view raw text
WILY METHODS TO DECEIVE CL0CKERS Difference of Opinion as to What Is Permissible to Escape with a Small Fine. By Ed Cole. Saratoga, N. Y., August 9. When horsemen congregate there are sure to be arguments and queries, expressions of opinion, decisions made and judgment criticised. A dozen of the knights of the turf were assembled in the Union pagoda yesterday and naturally all the talk was "horse." An argument started about the hiding of two-year-olds prior to their first start and the methods that had been used to deceive the dockers and bookmakers. Tommy Griffins cases were cited as instances of what was permissible or as closu to the edge of the rules that a person could escape witli a fine. At Los Angeles Griffin was late in the paddock with a filly that he had prepared for a killing and got away with the job by paying a fine. At New Orleans he met trouble by sending the wrong horse to the paddock until his commission had been placed. The question then arose, suggested by one of the old-timers, asking if it would be within the rules should a horse be sent to the paddock disguised by dyes or paints or even chalked up, displaying markings that would hide the horse from the prying eyes of the dockers. "Suppose," said the speaker, "that I had a colt which had no distinct markings, "that I had a colt and no one knew its name but myself. I entered it in a race and before bringing it to the paddock I dyed it, giving it a white ankle or leg and putting a blaze or white star oh its forehead, so changing its appearance that it would be unrecognizable as the horse that had worked well and which was at the mercy of the dockers. Would that be contrary to the rules of racing and, if so, what would be the punishment?" It was a question that made everybody sit up and listen. Visions of doing sucli a thing sprung up in the minds of the group and the possibilities of getting away with a killing some day. No one was inclined to answer for a time. Then someone intimated that the judges might regard the horse as a ringer as it would not correspond with the registered markings of the horse. Hide Identify of Colt from Sharpers. "It would hardly be a ringer," stated the man who made the suggestion, "as It would be the same horse as soon as the markings were washed off. The only offense would be deceit whereby the dockers would be outwitted. The public would not suffer as the horse would be an unknown quantity. No one would suffer, excepting the bookmakers, who are amply provided with percentage to take care of themselves. I think that an owner would go quite a long way to hide the identity of a colt from the sharpers of a race track. They do go a long way even now. "But the thing could be worked another way. The colt could be chalked up before he went to the paddock, in his preliminary gallop, as it were, and the markings washed off at the last minute, after my money was down. It could even be dyed during its works, weeks before the race and then deaned tip when the eventful day arrived. There are many ways that the scheme could be worked. I dont think there are many judges who would look upon the transaction as a great offense, as long as everything was regular in the way of registration and racing. All rules would have been complied with to the letter. What grounds would they have for dealing out punishment?" It was a knotty question and opinions differed as to the action the judges would take in such a case. An official was asked what would be done if the question was officially put up to him. He declined to venture an opinion, preferring to wait until such a case was on the docket. The general opinion, however, was that all owners should have some, priyileges if they wished to exert them in regard to maneuvering with two-year-olds the first time out, to hide their identity from the "bees" that fly around in the early morning hours.
