BEL Fall handle

[Cholly]

Did I miss this, or have they not yet released handle totals for the Fall meet?

[Shemp Howard]

Last year they announced the figures on November 9th

[FantasticDan]

From @DRFGrening at live.drf.com:

Due in part due to wet weather, Belmont Park’s fall meet suffered near double-digit declines in total and ontrack handle compared to a year ago.

All-sources handle for the 38-day meet was $294,710,551, a 9.8-percent decrease from last year’s total of $326,878,686 when 37 cards of racing were conducted. Ontrack handle for this year’s meet was $42,697,719, a 9.6 percent decline from last year’s figure of $47,238,016.

Attendance at this year’s meet was 102,566, an 18.9-percent decrease from last year’s figure of 126,469. Small crowds this fall prompted NYRA to close the third and fourth floors of Belmont for weekday programs in October.

Belmont conducted 365 races at this year’s fall meet, compared to 361 last fall. Inclement weather forced 47 scheduled turf races to be moved to the main track this year compared to only seven last year. All totaled, Belmont conducted 152 turf races this fall compared to 191 last year.

Average field size at this fall’s meet was 8.0 (2,927 starters for 365 races) compared to 8.4 (3,016 for 361 races) last fall.

[lamboguy]

From @DRFGrening at live.drf.com:every place is down across the board no matter how good or bad the weather is. i thought this past Belmont meet was excellent. i love seeing Todd and Chad win races all the time, especially on the turf. the owner's that pay those guys day rates of $200 a day plus+ all those extra's deserve to win all those races.

[westny]

every place is down across the board no matter how good or bad the weather is. i thought this past Belmont meet was excellent. i love seeing Todd and Chad win races all the time, especially on the turf. the owner's that pay those guys day rates of $200 a day plus+ all those extra's deserve to win all those races.


:jump:

[the little guy]

Did Lamboguy actually say people pay Chad and Todd over $200 as a day rate?

I hope people here don't listen to him.

[Shemp Howard]

D. Wayne Lukas got $90 a day in 1998 so $200 i not out of the realm of possibility.

[Robert Goren]

So maybe the rumors of a whale operation leaving the US market are true.

[lamboguy]

The Little Guy has no clue, he must be under the friends and family program. for peasants like myself you have to spend $9000-$10,000 per month per horse all in cost's to have these elite trainer's handle horses.

[the little guy]

D. Wayne Lukas got $90 a day in 1998 so $200 i not out of the realm of possibility.

Yes it is.

I guess it is a good thing I could correct him. People should not believe that. It isn't even close to true.

[FantasticDan]

Steve Zorn of @CVFPartnerships writes a blog, he had this to say about the day rates of the big trainers in 2012:

Training Costs at NYRA tracks still average about $90-$95 a day, with barely any increase since I last reported two years ago. The big guys -- Pletcher, Mott, etc. -- charge a lot more, but that's not who we're talking about.
From this blog entry about ownership costs:

http://businessofracing.blogspot.com/2012/03/update-cost-of-thoroughbred-ownership.html

[stringmail]

Yes it is.

I guess it is a good thing I could correct him. People should not believe that. It isn't even close to true.

Lambo may embellish somewhat but if he is paying the bills, I have no reason to doubt him.

Have you owned/or been involved in ownership to the extent that you are paying the invoices? I certainly have not. Is the extent of your opinion the result of second hand information or direct involvement?

Regardless, I know that I would rather use the $9-$10K playing the horses then paying for horses unless there are some compelling tax breaks associated with horse ownership.

[castaway01]

Lambo may embellish somewhat but if he is paying the bills, I have no reason to doubt him.

Have you owned/or been involved in ownership to the extent that you are paying the invoices? I certainly have not. Is the extent of your opinion the result of second hand information or direct involvement?

Regardless, I know that I would rather use the $9-$10K playing the horses then paying for horses unless there are some compelling tax breaks associated with horse ownership.

It's close to impossible for me to interpret Lamboguy's posts, but wasn't he being sarcastic in saying he loved seeing Pletcher and Brown winning everything? I'm almost certain he wasn't saying he personally was paying them $200 a day to train for him or that he as an owner was winning the races either...

[the little guy]

Lambo may embellish somewhat but if he is paying the bills, I have no reason to doubt him.

Have you owned/or been involved in ownership to the extent that you are paying the invoices? I certainly have not. Is the extent of your opinion the result of second hand information or direct involvement?

Regardless, I know that I would rather use the $9-$10K playing the horses then paying for horses unless there are some compelling tax breaks associated with horse ownership.

I'm sorry that he says wildly incorrect things and people like you, who I will guess are innocently reading this board and mistakenly think you can learn from him, are being misled. The little I can discern from his posts is frequently wrong, but the claim of $200 for Todd and Chad is simply wrong. If you think he knows better than me, then there's nothing I can do to change what is obviously a distorted opinion, but I surely know more about this particular instance than he does.

I realize people learn a lot of misinformation on these message boards. I thought I would at least correct this one. Believe whatever makes you happy.

[the little guy]

I just ran into Chad and told him that I read on the internet that he charges $200 a day. His response? " I wish. "

At that point another trainer jokingly said that he needs to start spreading that rumor...ya know....because nobody would pay that and then maybe he could get owners that were going to Chad instead of him.

[lamboguy]

if The Little Guy knows i am wrong and he does happen to be an expert on this subject he should tell us the exact charges so that we can all make a decision where to go for trainer's, so far he is doing nothing more than ranting here as usual for him.

[stringmail]

I just ran into Chad and told him that I read on the internet that he charges $200 a day. His response? " I wish. "

At that point another trainer jokingly said that he needs to start spreading that rumor...ya know....because nobody would pay that and then maybe he could get owners that were going to Chad instead of him.


...so second hand information and not direct involvement. Thanks. Whether it is $100 or $200, it is a function of what the market will bear. More power to the trainer that can command a higher daily rate.

The information provided by either party certainly won't mislead me as I have little interest in ownership but I do find the disparity between the claims interesting.

[the little guy]

if The Little Guy knows i am wrong and he does happen to be an expert on this subject he should tell us the exact charges so that we can all make a decision where to go for trainer's, so far he is doing nothing more than ranting here as usual for him.


I am not ranting, and I don't print misinformation here and then insult those that correct me.

Frankly, you should be ashamed of yourself.

[classhandicapper]

Maybe you guys are talking about two different things?

There's the day rate and there are other costs that accumulate that are also probably higher for some trainers because of the vet used, more frequent shipping etc...

[the little guy]

...so second hand information and not direct involvement. Thanks. Whether it is $100 or $200, it is a function of what the market will bear. More power to the trainer that can command a higher daily rate.

The information provided by either party certainly won't mislead me as I have little interest in ownership but I do find the disparity between the claims interesting.


I tried.

Asking the trainer, by the way, is not second hand information. In case you are interested.

[the little guy]

Maybe you guys are talking about two different things?

There's the day rate and there are other costs that accumulate that are also probably higher for some trainers because of the vet used, more frequent shipping etc...


We are NOT talking about two different things. He said Day Rate.

Don't defend him. He's indefensible.

[lamboguy]

I am not ranting, and I don't print misinformation here and then insult those that correct me.

Frankly, you should be ashamed of yourself.you corrected nothing here. you took a wild swing and said i am wrong. i asked you to tell us what the charges are for horses that are handled by those trainers and you haven't done it so far.

and by the way i am nowhere near wrong on this.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Maybe you guys are talking about two different things?

There's the day rate and there are other costs that accumulate that are also probably higher for some trainers because of the vet used, more frequent shipping etc...

I assumed that came into play when he claimed it cost $10,000 a month, which makes it closer to $325 a day.

[the little guy]

every place is down across the board no matter how good or bad the weather is. i thought this past Belmont meet was excellent. i love seeing Todd and Chad win races all the time, especially on the turf. the owner's that pay those guys day rates of $200 a day plus+ all those extra's deserve to win all those races.


Here is Lamboguys original lie for those that seem to be confused. This is the lie I corrected.

[thaskalos]

It said in Steve Zorn's article that training costs at NYRA average $90-$95 a day...but that the big guys charge a lot more than that. So...what's a lot more than $90-$95?

[lamboguy]

It said in Steve Zorn's article that training costs at NYRA average $90-$95 a day...but that the big guys charge a lot more than that. So...what's a lot more than $90-$95?that was over a year and a half ago. 8 years ago Pletcher only charged $125 per day. i am not going to argue any more, he chose to discredit me without producing a number. god bless him.

i know there are some people that get training deals, but i am sure if you delve into this you will find my number is not far fetched at all no matter what The Little Guy claims or doesn't claim.

we would all love to know the reason why the handles have been declining in New York, something that i do trust he is an expert at.

[Stillriledup]

Here is Lamboguys original lie for those that seem to be confused. This is the lie I corrected.

But you didn't really correct it as you didn't list the exact rates those guys charge. To me, its all he said she said. Lambo listed an exact number, anyone can come in and say 'that's wrong" but if you don't have the correct number, its not as strong of an argument.

200 doesn't SEEM right, it would probably be more in the 125-150 range if i had to make an uneducated guess, but for your argument to really be strong, the exact rates would be ideal.

[lamboguy]

But you didn't really correct it as you didn't list the exact rates those guys charge. To me, its all he said she said. Lambo listed an exact number, anyone can come in and say 'that's wrong" but if you don't have the correct number, its not as strong of an argument.

200 doesn't SEEM right, it would probably be more in the 125-150 range if i had to make an uneducated guess, but for your argument to really be strong, the exact rates would be ideal.what's the part that doesn't seem right?

do you think that you are going to walk up to Pletcher and have him train your horses that he doesn't want or need and not charge you crazy money to put them in his barn?

[Stillriledup]

what's the part that doesn't seem right?

do you think that you are going to walk up to Pletcher and have him train your horses that he doesn't want or need and not charge you crazy money to put them in his barn?

I don't know enough about it to know if any Joe Blow can walk up to Pletcher and ask him to take a horse, maybe you can only get TAP by "appointment only". Same thing with Brown who's the greatest trainer on the planet at the moment.

If these guys are "public" trainers, i'm sure it would be pretty easy to get a rate by just calling.

Is the 200 something that TAP actually CHARGES to current clients? How do you know this as fact?

[lamboguy]

I don't know enough about it to know if any Joe Blow can walk up to Pletcher and ask him to take a horse, maybe you can only get TAP by "appointment only". Same thing with Brown who's the greatest trainer on the planet at the moment.

If these guys are "public" trainers, i'm sure it would be pretty easy to get a rate by just calling.

Is the 200 something that TAP actually CHARGES to current clients? How do you know this as fact?
i have someone that sends horses to another elite trainer and asked him what he spent, he told me how much he goes for and i said what are you crazy, he told me its nothing compared to what Pletcher charges so i just added on a few bucks to come up with the $200. i know i can't be that far off even if its not exactly $200.

[magwell]

Last I heard to be fact was 120-130 a day with trainers just mentioned .....

[Stillriledup]

Last I heard to be fact was 120-130 a day with trainers just mentioned .....

But if it was 125 a day about a decade ago, how can it still be 125 a day with inflation and whatnut?

[Saratoga_Mike]

Here is Lamboguys original lie for those that seem to be confused. This is the lie I corrected.

TAP charges a roughly $15/day premium over most NYRA-based trainers. There are a few others that also charge a premium, such as KM. As you've already pointed out (indirectly), others aren't charging $185/day.

[magwell]

But if it was 125 a day about a decade ago, how can it still be 125 a day with inflation and whatnut?10 years ago 100 a day was normal for top NY trainers, this I know as fact.

[garyscpa]

I'm sure Pletcher would charge that if you only offered him cheap claimers. He routinely gets rid of horses that can't compete in allowance or stakes by dropping them into claimers just to get rid of them. Just my opinion.

[onefast99]

TAP charges a roughly $15/day premium over most NYRA-based trainers. There are a few others that also charge a premium, such as KM. As you've already pointed out (indirectly), others aren't charging $185/day.
Maybe lambo meant the total monthly charge as sometimes a trainer may add a per day vitamin charge, dentistry, new shoes, lubrisyn,ulcer meds etc. Based on what I pay in NY per day it ends up at slighly under $105.00 or $3k a month. Parx is about $71.00 per day and Mountaineer is about $45.00 per day.

[classhandicapper]

So maybe the rumors of a whale operation leaving the US market are true.

I have no idea if that's true. However, it it is, even though that would be bad for the industry, it could be good for guys like us. I'm going to assume whale money generally does a good job of taking inefficiencies out of the system. So removing one of them may make it slightly easier to find value. I know I'm looking forward to the return of OTBs or restaurant betting in NYC (via NYRA this time). I think some dead money left the game when NYCOTB closed.

[MadWorld]

But if it was 125 a day about a decade ago, how can it still be 125 a day with inflation and whatnut?

Purses have gone up way past inflation. It would make sense that day rates would not have gone up at the same rate since trainers can make more money on the purse side in NY now.

[Cholly]

So maybe the rumors of a whale operation leaving the US market are true.
Another poster mentioned that, whale or not, one very large plunger (Dan Borislow) has not only left the US Market, he has left the planet. The September handle plunge was shortly after his passing in July...coincidence?

[Track Phantom]

Another poster mentioned that, whale or not, one very large plunger (Dan Borislow) has not only left the US Market, he has left the planet. The September handle plunge was shortly after his passing in July...coincidence?

Wow. I did not know this. He is the guy that hit the GP Rainbow P6 in May by going ALL/ALL/ALL/ALL/4 horses/ALL for $6M right?

[castaway01]

Another poster mentioned that, whale or not, one very large plunger (Dan Borislow) has not only left the US Market, he has left the planet. The September handle plunge was shortly after his passing in July...coincidence?

Borislow was a big bettor, but I don't think his passing dropped handle nationwide by 10 percent unless he was betting $100 million a month by himself. Handle has been dropping since 2004 and this is just part of a larger trend. Keep in mind the actual amount of money being bet.

[the little guy]

Borislow was a big bettor, but I don't think his passing dropped handle nationwide by 10 percent unless he was betting $100 million a month by himself. Handle has been dropping since 2004 and this is just part of a larger trend. Keep in mind the actual amount of money being bet.

I don't agree ( well, I agree about Borislow ). The handle drop was too sharp to be considered part of a trend. It happened during the Summer at Del Mar. You don't drop 10% as part of a trend, at least in my opinion. We bucked it in Saratoga where were barely down, especially if you go by average handle per flat race. Belmont's drop was surely partially attributable to weather, but given the Keeneland numbers, it seems that handle dropped for whatever reason somewhat precipitously.

On another note, are people aware that CA tracks create handle numbers in a significantly different way than we do in NY ( and I would assume most everywhere else )? At NYRA, the handle is total dollars bet on the races at our track. In CA, it is dollars bet on that track, plus other tracks and other betting outlets in the State and their wagers on other tracks. As an example, on Saturday August 23rd, total handle at Del Mar was announced as $16.186 million, while the actual total dollars bet on their races from all sources was $12.307 million.

[Cholly]

Wow. I did not know this. He is the guy that hit the GP Rainbow P6 in May by going ALL/ALL/ALL/ALL/4 horses/ALL for $6M right?

That's him; he's gone on to a location where ADW's aren't allowed take his bets...kind of like Texas.

[EMD4ME]

I don't agree ( well, I agree about Borislow ). The handle drop was too sharp to be considered part of a trend. It happened during the Summer at Del Mar. You don't drop 10% as part of a trend, at least in my opinion. We bucked it in Saratoga where were barely down, especially if you go by average handle per flat race. Belmont's drop was surely partially attributable to weather, but given the Keeneland numbers, it seems that handle dropped for whatever reason somewhat precipitously.

On another note, are people aware that CA tracks create handle numbers in a significantly different way than we do in NY ( and I would assume most everywhere else )? At NYRA, the handle is total dollars bet on the races at our track. In CA, it is dollars bet on that track, plus other tracks and other betting outlets in the State and their wagers on other tracks. As an example, on Saturday August 23rd, total handle at Del Mar was announced as $16.186 million, while the actual total dollars bet on their races from all sources was $12.307 million.

Thanks for the info TLG. If I may restate, so I can make sure I understand correctly: At NYRA, if ten million is quoted, it's because a total of ten million dollars was wagered on the 9/10/11 NYRA races on that specific day from on site/off site sources. Where as at Cali, if 16 million is quoted, that is a total of monies wagered on their 8/9/10/11 Cali races from on site and off site locations PLUS monies wagered on other tracks via their Cali hubs?

Thanks in advance

[the little guy]

Thanks for the info TLG. If I may restate, so I can make sure I understand correctly: At NYRA, if ten million is quoted, it's because a total of ten million dollars was wagered on the 9/10/11 NYRA races on that specific day from on site/off site sources. Where as at Cali, if 16 million is quoted, that is a total of monies wagered on their 8/9/10/11 Cali races from on site and off site locations PLUS monies wagered on other tracks via their Cali hubs?

Thanks in advance


If you take the 8 out before 9/10/11 that would be correct from what I understand.

[EMD4ME]

If you take the 8 out before 9/10/11 that would be correct from what I understand.

I appreciate the info. Good to know. But they do run 8 races on Thursdays out in Cali, that's why I stated 8, 9, 10 or 11 races. Nevertheless, I think what they do isn't a true representation of handle then. I like NYRA's way of reporting better.

