BitPlayer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'd be surprised if the stewards did not have a
> hand in this. The rule is a NYS Gaming Commission
> rule and is thus subject to the stewards'
> interpretation.
>
> One problem is that "known to the public" is
> subject to a variety of interpretations. Given
> that the announcement was made only shortly before
> the close of betting, what do we do about players
> who are at other tracks, at simulcast centers, or
> have briefly left Living Room Downs to grab a
> beer? How long before the close of betting does
> an announcement have to be made at the track in
> order for most of the betting public to have heard
> about it and had time to react? I'm not a fan of
> the NYRA stewards, but this was not an easy
> situation.
>
> The real question is what took so long to make the
> decision to take the remaining races off the turf.
> I had an LOL moment when I read someone's post
> about possibly moving the races to Finger Lakes,
> but there was also an element of truth in it.
> Given the Churchill Downs precedent, NYRA must
> have been worried about being forced to suspend
> racing (either on the turf or completely) and
> "round up the usual suspects" if any more problems
> occurred on Sunday.

On the "known to the public" interpretation question, I think you are mixing up two things. What might or might not be tricky is how to interpret it. What is not tricky at all is when that interpretation needs to be communicated to the public. They could have interpreted any way they wanted to, but they had to communicate that interpretation to the betting public prior to the pool closing. What they cannot do is be silent, wait for people to enter their money in the pool, and then, after the first race is run, come out with an interpretation that defies common sense and common expectation. I think the common sense default is that if the Public Announcer states something clearly and loudly on the Public Address system and on the live feed, it is mighty hard to say on a common sense basis that the information is not known to the public. I get that it may not have filtered through to the whole public in time - but if you are going to make an interpretation like that, then you better also announce that uncommon interpretation at the same time you are making the first announcement. There is no reason, other than sheer idiocy, to split the timing of the two announcements.