There are a number of big, important issues that affect horseplayers. Debates about takeout rates, access to data, and the distribution of racing products must be dealt with in a timely manner. But along with the big concerns, racing also has a number of smaller issues facing the horseplayer – the incomprehensible quirks of the sport that defy 21st century technology but are so accepted by racing’s participants and horseplayers that we barely notice them.
A pacer wins a close race. Five horses are all within a length of each other at the wire. An outsider asks, “How fast did that horse go the mile?”
“1:52.4,” replies the racing enthusiast.
“Wow,” says the newbie. “Did the second placed horse finish the race in 1:52.5?”
“Ahhh, no,” says the enthusiast. “There is no 1:52.5. That would be 1:53.”
“I have no idea what you’re talking about,” says the newbie, brushing off the comment. “Okay, what was the final time of the… fifth place finisher?”
“1:52.4,” says the enthusiast, sheepishly.
“But, wasn’t that the time of the winner?”
“Yes, the top five horses all recorded the same mile time,” says the enthusiast. “We time races in fifths of a second, and measure it based on lengths behind the winner. Horses are not individually timed.”
“So let me understand this,” says the newcomer, boldly. “You guys have a sport where I need a PhD in mathematics to read the race program, yet your top five finishers are all recorded with identical times? Are you aware that it’s 2011 and you can buy a stopwatch at the dollar store that records hundredths of a second?”
“And another thing,” continues the outsider, his voice escalating. “If 1:52.4 is actually 1:52.8, then say 1:52.8! Your racing terminology is not only confusing – it’s incorrect.”
In horse racing, the oddities certainly don’t end there. The minutes to post clock is virtually meaningless. (Read our analysis on page 37 to understand why.) Posted odds change periodically, instead of in real time, and are rounded off to the nearest dollar. Racing rules are totally inconsistent from one jurisdiction to the next. Listed payouts are based on different dollar figures at different racetracks. Simulcast schedules and off times are poorly coordinated.
“Imagine I wanted to trade a stock,” says the newcomer. “What if I looked online and saw Canadian Tire at $60 per share? I lay out my money, press confirm, and my purchase is made… at $95 per share? What if the stock market said they’d open at 9:30 a.m. but actually open at 10:15? What if I checked my statement a month later to realize that the listed price of Canadian Tire was not actually $60 for one share, it was $60 for half a share?”
But the oddities continue.
Why is a female four year-old a mare in standardbred racing and a filly in thoroughbred racing? While there might be an explanation for that, surely there is nobody who can justify why thoroughbreds and standardbreds mysteriously use different colour schemes on saddlecloths. Apparently if you gallop, two is white, three is blue and four is yellow, while if you trot or pace, two is blue, three is white and four is green?
Rather than a change or competition committee, which will send cost conscious racing executives running for the hills, how about forming a Baby Steps Committee to tick three items off the list every year?
It would be a start.
Darryl Kaplan
[email protected]
Nice commentary
Nice commentary Darryl.
Obviously though, too many in the Harness Racing hierarchy prefer to whistle past the grave yard, ignore their clients and maintain the status quo. Long as they have slot dollars and/or government funding why bother to renew the sport? Problem is one day the worm (taxpayer) may turn. Then listen for the weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth. That day may not be too far off in some cases either, as there are already financial stability issues arising, particularly on the East Coast.