Where are all the "new fans?"

[CBedo]

Much love to Zenyatta, but the argument that she has brought in hordes of new fans seems specious at best. Maybe people who woudln't have otherwise watched any racing on tv possibly watched the BC or a race or two more because of her, but it doesn't seem the conversion rate to becoming a fan actually was there (I guess you could say "not yet" if you're trying to be optimistic?)

Here's the Google Trends for the search term "horse racing" in the United Staes. The first is long term, the second is the last 12 months.

http://grab.by/8cfm
http://grab.by/8cft

[BluegrassProf]

Driving up the Cal racing handle, obviously.

[FenceBored]

Driving up the Cal racing handle, obviously.

Shh, you're not supposed to connect those dots.

[PhantomOnTour]

There sure were a lot of new names on this board that joined in December, but that was probably just to vote for Zenyatta. We'll see how many newbies actually play the game.

[Tom]

Maybe they replaced all the old geezers who died off over the holidays.

[CBedo]

There sure were a lot of new names on this board that joined in December, but that was probably just to vote for Zenyatta. We'll see how many newbies actually play the game.There did seem to be a surge in new PA members (would have to ask P.A. I guess?), but of the ones that are still posting, I think they were already horse players who just found the board. I could be wrong, but I don't see too many brand new handicappers.

[Bruddah]

Maybe they replaced all the old geezers who died off over the holidays.

Hey!! I resemble those remarks. We old geezers don't use the D word in polite conversation. :lol:

[Horseplayersbet.com]

This just helps prove that horse racing is about gambling and not about entertainment.

Where were the commercials during the Breeders Cup that had winning Horseplayers telling people they should start betting and maybe they can be just as successful?

[saratoga guy]

... but the argument that she has brought in hordes of new fans seems specious at best.

Who made that argument?

Certainly Zenyatta - with her Oprah magazine profile and her appearance on 60 Minutes - raised awareness for the sport -- and that can only be a good thing.

But I don't know that anyone expected Zenyatta to bring horse-racing to NFL-popularity levels...

This kind of stuff comes in increments.

[Stillriledup]

This just helps prove that horse racing is about gambling and not about entertainment.

Where were the commercials during the Breeders Cup that had winning Horseplayers telling people they should start betting and maybe they can be just as successful?

They were too busy making poker commercials showing hot busty 19 year old women have suddenly turned into professional poker players over night.

[CBedo]

Who made that argument?

Certainly Zenyatta - with her Oprah magazine profile and her appearance on 60 Minutes - raised awareness for the sport -- and that can only be a good thing.

But I don't know that anyone expected Zenyatta to bring horse-racing to NFL-popularity levels...

This kind of stuff comes in increments.I've heard that argument from many (including the talking heads at TVG) as to why Zenyatta should be horse of the year, and I've heard that argument from those who don't think Zenyatta should be HOY ("Just because she has brought in thousands of new fans, doesn't mean she should win horse of the year." -- or similar reasoning).

And as far as her even raising awareness, it seems to have only been a temporary effect.

[Stillriledup]

It takes many, many years for a new fan to evolve into a serious bettor.

[CBedo]

It takes many, many years for a new fan to evolve into a serious bettor.1) If that's true, then racing is screwed since they haven't had many new fans in the last 30 years, lol.

2) I don't think that's true in some cases anyway. I know one person who had never laid eyes on a thoroughbred 2.5 years ago, today he bets about 10,000 a month.

[thaskalos]

It takes many, many years for a new fan to evolve into a serious bettor.Not true...

It takes many, many years for a serious bettor to learn how to stay "alive" for the long haul...:)

[Robert Fischer]

young people I talk to don't get it.

and they're right.

[Stillriledup]

Not true...

It takes many, many years for a serious bettor to learn how to stay "alive" for the long haul...:)

That's also true.

[DeanT]

C,

"They" say it takes six years and sixty million to brand something (or to rebrand). One year does not cut it, nor does two.

