Recurring Theme?

[justindew]

During the movie "Ruffian" last night, I heard more than one character say "We have to get people back to the race track."

Has this really been a problem for over 30 years? If so, have the "powers that be" been TRYING to get people to come back to the track the entire time? Because if this really has been a problem for over 30 years, and no one has solved it, maybe it's time to try some new ideas or put some new people in charge. For instance, maybe we could get some new people who can figure out how to show the Acorn live on national television AND get people back to the races.

I'm sure there are some Nobel Prize winning mathmaticians or physicists who can solve the complex issue of post times and network coverage.

[Scav]

One of the most serious issues is breeding, early breeding. Fact is that when a horse like Cigar was shipped around the USA, he brought people to the track. I'll never forget that Saturday. I was 2nd in line at 8am in the morning, only a winnebago from Minnesota beat us, lined up on Euclid Ave. Scav was a bit aggressive in those days and actually opened up the gates himself, thus letting the 50 cars sitting on Euclid Avenue in a bit early.

Arlington was packed that day, impossible to move, and some people didn't leave the finish line for the whole day. Brought more people then the Million.

[2Hot4TV]

Horse racing is doomed to be a small fan base sport because of all the gaming that is avalibale to the gambler. Handicapping races is a skill game and playing a slot does not require alot of home work.

[pointman]

The decline of people going to the racetrack imo has more to do with the increase of options of entertainment choices over the last 40 to 50 years. In the days before television the racetrack offered entertainment value during a time when options were very limited. OTB's then helped the decline in attendance giving people the option to bet off-track giving even less reason to go. The increase of channel options from about 5 to hundreds and now the option of watching and betting on horse racing from your living room further gives even the biggest fans less reasons to go to a racetrack. The solution to these problems are obviously difficult, but clearly NTRA has not provided real ones.

[Pedigree Ann]

Originally Posted by justindew

During the movie "Ruffian" last night, I heard more than one character say "We have to get people back to the race track."

Has this really been a problem for over 30 years? If so, have the "powers that be" been TRYING to get people to come back to the track the entire time? .

The short answer is 'yes.' And the 'graying' of the spectators has been a worry, as well, for forever. Of course, the fact that most people work on weekday afternoons so that retired people will make up more than their share of the crowd on those days was never mentioned. The Jockey Club types and track management types have very limited vision about what to do about interesting more people in the sport and always have.

[Swale84]

The problem may be in defining track attendance as a measure to whether the sport is successful or not. Only $8 million of the $54 million bet on the Belmont card was wagered at Belmont. On line wagering (Youbet, Brisbet etc) allows race fans the opportunity to wager and watch races via the computer without ever showing up on a turnstile count.

Many people neither have the time to spend a day at the track nor live in close proximity to one. Thus they are relegated to wagering on and following the sport on the internet. For racing to be successful in the future it must recognize that there is a "new breed" of fans and that attendance at tracks will never return to the glory days.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by Scav

One of the most serious issues is breeding, early breeding. Fact is that when a horse like Cigar was shipped around the USA, he brought people to the track. I'll never forget that Saturday. I was 2nd in line at 8am in the morning, only a winnebago from Minnesota beat us, lined up on Euclid Ave. Scav was a bit aggressive in those days and actually opened up the gates himself, thus letting the 50 cars sitting on Euclid Avenue in a bit early.

Arlington was packed that day, impossible to move, and some people didn't leave the finish line for the whole day. Brought more people then the Million.

I agree with Scav. It was a very different sport 50 years ago, when horses ran much more frequently and in general stayed around longer. Now, as soon as a star is born it's whisked off to the breeding shed. Real stars, like Cigar, come too seldom for a fan base to be sustained.

I think if the best players left the NFL or MLB every year, people wouldn't be nearly as interested in those sports, either. How popular would golf or tennis be right now if you had to learn a whole new list of contenders every 2 years?

--Dunbar

[justindew]

Either way, it seems there has been a problem with the popularity of the sport for at least 30 years, regardless of actual track attendance.

