Subsidized horses not participating at Hollywood

[rwwupl]

Interesting statement from the CHRB meeting 6-5-09:

Hollywood Park Racing Secretary Martin Panza
partially attributed the shortage to the poor economy and reduced investments in horses. Panza said
the number of horses working at Santa Anita and Hollywood Park in preparation for races is around
1,600, or about 400 horses below normal. Panza indicated that although 4,000 horses are in
subsidized training facilities in Southern California, including the host track, about half of those
horses are not actively participating in the Hollywood Park race meet


WHY NOT!

Why should the pari-mutuel players subsidize barn space,etc. for horses that do not participate?

Should the TOC have a policy that encourages their membership to race if they are subsidized for facilities? P.S.,The TOC is subsidized by take out too.

Should the track enforce their long time policy if you get stall space you promise your horse is race ready and will participate or you will have to pay for the facilities or asked to leave?

Maybe it would not be so difficult to lower takeout rates to the pari-mutuel participants if they were not subsidizing so many people who could get along without it. Lower rates might mean more customers.

[dutchboy]

Another website has an article about the 60% decline in the claiming of horses at Hollywood. The decline appears to have started with the increase of sales tax required on the price of the claim to almost 10%. The article also mentions that if a horse is claimed and immediately shipped out of state for a certain number of days the sales tax does not have to be paid on the claim. A lot of the horses shipped out of Ca do not return.

[fmolf]

Another website has an article about the 60% decline in the claiming of horses at Hollywood. The decline appears to have started with the increase of sales tax required on the price of the claim to almost 10%. The article also mentions that if a horse is claimed and immediately shipped out of state for a certain number of days the sales tax does not have to be paid on the claim. A lot of the horses shipped out of Ca do not return.
the reason why is probably a bit complicated,but i believe it has to do with a combination of the synthetic surfaces,the reduced purses...and the increased purses at other venues. Their also may be less pressure from the racing secretaries at the other tracks,because their is no need to run just to fill races.This would make it easier for a trainer to establish a training regimen and stick to it.once they do leave because of the sales tax on claims they find out how nice life can be outside the socal circuit.

[andymays]

Interesting statement from the CHRB meeting 6-5-09:




WHY NOT!

Why should the pari-mutuel players subsidize barn space,etc. for horses that do not participate?

Should the TOC have a policy that encourages their membership to race if they are subsidized for facilities? P.S.,The TOC is subsidized by take out too.

Should the track enforce their long time policy if you get stall space you promise your horse is race ready and will participate or you will have to pay for the facilities or asked to leave?

Maybe it would not be so difficult to lower takeout rates to the pari-mutuel participants if they were not subsidizing so many people who could get along without it. Lower rates might mean more customers.


You make too many good points for them to take you seriously.

Keep punching and always answer the bell!

[macguy]

This was something that I always had trouble understanding.

You would think that horses on the SoCal circuit would run on the circuit year round. That's why I can never really figure out why Hollywood has such a hard time filling races when Santa Anita doesn't seem to have as much of a problem, perhaps the last few years being exceptions.

With all the 1000s of horses in training in California, why is it the meets end up with such short fields?

Are there that many trainers that are training on the California backstretches and shipping out to other venues to race? I don't see how if this is happening, the trainers are continually allotted stalls year after year?

Do trainers purposely skip the Hollywood meet, and just wait for the Santa Anita winter meet and Oak Tree?

You would think with the circuit set up the way it is, any track that's running in SoCal would have enough horses to put on a decent meet? :confused:

[andymays]

This was something that I always had trouble understanding.

You would think that horses on the SoCal circuit would run on the circuit year round. That why I can never really figure out why Hollywood has such a hard time filling races when Santa Anita doesn't seem to have as much of a problem, perhaps the last few years being exceptions.

With all the 1000s of horses in training in California, why is it the meets end up with such short fields?

Are there that many trainers that are training on the California backstretches and shipping out to other venues to race? I don't see how if this is happening, the trainers are continually allotted stalls year after year?

Do trainers purposely skip the Hollywood meet, and just wait for the Santa Anita winter meet and Oak Tree?
You would think with the circuit set up the way it is, any track that's running in SoCal would have enough horses to put on a decent meet? :confused:


Many skip Hollywood to run at Del Mar. Most of the Owners like Del Mar and the social thing that goes on there. Many owners don't like going to Hollywood Park.

[Imriledup]

Interesting statement from the CHRB meeting 6-5-09:




WHY NOT!

Why should the pari-mutuel players subsidize barn space,etc. for horses that do not participate?

Should the TOC have a policy that encourages their membership to race if they are subsidized for facilities? P.S.,The TOC is subsidized by take out too.

Should the track enforce their long time policy if you get stall space you promise your horse is race ready and will participate or you will have to pay for the facilities or asked to leave?

Maybe it would not be so difficult to lower takeout rates to the pari-mutuel participants if they were not subsidizing so many people who could get along without it. Lower rates might mean more customers.

