Fort Erie Racetrack Beyond 2012

There will be a horse racing season at Fort Erie this year. Beyond that, the prospects are not very good without outside help.

Grossly unfair as it was, slots from the track will be pulled at the end next month, barring a very unlikely decision reversal by the OLG. The OLG has assured that the expected payments of what would have been if the slots were in place, would still be paid to the track this year. However, as it is right now, next year, Fort Erie is on its own.

Fort Erie is in big trouble if it has to fend for itself. From various sources and using extrapolation, a ballpark figure on what it costs to run a track for a season can be guesstimated. For the past three seasons (including 2012), thanks to the negotiations of the EDTC with the government, Fort Erie was able to receive $5.6 million instead of the $2.9 million they were only supposed to get a year from slot operations. Purse accounts received $2.9 million from slots as well, which represents 10% of the slots revenues at Fort Erie.

The Town of Fort Erie also pitched in as well from part of their municipality share of slots to try to keep the track at a break even level, as did the HBPA.

Fort Erie does give out around $100,000 a day in purses, which means that around $4 million must be generated by wagering. This also means that the track makes around $3.5-$4 million from wagering.

Nordic Gaming, the company that owns the track, leased it out to the EDTC the past 3 years, and in return received $100,000 in 2010, and $600,000 last year and this year.

In total, if Fort Erie to run a 75 day season in 2012, it appears to need more than $10 million to operate. Though the EDTC does not pay staff inside the casino, I imagine they will be able to cut some jobs that might be related to the casino from outside of it.

WHY IS HORSE RACING NEEDED AT FORT ERIE

In Ontario right now there are two thoroughbred tracks. Woodbine is home to large purses, and owners who pay big bucks to keep horses in training. Fort Erie is Woodbine's minor league affiliate. If a horse can't compete on polytrack or can't compete for $10,000 claiming or greater, they generally wind up at Fort Erie. Sometimes horses are given up on too early, or improve enough, and the might wind up back at Woodbine, and there are quite a few horses that toggle between the two tracks.

The existence of a B track is very important to most Ontario owners and breeders. The owners need an out that is simple. If the out for an owner of a horse who isn't cutting it at Woodbine is to ship to the US (which requires finding and trusting a new outfit miles and miles away in most cases), or trying to quickly get rid of the horse (which could, unfortunately, mean sell for meat), the owner will quickly become disillusioned, and most small owners and partnerships will either drastically reduce exposure or get out of the game completely.

This is not good news for breeders who need as many owners in the game to keep the demand for horses as high as possible. Many small owners also breed, without a B track, they will disappear as well.

From Woodbine's standpoint, with fewer owners and fewer horses, they will have a very difficult time filling races over as the years go on, and that is going to be very bad when it comes to their betting handle.

Woodbine is trying to become a recognized A track but will resemble Penn National instead.

Could Woodbine run a bunch of $5,000 claimers? Even if they wanted to, I doubt it. At $80-$100 in day pay rates, owners are not about to hang onto those horses even if they could get stalls at Woodbine. And those who might be able to pay Fort Erie rates ($45-$60 a day) while racing off a farm or training center, will quickly learn that they will be at a serious disadvantage running against horses dropping from $12,500 who have been training at Woodbine.

How about Ajax taking over as the B track location? They did build a five eighth oval, but unless they can house around 500 horses minimum in their backstretch (which they can't right now), it just won't work, for reasons cited above. There would be too much of a disadvantage and overall hassle if too many owners need to ship from anything but a racetrack.

Fort Erie is the perfect locale for a B track and it just doesn't make much sense not to have it around.

THE OPTIONS FOR RACING AT FORT ERIE BEYOND 2012 (outside of closing the track down altogether)

1. If nothing else changes, a shortened season with maybe 35-40 race dates might be in the cards. If expenses to run the tracks can be cut down to around $4-$5 million this is a definite possibility. But a shortened season means even fewer outfits will be attracted to stable at Fort Erie, and also may not be enough of an out for the Woodbine based owners and outfits. This will probably create shorter fields at both Woodbine and Fort Erie.

2. A new owner willing to gamble (or Nordic willing gamble...unlikely) that they can make a go of it by cutting expenses and focusing on horse racing handle, that they can make Fort Erie close to profitable. This is a long shot on the surface, and it might be appealing to someone with lots of money to lose who just wants to own a racetrack.

3. The OLG and Ontario government has stated that they are looking to privatize slots in the short term. However, Fort Erie wasn't even given the opportunity because of its proximity to the Niagara Casinos. The fact that Fort Erie is a different municipality than Niagara makes this move by the OLG even more unpalatable. I'm not a lawyer, but the move by the OLG has anti-trust written all over it, and if the OLG goes the privatization route at racetracks, I believe that Fort Erie should be given the opportunity to run their own slots. At this time, the OLG hasn't even hinted at what the new cut would be (they used to get 75% of slots revenues, but had to cover all the casino expenses. They receive 20% of gross revenues at the Caesar's at Windsor which the OLG does not operate and pay casino expenses, and Caesar's operators lost money even with that deal last year).
Depending on Fort Erie's ability to get back slots and what the new deal would be makes this scenario a possibility that has some hope.

4. An actual government subsidy to keep Fort Erie alive. The loss of slots jobs will be devastating enough to all businesses in the Fort Erie area, but loss of the track will turn Fort Erie into a ghost town. Whether this gives the Ontario government reason to step in, in light of their mandate to reduce the deficit, is up in the air, and something I wouldn't bank on. Small help from the HBPA will most likely happen if needed.

5. Woodbine's future is also unclear. They are perceived to know more than what they are saying, but that might just be a perception. Do they know what the new cut will be, do they know they are getting expanded casino gambling? Or will they get a much lighter cut than they are getting right now, and with the OLG getting into internet gambling soon, how much cannibalization will there be on current and future casino customers?

Whether they realize the importance of a B track now or not, they eventually will. And if no other option keeps Fort Erie alive next year, they might just step in and lease the track or even buy it back and operate it knowing they will most likely lose some money.

One thing track closures do for Woodbine is it increase their "home market" for HPI where they don't have to split betting commissions with tracks that close. If Fort Erie goes under, or if Woodbine ends up leasing or owning the track, they wind up with a full market of over 450,000 residents in the Fort Erie home market. A market that really hasn't been advertised probably because it isn't that profitable with a split....but without a split, it would be worth Woodbine's efforts most likely. Bottom line, because there is a lot of overlap in Horsemen operations between Woodbine and Fort Erie and factoring in more betting revenues, it might not be that difficult for Woodbine to run a break even operation at Fort Erie in an effort to maintain Ontario's current level of thoroughbred racing and breeding and horse ownership.

6. In a worst case scenario, Fort Erie revenues will now be totally dependent on what it makes on customers betting horses. The EDTC has not shown that they understand the Horseplayer yet. They did drop takeout on the Pick 4 last year to 17.3% (something that increased handle on that bet), but their total handle dropped 17%, which was much higher than the industry drop in 2010.

There has been a shift in the mentality of the Horseplayer lately. They've become more informed. Many are cognizant of track takeout. Takeout on doubles and exactors at Fort Erie is over 26%. There are most likely many who will not even look at Fort Erie because of that. Then there is the churn factor and its psychological effects. Slots works because they have a payout of around 90-93%. Players last, and even think they are winning when they are not...or at least think they are close to winning. The longer they last, the more they want to come back, the more likely they are to go more and expose more friends and family to their game. The same is true of horse racing, and even if it means paying out an extra $2 or $3 a day, that money will wind up back in the windows.

At 26%, whether the player knows it or not, they have no chance of even thinking the game is somewhat beatable.

Fort Erie must reduce takeout on exactors and doubles to 21% absolutely tops (Woodbine charges 20.5% for these two wagers). If that is something that Fort Erie management can't rationalize on its own, how about bringing in rolling doubles to make up for any deficit they think they might overcome (though I strongly believe that without having to resort to expanding the wagering menu, just dropping the exactor and double takeout will have a very positive effect on both handle and bottom line for the Fort Erie track).

Barring a bad reduction in field size, on track handle should rise just because slots are no longer available at The Fort.

The reality is almost $30 million was lost by "gamblers" at the slots in Fort Erie last year. Though Horseplayers and slot players are generally not the same person, there is some overlap and couple that with the racetrack now being the only game in town (OK, Fort Erie does have a Bingo Hall), it can be expected that at least some of the $30 million will now be lost betting on ponies. How much is the big question. But it doesn't have to be a huge percentage to fill in the gap that slots is leaving.

