Got An idea to improve Racing?

[BombsAway Bob]

www.HorsePlayerNow.com NIGHT SCHOOL holds it's annual
"TOWN MEETING" where you can give input to Racing Execs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
NTRA
NIGHT SCHOOL FORUM
Tuesday, November 19, 2013 - 8:30-10:00 p.m. (ET)

Night School, the racing industry's national online fan education program, conducts its second annual Racing Town Hall Meeting in Tuesday night's 38th lesson of the 2013 season. The gathering of industry movers and shakers begins at 8:30 p.m. ET and will offer fans and horseplayers a chance to interact directly with the policy makers.

The 90-minute Night School live chat will more than a dozen influential racing industry members, including executives, entrepreneurs, horseplayers and journalists. The panel will moderated by Night School's Jeremy Plonk, Joe Kristufek and Caton Bredar. The growing alphabetical list of panelists confirmed, which is expected to grow by the start of the Town Hall Meeting, includes:
•Michael Beychok, 2012 DRF/NTRA National Handicapping Championship winner and political strategist;
•Jill Byrne, racing analyst & director of multimedia video content for Churchill Downs;
•Justin Horowitz, player/media manager of The Meadowlands;
•Tom Lamarra, news editor of The Blood-Horse;
•Seth Merrow, owner of Equidaily.com and Capital OTB TV host;
•Mark Midland, founder of Derbywars.com and Horseracingnation.com;
•Dan Silver, director of racing operations for Penn National Race Course;
•John Siscos, director of media relations Woodbine and Mohawk;
•Mike Tanner, executive vice president of the United States Trotting Association;
•Eric Wing, director of media relations for New York Racing Association;
•Erich Zimny, director of racing for Charles Town Races.

The inaugural Racing Town Hall Meeting in 2012 remains available for archive view (http://tinyurl.com/lyu449v) and included the likes of Breeders' Cup-winning owner-breeder Satish Sanan, NTRA president Alex Waldrop, Maryland Jockey Club president Tom Chuckas, HRTV executive producer Amy Zimmerman, and Horseplayers Association of North America president Jeff Platt, among others.

"We opted for a different cast this year to expand viewpoints and access," said Night School co-founder Jeremy Plonk. "Our panel is a diverse mix of small and large track interests, not to mention an undervalued part of the industry that's burgeoning, the individual entrepreneurs."

Presenting title sponsors for Night School are the National Thoroughbred Racing Association, American Quarter Horse Association, Keeneland, Churchill Downs, Inc., and the United States Trotting Association.

Night School is offered every Tuesday for 40 consecutive weeks through Dec. 3. Topics change weekly, and fans are eligible for prizes and rewards for registering. Registration is optional and free. There is never a charge for taking part in Night School. The weekly program is offered in three media: live chat via the Cover It Live blogging/chat forum, audio/radio streaming and full video lesson plans. The media of delivery is based on the subject matter and alternates throughout the season.

This week's Night School will be followed at 10:00 p.m. ET by the "After Night School Special," featuring live racing from Mountaineer Park. The segment will cover the evening's final two races in real time with free, live-streaming video. Fans wishing to take part in the Mountaineer action simply need to remain in the Night School chat after class. Complimentary past performances are available, courtesy of BRIS.

Study Materials: http://www.horseplayernow.com/images/STUDY111913.pdf

Video Preview of this week's lesson: http://youtu.be/TJiMeA06HEs

Pod 5 Lesson Schedule: http://horseplayernow.com/images/2013NSCALENDAR5.pdf

[DeltaLover]

www.HorsePlayerNow.com NIGHT SCHOOL holds it's annual
"TOWN MEETING" where you can give input to Racing Execs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
NTRA
NIGHT SCHOOL FORUM
Tuesday, November 19, 2013 - 8:30-10:00 p.m. (ET)

Night School, the racing industry's national online fan education program, conducts its second annual Racing Town Hall Meeting in Tuesday night's 38th lesson of the 2013 season. The gathering of industry movers and shakers begins at 8:30 p.m. ET and will offer fans and horseplayers a chance to interact directly with the policy makers.

The 90-minute Night School live chat will more than a dozen influential racing industry members, including executives, entrepreneurs, horseplayers and journalists. The panel will moderated by Night School's Jeremy Plonk, Joe Kristufek and Caton Bredar. The growing alphabetical list of panelists confirmed, which is expected to grow by the start of the Town Hall Meeting, includes:
•Michael Beychok, 2012 DRF/NTRA National Handicapping Championship winner and political strategist;
•Jill Byrne, racing analyst & director of multimedia video content for Churchill Downs;
•Justin Horowitz, player/media manager of The Meadowlands;
•Tom Lamarra, news editor of The Blood-Horse;
•Seth Merrow, owner of Equidaily.com and Capital OTB TV host;
•Mark Midland, founder of Derbywars.com and Horseracingnation.com;
•Dan Silver, director of racing operations for Penn National Race Course;
•John Siscos, director of media relations Woodbine and Mohawk;
•Mike Tanner, executive vice president of the United States Trotting Association;
•Eric Wing, director of media relations for New York Racing Association;
•Erich Zimny, director of racing for Charles Town Races.

The inaugural Racing Town Hall Meeting in 2012 remains available for archive view (http://tinyurl.com/lyu449v) and included the likes of Breeders' Cup-winning owner-breeder Satish Sanan, NTRA president Alex Waldrop, Maryland Jockey Club president Tom Chuckas, HRTV executive producer Amy Zimmerman, and Horseplayers Association of North America president Jeff Platt, among others.

"We opted for a different cast this year to expand viewpoints and access," said Night School co-founder Jeremy Plonk. "Our panel is a diverse mix of small and large track interests, not to mention an undervalued part of the industry that's burgeoning, the individual entrepreneurs."

Presenting title sponsors for Night School are the National Thoroughbred Racing Association, American Quarter Horse Association, Keeneland, Churchill Downs, Inc., and the United States Trotting Association.

Night School is offered every Tuesday for 40 consecutive weeks through Dec. 3. Topics change weekly, and fans are eligible for prizes and rewards for registering. Registration is optional and free. There is never a charge for taking part in Night School. The weekly program is offered in three media: live chat via the Cover It Live blogging/chat forum, audio/radio streaming and full video lesson plans. The media of delivery is based on the subject matter and alternates throughout the season.

This week's Night School will be followed at 10:00 p.m. ET by the "After Night School Special," featuring live racing from Mountaineer Park. The segment will cover the evening's final two races in real time with free, live-streaming video. Fans wishing to take part in the Mountaineer action simply need to remain in the Night School chat after class. Complimentary past performances are available, courtesy of BRIS.

Study Materials: http://www.horseplayernow.com/images/STUDY111913.pdf

Video Preview of this week's lesson: http://youtu.be/TJiMeA06HEs

Pod 5 Lesson Schedule: http://horseplayernow.com/images/2013NSCALENDAR5.pdf

It would had been more interesting if people like Dave Swartz, CJ, PA or Thaskalos were also in this board.

[thaskalos]

It would had been more interesting if people like Dave Swartz, CJ, PA or Thaskalos were also in this board.

It's probably better that I won't attend. I'd probably be escorted out long before the meeting ends. :)

[Greyfox]

It's probably better that I won't attend. I'd probably be escorted out long before the meeting ends. :)

But your getting the bum's rush would be interesting in and of itself. :lol:

[Jeff P]

Here's a link to an article on the HANA Blog where I wrote about my experience as an invited panelist for last year's "Town Hall" event:
http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/2012/09/night-school-town-hall-recap.html

Night School Town Hall Recap
I was one of the panelists on the Night School Town Hall online chat session Tues Sept 11, 2012.

Before giving my recap I want to express the following:

The other panelists: ESPN's Jeremy Plonk, Jill Byrne, paddock analyst for Churchill Downs, Alex Waldrop, president and CEO of the National Thoroughbred Racing Association, Trey Buck, executive director of racing for the American Quarter Horse Association, Jason Wilson, vice president of business development for The Jockey Club, Tom Chuckas, president of the Maryland Jockey Club, Tim Ritvo, chief operating officer of the Stronach Group/president and general manager of Gulfstream Park, Jim Miller, assistant general manager of Hawthorne Race Course, Mandy Minger, vice president/marketing of Daily Racing Form, Amy Zimmerman, Eclipse Award-winning executive producer for HRTV, Jennie Rees, Eclipse Award-winning turf writer for the Louisville Courier-Journal, John DeSantis, senior vice president/editor for Xpressbet, Jeremy Clemons, vice president/marketing for Twinspires, Satish Sanan, Breeders' Cup-winning owner/breeder of Padua Stables –

ALL of the other panelists – EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM is a GREAT ambassador of this game.

I’ve met many of them in person. There is one universal theme among them that I find refreshing. To a person you will not meet ANYONE more upbeat and positive about racing. You will not meet anyone anywhere who LOVES horse racing more than the people on last night’s panel.

Don’t get me wrong. I was happy to have been thought highly enough of to have been invited onto the panel - and I certainly enjoyed participating.

But…

If you are a horseplayer and you followed last night’s Town Hall chat session (or if you read the transcript) you have to be struck by the following:

For ninety minutes the panel managed to duck what the vast majority of HANA’s horseplayer members see as racing’s core issues.

Why is this important?

According to numbers on the Jockey Club website, in 2003, all sources handle for thoroughbred racing conducted in North America was $15.9 billion. Last year, for calendar year 2011, all sources handle for thoroughbred racing conducted in North America came in at $11.4 billion. That’s a loss of 28.3% in just nine years. (The loss is even worse if you adjust it for inflation.)

That, by itself, should be enough to send a red flag up the pole.

But nothing of the sort happened on last night’s Town Hall panel. In fact, by the end of the night many of the panelists were patting each other on the back for all the things that racing does right – and without ever once addressing in any meaningful way the three obvious elephants sitting in the room.

I want to talk about the obvious elephants sitting in the room.

In 2009, we did the first HANA Survey. In that survey, 75 percent of you identified high takeout as the primary reason you bet less than you otherwise would. In that survey, more than 70 percent of you identified an outdated tote system and odds that change after the bell as the number two reason you bet less than you otherwise would. In that survey, more than two thirds of you identified racing’s drug problem as the number three reason you bet less than you otherwise would.

Not only that, but in survey after survey, HANA’s horseplayer members have consistently confirmed those original findings.

