Quality Trumps Quantity in TV Coverage

[toussaud]

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/65411/racing-needs-smarter-not-more-tv-coverage



This is one of the better articles I have read in a few months at least.


Some key points/ quotes

"We need to bring our leaders into this century," said Mike Trager, a longtime producer who put together the original Breeders' Cup package

Read more: http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/65411/panel-quality-trumps-quantity-in-tv-coverage#ixzz1a6mlFEQB
Wow that's pretty blunt and brutally honest yet at the same time, outside of maybe Keeneland, 100% accurate

"What struck me in reading the study is that it's a repeat of the one I did for NYRA in 1987," said Seigenfeld, now a consultant. The former NYRA executive put together the VISA and Chrysler sponsorship deals for Triple Crown Productions.

Said Trager: "I read the same thing 10, 20 years ago. It's a vast oversimplification. You can't say we're never on TV; we have two networks dedicated to it.

Read more: http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/65411/panel-quality-trumps-quantity-in-tv-coverage#ixzz1a6myQCDc




Zimmerman believes that racing missed the boat by not embracing attempts to cross over to the general population with shows such as "Jockeys," which Animal Planet dropped after two seasons because its viewership, at about 475,000, wasn't deemed large enough to continue producing it. Racing people dismissed the show as a soap opera and didn't support it. She noted that the 2009 Travers Stakes (gr. I), run the same year as "Jockeys" was on the air, attracted only 125,000 viewers.

Read more: http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/65411/panel-quality-trumps-quantity-in-tv-coverage#ixzz1a6n7PsmZ




Where racing lags is in its lack of high definition coverage, not just on the two racing networks but at the tracks, the experts said. That impacts simulcast coverage as well. Almost all major network coverage is now in HD.



"Out of the 35 all-sports networks, 31 are in high definition," Allevato said. "Out of the four that are not HD, two are horse racing. "


What that means is that rather than concentrating on Southern California, TVG will be spending more time at the tracks that are producing races in HD.

Read more: http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/65411/panel-quality-trumps-quantity-in-tv-coverage#ixzz1a6nh0pHP
lol at least they admit it now lol


"Maybe some of the money (the Jockey Club will spend) should go back to the tracks for the purpose of televising in HD," Trager suggested. "We have two networks devoted to horseracing and we're not providing them with what they need."




The industry doesn't have the patience it needs, Seigenfeld said. It tires of approaches such as "Jockeys" or years ago, the "Go Baby Go" marketing campaign, much too quickly.

"It takes a long time to build an audience," Seigenfeld said. "The lords of racing don't want to believe that, but it's the truth."

[Tom]

What are the two networks devoted to horse racing????

[toussaud]

What are the two networks devoted to horse racing????
lol that's a good one

[BlueShoe]

What are the two networks devoted to horse racing????
Well, while watching and listening to the spin, the viewer might think that they had tuned into the Sci Fi channel, Comedy Central, or perhaps one of the womens channels that air soap operas. ;)

[depalma113]

It doesn't take a consultant or a group to figure out racing's problem.

Racing's problem is there are too many graded stakes available.

Cut the number dramatically and two things will happen. Horses will be forced to face each other more often and horses will have to run longer racing careers before they get that graded win which is needed for stud duty.

After this problem is corrected, work on scheduling these graded stakes so they all fall in a two hour windows that can be packaged on Friday nights in the fall and Saturday afternoons in the spring. Air them on one National Broadcast Network.

I would go as far as to make sure Grade Ones were only run at one track a weekend.

[DJofSD]

Racing industry officals: "What's this new fangled HiDef stuff? We didn't need that back in the day when...."

[toussaud]

It doesn't take a consultant or a group to figure out racing's problem.

Racing's problem is there are too many graded stakes available.

Cut the number dramatically and two things will happen. Horses will be forced to face each other more often and horses will have to run longer racing careers before they get that graded win which is needed for stud duty.

After this problem is corrected, work on scheduling these graded stakes so they all fall in a two hour windows that can be packaged on Friday nights in the fall and Saturday afternoons in the spring. Air them on one National Broadcast Network.

I would go as far as to make sure Grade Ones were only run at one track a weekend.
I've had similar thoughts. AS of now, horse racing, the product itself is not what you would call "packagable" if that makes any sense.

you get on a somewhat coordinated schedule, spaced 10 minutes apart from each other, you can squeeze 6-7 bigger races/ big races in a 2 hour time frame, and if you can show that in HD, you are money and stick with that for as long as you need to, don't' pull the plug and go back to the old days besides the handle has not doubled in one meet.

[bdownes]

Everyone on here knows it but horse racing on HD is incredible. The colors alone make it must watch tv. Add in the sporting and gambling element...awesome. I would love for a technology person to estimate the costs involved for tracks and TVG/HRTV.

[depalma113]

The other thing I would recommend is absoluety no racing at any other track in the country on Breeders Cup weekend. It's supposed to be the Super Bowl, treat it like it.

Tracks can open for simulcast, have parties do whatever, just no racing.

[toussaud]

The other thing I would recommend is absoluety no racing at any other track in the country on Breeders Cup weekend. It's supposed to be the Super Bowl, treat it like it.

Tracks can open for simulcast, have parties do whatever, just no racing.
i agree with that as well.

Horse racing is like you can watch the super bowl or you can watch the lions and 49ers on fox, either or.


I would actually take it 1 step further and no racing the entire week leading up to breeders cup. Though I know it would be a cold day in hell before that happens.

[thaskalos]

Horse racing is NOT a sport, no matter how hard the industry tries to package it as such.

This is a GAMBLING game...and gambling games sink or swim in accordance to the public's perception of them.

Why is the public more attracted to poker than it is to horse racing?

Because they KNOW that poker is the better game from a betting standpoint...plain and simple.

Is TV coverage vital to the success of a gambling game?

In my opinion...NO!

TV coverage plays an instrumental role in introducing a gambling game to the public, but after that, the game must stand on its own merit.

Look at what happened with poker.

TV coverage provided poker with the publicity it needed to be widely introduced to its audience...and its popularity skyrocketed.

The TV coverage has now ended COMPLETELY (except for the WSOP) but the poker rooms nationwide are still going strong...and they will continue to prosper as long as the game remains a "good gamble".

Horse racing needs no introduction to the gambling public; the game has existed - in an organized form - for 150 years...and it was the most popular gambling game in the land not too long ago.

The reason its popularity came to an end has nothing to do with the lack of TV coverage.

The game simply can no longer stand on its own merit and compete against other gambling games out there.

Unless this game becomes a better "gamble", its prospects for survival remain bleak...TV coverage or not...

[Quesmark]

Horse racing is NOT a sport, no matter how hard the industry tries to package it as such.

This is a GAMBLING game...and gambling games sink or swim in accordance to the public's perception of them.

