LISTEN UP.

[TGJB]

A major industry organization has engaged a top research company to do an online survey of serious horseplayers about the problems facing the industry, and has asked us to have our customers participate. Those of you who have accounts with us should be getting an email tonight or tomorrow with a survey attached.

As I say in the cover letter with the survey, most of you at one time or another have complained about these issues and/or offered opinions about what needs to be done to fix things, and now you have a chance to have real input. If you\'re unwilling to take the 10 minutes to do this you have no right to complain about any of it again, ever.

[plasticman]

The NTRA players panel from 10 years ago had some great suggestions that were largely ignored by the movers and shakers in the game.  Why do we think this time its going to be different?

[JoseOcon]

done

[TGJB]

It may or may not be. But the difference is I\'m getting behind this one.

[rhagood]

Ditto

[Flighted Iron]

It was enjoyable. We should hope for the best.

Thanks

PS: I hope one day Sighthound returns

[RICH]

PS: I hope one day Sighthound returns


.....and while were at it, Chuckles the clown and classhandicapper too

[razzle]

Me, too.  Even if it turns out to be nothing else, it was a good venting opportunity-therapeutic.  The questions are specific, and very pointed, as though someone is knowledgeable and serious about change.  Love that the question of naming the vet made it.  I would like to have seen the question, \"what percent of races on an average 9 race card do find unplayable due to medication/PEDs?

[miff]

Re: LISTEN UP. (34 Views)
Posted by: razzle (IP Logged)
Date: July 30, 2013 08:

\"I would like to have seen the question, \"what percent of races on an average 9 race card do you find unplayable due to medication/PEDs?\"


Raz,

What\'s the answer, how many races? What are the names of the trainers using illegal PEDS, enlighten us.

Mike

[richiebee]

... and don\'t forget master red boarder and show bettor extraordinaire NYC 13741...

Unfortunately, for every one of these folks that was excluded for one reason or
another, there are three or four people who brought a lot to the table who have
voluntarily stopped posting...

As to the Survey, this was not created by some Pilgrims who just stepped ashore
and want to determine which way the wind is blowing. As I was completing the
Survey, the words \"self fulfilling prophecy\" kept popping into my head; the
creators of this survey have a pretty good idea, in advance, what the end result
will look like based on the way the questions were worded. In the end, it will be
evident that \"serious\" horseplayers (say they) want their racing clean, want their
offenders punished severely, want regulation and enforcement to come from a
unified body without the interference elected officials. The truth is that talk is
cheap, and that very few gamblers/horseplayers/racing fans that I know have
deserted the game despite all of its problems... and that very few will.

JB, you know I appreciate all you are doing to clean up the game when it would be
just as easy for you to raise the price of the product and cater to a smaller
following, but the accessible, reasonably priced data and the message board allow
you to advance an agenda which is important.

I love all animals, and spent nearly ten years on the backstretch with
thoroughbreds. The amount of veterinary work done, pre and post race, on these
animals, the amount of intravenous and intramuscular intrusions they are subjected
to, is dismaying. The only bright light shining is that the industry seems to be
taking care of some of these animals after their racing days are done, and I think
the people involved in anti slaughter/ equine rescue, in finding a second career
for these thoroughbreds, might well be saving the game.

[covelj70]

I would echo Richie\'s sentiments (as usual)

I thought the survey was very well done and it was put together by people who clearly have a good handle on the biggest issues facing racing.

implementing some of the changes I (and I am sure many others) suggested won\'t be easy but at least it\'s a start that a) people want to change what\'s wrong with the game, and b) they know the right issues that need to be changed.

Thanks JB for the efforts here

[SoCalMan2]

I did the survey; one thing that I found a little frustrating about the pre-ordained Q&A was that it seemed to leave little room for legal drugs.  Unless we are prepared for an extremely rocky transition, I do not think that going completely clean is the answer.  Going completely clean may be a great end result, but I would be worried that the patient would not survive the operation (see BC 2yo no lasix experiment, consider changes that would need to happen at the breeding level, etc)

I tried to emphasize that what we needed was uniformity, reliability, and transparency.  That does not mean do away with all drugs.  It means use the drugs that are to be allowed in a completely uniform way everywhere and make sure the public has access to full information on pharmaceuticals in the racehorses that are racing in public.  One example, lasix can be administered at different times and by different people and in different dosages (different states have different rules on dosage levels and times of injection). People may think that a horse doesnt ship well or is a horse for a course looking at its sheet, but the explanation for a preferred jurisdiction could be something as simple as which tracks allow the horse to get the full dosage or at optimal timing.

[TGJB]

That\'s the point, Mike. If the vet names are published we can address that question.

[covelj70]

SoCal,

very thoughtful comments overall but there was a specific question in there asking about whether we believe race day medications should be allowed and then following up on the uniformity questions so I think the survery covered your concerns there.

by the way, I have been and continue to be ambivalent on the Lasix issue but I can tell you from my own experience running Oscar Party in the BC that she didn\'t run any differently without Lasix than she did on Lasix (she actually ran her best 2 yr old fig in the BC without Lasix) and she came out of the BC race perfectly.  So, meaningless sample size of one but my personal experience did nothing to change my ambivalence on this particular topic.

The horses that backed up on the TGs in the BC didn\'t necessarily back up because of no Lasix, it\'s just as if not more likely that they backed up because of the testing for the other stuff they didn\'t get. This is supported by the fact that some of the older horses from those same outfits went backward as well in the BC

[TGJB]

Jim-- I agree with your view of the BC, but that\'s not the test for whether it should be legal(as you know). If it\'s banned owners will have an even harder time staing afloat, which will in turn cut field size even more. And bettors will bve dealing with a lot more unknown variables-- at least the ones without acess to inside info.

The date you were looking for is 9/11/12, by the way.