Grade Monmouth: So far I give Monmouth a B- and here's why....

[andymays]

As someone who helped hype the Monmouth meet I am fairly happy with the action so far. Field size and low takeout on bets like the Pick 5 are great but I do think there are a couple of areas that need improvement.

The surfaces yesterday (turf and dirt) were too extreme and there really isn't a good reason for it. The main track was way too slow and the turf was way too fast. It is my understanding that they expected rain but to not put some water on both surfaces was borderline incompetent in my opinion. If anyone knows the scoop I would appreciate your take.

The gate crew appears to be having a tough time and there are way too many disruptions getting horses into the gate and way too many problems once they're loaded. Is it because most of the gate crew is a part time crew or is it something else? To be a good gate crew it takes a lot of hard work in the mornings and the off days. Since Monmouth is only three days a week could that be affecting the performance of the gate crew?

Overall I'd give Monmouth a B- so far.

Any opinions?

[jballscalls]

there are going to be problems with every meet, someone can find something to complain about for every track.

A

[Robert Goren]

Anytime they have to run a non wagering race, they have big problems, While this may have been a great meet for the horse people, It has not been all that great for the gamblers. The larger fields has been a plus, the quality has not gotten very much better. The unpredictability of the races reminds me of a poly track. From a gambler's point of view it probably D+, if they hadn't had the breakdown on Saturday, it would gotten a maybe a C. It still need show that they are interested in the gamblers. Let them do something that helps the gamblers more than it helps the horse people, then I believe it. So far everything they have done has been to help the horse people and anything that helped the better was an unintended consequence. JMO

[jballscalls]

wow, i thought the bigger fields and much bigger pools have been a positive for me as a gambler. JMO

[onefast99]

As someone who helped hype the Monmouth meet I am fairly happy with the action so far. Field size and low takeout on bets like the Pick 5 are great but I do think there are a couple of areas that need improvement.

The surfaces yesterday (turf and dirt) were too extreme and there really isn't a good reason for it. The main track was way too slow and the turf was way too fast. It is my understanding that they expected rain but to not put some water on both surfaces was borderline incompetent in my opinion. If anyone knows the scoop I would appreciate your take.

The gate crew appears to be having a tough time and there are way too many disruptions getting horses into the gate and way too many problems once they're loaded. Is it because most of the gate crew is a part time crew or is it something else? To be a good gate crew it takes a lot of hard work in the mornings and the off days. Since Monmouth is only three days a week could that be affecting the performance of the gate crew?

Overall I'd give Monmouth a B- so far.

Any opinions?
I was on the backside for the 1st 2 races, the water trucks were putting down as much as they could but the track didn't seem to be holding it well. I left the backside before the 3rd race and when I got to my seats the water trucks were still throwing down a lot of water but once again the track wasn't holding any of it. In the 5th race Indy's Forum sizzled to a 22.1 1st quarter and that was enough to cook her. Prior to that race the 1st race had some pretty quick fractions and a final time of 110.3. The main track did get slower as the day went on and hopefully with the cooler weather coming in MP will stay on top of this problem.
I give an A- to MP , they actaully need to have a day when the purses are $1m.

[cj]

B+ from me. When you compare the fields and quality and pool size to other venues around the country, I'm not sure how a bettor could complain.

[Robert Goren]

B+ from me. When you compare the fields and quality and pool size to other venues around the country, I'm not sure how a bettor could complain. When you look at takeout for the win pool which is what I bet they are nothing to jump up and down about. The NJ bred races are just plain awful when it come to quality. You couple of more horses to a race which is a plus, but there are other places which have larger fields if that what you want. Then you throw that fiasco on Saturday which reeks of we don't give damn about the gambler. I don't want hear about how it happens everywhere because it doesn't. It happens in places that don't maintain their equipment.

[andymays]

I was on the backside for the 1st 2 races, the water trucks were putting down as much as they could but the track didn't seem to be holding it well. I left the backside before the 3rd race and when I got to my seats the water trucks were still throwing down a lot of water but once again the track wasn't holding any of it. In the 5th race Indy's Forum sizzled to a 22.1 1st quarter and that was enough to cook her. Prior to that race the 1st race had some pretty quick fractions and a final time of 110.3. The main track did get slower as the day went on and hopefully with the cooler weather coming in MP will stay on top of this problem.
I give an A- to MP , they actaully need to have a day when the purses are $1m.


