0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Probably Hawthorne, or one of the new York tracks.. Vernon or Tiaoga
I guess what I need to know is....Is harness racing for participants or fans, or blended both, with what percentage taking precedent, or is it intended to be 50/50?If harness racing is for participants, close all tracks with small purses. That is easy.If for fans, close all with no handle. Again, easy.Believers in the first fail to see that without a focus for fans, who will pay for the participation long term? And, on the second part, if participants are not paid, why will they race for fans?The bridge to the second perspective seems clearer to me. More fans, means more potential revenue to pay the participants, and thus encourage them to race. The first perspective requires an independent source, a handout to some, to continue to race. Clearly, some blend is needed, but it seems a focus towards fan participation leads to more on track participation, than vice versa. Just a quick, probably incomplete summary, of what I've felt for a while, yet never expressed. So, if I were to be in charge of closing tracks, I would close small handle tracks and shift their purse revenue, where possible, to larger fan base tracks. In NY, much of the Vernon, Vernon, Tioga and Buffalo money would go to Monticello, where there is a clear desire from fans to continue racing. Buffalo's Saturday card....13 races, top handle was $19,172, with 3 races handling under 10K.Monticello's Monday card.....9 races, top handle was $58,688, while the lowest was a single race with just over 11K, and all others closer to, and well over 30K. Harness racing seems to offer more of what people care less about. I'm not sure that is good business.
It is an entertainment/sports product which should be supported by customers/patrons/fans not government handouts. If the customers/patrons/fans do not support the product sufficiently then the product should be changed or cease to exist. Tax dollars should not support something the public does not want.
I guess what I need to know is....Is harness racing for participants or fans, or blended both, with what percentage taking precedent, or is it intended to be 50/50?If harness racing is for participants, close all tracks with small purses. That is easy.If for fans, close all with no handle. Again, easy.Believers in the first fail to see that without a focus for fans, who will pay for the participation long term? And, on the second part, if participants are not paid, why will they race for fans?The bridge to the second perspective seems clearer to me. More fans, means more potential revenue to pay the participants, and thus encourage them to race. The first perspective requires an independent source, a handout to some, to continue to race. Clearly, some blend is needed, but it seems a focus towards fan participation leads to more on track participation, than vice versa. Just a quick, probably incomplete summary, of what I've felt for a while, yet never expressed. So, if I were to be in charge of closing tracks, I would close small handle tracks and shift their purse revenue, where possible, to larger fan base tracks. In NY, much of the Vernon, Vernon, Tioga and Buffalo money would go to Monticello, where there is a clear desire from fans to continue racing. Buffalo's Saturday card....13 races, top handle was $19,172, with 3 races handling under 10K.Monticello's Monday card.....9 races, top handle was $58,688, while the lowest was a single race with just over 11K, and all others closer to, and well over 30K. Harness racing seems to offer more of what people care less about. I'm not sure that is good business. If a track closes there no “purse revenue” to move. You need to clarify that one?
