Of course, when I talk about momentum halting, I'm talking about the eyes of the casual fan, or the potential "real fan" -- and gambler -- who WOULD add to track attendance and handle eventually. Obviously, all of us are loving it year 'round.

Exactly.

I had NBC on for about two minutes and couldn't take it.

Pure torture.

Kentucky Derby draws highest TV ratings in 18 years
 

The Kentucky Derby's television ratings are the highest in 18 years.

NBC says Saturday's coverage of Calvin Borel riding Super Saver to victory for the third time in four years drew a 10.3 overnight rating and a 23 share. That's up 1 percent from last year's 10.2/22, when 16.3 million viewers made 50-1 shot Mine That Bird's win the most-watched Derby in 20 years.

Well said. The sport has taken terrible public hits in the recent past (Eight Belles), and had been forced out off into cable oblivion. Glad to see it back on the national networks. NBC obviously loves the sport, respects the sport, and they do a great job treating racing as a major, important sport deserving of more than an hour of coverage, even when it isn't nowadays.

What benefit does that type of sugary presentation give us? It helps with our continued existence. It helps the average somebody who doesn't care about racing to view the sport in a positive manner when confronted by some PETA person wanting to ban the sport due to an Eight Belles, or when having to vote on legislation to restrict gambling. It does help bring people out to a day at Arlington, a day at Keeneland.

Geesh - if people want nothing but the gambling aspect, read the DRF, watch at the OTB or your ADW site, go to the horse racing TV channels. Displays of futures and exotic payoff boxes would bore the general public to tears. I think NBC does a great job, and I'm thrilled to have horse racing back on that particular network. Calling that show "garbage" is unfair.

Just watched and actually thought it was pretty good. I don't even mind the celebs and hat stuff. Think I'd lose the Top Chef segment, though.

Very well said.

The problem is that horseracing does not derive its revenue in the same manner as other televised sports. Casual baseball fans may be motivated to attend a few games, buy some merchandise, follow a hometown team on the local tv/radio network, etc. None of that is a signifigant source of income for horseracing. We depend on gambling, for better or worse. The network is simply catering to the viewers it believes will create the highest ratings while using the telecast to promote other network shows. The exposure that racing gets is for televised events is nice but I dont know that the human interest stories or different camera angles contribute an iota to creating the new "fans that we need, the ones that gamble. The dude that won the 100k probably turned more lights on in potential fans that racing needs by promoting the best aspect of horseracing, the ability to make money.

We know that. That doesn't mean the NBC telecast for casual fans shouldn't exist, or isn't of benefit, in my book.

The ability to make money gambling in horseracing is vastly overrated.

That contest was a great addition, with the PR miracle being he won (although SS was the horse most likely to run his race in the eyes of many - good choice on his part).

But that was about 10 minutes of the entire broadcast. Glad it wasn't the only part. I don't need a two hour commercial for buying lottery tickets or going to the casino. That's not the reason why I love horse racing, never was, never will be.

I love the show Top Chef. Do I want to see it while watching the Kentucky Derby? NO.

I also didn't give a flying flip about how the lady's dress was picked out for her to wear on air.

I would rather hear about the horses. Not necessarily the gambling aspect of it. But maybe the human interest part of the horses. Tell me more about the female trainer trying to become the first woman trainer to win a derby. Tell me about the horses, trainers or owners. I don't give a FLIP what anyone is wearing. Put that on a show like "10 ten dresses at the Derby" on Bravo. But I will say it gave me a break to go get a drink or a bite to eat.

Oh boy.

Point 1- I didnt say that the telecast should be focused on gambling. I made the point that the focus on the human interest stories and other crap wont translate into "making" the type of fan that racing needs to succeed. Like it or not fans that don't gamble are just not important to the sport on a day to day basis because those types only focus on the few big events a year and dont really bring much revenue to the table.

Point 2- The allure of horseracing is the gambling, be it by wagering or owning horses. That fact is that the industry failed to capitalize on for years prior to gambling becoming more socially acceptable. For years the "leaders" of the industry tried to not focus on the gambling aspect of the game. Obviously this misfired as other forms of gambling become more popular. think poker exploded because of Phil Hellmuth's personality?

