Andy Asaro on Future of Horseracing

[HalvOnHorseracing]

This was written by Andy Asaro who has long worked to make the game better for horseplayers. He is California focused but the points are legitimate everywhere.

http://www.paulickreport.com/horseplayers-category/asaro-ground-zero-in-fight-for-future-of-horse-racing/

Excerpt:

Those of us who love the game often say that horse racing is the greatest gambling game of skill ever created. But in 2015, gambling on horse racing - when compared to other games of skill that are thriving - is becoming one of the worst games for customers and non-rebated gamblers who are charged retail takeout rates. This is due, in part, to prohibitive pricing (high takeouts), difficult multi-leg hard to hit exotics, the proliferation of jackpot bets, and the complexity of analyzing the data from past performances. This has caused even the most experienced gamblers to have a much more difficult time just breaking even.

When most of us learned the game and fell in love with racing we had a choice of wagering to Win, Place, or Show, along with two exactas per day with maybe one Daily Double. In the late 1970's it was much easier to make it through the learning curve, simply because we cashed more tickets. We became life-long customers by enjoying the great experience of solving the puzzle that is each race, and of cashing tickets at a rate that at the very least gave us the impression that we had a good chance to win.

The Industry has reached a point where it must "sink or swim" based on a model without alternative gaming revenue like slot revenue, or instant racing, or online poker. It is evident that there will come a day when those revenues will decrease or go away completely. Because California racing does not receive alternative gaming revenues I believe that California is ground zero in the fight for the future of Horse Racing. California racing must proceed on a sustainable model based on earning revenues directly and indirectly from gambling on horse racing alone. I would argue that an optimal pricing experiment is significantly more important in California precisely because there is no alternative gaming revenue.

The best way to begin an optimal takeout experiment in California is to eliminate breakage on Win, Place, and Show (currently 15.43% takeout) AND to lower exacta takeout to 16%. I believe that this experiment makes sense for a couple of reasons:

(For the rest of the story click on the link at the top)

[dilanesp]

He is right about takeout, but wrong about the "difficulty" of the bets. Only a very small percentage of bettors ever won over a statistically significant sample size. The difference is there is less dumb money in the pools. But if there were more dumb money, it wouldn't matter if the bets offered were more complex- you only have to be better at them than the other people in the pools.

[OTM Al]

"- is becoming one of the worst games for customers and non-rebated gamblers who are charged retail takeout rates. This is due, in part, to prohibitive pricing (high takeouts), difficult multi-leg hard to hit exotics, the proliferation of jackpot bets, and the complexity of analyzing the data from past performances."

Interesting because this is the same fellow that applauded (and took credit for) the creation of the pick 5 and claimed success in the boycott of California tracks because of its institution. Some things he says here have merit, though there is nothing new, but he is not someone I would ever follow given his behavior on this board and elsewhere.

[AndyC]

The changes suggested by Asaro would be welcome but I think it would be much too little too late.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Yes, the important points are that take should be no higher than 16% for all bets and there is no reason why breakage shouldn't be given back to the horseplayer. The important question is what would happen to handle if 16% became the limit for all bets? If handle increased to the point where there was no loss of revenue, it's a win/win for everyone. I would think a more concerted effort by horseplayers to force those issues would be time well spent.

[Stillriledup]

This is 2015, there's no need to not pay out all bets to the penny. If I had all my pennies over the years that were stolen from me, I would have a very large pile of cash right now.

Here's more on the Asaro/Auerbach 'dust up'. This is what horseplayers are up against.

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/Players-Up/comments/09052014-standing-up-for-horseplayers-everywhere/

[ronsmac]

"- is becoming one of the worst games for customers and non-rebated gamblers who are charged retail takeout rates. This is due, in part, to prohibitive pricing (high takeouts), difficult multi-leg hard to hit exotics, the proliferation of jackpot bets, and the complexity of analyzing the data from past performances."

