Racing has a serious problem here

[OTM Al]

Originally Posted by Horseplayersbet.com

How about a comparison to sports betting then? They only take 2 and a half hours to 3 hours to play. How come the takeout isn't higher than horse racing?

One could argue that take is too high in sport betting. It costs very little for the casinos to offer it so any take at all is pure profit. So comparing the two with a cost/revenue approach I'd dare say comparitively the take on sport betting is way higher than racing. It's a lot easier to make money when someone else is putting on the show.

[Tom]

I think PA could make a few bucks having over/under wagering on some of these thread counts!

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by OTM Al

One could argue that take is too high in sport betting. It costs very little for the casinos to offer it so any take at all is pure profit. So comparing the two with a cost/revenue approach I'd dare say comparitively the take on sport betting is way higher than racing. It's a lot easier to make money when someone else is putting on the show.

The excuse that horse racing's outrageous takeouts exist because of the high costs associated with running this game, is just that...an EXCUSE!

And as proof, I present the fact that not a single slot-assisted thoroughbred racetrack has ever reduced their takeouts to a noticeable extent...even though they have thriving casino businesses, which go a long way toward alleviating those costs.

The main reason why the takeouts in our game are so high is because the powers-that-be choose to view this game as an "entertainment" venue rather than a gambling game...and they price it accordingly.

Heck...some 'insiders" even suggest that the current takeouts may not even be high enough.

You'd think they would have learned better by now...

[OTM Al]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

The excuse that horse racing's outrageous takeouts exist because of the high costs associated with running this game, is just that...an EXCUSE!

This wasn't the argument being made and you know it.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by OTM Al

This wasn't the argument being made and you know it.

When it comes to takeouts, the horse racing industry has no valid argument to make...and neither do those who choose to sympathize with the game's governing bodies on this issue.

Every time takeouts are discussed, we hear the same old argument about how expensive it is to run this game...and how cheap other casino games -- and poker -- are to maintain by comparison. The assumption is thereby made that the racing industry would lower the takeouts, if the costs of running this game were somehow greatly alleviated.

Well...we have seen that this is clearly not the case.

The outrageous takeouts are here to stay...even if the slot profits end up covering ALL the costs associated with running this game.

Horse racing's long-term plan is obvious...and it was revealed to us by California-based trainer Jeff Mullins in 2005.

The game doesn't want the horseplayer anymore, because he is a trouble-maker. He complains too much. He wants an honest, affordable gambling game to play...and this seems to be an unreasonable request for the horseplayer to make.

So the industry has found a way to keep the game funded...without having to depend on the horseplayers for the lion's share of the operating expenses. And soon, they won't need us at ALL.

The purses will be funded by the slot players, who will also be showered with all the "player rewards".

The horseplayer will be ignored completely, and, consequently, the mutuel pools will decline to unacceptable -- for the horseplayer -- levels.

But so what?

The casino profits will be flowing...the race track executives will be smiling again...and the trainers will have all the 4-horse fields they could possibly want, so they could maximize their profits.

And the horseplayers...you ask?

Well...the players never counted for much in this game anyway.

As trainer Bob Baffert said not too long ago..."the 'gamblers' can always go find another game to bet on; but the rest of us are stuck here".

It's a brilliant plan when you think about it...

I just wish the industry had the balls to come out and say it...like Mullins did in 2005.

[OTM Al]

Now the martyr argument. Next usually comes the name calling. Meanwhile I was only pointing out flaws in the argument being presented. If you want to prove things to people, you kinda need to know how to respond to such issues rather than going to the "oh poor me" approach. By not addressing issues raised, you might as well say that your argument has no basis. You've given no yardstick on how to judge how much is too much in either situation. Your whole argument is "its bad". I don't think that's a very good argument.

[rastajenk]

It's hard to see why Thaskolos likes this game when he seems to hate everything about it.

But he's not alone in that regard.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by OTM Al

Now the martyr argument. Next usually comes the name calling. Meanwhile I was only pointing out flaws in the argument being presented. If you want to prove things to people, you kinda need to know how to respond to such issues rather than going to the "oh poor me" approach. By not addressing issues raised, you might as well say that your argument has no basis. You've given no yardstick on how to judge how much is too much in either situation. Your whole argument is "its bad". I don't think that's a very good argument.

