Saratoga meet is set to open July 16th, 2020

[Secondbest]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

I will bet against upstate. Cuomo is never going to allow it.

I can see Cuomo opening Saratoga with limited or no fans in the stands.
Aqueduct or Belmont no.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by drib

With the news today that Dr. Birx says she expects social distancing to continue throughout the summer, and Gov. Cuomo's statements about fan-less sporting events, I think we can conclude there will be no on track attendance at any NY track till the fall. Take away on track Saratoga attendees, and I don't believe that, out there in simulcast land, most bettors play races just b/c they are from Saratoga. Saratoga draws handle b/c of product quality, helped by calendar placement. Belmont would do just as well. Off track horseplayers are "not easily swayed by big flashing neon signs"; they will make do with what's available as the skyrocketing #'s for Fonner Park and Will Rogers Down indicate.

Wrong. There is absolutely no way you can assert that people will bet as much, or more, on Belmont than Saratoga. It is not based on anything factual or historical, but instead anecdotal evidence of two low-handling tracks that are the only games in town on certain days of the week during the height of the pandemic.

Panza made it very clear in the article that the per-starter handle at Saratoga blows what it is at Belmont out of the water. In a game that has suffered mightily in terms of popularity and performance, Saratoga is one brand that has actually gotten stronger over time.

Outside of the "Festival", Belmont's busiest day of the spring-summer meet is Stars and Stripes. The handle in 2018 was a record - $24.6 million. The card had 92 betting interests. Last year, the first Saturday at Saratoga was on July 13. The card had 88 betting interests. The handle? Over $28 million.

If there is racing, fans or not, it will be at Saratoga on July 16.

[HorsemenHeist]

I guess "Gulfstream Park West" handled a lot more under that brand than "Calder". Think that is the extent of the research done on the feasibility of "Saratoga at Belmont"

Should be noted that Saratoga gets many shippers from out of state, including Kentucky. Without a cohesive schedule elsewhere before the meet starts, how can horses be ready to sustain similar field size to previous years?

[alhattab]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Wrong. There is absolutely no way you can assert that people will bet as much, or more, on Belmont than Saratoga. It is not based on anything factual or historical, but instead anecdotal evidence of two low-handling tracks that are the only games in town on certain days of the week during the height of the pandemic.

Panza made it very clear in the article that the per-starter handle at Saratoga blows what it is at Belmont out of the water. In a game that has suffered mightily in terms of popularity and performance, Saratoga is one brand that has actually gotten stronger over time.

Outside of the "Festival", Belmont's busiest day of the spring-summer meet is Stars and Stripes. The handle in 2018 was a record - $24.6 million. The card had 92 betting interests. Last year, the first Saturday at Saratoga was on July 13. The card had 88 betting interests. The handle? Over $28 million.

If there is racing, fans or not, it will be at Saratoga on July 16.

Off track figs (per Equibase) were $23 million ($250k per starter) for Stars & Stripes and $23.8 million ($270k/starter) for Saratoga Saturday, so about 3.5% higher nominally and a shade under 10% per starter. I realize also the comparison may not be that great- presuming intentionally so- considering the Belmont card was stakes-laden and the Spa card featured a relatively mundane Diana. The burning question is does that Spa bump hold up in the circumstances? So many moving parts. Will be interesting to see how this plays out.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Wrong. There is absolutely no way you can assert that people will bet as much, or more, on Belmont than Saratoga. It is not based on anything factual or historical, but instead anecdotal evidence of two low-handling tracks that are the only games in town on certain days of the week during the height of the pandemic.

Panza made it very clear in the article that the per-starter handle at Saratoga blows what it is at Belmont out of the water. In a game that has suffered mightily in terms of popularity and performance, Saratoga is one brand that has actually gotten stronger over time.

Outside of the "Festival", Belmont's busiest day of the spring-summer meet is Stars and Stripes. The handle in 2018 was a record - $24.6 million. The card had 92 betting interests. Last year, the first Saturday at Saratoga was on July 13. The card had 88 betting interests. The handle? Over $28 million.

If there is racing, fans or not, it will be at Saratoga on July 16.

Panza has no statistics on handle during a pandemic. Those off track handles come from years where there is racing all over the country, and fans betting other tracks then also bet on races at Saratoga.

It makes zero sense to extrapolate them, and frankly, he was very stupid to make such a bad argument publicly. He hurt his employer (which is not even racing at all right now and can be kept out of business for an indefinite period by other government agencies) by saying it in an interview, because now it looks like NYRA thinks branding is more important than public safety.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Panza has no statistics on handle during a pandemic.

NYRA wasn't racing during the last pandemic (2009)??

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by clicknow

I've done some reading of caselaw that involves invocation of emergency powers that restrict activities that would normally be "constitutionally protected. "

(cases about violating different kinds of curfews, restricting the right to travel to regions with pestilences, personal detentions, etc.). One would have to overcome quite a lot in terms of legitimate purpose, imperativeness, etc. which is why these petitions that involve movements or actions that present a danger to other individuals or to the greater community never make it out of the Circuit Courts w/out being dismissed and thus are denied review by the Supreme Court.

To continue reading will take years of my time. Understanding caselaw and precedents is a lot more work than reading sentences out of the Constitution. Since you have earned a law degree you already know this.

But the reading has been interesting and has helped me form an opinion, so I will continue, but it's a lot of work.



I read that one. As you know, each case cites 4-5 other cases, so it's an endless reading project to really understand what is, and isn't, constitutionally protected. The reasoning and logic you get out of reading petitions is very worthwhile, I think.

