Is racing doing this right?

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

I did it both on thoroughbreds as a teller when I was 18 - and I still do it everytime I visit a dog track.

It was not uncommon for me to have at least over ten thousand dollars worth of canceled tickets on my cash position at the end of a shift. In fact, I might have had a Joe DiMaggio like streak of it going. No one ever said a single thing about it ... and I doubt it even made much difference in helping me get an edge.

One day - all the machines froze and betting was down for a couple of minutes. I had like a couple thousand dollar win bet on a horse I hated in a race coming up in like 15 minutes. I was about to crap my pants and I went back to the money room to see if I could get the ticket canceled by computer when the machines came back up. I canceled the ticket and never did it again.

No sense taking a risk - when you're not sure an edge is even being created from it.

With dog racing - the strategy is to go up and make four win bets of $50 apiece on the four dogs I like least. This drives down the win odds - I go to a teller with 0 MTP - bet about $70 on quinella and trifecta combos involving the dogs I like... cancel the $200 in win tickets and ask for like a $130 voucher back. Basically - I think it's a good way of getting overlayed quinella and trifecta prices. The odds come back to reality right before the rabbit starts moving.

A simple misdirection of my betting competition in an effort to possibly gain an edge. A fine, upstanding tactic to be sure.

GA in your future.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by freddymo

Well that is something that needs to change.. In the beginning BEFORE you were hooked did you really care about a Thistle thursday?

Well the original point of my post was that the current model is putting the cart before the horse.

That said, I can see your point that the original draw for the potential new fan is going to be the exciting stakes horse, but if a track provided the races before and after a particular stake, don't you think it is possible that someone is going to see that a) non-stakes races can be just as exciting b) money can be made in those races too?

I don't mean this to sound as if this is the cure to racing, but to get back to the topic of how racing is using technology correctly, I think this is an area in which they fail for the most part. Though improvements have been made.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

Well the original point of my post was that the current model is putting the cart before the horse.

That said, I can see your point that the original draw for the potential new fan is going to be the exciting stakes horse, but if a track provided the races before and after a particular stake, don't you think it is possible that someone is going to see that a) non-stakes races can be just as exciting b) money can be made in those races too?

I don't mean this to sound as if this is the cure to racing, but to get back to the topic of how racing is using technology correctly, I think this is an area in which they fail for the most part. Though improvements have been made.

agreed

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

GA in your future.

Dog racing gets a bad wrap. Only one or two tracks handle decently though.

I worked as a dog track lead-out for almost one week. They literally made you go to some doctors office place and take a drug test before they'd hire you.

I remember my father telliing a bettor he knew that was in town what I did - and the guy couldn't believe it. He comes out to the track - sees me walking a dog in the post parade - and the cigar falls out of his mouth and he shouts over the fence "Are you serious!? What are you up to now?"

The locker room of kennels downstairs they keep those dogs quarantined in for a couple of hours before the race is truly disgusting. I had a lot of fun doing it actually.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

I don't disagree with you Freddy, especially with the lack of a national governing body/voice.

As far as too many races go, yeah you are probably right. In some cases less is definitely more (monmouth being a prime example). But not everybody is looking for the ideal (in terms of good racing and betting) situations to wager. I always think back to when I went to NYC OTB's to watch races and think that many people just want the action and don't care what type of horses and races are going off. They were playing whether there was 3 horses in the gate or 13 and couldn't care if it was a 2k claimer or a 5 million dollar Graded Stake. To limit the amount of tracks/races and actual racing days could also hurt the sport by forcing gamblers to put their money in other betting venues on days where there are very limited places to bet horses. That wouldn't be good for the game either.

^^ The Scavs of the world

[The Devil]

Good luck Pat. Don't read all of these it will drive you nuts.

[PatCummings]

Up to 91 responses to the survey - thanks to many so far! If you haven't taken it yet, you'd be doing me a great favor...


http://baylor.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_2fsgkjB2oQQUEhm

[my miss storm cat]

Originally Posted by OldDog

Interesting questions. Tough assigning points/percentages to the various issues -- I could have/would have gone way over 100 if it hadn't kept me honest.

Yeah that part of it was especially interesting.

I'd love to see results some day.

Good luck, Pat.

[PatCummings]

Results will come along eventually. A few interesting findings through the results so far. MANY thanks to those who took the time to complete it!

[PatCummings]

Final call for those who haven't yet taken the survey. The responses have been great so far. Many thanks.

http://baylor.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_2fsgkjB2oQQUEhm