Happy Thanksgiving to my many US readers. As a way of thanking you, I will now provide a list of what I think are the best sites on the internet for horse racing. I'm sure I will leave a few out, but I can always re edit my post when I get some suggestions I may have temporarily forgot about. Most relevant sites pertaining to horse racing can be found on my sidebar. But here are the best:
Best sources to find news stories. There are five sites I go to at least once a day. Paulick Report, Equidaily, Thoroughbred Bloggers Alliance News Feed, Bloodhorse, and Racing 360.
Free stuff: Thoroughbred Blogger's Alliance links to a slew of free past performances every day. Equibase has made life easier and cheaper on handicapper's and horsemen who used to pay for certain information or didn't go after certain info because there was a cost involved. For example, check out Stats Central on their main page. You can even do a dam search now. Put in the name of a dam, and you will get her offspring, and then you can even look at the individual charts of each run for free. On the left hand side of their main page you can also do a horse, jockey or trainer search. I typed in Magnusson, and I found out they had stats for Glenn Magnusson dating back to 1953.
Best site for information regarding fines and suspensions: Racing Medication and Testing Consortium. Unfortunately it isn't complete as either many tracks make it harder to get this info, or there is something lacking in communication. Woodbine has done a very good thing in putting up an Ontario Racing Commission Rulings page on their Splash site, though their explanation for letting Fifty Proof's result stand was beyond laughable (the gate did open early but the Stewards deemed it to be a fair start and that is all that really matters, so it was a fair start, na na na na na!).
The best resource for scratches and change in track surfaces, etc. is at Equibase as well. Thank HANA and Equibase for that one.
Best track takeout information: HANA's Track Rating Chart, it is updated frequently, though it only covers thoroughbred racing. Google Maps has a separate takeout map for both harness and thoroughbred tracks in North America.
Best Horse Racing Forum: Pace Advantage. There are other good ones (see my sidebar) but nothing is close to PA.
Best Past Performances. I'm a pen and paper handicapper. I've never used a computer program to pick horses, so keep that in mind. I used to buy Daily Racing Forms regularly, and then bought TSN, and then Brisnet past performances, but the most success I've ever had in my life as a Horseplayer has occurred since using TrackMaster Standard Plus Pro Past Performances.
One of the best places to bet, if not the best place, Horseplayersbet.com. Free video and replay for active accounts. Industry high player rewards, and great customer service. You have to live in one of the right States to join though.
Off to watch some football. I need Brady to pass for 500 yards today to still have a shot in my Fantasy Football league.
25 November 2010
17 November 2010
Ray Paulick, C'mon Man
I like The Paulick Report. Great source for news stories on horse racing. They also allow comments on many stories and editorials over there. It opens the door for lots of fact from informed readers, innuendos, debate, etc.
Over the past few months, it appears that Ray Paulick has drank the CHRB Kool-Aid and has fallen for all the bs coming from them when it comes to the takeout hike that is going to happen at all major thoroughbred tracks in California on December 26th.
There is some question whether his judgment is being influenced because of the fact that he is getting advertising dollars from California racing groups. I honestly don't know. I actually hope that is the case, for Paulick's sake. I'd hate to think he was either that stupid or gullible to believe a takeout hike will help horse racing in California.
Anyway, Paulick has hit a peak when it comes to either selling out or just plain stupidity with his post California's Push For Purses.
In the article he mentions "cost of putting on the show." Sorry, but the cost of putting on the show has absolutely no connection with what takeout should be. The only thing that matters with regard to takeout is the optimum takeout percentage (the percentage where tracks and horsemen receive the most money collectively from bettors).
He compares horse racing to blackjack when it comes to cost of putting on the show. Last I heard, it costs millions a year to operate a casino. But casino operator know if they made a push go to the house in blackjack, the blackjack tables would be empty. They also know is they raise the hold on slots from 7% to 12%, their bottom line would suffer in a big way.
The point that most tracks have higher takeout rates even after this hike is just bad propaganda. Any takeout hike anywhere helps kill the game. As you move away from optimum takeout, this is a gimme. There is no good rationalization for a takeout hike.
He also writes that "to my knowledge no studies have proven the point that reducing the cost of a bet will increase the revenue to tracks and purses."
Either he has a short memory or he doesn't bother reading many of the comments on his site. I know for a fact that the Cummings Report has been linked there on many occasions.
As Caroline Betts states in the comment section: Google Scholar is your friend. There have been many studies regarding track takeout and optimum revenue.
Two things are certain regarding these studies. Racing has ignored all these studies. Racing has never tried to find out what the optimum takeout really is (all studies conclude that it is much lower than 20%).
Again, I don't blame the horsemen here (though they aren't looking out for the future of the industry). They are now getting a higher percentage of the pie. For the life of me, I can't see how the track owners allowed it to happen. Again, if handle drops by around 15%, horsemen will still get the same money they did last year (obviously they are hoping handle will at least stay stagnant), but the track owners will absorb the total loss. On any extra handle loss over 15%, it will be split between horsemen and tracks.
The track owners would have been best advised to just change the split to December 26th new split, and even lower overall takeout, or at least keep takeout rates the same.
This takeout hike has massive failure written all over it. Bigger purses, possible bigger fields, and a dirt track will not save the day.
In the comment section, well known handicapper/author Barry Meadow chimed in:
This triggered a response from yours truly:
I do give Ray Paulick credit for allowing comments on his ridiculous post and also linking to Pull The Pocket's post Has Paulick Jumped The Shark
Not sure if it was done out of fairness, guilt/remorse, fear of losing readership, or maybe he just likes being compared to The Fonz.
Where do I stand on the California takeout hike? I think my comment over at Pull The Pocket sums it up:
Over the past few months, it appears that Ray Paulick has drank the CHRB Kool-Aid and has fallen for all the bs coming from them when it comes to the takeout hike that is going to happen at all major thoroughbred tracks in California on December 26th.
There is some question whether his judgment is being influenced because of the fact that he is getting advertising dollars from California racing groups. I honestly don't know. I actually hope that is the case, for Paulick's sake. I'd hate to think he was either that stupid or gullible to believe a takeout hike will help horse racing in California.
Anyway, Paulick has hit a peak when it comes to either selling out or just plain stupidity with his post California's Push For Purses.
In the article he mentions "cost of putting on the show." Sorry, but the cost of putting on the show has absolutely no connection with what takeout should be. The only thing that matters with regard to takeout is the optimum takeout percentage (the percentage where tracks and horsemen receive the most money collectively from bettors).
He compares horse racing to blackjack when it comes to cost of putting on the show. Last I heard, it costs millions a year to operate a casino. But casino operator know if they made a push go to the house in blackjack, the blackjack tables would be empty. They also know is they raise the hold on slots from 7% to 12%, their bottom line would suffer in a big way.
The point that most tracks have higher takeout rates even after this hike is just bad propaganda. Any takeout hike anywhere helps kill the game. As you move away from optimum takeout, this is a gimme. There is no good rationalization for a takeout hike.
He also writes that "to my knowledge no studies have proven the point that reducing the cost of a bet will increase the revenue to tracks and purses."