Interesting because this is the same fellow that applauded (and took credit for) the creation of the pick 5 and claimed success in the boycott of California tracks because of its institution. Some things he says here have merit, though there is nothing new, but he is not someone I would ever follow given his behavior on this board and elsewhere.There was no way California was going to lower wps and they just increased exotic take at the time. So it was a major accomplishment to get them to make p5 take 14%. I might be wrong, but he may have been one of the guys that pushed for the 18% DD takeout that was later raised to 20%.

[castaway01]

There was no way California was going to lower wps and they just increased exotic take at the time. So it was a major accomplishment to get them to make p5 take 14%. I might be wrong, but he may have been one of the guys that pushed for the 18% DD takeout that was later raised to 20%.

Pretty sure Al's point was that the guy fought for the Pick 5 takeout to make that bet more attractive, so to complain that people are focusing too much on the bet now is pretty illogical. Then again, if you were around when Andy used to rant on here, it's no big surprise.

[ronsmac]

Pretty sure Al's point was that the guy fought for the Pick 5 takeout to make that bet more attractive, so to complain that people are focusing too much on the bet now is pretty illogical. Then again, if you were around when Andy used to rant on here, it's no big surprise.
I agree with what you're saying but it was still a major achievement. Especially the lowering of the DD from 22.68 to 18 even though it was for only a year or less. That's if he had anything to do with that. Takeout trends have obviously been up up up over the years, so any drop in any pool is an accomplishment. I'd love to see lower takeouts in the exacta.

[Hambletonian]

Unless you feel that the whales will beach themselves at your track alone, lowering takeout is just plain dumb.

the only way you make up for the loss of revenue per bet is if the bettor ends up betting his extra winnings AT YOUR TRACK.

if they use the newfound cash to bet somewhere else, you just got less revenue and the bettor took his extra pennies and gave them to another track.

obviously, the best way to increase handle is to increase churn....which is pretty problematic since practically every wager that has come about in the last 20 years is a high risk type that annihilates churn, especially the multiple race bets that tie up money all afternoon.

[Stillriledup]

Tracks need to stop carding horsemans races with fake entries who only get entered to make races go. If they don't want to lower the takeout, they need to have a better product to gamble on. The first race today at Los Al was a 4 horse field which was essentially a match race between the top 2 favorites, and yet, gamblers paid full takeout on that nonsense. Paid well to be an owner in there, not so much a bettor.

[whodoyoulike]

...
Interesting because this is the same fellow that applauded (and took credit for) the creation of the pick 5 and claimed success in the boycott of California tracks because of its institution. Some things he says here have merit, though there is nothing new, but he is not someone I would ever follow given his behavior on this board and elsewhere.

I remember this guy posting on here. I'm not sure he was taking credit for the creation of the pick 5 but, he did encourage for a lower take out % at the CHRB meetings compared to the other types of pick races. But, I don't recall why he left or any specific "behavior" on here. He posted some interesting topics and comments and then seemed to disappear. I figured he found something more interesting and enjoyable.

[Poindexter]

While all reductions in take are good for the horseplayer, I think the articles'suggestion of eliminating breakage and reducing exacta takeout to 16% would do very little long term. It is simply not enough. Losers will still lose and most will continue to find the game too hard to beat. I suggest they get really aggressive with takeout reductions in the win/place/show pools(8% & eliminating breakage would be awesome) and leave the rest of the pools right where they are. They will have a lot less downside (in potential lost revenue) and as the win/place/show pools grow racing will see the light and will start lowering the pools on the rest of the pools. The worst thing would be for racing to make big reduction in takeout and not get compensated for it with increased handle. Once that happens they will never try it again("we tried that it doesn't work....."). If the authors suggestion were tried, I believe that is exactly what would happen.

