SuperDealDomains.com

If only a 17.88% increase in handle in December was an apples to apples increase compared with December 2010.

First off, race days increased 10% which should mean an approximate gain of 10%. Then you have the closing of the NYOTBs in December 2010 (the OTB player has by now found an alternative), and of course Gulfstream instead of Calder had to help handle numbers.

Other factors to think about is the increased takeout in California which has a negative effect on handle overall, but then again, many tracks operating in December had lowered takeout on a few bets (like Hawthorne, Tampa Bay and Charles Town). However, signal fees have trended up from a year ago as well, which should decrease handle.

If I remember correctly, weather was pretty ugly in December and January last year causing quite a few cancellations (but that is reflective in the amount of racing dates).

And of course, the North American has improved ever so slightly.

One more thing. The US poker ban in April should have had a very positive effect on handle, however, because poker is perceived as beatable and horse racing is not, the amount of poker players horse racing was able to lure in has probably been very minuscule.

All in all, the December numbers look to me at best to be a wash over last year. Now, this is still an improvement over the 4 year huge slide we’ve seen, and perhaps a sign that the industry has bottomed out. But if it stays status quo as far as pricing is concerned, even a buoyant economy will mean very little when it comes to handle increases in the future.

The reality is that the new blood the game desperately needs will not be cultivated the same way the current Horseplayer was (years of going to the track with mom and dad, etc.). The new player will be attracted to the game if and only if the game is perceived as beatable by at least a few. Tomorrow’s player will not be required to go the track to become a regular and the industry has to understand this.

Lower takeout across the board and betting exchanges are a must if the industry is to become relevant again.

The popular Thoroughbred and Harness Google Track Takeout Maps have been updated. There are still a few mysteries (tracks missing takeout data), and if there are any new tracks that need to be added or old tracks that need to be deleted, or takeouts that are incorrect, please leave a comment and corrections will be made.

View Thoroughbred Racetracks in a larger map

View Harness Racetracks in a larger map

ADVERTISEMENT

HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM offers Horseplayers industry high Player Reward Bonuses. No minimums. Start getting bonuses immediately.

SPECIAL BONUS OFFER TO NEW MEMBERS AT HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM

BET $80 GET $40 DEPOSITED INTO YOUR ACCOUNT

Wager at least $80 in total, win or lose, and you will get $40 deposited into your account. You will also start receiving industry high Player Reward Bonuses daily as soon as you start wagering. To earn the $40 Bonus you must wager at least $80 in total within 7 days of making your initial deposit.

CLICK TO OPEN A FREE ACCOUNT

Why Horseplayersbet.com?:

* Industry High Player Reward Bonuses added to your account daily
* User friendly betting interface makes wagering easy
* FREE LIVE VIDEOS
* FREE RACE REPLAYS
* Wager Online or by Phone
* Great customer service
* 100% Parimutuel
* Bet cancellation capabilities
* No membership or wagering fees
* Green Dot & PINpocket fees rebated (deposits of $120 or more)
* No fees on debit/credit card deposits by phone of $100 or more
* Online credit card funding (4.5% fee rebated on deposits of $100 or more)

HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM, “WHERE HORSEPLAYERS COME FIRST.” SIGN UP TODAY AND SEE WHY HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM IS ONE OF THE FASTEST GROWING US BASED ADWS

Player Reward Bonuses could be the difference to you as to whether you win in the long run playing horses, or lose. Sure, you still need skill and luck as well to succeed, at HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM at least you have a fighting chance. And one thing is for sure, your money will last longer because of the PLAYER REWARD BONUSES you receive.

I’ve done a bit of reading on the evolution of horses lately. Really interesting topic. They share common ancestry with the zebra (branched off around 4 million years ago). Prior to that they share common ancestry with rhinos and tapirs. It is sort of like humans who share common ancestry with chimps around 7 million years ago, and monkeys around 25 million years ago. Of course, if you go back far enough all animals on this planet share common ancestry (humans and horses share a common ancestor around 65 million years ago.

Another interesting thing, horses evolved from having 3 toes in the front and four toes in the back to their current characteristic of have just one toe. The most probable reason for the change has to do with horses being pray animals. They eat grass, not other animals, so the ancestors who survived eventually needed speed to run away from predators, and balance in the plains, for example and having multi toes slowed them down.

Another cool yet disturbing reality is that horses made it to North America 2.5 million years ago, but they went extinct around 8,000 years ago. The most likely culprit for their extinction was a combination of a change in climate and man’s arrival to North America.

It was around the end of the last Ice Age. The ancestors of the North American Indian came to North America via the Bering Straight which had a frozen land bridge and may have been preceded by the Clovis People who likely came from a region in what is now France (not the Coneheads). They came across the Atlantic, most likely on small watercraft, as the Atlantic was full of icebergs to rest on. This is still a controversial hypothesis (not a scientific theory based on mounds and mounds of evidence like evolution), there is also a thought the Clovis came to North America via the Bering Straight as well.