From a market research standpoint, I have very little trouble identifying the obvious elephants sitting in the room as follows:

1. High Takeout.

2. Obsolete Tote System/Odds that change after the bell (translates to lack of integrity.)

3. Drugs (translates to lack of integrity.)

Don’t get me wrong. I think Night School is a wonderful idea. However, racing cheerleaders can only take you so far.

Until or unless racing decides to take on the obvious elephants sitting in the room – expect racing to continue to decline in popularity among the public at large and expect racing’s key metric: handle - to continue its long term decline as well.

EDIT: One thing I didn't get to see live as a panelist during the chat session were results of the polls. However, while scrolling through the "replay" of the chat I came across the following:

Poll Results - What is Racing's Biggest Problem to Fix?
http://www.horseplayersassociation.org/nightschool01.jpg

Poll Results - Which Idea Do You Like Best Tonight?
http://www.horseplayersassociation.org/nightschool02.jpg

I rest my case.

Jeff Platt
President, HANA




The problem as I see it isn't a lack of ideas coming from racing's (remaining) customer base.

The problem as I see it is one of simple denial.


-jp

.

[TheEdge07]

1.Takeout
2.Change Post time(75% people work when races are being run)
3.Drugs..get caught 3rd time lifetime ban

[Stillriledup]

The biggest problem in the game is that trainers, jocks and owners are not putting the game first, they're putting themselves first. Also, the bettors have showed that if they get crapped on, they'll just keep filing into the entrances. When Calif raised takeout, people didnt stop betting, the customers didnt "stick together" and cripple the product until they cried uncle.

Also, a big problem is that racing doesnt adhere to real life laws. You have guys like Michael Vick going to JAIL for dog abuse, but if a trainer abuses horses, or has them die mysteriously, you have no FBI or outside law enforcement getting involved. I'm not sure why the FBI wouldnt be interested in certain trainers who are killing horses due to neglect, but it seems that because jocks, trainers and owners don't go to jail, the game is the 'wild wild west' and nobody really cares about how many "rules" they break.

The game isnt policing themselves enough, there are a lot more trainers besides Rick Dutrow who need 10 year suspensions, and yet, nobody seems to care about tossing these people out of the game.

Maybe its because they feel the fans and bettors are idiots and will keep betting the product no matter how many cheating owners, trainers and jocks are plying their trades in this sport. If the bettors keep betting, "racing" has no real incentive to change things.

[PhantomOnTour]

The problem as I see it isn't a lack of ideas coming from racing's (remaining) customer base.

The problem as I see it is one of simple denial.


-jp

.
That's about the best darned thing I've ever read on this forum...right on.

[Phantombridgejumpe]

At so many tracks every day and even every race look the same.

For Example Parx on 11/19/13 looks almost identical to Philly Park on
11/19/93.

Some different distances? Different camera angles? Different graphics?

NFL Football on TV looks better now than it did 20 years ago.

Would 3 races a week on a network like FOX1 hurt? They need programming - the FOX 1 Thursday night pick 3 sounds good.

10% Takeout Tuesdays? Or 5% takeout Wednesday for on track only.

There is just no buzz with racing - some can be created.

[Stillriledup]

That's about the best darned thing I've ever read on this forum...right on.

Besides denial, it comes down to this. A lot of the suggestions that horseplayers and other people make to impvove the game that are NOT acted on are suggestions that probably don't help that particular racetracks bottom line in the short term.

A lot of the very best suggestions by people to improve the game are largely suggestions that are going to COST money in the short term in order to cultivate long term success.

Tracks are interested in TODAY. If they can make 5 cents extra TODAY, they could care less if they lose dozens of customers for life, they are not in the cultiviation business and they act as if they might not be here tomorrow.

Horse racing higher ups largely manage their tracks as if there's no tomorrow, they don't manage thinking about the future, they don't manage thinking that spending a small amount of money today will gain them money in the future.

[Jeff P]

10% Takeout Tuesdays?
In my humble opinion... FANTASTIC IDEA! (Why isn't some track doing that?)


-jp

.

[Stillriledup]

In my humble opinion... FANTASTIC IDEA! (Why isn't some track doing that?)


-jp

.

If i'm the manager of SRU downs and i take full card simulcasting on Tuesdays and Parx decides that all takeouts on Tues are 10%, why would i want my customers to bet on that track instead of some other track offering full takeout rates? If Parx lowers their take on Tues to 10%, they are essentially lowering MY cut of the profits, even though SRU downs may be 100s of miles away from Parx.

Parx gets the "Credit" for having a low takeout and yet i'm the one at SRU downs who will feel the pinch if my customers are betting their money on Parx races instead of some other track who's not lowering their takeout.

I would have to consider pulling Parx from my menu on Tuesdays because having them up there will cost me money.

[olddaddy]

I look at the list of "guests" at the this town hall meeting and their current lively hood depends on the how the game is currently played. These people are the ones that have done nothing to change the game and like it the way it is. Meetings like this are a total joke, no one is going to cut off their food source for the good of the game. Put some people on the panel whose livelihood doesnt depend on how this game is played and Id listen to it.

Finally, I do understand not biting off the hand that feeds you, I see that with the comments made by announcers and horse people that post here but dont make this town meeting as being anything special.

[traynor]

I look at the list of "guests" at the this town hall meeting and their current lively hood depends on the how the game is currently played. These people are the ones that have done nothing to change the game and like it the way it is. Meetings like this are a total joke, no one is going to cut off their food source for the good of the game. Put some people on the panel whose livelihood doesnt depend on how this game is played and Id listen to it.

Finally, I do understand not biting off the hand that feeds you, I see that with the comments made by announcers and horse people that post here but dont make this town meeting as being anything special.

It makes about as much sense as giving "bailout funds" to the people that caused the problem that required the bail out in the first place.

[shouldacoulda]

Stop charging for parking and reduce the admission. Every time I see a grandstand for the most part, at almost every track, it's empty anyway. How much would they really lose? If you want more butts in the seats you have to give people a reason to go.

[Stillriledup]

Stop charging for parking and reduce the admission. Every time I see a grandstand for the most part, at almost every track, it's empty anyway. How much would they really lose? If you want more butts in the seats you have to give people a reason to go.

There have been plenty of times where i've NOT gone to the track just because i didnt want to pay parking and admission. If i had free passes or free parking, i would go, otherwise, its "bad value" when you take into consideration gas, wear and tear on the car, odds of being in an accident, odds of getting a traffic ticket, etc.

You can't get a traffic ticket or in an accident if you bet from home. You're right, they need to give people incentive to start up the ole pontiac.

[Jeff P]

Let's play what if...

What if, for the sake of argument, PARX really did decide to run a 10% Takeout Tuesdays promotion?

To my way of thinking they would be the perfect track to try something like this. They already have a massive slots subsidy to fall back on.

So why not take a calculated risk and try a little innovation to create some brand recognition and build up the racing side of their business?

Methinks a promotion like this might have enough appeal to players (and be unheard of enough) that it just might catch on.

Since we're doing hypotheticals here: What if, for the sake of argument they decide to go after this in a serious way?.... radio, newspaper, billboards, etc. in their immediate metro area... plus banner ads at every horse racing related site all over the web.

You're right of course SRU...

If you are managing a brick and mortar outlet in direct competition with them, one of your options to try and thwart them is a decision to not let your customers see their track signal.

But what if they plan for this possibility during the early stages of their campaign? What if they sweeten the pot and offer a "deal" to every ADW and every brick and mortar to carry their Tuesday signal (because let's face it what else is running on Tuesday afternoons?) and as part of the package agree to cut their signal fee (Tuesdays only) down to next to nothing in hopes of enticing you and others like you to let their racing product be seen as widely each Tues as possible?

If you don't take their Tuesday signal - and their idea catches on despite your best efforts to stop it - you are going to end up with egg on your face.

Methinks if a track like PARX really did want to create some brand recognition and build up the racing side of their business...

Tuesdays are there for the taking.



-jp

.

[thaskalos]

You can't get in an accident if you bet from home.

Unless the wife attacks you with a frying pan when she sees how much you've lost.

[pat]

Free admission is definitely not the answer(It will become a homeless shelter)they must charge something and for the price of admission you should get a free program or a discount on DRF to make sure the attendees are there to wager and not for the heat or AC .Free parking is OK. Walk around aqueduct and see what free admission draws.

[horses4courses]

Unless the wife attacks you with a frying pan when she sees how much you've lost.

:lol:

[Dark Horse]

If Oracle's Larry Ellison can turn something as infinitely boring as sailing into a edge-of-your-seat spectator sport (last America's Cup), surely horse racing has a shot at reclaiming its former glory. All it takes is one person with a vision and enough money to realize it.

Horse racing has far greater longevity than any of the currently popular sports. Smack in the middle of ancient Rome, a mere stone's throw from the Colosseum (equivalent of a modern football stadium), was a huge race track. Like boxing, another timeless sport, horse racing was extremely popular during the radio era; but it failed to make the transition to television. There's only one reason for that: lack of vision; inability to sell a high quality product.

[Stillriledup]

Unless the wife attacks you with a frying pan when she sees how much you've lost.
:lol:

WOW.

[andtheyreoff]

If i'm the manager of SRU downs and i take full card simulcasting on Tuesdays and Parx decides that all takeouts on Tues are 10%, why would i want my customers to bet on that track instead of some other track offering full takeout rates? If Parx lowers their take on Tues to 10%, they are essentially lowering MY cut of the profits, even though SRU downs may be 100s of miles away from Parx.

Parx gets the "Credit" for having a low takeout and yet i'm the one at SRU downs who will feel the pinch if my customers are betting their money on Parx races instead of some other track who's not lowering their takeout.

I would have to consider pulling Parx from my menu on Tuesdays because having them up there will cost me money.

Come on. Parx outhandles every other track on Tuesday by a lot. Your business would go down by quite a bit if you dropped Parx from your betting menu. Besides, your customers would probably be none too happy about Parx being unavailable.

Free admission is definitely not the answer(It will become a homeless shelter)they must charge something and for the price of admission you should get a free program or a discount on DRF to make sure the attendees are there to wager and not for the heat or AC .Free parking is OK. Walk around aqueduct and see what free admission draws.

I remember reading somewhere (I think it was here, actually) that a good idea would be to have free admission up to a certain time (like 7 PM), then charge a small fee to get it, in order to keep the really rowdy folks out.

