1st Racing go F yourself

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

The much bigger question is whether New York State's $455m loan to rebuild Belmont and related facilities does anything for attendance. From what I gather, the projections are rather rosy.

It obviously makes sense from a cost savings perspective relative to the old and much too large facility. It will also be a beautiful facility. But if you build it, will they come? If they don't and the loan looks shaky, the days of NYS being pro horse racing could be over. The public won't stand for it any more.

Let me guess, is Delaware North handling the concessions? If so that explains a lot.

[denniswilliams]

That'd be something if they could get the Belmont crowds to 1980's levels.

What'd be even more impressive is if they got race fields back to 1980's levels.

Doubt the former is happening without the latter.

[racenomics]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

There was NOT 22,000 people there. It was empty.

That figure just tells me that even back in the day racetracks fudged crowd counts.

(BTW this whining over NYRA getting a slightly less tiny crowd is kind of orthogonal to the point that the same race at Santa Anita would draw 50,000 in those days. NYRA had driven away its live customer base while Santa Anita still had it, which was the point of my story.)

Why the hell we arguing about the 198whatever Marlboro cups attendance?

[bisket]

For everyone in California, racing fans in MD know your pain as far as purse levels and that feeling of impending doom. This was 20 to 30 years ago. The bill was moving through the legislature to pass slots and casino licenses targeted for Laurel and Pimlico. Delaware and West Virginia had beat MD to the punch and already built casinos at Delaware Park and Charles Town. The news came out that Magna bought Pimlico and Laurel. The articles mentioned in passing that Joe DeFrancis Jr kept proceeds from casino gambling while Magna would get all profits from racing and would run the Jockey Club. No one thought much of it but that put a halt to the government’s plans to put casinos at the tracks. The idea was the owner could use the money to update the tracks, with that money going directly to DeFrancis it made a casino license for the tracks a bad idea. It took 10 years for casino gambling to go to referendum, and 5 years to build the casinos. This entire time purses were almost 1/2 of Delaware and West Virginia’s and eventually Pennsylvania. Every racing circuit surrounding MD had purses almost twice the size than MD. It took a long time of suffering to get MD where we are today. All the suffering was thanks to 1st Racing…. MD made it because the breeding farms stuck it out. They deserve to run racing in MD. Thanks to the Preakness and our farms we still have racing in MD. I hope in a few years the same for you

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

There was NOT 22,000 people there. It was empty.

That figure just tells me that even back in the day racetracks fudged crowd counts.

(BTW this whining over NYRA getting a slightly less tiny crowd is kind of orthogonal to the point that the same race at Santa Anita would draw 50,000 in those days. NYRA had driven away its live customer base while Santa Anita still had it, which was the point of my story.)

You get points for admitting both how clueless you are and how biased. Man is this a bad post.

[Spalding No!]

Originally Posted by BarchCapper

Only 22,296 per a UPI article. Still not "empty". Though again, I won't argue that at Belmont, that could potentially feel empty.

Not on topic but here's some hilarious trainer quotes in the aftermath of the 1987 Marlboro Cup regarding the timing of the Breeders' Cup:

"...After that, there's only one major event left on the calendar—the Breeders' Cup on Nov. 21 at Hollywood Park. Java Gold may skip that dance, which could turn out to be a very smart move. Trainers on the Belmont backstretch were grumbling about the late date for this year's Breeders' Cup. "From October 10th to the 21st of November, that's a long time for a horse to be idle," said Miller.

Other horsemen agreed. "It's an absolute joke," said McGaughey. "If it was up to me, I wouldn't want to participate." But it isn't up to him, and owner Ogden Phipps has said nothing about holding Polish Navy out of the Breeders' Cup. Gulch will likely be at Hollywood Park, too, even though trainer LeRoy Jolley said, "It's really too late. It was difficult enough to make it for November 1st [last year's Breeders' Cup date], and when you extend it another three weeks, that makes it very difficult."

[bisket]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

Not on topic but here's some hilarious trainer quotes in the aftermath of the 1987 Marlboro Cup regarding the timing of the Breeders' Cup:

"...After that, there's only one major event left on the calendar—the Breeders' Cup on Nov. 21 at Hollywood Park. Java Gold may skip that dance, which could turn out to be a very smart move. Trainers on the Belmont backstretch were grumbling about the late date for this year's Breeders' Cup. "From October 10th to the 21st of November, that's a long time for a horse to be idle," said Miller.

Other horsemen agreed. "It's an absolute joke," said McGaughey. "If it was up to me, I wouldn't want to participate." But it isn't up to him, and owner Ogden Phipps has said nothing about holding Polish Navy out of the Breeders' Cup. Gulch will likely be at Hollywood Park, too, even though trainer LeRoy Jolley said, "It's really too late. It was difficult enough to make it for November 1st [last year's Breeders' Cup date], and when you extend it another three weeks, that makes it very difficult."

