CANADIAN GAMBLING NEWS AND ISSUES

Quality Road Looks Good In the Breeders Cup Classic

2009-11-05T11:41:00.005-05:00

It is that time of year again, when horseplayers around the world focus on two (should be one) days of championship horse racing. For me, it is eenie meenie minie, moe time, more or less.

I feel much more comfortable handicapping races where at least one third to one half of the field have raced against each other recently, and at least three quarters of the field are circuit regulars. Needless to say, this isn't the case when it comes to the Breeders Cup.

I'm going to admit it now, this year, I actually put in some time handicapping. I spent half of yesterday trying to figure out the cards at Santa Anita for both Friday and Saturday. I usually handicap cards a half hour or less before post time, so yes, I'm taking things seriously this time out.

Still, handicapping these races are very difficult because of all of the chaotic factors associated with things like polytrack, recency, big fields, European shippers, etc.

In the Classic, I really like Quality Road. He looks like he is on the improve. Sloppy tracks cloudy his form. He is nearly undefeated on a fast track, and he is undefeated on artificial surfaces (OK, he is zero for zero on poly but Elusive Quality sired horses are no slouches on plastic).

He looks like he is made for this race. He'll be close enough to the pace, and is also capable of very good late pace numbers. 35 days off is my only concern.

Here is the 2009 Jockey Club Gold Cup:

Summer Bird got a better trip, and was under urging for a good chunk of the race as well. Quality Road just came up short. He might not come up short on Saturday.

A horse familiar with the track, Colonel John, cannot be overlooked. He is very similar in style to Quality Road, but the 126 pounds may hurt him at this distance, though that wasn't the case in the Travers.

I really don't like Zenyatta. I even doubt she will hit the board. Her figures are inferior to at least 3 of the known horses, and there are a couple of European invaders who, if they transfer their numbers to the poly, will be very tough as well.

If you bet on favourites on either day this year, you better love them, and I mean love them. I'm expecting the payouts to be large in most Breeders Cup races. Click here for long shot plays worthy of having on your exotic tickets.

The following are what I believe are vulnerable favourites:

Lillie Langtry
Blind Luck
Careless Jewel
Interactif
Goldikova
Zenyatta

I really think Rachel Alexandra (how is that for stating the obvious?) would have jogged in the Ladies Classic, and Zenyatta will probably have wished she went there instead.

Click here for picks by members of the Thoroughbred Bloggers Alliance.

Canadian Breeders Cup Bettors Beware
If you bet at Woodbine, through HPI, or at a track that is affiliated with HPI, you better expect lower than track payoffs if you hit a triactor or Pick 3, etc.

Woodbine Entertainment is no fan of lower takeouts, and California has some of the lowest takeouts in horse racing (15.43% on WPS and 20.68% on all other bets). Woodbine has deemed that their takeout on triactors, supers, Pick 3's, Pick 4's, etc. are totally unacceptable, so they ramp up the takeout for their valued customer to reflect a 25% takeout.

Here are payoffs for yesterday's (November 4th) 8th race at Santa Anita Woodbine's payoff first, and Santa Anita's real payoff in parenthesis. The payouts were small so you need to appreciate the percentage differences:

$2 Daily Double $6.90 (6.80)
$1 Super High 5 $127.95 (136.20)
$2 Exactor $12.70 (12.60)
$1 Pick 3 $17.85 (19.00)
$1 Pick 4 $216.85 (230.90)
$1 Pick 5 $706.45 (752.10)
$1 Superfecta $65.80 (70.00)
$2 Triactor $19.90 (21.80)

You'll notice that Woodbine actually paid higher for the exactor and double. This is because in Ontario, prices are rounded down to the dime on $2 based payoffs. In most of the states, prices are rounded down to the nearest 20 cents on every 2 dollar based payoff. So one out of two times roughly, you can actually get a better payoff at Woodbine by a dime on exactors, doubles and WPS winning bets.

But the horrendous part is that if you are fortunate enough to cash something else, and something that pays real money, you will get around 93.9% of the actual payout if you cash through HPI.

Yeah, I've heard the argument that Canadians don't have to pay withholding and that horse race winnings are tax free in Canada. But how many people win in the long run anyway? Not many, especially those who play without substantial rebates.

Canadian tax laws are no excuse for Woodbine's pompous disdain and larcenous behaviour it has for its customer.

If Woodbine can't justify paying track odds, they shouldn't take the signal. They are ripping off, for the most part, an unsuspecting public, and showing absolutely no respect to those who know the scoop.

If you hit a triactor that pays $3000 for a buck at Santa Anita on a Breeders Cup race on Friday or Saturday, you will receive only around $2817 through HPI or at Woodbine or one of their affiliated teletheatres, etc. That is a complete rip off, and I don't understand how they get away with it, but they do.

Another ridiculous rule that hasn't been rectified is the fact that if you bet through a Canadian ADW or at a Canadian track you can't bet 10 cent, 20 cent, or 50 cent bets when that is in fact the minimum for certain bets at almost every track. If you want to play, you have to make the base bet at least a dollar.

But don't think this is just affecting Canadians. If you bet through a US ADW on a Canadian track offering bets that have less than a dollar base, you can't take advantage of the lower minimums in this case either.

AD BELOW

Horseplayersbet.com has a fantastic promotion going on right now: A 20% match on your initial deposit (for deposits up to $1000).

This means that if you open a Horseplayersbet.com account and deposit $500, once you bet $500, you will get $100 placed in your account (within 72 hours).

And to make things really easy Horseplayersbet.com has waived the Debit and Credit Card fee of 4% on deposits of $100 or more. You can also fund your account immediately with Green Dot as well. ACH's take three business days to clear.

Horseplayersbet.com is available to residents of 30 states in the USA, and is 100% parimutuel. Great betting interface, and free live video as well. Not available to residents of Canada.

For more information, CLICK HERE.

Horseplayersbet.com also has one of the best Player Rewards Program available to even the smallest player.

Back In The 60's You Could Bet $8 Million On A Horse And Not Even Affect The Odds

2009-11-02T09:47:00.007-05:00

Ah yes, the good ole days. In Hollywood, when someone needed money desperately, and/or in a hurry, one of the only options was to go to the track and bet like a maniac. The only other real competition to this was robbing a bank.

I was reminded of this, on Halloween night. My job was to be in the kitchen on high alert, waiting for kids to come to door, so I could hand out candies and make sure my dog was reminded not to bite little people in scary costumes, though I don't blame her for being freaked out.

One of the US channels was playing and Addams Family marathon. It was one of my favourite shows when I was a kid. It is funnier today than it was back then by the way. The episode played at around 8ish and was named The Addams Family Splurges.

Bored and looking for excitement, the Addams Family decide that going to the moon would make for a great holiday destination. They consulted their home built computer (Whizzo) to find out how much such a trek would cost and found it to be slightly over a billion dollars (seeing the computer in action gave me a deeper appreciation for the Google search engine).

In short, they decide to make the billion at the track, using selections from the computer. The idea was to start with $2000 and parlay until the billion was made.

Here is the episode on Youtube:

"I seem to remember having an extra couple of thousand to bet with lying around here somewhere." Classic.

Now of course, there was obvious silliness and things that made no sense like when Fester wondered where the money went and was told it is in a safe at the bank. Or the idea that they were negotiating canceling the bet when there weren't cell phones (or mentions of them back then).

And those Hollywood stretch runs that last over a minute are a pet peeve of mine, as well as when they change the horse and/or its position when switching from those viewing the race to the actual race itself. And those quick DQs too just make me cringe.

The best part of the episode though, is that an $8 million bet wouldn't affect the odds of a 100-1 shot. Racetracks across the world would love that to be the case.

JCapper may be great software today, but it just can't come close to competing with Whizzo.

One more thing. Does anyone have any idea which track was being shown in the episode? Hialeah? Tropical Park?

On a serious note, lets hope the condition of Canadian born jockey Julia Brimo improves. She fell down hard in the first race at Keeneland on Saturday. At latest report she is still in critical condition.

Also, check out the New Deal as proposed by Pompano racing exec John Berry. Cutting takeout to 12% throughout the industry would be fabulous.

Where Berry comes up short is the real reason this would be successful and how it would lead to actual growth.

Horseplayers will last longer, which means they will devote more time gambling on horses, which will inevitably draw in friends, family and/or coworkers to the game as well. At least it ups the chance that they will get exposed to horse racing.

Also, the odd long term winner will be created, and this will inevitably draw in new players as well be it word of mouth or the internet.

The reason slots are so successful is that they get the odd newbie because of an addicted family member or friend. But if the addicted person had to face an 80% payback, they wouldn't go nearly as much if at all eventually.

In his example, he is saying that there will be an additional $50,000 lost by patrons each day. Yet he contends that bettors will be leaving with more money each day. So it is contingent on bettors playing a lot more often, and it implies new players coming in, because bettors don't have a bottomless pit of money.

In a nutshell, his idea would work, but not for the only reason he cites.

Good interview by HANA with a Betfair exec. It is a must read. Good move by the Breeders Cup.

I'm still not sure this deal benefits Betfair though, because allowing its customers to bet into large takeouts will cause many of their customers to lose too quickly and may cost them customers in the long term, just as North American racing has managed to do over the last 40 years.

Steve Davidowitz article up at Trackmaster (free registration required). His view on how to solve racing's most pressing problems. Takeout takeout takeout. OK, not just that.

Bettors Want Bigger Fields Over Higher Quality Fields

2009-10-30T10:27:00.002-04:00

Cool poll over at Pace Advantage: Which would you rather bet on? High quality horses in races with short fields or low quality horses in races with full fields?

At the time of this posting, over 88% of voters chose full fields. I'm not surprised full fields is preferred, but the margin is a bit of a shock.

Takeout and track surface are also factored in big time by bettors, and that explains why Woodbine, with their big fields, fails to attract significant betting.

Looking at Woodbine's recent pathetic handles I have to wonder if they just need to go back to the drawing board and start over. With the fabulous purse structure they have, the near monopoly on horse race gambling they have in Canada as well, it is inexcusable to have handle numbers that range between $1.2-$1.6 million on Wednesday's and Thursdays. Even $2.5 million on Saturdays isn't anything to brag about either when compared to A tracks like Keeneland.

If not for slots, Woodbine would have been bankrupt a long time ago. Their leadership needs to go. They have killed a great game.

What good do $1 million dollar races at Woodbine do? They do have a couple of $5 million handle days thanks to them, but when you analyze things, they actually lose money on those days.

Are those days good for the Canadian economy? Not really. Most of the purse monies are grabbed by non Canadian outfits shipping in horses and the money leaves the country.

Does it help the Canadian/Ontario breeding industry? Nope. The horses that end up with the big money rarely have an ounce of Canadian blood in them.

How about creating more bettors? There is absolutely no evidence that new bettors have been created. Since Willmot took the reigns, very few new bettors have been created in Ontario. In fact, many older bettors have either died or took their business elsewhere. And if one looks at the handle numbers right before or after the big races, there is no apparent change when it comes to creating new business.

Besides drastically lowering takeout, Woodbine would be best advised to knock it off with the extraordinarily high purse paid out in their biggest races, and use their resources to attract and sustain Canadian outfits. Woodbine gives out too much to allowance runners as well (5 horse fields running for $100,000 purses aren't worth it as they attract little to no betting).

Woodbine should give out more money to lower end claimers, allowing new local owners/partnerships (Ontarians) a shot to make money and build a stable. Inevitably, these new owners will come to the track more, expose more friends and family to horse racing (taking them out to the track when their horses run). They will also be more inclined to buy yearlings (thus helping the local breeding industry). Like bettors, owners are more apt to play a lot longer the more money they receive each time they are victorious.

Delaware Bucks Downward Trend In Racing
Delaware ran 27 less days this year, but their total handle (not daily, total) was up.

See what happens when you allow your signal to be available to everyone, make your video available to everyone, and have half decent field sizes (close to 8 horses a race average), and have slightly lower than average track takeouts (19% on doubles and exactors). See also, Pull The Pocket: Less Races, More Betting

Speaking about those who don't give out their signal to everyone and also withhold their video, where are Belmont's final numbers? My guess is the that the boys at NYRA are scurrying around looking for viable excuses so they have a shot at keeping their jobs.

Fort Erie handle drops on par with the industry drop in 2009

Fort Erie handle dropped around 10% this year. Field size was up from last year to 8.2 horses a race from 7.7 a race last year. They gave out 5% less in purse distribution in 2009.
********************************************
There was no mention regarding whether they ran significantly less races in 2009. I do remember quite a few 10 race cards last year on Mondays and Tuesdays, and I'm inclined to think that the 5% drop in purse distribution is in line with 5% less races.
This would account for some of the drop off.

Fort Erie is very good about distributing their signal to all tracks and ADWs, so exposure isn't the issue. And players like races that have bigger field over quality, so that definitely isn't the issue.

The biggest factor could be public awareness of takeout. Thanks to HANA and blogs like mine, the public is becoming more and more educated as to why they aren't lasting long when they play the ponies.

Fort Erie, like Woodbine have ridiculously high takeout rates. See the HANA takeout chart here (it is not 100% up to date, but it is close). Fort Erie, has the highest takeout rate in North America for exactors and doubles. It is 26.2%. Besides educated players avoiding the track because of this, rates like this kill off people who don't even have a clue about takeout. When you send players home with less money, they are less likely to come back anytime soon.

Slot operators generally payout around 92%. In Ontario, slot operators are allowed to payout between 85-98%. They generally payout around 90-92%. Why not 85%? Because, slot operators have historically found that anything over 90% has a negative impact on future slot earnings. Players don't last long enough to make their experience enjoyable enough. They go less, and when they go less, they are less likely to bring friends or family along the odd night, possibly creating a new slots customer.

Here is a pretty current slot payback chart by state.

If Fort Erie doesn't open next year, the Welfare Offices could be getting a lot of extra business.
There is no doubt that Fort Erie's closure would have a tremendous negative impact in Fort Erie and its surrounding area. The more I think about it, Ajax Downs can't be the solution when it comes to where B horses will race next year. Without a backstretch, it would be just too impractical. Costs to ship to race or workout, coupled with the cost to train a horse off a farm (which also makes it difficult to get a horse to 100% race fit, and gives Woodbine shippers a insurmountable edge), will probably cause many owners to leave the game.

GOVERNMENT BAILED OUT FORT ERIE 17 YEARS AGO: PRECEDENT HAS BEEN SET

This isn't the first time, Fort Erie needed a government bail out. Back in the early 90's, the Ontario Jockey Club was making it known that Fort Erie was losing a couple of million a year. I happened to run across this yesterday: Ontario Jockey Club Study of the Impact of Casino Gambling on the Ontario Horse Racing industry
September 21,1992. It is important to note that back then, the government was making around 9% on every dollar bet (this has now been reduced to 1.3%, probably with this study in mind, as it was known in advance that slots would cannibalize horse racing).

On page 6 of the report:

In particular, smaller operations have been hit very
hard as shown by the plight of the 95-year old Fort Erie racetrack owned by the OJC. Fort Erie has been losing $2 million per year for the last five years.

The OJC was able to sustain these losses for a period of time as its other operations produced sufficient revenues to subsidize these losses.

They were forced into a position, however, to close the Fort Erie operation unless assistance was received from other participants.

An arrangement with the provincial government was reached at the end of July which is expected to provide the OJC with an additional $1.5 million by way of a tax rebate scheme.

It has recently been announced that smaller operations will receive a proportionately larger tax-rebate from the government in order to survive in the current recessionary environment.

If the government increases competition for these tracks by introducing new forms of gambling, it is likely that further government assistance will be required if significant track closures are to be avoided.

It was estimated by the OJC that closure of the Fort Erie track would have meant a loss of 4,500 jobs and a loss of payroll for the community of $38 million.

Bottom line, precedence has been set with respect to the government bailing out Fort Erie.

Fort Erie Trainer Gets A 9 Month Ban
Trainer Michael Osborne was caught by Woodbine security in the receiving barn with a loaded syringe. After analyzing the substance, the "liquid in the syringe to be n-butanol and ethanol both alcohol, a Class 2 medication."

This brings up at least a couple of concerns. I doubt that this mixture shows up on a test, yet it a Class 2 medication, so why don't they test for it?

I'm always of the mindset that when someone gets nailed like this, whether it is a trainer will an illegal substance or a drug dealer getting nailed by the RCMP, there are thousands of instances when the trainer or drug dealer is not caught. Some are never caught.

In my view, Osborne was just unlucky he got nailed. The odds were totally against him getting caught.

So this boils down to one key question: Are the penalties in place right now enough of a deterrent to stop the cheating?

My answer is NO. 9 months definitely will hurt anyone financially, but the time goes by pretty quickly. 3 years, would probably do the trick. I don't know if any trainer would risk that? Of course, if these drug violation were treated as they should be by the courts, and criminal charges were laid (defrauding the betting public), we might find a lot more honest trainers in the backstretch.

Trainers will adapt. But with so many trainers getting away with drug concoctions in the backstretch, even the honest ones need to compete to stay in business and they are tempted to cheat as well.

Give almost any trainer a blue pill, and tell them it won't test and you can expect an enhanced performance from the horse, and 99% of the trainers would be giving the horse the pill...at least that is how I see it.