The $30 million lost on the one armed bandits means that over $300 million was churned by slot players. In order to bring in $8 million extra to the track and the purse accounts, that means that around $45 million more needs to be churned on
track, and this includes simulcast wagering too. Believe it or not, I don't think that something like this is totally impossible. Even if they can capture another $20 million churn, it would help prospects for next year immensely.

But attracting churn means lowering the takeout, and paying real odds on simulcast races despite whatever takeout the other tracks have (it really pisses off players when they get less than the real payoff is).

Fort Erie needs to get with the mentality that it isn't a crime to let players leave with money in their pockets. They won't get cannibalized by slots when it comes to that money, and a player that leaves with money is a lot more likely to come back.

Are The OLG and Liberal Government Flying By The Seat Of Their Pants?

This modernization plan by the Ontario Liberal government and the OLG is starting to remind me of a Jackie Mason monologue: Do you know whats going on with slots and the racetracks? I don't know but someone else must. Where can I find this someone else? Start with Dalton McGuinty, he seems to know most of what needs to be known. But does he know everything? Not everything, maybe the OLG knows everything. They don't seem to know everything either. I think they thought they knew everything, but they don't know everything anymore. How about Finance Minister Dwight Duncan? He seemed to know everything too, but he doesn't know everything now, except maybe when it comes to donuts.

To make sense of the above, we'll have to look at some real information and real laws that are now coming out of the woodwork.

First, in my previous post, I stated that slots were taken away rather quickly from Fort Erie, Hiawatha and Windsor race tracks because it is the OLG's goal to sell the nearby casinos, so by taking away the slots from the tracks, the bottom line revenues for the casinos would go up making them more attractive to buyers.

Looks like I was wrong as it is illegal for a private company to both own/lease and operate a casino in Ontario according the Criminal Code of Canada, unless exceptions are made. Exceptions are not a gimme when there is a minority government whose popularity has shrunk since getting elected only 5 months ago.

These laws throw a monkey wrench when it comes to the idea that racetracks can have privatized gaming. The racetrack right now owns the property that the OLG is leasing from them. If a racetrack or even another business were to take over the operations on the tracks, that would mean that the OLG is neither leasing, owning or operating the casino. This is against the Criminal Code, unless a loophole exists that they can get away with just leasing gambling equipment to make it a go.

So in Fort Erie's case, lets say that the $30 million in revenues a year caused a break even for the OLG after operating expenses and the amounts paid out to the track, horsemen and municipality. Even if $5 million of that makes its way over to Niagara Falls, that is $5 million more bottom line for the OLG and the operators of the Niagara casinos.

Now by taking away the slots without giving a privatization option to these border tracks, the province and OLG have declared these tracks as nothing but competition. And I'm sure they are hoping the tracks close down completely so that if any gambling is done, it will be on OLG product. It sounds slimy, but heck we are talking about McGuinty here.

The biggest news that came out today is that McGuinty has stated that Municipalities can hold referendums when it comes to introducing new casinos (like in Toronto). Well, according the OLG Act of 1999, a referendum MUST be held. With the recent poll that shows 60% of Torontonians against a new casino, the likelihood of a yes is far from a sure thing. Unless, those bottom dwelling Liberals can pass new legislation regarding a referendum having to be held (and I wouldn't it put it past them).

In fact, the way the laws are written now when it comes to bringing in a new casino, there are quite a few hoops to jump through.

It appears right now that the Liberals and OLG have written a check their asses can't cash. Who knows, maybe they'll decide to leave well enough alone. For the racing industry, its many direct employees, and the many businesses these employees support or help support, one can only hope.

UPDATE: McGuinty has said that the provision to have a mandatory referendum has lapsed. So that means McGuinty has one less hoop to jump through. He can bully a new casino through in Toronto now, and even if the majority of Torontonians want a referendum, politicians can do what they do best and lie or come up with an excuse for not having to do a referendum.

Bottom line, no one has even mentioned what the split will be on the new privatization deal, and this reinforces my belief that there isn't a person who knows everything yet.

CANADIAN POLITICS NOTE

For my American readers who might be confusing Ontario or Canadian Liberal Parties with political liberals in the USA, every political party in Canada is to the Left of the US Democratic Party. The Federal Conservatives and the Ontario Progressive Conservatives are to the right in the Canadian political spectrum, with the Liberal Party on the Left, and the New Democratic Party closer to the Far Left.

Personally, I'm a social liberal (by American standards), while fiscally I'm close to the centre (center in American language).

One final note: Kim Craitor, the Liberal representative for the Niagara Region (including Fort Erie) has had threats against his life and now fears to set foot in Fort Erie. Craitor, took a lot of credit (whether he deserved it or not) when a deal was made to save racing at Fort Erie three years ago, but he was nowhere in sight when an OLG gunslinger came to town last week to take away the keys to the slot machines at the track.

Politicians don't need to have their life jeopardized (besides the fact that one can get jailed for doing the threatening). You get even with them by voting them out.

Lets Recap What The OLG Is Really Doing

The Drummond Report came out recommending that the Ontario government revisits the slots deal it has with racetracks.

It didn't take long for Dalton (Norman Bates) McGuinty and his sidekick Dwight (Have Another Donut) Duncan to start lying about the relationship between racetracks and slots (calling slots revenues tax dollars and stating they were subsidies to the tracks) and then hinting that racetracks may lose all or some of their slots revenues.

In what seems the time it took to read the Drummond Report, border Racinos in Fort Erie, Hiawatha, and Windsor were told that their slots were going to be eliminated by April 30th this year, but that the government will make sure tracks are able to operate and purses accounts will be (close to) maintained for another year as long as these tracks race.

Of course, more lies were used by the collective PR of the OLG and Ontario Liberal Party, stating these Racinos were losing money. Revenues are way down, but the only track that is close to break even is Fort Erie, and it is doubtful that the OLG was losing a dime there.

OK, so the macro reason for the slots closures has to do with the budget, or so they claim. But why close them so quickly? Because the main agenda item is to prop up the revenues for the 4 stand alone casinos (Niagara has two) that are very close to proximity to the 3 Racinos that had the slots taken away. The goal by the government is to sell these casinos (before online gambling erodes these numbers down again), and the reality is that these casinos actually do lose money.

The fact that the government is paying lots of severance to slots employees and lots of money to the three tracks for the lost slots revenues over the next year shows that immediate deficit reduction is what this move is all about, nor is it about changing the ratio of what tracks get to keep on slots revenues.

In fact, the government has made it clear that it wants to privatize all slots and casino operations within the next year or so, which means that the OLG will not have to worry about paying slots employees, maintaining machines, etc. The gaming operator will now take over that function. The question again is what will the new cut be if a track takes over the operation, and what will be the deal with expanded slots as well as online gaming which is expected in the near future.

The government is attempting to get out of paying for the expenses of gambling, and they are looking to sell their assets (by the way, someone should clue in Puppet Progressive Conservative leader Tim Hudak that what he wants is what the government is looking to do).

This isn't really what the Drummond Report said to do, but this is the new direction the government is taking. Let gambling competition run amok, and tax the gambling company as much as it can (without having no gambling companies interested in doing business with an untrustworthy government in Ontario).

Hudak meanwhile, is not getting the big picture. The government is looking to put slots anywhere and everywhere, which means that Fort Erie and the other tracks should have had the opportunity to keep them. But the selling of the casinos is the reason they were taken away abruptly.

I wonder if Fort Erie, Hiawatha, and Windsor have a legal case by having their rights denied to compete to have slots, and the way in which this was done (especially if it turns out that the other tracks will be given the choice to operate slots).

Down the road, once the government decides what their new cut is going to be on slots and how and for what price they will sell the location rights, the rest of the tracks that have slots will make their decision as to whether to operate or not. Once the Niagara Falls casinos as well as those in Windsor and near Sarnia are sold, Fort Erie may have the opportunity to buy the rights to operate slots, unless part of the sale of the casinos will have a clause that no other gambling operations can be put up within a 25 mile radius, for example.

I have to say though, Duncan, McGuinty, and Paul Godfrey make me sick with their lies and misrepresentations. Hudak, if he wasn't so clueless and wasn't so badly managed, could have been the Ontario leader right now, and one thing is for sure, this wouldn't be going down like it is right now. I also believe that there would be no closures either, nor would racing be destined to die at any location in the near future either.

