Sidebar

[Jeff P]

Three posts from four years ago in the Death by 1000 paper cuts thread that are relevant to the current situation at Santa Anita:

Post #75 from page 5:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...=152130&page=5

Originally Posted by Jeff P

Several years ago I showed up at a CHRB Parimutuel Committee meeting and presented data to the CHRB that (in my opinion) showed an alarming trend:

California Exacta pools (with 22.68% takeout) were underperforming the Exacta pools of other racing jurisdictions with lower Exacta takeout.

California Exacta pools weren't just underperforming in terms of handle.

California Exacta pools were underperforming in terms of generating purses and revenue from handle.

After I presented my findings and had taken a seat, someone from upper management at The Stronach Group took the podium and announced to the room:

"The trend in Jeff's data is interesting. But I'm pretty sure it's a short term blip. Something that will eventually self correct and revert back to the mean."

Below is a screenshot showing pool totals for Santa Anita R1 today Fri 02-21-2020.

I've highlighted the WIN and EXACTA pools.

Note the differential between the two:

WIN 70,777
EXA 48,353

Before anybody jumps in and posts "What do you expect? It was a six horse field with a dominant favorite" --

Here are pool totals from today Fri 02-21-2020 at Aqueduct R1 where the exacta takeout is 18.50%:

WIN 86,131
EXA 120,380

Fyi, the Aqueduct race was a five horse field with a dominant favorite.

And no, this is not an isolated occurrence.

California Exacta pools (at 22.68% takeout) really are underperforming the national norm in terms of generating purse money and revenue from handle.

The annoying part to me is the trend was obvious about six weeks into their takeout hike back in 2011. They should have corrected it then.

But instead they insisted on the status quo and said things like "It's a five year plan. We have to give it time to work" and "I'm pretty sure it's a short term blip. Something that will eventually self correct and revert back to the mean."

Now here we are almost ten years later.

Imo, the trend (and the data over nearly a decade) couldn't be more clear.

Ignoring the data has cost California racing millions of dollars in lost revenue and purse money.

Maybe the time has come to revisit SB 1072 and California's 22.68% Exacta takeout.

If you think 22.68% Exacta takeout isn't death by 1000 paper cuts - think again.

Post #76 from page 6:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...=152130&page=6

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Jeff...may I please ask you a question? Is the CHRB under the impression that California Racing is on stable ground...financially speaking?

And post #77 from page 6:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...=152130&page=6

Originally Posted by Jeff P

I don't see how the CHRB could get the impression thoroughbred horse racing in California is on solid financial ground.

As long as I've been following (since about 2008 or so) if you attend the public CHRB meetings live, or listen to the meeting audio, or read the published meeting transcripts afterwards: You eventually realize many of the meetings play out the same way.

Prior to each of the meetings, the CHRB publishes a meeting agenda. Basically, this is a list of items of interest to be discussed (and sometimes decided) at the meeting.

During the actual meeting, each item on the agenda is called in turn.

Before the Commissioners of the CHRB discuss or vote on the current agenda item, the general public (anyone in attendance who wishes to speak) is given three minutes to comment on the current agenda item.

After the general public has finished giving their commentary, at that point, the Commissioners of the CHRB will then discuss and sometimes vote yea or nay on the current agenda item (whatever it happens to be.)

Sometimes while attending these meetings in person I have borne witness to what seems like a never ending parade of speakers who are bemoaning a cutback in dates or the closing of a brick and mortar otb, etc. as a result of falling handle and purse money.

A good example might be a union rep telling the Commissioners about parimutuel tellers who for the past several years have had full time work - but who are now facing cutbacks in hours (for some even layoffs) if the current agenda item (which might be a reduction in race dates) is approved.

For the same agenda item (which might be a reduction in race dates) there might be two or three members from track management who step up to the podium to tell the Commissioners we have to cut dates because we don't have the horses and handle and purse money that we used to.

I cannot for the life of me see how anybody at the CHRB could possibly sit through public meeting after public meeting, month after month, for years on end --

And witness a never ending parade of speakers - each bemoaning the fact that business is off - and come away with the idea that thoroughbred horse racing in California is on solid financial ground.

I just can't.

Compound the effect of underperforming exacta pools over 14 years since SB1072 was implemented. ✓

While telling everybody 'It's a short term blip.' ✓

And refusing to make a course correction. ✓

Now 'suddenly' there's a crisis. ✓




-jp

.