EQUIBASE IMPROVES THINGS AGAIN FOR THE HORSEPLAYER
Equibase just unveiled a consolidated horse search. This allows anyone to type in the name of a race horse, and then view, for free, any of the race charts for that horse all the way back to 1999. Or you can view it 5X Pedigree for free as well. It also links to pay services as well. Simply go to the Equibase home page and you'll find the box that will get you going. You can also look up a broodmare's race record, and if she raced from 1999, see her actual charts race by race.

Equibase also recently did the horseplayer another great deed with a new and improved way for players to get up to the minute scratches, jockey changes, and surface changes. Every player needs to bookmark this page. It is an excellent resource.

ADVERTISEMENT BELOW
ARE YOU CLOSE TO MAKING MONEY BETTING THE PONIES?

Open up a free account with Horseplayersbet.com and the rewards might just push you into positive territory. 100% Parimutuel (Your bet goes right into the racetrack's betting pool). Free Video for active players. Excellent Player Rewards Program. Free replays coming soon.

20% Match On Your Initial Deposit!
(That is almost equivalent to betting the horses with a 0% track takeout).

Open an account and receive a 20% match on your initial deposit! Restricted to new customers only. Customer must play at least their initial deposit amount within 14 days of opening the account. Maximum deposit eligible for promotion is $1000. This promotion is not to be combined with our excellent standard rewards program which will begin after the initial deposit amount is wagered. Other restriction may apply.

CLICK HERE TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM

Please Note: Horseplayersbet.com is not available to Canadian residents.

Schwarzenegger Signs Amendment To Allow Tracks To Terminate California Racing

2009-10-26T11:03:00.003-04:00

I was really alarmed when I read the article, Governor Signs Bill To Help Horse-Racing Industry:

The bill (Bill 517) by Sen. Dean Florez (D-Shafter) allows a thoroughbred association or fair to increase the amount it deducts from horse-race wagering. It also provides the groups more flexibility to spend the money on improvements, including the purchase of tracks and training areas, and allows winnings that are more competitive with those offered in other states.

Legislative analysts estimate that a 5% increase in the amount taken out of wagers would generate $200 million annually for the horse-racing industry.

*************************************************************
This just goes to show how out of touch with reality governments are when it comes to horse racing. They are assuming that $4 billion that is now being bet will remain to be at least $4 billion bet. They have no idea what churn is, and how that $4 billion may turn into $3 billion if takeout in California rises a full 5%, which would lead to a bottom line decrease to the state and to the racetracks.

One commenter (Scott F.) on the article said it best:

"How does this actually help the racing industry? Bettors don't have bottomless pockets - if they lose their money faster, the total pie gets smaller and these players give up and go home. A bigger chunk of a smaller pie will be worth far less than a small chunk of a bigger pie. Yet again, wagering laws decided by people who have never placed a bet, or have certainly never tried doing it seriously. Basic economic theory of elasticity of price applies here."

As an aside, I don't recall any racetracks in any futuristic movies starring Arnold Schwarzenegger:)

Upon doing a little more digging, this bill doesn't mean that takeouts have to rise. Thanks to Equidaily for posting the actual old bill and the new revised bill to help clear the air.

In a nutshell, California had the 10%-25% takeout limits prior to the signing. But what this new bill does is give the power to the racetracks to be able to raise, or even lower takeout without any red tape from the government.

The only hurdle standing in the way of a takeout change is the California horsemen groups. They have to approve any changes before changes are made.

However, after reading the politician's take on the bill in the LA Times article, I would have to say that this was signed with a takeout increase in mind.

As for the Horsemen Groups veto. Don't count on it. In Ontario, racetracks have had the same powers California tracks now have. They can raise or drop takeout without red tape. However, horsemen groups stand in the way here when it comes to growth through lower pricing.

The reality is Woodbine has noted that the horsemen agreement actually stands in the way of a takeout decrease as they get an additional 2% on all bets placed and an additional 4% on triactors. What that means is if we look at the old takeout for triactors at Woodbine, the government got 1.3% out of the 28.3%, Woodbine received 11.5% (42.6% of the amount of takeout available to horsemen and track), the horsemen received 15.5% (57.4% of the available takeout money).

Theoretically, if Woodbine were to drop their takeout to 21.3% on triactors, the agreement would make it so that Woodbine would get 8% (only 40% of the amount of takeout available to horsemen and the track) and the horsemen 12% (60% of the amount of takeout available) on all triactor bets made.

If takeout were to decrease even more, the ratio the track gets would decrease even further.

It is the horsemen who are unwilling to renegotiate this contract to make it more equitable.

This also has implications on rebates given to its customers. The horsemen group is double dipping here because the rebates come from the track's money. When the rebate is churned, the horsemen get a cut on that money too.

In other words, horsemen groups don't help the game when it comes to lowering takeout and allowing the game to grow.

Maybe the horsemen groups need to be educated more on the matter.

Gambler's Book Club recently put up a podcast of an interview with icon handicapper/author Steve Davidowitz (click here, and then click the "Listen Now" button on the top right). At around the 8:30 minute mark of the interview, Davidowitz is asked about track takeout. He said there was a secret study done around 20 years ago (who knows, maybe it was 30 years ago) where takeout was changed from 14% to 17% and back again for a couple of years (Note: he didn't mention what track or tracks participated in this study). He did however state that the results were that when tracks lowered takeout, handle increased, and when they upped it, it dropped. In the long run, tracks made more money with the lower takeout.

To be honest, I never heard of this study until I heard the interview. But all one has to do is look at the success of Betfair to show that by allowing players to last longer, the players all of a sudden become more obsessed. Obsessed with the idea they can win, and the fact they last so long, it really kills other competitive forms of gambling in that player's life, not to mention it also increases the likelihood that the player will expose others to his or her obsession.

I can tell you for a fact, that the reason most players stop betting is that they run out of money. That has always been the case. But when you consistently run out of money too quickly, you increase your already negative expectations of the game (even if this is done on a subconscious level). This is the reason why slots take out an average of around 10%, not 20%.

When horseplayers sit on the sidelines, they lose interest in horse racing. And very importantly, they wind up not exposing new people to the game when on the sidelines.

The last track I know of that raised takeout was Calder back at the start of 2008. Calder recently had to slash purses. Now, instead of dropping takeout, the track has decided to put its effort into promoting its casino. Personally, I have not bet on a Calder race since the takeout increase was announced. If one track were to close tomorrow, I would like it to be them.

HANA (Horseplayers Association Of North America) is obviously against any takeout increases anywhere. We are pondering putting up an ad in The Daily Racing Form to help inform the public, horsemen and racetracks of the insanity that appears likely to transpire as a result of this bill. From the HANA President:

This bill does not in itself change takeout rates. However, we are obviously concerned by the implications and the tone of the press releases.

HANA, on behalf of horseplayers everywhere, is currently seeking further information as to any immediate consequences from this change of law.

HANA is extremely dismayed to see the same false economics continue to be thrown about, that suggests prices can rise while sales remain constant.

A price increase would obviously only have one effect -- to further accelerate the mass exodus of players and their wagering dollars from this game.

Jeff Platt

President, HANA

To help HANA out, please become a member (it is free and will take you a minute to fill the form), and if you want to contribute to the cost of the ad campaign, feel free to donate here.

Fort Erie 2010: Looking More and More Like A Long Shot

2009-10-21T11:38:00.009-04:00

Despite the efforts of the HBPA and the Fort Erie EDTC, the likelihood that live racing will happen at Fort Erie in 2010 is very dim.

Ontario HBPA President Sue Leslie paints a rather grim picture when it comes to the potential sale of the track. "Negotiations regarding the sale of Fort Erie Racetrack are stalling. In our observations the offer made to Nordic Gaming are not in line with their expectations in terms of the racetracks value."

What value? Nordic claims they are losing $3-4 million a year. And the business isn't looking any brighter. Their handles lately have been brutal. They appear to be off around 20% of late at least.

Note to Nordic: You can barely give away a business that loses millions a year. Nordic Gaming doesn't care about that fact. They continue to ask for prices way above the market. If it wasn't for pure "extortion" this year, there would have been no racing at all.

There was government money lying around ($2 million that was supposed to go towards a feasibility project for the smoke and mirrors $300 million expansion) to give away to Nordic. There is no more money left (Nordic has it all), so there are few options left in order for racing to happen at The Fort next year.

So what are the options?

1. Nordic sells the track. Won't happen without a government bail out, as Nordic always want way too much.

2. Fort Erie doesn't open next year for racing. This will crush the already down and out breeding and owning businesses in Ontario. Right now, because of the uncertainty going forward when it comes to B racing in Ontario, there is no claiming going on at Fort Erie, and it is nearly impossible to give a horse away. If there is no out in Ontario for horse owners, demand for Woodbine horses will also get hurt. For one thing, less Fort Erie horsemen means less demand for claimers at Woodbine, and without Fort Erie, there is greater risk claiming one for $12,500 to $20,000 than ever before. If the horse isn't competitive for Woodbine bottoms, the owner pretty much has to ship the horse to the States, and many owners don't want that hassle, and they want the option at least, to watch their horse run live.

The HBPA is now pushing for slots to close if the track isn't open. This could be a great wake-up call for Nordic Gaming if it does happen. It will definitely motivate them to sell, and probably at a very realistic price.

3. Woodbine steps in and leases Fort Erie for $1. They assume all losses for the near future. This does make business sense if Woodbine's goal is to grow horse racing in Ontario and not to kill horse racing in Ontario. But I'm not sure that this is the case. As stated above, if there is no B thoroughbred track in Ontario, breeders will get clobbered as owners continue to become fewer, this time at an accelerated rate.

4. Ajax Downs runs 50-70 thoroughbred dates. This is looking like the most likely scenario. They will have a five furlong track ready to go for 2010. The only stumbling blocks are a rumoured horsemen's agreement where Quarter horsemen were promised that there would be no thoroughbred racing at Ajax through 2010. Contracts can be broken, because everyone has a price. The big negative when it comes to thoroughbred racing at Ajax is the fact they literally have no backstretch. There usually isn't room at Woodbine for B horses, so training B horses off a farm and shipping them in for race day, becomes very expensive and problematic.

5. The government (Finance Minister Dwight Duncan) buys into the Fort Erie EDTC's plan. I'll simplify the plan here: The Fort Erie EDTC wants the government to give the Consortia $15 million a year for six years to replace the proceeds Fort Erie gets from slots (which sits at around $8 million a year). The way I figure the extra $7 million will be used is as follows: $2 million extra to purses (this would be great and would encourage more ownership of horses), $3 million to cover losses (again, this is a must because the EDTC Consortia has no money, and $2 million to lease the track. The latter is a deal killer as far as I'm concerned. Giving Nordic one cent profit would be absolutely absurd.

6. The government (or the OLG) gives Nordic $2.5 million on a year to year basis to cover the losses of the track. This is probably the second most likely scenario, as it keeps Fort Erie open until Nordic finally lowers their price realistically enough to sell the joint (it is a bad time right now to begin with because of all the Magna tracks on the market. There are only so many outfits interested in owning a racetrack out there). Of course, if the government is really smart, they hire me to help get Fort Erie out of the red:) There are many ways Fort Erie can improve their bottom line.

I need to also mention the obvious: Without racing in Fort Erie, the Niagara Region's economy will get hurt big time.

If you want to help encourage the Honourable Dwight Duncan, Minister of Finance save Fort Erie racetrack, email him at (NOTE: It appears the email address may not work):
dduncan@mpp.liberal.ola.org. or fax him at 416-325-0374

For more read Perry Lefko's article in the new issue of Down The Stretch. Down The Stretch also has some early Breeder's Cup selections.

The Price Of Betting Horses Is Way Too High

2009-10-16T12:29:00.006-04:00

John Pricci has been working overtime writing articles about what came out of the recently concluded simulcast conference.

Hopefully, the articles aren't falling on deaf, dumb and blind eyes.

In A Simulcast Manifesto, Pricci writes about changes that bettors want and need, from accurate data to a standardized payoff format that all tracks should use:

Post payoffs faster and with greater consistency, maybe utilizing a pop-up window. Standardize payoffs. Post all $2 minimum wagers: the Pick Six, Magna Five, W-P-S, etc., in $2 increments.

Post all fractional wagers--Dime Supers, Fifty-Cent Trifectas and Pick 4s--at the minimum offered. Horseplayers can do math. Stop trying to con newcomers by dangling big payoffs. Not sure I know anyone who’s ever hit a $2 superfecta.

And he ends the article with this:

three words: takeout, takeout and takeout.

Figure out a better split between tracks and simulcast venues and pass the savings along to the customer. The principle of churn is quite simple: The more money returned to players, the more they bet in return.

The Pricci piece inspired a Bloodhorse piece by Tom LaMarra; Are the Voices of Horseplayers Voices Being Heard?:

“Every time there was a lower takeout experiment in New York, handle went up,” Pricci said. “Small-minded bet-takers say they understand churn, but they don’t understand churn. This industry has a vested interest in keeping the player liquid.”

Pari-mutuel takeout has been a sticking point for many years. Impediments to change include regulations that vary by state and arguments between exporters and importers. Tracks that have experimented with takeout reductions have had their signals pulled from some wagering outlets.

When Laurel tried their 12% takeout experiment, Woodbine refused to put it on their menu. That is just one example I know about.

At least one racing exec admittedly gets it:

On Oct. 13 at the simulcast conference, Jeff Gural, who owns Tioga Downs and Vernon Downs, two New York harness tracks with video gaming machines, said because slots provide about 90% of the purse money, he’s willing to experiment with takeout even though wagering pools are small...“Tracks would drop our signals."

Not all tracks and ADWs would drop his signal though. And I know HANA would support this type of effort big time. Even me, someone who hasn't bet a harness race since I remember, would play his tracks.

Pricci outdid himself this morning with his piece: Gambling Consultant: “Amount of Money Taken from Bettors Is Not Sustainable”

Betting menus have expanded, popular because it gives customers more choice but problematic because betting pools become diluted. With new wagers having a higher degree of difficulty, coupled with high takeout, players are busting out at a faster rate. Times being what they are, they’ve been voting with their feet.

Even breakage is tackled in the article:

Today’s technology allows players to bet $2.43 to get back $9.17 if they wish. Pay the winners in full. There’s no good reason for breakage to exist in the modern era. The industry should have been fighting local governments for those pennies on behalf of their customers, instead of piling on.

Eugene Christiansen, gambling consultant gets it more than almost every racing executive and horseman put together:

He was asked: “If racing could correct just one problem, what should it be?”

Said Christiansen, without hesitation or equivocation: “Pricing is a threshold issue.”

How and why lowering takeout will grow the game?

The fact that the mainstream bettors will last longer. They will expose more friends family and coworkers to horse racing. For example, I had my sisters family over at my house recently, but I was on a good winning streak, and I was spending most of the day at the computer making bets. This got the interest of my brother-in-law, and my nephew and niece. Not saying that this turned them into gambling addicts, but it did perk their interest.

Conversely, they were at my place 6 months ago when I was temporarily not betting because I was having a bad streak. Horse racing wasn’t even mentioned that weekend.

If takeouts are reduced, the likelihood of regular players like me missing a day or a weekend become close to non existent.

Also, if takeout is reduced to 10-12% the idea that the game is unbeatable will be taken out by actual winners who will draw more newbies into the game (just like it works with Betfair and online poker who make their money because there are a few winners, but obviously a heck of a lot of losers who think they have a chance to win).

Excellent Proposal In California: Voiding Claims If A Horse Can't Make It Soundly Back To The Barn

This will take away the incentive to drop a really sore down with the purpose of getting it claimed:

He (Dr. Rick Arthur) cited one instance of a trainer and owner at Hollywood Park last fall "high-fiving" in front of the horse ambulance after a horse that had been claimed from them broke down in a race.

In Ontario, if a claimed horse is put down within 24 hours of the claim, the new owner gets half the claim back as a rebate. I like California's plan much better. It actually might protect more horses from dying on the track.

Quebec Horse Racing Firm Goes Bankrupt
The government didn't allow slots to bail out the dying industry in this case. Nick Eaves was asked if Woodbine will be pursuing Quebec racing: "Absolutely not," Eaves told Trot Insider on Wednesday. "It's terrible what Quebec is going through, but we have our own problems that we have to deal with here."

Dang right, Woodbine has their own problems here. But they have been self inflicted. Yesterday they had a total handle of just over $1.2 million in a week that they are promoting their biggest racing day of the year. It is disgusting what Woodbine's brass has done to horse racing's growth potential in Ontario by drastically overpricing their game to the consumer. Absolutely disgusting.

HERE IS A MESSAGE TO ALL WOODBINE EXECUTIVES: WHEN THE SINK BACKS UP, CALL A PLUMBER

Will Ontario's government bail out Fort Erie? The question still remains if there will be racing next year, but that was easy to predict. Next year may be a lot more difficult because the EDTC has run out of funny money to pay Nordic off to keep the track alive in 2010.

Meanwhile, Fort Erie may have a car racing track by 2011. I am doubting this will happen, but who knows?

