General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 435 comments are related to the topic:
The funding crisis in horseracing
The funding crisis in horseracing
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 435
|
By:
GM - Brighton is an interesting and unpretentious course with good viewing and you really must make the effort to see what's going on, if only once. I don't dress up for racing, I just keep it smart and comfortable like I would anywhere else. Those rules are probably just there to allow them to stop any idiots.
I'm originally a South Londoner and the only horses I ever saw as a child belonged to the rag and bone man or the police on their way to local Millwall matches. I watched the spectacle of the grand national and I discovered the world of horse racing in betting shops, then tv. It was a world apart until a girlfriend convinced me to go racing and my first trip was to Fontwell (and the crazy figure-8 chase track). It was a special day and that was me hooked. Sandown came next as that was only a train ride and the Tingle Creek remains a favourite to this day (and it's only when you walk accross the course that you feel the ground and realise the climb of the hill to the finish). I can't say I like the bustle of big crowds and I would rather enjoy a trip to a small track like Brighton (beware sea mist) or Folkestone (basic but charming). Hated the derby, Ascot and Goodwood, while Longchamp was an oddity. Now I'm on the Dorset coast and Salisbury is a delightful small track, while Newbury and Wincanton provide my NH interest. Cheltenham is the one course I feel I'm due a visit. Some years back I found the courage to visit a point at Godstone (now that is a trip to another world) and that really blew me away because it's racing without all the paraphernalia. I spent several years visiting the point courses in Sussex and Kent and now I've discovered the pure joy of Larkhill. It is damn cold sometimes, but the racing is just what it should be: jockey & horse racing against one another for the sheer joy of it. Sandown - that's a complicated answer you gave. That's part of the problem. Racing is a lot of (different) things to a lot of people. |
|
By:
There's only one real solution to the funding crisis and that's a Tote monopoly. The bookmakers keep telling everyone that racing is not important to their business anymore - call their bluff then.
There should be Tote terminals in newsagents (just like the Lottery) and you should be able to bet via the red button whilst watching attheraces on Freeview as well as Sky. No more laying horses to lose and no more crooked gambles. |
|
By:
Whatever you do REM don't try to get into Salisbury members with shorts. Bob Cooper was doing his anchor man there one day and said he seen a man knocked back wearing shorts and he later seen him stoating about members wearing golf waterproofs in searing heat. Racing for change - what a joke.
|
|
By:
Like the PMU in France?
|
|
By:
Any sort of monopoly would spell the end for UK racing as we know it.
|
|
By:
Think that could already be on the cards, Banks. I cant see anything else now but a slow decline. Racing missed its chance in the sixties and eighties to get the sport on a sound footing(thats when it was popular) via off course betting and SIS, they didnt take it.
|
|
By:
I agree zilzal1. I think the problem now is that many invlved in the sport are in denial about what the future may hold for racing and are therefore trying to maintain the status quo rather than looking to create the best possible scenario for the future.
Once there is general acceptance that the best possible scenario for the future looks very different to the current set up we will have a chance to stabilise things. |
|
By:
As a punter, I don't want to see a monopoly. A lot of the fun would disappear (taking a price, trading, in-running).
A monopoly would not be good for punters, bookies or exchanges but it would be good for racing. I see no other long-term option. Everything else is just tinkering with a flawed funding model. |
|
By:
If the sport cannot find a way to stand on its own two (four?) legs through internal and external funding - from benefactors not levys - then there is no hope for it.
It cannot reley on funding from third-party revenue. Reduce the calendar make each event more special. Live within their means. |
|
By:
The other problem may well be that horseracing is simply no longer an attractive day out for many people – one race every half-hour may simply be inadequate entertainment for today’s Adderrall munching, attention deficit disorder generation.