Think "go daddy". They ran a commercial for the Super bowl in 04 and if they ran only one, you get a spike and everyone forgets them. But when they do it for six years, the brand is well known.

We need about ten more Zenyatta's. It's asking a lot.

[Stillriledup]

C,

"They" say it takes six years and sixty million to brand something (or to rebrand). One year does not cut it, nor does two.

Think "go daddy". They ran a commercial for the Super bowl in 04 and if they ran only one, you get a spike and everyone forgets them. But when they do it for six years, the brand is well known.

We need about ten more Zenyatta's. It's asking a lot.

In order to get ten more Zenyatta's, we need ten more lifetimes.

;)

[thaskalos]

In order to get ten more Zenyatta's, we need ten more lifetimes.

;)She sure was something, wasn't she, SRU? :)

[CBedo]

She sure was something, wasn't she, SRU? :)amost good enough to be HOY this year! ;) (Hijacking my own thread. :bang: )

[thaskalos]

amost good enough to be HOY this year! ;) (Hijacking my own thread. :bang: )I don't know...she may win it yet.

The voting "experts" seem evenly divided...

[CBedo]

I don't know...she may win it yet.

The voting "experts" seem evenly divided...(Continuing the hijacking) I would not vote for her, but I think she wins it.

[BluegrassProf]

I don't know...she may win it yet.

The voting "experts" seem evenly divided...Ever pay attention to national politics? As ever, a split vote rarely indicates split rationality.

Just a thought. Hope 'n' change, baby! :ThmbUp:

[thaskalos]

Ever pay attention to national politics? NO!

I get aggravated enough following THIS game...:)

[Stillriledup]

She sure was something, wasn't she, SRU? :)

We may never again in our lifetimes see a horse win 19 in a row while competing at A racetracks.

[thaskalos]

We may never again in our lifetimes see a horse win 19 in a row while competing at A racetracks.You can bet on it...not even on "plastic", or on the turf.

[saratoga guy]

Just because she has brought in thousands of new fans...

She probably did - but how do you quantify that?

...And how do you define "new fans"?

I'm willing to look at new fans as, for example, a retired couple that lives in an area without a racetrack nearby but they got caught up in the Zenyatta frenzy. They spend their winter in Florida and decide this year to make the one-hour drive to Tampa Bay Downs a couple of times during the season.

..Or the 25YO woman in my neck of the woods who - because of the Zenyatta publicity - decides to make a couple of trips to Saratoga this summer.

New fans don't make an overnight conversion from having little or no interest in the sport to 3-times-a-week players with a $200 bankroll for each visit.

Like many racing fans they'll start with a couple of visits and small bankrolls and -- after they've tested the water and decided they like it, they'll perhaps become more ardent fans. And maybe that retired couple will tell their friends in the retirment community that they had a good time at the track. And the young woman will do likewise with her co-workers the next day...

When a Zenyatta raises awareness for the sport -- or a horse coming into the Belmont with a chance at a Triple Crown, or a mainstream movie like "Seabiscuit" or "Secretariat" -- there's no overnight jolt in handle and attendance -- but it makes a difference. And it's all good.

[BluegrassProf]

Exactly! Can't put a pricetag or an empirical label on fabulousness. Can't calculate or approximate beauty, or reduce to spreadsheet the steely glare of a champion.

Can't count the tears of the devoted follower inspired by selfless acts, nor the squeals of delights from toddlers in pink bows, nor the sweeping winds of change that surely follow in her wake, bringing with them the promise of a golden dawn.

Can't quantify Hope, my fellow Americans. Can't quantify Hope.

[Tom]

So we should throw the picnic tables out of Saratoga and stop inflating the attendance figures with all those non-serious people cluttering up the place?

Bar them all, the scoundrels! Who do they think they are polluting our racetracks and screwing up up our precious stats????

