The model is the World Series of Poker TV coverage

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by joeydb

It's been said before here, but it bears repeating:

If ESPN covered the NHC in a similar way to the World Series of Poker, this game would boom. In the same demographics -- college kids, young professionals, and just those currently unfamiliar with the game.

Millions of people watch the WSOP for weeks as a pool of over 7300 players narrow down to 9, and then to 1 winner -- where the winner gets several million dollars.

In contrast, a field of just over 300 players where the champion gets $500,000, and next year the winner is expected to get $1,000,000 has GOT to appear to be the value that it is. The NHC is much shorter -- two days in total. With the editing that is done similar to the WSOP, showing the highlights, it could be presented in 2 hours.

The similarity of horse racing to poker for the player is obvious. A pool of money is accumulated, a "rake" (or takeout) is siphoned off, and the rest is divided among the winner(s). Odds fluctuate that CAN make the game profitable in either case -- if you know the math and you get a little lucky.

It is universally accepted that Texas Hold 'Em Poker exploded in popularity after Chris Moneymaker won the whole thing back in 2003. He was one of 838 players that year. Seven years later, the tournament has grown to 7319.

If I had the money, I'd back this project myself. If done right, it can make a splash. I'd piggyback it off of the repeats of the World Series of Poker like networks do with new shows that are likely to have similar audiences...they call it the "lead in".

Am I the only guy who feels this way? I know some are opposed to the NHC itself expanding, just as some are dismayed that the WSOP is now so huge. But the benefits to the sport of getting positive exposure rapidly and stimulating new interest are enormous.

Honestly, I think it's a horrible concept. Poker has different things going for it.
#1- Most people now how to play and can relate to what's going on.
#2- After all these years of watching it, poker has personalities that people like to root for and against. It's almost like a secondary storyline.
#3- In poker you don't need the best hand to win. Obviously the tableside cameras make everything so mch more interesting, but watching somebody laying down their aces to a guy who has 2,7 offsuit is always fun to watch.

What is the horse racing show going to offer? Have some guy read the form and explain why he betting a certain horse at 7-1? I think it's just a poor introduction to the sport for beginers. Basically it's exposing them to contest play (which the betting rules and bets for that matter are different), with the percentage probably very low for many of these people just visiting a track, let alone going into a contest.

I just think if ESPN is really comitted to any type of horse racing programming, they would just be better of served showing races from a certain track for a two-three hour block. In between these races explain the different types of bets/angles while also getting into explaing how to dechiper a racing form for some of the newbies who might have intrest in learning. I think Friday night Hollywood cards would be a great place to start. Make it a weekly thing for the meet and see if intrest picks up. I believe that would do more justice for the sport than the airing of some contest that honestly I would think most horseplayers would have a hard time sitting through.

[jms62]

Friday nights at Hollywood would be neat. They can play it as the hot place to be for Friday Happy Hour crowd. As far as the TV crowd goes they need to devise a interactive game with decent prizes to really gather a following. Maybe an online Pick 4 which allows you to only pick 1 horse per race.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

I just think if ESPN is really comitted to any type of horse racing programming, they would just be better of served showing races from a certain track for a two-three hour block. In between these races explain the different types of bets/angles while also getting into explaing how to dechiper a racing form for some of the newbies who might have intrest in learning. I think Friday night Hollywood cards would be a great place to start. Make it a weekly thing for the meet and see if intrest picks up. I believe that would do more justice for the sport than the airing of some contest that honestly I would think most horseplayers would have a hard time sitting through.

Well, that's the ultimate goal, good exposure for the sport in whatever form it comes, and that exposure leading to an increase in the number of people who play in the pools. Other than that, I am flexible in that I will support and applaud any format that accomplishes the goal of revitalizing and strengthening the game.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

The nerds who play fantasy sports and take it very seriously - and there are millions of them - are the people who could really get into racing if they could understand it.

How you reach those people is anyones guess - and how you keep them after they start losing 20% of every dollar they bet is also anyones guess.

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

The nerds who play fantasy sports and take it very seriously - and there are millions of them - are the people who could really get into racing if they could understand it.

