Joel Stein: "Now I get it"
 

Terrific entry for ABR website about understanding racing's appeal..

http://www.followhorseracing.com/en/...-now-i-get-it/

"a long social event punctuated by sports..."

That was really cute. I imagine all of us with small kids can sympathize with his son's tears upon learning his pick had scratched. Been there.

Which is why I think actual track attn still matters.

Reminds me of when my wife finally came to Sam Houston with me. We were in the grandstand and she went downstairs for a smoke break. She did not come back for about 30/45 minutes. When she did, she was all wide-eyed and excited. She says " Did you know that the horses are right out there!" pointing in the direction of the paddock. I told her that she missed the race and she didn't care, she was going back out to see the jockeys and horses for the next race.:{>:
Also, I have been trying to get my 14 yo son to go with me to Sam Houston for simulcasting and he flat out has refused. No biggy, not forcing the kid to do this. This past weekend, I asked him to go with me opening night at SHRP and he said "Sure!". I asked why the change of heart and he tells me that " He will go and watch the races live but has no interest in watching them on TV". Baby steps I said to myself....baby steps ;)

For your next trick you need to get your wife to quit smoking. ;)

Sweet:tro:

What he describes is what they've been trying to market as racings appeal for the last several years.

In the glory years of the sport, it was said "there is little of the true spirit of sport and good feeling among people who attend the races. It is all envy, jealousy, cynicism, hatred, disrespect for authority --- even the humor is sardonic."

And in those same glory years...horse racing dominated pool halls in every city.

Pittsburgh Phil had amassed a fortune in his early 20's -- A.) without ever having watched a horse race before in his life and B.) by betting on horses through the bookies that operated in Pittsburgh's Pool halls.

He did it simply by keeping records of horses names, as well as the winners running time and their margin of victory, thus allowing him to create something resembling a homespun result chart.

If you look to the time period when horse racing was as big as any sport in the entire country (1880s through mid 1920s) -- it wasn't popular because it was some social event, held at beautiful venues. Not in the least.

If "getting" horse racing means accepting it as a social event, where people wear hats, sip on cocktails, watch celebrities athlete make bets, and chat with each other for 30 minutes in between races ... I sure as hell don't get it.

It's not an either/or proposition Doug. It's a gambling game, it's a convivial social setting. It doesn't matter which aspect initiates interest. Players and owners just need to be cultivated.

Still, there is a VERY important distinction, and an important one for the industry. Of course we want people to come to the track and enjoy themselves. Of course we also believe there are some great social situations at the track. Some of us are even old enough to remember when even degenerates found constant camaraderie at the racetrack. However, in order for the industry to thrive, people NEED to, at least eventually, gamble. I understand that the more people that get exposed to racing, the better chance we have to cultivate them as players, but we need to cultivate them as PLAYERS, and not settle for them enjoying an occasional social afternoon ( or evening ). Unless we find a way to do this at least somewhat successfully, we are not being helped by encouraging newcomers to attend. However, the onus is on us.

I'm a firm believer, based on the myriad I've personally brought to the track over 20+ years, that once they come, the intoxication of the gambling works it's magic. And agree of course that the onus is on us at all junctures.

But also...

How do you get... just 1 out of every 10 casual fans that go to the track on a big day- Derby, BC, or even something like Extreme Race Day that draws in as many fans as whatever local track's biggest stake day is, to come back again. To learn to read a pp? To become a somewhat regular bettor?

Most of those people that come can't read a PP. So they're picking numbers.A name they like. No real educated guess. It's just a novelty to them. That doesn't do all that much good for the longterm health of the sport.

If casual fan looks at a PP for the first time, they most likely see- 1 part stock market report, 1 part Swahili and 1 part something from the Matrix (the movie). And you're dealing with a lot of people where they lose interest quick when they realize that they can't learn it in 5 minutes.

To me that's the challenge. How do you educate people without them losing interest? I mean, the fact that you're making an educated decision in your gambling should appeal to some (as opposed to hoping the dice roll right, or that the dealer busts). But I try to emphasize to new people I try and teach the game to, that if you read a pp, and you see the one stat or angle that -gives you the long-shot winner, that good feeling you get is way better than getting a blackjack or hitting a flush on the river.

But I still struggle with what is the best way to teach these things. There's a few vids on how to read a past performance on youtube, and they're either too dull, dry, and sometimes too unclear to wanna watch them... tough... sorry, rambling, but I think if we can find a way to get 1 out of every 10 casual fans to become regulars, that would be huge. Not sure it's possible?

Bravo ! Good for you. You're doing your part. You know the old expression, you can lead a horseplayer to water....
Your job ends there, to an extent. More people like yourself need to expose friends to the game. However, you have to know which of those people are candidates.

1.Disposable income
2.Time
3.Gambling nature (Mandatory)
4.Puzzle solver (Will make your job easier,they don't need too much instruction and frankly, don't want it.)

In my somewhat limited social circle I know one person who I could invite to my home, show him the tools available and in 4 Saturdays he would be opening a Twinspires account having never set foot on a racetrack.

From my own experience I came to the conclusion that I needed to keep it simple. I drew an oval, marked the start and finish, pointed out what the "big number" and "little number" meant in the running lines and told them to ignore the rest. Once they understood where the horses positions were on the diagram during the running of the race it made it easier for them to understand the numbers.

As the day evolved I refrained from "teaching" too much unless they asked questions.

It's not an easy game and obviously positive results will beget more interest but I wouldn't put too much pressure on myself. I believe the true horseplayer you bring to the the track will get it win or lose.

Blood from a stone?

http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/...tail-spending/

Horse bettors don't have the greatest general reputations anymore.

My girlfriend had a 'New Girl' episode on, filmed at Santa Anita. Of course, the old guy (Dennis Farina) who takes the young people to the track is a crook, out to pull a con. He owes one of the kids $1,100 and cons another into buying a horse.

This is how Santa Anita described the scene:

That is definitely the hardest part of bringing people to the track. When you love the game, you love all of the angles, but it is hard to isolate which angles to teach.

This always devolves into the same discussion because, unfortunately, nothing is ever done to address the root causes.

1. The overall public's perception is precisely what Doug just described in the television episode; the game is full of crooks and con artists. Drugs are used to influence the outcomes of races and there are only degenerates that chase what boils down to a simple game of chance, unless you're on the inside. . It wouldn't be comedically translatable if that perception was inaccurate.
Everyone outside of the bubble of the game realizes this and the people inside the bubble refuses to accept it.
Of course we know that none of this could be further from the truth, but also everyone of us knows why that perception exists.

2. The educated gamblers, particularly poker players, that are way more savvy and knowledgeable, understand that the public perception is in no way remotely accurate and close to the general rule. They know that there is no way the sport could survive, thus are not scared off by it's perception.

What sends them running for the hills is the fact that roughly 20-25% of every wager goes to the house.

If your goal is to convince a new generation of intelligent gamblers to adopt this sport as a pastime, takeout has to be addressed, and not by 1-2% - anyone with half a brain will look for better odds elsewhere

The false impressions and perceptions are not really any different than when the game was in it's heyday. Casual gamblers will look for a convenient excuse not to bet, intelligent gamblers will flock to the sport if given a fighting chance.

No denying those views are out there. But the one positive, is if casual fans are at least coming to the track for the big days, watching the races on the big days, we hopefully at least sort of got a foot in the door?

What Stevie said.

If this were true, Bingo halls would be overflowing. Which is about the average age at the OTB.

Huh? What does this even mean?