As harness racing sinks slowly into the sunset...

[Jess Hawsen Arown]

...we have a new USTA President who says we will continue down the same road because the USTA is doing a great job.

Not surprising, the self-described "establishment" guy is an executive at Hanover Shoe Farms. Of course the "establishment" loves what is going on -- as the USTA stat page clearly points out.

Last year was another down year for handle, and this year the rate of decline is increasing. As I write this on 3/5/17, the handle is down an inconceivable 10.24% from last year at the same time. So why are the establishment guys happy? Because the purses are up 6.36%.

So while owners (USTA membership has dropped approximately 50%) and bettors are abandoning the product at a record clip, the boys at the top of the food chain are getting richer. With less owners buying horses, the rich owners have a better chance of winning the bigger purse money supplied by casinos-who-need-harness-racing-to-stay-in-business.

Don't the breeding farms and drug-culture owners and trainers realize that eventually there will be no more game? Of course they do -- and they do care. But they do not care nearly enough to make any changes that will impact their current gravy train.

Meanwhile, in Pennsylvania, racino owners are doing everything possible to get people away from their harness tracks so they can solicit the state legislators to eliminate the revenue killing harness racing from their books. The same is true for Yonkers Raceway where the casino owners spend a fortune marketing their casino on local TV and you would have no idea that horses raced there, also.

[upthecreek]

http://www.harnessracingupdate.com/2...e-post-parade/

[Jess Hawsen Arown]

Originally Posted by upthecreek

http://www.harnessracingupdate.com/2...e-post-parade/

Everybody on the Board of Directors appreciates the need for marketing. Every one of them knows what we all know -- that the game is on the way to oblivion. None of them wants the game to end.

So what is the problem? As I said, they won't risk one penny of the money they are making now to save the game. "Let the young people find another line of work. We're making money -- NOW!

[jtschmidt]

I saw today that Langley is not in support of lower takeout. The USTA and majority of track management are jokes. Some sports books who offer -105 betting is essentially offering 4.76% takeout wagers assuming they have a good bookmaker. Tracks cannot get sided either meaning they have no interest in who wins races. They get their cut regardless. How can harness racing possibly expect to survive with 35% takeout on supers at some PA tracks. Why would that attract any young gambler? It does not take rocket science to see this.

Last weekend, the Meadowlands had a Pick 5 carryover. These are the rough numbers I calculated:

$40,000 was bet ($6,000 takeout) causing a $25,500 C/O (Meadowlands pays 4/5 which is a different issue). So $40,000 was bet into a 15% takeout.


$170,000 was bet (takeout and carryover almost perfectly negate each other). So $170,000 was bet into a 0% takeout.

The sport needs lower takeout and market the sport as a gambling game to all parties. 35% takeout is not marketable. Gambling is so popular among young people these days. I actually think the small risk big reward of certain bets (example pick 5 wagers) are marketable to the young crowd more than some sports and casino wagers.

Yes there are numerous other issues in the sport right now too, but putting out the best gambling product is a start.

[Jess Hawsen Arown]

Originally Posted by jtschmidt

I saw today that Langley is not in support of lower takeout. The USTA and majority of track management are jokes. Some sports books who offer -105 betting is essentially offering 4.76% takeout wagers assuming they have a good bookmaker. Tracks cannot get sided either meaning they have no interest in who wins races. They get their cut regardless. How can harness racing possibly expect to survive with 35% takeout on supers at some PA tracks. Why would that attract any young gambler? It does not take rocket science to see this.

Last weekend, the Meadowlands had a Pick 5 carryover. These are the rough numbers I calculated:

$40,000 was bet ($6,000 takeout) causing a $25,500 C/O (Meadowlands pays 4/5 which is a different issue). So $40,000 was bet into a 15% takeout.


$170,000 was bet (takeout and carryover almost perfectly negate each other). So $170,000 was bet into a 0% takeout.

The sport needs lower takeout and market the sport as a gambling game to all parties. 35% takeout is not marketable. Gambling is so popular among young people these days. I actually think the small risk big reward of certain bets (example pick 5 wagers) are marketable to the young crowd more than some sports and casino wagers.

Yes there are numerous other issues in the sport right now too, but putting out the best gambling product is a start.

Sadly, your ideas are GOOD. Why, sadly? Many people have good ideas and the cumbersome Board of Directors at the USTA refuses to do anything about it.

[pandy]

The main problem with the harness gambling product, particularly on half mile and five-eighth tracks, of which there are many, is that it's way too speed favoring, and of course too chalky. Northfield Park last Saturday, 14 wire to wire winners. One night earlier last week, Yonkers, 11 wire to wire winners and of course at Yonkers in most of the races no one gets off the pylons until they hit the backstretch the second time.