Either he has a short memory or he doesn't bother reading many of the comments on his site. I know for a fact that the Cummings Report has been linked there on many occasions.
As Caroline Betts states in the comment section: Google Scholar is your friend. There have been many studies regarding track takeout and optimum revenue.
Two things are certain regarding these studies. Racing has ignored all these studies. Racing has never tried to find out what the optimum takeout really is (all studies conclude that it is much lower than 20%).
Again, I don't blame the horsemen here (though they aren't looking out for the future of the industry). They are now getting a higher percentage of the pie. For the life of me, I can't see how the track owners allowed it to happen. Again, if handle drops by around 15%, horsemen will still get the same money they did last year (obviously they are hoping handle will at least stay stagnant), but the track owners will absorb the total loss. On any extra handle loss over 15%, it will be split between horsemen and tracks.
The track owners would have been best advised to just change the split to December 26th new split, and even lower overall takeout, or at least keep takeout rates the same.
This takeout hike has massive failure written all over it. Bigger purses, possible bigger fields, and a dirt track will not save the day.
In the comment section, well known handicapper/author Barry Meadow chimed in:
There are two types of bettors–those who care very much about the takeout (e.g., professional gamblers, big bettors, rebate players, etc.) and those who don’t.
An increase hurts both. A professional works off a tiny margin; if he bets $1 million to earn $50,000 after rebates (5%), an increase of just 2% in the takeout can cut his profits nearly in half. At that point, he may feel there is no reason to continue betting on that track. Handle is unlikely to increase after a takeout rise, and every dip in handle forces him to cut his bets; already, it’s virtually impossible to bet any serious money on a daily double in northern California, which on November 10 featured a live crowd at Golden Gate of exactly 753 patrons.
The casual fan who knows little or nothing about takeout is affected as well, since he has less money in his pocket. He may not notice it after ten races, but after 500, the effect kicks in, whether he realizes it or not. He cannot contribute to churn because he has gone broke faster. If this doesn’t seem realistic, imagine a 90% takeout and you will quickly get the idea.
What most people may not realize is that racing handle has been artificially propped up for years:
In the 1980’s, the advent of cash-sell machines resulted in handle jumps since patrons didn’t have to run to five different lines to make and cash their bets.
In the 1990’s, simulcasting exploded, so fans who wanted to bet Santa Anita could do so from 400 locations instead of from one, again resulting in handle gains.
As 2000 dawned, rebate houses made it possible for big players to turn losses into profits, and begat the high-powered computer groups who dominate rebate play today. (Some track executives complained of “Handle up, purses down,” but failed to understand that without the hundreds of millions of dollars bet through rebate houses, they would have had “Handle down, purses down” instead.)
Some people think that exchange wagering will be the next big thing to save racing’s handle, but exchange betting, while it will increase the action, won’t prove a panacea. It’s just for win betting, you need a computer (who is going to lug a computer to a racetrack?), and if the liquidity isn’t high enough right from the start, the whole enterprise may be reduced to just a sidelight.
Certainly, it makes little sense to raise the price of a product during an economic downturn, particularly when it’s been shown that fewer people each year care about the product. Yes, it’s nice that we have films like Sea Biscuit or Secretariat, and Zenyatta thrilled us all, but none of this has much to do with the overall trend of the game, which is on a straight downhill slide. The comments of the CHRB members show how out of touch they are with the realities of the game (Racing as entertainment? So why do networks pay the football and basketball and baseball leagues millions to televise their games, yet racing has to shell out millions to get its own product on TV?)
The old days of huge crowds and huge handles are long gone, gone the way of the telegraph and the stagecoach–and they’re never coming back. Not with rock concerts (the youngsters who attend these have no time, no money, and no interest in betting thoroughbreds). Not with social media (it’s like having a huge mailing list filled with non-prospects). Not with catchy slogans (how many serious bettors came from ”Go Baby Go”?). Not with T-shirt giveaways or mugs.
We’d all like a minuscule takeout, but there are costs to run the show. But that doesn’t mean the customers have to absorb all the costs. The talk of a players’ boycott, whether it materializes or not, is the customers’ visceral response to being asked, time and again, to pay a higher price for a lesser product. The customers are simply fed up. And no industry can survive with fed-up customers.
This triggered a response from yours truly:
Barry, that was an excellent post, but I will take exception to your comment about “cost to run the show.” The cost to run the show is separate from what would be the optimum takeout (the takeout which creates the biggest revenue for the tracks and horsemen). If that takeout number is 30%, then takeout should be 30%. However, we know it isn’t for the reasons you mentioned. You can’t have optimum takeout when there is money that could be on the table that from former horseplayers, or potential horseplayers that won’t go near the game because they know it isn’t beatable.
Takeout needs to be reduced because players who last longer are great for growth. Their family and friends are almost forced to see what the fascination is all about. Some may start going. The opposite happens when players don’t last as long. Letting players last longer opens up the possibility for new money for purses and tracks, from new players being exposed to the game.
Secondly, not all rebate players make money, far from it. But they all last longer, and most believe that with rebates, if they start improving on their skill and have a few more lucky breaks, that they can beat the game. This is the way it was back in the 60’s and 70’s for many who played horses every day (of course, without rebates). Especially because there were not very many exotics (collective takeout was much lower), there was no intertrack betting…you had 8 races to play, and there was a good likelihood that you would leave with enough money to keep your interest so that you couldn’t wait to come back the next day that was free in your calendar. There was also lots of dummy money in the pool (money which is now gone to casinos and lotteries) Those using speed figures back then were in the same boat as many rebate players today…some were marginal winners, and some were marginal losers…but there was a feeling that the game could be beat.
That feeling is gone today for almost any horseplayer who doesn’t get rebates or who isn’t able to bet on an exchange. With high takeout exotics every race, which temp just about everyone, and the ability to play 4-15 cards a day, it doesn’t take long before any horseplayer is completely discouraged.
It was a shame that horse racing couldn’t pick up new players thanks to the movie Secretariat and the build up to Zenyatta’s last race. The reason why is simple. Horse racing is about gambling, and the only way to get the masses interested in gambling is to have visible winners.
You can’t have them in today’s high takeout environment. It is impossible.
Poker gained momentum with the movie Rounders. Why? Poker is gambling, and it is possible to beat the game. Even if very few do it in a big way, they are in our face. This attracts new players galore. The fact that if you can have a beatable game that someone with a little study and a fairly inexpensive learning curve, can move from their parent’s basement to become a King. This is what gambling is all about. This is how horse racing needs to be marketed. But we need lower takeouts to begin with, so players can last while they are learning, and winning players need to have the light shone on them.
Racing can do it right now with those who make money at rebate shops, but that is pretty much a secret society, unlike the poker stars. Racing won’t embrace these players because it is an admission that takeout is way too high, and that the only way to win today or even have a chance is to play with a substantial rebate.
But doing what California is doing is just putting another nail in the coffin when it comes to growing horse racing. Shame on California, and shame on the Paulick Report for supporting their action in any way shape or form.
