Things that make you go hmmm…= Jerry Brown + The JC

19 thoughts on “Things that make you go hmmm…= Jerry Brown + The JC”

  1. Things that make you go hmmm

    LOL That’s my line !!

    I read that letter in the print edition and could not help but go “hmm…I wonder who on the California Marketing Committee is also serving on the CHRB and/or TOC.

    It is that two-headed monster that has brought California racing to this point. And apparently no one there wants to start to clean up the backstretches, so they ask for “trust” from the public.

    Things that make me go “hmm”.

  2. Funny, everybody involved with the day in, day out care of racehorses (I guess on the East Coast, at least) knows how form reversals can happen regularly. Somebody please take a picture of Mr. Brown, or fellow conspiracy theorist Mr. Beyer, in a barn to prove to me they know anything about caring for a horse.

  3. Read this post for the third time now (bravo on the scoop, indeed!) and I still don’t understand the basic facts.

    How is it possible that the name of a trainer of a known racehorse (what a politically loaded lineage, btw) is withheld? Wouldn’t this horse have to be (publicly) registered to a conditioner for even being stabled at Saratoga?

    Do I understand correctly that this horse has run in Thoro-Graph-monitored races four times, with the last form being a huge improvement?

    You’re right that numbers alone aren’t enough reason to convict anyone (especially if the person doing so has a conflict of interest in considering a fault with the numbers themselves). There are two ways to detect cheating: sample testing (which racing does, more or less) and, crucially, investigative effort, a field in which American racing hasn’t dropped the ball for the simple reason that they never even picked it up.

    @Aunt Bea:
    I for one appreciate the efforts of that other conspiracy theorist, Mr. Beyer. In a sport/industry where the officially sanctioned version is as credible as a heroin addict’s claim that he would use your five bucks to “start a new life”, truth can only be found in conspiracy theories.
    That doesn’t mean every conspiracy theory is correct, but it does mean we should reject the notion of dismissing them on account of being a conspiracy theory.

  4. Mr. Malcer, theories are normally developed by intelligent people who have developed their thoughts over years of in depth experience on a particular subject.
    I theorize that Mr.s Brown and Beyer have developed their theories about east coast “cheaters” by simply watching one or two minutes a month of a racehorse’s life from afar, even naming names, without feeling any need to do any due diligence before making these outrageous claims.

  5. Malcer,

    The politically loaded lineage of the horse and the “story” is an attempt at satirical allegory.

    The facts are Jerry’s statements in DRF.

    The relationship is strange…

    The ramifications are BIG, brother!

  6. I completely missed the satirical allegory, shame on me.

    But frankly, after reading the Jerry Brown letter and the letter it was reacting to, I don’t see much reason for it.

    On what would you base an opinion about where suspicious move-ups are least common, other than your handicapping and experience? Of course it’s complete bullshit to trust that CA racing is clean, but that’s not the issue. Brown was (according to his letter, I didn’t check any further) quoted about a specific issue in an ad he had nothing to do with.

    I’d second the three paragraphs he wrote after the statement you quote, not only because the NTRA’s initiative is so futile (but no one who’s read more than 5 statements by Alex Waldrop could have expected otherwise).

    If Brown is participating in setting up the JCTSC’s system in an advisory function, I really don’t see a problem. It’s not like anything in the letter suggests that Brown’s figs are themselves treated as sufficient evidence for cheating.

    Every serious fan and horseplayer is wary of move-ups on American tracks. Ignoring the high probability that any individual move-up has more to do with the widespread cheating and miserable control than with the trainers golden touch means to shut your eyes to an obvious problem, plain and simple.

    True, move-ups can occur for all kinds of reasons, and happen anywhere in the world. Yet, there’s an automatic side effect to being as trustworthy as a politician (cheap shot both ways, but I stand by it): even when it happens to be legit, we can’t feel sure it is, and thus it smells fishy. Ultimately, it robs the sport of the qualities we follow it for in the first place – the root problem with American racing’s lack of integrity.

