- This topic has 29 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
- Total Posts 17716
The ‘sport’ had so much going for it when it was recognisable as such, most of it is now little more than an animated lottery, laid on for, and funded by,…
Thats a punters opinion, not a fact. It is a fact it provides employment, ownership opportunities, and a betting product enjoyed by tens of thousands , the silent MAJORITY who punt on it.
No.
That’s a punters opinion that believes the sport is served by providing betting opportunities. The sport is, as it’s always been, about identifying the best horse.Three AW meetings on one day last week, not one prize worth more than 4.25k amongst them, and not one race for any horse rated higher than 85, and you think that’s good for our ‘sport’? One 60k handicap would have probably drawn a better crowd, possibly a better turnover, would certainly have generated more interest from the media, and done a damn sight more for racing’s future than all the above 3 fixtures added together.
The Levy Board tell us each race earns an average of 10K for the levy. Thats 100K to the bookmakers, at lets say 15% profit on turnover, gives an amount bet per race of over 650 grand. Divide that by 8500 shops, it comes to about 80 quid per race per shop, which seems reasonable. Multiply that 650 grand by 21 races at 3 all weather meetings and your at over 14 million. Add in a conservative 500 grand per race on the exchanges and your not far off 25 million for 3 all weather meetings last week before adding phone and bookmaker internet business. As welcome as a 60k handicap would be this time of year, it wouldn’t be close. Unlike racing, the bookmakers know their customers and turnover is king.
There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. Averages are meaningless unless they compare like with like. Show me where the aforementioned 3 meetings generated more turnover than (say) the Portland Handicap, and you may have a point.
Now take even 5% of all of that interest directly back into racing then you CERTAINLY have a future, much more so than killing off half of it and dividing whats left of the surrender between Gosden and Lloyd-Weber.
Racing is a sport ffs, though it’s often forgotten by those who can only view the world through £ signs.
Agree. Something the pocket talking, defeatist, exterminators whom despite all their racing rhetoric and hyperbole, always come back to in the end, money.
No you don’t, you’re looking at it from your own ends, as a self-confessed punter in whatever the authorities prescribe as a cash cow. Sport is about identifying the best in each discipline and, at its purest, has nothing to do with money.
Anyway I’m not too worried about too much unneccessary fixture reduction happening anytime soon, the bookies will win, Group 1 versus Selling Class, as always.
Precisely
What a pity though that racing accepts the scraps from its own multi billion pound business.
One thing we agree on, but isn’t that exactly what Zorro said in his article?
Shouldn’t this thread be called, ‘I don’t like all weather racing so you shouldn’t either?’
I fail to see why people complain so much about certain races & types of racing not being profitable for the punter. If that’s the case then DON’T BET ON IT.
There are arguments to be made that there is too much racing in this country but when most of the arguments I’ve heard are based on a very specific agenda, it’s very difficult to take them seriously.
Cav,
You are miles off with your all-weather turnover. Take out the double counting, in-running long odds-on bets (which you wouldn’t be able to extract 5% out of) and trading and most races would have an ‘at risk’ total that probably doesn’t even break six figures on the exchanges. I very much doubt the books are taking circa several grand per shop per race on it either!
- Total Posts 17716
Shouldn’t this thread be called, ‘I don’t like all weather racing so you shouldn’t either?’
I fail to see why people complain so much about certain races & types of racing not being profitable for the punter. If that’s the case then DON’T BET ON IT.
There are arguments to be made that there is too much racing in this country but when most of the arguments I’ve heard are based on a very specific agenda, it’s very difficult to take them seriously.
It isn’t necessarily all weather racing; it just happens that that particular branch of the sport was seen as the vehicle for the introduction of Peter Savill’s banded racing dross, which took what was already basement racing to an entirely new low, both in terms of actual quality and in its perception by the media.
Ireland (thankfully not controlled by our HRA) has one AW course, where average prize money, quality of racing, and relative attendances, are way in front of any of the 4 British AW courses, (and no Tote monopoly, btw).Good post reet hard. Very well put points.
Where the comparison with Ireland falls down is that they have one all weather track now, I’d imagine if the English situation has such a bad reputation, the Irish will be keen for Dundalk to remain the sole all weather track.
