small fields vs. large fields - how the track fares

[Half Smoke]

..................


on many different forums I've read that bettors prefer large fields to small fields - and that would include me

they've also claimed that large fields would generate more action

I decided to take a look

of course, this is unscientific - and I'm not making any sweeping claims based on this, but it was, at least to me, pretty interesting


at Belmont on Sunday, the 20th


race 1 had 6 runners


it generated $188K in the WPS pool and $40K in the superfecta pool
exacta pool - $131K



race 7........... had 11 runners


$360K in the WPS show pool and $103K in the superfecta pool
exacta pool $279K




https://www.equibase.com/premium/cha...20/2021&cy=USA



.

.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by Half Smoke

..................


on many different forums I've read that bettors prefer large fields to small fields - and that would include me

they've also claimed that large fields would generate more action

I decided to take a look

of course, this is unscientific - and I'm not making any sweeping claims based on this, but it was, at least to me, pretty interesting


at Belmont on Sunday, the 20th


race 1 had 6 runners


it generated $188K in the WPS pool and $40K in the superfecta pool
exacta pool - $131K



race 7........... had 11 runners


$360K in the WPS show pool and $103K in the superfecta pool
exacta pool $279K




https://www.equibase.com/premium/cha...20/2021&cy=USA



.

.

Bettors surely prefer large fields. At the same time, your comparison is a bit unfair.

Handle tends to increase over the course of a race card. First of all, not everyone gets up early enough and makes the first race. And second, gamblers tend to bet more, and on more types of bets, later in the day because many of them are irrational and impatient and trying to make their money back on earlier losses.

Ask anyone who books sports betting and they will tell you that Monday Night Football always handles higher than the Sunday games, even if the Monday night game is terrible, because bettors are chasing their losses.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Bettors surely prefer large fields. At the same time, your comparison is a bit unfair.

Handle tends to increase over the course of a race card. First of all, not everyone gets up early enough and makes the first race. And second, gamblers tend to bet more, and on more types of bets, later in the day because many of them are irrational and impatient and trying to make their money back on earlier losses.

Ask anyone who books sports betting and they will tell you that Monday Night Football always handles higher than the Sunday games, even if the Monday night game is terrible, because bettors are chasing their losses.

By the way, the fact that I know this shows you something about takeout debates that I think is underappreciated.

California has had a 50 cent "Players Pick Five" for a decade. It's on races 1-5. That's not an accident.

Basically, takeout is being discounted on a bet that is least likely to generate handle, because people don't get up / get to the track early and aren't chasing losses yet when they bet it.

The reality is that this industry has not really thought at all about how to actually structure takeout. Compare it to the airline industry, which charges all over the place for different seats on the same plane serving different travelers.

Basically, takeout should be low on races that people aren't as likely to bet and high on races that they are.

This means:

1. Takeout should be low on weekdays and higher on weekends.
2. Takeout should be low on early races on the card and higher on later races.
3. Takeout should be low on small fields and higher on big fields.
4. Takeout should be lower on ordinary races and higher on the Kentucky Derby and Breeders' Cup and other big stakes that everyone bets.

If racing implemented these things, it could probably run a ton of events with 10 percent or less takeout and still bring in the same amount, or more, of total revenue from betting handle.

[Elkchester Road]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

By the way, the fact that I know this shows you something about takeout debates that I think is underappreciated.

California has had a 50 cent "Players Pick Five" for a decade. It's on races 1-5. That's not an accident.

Basically, takeout is being discounted on a bet that is least likely to generate handle, because people don't get up / get to the track early and aren't chasing losses yet when they bet it.

The reality is that this industry has not really thought at all about how to actually structure takeout. Compare it to the airline industry, which charges all over the place for different seats on the same plane serving different travelers.

Basically, takeout should be low on races that people aren't as likely to bet and high on races that they are.

This means:

1. Takeout should be low on weekdays and higher on weekends.
2. Takeout should be low on early races on the card and higher on later races.
3. Takeout should be low on small fields and higher on big fields.
4. Takeout should be lower on ordinary races and higher on the Kentucky Derby and Breeders' Cup and other big stakes that everyone bets.

If racing implemented these things, it could probably run a ton of events with 10 percent or less takeout and still bring in the same amount, or more, of total revenue from betting handle.

Excellent point, dilanesp. Which means it wont be happening anytime soon.

[lamboguy]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

By the way, the fact that I know this shows you something about takeout debates that I think is underappreciated.

California has had a 50 cent "Players Pick Five" for a decade. It's on races 1-5. That's not an accident.

Basically, takeout is being discounted on a bet that is least likely to generate handle, because people don't get up / get to the track early and aren't chasing losses yet when they bet it.

The reality is that this industry has not really thought at all about how to actually structure takeout. Compare it to the airline industry, which charges all over the place for different seats on the same plane serving different travelers.

Basically, takeout should be low on races that people aren't as likely to bet and high on races that they are.

This means:

1. Takeout should be low on weekdays and higher on weekends.
2. Takeout should be low on early races on the card and higher on later races.
3. Takeout should be low on small fields and higher on big fields.
4. Takeout should be lower on ordinary races and higher on the Kentucky Derby and Breeders' Cup and other big stakes that everyone bets.

If racing implemented these things, it could probably run a ton of events with 10 percent or less takeout and still bring in the same amount, or more, of total revenue from betting handle.

i like those ideas. its something i never gave to much thought to....however, as good an idea as it is, i would probably address other things like uniform rules, pool manipulations, and drugs before i got to your idea's.

you know the other day i was playing Mountaineer. Peter Berry announcing the races.. he pointed out that there was a horse that was 16-1 that was the favorite in the show pool. he was pretty astute to pick up on it, and then during the race he announced that the money bet on that horse had evaporated from the pool during the race. the horse wound up running second. now i admit, i see this going on all over the place on most races. its the first time a guy announcing the race has ever brought this out in the open. cancelling and betting the break goes on everywhere most of the time.

[therussmeister]

I'd be more interested to know how owners and trainers fare vis-a-vis large vs. small fields. They are the ones who have the most influence on field size.

[KingAnon]

It's easier to win in smaller fields because there's less horses which means less competition and there's less chances of horses getting stuck behind other horses with nowhere to go. It's really not that hard to pick a horse to come in Show or better in a field of 6.

Larger fields are harder to pick because there's more competition, there's more studying involved since you have 10 horses instead of 6 and there's better chances of horses getting stuck, getting bumped or getting hit with more dirt and mud. But there's more money because there are more horses to choose from.

[thaskalos]

Show me a horseplayer who says that he makes money betting on today's 6-horse fields...and I'll show you a liar.

[Robert Fischer]

small fields in the context of multi race sequences ⇌