[Robert Goren]

Belmont was still as was Delmar, no matter how they figure it. I doubt if the weather and the continuing downward spiral of handle accounts for all of it. 10% is pretty good drop. No matter how they slice it, this sport is in trouble. It can't afford too many hits like that. In most businesses, it would be a wake up call. They would be cutting expenses and increasing marketing. I don't see either. Maybe they think that getting a few more slot players is the answer. :)

[onefast99]

Belmont was still as was Delmar, no matter how they figure it. I doubt if the weather and the continuing downward spiral of handle accounts for all of it. 10% is pretty good drop. No matter how they slice it, this sport is in trouble. It can't afford too many hits like that. In most businesses, it would be a wake up call. They would be cutting expenses and increasing marketing. I don't see either. Maybe they think that getting a few more slot players is the answer. :)
Or sports wagering in NJ...:ThmbUp:

[the little guy]

Belmont was still as was Delmar, no matter how they figure it. I doubt if the weather and the continuing downward spiral of handle accounts for all of it. 10% is pretty good drop. No matter how they slice it, this sport is in trouble. It can't afford too many hits like that. In most businesses, it would be a wake up call. They would be cutting expenses and increasing marketing. I don't see either. Maybe they think that getting a few more slot players is the answer. :)


If you could get over your personal biases and just focus, you are smart enough to give a better take on it that this, your usual response. If major meetings ( Del Mar, Keeneland, and Belmont, in this case ) all see a relatively similar, and significant, drop at pretty much the same time, it is more than a random outflow of business. The question, of course, is what happened? Did three major players, bigger than Dan Borislow, pass away or walk away from the game? If so, and someone already brought this up, if they were positive equity players, is it possible that over time this will help the health of the game from a handle perspective?

One of the major reasons handle exploded almost 20 years ago was rebate driven handle. This was, essentially, a bubble, and when it abated, handle unsurprisingly decreased. Now, we had been showing signs of turning things around, and then this hit. The question is what exactly caused it, is it necessarily a long-term bad thing, and what can be done, if anything, to correct it. None of that gets done with the usual Chicken Little act. Not here....not anywhere.

[lamboguy]

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/88678/historical-racing-dealt-setback-in-texas?source=rss

i have to think that not being able to bet with ADW's in Texas has had to hurt the handles all over this year, there are some very huge players there, but this is only 1 factor, there are plenty more that i can see.

[Cholly]

If you could get over your personal biases and just focus, you are smart enough to give a better take on it that this, your usual response. If major meetings ( Del Mar, Keeneland, and Belmont, in this case ) all see a relatively similar, and significant, drop at pretty much the same time, it is more than a random outflow of business. The question, of course, is what happened? Did three major players, bigger than Dan Borislow, pass away or walk away from the game? If so, and someone already brought this up, if they were positive equity players, is it possible that over time this will help the health of the game from a handle perspective?

One of the major reasons handle exploded almost 20 years ago was rebate driven handle. This was, essentially, a bubble, and when it abated, handle unsurprisingly decreased. Now, we had been showing signs of turning things around, and then this hit. The question is what exactly caused it, is it necessarily a long-term bad thing, and what can be done, if anything, to correct it. None of that gets done with the usual Chicken Little act. Not here....not anywhere.
Cholly's never been accused of being particularly quick on the uptake, but even he can read between these lines. Thanks for the info.

[Stillriledup]

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/88678/historical-racing-dealt-setback-in-texas?source=rss

i have to think that not being able to bet with ADW's in Texas has had to hurt the handles all over this year, there are some very huge players there, but this is only 1 factor, there are plenty more that i can see.

NY added a 5% "tax" to bettors, whether or not they bet on the NYRA product, this possibly got rid of any large bettor who was a NY resident, nobody smart is going to keep betting large amounts and hand over 5% extra....but i don't know enough about this tax and its ramifications to say for sure if this was a factor or not.

[the little guy]

Cholly's never been accused of being particularly quick on the uptake, but even he can read between these lines. Thanks for the info.

Honestly, there is nothing "in between the lines" about my post. It's straight forward.

I think it's an interesting and important discussion. It's unfortunate that people get bogged down in their personal biases, or SRU interrupts and ruins every conversation here, as there are a lot of smart and knowledgeable people here. It's just tough for them to get an intelligent conversation going without it getting badly side tracked.

[Poindexter]

If you could get over your personal biases and just focus, you are smart enough to give a better take on it that this, your usual response. If major meetings ( Del Mar, Keeneland, and Belmont, in this case ) all see a relatively similar, and significant, drop at pretty much the same time, it is more than a random outflow of business. The question, of course, is what happened? Did three major players, bigger than Dan Borislow, pass away or walk away from the game? If so, and someone already brought this up, if they were positive equity players, is it possible that over time this will help the health of the game from a handle perspective?

One of the major reasons handle exploded almost 20 years ago was rebate driven handle. This was, essentially, a bubble, and when it abated, handle unsurprisingly decreased. Now, we had been showing signs of turning things around, and then this hit. The question is what exactly caused it, is it necessarily a long-term bad thing, and what can be done, if anything, to correct it. None of that gets done with the usual Chicken Little act. Not here....not anywhere.

Is Fantasy Football a big part of the problem? I know nothing about it(how hard it is to win or lose, takeout....), but obviously a huge industry right now. Has to be hurting all forms of gambling. I cant seem to get the link function to work, but paste this into your browser for a link to an article how big this is.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/leighsteinberg/2014/08/29/the-fantasy-football-explosion/

A quote from the article:

How big is the market? In terms of actual expenditures, the Fantasy Sports Trade Association (http://www.fsta.org/) – yes, there is a trade association – estimates that 32 million Americans spend $467 per person or about $15 billion in total playing. Roughly, 11 billion flows toward football. These figures don’t count ad revenue for fantasy hosting sites. The NFL’s annual revenue falls just under $10 billion currently. So the “derivative” market has grown larger than the foundational market.

[badcompany]

Or sports wagering in NJ...:ThmbUp:

Or Royalties from television shows that featured horses :ThmbUp:

http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100915185526/doblaje/es/images/c/cc/Mistered.gif

[DeltaLover]

NY added a 5% "tax" to bettors, whether or not they bet on the NYRA product, this possibly got rid of any large bettor who was a NY resident, nobody smart is going to keep betting large amounts and hand over 5% extra....but i don't know enough about this tax and its ramifications to say for sure if this was a factor or not.

Can you please explain exactly what you mean by an added five percent tax??? I think I am missing something here....

[Stillriledup]

Can you please explain exactly what you mean by an added five percent tax??? I think I am missing something here....

Maybe its not a tax? I don't know, i was under the impression that NY did some kind of law/rule change where bettors who live in NY had to pay a fee to bet with an ADW. I'm not sure what it was called though.

Here's a thread that has something to do with it.

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=109155&highlight=surcharge

[DeltaLover]

Maybe its not a tax? I don't know, i was under the impression that NY did some kind of law/rule change where bettors who live in NY had to pay a fee to bet with an ADW. I'm not sure what it was called though.

Hmm... I do not use their (or anyone else's) ADW, so probably you are correct... I am sure that my friend EMERALD knows more about it..

[DeanT]

New York fees.

http://www.drf.com/news/new-york-add-5-cent-fee-bets-made-out-state-companies

[the little guy]

Is Fantasy Football a big part of the problem? I know nothing about it(how hard it is to win or lose, takeout....), but obviously a huge industry right now. Has to be hurting all forms of gambling. I cant seem to get the link function to work, but paste this into your browser for a link to an article how big this is.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/leighsteinberg/2014/08/29/the-fantasy-football-explosion/

A quote from the article:

How big is the market? In terms of actual expenditures, the Fantasy Sports Trade Association (http://www.fsta.org/) – yes, there is a trade association – estimates that 32 million Americans spend $467 per person or about $15 billion in total playing. Roughly, 11 billion flows toward football. These figures don’t count ad revenue for fantasy hosting sites. The NFL’s annual revenue falls just under $10 billion currently. So the “derivative” market has grown larger than the foundational market.

I guess it's fair to say Fantasy Football is another competitor for the gambling dollar, but I'm not sure how you would connect it specifically to this sudden handle drop.

It just feels more specific, at least to me.

[Poindexter]

If you could get over your personal biases and just focus, you are smart enough to give a better take on it that this, your usual response. If major meetings ( Del Mar, Keeneland, and Belmont, in this case ) all see a relatively similar, and significant, drop at pretty much the same time, it is more than a random outflow of business. The question, of course, is what happened? Did three major players, bigger than Dan Borislow, pass away or walk away from the game? If so, and someone already brought this up, if they were positive equity players, is it possible that over time this will help the health of the game from a handle perspective?

One of the major reasons handle exploded almost 20 years ago was rebate driven handle. This was, essentially, a bubble, and when it abated, handle unsurprisingly decreased. Now, we had been showing signs of turning things around, and then this hit. The question is what exactly caused it, is it necessarily a long-term bad thing, and what can be done, if anything, to correct it. None of that gets done with the usual Chicken Little act. Not here....not anywhere.

While we are on the subject, at what point does racing realize that if you want to compete in the gambling world you have to compete on pricing. If sports betting thrives on a 2 team takeout of 4.5 %, racing can thrive on a 8 horse field takeout of 8%, not double that. On a exotic takeout of 12 or 13 % not double that.

In my above post I mentioned fantasy football. I believe during the Breeders Cup Draft Kings promoted they wanted to do something similar with horse racing. Can they transfer some of these 32 million people to horse racing? If so, can they get them interested in the betting aspect of horse racing? If so, how.

Does racing ever want to correct the mistakes they made and eliminate rebates, lower takeout significantly so that EVERYBODY has a chance(not will win, but has a chance to win) to win at the sport and not just those smart enough to find a rebate(even if that rebate is at an offshore book and not benefiting the racing industry at all)? So everybody is able to legally bet no matter what state they live in, at this competitive takeout.

There is thread after thread on this board about what posters here (many of them very serious horse players, deem important and crucial to making the sport better and more successful). I could be wrong, but I do not recall you participating in any of them. There are many reasons why this sport continues to struggle. You can blame the economy. Fantasy sports, other forms of gambling, the dumbing of America. Most have been discussed at length so many times. But we as horse players do not see much change for the bettor other than being nickel and dimed with a 2 % increase in take here and 3 % increase in take there........

You want to promote your track. How about next meet offering a 20 cent pick five or pick six with an 8% takeout(you can do this on the early races instead of the late ones). Think that might tempt a few people to handicap a bunch of race on your card? Think a few of them might plug some money in the windows that they otherwise would not have? Have you heard he term loss leader (racing's idea of a loss leader is a $100,000 guaranteed Daily Double pool:lol::lol:) Think there is a reason that all your major retail chains used them to capture the markets they own and give off the perception that they are actually cheaper than they are? Is there a reason racetracks do not feel a need for such a strategy in a market that is kicking their behind, the gambling market.

What has racing done to capture a huge market of poker players that used to play poker online but cannot legally do so anymore? What has racing done to capture sports bettors who love to gamble and 95 % of them expect to lose(they just do not want to be financially raped)? If you do not take action to make the sport more appealing, why in the world would you expect it to grow. Once it fails to grow the next step is to go the other direction because you lose some of your existing customer base each year and fail to replace them with a large enough new customer base.

Bottom line, racing can cry about anything and everything they want, but they have not done what is needed to turn the sport around. Until they do, I will be posting the same thing next year and the year after and racing executives will be blaming everything but the real reason this sport is failing (waiting for there slot machine handouts). It is very sad, because from an entertainment aspect there are no peers, racing is in a class of its own.

[castaway01]

I don't agree ( well, I agree about Borislow ). The handle drop was too sharp to be considered part of a trend. It happened during the Summer at Del Mar. You don't drop 10% as part of a trend, at least in my opinion. We bucked it in Saratoga where were barely down, especially if you go by average handle per flat race. Belmont's drop was surely partially attributable to weather, but given the Keeneland numbers, it seems that handle dropped for whatever reason somewhat precipitously.

On another note, are people aware that CA tracks create handle numbers in a significantly different way than we do in NY ( and I would assume most everywhere else )? At NYRA, the handle is total dollars bet on the races at our track. In CA, it is dollars bet on that track, plus other tracks and other betting outlets in the State and their wagers on other tracks. As an example, on Saturday August 23rd, total handle at Del Mar was announced as $16.186 million, while the actual total dollars bet on their races from all sources was $12.307 million.

I just wanted to be sure that one man's death didn't become the reason why handle was down 10% nationwide, and that seemed to be the way things were heading. Now, could it be a few whales are stopping their wagering at major tracks at the same time for some reason? That seems more likely than a large number of smaller bettors all cutting back on betting at the same time, but maybe it's some of both. Someone with access to the sources of wagering might have that answer (did money from North Dakota or Maine suddenly drop 50% or some other too-simplistic thing?), and it would certainly be interesting to know.

[badcompany]

I just wanted to be sure that one man's death didn't become the reason why handle was down 10% nationwide, and that seemed to be the way things were heading. Now, could it be a few whales are stopping their wagering at major tracks at the same time for some reason? That seems more likely than a large number of smaller bettors all cutting back on betting at the same time, but maybe it's some of both. Someone with access to the sources of wagering might have that answer (did money from North Dakota or Maine suddenly drop 50% or some other too-simplistic thing?), and it would certainly be interesting to know.

The "some of both" theory holds water considering that attendance was down considerably, at Del Mar, as well.

[JustRalph]

How can you compare sports betting? There is no payout to the participants (i.e. Horseman versus teams) in Sports betting?

doesn't that throw the entire argument sideways when you mention sports betting?

[whodoyoulike]

... You can blame the economy... But we as horse players do not see much change for the bettor other than being nickel and dimed with a 2 % increase in take here and 3 % increase in take there........


Bottom line, racing can cry about anything and everything they want, but they have not done what is needed to turn the sport around.

I agree. It's all about the take out increases over the years. It's probably been occurring each year and most people have had enough. The numbers prove the race customers are either leaving or cutting back on their wagering on the game. I know I've cut back and I'm thinking of leaving or only an occasional bet during the year.

I understand TLG that you're employed by NYSE. Has anyone there calculated what the maximum take out % will be before the majority of customers walk away (never to return) if not, they should. The CDI increase earlier this year will probably be remembered as the turning point.

I realize you have no control or influence over racing mgmt. decisions.

[the little guy]

Oh well. I tried.

[elhelmete]

Oh well. I tried.

Andy, one day can you get me up on the balcony to ring the bell and start the trading day?

[the little guy]

Andy, one day can you get me up on the balcony to ring the bell and start the trading day?

Well played.

[Track Phantom]

My few cents:




I think the thing to look at is the average age of horseplayers. I believe we are getting into a zone where dedicated players from the 50's, 60's and even into the 70's are, unfortunately, dying off. Are they being replaced with younger, similarly dedicated players? My guess is not at the rate these players are leaving the game. The most important thing for horse racing is to find a serious audience in the 20-30 year old range.


Takeout rate is certainly a factor but not the mortal impact that many say it is. There are millions that throw their money away playing the lottery with an obscene takeout rate. Having said that, I do believe a lower takeout rate would equate to a higher daily handle.


As a longtime fantasy football player, I really believe this audience can be appealed to. FF is online, as is horse racing (for the most part). There is strategy and ego involved, just like horse racing. Might be a synergy here.


Where is the creativity? The last new wager is the meaningless NY-CA daily double. I don't understand how that is at the least bit intriguing for serious players who can play one or both tracks anyway. 30 years ago, that would have been a huge wager that would have exposed both areas to the other venues. I can't say I love the Rainbow style pick 6 wagers but I give credit to those that came up with it for invigorating the one thing that will draw non-players to the track...BIG JACKPOTS to play into.


There are probably 5 things I can think of almost immediately that would enhance the experience for online players (HD, better graphics, displaying all will-pays for horizontal pools as they go, etc.).
There are some serious challenges to change the trajectory of many areas. It will take top leadership and visionaries to unearth new ways to market the game.

The main thing horse racing has going for it is the fact that it is a great game with no real apples to apples competition.

[Robert Goren]

Apparently nobody knows why BEL fell 10% or if they do they ain't talkin. Basically TLG is saying that NYRA doesn't think they have problem. This hayseed from Nebraska does not get is how a drop in handle could ever be a good thing. There are a lot things about race track management I don't understand. This is just one more.

For the record, I am not the only one who sees the sky falling. Almost every bettor who is not involved in the industry thinks so. So do a lot of horsemen, why do you think are trying so hard everywhere to get or keep a revenue stream from other forms of gambling. It is because horse racing can not support itself. Even with the slot money, some horsemen are giving up the fight. The decreasing number of race horses being foaled every year says all you need to know about how horsemen feel about their future.

[Robert Goren]

The main thing horse racing has going for it is the fact that it is a great game with no real apples to apples competition. If sports wagering ever becomes legal, that will no longer be the case, will it?

[Quesmark]

NY added a 5% "tax" to bettors, whether or not they bet on the NYRA product, this possibly got rid of any large bettor who was a NY resident, nobody smart is going to keep betting large amounts and hand over 5% extra....but i don't know enough about this tax and its ramifications to say for sure if this was a factor or not.
Out of state ADW's are now charged [taxed] 5% on all NY residents wagers,ostensibly to encourage New Yorkers to sign up with a NY outfit like NYRA Rewards.
Did the legislation lower rebates for some big NY players,and send many of their bets in search of shadow pools?

[magwell]

I think if sports betting becomes legal we can expect another 30% drop in handle every where...........anybody agree ?

[ReplayRandall]

I think if sports betting becomes legal we can expect another 30% drop in handle every where...........anybody agree ?

What it will do is speed up the contraction, which has already had a rash of closing these past 6 months, and will crush the remaining horse tracks that are just barely hanging on.........

[magwell]

What it will do is speed up the contraction, which has already had a rash of closing these past 6 months, and will crush the remaining horse tracks that are just barely hanging on.........Your right and people that never bet will bet sports, it would affect the lottery's also, especially if they can bet many game parlays and teasers etc.

