window awaiting a number.  (I want everyone to keep this in mind, because it casts huge doubt on this Maloney fellow's story, as you'll soon discover.)

Every PP team used basically the same set of hand signals.  If the 3-baby popped the starting gate, the guy with the binoculars held-up 3 fingers on his left hand.  If the 7-horse popped the gate, he held up 2 fingers on his right hand.  If it was the 11 or 12, he held both hands overhead, his left hand in a fist and either one or two fingers on his right hand.  And if no baby busted the gate, they passed the race.

When I tell you this went on for years, I am not exaggerating.  And the reason the track could care less is because these guys were putting upwards of $5,000 a day through the betting windows back when that was huge money, and basically breaking no laws.  They simply were taking advantage of a glitch in every betting machine, at every racetrack in the United States of America!

Getting back to Mr. Maloney and his contention that the windows at FG were staying open for upwards of 45 seconds after the start of the race.  You'll recall he claims to have made four wagers, and lost every one.  You'll also recall Mr. Maloney was posed in the article as "a big player!"

Tellya what.  If you archived the video of 100 6-furlong races at obscure race tracks I never bet, and therefore couldn't possibly know the results in advance, I'd bet anyone even money, as much as they wanted to wager, that 35-40 seconds into each of those races, I could predict either the eventual winner, or 2^nd place finisher, six-out-of-10 times.  (I'm extremely confident I can do it eighty percent of the time, which is why I'd bet all you wanted at sixty percent.)

Assuming Mr. Maloney isn't a total nitwit, then surely he knew enough about the game to pre-enter win-place or across-the-board wagers during this golden 45-second delay such that all he needed to do was punch in a number to get down.  If so, then how is it possible he wasn't able to cash a single ticket?  This guy's supposed to be "a big player?"  I'd like to bet I could give any 12-year-old five-minutes worth of instruction, and every single one could spot the eventual winner or runner-up a minimum of one-in-four with a 40-second head start.

The more I think about this Maloney fellow, the more I lean towards Roger the Ghost's speculation that he's a giant bullsh**t artist looking for his 15 minutes of racing fame.  Then again, perhaps he reads the Big Blog pages.  If so ... and his story is true ... I dearly would love to hear his explanation as to how a self-styled "big player" with a 40-second head-start couldn't manage to accomplish with four tries what I'm convinced the average 12-year-old would have no problem doing at least once.

Wouldn't you?

Rave

"The Kentucky Horse Racing Authority will form a committee to study an incident on Oct. 25 in which a bettor at Keeneland claimed he was able to wager on a race from Fair Grounds until almost one minute after the gates opened, authority officials said on Monday. Mike Maloney, a high-rolling horseplayer who bets at Keeneland, contended he was able to make four bets on a Fair Grounds race after the race had started."

Daily Racing Form On-line Edition - December 17, 2007

************************************************************

The story you are about to read is true.  In the early 90's, a friend with whom I grew-up in New Orleans moved to West Palm Beach.  Like me, as a kid my friend Dennis was a fixture at the FG.  A landscape architect by profession, Dennis had no problem finding work almost from the day he arrived.  His wife Jo Ann occasionally worked as a teller at the FG prior to the move.  Following formal introductions and a sterling recommendation, Jo Ann soon was manning a window in the Turf Room at the Palm Beach Kennel Club.

It's no secret that ticket sellers bet, and Jo Ann was no exception.  It's also no secret that born-and-bred New Orleanians love to hoist a pop, and Jo Ann could out-drink most guys I knew.  One day following the last race at Gulfstream, she came running over to our section screaming about how she had hit the last trifecta ($552), and invited all 10 of us to join her at the bar.  I left after two drinks, and most of the crew were still there.  All on Jo Ann's tab.

The next day after work, Jo Ann had the entire Turf Room teller staff at the bar, once again on her tab.  Just as she had the day before, she hit the last trifecta, and once again for boxcars.

The next day I happened to notice that Jo Ann was not in her customary window at the Kennel Club.  When I inquired, I was told she no longer worked there! 

Wait ‘til you hear why!

