Chicago Barn to Wire Breeders' Cup Handicapping Tournaments
Home | News | Bloggers | Forums | Resources | Links | Marketplace | Gallery | Contact Us | Search


October 24, 2014, 08:38:34 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: If you don't remember your password, email me.

New  registration procedures -- Some ISPs have been bouncing the verification emails.  Please email me to be activated or if you have any problems.  Click Contact Us above.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Arlington Stakes  (Read 3735 times)
orioles
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 913




Ignore
« on: December 09, 2008, 03:21:12 PM »

 Grin The 2009 stakes schedule is out, any comments ?     
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #1 on: December 09, 2008, 04:27:23 PM »

Grin The 2009 stakes schedule is out, any comments ?     

Yes, they have inconsiderately scheduled nearly all of them during the summer months, when I'll be out of state again.  Angry
Report to moderator   Logged
our favorite omen
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1046




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: December 09, 2008, 06:07:43 PM »

Enjoying Big Sky Country, or wherever it is that you go out west, Clockerstinky?
OFO
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #3 on: December 09, 2008, 06:10:28 PM »

Enjoying Big Sky Country, or wherever it is that you go out west, Clockerstinky?

Exactly so, Omission.

Any exciting Tuesday afternoon action at Trackside recently?
Report to moderator   Logged
General Powell
Guest

« Reply #4 on: December 09, 2008, 07:37:00 PM »

If you haven't done so please read Marcus story in the DRF--

If anyone really wants to know what's wrong with racing, start with the Illinois Thoroughbred Horseman's Association.  I had respect for that group and for Frank Kirby--but no more. He and his Exec Director, Greg Szymski, made the worse, most convuluted presentation I have every seen in all my years of attending meetings, either at work or in a Public setting such as this. He presented material with baseless assumptions and trumped up information. He wanted every stakes race cut to the Minimum amount to keep them graded--a strategy that would be doomed to failure. I was also surprised that while giving their presentation neither seemed to know anything about the rules and regulations of the Illinois Racing Board.  It would have been comical except that these individuals are responsible for a lot of owner investments and are clearly one of the problems with Illinois Racing. Commissioner Casiano really ripped into them after these jerks were finished.
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #5 on: December 09, 2008, 11:52:24 PM »

The Chicago thoroughbred horsemen have given poor and disjointed presentations in front of the IRB every time I've ever attended an IRB meeting. It sounds as though little has changed. It's disheartening to learn our ED did much of his work the night before the meeting. He's paid a salary, and a nice one, and that's what we get in the way of preparation and representation.  thumbs down

We can only hope the AP overnight purses go up the way the stakes purses did. They should, after all the gifts the IRB gave AP in the way of dates for 2009.

2009: The best year of AP racing ever! Big purse increases!
Report to moderator   Logged
big wally
Guest

« Reply #6 on: December 10, 2008, 09:16:03 AM »

Cut all the stakes races, extend the race to season to 12 months and run bottom claimers with 5 and 6 horse fields from Dec to March
that is the ITHA mission
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #7 on: December 10, 2008, 09:51:25 AM »

Cut all the stakes races, extend the race to season to 12 months and run bottom claimers with 5 and 6 horse fields from Dec to March
that is the ITHA mission

Actually, if you read the story, it said they were concerned about the purse increases for the stakes in 2009, because in a poor economy they might cause existing overnight purses to decline. It's probably a well-founded concern.
Report to moderator   Logged
General Powell
Guest

« Reply #8 on: December 10, 2008, 02:12:59 PM »

Clocker--Your opinion,but listening to those guys it came accross as follows---We are not good enough to race against open company, so screw the stakes and race the journeymen horses.

I was hoping Kirby would be willing to voluntarily accept smaller purses if he ends up in the money in 2009 stakes, but that was not forthcoming

BTW--Overnight stakes are planned to be run at 60K this year, an increase of 20% per race.
Report to moderator   Logged
Thomas Graham
Guest

« Reply #9 on: December 10, 2008, 05:36:36 PM »

Overnight stakes will be $60k because that is the new "black type" minimum for 2009
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #10 on: December 10, 2008, 10:54:20 PM »

Clocker--Your opinion,but listening to those guys it came accross as follows---We are not good enough to race against open company, so screw the stakes and race the journeymen horses.

