The model is the World Series of Poker TV coverage
 

It's been said before here, but it bears repeating:

If ESPN covered the NHC in a similar way to the World Series of Poker, this game would boom. In the same demographics -- college kids, young professionals, and just those currently unfamiliar with the game.

Millions of people watch the WSOP for weeks as a pool of over 7300 players narrow down to 9, and then to 1 winner -- where the winner gets several million dollars.

In contrast, a field of just over 300 players where the champion gets $500,000, and next year the winner is expected to get $1,000,000 has GOT to appear to be the value that it is. The NHC is much shorter -- two days in total. With the editing that is done similar to the WSOP, showing the highlights, it could be presented in 2 hours.

The similarity of horse racing to poker for the player is obvious. A pool of money is accumulated, a "rake" (or takeout) is siphoned off, and the rest is divided among the winner(s). Odds fluctuate that CAN make the game profitable in either case -- if you know the math and you get a little lucky.

It is universally accepted that Texas Hold 'Em Poker exploded in popularity after Chris Moneymaker won the whole thing back in 2003. He was one of 838 players that year. Seven years later, the tournament has grown to 7319.

If I had the money, I'd back this project myself. If done right, it can make a splash. I'd piggyback it off of the repeats of the World Series of Poker like networks do with new shows that are likely to have similar audiences...they call it the "lead in".

Am I the only guy who feels this way? I know some are opposed to the NHC itself expanding, just as some are dismayed that the WSOP is now so huge. But the benefits to the sport of getting positive exposure rapidly and stimulating new interest are enormous.

I think the main difference between poker and horse racing, from the perspective of the "new gambler", is that poker appears more "beatable" to those just starting out. Everybody who sits down at a poker table incorrectly thinks they have an edge over the competition by virtue of the fact that they have been playing for a while and "only lose on bad beats." But horse racing presents more challenges in getting up to speed. Add in the takeout, and I think it's easy to see why poker exploded while horse racing handle basically stayed steady.

*(Note: This is not an indictment on horse racing. Merely my view of the differences between poker and racing from a gambling perspective.)

I don't disagree with you on how we got here. But just as the World Series of Poker is independent of the rake at the casino due to the huge prize money, so would the NHC be independent of takeout. The draw is the big payoff -- can I beat the field of players, even if we are all cashing with chalk?

You are also quite correct on the learning curve aspect -- as an engineering and computer professional though, I find myself drawn to it. I would think that guys in college now studying a technical curriculum, who play poker online, might give this game a shot if they knew more about it.

All I was trying to point out was that the result of the television coverage of the WSOP was cheap and very effective advertising. That's how I started looking into Texas Hold 'Em or I never would have tried it.

ESPN attempted to do this once a few years ago - I watched the show - and it was pretty awful TV.

If they tried it again - certainly vast improvements would have to be made.

Before they put those cameras under the tables allowing you to see the hole cards - I doubt poker shows were hot TV.

Agree wholeheartedly about the advertising of the NHC. I think it would generate some interest. I do feel, however, that the poker pie is not the right group to be going after. While there are similarities, the main difference is a huge one. Horse racing is critically dependent on analysis of many data points. Poker is certainly not. If you know the rules of the game, you can sit down at a table and be competitive. Not so for a horse player. Not only does a horse player have to master all the litany of handicapping angles in order to have an edge, they have to understand and master all of the betting options, as well. To be competitive with the top players, this edge might take years or decades to achieve.

I do think there is a comparitive gambling pie to attack and it is the sports betting pool. Also, I think, from the non gambling industry, people that invest in stocks could be converted. Both sports betting and stock investing require serious data analysis to gain an edge. I think that's the most important connection.

They are very different games. What makes poker work on TV is that the viewer can see the hole cards so they know what is happening as the hand unfolds. There is no similar comparison for racing. Watching races is very exciting. Watching a room full of people watch races is not. Watching a room of people where nearly every horse is covered by someone in any given race has little drama.

