Ask The Experts
General Category => Ask the Experts => Topic started by: stellastar31 on September 21, 2005, 06:52:41 AM
-
TODAYS NEW YORK POST PAGE 3 STATES THE FOLLOWING THAT AGROUP OF TOP RACING OFFICIALS ALTERED THE OUTCOME OF RACES BY MISSTATING THE WEIGHT THAT JOCKEYS WERE CARRING THAT THEY LIED TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC PRIOR TO THE RACES BEING RUN AND GIVING THE INSIDE INFORMATION TO WELL INFORMED GAMBLERS GIVING THEM AN ADVANTAGE MARIO SCLAFANI CHIEF OF SCALES IS EXPECTED TO SURRENDER TODAY THE PROBE ALSO TARGETS BRAULIO BAEZA SCLAFANIS TOP DEPUTY ANOTHER CROOKED JOCK ELLIOT SPITZER NY STATE ATTORNEY GENRAL WILL UNSEAL THE 190 COUNT INDICTMENT TODAY IN ALBANY
-
Would be fascinating to see if TGJB is called as an expert witness on the effects of a couple of slabs of lead weight on the outcome of races...
Would the other party to the dispute call a Rag man to refute JBs testimony on said effects?
Just a reminder, folks, medication issues represent a portion, but not all, of the cheating which has been a part of racing for centuries. They have still not developed a sufficient \"test\" for human character.
Every time I read about people being indicted, I remember a quote that came out of the coverage of Hurricane Katrina. Billy Tauzin, a US House of Rep member (his 2nd or 3rd cousin, Leroy Tauzin, rode at Ellis and La tracks) from Louisiana said it best a few years BEFORE Katrina \"Half my state is underwater, and the other half is under indictment.\"
-
http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/53796.htm
(You need to register(free) to read complete article)
-
Bloodhorse has this story, and it appears there was no conspiracy to cash bets, just to let overweight jockeys ride (they claim, as much as 15 pounds overweight), although obviously a bettor who knew that could have an edge.
Here\'s the thing, and I will guarantee you the industry \"leaders\" don\'t get it-- Spitzer, who never saw a microphone he didn\'t like, is all over this. What the hell do you think is going to happen when something far bigger and more important breaks-- like the drug story, or past posting?
-
Its a very interesting story. Is this the weights story we heard rumor of last year? I imagine it is.
15 pounds overweight? Does anyone else find that highly unlikely? These are all 115+ pound guys as it is. Think they could really ride at 130+ and folks wouldn\'t notice?
What is the proof going to consist of? How are they going to prove Santos was 15 pounds over in a particular race and not merely 4 pounds over? Does it matter? Is there a reason to think 4 pounds over is not as big a problem legally as 15 pounds over?
What about this blurb from the story:
\"Co-conspirator jockeys then rode horses in races and thereby caused the horses to carry in excess of five pounds over the designated weight\"
Why is the number 5 pounds used as if it is a threshold?
This had to be looked into and stopped, but this Spitzer needs to focus. This is an attention case that is going to be very hard to prove. It will cost the defendants a lot of money to fight however.
-
There used to be a rule in NY that jocks couldn\'t ride if they were more than 5 pounds over-- but it\'s a racing rule (if it still exists), not a law.
-
wonder how deep albarado is involved in this. we had discussion last month about robby. i mentioned how bad his ROI was at the spa. i could never point to a reason why he was bad, and all of the top trainers seemed to think he was ok, but his mounts consistently underperformed their odds. probably not be related to the scandal, but who knows?
Jerry,
could you look at albarado\'s #\'s for me. did his spa ROI in early august include a lot of mounts from the 2004 season?
-
As Chuck said, this is an old story, and from what was said around the track, no one made a betting coup. Hard to believe that a jock could be 15lbs overweight.Like JB said, there was probably more of an accomdation than a conspiracy here.
This Spitzer is so politically motivated, he should be arrested himself.There is merit in arresting Santos, imo, for STRANGLING and WRANGLING many horses on the grass over many years.
-
An apprentice scheduled to ride at 106 lbs could carry an additional 15 lbs.
It is important to read the entire article as there were indeed betting coups involved. The overweights were then given to big betters who then had an unfair edge.
-
Miff,
How do you KNOW no one made a betting coup?
And you\'re saying you can tell just by looking at a jockey if they weigh 125 instead of 115? Or even 130? When they are all geared up?