How you reach those people is anyones guess - and how you keep them after they start losing 20% of every dollar they bet is also anyones guess.

Fantasy Stables for $$$. Could either be small pots like daily cards or big pots that go for entire meets.

This would have to be done primarily at two major tracks at first. And if popularity grows then expand the database to all tracks and have thousands of money stables.

I'd go into more detail but it's a waste of text because there are morons in charge of horse racing.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

I'd go into more detail but it's a waste of text because there are morons in charge of horse racing.

Sadly, I could not agree more.

[richard]

What is the take out on poker ?

[joeydb]

Depends on the casino and the game (1-2 no limit, 2-4 limit...)

It is not typically done as a raw percentage (in the casino) but as a tier system (this much of the flop betting, this much of the turn betting, river, etc) and there is usually a cap. It is nowhere near as high as 20% if I had to guess the ballpark.

Online might due a percentage (rounded to whole numbers) because the counting is that much easier. I haven't done it, so that's also a guess, but it would be feasible without slowing the game down.

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Fantasy Stables for $$$. Could either be small pots like daily cards or big pots that go for entire meets. This would have to be done primarily at two major tracks at first. And if popularity grows then expand the database to all tracks and have thousands of money stables. I'd go into more detail but it's a waste of text because there are morons in charge of horse racing.

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

The nerds who play fantasy sports and take it very seriously - and there are millions of them - are the people who could really get into racing if they could understand it. How you reach those people is anyones guess - and how you keep them after they start losing 20% of every dollar they bet is also anyones guess.

Not sure if Joey heard Steve Crist on ATR Wednesday in regards to this topic... All the relevant points brought up here were featured in Crist's thoughts, including the 'what can be added to the coverage as a hook' to make the broadcast compelling. And Doug and Coach have it. The viewer needs a stake in the outcome. And as suggested, there's ways to do it.

Callers to ATR regularly wax nostalgic about the regional grocery chain horse racing TV game that had viewers watching previously run races on tape that generated prizes based on the game tickets they accrued at the market. People are STILL talking about it 40 years later! WTF? Doesn't that say everything we need to know?

There are variations on this theme -- fantasy racing as Doug & Coach allude to -- that are very viable and marketable to the sponsors needed to make this work. I was broaching this subject with Satish as well Wednesday. It needs exploration and trial. The sport has nothing to lose...

[joeydb]

Steve I did not get to hear Crist's segment, but I will now seek it out in the archives.

If anyone does put up a good show about the sport, I'll definitely be watching it and promoting it to friends and family.

Hell, my wife bought me both seasons of Jockeys on DVD. A lot of equine entertainment materials around my house.

And if they EVER release Phar Lap on NTSC Region 1...

[tector]

I've sat in person at the WSOP and watched the final table unfold in real time. (I think the past two years the full table started the afternoon of BC Saturday). The amount of editing that goes into producing that show is pretty incredible, around 90% (say 16 real time hours cut down to 2 or 2.5 hours--with commercials). You could do something like that for the NHC--that isn't a problem. Here are the problems:

Handicapping a horse race is fundamentally different than making a poker decision. The latter lends itself to TV coverage and analysis, since the math (with hole cards) is plain enough. The former, not so much. And this is the "hook" for most people, not just seeing money change hands. Everybody has played poker, if even only badly. Most people have not truly doped out a horse race. A DRF looks more foreign to them than a WSJ.

You have about two months of lead-in coverage to the WSOP final table (easy enough to do with 8000 players playing over a week in real time). Nothing like that for racing.

You have year-round coverage of other poker tournaments which basically familiarize people with the process they are going to see at the WSOP--High Stakes Poker (new season starts later this month), WPT (new season starts Sunday), Poker After Dark (out of their repeats this week), Pokerstars series (in repeats now--season 1 just ended), and so on.

I just don't see the two as comparable, fundamentally.

