Is NYRA insane?
At post time of the first leg of a pick 5 with 3 of the 5 races on turf, NYRA announces that all turf races are switching to dirt. Do you think they announce that they are delaying this post to get scratches or tell people how the turf races in their tickets will be handled? ZERO. ZERO. They just announce that they are announcing for the first time that the last three races are coming off the turf and this race will go off as scheduled.
I was fortunate enough to be able to cancel my pick 5 ticket. I will be apoplectic if they make the turf races ALL win. They made the announcement before. I had my ticket in. Usually, they are not all win in that situation.
This is complete and total chaos. How can they expect people to bet when they change the bet with no warning and no information and no explanation moments before the bet starts.
Cluster for sure - heck, the announcers on the Fox show were scratching their heads. Even Andy didn\'t pretend to know, so if he\'s not playing \"I always know more than you\", what the heck is going on in this world?
It\'s been almost 30 mins...still nothing. My guess? jocks say a portion did not drain well, and it\'s unclear whether it\'s safe. But that is easy to take as a bettor, timing not so much.
shanahan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cluster for sure - heck, the announcers on the Fox
> show were scratching their heads. Even Andy
> didn\'t pretend to know, so if he\'s not playing \"I
> always know more than you\", what the heck is going
> on in this world?
>
> It\'s been almost 30 mins...still nothing. My
> guess? jocks say a portion did not drain well,
> and it\'s unclear whether it\'s safe. But that is
> easy to take as a bettor, timing not so much.
Now they are announcing they are making the grass races as ALL. HOW ON EARTH CAN THEY DO THAT!!! I would have left my bet in if i knew they were doing that. I can the rule be one thing before the bet starts and then something else after the bet starts? This is INSANITY. If my cancelled bet hits, they should pay it. They induced me to cancel it with faulty information.
Safe to say they have not had a stellar weekend. I was lucky and was able to cancel all my tickets. The kept the DD live according to the will pays - so who knows what they are going to do with the multi-race bets.
All races are off turf - presumably for safety after Ever Summer fell - I get that, but announcing it one minute before they are loading the race when they should have figured that out an hour ago is not right. Let me be clear, I am not complaining that they took the last three races off the turf - it makes sense to let them dry out and keep the horses safe if that is indeed their intent. This is true especially since they have a couple of days off. It is the timing that galls me and then loading the gate and running race 6 right away.
When they canceled the last four on Friday, they completely refunded the P5 even though the first race had been run. So if you had a dead ticket you got a reprieve.
Pick Four, Pick Five, and Grand Slam-races off the turf
When the condition of the turf course(s) warrants a change of racing surface to a non-turf course in any of the Pick Four or Pick Five races, and such change hs not been known to the public before the close of wagering in any of those wagers, the changed leg(s) will be deemed an "all win" for wagering purposes.
_______________________________________
That\'s from NYRA\'s website. So, rules, heck with the rules.
Fairmount1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Pick Four, Pick Five, and Grand Slam-races off the
> turf
> When the condition of the turf course(s) warrants
> a change of racing surface to a non-turf course in
> any of the Pick Four or Pick Five races, and such
> change hs not been known to the public before the
> close of wagering in any of those wagers, the
> changed leg(s) will be deemed an "all win" for
> wagering purposes.
>
> _______________________________________
>
> That\'s from NYRA\'s website. So, rules, heck with
> the rules.
Well, one way to look at it is the rule in the website is correct but incomplete....they left out the part where they will also deem the races all win, if after the first leg is run and made official, they feel, at that point, they didnt give enough time to the public before the race to change their bets.
Socalman3 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fairmount1 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Pick Four, Pick Five, and Grand Slam-races off
> the
> > turf
> > When the condition of the turf course(s)
> warrants
> > a change of racing surface to a non-turf course
> in
> > any of the Pick Four or Pick Five races, and
> such
> > change hs not been known to the public before
> the
> > close of wagering in any of those wagers, the
> > changed leg(s) will be deemed an "all win"
> for
> > wagering purposes.
> >
> > _______________________________________
> >
> > That\'s from NYRA\'s website. So, rules, heck
> with
> > the rules.
