Menu

Stay in Touch
Sign up for ENews
Subscribe Now

Unlimited access >

Menu

Penn National Chart Reporter

Racing
#61

Are you saying these charts have incorrect final times, or incorrect running lines or incorrect information about who was claimed or what they ran for?

Because that is what charts are all about. If those items and things like them are incorrect, I think you have a point.

Whether or not the chart reflects a euthanasia is not a gambling issue and these are gambling tools.

I use charts tangentially in my breeding selections when I can’t pull a race up and watch it but I understand that is not what they are compiled for.

You seem to imply fans are being shortchanged because they don’t necessarily know when horses have been put down. Is that really a fan thing? Do fans of the sport really need that information?

Wow.

#62

I’ve never been to Penn National–I have no desire to go.

I do know that if I hated something as much you hate horse racing and Penn, I wouldn’t waste my precious time on Earth being there. I’d just get out.

Anything’s got to be better, right?

#63

I disagree that on track euthanasia isn’t a relevant handicapping factor . As I posted previously, if there is a consistent pattern of an owner/trainer having a horse break down fatally after X number of starts off a claim/layoff, it is relevant . Again, it would be relevant to me if I were an owner with a horse in the gate next to that horse.
And, it also begs the question that if all the information is being partially reported/charted, wouldn’t it make you wonder about the accuracy of the other stats ?
I’m just saying that I think industry wide there should be standards adhered to, and accountability when they’re not . Chart calling accuracy is very important, and should be as complete as possible.
I mean, hypothetically, if on average, every time a Gill horse goes down, he takes two down with him, and that hypothetically, Gill’s trainers average 3 starts after a claim before the horse breaks down on the 4th… if I had that info available, I would not be betting, and I damn sure wouldn’t have a horse in that race.

#64

Bad news

[QUOTE=DickHertz;4647352]
Many…Lion’s Pride on December 18 was a catastrophic breakdown and is misreported. I’m not trying to make equibase’s life a complete hell so I haven’t felt the need to push the issue a whole lot further regarding past charts. They’d literally have to go back and change at least a dozen charts from 2009. Lion’s Pride was another Gill horse. THe problem is if anyone wants to go back and try and see exactly how many Gill horses broke down, they’ll never really know because the charts are poor. It begs the question, was there pressure from Penn to make vague comments or was this simply a poor worker? I’m not accusing Penn of influencing anything to be clear, but it smells rather fishy to me.

http://www.equibase.com/premium/eqbPDFChartPlus.cfm?RACE=5&BorP=P&TID=PEN&CTRY=USA&DT=12/18/2009&DAY=D&STYLE=EQB

It should read: Lion’s Pride broke down (because that’s what happened in terms of reporting the chart)

Goes back to one of my original posts: If there is a two person car crash and two people die, it’s not lying to say “There was a two person car accident on Main Street.” But it’s certainly not including the whole story. Judging by the depth and detail of the charts at Penn from last night, someone got spanked pretty hard. I think there was mounting pressure from other places and not just here to be fair.[/QUOTE]

The chart caller at CT does the same thing, broken down horses are marked as fell or sometimes pulled up or even sometimes no comment at all. It is there way of making the over all breakdown rate for the track less evident.
Our infamous state vet has many catistrophic breakdowns hauled off the track so that they are not reported thus again making the breakdown rate for the track appear far less then it actually is.