Why, just last year, I saw, in person, some guy eating chicken all afternoon, and he never got up make a bet!!!!! And this guys shows up in the attendance numbers. :eek:

[BlueShoe]

We old geezers don't use the D word in polite conversation. :lol:
Right, instead we should say deceased or decomposed, just like that bigshot over at the CHRB suggested. :D

[strapper]

I think Zenyatta attracted a lot of new blood but not the type that will open their wallets & purses at the betting windows. We need the betting kind to come out and support the tracks - at the track I might add.

[Some_One]

Wasn't it said at the time that Big Brown or Smarty Jones were to be a boost for racing also? The only thing Z did was bring out the 'women who love to bet on who has the prettiest name or silks crowd' more often and yet these people have been given the honour by some Eclipse Award voters to determine who the best horse of 2010 was. Just shameful and ignorant.

[Dave Schwartz]

IMHO, any "boost" racing gets right now gets somewhat lost in the shuffle because of the seemingly never-ending down turn.

When I look back at 2010 in review, I think the biggest positive of the year was Monmouth Park. It at least appears that overnight they improved things immensely with some policy/strategy changes.

I would hope that at least a handful of tracks who are not doing well - which is most of them - would look at Monmouth and say, we should try what they did. I would also hope that Monmouth's management would look at their improvement and say, "What else can we do?"

Eventually, maybe someone will get around to understanding that they must:

1. Improve the product for the customer.
2. Improve the experience for the customer.
3. Improve the monetary result for the customer (by lowering takeouts).

In other words, the "boost" that racing needs more than any other is to better compete with the game's competition from other games (i.e. casinos, sports betting, video poker, etc.).


Dave

[Tom]

The only thing Z did was bring out the 'women who love to bet on who has the prettiest name or silks crowd'

Data, please?

[toussaud]

I was reading an article on DRF about the OTB's shutting down. .that scares me, becuase think about it, it shows just how old the avg age of the bettor is. Without at least 10 ADW's out there that you can sign up with in minutes, these old guys the second you stopped the otb's they said screw it. That's not a good sign at all.


DS is dead on, any boost is not going to come from a horse or a quick fix. It's going to come by putting on a good product, better than what is being put on now. Day and day out. not free bobbleheads.

[Dahoss9698]

Data, please?

Not that I necessarily agree with the terminology he used, but do you have any data that contradicts what he said? Has there been a big surge in handle across the board?

I mean, you'd think if a horse brought thousands of new fans to a sport, we'd see a spike in handle. Unless of course they aren't betting. We can't pretend gambling is so important on certain threads and then act like it isn't in others. It's either important or it isn't.

[Tom]

Nope. Never made any specific claims.

I just said it was a good thing that more and more new people were getting exposed to the game. That is how I got started - I went to the track and loved it. If people never get to the track, what odds that they will ever make a bet?

I have no idea what percentage will stay around as new bettors - 1%, 1/2%, 5%? Who knows. The observation was that it was a good start. It can't be a bad thing to get people exposed.

Sure beats the the press we get now - drugs, breakdowns, corruption..,

[Dahoss9698]

Nope. Never made any specific claims.

I just said it was a good thing that more and more new people were getting exposed to the game. That is how I got started - I went to the track and loved it. If people never get to the track, what odds that they will ever make a bet?

I have no idea what percentage will stay around as new bettors - 1%, 1/2%, 5%? Who knows. The observation was that it was a good start. It can't be a bad thing to get people exposed.

Sure beats the the press we get now - drugs, breakdowns, corruption..,

Horse racing gets other press other than the negative stuff. It just doesn't get talked about as much because it's easier to talk about the bad stuff, and more fun.

I agree, exposing new people is a good thing. However, if the people don't eventually participate in the game through the windows, who cares really? Unless of course we can convince owners that instead of purse money, they will be running for signs people have made for the horses. That should go over well.

[DeanT]

Nope. Never made any specific claims.

I just said it was a good thing that more and more new people were getting exposed to the game. That is how I got started - I went to the track and loved it. If people never get to the track, what odds that they will ever make a bet?

