Why Not Increase Takeout To 40%?

It gets so tiresome on the internet, when horsemen and probably some racing execs use the same argument against lowering takeout over and over again. It happened again recently on a Pricci column "On Fixing A Broken Simulcast Model."

Here are their arguments followed by my rebuttal:

Most horseplayers don't know or care about track takeout
True. But horseplayers, like all gamblers realize when they come home with less money or more money. Lower the takeout, and bettors will come home with more money more often. This will be less discouraging than it is today with takeouts that average around 21% in the industry.
Lowering takeout allows bettors to last longer, and their desire to come back more often and play more often will increase.
If that increases, the likelihood that they expose friends, family, and/or coworkers to horse racing greatly increases.

Even horseplayers who know that takeout is lower on win bets will gravitate towards higher takeout exotics
Human nature. The horseplayer is out to make a score. That is why lottery tickets are bought. For many, if someone is going to gamble to begin with, low returns are not being sought by the masses. Horseplayers are gamblers, and dangling a triactor every race at them is too enticing, though in the end, it makes players go broke a lot quicker than a few decades ago.

All attempts at lower takeouts have not been successful
This is unfair. Those who tried to lower takeout were met with signal exclusion in many instances. Also, the extra money won by customers didn't go to buy new suits, it was in all probability churned back into the pools. However, they didn't necessarily go back to the tracks that had the lower takeouts. Simulcast and ADW bettors know that there are many many tracks on a menu to play once you cash a ticket.
Those who use this line of thought also conveniently do not take into account the ginormous growth we've seen at Betfair and online poker, where the house take is minuscule compared to the takeout at a racetrack. They also forget about the only growth aspect of North American horse racing where some ADWs essentially lower the takeout for customers by give decent player rewards.

Horse racing is a costly show to put on, high takeouts are a must
No one is denying that it costs a lot more to put on a horse race than it does to deal poker cards, and I don't begrudge any gambling venue from optimizing their bottom line returns, but horse racing has never tried to find an optimum price point.
The closest thing racing has ever come to having a real price determined by supply and demand is the signal fee each track charges to ADWs and other tracks. That is really what the product is worth to the real market, and that signal fee is usually 2% to 9% depending on the track.


For those who think that lowering takeout won't be good for the bottom line, let me use a reverse example:

Slots have a house take of around 10%. This number was arrived at by trial and error, most likely thanks to the years of experience Vegas has when it comes to different games of chance. This optimum price to gamble was determined by the market.

What this house take means is that a slots operator will see for example, $400 million bet over the course of the year. This yields a profit of $40 million in a year for the house. So what stops them and the government from increasing the house take to 20% (it isn't that they care about the gambler)? Surely, at least $200 million will be wagered in a year if that happens (and they will see at least $40 million in profit and probably more). Wrong! The slot operators KNOW this won't happen. What happens at anything over 10%?
Slot players, who are completely clueless about house take will not last as long. They may not know why, but many will stop wanting to go because they know they lose their money too fast. Most will definitely come back less, and when that happens, they are obviously less likely to bring friends and family along with them for a night out.

Every time horse racing increase takeout, their bottom line falls off. It isn't magic. It is gamblers natural sense of price sensitivity that lowers the handle.

For those "not too bright" horsemen and racing execs who "think" that increasing takeout means more money for them, it won't. Next time ask them why not double the takeout and see how they answer the question. The real answer can be seen above, but it fun sometimes playing with these yahoos.

But the same premise holds true with respect to the current takeouts at tracks in North America. If takeouts were 10% today on average, by increasing them to 20% or more would mean less money to the bottom line. This means there is more money if the industry would just get together and lower takeouts across the board.






PRESCRIPTION FOR RxACING

Outstanding article by Bill Finley.
Some of the best visionaries and realists including HANA President Jeff Platt share their views on fixing racing going forward. It does include the comments of a few wannabe visionaries like Bob Evans as well.
It is an excellent read over at Thoroughbred Daily News. The downside is that you need to register for a free 2 week subscription, but the registration only takes 10 seconds.




The Score did a feature on Alex Brown. Here it is if you haven't seen it yet:


To learn more about Alex Brown's mission, go to Alex Brown Racing. I still disagree with one of his focuses, horses who made over $500,000 who are now running for $5,000 claiming. Once a horse blows conditions, especially a male horse, there is sometimes no difference in running times for $5,000 claimers and $16,000 claimers. If anything, the competition is easier the lower a horse runs for, thus the cheaper claiming tags are more humane. Also, these horses are hardly ever running for the outfits for whom the horse made the bulk of its earnings, so if anything, it is up to those outfits, and those outfits only to buy or claim and then retire that particular horse.

If the horse has real bad problems, it shouldn't be racing, regardless of how much it has made. The horse has no idea how much it earned.

H/T The Paulick Report


No shocker: Marsh Side DQ heading for appeal
I think the odds are around 75% in favour of an overturn.


More Industry Dysfunction. I don't know where to start so just read the article by Nick Kling.


Down The Stretch has a new online issue out. Good reading. They even got controversial this time around (they put an article in it regarding the Stein-Sutherland conflict). Good article by women's curling expert Perry Lefko on Eddie Robinson and Jennifer Burnie.


Northlands Park cuts race dates this year for both thoroughbred and harness racing. Gone are Oct. 16,17,18,21,23,24,25 from their original thoroughbred schedule. Harness racing will now not run on Nov. 16, Dec. 23,27, and 30.





HORSEPLAYERBET.COM PROMO STILL GOING

10% Rewards*

*Bet $1,000.00 between now and October 4th and, upon wagering that amount, Horseplayersbet will provide you a 10% reward on that $1,000.00 worth of wagers. A minimum of $1,000.00 must be wagered to earn the 10%. Those who fail to reach the $1,000.00 minimum will be provided Horseplayersbet Standard Rewards (which are still very good regardless of the promo). Offer is available to new customers only and all promotional related wagers must be completed by end of day October 4, 2009.

Horseplayersbet does not take Canadian residents, as well as residents of some US States.

Stewards Shouldn't Have Thrown Out Marsh Side

Stewards Flipped The Coin And Got It Wrong In Northern Dancer
Unfortunately, on this Youtube video you don't get to see the head on (you can if go to Cal Racing or HPI replays), but the disqualification of Marsh Side was a bad call. There was no apparent bumping between Marsh Side and Quijano, and both jockeys were hitting with right hand while moving to the inside in tandem. If anything, Quijano would have squeezed Champs Elysee regardless of whether Marsh Side was in the race or not. Again, if the Stewards have to look at a race for more than two minutes, they should let the results stand.

The eventual winner had the common sense to get away from the rail as his jockey anticipated the tight quarters. Champs Elysee did get shut off, but I have a problem blaming Marsh Side for it.
I am pretty sure that this call will be overturned, and the bettor who picked the best horse in the race, will wind up getting screwed.

Also, Andrasch Starke, who rode Quijano must have forgot about the new whipping rule in Ontario. There were actually quite a few violations in both the Northern Dancer and Woodbine Mile. I wonder if fines have been handed down.



Steven Crist kisses Woodbine's butt, disses horseplayers in the meantime by failing to mention Woodbine's high takeouts.

Crist likes that Canada doesn't run that many Grade 1 stakes. The fact is that we can't, even if we wanted to. They do their best now to schedule these events at times when there is not that much competition to compete against. Whenever Canada was forced to compete, they drew sub par fields.


Crist is not all bad. At least he wrote an article that slams horse racing for still allowing breakage in today's computer age. How much does breakage cost the horseplayer? Read this.


Assiniboia Handle increases 38%. Most likely due to increased exposure at ADWs that offer rebates. Many bettors are avoiding the bigger tracks that try to prohibit their signal from going to rebaters. The smaller tracks are winning this war.

Woodbine had a $5 million handle day on Sunday. But lets not forget Friday when they couldn't even crack $1.5 million. They wrote a race specially for Jambalaya's return. The purse was over $90,000 and it attracted $61,766 in betting. They sure know how to run a business, don't they.


Slots in Ohio just took two steps backwards.


NYRA At It Again
NYRA has yanked live signals from ADWs like HPI and NJBets. For the real dirt behind the move, read this thread on Pace Advantage.


