The suspension was issued by the NTRA following discussions and a recommendation by the NHC Players' Committee, a group of NHC players who act as a sounding board on NHC policy and rule matters. The suspension covers the 2022 and 2023 NHC Tour seasons and the 2023 and 2024 NHCs.

“Maintaining the integrity of the NHC is of the utmost importance,” said NTRA President and CEO Tom Rooney. “We look forward to making the 2022 NHC Tour and the 2023 NHC the best ever.”

According to a report in HorseRacingNation.com, the disqualified player was Jonathon Kinchen, the Fox Sports racing analyst and a tournament regular who won the NHC Tour title in 2015. Kinchen reportedly left Las Vegas to attend Saturday's Pegasus World Cup day races at Gulfstream Park in Florida and had his tournament bets made in Las Vegas by an associate.

Source of original post

Mollicone, a 47-year-old real-estate developer from Somerset, Mass., will be presented the Global Tote King of the Turf Championship Belt during Sunday's awards dinner that wraps up the National Horseplayers Championship (NHC) at Bally's Las Vegas. The Global Tote belt was designed to mimic boxing's iconic world championship belts.

“I love it!” Mollicone enthused recently when texted a photo of the Global Tote Championship Belt. “Never had a trophy quite like that. Never had a championship belt. I'm going to put it right in my office. Put it right in a case.”

Asked if he's been getting the proper respect for being King of the Turf, he said with a laugh, “Believe it or not, I've had more than a few people who bet horses stop me and go, 'Hey, King of the Turf!' It's pretty funny.”

Mollicone won the six-day competition based on Kentucky Downs' races with an aggregate bankroll total of $5,783.90 after playing in all three of the individual two-day, live-money contests. That gave him a comfortable $1,163.90 advantage over runner-up Christy Moore of Fishers, Ind. Mollicone also earned $20,000 as the overall winner.

“Like Kentucky Downs, the King of the Turf Handicapping Challenge is one-of-a-kind in American racing,” said Dallas Baker, Head of International Operations for Global Tote's parent company, BetMakers Technology Group. “We wanted our King of the Turf to get a champion's trophy as unique as the tournament format and its venue. It's especially appropriate to use boxing's fabled world-championship belts as our inspiration for an event in Kentucky, which of course gave us Muhammad Ali.”

Eleven competitors earned Kentucky Downs-sponsored berths for the NHC, which runs Jan. 28-30. Moore, who already had earned the maximum two NHC qualifying seats, instead received an entry for the Breeders' Cup Betting Challenge, in which she finished fourth out of 522 entries.

“It's taken just two years for the Kentucky Downs King of the Turf Handicapping Challenge to become one of the most coveted prizes in the world of handicapping contests,” said Brian Skirka, Monmouth Park's marketing manager who has served as the Kentucky Downs' King of the Turf tournament director the past two years. “Andy Muhlada was a great inaugural champion in 2020, and 2021 champ Ken Mollicone – with the introduction of the new Global Tote King of the Turf Championship Belt – will literally carry his title into 2022.

“An unmatched layout and quality of turf racing gives Kentucky Downs such amazing content that serves as the ultimate ingredient with which to concoct a world-class contest series. I'm excited to work with the team to create this year's contest series.”

While the King of the Turf Handicapping Challenge features live money, with players keeping their final bankroll in addition to any prize money, the NHC's format utilizes mythical $2 win and place wagers on a single horse in mandatory and optional races. Competitors must play 18 races each of the first two days, after which the top 10 percent of entries based on mythical bankroll qualify for the third day's semifinals, where players pick their 10 races to play. The subsequent top 10 players advance to the Final Table, featuring seven mandatory races.

Mollicone finished 194th in last year's NHC out of 563 entries, his first time qualifying for the world's most prestigious handicapping competition.

“I had a horse that was 16-1 in the last race at Saratoga and got disqualified,” he said of the COVID-delayed 2021 NHC. “If he hadn't been taken down, I'd have been in the semifinals. I'm still sick about it. Watch the replay.”

Also qualifying for the NHC through Kentucky Downs, with hometowns are Marikate Carter (Saratoga Springs, NY), George Chute (Dedham, MA), Erin Doty-McQuaid (Nicholasville, KY), Gary Gristick (Lebanon, PA), Lawrence Kahlden (St. Petersburg, FL), Chris Larmey (Kennewick, WA), Nick Noce (Rochester, NY), Joseph Regan (Marlboro, MA), David Rink (Bannockburn, IL) and Gary Wright (Staten Island, NY). In addition to Moore, Ed Deicke (Lido Beach, NY) earned a Breeders' Cup Betting Challenge berth at Kentucky Downs after being double-qualified for the NHC.

With Kentucky Downs picking up a seventh racing day for 2022, the format for the King of the Turf Handicapping Challenge has not yet been set. Kentucky Downs will race Sept. 1, 3, 4, 8, 10, 11 and 14. Mollicone says he's participating however it's structured.

“One hundred percent,” he said. “I've got to defend myself. Have to go for another belt.”

The post Handicapping Heavyweight: Kenny Mollicone To Receive First King Of The Turf Championship Belt appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

The $1 Pick 6 returned $178.50 to bettors who selected 5-of-6 winners correctly.

Thursday's Pick 6 sequence kicked off in Race 4 when Jose Lezcano engineered a winning trip aboard the Mike Maker-trained Voliero [No. 9, $14.80], who came from last-to-first to earn a second victory in 14 starts for a $30,000 tag.