There you go again, making sense.

I've been preaching this for the longest time now...its not hard to know who the 'usual suspects' are, i'm sure Panza and his crew know which trainers have a barn ful of horses that seldom actually race...its not rocket science.

[Robert Goren]

Some trainers always have a reason on why a horse is just always 3 weeks from being able to run. Just ask any owner. :bang:

[macguy]

Many skip Hollywood to run at Del Mar. Most of the Owners like Del Mar and the social thing that goes on there. Many owners don't like going to Hollywood Park.


I suppose that's the problem, today's horses aren't good/sound enough to run at both meets.

50 years ago when horses were racing WAY more frequently, I suppose you only needed stabling for 1000 horses to run a meet 5 or 6 days a week with reasonably full fields.

I guess if horses are only going to run every 5 or 6 weeks on average you are going to need a much, much larger horse population to fill a decent card at any meet.

[ryesteve]

What incentive does a trainer have to keep horses in the barn if they ARE ready to race? I guess I'm missing something, because I would assume that if the horse wasn't "actively participating", it's because they're legitimately not able to, for whatever reason.

[Cadillakin]

What incentive does a trainer have to keep horses in the barn if they ARE ready to race? I guess I'm missing something, because I would assume that if the horse wasn't "actively participating", it's because they're legitimately not able to, for whatever reason.
I don't think there is any such incentive... IMO, (Most) horse owners simply cannot afford to keep the horse in the barn without good reason.

It's always been a little perplexing to me... that we would come out of Santa Anita with 9-10 horse fields.. and days later, we would be at Hollywood with 5-6 horse fields.

For those of you new to California wagering and horse racing.. It used to be that after Del Mar ended in September, a few horses went over to Pomona to race at the fair. The majority rested. And while they rested, so did the horse players. By the time the Santa Anita Winter Meet rolled around, we were all raring to go.. It was a festive occasion, almost celebratory. Opening Day at Santa Anita was like Christmas for the kids.. It was what we waited for, year after year.. Our Derby horses developed at that meet.. We watched our youngsters with keen interest, hoping at least a few would be good enough to make an impact in the Triple Crown Races.. We had the Strub Series for the newly turned 4 year olds - a great 3 race series...

Everything else, all other meets, were secondary to that winter meet. The racing at Hollywood that followed was seemingly of much less import to the fans and owners.. Nevertheless, it was still racing at a very high level and we followed along... and went on to Del Mar when Hollywood finished up.

I think - but I have no proof of it.. the sparsity of horses at the Hollywood summer meet began a few years after California went to year round racing... after Oak Tree and the Hollywood Fall Meet filled dates in the autumn months. I think the stables realized that the horses couldn't last out the year without resting... Year round racing was/is unsustainable for the athletes. I don't think anybody definitively knew that until we actually attempted to do it...But the tracks and taxing entities needed the revenue, so onward we went.

Prior, those Autumn dates were used by most stables for needed R&R. This phenomenon - the drop of entries at the Hollywood Summer Meet has been going on for a couple decades - long before the erosion of the fan base.

It's nothing new.

[jballscalls]

i thought So. Cal had one of the lowest takeout rates already?

[rrbauer]

I think - but I have no proof of it.. the sparsity of horses at the Hollywood summer meet began a few years after California went to year round racing... after Oak Tree and the Hollywood Fall Meet filled dates in the autumn months. I think the stables realized that the horses couldn't last out the year without resting... Year round racing was/is unsustainable for the athletes. I don't think anybody definitively knew that until we actually attempted to do it...But the tracks and taxing entities needed the revenue, so onward we went.




Spot on. When I was living there, I would quit playing Hollywood about the beginning of July because that's when shortfielditis set in. It gave me two-three weeks off before Del Mar. Now, I quit playing Hollywood before it opens. Only the fall meet and the turf racing are of interest. Also, the old Hollywood dirt surface had some extreme bias' when the spring meet opened that you could take to the bank. That's all gone now. And, if you recall you seldom saw horses wire a turf route field before they went to the tifgreen bermuda grass (putting-green stuff). There was always a calvary charge when they turned for home.

They're racing themselves right into oblivion.

[rrbauer]

i thought So. Cal had one of the lowest takeout rates already?


They do on WPS bets. Exotics, their rates are average.

[macguy]

I don't think there is any such incentive... IMO, (Most) horse owners simply cannot afford to keep the horse in the barn without good reason.

It's always been a little perplexing to me... that we would come out of Santa Anita with 9-10 horse fields.. and days later, we would be at Hollywood with 5-6 horse fields.

