TVG is becoming a joke.

[Enigma]

I'm watching the coverage from Santa Anita and the main topic is the number of twitters that Shrupp and Bray have. Ask them what their R.O.I is on their top picks and they don't have a clue. This morning it was Wolfe's golf swing. How long before Betfair clean house? It is long overdue.

[turninforhome10]

You did not enjoy the closeup of the blood stain on the table. I agree. No serious content to actually help anyone but those looking for bad entertainment.
:ThmbDown:

[Stillriledup]

You mean Greg Wolf wouldnt be able to support himself gambling if he lost his job at TVG? :eek:

[Shelby]

Aw, come on. There isn't much racing going on right now (that they can show) so they have to fill in with something.

You guys are a tough crowd ;)

[Tom]

Silence would be more informative and entertaining than those two dipsticks. Nice to see that the bottom 5% of the class got jobs, though.
Even though TVG can't cover Gulfstream, this weekend, these guys will be airing the Wholly Bull Stakes.:rolleyes:

[duncan04]

Can't we combine the bash TVG threads into one? :rolleyes: :D

[cj]

Can't we combine the bash TVG threads into one? :rolleyes: :D

I don't have that kind of free time!

[Stillriledup]

Gino said he's the best horseplayer in the world. :lol:

But ,all kidding aside, he did make a good point that you need the confidence that you have to THINK you're the best.

Gino and Tom were the "MC's" tonight during the Delta card and late in the card, the rail horse in one of the races ducked in and threw the jock, it was obvious if you were actually watching the race yet Tom said after the race was over "some horse lost the jock, but we're not sure who" and here i'm thinking "was he watching the race, or was he surfing his twitter account during the running?"

[Stillriledup]

What's with these guys? They're loading the final race at Aqu and they're showing a camera shot of the 3 stooges in the studio than they quickly cut to the gate at Big A and they start the race immediately.

TVG continues to 'taze' their viewers.

[FrankieFigs]

One would think with less tracks, they would focus more on handicapping instead of this BS filler crap they are throwing out lately. The best thing they have going right now is Paul LoDuca and The Quarters crew.

[duncan04]

One would think with less tracks, they would focus more on handicapping instead of this BS filler crap they are throwing out lately. The best thing they have going right now is Paul LoDuca and The Quarters crew.


I agree. Need more of the inside the mind of a horseplayer segments where they go horse by horse with the pp's

[Track Phantom]

The problem with TVG is they think they are producing an entertainment show. They always have thought that. I'm sure it is the first out of school job for these producers so they color it up as much as they can to build a resume for their next job. The issue there is they don't have more than 17 people that tune in for any type of entertainment. That is a fact whether TVG wants it to be or not.

99.95% of the people that tune in for more than 60 seconds are gambling online or inside horsepeople (trainers, owners, etc.). It's too bad they don't reconfigure their programming to cater to those that actually watch.

Boring as it may seem for the hosts, handicapping, PP's, trainer interviews, race replays, etc are what people want.

I would reconfigure the show to provide more detailed synopsis of the races they are showing. There would be creative ways to do that but they seem more dead set on pretending they are "talent" instead of horseplayers.

[CincyHorseplayer]

The problem with TVG is they think they are producing an entertainment show. They always have thought that. I'm sure it is the first out of school job for these producers so they color it up as much as they can to build a resume for their next job. The issue there is they don't have more than 17 people that tune in for any type of entertainment. That is a fact whether TVG wants it to be or not.

99.95% of the people that tune in for more than 60 seconds are gambling online or inside horsepeople (trainers, owners, etc.). It's too bad they don't reconfigure their programming to cater to those that actually watch.

Boring as it may seem for the hosts, handicapping, PP's, trainer interviews, race replays, etc are what people want.

I would reconfigure the show to provide more detailed synopsis of the races they are showing. There would be creative ways to do that but they seem more dead set on pretending they are "talent" instead of horseplayers.

Exactly.Good post.This isn't a major network doing a broadcast once a year that has to mediate between an unknowing public and a rabid fan.They are all year,fulltime horse racing networks,they are nuts if they think anybody is watching them for entertainment.They are broadcasting for themselves which is not only stupid but pathetic and bad business.

I've solved my "network crisis" I was having a month ago,when I wasn't happy I couldn't get both horse networks.I dug out an old computer and monitor for one feed,have another on my main computer,and bought a laptop for the 3rd feed.Then I put on Pandora on shuffle through my radio(mute during races).Day is not surprisingly far more enjoyable.I focus better.And it goes quick.It's fun!Imagine that!

[pandy]

If TVG's on air talent cut out all of the humor and just stuck to hard core horseracing facts and figures, as some of you suggest would be better, it could get monotonous.

Personally, I've always felt that they modeled themselves off of CNBC, especially the morning where Jim Cramer and the other on air people joke about popular culture, etc, and have a pretty casual and joking attitude even when the market is taking a dive. Certainly 58 flat is a copycat of Mad Money.

The bottom line, you can't please everybody. If they stopped the joking around it may make you watch more but it would turn off others so there would be no gain, and they could lose viewers.

It may seem stupid, but there is a reason behind the madness. I often have TVG on most or all of the day as I sit at my computer and handicap or write, and the fact that the on air personalities joke around makes me feel comfortable and crack a smile now and then. They actually keep me company. If they didn't joke around, I doubt that I would leave the channel on for long. (For those of you who've never tried it, running a home based business, or being a writer can be a lonely profession).

For decades The Today Show was the number 1 morning show. They suck at reporting the news. But, they have always joked around a lot even when the news isn't that good.

Al Roker is the king of corny puns and is not even a real meteorologist yet he is the highest paid weatherman in the history of TV.

We live in a tough world. Not everyone wants to see people being serious all the time. Furthermore, there's only so much you can say about handicapping horses and if they tried being as in depth as some of you want it could quickly become redundant and boring.

[johnhannibalsmith]

If TVG's on air talent cut out all of the humor...

I think this is one of those cases where legally you have to call it "alleged humor".

[pandy]

One thing the internet has taught us is that there are a lot of cynical people out there who like to criticize. I've seen remarks saying that the Beatles sucked, Joe Namath was not a good quarterback, Marilyn Monroe was not pretty...

The TVG producers, or any producers of TV shows, are not going to read a few negative things on a board like this and change because of it. They have ratings and something called "Q" scores to test the likeability scores of the on air talent.

Matt Carothers does 58 flat, Blinkers Off, and has regular shifts, so he gets more air time than anyone, and he acts pretty nutty and jokes around more than anyone. That should tell you something. Obviously his ratings are the best, and that's why it is what it is.

[PhantomOnTour]

One thing the internet has taught us is that there are a lot of cynical people out there who like to criticize. I've seen remarks saying that the Beatles sucked, Joe Namath was not a good quarterback, Marilyn Monroe was not pretty...

The TVG producers, or any producers of TV shows, are not going to read a few negative things on a board like this and change because of it. They have ratings and something called "Q" scores to test the likeability scores of the on air talent.

Matt Carothers does 58 flat, Blinkers Off, and has regular shifts, so he gets more air time than anyone, and he acts pretty nutty and jokes around more than anyone. That should tell you something. Obviously his ratings are the best, and that's why it is what it is.
Ummmm...Joe Namath did suck
Matty's ratings are the best compared to what? The other garbage on TVG?
So he is the shiniest turd, in other words?

[lamboguy]

if you think TVG is bad, turn on the pre-race commentary on the Gulfstream video. those 2 put you right to bed and you don't want to wake up!

[CincyHorseplayer]

One thing the internet has taught us is that there are a lot of cynical people out there who like to criticize. I've seen remarks saying that the Beatles sucked, Joe Namath was not a good quarterback, Marilyn Monroe was not pretty...

The TVG producers, or any producers of TV shows, are not going to read a few negative things on a board like this and change because of it. They have ratings and something called "Q" scores to test the likeability scores of the on air talent.

Matt Carothers does 58 flat, Blinkers Off, and has regular shifts, so he gets more air time than anyone, and he acts pretty nutty and jokes around more than anyone. That should tell you something. Obviously his ratings are the best, and that's why it is what it is.

