Chicago Barn to Wire
Home | News | Bloggers | Forums | Resources | Links | Marketplace | Gallery | Contact Us | Search


November 27, 2014, 03:42:19 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: If you don't remember your password, email me.

New  registration procedures -- Some ISPs have been bouncing the verification emails.  Please email me to be activated or if you have any problems.  Click Contact Us above.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [All]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: ITHA What a JOKE  (Read 4065 times)
User1015
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 261




Ignore
« on: January 20, 2006, 07:40:58 PM »

 maroon horse thumbs down thumbs down thumbs down thumbs down

Now do I have this straight? The current corrupt administration of ITHA is being threatened by a take over by the past corrupt administration? WHAT A JOKE! Wake up people! Huh
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #1 on: January 21, 2006, 01:10:53 AM »

maroon horse thumbs down thumbs down thumbs down thumbs down

Now do I have this straight? The current corrupt administration of ITHA is being threatened by a take over by the past corrupt administration? WHAT A JOKE! Wake up people! Huh

What was corrupt about the past administration? Details and examples, please.
Report to moderator   Logged
User1015
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 261




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2006, 02:40:39 AM »

 horse
Report to moderator   Logged
User1015
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 261




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: January 21, 2006, 02:45:13 AM »

Among many other things, selling out for recapture is one. Total incompetence and those in leadership for personal gain is another. Its insane to believe that those that caused many of the problems that ITHA has today can save them now. New leadership without agenda and personal gain is what is needed. Anything less is what the caption implies.. A JOKE.
Report to moderator   Logged
nwaryas
Guest

« Reply #4 on: January 21, 2006, 07:06:12 AM »

ITHA is a fraud. I will never support the organization.
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #5 on: January 21, 2006, 12:11:29 PM »

Among many other things, selling out for recapture is one. Total incompetence and those in leadership for personal gain is another. Its insane to believe that those that caused many of the problems that ITHA has today can save them now. New leadership without agenda and personal gain is what is needed. Anything less is what the caption implies.. A JOKE.

If one accepts the version of the negotiations that produced recapture as previously presented by Jim Carfagno here, recapture came down as a last minute edict from Gov. Edgar's office, and there wasn't any negotiation about it. If it happened that way, where was the sellout? Do you have better information than that, 1015? Were you there?

The rest of your argument isn't based on specifics so isn't worth our debating time. I will ask, however, besides the current crisis over leadership not obeying bylaws, what are the many problems the ITHA has? And, if it has such problems, which were caused by the old administration, and how?

To nwaryas: Are you even a horseman, that your support or lack would matter? If you're the Nick I think you are, horseman is not the story I've heard from John Frank.
Report to moderator   Logged
User1015
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 261




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: January 21, 2006, 12:20:39 PM »

If one accepts the version of the negotiations that produced recapture as previously presented by Jim Carfagno here, recapture came down as a last minute edict from Gov. Edgar's office, and there wasn't any negotiation about it. If it happened that way, where was the sellout? Do you have better information than that, 1015? Were you there?

The rest of your argument isn't based on specifics so isn't worth our debating time. I will ask, however, besides the current crisis over leadership not obeying bylaws, what are the many problems the ITHA has? And, if it has such problems, which were caused by the old administration, and how?

To nwaryas: Are you even a horseman, that your support or lack would matter? If you're the Nick I think you are, horseman is not the story I've heard from John Frank.
Report to moderator   Logged
User1015
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 261




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: January 21, 2006, 12:28:20 PM »

You're very defensive of the past corruption. Is it possible there is personal gain in the return of these individuals for you?  And by the way, there are many acts of corruption and selling out the horsemen by the past administration. There is not enough room to list them here.  Your demands to list them here are only a guise to divert attention away from the truth.
Recapture was a result of the past administration selling out to the Governors office and to the tracks. If the people you defend have such integrity, then why are they unable to take responsiblity for this?
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #8 on: January 21, 2006, 12:53:55 PM »

You're very defensive of the past corruption. Is it possible there is personal gain in the return of these individuals for you?  And by the way, there are many acts of corruption and selling out the horsemen by the past administration. There is not enough room to list them here.  Your demands to list them here are only a guise to divert attention away from the truth.
Recapture was a result of the past administration selling out to the Governors office and to the tracks. If the people you defend have such integrity, then why are they unable to take responsiblity for this?