Robert Evans homebred New Ginya [No. 11, $24.40] made her career debut a winning one for trainer Christophe Clement in Race 5, covering 1 1/16 miles over the inner turf. Dylan Davis piloted the winning trip aboard the daughter of Tonalist.

The shortest price in the sequence took place in the middle leg in Race 6, when Saratoga Beauty [No. 7, $3.30] earned her fifth career win while running for a $20,000 tag for trainer Rob Atras.

Dancing Buck [No. 5, $7] narrowly secured a third career win in Race 7, holding off Phantom Smoke in the final strides for trainer Michelle Nevin against his New York-bred counterparts.

Thomas Coleman and Doheny Racing Stable's Grape Nuts Warrior [No. 8, $5.80] defeated winners in Race 8 for trainer Chad Brown. The New York-bred son of Vancouver was ridden by Irad Ortiz, Jr. in the 1 1/16-mile allowance optional claimer on the inner turf.

Closing out the sequence in Race 9 was Vision Board [No. 12, $12.20]. The Saffie Joseph, Jr.-trainee was one of seven horses uncovered in the seven-furlong maiden claiming tilt. Dylan Davis provided the winning trip to secure a riding double on the card.

Friday's Pick 6 kicks off in Race 5 at 1:45 p.m. Eastern. First post on the 10-race card is 11:50 a.m.

The post Pick 6 Carryover Of $29K Into Friday’s Card At Aqueduct appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

The qualifier will be held in the Champions Simulcast Center & Sports Bar on the second floor of the Hialeah Park clubhouse, located at 2200 East 4^th Avenue, on Sunday, December 12, 2021.

Handicappers can purchase their entries for the qualifying tournament by visiting the Hialeah Park web site at www.hialeahpark.com.

Scheduled as a points event on the 2021 NHC docket, the grand prizes will be seats for the top two finishers in the National Horseplayers Championship finals at Bally's Las Vegas on January 28-30, 2022, including hotel and airfare.

Under rules established by the NHC, participants in the Hialeah Park tournament must be 2021 tour members to earn a seat in the 2022 finals.

The $500 entry fee for current NHC tour members will cover a $300 live bankroll for wagering on designated races at Gulfstream Park and Aqueduct, and $125 for cash prizes.

The remainder of the entry fee will cover a buffet lunch, programs for designated races, and Hialeah Park swag.

The prize money pool, determined by the total number of entries, will be awarded on site at the conclusion of the tournament, with 50% going to the winner, 30% to the runner-up, and 20% to the third-place finisher.

Only current National Horseplayers Championship tour members will be eligible to win the grand prizes. The event will also be open to non-members and they will be eligible to win the cash prizes.

As an incentive, the NHC will offer first-time tour members $25 off the regular $50 membership fee if they register for the Hialeah Park qualifier and submit a $525 entry fee.

The post Hialeah Park To Host Qualifying Tournament For National Horseplayers Championship appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

This year's NHC, which includes more than 600 entries, was originally scheduled to be held February 9-11, but was postponed due to the coronavirus pandemic and was rescheduled for late August. The total cash and prizes to be awarded at the 2021 NHC are estimated to be nearly $3.8 million, including an estimated $3 million in prize money.

“The menu of racetracks represents the best possible mix of quality racing and geographical diversity,” said NTRA Chief Operating Officer and NHC Tournament Director Keith Chamblin. “Del Mar and Saratoga, which on Saturday, Aug. 27, will feature six Grade 1 events headed by the Runhappy Travers Stakes, highlight the racing, but it will be great to introduce Ellis Park, Monmouth Park and Woodbine to NHC contest play.”

The three-day NHC requires players to make mythical $2 win and place wagers on eight mandatory races and 10 optional races on each of the first two days. The top 10 percent of players achieving the highest bankroll at the conclusion of the first two days will advance to Sunday morning's Semi-Final round which will consist of 10 optional plays. The top 10 players following the Semi-Final round will advance to Sunday's Final Table where they will compete in seven mandatory races to determine the National Champion. The winner will receive $800,000 and an Eclipse Award as the Horseplayer of the Year.

The NHC is the most important tournament of the year for horseplayers and is the culmination of a year-long series of NTRA-sanctioned local tournaments conducted by racetracks, casino race books, off-track betting facilities and horse racing and handicapping websites, each of which sends its top qualifiers to the national finals. There are no buy-ins to the NHC. Each year, the NHC winner joins other human and equine champions as an honoree at the Eclipse Awards. The NHC is presented by Racetrack Television Network, Caesars Entertainment and Bally's Las Vegas.

For more information on the NHC Tour and a complete contest schedule, visit NTRA.com/nhc.

The post Seven Racetracks Selected For 2021 National Horseplayers Championship appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

In the other, jockeys and trainers go unquestioned about in-race decisions or tactics, state veterinarians are not required to report publicly about episodes of bleeding or lameness after races, provide detailed reasons for scratches and voided claims, thrown shoes, or other measures which are standard across the rest of the racing world.

The gap must be narrowed.

In the concluding installment of “Wagering Insecurity,” we offer four observations from the process of compiling this series.

PART 12 – PRAVDA

In this final installment of “Wagering Insecurity,” we make four observations which have become clear. These are the product of input from many individuals, both named and anonymous, whose support throughout this series and whose assistance made it possible. .