HP
-
HP-- why not? He can tell just by looking at horses that they aren\'t 2% faster than they used to be.
-
Michael-- if I understand your question, we would have to do a special computer run to answer it, and I have George doing other stuff.
-
ok, no worries. probably not related, and would be impossible to prove if it was.
-
TGJB,
2% FASTER?? You\'re changing your tune. You said 2 seconds, 10 lengths faster and haven\'t you embarrassed yourself enough with that inane racing opinion of yours.
-
HP,
Forget about what I could tell. There 30 odd people, jocks, valets who see each other every day. I think that 10-15 lbs extra on a 112/5 pound person is very noticable.
As far as a betting coup they would have to release all the data for each race. What I should have said is that when this came out in Dec of 04, there was no mention of a betting coup at that time.
-
Miff-- using a mile in 1:40 (a hundred seconds) to make it easy, 2% would be two seconds, or 8 points at that distance. Which is more than we are saying they have developed-- you need to read \"Are Racehorses Getting Faster\" again.
Or, you can tell me again that you can tell I\'m wrong just by looking at them, or that it is a matter of opinion, and everyone\'s is worth the same. Like two guys in a bar arguing about Mantle, Mays and Snider.
-
Miff,
I wouldn\'t be so quick to call anybody else\'s opinion \"embarassing.\" You just wrote a \"no betting coups\" post as if you speak to EVERY SINGLE PERSON who bets at a NYRA track. Maybe Eliot Spitzer should talk to you, since you know everything about every single bet worldwide made on NYRA racing.
HP
-
Miff,
Our posts crossed
You wrote,
\"from what was said around the track, no one made a betting coup.\"
This is not what you\'re saying now...
HP
-
Miff,
If you have ever been in any jocks room you will know that its just like the police department. Code of silence is the golden rule. And there are lots of valets with gambling problems, the least of which being a runner for the jocks with gambling problems.
-
Isn\'t the mantra here: 5#\'s = 1 length? If the horse is toting an extra 10 lbs that\'s a huge advantage, especially for those that can\'t handle an ounce over 118 etc.
Betting coups? You betcha!
-
HP,
I do not know you, but I would bet that YOU know more about what goes on at NYRA tracks, day to day, than Elliot Spitzer.
-
TGJB,
Seriously, if you ever decide to go into politics, let me know. Your ability to not answer or \"change leads\" in mid stream seem to be a talent of yours.
A mile in 1:40 is not relevant to our debate. A mile in 1:34 would be. So you conclude that because tracks are slower today(your opinion, again) horses today are really running adjusted 1:32 miles if they ran on the same surfaces of 20 years ago.Not even close!!
-
The more people say bad things about Elliot Spitzer the more I like him.
-
Miff-- the difference between 1:34 and 1:40 (which I used for convenience sake) is 6%, which means the difference would be 6% of 2%. In other words, the comparable difference (2%) at 1:34 would be 1.88 seconds, if I did my math right, or about 7 1/2 points.
-
This is a troubling story. The assistant clerk of scales is Braulio Baeza. He was one of the finest jockeys to ever sit in the saddle. Some say the finest. Has anyone ever heard a word about him being shady in the past?
Before there is general speculation that Baeza or the Jocks passed on the inside knowledge of the overweights to effect \"Betting Coups\", lets at least require that the Media Attention starved Attorney General Eliot Spitzer at least ALLEGE in his indictment the Passing of such information for betting purposes. Heres the story, the indictment is apparently 195 pages long, but I see no indication in this story an allegation of Betting Coup:
http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=30105
Baeza was a tall man for a jockey and his career was cut short due to weight issues. He battled weight for a good part of his abbreviated career. IF Baeza allowed jockeys to run overweight, its certainly possible he did so out of empathy for their plight.
What if there is not even an allegation that Baeza received a kickback from the jocks for this favor? What if no proof exists that Baeza received anything from allowing jocks to run a little heavy? What if the heaviest it can said they ran was within the 5 pound State threshold?
It doesnt make it right. If it occurred it was a deceit upon the public. NYRA turned over what evidence they had to the State to begin the investigation. But ask yourself this. What jockey would get a four or five pound pass at the scales and turn around and make that knowledge public? Thats what some are speculating. That a clandestine arrangement to shave a few non sweatbox pounds was revealed to larger numbers for the wildly successful \"4 pound Betting Coup\".