The truth is that the telecast or its focus is really meaningless in the big picture, just as the NFL's pregame shows are hardly what is remembered after the games are over.

i still say the best way to make new fans is squarely on our shoulders, not some bimbet from nbc. take your friends, your co-workers, your kids to the track. there's only one of me, but i created three more fans just with my kids.

I agree with a lot of what you said but not with this part in a roundabout way.

I mean you are right here but the thing is these "fans", the once a year types, if they're not the main group who should be targeted who is?

The Nielsens are a joke. A dinosaur. I don't believe X million watched because they're as outdated as vhs tapes but whatever the true number is? The real X million? They need to be brought in.

Food and clothes... what is that, an effort to cater to women? That's insulting.

I refuse to be grateful that there's any coverage when it's this much of a joke.

Portray racing as what it was or what we want it to be. Show it as a mental puzzle, a physical thing of beauty, the sport of kings for God sake... a little bit of grandure left over from a century ago. There'e history, excitement... profit. That part is hard to show but the thing is if it's not shoved down peoples throats... if you get them hooked they WILL (I feel like tfm when I do that :D) bet. Most of them anyway.

... and they'll bet more and more...

Every once in a while I'll post that I'm from the Smarty era. This sounds stupid but it's true, it's my truth, and I know quite a few people who, like me, had zero interest in horse racing until the one two punch... Seabiscuit and Smarty.

With racing-themed tv shows and films coming out this is the perfect time to attract new fans and what happens? It's treated like some secondary reason for a talk show. It's outrageous and almost degrading. LIke I said I didn't watch this year but I've watched enough in the past to know that the race is one of the last things that's focused on.

If we can't get new people, new bettors, from this audience interested, where do they come from? The occassional couple of people who are brought to the track to experience it?

It's a nice thought but it's not going to bring in the numbers racing needs.

TV is still good for a few things which is why it's so f****** aggravating when it's done in such a manner as the NBC broadcasts always seem to be.

I don't know... maybe some savvy industry professionals could step up and demand that NBC (at least) take note. It doesn't mean they will but at least make them aware of the problem with their ridiculous broadcast. It's a first step...

Frank Stronach was on the right path when he had those Frank's drink bimbos at Gulfstream. Bring more hot women to the track and that will bring guys who get drunk. Drunk = higher probability of gambling.

Pi.ss on the fashion shows. Put hot women in bikinis and they will cu...err come.

Forget what I said. This will work. :D

You may be on to something.

I love this, that TV ratings go up year after year and we get less and less national TV coverage.

As for NBC, it wasn't ideal but it was a hell of a lot better than Bravo's abomination on Friday.

Why don't we just get cheerleaders for each race? Gulfstream Gals; Churchill chicks; Santa Anita Sluts, etc...

THEN you will cu... errr come. :eek:

I totally agree. Friday's coverage was unbelievable.

I just want them to do away with the disorientating blimp view during the race. I cannot tell which horse is which from that angle, nor do I see how a casual fan can tell where their horse is.

How about the Suffolk Downs Suckfuk go Downers?

My Wife, who could care less about horse racing, watched the entire ESPN broadcast, formulated her own opinion based on what she saw... and hit the Exacta and Tri.... She went to the track with me (for the first time as a horseplayer) today for the closing of TBD... Just sayin'....

That's my big complaint about NBC and ESPN when showing races.

Use a normal view or track feed of the live race, then they can use the blimps and other tricky camera angles for the replays.

Derby Wagering, Attendance Up Despite Weather
By Blood-Horse Staff

:tro:

A gentleman and a scholar, as I've already said. :p

Poker didn't explode because of Phil Hellmuth's personality. And it didn't explode because they decided to shine a light on the gambling aspect, either. Every idiot born yesterday knows that poker is gambling and always has been.

Poker exploded for one reason and one reason only: They found new and interesting ways to televise it and ESPN put it on the air....a lot. Television then educated the public and after a few episodes, every middle-aged man and college frat boy in America thought he was Doyle Brunson. Luckily, there was plenty of opportunity for them to put their money where their mouths were -- on their ADW Internet wagering sites.