I do give Ray Paulick credit for allowing comments on his ridiculous post and also linking to Pull The Pocket's post Has Paulick Jumped The Shark
Not sure if it was done out of fairness, guilt/remorse, fear of losing readership, or maybe he just likes being compared to The Fonz.
Where do I stand on the California takeout hike? I think my comment over at Pull The Pocket sums it up:
I proudly haven't wagered on any California race since the bill was signed.
When a California race is on TV, I view it like a commercial, I either get up to grab a snack, handicap a race at a venue I do play, get up to take a wizz, or, if my wife is talking to me at the time of the race, I actually listen to what she is saying to me.
9 November 2010
The Price Of Cheating In Ontario Has Just Gone Way Up
POLICE LAY CHARGES IN HORSE RACING INVESTIGATION
If the parties charged are in fact guilty, and their consequences are more than a slap on the wrist, this should be very good for horse racing in the long run.
Will it cause more betting? Not very much. Those who are staying away from horse racing aren't being deterred by the use of untestable drugs, but either have no interest in betting or they are betting where they last much longer.
However, it creates the foundation for non cheating horsemen to flourish. They will get a chance to grow as they will now most likely be getting a bigger share of purses available. If it plays out right, this will create more owners. More owners usually means more Horseplayers being introduced, though for Horseplayers to stick, takeout needs to be reduced.
The big question here is that if you are a horseman using non testable drugs like ITPP or snake or cobra venom, would you be scared straight by this arrest, or do you need more convincing?
See also Pull The Pocket, who I just found out, beat me to the punch by an hour.
WINDSOR, ON, Nov. 8 /CNW/ - Officers from the Ontario Racing Commission's Equine Medication & Controlled Drug Task Force who are seconded from the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) Organized Crime Enforcement Bureau (OCEB) have charged three Windsor residents as a result of an investigation into the use of non-therapeutic, performance enhancing substances on Ontario race horses.
On November 7, 2010 OPP officers from OCEB, as well as the Essex OPP detachment, the Windsor Police Service and the OPP Assets Forfeiture Unit, assisted the Ontario Racing Commission (ORC) Task Force members and Special Constables in the execution of search warrants at a Windsor residence and a Tecumseh horse stable.
The OPP has charged: 1) Christopher HASKELL, age 33 of Windsor
2) Cassie NANTAIS, age 24 of Windsor and
3) Derek RIESBERRY, age 40 of Tecumseh.
The accused have all been charged with one count each of cheat at play, fraud, and offences under the Pari-mutuel (betting) regulations of the Criminal Code. All charged persons have been released on an Undertaking which prohibits involvement in horse racing. They are to appear in Windsor court on January 5, 2011.
In addition to the charges, police seized drugs, medications and documents related to the criminal investigation, as well as offence related property including business vehicles and horse trailers.
Horse racing in Ontario is one of the most closely monitored and regulated sports in Canada. The vigilance is based on a philosophy of intelligence-led regulation, and the unique partnership of the racing community, the OPP, and the ORC. As a result, Ontario is recognized as a world leader of investigations into criminal and regulatory offences related to horse racing.
The investigation is continuing and police encourage anyone with knowledge of criminal activity to contact their local police or Crime stoppers.
If the parties charged are in fact guilty, and their consequences are more than a slap on the wrist, this should be very good for horse racing in the long run.
Will it cause more betting? Not very much. Those who are staying away from horse racing aren't being deterred by the use of untestable drugs, but either have no interest in betting or they are betting where they last much longer.
However, it creates the foundation for non cheating horsemen to flourish. They will get a chance to grow as they will now most likely be getting a bigger share of purses available. If it plays out right, this will create more owners. More owners usually means more Horseplayers being introduced, though for Horseplayers to stick, takeout needs to be reduced.
The big question here is that if you are a horseman using non testable drugs like ITPP or snake or cobra venom, would you be scared straight by this arrest, or do you need more convincing?
See also Pull The Pocket, who I just found out, beat me to the punch by an hour.
5 November 2010
Go Zenyatta Go, But Not With My Money
I will be rooting for Zenyatta to make it 20 for 20, but I don't think she has a hope in H-E-Double Hockey sticks. For the record, I didn't like her last year either. But this year she running against the top male horses on a dirt track.
She looks like she is at least 5 lengths inferior to Quality Road and my second choice, long shot Musket Man.
But I really want to see her win. She is great for the game.
My main concern is that lightning fast tracks can really hurt horses that try. I don't doubt Mike Smith when he says she has yet to have had to go 100%. Tomorrow will be different. I just hope her heart and desire to win doesn't turn into a serious injury.
I'll be torn if the horses I bet on are running one two with a sixteenth to go and Zenyatta is making her usual move. I actually think I will rooting for Zenyatta in this case.
I handicapped the entire Breeders' Cup for today and tomorrow. You can see my picks as well as those from fellow Thoroughbred Blogger's Alliance members here.
Drugs are in the news again. Here is a New York Times article At Breeders’ Cup, a Volatile Mix of Speed and Drugs Check out the chart in the left hand corner. Jamie Ness leads all top money winning trainers in the starts per medical violation category.
In what is hopefully a positive move, The Racing Medication and Testing Consortium (RMTC) has a list of recommended thresholds and withdrawal guidelines for numerous drugs that are commonly used. It would be great for the game if every jurisdiction is on the same page.
There is an in depth article on undetectable drugs over at Standardbred Canada. ITPP is mentioned. I did a piece on this drug recently.
The horse racing industry should be ashamed of themselves as handle for 2010 now looks like it will drop to 1996 levels. We've seen a handful of tracks recently doing something about it as they try to compete by lowering takeout on at least one of their betting items, but what is needed is a cut everywhere in takeout. Racing is a great game, but there needs to be visible long term winners for the masses to be attracted to it.
CANADIAN BREEDERS' CUP BETTORS BEWARE
HANA (The Horseplayers Association Of North America) is pissed at Woodbine, and rightfully so. There practice of skimming some of the winnings of their customers on low takeout triactors, superfectors and Pick 3's needs to stop.
Tom Says:
I actually have faith that the new regime under Nick Eaves will abolish this practice soon.
Speaking of tracks trying. Western Fair has reduced their Pick 4 wagers track takeout to 15% starting today.
Zenyatta on 60 Minutes. In case you missed it:
HT Standardbred Canada
She looks like she is at least 5 lengths inferior to Quality Road and my second choice, long shot Musket Man.
But I really want to see her win. She is great for the game.
My main concern is that lightning fast tracks can really hurt horses that try. I don't doubt Mike Smith when he says she has yet to have had to go 100%. Tomorrow will be different. I just hope her heart and desire to win doesn't turn into a serious injury.
I'll be torn if the horses I bet on are running one two with a sixteenth to go and Zenyatta is making her usual move. I actually think I will rooting for Zenyatta in this case.
I handicapped the entire Breeders' Cup for today and tomorrow. You can see my picks as well as those from fellow Thoroughbred Blogger's Alliance members here.
Drugs are in the news again. Here is a New York Times article At Breeders’ Cup, a Volatile Mix of Speed and Drugs Check out the chart in the left hand corner. Jamie Ness leads all top money winning trainers in the starts per medical violation category.
In what is hopefully a positive move, The Racing Medication and Testing Consortium (RMTC) has a list of recommended thresholds and withdrawal guidelines for numerous drugs that are commonly used. It would be great for the game if every jurisdiction is on the same page.
There is an in depth article on undetectable drugs over at Standardbred Canada. ITPP is mentioned. I did a piece on this drug recently.
The horse racing industry should be ashamed of themselves as handle for 2010 now looks like it will drop to 1996 levels. We've seen a handful of tracks recently doing something about it as they try to compete by lowering takeout on at least one of their betting items, but what is needed is a cut everywhere in takeout. Racing is a great game, but there needs to be visible long term winners for the masses to be attracted to it.
CANADIAN BREEDERS' CUP BETTORS BEWARE
HANA (The Horseplayers Association Of North America) is pissed at Woodbine, and rightfully so. There practice of skimming some of the winnings of their customers on low takeout triactors, superfectors and Pick 3's needs to stop.
Tom Says:
Just to get this straight. A bettor makes a wager on a Churchill Downs races and cashes. The money bet actually goes into the pool, and Churchill pays Woodbine based on real track odds. Woodbine keeps some of it and gives the rest to the customer.
Can't Woodbine see how wrong this is? What about the Canadian government? This just isn't right.
I actually have faith that the new regime under Nick Eaves will abolish this practice soon.
Speaking of tracks trying. Western Fair has reduced their Pick 4 wagers track takeout to 15% starting today.
Zenyatta on 60 Minutes. In case you missed it:
HT Standardbred Canada
31 October 2010
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.
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.
24 October 2010
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.
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.
16 October 2010
Big Day At Woodbine Today
Woodbine's Super Saturday is upon us. $3,500,000 in purses (The Canadian and US dollar are almost at par, so it really is $3.5 million) will be given out over three successive races.
Even if track takeout was 30% (Woodbine isn't quite that high), it would take almost $12 million in live handle to pay for those purses alone, and that is assuming all the money goes to purse accounts.
Is it worth giving out that much money in only three races? When you look at the handles on weekdays, I would say no. Not as long as Woodbine still has high takeout levels that stifle growth to the extent that a big show like today is meaningless in the long run.
The total purse money given out today represents half the money Fort Erie gives out in an entire year. I'm not a Communist, but I think it would be best to spread out that kind of dough amongst all the owners, and not just a few. Besides Horseplayers, growth can occur out of new owners who think they have a reasonable shot at breaking even or making money. There is only a tiny amount of elite owners who are in it for the home run.
Before I get to my picks, I have to bring up one more thing that bothers me when it comes to purse distribution, and even betting. It is the what seems to be endless amount of races at Woodbine that have big purses, that are made to go because one trainer enters two horses. If you look back at this year, overnight handicaps with $100,000 purses have been able to go thanks to this loop hole.
The bad thing about the loop hole is that almost every single time this has occurred, one of the trainer's horses mysteriously needed to be vet scratched. I don't blame trainers like Nick Gonzalez, Terry Jordan, Don MaCrae and others for taking advantage of the loop hole, I blame the system which makes this an easy thing to make a mockery of.
Today's first race is a good example of what could happen. A six horse barely bettable race where the one and two are both trained by Sid Attard. These horses have a reasonable shot of running 1-2, but there is a high likelihood one of them will come up with a cough and have to be scratched (at the time of this writing scratches are not out). It would turn the race into a five horse affair, and it is lousy for betting, and lousy for racing in general.
OK, now for my selections.
NEARCTIC STAKES
I've always like Grand Adventure. He has the best figures going, and just needs a little give to the turf and a little racing luck to come out ahead.
EP TAYLOR STAKES
I think Reggane will beat Shalanaya today. It has to do with cycles.
CANADIAN INTERNATIONAL
I didn't want to pick the now infamous Fifty Proof, but because of the way I handicap, and all the angles I consider, Fifty Proof has as good of a chance as anything in this field. This is jockey Justin Stein's biggest race ever, and I do give the connections Kudo's for sticking with him. The horse is vastly improved, and seems to love the lawn and the distance. One thing that could hurt him though is weight. He is picking up 9 pounds, while the horse who beat him last time out, Redwood, is picking up 7. Redwood though is more likely to bounce. The horse to beat is Chinchon.
As an aide, I wonder if the Stewards would at least put up the Inquiry sign if Fifty busts through the gate before the other horses are dispatched today. My guess is yes, and it would rightfully lead to a disqualification this time around.
It is still going to be hard for me root for a horse owned by a bunch of Woodbine board members who wound up receiving extraordinary consideration by the track Stewards and then the Ontario Racing Commission.
Science Stuff from MSNBC: THE SCIENCE OF HORSE RACING
Interesting stuff about the positioning of a jockey on a horse. It explains why a jockey out of the stirrups gives the horse no chance to win.
THIS IS THE BEST WAY TO CLEAN UP CHEATING: TRAINER FACES FELONY CHARGES FOR INJECTING HORSE
Muse denied it. The Stewards let him go. But tapes showed up. Caught in the act.
Maggi Moss has her panties in a knot, saying this is an abuse of power. She also said that racing authorities are set up to be stricter than any court. Really? When was the last time a trainer was sent to jail by a racing commission?
The reality is that there is defrauding of the public happening here because, people bet their money on races. There is also defrauding of the other horsemen who have clean operations that are run by the book.
A jail sentence could be what is needed to scare the bejeebers out of the cheaters.
By the way, one of the horses injected on tape won a $68K stake race and the other was third is a race with a purse of over $140K.
The horses in question did not test positively, which is not a shocker. Trainers generally stay clear of drugs that are tested for. The big question is what was in the syringes?
It surely wasn't a placebo which was given to fool the horses into believing they were drugged. I don't think horses are that smart.
What I find to be the biggest problem here, is the horsemen's attitude that this should stay out of criminal court. If I was a horseman who trained clean, I would want criminal charges to weed out the cheaters. It makes me wonder if this is not just a rare occurrence but a very widespread one.
Even if track takeout was 30% (Woodbine isn't quite that high), it would take almost $12 million in live handle to pay for those purses alone, and that is assuming all the money goes to purse accounts.
Is it worth giving out that much money in only three races? When you look at the handles on weekdays, I would say no. Not as long as Woodbine still has high takeout levels that stifle growth to the extent that a big show like today is meaningless in the long run.
The total purse money given out today represents half the money Fort Erie gives out in an entire year. I'm not a Communist, but I think it would be best to spread out that kind of dough amongst all the owners, and not just a few. Besides Horseplayers, growth can occur out of new owners who think they have a reasonable shot at breaking even or making money. There is only a tiny amount of elite owners who are in it for the home run.
Before I get to my picks, I have to bring up one more thing that bothers me when it comes to purse distribution, and even betting. It is the what seems to be endless amount of races at Woodbine that have big purses, that are made to go because one trainer enters two horses. If you look back at this year, overnight handicaps with $100,000 purses have been able to go thanks to this loop hole.
