And local horseplayers are still outraged by the takeout increase on exotic wagers imposed on them in 2010 by the Thoroughbred Owners of California (TOC) and the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB).
Indeed, 2012 handle at Santa Anita of $144,272,332 was not only lower than 2011 and 2010 handle at Churchill Downs of $161,512,867 and $173,857,697, respectively, but also lower than 2009 and 2008 handle at “synthetic” Santa Anita, which totaled $153,271,176 and $155,740,328, respectively.
But even dyed-in-the-wool boycotters like me can’t deny the decrease was due to the damper that Sandy put on travel, Internet access and disposable income, not to mention the disposition of the residents of those two horseplayer havens, the normally unflappable types in New York and New Jersey.
According to Daily Racing Form, however, "…other factors seemed to be at play, including a large drop in field sizes for the five races restricted to 2-year-olds. In addition, betting on the Saturday’s Breeders’ Cup races started off strongly – stronger, in fact, than betting last year – but by the time the day’s last race, the Classic, had rolled around for its first prime-time appearance, wagering on the races had fallen off precipitously compared to last year’s final slate of races."
I suspect perhaps another female could have influenced the proceedings by her absence -- the former Godiva On Dude, Chantal Sutherland—blamed by baffled Bob for his charge’s Pacific Classic placing behind the premier Polytrack performer, Dullahan.
The Classic mount on Game On Dude went to Baffert’s ballyhooed #1, Rafael Bejarano, remembered for another disappointment at the distance; Rail Trip in the infamous Hollywood Gold Crawl. The resultant Eastern exile of that synthetic specialist was a blow to California racing, a blemish on its owner’s otherwise superlative image.
Whether it was the best that replaced the beauty, or the beast itself, the ride was ugly. The job of Baffert’s go-to jockey seems about as secure as Santa Anita’s present CEO. (See David Flores, Victor Espinoza or Martin Garcia).
It’s been a tough year for the nationally-ranked trainer and TOC board member, who survived a heart attack in Dubai just in time only to finish second in all the agonizing legs of the Triple Crown.
Still, the money rolls in because he is also among other California leading horsemen who are the overwhelming beneficiaries of the takeout increase, which is designated for purses only. Interestingly, those crafty ADW folks also managed to get a share--but not the tracks.
Voters were ready to anoint the Dude Horse of the Year had he won but his loss seems to have slid support over to the Mile winner, Wise Dan, in my opinion a horse that ducked the Classic field.
Despite the favorite’s fizzle in the finale, and the failure of a few of the front-runners to fuel the early pace, Fort Larned still fired off a 117 Beyer – fastest of the fifteen Cup races.
Though Dullahan had run a competitive 10 furlongs on dirt in the Derby, and won with a 118 Beyer for the distance at Del Mar, he opted for the Turf. Also absent was the 2011 Derby winner, Animal Kingdom, who nearly upset Wise Dan on Saturday and had conquered the Classic runner-up, Mucho Macho Man, on multiple occasions.
In case no one gave it a second thought, Rail Trip eventually returned to trainer Ron Ellis and jockey Jose Valdivia this year. I finally had ended my boycott of California tracks to bet him at Del Mar in the San Diego Handicap. I also enjoyed betting him in the Dirt Mile where he finished second again in another crawl.
(Fortunately, my predilection for boxing and wheeling exactas continues to bear fruit).
I warmed up for Saturday’s program by girl-cotting Filly Friday, now formerly filly Friday, and have for several seasons. As a survivor of the Northridge Earthquake of the early '90s that flattened some apartment buildings and made others uninhabitable-- while barely felt just 40 minutes away in Arcadia.
Instead, I found myself contemplating human hurricanes, such as Reuben Carter and Andrew Cuomo, known for their knock outs of old-school prize-fighters and old-boy board directors, respectively.
And, too, there was the Lasix issue to ponder. Four fewer freshmen competed on Saturday, down from 13 in 2011. Even with a two million-dollar purse and an Eclipse championship on the line, a juvenile event without performance enhancers or an automatic Kentucky Derby berth found owners and trainers of talented two-year-olds turning away from the Breeders’ Cup and tilting toward Louisville.
Time will tell whether Churchill Downs CDI will succeed in taking back the top day in Thoroughbred racing from Breeders’ Cup Saturday.
So, what are the most likely paths to the Derby now?
The first and second-place finishers in the seven primary preps earning 100 and 50 points, respectively, could fill up 12 to 14 stalls. Those and the eight secondary prep winners earning 50 points could account for all 20 starters.
