ESPN Dropping More Horse Races

Originally Posted by PatCummings

Comparing the MLB and NFL to racing is so incredibly far-fetched, I don't know where to begin.

Even if some national racing entity bought TVG, how will that dramatically change anything?

I just don't believe that some stakes races without much context on ESPN does much of anything. I don't think it increases handle or a fan base that is going to wager. In previous years, they showed the Murmur Farms Maryland Starter Handicap. A $35,000 restricted overnight race. For what?

Hours and hours of live TV is dramatically expensive and while I cannot quantify it, my personal opinion is that it does relatively little to impact the national awareness of racing.
After several years of showing plenty of coverage on ESPN and its family of networks, if they've said - "the heck with it" - so be it.

If the sport was actually popular there would be
context and consistency. When TV has something
they think will be of interest, they go with it.
Horse racing fills a few gaps in time. It is a curiousity
now, like some wood chopping event on the Wide World
of Sports.

[Scurlogue Champ]

Originally Posted by PatCummings

I agree that the Betfair purchase of TVG is big. Of course, the arcane laws, both federal and state, will make Betfair's traditional approach a bit more difficult. But for them to be directly involved, I think we will see the impact soon enough.

I think they'll begin positioning themselves with the evolution towards their way of betting as a future hope.

If they don't buy a racetrack pretty soon I would be surprised.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Who exactly is " the industry? "

The $1 million question.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by PatCummings

Comparing the MLB and NFL to racing is so incredibly far-fetched, I don't know where to begin.

Even if some national racing entity bought TVG, how will that dramatically change anything?

Hours and hours of live TV is dramatically expensive and while I cannot quantify it, my personal opinion is that it does relatively little to impact the national awareness of racing.

Comparing benefits of an industry controlled TV network by saying the starter handicap on ESPN doesn't do "much of anything" is flawed. And comparison of MLB or NFL to horse racing in this regard is far-fetched how? From a TV scheduling perspective, horse racing is actually MORE equipped due to the number of events each day and consistency of daily programming. I'm not sure what plausible argument could be made there.

You actually, in a way, support my theory by saying it's "dramatically expensive/little impact". A horse racing TV channel run by horse racing dramatically change things in numerous positive ways including, but not limited to, exposure, general marketing of the sport, specific marketing of the sport, open content, big race coverage, consistent coverage, live coverage, industry-wide support versus fragmented portions etc. etc. etc.

For example, imagine this: An "industry" run not-for-profit ADW which uses a wide-spread network to broadcast/show races.

The NTRA buying TV time on ESPN ultimately just gives people a reason to complain about unique and exciting camera angles. The goal going in is question -- increase exposure? Create interest? The problem is there is no specific way to gauge whether or not it works. There are no metrics for which to measure its success. And does a few hours here or there really move people to join the game? Doubtful.

If the goal is to just keep horse racing mainstream and give the perception it's still a player in the major sports world, it makes more sense. I would counter-argue, however, that a 24-hour well-run industry network with 35% reach would speak more to potential customers than a few hours on ESPN with 100% reach.

[Bigsmc]

Originally Posted by pgardn

If the sport was actually popular there would be
context and consistency. When TV has something
they think will be of interest, they go with it.
Horse racing fills a few gaps in time. It is a curiousity
now, like some wood chopping event on the Wide World
of Sports.

I preferred the barrel jumping....

[Scurlogue Champ]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

\
For example, imagine this: An "industry" run not-for-profit ADW which uses a wide-spread network to broadcast/show races.

Imagine this as well: Pink "unicorns" bringing you a hot breakfast every morning and Papa Smurf making you a delectable cappuccino and giving you a handjob.

[MaTH716]

Obviously it's not good for the sport to lose exposure, but I personally don't think that it's really a big deal. Really, how many non betting/novice people are sitting there watching the continuous coverage of the undercard? Lets face it for every hour of coverage, what do you get 3-4 minutes of actual racing? They are going to sit there for all those great features? If they are interested they will tune in for the big race, but to think these people will go out of there way to be there/watch a race on the undercard is crazy. The regulars or anyone who plays on any sort of regular basis has their setup on how they watch and wager, so they aren't going to be affected. It's just not that big of a deal.

[SOREHOOF]

I enjoyed the all day coverage. Easier for a group of people to gather around a T.V. than a computer screen. Plus lots of time between races to grill up some chow. My friends and I would sometimes go to a neighborhood bar and commandeer the T.V. there. What races are they cutting out of the Derby telecast?

