Tampa Bay Downs
 

1996 takeout: 19% WPS - 28% all exotics

2001 takeout: 18.9% WPS - 25.9% all exotics

2011 takeout: 17.5% WPS - 18% Daily Double, 18% Pick 3, 18% Pick 4, 20.5% exacta, 25.9% trifecta


In 15 years time - you went from an exacta takeout of 28% to 20.5%... big-time drop for such a high-churn bet.


Lower takeout increases handle, increased handle leads to better purses, bigger betting pools, and more interest in racing. That leads to a better racing product and growth.


Considering how mind-bogglingly too high the takeout is everywhere - raising takeout will always have the exact opposite impact.

Southern California has twice raised their takeout in the last 8 years.

The exotic takeout has gone from 20.18% in 2003 to 23.68% today.

When they raised the takeout on exotic wagers from 20.18% to 20.68% in the year 2003 --- it had me so angry that I wrote the only Letter to the Editor I've ever sent the DRF.

http://www.drf.com/news/letters-editor-215

The So. Cal takeout raise last winter was MUCH steeper than the one I freaked out about in 2003.


It wasn't long ago that Tampa Bay Downs was an old laughing stock track that offered horrid racing and did disasterously bad in terms of handle. Now, Tampa Bay Downs out handles winter tracks such as Oaklawn, and Fairgrounds ... and they crush places like Arlington Park, Golden Gate, Turfway, and Calder.

Tampa is the only track in America during my time following horse racing that has taken takeout reductions seriously and made a steady march downward.

To everyone else - they either don't matter, or they're tried as a marketing gimmick on bets like like Pick 4 that offer no real churn potential, or political forces have cock-blocked them from reducing rates in a manner such as Tampa.

At this rate - If Tampa sticks with the program - by the year 2021 things will start looking pretty attractive for bettors. Get the takeout under 10% on a high-churn wager - and you'll see incredibly explosive growth. That's where the finish line and the glory is.

what are your thoughts on what a high takeout does to the sport, overall?

The purses at TB suck what are you talking about they race for popcorn and peanuts. TB takeout might be the cause of a bunch of decent things but consider that many a horseman have decided to use it instead of GP or FG.

Tampa Bay Downs is one of the best-run racetracks in America.

Then why are their purses so crappy?

You are out of your mind.

Their racing office absolutely sucks there, and as phystech said, all these gains they have had in wagering, and not a single purse increase.

Not true.

They raised purses in Feb 2001 by 6%.

It's a matter of perspective. Horsemen may see problems with Tampa Bay Downs but it's great for bettors.

Those guys in Pennsylvania say we don't notice or care about take out rates.

What are you trying to do---prove them wrong?:)

The purses are crappy because they can get away with it. They've hollowed out a niche where lower level horses can get on the grass for 16K all winter instead of getting their heads handed to them @ GP or FG - same goes with the dirt - good luck filling 8K N3L's twice a day at GP.

It is convenient to Ocala and South FL so you've got stock all around that can ship in, and as a result the fields are huge...

Finally, there is no incentive to increase the purses because there is NO COMPETITION from December to April - once the northern tracks open, trainers flee... by late April, there is usually less than a third of the stalls are full.

I'd like to believe that takeout has something to do with their success as Doug alludes to - You've got basically the same product all summer long at Suffolk, yet not a fraction of the handle.

Bettors can choose better horse racing at GP, FG, - with more formful/classier horses, higher profile trainers/connections, etc - yet Tampa continues to make a killing on a vastly inferior product, racing-wise - I don't know how the message to the industry can be anymore clear - It's the takeout, Stupid

And they make a killer Cuban sandwich.

Wouldnt an increase in handle automatically increase purses? I thought most tracks have the takeout split % wise between the horsemen(purses) and the track.

Lori, I don't know that the two are mutually inclusive - maybe Calzone can answer that..

I guess an increase in handle wouldnt automatically make an increase in takeout if the takeout rate was reduced...

it would depend on the amount of handle increase.

Freddy, do you know what a MSW purse at Tampa Bay Downs was in 1996? $4,200

The Sam Davis had a $25,000 purse - it's now a Graded Derby prep.


My father trained horses at Tampa in the 70's ... he told me Finger Lakes was unquestionably a cut above Tampa. Fort Erie was several cuts above.

Thistle Downs was a cut above Tampa.

Tampa was just a notch above places like Waterford Park and Commedore (the old Erie bullring)

The track is only 12 to 15 years removed from being River Downs.

How do their purses look when compared to River Downs and Suffolk?

Here's the chart of the 1997 Sam Davis:




* Feature race on a Saturday

* 12 horse field

* $33,760 in the WPS pool

* $15,360 in the exacta pool

* $28,515 in the Tri pool

* $7,455 in the Super pool (no one who played the super even had the first two numbers right!! It paid of on 7-ALL-ALL-ALL)



Here's the chart of this years Sam Davis:

http://www1.drf.com/drfNCWeeklyHorse...0212&raceNo=10

* Feature race on a Saturday

* 10 horse field

* $480,374 in win pool

* $300,762 in exacta pool

* $210,485 in trifecta pool

* $116,765 in superfecta pool


You had MSW races with purses of just $4,200 - that had $5,300 bet in the exacta pools. Sorry if you don't like where the purses are now .. but that place is growing better than any other racetrack bar none.

