Rachel, handle, exposure... it's all there

[Suffolk Shippers]

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

completely disagree, hockey poorly negotiated with ESPN and they finally walked away from the table and left them on a no name network. It has killed the game.

Racing should be doing everything it can to get on any platform that will shown them, TVG and HRTV should be on all mediums and the tracks would be wise to try and make that happen with the funds to do so.

Direct TV has additional channels to support HRTV, the only reason is poorly negotiated contracts with TVG.

You're way off. The NHL went downhill with Gary Bettman's pipe dream of removing the game from niche markets and regionalization and into areas like Arizona, Florida, etc. Hockey can work in SOME non-niche regions, like LA, Dallas, Anahiem even.

However, doing so at the expense of franchises in core areas, like southern Ontario, or Quebec, Minnesota (until the Wild), or even a second team in Toronto is terrible business. It's the thing that plagues the NHL most today. Oh, and the labor strife a few years back didn't help.

Horse racing can learn a lot from the NHL. The NHL did not need to expand it's horizons beyond a regional niche sport to be successful. Like any business, if you can carve out your percentage of the market, and maximize profit and revenue within that percentage, you're doing a lot better than most. Racing doesn't need to try and grasp at straws to burn money to find ways to bring in more casual fans. It sounds a lot like the NHL moving teams to Phoenix. A waste of money (as is being proven out) to foolishly expand the market.

I would be furious if racing foolishly spent money to get on ESPN, at the expense of much needed improvements within racing itself. All too often, those of us who make up the market for horse racing get stepped on and ignored. Why on earth would we want racing to try and foolishly spread it's wings where, we, the consumer, become even more irrelevant?

[zippyneedsawin]

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

completely disagree, hockey poorly negotiated with ESPN and they finally walked away from the table and left them on a no name network. It has killed the game.

Racing should be doing everything it can to get on any platform that will shown them, TVG and HRTV should be on all mediums and the tracks would be wise to try and make that happen with the funds to do so.

Direct TV has additional channels to support HRTV, the only reason is poorly negotiated contracts with TVG.

I didn't know that was the reason only TVG is on DirecTV (although it makes sense). Anyone know when the current contract expires? -- said the DirecTV customer.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by Kasept

I'm getting tired of this alleged relevence discussion. The "Racing still matters" crap... Enough. Why are people so insecure about their interest or involvement in racing? If a certain segment of the population, even a vast majority, doesn't get it.. WHO CARES? PHUCK THEM ALREADY... It's an enormous multi-billion dollar a year business... Stop worrying about who in the ESPN-driven world likes racing. There's more than enough people interested in the game. Instead of worrying about some network morons catching on and doing the work for us, take it upon yourself to grow interest in the game one fan at a time.

We have the entire Internet at our disposal and people are worried about what the tired, hackneyed media outlets are doing.

Wow, Steve... did I strike a nerve? I'm not sure why... I was just saying how this weekend shows that horse racing still has a pulse in general society, which regardless of how big any industry is, general interest is a positive.

But your point seems to be that who cares if general society doesn't like horse racing because we have a core following which will for sure carry this sport. Well, these figures tell me otherwise...



And you know how much I care about this game and what I've done to grow interest... that's not really a fair or accurate statement.

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

Wow, Steve... did I strike a nerve? I'm not sure why... I was just saying how this weekend shows that horse racing still has a pulse in general society, which regardless of how big any industry is, general interest is a positive.

But your point seems to be that who cares if general society doesn't like horse racing because we have a core following which will for sure carry this sport. Well, these figures tell me otherwise...



And you know how much I care about this game and what I've done to grow interest... that's not really a fair or accurate statement.

Any nerve struck wasn't by your post specifically. I'm tired of the 'woe is us' mentality that pervades a certain percentage of the industry and fan base.

General interest is fine, and it creates long term interest.

The wagering numbers are deceptive. Note that they encompass a period where certain amounts of handle went off shore. They also reflect the very recent peiod where ADW/HBPA/Signal providers were in a feeling out tug of war. And you have handle loss reflected there from the synthetic travails.

There's plenty of business out there and new customers will keep coming to the game. The chicken little mentality of aging fan base has been around 50 years. Racing is like Hyman Roth... dying from the same heart attack for 30 years.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Any nerve struck wasn't by your post specifically. I'm tired of the 'woe is us' mentality that pervades a certain percentage of the industry and fan base.

General interest is fine, and it creates long term interest.

The wagering numbers are deceptive. Note that they encompass a period where certain amounts of handle went off shore. They also reflect the very recent peiod where ADW/HBPA/Signal providers were in a feeling out tug of war. And you have handle loss reflected there from the synthetic travails.