>
> Well, one way to look at it is the rule in the
> website is correct but incomplete....they left out
> the part where they will also deem the races all
> win, if after the first leg is run and made
> official, they feel, at that point, they didnt
> give enough time to the public before the race to
> change their bets.
BTW, if they had said that even though they were notifying the public before the wagering closed about the surface switch, BUT because it was so close in time to the wagering closing that they will make the turf races ALL WIN, then it would have been okay. At least you would have known the rules of the bet you were making before you made the bet. Here, however, they changed the rules of the bet after the first leg was run and made official. I don\'t understand how that can be done. But, I dont have to understand. All I can do is what I can do. I am closing my NYRABets account. I can lose my money through other websites. I dont need to both take abuse from NYRA and also give NYRA my business.
I think the rule is CLEAR. There was approx 1 minute and 36 seconds before the race ran when they announced the surface change . Applying the rule to the facts, the change was KNOWN TO THE PUBLIC before the close of wagering on the p5. So the rule does not even apply for them to issue an ALL to my mind. It should be a REFUND or let it play out with the changes with the tickets as they were wagered. Now is the latter option fair? Well, maybe not, but does that give them the right to issue an ALL?
This is NYRA garbage again. Hopefully TGJB doesn\'t delete this one like a post last weekend that involved NYRA decisions.
This should have been a REFUND. That was the absolute correct decision once they ran the race so quick after the announcement. This is madness and nonsense.
NYRA decided to NOT follow the rule which would be to leave the tickets wagered as they were, decided to apply an ALL rule that doesn\'t fit the situation, and put their 15% in their coffers and made some gamblers feel warm and fuzzy inside I guess.
To be clear, I had zero dollars at stake here. As an old, cranky poster used to once say about NYRA: clueless clowns. This was another example in many of late by NYRA.
The best decision would have been to circle the horses for 10 minutes, announce to bettors to change their tickets if they desired or to cancel them. But they rushed them in the gate and ran and why???? To keep the tv schedule? IDK....but clueless idiots.
Is NYRA the most corrupt organization in horse racing?
No, I think that\'s the breeding folks and what happens at the sales.
Really? Can you explain your thought?
pip4126 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is NYRA the most corrupt organization in horse
> racing?
The corruption isn\'t the issue. The issue is they show no understanding whatsoever of who their customers are and what their customers want. They don\'t even realize that it would upset bettors to change the rule of a bet after the bet has started. This would be like a kosher person selling pork. If the customer says the pork tastes bad - here take a taste and see, then what is the kosher pork seller going to do? NYRA is like that. From what I can see, they are a bunch of non-gambler morons laughing all the way to the bank that their customers actually gamble and they cannot understand it when they screw up their own product.
Well stated!
P5 payout of $25.00 for $.50 for each winning combo.
At least NYRA preserved as much of their 15% takeout before people could cancel as they could with how they handled it.
Reminds me of nyc otb
statuette Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Reminds me of nyc otb
NYC OTB was way way way way better than NYRA and NYRA Bets are. Not even a close call.
I just put in my self-exclusion at NYRA Bets and I also plan to skip playing horizontal bets at NYRA tracks. I was fortunate enough to be able to cancel my bet today, but it really was dodging a bullet.
How can you make horizontal bets when they can make an announcement with no warning 90 seconds before the pool closes with major impact on your bet? How can you wager when they have the ability to change the rules after the bet has started? If I were to bet with them again and got stung by something like this happening, I would have nobody to blame but myself.
PUBLIC SERVICE WARNING - you are putting yourself at extreme danger if you bet horizontally at NYRA. Once you put your money in their pool, you are at extreme risk of banana republic shenanigans going on and you may not be able to react in time to cancel your bet.
BTW, the people who suffered the worst beat here are the guys who put in two sets of bets (on turf and off turf) and on hearing the announcement that they were off turf cancelled their on turf bets. If you did that, you played it perfectly right and then when the changed the rules to make the off the turf races ALL WIN you got totally and completely screwed. I was not in that group, but those guys got totally burned.
Fairmount1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> P5 payout of $25.00 for $.50 for each winning
> combo.
