Is racing clean? Damned if I know. Racing folk right across the planet place their faith in a sport, hoping that those who run the industry are on top of things. Day in, day out, we sit watching our selections go around on the idiot box, always trusting that we’re not being ripped off by some toe rag who is out to make a quick buck for himself. But in truth, we just don’t know for sure whether we’re being taken for a ride. How can we know? How hard would it be to lose a race by a neck? We have no idea what transpires in the jockey’s rooms or on the way to the barriers. We just shovel our cash on in the belief that the game is above reproach. Well maybe it’s not. Sure we can tell ourselves that the occasional rip off happens, all the while thinking that for the most part, our interests are being thoroughly looked after by those in charge of the racing, but personally, I think it’s probably much worse than that. At least if Australian racing is anything to go by. Today, Damien Oliver, the winner of 98 G1 races and often referred to by the rank and file punter as racing’s Bradman, was wiped out for 10 months by stewards for sticking $10,000 on a horse he was competing against at Moonee Valley in October 2010. He has insisted that his ride on the second favourite Europa Point, was to the best of his ability, that the horse was given every possible chance. It finished midfield. Stewards did not in any way question the ride. He was also found guilty of using a mobile phone while in the rooms, and sentenced to a further month, which is to be served concurrently. Much has been made of the whole messy affair in the last few months. The matter first raised its ugly head just before the Spring Carnival in Melbourne, but was not seen to be handled all that well by the racing authorities. Oliver it seems was not questioned by stewards. Why? According to them, investigations were not yet complete. Does it make sense to investigate a possible racing infringement without talking to the suspect? A lot of people think not. Hints of a legal standoff are rife in the air. When the media approached Oliver about the issue, he didn’t deny the claim, but asked that he be given a fair hearing by the powers that be. Damien Oliver was allowed by stewards to participate in the Carnival. It’s claimed that his winning percentages ran to about $200,000. On the Monday following the final day of racing, Oliver signed a confession. He had no choice, they had him bang to rights. But why was he allowed to compete? Reading between the lines, a possible deal was done whereby Oliver would confess after the carnival, which would then cement a case against him. It seems that Racing Victoria didn’t have the balls to play its own hand, even though they had the rider stone cold. There have been no winners in the Oliver affair. The punter has lost faith in the game. Stewards now come off as being weak at the knees, and racing itself now looks even more seedy that ever. Instances such as these are what stick in the mind. The heroic deeds of Dunaden, Green Moon and the like, now are unjustly tainted by the filth and cowardice of the few. Racing in Victoria is a grubby business at the moment. Jim Cassidy is under the pump for allegedly receiving $25,000 from underworld figure Tony Mokbel, for tips supplied. Another Melbourne rider, as yet unnamed, is also being accused for supplying tips. Danny Nikolic was handed a 2 year ban for threatening the life of a steward. And police are of the opinion that they might be closing in on the killer of Nikolic’s former father in-law Les Samba, who was gunned down as he fled execution on a deserted Middle Park road, on February 27 last year. And if what we are asked to believe is true, the above is just the proverbial tip of the ice burg.
Cyclonic, good morning. Is racing clean? Sure it is. Clean as a whistle. Have you ever seen the inside of a whistle? Seriously, though, so long as there is gambling in professional sport, then there will be fiddling, cheating, and fixing. Furthermore, horse racing was always run by the rich for the rich. Essentially they do what they want- for their own benefit and not for the man in the street. They're only concerned about the image that is portrayed- a bit like politicians really. It doesn't really matter that behind that sham facade of respectability lies a bed of iniquity shared by a privileged few. They do what they want; it's their club. If one of their members runs a 'non-trier' (for training purposes), then that's OK; but if an honest working jockey tries too hard and hits his horse too much, then he has to be banned. That's the 'image' they project, supposedly for the benefit of Joe Public. At the end of the day, does all this matter? Probably not. All we can do is accept it for what it is and take our own enjoyment out of it. Like freedom, it's the illusion that matters and, given we accept that, everything is hunky-dory.