Horse is somewhere between a girl and a boy
Caster Semenya, Tuscan Abbe, and Arizona Helen. I wonder if Rachel Alexandra has been checked lately:)


Is it me, or does it appear that the morning line oddsmaker at Fort Erie doesn't give many Daniel David and Nick Gonzalez close to enough credit? There seems to be a few horses that went off at pretty low odds that have been 12-1 or 20-1 in the program that are either ridden by David or trained by Gonzalez. And most of them looked like they should be one of the top three program selections.


"Slots and OLG In Their Own Little World" according to Fort Erie of the Fort Erie EDTC. Listen to him here, as he discusses the proposals he dropped off to the Ontario government.


Justin Stein Appealing Large Suspension and $2500 Fine For An Outburst That Would Have Helped "Jockeys" Ratings Soar
I first read about this on Jen's Thoroughblog in the comment section:
On September 7th' seventh race Justin Stein's mount, Sincerely A to Z, was clipped at the head of the stretch causing Stein to fall off. He was in a sandwich position, and to me it wasn't Chantal Sutherland's mount (Diplomatic Impact) that caused the clip. A long inquiry ensued as Chantal finished second or third, but the results stood.
After the race, allegedly Stein called Sutherland all sorts of very rude names.

The Stewards decided to suspend Stein 25 days and fine him $2500, which he is currently appealing.

After the suspension was announced, three days later on Saturday, in the 9th race, Sutherland was on the favorite on the grass (Soul of Nataka), and patiently waited for room. Meanwhile Stein was on a long shot (Caledon) who seemed to be waiting for Sutherland to try to get by. He came over on Sutherland's mount at the head of the stretch, and Sutherland's mount then came out causing some of the field to fan out. Sutherland's even money shot wound up romping, and there was no inquiry, which I found weird.

It is dangerous to be a jockey. Emotions run high, as does jealousy. Chantal Sutherland is the best thing that has happened to Woodbine in years, but she shouldn't be over protected either. I'm sure male jockeys call male jockeys some pretty ugly names at times, so I don't see why a female jockey should get special treatment here or that male jockeys should get an excessive punishment over something that happens during the heat of battle.

Replays are available at Cal Racing and HPI.






HORSEPLAYERBET.COM PROMO STILL GOING

10% Rewards*

*Bet $1,000.00 between now and October 4th and, upon wagering that amount, Horseplayersbet will provide you a 10% reward on that $1,000.00 worth of wagers. A minimum of $1,000.00 must be wagered to earn the 10%. Those who fail to reach the $1,000.00 minimum will be provided Horseplayersbet Standard Rewards. Offer is available to new customers only and all promotional related wagers must be completed by end of day October 4, 2009.

Horseplayersbet does not take Canadian residents, as well as residents of some US States.

Why Were CTHS Yearling Prices Down So Much?

Lets have a look at the the numbers.

The CTHS Select Sales held just over a week ago produced this:
"A drop in average price of just over 29% was the biggest in at least 10 years - from $39,131 (all figures in Canadian funds) last year to $30,142.
The sales gross of $4,672,000, for 155 yearlings sold was down from $5,830,500 for 149 sold.
The median sunk from $27,000 to $22,000."

The CTHS Open Sales numbers on Saturday were abysmal: "A total of 148 yearlings sold for $851,800, a 35 percent lower gross than last year, when 153 horses sold for $1,309,200. The average, $5,755, was 32.7 percent less than last year's average of $8,557. Forty-nine yearlings were listed as not sold, compared to 70 in 2008."

Sure, the easiest thing to do is blame the economy, and yes, it is partly to blame, but when you see the purses that are offered at Woodbine which have held steady, the economy is not the main factor here. Betting is down around 11% in North America this year, and it is not just the economy either. And I also know Keeneland's Yearling sale is also getting clobbered currently, and again, it isn't just the economy. For example, in the US purses have declined, yet costs have remained the same, unlike what has happened here in Ontario.

I'm not sure who to blame, or who mostly to blame, for the Ontario sales numbers, in other words, who has final say in the rules here that has made Ontario an even worse place than ever before to breed horses. Is it the CTHS?, The HBPA?, or Woodbine Entertainment? My best guesstimate is that it is a combo of the three.

Simple economics 101 make it easy to understand that prices are down because there aren't enough buyers. But why are there not enough buyers for Canadian bred horses?

Outside of the economy there are two major reasons why sales numbers have dropped significantly: 1. The effect of high takeouts (believe it or not) and 2. Not enough incentives for owners to buy Canadian.

HIGH TAKEOUT KILLING THE GAME

I know I've written at lengths regarding high takeout and the fact that by not allowing existing horseplayer's bankrolls to last, the result is that horseplayers become increasingly disillusioned to play, and they find other ways to gamble, whether it is offshore betting, sports betting, lotteries, internet poker, etc.

Because there are no visible winners who beat the takeout without substantial rebate, those marketing horse racing have basically no tools in which to attract new bettors. Gamblers want to know they have a chance to win. There are winners at Betfair, and while horse racing handle has stagnated, Betfair handle has skyrocketed. There are many blogs out there by Betfair players who consistently make money at it. This is the best advertisement for growth possible. And it is sorely lacking in horse racing, an industry that will not advertise the fact that there are winners, but these winners are being rebated significantly.

The choice the industry must make is lower takeouts significantly, or open the door to advertise the winners and the fact that these winners make their money because they are getting rebated.

So what does this have to do with the breeding game in Ontario? Simple, every owner in the game started somewhere, and most of today's owners got their start being introduced to the game by friends, family or coworkers.

Back in the 60's, 70's, and even the 80's, winning, breaking even, or losing a little wasn't as difficult a task as it is today. There were only 8 or 9 races to play a day and there were not nearly the amount of high takeout exotics available to play each day either. The collective takeout today at Woodbine is around 21-22%, back then it was around 16-17%. And of course, there was lots of mooch money in the pools as well back in the good ole days. Only around 1 in 3 in the crowd relied on past performances to make their decisions which meant the pools were full of dumb money. That dumb money has since left because of competition from slots and lottery mainly. It actually started in when the Blue Jays came to town, and went downhill from there.

The point of all this is that back then one could go to the track with $50 or $100 each day, be able to play the double and a few exactors and maybe a triactor, and still have a good chance to come home with money. This was true especially in the late 60's when there was only one double and two exactors offered each day. All a player had to do was cash a win bet or a win place bet in the last 4 races, and he or she was set to go to the track the next day.

The more a player goes to the track, or today, bets on horses, the more likely they are to get friends, family, and coworkers involved, or at least exposed to horse racing. The key is allowing the player to last longer. Many of the today's owners are the friends, family, and coworkers of horseplayers back in the 60's, 70's and 80's.


Many ownership partnerships have been formed by people who have hooked up because of their interest in horse racing. But the interest came about because there was a time that player's bankrolls to lasted longer. Ask any owner how they were introduced to horse racing.

In light of today's competition, horse racing has not tried to compete for the gambler's business. They assume they have a right to the bettor, but that assumption is just plain out wrong, and by sticking with the high takeout mentality, it has helped shrink the audience, and with it, the potential owners and buyers of yearlings that could have been.


NOT ENOUGH INCENTIVE TO BUY CANADIAN YEARLINGS

The cost to get a freshly bought yearling to the races is significant even if one pays a few thousand for that yearling. Many horses don't start until they are 3 or even 4, and a few times even older. And there are those who don't make it as race horses as well. What about those who make their first start at Fort Erie for a $5,000 tag, who are shooting for a net prize of something like 4 grand?

Bottom line, no matter the breeding or the confirmation, buying a yearling is probably the riskiest way to be a horse owner. Existing horse owners know this. New owners generally get into the game through the claiming side.

How to lower the risk? Right now it is pretty much a feast or famine situation for yearling buyers. Yes, you can buy a potential Queen's Plate winner, but you can also buy lottery tickets as well. If you are lucky enough, you can find a horse that may win a few Ontario sired special races, and maybe an Ontario sired stake race. But again, the odds are that you are going to wind up buying a horse who struggles to break its maiden for $12,500 at Woodbine, or $10,000 at Fort Erie. And some horses who compete at these lower levels sometimes get better, and then go on to be competitive in Ontario sired events, so from an owners standpoint, why not wait to see if there is potential to win these event without going through the expense of buying them somewhat blind, breaking them, and training them just to make the races?