I don't follow - Did they want more money dedicated to Illinois-bred races? Or, were they just griping about increases for stakes races, like Marcus wrote?

Track vs. local horsemen over the stakes issue is the same at every track. It's a legitimate concern.

Your journeymen horses make the bulk of the money (locally, and as a whole, because so much of our wagering is on other tracks' journeyman races). None of those stakes races ever draw enough wagering to pay for themselves, except a few really marquee ones like the Kentucky Derby, and the BC races. Go ahead and take a look back at last year's handle numbers on races like the AP Million. Not even close to paying for itself. Or, just imagine what kind of racing program you'd have if those stakes were the only races you ran after scaring off all those journeyman horses that are so despicable and insignificant. One race every two weeks wouldn't keep too many people employed, backside or front.
Report to moderator   Logged
orioles
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 913




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: December 10, 2008, 11:30:45 PM »

 Huh if overnight stakes are raised and some other stakes races are raised , where did the money come from? the 3% casino bill which wasn't' t signed yet. ( will it become a reality ?) or come after Million Day will AP say handle is bad and then cut purses across the board.
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #12 on: December 10, 2008, 11:37:09 PM »

Huh if overnight stakes are raised and some other stakes races are raised , where did the money come from? the 3% casino bill which wasn't' t signed yet. ( will it become a reality ?) or come after Million Day will AP say handle is bad and then cut purses across the board.

Well, in this case, AP will be so awash in new revenue next year thanks to the IRB taking dates away from Hawthorne and giving them to AP, that everyone will be enjoying huge 20% purse increases, stakes horses and 5k claimers alike.

Mark my words. 2009 = Best Arlington purses ever!
Report to moderator   Logged
fnlfurlong
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 485




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: December 11, 2008, 02:10:19 AM »

Well, in this case, AP will be so awash in new revenue next year thanks to the IRB taking dates away from Hawthorne and giving them to AP, that everyone will be enjoying huge 20% purse increases, stakes horses and 5k claimers alike.

Mark my words. 2009 = Best Arlington purses ever!

Keep drinking the Koolaid. Arlington got one more week over 2008, and Hawthorne lost a week. That isn't earth shattering from a bottom line perspective. The fact of the matter is that racing at AP generates more for the Illinois horsemen in purse revenue than racing at Hawthorne (because of larger handle), so the addition of dates is some what substantiated. Furthermore, Hawthorne's dates since the breakdown of the NJCC have increased substantially so they are in a better position in 2009 than they were in 2006 when they split dates with the NJCC.
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #14 on: December 11, 2008, 10:20:31 AM »

The fact of the matter is that racing at AP generates more for the Illinois horsemen in purse revenue than racing at Hawthorne (because of larger handle)

We agree, then. There should be a substantial increase in purses at AP next season.
Report to moderator   Logged
orioles
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 913




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: December 11, 2008, 11:58:02 AM »

 Grin Only time will tell.
Report to moderator   Logged
fnlfurlong
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 485




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: December 11, 2008, 03:17:11 PM »

We agree, then. There should be a substantial increase in purses at AP next season.

There will be more purse money generated than if that day was held a Hawthorne. But we don't agree, because no-one ever said it would equate to substantial increases. The substantial claim is your editorial. A few extra days of racing, won't cause that jump, and no one has claimed it would. You are the only one claiming there should be a large increase to try and set false expectations so that when there isn't "substantial increases" you can carry the flag of Hawthorne martyrdom. And what you always fail to address is how Hawthorne has actually had a greater increase in race dates and host time than AP since 2006 and the folding of the NJCC.
Report to moderator   Logged
NIATROSS
Guest

« Reply #17 on: December 11, 2008, 03:23:05 PM »




« Last Edit: December 11, 2008, 03:35:29 PM by NIATROSS » Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #18 on: December 11, 2008, 03:27:52 PM »

There will be more purse money generated than if that day was held a Hawthorne. But we don't agree, because no-one ever said it would equate to substantial increases.

So, what you're saying is, it really makes little difference at all which track has the dates, as far as purses? That it's only some small nominal amount more for a few days? That admission kind of cuts the rug out from under your argument that the dates are better off at Arlington from a purse standpoint, doesn't it?

Quote
And what you always fail to address is how Hawthorne has actually had a greater increase in race dates and host time than AP since 2006 and the folding of the NJCC.

On the contrary, that's what you always address, no matter what the subject, as if it has any bearing on anything. They had the crappy Fall dates, then they shared the crappy Spring dates, and now they've got both the crappy Fall dates and crappy Spring dates, and lost their lucrative winter harness meet in the process of covering for Arlington's two year snit fit. Those are all facts that have been known for several years, yet you keep bringing it up. There's no reason for me to address that - there's no argument. Taking away dates from one track, particularly the winter dark dates when there's no racing expense, and giving them to another track, is a transfer of wealth, no matter how many dates one track had to begin with. That's the issue now. The track that's getting the extra dates had better do something special with them to justify it. That's why I'm looking forward to that big purse increase for local horsemen as a result of this dates switch, not just Dick's out of town stakes friends. I feel confident it will happen. Let the good times roll! 
Report to moderator   Logged
fnlfurlong
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 485




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: December 11, 2008, 03:53:59 PM »

So, what you're saying is, it really makes little difference at all which track has the dates, as far as purses? That it's only some small nominal amount more for a few days? That admission kind of cuts the rug out from under your argument that the dates are better off at Arlington from a purse standpoint, doesn't it?

On the contrary, that's what you always address, no matter what the subject, as if it has any bearing on anything. They had the crappy Fall dates, then they shared the crappy Spring dates, and now they've got both the crappy Fall dates and crappy Spring dates, and lost their lucrative winter harness meet in the process of covering for Arlington's two year snit fit. Those are all facts that have been known for several years, yet you keep bringing it up. There's no reason for me to address that - there's no argument. Taking away dates from one track, particularly the winter dark dates when there's no racing expense, and giving them to another track, is a transfer of wealth, no matter how many dates one track had to begin with. That's the issue now. The track that's getting the extra dates had better do something special with them to justify it. That's why I'm looking forward to that big purse increase for local horsemen as a result of this dates switch, not just Dick's out of town stakes friends. I feel confident it will happen. Let the good times roll! 

It is amazing how you twist one small piece of the facts and turn it into something very much different. The increase in AP race dates and presumed resulting increase in revenue for the purse account (who knows, but the downturn in the economy is probably just balancing out the addition of days) does not necessarily mean an increase in purses for races. You neglect to take into account that there could be large purse over-payments that are being made up, you neglect to consider the number of races ran per day. Therefore these posts of yours are incredibly misleading, and you use them to support the martyrdom of Hawthorne. And even through all that, it has already been established on here that overnights are increasing 10K, with just seven or so more days.


Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #20 on: December 11, 2008, 04:09:59 PM »

It is amazing how you twist one small piece of the facts and turn it into something very much different. The increase in AP race dates and presumed resulting increase in revenue for the purse account (who knows, but the downturn in the economy is probably just balancing out the addition of days) does not necessarily mean an increase in purses for races.

So, what does it mean? More money for Arlington?

Quote
You neglect to take into account that there could be large purse over-payments that are being made up

Is there? Or, are you just making that up?

Quote
you neglect to consider the number of races ran per day.

What is that supposed to mean? Arlington says they run just as many per week at 4 says as Haw does at 5. What is it I'm supposed to consider?

Quote
Therefore these posts of yours are incredibly misleading, and you use them to support the martyrdom of Hawthorne.

Did or did not the IRB take dates from Haw and give then to AP? Fact. Did or did not you say the transferred dates would lead to greater purses earned at AP? Fact. Therefore, thanks to posters like you and your claims, the reader is entitled to believe there will be purse increases, is he not? I can't wait! What's truly misleading is you trying to spin the transfer of dates first as though as though it means something, but then as meaning nothing, just to support your brown nosing of AP. 

Quote
And even through all that, it has already been established on here that overnights are increasing 10K, with just seven or so more days.

When was that established? I missed that news. Was it an AP press release? Is the first book out? We can count on it, for sure? I can't wait!
Report to moderator   Logged
fnlfurlong
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 485




Ignore
« Reply #21 on: December 11, 2008, 04:36:07 PM »

So, what does it mean? More money for Arlington?

Nope, more money for the purse account....

Is there? Or, are you just making that up?

This has been discussed on here before and you know that. Don't all of sudden try and decredit me, when you know full well that this is an issue that has been discussed here before. There was a post recently specifically about this. Plus I didn't state there is, I said there could be and that a purse over-payment would factor into the ability to pay purses on a daily basis.