Bad racing, bad product, from both a spectator and gambling perspective.

[jtschmidt]

Pandy,

I agree that the product can improve. The obvious is full fields and get rid of passing lanes. The horse shortage is an obvious issue but why were passing lanes even ever installed? I'm too young to know (22 from your neighboring town of Bethlehem).

Personally, I think race cards should be condensed, drag should be eliminated, and there should be no dead time on air. These are secondary to full fields, no post/speed bias, and lowering takeout.

JT

[pandy]

Originally Posted by jtschmidt

Pandy,

I agree that the product can improve. The obvious is full fields and get rid of passing lanes. The horse shortage is an obvious issue but why were passing lanes even ever installed? I'm too young to know (22 from your neighboring town of Bethlehem).

Personally, I think race cards should be condensed, drag should be eliminated, and there should be no dead time on air. These are secondary to full fields, no post/speed bias, and lowering takeout.

JT

I can't remember what year the passing lane was started, quite a long time ago. I guess it seemed like a good idea at the time, but of course now it just results in less movement during the race. As for the bias, there are only two options for the three and four turn tracks, either they would have to race at longer distances, or go back to the wood sulkies. Many harness fans don't like longer races because they're used to handicapping the mile races, and the fractions are much different when you go longer. Because of that, I think that going back to a slower sulky would be the best option. Horseplayers don't care how fast the times are, they just want competitive races where you can get a good payoff. The speed bias is a big part of the reason why the payoffs are so low. If a driver has one of the faster horses in the race and is in one of the inside posts, he can just gun the horse to the lead and the race is over. The bettors know this so they bet heavily on inside speed horses. The whole thing is messed up. We took the greatest gambling sport of all time and screwed it up with speed favoring sulkies, passing lanes, drivers leaning way back. Truly a royal screw up. Thoroughbred players may not realize this, but up until about the mid 80's, a smart handicapper and bettor had a much bigger edge betting harness than thoroughbreds. But once the speed bias took over, most of the serious harness bettors, pros, whales, switched over to the thoroughbreds.

Since you're 22 you may not have heard of Brett Pelling. He was one of the all time winningest trainers, won a ton of major stakes races, but he retired and went back to Australia with his family. Now after an 11 year hiatus he's back and should have horses racing at the Meadowlands this spring. He was interviewed by Harness Racing Update recently and I was surprised to see his remarks about the sulkies. He said that the sulkies are a problem, and also mentioned how in Australia they don't allow the drivers to lean far back. Here is the link:


http://www.harnessracingupdate.com/2...aining-career/

[pandy]

By the way, I don't mean to infer that you can't win betting modern day harness racing. I bet a lot of harness races at many different tracks and I grind out a profit. It's still a good gambling sport if you know what you're doing. And, of course, you can bet tracks like the Meadowlands, Hoosier, Woodbine, etc., that have two turns and are not as biased, plus the pools are bigger.

On the half and five eighth tracks, you have to pick your spots carefully, but they can be beaten too. It's just not as much fun as it used to be.

[caper]

I try to bet almost exclusively low take out wagers now. The Western fair p4's. Woodbine p5's for the most part.

The other thing. I find woodbine is a better wagering product since they slashed purses. The faster horses moved south and there are a lot more weaker fields and suspect favorites. To me that makes for better opportunities for people willing to put the time in.

[pandy]

Originally Posted by caper

I try to bet almost exclusively low take out wagers now. The Western fair p4's. Woodbine p5's for the most part.

The other thing. I find woodbine is a better wagering product since they slashed purses. The faster horses moved south and there are a lot more weaker fields and suspect favorites. To me that makes for better opportunities for people willing to put the time in.

I haven't been following Woodbine but a lot of people recommend their racing.

[Jess Hawsen Arown]

Originally Posted by pandy

I haven't been following Woodbine but a lot of people recommend their racing.

I wonder how many people will play the MUST PAY pentafecta tomorrow night since the last one was the most obviously fixed race in recent history.

[Sea Biscuit]

Originally Posted by Jess Hawsen Arown

I wonder how many people will play the MUST PAY pentafecta tomorrow night since the last one was the most obviously fixed race in recent history.

Fixed race? Just exactly how do you know that?

[baconswitchfarm]

Originally Posted by Sea Biscuit

Fixed race? Just exactly how do you know that?

Maybe he has watched the races and has seen the payouts every time they have the must pay.

[LottaKash]

Originally Posted by Jess Hawsen Arown

I wonder how many people will play the MUST PAY pentafecta tomorrow night since the last one was the most obviously fixed race in recent history.

JHA, it would be interesting to me if you could point out a little bit more of your perceptions of that race, which was the obviously the most fixed race in history to you....