The Thoroughbred Idea Foundation supports the growth of the North American Thoroughbred racing industry. We want more horseplayers and more horse owners. That sort of future is impossible without beginning the process of adopting the recommendations offered previously and considering the observations below.

OBSERVATION #1

Medication use has dominated public discourse on North American racing integrity over the last three decades. The history is long and contentious.

For context, the 2021 Kentucky Derby was the first run since 1985 where the entire field ran without Lasix. Five years after that, the topic was front and center on Derby Day as exemplified in this video below, of the 1990 Kentucky Derby broadcast, where Al Michaels and Dave Johnson spoke of a Jockey Club study about the potential impact of Lasix use.

Michaels said it would be a story to follow throughout the summer. Regardless of the study's specifics, it took more than three decades for action.

Anti-doping control programs are a necessary component of a broader suite of integrity measures. But balance is needed; progress must be shown in other areas of the integrity arena, too.

There are many factors which have contributed to North American racing's issues with doping, including a weak regulatory structure, a laissez-faire culture about drugs and a general failure to be active overseers of the sport, protecting the betting public.

One area where racing has gotten it right is in constantly improving thresholds of testing. A wealth of well-educated experts has ensured that as science and testing improve, racing's approach to testing evolves as well.

But the contrast with other forms of racing's integrity infrastructure should not be lost.

In one corner, one-trillionth of a gram can be measured. Penalties may be assessed becaue of that microscopic finding. In another corner, jockeys and trainers go unquestioned about in-race decisions or tactics, state veterinarians are not required to report publicly any episodes of bleeding or lameness noticed after a race or provide reasons for scratches and voided claims, thrown shoes, or other measures which are standard across the rest of the racing world.

That gap needs to be closed.

OBSERVATION #2

North American stewards fall short of those in the rest of the developed racing world. The blame resides with the regulators and track operators (yes, sometimes stewards are hired directly by the tracks) who have allowed these roles to degrade over time.

They have less training, are paid less and have not been given responsibilities commensurate with the worldwide expectations for such positions. As many veterans of the stewards' stand and other officials have retired, their replacements are often even less prepared.

A positive development in this space came in August 2019 when the Jockey Club and Racing Officials Accreditation Program announced the launch of a global exchange program which would give North American stewards the opportunity to learn and practice in other countries. The pandemic delayed implementation, but the program should be embraced as the world reopens.

The Horseracing Integrity & Safety Authority (HISA) presents a vehicle for uplifting these standards.

TIF founder Craig Bernick is hopeful HISA evolves to tackle these issues, and the opportunities raised in Part 11 of this series.

“This time, it actually feels different. HISA offers racing a unique opportunity because it has superseding power over existing industry organizations.

“Past efforts to reform our sport have failed because of two main reasons – either the groups or organizations involved were not empowered to effect change or those involved were too focused on their own bottom line or retaining some semblance of control.”

While many horse and racetrack owners may have enjoyed slot-supplemented revenues and purses over more than the last two decades, additional funding has not found its way to racing's integrity infrastructure and the neglect shows.

Several stewards and racing officials consulted during TIF's research for the “Wagering Insecurity” series, who all requested anonymity to speak forthrightly, shared examples of poor working conditions, obsolete technology and general concerns over their ability to do their job well at present.

Uplifting standards will not be cheap, but the cost of not improving will be far greater for everyone who makes their living in racing.

OBSERVATION #3

A troublesome factor which belies all of the detail shared in this series is the absence of a robust, independent racing media in North America.

While racing has several influential trade publications and broadcasts with some very talented, knowledgable staff which contribute significantly to the sport, mainstream, independent coverage is practically non-existent.

Steve Crist, former publisher of the Daily Racing Form, lamented the state of racing coverage in March 2021 remarks to TIF for this series.

“Anyone from the outside who has seen the evolution of coverage of the sport can say that the kind of journalism which existed, even 10 years ago, is just not being done.

“This is a huge issue. It's nearly impossible to hold anyone accountable for anything.”

Crist recalled a time when he was a young reporter for the New York Times in the early 1980s, covering the ongoing hearings and legal wranglings around race-fixing from the 1970s. The coverage was endless, Crist recalls.

“I was working for the Times and there were three other racing beat reporters from each of the tabloids doing the same. Everyone wanted to be first.”

His work included eye-popping ledes, like the following from a 1981 piece:

“A former New York-based trainer has identified Jacinto Vasquez, a leading rider who has twice won the Kentucky Derby, as the man who offered the jockey Mike Hole a $5,000 bribe to hold back a horse at Saratoga in 1974, according to a deposition given to the State Racing and Wagering Board.”

Adjusting for inflation, a $5,000 bribe in 1974 would be about $26,000 today, the equivalent jockey's cut for winning a race with a purse of more than $400,000.

Most public racing coverage is restrained because advertising dollars come from within the industry itself. Mainstream coverage, when it happens, is often fleeting.

Crist thinks this is dangerous for a sport whose foundation is grounded in wagering.

“A media outlet in racing should not be compared to a propaganda machine like Pravda from the old Soviet Union, but in at least one case, that's what we now have.”

The line between journalism and publicity has been increasingly blurred.

Industry publications are hard-pressed to hold tracks, tote companies, ADWs and other-related organizations accountable for the degradation of the sport's integrity infrastructure when those same entities are their primary source of income through advertising. Years ago when he was with the New York Times, Crist and his mainstream media colleagues were in those roles. Today, coverage is mostly limited to the trades.

