Hard times at Fair Grounds

[Clocker]

An interesting article in the New Orleans Advocate (http://www.theneworleansadvocate.com/news/8728621-171/once-greeted-as-savior-of) about the track, the owners, and possible legislative action.

[Grits]

Thanks, Clocker, for sharing this one. It was difficult--every paragraph worse than the one before it. To understand how much these people love their racetrack. And CDI cares nothing. Not a thing. The profit of 700 million + is disgusting. I wish this sport had never seen a slot machine. It hasn't benefit horses--their surroundings, one bit.

[Just a Fan]

NOLA.com wrote a 5 part series of stories and an editorial, all saying similar things, a week or 2 earlier. They can all be accessed from this editorial.

http://www.nola.com/opinions/index.ssf/2014/03/fair_grounds_owners_at_churchi.html

The irony of it is that FG is the only track in the state that is owned by a non-casino gaming company... unless you now consider CDI to be a casino gaming company. I thought this was an interesting quote.

Added Stanley Seeling, president of the LHBPA: "I question sometimes that they're not trying to lessen the quality of racing here on purpose so that at some point they can say racing is dying, we want to run less days.

That is exactly how I have felt for the past few years about another track in the state, Harrah's-owned Louisiana Downs. And what do you know, there is a bill in the LA legislature that would reduce the mandatory race dates at LaD from 80 to 30. Sabotage the handle by making zero effort to promote the product, make the numbers look as bad as possible, and then cry for legislative relief. If LaD "succeeds", I'm sure FG will attempt a similar strategy.

[tzipi]

Thanks, Clocker, for sharing this one. It was difficult--every paragraph worse than the one before it. To understand how much these people love their racetrack. And CDI cares nothing. Not a thing. The profit of 700 million + is disgusting. I wish this sport had never seen a slot machine. It hasn't benefit horses--their surroundings, one bit.

These people and the government want the cash cow casinos now. There has been an explosion of them. The tracks are played out to them. Fan base has dwindled. They can not compete with casino money. The casinos only said they would care for the tracks to get their foot in the door to take them over I believe. Most racinos want to expand now.
I agree, and have always said the slots were a bad idea. It was never going to help or boost racing. I see the same horses, same trainers, high takeout and same racing. Only thing is, the owners and trainers are making more money now.

[nvemil]

Some pressure being applied now by the State of Louisiana

http://www.nola.com/horseracing/index.ssf/2014/04/state_officials_turning_up_on.html

[Stillriledup]

CDI bought Hollywood Park and then sold her to the 'killers'.

[whodoyoulike]

Interesting article, please keep us updated. Found a couple things worth noting to me.

... Racing Commission executive secretary Charles Gardiner said he has heard from all sides on the issues and hopes to bring everyone to the table in the near future. After the Feb. 17 confrontation, he appointed subcommittees from the commission to make a report at the group’s April 22 meeting. ...

Who does Mr. Gardiner consider as "all sides" and "everyone".

... “We are dealing with issues on a scale of which I’ve never seen before,” Gardiner said. “But our mission statement is to balance the interests of the horsemen, the racetracks and the fans — to serve as an arbiter if you will ...

Interesting look at his priority order to help horse racing.

I'm getting pissed when I re-read this article.

[Mineshaft]

Sell the track its time for new ownership.

[Robert Goren]

In the never ending battle to keep a market for their services, the horsemen have perverted the process by lobbying the state legislatures for special perks. While these perks have help the horsemen, they have created some very unusual business models. There absolutely no reason for racinos to sink any more money han required by law into the racing. A lot of these laws only require money from the casino side to go to purses. It was assumed that racinos would invest their own money in the rest of racing. We now know that assumption was in many cases in err. Now the racinos are full fledged battle with the horsemen over whether to keep their racing sides open or not. I think we all know who is going win that battle in the long run. In a lot of places, the horsemen are just buying time. You can not force by law forever force a company to keep a losing part of its operation going. The companies will get those laws changed eventually.

[Valuist]

In the never ending battle to keep a market for their services, the horsemen have perverted the process by lobbying the state legislatures for special perks. While these perks have help the horsemen, they have created some very unusual business models. There absolutely no reason for racinos to sink any more money han required by law into the racing. A lot of these laws only require money from the casino side to go to purses. It was assumed that racinos would invest their own money in the rest of racing. We now know that assumption was in many cases in err. Now the racinos are full fledged battle with the horsemen over whether to keep their racing sides open or not. I think we all know who is going win that battle in the long run. In a lot of places, the horsemen are just buying time. You can not force by law forever force a company to keep a losing part of its operation going. The companies will get those laws changed eventually.

The horsemen never seem to see the big picture. They embrace the small fields because the chance of getting a win or second is better. They embrace the slot fueled purses because they see more money in their wallet. Rather than be concerned with real problems like takeout and small fields, most are more concerned with winning their next race. Even the most hard core racing fan cannot realistically justify casinos propping up the racing industry.

[therussmeister]

Sell the track its time for new ownership.
But that's the thing. With a casino attached, it won't get sold.

[Stillriledup]

But that's the thing. With a casino attached, it won't get sold.

Exactly.

People like this want to kill racing while keeping the casino games. After all, if racing is "falling apart" in New Orleans and they can prove to the legislature that its a "dead end game" maybe there will be some sympathy and they'll pass a "measure" that says "ok, keep the casino, get rid of the racetrack".