With the Canadian International coming up, this video sure does bring back lots of memories. I was 12 when Secretariat raced at Woodbine. I sold racing forms prior to the first race that day, got cleaned up and spent the rest of the day at my mother's table in the dining room:

HT Jen's Blog

Calder Purses Slashed: No Surprise Here

2009-10-08T11:34:00.001-04:00

Calder slashes purses 15%; Horsemen Upset

I wrote this headline a year and a half ago: Calder Raises Takeout: What Imbeciles
There hasn't been very much movement upward when it comes to track takeout amongst North American tracks since I began blogging (I'm only partly responsible for this:)), and that is why I was so flabbergasted that Calder had the audacity to raise takeout rates last year:

The big news to specialty gamblers Monday was that Calder raised its takeout percentage on a few wagering options. The track will now take 27 percent out of Pick 3, 4 and 5 wagering (up 3 percentage points) and 21 percent from the Daily Double and Exacta bets (up 1 percentage point).

Yes, they took an already high takeout rate, and made it higher. What did they expect?
To make more money? HAHAHAHA Nope, they just found out how Economics 101 works. You don't raise the price for the sake of raising the price and expect to make more money. The doofuses need to read up on the basic law of supply and demand: When demand shrinks, they price (the takeout charged) needs to shrink.

The mix of track execs and horsemen is killing horse racing. The horsemen want want more money NOW and they attempt to use coercion to the point that racing execs, even if they had the foresight (which most don't) to grow the game (by lowering takeout), they can't. And in fact, they wind up making decisions like the one made by Calder, that help destroy the game.

The horsemen want more from a shrinking pie. I don't blame them wanting more, but they just don't seem to get the repercussions of their demands. For instance, they want larger signal fees to be charged by tracks so they can "theoretically" make more money from wagers. However, they don't seem to get that the only growing business in horse racing are the ADWs that offer rebates. By trying to squeeze out more, they wind up lowering the rebates offered, which in turn causes the price sensitive players to play less or bet with bookies offshore.

Good Reading: Crisis, Danger, And Opportunity
Well, the comments make for good reading. One jokester (probably a Woodbine Exec) posts under the name CGDean:

There is a simple fix for owners and breeders like myself.

It's a three pronged attack at raising revenues for the people that put on the show.

1. Open up all off track distribution (ADW's, internet, simulcast facilities, etc.) to anyone that wants it and pay them 5% for taking the bet.

2. Raise all takeout to a flat 30% on all bets.

3. Split the offtrack takeout 5% for bet taker, 10% for host track, 15% for horsemen.....on track takeout split 12.5% for track and 17.5% for horsemen.

If we can keep betting around the $12 billion mark, that means there will be close to $2 billion available for purses instead of the $600 million we currently have.

I know some people will say handle will decline but I beg to differ. We are already recovering from the horrendous economic downturn which will increase the already deflated handle. So basically, new money will easily replace any lost money if there is any.

Barry Irwin said "While the takeout is onerous, it has never stopped a real gambler". This reaffirms my thoughts that people will still bet on racing because that's just the way the game works. Even if we are wrong, and handle dips down to 9 million in a worst possible case scenario, under this plan, that still gives us between $1.4 and $1.5 million for purses which is about 2.5 times more than we get now.

Imagine a worst case scenario where our purses are doubled or tripled without slots. If we can get a slot subsidy on top of this, we can have purses in the same range of Hong Kong which will obviously increase betting astronomically and that will raise purses to levels of which we can only dream of.

*************************************
Is this a moron being serious, or is it someone trying to show how farcical owner/breeders have become with their collective industry mindset and their demands? I can't tell anymore.

I replied to another comment there:

VEC said: "I do not believe our take out, also 22 to 24%, deters the average bettor, and certainly not a newcomer to racing. Not many at the track, or down at the local OTB complain about it."
**********************************
Again, this misconception keeps on showing up all over the place.

True,most horseplayers don't care about takeout. Just like slot players don't care about the house edge. They never complain about it.

However, Vegas started out with a very high edge on slots, but through trial and error they realized that the optimum edge is 8-10%.

This means that if they doubled the edge, they wouldn't get even half the total money bet.

So why is it? Because customers get blown out to quickly. They may not even realize why they don't feel like going so much, but they don't.

And when they don't go so much, they are less likely to bring friends, family, neighbors and coworkers with them the odd time to expose them to the slots.

Same is true in horse racing.

HORSEPLAYERS ASSOCIATION OF NORTH AMERICA APPOINTS JOHN PRICCI TO THE ADVISORY BOARD
Pricci is one of the few horse racing journalists who completely understands that horseplayers are the driving force of horse racing, and has no problem writing about it.

Adena Springs Finally Figured Out That It Is More Lucrative To Breed Ontario Sired Horses Rather Than Florida Bred Ones

'The stallions that will be moving from Florida to Gardiner (in Ontario), joining other Adena stallions Sligo Bay and Silent Name, are 1996 Breeders’ Cup Classic (gr. I) winner Alphabet Soup (Cozzene—Illiterate, by Arts and Letters), multiple grade I winner Milwaukee Brew (Wild Again—Ask Anita, by Wolf Power), and graded winner Olmodavor (A.P. Indy—Corrazona, by El Gran Senor). New stallion Giant Gizmo(Giant's Causeway—Golden Antigua, by Hansel) also will stand in Canada.'

SHHH Don't tell anyone, but despite the bad economy gambling continues to be on the rise in Canada.
Well, not at the racetracks though. Maybe one day they'll wake up and understand that it is the onerous takeouts that prevent horse racing from growing. I have a feeling it won't be under Willmot's watch.

For those who think that takeout is the same as it was 40 years ago check out this from the Daily Racing Archives:

LINCOLN DOWNS R I May 13, 1964
Under a new appropriations law that went into effect Monday night, the total parimutuel takeout on racing in Rhode Island is now 16 per cent. The additional 1 per cent is split evenly between the state and the track. The state receives 8 1/2 per cent and the track 7 1/2%. The new tax went into effect with the races at Lincoln Downs Monday night. In Massachusetts and New Hampshire the takeout is 14 per cent. Vermont is the highest in the nation with an 18 per cent tax followed by Maine with a 17 nick.
******************************************
Stands were full back then. Bettors had fewer betting options, win, place and show, a couple of exactors a day and a daily double. Many left the track with money in their pockets, enough to entice them to go back as soon as possible.

One of the better arguments to today is how does a track rationalize charging more for triactors and other exotics? It doesn't cost them more to print the ticket or to take the bet at a terminal or online. But the reality is that the exotics with the highest takeouts really kill bankrolls and ultimately discourage bettors from playing as often.

I don't have the numbers, but I'm pretty sure takeout at the ORC track (Woodbine, Fort Erie, and Greenwood) were something in the neighbourhood of 14-16% tops. And the government was taking around 7.5% back then. Nowadays, Woodbine's average takeout is closer to 21%-22% and the government only gets 1.3% on each wager.

Did Chantal Sutherland recently have botox lip injections? It sure looked like yesterday on The Score.

HORSPLAYERSBET.COM HAS A NEW PROMOTION:
20% Match On Your Initial Deposit!

Open an account and receive a 20 % match on your initial deposit! Restricted to new customers only. Customer must play at least their initial deposit amount within 14 days of opening the account. Maximum deposit eligible for promotion is $1000. This promotion is not to be combined with our standards rewards program which will begin after the initial deposit amount is wagered. Other restriction may apply.

Real Time Scratches And Changes Now Available Thanks To HANA And Equibase

2009-10-01T17:53:00.007-04:00

See What A Collective Voice For Horseplayers Can Accomplish

One of the biggest complaints from horseplayers over the last few years has been not knowing if a race is still on the turf or if the race was taken off. Track conditions, late changes and even part of the entry changes has also been a source of contention, especially to online bettors.

Thanks to a meeting in the spring between HANA and Equibase, this particular gripe is now a thing of the past.

Leaving it to racing execs who should have known about this problem for years, did nothing for the horseplayer. Simply, racing execs are out of touch with horseplayers.

Here is the release courtesy of Equibase:

Current day scratches and program changes from racetracks throughout North America are now available throughout the day in a dedicated section of equibase.com, it was announced Oct. 1 by Equibase Company president and COO Hank Zeitlin.

Equibase developed the new service in conjunction with racetracks and with feedback from the Horseplayers Association of North America. Besides having access to the latest scratches, horseplayers can now obtain other critical updates such as when a race has been moved from turf to dirt, distance changes, jockey changes, and amended wagering options on equibase.com. They can also register to receive an RSS feed for each track they are playing, enabling instant delivery of information to desktops and mobile devices.

These scratches and program changes are updated live from the racetrack via eBase®, Equibase’s proprietary Internet-based data collection system. Designated personnel at the live track can now use eBase to enter the day’s scratches and program changes until one hour before post time for the first race, at which time Equibase chartcallers assume responsibility for entering subsequent changes.

“During the Keeneland spring meet where we held our first HANA Day at the Races, Equibase and members of HANA met for a productive meeting at their office,” said HANA President Jeff Platt. “We are very pleased that as a result of that beginning and subsequent discussions, horseplayers will now have access to a centralized, accurate resource for reporting of late-breaking changes.”

“Making it easier for horseplayers to acquire pertinent information such as scratches and program changes is simply good business and the tracks are happy to participate in this new arrangement,” said Chris Scherf, executive vice president of the Thoroughbred Racing Associations of North America.

The “Today’s Scratches & Program Changes” webpage was deployed Sept. 29 and is accessible via a link on the equibase.com homepage. The current day scratches and program changes are also available for electronic retrieval, which enables value-added resellers, tracks, and other industry organizations to provide timely changes and scratches to their respective customers.
*************************************************
Prior to HANA forming just over a year ago, horseplayer gripes and ideas usually fell on deaf ears. Things are changing. There is a lot happening behind the scenes. Being a board member, I'm involved in a weekly conference call, where we tackle many issues and devise strategies to tackle current issues.

We've done more than can be seen by the naked eye, and recently, some tracks have actually approached us for our ideas in an effort by them to grow their product.

Our main goal is the same as most racing exec or horsemen group. It is to grow the game and attract more betting and bettors. Except we know how to do it. Racing execs and horsemen groups have their collective heads in the sand when it comes to this issue. They just don't understand that horse racing is gambling first, without the horseplayer there is nothing. Our ideas go against "their conventional wisdom," which by the way is failing miserably of late. It isn't the 1950's anymore.

HANA still needs bigger numbers in membership to make more things like this happen. If you are not a member yet, please click here, and sign up (it is free). The more horseplayers we have as members, the more clout we have.

A couple of new threads have been started at Pace Advantage worth looking at. Hopefully, they'll be more additions to each.

Quotes and Comments That Make Sense

"Horseracing is still marketed as if it has a monopoly on legal gambling,
where the need for a cohesive voice and long term strategic planning was not
required to be successful. A racetrack would be built and people would come
and bet!

The industry has generally been run by Horsemen who have viewed wagering as a necessary evil. They have little understanding of the gambling component
and thus little understanding for their current and potential customers. In
some cases racetrack board members are prohibited from wagering.
Those who remain in the Horseplayer choir believe that horserace wagering
offers unique components that make it the most exciting, exhilarating and
challenging form of gambling. The industry will continue to decline until
racetrack operators can identify and embrace their customer, the
HORSEPLAYER, and conclude that Horseracing must be marketed as a 'GAME
ABOUT GAMBLING' and not a Sport of Kings!

Horseracing’s Day of Atonement is long overdue....."

- Eric Poteck

"Horseracing needn't look any further than the internet where online poker has taken young adults from all over the world by storm.

What, might you ask, does poker have over horseracing? Certainly not excitement (grinding poker can be quite boring). Certainly not intellectual challenge (although poker is quite close!). And certainly not the chance to make a quick score (to make a quick score (1K+), you might have play for HOURS online in a single tourney).

Nope, none of the above! What horseracing lacks is at the heart of fundamental economics: THE LACK OF A PERCEPTION THAT IT IS PROFITABLE!

Why do the young kids play poker? Because they perceive that if they work hard enough at it, they will eventually become +EV long term. NO SUCH NOTION exists with horse racing.

Consider that you can find online training sites for poker ad nauseum. Just do a quick Google (or in deference to your contributor, a Yahoo! search) for "online poker training" and you will find some outstanding training sites for relatively little money that can have you near-profitable in a couple of months of hard study. NOTHING like this exists for horseracing; instead all you get is people peddling lousy tips, speed figures, and for the most part, useless or superfluous information.

In addition, you can go to NUMEROUS sites online that list DOZENS of winning "poker pros" whose results are documented and posted. I challenge you to find and list FIVE "horseracing" pros that are profitable and whose names are public. Oh, these five may exist, but no one knows of them, and more importantly, because no one knows of them, they cannot help the sport attract what it needs: interest from young people that think or believe they can beat the game in the long run.

The solution to racing's woes is obvious: make people believe that they can win money long term by betting horses. NOTHING MORE and NOTHING LESS. If this was done, the issues of admission, the cost of a DRF, the odds changing after the bell, the drugs, the "super-trainers", field size, and all other "issues" would magically disappear. Easier said than done,isn't it?

And with that, sir, I proclaim the eventual slow death of racing as the cancer of takeout metastasizes and brings it to its Hospice in the caverns of Belmont, Hollywood Park, and Churchill Downs.

Good luck at the windows and thank you for your time."

-Quarter Pole (comment on a HANA piece)

"I can tell you the first time I played off shore and received a rebate, it was like night and day. All of a sudden, my small bankroll seemed to last longer.

No other business treats it’s customers with such contempt, than that of horseracing. It is really actually quite sickening. Horsemen and people within the industry need to give their collective heads a shake, and understand who puts food on their tables...... So, keep takeout stagnant, or better yet even increase them, it will be your own demise. I’m a gambler, I’ll bet on other things. What are you going to do, train gophers? Own show hogs?"

-Bullring

"Mr. Pope’s opinions epitomize thoroughbred racing’s perspective: When times get tough the boys at the top sit around figuring out ways of charging the customer more money for less product.

In an age when the main concern should be finding ways to cost-effectively GIVE the customer more for his money they are simply concerned with finding more ways to TAKE. The picture that comes to mind is jackals and hyenas looking down on an ever-dwindling herd of wildebeast. What happens when the heard is gone, boys?"

-David Schwartz

And there are quotes from those who are clueless. Here is the first entry:

"Cangamble, people like you should probably stick to the little league that is Canadian racing. Clearly you just don’t know what you’re talking about nor do you have any clue what would work in big league racing.

So why not head on back to the home of the Queen’s Plate (or the Canadian-bred, non-winners-of-2, if you can’t tell the difference) and let real people discuss the complexities that actually matter and relate to horse racing on a major circuit.

Most of the “words you’ve posted” either do not make sense or are not applicable whatsoever to horse racing of a significant nature.

With lesser-thans such as yourself continuing to spout your idiocy, the game of horse racing (even in little league status, such as that which you follow) simply cannot and will not “grow” (as you imply you would like) because the numbskulls quite clearly will not get out of their own way.

That makes you a walking, talking, oxymoron, who is no more significant than the next internet troll (another definition into which you clearly fit, based on your brainless expressions at this and every other racing blog you can get your browser on).

Finally, this is in no way “my problem”, for you are the only one here who constantly crows about the take-out. Obviously nobody who is active in horse racing pools really cares about take-out, as at its core, mutuel take-out on American horse racing has been quite steady since the 1970’s.

Furthermore, anyone cognizant of the WPS take-out of roughly 16% being too high in the 1970’s, now has many, many more multi-race options on which the effective take-out is much, much lower.

Why can’t you get it through your head that the take-out is much less significant today than it was in the 1970’s?

Cangamble, why don’t you make it your next mission to try to find a thoroughbred track in Quebec? Maybe that is one significant difference between life in your minor-league world today vs. what you knew in the 1970’s.

And stay out of the major leagues, Cangamble, for obviously the big show is no place for neophytes."

-Horatio

Well at least I know it wasn't from David Willmot, only because I doubt Willmot would knock Canadian racing in public like that, even hiding behind a pseudonym:)

Speaking of Woodbine. They are now guaranteeing a $50,000 pool in their first Pick 4, which starts in the fourth race on Saturdays and Sundays until the end of the meet. I checked and found that they had $50,000 plus pools in each of at least the last six weekend cards anyway, so this is pretty much guaranteeing that it will be dark outside at midnight.

Note to Woodbine and Fort Erie: How about a 15% Pick 3 every race? Give it a shot.

I can pretty much guarantee that Woodbine would have done better than the $1.3 million in handle they did today (Thursday) if they decided to do something that was really horseplayer friendly.

Speaking of horseplayer friendly. HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM just added Oak Tree at Santa Anita to the betting menu.
About Horseplayersbet.com: Horseplayersbet offers one of the most competitive Player Rewards Programs available for horse racing product. At Horseplayersbet, even the smallest bettors have the potential to become the biggest.

Fort Erie announcer Peter Kyte just took the Western Fair job in London, Ontario.
He didn't announce at the Fort on Tuesday because he had a baby due. Not sure if this means he won't be the Fort Erie announcer next year IF the track does defy the odds and remain open.

Why Not Increase Takeout To 40%?

2009-09-27T10:26:00.004-04:00

It gets so tiresome on the internet, when horsemen and probably some racing execs use the same argument against lowering takeout over and over again. It happened again recently on a Pricci column "On Fixing A Broken Simulcast Model."