[Linny]

One difference between racing and poker is that poker takes 3 or 4 days of thousands of players and mashes it into 2 hours of only the most suspenseful moments, racing tries to stretch it's 30 seconds of excitement out to one hour.
The other is that in viewing poker on the TV, the viewer is omnicient. He knows who's holding what cards. Having that knowledge makes him feel superior to the game. Effectively, the poker viewer is redboarding every hand he sees.

[MaTH716]

Has there ever been any attempt of tying horse racing in with the lottery and their terminals? I'll use NY as an example. Would it be beneficial (or even possible) for lottery retailers to sell tickets on races in NY? Tons of people sit in places like cafe's and bars to play keno (NY lottery offers a keno game every approx. 3 minutes) for hours at a time. It could be another wagering option for people instead of the usual lottery games. People play numbers twice a day in NY (actually 4 times if you count the pick 4 {another lottery game} which is offered in the afternoon and at night), come up with a strategy/marketing idea/game where people might want to play their numbers in some sort of sequance at a local NY track. Many people just want some action and if you give them the opportunity, I'm sure you will pick up some new customers.

Another thing that hurts the game (for at least the casual/newer people) is the lack of places that they could put a bet in. More so now in the NY area then ever with the closure of OTB. More locations to get a bet in would be a good thing. What good would it be to have some exposure on TV and for people not being able to put a bet in without having to travel all the way to Queens to get a bet in?

[Split Rock]

Originally Posted by tector

I've sat in person at the WSOP and watched the final table unfold in real time. (I think the past two years the full table started the afternoon of BC Saturday). The amount of editing that goes into producing that show is pretty incredible, around 90% (say 16 real time hours cut down to 2 or 2.5 hours--with commercials). You could do something like that for the NHC--that isn't a problem. Here are the problems:

Handicapping a horse race is fundamentally different than making a poker decision. The latter lends itself to TV coverage and analysis, since the math (with hole cards) is plain enough. The former, not so much. And this is the "hook" for most people, not just seeing money change hands. Everybody has played poker, if even only badly. Most people have not truly doped out a horse race. A DRF looks more foreign to them than a WSJ.

You have about two months of lead-in coverage to the WSOP final table (easy enough to do with 8000 players playing over a week in real time). Nothing like that for racing.

You have year-round coverage of other poker tournaments which basically familiarize people with the process they are going to see at the WSOP--High Stakes Poker (new season starts later this month), WPT (new season starts Sunday), Poker After Dark (out of their repeats this week), Pokerstars series (in repeats now--season 1 just ended), and so on.

I just don't see the two as comparable, fundamentally.

Spot on!!!

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Not sure if Joey heard Steve Crist on ATR Wednesday in regards to this topic... All the relevant points brought up here were featured in Crist's thoughts, including the 'what can be added to the coverage as a hook' to make the broadcast compelling. And Doug and Coach have it. The viewer needs a stake in the outcome. And as suggested, there's ways to do it.

Callers to ATR regularly wax nostalgic about the regional grocery chain horse racing TV game that had viewers watching previously run races on tape that generated prizes based on the game tickets they accrued at the market. People are STILL talking about it 40 years later! WTF? Doesn't that say everything we need to know?

There are variations on this theme -- fantasy racing as Doug & Coach allude to -- that are very viable and marketable to the sponsors needed to make this work. I was broaching this subject with Satish as well Wednesday. It needs exploration and trial. The sport has nothing to lose...

Definitely a great concept, most of us will never be a horse, even fewer get to be a jockey or trainer. The best chance we have to be involved is to gamble but a real stake (or even a fantasy stake) that actually pays off is the most attractive option and owning outright is too much. Someone had mentioned the TV pick-4 which is a great idea, at my Derby party I buy 20 $2 win tickets, with this simple move everyone is interested immediately. I turned my annual Haskell picnic from 6 gamblers drinking and eating burgers into over 50 people (all wagering) most of whom would call me to revisit the track again. I have moved away but they still have the party. Just a small stake and a little taste of action can be enough for most.

