Somebody told me an incredible stat the other day. In 2010-11, the track with the most racing days in Southern California will be Hollywood Park. Not only will Hollywood Park race the most days in these two years, it will be open more days than Santa Anita and Del Mar combined. Santa Anita and Del Mar are supposed to be the going concerns, and Hollywood Park, for several years now, has been telling the world that it wants out of the racing game. If a developer came along, claiming to know something that nobody else knows and growing greenbacks out of both ears, Hollywood Park would dump racing in a heartbeat. The two remaining tracks would dice up all those dates, and then the sport would really show us how more-is-less works.
Santa Anita was already in trouble by the time Stronach took over late in 1998. The Strub family, stung by some outside business investments, had had enough, and the new owners were an investment group that was all over the map. They didn't have a clue about race tracks, and must have kissed the hem of Frank Stronach's frock when he walked through the door. These were strange times for race tracks vis-a-vis casinos. R.D. Hubbard, who ran Hollywood Park, knew that you couldn't thrive if you had one without the other, and so did Tom Meeker, of Churchill Downs, but they were in the minority, and even considered heretics. Meeker came to California, made a speech about the symbiosis of slot machines and horse betting, and the gasps could be hard all the way to Louisville. In the Q & A that followed, pinning Meeker to the stake was the mood that prevailed.
Churchill Downs, of course, ended up owning Hollywood Park, but I never got the feeling that their hearts were in it. California governors came and went, all of them enamored with the Indians and their gambling endeavors, none of them taking the time to give racing a tumble. Off-track betting, just as it had years before in New York, arrived with a bad business plan, if there was a plan at all, and now the on-track revenue in California has been cannibalized, all the way down to the bone. Californians will elect another governor in a few weeks. We will either get a woman who's richer than Croesus, or a retread from the long ago. Racing doesn't appear to have a path to either candidate's door.
A year ago, attending the Oak Tree meeting at Santa Anita was nirvana. They were preparing to host their second straight Breeders' Cup, hopes were high and the place was festooned with banners. This year, Oak Tree, forced to relocate to Hollywood Park, doesn't have a Breeders' Cup and doesn't have a prayer. Interest is at low ebb. Crowds are abysmal, except the day Zenyatta ran. The Oak Tree meet will run right into Hollywood Park's regular fall meet, and if you think you've seen small crowds, stick around.
The racing board isn't even meeting this month, an odd thing for an industry in peril. For the horseplayers around Christmas, a lump of coal in their stocking--a significant increase in the takeout. By then the glow from the movie about Secretariat will be long gone. There's more high-profile exposure for racing to come--"Luck," an HBO series about denizens of the track. Dustin Hoffman and Nick Nolte head the cast. Those who have seen a rough cut of the first episode give it high marks. "It's enormously accessible to non-horseracing people," said Michael Lombardo, programming president of HBO. But "Luck," filmed mostly at Santa Anita, will not debut until September of 2011. Just in time to give the next Oak Tree-at-Hollywood Park season a boost.
17 Oct 2010 at 12:28 pm | #
Bill:
The picture will continue to fade and get even worse as time passes!! Also, you failed to give credit to Shapiro’s CRAP TRACK MANDATE and Brackpool’s SCREW THE BETTORS PLAN (HIGHER TAKEOUT) because both of these clowns have significantly contibuted to the demise of quality horseracing in CA!!!
17 Oct 2010 at 02:55 pm | #
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0dhJNxCxhk&feature=fvw
With apologies to Lennon & McCartney
I think I’m gonna be mad
I think it’s today, yeah
The California Horse Racing Board
Got carried away
They’re giving takeout a raise
They’re giving takeout a ra-ha-aise
They’re giving takeout a raise
And they don’t care
They said that entertaining me
Was costing too much, yeah
Owners could never agree
To stop spending so much
They’re using takeout to ride
They’re using takeout to stem the tide
They’re using takeout to hide
Incompetence
I don’t know why they’re skippin’ the meeting
They must have thought twice
About having fumbled the ball
Before they come together again
They ought to think right
And allow rebates to all
They said that getting a waiver
Should help the consumer, yeah
But their concern for the customer
Was only a rumor
They’re using takeout to run
They’re using takeout to stop the fun
They’re using takeout to pun
Ish casual bettors
It doesn’t matter who’s the next governor
Arnold’s appointees
Are already confirmed
Instead of disrespecting horseplayers
They ought to think twice
They ought to do right by them
They said by raising the purses
Racing would get better, yeah
But races without more horses
Won’t get more from each bettor
They’re raising takeout to fly
They’re raising takeout already too high
They’re raising takeout to buy
Owner loyalty
C H R B don’t care
C H R B don’t care
C H R B don’t care
17 Oct 2010 at 05:48 pm | #
Indulto, you’ve missed your calling. Have anything for the B side?
