@Hinesite@hisa_us@PastTheWire “If you think counting hits and nuking guys on metformin trace findings is going to find the next Servis or Navarro, you’re kidding yourself” @HIWUNews@hisa_us
@paulickreport 5th circuit has a 88% SCOTUS reversal rate since 2007.
6th circuit is at 76% during that same timeframe.
Amateur hour indeed @JustADCohen
@paulickreport 5th circuit has a 88% SCOTUS reversal rate since 2007.
6th circuit is at 76% during that same timeframe.
Amateur hour indeed @JustADCohen
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is the only federal appeals court that has struck down any part of the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act: https://t.co/DB2i7zePo0
In addition to HISA’s regular reporting, beginning in the first quarter of 2024, individual requests for information may be submitted by contacting Mandy Minger, Director of Communications ([email protected], 917-846-8804). HISA will respond to these requests on a case-by-case basis by taking into consideration whether there are privacy or confidentiality interests, ongoing investigations or pending litigation, or other circumstances that make public disclosure impractical or unfair to interested parties.
In addition to HISA’s regular reporting, beginning in the first quarter of 2024, individual requests for information may be submitted by contacting Mandy Minger, Director of Communications ([email protected], 917-846-8804). HISA will respond to these requests on a case-by-case basis by taking into consideration whether there are privacy or confidentiality interests, ongoing investigations or pending litigation, or other circumstances that make public disclosure impractical or unfair to interested parties.
In addition to HISA’s regular reporting, beginning in the first quarter of 2024, individual requests for information may be submitted by contacting Mandy Minger, Director of Communications ([email protected], 917-846-8804). HISA will respond to these requests on a case-by-case basis by taking into consideration whether there are privacy or confidentiality interests, ongoing investigations or pending litigation, or other circumstances that make public disclosure impractical or unfair to interested parties.
If I were examining this from a wagering-integrity perspective, the key question would not be:
“Are HISA records being sold?”
Instead, it would be:
“Who has access to treatment-related data fields that ordinary bettors do not have?”
Those are very different questions.
A CAW team does not necessarily need direct access to HISA.
Potential paths could include:
1. Regulatory feed → vendor → analytics company.
2. Regulatory feed → PP provider → institutional customer.
3. Private veterinary intelligence networks.
4. Stable-area information gathering.
5. Track-side information channels.
None of those require HISA itself to sell records.
What I find most interesting
You already located an example where intra-articular injections were embedded into a handicapping product.
That establishes three facts:
* The treatment data existed in machine-readable form.
* The data was transferred outside the regulator’s internal database.
* The data was considered valuable enough to include in handicapping products.
The unanswered question is:
Why did those disclosures largely disappear from mainstream PPs after HISA centralized treatment reporting?
If treatment transparency is beneficial to bettors, one might expect more disclosure under a national database, not less.
How to get a definitive answer
The most effective approach would be targeted records requests and direct inquiries asking for:
* Data dictionaries for commercial Equibase feeds.
* Data licensing agreements involving veterinary-treatment fields.
* Lists of HISA data-sharing partners.
* Whether any HISA treatment fields are transmitted to Equibase.
* Whether shockwave, joint injections, surgeries, or treatment histories are available in any commercial feed.
* Whether any wagering entities receive veterinary-related fields unavailable to retail bettors.
If a commercial feed contains treatment-related fields, there will usually be:
* a data specification,
* a field dictionary,
* a licensing agreement,
* and a customer list.
Those documents would answer the question far more conclusively than public PP products.
If I were examining this from a wagering-integrity perspective, the key question would not be:
“Are HISA records being sold?”
Instead, it would be:
“Who has access to treatment-related data fields that ordinary bettors do not have?”
Those are very different questions.
A CAW team does not necessarily need direct access to HISA.
Potential paths could include:
1. Regulatory feed → vendor → analytics company.
2. Regulatory feed → PP provider → institutional customer.
3. Private veterinary intelligence networks.
4. Stable-area information gathering.
5. Track-side information channels.
None of those require HISA itself to sell records.
What I find most interesting
You already located an example where intra-articular injections were embedded into a handicapping product.
That establishes three facts:
* The treatment data existed in machine-readable form.
* The data was transferred outside the regulator’s internal database.
* The data was considered valuable enough to include in handicapping products.
The unanswered question is:
Why did those disclosures largely disappear from mainstream PPs after HISA centralized treatment reporting?
If treatment transparency is beneficial to bettors, one might expect more disclosure under a national database, not less.
How to get a definitive answer
The most effective approach would be targeted records requests and direct inquiries asking for:
* Data dictionaries for commercial Equibase feeds.
* Data licensing agreements involving veterinary-treatment fields.
* Lists of HISA data-sharing partners.
* Whether any HISA treatment fields are transmitted to Equibase.
* Whether shockwave, joint injections, surgeries, or treatment histories are available in any commercial feed.
* Whether any wagering entities receive veterinary-related fields unavailable to retail bettors.
If a commercial feed contains treatment-related fields, there will usually be:
* a data specification,
* a field dictionary,
* a licensing agreement,
* and a customer list.
Those documents would answer the question far more conclusively than public PP products.
On pins and needles waiting for Andrew Cohen’s piece reminding his 8 readers that the hillbilly’s at the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit; are to be dismissed. As they don’t carry the same level of intellect that can be found in the 6th circuit.
@paulickreport@JustADCohen@hisa_us
@racetrackandy@theTDN@TheNYRA@BillFinley3 What profit comes from each dollar wagered by a caw vs retail?
2-3 cents caw & 5-7 cents retail? I’m just guessing here.
What I’m getting at is how much does retail handle need to increase to pick up slack from lost handle by CAW’s?
@DestinHeath It’s like the cartoon where the dam starts to leak. Guy plugs it with a finger, then a toe, then another finger, etc, etc….there is no fixing it when the foundation it’s built upon is so bad.
@DestinHeath 2 year old set a 350 yd track record winning the Ruidoso Futurity yesterday buy multiple lengths. The more things change, the more things stay the same in the Land of Enchantment.
@EJXD2@BelmontStakes@TheNYRA I should verify this before sending, but if I remember correctly it was pretty wet last year. Several turf races that weren’t stakes went to dirt. That would certainly be a contributing factor.