[Robert Goren]

But that's the thing. With a casino attached, it won't get sold.Without a casino attached, the only way it would get sold would be to be torn down. Nobody is buying racetracks these days.

[thespaah]

An interesting article in the New Orleans Advocate (http://www.theneworleansadvocate.com/news/8728621-171/once-greeted-as-savior-of) about the track, the owners, and possible legislative action.
Looks to me as though CDI may be trying to run the track into the ground so they can close it.
The company takes the loss and writes it off.
Question...Does anyone see this and the closing of BHP as the beginning of "the contraction" in racing?

[thespaah]

Thanks, Clocker, for sharing this one. It was difficult--every paragraph worse than the one before it. To understand how much these people love their racetrack. And CDI cares nothing. Not a thing. The profit of 700 million + is disgusting. I wish this sport had never seen a slot machine. It hasn't benefit horses--their surroundings, one bit.
I concur...
Yes, at some tracks slot or casino revenue has bumped up purses.
However, it appears little else has received the benefit of these revenue streams.
I read complaints from those who still attend races that despite the presence of slots, the race track facilities are not receiving the most basic of maintenance.

[thespaah]

These people and the government want the cash cow casinos now. There has been an explosion of them. The tracks are played out to them. Fan base has dwindled. They can not compete with casino money. The casinos only said they would care for the tracks to get their foot in the door to take them over I believe. Most racinos want to expand now.
I agree, and have always said the slots were a bad idea. It was never going to help or boost racing. I see the same horses, same trainers, high takeout and same racing. Only thing is, the owners and trainers are making more money now.
The thing is, if this trend continues, there will be no racing at all at some or even many tracks. State laws would have to be changed to allow the tracks to become casino only facilities.
I think the parties in control are building the gallows that will be their own undoing

[thespaah]

The horsemen never seem to see the big picture. They embrace the small fields because the chance of getting a win or second is better. They embrace the slot fueled purses because they see more money in their wallet. Rather than be concerned with real problems like takeout and small fields, most are more concerned with winning their next race. Even the most hard core racing fan cannot realistically justify casinos propping up the racing industry.
Horsemen seem to believe the wagering dollar is no longer needed because the slots will take care of the purses.
And the horsemen are fine with that due to the pervasive disdain they have for the bettor.
Just for giggles, I'd like to see what would happen if the horsemen got their wish. No more betting on races. They get the purse money from slots.
Let's see how they'd like THAT in their morning coffee....

[fmolf]

The same thing is happening at Aqueduct!The place has been neglected by Genting.My take is they want to discontinue racing their and build hotels and shopping malls and a convention center.Not too far off i believe
there will be a time i think in the not too distant future when maybe only 8 to 10 of the larger and most successful tracks are operating.This may be exactly what racing needs, contraction.I would rather see larger competive fields at fewer tracks.Does a shrinking pool of handicappers really need to have such an extensive menu of tracks all racing at the same time ,competing for the same simulcast dollars day in an day out!...I think not.Supply and demand will eventually correct the horseracing industry.

[thespaah]

A correction in the marketplace is coming..In fact, it may have already started.
Hollywood park is gone. Beulah Park is about to close. Colonial Downs may never see another thoroughbred race again. Aqueduct gets 400 people in the building during the week.

[rastajenk]

The Beulah permit is moving to Youngstown; there will still be 3 TB tracks in Ohio. No one will hold up Beulah Park as a sign of a healthy business, but it can't be included in a list of closures intended to illustrate the weakness of the state of the game.

[magwell]

The same thing is happening at Aqueduct!The place has been neglected by Genting.My take is they want to discontinue racing their and build hotels and shopping malls and a convention center.Not too far off i believe
there will be a time i think in the not too distant future when maybe only 8 to 10 of the larger and most successful tracks are operating.This may be exactly what racing needs, contraction.I would rather see larger competitive fields at fewer tracks.Does a shrinking pool of handicappers really need to have such an extensive menu of tracks all racing at the same time ,competing for the same simulcast dollars day in an day out!...I think not.Supply and demand will eventually correct the horseracing industry.I agree with your assessment of this game, I believe your right on the money, contraction will be the future , sad but true.......

[Tall One]

A correction in the marketplace is coming..In fact, it may have already started.
Hollywood park is gone. Beulah Park is about to close. Colonial Downs may never see another thoroughbred race again. Aqueduct gets 400 people in the building during the week.



Couldn't agree more, and unfortunately both are sad commentaries. I'll use the ongoing Calder/GP dispute as a further example.

[Grits]

When a sport is in the trouble that this one is facing, its difficult to understand the sustaining of three + thoroughbred racetracks in any state. Attrition will come to pass. Other closings, at some point, will happen.

When was the last time, (myself, at least) made wagers on a regular basis aside from Churchill or Keeneland--but instead at Kentucky Downs, Turfway Park, Ellis Park? In Louisana there's Fairgrounds, then, there's Delta, Evangeline.

https://www1.drf.com/racing_links/links_tracks.html

Its NUTS, the racetracks that are still open, relying on slot money or not. There are simply way too many.

[HUSKER55]

ya know what would be a good idea for a small track, although it won't happen.

