Field Size vs Takeout
Jun 24, 2017 10:49:07 GMT -5
Post by Evelyn on Jun 24, 2017 10:49:07 GMT -5
I'd rather play a m,aiden with 12 than a G1 with 3! You?
Takeout at the racetrack prompts varying points of view
Los Angeles Daily News
By Art Wilson
ARCADIA >> Takeout, the amount of money subtracted from each wagering pool to help race tracks fund their purses, has become a huge topic over the past 10-15 years. Before the advent of social media, takeout was a foreign word to the casual racing fan.
Now it’s debated daily on Facebook and Twitter. It became a real focal point in 2010, when the California legislature approved SB1072, increasing the takeout on exotic wagers such as exactas, daily doubles, trifectas and pick threes to augment purse sizes in California.
Members of the California Horse Racing Board stood and applauded when it was announced during one of their monthly meetings that the bill had been approved, whereas horseplayers across the nation united and staged a boycott that adversely affected Santa Anita’s mutuel handle during its 2010-11 meeting.
But how important is takeout in the grand scheme of things? Does it trump any or all of the other problems that ail the sport?
Well, depends on whose point of view you adhere to.
Tim Ritvo, chief operating officer of Santa Anita’s parent company, The Stronach Group, is one of the few racing executives who will admit that SB1072 was a mistake, and he believes takeout is too high.
“First of all, I don’t want to knock the people who instituted (SB1072) because as I operate, people look back at my agreements and say why did you do that at that time?” Ritvo said in a recent interview. “You never know what was going on at that time. I know horsemen don’t like to hear it a lot of times, but purse money doesn’t create good betting venues. There’s all the purse money in the world in New York and they still have six-horse fields and $100,000 maiden special weights. Whether a maiden special weight is $56,000 or $52,000 I think is insignificant to the customer. So purses do not drive a better racing product.
“With that said, I always have believed that takeout is a little bit too high. It’s a tricky formula, though, to touch because the minute you cut your revenue, if you don’t have the expanded growth, then you’re in a deficit. So we’re definitely going to bring in an analyst, we’re going to look at things like that for sure, and yeah, just by raising takeout to give people more purse money did not work when you look back at it now.”
Then there’s Jack Liebau, who served as president of Santa Anita from 2001-03, was president of Hollywood Park during its final eight years and is currently an advisor to his good friend Ed Allred at Los Alamitos.
Liebau believes you could walk around the grandstand at Santa Anita and Del Mar and fans would give you a puzzled look if you asked about takeout.
“Field size is the biggest factor, more important than takeout,” he said. “And the 50-cent increment is more important than the takeout. A lot of people can win (the 50-cent Pick 5), whereas the Pick 6 (a $2 minimum bet) usually is won by people that can afford (big tickets) because of the two dollars.
“The biggest driver in handle is field size. Anybody who wants to argue that doesn’t know what the hell they’re talking about. If somebody asked me if I’d rather have 12 horses in a $20,000 claimer than three horses in a Grade I race, as far as wagering is concerned, I would. You gotta have a product, you’ve got to give people some value. In order to have value, you’ve got to have field size.”
Liebau also disagrees with those who believe the Thoroughbred Owners of California wield too much power in the state. The saying goes that if you want to get something done, whether it be a reduction in takeout or any type of rule change, the TOC must sign off on it.
“I think the most power in California belongs to The Stronach Group,” he said. “They own the facility. It is a partnership. You can’t have racing unless you got owners and trainers and a facility, but if you asked me who was the most powerful factor, it’s The Stronach Group. But having the power and being able to get things done and improve things don’t go hand in hand. You gotta have everybody in the bag.
“Everybody started blaming the tracks, track management, for what’s perceived as racing being in dire straits. There are other segments of the industry that have just as big a stake, maybe a bigger stake like the owners and trainers, organized labor ... and you would hope that everybody would work together.
“I have to say that over time racing probably has been viewed as somewhat dysfunctional. I think even among the tracks at times there is a certain amount of dysfunctionality.”
On that, many would agree.
Takeout at the racetrack prompts varying points of view
Los Angeles Daily News
By Art Wilson
ARCADIA >> Takeout, the amount of money subtracted from each wagering pool to help race tracks fund their purses, has become a huge topic over the past 10-15 years. Before the advent of social media, takeout was a foreign word to the casual racing fan.
Now it’s debated daily on Facebook and Twitter. It became a real focal point in 2010, when the California legislature approved SB1072, increasing the takeout on exotic wagers such as exactas, daily doubles, trifectas and pick threes to augment purse sizes in California.
Members of the California Horse Racing Board stood and applauded when it was announced during one of their monthly meetings that the bill had been approved, whereas horseplayers across the nation united and staged a boycott that adversely affected Santa Anita’s mutuel handle during its 2010-11 meeting.
But how important is takeout in the grand scheme of things? Does it trump any or all of the other problems that ail the sport?
Well, depends on whose point of view you adhere to.
Tim Ritvo, chief operating officer of Santa Anita’s parent company, The Stronach Group, is one of the few racing executives who will admit that SB1072 was a mistake, and he believes takeout is too high.
“First of all, I don’t want to knock the people who instituted (SB1072) because as I operate, people look back at my agreements and say why did you do that at that time?” Ritvo said in a recent interview. “You never know what was going on at that time. I know horsemen don’t like to hear it a lot of times, but purse money doesn’t create good betting venues. There’s all the purse money in the world in New York and they still have six-horse fields and $100,000 maiden special weights. Whether a maiden special weight is $56,000 or $52,000 I think is insignificant to the customer. So purses do not drive a better racing product.
“With that said, I always have believed that takeout is a little bit too high. It’s a tricky formula, though, to touch because the minute you cut your revenue, if you don’t have the expanded growth, then you’re in a deficit. So we’re definitely going to bring in an analyst, we’re going to look at things like that for sure, and yeah, just by raising takeout to give people more purse money did not work when you look back at it now.”
Then there’s Jack Liebau, who served as president of Santa Anita from 2001-03, was president of Hollywood Park during its final eight years and is currently an advisor to his good friend Ed Allred at Los Alamitos.
Liebau believes you could walk around the grandstand at Santa Anita and Del Mar and fans would give you a puzzled look if you asked about takeout.
“Field size is the biggest factor, more important than takeout,” he said. “And the 50-cent increment is more important than the takeout. A lot of people can win (the 50-cent Pick 5), whereas the Pick 6 (a $2 minimum bet) usually is won by people that can afford (big tickets) because of the two dollars.
“The biggest driver in handle is field size. Anybody who wants to argue that doesn’t know what the hell they’re talking about. If somebody asked me if I’d rather have 12 horses in a $20,000 claimer than three horses in a Grade I race, as far as wagering is concerned, I would. You gotta have a product, you’ve got to give people some value. In order to have value, you’ve got to have field size.”
Liebau also disagrees with those who believe the Thoroughbred Owners of California wield too much power in the state. The saying goes that if you want to get something done, whether it be a reduction in takeout or any type of rule change, the TOC must sign off on it.
“I think the most power in California belongs to The Stronach Group,” he said. “They own the facility. It is a partnership. You can’t have racing unless you got owners and trainers and a facility, but if you asked me who was the most powerful factor, it’s The Stronach Group. But having the power and being able to get things done and improve things don’t go hand in hand. You gotta have everybody in the bag.
“Everybody started blaming the tracks, track management, for what’s perceived as racing being in dire straits. There are other segments of the industry that have just as big a stake, maybe a bigger stake like the owners and trainers, organized labor ... and you would hope that everybody would work together.
“I have to say that over time racing probably has been viewed as somewhat dysfunctional. I think even among the tracks at times there is a certain amount of dysfunctionality.”
On that, many would agree.