Paul

Agreed. However, if the show is telecast on delay and edited with narration, it might be a bit more interesting. However, to the non horse player, it probably wouldn't have the appeal the initial poster would have hoped for.

The main problem is that viewing poker and seeing the hole cards allow the home audience to strategize along with the players and live vicariously through the conclusion of the hand. Viewing racing without the specifics around why a horse will run or not run is rather uninteresting.

Saying it a bit differently, is there any difference between a $5,000 claiming race and the Kentucky Derby to the novice horse racing person watching a race on TV? Other than the excitement surrounding the race, that person wouldn't know the difference. So, unlike poker where you understand why certain things are happening, a faceless horse race has no meaning to most.

Good points by everyone. I guess one thing I think might help is that as leaders emerge in the competition, a brief synopsis of what the top 4 or so stand to win or lose at pivotal points in the competition might help, followed by a replay of the race itself and showing the subsequent reaction. Just as in the WSOP, by the time the editors get a hold of the footage, they know what happened and could present their best footage in the most exciting way.

Something like (in chart, with voiceover) "John Smith, in the lead with a $200 balance, is playing it safe, playing the favorite to win and place. Joe Brown has $180 and needs a contender not the favorite to come in, he's playing it all to win. Fred Nelson did well Day 1, but has lost a few today and at $150 he needs a big score. He has a live longshot that will push the cap of 20-1 and he's putting the most he can on it."

Cut to the race itself (either in whole or in part, depending on what the best format is for viewing) then the reactions from the winners and losers, not necessarily interviews, just good footage, how loud the room gets, the whole thing -- like you are there, but without the long intervals where nothing is happening.

This is something like having the percentages on the hands. Can't have percentages on what's likely to happen as they are not universally agreed upon.

Honestly, I think it's a horrible concept. Poker has different things going for it.
#1- Most people now how to play and can relate to what's going on.
#2- After all these years of watching it, poker has personalities that people like to root for and against. It's almost like a secondary storyline.
#3- In poker you don't need the best hand to win. Obviously the tableside cameras make everything so mch more interesting, but watching somebody laying down their aces to a guy who has 2,7 offsuit is always fun to watch.

What is the horse racing show going to offer? Have some guy read the form and explain why he betting a certain horse at 7-1? I think it's just a poor introduction to the sport for beginers. Basically it's exposing them to contest play (which the betting rules and bets for that matter are different), with the percentage probably very low for many of these people just visiting a track, let alone going into a contest.

I just think if ESPN is really comitted to any type of horse racing programming, they would just be better of served showing races from a certain track for a two-three hour block. In between these races explain the different types of bets/angles while also getting into explaing how to dechiper a racing form for some of the newbies who might have intrest in learning. I think Friday night Hollywood cards would be a great place to start. Make it a weekly thing for the meet and see if intrest picks up. I believe that would do more justice for the sport than the airing of some contest that honestly I would think most horseplayers would have a hard time sitting through.

Friday nights at Hollywood would be neat. They can play it as the hot place to be for Friday Happy Hour crowd. As far as the TV crowd goes they need to devise a interactive game with decent prizes to really gather a following. Maybe an online Pick 4 which allows you to only pick 1 horse per race.

Well, that's the ultimate goal, good exposure for the sport in whatever form it comes, and that exposure leading to an increase in the number of people who play in the pools. Other than that, I am flexible in that I will support and applaud any format that accomplishes the goal of revitalizing and strengthening the game.

The nerds who play fantasy sports and take it very seriously - and there are millions of them - are the people who could really get into racing if they could understand it.

How you reach those people is anyones guess - and how you keep them after they start losing 20% of every dollar they bet is also anyones guess.

Fantasy Stables for $$$. Could either be small pots like daily cards or big pots that go for entire meets.

This would have to be done primarily at two major tracks at first. And if popularity grows then expand the database to all tracks and have thousands of money stables.