Suppose you limit the grand stand area to say 500,( just a number), but enclosed the track and went with year round racing with really decent video and catered to the online better.

The cost structure would change, I would think. Now wether or not it would be profitable.....I think it would be yes or no and nothing in the middle. i hope I said that right. (pass-fail)

Think about this, if the barns all were underground 5' and used underground passageways the temperature year round would remain at 60 degrees +/-. That has to impact expenses in a good way. All you are moving now is air.

The track is always fast and maintenance would be minimal.


Horse racing is becoming part of gambling that the casinos offer. If you want to keep horse racing seperate then the cost have to shift and so does the marketing. The internet is the world we live in and I do not see it going away. Therefore the tracks have to embrace this and they are not doing it well.

JMHO

[Grits]

Think about this, if the barns all were underground 5' and used underground passageways the temperature year round would remain at 60 degrees +/-. That has to impact expenses in a good way. All you are moving now is air.

Living indoors, 24-7, sitting my butt online would be a pretty pathetic way to live. I couldn't do it. I know good and well, I wouldn't want horses living underground. Then, racing in the afternoon under a dome of artificial lighting--that same lighting, though not as bright, being used in their barns day and night.

No Huskers, this is a big pass. I wouldn't do this to any human or animal. Not for my entertainment, or otherwise..... That air you speak of, would be pretty tough. No sunlight, no grass, the whole bit. No way.

Horse racing is becoming part of gambling that the casinos offer. If you want to keep horse racing seperate then the cost have to shift and so does the marketing. The internet is the world we live in and I do not see it going away. Therefore the tracks have to embrace this and they are not doing it well.

No. Not everyone. Only those who have no life whatsoever--maybe those that tweet as soon as their feet hit the floor, on 'til sundown, and those that sit on Face Book the same amount of time. This is not a viable marketing strategy for horse racing , Huskers. Matter of fact, its insane.

[Robert Goren]

Pathetic or not, more and more of us are doing it, whether by choice or not. The computer is best thing to ever happen to horse race bettor since the racing wire. It is foolish for the industry not embarrass with open arms.
Although I must admit that every handicapper I have ever come across made their bet at the track. I am not sure anybody has figured out how get someone to place their horse racing bet online yet. That is the sticking point for race tracks.

[ultracapper]

You must go to the track early in your development. You need to hash out ideas with others in your early handicapping learning experience. You learn to read the form little bits at a time as other cappers point this and that out to you. If somebody were to just open a ADW acct, start buying forms, and sit in front of their computer and start making bets, they'd be done with the game in a matter of months. Even now as I sit and place 99.99% of my bets on the internet, I have a vision of what's going on at the venue that I'm betting at. Somebody getting into the game the way I described it above would get crushed immediately. They'd have no idea what mistakes they made as they placed losing bet after losing bet, no feedback from somebody that just hit a race, who, as obnoxious as it can be, starts spouting out their reason for betting the horse, and as little as we like to admit, we learn from that obnoxious spout. No, they'd just sit there in front of their computer screen, blaming it on crooked trainers, crooked tracks, incompetent jockeys, generally, they'd blame their lack of immediate success on the crooked game, never realizing that it's their poor, undeveloped handicapping skills that are killing them.

The track interaction, I'd say, for the first 4 or 5 years of your handicapping development, is crucial.

[Robert Goren]

People started playing poker online without playing in anything but a family game at holidays. The trick is get handicappers to bet only after making mental bets on the derby.

[Valuist]

People started playing poker online without playing in anything but a family game at holidays. The trick is get handicappers to bet only after making mental bets on the derby.

I'm not a poker expert, but from what I understand, one can go from novice to solid player much faster in poker than one can at betting thoroughbreds. Most people I know that are good enough to either be ahead, or at least beat most of the takeout, had a mentoring figure when they were learning the game. Its kind of like baseball. Nobody goes from high school to MLB. There's a number of years of experience that one needs before they've seen all the various scenarios that get thrown at a handicapper on a typical race day.

[ultracapper]

Sir, I've read enough of your posts to know you've been involved a long time. Honestly, how long did it take you before you started HONESTLY feeling like you had some real clue as to how to do this? How many races did you bet, losing real money, before you believed you REALLY had a clue?

I know in my experience, it was about 28 years of real time, 22 years of losing real money, and literally TENS OF THOUSANDS of races bet on. 1982-1987 was like elementary school. 87-94 was like middle school. 94-2000 I dropped out. 2001-2006 was like high school, 2006-May 2010 was like university. Only for the past 4 years have I felt like I really have a professional grasp of this, and I'm still wrestling with things to this day. My biggest challenge now is to find a partner that I can work with to fine tune my game. I know hundreds of handicappers who have been doing this longer than I have, and very few of them have gotten out of the middle school stage. Matter of fact, even as they continue to play, they've basically given up trying to educate themselves any further. They've basically punted, and their game is now just hoping to catch that P4 or trifecta now and again to put a quick stack in their wallet. They play day after day after day, and they have quit trying to learn how to fish, they just want me to give them a meal whenever I can, never even asking or caring how I prepared that meal. (Not comparing myself to Jesus, so everybody stand down. Simply a metaphor)

[thaskalos]

People started playing poker online without playing in anything but a family game at holidays. The trick is get handicappers to bet only after making mental bets on the derby.