Here are their arguments followed by my rebuttal:

Most horseplayers don't know or care about track takeout
True. But horseplayers, like all gamblers realize when they come home with less money or more money. Lower the takeout, and bettors will come home with more money more often. This will be less discouraging than it is today with takeouts that average around 21% in the industry.
Lowering takeout allows bettors to last longer, and their desire to come back more often and play more often will increase.
If that increases, the likelihood that they expose friends, family, and/or coworkers to horse racing greatly increases.

Even horseplayers who know that takeout is lower on win bets will gravitate towards higher takeout exotics
Human nature. The horseplayer is out to make a score. That is why lottery tickets are bought. For many, if someone is going to gamble to begin with, low returns are not being sought by the masses. Horseplayers are gamblers, and dangling a triactor every race at them is too enticing, though in the end, it makes players go broke a lot quicker than a few decades ago.

All attempts at lower takeouts have not been successful
This is unfair. Those who tried to lower takeout were met with signal exclusion in many instances. Also, the extra money won by customers didn't go to buy new suits, it was in all probability churned back into the pools. However, they didn't necessarily go back to the tracks that had the lower takeouts. Simulcast and ADW bettors know that there are many many tracks on a menu to play once you cash a ticket.
Those who use this line of thought also conveniently do not take into account the ginormous growth we've seen at Betfair and online poker, where the house take is minuscule compared to the takeout at a racetrack. They also forget about the only growth aspect of North American horse racing where some ADWs essentially lower the takeout for customers by give decent player rewards.

Horse racing is a costly show to put on, high takeouts are a must
No one is denying that it costs a lot more to put on a horse race than it does to deal poker cards, and I don't begrudge any gambling venue from optimizing their bottom line returns, but horse racing has never tried to find an optimum price point.
The closest thing racing has ever come to having a real price determined by supply and demand is the signal fee each track charges to ADWs and other tracks. That is really what the product is worth to the real market, and that signal fee is usually 2% to 9% depending on the track.

For those who think that lowering takeout won't be good for the bottom line, let me use a reverse example:

Slots have a house take of around 10%. This number was arrived at by trial and error, most likely thanks to the years of experience Vegas has when it comes to different games of chance. This optimum price to gamble was determined by the market.

What this house take means is that a slots operator will see for example, $400 million bet over the course of the year. This yields a profit of $40 million in a year for the house. So what stops them and the government from increasing the house take to 20% (it isn't that they care about the gambler)? Surely, at least $200 million will be wagered in a year if that happens (and they will see at least $40 million in profit and probably more). Wrong! The slot operators KNOW this won't happen. What happens at anything over 10%?
Slot players, who are completely clueless about house take will not last as long. They may not know why, but many will stop wanting to go because they know they lose their money too fast. Most will definitely come back less, and when that happens, they are obviously less likely to bring friends and family along with them for a night out.

Every time horse racing increase takeout, their bottom line falls off. It isn't magic. It is gamblers natural sense of price sensitivity that lowers the handle.

For those "not too bright" horsemen and racing execs who "think" that increasing takeout means more money for them, it won't. Next time ask them why not double the takeout and see how they answer the question. The real answer can be seen above, but it fun sometimes playing with these yahoos.

But the same premise holds true with respect to the current takeouts at tracks in North America. If takeouts were 10% today on average, by increasing them to 20% or more would mean less money to the bottom line. This means there is more money if the industry would just get together and lower takeouts across the board.

PRESCRIPTION FOR RxACING

Outstanding article by Bill Finley.
Some of the best visionaries and realists including HANA President Jeff Platt share their views on fixing racing going forward. It does include the comments of a few wannabe visionaries like Bob Evans as well.
It is an excellent read over at Thoroughbred Daily News. The downside is that you need to register for a free 2 week subscription, but the registration only takes 10 seconds.

The Score did a feature on Alex Brown. Here it is if you haven't seen it yet:

To learn more about Alex Brown's mission, go to Alex Brown Racing. I still disagree with one of his focuses, horses who made over $500,000 who are now running for $5,000 claiming. Once a horse blows conditions, especially a male horse, there is sometimes no difference in running times for $5,000 claimers and $16,000 claimers. If anything, the competition is easier the lower a horse runs for, thus the cheaper claiming tags are more humane. Also, these horses are hardly ever running for the outfits for whom the horse made the bulk of its earnings, so if anything, it is up to those outfits, and those outfits only to buy or claim and then retire that particular horse.

If the horse has real bad problems, it shouldn't be racing, regardless of how much it has made. The horse has no idea how much it earned.

H/T The Paulick Report

No shocker: Marsh Side DQ heading for appeal
I think the odds are around 75% in favour of an overturn.

More Industry Dysfunction. I don't know where to start so just read the article by Nick Kling.

Down The Stretch has a new online issue out. Good reading. They even got controversial this time around (they put an article in it regarding the Stein-Sutherland conflict). Good article by women's curling expert Perry Lefko on Eddie Robinson and Jennifer Burnie.

Northlands Park cuts race dates this year for both thoroughbred and harness racing. Gone are Oct. 16,17,18,21,23,24,25 from their original thoroughbred schedule. Harness racing will now not run on Nov. 16, Dec. 23,27, and 30.

HORSEPLAYERBET.COM PROMO STILL GOING

10% Rewards*

*Bet $1,000.00 between now and October 4th and, upon wagering that amount, Horseplayersbet will provide you a 10% reward on that $1,000.00 worth of wagers. A minimum of $1,000.00 must be wagered to earn the 10%. Those who fail to reach the $1,000.00 minimum will be provided Horseplayersbet Standard Rewards (which are still very good regardless of the promo). Offer is available to new customers only and all promotional related wagers must be completed by end of day October 4, 2009.

Horseplayersbet does not take Canadian residents, as well as residents of some US States.

Stewards Shouldn't Have Thrown Out Marsh Side

2009-09-22T15:31:00.000-04:00

Stewards Flipped The Coin And Got It Wrong In Northern Dancer
Unfortunately, on this Youtube video you don't get to see the head on (you can if go to Cal Racing or HPI replays), but the disqualification of Marsh Side was a bad call. There was no apparent bumping between Marsh Side and Quijano, and both jockeys were hitting with right hand while moving to the inside in tandem. If anything, Quijano would have squeezed Champs Elysee regardless of whether Marsh Side was in the race or not. Again, if the Stewards have to look at a race for more than two minutes, they should let the results stand.

The eventual winner had the common sense to get away from the rail as his jockey anticipated the tight quarters. Champs Elysee did get shut off, but I have a problem blaming Marsh Side for it.
I am pretty sure that this call will be overturned, and the bettor who picked the best horse in the race, will wind up getting screwed.

Also, Andrasch Starke, who rode Quijano must have forgot about the new whipping rule in Ontario. There were actually quite a few violations in both the Northern Dancer and Woodbine Mile. I wonder if fines have been handed down.

Steven Crist kisses Woodbine's butt, disses horseplayers in the meantime by failing to mention Woodbine's high takeouts.

Crist likes that Canada doesn't run that many Grade 1 stakes. The fact is that we can't, even if we wanted to. They do their best now to schedule these events at times when there is not that much competition to compete against. Whenever Canada was forced to compete, they drew sub par fields.

Crist is not all bad. At least he wrote an article that slams horse racing for still allowing breakage in today's computer age. How much does breakage cost the horseplayer? Read this.

Assiniboia Handle increases 38%. Most likely due to increased exposure at ADWs that offer rebates. Many bettors are avoiding the bigger tracks that try to prohibit their signal from going to rebaters. The smaller tracks are winning this war.

Woodbine had a $5 million handle day on Sunday. But lets not forget Friday when they couldn't even crack $1.5 million. They wrote a race specially for Jambalaya's return. The purse was over $90,000 and it attracted $61,766 in betting. They sure know how to run a business, don't they.

Slots in Ohio just took two steps backwards.

NYRA At It Again
NYRA has yanked live signals from ADWs like HPI and NJBets. For the real dirt behind the move, read this thread on Pace Advantage.

Horse is somewhere between a girl and a boy
Caster Semenya, Tuscan Abbe, and Arizona Helen. I wonder if Rachel Alexandra has been checked lately:)

Is it me, or does it appear that the morning line oddsmaker at Fort Erie doesn't give many Daniel David and Nick Gonzalez close to enough credit? There seems to be a few horses that went off at pretty low odds that have been 12-1 or 20-1 in the program that are either ridden by David or trained by Gonzalez. And most of them looked like they should be one of the top three program selections.

"Slots and OLG In Their Own Little World" according to Fort Erie of the Fort Erie EDTC. Listen to him here, as he discusses the proposals he dropped off to the Ontario government.

Justin Stein Appealing Large Suspension and $2500 Fine For An Outburst That Would Have Helped "Jockeys" Ratings Soar
I first read about this on Jen's Thoroughblog in the comment section:
On September 7th' seventh race Justin Stein's mount, Sincerely A to Z, was clipped at the head of the stretch causing Stein to fall off. He was in a sandwich position, and to me it wasn't Chantal Sutherland's mount (Diplomatic Impact) that caused the clip. A long inquiry ensued as Chantal finished second or third, but the results stood.
After the race, allegedly Stein called Sutherland all sorts of very rude names.

The Stewards decided to suspend Stein 25 days and fine him $2500, which he is currently appealing.

After the suspension was announced, three days later on Saturday, in the 9th race, Sutherland was on the favorite on the grass (Soul of Nataka), and patiently waited for room. Meanwhile Stein was on a long shot (Caledon) who seemed to be waiting for Sutherland to try to get by. He came over on Sutherland's mount at the head of the stretch, and Sutherland's mount then came out causing some of the field to fan out. Sutherland's even money shot wound up romping, and there was no inquiry, which I found weird.

It is dangerous to be a jockey. Emotions run high, as does jealousy. Chantal Sutherland is the best thing that has happened to Woodbine in years, but she shouldn't be over protected either. I'm sure male jockeys call male jockeys some pretty ugly names at times, so I don't see why a female jockey should get special treatment here or that male jockeys should get an excessive punishment over something that happens during the heat of battle.

Replays are available at Cal Racing and HPI.

HORSEPLAYERBET.COM PROMO STILL GOING

10% Rewards*

*Bet $1,000.00 between now and October 4th and, upon wagering that amount, Horseplayersbet will provide you a 10% reward on that $1,000.00 worth of wagers. A minimum of $1,000.00 must be wagered to earn the 10%. Those who fail to reach the $1,000.00 minimum will be provided Horseplayersbet Standard Rewards. Offer is available to new customers only and all promotional related wagers must be completed by end of day October 4, 2009.

Horseplayersbet does not take Canadian residents, as well as residents of some US States.

Why Were CTHS Yearling Prices Down So Much?

2009-09-18T10:07:00.006-04:00

Lets have a look at the the numbers.

The CTHS Select Sales held just over a week ago produced this:
"A drop in average price of just over 29% was the biggest in at least 10 years - from $39,131 (all figures in Canadian funds) last year to $30,142.
The sales gross of $4,672,000, for 155 yearlings sold was down from $5,830,500 for 149 sold.
The median sunk from $27,000 to $22,000."

The CTHS Open Sales numbers on Saturday were abysmal: "A total of 148 yearlings sold for $851,800, a 35 percent lower gross than last year, when 153 horses sold for $1,309,200. The average, $5,755, was 32.7 percent less than last year's average of $8,557. Forty-nine yearlings were listed as not sold, compared to 70 in 2008."

Sure, the easiest thing to do is blame the economy, and yes, it is partly to blame, but when you see the purses that are offered at Woodbine which have held steady, the economy is not the main factor here. Betting is down around 11% in North America this year, and it is not just the economy either. And I also know Keeneland's Yearling sale is also getting clobbered currently, and again, it isn't just the economy. For example, in the US purses have declined, yet costs have remained the same, unlike what has happened here in Ontario.

I'm not sure who to blame, or who mostly to blame, for the Ontario sales numbers, in other words, who has final say in the rules here that has made Ontario an even worse place than ever before to breed horses. Is it the CTHS?, The HBPA?, or Woodbine Entertainment? My best guesstimate is that it is a combo of the three.

Simple economics 101 make it easy to understand that prices are down because there aren't enough buyers. But why are there not enough buyers for Canadian bred horses?

Outside of the economy there are two major reasons why sales numbers have dropped significantly: 1. The effect of high takeouts (believe it or not) and 2. Not enough incentives for owners to buy Canadian.

HIGH TAKEOUT KILLING THE GAME

I know I've written at lengths regarding high takeout and the fact that by not allowing existing horseplayer's bankrolls to last, the result is that horseplayers become increasingly disillusioned to play, and they find other ways to gamble, whether it is offshore betting, sports betting, lotteries, internet poker, etc.

Because there are no visible winners who beat the takeout without substantial rebate, those marketing horse racing have basically no tools in which to attract new bettors. Gamblers want to know they have a chance to win. There are winners at Betfair, and while horse racing handle has stagnated, Betfair handle has skyrocketed. There are many blogs out there by Betfair players who consistently make money at it. This is the best advertisement for growth possible. And it is sorely lacking in horse racing, an industry that will not advertise the fact that there are winners, but these winners are being rebated significantly.

The choice the industry must make is lower takeouts significantly, or open the door to advertise the winners and the fact that these winners make their money because they are getting rebated.

So what does this have to do with the breeding game in Ontario? Simple, every owner in the game started somewhere, and most of today's owners got their start being introduced to the game by friends, family or coworkers.

Back in the 60's, 70's, and even the 80's, winning, breaking even, or losing a little wasn't as difficult a task as it is today. There were only 8 or 9 races to play a day and there were not nearly the amount of high takeout exotics available to play each day either. The collective takeout today at Woodbine is around 21-22%, back then it was around 16-17%. And of course, there was lots of mooch money in the pools as well back in the good ole days. Only around 1 in 3 in the crowd relied on past performances to make their decisions which meant the pools were full of dumb money. That dumb money has since left because of competition from slots and lottery mainly. It actually started in when the Blue Jays came to town, and went downhill from there.

The point of all this is that back then one could go to the track with $50 or $100 each day, be able to play the double and a few exactors and maybe a triactor, and still have a good chance to come home with money. This was true especially in the late 60's when there was only one double and two exactors offered each day. All a player had to do was cash a win bet or a win place bet in the last 4 races, and he or she was set to go to the track the next day.

The more a player goes to the track, or today, bets on horses, the more likely they are to get friends, family, and coworkers involved, or at least exposed to horse racing. The key is allowing the player to last longer. Many of the today's owners are the friends, family, and coworkers of horseplayers back in the 60's, 70's and 80's.

Many ownership partnerships have been formed by people who have hooked up because of their interest in horse racing. But the interest came about because there was a time that player's bankrolls to lasted longer. Ask any owner how they were introduced to horse racing.

In light of today's competition, horse racing has not tried to compete for the gambler's business. They assume they have a right to the bettor, but that assumption is just plain out wrong, and by sticking with the high takeout mentality, it has helped shrink the audience, and with it, the potential owners and buyers of yearlings that could have been.

NOT ENOUGH INCENTIVE TO BUY CANADIAN YEARLINGS

The cost to get a freshly bought yearling to the races is significant even if one pays a few thousand for that yearling. Many horses don't start until they are 3 or even 4, and a few times even older. And there are those who don't make it as race horses as well. What about those who make their first start at Fort Erie for a $5,000 tag, who are shooting for a net prize of something like 4 grand?

Bottom line, no matter the breeding or the confirmation, buying a yearling is probably the riskiest way to be a horse owner. Existing horse owners know this. New owners generally get into the game through the claiming side.

How to lower the risk? Right now it is pretty much a feast or famine situation for yearling buyers. Yes, you can buy a potential Queen's Plate winner, but you can also buy lottery tickets as well. If you are lucky enough, you can find a horse that may win a few Ontario sired special races, and maybe an Ontario sired stake race. But again, the odds are that you are going to wind up buying a horse who struggles to break its maiden for $12,500 at Woodbine, or $10,000 at Fort Erie. And some horses who compete at these lower levels sometimes get better, and then go on to be competitive in Ontario sired events, so from an owners standpoint, why not wait to see if there is potential to win these event without going through the expense of buying them somewhat blind, breaking them, and training them just to make the races?

The biggest problem is once an Ontario sired horse has shown that they don't have the potential to win Ontario sired events, they are pretty much worthless, as they have to face Kentucky breds in claiming events. It is just fact that Kentucky attracts the best sires and the best dams, and many dams from Ontario travel to Kentucky to be bred and then are brought back here or they wind up staying there. They produce a superior product there, and I have no immediate answers that will change that fact.

If you buy an Ontario bred who doesn't compete at the restricted allowance level, you are forced to run against better quality horses, especially at the higher claiming levels. Once an Ontario bred ekes out its conditions at low levels (ie at Fort Erie), they are pretty much not worth racing, and because the probability is that they will be that type of horse, why buy them at the sales in the first place?

Woodbine's purse structure has made it very appealing to American outfits like that of Steve Asmussen's to race here profitably. Does making the Woodbine product American friendly help? I don't think the pluses of better quality outweighs the damage that giving the purse money away to these outfits does to the breeding game and Canadian owners of Ontario sired horses. From a bettors standpoint too, quality doesn't matter that much. Double the purses and betting only increases 6%.

