Friday, January 21, 2011
Penny Chenery Gets It, Now It’s the Industry’s Turn
ELMONT, NY, January 20, 2011--It may be a romantic notion but I love the idea that as I read about what Penny Chenery has in mind for racing fans, I was sitting in the shadows of a racetrack that was the backdrop for perhaps the greatest equine performance ever made.
That, of course, would be June 9, 1973, when a defending Horse of the Year champion opened an insurmountable lead as he moved like a tremendous machine en route to a 31-length victory in a Belmont Stakes run in 2:24, 12-clipping the competition to death.
Secretariat is still widely regarded as the most popular Thoroughbred, certainly in the modern era, until a female behemoth named Zenyatta came along to challenge that legend as she boosted attendance and television ratings wherever and whenever she appeared in her Horse of the Year season.
The Horse of the Year Eclipse for her achievements on the track certainly was far from a no-brainer, narrowly tasting defeat for the first time in her career at the hooves of Blame, the best handicap male to race in America last year. But as to which Thoroughbred is more popular, that issue never was up for debate.
In that spirit, Ms. Chenery, owner of Secretariat, has created the Secretariat Vox Populi
Award to honor the most popular Thoroughbred of any racing season based on a vote of racing fans, the first time any racing person or organization formally recognized one extremely well-liked racehorse by the racing public. Fittingly, the newly created award will go to Zenyatta.
“Horse racing already has established avenues to award outstanding accomplishments and we certainly should honor superior performance,” Chenery said in a press release. “But achievement can be measured in many ways.”
“Fans occasionally feel a disconnect when the horses who most impacted [them] are not recognized through traditional equine awards. The industry is long overdue in annually acknowledging the star horse who brings the most excitement and attention to the sport. It is my hope that the Secretariat Vox Populi
Award will achieve that purpose.”
Chenery selected this year’s recipient but future plans call for a committee of distinguished racing personalities and industry representatives to choose the winner in each successive via a national online vote.
The idea of allowing fans to participate via their incorporation into the Eclipse Award process is certainly not a new one, but it’s always been viewed askance by some members of the three Eclipse voting groups, the National Turf Writers and Broadcasters, NTRA racing secretaries and Equibase chart callers, and Daily Racing Form staffers. The current voters fear that Eclipse Award recognition would devolve into a popularity contest, especially in the absence of stated guideline qualifications.
I have been against fan participation in the Eclipse process for just that reason. But I no longer feel that way, now believing time has come for fans to have a meaningful Horse of the Year voice upon the establishment of guidelines to monitor a secure voting process.
“Fans should play a greater part (in voting for Horse of the Year), and we need to figure a way to make that possible,” said Jerry Moss, owner of Horse of the Year Zenyatta, in an NTRA teleconference in advance of Monday‘s Horse of the Year announcement.
Moss is not the only practitioner who believes time has come to get fans more involved in the sport. An informal poll was conducted via telephone in advance of this post by HorseRaceInsider with seven horsemen. Every one was in favor of fan participation, but also agreed there should be some qualifying standards.
The Cartier Awards honoring European champions uses a formula that includes a point system based on performance in stakes races, points from votes cast by journalists, and Racing Post and Daily Telegraph readers on a 40-40-20 pro rated basis.
Whether that’s the best method is open to debate. But certainly some objective standard allowing fans to participate as a fourth group in the Horse of the Year Eclipse Award process should be required. Some measure should be put in place that helps assure the quality of fan opinion and a fail-safe that eliminates multiple ballots.
The industry is learning, not without some pain, that fans and horseplayers are demanding that they have a voice and have been expressing their displeasure with the status quo via boycotting tracks they deem fan unfriendly, and are supporting those which take measures to improve the lot of the customer.
Compared to that situation, getting fans more actively involved in the inner workings of Horse of the Year should by easy. If racing’s older demographic is allowed to participate in the process, it might be easier to get their children attracted to, and involved in, the game. Certainly couldn’t hurt, and it’s painless.
Online voters should be made to register before being allowed to vote. But this, too, needs to be a painless, one that doesn’t give the appearance of some marketing trick used to compiling a mailing list. This is about giving, not getting.
There have been proposals as to how best involve the voters. Distributing ballots at racetracks, simulcast venues and ADW account holders certainly would seem to assure the legitimacy of the fan voting bloc, but is limiting compared to online convenience.
As for online registration, the guess is only those who care will take the time to register. Seems unlikely a person would register just to prank the system. As for the criteria used by the three voting blocks in place, the system works fine. I’m opposed to a selection committee defining criteria for industry professionals to use.
And, please, no half measures. Allow fans to be a meaningful part of the Horse of the Year process. As for the notion of a “People’s Choice Award” in lieu of real fan participation, we now have one of those in place, courtesy of Secretariat and his owner.