>
> At least NYRA preserved as much of their 15%
> takeout before people could cancel as they could
> with how they handled it.
NYRA should not be allowed to keep that 15% take out. Once they decided to pick and choose which rules to apply and which rules not to apply, they lost all authority and right to benefit from the game. They should be forced to disgorge that 15% to their bettors. Up the rebates for non-CAW customers - totally should be double the amount -- $276,500 should be returned to small guy bettors.
Socalman3 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> statuette Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Reminds me of nyc otb
>
> NYC OTB was way way way way better than NYRA and
> NYRA Bets are. Not even a close call.
>
> I just put in my self-exclusion at NYRA Bets and I
> also plan to skip playing horizontal bets at NYRA
> tracks. I was fortunate enough to be able to
> cancel my bet today, but it really was dodging a
> bullet.
>
> How can you make horizontal bets when they can
> make an announcement with no warning 90 seconds
> before the pool closes with major impact on your
> bet? How can you wager when they have the ability
> to change the rules after the bet has started? If
> I were to bet with them again and got stung by
> something like this happening, I would have nobody
> to blame but myself.
>
> PUBLIC SERVICE WARNING - you are putting yourself
> at extreme danger if you bet horizontally at NYRA.
> Once you put your money in their pool, you are at
> extreme risk of banana republic shenanigans going
> on and you may not be able to react in time to
> cancel your bet.
>
> BTW, the people who suffered the worst beat here
> are the guys who put in two sets of bets (on turf
> and off turf) and on hearing the announcement that
> they were off turf cancelled their on turf bets.
> If you did that, you played it perfectly right and
> then when the changed the rules to make the off
> the turf races ALL WIN you got totally and
> completely screwed. I was not in that group, but
> those guys got totally burned.
Dear Statuette,
You said NYC OTB, and I disputed that. My apologies, it came to me overnight, that this is just like the Catskill OTB.
Anybody here remember Donald Groth? That was the wisenheimer at Catskill OTB who defended the Fix Six Fraudsters as legitimate betting customers.
Mind you, this Groth-character is somebody who saw nothing strange or unusual that somebody made a $12 pick six bet on a combo that took down the whole pool (i.e. they could have gotten the same payout for a sixth of the bet). This is like the kosher seller of pork. Only a person who doesn\'t bet would somehow think the fix sixers were normal legitimate customers. Anybody who knows anything about betting would have smelled a rat right away.
The point that is obvious is that NYRA and NYRABets are run by ignoramuses and you have to be a jackass if you would be willing to trust these morons to hold your hard earned money.
Sincerely,
Socalman3
Loyal Thorograph Customer since before they had internet accounts
Fairmount1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think the rule is CLEAR. There was approx 1
> minute and 36 seconds before the race ran when
> they announced the surface change . Applying the
> rule to the facts, the change was KNOWN TO THE
> PUBLIC before the close of wagering on the p5. So
> the rule does not even apply for them to issue an
> ALL to my mind. It should be a REFUND or let it
> play out with the changes with the tickets as they
> were wagered. Now is the latter option fair?
> Well, maybe not, but does that give them the right
> to issue an ALL?
>
> This is NYRA garbage again. Hopefully TGJB
> doesn\'t delete this one like a post last weekend
> that involved NYRA decisions.
>
> This should have been a REFUND. That was the
> absolute correct decision once they ran the race
> so quick after the announcement. This is madness
> and nonsense.
>
> NYRA decided to NOT follow the rule which would be
> to leave the tickets wagered as they were, decided
> to apply an ALL rule that doesn\'t fit the
> situation, and put their 15% in their coffers and
> made some gamblers feel warm and fuzzy inside I
> guess.
>
> To be clear, I had zero dollars at stake here. As
> an old, cranky poster used to once say about NYRA:
> clueless clowns. This was another example in
> many of late by NYRA.
>
> The best decision would have been to circle the
> horses for 10 minutes, announce to bettors to
> change their tickets if they desired or to cancel
> them. But they rushed them in the gate and ran
> and why???? To keep the tv schedule? IDK....but
> clueless idiots.
Fairmount meets me for the first time, he turns into P-Dub on the forum.