Woodbine would be doing the game here a huge favor if they would shave off some of the higher end purses and put that money into Ontario sired or Ontario bred claiming races.

By giving owners of Ontario breds more outs, it increases the incentive to buy Ontario breds. This means that the cheapest Ontario breds will be worth more than they are today, and if the cheapest ones raise in price, the more expensive ones will also rise in value.

Also, the game is designed for the rich right now thanks to the disparity between what a an allowance horse runs for and what a lower end claimer runs for. A key element to raising demand for new owners is to keep the small owners in the game (much like the lower takeout scenario). Knowing that a horse has to win 3 races at Fort Erie in one year just to break even, hardly attracts new owners, and it hardly keeps old owners in the game.

In Fort Erie's case they need to run fewer races at higher purse levels, and they also need more subsidies from the CTHS in the way of extra bonus money so that they can put on Ontario sired claiming races at the $5,000 and $10,000 level.

In Woodbine's case, they need to run Ontario sired claiming events. They also need to increase the purse structure for lower level events, but make it so Kentucky breds run against Kentucky breds. Eventually, owners will only want to own Ontario breds.

Recently, Ontario brought in a new rule that actually works against the breeding industry (as I predicted when it was introduced). If someone claims an Ontario bred horse, they are no longer able to run for the full purse, in other words, they might as well be be bred in another jurisdiction.

I believe the motivation for this rule was to try to get owners away from claiming Ontario breds, and trying to force them to buy at sales. This just shows that the decision makers are not in touch with reality.

Many owners of race horses are out to make a buck, or not get hurt at least. They only start buying yearlings once they've had some moderate success (which includes breaking even or losing just a little) racing horses. By reducing the demand to claim Ontario breds, all that has happened is that it has caused a greater demand for foreign breds. This rule has devalued Ontario breds, and owners of these horses know this, because it also becomes very difficult for them to unload their runners.

And what about those ridiculous B maiden allowance and allowance races run at Woodbine? Who exactly is that for? Mainly, for those owners who have higher priced Kentucky breds or Ontario breds that have foreign sires. It is a way for these owners to protect their horses and earn some allowance type when dealing with mares.
It also takes away from the free market. If these horses can't win an allowance A, they should be forced run in maiden claimer. The more horses run for the levels of what they are really worth as runners, the more claiming will happen, and with that, more potential owners.

How do these B races help the Ontario breeding industry in any way, especially the ones who own Ontario stallions? Isn't it telling that Kinghaven Farms has very few (I remember seeing one this year) Ontario sired horses, yet they have quite a few Ontario breds?

Sure, sales vouchers, and Ontario bred bonuses help a bit, but they only help those who win a few races, and with the cost of training a horse, they don't help nearly enough.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY HORSEPLAYERS ASSOCIATION OF NORTH AMERICA
HANA was formed one year yesterday. I'm proud to be on their board and the progress we have made in the past year, and I am looking forward to the future.

Take a minute, and join HANA here.

HORSEPLAYERBET.COM HAS A NEW PROMO

10% Rewards*

*Bet $1,000.00 between now and October 4th and, upon wagering that amount, Horseplayersbet will provide you a 10% reward on that $1,000.00 worth of wagers. A minimum of $1,000.00 must be wagered to earn the 10%. Those who fail to reach the $1,000.00 minimum will be provided Horseplayersbet Standard Rewards. Offer is available to new customers only and all promotional related wagers must be completed by end of day October 4, 2009.

Horseplayersbet does not take Canadian residents, as well as residents of some US States.

Fort Erie 2010: Totally Dependent On A Government Handout

2009-09-09T12:06:00.011-04:00

I went to the 9:30 Press Conference at the Holiday Inn this morning. At first when I heard about the PC I thought they must have a deal, but little that was being leaked out about it made me less optimistic.

In a nutshell, this is Fort Erie's position today as I know them:

The track generates around $8 million in slots revenue which is divided 50-50 between track and horsemen.

The track also generates around $8 million from betting revenues, again mostly split between track and horsemen.

There are other revenue streams for the track that come from food and beverage, etc.

Current owner Nordic Gaming is claiming that they lose around $3-4 million a year after subtracting the income stream from their total revenue stream. Therefore, I deduce that Nordic is claiming the track costs $11-$12 million a year to operate.

Of course, actual costs are almost always near impossible to get a true handle of especially since I'm not privy to looking at the real books, and maybe the Fort Erie Consortia wasn't privy to the "real" books either.

One other important thing is that Jim Thibert, Consortia CEO, states that there is no extra money that is available to get from slot revenues directly from the Fort Erie operation.

Doing quick math, since the horsemen plus track share is $8 million in total, and it represent 20% of the total profits, it must cost around $32 million to run the slots 365 days a year. Sounds very high, though there are 300 employees and electricity does cost some money.

All the above adds up to the fact that Fort Erie will not race next year unless it gets a government subsidy.

Apparently, those involved in the negotiations are optimistic. But we are talking unprecedented action that is required by the government. Which doesn't make too many people optimistic when one really thinks about it.

So why was the Press Conference called? My guess is to inform the horsemen of the current situation, and to get press to pressure the government to act quickly to get a deal done.

What is the Consortia asking for?

In a nutshell, $15 million from the government, or in other words, $7 million more than the track gets now from slots. Thibert doesn't care where the money inevitably comes from, but realizes that realistically it would come from the OLG's slot revenues at other locations.

The extra $7 million according to my math would be divided up this way: $2 million to the horsemen, $2-3 million to offset losses, and $2-3 million to pay to lease the joint.

Thibert did bring up a great example of the revenue sharing that occurs in the NFL over TV profits, and tied it nicely into the unfairness that Woodbine has a population of 4.5 million in their home market, while Fort Erie has probably less than one tenth of that if you don't include Buffalo.

According to Thibert's numbers, the $15 million guarantee will mean not losing the $300 million that he estimates Fort Erie Race Track generates into the Niagara region economy.

$6 million of the $15 million will be guaranteed to purses (which is around a $2 million increase for horsemen from what they get from slots now), which means at least 60 days a year at $100,000 a day in purses, but this doesn't included the money that comes from other income streams like betting , which is another $3.5-$4 million, which will likely bring dates up to 80-90 with slightly better purses than are available today. But knowing horsemen, I can see them demanding half of the $15 million....because that is what horsemen do:)

There are apparently nine other potential revenue streams discovered by the Consortia, but projections and details were not given out.

Thibert did admit that the $35 million deal had no shot even if the government gave them $35 million, because they wouldn't be able to maintain the track's losses every year, so they pulled out of the deal with Nordic 10 days early. Like I said when it happened, it had no shot because of this, but what really transpired is that Nordic was able to extort $2.3 million to keep the track alive in 2009. That was simple to have figured out the minute the deal was announced, and the reality is that the season was saved.

Two potential buyers were announce at the PC. Older gentlemen both, are said to have offers in to buy the track. It was also stated that they will lease the track to the Consortia if they buy it, and Nordic agreed to lease it to the Consortia if no one buys it.

This explains why the Consortia is asking for $15 million and not $12 or $13 million from the government. The leasing price must have been predetermined at around $2-3 million a year. If this is true, that puts a value on Fort Erie of between $15 to $25 million. Great for Nordic, because getting $2-3 million for a failing business a year is better than losing $3 million a year.

If the leasing price was what it is supposed to be (one dollar), there wouldn't be two other suitors for the place.

Will the government figure out that they are essentially giving Nordic around a $3 million dollar profit a year in one way or another if they go ahead with this? Could this be a deal breaker? Hopefully Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan will be completely sympathetic to the cause and have some major pull over the now infamous OLG.

Apparently there was a meeting scheduled with former OLG chief Kelly McDougald that was supposed to happen September 6th, but for some reason, it was canceled:) Just kidding, the meeting took place in 2007.

I really hope the deal goes through. Though I'm not sure that the Consortia is qualified to run a track, or if they have the proper vision to do so, but they will be better than Nordic Gaming at it. Not nearly as good as if I called the shots, though. But that goes without saying:)

One other note, HBPA Sue Leslie attended the Press Conference via telephone. She said she was meeting with the ORC about racing dates, and did state that Nordic was applying for 78 dates......probably with quite a few ifs attached.

To read the proposal click here.

Ontario's First Whip Violation A Doozy

2009-09-04T09:55:00.004-04:00

In my last posting I was wondering who was going to be the first jockey to violate the new whipping laws in Ontario. I did mention Chantal Sutherland who has been fined before for excessive whipping on at least a couple of occasions. That being said, I it still came as a complete surprise when I read Jen's Blog yesterday and found out that Sutherland was the first culprit, but it wasn't over whipping, but for USING THE WRONG WHIP.

Maybe Sutherland has been too busy modeling on her spare time to realize that the old whips were banned. Maybe she just forgot. But in the second race, she used the old whip and today this morning there will be a hearing going on to decide whether the purse will get redistributed. As luck would have it, Sutherland and her mount crossed the wire in first position in an allowance race.

The Toronto Star interview from Jen's Thoroughblog with my commentary attached:

Under the new “urging rules”, each rider must carry the kinder ‘cushion crop’, featuring a much softer end of the whip (“popper”) or their horse will be disqualified.
**************************************
Disqualified before the race is official or disqualified from purse monies? When did the track officials learn about this?

But because none of the three O.R.C. or the paddock judge or clerk of scales noticed Sutherland carrying the old whip, Sutherland’s mount, favoured Sans Sousi, was declared the winner of the $66,800 allowance race for betting purposes.
“We were made aware of it by a couple of other trainers after the race,” said steward Bill McMahon. “I am shocked that this happened, we are not happy about it.”
**********************************
Not happy about it? Look at the bright side, now protocol will now be in place, that should have been in place in the first place. I realize what Sutherland did was not anticipated, but it will not happen again because the judges now will make sure it doesn't.

McMahon said there will be a hearing into the matter on (FRIDAY) to determine if Sans Sousi, owned by Thor Eaton’s Eaton Hall Farm, will be disqualified post-race and lose the $40,080 winner’s share.
***************************************
Trainer Mike Doyle is having a train wreck of a year. He had a couple of wins on Wednesday night, but I can't see any justification to keep Sans Sousi's number up unless there is a loophole in the rule.

“I realized my mistake on the way to the gate,” said Sutherland. “The gate crew gave me another whip that they had there but it was not a cushion crop either.”
*************************************
This is an ugly admission. I have a feeling it isn't going to pay to be this honest. Sutherland knowingly raced with a banned whip and at least one person on the gate crew knew of the problem as well. They could have easily called upstairs and delayed the race by a couple of minutes.

Sutherland, the second-leading rider at Woodbine, said she accepts full responsibility.
**********************************
Well d'uh.

“It was totally my fault, I forgot,” said Sutherland. ‘I apologized to everyone. I hope they don’t disqualify the filly.”
*********************************
I really don't think there is any chance the filly won't get DQ'ed. It is too late for the public, though Sans Souci would have won even if Sutherland used a fly swatter.

More bright side: Sans Souci gets to keep her non winners of three Ontario sired status and should be a cinch to get that condition before the year is out if she came out of the race OK.

As for Sutherland's punishment. I hope they aren't too hard on her. She is the best and maybe the only marketing plus Woodbine has right now. Taking away her 10% of the winner's share and a stern warning would be fine by me and probably the rest of the public, except for maybe jealous wives and girlfriends who probably want her banned from Ontario:)

I'll update the blog when/if I get the results from the hearing.

OK, here is the update: The owners of Sans Souci got the shaft. Their horse was DQed from the purse....buh bye $32,000 plus. Chantal also received a whopping $200 fine.

The National Post needs journalists who know more than next to nothing about horse racing: Jockey may lose $40,000 prize for using banned whip

The mistake is not just in the headline but continues in the story as well:

Officials with the Ontario Racing Commission are expected to decide today whether Chantal Sutherland, one of Canada's top jockeys, with more than 400 first-place victories to her name, should be disqualified and stripped of her $40,000 prize.

*******************************
For the two of you who read my blog and don't know, the jockey gets 10% of the winner's share of the purse, so Sutherland stands to lose $4,000, and considering the fact she pays her agent 25% and is probably in a very high tax bracket, her net loss here might be around $1,500 to $2,000 tops.

Is Woodbine Entertainment Looking To Turf HPITV?
Just wondering after finding out that a poll question pops up after logging into one's HPI account asking if you subscribe to HPITV through cable or satellite.

First, Woodbine got rid of all their TV commenters on HPITV late last year, and now I bet they are looking to cut more expenses by getting rid of HPITV. Their rationale would be that bettors can now view any race they want on the internet so why have the expense of a TV station as well.

Again, I'm only speculating here, but if true this is just more confirmation that Woodbine is a terribly run business.

They pretty much have a monopoly on Canadian bettors who want to wager into parimutuel pools throughout North America. They have tremendous exposure through HPITV, the internet, and The Score and SunTV. Yet, they have turned their players completely off by having a corporate philosophy of taking as much money from the player as quickly as they possibly can.

Woodbine had a perfect opportunity and still does, to lower takeout substantially and actually compete with offshores and Betfair (where the big Canadian betting money has rightfully gone). Instead, they continue to have a collective takeout that is in the highest range in North America.

If Woodbine needs to cut expenses, how about just getting rid of the old school leaders within? They have killed horse racing in Ontario for the player, by making it impossible for a player to last let alone win.

Must read: An Interview With Cary Fotias

“Lower the takeout, dramatically! The game will never grow without a lower takeout. And anyone who doesn’t understand that didn’t pass Economics 101. This industry has never been run in a free-market environment. The politicians and bureaucrats that are stifling this game have no idea where the laws of supply and demand meet to maximize profit for owners, trainers, the state and local government. They don’t have a clue. They just don’t get it, and the people who do get it don’t have the power to make it change.”

Fotias goes on about many issues plaguing the industry right now, and he offers solutions. He also mentions the Horseplayers Association of North America, where he is a board member (like yours truly).

To become a member of the Horseplayers Association simply fill out this form, it is free and we need YOU. The more members we have, the more clout we have. As Pull The Pocket points out, horseplayers do not have a seat at the table, and that is why racing is dying.

Was Fred Pope joking around? It is hard to tell at the Paulick Report. He sure had horsemen eating out of his lap before he took too much heat from horseplayers and others who really understand the game.

Lots of good discussion in amongst the 100 plus comments. Of course, I chimed in calling Pope's idea ludicrous (even the one he admits to), as he basically wants the US to have what Woodbine/HPI has, and we've seen what Woodbine has done with the power. In other words, follow Pope, and racing will die faster and harder than ever before.

GREAT NEWS FOR BETTORS AND EVEN HORSEMEN
Paulick isn't sure if he is the reason why Equibase, Brisnet, and Thoroughbred Sports Network are now offering FREE ARCHIVED HISTORICAL CHART RESULTS to all members. Brisnet and Thoroughbred Sports Networks allows members to go back as far as 1991, while Equibase goes back to 1999.

Daily Racing form still charges $2.95 for historical chart results by card. I wonder if they are going to keep that going. I mean you have to be brain dead to buy a chart from them. But then again, the racing industry relies on the brain dead:)

Theocrats In Ohio Trying To Prevent Ohio VLTs With Lawsuit Don't these dudes know about separation of church and state?

Forterieracing is now on Twitter. Elissa Blowe and Daryl Wells Jr. give fans the heads up as well as their well meaning WIN 4 picks daily.

More content available at Horseplayersbet.com. Kentucky Downs, Zia Park, Emerald Downs, Turfway Park, Los Alamitos, Retama, and the last week of Ruidoso have been added to betting menu.

Horseplayersbet offers one of the most competitive Player Rewards Programs available for horse racing product. At Horseplayersbet, even the smallest bettors have the potential to become the biggest.

THIS JUST IN
Press conference regarding the Fort Erie Consortia Proposal for the Fort Erie Race Track.
Date: Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Time: 9:30 am – Press Conference
Location: Holiday Inn Fort Erie
*******************************************
I can't see this being grim news. I expect, considering the timing and the location of the press conference, that something very positive regarding the future of Fort Erie will be announced. Is Nordic finally gone? Has the place finally been sold? Has the Consortia extended the lease of the track? If so, who pays if the track loses money?

Axe Falls On Ontario Lottery & Gaming Corp.

2009-09-01T08:07:00.008-04:00

The OLG board resigned and CEO Kelly McDougald was fired with cause.
There has to be much more to these firings than expense filings for golf memberships, pen refills, or weight loss clinics by OLG execs. And no, it can't be because of giving out a Mercedes Benz during Ontario's auto crisis as a prize, as a lottery prize either. And I don't buy it being because of the mistakes made over ticket misprints or slot machine glitches.

Most likely, we will find out more. I expect there to be many non tendered contracts that have been awarded through McDougald's short reign as being a major part of the firing, but I am speculating. The practice of handing out non tendered contracts usually has something to do with nepotism or under the table payoffs or pay back for favours done or expected to be done in the near future. This is something the government is supposed to frown upon and take seriously as it wrecks public confidence, and perhaps that is what is going on here.

Moving forward, it is hard to say how this will impact the Racinos in Ontario. The old OLG regime was apparently tough to deal with, and the OLG may have been partly responsible for the lack of growth in the industry over the last few years.

