> TGJB
>
> Thanks again for the comment and offer. I've copied a subsequent post below. Like you and others here, I am in hopes of keeping the "activity" level up.

> My reference to Patrick Henry in the body of this is in error, I am told. It should be James
> Otis. The exchanges here are with Indulto, his comments are in quotations
> for the most part. raz
>
>
> Racing scandals - (razzle) 04-13-05 - 11:27 AM [Msgid=812819]
>
> Indulto, thanks for a very thoughtful and clear response. I'd like to
> respond to several of your comments.
>
> "Hank Wesch is the other (main?) racing guy at the Union Tribune and Jeff
> Nahill is another San Diego area racing columnist for the North County
> Times. They are both all over the Sweet Catomine story now and will continue
> to pursue it vigorously because their organizations have an agenda -- they
> want Del Mar to get Hollywood's racing dates. "
>
> Thanks for suggesting an additional motive for gaining the support of the
> paper. I was unaware of the Del Mar issue(I thought that was for
> obstetrics?...just kidding John Perona). Seriously, you may have something
> there. Any of those writers would likely be fine, I was just impressed with
> the bit of contact I had with Tim. I'm not from Calif, and have no
> familiarity with the publications or writers.
> ***********************************************************
>
> "I doubt B-H coverage can be influenced by horseplayers."
>
> "I suggest directing any letters and Emails to a single DRF columnist like
> Crist, Beyer, Bergstein, Hovdey, or Jerardi. Concentrating on one of them
> might at least create some noticeable pressure. Perhaps you could contact
> them to find out if one of them might be interested in carrying the ball.
> Someone with writing skills like yours could get published as a letter to
> the editor."
>
> I agree about the Bloodhorse not neccessarily being responsive. I've written
> them in the past without response. That's my feeling about DRF, too. I know
> Crist was contacted, and editorial(s) were published.
>
> There's another old story about frogs, oddly enough, it goes like this. If
> you throw a frog into a pot of boiling water, he's quick enough, with those
> huge webbed feet, to jump out when he hits the surface,without getting
> burned. But, if you place the frog into a pot of tepid water, and slowly
> bring the water to a boil, he'll cook before he realizes anything is wrong.
> It seems to me that the DRF, BH,and other racing specific entities, must
> have long ago become "cooked." Complacency and passivity appear to rule the
> roost, or bog, as the case may be(the older I get, the more I identify with
> my scorched, limbless, deaf, amphibian, bog-dwelling brothers...).
>
> Tim Sullivan appeals to me, in part, because he doesn't sound the least bit
> "cooked" nor "bogged."
> ******************************************************
> "You didn't specify what issue(s) you are gathering support for, but I
> assume it involves the recent multiple displays of insider indifference to
> bettor information demands. This is where we need the help of well-known
> horseplayer advocates. "
>
> Yes, that's one of them. Your assumption is correct. There are many others
> which could be lumped into that rubric. Another has to do with how the
> wagering dollars work. Bettors lose a greater percent of their wagering
> dollar to take-out than is even remotely approached in other games. We seem
> to get little in return, certainly no voice. I'm reminded of the American
> patriot, Patrick Henry's words, "take-out without representation or rebates
> is tyranny."
>
> I have neither a platform, an agenda, nor any personal ambition in any of
> this, other than my outrage at the commonplace corruption which is being
> fostered in the sport I love, and which is choking the life out of the game.
>
> I am a small player, far outside the mainstream of this industry. Usually,
> as issues arise, like the SA Derby-Canini scandal, I have to struggle just
> to figure out who the players are, let alone the specific violations. I
> complain often on these boards about the corruption, but haven't felt there
> was any "traction" gained with any venue for expressing my issues
> responsibly. I have tried to support efforts suggested by others. I've
> discussed boycotts, along with others. Who knows what will actually have an
> impact, or when. It does seem to me that we have hit a "window of
> opportunity" here, with the media coverage of a number of blatant scandals
> that even "stink" to non-horseracing writers such as Mr. Sullivan.
>
> When I wrote him, I mentioned: performance enhancing drugs; sedation drugs;
> quarantine barns; publishing more backside info, such as vet name. When I
> write again, I'll mention the take-out/rebate issue and computerized
> wagering, perhaps others. For you, or other readers, anything you can
> provide to Tim to help him get a sense of where to focus an investigative
> thrust would be helpful. Just the fact of writing provides a support base
> for him.
>
> So, for those that wish, this is a place to at least get some response,
> tim.sullivan@uniontrib.com. raz
>
>
>
> Date=04-13-05 [Msgid=812819] [LoginName=razzle]
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>