Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cmorioles
You made a tongue and cheek reference to my business.
Slots money isn't going to be there forever, of that I am sure. In the mean time, customers are leaving in droves. It is already happening at some places. What happens when that money is gone and the customers are gone, too?
Of course it is the tracks more than horsemen, I'll concede that point. I should have said welfare for tracks, of which horsemen are a part. Slots keep places in business that really don't belong in business. The effect is we have too many tracks with not enough horses, and crappy races to bet. Thus, people don't bet. That wouldn't be so bad if tied into the slots money were takeout cuts, but I haven't seen that happen, ever. When it does maybe my mind will change.
I have never said I want only a few tracks, but it wouldn't hurt to cut 25-30% of them. Hell, just in infrastructure alone the game could save millions. Do we really need Aqueduct and Belmont? Monmouth and the Meadowlands? Santa Anita and Hollywood? Pimlico and Laurel? Of course we don't.
That only tackles tracks in the same state in close proximity to each other. I could go on a with things like Philly and Delaware Park, Penn National and Charles Town, Turfway and River Downs, and so on. These tracks could work together and make things better for all with less dates.
In the end, the name of the game is handle. Without some of the changes I mention, it will continue to shrink. Just the fact that on a summer Saturday there are about 50 win pools to bet in makes the game very hard to play. The pools are diluted and unbettable at most places for all but the casual fan.
As for the political considerations, of course it is hard. But, is anybody even trying to change anything?
Finally, thanks for your take it or leave it statement. That is typical of a horsemen and a big part of why I think the way I do about things.
|
So it is ok to speak about my business but yours if off limits? Hey I may be a peon in the horse racing business but I am a face with a name. Why the sensitivity?
As for your take on closing tracks, it would be a great idea for track operators but I fail to see how racing Aqueducts meet at Belmont or Santa Anita's at Hollywood makes a difference in the quality of the product. Same crappy product, just now the same location. What you really want is the business forced to make drastic changes to itself and you believe that taking away slot money would make that happen. While that may play out in theory there are simply too many different variables to ever make that possible. Not that there arent isolated changes that have occurred or occasions where money will be taken away. But you are thinking globally here and racing is a local game.
The name of the game is handle. But slot money going to tracks doesnt chase players away any faster than if the tracks didnt have slots and some private operator right down the road did. It is a fallacious argument.
The ironic part is the vast majority of horseman support the bettors and their issues. A lot of them contribute tons of money themselves towards handle. But very rarely do we ever get any support from your side of the table. Not that it matters because the tracks and regulators dont really care, they have their own agendas.