Televising Big Harness Races

[DeanT]

After the word that the USTA voted 13-1 to not fund $75k towards Gural's idea to televise the Jug and Meadowlands Pace, the letters to the editor were smoking.

(pdf) http://www.harnessracingupdate.com/r...TOKEN=70965065

[Just a Fan]

Interesting. One of the letter writers who blasted the USTA, Andrew Cohen, at least used to write columns for the USTA, not sure if he still does.

I tend to agree with Gareth Dowse's take that he wants the USTA to use horseman's dues to help promote the sport. The USTA's promotional efforts generally seem geared primarily to people who are already involved in the sport, rather than attracting new fans. The USTA seems to have little to no power in regulating the sport, and if they aren't promoting harness racing effectively, what exactly are they doing? Do they effectively encourage kids to get involved in the sport? Are they good at funding programs that find homes for retired horses? Have they done a good job at making statistical information available to the public?

[Stillriledup]

So wait, Joe Faraldo is in charge of the USTA and was behind the decision to NOT help out Gural? Who woulda thunk it.

[RaceTrackDaddy]

Seems to me that with all the dues that go into the USTA and all the revenue via the past performances to boot, why can't they at least spend some of the money on promotions of this sport?

Yes, every time the USTA raises their take on the past performances (been a while now but I'm expecting them to charge more in the near future) don't complain to Trackmaster as it is the USTA that is behind it.

The sport could very easily do as the Canadians and offer a basic past performances on line for free. The greyhounds have been doing it for years and some even improved the basic to include more information and they provide it for free on their homepage. Case in point is Bluffs Run in Iowa. http://www.bluffsdogs.com/OfficialPrograms2.asp
Check them out. The one thing you don't see in the basic dog programs is money won, but that not is the case at Bluffs Run.

I will save their point system for the purse accounts for a latter time but their stake races are paid out similar to horse racing.

Maybe if the tracks were permitted to give out the free pp's, the people might be tempted in coming back to the races. Those that benefit from the sport should do everything they can to promote and improve it instead of depending upon those slot machines as I have a feeling those subsidies days are numbered. Too much money to be had for government spending than to increase purses as those in the state capital will eventually amend the slot legislation to siphon off the revenue to their pet projects.

[DeanT]

Chris Schick - the fella who runs Cal Expo, is a bettor and also helped create the USTA's strategic wagering initiative - was the lone yes vote. He thought it would be 'good to try as a test program' . Good for Chris.

All the more reason to throw a few more dollars Cal Expo's way, IMO.

[mrroyboy]

Very good article RTD. Free pp's would increase both the handle and attendance.

[wilderness]

I'm not sure how people are able to turn this issue into such a travesty, and especially when the information is freely available on the USTA website:

What is the USTA

I could be mistaken, however I'd "assume" that the items listed under the PURPOSE category are in order of precedence.

Please note that PROMOTION is at the bottom of the list.

What's not listed is that one of the primary purposes of the United States Trotting Association is to represent it's membership.

In addition the United States Trotting Association is not governed by their every-day management and/or staff.
They are governed by a board of directors numbering more than fifty (50) which are elected by the membership to represent the membership. As a result nearly every NEW issue must be approved by a vote of the directors at meetings. (If they called a meeting every time there was cloud in the sky than the expenses of operation could easily multiple by ten-fold or even a hundred-fold.

It's a well known fact that the USTA could easily double all of their fees and still remain unable to properly fund their primary PURPOSE designations, due to declining membership and/or market share.

[Overcall]

Thanks Wilderness for putting up the USTA link. That led me to Hoofbeats and the great story of Duncan MacTavish.

[Just a Fan]

Fair enough Don, but would you agree that the USTA promotional effort often seems geared towards presenting awards to the same group of cronies over and over again that have a lifetime of largely trivial impact? Or sending Faraldo or someone to France to wine and dine? Or paying someone to write a column with weekly handicapping selections that offers nothing in terms of fan education value, isn't interesting/humorous/stimulating in any way, and, um, bleeds money? Neither a newbie nor a regular player would find any value in reading that column that appears week after week.

The other missions are pretty straightforward, and shouldn't take up too much capital.

Licensing and registration isn't all that difficult (not sure how technologically advanced they are).

They get together once in awhile to propose and agree upon rule changes (let me know when they establish a universal pylon rule that is consistent and understood from track to track).

Racing information and records are only somewhat available - some info is free, some info is available thru a pay service (Pathway), but a lot of the sports statistical info (all time stats for example) is just not as accessible for harness racing as it is on a Tbred site like equibase.

