As the Meadowlands readies itself for the opening of the first Championship Meet under new management, it is a good time for a progress report on the Meadowlands after the first four months of the meet. Overall, it has been a success, realistically better than many doubters thought yet the detractors are still out there being critical of the Meadowlands. Are these doubters right?
Hardly, remember how far down the Meadowlands had fallen? The last few years the Meadowlands had been running on a shoe-string budget while still running a race meet supplemented by subsidies except for last year when the meet was raced without subsidies and the bottom fell out. Going to the Meadowlands felt like going to a mausoleum for a burial as you couldn't help but feel the somber mood. As for the racing, once the Pennsylvania tracks opened up, the quality of the race meet went down the tubes and last year you were hard pressed to fill a race card and the many short fields made for unbettable races. Attendance? If you were on the grandstand level of the facility, the seating was probably 90% empty even on Hambletonian Day..
So where are we this year? Let's take a look. To be fair, since there was no racing last year in April, we don't have an apples to apples comparisons and the region was blessed with the lack of a real winter this year.
Attendance - The tracks still looks empty, but let's not kid ourselves, attendance could have doubled and the track would have looked empty. The track grandstand is way too big for modern day racing. The fact is attendance was up 5.2%. When was the last time the Meadowlands showed an increase in attendance?
Handle - Over the first 41 days, overall handle on Meadowlands racing was up 8.8% with wagering on live racing being up 15.3%. That is 15.3% more of live racing commissions. The average handle was 2,304,167 a night. with $304,124 being bet on the Meadowlands on track. The 15.3% increase means $40.372 was bet more on the races at the Meadowlands which is the same as an increase of $80,745 bet on Meadowlands races off track. Any other expectations are simply not realistic.
Racing Quality - The racing quality was pretty good at the start of the meet until the Pennsylvania tracks started opening up. Then the quality droppped, but so far the Meadowlands has been able to card the normal number of races each day and more importantly, the fields have been for the most part, full. There has been some innovative attempts to keep horses at the Meadowlands with the Survivor series and overnight virtual late closing series. While we have been seeing $10,000 claimers, the $7,500 claiming races have been kept to a minimum up to now. Did anyone realistically expect racing quality to improve? Racing with no subsidies of any kind, how is the Meadowlands going to compete against slot-fueled purses at Harrah's Philadelpia, Pocono Downs, and Yonkers Raceway in New York? As long as Pennsylvania and New York have slots and the Meadowlans has to do without, nothing is going to change unless the Meadowlands races even fewer dates (something no one wants to see) or handles explode..
Perhaps the most important thing at the Meadowlands right now is hope. Where there was doom and gloom at the Meadowlands, the attitudes of customers are changing as there is hope for the future. Yes, the track is still for the most part empty, but there is optimism for the future, especially when the new grandstand opens, a grandstand which is appropriate for the new racing environment. With the Championship meeting starting Friday, there will be more promotions to make the track a more friendly environment including some new events to make the track part of the community and to continue drawing more people. Hopefully, this will translate in getting new people interested in racing and gambling.
Will there be mistakes? Absolutely. If anyone thinks every single promotion is going to work, they are kidding. Some events are going to do better than others; at least there is a willingess to try. The key is to learn what your customers want and be able to deliver it. No sense bemoaning the quality of racing as it is out of everyone's control. With the Bayonne OTW opening in July, hopefully more revenue will be coming into the system to increase purses.
Bottom line is the Meadowlands is off to a good start. Here's hoping the growth continues.
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
You Make the Call - Post Script
Remember the blog entry You Make The Call where we discussed whether or not the trotter Emily Do should have been disqualified or not last week and how difficult judging can be? Well she was back in action last night at Pocono Downs; more about that in a moment.
