Is horse racing rigged?

Answer 1

I'm sure the odd thing may go on at some of the bush tracks, but the money is way too good at the bigger ones. Riders have been suspended and fined for not riding full out in some races even if they are not going to win. It's easy for people to say its fixed when they have no clue on what goes on at the track, in the paddock and behind the scenes. Harness may be a little different too because the purses are alot worse. But most jocks pick up $1,500-3,000 for a win in an ordinary race, if it was fixed the money going into the pool to compensate that would throw it out of wack and people (running the track) would get suspicious, re watch the race over and over again and if they found wrong doing suspend and fine the jockey costing him way more than he would make by throwing the race in the first place. If I saw someone give my horse a **** ride I wouldn't ride him back, money lost, he would also loose all the mounts from my trainers other 50 horses in his barn, more money lost. I could go on forever, I'm sure it happens sometimes somewhere, but nowhere that's reputable.

As for Stewart Elliott throwing the Triple Crown that's the biggest load of **** I've ever heard, Smarty Jones was toast at the top of the stretch, no matter how many times you hit a horse down the stretch you are not going to re-rally and beat a horse with all the momentum. He was running a distance he wasn't bred for and got beat by a horse who was bred for the distance. I guess you think Ms. Whitney also bought the Travers at Saratoga that year too since she has a house there, and it's totally inconcievable Birdstone could win 2 Grade 1's in NY. She probably also bought the Kentucky Oaks with Birdstone's half sister Bird Town the year before. Funny Cide also threw the Triple Crown the year before and War Emblem the year before that, I can't quite find a connection with the owners or whatever but they did for sure and nobody bothered to say anything because the horse industry is only a billion dollar industry and the feds don't care. The owners of those horses are so rich they don't care about the $600,000 they would have got for the win either and the extra $10 million a year in stud fees they would have got with a triple crown winner.

Answer 2

I'm sure it happens, but just like in every sport there is pride in winning, from the owners to the trainers, jockeys and horses, you can't make a bad horse win without the time being way off what it should be and have the 10 other horses run with the jockeys riding them with a straglehold. The industry is so much bigger than 1 person betting on a race, it's 7 days a week and 365 days a year and rigging a race has more implications than the day you happen to show up and make a bet or two then think its rigged because you bet the favorite and it lost, everyone involved has to wake up and do it all over again. Right now there are about 10 jockeys that arn't allowed to ride because of a suspicious large bet made at Great Lakes Downs. Some of the jockeys suspended were not even riding in the race in question. They have been sitting out for 2 months now jobless because of suspicion at a small track in Michigan. I think if it happend in the Belmont a few people would care.

Answer 3

The Smarty Jones Belmont was not a rigged race. The jockey made a tactical error by going out too fast in a 12-furlong race which was probably beyond the horse's capability anyway.

But there are races which are manipulated, mostly cheaper races at lower-level tracks though (where somebody can make more money cashing a bet than they will give up in lost prize money). There is one piece of equipment that many horses have going into a race. Put it on wrong--and the horse will stop during the race like he's been shot because it shuts down his breathing airway. Put it on right--and nothing can stop him. Think a trainer has never put it on wrong three or four times in a row to make a horse look bad and then the day he's 50/1 suddenly he figures out how to put it on correctly?

Races that are rigged tend do be done so with equipment, medications, "buzzers", and things like that. It's highly unusual (if not completely nonextistent) for there to be pre-race meetings of jockeys where they decide who is going to win.

Remember, it's also customary (and wise horsemanship) for a jockey aboard a horse who has NO SHOT at making the top four places to gallop the horse out in the stretch (no whip, no shaking the reins, and sometimes virtually standing up in the irons). This does not mean the jockey was trying to lose the race--the race was already lost. But next time the horse races, and you see in the form that he lost last time by 42 lengths, don't automatically assume that he's the slowest four-legged animal on the planet and has zero shot today.

Answer 4

Well, of course if it were the people perpetrating it have shifted from drugging to something else, perhaps as subtle as hand signals; I heard from someone in it that allegedly a long time ago in harness racing that when the fix was in the driver "assigned" to win would carry the whip in his left hand (instead of the right) before the race to signal the important bettors in on the fix. And indeed Lucky Luciano and other Mafia figures used to rig a certain race (usually the 5th, 6th or 7th) in New York tracks on an almost daily basis to impress their girlfriends!

But I can state after having studied racing statistics for the past two years that the first, second, third favorite, etc., win a consistent percentage of races on a total track basis over time, so that if there still is rigging it is so subtle that the people doing it it are doing the exact same types of fixing over again to make the rig look like it's just statistically part of the game.