The next stage in the game for the Ontario Liberal Party and OLG is to believe they are entitled to have gamblers gamble with them. It won't work as long as they maintain their Pro-Line odds mentality. See "Is Horse Racing in Ontario the Fall Guy For Government Mismanagement?"

Note: The photo above is circulating on Facebook (where I happened to come across it). McGuinty has pissed off quite a few people. Even I find the message a bit harsh but decided it fit in well with the blog piece.

Nothing Much New, Except For The HANA Ratings

Parimutuel handle down 5% in June, close to 8% for the year
Where is the bottom? Players continue to die off and they aren't being replaced. No reason for newbies to get into horse racing with its high learning curve. We need visible winners. That is what did it for poker. Sports betting and blackjack are perceived as beatable in the long term too, at least by a few lucky and smart gamblers. In other words, a carrot exists. There is no carrot in horse racing.

At least we are seeing a slight trend in reduced takeouts. It needs to be faster.

On the bright side, if you took California racing out of the equation, June's handle numbers might be close to on par with last year. I had to check, and yes, they are still racing in California. How long the track's can continue to absorb the losses thanks to the takeout hike is the big question? Don't expect honest answers though because they wouldn't admit it if they are only a few more boycotters away from going to 3 days a week.


Back in September I wrote a piece called "Is ITPP The Super Trainer's Drug Of Choice
Today?," well the drug finally made it to print in the DRF. Stan Bergstein states that money is needed to test for the drug. Here we are, 9 months after a hack blogger (me) gets wind what is happening, and there still isn't a test for this stuff.

By the time the racing industry gets off their butts, the next designer drug will come into play.

This is just too frustrating. Not only do bettors like myself shy away from races with super trainers in them, but horse owners who don't have super trainers have no chance to make money. Either cheat or go for third money. Either pay huge vet bills and supplement bills or go for fourth or fifth money.

Horse racing's high collective takeout rates already keep newbie Horseplayers away, now cheating trainers keep new horse owners away too.


HANA (Horseplayers Association of North America) has come out with their 2011 track ratings.
California tracks sunk badly, and the stats don't include this year's handle numbers which are down farther than the industry average.
Woodbine climbed up to 23rd in overall ratings, but in order to crack the top 5, takeout on supers, pick 3's, triactors, and pick 4's need to come down.
Apparently, according to Nick Eaves, they are working on a 2% reduction across the board, something Eaves stated was a priority when he took over the reigns at Woodbine last year.

Fort Erie climbed up a couple of tracks thanks to dropping their Pick 4 takeout to 14%.

Interestingly, the Fort Erie takeout drop was mentioned in a recent Blood Horse article about what Ohio needs to do now that they have slots:

CIS said Ohio racing must lower takeout rates “enough so that it becomes the lowest in the region and lures new bettors.” The consultants used Fort Erie Racetrack & Slots in Canada as an example, noting a reduction in the pick four takeout from 26.2% to 14% generated a 59% increase in handle in the first two weeks.



Controversy At Woodbine Yesterday
In the fourth race, the first leg of the Pick 4, the favorite 1A Kiama out broke the gate yesterday. She overcame the weird start to win the race. However, the Stewards (flipped a coin?) and decided that it was an unfair start, so they issued a refund. Well, except for those holding Pick 4 or Pick 3 tickets. They wound up with the new favorite, who didn't wind up as the official winner.

The problem is of course, that this looks like the exact situation that occurred last year when Fifty Proof broke through the gate and was allowed to keep the victory (in fact, there wasn't even an Inquiry).

Here is yesterday's race:

It would nice for bettors to have just a little consistency.

Guess Who Has The Lowest Pick 4 Track Takeout

Monmouth? Close. Their Pick 4 takeout is 15%
Hollywood, Del Mar, and Santa Anita? Noooo. They raised the takeout on Pick 4's from 20.68% to 23.68% January 1st. Those dummies.
How about Woodbine? Uh that would be a no. 25%.
Keeneland or Churchill? Again close. 19%.
Aqueduct, Belmont, and Saratoga. Not even close at 26%.
Portland Meadows? You get part marks. They are now tied for the lowest rate at 14%. They used to be alone on top. But now they have been joined by Fort Erie Race Track.

You read that right. Starting tomorrow, Fort Erie has lowered the track takeout on Pick 4's from 26.2% to 14%.


From a press release: “We are testing the waters in terms of takeout reduction,” said FELRC’s Chief Operating Officer Rick Cowan. “Management will assess the results on a regular basis.”

Lets hope this is a massive success. I want Fort Erie to survive, but their track takeouts are way too high. If this drop works, I expect to see doubles and exactors to come way down too (there is plenty of room for some large drops).

This appears different than the disingenuous bone being tossed to Horseplayers by Hollywood Park when they recently put a low takeout Pick 5 on the menu. That bet has been successful despite the Horseplayers Boycott on California racing, and proof that there are plenty of cognizant players out there looking for value. But do you think they are doing anything with the empirical evidence and doing away with that larcenous takeout increase that occurred in January? The answer is a big fat no.

I'm truly hopeful that if this works, Fort Erie will make more moves that are player friendly in the near future.

There is an early Pick 4 that begins in race 1, and another that begins in race 4. If there is a 10 race card, a third one begins in race 7.

That pesky Horseplayer/Owner over at Pull The Pocket thinks "It's Time For Woodbine To Lower The Pick 4 Takeout."

It certainly is. With all the dysfunction going on in other jurisdictions, Woodbine could be on the runway to great growth. Lowering the triactor takeout from 27% to 25% recently was just is a minor step in the right direction. They need something that cries out "follow and play Woodbine daily."


BELMONT STAKES


My recent predictions haven't been all that great. You gotta keep picking yourself up and dusting yourself off though or you might as well be dead.

I'm pretty firm on my prediction today. I even think I have a decent shot at the Superfecta. I'm going with Nehro to win it, long shot Prime Cut to come second, the chalk Animal Kingdom for third, and Mucho Macho Man to finish fourth.


Tomorrow, HANA (Horseplayers Association of North America) is having another Pool Party, this time at Tioga Downs. Tioga even put together this promo on Youtube:


A few ADWs are supporting HANA on this, including Horseplayersbet.com which is giving an additional 2% reward on all wagers made on Sunday's card.

Update: TrackMaster has made free past performances available for tomorrow's Tioga card.

Pathetically Weak Derby Field Will Probably Lead To An Exciting Race

I just finished handicapping the Kentucky Derby, and other than Uncle Mo (will he or won't he run), this field has the same proven ability of a typical Non Winners Of One Other Than at Woodbine. The field is so blah that Mine That Bird would look bettable in the 2011 Derby.

Uncle Mo towers over the field based on peak speed figures. His last race though makes him questionable, as his final speed number ranks right in with the rest of the herd.

I've altered the way I handicap big races, so my second choice (who might wind up being my first choice if Mo is scratched) would have been a horse I eliminated last year. Master Of Hounds pulled off a decent speed figure (compared to the rest of the Derby field) in his last race at Dubai (according to TrackMaster ratings). The thing is that he is racing on a 40 day layoff. He has never tried a dirt track, and at the time of this writing has no published workouts since November (is he even eligible to run?).

Taking away all the negatives, there is some good theory behind playing Master Of Hounds. American based horses ran horrible at Dubai. Maybe they couldn't handle racing without the meds that are allowed on this side of the ocean. With the proposed ban on race day meds possibly looming, I find a sense of inner satisfaction (it has something to do with provocation and chaos) to see this European invader come to America and use Lasix for the first time.

The horse is definitely bred for the distance, and has a good post and good jockey.

The other horses I will likely throw in are Nehro and Santiva. But handicapping this Derby is like throwing mud against the wall. Even with Mo in the race, I'm expecting to see gigantic exotic payoffs.


Handle Falls Another 7.5% In April

There were 7.5% less race days as well. Less isn't better. Purses were up slightly. Why? Mostly because of artificial increases in California as well as the addition of slot money to purses at Gulfstream. A few tracks did buck the trend with handle increases: Keeneland, Gulfstream Park, Tampa Bay Downs to name a few.

The bottom will come out of the purse increase in California soon though. There is no way they can maintain a purse hike with consistent 20% declines in handle since they imposed that foolish takeout hike at the beginning of the year, which was met by an unprecedented Horseplayer's Boycott. Even though, little has been mentioned lately about the Boycott, handle is still getting slaughtered which leads me to believe that the natural forces of the takeout increase (players not having as much money to churn, and getting turned off quicker) coupled with higher signal fees (which turns off anyone who gets rebates) has taken its toll. The longer California doesn't rescind the takeout hike, the harder it will be to win back the players who have gone elsewhere.