Two things I would like to throw in in terms of a local fanbase:

1. Casinos run shuttle buses for seniors' groups and assisted living places a few times a week. Why can't racetracks do that? If you gave everyone a $2 betting voucher to start and a coupon for a free menu item, you'd probably get a nice customer base going.

2. Every track should have a replay show on their local sports channel, along with a handicapping show (a la "Talkin' Horses) that would air a few hours before the first race. It would be nice for non-racing fans to have a chance to see people intelligently discussing the races.

[proximity]

What if, for the sake of argument, PARX really did decide to run a 10% Takeout Tuesdays promotion?


rather than fiddling with takeout on certain days or bets, i think giving on track rebates is a better idea. imo, 10% flat would be a great first step in turning this game around.

(1) you wouldn't encounter nearly as much resistance from other tracks. you're paying everything out of your cut and they don't have to make any adjustments.

(2) the rebate (available the next day) is TANGIBLE.... ie players can actually see this money accumulating in their accounts day by day.

(3) it automatically brings bettors back to the track. example: joe bets $1,000 on thursday and loses all of his money but the $100 rebate will be available for him on friday...... he has something to come back for.

real life: i live by a racino that doesn't understand these concepts, but yet i still go to a.c. (despite the 3 hr drive and tolls) because i get free rooms and have hundreds of dollars in total rewards.

[Stillriledup]

rather than fiddling with takeout on certain days or bets, i think giving on track rebates is a better idea. imo, 10% flat would be a great first step in turning this game around.

(1) you wouldn't encounter nearly as much resistance from other tracks. you're paying everything out of your cut and they don't have to make any adjustments.

(2) the rebate (available the next day) is TANGIBLE.... ie players can actually see this money accumulating in their accounts day by day.

(3) it automatically brings bettors back to the track. example: joe bets $1,000 on thursday and loses all of his money but the $100 rebate will be available for him on friday...... he has something to come back for.

real life: i live by a racino that doesn't understand these concepts, but yet i still go to a.c. (despite the 3 hr drive and tolls) because i get free rooms and have hundreds of dollars in total rewards.

If you want to come to SRU Downs and bet at least a few grand a day, ill make it worth your while...you know what i'm getting at? ;)

[DeltaLover]

As far as entrance and parking fees I certainly think they should be imposed. As a general direction the race track industry should shift its profit making from takeout only to admissions and general attendance fees. I would be more than happy to pay a high ticket to enter the premises knowing that the take out will be more reasonable and more important if there are bookmakers providing fixed odds based on their assessments.

Some of my suggestions are the following:

Less racing is certainly another factor that should seriously be considered if we want horse betting to regain its status as the king of all betting activities. Equally important is the rethinking of the way races are written. I would vote for a national handicap system, assigning weights to horses similarly to the Australian system.

Eventually, claiming races should be marginalized to consist a very small fraction of the pie which should be dominated by allowance type races where weights will be assigned based in winnings. Two and three years old should go by not winners of 1,2 3 4 while as the horse matures it should enter to a national graded classification, like A, B, C, D, E, F. After a win his weight should increase while after a loss it should decrease.

In parallel of course we should have stakes races where weight is just assigned by age and sex, giving the ability to classic horses to compete with reasonable weights.

Horses who reached their fifth year and still have not broken their maidens should be banned from racing while starter allowances should completely be eliminated as they provide the most unbalanced fields.

Steward reports should be very comprehensive containing every possible information, like bleeding, racing trouble, equipment losses, weak ride and anything related.

There should be implied a maximum number of horses per horse (like in Japan for example) while the existing weight allowances will give more chances to bug boys (in Europe is common to have weight differences in the same race up to 17 kgr or more, which is approximately 30 pounds).

Major transformations like from last to first in less than 20 days should be investigated if no excuse will be described in the steward reports.

A trainer who is caught with illegal medication more than three times should be banned for life while suspicious rides should be examined by a special committee with potential harsh penalties for the jockey and possibly the trainer of the horse.

Historical data should be available for free to the public for non commercial purposes.

Less gimmics, with the intention of one long daily horizontal pick (like p5 or p6) with very low cost per unit which will be available nationally and offered by every lotto store. Ideally this can become a national bet combining the main circuits of the period.

Apply one, low take out rate across all bets while allowing private bookmakers to operate both on the track and through the internet.

That's for now, although the list can grow much longer.. (Of course I know that nothing like this is going to happen but... dreaming is good sometimes!)

[Stillriledup]

Jeff, even Mountaineer can do something like that...they have slots and they have the only track running at this moment, the only one. Parx is only competing with Finger Lakes for the most part on Tuesdays, your idea is great, the only thing i would ask is what happens the other days when there is NOT a 10% takeout...people might be spoiled by the low rake on Tuedsay and not bet the other days, they could lose business by having too big of a "Sale" on bets on Tuesdays.

What they could also do if they dont want to lower the takeout on their bets is to have one huge pick 5 bet in the middle of the card, with a 100k guaranteed pool, a 14% takeout and you know, they could do a ton of advertising for that bet....they would get that handle easily, their pick 4 pool today was 44k, they would get 100 if they guaranteed the 100 and lowered the take.

[proximity]

Jeff, even Mountaineer can do something like that...they have slots and they have the only track running at this moment, the only one. Parx is only competing with Finger Lakes for the most part on Tuesdays, your idea is great, the only thing i would ask is what happens the other days when there is NOT a 10% takeout...people might be spoiled by the low rake on Tuedsay and not bet the other days, they could lose business by having too big of a "Sale" on bets on Tuesdays.
.

i don't even think most people would notice the "low rake" although they'd certainly notice significant (around 10%, NOT free programs or coffee) rebate money in their account the next day.

also, immediate benefits to mnr itself would be sooo incredibly diluted (winning bettors, most not playing live at mnr, putting extra payoff $ back into other tracks) that it would never fly with upper management.

how good is mtr gaming's player rewards program anyhow????????

[Phantombridgejumpe]

If you think lower takeout means increased handle you roll the dice for a few weeks.

If it doesn't work, pull the signal.

[JustRalph]

Get rid of half the tracks

There, now you can cancel the get together........

[Tara73]

1- Lower the Take
2- Rebates For Every Dollar Bet
3- Exchange Wagering

[antigeekess]

Persuade good ole Uncle Sam to take it a little easier on exotics players?

(Yeah, right.) :D

[JustRalph]

I just watched a couple of those "night school" vids......just curious.......why is nobody watching these things? These guys seem to be putting some serious work into this show. They even provide "study materials" on their website. I have to say I kind of like them, even if most is geared to newbies.

under 3k views for most and under 1k for some.

They seem to be done pretty damn well. Why are "we" not watching this? Maybe why are "you" not watching this show?

Just curious.........

[Track Phantom]

....Maybe why are "you" not watching this show?

Just curious.........


My answer: This is in no way disparaging the product they are putting out or the intention they have, but I just don't think it matters. The changes that have to be implemented are too vast and wide reaching.

The following are some examples of what I think might have to be addressed to assist in achieving a new influx of fans and followers:

1. PED'S. The single most destructive thing to hit horse racing is the obvious cheating. It taints the legitimacy of the accomplishments in the game. I have no idea what it would take to catch the cheaters but I just don't think it's a fair fight right now. The chemists are showing up with a missile launcher and the racing industry is bringing a wooden spoon.

2. Tax modification. The current tax laws are old, outdated and absurd. However, the horse racing industry has almost zero pull with legislators and law makers to amend this. Ain't gonna happen.

3. Governing Body. Without a governing body, real collaboration and oversight will never happen and it is sorely missing. Universal drug laws and suspensions are the only chance to start eradicating the habitual drug users. However, there are too many competing interests and agendas at stake to ever give control to one universal figure. Ain't gonna happen.

4. High Definition. The only thing this game really has going for it outside of the core audience is the ambiance of racing. However, this can hardly be relayed to the casual fan in standard definition on a computer screen or even a TV screen. Hell, I can barely tell what number just got up for 2nd. In today's world, imagery is everything. Just look at the advancements in technology in the past 5 years. The product is shown in a very non-appealing format, not to mention the "same saddlecloth colors on big days" absurdity.

5. Lack of Racing Stars. Too many name runners are retired after one year or less in the spotlight, only to be replaced by new names. Thus, the peripheral fan has nothing to "grab" them. The days of horses like Seabiscuit or John Henry are likely over, for the most part. This hurts in attracting fans.

6. Understanding The Audience/Marketing. I am guessing there has never been a study done on what attracts people like me (eat, sleep and shit this game) versus most others that go to the races and don't come back for months or years. There is a certain genetic make-up that hard core horseplayers have. My guess is there are very few of us that don't also love a strategic challenge of data mining and hypothesizing. However, I am sure there are many other underlying traits that we have in common that should be unearthed in order to market to the correct demographic. I think there are too many wild assumptions made (for example, the assumption that poker players are a good target audience, of which I disagree) and not enough real psychological analysis.

In general, the game is very tough to master or even learn at a basic level. (Ever try to explain the difference to a newbie between a NW1X and an OPC75NW3L)? It is also slow with much dead air between races, difficult to follow during the race without vivid presentation and mostly meaningless on a day to day level (meaning the everyday 5k claimer means nothing on the national scene and, except for a gambling venture and to the connections, there is no draw to the average person). The product itself is waning and that doesn't even begin to incorporate things like high tax hits, illegal drugs and the costly nature of playing (DRF, etc).

[Robert Goren]

Two things; You have to market your product better and you need a better product to market. A side note, the people who bet are your customers and the horsemen are your suppliers and you need to start treat each as what they are. That is the way successful businesses are run. Buy a book on the way Walmart runs their business. You will see you are doing everything ass-backward from the way Walmart does.

[Jeff P]

Here's a link to a previous thread:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=107774&page=1&pp=15&highlight=target+market

In post 60 of that thread I posted an answer to the following question:

"However what exactly is your belief that the horsemen should do?"

Here's a link to the specific post where I gave my answer:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1519651&postcount=60

I'm going to repost my answer here in this thread in the event anyone with decision making capacity in racing happens to be reading...

Originally Posted by Cannon shell -
"So they should give it up? I don't understand your logic here. You want me to agree that the racing/breeding/handle ect has fallen well short of what could have been had the money been utilized more efficiently? Ok I'm pretty much on board with that. However what exactly is your belief that the horsemen should do? Should they say screw it this isn't working, give the money back to the politicians to squander? Or what? Horsemen have already seen their cut dipped into twice and know more is coming. You may not agree with their stance but what do you want them to do now at this point? Serious question. And while a takeout cut is the obvious answer, doesn't that cut into the rebates offered by the ADW's as well?"

