The McKinsey and Company report “Driving Sustainable Growth for Thoroughbred Racing and Breeding” totally misses the mark when it comes to figuring out the customer, and figuring out how to grow the customer base. So though not totally worthless, the report is nothing that will save the game, perhaps throw a few band aids on it, but that is about it. And really, there is nothing new there at all, other than some stats that just confirm what most insiders already know.
The report seems to put the horse owner ahead of the customer. Big mistake. The industry shouldn't focus on what is good for the owner, but what is good for the customer (the gambler). The more Horseplayers, the bigger the purses, the more horse owners. That is how it works.
Regarding track takeout:
The report acknowledged that 26% of core bettors consider pari-mutuel takeout a “top two concern,” but fewer than 2% of most fans know about takeout. Thus, the report makes no recommendations on an issue that has boiled over this year, particularly in California.
“We prefer rebates as the method to address the price-sensitive bettor,” Singer said.
When it comes to growth, it really doesn't matter what existing customers like. They aren't the big problem as Pull The Pocket points out. Price sensitive players are already getting rebates for the most part.
If slot players were given a similar survey, about 0% of the core players and casual players alike would state that house take was a major concern. However, it doesn't mean that slots charge a ridiculously high take (it is around 5-8% in most jurisdictions). Slots operate at something called an optimal takeout. A percentage that holds players attention the most so that they will lose the most money in the long run....not short run. A percentage that gives the player the illusion the game is beatable and/or they can get a good deal of enjoyment over time on average to keep their high going, and keep them wanting more after they leave the joint.
Horse racing operates in a way where they take as much money as possible whenever they can. The takeout is so high, that there is no chance to beat the game long term without substantial rebates, and the fact there are virtually no visible winners, makes it near impossible to attract new generations, like poker did.
The study failed to address this, instead focusing on trying to lure players by just teaching them to bet. Silliness. There has to be a reason for a newbie to get involved in the steep learning curve of horse racing handicapping. We need visible winners. We need lower takeouts.
No shocker:
But all major metrics have fallen since 2000, the study notes. Betting handle is down by 37 percent, attendance at tracks is down by 30 percent, starts per horse and race days are both down by 14 percent. If these trends continue, the findings say thoroughbred racing will lose fans at a rate of 4 percent a year.
Every year, the study said, 2 percent of fans die, 5 percent lapse and only 3 percent are newly attracted. If this trend persists, by 2020 the fan base will be only 64 percent of what it was in 2010.
I'll state it again. Horse racing is missing out on a fantastic opportunity right now with the closing of many poker sites in the US. Gamblers are itching for action, but they want to play a game that is at least perceived beatable by some.
17 August 2011
11 August 2011
Four Topics Four Opinions
Jeff Gural's Plan To Discourage The Retirement of Three Year Olds To Stud
Great idea. In fact, Gural have he may have got that from me. Unfortunately for thoroughbred fans, Gural is only talking harness here, and only talking three tracks.
No mention of broodmares. I think it is important that they don't stop racing too quickly either.
The two good things that will come from this for either harness or thoroughbred horses, is that good horses will have careers that can be followed longer, and it gives them a chance to develop a larger fan base, and secondly, it will lead to horses being bred for longevity instead of being bred to be a shooting star.
Trainer Lou Pena Barred At Yonkers
Two harness stories in a row, well they could be thoroughbred stories just the same, as the issues overlap in both industries.
Pena was barred for winning way way way too much. The controversy here is that whatever he is allegedly using to improve horses so drastically has not been found.
Tracks are private property, so one can be guilty until proven innocent. But this line of rule is hardly used.
As for his guilt, I think John Carter's comment at Standardbred Canada says it all:
"Lou Pena has this sport figured out. He knew the exact right speed to jog his horses thru the week. He figured out the exact right amount of hay and oats to feed his horses on a daily basis. He probably also knew the exact right amount of water to let them drink every day. This was pure genius on his part, no other trainer on the planet has been able to crack this formula and step up horses like they were given rocket fuel. No it is all technique."
The reality here is that both the thoroughbred and standardbred game doesn't do enough to deter cheating. Trainers get a slap on the wrist usually when caught. How about making cheating a criminal offense. Kinda like the riots in Britain, if I was vandalizing a business, I'd expect to be shot at, and until a couple of youths are shot or hurt real bad, there is nothing to stop it.
Super trainers are bad for the game. They not only create races that many handicappers won't play, but they also deter new owners from entering the game (if you are up against cheaters, you are mainly running for third or fourth money).
California Takeout Hike Is Hurting Handle
Del Mar's handle is shrinking (doesn't seem to be the economy judging by Saratoga's results so far), and the tracks want to reduce the takeout on at least a couple of exotics but the TOC isn't too into it. As long as the purses are artificially? higher, the horsemen have no urgency to do the right thing. But since the deal that was made last year which winds up giving the horsemen a higher percentage of what is bet, handle has fallen, and it is the tracks that have been getting clobbered. This is unsustainable, and the tracks know it. The horsemen may know it too, but until they are faced with purse cuts or date cuts, they will probably tend to stay away from fair negotiations regarding the future.
The Players Boycott is hurting them too. Probably not as much as they think, though I know at least 5 players who won't even open up California past performances, and my guess is that there are probably a lot more.
No, the decrease in handle has more to do with increased signal fees and takeout which create a lot less plays for value bettors, which causes them to be pickier and play less. Secondly, those who cash tickets are getting back less, and have less to churn with. This phenomenon gets only will get worse, as these players who don't last as long as they used to have less urgency in coming back to the track as often, and some actually quit over time.
As for the Players Boycott's effectiveness, well how many tracks have increased takeout since California decided to? NONE! How many have lowered takeout on at least one wager? Lots. Even Parx and Penn have got into the action of reducing takeouts. The Boycott is good for Horseplayers, and that means it is good for horse racing's future.
VEGAS NUMBERS IMPROVING
Is this a leading indicator that the economy is about to rebound? How come we aren't seeing the same thing in horse racing?
Maybe it has a lot to do with the US government coming down hard on online poker. These players need to go somewhere, they are after all gamblers.
Too bad horse racing doesn't have the visible winners poker did. Oh wait, the takeout is too damn high for that to happen.
There is very good reason to believe that some online poker players are actually getting their feet wet in online horse racing now. Again, the fact they won't last very long means that racing is missing a golden opportunity right now. And the learning curve is very steep as well.
The online poker players willing to give horse racing a shot though are probably smart enough to get started at ADWs that give rebates, as they are by nature, very price conscious. This fact may help cultivate the odd player into a long term Horseplayer. The industry can only hope.
Great idea. In fact, Gural have he may have got that from me. Unfortunately for thoroughbred fans, Gural is only talking harness here, and only talking three tracks.
No mention of broodmares. I think it is important that they don't stop racing too quickly either.
The two good things that will come from this for either harness or thoroughbred horses, is that good horses will have careers that can be followed longer, and it gives them a chance to develop a larger fan base, and secondly, it will lead to horses being bred for longevity instead of being bred to be a shooting star.
Trainer Lou Pena Barred At Yonkers
Two harness stories in a row, well they could be thoroughbred stories just the same, as the issues overlap in both industries.
Pena was barred for winning way way way too much. The controversy here is that whatever he is allegedly using to improve horses so drastically has not been found.
Tracks are private property, so one can be guilty until proven innocent. But this line of rule is hardly used.
As for his guilt, I think John Carter's comment at Standardbred Canada says it all:
"Lou Pena has this sport figured out. He knew the exact right speed to jog his horses thru the week. He figured out the exact right amount of hay and oats to feed his horses on a daily basis. He probably also knew the exact right amount of water to let them drink every day. This was pure genius on his part, no other trainer on the planet has been able to crack this formula and step up horses like they were given rocket fuel. No it is all technique."
The reality here is that both the thoroughbred and standardbred game doesn't do enough to deter cheating. Trainers get a slap on the wrist usually when caught. How about making cheating a criminal offense. Kinda like the riots in Britain, if I was vandalizing a business, I'd expect to be shot at, and until a couple of youths are shot or hurt real bad, there is nothing to stop it.
Super trainers are bad for the game. They not only create races that many handicappers won't play, but they also deter new owners from entering the game (if you are up against cheaters, you are mainly running for third or fourth money).
California Takeout Hike Is Hurting Handle
Del Mar's handle is shrinking (doesn't seem to be the economy judging by Saratoga's results so far), and the tracks want to reduce the takeout on at least a couple of exotics but the TOC isn't too into it. As long as the purses are artificially? higher, the horsemen have no urgency to do the right thing. But since the deal that was made last year which winds up giving the horsemen a higher percentage of what is bet, handle has fallen, and it is the tracks that have been getting clobbered. This is unsustainable, and the tracks know it. The horsemen may know it too, but until they are faced with purse cuts or date cuts, they will probably tend to stay away from fair negotiations regarding the future.
The Players Boycott is hurting them too. Probably not as much as they think, though I know at least 5 players who won't even open up California past performances, and my guess is that there are probably a lot more.
No, the decrease in handle has more to do with increased signal fees and takeout which create a lot less plays for value bettors, which causes them to be pickier and play less. Secondly, those who cash tickets are getting back less, and have less to churn with. This phenomenon gets only will get worse, as these players who don't last as long as they used to have less urgency in coming back to the track as often, and some actually quit over time.