[Quesmark]

I think if sports betting becomes legal we can expect another 30% drop in handle every where...........anybody agree ?
Racing doesn't have a league just a bunch of individual teams scrimmaging amongst themselves.
Even the state lotteries joined forces,to boost jackpots and interest,by creating Mega Millions and Powerball.
Racing jurisdictions need to create partnerships to standardize and promote the sport,create uniform rules,and generate handle through wagers which appeal to a cross section of the gambling public.
Fanatasy Sports has a takeout somewhere around 9%,can't a horse racing ADW create an algorithm,which lets fans generate an x horse stable daily from entries at major tracks,that can be entered into numerous matrixes.
In NYC there're lottery agents on every block,can't NYRA and the NY lottery find a way to partner on a race day pick x [with quick pick option] jackpot pool,at a low price point with carryover?Filling out slips would generate buzz and debate on who the best choices are,especially if the races were simulcast into stores.The system could be scaled too and independent outlets become a new OTB network[at the same 6 % commission rate for sellers,keeping overhead low].
Lots of possibilities...

[lamboguy]

more than likely handle will make all time records in the not to distant future with the implementation of co-mingled pools worldwide. the product might be playing to empty houses though and probably will not be sustainable for to long no matter what the takeout is. once someone is exposed to the product for any length of time the flaws show up clear as day.

its easy to say that a high priced rake in this game is the culprit, but if it is its only a very small reason. the rules and branding of the game is what is doing the sport in these days. smart businessmen have been able to exploit the flaws in the game, while the ones that haven't have failed miserably. every successful professional sport in the world has a limited roster, and they all do well. international soccer does not even allow replacements for injured players. in the NFL there are only 45 players per team, basketball 12, major league baseball has only a 25 person roster. maybe horse racing needs to find their own limits for their rosters, and find it real soon.

[drib]

If you could get over your personal biases and just focus, you are smart enough to give a better take on it that this, your usual response. If major meetings ( Del Mar, Keeneland, and Belmont, in this case ) all see a relatively similar, and significant, drop at pretty much the same time, it is more than a random outflow of business. The question, of course, is what happened? Did three major players, bigger than Dan Borislow, pass away or walk away from the game? If so, and someone already brought this up, if they were positive equity players, is it possible that over time this will help the health of the game from a handle perspective?

One of the major reasons handle exploded almost 20 years ago was rebate driven handle. This was, essentially, a bubble, and when it abated, handle unsurprisingly decreased. Now, we had been showing signs of turning things around, and then this hit. The question is what exactly caused it, is it necessarily a long-term bad thing, and what can be done, if anything, to correct it. None of that gets done with the usual Chicken Little act. Not here....not anywhere.

This thinking seems a bit twisted. A 10% drop in handle at Belmont equates to something over $600k per day. Ascribing such a large decrease to the loss of three major players sure asks a lot. It is awfully tough to bet $200k a day on the races at any track this side of Hong Kong; in addition, unless such imagined people died, it is fair to assume, their leaving the game would mean they were not making much profit. This lack of profit sort of negates your idea that the loss in handle presages good things in the future.
It would not take a great deal of analysis to figure out what is going on (general downward trend vs loss of a few whales). Is the loss in handle over a broad spectrum (WPS, DD, Tri's etc.)?; or concentrated in certain pools. Here is a clue...take a look at those low DD pools in races 3-7. The size of these pools precludes the entry of any plungers. If you see a 10% decline here, the problem is broad.

[Robert Goren]

I think if sports betting becomes legal we can expect another 30% drop in handle every where...........anybody agree ?It depend on where sports wagering becomes legal, if it were to become legal? It would very difficult for a track to operate in a state where it became legal. They can not take enough revenue from sports wagering to make up for the mass exodus of bettors from racing. I think the racing industry is badly underestimating the number of bettors it will lose just as it badly underestimated the number of bettors it would lose to the slots. As dog racing in Iowa has found out already, they have to at least some bettors betting on their product or the racinos and the state will pull the plug.

[Robert Goren]

This thinking seems a bit twisted. A 10% drop in handle at Belmont equates to something over $600k per day. Ascribing such a large decrease to the loss of three major players sure asks a lot. It is awfully tough to bet $200k a day on the races at any track this side of Hong Kong; in addition, unless such imagined people died, it is fair to assume, their leaving the game would mean they were not making much profit. This lack of profit sort of negates your idea that the loss in handle presages good things in the future.
It would not take a great deal of analysis to figure out what is going on (general downward trend vs loss of a few whales). Is the loss in handle over a broad spectrum (WPS, DD, Tri's etc.)?; or concentrated in certain pools. Here is a clue...take a look at those low DD pools in races 3-7. The size of these pools precludes the entry of any plungers. If you see a 10% decline here, the problem is broad.The thing we don't know, but the track does, is the takeout of the missing handle. In terms of revenue to NYRA, the amount could have been a lot smaller than 10% drop in handle.I suspect a lot of it was from highly rebated sources. They report all handle the same, but some is not rebated and some has varying percentages of rebates. We can not even make an educated guess as to how much revenue Belmont actually lost.

[pandy]

My take is that the lower handle is the result of the charges that some states have levied against ADW's. Here in Pennsylvania, that charge is 10% and this meant that every PA. bettor who was betting through ADW's had their account canceled. Every time a different state adopts this type of policy, it contributes to the lower handle. My betting was the highest when I was receiving max rebates. Now the only way I can get rebates is to bet offshore.

So, the states who try to shut down the ADW business are driving down handle.

Does anyone, HANA perhaps, have a list of every state that follows this practice and the percentage that they charge ADW's?

[badcompany]

My take is that the lower handle is the result of the charges that some states have levied against ADW's. Here in Pennsylvania, that charge is 10% and this meant that every PA. bettor who was betting through ADW's had their account canceled. Every time a different state adopts this type of policy, it contributes to the lower handle. My betting was the highest when I was receiving max rebates. Now the only way I can get rebates is to bet offshore.

So, the states who try to shut down the ADW business are driving down handle.

Does anyone, HANA perhaps, have a list of every state that follows this practice and the percentage that they charge ADW's?

What about the lower attendance?

18% seems a bit much to attribute to bad weather.

[Robert Goren]

My take is that the lower handle is the result of the charges that some states have levied against ADW's. Here in Pennsylvania, that charge is 10% and this meant that every PA. bettor who was betting through ADW's had their account canceled. Every time a different state adopts this type of policy, it contributes to the lower handle. My betting was the highest when I was receiving max rebates. Now the only way I can get rebates is to bet offshore.

So, the states who try to shut down the ADW business are driving down handle.

Does anyone, HANA perhaps, have a list of every state that follows this practice and the percentage that they charge ADW's?The tracks will retort that the surcharge is forcing residents in their state to bet their track. And that is more than making up for revenue lost by another state imposing a similar fee on their residents. I am not buying it.

[pandy]

I don't buy it, either. Rebates drive handle. Shutting down ADW business is going to cause a lot of players to cut down on their betting, and it also drives handle off shore.

[DeanT]

My take is that the lower handle is the result of the charges that some states have levied against ADW's. Here in Pennsylvania, that charge is 10% and this meant that every PA. bettor who was betting through ADW's had their account canceled. Every time a different state adopts this type of policy, it contributes to the lower handle. My betting was the highest when I was receiving max rebates. Now the only way I can get rebates is to bet offshore.

So, the states who try to shut down the ADW business are driving down handle.

Does anyone, HANA perhaps, have a list of every state that follows this practice and the percentage that they charge ADW's?

It's a part of it for sure. You can't suck money out of bankrolls without it having an effect on top line. VA, NY, PA are the three big ones. Rumors of others following suit. TX killed ADW wagering, as did Michigan. Fees in Illinois as well. Most of those are new.

In addition, more and more tracks are negotiating deals in consortium, making fewer and fewer tracks available to be bet on anything other than national or track ADW's. Supply is being stifled in many ways - in instances where the most money is being banked by every day players - which is a hindrance. Signal fees have been going up, and slowly these tracks get bit on the top line.

As usual, a lot of moving parts. But right now most of the moving parts are moving away from anything positive in terms of handle growth.

Mixed bag from track to track. HAW has been great since Indiana closed. CD has been awful and continues to be awful. AQ is poor, but the weather is bad, so we'll see. Woodbine has seen some increases. DMR up, but that's comparing apples to grapefruits. Overall handle will be down in November, and even with December holding firm it looks like handle will, in 2014, be the lowest ever.

[pandy]

Dean, I always thought that New Jersey was one of the first states to bar bettors from betting outside of the state. What's your take?

[DeanT]

Dean, I always thought that New Jersey was one of the first states to bar bettors from betting outside of the state. What's your take?

Ya, that's been like that for awhile. Plenty of NJ players here that can answer better than I.

There's a lot of protectionism going on; mostly led by horsemen groups. Strangely often times in places that have slot money. That might work in the short run, but with several forms of skill game gambling available (Draft Kings/Fan Duel are doing like a million a day in profit now and are fairly free to roam) it's not going to work long term.

[lamboguy]

maybe racing should pay more attention to its number 1 asset the dedicated customer instead of working overtime to scare them away. the customer's of the sport are the owner's of horse's and the bettors. forget about the track takeout, the prices that a bettor has to pay to be equipped properly at a race track is more than the takeout for an average player. lets call an average player someone who sticks about $200 a day in the window's. he has to go to the track, park his car for about $3, walk in the place at an average cost of $4. buy a racing form and program for a cost of roughly $10. if he wants a seat outside its another $3. buy a stale donut or muffin and a cup of coffee for $5, he is now up and over the takeout by an additional 10% of his bankroll.

the bettor is now ready to make his first bet, his average takeout is 20% plus the additional takeout of breakage up to 5%.. if that's not enough, after the customer makes his bets he has to buck the batch bettor player's that he doesn't even see, and possibly a few after the bell bettors that might exist in all those pools. with all that going on, the bettor might as well take his best shot at the lottery, at least if he wins he could get the life changing score.

when you look at all the abuse the betting customer takes, its remarkable that handle is only down about 10%, the bettor is very resilient.

maybe later i can go into the abuse an owner has taken, which is probably even worse than the bettor's have gone through. the scary part of this is that people love horses, love the races and the racing industry doesn't have a clue how to take advantage of this for the last 40 years.

those bettors that bet between $200-$500 per day are the life line of this game. the bigger player's are not really needed and easier to replace. my example is myself and a few people that i know. i used to be a big NYRA player about 10 years ago, my rebate went down on w-p-s from 6 1/2 % to under 4%, i quit playing along with other's. the outcome was the handle went up and remained up for a number of years. now they allow batch bettor's and the handle's are heading downwards again and losing plenty of customer's

the NYRA circuit is the most pristine, they have the highest standards and is the perennial leader in this industry. they need a complete re-focus on every single aspect of this game and make changes. if they lead other's will follow. without NYRA, there is no industry.

[the little guy]

Apparently nobody knows why BEL fell 10% or if they do they ain't talkin. Basically TLG is saying that NYRA doesn't think they have problem. This hayseed from Nebraska does not get is how a drop in handle could ever be a good thing. There are a lot things about race track management I don't understand. This is just one more.

For the record, I am not the only one who sees the sky falling. Almost every bettor who is not involved in the industry thinks so. So do a lot of horsemen, why do you think are trying so hard everywhere to get or keep a revenue stream from other forms of gambling. It is because horse racing can not support itself. Even with the slot money, some horsemen are giving up the fight. The decreasing number of race horses being foaled every year says all you need to know about how horsemen feel about their future.


This is just sad.

I NEVER said anything close to the words you jammed into my mouth.

The rest is more of your Chicken Little act. Later dude.

[castaway01]

Racing doesn't have a league just a bunch of individual teams scrimmaging amongst themselves.
Even the state lotteries joined forces,to boost jackpots and interest,by creating Mega Millions and Powerball.
Racing jurisdictions need to create partnerships to standardize and promote the sport,create uniform rules,and generate handle through wagers which appeal to a cross section of the gambling public.
Fanatasy Sports has a takeout somewhere around 9%,can't a horse racing ADW create an algorithm,which lets fans generate an x horse stable daily from entries at major tracks,that can be entered into numerous matrixes.
In NYC there're lottery agents on every block,can't NYRA and the NY lottery find a way to partner on a race day pick x [with quick pick option] jackpot pool,at a low price point with carryover?Filling out slips would generate buzz and debate on who the best choices are,especially if the races were simulcast into stores.The system could be scaled too and independent outlets become a new OTB network[at the same 6 % commission rate for sellers,keeping overhead low].
Lots of possibilities...

Okay, I think you have some potentially excellent ideas here (I could pick out the negatives, like there's no way you'd ever get a state to approve anything that would complete with their 40% takeout lottery goldmines, ever), but I'll present the other side. Is it worth it for tracks to spend millions of dollars to develop a new way of betting, get states and the federal government to accept it as being legal (huge point that is often overlooked), get the whales to change their way of play (this would be necessary at the start because you'd have to educate the small horseplayers and it might take time to build handle on the new bets), and get aged horseplayers to change their way of thinking? You could argue yes, and if you had the right system, you'd be right, but it's not an easy path and it's extremely risky.

One thing you mentioned about partnerships between tracks. I think a limited version of this, where three relatively nearby tracks alternate when they run but combine resources in some way---where basically you'd have $150,000 purses with 14-horse fields at one track that weekend instead of $50,000 purses with 7-horse fields at three tracks---would be quite appealing to bet on. Tie in your special wagers, guaranteed payouts, whatever. However, just typing that I can think of 10 reasons why it would never be able to come together. The amount of red tape alone would be ridiculous. And that's a relatively small idea compared to a fantasy sports-style 9% takeout horse wagering system (which for a new system is a pretty intriguing idea, just saying).

[TravisVOX]

Here is a look at racing handle since May. October is greatly influenced by the Breeders' Cup since the first day fell in October this year.

http://www.trackannouncer.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/handle2014.png

The law of large numbers comes into play here IMO. In September, handle dropped a substantial amount - nearly $82 million. This is a huge number. And you can see it's clearly an outlier vs. the other months.

Field size, foal crops, boycotts, weekend warriors leaving the game etc. did not suddenly take effect in September. It is something much, much bigger than that whether it be a team of whales, one whale, many whales or anything in between.

For those who have posted here that such players are bad for the game, well then this should be perceived as a good thing. I'm not enough of an economist to offer an opinion.

[PaceAdvantage]

Basically TLG is saying that NYRA doesn't think they have problem.And basically, you're wrong...again...

[classhandicapper]

The question is what exactly caused it, is it necessarily a long-term bad thing, and what can be done, if anything, to correct it.

Is it correct to assume that NYRA (or the industry in general) can trace the source of handle to specific ADWs, simulcast centers, tracks etc...?

That would allow you to determine if the drop was broad or from a specific location (or give you the breakdown between the two if it was both). You might even get to the exact players that dropped out.

[castaway01]

Is it correct to assume that NYRA (or the industry in general) can trace the source of handle to specific ADWs, simulcast centers, tracks etc...?

That would allow you to determine if the drop was broad or from a specific location (or give you the breakdown between the two if it was both). You might even get to the exact players that dropped out.

That's what I mentioned a while back in the thread. We could speculate on the reasons, but that source info would provide the answers for this specific decline.

[acorn54]

personally i have drifted away from serious wagering. my betting records attest to the fact that the combination of shorter fields AND lower rebates on my bets have diminished my bankroll substantially. of course the racetracks can rely on the addicted horseplayers, but personally i do not enjoy losing my money as i work hard for it.
dime breakage which is rarely mentioned eats up substantially larger portion of low priced winners, percentage-wise, than on longshots. also shorter fields tend to have lower frequency of longshots winning, according to my betting records, and when there is large take out rates making a profit becomes harder.
as an extreme case, if you bet a football game with two possiblities as to the outcome, the bookmaker only has a vig or take out rate of 1%, whereas in horse wagering the vig or take out rate is 15% or more.

[DeanT]

Here is a look at racing handle since May. October is greatly influenced by the Breeders' Cup since the first day fell in October this year.

http://www.trackannouncer.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/handle2014.png

The law of large numbers comes into play here IMO. In September, handle dropped a substantial amount - nearly $82 million. This is a huge number. And you can see it's clearly an outlier vs. the other months.

Field size, foal crops, boycotts, weekend warriors leaving the game etc. did not suddenly take effect in September. It is something much, much bigger than that whether it be a team of whales, one whale, many whales or anything in between.


It's a little smoother month to month than that, because of racedays and other outlying factors, YOY. September was bad, but racedates were drastically down YOY - by about 7% - and there was one fewer Sunday (a couple of points difference there).

It looks like in the aggregate, we are seeing worse gambles, at slightly higher prices with less fluid supply. Even tho the number of races have come down, field size and bettable racing should increase and there should not be a major difference in overall handle. But there is.

[cj]

Hard to believe such big bettors would leave if they were winning. As many have mentioned, with decreased field sizes, increased signal fees (and thus lower rebates), and ever fluctuating odds, they probably have lost the edge they once had if they have in fact left. People don't quit a profitable venture.

[badcompany]

Perhaps the answer to the handle and attendance drop can be found in the film, "This is Spinal Tap.":



Marty: The last time Tap toured America, they where, uh, booked into 10,000 seat arenas, and 15,000 seat venues, and it seems that now, on their current tour they're being booked into 1,200 seat arenas, 1,500 seat arenas, and uh I was just wondering, does this mean uh...the popularity of the group is waning?


Ian: Oh, no, no, no, no, no, no...no, no, not at all. I, I, I just think that the.. uh.. their appeal is becoming more selective.
...

[alydar]

Clearly something happened in September that was unlike any other month. NYRA knows exactly where the shortfall came from. The CHRIMS reports can tell them everything that they would need to know. I am not sure it really matters, in that it seems to have rebounded back.