Thanks for the information.

Any info on the gate crew or the hard turf course?

[Stevie Belmont]

I'll give it a B+

They still need a large screen TV in the infield. Like Belmont—at least one.

Last Saturday the tote board was down most of the day. If you were outside, you were clueless about the dead heat in one of the races. No way of knowing what was going o—unless you zipped back inside and tried to find out.

Everything else has been pretty good so far. I intend to get back down this Saturday.

The racing has been great. Their website has improved.

[Vinman]

I've been very happy with the Monmouth meet thus far, particulary the field sizes.

They need to make the most of their unique product....their 50 cent Pick 5, by making it as challenging as possible, ie biggest possible fields.

Yesterday for example, the Pick 5 paid a "pretty nice" $1,648.75 with a couple of value horses in the mix. But they should have switched races 10 and 11 so that the Pick 5 would end with the competitive 9 horse turf field instead of the 6 horse field Rumson Stakes with Garrett's $3.60 Cool Bullet as everyone's "universal single" to close it out.

If the $20.00 Two Notch Road from race 11 closes out the Pick 5 (top "last out" BRIS speed figure in the field of 98) the Pick 5 pays around $9,100, give or take, by dividing the $1,648.75 actual P5 payoff by $3.60 and multiplying by $20.00.

I will give them props for placing the 2yo maiden race as the first leg in the Pick 5, so folks can follow the win pool money when placing their P5 bets.

Congrats to Two Notch Road for being the first two time winner of the meet, as he won on opening day at 8-1 with Johnny V. up. Did anyone notice that "Notch" scored at 107.20-1 in his turf debut in last year's Continental Mile at MTH?

Vinman

[Steve 'StatMan']

I think their survival, being attempted with the new efforts, is a long term attempt to be a good thing for the bettors. Whether they can get enough of a big increase to be able to pay for enhanced purses (maybe not at 2010 levels but far better than 2009 levels), well, time and betting will tell. I'm sure as heck still rooting for them. Though I am concerned about all the major tracks compacting their racing week to 3 days.

[tbwinner]

B+ for sure, it has been a great meet so far. Aside from that tote glitch and LONG delay Saturday (which happens at least once a meet for every track like that) and the surface problem as OP brought up, there really is nothing not to like about this track this year.

15% takeout on their 50-cent Pick 5 is quite nice too. I don't usually play that type of wager but when I can single a horse in a leg of that it brings a good bargain to the table.

Keep it up Monmouth.

[Steve 'StatMan']

I will add that a lot of those cheap NJ breds, while needing an increase from past years, sure don't deserve that huge amount of purse money, nor the huge $1,500 appearance fee. Plus seeing horses jumping back & forth from $5,000 NWL to an $89,000 AlwnW1x has been strange - they may not fit, but they get paid to fill the races.

[onefast99]

Thanks for the information.

Any info on the gate crew or the hard turf course?
I have no idea what is happening with the turf course, how difficult can it be to turn on the sprinklers. If it continues to be rock hard you will see it closed to turf races about two weeks away from Haskell day as the turf course is taking a beating.
When we were on the backside we watched the maintainence crew open up the track drains in anticipation of the heavy rains that never materialized.
Nothing on the gate crew, sorry.

[andymays]

I have no idea what is happening with the turf course, how difficult can it be to turn on the sprinklers. If it continues to be rock hard you will see it closed to turf races about two weeks away from Haskell day as the turf course is taking a beating.
When we were on the backside we watched the maintainence crew open up the track drains in anticipation of the heavy rains that never materialized.
Nothing on the gate crew, sorry.
Thanks again. :ThmbUp:

[onefast99]

I will add that a lot of those cheap NJ breds, while needing an increase from past years, sure don't deserve that huge amount of purse money, nor the huge $1,500 appearance fee. Plus seeing horses jumping back & forth from $5,000 NWL to an $89,000 AlwnW1x has been strange - they may not fit, but they get paid to fill the races.
The majority race approximately 7 months out of the year, and are laid up at local farms the other 5. Don't you think they have as much right at large purses as any of the other horses running? They are the NJ breds and every decent track in America today allocates additional funds to their state breds.

