Is horse racing really reeling or merely being re-defined by the culture? The “New Normal” has been described by several economists, academicians and social theorists as an existence where success and prosperity won’t come easily. Occasionally, consumers indulge like their parents in products and services that make them feel special. Regardless, those who have lived through the past 60 years, in which 30 were bountiful, may be the last to have experienced what it is to have what you want when you want.
Who’s to blame for the current slump? That’s a question without a clear answer. By and large, the sport’s in the doldrums because the people involved are no different from the population in general. A sense of entitlement, greed and neglect are themes that surface everywhere.
Still, a market correction appears to have started in which the number of horses foaled, the prices they bring and the race days available for them have thinned to the point of permission. The amount of money available for purses has fallen, and will fall even more. Once the level-set’s set, the sport should flourish again - at least on terms that compare well to the present. Here are the half-dozen reasons it should.
Secondly, the emergence of a new ruling class creates hope that the old guard has run its course. Suddenly, as if a tornado struck, scores of young people with fresh ideas and some clout have emerged in the Breeders’ Cup Ltd., National Thoroughbred Racing Association and racetracks. If a Tea Party could sweep clean half the seats in the Clubhouse boxes of Saratoga and Keeneland and replace their inhabitants, those in waiting are ready to step in and take over. Whenever business enables optimism, innovation and experimentation, it flourishes. Wherever caution, status quo, personal politics and tradition lurk, it has stagnated. When obstructionists to horse racing’s progress pass away, evaporate or become drooling fools (a time that is closer than anyone thinks), their replacements will be an improvement.
There is no clearer example of the next generation at work than the realm of technology. The Web’s abuzz with horse racing sites, social networking opportunities and Internet newspapers. Hobbyists that have made horse racing writing an avocation have been good for the sport, widening the dialogue and giving voice to the unrepresented. Lacking money to advertise, the industry will concentrate its efforts for reaching new customers with exchange betting, tap and bet programs, smart phone applications and augmented reality. Although it is centuries old, the sport was designed for the 21st century.
The advance of technology will be helpful for leveraging one of the industry’s strengths – the popularity of horse racing in other countries. Sooner or later, all USA horse racing interests will stop being xenophobic. Horse racing in Australia, England, Ireland, Hong Kong, Japan and, to a certain extent, France, remain viable mainstream curiosities. Thoroughbred breeders have long understood the importance of foreign markets. But racetracks have remained provincial, acting as if their businesses are local. America is used to being first, biggest, best. But the new normal won’t permit that. The sport here is destined to become part of a greater, healthier whole instead of a struggling stand-alone.
For the first time in over a decade, the country’s number one market, New York, is prepared to behave like number one. When millions of Aqueduct casino dollars are added to NYRA’s revenue stream, horse racing’s largest wagering concession will raise purses to dizzying heights, creating, if you will, what would amount to a national horse racing center - its three courses the true place for champions. Bad government, unfriendly legislation, an untenable operating structure and a lack of financial resources have hampered business in the country’s financial capital. Having the Empire State strong in horse racing and breeding again relieves a worry that the product serves only small market interests.
Lastly, the sport’s number two attraction, the Breeders’ Cup, continues on a path of modernization. In recent years, after decades of hibernation, the Breeders’ Cup’s agenda has advanced to two days, 14 races, $185 million in wagering, a “Win and You’re In” qualifying strategy and primetime television viewing. Had the organization’s plan to appoint Santa Anita as a five-year site not been killed by a stubborn landlord, the end-of-year fixture would had a chance to blossom in the country’s entertainment center where the November weather is always perfect. Moreover, the move would have created an East, West and Kentucky approach to showcasing the sport in three distinct and important geographic areas. Talk continues that the possibility of the Breeders’ Cup buying a racecourse persists. Wouldn’t that be a grand development?
It may be that only a smattering of HorseRaceInsider.com readers will believe that a renaissance is possible. That’s understandable. Few people can imagine something that doesn’t exist in their experience. The themes presented herein are seldom expressed in the open for fear that accountability will follow. But that doesn’t mean they’re not real.
Return to HorseRaceInsider.com each morning Wednesday through Saturday as Vic Zast files daily reports from the Breeders’ Cup in Louisville. Go to the Vic Zast blog titled “FastWords.”


