The local horseman association here in Ontario called for a boycott of the box at Woodbine because of the lack of a racing contract. It appears that the sticking point is the fact that Woodbine can use their private property rights to exclude, or put restrictions on trainers and/or owners who they deem are bad for their business.
The horseman's executive seems to have thought this a good idea, but the rank and file have spoken against them. Woodbine received over 90 entries today for the 'supposed' boycotted card. There will be racing on January 1st.
Most Trafficked, Last 12 Months
-
This was originally printed in Trot Magazine's Horseplayer Issue. The pick 5 is a racing staple with almost every track trying to take...
-
I received a hot text on my Blackberry from Cub Reporter late last night. Cub said, "The racing braintrust was reading twitter last ni...
-
Our wagering game is an incredible mental exercise for many reasons. And one of its characteristics I like best is the variety of thought wh...
-
Everyone saw "the ride" , everyone commented on "the ride", everyone waited to see what was up with "the ride"...
-
I continue to be fascinated with both the press and general football fan reaction to the Bill Belichick 4th down decision in Sunday's ga...
-
So, I did a little reading on the railway rebate system. No, stop laughing, I really did. And it was a pretty interesting exercise. For tho...
-
I've been thinking about wagering, handicapping and gambling content this week. The topic has been front and center with Nico's grea... -
Several years ago the Denver Broncos were reeling. Their HOF quarterback was still hurting, had lost his fastball, and at halftime in week 1...
3 comments:
Well if they run tonight I'll throw my support behind them. My method will be betting Mark McDonald till he has a winner. Hopefully it will be Urban Rainforest in the 2nd.
I don't have a program so maybe you could tell me where those Buter horses have been running.
RG
Hey RG,
Buters horses have been in the Niagara here the last couple of times. They were from BLMP before that.
The one thing which should be non-negotiable is the rule of exclusion; that should be up to the track to decide who is welcome and who is not. Certain racing commissions such as NJ can't be trusted with banning 'undesirables'; the tracks need to be able to protect their interest and the interest of horsemen in general who will not police thier own. That being said, the track should be required to cite an instance where the horseman's activity in the past necesitates their banning (criminal conviction, fines, suspensions, etc.). They should not be allowed to ban a horseman because they are a leader of a horsemen's organization and the like.
Let's assume the horsemen boycott the entry box. I assume the slots stay open. Lay off the racing office staff, tellers (assuming simulcasting stops) and the track probably will come out ahead in the long run. Who is hurting who?
Post a Comment