I\'d be surprised if the stewards did not have a hand in this. The rule is a NYS Gaming Commission rule and is thus subject to the stewards\' interpretation.
One problem is that \"known to the public\" is subject to a variety of interpretations. Given that the announcement was made only shortly before the close of betting, what do we do about players who are at other tracks, at simulcast centers, or have briefly left Living Room Downs to grab a beer? How long before the close of betting does an announcement have to be made at the track in order for most of the betting public to have heard about it and had time to react? I\'m not a fan of the NYRA stewards, but this was not an easy situation.
The real question is what took so long to make the decision to take the remaining races off the turf. I had an LOL moment when I read someone\'s post about possibly moving the races to Finger Lakes, but there was also an element of truth in it. Given the Churchill Downs precedent, NYRA must have been worried about being forced to suspend racing (either on the turf or completely) and \"round up the usual suspects\" if any more problems occurred on Sunday.
BitPlayer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I\'d be surprised if the stewards did not have a
> hand in this. The rule is a NYS Gaming Commission
> rule and is thus subject to the stewards\'
> interpretation.
>
> One problem is that \"known to the public\" is
> subject to a variety of interpretations. Given
> that the announcement was made only shortly before
> the close of betting, what do we do about players
> who are at other tracks, at simulcast centers, or
> have briefly left Living Room Downs to grab a
> beer? How long before the close of betting does
> an announcement have to be made at the track in
> order for most of the betting public to have heard
> about it and had time to react? I\'m not a fan of
> the NYRA stewards, but this was not an easy
> situation.
>
> The real question is what took so long to make the
> decision to take the remaining races off the turf.
> I had an LOL moment when I read someone\'s post
> about possibly moving the races to Finger Lakes,
> but there was also an element of truth in it.
> Given the Churchill Downs precedent, NYRA must
> have been worried about being forced to suspend
> racing (either on the turf or completely) and
> \"round up the usual suspects\" if any more problems
> occurred on Sunday.
Okay, then that makes it even more simple. Whoever is the Czar of NYS horseracing is to blame because that person is the moron that hired a bunch of morons. If there is no Czar of NYS horseracing, then it is Governor Hochul\'s fault. I don\'t really understand why blame is relevant. Somebody wants us to entrust them with our gaming dollars. Whoever that is. That person (whoever it is that wants us to bet with them) cannot simply take our money, act like idiots, and then expect us to come back for more abuse.
The real problem I am having is that people at NYRA and NYRA Bets don\'t even think anything went wrong. They don\'t even understand why a bettor would never want to bet again if things like this can happen. That is what the real problem is.
I actually admit it is a tricky and difficult situation. But there needs to be an adult in the room who can at least say something like - okay, there is a lot of uncertainty, we cannot take peoples\' bets in uncertainty, so we just cancel those pools. That would have been very logical and nobody would have had a complaint. Okay, so there was no adult in the room and they did the wrong thing. But after the dust has cleared, somebody should be acknowledging that something wrong happened and suggesting that they would do something about it. They depend on us trusting them and they act like we should just trust them blindly. They should be worried about us losing faith in them and working on regaining trust.
BitPlayer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I\'d be surprised if the stewards did not have a
> hand in this. The rule is a NYS Gaming Commission
> rule and is thus subject to the stewards\'
> interpretation.
>
> One problem is that \"known to the public\" is
> subject to a variety of interpretations. Given
> that the announcement was made only shortly before
> the close of betting, what do we do about players
> who are at other tracks, at simulcast centers, or
> have briefly left Living Room Downs to grab a
> beer? How long before the close of betting does
> an announcement have to be made at the track in
> order for most of the betting public to have heard
> about it and had time to react? I\'m not a fan of
> the NYRA stewards, but this was not an easy
> situation.
>
> The real question is what took so long to make the
> decision to take the remaining races off the turf.
> I had an LOL moment when I read someone\'s post
> about possibly moving the races to Finger Lakes,
> but there was also an element of truth in it.
> Given the Churchill Downs precedent, NYRA must
> have been worried about being forced to suspend
> racing (either on the turf or completely) and
> \"round up the usual suspects\" if any more problems
> occurred on Sunday.
