Purse Money

[LottaKash]

Originally Posted by JustMissed

Of course I have no evidence, but it appears that Dale Baird(and others) will find a good horse that likes to run second and keep running and running and running that horse in NW2L. JM

In Harness Racing this is SOP with many barns, as once a weak horse wins his way out of the conditions, he will probably never get a win or a decent check again...

I see this quite a bit, and factor it in to my thinking when confronted with certain classes of races and these types of contenders.....It IS a relevant factor, and many unsuspecting handicappers, ultimately, will be left scratching their heads when their little goodie, just runs only good enough.....

Took a lotta-kash to get that thru my noggin.......

best,

[Thomas Roulston]

Originally Posted by rrbauer

Different venues payout in different fashion. Currently, in Calif, the money paid out to those that finish lower than purse-eligible finishers (usually 5th place) are paid an "appearance fee" that is a fixed amount and is not related to the race's purse structure; indeed, it is funded separately from the purse money (special 1/2 point increase in exotic takeout) and its original intent was to provide workers comp relief.

This is a topic I have obsessively followed for more than 30 years. Indeed, on request, I could successfully identify every format ever used by the vast majority of U.S. tracks over that period.

The "Starter's Bonus" system - also used in Australia where it is called a "starter's subsidy" - has the disadvantage of reducing the share of the total purse awarded to the winner: At Hollywood/Santa Anita/Del Mar, for example, a race with a $25,000 purse that attracts a field of 10 sees only 55.6% of its purse go to the winner ($15,000 out of $27,000), because of the extra $2,000 that is added to the race's value ($400 each to 6th through 10th). And the procedures followed by some of the tracks on the Northern California fair circuit result in the win share being even less.

To the best of my knowledge, the only racing jurisdiction that has ever paid descending purse shares to every specific placing has been Fairmount Park in the early-to-mid '90s, and even there only in Illinois-bred races.

[Thomas Roulston]

Well it seems as if the trotters have been bitten by the "starter's bonus" bug after all:


Make money... Just for hitching your sulky?
Racing and the Law by Chris E. Wittstruck

While critical matters perpetually threaten our industry, it is often the more mundane issues that evoke the most impassioned and divergent opinions. One such issue is the question of whether harness racing's traditional purse distribution formula should be tweaked so as to benefit the connections of those horses finishing up the track.

While the concept is not exactly revolutionary, a recent proposal put forth in the Dominion of Canada has rendered the subject worthy of discussion.

Read the rest here:

http://harnesslink.com/www/Article.c...1#comments-574

[whyhorseofcourse]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

JM,

As long as I have been involved in racing, you'd think I would have thought of that but I never did.

Pretty ingenious, when you think about it. A way to defeat the system!

Thanks for the post.


Dave

See it happen all the time at MSW's in the NYRA.
And a ton in MSW at Charlestown.

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by Thomas Roulston

Well it seems as if the trotters have been bitten by the "starter's bonus" bug after all:


Make money... Just for hitching your sulky?
Racing and the Law by Chris E. Wittstruck

While critical matters perpetually threaten our industry, it is often the more mundane issues that evoke the most impassioned and divergent opinions. One such issue is the question of whether harness racing's traditional purse distribution formula should be tweaked so as to benefit the connections of those horses finishing up the track.

While the concept is not exactly revolutionary, a recent proposal put forth in the Dominion of Canada has rendered the subject worthy of discussion.

Read the rest here:

http://harnesslink.com/www/Article.c...1#comments-574

I don;t know where I sit on this I agree that some kind of stipend should be available to defray costs. Especially in light of the state of horse racing itself. and of course the down economy.
On thr other side I have a problem with "welfare". By that I mean the redistribution of purse monies to award poor performance.
Now with these points in mind, the camp that says that certain horsement will bring a knowingly non comptetitive animal just to pick up a small check I think is a bit off the wall. The small stipend is to defray costs not cover them.

[Thomas Roulston]

Originally Posted by thespaah

I don;t know where I sit on this I agree that some kind of stipend should be available to defray costs. Especially in light of the state of horse racing itself. and of course the down economy.
On thr other side I have a problem with "welfare". By that I mean the redistribution of purse monies to award poor performance.
Now with these points in mind, the camp that says that certain horsement will bring a knowingly non comptetitive animal just to pick up a small check I think is a bit off the wall. The small stipend is to defray costs not cover them.