[lamboguy]

monmouth meet is great for bettor, people who love horses, owners and trainers, but bad for the state of new jersey.

[gm10]

As someone who helped hype the Monmouth meet I am fairly happy with the action so far. Field size and low takeout on bets like the Pick 5 are great but I do think there are a couple of areas that need improvement.

The surfaces yesterday (turf and dirt) were too extreme and there really isn't a good reason for it. The main track was way too slow and the turf was way too fast. It is my understanding that they expected rain but to not put some water on both surfaces was borderline incompetent in my opinion. If anyone knows the scoop I would appreciate your take.

The gate crew appears to be having a tough time and there are way too many disruptions getting horses into the gate and way too many problems once they're loaded. Is it because most of the gate crew is a part time crew or is it something else? To be a good gate crew it takes a lot of hard work in the mornings and the off days. Since Monmouth is only three days a week could that be affecting the performance of the gate crew?

Overall I'd give Monmouth a B- so far.

Any opinions?

I make it a big A. Can't say that there is any meet that interests me more than MTH right now. The Belmont Stakes was the perfect illustration of their current meet (yawn). Colonial Downs is always good as well.

[andymays]

They have some issues to address and problems to fix if they want to change racing as we know it.

[andtheyreoff]

When you look at takeout for the win pool which is what I bet they are nothing to jump up and down about. The NJ bred races are just plain awful when it come to quality. You couple of more horses to a race which is a plus, but there are other places which have larger fields if that what you want. Then you throw that fiasco on Saturday which reeks of we don't give damn about the gambler. I don't want hear about how it happens everywhere because it doesn't. It happens in places that don't maintain their equipment.

Geez, this becoming more commonplace than ghostyapper complaining about Rachel's fan club. "JMO"

[ronsmac]

B+ or A-.

[thespaah]

When you look at takeout for the win pool which is what I bet they are nothing to jump up and down about. The NJ bred races are just plain awful when it come to quality. You couple of more horses to a race which is a plus, but there are other places which have larger fields if that what you want. Then you throw that fiasco on Saturday which reeks of we don't give damn about the gambler. I don't want hear about how it happens everywhere because it doesn't. It happens in places that don't maintain their equipment.
Let us know next time you make a mistake that inconveniences others.

[Zman179]

I gave Monmouth a B+, because the handles have doubled and the field sizes have grown. It is true that some of the races are cheap, but most horseplayers would rather quantity over quality. That's why Beulah's signal is popular during the winter.

[alhattab]

I'll give it a B+

They still need a large screen TV in the infield. Like Belmont—at least one.

Last Saturday the tote board was down most of the day. If you were outside, you were clueless about the dead heat in one of the races. No way of knowing what was going o—unless you zipped back inside and tried to find out.

Everything else has been pretty good so far. I intend to get back down this Saturday.

The racing has been great. Their website has improved.

The absence of some late 20th-century media is a real sore spot. This is a track that has more people in the picnic area- on the track but in upper stretch- than anywhere else, but it can't find the resources to throw a big screen or two out there? It is a joke.

My friends and I bitch about it constantly. Supposedly Monmouth was going to get the old screens from Giants Stadium. The one from a few years back was allegedly the one from Tampa Bay Downs. One of my buddies accosted Kulina, who said they couldn't afford the $100k it took to install the screens. I mean Jesus Christ they ballyhoo the "$50 million meet" but they can't scrape up $100k so people know what's going on? They'd make it back in handle and advertising for Christ's sake.

[cj]

When you look at takeout for the win pool which is what I bet they are nothing to jump up and down about. The NJ bred races are just plain awful when it come to quality. You couple of more horses to a race which is a plus, but there are other places which have larger fields if that what you want. Then you throw that fiasco on Saturday which reeks of we don't give damn about the gambler. I don't want hear about how it happens everywhere because it doesn't. It happens in places that don't maintain their equipment.

So what tracks, exactly, should get an A? Every tracks runs lots of crappy race, whether they are state breds or bad maiden claimers or NW2lt races. There takeout is middle of the road. At least with big fields it is easier to overcome.

The tote thing does happen most places. It happened once, but I'm willing to see if it will be a problem again. Hell, it happened at the Preakness one year.

What I will complain about is they still don't give fractions for those 5.5f turf races. There is no excuse for that crap today. Suffolk doesn't give fractions because nobody cares about Suffolk, but good tracks are supposed to have this info.

[philcski]

Anytime they have to run a non wagering race, they have big problems, While this may have been a great meet for the horse people, It has not been all that great for the gamblers. The larger fields has been a plus, the quality has not gotten very much better. The unpredictability of the races reminds me of a poly track. From a gambler's point of view it probably D+, if they hadn't had the breakdown on Saturday, it would gotten a maybe a C. It still need show that they are interested in the gamblers. Let them do something that helps the gamblers more than it helps the horse people, then I believe it. So far everything they have done has been to help the horse people and anything that helped the better was an unintended consequence. JMO

You don't get it. Reducing takeout obviously has merit, but it isn't the only thing that is important. Unfortunately, a ton of the advantage to the player in a takeout reduction gets removed by breakage.
Here's a table of what the win pool would pay (after breakage) with a 14% takeout instead of a 17% takeout.

17% 14%
$4.00 $4.00
$4.20 $4.20
$4.40 $4.40
$4.60 $4.60
$4.80 $4.80
$5.00 $5.00
$5.60 $5.80
$6.00 $6.20
$7.00 $7.20
$8.00 $8.20
$9.00 $9.20
$10.00 $10.20
$12.00 $12.40
$14.00 $14.40
$16.00 $16.40
$18.00 $18.60
$20.00 $20.60
$22.00 $22.60


On top of that issue, you have the problem of 90% of players not paying attention to takeout when they play simulcast. So the pick 4 that a guy hits at Monmouth at 15% takeout that pays a $1,133 instead of $1,000 at a 25% takeout, gets reinvested in trifectas at Penn National at their usury 31% rate. What benefit does that do for Monmouth?

[Robert Goren]

They have breakage at all levels. 14% is still too way too high. Anybody thinks that having a couple extra horses in its races will save it is bonkers. If the tracks don't wake up get the takeout for all bets below 9% they will all close, I don't care how many VLTs have or how much money they get from the casinos. At the takeout they charge these days there just to few winners. The only people playing the game today are the 2% who are big winners and the people who are hooked. Even the people who are hooked are looking other things or they are going overseas to Betting Exchanges. It may not not a be flood, but it is at least a slow drip.

How much of MTH's handle is money from new betters? How much is what they have gotten from other tracks? Race tracks are not going to survive stealing customers from each other forever. You look at the big handles and you will see that they from the tracks who have the lowest takeouts in the win pool. California has small fields and lower takeout, but they get more handle than places with higher handle and bigger fields. Horse people hate to hear this but bigger purses is not going save anyplace for very long. As more places get slots, the racinos will get less money from their slots and less money to "waste" on horse racing. It is business model that can't work in the long run. The sad part is I see posters on here who know that defending places like Monmouth park.

[Robert Goren]

On top of that issue, you have the problem of 90% of players not paying attention to takeout when they play simulcast. So the pick 4 that a guy hits at Monmouth at 15% takeout that pays a $1,133 instead of $1,000 at a 25% takeout, gets reinvested in trifectas at Penn National at their usury 31% rate. What benefit does that do for Monmouth? While they may or may not know it, but over time they realize that they are not doing as well at a certian track. I will say that it happens a lot sooner for win betters. If all you do is "splatter" in the pick 4 pools, Mth is not that bad a place to play. But if you wonder into the Win pools that extra 1% or 2% will hurt you pretty bad and I don't care how many horses they have in the race. My guess is that each extra horse in a race is worth 0.25% of takeout for the win better. It is worth something, but not all that much. No, before you ask, I don't have any proof to back that up. It just comes looking at the type of horses I bet and how much better the odds I am getting. The public seems to find my horses no matter how much they try to confused them with a couple extra also rans.

[senortout]

For my purposes, I prefer quality over quantity, hands down. Hollywood Park may have short fields but most of them appear fitter and ready to run. The jockey colony there is also very good. The few tosses are recognizable of course, but even so, many of these manage to compete and win their share @ Golden Gate or the fair circuit.