01 Nov 2010 at 07:28 am | #
Dear Mr. Zast:
Will purses really be raised at NYRA (there, I said it, NYRA) tracks to “dizzying heights”? Forgive me for my pessimism in this regard, and for my use of a pseudonym; they are vindictive as hell, but you know that. I can say what I feel, I don’t have a press pass to protect. The NYRA, with very few exceptions, has always conducted themselves in the most niggardly fashion with respect to what is good for the sport, the horsemen, and the wagering public. Instead of taking the position of “how much can we give back and still survive,” they have always given back the bare minimum, part of the “we’re the only game in town” mentality. Someone should have told them they were no longer the only game in town 15 years ago or more. Strong corporations are able to survive in bad economic times, because they have treated their employees (the horsemen) and clients (the wagering public) fairly when times were good, building their business to be strong enough to ride out an economic storm. Certainly, when the machines are put in place, purses will be raised, but given the NYRA’s past performance record, even with these new-found funds, the nirvana you portray will just not happen.
Don T.
New York Railbird Association
01 Nov 2010 at 08:14 am | #
Don:
The purses are already high since the Genting go ahead to build the VLT’s. Just look at Sunday’s card ,where the usual 31K 2 yr old maiden claimer was now going for 62K
01 Nov 2010 at 09:14 am | #
At the end of the day more must participate tomorrow than do today. Aside from the subsidy dynamics (slots, etc.), purses are a function of handle (why the hell don’t we call it “sales”?) and that, of course, extends from the amount of individuals playing. Yes, the Romanovs are almost gone and attrition will take of the rest but, from what I’ve seen, the Bolsheviks aren’t exactly hard boots. They’re suits who like the southeast portion of P&L;’s. I agree there is passionate and articulate expression on the blogs and such but they don’t seem to be betting much. This business was built on people betting and the threshold of risk exhibited by today’s fans doesn’t seem to match earlier generations. I’d like to throw in with you Mr. Zask but, unless racing can somehow create new revenue streams, I see the game becoming more and more boutique.
01 Nov 2010 at 09:50 am | #
Fred, I hope you are right. Hope springs eternal.
01 Nov 2010 at 12:55 pm | #
Thought provoking, per usual, Vic. Good job.
David, you need to know that I consider it my patriotic duty to wager every day!
But to your point, it’s why the game NEEDS MORE FRACTIONAL WAGERING NOW!
You can’t punish neophytes while they learn the ropes. And for the rank and file regulars, who are in as many as two, three or more pools per race, the industry needs to provide these fans leverage.
It’s about the betting, stupids!
JP
01 Nov 2010 at 03:35 pm | #
no class+burn out bets+high takeout=reduction in handle/attendance
the ruling class has been gone for a long time. technology might help a few gamblers while accelerating the burn-out syndrome but does nothing for the sport aspect of the game that is necessary to understand the reason for pedigree enhancement; competition; distance capability.
the class of the sport aspect attracts women. no class erodes on track attendance a la Belmont Park.
women own 51% of horses in training and attend racing 14%!
03 Nov 2010 at 08:59 pm | #
Vic, I wish your comments about the younger people ready to take over from the rich old farts was based in reality, because that would be wonderful. But from where I sit, I don’t see a lot of young people that want to put the time in to learn about the game. A friend of mine that commutes to work told me that it dawned on her recently that every body 50 and over reads a newspaper and those under 50 are texting on their cell phones. This is a very accurate observation and points out the single biggest problem our sport has in gaining a foothold with the youth. They have a very short attention span. This fundamental difference is generational. If somebody can’t focus long enough to learn to read a racing form, how in the hell are they going to become interested in playing the races?
03 Nov 2010 at 09:11 pm | #
As long as the Industry charges for PP’s and a 26% takeout nothing will change.
03 Nov 2010 at 10:08 pm | #
When Man o’ War ran against Sir Barton in a match race, they charged for programs and the takeout was 22.40 percent. Next question?
03 Nov 2010 at 11:19 pm | #
When Man o’ War ran there was no TV,Internet,cable,cell phone.....Wow,you’re really up to date maybe you can get a job with the CHRB.