For those of you new to California wagering and horse racing.. It used to be that after Del Mar ended in September, a few horses went over to Pomona to race at the fair. The majority rested. And while they rested, so did the horse players. By the time the Santa Anita Winter Meet rolled around, we were all raring to go.. It was a festive occasion, almost celebratory. Opening Day at Santa Anita was like Christmas for the kids.. It was what we waited for, year after year.. Our Derby horses developed at that meet.. We watched our youngsters with keen interest, hoping at least a few would be good enough to make an impact in the Triple Crown Races.. We had the Strub Series for the newly turned 4 year olds - a great 3 race series...

Everything else, all other meets, were secondary to that winter meet. The racing at Hollywood that followed was seemingly of much less import to the fans and owners.. Nevertheless, it was still racing at a very high level and we followed along... and went on to Del Mar when Hollywood finished up.

I think - but I have no proof of it.. the sparsity of horses at the Hollywood summer meet began a few years after California went to year round racing... after Oak Tree and the Hollywood Fall Meet filled dates in the autumn months. I think the stables realized that the horses couldn't last out the year without resting... Year round racing was/is unsustainable for the athletes. I don't think anybody definitively knew that until we actually attempted to do it...But the tracks and taxing entities needed the revenue, so onward we went.

Prior, those Autumn dates were used by most stables for needed R&R. This phenomenon - the drop of entries at the Hollywood Summer Meet has been going on for a couple decades - long before the erosion of the fan base.

It's nothing new.


That makes a lot of sense.
When did SoCal start going year 'round?

[Sid]

50 years ago when horses were racing WAY more frequently, I suppose you only needed stabling for 1000 horses to run a meet 5 or 6 days a week with reasonably full fields.
Nobody much cared about full fields until gimmick wagering came on the scene, which was only yesterday on the time line.

Old paradigm: Go to the racetrack, find a horse to back in the win pool (keeping in mind that the $2 minimum wager was the norm before Henry Ford stunned to world by offering workers $5 a day wages).

New paradigm: Stay home, play on your computer, try to knock down a superfecta pool on a 10-cent bet, hit the "all" button often.

Once upon a time, and again not so long ago, the universal bitch from horseplayers was "Too many maiden races, not enough open claimers, and where are the allowance fields anyway?" Nowadays it's: "Send in the plowhorses . . . just make sure the gate is full."

Some hyperbole there. But not that much.

[Cadillakin]

That makes a lot of sense.
When did SoCal start going year 'round?
Oak Tree Racing started in 1969.. I just looked it up on the net... I think Hollywood Park followed a few years later..

It was like.. Ok, Santa Anita has extra dates.. now we at HollyPark need some too.

[senortout]

Pretty funny occurrence here, and occurs in many posts. Yet no one seems to notice whats happening!

Lately, at the elimination of (ONE) day of racing per week, field sizes at Hollywood are noticeably larger....

Why has no one mentioned this, it seems to fit with the thread a bit?

senortout

[Cadillakin]

Pretty funny occurrence here, and occurs in many posts. Yet no one seems to notice whats happening!

Lately, at the elimination of (ONE) day of racing per week, field sizes at Hollywood are noticeably larger....

Why has no one mentioned this, it seems to fit with the thread a bit?

senortout
The larger field size wasn't lost on me. Panza said he needed to cut a day out of the racing week to fill the races and get respectable sized fields..

And he did it..

[senortout]

Thanks for the reply, Cadillakin I thought I was living in a vacuum for a moment and it was eerie!

I have always enjoyed so-cal racing. I live in Ohio and the quality of racing here, is really, really bad. I loved going to Thistledown in the old days but those days are gone. I think the beginning of the end was some years back when mgmt. promised a turf course and never delivered. They chose to enclose the grandstand and things of that nature instead. The improvements were good but not enough to sustain the weak form of competition they provided their customers. Of course, purses can only be described as mediocre. In the old days Thistledown horses used to go down to Waterford Park and raid those cheap races, now its the other way around for sure.

It doesn't take much to make my day, but it ain't happening at Ohio tracks!

[LottaKash]

Too many racing meets going simultaneously.....Too many races, and not enough of new owners and horses....Something has got to give, and it seems that the tracks are for "every man for himself", and won't consider drastic new ways to comnbat the slow death of horse racing....If nothing changes, it will only get worse, I think.....GREED..

I remember looking forward to a "New Meet"....now it is "old-meat", day after day...:(

sadly,

[rrbauer]

Oak Tree Racing started in 1969.. I just looked it up on the net... I think Hollywood Park followed a few years later..

It was like.. Ok, Santa Anita has extra dates.. now we at HollyPark need some too.

That's right. Horse owners had been clamboring for more race dates so they wouldn't have to ship out of town for fall racing. They justified Oak Tree in terms of getting the race dates by saying the proceeds would go to charity (after everyone else got paid, of course).

[andymays]

That's right. Horse owners had been clamboring for more race dates so they wouldn't have to ship out of town for fall racing. They justified Oak Tree in terms of getting the race dates by saying the proceeds would go to charity (after everyone else got paid, of course).


I don't think the extra Hollywood meet started until the late 70's or early 80's but I'm not positive.