California Boycott starts (and handle plummets)

[The_Knight_Sky]

http://i53.tinypic.com/dnik42.jpg (http://theknightskyracing.blogspot.com/2011/01/boycott-day-1-handle-drops-152.html)

read full post here (http://theknightskyracing.blogspot.com/2011/01/boycott-day-1-handle-drops-152.html)

[jelly]

I would expect the CHRB to rescind the takeout soon,they can't keep going at this rate.


Keep up the good work everyone.

[toussaud]

anyone know what the comparable numbers were for last year's thursday card?

The thing about it, for me is, they seem to enamored with the dirt, they have seen to forget they have one of the best turf courses in the country. 2 turf races tomorrow, picture perfect weather. all those synthetic turf horses out there. 2 turf races.

[InsideThePylons-MW]

anyone know what the comparable numbers were for last year's thursday card?

2011 8 races 60 horses $4,622,000

2010 8 races 49 horses $4,696,000


Momentum is starting to build for the CHRB and TOC!

Only down 1.5% today and the horse population is starting to rise like it's on fire.

In a week or two it will be all full fields and handle up 25% or more!

[Stillriledup]

2011 8 races 60 horses $4,622,000

2010 8 races 49 horses $4,696,000


Momentum is starting to build for the CHRB and TOC!

Only down 1.5% today and the horse population is starting to rise like it's on fire.

In a week or two it will be all full fields and handle up 25% or more!

Didnt this place used to handle 10, 15 million per day about 10 years ago?

[andymays]

http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/sports/ci_17092476

Excerpt:

According to Way and his HANA associates, the CHRB and TOC are what's ailing California horse racing, which employs about 50,000 people statewide.
"They need to talk to somebody," Way said. "I wish they'd talk to us, but they don't want to recognize us because to them we're from a different planet. We're interested in the gaming portion of this and they're not. They just think things will ride on forever, because how do you lose money at a race track? Well, they're finding out how to do it."

What needs to happen, and quickly, is the CHRB and TOC need to quit playing games, sit down and meet with Platt and other members of the organization's board and try to find common ground for the good of an industry that is spiraling downward at an alarming rate.

Here's some less-than-startling news - the sport would not survive without the horse owners, but the owners need to recognize there would be no horse racing without the bettors. It's a two-way street, fellas.

The fact the TOC failed to mention HANA once in a two-page newsletter to members earlier this month might lead some to conclude the horseman's group would like to see the watchdog for horse players go away.

"About 99 percent of (horsemen) are good people, but it's the decision makers who are messing things up," said long-time California horse player and industry activist Andy Asaro, who believes Brackpool and CHRB vice chairman David Israel should resign because of poor leadership.


Read more: http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/sports/ci_17092476#ixzz1B0oKArDi

[FenceBored]

Didnt this place used to handle 10, 15 million per day about 10 years ago?

Good question. How does it compare to 10 years ago?

Thur. Jan 11, 2001: 8 races, 55 horses, $7,048,605

[Horseplayersbet.com]

2011 8 races 60 horses $4,622,000

2010 8 races 49 horses $4,696,000


Momentum is starting to build for the CHRB and TOC!

Only down 1.5% today and the horse population is starting to rise like it's on fire.

In a week or two it will be all full fields and handle up 25% or more!
Going from 5 to 4 days should help their field size you would think.
You would also expect handle to rise because of the cut back. Hawthorne increased their daily handle by 8% this year because they cut back from 5 to 4 days in their latest completed meet.
The fact they were still down this year despite having 20% more horses entered, Fair Grounds canceling, and also having the Mid Atlantic Co-op this year tells me that there has to be something else at work here.

BTW, the Mid Atlantic Co-Op came back aboard last year on January 22.

[OTM Al]

Don't want to rain on the parade here and do hope the boycott is effective, but I don't think much of this can be credited to a boycott, or at least additional boycotting. Attendance was pretty much the same this and last week but the on track handle dropped quite a bit, much the same amount of drop as the overall percentage wise. This indicates to me that the fields must have stunk relative to last week because otherwise you are going to have to tell me that players went to the track, paid admission, parking, etc but shifted their wagering to the simulcasts rather than the live product. Possible, but seems like a reach.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Don't want to rain on the parade here and do hope the boycott is effective, but I don't think much of this can be credited to a boycott, or at least additional boycotting. Attendance was pretty much the same this and last week but the on track handle dropped quite a bit, much the same amount of drop as the overall percentage wise. This indicates to me that the fields must have stunk relative to last week because otherwise you are going to have to tell me that players went to the track, paid admission, parking, etc but shifted their wagering to the simulcasts rather than the live product. Possible, but seems like a reach.
It is also possible that the effects of the takeout hike has started to take its toll on the on track customers. They might have less to bet with.
The fact that attendance remains unchanged would also be expected in fact, it should go up because they went from 5 days to 4 days.

[OTM Al]

It is also possible that the effects of the takeout hike has started to take its toll on the on track customers. They might have less to bet with.
The fact that attendance remains unchanged would also be expected in fact, it should go up because they went from 5 days to 4 days.

I suppose it's possible but that really sounds like a reach to me. Attendance however shouldn't be expected to change. It's not like if you couldn't come on Wednesday, you could come twice on Thursday. Track goers are creatures of habit.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

I suppose it's possible but that really sounds like a reach to me. Attendance however shouldn't be expected to change. It's not like if you couldn't come on Wednesday, you could come twice on Thursday. Track goers are creatures of habit.
I think it should. If racing were to cut back to one day a week, you'd expect a very high attendance. The odd person may have a choice each week to go on either Wednesday or Thursday, or Friday. Now with Wednesday eliminated, their choice is one of the other days. And there might be a few people who go on Wednesday and keep going until they are tapped for the week. The week now starts on Thursday, so the Wednesday tap out players will be there.

[toussaud]

considering about 85% of all wagers are made off track, what in the world does attendance have to do with anything?

[DJofSD]

Brackpool later issued the following statement in regard to a possible sit-down meeting with HANA: "The California Horse Racing Board appreciates input from HANA and other fans. In fact, the CHRB has an obligation to listen to the public at large. At the same time, we understand that at least one race track has met with HANA and will continue to do so. The CHRB encourages such dialogue."

Is it just me or does this come off as very arogent and condescending?

"The CHRB encourages such dialogue." GB SOB -- your organization is the one that is suppose to be having that dialogue not the race tracks.

I want this guys head on a platter.

[OTM Al]

considering about 85% of all wagers are made off track, what in the world does attendance have to do with anything?

The point I was making is that on track wagering per person averages do not fluctuate wildly. However a change occurred in on track total with no real change in attendance. Further, if you are making the effort to go to the track, you are probably not boycotting it. The change in ontrack betting percentage wise was was much the same as off track. Therefore it is more likely that some other factor caused the drop in wagering on that particular day than the boycott. One would expect with the boycott on track averages to stay the same (though totals could drop) but the real hit comes off track

[toussaud]

The point I was making is that on track wagering per person averages do not fluctuate wildly. However a change occurred in on track total with no real change in attendance. Further, if you are making the effort to go to the track, you are probably not boycotting it. The change in ontrack betting percentage wise was was much the same as off track. Therefore it is more likely that some other factor caused the drop in wagering on that particular day than the boycott. One would expect with the boycott on track averages to stay the same (though totals could drop) but the real hit comes off track You are making alot of generalizations to come to that conclusion. You have to look at the demographics. The avg HANA member or person who is serious about boycotting probably doesn't live in California and even if he does was more likely to be on his ADW account at home then the track anyway, especially on a thursday.

Heck, I'm quite sure attendance was UP the first day of the meet, yet, handle was down like 23%. Attendance has very little to do with this,whlie I see your point and I'm not trying to argue, I just don't' think it's a factor.

[Stillriledup]

The boycott is nonsense according to Ric Hammerle. So, this is a misleading thread, there's no way any boycott has anything to do with handle dropping.

