How To Save Horse Racing

[Cangamble]

I'm not copy the post here because it is a little long.
I gave PTC a good plug:

http://cangamble.blogspot.com/2007/0...se-racing.html

[Greyfox]

The cangamble article above is provocative. But alas still rests on a negative premise that ultimately gambling is a losing proposition. The article states:

"THE SOLUTION
If racing is to survive 10 years from now, ownership needs to change their mindset.
All track takeouts have to be reduced to 10% or less. This will give sophisticated handicappers a chance at winning. It will give John Q. Gambler a bigger bang for his buck, and over time, he will lose more of his gambling money at the race track and not elsewhere."

So even lowering the take out to 10 % the gambler loses. It just takes longer.
For me that's not a very attractive solution. In the meanwhile, the track still has purses to pay, buildings to maintain, tracks to keep up, and employees. There is an infrastructure.
Not only that there are a lot of posters on this board that agree that the average Joe Public loses at the track. One poster who says 95 % of horse players lose, gets lots of support. Albeit, I've asked for hard data supporting that and all we get are anecdotal comments that the stat has to be right.
At any rate, assuming that is roughly correct, racing would be a very hard sell on the possibilities of making money, except for a small fraction of smart and passionate players.

To be honest, I can't think of one reason that would convince the guy next door, the neighbour across the street, the woman two doors over and so on,
to go to the track, let alone go with the idea that you'll likely lose.
That's a pretty hard sell.
I once worked in a firm with 2,000 employees. I only ever saw 5 or so at the track.

Attendance at tracks is down. Participation at the windows may be holding with computer wagering. But in general the game is in decline.
So are all sports. The number of people leaving golf each year is as great as the number coming in. Skiing? Same thing. Baseball? .....
Also, I read yesterday where the majority of people are now living in Cities.
The old agricultural pull of watching animals race just aint there anymore.

It seems to me that the Sport of Kings has to be sold for it's Entertainment Value. The drop to 10 % take would increase that. But until you build up a customer base can racing afford to do that?
Attracting a younger crowd has always been a problem for racing. Hollywood Park is trying Friday evenings that are bringing in some younger blood? But are they gambling? At least they're being exposed to the game.

Then there is the problem of Getting Horse Racing on the Front Page of the Sports. Advertising sells. So far I think that the industry does a pretty shitty job of selling it's best product : The Triple Crown.
As things stand now the Triple Crown Dates are far too close!
Interest in horse racing would increase if these dates were scheduled at least a month a part from one another, say May, June, July.

History purists be damned. It's time to give your collective heads a shake and recognize that there is very poor marketing value placing those big three races within a 5 week period. That's just poor strategic planning.

Having said all that, I still can't think of any reasons that would get my neighbours out of their easy chairs or away from their computers. Society has changed.

[Cangamble]

Lets look at the reverse. Joe Gambler loses playing blackjack too. But if the house upped their take even by 1% (tie goes to the house for example), the tables woud be empty. They know it.

The reality is, no matter what the take out is, people are gonna lose. The takeout represents lossed money by the bettors.

By lowering to 10%, my point is that the bottom line will still be lost by the regular bettors, who will most likely make more bets, but it will also pave the way for winners, who might increase interest in the game.

My guess is 100% of players who don't do business with a rebate shop lose money over any 2 year period.

5% don't make money. Lets be honest.

[Cangamble]

Having said all that, I still can't think of any reasons that would get my neighbours out of their easy chairs or away from their computers. Society has changed.
***********************
Nobody has to go to the track today. While they are at the computer, why not bet? If they had a chance of winning that is.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Racing gamblers are just crybabies because they are the only gamblers who Expect to win!
In Ca bingo has 25% takeout, Ca state lottery has 50% takeout, and business is booming!

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by kenwoodallpromos

Racing gamblers are just crybabies because they are the only gamblers who Expect to win!
In Ca bingo has 25% takeout, Ca state lottery has 50% takeout, and business is booming!

Why not take advantage of those facts.
Years ago I used to play the Irish Sweepstakes Race.
You'd buy a ticket (illegally).
The number order that the horses came in determined the winner.
A National Sweepstakes in Racing with 50 % going to some recognizable charity or cause would escalate general interest in the game. Maybe even run 3 of them in association with the Triple Crown or other races?

