A Sport without a “Voice”

[Cratos]

Looking back at the TC races through the tapes which I made while away at the races and following the various sports channels on TV prior to and after the TC races it became very clear to me that this sport, thoroughbred horserace racing is in dire need of a “voice.”

When I speak of a “voice,” I am referring to the fact that horseracing does not have major voices in today’s sports media arena. Also I am only targeting the lack of media coverage that racing is not getting. I fully realize that there many other things about this that is in trouble and need fixing.

To continue, gone are the voices of Joe Hirsch, Bill Nack, Jim Murray, and Red Smith to name a few of the turf writers who were prominent voices in promoting this sport through their newspaper columns when racing truly was the “Sport of Kings.” As an appendage and before the outcry from the cynics becomes deafening I know that some of the aforementioned turf writers are deceased and my question was therefore rhetorical.

Also to his credit, Andy Beyer remains as the echo in the sports media arena for horseracing, but his voice is minute when compared to the voices coming from MLB, NFL, NBA, etc.

ESPN the 800-pound voice of all sports media gives only a minor “voice” to the sport and gave a less than stellar recognition to the recent TC races on its network. I watched ESPN’s “Sports Reporters” the Sunday morning after the Ky Derby and the amount of discussion given to the race was like it never happened.

The NBC TC telecasts weren’t much better although Bob Costas and others did their best on the NBC TC telecasts, but they were not horseracing knowledgeable enough to make the telecast both interesting and informative to the less informed sports fan who knows little or nothing about horseracing.

Another issue that was glaringly missing from the TC telecasts or at least I must have missed them were the lack of commercial support by the current “big dogs” of horseracing today. I didn’t see any commercials by the TOBA, NTRA, Equibase, Blood-Horse, or the Daily Racing Form.

When you watch the NFL, the NBA, MLB, NASCAR, Pro Golf and Tennis on ESPN or one of the other major networks they typically have former players or coaches on to give the viewer a better insight into the nuisances of the sport they are viewing. Yes, NBC did have Laffit Pincay, Jr, Jerry Bailey, and Randy Moss on during the TC telecasts, but they were sparingly used.

Therefore I believe that there are horseplayers (including some from PaceAdvantage) if given the opportunity and with the proper media training have the horseracing knowledge to become excellent color analysts on TV for horseracing. Additionally, they would bring a perspective that is lacking big time in the horserace telecasts and that is a view of the fan. The horseracing fan unlike the other major sport fans is both a spectator and a participant and that perspective need to be shown more clearly during horseracing telecasts.

Help might be on the way because one of the major networks will be telecasting some races from Saratoga this summer. If that happens, it will be good, but not nearly enough.

Telecasting just the major stake races will not do the trick in informing the novice or uninformed sports fan about racing. It would be good if during the telecast there would claiming and allowance races run with explanations of their differences.

I will agree that it is not just up to the sports networks to become the “voice” alone for horseracing. The racetracks need to do their share at the local level by having horseracing talk shows on the local radio airwaves and presenting on-track tours with presentations to better inform the fan.

Lastly, I have been to virtually every major sporting event in America and for one day; not one of them can match the Ky Derby experience. The one venue that I will say might have any recognition for fun to the Derby would be boxing and there must be the right boxers to pull that off. The Super Bowl with all of its hoopla is okay and I have been privilege to be invited to some private parties held at some of the most exclusive stadium boxes and they didn’t come close to my Derby experiences.

[Stillriledup]

If this wasn't such a serious topic and post, i'd make a lame joke and suggest that Danielle Bradbery might be available, but that's neither here nor there.

I think that the lack of coverage has to do with money. ESPN would find a way to promote horse racing if 'horse racing' paid them to do so. Unfortunately, horse racing is 'broke' and doesnt really have a dime to spend on purchasing media coverage.

Its the same thing with the NHL, ESPN barely mentions that the sport even exists, so, ESPN just picks and chooses which sports they have decided to cover.

As far as the Pace Advantage crew getting on TV, i do like what TVG has been doing with having an 'amateur' analyst to discuss one race, they've been doing that recently, but we need more of that. We need actual experts of horse racing on tv, there are plenty of people out there who would go on tv and talk about the game, give selections and real analysis too. I think many of us would rather hear a professional/expert gambler discuss a race rather than a professional journalist.

[iceknight]

I think that the lack of coverage has to do with money. ESPN would find a way to promote horse racing if 'horse racing' paid them to do so.
I think many of us would rather hear a professional/expert gambler discuss a race rather than a professional journalist. Spot on about the money. the other thing to ask also is... how can espn derive money even if horse racing does not pay them directly? There it becomes the chicken-egg discussion.

Regarding professional/successful gambler discussing races on TV, I am not sure many of them truly want to share?

[Stillriledup]

Spot on about the money. the other thing to ask also is... how can espn derive money even if horse racing does not pay them directly? There it becomes the chicken-egg discussion.

Regarding professional/successful gambler discussing races on TV, I am not sure many of them truly want to share?

Some of the good ones, you would think, have large ego's and want to get on tv and say how good they are, how much they bet, brag about big scores, etc.

A tv network would have to put an ad in the DRF saying that if you can prove you're a big bettor with documented "signers" and tax returns that show you earn a living from gambling, you can possibly get on tv and be a tv star! Maybe someone would answer the ad! :D

[Cratos]

If this wasn't such a serious topic and post, i'd make a lame joke and suggest that Danielle Bradbery might be available, but that's neither here nor there.

I think that the lack of coverage has to do with money. ESPN would find a way to promote horse racing if 'horse racing' paid them to do so. Unfortunately, horse racing is 'broke' and doesnt really have a dime to spend on purchasing media coverage.

Its the same thing with the NHL, ESPN barely mentions that the sport even exists, so, ESPN just picks and chooses which sports they have decided to cover.

As far as the Pace Advantage crew getting on TV, i do like what TVG has been doing with having an 'amateur' analyst to discuss one race, they've been doing that recently, but we need more of that. We need actual experts of horse racing on tv, there are plenty of people out there who would go on tv and talk about the game, give selections and real analysis too. I think many of us would rather hear a professional/expert gambler discuss a race rather than a professional journalist.

Racing is not broke; it is mismanaged with too much government involvement. ESPN although do not carry the regular season NHL games they do a very good job reporting on the NHL playoffs and showing the playoff highlights. Additionally, they use Barry Meadows as the color analyst for their NHL telecasts and he is very good.

