There are no wrong answers. Except silence.

The more info the better and it should be required but in Ontario at the major tracks when you see for example (one driver) getting in a hole , mind you let in with a 60 to 1 shot by (another driver) who is driving the 2 to 1 shot before the quarter and no one parked come on lets have some judges with x@xx or get rid of them. Make the call and lets put the racing in harness racing

How ironic the timing of this article is. I watched a trainer being interviewed about 6 or 8 months ago and after the WIN they said they scoped the horse after the last race and the horse showed mucus and blood. Something that was not shared with the public.
I have been working very hard with both Kawartha Downs and Rideau Carleton to have the trainers weekly info published in the program. Make it mandatory. If a trainer has time to enter a horse they have time for a comment. Publish it on the page opposite the race. For example:

Horse Trainer Comment
1)Horse's Name Trainer's Name Had a great week. Ran into traffic
trouble last week. Rail will help

2)Horse's Name Trainer's Name Finally draws inside and drops in
class. Huge factor

3)Horse's Name Trainer's Name Just got this horse last week.
Made huge changes in equipment.
Trained awesome.

It might be a little more work for everyone but let's face it we have to work harder because without the public and gamblers we are nothing.
As for interviews, yes 100%.

Gord Brown

It seems to me that the problem is that you have people betting on two different things. First is the better that wants the horse he has bet on to driven like there's no tomorrow ,whatever the cost to satisfy his wager. ($2- $1000?)
Then there are the owner, trainer and driver, who have invested perhaps tens of thousands of dollars as an investment, not for one race, but for a season, year or more. Both sides want to win races but the overall well being of the horse lies with the owner, trainer, driver.
I don't know if you can ever solve this issue with pre or post race interviews.
I do believe educating the public as much as possible how our business works behind the scenes is a great way to get more people involved and have them appreciate the responsibilities that are on the shoulders of all horse people.

Mr. Yamakva
I totally agree on every point you made. Now if only the drivers and rest of the industry would take note. Quite frankly I usually only post my comments on here as a matter of interest. I have been invovled in racing as a fan and owner for 40 years. If I stopped betting today or if the industry completely collapsed then so be it. I have shall we say had my fun.I only bet a few races at the Meadowlands on Saturday nights because at least with their racing I still get a thrill from time to time. If the industry were smart and would take it's head out of the sand for a minute they might realize that they are on the verge of collapse because players like yourself, myself and I'm sure thousands of others have stopped betting on their races for most of the reasons mentioned on this blog.
They can either choose to change and make their sport more transparent and as a result give it more integrity and possibly atract a future generation of players to sustain it and help it grow or they can do nothing and continue their slide into oblivion from which they will not return.

It does occur to me that pre-race insight may be better received than post-race excuses. Not that the driver should be asked to divulge his strategy for a race, but if the horse is in some way compromised or has a quirk that might eliminate options for the driver, the horseplayer would be well served to know that going in.

You are trying to make it sound like this horse was in to tough and couldn't leave, utter nonsense and will all due respect you can talk about your credentials all you want, i have heard this stuff from race players all my life and more often then not they are going around trying to borrow $20. off someone to bet the last race. You may be a winner you may not be, i sure as heck have no way of knowing and when i hear it i take it with a grain of salt.