On the \"known to the public\" interpretation question, I think you are mixing up two things. What might or might not be tricky is how to interpret it. What is not tricky at all is when that interpretation needs to be communicated to the public. They could have interpreted any way they wanted to, but they had to communicate that interpretation to the betting public prior to the pool closing. What they cannot do is be silent, wait for people to enter their money in the pool, and then, after the first race is run, come out with an interpretation that defies common sense and common expectation. I think the common sense default is that if the Public Announcer states something clearly and loudly on the Public Address system and on the live feed, it is mighty hard to say on a common sense basis that the information is not known to the public. I get that it may not have filtered through to the whole public in time - but if you are going to make an interpretation like that, then you better also announce that uncommon interpretation at the same time you are making the first announcement. There is no reason, other than sheer idiocy, to split the timing of the two announcements.
Socal -
I agree with everything in both of these posts.
The executive director of the NYS Gaming Commission is Robert Williams. I think he came in with Cuomo. The approach to regulating racing under his leadership has been, in my mind, sloppy and illogical.
My recent interactions with NYRA Bets have suggested to me that some of the people working there don\'t know what they are doing.
In general, I think horse racing has a personnel problem that is only going to get worse. It\'s not exactly an industry with a promising future.
BitPlayer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Socal -
>
> I agree with everything in both of these posts.
>
> The executive director of the NYS Gaming
> Commission is Robert Williams. I think he came in
> with Cuomo. The approach to regulating racing
> under his leadership has been, in my mind, sloppy
> and illogical.
>
> My recent interactions with NYRA Bets have
> suggested to me that some of the people working
> there don\'t know what they are doing.
>
> In general, I think horse racing has a personnel
> problem that is only going to get worse. It\'s not
> exactly an industry with a promising future.
This makes me sad.
I recently attended the races for the first time at Colonial Downs. Although the personnel were very energetic and cheerful and had the right spirit, they did not know or understand anything about horseracing. I shudder when I think how it is going to go with the Arlington Million there this upcoming Saturday.
I used to feel very angry at the Breeders Cup for no longer having the Series held at Belmont Park. I just thought it was crazy the NYC could not get a Breeders Cup. Now I completely understand and I do not blame the Breeders Cup. In fact, I thank god that they had the god sense not to give the Breeders Cup to a NYRA track.
I feel like the only race of relevance in my life is who will die first, me or horseracing. I was long hoping I was going to die first so I could enjoy the sport in my old age, but am now feeling worried it is going to be the other way around and my old age will not be as enjoyable as I was hoping it would be.
Fairmount1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> This is NYRA garbage again. Hopefully TGJB
> doesn\'t delete this one like a post last weekend
> that involved NYRA decisions.
>
You posted about NYRA being unworthy of trust and the post got taken down? Is that right? I don\'t know the posts you are talking about, So, I cannot comment too much, but it would seem to me quite troubling from a consumer protection perspective IF you made a truthful fact based post warning bettors that NYRA is untrustworthy and beware and the post got taken down and, THEN, after that, Sunday Aug 6 happened.
Does anybody here know anything about HISA? It would seem to me that Congress should have made some consumer protection rules for the horse betting public. What NYRA did on Sunday August 6 should have been a violation of consumer protection laws.
It sickens me that NYRA took 15% out of that pool. It seems to me at a minimum they should offer a compensatory Pick 5 where they do not take anything out of the pool and they seed into the pool the 15% they took out of the tainted pool - and in the special compensatory bet, they should not allow CAW to participate in it.
Instead, they do not even admit or acknowledge, or even seem to know that they did something terribly wrong. That is the absolute worst because with that it means you can just expect more of the same and you have nobody to blame but yourself the next time you get burned like this.
As bad as what NYRA did was bad, it is far far worse that they do not make any sort of public acknowledgement that what they did was wrong. This is like a corollary to the cover up is worse than the crime. Here, the lack of ownership to the foul up is worse than the foul up. I suppose this is where the term SNAFU comes from, but, in the army, there is nothing a foot soldier can do. Here, we all have the choice on whether or not to trust the leadership. Can you imagine if the soldiers complaining about SNAFUs could choose to walk? They would be idiots not to and the army would not be able to survive. Why should NYRA be able to survive in this environment? The bettors will end up only having themselves to blame because they keep coming back for more. The only possible way to effect change would be through a demonstrative concerted action.
