Should we be starting 12 across?

[edwardwilliam]

Let's push the infield in at Balmoral, and move the finish line 300 feet closer to the turn.

It's definitely a possibility that we could be the first harness track in America to start 12 across...would this help the handle?  I would think so.

If the horsemen are really that against trailers -- solve the problem...start 12 across.

Could you imagine the gimmick pools?  Let's not forget that a 12 horse field has 47% more exacta combinations, 83% more tri combinations, and 136% more super combinations.

If the tracks want to make a carryover -- make it tougher to hit it!

Best,
EW

[off stride]

YEA BABY....12 BREAKING 2 YEAR OLD COLT TROTTERS ON THE TRACK AT ONE TIME...NEXT COMMENT WILL SUGGEST WE HAVE FIGURE 8 HARNESS RACING...HHHHMMMMM I THINK WE GOT SOMETHING HERE...ANY HARNESS TRACKS IN ISLIP NEW YORK???]

[John Doe]

Let's push the infield in at Balmoral, and move the finish line 300 feet closer to the turn.

It's definitely a possibility that we could be the first harness track in America to start 12 across...would this help the handle?  I would think so.

If the horsemen are really that against trailers -- solve the problem...start 12 across.

Could you imagine the gimmick pools?  Let's not forget that a 12 horse field has 47% more exacta combinations, 83% more tri combinations, and 136% more super combinations.

If the tracks want to make a carryover -- make it tougher to hit it!

Best,
EW

EW;

Horrible idea. If you want to start 12 across just ask Brent Holland. I do not know if you have ever been in a horse accident but I can tell you first hand, it is not any fun. I have had my left leg, right ankle, left wrist, and left elbow all broken from horse accidents over the years. I still walk with a slight limp on my right side from my ankle being fractured in three places. Ouchhhhh!

As we speak about this, Brent has told Marty and the IHHA about the danger of 9-horse fields at Maywood and if you remember right, Brent refused to drive in them at first and is still not very happy about it. EW, anytime you add more horses to the number you already have, it becomes a recipe for disaster, especially considering the speed horses’ travel at today. It only takes one mistake or bad move by a person and it might be all done. I realize that factor exists today, but why increase it anymore than necessary. I understand the gambling end of it, but 12-horse fields are surely not the answer. Get rid of the current people in charge and you will see an upward trend in Chicago harness racing. There are too many pissed off people at the current regime for anything positive to happen in Chicago, in my opinion.

My suggestion if you want to start 12 horses across, make sure you have 3 to 4 ambulances and paramedics available at all times...on track! I think you are watching too many Thoroughbred races from Australia. Big difference in harness racing plus the fact that the bald snake cannot fill 7 horse fields right now, who would come to Chicago to race and deal with him, Langley, or the Johnston's when you know that you will be racing for less money and dealing with incompetent people busting your balls 24/7. where would all of these extra horses come from? Look at tonight's Balmoral program, the second race has 7 horses and it is a nw-4 to be claimed for $7k. I can see it printed across the top of the program now,"In this 12-horse field, in the event of a scratch, the purse will be reduced $1100.00 making the total purse money for the race $1600.00. Knock em dead boys. LOL 


Best Regards,
Joseph M. Dakuras

[Terry Hunt]

JD,

Don't be so tough on EW.  I sent him a private message in regards to the 12 horse fields and trailers.

I didn't really intend for it to be taken literally, but I suggested that trailers pose many problems for horsemen - safety, strategy, etc.

The only reason why anyone would contemplate starting a race with more horses than the starting gate can accomodate is to provide the possibility of more outcomes of the race - therefore increasing the possibility of higher payouts which might create more interest for the bettors.

I made the apples to oranges comparison that when the thoroughbreds race a bigger field than the main gate will hold that they don't put the auxiliary starting gate behind it...although I do think that would add some excitement

I also joked that if we are trying to create the appeal of speed and potential danger that seems to fuel the NASCAR fans, that we should consider a half mile figure eight race track that would take two complete laps and the horses would be making alternate left and right hand corners.

I think EW knew I was joking, and I think he has had a little fun with his post as well.

We have much more serious issues confronting our industry than putting more horses into a race than the track was designed to accomodate.  Joe is right, there is sufficient danger under normal race conditions...we don't need to intentionally add to that risk.

[TC]

JD,

Don't be so tough on EW.  I sent him a private message in regards to the 12 horse fields and trailers.

I didn't really intend for it to be taken literally, but I suggested that trailers pose many problems for horsemen - safety, strategy, etc.

The only reason why anyone would contemplate starting a race with more horses than the starting gate can accomodate is to provide the possibility of more outcomes of the race - therefore increasing the possibility of higher payouts which might create more interest for the bettors.