-
TGJB,
I think your math is ok. To end this, I\'ll acknowledge your horses are faster theory when it consistently happens on the track.It\'s strange that with the exception of a few modern day performances we have not seen:
6f in 1:06
7f in 1:19
8f in 1:31 etc, etc.
Surely, we have seen some glib surfaces in the past few years and I wonder how you defend your theory without us seeing many, many raw times as shown above. We also have the fastest horses in each category lined up and pointed to the Breeders Cup, which did not exist back when.Still, no consistently monster performances.Your theory does not reconcile.
-
CTC said:
Baeza was a tall man for a jockey and his career was cut short due to weight issues. He battled weight for a good part of his abbreviated career. IF Baeza allowed jockeys to run overweight, its certainly possible he did so out of empathy for their plight.
I know BB. He taught me everything I know about race riding when I was dating his (then) stable rider back in 1988. He ran rings around Shoemaker when Bill was in his prime. BB rode horse of the year 5 years in a row, when Bill was in his prime. BB was indeed the best. And the above comment by CTC is probably accurate. BB was always aware of the perception people had on racing and was always very careful to teach his students the right way of doing things, like keeping your mouth shut, riding your horse out past the finish line, keep your weight in check, don\'t use the whip unless needed, save ground, don\'t make a move on the turn with a sore horse, etc. He was as good a teacher as he was a rider. I asked him a few years back why he wasn\'t the COS and Mario HIS assistant. He said he didn\'t want the job. I knew right then why. I won\'t tell but to say that there\'s a lot more to this story than meets the eye. And there\'s a very good chance he\'s only guilty by association here in this case.
As for the 5 riders accused of conspiracy here, one speaks no English, and 2 others are known cheaters. And all five would rather rat on BB than take the fall themselves. Its the nature of the game.
http://www.brauliobaeza.com
-
miff,
its pretty clear, at least to me, the modern american racehorse is a very brittle animal. they\'ve always been brittle, but now its a new level of snap, crackle, pop.
everyone in the industry knows this and theres been mass breakdowns on various tracks that developed issues. Developing safer tracks is clearly a big issue in the industry and it seems apparent theres been a consensus that deeper cushion makes for safer racing. Obviously theres a lot of factors in that.
You can read about the cushion depths at several track sites. I\'ve done so, though haven\'t made a study of it. The salient question to me would be despite a deeper cushion can a modern track be as fast or faster than historically shallower cushion tracks? Factor in recoil and compaction and I\'m not certain about that. Also factor in the changing substance makeup of the cushion and base and its a question with a lot of variables.
TGraph says the horses are faster and I tend to believe them. In the end though it doesnt matter. All that matters is that the figures for the current crop adequately reflect the difference in ability for the horses you\'re gonna bet upon...or buy...lol
-
Miff-- I am so tired of going over this again and again. Read the damn article, I cover all of this, and I explain how I came up with the conclusions. One of the problems here is that when we do get a fast time, you say the track is lightning-- not recognizing that it is only fast compared to the even SLOWER, deeper tracks on other days.
What I do all the time, and have done now for many tracks, for 23 years, is deal with exactly this question-- how fast are tracks, and how fast are horses. Is it to some degree subjective? Yes, there is judgement involved. Is it simply \" a matter of opinion\"? No-- I\'ve looked at a lot of data to make those decisions, even before researching (note-- RESEARCHING) that article. Is the difference-- less than 2% over 23 years-- something you can address by looking at the horses, or just by having an \"opinion\"? Please.
Tracks are being made slower with the intent of making them safer-- since I wrote that piece, quoting Porcelli saying cushion depth in NY is 3 1/2 inches, you and others have told me they have gone to 4 inches. Despite that, we do get some really fast times-- especially on grass, where they do less (but some) to slow things down.
-
Chuck,
You missed the point I have been driving at all along. For about 17 years(I do not remember exactly)or more I have been buying TG.During the past few years I feel the product has changed. I tried to figure out why and I did comparisons with other similar products,but still no answers and only more questions.
About three years ago, I FIRST came to this site and began to read some of Jerrys latest thoughts and theories, I knew the old ones.Some I agreed with and some I had serious problems with.In seeking answers to what I felt was a \"changed\" product, I felt that maybe Jerry was beginning to let his personal beliefs slip into the figs.
Faster and faster figs,and many more \"ugly\"pairs were my main problems. Comparable products were not showing the same thing to the same degree, if at all.I had also heard that pairs were given out \"as a matter of course\" at TG,but I did not believe the source that told me.