But so far as "rewarding poor performance" goes: Shouldn't a really awful performance be rewarded less - or penalized more - than an only somewhat awful performance? Which was the point in the formula I came up with.

And, if adopted more or less universally, this might have a transformative effect on breeding and the like, in that an overmatched stretch-runner can be expected to pass a few tiring horses, while an overmatched speed horse is all but certain to finish last, or even be "eased."

Thus you may see greater emphasis on breeding horses for stamina rather than speed, speed, speed, since stamina horses would be more profitable.

And this has led to my having an article on the subject "published"!

http://www.harnesslink.com/www/Article.cgi?ID=70305

[onefast99]

Originally Posted by northerndancer

If I find out or determine that a jock is not trying to improve their position while on one of my horses that jock will at least get a penalty (lose a quality horse for a few mounts) or be banned from my string of horses. The bottomline is if your jock perserveres with your horses and improves his position by one placing that really adds up over the course of a year.

The standard payouts of the purse are 60% win, 20% for 2nd place, 11% for 3rd place, 6% for 4th place & 3% for 5th place. At some tracks (most of them with slot revenue purses) will pay a standard starting fee for a horse that finishes 6th and back to last. For example that fee at Woodbine is $400. This fee is to cover the cost of the jock mount as well as starting fees, gate fees, lasix, etc.

Therefore is the purse is $25,000 and you improve your finish position from 4th to 3rd the owner ends up with an additional $1,250. That will turn a losing month into a profitable month for most horses (assuming $2,500 per month cost factor).

If I catch one of my trainer trying to give one to a horse to cheapen his form or to put a bad race on the horses form then that trainer can find himself new horses to put in the stalls that my horses currently reside as the horses will be in a new place.

Drives me wild to see a jock stop riding a horse when they realize they can not win the race.

Easier said then done, the jockeys all hang out together and if someone bad mouths your horse to another rider you could be in for a long day at the track. Best bet is to never let the jockey see your emotions after a race unless he wins or puts in a very good effort. Rule number 1 is have a cooling out period. It is something that took me a long time to do and that is solely based on being a competitive individual. Rule number 2 you wont win every race, hope for the best and prepare for the worst. Rule number 3 never bring anyone to the track that bets against your horse in your race. Rule number 4 if you have a bunch of friends with you at the track when you run and someone asks to be in the picture before the race is run, the answer is no.

[supercap]

Originally Posted by onefast99

Easier said then done, the jockeys all hang out together and if someone bad mouths your horse to another rider you could be in for a long day at the track. Best bet is to never let the jockey see your emotions after a race unless he wins or puts in a very good effort. Rule number 1 is have a cooling out period. It is something that took me a long time to do and that is solely based on being a competitive individual. Rule number 2 you wont win every race, hope for the best and prepare for the worst. Rule number 3 never bring anyone to the track that bets against your horse in your race. Rule number 4 if you have a bunch of friends with you at the track when you run and someone asks to be in the picture before the race is run, the answer is no.

Dont bring Tom the mush!!!

[Jeff P]

Don't bring this guy to the track with you...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oATzS3f-iac


-jp

.

[Relwob Owner]

Originally Posted by northerndancer

If I find out or determine that a jock is not trying to improve their position while on one of my horses that jock will at least get a penalty (lose a quality horse for a few mounts) or be banned from my string of horses. The bottomline is if your jock perserveres with your horses and improves his position by one placing that really adds up over the course of a year.

The standard payouts of the purse are 60% win, 20% for 2nd place, 11% for 3rd place, 6% for 4th place & 3% for 5th place. At some tracks (most of them with slot revenue purses) will pay a standard starting fee for a horse that finishes 6th and back to last. For example that fee at Woodbine is $400. This fee is to cover the cost of the jock mount as well as starting fees, gate fees, lasix, etc.

Therefore is the purse is $25,000 and you improve your finish position from 4th to 3rd the owner ends up with an additional $1,250. That will turn a losing month into a profitable month for most horses (assuming $2,500 per month cost factor).

If I catch one of my trainer trying to give one to a horse to cheapen his form or to put a bad race on the horses form then that trainer can find himself new horses to put in the stalls that my horses currently reside as the horses will be in a new place.

Drives me wild to see a jock stop riding a horse when they realize they can not win the race.

If you ever want to see a pro at doing this, watch Desormeaux for a while----he almost caused a riot at Saratoga last year in a race in which he did it