Trainers Are Biting Their Fingers Off Over The Proposed New Bill To Ban Race Day Medication and Performance Enhancing Drugs

Here is a copy of the bill. It is very strict and provides very little wiggle room for anyone who is looking to do anything but feed oats and hay and water.

I'm curious if this is adopted in the US, if Canada will follow suit. I would have to say that Woodbine would comply, even if they don't have to. Would the ORC automatically make the US rules Canadian rules? It is an interesting hypothetical. Canada could become a haven for real bleeders and outfits that don't want to play by the new proposed rules.


FORT ERIE KICKS OF THE 2011 SEASON ON SATURDAY

Norm Borg interviews new announcer Mike Dimoff as well as Elissa Blowe. Listen here.

Great to see they acquired the services of Jennifer Morrison to make the morning line. I doubt we will see Nick Gonzalez trained horses at 12-1 or higher anymore in the program.

Fort Erie is trying (in every way but the right way), however with a track takeouts of 26.3 on exactors and doubles still, I don't see them doing anything but swim against the tide this year.

Fort Erie will still do well with US Horseplayers who receive rebates, and may pick up some of the ex California crowd, but other than that I think they are destined for around a 5-10% decrease in handle this year. Something they can ill afford.

Horse racing is about gambling, not about music or cheap hot dogs.

Sending their patrons home broke quickly (that is what high takeouts do) doesn't bring them back very quick, nor does it the plant seeds of future Horseplayers.

Many tracks have added new low takeout gimmicks. Fort Erie needs to do at least that. But still, 26.3% on doubles and exactors????? What are they thinking? The betting public is way more in tune with track takeouts than ever before.

I wish them all the luck in the world. But I'm afraid that luck won't cut it.

Woodbine Is Heading In The Right Direction

Woodbine just announced that they are lowering the takeout on thoroughbred triactors to 25% from 27%. This is definitely a step forward and an attempt to keep the positive momentum Woodbine has been achieving, relative to the rest of the industry, mostly since the departure of David Willmot early last year when Nick Eaves took over.

This isn't champagne cork popping news though. Even with the drop to 25%, Woodbine is now only tied for 27th when it comes to lowest triactor takeout rates out of 69 tracks.

Woodbine still has a way to go to be number one. Keeneland and Churchill Downs have the lowest blended takeout rates in thoroughbred racing with a 16% takeout on WPS and 19% takeout on all other bets.

Amazing that back when Secretariat ran, Woodbine has a takeout of 17% on everything. Horse racing was very popular, and was pretty much a gambling monopoly back then. I still don't get how when an industry loses monopoly status, that they would even think about increasing prices to the consumer (track takeout). That goes against every economics book ever written, but it explains why horse racing is in the state it is in right now.

Lowering takeout increases churn and allows Horseplayers to last longer. The longer they last, the less likely they are to play other forms of gambling as much, and the more likely they are to eat and breathe horse racing more, and therefore get family and friends exposed to the game, which could lead to more growth.

I would say that racetracks benefit the most by giving their live patrons (and in Woodbine's case, their own ADW customer) the biggest breaks, whether that be lowered takeout or increased rebate. That is how to grow your customer base. I'm not sure that Woodbine has begun to successfully build their business that way, yet.

This lower triactor takeout, like I said previously, appears to be looking towards building on the momentum Woodbine has right now when it comes to US bettors.

Constructive Criticism
Woodbine needs to stop bean counting when it comes to specific wagers. Pay track odds no matter if the takeout at the host track is 12% or 30%.

I have had quite a few private conversations with Horseplayers who admittedly bet less or have gone offshore (with Betfair etc.) at least partly because Woodbine pays less on certain type of wagers than host tracks pay out (eg. Keeneland and Churchill Downs triactors and superfectors).

The amount of money Woodbine grabs off the customer when doing this isn't worth losing the customer over. Let alone the fact that most Horseplayers will bet back the extra money, and even if they don't because the hit was "too big," the positive vibes of coming home with money is worth more than spending money on advertising.

Good vibes go a long way. Gulfstream Park is experiencing this.

Canada is full of gamblers and Woodbine would love to grow at the same pace gambling is growing in Canada, but bad vibes go a long way too, especially in the information age. If you don't believe me, check out the California Handle Massacre. Updated handle numbers out of California are atrocious.

I think the TOC and CHRB deserve this for increasing takeout (not me in the video):


The track owners are scrambling to figure out how to stop the bleeding, but I don't think band aids like introducing a low takeout bet will work at all. The takeout hike needs to be rescinded, and even with that, California tracks are going to have to really work at trying to get back the customers who have simply stopped following their tracks. The longer the takeout isn't rescinded, the harder it will be.

Fort Erie still hasn't announced any takeout reductions. Do they see what is happening around them? More and more tracks are announcing lower takeout bets or are reducing takeout on a few wagers. I am expecting Fort Erie to have an especially brutal year if they don't grab the bull by the horns. Fort Erie is ranked 67 out of 69 when it comes to blended takeout rates.

There are three types of people in this world, those who make things happen, those who watch things happen, and those who say what happened? When it comes to takeout rates and competing with other tracks, Fort Erie's management right now are in category 2, but sooner or later Fort Erie management and horsemen will be in category 3.

This is pretty funny. Even slot operators are talking in terms of takeout and competition. A casino is being reopened in Omaha:

In addition to adding new machines, (CEO Bill) Walsh said officials checked out the competition and set the takeout on the CasinOmaha machines one percent lower than other casinos.

“We feel that by setting the machines lower, people can leave here with a little money,” Walsh said.

HANA adviser and bettor extraordinaire has written a piece with solid solutions that the industry would be foolish to ignore.

The last thing we need is to waste time with another study. The problems are evident. High takeout, drug integrity, signal availability, and tote integrity. The first two problems are racing's biggest, but high takeout is number one, as Daryl Wells used to say, by a good margin.

I do disagree with Fotias about having too much racing. We need grass root tracks as owners and trainers bring in new potential players and tracks are needed within major town limits to expose newbies to the game. Nothing makes a Horseplayer a Horseplayer than the live experience does, but once they are a Horseplayer, the live experience isn't so much needed....but we desperately need new Horseplayers right now.

At this minute though, there is too much racing and too many wagering types because there are not enough bettors or betting dollars to go around. Lowering the blended takeout in North America will solve that problem.

One more thing. The centralized ADW idea is a bad one. Look at what has happened in Canada with HPI. They chased big Horseplayers offshore and to Betfair because they thought they were a monopoly (not to mention the fact that they don't even pay track odds sometimes as cited earlier in this post). If there was healthy competition in Canada (like rebate shops), horse racing handle and profits for purses would be seeing much stronger growth. A centralized ADW in North America would lead to negative growth as rebate players (the only thing in horse racing that is growing right now) would fall off the map, and new players would never be created. The problem is that Horsemen and tracks to a certain extent have a "right now" approach. A long term approach as been sorely lacking in our industry.

Until takeout is 10-12% everywhere, the idea of a centralized ADW with no competition will only help destroy the game over time. If takeout were reduced to 10-12% everywhere, rebates would not be needed to compete, the game would be beatable by enough players to create a buzz, and a centralized ADW would work just fine.

Did The TOC Pull A Fast One?

It may not have been the intention of the Thoroughbred Owners Of California (the TOC) to have pulled a fast one on the California racetracks, but the consequences sure makes them look like geniuses while California track ownership and management are looking like pretty bad right now.

The track owners and the Horsemen may have actually believed that bettors would be attracted to the move to dirt at Santa Anita, and that bigger purses would attract more horses and create larger fields which would increase handle attracting new money, more than enough to make up for the lost money in reduced churn (a bigger chunk of the existing pie, though their action will reduce the pie even more).

The reality is that it still costs too much to own a horse in California despite the purse hike, and not very many outfits are bringing horses to compete there.

Trainers charge relatively too much and vets don't help things either.

It is speculated on that trainers who charge high prices look for the smallest field they can find so as to keep their win percentages high enough in order to justify their prices (you can't have a 10% win percentage and have too many owners pay $125 in day rate). This culture doesn't change overnight.

The wild card is that there has been player push back, speeding up the effects of raising takeout. No one was anticipating this.