[Bobby Fischer]

more people would bet races if the television told them to.

we need regular prime-time coverage (night racing) for the best tracks and races.
There has to be an integrated Phone and Computer ADW system along with the mass media broadcast.

the more money in the pools, the better

[fpsoxfan]

Originally Posted by sumitas

I enjoy ESPN . Regardless, I'm looking forward to the NYRA specials on MSG+ from Saratoga .

This is a good point. The show last week was very good. The only problem is that this only has a limited television audience. Not that I'm bothered by this, it's just that ESPN can reach fans across the country. It's too bad ESPN can have on the spot coverage anytime an NFL player scratches his ass, but can't give horse racing it's just due.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by Scurlogue Champ

Imagine this as well: Pink "unicorns" bringing you a hot breakfast every morning and Papa Smurf making you a delectable cappuccino and giving you a handjob.

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by fpsoxfan

This is a good point. The show last week was very good. The only problem is that this only has a limited television audience. Not that I'm bothered by this, it's just that ESPN can reach fans across the country. It's too bad ESPN can have on the spot coverage anytime an NFL player scratches his ass, but can't give horse racing it's just due.

Listen I love racing as much as everyone else, but any comparisons (of any kind) between racing and the NFL are just utterly insane.

[Hickory Hill Hoff]

Originally Posted by JJP

Considering the quality of the coverage ESPN had, this might be a good thing.

Agreed, the coverage was much better when it was on NBC and ABC with the triple crown in the past.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

Listen I love racing as much as everyone else, but any comparisons (of any kind) between racing and the NFL are just utterly insane.

In certain instances, yes, but my point was not to say horse racing is/was/could be as popular as football but that racing is well-suited for a 24-hour network. It will never reach football's level in our lifetime, but the point is while NFL/MLB/NBA have their own channel... horse racing has two! The "industry" should be taking advantage.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

In certain instances, yes, but my point was not to say horse racing is/was/could be as popular as football but that racing is well-suited for a 24-hour network. It will never reach football's level in our lifetime, but the point is while NFL/MLB/NBA have their own channel... horse racing has two! The "industry" should be taking advantage.

The bird has flown on racing being a popular spectator sport. There was a time when television contracts were becoming popular where racing had an opportunity to gain significant exposure via the airwaves but opted against it and at that point in time, sports like football capitalized.

You're speaking of "if" and the "industry" but are forgetting about the people who are in charge of the game right now. Oh wait, that's right, no one is in charge of the game. It is a system of state-by-state governing bodies that have differing opinions on safety, wagering, takeout, and many other issues. Expecting, or even dreaming that somehow someone (and we don't even know who because we have quotations around there supposed name) is going to come along, scoop up all the fragments of this game, build something sophisticated like a racing network and a not-for-profit ADW has as much chance of happening as Jorge Chavez starting at Center for the Knicks next year.

NT

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

The bird has flown on racing being a popular spectator sport. There was a time when television contracts were becoming popular where racing had an opportunity to gain significant exposure via the airwaves but opted against it and at this point in time, sports like football capitalized.

You're speaking of "if" and the "industry" but are forgetting about the people who are in charge of the game right now. Oh wait, that's right, no one is in charge of the game. It is a system of state-by-state governing bodies that have differing opinions on safety, wagering, takeout, and many other issues. Expecting, or even dreaming that somehow someone (and we don't even know who because we have quotations around there supposed name) is going to come along, scoop up all the fragments of this game, build something sophisticated like a racing network and a not-for-profit ADW has as much chance of happening as Jorge Chavez starting at Center for the Knicks next year.

NT

Chavez starting for the Knicks would be it for me, I would die a happy man.

But you're right... and I'm speaking optimistically obviously.

[Travis Stone]

I will add this though... as a pure spectator sport in that 15,000 will show up for races consistently definitely not. But, horse racing is far from dead. And there are ways to fix it, it will probably requires lots of outside the box thinking, and some fairly obvious stuff as well.

[Bobby Fischer]

we know how great the sport and the game is

Originally Posted by MaTH716

Obviously it's not good for the sport to lose exposure, but I personally don't think that it's really a big deal. Really, how many non betting/novice people are sitting there watching the continuous coverage of the undercard? Lets face it for every hour of coverage, what do you get 3-4 minutes of actual racing? They are going to sit there for all those great features? If they are interested they will tune in for the big race, but to think these people will go out of there way to be there/watch a race on the undercard is crazy. The regulars or anyone who plays on any sort of regular basis has their setup on how they watch and wager, so they aren't going to be affected. It's just not that big of a deal.

Definitely not a made for TV sport.

[HaloWishingwell]

Honestly I can't blame the networks. The sport did this to itself. Since stud careers is so important and the horses of today are so brittle their are no stars in this sport to relate to on a long term basis.