Here's the rub though Bob.I don't mind some on air enjoyment from them at all.As you said it can keep you company at times.I have watched nearly everyday this offbetting winter while doing my own 2 year horse journal and just reading etc.Their humor only attracts scorn by the way they operate.They choose to show post parades from feature tracks live and races actually running on a delay.Sometimes they will show a feature race stakes from a track on up to a 20 minute delay.Then you have 15-20 minutes of handicapping slobber on certain tracks and nothing at all on others.At that point the jokes aren't funny and the station has you pissed off.Most would rather watch a race on a television feed than an internet feed.Then you have shows like their 2012 year in review.It's not even remotely related to the natural cycles of the game itself.It's a distortion of reality within the universe of their own perspective,presented as a microcosm of said reality.That level of ego is going to turn a lot of people off.Basically their values are mixed up.If the game came first and not last nobody would have a problem with who they are and what they say.

Like I stated earlier in my post,I'm mixing most of all of it out.I just got a 10 disc set by Vladimir Ashkenazy doing Mozart piano concertos to the tune of about 24 hours worth.That's my preferred background noise these days!

[usedtolovetvg]

They have ratings and something called "Q" scores to test the likeability scores of the on air talent.

You have to have a certain amount of viewers in order to show up on the ratings. TVG does not have enough viewers. As for Q scores, there was a focus group held once, many years ago, and those who you think would score the lowest did. The results were ignored. TVG goes by one thing and one thing only and that is $$$$ bet. Since TwinSpires got serious years ago, TVG appears to be losing market share at a pretty fast pace, hence the cutbacks. DRF recently stated that "Betfair U.S.’s exchange investment was on-hold pending licensing clarity.” Since its inception TVG has never made money and with the huge investment Betfair has made in trying to get EW going over here the loss is widening.

That being said it comes as no surprise that some people like that stuff. That is only right because it is largely subjective. The problem is that not enough people seem to. Suffice to say, those who have been with TVG for a very long time, both management and talent, have not made it a roaring success.

[PhantomOnTour]

while we're griping about TVG....HRTV is now discussing the sale and breeding of the leading cutting sire, and how they are making the best of his frozen semen.
All of this within 10 mins to post at GP and TAM...gotta love it !


Cutting - isn't that some kinda rodeo event?
This is Tuesday programming material for HRTV, not Sunday

[Stillriledup]

If TVG's on air talent cut out all of the humor and just stuck to hard core horseracing facts and figures, as some of you suggest would be better, it could get monotonous.

Personally, I've always felt that they modeled themselves off of CNBC, especially the morning where Jim Cramer and the other on air people joke about popular culture, etc, and have a pretty casual and joking attitude even when the market is taking a dive. Certainly 58 flat is a copycat of Mad Money.

The bottom line, you can't please everybody. If they stopped the joking around it may make you watch more but it would turn off others so there would be no gain, and they could lose viewers.

It may seem stupid, but there is a reason behind the madness. I often have TVG on most or all of the day as I sit at my computer and handicap or write, and the fact that the on air personalities joke around makes me feel comfortable and crack a smile now and then. They actually keep me company. If they didn't joke around, I doubt that I would leave the channel on for long. (For those of you who've never tried it, running a home based business, or being a writer can be a lonely profession).

For decades The Today Show was the number 1 morning show. They suck at reporting the news. But, they have always joked around a lot even when the news isn't that good.

Al Roker is the king of corny puns and is not even a real meteorologist yet he is the highest paid weatherman in the history of TV.

We live in a tough world. Not everyone wants to see people being serious all the time. Furthermore, there's only so much you can say about handicapping horses and if they tried being as in depth as some of you want it could quickly become redundant and boring.

I think that they could have the best of both worlds with mostly serious horse racing content, with some joking sprinkled in. But, instead, they seem to think they're comedy central with a little horse racing sprinkled in. Most people who watch the show are interested in betting on a winner, not hearing unfunny people try to be funny. Sure, a funny joke to break the tension of a serious handicapping day is welcome at all times, but it seems that all TVG has become about is how many Twitter followers each talking head can accumulate.