I'm not "defensive of the past corruption", I am asking you specifically what it was. I'm also asking you to specifically tell us about how recapture came to be. Whose idea it was (a person, not just "the tracks"), how it was presented to the Task Force, by whom and when, what options there were if any at that point, what discussion or negotiation was had about it, who held what position on it, and any other details you might want to share. When I know enough details of how it came about I can form an intelligent opinion as to how much blame to put on past ITHA leadership, which, by the way, featured Larry Frye in the negotiations, who I don't believe is part of the group currently challenging the ITHA. There were many other people at the 1994-1995 Task Force table, including tracks, harness horsemen, breeders, various politicians, and who knows who all. Hard to blame just one group or person for anything that came out of there without knowing the specifics.
Report to moderator   Logged
User1015
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 261




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: January 21, 2006, 02:00:53 PM »

And who hired Larry Frye? Who did he represent?Huh? Yes sir, the past administration of the ITHA.
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #10 on: January 21, 2006, 11:16:25 PM »

And who hired Larry Frye? Who did he represent?Huh? Yes sir, the past administration of the ITHA.

Meaning what?

Still waiting for you to detail even one thing to support your original claim of corruption. Recapture in and of itself isn't any proof of "corruption". You don't really know anything at all about the ITHA, past or present, do you user1015?
Report to moderator   Logged
User1015
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 261




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: January 22, 2006, 06:12:21 AM »

What would be so wrong with new leadership Clockerterry?? Why are you opposed to that?
Report to moderator   Logged
Thomas Graham
Guest

« Reply #12 on: January 22, 2006, 09:54:22 AM »

I don't think I hear Terry saying which leadership group he is for.  I hear him asking you to prover you asseratations of corrunptions.

By the way, if my memory serves correctly, Mr. Frye was the director under the CHristine Janks regime (which is the regime "voted in" during the Decemeber "we're having our electon anyway").

Also, from what I recall in a way earlier thread on the old BTW, I think Ed Duffy of Sportsman's was the man who gave us recapture.

TJG
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #13 on: January 22, 2006, 10:20:42 AM »

What would be so wrong with new leadership Clockerterry?? Why are you opposed to that?

There would be nothing wrong with that.  That's not what the subject has been about so far, though, starting with you saying both current and past administrations are/were corrupt, and saying nothing at all up until now about any totally new faces.

The question I asked you was, "What was corrupt about the past administration? Details and examples, please." That's all, details of how the past administration was corrupt. Surely you can provide those, since you have made the assertion. You don't have to list all reasons, since you say there are too many and will take up a lot of time. Just four or five concrete examples, that people could verify independently, would be sufficient, I think. Please proceed.
Report to moderator   Logged
Jim C
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1403




Ignore
« Reply #14 on: January 23, 2006, 02:31:18 AM »

Funny isn't it Terry when people love to toss around complaints or accusations with no supporting information. It is also the same old stuff too, people running off at the mouth and complaining with no suggestions on what they would do let alone step up and run for the board and DO SOMETHING other than ***.

To set the record straight...again, the concept and idea of recapture was dictated to all concerned with no real discussion. It went something like this. We are putting this into the bill, you can either be for it or against it but that will not matter as you cannot stop it. The bill will be passed and this provision will be in it. There was heated debate and in the end it did not matter, we meaning everyone the ITHA, IHHA, ITBOF were all against it but it did not matter. So don't give me any of this selling out garbage. I will also point out that EVERYONE wanted more OTBs and full card simulcasting. As it turns out maybe we would have been better off without it.

I will also point out that the "new" administration of Christine Janks is only an intermum situation and she is not willing nor will she serve a full term. She will only serve until a full election can be held. This is not something she needs to do either. She is doing so only because of her concern over what has been taking place and at the urging of fellow members. She also would not even take on the job until she saw for herself evidence that something was not right in the current administration. (all of which will be made public in due course).
Report to moderator   Logged
IL#1 Race Fan
Newbie
*
Posts: 20




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: January 23, 2006, 09:05:12 AM »

Here is how I heard that the Recapture deal went down.