TV coverage plays an instrumental role in introducing a gambling game to the public, but after that, the game must stand on its own merit.

The reason its popularity came to an end has nothing to do with the lack of TV coverage.

The game simply can no longer stand on its own merit and compete against other gambling games out there.

TV coverage,featuring appealing matchups,with a more limited menu of top graded races,shown in a 2 hour or so window,on Friday/Saturday evening,and maximum distribution through betting terminals in bars/restaurants etc.,and through state lottery systems,design wagers which produce big jackpot payoffs,but have a low takeout,and price them at a point which makes them affordable for the masses.
Dancing and singing have enjoyed a reality TV resurgence,so too could the "Sport of Kings" if properly presented in a coordinated fashion.

[therussmeister]

I don't believe you can improve racing's lot by just concentrating on graded stakes. There just aren't enough of them; especially since at least one poster calls for reducing the number of them.

You would be creating a fan base that is only interested in a few races, a few days of the year. They would never show any interest in racing on days without a graded stakes. It's the challenge of handicapping that needs to be sold.

But then, I'm a guy who has no interest in the race, only handicapping; so what do I know?

[depalma113]

You would be creating a fan base that is only interested in a few races, a few days of the year.

Isn't that the problem racing already has?

[toussaud]

I don't believe you can improve racing's lot by just concentrating on graded stakes. There just aren't enough of them; especially since at least one poster calls for reducing the number of them.

You would be creating a fan base that is only interested in a few races, a few days of the year. They would never show any interest in racing on days without a graded stakes. It's the challenge of handicapping that needs to be sold.

But then, I'm a guy who has no interest in the race, only handicapping; so what do I know? i'm sorry but that's hogwash.

that's pretty much how fans are generated in any sport.

I 've told this story here before, but when I was in my late teens, or early 20
s i forget, i caught smarty jones in the Kentucky derby. I was introduced to racing as a child but i had went to play more popular sports.

Then he came on again in the Preakness. Then I made sure i watched to watch the Belmont (freak you stewart elliott). I didn't run to the nearest OTB or anything, but i paid attention to the derby preps next year and watched the derby again. Then I moved to an apartment and was randomly flipping channels and found HRTV, and the rest was history.

My point being, is that the big races, gave me an introduction to horse racing and a familiarity that otherwise i would not have had. I don't know if i would have stopped on HrTV that night had it not been for the derby preps. I might have. I might have not.

And hell, that was just to WATCH races! i found HrTV in December of 06, about a week before opening day at santa anita. I did not make my first wager until the 07 Kentucky derby, on street sense.

In all, that's about a 2 year incubation period from "exposure" to going on xpressbet and opening an account and wagering.

And who cares if there aren't 25k fans outside on a Thursday afternoon to watch 8 maiden claiming races, there are too many of them anyway. We need whatever we can get now.


lol, horse racing is kinda like going on a date with a girl and you meet the girl and you like her and she's great and you are really clicking and she's like "wait, before you get too attached, you have to meet my 5 less attractive, and socially reclusive friends. And if you want to date me, they have to come along as well and there is no me without them, it's all of us or none". That extra girl is Charles town and penn national on a Tuesday night.

I have no problem with tracks like that, heck I'm playing fresno as we speak. there is just too much of it, and when a new fan comes in, he has to be a fan of all of this racing, and that's just not very realistic. So what if a guy wants to sit at home on the weekend and play play the stakes races from 2-6 on saturdays.

No one argues that the WSOP brought in new fans for poker, how do you think people who are into Olympic games, get the idea to be a speed skater or a 400 meter dash guy, that's not something you just dream about. b ut when it comes to horse racing, the thought that the big events can generate fans, is just above the head.

[nearco]

It's the challenge of handicapping that needs to be sold.


Bullshit.
The number of people in the world that actually get a kick out of spending umpteem hours pouring over a Form is less than .00001% of the population. Racing manages to thrive in other countries around the world, not because the population of those countries like to sit down and read pages of PP's, but because they first sell the excitement of the race, and the gambling follows. IMO American racing OVERsells the whole handicapping angle, and thus drives millions of people away from the sport. The sport is most often sold as nothing but a betting game that revolves around piles and piles of numbers and stats. Most normal people find that shit boring as all bejeezuz. Have you ever seen a race card in another country? It doesn't have half the info that a US card does. There usually are no timed work outs, no fractions. However it will have things the silks on the card in full color. If you get people to the racecourse and show them some exciting racing, and bit of variation to keep their interest (i.e not an endless procession of 6f lefthanded one turn sprints, where the horses finish in single file and the race is decided by early speed and is effectively over at the 1/8th pole), then the will bet while they are there. They don't have to know what they are doing. They don't have to have schooling in handicapping. The one's that are into that stuff will go that way on their own accord. Sell the experience, the horses, the pageantry, the excitement, the social aspect of it, and the betting will follow. Don't hand them a book of pages that is full of numbers and number and numbers piled on top of more numbers and expect them to get excited by it.

This idea that we need to teach people to "make money at the track" is the biggest pile of cobblers. It's a zero sum game, actually less than zero sum. If everyone that gambled on racing was an expert handicapper no one would make any money. You need to get people jazzed about going to the track and dropping a $50, $100, $200 for no other reason than it's a day/evening/night out. They will hit the occasional score and it'll be a big thrill. If they don't win a thing, they should feel that they were entertained and got some value for their money. People don't go to a sporting event, a concert, a nice restaurant and think "I didn't make any money at this, gee I guess I'm not doing this anymore".

[toussaud]

IMO American racing OVERsells the whole handicapping angle, and thus drives millions of people away from the sport. The sport is most often sold as nothing but a betting game that revolves around piles and piles of numbers and stats. Most normal people find that shit boring as all bejeezuz. Have you ever seen a race card in another country? It doesn't have half the info that a US card does. There usually are no timed work outs, no fractions. damn i never thought about it like that.

I have seen the aussie PP.. and you are correct, I mean it has some info but no where near as detailed as PP's.

[Tom]

And they have nowhere near as many races as we do.

[toussaud]

And they have nowhere near as many races as we do.
and that's a good thing

Australia features 2 tracks a day 7 days a week from what i can gather. there might be more than 2, but all they show here are 2. They rotate the 2, sometimes 3 tracks perfectly, they all are in unison, there are no inter-lapping races, as soon as one goes off you are 12 to post to the next race somewhere else, all in all you get between 16 to 24 races a day, that's really all the racing you need IMHO

[nearco]

And they have nowhere near as many races as we do.

???? How do you figure that?

For 2010
Australia 19,281 races per year
USA 46,220 races per year

Australia population ~20m
USA population ~300m

Australia has a bit less than half the races as the US with 1/15th the population.