If I were an embryo horseplayer...the Derby would scare the hell out of me. Year after year, the results of the race make no sense at all...and the horse who eventually wins, almost always turns out to be someone whom the "experts" on TV have seldom mentioned. The beginning horseplayer would have to think..."If even an expert like Andy Beyer cannot pick the winner in this race...then how am I supposed to do it?"

I just can't see how the Derby can motivate a neophyte player to actually start betting real money on this game.

[ultracapper]

Blaming the take out is a crock. Just another "can't be beat because it's all rigged against us" It would be nice if the takes were lower, and it would improve profitability, but if you can't get over the little speed bump that is the present take rate on WPS, the handicapper's problems are much deeper than he wants to admit. If you're hitting winners at a 20% clip for the year and you're down 10%, you only need to hit another 3 or 4 winners out of 100 races bet to get into solid profitability.

[thaskalos]

Sir, I've read enough of your posts to know you've been involved a long time. Honestly, how long did it take you before you started HONESTLY feeling like you had some real clue as to how to do this? How many races did you bet, losing real money, before you believed you REALLY had a clue?

I know in my experience, it was about 28 years of real time, 22 years of losing real money, and literally TENS OF THOUSANDS of races bet on. 1982-1987 was like elementary school. 87-94 was like middle school. 94-2000 I dropped out. 2001-2006 was like high school, 2006-May 2010 was like university. Only for the past 4 years have I felt like I really have a professional grasp of this, and I'm still wrestling with things to this day. My biggest challenge now is to find a partner that I can work with to fine tune my game. I know hundreds of handicappers who have been doing this longer than I have, and very few of them have gotten out of the middle school stage. Matter of fact, even as they continue to play, they've basically given up trying to educate themselves any further. They've basically punted, and their game is now just hoping to catch that P4 or trifecta now and again to put a quick stack in their wallet. They play day after day after day, and they have quit trying to learn how to fish, they just want me to give them a meal whenever I can, never even asking or caring how I prepared that meal. (Not comparing myself to Jesus, so everybody stand down. Simply a metaphor)

Add in the fact that most of the handicapping literature available is meant to exaggerate and deceive rather than to educate...and the task of the would-be "informed" player gets even tougher.

It's hard to know whom to really trust in this game. So many players seem so "smart", and are able to "talk such a good game" :) . But when you follow them to the betting windows...you are left scratching your head.

[thaskalos]

Blaming the take out is a crock. Just another "can't be beat because it's all rigged against us" It would be nice if the takes were lower, and it would improve profitability, but if you can't get over the little speed bump that is the present take rate on WPS, the handicapper's problems are much deeper than he wants to admit. If you're hitting winners at a 20% clip for the year and you're down 10%, you only need to hit another 3 or 4 winners out of 100 races bet to get into solid profitability.

The WPS takeout is more than "a little speed bump". Set the takeout in poker at a flat 10% -- not 17-18% -- and I can guarantee you that there would be no winners left.

[ultracapper]

The way they do it at the poker table kills the game as they are sweeping money off the table the minute the players throw it in the pot. It's so visible, and taps the small bankrolls out. At the races, you come to the track with a set amount of money, the races end at the end of the day, and whether you're tapped or sitting fat, it's over, it's time to quit. A poker game goes on and on until there just isn't anymore money on the table. The take has a much more profound effect.

If you go to the track with $20, and you bet and hit 2 races, you leave a winner. If you bet and lose 2 races, you're a loser. You don't even see the take. Pick winners and the take won't even be noticeable. If the take were less at the track, you'd get more back when you win, and you'd just bet more on your losers. The take is there, and it has an effect, but nothing like at a poker table. 2 different animals.

[thaskalos]

The way they do it at the poker table kills the game as they are sweeping money off the table the minute the players throw it in the pot. It's so visible, and taps the small bankrolls out. At the races, you come to the track with a set amount of money, the races end at the end of the day, and whether you're tapped or sitting fat, it's over, it's time to quit. A poker game goes on and on until there just isn't anymore money on the table. The take has a much more profound effect.

If you go to the track with $20, and you bet and hit 2 races, you leave a winner. If you bet and lose 2 races, you're a loser. You don't even see the take. Pick winners and the take won't even be noticeable. If the take were less at the track, you'd get more back when you win, and you'd just bet more on your losers. The take is there, and it has an effect, but nothing like at a poker table. 2 different animals.
Not true...IMO.

Whether a visible hand reaches into the pot, or an "invisible" hand dips into the mutuel pool...the effect is the same. Money is removed from the game...and the game gets tougher to beat.

[ultracapper]

That's why I called it a little speed bump. I don't deny it has it's effect, but, in my opinion, not nearly like at a poker table. You can't even fold a half a dozen hands in a row at a card table because all you're doing is sitting there watching money you once had a chance to win get sweeped off the table. It's just not as profound at the track. The proof is, if you watch the handle race after race at any track, you'll see it goes up as you get into the later races. Most days at Santa Anita, the last race of the day is a trash MCl, and there will be a quarter million in the win pool. Aside from the Stake races, it may be the heaviest bet race of the day in the WPS pools. The earlier races may only have 5 or 6 hunGs in all pools, while the later races, theoretically harmed by all the money being swept up by the take, will have hundreds of Gs more in their pools. The take doesn't kill the game from race 1 to race 8 like it does at a poker table from hand 1 to hand 75. Not even close to the same effect.

