March 6, 2025 • 55 mins
On this week's Harness Racing Alumni Show, we’ll continue with our open panel discussions on promoting harness racing. We focus on current concerns and issues of the sport while offering fresh ideas and solutions. Joining Freddie Trade, Bob and Andy on this week's panel is, international owners and breeders Gordon Banks & Marc Hanover, presiding judge Dan Kazmaier and standardbred owner Dr. Howard Perlmutter. It’s must listen to broadcast.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to this week's Harness Racing Alumni Show. I'm Freddie
Hudson and I'm here today with Trade Martin, Bob Marx
and Andy Cohen. The Harness Racing Alumni Show with your
host Freddie Hudson and Trade Martin. On this week's show,
we have a continuation of last week's show with international
(00:22):
owners and breeders Gordon Banks and Mark Hanover. Also owner
breeder Howard Promuter and prosidon judge Dan Kasmyer. We are
here to discuss harness racing. Gordon, Mark, Howard, and Dan.
Thank you for joining us tonight.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Pleasure.
Speaker 3 (00:42):
Gordon, You're the lead on this, so I'm turning it
over to you.
Speaker 2 (00:46):
Well, that was definitely all in trouble, but I guess
the summary is akin to giving you a feel for
what happened last week. Maybe you may not have heard
that tape yet, but everything was revolved around a discussion
as to what can be done to try to avoid
(01:10):
the cliff that North American harness racing is right at.
We've discussed international, We've discussed a little bit of what's
going on in New Zealand and Australia. They have a
similar set of problems, although somewhat different in the specifics,
but in terms of the future of harness racing, their
problems are quite similar. I think it was the consensus
(01:32):
of John Campbell and everybody else that was involved in
the first show that there really is a major problem
of harness racing that if significant changes aren't undertaken, that
the industry in five to ten years will be drastically
cut back five or more tracks, dying purse as much lower.
(01:58):
There were some ideas that were put forth, but I
don't want to prejudice everybody's feelings here, but I think
too much about what happened last week, So I think
I'll throw it open to anything that anybody suggests that
can address the real problem that racing in North America has.
With one other point that there's so many things one
(02:21):
can say that could improve the quality of racing, and
they're important, and they certainly can be brought up. But
the really important question is, even if you do everything well,
all those small points get fixed, how does one save racing.
Because it's an industry that's owned by people that want
its death, it's an industry that makes no money. There's
(02:42):
not one profitable harness track in North America on a
standalone horse racing basis, there's no real property ownership. Horse
racing has lost control of its product. This product nowadays
is the live feet. The online betting accounts for ninety
percent or more, and the racetracks get three percent or
(03:04):
less from most of that betting, as opposed to the
twenty percent or more that they used to get in
the old days from on track attendance. So the economics
don't work anymore. The system is hard to change. You
have enemies everywhere, and the question is, with that wonderful synopsis,
(03:24):
what can we all do? What ideas are out there
that can move things forward? So with that, please everybody's thoughts.
Speaker 1 (03:33):
So, as you said the other night, okay, that's Howard,
that's Howard talking.
Speaker 4 (03:41):
Yeah, thank you guys, Gordon. You made reference to a
very many important points the other night.
Speaker 2 (03:46):
There seems to be a lot of.
Speaker 4 (03:49):
Set you know, like everybody is congratulating each other on
the three to four million dollar handle, but at the
three percent return, because nobody's going to the track, it
doesn't really mean very much. And you know, the problem, unfortunately,
is that we have a lot of medieval minds that.
Speaker 2 (04:08):
Are still functioning like it was the eighties.
Speaker 4 (04:11):
When there wasn't really nearly the type of competition that
we had back then in for today's gambling dollar. I mean,
you know, times are just so different where we are
getting crushed and I mean crushed by the every night
gambler that is really into immediate gratification and we haven't
(04:35):
even come close to addressing that. And that's something that
in my humble opinion, if that is not addressed, then
I just don't see us being able to, meaningly, you know,
move forward, whether we have the same amount of tracks,
more tracks, less tracks. We must change the platform. We
must change the model in which we are accessible to
(04:58):
that every day, every night, overnight type gambler. And I'll
stop right now. And you know, I certainly don't want to,
you know, dominate the session, but I'd like to hear
people's response to that concept.
Speaker 2 (05:14):
Adam Mark, I mean, I have comments, but I also
don't want to monopolize, so I I'd rather come in after,
uh you give your thoughts to that, because it's it's
a it's a valid point and if you, uh, we
need to fix our product on the track, and we
need to fix our product from a wagering perspective. Any
ideas or thoughts to what Howard said.
Speaker 1 (05:37):
Dan Danny, Now you've been active that as a presiding judge,
Ed Harris and Dover we and I think Rosecark. What
are your thoughts on You see the attendant, you see
the people there, But what do you think.
Speaker 5 (05:50):
Well, there's a lot of problems, of course, Uh, you know,
something that needs to be stopped somehow by maybe a
lawyer or something, because they willn't have a life, and
the consumers do not have a license without horse racing,
but they want to decouple it. But a couple of
things that really hurt harness racing and therabre end quarter
(06:11):
horses are the drug problems that needs to be stopped.
You would think that the guarrell had, uh you know
twenty nine people indicted. Do you think that the drugs
would stopped? But no, they didn't.
Speaker 6 (06:24):
Uh.
Speaker 5 (06:25):
You've got the adv fubunaka positives in Delaware. You've got
these the quarter horses and three million dollar races, four
or five horses tesses positive for a class one. I
mean that's got to stop the problem with commissions and
the commissioners are they're afraid your lawyers, the lawyer gets
(06:46):
a fetanohl positive. If the lawyer takes a technol positive
to the commission and said it's contamination, well they fold.