As for the Players Boycott's effectiveness, well how many tracks have increased takeout since California decided to? NONE! How many have lowered takeout on at least one wager? Lots. Even Parx and Penn have got into the action of reducing takeouts. The Boycott is good for Horseplayers, and that means it is good for horse racing's future.
VEGAS NUMBERS IMPROVING
Is this a leading indicator that the economy is about to rebound? How come we aren't seeing the same thing in horse racing?
Maybe it has a lot to do with the US government coming down hard on online poker. These players need to go somewhere, they are after all gamblers.
Too bad horse racing doesn't have the visible winners poker did. Oh wait, the takeout is too damn high for that to happen.
There is very good reason to believe that some online poker players are actually getting their feet wet in online horse racing now. Again, the fact they won't last very long means that racing is missing a golden opportunity right now. And the learning curve is very steep as well.
The online poker players willing to give horse racing a shot though are probably smart enough to get started at ADWs that give rebates, as they are by nature, very price conscious. This fact may help cultivate the odd player into a long term Horseplayer. The industry can only hope.
30 July 2011
Lasix: The Pros And The Cons
The Lasix debate is going strong right now as the Feds in the States are looking to ban race day drugs. The prevailing viewpoint is that drugs do not belong in athletes, and that competition should pit natural talent against natural talent.
Horse racing has always had a seedy side to it. From the use of cocaine at the turn of the last Century to the designer drugs of today, the idea of improving a horse's performance artificially to cash a bet or grab purse money is simply a reality in the game. The question is how prevalent it is.
From many a horseman's perspective, if it isn't on a banned list and/or it isn't tested for, it is legal. And stretching that a bit for some operations, if you can beat a test with little risk, why not go for it?
Horseplayers seem to be in favor of not only banning race day drugs but all performance enhancers.
I'm really not sure why the Feds got involved. They had to have been nudged. Who nudged them? Certainly not an HBPA groups. And why Lasix, and not other drugs that are much more potent even if taken a few days out?
One can Google search forever and still not find definitive results when it comes to concluding whether Lasix is needed or not. In Europe and Hong Kong and other jurisdictions, race day Lasix is not allowed, and reportedly most horses do not train on Lasix. However, there isn't much discussed about what they substitute, if anything, for Lasix, and what happens to most horses who are chronic bleeders. On the other side, most Horsemen in North America state emphatically that without Lasix, the percentage of horses who can not race anymore will be dramatically high.
PROS
1. Allegedly, around 5% of race horses most likely need Lasix in order to race. Again, this is a number that is speculated on. Prior to the legalization of Lasix, the amount of horses barred from racing was next to none. However, it is not known what percentage were retired or didn't make it to the races by choice.
2. It levels the playing field. Because Lasix is known to have other enhancement qualities other than preventing EIPH (for instance, it is a bronchodilator, which means it helps all horses breathe better). So, it just isn't fair that if a horse is a known bleeder that they should be the only horses to have the extra performance enhancements that Lasix gives a horse.
Another argument is that consistent use of Lasix causes less erratic form that could arise from heavy bleeding of a horse one race to mild bleeding the next race.
As a side note, when Lasix was first introduced, and only given to real bleeders, it turned out to be quite a handicapping angle. But now that virtually every horse in North America runs on Lasix, the first or second time angle means nothing.
3. If drugs are to be allowed, this is a cheap and powerful way to go.
4. The jury is out, but Lasix could have humane factors in reducing scar tissue by bleeders.
5. The controlled use of Lasix may prevent training outfits from experimenting and using other anti-bleeding medications that may even be more harmful to a horse's system than Lasix allegedly is.
CONS
1. It is a performance enhancer. Anything that potentially makes a horse run faster while having the substance in them versus not having the substance in them, in an enhancer. The "running to its potential" line is a pretty weak argument. It doesn't just help prevent bleeding, but also helps non bleeders breathe better, amongst other things as well.
2. It mask other drugs, and clouds tests. I know it, and you know it. Stop the nonsensical denial. Simply Google "Pass a marijuana test lasix"
Lasix: Take an 80 milligram dose of prescription diuretic lasix (furosemide). Prescription diuretics are the most potent. Some over the counter diuretics will color your urine blue and should be avoided. WARNING! -Diuretics can be harmful to people with kidney problems, pregnant women, and diabetics.-
Super Trainers are one of the biggest turn offs horse racing has to offer today. Not only for Horseplayers, but for honest Horsemen and as importantly owners and potential new owners. It is hard to get new blood in the game if you are consistently running for third money. Masking other performance enhancing drugs doesn't help the game at all. Outfits that experiment with drug concoctions leads to erratic performances, and this leads to lack of confidence from Horseplayers.
3. Lasix is a potent diuretic. The side effects are many. The fact that a horse needs an electrolyte jug after competition to replace vital fluids the horse lost from racing on Lasix is cause enough to question using the drug. It might even border on cruelty.
4. The North American breed is allegedly weaker because the best breeding candidates who have been successful on the track raced with Lasix. Would they still be running the same times without Lasix? Probably not in many cases because of the performance enhancement Lasix offers, whether the top horses were helped by bleeding less or breathing better, there is a good likelihood that a heredity weakness is being passed on today versus the pre-Lasix days. And there is the possibility that if Lasix wasn't used, we might see a whole different cast of top horses every year, probably running slightly slower final times collectively, but a much heartier group.
5. There is a correlation between horses starts per year and per life and Lasix usage over the past 15-20 years. Horse are making 2 less starts a year these days on average.
Whether it is a direct correlation, the jury is out again. It could be a combination of Lasix and training strategies, the higher use of other drugs (legal and illegal alike), and/or the the higher frequency of detailing (tapping of joints, etc.) that is being used by more elite and/or high percentage outfits (where horses have the kitchen sink put in them for every infrequent race).
6. Lasix is not used race day in jurisdictions outside Canada and the USA. They seem to get along fine without it. It wasn't used in North America prior to the 80's either, and horse racing seemed to get along fine without it.
7. The elimination of Lasix and other drugs would most likely make it cheaper to own horses (providing they don't really need Lasix to race). Horses may run relatively slower collectively by a few ticks, but that really isn't relevant at all. Cutting the costs of horse ownership would most likely lead to owners having bigger stables, and it would entice newbie owners to enter the game.
CONCLUSION
Horse racing would probably get along just fine if Lasix were banned on race day. However, Lasix seems to be the whipping boy of a more severe problem, and that is the other performance enhancing drugs and treatments (like EPO, DPO, synthetic venoms, and ITPP) that are being used by cheaters. Getting rid of race day Lasix is only a tiny step in leveling the playing field for bettors and honest horsemen.
Solving the problem requires making an exact list of treatments and allowable drugs, as well as severely fining anyone caught using drugs or treatments not on the list.
ADVERTISEMENT
Horse racing isn't about to lower takeout collectively anytime soon. At least most astute Horseplayers have some options:
HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM offers Horseplayers industry high Player Reward Bonuses. No minimums. Start getting bonuses immediately.
SPECIAL BONUS OFFER TO NEW MEMBERS AT HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM
BET $80 GET $40 DEPOSITED INTO YOUR ACCOUNT
Wager at least $80 in total, win or lose, and you will get $40 deposited into your account. You will also start receiving industry high Player Reward Bonuses daily as soon as you start wagering. To earn the $40 Bonus you must wager at least $80 in total within 7 days of making your initial deposit.
CLICK TO OPEN A FREE ACCOUNT
Why Horseplayersbet.com?:
* Industry High Player Reward Bonuses added to your account daily
* User friendly betting interface makes wagering easy
* FREE LIVE VIDEOS
* FREE RACE REPLAYS
* Wager Online or by Phone
* Great customer service
* 100% Parimutuel
* Bet cancellation capabilities
* No membership or wagering fees
* Green Dot & PINpocket fees rebated (deposits of $120 or more)
* No fees on debit/credit card deposits by phone of $100 or more
* Online credit card funding (4.5% fee rebated on 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. Sure, you still need skill and luck as well to succeed, 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.
Horse racing has always had a seedy side to it. From the use of cocaine at the turn of the last Century to the designer drugs of today, the idea of improving a horse's performance artificially to cash a bet or grab purse money is simply a reality in the game. The question is how prevalent it is.
From many a horseman's perspective, if it isn't on a banned list and/or it isn't tested for, it is legal. And stretching that a bit for some operations, if you can beat a test with little risk, why not go for it?
Horseplayers seem to be in favor of not only banning race day drugs but all performance enhancers.
I'm really not sure why the Feds got involved. They had to have been nudged. Who nudged them? Certainly not an HBPA groups. And why Lasix, and not other drugs that are much more potent even if taken a few days out?
One can Google search forever and still not find definitive results when it comes to concluding whether Lasix is needed or not. In Europe and Hong Kong and other jurisdictions, race day Lasix is not allowed, and reportedly most horses do not train on Lasix. However, there isn't much discussed about what they substitute, if anything, for Lasix, and what happens to most horses who are chronic bleeders. On the other side, most Horsemen in North America state emphatically that without Lasix, the percentage of horses who can not race anymore will be dramatically high.
PROS
1. Allegedly, around 5% of race horses most likely need Lasix in order to race. Again, this is a number that is speculated on. Prior to the legalization of Lasix, the amount of horses barred from racing was next to none. However, it is not known what percentage were retired or didn't make it to the races by choice.