Despite handle being off, the Horsemen are ahead of the game and here is why the TOC is in no hurry to rescind the recent takeout hike:

In a nutshell, the takeout increase has caused blended rates in California to go from around 18.5% to 20.5%. However, the entire increase now goes to the Horsemen.
Out of State signal fees could range from 3% to brick and mortar locations to much more when it comes to what ADWs pay. It was admitted that California racetracks could not get the full increase from out of state bet takers, but only a little more than half. Still, if the average signal fee was 6% last year, it means that they are now getting 7%, but when you look at it closer, it means that purses now get 4% on average instead of 3% of every dollar bet on their product from out of state. using this example, which means an increase of 33% over last year (again, I'm not sure of the exact numbers, but this is probably very close).

Domestically, from in-state bets, they now receive anywhere between 25-33% more over last year on average. Tracks, meanwhile receive the exact same percentage on every wager, if everything that has been made public is true.

In layman's terms, this means that for every thousand dollars bet last year, the track and horsemen may have received $50 each on average (again, this is an educated guess). However, now horsemen receive about $65 on every $1000 wagered, while tracks still get $50.

If handle is down 15% because of a combination of the Players Boycott and less churning created by higher takeouts, it means that in relative terms, tracks are now receiving $42.50 on every thousand bet, while Horsemen are still receiving $55.25 per every thousand bet (in adjusted dollars). So even with a 15% drop in handle, something devastating for the track, Horsemen purse accounts will be up by 10%.

Now, if you go a step further, the California racetracks could have been actually up this year if not for the boycott and reduced churn. Gulfstream Park and Fair Grounds early success this year may mean that handle might be on the way to recovery. So California track owners are not only down whatever they are down this year, but down what other tracks are up as well.

Unless handle drops at least 25% gross over last year, the TOC is unlikely to be motivated to rescind the takeout hike, unless the tracks are hurt so much that they are forced to cut back dates even more (they are currently running only four days versus five at Santa Anita right now), or even worse, threaten to close down. The tracks may have to run only 3 days a week (to cut expenses down), less races (more per day), and a hope for fuller fields to attract more betting per race.

Both Del Mar and Hollywood Park have a foot in the grave (well at least a big toe) to begin with.

How can this mess be fixed immediately?

The TOC has to be persuaded to look into the crystal ball. It is inevitable that things will be a lot worse for horsemen, and whatever tracks remain standing in California a year or two out. There is zero evidence to show that higher takeout leads to more money bottom line for Horsemen and tracks.

The tracks have now changed percentages on net takeout, and the TOC would be ill-advised to not consider this when negotiating. The cut on net profits need to be readdressed. If the TOC and tracks are reasonable, the Horsemen should now aim to receive between 55-60% of net takeout received on the California product.

This change would be good going forward. As there would now be motivation to make the most net takeout money, which means that the track is free to seek optimal takeout rates.

If blended rates don't come back down to at least where they were in California, California racing is at risk of losing Horseplayers who will never return. Most Horseplayers who are boycotting are not interested in anything but a return to the old rates before they will consider betting another race there.

C'mon guys and Bo, I want the game to grow. Get together and make it happen.


WOODBINE HAS A SIMILAR IMPEDIMENT

Woodbine's blended takeout rate is approximately just over 21%. 1.3% goes towards taxes. That leaves $200 on every $1000 bet to be split between horsemen and tracks. However, Horsemen get an additional 2% on all bets (4% on triactors), which means that on every $1000 bet on track, Woodbine gets $89 while Horsemen get around $111 on average.

If Woodbine drops takeout, the Horsemen get even more of a percentage on net takeout. The HBPA and Woodbine should get together and try to help grow the game, by changing this deal and make it a percentage of net takeout, not a percentage of what is bet. A 55-45% split in favor of the Horsemen on wagers made through Woodbine would not change things one bit, except it gives Woodbine the ability to experiment with lower takeouts.

Of course, if Woodbine could find another way to fund the 2-4% the Horsemen gets, they would be free to experiment with lower takeouts as well.


FORT ERIE SAVED FOR AT LEAST ONE MORE YEAR

Not very many people knew that Fort Erie was even in trouble until early this week, when it came to racing in 2011. They supposedly were good to go for 3 years, but they were not able to make payments for the increased payment to Nordic ($650,000 this year and next, compared to $100,000 last year) and the new HST on time. And they obviously didn't make enough last year to overcome the concern that they could actually come up short this year, and they realized that there is a question of who pays for the shortfall if it happens?

Details are not out, but it looks like a deal was carved out that does not place the indemnify the EDTC (the current managers of the track).

Still, if they think there is a hope in hell to grow a business with a 26.2% track takeout on exactors and doubles, whoever is guaranteeing the losses is guaranteed to be out money.

CLICK TO LISTEN TO A RADIO INTERVIEW OF PROFESSIONAL GAMBLER AND HANA VP MIKE MALONEY
It starts at the 17 minute mark. You might learn a thing or two.



ADVERTISEMENT

Horse racing isn't about to lower takeout collectively anytime soon. It is a good thing that many astute Horseplayers have some options.

HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM offers everyday Horseplayers industry high Player Reward Bonuses.

INTRODUCTORY OFFER FROM HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM

BET $80 GET $40 DEPOSITED INTO YOUR ACCOUNT*

Wager at least $80 in total, win or lose, and you will get $40 deposited into your account. You will also start receiving the industry high Player Reward Bonuses daily as soon as you start wagering. Note: To earn the $40 Bonus you must wager at least $80 in total within 7 days of making your initial deposit.

CLICK LOGO TO OPEN A FREE ACCOUNT



Why Horseplayersbet.com?:

* Industry High Player Reward Bonuses added to your account daily
* User friendly betting interface making wagering easy
* FREE LIVE VIDEOS
* FREE RACE REPLAYS
* Wager Online or by Phone
* Great customer service
* 100% Parimutuel
* No membership or wagering fees
* Green Dot & PINpocket fees rebated (deposits of $120 or more)
* No fees on debit or credit card deposits of $100 or more.
* Bet cancellation capabilities


HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM, WHERE HORSEPLAYERS COME FIRST. SIGN UP TODAY AND SEE WHY HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM IS ONE OF THE FASTEST GROWING US BASED ADWS

Player Reward Bonuses could be the difference to you as to whether you win in the long run playing horses or lose. The better the rewards, the more of a chance you have to beat the game. Sure, you still need skill and luck as well to succeed, but at HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM at least you have a fighting chance. And one thing is for sure, your money will last longer because of the PLAYER REWARD BONUSES you receive.

The Ideal Racing Format

I've been handicapping and betting horses since I was 12, and probably even earlier than that (my memory escapes me as to when I actually began system handicapping). I'm 49 right now, so you can do the math.

Things have definitely changed in the world of horse race betting. Now, more than ever before, tracks are competing against each other for the online and simulcast player. Horseplayers like consistency, not only when it comes to form, but also betting format. Every player knows there is an exactor in every race, and there is a double that begins in the first race. This is true everywhere. But after these consistencies, chaos reigns supreme when it comes to betting formats.

Here is my idea of the perfect racing format:

1. 9 races a card. Not 10, not 8, and especially not 7,11, or 12. 9 races is just right when it comes to handicapping. 8 is too few. 10 or more races gets to be a bit overwhelming if you are handicapping by pen and paper as most people do.
Though not carved in stone, there are a few tracks that at least informally look to card exactly 9 races a day, no more, no less.

2. All races must have at least 7 betting interests or the race should just carryover. I realize racing secretaries these days are having a hard time filling some races thanks to a horse shortage brought on because owning a race horse has become less and less economical (especially in bad economic times), however a good racing secretary knows their local horse population, and most realize that if they put 2 or 3 bottom maiden claiming races in the book every day, they can almost be assured to fill 9 races a day.

3. Rolling doubles and pick 3's should be mandatory at each track. Daily doubles give savvy Horseplayers a possible edge over betting two horses to win, pick 3's too often pay much more than a three horse parlay (though the edge isn't as great at most tracks as the takeout is usually higher for pick 3's).

4. Two Pick 4's a day. One starting in the second race, the other in the 6th race. Hawthorne, when they run 9 races a day (which is their usual norm), does this. I know one thing I can't stand, and that is the Pick 4 overlap race. Woodbine often does this with race 7 in a 10 race card. If a handicapper who likes betting pick 4's can't stand the 7th race, he or she might pass the whole card. I think it also causes the late pick 4 to have less money bet into it as many players who are alive may bet less or not bet the late pick 4 at all.