Referencing the bolded part of the above quote, here's what I think you should do:

Ask yourself the following:

Q. Is the current path you as horsemen have put racing on (through the actions of your horsemen alphabet groups) causing revenue growth, increased market share vs. other forms of gaming, and success as measured by other generally accepted business metrics?
A. No. (Obviously.)

Q. Are there any Fortune 500 companies that have put themselves on a path (through the actions of their management teams) leading to revenue growth, increased market share, and success as measured by other generally accepted business metrics?
A. Yes. (Of course there are.)

Q. Do you (as horsemen) want thoroughbred racing to be on a successful path?
A. If the answer to this question is yes, then it's time to change what you are doing.

If the answer to that last question is yes, then start doing the things successful Fortune 500 companies do that make them successful:

Do market research. If you don't have the expertise in house, hire a reputable consulting firm and ask them to:
* Identify your target markets.
* Identify customer needs and wants within your target markets.
* Identify ways you can INNOVATE to satisfy the customer needs and wants within your target markets.

Finally, this is the MOST IMPORTANT thing you need to do:

ACT! PICK SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS HANDED TO YOU BY YOUR CONSULTING FIRM(S) OR YOUR OWN MARKET RESEARCH AND IMPLEMENT THEM!

Then, track your progress going forward. Monitor your results. Measure incremental changes in revenue brought about by the recommendations that you implemented.

When you see something that you implemented spark new customer interest in your target market(s) and start generating additional revenue and market share for you (the 14% takeout pick5 implemented by Hollywood Park in 2011 would be one such real world example of this) then take the next step:

MAKE YOUR BEST ATTEMPT TO IDENTIFY THE REASONS WHY THE CHANGES THAT YOU IMPLEMENTED ARE WORKING AND IMPLEMENT FURTHER CHANGES THAT YOU (OR YOUR CONSULTING FIRM) BELIEVE WILL WORK FOR THE SAME OR SIMILAR REASONS. (Sadly, California racing to date has willingly failed to take that next step.)

Yes, I know... There's risk involved. But successful Fortune 500 companies get to be successful in the first place because they take the occasional measured risk.

Thoroughbred racing is a business. If you want it to be successful you need to start running it the same way a successful Fortune 500 company would run it.

Anything less than that and you are all but guaranteeing thoroughbred racing remains on its own (self made) downward revenue and declining market share slope.

Jeff Platt
President, HANA
www.horseplayersassociation.org/

[Stillriledup]

1- Lower the Take
2- Rebates For Every Dollar Bet
3- Exchange Wagering

There are a decent amount of bets out there with a 14% take, pick 5s at major venues and a few other assorted low rakes (Superfectas at Meadowlands i believe are 15% and the Big M opens Saturday for harness racing) and i think win bets in NY and So Cal are somewhat low, in the 15% range.

As far as rebates go, there are rebate programs called rewards clubs, many tracks have them now and there's a sliding scale of rebates for every dollar bet, so rebates are available, you just have to do a little leg work to find them.

I agree with you on exchange wagering, it can't get here soon enough.

[Stillriledup]

Here's a link to a previous thread:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=107774&page=1&pp=15&highlight=target+market

In post 60 of that thread I posted an answer to the following question:

"However what exactly is your belief that the horsemen should do?"

Here's a link to the specific post where I gave my answer:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1519651&postcount=60

I'm going to repost my answer here in this thread in the event anyone with decision making capacity in racing happens to be reading...


Referencing the bolded part of the above quote, here's what I think you should do:

Ask yourself the following:

Q. Is the current path you as horsemen have put racing on (through the actions of your horsemen alphabet groups) causing revenue growth, increased market share vs. other forms of gaming, and success as measured by other generally accepted business metrics?
A. No. (Obviously.)

Q. Are there any Fortune 500 companies that have put themselves on a path (through the actions of their management teams) leading to revenue growth, increased market share, and success as measured by other generally accepted business metrics?
A. Yes. (Of course there are.)

Q. Do you (as horsemen) want thoroughbred racing to be on a successful path?
A. If the answer to this question is yes, then it's time to change what you are doing.

If the answer to that last question is yes, then start doing the things successful Fortune 500 companies do that make them successful:

Do market research. If you don't have the expertise in house, hire a reputable consulting firm and ask them to:
* Identify your target markets.
* Identify customer needs and wants within your target markets.
* Identify ways you can INNOVATE to satisfy the customer needs and wants within your target markets.

Finally, this is the MOST IMPORTANT thing you need to do:

ACT! PICK SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS HANDED TO YOU BY YOUR CONSULTING FIRM(S) OR YOUR OWN MARKET RESEARCH AND IMPLEMENT THEM!

Then, track your progress going forward. Monitor your results. Measure incremental changes in revenue brought about by the recommendations that you implemented.

When you see something that you implemented spark new customer interest in your target market(s) and start generating additional revenue and market share for you (the 14% takeout pick5 implemented by Hollywood Park in 2011 would be one such real world example of this) then take the next step:

MAKE YOUR BEST ATTEMPT TO IDENTIFY THE REASONS WHY THE CHANGES THAT YOU IMPLEMENTED ARE WORKING AND IMPLEMENT FURTHER CHANGES THAT YOU (OR YOUR CONSULTING FIRM) BELIEVE WILL WORK FOR THE SAME OR SIMILAR REASONS. (Sadly, California racing to date has willingly failed to take that next step.)

Yes, I know... There's risk involved. But successful Fortune 500 companies get to be successful in the first place because they take the occasional measured risk.

Thoroughbred racing is a business. If you want it to be successful you need to start running it the same way a successful Fortune 500 company would run it.

Anything less than that and you are all but guaranteeing thoroughbred racing remains on its own (self made) downward revenue and declining market share slope.

Jeff Platt
President, HANA
www.horseplayersassociation.org/

This stuff is all good, but that would require the racing industry to realize its 2013, and i think that's probably too much to ask, you know, the 1970s were berry berry good to them, they don't want to let go.

[Stillriledup]

My answer: This is in no way disparaging the product they are putting out or the intention they have, but I just don't think it matters. The changes that have to be implemented are too vast and wide reaching.

The following are some examples of what I think might have to be addressed to assist in achieving a new influx of fans and followers:

1. PED'S. The single most destructive thing to hit horse racing is the obvious cheating. It taints the legitimacy of the accomplishments in the game. I have no idea what it would take to catch the cheaters but I just don't think it's a fair fight right now. The chemists are showing up with a missile launcher and the racing industry is bringing a wooden spoon.

2. Tax modification. The current tax laws are old, outdated and absurd. However, the horse racing industry has almost zero pull with legislators and law makers to amend this. Ain't gonna happen.

3. Governing Body. Without a governing body, real collaboration and oversight will never happen and it is sorely missing. Universal drug laws and suspensions are the only chance to start eradicating the habitual drug users. However, there are too many competing interests and agendas at stake to ever give control to one universal figure. Ain't gonna happen.

4. High Definition. The only thing this game really has going for it outside of the core audience is the ambiance of racing. However, this can hardly be relayed to the casual fan in standard definition on a computer screen or even a TV screen. Hell, I can barely tell what number just got up for 2nd. In today's world, imagery is everything. Just look at the advancements in technology in the past 5 years. The product is shown in a very non-appealing format, not to mention the "same saddlecloth colors on big days" absurdity.

5. Lack of Racing Stars. Too many name runners are retired after one year or less in the spotlight, only to be replaced by new names. Thus, the peripheral fan has nothing to "grab" them. The days of horses like Seabiscuit or John Henry are likely over, for the most part. This hurts in attracting fans.

6. Understanding The Audience/Marketing. I am guessing there has never been a study done on what attracts people like me (eat, sleep and shit this game) versus most others that go to the races and don't come back for months or years. There is a certain genetic make-up that hard core horseplayers have. My guess is there are very few of us that don't also love a strategic challenge of data mining and hypothesizing. However, I am sure there are many other underlying traits that we have in common that should be unearthed in order to market to the correct demographic. I think there are too many wild assumptions made (for example, the assumption that poker players are a good target audience, of which I disagree) and not enough real psychological analysis.

In general, the game is very tough to master or even learn at a basic level. (Ever try to explain the difference to a newbie between a NW1X and an OPC75NW3L)? It is also slow with much dead air between races, difficult to follow during the race without vivid presentation and mostly meaningless on a day to day level (meaning the everyday 5k claimer means nothing on the national scene and, except for a gambling venture and to the connections, there is no draw to the average person). The product itself is waning and that doesn't even begin to incorporate things like high tax hits, illegal drugs and the costly nature of playing (DRF, etc).

Great post. Racing loses MILLIONS of dollars just on tax withholdings being held by our Uncle that can't be rechurned into the game. 1% of horseplayers show a profit in the long run, yet 100% of the horseplayers are treated as if they're winners by tax laws. Its a crushing amount of money that "goes away" only to have a large chunk of it returned after a year or a year and a half (or however long it takes for a person to get a refund).

The problem with a "governing body" is that rich track owners have to willingly give up control to a 3rd party and how can you trust that 3rd party to do the right thing? You have 'used car salesmen' running MLB, NFL, NHL and NBA i'm not sure who racing could get as "commissioner" who would do the right things. This goes to show you that big owners such as Stronach, Churchill and the like arent too interested in the health of the GAME, they're interested in themselves...if they really cared about the game and put the game first, they would out front and center leading the charge for a national commissioner to rule the sport with an iron fist and like you say, ain't happening any time soon.

Your comments on PEDs are obviously true, its crippling the game, i think racing needs to find ways to "hurt" the obvious cheaters in a different way because the current way (drug testing that's far behind what the best cheaters are able to pull off) so you need to find a way to get the people who "win too much" to not be able to win as much. There are ways, such as writing things into race conditions that indicate that trainers with x amount of wins....OR, x percentage at the meet, OR, monies won on the year in purses or some other creative ways to keep the cheats out of certain races, and yet, nobody seems to want to be thinking outside the box on this one.

[BlueShoe]

Better food and drink prices at the track. When the walk up concession stand charges more than does just a so so sit down restaurant for bad coffee and blah food, the business model is out of kilter. Squeezing a captive crowd not the way to make friends.

[Stillriledup]

Better food and drink prices at the track. When the walk up concession stand charges more than does just a so so sit down restaurant for bad coffee and blah food, the business model is out of kilter. Squeezing a captive crowd not the way to make friends.

