Has less been more?

[Foolish Pleasure]

Number of races conducted in NA year over year is down considerably.

Obviously at MON the racing is better for it.


Anywhere else? I see virtual no difference at any other jurisdiction despite dates being off significantly.


Can we finally retire this ludicrous idea that less racing leads to better racing and adopt the truth that less racing just leads to less racing which leads to less interest which leads to the same fate as the dog tracks.

[elhelmete]

IMHO, "less" is just "less" unless it's done with some sort of coordination of circuits, purses, post times, dark dates, etc.

[DJofSD]

Originally Posted by Foolish Pleasure

Can we finally retire this ludicrous idea that less racing leads to better racing and adopt the truth that less racing just leads to less racing which leads to less interest which leads to the same fate as the dog tracks.

Yes.

[ArlJim78]

Are there actually people claiming that less racing will lead to greater interest in racing? I really doubt it. Less racing is not being done primarily as a way to make racing better or more interesting, its an adaptation to an economic reality, it's survival.
the question how to adapt. maintain the same number of dates and have numerous cards filled with 5 and 6 horse fields running for smaller purses, or to cut dates and try to keep field sizes and purses up.
I prefer the later.

[classhandicapper]

I think the argument is that fewer tracks will lead to lower operating costs for the industry as a whole, but that much of the handle will simply shift to the remaining tracks (via internet, simulcast, phone and other OTB betting). That means the remaining tracks will be more profitable, which in turn will allow them to invest in their facilities, raise purses, consider lowering the take etc...