Question about DRFs goals in the racing game.

[Stillriledup]

Who IS the DRF and can they 'make a difference'?

I was thinking about how Steve Crist is one of the head honcho's over there (or THE head honcho) and how he's one of these guys who's always writing articles that generally are written from a bettors perspective. If a track raises takeout, Crist might write an article saying its a dumb idea and explain why.

Here's my question. Lets use Los Al as an example, because they're in the news for recently raising takeout. Why can't DRF just refuse to publish Los Al's PPs? Maybe Los AL has a contract with DRF and they're forced to publish the PPs but it seems to me that DRF could make a difference if they refused to pubish PPs of tracks that raise takeout.

I mean, lets face it, if a track raises takeout, that means bettors have less money to purchase DRF products. DRF can make the statement that by cutting Los Al out, they're sort of 'force' players to wager on other tracks, tracks with lower takeout rates and thus, those players will have more money to purchase racing forms and online subscriptions.

[Dahoss9698]

How about just not betting there if you have a problem with it? We as bettors shouldn't need DRF to not publish PP's in order for us to not bet on a track we think has too high a takeout.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Who IS the DRF and can they 'make a difference'?

I was thinking about how Steve Crist is one of the head honcho's over there (or THE head honcho) and how he's one of these guys who's always writing articles that generally are written from a bettors perspective. If a track raises takeout, Crist might write an article saying its a dumb idea and explain why.

Here's my question. Lets use Los Al as an example, because they're in the news for recently raising takeout. Why can't DRF just refuse to publish Los Al's PPs? Maybe Los AL has a contract with DRF and they're forced to publish the PPs but it seems to me that DRF could make a difference if they refused to pubish PPs of tracks that raise takeout.

I mean, lets face it, if a track raises takeout, that means bettors have less money to purchase DRF products. DRF can make the statement that by cutting Los Al out, they're sort of 'force' players to wager on other tracks, tracks with lower takeout rates and thus, those players will have more money to purchase racing forms and online subscriptions.

Because Mr. Crist is in the business of selling as many papers as possible. If DRF stopped providing the Los Al PPs (assuming it does currently - I have no idea), they would essentially be encouraging people to buy the Equibase program instead. Well why can't the DRF and Equibase get together and agree not to provide PPs for Los Al? I believe that would be an illegal act of collusion.

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

Who IS the DRF and can they 'make a difference'?

I was thinking about how Steve Crist is one of the head honcho's over there (or THE head honcho) and how he's one of these guys who's always writing articles that generally are written from a bettors perspective. If a track raises takeout, Crist might write an article saying its a dumb idea and explain why.

Here's my question. Lets use Los Al as an example, because they're in the news for recently raising takeout. Why can't DRF just refuse to publish Los Al's PPs? Maybe Los AL has a contract with DRF and they're forced to publish the PPs but it seems to me that DRF could make a difference if they refused to pubish PPs of tracks that raise takeout.

I mean, lets face it, if a track raises takeout, that means bettors have less money to purchase DRF products. DRF can make the statement that by cutting Los Al out, they're sort of 'force' players to wager on other tracks, tracks with lower takeout rates and thus, those players will have more money to purchase racing forms and online subscriptions.

Interesting idea, however I don't think the DRF has the muscle it once had as their are other sources of past performances available for bettors to gain the necessary info for handicapping purposes.

The reality is that we horsplayers have a tremendous amount of clout that (if organized), could certainly impact the industry or targeted projects.

[Zman179]

Here's my question. Lets use Los Al as an example, because they're in the news for recently raising takeout. Why can't DRF just refuse to publish Los Al's PPs? Maybe Los AL has a contract with DRF and they're forced to publish the PPs but it seems to me that DRF could make a difference if they refused to pubish PPs of tracks that raise takeout.

I mean, lets face it, if a track raises takeout, that means bettors have less money to purchase DRF products. DRF can make the statement that by cutting Los Al out, they're sort of 'force' players to wager on other tracks, tracks with lower takeout rates and thus, those players will have more money to purchase racing forms and online subscriptions.

That is one of the worst ideas that I've ever heard. If I wanted to bet on Los Alamitos, your idea not only would force me to the competition, but it would also make it inconvenient for me as a horseplayer to obtain past performances thus potentially driving me away from the DRF. Not only that, but your idea would increase the amount that I would need to spend on pp's, plus make it inconvenient to get something that I could get all in one paper (on the West Coast). At the time Los Alamitos runs, for all intents and purposes, there's only Cal Expo and Australia to bet on. I don't want to be inconvenienced because some company decides to make a "statement". If I want to make a statement, I'll make it on my own.

DRF is a business, their business is to provide racing information. To do anything to the contrary goes against their business regimen.

[miesque]

The Daily Racing Form is currently owned by a venture capital firm and they typically are in the business of making money, actually finding out how to make as much as possible.

[Steve 'StatMan']

And of course, there is the future. If it comes down, stays same or goes up further, having a track shut a provider out would not be good either. They are in the business of supporting both the racing business entity (track, OTBs) as well as the racing industry members (horsemen, owners, trainers, jockeys, etc) as well as the betting customer (handicappers of all levels.)

[takeout]

DRF took Charles Town out of the form years ago. Anyone remember that?