[Cratos]

Some of the good ones, you would think, have large ego's and want to get on tv and say how good they are, how much they bet, brag about big scores, etc.

A tv network would have to put an ad in the DRF saying that if you can prove you're a big bettor with documented "signers" and tax returns that show you earn a living from gambling, you can possibly get on tv and be a tv star! Maybe someone would answer the ad! :D


I believe that you are missing the point, I am not advocating someone to come on the TV and talk about betting. I am saying that thoroughbred racing needs more coverage period, not just the betting aspect of it. Far as betting, there is much more money wagered on Pro Football and College basketball than horseracing.

[Robert Goren]

It is all about companies willing to sponsor the broadcasts. The demographics for people who would watch the telecasts are not people most companies trying to reach.

[Cratos]

It is all about companies willing to sponsor the broadcasts. The demographics for people who would watch the telecasts are not people most companies trying to reach.

I agree, but that is racing problem; they must sell their product. This is America and if you package it right and promote it well, it will sell.

[098poi]

I agree, but that is racing problem; they must sell their product. This is America and if you package it right and promote it well, it will sell.


The problem is there is no "they". From a distance it looks like there is but the closer you get there are just many fragments. Maybe someday there will be a bit more unity and effective action will be taken for the larger whole.

[Striker]

Help might be on the way because one of the major networks will be telecasting some races from Saratoga this summer. If that happens, it will be good, but not nearly enough.

NBC and NBCSN televised some of the Saratoga stakes last year. This year's schedule--

http://advertise.nbcsports.com/media/22175/horseracing.pdf

[PaceAdvantage]

It is all about companies willing to sponsor the broadcasts. The demographics for people who would watch the telecasts are not people most companies trying to reach.Really? Hmmmm...I don't know about that.

What are the demographics of golf? Older males, no? Same as racing.

Do people on golf boards lament the lack of sponsorship?

[Cannon shell]

. Additionally, they use Barry Meadows as the color analyst for their NHL telecasts and he is very good.
The 'Money Secrets at the racetrack' guy?

You might be thinking of Barry Melrose.

[cordep17]

they use Barry Meadows as the color analyst for their NHL telecasts

It is Barry Melrose

In regards to the post, I think a few things would have to happen in order for ESPN to give a hoot about horseracing.
1. Get a guy
....No one on that network has made a serious comment about horse racing, so if they were to get involved in covering, I would want them to do it right.
2. Have a demographic.
...we have our sources for getting our horse racing news. ESPN has already built the demographic that they have by putting what they do on the air. That same demographic would probably not take too well to what they would see as way to much horseracing coverage. Where would they get such a demographic from. I don't know that there are enough of us to warrant them to cater to the sport. We have to build the abrand before we get recognition from the big guys.

So again, what would ESPN gain from showing the sport. I wish they would, but I don't know why they would.

[thespaah]

If this wasn't such a serious topic and post, i'd make a lame joke and suggest that Danielle Bradbery might be available, but that's neither here nor there.

I think that the lack of coverage has to do with money. ESPN would find a way to promote horse racing if 'horse racing' paid them to do so. Unfortunately, horse racing is 'broke' and doesnt really have a dime to spend on purchasing media coverage.

Its the same thing with the NHL, ESPN barely mentions that the sport even exists, so, ESPN just picks and chooses which sports they have decided to cover.

As far as the Pace Advantage crew getting on TV, i do like what TVG has been doing with having an 'amateur' analyst to discuss one race, they've been doing that recently, but we need more of that. We need actual experts of horse racing on tv, there are plenty of people out there who would go on tv and talk about the game, give selections and real analysis too. I think many of us would rather hear a professional/expert gambler discuss a race rather than a professional journalist.
It is not the dollars horse racing( term used in general) has to buy tv time.
The process begins with negotiations for tv time slots. Then for example, NBC Sports Net execs agree to a package of Grade 1 events for the Summer. The next step is to seek out advertisers. That is really where it begins..Or ends.
If a program producer cannot sell his program to advertisers, the deal is off.
Ad executives look at ratings as a guideline on the value of advertising on a certain program or event.
The only way horse racing, or anything else for that matter gets on television is the ability to draw viewers(ratings) which in turn increases the value of the programming to advertisers. The more people watch, the more the program producer can charge the advertiser for commercial time.
ESPN has pushed all of its chips in on NFL, NBA and MLB on the pro sports side. And of course NCAA Football and Hoops.
The rest of the time ESPN spends beating scandlas such as juicing in baseball, to death 258 times over.
I am interested to see what this new Fox Sports1 network is all about. Will they go outside the box and promote horse racing? Who knows.

[thaskalos]

I submitted my resume to the NTRA, and asked to be put in charge of "player development"...a job which I told them I would gladly do for free.

I told them that the game was in dire need of knowledgeable horseplayers in key positions...who could lend a voice to the many concerns that the betting public has in today's game.

Never got a response...

[cordep17]

I submitted my resume to the NTRA, and asked to be put in charge of "player development"...a job which I told them I would gladly do for free.

I told them that the game was in dire need of knowledgeable horseplayers in key positions...who could lend a voice to the many concerns that the betting public has in today's game.

Never got a response...

An oficionado of anything that is willing to do anything for free should be taken up on an offer, or at least spoken to.

[Robert Goren]

Really? Hmmmm...I don't know about that.

What are the demographics of golf? Older males, no? Same as racing.

Do people on golf boards lament the lack of sponsorship?Watch a golf telecast and watch the commercials and then tell me why those advertisers would want to reach horse players. Do very many horse players buy what they are selling? Figure out what many horse players buy and then get them to sponsor racing TV shows. It is going to take someone smarter than me to figure out who is going to want to sponsor horse racing shows. But I know this, some of the sponsors has to come from outside the industry.

[thespaah]

I submitted my resume to the NTRA, and asked to be put in charge of "player development"...a job which I told them I would gladly do for free.

I told them that the game was in dire need of knowledgeable horseplayers in key positions...who could lend a voice to the many concerns that the betting public has in today's game.

Never got a response...
Given the way the sport is operated, new ideas are most likely a frightening prospect to those who in charge.

[JustRalph]

ESPN has laid off 1500 people in the last few weeks. Lots of cost cutting.