Seems the evening before after a few too many pops, Jo Ann confided in one of her fellow tellers that her recent phenomenal hot streak had nothing to do with luck.  Turns out her betting machine was stuck in the "open" position.  Permanently!  Jo Ann was punching winning trifecta combinations after the horses had crossed the finish line!  Turns out, as well, she picked the wrong "friend" in whom to confide.  The girl turned her in, and Jo Ann immediately was terminated.  And that's all the PBKC could do, since she had broken no laws.

Comes now the point.  What regular horseplayer hasn't dreamed of opening his morning sport's page, turning to the official racing charts, and finding instead the next day's race results!  Haven't we all?  Well, is this not even better?  Having a betting window permanently locked in the "open" position?  And can you think of anything short of a team of wild horses in go-mode tethered to a rope the other end of which is tied to your private parts that could possibly persuade you to utter a word to anyone?

All of which brings me full-circle to one Mike Maloney, the guy who discovered he could bet races at the FG a full minute after the gates had opened, and promptly reported the problem to his service provider.  I suggest you commit Mr. Maloney's name to memory.  There's no doubt in my mind that a nitwit of such colossal proportions who also loves the horses has a huge career ahead of him in the highest echelons of racetrack management!

Mark my words!

Rave

And others like them.  Those in management who make the rules, I mean.  Clearly, Greg Avioli and his BC Committee do not.  Some do.  Like Churchill Downs, for example.

My cousin who owns the 46K sq. ft. entertainment complex on Second St. in downtown Louisville, recently renamed City Block, quite naturally stays abreast of trends in the 18-25 set.  He saw the evolution in "text messaging" as the communications-of-choice among the younger set before even AT&T, Sprint, and the rest of the big boys, and started a company three years ago to take advantage of it.  Among his many clients is Churchill Downs, with whom he currently is working on ways CD can use "texting" to reach the younger audience for its upcoming spring meet, including a Fantasy Thoroughbred Challenge for which I am crafting the format.  I know for a fact that last weekend's Twinspires on-line mega-qualifier for the NHC was a direct offshoot of these blogs in general, and the exceptional article penned in HorsePlayer Magazine by Caesar's Ghost and Silver Charm, in particular.

The fact that these weblogs have laid in the lap of our sport's new breed of management a whole universe of free, on-demand, one-click insight into the pulse of its consumer base that their predecessors only could glean from exhaustive and expensive market research, and that they routinely fail to take advantage of in staggering amplitude -- from coast-to-coast, venue-to-venue, and individual-to-individual -- speaks volumes to my assertion that our industry is a haven for dullwits.

Hopefully, 2008 will be the epiphany: the year when those in our sport who make the rules, like the folks at Churchill Downs, find en masse the communal wit finally to make use of a medium that lays at their feet the collective heartbeat of the industry whose future they ultimately hold in their hands.

Unfortunately, it's already too late for the Breeders' Cup.

Rave

"2,998 ... 2,999 ... 3,000!  Ready or not, here I come.  Ummm ... I can see your butt!"

Bill Slowsky - The Comcast Turtle

*****************************************

Comcast!  Loathe the company, love the commercials.  These days, whenever I see the Slowskys, I find myself thinking of our buddy Lost Code and his "Bring Stamina Back to the Game" campaign.  Seems the perfect analogy, does it not?  Broadband/dial-up versus speed/stamina?

Stamina, huh?  Here's a quick quiz, Lost One: name any Boston Marathon or Olympic Marathon champion of the 21^st Century?  Give up?  Me, too.  I guess neither of us speak Ethiopian!

Stamina, huh?  What say we take a quick look at some of the better known sports with world or Olympic championships where the word stamina, more so than speed, leaps to mind.  Mind you, I'm just brainstorming, here:

• Distance Running
• Distance Walking
• Cycling
• Rowing
• Cross-country skiing
• Cricket
• Curling
• Cribbage
• Extreme Ironing
• Mannequin Posing
• Midget Tossing
• Breeders' Cup World Championship Dirt Marathon

Be honest, gang: if the BC Dirt Marathon was on ESPN, and the Midget Tossing World Championships were on ESPN2 ... you had no TIVO ... no way to record ... and only could watch one ... to which one would you tune?

