Hollywood's First Cushion Track Meet
 

The first cushion track meeting at Hollywood produced larger fields, larger purses and an increase in handle. Hollywood experienced at 19% increase in wagering. The avg field size was up 13% which equates to 8.5 starters per race. This increase reversed a 7 year per race starter decline. There are more numbers in the article in bloodhorse.com; below is the link to the story.

So far every meet with a synthetic surface has produced increase handle and increase starters per race. I, for one, could not grasp handicapping Hollywood but I did get some pretty good notes and I think I will be wagering Hollywood in the summer. I think we have some good "testing" tracks for the synthetic surfaces. Lets see how these tracks do in the next 2-4 years and then we can decide if a synthetic surface is a good idea or not.

In 2-4 years, it may not matter if it is a good idea or not, as it seems most will have them by then.

Thanks for the info. How much for 10 lbs of Poly?

Was waiting for this, tee hee.
SMART people don't just recite stats, smart people examine the circumstances!!
Umm, Euro, you wanna tell me what Hollywood's handle crashed and burned so badly last year at the corresponding meet?
You wanna tell me why Hollywood's field size got clobbered last year?
Or don't you pay attention to "minor details" like that?

I could care less about stats, in my opinion the racing at Hollywood has been ruined. I use to like this meet and now I cant even watch a race unless its on turf. Thank god Santa Anita is only a few days away and that is still real dirt, at least for now.

You think this rocket scientist even realizes that last year Hollywood had to cancel grass racing for the entire meet? That they had to cancel the turf festival completely and lost all that handle on the stakes races?
YOu think he realizes that grass racing produces the greatest number of full fields(wrecked the field sizes last year without it) and large percentage of handle?
Actually I was expecting a 25% increase at least, and I'm not kidding.
I would consider it a disappointment.
But there I go using facts again, I'm such a disappointment.

Well lets hope not. I think Arlington should be the last to install a synthetic surface for awhile. Lets see how these tracks and surface do after a 2-4 year time.

http://www.bloodhorse.com/articleind...e.asp?id=30841

gee, i wonder why the handle and field size were up?

Well smart people go back further than one year to examine circumstances. The increase in field size reversed a 7 year trend (not an 1 year trend). For 7 years in a row, field size has been on a decline until this fall meet at Hollywood. So I am not looking at 1 year period. I tend to believe the workmans compensation problems in Cali have contributed greatly to the decline in starters year over year. And I believe they have that figured out. The decline in starters last year was because of the turf problems I believe.

http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=30884

Last year they cut racing days to 27 from 31 and only averaged 8 races per day. That and no grass races and a total cancellation of the turf festival.

Lets call a spade a spade, the TURF FESTIVAL races alone should have bumped the handle up huge. Factor in the return of grass races, and it should have bumped it up tremendously.
Spin doctors can work this anyway they want to. It was NOT a success in terms of looking at all the relevant factors.

So Oracle, what is your reasoning as to why there has been a 7 year decline in starters at Hollywood?

You cited a bump as compared to last year.
And lets face it, racetrack handle was up at the fair circuits huge this past year, and has been a trend all year.
19% bump off the worst meet in history circumstance wise is not even what I expected.
I've been waiting for this data, and was expecting you to be the first to post about it, but I was expecting a 25-30% bump. The 19% shocked me as very low.
Increased number of dates and average races per day, the return of grass racing, and a huge trend with upwward handle this year.
Trust me, it can be spun anyway you want, But I'm sure they expected a greater increase.

Yawn, compare handle going back over a 7 year period, not just one year.

You didnt answer my question. How do you explain the reversal from a 7 year pattern?

They ran many grass races, thats why. In the past the turf course was horrible and they couldnt.
The handle should have been up way more than that with the stakes races of the turf festival back in play, more racing dates!!!!! and many more races!!! and grass racing back!!!
Do you do deny this?

I will buy that as a reason for a one year period but not a steady decline in starters over a 7 year period. Orlace, do me a favor and go back and do a historical analysis of Hollywood..compare on-track handle and field size since 1999 and compare that to the 2006 fall meet then come back with your numbers. Dont just compare the worst meet in history and use that as an excuse. Again, smart people use at least a 5 year historical analysis (like me).

Can I get a discount on the 10lb order?

Just wanna point out what a dismal failure this past meet was, I would say it was borderline disastrous.
Fact 36 racing days this past year, as compared to 27 days last year(thats 33% more racing days)
AN increased number of races averaged on those days due to last year being reduced to 8 a day average because of no turf course.
Turf racing returned accounting for a big bump in field size as realtewd to last year and a HUGE bump in handle with the big races of the Turf Festival being back.
Bottom line is this, anyone who attempts to spin a 19% increase in handle when you had a 33% increase in racing days and a return of grass racing and the turf festival is pretty funny. It was tragic.