They laid off "The Schwab" yesterday after 26 yrs

I don't see ESPN giving a rats ass about horse racing in the future

The new Fox Sports network goes live in August. I believe ESPN is trying to get ahead of the curve.

[cordep17]

stump the schwab was the best. I never could do it, but it was fun watching those who tried.

[JustRalph]

stump the schwab was the best. I never could do it, but it was fun watching those who tried.

He was officially a researcher and producer. 26 yrs.

[Stillriledup]

I submitted my resume to the NTRA, and asked to be put in charge of "player development"...a job which I told them I would gladly do for free.

I told them that the game was in dire need of knowledgeable horseplayers in key positions...who could lend a voice to the many concerns that the betting public has in today's game.

Never got a response...

No response? Seems pretty arrogant on their part.

[PaceAdvantage]

Watch a golf telecast and watch the commercials and then tell me why those advertisers would want to reach horse players. Do very many horse players buy what they are selling? Figure out what many horse players buy and then get them to sponsor racing TV shows. It is going to take someone smarter than me to figure out who is going to want to sponsor horse racing shows. But I know this, some of the sponsors has to come from outside the industry.You'd be surprised at the number of horse players who are also into and play golf...it's the same demo...older men with lots of time on their hands...

So you tell me why the advertisers who go for the golf telecasts aren't going for the horse racing telecasts...what's the big secret scoop that I am missing out on...

[Al Gobbi]

ESPN used to have Len DeLuca and Mark Shapiro, both whom were fans of horseracing and were responsible for the network to acquire the Breeders' Cup and Belmont Stakes back in 2005. When both left ESPN (especially Shapiro), the coverage and interest significantly decreased.

I expect Fox will probably have some interest in trying to get the Derby when it comes up in a few year.

I will end this post with the ratings/viewership of NBCSN's Belmont week shows:

BELMONT STAKES SATURDAY (6/9) Sat 3:00PM- 5:00PM (0.2) 283k viewers
BELMONT STAKES RECAP (6/9) Sat 6:59PM- 7:30PM (0.1) 135k viewers
BROOKLYN HANDICAP & JAIPUR STAKES (6/8) Fri 5:00PM- 6:00PM (0.0) 67k viewers
BELMONT CLASSICS Fri 4:00PM- 5:00PM (0.0) 56k viewers

http://sonofthebronx.blogspot.com/2013/06/nbc-sports-network-nba-tv-mlb-network_14.html

[NJ Stinks]

Really? Hmmmm...I don't know about that.

What are the demographics of golf? Older males, no? Same as racing.

Do people on golf boards lament the lack of sponsorship?


I don't think golfers and horse players can be considered similar. For one thing, golfers need equipment - expensive equipment - to play the game. Manufacturers of golf equipment compete for the dollars spent by golfers to play the game by advertising. In contrast, what do horseplayers need to play? Money. Yea, Cashcall is advertising to loan us money but generally speaking you don't see financial institutions shelling out advertising bucks so horseplayers will borrow from them to play. :)

Also, I see a lot of golfers in their 30's and 40's. It's a younger demographic IMO.

[TJDave]

So you tell me why the advertisers who go for the golf telecasts aren't going for the horse racing telecasts...what's the big secret scoop that I am missing out on...

Because horseplayers don't buy Rolexes...they pawn them.

[thaskalos]

Because horseplayers don't buy Rolexes...they pawn them.
Don't you have to own something before you can pawn it?

Where would a horseplayer who is worth his salt find a Rolex?

[PaceAdvantage]

Because horseplayers don't buy Rolexes...they pawn them.Where do people get the idea that the majority of people watching racing telecasts are full time players? Or full time degenerates.

There is an entire fan base of people in between the extremes...an audience that skews older and has money...similar to golf...

[CincyHorseplayer]

I don't think golfers and horse players can be considered similar. For one thing, golfers need equipment - expensive equipment - to play the game. Manufacturers of golf equipment compete for the dollars spent by golfers to play the game by advertising. In contrast, what do horseplayers need to play? Money. Yea, Cashcall is advertising to loan us money but generally speaking you don't see financial institutions shelling out advertising bucks so horseplayers will borrow from them to play. :)

Also, I see a lot of golfers in their 30's and 40's. It's a younger demographic IMO.

I think nearly all of us on here spend far more on information every year than a golfer spends on equipment.

I think horseracing needs somebody like me.I'm 40,have been into the game since I was 23,have equal parts passion/betting interest in the sport,am well roundedly read,and when I want to be,well spoken enough.I'm about as younger of a demographic as I know of.Plus someone needs to be direct with these goofy bastard$.During the Preakness telecast that yapped right through the Dixie Stakes.I couldn't F-in believe it.That can't happen.Plus as has been mentioned more time needs to be used to talk about handicapping,actuality and theory.TVG talks too much about what they are betting and tv networks talk too much about connections.That'd be the equivalent of basefall fans hearing about player agents during the gamecast!

[Robert Goren]

In this day of networks showing nothing but rerun of shows from 50 years ago, if they could find somebody to lay down hard cash to sponsor horse racing, it would be on. Despite all the talk of causal fans, horse racing doesn't have very many. Horse Racing is about gambling. And Gamblers sink all of their spare income back into gambling. When poker was popular on TV, who sponsored it? Internet Poker, that is who. The horseracing equivalent, the ADWs either aren't interested or don't have the kind of cash to sponsor it.

[burnsy]

ESPN used to have Len DeLuca and Mark Shapiro, both whom were fans of horseracing and were responsible for the network to acquire the Breeders' Cup and Belmont Stakes back in 2005. When both left ESPN (especially Shapiro), the coverage and interest significantly decreased.

I expect Fox will probably have some interest in trying to get the Derby when it comes up in a few year.