#65

Get the Facts Right

[QUOTE=mongo mike;4650971]
Dick,[edit] I can guarantee, if you tried to call a chart, you’d be so nervious, your hands would be shaking so badly, you wouldn’t be able to hold the binoculars. You know nothing about calling chart and obviously you know less about horse racing. [edit]

You blame the chart caller for all the problems at Penn National. It’s kind of like blaming the head chef on the Titanic for it’s sinking.
How about the stewards, how about the veterinarians? How about Gill and his trainers, you know, the people who send out these unsound horses. It would seem they would have a little more control of what goes on than the person doing the charts.
[edit][/QUOTE]

Actually what you are referring to holding binoculars, is race calling(the announcer during the actul running of the race) not chart calling. Charts are done after the race off of video, so maybe you should get your facts right.
There are more then four comments allowed as to how a horse won a race, just look at the charts from several days worth of racing and you can easily see that.
I don’t think Dick is blaming the chart caller for the breakdowns he is blaming them for doing there job poorly, and obviously unprofessionally.
When a horse is pulling up broken down it is obvious, it does not matter weather he was put down or not the chart should note it correctly. Weather it be broke down (for catistophic), pulled up lame(for limpers that aren’t catistrophic), or pulled up vanned off (for other problems). When the chart is done it is off video so it is pretty obvious what happened, if the caller is still unsure he is free to call the stewards or vet for clarity.

#66

[QUOTE=DickHertz;4651907]
Pronzini,

Do you follow racing at Penn and in turn of the last 250 charts, how many have you reviewed compared to what you actually saw in person?

'Nuff said

Goodbye.[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately Dick, you need to be adult enough to accept that people such as Pronzini and myself, who may question your reasoning/motives, deserve a little better response that what you’ve given. To dismiss her comment, as you dismissed mine, follows your pattern of anonymous accusations against, Gill, his trainers, the vets, the chartcaller, and Penn management. Pronzini’s probably forgotten more about this business than you’ll ever learn, plus in your dismissal of my comment, what you don’t know is that I’ve put in my time at Penn National. True, the place does suck, but your rantings here mean nothing to me. If you have all of this “evidence” of wrongdoing, then man up, come out of anonymity,and take your evidence to proper authorities (such as the state police.)

#67

[QUOTE=mongo mike;4651777]
Perhaps I missed the article in the Racing Form where you were elected “CZAR OF RACING”…[/QUOTE]

A housewife sat with her infant in a park and “wondered” if the smog might be hazardous to her child. Out of that we now have something called the ‘air quality index’ or API. Having spent time and energy asking questions, she eventually helped by testifying in Congressional committees and we now have an index that even the american heart association, as well as every weather report, uses.

It’s called improving the world we live in. Anyone can do it. :wink:

It’s all about conscience, persistence, and taking the time and energy to “bother”.

If Mr. Hertz would like to improve race charts for the benefit of all, then I’m baffled as to why this represents such a challenge to you?

Identifying errors, raising questions, and offering better answers…Making progress matters.

On The Farm, you admit that you “did your time” at Penn (sounds pretty horrible) and it sucks. What did you do to improve things, if you don’t mind telling us about that, which would be infinitely more interesting… instead of attacking somebody who is trying to do just that?

#68

[QUOTE=Pronzini;4651920]
Do fans of the sport really need that information?[/QUOTE]

Yes. I like to know that the outfits I’m dealing with, and spending my $$ at, have accountability and transparency.

Is there any reason why methods that would lead us to know, and record, the exact number of breakdowns at any given track, should be hidden or unknown?

As a handicapper, I keep horses I’m interested in wagering in my virtual stable at Equibase. Often, I review my stable, and am completely UNABLE to find the status of a horse.

I have a group of horses right now in such “limbo”. If the chart told me they broke down, then I can delete them from my stable. Otherwise, I assume they are on layoff, when there are no workouts, and wait for them to return.

Why should information be so elusive? I also have ethical considerations about wagering…I really do not wish to spend a lot of money at tracks that have enormous breakdown rates. (Perhaps that is why they must be “hidden”?)

#69

On the Farm,

Each of the issues you raised are valid ones and I have sent what I deem to be invaluable evidence to the proper authorities. With that said, perhaps unlike you, I love Penn National and the area and maybe my dream of having a track that may be not considered minor league racing is unrealistic, but the only way things can improve is if certain people are called out.

