The problem with this argument, and you know this, is that this is a very finite and specific meet/situation, and moving the money to the second meet doesn't matter. In fact, what they are doing is saving money so there can be a second meet, or at least one that isn't skeletal. Having more money for that meet, but failing to give away the average in this one, doesn't change things.

The other thing your argument ignores is that you parse the money out in the manner you suggest, which obviously I understand and agree in theory with what you are saying, when your results will allow you to increase purses later. Well, while the handle numbers have been phenominally good, and surely way better than I expected, they still don't justify these purse levels, even with the subsidy, so how exactly can that translate into raising purses later in this 50 day session....or at least enough to meet the announced average?

Once again, so that it is clear, this Monmouth meeting has been a great success from a fan's perspective, and that is a great thing. Nobody can, or should, argue with that. However, that doesn't preclude having some realistic discussions about other facets of the plan. In fact, this should be especially important in this example given how many people claim this is a blueprint for a direction racing could, should, or must be not only exploring but perhaps heading towards. Looking at all parts, and honestly seeing how well they work, is the only way to reach intelligent and successful conclusions.

May I ask....why is it such a problem if some people want to discuss this?

worried about it? im not at all. this is a discussion board right?

So if they are 10% underpaid you are expecting a scandal or something? LOl

AP was underpaid far more than (%wise) that last season. Thankfully I may add because it kept them from slashing the purses there this year.

AP didn't advertise something....something that is being inaccurately repeated ad finitum.

i dont remember saying anything about a scandal at all and what arlington did last year is apples and oranges. if magna promised something important like purses and then came 10% away from delivering it, there would be discussion about it. if cdi did it, there would be discussion. if nyra did it, there would be discussion.

so why the rush to hush up anyone trying to discuss this?

Very true yet we are using assumptions for numbers which makes it tough to accurately determine. In this case much of the money is "found" money unlike any other meet and I have no idea what they are required to do with it.

No one is arguing that the current purse structure is sustainable. I dont think that was really part of the discussion that I was involved with. But the idea that they dont/didnt intend to distribute the 50 million just seems like conjecture.

I dont really think that we will be able to discuss the success or relative success of this entire experiment accurately until it is over and we have the numbers to examine. In my mind simply doing what Monmouth is doing without any additional source of purse money isnt really going to change the direction of anything. Hell Calder has already tried this a few years ago with mixed results. What we all want to know is how to quantify the increased field size and quality of racing and the subsequent gain in handle into a number where the purse structure needed can be accurately determined. In otherwords what do the purse levels need to be in order to maximize the other factors or vice versa I suppose.

I think that the advertising thing is completely overblow here. If they cant fill some of the higher purse races what are they supposed to do with the extra money?

No particular argument with that Chuck.

The beauty of this is that it actually does allow not just discussion, but some tangible results to work with, and what I find mind boggling is the defensive anger seen in this thread from some that can't seem to bear any post concerning Monmouth that isn't a congratulatory message. There is plenty of good about this meeting...but that doesn't preclude some from questioning certain things. We all learn from criticism.

No this isnt apples and oranges. What you seemingly dont understand is that yes magna and CDI and NYRA and every other tack has overpaid and underpaid purses every meet. 10% is not a gross underpayment and that money is still due to the horseman. It isnt like tracks can underpay purses and just keep the money (though John Brunetti has tried)

Hell CDI had a contract with the horseman concerning sponsorship money (Yum) and they didnt pay the purse account what was owed for almost 2 years passed and only then after they were sued by the HBPA.

Advertising is a euphamism. The fact is that this exclamation has, and is, repeated over and over again....yet it doesn't appear to be true. No, this is not the biggest deal in the world, and it doesn't change the fact that the betting public has reacted very favorably to their meet....but it also doesn't make people that point it out either wrong or evil.

Once again, this is not likely to be applicable here. However, time will tell, and perhaps I will be wrong about this.

No doubt. What I have heard from industry sources that isnt being talked about in public is the negative effect that Monmouth is having on the other meets handle. Since CDI refuses to publish handle figures it is hard to determine exactly how much Monmouth has cannibalized their handle at Calder, AP and CD. But I heard that the overall betting at those places isn't down that much but their handle on the CDI tracks is down significantly. The people are seemingly changing their betting habits to the detriment of the other tracks.

Hey its horseracing where the Breeders Cup mile has been held at 1 1/16th. A million a day has a better ring to it than $948,943.35 a day does.

Or $843,292.

you keep wanting to move the discussion away from what i am saying in an attempt to act like i dont understand something. i never said this hasnt happened at other meets. im just saying why isnt it up for discussion now?

i cant wait until labor day. maybe i will "get it" by then.

[quote=Gaining Ground;661709]moron? a little emotional about a nothing issue arent you?

thats how all these meaningless arguments go....its called the internet. i read alot of it for a good laugh. if you want to hear some real brain surgeons go at it, read the political threads. its the democrats....its the republicans ....its the liberals....its the conservatives....catch a buzz and read some of this crap...its just plain good moronic internet at its best.....lol.

Because underpayment of purses is 1. hard to discuss until it happens and 2. is a regular occurence. Why does this keep eluding you?

Perhaps if you stopped trying to defend yourself against imaginary attacks you could understand better? Like I said if Monmouth doles out 47.6 million in purses after 50 days it is still not much of a story.

This is very true...

Never try to walk across a river that has an average depth of 4.5 ft