In the replay of the race, it looked to me like Emily Do was rough-gaited and possibly off-stride at the end of the race. When I saw the isolated slo-mo, it became obvious to me she definitely was on a break though I thought it was possible the trotter was back on gait at the very last second (I must acknowledge the video was a bit grainy to say it with 100% certainty). The judges did post the inquiry sign to see if there was a violation of the breaking rule and they decided there was no violation. Apparently, they didn't think there was even a break as the trotter was given a clean line.
Last week I asked a former and a current driver to take a look at the race and both of them said they weren't sure. The current driver indicated Emily Do was off-stride but appeared to be back on when the flash of the photographer went off, but not knowing where the photographer was standing in conjunction to the finish line it was hard to make a call, especially with the quality of the video. He pointed out the judges have access to different angles than the replay showed and certainly better quality video.
As for the those blog readers who decided to respond, it was basically unanimous; the judges blew it big time. You had no doubt Emily Do was off-stride at the end of the mile and felt there was a violation of the breaking rule.
So now, let's return to last night when Emily Do was racing. The public loved her and made her a 1.50-1 favorite. Unfortunately, the racing gods were not kind to her. Parked out to the half mile pole, it apparently was too much for the trotter to keep up so she jumped off stride approaching the half mile marker and once again in the stretch.
Now, I am not going to re-debate last week's race. For arguement sake, let's accept the judges call. If you are a gambler who relies solely on the past performance lines as being gospel, you may have very well wagered on the Emily Do last night. Odds are if you were there last week or are one to watch video replays, there is an excellent chance you would have stayed away from Emily Do like the plague, especially at 3-2.
So what does this teach us? allow me to present my top three handicapping rules:
Now, I will be the first one to say I am a recreational player so I don't watch the replays. Besides, with all the tracks one can wager on, you need to be a full-time gambler to watch all the races you should be watching. If you don't watch the replays, you are at a big disadvantage when you are wagering against serious gamblers (which you are doing when it comes to pari-mutuel or exchange wagering).
Being I know this and I love racing as a sport first, it is not that big a deal. To me, going to the track is entertainment, so winning or losing on a particular night is not paramount to me (though I need to have some winning nights). However, I know I am in a very small minority as most people come to the track (and watch on their laptops) for the gambling. I also believe while the serious handicappers will always have an advantage over the recreational gambler, racing must do its best to make the betting landscape as fair as possible for the little guy. How can this be done? I call them racing responsibilities (RRs for short):
In the replay of the race, it looked to me like Emily Do was rough-gaited and possibly off-stride at the end of the race. When I saw the isolated slo-mo, it became obvious to me she definitely was on a break though I thought it was possible the trotter was back on gait at the very last second (I must acknowledge the video was a bit grainy to say it with 100% certainty). The judges did post the inquiry sign to see if there was a violation of the breaking rule and they decided there was no violation. Apparently, they didn't think there was even a break as the trotter was given a clean line.
Last week I asked a former and a current driver to take a look at the race and both of them said they weren't sure. The current driver indicated Emily Do was off-stride but appeared to be back on when the flash of the photographer went off, but not knowing where the photographer was standing in conjunction to the finish line it was hard to make a call, especially with the quality of the video. He pointed out the judges have access to different angles than the replay showed and certainly better quality video.
As for the those blog readers who decided to respond, it was basically unanimous; the judges blew it big time. You had no doubt Emily Do was off-stride at the end of the mile and felt there was a violation of the breaking rule.
So now, let's return to last night when Emily Do was racing. The public loved her and made her a 1.50-1 favorite. Unfortunately, the racing gods were not kind to her. Parked out to the half mile pole, it apparently was too much for the trotter to keep up so she jumped off stride approaching the half mile marker and once again in the stretch.
Now, I am not going to re-debate last week's race. For arguement sake, let's accept the judges call. If you are a gambler who relies solely on the past performance lines as being gospel, you may have very well wagered on the Emily Do last night. Odds are if you were there last week or are one to watch video replays, there is an excellent chance you would have stayed away from Emily Do like the plague, especially at 3-2.
