Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Racing Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 05-22-2018, 03:51 PM   #31
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp View Post
4. I am sorry if it offends any older posters on this board, but I think it is absolutely stupid and self-destructive for any sport to cater to old people. Old people get sick and die, and they also never make any activity they are involved in hip and trendy and marketable.

You want to have horse races available to bet on for years to come? You need to attract younger people. Period.
And I, in turn, apologize if it offends the less informed among us...but a gambling game that can't hold on to its existing "older" customer base isn't likely to be able to attract any "younger" customers. In what other business can you say that "it is absolutely stupid and self-destructive" to cater to old customers...because "they get sick and die."? Isn't the old customer's money just as green as anyone else's?
__________________
Live to play another day.

Last edited by thaskalos; 05-22-2018 at 03:56 PM.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-22-2018, 04:00 PM   #32
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poindexter View Post
......I am talking about the future of racing. I am talking about providing some 21 year old who goes to Belmont Park for the first time with some friends and finds the game thrilling. He likes to gamble, finds the challenge of determining who will win a horse race an interesting puzzle. He watches you tube videos, picks up some books on the subject and he want to evolve into a serious horse player. This is the future of racing, not whales who come and go as the opportuinites arise, not us dudes in our 50s and 60's and 70's who may have already given the game up, or have a lot fewer years to give the game etc. If racing continue to price out the 21 year old and many others for that matter, there will be no future in racing. Despite their delusions otherwise, the main enternment value of horse racing is solely the gambling aspect. Properly priced this game is ten fold the best gambling game around (I know you disagree Andy C) imo. It becomes beatable, complex and the greatest intellectual challenge (I think that is what Andy Beyer said in one of his books). Right now, if you are not getting hefty rebates it is simply pick your poison, because no matter who you bet there just isn't much value there. For most over the short run they can hope to get lucky and over the long run just add up their losses. At this point I would say that for most they are better off taking a stab at a pick 5 or pick 6 carryover then they are trying to grind out profits in the other pools. Imagine what would happen to the pools if every horse player came to a similar conclusion,

Now Dilane (and the racing industry itself) come from the school of thought that gamblers expect to lose, so what. Some maybe, but overall I disagree with that premise. I get why they feel that way. If you run an adw and you see player X lost 21% in 2010 and 18% in 2011 and 25% in 2012 and 30% in 2013 and 14% in 2014..your reaction is going to be they just don't care. I do not believe it is that simple.

Any game that is beatable blackjack, sports betting, poker, horse racing, fantasy, has a leg up on the rest. All the beatable games are still very tough to beat, so every gambler will go the direction(s) that work best for them, and many will lose consistently in striving to beat these games. But that doesn't mean they want to lose, expect to lose or will continue to allow themselves to lose. In their mind there is a light at the end of the tunnel. Poker and sports betting are largely the same game they were (obviously the competition is more educated in poker), either you climb the mountain or you don't. Racing brought in whales. They basically changed the landscape to the point where that light at the end of the tunnel is gone. What % of current players realize that I am not sure, but they ultimately will find out. Once they realize that, they will exit the game and find another. Plenty already have and it is quite an easy and convenient excuse for this industry to blame competition.
I agree that a properly priced racing game is the best game around. But part of that pricing needs to be a fixed or stable price that a bettor can rely on when they put their money down.

Nobody wants to lose but they accept losing as part of the cost of participation. It is amazing that many casual bettors will take X number of dollars to the track or the casino and proceed to find a way to lose all of it before finally leaving.
AndyC is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-22-2018, 04:13 PM   #33
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp View Post
1. People bet on other sports too. Indeed, sports betting is a big part of the rise of pro football and the NCAA tournament, among other things.

2. If horse racing's decline were exclusively a betting phenomenon, why did boxing decline at the same time? And why did other sports rise up?

3. The racetracks used to be filled with what were called "$2 bettors". Yes, they bet, a little. But their main affinity for the sport was aesthetic, not gambling.

