TP only 6 races for Sun.

[Ca9]

TP could only fill 6 races for Sunday.Average field size is 6.

http://www.drf.com/race-entries/TP/USA/2012-09-09/​D (http://www.drf.com/race-entries/TP/USA/2012-09-09/D)

[cj]

I would guess Kentucky Downs isn't helping, but that is ugly.

[Itamaraca]

bel starts the fall meet with a 7 entry 1st race; down to 5 with scratches. And a pretty awful card for the day. And WO is not offering much better. Are TBREDS an endangered species?

[illinoisbred]

Entries have been light at Arlington too since thursday.

[cj]

bel starts the fall meet with a 7 entry 1st race; down to 5 with scratches. And a pretty awful card for the day. And WO is not offering much better. Are TBREDS an endangered species?

Too many tracks, too few COMPETENT horsemen.

[thespaah]

Wow! Just 39 going to the gate...
Was this track not in danger of closing?

[therussmeister]

Entries have been light at Arlington too since thursday. :rolleyes:
This is usual for Arlington after running an extra card on Labor Day. I think they should take the following Thursday off.

And now Calder will be adding a fifth day (Wednesdays) to their schedule. Can't wait to see how that works out. :rolleyes:

[Some_One]

And on the other side of the world, HK opens up 12/13 with 65K on track (20 yr recond), 2% handle increase to 120 US$ Million and I believe a 5 US$ Million carryover in the triple trio to next weekend

[The Hawk]

And on the other side of the world, HK opens up 12/13 with 65K on track (20 yr recond), 2% handle increase to 120 US$ Million and I believe a 5 US$ Million carryover in the triple trio to next weekend

Aren't there are only two tracks in Hong Kong that run once or twice a week?

[Some_One]

Exactly the model that needs to be used here. According to my Horsedata screen, there 36 tracks running in North America on Saturday.

[wisconsin]

Exactly the model that needs to be used here. According to my Horsedata screen, there 36 tracks running in North America on Saturday.


Playing one or two tracks where only the best horses anywhere compete day in and day out would provide you with very tough, if not impossible race cards long term.

[cj]

Playing one or two tracks where only the best horses anywhere compete day in and day out would provide you with very tough, if not impossible race cards long term.

Really? I mean, people really hate betting the Breeders Cup and the Derby, right? Those big pools would be pretty awful too. Imagine making a bet on a horse that is 4 to 1 and not worrying that when he wins he'll be 7 to 5. Terrible I know.

[Some_One]

Really? I mean, people really hate betting the Breeders Cup and the Derby, right? Those big pools would be pretty awful too. Imagine making a bet on a horse that is 4 to 1 and not worrying that when he wins he'll be 7 to 5. Terrible I know.

Lol, you beat me to the reply CJ...who complains about 12 horse evenly matched fields? HK is suppose to have the best handicappers/teams in the world, yet despite that not one fav won on Saturday.

[wisconsin]

Really? I mean, people really hate betting the Breeders Cup and the Derby, right? Those big pools would be pretty awful too. Imagine making a bet on a horse that is 4 to 1 and not worrying that when he wins he'll be 7 to 5. Terrible I know.


I get that, but you know how hard some maiden races are, and now with 2 or 3 tracks, it just gets harder. Don't bet maidens, great, would you really look at a full field of $100,000 claimers the way you look at a field of seven $20,000 claimers?

Most people lose their ass on BC and Derby day. I personally think it would become mighty difficult to class out horses the way we do now. Only the top level horses would be competing every day. Just my objective opinion.

[cj]

I get that, but you know how hard some maiden races are, and now with 2 or 3 tracks, it just gets harder. Don't bet maidens, great, would you really look at a full field of $100,000 claimers the way you look at a field of seven $20,000 claimers?

Most people lose their ass on BC and Derby day. I personally think it would become mighty difficult to class out horses the way we do now. Only the top level horses would be competing every day. Just my objective opinion.

I don't see any reason we still can't have the lower level tracks. We just need less of them. We need less of them at ALL levels of races. I think having just a few tracks running a few days a week is going too far.

[alhattab]

I don't see any reason we still can't have the lower level tracks. We just need less of them. We need less of them at ALL levels of races. I think having just a few tracks running a few days a week is going too far.

And we also need fewer tracks running for very similar purse values, and with rich stakes races. We need lower level tracks and we need an A-ball to Major Leagues pecking order like we used to in the East when NYRA was the majors, NJ and MD were AAA, PA was AA and Del, et al was A-ball. The slots-infused stakes are killers too as the upcoming Parx races have killed NYRA's BC preview day.