I'd go into more detail but it's a waste of text because there are morons in charge of horse racing.

Sadly, I could not agree more.

What is the take out on poker ?

Depends on the casino and the game (1-2 no limit, 2-4 limit...)

It is not typically done as a raw percentage (in the casino) but as a tier system (this much of the flop betting, this much of the turn betting, river, etc) and there is usually a cap. It is nowhere near as high as 20% if I had to guess the ballpark.

Online might due a percentage (rounded to whole numbers) because the counting is that much easier. I haven't done it, so that's also a guess, but it would be feasible without slowing the game down.

Not sure if Joey heard Steve Crist on ATR Wednesday in regards to this topic... All the relevant points brought up here were featured in Crist's thoughts, including the 'what can be added to the coverage as a hook' to make the broadcast compelling. And Doug and Coach have it. The viewer needs a stake in the outcome. And as suggested, there's ways to do it.

Callers to ATR regularly wax nostalgic about the regional grocery chain horse racing TV game that had viewers watching previously run races on tape that generated prizes based on the game tickets they accrued at the market. People are STILL talking about it 40 years later! WTF? Doesn't that say everything we need to know?

There are variations on this theme -- fantasy racing as Doug & Coach allude to -- that are very viable and marketable to the sponsors needed to make this work. I was broaching this subject with Satish as well Wednesday. It needs exploration and trial. The sport has nothing to lose...

Steve I did not get to hear Crist's segment, but I will now seek it out in the archives.

If anyone does put up a good show about the sport, I'll definitely be watching it and promoting it to friends and family.

Hell, my wife bought me both seasons of Jockeys on DVD. A lot of equine entertainment materials around my house.

And if they EVER release Phar Lap on NTSC Region 1... :rolleyes:

Definitely a great concept, most of us will never be a horse, even fewer get to be a jockey or trainer. The best chance we have to be involved is to gamble but a real stake (or even a fantasy stake) that actually pays off is the most attractive option and owning outright is too much. Someone had mentioned the TV pick-4 which is a great idea, at my Derby party I buy 20 $2 win tickets, with this simple move everyone is interested immediately. I turned my annual Haskell picnic from 6 gamblers drinking and eating burgers into over 50 people (all wagering) most of whom would call me to revisit the track again. I have moved away but they still have the party. Just a small stake and a little taste of action can be enough for most.

I've sat in person at the WSOP and watched the final table unfold in real time. (I think the past two years the full table started the afternoon of BC Saturday). The amount of editing that goes into producing that show is pretty incredible, around 90% (say 16 real time hours cut down to 2 or 2.5 hours--with commercials). You could do something like that for the NHC--that isn't a problem. Here are the problems:

Handicapping a horse race is fundamentally different than making a poker decision. The latter lends itself to TV coverage and analysis, since the math (with hole cards) is plain enough. The former, not so much. And this is the "hook" for most people, not just seeing money change hands. Everybody has played poker, if even only badly. Most people have not truly doped out a horse race. A DRF looks more foreign to them than a WSJ.

You have about two months of lead-in coverage to the WSOP final table (easy enough to do with 8000 players playing over a week in real time). Nothing like that for racing.

You have year-round coverage of other poker tournaments which basically familiarize people with the process they are going to see at the WSOP--High Stakes Poker (new season starts later this month), WPT (new season starts Sunday), Poker After Dark (out of their repeats this week), Pokerstars series (in repeats now--season 1 just ended), and so on.

I just don't see the two as comparable, fundamentally.

One difference between racing and poker is that poker takes 3 or 4 days of thousands of players and mashes it into 2 hours of only the most suspenseful moments, racing tries to stretch it's 30 seconds of excitement out to one hour.
The other is that in viewing poker on the TV, the viewer is omnicient. He knows who's holding what cards. Having that knowledge makes him feel superior to the game. Effectively, the poker viewer is redboarding every hand he sees.

