Public will decide Monmouth's fate

[eajinabi]

Originally Posted by jms62

This isn't your fathers Monmouth Park. Box car payouts , a pick 5 carry, horses winning from off the pace... IMHO a smashing success.

Just by increasing purses, the speed bias that is notoriously known at monmouth automaticaly goes away? Amazing!

[Travis Stone]

Field size generally trumps quality, unless you're talking about big guns and major stakes. Timing and exposure (post time) trumps quality as well, although not as effectively.

I think you can look at it this way... Imagine there's 10 minutes to post at Belmont, and 16 minutes to post at Monmouth. Belmont is a field of 9, Monmouth is maxed-out at 14. Are people going to skip the Belmont race and play Monmouth? No, they'll play both, just like they always have.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

Field size generally trumps quality, unless you're talking about big guns and major stakes. Timing and exposure (post time) trumps quality as well, although not as effectively.

I think you can look at it this way... Imagine there's 10 minutes to post at Belmont, and 16 minutes to post at Monmouth. Belmont is a field of 9, Monmouth is maxed-out at 14. Are people going to skip the Belmont race and play Monmouth? No, they'll play both, just like they always have.

Here's what's escaping most of the racing GURUS:

MTH is operating, essentially, thurs, friday, saturday, and sunday

which is basically when MOST other tracks are also running

MOREVER

they're running at the same time that a whole bunch of tracks are

Now, I don't know where these GURUS are residing but if they think that HIGHER QUALITY HORSES and LARGER FIELDS will make a significant difference, they're mistaken. Nobody from NY is going to make the drive to MTH and MTH will be just ONE MORE track that anyone playing multiple tracks will have to deal with. When it comes to betting, better horses and larger fields (or better purses) doesn't NECESSARILY translate to MISMATCHES (especially on SPEED FAVORING bullring like tracks). I could give a **** how good the horses are; what I'm concerned with is finding races where I have an advantage. And, I suspect, anyone playing the game seriously is looking for the same thing. Moreover, anyone who is not computer generating plays will be forced to either ADD MTH to the HIGH NUMBER of tracks they already play or just IGNORE THEM. I'm going with the latter. Frankly, there are much better betting options at CHEAPER but FAIR tracks elsewhere.

You'd think that tracks would get a ****in clue and spread out their days/time of operation. I'm overloaded with 10 or so tracks on weekends, during the day, and basically play with myself the rest of the week because there are no tracks operating.

MTH must be counting on ON TRACK handle. Which means they're still in 1970's/1980's mode.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Here's what's escaping most of the racing GURUS:

MTH is operating, essentially, thurs, friday, saturday, and sunday

which is basically when MOST other tracks are also running

MOREVER

they're running at the same time that a whole bunch of tracks are

Now, I don't know where these GURUS are residing but if they think that HIGHER QUALITY HORSES and LARGER FIELDS will make a significant difference, they're mistaken. Nobody from NY is going to make the drive to MTH and MTH will be just ONE MORE track that anyone playing multiple tracks will have to deal with. When it comes to betting, better horses and larger fields (or better purses) doesn't NECESSARILY translate to MISMATCHES (especially on SPEED FAVORING bullring like tracks). I could give a **** how good the horses are; what I'm concerned with is finding races where I have an advantage. And, I suspect, anyone playing the game seriously is looking for the same thing. Moreover, anyone who is not computer generating plays will be forced to either ADD MTH to the HIGH NUMBER of tracks they already play or just IGNORE THEM. I'm going with the latter. Frankly, there are much better betting options at CHEAPER but FAIR tracks elsewhere.

You'd think that tracks would get a ****in clue and spread out their days/time of operation. I'm overloaded with 10 or so tracks on weekends, during the day, and basically play with myself the rest of the week because there are no tracks operating.
MTH must be counting on ON TRACK handle. Which means they're still in 1970's/1980's mode.

Colonial is trying a new schedule this year to try to take advantage of this - and I think they settled their ADW issues!

[philcski]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Here's what's escaping most of the racing GURUS:

MTH is operating, essentially, thurs, friday, saturday, and sunday

which is basically when MOST other tracks are also running

MOREVER

they're running at the same time that a whole bunch of tracks are

Now, I don't know where these GURUS are residing but if they think that HIGHER QUALITY HORSES and LARGER FIELDS will make a significant difference, they're mistaken. Nobody from NY is going to make the drive to MTH and MTH will be just ONE MORE track that anyone playing multiple tracks will have to deal with. When it comes to betting, better horses and larger fields (or better purses) doesn't NECESSARILY translate to MISMATCHES (especially on SPEED FAVORING bullring like tracks). I could give a **** how good the horses are; what I'm concerned with is finding races where I have an advantage. And, I suspect, anyone playing the game seriously is looking for the same thing. Moreover, anyone who is not computer generating plays will be forced to either ADD MTH to the HIGH NUMBER of tracks they already play or just IGNORE THEM. I'm going with the latter. Frankly, there are much better betting options at CHEAPER but FAIR tracks elsewhere.