I will end this post with the ratings/viewership of NBCSN's Belmont week shows:

BELMONT STAKES SATURDAY (6/9) Sat 3:00PM- 5:00PM (0.2) 283k viewers
BELMONT STAKES RECAP (6/9) Sat 6:59PM- 7:30PM (0.1) 135k viewers
BROOKLYN HANDICAP & JAIPUR STAKES (6/8) Fri 5:00PM- 6:00PM (0.0) 67k viewers
BELMONT CLASSICS Fri 4:00PM- 5:00PM (0.0) 56k viewers

http://sonofthebronx.blogspot.com/2013/06/nbc-sports-network-nba-tv-mlb-network_14.html

This is why right here..........more people watch Duck Dynasty, Swamp People and Nancy Grace...oh, and the "NEWS" which is half BS too. Like TheSpa said "How does a producer sell this?".......Handle is not everything...PUBLIC INTEREST is HUGE. This sport had a history where people dropped everything to see WHO won....Seabiscuit vs. War Admiral. People skipped work to SEE it! When i was kid every time Secretariat or Seattle Slew ran....it was NEWS! This used to be a major game with Baseball and Boxing. Its not just the betting, fan support is what sells to ANY media because they need SPONSERS! Any stupid thing people care about....is on TV now.........Yeah, horse racing does a great job promoting itself..........:lol: Instead of merging,(like every other professional sport has done) its still dog eat dog, the game suffers, then the ones that do love it....suffer also.

[Longshot6977]

I would assume (maybe incorrectly) that the sponsors would consist of wagering platforms/ADWs and data services such as Brisnet, DRF, Equibase etc. They should be able to see that the more people who bet would need their products. Maybe beverage ads too. And I would assume companies like HRTV, TVG, racetracks, Trakkus etc would be inclined to advertise during the broadcasts. Maybe tout services? I guess they either never had the chance to do so or are just happy with their present financial climate.

[thaskalos]

I would assume (maybe incorrectly) that the sponsors would consist of wagering platforms/ADWs and data services such as Brisnet, DRF, Equibase etc. They should be able to see that the more people who bet would need their products. Maybe beverage ads too. And I would assume companies like HRTV, TVG, racetracks, Trakkus etc would be inclined to advertise during the broadcasts. Maybe tout services? I guess they either never had the chance to do so or are just happy with their present financial climate.

There isn't enough interest in the game -- from audience or sponsors -- to support a decent monthly magazine!

Every single hobby or pursuit -- regardless of its seeming insignificance, or its standing with the mainstream audience -- has a regular magazine which caters to its loyal following. Most hobbies or pursuits have several magazines...and you can find them on the magazine racks of every book store.

The horseplayers have one magazine which supposedly caters to them...and no one knows if it's still in circulation.

Doesn't that tell us anything?

And we are talking about regular TV programming?

[melman]

With golf the local clubs spend money on promoting golf. Same with the mangement of the PGA Tour. With racing most tracks promote the casino side of the business. At the tracks in my area and IMO most tracks nationwide don't really care what the attendance or the handle is.
The profit is with the casino side. So why would any sponser/ad firm want to put money into racing? Even the mangement of racing is unwilling to do so. Again in my area the ad money spent on casino vs racing by Parx or Harrah's Philadelpia is about 95 percent towards the casino side. That is where the profit is.
Locally I see ad's on tv or hear them on radio for local golf clubs.
A whole lot more of them then the very very few run by racing.

[melman]

There isn't enough interest in the game -- from audience or sponsors -- to support a decent monthly magazine!

Every single hobby or pursuit -- regardless of its seeming insignificance, or its standing with the mainstream audience -- has a regular magazine which caters to its loyal following. Most hobbies or pursuits have several magazines...and you can find them on the magazine racks of every book store.

The horseplayers have one magazine which supposedly caters to them...and no one knows if it's still in circulation.

Doesn't that tell us anything?

And we are talking about regular TV programming?
How very true. "Back in the day" there was a buzz about racing. People would talk about and look forward to the old garden state park spring and fall meets. More than a few people would plan there summer vacations around the ac meet's big races. Local radio staton KYW had live race calls in there sports segments.

[dilanesp]

While many of the problems horse racing faces are unique to the sport (breakdowns, drugs, field size, too many tracks and too much racing, etc.), this one is not. This is a problem in all "minor" sports.

What has basically happened is that the advent of cable television has allowed for a lot of specialization of sports programming. Instead of an anthology series like Wide World of Sports on ABC, or local programming like the Saturday feature race on Channel 2 in Southern California, or cable programming like Racing Across America on ESPN, you have specialized networks like Tennis Channel, Speed Network, and, in horse racing, TVG and HRTV.

Specialty channels need programming and have some money, which means they are willing to pay decently for content. But what that also means is that a lot of stuff that used to air on network or cable television now airs on the specialty channels instead, and only the people who already care about the sport see it.

There is a bit of pushback to this-- NYRA has gotten Saratoga racing onto NBC, for instance, which is a really good idea. But NYRA is basically giving up some revenue to do this, and it's hard to ask tracks to do that especially given the financial health of the industry. And it's not as clear that as many people care anymore-- track and field, for instance, still gets a fair amount of its product on network television and it hasn't expanded the audience for the sport.

The bottom line is that there probably isn't any magic bullet to getting more people interested in horse racing. There are things to avoid that get people less interested-- like breakdowns, doping stories, ugly and decrepit racetracks, and unbettable 5 horse races. But any growth in the audience is going to have to happen organically, as people find the sport and discover they like to bet on it and watch it.

[Cratos]

This has been an interesting and thought provoking thread which is what thoroughbred racing needs if it is to recover to competitive prominence in the sports media arena which should allow it to increase its revenues and reduce its costs.

What I am saying is that thoroughbred racing needs more “voices.”

However there is an understanding that I acquired while in B-school and it was “products produce customers; customers do not produce products, they buy products.”

Is that true? Yes and we need to look no further than 50+ years ago when the now behemoth NFL was a fledging sports league trailing major league baseball, horseracing, and boxing.

In 1960, the NFL brass turned controls of its organization over to Pete Rozelle, the 33-year-old general manager of the Los Angeles Rams at the time with the expectation that he would be a commissioner who could be twisted in their favor.

However they were wrong, Rozelle a former public relations executive turned the NFL into the number 1 sport in America today.

I am not going into much detail about how that was done, but one of the significant achievements by Rozelle was that through his leadership the NFL generated huge contracts with network television. The NFL had 12 teams worth about $1 million apiece when Rozelle began his rule; when he left in 1989, there were 28 teams, most worth more than $100 million each and today, only CBS' 60 Minutes has been on the air longer.

Additionally, he reorganized the NFL into a manageable single unit with one voice speaking for all. For the cynics out there; there were stumbles and there was Rozelle’s antagonist in Al Davis of the Oakland Raiders.