The bad thing about the loop hole is that almost every single time this has occurred, one of the trainer's horses mysteriously needed to be vet scratched. I don't blame trainers like Nick Gonzalez, Terry Jordan, Don MaCrae and others for taking advantage of the loop hole, I blame the system which makes this an easy thing to make a mockery of.
Today's first race is a good example of what could happen. A six horse barely bettable race where the one and two are both trained by Sid Attard. These horses have a reasonable shot of running 1-2, but there is a high likelihood one of them will come up with a cough and have to be scratched (at the time of this writing scratches are not out). It would turn the race into a five horse affair, and it is lousy for betting, and lousy for racing in general.
OK, now for my selections.
NEARCTIC STAKES
I've always like Grand Adventure. He has the best figures going, and just needs a little give to the turf and a little racing luck to come out ahead.
EP TAYLOR STAKES
I think Reggane will beat Shalanaya today. It has to do with cycles.
CANADIAN INTERNATIONAL
I didn't want to pick the now infamous Fifty Proof, but because of the way I handicap, and all the angles I consider, Fifty Proof has as good of a chance as anything in this field. This is jockey Justin Stein's biggest race ever, and I do give the connections Kudo's for sticking with him. The horse is vastly improved, and seems to love the lawn and the distance. One thing that could hurt him though is weight. He is picking up 9 pounds, while the horse who beat him last time out, Redwood, is picking up 7. Redwood though is more likely to bounce. The horse to beat is Chinchon.
As an aide, I wonder if the Stewards would at least put up the Inquiry sign if Fifty busts through the gate before the other horses are dispatched today. My guess is yes, and it would rightfully lead to a disqualification this time around.
It is still going to be hard for me root for a horse owned by a bunch of Woodbine board members who wound up receiving extraordinary consideration by the track Stewards and then the Ontario Racing Commission.
Science Stuff from MSNBC: THE SCIENCE OF HORSE RACING
Interesting stuff about the positioning of a jockey on a horse. It explains why a jockey out of the stirrups gives the horse no chance to win.
THIS IS THE BEST WAY TO CLEAN UP CHEATING: TRAINER FACES FELONY CHARGES FOR INJECTING HORSE
Prosecutors have brought criminal charges for a horse-racing violation - believed to be a first in the state of Iowa.
Brian Muse faces three felony counts of cheating at a gambling game for allegedly injecting two animals with unknown substances Sept. 24, hours before their quarter-horse races at Prairie Meadows.
Muse denied it. The Stewards let him go. But tapes showed up. Caught in the act.
Maggi Moss has her panties in a knot, saying this is an abuse of power. She also said that racing authorities are set up to be stricter than any court. Really? When was the last time a trainer was sent to jail by a racing commission?
The reality is that there is defrauding of the public happening here because, people bet their money on races. There is also defrauding of the other horsemen who have clean operations that are run by the book.
A jail sentence could be what is needed to scare the bejeebers out of the cheaters.
By the way, one of the horses injected on tape won a $68K stake race and the other was third is a race with a purse of over $140K.
The horses in question did not test positively, which is not a shocker. Trainers generally stay clear of drugs that are tested for. The big question is what was in the syringes?
It surely wasn't a placebo which was given to fool the horses into believing they were drugged. I don't think horses are that smart.
What I find to be the biggest problem here, is the horsemen's attitude that this should stay out of criminal court. If I was a horseman who trained clean, I would want criminal charges to weed out the cheaters. It makes me wonder if this is not just a rare occurrence but a very widespread one.
9 October 2010
Hialeah Gets It
Hialeah Park recently announced they are dropping their takeout to 12% on all bets. Now this is forward thinking at its finest. It is unfortunate that Hialeah runs such a short meet, and that they don't have thoroughbred racing (only quarter horse racing) yet.
This is a track looking to rebuild. Another track looking to rebuild is Fort Erie. They have done nothing in the takeout reduction area, and now have an average takeout twice the amount of Hialeah's new rates. I'm disappointed in Fort Erie and their new regime. Problem is that they went with the old guard who just don't get takeout. No clue. Fort Erie has the second worst blended takeout rate in North America. And since the overwhelming majority of bets happen at venues where they only get a fraction of the takeout rate, the only people getting constantly slaughtered by the rate are those who attend races live. They give these patrons who cash tickets less than 99% of the tracks in North America. The players have less to bet back, go broke quickest, and are likely to come back less.
This is not how to grow a business. Give players more money back and they will bet more and come back more often.
It took John Brunetti Jr. to do the opposite of what his dad did 17 years ago which helped put the final nail in Hialeah's coffin at the time when he raised takeout to levels that resemble Fort Erie's today.
The biggest problem Hialeah will have now is exposure. Barring a miracle of Biblical proportions, Canadians won't be able to find Hialeah at HPI or any Canadian racetracks, unless the tracks pay a lot less than what Hialeah patrons would get on track.
This is what is sad about the industry today. Even in the USA, I don't expect many tracks to carry Hialeah. ADWs will probably have them, but only ADWs like this one will actually look forward to having them on the menu.
Hialeah's drop in takeout comes into effect around the same time as the mindless takeout hike in California. I believe a lot of pissed off Horseplayers are going to divert some funds and give Hialeah a try.
TrackMaster recently upgraded the way they do speed figures for Quarter Horse racing, probably giving their customers the best edge amongst past performance distributors.
They also added a trouble indicator in their thoroughbred past performances.
I know for a fact that this company actually listens to the customer.
The Breeder's Crown, harness racing's version of the Breeder's Cup races tonight (Saturday) at Pocono Downs. Post time is 5PM. Here are free past performances for the event.
The Knight Sky has put all the finalists in the University of Arizona's Racetrack Industry Program's Funniest Horse Racing Video contest on his website.
The one I laughed at the most was the one on the top right. The one done by Grand River (the one at the bottom right of the second section) also gave me a chuckle.
The ORC released their ruling which allows Woodbine to ban Bruno Schickedanz indefinitely from stabling and running horses at Woodbine because of the Wake At Noon tragedy.
It is a pretty long ruling, but interesting nonetheless. The most damning part of the report to me was this:
Interesting that this is track specific, and I believe Schickedanz can still stable and race at Fort Erie.
They nailed him on conduct unbecoming to horse racing, because it appears he didn't violate any other rules.
The ORC should put in new rules so that morally bankrupt acts like this are dealt with in not such a vague manner.
Of course, at least to me and probably many others, the ORC has major credibility issues due to their recent mind numbing decision in letting Fifty Proof's result to stand. A couple of comments from Jen's Blog:
W. McGovern - October 5th, 2010 at 5:25 pm
This is a track looking to rebuild. Another track looking to rebuild is Fort Erie. They have done nothing in the takeout reduction area, and now have an average takeout twice the amount of Hialeah's new rates. I'm disappointed in Fort Erie and their new regime. Problem is that they went with the old guard who just don't get takeout. No clue. Fort Erie has the second worst blended takeout rate in North America. And since the overwhelming majority of bets happen at venues where they only get a fraction of the takeout rate, the only people getting constantly slaughtered by the rate are those who attend races live. They give these patrons who cash tickets less than 99% of the tracks in North America. The players have less to bet back, go broke quickest, and are likely to come back less.