Comparing handle numbers is extremely difficult to do, with all of the variables that come into play. People need to be careful not to read too much into short term differences.

What is relevant is the overall, long term trends, which everybody here has identified as being negative. These problems are industry wide, and not isolated to NYRA.

NYRA has been really resilient over the years. The loss of NYC OTB and cutting off some rebate shops in the past did not kill its handle the way many thought it would.

Overall, nobody puts on a better show, and I am confident that well into the future NY racing will be around and a leader nationally.

[pandy]

Clearly something happened in September that was unlike any other month. NYRA knows exactly where the shortfall came from. The CHRIMS reports can tell them everything that they would need to know. I am not sure it really matters, in that it seems to have rebounded back.

Comparing handle numbers is extremely difficult to do, with all of the variables that come into play. People need to be careful not to read too much into short term differences.

What is relevant is the overall, long term trends, which everybody here has identified as being negative. These problems are industry wide, and not isolated to NYRA.

NYRA has been really resilient over the years. The loss of NYC OTB and cutting off some rebate shops in the past did not kill its handle the way many thought it would.

Overall, nobody puts on a better show, and I am confident that well into the future NY racing will be around and a leader nationally.

I agree, NYRA is the clear leader. Southern California has made several mistakes over the past six years or so, from horrible racing surfaces at Santa, track bias at Santa Anita, raising takeouts, capped off by letting a horse get away with murder in this years biggest race. Gulfstream is speed favoring, Churchill is pathetic, and Keeneland is terrific but has short meets.

[Stillriledup]

I agree, NYRA is the clear leader. Southern California has made several mistakes over the past six years or so, from horrible racing surfaces at Santa, track bias at Santa Anita, raising takeouts, capped off by letting a horse get away with murder in this years biggest race. Gulfstream is speed favoring, Churchill is pathetic, and Keeneland is terrific but has short meets.

BUT, Gulfstream WEST is a "closers track" :D

[classhandicapper]

Doesn't sound like things are getting much better if these numbers are accurate.

http://www.drf.com/news/nyra-no-immediate-plans-aqueduct

"It was not mentioned at Wednesday’s board meeting that all-sources handle at the recently concluded Belmont meet was down 9.8 percent, or $32 million, compared with the 2013 Belmont fall meet.

Business has been no better at Aqueduct through the first two weeks of the meet. For the first two weeks of the meet, average daily all-sources handle is $5,774,159, down 22 percent from $7,404,213 through the first two weeks last year. This fall, Aqueduct has run 11 cards, compared with eight through two weeks last year."

[alydar]

Well, it would appear that something significant may be going on.

I guess it will come out eventually.

[pat]

The nyra board is totally worthless they can care less about its customers.$4.50 for the same cup of coffee you get for free in the casino.It appears that the casino is forcing the nyra patrons to their side of the building with its food and beverage prices. No one at NYRA is looking out for their customers as long as they and the horsemen are getting their cut.A bagel and coffee $10.50! !!!!!!!

[the little guy]

The nyra board is totally worthless they can care less about its customers.$4.50 for the same cup of coffee you get for free in the casino.It appears that the casino is forcing the nyra patrons to their side of the building with its food and beverage prices. No one at NYRA is looking out for their customers as long as they and the horsemen are getting their cut.A bagel and coffee $10.50! !!!!!!!


This is the kind of stuff I just love. You have absolutely no idea what NYRA is or isn't doing about this situation, yet despite seemingly knowing the situation concerning food and Genting, you place the blame squarely on NYRA, while having zero idea what we may be currently doing about this situation.

Typical internet blather. Why care about the truth when you can make something up?

[pat]

What I do know is coffeee has been 4.50 from the beginning of the meet. And Im sure your getting yours on the arm(and if you dont understand that means free)

[pat]

Furthermore Im on the 2nd floor of Aqu now so why dont you come and explain to me and everyone else what they are doing. So we can d away with the internet blather.

[lamboguy]

Furthermore Im on the 2nd floor of Aqu now so why dont you come and explain to me and everyone else what they are doing. So we can d away with the internet blather.
sorry pat, you don't get answer's from that guy, just underhanded mean insults. its pretty foolish and boring already.

[the little guy]

What I do know is coffeee has been 4.50 from the beginning of the meet. And Im sure your getting yours on the arm(and if you dont understand that means free)

I don't drink coffee, but I pay for my tea, and I get nothing free.

You're batting 1000. Wrong about everything. Typical.

[PaceAdvantage]

sorry pat, you don't get answer's from that guy, just underhanded mean insults. its pretty foolish and boring already.Funny, I never seem to have to delete posts from Andy because they violate the terms of service here. Yet, cj had to delete a response from pat to TLG that was not only mean, it was vulgar as well...take note of that for the future.

[thaskalos]

This is the kind of stuff I just love. You have absolutely no idea what NYRA is or isn't doing about this situation, yet despite seemingly knowing the situation concerning food and Genting, you place the blame squarely on NYRA, while having zero idea what we may be currently doing about this situation.

Typical internet blather. Why care about the truth when you can make something up?

"Doing"...or "THINKING of doing"? Not exactly the same thing... :)

[Track Phantom]

Typical internet blather. Why care about the truth when you can make something up?

May not happen all that often but I agree with your comment here. I understand that customers have a right to complain about prices or services. But you'd think that someone who takes the time to write on a message board would attempt to point their frustrations in the right area.

The world we leave in today requires an awfully thick skin especially if you're at all in the public eye.

[the little guy]

"Doing"...or "THINKING of doing"? Not exactly the same thing... :)

Yes "doing"

What is your point....or did you just feel a need to comment?

[drib]

Doesn't sound like things are getting much better if these numbers are accurate.

http://www.drf.com/news/nyra-no-immediate-plans-aqueduct

"It was not mentioned at Wednesday’s board meeting that all-sources handle at the recently concluded Belmont meet was down 9.8 percent, or $32 million, compared with the 2013 Belmont fall meet.

Business has been no better at Aqueduct through the first two weeks of the meet. For the first two weeks of the meet, average daily all-sources handle is $5,774,159, down 22 percent from $7,404,213 through the first two weeks last year. This fall, Aqueduct has run 11 cards, compared with eight through two weeks last year."

I agree with others that NYRA is the most important circuit in US racing, and that is why any decrease in their business is troubling. Looking at the recently concluded Belmont meet, the almost 10% drop in handle was broad, and included October racing days (example 17 of 21 days down). In any normal business, such a drop would be catastrophic, but, in the dysfunctional world of horse racing, who knows if anyone is on top of the situation (other than camouflage work like no longer reporting attendance figures)?
In all fairness, I do think the Aqueduct numbers, using daily average handle, are a bit misleading. This year, the meet started with 8 race cards on Wed/Thurs, while last year, they started on Friday (first day of Breeder's Cup). Just this fact would account for a significant drop in that daily average, especially with a two week old meet.....however, in eyeballing the Aqueduct business on a daily 2014-2013 comparison, it is apparent there is a major loss in handle. Pretty much every comparable day from last year is way up over this year; even yesterday's huge Pick 6 handle only made this year $250k better than last year.

[thaskalos]

Yes "doing"

What is your point....or did you just feel a need to comment?
No point...I just felt the need to comment.

[Tom]

Furthermore Im on the 2nd floor of Aqu now so why dont you come and explain to me and everyone else what they are doing. So we can d away with the internet blather.

If you are the track, get the hell off the internet and go bet!
Do your part - betting is better than talking.
Lead by example! Bets, not blather!

[the little guy]

No point...I just felt the need to comment.

I appreciate the honesty :)

[Tall One]

My few cents:



I think the thing to look at is the average age of horseplayers. I believe we are getting into a zone where dedicated players from the 50's, 60's and even into the 70's are, unfortunately, dying off. Are they being replaced with younger, similarly dedicated players? My guess is not at the rate these players are leaving the game. The most important thing for horse racing is to find a serious audience in the 20-30 year old range.


Takeout rate is certainly a factor but not the mortal impact that many say it is. There are millions that throw their money away playing the lottery with an obscene takeout rate. Having said that, I do believe a lower takeout rate would equate to a higher daily handle.


As a longtime fantasy football player, I really believe this audience can be appealed to. FF is online, as is horse racing (for the most part). There is strategy and ego involved, just like horse racing. Might be a synergy here.


Where is the creativity? The last new wager is the meaningless NY-CA daily double. I don't understand how that is at the least bit intriguing for serious players who can play one or both tracks anyway. 30 years ago, that would have been a huge wager that would have exposed both areas to the other venues. I can't say I love the Rainbow style pick 6 wagers but I give credit to those that came up with it for invigorating the one thing that will draw non-players to the track...BIG JACKPOTS to play into.


There are probably 5 things I can think of almost immediately that would enhance the experience for online players (HD, better graphics, displaying all will-pays for horizontal pools as they go, etc.).
There are some serious challenges to change the trajectory of many areas. It will take top leadership and visionaries to unearth new ways to market the game.

The main thing horse racing has going for it is the fact that it is a great game with no real apples to apples competition.


All valid points, Valento; but i'd love life if the bold faced portion would become reality. I'd LOVE being able to spot a possible live play in the horizontals, but xpressbet's idea of this graphic is worse than terrible. :ThmbDown:

[drib]

Here are today's numbers from Aqueduct:
On Track $724,064 Total $5,056,171 P6 pool was $34k

One year ago same Thursday:
On Track $719,948 Total $6,087,368 There was a P6 carryover so that pool was $287,000.

I realize one day is can be a misleading snapshot, but the data is starting to accumulate that something very unusual is happening to NYRA's handle.

[whodoyoulike]

Doesn't sound like things are getting much better if these numbers are accurate.

http://www.drf.com/news/nyra-no-immediate-plans-aqueduct

"It was not mentioned at Wednesday’s board meeting that all-sources handle at the recently concluded Belmont meet was down 9.8 percent, or $32 million, compared with the 2013 Belmont fall meet.

Business has been no better at Aqueduct through the first two weeks of the meet. For the first two weeks of the meet, average daily all-sources handle is $5,774,159, down 22 percent from $7,404,213 through the first two weeks last year. This fall, Aqueduct has run 11 cards, compared with eight through two weeks last year."

You should have included the next paragraph in your post.

Part of Belmont’s handle decline was due to 47 races being taken off the turf due to inclement weather. Kay said there has been talk about putting a synthetic track inside of Belmont’s two turf courses in part to keep fields intact when races are rained off the turf.

When they take 47 races off the turf, how does the handle decline? Do they cancel the races? Is the handle for turf races significantly higher than dirt races?

[cj]

You should have included the next paragraph in your post.



When they take 47 races off the turf, how does the handle decline? Do they cancel the races? Is the handle for turf races significantly higher than dirt races?

Field size is reduced, and field size is probably the number 1 handle generator. Not to mention people just aren't that down with betting turf horses moving to dirt or "Main Track Only" horses at 4 to 5.

[aaron]

This is a pretty interesting thread. I am going to take a shot and would like to know if this makes any sense when it comes to declining handle.
1-I really believe many big bettors have left the game. Some of the so called big bettors were not winning players. If their rebates were reduced,they probably bet less or found another game.
2-The bettors who were regulars at the track and bet between 25000-75000 just got worn out by the takeout and never being recognized by track management as valued customers.
3-The guest experience at the track,generally is a negative experience,so any new customers come once and do not return.
4-Most new players never learn the game. Many years ago,they used to have seminars that were fun and educational. I don't see that anymore.
5-National TV never features the players. How many times can you watch rich owners and trainers ? It just gets boring watching the Breeders Cup and listening to these people. It would have been much better following the Breeders Cup betting challenge.
6-Perception of racing. For instance today at Aqueduct a horse was 2-1 when the race went off and paid 1/2. This sort of thing turns bettors off and can cause a reduction in handle.

[thaskalos]

Field size is reduced, and field size is probably the number 1 handle generator. Not to mention people just aren't that down with betting turf horses moving to dirt or "Main Track Only" horses at 4 to 5.
Yes...but are people down with betting on the turf horses when they move to the synthetic track? Is Kay right when he suggests that building a synthetic track at Belmont will keep the turf fields intact when turf racing is cancelled for the day?

[lamboguy]

i am sure that there is a some reason why the handle has dropped all over the place, its not just NYRA.

no matter what the reason is the game needs some type of plan for growth. there has been no growth and i promise there won't be any until things are done differently.

we are all sick of hearing that the competition is to tough vs other forms of gambling which is complete rubbish. this game is the easiest thing in the world to attract new people to the sport. instead the game chooses to scare them away.

[pandy]

No doubt that the rain has hurt the handle this meet, washed off the turf means short fields and often short prices.

[whodoyoulike]

Field size is reduced, and field size is probably the number 1 handle generator. Not to mention people just aren't that down with betting turf horses moving to dirt or "Main Track Only" horses at 4 to 5.


Thanks, I can now see what you've mentioned. But, do you think it was a significant part of a $32 million decrease? I've never paid much attention to the changes in pool sizes when they go from turf to dirt because of weather. My horse's odds usually don't change much.

[badcompany]

Furthermore Im on the 2nd floor of Aqu now so why dont you come and explain to me and everyone else what they are doing. So we can d away with the internet blather.

When you go to a place like Aqueduct Racetrack, you're not really paying for the coffee so much as the ambiance. ;)

[drib]

Field size is reduced, and field size is probably the number 1 handle generator. Not to mention people just aren't that down with betting turf horses moving to dirt or "Main Track Only" horses at 4 to 5.

There are many factors that go into mutuel handle. Yes, off the turf races, with their associated small fields do have a negative effect, and P6 carryovers and minus show pools can inflate, but I am afraid that the NYRA betting plunge (seems to be greater away from the track) cannot be explained by the vicissitudes of weather.....it is just too darn large a decrease, and definitely has been seen on many days (like today) when weather was ideal.

[lamboguy]

No doubt that the rain has hurt the handle this meet, washed off the turf means short fields and often short prices.there are people that only play off track and off the turf races.

if you go to places like Saratoga or Gulfstream you will find at least 100 people starting at feet when the track is sloppy or muddy.

[ReplayRandall]

I guess I'll have to post it 20 more times to get the ultimate solution across: Contraction to 10 super-hubs is how horse racing will thrive again........period..........and no, not the Obama period.

[Robert Goren]

Clearly something happened in September that was unlike any other month. NYRA knows exactly where the shortfall came from. The CHRIMS reports can tell them everything that they would need to know. I am not sure it really matters, in that it seems to have rebounded back.

Comparing handle numbers is extremely difficult to do, with all of the variables that come into play. People need to be careful not to read too much into short term differences.

What is relevant is the overall, long term trends, which everybody here has identified as being negative. These problems are industry wide, and not isolated to NYRA.

NYRA has been really resilient over the years. The loss of NYC OTB and cutting off some rebate shops in the past did not kill its handle the way many thought it would.

Overall, nobody puts on a better show, and I am confident that well into the future NY racing will be around and a leader nationally.I know I am going to catch Hell for saying this. NYRA was in some trouble until it was baled out by slot money. When NYC OTB went under, they owed NYRA a lot of money. It put NYRA in a real bind. The good news is that the NYRA is using some of the slot money on things other than just purses. The biggest problem NYRA has now is that Belmont and Aqueduct are located on land that is worth a lot more money than its use as a race track can justify. That may not be an issue right now, but it will be one in the future.

[whodoyoulike]

I guess I'll have to post it 20 more times to get the ultimate solution across: Contraction to 10 super-hubs is how horse racing will thrive again........period..........and no, not the Obama period.

This reduction in number of tracks has been mentioned previously in another thread. I don't know what the number should be but, someone needs to figure it out (the sooner the better). In order to provide a competitive product the direction points to having fewer tracks. But, this someone will probably screw it up with poor scheduling, even higher take out recommendations, etc.

[lamboguy]

I guess I'll have to post it 20 more times to get the ultimate solution across: Contraction to 10 super-hubs is how horse racing will thrive again........period..........and no, not the Obama period.i am not saying i disagree with you, but do you think by contracting, will the handles of the remaining tracks go up or down? what happens to the horses that aren't good enough to compete in one of those 10 remaining circuits?

personally i think if the game contracted that much there will be much less interest in the sport. the reason why i say that is because i have watched the growth of the NFL. the more they expanded, the more interest there was in the game of football. on the other side of the coin, to much expansion can hit the law of diminishing returns. i have not seen any new franchises in Football or any other professional sport for that matter in quite some time now.

[Robert Goren]

If they put in a poly track for off the turf races, would they move the off track dirt race to it too?

I don't see them putting in a poly track just for off the turf races at Belmont. It would be to expensive. Now if they were to close AQU and run Bel during the winter, they could use it for what is now Aqu inner meet as well. That would make sense. How well the bettors would like it is another question. I can not see NYRA give up on a winter meet. One more thing, for all its problems, NY racing is not going away anytime soon. They have as good a product as racing puts out these days.

[ReplayRandall]

This reduction in number of tracks has been mentioned previously in another thread. I don't know what the number should be but, someone needs to figure it out (the sooner the better). In order to provide a competitive product the direction points to having fewer tracks. But, this someone will probably screw it up with poor scheduling, even higher take out recommendations, etc.


And you know what?.......you're a 100% right on the money......BTW, I started that other thread and made a few of the posters downright angry......won't be the last time.

[whodoyoulike]

i am not saying i disagree with you, but do you think by contracting, will the handles of the remaining tracks go up or down? what happens to the horses that aren't good enough to compete in one of those 10 remaining circuits?

personally i think if the game contracted that much there will be much less interest in the sport. the reason why i say that is because i have watched the growth of the NFL. the more they expanded, the more interest there was in the game of football. on the other side of the coin, to much expansion can hit the law of diminishing returns. i have not seen any new franchises in Football or any other professional sport for that matter in quite some time now.