5. Superfectas in every race with 9 or more separate mutuel entrants only. The track takeout is usually highest for supers than any other bets at most tracks, and I realize the public likes them. But having supers on races with short fields really wipes the Horseplayer out much faster. It is kind of like putting a large double cheese pepperoni pizza in front of me instead of a small. I'll eventually eat the large pizza, but it isn't good for me. Superfectas on short fields is not good for the growth of the game.

6. 50 cent minimums on superfectas, pick 4's, pick 5's and pick 6's. $1 minimums on all other bets. The movement towards 10 or 20 cent minimum supers and pick 4's (in Canada) again has a negative affect as it lures small players into high takeout bets that produce very little churn, and this causes players to go broke quicker, and disillusioned faster. The idea of these bets is (or should be) to give Horseplayers the shot at a year changing cash. 50 cent minimums leads to more pool shots and it is the chance of this that will build interest not only from existing players (especially the big bank roll players), but the lottery/slots player as well. Churn will still happen, as there will be more 3 out of 4's or three horses all results for supers. It will also curb the smaller every day player into wagers that produce more churn.

I'll add a few more ideas here that will do nothing but grow the game:

7. A 12% cap on takeout, 10% on WPS. Maybe eventually the powers of racing will get it, but the horsemen need to step aside and let it happen.

8. Eliminate breakage. It is the customer's money. Give it to them. It will get churned back. In today's day and age breakage is simply a way the track rips the Horseplayer off, as the technology is there to pay off in pennies, especially in account wagering systems.

9. Any trainer who is hitting at 25% or greater gets to race from a detention barn until their average drops. If a trainer has at least 50 starts and the field size average is at least 8, there is no way in heck they should be hitting at better than 25% or better without using something that isn't being tested for. That is my story and I'm sticking to it. Drugs not being tested for are bad for the game.


Zenyatta will be on 60 Minutes tonight. Horse Racing Simulation created a race pitting Zenyatta against some of the greatest horses ever:

If it were a true simulation, a race with a field of 10 would produce a different result every time (I wonder if that is the case with this program). I don't think the result of the race will hurt Rachel Alexandra's value as a broodmare.

One thing about this simulation program is that if racing keeps going in the direction it is going, it might be all that is left. The thing is, it could really catch on and attract Horseplayers of today and the future, especially if the takeout was low enough and the possibility of cheating within the program was at least perceived to not exist.


Fort Erie Handle Down 12%
This is worse than the industry average which is between 8 and 9%. And new management was "trying." Imagine if they weren't trying. The reality here is that Fort Erie has the third highest blended track takeout rate in North America. They bleed the Horseplayer, especially the ones that go to the track. The higher the takeout, the less the churn, the quicker the Horseplayer loses interest. It isn't only that, now, more than ever before, Horseplayers are collectively informed and many avoid high takeout tracks when given choice.

The new management is really the old management of Woodbine, and they just don't get takeout. Coupled with being directed by what Horsemen want as opposed to what Horseplayers want or whats best for Horseplayers, Fort Erie's 2010 results were a predicted disaster.

There is a reason why slot takeout is 8-10%. It is the highest rate slot players will tolerate, and most slot players wouldn't be able to tell you what the rate is, it is all about optimal pricing.

Advertisement

WAGER ON THE BREEDERS CUP AT HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM

Horse racing isn't about to lower takeout collectively anytime soon. It is a good thing that many astute Horseplayers have some options.

HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM offers everyday Horseplayers industry high Player Reward Bonuses.

INTRODUCTORY OFFER FROM HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM

BET $100 GET $50 DEPOSITED INTO YOUR ACCOUNT*

*Open up an account and deposit at least $100 in total. Once you wager $100, you will get $50 deposited into your account the very next day. You will also start receiving the regular Excellent Player Reward Bonuses on anything you bet in excess of the initial $100 going forward. Note: To earn the $50 Bonus you must wager at least $100 in total within 7 days of making your initial deposit.

CLICK LOGO TO OPEN A FREE ACCOUNT



Why Horseplayersbet.com?:

* GREAT PLAYER REWARDS added to your account daily.
* User friendly betting interface making wagering easy.
* FREE LIVE VIDEOS.
* FREE RACE REPLAYS.
* Wager Online or by Phone.
* Great customer service.
* 100% Parimutuel.
* No membership or wagering fees.
* No fees on debit or credit card deposits of $100 or more.


HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM, WHERE HORSEPLAYERS COME FIRST. SIGN UP TODAY AND SEE WHY HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM IS ONE OF THE FASTEST GROWING US BASED ADWS

Player Reward Bonuses could be the difference to you as to whether you win in the long run playing horses or lose. The better the rewards, the more of a chance you have to beat the game. Sure, you still need skill and luck as well to succeed, but at HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM at least you have a fighting chance. And one thing is for sure, your money will last longer because of the PLAYER REWARD BONUSES you receive.

Fort Erie's Season Winding Down

At least they had a 2010 season. But that is about it. The highlight for Fort Erie this year was being able to negotiate with the government to stay alive. Other than that, nothing significant was accomplished. The track is still being run like it is 1965 and there is no competition out there. It will be interesting to see their handle numbers, but my guess is that they will be down.

Fort Erie continues to murder their on track patrons with sky high track takeouts, and that was the first thing that should have been fixed. It is impossible to grow a gambling business with high takeouts.

The government has found it out too, though they don't realize what they found out. Perkins: Internet Forcing Government's Hand On Sports Betting. The government "thinks" that single game sports betting will be a win fall for them allowing them to compete with sites like Betfair or bookies, etc. Well, apparently not if the government runs it:

'...the OLG’s Pro-Line parlay game is drying up; for the fiscal year ended in March of 2009, OLG sports lotteries took in only $249 million (and paid out only $156 million, or 63 per cent, to winners). Most smart bettors have long since tossed aside parlay cards in favour of single-game betting on the Internet, with its 10 per cent “juice.'

No, Pro-Line is drying up because of the 37% takeout. A three team parlay with most bookies has a takeout of 12.5%. Only the true brain dead play Pro-Line, and because of the high takeout, they get wiped out very quickly.

Will they have single games where the house edge is 4.6% like bookies offer? I highly doubt it. We will see.

The government (OLG) has a license to print money by allowing parlays, but so far they have blown it. They, like the racing industry have forced most moderate and big gamblers to gamble anywhere but Canada.


Battle Of The Breeds At Fort Erie Today

Definitely an interesting concept. This is probably the first time that a race pitting thoroughbreds and quarter horses has ever occurred in Ontario. Yesterday's race didn't count, as it attracted one thoroughbred (Black Napkins), and quarter horses in the gate with her must have confused the heck out of her. When the gate opened, it appeared she started looking for thoroughbreds to race against.

According to figures, quarter horses have a huge edge going a quarter of a mile. But today's distance is around 4 furlongs. I believe the thoroughbreds have the edge today. I can see Daverick and Wasted running one two.


Another excellent blog piece by Craig Walker over at TrackMaster Blog
Craig has posted the best deals out there as far as takeout goes in both harness racing and thoroughbred racing.

His ideas on increasing handle are right on, though his idea about artificial tracks can be definitely argued against in regards to increasing handle.


Another Typical Bad Move By Woodbine When It Comes To Retaining Long Term Customers

In case you haven't noticed, Woodbine has now put a superfecta in every race that has at least 7 betting interests.

This is something the Woodbine brass feels is the right thing because the public wants it. Just because the general public wants it, doesn't mean it will increase business.

The problem is the takeout for the bet is 26.3%. The payoffs tempt the Horseplayer to bet these things, and putting them in every race, especially races with fields of less than 9 horses, will erode the Woodbine player's bankroll even faster than before.

Because Woodbine core customer's don't have an endless supply of money, what this does is take the Horseplayer out of the game faster, and it is terrible for long term business. The blended takeout to the Horseplayer is now higher, as they won't be putting new money towards these bets, but money that might have gone on other bets with lower takeouts like WPS or exactors.

So You Want To Be A Steward

Have you ever wondered what it takes to be a Steward or be an Ontario Racing Commission judge? Here is a test case for you. There is a mini quiz afterward. Lets see if you have what it takes.

