CHRB-Brackpool on funding its programs,"Something is going to give,"

[Kelso]

Originally Posted by andymays

I'm hoping to see the exacta and double takeout drop a little

"A little?" Only "A LITTLE?!?" If that's the best for which we can reasonably hope, it's time to toss the turf into the surf.

"A little" should translate to "boycott continues."

[andymays]

Originally Posted by Kelso

Only "a little?" If that's the best we can reasonably expect, it's time to toss the turf into the surf.

"A little" should translate to "boycott continues."

What do you want the takeout to be?

[Kelso]

Originally Posted by pondman

No we don't.

We want to see good racing-- and don't want to see it turn into Mountaineer. The worst thing you could do it bring in a herd of $1,500 claimers.

"Good racing" means "what class matched fields with betting value." I think most bettors are just as happy finding overlays in nickel claiming races as they are finding them in open allowances.

"Good racing" doesn't require "good horses." It requires only full, competitive fields.

[Kelso]

Originally Posted by Southieboy

If there was a merger, what would the racing calendar look like?

What's NoCal weather like from May to October? Is it very much cooler, in general, than in SoCal? If so ... how 'bout summer racing up north and "winter" racing in the south?

[Kelso]

Originally Posted by andymays

What do you want the takeout to be?

According to HANA's 2010 survey, Exactas and Doubles are at 19% in New York, Kentucky, New Jersey and West Virginia. Tampa DDs are 18%.

If they ever decide to get serious about restoring a profitable customer base, they should start by handily beating all of the above, and promoting the hell out of it. (They should also examine parlaying the decrease with free admission and cheap parking. Maybe knock off another 2-4% for on-track wagers.)

[andymays]

Originally Posted by Kelso

According to HANA's 2010 survey, Exactas and Doubles are at 19% in New York, Kentucky, New Jersey and West Virginia. Tampa DDs are 18%.

If they ever decide to get serious about restoring a profitable customer base, they should start by handily beating all of the above, and promoting the hell out of it. (They should also examine parlaying the decrease with free admission and cheap parking. Maybe knock off another 2-4% for on-track wagers.)

They should never have raised it in the first place. Having said that all this crap is a lot more complicated than people think it is. Very few people know what it's like to negotiate with all the different organizations. It's nuts.

[Kelso]

Originally Posted by andymays

few people know what it's like to negotiate with all the different organizations. It's nuts.

I'm sure you're right. But I think most of us know enough about it to be very happy that it's you, Roger, Jeff and Dean (sincere apology to those I missed) ... and not we ... who are trying to crack those thick skulls. (THANK YOU!!)

[andymays]

Originally Posted by Kelso

I'm sure you're right. But I think most of us know enough about it to be very happy that it's you, Roger, Jeff and Dean (sincere apology to those I missed) ... and not we ... who are trying to crack those thick skulls. (THANK YOU!!)

If they do anything else it will be incrementally. You have to show them the numbers to get anything done. The last handle spreadsheet done by Charlie and Bill (I think Bill did some of it) broke it down perfectly and they couldn't deny the comparison of WPS to all of the exotics except the P5. There have been a lot of little things done by quite a few people that have made a big difference. The early pick 5 with 14% takeout has been a much bigger success than they anticipated and I have a feeling Del Mar and Santa Anita will continue with it. That was our doing and we gained some respect from the people in charge because of it.

Thanks,

Andy

[Deepsix]

Hey Andy/RW, lots has been learned along the way. Thanks for your hard work and dedication, though we differ from time-to-time.

[andymays]

Originally Posted by Deepsix

Hey Andy/RW, lots has been learned along the way. Thanks for your hard work and dedication, though we differ from time-to-time.

We appreciate the compliments. There's a long way to go.

[Southieboy]

Hope everyone enjoyed the $34.65 50¢ late pick 4 & $60 Pick 8 tonight.

[pondman]

Originally Posted by Horseplayersbet.com

It has been proven that takeout and field size are the biggest factors when it comes to handle (it is about gambling, and creating value for the Horseplayer). Purse size and quality is almost worthless going forward for tracks looking to use that as an excuse to get more handle, except that purses are supposed to attract more horses per race at many venues.

I this were true, you'd all be playing at Mountaineer and Finger lakes.

People want a competitive field with little larceny-- not broken down $1,500 claimers being subsidized. Large fields will mean nothing if the horses aren't up to par. Bringing in cheap, subsidized horse would mean nothing for California racing except for places such as LA. These horses wouldn't even make it at the Fairs.

[toussaud]

Originally Posted by pondman

I this were true, you'd all be playing at Mountaineer and Finger lakes.

People want a competitive field with little larceny-- not broken down $1,500 claimers being subsidized. Large fields will mean nothing if the horses aren't up to par. Bringing in cheap, subsidized horse would mean nothing for California racing except for places such as LA. These horses wouldn't even make it at the Fairs.

this is true. we want bigger fields, but again, i don't think most horse players realize what they want.

gulfstream did it right by having big and competitive /classy fields. you have to have both.

[andymays]

Originally Posted by toussaud

this is true. we want bigger fields, but again, i don't think most horse players realize what they want.

gulfstream did it right by having big and competitive /classy fields. you have to have both.

That's right. Having a cheap claiming race with 10 horses in the first or second race of the day is fine.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Originally Posted by pondman

I this were true, you'd all be playing at Mountaineer and Finger lakes.

People want a competitive field with little larceny-- not broken down $1,500 claimers being subsidized. Large fields will mean nothing if the horses aren't up to par. Bringing in cheap, subsidized horse would mean nothing for California racing except for places such as LA. These horses wouldn't even make it at the Fairs.

I'm talking about going forward. California, NY, etc. already have a faithful established market. Cheapening up the circuits will not drive the faithful away just as increasing purse size by itself won't increase the faithful...increasing the takeout and/or decreasing the field size will and does reduce the faithful however.