If there were enough outrage, a significant amount of NYRA Bets customers could agree on a particular large bet that they will only make the bet through other websites and not through NYRA Bets. The handle on the race would be unchanged nobody has to skip a bet they wanted to make, but the allocation of the betting among bet takers would be altered and hopefully a meaningful message could be sent. However, quite pessimistic this could be orchestrated and if it were tried and failed the consequences would be worse than not even trying. All I am doing is my own self-exclusion from NYRA Bets and doing all my betting on other websites instead.
To be clear, I didn't take that post down because it was anti NYRA— I'm in the middle of suing the SOBs, aside from which their screwups cost TGPS a lot of money.
I took the post down because of something else in it.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> To be clear, I didn't take that post down
> because it was anti NYRA— I'm in the middle of
> suing the SOBs, aside from which their screwups
> cost TGPS a lot of money.
>
> I took the post down because of something else in
> it.
To the extent my post was critical of your actions, I retract that aspect of it, and I apologize to you for having done that. It was not my intention to falsely accuse you of wrongdoing.
I see from Andy Serling\'s Twitter feed that he is going to have David O\'Rourke, President of NYRA, on at the beginning of Talking Horses today to \"discuss events from this past weekend.\" I have no idea what the scope of the discussion will be (just the breakdowns, or also the off-the-turf decision making?), but it might be worth a listen. The show starts at 12:05 EDT today and is usually uploaded to Youtube afterwards.
BitPlayer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I see from Andy Serling\'s Twitter feed that he is
> going to have David O\'Rourke, President of NYRA,
> on at the beginning of Talking Horses today to
> \"discuss events from this past weekend.\" I have
> no idea what the scope of the discussion will be
> (just the breakdowns, or also the off-the-turf
> decision making?), but it might be worth a listen.
> The show starts at 12:05 EDT today and is usually
> uploaded to Youtube afterwards.
Thank you for heads up on this. Due to work, I wont be able to listen to it live, but I will be very interested to hear what he has to say. If it is anything less than abject acknowledgement of the failure, the problem remains.
Socalman3 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BitPlayer Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I see from Andy Serling\'s Twitter feed that he
> is
> > going to have David O\'Rourke, President of
> NYRA,
> > on at the beginning of Talking Horses today to
> > \"discuss events from this past weekend.\" I
> have
> > no idea what the scope of the discussion will
> be
> > (just the breakdowns, or also the off-the-turf
> > decision making?), but it might be worth a
> listen.
> > The show starts at 12:05 EDT today and is
> usually
> > uploaded to Youtube afterwards.
>
> Thank you for heads up on this. Due to work, I
> wont be able to listen to it live, but I will be
> very interested to hear what he has to say. If it
> is anything less than abject acknowledgement of
> the failure, the problem remains.
Well, you have to give the O\'Rourke credit for acknowledging that what they did was wrong and that they need to do better. So, on the positive side of the ledger, they finally acknowledged wrongdoing (albeit, 3 days late) and admit they need to do something for the bettors. On balance, his statement was more positive that negative, but there were some negatives.
One, he said, by way of explanation, that they asked for time to extend the post time and they asked to cancel the bet and were not permitted this. Well, that seems to me mighty significant. He did not say who he asked and why that person said no, but it seems to me that any dealing with this issue needs to expose exactly what happened here and proactive measures need to be taken so whoever it is doesn\'t make the wrong calls in those situations. If they had not been denied their request to delay post time or two cancel the bet, this situation wouldn\'t exist. To the extent blame is relevant, it is now clear who deserves to be blamed for this. This cannot get fixed without getting to the bottom of this.
The other is that he did not address the elephant in the room. Declaring the races ALL WIN was contrary to the rules and regulations. Did the same wisenheimer who wouldn\'t allow him to cancel the bet or delay post time allow this breaking of the rules? Why did they choose to break the rules in favor of one group of bettors against another group of bettors? These were all legitimate questions and the guy did not address them.
