Santa Anita delays opening two days, now the 28th

[cj]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

There is no data that an off track is more unsafe than a regular track. Racing now is doing things for no statistical reason at all (other tracks cancelled due to forecast as well). Fighting public opinion based on nothing is a recipe to get nowhere fast.

I believe there is data thai says exactly that. Almost positive I've seen it before.

[clicknow]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Businesses move all the time when taxes, regulations, or the general business climate is hostile in their present location or friendlier elsewhere.

CA racing moving "offshore" (which is where most businesses move in your above scenario) isn't going to be *friendlier*. It's going to be less friendly.

The CHRB has proved it operates under an opaque cloud and to many people both inside and outside of racing, appears corrupt (as we saw in that scopolamine positive with the utter lack of transparency).

Plenty of non- *lunatics* don't like to see what they perceive as greed, favoritism, conflicts of interest & arrogance.

How about we wait to see what happens with The Horse racing Integrity Act before we put CA racing to bed?

Bottom line, is you study failed businesses, what they have in common is poor management decisions, bad marketing, inability to compete with other similar businesses, bad business model, and/or a lack of interest from the public in their particular flavor of offerings, while others around them manage to stay afloat.

Blaming failure on the outside is like blaming the american consumer for Sears going under. It's convenient but not the whole picture.

[GMB@BP]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Maybe it's time to close up shop in CA and move the horses and horsemen to friendlier territory. CA is a somewhat unique state with unique people and attitudes that may not be compatible with our sport anymore.

Businesses move all the time when taxes, regulations, or the general business climate is hostile in their present location or friendlier elsewhere.

Why should horse racing be any different?

There is nothing stopping the industry from moving forward on issues that will make it more palatable to the general public everywhere else (including educating people so all the misinformation and spin from our enemies inside and outside press don't dominate perceptions). Beside, it make perfect sense to do everything possible to make the sport safer for everyone involved.

I just see no reason CA has to be part of the future. There are no fixes that will make racing palatable to lunatics. Let the racing occur elsewhere and if CA wants to allow betting on it fine (I would hope would be the case to avoid a serious economic blow outside CA by losing that handle), otherwise to hell with them.

they can come run on Indian land here in AZ, government could not do a thing, neither could the ballot box.

[Tom]

I'm sure all the owners who live in California are happy to hear that!

[horses4courses]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

they can come run on Indian land here in AZ, government could not do a thing, neither could the ballot box.

Hey....they could run cock fights and 3 card monte games on the side.

[horsefan2019]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Racing is dying in Southern California.

Note that GGF, with its Tapeta track, doesn't have to do this.

Isn't Bay Meadows now zoned for residential and commercial? I'm inclined to believe that there is just in general less audience for horse racing in California in general compared to the 70's and 80's.
Hollywood Park went synthetic and it couldn't save the track so it has little to with the surface. Fairplex no longer uses its track and gave its dates to Los Alamitos.
The biggest attendance for Santa Anita these days is the Breeders Cup and it pales in attendance compared to the typical weekday during the 80's. Back then they actually used the south parking lot and the gates there. Satellite wagering played its part but the fact is there is in general a smaller racing audience these days. And that smaller audience is not going to show up when there is a small field.

[horsefan2019]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

they can come run on Indian land here in AZ, government could not do a thing, neither could the ballot box.

Tribal land is basically considered a sovereign nation so I'm not surprised state law can't touch it.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

they can come run on Indian land here in AZ, government could not do a thing, neither could the ballot box.

While tribal sovereignty over horse racing is something I wouldn't doubt, any wagering would be governed by the Indian Gaming law, which requires a written agreement between the tribe and the state government regulating the betting pools.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by horsefan2019

Isn't Bay Meadows now zoned for residential and commercial? I'm inclined to believe that there is just in general less audience for horse racing in California in general compared to the 70's and 80's.
Hollywood Park went synthetic and it couldn't save the track so it has little to with the surface. Fairplex no longer uses its track and gave its dates to Los Alamitos.
The biggest attendance for Santa Anita these days is the Breeders Cup and it pales in attendance compared to the typical weekday during the 80's. Back then they actually used the south parking lot and the gates there. Satellite wagering played its part but the fact is there is in general a smaller racing audience these days. And that smaller audience is not going to show up when there is a small field.