The biggest problem is once an Ontario sired horse has shown that they don't have the potential to win Ontario sired events, they are pretty much worthless, as they have to face Kentucky breds in claiming events. It is just fact that Kentucky attracts the best sires and the best dams, and many dams from Ontario travel to Kentucky to be bred and then are brought back here or they wind up staying there. They produce a superior product there, and I have no immediate answers that will change that fact.

If you buy an Ontario bred who doesn't compete at the restricted allowance level, you are forced to run against better quality horses, especially at the higher claiming levels. Once an Ontario bred ekes out its conditions at low levels (ie at Fort Erie), they are pretty much not worth racing, and because the probability is that they will be that type of horse, why buy them at the sales in the first place?

Woodbine's purse structure has made it very appealing to American outfits like that of Steve Asmussen's to race here profitably. Does making the Woodbine product American friendly help? I don't think the pluses of better quality outweighs the damage that giving the purse money away to these outfits does to the breeding game and Canadian owners of Ontario sired horses. From a bettors standpoint too, quality doesn't matter that much. Double the purses and betting only increases 6%.

Woodbine would be doing the game here a huge favor if they would shave off some of the higher end purses and put that money into Ontario sired or Ontario bred claiming races.

By giving owners of Ontario breds more outs, it increases the incentive to buy Ontario breds. This means that the cheapest Ontario breds will be worth more than they are today, and if the cheapest ones raise in price, the more expensive ones will also rise in value.

Also, the game is designed for the rich right now thanks to the disparity between what a an allowance horse runs for and what a lower end claimer runs for. A key element to raising demand for new owners is to keep the small owners in the game (much like the lower takeout scenario). Knowing that a horse has to win 3 races at Fort Erie in one year just to break even, hardly attracts new owners, and it hardly keeps old owners in the game.

In Fort Erie's case they need to run fewer races at higher purse levels, and they also need more subsidies from the CTHS in the way of extra bonus money so that they can put on Ontario sired claiming races at the $5,000 and $10,000 level.

In Woodbine's case, they need to run Ontario sired claiming events. They also need to increase the purse structure for lower level events, but make it so Kentucky breds run against Kentucky breds. Eventually, owners will only want to own Ontario breds.


Recently, Ontario brought in a new rule that actually works against the breeding industry (as I predicted when it was introduced). If someone claims an Ontario bred horse, they are no longer able to run for the full purse, in other words, they might as well be be bred in another jurisdiction.

I believe the motivation for this rule was to try to get owners away from claiming Ontario breds, and trying to force them to buy at sales. This just shows that the decision makers are not in touch with reality.

Many owners of race horses are out to make a buck, or not get hurt at least. They only start buying yearlings once they've had some moderate success (which includes breaking even or losing just a little) racing horses. By reducing the demand to claim Ontario breds, all that has happened is that it has caused a greater demand for foreign breds. This rule has devalued Ontario breds, and owners of these horses know this, because it also becomes very difficult for them to unload their runners.

And what about those ridiculous B maiden allowance and allowance races run at Woodbine? Who exactly is that for? Mainly, for those owners who have higher priced Kentucky breds or Ontario breds that have foreign sires. It is a way for these owners to protect their horses and earn some allowance type when dealing with mares.
It also takes away from the free market. If these horses can't win an allowance A, they should be forced run in maiden claimer. The more horses run for the levels of what they are really worth as runners, the more claiming will happen, and with that, more potential owners.

How do these B races help the Ontario breeding industry in any way, especially the ones who own Ontario stallions? Isn't it telling that Kinghaven Farms has very few (I remember seeing one this year) Ontario sired horses, yet they have quite a few Ontario breds?

Sure, sales vouchers, and Ontario bred bonuses help a bit, but they only help those who win a few races, and with the cost of training a horse, they don't help nearly enough.



HAPPY BIRTHDAY HORSEPLAYERS ASSOCIATION OF NORTH AMERICA
HANA was formed one year yesterday. I'm proud to be on their board and the progress we have made in the past year, and I am looking forward to the future.

Take a minute, and join HANA here.







HORSEPLAYERBET.COM HAS A NEW PROMO

10% Rewards*

*Bet $1,000.00 between now and October 4th and, upon wagering that amount, Horseplayersbet will provide you a 10% reward on that $1,000.00 worth of wagers. A minimum of $1,000.00 must be wagered to earn the 10%. Those who fail to reach the $1,000.00 minimum will be provided Horseplayersbet Standard Rewards. Offer is available to new customers only and all promotional related wagers must be completed by end of day October 4, 2009.

Horseplayersbet does not take Canadian residents, as well as residents of some US States.

Fort Erie 2010: Totally Dependent On A Government Handout

I went to the 9:30 Press Conference at the Holiday Inn this morning. At first when I heard about the PC I thought they must have a deal, but little that was being leaked out about it made me less optimistic.

In a nutshell, this is Fort Erie's position today as I know them:

The track generates around $8 million in slots revenue which is divided 50-50 between track and horsemen.

The track also generates around $8 million from betting revenues, again mostly split between track and horsemen.

There are other revenue streams for the track that come from food and beverage, etc.

Current owner Nordic Gaming is claiming that they lose around $3-4 million a year after subtracting the income stream from their total revenue stream. Therefore, I deduce that Nordic is claiming the track costs $11-$12 million a year to operate.

Of course, actual costs are almost always near impossible to get a true handle of especially since I'm not privy to looking at the real books, and maybe the Fort Erie Consortia wasn't privy to the "real" books either.

One other important thing is that Jim Thibert, Consortia CEO, states that there is no extra money that is available to get from slot revenues directly from the Fort Erie operation.

Doing quick math, since the horsemen plus track share is $8 million in total, and it represent 20% of the total profits, it must cost around $32 million to run the slots 365 days a year. Sounds very high, though there are 300 employees and electricity does cost some money.


All the above adds up to the fact that Fort Erie will not race next year unless it gets a government subsidy.


Apparently, those involved in the negotiations are optimistic. But we are talking unprecedented action that is required by the government. Which doesn't make too many people optimistic when one really thinks about it.

So why was the Press Conference called? My guess is to inform the horsemen of the current situation, and to get press to pressure the government to act quickly to get a deal done.

What is the Consortia asking for?

In a nutshell, $15 million from the government, or in other words, $7 million more than the track gets now from slots. Thibert doesn't care where the money inevitably comes from, but realizes that realistically it would come from the OLG's slot revenues at other locations.

The extra $7 million according to my math would be divided up this way: $2 million to the horsemen, $2-3 million to offset losses, and $2-3 million to pay to lease the joint.

Thibert did bring up a great example of the revenue sharing that occurs in the NFL over TV profits, and tied it nicely into the unfairness that Woodbine has a population of 4.5 million in their home market, while Fort Erie has probably less than one tenth of that if you don't include Buffalo.

According to Thibert's numbers, the $15 million guarantee will mean not losing the $300 million that he estimates Fort Erie Race Track generates into the Niagara region economy.

$6 million of the $15 million will be guaranteed to purses (which is around a $2 million increase for horsemen from what they get from slots now), which means at least 60 days a year at $100,000 a day in purses, but this doesn't included the money that comes from other income streams like betting , which is another $3.5-$4 million, which will likely bring dates up to 80-90 with slightly better purses than are available today. But knowing horsemen, I can see them demanding half of the $15 million....because that is what horsemen do:)

There are apparently nine other potential revenue streams discovered by the Consortia, but projections and details were not given out.

Thibert did admit that the $35 million deal had no shot even if the government gave them $35 million, because they wouldn't be able to maintain the track's losses every year, so they pulled out of the deal with Nordic 10 days early. Like I said when it happened, it had no shot because of this, but what really transpired is that Nordic was able to extort $2.3 million to keep the track alive in 2009. That was simple to have figured out the minute the deal was announced, and the reality is that the season was saved.

Two potential buyers were announce at the PC. Older gentlemen both, are said to have offers in to buy the track. It was also stated that they will lease the track to the Consortia if they buy it, and Nordic agreed to lease it to the Consortia if no one buys it.

This explains why the Consortia is asking for $15 million and not $12 or $13 million from the government. The leasing price must have been predetermined at around $2-3 million a year. If this is true, that puts a value on Fort Erie of between $15 to $25 million. Great for Nordic, because getting $2-3 million for a failing business a year is better than losing $3 million a year.

If the leasing price was what it is supposed to be (one dollar), there wouldn't be two other suitors for the place.

Will the government figure out that they are essentially giving Nordic around a $3 million dollar profit a year in one way or another if they go ahead with this? Could this be a deal breaker? Hopefully Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan will be completely sympathetic to the cause and have some major pull over the now infamous OLG.

Apparently there was a meeting scheduled with former OLG chief Kelly McDougald that was supposed to happen September 6th, but for some reason, it was canceled:) Just kidding, the meeting took place in 2007.

I really hope the deal goes through. Though I'm not sure that the Consortia is qualified to run a track, or if they have the proper vision to do so, but they will be better than Nordic Gaming at it. Not nearly as good as if I called the shots, though. But that goes without saying:)

One other note, HBPA Sue Leslie attended the Press Conference via telephone. She said she was meeting with the ORC about racing dates, and did state that Nordic was applying for 78 dates......probably with quite a few ifs attached.

To read the proposal click here.

Ontario's First Whip Violation A Doozy

In my last posting I was wondering who was going to be the first jockey to violate the new whipping laws in Ontario. I did mention Chantal Sutherland who has been fined before for excessive whipping on at least a couple of occasions. That being said, I it still came as a complete surprise when I read Jen's Blog yesterday and found out that Sutherland was the first culprit, but it wasn't over whipping, but for USING THE WRONG WHIP.

Maybe Sutherland has been too busy modeling on her spare time to realize that the old whips were banned. Maybe she just forgot. But in the second race, she used the old whip and today this morning there will be a hearing going on to decide whether the purse will get redistributed. As luck would have it, Sutherland and her mount crossed the wire in first position in an allowance race.

The Toronto Star interview from Jen's Thoroughblog with my commentary attached:

Under the new “urging rules”, each rider must carry the kinder ‘cushion crop’, featuring a much softer end of the whip (“popper”) or their horse will be disqualified.
**************************************
Disqualified before the race is official or disqualified from purse monies? When did the track officials learn about this?


But because none of the three O.R.C. or the paddock judge or clerk of scales noticed Sutherland carrying the old whip, Sutherland’s mount, favoured Sans Sousi, was declared the winner of the $66,800 allowance race for betting purposes.
“We were made aware of it by a couple of other trainers after the race,” said steward Bill McMahon. “I am shocked that this happened, we are not happy about it.”
**********************************
Not happy about it? Look at the bright side, now protocol will now be in place, that should have been in place in the first place. I realize what Sutherland did was not anticipated, but it will not happen again because the judges now will make sure it doesn't.

McMahon said there will be a hearing into the matter on (FRIDAY) to determine if Sans Sousi, owned by Thor Eaton’s Eaton Hall Farm, will be disqualified post-race and lose the $40,080 winner’s share.
***************************************
Trainer Mike Doyle is having a train wreck of a year. He had a couple of wins on Wednesday night, but I can't see any justification to keep Sans Sousi's number up unless there is a loophole in the rule.

“I realized my mistake on the way to the gate,” said Sutherland. “The gate crew gave me another whip that they had there but it was not a cushion crop either.”
*************************************
This is an ugly admission. I have a feeling it isn't going to pay to be this honest. Sutherland knowingly raced with a banned whip and at least one person on the gate crew knew of the problem as well. They could have easily called upstairs and delayed the race by a couple of minutes.

Sutherland, the second-leading rider at Woodbine, said she accepts full responsibility.
**********************************
Well d'uh.

“It was totally my fault, I forgot,” said Sutherland. ‘I apologized to everyone. I hope they don’t disqualify the filly.”
*********************************
I really don't think there is any chance the filly won't get DQ'ed. It is too late for the public, though Sans Souci would have won even if Sutherland used a fly swatter.

More bright side: Sans Souci gets to keep her non winners of three Ontario sired status and should be a cinch to get that condition before the year is out if she came out of the race OK.

As for Sutherland's punishment. I hope they aren't too hard on her. She is the best and maybe the only marketing plus Woodbine has right now. Taking away her 10% of the winner's share and a stern warning would be fine by me and probably the rest of the public, except for maybe jealous wives and girlfriends who probably want her banned from Ontario:)

I'll update the blog when/if I get the results from the hearing.

OK, here is the update: The owners of Sans Souci got the shaft. Their horse was DQed from the purse....buh bye $32,000 plus. Chantal also received a whopping $200 fine.


The National Post needs journalists who know more than next to nothing about horse racing: Jockey may lose $40,000 prize for using banned whip

The mistake is not just in the headline but continues in the story as well:

Officials with the Ontario Racing Commission are expected to decide today whether Chantal Sutherland, one of Canada's top jockeys, with more than 400 first-place victories to her name, should be disqualified and stripped of her $40,000 prize.

*******************************
For the two of you who read my blog and don't know, the jockey gets 10% of the winner's share of the purse, so Sutherland stands to lose $4,000, and considering the fact she pays her agent 25% and is probably in a very high tax bracket, her net loss here might be around $1,500 to $2,000 tops.


Is Woodbine Entertainment Looking To Turf HPITV?
Just wondering after finding out that a poll question pops up after logging into one's HPI account asking if you subscribe to HPITV through cable or satellite.

First, Woodbine got rid of all their TV commenters on HPITV late last year, and now I bet they are looking to cut more expenses by getting rid of HPITV. Their rationale would be that bettors can now view any race they want on the internet so why have the expense of a TV station as well.

Again, I'm only speculating here, but if true this is just more confirmation that Woodbine is a terribly run business.

They pretty much have a monopoly on Canadian bettors who want to wager into parimutuel pools throughout North America. They have tremendous exposure through HPITV, the internet, and The Score and SunTV. Yet, they have turned their players completely off by having a corporate philosophy of taking as much money from the player as quickly as they possibly can.

Woodbine had a perfect opportunity and still does, to lower takeout substantially and actually compete with offshores and Betfair (where the big Canadian betting money has rightfully gone). Instead, they continue to have a collective takeout that is in the highest range in North America.

If Woodbine needs to cut expenses, how about just getting rid of the old school leaders within? They have killed horse racing in Ontario for the player, by making it impossible for a player to last let alone win.


Must read: An Interview With Cary Fotias

“Lower the takeout, dramatically! The game will never grow without a lower takeout. And anyone who doesn’t understand that didn’t pass Economics 101. This industry has never been run in a free-market environment. The politicians and bureaucrats that are stifling this game have no idea where the laws of supply and demand meet to maximize profit for owners, trainers, the state and local government. They don’t have a clue. They just don’t get it, and the people who do get it don’t have the power to make it change.”

Fotias goes on about many issues plaguing the industry right now, and he offers solutions. He also mentions the Horseplayers Association of North America, where he is a board member (like yours truly).

To become a member of the Horseplayers Association simply fill out this form, it is free and we need YOU. The more members we have, the more clout we have. As Pull The Pocket points out, horseplayers do not have a seat at the table, and that is why racing is dying.


Was Fred Pope joking around? It is hard to tell at the Paulick Report. He sure had horsemen eating out of his lap before he took too much heat from horseplayers and others who really understand the game.

Lots of good discussion in amongst the 100 plus comments. Of course, I chimed in calling Pope's idea ludicrous (even the one he admits to), as he basically wants the US to have what Woodbine/HPI has, and we've seen what Woodbine has done with the power. In other words, follow Pope, and racing will die faster and harder than ever before.


GREAT NEWS FOR BETTORS AND EVEN HORSEMEN
Paulick isn't sure if he is the reason why Equibase, Brisnet, and Thoroughbred Sports Network are now offering FREE ARCHIVED HISTORICAL CHART RESULTS to all members. Brisnet and Thoroughbred Sports Networks allows members to go back as far as 1991, while Equibase goes back to 1999.

Daily Racing form still charges $2.95 for historical chart results by card. I wonder if they are going to keep that going. I mean you have to be brain dead to buy a chart from them. But then again, the racing industry relies on the brain dead:)


Theocrats In Ohio Trying To Prevent Ohio VLTs With Lawsuit Don't these dudes know about separation of church and state?


Forterieracing is now on Twitter. Elissa Blowe and Daryl Wells Jr. give fans the heads up as well as their well meaning WIN 4 picks daily.


More content available at Horseplayersbet.com. Kentucky Downs, Zia Park, Emerald Downs, Turfway Park, Los Alamitos, Retama, and the last week of Ruidoso have been added to betting menu.