The Task Force never endorsed it. It was a last-minute deal added to the
bill by the Arlington and Sportsman's Park hierarchy. The horsemen were told
it would be a deal-breaker if it wasn't included.
The only group of people who raised any red flags about were a small group of
harness horsemen who were chastised as wackos.
They supposedly laid out some numbers and explained
Recapture would be a very damaging aspect of the simulcasting bill.
They were totally ignored by everyone, except for a couple of state reps
who asked a few questions about it at the Ag Committee meeting.
After those questions were raised, the bill was shuffled off to the Executive Committee
to eliminate further questioning.
However, this small group of harness horsemen caused enough commotion that
Governor Edgar promised he would re-address the Recapture portion of the bill later
if it proved to detrimental. We all know that never happened.
Report to moderator   Logged
User1015
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 261




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: January 23, 2006, 11:09:49 AM »

And so to revisit my question,  What would be so wrong about electing new leadership for the ITHA? To do anything less, and expect better things for Illinois horsemen is insane.
Report to moderator   Logged
jrstark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6344



« Reply #17 on: January 23, 2006, 12:38:21 PM »

And so to revisit my question,  What would be so wrong about electing new leadership for the ITHA? To do anything less, and expect better things for Illinois horsemen is insane.

That's what is going to happen.  From last week's release:

"Therefore, at a Special Meeting on 12-17-05 (called pursuant to Article V, Section 3 of the Bylaws), ITHA members unanimously elected Christine Janks as interim President until a regular election can be held."

http://www.barntowire.com/2006/BTW060117.html
Report to moderator   Logged
David
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 863




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: January 23, 2006, 01:47:11 PM »

There was a point raised on the harness board about, what I assume to be, thier version of the ITHA that seemed to make some sense to me.

The point was that perhaps there shouldn't be that many trainers or owners involved, at least at much more than superficial levels - that they should spend some money and get top notch legal and lobbyist types to spearhead their boards, issues and negotiations. With all due respect to all involved, they all got the short end of alot of the negotiations in particular those involving Springfield -  and this goes back through current and past boards.

I realize hindsight is 20/20 and all that - but everyone else comes to the table with top connections and the horseman groups come with people who say they had no choice but to accept terms such as recapture or whatever, I think y'all need to agree that you got outplayed in that hand of poker and need to bring in some  sharper professional players to your next game

Yes, it would cost money to even the playing field, but how much has the recapture cost the horseman? how much will an unfair split of future slot money cost them when and if that happens?
Report to moderator   Logged
User1015
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 261




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: January 23, 2006, 02:56:28 PM »

Good post David!!!   
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #20 on: January 23, 2006, 03:09:49 PM »

Yes, it would cost money to even the playing field, but how much has the recapture cost the horseman?

The opposite side of the question is how much did full card simulcasting and the 50-50 splits that came with it cost the tracks? Prior to full card, tracks were getting over 60% of the revenue from takeout. Last year, before recapture, the number was more like 52% - 48%. So you can't just talk about recapture costing horsemen, because full card in general has helped them tremendously, at least as far as getting more of the pie, such as it is.
Report to moderator   Logged
Stat Man Steve
Elevator Commedian
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 979




Ignore
« Reply #21 on: January 23, 2006, 08:37:23 PM »

Remeber when the Merriville, IN parlor opened up with full-card simulcasting of national tracks, when IL could only offer IL races.   Huge attendance drop at Sportsman's Park that spring.  Fans were leaving IL to bet the other tracks - I don't know that they were offering IL racing in IN at that time.  It was 1994 or 1995 when that happened.  Out of state wagering was passed to get some of those fans back.  Without offering it, many of those fans would just have kept going to Indiana.  The live IL fans, the loyalist of the IL fans, and those who couldn't get to Indiana (and later Wisconsin), and anything they could legally send to outside of IL, would be left betting on IL racing. 

Increased competitiion directly at racing fans was the big business changer, after the casinos fired the first salvo.   Changes were made that got people back here, but these laws and splits were done rather hastily.  That things done in haste have been 'permanent' has done the cruelst damage. 
Report to moderator   Logged
David
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 863




Ignore
« Reply #22 on: January 23, 2006, 08:56:38 PM »

I remember the drives to Merrillvile, it was winter 1995 if I'm not mistaken, and then Illinois got full card that June or something.