I made the apples to oranges comparison that when the thoroughbreds race a bigger field than the main gate will hold that they don't put the auxiliary starting gate behind it...although I do think that would add some excitement

I also joked that if we are trying to create the appeal of speed and potential danger that seems to fuel the NASCAR fans, that we should consider a half mile figure eight race track that would take two complete laps and the horses would be making alternate left and right hand corners.

I think EW knew I was joking, and I think he has had a little fun with his post as well.

We have much more serious issues confronting our industry than putting more horses into a race than the track was designed to accomodate.  Joe is right, there is sufficient danger under normal race conditions...we don't need to intentionally add to that risk.

Terry and Joe, I myself think that a trailer or two at Balmoral isn't as dangerous as you think.  I don't like them on a 1/2 mile -the Galt was a joke IMO.  People are forgetting that today's steeds are speedier as Joe said, and an accident at higher speeds could turn into a disaster.  i think a mini-solution would be to get horsemen to take advantage of the AE rules and scratch your stock if you think he's still sick or lame, instead of waiting and causing a short field.  This way the fans can see full fields and the track can reach full handle to trickle down to the horsemen.  JMO.  TC

[burton]

TC,
Keeping AE horse ready to go would probably not work from a training standpoint but you're right, these small fields are a joke and any idea to stimulate bigger pools, better payoffs, more fans etc; should be looked at.

[njhorseman]

Terry and Joe, I myself think that a trailer or two at Balmoral isn't as dangerous as you think.  I don't like them on a 1/2 mile -the Galt was a joke IMO.  People are forgetting that today's steeds are speedier as Joe said, and an accident at higher speeds could turn into a disaster.  i think a mini-solution would be to get horsemen to take advantage of the AE rules and scratch your stock if you think he's still sick or lame, instead of waiting and causing a short field.  This way the fans can see full fields and the track can reach full handle to trickle down to the horsemen.  JMO.  TC

The safety problem has little or nothing to do with speed...it has everything to do with how many horses' noses are on how many drivers' helmets on a piece of real estate of limited size.

As for using AEs, the problem lies in scratch time in the age of full card simulcasting to the "world." There just isn't as much time between the draw and scratch time as there was before simulcasting, because programs have to be finalized early enough to allow them to be available at remote locations or via Trackmaster. As a result, at many, if not most tracks, scratch time is 24 hours or less after the draw. If your horse was sound and healthy enough to drop in the box today, he probably still will be tomorrow at final scratch time, but might not be by race date. If scratch time was 2 or 3 days after the draw as it used to be, more horses would be scratched before the program is finalized, allowing AEs to move in.

[John Doe]

Terry and Joe, I myself think that a trailer or two at Balmoral isn't as dangerous as you think.  I don't like them on a 1/2 mile -the Galt was a joke IMO.  People are forgetting that today's steeds are speedier as Joe said, and an accident at higher speeds could turn into a disaster.  i think a mini-solution would be to get horsemen to take advantage of the AE rules and scratch your stock if you think he's still sick or lame, instead of waiting and causing a short field.  This way the fans can see full fields and the track can reach full handle to trickle down to the horsemen.  JMO.  TC

TC;

As a bettor, I love larger fields to wager and gamble on for obvious reasons. As a participant in the game, I hate them because of safety reasons, having to beat more horses to earn a check, and the chances of interference between competing horses becomes drastically increased with every single horse you add to the mix.

As far as scratching your horse if he is sick/lame at the last minute goes, if you got rid of the bald snake Doc, Langley, and the Johnston's, you would see a sudden increase in the number of horsemen willing to accommodate an AE along with industry related issues being done in a more fair and honest manner. In other words, I believe the horsemen would be much more cooperative if these cancerous growths were removed from the industry. These guys are worse that RECAPTURE! When you have guys like Johnny Johnston (whom rode a ringer) and Langley, whom owns horses in partnership with Johnny, writing races and defrauding the horsemen, as I have said so many times before, they are suppose to set examples, not display forms of corruption as they do. They say all horsemen all crooks and such, but I say, it takes one to know one! LOL. Just my opinion.


Best Regards,
Joseph M. Dakuras

[Dan Nance]

Let's push the infield in at Balmoral, and move the finish line 300 feet closer to the turn.

It's definitely a possibility that we could be the first harness track in America to start 12 across...would this help the handle?  I would think so.

If the horsemen are really that against trailers -- solve the problem...start 12 across.

Could you imagine the gimmick pools?  Let's not forget that a 12 horse field has 47% more exacta combinations, 83% more tri combinations, and 136% more super combinations.