2. It levels the playing field. Because Lasix is known to have other enhancement qualities other than preventing EIPH (for instance, it is a bronchodilator, which means it helps all horses breathe better). So, it just isn't fair that if a horse is a known bleeder that they should be the only horses to have the extra performance enhancements that Lasix gives a horse.
Another argument is that consistent use of Lasix causes less erratic form that could arise from heavy bleeding of a horse one race to mild bleeding the next race.
As a side note, when Lasix was first introduced, and only given to real bleeders, it turned out to be quite a handicapping angle. But now that virtually every horse in North America runs on Lasix, the first or second time angle means nothing.
3. If drugs are to be allowed, this is a cheap and powerful way to go.
4. The jury is out, but Lasix could have humane factors in reducing scar tissue by bleeders.
5. The controlled use of Lasix may prevent training outfits from experimenting and using other anti-bleeding medications that may even be more harmful to a horse's system than Lasix allegedly is.
CONS
1. It is a performance enhancer. Anything that potentially makes a horse run faster while having the substance in them versus not having the substance in them, in an enhancer. The "running to its potential" line is a pretty weak argument. It doesn't just help prevent bleeding, but also helps non bleeders breathe better, amongst other things as well.
2. It mask other drugs, and clouds tests. I know it, and you know it. Stop the nonsensical denial. Simply Google "Pass a marijuana test lasix"
Lasix: Take an 80 milligram dose of prescription diuretic lasix (furosemide). Prescription diuretics are the most potent. Some over the counter diuretics will color your urine blue and should be avoided. WARNING! -Diuretics can be harmful to people with kidney problems, pregnant women, and diabetics.-
Super Trainers are one of the biggest turn offs horse racing has to offer today. Not only for Horseplayers, but for honest Horsemen and as importantly owners and potential new owners. It is hard to get new blood in the game if you are consistently running for third money. Masking other performance enhancing drugs doesn't help the game at all. Outfits that experiment with drug concoctions leads to erratic performances, and this leads to lack of confidence from Horseplayers.
3. Lasix is a potent diuretic. The side effects are many. The fact that a horse needs an electrolyte jug after competition to replace vital fluids the horse lost from racing on Lasix is cause enough to question using the drug. It might even border on cruelty.
4. The North American breed is allegedly weaker because the best breeding candidates who have been successful on the track raced with Lasix. Would they still be running the same times without Lasix? Probably not in many cases because of the performance enhancement Lasix offers, whether the top horses were helped by bleeding less or breathing better, there is a good likelihood that a heredity weakness is being passed on today versus the pre-Lasix days. And there is the possibility that if Lasix wasn't used, we might see a whole different cast of top horses every year, probably running slightly slower final times collectively, but a much heartier group.
5. There is a correlation between horses starts per year and per life and Lasix usage over the past 15-20 years. Horse are making 2 less starts a year these days on average.
Whether it is a direct correlation, the jury is out again. It could be a combination of Lasix and training strategies, the higher use of other drugs (legal and illegal alike), and/or the the higher frequency of detailing (tapping of joints, etc.) that is being used by more elite and/or high percentage outfits (where horses have the kitchen sink put in them for every infrequent race).
6. Lasix is not used race day in jurisdictions outside Canada and the USA. They seem to get along fine without it. It wasn't used in North America prior to the 80's either, and horse racing seemed to get along fine without it.
7. The elimination of Lasix and other drugs would most likely make it cheaper to own horses (providing they don't really need Lasix to race). Horses may run relatively slower collectively by a few ticks, but that really isn't relevant at all. Cutting the costs of horse ownership would most likely lead to owners having bigger stables, and it would entice newbie owners to enter the game.
CONCLUSION
Horse racing would probably get along just fine if Lasix were banned on race day. However, Lasix seems to be the whipping boy of a more severe problem, and that is the other performance enhancing drugs and treatments (like EPO, DPO, synthetic venoms, and ITPP) that are being used by cheaters. Getting rid of race day Lasix is only a tiny step in leveling the playing field for bettors and honest horsemen.
Solving the problem requires making an exact list of treatments and allowable drugs, as well as severely fining anyone caught using drugs or treatments not on the list.
ADVERTISEMENT
Horse racing isn't about to lower takeout collectively anytime soon. At least most astute Horseplayers have some options:
HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM offers Horseplayers industry high Player Reward Bonuses. No minimums. Start getting bonuses immediately.
SPECIAL BONUS OFFER TO NEW MEMBERS AT HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM
BET $80 GET $40 DEPOSITED INTO YOUR ACCOUNT
Wager at least $80 in total, win or lose, and you will get $40 deposited into your account. You will also start receiving industry high Player Reward Bonuses daily as soon as you start wagering. To earn the $40 Bonus you must wager at least $80 in total within 7 days of making your initial deposit.
CLICK TO OPEN A FREE ACCOUNT
Why Horseplayersbet.com?:
* Industry High Player Reward Bonuses added to your account daily
* User friendly betting interface makes wagering easy
* FREE LIVE VIDEOS
* FREE RACE REPLAYS
* Wager Online or by Phone
* Great customer service
* 100% Parimutuel
* Bet cancellation capabilities
* No membership or wagering fees
* Green Dot & PINpocket fees rebated (deposits of $120 or more)
* No fees on debit/credit card deposits by phone of $100 or more
* Online credit card funding (4.5% fee rebated on 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. Sure, you still need skill and luck as well to succeed, 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.
19 July 2011
The Score In Canada: Soccer 1 Horse Racing Nil
In Canada eh, we have a Sports network called The Score. Mostly it is known for sports news and recaps, and they also show quasi sports events like WWE, martial arts fighting, poker tournaments, and soccer. Oh, they also have horse racing. On Mondays, they do a harness show called Bet Night Live, and they do the same thing for thoroughbreds on Wednesday nights. On Sundays they usually show the entire Woodbine card (until the baseball playoffs begin).
The Score is pretty much the place of final refuge for sporting events in Canada.
And to show how much horse racing is falling off the map here, on the Score on Wednesday nights, instead of showing the first four races at Woodbine, soccer is taking precedence after two or three races are run.
One aside, Canadians can still watch racing on a Premium Station (HPITV), so things aren't horrible here.
The Queen's Plate generally gets covered on CBC (Canada's largest nation wide TV station), and I remember when the other Triple Crown events were shown on CBC or, CTV I believe, as well. Those days are gone, gone, gone.
Anyway, on Sunday, Canadian racing's second Jewel of the Triple Crown (arguably the fourth to the eighth most important race of the year in Canada), was run at Fort Erie. The Woodbine Score show announced at the beginning that they would break away for soccer and come back to possibly watch a late race or two at Woodbine as well as the Prince of Wales Stakes....hopefully, if the soccer game didn't go into extra innings or whatever they do in soccer when the game is tied (actually, later in the afternoon, I found out they go into overtime).
I guess that it needs to be mentioned that the filly who won the Queen's Plate, whats her name....OK Googling...Inglorious, was a no show for the Prince of Wales, which was run on a dirt surface, so there was no chance of a Triple Crown winner this year.
That aside, this is still Canada. And the Prince Of Wales is Canadian content. I'm not sure if Brazil or Paraguay has a player on either team who has even visited Canada. But that is what won out over horse racing.
Even though Fort Erie racetrack is literally 5 minutes away from me, I just couldn't get motivated to show up there because the idea of the heat and wall to wall humans just didn't do it for me. I wound up hanging at home, watching the soccer overtime hoping for a quick goal that didn't happen, and then the shoot out (since no one scored in the overtime). The shoot out seemed to drag on, taking forever to begin, and since I knew that the POW was moments away, I was wondering what would happen if the shoot out was to continue the same time the race began. I'm pretty sure they would have stayed on the soccer game, but the game was decided with a grand 4 minutes to post time, so I can only speculate.
Even though the POW was only a 7 horse race, it did include a very exciting finish. Which brings me to the point about soccer. It seems that you have to wait intervals of around 10 to 15 minutes for a couple of seconds of excitement. It is very comparable to a live racetrack experience that way, but at least at a racetrack you know when it is going to be exciting. I just could never get into soccer. Paint drying, paint drying, paint drying, paint drying, oh there is a fly on the wall, I wonder if it will stick, paint drying, paint drying, paint drying.
Now, I think it is a fair argument that horse racing is not really a sport (if you don't believe me, check out the Score's main page and look for horse racing news), but a game of chance, but soccer over horse racing in Canada? How far has horse racing sunk in the ratings for that to happen?
I don't think Woodbine helps things when it comes to content (which I believe they control on the Score). On Sundays they show tracks like Belmont and even Monmouth ahead of the Canadian content that can be had at Fort Erie. I realize they probably make a lot more from their HPI customers at those tracks, but in order to build Canadian viewership in the long run, sacrifices need to be made. The Woodbine viewing audience is most likely more familiar with the Fort Erie horses (many come from Woodbine), and the breeders of Ontario horses and their families would most likely catch a glimpe of the has been it bred than a race from a US venue.
The Score is pretty much the place of final refuge for sporting events in Canada.
And to show how much horse racing is falling off the map here, on the Score on Wednesday nights, instead of showing the first four races at Woodbine, soccer is taking precedence after two or three races are run.
One aside, Canadians can still watch racing on a Premium Station (HPITV), so things aren't horrible here.
The Queen's Plate generally gets covered on CBC (Canada's largest nation wide TV station), and I remember when the other Triple Crown events were shown on CBC or, CTV I believe, as well. Those days are gone, gone, gone.