"Next up, Jurgen von Knezeling of Denmark.  Ahhhh ... a disappointing heave for The Great Dane, to be sure.  Barely the five metre mark.  Still, he should get extra style points from the judges for landing the little grumpler keen on his forehead."

Stamina, huh?  Yeah boy, that'll save our ailing sport, for sure.  Nothing like a horse race where you can leave the box at post time, go get a dog and beer, finish ‘em, walk back to your seat, and still catch the stretch run!  

Is that what you had in mind, Code?  Because if not, then what exactly is your point?  Could it be you're confusing stamina with longevity?  Brett Favre (you mangled both his names!) has longevity.  Longevity in the breed is a worthy mantra to take up.

But stamina?  Who gives a rat's ass about stamina unless ... UNLESS ... it is accompanied by a proportionate degree of speed?  Like ... for example ... a Secretariat.  That said, when the name Secretariat is uttered, do you know anyone who screams stamina?  Or for that matter, even associates the word with him?  Secretariat was FAST!  The fastest horse the racing world has ever seen, and likely ever will see.  His records bear-out that assertion.  That he also could carry that extraordinary speed farther than any horse in history makes him all the more the sport's atemporal anomaly.

But stamina purely for the sake of stamina?  Such animals already exist. 

They're called camels.

Rave

"The new races - the Turf Sprint at 6 1/2 furlongs, the Juvenile Fillies Turf at one mile, and the Dirt Marathon at 1.5 miles - will be added to the card scheduled for Friday, Oct. 25, at Santa Anita Park."

Daily Racing Form - December 11, 2007 on the new Breeders' Cup expansion.

*******************************************************

Seriously, where do they find these people?  Is there an executive search firm somewhere named Nitwits-R-Us who've signed an exclusive agreement with the horse racing industry?  It seems to me impossible - not unlikely nor even implausible - but rather impossible for even marginally intelligent human beings to have arrived, after three days of intense discussions, at the abject idiocy captured above. 

It is so cosmically ill-conceived on so many different levels I hardly know where to begin.  Instead, I'll do the unthinkable: direct you to the following website - http://www.drf.com.  Click-on Dan Illman's recent blog about this very subject.  It's an exceptional analysis of much of the lunacy oozing from this decision, albeit sugar-coated with the feigned diplomacy that has become the soft-shoe, suck-up hallmark of this once great paper under Steven Crist.

A couple of key points that Mr. Illman overlooked, starting with the most obvious: the sheer number of races.  Fourteen?  If the intent of this move was to bring Friday's card more in line with Saturday's, does not common sense dictate that the simplest and most effective way would have been to add one new race - preferably the Turf Sprint @ 5.5F instead of an idiotic 6.5F - and move the two Juvenile races to Friday? 

Just look at what this simple move accomplishes.

First, it takes the two Juvenile races that are not currently part of the Saturday Pick 6, and that most handicappers could care less about, and not only makes them part of the Friday Pick 6, but elevates them to marquee status on Friday.  As they should be, since they showcase the lifeblood of the sport and the stars of tomorrow: our future Triple Crown hopefuls.  Second, it makes EVERY Cup race now part of a Pick 6, and of equal importance v. the handicapping process.  Most important, it would reduce Saturday's root-canal boring, 6-hour television broadcast of eight races to a more reasonable 4-hour broadcast of six races, which anyone with half-a-brain will tell you SHOULD have been the overriding objective of these discussions.  Here's why.  Check-out this quote:

"The more than six-hour broadcast on Saturday, October 27, 2007 earned a rating of 0.87, up from last year's rating of 0.85. ESPN Spokesman Mark Mandel said the actual number of people who watched the Saturday ESPN broadcast was up 6% to 982,892."