First, here is some evidence:

Below is a screen shot of the start of Indian Apple Is (Not owned by Good To Be King Farms) from August 15th 2010:

Below is the screen shot of the start of Fifty Proof (co-owned by Good To Be King Farms) from July 22 this year

Here is a screen shot from right after the gate opens for the rest of the horses in the Indian Apple Is (not owned by Good To Be King Farms) race:

Here is a screen shot from right after the gate opens for the rest of the horses in the Fifty Proof (co-owned by Good To Be King Farms) race:

Now, there is no need to go through the ORC Rule Book. I've done it for you. Here is the only rule that matters in cases where a horse breaks through the gate before the starter hits the release:

ORC rule 11.16 states that a horse is a starter “when the stall doors of the starting gate open in front of it at the time the starter dispatches the horses in a valid start.”

Now for the quiz. Read the questions and answers carefully.

1) If a horse is not owned by Good To Be King Farms and the horse breaks through the gate before the starter opens the gate for the rest of the horses:

A) The horse is definitely not a starter because the rules state that the gate has to open IN FRONT of the horse by the starter. If a horse is not a starter, it is logical that the horse is a non starter. This is not rocket science.

B) Even though there is nothing about it in the rule books about whether a horse who breaks through the gate has an advantage, the Stewards get to try to determine if it was an unfair advantage. For some Stewards, an unfair advantage might mean a quarter of a length head start, while other Stewards may decide that a horse needs at least a three quarter of a length head start to have an advantage. And some Stewards can even take who owns the horse into account as well.

2) If a horse is owned by Good To Be King Farms and the horse breaks through the gate before the starter opens the gate for the rest of the horses:

A) Even though there is nothing about it in the rule books about whether a horse who breaks through the gate has an advantage, the Stewards get to try to determine if it was an unfair advantage. For some Stewards, an unfair advantage might mean a quarter of a length head start, while other Stewards may decide that a horse needs at least a three quarter of a length head start to have an advantage. And some Stewards can even take who owns the horse into account as well.

B) The horse is definitely not a starter because the rules state that the gate has to open IN FRONT of the horse by the starter. If a horse is not a starter, it is logical that the horse is a non starter. This is not rocket science.

3) The first thing Stewards are supposed to do after a race is check out the start to see if there was any major bumping or gate violations that might necessitate in a declared non starter. If a Steward sees that a horse not owned by Good To Be King Farms pushes the gate open early:

A) The Steward automatically puts up the Inquiry sign and then views the tapes over and over to see if this was indeed the case and if so, declares the horse a non-starter.

B) The Steward does not put up an Inquiry so as to draw attention to the violation, as the public knows exactly what a fair start is and that if a horse opens the gate before the official starter opens the gate, a refund is expected. To put up an Inquiry in such a case and then decide that despite the violation in rules that the horse is declared a starter could result in garbage cans being lit on fire.

4) If a Steward sees that a horse not owned by Good To Be King Farms pushes the gate open early:

A) The Steward does not put up an Inquiry so as to draw attention to the violation, as the public knows exactly what a fair start is and that if a horse opens the gate before the official starter opens the gate, a refund is expected. To put up an Inquiry in such a case and then decide that despite the violation in rules that the horse is declared a starter could result in garbage cans being lit on fire.

B) The Steward automatically puts up the Inquiry sign and then views the tapes over and over to see if this was indeed the case and if so, declares the horse a non-starter.

5) You are a judge at an appeal regarding whether a horse not owned by Good To Be King Farms is a non starter or deemed to be starter. The person in charge of opening the gates states: "the starting gate mechanism had functioned properly and that all horses received a fair start."

A) The starting is made so that it will open upon force, so this little tidbit of information has nothing to do with whether a horse out broke the gates. The wording of "fair start" is very subjective, because the visual evidence runs contrary when it comes to the horse that broke through the gate, unless you want to say that all horses had a fair start, but the horse who broke through the gate had a more fair start than the others.

B) This is very important testimony. The gates were functional, and it really doesn't matter that a horse happened to outbreak the gates. Had the horse not outbroke the gate, it would have had the same advantage as the rest of the field. Therefore, the horse should be declared a starter, case closed.

6) You are a judge at an appeal regarding whether a owned by Good To Be King Farms is a non starter or deemed to be starter. The person in charge of opening the gates states: "the starting gate mechanism had functioned properly and that all horses received a fair start."

A) This is very important testimony. The gates were functional, and it really doesn't matter that a horse happened to outbreak the gates. Had the horse not outbroke the gate, it would have had the same advantage as the rest of the field. Therefore, the horse should be declared a starter, case closed.

B) The starting is made so that it will open upon force, so this little tidbit of information has nothing to do with whether a horse out broke the gates. The wording of "fair start" is very subjective, because the visual evidence runs contrary when it comes to the horse that broke through the gate, unless you want to say that all horses had a fair start, but the horse who broke through the gate had a more fair start than the others.


If you answered A to every question above, congratulations, you qualify to be a Steward in Ontario and maybe even an ORC judge. Remember one thing though, INTEGRITY MATTERS most of the time.

Read about the Fifty Proof appeal here.


Through the grapevine, things are improving at Woodbine under Nick Eaves. I'm being told he is more open to suggestion than his predecessor. The people under him aren't scared to make suggestions either. And it appears he is attempting to grow the customer base, while actually listening to the customer.

HPI has a great promo going today:

Get up to $100 Cash Back!

It pays to play on Hawthorne Gold Cup day.

I think Woodbine is starting to get it:

HPI is going to reward you for getting in on great three-year-old racing at the $250,000 Hawthorne Gold Cup on Saturday, October 2nd. The feature race has historically been a stepping stone to the Breeders' Cup and highlights a race card of full fields and larger pools that aren't to be missed.

It's simple, here's how:

Get up to $100 when you bet through your HPI account on any race of the Hawthorne Race Course card on Saturday, October 2nd.

Listed below are the minimum bet amounts required to reach each cash back level:

$100 gets you $10
$200 gets you $25
$300 gets you $45
$400 gets you $75
$500 gets you $100

*Offer valid for open HPI accounts in good standing. Only wagers made on the Hawthorne race card on October 2, 2010 qualify for the Cash Back offer. HPI member must wager a minimum of $100 in order to qualify for the Cash back. Maximum of $100 Cash Back per account. Deposits will be made to qualified HPI accounts by October 6, 2010.

I hope a lot of HPI account holders take advantage of this. It might push Woodbine in the right direction for good. Who knows, maybe they'll do something about their takeout, especially now with many Horseplayers enraged over the takeout hike that is coming in California. I know that in Fort Erie, a lot of people started going to Little Caesar's since it came to town with their $5 pizzas, taking away business from other pizza joints, even causing at least a couple to reduce their prices to compete.

Imagine that, there are businesses actually reduce their price to consumers to compete. The owners of these companies wouldn't last very long as racing execs:)


Quarter horse races start at Fort Erie today for the next few Saturdays. I wish Fort Erie well, but I think if there is a way to lose money on this, Fort Erie will do so. I don't see this generating much interest. But I've been wrong before.

The Inquiry Sign Has NOT Been Placed On The Board

Apparently there are quite a few horsemen and Horseplayers alike talking about what happened in the fourth race at Woodbine last Thursday. I received a few emails on it as well.

It is pretty clear, just by watching the replay of the race that that the heavy favorite and subsequent winner, Fifty Proof, got a head start before the gates were opened for the other horses in the race. He should have been declared a non-starter.

Here is the video of the race:


In case the video wasn't conclusive enough, here is a head on picture of the start:

"Broke through the gate at the break":

It is the opinion of the few I have spoke with on this that there is no way the Stewards missed it (one of the first things they look at is the start of the race). This brings up the obvious question as to why the inquiry sign did not go up?

It was the first leg of the Pick 4, and over $45,000 was bet on it. If Fifty Proof was declared a non-starter, those holding live tickets off him would have been given the new favorite, and their tickets would be dead. This would have caused a lot of unrest amongst some bettors. Fifty Proof's scratch would have also necessitated in a refund of about $75,000. did that have something to do with it?

But the owner of the horse could have something to do with the non call. Kinghaven Farms is a partner on Fifty Proof. Perception is very important in horse racing, and even if this had nothing to do with the non call, it is hard to convince many horseman and Horseplayers, whom are skeptical by nature. Did the Stewards give former Chief Executive Officer David Willmot a going away present?

The race is now under appeal with the Ontario Racing Commission. I can't see the results standing.

UPDATE: Last year, August 15th Race 4, Indian Apple Is broke through the gate and got a head start. She was 1-5, the inquiry was called, and the horse was declared a non-starter.