Of course, I have nothing stats-wise to substantiate my beliefs, but I do know I enjoy the type of racing presented there.

Also, I have consistently enjoyed greater success there, though my roi is still a point low for overall success.

Played Monmouth the first two days of the meet, I may try again this weekend,but something tells me I've already seen enough.

[KingChas]

Anytime they have to run a non wagering race, they have big problems. JMO

Agreed Robert,
how can you be running 2-3 days a week and not have everything pm'd(Preventive maintenanced) or a back up plan? Unreal

[andicap]

A.

I would admit that my grade might be lower if I were at the track instead of betting from home or a simulcast. So some of the complaints offered by the on-track players just aren't relevant to me, and I will overlook the other wrinkles as long as they remain isolated.

You should grade on a curve and there's nothing out there today in the U.S that compares with what Monmouth is doing as far as purses, field sizes. Quality might be better at Keeneland, but overall I'd grade Mth a bit higher. I also give them enormous credit for innovation -- trying something original --- and getting all the agreements in place with the state, horsemen, etc.

To me, complaining about the takeout is spitting in the wind, if the percentage isn't overly high. Sure lowering takeout would be good for the sport -- keeping more money in people's pockets which they would recycle into the betting pools.

If you don't like the takeout, bet the NFL or NBA where the "vig" is lower. The takeout is what it is and it varies enough from state to state that you can vote with your wallet/pocketbook or go offshore. (I agree Pa. is highway robbery so I avoid it.)

It ain't never going to be 10%, so get over it and focus on things that actually stand a chance of changing. And you can't put all the blame on the tracks as they are not the only entity that affects takeout.

As far more tracks going to three days a week, well considering the weak field sizes in many races, one of two things have to happen:

1. More tracks close so field sizes and purses improve at the remaining ones.
2. Existing tracks race less often, like the Mth model. Maybe not three days a week, but perhaps four.

Finally, I would congratulate MTH horsemen for going along with the idea of less racing even though it goes against all of their previous inclinations.

I have little sympathy for horsemen who fight tooth and nail the need to cut back the number of races in this country because they would be forced out of the business. Tough luck.

This is America, land of brutal capitalism.You make it or you don't. In every industry the little guy is taking it on the chin and consolidation rules. Why should racing be exempt from the laws of economics? Why should training horses be different than say, farming, where the family farmer has all but disappeared?

Running more races than the laws of economics prudently dictate equates to horsemen receiving an unfair handout from the state. It is inefficient. It must end for the sport to thrive.

[olddaddy]

When a world record (in a starter handicap) and a track record (allowance race) are attained in the same day on the grass course, something is wrong. They have all this money for purses , how about using some to water the grass course.

[Robert Goren]

B+ for sure, it has been a great meet so far. Aside from that tote glitch and LONG delay Saturday (which happens at least once a meet for every track like that) and the surface problem as OP brought up, there really is nothing not to like about this track this year.

15% takeout on their 50-cent Pick 5 is quite nice too. I don't usually play that type of wager but when I can single a horse in a leg of that it brings a good bargain to the table.

Keep it up Monmouth.That is bull crap, It happpens one in a blue to tracks don't give care and try to get by cheap like Penn or Pim. When was the last time it happen at Belmont or Santa Anitia or Hollywood Park or even lower tracks like Oaklawn or FG. If going to make excuses, at least don't make up the facts .

[onefast99]

That is bull crap, It happpens one in a blue to tracks don't give care and try to get by cheap like Penn or Pim. When was the last time it happen at Belmont or Santa Anitia or Hollywood Park or even lower tracks like Oaklawn or FG. If going to make excuses, at least don't make up the facts .
Relax, you act as if someone ran over your cat. MP has a few bugs to work out and the tote system is one of them. Give the track a chance to fix this problem.

[philcski]

While they may or may not know it, but over time they realize that they are not doing as well at a certian track. I will say that it happens a lot sooner for win betters. If all you do is "splatter" in the pick 4 pools, Mth is not that bad a place to play. But if you wonder into the Win pools that extra 1% or 2% will hurt you pretty bad and I don't care how many horses they have in the race. My guess is that each extra horse in a race is worth 0.25% of takeout for the win better. It is worth something, but not all that much. No, before you ask, I don't have any proof to back that up. It just comes looking at the type of horses I bet and how much better the odds I am getting. The public seems to find my horses no matter how much they try to confused them with a couple extra also rans.