I would think included in the available tracks are those offering $1k -$2k purses or whatever is the bottom rung. I know people do like this racing level. I don't follow these "D" tracks. Do they offer full (12??) competitive fields? Maybe, they would offer 10 - 12 races per day (5 days a week) instead of 8 (4 days a week)?

[pandy]

there are people that only play off track and off the turf races.

if you go to places like Saratoga or Gulfstream you will find at least 100 people starting at feet when the track is sloppy or muddy.


Yeah, but, that is certainly not a majority. Off the turf races hurt handle.

[lamboguy]

Yeah, but, that is certainly not a majority. Off the turf races hurt handle.i agree, but off the turf does not knock the handle down 22%. but it does seem like people love turf racing. i have seen 2 different places that have run exclusive turf races, Colonial and Rockingham, they both did pretty well and had people there.

[whodoyoulike]

And you know what?.......you're a 100% right on the money......BTW, I started that other thread and made a few of the posters downright angry......won't be the last time.

Thanks, I was unaware just recalled reading about it. And sadly, I have the feeling you're correct about the need to mention it another 20 more times. Don't give up because they're angry. I have a feeling their opposition is because of some ulterior motives.

[ReplayRandall]

Thanks, I was unaware just recalled reading about it. And sadly, I have the feeling you're correct about the need to mention it another 20 more times. Don't give up because they're angry. I have a feeling their opposition is because of some ulterior motives.


Now you have me intrigued......So tell me, what do you believe some of those "ulterior motives" are?

[whodoyoulike]

Now you have me intrigued......So tell me, what do you believe some of those "ulterior motives" are?

I don't know what their responses were but, right off I would think those who are employed one way or another thru the track. They don't want to move, look for another source of income, etc. Maybe even racing commissioners realizing the fewer States having racing will mean fewer commissioners will be needed to decide whether they should lower or raise take outs.

[Poindexter]

Why exactly is contraction a good thing? It is a temporary fix. If the racing industry is broken now, it will be broken with 10 less race tracks. Sure, if there are less racetracks, obviously people will be forced to bet another racetrack, possibly in another state or another part of the country. But if they do not fix the problem(excessive takeout) the remaining racetracks will get a temporary shot in the arm, but ultimately they will get back to where they are now. Also, by closing local racetracks, you lose that draw to the sport. IF there is one track in a geographic region and that is where someone lives and that track is closed down, 2 things happen
1) It is much harder to gain new people from that area to the sport
2) Many existing horseplayers may just look for an alternative form of gambling/entertainment rather than look for a new racetrack to play accross the country.

Personally I dont care if there are 5 tracks or 500 tracks. I only play 1 at a time anyhow. Also it really doesn't matter to me if Del Mar has a 3 million dollar pool for the day or 25 million dollar pool for the day. What matters is the intelligence of the money being bet. Also is there any chance that takeout would be reduced if Contraction signiificantly increased the pools of the remaining racetracks? Of course not.

Redundancy Alert! :lol:

I know some do not think pricing(takeout) is the problem, but in all industries very few companies thrive when they charge double the price of their competition. The ones that do offer something very special to their customers. Racing does offer something very special to some of us, and that is why many of us will play the game to some degree no matter what the take is, but unforunately there are just not nearly enough of us to keep the sport successful and the excessive take ends up driving a lot of us out of the game either temporarily or long term because we cannot afford to or want to keep losing as much as we are. Also, I still maintain that us existing horseplayers will bet enough eventually to make up for the loss revenue of decreased take if done properly (new horseplayers would just be gravy). The sport needs new blood, and to convert new blood means new ideas and more innovative ways to reach the potential market and most importantly competitive pricing that makes people want to play and keeps people playing, not drive them away.

[Tom]

When you go to a place like Aqueduct Racetrack, you're not really paying for the coffee so much as the ambiance. ;)
Save racing.....have Dunkin Donuts install SAM's.

[cj]

Why exactly is contraction a good thing? It is a temporary fix.

Probably, but it could work if race days are contracted, not racetracks. There is way too much racing and not enough horses.

[whodoyoulike]

Probably, but it could work if race days are contracted, not racetracks. There is way too much racing and not enough horses.

I don't think I'm following your thinking. Wasn't this some of the reasoning and arguments for reducing race dates from generally 5 days to 4 days and races which used to be 9 races per day to 8 races? I agree there is too much racing given the number of horses available to offer competitive fields. It may require a combo of still reducing # of race dates and tracks. The goal is to determine the optimum # of tracks given # of race dates and the # of available horses.

Sounds like an Excel solver problem. I guess you'd need to stratify the horse population by some type of classification or something else. Anyone familiar with Excel solver?

[cj]

I don't think I'm following your thinking. Wasn't this some of the reasoning and arguments for reducing race dates from generally 5 days to 4 days and races which used to be 9 races per day to 8 races? I agree there is too much racing given the number of horses available to offer competitive fields. It may require a combo of still reducing # of race dates and tracks. The goal is to determine the optimum # of tracks given # of race dates and the # of available horses.

Sounds like an Excel solver problem. I guess you'd need to stratify the horse population by some type of classification or something else. Anyone familiar with Excel solver?

I'm talking tracks reducing dates and creating regional circuits. Do we really need Parx, Penn, and Presque Isle all running at the same time, two of them year round. That is just one example. There are many. Keep tracks open to have live racing available, but it doesn't have to be for 250 days a year.

[Poindexter]

Probably, but it could work if race days are contracted, not racetracks. There is way too much racing and not enough horses.


Isn't this being done already? Have a question. In todays races at Del Mar there were a number of big fields, a few even had also eligibles, but often the also eligibles get scratched even when horses are scratched prior to race day(sort of defeats the idea of also eligible). But the big problem was that there were so many late scratches. Am I to believe that so many horses were not physically able to run or are trainers just scratching horses for whatever reason they want?

[cj]

Isn't this being done already? Have a question. In todays races at Del Mar there were a number of big fields, a few even had also eligibles, but often the also eligibles get scratched even when horses are scratched prior to race day(sort of defeats the idea of also eligible). But the big problem was that there were so many late scratches. Am I to believe that so many horses were not physically able to run or are trainers just scratching horses for whatever reason they want?

Where is it being done? I'm not talking about racing moving from Santa Anita to Fairplex to Del Mar, I'm talking about tracks that run at the same time.

[Robert Goren]

Tracks need to close, there is doubt about that. Closing a few low level tracks is not going to help fill races at AQU. Some tracks at all levels need to close. There is a real shortage of horses and it is getting worse despite very high purses fueled by slots. If higher purses isn't the answer, what is?

Even worse than the shortage of horses is the shortage of bettors. I am not sure anybody has a good number of how many of there are, but I am pretty sure everybody will agree there are fewer of us everyday. The advent of internet betting hide that fact for a while, but it can't do it anymore. I, like most of us, have some ideas. Some are probably impossible to achieve. The one thing I do know for sure, too many potential bettors barely know horse racing exists. The thought of betting on a horse race has never entered the head of too many Americans for this game to be successful.

[ReplayRandall]

Tracks need to close, there is doubt about that. Closing a few low level tracks is not going to help fill races at AQU. Some tracks at all levels need to close. There is a real shortage of horses and it is getting worse despite very high purses fueled by slots. If higher purses isn't the answer, what is?

Even worse than the shortage of horses is the shortage of bettors. I am not sure anybody has a good number of how many of there are, but I am pretty sure everybody will agree there are fewer of us everyday. The advent of internet betting hide that fact for a while, but it can't do it anymore. I, like most of us, have some ideas. Some are probably impossible to achieve. The one thing I do know for sure, too many potential bettors barely know horse racing exists. The thought of betting on a horse race has never entered the head of too many Americans for this game to be successful.


RG, think back and remember this: When we were in our teens, Safeway used to have a continuous promotion giving a shopper who purchased at least $10 in groceries, a ticket with a horse's name and number to be televised at noon every Saturday. The amounts on the tickets varied, but if you won the replayed telecast at noon, you won that amount towards free groceries at Safeway. My best memory is of my mother, jumping up and down screaming for the 5 horse and watching it win for $50 free groceries........She never made a bet in her life, but soon enough, there she was at Cal Expo with a group of lady friends, who were newbies themselves..........Just makes you wonder what happened to creative marketing in the horse racing industry.

[EMD4ME]

Why exactly is contraction a good thing? It is a temporary fix. If the racing industry is broken now, it will be broken with 10 less race tracks. Sure, if there are less racetracks, obviously people will be forced to bet another racetrack, possibly in another state or another part of the country. But if they do not fix the problem(excessive takeout) the remaining racetracks will get a temporary shot in the arm, but ultimately they will get back to where they are now. Also, by closing local racetracks, you lose that draw to the sport. IF there is one track in a geographic region and that is where someone lives and that track is closed down, 2 things happen
1) It is much harder to gain new people from that area to the sport
2) Many existing horseplayers may just look for an alternative form of gambling/entertainment rather than look for a new racetrack to play accross the country.

Personally I dont care if there are 5 tracks or 500 tracks. I only play 1 at a time anyhow. Also it really doesn't matter to me if Del Mar has a 3 million dollar pool for the day or 25 million dollar pool for the day. What matters is the intelligence of the money being bet. Also is there any chance that takeout would be reduced if Contraction signiificantly increased the pools of the remaining racetracks? Of course not.

Redundancy Alert! :lol:

I know some do not think pricing(takeout) is the problem, but in all industries very few companies thrive when they charge double the price of their competition. The ones that do offer something very special to their customers. Racing does offer something very special to some of us, and that is why many of us will play the game to some degree no matter what the take is, but unforunately there are just not nearly enough of us to keep the sport successful and the excessive take ends up driving a lot of us out of the game either temporarily or long term because we cannot afford to or want to keep losing as much as we are. Also, I still maintain that us existing horseplayers will bet enough eventually to make up for the loss revenue of decreased take if done properly (new horseplayers would just be gravy). The sport needs new blood, and to convert new blood means new ideas and more innovative ways to reach the potential market and most importantly competitive pricing that makes people want to play and keeps people playing, not drive them away.

Excellent post. Agreed on all fronts. If there is no racing in the northeast for example, no new racetrack fans will be born, hence less money being bet. It will be like having 39 states like South Carolina. They don't have horse racing and you can't bet horse racing there. Except this would be worse because a greater portion of the population will not even know these X amount of remaining tracks exist.

The key is to drive new fans to the game. Creative marketing and less takeout are two simple solutions that are being ignored by most track executives.

[castaway01]

I'm talking tracks reducing dates and creating regional circuits. Do we really need Parx, Penn, and Presque Isle all running at the same time, two of them year round. That is just one example. There are many. Keep tracks open to have live racing available, but it doesn't have to be for 250 days a year.

That's what I said earlier in the thread, before we started arguing about the price of coffee, though I think even a deal like that would require more compromise than some track management is currently capable of.

[Robert Goren]

The horsemen want races. They are not going to go down easy in attempts to reduce days. They will look to use any means possible to a track open even if means running 3 horse races. Cutting dates and closing tracks is going to be a long drawn out fight. Even if that is accomplished, I am not sure that OTBs in states without live racing and ADWs can lure new bettors. It will certainly take more and better marketing than the industry has today. Plus state laws have to be changed and state legislators are going to ask what is in for their state if there is no live racing there. A tough question to answer.

[JustRalph]

CJ and I have been talking contraction for years. There are threads from way back where we get scalded for it.

The bottom line is there are not enough "decent horses" and way too many tracks. When you can log on to an ADW in July and have a choice of forty tracks a day to play and 15-20 of them have several 6-7 horse races, there is a shortage of horses and even worse, decent horses.

I see races in places like Ohio where horses are staggering around the track in small fields and nobody gives a damn that old horses who are running 1:15-16 for 6F are being recycled over and over again in crap races. Places where if you bet 20 dollars to win on a horse you can knock him from 8-1 to 2-1. How does that help the sport? Who plays these shit races?

[TravisVOX]

The issue is not the tracks, it's the dates. Too many race dates. Look at Louisiana... despite diminished foal crops, each of the four racetracks there are REQUIRED to run 80+ days per year (the actual number escapes me). In what universe does that make sense?

Getting rid of tracks is a bad idea IMO. If you, just for example, closed Lone Star Park in Dallas, a major metro area now has zero horse racing... that can't be good for the game long term.

[cj]

The issue is not the tracks, it's the dates. Too many race dates. Look at Louisiana... despite diminished foal crops, each of the four racetracks there are REQUIRED to run 80+ days per year (the actual number escapes me). In what universe does that make sense?

Getting rid of tracks is a bad idea IMO. If you, just for example, closed Lone Star Park in Dallas, a major metro area now has zero horse racing... that can't be good for the game long term.

That is exactly what I was saying, too many dates. It is really bad in the east. It works pretty well in this area, Remington, Lone Star, and Oaklawn don't overlap and a lot of horses run at all three places. Pretty sure Remington even ran an Arkansas bred stakes race not long ago.

I totally agree we need tracks to get fans, period. Not many people are going to become bettors without exposure to the live product. That said, the ones that have been built purely to be a casino with racing as an afterthought, forget them.

[lamboguy]

just one other thing that needs to be added is that you not only have to get fans in, you need to convert some of those fans into owner's. owner's tend to have friends and family's that come to race tracks when their `horses run.
under present condition's i find that a very tough task. unless you have your horses with the top trainer's at the track its close to impossible to win or run second. those owner's that are not with the top trainer's tend to quit the game after more than normal percentage of losing.

the way the game is structured today, you will find the same owner's and trainer's all over the continent. if indeed those owner's do show up to watch their horses run, they can only be in one track at a time, the same with the top trainer.

[JustRalph]

just one other thing that needs to be added is that you not only have to get fans in, you need to convert some of those fans into owner's. owner's tend to have friends and family's that come to race tracks when their `horses run.
under present condition's i find that a very tough task. unless you have your horses with the top trainer's at the track its close to impossible to win or run second. those owner's that are not with the top trainer's tend to quit the game after more than normal percentage of losing.

the way the game is structured today, you will find the same owner's and trainer's all over the continent. if indeed those owner's do show up to watch their horses run, they can only be in one track at a time, the same with the top trainer.

I always thought the tracks should own their own horses and lease them back to trainers or employee trainers at a flat rate to care for and race them. Probably too expensive, millions to get started, but then owners would be out of the loop. Incentives to breed etc would fall away......I don't know enough about the game to evaluate the premise anymore than that, but it seems that if tracks were more invested in the product itself, there might be a sea change in the way horses are treated, acquired and traded. Just like any other asset at the track.

[lamboguy]

I always thought the tracks should own their own horses and lease them back to trainers or employee trainers at a flat rate to care for and race them. Probably too expensive, millions to get started, but then owners would be out of the loop. Incentives to breed etc would fall away......I don't know enough about the game to evaluate the premise anymore than that, but it seems that if tracks were more invested in the product itself, there might be a sea change in the way horses are treated, acquired and traded. Just like any other asset at the track.not such a bad idea. in Hong Kong where racing handles are on the improve, the Jockey Club sells the horses to approved owners. they limit the owner to 2 horses. they limit the trainer's to 16. the race tracks there seem to be packed with patrons and everything looks pretty healthy there.

the other main point is that in Hong Kong they don't allow any medication's, that enables horses to run more often. in North America our horses are lambasted with substances and they take time to overcome the substances that are pumped into their bodies.

[drib]

Here are today's numbers from Aqueduct:
On Track $724,064 Total $5,056,171 P6 pool was $34k

One year ago same Thursday:
On Track $719,948 Total $6,087,368 There was a P6 carryover so that pool was $287,000.

I realize one day is can be a misleading snapshot, but the data is starting to accumulate that something very unusual is happening to NYRA's handle.


Here is Friday's (11/14) Aqueduct numbers:
On Track: $704,593 Total: $5,103,103

Last year Friday. 11/15/13:
On Track: $844,478 Total: $6,608,258

Today there were three off the turf races (including a 4 horse field), but last year the card also had one 4 horse race. I must say the falloff indicated by these numbers is very disturbing.

[whodoyoulike]

I'm talking tracks reducing dates and creating regional circuits. Do we really need Parx, Penn, and Presque Isle all running at the same time, two of them year round. That is just one example. There are many. Keep tracks open to have live racing available, but it doesn't have to be for 250 days a year.

I think we're saying the same thing except you're being PC in your solution. The way the industry reacts to criticism, you should stay PC IMO. Although, I like my suggestion better. It doesn't prolong the inevitable. If two of the tracks you mention don't overlap and the horses run at the remaining open track, one would hope the results would be full competitive fields. And, the pools would be larger since the fields are full.

Getting back to the Belmont handle drop off, this was noted in (I'm guessing) a press release from the track. Do you think they could be attempting to deflect criticism that they earlier in the year paid a $250k bonus to their CEO for his efforts to improve NY racing? Blaming the weather. A really poor attempt!!

[ronsmac]

Here is Friday's (11/14) Aqueduct numbers:
On Track: $704,593 Total: $5,103,103

Last year Friday. 11/15/13:
On Track: $844,478 Total: $6,608,258

Today there were three off the turf races (including a 4 horse field), but last year the card also had one 4 horse race. I must say the falloff indicated by these numbers is very disturbing.Belmont's spring handle was bad also. California Chrome going for a triple crown, skewed the numbers.

[Stillriledup]

I think we're saying the same thing except you're being PC in your solution. The way the industry reacts to criticism, you should stay PC IMO. Although, I like my suggestion better. It doesn't prolong the inevitable. If two of the tracks you mention don't overlap and the horses run at the remaining open track, one would hope the results would be full competitive fields. And, the pools would be larger since the fields are full.