[DJofSD]

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/60772/sidneys-candy-out-of-san-fernando?source=rss

[BillW]

The boycott is nonsense according to Ric Hammerle. So, this is a misleading thread, there's no way any boycott has anything to do with handle dropping.

That's probably true ... the increase in takeout does!

[jelly]

Another rough day for santa Anita.


Last year 9 races $7,242,359.

Last year 9 races $6,733,266.



Who's the first to take the fall out west,Blackpool?

[Stillriledup]

Another rough day for santa Anita.


Last year 9 races $7,242,359.

Last year 9 races $6,733,266.



Who's the first to take the fall out west,Blackpool?

Nobody's getting fired, things are fine, its only a 500k dropoff, not that big of a deal. They'll make that up once the weather in Concord, New Hampshire gets better, the NFL season wraps up and the national deficit is squared away. Its the economy, that's the problem.

[MONEY]

Only a 500K drop off might be a bad sign for the boycott. As the meet goes on, it seems that the handle is getting closer to last years. Also a lower handle does not necessarily mean that they are making less money.

One more thing, when I try to talk to other players at the track about takeout, you could swear that I'm speaking gibberish. All they know is that if they play a 1-2 exacta & the results come out 1-2, they win.

[cj]

Only a 500K drop off might be a bad sign for the boycott. As the meet goes on, it seems that the handle is getting closer to last years. Also a lower handle does not necessarily mean that they are making less money.

One more thing, when I try to talk to other players at the track about takeout, you could swear that I'm speaking gibberish. All they know is that if they play a 1-2 exacta & the results come out 1-2, they win.

The people at the track, on average, are quite a bit dumber than those playing from home in my opinion.

[MONEY]

The people at the track, on average, are quite a bit dumber than those playing from home in my opinion.
:)Thanks, I go to the track every day.

Money

[cj]

:)Thanks, I go to the track every day.

Money

I am not saying everyone at the track is dumb, or anything close. But your last post kind of proves my point.

[sammy the sage]

there are a "SELECT" few that bet in person who "SMARTER" by far than ANYBODY who wager's at home...and if you ain't smart enough to figure why :rolleyes:

[cj]

there are a "SELECT" few that bet in person who "SMARTER" by far than ANYBODY who wager's at home...and if you ain't smart enough to figure why :rolleyes:

I know there are, but those aren't the ones that don't understand takeout.

[Stillriledup]

there are a "SELECT" few that bet in person who "SMARTER" by far than ANYBODY who wager's at home...and if you ain't smart enough to figure why :rolleyes:

Rich horseowners who bet 10k per race and employ a supertrainer? (or, employ a guy who was just another trainer and then he BECOMES a supertainer?)

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Only a 500K drop off might be a bad sign for the boycott. As the meet goes on, it seems that the handle is getting closer to last years. Also a lower handle does not necessarily mean that they are making less money.

One more thing, when I try to talk to other players at the track about takeout, you could swear that I'm speaking gibberish. All they know is that if they play a 1-2 exacta & the results come out 1-2, they win.
Lets not forget that they are going 4 days a week instead of 5. For example, if they only raced on Saturday, I would expect their daily handle to go through the roof, even with a boycott.
The fact that they are down daily even a penny is not a good sign.

[MONEY]

Lets not forget that they are going 4 days a week instead of 5. For example, if they only raced on Saturday, I would expect their daily handle to go through the roof, even with a boycott.
The fact that they are down daily even a penny is not a good sign.

4 days is not the same as one. When they take a day off they don't have to pay purses, gate crews, etc.
If after expenses they were lose money on Wednesdays, then it is better for them not to race on Wednesdays.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

4 days is not the same as one. When they take a day off they don't have to pay purses, gate crews, etc.
If after expenses they were lose money on Wednesdays, then it is better for them not to race on Wednesdays.
Not the point. I'm not discussing whether it is a wise business decision to race one less day, I am pointing out that racing one day less a week should be good for handle on the other four days. As I pointed out before, if someone, for example could only make it to the track on either Wednesday, Thursday or Friday, now that person's handle will show up on either Thursday or Friday.
Also, by racing only four days, field size should go up, because in theory at least the races with less horse are more likely to be dropped.