It is even longer than that. There are four "Day 1s" and two "Day 2s". So just to get the field cut to 2000 or so requires six days of real play.

Has there ever been any attempt of tying horse racing in with the lottery and their terminals? I'll use NY as an example. Would it be beneficial (or even possible) for lottery retailers to sell tickets on races in NY? Tons of people sit in places like cafe's and bars to play keno (NY lottery offers a keno game every approx. 3 minutes) for hours at a time. It could be another wagering option for people instead of the usual lottery games. People play numbers twice a day in NY (actually 4 times if you count the pick 4 {another lottery game} which is offered in the afternoon and at night), come up with a strategy/marketing idea/game where people might want to play their numbers in some sort of sequance at a local NY track. Many people just want some action and if you give them the opportunity, I'm sure you will pick up some new customers.

Another thing that hurts the game (for at least the casual/newer people) is the lack of places that they could put a bet in. More so now in the NY area then ever with the closure of OTB. More locations to get a bet in would be a good thing. What good would it be to have some exposure on TV and for people not being able to put a bet in without having to travel all the way to Queens to get a bet in?

This is a more realistic idea, although tying racing to the money vacuum that is the lottery has its downside. But unless you can show that this would lead to a lot more lottery play, why would a state do it? The take out on the lottery is HUGE. Why would a state want to encourage its lottery players to spend some of their money on horses, where the state gets a far lesser return?

That's the grey area for me. I know NYRA is a franchise, but they are obviously involved with New York State. I just have no idea how hand in hand they are and would want to be. Obviously it would be good for NYRA, the question is could they make a deal that would be good enough for the State that would entice them to go into this buisness together.

You would think that even if a few lottery retailers had the opportunity just to sell the tickets ,that would be good enough for NYRA and it wouldn't take much away from NYS.

Why are other forms of gambling taxed (takeout) at a lower rate than horse race wagering? This just does not sound legal.

Spot on!!!

Re: Fantasy Racing. Will never, ever work. The lure of Fantasy Football is the predictability to when the games are played. No way to have such with Fantasy Racing. It will never, never, never, never work as a "hook".

Re: WSOP vs. NHC. Apples and oranges. What the previous poster said about understanding the how's and why's are the big difference. To see player A needs #3 to win to take the lead in the NHC is dull. We likely have no connection to the players or the horses, just the interest in seeing someone win a lot of money. Again...dull (unless it was me winning the money).

One poster said something about people watching a horse race for a grocery store gimmick or something. It got me thinking, what a fantastic way for racing to get the non players to at least tune in and watch. Offer grocery store discounts to those shoppers that keep their receipt with a number printed on it for the Kentucky Derby. If that number horse wins, they win X from the grocery store. While not really getting my blood pumping, neither does cutting out a coupon for 10c off of white rice. People do it.

If racing (whoever or whatever racing is) partnered with a big grocery chain and made the prize worthwhile it might spark enough interest to keep some engaged long enough to check it out. Couldn't hurt!!

The tired ways they reach out to get public interest today is silly.

Final comment.....I believe the real "hook" of racing is the racing form. Analysis. Educating guessing, etc. Develop a marketing plan that embraces that rather than hide it (i.e. game is a serious challenge for agile thinkers vs. it's super easy, just like pulling a lever).

Another sentiment I totally agree with. Without the Form, I won't play, period.

I don't see how fantasy racing could work given the amount of time and effort it would take to stay on top of horse's form, health, training etc....

I don't have enough time to handicap they way I would like to now.

The millions of people who play fantasy sports and take it seriously spend countless hours a week pouring over stats - it takes a lot of dedication and there is very little reward. I believe one survey even claimed it was the #2 reason given why women break up with their boyfriend.

The kind of guy who is going to juggle his fantasy outfielders around every day because....