The beauty of HK is that it is easily the best racing around SE Asia. They have a season and every day is important. They can bet other jurisdictions like Macau and Singapore I believe.

[thespaah]

I don't see any reason we still can't have the lower level tracks. We just need less of them. We need less of them at ALL levels of races. I think having just a few tracks running a few days a week is going too far.
The problem I see is there are too many tracks running at the same time in close geographic proximity while competing for the same or similar racing stock.
The business model is self destructive.
I maintain there should be a major contraction in the industry.
Tracks that continue to struggle with revenue are eventually going to be forced out of business.
The solution in my opinion is shorter meets.
Instead of racing 150 or 200 days, run 40.
The shorter meets have higher average attendance, higher average handle. Shorter meets reduce operating costs and reduce the cost of labor.
Cold weather meets should be eliminated.
Nobody goes and even internet wagering is paltry. Why bother?

[alhattab]

The problem I see is there are too many tracks running at the same time in close geographic proximity while competing for the same or similar racing stock.
The business model is self destructive.
I maintain there should be a major contraction in the industry.
Tracks that continue to struggle with revenue are eventually going to be forced out of business.
The solution in my opinion is shorter meets.
Instead of racing 150 or 200 days, run 40.
The shorter meets have higher average attendance, higher average handle. Shorter meets reduce operating costs and reduce the cost of labor.
Cold weather meets should be eliminated.
Nobody goes and even internet wagering is paltry. Why bother?

The major contraction would have happened if no slots. They have ruined the sport. Before slots I really looked forward to Saturday racing and all the big races, especially in NY. Now so man of the Saturday cards look like weekday cards, and many stakes races are diluted. So now nothing save for a very few days are special anymore, whereas before slots it seemed most Saturdays and Sundays had some appeal.

[Al Gobbi]

Sample of yesterdays US track handles (that are reported) + #of races:
Belmont: 10.7M (10)
Fairplex: 5.4M (11)
Monmouth: 2.4M (9) :eek:
Parx: 1.2M (11)
Presque Isle: $620k (8)

Fact is, only a handful of tracks (NYRA, NJ, Arlington, Woodbine, CA and KEE/CD) should be running on weekends that are in the afternoon. The others have very little to no handles slots or no slots.

When the slot money is curtailed (and it will) the PA tracks will be the first to fold the tent. None of them care about racing, and that goes for most racinos as well.

[Some_One]

I get that, but you know how hard some maiden races are, and now with 2 or 3 tracks, it just gets harder. Don't bet maidens, great, would you really look at a full field of $100,000 claimers the way you look at a field of seven $20,000 claimers?

Most people lose their ass on BC and Derby day. I personally think it would become mighty difficult to class out horses the way we do now. Only the top level horses would be competing every day. Just my objective opinion.

People who have trouble on those days are those that scream and shout for their 1/2 favs that win by a nose in 5 horse fields. BC and Derby are great days with insane value in all the pools, if you can hit a P3 or P4, you're playing with house money the rest of the day.

[letswastemoney]

I get that, but you know how hard some maiden races are, and now with 2 or 3 tracks, it just gets harder. Don't bet maidens, great, would you really look at a full field of $100,000 claimers the way you look at a field of seven $20,000 claimers?

Most people lose their ass on BC and Derby day. I personally think it would become mighty difficult to class out horses the way we do now. Only the top level horses would be competing every day. Just my objective opinion.
Form holds better with higher quality horses. It's easier to see angles in the past performances.

With a lot of claiming races, I feel I'd be better off shooting darts.

I would love if every weekend was like the Breeders' Cup.

[thespaah]

The major contraction would have happened if no slots. They have ruined the sport. Before slots I really looked forward to Saturday racing and all the big races, especially in NY. Now so man of the Saturday cards look like weekday cards, and many stakes races are diluted. So now nothing save for a very few days are special anymore, whereas before slots it seemed most Saturdays and Sundays had some appeal.
I just pulled out my program for Hopeful day 1977...Yes I still have it..
9 races....Card started with two claiming races. One for 18k- 16k...
2nd race was for $35k claimers...Next two ...NW3X...Then a 2yo NW1X..
Next in the 5th it was a NW3X then a condition never seen anymore....NW4X...Then a NW1X..8th race was the Hopeful. The night cap was a 2YO mdn..
To sum it up, that day there were 2 claiming races 4 allowance 2 maiden races and one Stakes race...
Fast forward to today and we see cards laced with maiden races and mdn claimers.
Thing is racing secretaries are going to write races they know will fill. So if there are tons of claiming horses and maidens on the grounds, then that is what they will write.