"Endeavor to ensure the integrity of harness racing" - ha! that's left to the states, or the individual racetracks. The states' racing boards perform human and equine drug tests, and the states and/or racetracks ultimately decide who can and can not race. Horsemen kicked out of one racetrack regularly move on somewhere else to cause trouble. The USTA denies licenses to people that they deem unfit, but those people can still race in most jurisdictions.

I actually agree that if you are looking an annual budget of, say, 200K to more effectively market the sport, a large portion should come out of the revenues produced by/for the sport (VLT money, betting handle, and a horsemen's share, from purse money). But the USTA needs to make a stronger commitment to market the sport, whether they see it as a priority or not.


RTD - I agree that allowing tracks to offer free PPs would be good for the sport, and I remember Pompano, CalX, andOcean Downs (and probably some others) used to do it before the USTA stopped them. But if all the tracks offered free PPs, how would Trackmaster stay in business? As long as Trackmaster is a business partner of the USTA, I can't see how making all PPs free would work.

[RaceTrackDaddy]

Originally Posted by Just a Fan

RTD - I agree that allowing tracks to offer free PPs would be good for the sport, and I remember Pompano, CalX, andOcean Downs (and probably some others) used to do it before the USTA stopped them. But if all the tracks offered free PPs, how would Trackmaster stay in business? As long as Trackmaster is a business partner of the USTA, I can't see how making all PPs free would work.

I am saying to offer a 'basic version' of the past performances for free. Most people that crunch numbers like myself will still be buying Trackmaster pp's or Sports Eye. But to get more people into the track and this day and age most people have internet access, a free basic version could create more in revenue than not having it. I really do not see a downside as with the inferior programs bringing in rookie money, I should be able to increase my revenue stream using the better pp's. I see it as a win/win situation for both the tracks and consumers of racing. They can buy the pp's at the track if they care to but they might be drawn to the track by the online versions although not as detailed.

[mrroyboy]

Agree 100%

[wilderness]

Originally Posted by Overcall

Thanks Wilderness for putting up the USTA link. That led me to Hoofbeats and the great story of Duncan MacTavish.

Overcall,
There's also a Duncan MacTavish story on Robert Smith's website.

[Just a Fan]

Originally Posted by RaceTrackDaddy

I am saying to offer a 'basic version' of the past performances for free. Most people that crunch numbers like myself will still be buying Trackmaster pp's or Sports Eye. But to get more people into the track and this day and age most people have internet access, a free basic version could create more in revenue than not having it. I really do not see a downside as with the inferior programs bringing in rookie money, I should be able to increase my revenue stream using the better pp's. I see it as a win/win situation for both the tracks and consumers of racing. They can buy the pp's at the track if they care to but they might be drawn to the track by the online versions although not as detailed.

Makes sense to me. I read right past the word "basic" in your previous post.

I see the Tri-Super jackpot stands at 11.25 at Bluffs Run - you've gotta give us the 4-1-1 on those races!!! Lets scoop it!!!

[RaceTrackDaddy]

Just A Fan
I do the same thing. Seems we are mutlitasking so much today that we give a cursory reading of things and then respond or react in the real world. We got to face it that today, with technology, time if fleeting.

Back in the day, we bought our programs the night before as we left the track. Went to our local watering hole with our friends and did a slow methodical handicapping session (collectively) until last call. Next day after work we would all meet up at the track and start betting.

Today, we do it all online and with so many tracks and wagering options it is a surprise to me that we all don't go broke.

The limit of betting only on track and only those races that were run in front of us kept money in our pockets. At least then, I would have to get the cash out of my wallet and hand it over the teller to make my wagers. Today, electronic cash is so easy to lose track and before you know it, I bet a lot more than I intended and it will affect my handicapping.

Since I am on a thought progression here, let me say that when handicapping is used for wagering without any type of money management we the bettor are in trouble. The hardest thing for me to do (and I have been doing this since the early 1970's) is to pass up a race that I like (not love). Our goal should be to end up with a positive roi (return on investment). To make more money that we started. To bet every race is not conducive to our goal. We have to pick our spots.

To this day I cannot say to someone else on how to determine which races to bet. I don't know myself other than creating rules (like my troubled trip rule of betting three times before jumping off).

There are occasions where I spit into the wind and bet every race. It is when I am usually out of town at another track. Case in point from 1980 through 2003 one would usually find me on the third Thursday in September at the Delaware County Fairgrounds in Ohio for the Jug and Juggette. It is like a vacation and I usually end up broke or a nice winner when we drive back home.

I rambled on enough I guess.
rtd

[mrroyboy]

Very good article RTD. It's obvious you know your stuff. Looking forward to reading more of your posts.