Quote:
Originally Posted by BCOURTNEY
Transparent on vet records, investigations when a heavy favorite doesn't place, actual jockey suspensions.. the list goes on.. and on.. They are a great model for the future.. they wil; make it because they insist it's a professionally run game so it operates and acts like one, you get the sense it will survive a long time... downsides are a known small population of animals, small number of venues.
|
The benefit of a small number of animals is that you get to know the horses. That might not appeal to everyone, but that doesn't bother me. I like that they have a lot of handicap races. From what I have seen there are a lot more longshot winners because of the amount of weight a horse has to carry gives longshots a better chance. The turf races have a lot of close finishes with 12 to 14 horse fields which makes for exciting racing.
HK racing might be better compared to what U.S. racing could have been like in the 1940s when horseracing was the only legal gambling outlet. The tracks made a lot of money and could better support the product. Now, there is so much legalized gambling that it is hard for a U.S. track to stay in business without some kind of subsidy.
I used to really like NYRA in the mid-1990s when Lasix was banned. Part of the reason NYRA legalized it was because of economics. Other jurisdictions allowed Lasix so NYRA was forced to allow it, too, or risk losing horses to other venues where it was permitted.
The biggest positive for me about HK racing is that drugs are not permitted -- even in training. At least I know when I'm handicapping that I don't have to worry handicapping the trainers to determine who has the best pharmaceuticals or who is best at masking snake venom.