[Robert Goren]

No one argues that the WSOP brought in new fans for poker, how do you think people who are into Olympic games, get the idea to be a speed skater or a 400 meter dash guy, that's not something you just dream about. b ut when it comes to horse racing, the thought that the big events can generate fans, is just above the head.The WSOP has been on tv almost since the first one. No paid much attention to it for years. It was the World Poker Tour on the Travel Channel of all places that started to draw people with its hole card camera that got people to start watching. Almost every male had played some form of poker at sometime so they knew something about it. It was the seeing the hands during the play that made it interesting. It did hurt that the edited out the 90% of the hands that someone made a bet and then everybody else folded. It was the deciding what you would do then that made it interesting.
Watching horse racing on network TV or ESPN is one big snooze fest. Nobody cares about the life story of the owner, trainer or the jockey. I think they should show video of the horses' recent races. If a horse was gaining on another horse late in stretch of a previous race, make a big deal of it. Will that horse get up in time today? Will the other horse hang on again? Will the invader kill off the front runner. Spark some interest in the race. In other words, do what we as bettors do before we make a bet, only with video..

[BombsAway Bob]

The WSOP has been on tv almost since the first one. No paid much attention to it for years. It was the World Poker Tour on the Travel Channel of all places that started to draw people with its hole card camera that got people to start watching. Almost every male had played some form of poker at sometime so they knew something about it. It was the seeing the hands during the play that made it interesting. It did hurt that the edited out the 90% of the hands that someone made a bet and then everybody else folded. It was the deciding what you would do then that made it interesting.
Watching horse racing on network TV or ESPN is one big snooze fest. Nobody cares about the life story of the owner, trainer or the jockey. I think they should show video of the horses' recent races. If a horse was gaining on another horse late in stretch of a previous race, make a big deal of it. Will that horse get up in time today? Will the other horse hang on again? Will the invader kill off the front runner. Spark some interest in the race. In other words, do what we as bettors do before we make a bet, only with video..
For Network coverage, surely they could create a "computer Composite" showing the final 3 furlongs of the Top Contenders last races, re-created so you can visually see who was closing, tiring, or plodding one-paced in a manner making it look like they are running in the same video backtrack, one that casual fans might embrace.
i have long touted selling the event, not the handicapping to newbies.
The thrill will do the trick....

[toussaud]

The WSOP has been on tv almost since the first one. No paid much attention to it for years. It was the World Poker Tour on the Travel Channel of all places that started to draw people with its hole card camera that got people to start watching. Almost every male had played some form of poker at sometime so they knew something about it. It was the seeing the hands during the play that made it interesting. It did hurt that the edited out the 90% of the hands that someone made a bet and then everybody else folded. It was the deciding what you would do then that made it interesting.
Watching horse racing on network TV or ESPN is one big snooze fest. Nobody cares about the life story of the owner, trainer or the jockey. I think they should show video of the horses' recent races. If a horse was gaining on another horse late in stretch of a previous race, make a big deal of it. Will that horse get up in time today? Will the other horse hang on again? Will the invader kill off the front runner. Spark some interest in the race. In other words, do what we as bettors do before we make a bet, only with video..

This is what i kinda mean by packaging

in reality, it's not ESPN's fault, they are working with what we are giving them.

Take, Belmont day, just using a random day here. On Belmont day, there are usually some decent races elsewhere. I know Hollywood Park runs some goo races as it's usually I want to say the day they run the Affirmed. I know Churchill downs usually runs some good races that day as well.

NO one ever gets together and says, look let's stagger our times, 10 minutes apart from each other, so they are always showing SOMETHING on ESPN. But ey don't, so ESPN is stuck trying to fill in the 30-35 minutes between races by themselves, and what else can you do besides show hammered hank and the sappy stories? They are working with what we give them.

Wow that's especially true on Preakness day as that's usually the day they run the shuvee handicap @ Belmont.

Because there is nothing else going on between races, you have to really keep in mind just how much you and I take for granted that the avg person doesn't know. The avg person doesn't know there are 2 networks that show nothing but horse racing, or that there is another race going off somewhere else as soon as this one is over, hell another grade 1 race at that lol. All they know is "this is freaking boring" and how can you blame them.

[nearco]

in reality, it's not ESPN's fault, they are working with what we are giving them.


NO one ever gets together and says, look let's stagger our times, 10 minutes apart from each other, so they are always showing SOMETHING on ESPN. But ey don't, so ESPN is stuck trying to fill in the 30-35 minutes between races by themselves, and what else can you do besides show hammered hank and the sappy stories? They are working with what we give them.



Last weekend ESPN came on the air at what was it, 4:30? There was already several G1 races (Turf Classic etc) run before they came on air. They didn't even bother to show replays of any of those races the whole time they were on air. Are they not allowed to? Is it a rights issue? They did manage to throw in a few stupid human interest things though.
This shit happens all the time. You never see any of the undercard races on Triple Crown race days..... there's usually a few G1 races in there, Woodford Reserve, Manhattan, Pimlico Special etc.

[toussaud]

Last weekend ESPN came on the air at what was it, 4:30? There was already several G1 races (Turf Classic etc) run before they came on air. They didn't even bother to show replays of any of those races the whole time they were on air. Are they not allowed to? Is it a rights issue? They did manage to throw in a few stupid human interest things though.
This shit happens all the time. You never see any of the undercard races on Triple Crown race days..... there's usually a few G1 races in there, Woodford Reserve, Manhattan, Pimlico Special etc.
you talking about at belmont?

when was the last time they actually ran the pimlico special? i don't think they ran that this year. it's off and on.

I know the Woodford Reserve and i feel your pain on that. it's a "in limbo" race, and that's kinda the exception as the derby, NBC does the red walk of fame coverage, but they have the rights to the Woodford, they just chose not to show it, and I get why and while i don't agree, I get it, won't argue.


it just gets under my skin, forth of July weekend, is usually a pretty big weekend in horse racing. if all the tracks put their collective heads together, they could put together a damn good 2 hour show. Suburban, United Nations, etc. But no, in stead you have the united states and the suburban going off within 3 minutes of each other, and hollywood park running grade 1's at 7:30 at night.

NBC has no problem doing this when they want to. Every year it seems, at least in the past, the Santa Anita Derby and Wood were on the same live broadcast. I know the Louisiana derby and the Spiral stakes were last year on the same broadcast. They CAN. they just chose not to.

[Canarsie]

The WSOP has been on tv almost since the first one. No paid much attention to it for years. It was the World Poker Tour on the Travel Channel of all places that started to draw people with its hole card camera that got people to start watching. Almost every male had played some form of poker at sometime so they knew something about it. It was the seeing the hands during the play that made it interesting. It did hurt that the edited out the 90% of the hands that someone made a bet and then everybody else folded. It was the deciding what you would do then that made it interesting.
Watching horse racing on network TV or ESPN is one big snooze fest. Nobody cares about the life story of the owner, trainer or the jockey. I think they should show video of the horses' recent races. If a horse was gaining on another horse late in stretch of a previous race, make a big deal of it. Will that horse get up in time today? Will the other horse hang on again? Will the invader kill off the front runner. Spark some interest in the race. In other words, do what we as bettors do before we make a bet, only with video..