I often wonder why, if the racing is so corrupt, that next to nothing is done to crack down on the culprits. With the technology we have on offer today, why can't this stuff be rooted out? Surely in this day and age, it wouldn't be a major problem. Everyone keeps records, bookmakers, betting houses, phone companies, banks etc. It just takes an effort.
It's a sad story Cyc, and one im afraid will pop up every now and again, and not just in racing... Cricket, football, rugby, snooker the list goes on and on with players, competitor's not giving their all or a team just not trying to win the match. I suppose if there is money involved then you will always get suspicion, greed and corruption...
Totally, totally true. Unfortunately any sport which is dominated by the triumvirate of man, gambling and handicapping is going to be food for the old rogue and lead to many an unscrupulous ‘plot’.
Racing is a hell of a lot cleaner than it was just 30 or 40 years ago. Drug testing of both horse and rider has pretty much put an end to favourites being "got at". Of course, as others have already said, any time money is involved there will always be someone willing to cut corners or do something unscrupulous to try and get ahead. I'm still personally of the opinion that betting exchanges are one of the worst things to happen to racing in this country. I know a lot of people will disagree with me, and that's fine, but it's my opinion and I stick to it. Allowing people to back a horse to lose has opened the flood gates. The vast majority of cases that have been investigated in this country in recent years have involved people backing horses to lose. I'm not for a minute suggesting that without exchanges all would be fine and dandy, but I seriously believe they are part of the problem. It is part of the reason that many racing jurisdictions still refuse to permit them.
Out of interest, why is not illegal for stable hands etc to put bets on races involving their stables horses? There was obviously the famous accumulator that won £1m (well it actually won 3x that but the unscrupulous bookmakers had a maximum payout of £1m). I've nothing against that particular case as he was betting on his stable's horses to win, good on him, I'm glad he had faith in his own stable. I see them putting bets on all the time when i'm down at the races though, surely this could easily be "inside info" on a horse that isn't going to run well or they could be putting it on for a jockey who is set to run a stinker?
Racing is cleaner than it was 40, 60, 80, and over 100 years ago. Horseracing literature is full of true accounts of dark deeds such as stopping horses, fearful threats to jockeys, trainers, and stable employees, etc., etc. I fully agree with the above comment that the exchanges are a really bad thing for racing; they should never have been allowed. We seem to be making so many backward steps instead of going forward? Selling Aunty to a bookmaker, for God's sake, that was insane, surely? The old Tote was, however boring, one of the few straight things about horseracing. I guess the exchanges are here to stay, unfortunately. They probably have a parliamentary lobby just as powerful as the bookmakers do?
Previous good character or not 10 months ban is pathetic. I don't care if he's a good egg, bad egg or indifferent egg he crossed the line and the sport should be finished with him.
Racing sure is cleaner than it was 30+ years ago, advance in technology ha smade sure of that, but as red says wherever there is gambling there'll be corruption., But let's not beat ourselves up over the failures of the sport we all love because there is corruption is every single sport, not a week goes by where an irregular betting pattern is investigated by betfair, tennis, darts, snooker, badminton and a host of other sports have all experienced regular fixing and attempted fixing. Where I think corruption has increased is with the option of laying on exchanges and cannot see how betfair/betdaq do anything for the benefit of the sport, sure they might sponsor the odd race from the tens of millions they make but I think from their very existence a new breed of crook has evolved. I say it is impossible to prove that a jockey has deliberately stopped his/her ride from winning a race - take a 20 runner sprint and I'd suggest it's fairly easy to make sure your mount gets blocked in, there are hard luck stories in every single and we presume the vast majority are clean races, so how easy must it be if you're actually trying to do it ? Personally I think the sport is a poorer place for the exchanges - and that's not even taking into account the impact their existence is having on the on course ring and ring turnover and the fact most bookmakers are selling their pitches at a loss just to get out of the industry. Cyc - on a lighter note, I did enjoy the sequence you posted a while back on corruption from years back, some of the coups landed were entertaining and brilliant for their time....