It doesn't seem right that poker and NASCAR can both see massive surges in popularity, while horse racing drops year after year.

I'm not trying to be a smartass, but I would really like someone to give me examples of what the NTRA has accomplished besides the "win and you're in" Breeders' Cup nonsense.

[pointman]

Go Baby Go?

[jman5581]

How about, "Who do you like?"

[SCUDSBROTHER]

I really don't understand this whole thing,because they are very lucky to have the few people they do have(paying that take-out.) Why would anybody expect this sport to grow?

[SilverRP]

The day after a big race day like the Belmont, I am stunned at how many people really have no clue (and don't care) about what happened. I'm amazed how this sport has so little impact on people. I'm in OKC. My home track (Remington) opened 15-20 years ago. For 5 years or so the track attendance averaged around 8,000 a day. It now is maybe 2,000 a day. (I know there are many more tracks like this) Now, something had to happen, or not happen, to have attendance drop like a rock so quickly. There could be many reasons as to why this happened, but I believe the one key aspect is how you have to THINK in this game, and there are a lot of people who don't care to do that. You HAVE to do some homework. You HAVE to keep yourself updated as to what is going on, even when you can't get to the track or you will not succeed in this game. I don't know, maybe people are just too busy anymore, maybe there is a better form of entertainment, but there has to be a reason why so many don't care for this wonderful game. I guess that is the million dollar question that won't be answered anytime soon. It really makes you have to wonder, 25-50 years from now, will Horse Racing even exist?

[ninetoone]

Originally Posted by SilverRP

The day after a big race day like the Belmont, I am stunned at how many people really have no clue (and don't care) about what happened. I'm amazed how this sport has so little impact on people. I'm in OKC. My home track (Remington) opened 15-20 years ago. For 5 years or so the track attendance averaged around 8,000 a day. It now is maybe 2,000 a day. (I know there are many more tracks like this) Now, something had to happen, or not happen, to have attendance drop like a rock so quickly. There could be many reasons as to why this happened, but I believe the one key aspect is how you have to THINK in this game, and there are a lot of people who don't care to do that. You HAVE to do some homework. You HAVE to keep yourself updated as to what is going on, even when you can't get to the track or you will not succeed in this game. I don't know, maybe people are just too busy anymore, maybe there is a better form of entertainment, but there has to be a reason why so many don't care for this wonderful game. I guess that is the million dollar question that won't be answered anytime soon. It really makes you have to wonder, 25-50 years from now, will Horse Racing even exist?

Well said. It's hard to understand the mindset of others who are not fans when you love the sport as much as we do. I think you make a good point with the "thinking" aspect also. People want instant gratification, so why take the time to try to handicap? Also, when you lose at something else, you can always blame the machine, or the odds stacked against you. When you pick the wrong horse, you have only yourself to blame.

[MaTH716]

They have to make the track more family friendly. I love the track, but I have 2 small boys. My 4 year old like going to Monmouth but he only lasts about 4 races. They have some things for him to do. I handicap the night before. Then when we get to the track, he goes in one of those jumpy things for a while, then we go to the paddock to see the horses. I make a bet and we watch the race. Then the cycle starts again, we see the clown making the ballon animals and so on. This goes on until he crashes off the sugar high from the ice cream and crap he eats. I am just happy to be there. I would love to go to the Spa this year, but the bottom line is What is there for a 4 year old to do for 5 hours? Maybe if tracks looked in other ideas to entertain kids and other family members, they could establish a different and even younger fan base. First thing they could do is shorten the time in between races!

[Pedigree Ann]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

T First thing they could do is shorten the time in between races!

I have heard this many times and I am trying to see how it can be done. Shave off a few minutes, maybe, but nothing significant. Let's see - say Post time is 2:00; the horses are ready to load. A minute or two to load, or a bit longer if one of them is acting up. The actual race is 1 to two minutes. The gallop out (which is important - they can't just stop dead) and gallop back to weigh in and make the race official is going to be at least a couple of minutes more. Jockeys then walk back to the jocks room, wash off their faces, put on new silks, gets his cleaned up saddle from the valet, goes to the scale, gets the necessary lead, weigh out. Walk back to the walking ring, to consult with the trainer and owners (could cut a few minutes here, perhaps, but some bettors do want to get a look at the way the horses are moving). Get up on the horse, go out to the track and warm the horse up - this is also important - do human athletes race without loosening up their muscles with a warm-up?