Several racing writers and broadcasters questioned by TIF acknowledged these issues are ever-present in their daily work. They all asked to remain anonymous because of a fear of reprisal from their employers and contacts within the industry. Staffing within industry media has contracted substantially in recent years, reducing the opportunity for deep coverage. Those in place are doing the best they can with what they have, but it is a delicate balance. One said the situation has devolved to such a degree that they know instinctively what topics are off-limits.

Criticism about the industry's integrity failings and other myriad issues could come at significant cost to racing media.

Those with substantial investments in horses, farms, associated agribusiness and other economic drivers of the sport should recognize that racing media must be given the freedom to hold the business to a higher standard than at present.

In the long run, the truth benefits the greatest number of stakeholders.

OBSERVATION #4

The overall wagering space is changing rapidly. Fixed odds betting for racing in North America is a necessity for one key reason – all new betting customers expect to know what price they are getting on their bets. While pari-mutuel betting still has a future, particularly in exotic wagers, the tote monopoly which has existed for generations on U.S. racing is coming to an end, as it should.

The tote protocol in use now, relying on a decades-old approach known in the industry as ITSP, is likely on its way out. Global commingling is more important than ever and TIF has learned from several major players in the pari-mutuel wagering technology space that a much-revised modern system of bet processing and information sharing will be needed. Support for antiquated tote technology is fading fast.

Customers must still be protected in the interim, and whatever new systems are developed should have proper oversight measures at its core.

CONCLUSION

The “Wagering Insecurity” series is unlike anything we have researched and published at the Thoroughbred Idea Foundation. We hope lessons can be learned from it.

“TIF was created to improve the prospects of horse owners and horseplayers, whose participation fuels racing's sustainability,” said Bernick.

“We have focused on issues related to pricing, transparency, technology and access to data. Racing has huge obligations too – now more than ever: aftercare, backstretch programs, jockey health and equine research. The best way to meet these obligations and sustain the business is to grow revenue through wagering. Doing so will be impossible without the greater industry accepting the serious issues raised and recommendations provided by this series.”

Ensuring integrity in horse racing takes a team effort. It's hard work. And it requires drive and support from horse owners, breeders, racing fans and most especially, the customers who need the most significant protection – the horseplayers.

It will take significant capital from the greater industry, investing in the appropriate resources to build an acceptable standard of integrity oversight. That does not go unnoticed. Under no circumstances should the costs for such programs come from increasing takeout – the cost of betting. There would be no more counterproductive effort than that.

The long-term costs to racing and its stakeholders' investments, if we do not upgrade racing's integrity infrastructure, will be far more substantial than the short-term costs of filling those needs. 

We must restore and build confidence in existing horseplayers and horse owners, which will help us attract future customers. Little that racing in North America is doing now will accomplish that, particularly given our general embrace of opaque practices.

Racing must be operated more sustainably than it is now and we need to adopt the measures recommended here, and others, to bring the industry forward.

The path to better securing racing's wagering business is challenging and getting there will require exposing some long-standing failings.

For sports and racing integrity expert Jack Anderson, there is no choice.

“In the immediate, U.S. racing needs to look within. It needs to consult and review its own stakeholders and undertake a clear-eyed, hard-headed analysis of the state of the sport.

“That process may be a painful one. It may shock the racing public. It may, in the short term, undermine the reputation of the sport even amongst the most sympathetic of its supporters in the wider American sporting public.”

These improvements are needed to make North American racing better, to sustain the interest of bettors and secure the substantial investments of owners and breeders, as well as the reach of racing's economic impact.

The role of the Horseracing Integrity & Safety Authority offers a tremendous opportunity for ALL parties in the sport going forward and should be leveraged in every capacity to yield much-needed, uniform control over the integrity of U.S. racing. As previously outlined, HISA is required to report to the Federal Trade Commission.

Outside the FTC's Washington D.C. headquarters are a pair of sculptures created by Michael Lantz in 1942 entitled “Man Controlling Trade.” Each sculpture depicts a man holding a horse.

Our collective opportunity for improvement is real. There are countless examples for North American racing to follow.

Miss a previous installment? Click on the links to read more.

Part 1 – Expectations

Part 2 – Intertwined

Part 3 – Volponi

Part 4 – Confidence

Part 5 – Bingo

Part 6 – Proof

Part 7 – Z

Part 8 – Damage

Part 9 – Alerts

Part 10 – Grey

Part 11 – Recommendations

Want to share your insights with TIF? Email us here.

The post Wagering Insecurity: Avoiding Another ‘Medina Spirit Mess’ appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

“The biggest challenge facing the sport today is the same one that I wrote about for much of my newspaper career: the widespread use of illegal drugs,” Beyer said. “Almost any serious horseplayer can look at the form of certain trainers' horses and recognize that their performances defy handicapping logic. The cheating trainers and vets have made cynics out of the horseplayers, who should love this game without reservation.”

For more about Beyer, check out John Scheinman's Eclipse Award-winning feature from 2016: Andrew Beyer: Rebel With A Cause.

Beyer himself won an Eclipse Award of Merit in 2017.

Read more at the Thoroughbred Racing Commentary.

The post Beyer: ‘Almost Any Serious Horseplayer’ Can Recognize Performances Which ‘Defy Handicapping Logic’ appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Faced with remarkable competitive pressure from the rise of legal sports betting, horse racing is at a crossroads.