[thaskalos]

I think Mr. Asaro has it BACKWARDS. The players haven't become disenchanted with the game because the bets currently offered are "too difficult to hit"; their interest in the game has waned because the bets have gotten too EASY to hit. With the emergence of the small fields, the favorites are winning at a 40%+ clip at many racetracks...and these short fields have teamed-up with the recently-reduced exotics minimums to drive the exotics payoffs to thoroughly unappetizing levels. The lure of our game had always been that you could "bet a little to win a lot"...but what most of the tracks are currently offering are an abundance of $4.40 winners, accompanied by trifecta payoffs of $24.60 for a 50-cent minimum. Hardly the sort of payoffs which would entice today's player to become (or remain) serious about this game.

You want to rekindle people's interest in this game? Then do something about this late-scratch epidemic, that's reducing this game to a mere shadow of what it once was. Anything short of that is like placing a band-aid on a serious bullet wound...IMO.

[Stillriledup]

I think Mr. Asaro has it BACKWARDS. The players haven't become disenchanted with the game because the bets currently offered are "too difficult to hit"; their interest in the game has waned because the bets have gotten too EASY to hit. With the emergence of the small fields, the favorites are winning at a 40%+ clip at many racetracks...and these short fields have teamed-up with the recently-reduced exotics minimums to drive the exotics payoffs to thoroughly unappetizing levels. The lure of our game had always been that you could "bet a little to win a lot"...but what most of the tracks are currently offering are an abundance of $4.40 winners, accompanied by trifecta payoffs of $24.60 for a 50-cent minimum. Hardly the sort of payoffs which would entice today's player to become (or remain) serious about this game.

You want to rekindle people's interest in this game? Then do something about this late-scratch epidemic, that's reducing this game to a mere shadow of what it once was. Anything short of that is like placing a band-aid on a serious bullet wound.

NLjXt7KxD4c

[Hoofless_Wonder]

SRU. I didn't realize you were a man of faith.... :)

Lowering takeout is a great start, but the game has many other challenges. Drugs, short fields, business modesl, tax codes, demographics, economic conditions, etc.

Much of the problem is greed. That's hard to cure.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

I think Mr. Asaro has it BACKWARDS. The players haven't become disenchanted with the game because the bets currently offered are "too difficult to hit"; their interest in the game has waned because the bets have gotten too EASY to hit. With the emergence of the small fields, the favorites are winning at a 40%+ clip at many racetracks...and these short fields have teamed-up with the recently-reduced exotics minimums to drive the exotics payoffs to thoroughly unappetizing levels. The lure of our game had always been that you could "bet a little to win a lot"...but what most of the tracks are currently offering are an abundance of $4.40 winners, accompanied by trifecta payoffs of $24.60 for a 50-cent minimum. Hardly the sort of payoffs which would entice today's player to become (or remain) serious about this game.

You want to rekindle people's interest in this game? Then do something about this late-scratch epidemic, that's reducing this game to a mere shadow of what it once was. Anything short of that is like placing a band-aid on a serious bullet wound...IMO.

I think I may be more of the exception when it comes to playing horses. I play one track a day, and almost always one of the NYRA tracks. I only bet races where I believe I have an edge, but in those races I will fire. That limits my action quite a bit. I tend to focus more on win and exacta than the lottery bets. I'm happy playing that way, and it has worked very well for me, but I understand that the average fan wants action (probably more than at 30 minute intervals), fairness, and an abiity to win based on skill (although perhaps not having to spend two hours handicapping a card). Thask is right. Most people are irritated at low priced winners, and the fact that they can't bet the race to make real money is discouraging. There are myriad problems in racing and this site has mentioned them all. Unfortunately there isn't just one problem we can focus on.

[OTM Al]

There was no way California was going to lower wps and they just increased exotic take at the time. So it was a major accomplishment to get them to make p5 take 14%. I might be wrong, but he may have been one of the guys that pushed for the 18% DD takeout that was later raised to 20%.
Probably was. Think it is clear I don't care for the guy, but not going to bust on him when he's not here to defend himself because that is also a rotten thing. The part of the whole thing I never understood though was why were we supposed to give CA our money towards a bet that is extremely difficult to win when they hiked the price on the real player friendly bets that can be hit. Never played CA much before but sure don't play them now. For a large percentage of players the P5 is a bad bet and just wasn't needed regardless of takeout.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

"- is becoming one of the worst games for customers and non-rebated gamblers who are charged retail takeout rates. This is due, in part, to prohibitive pricing (high takeouts), difficult multi-leg hard to hit exotics, the proliferation of jackpot bets, and the complexity of analyzing the data from past performances."