However, it seems more likely that some horses will also qualify with combinations of primary thirds and secondary seconds and less likely that a horse will qualify without an in-the-money finish in one of the "sweet fifteen.”
By isolating, promoting, and televising those events - and focusing on their contestants - the Derby with its undercard will regain and secure the highest-handle, best-attended, most-watched status.
But all this is much easier than pondering what a 2013 Breeders’ Cup completely off Lasix would look like.



07 Nov 2012 at 11:41 pm | #
Indulto, baby, how could you leave out Trinniberg, the fastest horse in the Milky Way galaxy,if you loved Lumber Loser? Love ya babe!!!!
TTT
08 Nov 2012 at 12:31 am | #
Not sure about I, but if only The Lumber Guy had gotten up…
08 Nov 2012 at 01:48 am | #
T,
Sometimes you just fall in love, and of course, love is blind.
Tle Lumber Guy was my single in mutiple horizontal wagers, including some with both Little Mike and Animal Kingdom. Had to go deep in the Classic and the Turf.
No complaints,though, the verticals in the classic stood me up straight again.
08 Nov 2012 at 08:48 pm | #
Men, Lumber Guy was my top number, and Trinniberg was my third best not too far off from Lumber Lad, but at those odds, I fall in love fast, especially when they are fast, and those rumors about a fast track and all. I try not to think too much, it hurts my brain, just ensure they give me what I’m due when I go to the window.
TTT
08 Nov 2012 at 09:07 pm | #
Good for you, I. I underrated Fort Larned--my bad--and after he made me well in Whitney, too!
T, you know--it’s about price.
08 Nov 2012 at 10:00 pm | #
I would speculate that the Classic result was largely a function of speed and trips.
The winner had a favorble post and was the main inside speed; saved ground and controlled the pace.
The runner-up lost ground to the winner on both turns, starting from a poor outside post.
Wish they had Trakus to see just how much.
They say each extra path is a length to 1-1/2 lengths. So MMM ran perhaps 20-30 extra feet.
TTT way to go!
08 Nov 2012 at 11:04 pm | #
Denny,
You are right on. Fort Larned ran 6663 feet while Muchomachoman ran 6694 feet
09 Nov 2012 at 12:18 am | #
I...I...I… Now what? How about some power?
The Breeders Cup happenned? The election went on?
Day eleven here on Strong Island. No electricity, no gasoline, no hot water, no heat, no telephone, no TV, no internet and no racing form.
Where’s the Governor? The same Governor that can save NYRA?!?!?
The beat goes on…
I’ve seen the lights go out on Broadway.
I saw the Empire State laid low.
The storm went on beyond the Palisades.
Out in The Rockaways, the oceans overflowed.
We held a concert out in Brooklyn,
To watch the island bridges blow.
We shut our power down.
Staten Island drowned.
But we went right on with the show.
I’ve seen the lights go out on Broadway.
I saw the ruins at my feet.
You know we almost didn’t notice this.
You see it all the time on 42nd Street.
They burned the churches up in Harlem,
Like in that Spanish Civil War.
The flames were everywhere.
But no one really cared.
It always burned up there before.
I’ve seen the lights go out on Broadway.
I watched the mighty skyline fall.
The boats were waiting at the Battery.
The union went on strike, they never sailed at all.
They sent a carrier up from Norfolk,
And picked the Yankees up for free.
They said that Queens could stay.
They blew the Bronx away.
They sank Manhattan out at sea.
You know those lights were bright on Broadway.
But that was so many years ago.
Before we all moved down to Florida,
Before the mafia took over Mexico.
There are not many who remember.
They say a handful still survive.
To tell the world about,
The way the lights went out.
To keep the memory alive.
09 Nov 2012 at 02:00 am | #
Cat,
Among the The human hurricanes I contemplated was the heartbreaker from Pail Evan’s musical masterpiece:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-1inz-04I4
09 Nov 2012 at 02:48 pm | #
Daily Racing Form’s Dave Litfin comments on so-called ‘speed bias’ at the Breeders’ Cup:
“According to the Racing Flow Figures, where ratings of -150 or less indicate a speed bias and ratings of +150 or more are anti-speed, Santa Anita’s dirt track was somewhat speed favoring (-116) on Friday but less so (-65) on Saturday.