The player that can't beat the take at the races just isn't handicapping well enough, while a guy at a poker table may be playing the best game of his life as he sits and watches the game disintegrate in front of his eyes.

[wiffleball whizz]

The way they do it at the poker table kills the game as they are sweeping money off the table the minute the players throw it in the pot. It's so visible, and taps the small bankrolls out. At the races, you come to the track with a set amount of money, the races end at the end of the day, and whether you're tapped or sitting fat, it's over, it's time to quit. A poker game goes on and on until there just isn't anymore money on the table. The take has a much more profound effect.

If you go to the track with $20, and you bet and hit 2 races, you leave a winner. If you bet and lose 2 races, you're a loser. You don't even see the take. Pick winners and the take won't even be noticeable. If the take were less at the track, you'd get more back when you win, and you'd just bet more on your losers. The take is there, and it has an effect, but nothing like at a poker table. 2 different animals.


Not even close to true.........poker tables take $4/$5 a pot....and when 1 person leaves another person fills the seat...

Horse racing will provide more bang for your buck in limit poker but not no limit poker....

Limit you pay $5 on a $50 pot
No limit u can pay $5 on a $2200 pot so to speak......you can overcome rake in no limit

But to say horse racing has better rake/value for your gambling dollar isn't a good example....


Or a time charge of $5-$8 a half hour....all more fair then racing


If you want to argue a 5-10 limit house game with a dealer that runs 7 hours there can be at most 2 winners....the dealer and house get all the money


No limit > limit in terms of rake least affecting the game

[thaskalos]

That's why I called it a little speed bump. I don't deny it has it's effect, but, in my opinion, not nearly like at a poker table. You can't even fold a half a dozen hands in a row at a card table because all you're doing is sitting there watching money you once had a chance to win get sweeped off the table. It's just not as profound at the track. The proof is, if you watch the handle race after race at any track, you'll see it goes up as you get into the later races. Most days at Santa Anita, the last race of the day is a trash MCl, and there will be a quarter million in the win pool. Aside from the Stake races, it may be the heaviest bet race of the day in the WPS pools. The earlier races may only have 5 or 6 hunGs in all pools, while the later races, theoretically harmed by all the money being swept up by the take, will have hundreds of Gs more in their pools. The take doesn't kill the game from race 1 to race 8 like it does at a poker table from hand 1 to hand 75. Not even close to the same effect.

The player that can't beat the take at the races just isn't handicapping well enough, while a guy at a poker table may be playing the best game of his life as he sits and watches the game disintegrate in front of his eyes.

I respect your opinion...but I just can't agree with you here. I think the vast majority of the gamblers would agree that poker is the better game...if profit is the main motivation. Yes...the horseplayer who can't beat the takeout isn't handicapping well enough...but handicapping "well enough" is a lot tougher than you make it seem.

All those dedicated horseplayers who take long hiatuses from the game are not doing it just to "recharge their batteries". As my friend SRU likes to say...players don't leave the game when they are winning.

There are a lot more poker players than horseplayers in this country...even though poker is still largely illegal.

[BettinBilly]

Sad article, but timely.

I've got a few friends my age whom are Horseplayers. My younger friends are too "Me" generation to put any time, money or interest into Handicapping. They would want an online service to do ALL of the Handicapping for them, point them to a sure thing - delivered conveniently to their smartphone, bet on it, and walk away. Heck, they'd actually like it if there were an iPhone App that would auto-handicap and place the bet for them so they would not have to get involved at all, as long as it was a sure winner. Anything less, they would not be interested.

And the economy is not helping any. With millions losing their homes, jobs, and any hope for a future, recreational disposable income is dwindled to the point of non-existence. I've seen it at tracks. As much as I like the legacy of a place like Beulah, the track has been looking tired and worn for a very long time. Duct tape holding together barricades, mud on walkways where crushed stone used to be, worn and cracked counters, meager tellers available to take bets, old buildings in need of maintenance, and old 27" CRT monitors that are sometimes fuzzy or on the blink. Am I upset that Beulah is closing? Hell yes. Am I surprised? Unfortunately no.

I'm not sure what lurks long term for our sport, but the good news is, I'm still here to enjoy it while I can.

[Poindexter]

Blaming the take out is a crock. Just another "can't be beat because it's all rigged against us" It would be nice if the takes were lower, and it would improve profitability, but if you can't get over the little speed bump that is the present take rate on WPS, the handicapper's problems are much deeper than he wants to admit. If you're hitting winners at a 20% clip for the year and you're down 10%, you only need to hit another 3 or 4 winners out of 100 races bet to get into solid profitability.

That is it? You only need add 3 or 4 % to a 20% win clip to reach profitability. I forgot how easy this game is. Let's see, a sports bettor that can hit at a 54% clip is a solid above average bettor. But at that his rate he is just grinding. If he can do what you say is so easy, he should be able to become
a 58% sports bettor which would make him considered one of the best sports bettors alive, and would take him from grind mode to the print money mode. But you expect horse players to be able increase their winning % that much from a much lower winning %(not to mention there average payoff cannot go down either). Also, let's say our -10% horse player does increase his winning percentage from 20% to 24% and retains that $9.00 average payoff(which would have made him a 10% loser before, he is only transforming into a +8 % winner. IMO with the game the way it currently is the chances of this happening are miniscule, and for every 1 in 100 people that can make that transformation, there are 99 others that will always be consistent losers(and these are the guys that are already above average). What about the poor sap that is new to the game and is donating at a 25% clip. How quickly does he tell the game to stick it where it belongs. Not everybody has your perseverance & many others will not even give the game a try because they already know the take is too high. If you don't adapt, you die. Racing isn't adapting................

