I’ll never let you see
The Inspector General’s Report to me
I’ve done my crying and I know how to hide
The incompetence I disdain
Until no overseers remain
It came to me in a vision sometime last week following the announcement in the Saratogian, that "John Sabini was stepping down as chairman of the New York Racing & Wagering Board to pursue other career opportunities."
"The Racing & Wagering Board will cease functioning independently Feb. 1, when it merges with the state Division of Lottery to form a new State Gaming Commission."
"Gov. Andrew Cuomo hasn’t announced who will be on the commission. Members, including the chairman, will be paid on a nominal, per diem basis. They are not full-time salaried positions."
For once it was possible to laugh with the ex-NYSRWB Chairman as he implicitly acknowledged that sometimes he has been the target of press corps humor when he shared a self-deprecating moment with writer, Paul Post: ‘… the board itself reduced 30 percent of its full-time staff, which he said had become “a political dumping ground for certain political folks.”
"We got the board in better fiscal shape," Sabini said.
(As the former chairman secured his pension in advance of his agency’s--and his own job’s demise--it wasn’t clear whether that 30% included his position with its salary of $124,476).
Until reporter James Odato can pry the report out of Team Cuomo by using the Freedom of Information Law--unless someone on the second floor of the State Capitol leeks it to him first--we won’t know just how remiss the NYSRWB was in not fulfilling its assigned oversight responsibility, thereby contributing to the takeout fiasco.
Does this give us more or less confidence in his continued involvement in New York racing, I wonder? Is he, perhaps even more than Chairman Skorton, the Governor’s fly on the boardroom wall?
The remainder of the Sabini interview might suggest to some that despite his claimed accomplishments in the wake of NYCOTB’s bankruptcy, he left New York racing pretty much the way he found it.
‘"NYRA has been very focused on getting people in the Capital District to spend a day at the track with their friends," said Sabini, a Queens resident. "It’s not marketed down here as well."
Possible suggestions included fewer, shorter racing days including a scaled back Aqueduct winter meet, he said. NYRA’s year-round calendar has 250 racing programs.
Downstate fans, in particular, are saturated from September to mid-July, he said. "There’s nothing special about it," Sabini said.
With the exception of events such as Showcase Day, Holidayfest, the Wood Memorial, Met Mile and Belmont Stakes, it isn’t. And, sadly, that’s the case at any and all American racetracks.
Rather than promote that Belmont Stakes as the traditional "Test of Champions" for a horse who gallantly captured the first two legs, the 2012 Belmont became a hostile-to-horsemen environment of suspicion orchestrated by Sabini.
The trainer of the Triple Crown candidate was treated as if he were a Manchurian Candidate. Whether or not it was deserved, no such official attitude was observed in Kentucky or Maryland.
Do NYRA’s customers, both in and out-of-state, desire a jurisdiction more restrictive than those existing elsewhere, or do they want to see uniformity among venues that supports fairness and equality for both horsemen and horseplayers?
Does reinforcing suggestions that the game is not on the level promote it properly while little is being done to change it?
The "specialness" of Belmont Fall has definitely been compromised. Even Jockey Club Gold Cup day has failed to draw crowds commensurate with the quality of the horses competing. This is due not only to colder weather, a competing mainstream sports calendar and Grade 1 events serving mainly as Breeders’ Cup preps, but smaller foal crops have resulted in fields short on quality and quantity, a less attractive gambling proposition.
In addition, none are the culmination of a bonus-incentivized series.
To elevate the status of at least a sub-set of its rich array of graded stakes, NYRA must recognize and reward the cumulative accomplishments of its participants. Just as Churchill Downs has circumvented the Graded Stakes Committee and specified its own qualifying races, so should NYRA – not only for berths in the starting gate, but also for bonuses based on performances across a series of races.
Suppose, for example, finishing 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th in the Jockey Gold Cup could make each of those horses eligible for a variable bonus based on their cumulative top four finishes in the Metropolitan, Suburban, Whitney, and/or Woodward.
The JCGC still would attract horses prepping for the Classic (the last three BC winners were JCGC starters that finished behind the winner), but now other proven performers within the division, possibly reluctant to compete a furlong further, might do so for a bigger payday. And such a concept need not be limited to older males.
What gets people to the track are a) good horses, b) good gambling opportunities, c) good weather and d) good company. More effective marketing would be to concentrate on these areas, rather than concerts, giveaways and the like.
When the Pick Six first came to California, seminars by professional handicapper Gordon Jones, were very popular with new players. He would handicap the Pick Six with input from the audience and structure the tickets. The audience was then invited to participate to purchase shares for any amount each of them wished.
(Jones covered what remained and – as I understood it – returned the purchased percentage of the payoff balance after withholding. The Hollywood seminars were held on-track while those at Santa Anita were conducted off-track at nearby restaurants.)
Belmont is big enough for competing handicappers to simultaneously conduct on-track educational handicapping sessions and create class project mini-whales. Some of the NYRA social media handicapping personalities are so popular they’d never have to put up a dime of their own—if they were allowed to do so.
Add to that the ability of tracks to distribute tax liability among on-track players with IDs forming any ad-hoc partnership and attendance could explode.
"We have to try different things to make the product more interesting and the on-track experience more fun," Sabini added. Do you think that this is what he or the new Gaming Commission had in mind?
Me either.


16 Jan 2013 at 09:31 am | #
I do not know anything about John Sabini. I imagine that NYRA, when wanting to change, modify, or create another gambling option had to seek approval from NYR&WB; which meant going with hat in hand to a private dining area at a 5-star restaurant and bring the credit card.
