"We’re in trouble"....D.Wayne Lucas

[randallscott35]

Betting on Preakness down 11.6 percent
By Matt Hegarty

All-sources wagering on Saturday's Preakness Stakes at Pimlico Race Course in Baltimore fell 11.6 percent from the near-record number posted on the race last year, according to figures released by Pimlico.

The decline in Preakness betting accompanied similar drops in total betting on the 13-race Saturday card and in the preliminary television rating for a two-hour broadcast on NBC. However, the attendance figure for the day rebounded sharply after a dramatic decline last year that was triggered by Pimlico's decision to prohibit infield attendees from bringing in alcoholic beverages.

According to the figures, betting this year on the 12-horse Preakness was $52,766,815, down almost $7 million from the wagering figure of $59,726,342 on last year's 13-horse field, a lineup that included the eventual Horse of the Year, the filly Rachel Alexandra. Betting on last year's race was up 30 percent compared to the 2008 running, which was won by the heavy favorite Big Brown, and was the second-highest total of all time.

The sharp decline on the Preakness contributed to an 8.5 percent drop in all-sources betting on the entire 13-race card. Total wagering this year was $79,248,002, compared to $86,684,470 last year. However, last year's betting figure was up 14 percent from the all-sources handle total of $71.5 million in 2008.

The decline in Preakness betting almost exactly matched the decline in betting on the entire card, indicating that horseplayers bet nearly the same amount on the 12 undercard races as they did last year. On the Preakness itself, the wagering pools for win, place, show, exacta, and trifecta bets were all down significantly compared to last year.

[Kasept]

Crist succinctly explains the handle numbers...


Preakness 2010 Handle
CristBlog

The $7.4 million decline in Preakness Day betting from last year was almost entirely due to a sharp dropoff in straight, exacta and trifecta betting on the Preakness itself[/u] on a day when handle was virtually even with last year's through the day's first 11 races.

As the table below illustrates, nearly $7 million of the $7.4 million dropoff came from intrarace betting on the Preakness: declines of $2.98 million in win-place-show betting (from $23.08 million to $20.10), a $1.5 million decline in exacta betting (from $13.26 to $11.73 million), and a $2.5 million decline in trifecta betting (from $16.43 to $13.94 million.)

The rest of the day's decline of just over $500,000 was entirely attributable to the day's last race, right after the Preakness, where there was only a five-horse field and intrarace pools were off 34 to 73 percent from a year ago.

Betting was up 10 percent after the day's first six races. Pools were all over the map after that -- down on the Schaefer and Gallorette, then up on the Maryland Sprint and the Dixie -- but the total after 11 races was off by less than 1 percent.

It seems that the decline, especially after a 4 percent jump in Derby betting two weeks ago, speaks less to any industry trends than to the appeal of the main event. Clearly, last year's Preakness, with Rachel Alexandra taking on the 1-2-3 Derby finishers, piqued betting interest more than this year's edition.

[randallscott35]

True Steve but I would have thought they might get a slight improvement off the 1% drop up to the last race, off CD 4% increase. Especially after allowing the infield crowd back.

[pointman]

I couldn't agree more, Steve. This Preakness really just didn't create any exciting buzz as some of the horses in the past few years. Very few outside the industry were talking about Super Saver the last two weeks. I guess a horse with likeable connections or a compelling story really makes a big difference in the intrest of the triple crown series.

[randallscott35]

I thought the Fields were also excellent for the undercard.

[VOL JACK]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Crist succinctly explains the handle numbers...


Preakness 2010 Handle
CristBlog

The $7.4 million decline in Preakness Day betting from last year was almost entirely due to a sharp dropoff in straight, exacta and trifecta betting on the Preakness itself[/u] on a day when handle was virtually even with last year's through the day's first 11 races.

As the table below illustrates, nearly $7 million of the $7.4 million dropoff came from intrarace betting on the Preakness: declines of $2.98 million in win-place-show betting (from $23.08 million to $20.10), a $1.5 million decline in exacta betting (from $13.26 to $11.73 million), and a $2.5 million decline in trifecta betting (from $16.43 to $13.94 million.)

The rest of the day's decline of just over $500,000 was entirely attributable to the day's last race, right after the Preakness, where there was only a five-horse field and intrarace pools were off 34 to 73 percent from a year ago.

Betting was up 10 percent after the day's first six races. Pools were all over the map after that -- down on the Schaefer and Gallorette, then up on the Maryland Sprint and the Dixie -- but the total after 11 races was off by less than 1 percent.