Mr. Boggs I'm sorry but you are using one example to make a point whereas we are referring to a very general observation. You may be right about the horse you are speaking of. Frankly I don't know because I don't have the program in front of me.
However I also have many years of handicapping experience (40 years) and I can write you many many books with many many examples of driver inconsistencies and suspicious drives that would make anyone wonder what the heck is going on. I have seen horses who have shown lots of speed suddenly taken to the back of the pack. I have seen horses who races off the pace suddenly go to the front and set blistering fractions. Quite frankly and honestly I don't think there is too much that I haven't seen.
One thing I have definitley noticed is why is it that at the Meadowlands a horse drops in class and wins (drop and pop) while at Woodbine/Mohawk they drop in class and are nowhere? That happens way too often.
This is the problem I find with Mohawk/Woodbine. Everything is explained as justifiable except for the obvious that being that the driver did not give th bettors a fair shake. Honestly I often think that the industry here can't see the forest for the trees. It's borderline ridiculous. If this attidue persists, and we keep getting fed garbage from the sport then nothing will change.
I can't tell you how many people I know who started off as bettors before me (so were talking over 40 years ago) who used to tell me that they used to play the buggies but switched to T bred and won't go near the buggies anymore. I find it amazing how this industry has somehow managed not to hear these laments that have been going on for so many years. It's because the casinos provided nice big fat purses and everyone was happy getting their piece of the pie. Now that that is gone and the bettors have gone there is a shell left of wehat was once a great game.
I have been involved in racing for a long time as well and with all due respect sir I'm not blowing smoke out of my arse either.

While I think interviews might make for good viewing and entertainment I don't really know that they will satisfy bettors who lose money (especially big money) because it's just too easy for drivers to come up with reasons or excuses for why they lost. For example, I got caught first over. While this may be true so often the reason for this is because there is such a lack of flow on Woodbine/Mohawk races.

At the Meadowlands more often then not a driver can catch cover while here it rarely happens.At the Meadowlands a driver and horse will often win multiple legs of a series while here they are happy to save the horse for the final even if they are the heavy favourite.For example recently at the Big M Rockeyed Optimist with Timmy T won all the legs and the final of a series even though they were very heavy favourites every week. Timmy did not get boxed in, sometimes went first over, sometimes came off the pace but always won. How often do we see that happen here? Hardly ever.

While I understand that people hate the term stiffed, I make no apologies for using it because so so far too often this is how it feels to us bettors. If I had a nickel for everytime I saw a live horse sit third and not pull only to get boxed in, shake loose late and come flying to lose by a nose, whereas you can easily tell they wouldve won by 10 had they pulled. I don't want to hear the driver say he didn't pull because he didn't have horse when it's so obvious he did.

Some of us older players here may remember an incident in thourobred racing a long time ago where Craig Perret was riding a favourite in the Plate trial stakes and lost by a nose. Then he won the Plate a few weeks later and in the ensung interview he conceded that he could've won the plate trial but he didn't use the horse hard in the plate trial because he wanted to save him for the plate. Well that was an embarrassing moment for Woodbine and all of racing. Here you have a jockey basically admitting that he stiffed a heavy favourite. Mr Perret was told to take a long vacation after that incident.

Look. I understand owners wanting to save horses for big purses.Having been an owner myself I get it. However horse racings exists for one reason and onse reason only. For wagering. Nobody is going to go watch horses race just for the fun of it. Therefore as Mr. Carter so rightly puts it don't teach or train the horse on my dollar. How many times does a horse run a monster qualifier in a time that would be enough to compete in a race and then they simply take it easy first time back.

As I have so often said picking up a cheque is great for owner , trainer and driver but does squat for the bettor.

Unless drivers show, with or without interviews that they are competing hard to win EVERY SINGLE TIME THEY GET ON THE TRACK, this sport is done done done. The bettors will leave and not come back and there will be now new bettors to replace them. ARE YOU LISTENING TO US DRIVERS???

I guess one issue I have is there have been great comments made on this thread and there have been two instances mentioned here where the racing rules have been broken but when I check the fines and suspensions pages I don't see any starting violations or other wise. The issue when you have judges who have previously participated in racing be it as a trainer, jockey, driver or groom is they loose they ability to separate themselves in a capacity that is fair/ transparent. For the industry to transform and become more accountable why not look at a model for judges where you hire outside participants to regulate the races or since the Ontario Racing Commission is an agency of the Ontario government treat judges as an appointed position. Much like the government agencies where they are appointed to three and four year terms. If they haven't done a good enough job enforcing the rules of racing don't reappoint them if they have keep them.