But England has four all weather tracks with meetings now on most days of the week; the trainers of the horses that run there employ alot of people, the courses employ alot of people & there are alot of owners, not to mention alot of horses.
If a reduction is required, how do you go about ‘putting the toothpaste back in the tube’?
Reducing the number of races on the all weather at present, while keeping the same horse population, is very easy. You could have halved the number of races this week and still given every horse a run.
Over half the races on the all-weather lately haven’t filled up enough to create each-way betting, and the 4k per race subsidy it brings.
Reducing the number of races on the all weather at present, while keeping the same horse population, is very easy. You could have halved the number of races this week and still given every horse a run.
Over half the races on the all-weather lately haven’t filled up enough to create each-way betting, and the 4k per race subsidy it brings.
There’s an extra meeting at Leafy on Monday Glenn. Bet you’re pleased.
You are miles off with your all-weather turnover. Take out the double counting, in-running long odds-on bets (which you wouldn’t be able to extract 5% out of) and trading and most races would have an ‘at risk’ total that probably doesn’t even break six figures on the exchanges. I very much doubt the books are taking circa several grand per shop per race on it either!
I only have Levy Board estimates to go on, Glenn. I’ve done the calculation based on their estimated average return of 10K per race. That worked through to a reasonable guestimate is over 650 grand per race. At 8500 shops that’s about 80 quid per shop, a perfectly realistic figure imo. I take your point on return from the exchanges as things stand, but I was using amounts matched on BF as an indication of the interest in betting on all weather racing and the worth to the sport if it could get back 5% of that through a really good Tote internet and shop product.
As far as I remember, Gosden in his last RP interview gave a figure of circa 12 billion being bet on UK racing per annum at present. The interest and money is there at all levels, the heritage is there, the punters are there. The best quality racing in the World is all punter funded.
Reet, I’ll get the Portland v 3 all weather meetings exchange turnover figures over the next day or two to provide an indication of turnover, the Portland wont exceed them, no way. The sport does identify the best in each discipline and quality at the top end has never been affected. I have stats to back that up.
What a pity the powers that be, cant tap into a small percentage of those billions and give a relatively large, G8 country, an economic superpower with a population of 60 million, a modest 28 races a day with a minimum prize fund of 10k a race.
It shouldn’t be rocket science.
You’re falling into the trap Savill did in thinking that adding another race, any race, will produce in extra revenue what an average race produces currently. They don’t!
We don’t have bookie turnover figures by race type but we can get a pretty good idea of how Betfair and the tote do and all-weather racing produces way below the average turnover.
Even with the three tramps manipulating things, I can’t see how these small-field carve ups where the jolly always wins, that we’ve seen this week, produce anything like the same profit for bookies as most turf races. The fact that the bookies are hesitant to spell out exactly what levy is produced on these all-weather evening fixtures in winter tells it’s own story – it is too embarassing to disclose!
There’s an extra meeting at Leafy on Monday Glenn. Bet you’re pleased.
Tell me you’re joking.
Who the hell is running the show? Can’t they see that Leafy’s Tuesday meeting would only require ballotting for one race if every single five-day dec stood their ground.
Even in purely short term levy-producing terms, halving the average number of runners per race must be absolutely disastrous to bookies’ profits. Don’t The Rabble realise that bookies bet to a certain percentage per runner?
It’s like when Savill paid appearance money to Berry camels to run in stakes races so he could get each-way betting on them. Each-way betting was on average profitable for the books, ergo anything that artificially created it would work wonders for the levy, even races where they bet 4/11, 4/1, 10/1, 100/1 each of five
The article is utter nonsense. We are spoilt for choice in this country with the choices on how to bet, where to bet and what to bet. I hadn’t watched a horse race in my life until 6 years ago but after plenty of hard work I can make the game pay. If you can’t make the game pay you have yourself to blame not the bookmakers.
Reducing the number of races on the all weather at present, while keeping the same horse population, is very easy. You could have halved the number of races this week and still given every horse a run.
Over half the races on the all-weather lately haven’t filled up enough to create each-way betting, and the 4k per race subsidy it brings.
Another good point.
You’ll like my next point Glenn, I think they should rip up the all weather at Lingfield (and Southwell too). If they’re not going to put up floodlights, the bookies are always going to demand endless evening meetings at Wolves or Kempton on the same day.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.