Lol today that’s two months to early

[the little guy]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

Not on topic but here's some hilarious trainer quotes in the aftermath of the 1987 Marlboro Cup regarding the timing of the Breeders' Cup:

"...After that, there's only one major event left on the calendar—the Breeders' Cup on Nov. 21 at Hollywood Park. Java Gold may skip that dance, which could turn out to be a very smart move. Trainers on the Belmont backstretch were grumbling about the late date for this year's Breeders' Cup. "From October 10th to the 21st of November, that's a long time for a horse to be idle," said Miller.

Other horsemen agreed. "It's an absolute joke," said McGaughey. "If it was up to me, I wouldn't want to participate." But it isn't up to him, and owner Ogden Phipps has said nothing about holding Polish Navy out of the Breeders' Cup. Gulch will likely be at Hollywood Park, too, even though trainer LeRoy Jolley said, "It's really too late. It was difficult enough to make it for November 1st [last year's Breeders' Cup date], and when you extend it another three weeks, that makes it very difficult."

That really is incredible.

[BarchCapper]

Originally Posted by Spalding No!

Not on topic but here's some hilarious trainer quotes in the aftermath of the 1987 Marlboro Cup regarding the timing of the Breeders' Cup:

"...After that, there's only one major event left on the calendar—the Breeders' Cup on Nov. 21 at Hollywood Park. Java Gold may skip that dance, which could turn out to be a very smart move. Trainers on the Belmont backstretch were grumbling about the late date for this year's Breeders' Cup. "From October 10th to the 21st of November, that's a long time for a horse to be idle," said Miller.

It was only the 4th Breeders' Cup - so it hadn't really gotten "locked in" to a routine - but that was 11 days later then the previous time it had been at Hollywood Park (for the first one). Was there something else scheduled to go on in the sporting world that caused the date to be pushed back that far this one time? It was back to Nov 5th the following year.

[ScottJ]

https://paulickreport.com/news/the-b...en-gate-fields

Key points (although late with this post) from the article follow.

The California Horse Racing Board, by a 6-0 vote, on Thursday approved allocation of dates for an October-December 2024 race meet at Pleasanton racetrack on the Alameda County fair grounds.

"If you (1/ST Racing executive Craig Fravel) go out of business, it's because of mismanagement, not because of this board," (Thomas) Hudnut added.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by ScottJ

"If you (1/ST Racing executive Craig Fravel) go out of business, it's because of mismanagement, not because of this board," (Thomas) Hudnut added.

I guess it's hard to defend 1/ST Racing, but if the board can't understand the competitive disadvantage SA is operating under that has nothing to do with their management of SA, the situation is so bad in CA you have to just laugh.

If I was operating a track in CA and someone said that to me, it would make me more likely to close it down and sell the property to developers.

[Poindexter]

Lost 17 million in 2 years. I would take that as sign that maybe their feed the whales program isn’t as clever they think it is. Go figure. They can always pray for charity. At this point it is likely too late to right the ship. But all Belinda Stronach has to do is remember those days that she arrogantly proclaimed that racing was entertainment and basically told horse players to go fuck themselves. Oh well they have left the building and aren’t coming back. What a shame.

You know the rest of the remaining industry that does get charity might want to realize that California is basically a precursor to their future if they don’t fix the pricing in this game. (I know being proactive is such a silly idea).

Btw, this idiotic rebate experiment that has failed for close to 25 years definitely falls in the category of mismanagement. So for once something intelligent came from the CHRB.

Sorry if this offends anyone (actually I am never sorry about offending anyone). Just enjoying the show of a bunch of idiots that think they are geniuses (which is the worst kind of idiot), watching their business implode.
A most deserving bunch.

[classhandicapper]

Via Charles Simon on Twitter
Charles Simon
@cannonshell

E. As igaming becomes more prevalent, existing casinos will lose market share meaning that the source of a great deal of the industry funding (including the tracks bottom lines) will be diminishing. Sports betting is the greatest example of how the internet will squash most bricks and mortar operations. In NJ when online sports wagering was passed, the next year 94% of wagers were placed somewhere other than a physical Sportsbook location. If online slots (which in most places will assuredly be free of any racing obligations) take just 50% of the bricks and mortars business, it would be a disaster. We have already seen purse $ lowered in PA due to competition.

The tracks better start thinking about this because the current (imo unsustainable casino model) may be closer to the bubble getting pricked than I thought. I was thinking in terms of politicians and the public eventually asking why the F are we shifting money from an economically viable business to a terrible one, but there's another risk on the horizon.

[AskinHaskin]

Originally Posted by Andy Asaro

Some Moron on... P...a

Originally Posted by Andy Asaro

Pretty sure the new northern racing deal won't happen.

Originally Posted by Andy Asaro

California is one of the worst States to do any kind of business in. There is no alternative gaming revenue to bolster purses. How do these idiots think having a horrible product in the North and a Subpar product in the South benefits anyone?

The formula is Field sizes averaging 8 horses or more per race, Big pools, and reasonable takeout. Field size in So Cal is plummeting. Purses are plummeting, and takeout is way too high for short fields. The current formula in California is certain catastrophic failure...