You can read a long time, and outside of the religion context, as well as a few cases from 120 years ago involving using a epidemic as an excuse to effectively imprison Chinese residents in San Francisco, you won't find any reported cases where the judges actually reviewed a Governor's finding that there was an epidemic, beyond a cursory "does he believe it in good faith" review.

The law in this area is clear.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

NYRA wasn't racing during the last pandemic (2009)??

That pandemic didn't involve nationwide social distancing. We don't have any statistics that give Panza any basis for the BS in that interview.

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Panza has no statistics on handle during a pandemic. Those off track handles come from years where there is racing all over the country, and fans betting other tracks then also bet on races at Saratoga.

It makes zero sense to extrapolate them, and frankly, he was very stupid to make such a bad argument publicly. He hurt his employer (which is not even racing at all right now and can be kept out of business for an indefinite period by other government agencies) by saying it in an interview, because now it looks like NYRA thinks branding is more important than public safety.

It's actually remarkable the lack of intuitive thinking you are willing to display in order to stick to your perverse agenda....whether on this specific issue or others.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by the little guy

It's actually remarkable the lack of intuitive thinking you are willing to display in order to stick to your perverse agenda....whether on this specific issue or others.

To be clear, TLG is a NYRA employee and is required by his employer to back up Panza.

That is the only reason he is saying this, as he is too smart to actually believe it.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Panza made it very clear in the article that the per-starter handle at Saratoga blows what it is at Belmont out of the water. In a game that has suffered mightily in terms of popularity and performance, Saratoga is one brand that has actually gotten stronger over time.

I'm sure Panza has some kind of estimate for how much on track handle he gets from tourists and other casual fans that attend Saratoga everyday as part of their vacation, weekend getaway, or day trip etc.. He did not include or mention that as part if the analysis. However, IMO a lot of those people will NOT be betting Saratoga as a simulcast this year. They are only there and gambling for the on track experience. Most of the the people I go to Saratoga with every year fall into that category. Even if it's not a huge handle number, the past per starter numbers for Saratoga are misleading relative to Belmont and Aqueduct for that reason alone.

Also, I personally often don't even look at AQU (12 horse fields or not) because the horses stink and the races are sometimes undecipherable. But I often bet 5-7 horse fields at Saratoga because they are high quality horses on which I have a good line.

There's no way to know how much the quality issue alone impacts per starter numbers at each track.

If you ran Saratoga quality races at Belmont and especially AQU, the per starter handle at each track would almost certainly narrow from where it is now.

When all is said and done, the Saratoga brand is the superior brand, but I'm not so sure it's by enough to warrant all the extra expenses and risks of sending all the horses, horsemen, and backstretch workers up there.

In any event, there will also be no way to prove anything after the fact because we'll never know what "Saratoga at Belmont" would have handled, we have no idea how millions of job losses are going to impact handle, and we don't know how a smaller national schedule and lack of other sports gambling are going to impact either Saratoga or Belmont on the plus side.

If they can race, they should race, but imo Saratoga vs. Belmont is not a no brain decision, especially when costs and risks are included.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

To be clear, TLG is a NYRA employee and is required by his employer to back up Panza.

That is the only reason he is saying this, as he is too smart to actually believe it.

Way to up the ol' "dick factor...."

Didn't think it was possible at this point.

I know, I know...TLG is a dick to you too...you're just a poor misunderstood Clarence Darrow.

[MonmouthParkJoe]

While I am enjoying reading this thread and everyone going back and forth about numbers they likely don't know, there is one thing we do know for sure.

Saratoga is the best meet in the country, and its not even close. Assuming the meet is run, customers will go out of their way to find and wager on it. 90% or more of that on track crowd, if there are no spectators, will find a way to play either on an ADW or other locations. Yes, some casual money will be lost but likely immaterial.

It is also laughable that Panza or any other executive there has no clue about the numbers. If it was even remotely true that the brand means nothing and having the same quality fields at Belmont or Aqueduct would result in about the same handle, why go upstate? Why incur all the costs to ship both office items and people, at a time when they have not been able to run for months, if it was not in their best financial interest? AND if they have no fans and miss out on all the non-parimutuel revenues like gate, F&B, ect, yet STILL want run upstate, what does that tell you?

Come on man!

[ubercapper]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

I am saying if the Governor says there is an infectious disease and there is one, he or she is deferred to by the courts. "Whim" is you spinning. Since nobody doubts the existence of the pandemic, this is not about whims and the Governor has plenary authority not only to close businesses, but even to close cities and lock people in their houses.

There is 175 years of caselaw on this. There may be a partial exception for the exercise of religion, but that is it.

The government has to treat every class of business the same, or at least treat the citizens the same, right?

Maybe at the start of the pandemic, Governor's had basis for emergency orders to define "essential businesses" then close all but those "essential" businesses.

However, I think at some point a class of business (and it's customers) may try to make the case in court either the government is 1) Treating them differently or 2) has no right to determine business A is more or less essential then business B.



Is it possible courts may be more inclined to accept those arguments?

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Way to up the ol' "dick factor...."

Didn't think it was possible at this point.

I know, I know...TLG is a dick to you too...you're just a poor misunderstood Clarence Darrow.

I actually like him. Indeed, I think as an ambassador to horse racing there are few better- he's sort of a latter day Andy Beyer.

But he's also a NYRA employee. I don't think that makes him a bad person at all. I am not allowed to go on this website (or any other) and undermine my clients either. Anyone who works in a public-facing job faces these restrictions; they are part of life.

But when he says that I'm an idiot for not understanding all the magic subtleties of the statements of NYRA's racing executives in public interviews, I think his employment is something worth taking into account. I doubt he is actually thinking that the points I made had no relevance.