[thespaah]

Form holds better with higher quality horses. It's easier to see angles in the past performances.

With a lot of claiming races, I feel I'd be better off shooting darts.

I would love if every weekend was like the Breeders' Cup.
Hmm. I find claiming races to be formful enough that there is predictability.
In fact, there are angles in open claiming races if one looks closely enough at the conditions of the race.

[devilsbag]

I just pulled out my program for Hopeful day 1977...Yes I still have it...

I'll give you the 35 cents cover price for it. :)

[therussmeister]

Form holds better with higher quality horses. It's easier to see angles in the past performances.

With a lot of claiming races, I feel I'd be better off shooting darts.

I would love if every weekend was like the Breeders' Cup.

The problem with formful races is that they are formful for all bettors, reducing your edge. The key to winning is to do difficult things. To me that means finding the form angles (they are there) in cheap claimers and maidens.

[dilanesp]

Playing one or two tracks where only the best horses anywhere compete day in and day out would provide you with very tough, if not impossible race cards long term.

This is quite true. But on the other hand, that doesn't damper handle at all in Hong Kong-- they bet a ton on every race.

[dilanesp]

The major contraction would have happened if no slots. They have ruined the sport. Before slots I really looked forward to Saturday racing and all the big races, especially in NY. Now so man of the Saturday cards look like weekday cards, and many stakes races are diluted. So now nothing save for a very few days are special anymore, whereas before slots it seemed most Saturdays and Sundays had some appeal.

I'm not sure the contraction would have happened without slots.

To some extent, of course, the contraction HAS happened. There are plenty of tracks that don't run anymore. There are entire states that don't have horse racing anymore.

But we do need a much bigger contraction. And the roadblock isn't slot money-- it's horsemen. Horsemen's groups oppose reductions in race dates, and demand year round racing anywhere they can get it. Indeed, they LIKE short fields where the races are easier to win.

To pick the state that is near and dear to my heart-- it is quite obvious that here in California, there are not enough horses for 2 separate racing circuits. But there are enough for one. So instead of awarding overlapping dates for Golden Gate and the Southern California circuit, the CHRB ought to set up a single Califonia circuit (which is how it was set up originally in the 1930's anyway).

But every time we close a track, the horsemen maintain that it is out of the question that we do anything other than reward the dates to the other tracks. So it never happens.

[cj]

I'm not sure the contraction would have happened without slots.

To some extent, of course, the contraction HAS happened. There are plenty of tracks that don't run anymore. There are entire states that don't have horse racing anymore.

But we do need a much bigger contraction. And the roadblock isn't slot money-- it's horsemen. Horsemen's groups oppose reductions in race dates, and demand year round racing anywhere they can get it. Indeed, they LIKE short fields where the races are easier to win.

To pick the state that is near and dear to my heart-- it is quite obvious that here in California, there are not enough horses for 2 separate racing circuits. But there are enough for one. So instead of awarding overlapping dates for Golden Gate and the Southern California circuit, the CHRB ought to set up a single Califonia circuit (which is how it was set up originally in the 1930's anyway).

But every time we close a track, the horsemen maintain that it is out of the question that we do anything other than reward the dates to the other tracks. So it never happens.

Without slots, there would be no Mnr, Prx, Del, CT, and probably Mth without the AC subsidies. That track won't be around much longer. RP would be gone too, and I'm sure there are many others like all the New Mexico tracks.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Without slots, there would be no Mnr, Prx, Del, CT, and probably Mth without the AC subsidies. That track won't be around much longer. RP would be gone too, and I'm sure there are many others like all the New Mexico tracks.

Exactly. They have the luxury of making a poor racing product completely immune from the immediate natural consequences of a poor racing product. Worse yet, they have the luxury of standing by and allowing the product to deteriorate more and more without alarm or intervention. Worse yet, as this all happens, their model damages the abilities of those entities that are not immune from all of this repercussion to maintain or improve the quality of their products in a healthy way.

Slots, as was forseeable, are becoming the major (tangible) obstacle to any real improvement in the industry long term. If you can't fight them, you join them, or suffer, and if you join them, you've already lost. Of course, there are many cooperating influences in racing's demise - it's just that the gaming via racing method that has been implemented has proven itself to be the short-term quack medical innoculation that shuts down any pathway to a healthy recovery in most jurisdictions and is an obviously highly contagious virus. The sooner this virus overwhelms its victims and runs its course in their systems leaving nothing but a corpse of its original host, the sooner those that have yet to be infected can at least have a bit of a fighting chance at trying to get healthy without seeing the quack.