Sure, 10lbs at 87 cents per pound. How does that sound?

YAWN - and this coming from a person who couldnt make it in the business world.

Great!!! My niece has a nice breyer collection and i'm going to show her how to make them slide on the poly.

The Pick 6 pools seemed lackluster.

If that is the case then you can have 10lbs for 5 cents a lb.

Delmar, Bay Meadows, Golden Gate will for now.

Yeah, I am not real happy about that. I would like to see Hollwood and Bay Meadows until they get some data on the surface.

Pillow I've been going over these numbers here for a while now and I truly can't believe this. This is far worse than I even stated earlier, and although many will think I'm just doing this to bash poly, its the pure stats that I find incredible.
You have 36 racing days as opposed to 27(33% more races run), you have a boost in the avg number of races per day(about 38% more races run), you had the return of grass racing(big boost for handle and field size) and the return of heavily bet featured graded stakes race in the turf festival that wer not run last year. Then Euro cites incresased average field size as well, this is significant because increased field sizes usually mena increased handle.
Now you factor all that in an they only went up 19%. MY god, the increased race dates and races should bump you 35% alone. The return of grass racing and stakes races should bump you at least another 8-10%. So just on increased number of dates and racing and return of grass you would have to expect in the neighborhood of 44% increase in handle. Factor in the trend of tracks having increased handle this year, and its even higher. 19%? Are you kidding me. This was a complete disaster, and nothing short of tragic.
Near as I can tell, this may be the biggest disaster I ever saw, and really proves that people did not wanna bet cushion track. I suppose I should have seen this coming, as I always thought once the novelty wore off, that disgruntled cappers would avoid it like the plague. But this is shocking, and I'm not exaggerating. YOu can run these numbers yourself, its all out there in plain sight, no secrets.
If I was a Hollywood Park management type, I'd have cold sweats right now.
Does anyone here see this any other way? And if so what am I missing or not taking into account in my analysis of the situation?

Whether this is good or not, a big part of the reason for the bump in field size is the success turf horses had running on the fake stuff. Those type horses never ran on dirt, but were more than happy to run on the new surface where the had at worst a fair shot, and probably an edge.

Exactly correct CM. Turf horses now have two options. If they dont get in a race on the turf, they can go in one on cushion. There are many factors to the increase in field size, but the fact that turf horses have more options is a major factor.

I bet the Los Alamitos deal comes back into play next year. I can't see Bay Meadows Land Co. keeping Hollywood open when they can make a fortune developing the land.

I find it very annoying when Vic Stoffer says "And so and so is charging down the center of the cushion track".

Why does he have to remind everybody that polycrap (cushion) has been installed.

Its also very weird to look up at the track condition and see:

Turf: Firm
Track: Cushion

Why not just call it fast?

I was thinking the same thing. Wonder what they will do with 10 million bucks worth of cushion? I bet you could get a real good deal on it this coming year for your niece.

No kidding. But dont they have to keep Hollywood open for like 3 years or so? But that land is worth much more than the racetrack. Didnt Pegram want to develop Los Al?

I think we should put in your yard....oh yeah, you dont own a house.

Cushion is a bust. They'll probably give the stuff away.

And Euro, Pegram backed out of the deal a few months ago because they couldn't get an answer from Bay Meadows. I bet the phones will be ringing now.

LOL!!!!!
Look, I made your argument look stupid once again, perhaps you could tell me how that "great" 19% bump looks in light of the data I just posted.
I'm still waiting for the spin on it. But even for a supporter like you, this one is gonna be real tough to spin in anything close to a postive manner.
Give it a shot though.

You know, anyone who was monitoring this hoping cushion busted out so they could get the land had to be absoultely gleeful when these numbers came out.
I bet the phones are ringing away.

Bullsh!t Oracle. This meet was a significant improvement field-size wise over previous years (even leaving out last year's debacle.) The cushion track brought the runners out, there is no debating that.

FACT: The average daily handle was up 16% over last year. Turf racing or not, that's significant. Some people don't like wagering turf racing (like me), ever thought about that?

How could the average handle be up 16% on a daily basis genius? The overall handle was only up 19% and they ran 9 more racing days.
Get real will you? Better check those stats again.

To be fair, maybe it's wrong to compare the two meets.

Instead, perhaps someone could compare field size this year vs last year for a single class of race.

Let's use the basic 2-turn N1X Allowance and see what we come up with.

Wait, I forgot. They don't run those races in SoCal anymore.

Never mind.

Should say 14%. From the BH article (did you read it?): "All sources handle averaged $9.8 million, up 14% from $8.6 million in 2005."