So what does this teach us? allow me to present my top three handicapping rules:
- Rule #1 - Racelines do not tell the whole story.
- Rule #2 - If you are wagering serious amounts of money, you better be watching replays.
- Rule #3 - If you can't watch all the replays, you better not be betting serious amounts of money unless you like throwing money away.
Now, I will be the first one to say I am a recreational player so I don't watch the replays. Besides, with all the tracks one can wager on, you need to be a full-time gambler to watch all the races you should be watching. If you don't watch the replays, you are at a big disadvantage when you are wagering against serious gamblers (which you are doing when it comes to pari-mutuel or exchange wagering).
Being I know this and I love racing as a sport first, it is not that big a deal. To me, going to the track is entertainment, so winning or losing on a particular night is not paramount to me (though I need to have some winning nights). However, I know I am in a very small minority as most people come to the track (and watch on their laptops) for the gambling. I also believe while the serious handicappers will always have an advantage over the recreational gambler, racing must do its best to make the betting landscape as fair as possible for the little guy. How can this be done? I call them racing responsibilities (RRs for short):
- RR #1 - Judges must strive for 100% accuracy. Yes, mistakes will be made, but realize your decision not only impacts gamblers this week, it impacts gamblers next week.
- RR #2 - Racelines must be as accurate as possible.
- RR #3 - Meaningful comments on each raceline. - What if Emily Do's last comment line said 'rough deep stretch'? Odds are she wouldn't have gone off 3-2 last night and may not even have been the favorite.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
Communication is a Two-Way Street
Over on a message board where they were talking about fans being able to select which races will comprise the Win 4 on Molson Pace Day at Western Fair District, an American gambler was frustrated he were unable to make $.20 wagers on their Win 4 and Superfectas as Canadian customers are able to do. The poster was annoyed the problem was fixed at WEG tracks and felt The Raceway at WFD was being unresponsive.
Sometimes things are not what they seem. Turns out the people at WFD are aware of the problem and while it seems the track doesn't care, such an impression is far from the truth. The people at WFD are aware of the problem and share the frustration the poster is expressing and has had their tote provider working on the problem for quite a while. Everyone involved has hoped to have this problem fixed a while ago, alas it has not happened. However, it is hoped this problem will be fixed shortly and American gamblers will then be able to wager the same minimums Canadian citizens are able to do.
Racing does not need their customers feeling like they are being taken for fools. Is there a way to keep customers in the loop to problems such as above so their customers (and potential customers) will know their concerns are being addressed? Perhaps. However, I am a firm believer if you don't ask, you can't complain. You want to know why a track is not offering a certain wager or why they don't have a certain minimum on a wager? Ask. Write (email) the track. Maybe they don't think there is a demand for a type of wager you like; your letter may be the one to tip the scales to prove there is a demand for a it. Don't think a track cares what you think or is taking advantage of you? Maybe you will find out this is not the case as in the above case where WFD is working on the problem. Communication is a two-way street. You don't ask, you don't get an answer. Customers have rights but they also have responsibilities. Communicating concerns is one of those responsibilites.
Standardbred fans in Central New York will be treated to some marquee drivers on Sundays this year at Tioga Downs as drivers Jason Bartlett, Dan Noble and Mark McDonald have committed to drive at the Nichols oval on Sunday afternoons.
Sometimes things are not what they seem. Turns out the people at WFD are aware of the problem and while it seems the track doesn't care, such an impression is far from the truth. The people at WFD are aware of the problem and share the frustration the poster is expressing and has had their tote provider working on the problem for quite a while. Everyone involved has hoped to have this problem fixed a while ago, alas it has not happened. However, it is hoped this problem will be fixed shortly and American gamblers will then be able to wager the same minimums Canadian citizens are able to do.