The 40 hands per hour poker rooms are emptying as people rush to play 60 hph online across multiple tables, or 1200 hph 4-tabling Rush. People sit and play multiple slots because they simply can’t lose their money fast enough at just one. Racecourses need to find something for people to do between races other than just eat and drink (expensively), why are their no racecourses (that I know of) that have a proper casino on-site? |
|
By:
zilzal1
The huge amount of problems racing has are summed up by your last statement. Short-sighted behaviour has caused a vicious circle where, as just one example, tracks look at attacting drinkers rather than punters. There are similar instances throughout the sport where the practise of looking for a quick buck has wrecked the game long-term. The dogs went the same way years ago and is now alomst finished. I fear the horses are going the same way and there is not a solution because society has changed so much since the turn of the decade and the popularisation of the Internet. As a life-long punter I have almost given up on the horses and prefer betting on football. I am almost 50 and I'd wager there are many like me. As for the younger generations, well they have never even bet on the horses so they are not going to begin now. On the eve of the big race at Ascot, I fear the halycon days of Henry Cecil and Steve Cauthen (Reference Point and others) from the glory betting days of my 20's are gone forever and that makes me sad. The buzz at the big meetings in the 80's and 90's will never be repeated and I miss them. Again, I will not be alone. Your user names suggests you may be in the same bracket! I wish I had the solution to arrest the decline but I'd make my biggest bet of all that there simply isn't one.... |
|
By:
The only thing that can save racing is THE BIG SOCIETY (IMO).
|
|
By:
For a start racing should be family friendly, we don't want the boozers and drunks. We want families with young children. It should cost £5 (kids and pensioners go free) to get in any racecourse, only one enclosure and no dress code. Food and drink costs should be reasonable for a family to pay. There should be ex-jockey's offering free tours of the course and explaining to newcomers how to bet. There should be bouncy castles, face painting and occasional concerts.
During the week, when the kids are at school, we should be attracting the racing enthusiast. We want quality racing - two meetings a day, no all-weather, no summer jumping, no evening meetings. We want to see quality horses who are consistent. I don't ever want to see a horse winning with form figures of 0000. So how do the racecourses fund all this. FOBT's on course could rake in the cash or a casino at the bigger tracks (racino). But the core funding should come from a Tote monopoly. If less racing means many smaller tracks are closed and many horses are retired, so be it. |
|
By:
Maybe artie could supply his bouncy castle free as his contribution to THE BIG SOCIETY.
|
|
By:
I mean come on, Bouncy castles, FOBT, monopoly tote. What other sport thinks sticking these into venues is a good idea that will solve its problems.
The sport itself is the center piece, horse racing just isnt that interesting. |
|
By:
Racing's a dinosaur. Can you believe the BBC main evening news in 1976 actually carried a report on, and showed the finish of, the Prince of Wales stakes? Here's a bit of it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHAvr-G5DHo&feature=related Can you imagine that nowadays? Racing only survives in its present form because of the betting on it, but there are now just too many other easy-to-understand betting opportunities. The arrival of the internet changed everything. Racing has had its day and is in permanent decline, imo, and no amount of 'change' will alter that fact. I suppose time will tell whether I'm right or wrong, but like The Knight said above, I decided last year not to wait around any longer to find out. |
|
By:
British racing is Manchester Citeh. If Rag Ed pull out its finnish
|
|
By:
fbsdjf The problem with 'family friendly' (as Las Vegas discovered in the 90's) is that kids are expensive and a lot of the parents' disposable income is devoted to their upbringing. They may turn up in their droves, but they won't be having £500 e/w.
|
|
By:
I first went racing when I was 13 years old with my parents. I had 50p on a 40/1 shot in the first race and it won. I've been hooked ever since. Don't underestimate how important it is to introduce children to racing.