There's plenty of business out there and new customers will keep coming to the game. The chicken little mentality of aging fan base has been around 50 years. Racing is like Hyman Roth... dying from the same heart attack for 30 years.

I guess my point was while despite all these issues and "woe is us" mentality so many people in racing have, there is plenty out there to grab a hold of. Yesterday's Preakness is a prime example.

The same heart attack argument has a lot of merit because the negative-minded individuals have been singing the same song ever since I read my horse racing book. But at the same time, society is changing, interest and entertainment values to general society are changing as well. So I am concerned of an industry sitting back on its heels, hoping for a slot machine to save it, while not proactively attacking the fronts which could provide the longevity the sport needs.

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

while not proactively attacking the fronts which could provide the longevity the sport needs.

Like giving the FATman his trackus
and letting me bet on the net.

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

I guess my point was while despite all these issues and "woe is us" mentality so many people in racing have, there is plenty out there to grab a hold of. Yesterday's Preakness is a prime example.

The same heart attack argument has a lot of merit because the negative-minded individuals have been singing the same song ever since I read my horse racing book. But at the same time, society is changing, interest and entertainment values to general society are changing as well. So I am concerned of an industry sitting back on its heels, hoping for a slot machine to save it, while not proactively attacking the fronts which could provide the longevity the sport needs.

We're on the same page, which is why I didn't want you to think your original post specifically set me off. I should elaborate more but can't right now... Most of the industry's issues stems from its' age and longevity. It's complex but is steadily being addressed. Those looking for a panacea will be disappointed. Yesterday was a huge win for all that's good about racing.

[Heels1989]

Originally Posted by Kasept

A few things...

The pace assumption is incorrect because no one seems to be taking into account that HULL would have run had Rachel not run... So there very well may have been a similar set up for Mine That Bird because Hull was certainly goinmg to be on the engine, and Bird very well could have won under those conditions.

Not sure where you seemed to read or hear exclusively that there was no sentiment or excitement or eagnerness for Rachel Alexandra's running. I found the opposite to be totally the case... I had nearly 100 calls to 'At the Races' this week and could have taken many more. EVERYONE was excited and NO ONE that I talked to took the anti-running stance. The only place I saw a vapid argument about it was Rick Bozich's pathetic piece in the C-J.

I'm getting tired of this alleged relevence discussion. The "Racing still matters" crap... Enough. Why are people so insecure about their interest or involvement in racing? If a certain segment of the population, even a vast majority, doesn't get it.. WHO CARES? PHUCK THEM ALREADY... It's an enormous multi-billion dollar a year business... Stop worrying about who in the ESPN-driven world likes racing. There's more than enough people interested in the game. Instead of worrying about some network morons catching on and doing the work for us, take it upon yourself to grow interest in the game one fan at a time.

We have the entire Internet at our disposal and people are worried about what the tired, hackneyed media outlets are doing.

I had not attended a Preakness since Summer Squall's win in 1990. The ONLY reason I went yesterday was for the chance to see RA in person and the possibility to witness some history.

[tanner12oz]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

How many times did you hear or read how going to the Preakness was not in her best interests, or made no sense, or there was no point.

Imagine if she was never bought by Jess Jackson. Mine That Bird would not of had the pace to close in on, Musket Man would have likely been the Preakness winner and the buzz surrounding this year's Preakness would be non-existent.

Handle on the card yesterday was exceptionally strong - this stuff works. Having big match-ups, big names, stars - it works.

Now I read in various locations how going to the Belmont makes no sense with Rachel Alexandra. Huh?

Kudos to Jess Jackson for putting her in a spot where she belonged. And provided she is healthy and no worse for the wear, I hope it's the Belmont next.

It's weekends like this which prove horse racing still has a place.

wouldnt have heard a complaint from me

[MisterB]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

How many times did you hear or read how going to the Preakness was not in her best interests, or made no sense, or there was no point.

Imagine if she was never bought by Jess Jackson. Mine That Bird would not of had the pace to close in on, Musket Man would have likely been the Preakness winner and the buzz surrounding this year's Preakness would be non-existent.

Handle on the card yesterday was exceptionally strong - this stuff works. Having big match-ups, big names, stars - it works.

Now I read in various locations how going to the Belmont makes no sense with Rachel Alexandra. Huh?

Kudos to Jess Jackson for putting her in a spot where she belonged. And provided she is healthy and no worse for the wear, I hope it's the Belmont next.

It's weekends like this which prove horse racing still has a place.

Handle up, Attendence down is a good thing? The only people who want her to run in the Belmont is NYRA, ESPN, Casino's, and sport writers. Jackson is a hero???

If she runs in 3 weeks, I hope she comes out ok. She won't win the Belmont anyway.