Racing does not need their customers feeling like they are being taken for fools. Is there a way to keep customers in the loop to problems such as above so their customers (and potential customers) will know their concerns are being addressed? Perhaps. However, I am a firm believer if you don't ask, you can't complain. You want to know why a track is not offering a certain wager or why they don't have a certain minimum on a wager? Ask. Write (email) the track. Maybe they don't think there is a demand for a type of wager you like; your letter may be the one to tip the scales to prove there is a demand for a it. Don't think a track cares what you think or is taking advantage of you? Maybe you will find out this is not the case as in the above case where WFD is working on the problem. Communication is a two-way street. You don't ask, you don't get an answer. Customers have rights but they also have responsibilities. Communicating concerns is one of those responsibilites.
Standardbred fans in Central New York will be treated to some marquee drivers on Sundays this year at Tioga Downs as drivers Jason Bartlett, Dan Noble and Mark McDonald have committed to drive at the Nichols oval on Sunday afternoons.
Florida Report
Pompano Park's GiGi Diaz interviews drivers Wally Hennessey and Joe Pavia Jr. about their feelings regarding the UFO sulky. It is interesting to hear their takes on whether the sulky does or doesn't make the horse.
This past Friday, the Florida Supreme Court let stand a lower court ruling which basically means slot machines can be installed at any parimutuel facility in the state of Florida provided the legislature approves it; no state-wide referendum is required. How big an impact this will have on racing at Pompano Park remains to be seen. However, it may cause trouble with Calder and Gulfstream Park as this will allow Hialeah Racetrack, the track at the core of the decided court case to offer big purses and since a quarter horse track in Florida is legally allowed to offer some thoroughbred races, it may draw horses and wagering away from the two Southeast Florida tracks.
Speaking about Hialeah, track operator John Brunetti has dropped his case against the NJSEA for awarding the right to operate Monmouth Park to the NJTHA. As part of the settlement, the NJTHA has agreed to discuss forming a circuit between Monmouth Park and Hialeah Park which means if Gulfstream and Calder attempt to strong arm their horsemen and jockeys from racing at Hialeah, there would be no shortage of horses available to race at Hialeah.
Funny thing about the New York Times current series on horse racing abuse is the fact people are upset about the Times coming out with their latest story during Derby week with some people complaining that it merely is a means to sell newspapers. Of course the NYT is running this expose in an effort to sell newspapers; this is what happens in a capitalistic society, but the fact is everyone complaining about when the article ran or attacking the paper for its reporting are misdirecting their anger. Instead of attacking the New York Times, these people should be looking within for without the wrongdoing, there would be nothing for them to report. Society has changed its attitude with regards to animals and what used to be ignored in the past with race horses is no longer accepted; this is one of the reasons why the use of a whip in harness racing is going to become a big issue to the general public before long.
Another day, another story regarding the possibility of race horses going to slaughter in Ontario if the Slots at Tracks program isn't restored or replaced with a new funding mechanism for racing. I have no doubt there will be culling of stables if some of the B tracks close, but with horse shortages south of the border , I suspect the potential blood letting is being overstated. On thing for sure, should such a wholesale slaughter of horses occur in Ontario, anti-racing operatives in Canada and the United States will be watching. It may be the slaughter of surplus racehorses putting the nail in horse racing altogether in Canada, not the loss of slot revenue.
NYRA Needs to Go
Since people are so focused on the Kentucky Derby, we may as well take a stroll on the wild side and talk about what is going on with the wonderful people at NYRA, the New York Racing Association. Specifically, is there anything which will cause NYRA to lose their franchise to operate Aqueduct, Belmont, and Saratoga racetracks?
Remember the accidental takeout mistake where NYRA was taking the incorrect takeout rate? It turns out according to a NYSRWB interim report that it wasn't so accidental. In fact, it allegedly was a deliberate attempt to increase the cash position of NYRA. At this point, NYRA's CEO Charles Hayward and General Counsel Patrick Kehoe have been put on administrative leave without pay with regards to this scandal. This alleged conspiracy not to charge the legal takeout rate cost bettors $8.5 million. Those who have ADW accounts where the bets can be traced back will be credited but for those who don't have wagering accounts that played NYRA races for the fifteen months the takeout was incorrect are out of luck. Sure they are now paying it back by temporarily reducing the takeout rate, but what if they never got caught?