Anyway, on Sunday, Canadian racing's second Jewel of the Triple Crown (arguably the fourth to the eighth most important race of the year in Canada), was run at Fort Erie. The Woodbine Score show announced at the beginning that they would break away for soccer and come back to possibly watch a late race or two at Woodbine as well as the Prince of Wales Stakes....hopefully, if the soccer game didn't go into extra innings or whatever they do in soccer when the game is tied (actually, later in the afternoon, I found out they go into overtime).
I guess that it needs to be mentioned that the filly who won the Queen's Plate, whats her name....OK Googling...Inglorious, was a no show for the Prince of Wales, which was run on a dirt surface, so there was no chance of a Triple Crown winner this year.
That aside, this is still Canada. And the Prince Of Wales is Canadian content. I'm not sure if Brazil or Paraguay has a player on either team who has even visited Canada. But that is what won out over horse racing.
Even though Fort Erie racetrack is literally 5 minutes away from me, I just couldn't get motivated to show up there because the idea of the heat and wall to wall humans just didn't do it for me. I wound up hanging at home, watching the soccer overtime hoping for a quick goal that didn't happen, and then the shoot out (since no one scored in the overtime). The shoot out seemed to drag on, taking forever to begin, and since I knew that the POW was moments away, I was wondering what would happen if the shoot out was to continue the same time the race began. I'm pretty sure they would have stayed on the soccer game, but the game was decided with a grand 4 minutes to post time, so I can only speculate.
Even though the POW was only a 7 horse race, it did include a very exciting finish. Which brings me to the point about soccer. It seems that you have to wait intervals of around 10 to 15 minutes for a couple of seconds of excitement. It is very comparable to a live racetrack experience that way, but at least at a racetrack you know when it is going to be exciting. I just could never get into soccer. Paint drying, paint drying, paint drying, paint drying, oh there is a fly on the wall, I wonder if it will stick, paint drying, paint drying, paint drying.
Now, I think it is a fair argument that horse racing is not really a sport (if you don't believe me, check out the Score's main page and look for horse racing news), but a game of chance, but soccer over horse racing in Canada? How far has horse racing sunk in the ratings for that to happen?
I don't think Woodbine helps things when it comes to content (which I believe they control on the Score). On Sundays they show tracks like Belmont and even Monmouth ahead of the Canadian content that can be had at Fort Erie. I realize they probably make a lot more from their HPI customers at those tracks, but in order to build Canadian viewership in the long run, sacrifices need to be made. The Woodbine viewing audience is most likely more familiar with the Fort Erie horses (many come from Woodbine), and the breeders of Ontario horses and their families would most likely catch a glimpe of the has been it bred than a race from a US venue.
9 July 2011
Nothing Much New, Except For The HANA Ratings
Parimutuel handle down 5% in June, close to 8% for the year
Where is the bottom? Players continue to die off and they aren't being replaced. No reason for newbies to get into horse racing with its high learning curve. We need visible winners. That is what did it for poker. Sports betting and blackjack are perceived as beatable in the long term too, at least by a few lucky and smart gamblers. In other words, a carrot exists. There is no carrot in horse racing.
At least we are seeing a slight trend in reduced takeouts. It needs to be faster.
On the bright side, if you took California racing out of the equation, June's handle numbers might be close to on par with last year. I had to check, and yes, they are still racing in California. How long the track's can continue to absorb the losses thanks to the takeout hike is the big question? Don't expect honest answers though because they wouldn't admit it if they are only a few more boycotters away from going to 3 days a week.
Back in September I wrote a piece called "Is ITPP The Super Trainer's Drug Of Choice
Today?," well the drug finally made it to print in the DRF. Stan Bergstein states that money is needed to test for the drug. Here we are, 9 months after a hack blogger (me) gets wind what is happening, and there still isn't a test for this stuff.
By the time the racing industry gets off their butts, the next designer drug will come into play.
This is just too frustrating. Not only do bettors like myself shy away from races with super trainers in them, but horse owners who don't have super trainers have no chance to make money. Either cheat or go for third money. Either pay huge vet bills and supplement bills or go for fourth or fifth money.
Horse racing's high collective takeout rates already keep newbie Horseplayers away, now cheating trainers keep new horse owners away too.
HANA (Horseplayers Association of North America) has come out with their 2011 track ratings.
California tracks sunk badly, and the stats don't include this year's handle numbers which are down farther than the industry average.
Woodbine climbed up to 23rd in overall ratings, but in order to crack the top 5, takeout on supers, pick 3's, triactors, and pick 4's need to come down.
Apparently, according to Nick Eaves, they are working on a 2% reduction across the board, something Eaves stated was a priority when he took over the reigns at Woodbine last year.
Fort Erie climbed up a couple of tracks thanks to dropping their Pick 4 takeout to 14%.
Interestingly, the Fort Erie takeout drop was mentioned in a recent Blood Horse article about what Ohio needs to do now that they have slots:
CIS said Ohio racing must lower takeout rates “enough so that it becomes the lowest in the region and lures new bettors.” The consultants used Fort Erie Racetrack & Slots in Canada as an example, noting a reduction in the pick four takeout from 26.2% to 14% generated a 59% increase in handle in the first two weeks.
Controversy At Woodbine Yesterday
In the fourth race, the first leg of the Pick 4, the favorite 1A Kiama out broke the gate yesterday. She overcame the weird start to win the race. However, the Stewards (flipped a coin?) and decided that it was an unfair start, so they issued a refund. Well, except for those holding Pick 4 or Pick 3 tickets. They wound up with the new favorite, who didn't wind up as the official winner.
The problem is of course, that this looks like the exact situation that occurred last year when Fifty Proof broke through the gate and was allowed to keep the victory (in fact, there wasn't even an Inquiry).
Here is yesterday's race:
It would nice for bettors to have just a little consistency.
Where is the bottom? Players continue to die off and they aren't being replaced. No reason for newbies to get into horse racing with its high learning curve. We need visible winners. That is what did it for poker. Sports betting and blackjack are perceived as beatable in the long term too, at least by a few lucky and smart gamblers. In other words, a carrot exists. There is no carrot in horse racing.
At least we are seeing a slight trend in reduced takeouts. It needs to be faster.
On the bright side, if you took California racing out of the equation, June's handle numbers might be close to on par with last year. I had to check, and yes, they are still racing in California. How long the track's can continue to absorb the losses thanks to the takeout hike is the big question? Don't expect honest answers though because they wouldn't admit it if they are only a few more boycotters away from going to 3 days a week.
Back in September I wrote a piece called "Is ITPP The Super Trainer's Drug Of Choice
Today?," well the drug finally made it to print in the DRF. Stan Bergstein states that money is needed to test for the drug. Here we are, 9 months after a hack blogger (me) gets wind what is happening, and there still isn't a test for this stuff.
By the time the racing industry gets off their butts, the next designer drug will come into play.
This is just too frustrating. Not only do bettors like myself shy away from races with super trainers in them, but horse owners who don't have super trainers have no chance to make money. Either cheat or go for third money. Either pay huge vet bills and supplement bills or go for fourth or fifth money.
Horse racing's high collective takeout rates already keep newbie Horseplayers away, now cheating trainers keep new horse owners away too.
HANA (Horseplayers Association of North America) has come out with their 2011 track ratings.
California tracks sunk badly, and the stats don't include this year's handle numbers which are down farther than the industry average.
Woodbine climbed up to 23rd in overall ratings, but in order to crack the top 5, takeout on supers, pick 3's, triactors, and pick 4's need to come down.
Apparently, according to Nick Eaves, they are working on a 2% reduction across the board, something Eaves stated was a priority when he took over the reigns at Woodbine last year.
Fort Erie climbed up a couple of tracks thanks to dropping their Pick 4 takeout to 14%.
Interestingly, the Fort Erie takeout drop was mentioned in a recent Blood Horse article about what Ohio needs to do now that they have slots:
CIS said Ohio racing must lower takeout rates “enough so that it becomes the lowest in the region and lures new bettors.” The consultants used Fort Erie Racetrack & Slots in Canada as an example, noting a reduction in the pick four takeout from 26.2% to 14% generated a 59% increase in handle in the first two weeks.
Controversy At Woodbine Yesterday
In the fourth race, the first leg of the Pick 4, the favorite 1A Kiama out broke the gate yesterday. She overcame the weird start to win the race. However, the Stewards (flipped a coin?) and decided that it was an unfair start, so they issued a refund. Well, except for those holding Pick 4 or Pick 3 tickets. They wound up with the new favorite, who didn't wind up as the official winner.
The problem is of course, that this looks like the exact situation that occurred last year when Fifty Proof broke through the gate and was allowed to keep the victory (in fact, there wasn't even an Inquiry).
Here is yesterday's race:
It would nice for bettors to have just a little consistency.
1 July 2011
It Must Be The Economy
IT MUST BE THE ECONOMY
Well, that is the excuse that seems to be prevalent over in California, as the leaders over there look to blame everything except their disastrous decision to hike takeout at the beginning of the year.
It is estimated that handle at California A tracks will be down a whopping $400,000 million.
The horsemen are getting a bigger cut of the betting, so the big losers are the tracks. I doubt the tracks will be able to hold out much longer before drastic action will have to occur....either that or they can rescind the takeout hikes.