I thought I addressed my concerns to Jerry in a respectful way only to be spoken \"down\" to as if I had just started to buy the product and just learned the game and in a how dare you mode. The more I read the more I was convinced that maybe the current figs could not be interpreted/relied upon by me as before.
I have no problems with Jerry having his theories/opinions as long as he does not let them \"bias\"his figure making.Let the horses run the figs, period.
-
Why not do some research before concluding \"betting coup\"?
It was such an involved \"scheme\", that on two of the overweight incidents, THE JOCKS IN QUESTION WON RACES AT SARATOGA...
On 8/22 in the 9th, Corny Velasquez is alleged to have \"rode the number eight horse in race nine at SRC to completion\". In said race, C. Velasquez managed to pilot Evening Attire (7-1) to a 5 length victory over Funny Cide (1-1) and Bowman\'s Band (4-1) in the Saratoga Breeders Cup Handicap...
On 8/25 in the third, Robby Albarado is alleged to have \"rode the number four horse in race three at SRC to completion\". In said race, R. Albarado managed to bring Shadow Cast (6-1) in first in a 9f O/Alw Clm over Cloak of Vagueness (1-1) and Childress (5-2)...
Wow... Pretty clever conspiracy. Overweight the mounts and win anyway!
I\'d also like an explanation of how Albarado was overweight on 8/21.. He carried 118 in the 5th (7th on Maharishi at 18-1) and 117 in the 6th (7th and last on Ginny\'s Queen at 9-2, third choice). Both races are cited in the indictment. But 25 minutes later in the 7th, Albarado was again at 118 when he won a $100k Opt Clm on Midway Road. THAT race isn\'t cited.
This entire fiasco is the work of one person at NYRA who must have thought he was Karen Silkwood. The fact that Mario and Braulio both were kept on salary while suspended tells you everything you need to know.
Here are the cited transgressions from last year\'s Toga meet...
Date, Race #: Rider, Finish-Horse (Trainer) Odds:
8/16, 1st: Castillo, 9th Anat (Cuandra) 53-1
8/16, 2nd: Albarado, 7th Musha Cay (Walden) 23-1
8/16, 4th: Albarado, 4th Woodlander (Albertrani) 11-1
8/16, 6th: Albarado, 3rd Contagious (Young) 4-1
8/16, 7th: Castillo, 5th Race For Glory (Lukas) 31-1
8/16, 8th: Albarado, 10th Vanity Affair (Stoklosa) 11-1
8/19, 3rd: Castillo, 6th Punchout (DeMasi) 16-1
8/19, 6th: Smith, 3rd Command Center (Gyarmati) 14-1
8/19, 6th: Castillo, 9th Cuse (Trimmer) 35-1
8/21, 5th/6th: Albarado as cited above
8/22, 1st: Castillo, 2nd Renamed (Pederson) 11-2
8/22, 8th: Albarado, 6th Strategy (McGaughey) 5-2 * beaten favorite
8/22, 9th: Velasquez, 1st Evening Attire (Kelly) 15-2
8/22, 9th: Albarado, 4th Alumni Hall (Howard) 7-1
8/23, 3rd: Albarado, 2nd Tap\'n Tango (Lukas) 2-1 * 2nd choice
8/23, 3rd: Smith, 6th Miss Discover (Parisella) 52-1
8/23, 6th: Smith, 4th Thirteen Mil (Ferraro) 70-1
8/23, 6th: Albarado, 8th Yankee Magic (Dutrow) 11-2 * 2nd choice
8/25, 3rd: Albarado, 1st Shadow Cast (Howard) 6-1
8/25, 5th: Velasquez, 2nd Family Business (Stewart) 3-1 * 2nd choice
8/25, 5th: Albarado, 5th Amanuensis (Vestal) 8-1
8/26, 2nd: Albarado, 6th Burmese Cat (Stewart) 8-1
8/26, 3rd: Albarado, 4th Vibs (Romans) 20-1
8/26, 4th: Albarado, 4th My Hidden Storm (Matz) 30-1
8/26, 9th: Castillo, 3rd Land of Dreams (Feron) 9-1
8/27, 1st: Castillo, 9th Desert Patrol (Lukas) 43-1
8/27, 6th: Smith, 2nd Veiled Speed (Contessa) 19-1 * debut
8/27, 6th: Albarado, 3rd Straw Hat (Howard) 11-2
8/30, 2nd: Velasquez, 5th Datts Joesrainbow (Serpe) 48-1
8/30, 6th: Albarado, 5th Parading Tomisue (Howard) 27-1
8/30, 6th: Santos, 12th Ohbeegeewhyen (K. O\'Brien) 24-1
This whole thing is so disgusting that it\'s hard to believe. To ruin two men\'s lives over this, one a Hall of Famer that\'s beloved by everyone in NY no less, is pathetic.