So the "hopeless" extra horse(s) that you can throw out are all 400-1?

I'll ask you again because you didn't answer me before, if I gave you the option of 3 extra horses in a race, each 30-1, that you could confidently toss out, or lowering the WPS pool from 17% to 12%, what would provide a better return?

Actually, those that would "do better" or "do worse" at a specific track would probably notice it quicker in pools OTHER than WPS, because the spreads are much steeper. The highest WPS takeout is AZ with 20% and the lowest is California at 15.5%. The highest trifecta is PA with 31% and the lowest is Kentucky with 19%. You notice pretty quickly when a trifecta pays $250 instead of $350.

[garyscpa]

Other than the non-race, the only problems I had with them were:

1) A late scratch on the 1 horse in the eighth race, I think, on Sunday. He was scratched at the starting gate, they showed them unsaddle the horse, and it seemed like the race started in less than 20 seconds. No time to change tickets.

2) Some races seem to be filled with horses that are only there for the appearance money. They don't appear to have a chance in the race.

[Robert Goren]

So the "hopeless" extra horse(s) that you can throw out are all 400-1?

I'll ask you again because you didn't answer me before, if I gave you the option of 3 extra horses in a race, each 30-1, that you could confidently toss out, or lowering the WPS pool from 17% to 12%, what would provide a better return?

Actually, those that would "do better" or "do worse" at a specific track would probably notice it quicker in pools OTHER than WPS, because the spreads are much steeper. The highest WPS takeout is AZ with 20% and the lowest is California at 15.5%. The highest trifecta is PA with 31% and the lowest is Kentucky with 19%. You notice pretty quickly when a trifecta pays $250 instead of $350.I thought I made it clear I would take the 12% takeout. The races where there would be 3 horses that are 30-1 with no chance are pretty few. I have been around this game to know there no sure things and that includes sure thing losers. Most of the time at least one of the extra horses has a decent(10% +)chance of winning. The race you describe pops up about once in two days at a track. The 12% is in every race. There some value in having extra 3 horses in the race but it doesn't even come close to a 5% cut in the win pool. Now people who are large enough betters and live in places where they can get a good rebate, then there are more races that the extra 3 horses are a help. But since I am nether, I have to try to find decent odds on the horse I like. People who bet at the track or simulcast center don't get rebates either (for the most part). I have I no idea how the extra horses effect people who bet exotics with or without rebates. You are obviously not a win a better or you would not be asking this question. Once you understand that win better usually only bet 1 horse a race, you would get the idea. I am constantly amazed at the reasons people come up with not to cut the takeout. :bang:

[Stevie Belmont]

There should be a big screen out there somewhere. It should face directly towards the granstand, so everyone can see it. At least you can see the odds and other stuff, racem warm ups, paddock and so on. You can't see all the odds on the tote board. The bottom numbers are blocked by the rail.

The people in the picnic don't see all that much. I think they did something there. I think they lowered the tote board a bit. I can se the horses on the backstretch now when I'm by the winner's circle.

They also need more betting machines. I think with more betting machines, it's easier to get a bet in when you need to. Waiting in those long teller lines is for the birds. I always thought they should cut the teller staff 50% to 60%. Instal more machines and have peope right there to help newbies explain how to use the. It's pretty simple.

And another thing, before long the machines they have now will not work. The machines have lost the touch sense on many of them in the meadowlands, and some at Monmouth are having the same issues. It might be time to switch to the NY machines.









The absence of some late 20th-century media is a real sore spot. This is a track that has more people in the picnic area- on the track but in upper stretch- than anywhere else, but it can't find the resources to throw a big screen or two out there? It is a joke.

My friends and I bitch about it constantly. Supposedly Monmouth was going to get the old screens from Giants Stadium. The one from a few years back was allegedly the one from Tampa Bay Downs. One of my buddies accosted Kulina, who said they couldn't afford the $100k it took to install the screens. I mean Jesus Christ they ballyhoo the "$50 million meet" but they can't scrape up $100k so people know what's going on? They'd make it back in handle and advertising for Christ's sake.