NYRA Cuts Winner's Share Of Purse

[Thomas Roulston]

And just think: For the longest time, NYRA stuck to a 65% winner's share (65-20-10-5) before cutting it to 60% (60-22-12-6) in the 1960s.

The change will take effect with the opening of the Saratoga meet.

http://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/increased-purses-new-purse-distribution-for-2018-saratoga-meet/

Increased Purses & New Purse Distribution for 2018 Saratoga Meet

All maiden and allowance races, as well as some claiming races, at the 2018 Saratoga meet will get a $2,000 across-the-board purse increase. Maiden special weights will now have a purse of $85,000 and first-level allowance optional claimers will carry a $95,000 purse.

The 2018 meet will also have a new purse distribution allocation. With the exception of any stakes with awards specifically stated in the condition book, all races going forward will pay out as follows: 55% of the total purse to the winner, 20% to second place, 12% to third, 6% to fourth, 4% to fifth, with the remaining 3% divided among the remaining runners.

The new purse distribution will be adjusted from the current breakdown of 60-20-10-5-3% to the top five finishers, respectively, with the remaining 2% divided among the remainder of the field.

[davew]

If tracks want larger fields, they need to pay more deeper.

[pandy]

If this doesn't result in bigger fields, something is very wrong.

[Tom]

Great plan - reward failure.
Off the board can now be a career path.

Do the bettors get a percentage back when their horse finishes out?


This may add to the fields, but do you really think it will add horses ready to fire and meant to win?

[pandy]

Great plan - reward failure.
Off the board can now be a career path.

Do the bettors get a percentage back when their horse finishes out?


This may add to the fields, but do you really think it will add horses ready to fire and meant to win?


That's the other side of the coin. But I don't think it will be a problem. The cost of owning and racing thoroughbreds is so high, and especially now that, on average, horse's don't race as often as they used to. Consequently, any idea of not trying to win is nuts and doesn't make sense. Trainers who don't win end up in another profession. And owners don't buy racehorses and then tell the trainers and jockeys, "Please don't try to win the race, I prefer to lose as much money as I possibly can, as fast as I can, and I don't like watching my horses win."

[Andy Asaro]

55% is the way it should be. Ca. should do the same.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Great plan - reward failure.
Off the board can now be a career path.

Do the bettors get a percentage back when their horse finishes out?


This may add to the fields, but do you really think it will add horses ready to fire and meant to win?

Exactly right.

[thaskalos]

That's the other side of the coin. But I don't think it will be a problem. The cost of owning and racing thoroughbreds is so high, and especially now that, on average, horse's don't race as often as they used to. Consequently, any idea of not trying to win is nuts and doesn't make sense. Trainers who don't win end up in another profession. And owners don't buy racehorses and then tell the trainers and jockeys, "Please don't try to win the race, I prefer to lose as much money as I possibly can, as fast as I can, and I don't like watching my horses win."

It makes sense when you consider that owners and trainers often try to cash BETS, as well as collect purses.

[AltonKelsey]

This % shift is a response to the concentration of wins among very few barns.


The rest starve . Now they can eat gruel.

[onefast99]

It makes sense when you consider that owners and trainers often try to cash BETS, as well as collect purses.In 15 years I Have never bet on one of my horses. You also don't "collect" the purse you win it, ITM means you get a share and if NYRA wants to cut the win to 55% not only do I get less for the win but the jockey and trainer do as well!

[Tom]

It makes sense when you consider that owners and trainers often try to cash BETS, as well as collect purses.

That is the fatal flaw of the game.
No trainer, owner, rider or steward should ever be allowed to bet on ANY horses anywhere.

You cannot be a part of the game and play it as well.
It is a major conflict of interest.

[Tom]

In 15 years I Have never bet on one of my horses. You also don't "collect" the purse you win it, ITM means you get a share and if NYRA wants to cut the win to 55% not only do I get less for the win but the jockey and trainer do as well!

So let me ask you this.
Does this action not tend to invite trainers,owners, and jocks of "lesser character" to get more "creative" in exploring alternative income streams?