Television is the media that young viewers are going to be introduced to the game, and if they're introduced to clowning around and so called experts who cant pick winners, how are they going to 'get serious' about this game?

Lets have a few jokes here and there but mostly serious horse racing content. And for god sakes stop the releasing of a pick anything on every race at every track, there's zero percent chance that if you bet all of the 'experts' tickets at every track you're ahead, have you ever heard a tvg analyst say "this is a tough pick 6 today, there are six twelve horse fields and the carryover is only 30k,......no, they say "here's my 96 dollar ticket, fire away"

They dont seem to understand that there isnt an unlimited supply of money from their tvg account holders and constantly playing pick 4s and pick 6s from the experts is going to drain that account faster than if they just said "bet 50 to win on the 1 horse".

[thaskalos]

I think this is one of those cases where legally you have to call it "alleged humor".

Excellent! :ThmbUp:

Now...if TVG featured YOUR type of humor...who would complain? Not I...:)

[pandy]

Whether or not TVG stays on the air probably has little to do with taking a lighthearted approach or having guys crunching numbers and showing replays until the cows come home. If they're losing money it's because they broadcast horseracing, which, let's face it, is not the NFL. Horse racing's fan base is dwindling.

[usedtolovetvg]

Horse racing's fan base is dwindling.

The purpose of wanting it on TV is to try and reverse that trend. Sports that have used the medium well and marketed their sport properly have stemmed the tide and made their sports and themselves a success. Looking at it that way, which is the way I must view it, TVG and its entire management team have been abject failures: HRTV too, btw.

[thaskalos]

TVG is caught in no-man's land...IMO.

They don't have the talent to appeal to the viewers who are seeking "entertainment"...nor do they show enough races to be taken seriously by the gambling audience.

[pandy]

Not showing enough races is a problem both HRTV and TVG have but a lot of that is the nature of the horseracing industry. I used to look forward to betting the early double at Parx (Mondays and Tuesdays) and watching Rich Perloff and his viewers give their opinions but now they don't show Parx because they can't come to an agreement and there's nothing until 2 p.m.

Stuff like this really hurts but that's the industry, that's the real problem. Believe me, as someone who has been active in the industry for 38 years, TVG is not the problem, it's good for racing. The racing industry is the problem because it doesn't try hard enough to fix it's many problems.

[usedtolovetvg]

TVG is caught in no-man's land...IMO.

They don't have the talent to appeal to the viewers who are seeking "entertainment"...nor do they show enough races to be taken seriously by the gambling audience.

Both of the situations that TVG finds itself in are self-inflicted. This is not a case of circumstances prevailing. The remedy seems simple enough. Hire some people with talent and make deals that allow you to show more races.

What team keeps the same coaching staff in place for well over a decade when they are perennial losers? The guys calling the shots have been there since day one.

[Marshall Bennett]

The remedy seems simple enough. Hire some people with talent and make deals that allow you to show more races.
TVG doesn't have the budget to hire the talent you're probably referring to nor make all the deals that would make the entire horse racing public happy.
They're basically simple (just look at some of the ridiculous ads they run to stay afloat) and it's not going to change because there just isn't a market to pay for it.
You see what you get, you either take it for what it's worth or watch something else. It's as simple as that.

[Stillriledup]

TVG doesn't have the budget to hire the talent you're probably referring to nor make all the deals that would make the entire horse racing public happy.
They're basically simple (just look at some of the ridiculous ads they run to stay afloat) and it's not going to change because there just isn't a market to pay for it.
You see what you get, you either take it for what it's worth or watch something else. It's as simple as that.

Your point, which makes sense, is that TVG can't hire people who actually know how to pick winners and when to point the public to those particular winners....the best horseplayers dont give their stuff away for free.

[usedtolovetvg]

they don't show Parx because they can't come to an agreement and there's nothing until 2 p.m.....

TVG is not the problem, it's good for racing. The racing industry is the problem because it doesn't try hard enough to fix it's many problems.

Some people see it that Parx wouldn't give in to TVG's unrealistic demands as we've seen so many other tracks not give in recently.