-
Kasept,
Great post!! Like I said HP, you know more than Elliot Spitzer about NYRA racing.
-
You mention Cornelio V beat Funny Cide. Was Santos aboard Funny Cide? Was FC favored? Was Santos overweight?
If one bettor made $2 because of this info, then it is a coup. INTEGRITY is not subject to \"a wink is as good as a nod to a blind horse\". You are honest, or you are not. THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Kasept wrote:
\"This entire fiasco is the work of one person at NYRA who must have thought he was Karen Silkwood. The fact that Mario and Braulio both were kept on salary while suspended tells you everything you need to know.\"
Care to let us in on the mystery person?
-
Miff,
Don\'t try to hide your smug and worthless initial assessment of this behind Kasept\'s detective work. The jockeys are \"unindicted co-conspirators\" at this stage and no one is disputing that the weights were fudged. An intelligent and humble person would say, \"let\'s wait and see what happens when the initial fireworks are over.\" Jockeys talk. Some of them bet. At the very least, this bears further investigation.
Plus, it wasn\'t ME who said that there was or wasn\'t any betting coup. I will leave that to the other \"experts\" like you and Chuckles.
You were the one who weighed in on that with the insta-uninformed opinion, which you were happy to make out like it was available to you via \"what you heard at the track.\" Okay, Mr. Insider? If you feel happy about your posts here, more power to you... Anybody can read them...
I feel pretty sure that Spitzer would not frivoulously ruin people\'s lives (they are looking at seven years in jail) and I will not let your nonsense interrupt my dinner...
HP
-
I could swear this type of thing was also discovered in Chicago a few years back. The following, from the Thoroughbred Times in 2001, was all I could find through Google:
Arlington Park Clerk of Scales Conrad Enrique has been shifted to the position of placing and patrol judge after a spot check by the stewards before the running of the Hanshin Cup (G3) on July 7 revealed that five of the eight jockeys weighed between two and five pounds more than their published weights.
Among the jockeys was Robby Albarado, who went on to win the race on Bright Valour. He weighted 119 pounds rather than the assigned 115. The other jockeys were Eusebio Razo Jr., who finished second on Apt to Be, Carlos Silva, who was third on Castlewood, Eddie Martin, and Ramsey Zimmerman.
The stewards fined each of the riders $100 and, when racing resumed Wednesday after two dark days, Assistant Racing Secretary Jack Bubolz replaced the reassigned Enrique as clerk of scales.
In a statement announcing the changes, Arlington Chief Executive Officer Scott Mordell said, \"Though we do not believe that our employees acted improperly we are immediately realigning the employee responsibilities in our racing department to alleviate any potentially adverse perceptions.\"—Neil Milbert
-
{In a statement announcing the changes, Arlington Chief Executive Officer Scott Mordell said, \"Though we do not believe that our employees acted improperly we are immediately realigning the employee responsibilities in our racing department to alleviate any potentially adverse perceptions.\"—Neil Milbert }
I love the part: We do not believe our employees acted improperly.
No, it was .... a ghost! Yeah, that\'s it! A ghost named.... Casper. Yeah - that\'s it!! Casper the friendly ghost.
-
HP,
I\'ve read your and uncalled for nasty and often belligerent posts aimed at several people on this board many times before. Anytime, anyplace AO, I\'m not anonymous.
-
Miff, knew you\'ve been involved by your posts and pay attention to your insights.
The numbers are on about a four to five year faster trend. Do you think drugs in racing. Perhaps even new drugs help explain it?
During this same time period we\'ve had the appearance of the \"Supertainers\" too. Seems all far too coincidental to me.
I\'m not as big a believer in the \"horses will tend to pair\" theory. I know TGraph relies upon data for that. Just think big wins or unexplainable losses call for close scrutiny in figuring tough races. It does appear tgraph is factoring comparative placing in the race more prominently now and resolving anamolies with Pair Probability.
miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Chuck,
>
> You missed the point I have been driving at all
> along. For about 17 years(I do not remember
> exactly)or more I have been buying TG.During the
> past few years I feel the product has changed. I
> tried to figure out why and I did comparisons with
> other similar products,but still no answers and
> only more questions.