17 Oct 2010 at 06:39 pm | #
Just what I was thinking Bill! Singalong commentary: What’s next? Good job all around.
JP
18 Oct 2010 at 01:03 am | #
BC,
Thanks. I do have a flip side, but I haven’t found the appropriate tune for it yet.
That now infamous CHRB meeting, whose back-to-back spin–doctoring you already debunked in these pages, was – at the time—partially recounted in a press release. To really appreciate the arrogance and hypocrisy involved, however, one must read the transcript: (http://www.chrb.ca.gov/board_meeting_transcripts/TRANSCRIPT 09-23-10.pdf). This may just be the gift that keeps on giving to activist horseplayers trying to keep passion for collective action alive while recruiting new blood to boil.
Those concerned and intrepid enough to actually peruse this 174-page document will find the fanfare begins on page 51 with the discussion of Item 7. Brackpool’s “interpretation” of the takeout bill appears on pages 53-55 with Israel’s “version” following on pages 57-59 where he first deploys the term “consumer.” Word of the actual signing is introduced on page 62, but no reported cheering is reflected. Still the timing may cause some readers to experience an aura of orchestration.
I was reminded of the phrase “impaled on one’s own words.” To MID representatives presenting the benefits of waiving the restriction on the common ownership of Santa Anita, Golden gate, and XpressBet, Brackpool complained on page 109, ”… to me there’s not enough in here about what’s good for the sport and what’s good for the public. As far as I understand it, Counsel, our requirement here is to find that this is in the public interest to do this.” On page 110 Israel jumped in, “And before you start, I’d like to give you a little crib sheet on what you need to improve on. Nowhere does the phrase public interest appear. Nowhere does the word workers appear. Nowhere does the word customer or consumer appear. …”
Well, the consumer was also mentioned on pages 74, 77, 81, 110, 111, 114-116, and 123. The word “customer” appeared on pages 110, 113, and 136. The problem is that any CHRB “concern” for this “cherished” group seems to be practiced only for the purpose of putting pressure on others. If Lady Justice weren’t blind, she’d demand the tables be turned, and the Brackpool-Israel tag-team tactics be applied to those two takeout spin-meisters as well. It’s hard to view them as the “protectors of the betting public” defined in the CHRB mission statement (http://www.chrb.ca.gov/mission_statement.htm).
The “racing experience” is indeed a varied one that can and should be enjoyed on many levels, but attempting to transfer the bulk of the collective burden of horse-owning to horse-bettors in the name of entertainment is neither amusing nor justifiable. Horseplayers must become the public that is interested enough to define and to benefit from whatever should be considered the “public interest.”
18 Oct 2010 at 01:41 am | #
JP,
I’m glad you enjoyed the “singalong commentary” and thanks for that label. Rarely do inspiration and clarity of mind arrive simultaneously at my keyboard.
BC’s “Get Out the Lifeboats” piece drew a huge response including one from Cary Fotias who offered an interesting statistic —[I assume he was referring to pools large enough to attract whales] “ … 5% of us who account for over 90% of handle …” His figures suggest that California pools have already degenerated into arenas dedicated to whale-on-whale competition. If that’s true, no boycott of California tracks could be successful without whales, and once they become involved, recreational bettors may be irrelevant regardless of their number.
So what’s in it for the “little guy?” Why should an out-of-state resident be concerned, especially one who’s capable of getting at least some relief from the already excessive takeout—through rebates significantly lower than those to whales? Why shouldn’t California residents simply accept their being singled-out to pay the highest wagering costs of anyone playing California tracks both before and after the latest increase?
Because they really SHOULDN’T and DON’T HAVE TO put up with being forced to play the game they’ve loved for decades at a competitive disadvantage with respect to other bettors. One doesn’t need to bet every day to develop the passion for the game that makes it a life-long pastime, Those at the helm must treat all their customers with respect and return their loyalty.