[lamboguy]

So let me ask you this.
Does this action not tend to invite trainers,owners, and jocks of "lesser character" to get more "creative" in exploring alternative income streams?
Tom has this 100% correct. paying more for running 4th and 5th ain't gonna bring new blood to the game. at this point, i don't think there is to much that will bring new faces in, so this is just a life line because NYRA is going to have plenty of trouble getting big fields this year. Monmouth pays a trainer $300 just to enter a horse. Navaro runs about 15 horses a week at Monmouth, plus he wins most of his races.

[Saratoga_Mike]

That is the fatal flaw of the game.
No trainer, owner, rider or steward should ever be allowed to bet on ANY horses anywhere.

You cannot be a part of the game and play it as well.
It is a major conflict of interest.

Totally disagree - you want their money in the pool. I guarantee you are a radically better handicapper than 99.5% of the "insiders."

[Tom]

Write races that exclude trainers with X number of horses in their care.
Panza can write can't he?
Isn't getting ALL the horses on the grounds into races his job?

[Saratoga_Mike]

Write races that exclude trainers with X number of horses in their care.
Panza can write can't he?
Isn't getting ALL the horses on the grounds into races his job?

This idea was tried somewhere in the past year or so - maybe it was in harness racing. I don't know how it worked out. I'm sure someone knows.

[AskinHaskin]

You also don't "collect" the purse you win it,


You have no understanding as to what you're talking about.




According to Webster's:

Definition of collect:



4 : to claim as due and receive payment for
5 : to get and bring with one; specifically : pick up went to collect her at the train station



Racing tradition dates back to a time when the purse/winnings were indeed there at the finish to be 'collected' by the first on the scene.


Whether it is 1700 or 2018, "collect" is correct.


In modern times, by running 4th you are due (some relative pittance) and you indeed collect this from the Horseman's Bookkeeper. Few would boast of having won anything.


On the other side of the course, you spent $576 on a pick-6 and you are due $684. You went to the window to collect $684. You did not realistically win $684. (even the IRS finally admits as much - you should be next)

[Tom]

Totally disagree - you want their money in the pool. I guarantee you are a radically better handicapper than 99.5% of the "insiders."
Yes, but those insiders also have the power to influence the outcomes of races.

[pandy]

It makes sense when you consider that owners and trainers often try to cash BETS, as well as collect purses.

Maybe at the smaller tracks that have low purses, but we're talking about the NYRA circuit. Of course, I'm not a cynic or conspiracy theory type of person in the first place, but it's extremely rare to see a horse held in New York. The jockeys riding on the NYRA circuit aren't going to hold a horse so some jerk off owner can set up a bet.

And I know from interviewing successful harness drivers, they don't listen to the trainers...well, not that they don't listen, but they don't follow instructions. You ask any of them if they do what the trainer tells them and they shake their head and say, "Of course not."

[lamboguy]

Maybe at the smaller tracks that have low purses, but we're talking about the NYRA circuit. Of course, I'm not a cynic or conspiracy theory type of person in the first place, but it's extremely rare to see a horse held in New York. The jockeys riding on the NYRA circuit aren't going to hold a horse so some jerk off owner can set up a bet.

And I know from interviewing successful harness drivers, they don't listen to the trainers...well, not that they don't listen, but they don't follow instructions. You ask any of them if they do what the trainer tells them and they shake their head and say, "Of course not."what trainer in his right mind would rely on a jockey to hold his horse for him when he can do it himself easy as hell without leaving the barn?

[Fager Fan]

Tom has this 100% correct. paying more for running 4th and 5th ain't gonna bring new blood to the game. at this point, i don't think there is to much that will bring new faces in, so this is just a life line because NYRA is going to have plenty of trouble getting big fields this year. Monmouth pays a trainer $300 just to enter a horse. Navaro runs about 15 horses a week at Monmouth, plus he wins most of his races.

Tom is 100% wrong. No one enters a MSW or allow to get a $3k payday. The wins are what an owner needs to stay afloat in this sport. It is always better for the bottom line to run where you can win because the win money is too significant. What this does is help pay for the training of that particular horse that month.