What that phantom statistic doesn't tell you is the staggering decline over the past decade that has seen ratings drop from an NBC-, Tom Hammond-, Tom Durkin-high of 5.2 - or 5.2 million viewers - to its almost laughable ESPN figures of today.  The reason, of course, is because the show is just too damn long, and too full of fluff, to keep the interest of anyone who isn't a die-hard degenerate.  Do you know why cutting-back the show NEVER was considered?  Because doing so would mean an automatic reduction by one-third of the amount of commercial revenue.  You can be assured that was the mindset because that's precisely how certified, card-carrying nitwits think: in the short term!

In fact, viewership ... ratings points ... are the sole determinant in gauging the amount of money an event owner can charge a perspective advertiser.  Does not common sense dictate that a 4-hour broadcast naturally will draw more viewers than a 6-hour broadcast?  Think about it.  Less competition.  Less fluff.  More action. And, oh BTW, fewer commercials to sell over 4 hours than 6, such that as ratings increase over the coming years, so too does the value of each of those precious commercial minutes.  THIS is what the committee should have been thinking about first and foremost: how to bring more NEW viewers to the event, NOT how to invent ways to make an already excruciatingly dull, overdrawn event duller even for the most die-hard among us.

Unbelievable, yet that's just the tip of the iceberg of stupidity.  A mile-and-a-half dirt race!! Can anyone fathom how even marginally intelligent people arrived at such colossal ignorance? 

Do you know any trainer of sound mind who would take even a decent racehorse - never mind a good one, just a decent horse - and train him up to a race with a stinking $300K winner's check that likely will knock him out of action for the next six months?  How can people who function as Executives in this sport, and are charged with the responsibility of setting its standards, be this friggen' stupid? 

Does it not stagger the imagination?  For anyone who loves the game, and remembers when it was run not by greed-driven, short-sighted nitwits, but rather by giants of integrity, good will, and immense talent, it doesn't get more frustrating than this latest moronity.

I'll leave you only partially done ranting at this idiocy - cuz believe me, there's a LOT more - but also on a positive note.  Go to the bank and withdraw ten grand.  Convince three of your racing buddies to do the same.  Send twenty grand to the Racing Secretary's office at the Fair Grounds, and the other twenty to the Racing Secretary's office at Aqueduct.  Then the four of you begin scouring the Brisnet PPs every day at FG and the ‘Duct.  The first "claimer" you see in for $20K or less whose sire and dam sire's AWD totals 20F or more, claim him!  Then get your other $20K back, use part of it to buy your tickets to Santa Anita for next October, and give the rest to your trainer to train the Dyna-slug up to the "new" BC marathon.

Not only will you draw in, we could be side-by-side in the starting gate!

Rave

Mr. X: "Mr. Trump, I need your advice."

Trump: "Shoot cowboy."

Mr. X: "Well, I have this fifty-six million dollar horse, see, and ..."

Trump: "Say what? $56 million?  A horse?  What is he f *****n' plutonium?"

Mr. X: "No, a race horse.  See, we got this breeding offer, and I get a piece of that $56 million, only the owners are all screwed-up.  Two are indicted and they need the money he can win from running to pay their legal fees, whereas the breeding money doesn't start coming for two years, when the babies hit the ground, so they want him to keep running.  Everybody else wants to take the deal.  Am I confusing you, sir?"

Trump: "I'm all over this, son.  Keep talking."

Mr. X: "Great.  OK, so my problem is ... like ... well ... here's an example: after pony-jogging him for four days until he's jumping out of his skin ..."

Trump: "Pony jogging.  What's that.  Explain that."

Mr. X: "Like taking a dog out for a walk on a leash, only this is a horse out for a run."

Trump: "And you got the leash, right?"

Mr. X: "Right."

Trump: "And where do you do this, on a farm, right?  He's got a big, wide-open pasture with no low hangin' limbs and farm tractors and s**t to run into, right?"

Mr. X: "No ... no ... ummmm, we do it on the race track.  Here, in New Orleans.  At the Fair Grounds."

Trump: "So whadda rent the place?  Like an hour at a time?"

Mr. X:  "No .... see ... it's a horse track.  Where they race.  They're racing now.  So, in the morning I take the horse out pony-jogging with the rest of the horses."

Trump:  "That's the fifty-six million dollar horse, right?"

