All the way from Las Vegas - Racing in Trouble

[MPRanger]

http://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion...ground-bettors

[macguy]

Hastings Park matches those statistics bang on.

In the mid 1990s, Hastings Park had over 2000 horses jammed into the backstretch, and there was still a waiting list with trainers fighting for stalls. There were rules about how many two year olds a trainer could have stabled and there wasn't a maiden over 5 years old allowed on the grounds.

Fast forward to today, and the track struggles to find horses, sometimes having as few as 300 stabled on the backstretch, a scary number that many could argue is the bare minimum for holding a meet.

So far this year they've already cancelled a few cards, due to lack of entries. The weeks they have raced 2 days often see 7 races with short fields of 5 or 6. A far cry from the days of full fields and racing nearly everyday of the week.

Should the trend continue, I don't see horse racing sticking around in Vancouver for very much longer, it may be a matter of only a few more years.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by macguy

Hastings Park matches those statistics bang on.

In the mid 1990s, Hastings Park had over 2000 horses jammed into the backstretch, and there was still a waiting list with trainers fighting for stalls. There were rules about how many two year olds a trainer could have stabled and there wasn't a maiden over 5 years old allowed on the grounds.

Fast forward to today, and the track struggles to find horses, sometimes having as few as 300 stabled on the backstretch, a scary number that many could argue is the bare minimum for holding a meet.

So far this year they've already cancelled a few cards, due to lack of entries. The weeks they have raced 2 days often see 7 races with short fields of 5 or 6. A far cry from the days of full fields and racing nearly everyday of the week.

Should the trend continue, I don't see horse racing sticking around in Vancouver for very much longer, it may be a matter of only a few more years.

It won't. There's two types of tracks that will survive in the simulcasting era:

1. "Vacation" tracks like Oaklawn, Monmouth, Saratoga, and Del Mar, with short meetings which are "special" and generate significant revenue from live attendance.

2. "Super-tracks", which offer a superior product through simulcasting that people want to bet on, such as the NYRA tracks, Santa Anita, and Churchill.

Everything else is in trouble for a very simple reason-- when you have widespread simulcasting and can bet on the Internet, most people have no interest in betting a small track with small fields of weak horses like Hastings.

We will eventually contract to that level, and the sport will survive and may even thrive once enough tracks close.

[HuggingTheRail]

Originally Posted by macguy

Hastings Park matches those statistics bang on.

In the mid 1990s, Hastings Park had over 2000 horses jammed into the backstretch, and there was still a waiting list with trainers fighting for stalls. There were rules about how many two year olds a trainer could have stabled and there wasn't a maiden over 5 years old allowed on the grounds.

Fast forward to today, and the track struggles to find horses, sometimes having as few as 300 stabled on the backstretch, a scary number that many could argue is the bare minimum for holding a meet.

So far this year they've already cancelled a few cards, due to lack of entries. The weeks they have raced 2 days often see 7 races with short fields of 5 or 6. A far cry from the days of full fields and racing nearly everyday of the week.

Should the trend continue, I don't see horse racing sticking around in Vancouver for very much longer, it may be a matter of only a few more years.

Hey, they may ask you and I to run in the 7th race - we could probably beat most of the horses from Barn M, and we would still get the $300 participation money if we didn't. I can get 6.5f in about 12 minutes.....

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

It won't. There's two types of tracks that will survive in the simulcasting era:

1. "Vacation" tracks like Oaklawn, Monmouth, Saratoga, and Del Mar, with short meetings which are "special" and generate significant revenue from live attendance.

2. "Super-tracks", which offer a superior product through simulcasting that people want to bet on, such as the NYRA tracks, Santa Anita, and Churchill.

Everything else is in trouble for a very simple reason-- when you have widespread simulcasting and can bet on the Internet, most people have no interest in betting a small track with small fields of weak horses like Hastings.

We will eventually contract to that level, and the sport will survive and may even thrive once enough tracks close.