I do think that if there is any rigging at all it is probably centered on getting a longshot into a trifecta, and I think any possible T rigging would not be conducted on tracks with known stable handicapping (Golden Gate, Portland Meadows), or in the Kentucky Derby, but rather in tracks in low purse races in or near big cities; but it is a natural phenomenon to have a high odds horse in the money on a regular basis - 42% of all Place achievements (either W or P) are among horses with odds of 7 to 1 or higher; the only way I know to check this out for sure would be to use fibonnaci fraud analysis, where, for example, if in a company's books too many checks starting with a certain digit can be proof of fraud. This has been explained thoroughly in the excellent book "The Golden Ratio: The Story of Phi, The World's Most Astonishing Number" by Mario Livio. In this case the analysis would have to be used by assigning a favorite number to each horse and seeing if the higher numbers showed up too much. But let's admit it - handicapping (and the public) can just be "off" every so often, so that alone would not really prove anything until a statistically significant (not possible to be attributed to chance) amount of longshots in trifectas started being the trend, and even that may not be proof of anything more than the old racing secretaries retiring and the newer ones not applying the same old rules of assigning a horse 10 to 1 Morning Line odds under certain past performance guidelines (for example), etc.

Also, to see a lot of Longshots win at a track on any day is proof of nothing - perhaps they're low purse Maiden claiming races for 4 year old and up Fillies and Mares where such is the expected thing for the favorite to miss because the public has too much faith in it just because it finished second previously - let's face it - a miss is as good as a mile, so that anything BUT first keeps that horse a maiden (and don't forget that the odds are exaggerated in their range in such races, or in NW2s, NW's 2006-2007, etc.).

I'm afraid that the answer has to be: of course once in awhile it is bound to happen, much less so than before, but the only ones who'd really know wouldn't say anything, would they? I'm not being cynical but I think that the major players in this (the tracks, the online services, etc.) would do their best to cover up such a thing IF it was a vast conspiracy (while they'd throw the book at a small-time operator) because the lost revenue after such an all-pervasive scandal would destroy the sport once and for all.

BTW I remember a jockey disappearing in the Nineties (his car was found on the Golden Gate Bridge) - but to say that this was due to pressure to rig or punishment for not doing it, or whether he felt a failure and just committed suicide, who's to know? And maybe it wasn't even horserace related.

Answer 5

Anywhere money is involved there's usually some type of "rigging" and horse racing is no different........There are trainers who use drugs on their horses to make them run fast or to numb a hurting horse and some have been caught and suspended.......Jockeys have been caught using batteries to "spark" a horse........There are syndicates involved in the big money wagering like a pick-six etc. and yes, they use muscle to rig a race..........Muscle and payoffs........Races like the Triple Crown races or the huge purse allowance races are, for the most part, on the up and up...........

It's easy to "buy" a jockey who will just jerk a horse enough at the start to make him stumble slightly and be taken out of the race or not try hard enough on the horse in order to lose........

Harness racing is even more rigged than flat racing........All a driver has to do is to pull the reign one way or the other ever so slightly causing the horse to "break" and take him completely out of the race..........

Where money is involved, in any sport (point shaving, etc) there is always the chance of some rigging going on..........CAT

[e-mail]

Answer 6

After watching Smarty Jones lose the Belmont, I think that, yes, it can be rigged. Why in the world did his jockey get him out in front so the other horses could push him and get him tired? And in such a long race! Some people may think I'm stupid, but I definitely think that was a set-up. I'm STILL mad about it!!

Answer 7

In some instances. I just received an email from a friend who told me that his horse will absolutely NOT WIN tomorrow. This information is advantageous for hedging against his horse. Is this rigging? Not in this case, but the more information you have, the better.

Answer 8

I'd say yes, and here's why. Smarty Jones dominated the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness, and went on to lose in the Belmont by a come-from-behind win from Birdstone. Nothing suspicious there, but if you were to watch Smarty's jockey down the stretch, he practically puts the whip away.
No point in making a federal case over it, but research Birdstone's owner and the Belmont. Find out what they have in common, and make your own opinions.

Answer 9

It can be to some extent...My exhusband used to race (drive harness horses) the owners, etc. would work out signals to them when they knew the horse would have a good chance of winning in the post parade. And work things out with other racers right before the race in the paddock.

Answer 10

If we have learned nothing else this century, it is that any industry in which billions of dollars are exchanged will be susceptible to attempts to game it. Occasionally such corruption is uncovered and punished severely--jockeys who throw races are usually disallowed from racing, while trainers and riders who cheat in order to improve their chances of winning are generally suspended for a period. To say racing is fixed because of the acts of these individuals would be the same as saying the stock market is fixed because of Enron and Martha Stewart. To me, these situations prove exactly the opposite--that racing and the stock market are well regulated in order to protect the interests of the people who put their money into them in good faith.