[Little Watermelon]

Haven't been to the Fair Grounds in over 10 years but it was a nice little track then, and the food was outstanding and cheap, too.

[ultracapper]

I'll be honest Whifflewhiz, I don't always pay all that much attention to the card tables at the places I go to, but I pay enough attention to the point I can't ever remembering even once a card room I've walked into running a no-limit game. I'm not going to argue and say they aren't out there, but I couldn't find one right now if you gave me 2 hours to run from room to room.

Plenty of 4-8 games, even 5-20s and an occasional 2-40, but don't know where to go here in the greater Seattle area playing no limit, even on a once a week basis. Doesn't mean they aren't out there, but I don't know where. I've seen a hell of a lot of dealers sitting at empty tables though. Maybe a couple guys waiting for more to come in the door.

I'm not going to argue the popularity of poker vs. horse racing, as common sense will tell you that poker is more popular. But you watch these guys on ESPN playing these huge tournaments and some of them haven't been playing more than 24 months. I swear some of them are still in diapers. Everybody that watches those things thinks he's a card player 2 weeks later. I'm sure you know better than I that the reason the poker tables stay full is because the defectors, those that lost their nut before they really learned the game, are replaced by new blood faster than you can turn around. The abundance of poker players isn't due to the ability to beat the rake as much as the sheer popularity of the game and the new players conception that they can beat it. You have neither of those scenarios in horseracing. The first thing put in front of a newbie horse player is the form. Good luck with that introduction.

[ultracapper]

Poindexter,

The average pay on a winning horse in North America is $12.40. The public picks winners at a 30% clip. Yeah man, go from 20% to 24% on below average paying horses. It's that easy. Work on your handicapping and don't worry about the take.

And as for the 99 out of 100 that are consistent losers blah, blah, blah.....what, you gonna make them a winner by lowering the take?

The take is there, it always has been and always will be. The track needs the money to operate, and the state needs to exercise it's right to shake down the citizens. Nothing we can do about it. So if you want to beat the game, you have to pick enough winners to make more than you're betting. That's all, that easy. Bet X, win X+1 or more. That easy. There is no other equation that applies. The silver lining is that you know what you're offered when you make your bet. The take is already calculated when you make your bet. So there is none of this "I bet it because it was 6-1 but then after they took their cut, I only got 9/2. I would have played different." If 6-1 is OK on the board, then regardless of what the numbers crunched were to get there, 6-1 is what you're betting on. If the odds would have been 7-1 if there were no take, and 7-1 is what you gotta have, skip the race, don't bitch that I'm only getting 6-1 when I should get 7-1. There will be a million 7-1 propositions before you're storied horse betting career is complete, wait for it.

The take is much, much more harmful to the overall health of the industry than it is to any individual gambler. Infinitely so.

[Tall One]

When a sport is in the trouble that this one is facing, its difficult to understand the sustaining of three + thoroughbred racetracks in any state. Attrition will come to pass. Other closings, at some point, will happen.

When was the last time, (myself, at least) made wagers on a regular basis aside from Churchill or Keeneland--but instead at Kentucky Downs, Turfway Park, Ellis Park?

https://www1.drf.com/racing_links/links_tracks.html

Its NUTS, the racetracks that are still open, relying on slot money or not. There are simply way too many.


I've never placed at bet on a KD race, haven't placed a bet at Ellis in years, and my bet on We Miss Artie in The Spiral was the first one since the poly was installed. Unless there are serious changes made, Turfway will be shuttered in a couple years. Let them run March, September, and their traditional Holiday December meet, and call it a day.

Seasonal racing needs to return. That goes for NYRA tracks too.

[thespaah]

Couldn't agree more, and unfortunately both are sad commentaries. I'll use the ongoing Calder/GP dispute as a further example.
That battle is going to end suicidal.
One track will come out the winner. The other will close.
Same thing ( roughly) happened when Greenwood Racing decided to run Philly Park year round. That buried Garden State Park.

[Poindexter]

Poindexter,

The average pay on a winning horse in North America is $12.40. The public picks winners at a 30% clip. Yeah man, go from 20% to 24% on below average paying horses. It's that easy. Work on your handicapping and don't worry about the take.

And as for the 99 out of 100 that are consistent losers blah, blah, blah.....what, you gonna make them a winner by lowering the take?

The take is there, it always has been and always will be. The track needs the money to operate, and the state needs to exercise it's right to shake down the citizens. Nothing we can do about it. So if you want to beat the game, you have to pick enough winners to make more than you're betting. That's all, that easy. Bet X, win X+1 or more. That easy. There is no other equation that applies. The silver lining is that you know what you're offered when you make your bet. The take is already calculated when you make your bet. So there is none of this "I bet it because it was 6-1 but then after they took their cut, I only got 9/2. I would have played different." If 6-1 is OK on the board, then regardless of what the numbers crunched were to get there, 6-1 is what you're betting on. If the odds would have been 7-1 if there were no take, and 7-1 is what you gotta have, skip the race, don't bitch that I'm only getting 6-1 when I should get 7-1. There will be a million 7-1 propositions before you're storied horse betting career is complete, wait for it.