Why would the sport survive or even thrive if enough tracks close? This isn't a case of a business expanding too fast and now seeing that it has to trim the fat. Tracks closing doesn't change the business model which works for absolutely nobody. Tracks closing doesn't create interest in the sport. Tracks closing will necessarily reduce the foal count resulting in fields of weak horses running at the surviving tracks.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Why would the sport survive or even thrive if enough tracks close? This isn't a case of a business expanding too fast and now seeing that it has to trim the fat. Tracks closing doesn't change the business model which works for absolutely nobody. Tracks closing doesn't create interest in the sport. Tracks closing will necessarily reduce the foal count resulting in fields of weak horses running at the surviving tracks.

If fewer tracks are operating, field size at remaining tracks should eventually expand. The "super-tracks", in particular, should be able to offer big purses (based on big handle) and draw big fields. Those big fields should in turn attract more betting. It will make this a bettable sport again.

But as long as there are a ton of second-tier tracks where trainers can go and enter 6 horse races, that's not going to happen.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

If fewer tracks are operating, field size at remaining tracks should eventually expand. The "super-tracks", in particular, should be able to offer big purses (based on big handle) and draw big fields. Those big fields should in turn attract more betting. It will make this a bettable sport again.

But as long as there are a ton of second-tier tracks where trainers can go and enter 6 horse races, that's not going to happen.

Fewer tracks are operating now and field size has not been expanding. It is wishful thinking to believe that the demand for racing will increase if there is less of it. Many former players I know have moved on from racing and surely won't return if the field size increases. There is a better chance that rotary dial phones make a comeback before horse racing does.

[macguy]

Originally Posted by HuggingTheRail

Hey, they may ask you and I to run in the 7th race - we could probably beat most of the horses from Barn M, and we would still get the $300 participation money if we didn't. I can get 6.5f in about 12 minutes.....

Spent a lot of time walking horses up and down the shed rows of "Barn M" the better part of 20 years ago. It was my first real full time job out of high school.

I remember standing at the gap in the early mornings listening to all the old time trainers complaining about how the sport is dying and there's no future in horse racing. At that time Hastings was racing three days a week, sometimes 10 races a card, and still handling over $1 million on a Wednesday night. If only they were around to see what it's become now, they were certainly right.

I listened to their opinions and left the track, despite a part of me knowing that I could probably be very happy working there for the rest of my life.

There truly isn't anything like the atmosphere of the backstretch first thing in the morning.

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Fewer tracks are operating now and field size has not been expanding. It is wishful thinking to believe that the demand for racing will increase if there is less of it. Many former players I know have moved on from racing and surely won't return if the field size increases. There is a better chance that rotary dial phones make a comeback before horse racing does.

The tracks that are closing are those that cater to a certain type of horse. Low level claimers and State Breds that cannot compete vs open company.
My guess is as tracks close, those horses have nowhere to race as racing Secretaries are reluctant to write races for them.
For example, the stock which ran at Suffolk is unlikely to have a snowball's chance in July of competing in NY or NJ. Maybe Philly or Delaware but those stalls are taken.

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by macguy

Spent a lot of time walking horses up and down the shed rows of "Barn M" the better part of 20 years ago. It was my first real full time job out of high school.

I remember standing at the gap in the early mornings listening to all the old time trainers complaining about how the sport is dying and there's no future in horse racing. At that time Hastings was racing three days a week, sometimes 10 races a card, and still handling over $1 million on a Wednesday night. If only they were around to see what it's become now, they were certainly right.

I listened to their opinions and left the track, despite a part of me knowing that I could probably be very happy working there for the rest of my life.

There truly isn't anything like the atmosphere of the backstretch first thing in the morning.

I worked one summer at a training farm in Central NJ.....I loved it.
I was as green as they came, but dove into every book and manual I could to learn. Anyway, I used a line from Apocalypse Now that Robert DuVal said when he was talking about Napalm....I said "I love the smell of horse sh!t in the morning"....I really did.....Plus the sounds. Horses snorting. Shuffling their hooves in their stall bedding, sensing that full feed bucket was about to be hung in their stall. Cool stuff.