If the tracks want to make a carryover -- make it tougher to hit it!

Best,
EW

Come on Edward, they can't fill races now so how in the hell do you think they can race 12 horse fields. Use some common sence already.

   

[sn]

When the gestapo wanted 12 horse fields on the last race at SPK5/8 he guaranteed money to the horses not getting a check and made the purse 50% bigger!!!
The drivers hated it , the trainers were ok with it, and of course the owners loved it!!!
Who do you think won out?? the drivers!!!

[race track phil]

           when they had them at spk were there any accidents ? naturally the drivers would object its harder to get a good check . its a good subject ! if i were a driver i would'nt want them . as a bettor naturally you can hit a big one . but it will never happen the drivers will never agree to 12 horse fields . and lets face it the drivers are in control .       RTP

[Dan Nance]

           when they had them at spk were there any accidents ? naturally the drivers would object its harder to get a good check . its a good subject ! if i were a driver i would'nt want them . as a bettor naturally you can hit a big one . but it will never happen the drivers will never agree to 12 horse fields . and lets face it the drivers are in control .       RTP

You're right Phil the drivers are in control. Look how they sat out when they wanted to take away their $25 driver fees.

[edwardwilliam]

TC;

As a bettor, I love larger fields to wager and gamble on for obvious reasons. As a participant in the game, I hate them because of safety reasons, having to beat more horses to earn a check, and the chances of interference between competing horses becomes drastically increased with every single horse you add to the mix.

As far as scratching your horse if he is sick/lame at the last minute goes, if you got rid of the bald snake Doc, Langley, and the Johnston's, you would see a sudden increase in the number of horsemen willing to accommodate an AE along with industry related issues being done in a more fair and honest manner. In other words, I believe the horsemen would be much more cooperative if these cancerous growths were removed from the industry. These guys are worse that RECAPTURE! When you have guys like Johnny Johnston (whom rode a ringer) and Langley, whom owns horses in partnership with Johnny, writing races and defrauding the horsemen, as I have said so many times before, they are suppose to set examples, not display forms of corruption as they do. They say all horsemen all crooks and such, but I say, it takes one to know one! LOL. Just my opinion.


Best Regards,
Joseph M. Dakuras

Is there any proof, other than opinion, that there's a marked decrease in safety with larger fields?  I'm trying to think of the wild carnage caused by the trailers at Maywood, but I'm coming up blank.

Best,
EW

[Dan Nance]

Is there any proof, other than opinion, that there's a marked decrease in safety with larger fields?  I'm trying to think of the wild carnage caused by the trailers at Maywood, but I'm coming up blank.

Best,
EW

Please, lets put this topic to rest. This is not t-bred racing with 12 or more horses in a race. It's harness racing where 10 should be the limit. T-breds don't pull racebikes around the track. There is much more room on the track for t-breds opposed to harness horses pulling sulkies around.

[edwardwilliam]

Please, lets put this topic to rest. This is not t-bred racing with 12 or more horses in a race. It's harness racing where 10 should be the limit. T-breds don't pull racebikes around the track. There is much more room on the track for t-breds opposed to harness horses pulling sulkies around.

Dan,

This has nothing to do with the flats in any way, shape, or form.  It's about creating more interest and pools for the gamblers that allow this sport to exist.

I don't notice any more accidents in races with trailers, especially on the mile.  I can definitely understand the concerns at Maywood -- but at Balmoral, there's no reason that you couldn't run 12 on the track at once.

The drivers/trainers/owners always have a choice not to participate.  If purse bonuses were put up, and good classes were chosen (so not to have too many young or cheap horses out there), there's no reason that we couldn't use something like this to deviate our product.

Who chose the arbitrary numbers of 8 and 10 across anyway?  Who's to say 7 and 9 across aren't safer?  At the same time, since it hasn't been done, who's to say 12 across is impossible or completely unsafe?

People in this sport need to think outside of the box, otherwise, it will cease to exist.  Not saying that this is a great idea, but anything remotely different always gains a pile of naysayers.

Best,
EW

[TC]

EW, stack up 12 bikes across Balmoral, side by side, and tell us what you have.  CHAOS.  If you wanted to schedule these, you can't cram them down tthe throats of drivers who don't want them, owners who want a better percentage edge of getting a check (one of youe tenets, I believe), or trainers who don't want an injured horse in their stalls.  That's what these people are trying to tell you on this.  BTW, since you mostly stay at home, don't wager into the pools, don't own any, etc. don't you think the use of "us' and "we" is a little off ? I catch myself from time to time, but then again I've stimulated the economies of Mel Pk. and Crete thousands of times, did own a piece or two from time to time, and still give my best "shot" (roughly 80 %) to the tracks live, rather than Youbet, Pinnacle, or SD or ID.  JMO.  TC

[Dan Nance]

Dan,

This has nothing to do with the flats in any way, shape, or form.  It's about creating more interest and pools for the gamblers that allow this sport to exist.

I don't notice any more accidents in races with trailers, especially on the mile.  I can definitely understand the concerns at Maywood -- but at Balmoral, there's no reason that you couldn't run 12 on the track at once.

The drivers/trainers/owners always have a choice not to participate.  If purse bonuses were put up, and good classes were chosen (so not to have too many young or cheap horses out there), there's no reason that we couldn't use something like this to deviate our product.

Who chose the arbitrary numbers of 8 and 10 across anyway?  Who's to say 7 and 9 across aren't safer?  At the same time, since it hasn't been done, who's to say 12 across is impossible or completely unsafe?

People in this sport need to think outside of the box, otherwise, it will cease to exist.  Not saying that this is a great idea, but anything remotely different always gains a pile of naysayers.

Best,
EW

Edward

        It's really not about safety on a mile track. Scoring 12 across is crazy in the first place. It's hard enough to win when you have the 8, 9, or 10 hole in harness racing let alone adding 2 more horses into the mix.

        Increasing the size of the fields is not going to put more money into the pools. The same amount of money will be bet by the same people who attend the races.

[edwardwilliam]

Edward

        It's really not about safety on a mile track. Scoring 12 across is crazy in the first place. It's hard enough to win when you have the 8, 9, or 10 hole in harness racing let alone adding 2 more horses into the mix.

What about a slanted starting gate?

        Increasing the size of the fields is not going to put more money into the pools. The same amount of money will be bet by the same people who attend the races. [/b]

In my opinion, this is an incorrect statement.  Many people bet because they want to hit a "big one" and something like this would give them a chance.  Give a sharp gambler a chance at a healthy return, and his money you will receive.  I would guarantee the handle in Indiana on the "12 horse field day" was much larger then normal.

Best,
EW

[edwardwilliam]

EW, stack up 12 bikes across Balmoral, side by side, and tell us what you have.  CHAOS.  If you wanted to schedule these, you can't cram them down tthe throats of drivers who don't want them, owners who want a better percentage edge of getting a check (one of youe tenets, I believe), or trainers who don't want an injured horse in their stalls.  That's what these people are trying to tell you on this.  BTW, since you mostly stay at home, don't wager into the pools, don't own any, etc. don't you think the use of "us' and "we" is a little off ? I catch myself from time to time, but then again I've stimulated the economies of Mel Pk. and Crete thousands of times, did own a piece or two from time to time, and still give my best "shot" (roughly 80 %) to the tracks live, rather than Youbet, Pinnacle, or SD or ID.  JMO.  TC

Would 11 across be chaos?  Is 10 across chaos now?

With the appropriate purses/bonuses handed out, owners could be taken care of.  As I've noted -- I don't see how 12 horses on the Balmoral track will cause that much more trouble!  If the proverbial "shit hits the fan," injuries and accidents can occur in a 5 horse field.  Obviously, there's more horses on the racetrack -- but you can't hope for the worse, and lose handle as a result.

Best,
EW

[TC]

EW, actually is was a bit, but not marginally.  The payoffs were a huge hit -multiple IRS exactas on the card, wth tris and super to make your mouth water.  But, it was all $5,000 claimers and many horsemen in the ship-in barn were upset that they didn't get a check.  Hence, no such event this year.  The law of averages says a trainer has a 1 in 2 chance of cashing in a 10 horse field.  They don't like their average falling to just above 41% -you might not either.  Keep in mind I want to see these "super fields" too.  TC

[Chitown Stan]

I agree with Edward. If it was up to these drivers and trainers, there would be 6 horse fields every race. Its time to do whats better for the sport, and I believe this is one of the many ideas that can give Chicago a boost.