I see TVG as being as much of the problem as everyone else or maybe even more; i.e. those .25 cent bets etc.

[usedtolovetvg]

You see what you get, you either take it for what it's worth or watch something else. It's as simple as that.

Then you are doomed for failure. That's not how an innovative marketing team would look at it.

[pandy]

TVG doesn't have the budget to hire the talent you're probably referring to nor make all the deals that would make the entire horse racing public happy.
They're basically simple (just look at some of the ridiculous ads they run to stay afloat) and it's not going to change because there just isn't a market to pay for it.
You see what you get, you either take it for what it's worth or watch something else. It's as simple as that.


I agree. And like I said, if they got more serious broadcasters, some would like that better and some wouldn't, so that wouldn't help. We love horse racing so it's easy to fool yourself into thinking that tens of millions of people feel the same way, but it's actually just several thousand people in the entire country that actually follow horse racing on a regular basis.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Your point, which makes sense, is that TVG can't hire people who actually know how to pick winners and when to point the public to those particular winners....the best horseplayers dont give their stuff away for free.

On the other hand, they hire people that try (I guess) to make watching and betting races seem fun and reasonably possible for a novice, with no real expectations for charting success or failure beyond high-fives and cash register noises if someone stumbles upon a winner.

As much as this doesn't turn me on in particular...

(and it drives me batty just to hear the word "Twitter", much less when it drags on for seven minutes and they've informed me that there is a live race going to the gate that can be seen on the website while they compare Twitters and whatnot)

... I'm not exactly positive that you are going to engage the novice, or casual player, or even totally uninitiated by having Professor Al Garrithim trying to explain the methods of many of the actual "best".

TVG, I think, has to appeal to the less sophisticated and just get them in the front door. If they enjoy the visit to this new environment, they'll seek out a more refined environment. Poker and the WSOP format starts out as fun bluffs and wild all-in pushes, then at some point you start to look beyond the entertainment element and learn strategies and probabilities on your own volition from other sources because you made it through the front door and liked it. I just can't see a format with a host looking at a full card from here or there and advising to play these three horses in race six if the respective prices are at this betting line or above and then pass the rest of the card and wait until the seventh at this other track for another possible play at the right price.

That said, they could dial down significantly the "less sophisticated" approach to the entertainment element and reserve that attribute for the wagering context.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Horse racing itself is the problem therefore everybody in and around it can act like irresponsible morons and have a ball with it.Brilliant.That type of attitude is why it's f***ed up to begin with.Here we have a perennially winnable game(ie the crowd favorites still fail 60%+) and everybody that can change something choose to adopt the apocalypse mentality,guaranteeing that it will always be as F-ed up as humanly possible.What an absolutely worthless rationalization.I'm outta here......

[Stillriledup]

On the other hand, they hire people that try (I guess) to make watching and betting races seem fun and reasonably possible for a novice, with no real expectations for charting success or failure beyond high-fives and cash register noises if someone stumbles upon a winner.

As much as this doesn't turn me on in particular...

(and it drives me batty just to hear the word "Twitter", much less when it drags on for seven minutes and they've informed me that there is a live race going to the gate that can be seen on the website while they compare Twitters and whatnot)

... I'm not exactly positive that you are going to engage the novice, or casual player, or even totally uninitiated by having Professor Al Garrithim trying to explain the methods of many of the actual "best".

TVG, I think, has to appeal to the less sophisticated and just get them in the front door. If they enjoy the visit to this new environment, they'll seek out a more refined environment. Poker and the WSOP format starts out as fun bluffs and wild all-in pushes, then at some point you start to look beyond the entertainment element and learn strategies and probabilities on your own volition from other sources because you made it through the front door and liked it. I just can't see a format with a host looking at a full card from here or there and advising to play these three horses in race six if the respective prices are at this betting line or above and then pass the rest of the card and wait until the seventh at this other track for another possible play at the right price.

That said, they could dial down significantly the "less sophisticated" approach to the entertainment element and reserve that attribute for the wagering context.