Mr. X:  "Right."

Trump:  "And these other horses, they get out of the way, right?  They move off to the side."

Mr. X: "No, it's not like that.  Some are jogging, like me, some are galloping, some are working, a few are coming out of the gate, a bunch are going in the opposite direction, ..."

Trump:  "And your fifty-six million dollar horse is in the middle of all this s**t?  On a leash?"

Mr. X: "Basically."

Trump: "Son, I have two pieces of advice for you:  #1 Call Wackenhut, you know those no-neck, steroid-for-lunch-bunch, cop wannabes?"

Mr. X: "Yes, sir."

Trump: "Have ‘em send over the baddest sumbich they have.  Fifty-six dimes?  Better yet, have ‘em send over two.  With guns.  Big guns.  Every eight hours.  Got that?"

Mr. X: "Yes, sir."

Trump: "Good.  #2: You don't let him out to s**t.  You got that?  He stays in his stall.  He eats there ... he sleeps there ... when he s**ts, you go in and get it, right?  Buy him a flat-screen TV with one of those X-boxes.  Whatever.  But no one comes near him, and he don't get out.  You got it?"

Mr. X: "Yes, sir."

Trump: "Excellent. Now ... how big is that piece you got?"

Rave

I thought it only fitting to resurrect this article from almost 16 months ago.  It's long enough, and self-telling, without further comment:

Wednesday, August 16, 2006

Racing's "Nitwit Pandemic" Goes Global!

On Citgo's Wire to Wire this morning, host Randy Moss mentioned in passing that the Illinois Racing Board refused a request by English jockey Kieren Fallon to ride in the Arlington Million, then concluded the segment by opining, "which is really unusual since Fallon hasn't even been to trial yet!"  Finally, after all this time, someone of influence in racing had the courage to point-out what clearly is one of the most outrageous travesties not just in the history of racing, but in the history of sports.

Let me preface this piece by acknowledging that the preponderance of evidence pointing to Fallon's guilt, from what I gather, is substantive.  Still, I'd like to bet it's no more substantive than the Grand Jury evidence pointing to Barry Bond's guilt, yet he's still playing.  Pete Rose continued working during his MLB wagering scandal.  So, too, did Paul Horning, Alex Karras, Kenny Stabler, and Joe Namath during their NFL wagering scandals of the 60's and 70's. 

The reason, of course, is because there is no more fundamental tenet of a free society than the right to due process, i.e., the right to be presumed innocent of all charges until proven guilty in a court of law, or until admitting culpability.  Kieren Fallon has done no such thing. He steadfastly has denied every allegation.  

Part of England's Horse Racing Regulatory Authority's reasoning for upholding the riding ban was they found "no supporting evidence" to validate Fallon's attorneys' contention that a 2-year hiatus from riding effectively would end his career.  Literally translated, this ruling says, "In our collective opinion, a 38-year-old man living on 350 calories-a-day for the next 700 days while waiting to fully resume his career, and deriving only menial income in the interim, does not constitute mitigating circumstance!"  How would you like 12 nitwits like that sitting in judgment over your career?

Let me say again that if I had to bet, I reluctantly would opt for "guilty."  Nor am I some soft-on-crime, bed-wetting liberal. Far from it.  And, as well, I understand perfectly that under British Racing Rule, the HRA has every right to uphold this suspension. Still, none of that amounts to a hill of beans.  This is a clear-cut violation of due process, and a blatant disdain for one of the cornerstones of democracy. Because it is, I believe passionately that American Racing has a clear-cut mandate, and a golden opportunity, to raise its collective voice in protest of a ruling that reeks of demagoguery.  Clearly, this sort of thing never could happen in the USA, and it never should happen in a country most of us think of merely as an extension of our own - especially in the one sport where we share a genuine, common bond.

Until this morning, I had not heard a peep out of anyone of influence in American racing, nor have I been the least bit surprised.  To the contrary, it only points-out the total absence of the kind of strong, forceful leadership at the fore of competing venues like the NFL, NBA, MLB, and PGA that has allowed them to flourish and prosper beyond their wildest dreams, while American Racing continues to flounder in the minor leagues of relative obscurity.

