Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > Main Forum > The Paddock
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-19-2006, 10:13 AM
cmorioles's Avatar
cmorioles cmorioles is offline
Santa Anita
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 3,169
Default

In 2-4 years, it may not matter if it is a good idea or not, as it seems most will have them by then.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-19-2006, 10:15 AM
oracle80
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Was waiting for this, tee hee.
SMART people don't just recite stats, smart people examine the circumstances!!
Umm, Euro, you wanna tell me what Hollywood's handle crashed and burned so badly last year at the corresponding meet?
You wanna tell me why Hollywood's field size got clobbered last year?
Or don't you pay attention to "minor details" like that?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-19-2006, 10:17 AM
Gander Gander is offline
Del Mar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,336
Default

I could care less about stats, in my opinion the racing at Hollywood has been ruined. I use to like this meet and now I cant even watch a race unless its on turf. Thank god Santa Anita is only a few days away and that is still real dirt, at least for now.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-19-2006, 10:27 AM
eurobounce
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oracle80
Was waiting for this, tee hee.
SMART people don't just recite stats, smart people examine the circumstances!!
Umm, Euro, you wanna tell me what Hollywood's handle crashed and burned so badly last year at the corresponding meet?
You wanna tell me why Hollywood's field size got clobbered last year?
Or don't you pay attention to "minor details" like that?
Well smart people go back further than one year to examine circumstances. The increase in field size reversed a 7 year trend (not an 1 year trend). For 7 years in a row, field size has been on a decline until this fall meet at Hollywood. So I am not looking at 1 year period. I tend to believe the workmans compensation problems in Cali have contributed greatly to the decline in starters year over year. And I believe they have that figured out. The decline in starters last year was because of the turf problems I believe.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-19-2006, 10:30 AM
eurobounce
 
Posts: n/a
Default

So Oracle, what is your reasoning as to why there has been a 7 year decline in starters at Hollywood?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-19-2006, 10:31 AM
oracle80
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eurobounce
Well smart people go back further than one year to examine circumstances. The increase in field size reversed a 7 year trend (not an 1 year trend). For 7 years in a row, field size has been on a decline until this fall meet at Hollywood. So I am not looking at 1 year period. I tend to believe the workmans compensation problems in Cali have contributed greatly to the decline in starters year over year. And I believe they have that figured out. The decline in starters last year was because of the turf problems I believe.
You cited a bump as compared to last year.
And lets face it, racetrack handle was up at the fair circuits huge this past year, and has been a trend all year.
19% bump off the worst meet in history circumstance wise is not even what I expected.
I've been waiting for this data, and was expecting you to be the first to post about it, but I was expecting a 25-30% bump. The 19% shocked me as very low.
Increased number of dates and average races per day, the return of grass racing, and a huge trend with upwward handle this year.
Trust me, it can be spun anyway you want, But I'm sure they expected a greater increase.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-19-2006, 10:33 AM
eurobounce
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oracle80
You cited a bump as compared to last year.
And lets face it, racetrack handle was up at the fair circuits huge this past year, and has been a trend all year.
19% bump off the worst meet in history circumstance wise is not even what I expected.
I've been waiting for this data, and was expecting you to be the first to post about it, but I was expecting a 25-30% bump. The 19% shocked me as very low.
Increased number of dates and average races per day, the return of grass racing, and a huge trend with upwward handle this year.
Trust me, it can be spun anyway you want, But I'm sure they expected a greater increase.
You didnt answer my question. How do you explain the reversal from a 7 year pattern?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-19-2006, 10:39 AM
oracle80
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eurobounce
You didnt answer my question. How do you explain the reversal from a 7 year pattern?
They ran many grass races, thats why. In the past the turf course was horrible and they couldnt.
The handle should have been up way more than that with the stakes races of the turf festival back in play, more racing dates!!!!! and many more races!!! and grass racing back!!!
Do you do deny this?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-19-2006, 10:43 AM
eurobounce
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oracle80
They ran many grass races, thats why. In the past the turf course was horrible and they couldnt.
The handle should have been up way more than that with the stakes races of the turf festival back in play, more racing dates!!!!! and many more races!!! and grass racing back!!!
Do you do deny this?
I will buy that as a reason for a one year period but not a steady decline in starters over a 7 year period. Orlace, do me a favor and go back and do a historical analysis of Hollywood..compare on-track handle and field size since 1999 and compare that to the 2006 fall meet then come back with your numbers. Dont just compare the worst meet in history and use that as an excuse. Again, smart people use at least a 5 year historical analysis (like me).
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-19-2006, 10:22 AM
eurobounce
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmorioles
In 2-4 years, it may not matter if it is a good idea or not, as it seems most will have them by then.
Well lets hope not. I think Arlington should be the last to install a synthetic surface for awhile. Lets see how these tracks and surface do after a 2-4 year time.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-19-2006, 11:05 AM
cmorioles's Avatar
cmorioles cmorioles is offline
Santa Anita
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 3,169
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eurobounce
Well lets hope not. I think Arlington should be the last to install a synthetic surface for awhile. Lets see how these tracks and surface do after a 2-4 year time.
Delmar, Bay Meadows, Golden Gate will for now.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-19-2006, 11:06 AM
eurobounce
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmorioles
Delmar, Bay Meadows, Golden Gate will for now.
Yeah, I am not real happy about that. I would like to see Hollwood and Bay Meadows until they get some data on the surface.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-19-2006, 11:08 AM
cmorioles's Avatar
cmorioles cmorioles is offline
Santa Anita
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 3,169
Default

Whether this is good or not, a big part of the reason for the bump in field size is the success turf horses had running on the fake stuff. Those type horses never ran on dirt, but were more than happy to run on the new surface where the had at worst a fair shot, and probably an edge.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-19-2006, 11:11 AM
eurobounce
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmorioles
Whether this is good or not, a big part of the reason for the bump in field size is the success turf horses had running on the fake stuff. Those type horses never ran on dirt, but were more than happy to run on the new surface where the had at worst a fair shot, and probably an edge.
Exactly correct CM. Turf horses now have two options. If they dont get in a race on the turf, they can go in one on cushion. There are many factors to the increase in field size, but the fact that turf horses have more options is a major factor.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-19-2006, 07:01 PM
sumitas sumitas is offline
Santa Anita
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,362
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmorioles
Delmar, Bay Meadows, Golden Gate will for now.
Throw Presque Isle in with those. Dirt is on the way out.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-21-2006, 05:52 AM
Danzig Danzig is offline
Dee Tee Stables
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: The Natural State
Posts: 29,943
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmorioles
Delmar, Bay Meadows, Golden Gate will for now.
no, delmar and goldent gate. bay meadows is looking at developing, not remaining a track.
__________________
Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all.
Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-21-2006, 06:04 AM
Danzig Danzig is offline
Dee Tee Stables
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: The Natural State
Posts: 29,943
Default

from bloodhorse article:

development of Bay Meadows and Hollywood Park by the Bay Meadows Land Co., which owns the two tracks. The company has not made a commitment to race at Hollywood Park beyond 2008 and it wants to develop Bay Meadows before then.
__________________
Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all.
Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.