All horses in the race play a part in that particular betting show, so I’ve always thought they should get some small pay for the role they play.

[Tom]

No, you are wrong.
I said jockeys, trainers, and stewards.
Any of them can affect the outcome of a race.
Not saying they do, but it is still a conflict of interest.

The integrity of the game depends on more than "oh, no one would do that."
As long as someone CAN do it, you need to regulate the game to prevent it.
Ever hear of a buzzer?
How many drug violations are there?
Is Dutrow on 10 ears suspension because he would ever do that?

[lamboguy]

Tom is 100% wrong. No one enters a MSW or allow to get a $3k payday. The wins are what an owner needs to stay afloat in this sport. It is always better for the bottom line to run where you can win because the win money is too significant. What this does is help pay for the training of that particular horse that month.

All horses in the race play a part in that particular betting show, so I’ve always thought they should get some small pay for the role they play.again Tom is right. there are hobo's that mistreat their horses and just run them in spots where they collect an appearance fee,

[Milkshaker]

That is the fatal flaw of the game.
No trainer, owner, rider or steward should ever be allowed to bet on ANY horses anywhere.

You cannot be a part of the game and play it as well.
It is a major conflict of interest.

You don't think this entire industry/sport isn't already rife with conflicts of interest?

Betting by jocks/trainers/owners would seem pretty far down the list of conflict of interest concerns (at least it is on my list).

[Tom]

Such as?

[davew]

This % shift is a response to the concentration of wins among very few barns.


The rest starve . Now they can eat gruel.

when 4th gets less than 10% of win and 5th gets less than 5% of win, there is no incentive to enter unless you can win.

beginning owners and trainers have a difficult time getting established before going broke.

[BIG49010]

The old Sportsman's Park in Chicago, used to have races, non winners of a race at meeting, with 10 or more starts. Grey horse only conditions. It's too bad they listened to car racing promoters and ruined that track!

[classhandicapper]

I like the new purse distribution.

It's tough to win races in NY. If you aren't wining it's tough to pay the bills unless you have a very good horse. Paying more money further down is a way redistributing the wealth a little so more horses can cover the costs of their training, vet care, and other expenses. If you have a very good horse that's winning, you'll still do very well with the generous purses in NY.

[onefast99]

Anyone should be able to bet unless you are an employee of that track the horse is racing at. jocks and trainers and agents are not employees of tracks. A steward has the ability to change the outcome of a race, they must be barred from wagering at the track they are employed at.

[onefast99]

You have no understanding as to what you're talking about.




According to Webster's:

Definition of collect:



4 : to claim as due and receive payment for
5 : to get and bring with one; specifically : pick up went to collect her at the train station



Racing tradition dates back to a time when the purse/winnings were indeed there at the finish to be 'collected' by the first on the scene.


Whether it is 1700 or 2018, "collect" is correct.


In modern times, by running 4th you are due (some relative pittance) and you indeed collect this from the Horseman's Bookkeeper. Few would boast of having won anything.


On the other side of the course, you spent $576 on a pick-6 and you are due $684. You went to the window to collect $684. You did not realistically win $684. (even the IRS finally admits as much - you should be next)
Wrong
The trainer jockey and owner earned their share of the purse it’s called income and yes despite your confusion here the IRS is still interested in your earnings so much so that once a year prior to April 15th you must file a tax return. Unless you are speaking about a different country your facts are not correct but great post anyway.

[Grits]

Anyone should be able to bet unless you are an employee of that track the horse is racing at. jocks and trainers and agents are not employees of tracks. A steward has the ability to change the outcome of a race, they must be barred from wagering at the track they are employed at.

