Recent scandals and playing favorites

by John Berry

The unearthed NBA scandal has shaken the sports world — the entire sports world.

But scandal is nothing new to sports.

From the 1919 Black Sox scandal with several players from the Chicago White Sox conspiring with gamblers to throw the World Series to the 1961 college basketball point-shaving scandal to a referee admitting to betting on games he officiated and providing that info to gamblers.

Then there are performance enhancing drugs and doping in sports — both human and equine — and the importance of those in trust-making decisions that reach and affect all participants, whether they be at a specific game, on their phones, watching television, or at their favorite track or simulcasting facility.

Chances are that they have a bob-or-two bet on it.

In our sport, the importance of a competent trainer — and caretaker — along with a top-notch driver is just a small component to success.

But, in the dark shadows of buildings, out of public viewing, are those persons whose decisions can make or break the most important component of our sport.

Those persons are judges and state officials, along with racing secretaries, who have the near impossible task of keeping everyone happy, change that to impossible.

Their competence, knowledge and, most of all, fairness to all is absolutely imperative for our sport’s survival and future success, and I am not sure that is a sure thing.

It used to be that our sport’s most important participants were the bettors but, as time has gone by, and with those fortunate enough to race at a facility still supported by casinos and legislatures, we regularly witness races where the purses are higher than the betting handle.

Oh, there are still a few bright spots, Harrah’s Hoosier Park, The Meadowlands, some Ohio tracks, but the trend is drifting lower with every scandal rusting away at our aging punters with not many replacements in the bullpen with fresh, ionized young blood.

As mentioned, our sport needs many components for success — caretakers, trainers, drivers, trotters, and pacers — even us journalists that write about the heroics on the racetracks of the world and brag about their durability, speed and grace with no speed limits in sight. But the most important component in our sport is the owner!

The owner might buy the yearling, pay the bills, and, actually, an owner’s monthly contribution helps employ just about every person that participates in our sport on the racetracks of the world.

As for all of the overnight events, where would harness racing be without the owner?

Yes, the caretakers and farriers get things rolling in darkness at 5 a.m. and, many times, don’t hit the hay themselves until the night is at its darkest.

But, when it comes down to the brass tacks, without owners, we’d have a DNF on our lines.

Indeed, the performance of those who handle the horses day-in and day-out are key components to keeping the owners in the business.

But, behind the scenes, mostly out of site of the public’s view are the keys to keeping our current owners and attracting new ones.

Those keys are the aforementioned racing secretaries that attempt to put competitive programs together and the judges high above keeping a watchful eye on the races, and, further down the line, those that work for the State Racing Commissions that are supposed to be unbiased and protect the pulse of the public and their wagered dollars, and, going a stride further, the ones who have to protect the largest investors in this business, the owners.

Every single decision that a race secretary makes in building a competitive racing program, and every single decision the judges make through their binocs from far above the racetrack, and those final decisions from Racing Commission personnel upon any appeal — sometimes protected far away from public scrutiny — have an effect on a bettor, a trainer, a driver, and, most importantly, the owner.

Yes, the bettors are allowed to play favorites — there’s one in every race — but when the favoritism spreads down the line in a race office, judges stand, or, most importantly, the office of the Racing Commission, playing favorites should never be allowed.

Yes, we have some great ones, no doubt about it, but there have been some instances of question, affecting, most importantly, owners.

In any type of pari-mutuel racing — or any event involving the evil of money — it’s impossible to dig deep enough to unearth everything that may happen to influence the outcome of a race, whether it be on or off the racetrack.

To get started in this conversation on a very raw subject, those who did volunteer their thoughts requested anonymity, and who can blame them.

“I’m a little guy from Kentucky,” said one. “I have lived there all my life and horses is all I know and I scraped out a living — well, sometimes I did, sometimes I didn’t — when the purses were bare minimum $2,000, $3,000, $4,000, you know, I had some 2:02-2:04 horses back then.

“When the legislature, finally, took some action and we had some casino action, too, come into play, all-of-a-sudden — BOOM — everyone was moving to Kentucky and buying land and farms and Kentucky-breds [horses] and where were we left?

“At the starting gate with not much protection, and we didn’t have the money to spend to keep up with the Joneses, so to speak. We are getting the leftover scraps, and that’s OK.

“The story you did recently on [Jerry] Glantz proves the point that, for the majority, there is no level playing field.

“One guy gets picked on randomly and risks that he’ll get a positive.

“What’s good for one should be good for all but, and let me emphasize this, there’s not nearly enough money to have a fair testing program anywhere!”

I am not sure whether Mr. Anonymous meant “fair” as being unjust or County “fair” tracks, where this Mane Attraction in headed a bit further down the road.

Mr. Anonymous continued, “I don’t really think our sport is important enough in the world of sports to get this going.”

Valid point.

The Jerry Glantz situation reported in a recent Mane Attraction was life changing for a gentleman that has devoted his life to harness racing in many arenas, when his trainer filled out the proper notice of appeal to state official Casey Larson explaining that he had no idea how this happened and requested a DNA sample for confirmation of the result.

Refreshing memory, Glantz’s trainer got a positive at a fair track on a Class IV medication, among the very bottom of classes for medications or drugs or whatever.

Glantz didn’t own the horse in question but had two eligibles for the lucrative Kentucky Stakes finals and his entries were accepted only to be scratched by Kentucky commissioner Jamie Eads after the trainer properly filed a notice of appeal on July 27, 2025 to Casey Eugene Larson, explaining what must have been a testing error with a request for a DNA test.

Some six weeks later — 47 days — the trainer received a letter saying his request for a stay was denied.

Class IV — at a fair track — stay denied.

We are at the start of November now, and still no results.

For those who are not familiar with drug/medication classifications, there are five of which I have some familiarity.

• Class I: “Highest potential of enhancing performance and said to be no accepted medical use in horse racing.”

• Class II: “High potential of affecting performance (and “often no therapeutic use in horses).”

• Class III: “Moderate potential and may have therapeutic uses but can impact performance.”

• Class IV: “Therapeutic medications with limited impact on performance.”

• Class V: “Medications with established concentration limits; minimal performance impact.”

Class I and II are strictly prohibited, Class III are regulated buy may be used under specific conditions, Class IV and V are medications with established concentration with minimal performance impact.

Upon further inquiry, Equine DNA test results typically return within 10 working days after the lab received the sample. However, total time can vary, with some labs estimating up to two weeks. It can take longer if issues arise, such as a poor-quality sample.

This Glantz decision has destroyed an artery of most importance in our sport — the owner — or, in this case, owners, as another unnamed owner was involved, as well.

As we all know, there have been far more egregious situations, some going on for months, or, even, years, with appeals and stays granted and the question now becomes, how many more owners have been victims of blatantly inconsistent rulings and shouldn’t officials be held to a single industry-wide standard?

It also has come to the Mane Attraction’s attention that, in another instance, a trainer entered seven horses at a track up in the North East but the race secretary used only two, with the remaining two entered in a class above where they were entered. The trainer scratched those other two.

One owner noted that three of his horses had preference being state sired but that seemed to make no difference to the race secretary.

Again, multiple owners were hurt, something we cannot afford to have happen.

So, here we are at the crossroads, less fans, less handle, less owners.

Obviously, we’re on the wrong track.

May The Horse Be With You!