04 Nov 2010 at 05:59 am | #
Steve, I’ve heard gamblers complain about takeout percentages and they have some good talking points; but free PPs? Why should this be an entitlement? Are you against paying people that perform a valuable service? Free parking I can see. But I don’t see free programs or PPs.
04 Nov 2010 at 07:28 am | #
Mr. Irwin, when Man O War was competing, gambling was also illegal (so they tell me), horse racing was it. Steve, with respect to free parking, programs or even a pay toilet, these incidentals do not keep the masses away, but I agree that the tracks do little to accomodate the fans who are vital to the game. The takeout is the real issue, and just because the takeout was an exhorbitant 22.40 percent, and the public was being taken advantage of when there was no other form of gambling, does not make it advantageous for growth. Low takeout, high handle. You open up a can of worms with me when you mention past performances. With respect to past performances, I do believe that on-track, they should provide the day’s Daily Racing Form program for say $1.00, which contains only the races for the track you are attending. The casual fan is being treated unfairly, when the Daily Racing Form continues to charge persons for 5 racetracks in say the Eastern Edition at the track, when a fan may only be interested in the track they are attending. Also, the Daily Racing Form has done everything it can to make it difficult to read the paper, by reducing print size and paper size; and what have they done for the serious fan? As far as I’m concerned, they too are the only game in town with respect to past performances (the best product), and a serious player must buy two (2) $6 dollar papers to cover all tracks in the country; this is just wrong, and a marketing ploy. The prices to download should be much lower, as the Form obviously has much lower overhead. I could understand if they offered one paper with the tracks with the highest purse money, and another with the secondary tracks, instead they mix them up in order to maximize profits, forcing you to buy 2 papers. And so life goes on, business as usual, after all, we are just a bunch of degenerate gamblers in the eyes of those persons who make these marketing decisions, and nearly all of them are simply trying to maximize immediate profits, without thinking long-term, and caring nothing of the wagering public, without which there would be no horse racing.
Top Turf Teddy
Pari-mutuel Investment Analyst
04 Nov 2010 at 07:55 am | #
Teddy, you make me giggle. Gambling was illegal and horse racing was the only game in town. My man, this was at the start of Prohibition, which made drinking illegal. Did that stop people from drinking? During this same era, casinos and underground gambling (not to mention bookie parlours) flourished. The ability for bookies to be able to take 22.40 percent was based on competition among bookies, of which there were tons available to compete for the betting dollar. Is the takeout too high today? Of course it is, but don’t blame the racetracks; blame politicians, whose States deserve nothing from racing because they offer nothing. It is just another tax. Are you going to stop buying gasoline because the State adds on taxes? I don’t think so. The main reason people choose to stop gambling on horse racing is not because of the takeout, in my opinion, it is because a) the fields are too small and b) they don’t trust the integrity of the game.
04 Nov 2010 at 08:27 am | #
Dear Mr. Irwin, say what? I’m glad you are giggling, so am I, to keep from crying, you obviously miss the entire point. Have never believed in communistic viewpoints or methods, and your blurb above certainly will not convince me. It is not I who am naive, sir, the bookies still exist today, even stronger than before, they have moved out of the country and are jeopardizing the game. From your statement about blaming racetracks, you are obviously oblivious to the fact that the racetracks and the politicians are one and the same. With your kind of attitude, we should let the take rise to say 50%; after all it is for our own good, right, we will keep wagering anyway, and I’m all for gasoline taxes, perhaps we can get it up to $10.00 per gallon, we won’t stop buying it will we? The only thing you are correct about is that I won’t stop drinking.
04 Nov 2010 at 08:56 am | #
Well, we have drinking, drugs, sex and gambling as the Quadruple Crown of indulgences. Everybody has their favorite and everybody makes their own decisions. I am all for the takeout being reduced, but gamblers are kvetching and will continue to do so, but never take any meaningful stand on the issue.
04 Nov 2010 at 03:06 pm | #
I would like nothing better than for handle in Horse racing to increase 500%.Charging people to buy pp’s so they can bet is just stupid,It’s holding the Industry back.
Lower the take,let’s get the stock guy’s let’s get the Football guy’s.Let’s grow this game!