Horseplayersbet offers one of the most competitive Player Rewards Programs available for horse racing product. At Horseplayersbet, even the smallest bettors have the potential to become the biggest.

THIS JUST IN
Press conference regarding the Fort Erie Consortia Proposal for the Fort Erie Race Track.
Date: Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Time: 9:30 am – Press Conference
Location: Holiday Inn Fort Erie
*******************************************
I can't see this being grim news. I expect, considering the timing and the location of the press conference, that something very positive regarding the future of Fort Erie will be announced. Is Nordic finally gone? Has the place finally been sold? Has the Consortia extended the lease of the track? If so, who pays if the track loses money?

Axe Falls On Ontario Lottery & Gaming Corp.

The OLG board resigned and CEO Kelly McDougald was fired with cause.
There has to be much more to these firings than expense filings for golf memberships, pen refills, or weight loss clinics by OLG execs. And no, it can't be because of giving out a Mercedes Benz during Ontario's auto crisis as a prize, as a lottery prize either. And I don't buy it being because of the mistakes made over ticket misprints or slot machine glitches.

Most likely, we will find out more. I expect there to be many non tendered contracts that have been awarded through McDougald's short reign as being a major part of the firing, but I am speculating. The practice of handing out non tendered contracts usually has something to do with nepotism or under the table payoffs or pay back for favours done or expected to be done in the near future. This is something the government is supposed to frown upon and take seriously as it wrecks public confidence, and perhaps that is what is going on here.

Moving forward, it is hard to say how this will impact the Racinos in Ontario. The old OLG regime was apparently tough to deal with, and the OLG may have been partly responsible for the lack of growth in the industry over the last few years.

They also seem to have forgot why casinos were placed at racetracks in the first place: to help subsidize the racing industry in Ontario. For example, it seemed like an impossibility for Fort Erie to get a bigger percentage of casino revenues in order to help its survival under McDougald's regime. I kept hearing that the OLG does not care about horse racing, that it is just a necessary evil.

Maybe the new board and leader will be more racetrack friendly. I know the OLG needs some positive press, and keeping jobs is a must, so they can't afford for Fort Erie racetrack to close. Creating jobs would also be something that would give them some positive news, and I expect the new regime to do their best to fast track the creation of the proposed new Racino in Belleville.

Now if only we can see the same type of house cleaning at Woodbine Entertainment, life for the Ontario gambler, and the industry as a whole, would improve immensely.

Is it just me, or does Kelly McDougald look like Sarah Palin without a makeover?


I think it was a great thing to see Palin gone (not a fan, sorry conservative readers), and it might just be a good thing that McDougald is gone now too.


Ontario Racing Commission Hands Out Large Fine For Violation Of Archaic Rule

The Ontario Racing Commission has released details pertaining to the penalties doled out earlier today to Kerry and Shirley House, the owners of this year’s Gold Cup & Saucer winner, All The Weapons.

As outlined earlier today, each of the owners were fined $17,343.50 for violating ORC rule 15:09a, which stipulates:

15.09. A claimed horse, regard less of ownership:

(a) shall race only at a track or tracks in the Province of Ontario for the next 60 days, except where such a horse had been nominated to participate in an added money event before it was claimed, or unless the track where the horse was claimed is closing for more than 30 days. If the track where the horse was claimed closes for more than 30 days, the horse is released from the requirements of 15.09 (a).

***********************************************
The horse gets claimed in Ontario, and the new owners, who were probably not aware of the rules to begin with, entered the horse in a Stake series in PEI.

The rule has been in place for years to help protect our racing population. This made more sense when Ontario didn't offer some of the best purses in North America, but now the rule needs to be thrown away.

It was wrong to begin with, because it interferes with free enterprise, but especially now with higher purses available, the rule makes no sense, and it only takes away options for new owners, which has could have a negative affect on the amount of horse owners and potential horse owners in the future.

Yes, the House's broke the rules (and willfully too it appears), and they deserve the fine, but this rule needs to be taken out of the books going forward.


Goodbye Whip, Hello Crop
The ORC is just stuck in the stone ages, they do have their progressive moments. Today is the first day that the soft cushion crop is mandatory for jockeys to use. Jennifer Morrison's article in the Star explains things a lot better than I can.

I wonder who will be the first jockey to get fined under the new urging rule.



Steven Crist: More Questions Than Answers In Lasix Debate
Excellent read. But whether Lasix is allowed or not, it really doesn't matter, as long as takeout is high. Racing's woes won't be fixed by cleaning up their tarnished image in regards to Lasix masking other drugs.

I'll also add that if racing wasn't so dysfunctional in North America, Lasix would have no place in the game except during workouts.

Don't shoot the messenger.


Finally, the other Canadian blogger who really gets it has written an excellent piece over at the HANA blog on the fact that carnivals are light years ahead of the racing industry when it comes to understanding the customer.

Track Takeout: The Highest And The Lowest

Awareness of track takeout has risen tremendously over the last year or so, since HANA (Horseplayers Association of North America) started up, and prior to that, blogs like this one (Cangamble) and Pull The Pocket have contributed greatly to making the public understand why they have stopped betting on horses, or why they are thinking of stopping, or have reduced their wagering considerably over the past 20 years or more.

Many people will say they don't care about takeout, but bottom line takeout affects how much one bet and how long one lasts on a collective basis. Bottom line, the higher the takeout, the less likely a bettor's bankroll will last.

The ramifications of high takeouts are pretty simple. The horseplayer will spend less time betting and watching races. They are less likely to get families and friends involved in horse racing. Therefore, when they quit or die, they have not brought in any new blood to the game.

We are experiencing this phenomenon big time right now throughout the industry. Those in their forties (like me) or older are pretty much the last generation of players who were introduced to the game because most horseplayers lasted longer back in the 60's and 70 and early 80's, prior to the dummy money being lost to lotteries and slots, and prior to simulcast wagering, where players could bet more than 8 or 9 races a day (which eroded bank rolls very quickly as takeouts remained the same), and prior to when exotic bets like triactors and superfectors were available in the majority of races (at a takeout of 25% or more in most cases, these appealing high return wagers upped the mean takeout horseplayers paid out on average from around 18% back in the late 70's to 21% today).

I saw a relevant quote on Twitter this morning. I believe it dates back to the 30's or 40's: "You don’t gamble to win. You gamble so you can gamble the next day." - Bert Ambrose (Band Leader). The racetracks understood that back in the 30's and 40's, but don't understand it, or care today.

Ok, time to get off the soap box and provide the Best and Worst Takeouts for North American tracks (approximately 70 tracks):

THE LOWEST TAKEOUTS

Win, Place, Show
Hollywood, Los Alamitos 15.4%
Santa Anita, Del Mar, Golden Gate Fields 15.43%
Northlands Park 15.8%
Note: Hastings has a 12% takeout on show bets, but has a 17% takeout on win & place.

Exactors and Doubles
Aqueduct, Belmont, Saratoga 18.5%
Note: Retama has a 12% takeout on doubles, but has a 21% takeout on exactors. Tampa Bay Downs has an 18% takeout on doubles but a 21.5% takeout on exactors.

Triactors
Churchill Downs, Keeneland 19%

Superfectas
Meadowlands 15%
Churchill Downs, Keeneland 19%

Pick 3's
Retama, Sam Houston 12%
Churchill Downs, Keeneland 19%

Pick 4's
Meadowland, Monmouth 15%
Churchill Downs, Keeneland 19%

Pick 6's
Gulfstream 15%
Hawthorne 16%


THE HIGHEST TAKEOUTS

Win, Place, Show
Turf Paradise, Yavapai 20%

Doubles and Exactors
Fort Erie 26.2%
Assiniboia, Suffolk Downs 26%
Arapahoe 25%
Northlands Park, Stampede Park 24.8%

Triactors
Penn National 31%
Philadelphia 30%
Assiniboia 29%
Fort Erie 28.2%
Calder, Woodbine 27%
(Note: Woodbine ups the takeout to 27% for any track on their HPI or simulcast menu, which means that a triactor that when a triactor pays $810 at Keeneland or Churchill, Woodbine will pay their customers only $730 for the same bet.