Interesting because this is the same fellow that applauded (and took credit for) the creation of the pick 5 and claimed success in the boycott of California tracks because of its institution. Some things he says here have merit, though there is nothing new, but he is not someone I would ever follow given his behavior on this board and elsewhere.

As far as I know, Asaro was one of the movers on the Pick 5 in CA. Here are some articles I found that might be relevant.

http://www.drf.com/news/beyer-pick-five-shows-how-lower-takeout-works

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2015/jun/05/del-mar-pick-six-modify/

http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/2014/03/california-players-pick-5-its-just.html

Whatever you think about Asaro, he is a passionate advocate for horseplayers. I have no knowledge of how he interacted here, but he spends a lot of time pushing CHRB to do the right things for horseplayers.

[thaskalos]

As far as I know, Asaro was one of the movers on the Pick 5 in CA. Here are some articles I found that might be relevant.

http://www.drf.com/news/beyer-pick-five-shows-how-lower-takeout-works

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2015/jun/05/del-mar-pick-six-modify/

http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/2014/03/california-players-pick-5-its-just.html

Whatever you think about Asaro, he is a passionate advocate for horseplayers. I have no knowledge of how he interacted here, but he spends a lot of time pushing CHRB to do the right things for horseplayers.

Who was Andy Asaro when he was posting on this board? Indulto?

[Stillriledup]

Who was Andy Asaro when he was posting on this board? Indulto?

Andymays

[Luckycreed]

What form of gambling is not incredibly hard to win at long term?Please tell me I am desperate to know.

Racing needs to find it's niche in the gambling market and play to it's strengths and single race exotics like trifecta and first four combined with the fact that unlike sports it does not tie the players money up for long periods of time are it's strengths.

Down here in Australia trifecta pools have almost overtaken win pools, exotics are what younger players want to play, their not interested in trying to grind it out backing 2-1 shots their chasing big hits. Young people who want to back 2-1 shots bet on football or Rugby.

Racing is still killing sports betting in Australia even though sports wagering is just as accessible because young people don't want to back 2-1 shots and they don't want their money tied up all weekend in a multigame parlay.

The big exotics also give the serious player his best chance of winning, it requires more skill and patience, even people who are skilled handicappers often bet like novices when it comes to exotics There is more mug money in the pools, the degree of difficulty in pricing all the different possible combinations is much higher, and people take unders much more than in win pools because they box or banker and part box and take lots of combinations that are horribly overbet.

The big exotics that don't tie money up for long periods of time are racings future and the bet types it needs to promote, but to make it work it needs competitive fields and decent field sizes and that is THE big challenge it faces.

[Luckycreed]

The other big advantage racing has over sports for the serious player is racing has the tote and the tote will always welcome your money,

Sportsbooks will welcome your money if you are a loser, but if you are a winner they will close your account very quickly and share your details with the other sportsbooks and pretty soon you are blacklisted by all of them.

Of course you can pay commission agents to open accounts and bet on your behalf (until they get banned) but that starts to get pretty expensive, you have to be a really big player for that to be viable for any length of time.

[Seabiscuit@AR]

Luckycreed

I am not sure it is a case of trifecta pools almost overtaking the win pools in Australia. It is likely the other way round, the win pools are shrinking back down to the size of the trifecta pools

Last time I checked tote turnover in Australia was down badly in the last 5 years but at the same time there was a corresponding rise in fixed odds betting with bookies/exchange. So a decent portion of the win betting has shifted from tote win betting to fixed odds win betting

Exotics betting has never been big in Australia and never will be. Once you add up all the fixed odds win bets they dwarf anything in the exotics pools