Written by John Pricci
Friday, January 14, 2011
SARATOGA SPRINGS, NY, January 13, 2011--It just might come to pass that the first NTRA teleconference of the year will never be surpassed given the amount of respect, drama and determination on display Thursday afternoon.
This one was for all the marbles, but it should never be confused with a Ryan vs. Belichick or Cromartie vs. Brady scenario. The urgency in advance of Monday’s announcement was palpable, the level of respect for the opponent worthy of what’s at stake, the 2010 Horse of the Year title.
For Team Zenyatta and Team Blame, it’s a matter of their place in the annals of the Thoroughbred sport. Neither seemed willing to settle for being the one the pushed their rival to the max.
No one ever remembers the team that finishes second in the Super Bowl.
Representing Zenyatta was owner Jerry Moss, who clearly hasn’t forgotten last year’s slight. “It would be bad [if she lost], that’s all I can say,” Moss said.
“With everything she’s accomplished, it’s ridiculous if she didn’t win one Horse of the Year title.
“I think she’s done enough. She got beat fair and square, but it was a narrow loss. She won five Grade 1’s, was great for racing, and brought 19 straight wins into the Breeders‘ Cup.”
Later, Al Stall Jr. made a counterpoint: “My whole life I read about what horses did on the racetrack. I think Blame did enough, winning the Foster, Whitney and Breeders’ Cup. I’m a strength of schedule, head-to-head kind of guy.”
Each makes a compelling case.
Given that Zenyatta is the sentimental favorite, would Stall feel badly if Blame were named Horse of the Year? “No, not at all. He means as much to us as she means to them.”
“We’re racing people. We feel we deserve it as long as the horse performed on the racetrack, which he did.”
On that, counterpoint Moss: “Two years ago, the horse that finished fourth in the Classic was Horse of the Year. Last year, we won the Classic and the Horse of the Year didn’t even run.”
Throughout the program, as it has been this winter and fall, the definition of Horse of the Year remained a lively topic. Whatever happens, Moss believes that it wouldn't adversely affect Zenyatta’s legacy.
“I believe she’ll go down as perhaps the greatest mare in history. Nineteen wins without a defeat is quite an accomplishment. All are welcome to try [to duplicate it].”
Moss spoke about his definition of the title and the role of the fans: “Who was the most important race horse in the U.S.? Who’s the horse that people look for and come out to see?
“She was the story this year. Last year, we won the Super Bowl and didn’t take home the trophy.”
Moss continued, acknowledging Zenyatta‘s followers: “The fans have been fantastic and have to be acknowledged. They’re a very important part of the process and they should be.”
The results of HRI’s own Horse of the Year poll was one-sided; the battle between these protem champions on Monday night is expected to be a real horse race. That's the buzz, anyway.
As this was written, 179 ballots were cast on HorseRaceInsider.com. Zenyatta received 155 first place votes, 86.5% of responders. Blame garnered 17 votes, or 9.5%. The other 4% went to Goldikova.
Some argue that this disparity, compared to the tight race that exists among Eclipse voters, is the reason fan voting shouldn’t be allowed, that too much of the public’s opinions are rife with emotional subjectivity.
Of course, it just could be that Thoroughbred racing fans are as passionate about all horses as horse people who tend to their own stock.
Since the game could not exist without the participation of fans/horseplayers, perhaps time has come to allow them to be part of the process, at minimum on a pro forma basis.
“I believe fans should have a greater place in this,” said Moss. “Let the fans in. You’ve got to pay attention to your customers. You get into one of these [tough decisions], it gets subjective.
“If [qualifications for Horse of the Year] were a little more cut and dry, it wouldn’t have to be as political, taking out ads [and the like].”
Another teleconference storyline dealt with the acrimonious discourse surrounding the last two Horse of the Year campaigns, Rachel Alexandra vs. Zenyatta last year and continuing in 2010 with Blame, due to the disparate accomplishments of the two horses.
“Whoever would disrespect Blame might not have the knowledge of how this game works,” offered Stall.
“We’ll be happy for Zenyatta if she wins. But I backed off reading those [negative] things on the blogs. That’s just the way [the Internet] is.
And the backlash that would develop should Zenyatta again be denied the honor?
“I can guarantee that if Blame wins Horse of the Year, there will be all kinds of talk on the Internet. I can handle that.
“We’re not going to be embarrassed. We concentrated on winning races all year and the voting is out of our control. We’ll go down [to Miami] and have a good time.”
Not likely the case for Team Zenyatta. “If we didn’t win the big prize,” Moss said, “we’d be disappointed.”
It wouldn’t be the first time.
Written by John Pricci
Thursday, January 06, 2011
“It’s Enough to Make You Sick; Is It Enough to Make You Stop?