>
> About three years ago, I FIRST came to this site
> and began to read some of Jerrys latest thoughts
> and theories, I knew the old ones.Some I agreed
> with and some I had serious problems with.In
> seeking answers to what I felt was a \"changed\"
> product, I felt that maybe Jerry was beginning to
> let his personal beliefs slip into the figs.
>
> Faster and faster figs,and many more \"ugly\"pairs
> were my main problems. Comparable products were
> not showing the same thing to the same degree, if
> at all.I had also heard that pairs were given out
> \"as a matter of course\" at TG,but I did not
> believe the source that told me.
>
> I thought I addressed my concerns to Jerry in a
> respectful way only to be spoken \"down\" to as if I
> had just started to buy the product and just
> learned the game and in a how dare you mode. The
> more I read the more I was convinced that maybe
> the current figs could not be interpreted/relied
> upon by me as before.
>
> I have no problems with Jerry having his
> theories/opinions as long as he does not let them
> \"bias\"his figure making.Let the horses run the
> figs, period.
-
Miff,
If you consider my review of your posts \"nasty and belligerent\" maybe you should re-read some of YOUR posts. Did I misquote you or mis-state your comments?
Your implied threat is truly terrifying. If bulletin boards get you so excited, maybe you should find another way to get off...
HP
-
Im beginning to believe this that this case is based upon the weigh ins vs. the weigh outs which was done on different scales. NYRA supposedly took the matter to investigators and beginning to believe it was on the weigh in vs. weigh out discrepancies.
You\'d think they\'d need testimony though......puzzling
MO Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kasept wrote:
>
> \"This entire fiasco is the work of one person at
> NYRA who must have thought he was Karen Silkwood.
> The fact that Mario and Braulio both were kept on
> salary while suspended tells you everything you
> need to know.\"
>
> Care to let us in on the mystery person?
>
-
Chuck,
No one has been caught with the magic bullet yet so it\'s only suspicion. Having said that, I think guys are cheating. I get back to why we have not seen many more freakish performances in raw terms. There are certainly many very fast horses running all the time and it would seem if they are supposed to be 10 lengths faster(as Jerry feels)we would see 1:06\'s at 6f or 1:18\'s at 7f etc.It ain\'t happening.All I see is TG, Rags, Beyer and Brisnet disagreeing too widely and too often.
Jerry talks about the cushion being at 4in. now as opposed to 2.5in.years ago, but no one can say with certainty that tracks are slower although logically it should follow.Why I am suspect about the 4in. cushion thing is because during a recent period at Belmont the cushion was posted at 4in. for 8 consecutive racing days and raw times for similar runners on successive days varied by 5-7 lenghts.So what does a posted cushion of 4in. really mean??I guess wind, moisture, sun etc play havoc.
From the above, you could reason that the 2.5in cushion of years ago may have been all over the place also.Very unscientific this cushion thing.
-
Are you suggesting that one scale was working properly and the other was not? Hmmmmmmmmmm, I could see that as a possible scenario, especially if union labor was involved.
-
MO..
Santos WASN\'T on Funny Cide that day.. He was nursing an injury and Prado was on board.. Cide was indeed the public choice..
And no.. I don\'t care to name the mystery person that initiated this enormous \"monkey f------ a football\" mess..
And if the weigh in/weight out scales were out of whack, it would register discrepancies on ALL the jocks.. Not just the chubby ones.
-
Well that seemingly clears up one race. Now regarding the other 66..........
But a closer look into how the scales are calibrated, when and by whom is definately warrented. I get on them all the time and I have NEVER in my 18 years of employment ever seen a scale technician at work. Furthermore, I question the accuracy of these scales. I know that my horn weighs about 3 1/2 pounds, but when I put it on the scale all by itself, it weighs zero. Perhaps all race tracks should go to a digital scale instead of the traditional, sentimental favorite from the Norman Rockwell portraits.
-
Definitely MO
Two different scales.
At time NYRA was using analog scales......they have gone digital now I understand.
Additionally, on the weigh out the protective equipment is not removed (helmut, flak jacket).
Add the track dust or dirt or mud and perhaps even sweat from the horse picked up from the leggings. Maybe high humidity too.