Assman knows best for the horse, which some could care less about.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by MisterB

Handle up, Attendence down is a good thing?

Well, how many of the 35,000 drunks they were missing actually put more than $2 down on a bet?

I don't think anyone missed the "Running of the Porta Potties" this year.

The AP story speaks for itself:

To compensate for not allowing fans to bring in alcohol, Pimlico sold beer at modest prices. From 8-11 a.m., fans could get a cup for a buck. After that, it was $3.50.

"Kids my age won't pay that much," said Kendall Wadsworth, 21, who went to the race with her father. "If you could pay $1 all day, that would be different. It wouldn't cost that much to get wasted."

Good riddance.

[MisterB]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Well, how many of the 35,000 drunks they were missing actually put more than $2 down on a bet?

I don't think anyone missed the "Running of the Porta Potties" this year.

The AP story speaks for itself:

To compensate for not allowing fans to bring in alcohol, Pimlico sold beer at modest prices. From 8-11 a.m., fans could get a cup for a buck. After that, it was $3.50.

"Kids my age won't pay that much," said Kendall Wadsworth, 21, who went to the race with her father. "If you could pay $1 all day, that would be different. It wouldn't cost that much to get wasted."

Good riddance.

And you couldn't find 500 people at the track after the one day wonder. People talk about bringing the young into the sport?? With over 50 years in this sport, I can say it's soon disappearing in the rear view mirror.

Could care less about the pot smokers, beer bongs, and potty runners.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by MisterB

And you couldn't find 500 people at the track after the one day wonder. People talk about bringing the young into the sport?? With over 50 years in this sport, I can say it's soon disappearing in the rear view mirror.

Could care less about the pot smokers, beer bongs, and potty runners.

I hope not... they were closed on Sunday

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by philcski

I hope not... they were closed on Sunday

That was funny!

[MisterB]

Originally Posted by philcski

I hope not... they were closed on Sunday

Really

[pointman]

Originally Posted by MisterB

And you couldn't find 500 people at the track after the one day wonder. People talk about bringing the young into the sport?? With over 50 years in this sport, I can say it's soon disappearing in the rear view mirror.

Could care less about the pot smokers, beer bongs, and potty runners.

The sport is not dying, people have to stop buying into this. I don't know the exact number, but when you count the total attendance of every racetrack around the country on any given day, racing still draws a ton of fans and likely more than the combined attendance of any other single sport attending a live event on a given day. The ban on bringing liquor into the infield is the primary factor in the reduction of attendance at Pimlico this year, however, the obvious conclusion is that those that didn't attend don't really pump much money into the handle anyway.

Then, when you factor the ease of placing bets over the internet from your living room couch, it becomes clear that the dynamics are simply changing and the sport must (and has been) adjust to it. I still love taking in a day at the races, but I don't go to the track as much even though I am 20 minutes from Belmont and Aqueduct simply because I really enjoy going to my couch and enjoying a day "at" the races on a large flat screen television. The sport will be fine going forward.

[Rootdog1]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

How many times did you hear or read how going to the Preakness was not in her best interests, or made no sense, or there was no point.

Imagine if she was never bought by Jess Jackson. Mine That Bird would not of had the pace to close in on, Musket Man would have likely been the Preakness winner and the buzz surrounding this year's Preakness would be non-existent.

Handle on the card yesterday was exceptionally strong - this stuff works. Having big match-ups, big names, stars - it works.

Now I read in various locations how going to the Belmont makes no sense with Rachel Alexandra. Huh?

Kudos to Jess Jackson for putting her in a spot where she belonged. And provided she is healthy and no worse for the wear, I hope it's the Belmont next.

It's weekends like this which prove horse racing still has a place.

Much of this is attributed to my comment that she didnt need to run back in two weeks. They did and she won...I am glad I was not "proven" right by her becoming injured. Your views do not take into account the wellfare of the horse, but rather the sport in total. That is fine...we just see it different.

[mes5107]

I, for one, would love to see a RA/MTB rematch in the Belmont if both are able to run back. Nobody's really talking about that here. That final stretch run in the Preakness was really exciting. "Can MTB get there?; Can Rachel last til the wire?; Where the heck IS the wire?" The early speed/closer dichotomy is very fun to watch.

[Bigsmc]

Originally Posted by mes5107

I, for one, would love to see a RA/MTB rematch in the Belmont if both are able to run back. Nobody's really talking about that here. That final stretch run in the Preakness was really exciting. "Can MTB get there?; Can Rachel last til the wire?; Where the heck IS the wire?" The early speed/closer dichotomy is very fun to watch.

I think that is a given. You'd be hard pressed to find anybody on this board that wouldn't want to see them go at it again.

[sumitas]

This has to be the biggest rivalry since Affirmed and Alydar .