What I do submit, that in a panic to get a deal done - the right deal didn't get done. If the horseman needed to bite the bullet and hold out for an equitable deal that would have been the time, that is the problem with people being too deeply involved running thier trade organazations or unions or whatver this horsemans group is. If you have ever been involved in union negotiations, the rank and file take a back seat and let the labor lawyers hammer out a deal, sometimes if people are too close to the front line they can't see the big picture - sometimes you need to do sacrifice short term gains for long term viability and gains. That is the only point I was trying to make.
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #23 on: January 24, 2006, 12:18:30 AM »

I remember the drives to Merrillvile, it was winter 1995 if I'm not mistaken, and then Illinois got full card that June or something.

What I do submit, that in a panic to get a deal done - the right deal didn't get done. If the horseman needed to bite the bullet and hold out for an equitable deal that would have been the time, that is the problem with people being too deeply involved running thier trade organazations or unions or whatver this horsemans group is. If you have ever been involved in union negotiations, the rank and file take a back seat and let the labor lawyers hammer out a deal, sometimes if people are too close to the front line they can't see the big picture - sometimes you need to do sacrifice short term gains for long term viability and gains. That is the only point I was trying to make.

I'm saying it didn't make any difference.

Remember back then, Dick D. had threatened to close his track entirely, because he didn't get the "racetrack casino". Gov. Edgar freaked and set up the Task Force. There was going to be some sort of horse racing legislation on Gov. Edgar's watch no matter what. What they came up with was full card, perceived to be "horseman friendly" as opposed to the OTB bill in the 80's that was track friendly. But at the last minute of this new bill recapture came in. There wasn't any fighting it. No matter who was negotiating for the horsemen. Jim C. can correct me, but that's the way it sounds. No option. So what difference would it make who the ITHA officers were?     
Report to moderator   Logged
David
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 863




Ignore
« Reply #24 on: January 24, 2006, 03:52:55 AM »

I'm saying it didn't make any difference.

\ But at the last minute of this new bill recapture came in. There wasn't any fighting it. No matter who was negotiating for the horsemen. Jim C. can correct me, but that's the way it sounds. No option. So what difference would it make who the ITHA officers were?

What I would suggest to you is that the opposition had no respect for the bargaining position and ability of the horsemans union or trade association or whatever it technically is - if they did there is no way you spring a last minute - too bad if you don't like it deal on someone. If someone was negotiating a union contract and one side pulled that - the other side would stand up and walk out of the negotiations,, even if the settllement was otherwise favorable.

 If you have a seat at the negotiating table and you don't have the respect of the other parties you are dead before you sit down, respect at the table is earned by the belief of the others that you will make hard decisions - such as standing and walking away from an otherwise favorable deal, calling a work stoppage, be willing to scrap the whole card simo unless you get a fair and equitable deal. No horseman = No racing.

I don't care who is on the board, both sides seem to have thier points to me, what I have suggested is that perhaps the board should be not much more than figure heads or maybe deal with the charity function of the group and they get and pay for and listen to top notch counsel to level the negotiation table.
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #25 on: January 24, 2006, 01:39:19 PM »

What I would suggest to you is that the opposition had no respect for the bargaining position and ability of the horsemans union or trade association or whatever it technically is - if they did there is no way you spring a last minute - too bad if you don't like it deal on someone. If someone was negotiating a union contract and one side pulled that - the other side would stand up and walk out of the negotiations,, even if the settllement was otherwise favorable.

It was a new law being crafted for the governor, not a labor negotiation. The law was going to happen whether or not the horsemen agreed, if what Jim C. says is correct.

I'll also add that no horsemen, except maybe a few, expected total wagering to remain the same, for 85% to shift over to simulcast, for recapture to ever kick in, and for the tracks to actually take it - then Dick D. proved them wrong immediately after the artificially short 1995 season. You can go back and read the July (?) 1995 Illinois Racing News with all the stories about what they thought was going to happen. Would "professional negotiators" without any racing background have known better about what was going to happen? There weren't that many models at the time, and states like Ohio had experienced a lot of positive success.