I was hoping that the £500 e/w punters would go racing during the week when my hoped for quality racing is taking place. |
|
By:
I am of the same era(and age) The Knight
My 1st race meeting was Sandown where Bula beat Tingle Creek in a match and ive been to meetings in quite a few countries. If it came down to it, id rather a Tote Monopoly off course with on course bookmakers, rather than a slow death , id not benefit from it but in the bigger picture, id rather racing survived, even though i probably think its too late now, ive been involved in the industry, started Clerkwatch over inaccurate going descriptions, had a meeting with the BHA and can see the cracks getting wider-i hope im wrong |
|
By:
zilzal1
Oh yes...Tingle Creek at Sandown, sheer magic. The first meeting I went to and bet at (as opposed to tearing around collecting discarded bookie tickets) was the old 'Yellow Pages' day at Sandown on Whit Monday. That day itself sums up the decline in the game. It went through a variety of sponsors over the years but was my favourite day of the year - Henry VI Stakes, Brigadier Gerard Stakes, , Temple Stakes, Whitsun Cup etc. Then it was dispersed across two days, then the crowds dropped and now Sandown does not even race on Whit Monday anymore! Providing a good portion of the turnover is pumped back into racing (and not spread too thin) then I don't think it matters how money is bet off course but a Tote Monopoly is definitely one way. But, yes, I think it is too late now and the game is only going to survive in a very different format - one I suspect neither you nor I will like.. fbsdjg Agree with your post but let's not forget that introducing children to horse racing on its own is no good. It is the betting associated with it that counts and in today's mad society nobody would dare do anything like showing children how to bet, despite how I became red hot at maths through understanding odds. |
|
By:
Crikey, The Yellow Pages, brings back memories
Going back, The Tingle creek used to be called "The Black and White" if i remember rightly, then the "Mecca Bookmakers" for a couple of years, it was run as a handicap then. Sadly for younger people the age of discretion has vanished, i actually did the Board on a couple of times when i was a t School(i eventually got suspended for running a book on the 1974 Derby(which with Snow Knight winning was a skinner) but as youngsters then we took the consequences and didnt blame others. Same as having a drink, if you were around 16/17 looked around 18 and behaved yourself, you were served and realised the compliment. On "The racing forum" site, there was a article about Woodbine and how they reversed a downward trend by actually making it grown up and aiming for the market as a intellectual pursuit aimned at a male market of around 35 plus, giving reasons for bets and discussing angles of the race. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
Ascot crowd today was probably half Wed at Sandown when they had some band on even though through BF admission today was 1/2 price. Maybe it just felt a small crowd because of the size of the place but half the bars didn't bother to open. I swear that there are more places to get food at Sandown than there are at Ascot. Half the space inside is taken up with a floor to ceiling atrium so its impossible to find very much in the way of seating. Tomorrow you won't see a seat for love or money unless you want to spend £00's in the restaurant.
According to figs just published attendances are up 3% or so this year to June and of course a positive spin is being put on them. But, this just doesn't fit with BM's returns nor with word of mouth. The reason is that more courses have put on evenings like Wed at Sandown but these people are not gambling. Add in the fact that TV audiances for RAscot, Grand National etc are down and I think that the attendances give a false view of the situation. Fact is, just increasing attendances isn't enough, even if they crowd was a gambling crowd,becasue it represents such a small share of the total bet. Obviously, the more newbies can trial racing the more likely it is some will be hooked so I'm not knocking the musical evening approach. The racing church is very widely spread although I have to say that history suggests that it has always been popular with the upper classes and the lower classes and not the middle classes. Perhaps as we are all middle class now, this may be a factor in its appeal declining.The obvious action is therefore to appeal to the middle class market. I agree with earlier points made about the perception of racing. It amazes me that the old class uniform of trilbies for trainers/ownies and the traditional overcoats are still so widespread.And of course RAscot has its fancy dress. But that is no worse than loads of drunken yobs who booze to snooze, irrespective of what they look like. I like the suggestion that Woodbine is attempting to push the knowledge side of the game. Phil Bull was convinced that was what made racing so attractive and he was right. The "fun day" out push has its place but it should be limited. The thread is about the financial crisis and on that score I don't see a Tote monopoly as being an option ever now. The bookmakers lobby wouldn't allow it and anyway I don't believe that what punters want is a pool system now that they have been exposed to fixed odds and exchange betting. The first step is to change the terms of the negotiating process so that income can be maximised through the levy. . lh meeting has a value in betting terms and ought to be priced accordingly. R.Ascot and Cheltenham should carry a huge premium comapred to say Southwell or Ffos las. break it down and the sum of the parts will add up to more than one single global figure. It would introduce the market and that would lead to proper valuations. The subsidy each course then gets could be related to that valuation. |
|
By:
One other thing Sandown, do you think that the increasing assertiveness of women in the household mean that less men are attending fixtures and indeed betting offices????
|
|
By:
FAO General Midwinter
Re. racecourse casino http://www.arenaleisureplc.com/ongoing-developments/wolverhampton.html |
|
By:
Having every race available on TV every day cannot be helping. Why bother going to the course when you can sit at home with your feet up having all the bets you wish with a great view of the action and get a cup of tea for about a penny?
|
|
By:
zilzal1
Not sure I believe that women have become more assertive, but even if they have I don't see this as a reason why men are attending fewer fixtures/betting shops. But its an iteresting theory, anyway. The Visionary The role of the racing channels is interesting, too. I can see that it might be affecting attendances on the one hand but on the other you would think that it is having a positive effect on betting turnover. On balance, i would say that too much exposure is much better than too little. One thing for sure, the racing channels are preaching to the already converted - they are not widening the appeal. Racing has had a lot of main channel terrestial coverage over the years but despite that we have decling interest. terrestial TV cutting back isn't a positive factor, for sure. |
|
By:
The theme about getting people into the betting seems to be key. Certainly for the casual goer initially what is the point of horse racing if you are not having a bet? For other sports you are at least seeing a team and/or individuals you have heard of or have an interest in. Racing just does not have this appeal by default.
Unfortunately for racing the competition for the betting pound is immense - and not just from other sports these days as we know to well. Yet once you get into it the fascination of trying to solve the puzzle hooks many. Is it likely to hook the stay at home internet generation in a world of endless opportunities? Maybe the BHA (or whoever) should be pushing a game for playstations? Maybe one already exists......it's not a world I am in touch with  |
|
By:
Happy to kiss good riddance to horse racing especially flat racing as a betting medium, and that's speaking as hard core form student in the days of Reference Point, Triptych and Mtoto. Betting comes from people who have some sort of opinion, and some knowledge ( it doesn't have to be much ) of form. And owners have to be able to afford the game. And breeding has to mean something interesting.
On all counts horse racing authorities have failed to modernise, and they have had too many chances and over the decades have told the public to gtf, they can take their product as they find it. Well a lot of people are tunred off / bored by their product so they are off elsewhere now enjoying other activities. They could have abolished weight for age in champonship contests. They could have incentivised older horses to stay in training. They could have allowed AI, and unlimited matings - who are they to restrict the market and keep breeding costs high. They could publish the actual results of races for the first time instead of keeping race times secret and giving you the weird 'converted' results you see in the papers. They could use kilogrammes and meters. They could measure race distances with lasers and get rid of stupid distances of 5 furlongs 129 yards and three shillings. What's wrong with a 1 kilometer race. They could sack judges who call the wrong result. They could publish ratings based on what's been achieved, not what would have been achieved based on some sort of 'notional' age based development. They could by and sell horses using british money ( what is the point of a guinea ). Trying to understand horse-racing for a beginner is just too much of a headache - some of the concepts aren't even worth starting with for anyone born after 1960, when there's so many other hobbies out there. |
|
By:
Racing is facing a real fight for the gambling pound and its losing. I can't see why the powers that be can't recognise that this is the main reason behind the the funding crisis which the sport faces.I suppose that in a way RFC's attempt at pushing decimal odds was some indication that they do see it, but the reason why new gamblers are not betting on racing as much as earlier generations did, is not because of fractional odds being hard to understand. that is really patronising. Its all very well getting people to go racing but unless they bet in a bigger way than currently there will be no solution to the declining levy.
Racing's problem is that although they are dependent upon a betting levy they do not control the contact with the consumer, the punter. Only bookmakers and exchanges do that. And if they decide that it is in their best interests to encourage migration to other sports or FOBT's then there is very little that can be done unless racing goes over the heads of bookmakers/exchanges and directly engages with the punters. It must get across why betting on horses is superior to betting on anything else. Yet, no-one in power within racing seems to understand gambling. mr Roy certainly doesn't. they need to persuade someone like Barney C to contribute but I guess he is just too far the wrong side of the salt for the likes of racing's controllers. |
|
By:
Bongo
Your reply illustrates the problem. Not only is racing not attracting new punters it is losing established knowledgable players like yourself. |
|
By:
It must get across why betting on horses is superior to betting on anything else.
But, it plainly isnt. Its too hard for new comers, the man off the street has no hope of going through a claimer where you'll find no horse has ever won a race, where the first five in the betting in some handicap have form figures reading 926764, 989083 or 3-30484. And horse racing isnt exciting either (thats coming from someone who loves the sport  ) |
|
By:
Betting on horses is the worst never mind superior to other sports. Owners laying their own horses and getting a slap on wrist
 They are so immune they do it on your own accounts too. |
|
By:
Compare horse racing to exciting sports like tennis, darts, limited overs cricket - people watch that stuff without betting on it and are genuinely interested in who wins and the players. Would anyone watch Lingfield without a bet?
But look at how other sports have moved forward, T20 cricket, Prizefighter boxing, money in darts - the night out side too. Other sports like rugby world cup, soccer world cup, golf majors, tennis slams, already have the wow factor. What does horse racing have these days? And how has it improved like the others to become big, I read somewhere VC said it was the ONLY sport decreasing in turnover, sums up interest levels really. Add to the fact the "normal" man finds other sports easier to call. |
|
By:
I made this point on the HR forum but was pretty much ignored (Not entirely I must add)
Racing has no structure for those of us who don't follow it (I did once upon a time) The quality of the horses on offer is borderline irrelevant, but the question that comes up over and over again for 99% of races is "So, WHY are they racing" There's no reason for a horse to win a race other than the paltry prize money which we all know is less than you can make by some cleverly placed bets. Some kind of different structures... A series of races with a pool of , say, 40 horses where the top, say, ten after each horse has raced three times get into the final. or a race every day for a week where the top three reach a final. Maybe some more defined league system where horses can actually be relegated and promoted for better or worse prize pools. To watch a sport these days, analysing (or at least the illusion of analysing) form should be really easy. If I watch a horse come third in a qualifier that I think could have won, I'll watch the other qualifiers so I can judge "my" horse's chance in the final. I'll also know when it's next running as the final will have a predetermined date. I'm not saying these exact ideas are what is needed, but just a little structure with pre-defined fixtures (to some degree) is more attractive than random (or at least apparently random) races. |
|
By:
While T20 Cricket may be a turn off for traditional Cricket followers it's a massive success in the sense that the crowds come to see the actual Cricket, as opposed Concert racedays attracting an audience that come for the concert !
|
|
By:
I'm the sort who likes to bet when I feel I have good knowledge about the runners (in any sport). What horse racing lacks is a clear structure of how the sport works, and that's why I don't bet on it. For example I'll hear that a horse has won a race and that "it'll probably run in the Champion Hurdle next year". Why will it? A newcomer like me doesn't know why. As someone said earlier, they cater for those that know and not for those who may want to know. What's the progression for horses?
Does the jockey choose his mounts? Is he approached? If so, by the owner or the trainer? How is the winning prize fund of a race divided between connections of the horse? Knowing that helps to get a feel for how important it is to the owner/trainer/jockey, and hopefully thus a likelihood indicator that his horse (and the others...) may or may not be out "for a jog" as they say. Every sport has a competition which, at the end of its respective season, culminates in the meeting of the two greatest exponents of that sport/sporting discipline. Does horse racing? One of the biggest niggles for me is that I can't deduce how a horse will fare due to an increase or decrease in weights. I believe all horses should run carrying the same weight, and that time ratings should be used to 'promote' or 'demote' horses. For example, a horse able to complete a three-miler at Exeter in x minutes can qualify for Cheltenham, but a horse not able to complete a two-mile-four-furlonger at Doncaster in y minutes should not qualify. Courses would be graded in my world - ie Cheltenham as the Premier League, Newmarket as the Championship etc. Sorry if Newmarket isn't next in line as far as prestige is concerned - but I wouldn't know because it's not made explicit. Is there a grading of courses, either official or unofficial? So many questions, so little places that provide answers. Structure is king for any sport. Horse racing's seems skewed, complicated, and probably even arbitrary to some. I mean, horses meant to run, but then pulled out because the ground isn't 'right'? Well that's helpful. |
|
By:
I starting typing my post before yours was there, Lori. So I'm not alone. And we're just from a handful of people who've found a betting forum. Thousands more out there.
|
|
By:
The replies on this thread should be read and noted by RFC and anyone else who has racing's interests at heart. It's clear that other betting alternatives are more attractive because they are simpler to get involved with, may be more exciting to many, have fewer integrity issues, fewer insiders creaming off the profit and have some structure to the season, and may present more frequent opportunities to bet. I don't know if these can be countered, really.
When I got involved first with racing it was nearly 50 years ago. All you could bet on was horses and dogs. You couldn't even see the action only hear it. The world has moved on but racing hasn't. I guess that's the charge.And its true, it does take a longtime to develop the knowledge to understand the game.The introduction of the lottery opened the flood gates to a wider acceptance of gambling but it has not worked in racing's interests. Nevertheless, the problem is getting clearer in my mind and this is a good thing. Until and unless the real issue is clearly understood, all solutions become nothing more than muck thrown at a wall hoping something hits the target. |