Your my poker guy do you have an answer for this? While I loved them showing the delayed coverage of less than one hour and everyone mucking their hands I would think the ratings are far higher for the edited version. Like you stated anyone who played knows that happens 90% of the time. Sometime when I see a guy call with not so good cards I figured he was on a roll and riding it but they never tell you.

As for racing networks don't care about the 50,000 active players in the game. They need to reach a much broader audience. Surely they know you can watch the race from your ADW so its not a major concern for them.

Another example would be I can now watch NYRA on HRTV instead of TVG. So if I don't like who is on I have a backup and choices. Can't wait for my NYRA rewards card to come in the mail. :jump:

The most important demographic is that probably over 75% of the people here fall into one that isn't desired by most networks or advertisers. Read this and see what the demographics are for The Price is Right

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_profile


Here's one for the road.


In general, the number of viewers within the 18–49 age range is more important than the total number of viewers.[5][6] According to Advertising Age, during the 2007–08 season, Grey's Anatomy was able to charge $419,000 per commercial, compared to only $248,000 for a commercial during CSI, despite CSI having almost five million more viewers on average

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nielsen_ratings

[Tom]

???? How do you figure that?

For 2010
Australia 19,281 races per year
USA 46,220 races per year

Australia population ~20m
USA population ~300m

Australia has a bit less than half the races as the US with 1/15th the population.

So that would be far less.

[thespaah]

When I was a kid two things grabbed my interest in horse racing. In 1976 the Meadowlands opened. The other was a availability of racing shows on tv.
Regular over the air tv.
Every Saturday afternoon WOR-TV ch 9 showed the feature and the last races from NYRA. In the summer, these were shown live in a well packaged 30 minute show.
Then at night, racing from Yonkers or Roosevelt at 11pm.
Without these shows, I probably would have never gone to the Meadowlands and thus not gotten into horse racing.
The whole thing was just fun for us. We wanted to go to the races just to be there. We were fans of the horses, drivers/jocks first. The betting to win money came later.
We were teenagers looking for something to do that was different.
Track marketing is still stuck in "we built it, now get here"...That doesn't wash.
Tracks have to market themselves as a place to go that's fun.
Of course I have heard and read the griping from hard core handicappers who whine about "these kids" who come to the track and don't bet anything and don't know what they are doing.
I will preface the following remarks...I go to the track to make money at the races. I do still go to have a good time. It's entertainment. No tlife and death. I do not handicap races to make a living.
However, I would much rather see thousands of young and middle aged people at the track having a good time than be at the track with a couple thousand "business handicappers".
The races should be a fun and entertaining activity. Track managements MUST realize that and implement strategies to get people through the doors. And then give them a reason to come back.
Offer perks and comps. Coupons for free admission. Offer couples a discount on meals in the clubhouse. Set up places where kids can be dropped off and cared for while parents enjoy the races. Offer teens and twenty somethings date night promos. Or bring your friends. Guys night/day out. Same for the girls.
Offer free wager coupons. College days/nights. There's tons of stuff that can be done.
Attitudes of track managements and horsemen( their animosity toward those who wager) must change.
Heck a race track could run commercials featuring trainers or jocks/drivers offering the message of "come on out to the track and see the fun you've been missing."..That kind of thing.

[Edward DeVere]

Racing's problem is there are too many graded stakes available.


Yeah, I'm putting the odds of the number of graded stakes being reduced by a percentage equal to the decline in the foal crop at about, oh, 500-1.

(Does the tote board go that high?)

[Robert Goren]

I hate the idea of kids at a race track. The idea of kids being around any place that gambling is going on is just plain wrong. It doesn't matter if it a race track or Casino floor. I haven't been to lot of casinos in recent years. but I can't imagine that very many of them are allowing 12 year old sit next to their parents at a blackjack table.

[Spiderman]

I hate the idea of kids at a race track. The idea of kids being around any place that gambling is going on is just plain wrong. It doesn't matter if it a race track or Casino floor. I haven't been to lot of casinos in recent years. but I can't imagine that very many of them are allowing 12 year old sit next to their parents at a blackjack table.
House rule in all Atlantic City casinos - no children allowed.

[Canarsie]

I hate the idea of kids at a race track. The idea of kids being around any place that gambling is going on is just plain wrong. It doesn't matter if it a race track or Casino floor. I haven't been to lot of casinos in recent years. but I can't imagine that very many of them are allowing 12 year old sit next to their parents at a blackjack table.

Do you realize how many less fans racing would have attracted if your wish was granted? My father took me to the track when I was twelve and it was an experience I loved. By the time I was fourteen my time spent with him on father son activities was far less than ten percent. At that point in my life I was going to the track on my own. I did go with him occasionally on the weekend but when school let out it was hitchhiking on the Belt Parkway for me.

I was also playing Las Vegas nights in Brooklyn starting around 16 nobody objected my money was as good as anyone else.

What's my point? If he hadn't taken me precisely the time he did racing would have had at least one less fan and probably one less poster. Though some would agree my last point would be a good thing. :D

[thespaah]

I hate the idea of kids at a race track. The idea of kids being around any place that gambling is going on is just plain wrong. It doesn't matter if it a race track or Casino floor. I haven't been to lot of casinos in recent years. but I can't imagine that very many of them are allowing 12 year old sit next to their parents at a blackjack table.Gee Rob, did you see the word "kids" and your knee jerked up and hit you in the jaw?
I stated quite clearly that kids could be dropped off in special areas set aside where they can be watched and entertained while their parents enjoyed the races.
It is your kind of thinking inside the little box that pervades race track management policies.

[toussaud]

Do you realize how many less fans racing would have attracted if your wish was granted? My father took me to the track when I was twelve and it was an experience I loved. By the time I was fourteen my time spent with him on father son activities was far less than ten percent. At that point in my life I was going to the track on my own. I did go with him occasionally on the weekend but when school let out it was hitchhiking on the Belt Parkway for me.

I was also playing Las Vegas nights in Brooklyn starting around 16 nobody objected my money was as good as anyone else.

What's my point? If he hadn't taken me precisely the time he did racing would have had at least one less fan and probably one less poster. Though some would agree my last point would be a good thing. :D
same here. some of my founder memories as a child is going down to oaklawn with my dad. my mom would even take me when we were out of school.

[Tom]

What, is racing dirty or something? :confused:

[toussaud]

Robert Gorens (the poster not the actual detective) point is a classic affirmative conclusion drawn from a negative premise ( kids often go to the rack track, if you go to the track too often, you would be a degenerate gambler, therefore, we should keep kids away from the track so that they do not grow up to be gambling degenerates).