Getting back to the Belmont handle drop off, this was noted in (I'm guessing) a press release from the track. Do you think they could be attempting to deflect criticism that they earlier in the year paid a $250k bonus to their CEO for his efforts to improve NY racing? Blaming the weather. A really poor attempt!!

Right, because horseplayers really don't bet because its bad weather outside. :D

[castaway01]

not such a bad idea. in Hong Kong where racing handles are on the improve, the Jockey Club sells the horses to approved owners. they limit the owner to 2 horses. they limit the trainer's to 16. the race tracks there seem to be packed with patrons and everything looks pretty healthy there.

the other main point is that in Hong Kong they don't allow any medication's, that enables horses to run more often. in North America our horses are lambasted with substances and they take time to overcome the substances that are pumped into their bodies.

The main point in Hong Kong is the Hong Kong Jockey Club runs ALL gambling in the country. It is a non-profit and has a government-sponsored monopoly on horse racing, casinos, the lottery, and sports betting. It's also the largest taxpayer in the country. You can compare the U.S. to Hong Kong all you want, but it's comparing apples to bowling balls.

[Tall One]

CJ and I have been talking contraction for years. There are threads from way back where we get scalded for it.

The bottom line is there are not enough "decent horses" and way too many tracks. When you can log on to an ADW in July and have a choice of forty tracks a day to play and 15-20 of them have several 6-7 horse races, there is a shortage of horses and even worse, decent horses.

I see races in places like Ohio where horses are staggering around the track in small fields and nobody gives a damn that old horses who are running 1:15-16 for 6F are being recycled over and over again in crap races. Places where if you bet 20 dollars to win on a horse you can knock him from 8-1 to 2-1. How does that help the sport? Who plays these shit races?


Here, here. If the sport doesn't get back to a more seasonal approach, then the decline could continue.

I'm not biased by any means, but take a look at the quality meet Keeneland* puts on. Twice a year, a month's worth of days, and people look forward too going out there. Further example..The Keeneland & Kenucky football day/night double header is a fall Saturday tradition. Races during the day, UK football at night. All our visiting SEC fans, particularly Georgia and South Carolina fans love them some Keeneland. Saratoga, IMO, almost bled the rock dry this year. Scale those dates back, and with that purse structure..you could run allowance races for grade 3 purses..



*Keeneland handle/attendance this fall was down considerably from last year. Shitty weather the first few days hurt some, but not that much.

[Poindexter]

The problem with cutting racing, however you do it is that what happens to the people and horses involved in the sport? Especially at your smaller tracks I am sure most trainers and jockeys are not exactly rolling in the money and I am sure a lot of these really bad horses, if they don't run there, are not running anywhere. Then what? If a track is there and it is bringing in enough revenue to support the people and horses racing there, that is a good thing, no? To me the benefit of contraction does not outweigh the cost(and I certainly do not have a horse in this race). What is the harm if some small track is running a bunch of 7 horse fields full of 2 claimers. How does that hurt me if I am betting Santa Anita or Belmont?

[Stillriledup]

The problem with cutting racing, however you do it is that what happens to the people and horses involved in the sport? Especially at your smaller tracks I am sure most trainers and jockeys are not exactly rolling in the money and I am sure a lot of these really bad horses, if they don't run there, are not running anywhere. Then what? If a track is there and it is bringing in enough revenue to support the people and horses racing there, that is a good thing, no? To me the benefit of contraction does not outweigh the cost(and I certainly do not have a horse in this race). What is the harm if some small track is running a bunch of 7 horse fields full of 2 claimers. How does that hurt me if I am betting Santa Anita or Belmont?

It hurts you because if those tracks didn't exist, their bettors would be putting their money into Santa Anita or some other larger track. With bigger pools, the "takeout" is essentially less because you win less of your own money. A track going out of business is essentially a takeout reduction at all the other tracks that are left. (some will benefit more than others obviously)

[whodoyoulike]

The problem with cutting racing, however you do it is that what happens to the people and horses involved in the sport? Especially at your smaller tracks I am sure most trainers and jockeys are not exactly rolling in the money and I am sure a lot of these really bad horses, if they don't run there, are not running anywhere. Then what? If a track is there and it is bringing in enough revenue to support the people and horses racing there, that is a good thing, no? To me the benefit of contraction does not outweigh the cost(and I certainly do not have a horse in this race). What is the harm if some small track is running a bunch of 7 horse fields full of 2 claimers. How does that hurt me if I am betting Santa Anita or Belmont?

I mentioned in a previous post there should be tracks racing the lower level purses. People's lives are going to be disrupted. But, that's what will happen when a track closes because they are now uneconomical, recent threads indicated that several small tracks have closed this year. If the number of remaining tracks turns out to be 10 survivors, the mix can be 2 "A", 3 "B" and/or "C" and 5 "D" tracks. Maybe the "A" tracks will only operate 3 days per week (maybe 12 races per day) etc. The mix will depend on how many and the quality of the horses available.

The goal for racing to survive is to provide full competitive fields. And, I would think would result in larger parimutuel pools. Possible side effect is a reduction in take out. If take out isn't reduced because of lower track costs and owner's costs etc., maybe someone can explain it to me. Do you realize how much pool money is siphoned off just to support each State racing commission?

Imagine every race consisting of full fields, double digit odds and consistent large payouts similar to the recent Breeder's Cup races or those special race days. I can see this occurring at all ("A" - "D") types of tracks.

[Track Phantom]

If there is a torrential rainfall and your basement is flooded with two feet of water, fixing a leaky faucet is meaningless.

Nothing, and I mean nothing, of significance will change in this game until U.S. racing has a governing body with universal rules. Until that happens the game will dribble along with little to no hope for revitalization.

It's really that simple.

[the little guy]

It's really that simple.



Nothing about this game, from playing it, to working in it, to understanding it, to even trying to fix it, is anything close to simple. About the only thing that is "simple" is typing what you think are the answers on the internet.

[stormreveler]

I understand that your position probably makes it impossible to get into things very specifically in a place like this, but if all you can then do is respond to selected posts with either "You're wrong" or "You're stupid" or "You're wrong and stupid" then maybe it's better just to stay quiet.

[aaron]

Nothing about this game, from playing it, to working in it, to understanding it, to even trying to fix it, is anything close to simple. About the only thing that is "simple" is typing what you think are the answers on the internet.
So true,even the most logical changes and answers seldom seem to produce any results. It is like no matter what is done,the time warp remains the same.

[the little guy]

I understand that your position probably makes it impossible to get into things very specifically in a place like this, but if all you can then do is respond to selected posts with either "You're wrong" or "You're stupid" or "You're wrong and stupid" then maybe it's better just to stay quiet.

Please find my posts where I said "you're stupid" given that you used quotes.

Thanks in advance.

I know, trashing me is fun for people on this board. I even find it amusing at times as well.

The funniest thing is that I posted something pretty interesting in this very thread about how CA handle is determined, and yet only one person showed any interest whatsoever. Maybe that's why I infrequently do it.

[the little guy]

I understand that your position probably makes it impossible to get into things very specifically in a place like this, but if all you can then do is respond to selected posts with either "You're wrong" or "You're stupid" or "You're wrong and stupid" then maybe it's better just to stay quiet.


Let me add, with all due respect, you have been a member here for 11 months, have 51 posts, yet feel comfortable telling me I should "stay quiet."

Actually, I just wanted to show the correct way to use quotes...but still, I'm sure you get my point.

[Track Phantom]

Nothing about this game, from playing it, to working in it, to understanding it, to even trying to fix it, is anything close to simple. About the only thing that is "simple" is typing what you think are the answers on the internet.

You think U. S. horse racing can stem the decline and start to grow without a governing body? I don't see how. I think it is paramount. I would really like to know if you think the game can even have a chance of year on year growth without a commissioner/governing body?

Having said that, the process to get there is impossibly difficult. I just think the "direction" is simple. To have a governing body would require many jurisdictions making sacrifices (tough to do in tight margin environments).

[Track Phantom]

Please find my posts where I said "you're stupid" given that you used quotes.

Thanks in advance.

I know, trashing me is fun for people on this board. I even find it amusing at times as well.

The funniest thing is that I posted something pretty interesting in this very thread about how CA handle is determined, and yet only one person showed any interest whatsoever. Maybe that's why I infrequently do it.

I hope this comment doesn't come across the wrong way. It is honestly well-intended.

I happen to think you are the absolute best in the business at what you do. Your thought provoking opinions and the way you communicate succinctly is so rare and enjoyable to listen to.

However, on this message board, you "come across" condescending and a know-it-all. It's probably hard not to since you're so plugged in to the game and surrounded by a lot of misinformation in here. But the people on this message board are true horse racing fans and are on your side. Maybe not such a quick trigger at burying those of us that just want to have respectful dialogue.

Again, hope no offense taken. Just an observation.

[Canarsie]

Nothing about this game, from playing it, to working in it, to understanding it, to even trying to fix it, is anything close to simple. About the only thing that is "simple" is typing what you think are the answers on the internet.

I agree with this statement 100% and then some. If I had a buck each time someone said "simple fix" in my lifetime the budget deficit could be pared down significantly.



we are all sick of hearing that the competition is to tough vs other forms of gambling which is complete rubbish. this game is the easiest thing in the world to attract new people to the sport. instead the game chooses to scare them away.


I also take offense when a person says "we" like the post above. I certainly don't need a spokesman or spokeswoman to articulate my thoughts. Quite a few years ago I remember this poster posting for a certain ADW company "no bonus" while others were offering up to $250. I have no idea how it worked out but maybe it "scared" some people away because he was comparing ADW's.

I consider a bunch (in fact huge) of people on here way smarter than I am.They also know the industry far better than me by a country mile. I have yet to see one say this is the instant way to overhaul thoroughbred racing and each and every problem will be solved. The quote from TLG stands tall because the answers will be extremely tough and not simple.

This isn't an election that would be filled with a bunch of empty promises. Anyone can write whatever they want on here then claim to be a stinking genius. Unfortunately that isn't how a company or industry is fixed.

[magwell]

Just one time if a major track like Gulfstream (winter meet) would step up and try something like a 10% take out on all bets,( no rebates), if handle doesn't go WAY up, then there is no hope for the game to get new people and bring back many that have been disenchanted.......... IMHO

[OTM Al]

Just one time if a major track like Gulfstream (winter meet) would step up and try something like a 10% take out on all bets,( no rebates), if handle doesn't go WAY up, then there is no hope for the game to get new people and bring back many that have been disenchanted.......... IMHO

This isn't exactly right. You would need to show increases at the particular track that result in inreased profit as well as overall inreases nationally. Otherwise it is just money shifting around

[DeltaLover]

Sure it is not simple but it is doable.

Unfortunately the lack of a central governing body is one of the most serious problems when it comes to horse racing as a sport while the antiquated betting mechanisms it the second one.

I have the impression that, those who decide about the future of the game, have at least a myopic vision when it comes to any kind of a strategic decision and cannot see any further from their current meet and local circuit!

Racing as a sport, seems to be a completely anarchic domain, providing fertile ground for the development of all kind of strange dependencies among the various involved parties. Owners, trainers, breeders and racing officials, all of them seem to operate in a jungle, where each of them tries to dominate and dictate his individual benefits, without the existence of any kind of a controlling body.

Can you think of another professional sport, following the same approach? Try to compare horse racing to soccer, football, baseball, hockey and it will be easy to realize, what kind of a joke it is..

When it comes the betting side of horse racing, things are even worse! While Europe, Australia, Canada and most of the other places where racing exist, allow for flexible and gambler friendly forms of gambling, like exchanges and book makers, here in the States, all of our betting follows the antiquated model of mutual betting, trying to stimulate action by introducing ridiculous kind of gimmicks, multiplying the effect of takeout and simulating the game to some kind of a lottery..

Having said this, it is not a surprise to see the shrinkage of the betting handle and the overall decline of the game. Both of them will continue, until there are some radical changes in the way the game is running today..

[badcompany]

I agree with this statement 100% and then some. If I had a buck each time someone said "simple fix" in my lifetime the budget deficit could be pared down significantly.





I also take offense when a person says "we" like the post above. I certainly don't need a spokesman or spokeswoman to articulate my thoughts. Quite a few years ago I remember this poster posting for a certain ADW company "no bonus" while others were offering up to $250. I have no idea how it worked out but maybe it "scared" some people away because he was comparing ADW's.

I consider a bunch (in fact huge) of people on here way smarter than I am.They also know the industry far better than me by a country mile. I have yet to see one say this is the instant way to overhaul thoroughbred racing and each and every problem will be solved. The quote from TLG stands tall because the answers will be extremely tough and not simple.

This isn't an election that would be filled with a bunch of empty promises. Anyone can write whatever they want on here then claim to be a stinking genius. Unfortunately that isn't how a company or industry is fixed.

And who says everything can be fixed.

We live in an online society. Horseracing doesn't work as well on the internet as video based gambling games, like poker, which can be set up cheaply in unlimited amounts.

Moreover, we live in a more segmented society, largely because of the net. The casual fan for everything has been reduced as people can spend their time and money on things they're really into.

[Track Phantom]

Can you think of another professional sport, following the same approach? Try to compare horse racing to soccer, football, baseball, hockey and it will be easy to realize, what kind of a joke it is...

Boxing

[DeltaLover]

Boxing

Followed the same path as horse racing !

[Tall One]

However, on this message board, you "come across" condescending and a know-it-all. It's probably hard not to since you're so plugged in to the game and surrounded by a lot of misinformation in here. But the people on this message board are true horse racing fans and are on your side. Maybe not such a quick trigger at burying those of us that just want to have respectful dialogue.

Again, hope no offense taken. Just an observation.



I think he's one of the best in the biz, but his comments above are ridiculous. I guess this is his outlet to vent, but, it's unfortunate Serling doesn't post more about handicapping instead of the drivel in some posts in this thread.

[the little guy]

I think he's one of the best in the biz, but his comments above are ridiculous. I guess this is his outlet to vent, but, it's unfortunate Serling doesn't post more about handicapping instead of the drivel in some posts in this thread.


I'll ignore the double standard people frequently have here when it comes to me, though I am a bit curious what I said that was ridiculous, but I will answer this...

First of all, and seriously, I do appreciate the compliments, but I spend a huge portion of my day, pretty much every day, either handicapping or talking about it, and I essentially come to message boards to have some fun. I really don't even post much anymore, and a lot of that is because I can't comment on a lot of things. However, I read a LOT of very incorrect things here, and sometimes it gets pretty frustrating. I've been a horse player for 40 years, so believe me, I get the frustrations. However, sometimes some pretty unfair things get said, and occasionally I can respond to them. Like when I correct the blather posted in this thread about someone paying $200 a day as a Day Rate, I'm being helpful, as badly misleading information was being spread, and judging by some of the responses ( which weren't particularly kind ), people actually believed the grossly misleading figures. Anyone criticizing me for correcting that is just wrong. I don't care...but it is what it is.

[stormreveler]

And the way CA determines handle was interesting, but not really germane to precipitous drops in overall handle at NYRA and just about everywhere else.

4+4 and 2+6 both =8

[stormreveler]

I'll ignore the double standard people frequently have here when it comes to me, though I am a bit curious what I said that was ridiculous, but I will answer this...

First of all, and seriously, I do appreciate the compliments, but I spend a huge portion of my day, pretty much every day, either handicapping or talking about it, and I essentially come to message boards to have some fun. I really don't even post much anymore, and a lot of that is because I can't comment on a lot of things. However, I read a LOT of very incorrect things here, and sometimes it gets pretty frustrating. I've been a horse player for 40 years, so believe me, I get the frustrations. However, sometimes some pretty unfair things get said, and occasionally I can respond to them. Like when I correct the blather posted in this thread about someone paying $200 a day as a Day Rate, I'm being helpful, as badly misleading information was being spread, and judging by some of the responses ( which weren't particularly kind ), people actually believed the grossly misleading figures. Anyone criticizing me for correcting that is just wrong. I don't care...but it is what it is.

The Day Rate thing is an example where even though you didn't say "Pletcher is $160", you still gave more than a declaration of wrongness without any proof, thanks to the Chad Brown conversation.

But other times, when you're probably forced to hold back certain facts that would make your case, you're just using an appeal to authority argument, which is useless.

[thaskalos]

And who says everything can be fixed.

We live in an online society. Horseracing doesn't work as well on the internet as video based gambling games, like poker, which can be set up cheaply in unlimited amounts.

Moreover, we live in a more segmented society, largely because of the net. The casual fan for everything has been reduced as people can spend their time and money on things they're really into.
This may be so, but it's still disheartening to see that no serious effort whatsoever has been made to try to rectify things in this game...even after all these years of steady decline. The game has been reduced to a shell of its former self, and yet, the game's "leadership" is still playing the waiting game. Problems are always difficult to fix, in any business. But they must be dealt with...because they won't fix themselves.

[thaskalos]

I'll ignore the double standard people frequently have here when it comes to me, though I am a bit curious what I said that was ridiculous, but I will answer this...

First of all, and seriously, I do appreciate the compliments, but I spend a huge portion of my day, pretty much every day, either handicapping or talking about it, and I essentially come to message boards to have some fun. I really don't even post much anymore, and a lot of that is because I can't comment on a lot of things. However, I read a LOT of very incorrect things here, and sometimes it gets pretty frustrating. I've been a horse player for 40 years, so believe me, I get the frustrations. However, sometimes some pretty unfair things get said, and occasionally I can respond to them. Like when I correct the blather posted in this thread about someone paying $200 a day as a Day Rate, I'm being helpful, as badly misleading information was being spread, and judging by some of the responses ( which weren't particularly kind ), people actually believed the grossly misleading figures. Anyone criticizing me for correcting that is just wrong. I don't care...but it is what it is.
We are longtime houseplayers too, Andy...and we also come to this board to "have some fun". And having fun sometimes means stretching the truth a little. It isn't done with mean intent...nor are we looking to offend. There is room for a little "fun" in even the most serious topics of conversation. At the end of the day...this is still only a game.