When it comes to "name-calling"...I'll have to come to you for advice.

It was YOU who brought up the costs of running this game...when you wrote "It's a lot easier to make money when someone else is putting on the show."

Now you are pretending that I pulled it out of the air.

Very predictable of you..as is your condescending attitude.

And I would like you to know that I am not the "martyr" here, Al...

I will do just fine...even if the game is driven into the ground.

And thanks for the advice on "learning how to respond to issues", instead of going into my "oh poor me" routine...

I didn't realize that I was crying..."oh poor me". I thought that I was presenting an opinion in a well thought-out and respectable manner...as I always try to do.

But I can see how an unbiased person like yourself could have seen it as such.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by rastajenk

It's hard to see why Thaskolos likes this game when he seems to hate everything about it.

But he's not alone in that regard.

I guess this is another way of..."addressing the issues".

Let's all either bury or head in the sand, or flee this game.

No criticism of the game is allowed...

I don't hate everything about this game, friend.

I just think that the game has a lot of...how shall I say it..."room for improvement".

Is it okay if I occasionally voice a critical opinion about it...or should I always be asked why I keep playing this game, every time I say something negative about this sport?

Isn't this what horse racing forums are all about?

Don't you think that there are valid complaints to be made about how this game is being run?

Is the horseplayer always crying "oh poor me" everytime he vents his frustration?

Should we be praising the horse racing industry instead?

[rastajenk]

Yes...no
Sometimes
Yes
Yes
and Yes

[Robert Goren]

As another track gets ready to close, the game's defenders are out in full force defending the Status Quo.

[jelly]

Al,


How would you increase handle in Horseracing?

[OTM Al]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

When it comes to "name-calling"...I'll have to come to you for advice.

It was YOU who brought up the costs of running this game...when you wrote "It's a lot easier to make money when someone else is putting on the show."

Now you are pretending that I pulled it out of the air.

Very predictable of you..as is your condescending attitude.

And I would like you to know that I am not the "martyr" here, Al...

I will do just fine...even if the game is driven into the ground.

And thanks for the advice on "learning how to respond to issues", instead of going into my "oh poor me" routine...

I didn't realize that I was crying..."oh poor me". I thought that I was presenting an opinion in a well thought-out and respectable manner...as I always try to do.

But I can see how an unbiased person like yourself could have seen it as such.

The name calling always comes after the martyr speech. Without fail.

[OTM Al]

Originally Posted by jelly

Al,


How would you increase handle in Horseracing?

Now an honest question which deserves an honest response.

I'm not sure you can. Gambling opportunities are absolutely saturating the marketplace. People what flashy things with instant gratification for little or no work involved. Those that do work will be equally drawn to other betting venues such a sport wagering when that becomes more available, and it will, so I have no doubt things will get worse.

I'm still not convinced an industry wide takeout drop would make handle increase much. Hastings I think was advertising 0% P3, P4, and P5. the grand total bet on all 3 last Saturday that paid on the last race was about $14,000. So it is even suspect about how much money moves toward a track that lowers, but I would still think it's possible that a unilateral move by a track could be beneficial to it for a little while. And it's clear players don't really care as much as they claim. Some may, yourself possibly included, but most don't. But it's still worth some experiment.

I also don't think giving free PPs is going to change much either. There are cheap enough options and people are used to buying a program when they go to events. You can't know the players with a program as they say.

I think the best chance for improvement right now actually lies in getting racing out into the public conscience through TV. The current contract with NBC to show several races throughout the year would be a good start. Regular day to day play probably won't change much from that audience, but it can do a lot to get more notice for big days other than the TC days.

I also think racing has been teying to target the wrong group of people. It needs to target people 50+ rather than going after young people. Young people have never cared that much, but older people, especially those now retiring will have the two things needed. Time and disposible income, things the younger crowd does not have.

That's the best I got. Pretty basic really.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

As another track gets ready to close, the game's defenders are out in full force defending the Status Quo.

Track closing are a good thing.
We have too many tracks.
Far too many tracks.
When track closed, the horses go elsewhere.
We start to see 's and then 's.
Eventually, we might get to see a lot of 's and 's.

Or, better yet, we might see a whole lot less semi-horses being bred to being with.

Like football......image what a good product the NFL would be if there were only 14 teams. Or 12.