They also seem to have forgot why casinos were placed at racetracks in the first place: to help subsidize the racing industry in Ontario. For example, it seemed like an impossibility for Fort Erie to get a bigger percentage of casino revenues in order to help its survival under McDougald's regime. I kept hearing that the OLG does not care about horse racing, that it is just a necessary evil.

Maybe the new board and leader will be more racetrack friendly. I know the OLG needs some positive press, and keeping jobs is a must, so they can't afford for Fort Erie racetrack to close. Creating jobs would also be something that would give them some positive news, and I expect the new regime to do their best to fast track the creation of the proposed new Racino in Belleville.

Now if only we can see the same type of house cleaning at Woodbine Entertainment, life for the Ontario gambler, and the industry as a whole, would improve immensely.

Is it just me, or does Kelly McDougald look like Sarah Palin without a makeover?

I think it was a great thing to see Palin gone (not a fan, sorry conservative readers), and it might just be a good thing that McDougald is gone now too.

Ontario Racing Commission Hands Out Large Fine For Violation Of Archaic Rule

The Ontario Racing Commission has released details pertaining to the penalties doled out earlier today to Kerry and Shirley House, the owners of this year’s Gold Cup & Saucer winner, All The Weapons.

As outlined earlier today, each of the owners were fined $17,343.50 for violating ORC rule 15:09a, which stipulates:

15.09. A claimed horse, regard less of ownership:

(a) shall race only at a track or tracks in the Province of Ontario for the next 60 days, except where such a horse had been nominated to participate in an added money event before it was claimed, or unless the track where the horse was claimed is closing for more than 30 days. If the track where the horse was claimed closes for more than 30 days, the horse is released from the requirements of 15.09 (a).

***********************************************
The horse gets claimed in Ontario, and the new owners, who were probably not aware of the rules to begin with, entered the horse in a Stake series in PEI.

The rule has been in place for years to help protect our racing population. This made more sense when Ontario didn't offer some of the best purses in North America, but now the rule needs to be thrown away.

It was wrong to begin with, because it interferes with free enterprise, but especially now with higher purses available, the rule makes no sense, and it only takes away options for new owners, which has could have a negative affect on the amount of horse owners and potential horse owners in the future.

Yes, the House's broke the rules (and willfully too it appears), and they deserve the fine, but this rule needs to be taken out of the books going forward.

Goodbye Whip, Hello Crop
The ORC is just stuck in the stone ages, they do have their progressive moments. Today is the first day that the soft cushion crop is mandatory for jockeys to use. Jennifer Morrison's article in the Star explains things a lot better than I can.

I wonder who will be the first jockey to get fined under the new urging rule.

Steven Crist: More Questions Than Answers In Lasix Debate
Excellent read. But whether Lasix is allowed or not, it really doesn't matter, as long as takeout is high. Racing's woes won't be fixed by cleaning up their tarnished image in regards to Lasix masking other drugs.

I'll also add that if racing wasn't so dysfunctional in North America, Lasix would have no place in the game except during workouts.

Don't shoot the messenger.

Finally, the other Canadian blogger who really gets it has written an excellent piece over at the HANA blog on the fact that carnivals are light years ahead of the racing industry when it comes to understanding the customer.

Track Takeout: The Highest And The Lowest

2009-08-26T10:59:00.004-04:00

Awareness of track takeout has risen tremendously over the last year or so, since HANA (Horseplayers Association of North America) started up, and prior to that, blogs like this one (Cangamble) and Pull The Pocket have contributed greatly to making the public understand why they have stopped betting on horses, or why they are thinking of stopping, or have reduced their wagering considerably over the past 20 years or more.

Many people will say they don't care about takeout, but bottom line takeout affects how much one bet and how long one lasts on a collective basis. Bottom line, the higher the takeout, the less likely a bettor's bankroll will last.

The ramifications of high takeouts are pretty simple. The horseplayer will spend less time betting and watching races. They are less likely to get families and friends involved in horse racing. Therefore, when they quit or die, they have not brought in any new blood to the game.

We are experiencing this phenomenon big time right now throughout the industry. Those in their forties (like me) or older are pretty much the last generation of players who were introduced to the game because most horseplayers lasted longer back in the 60's and 70 and early 80's, prior to the dummy money being lost to lotteries and slots, and prior to simulcast wagering, where players could bet more than 8 or 9 races a day (which eroded bank rolls very quickly as takeouts remained the same), and prior to when exotic bets like triactors and superfectors were available in the majority of races (at a takeout of 25% or more in most cases, these appealing high return wagers upped the mean takeout horseplayers paid out on average from around 18% back in the late 70's to 21% today).

I saw a relevant quote on Twitter this morning. I believe it dates back to the 30's or 40's: "You don’t gamble to win. You gamble so you can gamble the next day." - Bert Ambrose (Band Leader). The racetracks understood that back in the 30's and 40's, but don't understand it, or care today.

Ok, time to get off the soap box and provide the Best and Worst Takeouts for North American tracks (approximately 70 tracks):

THE LOWEST TAKEOUTS

Win, Place, Show
Hollywood, Los Alamitos 15.4%
Santa Anita, Del Mar, Golden Gate Fields 15.43%
Northlands Park 15.8%
Note: Hastings has a 12% takeout on show bets, but has a 17% takeout on win & place.

Exactors and Doubles
Aqueduct, Belmont, Saratoga 18.5%
Note: Retama has a 12% takeout on doubles, but has a 21% takeout on exactors. Tampa Bay Downs has an 18% takeout on doubles but a 21.5% takeout on exactors.

Triactors
Churchill Downs, Keeneland 19%

Superfectas
Meadowlands 15%
Churchill Downs, Keeneland 19%

Pick 3's
Retama, Sam Houston 12%
Churchill Downs, Keeneland 19%

Pick 4's
Meadowland, Monmouth 15%
Churchill Downs, Keeneland 19%

Pick 6's
Gulfstream 15%
Hawthorne 16%

THE HIGHEST TAKEOUTS

Win, Place, Show
Turf Paradise, Yavapai 20%

Doubles and Exactors
Fort Erie 26.2%
Assiniboia, Suffolk Downs 26%
Arapahoe 25%
Northlands Park, Stampede Park 24.8%

Triactors
Penn National 31%
Philadelphia 30%
Assiniboia 29%
Fort Erie 28.2%
Calder, Woodbine 27%
(Note: Woodbine ups the takeout to 27% for any track on their HPI or simulcast menu, which means that a triactor that when a triactor pays $810 at Keeneland or Churchill, Woodbine will pay their customers only $730 for the same bet.

Superfectas
Penn, Philadelphia 30%
Assiniboia, Presque Isle Downs 29%
Calder 27%
Hastings, Woodbine 26.3%

Pick 3's
Assiniboia 29%
Calder 27%
Woodbine 26.3%
Fort Erie 26.2%

Pick 4's
Assiniboia 29%
Penn National 28%
Calder 27%
Fort Erie 26.2%

Pick 6's
Woodbine 26.3%
Philadelphia 26%
Pimlico 25.75%
Laurel 25.75%

The troubling thing about the tracks that have the highest takeouts, is that most of them have slots. This illustrates the short sightedness and idiotic greed displayed by many racing execs and horsemen who do have a say in takeouts as well in many jurisdictions.

As many sharp bettors know, there are ways to combat high track takeouts and still play the ponies. Exchange betting as offered by Betfair has attracted many Canadians, and ADWs like Horseplayersbet.com, which offer decent player rewards, are available to many American horseplayers.

For a nearly complete, nearly up to date chart of sortable tracks takeouts, click here.

New Whipping Rules In Ontario May Alter Handicapping A Little

2009-08-19T11:05:00.002-04:00

New Whipping Rules Coming To Ontario September 1st

"Whips will have to be be cushioned, be no more than 30 inches in length, and have a padded noise-making "popper."......................... Use of a non-approved whip will lead to the disqualification of the horse..................a horse cannot be hit with the whip more than three times in a row without being given time to respond, and the whip is not to be used when a horse is not visibly responding or is not in contention for a meaningful position."
***********************************************************
This appears to have major implications when handicapping horses who were not in contention. Speed figure players may need to add a few lengths to horses well beaten, or discard the race entirely because the riders will now wrap up on them early. Some jockeys do this already, but it might be more of a factor now.

Frank Stronach Could Be In Deep Doo Doo

The Magna creditors are claiming: "MI Developments prevented Magna Entertainment from selling assets that might have allowed it to successfully restructure." And the intent was apparently sinister on Stronach's behalf. He purposely put Magna into the bankruptcy position in order to benefit himself by doing many "sham" transactions.

If these allegations are proven, I can see possible jail time being pursued as well. The Madoff scandal has put market regulators on high alert, and they don't mind taking the odd big guy down.

Jockey Norberto Arroyo charged with possession with the intent to sell cocaine
Arroya is currently 2 for 56 at Saratoga. The purses are good, and his mounts have earned over $166k; no reason for him to have a second job.

Baymount Enters Into Letter Of Intent On The New Quinte Track

The new proposed partner is a subsidiary of the Kilmer Group which has a significant ownership stake in the Toronto Maple Leafs and Toronto Raptors.

Nick Gonzalez is hotter than a Playboy centerfold on the planet Mercury. Six consecutive winners at Fort Erie including a natural hat trick yesterday as he won the 4th, 5th and 6th. I picked all three as first choices, so I will leave speculation that Gonzalez is using some special concoction to jealous horsemen and maybe the ORC.

Ray Paulick Vents Against Equibase
One of HANA's issues is free information for bettors. I'm don't want to solely blame Equibase though. This is an industry problem and it illustrates just how dysfunctional and anti-player the industry is and always has been. Equibase should be subsidized by the racetracks in a way that the information becomes free. Everything from lifetime charts to daily past performances to breeding records. Free info will only attract more players and owners, etc., and this might just result in growth.

Paulick makes a great point comparing the free information available for every other sport out there. You can get just about any player stat for free by doing just a quick web search or go to sites like NBA.com or NFL.com, etc.

Just a quick note. Equibase does give out some good free info. I go there every day when I do my daily charting of the tracks that I do track variants for.

Bill Finley Says That Lagging Odds Are Unacceptable

He is preaching to the choir.

"As long as the odds continue to change during races, people have a right to be suspicious....close when the first horse is loaded into the gate. It usually takes upward of a minute to load an entire field, normally enough time for every bet made everywhere to funnel its way into the system.....Horseplayers aren't stupid. They will quickly figure out that they have to get their bets in in time and will adjust accordingly."

Fort Erie Still Not Sold

2009-08-13T09:32:00.005-04:00

For the past 8 years, since moving to Fort Erie, I've heard numerous rumours about the sale of Fort Erie. I'm sure offers have been made, in fact, I know offers have been made. But no offers have been accepted to date.

Nordic Gaming has historically overvalued the racetrack. The asking price has dropped, but like an unsavvy investor, who bought a stock that dropped well below what it is was once worth, Nordic is unwilling to unload at today's prices (they seem to be chasing 2 year old prices), even though they don't want the stock in their portfolio anymore. Nordic continues to want more Fort Erie than what the market is willing to pay for it, so Nordic continues to hang on to it. Pretty simple stuff.

According to a newly issued press release by the Ontario HBPA, there are a couple of interested parties kicking the can and the Fort Erie Racing Consortia is also looking into leasing the track long term.

I don't know how they can afford to lease the joint, IF in fact, the track really does lose money.

I wonder if Great Canadian Gaming is one of the potential suitors. They are a well run company, but I can't see them overpaying for the Fort.

So basically, it might as well be February all over again, as there is nothing definitive regarding racing at Fort Erie......the only thing for sure is Ajax Downs will have a 5 eighth track ready to go next year.

Canadian Man In Deep Doo Doo Over Internet Gambling

A Canadian man was indicted this week in the United States on fraud and money laundering charges after he allegedly processed more than US$350-million in online gambling payments, highlighting the cat-and-mouse battle that pits law enforcement agencies against the intangible world of Internet gambling.

Douglas Rennick, 34, who lives in Canada, faces a maximum of 55 years in jail and must turn over US$565,908,288 in monies reaped through the alleged financial conspiracy that saw millions of dollars funneled from a Cyprus bank to two accounts in California.

He is alleged to have tried to disguise the transactions to distribute gambling winnings to U. S. residents.

Why was Chantal Sutherland taken off her mounts on the weekend, and didn't ride yesterday? Lets just say, it was just a hiccup.

Breeders Cup Gets Tough On Drugs....sort of

In addition to the crackdown on steroids and Class 1 and Class 2 drugs, this year's Breeders' Cup at Santa Anita (Nov. 6-7) will include out of competition testing for EPO (blood doping) 10 days before the Breeders' Cup and TCO2 (milk shaking) testing in the detention barn before all 14 Breeders' Cup races. A failed EPO test would render the horse ineligible for the race and the trainer open to suspensions. Failed tests for TCO2 will mean purse redistributions and suspensions. The latter two testing policies were introduced at the 2007 Breeders' Cup at Monmouth Park.

*****************************************************
This is pretty much an admission that there is an EPO/DPO and milkshake problem still plaguing the industry in a big way.

The test for EPO should be specifically 10 days from the race, but it should be done anytime, and without warning to all entrants, or potential entrants from 30 days to after the race. Savvy trainers (amateur pharmacists) can easily work around pre-determined test dates.

I don't agree with the author's attitude towards penalizing the owner. The trainer yes, the owner, no, unless there is proof that the owner had knowledge of the use of the illegal substances.

The NTRA Comments On The Menendez Bill
Some key points in the bill:

# S. 1597 (Section 203) amends the tax code to eliminate the automatic 25% federal withholding on pari-mutuel winnings of $5,000 or more (incorporating tax legislation also known as the Pari-mutuel Conformity and Equality Act, or PACE Act).

# S. 1597 (Section 206) raises the reportable amount for pari-mutuel winnings from $600 at odds of 300-1 to $1,200 at odds of 300-1, in line with the reportable dollar amount for slot machine winnings.
******************************************
Considering that almost every horseplayer who doesn't get substantial rebates loses money in the long run, withholding and tax reporting is ridiculous, and an out and out tax grab. Plus it takes potential churnable money out of the pools.

This is something that Canada understands, and it is good to see it as an issue in the USA finally.

One thing that I don't understand fully is how poker is considered a skill game, but sports betting seems to be left out of that definition in regards to this bill.

Youbet handle up, profits down

Don't forget to check out Horseplayersbet.com. Where today's small bettor has a real chance to be tomorrow's big bettor.

Betfair Sizzles While Parimutuel Handle Fizzles

2009-08-07T11:30:00.009-04:00

Handle Down Another 13% In July
Short Post At Pull The Pocket Says It All.

HANA represented at Yavapai this weekend

HANA prez Jeff Platt will be there. Arizona is one of the most problematic states out there when it comes to being bettor-friendly. It is illegal for anyone to make a bet over the internet in Arizona. No phone betting either. In fact, if you are a resident from another state, it is against the law to place a bet on the internet while on Arizona soil (though I don't think anyone has been charged or prosecuted violating that law yet).

The laws are ridiculous and only benefit the off track parlours and Indian casinos (because they are faced with less competition). Smells of political payoffs. Why not have a state run or racetrack run ADW and keep a law that states that Arizona residents can only bet on the internet through that ADW? At least it gives the Arizona residents the opportunity to play from home.

Arizona also allows ticket cancellations after the race goes. At Yavapai it is 4 seconds, and at Turf Paradise it is 8 seconds.

This opens the door to possible fraudulent behavior like we saw at Woodbine and Greenwood over 20 years ago when a betting syndicate would make large bets and cancel tickets when their horse had a bad start (there were tellers involved in the scam as well).

The Bizarro World Of Woodbine

I know I've been outspoken over Woodbine's policy to ramp up takeouts on triactors to 27%. It is completely unfair, and borderline illegal, if not illegal if challenged.

What that means is that if you hit a triactor at a WEG outlet or through HPI that pays $810 for a deuce at Churchill Downs (which has a 19% takeout on triactors), you will be paid off $730 in Canada.

Well, it seems that HPI/WEG/Woodbine ramps down the takeout on venues that have a higher than 27% takeout like Penn and Philadelphia Park.

I was amazed when I saw that triactors actually paid a little more in Canada than they did at the track where the race was held.

I'm wondering if Woodbine did this voluntarily, or if the CPMA or another government agency pressured them to do this.

It isn't like Woodbine is going to advertise this because they rip customers off way more than the customer gets an advantage under this new rule, and they would be crazy to bring this to light. So I'm advertising this for them:)

Jen's Thoroughblog on the death of Charles (Norcliffe) Baker

Thoroughbred Bloggers Alliance has a new web page and has added a few more blogs.

What's The Deal With Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy?

.....The New York State Racing and Wagering Board has decided to deny horses entry into races if they have received hyperbaric oxygen therapy treatment within one week of post time.....Purified oxygen does not exist naturally in a horse....these treatments could give a horse an unfair advantage in a race while jeopardizing the horse’s health.....

After watching horses who race for certain trainers at Woodbine, who have abnormally high win percentages, I wouldn't be startled that these horses are running with an unnatural supply of oxygen.

One trainer in particular seems to win a heck of a lot of races on the front end at Woodbine, which is quite a feat in itself. And most of these runners seem to run identical. They bust out of the gate, look like they will get beat halfway around the far turn as the field catches up, but then, almost like what happens when Popeye eats spinach, they rebreak as if they haven't run an inch in the race.