[Robert Goren]

The people boycotting S. Cal racing are betting or in this case not betting online almost entirely.

[Robert Goren]

I have watched the cutting back on racing days in week for a long time. Fewer races means fewer horses on the grounds. It does not have a great effect on the number of starters in a race in the long run.

[DeanT]

I mean, hey guys, you’re arguing about how much your handle is down. Your handle is down, at the same time that Tampa is booming and Gulfstream is reporting gains. Aqueduct isn’t up, but that’s because NYRA was especially hard hit by NYC OTB’s closure, and they’ve admirably met that challenge so far by treating it as an opportunity to grab new customers, take over the OTB TV channel, and get live streaming video on the NYRA Rewards site. Santa Anita’s handle is down, and track executives are debating by how much? Instead of admitting that customers might have a point — that maybe the product is overpriced, or not all that enticing — and considering how they might respond positively to reverse the slide, they’d rather defend how they’re running the business. The way things are going, that’s right into the ground.



http://jessicachapel.com/2011/01/16/more-sa-numbers/

[Stillriledup]

http://jessicachapel.com/2011/01/16/more-sa-numbers/

Good stuff.

If your handle is down and other tracks are up, you're really DOWN the raise also. Not only are you under even, but you're also losing out on the 'gains' that some other tracks have because you would be getting those same gains if your takeout wasn't substantially raised and your product was actually good.

SA has a bad product, a hard and biased track, short fields, drug cheats are tolerated and a massive takeout raise and they're actually mad at the horseplayers for not betting their place.

[JustRalph]

one thing I can guarantee you. They are down about 200 bucks a weekend since I am not playing like I did last year.........

somebody should be fired for that............ :lol:

[toussaud]

I have watched the cutting back on racing days in week for a long time. Fewer races means fewer horses on the grounds. It does not have a great effect on the number of starters in a race in the long run.
I do and don't agree.

Oaklawn races 4 days a week and most races are full to the brim.

But, it's in the midwest, people don't have to stable here to race here.

But santa anita is a long way away from everyone else. But at the same time, they don't have a choice.

The only solution I see actually starting to go the right direction is to drop the socal high horse, run 3 days a week and let golden gate run 3 alternate days a week and rotate. You are going to need to allow some of the cheaper horses to run the same circuit. Their first priority should be getting the avg field size up to about 8 or 9 somehow. That is of course, after dropping takeout

[Robert Goren]

What need is not tracks racing fewer days a week, but fewer tracks racing 5-6 days week. 20 tracks running on Saturday and 6 on Wednesday is a joke. Most horseplayers are full time.

[toussaud]

What need is not tracks racing fewer days a week, but fewer tracks racing 5-6 days week. 20 tracks running on Saturday and 6 on Wednesday is a joke. Most horseplayers are full time.
that of course, would be idea.

[lamboguy]

no question the game is in a consolidation phase now. maybe its a good thing for now. the few that are going to remain standing might get their act together and and maybe the game might grow.

there was a time when the purses were much smaller, the racetracks were full of people, and the racing schedules were being increased. it was also a time where an ordinary small owner could funtion in this game and not lose that much. a purse was $3000 and the horse ran every week, the whole family got involved and they all had fun doing it. these people are all gone but not forgotten.

[Stillriledup]

Not the point. I'm not discussing whether it is a wise business decision to race one less day, I am pointing out that racing one day less a week should be good for handle on the other four days. As I pointed out before, if someone, for example could only make it to the track on either Wednesday, Thursday or Friday, now that person's handle will show up on either Thursday or Friday.
Also, by racing only four days, field size should go up, because in theory at least the races with less horse are more likely to be dropped.

Exactly, if a person who normally bets 100 per day ( and loses the takeout) doesnt bet 1 penny on wednesday, he should be ready to lose twice the takeout on Thursday, but it doesnt work out that way. That 20 dollars that gets lost on weds is lost forver, the track doesnt make that money up, because the horseplayer just goes to the track the next day and bets like he normally bets, he won't raise his bets because he 'saved' 20 dollars from the previous day.