Archive for the ‘California’ Category

CHRB WITCH HUNT

Monday, December 21st, 2009
By Ray Paulick
“If I had a rifle, I’d have shot him out of the saddle.” That’s how the late Hall of Fame trainer Charlie Whittingham responded when asked about the ride he got from another Hall of Famer, Sandy Hawley, when the Canadian jockey went to the early lead aboard the late-running Kentucky Derby winner, Gato del Sol, in a turf marathon at Santa Anita Park in 1984. The Bald Eagle was only kidding…I think.

Times have changed in this more politically correct era. These days, trainers are more likely to go to the stewards and complain when a jockey fails to follow their instructions in a race. That’s what John Glenney did when he was unhappy with the ride Joel Rosario gave him aboard a colt that finished fourth in a Del Mar maiden turf race on Sept. 6. Glenney told Rosario to keep Cedros in the clear; the horse ended up on the rail down the stretch. Glenney’s anger over Rosario’s failure to follow his instructions were exacerbated when Rosario’s agent, Vic Stauffer, made a flippant remark to him over the phone the next morning about whether or not Cedros was for sale.
 
But what happened next is a good example of how convoluted our game can be. Instead of looking into the complaint, talking to all the principles involved, and dismissing the case before it made headlines, the California Horse Racing Board rushed to file a complaint against Rosario, unfairly tarnishing the reputation of one of the brightest lights in California racing, and in the process giving the sport an unnecessary black eye.

How the complaint against Rosario–for not putting forth his best effort and conduct detrimental to horse racing–reached the point of a public “trial” in front of the stewards is only one of the questions that begs an answer. Why did the lead investigator in this case not talk with Rosario before a formal complaint was filed? And if Rosario’s ride aboard Cedros was deemed “questionable” by CHRB steward Scott Cheney, as he was quoted as saying, why was the accused jockey not called in by the stewards to review the film of the race, something that is standard operating procedure?

I called the CHRB to try and get answers to those questions but was told by Mike Marten, the agency’s public information officer, neither the CHRB nor its investigators would not talk about the Rosario case or how the agency’s investigations in general are conducted.

Some might say “the system worked” because the complaint against Rosario was dismissed by the stewards after a hearing. However, that was not until the 24-year-old rising star from the Dominican Republic had his name dragged through the mud on one of the most serious charges a jockey can face in the eyes of the betting public and the trainers and owners for whom he rides.

‘DOES YOUR JOCKEY FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS?’
The saga began in August, according to Stauffer, when Glenney approached the agent at Del Mar and asked, “Does your jockey follow instructions?”

“Yes, he does, who are you?” answered Stauffer, who said Glenney then identified himself and said “I can’t find jockeys to follow instructions, and I need a jockey who will do what I say. I should be winning, and I’m not because the jockeys aren’t following instructions.’”

Stauffer said he went over the horses in Glenney’s barn with the trainer and wasn’t interested in riding any of them with the exception of Cedros. “I liked his race the day Aaron Gryder rode him,” Stauffer recalled, “but Glenney said Gryder rode the horse like an ‘idiot.’” Cedros had finished second, beaten a head at 25-1, under Gryder on Aug. 9.

Glenney agreed to ride Rosario on Cedros and the jockey worked him once before the Sept. 6 race, according to Stauffer.

Rosario, who had been leading rider at Hollywood Park during the spring-summer meeting and was about to lock up the Del Mar riding title, rode four winners on Sept. 6, including the $350,000 Del Mar Derby aboard Rendezvous for trainer Jerry Hollendorfer. Stauffer, who said he bet $250 to win on Cedros because he thought the nearly 9-2 odds were overly generous, approached the rider after Cedros finished fourth in what was the day’s final race.

“I greeted Joel on his way back to the jockeys’ room to congratulate him and he said he couldn’t manage the horse he just rode,” Stauffer recalled. “He said the horse had ability but had the wrong bit and that we had to tell the trainer to change his equipment. ‘If he doesn’t consider changing the equipment I won’t ride him again.’”

Cedros fought for the early lead on the outside from the nine post in the 1 1/16-mile turf race, setting quick fractions of :23.11 for the opening quarter mile and :46.62 for the half. Down the backside, two horses made a strong move past the dueling leaders, and Rosario let them go. He wound up on the rail at the top of the stretch—against Glenney’s wishes—and lost a photo finish for third. The winner came from dead last. Rosario raised the whip in his left hand in mid-stretch, but Cedros appeared to shy from it and drifted out, prompting Rosario not to strike the horse.

The next morning, while Stauffer was visiting trainer Hollendorfer and his assistant, Dan Ward, the subject of Cedros came up. Ward called a replay of the race up on his computer and, according to Stauffer, told Hollendorfer, “You ought to look at this. This is a nice horse.”

Hollendorfer, according to Stauffer, was not interested for two reasons: 1) he was heading to the Keeneland September yearling sale where he planned to be active as a buyer, and 2) he had a previous experience with Glenney and didn’t want to do any more business with him.

“Jerry said to Dan, ‘You like the horse, you call the guy,’” Stauffer said. “Dan said, ‘I’m not calling him, that guy’s crazy,’ then said, ‘Vic, you call him.’”

Stauffer said it’s his custom to follow up with trainers Rosario had ridden for and called Glenney from Hollendorfer’s tack room, putting the call on speaker phone. “I asked Glenney how he was doing and he says, ‘How am I doing? How do you think I am? Terrible. That was a horrible ride.’ Then he goes off for two or three minutes on a diatribe about how bad Rosario rode his horse and how could this kid call himself a leading rider.’ I thought it was a basic rant by a losing trainer. I hear it all the time.

“So at the end of his rant, I said to him, ‘So, I guess you don’t want to sell him, huh?’ That was designed to make Jerry and Dan laugh. It was said flippantly and benignly. There was no actual initiation of being mildly interested in buying the horse. Jerry had already said he wouldn’t buy the horse from the guy. So I said this thing that I thought was sarcastic and flippant. Glenney blew up. ‘Buy the horse…are you kidding me?’ I said, ‘Yes, I was just kidding.’ He then reiterated all the admonitions about Joel’s ride, this time more aggressively.”

Stauffer listed and after a few minutes more said he told Glenney, “OK, have a nice day,” and hung up the phone. “That was the entire conversation and the entire spirit of the conversation that I had with John Glenney,” Stauffer said. “Nothing before or since.”