I have no idea what percentage will stay around as new bettors - 1%, 1/2%, 5%? Who knows. The observation was that it was a good start. It can't be a bad thing to get people exposed.

Sure beats the the press we get now - drugs, breakdowns, corruption..,

I think of it like this:

What if Uncle Mo wins the first two legs this year?

When the headlines come, the millions upon millions of people who were exposed on TV or through social media because of the big mare, might actually open a news article and watch the Belmont. They saw Z, they were introduced to horse racing, so they are more pre-qualified to watch Uncle Mo.

Zenyatta was more popular last year because people who saw a girl go through a leg of the Triple were introduced to racing. Uncle Mo might be more popular because people saw Zenyatta. "Horse X" in 2012 might be more popular because of Uncle Mo.

Before you know it, you grow.

[bigmack]

I don't know where many of you have been but the overwhelming vast majority of the population barely knows that horse racing still exists.

[Broad Brush]

This is just the same failed strategy that racing has used for the last 40 years
since it lost the monopoly it had on gambling. As much as I love racing, it
simply cannot exist as a "spectator" sport. The public followed and cared
about racing when they were betting on it. Now the idea is to seek the
"casual (i.e. non betting) fan". Racing leaders believe that they compete with
NASCAR and casinos for horseplayers--what a joke. Today's would-be-horseplayers
are playing Poker and betting on other sports. They are "thinking" players..."If I
am smarter than the competition I win". Because racing acts almost embarressed
that it has betting I am not sure this will ever change.

Get this into your cement filled heads once and for all: NTRA, Tracks Execs,
and The Breeder's Cup: Without Horseplayers---there is NO RACING.

[thaskalos]

I don't know where many of you have been but the overwhelming vast majority of the population barely knows that horse racing still exists.Yeah...but the same thing can be said about hockey.

As long as our game's leaders dare to call this a "sport", albeit a minor one, there should be an effort made to organize it like a sport.

No unified governing body, no uniform drug policy, no proper "policing" of the sport, no competent people overseeing operations...and then we expect "superstar" horses to shoulder the responsibility of bringing more fans to this game?

[toussaud]

This is just the same failed strategy that racing has used for the last 40 years
since it lost the monopoly it had on gambling. As much as I love racing, it
simply cannot exist as a "spectator" sport. The public followed and cared
about racing when they were betting on it. Now the idea is to seek the
"casual (i.e. non betting) fan". Racing leaders believe that they compete with
NASCAR and casinos for horseplayers--what a joke. Today's would-be-horseplayers
are playing Poker and betting on other sports. They are "thinking" players..."If I
am smarter than the competition I win". Because racing acts almost embarressed
that it has betting I am not sure this will ever change.

Get this into your cement filled heads once and for all: NTRA, Tracks Execs,
and The Breeder's Cup: Without Horseplayers---there is NO RACING.

Welcome to the forum

You know I am kinda in the middle on this. I do believe that those fans matter, and it can be a spectator driven sport.

But, there is a catch. NO where near the same levels as there is now. My whole thing is, that they can't have both.... 200-250 races running a day, a week day, yet at the same time, be spectator driven, 2 dollar hot dog buying fan. If they want to go that route they need to downsize and make the races alot more attractive, more visually appealing, more turf races, longer races.

They are putting the equivalent of the NBDL out and trying to call it entertainment. No one goes to a "day of the races" to see ready's rocket, a 10k claimer at the fair grounds (a good one but still) run in his 2nd race in 2 weeks. There is nothing appealing about a slow cheap claimer

[strapper]

I think some of the problem with the loss in fans started when newspapers sports sections stopped covering as much. But the big hit came from the proliferation of casino gambling for the betting bucks. Now the casinos are running the show. Go figure.

[PhantomOnTour]

Racing's fate will not be turned around by one great horse.