Exactly, When in doubt (and even when NOT in doubt), do what Vegas does. Those marble floors and glitzy billion dollar hotels didnt come from thin air, these people know what theyr'e doing. Last i checked, it was free parking and admission to make a horse wager at a sportsbook.

[Track Phantom]

There are ways, such as writing things into race conditions that indicate that trainers with x amount of wins....OR, x percentage at the meet, OR, monies won on the year in purses or some other creative ways to keep the cheats out of certain races, and yet, nobody seems to want to be thinking outside the box on this one.

Not sure I agree....It might be a slippery slope.

[Stillriledup]

Not sure I agree....It might be a slippery slope.

Why do you think putting "trainers who are 20% win pct or higher at the current meet, not eligible" is slippery?

Its important that the small fish win on occasion, they need to feel they have SOME shot.

JohnHannibalSmith suggests that there would be a lot of shenanigans with transfering ownership and fake names on the program, and that's certainly a valid concern, but there has to be some way to get a few races anyway where supertrainers are not in those races. Its better for competitive purposes and its ok since you're not singling out anyone by name, you're just saying that if you win a certain percentage at the current meet out of x amount of starters, you arent eligible for certain races.

[Robert Fischer]

I put in some good ideas, but it seems that politics are still one of the major hurdles.

Just have to make do with the reality.

[Some_One]

Not sure I agree....It might be a slippery slope.

Why not just get rid of claiming races?

I think North America is only place with these type of races, everywhere else there is an official handicap and horses within a band of ratings are put into a race.

The supertrainers only hang out with the cheap horses and they take advantage of creative race conditions, if you simply say a race is rated for horses 60 to 70, I think you take away a lot of their power.

[Stillriledup]

Why not just get rid of claiming races?

I think North America is only place with these type of races, everywhere else there is an official handicap and horses within a band of ratings are put into a race.

The supertrainers only hang out with the cheap horses and they take advantage of creative race conditions, if you simply say a race is rated for horses 60 to 70, I think you take away a lot of their power.

I love the idea of getting rid of claiming races...there are so many good things about getting rid of the "rent a horse" programs. If there are no claimers, it sort of forces owners to purchase at auction or purchase privately and if you purchase at auction, you have more skin in the game, you have more "invested" in getting that horse to the races and when you buy a yearling and you get that horse to the races and you win, its more rewarding, its more of an investment in the game and not just trying to make a quick buck with a horse that someone else bought at the yearling sales.

Also, claiming races sort of force owners to put their horses up for sale when they might not want to sell them. People who purchase a yearling might actually want to keep the horse, they don't want the robber barons taking their horse.

Without the ability to dump a bad horse in a claimer, owners and trainers will be more caring towards that horse, they won't treat the horse like its a horse they arent going to own next week, i think that's important for the health of the game.

There are some positives to the 'claiming game' but i think that the negatives outweigh the positives.

[rastajenk]

You've never been around horses and their owners, have you?

[barn32]

The biggest problem in the game is that trainers, jocks and owners are not putting the game first, they're putting themselves first. When I play poker, I don't put "the game" first, I put myself first.

Horseracing, plain and simple, is antiquating itself.

Things come and things go. Technology plays a part in this.

I used to love going to the track. I haven't been to a track in 15 years.

I have many ideas, but I'll offer up just one suggestion:

Only allow vet scratches

[shouldacoulda]

As far as entrance and parking fees I certainly think they should be imposed. As a general direction the race track industry should shift its profit making from takeout only to admissions and general attendance fees. I would be more than happy to pay a high ticket to enter the premises knowing that the take out will be more reasonable and more important if there are bookmakers providing fixed odds based on their assessments.

Some of my suggestions are the following:

Less racing is certainly another factor that should seriously be considered if we want horse betting to regain its status as the king of all betting activities. Equally important is the rethinking of the way races are written. I would vote for a national handicap system, assigning weights to horses similarly to the Australian system.

Eventually, claiming races should be marginalized to consist a very small fraction of the pie which should be dominated by allowance type races where weights will be assigned based in winnings. Two and three years old should go by not winners of 1,2 3 4 while as the horse matures it should enter to a national graded classification, like A, B, C, D, E, F. After a win his weight should increase while after a loss it should decrease.

In parallel of course we should have stakes races where weight is just assigned by age and sex, giving the ability to classic horses to compete with reasonable weights.

Horses who reached their fifth year and still have not broken their maidens should be banned from racing while starter allowances should completely be eliminated as they provide the most unbalanced fields.

Steward reports should be very comprehensive containing every possible information, like bleeding, racing trouble, equipment losses, weak ride and anything related.

There should be implied a maximum number of horses per horse (like in Japan for example) while the existing weight allowances will give more chances to bug boys (in Europe is common to have weight differences in the same race up to 17 kgr or more, which is approximately 30 pounds).

Major transformations like from last to first in less than 20 days should be investigated if no excuse will be described in the steward reports.

A trainer who is caught with illegal medication more than three times should be banned for life while suspicious rides should be examined by a special committee with potential harsh penalties for the jockey and possibly the trainer of the horse.

Historical data should be available for free to the public for non commercial purposes.

Less gimmics, with the intention of one long daily horizontal pick (like p5 or p6) with very low cost per unit which will be available nationally and offered by every lotto store. Ideally this can become a national bet combining the main circuits of the period.

Apply one, low take out rate across all bets while allowing private bookmakers to operate both on the track and through the internet.

That's for now, although the list can grow much longer.. (Of course I know that nothing like this is going to happen but... dreaming is good sometimes!)

Delta, I agree with your ideas about cleaning up the sport but I have to disagree with you about parking and attendance fees.

Every business has a core profit center. For the tracks it's take out. The hard core players would love to see a reduced take out but these are the players that will play anyway. Most of them will play through an ADW for the rebates. It's the recreational players they need to bring back. Instead of going to the movies, get them to come to the track. Once they're there, they will spend money for food and drinks. They will also bet money. The overhead to maintain the grandstand and grounds are pretty much fixed and will occur if nobody shows up. These recreational players will never feel the takeout but they will feel $20.00 to park and walk in and the cost of the program. They're down $25.00 and they haven't even opened the program. If they do charge an admission they should give you the program with the cost of admission. If I was offered free tickets to a baseball or football game I still wouldn't go. I will not pay $30.00-$40.00 to park a half a mile away. Then to stand on line for 5-10 minutes to pay $5.00 for a bottle of freakin water? No Thanks. It's all about incentive and value. A customer needs incentive to frequent a business and it's value that will determine the incentive whether it's real or perceived.

[Mineshaft]

I love the idea of getting rid of claiming races...there are so many good things about getting rid of the "rent a horse" programs. If there are no claimers, it sort of forces owners to purchase at auction or purchase privately and if you purchase at auction, you have more skin in the game, you have more "invested" in getting that horse to the races and when you buy a yearling and you get that horse to the races and you win, its more rewarding, its more of an investment in the game and not just trying to make a quick buck with a horse that someone else bought at the yearling sales.

Also, claiming races sort of force owners to put their horses up for sale when they might not want to sell them. People who purchase a yearling might actually want to keep the horse, they don't want the robber barons taking their horse.

Without the ability to dump a bad horse in a claimer, owners and trainers will be more caring towards that horse, they won't treat the horse like its a horse they arent going to own next week, i think that's important for the health of the game.

There are some positives to the 'claiming game' but i think that the negatives outweigh the positives.






Without claiming races you can shut down the horse racing industry.

[thaskalos]

The high takeouts that are levied against the bettors are even more oppressive when they are combined with today's smaller fields. The industry just doesn't get that. A way must be found to relate the takeout to the size of the field.

Not only should there be no parking and entrance fees...but the simulcast programs should be handed out free as well. At my local OTB, the programs are printed right on the premises. What possible reason could they have for charging $5 for them? Make it as easy as possible for the patron to come in and make a bet. Forcing the player to pay for something that he cannot do without is like pushing him right out the door.

An investigative committee should be put in place to review the performances and the betting patterns in a race. When a horse miraculously wakes up, and pays a lot less than it should (either to win, or in the exotics)...then heavy fines and lengthy suspensions should be handed out. If the industry lacks the "sophistication" to smell-out these nefarious business practices...then I am willing to volunteer my services towards that end -- free of charge. This is REAL money we are betting here...not monopoly money.

[Show Me the Wire]

Thask,

Agreed the higher take-out on smaller fields is very oppressive, especially with the increasing volatile odds changing through out the race. At lower odds I have to pay more take-out, because one must invest more money to get the wanted return.

Regarding the concession fees those usually go directly to a third party and not the track. Food concessions are contracted out ,lowering operating costs to the track, but increases costs to the consumer. The same situation applies to parking.

You may be surprised to learn revenue from program sales and forms go directly into an individuals pocket in many cases. In some cases this income is directly paid to the owner or executive as outside revenue. Under this structure free parking, programs etc., will never happen as these individuals will not give up this revenue.

Certainly there should be investigations of suspicious races and unusual betting patterns and this will only happen if the industry admits there is a problem. According to the industry there is no problem. Maybe if the industry is sued in a class action for violating their fiduciary duty to the public for not insuring the integrity of the pools or the race itself, we may see some change.

[cj]

Way too much people racing in my opinion. In other words, the races are about who has new trainer way too often, instead of being about the horses. You are never going to draw in new people for long with this going on.

[elhelmete]

For tracks that use a rewards card:

"REFER A FRIEND"
Every time a cardholder "brings a friend" who signs up for a card himself and deposits or wagers a certain level the cardholder gets some sort of credit (wagering, food and bev, parking etc.)

"TAKE YOUR FRIENDS TO THE TRACK DAY"
Rewards cardholders bring 5 friends for free...each friend gets a program/PPs and a $5 voucher. Every time a friend returns, the original cardholder gets points.

[Stillriledup]

The high takeouts that are levied against the bettors are even more oppressive when they are combined with today's smaller fields. The industry just doesn't get that. A way must be found to relate the takeout to the size of the field.

Not only should there be no parking and entrance fees...but the simulcast programs should be handed out free as well. At my local OTB, the programs are printed right on the premises. What possible reason could they have for charging $5 for them? Make it as easy as possible for the patron to come in and make a bet. Forcing the player to pay for something that he cannot do without is like pushing him right out the door.