There is evidence though that the Clovis dined on horse meat amongst other animals like the mastodon. The Native Indians most likely feasted on horses as well (it was the end of the Ice Age, and there is no evidence that the horse was used as transportation back then). The Clovis too were mostly wiped and the rest absorbed in the Indian cultures. There is even a hypothesis that a comet may have been responsible for a massive extinction of mammals in North America around 12,000 years ago.

The bottom line here is that there are some facts thanks to scientific observation and analysis of evidence: evolution of horses, horses dating back to North America dating around 2.5 million years ago, and the extinction of horses around 7,000 or 8,000 years ago (horses were reintroduced to North America by the Spanish around the 1500′s, and many horses escaped, and this time around weren’t hunted to extinction, but used as transportation by the Native Indians). The speculation comes in when it comes to things like man’s hand in the extinction event, when man made it to North America exactly, and how, etc.

Future discoveries will eventually settle just about every question posed here.

So what does this have to do with horse racing?

Scientific inquiry is a wonderful thing. It is very efficient as well in determining how the universe works and how it got to this point. Hypothesizes are made (they are generally educated guesses), if over time they aren’t falsified (by contrary evidence), they are accepted as scientific theory. For example, it is a fact that evolution takes place, the theory lies in how exactly it occurs in specific cases.

Horse racing seems to dismiss the scientific process, in other words, it continually flies by the seat of its pants.

For example, take the Lasix controversy. Lasix has been used for three decades, yet there are no answers that are close being conclusive regarding masking and whether it is needed as a staple. Why? There has hardly been any research done. The best we can do is make inferences at this time, and unfortunately, the inferences turn out to be very subjective (which is the polar opposite of how science works).

This is exactly why super trainers exist. At least they are exploring science as they find ways to make concoctions that are not tested for.

What racing needs to do is play catch up. Hand out heavy heavy fines, and list only a handful of drugs that are acceptable, while doing testing on whether these drugs should be acceptable in the future. The science exists to figure this stuff out.

And what about the pricing of the game (the takeout)? There has been absolutely no attempt to search for the optimal takeout. Strong evidence exists regarding takeout being too high. Though at this time, thanks to horse racing’s dysfunctional ways, empirical evidence is impossible to find (for example, all racetracks would need to start off by dropping all takeout rates so that we can see actual results, which of course will still be clouded by the economy and field size as well). However it is doable. Casinos have done it, to the point that they know exactly when to tweak a house hold when it comes to their slot machines.

Empirical evidence shows that handles are dropping, amount of players are also dropping. The one thing that hasn’t been dropping, in fact, going up, is collective track takeout (supers and other exotics with the higher rates are now available in just about every race and have attracted a higher percentage of total pool money).

Now if racing was thinking with a scientific mindset, they would tweak the thing they have control of, the takeout, and they should be doing it in a desperate manner as well. By the looks of it, revenues from alternative gaming will eventually start to decline and may go away altogether. A good scientist, doesn’t just think of the past and present either, they think of the future.

But the horse racing industry doesn’t seem that interested in researching evidence, or acting on evidence. Maybe part of the problem is that the center of the horse racing is Kentucky, the home of the Creationist Museum, a place where scientific evidence is an invention of the Devil.

Handicappers, on the other hand, look like Einsteins compared to the rest of the industry, as most everyday player uses a very scientific approach to picking winners.

If horse racing took a more scientific approach to both drugs and pricing, the game would be growing in leaps and bounds. It is after all a great game. The controversy is in regard to how it is managed.

Like with those who deny evolution, there seems to be a willful ignorance (see California for example) that plagues horses and not only is it standing in the way of progress, but it is actually causing a regression today.

BTW, please no comments about how evolution is hooey. There is no controversy amongst scientists. And if you are an anti-evolutionist or someone who believes the earth is less than 10,000 years old, no need to tell me about it, but if you want to really know what science knows, have a look at Potholer54′s Made Easy Series. It is a wonderful educational tool.

The Lasix debate is going strong right now as the Feds in the States are looking to ban race day drugs. The prevailing viewpoint is that drugs do not belong in athletes, and that competition should pit natural talent against natural talent.

Horse racing has always had a seedy side to it. From the use of cocaine at the turn of the last Century to the designer drugs of today, the idea of improving a horse’s performance artificially to cash a bet or grab purse money is simply a reality in the game. The question is how prevalent it is.

From many a horseman’s perspective, if it isn’t on a banned list and/or it isn’t tested for, it is legal. And stretching that a bit for some operations, if you can beat a test with little risk, why not go for it?