Actually it's the exact opposite. That's where our next generation of trainers, jockeys, TV Analyst, owners, track announcers are going to come from. Jeff Siegl commonly tells the audience how is "old enough to see bill shoemaker ride when I was a kid". Kurt hoover and Peter Laurie both were going to race tracks at a very early age, Kurt Hoover has been working at race tracks in some way shape or form since he basically got out of school. john white's dad used to take him to longacers race track as a child and he has been hooked ever since (i watch too much hrtv lol)

I just don't get the logic of someone who spends so much time wagering, who thinks the thing he does more than antyhing is bad for everyone else to do.

I took my then 9 year old sister to go see Zenyatta in the apple blossom, just me and her. First time at the track, figured it would be one of those things she will look back on and remember when she gets older. I mean she doesn't have to have a racing form or antyhing to enjoy the sport of the game, you know how often city kids like me see real life horses in real life? not often. And then see the RUNNING against each other? she thought that was just so neat. I had a best friend named taylor and lucky me, his dad was a handicapper, and lol i remember getting Rick Lee's picks in the sports section and we would sit in the back seat of the car for the hour long ride and come up with our wagering strategy (we would both get 20 bucks) for the day. i could not have been 8-9 years old. Those were the days.

[Robert Goren]

I stand by what I posted. When they get to be adults, they do whatever they want. If you want to go to track, hire a baby sitter. If you can't afford both, then you got no business being at track anyway. I feel the same way about kids in bars too.

[Robert Goren]

Actually it's the exact opposite. That's where our next generation of trainers, jockeys, TV Analyst, owners, track announcers are going to come from. Jeff Siegl commonly tells the audience how is "old enough to see bill shoemaker ride when I was a kid". Kurt hoover and Peter Laurie both were going to race tracks at a very early age, Kurt Hoover has been working at race tracks in some way shape or form since he basically got out of school. john white's dad used to take him to longacers race track as a child and he has been hooked ever since (i watch too much hrtv lol)


.The next generation of bettors should come the same places as the next generation of accountants or lawyers come from. No one takes a kid to an accountant's or lawyer's office. You do not have to be exposed to this stuff in a major way as a kid to be involved with it as an adult.

[thaskalos]

I just don't get the logic of someone who spends so much time wagering, who thinks the thing he does more than antyhing is bad for everyone else to do.

I don't think this was Robert Goren's point at all...

Nobody is trying to discourage "everyone else" from doing something that we like to do...

Some of us just think that 8 and 9 year olds are a little too young to appreciate the majesty of the race track...and the thrill and intrigue of a race.

I myself happen to think that the only reason adults take 8 and 9 year olds to the track in the first place is because they (the adults) want to go there...and they have no place to leave the kids.

IMO...8 and 9 year olds would much rather be at a zoo...

[toussaud]

i don't think that's the case. at 8 years old i would basically ask my dad to take me to the track lol. more than once i talked him into going.


You do not have to be exposed to this stuff in a major way as a kid to be involved with it as an adult.

you are now changing the battle grounds of the debate from "horse racing makes kids grow up to be degenerates" to "there is no reason horse racing should have to rely on getting kids interested in the sport to fuel the next generation of professionals in the sport"

I never said that was the case. But you are skipping over the fact that, this has been the case. You are also making the assumption that kids are being taken against their will to race tracks when I honestly believe that's not the case whatsoever, at least for the most part.


The next generation of bettors should come the same places as the next generation of accountants or lawyers come from


There is no national mandate on where bettors should come from. Also you didn't put much thought into this sentence.

People, all or at least most people, get into professions that somehow impacted them in some way. This is the same way hobbies are formed. My mom forced me to take piano lessons as a child and now I play the piano as a hobby. My dad used to watch Arkansas football games with me as a child and now I am rabid razorback fan.

Even little things. My dad used to always watch the NBA draft. Even now I follow the NBA draft, and consider myself somewhat of a draftnik.

When i was 9, my mom bought our first computer off the home shopping network lol. I remember getting it and us spending all day trying to put it together. That was probably in retrospect the most important day of my life, what seemed inconsequential at the time, just getting a computer, i took to it like a fish to water. I could type fluently by the time i was 11 and knew MS dos pretty well as well. I could get around the internet very easily. My mom seeing I had taken to it, bought herself a new computer and told me i could have it. by the time i was 13 i could take it apart and put it back together. I knew what everything inside of it did and was supposed to do, i would cut grass around the neighborhood and save my money and while other kids were buying video games, as was I, i was buying more ram and the newest version of windows (this is pre cd burner). i was building html pages by the time was 16 and by the time i was out of high school i was basically the computer tech guy at school, more than once i got called out of class to fix a computer problem in another room.

needless to say I knew what i wanted to do, without question as my career, i wanted to build/ fix computers, and by golly that's what i did. I did not have to go to college to figure this out and they weren't going to teach me anything i didn't already know, so I spent the time instead saving money. I started my own custom computer building company. I had no problem working my butt off because i was doing what i loved. before my 2 best friends had graduated from college, my company was doing well over a million in revenue and i sold the company a few days before my 21st birthday.

something as inconsequential as my mom, buying me a computer when i was 9 years old. I remember the day like it was yesterday, it was a Saturday in april, i played little league baseball and I had a double hitter that day because the Wednesday game got rained out. we won the first game in the morning (and i pitched :)). I was a call up kid, every team a league above you had 3 kids they could call up to play in case of emergency, and i was good enough that i basically played full time with both teams and they played later that night.. actually that league included now all pro safety Chris Smith for the Chicago bears and his twin brother, and his dad coached the team we played that night and we got beat pretty good. they always had a good team.


Anyway, i know i can get long winded but i say that to say this. If you want people, who are passionate enough to fight for the game to stay the way it is, if not thrive, and not be overrun by money hungry trainers and bureaucrats looking to have their pockets filled by slot money, you have to expose them young.

I have never in my life known someone who wasn't passionate about something that they weren't exposed to in some way shape or form as a child or teenager.

I mean thinka bout what you are saying.. race track announcer? who just looks in the newspaper when they are 25 and says "yeah I'm unemployed... dammit... hum..race track announcer, I can do that, can't be that hard, let me call and see if they have health coverage as well"

My sole point is you are arguing a false premise, with that premise that all kids, don't want to be at the race track, and you are then backing it up by saying that kids should not be exposed to the sport, but you really don't have a valid reason as to WHY they should not be exposed to the sport. Why not? It doesn't make sense. How can you sit here in one thread talking about how we don't need to expose kids to the sport of horse racing, and in the next thread, praise people like mike repole who, grew up watching horse racing and would not be buying the horses he buys now and spending ht money he spends now if not for that. If my dad would have taken me to the track and i cried entire time, he would not have taken me back and that would have been the end of it. But hell i didn't want to leave. I asked him to tell me more stories about these horses he talked about all the time, i was particularly facilitated by holy bull. I would look forward to the hour ride home and just listening to him talk about the really good horses.