What is that supposed to mean? Arlington says they run just as many per week at 4 says as Haw does at 5. What is it I'm supposed to consider?

I'm stating that the number of races run directly impacts the level of purse money offered. The point simply is you are taking a small portion of the facts and providing it in a light to make it sound like it is the whole truth. The fact of the matter is that there are lots of other factors in the purse distribution equation that mean more race/host time does not necessarily equal an increase in individual purses. E

Did or did not the IRB take dates from Haw and give then to AP? Fact.

They awarded dates in a manner that they thought would benefit Illinois racing the most as a whole. One track got more than the other, and the ITHA supported it.

Did or did not you say the transferred dates would lead to greater purses earned at AP? Fact.

Again you're twisting the facts. I said that it would lead to greater money generated for the purse account, but there are many factors that impact the distribution of money from the purse account. I never said anything about the level of purses horsemen would earn at the track.

Therefore, thanks to posters like you and your claims, the reader is entitled to believe there will be purse increases, is he not? I can't wait! What's truly misleading is you trying to spin the transfer of dates first as though as though it means something, but then as meaning nothing, just to support your brown nosing of AP. 

You've done nothing to substantiate your claim. I've made a fairly clear and reasoned presentation of other factors you've neglected to present. I'll let the readers of this forum make their own judgements. And again, I'm not saying there will or will not be a purse increase, just that I wouldn't expect a "substantial" increase from 7 additional days as you seem so compelled to keep claiming.

When was that established? I missed that news. Was it an AP press release? Is the first book out? We can count on it, for sure? I can't wait!

Two posters addressed this, and the Graham fellow said it was a new minimum for 2009.
Report to moderator   Logged
CLOCKERTERRY
Guest

« Reply #22 on: December 11, 2008, 05:17:25 PM »

This has been discussed on here before and you know that. Don't all of sudden try and decredit me, when you know full well that this is an issue that has been discussed here before. There was a post recently specifically about this. Plus I didn't state there is, I said there could be and that a purse over-payment would factor into the ability to pay purses on a daily basis.

Yeah, there could be one in theory. If there isn't though, it's no excuse. So, is there one, or is there not? If there's not, then you're just intentionally misleading readers to confuse things.

Quote
I'm stating that the number of races run directly impacts the level of purse money offered. The point simply is you are taking a small portion of the facts and providing it in a light to make it sound like it is the whole truth. The fact of the matter is that there are lots of other factors in the purse distribution equation that mean more race/host time does not necessarily equal an increase in individual purses.

Yes, the number of races affects purses. However, if the number of races run is the same (like AP says), and the available money is more, like you claim, there should be a purse increase. If you know something about the number of races next year that no one else does, spit it out, or quit misleading the readers with red herrings.

Quote
Again you're twisting the facts. I said that it would lead to greater money generated for the purse account, but there are many factors that impact the distribution of money from the purse account. I never said anything about the level of purses horsemen would earn at the track.

So, where else does the purse account go besides "earned at the track"? (Besides recapture, and the usual small nicks.)

Quote
You've done nothing to substantiate your claim.

Arlington got more days. That's all I need. More days = more revenue = higher purses. It's why they asked for the extra days, to "improve Illinois racing", and now it will be up to them to deliver. No excuses can be accepted when the IRB is giving them everything they want.

Quote
I've made a fairly clear and reasoned presentation of other factors you've neglected to present.

Things that might be, but aren't, because you just made them up. I could say Hawthorne's woes might be due to space aliens.

Quote
And again, I'm not saying there will or will not be a purse increase, just that I wouldn't expect a "substantial" increase from 7 additional days as you seem so compelled to keep claiming.

Two posters addressed this ($10,000 extra per day), and the Graham fellow said it was a new minimum for 2009.