SPRINGFIELD, MASSACHUSETTS, January 6, 2011--I was stuck a few dollars at The Rock simulcasts on Tuesday. Alive in a chalky late double at Parx, I decided to handicap the Calder finale, literally, as Gulfstream Park would open the next day.
It was a nondescript field of seven older filly maiden claimers going two turns. Al’s Angel, with hot riding Paco Lopez, opened at 1-2, the rest of the field nowhere in the wagering, so I took a closer look.
There was no doubt that Al’s Angel was a deserving favorite. Her last performance figure over the same surface towered over the competition.
The bad news, however, is that she was entered back on only nine days rest, and the lifetime best figure set her up for a regression. It was time to dig deeper.
Gimmeamink was running consistent figures, albeit slower, and figured to run at least as well. At 6-1 on the tote, I had found an overlay. A $20 win bet would make me a winner for the day--no matter how the Parx late double turned out.
I made my wager, rejoined my friends at the table. One didn’t play, the other had the favorite and Gimmeamink in a boxed exacta. There was 1 minute on the tote board as the track feed turned to the horses being loaded. “They’re off.”
Under a well timed move by apprentice Jose Alvarez, Gimmeamink rushed passed the favorite, who got on my filly but didn't go on with it.
Sometimes things go as planned, Gimmeamink drew off nicely as Al’s Angel held second. Smiling faces all around.
Until the prices were posted. Gimmeamink paid $8.00 to win. Not even breakage on the $8 mutuel!
“Wait a minute,” said Phil. “That horse was 9-1 as they were running.” I didn’t see that myself, but I know the filly was 8-1 on the tote with less than a minute to post.
I’ve been around the game long enough not to be a sore winner. I hate it when players tell me how much they won but should have been more; if this, and if the other thing.
The chalky late double won and I was able to maximize the play, taking two price shots to complete cold exactas, using the ALL button to block, essentially making a trifecta saver. Got lucky when my 25-1 chance finished third to a 19-1 shot.
Harissa won the race, the Sleigh Ride Stakes, paying $3. The trifecta returned $119.50 for $1 despite the usurious Parx trifecta takeout of 30 percent. But I was livid, and I'm not being a sore winner. It made me think about the declining wagering trends, and the admonition at the top when cigarette advertising was first banned on television.
With apologies to master thief Frank, the James Caan character in “Thief,” the 1981 movie marking the directorial film debut of Michael Mann, I’ve got some A-B-C-type information for Santa Anita President George Haines.
Haines beleves that betting on horses is about picking winners, not takeout, and that only the top fraction of one percent is concerned about the rake. Well, Mr. Haines, I would not have bet on Gimmeamink at 3-1. I couldn't afford to.
Most good bets lose, Mr. Haines, that’s why you must “get paid” when you win. Players can’t afford to take bad prices in a difficult risk-reward, zero-sum game.
Fortunately, however, the industry is coming to the rescue. The Thoroughbred Racing Associations, in a recent press release, announced that its board “approved to support development…” of a tote security system…
To “ensure the close of betting throughout the parimutuel network” and the dissemination of real-time decimal odds to “participating host racetracks” for display…”Upon implementation within 18-24 months…”
If this is supposed to be the model for private sector efficiency then government might as well take over everything.
“Support development?” “Participating host racetracks?” “Implementation within 18-24 months?”
What’s the rush?
I don’t mean to be flippant, truly don’t. And I applaud the development. But I’m not even sure if “participating racetracks” only means TRA member tracks. Certainly hope not.
This is not a new problem. The first time I became acutely aware was when Monarchos won the 2001 Florida Derby, the odds going from 9-2 entering the backstretch to 5-2 entering the final turn.
This process should be further along by now--and it could take up to two more years? Wonder what the national handle figures will trend like then?
Then I shouldn’t worry. Everyone knows that further contraction is inevitable, and with further contraction will come greater efficiency. But don’t take my word for that.
“It seems that this year’s wagering drop was much more a function of the decline in racing days--compared to 2009 when wagering declined 9.8% and race days were down only 2.6%,” said Alex Waldrop, President and CEO of the National Thoroughbred Racing Associations.
You mean you don’t understand? Then simply follow this: Wagering on U. S. races in 2010 declined by 7.33%, from $12.3-million to $11.4 million. Race days, meanwhile, declined by 7.75%, from 5,933 days to 5,473.
Hell, we’re practically making money? Time to invoke Larry the Liquidator again, the second time this month. That's Larry, who just loves “Other People’s Money”:
“We're not broke. And you know the surest way to go broke? Keep getting an increasing share of a shrinking market. Down the tubes. Slow but sure.”
I see Netflix in Mr. Waldrop’s future; I'm willing to pay for the rental.
In the meanwhile, perhaps racing managers who have not yet read Ed DeRosa’s instructive tutorial blog on the Thoroughbred Times website re: the debilitating effects of takeout, should take note.
Written by John Pricci