CD studying races

[Cannon Shell]

http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/...706290402/1003

Lets hope that $7500 claimers dont turn out to be the most popular race.

[ArlJim78]

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.

[ALostTexan]

Ouch.

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.

[letswastemoney]

$5,000 claimers FTW!!!!!!


ehhh...j/k

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

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.

If you "peel back the onion" of this guys previous employment history, it leads straight to Anderson Consulting...last seen knee deep in Enron

[JJP]

Originally Posted by GBBob

If you "peel back the onion" of this guys previous employment history, it leads straight to Anderson Consulting...last seen knee deep in Enron

LOL

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.

[SentToStud]

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.

[citycat]

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?

[philcski]

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?

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by GBBob

If you "peel back the onion" of this guys previous employment history, it leads straight to Anderson Consulting...last seen knee deep in Enron

wonderful.
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..."

[VOL JACK]

Originally Posted by citycat

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?

CD protects the turf course at all cost, they had the rail up with one week left in the meet.
no disrespect, but the idea about about ky bred races has got to be the dumbest idea ever. The idea is to increase field sizes not to exclude the couple of horses that aren't KY breds.

[whodey17]

There are way too many vairables that go into what race attracts the most wagers. What other race was being runned at the same time at other tracks, was their a big carryover that day so people invested in that instead of the individual race, was there computer problems, was a big race coming up the following day, was there family reunions, etc etc. This is about impossible to figure out.

If they want to know what type of races us gamblers would wager on; then ask us. I think they will find commonalities and some great ideas. Here is what I think and I feel my thinking echos others thinking as well:

1) decrease takeout %
2) go to a 4 day race week with 8 or 9 races per day to increase field size
3) if you decrease the number of racing days and races then more horses would be nominated to a race. then you can split that race into two different races structuring the races for competitiveness. this way you may decrease the races where you get the 2/5 fav and add more value to the bettors.
4) offer rebates to the bettors instead of free programs, free admission or a free hot dog.

That is all I have for right now.

[unassailable08]

decreased takeout would be awesome

[MisterB]

Originally Posted by philcski

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.

You should have more horsemen like Bobby. He doesn't run lame horse, or ones that are sick just to run. You guys crack me up with your arm chair training licences.

[MisterB]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

It's an opinion, and an opinion that many, many share. If we had more horseman like Bobby, more tracks would be shutting down because of field size. Would you disagree that he doesn't scratch a lot?

A trainer that makes at least 17 million a year seems to understand where his best chances are. He scratches like anyone else does, just that he is alot smarter than most. I measure success, not how many scatches one makes. I don't think he is thinking of the player when he scatches, but the players are always talking trash about him, he doesn't care what people say about him.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by GBBob

If you "peel back the onion" of this guys previous employment history, it leads straight to Anderson Consulting...last seen knee deep in Enron

He will fit right in....

[MisterB]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

You didn't answer my question.

That is your opinion. I think he scatches as much as he needs to. It is part of the game. What is more, or allot?? 3, 4, 5 10, what number you trying to put on things with no meaning at all.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by philcski

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?

I admit to some mularkey on occasion.

But to answer your question it is very easy to obtain a vet scratch and you open up a whole can of worms if you start having state vets try to overrule calls made by the private vets.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I admit to some mularkey on occasion.

But to answer your question it is very easy to obtain a vet scratch and you open up a whole can of worms if you start having state vets try to overrule calls made by the private vets.

In the case of a developing horse coming off a layoff, like First Defence, would you say most horses (If you can even generalize like this) are better off having one or two 'lighter' races up to the big one, and scratching if it comes up tough, or is the horse not getting as much benefit off the easy wins?