[GSP]

Thanks SS,
Camelot are always on the look out for new games, to keep things fresh, find new players.
Yes this may dilute the lotto a little, but my estimates are it would have little effect with most players using the same numbers for years and years. They will just carry on.

This is quite different to a lottery in that 20 winners know they will win a big prize at least, but the run of a race will determine if that figure will be £500,000 or £3 million. The excitement would be unbelievable.

When I approached ITV, they had only just started their new programme and said it would conflict with their ITV seven competition.
Maybe now after several years later they would listen to an idea that would attract so so many more people to their programme with the sums involved. It would dwarf their ITV seven tipster competition, probably dwarf their programme, but what viewing figures!

[GSP]

Thanks SS,
The calculation is not based on racecourse attendances. It’s a national draw using something like the infrastructure of Camelot and the lotto draws. Tickets worth £30 million a week are already bought for these draws.
With the British public’s appetite for sweepstakes, a flutter, lotto’s and to help good causes/charities, the £30 million a week would be easily surpassed. This is what would be left once prize money for the 20 winning tickets is allocated.
On the contrary, the concept of a sweepstake was successfully run and achieved in Ireland some years ago with ticket receipts of Euro’s 40 million. The big problem there was their business model was wrong. Imagine with ten times as many people here, my £30 million estimate may in fact be quite conservative!

Yes, I totally agree there are some big obstacles to conquer for this to ever get off the ground, and a nobody like me would not get anywhere.

My hope was that someone who is known out there with some clout and the same vision who believed in this idea would adopt and take this onboard and promote this.

[GSP]

Hi SS,
c£30 million * 52 weeks = c£1.5 billion.

[GSP]

How many names have you mentioned there PP, and there’s still a number missing.
Do they need so many presenters?
It really seems they throw as many as they can on there in the hope viewers at least like a couple.

Even after three years, if the music is still be debated it must suggest it’s a problem.

I like your username by the way. My Dad used to go on about Peter Poston and would point out running rails by the side of the road where I believe he trained near Maldon, Essex.

[GSP]

Sorry if this is getting a bit mixed with the ITV racing thread running alongside.

That’s the thing. I think ITV have gone for a much ‘too polished’ programme. BBC started going wrong with Clare Balding. Too perfect if that is a problem it was all about the presenting skills.
With Chapman, he is a bit rough around the edges but that’s what the programme needs, just like Big Mac.
Francome, always sounded like he had a cold but he had that country accent and was good and interesting to listen to.

What I am saying is the programme tries to put emphasis on perfection, and they don’t need to. It gets in the way of the racing.
So many presenters on ITV racing, it overwhelms the racing itself.

[GSP]

I’ve always recorded the racing, but now find I just fast forward to the races themselves whereas in past years I would watch the whole lot. Even then I try to block out Hoiles incessant, relentless, not coming up for air commentaries. He is knowledgeable, but what a poor poor commentator.

There’s no chemistry with ITV racing.

Shows that had Francome, Big Mac, Jim McGrath and Simon Holt or Mike Cattermole. Just a few presenters, but boy was it a much better well balanced programme.
Seems ITV think if they can chuck as many people as they can on a programme, people will find their favourites and find it watchable.
It’s not working ITV! And in this case less would definitely be best.

I remember when there was racing with just John Oaksey, John Rickman and John Tyrell doing the betting shows and results. So simple, so perfect!

[GSP]

Tank, that’s right MC and SH. No problems with them.
Holies doesn’t come up for air. I just wished he would at least pause for breath every now and again. It’s relentless!

[GSP]

Tank,
Big Mac, Francome and Jim McGrath worked well to me with a decent commentator, I can’t remember his name. Plenty of knowledge and discussion, some a bit feisty at times as well.
Now, ITV have so many people on there with some trying to out do each other.