There are many issues with racing but I personally don't feel that more interviews with racing participants is going to resolve the issue of transparency. By looking at the tools we have in place and enhancing the model to make it more transparent and accountable that's how we will improve the racing product. If we build an environment of zero tolerance of sub par product we will force those who choose to race here to be better not worse.

One point to Mr.Boggs, over the years i have seen many, many favorites win coming 1st over but you see darn few win sitting dead last. No one could possibly believe that any driver who has the favorite who has gate speed that he believes the horses best shot of winning is to take back off the gate and sit dead last. Sorry i don't buy it. If you want to school the horse do it on the training track, don't do it when the public's money is on the line.

Many great comments
One question I would like answered is: Why did you let that horse or even horses into that hole? You can bet that any driver in the top tier of the driving colony will get a "seat" before the first turn. If you are new in the driving ranks at WEG; well good luck, you had better have a horse that can really leave or maybe draw the rail. As was commented, it makes for boring races.
Ted Wilson

Great topic and I wanted to contribute as an owner. Most of you will recognize my name or stable name ICR Racing. Before each race, my trainers have a game plan based on the horse's ability within a race or how the horse trained etc. I would never share that plan with anyone before the race because that's like giving the other team the game plan.

We always want to win but sometimes the race dictates how we will go about that and sometimes we already know that our chances are slim.

Certain drivers do a lot of homework and study the race, days in advance and watch video of how other horses performed that they will race against. Some look at the program just that is tacked up in the barn about 5 minutes before they jump on. The trainer spends all week getting ready for the 2 minute race. It can all come apart in a hurry. When a driver wins for me it's glorious but sometimes when a driver gets me a 4th place finish I send him a text for over-achieving. I'm like the bettors when my horse under-achieves.

Georg Leber-ICR Racing

Personally I do not think the judges are doing a good job. When Mr. Claire Smith was a presiding judge, there was not to many things he did not see pertaining to a race. He was very high on the LACK OF EFFORT by some drivers and they paid the price. I watch most racing at A tracks and B tracks and let it be knowing that there are a few drivers that need to be given a warning and suspension. Have a good day.

I can tell you where a lot of the drivers went wrong. "They got on the bike seat" !!!!!

This is a great topic and one that needs more coverage. Holding the drivers accountable will absolutely change the perception of the sport however the problem is it isn't something that we can correct at one track we need to correct the problem at all the tracks. We need to ensure that the judges are implementing the rules of racing properly and holding drivers who frequently break the rules accountable. If they break the rule once they should have a fine, twice the fine goes up, three times the fine increases until it becomes days and proper suspensions.

Canadian drivers, specifically Ontario drivers also need to be more aware that the public is scrutinizing their skills more now than ever. Why is it at the Meadowlands, Northfield Park, Pocono's and Yonkers horses are out and driving at the quarter pole. The races in the States have constant flow. The races at our Premier tracks lack flow and often don't see any movement until their well past the half. Bettors watch horses at all tracks and when they witness this kind of racing it devalues the product. Bettors want to watch and wager on exciting competitive races. They want to know whether their horse is 2/5, 10/1 or 35/1 they are going to have a shot. Racing in BC is very competitive and at some of Ontario's "B" tracks too, but across the board it isn't. It's very sad that the most exciting races are those when the good horses arrive and not 364 other days of the year. The model at the Meadowlands seems to be one that is working well and should be looked at by all jurisdictions.

More rules of racing need to be implemented and the judges need to be held accountable as well as the drivers. Lets prove to the public we are transparent. Hosting post race, pre race interviews are over done and provide very little transparency to the bettor. Of course a driver is going to say I gave the horse a shot and he didn't fire. Or he fell short, or he was sick, or the shoeing change didn't work. They would never be honest and say what really happened. Sadly our bettors know that and that's why our big bettors have gone elsewhere with their money.