An investigative committee should be put in place to review the performances and the betting patterns in a race. When a horse miraculously wakes up, and pays a lot less than it should (either to win, or in the exotics)...then heavy fines and lengthy suspensions should be handed out. If the industry lacks the "sophistication" to smell-out these nefarious business practices...then I am willing to volunteer my services towards that end -- free of charge. This is REAL money we are betting here...not monopoly money.

Great stuff Gus, Happy Birthday also!

One of the things the industry lacks is a person or persons who painstakingly review betting patterns, cancellations, exotic prices that pay too short, pick 6 wagers where someone is alive but really shouldnt be and stuff like that. There would be some way to dig into that, especially since now you have many people who are betting with ADW, so their name is known as the bettor of record.....i'd bet dollars to doughnuts (or, the other way around) that if you sniffed out some of these big exotic pool scores, you might see some kind of common thread and you can probably find out if the bettor of record is associated with a trainer or owner in some way....you know, to make sure that this person wasnt betting against himself in some way.

I'd also love to know if there is a person who is consistently signing large pick 6 winning tickets on 8 dollar tickets. Wouldnt you love to know that so and so has hit 9 pick 6s all paying over 100k and all done on 16 dollar tickets or under featuring 4 singles in the first 4 races? I know i would.

Would the racing industry ever make this info public if they even DID sniff it out? They're famous for sweeping stuff under the rug, mollycoddling certain trainers who have killed horses thru neglect and the list is endless of stuff that you 'dont hear about' because it would be 'bad for business'

[JustRalph]

For tracks that use a rewards card:

"REFER A FRIEND"
Every time a cardholder "brings a friend" who signs up for a card himself and deposits or wagers a certain level the cardholder gets some sort of credit (wagering, food and bev, parking etc.)

"TAKE YOUR FRIENDS TO THE TRACK DAY"
Rewards cardholders bring 5 friends for free...each friend gets a program/PPs and a $5 voucher. Every time a friend returns, the original cardholder gets points.

Why would I burden my friends like that? Bernie Madoff is in prison, so I guess the 2nd best choice would be horse racing...........

[Stillriledup]

Why would I burden my friends like that? Bernie Madoff is in prison, so I guess the 2nd best choice would be horse racing...........

I agree. The racing industry is not a place i'd bring someone i consider a friend into, i'd keep them as far away as possible. When i do bring newbies to the track, i'm just hoping they don't ask "certain questions' that i might be too embarrassed to answer.

This game embarrasses me and that's why i won't subject anyone i actually care about to the sport.

[Cannon shell]

Here's a link to a previous thread:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=107774&page=1&pp=15&highlight=target+market

In post 60 of that thread I posted an answer to the following question:

"However what exactly is your belief that the horsemen should do?"

Here's a link to the specific post where I gave my answer:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1519651&postcount=60

I'm going to repost my answer here in this thread in the event anyone with decision making capacity in racing happens to be reading...


Referencing the bolded part of the above quote, here's what I think you should do:

Ask yourself the following:

Q. Is the current path you as horsemen have put racing on (through the actions of your horsemen alphabet groups) causing revenue growth, increased market share vs. other forms of gaming, and success as measured by other generally accepted business metrics?
A. No. (Obviously.)

Q. Are there any Fortune 500 companies that have put themselves on a path (through the actions of their management teams) leading to revenue growth, increased market share, and success as measured by other generally accepted business metrics?
A. Yes. (Of course there are.)

Q. Do you (as horsemen) want thoroughbred racing to be on a successful path?
A. If the answer to this question is yes, then it's time to change what you are doing.

If the answer to that last question is yes, then start doing the things successful Fortune 500 companies do that make them successful:

Do market research. If you don't have the expertise in house, hire a reputable consulting firm and ask them to:
* Identify your target markets.
* Identify customer needs and wants within your target markets.
* Identify ways you can INNOVATE to satisfy the customer needs and wants within your target markets.

Finally, this is the MOST IMPORTANT thing you need to do:

ACT! PICK SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS HANDED TO YOU BY YOUR CONSULTING FIRM(S) OR YOUR OWN MARKET RESEARCH AND IMPLEMENT THEM!

Then, track your progress going forward. Monitor your results. Measure incremental changes in revenue brought about by the recommendations that you implemented.

When you see something that you implemented spark new customer interest in your target market(s) and start generating additional revenue and market share for you (the 14% takeout pick5 implemented by Hollywood Park in 2011 would be one such real world example of this) then take the next step:

MAKE YOUR BEST ATTEMPT TO IDENTIFY THE REASONS WHY THE CHANGES THAT YOU IMPLEMENTED ARE WORKING AND IMPLEMENT FURTHER CHANGES THAT YOU (OR YOUR CONSULTING FIRM) BELIEVE WILL WORK FOR THE SAME OR SIMILAR REASONS. (Sadly, California racing to date has willingly failed to take that next step.)

Yes, I know... There's risk involved. But successful Fortune 500 companies get to be successful in the first place because they take the occasional measured risk.

Thoroughbred racing is a business. If you want it to be successful you need to start running it the same way a successful Fortune 500 company would run it.

Anything less than that and you are all but guaranteeing thoroughbred racing remains on its own (self made) downward revenue and declining market share slope.

Jeff Platt
President, HANA
www.horseplayersassociation.org/


Placing all the ills of the game ("the current path that you as horseman have put the game on") on horsemans organizations is ridiculous.

The idea that horseman's organizations can be compared to Fortune 500 corporations is a bizarre concept. A better analogy would be a professional sports leagues player union, all of whom are "in the business" of getting the best deal for their constituents, not focusing on the long term growth of anything but player compensation. Did the latest NBA work stoppage include the players union agreeing to donate a portion of their piece of the pie to lower ticket prices? Representative organizations in racing are for the most part made up of volunteers that were elected by a vote of general membership.

You might want to readdress your little business lesson to the proper party, the tracks, because bettors aren't horsemen customers. I run a racing stable (as a corporation) that employs people, pays taxes and exists to make a profit. My customers are my clients/owners who pay me for my services. I have but one vote for whatever horseman's group that I may qualify for whenever they may hold elections. As stated in this thread I am on the supply side of this equation. I supply my entries to whatever track has the proper race. I have no control over who bets on the race, what type of wagers are available, where the signal is disseminated, or pretty much anything else that happens in that race. You and others continually state that horsemen should give up a portion of their share for the common good but somehow always seem to let the tracks or third party ADW's slide.

What you are proposing is basically the Democratic party mantra which identifies aggrieved parties, tells those parties how bad they have it and place the "blame" on the easiest target possible. Somehow in your world the bettors are the "poor" and the horseman are the "rich" and all others are somehow ignored. Perhaps you have a personal agenda that would preclude you from wanting to call out regulatory bodies, tracks, or ADW's?

I dont agree with a lot of what horseman's groups do or with the stances that they take. Often depending on the location different organizations take completely opposite views. (I dont know or care what happens in California) But the idea that they are the sole group responsible for all that ails the sport is ridiculous.

[Cannon shell]

An investigative committee should be put in place to review the performances and the betting patterns in a race. When a horse miraculously wakes up, and pays a lot less than it should (either to win, or in the exotics)...then heavy fines and lengthy suspensions should be handed out.
Agreed. On that note the FBI just showed up at Penn National about 5 mins ago

[Robert Goren]

Placing all the ills of the game ("the current path that you as horseman have put the game on") on horsemans organizations is ridiculous.

The idea that horseman's organizations can be compared to Fortune 500 corporations is a bizarre concept. A better analogy would be a professional sports leagues player union, all of whom are "in the business" of getting the best deal for their constituents, not focusing on the long term growth of anything but player compensation. Did the latest NBA work stoppage include the players union agreeing to donate a portion of their piece of the pie to lower ticket prices? Representative organizations in racing are for the most part made up of volunteers that were elected by a vote of general membership.

For the record the NBA players union did give back part of their piece of the pie. In 2005 players received 57% of the income and as of the new CBA they are receiving about 49-50% of revenue. I will give this, none of the give back is likely to lower ticket prices.

[cj]

Comparing bettors to NBA fans is a little silly too. I really don't think most bettors, not the ones pumping a lot of money through the pools, are doing it for entertainment.

[Cannon shell]

For the record the NBA players union did give back part of their piece of the pie. In 2005 players received 57% of the income and as of the new CBA they are receiving about 49-50% of revenue. I will give this, none of the give back is likely to lower ticket prices.
Right but it wasn't to grow or improve the game, they just got squeezed by the richer guys, the owners when getting locked out. The owners know that the majority of the players can only go so long without getting paid and used that power to renegotiate their deal. None of those owners have used that extra revenue to make things more affordable for fans that i'm aware of.

[Cannon shell]

Comparing bettors to NBA fans is a little silly too. I really don't think most bettors, not the ones pumping a lot of money through the pools, are doing it for entertainment.
Really? What exactly are they doing it for?

[cj]

Really? What exactly are they doing it for?

To make money? I'm not saying that there are no bettors doing it for entertainment, but not the ones betting a lot. And therein lies the problem, tracks and horsemen tend to think we do this for the fun of it.

Personally, I could find a lot more fun things to do than spend a day betting on horses.

[Robert Fischer]

Income and "other". Definitely not entertainment.

[Jeff P]

I offer these recent actions by Horsemen's Alphabet Groups:

* Within the past week: A deal was struck in IL at the conclusion of the IRB meeting calling for an additional surcharge on winning wagers cashed by horseplayers unlucky enough to be residents of Illinois.

Q. Who backed this idea?

A. The Illinois Horsemen.

----------------------

* Within the past month: 10% ADW Tax imposed on horseplayers unlucky enough to be residents of Pennsylvania.

Q. Who backed this idea?

A. The Pennsylvania Horsemen.

----------------------

* Within the past 6 weeks: 5% ADW Tax imposed on horseplayers unlucky enough to be residents of New York.

Q. Who backed this idea?

A. The New York Horsemen.

----------------------

* Within the past 3 years: Exacta Takeout increased to 22.68% in California.

EXA takeout at major tracks:
18.50% AQU-BEL-SAR
19.00% at CD-KEE.
22.68% DMR-HOL-SA

Q. Who backed this idea?

A. The CA Horsemen (TOC.)

Some history:

The immediate result of this change was a $150 million fall off in handle during the early part of the Santa Anita meet that began in Jan 2011.

The shortfall was alarming enough that TRACK MANAGEMENT invited horseplayers to the table to find out why we weren't betting.