Of course, the NYSRWB is not without blame. Don't they audit the tracks to makes sure the current rates are being charged, especially for a franchise as troubled as NYRA? After all, what are the NYSRWB people doing in the tote room? A simple calculator could have detected the incorrect payments.
This is not the first time NYRA has run into problems. Back in 2005, NYRA was rocked by a scandal where the Clerk of Scales at the time was not reporting overweights. In 2003, NYRA was indicted and then agreed to a deferred prosecution agreement on income tax invasion and money laundering charges. Then of course, there is their bankruptcy and government bailouts.
It is clear NYRA is a dysfunctional organization. The time has come for the NYSRWB to revoke the license of NYRA to operate the race meets and the state should either find a new operator or privatize operation of the three tracks which comprise NYRA. Of course, the question is will they? If the allegation in the interim report are true, NYRA stole from gamblers, plain and simple. To allow NYRA to maintain operation of the racetracks operated by them would be the ultimate in disregard for the gambler and will show that the NYSRWB could care less about horseplayers.
This case also shows the problem of states owning. Does anyone think the NYSRWB would have accepted such a track record from Finger Lakes ownership? If something similar happened at Finger Lakes or any other privately operated track in New York, the license to operate a race meet would have been revoked and the racing commission would have stepped in until the track operator was able to sell the track. Clearly you can't adequately regulate an organization the state has a vested interest in.
NYRA and the NYSRWB are both in the spotlight. Let's see what happens.
Remember the accidental takeout mistake where NYRA was taking the incorrect takeout rate? It turns out according to a NYSRWB interim report that it wasn't so accidental. In fact, it allegedly was a deliberate attempt to increase the cash position of NYRA. At this point, NYRA's CEO Charles Hayward and General Counsel Patrick Kehoe have been put on administrative leave without pay with regards to this scandal. This alleged conspiracy not to charge the legal takeout rate cost bettors $8.5 million. Those who have ADW accounts where the bets can be traced back will be credited but for those who don't have wagering accounts that played NYRA races for the fifteen months the takeout was incorrect are out of luck. Sure they are now paying it back by temporarily reducing the takeout rate, but what if they never got caught?
Of course, the NYSRWB is not without blame. Don't they audit the tracks to makes sure the current rates are being charged, especially for a franchise as troubled as NYRA? After all, what are the NYSRWB people doing in the tote room? A simple calculator could have detected the incorrect payments.
This is not the first time NYRA has run into problems. Back in 2005, NYRA was rocked by a scandal where the Clerk of Scales at the time was not reporting overweights. In 2003, NYRA was indicted and then agreed to a deferred prosecution agreement on income tax invasion and money laundering charges. Then of course, there is their bankruptcy and government bailouts.
It is clear NYRA is a dysfunctional organization. The time has come for the NYSRWB to revoke the license of NYRA to operate the race meets and the state should either find a new operator or privatize operation of the three tracks which comprise NYRA. Of course, the question is will they? If the allegation in the interim report are true, NYRA stole from gamblers, plain and simple. To allow NYRA to maintain operation of the racetracks operated by them would be the ultimate in disregard for the gambler and will show that the NYSRWB could care less about horseplayers.
This case also shows the problem of states owning. Does anyone think the NYSRWB would have accepted such a track record from Finger Lakes ownership? If something similar happened at Finger Lakes or any other privately operated track in New York, the license to operate a race meet would have been revoked and the racing commission would have stepped in until the track operator was able to sell the track. Clearly you can't adequately regulate an organization the state has a vested interest in.
NYRA and the NYSRWB are both in the spotlight. Let's see what happens.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)