[toussaud]

I don't think one would..


but I think 2 could go a very long way to reviving some mainstream interest. what I mean is, 2, GREAT horses running head to head, more than once, in non breeders cup races. That is what pissed me off so much about the Zenyatta Rachel situtation. who the hell cares if you bring a mare back to run against claimers, that's not doing antyhing. Put her on ESPN runing against Rachel... oaklawn would have had 70k there on a friday, without question, and probably higher.ON A FRIDAY.


it's not entertaining when someone is so hell bent on being "perfect" they wont' run against anyone. That's why I stopped watching floyd mayweather. you know he is going to win what's the point? 2007 was entertaining, watching curlin and hard spun and street sense. Ghostzapper and Saint Liam was entertaining.

In other words, they need to make it...enticing to actually run real campaigns, against real horses again. That would be a huge step in the right direction.

[skate]

Who made that argument?

Certainly Zenyatta - with her Oprah magazine profile and her appearance on 60 Minutes - raised awareness for the sport -- and that can only be a good thing.

But I don't know that anyone expected Zenyatta to bring horse-racing to NFL-popularity levels...

This kind of stuff comes in increments.

Ah, good one....S Guy

[BluegrassProf]

The Apple Blossom was in a way a legitimate attempt to "bring two stars together," but under the circumstances - the circumstances very particular to those two horses, at that particular point in time - it didn't work out. Of course, those important particulars are often ignored in favor of "We TOTALLY triiiiiied!" rhetoric (particularly from the Zenhead side of the fence, and no doubt the track admin's), which ignores the underlying, more serious issue at hand: the realization that putting eggs in a single basket rarely works out, and even more rarely, helps the numerous other baskets out there.

It's not about Zenyatta, or Rachel Alexandra, or Eight Belles, or Big Brown, or Barbaro, or their powerful legion of cat ladies with signs and bows and tears.

We no longer have a racing environment that can bank on showcase horses - at one time, when there was broader support for the game (think Depression-era Hillenbrand-fodder, that was - SHOCK! - driven primarily by bettors), such a thing was far more viable. Unfortunately, today's racing simply can't afford to throw the vast prepondrance of its focus on one or two singular stars, particularly when their shine is today so fleeting.

Until racing learns to stop putting its eggs in individual equine baskets and turn to the game at large (including un-BC-esque showcase races across the country ALL year long)- an almost impossible feat, I think...looked at the BH lately? - the broad racing industry will continue to suffer its speedy decline.

We cling so very firmly to racing's past in the practical pursuit of its future, be it names or practices or themes, despite the obvious. The past will always be there. Time to innovate, and to look at the game on the grander scale - at the cracks in the foundation - rather than simply painting over them with easy but superficial strokes.

[skate]

Matter of factly...we've hearded that saying "where are the fans" for bout 45 years.


Lookey, you start the kids out, playing with blocks and dolls, they progress to NFL type football, fine, nothing wrong, but then they see something else about life, something with somewhat of a challenge and playful, all in one, and then then then...Ba Ba ba Bingo
they learn to enjoy the thoroughbred racing game, trots too, babe...yep.:)

[FenceBored]

Ah, good one....S Guy

You know, 60 Minutes II did a feature on Jerry Bailey (http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/21792/60-minutes-ii-chronicles-baileys-annual-visit-with-cigar)in April 2004 and highlighted his yearly trip to visit Cigar at the Ky Horse Park.

Guess if it wasn't for that segment racing would already have disappeared before Zenyatta ran her first race in Nov. 2007.

[keithw84]

You know, 60 Minutes II did a feature on Jerry Bailey (http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/21792/60-minutes-ii-chronicles-baileys-annual-visit-with-cigar)in April 2004 and highlighted his yearly trip to visit Cigar at the Ky Horse Park.

Guess if it wasn't for that segment racing would already have disappeared before Zenyatta ran her first race in Nov. 2007.

So we need another 60 Minutes feature in April 2017 to make sure the sport survives? Let's hope there's some good crops of foals over the next 2-3 years!