Horseplayers seem to be in favor of not only banning race day drugs but all performance enhancers.

I’m really not sure why the Feds got involved. They had to have been nudged. Who nudged them? Certainly not an HBPA groups. And why Lasix, and not other drugs that are much more potent even if taken a few days out?

One can Google search forever and still not find definitive results when it comes to concluding whether Lasix is needed or not. In Europe and Hong Kong and other jurisdictions, race day Lasix is not allowed, and reportedly most horses do not train on Lasix. However, there isn’t much discussed about what they substitute, if anything, for Lasix, and what happens to most horses who are chronic bleeders. On the other side, most Horsemen in North America state emphatically that without Lasix, the percentage of horses who can not race anymore will be dramatically high.

PROS
1. Allegedly, around 5% of race horses most likely need Lasix in order to race. Again, this is a number that is speculated on. Prior to the legalization of Lasix, the amount of horses barred from racing was next to none. However, it is not known what percentage were retired or didn’t make it to the races by choice.

2. It levels the playing field. Because Lasix is known to have other enhancement qualities other than preventing EIPH (for instance, it is a bronchodilator, which means it helps all horses breathe better). So, it just isn’t fair that if a horse is a known bleeder that they should be the only horses to have the extra performance enhancements that Lasix gives a horse.
Another argument is that consistent use of Lasix causes less erratic form that could arise from heavy bleeding of a horse one race to mild bleeding the next race.
As a side note, when Lasix was first introduced, and only given to real bleeders, it turned out to be quite a handicapping angle. But now that virtually every horse in North America runs on Lasix, the first or second time angle means nothing.

3. If drugs are to be allowed, this is a cheap and powerful way to go.

4. The jury is out, but Lasix could have humane factors in reducing scar tissue by bleeders.

5. The controlled use of Lasix may prevent training outfits from experimenting and using other anti-bleeding medications that may even be more harmful to a horse’s system than Lasix allegedly is.

CONS
1. It is a performance enhancer. Anything that potentially makes a horse run faster while having the substance in them versus not having the substance in them, in an enhancer. The “running to its potential” line is a pretty weak argument. It doesn’t just help prevent bleeding, but also helps non bleeders breathe better, amongst other things as well.

2. It mask other drugs, and clouds tests. I know it, and you know it. Stop the nonsensical denial. Simply Google “Pass a marijuana test lasix”

Lasix: Take an 80 milligram dose of prescription diuretic lasix (furosemide). Prescription diuretics are the most potent. Some over the counter diuretics will color your urine blue and should be avoided. WARNING! -Diuretics can be harmful to people with kidney problems, pregnant women, and diabetics.-

Super Trainers are one of the biggest turn offs horse racing has to offer today. Not only for Horseplayers, but for honest Horsemen and as importantly owners and potential new owners. It is hard to get new blood in the game if you are consistently running for third money. Masking other performance enhancing drugs doesn’t help the game at all. Outfits that experiment with drug concoctions leads to erratic performances, and this leads to lack of confidence from Horseplayers.

3. Lasix is a potent diuretic. The side effects are many. The fact that a horse needs an electrolyte jug after competition to replace vital fluids the horse lost from racing on Lasix is cause enough to question using the drug. It might even border on cruelty.

4. The North American breed is allegedly weaker because the best breeding candidates who have been successful on the track raced with Lasix. Would they still be running the same times without Lasix? Probably not in many cases because of the performance enhancement Lasix offers, whether the top horses were helped by bleeding less or breathing better, there is a good likelihood that a heredity weakness is being passed on today versus the pre-Lasix days. And there is the possibility that if Lasix wasn’t used, we might see a whole different cast of top horses every year, probably running slightly slower final times collectively, but a much heartier group.

5. There is a correlation between horses starts per year and per life and Lasix usage over the past 15-20 years. Horse are making 2 less starts a year these days on average.
Whether it is a direct correlation, the jury is out again. It could be a combination of Lasix and training strategies, the higher use of other drugs (legal and illegal alike), and/or the the higher frequency of detailing (tapping of joints, etc.) that is being used by more elite and/or high percentage outfits (where horses have the kitchen sink put in them for every infrequent race).

6. Lasix is not used race day in jurisdictions outside Canada and the USA. They seem to get along fine without it. It wasn’t used in North America prior to the 80′s either, and horse racing seemed to get along fine without it.

7. The elimination of Lasix and other drugs would most likely make it cheaper to own horses (providing they don’t really need Lasix to race). Horses may run relatively slower collectively by a few ticks, but that really isn’t relevant at all. Cutting the costs of horse ownership would most likely lead to owners having bigger stables, and it would entice newbie owners to enter the game.