Sure, there are some horses who can do that, with a relaxed lead, and their are certain horses that are just that much better than the rest and know how to win. But when you see quite a few horses in the same barn run like that, it certainly looks very suspicious.

But is it breaking the rules in Ontario to have oxygen therapy or use a drug that enhances the oxygen flow during a race? I don't know.

Things That Make You Wonder If Woodbine Doesn't Need To Replace Their Head Honcho

Fort Erie's handle on Tuesday's 9 race card: $1,200,800
Woodbine's 8 race handle on Thursday: $1,205,973

Fort Erie is on death's door, but Woodbine, thanks to slots and only slots (location, location, location), can afford to pay their racing execs mega salaries and bonuses for doing absolutely nothing beneficial to attract new customers.

Belmont Handle Down Over 13% And I Know Why

2009-08-02T09:48:00.006-04:00

NYRA President and CEO Charles Hayward can blame the weather all he wants. He can also blame the economy too. Sure, these factors could have contributed to the fact that betting on Belmont live was down over 17%, and that handle from from all other sources was down over 13%, but I think it goes deeper than that.

I think that over the last year especially, existing horseplayers are starting to wise up. Organizations like HANA (Horseplayers Association of North America) have helped educate the player immensely. Hopefully, my blog has as well. The betting public is becoming more aware each and every day of two words that make racing execs cringe: takeout and rebate.

The reality has become totally apparent now; the only way a horseplayer has a fighting chance to even think about turning a profit long term, is by getting a substantial (5-10%) rebate. And most serious players have now adopted a rebate only philosophy, where over 90% of their bets are on races they get a rebate on.

NYRA and every track out there should be selling their signal everywhere. Again, it is just more evidence that horse racing is probably the most dysfunctional business in the Western Hemisphere.

Personally, I bet on two races at Belmont this year. The Belmont and another race that was part of a handicapping challenge that I handicapped and felt compelled to bet on because I was having a good day that day.

NYRA doesn't seem to let their signal go out to many rebate shops, especially the ones that give rebates to the small to medium player. Foolish move. Very foolish.

I haven't even handicapped a race at The Spa this year, and I don't plan to. But I do handicap and wager on around 5-7 tracks a day. I'm not alone.

To put things in perspective though, Belmont still did over $9 million a day in handle which is around 4 times what Woodbine averages a day. Mind you, the public is very aware of Woodbine's high takeout rates by now, and a lot of players just can't stand the Polytrack.

Woodbine Stewards Goofed

I think the Woodbine stewards have done a very good job this year, but on Friday, they blew it.

Taking down Carrtowns Katie in the 8th race was a terrible call. Yes, she was lugging and jockey Chantal Sutherland knew it as she was whipping the horse with her left hand, but she was clear and had momentum when she was passing Spend Now And Save at around the sixteenth pole in the stretch.

Carrtowns Katie was definitely the best horse in the race, and the fact that it was a relatively long inquiry means that the stews were having a hard time deciding what to do. I think I can speak for most horseplayers when I state that if the stewards are dealing with a tough decision, the results should stand.

I realize riding horses is one of the most dangerous jobs on this planet, but it sure looked like a phantom check to me. Not sure if it was the horse who shied away, or if it was Emma-Jayne Wilson, but I've seen a lot worse happen without an inquiry.

Were the stewards compelled to appease the betting public by putting up a 6-5 shot? Public perception may say that had a lot or at least a little to do with it.

If the owners of Carrstowns Katie appeals, I think they win. But those who bet on the best horse still lose.

If Chantal gets days for the ride, it would be an injustice.

$40,000 Raised For Chad Beckon
Good job by Robbie King and Gus Schickedanz to make it happen.

THE BREEDERS STAKES
The Breeder's Stakes goes today at Woodbine. It brings back memories from my early teens, as two of my all time favorite horses, Momigi and Tiny Tinker, won this race back to back. Both of these runners would pretty much come from last and fly in the stretch.
Tiny Tinker, especially, sporting the bright orange colours of Beasley, was a thrill to watch. He was known to trail the field by many lengths before taking off and passing horses one by one.

How about Mensch to upset today? This is one of Fieldstone's three runners in the race, and to me, at a mile and a half, I can see it coming down to stretch closers.
Still a maiden, Mensch ran a good one going a mile and three eighths last time, losing to entry mate Guipago, who I think had a better trip and took advantage of the slower pace, which probably compromised Mensch.

Eye of the Leopard is definitely the horse to beat here. Last time he ran completely against the bias, and Mark Frostad would probably have worked the horse over Fort Erie if he could turn back the hands of time. According to my form, Eye of the Leopard has not worked on the turf, and has never raced on the turf. Despite his breeding, this makes him very vulnerable today.

In the co feature today, I'm giving Elated Moon one more chance. She obviously didn't hurt herself last time out, when she embarrassed me for publicly picking an even money shot who got basted. But something else went wrong, and I'll bet Steven Asmussen's team is bright enough to have corrected it. I'm going to predict she wins the Nandi Stakes easily today.

Forget GO BABY GO and BET IT TO GET IT. This should be used in a campaign to get people to go to the track:

Bet
. - Watch more comedy videos and sitcoms.

Speaking of betting. Check out new ADW Horseplayersbet.com.

One more thing. Just to make sure I get Google hits today: Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER, Rachel AlexandER.

Ten Percent (Track Takeout) Is Sufficient: DRF May 13th, 1935

2009-07-29T12:01:00.002-04:00

A Pace Advantage member, "Quarter Crack," posted a great link to DRF archives that go way way back in time.

Sure, the nostalgia of looking at past performances and charts that go back to the late 1800's is a great way to kill time, but I immediately to it upon myself to search the term "takeout."

The two earliest articles available are the most telling, and one can trace the demise of horse racing that we see now, to the words that were printed in 1935 and 1953 respectively.

Here is an article, most likely written by a DRF editor from May 13th, 1935:

The California legislature is considering an amendment to its parimutuel betting
law reducing the takeout allowed the tracks from eight per cent to six. A Los Angeles assemblyman introduced it, but the change is being opposed by William P Kyne and John W Marchbank operators of the Bay Meadows and Tanforan tracks, who say
they cannot operate successfully if the reduction is made at this time. The law does
not have to be changed if a track wishes to have a smaller take, and it will not be
surprising if Santa Anita voluntarily makes a reduction for its meeting next winter
When the law is altered, however, the state should cut its percentage, which is now
four. A total of ten per cent is sufficient and if anything is done by the California
legislature it should at least make the tracks take seven, and the states cut three
per cent. The smaller take, the better.
***********************************

Can you say Holy Cow? California racetracks were getting around 8% of every dollar bet on horses back in 1935. Yes, the tracks had a good gripe against the government trying to get more of a cut back then. But at 10%, it is no wonder that the stands were full, even though America was just getting out of a recession.

Nowadays, many states have reduced their share of the cut from the pie dramatically. Around 12 years ago, Ontario opted to remove their 7% of what they were taking on each bet. Of course, the ORC, now WEG, didn't reduce takeout by that amount. They just scooped it.

Now Woodbine cries that they had to increase the takeout on Tracknet, Magna, and California tracks to 27% on triactors (even though Churchill and Keeneland have a takeout on triactor of 19%). They pay a whopping 1.3% on each bet to the government. Sure, 4% on triactors goes to the breeding program, but they wind up splitting the remaining 22% with the purse accounts.

Can you imagine that back in 1935, they would be splitting 8%? And guess what?, people would be betting like crazy today, like they did back then.

Now for a very prophetic article. This is longer, but definitely worth the read. It happened at what we would call now, a Racing Symposium, originally printed June 11th, 1953:

NARSC Hits Excessive Turf Taxation

...The report of the Committee on State Revenues was of particular interest to the large assemblage of turf solons and representatives of various other organizations within racing, for the spiraling taxation has disturbing implications to those in every phase of racing and bloodstock production.

This report was presented by Michigan's James H. Inglis.

Inglis began by noting that increases in the rate of taxation on parimutuel
wagering are continuing, in spite of warnings from this and other turf bodies that
the patience of the long suffering horse players to an excessive takeout is wearing
thin.

Continuing, he said:
"We have apparently failed to get across to state legislators and other public officials the message that a takeout from parimutuel pools of more than 10 or 11
per cent is not only unfair to the patrons but also is unwise and detrimental to the
long term health of the sport."

The most serious setback came this spring with the decision of Governor Dewey
and the New York legislature to restore the full amount of five per cent O'Dwyer
"bite," boosting the total takeout in New York from the 14 per cent which prevailed
in 1952 to 15 percent. The descending escalator clause in New York, was also abandoned and there can be no relief from the 15 per cent by just waiting for it.

There are undoubtedly good reasons for what happened in New York involving local
politics and a serious financial crisis in New York City but this isn't the place and
there isn't time to analyze these factors here. Yet, it should be emphasized that the decision in New York has had and will continue to have serious effects in other states, because whether we like it or not, many other states look to New York for leadership in legislation of this type.

Legislators Point to New York, Florida

The task of a racing commissioner in Michigan or Ohio to try to hold the line
on horse racing tax rates is made very difficult when the revenue-hungry legislators
can point to the 15 per cent takeout in New York and Florida and a 14 percent takeout in Illinois, all three being important racing states.

Just within recent weeks Michigan, Ohio, and Massachusetts have joined the
parade. The new act in Michigan has not yet been signed but it calls for an increase in the takeout from 11 to 12 per cent for thoroughbred tracks and an increase from 11 to 13 per cent for harness meetings. Ohio has boosted the take out from 10 to 12 per cent and in Massachusetts the increase has been from 12 to 14 percent.

One of the unpleasant facts of life in the world of racing is that often the racing
associations with their well financed full time lobbyists are able to sell their views to legislators more effectively than are racing
commissioners and other friends of the sport. Add to this unpleasant fact another unpleasant fact to wit that too often racing associations for their own selfish gain,
have been willing to use higher parimutuel tax rates as the bait with which to secure
larger track commissions or other legislative gains.

An increase in parimutuel tax rates is usually dished up as part of a legislative
package which includes gains for the racing associations.

Cites Michigan as Example

In Michigan, for example, the tax rate increase has included as part of a bill
which also attempted to unload on the tax payer more than 100000 worth of auditing
veterinary work and chemical testing which had previously been paid for by the
associations. The package also included a provision taking away from the racing
commission the power to control price gouging by race track concessionaires.

The game of playing Santa Claus with other peoples money is not a new one and
I regret to say that some racing associations have played this game in their legislative campaigns. Thus we get back to this familiar and disturbing fact of racing. This is the fact that in the power politics of racing between the horsemen the organized employees. the racing associations, and the financially hard pressed state governments, every element of racing is able to force a larger slice of the pie for himself, except the racing fan, the all important lover and patron of the sport, who in the last analysis, is the man who keeps the show on the road.

The racetrack customers, whom it is our responsibility to look out for, have been
getting a smaller and smaller slice of the pie, but in spite of dire warnings, he has
not yet revolted and stayed home in sufficient numbers to cause the professionals
any serious worry.

The total handle and the total tax revenue to the various states continues to
climb year after year. Since 1946,for example, the total handle has climbed from 1,830,000,000 to 2,326,000,000 last year, and state revenues have climbed from 93,800,000 in 1946 to 14,2500,000 last year.

How Much Will Fans Stand?

"It is hard to say how much longer the
racing fans will continue to allow themselves to be imposed upon.
But it would appear to your committee that there is an urgent need for this organization to find out without too much delay, the answer to the all important question of how much is too much and where and when should the line be drawn to stop
further compromises with expediency which have resulted in haphazard and parimutuel
tax rate increases among the several states.

There have been a number of studies
made of the effect of increased tax rates
on total handle. Unfortunately, none have been made recently and those that have been published in the past have been made by groups that have been seeking to prove
the justification of a position already adopted. In conclusion. your committee wishes to respectfully suggest that there is a crying need for a new and completely independent survey to establish authoritative answers to
these questions.

1 What is the maximum takeout that can be exacted consistent with good racing
good race track management and a continuation of the normal healthy growth of the
sport?

2 Having answered the first question, what is an equitable split of the total takeout
between the state and the racing associations, bearing in mind the possibility of
a graduated tax rate based upon the amount of the handle?

For what it may be worth to the public
lets gather the complete facts.
**********************************************

The gain in handle from 1946 to 1952 wasn't all that much (27% over 7 years), when you take inflation into account. From the end of 1946 to the end of 1952, the CPI rose by just over 24%. And lets not forget, the war was over, and North America was in an optimistic growth mode.

A dollar back in 1950 is worth around $8.50 today. This means that if racing stayed even with inflation since then, total hand would be around $20 billion. Right now it sits around $13 billion, and that includes the heavy increase that happened when internet betting was introduced.

Meanwhile, track takeout has increased to an average of around 21% today, from the 12% average that apparently was there in the early 50's. Where has it got them? Racing can't even keep up with inflation.

As for studies regarding optimal takeout. A very important one was done back in 2004. The Cummings Report does not state what that takeout is, but he concludes that it is a lot less than what is out there today.

It is great to see the acknowledgment by Inglis, that the horseplayer is one who "keeps the show on the road."

Great article at HANA "So Players Don't Care About Takeout, Huh?" Well worth reading, as it crushes the excuse that most bettors don't care or realize what takeout is. Though that might be true, the article clearly points out that most players are affected by takeout whether they care or not.

For the link to the Daily Racing Form Archives, it is available at this Pace Advantage thread.

I never saw this movie until last night: The Two Dollar Bettor

It is from 1951. Shows the dangers of getting hooked on betting horses:) Love the crowd scenes. Brings back memories from the 60's and 70's at Woodbine, Greenwood, and Fort Erie, when the stands were full of enthusiastic bettors.

The big crowds disappeared with lower takeouts.

A couple of notes about the movie. Barbara (Beaver's Mom) Billingsley has a small part as a secretary. And the nerdy "teen" who hangs around the main character's home drooling over one of his daughters is none other than the kid who played Alphalfa in the Little Rascals series, Carl Switzer.

If you like the information found on this blog, and you are a horseplayer, please join HANA, it is free, and it will take you less than two minutes to fill out the form.

Don't forget to check out the new ADW Horseplayersbet.com, if you want to maximize your chances of beating the horses. Unfortunately, Horseplayersbet does not take Canadian customers.

$4.4 Million Lottery Win Lands The Lucky Guy In Jail Overnight

2009-07-26T10:49:00.005-04:00

Too Funny: Ontario Man Wins A $4.4 Million Lottery Jackpot. He collected his check, posed for the camera, walked out of the OLG offices, and was quickly nabbed by police officers because "he was wanted on a six-year-old warrant for failing to appear, theft under $5,000 and possession of property obtained by crime."

Seems the OLG ratted him out after they did a security check on the winner. They do these checks now whenever they are suspicious, because of all the bad press they received over the fact that a disproportionate amount of big winners were found to be ticket sellers (and ticket checkers, of course).

'According to court documents, Shell was charged in 2003 for allegedly stealing cameras, global positioning systems, memory cards and watches belonging to Kuehne + Nagel, an international transport and logistics company, and for having the items in his possession knowing they were obtained by crime.'

Sports Betting In Delaware: The four major pro sports leagues and the NCAA sued Delaware Friday, seeking to block the state from implementing sports betting.

The lunacy of these sports leagues is mind numbing. Like sports betting doesn't happen already? It is just like prostitution and marijuana as far as I'm concerned, legalize it, and that way the government can make some extra money.

The NFL especially is laughable to pride itself on the say no to legalized gambling on sports in the USA. First off, Vegas already has legalized gambling on the NFL, so the monkey is already out of the cage. Secondly, if betting and Fantasy Football leagues (which is gambling as far as I'm concerned), didn't exist, the NFL might be just as dead as horse racing is now. I love watching the NFL, but if I didn't have a bet going and/or fantasy players to root for, I would rather be watching The Antiques Road Show.

Are Frank Stronach's alleged financial shenanigans finally going to be fully exposed? It looks like a good possibility that his house of cards will be analyzed, and I think it could get ugly.

Town of Fort Erie gets $325,000 from quarter one slots revenue. Last year, the town received just over $1.3 million for the year, so it seems that revenues have at least stabilized at the bottom, unfortunately, but at least this might be the bottom.

And now for something completely different. A harness race on the turf at The Meadowlands:

H/T Bane on Pace Advantage

Rebate Shops Endangers Tournaments by Richard Eng
Seems like those who buy in to play in the big handicapping tournaments have stopped betting through Vegas, and are making their large plays through ADWs that offer rebates.
First off, that is how almost all big players play. And why not? You get an average 7% rebate and you bet a million a year, that is $70,000 in extra money to play with. Also, if the rebates didn't exist, these players would probably betting only $1-200,000 tops, but that is another story.
But Eng is right. The ones who put on these tournaments need to at least break even, and it isn't a terrible request to make it so that monies bet on the tournament go through the hotel. And the method outline by Eng makes perfect sense.
It is a choice for the player to even pay to be in the tournament in the first place, and they can always play from home and forget the tournament and simply just get their rebates on every bet.
Choice is important for the player. As long as it exists, I'm happy.

Speaking of tournaments, in the recent one held in Vegas, a California horseplayer just set a tournament record.