[keithw84]

I don't think one would..


but I think 2 could go a very long way to reviving some mainstream interest. what I mean is, 2, GREAT horses running head to head, more than once, in non breeders cup races. That is what pissed me off so much about the Zenyatta Rachel situtation. who the hell cares if you bring a mare back to run against claimers, that's not doing antyhing. Put her on ESPN runing against Rachel... oaklawn would have had 70k there on a friday, without question, and probably higher.ON A FRIDAY.


it's not entertaining when someone is so hell bent on being "perfect" they wont' run against anyone. That's why I stopped watching floyd mayweather. you know he is going to win what's the point? 2007 was entertaining, watching curlin and hard spun and street sense. Ghostzapper and Saint Liam was entertaining.

In other words, they need to make it...enticing to actually run real campaigns, against real horses again. That would be a huge step in the right direction.

I agree it would help if there were two competing stars, but I wonder if it would increase wagering much more than having one big star has.

[Tom]

I was under the impression that if Z got HOY, racing as we know it would cease to exist. Is that not true????:confused:

[FenceBored]

I was under the impression that if Z got HOY, racing as we know it would cease to exist. Is that not true????:confused:

No, no, no. If Zenyatta doesn't get it racing will cease to exist. Remember: "Horse of the Year vote for Zenyatta is a vote for racing itself." (http://espn.go.com/horse-racing/blog/_/name/novak_claire/id/5973253/eclipse-award-ballot)

[my_nameaintearl]

They are in pennsylvania pllaying blackjack and craps

[toussaud]

I agree it would help if there were two competing stars, but I wonder if it would increase wagering much more than having one big star has.
NO QUESTION in my mind. Let's think about it.

Say, the apple blossom did happen. You got 70k fans there. they are going to gamble on their opinions. Everyone is going to gamble on their opinions. Money goes into the pool, alot of it. Gamblers take note of pool size, and all the dumb money, or what they perceive as dumb money and wager accordingly.


Also, you got 70k people there, what are they going to do the other 10 races? They are going to gamble.

I live in Little Rock, hotels were booked literary, all the way here from hot springs for that. Horse racing is not dead, just like boxing isn't' dead. however, they are clambering for real horse races. You put a real horse race in the classic and lo and behold you break all kinds of records.

But when you got 1 horse in a race, what's the point? The whole point of gambling,in it's simplest form is you think this horse is going to win, I think this horse is going to win, let's wager and see who is right. But when everyone in the room knows that one horse is going to win, what is the point in wagering? I might go to see that special horse but I am not as inclined to wager if they will or will not win becuase there is no money to be made.

[Saratoga_Mike]

[QUOTE=toussaud]NO QUESTION in my mind. Let's think about it.

SAy, the apple blossom did happen. You got 70k fans there. they are going to gamble on their opinions. Everyone is going to gamble on their opinions. Money goes into the pool, alot of it. Gamblers take note of pool size, and all the dumb money, or what they perceive as dumb money and wager accordingly.

QUOTE]
I believe he meant beyond the one race.

[Broad Brush]

Welcome to the forum

You know I am kinda in the middle on this. I do believe that those fans matter, and it can be a spectator driven sport.

But, there is a catch. NO where near the same levels as there is now. My whole thing is, that they can't have both.... 200-250 races running a day, a week day, yet at the same time, be spectator driven, 2 dollar hot dog buying fan. If they want to go that route they need to downsize and make the races alot more attractive, more visually appealing, more turf races, longer races.

They are putting the equivalent of the NBDL out and trying to call it entertainment. No one goes to a "day of the races" to see ready's rocket, a 10k claimer at the fair grounds (a good one but still) run in his 2nd race in 2 weeks. There is nothing appealing about a slow cheap claimer

Hello Toussaud,

Thanks for the greeting. I'm sorry if I came across that it is all about the betting. It is not. I think the "true fans" are horseplayers who respect
all horses: both champions and claimers. Casual fans will never understand
that claimers try hard too!! I enjoy watching all races no matter what the level
of class they are. I have seen claimers in my life that had more determination
than most horses in The Hall of Fame. They were just born with bodies that could run only so fast. I just think racing's idea that you attract a "casual fan"
1st and they will become a "betting fan" is backwards. I think there is a better chance of it working the other way around. Attract bettors who want a "thinking challenge".
Some will become "true fans" and some will only be "bettors".
Both results are good for the game.