[Bigsmc]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Not sure if Joey heard Steve Crist on ATR Wednesday in regards to this topic... All the relevant points brought up here were featured in Crist's thoughts, including the 'what can be added to the coverage as a hook' to make the broadcast compelling. And Doug and Coach have it. The viewer needs a stake in the outcome. And as suggested, there's ways to do it.

Callers to ATR regularly wax nostalgic about the regional grocery chain horse racing TV game that had viewers watching previously run races on tape that generated prizes based on the game tickets they accrued at the market. People are STILL talking about it 40 years later! WTF? Doesn't that say everything we need to know?

There are variations on this theme -- fantasy racing as Doug & Coach allude to -- that are very viable and marketable to the sponsors needed to make this work. I was broaching this subject with Satish as well Wednesday. It needs exploration and trial. The sport has nothing to lose...

I don't see how fantasy racing could work given the amount of time and effort it would take to stay on top of horse's form, health, training etc....

I don't have enough time to handicap they way I would like to now.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

The millions of people who play fantasy sports and take it seriously spend countless hours a week pouring over stats - it takes a lot of dedication and there is very little reward. I believe one survey even claimed it was the #2 reason given why women break up with their boyfriend.

The kind of guy who is going to juggle his fantasy outfielders around every day because....

'guy A might be my 5th best hitting outfielder - but he is playing in high scoring Coors Field tonight - and going against a mediocre left handed pitcher. He's 11-for-24 lifetime with 4 HR's against this pitcher - and he generally feasts off of left handed pitching - guy B is my 2nd best hitting outfielder - he's up against Johan Santana today and he's 4-for-31 lifetime against him. I'll sit him and play the scrub'

These are the kind of guys that horse racing would have a big chance with.

Like I said - no idea how to reach them. That's racings problem to figure out.

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

The millions of people who play fantasy sports and take it seriously spend countless hours a week pouring over stats - it takes a lot of dedication and there is very little reward. I believe one survey even claimed it was the #2 reason given why women break up with their boyfriend.

The kind of guy who is going to juggle his fantasy outfielders around every day because....

'guy A might be my 5th best hitting outfielder - but he is playing in high scoring Coors Field tonight - and going against a mediocre left handed pitcher. He's 11-for-24 lifetime with 4 HR's against this pitcher - and he generally feasts off of left handed pitching - guy B is my 2nd best hitting outfielder - he's up against Johan Santana today and he's 4-for-31 lifetime against him. I'll sit him and play the scrub'

These are the kind of guys that horse racing would have a big chance with.

Like I said - no idea how to reach them. That's racings problem to figure out.

I disagree Doug. Don't forget these are guys who have the chance to make moves everyday. Then there is that almost instant gratification (especially in baseball) with games being played every night.

I just think that there are too many varibles in racing for it to be a success.

[Oaklawnfan]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Not sure if Joey heard Steve Crist on ATR Wednesday in regards to this topic... All the relevant points brought up here were featured in Crist's thoughts, including the 'what can be added to the coverage as a hook' to make the broadcast compelling. And Doug and Coach have it. The viewer needs a stake in the outcome. And as suggested, there's ways to do it.

Callers to ATR regularly wax nostalgic about the regional grocery chain horse racing TV game that had viewers watching previously run races on tape that generated prizes based on the game tickets they accrued at the market. People are STILL talking about it 40 years later! WTF? Doesn't that say everything we need to know?

There are variations on this theme -- fantasy racing as Doug & Coach allude to -- that are very viable and marketable to the sponsors needed to make this work. I was broaching this subject with Satish as well Wednesday. It needs exploration and trial. The sport has nothing to lose...

I handled this program, "Let's Go to the Races" in my regional market for the primary grocery distributor of the area. Over three hundred stores in Southern Missouri and Northern Arkansas participated. The races were taped from Gulfstream and the promotion ran the two months prior to the opening date of the Oaklawn meet. Not only was it a smash hit with people who had never been in the sport, we aired it on our television station the thirty minutes prior to the local newscast. It boosted our local newscast ratings considerably and fans were chompin' at the bit when Oaklawn opened.

[richard]

It is eye popping that you had over 300 stores participate on the TV/Oaklawn promotion. Impressive.