This is not how to grow a business. Give players more money back and they will bet more and come back more often.
It took John Brunetti Jr. to do the opposite of what his dad did 17 years ago which helped put the final nail in Hialeah's coffin at the time when he raised takeout to levels that resemble Fort Erie's today.
The biggest problem Hialeah will have now is exposure. Barring a miracle of Biblical proportions, Canadians won't be able to find Hialeah at HPI or any Canadian racetracks, unless the tracks pay a lot less than what Hialeah patrons would get on track.
This is what is sad about the industry today. Even in the USA, I don't expect many tracks to carry Hialeah. ADWs will probably have them, but only ADWs like this one will actually look forward to having them on the menu.
Hialeah's drop in takeout comes into effect around the same time as the mindless takeout hike in California. I believe a lot of pissed off Horseplayers are going to divert some funds and give Hialeah a try.
TrackMaster recently upgraded the way they do speed figures for Quarter Horse racing, probably giving their customers the best edge amongst past performance distributors.
They also added a trouble indicator in their thoroughbred past performances.
I know for a fact that this company actually listens to the customer.
The Breeder's Crown, harness racing's version of the Breeder's Cup races tonight (Saturday) at Pocono Downs. Post time is 5PM. Here are free past performances for the event.
The Knight Sky has put all the finalists in the University of Arizona's Racetrack Industry Program's Funniest Horse Racing Video contest on his website.
The one I laughed at the most was the one on the top right. The one done by Grand River (the one at the bottom right of the second section) also gave me a chuckle.
The ORC released their ruling which allows Woodbine to ban Bruno Schickedanz indefinitely from stabling and running horses at Woodbine because of the Wake At Noon tragedy.
It is a pretty long ruling, but interesting nonetheless. The most damning part of the report to me was this:
“I was spending money on the horse and I was researching what the possible options could be.” “No decision had been made on any of those options.”
“Q. And when you say you were spending money on the horse I take it that if he was racing you were hoping to get some of that back?
A. I think anybody would be thinking that if they were doing it. Is that a bad thing by the way?”
Interesting that this is track specific, and I believe Schickedanz can still stable and race at Fort Erie.
They nailed him on conduct unbecoming to horse racing, because it appears he didn't violate any other rules.
The ORC should put in new rules so that morally bankrupt acts like this are dealt with in not such a vague manner.
Of course, at least to me and probably many others, the ORC has major credibility issues due to their recent mind numbing decision in letting Fifty Proof's result to stand. A couple of comments from Jen's Blog:
W. McGovern - October 5th, 2010 at 5:25 pm
Excellent blog Jen. This is a great source for racing info covering Ontario. Regarding Fifty Proof: this stinks. I’ve seen similar starts result in a DQ…and then there’s the Wilmot (sic) angle which further makes it stink. If I were racing at Woodbine, I’d keep a copy of that start on hand just in case you ever got a DQ for a similar situation.
Keep up the excellent work, Jen. Your blog is a pleasure to read. I have written to the ORC regarding the Fifty Proof matter. I hope that others do too. The decision is nonsensical. If the gate was functioning properly then the only explanation is that Fifty Proof pushed it open. Totally contrary to what the Chairman says. A disgrace for horse racing in Ontario.
2 October 2010
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:
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.
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.
26 September 2010
Terminator 6: Death Watch
The takeout hike will most probably go into effect the day after Christmas this year. Although the WPS takeout remains relatively low at 15.43%, daily double and exactor takeout will rise to 22.68%, placing Hollywood Park, Santa Anita, Golden Gate, and Del Mar in a tie for those betting types at around 57th out of 69 tracks according to HANA's up to date takeout data. Triactors and other exotics will go up 3% (which is really 15%) to 23.68%.
HANA reports on the takeout increase here.
Again, I understand the Horsemen who went along with this increase. Why? Because the entire 3% will go into purses. If handle were to remain stagnant, which it won't, monies available for purses would go up 15%. So handle could drop significantly, and the Horsemen will still end up ahead.
Here is an example (using many guesstimates). For every million bet, lets say $300,000 is wagered on WPS, $300,000 on doubles and exactors and $400,000 on all other wagers. Also lets assume that California exports its signal for 5% and 50% of handle is generated from exporting. Also, I believe the Horsemen get 50% of takeout revenues to fund purses.
Using these numbers, prior to the takeout hike, for every million bet, Horsemen receive around $58,000. Assuming signal fees increase on exotics (see Understanding Signal Fees), under the new arrangement, Horsemen will receive around $67,000 per every $1 million.
All source handle would need to drop off 13.5% in order for Horsemen to be worse off.
Any drop in handle up to 13.5% will be absorbed entirely by the racetracks. Which makes me shake my head here at the track owners who have put a huge "Kick Me" sign on their backs by going along with this.
I also doubt very much that the signal fees will go up that much. I can't see Twinspires and other major ADWs or tracks going for such an increase. If signal fees only go up by half the increase on exotics, it will be closer to a 10% decrease that will cause purse accounts to have less collective money.
Handle will drop. The question is how fast, and by how much?
The total effect of takeout increases or decreases normally take time to assess. If a hike occurs, Horseplayers receive less on each bet than they did before. They last less, they go home quicker, they come back less often. Some quit, some find a new hobby or a new game. These players will expose friends and family to horse racing as well. In other words, negative growth is created. Horseplayers collectively won't bet more and reload more just so they could have the same action as before (I believe that there are actually people who were in on this decision that assume Horseplayers do react this way).
I just want to note, that the opposite occurs if a takeout decrease happens.
There are other factors out there. Thanks to HANA and the internet in general, the public is much more aware of track takeout than ever before. There are some really pissed off Horseplayers out there over the action by California, and many of them vow to quit betting California racing. I believe them. I know it would be much harder for someone in California to boycott their own state's product because of familiarity, but for those outside of California, it isn't hard at all.
Personally I stopped playing California the day the bill was signed. Though I will play on Breeder's Cup days. Just keeping it honest. I want horse racing to grow, I love the game, but this move by California racing just really upsets me, and it just tightens the noose around horse racing's neck right now.
And finally, there is one major factor. An estimated 15% of all handle is generated from computer program bettors or sophisticated value players. Not only will increasing the takeout, create less value situations for these players, but increasing the signal fee, even it is half of what the takeout increase will be, will also come into play as to whether an astute rebate player makes a bet or not.
Despite, the flawed argument that bigger purses will lead to bigger field sizes in California (it is flawed because horse racing is experiencing negative growth thanks to not recognizing that the Horseplayer is the customer, and new owners generally get started on a smaller scale, many are Horseplayers first, and the day rates in California are just way too high regardless of the purses), I will predict that within 6 months of the takeout increase, California handle will drop 15-20% regardless of what happens anywhere else.
I originally stated that no good could come out of this in a previous post. Perhaps I jumped the gun a little. Portland Meadows has announced that they are dropping their takeout on Pick 4's from 22% to 14%. Delaware has also decreased their on track takeout on exactors from 19% to 10%.