UPDATE 2 The Stewards and John Leblanc, trainer of the 2nd finisher in the race met on Friday and the protest was denied. It was decided that no unfair advantage was gained by Fifty Proof. Huh? First off, that really shouldn't matter. In the Olympics if a runner starts before the gun goes off, a recall occurs. In other words, if a horse breaks through the gate, the horse should lose its right to compete for the prize and should be refunded.

And of course, what about consistency. How was this different that Indian Apple Is? And I also remember a few incidences when the gate was open even less, and the horse in question finished up the track, and a refund was given because the horse broke through the gate before the gate officially opened.

UPDATE 3: This case will go to the ORC for appeal. With precedence in place, I can't see the results standing. Doesn't help the bettors of the 2nd finisher for their win tickets, exactors, Pick 3's and Pick 4, etc.

Another question, in the short time between the finish of the race and the time the official sign went up, how did the Stewards determine that there was no unfair advantage gained by Fifty Plus without even an Inquiry? And again, the fact that the horse broke out before the rest of the field should be deemed an unfair advantage.....end of story.

UPDATE 4: How can the Stewards argue against the ORC Rulebook?
11.16 A horse is a starter for all purposes of the Rules when the stall doors of the starting gate open in front of it at the time the starter dispatches the horses in a valid start.

Fifty Proof was not a starter by ORC rules.  The gate did not open for Fifty Proof when the starter dispatched the horses, but before. and it didn't open in front of the horse at the time the starter dispatched the horses either.


FORT ERIE RECEIVES DATES FOR QUARTER HORSE RACING

According to a release at the ORC web site, Fort Erie will race quarter horses on three Saturdays in October. Also, a make-up date of Saturday October 23 has been added to the thoroughbred schedule. On that last weekend, post times have been changed from 1:30 PM to 12:30 PM.

The Prince of Wales was a very exciting race. Announcer Peter Kyte's exuberance has triggered a thread on Pace Advantage.

I couldn't have picked the winner, Golden Moka, in a gazillion years. Not the way I handicap. Horses making their first start after a long layoff in a Stake races of over a mile are automatic pitches for me. They don't win very often, and I'm still sticking with my rules the next time a situation like this happens.

Either Golden Moka is special, or the competition was was sub par. I guess we will find out pretty soon which is the case.

On track handle was off about 2% from last year, but handle from other sources was down over 20%. Saratoga starting up early could be part of the blame, and of course racing is down this year collectively too, but it is possible that more and more Horseplayers have become aware of the high takeouts Fort Erie dings the public with.


The Ontario Racing Commission wants public input on proposed rule changes. Click here to view them.


TRACKMASTER HAS IMPROVED THEIR PRODUCT LINE

'Just in time for these premier meets, TrackMaster has made some significant improvements to its Thoroughbred product line. Many of these changes were a result of a meeting we had with the guys from HANA (Horse Players Association of North America), a smart group who has given a voice and influence in the industry for the “player”.

Now available in TrackMaster Plus Pro and our Platinum and regular PP files:

* Listing of prior race scratches, including reason
* A simple one page “In to go” list for jockeys, trainers and horses
* Highest Equibase Speed Figure earned added to the horse’s summary stats
* Direct link to Equibase for late scratches and changes
* Expanded conditional trainer stats
* Added statistics for the prior trainer when there is a trainer change'

Jockeys At Fort Erie Band Together To Make The Wrong Decision

Emotion sometimes leads to stupidity, and stupidity reigned supreme in the jock's room at Fort Erie on Tuesday. For those who don't know, leading jockey Krista Carignan was abruptly taken off her mounts because it was confirmed after a lunch time meeting with the Stewards that she committed her fourth whipping violation of the year on Sunday.

The new whipping and urging rules in Ontario state that the driver or jockey is immediately indefinitely suspended after the fourth violation. Thems the rules, like it or not.

But the jockeys, who have been complaining about the new rules all year long, decided that it was time to take a stand. They banded together and refused to ride any of Carignan's mounts.

First off, the act of getting licensed for jockey, groom, trainer, etc. implies that you will abide by the rules of racing. In other words, the jocks had no grounds to react like they did, though I do not believe they broke any rules by colluding the way they did.

But who did they hurt with this decision? Just about everyone except the ones they have the beef with (The Ontario Racing Commission). Trainers get horses ready for specific races. Carignan being the leading jockey most likely had mounts that would have made relatively substantial money that afternoon. The trainers of Carignan's mounts were all denied an opportunity to make their profits.

The owners got screwed. Probably the odd one showed up to watch their horse in person (scratches were not announced until around the 2nd race as Carignan's first mount was in the 3rd race). Of course, they had to pay for Lasix, but they also pay the day pay that keeps the backstretch going. Now they all have to wait at least another week for perhaps a not so good spot to run in.

Horse racing's growth depends a lot on satisfied owners. They bring friends and family to the track, some owners are potential big owners down the road, and of course friends and family are potential new owners and new horseplayers.

When a track is offering purses on the lower end of the scale like Fort Erie, these unnecessary speed bumps can only do damage.

And the last thing that Fort Erie needs is any speed bumps as they struggle for survival. Handle seems to be down this year (as it is for North America collectively). And Tuesday is Fort Erie's biggest handle day.

Handle for Fort Erie is dependent on two main things: competition and field size. The last thing Fort Erie needed was 6 or 7 unnecessary scratches that resulted in already short fields to be much shorter.

I do agree with the jockeys on their points. Yes, it seems that whipping violations are open for too much subjectivity and also cause jocks to worry about too many things when they are trying to win a race (Carignan's fourth violation was simply holding the whip too high...talk about walking on egg shells), and the fines being equal at both Woodbine and Fort Erie are relatively greater at Fort Erie because of the much larger purses at Woodbine.

I also believe that whipping violations should be subject to immediate inquiry before a race is made official. If a jockey is "cheating" to win, the horse should be DQ'ed. Lets face it, if a jockey was found using a buzzer during the race on the tapes, the horse would be thrown out.

The Stewards turned the indefinite suspension to three days and a years probation, so maybe the jockeys move of not accepting mounts intimidated them and perhaps they will revisit the way the rules are written.

I've made this point before, but as a bettor, I hate these rules because if my horse needs to be whipped to win, I want it whipped without the jockey doing a count in his or her head. Ontario has already moved to a more human whip. And of course, if I thought the horse was suffering due to whips, I would be totally against them (the welfare of the animal is extremely important but I think these rules go too far as a way to appease the PETA types). I guess what I'm trying to say is if whips are bad for the horse, then ban them outright, if not, amount of hits shouldn't even be looked at.

The only good thing that came out of this is Fort Erie got some press. Maybe a few gamblers found out that they still race horses in Fort Erie.


Woodbine Has Momentum

I'm definitely noticing an increase in handle at Woodbine. Lots of it has to do with being featured on TVG. The big fields are helping. Maybe even Race Night on the Score is helping as well. They are probably getting a boost because they are now back on RGS's betting schedule. RGS is an offshore rebate shop that caters to bettors who wager in the millions each year.

Woodbine underperformed plenty under David Willmot's leadership. Things have improved under Nick Eaves, and they have a chance to really blossom now.

If Woodbine would only lower their takeout while they have momentum and newbies joining up, they could catapult themselves as one of the major tracks, when it comes to handle, in North America. Their takeouts for triactors are still 27%, which is embarrassingly too high, as it shows they aren't interested in keeping customers long term.


Hermaphrodite horse at Hollywood Park? He/she/it (Mo Steam) can't run in straight filly races. I guess if I was a hermaphrodite in a public sauna, I'd want Mo Steam too.


Balmoral's 15% Takeout On Pick 4 Successful So Far
According to Pull The Pocket, handle is up 40-50% on that bet.

I hope the management at Woodbine, and especially Fort Erie are taking notes.

Fort Erie still has takeouts of 26.2% for exactors and doubles. If they fail, this will stand out as a major reason. You need to send a customer home with some money, or they won't come back too fast, if at all.


Too Bad Horse Racing Can't Harness This And Get Horseplayer Out Of It
British Columbia launched their now legal online gambling site on Thursday. It lasted only a few hours before it was flooded by too many site hits forcing it to shut down.

Players last playing online poker and blackjack far longer than they do playing horse racing. And even though the games are unbeatable in the long term, they attract gamblers. The learning curve also is a huge factor and keeps players from giving horse racing a fair chance. But still, horse racing with a 21% takeout is unbeatable, so if you have to gamble, why not have fun and last as long as possible?