In my opinion, we should be clamoring to frame the primary objective of any forthcoming collective action as leveling the playing field for all bettors. We should take advantage of Fotias’s estimate that we comprise 95% of all bettors playing the largest handle California tracks and establish influence commensurate with our number. Surely we are past the point where merely rescinding the takeout increase is a sufficient response to our combined efforts. Perhaps we should consider advocacy of automatic lowering of takeout (and raising of purses) independently by individual pool according to level of handle attained in order to reward popular situations wherever and whenever they occur. We need to send a message to both HANA and the CHRB that recreational players are no less important than professional players, and that we expect our interests to be represented at both.
18 Oct 2010 at 10:13 am | #
I love old movies. Over the weekend I watched “How To Marry A Millionaire” in which Lauren Bacall had a line about the “3rd at Belmont.” She didn’t say “3rd race at Belmont Park.” She didn’t refer to horses. She didn’t have to. Whoever wrote the line knew in 1953 that everyone watching would “get” it.
It occurred to me how frequent references to racetracks used to be be in the movies. It’s hard to imagine now that there was a time when most Americans knew quite a lot about races and racetracks.
From time to time, as the Zenyatta express has kept rolling, I’ve mentioned her to people in my office. Not one had heard of her.
I’m not sure what this has to do with your well-made points about the destruction of California racing by a confederacy of dunces. It’s just just sad that the great, great sport of Thoroughbred horseracing has been so diminished by year after year of one-bad-decision-after-another mismanagement.
18 Oct 2010 at 11:39 am | #
Noelle, I’ve thought about one of your points as well. I listen to Sirius satellite radio a lot, especially the channel that has the old-time radio shows. Jack Benny, Fred Allen, Fibber & Molly, Red Skelton, that sort of stuff. And Bob Hope. There was even a Hope show that was based, fictitiously I suppose, on the cast’s visit to Santa Anita the previous weekend. A Bing Crosby show without a reference to his racing stable would be a rare show indeed. And Life of Riley, with William Bendix. In one show, Riley thinks he has a rival, and is talking to his conscience. He scoffs that all the other guy does is read the Form all the time. “All he knows is Citation,” Riley says. “Don’t make fun of Citation, Riley,” the conscience says. “He’s made over a half-million dollars. . . And he’s only three years old.” Now, if you’d hear any of these references in a TV script, you’d fall off the chair. Out of sight, out of mind--more of a cliche than a proverb, but there’s much truth to it still.
18 Oct 2010 at 12:48 pm | #
I did hear a Secretariat joke in a Seinfeld rerun - but of course Seinfeld went off the air years ago and anyway I bet Secretariat is the ONLY horse Seinfeld would assume his audience might know.
18 Oct 2010 at 01:35 pm | #
Mr. C -
Consider me a bit disappointed to see Frank Stronach get bashed (again). Instead the CHRB and the TOC are far more responsible for California’s predicament than is Mr. Stronach.
Even the departure of Churchill Downs Inc. from California which has led to the destruction of Bay Meadows and the perennial limbo of Hollywood Park is far more significant than anything Frank Stronach has done.
I hope all media members get that part right in the future. Thanks.
24 Oct 2010 at 02:39 pm | #
Bill, let’s face, the horse racing lobby doesn’t have the guns (big money) to counter the Indian Casinos. Nor does their lobby or leadership or whatever you want to call it have the vision. Track executives aren’t horseplayers and are quardened off in their lavish offices away from the bettors. The takeout increase is a total slap in the face to bettors in Calif and accross the country. IT WILL BE THE FINAL STRAW. You see, track management, these days we have this thing called “The Internet”. It’s not the 1970’s anymore when you had a monopoly on gambling. Now we can “comunicate” to one another. If you want to keep running the show like it was 40 years ago, go ahead. By May when Aqueduct gets its slots and steals away Bejarano, Rosario and Baffert and any good horses left, will the answer be: “I know, let’s raise the takeout again, so we can compensate for the lost revenue do to the last takeout!” What you guys need is the leadership that will: Take on the Indian Casinos and leadership that will understand and stand with your remaining bettors. OTHERWISE YOU WILL BE “EASED” OUT OF THE PICTURE! THINK!