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


September 30, 2014, 10:57:36 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 3 [4]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: AP vs ITHA  (Read 3536 times)
nmslim
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 872




Ignore
« Reply #75 on: February 14, 2013, 12:23:48 PM »

Wow!   I'm an old harness guy, but if this is the mindset on the TBred side, good luck to you all.  You're doomed.  Hey, NMSLIM, maybe the horsemen should go out there and race for blankets.   bang head bang head bang head
Haven't the harness folks had a few issues with the Johnstons?Harness accounts for roughly one-third of racing revenue in Illinois and yet they have a bigger say than they should.And of course as far as racing for blankets,I am sure everyone is flocking to harness venues to get at some of those 1500 and 2000 dollar pots.
Report to moderator   Logged
nmslim
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 872




Ignore
« Reply #76 on: February 14, 2013, 12:25:39 PM »

Signal belongs to the horsemen if they dont want to send to certain Locale.... Problems with the CDI empire should be noted with the Calder Horsemen a few years ago and last year when the Kentucky Horsemen would not send the Signal from Churchill to Illinois the first few days of derby week because of the ITHA/AP dispute.... Gotta love CDI Management a bunch lying scumbags they are............
Good thing no horse trainer has ever been a lying scumbag.
Report to moderator   Logged
beobob
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1844




Ignore
« Reply #77 on: February 14, 2013, 12:58:58 PM »

Marcus' in DRF

http://www.drf.com/news/arlington-dispute-arises-tracks-desire-charge-stall-space

Report to moderator   Logged
honest & balanced terry
formerly plain old clockerterry
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 12386

silver-tongued track bum




Ignore
« Reply #78 on: February 14, 2013, 01:20:28 PM »

I still say this stall issue is nothing but smoke and noise obscuring whatever the true issue(s) might be. How can MAYbe charging a few trainers a few stall rents be the basis of AP's claim that the ITHA wants something that is going to cost owners and AP $hundreds of thousands? Not even the flack dept. at AP would exaggerate that much, would it?

See the Feb. 7 entry here. Sounds like an argument over "industry money" again?

"In the contract he tendered, the purse account would be reduced hundreds of thousands of dollars and harms Arlington financially.  Arlington will do everything in its power to hold onto overnight purse money to pay to owners of the horses than run in its races and will operate within its means."

http://www.arlingtonpark.com/horsemen/news
« Last Edit: February 14, 2013, 01:27:44 PM by honest & balanced terry » Report to moderator   Logged

"There are no $7500 maiden claimers, state-bred or otherwise, at Arlington."
nmslim
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 872




Ignore
« Reply #79 on: February 14, 2013, 01:29:46 PM »

I still say this stall issue is nothing but smoke and noise obscuring whatever the true issue(s) might be. How can MAYbe charging a few trainers a few stall rents be the basis of AP's claim that the ITHA wants something that is going to cost owners and AP $hundreds of thousands? Not even the flack dept. at AP would exaggerate that much, would it?
Is there just some personal animosity between the ITHA and Arlington?As far as Hawthorne goes,do they reach agreements more quickly because they are dealing from a less tenable or strong position?This whole thing seems to me like some pissing contest.As is said often in these situations,it is like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Report to moderator   Logged
beobob
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1844




Ignore
« Reply #80 on: February 14, 2013, 01:35:03 PM »

I still say this stall issue is nothing but smoke and noise obscuring whatever the true issue(s) might be. How can MAYbe charging a few trainers a few stall rents be the basis of AP's claim that the ITHA wants something that is going to cost owners and AP $hundreds of thousands? Not even the flack dept. at AP would exaggerate that much, would it?

I agree, this should not be an issue at all.  No one in their right mind could expect us to agree to a provision that can be so arbitrarily enforced.  I'm probably in the minority, but I feel that it wouldn't be unreasonable for there to be rules in place that would protect AP (and HAW) from trainers using their facility strictly as a training base (3yr old and up). What AP is proposing here is both unreasonable (running once a month) and arbitrary (MAY charge).

Is this the issue that is holding up the contract?  
Report to moderator   Logged
Chris Szulc
Guest

« Reply #81 on: February 14, 2013, 01:45:23 PM »



Is this the issue that is holding up the contract?  

