McKinsey Post Time Study

[Bigadam119]

https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-rac...uld-add-handle

Only in racing would you see pushback on such an obvious issue. Even when the recommendation is coming from arguably the most prestigious consulting firm in the business.

[zerosky]

Excellent point, lets hope something is done about it.

[alydar]

How much did they pay for this little bit of wisdom? This problem has been obvious for over twenty years or when simulcasting became widespread. And still, the tracks have not adjusted. Such a relatively simple solution and nothing is done. There are other improvements that could be made, but they are far more complex. The fact that little or no effort has been made on this issue shows how inept the indusrty is.

[Track Phantom]

I believe track cooperation is going to be a big thing in the 5-10 years. They will not only collaborate with post times but might be able to create races that more accurately share in horse population, at least from a regional standpoint.

My suggestion would have similar sized and reasonably geographically located tracks "team up" when creating racing dates, post times, morning or night racing, types of racing on which dates (weeks and days) etc.

Since I know the Midwest more, my example would be Prairie Meadows and Canterbury. I wondered this past weekend if Canterbury could write races that are for Mn-bred AND Ia-bred runners. Now that PRM season closed, they would get an influx of those horses. You could even allow PRM to write similar races earlier in their meet before CBY starts. However, you wouldn't really want these to overlap during the year.

Or maybe even conduct "trial" races for both states that see a "championship" of sorts at one track towards the end of the year. 5 MN-breds and 5 IA-breds.

The point is you could get very creative and leverage horse availability and optimal racing times. The big question is will racing entities be able to come together for the greater good?

[therussmeister]

Originally Posted by Track Phantom

I believe track cooperation is going to be a big thing in the 5-10 years. They will not only collaborate with post times but might be able to create races that more accurately share in horse population, at least from a regional standpoint.

My suggestion would have similar sized and reasonably geographically located tracks "team up" when creating racing dates, post times, morning or night racing, types of racing on which dates (weeks and days) etc.

Since I know the Midwest more, my example would be Prairie Meadows and Canterbury. I wondered this past weekend if Canterbury could write races that are for Mn-bred AND Ia-bred runners. Now that PRM season closed, they would get an influx of those horses. You could even allow PRM to write similar races earlier in their meet before CBY starts. However, you wouldn't really want these to overlap during the year.

Or maybe even conduct "trial" races for both states that see a "championship" of sorts at one track towards the end of the year. 5 MN-breds and 5 IA-breds.

The point is you could get very creative and leverage horse availability and optimal racing times. The big question is will racing entities be able to come together for the greater good?

This already happens. I don't know if it is mentioned in the conditions printed in the PPs, but during the parts of each meet that don't overlap state bred races are indeed open to horses bred in both states.

[Afleet]

Originally Posted by Track Phantom

I believe track cooperation is going to be a big thing in the 5-10 years. They will not only collaborate with post times but might be able to create races that more accurately share in horse population, at least from a regional standpoint.

My suggestion would have similar sized and reasonably geographically located tracks "team up" when creating racing dates, post times, morning or night racing, types of racing on which dates (weeks and days) etc.

Since I know the Midwest more, my example would be Prairie Meadows and Canterbury. I wondered this past weekend if Canterbury could write races that are for Mn-bred AND Ia-bred runners. Now that PRM season closed, they would get an influx of those horses. You could even allow PRM to write similar races earlier in their meet before CBY starts. However, you wouldn't really want these to overlap during the year.

Or maybe even conduct "trial" races for both states that see a "championship" of sorts at one track towards the end of the year. 5 MN-breds and 5 IA-breds.

The point is you could get very creative and leverage horse availability and optimal racing times. The big question is will racing entities be able to come together for the greater good?

How is Canterbury's handle so far this year? I haven't bet one race there this year. A filly, I had a small share of, won a stake there a few years back while I was attending Canterbury for the first time, so it's special to me. The raised takeout moved them to my banned list-my banned list is really full!!