Spitzer better have a magic bullet or it could be trouble.
As far as all jockeys going overweight.thats probably true...did they? Just because they are not listed in the indictment who is to say there were others that were not consistently overweight, even if not over five pounds overweight.
MO Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Are you suggesting that one scale was working
> properly and the other was not? Hmmmmmmmmmm, I
> could see that as a possible scenario, especially
> if union labor was involved.
-
Anyone notice that the DRF has chosen not to cover this story yet?
-
http://www.drf.com/news/article/68771.html
I guess a kick in the ass was all it took to get that horse moving........
-
When I first heard about this I thought the worst.
From Kasept\'s recap I think the only conclusion that can be made is this is a big nothing.
No indictments of druggies, but nail some small fry in a public spectacle. An analysis of the odds on these plugs, is proof enough no betting coup was involved. Tossing 30-1 shots aint the ticket.
Spitzer scraped the barrel here, but that doesn\'t take away from his good efforts.
-
http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2005/sep/Indictment%20Final.pdf
-
Asfufh:
Thank you for posting the full indictment and the other articles you\'ve posted recently.
My feeling is that the activity Sclafani and Baeza were indicted for is going on every day at every racetrack in the country. The only thing that is missing in these other jurisdictions is a publicity hungry public servant.
Had to laugh at the indictment itself, which is worded rather poorly. According to the indictment, Sclafani and Baeza \"...deprived bettors of hundreds of thousands of dollars by misrepresenting the jockey\'s weights\" [the only way to \"deprive\" bettors of money is to siphon money from the pari-mutuel pools, and only racetrack and the state can do this (takeout)] \"and thereby tricked said bettors into betting on said horses\". Nice to know that when I lose a bet, I am merely the victim of a clever ruse, and not a bad handicapper.
Kasept... I appreciate your passion for the human side of this.
-
I don\'t get it. Someone at NYRA came forward with info. According to the article in today\'s New York Times, they actually planted a camera by the scale to confirm the NYRA allegations. It\'s not some frivolous thing, it\'s based on solid evidence. Somehow this translates into \"publicity hungry public servant?\"
I agree it\'s a tragedy about a guy like Baeza, but what would you propose doing about this?
It\'s possible that the big initial tumult is just a way to put pressure on the participants to determine if anything else is going on. Even if it\'s not connected to making bets, it\'s still not exactly \"good\" is it? NYRA is a state agency. Who else would you expect to investigate this besides the Attorney General?
HP
-
All of these horses should have run faster than the figures will indicate. In other words, a horse is given a figure carrying 115, but was actually carrying 125. So, his performance was actually better than it appears in the DRF, on TG, etc. I\'d be curious to know how these horses performed in the next few races, i.e were they underbet?
-
Their are dozens of counts in this document accusing Scalfoni and Baeza of Petit Larceny and a couple of Grand Larceny. In scanning the indictment very quickly, I noticed Count # 288 (out of 291 total) charging Grand Larceny of $3000 +. Also, I\'m not a lawyer but all the larceny charges appear to cite a (unnamed) third party in cahoots with Scalfoni and Baeza.
-
Here\'s the deal with the betting coups.
They obviously weren\'t going to be made when the \"overweight\" jockeys were on the horses. But when he was replaced by a jockey carrying the legitimate weight some people would know that the horse carrying 115 in this race and the last according to the PPs is actually losing four, or five, or seven pounds today. In the right circumstances this could be a critical advantage. And in fact, what the clerks of scale effectively did was destroy the integrity of the PPs for much time to come. As such, it seems like a pretty serious offense to me, at least worthy of public condemnation.
But you know the NYRA has to bear more responsibility for this incident that just taking credit for turning in their employees. I could make the argument that such a situation could have never occured except in such a lax and corrupt climate as was foisted by the NYRA culture, but the responsibility I want them to take is to bring greater transparancy to their \"information operations.\" In the case, of the weights they\'ve gone to digital scales, but what they should be doing is televising the weigh ins to certain monitors in the granstands so that the public can be sure the digital readouts are recorded properly.
The same transparancy should apply to the detention barns. As the\'re set up, only the NYRA veternarian can administer LSX. The default amount is 5cc (or 5 whatever.) This is the amount the veternarian will give the horse unless a different amount is officially requested by a trainer. Which means that horses can we running with different amounts of LSX in different races. Does the public find this out? No? Which means the detention barns are officially structured to sanction cheating by allowing the manipulation of LSX amounts from effective to ineffictive back to effective levels without the public having an inkling of what is going on.