I do appreciate the hot 'jockey girls' they have on Friday nights at the Hol. Maybe more hot chicks and less Todd's twitter follower count? :D

[pandy]

Another thing some of you are missing, these guys are not bad handicappers by any stretch of the imagination. I'd like to see how you would do. Carothers, for instance, is a very good handicapper. And some of the others are also very good handicappers and they have some excellent insights.

You know,Gary Stevens is a serious broadcaster, and offers some excellent insights based on his experience as a top-class jockey. But some of the guys on TVG are much better handicappers and analyze the race better, while also providing a touch of humor that Stevens lacks since he is obviously a very aggressive person who wants to compete.

[Shelby]

Another thing some of you are missing, these guys are not bad handicappers by any stretch of the imagination. I'd like to see how you would do. Carothers, for instance, is a very good handicapper. And some of the others are also very good handicappers and they have some excellent insights.

You know,Gary Stevens is a serious broadcaster, and offers some excellent insights based on his experience as a top-class jockey. But some of the guys on TVG are much better handicappers and analyze the race better, while also providing a touch of humor that Stevens lacks since he is obviously a very aggressive person who wants to compete.


I agree with you about Matt C. I also think think that Perloff and Tom Cassidy do well. Cassidy does especially well at Monmouth.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Another thing some of you are missing, these guys are not bad handicappers by any stretch of the imagination. I'd like to see how you would do. Carothers, for instance, is a very good handicapper. And some of the others are also very good handicappers and they have some excellent insights. ...

I agree. They've tried to sprinkle in a few other options for these guys to show off their handicapping prowess with gimmicky spot play opportunities that seem to give them a bit more latitude beyond pick 3, 4, 5, 6 tickets. Doing a whole card and then adding in plays at various other tracks whenever they pop-up using a template that everyone adheres to 95% of the time obviously isn't going to be a great way to showcase your actual individual abilities.

I'm willing to give them that caveat and try to read between the lines and gauge their talents based more on how they actually see a race than how they post cookie cutter tickets in accordance with format. But, I do find it nearly impossible to endure the "comedy" that overwhelms all that potentially useful insight that would acquit them of being guilty of the perception that they are somehow inept.

[Stillriledup]

I agree. They've tried to sprinkle in a few other options for these guys to show off their handicapping prowess with gimmicky spot play opportunities that seem to give them a bit more latitude beyond pick 3, 4, 5, 6 tickets. Doing a whole card and then adding in plays at various other tracks whenever they pop-up using a template that everyone adheres to 95% of the time obviously isn't going to be a great way to showcase your actual individual abilities.

I'm willing to give them that caveat and try to read between the lines and gauge their talents based more on how they actually see a race than how they post cookie cutter tickets in accordance with format. But, I do find it nearly impossible to endure the "comedy" that overwhelms all that potentially useful insight that would acquit them of being guilty of the perception that they are somehow inept.

But, when they win one of their cookie cutter tickets, they do the back pat and self congratulations...so, isnt it fair to hold their losses against them too?

Give them credit for winning and then when they lose, kind of look the other way and gauge their talents based on how they see a race?

[johnhannibalsmith]

But, when they win one of their cookie cutter tickets, they do the back pat and self congratulations...so, isnt it fair to hold their losses against them too?

Give them credit for winning and then when they lose, kind of look the other way and gauge their talents based on how they see a race?

Sure, it's fair in the context you describe (though I think the excitement and high fives is theatrical as much as genuine for the reasons I described in conveying a fun experience). But in terms of deciding just how great they are in general at both handicapping and wagering, I don't think you can look at a pick five ticket or six out nine "checkmark" picks up in smoke. Being a successful handicapper and/or bettor and being one as on-air talent with serious constraints on your play are pretty different. The best guys are the ones that can let you know what their selection is, but also subtly convey the extent to which they actually like that selection.

[cj]

We all that an important part of wagering is knowing when NOT to bet. Yet, on TVG, you are never going to hear that.

Is that smart for business? I'm not sure. I think long term it would be better to educate the fan base and let them know it is ok to pass. But on the other hand, their income comes directly from people wagering. It is a tough call.