The take is much, much more harmful to the overall health of the industry than it is to any individual gambler. Infinitely so.

Just some clarification. I am not complaining because I am a disgruntled horse player who blames whales for my losses. I could honestly care less. So basically everything you mention doesn't apply to me. If I win, I win, if I lose, I lose, if I get rebates, I get rebates, if I don't, I don't. Why would anyone here even care. I am trying to drive home a point that racetracks have used a model that does and cannot work. A 15-16% take with large fields and no rebates is what this sport used to be. That was a successful model for a time with virtually no competition. Todays game is a 16% take with short fields and rebates and is a model that cannot work given today's significant competition. Now,I think, that you think that I want a reduced take because, I want to be able to beat the sport. I can bet offshore and get my own rebates (doesn't help racing any however). I want a reduced takeout, because, if done properly (eliminating rebates, educating new clientele, attention to detail, proper marketing of the sport, stable tours,actually caring about customers, Hdtv broadcasts to everyone whether dish, cable or direct tv, smartphones, cleaning up the sport.......) then instead of spiraling downwards this sport can reverse the trend and actually grow into something very powerful. I believe this sport has so much more to offer people than all other forms of gambling and it is actually legal. Unfortunately the current way has priced most people out of the game and that is the primary reason the game is going down the tubes. I do not believe people are comfortable losing 25% on the dollar as newcomers to this sport do. Think about it. Joe likes to gamble and decides to give racing a try. He bets $500 over the 9 races every time he goes(for a middle class income that is not a tremendous amount). After about 50 visits he is now down over $6000, 100 visits $12,000.. At what point does he decide that this is not for him? At what point does he start chasing? At what point does he just give up either by choice or need? Newcomers are always going to lose, but you do not want them to hemorrhage? This is the only point I am trying to drive home.

Back to the competition aspect. If you are the only burger stand in town and are selling quarter pound burgers for $10, you are rolling in the money. Then Mcdonalds comes in, and it hurts. Now yours may taste better so you keep some of your business but ultimately it takes a big bite out of sales. Then a few months later here comes IN & OUT Burger. Now you are toast. What do you do? First off you have to bring down your price, 2nd you have to differentiate your product. Maybe you can create and awesome tasting half pound burger or Turkey burgers or Veggie burgers or Cheesesteaks.... You wont be able to get $10 any more, but perhaps $7 or $8 for twice as much meat. That is what racing has to do. They have to bring the takeout within range of their competition and they have to make their form of gambling more interesting than the competition. The bizarre thing is all that slot money that was basically an opportunity to do just that went where? Talk about short sighted.

[Valuist]

Sir, I've read enough of your posts to know you've been involved a long time. Honestly, how long did it take you before you started HONESTLY feeling like you had some real clue as to how to do this? How many races did you bet, losing real money, before you believed you REALLY had a clue?

I know in my experience, it was about 28 years of real time, 22 years of losing real money, and literally TENS OF THOUSANDS of races bet on. 1982-1987 was like elementary school. 87-94 was like middle school. 94-2000 I dropped out. 2001-2006 was like high school, 2006-May 2010 was like university. Only for the past 4 years have I felt like I really have a professional grasp of this, and I'm still wrestling with things to this day. My biggest challenge now is to find a partner that I can work with to fine tune my game. I know hundreds of handicappers who have been doing this longer than I have, and very few of them have gotten out of the middle school stage. Matter of fact, even as they continue to play, they've basically given up trying to educate themselves any further. They've basically punted, and their game is now just hoping to catch that P4 or trifecta now and again to put a quick stack in their wallet. They play day after day after day, and they have quit trying to learn how to fish, they just want me to give them a meal whenever I can, never even asking or caring how I prepared that meal. (Not comparing myself to Jesus, so everybody stand down. Simply a metaphor)

Several years. Probably 4 or 5. But I had the advantage of knowing a guy who was a full time player. I started around 1983. Met him around 1988. At the time I thought I knew it all by '88 but still had a few things to learn. I was a better handicapper 20 years ago than I am now. But now I don't play all year. Just too much work. Now I pretty much just play the Dec-March Gulfstream, Saratoga, fall Belmont, fall Keeneland, and the Breeders Cup.

[Grits]

http://www.nola.com/horseracing/index.ssf/2014/04/louisiana_state_racing_commiss_6.html


Despite pledges by Churchill Downs Inc. to re-invest in several lagging areas at the Fair Grounds, the Louisiana State Racing Commission hasn't been convinced.

After almost two hours of discussion at a Tuesday meeting, the Racing Commission decided to defer the company's rolling 10-year license to hold live racing at the Fair Grounds and operate its off-track betting parlors in Louisiana.

[thespaah]

http://www.nola.com/horseracing/index.ssf/2014/04/louisiana_state_racing_commiss_6.html
The question I have is CDI deliberately allowing FG to go into disrepair?
Or, is the problem simply a question of revenue?