Indeed, for most of horse racing's history as a major, popular sport, it was actually very hard to make a big gambling score. When horse racing was popular, there were very few exotic bets. A daily double, and then later on a handful of exactas. It was a much, much worse gambling game back then than it is now. And yet it was more popular.

And even now, where horse racing still IS successful, it attracts lots of casual bettors. Like at Saratoga or at the TC races.

4. I am sorry if it offends any older posters on this board, but I think it is absolutely stupid and self-destructive for any sport to cater to old people. Old people get sick and die, and they also never make any activity they are involved in hip and trendy and marketable.

You want to have horse races available to bet on for years to come? You need to attract younger people. Period.
I can mostly agree with #1 & #2 but #3 I believe is wrong. I used to go to the racetracks when they were filled with $2 bettors and they weren't there to just look at the pretty horses and the trees. They went to gamble. They went to the races because that was the only game in town. If aesthetics were such a draw the $2 bettors would still be flocking to the track.

As for #4, tell me, Mr. Marketing Director, how would you make racing hip and trendy? Given that old people have more money and more time to spend it wouldn't it be foolish just to kick them to the curb?
AndyC is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-22-2018, 04:20 PM   #34
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
I can mostly agree with #1 & #2 but #3 I believe is wrong. I used to go to the racetracks when they were filled with $2 bettors and they weren't there to just look at the pretty horses and the trees. They went to gamble. They went to the races because that was the only game in town. If aesthetics were such a draw the $2 bettors would still be flocking to the track.

As for #4, tell me, Mr. Marketing Director, how would you make racing hip and trendy? Given that old people have more money and more time to spend it wouldn't it be foolish just to kick them to the curb?
Just FOOLISH? It would be "absolutely stupid and self-destructive".
__________________
Live to play another day.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-22-2018, 04:32 PM   #35
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos View Post
And I, in turn, apologize if it offends the less informed among us...but a gambling game that can't hold on to its existing "older" customer base isn't likely to be able to attract any "younger" customers. In what other business can you say that "it is absolutely stupid and self-destructive" to cater to old customers...because "they get sick and die."? Isn't the old customer's money just as green as anyone else's?
It's just as green, but there is no future in old people.

Thask, we have been around this merry-go-round before, but you need to separate "what would be convenient for me" from "what is good for the long-term health of the sport". They are two different things.

To put a rather coarse point on it, we are in the midst of the Triple Crown. I don't know if you ever attend any of those races (I have been to the Belmont when a TC was on the line), but they are not marketed to you and what you offer to the sport, at all, and yet they make tons of money for the three tracks that put those races on. And if someone said Churchill shouldn't worry about all the fashionable wealthy young folks who come to the Derby and should focus on its older customer base of gamblers, that would just be obviously crazy advice.

It may be less obviously crazy with respect to other racing days, but it is still crazy.
dilanesp is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-22-2018, 05:18 PM   #36
thaskalos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp View Post
It's just as green, but there is no future in old people.

Thask, we have been around this merry-go-round before, but you need to separate "what would be convenient for me" from "what is good for the long-term health of the sport". They are two different things.

To put a rather coarse point on it, we are in the midst of the Triple Crown. I don't know if you ever attend any of those races (I have been to the Belmont when a TC was on the line), but they are not marketed to you and what you offer to the sport, at all, and yet they make tons of money for the three tracks that put those races on. And if someone said Churchill shouldn't worry about all the fashionable wealthy young folks who come to the Derby and should focus on its older customer base of gamblers, that would just be obviously crazy advice.

It may be less obviously crazy with respect to other racing days, but it is still crazy.
Yes, you are right...we've been through this merry-go-round before...but we still don't understand each other. I'm not just concerned with what's good for me...I'm also deeply concerned with the future of the sport. You've been on this board pretty regularly now...and you've seen what the vast majority of the posters here have been saying in regards to their current participation in this game. Almost to a man, they've said that they currently wager only a small percentage of what they used to in years past...if they haven't stopped betting ALTOGETHER. And they haven't done so because they've "gotten sick or died"; most are still in their 50s and 60s, with plenty of time and disposable income...along with a deep-seeded affection for what this game once was. And you'd compare the patronage of these faithful, regular horseplayers...to the twice-a-year group of "fashionable wealthy young folks"...who only show up for our ultra-glamour races? On which of those two groups should our sport focus on...for its "future"?

