Breeders Cup Handle, 2006, 2007, 2008

[steward]

With figures derived from several sources, it looks like that the 2008 version was a disaster.

In 2007 at Monmouth (with bad weather and an off track), the total handle for the 11 races on Saturday was $111.9 million. That in itself was a financial debacle, 20.3% lower than 2006 numbers from Churchill Downs.

But the 2007 numbers were understandable. Many serious bettors hate off tracks and keep their bankrolls in their pockets. OTOH, the 2008 version was run under sunny skies. Yet, the 11 races on last Saturday produced an even smaller handle, only $107.6 million. More people showed up in person and watched on TV, but they bet about 25% less than in 2006.

Personally I bet several thousand $$ in 2006. This year, nada.

[steward]

On the other hand, the handle for the 2008 Kentucky Derby card was $164.7 million (12 races), decline of only 6% from 2006.

Blame there was placed mainly on ADW issues, although the economy obviously has some small effect, 2008 vs. 2006.

[Worksoplad]

On the other hand, the handle for the 2008 Kentucky Derby card was $164.7 million (12 races), decline of only 6% from 2006.

Blame there was placed mainly on ADW issues, although the economy obviously has some small effect, 2008 vs. 2006.

I think that you are seriously biased against synthetic surfaces and your bias shows from the statistics you chose to use. In the last two months we have had the most serious economic downturn since the Great Depression. The Dow dropped from 14,000+ a year ago to as low as 7,800 a couple of weeks ago. House and land prices are imploding. Unemployment, foreclosures and bankruptcies is skyrocketing.

Just look at the sales results from Keeneland onwards this year. Prices are way, way down; buy-backs are way, way up. In fact, people are trying to give their horses away because they did not sell and they can't afford to keep them.

In view of all that, I think the Oak Tree Breeder's Cup did remarkably well.

[bdw0617]

steward actually has a point. ic an tell you first hand.. my handle in SoCal has went down about 30-40% simply becuase i pass alot of races that i would play 2 years ago, or early last year becuase of the surface.

there are TOO many tracks out there, that offer good cards on something htat is halfway handicappable to guesstimate what is going to do what on what.

[steward]

The economy hasn't collapsed just in the last two months. That's a lame stretch used to rationalize the 2008 BC handle debacle.

The economy - and the various financial markets - have soured mainly because of the housing bubble and oil price spikes. But those have been going on a lot more than two months (2 years for the former). Granted, the last two months have seen people's 401Ks retreat, but who cashes their retirement to bet on the BC?

This has been an unusual business cycle downturn, in that the financial system was hit temporarily hard. But the average handicapper hasn't suffered major effects yet if ever. There is only 6% unemployment. In other words, only about 1.5% of the population has lost jobs so far in the business cycle, hardly the numbers to produce a 25% decline in BC betting.

In fact, in the last few months, gas price declines has had the effect of putting tens of billions of dollars in the pockets of average consumers/bettors. The Kentucky Derby last spring should have borne the brunt of the oil price spike near its peak. But it didn't, and the handle held up pretty well.

No, there is a reason the BC handle flopped: only the casuals bet it, and they were cautious. The regulars put a few bucks just for recreation purposes. I didn't even buy a a few tote tickets just for souvenirs. I want this year to be one to forget.

[steward]

I have one suggestion for the Breeders. Run the blasted thing next year in the wee hours in the US, so as to cater to the foreign viewers. They seem to get their jollies with turf races anyway.

Then run the video for Americans the next day. Most wouldn't know the difference anyway, the way things are going.

[reese]

With figures derived from several sources, it looks like that the 2008 version was a disaster.

.

Personally I bet several thousand $$ in 2006. This year, nada.

At my local OTB, ppl who easily wager 100 per race per day on several tracks, bet nothing on this year BC when last year, even the mud at MON didn't deter big bettors.

People who are serious handicappers and big bettors avoided fake track. Good or bad, that is the story.

[Worksoplad]

The economy hasn't collapsed just in the last two months. That's a lame stretch used to rationalize the 2008 BC handle debacle.

The economy - and the various financial markets - have soured mainly because of the housing bubble and oil price spikes. But those have been going on a lot more than two months (2 years for the former). Granted, the last two months have seen people's 401Ks retreat, but who cashes their retirement to bet on the BC?

This has been an unusual business cycle downturn, in that the financial system was hit temporarily hard. But the average handicapper hasn't suffered major effects yet if ever. There is only 6% unemployment. In other words, only about 1.5% of the population has lost jobs so far in the business cycle, hardly the numbers to produce a 25% decline in BC betting.

In fact, in the last few months, gas price declines has had the effect of putting tens of billions of dollars in the pockets of average consumers/bettors. The Kentucky Derby last spring should have borne the brunt of the oil price spike near its peak. But it didn't, and the handle held up pretty well.

No, there is a reason the BC handle flopped: only the casuals bet it, and they were cautious. The regulars put a few bucks just for recreation purposes. I didn't even buy a a few tote tickets just for souvenirs. I want this year to be one to forget.

Where have you been buried? On August 28, 2008 the Dow was at 11,715. On October 10, 2008 it dropped as low as 7,882. Bear Stearns went bust at the end of September, Wachovia, AIG, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Lehman etc etc rescued by a SEVERAL HUNDRED BILLION DOLLAR bailout from the government otherwise they and all of the major banks and economies around the world, including hundreds of millions of jobs around the world would have been toast. Iceland's economy and banks did collapse and default. Other countries throughout the entire world had to bail out their major banks. Fed has already announced US economy is in a DEPRESSION. UK and the rest of Europe also in a DEPRESSION. Retail sales in the toilet and not likely to improve until 2010 U.S. Big Three auto sales worst in 25 years last month.

And unemployment 6.0%?? Try 7.7% in California in September, the last official figure available, and unemployment is rising by leaps and bounds. Major departrment stores and auto dealers are empty and laying off people left and right or cutting their hours way down so they don't qualify for benefits.
And you say punters have the same amount of money to throw away willy nilly on gambling??

[Worksoplad]

I have one suggestion for the Breeders. Run the blasted thing next year in the wee hours in the US, so as to cater to the foreign viewers. They seem to get their jollies with turf races anyway.

Then run the video for Americans the next day. Most wouldn't know the difference anyway, the way things are going.

Tell that to the 31,257 people who attended Oak Tree on the Friday and the 51,331 who attended on Saturday.

[steward]

Writing "depression" in capital letters doesn't make it so.

When the GDP contracts 0.3% as it did in the 3rd quarter 2008, one can hardly begin jumping off tall buildings. Unless one's sense of perspective and history is so warped. The contraction is so tiny that it is within the margin of error of its calculation methods, and may be revised as more data comes in.

In the Great Depression, unemployment reached 25%. Now it is 6%. In the 80s, 1000 banks and savings&loan companies went bankrupt. In this business cycle, only several dozen. In 1982, short term interest rates were up to 17% and mortgage rates were around 13%. Today? Way less than half for both. Just this spring, people were paying $4+ for gas. Last Friday I paid $2.29 in a neighboring state.

The business cycle is just that, a cycle. The mortgage meltdown is already into the third year, and the downturn is long in the tooth. Sales for homes have already experienced upticks. To young people who have never experienced a REAL biting recession in their lifetimes: the end of the world isn't gonna happen. Money has been gushed into the system and in a few quarters there will be reports of how things are getting rosier. Earlier, if Obama is elected (nothing will be negatively reported then, even bona fide negativity).

There is a solid reason why people avoided betting the BC races: the smart money pulled its punches. Betting horses coming onto a different surface is a reach, not a calculated risk.

[steward]

I'll add that prospective horse owners are being wise in avoiding yearling sales for the foreseeable future. Who knows what's in store as far as track surfaces in a few years. People who buy horses with dirt breeding might be stuck holding the bag. Or it could work the other way.

Best to sit on the sidelines with such uncertainty. I feel sorry for the litte breeders, but they can only blame themselves if they are among the clique trying to shove fake tracks down the bettors' throats.

[bdw0617]

With figures derived from several sources, it looks like that the 2008 version was a disaster.

.

Personally I bet several thousand $$ in 2006. This year, nada.

At my local OTB, ppl who easily wager 100 per race per day on several tracks, bet nothing on this year BC when last year, even the mud at MON didn't deter big bettors.

People who are serious handicappers and big bettors avoided fake track. Good or bad, that is the story.

mud is very handicappable. espically if you know a thing or two about certian pedigrees.

you want as many certain veriables when handicappable... X is going to happen. this horse doesn't liek this. i know that. this horse loves this but doesnt like that. I know that.

take a bunch of horses that have never ran over a certain surface, and you are GUESSING. there are too many tracks , to many races out there to GUESS.

and that's all there is too it. i don't HAVE to. i ahve options.

i stopped playing socal for the most part, i play the midwest circuit, the NY circuit, calder and even mountineer/charles town... there aren't a shortage of tracks.

[Dave C]

Worksoplad: Whether handicappers dislike of synthetics is rational or not is irrelevant, many do not like it and don't bet it accordingly. Blaming in entire decline on handle on those xenophobic handicappers is also irrational but I have little doubt that it is one of the contributing variables. Steward has an agenda to pursue on this subject so there is little point in arguing with him.

Why do I believe the dislike of synthetics is irrational? As a handicapper I don't care what surface they run on as long as it is consistent. As long as the surface is consistent over its length and over time, then handicapping is straight forward. The synthetics are consistent, not necessarily fair to every horse, but consistent and therefore predictable. Handicapping them is really no different than handicapping any other track, dirt or turf. I don't handicap Calder the same way I handicap Gulfstream because I perceive the surfaces to be completely different and consequently I treat horses differently when the ship back and forth. Same goes for the NY tracks, and when the SCal tracks were conventional the were derisively called 'drag strips' by the east coast handicappers who refused to bet them then.

and that's all there is too it. i don't HAVE to. i ahve options.

I completely agree and whole heartedly defend everybodies right to spend their money where they choose. I don't bet every track because there are so many choices. Some tracks I have a better feel for than others. However, when I can't get a feel for a surface I don't demand that track management change the surface to my liking (not implying that you do).

[bdw0617]

Dave C,

you said it better than I could. Yes I bet SoCal but only when I can look at every horse and know what they will or wont' do on synethics. the problem is, there are 3 different synethics, and they are always switching tracks, and fairplex is dirt, horses ship in from sunland which is dirt, etc. it's too much.

turf i'll play all day long however.

My bread and butter is and always been Churchill/Oaklawn/ Arlington. I don't know why.. I just have a very good feel for those tracks ov er others. those three tracks are the staple of what I do. NY tracks and Delaware is definatly playable as well.

I won't tough presque isle or suffolk if it were the last track in the country

[BenB]

Steward you are JUST AGAINST THE ARTIFICIAL TRACKS no matter what.