I’ve made my problems with the chart caller known to several people both at Equibase and at Penn over the last five months and it fell on deaf ears. So, should I have laid back and done nothing so that things could be “Business as Usual at Penn National”?

The majority of the horseman at Penn want change in a dramatic way. They want to see that ownership at the track has in interest in improving the racing product and 90% of the trainers on the backside want Penn to clean house and start fresh. Improving the racing product means more than just raising purses. Where is the jumbotron on the infield? Why are takeout rates so high that keep large bettors from playing Penn? What about frontside-backside relations? Just to name a few…

I am sorry that you are content with a chart reporter who failed to report dozens of true breakdowns in 2009 and allegedly misreported the actual jockey almost 75 times. Why don’t you call a few of the jock agents at Penn and ask them how this makes their life hell if and when they’d ever get an IRS tax audit. The “OFFICIAL” equibase chart would report their rider rode more or less races than was the actual truth.

Pronzini, I addressed your issues and if you feel that talking to Anthony Adamo and Darrel Delahoussaye are the answers then you haven’t been reading about them in the last few days. You can’t have a rational conversation with cold-blooded butchers who carry out the demands of a ruthless owner.

UNACCEPTABLE !

#70

[QUOTE=Pronzini;4651929]
. I do know that if I hated something as much you hate horse racing and Penn, I wouldn’t waste my precious time on Earth being there. I’d just get out.

Anything’s got to be better, right?[/QUOTE]

Well, said, Pronzini.

I disagree that on track euthanasia isn’t a relevant handicapping factor . As I posted previously, if there is a consistent pattern of an owner/trainer having a horse break down fatally after X number of starts off a claim/layoff, it is relevant . Again, it would be relevant to me if I were an owner with a horse in the gate next to that horse.
And, it also begs the question that if all the information is being partially reported/charted, wouldn’t it make you wonder about the accuracy of the other stats ?

For the third time, whether a horse was euthanized as a result of a DNF or a fall after the wire matters not one bit to a handicapper. What matters is that the horse DNF’d. Because if he doesn’t finish the race, it’s a bad bet - regardless of the final outcome for the horse.

What, exactly, as an owner are you going to do if you draw a post next to a horse owned by someone who had one euthanized on the track? Scratch and get your trainer fined? Throw a fit? As an owner you know anything can happen and you deal with it.

As far as questioning the rest of the stats - omitting the word “euthanized” is a far cry from getting the points of call wrong or the fractions. Not even in the same ballpark. I’ve seen lots of chart comments that didn’t very accurately reflect what I saw on the track but I never though that meant the whole chart was wrong. As Pronzini mentioned, handicappers, trainers, etc. don’t put a lot of stock in chart comments anyway - you look at the points of call, the fractions, etc and if you want a really good idea of what happened in the race, you watch the replay.

I think people are making the comments out to be a lot more than they are.

#71

Whoever it was that said they use charts in making breeding decisions had better hope the charts are accurate in regards to those DNF/fell/broke down/vanned off horses. If a high percentage of Joe Studly’s foals break down/pull up/whatever, isn’t that vital information? And if it isn’t reported properly it does affect you. Unless you are an idiot, you aren’t going to want to breed to something that has a high number of breakdowns. And as a bettor, I certainly agree that I want to know if a trainer or owner has a high percentage of horses that do not finish or survive. I would not want to bet on them for fear of them not making it to the finish line, and most importantly, I would not want to show any kind of support for such an outfit. And FWIW, if the owner gives a shit about his horses, he’ll get rid of any trainers that are breaking down his horses…

#72

[QUOTE=WinterTriangle;4652943]

On The Farm, you admit that you “did your time” at Penn (sounds pretty horrible) and it sucks. What did you do to improve things, if you don’t mind telling us about that, which would be infinitely more interesting… instead of attacking somebody who is trying to do just that?[/QUOTE]

WT, I have a philosphy about my life that’s done very well for me and that’s if I’m spending all my time trying to tell someone else how to live or do their job, then I’m not worried enough about how I’m conducting my own existence. THAT’S how I improve “things” and I certainly did enough of that in my two months at Penn.