Tampa Bays purses arent higher because the TB HBPA is controlled by hacks from Suffolk who dont want purses to get too much higher because they know wont be able to compete and even more legit trainers will want to show up for better money. They have no objection to increases to the stakes purses because they are mostly won by ship-ins and with the handle increasing they have to use the money somewhere.

It's also worth noting that part of what makes Tampa such a well run racetrack is how the staff manages the post times perfectly. That is an instant handle driver when done properly.

Yes - if they did that with a 28% takeout - they might rack up an extra $78 in handle over the course of a card.

I'd never dispute the importance of takeout and the effects of lowering it have been huge for Tampa. The post times are also very important. That's why they'll occasionally get as much as 15 minutes away from their scheduled post times later on in a given card.

I doubt that really matters much to be honest. I love the tracks who are so desperate they make it 0 MTP and will load five minutes later.

Louisiana Downs had a sizable increase in handle mid-meet last year when more attention was paid to post times. There are a lot of bettors out there whose only criteria for betting is which race is next.

During their meet Tampa stays a good amount of time away from GP and Aqu and their races are almost always isolated in terms of competition. The fact that they are an early signal helps a lot because the east coast simulcast players who start their day with Aqueduct have Tampa just a few minutes before and immediately start looking at their races. They often end up staying with them the rest of the day.

I don't know.

These type of degenerates are typically very small bettors...and there are some places that even they won't play.

It's pretty sick to think tracks would put effort into playing games with post times for them... when they're not doing things that would be much more to their benefit - and MUCH more to the benefit of the sport overall.

Post times are a significant factor.

I manage our post times race-by-race at Louisiana Downs. Amtote gave me a computer that shows all the tracks running and their current MTP/Race/Handle information. After our race, I look at the line-up and call a time into the tote room.

I generally try and stay close to the published times (which were planned-out ahead of time to avoid the big tracks), but things happen, and adjustments are always necessary.

Yesterday, for example, was a tricky day. It was 108-degrees at LAD, and we had 5 minute post parades. Because of the heat, I didn't want to have 30 minutes between races with so many folks working outside (gate crew, outriders etc.). So I accelerated our races. This put us in a good spot early in the day, and then again towards the end.

Here is the handle on the last three races...



The post times were...

Race 7 - 4:12pm (12 minutes after Saratoga R8) - Excellent time
Race 8 - 4:36pm (3 minutes after Saratoga R9) - Horrendous time
Race 9 - 5:04pm (4 minutes before Saratoga R10, 1 minute before Del Mar R3) - Better than race 8 (always better to be ahead of everyone) but still too close to Sar/Dmr

12 minutes is the perfect amount of time after a big track. The race is usually over and priced-out with a few minutes to allow the action to role in. There are other factors at a track like LAD, such as Arlington, who plays a big role in our handle because we share a lot of mid-west players.

In doing this I can also tell which other tracks are actively working their times, and which ones are not. Tampa Bay is all over their post times, with aggressive moves throughout the day.

Is it a bunch of two dollar bettors? Maybe. But for for the extra $122k in handle, it's worth it.

Stuff like that is like sucking dick for crack rocks on the train tracks, and fingerfucl<ing someones grandmother because they think she has a dime stashed away in her pus$y.

It's the competition among tracks -- to try and win the dollar of the compulsive degenerate bettor who isn't giving himself a chance.

And I'm sure that you'll get a few dollars extra dollars dancing around Saratoga's post time - just as Tampa tries to dance around Gulfstream and Santa Anita.

However, that isn't going to lead to explosive long-term handle growth. It's not going to lead to better purses. It's not going to lead to repealing the "suckers game" image attached to betting horses, it's not going to add interest in the sport and bring in the money of a lot of useful new faces.

I understand it's about shifting funds within the market, but heck, market share is a big deal in business. At this point, with national handle dwindling (-3% in July I believe), it's hard to blame a track for trying to gain more share.

But no, it's not the Holy Grail for saving the sport.

Anyone with an IQ above of 'bag of hammers' or 'box of rocks' should be able to see that the Holy Grail is takeout reductions and not screwing up exchange wagering.

The reverse Holy Grail is takeout increases - kicking the can down the road with exchange wagering - and keeping on with doing nothing or next to nothing.


Every study I've ever seen on the impact of takeout in horse racing - strongly endorses lowering takeout. These are done by respectable econimists

And even though all the "smart" studies say the right things about takeout - they fail to look back 100+ years to the betting patterns people displayed when favorable takeout levels existed.

You think Plunger Walton would bet - adjusted for inflation - over a million dollars on a single race if he was playing at a 20% disadvantage? You think Pittsburg Phil ever would have attempted to even bother with horse racing? People came popping out of the woodwork betting eye-popping sums of money. They almost always got involved in horse ownership -- some very heavily so.

The Cummings Report of 2004 mentioned it - but didn't go back to study the old, old, days when Horse Racing was king to see how much of a reality it was: