Saratoga's Attendance Apparently No Good

[Somnambulist]

http://www.paulickreport.com/news/the-b ... arassment/

Before the obvious candidates step forward to denigrate me for voicing any issue with NYRA, I'd like to say that I hope I'm fortunate enough in my life to die at Saratoga (it's that awesome of a place) and think, at least in terms of what the media has reporting, NYRA is making some well thought out, conscious decisions about trying to attract a larger audience (see please, "Discover Belmont" Sundays").

However, I sincerely hope that this is a lesson that more days should NOT be added to toga's racing calendar. Obviously, you can't isolate one variable like that - not when the economy blows, the meet in general was fairly difficult for most everyone I've spoken to, etc... but I didn't get why they added additional days last year, and hope they're removed next year.

[Ballerina]

Six days of racing a week when 3 of them are begging for attendance is way too much. More than 9 or 10 races a day is way too much.

[Barnfour]

They should be racing 5 days a week instead of 6 and like Bal says have no more than 9 or 10 races a day.And the meet was a hell of a lot more special when it was shorter......they've stretched it out too long.

[Little Watermelon]

I might be obtuse here (most likely) but if the handle is the same or improved, what difference does it make if attendance is down or not? If lack of attendance is a problem they could have more give-away days to bloat the attendance figures. Probably the attendance was down this year because the junk they gave away was not as good as the junk they gave away in previous years. The obvious solution is to give better junk away next year and have more days in which they give junk away. The figues will be good; what matter if the junk wanters leave after a few races; many people leave before the stakes anyway. Who wants to see Royal Delta run live when you can waddle off with your armfuls of junk?

[Ballerina]

[quote="Little Watermelon"]I might be obtuse here (most likely) but if the handle is the same or improved, what difference does it make if attendance is down or not? ?/quote]

Both the handle and the attendance are down when compared to 2012

Wagering and attendance both declined slightly during the 40-day 2013 meet at Saratoga Race Course that concluded on Labor Day, Sept. 2.

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/ ... ce-decline

[Jeff]

I might be obtuse here (most likely) but if the handle is the same or improved, what difference does it make if attendance is down or not? If lack of attendance is a problem they could have more give-away days to bloat the attendance figures. Probably the attendance was down this year because the junk they gave away was not as good as the junk they gave away in previous years. The obvious solution is to give better junk away next year and have more days in which they give junk away. The figues will be good; what matter if the junk wanters leave after a few races; many people leave before the stakes anyway. Who wants to see Royal Delta run live when you can waddle off with your armfuls of junk?

Giveaway days aside, attendance does matter in that it impacts on-track handle. An on-track dollar is worth several times what an off-track dollar is worth.

On-track attendance is trending in the wrong direction for NYRA. I don't personally think that's because of too many races per day, but I do think it's because of too many racing days. Many people warned that extending the meet to 40 days would dilute the product. I think those people have been proven correct. Any further extension would just dilute it further.

I don't actually know anyone around this town with a modicum of racing knowledge who thinks otherwise.

[WarBiscuit]

Lenny Shulman and Steve Haskin speak to this issue in their latest "And They're Off - End of Summer Edition" ...


http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/ ... theyre-off


WarBiscuit