Meanwhile, it is hard to blame the economy when tracks like Will Rogers Down increased their handle by 92% during their meet that just ended. They increased their exposure, that was big, but they also maintained decent field size. Another big thing is that they sell their signal relatively lower than the average track. This is very appealing to bettors who get rebates. And with tracks in California going the opposite direction, tracks like Will Rogers win out from price sensitive bettors.
Going forward, Will Rogers (it just doesn't sound like the name of a racetrack) should think of a name change, maybe The Great Race Place or something like that.
Also, if it is the economy, how did Woodbine pull off a record handle last Sunday on Queen's Plate Day?
Economies go up and down, and I'm sure horse racing has been affected the last two years. However, when the economy was on the rise, horse racing handle was still trending downward.
With Horseplayers able to play just about anytime from just about anywhere, more than anytime ever, why is horse racing dying?
It is the price of the product (the takeout).
Two things at play here:
Horse racing is a thinking person's gamble. It has a steep learning curve too. How do you attract a thinking person to get motivated to learn the game when there are no visible winners?
Secondly, horse racing is still gambling. I believe every gambler, no matter how outwardly emotional or how Spock like they are, get some degree of highs when handicapping and or placing a bet and or watching a race and or cashing a bet.
The more races they handicap, the more bets they will place, the more races they will watch, and the more bets they will cash.
All the above is predicated on churn. Churn goes up, the lower the takeout, and goes down, the higher the takeout.
Keeping the gambler in the game is paramount in growing the game.
Racing right now is focusing on lowering takeout on low churn wagers (Pick 4's, 5's, and 6's). This is just a competition for the existing Horseplayer. It does nothing to grow the game.
Lower the takeout on WPS, doubles, exactors, and even triactors and dime supers, and then we might start to see actual growth.
Must Read Post Over At Pull The Pocket: Why Is Optimal Takeout So Hard To Understand
If you are a racing exec or in a Horseman's Group, read this article.
One more thing. Why are so many Horseman's Groups involved in how much a track can charge in way of takeout? Does Royale tell Walmart what price they have to sell toilet paper at?
Well, that is the excuse that seems to be prevalent over in California, as the leaders over there look to blame everything except their disastrous decision to hike takeout at the beginning of the year.
It is estimated that handle at California A tracks will be down a whopping $400,000 million.
The horsemen are getting a bigger cut of the betting, so the big losers are the tracks. I doubt the tracks will be able to hold out much longer before drastic action will have to occur....either that or they can rescind the takeout hikes.
Meanwhile, it is hard to blame the economy when tracks like Will Rogers Down increased their handle by 92% during their meet that just ended. They increased their exposure, that was big, but they also maintained decent field size. Another big thing is that they sell their signal relatively lower than the average track. This is very appealing to bettors who get rebates. And with tracks in California going the opposite direction, tracks like Will Rogers win out from price sensitive bettors.
Going forward, Will Rogers (it just doesn't sound like the name of a racetrack) should think of a name change, maybe The Great Race Place or something like that.
Also, if it is the economy, how did Woodbine pull off a record handle last Sunday on Queen's Plate Day?
Economies go up and down, and I'm sure horse racing has been affected the last two years. However, when the economy was on the rise, horse racing handle was still trending downward.
With Horseplayers able to play just about anytime from just about anywhere, more than anytime ever, why is horse racing dying?
It is the price of the product (the takeout).
Two things at play here:
Horse racing is a thinking person's gamble. It has a steep learning curve too. How do you attract a thinking person to get motivated to learn the game when there are no visible winners?
Secondly, horse racing is still gambling. I believe every gambler, no matter how outwardly emotional or how Spock like they are, get some degree of highs when handicapping and or placing a bet and or watching a race and or cashing a bet.
The more races they handicap, the more bets they will place, the more races they will watch, and the more bets they will cash.
All the above is predicated on churn. Churn goes up, the lower the takeout, and goes down, the higher the takeout.
Keeping the gambler in the game is paramount in growing the game.
Racing right now is focusing on lowering takeout on low churn wagers (Pick 4's, 5's, and 6's). This is just a competition for the existing Horseplayer. It does nothing to grow the game.
Lower the takeout on WPS, doubles, exactors, and even triactors and dime supers, and then we might start to see actual growth.
Must Read Post Over At Pull The Pocket: Why Is Optimal Takeout So Hard To Understand
If you are a racing exec or in a Horseman's Group, read this article.
One more thing. Why are so many Horseman's Groups involved in how much a track can charge in way of takeout? Does Royale tell Walmart what price they have to sell toilet paper at?
26 June 2011
Queen's Plate Prediction: Bowman's Causeway
My handicapping of big races of late has been pathetic but always keep in mind that even a broken watch is right twice a day, and I am due.
That being said, it is hard for me to state "bet the house" on Bowman's Causeway with confidence, however, it doesn't mean you can't bet the tool shed on him.
Unfortunately, jockey Eurico Rosa Da Silva isn't in the same rut as me, as he is going for his third Queen's Plate in a row, something that has never been done before.
He was second in the Plate Trial a few weeks back. He ran good, but Check Your Soul ran much better. The key word is "ran." Past tense. Horses who win generally have a lot going for them in the race they won (including being in peak form much of the time). Things change. You get better value wagering on the horse who didn't have everything go his own way the previous start, or a horse who just wasn't at a peak that race.
Here is a video of the Plate Trial. Yes, Check Your Soul won easily, however, Bowman's Causeway looks like a horse who needed the race and treated the race like a prep:
To round out the triactor, I like long shot Seawatch. Definitely worth throwing in.
There is an early post time for Woodbine's card today (12:25PM EST).
Handicapping tip. I've noticed through the years that when a jockey has a good shot in a big race, that jock might not be a good bet in the early races. I think it is a mixture of practicality (focusing on the huge purse), the possible fame that goes with it, the jockey's testing of track biases (using his mounts as guinea pigs), and possibly the idea of saving themselves for the big race and not putting themselves in a position to get injured (which might be on the back of their mind).
I would avoid Patrick Husbands mounts prior to the Plate today, unless you think he is on an immortal cinch. Eurico Rosa Da Silva may be another jockey to stay clear of. He would love to win this race a third year in a row. And possibly it might be a good idea to tread lightly on horses ridden by Luis Contreras who rides filly Inglorious.
The overall card at Woodbine today looks fairly predictable (for Woodbine which isn't saying a lot). Here are my selections (yep, I know I'll get comments afterwards on how bad a handicapper I am):
1st Race Playin'inmywhiskey
2nd Race Mollymook at a price
3rd Race Captain Raucous
4th Race Pit Alley/Aerial View
5th Race Silver Timber
6th Race Are You Kitten Me/R Unpainted Dancer
7th Race Windward Islands/Simmard
8th Race Bartletts
9th Race Opening Meet
10th Race Bowman's Causeway
11th Race Thunder Dancing
12th Race Gangster Rap
Fort Erie too, looks very predictable today. Don't forget, the Pick 4 takeout rate is only 14%.
Here you go:
1st Race: Sexy Made Simple (Best Bet of the day)
2nd Race: Vale of Avoca
3rd Race: Zlato
4th Race: Purple Satchel/Myah's Flight
5th Race: Decker West
6th Race: Limosano/Kennisis River
7th Race: Sharing The Love
8th Race: Voodoo Momma
That being said, it is hard for me to state "bet the house" on Bowman's Causeway with confidence, however, it doesn't mean you can't bet the tool shed on him.
Unfortunately, jockey Eurico Rosa Da Silva isn't in the same rut as me, as he is going for his third Queen's Plate in a row, something that has never been done before.
He was second in the Plate Trial a few weeks back. He ran good, but Check Your Soul ran much better. The key word is "ran." Past tense. Horses who win generally have a lot going for them in the race they won (including being in peak form much of the time). Things change. You get better value wagering on the horse who didn't have everything go his own way the previous start, or a horse who just wasn't at a peak that race.
Here is a video of the Plate Trial. Yes, Check Your Soul won easily, however, Bowman's Causeway looks like a horse who needed the race and treated the race like a prep:
To round out the triactor, I like long shot Seawatch. Definitely worth throwing in.
There is an early post time for Woodbine's card today (12:25PM EST).
Handicapping tip. I've noticed through the years that when a jockey has a good shot in a big race, that jock might not be a good bet in the early races. I think it is a mixture of practicality (focusing on the huge purse), the possible fame that goes with it, the jockey's testing of track biases (using his mounts as guinea pigs), and possibly the idea of saving themselves for the big race and not putting themselves in a position to get injured (which might be on the back of their mind).
I would avoid Patrick Husbands mounts prior to the Plate today, unless you think he is on an immortal cinch. Eurico Rosa Da Silva may be another jockey to stay clear of. He would love to win this race a third year in a row. And possibly it might be a good idea to tread lightly on horses ridden by Luis Contreras who rides filly Inglorious.
The overall card at Woodbine today looks fairly predictable (for Woodbine which isn't saying a lot). Here are my selections (yep, I know I'll get comments afterwards on how bad a handicapper I am):
1st Race Playin'inmywhiskey
2nd Race Mollymook at a price
3rd Race Captain Raucous
4th Race Pit Alley/Aerial View
5th Race Silver Timber
6th Race Are You Kitten Me/R Unpainted Dancer
7th Race Windward Islands/Simmard
8th Race Bartletts
9th Race Opening Meet
10th Race Bowman's Causeway
11th Race Thunder Dancing
12th Race Gangster Rap
Fort Erie too, looks very predictable today. Don't forget, the Pick 4 takeout rate is only 14%.