It’s hard to argue with that assessment after a close inspection of Saturday’s charts. Politicallycorrect overcame a deficit of 7 1/2 lengths in the Damascus. Groupie Doll raced wide throughout and was sixth early before hitting her best stride. The 2-3-4 finishers in the Dirt Mile were 8-5-9 after a half-mile. The 2-3-4 finishers in the Juvenile were 7-9-4 early, debunking the theory that a slow start automatically spelled doom.”
09 Nov 2012 at 04:27 pm | #
I live 5 miles from Santa Anita and have formerly bet on horse racing for 40 years. I didn’t even go to the Breeders’ Cup. I no longer want to invest my money at a 20% reduction.
If you bet just $10 a race, after a hundred races, you’d, on average, be down $200. If you bet $100 a race, you’d be down $2,000.
Horse racing has left me. I still checked the results to see how the horses did. I know one thing, I still have much more money in my wallet by not going.
09 Nov 2012 at 05:20 pm | #
Folks,
What Markinsac said is a sad fact, both in terms of how tskeout eats you alive and how many loyal fans and readers like Mark felt compelled to leave the game, tired of rhetoric and studies, followed by inaction.
We’re going to try some kind of grassroots ideas here at HRI. Stay tuned; then, please, let us know what you think.
Thanks all.
JP
09 Nov 2012 at 05:33 pm | #
#11: You could apply your final comment to the the thousands of patrons at racetracks in the fall of 1965, 1975, 1985, 1995, 2005.
Aah takeout, responsible for Thoroughbred’s decline in popularity; how do you rationalize its affect if the takeout were 10% on a win ticket or an exacta when another huge variable comes into play? Example: You like a plodder at five minutes to post showing odds of 6-1, or $14.00; or an exacta listed at five minutes to post as paying $76. You bet, and at post time the plodder is now 3-1, and the exacta will now pay $35. Is takeout to blame for this sudden drop in payoffs?
Is takeout really the culprit, or your inability to pick winners?
09 Nov 2012 at 09:43 pm | #
wmc,
It isn’t just takeout by itself, but the disparity in takeout applied to individual players that effectively subsidizes a tiny minority of bettors at the expense of the vast majority.
I don’t deny that takeout makes no difference if one never cashes a ticket, or that there aren’t an exceptional few who can make money without a rebate, but both are also tiny minorities.
Most players that leave the game are those who cash tickets, but whose payoffs have become too small to enable them to keep playing on a regular basis. Those who aren’t profitable, but who don’t leave, usually wind up curtailing their participation.
The fact that most players aren’t profitable in the long run is no justification for tilting the playing field in favor of those who can show a profit when given an unfair advantage.
Ours is a game where spectators are competitors, which includes those who put on the show as well as those who possess information and funding not available to others. It should not be easy to beat, but everyone should at least play by the same rules.
09 Nov 2012 at 10:46 pm | #
Day 12 after hurricane Sandy, and millions of people in the Metropolitan area still have no power. Thousands have no shelter or a hot meal to eat. Lifetime possessions washed away in a matter of hours.
Why not have Cigar Mile Saturday at Aqueduct serve as a benefit for the victims and an experiment on handle takeout? How about trying a reduced takeout rate of 10% for that day? Let’s see how much more handle can be raised! Give 5% of the takeout to the Red Cross. Might bring back players that have left the game. Hello anyone home?
The beat goes on…
Grab your ticket and your suitcase
Thunder’s rolling down the tracks
You don’t know where you’re goin’
But you know you won’t be back
Darlin’ if you’re weary
Lay your head upon my chest
We’ll take what we can carry
And we’ll leave the rest
Big Wheels rolling through fields
Where sunlight streams
Meet me in a land of hope and dreams....
09 Nov 2012 at 11:48 pm | #
Day 12 and I just drive through parts of the North Shore, missing a downed power line by about 10 feet, made many 4-corner stops with dark traffic lights, and still enough closed gas stations to put a strainon those with power AND gas.
...And there is NO GAS SHORTAGE.
LIPA was told to upgraded their communications and make improvements to the grid after Hurricane Irene. They did NOT. Those executives should be in jail with the Wall St. credit swappers and prior administrations that start undeclared wars.
A Islander W/O power called into a radio sports talker on Friday, today, to say he asked a power crew outside his house when they would begin work on a downed power line. They were told by the local power company they were not allowed to touch LIPA equipment.
So, how’s that profit-motive thing working out for the anti-government types I wonder?
Hang in there Cat, the best to you and your family.
10 Nov 2012 at 12:16 am | #
#15: Who’s John Galt? Who is Indulto? Who are these guys (Butch and Sundance)?