'guy A might be my 5th best hitting outfielder - but he is playing in high scoring Coors Field tonight - and going against a mediocre left handed pitcher. He's 11-for-24 lifetime with 4 HR's against this pitcher - and he generally feasts off of left handed pitching - guy B is my 2nd best hitting outfielder - he's up against Johan Santana today and he's 4-for-31 lifetime against him. I'll sit him and play the scrub'

These are the kind of guys that horse racing would have a big chance with.

Like I said - no idea how to reach them. That's racings problem to figure out.

I disagree Doug. Don't forget these are guys who have the chance to make moves everyday. Then there is that almost instant gratification (especially in baseball) with games being played every night.

I just think that there are too many varibles in racing for it to be a success.

Which make the possibilities endless and gives a much higher percentage of implementing a system that will be a success.

It won't happen. You really need media exposure. TVG and HRTV aren't cutting it.

Decades ago here in the Albany NY area one of the supermarkets had a game tied to racing. You got a ticket with every receipt with a race # and a horse #. Every Saturday (I think) they would show a series of races (I think from Tropical Park) and you tuned into see if you won. The races in question were old races, not current and effectively the horses were the moral equivalent of ping pong balls in the lottery.

I have long thought that encouraging a "lottery" for racing is a good idea. Have you ever taken a non racing friend to a track? They don't really get the PP's or understand how you might project a future effort from them, but they bet on a name or a color or a jockey and have a great time.

Why not promote something like the .10 super as a lottery. If people could buy a superfecta ticket at a convenience store on the way home and have a reason to watch a horse race as soon as they get home what harm is done? Sure, not everyone is going to evolve into a fan or regular bettor, but some might. Back to the prior example, if you bring different friends to the track eventually one or two might actually want to learn to read the pp's? Maybe a couple take an interest. If the same % of "lottery" style players want to get more involved, racing could grow.
The biggest issue with this example is that states wouldn't allow selling of racing tickets like lotto tickets in direct competition with their beloved lotteries.

I guess the possibilities could be endless. But I just feel like there is a big obstacle besides the lack of coverage that racing would have to get over for this to work. Mostly the education of the possible new fan base would be number one on the list. But then I think, if there was a way to educate this new group, wouldn't you rather that they were using there new knowledge by putting money into betting pools then wasting their time playing some sort of fantasy game? Or am I putting the cart before the horse and people are thinking that the fantasy game will draw people into playing for real?

I'm not even suggesting fantasy horse racing - I'm just saying there is huge cross-over potential with those kind of people.





Those are people racing might have a chance with - and there are millions of them. Getting the horsey loving girls carrying Zenyatta signs to study a racing form and think up betting strategies - no chance.

A simple suggestion might be to sponser a couple fantasy tournaments - and give the top four finishers a betting voucher type special coupon to hand the teller.

Give the contest winner something like two free $50 win bets and ten free $5 exactas for each weekend - over a stretch of five weekends.. along with a kit and handicapping book.

Educating the new players is a big problem. Drf, sheets, and video replays can price most people out of the market.

You would have so many hands in the pot and that would raise the takeout to a level that wouldn't keep it a competitive product.

Many sacrifices would have to be made in order for it to work. Good luck with any being made.

Are you talking about different sports or just horses?

Football and Baseball.

So basically you are turning the track into a sports bar for these people? What good is it, if they are doing nothing than just focusing their time on football & baseball the entire time.

Education is the key. On these days at the track when they focus on families, college kids and or any type of new patron that makes it to the track, the sport must focus it's attention on educating these people and getting them to use this new found knowledge on a return trip to the track. Maybe instead of giving away an umbrella, run some sort of education DVD giveaway sponsered by DRf or Equibase etc. and have it be part of a 4 part education set about the sport and more importantly betting it. Maybe in special editions of the weekend programs or forms they could include some sort of beginer DVD. You would think that anything would be a step in the right direction. Hell with all the useless programming TVG has, how about some sort of weekly handicapping show that they could just replay at certain times.

The ideas are endless, but unfortunately too many people inside the game seem to be alright with the staus quo and that's very unfortunate.