[Michigan Dale]

A very unscientific mini-poll among bettors at one of my local haunts indicated they're betting amounts and styles would not change just because the field is larger.  In fact, some indicated they'd look more favorably for 'value' in a shorter field and as such wager accordingly.   Must agree with DN about starting 12 across - not a great idea.  Further, my poll says the pools will remain about the same.   Again, very unscientific but I tend to think correct.    I can remember those mega fields at Sportsman's Park (may it rest in peace) and frankly didn't care for them.   My wagering style did change - amounts were lessened and Tri's were seldom an attractive bet for me.
Speaking of large fields, try this on for size - Northfield Park has a 10 horse field (two trailers) in a CKG Billings Amateur Race Friday night!   Now, to me, much as I like the Billings, I think thats a very bad idea and a potentially dangerous one.   Chances are 3 or 4 will make a break in the first quarter as they try and win the race in the first turn and then hopefully they'll get out of the way of the others.  Hope I'm wrong but I can almost see it coming.  Speaking of the Billings - the Midwest Consolation and Final will be contested at Balmoral a week from Sunday on November 13th.   If last year is an indication one will be a wagering affair, the other a non-betting purse race.   For those handicapping, remember to hone in on the driver more than the horse.   Generally good horses can get fouled more in these races and the lesser horses can finish strong when handled by one of the leading drivers in the series. Now, if you have both a leading driver AND a good looking horse, that bodes will for a WIN.  Happens time and time again.   Lets see what happens.

[edwardwilliam]

EW, actually is was a bit, but not marginally.  The payoffs were a huge hit -multiple IRS exactas on the card, wth tris and super to make your mouth water.  But, it was all $5,000 claimers and many horsemen in the ship-in barn were upset that they didn't get a check.  Hence, no such event this year.  The law of averages says a trainer has a 1 in 2 chance of cashing in a 10 horse field.  They don't like their average falling to just above 41% -you might not either.  Keep in mind I want to see these "super fields" too.  TC

Truthfully, only doing it for one night will not really allow the results to shine...imagine -- if after seeing those big payoffs -- you let people do it again!  They would DEFINITELY be back for more.

As far as the purse problem, here it is solved:
10 horse field, $5,000 purse pays: $2,500-$1,250-$600-$400-$250, right?
12 horse field, $5,500 purse pays: $2,695-$1,320-$660-$400-$275-$150.  Or, pay the same purse levels, and give $100 just for starting...

As I said before, I'm not saying this is the answer to save racing...but people need to be open to trying different ideas like this.  If there's issues with implementation of a potential improvement, you don't complain, you solve the problem -- a la the above.

Best,
EW

[John Doe]

A very unscientific mini-poll among bettors at one of my local haunts indicated they're betting amounts and styles would not change just because the field is larger.  In fact, some indicated they'd look more favorably for 'value' in a shorter field and as such wager accordingly.   Must agree with DN about starting 12 across - not a great idea.  Further, my poll says the pools will remain about the same.   Again, very unscientific but I tend to think correct.    I can remember those mega fields at Sportsman's Park (may it rest in peace) and frankly didn't care for them.   My wagering style did change - amounts were lessened and Tri's were seldom an attractive bet for me.
Speaking of large fields, try this on for size - Northfield Park has a 10 horse field (two trailers) in a CKG Billings Amateur Race Friday night!   Now, to me, much as I like the Billings, I think thats a very bad idea and a potentially dangerous one.   Chances are 3 or 4 will make a break in the first quarter as they try and win the race in the first turn and then hopefully they'll get out of the way of the others.  Hope I'm wrong but I can almost see it coming.  Speaking of the Billings - the Midwest Consolation and Final will be contested at Balmoral a week from Sunday on November 13th.   If last year is an indication one will be a wagering affair, the other a non-betting purse race.   For those handicapping, remember to hone in on the driver more than the horse.   Generally good horses can get fouled more in these races and the lesser horses can finish strong when handled by one of the leading drivers in the series. Now, if you have both a leading driver AND a good looking horse, that bodes will for a WIN.  Happens time and time again.   Lets see what happens.

Dale;

Is Langley in that amateur race at Northfield? If he is, I hope he ends up lying face first in front of the grandstand and he gets ran over by the other nine horses. Langley has no business driving in any of those races because he is too old and senile. Some of the other amateurs who have driven against him say he is dangerous and if you park his ass, he will not give you stalls or tell the IRB not to license you. I would love to put Langley up to drive one and load him up with M99 and Heroine and watch his ass go flyin!

[Michigan Dale]

Hello Joe D - Nope, the Commander in Chief of the USTA only drove in 1 Billings race this year (Balmoral) and in a 'Gentlemans Trot' at Lexington last month.   In the Midwest standings that places him 60th among 66 drivers that earned points.  Actually, there are some pretty decent drivers in the series.  Others, well, as they say they try and win in the first turn and that just does not work!   Someday probably next year I plan to give em' a try myself.   Only in non-wagering events at this point, however.   I don't want some poor sap putting a couple of bucks on a horse I'm driving.  I know my limitations and do it for fun and the rush it provides.   Hopefully my horse, however, will be entered at Balmoral on the 13th.   That is, if she behaves herself between now and then.   We'll have to wait and see.....