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by thespaah

The tracks that are closing are those that cater to a certain type of horse. Low level claimers and State Breds that cannot compete vs open company.
My guess is as tracks close, those horses have nowhere to race as racing Secretaries are reluctant to write races for them.
For example, the stock which ran at Suffolk is unlikely to have a snowball's chance in July of competing in NY or NJ. Maybe Philly or Delaware but those stalls are taken.

There really aren't many tracks closing though. It's more that the existing tracks still running are cutting race dates. Unfortunately, this is only keeping field sizes stagnant, not raising them as you would expect.

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by castaway01

There really aren't many tracks closing though. It's more that the existing tracks still running are cutting race dates. Unfortunately, this is only keeping field sizes stagnant, not raising them as you would expect.

Kind of a head scratcher, isn't it?
I have seen where some on here blame the horsemen for short fields. Claiming that because short fields give their horses a better chance of picking up a check, the trainer may elect to not enter when he or she knows the race will fill.
Appears to be conspiratorial, but not outside the realm of possibility.

[RXB]

Originally Posted by macguy

Hastings Park matches those statistics bang on.

In the mid 1990s, Hastings Park had over 2000 horses jammed into the backstretch, and there was still a waiting list with trainers fighting for stalls. There were rules about how many two year olds a trainer could have stabled and there wasn't a maiden over 5 years old allowed on the grounds.

Fast forward to today, and the track struggles to find horses, sometimes having as few as 300 stabled on the backstretch, a scary number that many could argue is the bare minimum for holding a meet.

So far this year they've already cancelled a few cards, due to lack of entries. The weeks they have raced 2 days often see 7 races with short fields of 5 or 6. A far cry from the days of full fields and racing nearly everyday of the week.

Should the trend continue, I don't see horse racing sticking around in Vancouver for very much longer, it may be a matter of only a few more years.

Macguy, I started going to Hastings in the mid-80's when it was named Exhibition Park and at that time it was four days a week of racing, in fact five days in the summer as long as they could fill a Monday evening card. Averaged almost nine horses per race in those years.

Simulcasting is a double-edged sword for smaller tracks. Boosted revenue in the short and medium term but killed any buzz for live racing. And you're right, Hastings really can't cut the live racing down any farther. It's already at a bare minimum on two days per week. BC racing is at the edge of the cliff.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by thespaah

The tracks that are closing are those that cater to a certain type of horse. Low level claimers and State Breds that cannot compete vs open company.
My guess is as tracks close, those horses have nowhere to race as racing Secretaries are reluctant to write races for them.
For example, the stock which ran at Suffolk is unlikely to have a snowball's chance in July of competing in NY or NJ. Maybe Philly or Delaware but those stalls are taken.

If breeding were an exact science we would have nothing but stakes horses, the problem is it isn't. In the process of breeding stakes horses there are many other horses bred that are the low level horses you refer to. The tracks closing are the minor leagues for racing. It is where up and coming jockeys, trainers, grooms, and sometimes even horses get their experience. Losing the minor leagues doesn't help the major leagues

[chenoa]

Originally Posted by RXB

Macguy, I started going to Hastings in the mid-80's when it was named Exhibition Park and at that time it was four days a week of racing, in fact five days in the summer as long as they could fill a Monday evening card. Averaged almost nine horses per race in those years.

Simulcasting is a double-edged sword for smaller tracks. Boosted revenue in the short and medium term but killed any buzz for live racing. And you're right, Hastings really can't cut the live racing down any farther. It's already at a bare minimum on two days per week. BC racing is at the edge of the cliff.

Alberta is in the same boat. Northlands has said its pulling the pin on horse racing after 2016. The new racino down south is laughable. All the serious horseplayers are gone and they are left with the newbies and $2 WPS players, but as long as suckers are plugging their slots, that's all that really matters isn't it??

For that, I am grateful for internet/simulcasting.