You hint that there may be things being done behind the scenes to remedy the situation that our game finds itself in. You are on the inside...and we believe you. But can you really blame us for being a little pessimistic about the future...after what we've seen so far? Regardless of what you might think about some of us...we are all on the same side here. All of us want to see the game get back on its feet.

[Redboard]

TLG, Some of us here think that the game has gotten harder in the past few years. Because of the advancement in computers, software, spedd figures, or whatever, it seems that it's harder to make a profit. My question is this, do you find it harder to gat value today than it was, say, 10 years ago? Would this be a reason why the whales are dropping out?

[whodoyoulike]

Nothing about this game, from playing it, to working in it, to understanding it, to even trying to fix it, is anything close to simple. About the only thing that is "simple" is typing what you think are the answers on the internet.

I'm uncertain how to take this statement. The exchange of ideas is how I learn. And, the internet forum is just one vehicle. If you're on the "inside" then just fix it , I don't care who does it. Most of us posted our suggestions which wasn't directed towards you.

You mentioned some things are in the works to remedy the situation. When can we expect to see these positive step(s)? Can you provide a time frame? You don't have to provide any details. So, we're not still waiting after 3 years.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Here is a look at racing handle since May. October is greatly influenced by the Breeders' Cup since the first day fell in October this year.

http://www.trackannouncer.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/handle2014.png

The law of large numbers comes into play here IMO. In September, handle dropped a substantial amount - nearly $82 million. This is a huge number. And you can see it's clearly an outlier vs. the other months.

Field size, foal crops, boycotts, weekend warriors leaving the game etc. did not suddenly take effect in September. It is something much, much bigger than that whether it be a team of whales, one whale, many whales or anything in between.

For those who have posted here that such players are bad for the game, well then this should be perceived as a good thing. I'm not enough of an economist to offer an opinion.

Nevada Table Game Win by Month ex-Baccarat*:
Jul-14 +3.5%
Aug-14 -3.1%
Sep-14 -9.3%

Nevada Slots Win by Month:
Jul-14 +0.7%
Agu-14 -2.7%
Sep-14 -6.0%

*Baccarat results are typically excluded when examining Nevada gaming trends, given the very volatile nature of the game's results on a monthly basis

Source: Nevada State Gaming Control Board

[aaron]

Party of the reason for the decline in handle is that racing is not innovative,at least not in NY. This is not a criticism of anyone in particular. Example-The Rainbow Pick 6 generated handle and conversation,yet NY never tried it.If it was instituted and didn't work then get rid of it. The Grand Slam is still here. Do you really think the Rainbow wouldn't generate more handle. The Pick 6 handle in NY seems to have declined. This is just from looking at the carryovers so if I am wrong,please correct me.I guess the thought is that the Rainbow would take away from the regular Pick 6 and it might,but wouldn't be worth trying for a year especially if you could get a reasonable takeout. I believe the Pick 5 has been successful,so if the Rainbow was races 3-8 what would be so terrible. Another silly rule is you can't have a superfecta in a race with entries.Don't they think we could figure the order of finish ?
Racing should be trying everything to increase handle. I also believe racing is great on the internet. As a matter of fact,that is probably the biggest reason for the decline of on track attendance. Attendance at the track will probably never increase. Most people won't drive a great distance to go to the track. I still enjoy going to Belmont,but haven"t been to Aqueduct in 2 years. I used to go 3 or 4 times a week. For me I stay home go to Belmont or OTB instead of Aqueduct.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Party of the reason for the decline in handle is that racing is not innovative,at least not in NY.

While this explanation may impact long-term trend, it does not explain the drop-off in Sept (vs July/Aug trend). The Nevada numbers show the Sept drop-off was not isolated to pari-mutuel racing.

[dirty moose]

Party of the reason for the decline in handle is that racing is not innovative,at least not in NY. This is not a criticism of anyone in particular. Example-The Rainbow Pick 6 generated handle and conversation,yet NY never tried it.If it was instituted and didn't work then get rid of it. The Grand Slam is still here. Do you really think the Rainbow wouldn't generate more handle. The Pick 6 handle in NY seems to have declined. This is just from looking at the carryovers so if I am wrong,please correct me.I guess the thought is that the Rainbow would take away from the regular Pick 6 and it might,but wouldn't be worth trying for a year especially if you could get a reasonable takeout. I believe the Pick 5 has been successful,so if the Rainbow was races 3-8 what would be so terrible. Another silly rule is you can't have a superfecta in a race with entries.Don't they think we could figure the order of finish ?
Racing should be trying everything to increase handle. I also believe racing is great on the internet. As a matter of fact,that is probably the biggest reason for the decline of on track attendance. Attendance at the track will probably never increase. Most people won't drive a great distance to go to the track. I still enjoy going to Belmont,but haven"t been to Aqueduct in 2 years. I used to go 3 or 4 times a week. For me I stay home go to Belmont or OTB instead of Aqueduct.


Unfortunately I think you're speaking on deaf ears. So many people on here have so many great/brilliant ideas to help improve the state of racing. I mean some really great stuff. Yet none of the track even listen to even an single idea.

If you don't give people incentive to go to the track, they why would we? A place like Aqueduct is a great example. Place is a dump why the heck would we go there. So what did they do? They fixed it up a little bit and added "Long Shots" bar/simulcast center. Place is gorgeous, in my opinion. But of course they found a way to screw it up. It was free entry if you have a NYRA reward account, now it's $5 to walk in with an account and $10 without. Good luck with that NYRA, only a fool would pay to be in the only decent part Aqueduct.

Let's not forget all the incentives you get from playing with an ADW, bonus', rebates in most states, free pp's at some sites, the list goes on. The tracks handles and attendance will continue to decline.

[aaron]

Unfortunately I think you're speaking on deaf ears. So many people on here have so many great/brilliant ideas to help improve the state of racing. I mean some really great stuff. Yet none of the track even listen to even an single idea.

If you don't give people incentive to go to the track, they why would we? A place like Aqueduct is a great example. Place is a dump why the heck would we go there. So what did they do? They fixed it up a little bit and added "Long Shots" bar/simulcast center. Place is gorgeous, in my opinion. But of course they found a way to screw it up. It was free entry if you have a NYRA reward account, now it's $5 to walk in with an account and $10 without. Good luck with that NYRA, only a fool would pay to be in the only decent part Aqueduct.

Let's not forget all the incentives you get from playing with an ADW, bonus', rebates in most states, free pp's at some sites, the list goes on. The tracks handles and attendance will continue to decline.
I was just venting. Thanks for the reply. I realize,I am speaking on deaf ears. I have been to many fan symposium's at NYRA. Nothing changes,but the racing is still there and I still enjoy the game as frustrating as it is. I have seen many big bettors leave the game for one reason or another and not be replaced. The group of players I know has shrunk considerably. This year at Belmont I saw many familiar faces disappear. Some of them are still playing,but not at the track.

[lamboguy]

those were interesting numbers from Saratoga Mike. the big drop in the table games is big.

today the pools look pretty light all over the place again today.

[Saratoga_Mike]

If racing's audience skewed younger, I'd point to the Apple iPhone 6 launch in Sept. It certainly had a negative impact on other consumer-oriented businesses in Sept. In the case of racing, the impact was probably negligible.

[Cholly]

...how CA handle is determined, and yet only one person showed any interest whatsoever...

I caught it, thought it very interesting (and germane!)...didn't say anything because it left me speechless--how nutso is it that tracks can't even standardize something as simple as how handle is reported? Geez...

[Robert Goren]

And who says everything can be fixed.

We live in an online society. Horseracing doesn't work as well on the internet as video based gambling games, like poker, which can be set up cheaply in unlimited amounts.

Moreover, we live in a more segmented society, largely because of the net. The casual fan for everything has been reduced as people can spend their time and money on things they're really into.I think horse racing works great on the net. It work even better if the tracks made a few changes for internet bettors. Not having 2 tracks going off at the same time would be a start. Of course it will cure things like having races with too few starters which is a problem for bettors whether the bettor is the track, an otb or online.

[dirty moose]

Can we also get HD feeds for **** sake?

[Saratoga_Mike]

Can we also get HD feeds for **** sake?

...the inhumanity of it

[Track Phantom]

If I were in charge, as it relates to growing the wagering base, I'd focus on just two things for the next 5 years.

1. Find out what larger players want improved
2. Find a way to appeal to a young demographic (18-25 YO)

I would survey as many of the high dollar, dedicated players as I can. Start with common responses that cost nothing to implement (for example, posting the number of remaining tickets for each horizontal wager after each sequence is completed). The powers that be should know exactly what this core group of large players feel they are missing when betting at home or on track. I would absolutely make sure I was keenly plugged in to feedback from this segment. I am not sure where I fit but I bet daily and a pretty large dollar amount and have for nearly 30 years. I've never been asked even ONCE for my opinion. I think that is shameful. You can't fix problems if you don't really know what they are.

Finding an appeal to a younger demographic is, quite possibly, the single most important task. I have no idea how to do this but, come on, there are people that do this professionally that should be brought in to consult. These people can make a turd on a string cool. I'm quite sure they can figure out how to make horse racing cool to a younger demographic. Canterbury Park has "buck Thursdays" during the summer which appeals to the college aged crowd. There's probably dozens of ideas that might stimulate interest in this group. If horse racing doesn't address the issue of older players dying off and not being replaced, who is going to be left in 15-20 years...hell 5 years?

Finally, I've said this before and I think this is important. There is something about my personality and those similar to me that play the game daily for 10, 20, 30 or more years. I think a detailed personality/psychological study should be done on as many long term dedicatd players as possible in order to find out what commonalities they have and what other types of endeavors they would commonly find appealing. Once this is done, you'd have a more focused demographic to market to.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Perhaps not exactly what the last poster suggested, but certainly an effort to reach out to customers...

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/88753/nyra-officials-meet-with-aqueduct-customers

[JustRalph]

not such a bad idea. in Hong Kong where racing handles are on the improve, the Jockey Club sells the horses to approved owners. they limit the owner to 2 horses. they limit the trainer's to 16. the race tracks there seem to be packed with patrons and everything looks pretty healthy there.

the other main point is that in Hong Kong they don't allow any medication's, that enables horses to run more often. in North America our horses are lambasted with substances and they take time to overcome the substances that are pumped into their bodies.

Thanks.... I didn't know that

[JustRalph]

The key is to drive new fans to the game. Creative marketing and less takeout are two simple solutions that are being ignored by most track executives.

Every time I hear this I laugh. This is not going to happen. The younger fans have way too many choices. No way they come over to the dark side. They first of all don't have the basic skills to analyze a racing form. It's over. These kids today don't do math in their heads. It's simple. They can't do the math. You think you can interest a kid today in a game that uses fifths of a second as one of the most notable things an announcer says during a race? Even if you changed the way we time and explain the timing, the only timing that would matter to them is "why the hell am I waiting 20 minutes between races?" Bottom line, there are no "new fans" to drive to the game.

Do you see any young people sitting around doing the NY Times crossword puzzle anymore? Find me a great crossword guy and I will find you a good handicapper. We are the last of the breed ladies and gents. Get used to it.
I was standing outside Lone Star park a few weeks back waiting for the doors to open. They were having a tournament that day. I was fifteen minutes early. In the fifteen minutes I was there, the tournament guys starting showing up. In fifteen minutes the crowd grew to about 35 guys. I was the youngest guy. I'm closing in on 55. The average age I am going to guess was 62-63. We are playing a game that is done. The Dinosaurs eventually have to die off.

[Track Phantom]

Perhaps not exactly what the last poster suggested, but certainly an effort to reach out to customers...

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/88753/nyra-officials-meet-with-aqueduct-customers

This can't hurt but they need to make sure the feedback is coming from high dollar players. This is important. It's not that small players shouldn't have a voice but small players...shouldn't have a voice.

If a guy that wagers $50 on a racing card shows up to one of these and complains coffee is too expensive, the people listening to the feedback might erroneously assume this is a game changer.

In all due respect, if you're at the track and concerned about the price of coffee, you shouldn't be at the track. And if you don't understand the need for the track to maximize their onsite concessions revenue, you shouldn't have a voice. Sounds harsh but all the self-serving, deflecting of the serious concerns that would drive volume players away needs to be weeded out.

[dirty moose]

Do you guys think any one for the race tracks check this site?

[castaway01]

If I were in charge, as it relates to growing the wagering base, I'd focus on just two things for the next 5 years.

1. Find out what larger players want improved
2. Find a way to appeal to a young demographic (18-25 YO)

I would survey as many of the high dollar, dedicated players as I can. Start with common responses that cost nothing to implement (for example, posting the number of remaining tickets for each horizontal wager after each sequence is completed). The powers that be should know exactly what this core group of large players feel they are missing when betting at home or on track. I would absolutely make sure I was keenly plugged in to feedback from this segment. I am not sure where I fit but I bet daily and a pretty large dollar amount and have for nearly 30 years. I've never been asked even ONCE for my opinion. I think that is shameful. You can't fix problems if you don't really know what they are.

Finding an appeal to a younger demographic is, quite possibly, the single most important task. I have no idea how to do this but, come on, there are people that do this professionally that should be brought in to consult. These people can make a turd on a string cool. I'm quite sure they can figure out how to make horse racing cool to a younger demographic. Canterbury Park has "buck Thursdays" during the summer which appeals to the college aged crowd. There's probably dozens of ideas that might stimulate interest in this group. If horse racing doesn't address the issue of older players dying off and not being replaced, who is going to be left in 15-20 years...hell 5 years?

Finally, I've said this before and I think this is important. There is something about my personality and those similar to me that play the game daily for 10, 20, 30 or more years. I think a detailed personality/psychological study should be done on as many long term dedicatd players as possible in order to find out what commonalities they have and what other types of endeavors they would commonly find appealing. Once this is done, you'd have a more focused demographic to market to.

I'm not saying you don't need NEW fans because obviously you do, but the idea they have to be 20-year-olds is just not right. Casinos (except here in NJ of course) are mostly doing just fine. Ever been in a casino on a weekday? Everyone is 70 and over. Their money is still green. It's an easier, simpler game, and every now and then you hit something decent. That's where the casual gambler is now (that and the lottery, and fantasy sports, and offshore, and...).

[thaskalos]

Do you guys think any one for the race tracks check this site?
No way. With all the great advice that we have presented at this site, all the game's problems would have already been solved, if the tracks lurked around here. :)

[castaway01]

Every time I hear this I laugh. This is not going to happen. The younger fans have way too many choices. No way they come over to the dark side. They first of all don't have the basic skills to analyze a racing form. It's over. These kids today don't do math in their heads. It's simple. They can't do the math. You think you can interest a kid today in a game that uses fifths of a second as one of the most notable things an announcer says during a race? Even if you changed the way we time and explain the timing, the only timing that would matter to them is "why the hell am I waiting 20 minutes between races?" Bottom line, there are no "new fans" to drive to the game.

Do you see any young people sitting around doing the NY Times crossword puzzle anymore? Find me a great crossword guy and I will find you a good handicapper. We are the last of the breed ladies and gents. Get used to it.
I was standing outside Lone Star park a few weeks back waiting for the doors to open. They were having a tournament that day. I was fifteen minutes early. In the fifteen minutes I was there, the tournament guys starting showing up. In fifteen minutes the crowd grew to about 35 guys. I was the youngest guy. I'm closing in on 55. The average age I am going to guess was 62-63. We are playing a game that is done. The Dinosaurs eventually have to die off.

Ralph, it has nothing to do with math. Poker is all math and probabilities and has plenty of players 30 and under (though admittedly the "boom" is over most due to government legislation). There are other gambling options that are easier and more attractive. If that doesn't change in some way (and as this thread has listed many possible changes, there are also roadblocks in the way of most of them) it will continue to shrink in popularity. The pace of the game and the other things you mentioned are somewhat an issue, but you could play 30 races an hour on a Saturday if you just wanted action.

[Tom]

I caught it, thought it very interesting (and germane!)...didn't say anything because it left me speechless--how nutso is it that tracks can't even standardize something as simple as how handle is reported? Geez...

Took 'em 10 years to agree on saddle cloth colors.
This is the creative pool you are dealing with.

[Tom]

In all due respect, if you're at the track and concerned about the price of coffee, you shouldn't be at the track. And if you don't understand the need for the track to maximize their onsite concessions revenue, you shouldn't have a voice. Sounds harsh but all the self-serving, deflecting of the serious concerns that would drive volume players away needs to be weeded out.

You wouldn't need race tracks in that case. Or concession stands. Or a picnic are at Toga, or Toga, for that matter.

That is not the attitude the racino's take, and they underwrite most of racing.
Good thing for the little guys. Imagine, the riff raff pumps enough money through the slots to pay for so-called big boys with shit on their boots.

[the little guy]

That is not the attitude the racino's take, and they underwrite most of racing.
Good thing for the little guys. Imagine, the riff raff pumps enough money through the slots to pay for so-called big boys with shit on their boots.



Actually, Tom, not really...as it is Genting that runs the concessions at Aqueduct, and they set the prices, not NYRA. They also charge exorbitant prices in the casino as well.

[JustRalph]

Ralph, it has nothing to do with math. Poker is all math and probabilities and has plenty of players 30 and under (though admittedly the "boom" is over most due to government legislation). There are other gambling options that are easier and more attractive. If that doesn't change in some way (and as this thread has listed many possible changes, there are also roadblocks in the way of most of them) it will continue to shrink in popularity. The pace of the game and the other things you mentioned are somewhat an issue, but you could play 30 races an hour on a Saturday if you just wanted action.