Here you go:
1st Race: Sexy Made Simple (Best Bet of the day)
2nd Race: Vale of Avoca
3rd Race: Zlato
4th Race: Purple Satchel/Myah's Flight
5th Race: Decker West
6th Race: Limosano/Kennisis River
7th Race: Sharing The Love
8th Race: Voodoo Momma
22 June 2011
Fort Erie 14% Pick 4 Takeout Continues To Gather Steam
Crunching the numbers from the past week ending yesterday (Tuesday) shows that the recent drop in takeout on the Pick 4 from 26.2% to 14% has become very popular amongst Horseplayers.
There was improvement in handle on Sunday, as $8,900 was wagered in total for both Pick 4s. That is compared to $8,200 from a year ago. But this increase was nothing compared to Monday and Tuesday when $20,000 and over $19,000 was wagered respectively, compared with $10,100 and $11,800 last year.
Comparing the total for all 6 Pick 4s, handle was up over 59%. That is amazing considering there has been very little written about the increase.
There is obviously a group of Horseplayers paying attention to takeout these days.
Unfortunately for Fort Erie, there has been no sign of spillover to other pools, as total handle for all pools was down over 20% the past three days.
It looks like that many Horseplayers have become aware that the Pick 4 at Fort Erie is a great deal, while the rest of the exotics suck big time, as the takeout on these bets remain at a minimum of 26.2%.
Maybe it is too early in the season for the 4 PM post time, or maybe the 4 PM post time on Mondays and Tuesdays is a little too late and should be changed to 2:30 or 3:00.
A ninth race on Mondays and Tuesdays would probably pay for themselves.
And what is with short field allowance races that attract horses who should be running at Woodbine? Those relatively high purse races aren't being bet, and they aren't good for the local economy if the winner is stationed at Woodbine.
Anyway, lets hope Fort Erie comes to the realization that some of their takeouts are ridiculously high. Lets also hope that Woodbine is paying attention, because some of their takeouts are relatively on the average to low side (exactors and doubles), and a low takeout Pick 4 could create lots of spillover into other pools.
There was improvement in handle on Sunday, as $8,900 was wagered in total for both Pick 4s. That is compared to $8,200 from a year ago. But this increase was nothing compared to Monday and Tuesday when $20,000 and over $19,000 was wagered respectively, compared with $10,100 and $11,800 last year.
Comparing the total for all 6 Pick 4s, handle was up over 59%. That is amazing considering there has been very little written about the increase.
There is obviously a group of Horseplayers paying attention to takeout these days.
Unfortunately for Fort Erie, there has been no sign of spillover to other pools, as total handle for all pools was down over 20% the past three days.
It looks like that many Horseplayers have become aware that the Pick 4 at Fort Erie is a great deal, while the rest of the exotics suck big time, as the takeout on these bets remain at a minimum of 26.2%.
Maybe it is too early in the season for the 4 PM post time, or maybe the 4 PM post time on Mondays and Tuesdays is a little too late and should be changed to 2:30 or 3:00.
A ninth race on Mondays and Tuesdays would probably pay for themselves.
And what is with short field allowance races that attract horses who should be running at Woodbine? Those relatively high purse races aren't being bet, and they aren't good for the local economy if the winner is stationed at Woodbine.
Anyway, lets hope Fort Erie comes to the realization that some of their takeouts are ridiculously high. Lets also hope that Woodbine is paying attention, because some of their takeouts are relatively on the average to low side (exactors and doubles), and a low takeout Pick 4 could create lots of spillover into other pools.
11 June 2011
Guess Who Has The Lowest Pick 4 Track Takeout
Monmouth? Close. Their Pick 4 takeout is 15%
Hollywood, Del Mar, and Santa Anita? Noooo. They raised the takeout on Pick 4's from 20.68% to 23.68% January 1st. Those dummies.
How about Woodbine? Uh that would be a no. 25%.
Keeneland or Churchill? Again close. 19%.
Aqueduct, Belmont, and Saratoga. Not even close at 26%.
Portland Meadows? You get part marks. They are now tied for the lowest rate at 14%. They used to be alone on top. But now they have been joined by Fort Erie Race Track.
You read that right. Starting tomorrow, Fort Erie has lowered the track takeout on Pick 4's from 26.2% to 14%.
From a press release: “We are testing the waters in terms of takeout reduction,” said FELRC’s Chief Operating Officer Rick Cowan. “Management will assess the results on a regular basis.”
Lets hope this is a massive success. I want Fort Erie to survive, but their track takeouts are way too high. If this drop works, I expect to see doubles and exactors to come way down too (there is plenty of room for some large drops).
This appears different than the disingenuous bone being tossed to Horseplayers by Hollywood Park when they recently put a low takeout Pick 5 on the menu. That bet has been successful despite the Horseplayers Boycott on California racing, and proof that there are plenty of cognizant players out there looking for value. But do you think they are doing anything with the empirical evidence and doing away with that larcenous takeout increase that occurred in January? The answer is a big fat no.
I'm truly hopeful that if this works, Fort Erie will make more moves that are player friendly in the near future.
There is an early Pick 4 that begins in race 1, and another that begins in race 4. If there is a 10 race card, a third one begins in race 7.
That pesky Horseplayer/Owner over at Pull The Pocket thinks "It's Time For Woodbine To Lower The Pick 4 Takeout."
It certainly is. With all the dysfunction going on in other jurisdictions, Woodbine could be on the runway to great growth. Lowering the triactor takeout from 27% to 25% recently was just is a minor step in the right direction. They need something that cries out "follow and play Woodbine daily."
BELMONT STAKES
My recent predictions haven't been all that great. You gotta keep picking yourself up and dusting yourself off though or you might as well be dead.
I'm pretty firm on my prediction today. I even think I have a decent shot at the Superfecta. I'm going with Nehro to win it, long shot Prime Cut to come second, the chalk Animal Kingdom for third, and Mucho Macho Man to finish fourth.
Tomorrow, HANA (Horseplayers Association of North America) is having another Pool Party, this time at Tioga Downs. Tioga even put together this promo on Youtube:
A few ADWs are supporting HANA on this, including Horseplayersbet.com which is giving an additional 2% reward on all wagers made on Sunday's card.
Update: TrackMaster has made free past performances available for tomorrow's Tioga card.
Hollywood, Del Mar, and Santa Anita? Noooo. They raised the takeout on Pick 4's from 20.68% to 23.68% January 1st. Those dummies.
How about Woodbine? Uh that would be a no. 25%.
Keeneland or Churchill? Again close. 19%.
Aqueduct, Belmont, and Saratoga. Not even close at 26%.
Portland Meadows? You get part marks. They are now tied for the lowest rate at 14%. They used to be alone on top. But now they have been joined by Fort Erie Race Track.
You read that right. Starting tomorrow, Fort Erie has lowered the track takeout on Pick 4's from 26.2% to 14%.
From a press release: “We are testing the waters in terms of takeout reduction,” said FELRC’s Chief Operating Officer Rick Cowan. “Management will assess the results on a regular basis.”
Lets hope this is a massive success. I want Fort Erie to survive, but their track takeouts are way too high. If this drop works, I expect to see doubles and exactors to come way down too (there is plenty of room for some large drops).
This appears different than the disingenuous bone being tossed to Horseplayers by Hollywood Park when they recently put a low takeout Pick 5 on the menu. That bet has been successful despite the Horseplayers Boycott on California racing, and proof that there are plenty of cognizant players out there looking for value. But do you think they are doing anything with the empirical evidence and doing away with that larcenous takeout increase that occurred in January? The answer is a big fat no.
I'm truly hopeful that if this works, Fort Erie will make more moves that are player friendly in the near future.
There is an early Pick 4 that begins in race 1, and another that begins in race 4. If there is a 10 race card, a third one begins in race 7.
That pesky Horseplayer/Owner over at Pull The Pocket thinks "It's Time For Woodbine To Lower The Pick 4 Takeout."
It certainly is. With all the dysfunction going on in other jurisdictions, Woodbine could be on the runway to great growth. Lowering the triactor takeout from 27% to 25% recently was just is a minor step in the right direction. They need something that cries out "follow and play Woodbine daily."
BELMONT STAKES
My recent predictions haven't been all that great. You gotta keep picking yourself up and dusting yourself off though or you might as well be dead.
I'm pretty firm on my prediction today. I even think I have a decent shot at the Superfecta. I'm going with Nehro to win it, long shot Prime Cut to come second, the chalk Animal Kingdom for third, and Mucho Macho Man to finish fourth.
Tomorrow, HANA (Horseplayers Association of North America) is having another Pool Party, this time at Tioga Downs. Tioga even put together this promo on Youtube:
A few ADWs are supporting HANA on this, including Horseplayersbet.com which is giving an additional 2% reward on all wagers made on Sunday's card.
Update: TrackMaster has made free past performances available for tomorrow's Tioga card.
5 June 2011
Handle Continues To Fall, Where Is The Bottom?
Handle was down another 7.8% in May compared to 2010. Racing dates were down, races were down, and so were purses. So much for less is more.
California racing is responsible for a good chunk of the drop, as the powers that be there continue to hold out against rescinding that idiotic takeout hike that occurred at the beginning of the year. Exotic wagers had an additional 2-3% takeout increase tacked on. Taking money faster from a dying customer base is hardly a way to grow a business.