Call Glen - I'm sure he'll be glad to tell you.  sarcasm
Report to moderator   Logged
honest & balanced terry
formerly plain old clockerterry
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 12386

silver-tongued track bum




Ignore
« Reply #82 on: February 14, 2013, 02:11:28 PM »

Another exciting stall-rent-gate story that makes the point the rate isn't specified. It could be anything AP dreams up to punish those it wishes to punish.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/horseracing/ct-spt-0213-arlington--20130213,0,6163800.story
Report to moderator   Logged

"There are no $7500 maiden claimers, state-bred or otherwise, at Arlington."
beobob
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1844




Ignore
« Reply #83 on: February 14, 2013, 02:38:02 PM »

I agree with AP's implied position that their responsibility is to the horses and the horsemen that run in their races, not horsemen in general. I think their proposal to deal with this is unreasonable.  I haven't seen the ITHA's position on this principle, their arguments I have seen have been more about never having been done before and IRB rules.  However, if the ITHA position is that AP (or HAW) must provide facilities and services for any horse/horseman who gets a stall(s) whether they run or not, some might consider that unreasonable as well.  I know that each track determines who gets stalls, but I assume it is with the understanding they will race.
Report to moderator   Logged
big wally
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 693




Ignore
« Reply #84 on: February 14, 2013, 02:41:30 PM »

Good thing no horse trainer has ever been a lying scumbag.

Some of them are too... No doubt
Report to moderator   Logged
honest & balanced terry
formerly plain old clockerterry
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 12386

silver-tongued track bum




Ignore
« Reply #85 on: February 14, 2013, 06:05:13 PM »

However, if the ITHA position is that AP (or HAW) must provide facilities and services for any horse/horseman who gets a stall(s) whether they run or not, some might consider that unreasonable as well.

I sincerely doubt that's what the ITHA is advocating. AP already has the power to deal with trainers not properly utilizing their stalls by not allocating the stalls in the first place. They can reduce the allocation mid-meet, too.

The ITHA's issue IMHO is the entirely arbitrary nature of the proposed rule, and its potential to be used as a political weapon.

Earlier Equiforce spoke of "the usual deadbeats" in regard to this. Let's see some names and see what we're dealing with.
Report to moderator   Logged

"There are no $7500 maiden claimers, state-bred or otherwise, at Arlington."
Scav
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 731




Ignore
« Reply #86 on: February 14, 2013, 06:14:28 PM »

I sincerely doubt that's what the ITHA is advocating. AP already has the power to deal with trainers not properly utilizing their stalls by not allocating the stalls in the first place. They can reduce the allocation mid-meet, too.

The ITHA's issue IMHO is the entirely arbitrary nature of the proposed rule, and its potential to be used as a political weapon.

Earlier Equiforce spoke of "the usual deadbeats" in regard to this. Let's see some names and see what we're dealing with.

You know exactly who ships out of here all the time to score at 1/5 odds. He is probably the only serial person out of it cause most of the time when these other guys ship, its cause their horse hates the surface.

Arlington needs to be very afraid of Cantebury this summer, if they are gonna be running horses for same pots, with much easier competition, that is gonna cause a hell of alot of late nights in the racing office. I think its about 5-6 hours, and around 600$ roundtrip.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2013, 06:16:40 PM by Scav » Report to moderator   Logged
Chris Szulc
Guest

« Reply #87 on: February 14, 2013, 06:15:13 PM »



Earlier Equiforce spoke of "the usual deadbeats" in regard to this. Let's see some names and see what we're dealing with.

I could be wrong, but I don't think too many are using AP as a "2yo training center" anymore. Wasn't the last big name supposedly doing this Asmussen? Don't think he has been stabled at AP since 2009? 2008?

Report to moderator   Logged
Scav
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 731




Ignore
« Reply #88 on: February 14, 2013, 06:18:17 PM »

I could be wrong, but I don't think too many are using AP as a "2yo training center" anymore. Wasn't the last big name supposedly doing this Asmussen? Don't think he has been stabled at AP since 2009? 2008?



That 2 yo training center stuff is crap. Its the TIME of the year. May 1st is when alot of babies come to the track, when stables refresh their stock.
Report to moderator   Logged
Chris Szulc
Guest

« Reply #89 on: February 14, 2013, 06:22:50 PM »

That 2 yo training center stuff is crap. Its the TIME of the year. May 1st is when alot of babies come to the track, when stables refresh their stock.

Oh yeah I know, but I meant the barns that were full of 2yos that had no other starters. AP certainly should be able to reasonably expect a mixed ratio of 2yos to older horses/types (which is why the stable apps exist in the first place too), but I think the big names got away with it for marketing sake.

But the arbitrary clause as being discussed (stall rent 'may' be charged) is certainly a problem.
Report to moderator   Logged
beobob
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1844




Ignore
« Reply #90 on: February 14, 2013, 06:27:28 PM »

Oh yeah I know, but I meant the barns that were full of 2yos that had no other starters. AP certainly should be able to reasonably expect a mixed ratio of 2yos to older horses/types (which is why the stable apps exist in the first place too), but I think the big names got away with it for marketing sake.

But the arbitrary clause as being discussed (stall rent 'may' be charged) is certainly a problem.