The absolute minimum for this routine is on the order of 20 minutes and the practical minimum is probably 25 minutes. Would that help you?

The only way to get races closer together would be to have two sets of jockeys, so that one set would be going out to the track while the other is getting cleaned up from the previous race. I don't know if there are enough good jockeys out there to support this kind of schedule.

[eajinabi]

I think the reason for the decline in attendance is online wagering. People dont have to dress up and drive 30-40 miles to thier local track anymore.

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by Pedigree Ann

I have heard this many times and I am trying to see how it can be done. Shave off a few minutes, maybe, but nothing significant. Let's see - say Post time is 2:00; the horses are ready to load. A minute or two to load, or a bit longer if one of them is acting up. The actual race is 1 to two minutes. The gallop out (which is important - they can't just stop dead) and gallop back to weigh in and make the race official is going to be at least a couple of minutes more. Jockeys then walk back to the jocks room, wash off their faces, put on new silks, gets his cleaned up saddle from the valet, goes to the scale, gets the necessary lead, weigh out. Walk back to the walking ring, to consult with the trainer and owners (could cut a few minutes here, perhaps, but some bettors do want to get a look at the way the horses are moving). Get up on the horse, go out to the track and warm the horse up - this is also important - do human athletes race without loosening up their muscles with a warm-up?

The absolute minimum for this routine is on the order of 20 minutes and the practical minimum is probably 25 minutes. Would that help you?

The only way to get races closer together would be to have two sets of jockeys, so that one set would be going out to the track while the other is getting cleaned up from the previous race. I don't know if there are enough good jockeys out there to support this kind of schedule.

I think twenty minutes is fine. I understand that horses have to warm up and jocks have to clean up. People want to dope them out and bet. Just keep things moving. Some places they race every half hour and that's when it gets difficult.

[AeWingnut]

Originally Posted by eajinabi

I think the reason for the decline in attendance is online wagering. People dont have to dress up and drive 30-40 miles to thier local track anymore.

There aren't nearly as many tracks as there used to be. If it were only 60-80 minutes away. They need to embrace online gambling instead of tryong to screw each other over and we all know who gets it in the end.

As a matter of fact. I am starting to hate my OTB more and more. There used to be a bunch of regulars and new people ain't bad in theory..

I'm waiting for Mr Gassy and his wife Gabby to hit the road. They take all the fun out of it.

I was having a bad day because it was so chalky... that's one thng that bugs me more than anything. The tracks believe that the dumb slot players types have to have the bottom of the program come in or they are cheating. So, Gassy lets one go and I decided I had enough. Went home to watch it on TV and the local station gets knocked off the air right before the race. Couldn't bet the rest of the races online casue some greedy b asta rdo wants a bigger slice of my money....

Non-competitive races with short fields may be good for someone but not the bettors.

I really hate the idea of concerts in the infield or anywhere else on the track. There are horses stabled near by. I don't see how they can make a profit. Is the point just to make people aware there is a race track near by?

Racing is in my blood. I tried to get others interested by sharing stories about the partnership. They like hearing about it and maybe they will do more than give me $2 to take down with me.

[Holland Hacker]

While reading each of the above posts I had some thoughts on most of them some I agree with and some I do not. Any way the sport has been "dying" for as long as I have been a fan (about 26 years.) I do not have actual figures in front of me but I would venture to guess that while attendance is decling national handle is probably remaining fairly constant or even improving.

Here are my thoughts & comments on the above posts:

Post # 1 Declining attendance for 30 years back when Ruffian ran.

This is probably true. If you think about some of the old races you have seen and look at the charts to the races we can see attendance was higher in the 40s & 50s than it was in the 70s & 80s. I would think this decline could be attributable to different forms of entertainment being created. Most homes only had a radio in the 40s & 50s but by the 70s they probably all had color TV (technicolor no less.)