The result of those meetings was that track management at Hollywood Park took a risk and introduced a 14% takeout pick5. (This bet has since sparked handle growth not just in the pick5 pools but in all the other pools for the races in the pick5 sequence. This trend of sparking handle growth in the WPS, DD, EXA, TRI, and SUPER pools for the races of the pick5 sequence was noteworthy enough that NYRA recently introduced a low takeout pick5 of their own.)

Horseplayers have since been called back to the table several times by track management. Each time TRACK MANAGEMENT (and recently the CHRB) has backed additional player driven ideas for changes to the wagering menu that involve leveraging lower takeout to spark handle growth, increased total revenue for track bottom lines, and bigger purses for horsemen.

Despite the success of the low takeout pick5 in CA, no further changes to the wagering menu have been implemented.

Care to guess why?

In each case, despite efforts by TRACK MANAGEMENT: It was the HORSEMEN'S ALPHABET GROUP (specifically leadership at the TOC) who had zero interest in allowing further changes to the wagering menu to be tried.

----------------------

The idea that horsemen (through the actions of their Alphabet Groups) bear zero responsibility for racing's decline in popularity and continued downward handle trend is complete and utter bullshit.



-jp

.

[thaskalos]

Horseplayers have since been called back to the table several times by track management. Each time TRACK MANAGEMENT (and recently the CHRB) has backed additional player driven ideas for changes to the wagering menu that involve leveraging lower takeout to spark handle growth, increased total revenue for track bottom lines, and bigger purses for horsemen.

Despite the success of the low takeout pick5 in CA, no further changes to the wagering menu have been implemented.

Care to guess why?

In each case, despite efforts by TRACK MANAGEMENT: It was the HORSEMEN'S ALPHABET GROUP (specifically leadership at the TOC) who had zero interest in allowing further changes to the wagering menu to be tried.



Is it common practice, in other businesses too, to have the "suppliers" be in charge of the "menu"?

[Cannon shell]

To make money? I'm not saying that there are no bettors doing it for entertainment, but not the ones betting a lot. And therein lies the problem, tracks and horsemen tend to think we do this for the fun of it.

Personally, I could find a lot more fun things to do than spend a day betting on horses.
I would say the vast majority of people could find a much better way to make money. I find it odd that you dont think the majority of players enjoy betting.

[Cannon shell]

I offer these recent actions by Horsemen's Alphabet Groups:

* Within the past week: A deal was struck in IL at the conclusion of the IRB meeting calling for an additional surcharge on winning wagers cashed by horseplayers unlucky enough to be residents of Illinois.

Q. Who backed this idea?

A. The Illinois Horsemen.

----------------------

* Within the past month: 10% ADW Tax imposed on horseplayers unlucky enough to be residents of Pennsylvania.

Q. Who backed this idea?

A. The Pennsylvania Horsemen.

----------------------

* Within the past 6 weeks: 5% ADW Tax imposed on horseplayers unlucky enough to be residents of New York.

Q. Who backed this idea?

A. The New York Horsemen.

----------------------

* Within the past 3 years: Exacta Takeout increased to 22.68% in California.

EXA takeout at major tracks:
18.50% AQU-BEL-SAR
19.00% at CD-KEE.
22.68% DMR-HOL-SA

Q. Who backed this idea?

A. The CA Horsemen (TOC.)

Some history:

The immediate result of this change was a $150 million fall off in handle during the early part of the Santa Anita meet that began in Jan 2011.

The shortfall was alarming enough that TRACK MANAGEMENT invited horseplayers to the table to find out why we weren't betting.

The result of those meetings was that track management at Hollywood Park took a risk and introduced a 14% takeout pick5. (This bet has since sparked handle growth not just in the pick5 pools but in all the other pools for the races in the pick5 sequence. This trend of sparking handle growth in the WPS, DD, EXA, TRI, and SUPER pools for the races of the pick5 sequence was noteworthy enough that NYRA recently introduced a low takeout pick5 of their own.)

Horseplayers have since been called back to the table several times by track management. Each time TRACK MANAGEMENT (and recently the CHRB) has backed additional player driven ideas for changes to the wagering menu that involve leveraging lower takeout to spark handle growth, increased total revenue for track bottom lines, and bigger purses for horsemen.

Despite the success of the low takeout pick5 in CA, no further changes to the wagering menu have been implemented.

Care to guess why?

In each case, despite efforts by TRACK MANAGEMENT: It was the HORSEMEN'S ALPHABET GROUP (specifically leadership at the TOC) who had zero interest in allowing further changes to the wagering menu to be tried.

----------------------

The idea that horsemen (through the actions of their Alphabet Groups) bear zero responsibility for racing's decline in popularity and continued downward handle trend is complete and utter bullshit.



-jp

.

There is a large difference between zero responsibility and complete responsibility. The way the game is structured there are rarely easy answers that can be implemented. You aren't offering counterpoints to your complaints on how those issues should be dealt with, just that you dont like the horsemen signing off on them.

[JustRalph]

I would say the vast majority of people could find a much better way to make money. I find it odd that you dont think the majority of players enjoy betting.

Give it a rest. You know what he means.

Christ! This is why this game sucks so much anymore. Bullshit artists abound....

[Cannon shell]

Is it common practice, in other businesses too, to have the "suppliers" be in charge of the "menu"?
Yes because over the last 25 years no new wagers have been tried or introduced and horsemen have blocked them all.

[Cannon shell]

Give it a rest. You know what he means.

Christ! This is why this game sucks so much anymore. Bullshit artists abound....
Seriously? You guys are making the case that you bet races because it is your best opportunity to make money?

[mistergee]

I wish the tracks would treat the players the way a good casino treats the players for one

[JustRalph]

Seriously? You guys are making the case that you bet races because it is your best opportunity to make money?

Nobody said that and you are still playing games. Have a nice day.....

[Cannon shell]

Nobody said that and you are still playing games. Have a nice day.....
CJ responded to something I wrote that wasnt directed at him, not vice versa.

[thaskalos]

I would say the vast majority of people could find a much better way to make money. I find it odd that you dont think the majority of players enjoy betting.

We enjoy the betting part. It's the losing that doesn't appeal to us much...

[thaskalos]

Yes because over the last 25 years no new wagers have been tried or introduced and horsemen have blocked them all.

Hold on a second, Cannon. You said earlier that you are the "supplier", and that the racing fan is not really YOUR customer. Fair enough. You supply the product to the racetrack...and the racetrack offers it to us. In such a scenario...should the supplier have any sort of say in the menu that is being offered to the customers? Would the supplier of a restaurant or a grocery store be able to dictate to the establishment how their business ought to be run?

[johnhannibalsmith]

...Would the supplier of a restaurant or a grocery store be able to dictate to the establishment how their business ought to be run?

Not that I want to speak for Cannon Shell or give the appearance that I'm on his side here on this topic... but if the supplier in your example was effectively being paid in the form of dividends from that grocery's revenues of the core product/service to the tune of roughly half, it might be stipulated that that supplier has some input on the business practices by a wise supplier.

It's a unique relationship and blame belongs everywhere.

[thaskalos]

Not that I want to speak for Cannon Shell or give the appearance that I'm on his side here on this topic... but if the supplier in your example was effectively being paid in the form of dividends from that grocery's revenues of the core product/service to the tune of roughly half, it might be stipulated that that supplier has some input on the business practices by a wise supplier.

It's a unique relationship and blame belongs everywhere.

Yes...but this sort of "supplier" is then not just a "supplier". And he should refrain from presenting himself as such. No?

[johnhannibalsmith]

Yes...but this sort of "supplier" is then not just a "supplier". And he should refrain from addressing himself as such. No?

I agree with you, and I think my history here on the subject would probably spell it out pretty clearly that I'm neither in the Cannon Shell camp nor the Robert "Horsemen Are Satan" Goren camp.

I've been up and down this road so many times in the past in trying to find a balance between the howls of horsemen being the sole ruination of racing and the reality that they have certainly been complicit in it's demise, that I just find it hard to fight with much vigor on the subject any longer. It seems to have become too much of an "either/or", "them/us" debate that I can really only sit back and watch the others argue it out most of the time... and honestly, part of that probably stems from the fact that as more time passes, the more my fellow horsemen seem to validate the positions of guys like Goren.

[Stillriledup]

Exchange wagering was trying to get passed in California and implemented. Did the horsemen say "yes, exchange wagering will help horseplayers have more betting options" No. They said "what's in it for us".

[Robert Goren]

Seriously? You guys are making the case that you bet races because it is your best opportunity to make money? Maybe it is for some. In any case it is their choice of how they earn a living. Your attitude toward them is what drives so many of us crazy.

[cj]

I would say the vast majority of people could find a much better way to make money. I find it odd that you dont think the majority of players enjoy betting.

The people that bet on horses purely for entertainment aren't really betting much money.

Those that bet a lot do so because they take the game seriously and are winning money, or at least think they can. That doesn't mean a lot of those betting the most money aren't delusional. But entertainment? I don't see it.

[mistergee]

is the betting entertaining or the handicapping?

[cj]

Seriously? You guys are making the case that you bet races because it is your best opportunity to make money?

And again, therein lies the rub. Tracks and horsemen look at bettors like fans going to a baseball game. This couldn't be further from the truth. Whether it is true or not, most people bet because they actually think they can win, not for fun.

I think baseball is about the most boring spectator sport there is in the US (that way I leave out cricket). But compared to watching 5k claimers run around in a circle at Penn or CharlesTown night in and night out every 25 or 30 minutes, baseball is a virtual adrenaline rush. And I'm not just picking on small tracks, the same holds true for most other tracks on all but the biggest days.

It is about the gambling.

[cj]

is the betting entertaining or the handicapping?

What percentage of people handicap races they have no intention of betting on? It doesn't mean they bet them all, but they go on with that possibility on the table.

[Cannon shell]

Hold on a second, Cannon. You said earlier that you are the "supplier", and that the racing fan is not really YOUR customer. Fair enough. You supply the product to the racetrack...and the racetrack offers it to us. In such a scenario...should the supplier have any sort of say in the menu that is being offered to the customers? Would the supplier of a restaurant or a grocery store be able to dictate to the establishment how their business ought to be run?
I said I was supply side because someone designated that in a prior post and it fits well enough. The point I was trying to make it that with the plethora of new wagers and huge increase in types and pricing of wagers over the last decade it doesnt appear that the horsemen have been much of an impediment to innovation. The structure of contracts between tracks and horsemen that give horsemen some sort of wagering approval are signed by two parties and ok'ed by the racing commissions. I have to say that i have never heard a single word spoken about horseman vetoing some sort of new wagers except in conjuncture with proposed exchange wagering.