Whatever (or if ever a) deal is cut, 2yr olds would have to be excluded.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2013, 06:29:24 PM by beobob » Report to moderator   Logged
Red Ketcher
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 613




Ignore
« Reply #91 on: February 14, 2013, 07:08:17 PM »

 
  Even if the parties agreed, it appears it would be in violation of IRB Rules and in turn In violalation of IL Law.
So Arlington's License to operate would need to be pulled.

  Do it.
Report to moderator   Logged
LuvIllinoisRacing
Newbie
*
Posts: 4




Ignore
« Reply #92 on: February 15, 2013, 10:39:48 AM »

If I read the stall app in question - it refers to an average of one start per stall per month - so unless your entire allotment consists of lay-up horses or 2yos, the older horses that in theory run very 21 days (since that is how ofthen races come up in the books) could/should make up for the injured horse or 2yos.

Also, I've never heard of stall allotments being reduced by a track mid-meet unless a trainer has empty stalls (not a stall with a horse not intending to race at the meet)

I could be wrong, I'm a fairly new owner to this (and my percentage is so small I think I may only cover the withers of my horse) but that's what I've been told by my trainer.
Report to moderator   Logged
honest & balanced terry
formerly plain old clockerterry
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 12386

silver-tongued track bum




Ignore
« Reply #93 on: February 15, 2013, 11:16:02 AM »

What I really can't understand about this is that Petrillo was asked at the dates meeting whether or not Arlington intended to charge stall fees in 2013, presumably in relation to this language, and he flat out told the commissioners, on the record, no they wouldn't.  

Quote
In fact, Laino said, Petrillo was asked by a commissioner, Patricia Beauvois, during an IRB hearing for 2013 dates last September if Arlington had any intention of charging stall rent for the coming year.

His reply was No, he had no intention, Laino said. Im surprised and a little perplexed (by the new stall application) considering the testimony at the dates hearing and the rule.

http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/arlington-park-adds-rent-language-to-stall-applications/

So, my question is, if they have no intention of charging stall rent, why are they insisting that language remain in the stall apps and asking horsemen to agree to that language? Is Petrillo a bald-faced liar to the IRB and they really intend to do this, or is it simply because AP management insists on being dicks about some little power play of language, "getting one over" on the ITHA?
Report to moderator   Logged

"There are no $7500 maiden claimers, state-bred or otherwise, at Arlington."
beobob
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1844




Ignore
« Reply #94 on: February 15, 2013, 12:05:28 PM »

So, my question is, if they have no intention of charging stall rent, why are they insisting that language remain in the stall apps and asking horsemen to agree to that language? Is Petrillo a bald-faced liar to the IRB and they really intend to do this, or is it simply because AP management insists on being dicks about some little power play of language, "getting one over" on the ITHA?


"intend" or "intention" are great hide behind words.  Kind of like "I have no recollection of that".  It allows one to lie with an out. 

In this issue we see the result of an an adversarial relationship.  Whether AP is trying to sneak something through, jam something down our throats, or just stick it to the ITHA for fun, it is obvious that they don't view our relationship as collaborative.  If there were a healthy relationship, AP should/would have approached Mike or Glen in advance and told them they wanted to do something about trainers taking stalls for horses they weren't intending on racing.  Maybe I'm naive but I think they could have reached an acceptable fix rather quickly. I believe that if HAW had an issue that might be controversial, they would work it out with ITHA leadership before springing it on everyone - there is an attitude of respect and trust between those two organizations. 

It doesn't matter anymore how we got here, the relationship has to be fixed. If personal animosity between the principals involved prohibits collaboration, send surrogates. Reasonable people can cut reasonable deals.
Report to moderator   Logged
honest & balanced terry
formerly plain old clockerterry
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 12386

silver-tongued track bum




Ignore
« Reply #95 on: February 15, 2013, 12:09:39 PM »

Every year Arlington does something right around the opening of Haw to divert attention from that and focus things back on AP, and I have half a suspicion that this stalls issue, dickish as it might make them look, is this year's installment of "Look at us!"
Report to moderator   Logged

"There are no $7500 maiden claimers, state-bred or otherwise, at Arlington."
nmslim
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 872




Ignore
« Reply #96 on: February 15, 2013, 12:13:47 PM »

Some of them are too... No doubt
Just pointing out there are self-serving people on both sides.
Report to moderator   Logged
ggenie
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 304




Ignore
« Reply #97 on: February 15, 2013, 01:29:25 PM »

Just remember, the word about stall rent was out last fall.  At the Sept dates hearing, commissioner Beauvais flat out asked Tony about stall rent and he said "no".  This has been  coming for that long, with no mention to the ITHA.
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.076 seconds with 16 queries.

Home
Upcoming events
Arlington Million
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

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