A few days later, the day after a late-night bachelor party prior to his Sept. 12 wedding, Stauffer got an 8 a.m. call from CHRB investigator Rick Amieva, saying a complaint had been filed against Rosario for not putting in his best effort. Stauffer said Amieva asked about his conversation with Glenney the morning after the race and asked, ‘Who approached you?’

“(Amieva) said, ‘I’ve seen the videotape. It’s obvious that he’s guilty of what is being alleged.’ And I said, ‘Hold on there. Are you certified as a film analyst?’ He said ‘no,’ and I told him, ‘So you have taken it upon yourself to analyze this film and you are telling me it’s obvious Joel is guilty?’ He said, ‘Yes.’”

Stauffer said he was caught off-guard by the call and asked Amieva if he could go back over the questions the investigator had asked him. “I think the first thing I said was the ramblings of a sleeping person,” said Stauffer. “I asked if I could restate the answers to his questions, because I wanted to make sure he got all the facts.”

Amieva, Stauffer believes, is a “bitter” person who has been passed over for promotions by the CHRB. “I think he said, ‘Aha. Now we’ve got a conspiracy. I’ve got him changing his story. This is going to put me on the map as an investigator because it’s race fixing.”

After that conversation, Stauffer immediately called Glenney and “used every cuss word that I know. I asked how he could have the nerve to do this when his horse just didn’t perform to his expectations.” Glenney hung up on Stauffer.

One week later, after Amieva consulted with his superiors, chief investigator Rod Coulter and supervising special investigator Bill Westermann, the CHRB filed a formal complaint against Rosario.

STEWARDS HEARING, THEN A DISMISSAL
After several delays, a hearing was conducted in front of stewards Randy Winick, Kim Sawyer and Albert Christiansen, beginning Nov. 19, and then continued in early December. Attorney Roger Licht, a former chairman of the CHRB and a racetrack regular, was hired to represent Rosario. Deputy attorney general Kenneth Jones prosecuted the case for the CHRB.

 
Amieva relied on backup or safety steward Luis Jauregui to analyze the film of the race in question, but Jauregui’s comments, curiously, were not included in the investigator’s report. Neither did Amieva interview Rosario before the CHRB complaint was filed. It was only afterwards, and at the insistence of Licht, that Amieva interviewed the jockey. Both Licht and Stauffer said Amieva had declined to talk with Rosario because, the investigator had said, “I know what he was going to say anyways.”

“From everything I’ve been told, (Amieva) would flunk law enforcement 101 because he had the opportunity to interview the subject and he didn’t,” said Licht.

As previously reported here, Hall of Fame jockey Gary Stevens contacted Stauffer after he learned of the complaint and offered to testify on Rosario’s behalf, calling the charges against the rider a “joke” and analyzing in detail what he felt happened during the race. “Gary Stevens was a tremendous witness,” said Licht. “He was very thorough and credible. You couldn’t ask for a better expert witness. He said the charges were not warranted and also spoke about Joel’s integrity.”

Hollenderfer and Ward also testified, corroborating the conversation they’d had with Stauffer and his phone call to Glenney the morning after Cedros raced. They also talked about Rosario’s character and ability.

Glenney testified about his post-race conversation with Stauffer and an exercise rider for Cedros said she did not consider the horse “unmanageable” during training. Neither Jauregui nor steward Cheney would condemn Rosario’s ride in their testimony at the hearing, leaving the CHRB and Jones with a flimsy case, at best. In his summation, Jones said he was convinced there was no conspiracy, that the video tape was the principal evidence. No charges were ever filed against Stauffer.

“Jones never had his heart in this,” Stauffer said. “He knew he was pissing in the wind, and you could tell he was pursuing this because the CHRB insisted.”

On Dec. 13, two days after closing arguments, the stewards voted unanimously to clear Rosario of all of the charges against him. The witch hunt was over.

THE AFTERMATH
Stauffer said the damage to Rosario’s reputation due to what he called “negligence” by Amieva in investigating the case is “irreparable,” adding that “people all around the country have drawn their conclusions about his guilt. You can never fix that reputation. You can’t get it back. Believe me, Joel is the absolute antithesis of what they say he did.”

Stauffer said there are no plans at present to file a lawsuit, “but we are hoping the CHRB will take it upon themselves to investigate Amieva’s shoddy work. I will not rest until Amieva is held responsible, or whoever was pushing Amieva is held responsible for gross negligence.”

“The CHRB argued that they owe the duty to the industry to investigate everything that appears to be unscrupulous,” said Licht. “There’s nothing wrong with an investigation. The mistake was in bringing the charges prematurely.”

The case hasn’t slowed down Rosario’s success in Southern California. He won his third California riding title at the just-concluded Hollywood Park meeting, where Stauffer also serves as track announcer. On the final day of his hearing, Rosario went out that afternoon and rode six winners in eight races, equaling a record held by three Hall of Famers—Bill Shoemaker, Laffit Pincay Jr., and Kent Desormeaux.

“My heart is broken that he had to go through this,” said Stauffer. “He is such a fine young man. He really exemplifies everything that is good about jockeys.

“I also feel terrible about my contribution, which was stupid. How do you know when you’re saying something benign and flippant that it will morph into this? I wish I had been smarter.”

I wish the CHRB had demonstrated more intelligence, too. From all appearances, the investigation was shoddy from the start, and a formal complaint would never have been filed if the CHRB’s Amieva had talked with all of the parties involved. The case has unnecessarily tainted not just a future superstar, but the sport as a whole.

Copyright © 2009, The Paulick Report

Savvy businesses recognize value.
Advertise in the Paulick Report.

Sign up for our
Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick

ANYONE WILLING TO SAVE CA RACING?

Friday, December 11th, 2009

By Ray Paulick
I always felt as though Marje Everett unnecessarily shoe-horned in the Hollywood Park fall meeting when it was added to the Southern California racing schedule in 1981. Until then, there had been a break in the action at the area’s major tracks from the end of the Oak Tree Racing Association meeting at Santa Anita Park in early November until the traditional Dec. 26 opening day of the Santa Anita winter-spring meet. That break gave horses, horsemen and fans a brief reprieve from the daily grind.

It may have been good business at the time for the former Hollywood Park owner to add the autumn meeting, especially since it helped her land the inaugural Breeders’ Cup in 1984. And there have been many outstanding and exiting races offered during that meeting over the last 28 years.

Lately, however, the Hollywood Park fall meeting merely serves as a reminder of how tired and old horse racing has become in Southern California as it limps to the end of the racing year.

Perhaps we should count our blessings that Hollywood Park is still in business, given its present ownership by a land development company that has a wrecking ball at the ready as soon as it can obtain financing. Its caretaker management team, led by Jack Liebau, who turned Bay Meadows in Northern California into a useless pile of rubble, is doing little more than going through the motions, knowing the end is near. Can they really be blamed? The track is on life support, with Liebau playing the role of assisted suicide doctor Jack Kevorkian, aka Dr. Death.

But when some look at what’s going on during the fall meeting at the “track of the lakes and flowers,” they might wonder if it would be better to put Hollywood Park out of its misery and move on…to wherever that is. California horse racing’s “leaders” have no plan for the future.

Field size is abysmal, and the quality of racing, even on weekends, may be at an all-time low. Saturday’s nine-race program has just 58 horses entered. There are six claiming races, three five-horse fields and three six-horse fields. The average field size before scratches is 6.44.

That follows a Wednesday card with an average field size of 6.375, a Thursday program with 7.375 and a Friday card that has 6.625 horses entered per race.

The falling economy and real estate crisis has hit California especially hard, affecting horseplayers and horse owners. There aren’t enough horse owners with ready-to-run Thoroughbreds to fill the cards adequately for a year-round circuit anymore in Southern California. The daily diet of bad betting races is only discouraging to horseplayers.

The California Horse Racing Board won’t make any significant changes because it is rudderless. Is anyone willing to step up and save California racing?

Copyright © 2009, The Paulick Report

Savvy businesses recognize value.
Advertise in the Paulick Report.

Sign up for our
Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick

IT’S WAR! CTT FIRES BACK

Wednesday, October 21st, 2009

By Ray Paulick

UPDATED 9 P.M. 
(NOTE: Several hours after the following story was published, the Paulick Report received a press release from the group known as California Horsemen for Change in reaction to the email distributed by the California Thoroughbred Trainers to some of its members.  Click here to read the press release from California Horsemen for Change.)

The civil war that broke out recently among California trainers has escalated as a result of the following email that warns horseman what could happen if California Thoroughbred Trainers is decertified. A group calling itself California Horsemen for Change is staging a palace revolt to either replace all nine members of the CTT’s current board of directors through a special election or get enough signatures from trainers to have the CTT decertified.

Click here for a previous Paulick Report story providing background on the war between the California trainers and here for a press release from the California Horsemen for Change. 
Following is the warning email distributed by the California Thoroughbred Trainers to its members:

WARNING!
   
An organization has been formed that is attempting to eliminate the CTT.  That group plans to ask the CHRB to make it the representative of all the trainers.  Be aware that:
  •     YOUR SUPPORT OF A NEWLY FORMED TRAINER GROUP COULD HAVE SERIOUS NEGATIVE FINANCIAL AND POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS 
  •     WE URGE YOU NOT TO SUPPORT THE ELIMINATION OF THE CTT 
  •      WE URGE YOU NOT TO SIGN ANY PETITION TO DECERTIFY THE CTT

 

 

 
 
Joining that group or signing a petition to decertify the CTT could have the following consequences:
 
·       IT COULD THREATEN THE CTT / CHSA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION INSURANCE PROGRAM, RESULTING IN HUGE INCREASES IN YOUR PREMIUM
 
·       IT COULD LEAD TO TERMINATION OF THE CURRENT INSURED PENSION PLAN AND REQUIRE THAT YOU BE LIABLE FOR BENEFITS DUE TO YOUR EMPLOYEES UNDER ANY NEW INSURED PLAN
 
·       IT COULD KILL INDUSTRY EFFORTS TO PURCHASE SANTA ANITA AS A HORSEMEN’S NON-PROFIT
 
·       IT COULD PUT AN END TO CURRENT DISCUSSIONS BETWEEN THE CTT AND THE TOC REGARDING UNIFICATION OF THE ORGANIZATIONS
 
·       IT COULD LEAD TO A LOSS OF REPRESENTATION ON THE RACING MEDICATION & TESTING CONSORTIUM (RMTC)
 
If your desire is to change the management, directors, and direction of the CTT while bringing the industry new leadership, there is a much easier, faster, and sensible way to do so without creating these risks.
 
WHY COULD A DECERTIFICATION PETITION COST ME MONEY?
 
Simply put, AIG could refuse to continue with the current workers’ compensation program.  This program was built on personal relationships with AIG and trust in the CTT management of the program.  The program could not be replaced.  There are no other insurers out there that will provide such low-cost coverage.  Your only option would be State Fund at three to four times what you are now paying.  In the current environment, AIG is being very careful about the way they do business. In July of each year, they are owed $11 million in premiums from the organization.  They have faith in the fact that the CTT will make sure they are paid and the program will be managed honestly and efficiently.  If they see turmoil and a new group being responsible for the program, they could well decide not to offer coverage.  That would cost individual trainers thousands or tens of thousands each month out of their respective pockets.
 
WHY COULD DECERTIFICATION LEAD TO ME BEING PERSONALLY LIABLE FOR THE PENSION BENEFITS OF MY EMPLOYEES?
 
When the CTT Backstretch Pension Plan was created, it was allowed to become part of a federal insurance plan that did not require that each employer be individually liable for the benefits due to his/her employees.  The rules have since been interpreted to provide that a plan may not obtain federal insurance unless each individual employer is liable for his/her employees’ benefits.  Currently, the CTT Plan remains federally insured even though federal administrators have again raised the question of its eligibility.  If the CTT were to be disbanded, the regulators could declare the plan ineligible to continue with the individual liability exception that we now enjoy.  The Plan would then become uninsured.
 
By way of information, the Plan under current CTT management has seen its value INCREASE 42% over the past ten years.  That increase in value has taken place in spite of the fact that the leading stock market index has actually DECREASED 9.4% in that same period.  The current value is approximately $34 million.   Approximately 760 people are currently collecting monthly benefitsand there are over 2,400 combined trainers and their employees who are registered to one day collect benefits from the Plan.  The success of the CTT Pension fund is due to the dedication of a volunteer management committee that includes three professional money managers.  Should a battle break out over decertification of the CTT, those volunteers are unlikely to want to continue to be involved.   
 
WHY WOULD A DECERTIFICATION PROCESS ELIMINATE THE POSSIBILITY OF A HORSEMEN’S NON-PROFIT GROUP OWNING SANTA ANITA?
 
The people putting together this non-profit group have advised that any turmoil within the industry at this time would make such a project impossible to finance.  The investment bankers are not going to put up funds for a project when the industry is involved in a battle over horsemen’s representation.
 
WHY WOULD THE THREAT OF A NEW TRAINERS GROUP END ANY POSSIBILITY OF CURRENT CTT-TOC UNIFICATION?
 
One of the major concerns of the TOC in dealing with trainers has always been that certain dissidents would take seats on its Board.  The TOC even fashioned rules to prevent that.  A takeover movement by the newly formed group would again fuel those fears and cause a breakdown of current talks.
 
WHY WOULD THE ELIMINATION OF THE CTT AS THE TRAINERS’ REPRESENTATIVE LEAD TO A LOSS OF THE CTT’S DIRECTORS SEAT ON THE RMTC?
 
The RMTC is the source of almost all new medication rules and penalties in California.  The CTT was one of the original members of the RMTC and is on the board of directors of that organization.  If a new organization were to become the representative of the California trainers, that seat could be lost.  The TOC also holds a seat on that Board and the RMTC Board may feel that no other state has duel seats and, therefore, the TOC is sufficient representation.
 
THERE ARE SIMPLER, FASTER, AND LESS DEVICIVE WAYS OF MAKING YOUR VOICE HEARD AND CREATING POSITIVE CHANGE IN THE HORSE RACING INDUSTRY.
 
The CTT is a democratic organization owned equally by YOU and each licensed trainer in California.  It has a nine person Board of Directors who are all trainers, with three directors being replaced each year by an election in which each trainer is allowed to vote.
 
Three directors’ seats will be up for election in less than nine months.  Another three directors were elected just 3 months ago, with two of them likely to be appointed by the newly formed group to its board.  By electing three new directors of your choice, you can change the make-up and direction of the CTT Board.  
 
Given that option, ask yourself, why would I choose to use a process that requires obtaining signatures from about 1/3 of the membership, approval by the CHRB, followed by a vote of all trainers, and the time and expense of creating and funding a new organization?   Why would I choose to risk the resultant damages that are described above?   Why would I choose to take sides in such an angry battle that is likely to create acrimony at my workplace for years to come?
 
Do not support that new organization called the CHC.   Do not sign any petition to decertify the CTT.  You do have other more effective and less destructive options.  To promote change in the industry, become active, call (626-447-2145), email to comments@caltrainers.org, or visit a CTT office and voice your concerns.  Volunteer to join or create CTT committees of your choosing.      
 
If you think you might have signed a petition to decertify the CTT and you wish to withdraw your signature, please complete the below and return to the nearest CTT office.  You may also fax to the CTT at (626) 446-0270.

 

 

 
I hereby withdraw my name from any petition to decertify the CTT.
 
__________________________________           _______________
Signature                                                                                          Date
 
__________________________________
Print Name

 


 


 

WARNING

THE WILD WEST

Tuesday, October 13th, 2009

By Ray Paulick
The California racing and breeding industry appears to have the stability of a bowl of Jello. Two tracks, Santa Anita Park and Golden Gate Fields, are owned by bankrupt Magna Entertainment and their future is cloudy. Hollywood Park is in the hands of a land developer that already bulldozed Bay Meadows and has similar plans for the Inglewood facility, though when he gets the money to develop the property is anyone’s guess. Del Mar is run by a non-profit association whose contract will soon expire. Training centers are being shut down, farms are closing and the foal crop is sinking. The former head of the California Horse Racing Board pleaded guilty to a crime most often committed by juvenile delinquents. The Thoroughbred Owners of California has been without an executive director for the last several months. And now the state’s Thoroughbred trainers are forming a circle, pulling out their weapons and getting ready to fire.

In a word, it’s a mess.

It’s been more than 15 years since the late Ed Friendly—the Emmy-winning television producer of such shows as “Laugh In” and “Little House on the Prairie”–led a revolt that ejected the Horsemen’s Benevolent and Protective Association from its traditional role representing the state’s owners and trainers and created the Thoroughbred Owners of California. TOC would be responsible for negotiating purse and simulcast contracts with racetracks and represent owners in front of the CHRB and state lawmakers. At the same time, a new group called California Thoroughbred Trainers was formed and certified, and their role was to deal with track management and the CHRB on issues related to backstretch conditions, track safety and benevolence.

Owners in other states have tried similar maneuvers but failed, in part because they lacked a leader with the tenacity and commitment of Ed Friendly and also because they didn’t have a focal point to rally around. For Friendly and his fellow owners, that focal point was a trainer-led boycott of Friday night racing at Hollywood Park in 1992. The trainers didn’t want to race at night, and Friendly said it wasn’t up to them to decide when to race his and his fellow owners’ horses. Friendly persevered and won the fight, getting legislation passed that created TOC and neutered the HBPA.

The two groups have pretty much stuck to the script since then, with TOC representing owners not only in California but on national organizations like the National Thoroughbred Racing Association. CTT has focused mainly on backstretch issues. How well has the arrangement worked? It depends on who you ask.

A group of prominent trainers have become increasingly unhappy with the situation and with the representation they were getting from the CTT. When an general election was held in June for three of the CTT’s board seats, trainer Jim Cassidy, who had served as president for the previous year, was voted off  the board. The following month, when the newly seated board met (John Shirreffs, Clifford Sise and Ed Moger were elected in June, joining incumbents Dan Hendricks, Jack Carava, Bill Anton, Gloria Haley and Tim Bellasis), their first order of business was to appoint a replacement for Eoin Harty, who had resigned from the board with one year left on his term. Harty said he was spending an increasing amount of time out of state.

The board voted to replace Harty with Cassidy, who had the fourth-highest number of votes for the three board positions in the June election. After being put back on the board, Cassidy was then re-elected president on the second ballot (three individuals nominated on the first ballot each received three votes, and one of the candidates withdrew his name from consideration prior to the second ballot).

That sequence of events didn’t sit well with the trainers who voted to keep Cassidy off the board in June. Much like the Friday night boycotts motivated owners to form the TOC, the appointment of Cassidy and his subsequent reelection as president galvanized CTT’s critics. They formed an ad hoc group called California Horsemen for Change, and began laying the groundwork in an effort to replace CTT as the organization representing trainers. Members of the California Horsemen for Change and others met with the CTT last Friday (click here for a press release from the California Horsemen for Change), and urged the CTT’s board to vote for a new election to fill all nine board seats. The CTT board agreed, by a 5-4 vote according to a source, but additional changes in the bylaws will be required before they can wipe the slate clean and elect a new board of directors. According to a published report, one CTT member has challenged the legality of the board’s decision to hold a new election.

Interestingly, the trainer said to be behind this new organization is Darrell Vienna, one of the leaders of the Friday night boycott at Hollywood Park in 1992 that led to the HBPA being ousted and the trainers losing much of their clout. According to a source, Vienna, who is one of a number of trainers unhappy with the CHRB’s synthetic surface mandate at California racetracks, spoke up against the synthetic tracks at a CTT meeting earlier this year where the CHRB’s equine medical director, Dr. Rick Arthur, presented statistics comparing equine fatalities on dirt versus synthetics. Vienna “got into it” with Arthur, the source said, demanding to see the data of the study. At that point, Gloria Haley, a CTT board member from Northern California, was said to have reprimanded Vienna, reminding him that he was “guest” at the meeting. The comment apparently infuriated Vienna.

“When we had the vote three months ago I asked Vienna personally to run for the board,” Cassidy told the Paulick Report. “He refused. He said ‘I’m not getting involved.’” It looks as though he’s changed his mind.

Vienna didn’t answer questions when contacted by the Paulick Report, instead deferring them to Chris Knight, a recent law school graduate and son of trainers Chay and Mary Knight who has been brought on as interim executive director of the California Horsemen for Change. Knight downplayed any discord between any individuals within the two organizations or anger with the recent election, instead saying the “CTT and California trainers in general are dissatisfied with California racing. We’ve capitalized on the momentum and will be holding a new general election, having everyone involved.”

Knight said there are a number of critical issues, including:
- the pending closing of Fairplex Park to stabling and training due to revenue shortfalls;
- the poor economic state of the racetracks and the uncertainty over the future of Hollywood Park, Santa Anita Park, Golden Gate Fields and Del Mar;
- questions about the safety of the synthetic tracks;
- a desire to be more closely engaged with TOC (according to sources, there have been recent talks between CTT and TOC to bring the groups closer together).

Cassidy said the individuals within the two groups share common ground in many areas, including a desire for higher purses and greater stability in track ownership. “A lot of them have their own agendas including a change in surfaces, and I understand all that,” he said. ”I tell them we work on what we can. I’m at so many of these meetings that my head spins. I hate to see what’s happening, because people are desperate and angry, but those are the times we are in right now. I feel like the Lone Ranger.

Copyright © 2009, The Paulick Report

Savvy businesses recognize value. Advertise in the Paulick Report.

Sign up for our
Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick

MEDICATION MUCKS MULES

Thursday, September 17th, 2009

By Ray Paulick
If Francis the Talking Mule of movie fame were still around, he might tell us what on earth happened at the Los Angeles County fair race meeting at Fairplex Park on Thursday. All I know is that the following press release that arrived in my inbox from the California Horse Racing Board on Thursday night was one of the strangest I’ve ever received. There is a lot left to the imagination in the advisory sent out:

 

CHRB ADVISORY OF CANCELED RACES
 
The stewards at Fairplex Park in consultation with the California Horse Racing Board and Fairplex management canceled the first two races on the program for Thursday, September 17, when they received documentation that 11 of the 14 mules in those two races had received medication within 24 hours of the race in contravention of CHRB rules.

CHRB: DRUG TESTING DOESN’T DISCRIMINATE

Tuesday, July 28th, 2009
By Ray Paulick
There seems to be a belief among more than a few people in horse racing, including some trainers, that a state racing commission’s drug testing protocol goes something like this: Stewards call the testing lab and say, “The guy that won this race is a known cheater, and we don’t like him. Make sure you test his horse’s urine for everything under the sun.”

The sample subsequently arrives at the test laboratory with a big “cheater” sticker on it, and the lab technicians spend all of their waking hours testing it. Meanwhile, these same conspiracy theorists are convinced that some trainers never have their horses tested for drugs no matter how many races they win because they wear white hats and are given preferential treatment by stewards, racing commissions and chemists.

It reminds me of the old Smothers Brothers routine, “Mom Always Liked You Best.”

A number of trainers at Del Mar expressed the belief that former California Horse Racing Board executive director Ingrid Fermin has a bias against them and should not be allowed to judge races they are involved in from the steward’s stand. Others have said Fermin has a conflict of interest because her sister is married to trainer Bruce Headley.

We decided to ask a few questions about the protocol for drug testing in California to see just how easy it is to discriminate in the testing of post-race samples. Turns out these folks actually have a system to protect the integrity of the process.

Veterinarian Rick Arthur, equine medical director for the CHRB, told the Paulick Report: “We never alter the standard protocol for any test associated with a race sample. All samples are treated the same per the lab’s SOP. This is one of the advantages of having an accredited lab; all samples are treated the same and every step is documented to confirm that is the case. In rare instances we will go back on a sample if we have seen something suspicious in the lab or we have some intelligence, but that sample, once it has passed the SOP protocol, is considered cleared.

“Any special testing is done to improve the lab and testing protocol going forward,” Arthur said. “We have never filed a complaint on the rare sample that has received special attention after the sample has cleared. I doubt we ever would unless there were exceptional circumstances, i.e., the drug was something especially egregious–cobra or snail venom would be examples. Regardless, due to the documentation process required in accredited labs, any special attention to a sample is recorded and would be open to scrutiny if any regulatory action was taken.

“A few trainers who have had repeated problems with drug positives claim they have been targeted,” Arthur continued. “That is pure fantasy to deflect their personal responsibility for their drug violation records. Samples go into the lab as numbered samples and they are reported out by sample numbers. The sample custodian at CHRB headquarters in Sacramento has the paperwork that decodes the sample numbers to the horse and trainer. Only then does anyone know what sample is tied to what horse and trainer.

“Any trainer who thinks the system is corrupt overvalues their importance,” said Arthur. “Who is going to bother with a vast conspiracy involving multiple people at the CHRB and the University of California? Get real; no one cares. If someone is breaking the rules they will trip up sooner or later. We don’t need to go looking.”

Dr. Scott Stanley heads the Ken Maddy Equine Analytical Chemistry Laboratory at the University of California-Davis, the official lab for the CHRB. Stanley made a couple of additional points about California’s testing protocol.

“First, California also maintains a small portion of the original sample which can be used for retrospective testing,” said Stanley. “The retrospective samples are maintained for two years; while the lab still does not have the information on the horse or the trainer the CHRB can use these samples to identify new drugs or patterns for previously undetected drugs. Second, the testing scheme at UC Davis includes an extensive drug panel equal to or greater than most laboratory’s TOBA testing panel. All samples, from claiming races to graded stakes, receive the same test so there isn’t any one individual trainer or horse singled out or held to a different standard.”

Arthur said out-of-competition testing is somewhat different than post-race tests. “We will alter protocol depending on the circumstances, but again, all samples are treated the same. For example, we had intelligence of an andrenergic drug being used in Quarter horses. Besides testing for EPO in our out-of-competition samples we did additional testing for the rumored drug and other anabolic drugs. Usually we just concentrate on blood doping agents in our out-of-competition testing; the additional tests were a modification of protocol. FYI…the additional drugs we tested in the out-of-competition testing are covered in our standard race testing protocol.”

So, according to those most closely involved in California’s drug-testing procedures, there really isn’t the opportunity to discriminate. Not that the facts are ever going to change anyone’s mind.

By the way, I heard that the Smothers brothers’ mother didn’t play favorites, either.

Copyright © 2009, The Paulick Report

Savvy businesses recognize value.
Advertise in the Paulick Report.

Support the Paulick Report. Make a
donation today.

Sign up for our
Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick

FUROR OVER FERMIN

Sunday, July 26th, 2009
By Ray PaulickThe California Horse Racing Board has created a potential mess by appointing its former executive director, Ingrid Fermin, as one of three individuals on the board of stewards during the Del Mar Thoroughbred Club meeting that began on Wednesday.

Fermin’s tenure as head of the state agency, which lasted three years, ended in 2007  when she said she did not want to relocate to Sacramento, home of the CHRB’s headquarters, as required by the board. There were several controversies and internal turmoil during her time as executive director, and some critics reportedly accused her of showing favoritism in appointments and contracts.

Foremost among those critics is owner Jerry Jamgotchian, who has filed several lawsuits against the CHRB, sent hundreds if not thousands of e-mails critical of Fermin, former CHRB chairman Richard Shapiro and others, and recently told the Paulick Report Fermin was “the most corrupt” executive director and steward in CHRB history.

When Fermin (pictured, left) was named one of three stewards for the Del Mar meeting, resuming a career she began in 1981 as the first female steward in California history, Jamgotchian requested a hearing with the CHRB to stop the appointment, saying that Fermin was biased against certain trainers and owners. The furor over the appointment ramped up when several trainers, including Mike Mitchell, Jeff Mullins, Art Sherman and Doug O’Neill, appealed to have Fermin recuse herself from judging races in which they have horses. There have been accusations that Fermin specifically targeted certain trainers in post-race drug testing while she was CHRB executive director. Fermin told the San Diego Union-Tribune the accuslations were “baseless” and “twisted.”

Jamgotchian’s complaint against Fermin stemmed from an incident in 2005 involving a horse owned by Jamgotchian that he wanted to scratch from a race at Del Mar. After a steward refused to allow the horse to be scratched, the horse ran and suffered an injury. UPDATE: While Jamgotchian has alleged that the horse, John’s Kinda Girl, was injured in that Aug. 14, 2005, race, the filly subsequently worked out three times over the next six weeks, and raced Oct. 7, 2005, and 12 more times in the next year, winning two of those races.

Jamgotchian’s request for a hearing before the Del Mar meet opened was denied when Fermin declined to attend. After the board met privately in executive session on Thursday, CHRB chairman John Harris said during the public portion of the regularly-scheduled monthly meeting that the stewards named for the Del Mar meeting would be retained. Harris also was board chairman when Fermin was appointed CHRB executive director in 2004.

Things appeared to change somewhat on Friday, however, when owner Martin Wygod, a member of the Del Mar Thoroughbred Club’s board of directors and one of the most influential owners in California racing, reportedly asked Fermin to recuse herself from presiding over a race in which one of his horses was running. According to a report in the North County Times, former jockey Luis Jaurequi, now a “safety steward,” would have substituted for Fermin in judging any inquiry or claim of foul involving one of Wygod’s horses in that race. Does that mean Fermin would have judged foul claims in the same race if they didn’t involve Wygod’s horse?

Wygod is believed to have been upset with Fermin ever since an incident involving 2-year-old champion Sweet Catomine at Santa Anita three years ago when the filly left the grounds for medical treatment prior to the Santa Anita Derby. Wygod was charged, following an investigation led by Fermin, with having the filly falsely identified when she was vanned out of the stable area and exhibiting conduct detrimental to racing. The charges, which could have resulted in Wygod having his owner’s license suspended, were dismissed following a hearing.


Jamgotchian, citing numerous sources, provided the following commentary about the reported request by Wygod to have Fermin recuse herself from presiding over Friday’s race in which Wygod’s horse ran: “On July 24, 2009, around noon,” Jamgotchian wrote in a widely distributed e-mail, “a ‘secret’ meeting was held in the Steward’s office at Del Mar. At this meeting,Ingrid Fermin agreed to recuse herself from Race No. 2 at Del Mar. Her recusal was made orally at the demand of owner Marty Wygod because he believed that Fermin has a known, actual and direct bias and prejudice against him because of the Sweet Catomine incident and various statements made about Wygod in the Frank Moore declaration dated July 14, 2009.”

Jamgotchian went on to say that Wygod threatened to scratch his horse from the race if Fermin failed to recuse herself as a steward in that race. “Fermin agreed,” Jamgotchian wrote, “and her recusal was made in front of fellow Stewards Scott Chaney, Tom Ward and in the presence of other parties in the room, including Wygod.”

Jamgotchian said he called Wygod’s attorney, Roger Licht, “to confirm the above facts regarding their recusal agreement with Fermin” and that Licht told him “there was an ‘oral’ confidentiality agreement in place with Fermin and that he could not discuss Fermin’s recusal.”

Jamgotchian said he also tried unsuccessfully to speak with Fermin by telephone before the first race and said he intends to file a complaint with the CHRB regarding the “Wygod recusal” and demand an investigation by the CHRB because of what he called a “unilateral” decision and one that was not publicly disclosed.

If the North County Times article and Jamgotchian’s assertions are accurate, it appears either the CHRB or Fermin are applying a double standard when it comes to Fermin recusing herself from races in which the principals involved feel as though there is a bias by her against them. If she recused herself in a race involving Wygod, shouldn’t she do the same in races involving the trainers who have made similar appeals?

Copyright © 2009, The Paulick Report

Savvy businesses recognize value.
Advertise in the Paulick Report.

Support the Paulick Report. Make a
donation today.

Sign up for our
Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick

(UPDATED: SUNDAY, 5:15 P.M. , FIFTH PARAGRAPH)

HOLLYWOOD PARK: THANKS FOR THE MEMORIES…AND THE TOTE BAG

Thursday, July 9th, 2009
By Ray Paulick
How appropriate that just a few days before the Hollywood Gold Cup, the signature event of the Southern California racetrack of lakes and flowers, the Inglewood city council has driven the last nail into the track’s proverbial coffin. The once-proud Hollywood, a place where tens of thousands of people would come out for an ordinary day of racing, where champions like Citation and Swaps and Affirmed would make headlines, where people like Cary Grant and Elizabeth Taylor could be seen reading the Daily Racing Form and rubbing elbows with the fans…that track will soon be nothing but a memory as the Bay Meadows Land Co. prepares to bring in the wrecking ball and develop it into something called Hollywood Park Tomorrow.

I yearn for Hollywood Park yesterday.

Times change, though I often wish they didn’t. The death knell for Hollywood Park came when Churchill Downs Inc. sold the track, three years ago last Tuesday to the Bay Meadows Land Co. Then CDI president Tom Meeker said California “has forsaken racing and its needs.” If things were grim for the sport in California then, how do you think it looks now, with Bay Meadows also bought and closed for development by the same Bay Meadows Land Co., and Golden Gate Fields and Santa Anita Park in the middle of owner Magna Entertainment’s bankruptcy proceedings.

But Hollywood Park yesterday was the place that solidified my love of the sport. My first racetrack experiences were in Chicago in the mid-1970s, but it wasn’t until I moved to Southern California in the spring of 1979 that I got to see the best of what racing offered.

That was the year Affirmed carried 132 pounds to victory in the Gold Cup, covering the mile and a quarter in an incredible 1:58 2/5 while pushed the whole way by the Italian champion Sirlad. It was the year a hotshot California-bred named Flying Paster, winner of the Hollywood Derby, would carry the hopes of West Coast racing fans to the Kentucky Derby, where he would be crushed by Spectacular Bid, a colt who would come West a year later and continue to dominate that same rival.

Legends like Shoemaker, Pincay, McCarron, Hawley, and McHargue populated the jockeys room, Trainer Charlie Whittingham dominated the big races, and the stands were packed to the gills every weekend. Little did I know then that the 24,930 average daily attendance from the 77-day meeting of 1979 was down considerably from just a few years earlier, when Hollywood averaged over 30,000. Santa Anita Park was getting the upper hand under the marketing innovations of Alan Balch.

Not to be outdone, track owner Marje Everett pulled out all the stops in 1980 to reverse the “sagging” business figures. On Sunday, May 4, 1980, the day after Genuine Risk beat the California-bred Rumbo in the Kentucky Derby, Hollywood Park tried something new–a “giveaway” for every paid admission, of a canvas tote bag. 

I was one of the 80,348 on hand that day, though I didn’t even know about the tote bag giveaway. I had come to see the ongoing rivalry between ex-claimer Wishing Well (who went on to produce Horse of the Year Sunday Silence) and Country Queen in the Gamely Handicap. I’ll never forget the traffic jam on Century Boulevard trying to get into Hollywood Park that day, or the lines for concessions and betting. I managed to snag one of the tote bags, and, somehow, 29 years later I still have it. Though it’s a bit the worse for wear, the bag is a reminder for me of the glory days of the sport.

That same year, Hollywood Park introduced Pick Six wagering (they even gave away a Pick Six beach towel in the image of a $100 bill….signed by “Secretary of the Treasury Vernon O. Underwood”) , and the racing was highlighted by incredible performances from Spectacular Bid in the Mervyn LeRoy and Californian Stakes (I kept my free “Bid and The Shoe” T-shirt for years until it mysteriously shrunk and no longer fit me). Average attendance soared to 31,150 in 1980.

Hollywood Park is where I stood in awe alongside my friend and former Daily Racing Form colleague Jay Hovdey, watching a 2-year-old daughter of Seattle Slew, named Landaluce, power her way to victory in the 1982 Lassie Stakes, a race since renamed in her honor. She drew off down the stretch of the six-furlong event to win by an implausible 21 lengths, covering the distance in 1:08 flat for an up-and-coming trainer named D. Wayne Lukas. It’s the track where the first Breeders’ Cup was held in 1984, when Everett pulled a few favors with her Hollywood pals and made it a star-studded event for people and horses. It’s been a huge part of racing history since its opening in 1938. Click here for a trip through Hollywood Park’s history in the introduction to the track’s media guide.

I could go on with the memories of this track, just as I could listen all day long to the deadly accurate and gravelly voiced race calls of the late Harry Henson. It’s not the same as it used to be—few places are—and since moving to Kentucky in 1988 I don’t get there as often as I’d like to.

I loved Hollywood Park, its horses, its people and its energy, but mostly for how it made me feel about racing.

Copyright © 2009, The Paulick Report

Savvy businesses recognize value. Advertise
in the Paulick Report.

Support the Paulick Report. Make a donation today.

Sign up for our
Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick

THOROUGHBRED OWNERS OF CALIFORNIA TO BID ON SANTA ANITA

Wednesday, June 3rd, 2009
By Ray Paulick
The Paulick Report has learned that the Thoroughbred Owners of California has submitted an “expression of interest” to buy Santa Anita Park, which is in the process of being sold as part of the bankruptcy proceedings involving the track’s current owner, Magna Entertainment. According to sources, TOC’s plans would be to form a non-profit company to own and operate the Arcadia, Calif., track that averaged nearly 33,000 in daily on-track attendance as recently as 1985 but sees about one-fourth of that number today.

Drew Couto, president of TOC, confirmed Wednesday night that the owners’ organization has filed an intention to bid on Santa Anita but would not offer any additional comment. It is not known if there are individual investors behind the proposed bid or if the funding would be institutional.

The paperwork filed with the expression of interest to bid on Santa Anita is only the first step in the process. TOC will then have to be ruled as a “qualified” bidder after Miller Buckfire and Co., the bankruptcy specialist firm handling the sale of the Magna tracks, reviews its application. The deadline for expressing an interest in bidding was May 27, and formal bids must be submitted by July 31. If necessary, an auction on the properties may take place in September. (Click here for more information on bankruptcy bidding processes.)

There have been many rumors circulating through Southern California that another bidder for the track represents Chinese interests. Internet entrepreneur Halsey Minor has also expressed an interest in acquiring some of the tracks through the purchase of Magna Entertainment’s accumulated debt. MI Developments, which like Magna Enterainment was a spinoff of the automotive giant Magna International, submitted a “stalking horse bid” for a number of the tracks in the original bankruptcy filing in March. Since then, however, MI Developments, the largest shareholder in Magna Entertainment, has backed away under the threat of litigation from many of its institutional shareholders.

There are profound fears in the California Thoroughbred community that if Santa Anita is sold to a development company, racing in the Golden State would soon be extinct. Bay Meadows racetrack in Northern California has been torn down for future development by the Bay Meadows Land Co., which also owns Hollywood Park, where plans for mixed-use development could kill live racing at the end of this year. If Santa Anita is sold for development purposes, the only major track remaining in Southern California would be the  Del Mar, which races from mid-July to early September. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has listed Del Mar, which is owned by the state of California, as a potential property the financially troubled state may attempt to sell.

A successful bid by TOC on Santa Anita Park could go a long way toward preserving the California racing industry.

Magna Entertainment also owns Gulfstream Park in Florida, PImlico and Laurel in Maryland, Golden Gate Fields in Northern California, Lone Star Park in Texas, Remington Park in Oklahoma, Thistledown in Ohio, and Portland Meadows in Oregon.

Santa Anita Park, which opened in December 1934, was purchased by Magna chairman Frank Stronach for $126 million in 1998.

TOC was incorporated in 1993 and eventually replaced the California Horsemen’s Benevolent and Protective Association as the recognized organization representing horse owners in the state.

Copyright © 2009, The Paulick Report

Savvy businesses recognize value. Advertise in the Paulick Report.

Support the Paulick Report. Make a donation today.

Sign up for our
Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick

HOLLYWOOD PARK PAST-POSTING INCIDENT UNDER INVESTIGATION

Tuesday, May 19th, 2009
By Ray Paulick
Betting windows at 33 simulcast sites remained open on Saturday’s Los Angeles Handicap at Hollywood Park until after the Grade 3 stakes race had been run because they did not receive a stop betting signal from the Scientific Games tote system that contracts with California racetracks to handle pari-mutuel wagering.

According to Eual Wyatt Jr., the Inglewood, Calif., track’s general manager, all of the money wagered at those sites – properly or improperly—was “thrown out of the pools” and refunded. Wyatt did not know the amount. He said the 33 simulcast sites all went through a single betting hub. (Click here to view the sites affected and the amount wagered at those sites.) 

The incident is under investigation by the California Horse Racing Board.

The past-post wagering was first reported by Mike Maloney, a Lexington, Ky.-based professional horseplayer and industry watchdog on betting issues, in an article posted on the Horseplayers Association of North America web site. Maloney, a frequent speaker at industry gatherings on the issue of integrity of totalizator systems, was recently named vice president of HANA.

Terry McWilliams, a West Coast representative for Scientific Games Racing (formerly Autotote), would not comment on Saturday’s betting irregularities, saying, “I am not authorized to speak on behalf of the company. “ McWilliams referred the Paulick Report to a corporate spokesperson who did not immediately return a phone call. Scientific Games Racing president Brooks Pierce also could not be reached for comment.

Here is one explanation of the incident provided to Hollywood Park officials by George Brannen, Western Regional Director of Scientific Games Racing, in an email provided by the California Horse Racing Board to the Paulick Report. “At stop betting of race 9 for Hollywood Park we were not receiving pools from a group of 33 imports,” Brennan wrote. “All of these import processes were running on the Slave system. We had 7 other systems in the room wagering on Hollywood and of those 4 were on the Slave system and did not get the stop betting message from the California tote. The other 3 systems imports that were on the Master system did get the stop betting and shipped pools final on time. Because of this we were pretty sure that a stop betting message was not sent to any of the 33 imports and made the decision to clear and close those 33 sites. We then stopped the Slave system, promoted the Clone to become Slave, restarted all the Golden Gate imports that were also hung on the old Slave so that Golden Gate would not be delayed. A more detailed report will follow.”

“This is my first recollection of this (type of wagering irregularity),” Wyatt said. “The good thing is whatever mechanical error occurred, it was discovered and those bets didn’t count.”

At least that’s what Scientific Games apparently is telling Hollywood Park officials. This isn’t the first irregularity in California regarding the tote company, which in 2008 agreed to a settlement with the California Horse Racing Board over software errors related to “quick pick” wagers. Scientific Games knew of the software flaws for months, yet failed to notify the tracks or CHRB. It wasn’t until a horseplayer discovered the flaws while making “quick pick” superfecta wagers on the 2008 Kentucky Derby that the software problem was made public.

Other Scientific Games tote problems have been reported in other states, including a Philadelphia Park past posting incident last June 28 when wagering sites in Florida did not receive a stop-betting signal from a Scientific Games hub. Maloney reported a past-posting incident on a race originating at Fair Grounds in New Orleans, which also used Scientific Games. The most infamous Scientific Games/Autotote incident, however, involved the 2002 Breeders’ Cup Pick Six scandal when company employees hacked into the system to make Pick Six wagers long after the betting cutoff and took home the entire pool.

Kirk Breed, executive director of the California Horse Racing Board, has ordered an investigation by his agency into the latest Scientific Games mistake. “I have read Scientific Games’ explanation and did not understand what it said,” said Breed. “It is their fault. They basically said it’s a malfunction, and I accept that as their malfunction, so they are taking responsibility. They’re the ones that are going to be charged with responding to whoever lost money or was left out.”

Is Breed satisfied that the past-post wagers on the Los Angeles Handicap were excluded from the pools? “I don’t know. I’m not satisfied with anything at this stage,” he said. “All I have is an explanation from Scientific Games sent to Eual at Hollywood Park and which he sent it to me immediately. He and I talked yesterday. Frankly, I do not understand what they are talking about.

“It’s like the quick-pick," Breed added. “It had been going on for nine months and they didn’t do anything about it and didn’t tell us about it. This is why we are trying to get some real-time monitoring in this state so we can have an independent source looking at our wagering, rather than depending on Scientific Games.”

Copyright © 2009, The Paulick Report

Support the Paulick Report. Make a
donation today.

Visit the Paulick Report for
all the latest news throughout the racing world.

Sign up for our
Email Flashes to get the latest news, analysis and commentary from Ray Paulick