Today most homes have computers with internet access, cable or satellite TV, multiple phones, etc. The NFL was in its infancy, the Superbowl was not yet an "EVENT", only folks in the south cared about stock car racing, remeber that term. Casinos only existed in Las Vegas, and it was run by small group of individuals. The world is much different place today than it was when Ruffian ran.

Post # 2 - Early breeding is to blame.

Is that really true? Wasn't Secretariat retired at the end of his 3 year old campaign? I know one horse, but do you honestly think "The incomparable, invincible, unbeatable CIGAR" would have run as a four or five year old if he had his winning streak start during his two year old campaign instead of his four year old campaign. I known Allen Paulson was a sportsman, but even he might have thougt about selling out.

Post # 8 - NTRA is Useless.

I tend to agree with that comment. When it was founded my ex-brother in-law said that it was the greatest advertising coup ever created. A bunch of advertsiing execs. selling a struggling industry on the idea of spending million$ on an advertising campaign. I think the money could have been spent better going back into purses or research or creating a nationall orgainzation to standardize the rules nationwide, I know it will never happen but there has got to be a point when the tracks can say no mas to the NTRA. Hopefully before it is too late.

Post # 11 - Take out driving bettors away

Is the take out really that horrendous? The take out at the NYRA tracks is between 15% for straight bets and 25% for exotic bets. I don't think that is too bad given most state lotteries have a much higher takeout probably approaching 50% in most states.

Post # 14 - There is nothing to do for a 4 year old at the track.

Take your son to Saratoga he will love it, there is plenty of ice cream, candy soda etc. He can even try some Carolina BBQ. My son is 5 now and has been to Saratoga every year since he was 4 months old. Granted I have totally brainwashed him into loving horse racing (so much that he will not go to bed without watching some horse racing on the computer OK perhaps I went a little to far.) but there is plenty for children to do at Saratoga. The Breakfast and tram ride to the back side come to mind.


Some of my own observations:

Breeders Cup:

Is it possible that the Breeders Cup is destroying racing to some degree. I know that at the end of the year there is one great day of racing, but what has been the cost of that one day? Now the entire Fall Championship meetings whether at Keeneland, Belmont or Santa Anita have become "prep" races for the Breeders Cup. Prior to the Breeders' Cup these races actually had full fields and were competetive. Do any of you remember when the Woodward or Jockey Club Gold Cup were races with full fields and the outcome had year end award implications?


Shut down some tracks for a couple of months:

Is winter Racing necessary?

A also think the need to have a full year of racing across the country is hurting racing. Do we really need to be running at Aqueduct, Philly Park, Turfway in January and February. Give the horses a couple of months off and perhaps when the tracks do reopen we'll have some races with more than 6 horses per race.

Hopefully this wasn't too long.

[Pedigree Ann]

Originally Posted by Holland Hacker

Some of my own observations:

Breeders Cup:

Is it possible that the Breeders Cup is destroying racing to some degree. I know that at the end of the year there is one great day of racing, but what has been the cost of that one day? Now the entire Fall Championship meetings whether at Keeneland, Belmont or Santa Anita have become "prep" races for the Breeders Cup. Prior to the Breeders' Cup these races actually had full fields and were competetive. Do any of you remember when the Woodward or Jockey Club Gold Cup were races with full fields and the outcome had year end award implications?
.

Uh-oh, I'd better get my editorial on this topic finished before you scoop me. The Breeders' Cup is not only destroying stakes racing in the fall, its "Win this and you are the champion" message is totally wrong for the sport. Horse racing isn't like the NFL - win the Super Bowl and you're the champion. It's more like golf or NASCAR; you can win one of the big ones (the Masters or Daytona) without being the best of the year - the body of work has more impact on championships. And far too often, the best horse in a division isn't even nominated (from South America, usually) and has to sit out or pay enormous supplemental fees.

I have another argument having to do with how having a BC Sprint is destroying the breed, but this forum probably isn't interested.