Fast, c'mon....tell me this doesn't include the NYRA gate crew. I love those guys! I've watched them going over the pocket racing program between races so many times. ... I don't care if they bet. ... Seriously. :)

[Red Knave]

I have mixed feelings about the change.
I don't feel too bad about winners at SAR getting 5% less of an even larger purse. One win at SAR may not pay the training bill for a year but it sure takes the pressure off.
3rd, 4th and 5th get a better deal now, maybe enough to try harder.
Also now, a 6th place horse in a 6 horse field gets paid the same as the 5th place horse. I'm not sure that's right.
And I'm not sure how this makes for larger fields, since the more horses you have after 6 the less each one gets. In a larger field it's likely less than $200 each over last year. Does that tip the decision to keep a new horse on the grounds or to ship it in?
Horses at SAR were already getting paid more than anywhere else in the country and they still are after this change.

[Tom]

Anyone should be able to bet unless you are an employee of that track the horse is racing at. jocks and trainers and agents are not employees of tracks. A steward has the ability to change the outcome of a race, they must be barred from wagering at the track they are employed at.

So you are OK with Irad betting a grand on Jose in a race they are riding in together?

Is Pete Rose riding these days?

[upthecreek]

https://twitter.com/JockeyTalk/status/1017096301123702785

[onefast99]

Fast, c'mon....tell me this doesn't include the NYRA gate crew. I love those guys! I've watched them going over the pocket racing program between races so many times. ... I don't care if they bet. ... Seriously. :)

I always wondered about those guys I did see a race a few years back where the gate crew ran over to a horse that was acting up in the gate and left the 8:5 favorite with nobody near him the gate opened the 8:5favorite went to his knees and never came in the money but now you have me thinking again!

[onefast99]

So you are OK with Irad betting a grand on Jose in a race they are riding in together?

Is Pete Rose riding these days?

So what makes you think that Irad or his brother aren’t trying to win the race you are not a jockey and neither am I and they are not riding in cars out there with brakes steering wheels or gas pedals there are a lot more things that could change the outcome of a race other than a jockeys bad ride. I know owners that play $50-$1000 or more to win on a horse and hand the ticket to the jockey in the winners circle. It happens more often than you think!

[cj]

So what makes you think that Irad or his brother aren’t trying to win the race you are not a jockey and neither am I and they are not riding in cars out there with brakes steering wheels or gas pedals there are a lot more things that could change the outcome of a race other than a jockeys bad ride. I know owners that play $50-$1000 or more to win on a horse and hand the ticket to the jockey in the winners circle. It happens more often than you think!

Come on, you can't have jockeys betting on other horses in the race.

[Tom]

Only fool ever assumes honesty.
You CANNOT allow the people who participate in the sporting event to bet on it's outcome. ANY sporting event, Anyone. Anytime.

[Fager Fan]

Only fool ever assumes honesty.
You CANNOT allow the people who participate in the sporting event to bet on it's outcome. ANY sporting event, Anyone. Anytime.

I see no problem with a participant betting on themselves to win.

[cj]

I see no problem with a participant betting on themselves to win.

Pete Rose agrees with you. I don't think it is a big problem, but it does bring into question the times riders don't bet on themselves. Obviously it wouldn't be wise to bet on yourself every race, but it still isn't a good optic.

[onefast99]

Come on, you can't have jockeys betting on other horses in the race.

ban jockeys from betting on races they are involved in and their friends or family can still bet for them. Employees of the track should be banned from betting from the gate crew to the horse identifier to the chief of scales to the racing secretary and stewards that should be set in stone.

[PaceAdvantage]

You can't stop jockeys or trainers or anyone from betting on horses...all they need is a friend to do it for them if they don't want to risk doing it themselves.

[onefast99]

Only fool ever assumes honesty.
You CANNOT allow the people who participate in the sporting event to bet on it's outcome. ANY sporting event, Anyone. Anytime.

honesty? We can’t even agree on a drug policy that covers every track let alone worry about a jockey betting his hard earned money on the outcome of a race he is involved in.

[Seabiscuit@AR]

You don't want jockeys betting even on themselves to win

The problem is a group of jockeys could reach an understanding that they will help each other's bet win. So 4 jockeys might agree to help each of them cash a winning bet by not trying when one of them has a bet running. So in R1 Jockey A backs themself to win while Jockeys B, C and D don't try or even engage in tactics to help A win. Then in R2 Jockey B bets so A, C and D try to help B get home etc etc. After 4 races each of them cashes a big bet on their own mount

So the rule has to be that jockeys cannot bet

However back in the real world it is very hard to stop jockeys betting and rumours always abound about some jockeys being big bettors

[Tom]

Well, there you go.
Why bother if it is hard to do.

