Quote:
Originally Posted by philcski
Larger fields and higher quality horses have a direct correlation to increased handle. It's been proven time and again. There's a good reason for that... if you think hard you might be able to figure out why.
|
The question is whether or not it's significant enough, but then you have to say that every little bit helps.
When you take-out the data movers, such as stakes races and marquee events, and look at the day-in and day-out races, field size trumps everything.
Here is a screenshot from Excel of average handle data at Keeneland. These figures do not include multi-race wagers; only the WPS, Exacta, Trifecta and Superfecta data are repsented as they are the best indicators of a race's strength in the pools. No races with purses > $75k are included. The figures are based on the pool size of all the wagers.
I was perplexed by the 11 horse field size, so I drilled down to that data a bit more. The graph shows that purse (quality) was not a significant mover in this case and the disparity can attributed to a lot of things, possibly including:
* Race placement relative to other big events/races happening at or around the same time (post times)
* Heavy, heavy favorite, which deters exotic wagerers
* Race placement on the card (later in the card typically handles better)
* Randomness (ultimately, this is a small sample)
In my experience being a nerd when it comes to racing handle and following data, field size is the big mover. Major signals, particularly Belmont, are more immune to field size fluctuations due to the strength of their overall brand and product (a 5 horse field at Bel will always out handle a typical 5 horse field at say Louisiana Downs, Arlington or Prairie Meadows etc). When Belmont is able to put 14 horses on the track, however, look out - big handle coming-up.
Secondly, horseplayers will bet anything they have an edge on, regardless of quality. If any random horseplayer spotted a running line he liked, it doesn't matter if the horse is 10-1 in a $5k claimer at Presque Isle or 10-1 in a $5k claimer at Churchill - it's game on.
Third, the whole argument about quality is tough because naturally there is going to be a separation of ability in a sport like horse racing, and there needs to be a place for horses on the bottom. Every track would love to have 10 races everyday with nothing but N1X's, N2X's and stakes... unfortunately, it's not feasible.
Ultimately it comes down to a premise such as this: If you're a player who puts decent money through the windows (you aren't a $2 across the board, or $2 boxer... nor are we talking about big win bettors, as they're rare), and in 10 minutes there is a 7 horse allowance coming up, and right at the same time, a 12 horse claimer... where are you inclined to play? The majority of people go the 12 horse claimer, as that's where the money is.