CONCLUSION

Horse racing would probably get along just fine if Lasix were banned on race day. However, Lasix seems to be the whipping boy of a more severe problem, and that is the other performance enhancing drugs and treatments (like EPO, DPO, synthetic venoms, and ITPP) that are being used by cheaters. Getting rid of race day Lasix is only a tiny step in leveling the playing field for bettors and honest horsemen.
Solving the problem requires making an exact list of treatments and allowable drugs, as well as severely fining anyone caught using drugs or treatments not on the list.

ADVERTISEMENT

Horse racing isn’t about to lower takeout collectively anytime soon. At least most astute Horseplayers have some options:

HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM offers Horseplayers industry high Player Reward Bonuses. No minimums. Start getting bonuses immediately.

SPECIAL BONUS OFFER TO NEW MEMBERS AT HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM

BET $80 GET $40 DEPOSITED INTO YOUR ACCOUNT

Wager at least $80 in total, win or lose, and you will get $40 deposited into your account. You will also start receiving industry high Player Reward Bonuses daily as soon as you start wagering. To earn the $40 Bonus you must wager at least $80 in total within 7 days of making your initial deposit.

CLICK TO OPEN A FREE ACCOUNT

Why Horseplayersbet.com?:

* Industry High Player Reward Bonuses added to your account daily
* User friendly betting interface makes wagering easy
* FREE LIVE VIDEOS
* FREE RACE REPLAYS
* Wager Online or by Phone
* Great customer service
* 100% Parimutuel
* Bet cancellation capabilities
* No membership or wagering fees
* Green Dot & PINpocket fees rebated (deposits of $120 or more)
* No fees on debit/credit card deposits by phone of $100 or more
* Online credit card funding (4.5% fee rebated on deposits of $100 or more)

HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM, “WHERE HORSEPLAYERS COME FIRST.” SIGN UP TODAY AND SEE WHY HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM IS ONE OF THE FASTEST GROWING US BASED ADWS

Player Reward Bonuses could be the difference to you as to whether you win in the long run playing horses, or lose. Sure, you still need skill and luck as well to succeed, at HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM at least you have a fighting chance. And one thing is for sure, your money will last longer because of the PLAYER REWARD BONUSES you receive.

IT MUST BE THE ECONOMY
Well, that is the excuse that seems to be prevalent over in California, as the leaders over there look to blame everything except their disastrous decision to hike takeout at the beginning of the year.

It is estimated that handle at California A tracks will be down a whopping $400,000 million.

The horsemen are getting a bigger cut of the betting, so the big losers are the tracks. I doubt the tracks will be able to hold out much longer before drastic action will have to occur….either that or they can rescind the takeout hikes.

Meanwhile, it is hard to blame the economy when tracks like Will Rogers Down increased their handle by 92% during their meet that just ended. They increased their exposure, that was big, but they also maintained decent field size. Another big thing is that they sell their signal relatively lower than the average track. This is very appealing to bettors who get rebates. And with tracks in California going the opposite direction, tracks like Will Rogers win out from price sensitive bettors.

Going forward, Will Rogers (it just doesn’t sound like the name of a racetrack) should think of a name change, maybe The Great Race Place or something like that.

Also, if it is the economy, how did Woodbine pull off a record handle last Sunday on Queen’s Plate Day?

Economies go up and down, and I’m sure horse racing has been affected the last two years. However, when the economy was on the rise, horse racing handle was still trending downward.

With Horseplayers able to play just about anytime from just about anywhere, more than anytime ever, why is horse racing dying?

It is the price of the product (the takeout).

Two things at play here:

Horse racing is a thinking person’s gamble. It has a steep learning curve too. How do you attract a thinking person to get motivated to learn the game when there are no visible winners?

Secondly, horse racing is still gambling. I believe every gambler, no matter how outwardly emotional or how Spock like they are, get some degree of highs when handicapping and or placing a bet and or watching a race and or cashing a bet.

The more races they handicap, the more bets they will place, the more races they will watch, and the more bets they will cash.

All the above is predicated on churn. Churn goes up, the lower the takeout, and goes down, the higher the takeout.

Keeping the gambler in the game is paramount in growing the game.

Racing right now is focusing on lowering takeout on low churn wagers (Pick 4′s, 5′s, and 6′s). This is just a competition for the existing Horseplayer. It does nothing to grow the game.

Lower the takeout on WPS, doubles, exactors, and even triactors and dime supers, and then we might start to see actual growth.

Must Read Post Over At Pull The Pocket: Why Is Optimal Takeout So Hard To Understand
If you are a racing exec or in a Horseman’s Group, read this article.

One more thing. Why are so many Horseman’s Groups involved in how much a track can charge in way of takeout? Does Royale tell Walmart what price they have to sell toilet paper at?