THE TIME IS RIPE
This is a great time for a track with enough brains and guts to take advantage of the California takeout rate hike by lowering their takeout rates and attracting to begin with, the disgruntled soon to be ex California bettors.
I'd like to think that NYRA, Tampa Bay Downs, and even Woodbine could benefit immensely if they were to do the right thing within the next month or two.
Finally, takeout increases no matter where they originate hurt the game's total growth potential. They kill off the player, albeit slowly and provide zero potential for growth. A player at Hawthorne, for example, receiving $2 less for a $100 exactor he hit at Santa Anita won't feel it immediately, but slowly but surely it takes away his incentive to believe the game is beatable, and besides either coming home with less money than before, or churning one less race because of it, the player eventually becomes more disillusioned though he doesn't really know why.
If that is hard to believe, ask a slots operator what happens to the bottom line if hold is increased by a couple of points.
QUOTE OF THE WEEK:
“(If there isn’t growth in handle), we could end up with two-bit racing and virtual racing. The competition is smart, and it is giving the customer what the customer wants. Racing is still giving the customer what racing wants.”
UPDATE: About the movie Terminator 6. The year is 2029, and there has been no horse racing in California for 12 years. The Terminator's assignment is to go back in time and destroy Arnold Schwarzenegger the day before he signs the takeout hike.
16 September 2010
Is ITPP The Super Trainer's Drug Of Choice Today?
Andrew Cohen a columnist for Harnesslink has left best for last. His last regular column is all about a fairly new drug that is not being tested for by any jurisdiction in North America called ITPP, which is short for Myo-inositol-trispyrophosphate (NormOxys).
According to Cohen, the drug, developed in France in 2005, "makes the hemoglobin in blood release more of its oxygen, enhancing physical performance in a swift and powerful way."
This probably explains why certain trainers have unusually high win percentages. The horses that race for super trainers run out of their skin often, putting up very fast times in relation to their class. Another thing that I've observed is the ability for super trainer's horses to rebreak in the stretch, even on the poly track where the average horse has only one real run.
Cohen asks, what now? That is a great question. If I was a trainer or owner, I'd be tempted now to buy some of this stuff and try to even the playing field. There is nothing in the article about ITPP being harmful to a horse. In fact, it might be beneficial.
and
One choice is to make the drug legal, something I doubt racing commission's would even consider. The other alternative is to create a test for this drug as soon as possible, and in the meantime, levy huge fines and suspensions for anyone caught using this drug or possessing it at the track or at a farm or training center.
Do I feel better knowing that there is possible solution has been found out for why super trainers exist? Yes. But it does nothing for my confidence when it comes to betting horses. One good thing about this is that reality deniers and cheaters can stop with the BS excuse "the horses are spotted well."
The second biggest problem (takeout is number one by a country mile) horse racing has is drugs. Unfortunately, like with EPO and DPO, super trainers can get away with using them for years, and when a test is finally discovered, many have moved on to the next undetectable drug.
The real solution is to have a limited list of drugs that horses can use (all other drugs would be considered illegal). Most importantly, fines and suspension need to be extremely high, and if only possible jail time could be added to the equation (it is all about defrauding the public), maybe that would enough deterrent so that potential cheaters wouldn't cheat anymore.
WOODBINE'S WEBSITE HAS PHOTO FINISH PICTURES
Well at least some of the extra money Woodbine takes from winning bettors on certain exotic bets with low takeouts doesn't go to complete waste. They have spent some dough on their new website to make it more customer friendly. Now you can see how badly you beaten in a photo at Woodbine.
TRACKMASTER WINS TIOGA HANDICAPPING COMPETITION
TrackMaster may just have the most superior past performances of the Big 3 (DRF, TrackMaster and Brisnet). As I mentioned in another post, they have a product that give actual speed figures for harness racing, and apparently they are very accurate.
Personally, just over a month and a half ago I switched from Brisnet to TrackMaster Premium Past Performances for thoroughbreds (I'm an pen and paper handicapper), and I've seen a huge improvement when it comes to cashing tickets.
Check out what TrackMaster has to offer.
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 $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 weekly.
* 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.
According to Cohen, the drug, developed in France in 2005, "makes the hemoglobin in blood release more of its oxygen, enhancing physical performance in a swift and powerful way."
This probably explains why certain trainers have unusually high win percentages. The horses that race for super trainers run out of their skin often, putting up very fast times in relation to their class. Another thing that I've observed is the ability for super trainer's horses to rebreak in the stretch, even on the poly track where the average horse has only one real run.
Cohen asks, what now? That is a great question. If I was a trainer or owner, I'd be tempted now to buy some of this stuff and try to even the playing field. There is nothing in the article about ITPP being harmful to a horse. In fact, it might be beneficial.
This new class of drugs can be potentially developed in a broad range of clinical indications where therapeutic benefit can be obtained through an increased, regulated delivery of oxygen to hypoxic tissue. Potential clinical indications include cancer, cardiovascular diseases, anemia, stroke and diabetic retinopathy. NormOxys’ lead compound, OXY111A, is currently in Phase I clinical trials.
and
When given by direct injection to mice with damaged hearts in a recent experiment, it turned these couch potato mice into treadmill lovers - exercise levels rose 60%.
According to Jean-Marie Lehn of the University of Strasbourg in France, hemoglobin only releases about 25% of its oxygen during one trip through the body. But when ITPP binds to hemoglobin, it releases 35% more than usual.
One choice is to make the drug legal, something I doubt racing commission's would even consider. The other alternative is to create a test for this drug as soon as possible, and in the meantime, levy huge fines and suspensions for anyone caught using this drug or possessing it at the track or at a farm or training center.
Do I feel better knowing that there is possible solution has been found out for why super trainers exist? Yes. But it does nothing for my confidence when it comes to betting horses. One good thing about this is that reality deniers and cheaters can stop with the BS excuse "the horses are spotted well."
The second biggest problem (takeout is number one by a country mile) horse racing has is drugs. Unfortunately, like with EPO and DPO, super trainers can get away with using them for years, and when a test is finally discovered, many have moved on to the next undetectable drug.
The real solution is to have a limited list of drugs that horses can use (all other drugs would be considered illegal). Most importantly, fines and suspension need to be extremely high, and if only possible jail time could be added to the equation (it is all about defrauding the public), maybe that would enough deterrent so that potential cheaters wouldn't cheat anymore.
WOODBINE'S WEBSITE HAS PHOTO FINISH PICTURES
Well at least some of the extra money Woodbine takes from winning bettors on certain exotic bets with low takeouts doesn't go to complete waste. They have spent some dough on their new website to make it more customer friendly. Now you can see how badly you beaten in a photo at Woodbine.
TRACKMASTER WINS TIOGA HANDICAPPING COMPETITION
TrackMaster may just have the most superior past performances of the Big 3 (DRF, TrackMaster and Brisnet). As I mentioned in another post, they have a product that give actual speed figures for harness racing, and apparently they are very accurate.