  7. You wrote: “If Brown is participating in setting up the JCTSC’s system in an advisory function, I really don’t see a problem. It’s not like anything in the letter suggests that Brown’s figs are themselves treated as sufficient evidence for cheating.”

    Actually, I see plenty of problems.

    First off, the JC Thoroughbred Safety Committee’s mission statement has nothing to do with “rooting out cheaters.”

    Second, Brown provides nothing else but figures to base his “opinions” on “cheaters.” He’s not a chemist analyzing split samples that would irrefutably identify prohibited substances that would identify cheaters. In essence, his “advisory function,” if that’s what it is, is to identify “cheaters” in a purely subjective manner — “suspicious move-ups” based on numbers he assigns to horses.

    Third, how about the conflicts of interest? Brown privately represents owners and trainers, and JC members race horses with trainers. Would they get a pass?

  8. Come on Sid, knock it off.

    1– You know damn well I wasn’t suggesting that anyone should be sanctioned on the basis of figure move-ups.

    2– It’s the Safety AND INTEGRITY Committee. Get it? They already published some recommendations regarding TCO2 and other testing. I was one of the first who suggested the freezing of blood for later testing, which is now being done. You know, like they do for the Tour De France, and other actual major league sports. Which don’t even depend on people betting on them.

    3– None of those guys are my clients. (I wish). And even if they were, it would have nothing to do with what I do there. I’m there basically to give voice to my clients, many of whom are big bettors, and to impress upon the powers that be that serious, sophisticated horseplayers, based on what they see, are convinced that people are cheating, and that the industry should take the issue seriously.

    4– Seriously. You’re going to take issue with the main thrust of the letter, that the results of drug tests should be made public? Seriously??? What’s your reasoning, exactly?

    5– When you get a chance, why don’t you get back to something you know something about (pedigrees), and tell me what you think of the new line of products for horses being sold at auction we just introduced in our joint venture with the Jockey Club. If you don’t understand them I’ll explain them to you.

  9. (Full disclosure: I know Jerry Brown, have had dinner and drinks with him in the past, have socialized with him in the past, and have attended races with him in the past in the company of movie actors, sometimes. Jerry’s a typical New Yorker, brash, opinionated, mercurial, entrepreneurial — basically in your face.)

    Jerry, Jerry, Jerry.
    Knock what off? You blurt before you think, you write before you read, and you don’t read what’s written. Now that we have you on the stand, let’s cover your points and ask some questions.

    The facts, just the facts, ma’am:

    1. I don’t know, but if you say so, I’m happy to hear it. You bragged in print that you work with the JC’s Safety Committee “to try to root out cheaters…” — your words, not mine. If it’s not about “figure move-ups,” then what is it? Please explain to all of us how you “root out cheaters.”

    2. No, I don’t get it. As far as I know, it’s the THOROUGHBRED SAFETY COMMITTEE, period! There’s no INTEGRITY in it (no pun intended). Click here to view the JC’s website:
    Perhaps the INTEGRITY part of the title was wishful thinking on your part. Kudos by the way for your blood-testing recommendations.

    3. I never said “those guys” — the JC members — were your clients. You didn’t read carefully enough. However, you do have clients that you advise, such as Ro Parra, who has enjoyed remarkable success with horses you’ve spotted for him , like Student Council. For Will Farish, Student Council was half the horse he became for Mr. Parra. No one questioned the form move up on him.

    Your comments on representing bettors with the committee is admirable, and, yes, many are convinced that people are cheating.

    4. Seriously, I never addressed the main thrust of your letter — only a few lines — so, here you go again, not reading what was actually written. I never had any comments about drug tests being made public, but I’m sure you’re aware you can also get info on that here:

    5. Since I’ve finished schooling you here, yea, I’ll take a look at your new products with the JC — which I never knew about until after I wrote the post. If you want to explain them to me, I’d be more than happy to listen over dinner — on your dime.