Confidence amongst horseplayers and horse owners is essential to the future sustainability of the sport. Efforts to improve the greater North American Thoroughbred industry will fall flat if its stakeholders fail to secure a foundation of integrity, along with increased transparency of the wagering business and its participants over time. Achieving this is growing increasingly difficult after the sport has neglected its core base – horseplayers – for decades.

“Wagering Insecurity” details some of that neglect, and the need to embrace serious reform. Fortunately, there are examples across the racing world to follow.

PART 7 – Z

Transparent oversight of racing has been defunded over decades and customer protection remains weak. North American Thoroughbred racing in the 2020s is saddled with a regulatory infrastructure designed for a sport in the 1970s.

Racing has to change.

Ten years ago, Jockey Club research conducted by McKinsey showed that a minority of racing fans, just 46% of those surveyed, said that they would recommend the sport to others.

“Thoroughbred fans are almost twice as likely to recommend baseball (81%), football (73%), or basketball (77%) to others as they are to recommend Thoroughbred racing.”

There are many reasons for racing's waning appeal among its own fans but the gambling experience is certainly a key one. Simply getting more eyes on racing is not going to be enough to sustain interest amongst future generations.

While many of racing's existing American customers have long been accustomed to a sport with substandard, haphazard and insufficient oversight, the next generation might not be as forgiving. A 2019 piece by Julie Arbit, Global Senior Vice President, Insights at VICE Media Group, highlighted this burgeoning need among Generation Z, whose oldest members are now in their mid-20s.

“Gen Z is coming of age in a world of infinite choice, and this affects everything from how they define themselves to how they love and how they buy…

“If brands want consumers to be committed to them, brands need to be committed to consumers. What brands say and do should demonstrate this dedication — showing that the satisfaction and happiness of their customers is of utmost importance. Trust is also paramount in relationships, and brand relationships are no exception. Authenticity, transparency and two-way dialogue with consumers are essential.”

The topic has been raised in racing too.

Dr. Jennifer Durenberger, Jockey Club Steward at the New York Racing Association, has served as both a regulator and regulatory veterinarian, among many other roles across racing. In a 2019 presentation at the University of Arizona's Global Symposium on Racing, she highlighted the growing interest consumers are showing in the values of companies they patronize.

“Ethical consumerism is when a consumer consciously chooses or avoids a product, or an experience based on the perceived ethics of the processes that are used to produce them.

“…this is not just a Millennial or a Gen-X phenomenon…this is consumers who actively consider company values when making a purchase and remember these are purchases of inanimate objects.”

How can American racing hope to compete in the future for market share if newer potential customers are turned-off by the sport's poor standards of oversight? Sports betting customers in America generally have confidence in the betting systems and oversight of major sports for which wagering is accepted.

At the time of this publication, 26 states and the District of Columbia, accounting for more than 45% of America's population, reside in a state where sports betting is legal. Nearly all of those states are currently accepting bets at present while others will launch soon.

While American horse racing is a laggard, others in the racing world are staying relevant and accomplishing this far better.

COMPREHENSIVE REVIEWS LED TO UPGRADES

North America is an outlier when it comes to monitoring wagering and uncovering malfeasance.

Two other major racing jurisdictions – Australia and Great Britain – have aggressively promoted racing and wagering integrity during the same two decades (2002-present) while America has floundered on such issues.

The British Horseracing Authority (BHA) has been a leader in monitoring wagering as a key component of its integrity services. Australia, which operates a state-by-state regulatory system similar in basic structure to America, has created independent statutory authorities to enhance integrity across all facets of racing.

The British racing industry studied the matter across 2002-2003, published the Neville Review in 2008 which, among other things, “assessed the role and procedures racing and sports governing bodies should adopt when dealing with matters that may involve breaches of the criminal law as well as its own rules in relation to corruption connected to betting.” In 2016, it followed-up with the Brickell Review.

In the foreword of the Brickell Review, then BHA chief executive Nick Rust outlined quite clearly the importance of the topic to the sport's regulators.

“It should come as no surprise that one of my priorities is to continually improve our integrity work to make sure we have the confidence of participants and the racing and betting public.”

Confidence is good for business.

Australia's focus is similar, but approaches it differently.

Victoria is Australia's second largest state and its capital, Melbourne, is home to one of the great racing festivals, headlined by the Melbourne Cup.

In 2007, Victoria's Minister for Racing commissioned Judge G.D. Lewis to:

“…lead a process of consultation with racing industry Controlling Bodies and stakeholders, with the objective of identifying options to ensure that integrity assurance within the industry is of the highest standard.”

“For the purposes of this Review, “integrity services and systems” were deemed to include: overall stewardship and associated investigations, race-day operations, betting compliance and regulation, veterinary services, drug control, licensing and registration.”

The finished product, known as the Lewis Report, can be read in its entirety here.

American racing has not seen anything similar to the Neville Review, the Brickell Review the Lewis Report, or a 2018 Australian update, the Wood Review.

That is part of the problem, according to global sport and racing integrity expert, Professor Jack Anderson:

“Thoroughbred racing in the U.S. urgently needs the equivalent of a Lewis Report and one that would follow a similar methodology to the integrity reviews undertaken [by both the BHA and Victoria].”

Anderson says that such reviews offer an opportunity to reset expectations and prepare the industry for a major boost to integrity that is most needed. For him, two key principles emerged from these reports:

“The greatest threat to the integrity of racing in the U.S. and elsewhere (be it race rigging for gambling purposes, doping, animal welfare) often comes from poor but engrained practices and culture within the sport itself and not external threats.