James Odato, TimesUnion columnist, has kept the follies and going-on at NYRA on the front burner for well over a decade; he has been a thorn in NYRAS’s side and should be thanked by all bettors.
I read above that what gets people to the track are good horses, good gambling opportunities, good weather, and good company. Good adjective ‘good’ is.
What is the word good anyway? It falls between excellent and fair. Is there such a thing as an excellent horse? or fair horse? I believe the intent is to imply that quality thoroughbreds attract bettors; I guess they do, as I haven’t yet read anything by a turf writer that implorers the public to go to the track and wager on a claimer. So the public, like the Manchurian Candidate, is programmed and/or convinced that stake races are far superior. Superior in what? to what?
In ‘capper jargon, quality translates into class, and class is certainly an important handicapping tool. I’ve tried many times to distinquish between a claimer with fifty starts already and a stake horse with four starts. Damn if I can observe any difference up close, in the walking ring, in the post parade, or during the actual running of the race; the races all look the same to me. Over the many years, though, I have developed some empirical evidence, measured in money. I, personally, have realized that I win more wagering on the cheapest races. Now, if I could only get a few turf writers to redirect the public, to get them to the promised land.
Here are my beliefs in order of significance what draws people to the racetrack (I know ya all have been waiting with bated breath): 1) knowing that the facility is modern, clean, has reasonably priced food/drink, and parking/admission are free; 2) that the day’s race card has at least six entrants per race; 3) that the wagering menu offers numerous options and $1 bets; and 4) that the weather is favorable. Whether a stake race is on the card or not means nothing, nor does takeout.
---------
Think Hunter Jak in 7th at Laurel got a shot today?
20-1 morning line; won’t get these odds chasing Ramon or Sir Todd.
16 Jan 2013 at 11:41 am | #
Ladies and gentlemen, HRI, about to celebrate its sixth anniversary come Kentucky Derby week, and, finally, we get our first selections from WMC. I’m with you Wendell old boy, give me a dollar across on Hunter Jak.
Laurel, eh? Sound like you’re stepping up in class a bit there, chief. May your horse have a speedy and safe journey.
16 Jan 2013 at 12:22 pm | #
Once again, wmc, you are the early worm that gives the bird to HRI bloggers.
Even though that posture is consistent with a self-professed “low-life,” your knowledge of the “Manchurian Candidate” gave you away as someone with interests outside of racing.
But this preposterous obsession of yours that turf writers are programming people to prefer performers in stakes races is backwards. It is the preponderance of player handle and attendance on cards with stakes races (with the possible exception of AQU during the inner track meet) that precludes your presumption, and suggests that it is proven player preferences which program many turf writers.
16 Jan 2013 at 02:42 pm | #
‘Preposterous’ is a powerful word. Anyone using that word should have strong data, information, and facts to support painting one with its implication.
Methinks you have it backwards, not me. It is mentioned ‘the preponderance of player handle and attendance on cards with stake races ....is proven player preference which programs many turf writers’. Boy, is that comment simply bullsh--!
Handle and attendance at racetracks are a direct result of people being enticed to attend. Turf writers are the advertising arm of Thoroughbred racing, though unpaid (I think) by any racing association; their writing is a tremendous influence on people interested in maybe going to the races to see what is going on.
To rationalize that turf writers do not write until they note the handle and attendance on race cards with stake races is preposterous.
I stand behind my comment (many times already at HRI) that turf writers have contributed to the decline in racing’s popularity by their obsession with stake races, a handful of trainers, and a few jockeys while failing to inform the public that Thoroughbred racing at any racetrack is worthy of one’s attention; that Thoroughbred racing is exactly the same anywhere, be it at a fair track or Saratoga - ya bet, you watch, you enjoy the excitement if your plodder is in contention, and you may cash or not.
As to your opening comment above, is the ‘bird’ the finger? You are right in regard to most of the HRI bloggers, but there are a few, a very few, who apparently get it.
16 Jan 2013 at 04:49 pm | #
How many local newspapers even have turf writers any more? Before he retired the Sun-Sentinel’s racing coverage was done by their TV writer, on his own time! We are lucky to even get coverage of stakes racing! Stakes racing, especially the Derby and Breeder’s Cup, serve as an introduction to the sport(if it is a sport) to a great many people. And if there is a winner in the first two legs of the triple crown, Belmont day is packed with first timers in hope of seeing a superstar. Racing needs a superstar that even the non turf writers write about. Also when almost everyone is betting the Derby and Breeder’s Cup, as a handicapper, you get a certain satisfaction making money on those races. To a lesser extent this also applies to other grade ones. It could be because the public feels that everyone is trying to win these races and not using it as a prep for another spot or some other chicanery.
17 Jan 2013 at 04:32 pm | #
As no-one reported the results of wmc’s surprise pick in Wednesday’s 7th at Laurel, I accessed the DRF charts without optimism.
I guess I had expected a moment like Babe Ruth’s pointing out the home run he was about to hit, but Hunter Jak—winner of his last start at LRL on 12/22—finished at the back of the pack on a sloppy (sealed) track at 13.50 to 1. The comment was “outrun.”
I hope wmc has encouraged others here to step up to the plate as well.
18 Jan 2013 at 04:18 am | #
As I informed Mr. Kling, I did not select Hunter Jak I merely asked if anyone thought the plug had a chance. You know, it takes just as much talent to select a donkey to run last as it does first.
Monday, three plodders I wagered on finished dead last; that should attest to the fact that I am a very good handicapper.
18 Jan 2013 at 11:29 pm | #
The gentleman doth protest too much methinks.
Wouldst accolades accompanying accuracy accumulating among admiring adversaries been abandoned with such alacrity or accepted with abandonment?
Yon commenter hath a lean and hallow sound.