Superfectas
Penn, Philadelphia 30%
Assiniboia, Presque Isle Downs 29%
Calder 27%
Hastings, Woodbine 26.3%

Pick 3's
Assiniboia 29%
Calder 27%
Woodbine 26.3%
Fort Erie 26.2%

Pick 4's
Assiniboia 29%
Penn National 28%
Calder 27%
Fort Erie 26.2%

Pick 6's
Woodbine 26.3%
Philadelphia 26%
Pimlico 25.75%
Laurel 25.75%


The troubling thing about the tracks that have the highest takeouts, is that most of them have slots. This illustrates the short sightedness and idiotic greed displayed by many racing execs and horsemen who do have a say in takeouts as well in many jurisdictions.


As many sharp bettors know, there are ways to combat high track takeouts and still play the ponies. Exchange betting as offered by Betfair has attracted many Canadians, and ADWs like Horseplayersbet.com, which offer decent player rewards, are available to many American horseplayers.


For a nearly complete, nearly up to date chart of sortable tracks takeouts, click here.

New Whipping Rules In Ontario May Alter Handicapping A Little

New Whipping Rules Coming To Ontario September 1st

"Whips will have to be be cushioned, be no more than 30 inches in length, and have a padded noise-making "popper."......................... Use of a non-approved whip will lead to the disqualification of the horse..................a horse cannot be hit with the whip more than three times in a row without being given time to respond, and the whip is not to be used when a horse is not visibly responding or is not in contention for a meaningful position."
***********************************************************
This appears to have major implications when handicapping horses who were not in contention. Speed figure players may need to add a few lengths to horses well beaten, or discard the race entirely because the riders will now wrap up on them early. Some jockeys do this already, but it might be more of a factor now.



Frank Stronach Could Be In Deep Doo Doo

The Magna creditors are claiming: "MI Developments prevented Magna Entertainment from selling assets that might have allowed it to successfully restructure." And the intent was apparently sinister on Stronach's behalf. He purposely put Magna into the bankruptcy position in order to benefit himself by doing many "sham" transactions.

If these allegations are proven, I can see possible jail time being pursued as well. The Madoff scandal has put market regulators on high alert, and they don't mind taking the odd big guy down.



Jockey Norberto Arroyo charged with possession with the intent to sell cocaine
Arroya is currently 2 for 56 at Saratoga. The purses are good, and his mounts have earned over $166k; no reason for him to have a second job.



Baymount Enters Into Letter Of Intent On The New Quinte Track

The new proposed partner is a subsidiary of the Kilmer Group which has a significant ownership stake in the Toronto Maple Leafs and Toronto Raptors.



Nick Gonzalez is hotter than a Playboy centerfold on the planet Mercury. Six consecutive winners at Fort Erie including a natural hat trick yesterday as he won the 4th, 5th and 6th. I picked all three as first choices, so I will leave speculation that Gonzalez is using some special concoction to jealous horsemen and maybe the ORC.



Ray Paulick Vents Against Equibase
One of HANA's issues is free information for bettors. I'm don't want to solely blame Equibase though. This is an industry problem and it illustrates just how dysfunctional and anti-player the industry is and always has been. Equibase should be subsidized by the racetracks in a way that the information becomes free. Everything from lifetime charts to daily past performances to breeding records. Free info will only attract more players and owners, etc., and this might just result in growth.

Paulick makes a great point comparing the free information available for every other sport out there. You can get just about any player stat for free by doing just a quick web search or go to sites like NBA.com or NFL.com, etc.

Just a quick note. Equibase does give out some good free info. I go there every day when I do my daily charting of the tracks that I do track variants for.



Bill Finley Says That Lagging Odds Are Unacceptable

He is preaching to the choir.

"As long as the odds continue to change during races, people have a right to be suspicious....close when the first horse is loaded into the gate. It usually takes upward of a minute to load an entire field, normally enough time for every bet made everywhere to funnel its way into the system.....Horseplayers aren't stupid. They will quickly figure out that they have to get their bets in in time and will adjust accordingly."

Fort Erie Still Not Sold

For the past 8 years, since moving to Fort Erie, I've heard numerous rumours about the sale of Fort Erie. I'm sure offers have been made, in fact, I know offers have been made. But no offers have been accepted to date.

Nordic Gaming has historically overvalued the racetrack. The asking price has dropped, but like an unsavvy investor, who bought a stock that dropped well below what it is was once worth, Nordic is unwilling to unload at today's prices (they seem to be chasing 2 year old prices), even though they don't want the stock in their portfolio anymore. Nordic continues to want more Fort Erie than what the market is willing to pay for it, so Nordic continues to hang on to it. Pretty simple stuff.

According to a newly issued press release by the Ontario HBPA, there are a couple of interested parties kicking the can and the Fort Erie Racing Consortia is also looking into leasing the track long term.

I don't know how they can afford to lease the joint, IF in fact, the track really does lose money.

I wonder if Great Canadian Gaming is one of the potential suitors. They are a well run company, but I can't see them overpaying for the Fort.

So basically, it might as well be February all over again, as there is nothing definitive regarding racing at Fort Erie......the only thing for sure is Ajax Downs will have a 5 eighth track ready to go next year.



Canadian Man In Deep Doo Doo Over Internet Gambling

A Canadian man was indicted this week in the United States on fraud and money laundering charges after he allegedly processed more than US$350-million in online gambling payments, highlighting the cat-and-mouse battle that pits law enforcement agencies against the intangible world of Internet gambling.

Douglas Rennick, 34, who lives in Canada, faces a maximum of 55 years in jail and must turn over US$565,908,288 in monies reaped through the alleged financial conspiracy that saw millions of dollars funneled from a Cyprus bank to two accounts in California.

He is alleged to have tried to disguise the transactions to distribute gambling winnings to U. S. residents.

Why was Chantal Sutherland taken off her mounts on the weekend, and didn't ride yesterday? Lets just say, it was just a hiccup.



Breeders Cup Gets Tough On Drugs....sort of

In addition to the crackdown on steroids and Class 1 and Class 2 drugs, this year's Breeders' Cup at Santa Anita (Nov. 6-7) will include out of competition testing for EPO (blood doping) 10 days before the Breeders' Cup and TCO2 (milk shaking) testing in the detention barn before all 14 Breeders' Cup races. A failed EPO test would render the horse ineligible for the race and the trainer open to suspensions. Failed tests for TCO2 will mean purse redistributions and suspensions. The latter two testing policies were introduced at the 2007 Breeders' Cup at Monmouth Park.

*****************************************************
This is pretty much an admission that there is an EPO/DPO and milkshake problem still plaguing the industry in a big way.

The test for EPO should be specifically 10 days from the race, but it should be done anytime, and without warning to all entrants, or potential entrants from 30 days to after the race. Savvy trainers (amateur pharmacists) can easily work around pre-determined test dates.

I don't agree with the author's attitude towards penalizing the owner. The trainer yes, the owner, no, unless there is proof that the owner had knowledge of the use of the illegal substances.



The NTRA Comments On The Menendez Bill
Some key points in the bill:

# S. 1597 (Section 203) amends the tax code to eliminate the automatic 25% federal withholding on pari-mutuel winnings of $5,000 or more (incorporating tax legislation also known as the Pari-mutuel Conformity and Equality Act, or PACE Act).

# S. 1597 (Section 206) raises the reportable amount for pari-mutuel winnings from $600 at odds of 300-1 to $1,200 at odds of 300-1, in line with the reportable dollar amount for slot machine winnings.
******************************************
Considering that almost every horseplayer who doesn't get substantial rebates loses money in the long run, withholding and tax reporting is ridiculous, and an out and out tax grab. Plus it takes potential churnable money out of the pools.

This is something that Canada understands, and it is good to see it as an issue in the USA finally.

One thing that I don't understand fully is how poker is considered a skill game, but sports betting seems to be left out of that definition in regards to this bill.



Youbet handle up, profits down



Don't forget to check out Horseplayersbet.com. Where today's small bettor has a real chance to be tomorrow's big bettor.

Betfair Sizzles While Parimutuel Handle Fizzles

Handle Down Another 13% In July
Short Post At Pull The Pocket Says It All.



HANA represented at Yavapai this weekend

HANA prez Jeff Platt will be there. Arizona is one of the most problematic states out there when it comes to being bettor-friendly. It is illegal for anyone to make a bet over the internet in Arizona. No phone betting either. In fact, if you are a resident from another state, it is against the law to place a bet on the internet while on Arizona soil (though I don't think anyone has been charged or prosecuted violating that law yet).