It is tough to tell which horses the on air personalities really like, and those that they just pick because they have to make one. In the end, who really cares how the selections do? I only care how mine do.

[Stillriledup]

We all that an important part of wagering is knowing when NOT to bet. Yet, on TVG, you are never going to hear that.

Is that smart for business? I'm not sure. I think long term it would be better to educate the fan base and let them know it is ok to pass. But on the other hand, their income comes directly from people wagering. It is a tough call.

It is tough to tell which horses the on air personalities really like, and those that they just pick because they have to make one. In the end, who really cares how the selections do? I only care how mine do.

I completely agree with what you're saying, its a tough call, but i think that their dilemma is do they sacrifice betting handle today in order to cultivate a relationship with their customers that says "we care about you and we want you to do well and we want you to remain a customer for life"?

It comes down to the unlimited supply theory that the customer will just 'find' more money to bet the very next race after losing on Nick Hines' pick 4 at Delta Downs. I'm fairly certain that if a customer of theirs loses 96 dollars on the talent ticket, that's 96 dollars that they might not have in their account...and who knows, maybe they'll just take sunday off because they lost their budget on Saturday. But, if they skipped the talent ticket on Saturday and used the 96 dollars to make more conservative wagers like some exactas or DDs, they might be 'in action' on Sunday as they would have churned that 96 and not just lost it on a Les Onaka's Pick 4 recommendation at Dania Jai Lai.

[Stillriledup]

Sure, it's fair in the context you describe (though I think the excitement and high fives is theatrical as much as genuine for the reasons I described in conveying a fun experience). But in terms of deciding just how great they are in general at both handicapping and wagering, I don't think you can look at a pick five ticket or six out nine "checkmark" picks up in smoke. Being a successful handicapper and/or bettor and being one as on-air talent with serious constraints on your play are pretty different. The best guys are the ones that can let you know what their selection is, but also subtly convey the extent to which they actually like that selection.

The guys did well today in the finale at Golden Gate. They saw a 3-1 shot heading to the gate that really washed out and they basically told their viewers "get your money back on this horse its not winning". It might have been part of their new handicappers corner thing where they go over the race horse by horse and show the PPs on tv. This was a situation where they get kudos for noticing and adjusting on the fly, it was good stuff by them to alert the bettors to stay away from the extremely washy horse who was a major contender on paper.

The great thing about their comments is that this wasnt just a horse who had a little sweat on the neck but was otherwise fine, this was a horse who really 'lost it' (think Hansen in the Derby) and was drenched and almost quivering. They saw this and were like "get off this horse now".

[edmond1]

The guys did well today in the finale at Golden Gate. They saw a 3-1 shot heading to the gate that really washed out and they basically told their viewers "get your money back on this horse its not winning". It might have been part of their new handicappers corner thing where they go over the race horse by horse and show the PPs on tv. This was a situation where they get kudos for noticing and adjusting on the fly, it was good stuff by them to alert the bettors to stay away from the extremely washy horse who was a major contender on paper.

The great thing about their comments is that this wasnt just a horse who had a little sweat on the neck but was otherwise fine, this was a horse who really 'lost it' (think Hansen in the Derby) and was drenched and almost quivering. They saw this and were like "get off this horse now".

Better this up to the second information than multi-race picks that mean nothing to me.....

[Hosshead]

One thing that really bothers me about the TVG guys is:

Talking Over Each Other !!

One guy can't complete a frickin' sentence without the other guy butting in and talking over the first guy.

And if one guy actually gets to speak a complete sentence, then right at the end of his sentence, while he is on the last 2 words, .....he gets cut off and talked over by the other guy who is ready to pounce on the previous sentence..

They all do it but: One guys ego in particular is really guilty of this.
And the guy that is constantly doing this creates a situation where everybody has to "butt in" and talk over the other person if he wants to get the chance to say anything !

This makes for uninterrupted "endless chatter" that is like watching a film clip with each scene edited to only 2 seconds long, and becomes so annoying that you just turn away from the screen or change the channel or hit the mute.

They just can't let a sentence (from the person who is talking) come to a complete stop without "stepping on it".