You gotta admit it's a different kind of analysis? I didn't mean to say math is the whole thing, but looking at a racing form and working card probabilities on a specific hand are different. Not to mention they don't wait 20 minutes between hands. But I get your point. But even poker is no longer as popular.

[ReplayRandall]

Do you see any young people sitting around doing the NY Times crossword puzzle anymore? Find me a great crossword guy and I will find you a good handicapper. We are the last of the breed ladies and gents. Get used to it.
I was standing outside Lone Star park a few weeks back waiting for the doors to open. They were having a tournament that day. I was fifteen minutes early. In the fifteen minutes I was there, the tournament guys starting showing up. In fifteen minutes the crowd grew to about 35 guys. I was the youngest guy. I'm closing in on 55. The average age I am going to guess was 62-63. We are playing a game that is done. The Dinosaurs eventually have to die off.


Ralph, what you've posted is the absolute truth of the game. I remember living in Phoenix 33 years ago, played Turf Paradise in the day and Phoenix Greyhound Park at night. Both entities were bristling with action and young people. It was an exciting time to be a player.....Now, those much older people are all that is left, and Dog Racing is basically extinct. For the first time in 37 years, I am seriously considering quitting the game, rebate and all. It just isn't worth my time, effort and energy any longer. The edge in Live action and Tournaments is just too small. I believe there are much wiser ways to invest my time and money in profitable pursuits..........Can't believe I'm posting this, but it's just finally the time to do it, my enthusiasm for the game is gone.........

[dirty moose]

Actually, Tom, not really...as it is Genting that runs the concessions at Aqueduct, and they set the prices, not NYRA. They also charge exorbitant prices in the casino as well.

You're the perfect guy to answer a question I asked earlier, does anyone at NYRA other than you or the personalities check this website? Maybe some of the decisions makers?

[Tom]

Actually, Tom, not really...as it is Genting that runs the concessions at Aqueduct, and they set the prices, not NYRA. They also charge exorbitant prices in the casino as well.

I wasn't taking a shot at NYRA prices, just the idea that we need to "weed out" Joe-Customer and only listen to the high rollers. I suppose the guys he was talking about only drink champagne anyways. I don't know how many whales are playing slots at Roosevelt. :rolleyes:

Ignoring customers seems a bad way to really improve things. If you want to get rid of the riff raff, raise admissions to $100....should do the trick, ay? Hey, DRF is ALREADY going down that path! :D

I do know that at FL, you are treated like royalty on the slots side and trash on the racing side.

[EMD4ME]

You're the perfect guy to answer a question I asked earlier, does anyone at NYRA other than you or the personalities check this website? Maybe some of the decisions makers?

I speak from literal experience, YES. NYRA executives do look at this board. When I made a stink about being mistreated by a NYRA middle management employee and had a major service issue this August, they were very attentive to this blog and the public sentiment.

For the record, they made many attempts to correct the issue. Not 100% remedied but enough to make people happier.

[stormreveler]

You're the perfect guy to answer a question I asked earlier, does anyone at NYRA other than you or the personalities check this website? Maybe some of the decisions makers?

I don't see how it would matter if they did. The people here care about the game, but the solutions proposed here aren't anything that haven't been put forth in any number of other places.

Unfortunately, the folks in charge of most tracks/jurisdictions are seriously deficient. On the other hand, it probably doesn't matter at this point.

I read an article yesterday about the crash of Air France 447 that discussed how once the jet's engines stalled and a certain amount of altitude was lost, no amount of pilot effort was going to keep it out of the water. I think it's pretty much the same thing here.

[classhandicapper]

Actually, Tom, not really...as it is Genting that runs the concessions at Aqueduct, and they set the prices, not NYRA. They also charge exorbitant prices in the casino as well.

This is not directed at you personally.

IMO there's a mismatch between the track customer base and what is being charged for food, entrance etc....

When I go to the see the Knicks, Rangers, US Open Tennis etc... the prices for food are outrageous. But when I look around, I see a lot of professionals, businessmen, and middle class people out for the night. Even though they are getting gauged for food and and tickets and they know it, it's only one night out and they can afford it anyway.

When I go the track, I see the same faces every day. My guess is that a lot of them are retired on fixed incomes, unemployed, or not exactly well off. That stupid overpriced coke, coffee, hot dog, increased entry fee, $5 entry fee into the nice section etc... puts a major dent in their finances if they go a few times a week. It discourages them.

I think on some level whoever is making these decisions is under the mistaken belief that the typical horseplayer is the same guy that goes to watch US Open finals. It's not.

Trying to squeeze extra money out your customers on a Belmont or BC day is understandable. That's an "event" that attracts the kind of people you can squeeze a little without offending or discouraging them too badly. But on the typical weekday at AQU or BEL is an entirely different customer base. You can't squeeze blood out of a customer that already needs a transfusion without killing him.

[pandy]

Doesn't Aqueduct have a reasonably priced buffet now?

[DeltaLover]

Doesn't Aqueduct have a reasonably priced buffet now?

small cup of coffee: FOUR DOLLARS

[Secondbest]

No. It closed because it was way too expensive. I'm talking the casino. The track itself doesn't have much

[the little guy]

This is not directed at you personally.

IMO there's a mismatch between the track customer base and what is being charged for food, entrance etc....

When I go to the see the Knicks, Rangers, US Open Tennis etc... the prices for food are outrageous. But when I look around, I see a lot of professionals, businessmen, and middle class people out for the night. Even though they are getting gauged for food and and tickets and they know it, it's only one night out and they can afford it anyway.

When I go the track, I see the same faces every day. My guess is that a lot of them are retired on fixed incomes, unemployed, or not exactly well off. That stupid overpriced coke, coffee, hot dog, increased entry fee, $5 entry fee into the nice section etc... puts a major dent in their finances if they go a few times a week. It discourages them.

I think on some level whoever is making these decisions is under the mistaken belief that the typical horseplayer is the same guy that goes to watch US Open finals. It's not.

Trying to squeeze extra money out your customers on a Belmont or BC day is understandable. That's an "event" that attracts the kind of people you can squeeze a little without offending or discouraging them too badly. But on the typical weekday at AQU or BEL is an entirely different customer base. You can't squeeze blood out of a customer that already needs a transfusion without killing him.



Is this the Daily Racing Form's opinion on pricing, or just yours, and do you express these same opinions to them at meetings?

[aaron]

Is this the Daily Racing Form's opinion on pricing, or just yours, and do you express these same opinions to them at meetings?
What does it matter,as you seem to indicate that you think the prices are set too high. At the Belmont simulcast,the prices seem to be more reasonable.During the Belmont meet,the price for a bottle of coke on the 3rd floor was $4.50. Who set that price ?

[Grits]

I think on some level whoever is making these decisions is under the mistaken belief that the typical horseplayer is the same guy that goes to watch US Open finals. It's not.

I'd be surprised if this is the belief of management. As much description as has been rendered here at PA on the habits and the appearance of the daily player? No, Class, they're not attending the U.S.Open at Flushing. One spin around the plant any day out of seven tells them--this is not the case. Instead, its quite likely that they know their customer far too well. And knowing them allows them to summarily figure..."if they're breathing, they're here". Its simply the way the daily player is. Win or lose, they're dedicated or addicted, whichever fits his/her situation. Keep in mind, its all over a period of weeks, months, years. They love the game.

"Tomorrow's another day, another card", said, every horse player ever, while picking up the next day's DRF before exiting the gate.

EDIT to add: With apologies to TLG as to my comments. This noted, still, I'm not one to believe it isn't beneficial to fully know your customer.

[the little guy]

What does it matter,as you seem to indicate that you think the prices are set too high. At the Belmont simulcast,the prices seem to be more reasonable.During the Belmont meet,the price for a bottle of coke on the 3rd floor was $4.50. Who set that price ?

Aaron, once again, NYRA does NOT set the prices for concessions at Aqueduct.

[DeltaLover]

Aaron, once again, NYRA does NOT set the prices for concessions at Aqueduct.

Should we really care about who is actually setting the prices at AQUEDUCT? Do you really think that paying four dollars for a cup of coffee of a small bottle of water makes sense? Who is to be blamed for this unacceptable policy anyway?

[Tom]

This sounds like it is a least part of the problem.
No matter who sets the prices, it is the NYRA customer who pays them.
You can't separate the day at the track experience into who provides what service.

People got to Aqueduct. Period.

But all this is the wrong direction to be going in, as most people who bet ( or don't bet) NYRA never set foot in any of their tracks. I have my own coffee and cold beer here.....it is reasonably priced. :p

The only point I was trying to make earlier was that it makes no sense to limit listening to customers based on how much they bet. Anyone who actually goes to the trouble to visit a track nowadays deserves some degree of respect. If we dismiss most players for betting too little, why do we get all giddy over a 50,000 attendance day?

[aaron]

Aaron, once again, NYRA does NOT set the prices for concessions at Aqueduct.
I know that. I am not blaming NYRA. That doesn't mean,I agree with the pricing.The pricing doesn't affect me personally since I seldom eat at the track and when I do,I just pay the price. I think where we arguing is that the prices are too inflated,not who sets the price. I think all of us understand NYRA does not set the price at Aqueduct.

[Track Phantom]

The only point I was trying to make earlier was that it makes no sense to limit listening to customers based on how much they bet. Anyone who actually goes to the trouble to visit a track nowadays deserves some degree of respect. If we dismiss most players for betting too little, why do we get all giddy over a 50,000 attendance day?

I think you're missing my original point. I agree that all patrons deserve to be heard. However, in an attempt to expand the wagering base of larger players, I would not cloud the discussion with prices of coffee and the cost of a program. These are important points but not in the narrow focus of attracting players that move the needle.

I know this offends some but such is life. Not all opinions should be weighted the same. At least they wouldn't be if I was running the show there :)

[Grits]

Should we really care about who is actually setting the prices at AQUEDUCT? Do you really think that paying four dollars for a cup of coffee of a small bottle of water makes sense? Who is to be blamed for this unacceptable policy anyway?

Have you ever considered? You take your handicapping papers, your tablet, whatever to the track. Why can you not take your own beverage, coffee, water, soda, or whatever, along with your past performances? I have on weekdays. I've even taken lunch on Belmont day. Why is this so difficult? .... You don't like a tote or a man purse? ;) Its ok.

Also, directly across the street from Belmont's entrance on Hempstead, there's a DUNKIN DONUTS. Have you thought of making a stop there before going into the gate? The place is always packed.

I eat at Belmont all the time. Great deli sandwiches. I pay the price. I've eaten the buffet at Aqueduct many times. Its very good. The price is what I'd pay (or much less) in other restaurants.

You are aware, too, that you can purchase bottled water all day for $1. outside each gate from half of the teens that reside in Saratoga county throughout that race meet? So, this takes care of that one.

Anyway, if it burned me this much, I would do each of these, particularly for coffee.. before complaining about parting with $4, while putting hundreds a day through the windows. In other words, I don't mind parting with hundreds, but I'm too cheap to part with $4 bucks. :rolleyes:

[Grits]

Another thing for all the p****** and moaning, gentlemen. Vegas ain't doing so hot shot with the comp deals either. As hard as they can, they're throwing up new hotels, renovating hotels. Big changes. All geared for twenty somethings hoping to make it a destination spot for the party set. Kinda like the Grand Caymans, etc. The horse player and other gamblers, it seems, aren't being as greatly appreciated there, these days, either. .... This, or the recent news is lying.

It doesn't matter where you are, or what your entertainment choice is. We pay to play. Nothing's free. So why keep complaining when you have better to do with your time? These aren't front burner issues. And they never will be.

[DeanT]

A good players reward system is (or should be, if not) a staple at tracks. Most of them do have that in some form. Makes sense in the modern world. A free coffee for every few hundred in bets is only a small rebate, and if it makes regulars happy, they come back and keep contributing to the bottom line. Better than them playing in an ADW at home, and adding less than half of what they would on track.

[the little guy]

I know that. I am not blaming NYRA. That doesn't mean,I agree with the pricing.The pricing doesn't affect me personally since I seldom eat at the track and when I do,I just pay the price. I think where we arguing is that the prices are too inflated,not who sets the price. I think all of us understand NYRA does not set the price at Aqueduct.

You won't see me defending the pricing.

[Grits]

Dean, I know you're right. But just think how little the "r" is in that whopping rebate. I'd be embarrassed to offer it. :lol:

[DeltaLover]

Anyway, if it burned me this much, I would do each of these, particularly for coffee.. before complaining about parting with $4, while putting hundreds a day through the windows. In other words, I don't mind parting with hundreds, but I'm too cheap to part with $4 bucks. :rolleyes:

Not my style..

I remind you that a few months ago, before we move to the Longshots Bar, coffee and water was completely free... All this started since the last running of Wood and has to do with the awful Resorts Casino!

[badcompany]

The point if the $4.50 cup of coffee is not the $4.50. It's the gouging of the customer on every level.

That said, I don't complain about any of it: the take out, the admission fee, the program price etc. They could charge $20 for a cup of coffee at Aqueduct and I wouldn't care.

Why?

Because I have the option to not bet.

[thaskalos]

It isn't the high concession prices...it's the disconnect between the industry and the situation at hand that's the problem. The live attendance at the tracks in recent years has been so laughable...that the tracks are too embarrassed to report the daily attendance figures, as they once did. These outrageous concession prices can only succeed in driving even the rest of the hardcore racegoers away.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Why did NYRA cede control of AQU concession pricing to Genting in the first place? From reading the NYRA annual report, it appears that Genting built Longshots as part of the agreement. I can understand why Genting would want uniform food/beverage pricing, but I don't see it from NYRA's perspective. Prior to the Genting agreement, I wonder if NYRA was losing money on its concession operations at AQU? Under the Genting agreement, NYRA receives an annual commission of $536,000.

[whodoyoulike]

Most venues I've heard which allows outside vendors on their properties usually APPROVE the range of prices to be charged by a vendor. If the range is too high, the acceptable and prudent business practice dictates competitive bidding. NYRA may not set the concession prices but most likely are approving them. Unless they allow anyone to become an exclusive vendor, then I'd be closely looking at any relationship between the vendor and whoever permits them on their grounds.

This can be simply tested. Have concessions for the club house members and one in the general grandstand, The club house will charge $5.00 a cup for coffee, etc., and the grandstand will charge $1.00 per cup, etc.. Where do you think most of the club house customers will be buying their coffee and food? This test will answer the question of price sensitivity of the racing customer.

And, I don't agree it is ever acceptable to gouge their customers because of a promotional event. I think a good business would provide discounts (sales) to draw in more customers.

[Tom]

NYRA receives an annual commission of $536,000.

134,000 coffees. :eek:

[Quesmark]

Here is a look at racing handle since May. October is greatly influenced by the Breeders' Cup since the first day fell in October this year.

http://www.trackannouncer.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/handle2014.png

The law of large numbers comes into play here IMO. In September, handle dropped a substantial amount - nearly $82 million. This is a huge number. And you can see it's clearly an outlier vs. the other months.

Field size, foal crops, boycotts, weekend warriors leaving the game etc. did not suddenly take effect in September. It is something much, much bigger than that whether it be a team of whales, one whale, many whales or anything in between.

For those who have posted here that such players are bad for the game, well then this should be perceived as a good thing. I'm not enough of an economist to offer an opinion.
Could it be the impact of Fantasy Sports?These sites were doing heavy promotions before the start of the NFL season in September,with bonuses being offered,the take on their game's less than 9% with various rebates[player point deals,free rolls etc] available.

There are pages of contests to enter on all sports,and the handle runs into the millions,particularly on football Sundays.Could some of racing's business have been siphoned away to these competitors for the gambling dollars?

[classhandicapper]

Is this the Daily Racing Form's opinion on pricing, or just yours, and do you express these same opinions to them at meetings?

Obviously, that's just my opinion.

If you would like to have a conversation about my view on DRF pricing we can do so privately. Just send me a note.

(You've made it clear that NYRA does not set "food" pricing).

[pandy]

Food concession companies like Harry M Stevens, which was purchased by Aramark, are notoriously over priced and offer some of the worst food imaginable. One of the nice things about the racinos is that you can just walk over to the casino and get a good meal. Is that not the case at Aqueduct?

[badcompany]

Every time I hear this I laugh. This is not going to happen. The younger fans have way too many choices. No way they come over to the dark side. They first of all don't have the basic skills to analyze a racing form. It's over. These kids today don't do math in their heads. It's simple. They can't do the math. You think you can interest a kid today in a game that uses fifths of a second as one of the most notable things an announcer says during a race? Even if you changed the way we time and explain the timing, the only timing that would matter to them is "why the hell am I waiting 20 minutes between races?" Bottom line, there are no "new fans" to drive to the game.

Do you see any young people sitting around doing the NY Times crossword puzzle anymore? Find me a great crossword guy and I will find you a good handicapper. We are the last of the breed ladies and gents. Get used to it.
I was standing outside Lone Star park a few weeks back waiting for the doors to open. They were having a tournament that day. I was fifteen minutes early. In the fifteen minutes I was there, the tournament guys starting showing up. In fifteen minutes the crowd grew to about 35 guys. I was the youngest guy. I'm closing in on 55. The average age I am going to guess was 62-63. We are playing a game that is done. The Dinosaurs eventually have to die off.

There is a bright side, Ralph. We still have Saratoga.

Loads of young people there, this past Summer. In fact, so many of them that they were getting on my nerves :cool:

[Tom]

How many will be at Aqueduct in February?

[dirty moose]

How many will be at Aqueduct in February?

After they added a $5 cover to Long Shots, I wont.... Shame place was gorgeous.

[EMD4ME]

I will. Love the racing at Aqu.