You'd think that tracks would get a ****in clue and spread out their days/time of operation. I'm overloaded with 10 or so tracks on weekends, during the day, and basically play with myself the rest of the week because there are no tracks operating.

MTH must be counting on ON TRACK handle. Which means they're still in 1970's/1980's mode.

Larger fields and higher quality horses have a direct correlation to increased handle. It's been proven time and again. There's a good reason for that... if you think hard you might be able to figure out why.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by philcski

Larger fields and higher quality horses have a direct correlation to increased handle. It's been proven time and again. There's a good reason for that... if you think hard you might be able to figure out why.

The question is whether or not it's significant enough, but then you have to say that every little bit helps.

When you take-out the data movers, such as stakes races and marquee events, and look at the day-in and day-out races, field size trumps everything.

Here is a screenshot from Excel of average handle data at Keeneland. These figures do not include multi-race wagers; only the WPS, Exacta, Trifecta and Superfecta data are repsented as they are the best indicators of a race's strength in the pools. No races with purses > $75k are included. The figures are based on the pool size of all the wagers.



I was perplexed by the 11 horse field size, so I drilled down to that data a bit more. The graph shows that purse (quality) was not a significant mover in this case and the disparity can attributed to a lot of things, possibly including:

* Race placement relative to other big events/races happening at or around the same time (post times)
* Heavy, heavy favorite, which deters exotic wagerers
* Race placement on the card (later in the card typically handles better)
* Randomness (ultimately, this is a small sample)



In my experience being a nerd when it comes to racing handle and following data, field size is the big mover. Major signals, particularly Belmont, are more immune to field size fluctuations due to the strength of their overall brand and product (a 5 horse field at Bel will always out handle a typical 5 horse field at say Louisiana Downs, Arlington or Prairie Meadows etc). When Belmont is able to put 14 horses on the track, however, look out - big handle coming-up.

Secondly, horseplayers will bet anything they have an edge on, regardless of quality. If any random horseplayer spotted a running line he liked, it doesn't matter if the horse is 10-1 in a $5k claimer at Presque Isle or 10-1 in a $5k claimer at Churchill - it's game on.

Third, the whole argument about quality is tough because naturally there is going to be a separation of ability in a sport like horse racing, and there needs to be a place for horses on the bottom. Every track would love to have 10 races everyday with nothing but N1X's, N2X's and stakes... unfortunately, it's not feasible.

Ultimately it comes down to a premise such as this: If you're a player who puts decent money through the windows (you aren't a $2 across the board, or $2 boxer... nor are we talking about big win bettors, as they're rare), and in 10 minutes there is a 7 horse allowance coming up, and right at the same time, a 12 horse claimer... where are you inclined to play? The majority of people go the 12 horse claimer, as that's where the money is.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

The question is whether or not it's significant enough, but then you have to say that every little bit helps.

When you take-out the data movers, such as stakes races and marquee events, and look at the day-in and day-out races, field size trumps everything.

Here is a screenshot from Excel of average handle data at Keeneland. These figures do not include multi-race wagers; only the WPS, Exacta, Trifecta and Superfecta data are repsented as they are the best indicators of a race's strength in the pools. No races with purses > $75k are included. The figures are based on the pool size of all the wagers.



I was perplexed by the 11 horse field size, so I drilled down to that data a bit more. The graph shows that purse (quality) was not a significant mover in this case and the disparity can attributed to a lot of things, possibly including:

* Race placement relative to other big events/races happening at or around the same time (post times)
* Heavy, heavy favorite, which deters exotic wagerers
* Race placement on the card (later in the card typically handles better)
* Randomness (ultimately, this is a small sample)



In my experience being a nerd when it comes to racing handle and following data, field size is the big mover. Major signals, particularly Belmont, are more immune to field size fluctuations due to the strength of their overall brand and product (a 5 horse field at Bel will always out handle a typical 5 horse field at say Louisiana Downs, Arlington or Prairie Meadows etc). When Belmont is able to put 14 horses on the track, however, look out - big handle coming-up.

Secondly, horseplayers will bet anything they have an edge on, regardless of quality. If any random horseplayer spotted a running line he liked, it doesn't matter if the horse is 10-1 in a $5k claimer at Presque Isle or 10-1 in a $5k claimer at Churchill - it's game on.

Third, the whole argument about quality is tough because naturally there is going to be a separation of ability in a sport like horse racing, and there needs to be a place for horses on the bottom. Every track would love to have 10 races everyday with nothing but N1X's, N2X's and stakes... unfortunately, it's not feasible.

Ultimately it comes down to a premise such as this: If you're a player who puts decent money through the windows (you aren't a $2 across the board, or $2 boxer... nor are we talking about big win bettors, as they're rare), and in 10 minutes there is a 7 horse allowance coming up, and right at the same time, a 12 horse claimer... where are you inclined to play? The majority of people go the 12 horse claimer, as that's where the money is.

Great work Travis.

As for your question about the 11 horse fields' data point falling off a bit when you'd expect a number around $900k, sample size probably has the most to do with it. What was your sample size for the other points?

[chucklestheclown]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

The majority of people go the 12 horse claimer, as that's where the money is.

I believe this is the ultimate fallacy.