Viewpoint / Letters : Horse Racing Writers, If Journalists, Have No Business Betting

Though Gordon Jones and Andy Beyer did present a defense of their positions on betting in Bill Christine’s article, I don’t think their defense can stand up to closer scrutiny. Anyone that has such an intimate financial connection with the subject they are reporting on must have some question of conflict of interest brought up.

Gordon Jones’ press card gives him access to all the jockeys, trainers, owners and backstretch help the paying customers don’t have. Though this is an aid to his reporting, it is also an asset to his gambling. If all the information he picked up was passed on to his readers, it might be acceptable. But is this the case? Though it was noted how well some of those writer-gamblers were doing, no mention was made on how their readers were doing at the window.

Let’s look deeper into this. Horse racing people are by the nature of the business clannish, secretive and, at the same time, individual contractors. Theirs is a tough, sometimes ruthless business, and they like to keep their dirty laundry hidden from those suckers (customers) out front. Once they accept any of the writer-gamblers into the “family,” they expect them to obey the code. And therein lies the problem.

For anyone to win betting on horse races, it takes a tremendous amount of time and effort. In other words, it has to be their primary occupation and inclination. For those writer-gamblers to claim they are serving their readers first goes against all the known habits of hard-core gamblers. That press card is a nice front, and a nice “edge” to support their real business.

(I never bet the nags myself.)

DON LOVE

Palm Springs

Anybody who lives and dies with handicapping races better make more than a newspaper salary. This is where stress was invented. Look at Gordon Jones, a young man, who looks like father time.

VIC BULAICH

Inglewood

I see where the racing establishment is crabbing about lagging attendance and decreasing handles. And they’re wondering what the hell is going on. The problem isn’t fixing or doping or lousy advertising or even mismanagement. The owners and breeders are the villains. They take 3-, 4- and 5-year-old stars and retire them to stud at the height of their careers. What happened to Devil’s Bag and what/who killed Swale? And do you think John Henry would be racing today if he had all his parts?

I notice these same hypocrites passed a convenient law forbidding artificial insemination, thus skyrocketing stud fees. But do you ever think they would pass another law forbidding the retirement of horses before they were at least 6 or 7 years old? Again, hell no, because that would benefit only the fan.

You know, it’s funny because the racing establishment keeps eating its own children and wondering why its family doesn’t grow.

LES KAMM

Vista