They knew they were going to close BM so never installed a synthetic track. Hollywood had been losing money for 15 years before its closure.

FWIW Santa Anita's BC crowds are much larger than even weekend crowds in the 1980's. Santa Anita draws 60-70,000 for a typical BC Saturday. Even in the 1980's, there were only something like 10 to 15 crowds that high in the entire decade. Typical in the 1980's was 18,000 on a weekday and 35,000 on a weekend, with over 45,000 for the big races.

[horsefan2019]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

They knew they were going to close BM so never installed a synthetic track. Hollywood had been losing money for 15 years before its closure.

FWIW Santa Anita's BC crowds are much larger than even weekend crowds in the 1980's. Santa Anita draws 60-70,000 for a typical BC Saturday. Even in the 1980's, there were only something like 10 to 15 crowds that high in the entire decade. Typical in the 1980's was 18,000 on a weekday and 35,000 on a weekend, with over 45,000 for the big races.

Either people are taking Ubers to the track or those numbers are fudged....judging by the number of cars I seen at the parking lot at Breeders Cup Saturday the past couple of years, it was nowhere near as full as when I was going to the track at Santa Anita on the weekends in the 80s, especially for a big event like Big Cap Day or the Santa Anita Derby. Heck, just go watch some youtube videos of the big races in the 80's, there were tons of people in the infields and cars parked into overflow areas because they ran out of parking space.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by clicknow

Blaming failure on the outside is like blaming the american consumer for Sears going under. It's convenient but not the whole picture.

I don't think my point was that there aren't serious problems to be addressed and fixed to win back broad public opinion. My point was that some states are more hostile than others to business in general or especially specific industries. IMO, CA is not going to be a friendly state to horse racing long term and it's not just because they had a rough meet or two with breakdowns. That was just the trigger point. It's that the politics are different.

If I was a major CA owner or trainer, I'd be making plans to move to Oaklawn or CD and If I was small time claiming guy I'd probably be thinking about getting out.

[ubercapper]

I'm not sure why everyone doesn't get the reason for the postponement.

If SA ran as planned on Thursday after rain Wed. & Wed. night, ALL the turf races would be run on dirt, likely with significant scratches. I’d rather watch/handicap/bet on 10 horse fields on turf rather than 6 horse fields in off-turf races so I applaud this decision.

[ubercapper]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

Racing is dying in Southern California.

Note that GGF, with its Tapeta track, doesn't have to do this.

GG doesn't run on turf for another month of two. SA had four races in the condition book on turf plus one alternate for Thursday.

[groupie doll]

Originally Posted by ubercapper

I'm not sure why everyone doesn't get the reason for the postponement.

If SA ran as planned on Thursday after rain Wed. & Wed. night, ALL the turf races would be run on dirt, likely with significant scratches. I’d rather watch/handicap/bet on 10 horse fields on turf rather than 6 horse fields in off-turf races so I applaud this decision.

Agreed. I'd rather wait two days and have a (potentially) better card, esp. because I live for turf racing. Even more subjectively, I have more free time on Saturday vs. the 26th. Win-win.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by horsefan2019

Either people are taking Ubers to the track or those numbers are fudged....judging by the number of cars I seen at the parking lot at Breeders Cup Saturday the past couple of years, it was nowhere near as full as when I was going to the track at Santa Anita on the weekends in the 80s, especially for a big event like Big Cap Day or the Santa Anita Derby. Heck, just go watch some youtube videos of the big races in the 80's, there were tons of people in the infields and cars parked into overflow areas because they ran out of parking space.

There really is more transit now. Not just Ubers but the Gold Line as well.