No one can stop a cook from pissing in the mashed potatoes if they have a mind to do so.

So why make it illegal?:rolleyes:

[onefast99]

You don't want jockeys betting even on themselves to win

The problem is a group of jockeys could reach an understanding that they will help each other's bet win. So 4 jockeys might agree to help each of them cash a winning bet by not trying when one of them has a bet running. So in R1 Jockey A backs themself to win while Jockeys B, C and D don't try or even engage in tactics to help A win. Then in R2 Jockey B bets so A, C and D try to help B get home etc etc. After 4 races each of them cashes a big bet on their own mount

So the rule has to be that jockeys cannot bet

However back in the real world it is very hard to stop jockeys betting and rumours always abound about some jockeys being big bettors

So I guess you think stewards do nothing and in your scenario they wouldn’t see 4 jocks trying to “help” another jock win. Why do we have stewards? A jockey has a license if they do something illegal they lose their livelihood. I don’t think a quick fix would give them enough money to live off of for the rest of their life.

[jay68802]

Come on, you can't have jockeys betting on other horses in the race.

(a) No jockey shall bet on any race except through the owner of and on the horse that such jockey rides, and any jockey who shall have any interest in any race or horse or to have been engaged in any betting transaction except as permitted by this section, or to have received presents from persons other than the owner, may be punished as provided by sections 4022.12 through 4022.15 of this Article.
(b) Any person knowingly acting in the capacity of part owner or trainer of any horse in which a jockey possesses an interest or making any bet with or in behalf of any jockey except as provided in subdivision (a) of this section, or otherwise aiding or abetting in any breach of this Article, may be punished as provided by sections 4022.12 through 4022.15 of this Article.


But jockeys are allowed to bet through the owner? Learn something new every day.

[onefast99]

[QUOTE=jay68802;2340574](a) No jockey shall bet on any race except through the owner of and on the horse that such jockey rides, and any jockey who shall have any interest in any race or horse or to have been engaged in any betting transaction except as permitted by this section, or to have received presents from persons other than the owner, may be punished as provided by sections 4022.12 through 4022.15 of this Article.
(b) Any person knowingly acting in the capacity of part owner or trainer of any horse in which a jockey possesses an interest or making any bet with or in behalf of any jockey except as provided in subdivision (a) of this section, or otherwise aiding or abetting in any breach of this Article, may be punished as provided by sections 4022.12 through 4022.15 of this Article.


But jockeys are allowed to bet through the owner? Learn something new every day.

Been going on since the dawn of time and why not? I have also seen where an agent makes a considerable bet on his jock. Trainers bet as well and none of it changes the outcome of the race like some in this thread seem to think.

[Fager Fan]

Pete Rose agrees with you. I don't think it is a big problem, but it does bring into question the times riders don't bet on themselves. Obviously it wouldn't be wise to bet on yourself every race, but it still isn't a good optic.

I've always thought Rose should be in the Hall of Fame.

Betting against yourself is one thing. Betting for yourself is extra incentive to do your best to win. I've no problem with that.

[Fager Fan]

You don't want jockeys betting even on themselves to win

The problem is a group of jockeys could reach an understanding that they will help each other's bet win. So 4 jockeys might agree to help each of them cash a winning bet by not trying when one of them has a bet running. So in R1 Jockey A backs themself to win while Jockeys B, C and D don't try or even engage in tactics to help A win. Then in R2 Jockey B bets so A, C and D try to help B get home etc etc. After 4 races each of them cashes a big bet on their own mount

So the rule has to be that jockeys cannot bet

However back in the real world it is very hard to stop jockeys betting and rumours always abound about some jockeys being big bettors

They sure have to be on the right horses to make that work. I'd bet (ha) that they could try that 100 times and fail 100 times. The horses have far too much to say in the outcomes.