Horse racing is tailor-made for the older crowd. Only THEY have the free time to play a game which is run during the time of day when the "young folks" are busy working in order to provide for a growing family. When you have family responsibilities, your weekdays are spent on the job...and your weekends belong to your family. The game should try to attract the younger crowd if it can...but to do so while refusing to cater to the "older folks", for fear that their "marketing efforts" will be in vain because the older folks will soon ''get sick and die', is sheer lunacy...IMO. When the game is in dire straits, as it is now...you can't afford to alienate your most loyal customers.
__________________
Live to play another day.

Last edited by thaskalos; 05-22-2018 at 05:25 PM.
thaskalos is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-22-2018, 05:22 PM   #37
chiguy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
I can mostly agree with #1 & #2 but #3 I believe is wrong. I used to go to the racetracks when they were filled with $2 bettors and they weren't there to just look at the pretty horses and the trees. They went to gamble. They went to the races because that was the only game in town. If aesthetics were such a draw the $2 bettors would still be flocking to the track.

As for #4, tell me, Mr. Marketing Director, how would you make racing hip and trendy? Given that old people have more money and more time to spend it wouldn't it be foolish just to kick them to the curb?

Get some figure skaters to host coverage of the Kentucky Derby. That would attract the hip and trendy folks out there.
chiguy is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-22-2018, 05:39 PM   #38
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
I can mostly agree with #1 & #2 but #3 I believe is wrong. I used to go to the racetracks when they were filled with $2 bettors and they weren't there to just look at the pretty horses and the trees. They went to gamble. They went to the races because that was the only game in town. If aesthetics were such a draw the $2 bettors would still be flocking to the track.

As for #4, tell me, Mr. Marketing Director, how would you make racing hip and trendy? Given that old people have more money and more time to spend it wouldn't it be foolish just to kick them to the curb?
I think Del Mar has the best business model.

Now, is it replicable?
dilanesp is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-22-2018, 05:57 PM   #39
keenang
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: hot springs ar.
Posts: 171
Thumbs up racing

It is strange that the three tracks that seem tom do well are all called "RESORT areas

DELMAR
SARATOGA
OAKLAWN

Maybe we can learn something from this

Geno
keenang is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-22-2018, 05:59 PM   #40
Poindexter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
I agree that a properly priced racing game is the best game around. But part of that pricing needs to be a fixed or stable price that a bettor can rely on when they put their money down.

Nobody wants to lose but they accept losing as part of the cost of participation. It is amazing that many casual bettors will take X number of dollars to the track or the casino and proceed to find a way to lose all of it before finally leaving.
First off if racing corrected it's pricing issue, much lower takeout and no rebates the pricing would be a lot less volatile then it is now. Pools would be much larger and whales would not be able to pound horses down nearly as much and make a profit.

The obvious answer is exchange betting. While I personally would be for exchange betting, I just think racing gives it to Betfair, Betfair makes the money and racing becomes a partner in it's owns game. I just do not see the logic of that.

Regarding age, no matter who you market to, proper pricing gives you a much better chance of attaining and retaining both young and old.
Poindexter is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-22-2018, 06:12 PM   #41
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp View Post
I think Del Mar has the best business model.

Now, is it replicable?
We have been over this before. Del Mar runs a fall meet where the attendance is just slightly higher than a high school JV basketball game. Is that the business model that should be followed? Any success achieved in the summer doesn't carryover to the fall. Perhaps the $12 beer and $15 Margarita drinkers aren't really interested in becoming horseplayers.
AndyC is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-22-2018, 06:25 PM   #42
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poindexter View Post
First off if racing corrected it's pricing issue, much lower takeout and no rebates the pricing would be a lot less volatile then it is now. Pools would be much larger and whales would not be able to pound horses down nearly as much and make a profit.

