NEWS
Loss of confidence in racing
Posted: Saturday, September 30, 2000
Perception is reality in indictments of race fixing at Penn National
In August, when the New Jersey Racing Commission announced it had formed a task force to investigate the integrity of Standardbred racing, I let out a hearty guffaw. It's about time they caught some of those crooks, I said to colleagues, smiling smugly.
Little did I realize that in Pennsylvania, law enforcement officials were investigating allegations of race fixing at Penn National Race Course in Grantville. On September 6, a Harrisburg grand jury was convened and subpoenaed a number of Penn National riders. Two days later, six riders-including Lazaro Vives and Luis Morales, who were in the top five in wins-were barred from the track. On September 21, seven jockeys and two owners were indicted by the grand jury for fixing races at Penn National between January and May of this year.
Eleven races were specifically mentioned in the indictment.
We can cite the common cliche of innocent until proven guilty, but public perception of this situation gives all indications of reality.
The Penn National situation bothers me for several reasons.
First, Thoroughbred racing is the sport nearest and dearest to my heart. A Mike Piazza walk-off home run or a Mark Messier overtime goal doesn't give me as much of a thrill as a prolonged stretch duel, such as that in the Woodward Stakes (G1).
Things in racing are going pretty well right now. Purses are at record levels nationally, and owners are spending record amounts on yearlings at this year's sales.
Yet, the indictments in Harrisburg will likely be spread louder and longer by the national media than any of them gave ink or airtime to Fusaichi Pegasus's triumph in the Kentucky Derby (G1). In one fell swoop, it will cast a dark cloud of suspicion over the entire sport.
My youngest daughter once said to me years ago, "Mommy says all those races you go to are fixed." Co-workers and friends think I have "inside information," most likely for that same reason.
Second, as a racing consumer, I am outraged. I have played Penn National simulcasts frequently this year. I was hoping to get a media invitation to the World Series of Handicapping Finals at Penn National and wanted lots of experience studying form at the track and the tendencies of trainers.
I'd stop at Monmouth Park on Wednesday night after my summer bowling league to catch Penn National's late double and superfecta. I'd linger on Sunday evenings after Monmouth's live card for the remainder of the Penn National twilight signal. I took a lot of flak from friends for playing the simulcast signal from Grantville instead of Del Mar.
Sometimes I'd win. Sometimes I'd lose. I hit a superfecta one Wednesday night and had a great evening after the August 6 Haskell Invitational Handicap (G1), winning exacta after exacta. I also had a few perfectly awful nights. That's to be expected anywhere.
I argued that though the quality of Penn National racing wasn't anywhere near that of Del Mar, lower-level claiming horses ran truer to their current form. Or so I thought.
I wonder how many of the Penn National mutuel tickets that I tore up this summer were a result of bad decisions on my part or the result of decisions made in the jockey's room prior to the night's card.
I'll probably never get that answer. But, there is one fact that I am sure of. I will not be putting my hard-earned money through the mutuel windows on a Penn National simulcast race anytime soon. Maybe I will change my mind later, but not now.
I haven't been to Penn National since 1979, when I was a teenager, and had been looking forward to returning. About that invitation to the World Series of Handicapping Finals over the weekend of October 6-8, I'll be sending my regrets.
Tom De Martini is a New York and New Jersey correspondent of Thoroughbred Times.