When I arrived there last July to fill in for the assistant who was on medical leave, I walked into a shedrow of unhappy horses, unhappy employees, and an atmosphere that “getting finished” was the most important objective of every day. I stayed for two months before a financial issue back home took precedent, but in that two months I elminated the malcontents (I mucked alot of stalls by myself,) my horses became happier and healthier, the walk day routine of walking the horse for only the amount of time necessary to half-ass muck a stall (sometimes only several minutes) became a mandatory twenty minute session, and the result was alot of compliments and respect form people I’d never met or barely knew. Each and every day I was reminded by someone that there’s a “Penn National way” and I had to always fight back that that train of thought was not good enough for MY outfit. I inherited a crew of five and in two months I dismissed a total of five grooms, one hotwalker, and one exercise rider. Only one of the original five stayed on, but in a conversation with my old boss last week, I was complimented that the final crew that I left was still on the job and carrying on with my attitude that “the horse comes first.”

So you see WT, my idea of positive change involves how I conduct MYSELF and not anonymously slinging accusations on the internet. Alot of things (such as making sure one can get a horse scoped post race) should take some priority over carrying out an anonymous poster’s personal vendetta against Michael Gill.

#73

Well I am the one who said I rely on them tangentially. Horses can break down for so many reasons, that really isn’t a factor for me. (As an example, your namesake died recently–was he inherently unsound or was that a terrible accident? No I can’t answer that either nor can a chart.)

What I am looking for are things like precocity, early speed, distance, surface preference and overall ability and I try to glean those things from whats in the chart. But I know it is an imperfect exercise and that was never the purpose of the chart.

#74

That’s not just Penn National. I’ve seen that “its good enough” attitude in the bigs and I’ve also seen the effect that one motivated person can have on the people around him.

Unfortunately there are some pretty sorry stables everywhere including on fancy farms and Santa Anita. At the end of the day, it comes down to the horsemen and leadership/ management and not the fancy trappings.

#75

[QUOTE=Pronzini;4653253]
Well I am the one who said I rely on them tangentially. Horses can break down for so many reasons, that really isn’t a factor for me. (As an example, your namesake died recently–was he inherently unsound or was that a terrible accident? No I can’t answer that either nor can a chart.)

What I am looking for are things like precocity, early speed, distance, surface preference and overall ability and I try to glean those things from whats in the chart. But I know it is an imperfect exercise and that was never the purpose of the chart.[/QUOTE]
I do not know if Kinsella (the horse, not my namesake as I have been using that name since before he was born) had any inherent unsoundness as I have not studied the charts of Mr. Greeley offspring to see if there is a large percentage of breakdowns. I do not breed racehorses, but I am a breeder of sporthorses and soundness is something I take very seriously. Yes, accidents happen to everyone. But if I looked at the horses I owned and saw a higher percentage of “accidents” than the norm, i would take a very hard look at what I owned, who was training it, and who was vetting it. And I’d damn sure make some changes - even if it meant gasp not being the leading this or that. Surface preference, distance, and overall ability can be seen in broke down/pulled up/fell as well.

I agree that change has to start at home in your own barn. But I also think that if no one says or does anything about the bad seeds, they will grow and spread their influence much faster than any good being done at home. I know that more than Mr Gill are bad in the racing world, but I also know that you have to start somewhere. The biggest problem I see everywhere is an “I don’t care, it doesn’t affect me” attitude. When there is so much outrage over cruelty in racing that we have no more racing, well, where will we be then?

Get your Digital Subscription here - only $29.99 / year

Subscribe here
See gift options

Sign up to our monthly newsletter!

By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.

Copyright © 2023 The Chronicle of the Horse