There is nothing wrong, as long as the child wants to be there, with taking the child to the track.


Let me clarify something. I know my writing style /tone can come off as somewhat abrasive at times, and that's not my intention, you just have to know me, I'm pretty outspoken. You are a good guy and i don't think you are evil or antyhing if we have a difference of opinion.

I will agree with you on this.. that kids should not be exposed to the gambling aspects of it as a kid. My dad did that as well, but in retrospect, i was just as happy going to the track seeing the horses, i didn't care about the money.

[Cardus]

i don't think that's the case. at 8 years old i would basically ask my dad to take me to the track lol. more than once i talked him into going.




you are now changing the battle grounds of the debate from "horse racing makes kids grow up to be degenerates" to "there is no reason horse racing should have to rely on getting kids interested in the sport to fuel the next generation of professionals in the sport"

I never said that was the case. But you are skipping over the fact that, this has been the case. You are also making the assumption that kids are being taken against their will to race tracks when I honestly believe that's not the case whatsoever, at least for the most part.





There is no national mandate on where bettors should come from. Also you didn't put much thought into this sentence.

People, all or at least most people, get into professions that somehow impacted them in some way. This is the same way hobbies are formed. My mom forced me to take piano lessons as a child and now I play the piano as a hobby. My dad used to watch Arkansas football games with me as a child and now I am rabid razorback fan.

Even little things. My dad used to always watch the NBA draft. Even now I follow the NBA draft, and consider myself somewhat of a draftnik.

When i was 9, my mom bought our first computer off the home shopping network lol. I remember getting it and us spending all day trying to put it together. That was probably in retrospect the most important day of my life, what seemed inconsequential at the time, just getting a computer, i took to it like a fish to water. I could type fluently by the time i was 11 and knew MS dos pretty well as well. I could get around the internet very easily. My mom seeing I had taken to it, bought herself a new computer and told me i could have it. by the time i was 13 i could take it apart and put it back together. I knew what everything inside of it did and was supposed to do, i would cut grass around the neighborhood and save my money and while other kids were buying video games, as was I, i was buying more ram and the newest version of windows (this is pre cd burner). i was building html pages by the time was 16 and by the time i was out of high school i was basically the computer tech guy at school, more than once i got called out of class to fix a computer problem in another room.

needless to say I knew what i wanted to do, without question as my career, i wanted to build/ fix computers, and by golly that's what i did. I did not have to go to college to figure this out and they weren't going to teach me anything i didn't already know, so I spent the time instead saving money. I started my own custom computer building company. I had no problem working my butt off because i was doing what i loved. before my 2 best friends had graduated from college, my company was doing well over a million in revenue and i sold the company a few days before my 21st birthday.

something as inconsequential as my mom, buying me a computer when i was 9 years old. I remember the day like it was yesterday, it was a Saturday in april, i played little league baseball and I had a double hitter that day because the Wednesday game got rained out. we won the first game in the morning (and i pitched :)). I was a call up kid, every team a league above you had 3 kids they could call up to play in case of emergency, and i was good enough that i basically played full time with both teams and they played later that night.. actually that league included now all pro safety Chris Smith for the Chicago bears and his twin brother, and his dad coached the team we played that night and we got beat pretty good. they always had a good team.


Anyway, i know i can get long winded but i say that to say this. If you want people, who are passionate enough to fight for the game to stay the way it is, if not thrive, and not be overrun by money hungry trainers and bureaucrats looking to have their pockets filled by slot money, you have to expose them young.

I have never in my life known someone who wasn't passionate about something that they weren't exposed to in some way shape or form as a child or teenager.

I mean thinka bout what you are saying.. race track announcer? who just looks in the newspaper when they are 25 and says "yeah I'm unemployed... dammit... hum..race track announcer, I can do that, can't be that hard, let me call and see if they have health coverage as well"

My sole point is you are arguing a false premise, with that premise that all kids, don't want to be at the race track, and you are then backing it up by saying that kids should not be exposed to the sport, but you really don't have a valid reason as to WHY they should not be exposed to the sport. Why not? It doesn't make sense. How can you sit here in one thread talking about how we don't need to expose kids to the sport of horse racing, and in the next thread, praise people like mike repole who, grew up watching horse racing and would not be buying the horses he buys now and spending ht money he spends now if not for that. If my dad would have taken me to the track and i cried entire time, he would not have taken me back and that would have been the end of it. But hell i didn't want to leave. I asked him to tell me more stories about these horses he talked about all the time, i was particularly facilitated by holy bull. I would look forward to the hour ride home and just listening to him talk about the really good horses.


There is nothing wrong, as long as the child wants to be there, with taking the child to the track.


Let me clarify something. I know my writing style /tone can come off as somewhat abrasive at times, and that's not my intention, you just have to know me, I'm pretty outspoken. You are a good guy and i don't think you are evil or antyhing if we have a difference of opinion.

I will agree with you on this.. that kids should not be exposed to the gambling aspects of it as a kid. My dad did that as well, but in retrospect, i was just as happy going to the track seeing the horses, i didn't care about the money.

This reads like, "Toussaud, an American Life".

[Robert Goren]

It is not the "sport" of horse racing that I object to kids being exposed to. It is exposing them to the "gambling game" of horse racing that I object to. We all know that horse racing is about the gambling, although some people are a little reluctant to admit it. I just don't think that kids should to exposed to gambling. There are somethings that are meant of for adults only and gambling is one of those things.

[Canarsie]

The next generation of bettors should come the same places as the next generation of accountants or lawyers come from. No one takes a kid to an accountant's or lawyer's office. You do not have to be exposed to this stuff in a major way as a kid to be involved with it as an adult.


If I had a dollar for every parent who introduced their child to an accountant or lawyer after they made their profession wish made the sum would be larger than any P6 hit in history.

When I was really young I wanted to be a stock broker my parents introduced me to one and he would send me a bunch of financial information in the mail. Guess that resonates in a negative tone for you.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion but yours means many many children who had their intentions geared to a certain profession should be discouraged.

So you don't believe in mentoring would that be accurate?

[mannyberrios]

Do you realize how many less fans racing would have attracted if your wish was granted? My father took me to the track when I was twelve and it was an experience I loved. By the time I was fourteen my time spent with him on father son activities was far less than ten percent. At that point in my life I was going to the track on my own. I did go with him occasionally on the weekend but when school let out it was hitchhiking on the Belt Parkway for me.

I was also playing Las Vegas nights in Brooklyn starting around 16 nobody objected my money was as good as anyone else.

What's my point? If he hadn't taken me precisely the time he did racing would have had at least one less fan and probably one less poster. Though some would agree my last point would be a good thing. :DWhere on the Belt Parkway were you hitchhiking ?

