How speed has affected bettors over the years

After receiving a communique from Hughie, a long-time player, he related why his participation in harness racing has become limited over the years and confined to, mostly, tracks larger than a half mile.

“I consider myself a decent player—$50 to, maybe, $100 a race” he said, “and John Campbell hit the nail right on the head when he said that legislators and casinos watch (pari-mutuel) handle closely to monitor their investment in racing every year.

“There are ‘live’ tracks and there are ‘dead’ tracks and I classify them on how a $50 to $100 win wager will alter the odds.

“Of course, (in the U.S.) The Meadowlands is the king because a $50 win bet may (or may not) cost a bettor anything on the board or, maybe, 20 cents if they are on the cusp of change and there are some other decent ones here like (Harrah’s) Hoosier (Park) and Scioto (Downs) and, on occasion, The Red Mile.

“The guy down there (Gabe Prewitt) is doing a lot of things to build the place up and build handle.

“But, when you get down to the nitty-gritty of half-milers, Northfield Park is, really, the only one that I can even think of playing these days, although Monticello gets a little action, too, lately, especially in the exotics” (exacta, trifecta, superfecta).

“Northfield has full fields and a pretty good clientele and the pools are pretty darn good…but I tend to stay with the larger tracks because the stretches are longer and there are still horses that can close a bit more than on half milers.

“Guys leaning back don’t do the bettors any good because they put the closers too far back to much damage.”

Hughie is “right on the money” here with his thoughts and the ever threat of shorter fields is slowly putting the sport in future danger.

“Breeders run the business,” he said, “and all they care about is speed but speed kills longer racing careers and has played a big role in these shorter fields…and I think it’s only going to get worse.”

Examining Hughie’s thoughts, a “bit further, in a 10-horse field with a 20% takeout, if all horses had the same amount bet on each one, the odds board would show “8” (to 1) and the pay would be about $18.00.

In a eight horse field, the board would show “5” (to 1) with the win mutuel about $12.80.

When you get down to a six-horse field—with all things being equal—the board would show 7 to 2 with a mutuel of $9.60.

Hughie is correct in thinking that, with shorter fields, the wagering value decreases and players can become disenchanted and disengaged from wagering as value decreases.

“This is a spectator sport with an aging clientele that loses more older players at a faster rate without the newer, younger crowd replacing them,” he rightfully says.

If you think the lottery is to blame…or casinos…or sports betting…or props…you’re right because they are always finding new gimmicks to entice new blood—something harness racing is not doing to any great degree.

Guaranteed pools help a bit but they are only used when there are carryovers…and that’s not every night!

Again, there are some tracks doing something about this dilemma…and others trying to do something…but, as Hughie says, there are “dead” tracks for the bettor, no matter what purses are offered.

In examining win pools from a recent Saturday night—remember, it’s still winter time—The Meadowlands average win pool for all their races was a tad over $40,000—some a little lower and some appreciably higher.

Hughie’s $50 win bet would have a negligible effect on the odds board.

Looking at another track—won’t mention the name—even a $50 bet would destroy that horse’s value to the bettor BIG TIME.

Here’s a breakdown from one track…

In the particular race in question, on a Sunday night with little competition, the official chart had number one at odds of 4.1 to 1 ($8.20). Had Hughie placed a $50 wager on this horse, the winning payoff would have been reduced to $6.40 and, with a $100 bet, the odds would have been 3 to 2 ($5.00).

Number two was off at 12 to 1 (probable $2 pay of $26.00). A $50 bet would reduce the odds to 9 to 2 ($11.80) with a $100 bet further lowering the odds to 5 to 2 ($7.80).

Yet another example involving the even money tote-board favorite—actually 1.10 to 1 ($4.20) —would reflect a $2 payoff of $3.40 with an additional $50 bet, further reduced to tote-board odds of 1 to 2, resulting in a $3.00 win mutuel.

Of course, one might argue that the difference between $4.20 and $3.00 is only a measly dollar and twenty cents…but, if it’s that $100 wager we’re talking about, that means a $60 difference in the win payout, which is quite significant, even for the “bigger” player.

The most extreme change with a “Hughie” bet involves the longest shot on the board—15 to 1. A $33.40 win payoff would shrink to $14.00 with a $50 bet and, with that $100 bet would make that pick in a “DH” as second choice in the betting at 3 to 1 ($8.80).

By the way, the purse in this race was $10,000 and, based on total handle for this particular race the purse would have been about $180.00! (Yes, one-hundred eighty and 00/100 dollars).

Hughie classifies this track as a “dead” track for the bettor.

He continued, ”To be a successful bettor—and I’ve been gambling for way over 50 years—you have to find value for your bets…bets that make it worthwhile win, lose or draw.

“When betting what I call ‘a dead track,’ you wind up being against yourself…and that’s what harness racing is doing to itself with short fields and tracks with low handle.

“Purses don’t matter to me all that much because many tracks are on crutches with casino help and legislative transfusion making purses decent for horse people…but for how long?”

Hughie also believes that, with the drain on the bottom line, infusing purse money into bloodstream of racing may get to be a “bothersome thing for shareholders, if these are publicly held companies on the NYSE or NASDAQ,” he says.

“Casinos watch their bottom line like a hawk, and they are going to get tired of supporting racing down the road and there’s no telling what a buck or two in a legislator’s pocket can do to turn the tide favoring decoupling.

“Just look at Florida, for example!

“That guy (the Governor) turned his back on the very voters that allowed casinos in the first place.

“MIchigan is a bad way now. So is Chicago and all of Illinois. The midwest was one of the biggest players and, now, they are hardly visible—encased in fog!”

So, Hughie, what do you consider to be the “live” tracks besides the ones mentioned above?

“As they say, different strokes for different folks…I like win wagering and win pools are pretty weak these days…but that because of all the different types of waters offered, so it’s hard to find a track with decent win pools.

“Saratoga is pretty good, especially with exotic handle…Cal Expo is very decent, but short fields tend to put a damper on value in some races…Dover (Downs) has fairly full fields, good driver colony and value in some exotics…

Hughie has no opinion—yet—on many of the tracks that haven’t opened for the 2024 season as yet—like Oak Grove, Shenandoah, Harrah’s Philly, Running Aces—saying, “I’ll look at them and, if I find value in anything, I’ll be in the action.

“I love the sport,” he says, “but I’m not sure how long I’ll be in the betting arena if things don’t change a ‘bit.’”

Hughie says, “only TIME will tell!”

And that’s too bad.

May The Horse Be With You.

by John Berry, for Harnesslink