I realize that you are upset, disturbed, and chagrined knowing that ‘whales’ receive preferable treatment via rebates; why shouldn’t they? Walmart, Target, et cetera are able to purchase inventory at a lower price than a mom and pop store. Quantity discounts exist when the money involved in purchasing inventory is significantly greater - makes sense to me, and millions of others.
Of course, lowering takeout will put more money is bettors’ pockets WHO PICK WINNERS. Unfortunately takeout is not the reason Thoroughbred racing is declining in popularity. The reason? Picking winners is simply much harder than gambling at a casino. If bettors were cashing on a regular basis, takeout would be of little concern. BTW, I still stand by my opinion that the majority of bettors on-track and off-track have no idea what the takeout rate is on their wagers.
What I find interesting is the now tired phrase ‘lowering takeout will allow bettors to stay in the game longer’; this ole saw, to me, is utterly ridiculous!
Will lowering takeout to 10% make it easier for you to pick a winner? Until a bettor picks a winner, takeout is irrelevant.
And, if I were a ‘whale’ I would expect a rebate - simply business.
Ya all seem to be forgetting that odds actually water down the argument for reducing takeout; as I wrote in a previous, mundane, pedestrian comment
when your plug drops from 6-1 to 3-1, how has takeout become a relevant factor?
Foster time, then UConn basketball from Germany, then UConn football from Hartford (where I am headed in a few minutes).
10 Nov 2012 at 12:56 am | #
Preach,
LIPA is the government. They were created when LILCO was forced out of business and became a patronage mill for Long Island. Just saying. You around tomorrow?
Dick
12 Nov 2012 at 08:22 pm | #
The following is a point-by-point response to #17, wmcorrow’s, attempt to trivialize concerns regarding takeout and rebates:
”… I realize that you are upset, disturbed, and chagrined knowing that ‘whales’ receive preferable treatment via rebates; why shouldn’t they? Walmart, Target, et cetera are able to purchase inventory at a lower price than a mom and pop store. Quantity discounts exist when the money involved in purchasing inventory is significantly greater - makes sense to me, and millions of others.”
Why don’t casino games pay off at a higher rate to individuals who bet significantly larger amounts than the average player of those games?
I doubt there are millions of others who agree with you that making a bet is the equivalent of a wholesale or retail transaction in which money is exchanged for goods or services which retain some value to all final purchasers.
Neither is the value of even a restricted “frequent flyer” ticket equivalent to a non-promotional fare, both of which get the passenger to their desired destination—and generally at the same time—as opposed to one getting there and the other not.
Nor should a rebate be confused with “comps” to large bettors whose presence enhances the host’s attractiveness to other bettors when they win, and contribute to profit when they lose.
”… takeout is not the reason Thoroughbred racing is declining in popularity. The reason? Picking winners is simply much harder than gambling at a casino. If bettors were cashing on a regular basis, takeout would be of little concern. BTW, I still stand by my opinion that the majority of bettors on-track and off-track have no idea what the takeout rate is on their wagers.
What I find interesting is the now tired phrase ‘lowering takeout will allow bettors to stay in the game longer’; this ole saw, to me, is utterly ridiculous!”
Even if a player is not aware of exactly what the takeout rates are on his wagers, he knows when he can no longer continue playing, and how long it took him to reach that point.
”Will lowering takeout to 10% make it easier for you to pick a winner? Until a bettor picks a winner, takeout is irrelevant.”
Actually, unrebated players cashing frequently with straight wagers on low-priced horses generally suffer the most in comparison with rebated players making the same bets.
I have yet to converse with an unrebated player who doesn’t believe his bottom line on exotic wagers would improve if he were able to purchase 10% in additional combinations—either replicating existing combinations or adding new ones—at no effective additional cost.
”And, if I were a ‘whale’ I would expect a rebate - simply business.”
Why should an enterprise in the entertainment business whose overall income is for the most part derived from an overwhelming majority of recreational bettors, be permitted to subsidize a few who make a living at it?
Why should that majority of customers and handle be subjected to excessive takeout so that independent bet-taking agents with less overhead can split their gross profit with their own customers to thereby increase their own net?
“Ya all seem to be forgetting that odds actually water down the argument for reducing takeout; as I wrote in a previous, mundane, pedestrian comment when your plug drops from 6-1 to 3-1, how has takeout become a relevant factor? …”
Some players weigh payoff potential against performance predictability; others don’t. In either case, however, the reductions in pari-mutuel payouts resulting from excessive takeout continues taking its cumulative toll on the bankrolls of unrebated bettors, regardless of the final odds on individual events.