Jeff, in answer to your question. It is not against the Rules of Racing to back horses in your stable to win. "Inside information" only concerns information about a horse that means it is likely to lose. So basically anyone can hand out tips about horses that will win, but it is against the rules to pass on information that a horse will definitely lose.
Being 'cleaner' than a previous decade is no excuse for not being clean at all. Of course it is rife. Handicap racing and laying exchanges make sure of that! Hunt Ball, whilst a fabulous story for the media, did not 'improve' 80lb in the handicap- he was simply engineered to start of a false mark. Everyone ought to know that. You see it every season, every week. Maiden form where horses are tailed off, given 'learning rides' etc etc. Sir Mark Prescott thew prime example- well bred horses who are not clued up or readied for maidens, end up pissing races from marks in the 50s. Stick to your Grade 1 racing folks.
Grizzly: Following is well-worth a read. A real treasure on true stories of horseracing's greatest con artists. Amazing book: "Ringers & Rascals" by David Ashforth (Publisher: Blood-Horse Publications - First Edition: May 2004).
What you don't seem to get to the same extent as in the past is doping. The worst time appears to have been at the end of the 50s. But the Dermot Browne dopings of the late 80s/early 90s were pretty bad. What I don't like about it is the damage done to the horses obviously, leaving aside its highly illegal nature.. I'm sure horses are pulled in races but I don't think as much happens as before because as people have said the technology is a great deal better. I'm not sure if Tamerlo is right about racing formerly being run for the rich and there being any linkage to corruption. I can almost see the red flag flying over the People's Socialist Commune of Nuneaton. I doubt the Holidays, Joels, Astors, Ranks and Khans ever had a thought of cheating in racing. They were all sporting owners. Just because the Jockey Club was a basket case full of snobs doesn't mean it was a force for corruption. What it did have in spades was inertia. Lower down in the food chain there is little doubt the trainers, jockeys and punters were the likely source of corrupting influences. And no doubt that will continue to be the case. Horses will be laid out for handicaps while there's money to be made from betting. I think the grey area for all of us is the the non-trier first time out. We all know that even top yards don't try some of their horses first time out, and you can see why that might happen as they might not be as they say fully wound-up . What I object to is when a horse with ability is not running to its full capabilities first time out. My favourite scam was definitely the August Bank Holiday coup of 1974, when a very smart attempt was made to defraud the bookies of hundreds of thousands by playing on the then weakness of the bookmaking fraternity. Back then because there were so many meetings and everything was done on boards the bookies wouldn't really follow the smaller meetings. Three horses were entered around the country at these smaller tracks and one of them was a ringer. Nearly the whole Irish population of West London was sent into action to put relatively small win trebles on these 3 horses. This showed another understanding of human weakness because you generally think trebles etc. are for mugs and so don't register them. Then as with most bank holidays two of the 3 horses were withdrawn leaving the ringer to romp in at Cartmel and a huge pile of single win bets to be landed. For sheer style and audacity I almost feel they deserved to succeed. I may have embellished this slightly but that was the gist of the coup. I always thought it very clever as it showed a great understanding of the the betting world and how it clicks, but it was highly illegal.
I believe drugs may be rampant in racing. Just because they are not being picked up in testing doesn't mean that racing is clean. Along with the current jockey problems in Australian racing, the smell of dope is in the air. A lot of trainers and vets are saying that the milk-shaking with sodium bicarbonate is being mixed with undetectable variants of oxygen-boosting hormones. Elephant juice also seems to rearing it's head again. International sport is rife with drugs and those who test are it's said, a decade behind the cheats.
Bustino: Top post! . If they hadn't overplayed their hand with the two scratched horses, they might well have succeeded with the Cartmel coup? Going by memory only, but I think they overdid it a bit with the 'breakdown' en-route to Market Rasen (?). That caught them out in the end?