“The first, and most prominent recommendation in the Brickell Report, is related to engagement with participants in the industry and the need to consult continuously with the sport's stakeholders to better ensure 'buy-in' from the sport for integrity initiatives.

“Rewarding good behavior in the industry, consulting them on education initiatives and better communication between regulators and the industry's participants perpetuates long term trust and confidence in the integrity of the industry as a whole.”

“Second, and similar to the Lewis report's recommendations in Australia, it is unlikely that any review of the thoroughbred industry in the United States would recommend either that the status quo in, or piecemeal reform to, current integrity services in the sport nationwide would be the way forward.

“Radical, comprehensive and, likely, federally mandated statutory reform is needed to better promote the integrity of thoroughbred racing in the U.S.”   

While it is unlikely that the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Authority (HISA) will take-up wagering systems integrity, bet monitoring and understanding wagering's role in rules violations and potential criminal infractions is a basic practice around the world. Communication around such incidents is routine.

Measures of transparency from international racing regulators far exceed America's standards at present.

Coming Thursday, May 5: Part 8 – Damage

Miss a previous installment? Click on the links to read more.

Part 1 – Expectations

Part 2 – Intertwined

Part 3 – Volponi

Part 4 – Confidence

Part 5 – Bingo

Part 6 – Proof

Want to share your insights with TIF? Email us here.

The post Wagering Insecurity: Gen Z’s ‘Ethical Consumerism’ appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Faced with remarkable competitive pressure from the rise of legal sports betting, horse racing is at a crossroads.

Confidence amongst horseplayers and horse owners is essential to the future sustainability of the sport. Efforts to improve the greater North American Thoroughbred industry will fall flat if its stakeholders fail to secure a foundation of integrity, along with increased transparency of the wagering business and its participants over time. Achieving this is growing increasingly difficult after the sport has neglected its core base – horseplayers – for decades.

“Wagering Insecurity” details some of that neglect, and the need to embrace serious reform. Fortunately, there are examples across the racing world to follow.

PART 6 – PROOF

Past-posting is the act of placing a bet after a race has started because the wagering pools were not properly closed. Professional horseplayer Mike Maloney had suspected past-posting was happening with regularity and pleaded with a variety of officials for years to clamp down, but to no avail.

Paul Bowlinger, then Vice-President at the Association of Racing Commissioners International (ARCI), a trade group of racing commissions, recounted his 2007 observations of Maloney in a 2008 conference at the University of Arizona.

“He basically came and told this audience [one year earlier]…I past-posted and I did it to show the industry how easily and how frequently it can be done.' “

Mike Maloney is a member of the Thoroughbred Idea Foundation's Wagering and Integrity Issues Steering Committee and documented his experience uncovering past-posting opportunities in the 2000s at the end of his 2017 book “Betting With An Edge.” After engaging, or attempting to engage, with a plethora of track executives and even the NTRA, Maloney realized there was almost no traction to securing wagering systems.

He wrote:

“To make people in racing realize what's going on here, I don't just need proof…I need to drop a bomb. At Fair Grounds in 2007, I found one.”

After months of trying to understand the issue while betting the races, Maloney explained how he identified that betting pools were not closing appropriately. Tracks maintained little to no record of when races actually started and a series of issues with time syncs between tote betting machines and the host track made it increasingly challenging to prove when there was an actual problem.

What Maloney knew, for certain, is that if the mechanism to stop betting at the host track and all other simulcast and online sites was being used, it was not always functioning correctly.

Stewards at tracks are provided a mechanism to close the betting pools for a race under their supervision.

This mechanism, known as a “stop wagering device,” is supposed to lock all wagering on that race from on-site and at all other locations off-site, and online, where bets are accepted. Maloney noticed that the act of closing the pools was replicated in individual betting terminals with an audible notification to live tellers.

THE BEEP

With an established “office” for wagering at Keeneland, and with a semi-private teller to enter Maloney's bets, he began to notice the “beep.”

“The beep is just an alert to the teller. I began to listen for the beep. In the vast majority of races, it came at the proper time. The gates would open, within two seconds I would hear the beep, and I knew the race was properly closed.

“If I was betting that track, my tickets would stop coming out. But that's not how it was all the time, and I noticed that certain tracks were a lot worse than others.

“Fair Grounds was really bad about it. Golden Gate was really bad about it. Aqueduct was really bad about it. The Florida tracks had issues. As I watched this, I no longer suspected that past-posting was possible, I knew with certainty it could happen.”

To prove the point, Maloney bet on a race at Fair Grounds where wagering remained open during the race, well after the start.

“We were over 50 seconds into the race when I heard the beep and wagering finally closed.”

Following these startling revelations, Maloney thought an investigation would be forthcoming and wagering security bolstered.

“I got a visit from the TRPB…I was hoping I'd be able to help them investigate the incident, but that was naïve. They were more interested in investigating me.”

While Bowlinger simplified Maloney's actions in his 2008 remarks, Maloney clarified his intent in a 2021 interview for TIF.

“I certainly wasn't doing it for fun. Despite regular pleading with some officials, very few believed it was happening and said they did not have actual proof.

“So, I showed them the proof from my bets and all of the other legwork I did to expose this for them. I thought that would be enough for those in charge to realize that there was a real problem with the tote systems and that now it could get fixed.

“Instead, I was called before two Commission meetings to show cause as to why my racing license shouldn't be revoked.