Sure, the economy isn't helping, but horse racing's handle was dropping well before the recession hit, in fact, when the economy was growing, handle was on the downswing too. At this rate, 2011 handle will be close to 1995 levels. Absolutely disgusting since horse racing is probably the best gambling game out there (not taking takeout into consideration) for the thinking person, and taking into account that it has become a whole lot easier to wager on horses from anywhere over the last 16 years.
Even the heat on online poker sites that were ramped up again in May didn't help horse racing handle. But then again, the main reason poker players don't play horses is because of the ridiculous takeout rates which makes it impossible to beat the game in the long run (if you don't get rebates, and even with rebates, it is near impossible to beat the game, though there is a lot more hope).
In 1990, handle for the US and Canada combined was $10.2 billion. Inflation since then is up 75%. This means that if horse racing was keeping pace with inflation there should be $18 billion wagered. Population rates have increased around 20% since then, so the real number should be closer to $21 billion. It is only slightly higher than half that.
What happened? On the positive side, internet and phone wagering has made it easy to play many tracks a day. That definitely helps handle immensely. However, by taking gamblers away from the track, it takes away growth. Most Horseplayers alive today were weaned at the track by parents, friends, and/or other relatives. Those days are gone. Focusing on getting those days back will be a waste of energy as technology improvements and a day at the racetrack just don't jive anymore.
Another bad consequence to being able to wager on any race at any time is that the gambler just doesn't last anymore. Bankroll breaks become more frequent, and new hobbies take the place of horse racing.
Too many high takeout wagers have been added in recent years, taking money faster from Horseplayers. There are triactors and superfectas in every race these days, and with that are takeouts that are on the much higher end. Today's blended takeout rate is higher than 21% compared with a blend rate below 20% in the early 90's. One or two percent coupled with the ability to play many more tracks just kills the Horseplayer, who was a lot more likely to end the day with at least some money in the 90's giving them incentive to play the next day.
Of course, the biggest killer to handle has been alternative forms of gambling. Slots and lotteries have grown substantially since 1990 taking away lots of the dummy money that made it easier for Horseplayers who had half a clue to last a lot longer. The dummy players were also responsible for some growth, as they would bring out friends, and some would become regular Horseplayers over time. Now these potential newbies go play slots with their addicted friends or family members instead.
Low takeout games like sports betting and poker have also taken out a lot of Horseplayers, but more importantly, potential Horseplayers, who could have easily replaced the Horseplayers who have died since 1990. The main attraction to long term gamblers who are thinkers is that they get involved in a game that is possibly beatable in the long run. Both poker and sports betting is perceived as such. Horse racing, no chance. There is no reason to get involved in racing's learning curve for a newbie.
With internet poker on the outs (at least in the USA) and rebates becoming more readily available to the majority of Americans, one would figure that we should be at the bottom, but it just isn't happening.
The takeout increase in California has hurt the chance of finding a bottom just yet, as they do a significant amount of handle per year, and even though most Horseplayers aren't cognizant of takeout when wagering, they get back less and become disenchanted a lot quicker. They wind up devoting less time to the game.
Also, we are seeing signal fees on the increase. This is hurting the rebate player who makes up a lot of the handle.
It is a misconception that most rebate players win money. Most lose, they just last longer than if they didn't receive a rebate, though they have a greater incentive to become better and possibly win money in the long run. An increase in signal fees is like a takeout hike to rebate players. They end up with less to churn, and that is bad for handle. Value players have less plays as well going into a race. Again, handle suffers.
It appears that signal fees are now going in the opposite direction of optimal levels. That and a slightly higher collective blended takeout rate are probably responsible for the decrease in handle we've seen over the past year or so. Both work against having visible long term winners, the one thing racing desperately needs if it ever going to grow again.
Tracks closing or cutting days doesn't help at all. If you are a player, there are still tons of ways to erode your bankroll every day. Less racing means less growth because there are less people being exposed to live racing (not that this is a major source of growth these days, everything helps though).
Looks like the HANA Boycott of California racing is still on.
It is disheartening to see that California Fairs, which start up in a couple of weeks, have decided to increase takeout (2% on exactors and doubles, 3% on all other wagers). Despite all the empirical evidence against a takeout hike, it seems California is just a hopeless jurisdiction for Horseplayers.
Fort Erie handle is still terrible. Looks worse than last year. Reminds me of a deer in the headlights. Sure, they are working their butts off trying to get people to the track, but they have their head in the sand when it comes to what it takes to get gamblers to play the track. A 26% takeout on exactors and doubles turns off cognizant players (a lot more players are aware of takeout today than ever before) all across North America. It also creates less value for value players with lower probable payoffs. And when it comes to the live players Fort Erie attracts, taking their money faster just isn't the way to go. More people leave broke and if they are broke, they are a lot less likely to return.
Fort Erie needs to drop takeout rates at least on doubles and exactors, and they should also introduce a $1 Pick 5 that can be carried over.
The Plate Trial and The Oaks At Woodbine
Today we'll find out if I am right and Bears Chill is the best 3 year old right now in North America. The only 3 year old in his ball park this year is the injured Uncle Mo. Lets see what kind of rating he can get going around two turns. To complete the exactor I like long shot Sandy Gully. I'm hoping they don't kill each other, and it would be nice if it isn't a closer's track. Bowman's Causeway looks to be bred for the polytrack, but may need one off his last disastrous performance.
Can a recent $20,000 claim win the Oaks. Maybe. I like Spooky's Kitten today. She should be closer to the lead this time out, and may have needed the last one. Inglorious may bounce so she is worth betting against. Marketing Mix could improve enough to be right there today, and might find the distance to her liking.
California racing is responsible for a good chunk of the drop, as the powers that be there continue to hold out against rescinding that idiotic takeout hike that occurred at the beginning of the year. Exotic wagers had an additional 2-3% takeout increase tacked on. Taking money faster from a dying customer base is hardly a way to grow a business.
Sure, the economy isn't helping, but horse racing's handle was dropping well before the recession hit, in fact, when the economy was growing, handle was on the downswing too. At this rate, 2011 handle will be close to 1995 levels. Absolutely disgusting since horse racing is probably the best gambling game out there (not taking takeout into consideration) for the thinking person, and taking into account that it has become a whole lot easier to wager on horses from anywhere over the last 16 years.
Even the heat on online poker sites that were ramped up again in May didn't help horse racing handle. But then again, the main reason poker players don't play horses is because of the ridiculous takeout rates which makes it impossible to beat the game in the long run (if you don't get rebates, and even with rebates, it is near impossible to beat the game, though there is a lot more hope).
In 1990, handle for the US and Canada combined was $10.2 billion. Inflation since then is up 75%. This means that if horse racing was keeping pace with inflation there should be $18 billion wagered. Population rates have increased around 20% since then, so the real number should be closer to $21 billion. It is only slightly higher than half that.
What happened? On the positive side, internet and phone wagering has made it easy to play many tracks a day. That definitely helps handle immensely. However, by taking gamblers away from the track, it takes away growth. Most Horseplayers alive today were weaned at the track by parents, friends, and/or other relatives. Those days are gone. Focusing on getting those days back will be a waste of energy as technology improvements and a day at the racetrack just don't jive anymore.
Another bad consequence to being able to wager on any race at any time is that the gambler just doesn't last anymore. Bankroll breaks become more frequent, and new hobbies take the place of horse racing.
Too many high takeout wagers have been added in recent years, taking money faster from Horseplayers. There are triactors and superfectas in every race these days, and with that are takeouts that are on the much higher end. Today's blended takeout rate is higher than 21% compared with a blend rate below 20% in the early 90's. One or two percent coupled with the ability to play many more tracks just kills the Horseplayer, who was a lot more likely to end the day with at least some money in the 90's giving them incentive to play the next day.
Of course, the biggest killer to handle has been alternative forms of gambling. Slots and lotteries have grown substantially since 1990 taking away lots of the dummy money that made it easier for Horseplayers who had half a clue to last a lot longer. The dummy players were also responsible for some growth, as they would bring out friends, and some would become regular Horseplayers over time. Now these potential newbies go play slots with their addicted friends or family members instead.
Low takeout games like sports betting and poker have also taken out a lot of Horseplayers, but more importantly, potential Horseplayers, who could have easily replaced the Horseplayers who have died since 1990. The main attraction to long term gamblers who are thinkers is that they get involved in a game that is possibly beatable in the long run. Both poker and sports betting is perceived as such. Horse racing, no chance. There is no reason to get involved in racing's learning curve for a newbie.
With internet poker on the outs (at least in the USA) and rebates becoming more readily available to the majority of Americans, one would figure that we should be at the bottom, but it just isn't happening.
The takeout increase in California has hurt the chance of finding a bottom just yet, as they do a significant amount of handle per year, and even though most Horseplayers aren't cognizant of takeout when wagering, they get back less and become disenchanted a lot quicker. They wind up devoting less time to the game.
Also, we are seeing signal fees on the increase. This is hurting the rebate player who makes up a lot of the handle.
It is a misconception that most rebate players win money. Most lose, they just last longer than if they didn't receive a rebate, though they have a greater incentive to become better and possibly win money in the long run. An increase in signal fees is like a takeout hike to rebate players. They end up with less to churn, and that is bad for handle. Value players have less plays as well going into a race. Again, handle suffers.
It appears that signal fees are now going in the opposite direction of optimal levels. That and a slightly higher collective blended takeout rate are probably responsible for the decrease in handle we've seen over the past year or so. Both work against having visible long term winners, the one thing racing desperately needs if it ever going to grow again.