If the horsemen decide they need to pay some other professional, they will. They already have an executive director who is supposed to take care of this stuff. He was at the full card law negotiations.   
Report to moderator   Logged
IL#1 Race Fan
Newbie
*
Posts: 20




Ignore
« Reply #26 on: January 24, 2006, 03:13:55 PM »

Terry:

If everyone had listened and acted upon what that small group of harness horsemen
was predicting about the recapture portion of the bill, perhaps the horsemen could have
united and made some noise. Would it have done any good? probably not, but who knows.
When Rep. Lou Lang started asking questions about it at the Ag Committee Meeting, which
he was a member of, the bill was mysteriously moved to the Executive Committee where it
was quickly hustled to the House and Senate for approval. As it was explained to me, the
thoroughbred horsemen were 100 % behind the bill, while the harness horsemen were 97 %
behind it, save for that small group of harness wackos, who as we all know, were right all along.
Report to moderator   Logged
David
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 863




Ignore
« Reply #27 on: January 24, 2006, 04:31:23 PM »

I was using the labor negotiation as an analogy to make some sense of it, in politics there generally isn't a table to negotiate at - it is in side and backroom meetings and negotiations - and  in this case it was a 3 way negotiation - mgt.(track owners)/rank and file(horseman)/politicians.

You say the horseman didn't see this coming, there was nothing to base it on etc. etc. which is probably valid, hindsight 20/20 thing again but then again obviously somebody saw it coming, and that someone was smarter than the horsemans or thier paid negotiators/lobbyists - I think that was the point I was trying to make (or actually just import from a thread on the harness side that I agreed with) was that thier was smarter people at that "table" than the horseman (or the horseman negotiators) that time and if you get back to the table I would suggest having the smartest people on your side - no matter what it cost.
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #28 on: January 25, 2006, 12:30:13 AM »

Terry:

If everyone had listened and acted upon what that small group of harness horsemen
was predicting about the recapture portion of the bill, perhaps the horsemen could have
united and made some noise. Would it have done any good? probably not, but who knows.
When Rep. Lou Lang started asking questions about it at the Ag Committee Meeting, which
he was a member of, the bill was mysteriously moved to the Executive Committee where it
was quickly hustled to the House and Senate for approval. As it was explained to me, the
thoroughbred horsemen were 100 % behind the bill, while the harness horsemen were 97 %
behind it, save for that small group of harness wackos, who as we all know, were right all along.

If it really happened that way. Everyone has all sorts of 2nd and 3rd hand stories about what happened during the Task Force meetings, usually to the effect of making their sources look "right" while others were "wrong". The only person I see posting on this forum who might have been there in person is Jim C., and even then I think he came in to the process quite late.

Everyone talks like recapture is the great bugaboo ruining Illinois purses. It isn't. Total purses in 2004 were almost $10 million highr than they were in 1994. On the thoroughbred side, if you go back and look at old programsfrom 1994, you see that individidual race purses are noticeably higher, espcially at Hawthorne. Some of that was due to dropping from 6 days to 5, of course. But the 1995 law and then the 1999 law did what they were supposed to do, redistribute some of the money from racetracks and taxpayers to purses.

You want to know the real problem, it is that neither law did a thing to increase betting in the state. No law can force people to bet horses or Illinois racing when they have options. Only the horsemen can improve their product as a wagering option, and we have talked about that endlessly here. They don't want to think about that. They just want a handout from the State to keep doing business as usual, putting on a show that less and less people want to buy, running for free money, or squeezing more of the existing money out of the racetracks.
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #29 on: January 25, 2006, 12:44:35 AM »

You say the horseman didn't see this coming, there was nothing to base it on etc. etc. which is probably valid, hindsight 20/20 thing again but then again obviously somebody saw it coming, and that someone was smarter than the horsemans or thier paid negotiators/lobbyists - I think that was the point I was trying to make (or actually just import from a thread on the harness side that I agreed with) was that thier was smarter people at that "table" than the horseman (or the horseman negotiators) that time and if you get back to the table I would suggest having the smartest people on your side - no matter what it cost.