“It seemed that more than anything, they wanted to intimidate me and interrogate me, almost like I was a criminal for revealing to them their own systems' failings.”

A June 2008 past-posting incident came to public attention after it was learned customers at Tampa Bay Downs were able to bet on a race at Philadelphia Park (now Parx) after the race was over, clearing more than $13,000 from $2,000 in bets made after the race.

The TRPB's Curtis Linnell told the Paulick Report at the time “it didn't look like it was widespread.”

Paulick wrote:

“This issue begs the question of who is minding the tote, a patchwork, less-than-state-of-the-art wagering network that handles the approximate $15-billion in bets each year and flows through racetracks, hubs, guest hubs, off-track betting sites, account wagering systems, and off-shore rebate shops?”

WHISTLEBLOWING

More than 18 months after Maloney's first proof and exposure of past-posting, and seven years since the Breeders' Cup Fix Six, Maloney was contacted by a tote employee “who didn't trust his company to report” such an incident properly.

The race in question was the Grade 3 Los Angeles Handicap at Hollywood Park on May 16, 2009.

“Rather than immediately report it myself and initiate the usual industry cover-up, I decided to wait and watch what the tracks and regulators would do…

“I was hoping the higher-ups at Hollywood Park would inform the betting public of the failure of the tote system. Then I hoped to see the California Horse Racing Board, since it regulates all wagering and racing in the state, issue a press release regarding a potential investigation.”

But there was no immediate reaction.

Maloney blogged about the incident, which was then picked-up by Paulick Report. Wagering on the race at 33 locations had not been closed properly, enabling patrons there to continue betting on the race even after the results were known.

Tote officials recognized the issue and did not honor winning bets placed at the 33 locations for the race, though they never raised the issue to the public, until Maloney blew the whistle.

“The Hollywood incident summed up the industry response to all of the tote problems.

“First, the industry doesn't want anyone to know about the issue, because it makes them look bad. Then, when they're called on it, they deal with it in a way where they don't even acknowledge the systematic failure that led to the people who fund the game being cheated out of their money.”

Maloney's quest continued for several years, with more incidents identified. Many horseplayers recall the incidents and remain concerned about past-posting, though tote experts, who wished to remain unnamed, told TIF that the specific issues Maloney identified about past-posting were rectified.

While he backed away from the fight in 2012, as Maloney explains in the book, he remains steadfast to this day that the wagering systems for American racing still lack some of the basic security provisions they need.

A STEP BACK FOR INTEGRITY IN 2020

In December 2020, ARCI adopted an update to its Totalisator Technical Standards (TTS) document. This document contains the requirements for North American pari-mutuel wagering operators and bet-takers, and is supposed to be adhered-to by members.

In its most recent update, the document included an adjustment to the requirements of the stop wagering device. As it describes, tote vendors “shall install two separate devices that activate the stop wagering function.”

The device closes wagering on a race and provided all downstream receivers of the signal from the device are calibrated, it stops the occurrence of past-posting as painstakingly identified by Mike Maloney over years.

According to the TTS document:

“The stop wagering device shall be the judge's console and a tote system backup located at the racing association.”

That is, the host track where the race is taking place.

The primary device is in the possession of the stewards overseeing the race itself. But the 2020 update amends the backup device's requirements.

“Said tote system backup may be operated by local racing personnel and/or racing stewards, and also remotely operated by tote personnel not physically located at the racing association.

“If the tote system backup is operated remotely, a protocol for the remote operation shall be submitted to the racing commission for approval.”

In other words, the main device is still with the stewards, but the backup device can be operated remotely, out of control of the track and stewards. This has flabbergasted Maloney, who offered the following comments in 2021:

“I can't imagine a system where an update of these protocols would bring us to, hypothetically, a less secure operation of the stop wagering function in 2021, but that is what seems to have happened.

“The same general lack of concern I felt the industry showed horseplayers in 2007, seems to still be in place now. The betting infrastructure is ancient. How can a reasonable observer look at what we have in place and not think it is in need of monumental upgrades to protect honest customers?”

If technology had evolved across the American pari-mutuel wagering landscape and centralized backup remotes were implemented with transparent oversight, then confidence might be warranted.

But that does not seem to be the case.

Instead, while other gambling technologies continue improving over time, tote technology seems to remain much the same.

“TRUST US” ISN'T ENOUGH

Alarmingly, some of the same “late scan” functions which Chris Harn and his conspirators exposed in the Breeders' Cup Fix Six remain in place.

Maloney documented in 2017 that the method by which tracks identify winning superfecta bets across all North American races still uses the “late scan” approach for verifying winning tickets.

Instead of submitting the full details of every superfecta bet to the host track as it is placed, the remote bet taker only communicates to the host track the dollar amount of superfecta bets they have taken before the race begins. Once the race is run and order of finish confirmed, then the host track requests that the remote betting sites provide detail on how many winning superfecta tickets should be paid to them.

Defined as a process “used after the winners are known” by the Inter Tote System Protocol (ITSP), a shared resource used by tote companies, tracks and remote betting sites, every superfecta bet on North American racing is processed as a late scan.

Maloney said:

“The 2002 pick-six scandal happened for a variety of reasons, all well-documented. To the best of my understanding, the only update that has been made to the ITSP is for the pick six, or any multi-race bet like it, which the industry calls 'Pick-N' bets. They've moved from late scans to early scans.”

The ITSP identifies an early scan is “used after the winners are known from leg to leg of Pick-N pool types.”

