Racing More like a Sporting event?

[Flysofree]

Will we ever see one vs one racing at sometime in the future of racing. The big money owners of high caliber horses one on one would be fun to see and these people usually have big attitudes as well.
Even in the next 2 or 3 lower rungs of races one horse vs another would make the game more like a sporting event.
No more of this one horse got beat "because he had nowhere to go with traffic problems"...

I'm not saying end all 8 to 12 horse fields of racing, because people love exotic wagering etc... But I think a headline 2 horse matchup at tracks would create a lot of interest if done properly.

[Tom]

The game is about betting.
Occasional "sporting races" are fun, but could never sustain racing.

[elhelmete]

Is this a joke?

Seriously, hasn't the Ruffian story been told 100x before?

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by elhelmete

Is this a joke?

Seriously, hasn't the Ruffian story been told 100x before?

What does that have to do with anything? Ruffian didn't break down because there was only one other horse in the starting gate, why do we keep acting as if that's why she injured herself?

[letswastemoney]

I'd argue match races are tougher and may result in more injuries (if they were common) because the horse is asked from the beginning with zero break.

A full field gives a bit more options than that, depending on what kind of horse it is. At the very least, every jockey isn't going to think "send hard" from the moment the gate opens.

[Flysofree]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

What does that have to do with anything? Ruffian didn't break down because there was only one other horse in the starting gate, why do we keep acting as if that's why she injured herself?

You are correct. Plus if they'll do the research on Ruffian, they will find out, she had a leg problem before the race that the trainer and owner knew about.


It would just be nice to have one race a day as a matchup... The interest would build over time, in my opinion.

[elhelmete]

The relevant Ruffian story aside...still not a good idea.

Betting on them is a lose-lose-lose for all relevant parties.

It's a waste of a portion of the racing day which can already be too long.

Horses aren't always ready to run when we say they are. So the Ali-Frazier matchup is far from guaranteed at any given point of time.

Why would I want to see horses eligible for NW2X go head to head? Even if their owners were 'characters?'

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by Flysofree

You are correct. Plus if they'll do the research on Ruffian, they will find out, she had a leg problem before the race that the trainer and owner knew about.


It would just be nice to have one race a day as a matchup... The interest would build over time, in my opinion.

Match races are terrible for betting and boring to watch...other than that, they're great. There's a reason they were phased out of existence. No need to return to failed ideas.

[ReplayRandall]

Hold on now people.....don't just dismiss this off-hand as an idea that has no real merit. Suppose there was a Nationalized Pick-4 with an add-on Match Race? After the first four races have been run, half of the pool goes to those that picked all four, the remaining half to be divided by those P-4 winners and their Match Race pick by proportion.......A tweak here, a tweak there, who knows?

[Robert Fischer]

Match races require a special low takeout if in fact the money is to be made on the 'event' aspect of it all.

[whodoyoulike]

Didn't match races require the owners to put up some large amount of money?

The owners would then compete for some % like 60% or some other % of the total including purse money.

[Robert Goren]

I have seen a few match races over the years, perhaps a 10 or 12. They have one thing in common, they are lousy betting opportunities. They really highlight how much the high takeout is ruining the sport. Two equally bet horses in a match race would both be 3/5 with standard 17% takeout.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

I have seen a few match races over the years, perhaps a 10 or 12. They have one thing in common, they are lousy betting opportunities. They really highlight how much the high takeout is ruining the sport. Two equally bet horses in a match race would both be 3/5 with standard 17% takeout.

They're always lousy bets because 'racing' doesn't have sliding takeout scales for smaller fields. If a 2, 3 or 4 horse field has the same takeout as a 10, 11 or 12 horse field, where's the incentive to bet the smaller field? They think people are stupid.

[Valuist]

Originally Posted by Flysofree

Will we ever see one vs one racing at sometime in the future of racing. The big money owners of high caliber horses one on one would be fun to see and these people usually have big attitudes as well.
Even in the next 2 or 3 lower rungs of races one horse vs another would make the game more like a sporting event.
No more of this one horse got beat "because he had nowhere to go with traffic problems"...

I'm not saying end all 8 to 12 horse fields of racing, because people love exotic wagering etc... But I think a headline 2 horse matchup at tracks would create a lot of interest if done properly.

Be careful what you wish for. Field sizes are getting smaller and smaller....

[thaskalos]

There was a grass race at Parx not too long ago...where a field of ten was reduced to a match race because of the sloppy track condition. As I recall...one horse was 2/5, and the other was 4/5.

No thanks...