Of course, this has kind of manipulation has been going on for a long time. In my day of heard of a few instances where horses listed as second time LSX horses were really running on LSX for the first time. And if you think about it, what an easy scam that is. Of course, with the new detention barn system that couldn\'t happen in NY (unless the vet had tradional NYRA ethics.)
Still, the argument here is, the public has a right to know how much LSX a horse is using. Varying amount, or amounts being varied, might indeed explain improved or deteriorating performances. But more importantly I would think the NYRA would instinctively want to make the information available. If only as a PR move they would want to make operations of the detention barn as transparent as possilbe. But no, they just want to go throught the motions, pretend they care about the public, while implementing a system that now legally allows trainers to cheat.
And quite honestly until I see real transparency in the \"information operaton\" I\'m going to presume nothing has really changed, digital scales, detention barns or not. Its the same old, same old, don\'t fix a problem, pretend you\'re fixing a problem.
-
I dont have time to read the full indictment. At least not now, but I\'ll save it and read it later if more is revealed.
To me the most troubling counts involved the larceny charges. The allegation is the clerks of scales commandered specific riding fees for the respective jockeys.
If they can prove retention of the riding fees by the clerks then the rest of the story has legs if the weigh in camera shows significant weight overages.
Everything I know about Baeza says this plan would be anathema to his character. If money motivated him he could have progressed further up the NYRA ladder in my estimation. They are gonna need solid evidence to change my mind upon that.
I\"m also not convinced a couple of these jockeys had weight issues in the 7 to 15 pound range.
asfufh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Their are dozens of counts in this document
> accusing Scalfoni and Baeza of Petit Larceny and a
> couple of Grand Larceny. In scanning the
> indictment very quickly, I noticed Count # 288
> (out of 291 total) charging Grand Larceny of $3000
> +. Also, I\'m not a lawyer but all the larceny
> charges appear to cite a (unnamed) third party in
> cahoots with Scalfoni and Baeza.
-
Hoarse--
1-- First of all, I agree with you, transparency should be paramount, whether we are talking about racing or government. The intended goal-- serving the public-- should really be the goal. And this extends all the way into properly dealing with the move-up trainers. If racing thinks they have a scandal now, just wait until somebody gets in trouble and starts singing.
2-- Having said that, the weight business is probably going on all the time, which is not to say it should. I\'ve told the story here before about how Brandon Simpson, as a leading bug rider in the late 70s or early 80s, would ride at Pha at 109 in the afternoon, then be overweight and only make 115 every night at Meadowlands. The clerk of scales at Pha eventually moved to another track, and a week later Simpson went to the same place.
3-- All that aside, I want to point out the AMAZING hatchet job the Daily News did on NYRA in their editorial about this today. They called for selling off NYRA, just as they did after the February scandal and the earlier stuff, and dredged up all that crap all over again. They of course did not point out that NYRA itself called the cops.
I\'m really interested in who is pulling the News\' strings. Wonder if it was the same outfit that sent the anonymous letter to Spitzer asking him not to let NYRA off.
-
Asfufh:
The only inference that a reader can draw is that the reference to \"others\" in various counts (such as count 288) means the jockeys in question, although as others have pointed out it is possible that Spitzer is hunting others who knew about the overweights and were involved in some way.
Peter
-
As I said to someone today \"If you continuously treat your employees like crap, they will rebel\".
Have you any idea what kind of salary the NYRA clerk of scales makes? Its nothing to write home about.
NYRA has always treated their employees like crap, unless they want to make an example of someone. I was (and still am in many people\'s opinion) the top bugler in the country when I worked for NYRA from 87-92 but was the lowest paid in the country. $69.00 a day!!!! I had to quit and go to Albuquerque to get a decent pay check ($110.00 per day!!!). NYRA has never forgiven me for that or the fact that my prophesy proved true - that they would never get anyone to replace me for what they were paying. It took them 4 months to find someone. Nobody wanted the job.
Regarding Braulio, you would think that Phipps would have made him his trainer for all the great work BB did for OP as a rider. But no, he treated BB like a hot walker. And so BB was relegated to training garbage cans for no name owners.
There\'s also a huge amount of peer pressure there and Braulio is not the type to make waves. He\'s probably only guilty of following orders, and now living his worst night mare. I really feel sorry for him.