[DJofSD]

Robert, life is a gamble. Woe be the child whose parent does not teach them that fact and how to deal with it. That includes games of chance and gambling. Your approach is that same that most parents take when it comes to sex -- they don't talk about it and the "street" ends up being the teacher.

[Tom]

Your kid might be the next Andy Beyer and you have him home reading poetry!

[Robert Goren]

Robert, life is a gamble. Woe be the child whose parent does not teach them that fact and how to deal with it. That includes games of chance and gambling. Your approach is that same that most parents take when it comes to sex -- they don't talk about it and the "street" ends up being the teacher. That is the crap that the problem gamblers keep telling themselves to justify their gambling. Lets at least try to be honest about gambling. The only person you are fooling is yourself with that argument. People who are not gamblers just shake their heads when that argument is brought up. Rightfully so.

[DJofSD]

You probably take the same approach to smoking and drinking. I didn't know you were a mormon.

[toussaud]

Your kid might be the next Andy Beyer and you have him home reading poetry!
:lol:

[Canarsie]

Where on the Belt Parkway were you hitchhiking ?

Wow what a question big smile on my face.

Exit 13 Rockaway Parkway where Canarsie is. I used to get there many ways it was fun. Hitchhiked, walked, took my bicycle, and bummed rides. Took the subway once believe it or not that took the longest amount of time.

A little off topic but when I met a whole bunch of my old friends growing up via Facebook a lot said "the last time I was at the track was with you and that was over 40 years ago". One of my friends wrote on my wall stating "ask me who was the president of this country was and I wouldn't know (he was exaggerating I liked politics even then) but if you wanted Dr. Fagers splits I was the person to see. :D

[thaskalos]

Robert, life is a gamble. Woe be the child whose parent does not teach them that fact and how to deal with it. That includes games of chance and gambling. Your approach is that same that most parents take when it comes to sex -- they don't talk about it and the "street" ends up being the teacher.
If a player is truly involved in this game, he cannot possibly hide his involvement from his kids. Even if we do our betting at the track or the OTBs, there will still be enough racing forms and horse racing "bibles" laying around the house to arouse the curiosity of our kids about our favorite game.

That's all the encouragement we have to provide, IMO...there is no need to take them by the hand and lead them to the race track at 8 years of age.

This is not Little League baseball.

When the kids are old enough to make responsible decisions about things, they can make up their own minds about whether or not they will get interested in the game...and statistics say they WON'T.

Those of you who are in a hurry to get the kids to the race track must not have traveled the same rocky journey that Robert and I have encountered while playing this game...

I envy you...:)

[Canarsie]

That is the crap that the problem gamblers keep telling themselves to justify their gambling. Lets at least try to be honest about gambling. The only person you are fooling is yourself with that argument. People who are not gamblers just shake their heads when that argument is brought up. Rightfully so.

I'm being serious now how many problem gamblers have you known in your lifetime? The answer for me is one and he was really bad at least his kids were grown when his life collapsed.

I doubt a problem gambler would bring his kids to the track there's not enough action plus he or she could stay home now its much easier.

Playing the lottery is a gamble so what percentage in this great country of ours doesn't gamble? I eagerly wait with anticipation your answer trying to squirm out of this below.

A lottery is a form of gambling which involves the drawing of lots for a prize.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lottery

[thaskalos]

I'm being serious now how many problem gamblers have you known in your lifetime? The answer for me is one and he was really bad at least his kids were grown when his life collapsed.

I doubt a problem gambler would bring his kids to the track there's not enough action plus he or she could stay home now its much easier.

Playing the lottery is a gamble so what percentage in this great country of ours doesn't gamble? I eagerly wait with anticipation your answer trying to squirm out of this below.

A lottery is a form of gambling which involves the drawing of lots for a prize.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lottery
It depends on how you define "problem gambler"...

If we go by the Gamblers Anonymous definition, then I doubt that I have met even one serious player who is not a "problem gambler" - or at least was one at some point of his life - and this includes myself.

[Canarsie]

This is not Little League baseball.

When the kids are old enough to make responsible decisions about things, they can make up their own minds about whether or not they will get interested in the game...and statistics say they WON'T.

Those of you who are in a hurry to get the kids to the race track must not have traveled the same rocky journey that Robert and I have encountered while playing this game...

I envy you...:)

Your right Little League baseball can be far worse have you seen some of the parents behavior at these games? I really would have loved to coach kids but what stopped me was parents whose desire for their kids to be the best ruined it for them. The first parent who would have objected for me putting in an inferior child whose capabilities were much lower probably would have wound up on the floor. Kids playing today can have a life shattering experience due to their parents.


Where did anyone say they are in a hurry to drag their kids with them? If I was a dad today and asked my son "do you want to go to the track with dad" is that a criminal offense?

I will agree with the getting older part to a degree. When I used to hang at Yonkers a friend of mine wanted me to meet his son. He came with his girlfriend, ate dinner, and left after the sixth race. I turned to him and said "they are never coming back you know that"? He nodded his head in agreement and then said "yes".

[BombsAway Bob]

It depends on how you define "problem gambler"...

If we go by the Gamblers Anonymous definition, then I doubt that I have met even one serious player who is not a "problem gambler" - or at least was one at some point of his life - and this includes myself.
Like Earl Hickey once said at a Gamblers Anonymous meeting,
when asked if he had a Gambling Problem (while studying PP's)...
"Do i have a Gambling Problem? That would be like asking
Def Leopard if they had an Awesomeness Problem! NO!"

[thaskalos]

Where did anyone say they are in a hurry to drag their kids with them? If I was a dad today and asked my son "do you want to go to the track with dad" is that a criminal offense?

Doesn't Toussaud (in post 36) talk about the positive affects of taking 8 and 9 year olds to the race track...or did I misread his post?

And when did I say anything about "criminal offenses"?

[iceknight]

Doesn't Toussaud (in post 36) talk about the positive affects of taking 8 and 9 year olds to the race track...or did I misread his post?

And when did I say anything about "criminal offenses"?


Wow, really long thread.. I just wanted to make a brief point. Robert Goren is stating that racing is ALL about gambling. That is fine, but if it is a truly a one shot gamble on weekends or outing where people put down 20-50 bucks over 3-4 races it will be more like a fun entertainment with a possible chance of getting back some or more of what you play.

As someone else noted, in US, racing seems to be more about statistics and numbers - just like other sports betting events. It gives the illusion that players might make money, but it only helps the HOUSE more with the takeout.

Horsetracks needs to think themselves more as entertainment venues, lower the take out and increase mass appeal by reducing small field races.
I agree with Toussad for most of the part, except I did nt have time to read his autobiography. :)

[elhelmete]

I would take my kids to Santa Anita 200 times before I took them to a Lakers or Dodgers game.