The laws are ridiculous and only benefit the off track parlours and Indian casinos (because they are faced with less competition). Smells of political payoffs. Why not have a state run or racetrack run ADW and keep a law that states that Arizona residents can only bet on the internet through that ADW? At least it gives the Arizona residents the opportunity to play from home.

Arizona also allows ticket cancellations after the race goes. At Yavapai it is 4 seconds, and at Turf Paradise it is 8 seconds.

This opens the door to possible fraudulent behavior like we saw at Woodbine and Greenwood over 20 years ago when a betting syndicate would make large bets and cancel tickets when their horse had a bad start (there were tellers involved in the scam as well).



The Bizarro World Of Woodbine

I know I've been outspoken over Woodbine's policy to ramp up takeouts on triactors to 27%. It is completely unfair, and borderline illegal, if not illegal if challenged.

What that means is that if you hit a triactor at a WEG outlet or through HPI that pays $810 for a deuce at Churchill Downs (which has a 19% takeout on triactors), you will be paid off $730 in Canada.

Well, it seems that HPI/WEG/Woodbine ramps down the takeout on venues that have a higher than 27% takeout like Penn and Philadelphia Park.

I was amazed when I saw that triactors actually paid a little more in Canada than they did at the track where the race was held.

I'm wondering if Woodbine did this voluntarily, or if the CPMA or another government agency pressured them to do this.

It isn't like Woodbine is going to advertise this because they rip customers off way more than the customer gets an advantage under this new rule, and they would be crazy to bring this to light. So I'm advertising this for them:)




Jen's Thoroughblog on the death of Charles (Norcliffe) Baker


Thoroughbred Bloggers Alliance has a new web page and has added a few more blogs.



What's The Deal With Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy?

.....The New York State Racing and Wagering Board has decided to deny horses entry into races if they have received hyperbaric oxygen therapy treatment within one week of post time.....Purified oxygen does not exist naturally in a horse....these treatments could give a horse an unfair advantage in a race while jeopardizing the horse’s health.....

After watching horses who race for certain trainers at Woodbine, who have abnormally high win percentages, I wouldn't be startled that these horses are running with an unnatural supply of oxygen.

One trainer in particular seems to win a heck of a lot of races on the front end at Woodbine, which is quite a feat in itself. And most of these runners seem to run identical. They bust out of the gate, look like they will get beat halfway around the far turn as the field catches up, but then, almost like what happens when Popeye eats spinach, they rebreak as if they haven't run an inch in the race.

Sure, there are some horses who can do that, with a relaxed lead, and their are certain horses that are just that much better than the rest and know how to win. But when you see quite a few horses in the same barn run like that, it certainly looks very suspicious.

But is it breaking the rules in Ontario to have oxygen therapy or use a drug that enhances the oxygen flow during a race? I don't know.


Things That Make You Wonder If Woodbine Doesn't Need To Replace Their Head Honcho

Fort Erie's handle on Tuesday's 9 race card: $1,200,800
Woodbine's 8 race handle on Thursday: $1,205,973

Fort Erie is on death's door, but Woodbine, thanks to slots and only slots (location, location, location), can afford to pay their racing execs mega salaries and bonuses for doing absolutely nothing beneficial to attract new customers.

Belmont Handle Down Over 13% And I Know Why

NYRA President and CEO Charles Hayward can blame the weather all he wants. He can also blame the economy too. Sure, these factors could have contributed to the fact that betting on Belmont live was down over 17%, and that handle from from all other sources was down over 13%, but I think it goes deeper than that.

I think that over the last year especially, existing horseplayers are starting to wise up. Organizations like HANA (Horseplayers Association of North America) have helped educate the player immensely. Hopefully, my blog has as well. The betting public is becoming more aware each and every day of two words that make racing execs cringe: takeout and rebate.

The reality has become totally apparent now; the only way a horseplayer has a fighting chance to even think about turning a profit long term, is by getting a substantial (5-10%) rebate. And most serious players have now adopted a rebate only philosophy, where over 90% of their bets are on races they get a rebate on.

NYRA and every track out there should be selling their signal everywhere. Again, it is just more evidence that horse racing is probably the most dysfunctional business in the Western Hemisphere.

Personally, I bet on two races at Belmont this year. The Belmont and another race that was part of a handicapping challenge that I handicapped and felt compelled to bet on because I was having a good day that day.

NYRA doesn't seem to let their signal go out to many rebate shops, especially the ones that give rebates to the small to medium player. Foolish move. Very foolish.

I haven't even handicapped a race at The Spa this year, and I don't plan to. But I do handicap and wager on around 5-7 tracks a day. I'm not alone.

To put things in perspective though, Belmont still did over $9 million a day in handle which is around 4 times what Woodbine averages a day. Mind you, the public is very aware of Woodbine's high takeout rates by now, and a lot of players just can't stand the Polytrack.


Woodbine Stewards Goofed

I think the Woodbine stewards have done a very good job this year, but on Friday, they blew it.

Taking down Carrtowns Katie in the 8th race was a terrible call. Yes, she was lugging and jockey Chantal Sutherland knew it as she was whipping the horse with her left hand, but she was clear and had momentum when she was passing Spend Now And Save at around the sixteenth pole in the stretch.

Carrtowns Katie was definitely the best horse in the race, and the fact that it was a relatively long inquiry means that the stews were having a hard time deciding what to do. I think I can speak for most horseplayers when I state that if the stewards are dealing with a tough decision, the results should stand.

I realize riding horses is one of the most dangerous jobs on this planet, but it sure looked like a phantom check to me. Not sure if it was the horse who shied away, or if it was Emma-Jayne Wilson, but I've seen a lot worse happen without an inquiry.

Were the stewards compelled to appease the betting public by putting up a 6-5 shot? Public perception may say that had a lot or at least a little to do with it.

If the owners of Carrstowns Katie appeals, I think they win. But those who bet on the best horse still lose.

If Chantal gets days for the ride, it would be an injustice.



$40,000 Raised For Chad Beckon
Good job by Robbie King and Gus Schickedanz to make it happen.


THE BREEDERS STAKES
The Breeder's Stakes goes today at Woodbine. It brings back memories from my early teens, as two of my all time favorite horses, Momigi and Tiny Tinker, won this race back to back. Both of these runners would pretty much come from last and fly in the stretch.
Tiny Tinker, especially, sporting the bright orange colours of Beasley, was a thrill to watch. He was known to trail the field by many lengths before taking off and passing horses one by one.

How about Mensch to upset today? This is one of Fieldstone's three runners in the race, and to me, at a mile and a half, I can see it coming down to stretch closers.
Still a maiden, Mensch ran a good one going a mile and three eighths last time, losing to entry mate Guipago, who I think had a better trip and took advantage of the slower pace, which probably compromised Mensch.

Eye of the Leopard is definitely the horse to beat here. Last time he ran completely against the bias, and Mark Frostad would probably have worked the horse over Fort Erie if he could turn back the hands of time. According to my form, Eye of the Leopard has not worked on the turf, and has never raced on the turf. Despite his breeding, this makes him very vulnerable today.

In the co feature today, I'm giving Elated Moon one more chance. She obviously didn't hurt herself last time out, when she embarrassed me for publicly picking an even money shot who got basted. But something else went wrong, and I'll bet Steven Asmussen's team is bright enough to have corrected it. I'm going to predict she wins the Nandi Stakes easily today.


Forget GO BABY GO and BET IT TO GET IT. This should be used in a campaign to get people to go to the track:

Bet
. - Watch more comedy videos and sitcoms.

Speaking of betting. Check out new ADW Horseplayersbet.com.


One more thing. Just to make sure I get Google hits today: Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER.

Ten Percent (Track Takeout) Is Sufficient: DRF May 13th, 1935

A Pace Advantage member, "Quarter Crack," posted a great link to DRF archives that go way way back in time.

Sure, the nostalgia of looking at past performances and charts that go back to the late 1800's is a great way to kill time, but I immediately to it upon myself to search the term "takeout."

The two earliest articles available are the most telling, and one can trace the demise of horse racing that we see now, to the words that were printed in 1935 and 1953 respectively.