[Nitro]

That is the fatal flaw of the game.
No trainer, owner, rider or steward should ever be allowed to bet on ANY horses anywhere.
You cannot be a part of the game and play it as well.
It is a major conflict of interest. ......................................B.S.

Only fool ever assumes honesty.
You CANNOT allow the people who participate in the sporting event to bet on it's outcome. ANY sporting event, Anyone. Anytime.
Tom don’t feel bad, because you’re not alone when it comes to these type of rash and biased opinions. However, please keep in mind that the “Sport of Kings” was never initially intended to be a game for Outsider betting. It only evolved that way and eventually the side-betting became the mutual betting we experience today.

Someday those like yourself will come to the realization that if you’re not among the connections, you’re an Outsider playing an Insider’s game. Anyone that can’t rationalize or come to grips with that simple fact will never acquire a inclusive handle on what this game is all about. I believe that this denial may also be one of the root causes for the majority players losing.

I will also go as far to say (from a bettor’s perspective) that the game is not just about the horses. (As most so-called handicappers believe). It’s about those involved in every aspect of a horse’s racing career: their mental and physical well-being, training, freshening, and of course placement into various racing events. As far as I know these thoroughbreds are still totally dependent on their immediate connections for ALL aspects of their lives. I see no reason why those who put on the show at their expense and sweat equity should be denied the opportunity to reap any additional compensation.

Funny how so many players gripe about their personal costs of staying in this game. When in fact it’s trivial when compared to what’s involved to the care of even a single horse.

It makes sense when you consider that owners and trainers often try to cash BETS, as well as collect purses. ...........................EXACTLY!!

[Robert Fischer]

Duly noted.

I'm no expert with NYRA's program or their purse structure.

I hope it helps some of the short fields. When I see these 5 or 6 horse fields, I can only invest a brief look at the chalk to see if I'm against.

It's like betting against an additional takeout when there are 3 less horses that you would exclude who would happen to take at least some money. Pass over those races unless I see a bad favorite.

I think tomorrow, races 4-7 have four consecutive races with a decent field size. They aren't top races, but I am excited to have a four race sequence in a NY market. I can work with that. I like that it seems that they try to card the full races later in the card with the half races earlier on most days.

[Tom]

Funny how so many players gripe about their personal costs of staying in this game. When in fact it’s trivial when compared to what’s involved to the care of even a single horse.


Not my problem.
If I go to nice restaurant, should I accept cold fries because the cost of running the kitchen is so high.

I say BS right back at ya.
You guys deserve to go the road that Harness went down.

[GMB@BP]

......................................B.S.



Funny how so many players gripe about their personal costs of staying in this game. When in fact it’s trivial when compared to what’s involved to the care of even a single horse.

...........................EXACTLY!!

The cost to buy a cup of coffee is minuscule to the cost to build the shopping center. I have no idea what one has to do with the other.

[Nitro]

Not my problem.
If I go to nice restaurant, should I accept cold fries because the cost of running the kitchen is so high.

I say BS right back at ya.
You guys deserve to go the road that Harness went down.
Glad to hear that you’ve changed you’re ways! Can we also expect to start seeing some more thought provoking and encouraging posts about the game you enjoy so much?

BTW your premise about it being a “nice restaurant” is a bit flawed.
Not many decent restaurants that I’m aware of would ever serve “cold” food of any kind (unless of course its salad). Then again, if you’re a known regular and a scanty tipper who knows what you might be served. (Maybe even those defiled mashed potatoes you mentioned earlier) LOL

[Nitro]

The cost to buy a cup of coffee is minuscule to the cost to build the shopping center.
I have no idea what one has to do with the other.
I second that motion because I also haven’t a clue as to how you could possibly arrive at that correlation based on my earlier comment. I’m really not interested in a subsequent explanation either because you’re profound thoughts would probably go right over my head.

[Tom]

I’m really not interested in a subsequent explanation either because you’re profound thoughts would probably go right over my head.

Short hop.