The level of idiocy stunning.

Originally Posted by Jeff P

^^^ -- This !

100% spot on.

Think back to SB1072 and 22.68% exacta takeout and changing the historical takeout split from 50/50 to 48% track and 52% purses.

The CHRB and TOC promised SB1072 would lead to increased purses, field size, and handle.

A few months in, it was obvious the opposite was taking place.

They had succeeded -- at accelerating the decline.

Handle cratered.
-jp
.

So now we've heard from HANA and its head cheerleader.


And we're supposed to be taking lessons when HANA cratered
well before any of this.

Hawthorne still won't come out and summarize its 2023 bloodbath resulting from the takeout cut.


Can't wait to see the daily Hawthorne touts on whatever remains of the HANA website.

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Virtually the entire reason CA racing is on the fast track to oblivion is the politics of the state.

And this line above couldn't be more inaccurate.


The entire reason California racing is on the fast track to oblivion is the tracks themselves.


Overlay the way horse racing is run across the continent (and especially at Stronach/1st headquarters) upon the greater society at large:

You'd have a scenario wherein copper thieves were in the advanced stages of rendering infrastructure like trains, traffic signals, websites and airports largely useless.

At 1st/Racing headquarters you'd have Belinda Stronach at the front door selling opportunities to the copper thieves (at $40K a whack, somebody reported here).


That is to point out what should have been glaringly obvious (to all but those with the HANA mentality), that horse racing itself is being entirely besieged by what are mere opportunists, each of whom were invited by the tracks themselves to help themselves to the innate value of all things horse racing.

Any middle school student should be able to recognize that if you are being besieged by opportunists who are milking you dry at 20-25% takeout, the very last move you'd want to make would be to lower the bar for the opportunists.

That is akin to government employees now leaving the doors to the copper wiring infrastructure open at night for the sole use and convenience of the opportunists.

The clueless perspectives put forth by others in this thread to this point are akin to people in Sacramento lobbying on behalf of the opportunists!!!


Pause to invoke the words of HANA's head cheerleader:

Originally Posted by Andy Asaro

The level of idiocy stunning. (<sic, naturally>)

The rest of the society at large has no interest in participating in the shell game which Belinda Stronach and her ilk have created. Do you ever walk past a shell game and see anyone (aside from perhaps HANA cheerleaders) participating while simultaneously knowing that a shell game is ongoing there?

This has been the case since the very beginning of Stronach involvement with California racing. Rather than set racing on a proper course very early, as she should have done, Belinda Stronach and her ilk have instead decided to sell opportunities to the opportunists who are choking her out. The princely sums of immediate revenue from those sales akin to a near-term Band Aid to offset shortfalls which have been entirely a function of her own unending stupidity.


Now sadly such stupidity has had the disastrous effect of reducing on-site crowds to the unknowing and the unwitting while "B.S." simultaneously continues to do nothing to bolster any prayer those on-site participants have.


Anyone who passed middle school math classes should be able to ascertain that the number one move by race tracks in 2024 should be to do all in their power to bolster the diminished hopes of the on-track wagering crowds. Instead, of course, those tracks continue their long tradition of doing precisely zero for their customers while ostensibly promoting a racing product that has long been provided by the independent contractors in those barns over yonder.


As has been underscored time and again by multiple sources, racegoers in largest numbers "do not even know about takeout". Ergo they clearly DNGAF about takeout.

Takeout reductions only assist the opportunists who are and have been chewing racing to its core for decades along with every remaining HANA clown who hasn't scurried back beneath the rock from which he originated.

Race tracks must first reverse the effects of their own stupidity exacted upon the surrounding societies over decades before bothering with any future planning.

Hell, in the 1980's, the takeout/tax revenue gained by the state of California was upward of $100 Million a year. ($129M in 1983 to $131M in 1989).

A recent report cites the total track/associations' commission in the 2022/23 fiscal year as having been $104M. (that means the associations at SA, Dmr, Los Al, GG, and the fairs put together got $104M from the wagering dollar)

Just how much do you think goes to the state of California these days?


No wonder the state doesn't care at all that Santa Anita and all other race tracks are in the process of self-destructing beneath the weight of their own stupidity across decades of time. Why should state government care anymore?

[classhandicapper]

If you are saying the state government is correct to not use casino money as part of the racetrack model or to help racing in other ways, then we agree.

But that was/is in part a political decision that makes CA racing uncompetitive with racing in other states on the purse side while also being uncompetitive with may states on the cost side due to other political priorities.

How in God's name can any track, even with the best possible intentions, attract large competitive fields when it costs a lot more more to run there and you win less purse money if you have a good horse?

You can be a racing fan, think CA racing is failing primarily because it's not supported by casino money and has to deal with the extremely high costs/regulations in CA but still think not using casino money was the correct political decision for the people of CA (if not racing).

I'm of the opinion that casino money in general threw a monkey wrench into the racetrack free market by keeping zombie and inferior tracks alive at the expense of tracks in superior markets. The CA market, which should be a very good one, may be a fatality.