It seems that the decline, especially after a 4 percent jump in Derby betting two weeks ago, speaks less to any industry trends than to the appeal of the main event. Clearly, last year's Preakness, with Rachel Alexandra taking on the 1-2-3 Derby finishers, piqued betting interest more than this year's edition.

I was ignorant on how big of a percentage the Preakness itself means to the days total handle.
Why is no one betting the undercard races....there were some really good betting races at Pim Saturday.

[cmorioles]

How is it possible after all these years people still can't spell L-U-K-A-S correctly?

[Soaring Softly]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

How is it possible after all these years people still can't spell L-U-K-A-S correctly?

I know it's a totally meaningless issue, but that just makes me crazy too, cmorioles. I just don't get it.

The man is in the Hall Of Fame, basically revolutionized the training game into what we see today, has trained 4 Derby winners, 5 Preakness winners, and at least 2 Belmont winners, is still the all-time leader in Breeders Cup winners, and throw in an Arlington Million for the heck of it......

and people STILL can't spell his name right! Just amazing!

[DaTruth]

Originally Posted by Soaring Softly

I know it's a totally meaningless issue, but that just makes me crazy too, cmorioles. I just don't get it.

The man is in the Hall Of Fame, basically revolutionized the training game into what we see today, has trained 4 Derby winners, 5 Preakness winners, and at least 2 Belmont winners, is still the all-time leader in Breeders Cup winners, and throw in an Arlington Million for the heck of it......

and people STILL can't spell his name right! Just amazing!

It is common to see Asmussen misspelled as Assmussen, but that might be intentional.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by DaTruth

It is common to see Asmussen misspelled as Assmussen, but that might be intentional.

i know when i do it, it's intentional. i would rather people quit spelling a lot as one word, they can keep that c in lukas as a trade!


and that pic is hilarious. i wish i'd taken a pic of the 'jewlery' store sign.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by Soaring Softly

I know it's a totally meaningless issue, but that just makes me crazy too, cmorioles. I just don't get it.

The man is in the Hall Of Fame, basically revolutionized the training game into what we see today, has trained 4 Derby winners, 5 Preakness winners, and at least 2 Belmont winners, is still the all-time leader in Breeders Cup winners, and throw in an Arlington Million for the heck of it......

and people STILL can't spell his name right! Just amazing!

You forget to mention how he 'trained' a couple of the preeminent juicers in the game presently.

[VOL JACK]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

You forget to mention how he 'trained' a couple of the preeminent juicers in the game presently.

Mark Hening and Dallas Stewart???....

[Handicappy]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

You forget to mention how he 'trained' a couple of the preeminent juicers in the game presently.

Help me with this. I am very confused with what a trainer has to do to "juice" a horse for a race. ARe they considered a juicer if they train on it but run clean? It doesn't seem to make sense that a horse is gonna run on banned substances on purpose when they are only gonna get caught bact at the spit barn after the race.

[Soaring Softly]

Originally Posted by Cardus

He might have won at least four Belmont Stakes, three of them consecutively.

That's why I said "at least two" Cardus. I knew when I typed my post that there were more than two, but Tabasco Cat and Thunder Gulch were the only ones I could remember at that moment. I thought I'd rather be conditionally wrong than state some number that was completely wrong! LOL!

You said four......the other two are Editor's Note and Commendable, right?

One thing that's neat is that I'll never forget them again!

[cakes44]

Originally Posted by Soaring Softly

That's why I said "at least two" Cardus. I knew when I typed my post that there were more than two, but Tabasco Cat and Thunder Gulch were the only ones I could remember at that moment. I thought I'd rather be conditionally wrong than state some number that was completely wrong! LOL!

You said four......the other two are Editor's Note and Commendable, right?

One thing that's neat is that I'll never forget them again!

For the life of me I have no idea how he ever trained a horse to get 1 1/2 miles. It is a fricken MIRACLE when his horses make it a mile against anyone but Oaklawn maidens these days.

Dublin might seriously be a SUPER HORSE, but we likely won't ever find out.

[westcoastinvader]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

How is it possible after all these years people still can't spell L-U-K-A-S correctly?

Perhaps an apt time to note California Public Education with the sharing of a sign that appears at our local OTB on "big event" weekends.

This photo is from Preakness Saturday.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

How is it possible after all these years people still can't spell L-U-K-A-S correctly?

I blame the schools.

[Danzig]

it's due to no prayer in schools, and women wearing pants. i'm sure that's the cause.

[2Hot4TV]

Ebonics, sex education and George W. Bush. My excuse is quitting school to pay the rent alnog with being slow.

[clyde]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

How is it possible after all these years people still can't spell L-U-K-A-S correctly?

Tell me how this will change the rotation of Earth...and maybe you can get an answer.