[gIracing]

Originally Posted by kenwoodallpromos

Racing gamblers are just crybabies because they are the only gamblers who Expect to win!
In Ca bingo has 25% takeout, Ca state lottery has 50% takeout, and business is booming!

it's a stupid arguement, first of all, yes the takeout is more but becuase of para mutual wagering, the odds that can be hit are more as well. show me a 20-1 in a blackjack table

Alot of people who write aritcles and tell us how to save our sport are from an outside perspective, and have no eartlhy idea what they are talking about.

the takeout for the pick 6 is in the 20's and at least in California, business couldn't be better.

horse racing has alot of issues.... the takeout isn't one of them I assure you. In the list of things that needs to be done, this is on the "put off when my slate is clear" list.. Drugs, ADW, horses leaving early, unsoundness, correuption, small race cards, attendance & getting our AS@ES handed to us by the international racing world as far as a product are things that i would be more concerned with before i even touched this with a 10 foot pole

[Cangamble]

g1racing and kendle, race track owners love you two. But neither of you have much of a clue regarding racings number one problem.

Yes, it is takeout.

Kendle, you sound like race track management or ownership. Are you?

g1, when you bet into a 20% average takeout over and over, it takes its toll pretty quick on your bank roll.

The dollars being bet are not going up like they should when you take inflation into account over 20 years. And that is even with internet and simulcast wagering.

Horse gamblers don't expect to win, they just want a chance to win. At the current t/o's there is no chance. Only people who bet with rebate houses have a shot.

[SMOO]

Originally Posted by Cangamble

Horse gamblers don't expect to win, they just want a chance to win.

[Premier Turf Club]

Originally Posted by Cangamble

Horse gamblers don't expect to win, they just want a chance to win. At the current t/o's there is no chance. Only people who bet with rebate houses have a shot.

And we're doing our level best to give them that chance.

[BadaBing]

Getting tracks to reduce their takeout to 10 % will NEVER,EVER happen.Sorry.

[KingsLaw]

An article was written in the Baltimore Sun after the summer meet at Pimlico stated that the Maryland Jockey Club is slashing the purses on all races except stakes, and reducing the number of races on the programs from the remainder of 2007. Obviously not a good sign for 2008, especially the Pimlico meet which is already reduced in size.

The big angle is slots, pitched as a saviour to us in Maryland, not to horse racing, but to a huge budget shortfall. Another article recently published in the Baltimore Sun explored horse racing at Delaware Park, basically stating that the on premise action is mainly slots with relatively few people are actually playing the horses at the track these days. But the higher purses attract the simulcast crowd.

I don't want to be flamed for having an agenda, so I will just come clean now ... I don't want slots in Baltimore. And I have a solution ... if you will - get rid of the 38 mile radius around race tracks for OTB parlors and let there be wide spread action on horses.

Play the races by chosing your favorite silks, I don't care, just bet on a horse and don't pull a handle.

They have the absolute lamest game in the Maryland Lottery now called RaceTrax, which is animated horse racing, but more like keno, the 1 horse always has x odds, 2 horse always has y odds, z horse always has z odds, etc. Lame mindless BS, just let people bet on Hollywood Park at the bars Friday night, I'm sure $2 win bets would roll in ... Make horse betting more accesible. Tax the horse racing action, get people involved back into the sport.

Really, if you are going to legalize mindless betting on cartoon horses, why wouldn't the MJC step up and say "Hey why can't they bet on live horses?!?"

Before I get off my soapbox, I have a second point (or pet peeve, whatever). Pimlico is a huge facility that is way under used and under appreciated. Pimlico sits between one of the more dangerous areas of Baltimore, and literally on the other side of the track is a pretty ritzy area. There is an image problem. If Magna is serious about saving Pimlico, it would be easy to find ways to revamp the image and generate interest in the track; local bands playing after the races (or even during the races inside, 3/4 of the place probably isn't used expect for Preakness), open a sports bar in the unused spots, anything to generate interest in and get people to the track.

And while they are there waiting to file a police report because some broke into their car (that's a joke, there is a vast amount of secure parking), who knows, someone may get the wild hair and place a bet.

[gIracing]

the reason it itn's a problem is becuase the tracks have to make money.


I would rather, much much rather play into a para mutual pool where the track gets 1/5th off top therefore not caring who wins, than to go to a sports book where the takeout is say 5% and the house does not want you to win, and when you do win alot you get kicked out becuase you are costing them money

is it harder to turn a ROI? no @@@@ shurlock. no one is going to aruge that point. But it's pointless. it's a give and take.

[Cangamble]

GIracing: If takeouts are reduced in half, you and everyone else will end up with more money(because everyone has a certain amount they can lose every year) and most likely you will bet at least double over the long run.
Your ability to last longer may attract others to start going to the track too.
Winners too, may attract more gamblers as well.

Oh, and a pet peeve of mine: "A lot" is two words. I'd say close to one third of the population doesn't realize it.

[Cangamble]

Also sports books only make money if you lose. I'm sure PTC wouldn't mind if every one of their clients made money, because they just make a commission on what is bet.