Here is an article, most likely written by a DRF editor from May 13th, 1935:

The California legislature is considering an amendment to its parimutuel betting
law reducing the takeout allowed the tracks from eight per cent to six. A Los Angeles assemblyman introduced it, but the change is being opposed by William P Kyne and John W Marchbank operators of the Bay Meadows and Tanforan tracks, who say
they cannot operate successfully if the reduction is made at this time. The law does
not have to be changed if a track wishes to have a smaller take, and it will not be
surprising if Santa Anita voluntarily makes a reduction for its meeting next winter
When the law is altered, however, the state should cut its percentage, which is now
four. A total of ten per cent is sufficient and if anything is done by the California
legislature it should at least make the tracks take seven, and the states cut three
per cent. The smaller take, the better.
***********************************

Can you say Holy Cow? California racetracks were getting around 8% of every dollar bet on horses back in 1935. Yes, the tracks had a good gripe against the government trying to get more of a cut back then. But at 10%, it is no wonder that the stands were full, even though America was just getting out of a recession.

Nowadays, many states have reduced their share of the cut from the pie dramatically. Around 12 years ago, Ontario opted to remove their 7% of what they were taking on each bet. Of course, the ORC, now WEG, didn't reduce takeout by that amount. They just scooped it.

Now Woodbine cries that they had to increase the takeout on Tracknet, Magna, and California tracks to 27% on triactors (even though Churchill and Keeneland have a takeout on triactor of 19%). They pay a whopping 1.3% on each bet to the government. Sure, 4% on triactors goes to the breeding program, but they wind up splitting the remaining 22% with the purse accounts.

Can you imagine that back in 1935, they would be splitting 8%? And guess what?, people would be betting like crazy today, like they did back then.


Now for a very prophetic article. This is longer, but definitely worth the read. It happened at what we would call now, a Racing Symposium, originally printed June 11th, 1953:

NARSC Hits Excessive Turf Taxation

...The report of the Committee on State Revenues was of particular interest to the large assemblage of turf solons and representatives of various other organizations within racing, for the spiraling taxation has disturbing implications to those in every phase of racing and bloodstock production.

This report was presented by Michigan's James H. Inglis.

Inglis began by noting that increases in the rate of taxation on parimutuel
wagering are continuing, in spite of warnings from this and other turf bodies that
the patience of the long suffering horse players to an excessive takeout is wearing
thin.

Continuing, he said:
"We have apparently failed to get across to state legislators and other public officials the message that a takeout from parimutuel pools of more than 10 or 11
per cent is not only unfair to the patrons but also is unwise and detrimental to the
long term health of the sport."

The most serious setback came this spring with the decision of Governor Dewey
and the New York legislature to restore the full amount of five per cent O'Dwyer
"bite," boosting the total takeout in New York from the 14 per cent which prevailed
in 1952 to 15 percent. The descending escalator clause in New York, was also abandoned and there can be no relief from the 15 per cent by just waiting for it.

There are undoubtedly good reasons for what happened in New York involving local
politics and a serious financial crisis in New York City but this isn't the place and
there isn't time to analyze these factors here. Yet, it should be emphasized that the decision in New York has had and will continue to have serious effects in other states, because whether we like it or not, many other states look to New York for leadership in legislation of this type.

Legislators Point to New York, Florida

The task of a racing commissioner in Michigan or Ohio to try to hold the line
on horse racing tax rates is made very difficult when the revenue-hungry legislators
can point to the 15 per cent takeout in New York and Florida and a 14 percent takeout in Illinois, all three being important racing states.

Just within recent weeks Michigan, Ohio, and Massachusetts have joined the
parade. The new act in Michigan has not yet been signed but it calls for an increase in the takeout from 11 to 12 per cent for thoroughbred tracks and an increase from 11 to 13 per cent for harness meetings. Ohio has boosted the take out from 10 to 12 per cent and in Massachusetts the increase has been from 12 to 14 percent.

One of the unpleasant facts of life in the world of racing is that often the racing
associations with their well financed full time lobbyists are able to sell their views to legislators more effectively than are racing
commissioners and other friends of the sport. Add to this unpleasant fact another unpleasant fact to wit that too often racing associations for their own selfish gain,
have been willing to use higher parimutuel tax rates as the bait with which to secure
larger track commissions or other legislative gains.

An increase in parimutuel tax rates is usually dished up as part of a legislative
package which includes gains for the racing associations.

Cites Michigan as Example

In Michigan, for example, the tax rate increase has included as part of a bill
which also attempted to unload on the tax payer more than 100000 worth of auditing
veterinary work and chemical testing which had previously been paid for by the
associations. The package also included a provision taking away from the racing
commission the power to control price gouging by race track concessionaires.

The game of playing Santa Claus with other peoples money is not a new one and
I regret to say that some racing associations have played this game in their legislative campaigns. Thus we get back to this familiar and disturbing fact of racing. This is the fact that in the power politics of racing between the horsemen the organized employees. the racing associations, and the financially hard pressed state governments, every element of racing is able to force a larger slice of the pie for himself, except the racing fan, the all important lover and patron of the sport, who in the last analysis, is the man who keeps the show on the road.

The racetrack customers, whom it is our responsibility to look out for, have been
getting a smaller and smaller slice of the pie, but in spite of dire warnings, he has
not yet revolted and stayed home in sufficient numbers to cause the professionals
any serious worry.

The total handle and the total tax revenue to the various states continues to
climb year after year. Since 1946,for example, the total handle has climbed from 1,830,000,000 to 2,326,000,000 last year, and state revenues have climbed from 93,800,000 in 1946 to 14,2500,000 last year.

How Much Will Fans Stand?

"It is hard to say how much longer the
racing fans will continue to allow themselves to be imposed upon.
But it would appear to your committee that there is an urgent need for this organization to find out without too much delay, the answer to the all important question of how much is too much and where and when should the line be drawn to stop
further compromises with expediency which have resulted in haphazard and parimutuel
tax rate increases among the several states.

There have been a number of studies
made of the effect of increased tax rates
on total handle. Unfortunately, none have been made recently and those that have been published in the past have been made by groups that have been seeking to prove
the justification of a position already adopted. In conclusion. your committee wishes to respectfully suggest that there is a crying need for a new and completely independent survey to establish authoritative answers to
these questions.

1 What is the maximum takeout that can be exacted consistent with good racing
good race track management and a continuation of the normal healthy growth of the
sport?

2 Having answered the first question, what is an equitable split of the total takeout
between the state and the racing associations, bearing in mind the possibility of
a graduated tax rate based upon the amount of the handle?

For what it may be worth to the public
lets gather the complete facts.
**********************************************

The gain in handle from 1946 to 1952 wasn't all that much (27% over 7 years), when you take inflation into account. From the end of 1946 to the end of 1952, the CPI rose by just over 24%. And lets not forget, the war was over, and North America was in an optimistic growth mode.

A dollar back in 1950 is worth around $8.50 today. This means that if racing stayed even with inflation since then, total hand would be around $20 billion. Right now it sits around $13 billion, and that includes the heavy increase that happened when internet betting was introduced.

Meanwhile, track takeout has increased to an average of around 21% today, from the 12% average that apparently was there in the early 50's. Where has it got them? Racing can't even keep up with inflation.


As for studies regarding optimal takeout. A very important one was done back in 2004. The Cummings Report does not state what that takeout is, but he concludes that it is a lot less than what is out there today.

It is great to see the acknowledgment by Inglis, that the horseplayer is one who "keeps the show on the road."


Great article at HANA "So Players Don't Care About Takeout, Huh?" Well worth reading, as it crushes the excuse that most bettors don't care or realize what takeout is. Though that might be true, the article clearly points out that most players are affected by takeout whether they care or not.



For the link to the Daily Racing Form Archives, it is available at this Pace Advantage thread.


I never saw this movie until last night: The Two Dollar Bettor

It is from 1951. Shows the dangers of getting hooked on betting horses:) Love the crowd scenes. Brings back memories from the 60's and 70's at Woodbine, Greenwood, and Fort Erie, when the stands were full of enthusiastic bettors.

The big crowds disappeared with lower takeouts.

A couple of notes about the movie. Barbara (Beaver's Mom) Billingsley has a small part as a secretary. And the nerdy "teen" who hangs around the main character's home drooling over one of his daughters is none other than the kid who played Alphalfa in the Little Rascals series, Carl Switzer.



If you like the information found on this blog, and you are a horseplayer, please join HANA, it is free, and it will take you less than two minutes to fill out the form.



Don't forget to check out the new ADW Horseplayersbet.com, if you want to maximize your chances of beating the horses. Unfortunately, Horseplayersbet does not take Canadian customers.