Huge problem with racing

[Overlay]

Originally Posted by cj

Maybe part of the problem is we have WAY TOO MANY pools on every race.

I'm not sure that that's necessarily a bad thing. As I believe bettheoverlay was implying with his post, it offers additional opportunities to find value (at least on those exotics where advance probable payoffs are available), when individual horses are underlaid to win.

[LottaKash]

Originally Posted by thoroughbred

It's all a matter of perspective.

We all want to hit it big.

But look at even the $3.10 payout, the lowest payout on your list. That's a 55% profit.

Yes, I know, it may not be enough to cover possible future losses.

But a novice might think this is pretty good. Maybe in some sense it is.

HaHa, back in the day, I would think that a 3 or 4 dollar score was okay....Hey, back then ANY WINNER was a score, and I needed those little scores for maintaining the emotional end of my game....A win was a win............C'mon all, admit it, were'nt we all there at one time or another......?...

Perhaps some of us have advanced so far, that we may often fail to recall those 3 & 4 dollar days, and that , the newer or entertainment players, often are not seeing things quite the same as we do these days....

I often remember a lot of chalk coming in on a lot of days

best,

[Overlay]

Originally Posted by LottaKash

HaHa, back in the day, I would think that a 3 or 4 dollar score was okay....Hey, back then ANY WINNER was a score, and I needed those little scores for maintaining the emotional end of my game....A win was a win............C'mon all, admit it, were'nt we all there at one time or another......?...

Perhaps some of us have advanced so far, that we may often fail to recall those 3 & 4 dollar days, and that , the newer or entertainment players, often are not seeing things quite the same as we do these days....

I often remember a lot of chalk coming in on a lot of days

best,

You're certainly right about where I think most of our handicapping roots were established when we first encountered racing. It was all about picking winners. Any score was emotionally gratifying, but you needed an unsustainably high percentage of them at those short prices to come out ahead.

I think the difference is the performance data now available that makes assessment of fair odds and value much more accessible than it was in those days, when it depended on either educated subjective opinion or voluminous stubby-pencil record-keeping.

[barn32]

Originally Posted by cj

It is possible, but a lot of newbies aren't playing P3s and P4s. Maybe they should be. Maybe part of the problem is we have WAY TOO MANY pools on every race.

I agree. This is one part of the problem. When I was a kid playing the horses you had win, place and show--the daily double--two quinella and one exacta race per card. That's it.

We also had full fields (10-horse max) almost 100% of the time.

But let me ask you. Northern California is notorious for short fields. Why do you think that is? It's difficult for me to say, "well, it's because of all the different betting pools." I could be wrong though.

[RXB]

For major tracks with good mutuel handles, multiple pools isn't a problem. But some of these minor tracks-- quinellas, exactors, tri's, super's, rolling pick 3's almost every race-- I just don't understand their thinking. The pools are so diluted, they chase away not only big bettors but also medium bettors, too.

Also, while big payouts sound wonderful and get attention, the worst thing that can happen for a racetrack is when too many people bust their bankroll in short order. They need to win with reasonable frequency in order to keep their money in play. Chasing big-money payoffs is about the easiest way to go bust quickly.

[cj]

Again today, after 9 races, no win payoffs over $10 at woodbine. The last race has only two horse at 4 to 1 or less of 12....

[cj]

It is finally over!!!

[Zman179]

Short fields have a good side and a bad side.

The bad side is that it prevents big scores from occurring with more frequency.

The good side, for newbies, is that it makes it easier to cash a bet. Someone going to the racetrack for the first time isn't going to be dallying with the pick fours nor the trifectas. They're going to be playing WPS and an occasional exacta. I've seen many a rookie scream out their lungs because their show bet came in. By having full fields, it'll make it harder for the newbie to win...and that person might not come back. After all, reading the program or DRF to them is like figuring out chinese arithmetic. Add that to bowling a donut for 9 races and that person is lost for good.

But for the daily fare, bigger fields are obviously better. Personally, I think that you need a mix of both on every card. Just ask a heavy pick six player desperately looking for a potential single.

[samyn on the green]

There are too many tracks and not enough horses. The talent is spread so thin. Part of the problem is the slot money which as artifically pumped up purses beyond what the horse population can support at the entry box. As long as all of these slot tracks continue to run the racing will be overextended and too common to be interesting.

Just in the Northeast region we have Bel/WO/MTH/SUF/FL/DEL/PHA/CT/MNR/PEN/PID/LRL all running this month within 500 miles of each other. That is 12 tracks running on a Saturday with 10 races each. That requires 1200 horses to fill all those cards. It is not going to happen. Racing will be cheap, common and mundane.

[jonnielu]

Originally Posted by cj

It is possible, but a lot of newbies aren't playing P3s and P4s. Maybe they should be. Maybe part of the problem is we have WAY TOO MANY pools on every race.

They should be, modern racing revolves around the exotic wager. The exotics have more general appeal. They are played most when the average player sees that any horse could win, that is a live concept when fields are full.

jdl

[dav4463]

Sep. 29-- I believe the highest payoff of any winner at these three tracks today was $9.60. Plenty paid $4.00 or less.


Oops! $15.80 in the final race at Mountaineer. Only had to wait through 27 or so races for a double-digit winner!