The obvious answer is exchange betting. While I personally would be for exchange betting, I just think racing gives it to Betfair, Betfair makes the money and racing becomes a partner in it's owns game. I just do not see the logic of that.

Regarding age, no matter who you market to, proper pricing gives you a much better chance of attaining and retaining both young and old.
You are making a lot of assumptions. Pools would be much larger? Doubtful. Less volatile? Doubtful. If pools were much larger it would mean that many new sharp gamblers have entered the game and sharp gamblers would be betting right near the bell. Do you think that ADWs will be lining up to take a substantially lower commission on bets without the ability to pay rebates?
AndyC is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-22-2018, 07:12 PM   #43
Poindexter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
You are making a lot of assumptions. Pools would be much larger? Doubtful. Less volatile? Doubtful. If pools were much larger it would mean that many new sharp gamblers have entered the game and sharp gamblers would be betting right near the bell. Do you think that ADWs will be lining up to take a substantially lower commission on bets without the ability to pay rebates?
Of course pools would be larger. Everyone (except whales) would be getting back more money on every bet they collect. Their roi's will be better, their money lasts longer, they see more value opportunities on the board, they enjoy the game more, they stay in the game, they enter the game, they come back to the game....Whales just react to what we do. The more we bet the more they bet so ultimately they will bet more money too. No assumptions, pure logic.

Regarding the volatility, yes most sharps/whale are going to bet late, but the fact they don't make money by hammering a horse they make 2-1 down to 9/5 or even 8/5(depending on what kind of rebate they are getting) limits how much they will pound the horse.

RE adw's two of the biggest are owned by racing companies. I don't have the numbers so I can't give you a solution that works, but I am sure if there was a will it would take all of five minutes to come up with one. Also do you think it makes sense that some ADW is making so much money that the can give up to 20% rebates on some bets at some tracks and still remain profitable. Talk about idiotic. Why have ADW's and certain players become partners at the expense of all other players? How does that make the game sustainable long run? Adw's provide a function and should be compensated for that function only. On marketing gimmicks deals can be discussed.
Poindexter is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-22-2018, 09:53 PM   #44
AskinHaskin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 487
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poindexter View Post
what if the game was fairly priced at 8% wps(with no rebates). The numbers would look more like this. The whales might bet 20%(less betting opportunities) at +6%, the serious players would be at about -3% with 30% of the pool. The track would give back $92,000 per $100,000 but the whales would get back $21,200, the serious players would bet back $29,100 and thus the recreational player would get $40,700 per $50,000 bet or lose about 18.6%. They are still going to struggle as a group, but the sharpest of that group will evolve into serious players, the sharpest of the serious players will evolve into winning players, pools will get bigger, whales have an endless supply of cash and will just bet more because more is being bet and the game grows. Moreover even the weakest of the recreational players will be a lot more likely to stick around because they are losing at a much slower rate.

[/B]


LOL - which side of the equation are you even on?


So racing should halve the mutuel take while fully expecting the whales to wager 2/3 of what they now wager, while the serious players bet no more than they do now (in your example). All of this while racing slices its revenue by at least 50% ?


(this already happens in just about every example of lowering takeout known to North American racing in the 2000's, each with somebody trumpeting: "Pools will get bigger!" in a sorry attempt to goad those establishments into another absurd wrong turn)


The net effect of lowering takeout would be a death knell for racing associations everywhere, because of the lack of parity in the pools. The factual reality is that, if you reduce the house cut to that level or further, various factions will come out of the woodwork and suddenly make a go of betting for profit, which in turn would further exacerbate the lack of parity in the mutuel pools (leaving the novices even more buried than they are today).