[GSP]

I understood racing was full of characters and can’t see a problem with him.
McCririck was knowledgeable and could be controversial at times, but was a colourful character, the sort of eccentric types racing needs.
Not trashing another thread but there far bigger problems with the ITV racing programme.
The biggest issue is boring presenters or commentators.
Richard Hoiles – Boring, boring, boring. Knowledgeable but just does not shut up, doesn’t take a breath. No charisma, nothing.
Francesca Cumani – Boring posh totty.
Fitgerald – Blarney, blarney, blarney.
The music – what the hell is it. Still after three or so years grates people.

Matt Chapman. Yes OTT, but a perfect fit in a programme that needs a total overhaul. They could do so so so much better.

[GSP]

Thanks and Hi Richard,
Yes that is by far the easiest solution.

But this is not only about raising money, but raising profile as well. Such a race would bring so much attention to the sport, the interest would increase attendances and boost money for racecourses.

[GSP]

Thanks Drone. Some very interesting debate and information in the link you kindly provided.
I can see the concern of throwing money at the NHS if it’s not going to be used efficiently. I always thought there was wastage and areas which needed tightening and sharpening up.
Perhaps the money should be used in areas where ‘a return’ or difference is visible (New hospitals or theatres etc), rather than being swallowed up in a big hole.

While I believe the concept of the race is sound, perhaps even this idea of giving this money to the NHS is questionable, could it be used somewhere else, or to help fund a whole host of other options?

[GSP]

Thanks Drone.
No, I haven’t seen a thread on NHS funding. Does it have any relation to this horse racing idea? Thanks.

[GSP]

Forgive me apracing, but from your opening salvo you seem so defensive and negative, I can only assume rightly or wrongly you are trying to protect something, hence the other interests suggestion.

Indeed, from your first post last paragraph “ I suspect that the vast majority of posters on this forum are simply too polite to point out the problems with your plan. I’m not made that way, it’s pie in the sky“.
Are you right to assume this is the case? Do you speak for everyone? Yes, I am sure there are many many questions and more obstacles to conquer than all the Grand National’s put together. But, without reading concerns, thoughts, suggestions etc, how can anything ever get a chance of getting off the ground.

[GSP]

Just think apracing, you could have a hospital named after you if you took this onboard!

[GSP]

apracing,
On the contrary it was not meant as an insult, that’s not helpful and what good does that achieve? I was just surprised how you dismissed the idea saying that the vast majority of people ‘were too polite’ to highlight any problems with it. That’s what a forum is for to discuss and debate. How do we ever get to any solutions if we don’t?

[GSP]

Thanks for your reply apracing.
I suspect from your tone you have ‘other interests’ in racing that you consider ‘at risk’ if this ever came off.
If not, I’m quite surprised at your negative attitude.

Yes, if this massive weekly feature was up and running and established, the true owners of the race would receive a decent sum of money just for having their horse participate. It would ensure a steady stream of runners and reserves if need be to make up the field.
The owners would not be standing aside anyway. The same process would continue. The sweepstake winners would be kept apart and enjoy their moment in another part of the racecourse and I’m surprised you think you would play ‘second fiddle’ on the day. The owners are a very important part of the sport.

Okay, you make 1% sound small, but that ‘little’ £1.5 billion would still save an awful lot of lives. I am sure most owners would love to help out if their horse is part of something saving thousands of lives over time. Do you have a problem with that?

For horse racing as a whole, this idea would have a ‘halo’ effect where the interest in such a race would attract many more viewers, more racegoers and much more money to the industry.

This idea may be good timing now for all concerned.

[GSP]

Interesting and true comments there BH. I suppose it’s not a charity, but could be considered a good cause. Even athletes and various associations get lottery money.

As the British public like a flutter (enough enter Grand National sweepstakes etc), as well as being very generous towards good causes I could see many going for this if it ever got off the ground. On the contrary, I am sure any distinction between ‘dirty money’ and money that could be used to save lives would not be an issue.

For the 20 winners who had been allocated a horse each for the race, they would be invited to the racecourse to watch ‘their’ horse, as if they were the owner of it. They would certainly win more than the owners!

Everyone wins!
Just need someone with a ‘bit of clout’, who believes in this and in the know to own this and take forward.
They’ll be knighted!

[Author]

Posts