Many people, myself included, believe one of the biggest problems harness racing is facing is there is too much racing. Too many dates results in a fixed pool of wagering dollars being split in many small pieces which results in pools so small that anyone other than the recreational gamblers is likely not to bet. Too many races results in horse shortages at race tracks which results in short fields and inferior racing which further erodes wagering. Basically, we are cheapening the product. This needs to stop.
Yesterday, there were eight harness tracks racing in the United States (this excludes the eight Canadian tracks which some ADW and simulcast customers can wager on). Eight tracks racing in the middle of winter. If we were still in the pre-Internet days, this would not be a problem as each track would have their own market and the vast majority of the wagering was done on track. With tracks like the Red Mile offering simulcast wagering on eleven harness tracks in one day; it is clear that the gambling dollar is being divvied up into miniscule portions. When tracks like the Red Mile and Freehold take wagers on Canadian tracks like Fraser Downs, it is clear to see there is no local market anymore; a track in East Rutherford, New Jersey is in the same geographical market as a track in Cloverdale, British Columbia. Thanks to the Internet, within five years this new market will be including harness tracks in Australasia and Europe. With the vast amount of gambling dollars being wagered off track, this spells disaster for harness racing. Clearly the number of racing days needs to be cut so the gambling pie is cut into fewer pieces.
Racing days will be cut, there is no question. While the market will decide how the dates will be cut, we can influence how the reduction will occur. Many people will argue we need to get rid of race tracks with only the strongest surviving. They are wrong. The problem is not the number of tracks racing; it is the number of days we are racing, especially if we are attempting to expand our audience. It is true with the prominence of the Internet, you don't need to be at a race track to wager; just sign up with an ADW and you are good to go. But just because you have the ability to wager on harness racing doesn't mean you will. You need to be exposed to it; to be able to 'kick the tires' and that is done by visiting a local harness track. Once you are able to go to a race track and experience harness racing up close and learn the fundamentals then you are likely to wager on the sport over the Internet, not before.
We don't need eight month or year round racing at any one track. Our major tracks should race no more than three months a year; the minor ones should race no more than six weeks. With year round simulcast wagering and, in some states, slot revenue, horsemen can be racing for huge purses during these shorter meets. Even at harness tracks without slots, purses would become a lot more meaningful. With fewer tracks racing at any one time, the quality of racing would improve and thanks to larger fields, meaningful wagering pools will make wagering worthwhile for our heavy hitters. More importantly, by keeping the smaller tracks racing for shorter periods of times, we will have the ability to promote these boutique meets and draw large crowds to our 'events' to expose a new generation to the sport. Tracks will be able to generate profits instead of losses by cutting their expenses dramatically.
Such changes can't happen overnight. We need to evolve by gradually reducing dates in coordination with other tracks within a geographical region. Begin offering regional sire stakes programs to complement individual state programs. Give horsemen and the market a chance to gradually adjust to the new market. In the long run, we will have a stronger, more attractive product to offer the wagering public.
No comments:
Post a Comment