Join our forum and message boards to talk about thoroughbred horse racing in America, handicap races and more
https://horse-racing-forum.com/forum/
https://horse-racing-forum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=8103
Good news, Tachyon.tachyon wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 9:23 am -- from bloodhorse
''Japanese Breeders' Cup Delegation Expands to Seven'' . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . ..
https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing ... s-to-seven
For 3 million dollars, I would have taken a chance at the Classic. I get that winning a G1 is a big deal, but let’s say Maxfield does win the Clark, is it really going to make a huge difference in how breeders look at him? Wouldn’t a big performance in the Classic mean more ?
And this is why they need to slash the Grade 1 stakes by at least half. If you don’t think you have a grade 1 horse to compete in the BC, why should you be rewarded by skipping it with a grade 1 prize. However, the sales ring rules all in racing these days. Honestly, it is really the only thing horse racing has left of its “glamour” to attract the big money.
Sadly I agree with you. Is all about pinhooking and “ making a stallion”. Racing very much secondary.CorridorZ75 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 3:50 pmAnd this is why they need to slash the Grade 1 stakes by at least half. If you don’t think you have a grade 1 horse to compete in the BC, why should you be rewarded by skipping it with a grade 1 prize. However, the sales ring rules all in racing these days. Honestly, it is really the only thing horse racing has left of its “glamour” to attract the big money.
The whales used to show off their money with prestigious racing records of homebreds. Now they do it with overpaying for unraced horses and stallions and have left the racing to needle trainers and computer aided betting groups. In the modern era where animals are considered living beings just about everywhere else, horses in racing are even more just a commodity.
While I appreciate a good rant, not sure what CAW groups have to do with this.CorridorZ75 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 3:50 pmAnd this is why they need to slash the Grade 1 stakes by at least half. If you don’t think you have a grade 1 horse to compete in the BC, why should you be rewarded by skipping it with a grade 1 prize. However, the sales ring rules all in racing these days. Honestly, it is really the only thing horse racing has left of its “glamour” to attract the big money.
The whales used to show off their money with prestigious racing records of homebreds. Now they do it with overpaying for unraced horses and stallions and have left the racing to needle trainers and computer aided betting groups. In the modern era where animals are considered living beings just about everywhere else, horses in racing are even more just a commodity.
If apparently a majority of the betting handle is generated by a computer, why should anyone in racing worry about losing handle due to optics or cheating scandals when the algorithm certainly doesn't care why a trainer has a great win percentage and moves up horses in certain situations? They just factor the effectiveness of the PED into their numbers.thinair wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 4:12 pmWhile I appreciate a good rant, not sure what CAW groups have to do with this.CorridorZ75 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 3:50 pmAnd this is why they need to slash the Grade 1 stakes by at least half. If you don’t think you have a grade 1 horse to compete in the BC, why should you be rewarded by skipping it with a grade 1 prize. However, the sales ring rules all in racing these days. Honestly, it is really the only thing horse racing has left of its “glamour” to attract the big money.
The whales used to show off their money with prestigious racing records of homebreds. Now they do it with overpaying for unraced horses and stallions and have left the racing to needle trainers and computer aided betting groups. In the modern era where animals are considered living beings just about everywhere else, horses in racing are even more just a commodity.
Apparently? I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers but certainly the "majority of the betting handle" is not being derived from CAW play. The numbers may be exceedingly high elsewhere, though nowhere is it the majority, but in NY it's around 15%.CorridorZ75 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 8:21 pm
If apparently a majority of the betting handle is generated by a computer, why should anyone in racing worry about losing handle due to optics or cheating scandals when the algorithm certainly doesn't care why a trainer has a great win percentage and moves up horses in certain situations? They just factor the effectiveness of the PED into their numbers.
https://racingthinktank.com/reports/tif ... only-elitethinair wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 8:47 pmApparently? I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers but certainly the "majority of the betting handle" is not being derived from CAW play. The numbers may be exceedingly high elsewhere, though nowhere is it the majority, but in NY it's around 15%.CorridorZ75 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 8:21 pm
If apparently a majority of the betting handle is generated by a computer, why should anyone in racing worry about losing handle due to optics or cheating scandals when the algorithm certainly doesn't care why a trainer has a great win percentage and moves up horses in certain situations? They just factor the effectiveness of the PED into their numbers.
I think you have some misunderstanding about what CAW play is. It's highly sophisticated computer algorithms. I don't think "most young sports bettors" will be going the "CAW route." I don't see the two situations as even reasonably analogous. What the future of CAW play in horse racing will be is difficult to guess. If I had to bet on it, I would say it figures to go down going forward, and would be very surprised if it increases. That's just my opinion. We put some restrictions on their play in the WPS this Summer at NYRA and it resulted in them leaving those pools. I have no idea if others will follow this route.CorridorZ75 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 9:20 pmhttps://racingthinktank.com/reports/tif ... only-elitethinair wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 8:47 pmApparently? I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers but certainly the "majority of the betting handle" is not being derived from CAW play. The numbers may be exceedingly high elsewhere, though nowhere is it the majority, but in NY it's around 15%.CorridorZ75 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 8:21 pm
If apparently a majority of the betting handle is generated by a computer, why should anyone in racing worry about losing handle due to optics or cheating scandals when the algorithm certainly doesn't care why a trainer has a great win percentage and moves up horses in certain situations? They just factor the effectiveness of the PED into their numbers.
This is what I was thinking of, but you are right, I misremembered- the figure is supposedly a little more or a little less than 30%. However, if these groups are doing a lot of the winning, that means the recreational bettor is doing a lot of the losing. Since most young sports bettors are going to be more inclined and set up to go the CAW route than the older population that is literally gradually dying out, the percentages will only rise wouldn't they? At least until the critical point is met where too much "smart" money in the pools means the margins are too slim to make it worth it.