|
|
 |
|
|
|
#1
07-12-2007, 10:45 PM
|
||||
|
||||
CD studying races
http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/...706290402/1003
Lets hope that $7500 claimers dont turn out to be the most popular race. 
|
|
#2
07-12-2007, 11:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm sure they'll figure it out since they put a guy with no racing experience in charge of the research, says it's like peeling off the layers of an onion.
I wish they would survey me on what races I like. my answer? races not at Churchill Downs.
|
|
#3
07-12-2007, 11:23 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Ouch.
|
|
#4
07-12-2007, 11:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
More two year old maiden races so I can see the day when Assmussen has a gate to wire with 20.9 opening quarter and a 42.9 half.
|
|
#5
07-12-2007, 11:54 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
$5,000 claimers FTW!!!!!!
ehhh...j/k 
|
|
#6
07-13-2007, 07:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
If you "peel back the onion" of this guys previous employment history, it leads straight to Anderson Consulting...last seen knee deep in Enron
__________________
"but there's just no point in trying to predict when the narcissits finally figure out they aren't living in the most important time ever." hi im god quote
|
|
#7
07-13-2007, 07:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Real smart by CDI. Take some guy who joined CDI in March to try and speak for the North American betting public. I could tell them in 2 sentences how they could increase their market share of the handle: 1. Lower the takeout 2. Increase field size Number 2 at many tracks would likely mean racing one less day a week, an experiment that has worked well virtually every place its been tried. Now, pay me a $200K consulting fee, CDI.
|
|
#8
07-13-2007, 08:10 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
All they need to do is look at what Ellis did with their pick-4. Decent size fields and 4% takeout. It ain't brain surgery.
|
|
#9
07-13-2007, 09:13 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Strictly from an owner perspective, I wish they would write more races on the grass for mid-level horses. You practically have to have a nice allowance horse to get the chance to run on the grass. I would love to see them write some 10/15/20/25 K claiming races on the grass. I bet you would have all full fields for those.
A couple of other thoughts: 1. A few more races on each end of the distance spectrum, maybe some 5 and 5 1/2f or some more 1 1/8 races. 2. Races for 5 yr old and up 3. Got to have many more 2yr old races in the fall meet 4. Bring back the 20K races. Currently we have only 16K and 25K claiming races. I dont know how we got on "odd" numbers at CD. What happened to 10/15/20/25/30 ?? 5. How about some state-bred races? I know most of the horses are KY-bred but how come Ky is like the only state that doesnt have state-bred races?
|
|
#10
07-13-2007, 09:19 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Competitive, balanced, and large allowance/stakes fields draw the best handle. You don't have to be a quantitative statistical modeler to determine that.
I've got a suggestion for increasing field size... have a penalty assessed to the trainer for scratching with no physical reason (of course if the horse is hurt or sick, and vets out as such, no penalty would be assessed.) The Bobby Frankels of the world are killing the field size in New York and elsewhere. They draw 75 for a 9 race card and there's 15 scratches. Chuck, since I know you don't pull this kind of mularkey, what would you think of this policy?
__________________
please use generalizations and non-truths when arguing your side, thank you
|
|
#11
07-13-2007, 09:38 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
In my experience when the consultants are brought in it usually means things are really screwed up and its likely to get worse. After their visionary plans are implemented and fail horribly then someone can come in and pick up the pieces and turn things around in a positive way. Sorta like a forest fire, looks like a very bad thing but in the end necessary for healthy growth. The opening comments from a future stockholders meeting "we have learned that we have to listen to those with experience in the industry..."
|
|
#12
07-13-2007, 01:16 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
Hybrid Mode