Chris Moneymaker didn't hurt. That's when I think it went ballistic. That dude hitting SS with $100K was good publicity. I didn't see any of the network news this weekend, I just wonder if it got any attention on that?

GTFO... that is great! That is how you create a horseplayer.

:tro:

It hit some news stands, my mother saw it in her papers this morning (Buffalo News, Rochester D&C) but the dumbfuks reporting didn't even do due diligence on the story- they reported it as "some guy walking around with briefcase full of $100k in cash", not that it was a CNBC contest that he won the opportunity to bet.

Poker is pure gambling. Nothing else, nothing more. The millions of people that played poker after the exposure were looking to gamble anyway, they werent brainwashed into it.

TV educated the public about the strategy being used which is basically the gambling aspect. I understand that three live shows weeks apart on Saturday afternoons in the Spring isnt the same as edited wall to wall coverage. And i understand that NBC or ABC or ESPN is under no obligation to educate people on anything. But the idea that someone is sparked to bet on the races by flowery interviews or human interest stories versus someone winning a couple hundred dollars is flawed.

Perhaps an attempt to explain why people like certain horses, and why they don't like others, could enlighten people a little about what is so interesting about handicapping that many people devote their lives to it's pursuit. There are many stories within a race.....surely some of these could be interesting.

Well that's good news, any way you cut it.

My biggest gripe was, as usual, how they didn't show the finish order or payouts until much later. I used my phone to go to my adw site and get the pays.

That's awesome... I love it.

From the NY Post:

And yet NBC took this big, evolving story and repeatedly ignored it. For the next 90-plus minutes, instead of leaving the odds up along the top or bottom of the screen, NBC posted them once in a while, occasionally, now and then, seldom.

But NBC annually does this to Derby viewers and to itself. Imagine if the folks who run CNBC decided to keep the screen free of the latest stock market prices?

And so, once again, when we need no graphics, the screen is loaded with them; when we need 'em, there's nothing there.

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/more_...MAg9T4kXvnbUMP

Pants -- I'm with you on that one... gotta love Diane Lane.

I dunno. In our celebrity-obsessed culture, seeing Michael Jordan, Jessica Simpson, and other glamerous people there and singing its praises gives a lot of people out there reason to think, "hey, maybe this isn't just a seedy, degenerate sport. This is HIP. What am I missing?" Think of them as celebrity endorsements, much like Charles Barkley for Right Guard, or Catherine Zeta-Jones for that phone company.

And really, whether you believe television doesn't -- or is under no obligation to -- educate, it does on a very basic, fundamental level. When Costas talks about different horses' running styles and how it could affect the outcome, or when guys like Goldberg give their picks and tell you why, it piques interest in people, which they may investigate further on their own later.

but you arent the typical "woman".. I mean your family vacations are centered around watching big russian guys check other big canadian guys into walls and gambling on ponies. You are like the coolest woman in the world.

typical "women" who watch the Derby (and Derby only) do it for the hats, dresses, and parties.

women, in general, arent gamblers (besides penny slots). Of course there are exceptions. But when you go to a casino or race track.. its men that are doing the gambling. The women you can find playing the penny slots.. the men are losing $4000 playing poker and black jack & pick 3's.

The way to get the girls to tune in to the Derby, is to show the other stuff. If the Derby coverage was basically a simulcast feed, nobody would watch it.

:tro:

NBC coverage started at 4.. race didnt start til 630. There is only so much "human uninterested in their stories" out there. I personally am a fan of showing hot chicks in dresses for 2 hours. Though I agree with your suggestion more.

I know that you said there are exceptions but I just can't agree.

Women aren't gamblers?

Penny slots?

I'd assume there are many more men than women who gamble but still..

How do we know this, that they don't gamble as much?

When you're at the track what's the ratio of men to women like?

Oh right well I got distracted by the last post but this is what I really wanted to say here.

MAKE IT STOP.

The Kentucky Oaks, the filly version of the Kentucky Derby, is broadcast on Bravo, which skews heavily toward female viewers. There are Derby segments on "The Today Show" in the run-up to the race focusing on everything from fashion to how to create the perfect mint julep.

"Women are watching the Derby more for the spectacle than the sporting event," McCarley said. "There's a balance you have to strike for the different people that you're watching."


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...n6447802.shtml