That's what the ED's are supposed to be for - the paid "pro". Yes, some track owners or owner definitely saw the scenario as a possibility. I suspect Dick D., as he was complaining about that law and the revenue shifts all through the negotiations, and immediately pounced on it after running a 50 day meet in 1995 to compare to the 130+ baseline days of 1994, with a comment along the line of "tough". I'm less inclined to believe the Sportsman's involvement, because they didn't even take out the recapture they were entitled to get for several years, until it grew very large. The horsemen were blinded by the promise of free money from extra simulcasting, and didn't think it would come to that. Except of course for an alleged handful of harness horsemen (and a few other people I've read later who claimed they said it was bad all along, but who somehow I don't remember reading in 1994 or 1995) who, if they were so prescient to know Illinois bettors were going to abandon live Illinois races to the point where recapture would hurt, should have been fighting full card or the model that was adopted from the get go, in its entirety.

In any case, if any of the horsemen read this, or the companion thread you say is on harness side, and agree, maybe they will hire better experts. If they don't agree, that's their business.
Report to moderator   Logged
User1015
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 261




Ignore
« Reply #30 on: January 25, 2006, 10:31:03 AM »

The point of this sums up to this.  The ITHA is in need of stronger, more professional leadership. And as I pointed out initially, eliminating the present leadership in lieu of the past leadership doesn't make any sense at all. Either administrations proved to be effective when it came to dealing with the legislative issues that really matter to the horsemen. The ITHA needs to move forward, but instead, they are in a holding pattern. The only ones benefiting now are the legal beagles.
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #31 on: January 25, 2006, 04:32:51 PM »

The point of this sums up to this.  The ITHA is in need of stronger, more professional leadership.

That's certainly your opinion.

Do you have anyone in mind?

And, for the record, what you pointed out initially was that the past leadership was not ineffective but  corrupt, a claim for which you have still provided zero proof.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2006, 04:40:42 PM by CLOCKERTERRY » Report to moderator   Logged
Addatude
Newbie
*
Posts: 6




Ignore
« Reply #32 on: January 25, 2006, 06:17:13 PM »

Yes Clockerterry.. perhaps you are up for the job? 
Report to moderator   Logged
APCD Dan
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3854




Ignore
« Reply #33 on: January 25, 2006, 09:08:42 PM »

Yes Clockerterry.. perhaps you are up for the job? 

Two of the strongest industry thinkers are on this board in Terry and Jim C.  If both of them were involved, there would be arguments, but racing would move forward in Illinois at last.
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #34 on: January 26, 2006, 12:34:00 AM »

Yes Clockerterry.. perhaps you are up for the job? 

LOL!

No, I flunked cat herding. Miserably.

Hey, you want to know what real corruption is ... $7 beers at the United Center for the Rolling Stones concert, as opposed to the usual $5.25 at Blackhawk games. Yeeesh!
Report to moderator   Logged
Ed
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1024




Ignore
« Reply #35 on: January 26, 2006, 08:29:42 AM »

APCDDan - Has'nt Jim C. already (still) been involved? It's time for some NEW leadership.

Ed
Report to moderator   Logged
User1015
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 261




Ignore
« Reply #36 on: January 26, 2006, 08:53:47 AM »

I agree, Clockerterry would probably be good for the job.  New leadership is a must  and he seems well informed. Jim C was one of the EDs of the last administration I believe.      horse
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 2 [All]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.114 seconds with 16 queries.

Home
Upcoming events
Breeders' Cup
Horse slaughter in IL
Racing TV schedule
News Updates
Legislation

Galloping Out

Previous stories

Arlington
Balmoral
Hawthorne
Maywood
Chicago Sun-Times
Chicago Tribune
Blood-Horse
Daily Racing Form
Thoroughbred Times
Harness Link
Illinois Racing Board

 

2014

Breeders' Cup
Arlington Million
Triple Crown
Illinois Derby

2013

Breeders' Cup
Hawthorne Gold Cup
Arlington Million
Triple Crown
Illinois Derby

2012

Breeders' Cup
Hawthorne Gold Cup
Arlington Million
Triple Crown
Illinois Derby

More ebay items

 

Home | News Updates | Bloggers | Forums | Search
Resources | Links | Marketplace | Gallery | Advertising | Contact Us

Copyright © 2000-2014 Chicago Barn to Wire. All rights reserved.
Privacy policy