Shhhh.....Horseplayers Sometimes Really Do Get Robbed

2009-07-21T11:08:00.005-04:00

I got this story from two different sources:

"On June 3, one of the WEG teletheatres in Brampton was robbed. Tellers and 20 patrons relieved of cash. O n July 6, the other WEG location in Brampton was robbed. The teller(s) and 3 patrons relieved of cash."

"The total money illegally stolen was reportedly just under $50,000."

I'm doing this as a public service to patrons who haven't been able to read a thing about it in any Greater Toronto Area newspaper. They should know that there is now a real danger in going to a teletheatre right now.

One can speculate why this hasn't made the newspapers. Woodbine does a lot of newspaper and television advertising, and thus they wield clout when it comes to having bad publicity not make it to the newspapers and television.

By not making this public the first time, the teletheatres were even more at risk to be hit the second time around, especially if the crimes were committed by the same robber(s).

If I was robbed in the second robbery, and knew that there was a cover up on the first robbery on purpose, I might go after those responsible for the cover up, because I may not have gone to a teletheatre until arrests were made on the first robbery.

If there is an armed robbery of a bank, it makes news. Why is that?

Science proves what jockeys know: Posture matters

They (scientists) discovered the jockeys' crouch lets them isolate their bodies from the horse's movement — the horse is moving up and down a lot more than its rider. When the horse's feet hit the ground, its motion temporarily slows until accelerating again with push-off. Through incredible effort that makes the jockey's legs act like a spring, his or her mass stays at a more constant speed. It's basic physics.

"The jockey adds weight but not inertia to the horse," explained research fellow Andrew Spence, a study co-author. The jockeys "say things like, 'You need to go with the flow of the horse.' ... The neat part of the study is we've shown how that happens mechanically."

Still, I contend that horses are capable of running fastest without jockeys and their weight. And I'm also convinced that what we call a good ride, is really a ride where the jockey makes the least mistakes. For proof, over the years I've seen quite a few horses finish ahead of the field after dumping the rider early in the race, even if the horse had very little chance to win the race on paper.

NEW ADW: HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM
HPBet (Horseplayersbet.com) is a pari-mutuel Advanced Deposit Wagering (ADW) service, providing legal, secure and user-friendly online and phone account wagering, powered by eBet Technologies, Inc. through its fully licensed Multi-Jurisdictional Account Wagering Hub in the State of Oregon. All wagers placed through HPBet are commingled with partnered Host Track pari-mutuel pools.

HPBet offers one of the most competitive Player Rewards Programs available for horse racing product. At HPBet, even the smallest bettors have the potential to become the biggest.

Easy to use wagering interface.

Free video stream for active members and more.
********************************************
Unfortunately, Horseplayersbet.com does not take Canadian customers:(

Today's Hot Topic On Pace Advantage: Can Sports Betting on Track and Satellite Save Racing?

Ajax Downs Leaves Door Open For Thoroughbred Racing

2009-07-16T08:35:00.006-04:00

Ajax Downs VP of Corporate Affairs Nick Coukos was recently interviewed on Trot Radio. He was asked a variety of questions including many to do with the future of the track.

He stated that the reason they are in the midst of making it a 5 furlong track is because they want to be ready in case they get the opportunity to race standardbreds or thoroughbreds.

Standardbreds? Plenty of standardbred tracks in Ontario. But thoroughbred? Is Ajax Downs getting ready to fill the niche that Ontario horsemen will need if Fort Erie decides to close their doors? That is a strong possibility. Very strong.

With Stronach tracks being auctioned off shortly, the few groups or people interested in owning a track will be able to get in and most likely be able to get a nice discount. This coupled with the fact that Nordic has always over priced Fort Erie, I just don't see anyone willing to pay Nordic's price.

When Stronach tracks do sell, the prices they go for might thrust the price Nordic wants into reality. I said might.

One thing is for sure, I don't see there being any money left for Nordic to get handed to them after this year. And I doubt they will operate if they are indeed losing money. The only way I see Nordic operating Fort Erie next year is if the OLG gives them a better cut on slot revenues, and if that could happen, it most likely would have happened earlier this year.

Back to Ajax. They only do around $15,000 in handle a day, but they aren't exporting their signal yet. Coukos said he expects to do that by the end of this year (which probably means the beginning of next year). He says he feels there is only one chance when it comes to marketing his product outside of live racing, and he wants to make sure he does it when the time is right.

Coukos brags that Ajax is giving away in purses more than what Fort Erie is giving a way in purses each racing day. What I found most interesting is that he said that it only costs around half to train a quarter horse as it does a thoroughbred. Does he mean a thoroughbred at Woodbine where the rates are around $80 a day on average, or half of what the rates are at Fort Erie, which averages around $50 a day.

There is an unconfirmed rumour regarding the additional 500 plus slots that Ajax just received: The horsemen will get zilch from those machines.

The OLG Responds To $3.5 Billion Lawsuit Against Them

'Gambling addicts who keep coming back to casinos and racetracks despite joining a voluntary list of problem gamblers aren't the responsibility of provincial authorities, the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp. says.'

Again, I just don't see why they offered up the voluntary program then. Didn't they assume responsibility by just having the exclusion program in the first place?

It all depends on how the program form was worded when they first implemented it. I'm sure the OLG changed the wording since the beginning.

And if they aren't responsible, why are they testing out facial recognition technology soon?

Three Strike Program In Australia
A trainer gets a 5 YEAR BAN for milk shaking a horse that wound up finishing fifth. It was his third offense.
Too bad they aren't so tough on cheating trainers in North America.

Harnessdriver.com Chat Board Member Putting A Little Needed Heat On The ORC

"Timebomb" a Windsor Ontario racefan has been on a crusade to get the judges of harness racing in the province to call infractions based on the rulebook. If it is in the rulebook and it is not called (the fines and suspensions are published via the web at Standardbred Canada) he is making sure people know about it.

Link for Harnessdriver.com

ORC Rules That Claims Can Be Ruled Invalid If Positive Results Are Found In A Drug Test
I think that all claimed horses should be tested, and the industry, not the new claiming outfit, should pay for the tests.
Most claimed horses are top performers. They are most likely to be benefiting from performance enhancing drugs.
Why have an added expense tacked on to someone who is willing to take a chance claiming a horse? Integrity should override everything, and these tests should be mandatory, and it is unfair to burden the new owner with this expense.

Not to mention this comment which may hold some truth in light of the fact that there seems to still be "super trainers" who run horses in Ontario:

Greg Parke SAID...

"Mr. Swinhoe (another commenter) don't waste your money. The sport has really cleaned up it's act or the testing is inadequate to find these types of drugs. Same old story, let the buyer beware, you have a 99-1 shot to finding drugs in a horses system with the testing the way it is."

Great Article: Lasix May Help Some Horses, But Is It Worth It?
Bill Finley may doubt if Lasix works at all. A recent study may have put his doubts to bed, as it did show that Lasix does what it is supposed to do: reduces exercise-induced pulmonary hemorrhage (EIPH) in racehorses.

But what else does Lasix do?

Oh come over 95% of horses that run in Canada and the US are on it and in every other jurisdiction in the world, it is not needed?

Is it worth the fact that it masks other drugs, and enhances performance, and makes it so that horses who end up using Lasix to run fast (either through anti-bleeding or drug masking) become possible stud and broodmare prospects, who most probably weaken the breed by passing on inheritable flaws to the next generation of horses?

It Feels Good To Be Quoted In A John Pricci Column
Good follow up article regarding past posting. Pricci notes:

"One interesting aside was that respondents appeared troubled by the “perception” that late-odds drops were the result of past-posting. Sadly, the only inference that can be drawn from that is that horseplayers seem to care more about how false perceptions hurt racing than regulators do."

Another interesting aside is the fact that there are still a handful of tracks that allow cancel delays (which allows tellers to cancel bets after the race has begun):
Turf Paradise, 8 seconds
Les Bois Park, 5
Bay Meadows, 4
Del Mar, 4
Fairplex Park, 4
Golden Gate, 4
Hollywood Park, 4
North California Fairs, 4
Oak Tree, 4
Portland Meadows, 4
Santa Anita, 4
Yavapai Downs, 4
Gulfstream Park, 3

Many scams have come and gone where astute gamblers, in league with a teller or two, could make bets on contenders, and if the horse doesn't get out of the gate in a good manner, or even jump to the lead out of the gate, the teller simply cancels the ticket.

The fact that this could still happen, is enough reason to close betting at zero minutes to post (the second the 1 MTP disappears).

HANA RACE OF THE WEEK: MOUNTAINEER RACE 2 FRIDAY
We've been picking pools that have been difficult to gauge of late, as to how much power this Pool Party idea has. This week we are going for broke.
We really need support on this one. Early in our campaign we did a race from The Mountain, and according to our calculations we estimate we attracted $15,000 in new money. Please bet this race, because we want to blow that number away.

Mountaineer Race 2 Handicapping Info including Past Performances, Thoro-Graph data here.

Introducing the FREE TrackMaster Players Club
* Track Bias Reports for almost every Thoroughbred race track
* Thoroughbred/Quarter Horse Selections for a handful of races everyday
* Thoroughbred Best Bets reports on selected days
* Audio Selections for New York and California tracks
* Exclusive articles by Steve Davidowitz
* Harness Selections for a handful of races everyday
* StatsMaster, a tool to gather detailed statistics for drivers, trainers and horses from Harness tracks across the country

Chad Beckon Update
Cory Clark on Facebook happily reports that her husband, jockey Chad Beckon, is heading to Toronto today to start rehab.
Beckon was involved in a horrific accident a month ago in a horse race at Woodbine.

Fun Thread On Pace Advantage: Who Is Your Favorite Female Reporter/Analyst In Racing?

What Do You Think Of The Cangamble Blog

2009-07-13T10:32:00.004-04:00

Note to Internet Explorer uses. There is a problem with IE and Blogger right now. If you get an abort message, click OK. You will be sent to a page asking if you want to do diagnostics. Simply click the back button, and the IE issue will most likely be resolved. This is why I use Mozilla Firefox.

Yesterday, at Fort Erie during Prince Of Wales day, I set out to find out:

Thanks to everyone who participated including Cindy Pierson Dulay who runs Horse-Races.net and About.com: Horse Racing, Jocko Lauzon, Peter Gross (Down The Stretch Newspaper), Kevin Attard (the best dressed guy at The Fort yesterday), Daryl Wells Jr., Jim Thibert (who waved at the end), and all the rest. Cub reporter Perry Lefko was also very helpful in the making of the video.

Gallant Wins The Prince Of Wales

The track was absolutely the most speed favoring one of the year and the rail was golden, yet the pace was very slow in the Prince Of Wales.
The fastest early pace horse, on form, in the race, Mr. Foricos Two U decide to rate. Why? Was that Mike Smith's decision or the outfit's decision? Or was the horse just off his game? As I stated in my post handicapping the race, my biggest concern with this horse was his breeding. Porto Foricos horses are not great routers. They are more inclined to be 6-7 furlong horses. This one has shown that he can go around two turns though, but I haven't seen very many do so, especially at Fort Erie. I had him pegged as the lone speed in the race, and the track came up perfect for him. He at least stayed near the rail most of the race, but he had no chance yesterday trying to stalk.

And what is with Eye Of The Leopard deciding not train at least once at Fort Erie? Horrible move. As Elissa Blowe rightfully points out almost daily when doing the handicapping at Fort Erie, horses dropping in from Woodbine many times don't do so well their first time racing at The Fort. By shipping and running The Leopard, it may very well cost him the Triple Crown This Year. That being said, the track totally played against him yesterday, and if the track was playing fair, he might have won regardless of his connection's blunder.

Stewart Elliot on Milwaukee Appeal did the right thing early by grabbing the lead on the inside going into the first turn, but then blew the race by allowing Gallant not only take over the lead but also let Corey Fraser grab the rail. The filly still did run a very game race. She could be the second best 3 year old filly in North America right now, which still means she could be 16 lengths inferior to Rachel Alexandra.

It was a masterful ride on Gallant by Corey Fraser who out rode the rest of the jockeys in the race.

There was tremendous drama during the extra long wait as the judges tried to figure out who won the race. I was 90% sure, Milwaukee Appeal won it after watching the stretch replay 3 or 4 times, though when I watched the race, I was a little past the wire, and it seemed Gallant was in front at that time.

When Peter Kyte finally announced that Gallant had won, there was probably not a happier person on the planet than Niagara Falls native, jockey Corey Fraser.

Great race no matter how you slice it.

Non Seeded Pick 6 Attracts $11,000 In New Money At Woodbine
Since the Pick 6 only usually only got around $1,000-$3,000 in new money prior to Woodbine's Turbo Charge experiment, I can only conclude that many bettors were duped into thinking that Woodbine was still seeding the pools.

The small field sizes offered, coupled with most people knowing the Turbo Charged Pick 6 was no more, resulted in a pathetic $2.1 million in handle at Woodbine yesterday.

Milwaukee Appeal To Win The Prince Of Wales? I Think Yes

2009-07-11T14:48:00.003-04:00

Fort Erie Race Track Ready For Their Biggest Day Of The Year

The Prince Of Wales runs tomorrow at The Fort. Although it only has 6 horses, I can see numerous outcomes. It is a tough race. Horses who do well at distances on the Poly don't necessarily have the edge on a dirt track going a distance of ground. I'm still not on the Eye of the Leopard bandwagon, so I'm leaning to the filly, Milwaukee Appeal who figured to bounce a bit in her last race. She does have the best numbers going into this race from two and three starts ago.

The Leopard may in fact bounce too, as Sam Son Farms horses are usually aggressively trained and aren't use to running three tough races in just forty odd days.
Mr. Foricos Two U looks like he'll be able to control the pace, but his sire (as a route sire) turned me off him last time and I'm not about to jump on him here, though he could hang in for third.

I still think Keino West is going to move forward. He was way too far back last time out. If speed comes back, I can see him getting into the second or third.

Selections: 2-6-4

I did pick the exactor last year, so I'm definitely not due tomorrow.

Only 76 horses are racing in 10 races at Woodbine tomorrow barring scratches. Good day to avoid their high takeouts....at least in theory. Even Fort Erie has them beaten out with 78 horses entered tomorrow on Wales Day.

Excellent piece by John Pricci
The article is mostly to do with pool integrity, an issue that HANA is about to be all over soon.

"I argued with the industry official that the majority of players would prefer wagering to be stopped at post time, that even though odds will continue to change late, horseplayers would prefer to know the closing odds before a race starts."

Ajax Downs To Get Another 544 Slot Machines

With Nick Coukos there, Ajax has a perfect chance to grow their betting product. Right now there is an average of around $1500 bet on a race. No real exposure at all. They can change that in a hurry.

Somehow I missed this: OLG To Use Facial Recognition Technology (Biometrics) To Keep Out Problem Gamblers
An experimental test will be conducted in September.

This is of course too late in regards to the large lawsuits against the organization with problem gamblers who signed documents asking the OLG not to let them in.

10,000 people have signed up to be booted off the premises if spotted by OLG staff.

I wonder what percentage these problem gamblers make up of the total revenues generated by places like Woodbine.

If it is big, this could be the catalyst that brings down purses at WEG, and it might motivate the execs to try to really compete on the racing side. They might even get the horsemen to work with them. Horsemen in the USA right are like deer in the headlights. That could easily happen with the Woodbine horsemen. Fort Erie has already experienced that feeling, and unfortunately, that feeling isn't over and done with yet.

Christine Papakyriakou wasn't one of Woodbine's customers. But she will be sentenced next month after being found guilty of stealing $7.4 million from wine company Andrew Peller Ltd.

It seems the gambling bug got to her in a bad way. And instead of accepting responsibility that she is a just a criminal, she is looking at the OLG as being the scapegoat.

'Papakyriakou has launched a $10-million lawsuit against the province, Casino Niagara and Niagara Fallsview Casino Resort alleging they encouraged her to gamble.'

How many Christine's play slots at Woodbine?

Great News For Ohio Racing
Ohio has approved VLTs to be placed in the 7 Ohio race tracks. Those bible belters sure made it difficult, but many of them will be heading to the track now. Of course, that is what they were scared of in the first place.

It hasn't been determined what percentage of VLT profits the tracks and horsemen will receive yet.
Hopefully for them, it will be 10% for each. There purses are just pitiful now, and nobody has been more patient than Ohio tracks and horsemen.

Really Cool Gadget: Streak Calculator; Determines the probability of losing a streak of wagers over the course of a wager series of specified length.

Down The Stretch on-line has some really informative articles in its newest issue.

Well, there is a now humiliating article on Woodbine's Turbo Charged Pick 6 that was obviously done before Woodbine wisely pulled the plug on this losing money fiasco.

"(Sean) Pinsonneault and CFO Steve Mitchell may have dreamed this one up, but there's some logic behind it and when they ran it by President Nick Eaves and CEO David Willmot, there was almost immediate approval."

Who would Donald Trump fire for this? Probably Willmot. He has the final say I believe. Lucky for Willmot, it is a private company and he is a Teflon CEO.

But it is still nice to say "Willmot, you're fired."

There is an informative article on Ajax Downs

Budding cub reporter Perry Lefko has a more in depth article on the three suitors that Fort Erie has right now.