[Grits]

It is really difficult to be excited about the one day of racing--the Kentucky Derby--that allows CDI to thrive when the net profits such as the one, below, leave Fairgrounds in the shape that it is in.

This kind of thing is true garbage sucking greed.

http://www.drf.com/news/no-decision-fair-grounds-license-renewal

Horsemen based at the track have been highly critical of Churchill’s management of the track over the last several months and have registered specific complaints about the condition of the turf course and the maintenance of the racetrack building. The complaints led to hearings in the state legislature, and last week, the Louisiana House passed a bill by a vote of 94-0 that would require Churchill to use 10 percent of the revenue from its Louisiana slot machines for capital expenditures.Churchill opposed the legislation, telling legislators that the problems at the track were related to a decline in racing-related revenue in the midst of an industry “depression.” Handle at Fair Grounds was down 11 percent in 2013 compared with 2012, according to the company’s financial statements.

Last year, Churchill had net revenue of $40.1 million from the racing operations at Fair Grounds, down 8 percent from 2012, according to the financial statements. Its net slot-machine revenue in Louisiana in 2013 was $40.9 million, according to the statements, down 2 percent from 2012.

[Saratoga_Mike]

It is really difficult to be excited about the one day of racing--the Kentucky Derby--that allows CDI to thrive when the net profits such as the one, below, leave Fairgrounds in the shape that it is in.

This kind of thing is true garbage sucking greed.

http://www.drf.com/news/no-decision-fair-grounds-license-renewal

The $40 mm is NOT a net profit number. It's a net revenue (sales) number. Companywide the racing operations generate roughly a 17.5% EBITDA margin (cash flow proxy before taxes and non-cash fixed charges). I suspect (haven't bothered to check) that number is skewed higher by Churchill, the main track. I'd apply a 15% EBITDA margin to the $40 mm in revenue at FG - the result $6 mm. My guess (again haven't checked) is between cap ex and taxes CHDN generated maybe a couple million bucks in actual cash from racing at FG last yr, if that. None of this includes the slots side of the biz.

[Grits]

NET revenue led me to believe, net, being....after operating expenses, taxes, financing, capital expenditures, fixed assets, etc, etc

My mistake, I'm sorry.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Article should have explained the term better, imo

[davew]

I'll be honest Whifflewhiz, I don't always pay all that much attention to the card tables at the places I go to, but I pay enough attention to the point I can't ever remembering even once a card room I've walked into running a no-limit game. I'm not going to argue and say they aren't out there, but I couldn't find one right now if you gave me 2 hours to run from room to room.

Plenty of 4-8 games, even 5-20s and an occasional 2-40, but don't know where to go here in the greater Seattle area playing no limit, even on a once a week basis. Doesn't mean they aren't out there, but I don't know where. I've seen a hell of a lot of dealers sitting at empty tables though. Maybe a couple guys waiting for more to come in the door.

I'm not going to argue the popularity of poker vs. horse racing, as common sense will tell you that poker is more popular. But you watch these guys on ESPN playing these huge tournaments and some of them haven't been playing more than 24 months. I swear some of them are still in diapers. Everybody that watches those things thinks he's a card player 2 weeks later. I'm sure you know better than I that the reason the poker tables stay full is because the defectors, those that lost their nut before they really learned the game, are replaced by new blood faster than you can turn around. The abundance of poker players isn't due to the ability to beat the rake as much as the sheer popularity of the game and the new players conception that they can beat it. You have neither of those scenarios in horseracing. The first thing put in front of a newbie horse player is the form. Good luck with that introduction.


Just north of Everett, the casino Tulalip is mostly NL holdem. They have nice food, hotel, shows, summer concert series, casino, poker room - but if you don't do those things, you wouldn't know. Why has this thread moved so far from Fair Grounds?

I heard Travis Stone is going to Monmouth as announcer. Was he at FairGrounds or LouisianaDowns? How close are those 2 tracks?

[Thomas Roulston]

My favorite memory of the Fair Grounds, if it is doomed, will be the fact that their 7 1/2-furlong turf races featured a 480-foot run into an 814-foot turn - yet the stuffed shirts at NYRA won't even consider running 7 1/2 f on their turf course at Aqueduct when a 617-foot run into an 847-foot turn would be involved.

[thespaah]

Just north of Everett, the casino Tulalip is mostly NL holdem. They have nice food, hotel, shows, summer concert series, casino, poker room - but if you don't do those things, you wouldn't know. Why has this thread moved so far from Fair Grounds?

I heard Travis Stone is going to Monmouth as announcer. Was he at FairGrounds or LouisianaDowns? How close are those 2 tracks?
These two tracks are roughly 330 miles apart driving distance.
I've heard Travis' calls. He's a very good announcer. I believe he hails from the east coast as well. So the NJ location may very well be a good fit for him.

[Stillriledup]

CDI given one year temp license to run FG next meet.

[Mineshaft]

CDI given one year temp license to run FG next meet.




That sucks. I hope they sell the track. The can put a big ass video board at Churchill just in time for the KY derby but they cant put one at FG and they cant even fix the turf course at FG. **** Churchill....

[Stillriledup]

That sucks. I hope they sell the track. The can put a big ass video board at Churchill just in time for the KY derby but they cant put one at FG and they cant even fix the turf course at FG. **** Churchill....

The "slumlords" of American Racing.