[iceknight]

Wow, really long thread.. I just wanted to make a brief point. Robert Goren is stating that racing is ALL about gambling. That is fine, but if it is a truly a one shot gamble on weekends or outing where people put down 20-50 bucks over 3-4 races it will be more like a fun entertainment with a possible chance of getting back some or more of what you play.

As someone else noted, in US, racing seems to be more about statistics and numbers - just like other sports betting events. It gives the illusion that players might make money, but it only helps the HOUSE more with the takeout.

Horsetracks needs to think themselves more as entertainment venues, lower the take out and increase mass appeal by reducing small field races.
I agree with Toussad for most of the part, except I did nt have time to read his autobiography. :)

I should also add that taking kids to the track should be PERFECTLY fine. Gambling occasionally is not a sin but gambling all the time with sheets and pps is. Or with technical pivot point charts? So there should be entertainment sections in racetracks where no PP carrying hardcore handicappers should be allowed :lol: jk

[toussaud]

I should also add that taking kids to the track should be PERFECTLY fine. Gambling occasionally is not a sin but gambling all the time with sheets and pps is. Or with technical pivot point charts? So there should be entertainment sections in racetracks where no PP carrying hardcore handicappers should be allowed :lol: jk
I get what Robert is trying to say. I really do. But I think, to say that, you don't have to go so far as saying that kids should never be at the track. That's like the entire other end of the spectrum.

[Canarsie]

Doesn't Toussaud (in post 36) talk about the positive affects of taking 8 and 9 year olds to the race track...or did I misread his post?

And when did I say anything about "criminal offenses"?


First off you know I like how you post lets get that out of the way.


That is one post and encompasses three people one who went to see Zenyatta run. I wonder how many other parents took a child that age to see an excellent horse on the track. So are you saying on Hambetonian day when they hire a clown to paint faces children shouldn't go?

Lets be serious here how many best friends father is going to give a 8-9 year old kid $20 to wager. I don't know how old toussaud is but it really doesn't matter. Looks like toussaud turned out pretty well he also makes a good read.

If I was a pollster should I stop after 2-3 if the results are what I really wanted?


Criminal offense is a line I use in my rebuttals from time to time it was not intended for you. When I write stuff like that its meant (guess I failed...lol) to be an entertaining read.

[Canarsie]

It depends on how you define "problem gambler"...

If we go by the Gamblers Anonymous definition, then I doubt that I have met even one serious player who is not a "problem gambler" - or at least was one at some point of his life - and this includes myself.

I don't go by any anonymous definition but that's just me. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

The guy I was talking about lost his house because of gambling and went severely into debt which he had to repay.

Again my opinion if you beat something you can't be labeled with it for life. I'm an ex smoker plain and simple. I never refer myself as a reformed or addicted smoker.

Same thing for drugs not proud of it but it is what it is. There is no way I was an ex addict but if someone wants to call me that fine and dandy. I quit using both examples on my own with drugs coming first. After having six friends die of overdoses some sense had to be knocked into that thick skull of mine.

[thaskalos]

First off you know I like how you post lets get that out of the way.


That is one post and encompasses three people one who went to see Zenyatta run. I wonder how many other parents took a child that age to see an excellent horse on the track. So are you saying on Hambetonian day when they hire a clown to paint faces children shouldn't go?

Lets be serious here how many best friends father is going to give a 8-9 year old kid $20 to wager. I don't know how old toussaud is but it really doesn't matter. Looks like toussaud turned out pretty well he also makes a good read.

If I was a pollster should I stop after 2-3 if the results are what I really wanted?


Criminal offense is a line I use in my rebuttals from time to time it was not intended for you. When I write stuff like that its meant (guess I failed...lol) to be an entertaining read.
I do know that you find my posts entertaining and thought-provoking...and I thank you.

I enjoy your posts as well...

As I've said before...I just voice my opinions, I don't claim to always be right about everything I talk about.

And I am always willing to listen to opposing views...

It isn't that I believe there is something inherently wrong with taking a child to the track...

It's just that I have had the misfortune of being an eyewitness to more than a few race track disaster stories...and this has soured my perception that the race track can also be a place of amusement for a child.

I could be wrong...:)

[toussaud]

Lets be serious here how many best friends father is going to give a 8-9 year old kid $20 to wager. I don't know how old toussaud is but it really doesn't matter. Looks like toussaud turned out pretty well he also makes a good read.

I am 28 years old. I should clarify, the friends dad, happened to be a handicapper but so was my dad. My dad would actually give me money if he knew i was going to oaklawn with the friends dad, and my friend would come with me and my dad every once in a while and visa versa.

really don't see the big deal, my mom would give me money to wager when she took me as well. A general 20 dollars i could spend however i wanted, rather it be food, wagering, etc. i think that's honestly where my penchant come for sticking to W/P/S wagers, because as a kid you didn't want to waste your money on the exotics unless you knew you had a real good shot at something.

[thaskalos]

...because as a kid you didn't want to waste your money on the exotics unless you knew you had a real good shot at something.
Pretty advanced for a kid...:)

[toussaud]

well you learned the hard way. 20 bucks is basically 10 2 dollar wagers, and if you blow your money by the 4th race or what not, then you are just sitting there looking stupid lol. plus i would like to eat something so usually i only had like 14 bucks or so left.

ironically enough, the goal for me when i went should be the goal for most people who go to the track now; to leave with what i came with. if i could go home with 20 bucks, as a 9 year old, stop by mc donalds, go rent a video game at blockbuster, you are living the dream lol.


as i started getting more serious about sports, in particular basketball, and basketball season is in the winter, and basketball practice is always on Saturdays when you are in jr and senior high school, i stopped going to the track as much, but once i started following it again i had a leg up on the vast majority of newcomers, i knew what was going on for the most part.

[Zydeco]

When my cousin who is now 16, would wager on the horses with me at parties at my house, his mother would say " Oh teaching him how to gamble." I would say " No, I am teaching him math". He likes it still. Mentoring is a good word I think. We wager for entertainment purposes only.

[Canarsie]

I do know that you find my posts entertaining and thought-provoking...and I thank you.

I enjoy your posts as well...

It's just that I have had the misfortune of being an eyewitness to more than a few race track disaster stories...and this has soured my perception that the race track can also be a place of amusement for a child.

I could be wrong...:)

I'm going to play devils advocate.


Wouldn't that be the same for me with internet horror stories?


My point being is we always find the "bad" but the "good" gets neglected because its what we expect. How many well behaved kids did you pass by without even realizing it?

I don't use Craigslist but millions do. If I recall correctly there was a homicide a while back and everyone jumps on the bandwagon. While I rather have zero give me one bad instance out of a million anytime. The odds of homicide are higher in any city.

You really never hear all the good will stories about people helping others on the net but it happens everyday. Just look at the JCGC and how many people went from here and had a great time. I'm showing up next year they better duck. :lol: