- This topic has 27 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I can happily enjoy racing without having to bet on it, however the sport as a whole wouldn’t exist as it does now if there was no gambling.
If prize money became the sole means of profiting for connections, racing would be far more honest.
With no gambling the opportunity to profit from disguising a horse’s ability would not exist.
Not trying is the single most off-putting factor for backers currently turning their backs on racing in their thousands.
If prize money became the sole means of profiting for connections, racing would be far more honest.
With no gambling the opportunity to profit from disguising a horse’s ability would not exist.
Not trying is the single most off-putting factor for backers currently turning their backs on racing in their thousands.
You heard it here first:
If there was no gambling then "gambling" would be straight.
Value Is EverythingYou heard it here first:
If there was no gambling then "gambling" would be straight.That’s not what he said, though.
If prize money became the sole means of profiting for connections, racing would be far more honest.
With no gambling the opportunity to profit from disguising a horse’s ability would not exist.
Not trying is the single most off-putting factor for backers currently turning their backs on racing in their thousands.
You heard it here first:
If there was no gambling then "gambling" would be straight.Ginger, there is no gambling, read the question again.
The prize money and possible stud fees is all there is , the only incentive to win, there is no profit in not trying.
I don’t really have an answer.
I’ve spent long periods – more than three years between 2009 and 2013 is just one example – without having a single bet. I still followed the sport.
However, if I
knew
I could never bet again, I probably wouldn’t.
But then again I might do..!
Mike
I can quite easily follow good quality racing without having a bet. Meetings can be more enjoyable I find without the pressures of placing a bet ie time spent studying form, trying to get best odds, if there are plenty of interesting back stories.
Low grade meetings though tend to get tedious without having a bet and ironically these are the ones to avoid betting on.
You don’t need to have bet on a football match to enjoy it, and to follow your team, and I know that football and racing are totally different BUT both are vying for customers in the leisure industry. But does racing want to attract people that aren’t betting!!??
Well, I already do!
http://www.nationalsteeplechase.com/
Obviously I’d prefer (and I’m sure the National Steeplechase Association would too) that I could bet, but it’s extremely difficult for these one or two-day meetings to get a license for parimutuel wagering. There’s wagering at the dozen or so hurdle races held at flat tracks, and in the past few years they’ve been able to get on-track wagering allowed at Fair Hill and Great Meadow, but that’s it.If prize money became the sole means of profiting for connections, racing would be far more honest.
With no gambling the opportunity to profit from disguising a horse’s ability would not exist.
Not trying is the single most off-putting factor for backers currently turning their backs on racing in their thousands.
You heard it here first:
If there was no gambling then "gambling" would be straight.Ginger, there is no gambling, read the question again.
The prize money and possible stud fees is all there is , the only incentive to win, there is no profit in not trying.
Exactly Woolfie, "no gambling".
Without gambling "backers" don’t exist. No backers to be turning their backs because of their gambling experiences…
If you redefine backers as people… Without gambling most of those "backers" turned off by gambling experiences are unlikely to be in racing in the first place.
Does today’s gambling turn off true non-gamblers (those who never gamble)? Would it really matter that much to a non-gambler who wins the race? Gambling is the main reason strict rules are there to ensure the rightful horse wins. With no punters winning only matters to a few people, would stewards be more inclined to find in favour of their own personal favourite connections?
In a similar vein to the original question…
Without gambling would there be enough "racing enthusiasts" to keep racing going?
If we had no official gambling would illegal gambling make racing more dishonest than it is now?
Value Is EverythingOf course we need gambling but all other sports survive without gambling being the be all and end all.
Blackbeard to conquer the World
I never bet anyway. I just love following the horses, and enjoying the whole palaver that goes with it.
What would there be to be interested in? No Racing Post, no Timeform, little racing coverage.
What about dedicated racing channels, I’m guessing none. Racecourses that even now want to sell to developers probably would. The festivals, you would know little about the runners.
Would anything but the very big races be shown on TV? I’m thinking here of Frankel. Would races like the 2000G be on TV, or Royal Ascot, certain to be greatly reduced. Frankel never really ran in a big race likely to be televised.
People who like watching racing without betting, fair enough but they are watching a sport supported by betting not fresh air. Lets be clear not betting is a choice it is not a superior moral position.
So no I probably would not watch the few races on TV as I would know nothing about them.
Exactly Woolfie, "no gambling".
Without gambling "backers" don’t exist. No backers to be turning their backs because of their gambling experiences…
If you redefine backers as people… Without gambling most of those "backers" turned off by gambling experiences are unlikely to be in racing in the first place.
Does today’s gambling turn off true non-gamblers (those who never gamble)? Would it really matter that much to a non-gambler who wins the race? Gambling is the main reason strict rules are there to ensure the rightful horse wins. With no punters winning only matters to a few people, would stewards be more inclined to find in favour of their own personal favourite connections?
In a similar vein to the original question…
Without gambling would there be enough "racing enthusiasts" to keep racing going?
If we had no official gambling would illegal gambling make racing more dishonest than it is now?
I am not anti gambling, I am for the enforcement of racing’s laws.
”Racing enthusiasts” are turning away from the sport in droves and the common mantra uttered by backers as they walk away is ” What chance do you have?”In other words even the most stubborn of mug punters see no hope of profiting or even winning enough to maintain an interest in the sport.
My whole point is that it’s the gambling element that drives racing especially low grade racing, from the point of view of connections. Prize money on offer is derisory and gambling is the only way to realise a profit. The exchanges now offer an opportunity for trainers to recoup outgoings in sending horses out to lose simply by laying their entered runners.
Remove low grade racing or increase the prizes on offer and there may be greater incentive to win a race. The handicapping system has served it’s purpose over many years but it has become easier to subvert.
The prize money and possible stud fees is all there is , the only incentive to win, there is no profit in not trying.
As John says in the post above racing would all bar disappear.
There would be no prize money as there would be no public interest therefore no advertisers, sponsors etc. Racing on television would disappear completely. Stud fees would be one hundreth of what they are now. Virtually all courses would close.
Basically the game would be the preserve of the very rich, reverting back to 18th century-style private sweepstakes and matches.
Mike
Not trying is the single most off-putting factor for backers currently turning their backs on racing in their thousands.
No. Losing is the overwhelming reason anyone ‘turns their back on racing’. Try asking any regular winners at the game if they want to quit racing due to ‘not trying’.
However, non-trying is the number one
excuse
for those who leave betting on racing. The alternative would be to admit their own inadequacies which most people avoid at all costs.
Mike
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.