It sounds good in theory, but will fail in practise. It may surprise you but it has been tried before. The program was initiated in the "Heyday Of Harness Racing", in the 1970"s in Roosevelt and Yonkers. The problem was if a Trainer or Driver was "honest" and said something like (we did not train the horse tight because we want to have him peak in a stake series he is payed into in a couple of weeks), the fans/betters who were not "in the know' were livid because they believed others in the know profited from that information. So what would happen is the interviewed Trainers and Drivers would stick to a meaningless safe pablum script which was all too transparent to the fans/betters.

That said is there nothing that can be done? Au Contraire! In Japan and Chins at the Major tracks as much relevant information is given BEFORE A Race is run. Pre race drug test results, list of medications used in the previous 3 months, Training Program followed, and are you ready for it, The Jockeys Race Plan. Oh and for what it is worth the minimum 10 year suspension for Miscreants in those 2 Countries seems to be having a positive effect if the Racing Handle is an indicator!!

Perhaps a post race brief interview would possibly work. However bare in mind that there are still an infinite number of shoulda....woulda...couldas that affect the finish of all horses not just the favourite.

Maybe the favourite races from off the pace and has to go first up because he´s flushed out. This may not be to this horse´s liking.Perhaps the track is off and maybe a shoeing change might be in order but doesn´t happen at the track.The favourite has an outside post and has early gate speed but there are maybe 2 horses on the inside that have the same early speed.Do you send him and risk getting stung to the quarter or take a seat and make a move later.So many factors enter in to play and sometimes these decisions are forced or made on the spur of the moment. Stiffed is not a term that sits well with me.Hind sight they say is 20-20.

One final point, a shoe thrown during a race, I think should be noted as an equipment break.This is also as much a piece of equipment as any other.A horse returning to the paddock for a thrown shoe should be announced,and the same after a race for one tossed during a race.

I have always felt that post race interviews would be a great idea for the benefit of the betting public. We do interviews now after major stake races and they are well received. Why not do it for every race?

I have always wondered what impact post race information would have on the betting public? Personally I would really enjoy hearing Randy Waples say, "Chris wants to be looking over his shoulder the next time we are in together." (Example only)

We desperately need to sell the sizzle every race, not the steak.
Before implementing this we need to have a long hard look at what is happening right now. Are we ready to have a driver or trainer report their horse had a quarter crack or a small hoof separation. How would we handle driver's complaints of slow fractions? Does the betting public presently know if a horse has a quarter crack or a small separation of the the foot? Does all of our betting public know that a horse has drawn the far outside six starts in a row on a half mile track or is not classified properly? Excellent idea especially if we are prepared to tell the public everything.

Great subject, on Saturday night at Mohawk in race no. 9, the 8 horse Artistic Madison who was bet down to favorite, who has all kinds of gate speed, was taken back to dead last off the gate and sat last right until the 3/4 mark of the race and then flew home to finish 2nd.

If you bet this horse should you be happy with the effort or lack there of, of the driver? In the horse's previous start from post 7 he took back off the gate and sat 7th only to fly home thru the stretch and get beat a nose once again as the favorite.

Perhaps the driver may consider next start leaving a bit with the horse to give people who bet him a better shot at winning the race. It is not as if the horse has no gate speed, at least leave for position and give the appearance that you are trying to win and not just in it to pick up a check.

In the 1980's and 90's I worked as a radio sportscaster in a major Canadian market. All too often it was made clear to me by fans that my job was to ask their questions and as Darryl says more often than not, their requests were to know what went wrong: why that line was on the ice at a crucial time; why they didn't go for it on third down rather than kicking an impossibly long field goal. I can tell you I got a lot of icy glares and threatening stares from professional athletes, but most often I got an answer to the question I asked.

I think Darryl is on to something important and it is clear from what he has written, the drivers would be on board. Many tracks have a pre-game show, why not a post game show. And while we are at it, why not have an opportunity for the judges to explain controversial decisions.

I've often wondered why racetracks do not do this. I doubt that there are more than a handful of drivers, maybe not even that many, who would not be receptive to responding to a losing race interview.
Meadowlands and WEG are you listening?