[alhattab]

Without slots, there would be no Mnr, Prx, Del, CT, and probably Mth without the AC subsidies. That track won't be around much longer. RP would be gone too, and I'm sure there are many others like all the New Mexico tracks.

Not sure what you mean by the Mth comment, but what is criminal in all this is that a track like Mth is clearly threatened because of Parx and Del. Meanwhile, on any given Saturday or Sunday Mth will attract 10,000 people and $600-$700k on track on the live product (and my guess is about the same amount on inbound simulcast product) while Parx barely breaks $100k ontrack on the weekend. This will crush the game in the long run because it is tracks like Mth and others that draw live bodies that create horseplayers of the future.

[menifee]

Exactly. They have the luxury of making a poor racing product completely immune from the immediate natural consequences of a poor racing product. Worse yet, they have the luxury of standing by and allowing the product to deteriorate more and more without alarm or intervention. Worse yet, as this all happens, their model damages the abilities of those entities that are not immune from all of this repercussion to maintain or improve the quality of their products in a healthy way.

Slots, as was forseeable, are becoming the major (tangible) obstacle to any real improvement in the industry long term. If you can't fight them, you join them, or suffer, and if you join them, you've already lost. Of course, there are many cooperating influences in racing's demise - it's just that the gaming via racing method that has been implemented has proven itself to be the short-term quack medical innoculation that shuts down any pathway to a healthy recovery in most jurisdictions and is an obviously highly contagious virus. The sooner this virus overwhelms its victims and runs its course in their systems leaving nothing but a corpse of its original host, the sooner those that have yet to be infected can at least have a bit of a fighting chance at trying to get healthy without seeing the quack.

I've made this point a number of times. The slot subsidy has done what all government subsidies do when they interfere in the market. The market gets distorted and a bad product survives because of the subsidy. It is has been obvious for years, that there needs to be a contraction at the lower level tracks, but the slot subsidy will not let it happen. As a result, you have too many tracks running too many races with very few horses.

[The Hawk]

Not sure what you mean by the Mth comment, but what is criminal in all this is that a track like Mth is clearly threatened because of Parx and Del. Meanwhile, on any given Saturday or Sunday Mth will attract 10,000 people and $600-$700k on track on the live product (and my guess is about the same amount on inbound simulcast product) while Parx barely breaks $100k ontrack on the weekend. This will crush the game in the long run because it is tracks like Mth and others that draw live bodies that create horseplayers of the future.

Excellent post.

[cj]

Not sure what you mean by the Mth comment, but what is criminal in all this is that a track like Mth is clearly threatened because of Parx and Del. Meanwhile, on any given Saturday or Sunday Mth will attract 10,000 people and $600-$700k on track on the live product (and my guess is about the same amount on inbound simulcast product) while Parx barely breaks $100k ontrack on the weekend. This will crush the game in the long run because it is tracks like Mth and others that draw live bodies that create horseplayers of the future.

I didn't mean that Monmouth is a bad track, far from it. But without the slots subsidies, I doubt it will be around much longer. Of course if the others slots havens go away, it would probably survive.

[Maximillion]

Not sure what you mean by the Mth comment, but what is criminal in all this is that a track like Mth is clearly threatened because of Parx and Del. Meanwhile, on any given Saturday or Sunday Mth will attract 10,000 people and $600-$700k on track on the live product (and my guess is about the same amount on inbound simulcast product) while Parx barely breaks $100k ontrack on the weekend. This will crush the game in the long run because it is tracks like Mth and others that draw live bodies that create horseplayers of the future.

Its sad that there is no "leadership" in the industry capable of understanding that tracks like Mth, Arlington, and as a previous poster mentioned even Atlantic City clearly have the "potential" to be something more....

[alhattab]

I didn't mean that Monmouth is a bad track, far from it. But without the slots subsidies, I doubt it will be around much longer. Of course if the others slots havens go away, it would probably survive.

Understood. I unfortunately think you are right. Final numbers aren't out but I think Mth had a bad meet this year, the first with no subsidy. Quality was certainly off. I think you have to give them a pass for this year considering the timing of getting a deal with the state, but a few more years like this one and things won't be good.

[dilanesp]

I've made this point a number of times. The slot subsidy has done what all government subsidies do when they interfere in the market. The market gets distorted and a bad product survives because of the subsidy. It is has been obvious for years, that there needs to be a contraction at the lower level tracks, but the slot subsidy will not let it happen. As a result, you have too many tracks running too many races with very few horses.

Regulated race tracks have nevet been a free market. Indeed, some very important tracks would get killed in a true free market.