I am not sure who Serling is. He may be conflicted and it is not appropriate that he doesn\'t clearly disclose his interests. Is he supposed to be a journalist, a pitch man, a consumer advocate? Is he on the side of horseplayers or on the side of management? That needs to be disclosed because you cannot understand what he is saying without knowing that. He sort of said that he is NYRA but he is also a horseplayer (sort of trying to have it both ways) - but in situations like this, you cannot really have it both ways, you need to come out on one side of the divide. The one thing I can say is that IF Serling is supposed to be either a journalist or a consumer (horseplayer) advocate, then he completely fell down on the job. He did not ask the obvious tough questions and he allowed the guy to get off with just giving an abject apology without getting into the difficult stuff. However, if he was interviewing his boss, then that is a really difficult position. I would just say there shouldn\'t be a veneer that O\'Rourke actually faced the betting public because Serling was conflicted and couldn\'t ask the questions a pure member of the betting public could.
It looks, at least, like they have stopped digging in the hole and have throw away the shovel, but they still have a lot of work to do - including addressing the glaring omissions from the talk.
I believe it\'s two separate issues, and O\'Rourke\'s opacity was due to his not wanting NYRA to look even worse than it already does.
On the inability to refund the wager, see page 67 of the NYSGC rules on horse racing. There are no provisions for refunding P5 wagers due to any number of surface changes. As to who made that decision, that would be the stewards, who are charged with enforcing the rules as written.
O\'Rourke\'s saying that they WANTED to refund the wagers is either disingenuous (because he should have known they couldn\'t) or damning (in the case that he/they DIDN\'T know that).
As to being unable to delay the race, Im guessing it was Fox Sports that said no. NYRA delays or moves up post times all the time. If they didn\'t delay the race because TV guys said so, well, I guess that puts Fox in charge of the henhouse.
BB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I believe it\'s two separate issues, and O\'Rourke\'s
> opacity was due to his not wanting NYRA to look
> even worse than it already does.
>
> On the inability to refund the wager, see page 67
> of the NYSGC rules on horse racing. There are no
> provisions for refunding P5 wagers due to any
> number of surface changes. As to who made that
> decision, that would be the stewards, who are
> charged with enforcing the rules as written.
>
> O\'Rourke\'s saying that they WANTED to refund the
> wagers is either disingenuous (because he should
> have known they couldn\'t) or damning (in the case
> that he/they DIDN\'T know that).
>
> As to being unable to delay the race, Im guessing
> it was Fox Sports that said no. NYRA delays or
> moves up post times all the time. If they didn\'t
> delay the race because TV guys said so, well, I
> guess that puts Fox in charge of the henhouse.
Thank you, this is very interesting.
I wonder why they couldn\'t have just done my novel solution? Once they broke the rules by declaring the off the turf ALL WINS, they then needed to declare the rest of the bet ALL WINS so that the breaking of the rules did not prejudice players who played by the rules and expected the rules to be enforced. Yes, that would have resulted in a $50,000 minus pool with everybody getting back 105% but also it is a result that nobody can complain about. Who can complain about it? O\'Rourke himself said he wanted to give the money back and he wants to seed pools. Well declaring the whole bet all wins does exactly what he says he wanted to do. Plus, it is entirely justified.
The other thing that is completely missing is nobody is talking about the violation of the rules and why that was okay and why there is no remedy for a breach of the rules. If there is no remedy for the breach of the rules, aren\'t the rules pretty meaningless? If the answer is one of interpretation - they didn\'t think the public knew because there wasn\'t enough time for the public announcement to be heard by everybody - that would establish an absolutely awful precedent and would be completely unmanageable on a going forward basis. Imagine every time there is a switch off the turf, you have to do an analysis of whether the public got enough notice or not? Also, how do you make the decision after the fact instead of at the time? How are people supposed to know the rules before they bet if they are only told of them after the bet? It just seems like a completely ludicrous interpretation and terrible precedent. Who could possibly justify such an action as consistent with the rules? if it is, the rules are worthless for two reasons, one there is no remedy if they are breached, plus, they are allowed to be changed after the fact with impunity.
Props for the Fox/henhouse bit, Bob.