In conclusion, I not saying or inferring that thoroughbred racing will rival the NFL, but what I am saying with reorganization and ingenious marketing it could become a significant player in today’s sports media arena with a “voice” that would be heard by many.

[melman]

Cratos I could not disagree more. Do you think boxing could make a big comeback also? By having a "voice" or better marketing.
The mangement at the casino tracks are not totally stupid people.
They know where the money is. Back in the day horse racing was the only game in town. Now you have casino's all over the place and big money lotto games in almost every state. Could racing do a better job and increase there market? Yes, but forget about any idea of returning to large crowds and big handles. This last year racing did show a small overall gain in handle. How? I believe by catering more and more to the big time players. Rebates of 10-12-15 percent mean the large player does NOT have to show a profit betting. Just break even and the rebates take care of the rest. That's about the best racing can hope for.

[thespaah]

This is why right here..........more people watch Duck Dynasty, Swamp People and Nancy Grace...oh, and the "NEWS" which is half BS too. Like TheSpa said "How does a producer sell this?".......Handle is not everything...PUBLIC INTEREST is HUGE. This sport had a history where people dropped everything to see WHO won....Seabiscuit vs. War Admiral. People skipped work to SEE it! When i was kid every time Secretariat or Seattle Slew ran....it was NEWS! This used to be a major game with Baseball and Boxing. Its not just the betting, fan support is what sells to ANY media because they need SPONSERS! Any stupid thing people care about....is on TV now.........Yeah, horse racing does a great job promoting itself..........:lol: Instead of merging,(like every other professional sport has done) its still dog eat dog, the game suffers, then the ones that do love it....suffer also.
Merging. You hit on a point I agree with.
Let's take a look at NASCAR.
Up until the late 90's NASCAR was more or less a regional sport.
There was little if any appreciable tv revenue. Tracks promoted their events and put up most of the purse money. Each track negotiated its own tv and radio deals. Even though ESPN is considered the one entity for putting NASCAR into the homes of viewers, the money was not there. The main reason is that ESPN and the other broadcasters had to negotiate with the tracks.
NASCAR management finally woke up. They decided that if the sport was going to grow it needed new revenue streams and a wider tv viewing audience. The Company got all the track managements to agree on a national tv contract. That got FOX interested.
This is precisely what the horse racing industry should do.
Step one would be to form a national board which could put together a proposal for any tv outlet that will listen.
Now, obviously the major tracks with the best races would have to be involved. Of course that would be in a perfect world.
The reality is this will probably never happen. Cooperation among track managements and horseman's groups would be at best difficult to attain.
Not a good scenario at all.

[Cratos]

Cratos I could not disagree more. Do you think boxing could make a big comeback also? By having a "voice" or better marketing.
The mangement at the casino tracks are not totally stupid people.
They know where the money is. Back in the day horse racing was the only game in town. Now you have casino's all over the place and big money lotto games in almost every state. Could racing do a better job and increase there market? Yes, but forget about any idea of returning to large crowds and big handles. This last year racing did show a small overall gain in handle. How? I believe by catering more and more to the big time players. Rebates of 10-12-15 percent mean the large player does NOT have to show a profit betting. Just break even and the rebates take care of the rest. That's about the best racing can hope for.

I didn’t say equal, I said “competitive prominence in the sports media arena,” but it is apparent to me that you were on the same ship with the ones who wanted to allow GM to “crash and burn” after many years of bad decisions and mismanagement. Take a look at GM today and see if that was the right decision and please don't go off in to the political haggling.

I not comparing the producing of cars to the production of horseracing as a viable sports entity, but I am saying many principles of econometrics do apply and to what level of economic success is achieved is as probabilistic as it is with most products before they are released to market.

Boxing problem is not suffering from lack of fan interest as much as lack of quality boxers (particularly at the heavyweight level) for the fans. However there must be some interest because Showtime gave Floyd Mayweather a 6 fight $200 million contract; only Alex Rodriguez contract in MLB exceeded that amount.

I understand your points, but horseracing as an entity must be sold; not just parts of it because the horseracing fan base that should be targeted would be primarily threefold: (1) fans who are handicappers and bet, (2) fans who are bettors and sometimes handicappers, and (3) fans who just attend races and are neither handicappers are bettors.

[Cratos]

It is Barry Melrose

In regards to the post, I think a few things would have to happen in order for ESPN to give a hoot about horseracing.
1. Get a guy
....No one on that network has made a serious comment about horse racing, so if they were to get involved in covering, I would want them to do it right.
2. Have a demographic.
...we have our sources for getting our horse racing news. ESPN has already built the demographic that they have by putting what they do on the air. That same demographic would probably not take too well to what they would see as way to much horseracing coverage. Where would they get such a demographic from. I don't know that there are enough of us to warrant them to cater to the sport. We have to build the abrand before we get recognition from the big guys.

So again, what would ESPN gain from showing the sport. I wish they would, but I don't know why they would.

Thanks for the correction

[melman]

Cratos--You seem to overlook what is very clear to me. In the glory days of racing it was the many small bettors who made it so popular. It was the "only game in town". If you wanted to bet legal that was your action.
Those days are gone forever. Talking about one boxer getting a huge contract does NOT a sport make. There will always be a Saratoga, a Keeneland a track in fla in the winter and one or two in ca. Things are not that bad, but a return to a competive prominence in the sports media area is just wishful thinking. The same type of thing that has gone on over the years here on the Pace Advantage board. A thread will pop up from time to time called "are you ahead lifetime" or are you ahead since you started taking the game serious, or since you got a certain set of figs, or software. If you believe the answers then a whole lot of people are winning money betting on horse racing. Just more wishful thinking. Cratos I say this as a LONG time fan of racing. I would attend live racing six days a week. Many a time I did a "doubleheader" going both during the day and at night. I don't believe for a minute that any "voice" or great marketing plan will bring it back. There are far to many of options for the person who wants to bet money. In the old days racing had a "buzz" people looked forward to certain meets.
They talked about it at bars, at barbershops, and the local market. I understand things have really changed now with the social media, texting, and tweets but even if you count those there is a huge lack of interest.