[Tom]

No, no, no. If Zenyatta doesn't get it racing will cease to exist. Remember: "Horse of the Year vote for Zenyatta is a vote for racing itself." (http://espn.go.com/horse-racing/blog/_/name/novak_claire/id/5973253/eclipse-award-ballot)

If I had a vote, it would go to Taz!

[Horseplayersbet.com]

You know what would help horse racing grow?, not a feature on Zenyatta or Cigar, or Frank Stronach's flower gardens, but a 60 Minutes feature on computer teams, or handicappers that actually make money every year.

Fans do not bet enough, and it is hard to cultivate fans into bettors these days, because the old days of regulars bringing friends and family to the track 2-5 times a week are long long gone, so fans are mostly only fans 3 or 4 times a year. And the motivation for fans to become bettors isn't there because of an absent of visible long term winners combined with a high blended takeout which wipes players out faster than ever before.

Horse racing is about betting. And takeout needs to be drastically reduced if the game is to grow.

Any other solution is complete wishful thinking and a waste of time.

[Stillriledup]

You know what would help horse racing grow?, not a feature on Zenyatta or Cigar, or Frank Stronach's flower gardens, but a 60 Minutes feature on computer teams, or handicappers that actually make money every year.

Fans do not bet enough, and it is hard to cultivate fans into bettors these days, because the old days of regulars bringing friends and family to the track 2-5 times a week are long long gone, so fans are mostly only fans 3 or 4 times a year. And the motivation for fans to become bettors isn't there because of an absent of visible long term winners combined with a high blended takeout which wipes players out faster than ever before.

Horse racing is about betting. And takeout needs to be drastically reduced if the game is to grow.

Any other solution is complete wishful thinking and a waste of time.

Horse racing needs to follow poker, they need to get an attractive young female and have her come out publicly and admit that she beats the races for a living and its not really that hard (then, she can giggle and flip her hair while she's smacking her gum)

[Dahoss9698]

You know what would help horse racing grow?, not a feature on Zenyatta or Cigar, or Frank Stronach's flower gardens, but a 60 Minutes feature on computer teams, or handicappers that actually make money every year.


I've been saying this for years. The way to get people to bet is to show them that they can win and that real people actually do it. That is why poker took off. People saw regular guys winning millions on the WSOP and people saw that it is possible to do.

For some reason a lot of the powers that be want to pretend the game isn't driven by gambling.

[PaceAdvantage]

And the funny thing is that more than a few of those "big winners" you see highlighted by the poker media end up going broke or having to be staked down the line in order to get back on their feet...you never seem to read about those kinds of stories...

[Horseplayersbet.com]

I've been saying this for years. The way to get people to bet is to show them that they can win and that real people actually do it. That is why poker took off. People saw regular guys winning millions on the WSOP and people saw that it is possible to do.

For some reason a lot of the powers that be want to pretend the game isn't driven by gambling.
The problem is that the real winners get decent rebates. Horse racing doesn't want to have to admit that, because it would be an admission that takeout rates are way too high.

[thaskalos]

And the funny thing is that more than a few of those "big winners" you see highlighted by the poker media end up going broke or having to be staked down the line in order to get back on their feet...you never seem to read about those kinds of stories...That is true PA...and everybody in poker knows it.

What is also true, however, is that there are more than a few players, who play CASH games (not tournaments) strictly online, and who have DOCUMENTED earnings of hundreds of thousands of dollars - or MILLIONS in some cases - year in and year out.

Yes...they represent a tiny percentage of the total poker-playing population...but they prove conclusively to all that it is POSSIBLE. And as a result, online poker is thriving in this country...eventhough it's illegal.