    1. Briefly, because I have to get back to work on planet earth:

      Yes, I work with them to root out cheaters. No, I do not, AS YOU IMPLIED, suggest my figures (or anyone else’s) should be used to disqualify horses or sanction anyone. The difference is the difference between evidence and proof. What I do is tell them what I have heard, what I see (which is what every serious handicapper, all of whom use professional level figures, see), and what to look for. I also make suggestions (like freezing blood) as to what to do to stop the cheating. But most of all, my job is to prod the industry into taking the problem seriously. Which you clearly do not.

      The evidence that you have no idea what you are talking about is this– you point people to a site that lists what positives and sanctions have been ANNOUNCED. Just so you have a clue– I sent Freedom Of Information requests to three states a couple of years ago for TCO2 test results. One state fought me tooth and nail to prevent my getting them, but when my lawyer got involved, they finally gave them up. Sure enough, there was a reading of 41– way above the threshhold for a positive– during a time period where no positives were announced and no-one was sanctioned.

      Think maybe that’s a problem?

      We need to have ALL TEST RESULTS announced, in detail.

      1. Jerry,

        Thanks for the clarification, but it still doesn’t absolve your involvement from the conflict of interest issues — a main point of my post. You are so up to your eyeballs in it that perhaps you can’t see my point.

        You, a proponent of transparency, wrote: “What I do is tell them what I have heard, what I see (which is what every serious handicapper, all of whom use professional level figures, see), and what to look for.”

        What you see, as you dress up, is “move-ups” in your figures.

        As someone with clients who are trainers and owners, what happens if you “see” and “hear” stuff about them? Do you “tell them” — the JC — this stuff about paying clients? Are we to “trust” that you’ll report in an unbiased manner on everything you “see” and “hear”? Is it fair to your paying clients for you to be reporting on them, if the situation were to arise? What happens if you report negative information on someone with whom you’re involved in a private lawsuit?

        Mind you, I’m not implying that you’re doing anything wrong, but it doesn’t look very good.

        As for your information on the TCO2 test results, you’re so vague as to make it difficult to comment on it. For instance, was the reading of 41 gathered from a radiometer reading or from another, less reliable testing procedure? The accepted threshhold level for TCO2 is 37 millimoles, and unless the tests were conducted under the strictest of protocols, the 4 millimole difference — hardly “way above the threshhold for a positive,” could have been challenged in a court of law a “couple of years ago,” when testing for TCO2 was nowhere as sophisticated as it is now.

        Please don’t try to snow people by throwing around stuff that has nothing to do with the comments in my post.

  10. gotta be a marzelli thing or somebody in the JC that has never walked a hot! Can’t be Phipps. this might get really scientific like adding blinkers and lasix. the English are laughing their asses off!

  11. Also, I would like to know what your work to “root out cheaters” has revealed of any import, based on your figures and what you “hear”.

    1. Depends what you mean by “of any import”. This isn’t the place to name names, or names of drugs, for that matter. I did have quite a bit to do with the focus on TCO2 (alkalyzing agents) in the Jockey Club recommendations.

      But the upshot of the whole things is what I wrote about in my letter to the editor, the real stuff, not the controversy Sid created.

      To give you one example– a few years ago, the following happened at a track DURING THE MEET WHEN THEY HOSTED THE BREEDER”S CUP.

      The guy who was taking the blood for TCO2 testing quit at the beginning of the meet.

      And was not replaced. They stopped taking blood, stopped testing.

      When I found out about it– a couple of weeks before the BC– I put some members of the press in motion. When they called the track, they were told there would be TCO2 testing at the BC, of some horses chosen at random. And for all I know there may have been. But how do we know? The public wasn’t told who was tested, let alone what the results were.

      All details of testing should be made public. Without that we are all guessing about what is going on.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s