Tell Churchill Downs You Want Dime Supers!

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

Dime supers actually hurt overall handle believe it or not. It detracts from the overall pools. For example, if someone decides to bet $50 on a race at your track, they'll bet $50. But, if dime supers are available, they might only bet $30 (because they can bet for cheaper) and they spend the $20 on other racetracks.

In a big race like the Derby, I don't disagree with them not allowing 10-cent supers, with so much money being handled.

This is a very naive approach and exactly the kind of thinking by racetrack management ( on a variety of situations ) that helps keep racing in the dark ages. Just because a change, in this case a popular one, does not pay immediate dividends does not mean it won't be successful in the long run. While takeout obviously doesn't change from $1 supers to dime supers, the dime super obviously allows more coverage overall for all your players, and probably rates to keep more money in action, and thus possibly raises the churn on this bet....which is what increases handle. Instead of the money from the pool being dispersed to a few bettors it ends up spreading it more thinly to many betters. Theoretically this is better for churn ( and thus handle ). It's early ( for me and this bet ) and over time it is highly possible that this bet will prove a handle booster.

It's also worth noting that the $20 you give as an example that is wagered at another track, through simulcasting, provides only incremental less dollars to the simulcasting outlet. One could argue that the few lost dollars are more than made up by keeping your customer happy.

Churchill Downs Inc. makes baffling decisions all the time ( did they not raise their takeout substantially on Pick-4s and, I think, Supers or Pick-3s for the recently begun Calder meeting? ) so this recent one comes as no great surprise. However, the simple solution offered in this thread of allowing Supers on only self-service machines on Derby Day seems to have alluded them. Do they honestly believe that the carnage of Derby Day will be further exacerbated by doing so? Or, more likely, did they not really think this through? Your core players should never be dismissed just because it's the one day you can do no wrong. Racetracks seem to make this kind of mistake far too often.

[mik9872]

I agree that Churchill should offer .10 supers on Derby and Oaks days, even if only on automated machines or Adw. Oops, there won't be Adw

[booner]

If I read an article correctly (can't remember where), you will be able to bet the Oaks, Woodford Reserve and Derby through twinspires and Xpressbet. Those 3 races are the sole property of CDI and they can offer those.

It went something like that, but I may be wrong.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

This is a very naive approach and exactly the kind of thinking by racetrack management ( on a variety of situations ) that helps keep racing in the dark ages. Just because a change, in this case a popular one, does not pay immediate dividends does not mean it won't be successful in the long run. While takeout obviously doesn't change from $1 supers to dime supers, the dime super obviously allows more coverage overall for all your players, and probably rates to keep more money in action, and thus possibly raises the churn on this bet....which is what increases handle. Instead of the money from the pool being dispersed to a few bettors it ends up spreading it more thinly to many betters. Theoretically this is better for churn ( and thus handle ). It's early ( for me and this bet ) and over time it is highly possible that this bet will prove a handle booster.

It's also worth noting that the $20 you give as an example that is wagered at another track, through simulcasting, provides only incremental less dollars to the simulcasting outlet. One could argue that the few lost dollars are more than made up by keeping your customer happy.

I don't think the churn figures are as high as we might think. People are not attacking the wager properly. If you walk around our track, the floor is scattered with $2.40 super boxes. Obviously, this is an ineffective way to bet the wager (and yes, all tix on the floor are losers to begin with). Personally, I am constantly struggling with the best way to play them and have almost phased them out completely.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

I don't think the churn figures are as high as we might think. People are not attacking the wager properly. If you walk around our track, the floor is scattered with $2.40 super boxes. Obviously, this is an ineffective way to bet the wager (and yes, all tix on the floor are losers to begin with). Personally, I am constantly struggling with the best way to play them and have almost phased them out completely.

you can go in the Gold Room at Arlington and find $10 super box tickets on the floor.

[jballscalls]

I had a guy yesterday at Keeneland ask me to 'borrow' 1.40 for the last race LOL that meant he either had 60 cents, or had a dime super that was sure to hit!!

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

you can go in the Gold Room at Arlington and find $10 super box tickets on the floor.

I can go to the gold room anywhere and see $10 boxes, just like I go to the first floor anywhere and see $2.40 boxes...

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

I can go to the gold room anywhere and see $10 boxes...

I don't know what Gold room you're going to, but.......nevermind.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

I can go to the gold room anywhere and see $10 boxes, just like I go to the first floor anywhere and see $2.40 boxes...

you implied that people were not playing the dime super effectively, when the truth is irrespective of the amount you can find people that don't play supers effectively.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

you can go in the Gold Room at Arlington and find $10 super box tickets on the floor.

Those are usually mine!!

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Scav

Those are usually mine!!

i didn't want to name names.