[Cannon shell]

Not that I want to speak for Cannon Shell or give the appearance that I'm on his side here on this topic... but if the supplier in your example was effectively being paid in the form of dividends from that grocery's revenues of the core product/service to the tune of roughly half, it might be stipulated that that supplier has some input on the business practices by a wise supplier.

It's a unique relationship and blame belongs everywhere.
My side is that horsemen arent responsible for all of the evils that Jeff p wants to assign to them. Of course he fails to disclose his personal business relationships with ADW's which have contributed to many issues of course are conveniently ignored. It is hardly a controversial side to be on. I wont even charge you an extra 10%.

[Cannon shell]

Maybe it is for some. In any case it is their choice of how they earn a living. Your attitude toward them is what drives so many of us crazy.
Really? My attitude that the horsemen's organizations should not be blamed for all of the ills of the game? What exactly did I support other than that and that instructing trade organizations to operate as Fortune 500 corporations is dumb?

[Stillriledup]

My side is that horsemen arent responsible for all of the evils that Jeff p wants to assign to them. Of course he fails to disclose his personal business relationships with ADW's which have contributed to many issues of course are conveniently ignored. It is hardly a controversial side to be on. I wont even charge you an extra 10%.

I think Jeff's general argument is that there hasnt been too many trainers (or, any for that matter) who have fought for the game, looked out for the bettors best interests and were interested in growing the game thru vocal support of lowering takeouts. You have the faces of the game, guys like Pletcher and Baffert and has either one of them said "we need to work together for the good of the game, we need to get some of these takeouts lowered, we need to do more for the fans/bettors" I havent heard the "voices" of the game from the trainer side doing anything but collecting money and putting it into buying a new Mercedes or a new townhome.

Trainers arent all to blame and they arent to blame for everyting, but geez, can't we get someone to at least PRETEND they care about the customers and the state of the sport?

[Cannon shell]

I think Jeff's general argument is that there hasnt been too many trainers (or, any for that matter) who have fought for the game, looked out ford the bettors best interests and were interested in growing the game thru vocal support of lowering takeouts. You have the faces of the game, guys like Pletcher and Baffert and has either one of them said "we need to work together for the good of the game, we need to get some of these takeouts lowered, we need to do more for the fans/bettors" I havent heard the "voices" of the game from the trainer side doing anything but collecting money and putting it into buying a new Mercedes or a new townhome.

Trainers arent all to blame and they arent to blame for everyting, but geez, can't we get someone to at least PRETEND they care about the customers and the state of the sport?

Where exactly is a forum for horsemen to do this? I have heard numerous time on various radio shows plenty of prominent horsemen speaking of addressing bettors needs. We dont get any real TV coverage and everytime a horseman ventures into forums like these they are routinely savaged. I have said here and many other forums that I fully support exchange wagering if implemented properly. On national radio I blasted DeBunda the horseman rep at Parx over statements he made over takeout that were idiotic. I know Dale Romans has spoken up about it as well. Truth is that nobody listens to us most of the time and if you want to complain about coverage of this topic ask the racing media where are they on the issue? Or what about the ambush that Finley laid on Rick Violette this past weekend? Trainers have a lot of their own issues to worry about.

Perhaps you should ask Jeff P why he fails to talk about ADW's and their effect on takeout?

[Stillriledup]

Where exactly is a forum for horsemen to do this? I have heard numerous time on various radio shows plenty of prominent horsemen speaking of addressing bettors needs. We dont get any real TV coverage and everytime a horseman ventures into forums like these they are routinely savaged. I have said here and many other forums that I fully support exchange wagering if implemented properly. On national radio I blasted DeBunda the horseman rep at Parx over statements he made over takeout that were idiotic. I know Dale Romans has spoken up about it as well. Truth is that nobody listens to us most of the time and if you want to complain about coverage of this topic ask the racing media where are they on the issue? Or what about the ambush that Finley laid on Rick Violette this past weekend? Trainers have a lot of their own issues to worry about.

Perhaps you should ask Jeff P why he fails to talk about ADW's and their effect on takeout?

The ADW and effect on takeout is a seperate issue, i'm sure we can all discuss it at a different place and time.

The media is also to blame, no doubt, many of them are sitting around on their duffs eating doughnuts and not rocking the boat, you're right about that, they need to do more too.

You're a horsemen and you seem to have no trouble battling it out with horseplayers on the net and by the way, we're giving you a bit of hard time here, i have to say your presence is much appreciated, thanks for debating important issues and sharing your insight, hopefully you don't feel we are too rough on you, you're manning up and arent shy to make your opinion known, i respect that a lot.

[Cannon shell]

The ADW and effect on takeout is a seperate issue, i'm sure we can all discuss it at a different place and time.

The media is also to blame, no doubt, many of them are sitting around on their duffs eating doughnuts and not rocking the boat, you're right about that, they need to do more too.

You're a horsemen and you seem to have no trouble battling it out with horseplayers on the net and by the way, we're giving you a bit of hard time here, i have to say your presence is much appreciated, thanks for debating important issues and sharing your insight, hopefully you don't feel we are too rough on you, you're manning up and arent shy to make your opinion known, i respect that a lot.

It is entirely the same issue.

My intention is to simply state that while horsemans organizations are hardly bastions of competence they arent designed to "improve" the game, they are designed to support horsemen. Why that makes some people insane is beyond me.

[Robert Goren]

It is entirely the same issue.

My intention is to simply state that while horsemans organizations are hardly bastions of competence they arent designed to "improve" the game, they are designed to support horsemen. Why that makes some people insane is beyond me.How is the "improvement of game" not is in the best interest of the horsemen?

[johnhannibalsmith]

...

My intention is to simply state that while horsemans organizations are hardly bastions of competence they arent designed to "improve" the game, they are designed to support horsemen. Why that makes some people insane is beyond me.

I love your posting here, for the record, and more often than not I love the way that you frame your position - which often reflects my own.

But - and I know that our perspectives are vastly different given that the industry that you work in is still rather healthy from a horseman's perspective and the one that I have more or less exiled myself from is most certainly not - I can't help but think that at least in my case, horsemen need to care about improving the game if they want to truly support horsemen. And I do think that horseplayers, looking from the outside in, see that those factions of the industry that don't need to concern themselves with improving the game have that luxury essentially at the expense of those horseplayers - because they are increasingly becoming less of the equation.

Those places (and the horsemen within) that still rely on the horseplayer for their purses, yet fail to recognize the horseplayer, can rightfully be questioned for that attitude. Those places that do not rely on the horseplayer and therefore needn't recognize the horseplayer, can enjoy that position, I suppose, but I can't see it as a winning long term approach either. Then again, I haven't known many in any HBPA to have a very long term view, which is basically the gist of my dismay on the subject.

[PaceAdvantage]

Perhaps you should ask Jeff P why he fails to talk about ADW's and their effect on takeout?Perhaps you should note exactly how this came to pass. Whose fault was it that the market allowed ADWs to start offering substantial rebates? Was it the ADW's fault?

No. They are filling a niche. They are doing exactly what they SHOULD be doing.

So then, who ****ed all this up to begin with? I'll tell you who. The horsemen, the tracks, and the industry as a whole.

Forward thinkers they certainly are not. Yet you want to bash the forward thinkers (the ADWs, who gave the customer what they wanted).

[ronsmac]

I offer these recent actions by Horsemen's Alphabet Groups:

* Within the past week: A deal was struck in IL at the conclusion of the IRB meeting calling for an additional surcharge on winning wagers cashed by horseplayers unlucky enough to be residents of Illinois.

Q. Who backed this idea?

A. The Illinois Horsemen.

----------------------

* Within the past month: 10% ADW Tax imposed on horseplayers unlucky enough to be residents of Pennsylvania.

Q. Who backed this idea?

A. The Pennsylvania Horsemen.

----------------------

* Within the past 6 weeks: 5% ADW Tax imposed on horseplayers unlucky enough to be residents of New York.

Q. Who backed this idea?

A. The New York Horsemen.

----------------------

* Within the past 3 years: Exacta Takeout increased to 22.68% in California.

EXA takeout at major tracks:
18.50% AQU-BEL-SAR
19.00% at CD-KEE.
22.68% DMR-HOL-SA

Q. Who backed this idea?

A. The CA Horsemen (TOC.)

Some history:

The immediate result of this change was a $150 million fall off in handle during the early part of the Santa Anita meet that began in Jan 2011.

The shortfall was alarming enough that TRACK MANAGEMENT invited horseplayers to the table to find out why we weren't betting.

The result of those meetings was that track management at Hollywood Park took a risk and introduced a 14% takeout pick5. (This bet has since sparked handle growth not just in the pick5 pools but in all the other pools for the races in the pick5 sequence. This trend of sparking handle growth in the WPS, DD, EXA, TRI, and SUPER pools for the races of the pick5 sequence was noteworthy enough that NYRA recently introduced a low takeout pick5 of their own.)

Horseplayers have since been called back to the table several times by track management. Each time TRACK MANAGEMENT (and recently the CHRB) has backed additional player driven ideas for changes to the wagering menu that involve leveraging lower takeout to spark handle growth, increased total revenue for track bottom lines, and bigger purses for horsemen.

Despite the success of the low takeout pick5 in CA, no further changes to the wagering menu have been implemented.

Care to guess why?

In each case, despite efforts by TRACK MANAGEMENT: It was the HORSEMEN'S ALPHABET GROUP (specifically leadership at the TOC) who had zero interest in allowing further changes to the wagering menu to be tried.

----------------------

The idea that horsemen (through the actions of their Alphabet Groups) bear zero responsibility for racing's decline in popularity and continued downward handle trend is complete and utter bullshit.



-jp

.
To this day , I'm still perplexed why the California racetracks allowed the entire takeout increase to be given to purses. It allowed purses to grow even when handle went down. It hurt the bettors, and tracks but not the horseman, so they didn't care. By the way, what happened to the exchange wagering that was attached to the rate increase? Of course that never came to fruition.

[Stillriledup]

To this day , I'm still perplexed why the California racetracks allowed the entire takeout increase to be given to purses. It allowed purses to grow even when handle went down. It hurt the bettors, and tracks but not the horseman, so they didn't care. By the way, what happened to the exchange wagering that was attached to the rate increase? Of course that never came to fruition.

Bingo.