[Cratos]

Cratos--You seem to overlook what is very clear to me. In the glory days of racing it was the many small bettors who made it so popular. It was the "only game in town". If you wanted to bet legal that was your action.
Those days are gone forever. Talking about one boxer getting a huge contract does NOT a sport make. There will always be a Saratoga, a Keeneland a track in fla in the winter and one or two in ca. Things are not that bad, but a return to a competive prominence in the sports media area is just wishful thinking. The same type of thing that has gone on over the years here on the Pace Advantage board. A thread will pop up from time to time called "are you ahead lifetime" or are you ahead since you started taking the game serious, or since you got a certain set of figs, or software. If you believe the answers then a whole lot of people are winning money betting on horse racing. Just more wishful thinking. Cratos I say this as a LONG time fan of racing. I would attend live racing six days a week. Many a time I did a "doubleheader" going both during the day and at night. I don't believe for a minute that any "voice" or great marketing plan will bring it back. There are far to many of options for the person who wants to bet money. In the old days racing had a "buzz" people looked forward to certain meets.
They talked about it at bars, at barbershops, and the local market. I understand things have really changed now with the social media, texting, and tweets but even if you count those there is a huge lack of interest.

I don’t know exactly where to begin in responding to your post so I will start by saying I have been in this game for 40+ years (almost exclusively on the NYRA circuit) and I have seen the decline in this sport close up and personal.

Therefore I am not a person who dream of the “good old days” because I believe the best days are here and in the future. Many things have change since the days that Man O’ War and Seabiscuit were the darlings of the sports world along with Babe Ruth and Joe Louis. We have gone to the moon, developed the personal computer and the Internet to name a few significant changes.

If you are inferring that the task that I am advocating will be difficult I will agree with you wholeheartedly, but it is not impossible or improbable.
The major obstacle facing thoroughbred racing today is POLITICS.

Thoroughbred racing is looked upon by the various authorizing states that have legalized racing as a “cash cow.” Go back over the last 50 years and ask yourself how much investment has been put into thoroughbred racing to improve its infrastructure and you find it to be minimal while the other major sports were building new stadiums and arenas, racing was doing little or nothing.

The major changes in horseracing has come in the form of betting which benefited the authorizing states probably more than any other entity because it increased the revenues to the authorizing states from the mutuel take.

As I said, politics is the “blocking wall”, but it can be overcome because horseracing along with basketball, hockey, golf, and tennis plays very well on both the American and international stages and that is where I suggest horseracing go.

Yes to do this it will take major reorganization of how horseracing is managed in this country, but multinational economic entities are not new and many are doing just well today.

I will leave you with this, I have spent my professional life in the consulting side of the business world and I have seen what was called the “impossible” become the possible with major profit. Stop looking backwards, look ahead because that is where change occurs.

[Lasix67]

There isn't enough interest in the game -- from audience or sponsors -- to support a decent monthly magazine!

Every single hobby or pursuit -- regardless of its seeming insignificance, or its standing with the mainstream audience -- has a regular magazine which caters to its loyal following. Most hobbies or pursuits have several magazines...and you can find them on the magazine racks of every book store.

The horseplayers have one magazine which supposedly caters to them...and no one knows if it's still in circulation.

Doesn't that tell us anything?

And we are talking about regular TV programming?

I am a commercial printer by trade, andi hate to say it, however print media is either dead or dying faster than horse racing itself.

[AndyC]

I agree, but that is racing problem; they must sell their product. This is America and if you package it right and promote it well, it will sell.

This is the same argument that has been used for the last 20 years. Great marketing can't overcome a product that can't compete. In its current package racing can't compete with poker, sports betting or casino games all of which are plentiful and easy to access for any bettor. In racing's heyday there were few alternatives outside your local bookie or a trip to Las Vegas.

[melman]

Cratos I'll end this also. We will just have to disagree. You say it's all politics and I say racing now is not the only game in town. I do agree with the last post of AndyC. I would hope that we at least can find common ground on this. There will never be the large attendance at tracks that happened in the past. With the ease of betting today on the internet why go to the track? That is part of the problem right there. Your type of wishful thinking you dress up with fancy statements. I remember the same type thinking when "racing can be much better we just need expanded simulcasting". Then "racing can be much better we just need to work with the casino's to increase purses and attrack better horses and more owners". The huge expansion in gambling over the past twenty years has taken the casual players away from the racing industry. I take no delight in saying any of this. I loved my days of going to Delaware Park during the day and then Brandywine at night, or the old Keystone Park during the day to Liberty Bell Park at night. Met a lot of friends for life at those places. To this day I really miss Brandywine summer nights. But I face the facts and deal in reality not wishful thinking.
Those days are over. Racing's days are not over. There will always be some major tracks. The best hope for better days I think is for a drastic cut in the takeout rates and less racing days with fewer tracks.

[Stillriledup]

Cratos I'll end this also. We will just have to disagree. You say it's all politics and I say racing now is not the only game in town. I do agree with the last post of AndyC. I would hope that we at least can find common ground on this. There will never be the large attendance at tracks that happened in the past. With the ease of betting today on the internet why go to the track? That is part of the problem right there. Your type of wishful thinking you dress up with fancy statements. I remember the same type thinking when "racing can be much better we just need expanded simulcasting". Then "racing can be much better we just need to work with the casino's to increase purses and attrack better horses and more owners". The huge expansion in gambling over the past twenty years has taken the casual players away from the racing industry. I take no delight in saying any of this. I loved my days of going to Delaware Park during the day and then Brandywine at night, or the old Keystone Park during the day to Liberty Bell Park at night. Met a lot of friends for life at those places. To this day I really miss Brandywine summer nights. But I face the facts and deal in reality not wishful thinking.
Those days are over. Racing's days are not over. There will always be some major tracks. The best hope for better days I think is for a drastic cut in the takeout rates and less racing days with fewer tracks.

It comes down to supply and demand. The wagering product is overpriced, so, its not going to attract as many customers to make purchases if it was more competitively priced. People can bet an NFL game at what's essentially a 5% takeout, why bet a horse race at 17% especially if you know more about the NFL (or, so they think) than horse racing?

[thespaah]

It comes down to supply and demand. The wagering product is overpriced, so, its not going to attract as many customers to make purchases if it was more competitively priced. People can bet an NFL game at what's essentially a 5% takeout, why bet a horse race at 17% especially if you know more about the NFL (or, so they think) than horse racing?
It's over priced re: take out and in some markets, has reached a saturation point.
For example. For someone who lives in Central NJ, it is possible to reach several gaming/gambling venues of several types in one hour of car travel time.
Two hours, gets them to every casino save the two in CT.