Do you ever read an old racing story about some shifty character at Aqueduct in the 1960's or 1970's who made a betting coup on a place bet?? (it may have happened a time or two, but do you ever read about it??? )


Chief among the reasons racing thrived back then is that even the whales were there slugging it out with the rank and file, in long wagering lines and with toteboards showing enough money so that the odds didn't change drastically in the last few seconds. Everybody went back and forth all day long, betting win and place, or stacking tickets at the $6 combo window.

Today the whales and their ilk are making bets where they need only net one good score every month the stay well above the water line. The rank and file, who once stood elbow-to-elbow with them in those long lines at Aqueduct, can no longer interact on the same level, and thus they have given up and gone away, never to return.


Fictional characters who might one day read on Twitter that Aqueduct to lower takeout from 20% blended down to 7% blended are not going to materialize and race to the track just to leap on that bandwagon (with a jazz band belting out "Happy Days are here Again" at one of Aqueduct's entrances).

The only reactions to such drastic, last-gasp measures will be those few who in their best current performances, lurk just under the break-even line... leaping up to find a bankroll somewhere with the new and exciting belief that they can now, finally make a living at the races... (and many of them would succeed (if racing didn't go belly-up entirely before it could matter) ).

The net effect would be even greater parimutuel pressure on the stragglers down at the bottom who in even greater numbers would stay home and never reappear.

Collectively, just about every attained desire had by the Pace Advantage sorts over the past 3 or 4 decades has been detrimental to the bottom line of horse racing. For it has been those self-indulgent pursuits which doomed racing's bottom line to where most once-self-sufficient racing entities exist today only because of handouts and subsidies from elsewhere.

In this world where it's quite customary to blame guns... or blame Facebook for whatever problems there are all around you, it has become way too easy to avoid identifying yourselves as the forces behind today's downward/problematic trends.


The most significant problem racing faces in 2018 is that potential newcomers are completely buried before they can even think about entering a wagering establishment for a second time. You (collectively) caused this - it's that simple and concise.

And the first step toward solving past mistakes is to begin to offset all of the advantages which you and the whales have created for yourselves over the past 30 years, on behalf of the little guy who is still getting buried at never-before-seen levels even though takeout hasn't changed markedly in decades.


So that's it:

Guns...

Facebook...


and now Parimutuel takeout




Look in the mirror for the culprits - youuuuuuuuuuu caused this.
AskinHaskin is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-22-2018, 09:56 PM   #45
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poindexter View Post
Of course pools would be larger. Everyone (except whales) would be getting back more money on every bet they collect. Their roi's will be better, their money lasts longer, they see more value opportunities on the board, they enjoy the game more, they stay in the game, they enter the game, they come back to the game....Whales just react to what we do. The more we bet the more they bet so ultimately they will bet more money too. No assumptions, pure logic.
Pure fantasy. There would need to be a whole lot of new money bet to make it work. New money is not the churn the track gets from having lower rates. Players would literally have to dig into their pockets and bet more money than usual or a there would have to be a huge throng of new players just waiting to throw their money down. Neither of those scenarios is likely. Losing less money doesn't make most people want to increase their bets size.


Quote:
Regarding the volatility, yes most sharps/whale are going to bet late, but the fact they don't make money by hammering a horse they make 2-1 down to 9/5 or even 8/5(depending on what kind of rebate they are getting) limits how much they will pound the horse.
So if I am to believe what you wrote in your first paragraph, the whales and sharps will be betting more, not less and betting at the last minute. More bet, less volatility?

Quote:
RE adw's two of the biggest are owned by racing companies. I don't have the numbers so I can't give you a solution that works, but I am sure if there was a will it would take all of five minutes to come up with one. Also do you think it makes sense that some ADW is making so much money that the can give up to 20% rebates on some bets at some tracks and still remain profitable. Talk about idiotic. Why have ADW's and certain players become partners at the expense of all other players? How does that make the game sustainable long run? Adw's provide a function and should be compensated for that function only. On marketing gimmicks deals can be discussed.
Problems with the contractual arrangements with ADW's has been a constant since the start. I don't think there is a magic wand that takes it all away in 5 minutes.
AndyC is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.