Well, let's just think about that for a minute. What you're apparently claiming is that by giving the dates to AP, the local/overnight horsemen will be seeing an extra $10k per day across the whole live AP meet. The 2009 dates, as compared to the 2008 dates, give Arlington a grand total of two (2) more live racing days. The other eight (8) days they picked up are simulcast host days. Now then, I think we can pretty much agree it doesn't matter who is simulcast host, bettors are going to bet their simulcasts no matter who gets the dough, and the horsemen will get that purse money no matter who is running the meet. That's a wash. So, this entire claim must boil down to generating an extra $10,000 per day of purse money across the whole 98 days of live racing, just based on two extra live days. In other words, each of those extra live days will generate $490,000 above and beyond the normal amount earned per day, $280,000 or whatever it is. Wow! Why didn't the 96 days AP ran this year generate anything like $770,000 per day of purses? Those two days next year are going to be "do not miss" for sure! I wonder if they will advertise them ahead of time so we'll know them when we see them. 

Now then, if the claim is that those two extra racing days next year will have a total outlay $10k more than if they had been run at Haw, well, maybe I could believe that. But that's not what you said at all, was it? 
Report to moderator   Logged
Thomas Graham
Guest

« Reply #23 on: December 11, 2008, 05:37:24 PM »

Hang on - I'm being taken out of context ---

I said that $60,000 is the new minimum overnight stakes purse to  be considered to get black type.  That doesn't equate to $10k per day more in purse money - it means that if either track wants the overnight stakes race to have ANY meaning for breeders (and that all that black type matters to) then it has to have a minimum purse of $60k.

Since neither AP nor HAW offer overnight stakes daily, this by no means means that they are paying $10k more PER DAY - just $10k more per overnight stakes race when offered.

HAW's stakes schedule release said any Saturday that there is no regular stakes race there will be a $60k o/n stakes.  I would assume that AP will offer o/n stakes most weekends when they don't have a major stakes as well.

But if total outlay is $200k per day on average, paying $60k for an o/n stakes means some other race(s) will have to have a lower purse since the total is the same - unless as Terry likes to say "gold dubloons come falling from the sky" or something to that effect.

Signed,
That Graham guy (Tom or Thomas would be just fine)
Report to moderator   Logged
fnlfurlong
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 485




Ignore
« Reply #24 on: December 11, 2008, 05:42:34 PM »

Hang on - I'm being taken out of context ---

I said that $60,000 is the new minimum overnight stakes purse to  be considered to get black type.  That doesn't equate to $10k per day more in purse money - it means that if either track wants the overnight stakes race to have ANY meaning for breeders (and that all that black type matters to) then it has to have a minimum purse of $60k.

Since neither AP nor HAW offer overnight stakes daily, this by no means means that they are paying $10k more PER DAY - just $10k more per overnight stakes race when offered.

HAW's stakes schedule release said any Saturday that there is no regular stakes race there will be a $60k o/n stakes.  I would assume that AP will offer o/n stakes most weekends when they don't have a major stakes as well.

But if total outlay is $200k per day on average, paying $60k for an o/n stakes means some other race(s) will have to have a lower purse since the total is the same - unless as Terry likes to say "gold dubloons come falling from the sky" or something to that effect.

Signed,
That Graham guy (Tom or Thomas would be just fine)

I meant overnight stakes and misspoke. Both you and General referred to the 10K overnight increase as I did in an earlier post in this thread. It was just an mistake that Terry tried to jump all over. The fact of the matter is, the extra days don't necessarily equate to an substantial increase in daily purses like Terry is trying to claim. There is nothing misleading in what I am saying. I'm just saying there is more to it than just adding or subtracting days. For god sake, he doesn't even account for the fact that by the nature of adding more days they have to incur an increased outlay in purse money paid out in order to run races those extra days.
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.107 seconds with 16 queries.

Home
Upcoming events
Arlington Million
Horse slaughter in IL
Racing TV schedule
News Updates
Legislation

Galloping Out

Previous stories

Arlington
Balmoral
Hawthorne
Maywood
Chicago Sun-Times
Chicago Tribune
Blood-Horse
Daily Racing Form
Thoroughbred Times
Harness Link
Illinois Racing Board

 

2014

Arlington Million
Triple Crown
Illinois Derby

2013

Breeders' Cup
Hawthorne Gold Cup
Arlington Million
Triple Crown
Illinois Derby

2012

Breeders' Cup
Hawthorne Gold Cup
Arlington Million
Triple Crown
Illinois Derby

More ebay items

 

Home | News Updates | Bloggers | Forums | Search
Resources | Links | Marketplace | Gallery | Advertising | Contact Us

Copyright © 2000-2014 Chicago Barn to Wire. All rights reserved.
Privacy policy