[Robert Goren]

I don’t know exactly where to begin in responding to your post so I will start by saying I have been in this game for 40+ years (almost exclusively on the NYRA circuit) and I have seen the decline in this sport close up and personal.

Therefore I am not a person who dream of the “good old days” because I believe the best days are here and in the future. Many things have change since the days that Man O’ War and Seabiscuit were the darlings of the sports world along with Babe Ruth and Joe Louis. We have gone to the moon, developed the personal computer and the Internet to name a few significant changes.

If you are inferring that the task that I am advocating will be difficult I will agree with you wholeheartedly, but it is not impossible or improbable.
The major obstacle facing thoroughbred racing today is POLITICS.

Thoroughbred racing is looked upon by the various authorizing states that have legalized racing as a “cash cow.” Go back over the last 50 years and ask yourself how much investment has been put into thoroughbred racing to improve its infrastructure and you find it to be minimal while the other major sports were building new stadiums and arenas, racing was doing little or nothing.

The major changes in horseracing has come in the form of betting which benefited the authorizing states probably more than any other entity because it increased the revenues to the authorizing states from the mutuel take.

As I said, politics is the “blocking wall”, but it can be overcome because horseracing along with basketball, hockey, golf, and tennis plays very well on both the American and international stages and that is where I suggest horseracing go.

Yes to do this it will take major reorganization of how horseracing is managed in this country, but multinational economic entities are not new and many are doing just well today.

I will leave you with this, I have spent my professional life in the consulting side of the business world and I have seen what was called the “impossible” become the possible with major profit. Stop looking backwards, look ahead because that is where change occurs.There is not single state that looks up on horse racing as cash cow anymore. Most states are hoping to collect enough in taxes from it to pay for regulating it. I can safely say that horse racing in any state never produces more than a fraction of 1% of its revenues. If you can name a state does more than I will eat my words and quit posting. I look into this a couple years ago. If you could get a governor or state senator to say what they really think about racing, I am sure they'd say it is more trouble than it is worth. There are a lot of things wrong with racing, but the politicians are far down the list. The only good thing politicians could do for racing is to pass laws to get rid of the drugs and the doping trainers out the game(and in jail). Even that the game could do for itself if it had the will power.

[Robert Goren]

At this point, the only thing racing has going for it is that it the only thing that you can legally bet on in the US. And it is doing a lousy job of even using that advantage. If online poker is legalized again, me and about third of the bettors will abandoned racing for poker because you get far more bang for your buck. Horse racing from a purely rake point of view is the worst bet going this side of Chuck-a-Luck and that is even with the rebates. It does have going for it that has the illusion of a game of skill. And even that illusion is fast disappearing for a number reasons.

[grant miller]

abc-and ,espn are in bed with the nba-if you listen to there sports radio all they talk about is what ever sports there sleepng with- (x- games, nba , espys ) ,I pissed off mike & mike a few years ago when I called and said that they only care about the nba ,before I got cut off , I tould them that your show jumped the shark! and your 2 snake oil sailmen for whomever is on espn tv now.

[JustRalph]

abc-and ,espn are in bed with the nba-if you listen to there sports radio all they talk about is what ever sports there sleepng with- (x- games, nba , espys ) ,I pissed off mike & mike a few years ago when I called and said that they only care about the nba ,before I got cut off , I tould them that your show jumped the shark! and your 2 snake oil sailmen for whomever is on espn tv now.

That's called cross promotion.

That's the same reason the record company(s) that Disney owns books their acts on Kimmel ten times as often as other late night shows.

Often the theme songs used on ESPN and ESPN DOcumentaries etc are from artists signed to a Disney record company. Then there are either no royalties paid or the royalties are paid from one Disney company to another.

NBC does the same with Leno and CBS with Letterman. The only artists that cross over are the ones who are huge hits, and will bring ratings to the other network. But it doesn't happen often. Leno actually fought with GE and Universal. when they bought Vivendi it didnt include Universal music.

Leno began inviting tons of artists on the show from other record companies that were affiliated with other networks and companies. Leno won out because his ratings got better.

For just a short example here is a list of Disney owned music companies and TV properties ripe for cross promotion. And of course they own ESPN too.

Disney–ABC Television Group[edit]
ABC, Inc. DBA Disney–ABC Television Group[11]
Disney/ABC Television Group Digital Media
Walt Disney Television
Disney-ABC Domestic Television - formerly Buena Vista Television
Disney-ABC International Television - formerly Buena Vista International Television
ABC Television Network
ABC News
A+E Networks (joint venture with Hearst Corporation; equity holding)
A&E
History
Bio.
H2
Military History
Crime & Investigation Network
Lifetime
Lifetime Movie Network
Lifetime Real Women

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disney_Music_Group

Cross promotion drives most of what's covered on non News networks. I suspect tons of news shows are influenced by it too

[thespaah]

That's called cross promotion.

That's the same reason the record company(s) that Disney owns books their acts on Kimmel ten times as often as other late night shows.

Often the theme songs used on ESPN and ESPN DOcumentaries etc are from artists signed to a Disney record company. Then there are either no royalties paid or the royalties are paid from one Disney company to another.

NBC does the same with Leno and CBS with Letterman. The only artists that cross over are the ones who are huge hits, and will bring ratings to the other network. But it doesn't happen often. Leno actually fought with GE and Universal. when they bought Vivendi it didnt include Universal music.

Leno began inviting tons of artists on the show from other record companies that were affiliated with other networks and companies. Leno won out because his ratings got better.

For just a short example here is a list of Disney owned music companies and TV properties ripe for cross promotion. And of course they own ESPN too.

Disney–ABC Television Group[edit]
ABC, Inc. DBA Disney–ABC Television Group[11]
Disney/ABC Television Group Digital Media
Walt Disney Television
Disney-ABC Domestic Television - formerly Buena Vista Television
Disney-ABC International Television - formerly Buena Vista International Television
ABC Television Network
ABC News
A+E Networks (joint venture with Hearst Corporation; equity holding)
A&E
History
Bio.
H2
Military History
Crime & Investigation Network
Lifetime
Lifetime Movie Network
Lifetime Real Women

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disney_Music_Group

Cross promotion drives most of what's covered on non News networks. I suspect tons of news shows are influenced by it too
Not actually cross promotion.
Narrowing things down to the state of racing coverage, the issue is the promotion of certain sports on what is presumably an all sports network, to the exclusion of all others.
ESPN hosts ignore horse racing as do many radio talk show hosts. To a lesser extent, NHL is treated with the same respect as the red headed step child.
What has occurred is the all sports niche has marginalized certain sports in the name of market research and a strict adherence to viewer ratings.