Let me put it another way: is there a shard of doubt in anyone's mind that if a former jockey like Pat Day or Jerry Bailey just happened to be the Commissioner of Racing, and had the same powers as a Goddell, Stern, Bettman, or Finchem, that Kieren Fallon, if he so chose, would be riding at Saratoga this very day? There's absolutely no doubt in mine! 

But forget pie-in-the-sky stuff.  What if ... what if ... NYRA, CD Corp., Magna, and the Cal boys got together; named a media-savvy spokesperson for the group like ... and I'm just brain-storming here ... like that late, life-long lady racing fan from Hot Spring's kid ... and the former President called a live press conference ... and summarily denounced the ban as un-American and unacceptable ... and concluded by extending on behalf of the group, on live national television, an invitation to Kieren Fallon to spend the next two years riding in America? 

What if?  Are you kidding?  I'll tell you what if: it would light-up the fricken' tote board! 

The next day, racing would find itself on the Op Ed pages of USA Today, the New York Times, Washington Post, and Wall Street Journal.  Everyone from Oprah to O'Reilly would be clamoring to interview Billy C., which of course he'd do, since it's free air time and the perfect ruse for plugging his party's agenda for the critical elections just 80 days away.  (Nah, Billy C. wouldn't belly-up to a ruse, would he?)  SI, Time, and Newsweek would be on this story with both feet.  Plus, it would become the dominant story in the racing media, conveniently squelching to an afterthought our current PR nightmares of drugs and fatalities.  And if all that wasn't enough, on-track attendance wherever Fallon rode would skyrocket. But wait, there's more.  Guess who owns one of the most prominent racing stables in the UK?  Her Royal Highness, the Queen!!  Can't you just picture the live, BBC cut-in when those little weasels from the British tabloids dropped out of the trees @ Buckingham Palace and ambushed Big Momma at first asking? 

Is every one getting this?  Are you picturing yourselves walking up to the water cooler on Monday morning and having your boss grab you and saying, "You're a big horse racing fan, right?  Come into my office and tell me more about what's going on with this story."

It's called exposure - that which introduces entire new segments of society to our sport - and at which racing wouldn't recognize a golden opportunity if it came packaged as Pam Andersen in Krugerrand pasties and a 24-carat G-string.  If you doubt that assertion, you need only imagine your reaction just five short years ago had someone at your table in the Turf Club opined magnanimously that in the not-too-distant future, POKER would usurp horse racing in popularity, worldwide TV coverage, and public participation! 

Be honest: would you not have thought him the ultimate flaming nitwit?

Octave-the-Rave

It's Symposium time again, and we all know what that means: ad nausea press coverage re all the marvelous innovations and efficiencies our beloved industry has "tabled" for 2008, none of which of course ever will see the light of day!

(Given the swallow-anything profile of the folks who still pay good money to attend this swill session, I'm thinking a real estate kiosk specializing in bridge sales would do killer some year!)

Instead, here's an idea: what say we brainstorm the new contest prize for 2008?  To date, JP has two home runs to his credit with the HP exclusive and the BC trip, but I'm sure the lad wouldn't mind a little player input for 2008.  Let's up the ante a mite, shall we:

A video blog on ESPN on BC Day handicapping each race for a live TV audience!

The victorious blogger would travel to Santa Anita on Oaks Day; meet the broadcast crew; enjoy the Oaks; then go into the on-site studio that night and under the direction of a production assistant, cut eight 2-minute segments -- one for each race on Saturday -- for airing on Cup Day.  If s/he does really well in studio and the crew is duly impressed, perhaps some "live" on-air cameos on Cup Day might also be in the offing.

For ESPN, it provides a minimum of 16 additional minutes of air time, something they're always looking for on Cup Day, given the length of the show.  For the viewing audience, it provides a unique perspective from "one of their own."  And for JP, it's perfect, since it combines the ability to write clearly and concisely with the ability to analyze the game.

Anyway, that's my two cents, with the following caveat: I'll settle for a new Rolex!