Personally, just over a month and a half ago I switched from Brisnet to TrackMaster Premium Past Performances for thoroughbreds (I'm an pen and paper handicapper), and I've seen a huge improvement when it comes to cashing tickets.
Check out what TrackMaster has to offer.
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 $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 weekly.
* 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.
9 September 2010
Betting Scandal Is Worrisome
After a pretty lengthy investigation three Canadian harness horsemen have been given lengthy suspensions and large fines for allegedly fixing races at Windsor and at Michigan harness tracks.
Receiving suspensions and fines are:
Brad O. Forward, Woodstock, Ont. - 5 years, fine of $5,000
Gene T. Piroski, Cottam, Ont. - 10 years, fine of $100,000
Kevin W. Wallis, Maidstone, Ont. - 12 years, fine of $100,000
In addition, Arthur McIlmurray, (not currently licensed by the ORC) of Northville, Michigan is hereby ruled ineligible to be licensed in Ontario until such time as he appears before the director.
These fines and suspension were handed out before the parties received an ORC hearing, so with that in mind, I'm pretty sure that the evidence is pretty damning.
What I find worrisome is that Windsor and Michigan harness tracks have very little handle to begin with. These horsemen had to be selling out for only hundreds of dollars unless bookies were involved. But how many bookies would be willing to take too many hits on harness races? I don't think the bookie route could yield more than a few thousand dollars before the bettors were cut off.
So if a few horsemen will sell their souls for a few hundred, how many would sell out for thousands? I'm talking of course, tracks that have larger pools. Drivers only receive 5% of the purse, and harness horses can race once a week if they are fairly sound, so stiffing for a price isn't out of the question. Plus if you watch a harness race, it can be simple to stiff a horse, and it can also be easy to fix a race by just getting the top three contenders to play ball. Many drivers also train and even own which makes it easier to get a syndicate going.
It is more difficult to fix a thoroughbred race though. Jockeys are not the trainer, and the trainer is very often not the owner. From a trainer's perspective, horses may only race 6 or 7 times a year, so to not try when the horse is in peak form is pretty silly unless the purses are really inadequate.
Jockeys could conceivably get together to fix a race though, as they only get 10% of the winning purse, and whether a horse is ready to fire or not, is not of as much consequence, as they'll hop on another horse in a race or two in most cases.
Trainers who bet probably take advantage of their knowledge of how much vet work was put into the horse for the race combined with how the horse is really doing.
Again, like with cheating drug trainers to race fixing drivers, I think criminal charges need to be handed down. It is defrauding the public, plain and simple. Putting a violator or two behind bars is probably the best deterrent there is.
In related news, Doug O'Neill gets nabbed for his fourth TCO positive in California.
Is it me, or are we starting to see super trainers starting to slump in the last few weeks. Does their undetectable stuff work best during hot weather, or has someone come up with either a procedure or test that can nail them? Does it have something to do with the recent eight positives in Illinois for the drug etodolac?
Bob Summers, The Happy Handicapper, passes away. It is tragic to lose such a racing enthusiast who was part of the media. The worse thing is that there isn't a lineup of replacements. For more on Bob Summers: Jen's Blog and Pull The Pocket wrote tributes.
Canadian jockey Alan Cuthbertson succumbs to cancer. He rode his last race at Hastings last year, at 63. He had his first win at Woodbine in 1964.
Down on all counts: CTHS Sales numbers show the continued downward trend for horse racing, in Ontario too.
Woodbine needs to give more money to the lower end horses so that more owners will break even or make money, and this will attract more owners into the game. Stop kissing the elite's butt, it is no way to grow the game. Partnerships usually buy cheaper stock to begin with. Give them a chance to grow.
Ontario sired or Canadian bred claiming races need to be written too. It will help the breeding industry immensely, as demand for Canadian breds will rise, not only at sales but in the claiming game as well.
Receiving suspensions and fines are:
Brad O. Forward, Woodstock, Ont. - 5 years, fine of $5,000
Gene T. Piroski, Cottam, Ont. - 10 years, fine of $100,000
Kevin W. Wallis, Maidstone, Ont. - 12 years, fine of $100,000
In addition, Arthur McIlmurray, (not currently licensed by the ORC) of Northville, Michigan is hereby ruled ineligible to be licensed in Ontario until such time as he appears before the director.
These fines and suspension were handed out before the parties received an ORC hearing, so with that in mind, I'm pretty sure that the evidence is pretty damning.
What I find worrisome is that Windsor and Michigan harness tracks have very little handle to begin with. These horsemen had to be selling out for only hundreds of dollars unless bookies were involved. But how many bookies would be willing to take too many hits on harness races? I don't think the bookie route could yield more than a few thousand dollars before the bettors were cut off.
So if a few horsemen will sell their souls for a few hundred, how many would sell out for thousands? I'm talking of course, tracks that have larger pools. Drivers only receive 5% of the purse, and harness horses can race once a week if they are fairly sound, so stiffing for a price isn't out of the question. Plus if you watch a harness race, it can be simple to stiff a horse, and it can also be easy to fix a race by just getting the top three contenders to play ball. Many drivers also train and even own which makes it easier to get a syndicate going.
It is more difficult to fix a thoroughbred race though. Jockeys are not the trainer, and the trainer is very often not the owner. From a trainer's perspective, horses may only race 6 or 7 times a year, so to not try when the horse is in peak form is pretty silly unless the purses are really inadequate.
Jockeys could conceivably get together to fix a race though, as they only get 10% of the winning purse, and whether a horse is ready to fire or not, is not of as much consequence, as they'll hop on another horse in a race or two in most cases.
Trainers who bet probably take advantage of their knowledge of how much vet work was put into the horse for the race combined with how the horse is really doing.
Again, like with cheating drug trainers to race fixing drivers, I think criminal charges need to be handed down. It is defrauding the public, plain and simple. Putting a violator or two behind bars is probably the best deterrent there is.
In related news, Doug O'Neill gets nabbed for his fourth TCO positive in California.
Is it me, or are we starting to see super trainers starting to slump in the last few weeks. Does their undetectable stuff work best during hot weather, or has someone come up with either a procedure or test that can nail them? Does it have something to do with the recent eight positives in Illinois for the drug etodolac?
Bob Summers, The Happy Handicapper, passes away. It is tragic to lose such a racing enthusiast who was part of the media. The worse thing is that there isn't a lineup of replacements. For more on Bob Summers: Jen's Blog and Pull The Pocket wrote tributes.
Canadian jockey Alan Cuthbertson succumbs to cancer. He rode his last race at Hastings last year, at 63. He had his first win at Woodbine in 1964.
Down on all counts: CTHS Sales numbers show the continued downward trend for horse racing, in Ontario too.
Woodbine needs to give more money to the lower end horses so that more owners will break even or make money, and this will attract more owners into the game. Stop kissing the elite's butt, it is no way to grow the game. Partnerships usually buy cheaper stock to begin with. Give them a chance to grow.
Ontario sired or Canadian bred claiming races need to be written too. It will help the breeding industry immensely, as demand for Canadian breds will rise, not only at sales but in the claiming game as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)