Ja, Murray and Gerard spawn these questions

Ja Morant, Murray and Gerard have spawned Mane Attraction conversation and questions about our future here in harness racing.

I’m sure some of you, especially pro basketball fans, know of Ja Morant.

He can shoot baskets with the best of them, but he’s been caught brandishing a gun on a couple of occasions which has put him in some hot water.

So, what’s the big deal?

Well, the NBA tries to have the highest of standards not only in the game of basketball, itself, but in the very players its teams draft for the future and their fortunate “inheritance” of a career that will make them multi-multi-millionaires.

When a player steps out of line even a single step, action is taken in the form of a COMMISSIONER and his ruling.

Adam Silver is the Commissioner for the NBA having taken over from David Stern and Silver’s hand has been, indeed, “stern” when necessity has called for consequences.

Racist comments, brandishing a gun…that sort of thing, doesn’t sit well with him.

He’s banned team owners from the sport for life, moved game venues, handed out multi-million-dollar fines and long-term suspensions.

In other words, he takes no guff…from language to behavior…

Ja stepped out of that line—not once, but twice—the Commissioner caught it, didn’t like it and there were consequences.

Major league baseball is the same way…and so is the NFL.

From baseball’s Kenesaw Mountain Landis way back when on through Bowie Kuhn and Peter Ueberroth and Bart Giamatti and Fay Vincent we have Commissioner Bud Selig, who has banned more people from the game of baseball than his three immediate predecessors…COMBINED.

By people, the bans include players, scouting personnel, assistant general managers, and pitching coaches.

Take a guess on how many NFL fines and suspensions have taken place since, say, 1980.

100?   150?   175?

I stopped counting at 700.

That’s right! Commissioners take no guff!

The fines and suspensions stretch to officials, executives and judges—line judges, field judges, umpires and replay judges, too…even an assistant equipment handler (remember deflate gate?)

For what are we waiting?

If we consider ourselves a major sport, we need to step up to the plate and prove to those both inside and outside of our industry that we are.

Next, Murray Brown is one of the most astute geniuses in our grand sport. Yes, a wine connoisseur he is…but, as well, a keen observer of the standardbred and, when he speaks or writes anything about our beloved sport, we should all listen or read.

He posted a Facebook tale recently about the number of odds-on favorites these days with proof of such occurrences at no less than 10 tracks.

Yes, “times” have changed with the “times” and it’s even possible in Kentucky, now that they have penny breakage, to have a legitimate 1 to 9 shot on the tote board paying $2.24 cents to win…also 1 to 8 ($2.28), 1 to 7 ($2.32) and 1 to 6 ($2.36) before popping up to $1 to 5 ($2.40).

Anyhow, there may be a solution to this problem.

Of course, nothing is going to happen, but there is a solution.

Back in 1953, The Hambletonian had 23 starters with two tiers of 10 and a third tier of three.

To this very day, elite races contested in other countries have large fields, as well.

The problem of odds-on horses in races can be alleviated with larger fields and fewer races.

A perfect example of this theory can be found on a recent Saturday in Pennsylvania…two tracks…27 races…without a single field larger than eight starters.

There were 11 eight horse fields, eight races with seven horses entered and seven races with but six starters.

Taking one of those tracks as an example, there were 13 races with purses totaling $200,500—an average of $15,423 per race—with an average field size just over seven.

There were 92 starters on that program with 65 earning purse money and 27 going back to the stable empty.

Had there been only nine races with the same purse money available, the average purse would have jumped to $22,278 and the purse structure could have accommodated every starter to, at least, cover expenses.

But even more importantly, the average field size would have been slightly more than 10 per race with the probability of an odds-on favorite reduced by the distance of a race—a mile!

Racing secretaries could certainly write conditions stretching them a bit to accommodate the increased entries and things would be “better for the bettor!”

On larger tracks field sizes would increase from 10 to 12 with two second tier trailers.

On smaller tracks, field sizes would be increased from seven to nine or eight to 10 with two second tier trailers, as well.

One question has to be answered in putting this program into place…Do we write races for the horsemen or the betting public?

If you have selected the former, harness racing has lost the ballgame.

Finally, past Mane Attraction columns have advocated the use of prop bets to promote interest in the sport and grab some sorely needed headlines outside of our own bubble and another headliner came recently when one bettor plunked $20 on two specific pro basketball players each making three point shots of for their first points.

That parlay had +128000 odds but his two players—Joel Embed and Michael Porter, Jr.—hit the buckets and the guy got $25,620…and the headlines!!!!!

It only takes one to grab headlines and put any sport in the limelight.

Many suggestions have been received from the people that really matter—the bettors—and here are some of their voices on the issue.

From Al Weiss of Chicago: “Instead of betting on the horses, I would like to see a separate pool betting on drivers. Some years back, they did that for the (Kentucky) Derby, and the horse was 3 to 1 and there was a prop on his jockey at 4 to 1.”

Ken “The Bug Man” wrote “I love the future bets on our big races and think there should be future bets on these beginning when the first nominations are complete. I’d love to take a shot at a well-bred two-year-old for the Hambo for three-year-olds and get 100 to 1 odds. I remember the prop bets on Presidential elections far out and got 80 to 1 on one of my picks…but didn’t win…but I saw as time went on the future bets were updated regularly and, a few months later, he was 10 to 1.”

Gerard W. Thinks an “over-under” figure on the winning number of favorites could be interesting along with driver-to-driver competition and number of wins on a particular program, I.e., Meadowlands-Corey Callahan over/under 1 1/2 or Northfield Park—Aaron Merriman over/under 3 1/2 or Saratoga—Wally Hennessey over/under 2 1/2.”

Other bets could be on times, inquiries, disqualifications, winners at 20 to 1 or more, quarter times, miles under 1:50, dead-heats for win (over/under 1/2 or any position over/under 1 1/2)—all calculated by the professional prop betting expert.

Bettors could hand pick their parlays and daily double and other exotic wagers…even create a daily double for oneself at two different racing venues. (Remember the guy who won $72,000 and change for his $5 football parlay bet with four different teams?)

Who will be the leading dash winning driver this year? How about purse earnings? Will any horse earn $1,000,000 this racing season?

The possibilities are endless and interesting and may even soften the blow to a 23 minute torturous wait between races.

Of course, the safest bet is for nothing to happen with these observations and our sport will remain in a quagmire fighting for survival grabbing at the lifeline from casinos and legislatures.

That, my friends, sadly, just might be the best bet!

by John Berry, for Harnesslink