Tracks closing or cutting days doesn't help at all. If you are a player, there are still tons of ways to erode your bankroll every day. Less racing means less growth because there are less people being exposed to live racing (not that this is a major source of growth these days, everything helps though).
Looks like the HANA Boycott of California racing is still on.
It is disheartening to see that California Fairs, which start up in a couple of weeks, have decided to increase takeout (2% on exactors and doubles, 3% on all other wagers). Despite all the empirical evidence against a takeout hike, it seems California is just a hopeless jurisdiction for Horseplayers.
Fort Erie handle is still terrible. Looks worse than last year. Reminds me of a deer in the headlights. Sure, they are working their butts off trying to get people to the track, but they have their head in the sand when it comes to what it takes to get gamblers to play the track. A 26% takeout on exactors and doubles turns off cognizant players (a lot more players are aware of takeout today than ever before) all across North America. It also creates less value for value players with lower probable payoffs. And when it comes to the live players Fort Erie attracts, taking their money faster just isn't the way to go. More people leave broke and if they are broke, they are a lot less likely to return.
Fort Erie needs to drop takeout rates at least on doubles and exactors, and they should also introduce a $1 Pick 5 that can be carried over.
The Plate Trial and The Oaks At Woodbine
Today we'll find out if I am right and Bears Chill is the best 3 year old right now in North America. The only 3 year old in his ball park this year is the injured Uncle Mo. Lets see what kind of rating he can get going around two turns. To complete the exactor I like long shot Sandy Gully. I'm hoping they don't kill each other, and it would be nice if it isn't a closer's track. Bowman's Causeway looks to be bred for the polytrack, but may need one off his last disastrous performance.
Can a recent $20,000 claim win the Oaks. Maybe. I like Spooky's Kitten today. She should be closer to the lead this time out, and may have needed the last one. Inglorious may bounce so she is worth betting against. Marketing Mix could improve enough to be right there today, and might find the distance to her liking.
25 May 2011
Maybe Luck Can Save Horse Racing
HBO's upcoming series Luck is being touted as the next Sopranos. Luck is all about horse racing. Chantal Sutherland is in it too. She plays an exercise rider.
Horse racing definitely has a seedy side. Always has. And this series will definitely magnify it and blow it out of proportion. But so what? Some say there is no such thing as bad publicity (I'm not sure Barbaro's demise helped horse racing), I think that statement is very true here. As long as the show has some focus on gambling (and the preview indicates it), I think this will be good exposure for the game.
The key is that no matter how shady some of the gamblers are, if they even give an inkling that the game can be beat in the long run, it just may spark viewers enough to create new Horseplayers.
The movie Secretariat didn't focus on the gambling aspect of horse racing at all, nor did the rise of Zenyatta. Luck may be the catalyst horse racing needs. Now if only horse racing execs can make a concerted effort to make the game actually winnable in the long run by reducing takeouts (not just on gimmick Pick 5's), we might just see some growth and some light at the end of the tunnel for the industry which continues on its downward spiral:
HT EQUIDAILY
Pull The Pocket has a good post up on positioning horse racing from a marketing stand point. Conclusion, way too many cooks without a clue. There are right answers out there, but those who have a say today, give the wrong answers and worst of all, act on them.
HANA ANNOUNCES POOL PARTY FOR MOLSON PACE NIGHT AT WESTERN FAIR ON FRIDAY
HANA (Horseplayers Association Of North America) has organized a late PICK for Pool Party. Track takeout for Western Fair's Pick 4 is 15%.
On that night, Canadian Horseplayers through HPI will get 10 times rewards on triactors. Most American Horseplayers can get a great deal too at ADWs like Horseplayersbet.com.
Here is a free program from Western Fair's site for Friday night.
Horse racing definitely has a seedy side. Always has. And this series will definitely magnify it and blow it out of proportion. But so what? Some say there is no such thing as bad publicity (I'm not sure Barbaro's demise helped horse racing), I think that statement is very true here. As long as the show has some focus on gambling (and the preview indicates it), I think this will be good exposure for the game.
The key is that no matter how shady some of the gamblers are, if they even give an inkling that the game can be beat in the long run, it just may spark viewers enough to create new Horseplayers.
The movie Secretariat didn't focus on the gambling aspect of horse racing at all, nor did the rise of Zenyatta. Luck may be the catalyst horse racing needs. Now if only horse racing execs can make a concerted effort to make the game actually winnable in the long run by reducing takeouts (not just on gimmick Pick 5's), we might just see some growth and some light at the end of the tunnel for the industry which continues on its downward spiral:
HT EQUIDAILY
Pull The Pocket has a good post up on positioning horse racing from a marketing stand point. Conclusion, way too many cooks without a clue. There are right answers out there, but those who have a say today, give the wrong answers and worst of all, act on them.
HANA ANNOUNCES POOL PARTY FOR MOLSON PACE NIGHT AT WESTERN FAIR ON FRIDAY
HANA (Horseplayers Association Of North America) has organized a late PICK for Pool Party. Track takeout for Western Fair's Pick 4 is 15%.
On that night, Canadian Horseplayers through HPI will get 10 times rewards on triactors. Most American Horseplayers can get a great deal too at ADWs like Horseplayersbet.com.
Here is a free program from Western Fair's site for Friday night.
19 May 2011
Knowing Who's Gonna Win Kinda Takes The Fun Out Of It
I hope this video embeds well. You may have to click the arrow a couple of times if it doesn't work the first time (it should open within the blog post eventually so close any popups).
I love The Beverly Hillbillies and caught this episode a few weeks ago on TV. This is classic horse racing comedy. Don Rickles helps. The real good stuff starts at around the 11:45 mark.
Jed Clampett's system: "I just pick out the horse that looks like he can outrun the others."
I think there are a few Horseplayers who handicap that way these days. With the flagrant use of concoctions and treatments like hyperbaric oxygen chambers, it might be the best way to make money. The past performances become less and less of a reliable tool.
"There must be 50,000 people here." Thems were the days. Takeouts were around 15%, and there was plenty of churn because you could only wager on a handful of exotics each day. Some Horseplayers could actually leave the joint with more money than they came in with.
Advertisement
Horse racing isn't about to lower takeout collectively anytime soon. At least many astute Horseplayers have some options.
HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM offers Horseplayers industry high Player Reward Bonuses. No minimums. Start getting bonuses immediately.
SPECIAL BONUS OFFER TO NEW MEMBERS AT HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM
BET $80 GET $40 DEPOSITED INTO YOUR ACCOUNT
Wager at least $80 in total, win or lose, and you will get $40 deposited into your account. You will also start receiving industry high Player Reward Bonuses daily as soon as you start wagering. To earn the $40 Bonus you must wager at least $80 in total within 7 days of making your initial deposit.
CLICK LOGO TO OPEN A FREE ACCOUNT
Why Horseplayersbet.com?:
* Industry High Player Reward Bonuses added to your account daily
* User friendly betting interface makes wagering easy
* FREE LIVE VIDEOS
* FREE RACE REPLAYS
* Wager Online or by Phone
* Great customer service
* 100% Parimutuel
* Bet cancellation capabilities
* No membership or wagering fees
* Green Dot & PINpocket fees rebated (deposits of $120 or more)
* No fees on debit/credit card deposits by phone of $100 or more
* Online credit card funding (4.25% fee rebated on 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. Sure, you still need skill and luck as well to succeed, and 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.
I love The Beverly Hillbillies and caught this episode a few weeks ago on TV. This is classic horse racing comedy. Don Rickles helps. The real good stuff starts at around the 11:45 mark.
Jed Clampett's system: "I just pick out the horse that looks like he can outrun the others."
I think there are a few Horseplayers who handicap that way these days. With the flagrant use of concoctions and treatments like hyperbaric oxygen chambers, it might be the best way to make money. The past performances become less and less of a reliable tool.
"There must be 50,000 people here." Thems were the days. Takeouts were around 15%, and there was plenty of churn because you could only wager on a handful of exotics each day. Some Horseplayers could actually leave the joint with more money than they came in with.
Advertisement
Horse racing isn't about to lower takeout collectively anytime soon. At least many astute Horseplayers have some options.
HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM offers Horseplayers industry high Player Reward Bonuses. No minimums. Start getting bonuses immediately.
SPECIAL BONUS OFFER TO NEW MEMBERS AT HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM
BET $80 GET $40 DEPOSITED INTO YOUR ACCOUNT
Wager at least $80 in total, win or lose, and you will get $40 deposited into your account. You will also start receiving industry high Player Reward Bonuses daily as soon as you start wagering. To earn the $40 Bonus you must wager at least $80 in total within 7 days of making your initial deposit.
CLICK LOGO TO OPEN A FREE ACCOUNT
Why Horseplayersbet.com?:
* Industry High Player Reward Bonuses added to your account daily
* User friendly betting interface makes wagering easy
* FREE LIVE VIDEOS
* FREE RACE REPLAYS
* Wager Online or by Phone
* Great customer service
* 100% Parimutuel
* Bet cancellation capabilities
* No membership or wagering fees
* Green Dot & PINpocket fees rebated (deposits of $120 or more)
* No fees on debit/credit card deposits by phone of $100 or more
* Online credit card funding (4.25% fee rebated on 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. Sure, you still need skill and luck as well to succeed, and 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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)