Rave

If there's one thing in abundance on this site that goes wanting on other racing sites it's common sense.  Here's a common sense reminder for the memory bank. 

*******************************************************

As you go through the Fair Grounds PP's today, note the dates November 17 and 18 (Saturday & Sunday), and November 24 and 25 (Saturday & Sunday) on the workout tab.  What you'll discover in the rankings are numbers like 67/108! 

So that everyone is clear, that means the subject runner was one of 108 horses who worked that morning at that distance.  One hundred eight is not the total number of horses to work that morning, simply the number for that distance!  Add-up the numbers on any of those mornings for all horses, at all distances, and they easily exceed 200. 

That's 200 horses in a 6-hour period, or roughly 33 per hour!  So that you're further clear, each of those horses must be: a) reported by name and distance by the trainer or ass't trainer to the trackside Clocking attendant (clock-staff person #1); b) relayed by 2-way radio to the Clockers' booth; c) verified v. markings by a Clocking assistant (clock-staff person #2) from the subject runner's foal papers; d) picked-up on track amid dozens of other horses on track that morning, at that same instant, merely out jogging or galloping; e) accurately timed from start-to-finish by the Lead Clockers (clock-staff persons 3 & 4); and f) physically logged in the official record for reporting to Equibase.

Everyone got this picture clearly?  Good, because the next time you complain at work about it being "busy," your tongue should fall out of your head!  What these Clockers do on any given morning at every major racetrack in America is the textbook definition of controlled chaos, and truly an amazing site to witness in person.

That our sport is plagued by a lack of integrity, and haunted by the constant specter of impropriety, is inarguable.  For years I've heard Clockers thrown into this mélange, as have you.  Every day at any track we'll hear someone droning-on about how the workout times are bogus and rigged.  What does your common sense tell you about this unique feature of our sport relative to the potential for liability it holds for the host track?  More to the point, when was the last time you heard or read about a subject trainer exercising his written-in-stone right to contest a claim on the basis of false and misleading information provided by the host venue?  You never do, because Clock staffs at most tracks are more closely scrutinized by track management and track security than any other group of employees.  Here's why.

Over the next few months at FG, 300-500 horses will change hands via the "claim box."  Without safeguards in place at every track in America, how easy would it be - and how routine - for a trainer to substitute a perfectly healthy, high quality look-alike in a morning workout for a $10K claimer with a bowed tendon?  Those safeguards are the foal papers that every Clocking staff refers to by rote on every horse before every work to confirm the horse's markings, and to preclude the dreaded "ringer." 

Not that some haven't tried. 

Back in the mid 90's at FG, one of the most prominent young trainers of the era tried to pull the "reverse ringer" on Clocker 1.  Despite the fact that this young trainer had upwards of $30M in stock under tack at the time, and more trust-fund money than he could spend, he tried to substitute a plow mule for a 3YO who had broken his maiden at first asking 6 months earlier in Kentucky, and hadn't been seen since, in order to cash a huge bet!  To share the complete details of the planned coupe, I'd have to reveal the trainer's name, which I can't do.  Instead, here are the broad strokes.

After trudging through a half mile work in 51.4 handily, the trainer re-confirmed the ringer as the 3YO maiden breaker.  Clocker 1 said nothing, posed no queries, nor let-on that anything was amiss.  The rest of the trainer's string worked that morning without a hitch.  Only, when the official chart was published the next day in the DRF, Clocker 1 had altered slightly the ringer's workout time.

By slightly, I mean ... SEVEN SECONDS!  Instead of 51.4 handily, the 3YO's official work was listed in the DRF the next morning at 44.4 breezing!  Mr. Slick young trainer, who likely would have gotten 8-1 on his next out maiden breaker simply by playing it straight, instead had to watch his young charge win by the length of the stretch at 4/5!

For the record, said young trainer is out of the game, and no one since has tried to put-over a ringer on Clocker 1!  Great story, doncha think?  And true!

For all the problems that plague our game, the one place where common sense dictates an abnormal level of scrutiny and accuracy is the Clocker's booth.

Octave-the-Rave