The total Pick-N play, with combinations and wager amounts, is still not secured and transmitted to the host track before the betting sequence begins. In 2017, Maloney called these situations “vulnerabilities without reasonable oversight.”

These processes still exist today.

TIF questioned the TRPB about the unusually low superfecta result of the 2019 Kentucky Derby in the weeks following the race. That year's race was unofficial for more than 20 minutes before stewards demoted Maximum Security and promoted Country House, at 65-1, to the win. The longest-priced winner of the race in modern times, which holds America's largest field and largest superfecta pool, produced a superfecta return which was surprisingly low in comparison to other combinations in the past, at just $51,400.

There may be a plethora of reasonable explanations, but none have ever been provided.

“Trust us” isn't enough.

The 2005 remarks of then Del Mar Thoroughbred Club President Craig Fravel, now the Chief Executive Officer for 1/ST Racing (formerly The Stronach Group), questioned the ability of the tracks themselves to properly ensure the security of wagering. Keep in mind that the one entity which exists in this capacity, the TRPB, is a wholly owned subsidiary of a consortium of racetracks.

“We [track operators] are a little suspect simply because we are maybe overly confident at times.

“I think to allow customers to have sufficient levels of confidence in us, we have to demonstrate that not only are we capable of reviewing things, but that there is a sufficiently independent and authoritative organization out there that can be the ultimate arbiter of those kind of decisions.”

North American racing is still waiting for one, some 16 years after Fravel's remarks, and 19 years since the Breeders' Cup Fix Six.

The lack of oversight is a flashing red light to both existing and new racing fans. In our next installment, we will look at other racing jurisdictions which are tackling these topics and seeking to keep pace with the ever-changing world.

Coming  Tuesday, May 4: Part 7 – Z

Miss a previous installment? Click on the links to read more.

Part 1 – Expectations

Part 2 – Intertwined

Part 3 – Volponi

Part 4 – Confidence

Part 5 – Bingo

Want to share your insights with TIF? Email us here.

The post Wagering Insecurity: ‘Trust Us’ Isn’t Enough appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

Free Equibase past performances for the Cross Country Pick 5 sequence are now available for download at https://www.nyra.com/belmont/racing/cross-country-wagers.

A full field of 12 maidens 3-years-old and up competing at 1 1/16 miles on the Widener turf course will start the sequence in Belmont's Race 6 at 3:34 p.m. Eastern. Mandatory has finished in the money in four of his five career starts, posting a 0-2-2 record, including earning a field-best 85 Beyer Speed Figure for a runner-up last out on March 14 at Aqueduct Racetrack for Hall of Fame trainer Bill Mott. The Todd Pletcher-trained Shaftesbury, a $675,000 purchase at the 2019 Keeneland September Sale, has finished second in three consecutive starts, all at Gulfstream Park, and is 7-2 on the morning line.

Oaklawn will get in on the fun with a six-furlong starter allowance race for 3-year-olds and up going six furlongs in Race 5 at 3:54 p.m. Sevier, 3-1 for trainer Coty Rosin, won his last two races at Oaklawn and will look for a third consecutive win. Greeley and Ben, trained by Karl Broberg, and I Belong to Becky both are listed at 7-2.

The sequence alternates back to Belmont with a seven-furlong allowance optional claimer contest for 4-year-olds and up in Race 7 at 4:08 p.m. The Chad Brown trained Looking At Bikinis will be making his first start of 2021, returning off a five-month break. Looking At Bikinis, who ran 11th in the 2019 Grade 1 Travers and fourth in that year's Grade 1 Cigar Mile, will be racing for just the third time since 2020 but is 2-1 on the morning line. The New York-bred T Loves a Fight will be making his 50th career start, listed at 15-1 for trainer Orlando Noda.

A full field of a dozen 3-year-olds and up will contest Oaklawn's sixth race, a six-furlong claiming contest, at 4:29 p.m. Balandeen, at 3-1 on the morning line, has finished in third in his last three races for trainer Juan Cano. Unscathed, listed at 9-2 for conditioner Genaro Garcia, also ran third last out in a claiming contest, finishing in the money in April at Oaklawn going the same distance as Saturday's race.

Belmont will wrap up the Cross County Pick 5 with the sequence's only stakes, as eight 4-year-olds and up will square off in the $100,000 Elusive Quality going seven furlongs on the Widener turf course. Eight-time stakes winner Therapist will look to win his seasonal debut for the third consecutive year and is listed at 7-2 for trainer Christophe Clement. Brown will send out three contenders in the eight-horse field, including 2-1 favorite Front Run the Fed, along with 4-1 Value Proposition and 12-1 selection Seismic Wave.

The minimum bet for the multi-track, multi-race wager is 50 cents. Wagering on the Cross Country Pick 5 is also available on ADW platforms and at simulcast facilities across the country. Every week will feature a mandatory payout of the net pool. The Cross Country Pick 5 will continue each Saturday throughout the year. For more information, visit NYRABets.com.

Cross Country Pick 5 – Saturday, April 22:
Leg A: Belmont– Race 6 (3:34 p.m.)
Leg B: Oaklawn – Race 5 (3:54 p.m.)
Leg C: Belmont – Race 7 (4:08 p.m.)
Leg D: Oaklawn – Race 6 (4:29 p.m.)
Leg E: Belmont – Race 8 Elusive Quality (4:40 p.m.)

The post Cross Country Pick 5 Features Opening Weekend At Belmont Park, Action From Oaklawn appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post