And in doing this, they give the impression that they could care less about what somebody just said, because their comment is much more important, and justifies cutting the previous person off.
Trying to "top" what was being said by cutting the person off.
The viewer doesn't have time to think about what somebody said because the other guy has interrupted him !

They just don't know how to work (talk) together, in harmony, to creat something that is (audibly) easy and enjoyable to listen to.

And this has nothing to do with what they are actually talking about !
I'll save that for another day.

[Track Phantom]

TVG has a chance to be good. Todd S, Matt C, etc are not bad guys. I think Todd is easy enough to listen to. There are some I don't care for but that is more of a product of hearing them too much.

Having said that, IMO their format is misguided and unfocused. You have an audience of fairly sophisticated horse people and horse players tuning in. Your product should cater enough to their wants as possible. I don't believe it does that.

I don't have the answers but I believe what they are doing is below what they could be doing.

Also, the Twitter follower war reminds me of 4th grade girl stuff. That is hard to listen to.

[Stillriledup]

TVG has a chance to be good. Todd S, Matt C, etc are not bad guys. I think Todd is easy enough to listen to. There are some I don't care for but that is more of a product of hearing them too much.

Having said that, IMO their format is misguided and unfocused. You have an audience of fairly sophisticated horse people and horse players tuning in. Your product should cater enough to their wants as possible. I don't believe it does that.

I don't have the answers but I believe what they are doing is below what they could be doing.

Also, the Twitter follower war reminds me of 4th grade girl stuff. That is hard to listen to.

And, even for the people who are not currently sophisticated horse people, you want to 'groom' those people to become either sharp handicappers or people who feel that they know a decent amount about this sport and business. If you're a newbie and you tune in and see all the jokes and twitter wars, i'm not sure that portrays a good image of what the horse racing industry wants to convey.

[Track Phantom]

And, even for the people who are not currently sophisticated horse people, you want to 'groom' those people to become either sharp handicappers or people who feel that they know a decent amount about this sport and business. If you're a newbie and you tune in and see all the jokes and twitter wars, i'm not sure that portrays a good image of what the horse racing industry wants to convey.

As opposed to tuning in and seeing a recently claimed Jamie Ness runner who last out ran 5th in a $12,500 claimer but today sets the track record at $25,000 claiming.

I'm just kidding a bit but it's not like TVG is CSPAN covering serious, worldly stuff. TVG is covering turds floating in a toliet.

[proximity]

I'm just kidding a bit but it's not like TVG is CSPAN covering serious, worldly stuff. TVG is covering turds floating in a toliet.

career politicians spending opm vs supertrainers juicing for slots dollars? :confused:

[Stillriledup]

I had to share this with you guys.....last night, late at night, Gino and Rich were on doing Japan racing...every race was a 16 horse field....now, i'm guessing that if you wager with TVG, the money doesnt go comingled into the pools in Tokyo, so its just the 'tvg pool' im guessing. Gino released a 48 dollar play on a pick 4...four races of 16 horses each.....i dont know, was the pool even 48 dollars? I can't imagine the tvg seperate pools are big, was the pick 4 pool big enough where a 48 dollar pick 4 part wheel with extremely large fields was going to be good value? I can't imagine it was.

[duncan04]

I had to share this with you guys.....last night, late at night, Gino and Rich were on doing Japan racing...every race was a 16 horse field....now, i'm guessing that if you wager with TVG, the money doesnt go comingled into the pools in Tokyo, so its just the 'tvg pool' im guessing. Gino released a 48 dollar play on a pick 4...four races of 16 horses each.....i dont know, was the pool even 48 dollars? I can't imagine the tvg seperate pools are big, was the pick 4 pool big enough where a 48 dollar pick 4 part wheel with extremely large fields was going to be good value? I can't imagine it was.


It goes in the North American pool which all ADW's which carry the feed participate in. I hope you seriously don't think it was a TVG only pool. :rolleyes:

[Stillriledup]

I have a good/great idea for TVG, you ready? ( i know, you were born ready!)

They ought to have more stallion ads. Not enough stallion owners advertise their stallions on TVG, that needs to change.

Hear what i'm saying? :D