[VastinMT]

Not actually cross promotion.
Narrowing things down to the state of racing coverage, the issue is the promotion of certain sports on what is presumably an all sports network, to the exclusion of all others.
ESPN hosts ignore horse racing as do many radio talk show hosts. To a lesser extent, NHL is treated with the same respect as the red headed step child.
What has occurred is the all sports niche has marginalized certain sports in the name of market research and a strict adherence to viewer ratings.

I don't watch a lot of ESPN, because I like sports -- not just the NFL and NBA.

If ESPN were to cover horse racing the way it covers the NFL, we would have video crews stationed in every breeding barn in the country, with in-depth analysis of whether or not the standing session we're about to witness is going to help the barn find a starter in the Breeder's Cup before the barn down the road can create a Kentucky Derby sire.

Then they'd kick it back to the studio because the winner of the 7th at Golden Gate (ImobsessedwiththeNFL, by labronisendlesslyfascinating out of labronstinks by labronisgod, a runner partly owned by ESPN) just changed to a left-hand lead at the top of the stretch, the first time he's done that since two years ago prior to his win in a nonwinner of two at Hastings on a sloppy track, in a race attended by Taylor Swift's second video director!

Someone would put up a graphic showing that no horse has ever done that in the entire history of horse racing since May 14, 1997, except for two others. Then Skip Bayless would whine about it.

[johnhannibalsmith]

I don't watch a lot of ESPN, because I like sports -- not just the NFL and NBA.

If ESPN were to cover horse racing the way it covers the NFL, we would have video crews stationed in every breeding barn in the country, with in-depth analysis of whether or not the standing session we're about to witness is going to help the barn find a starter in the Breeder's Cup before the barn down the road can create a Kentucky Derby sire.

Then they'd kick it back to the studio because the winner of the 7th at Golden Gate (ImobsessedwiththeNFL, by labronisendlesslyfascinating out of labronstinks by labronisgod, a runner partly owned by ESPN) just changed to a left-hand lead at the top of the stretch, the first time he's done that since two years ago prior to his win in a nonwinner of two at Hastings on a sloppy track, in a race attended by Taylor Swift's second video director!

Someone would put up a graphic showing that no horse has ever done that in the entire history of horse racing since May 14, 1997, except for two others. Then Skip Bayless would whine about it.

:lol:

This pretty much sums up why I don't even know what channel ESPN and it's half-dozen step-siblings are on my cable system.

[VeryOldMan]

I don't watch a lot of ESPN, because I like sports -- not just the NFL and NBA.

If ESPN were to cover horse racing the way it covers the NFL, we would have video crews stationed in every breeding barn in the country, with in-depth analysis of whether or not the standing session we're about to witness is going to help the barn find a starter in the Breeder's Cup before the barn down the road can create a Kentucky Derby sire.

Then they'd kick it back to the studio because the winner of the 7th at Golden Gate (ImobsessedwiththeNFL, by labronisendlesslyfascinating out of labronstinks by labronisgod, a runner partly owned by ESPN) just changed to a left-hand lead at the top of the stretch, the first time he's done that since two years ago prior to his win in a nonwinner of two at Hastings on a sloppy track, in a race attended by Taylor Swift's second video director!

Someone would put up a graphic showing that no horse has ever done that in the entire history of horse racing since May 14, 1997, except for two others. Then Skip Bayless would whine about it.

This is brilliant. Absolutely right about the coverage!

Ever see the movie Dodgeball? "ESPN8 - The Ocho" was funny at the time but now is closer to truth than parody.

[Zydeco]

[QUOTE=VastinMT]I don't watch a lot of ESPN, because I like sports -- not just the NFL and NBA.

If ESPN were to cover horse racing the way it covers the NFL, we would have video crews stationed in every breeding barn in the country, with in-depth analysis of whether or not the standing session we're about to witness is going to help the barn find a starter in the Breeder's Cup before the barn down the road can create a Kentucky Derby sire.

Then they'd kick it back to the studio because the winner of the 7th at Golden Gate (ImobsessedwiththeNFL, by labronisendlesslyfascinating out of labronstinks by labronisgod, a runner partly owned by ESPN) just changed to a left-hand lead at the top of the stretch, the first time he's done that since two years ago prior to his win in a nonwinner of two at Hastings on a sloppy track, in a race attended by Taylor Swift's second video director!

Someone would put up a graphic showing that no horse has ever done that in the entire history of horse racing since May 14, 1997, except for two others. Then Skip Bayless would whine about it.[/QUOTE
This is great! :lol: so true

[CincyHorseplayer]

I bet I could sit down with Thask,about 11 am,be given a vanilla coverage script,add in our own things we wanted to talk about with time estimates,stick a mike and camera in our faces and we'd blow away TVG,NBC,and whatnot!I'm not scared.:cool:

[thaskalos]

I bet I could sit down with Thask,about 11 am,be given a vanilla coverage script,add in our own things we wanted to talk about with time estimates,stick a mike and camera in our faces and we'd blow away TVG,NBC,and whatnot!I'm not scared.:cool:

And watch the ratings skyrocket! :)

[CincyHorseplayer]

And watch the ratings skyrocket! :)

Absolutely!And the first thing we would do is shut the hole in our faces when it was post time and have zero delays.Talk about the subjectivity of betting and leave it at that and move on to handicapping,and especially not be talking about feature races that are 6 hours away while we verbally jerk-off a "Featured" track which shouldn't be.Plus we might mention some things that actually exist,like pace figures,pedigree ratings,and form cycles as it relates to ages,days between,and trainer intent after top efforts and/or wins etc etc.Plus I think the occasional good hearty insult is given it's due diligence when you see a track I love like Belmont where trainers/jocks are getting hammered at the windows and a perfectly dominant on figures across the board horse goes off at 7/2,6-1,8-1.It happens and they deserve some chastising!:p

[JustRalph]

The latest Apple TV update has a new ESPN channel with what looks like all of their content on demand.

It includes Cricket-skateboarding and lacrosse.

No horse racing........