Chalk fest

[chico9166]

Does the track make more money if the favorite wins? Racing around the country has turned into one big chalk fest. Incredibly boring.

[skipaway100]

Originally Posted by chico9166

Does the track make more money if the favorite wins? Racing around the country has turned into one big chalk fest. Incredibly boring.

Yes they do. When chalk is hitting, a greater % of players are keeping their money (minus the takeout), therefore there's more money being circulated back into the pools. When the longshots are hitting, the money is only going to a handful of players, some of whom might pack up there bags and call it a day after a big score.

Also, when the longshots are hitting, the casual betting public is losing every race and not having fun and are less likely to make return visits. If they celebrate some winners by cashing a few chalkers, they have more fun and will come back next week, even if they finish down for the day.


Rick

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by skipaway100

Yes they do. When chalk is hitting, a greater % of players are keeping their money (minus the takeout), therefore there's more money being circulated back into the pools. When the longshots are hitting, the money is only going to a handful of players, some of whom might pack up there bags and call it a day after a big score.

Also, when the longshots are hitting, the casual betting public is losing every race and not having fun and are less likely to make return visits. If they celebrate some winners by cashing a few chalkers, they have more fun and will come back next week, even if they finish down for the day.


Rick

What you say may make sense...but that doesn't make it true.

The way you have phrased your post assumes that there are only two groups of horses in this game...the favorites and the longshots. We all know that this is not the case.

Do you really think that there is more "circulation" of the money when the 8-5 favorite wins the race...rather than the 4-1 third betting choice?

[Robert Goren]

The shorter the price, on average the greater the money taken out on breakage. So the answer is a qualified yes.

[skipaway100]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Do you really think that there is more "circulation" of the money when the 8-5 favorite wins the race...rather than the 4-1 third betting choice?

Yes.

[grimm7]

One thing I noticed the 1st four or five races at almost every track have short fields and are very chalky. Not enough horses to field quality cards.

[lamboguy]

Originally Posted by Robert Goren

The shorter the price, on average the greater the money taken out on breakage. So the answer is a qualified yes.

the track only gets their own share of the breakage, the simulcast and adw's get their own share. that breakage is supposed to make up for the minus pools that they have to pay out. just remember if the horse is supposed to pay 4.19 they only pay 4.00. that is more than the percentage that they are working off of and doesn't go back to the horsemen.

[pandy]

Originally Posted by skipaway100

Yes they do. When chalk is hitting, a greater % of players are keeping their money (minus the takeout), therefore there's more money being circulated back into the pools. When the longshots are hitting, the money is only going to a handful of players, some of whom might pack up there bags and call it a day after a big score.

Also, when the longshots are hitting, the casual betting public is losing every race and not having fun and are less likely to make return visits. If they celebrate some winners by cashing a few chalkers, they have more fun and will come back next week, even if they finish down for the day.


Rick

I don't agree with you, this is a fallacy. In fact it's just the opposite of what you have said. When the chalk is winning, more players lose because it's almost impossible to win betting favorites so overall there is less money being circulated into the pools.

I'll give some examples. in Harness Racing the percentage of winning favorites has been climbing steadily since the modified sulky was introduced back in 1977. Industry wide the favorites used to average 34% and the handle was strong. Now the favorites average over 40% and the handle is weak and has steadily declined.

In thoroughbred racing the players obviously like the tracks that don't have a high % of winning favorites. Gulfstream and Tampa Bay both had strong meetings with big fields and the favorites were around 33%.

If favorites win about a third of the time, handle is usually good. When the % of winning favorites is high handle always declines over time.

Look at the Meadowlands, which has had the highest handle of any harness track in the sport for many years. During its heyday when the handle was huge, it had the lowest percentage of winning favorites of any harness track. The majority of bettors DO NOT want a high percentage of favorites. They don't necessarily want 25% winning favorites either, usually handle peaks when favorites win about a third of the time.

[skipaway100]

The % of winning favorites climb in smaller fields that's why it might appear that higher % favorites is counter productive to pools. It has nothing to do with the "favorite" winning. Larger fields will always have bigger pools. The field size has a much greater influence on handle than the price of the winner. If field sizes are equal, more favorites winning early = greater pools towards the tail of the cards, everytime.

The Harness industry falling off the map has more to do with themselves and their poor marketing efforts than anything else. Young people that are familiar with thoroughbred racing will see a harness race and be like "wtf are those things?".

[pandy]

I know a ton of harness bettors as well as many thoroughbred bettors and one thing I hear over and over again is "I can't bet that track anymore, too much chalk."

I agree that big fields usually produce higher handle, but that is because favorites don't win a high percentage when the fields are big. That''s why players like big fields, more longshot winners.