It's one driver with the training. We gave a ten
one thousand dollars fine and your suspension for a betting
all positive was reduced to one thousand dollars and ten days. Now,
(07:08):
you know, if you can't protect, you can't protect the
innocent unless you prosecute the guilty, and that's not happening.
That doesn't help. You know, you're won in nine shots
at Doverer Down if you were probablyshed five or six
one and nine shots every night in fifteen races, who's
(07:28):
going to bet on one and nine shots. You've got
to change the condition so there's no one in nine shots,
maybe win is over instead of nine winners of one
or two or none, winners of five or between five
and six place or whatever. One in nine shots not good.
(07:50):
The other thing is, you know, I don't know how
it can stop it, but if you don't have a tie,
if you don't promote your business, you're going to die.
And that's what's happened. The casinos don't.
Speaker 1 (08:06):
Want to do that.
Speaker 5 (08:07):
Harness racing they don't want to waste the money. Harry's
water doing it. Harry's of a Chester. They were five
years six years ago and they got a good travel
but then they stopped advertising and they stopped promotions.
Speaker 2 (08:21):
So if you.
Speaker 5 (08:23):
Don't want we've got to We've got to continue to
somehow bring back Horner reason by advertising maybe somehow.
Speaker 3 (08:32):
You know. I'm not an advertising guy, but these are the.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
Powers I think there's good. I think that advertising can
get people in the door. Advertising can get people to
wager and watch uh harness racing. But if the product
isn't good, and if it's not well presented, nobody's going
to come back a second time. And I think that
(08:56):
that Harness Racing hasn't worked on its product. Yeah, that
the races are boring. As you said, there are too
many one to nine shots. The drug issue is always there.
It's there for every breed. That's just a perennial, a
perennial problem. I had a really interesting conversation with one
of the people who was on the show last week,
Ravit Famuolara in New Zealand, because they're white years ahead
(09:21):
of us when it comes to gaming ability and they
offer what they call multi bets. So on any fixed odds,
that's another point, but they're fixed ods. Racing is necessary.
But on any fixed odds race anywhere in the world,
or any fixed fixed odds sporting event, somebody in New
(09:43):
Zealand can go online or at a track and bet
whatever combination they want. It could be two, four or
five events. You could bet five dollars and if everything
would hit, it's basically a parlay. They don't call it
a parlay. That's only through fixed odds because if it's
through the toad system, by the time you hit the
(10:05):
third leg you're getting no money back. But on the
fixed odds system it does work, and they've had people
win eight hundred thousand dollars on a ten dollars bet.
You can. You can have all sorts of things that
are done to make racing interesting and gambling interesting that
(10:25):
we're not doing and there's no talk of it. There's
there's you know, people don't know what I think. You know,
Freddy may have a show one of these days with
Robert to introduce people in this country to what's being
done there. But it's really revolutionary and it makes it
really exciting for people who don't want a better lot,
but can win a lot, which after all, is what
distinguishes potentially racing from the casinos and other places. And
(10:49):
gog this is.
Speaker 4 (10:51):
Yeah, Gordon, this is up. It's Howard again. And what
what Gordon said the other night is that a meaningful
approach as decoupling is going to become this It's it's
it's inevitable that decoupling will occur. Excellent chance three years
in Florida, you're going to have the decoupling of of
(11:11):
Gulf Stream Tampa. And if it's going to happen down there,
it's going to happen up in the Northeast corridor. Everybody
knows that. It's just it's not a matter of how,
it's a matter of when.
Speaker 2 (11:24):
So we just have to think about.
Speaker 4 (11:28):
Presenting presenting our product differently within within the dominant mobile
app format like uh and Gordon we were talking about
this last night. You know, whether it's fan duel, labrook,
you know, backfair, things of that nature. But it was
(11:49):
my idea that if we could couple, if we could
use our product and kind of form a conglomerate with
other made your seasonal events, we may be able to
derive very large global.
Speaker 2 (12:06):
Betting pools.
Speaker 4 (12:08):
Because and it may be a way of organically directing
people to kind of learn about our sport.
Speaker 2 (12:16):
Imagine being alive.
Speaker 4 (12:17):
In a pick eight or a Pick ten for twenty
five to fifty million dollars, just to be hypothetical, I
think that that could create some very meaningful possibilities.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
It would be exciting. I mean, after all, in France,
the Sunday lottery is based on the finish of a
certain race at Van sent in the French racing every
week called that you're say you have the seventy five
in Sweden, you have huge payoffs because of that. You
could do it in the States too. The difficulty is
(12:50):
that there seems no will to do it. Clay Horner
in last week's show brought up an idea similar in
that he feels that the big tracks in terms of
handle in the States have to work together in some
sort of time sequenced network so everything's organized well presented,
(13:15):
and that those major tracks have to have their own
network for video and also for gambling, so that all
the vague, all the fifteen to twenty percent income that
the tracks used to get that they gave away for online,
that they're going to get that back, taking it away
(13:36):
from the platform companies and doing it themselves. And I
think I think there's a consensus on the part of
everyone at last week's show, and I think most people
that think about it that that's really the only solution
to have an industry that can be profitable on a
standalone basis in the future.
Speaker 4 (13:55):
Gordon, I really agree with what play has to say
along that premise, and I think you guys were also
talking about in the inevitability of decoupling that maybe through
the legislation, the legislative bodies.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
Our group and.
Speaker 4 (14:18):
Casinos, maybe some type of deal could be made over
a six to eight year plan where casinos would be
able to pay us a certain amount to get the
decoupling out of the way, but we could use that
money to find a cheaper piece of land, build a
new facility, but to also invest in some of these
(14:40):
online apps so that we can always have our name there,
our product there, to be included in these big pool events.
I really think that long term it's going to be
a necessity, not a luxury.
Speaker 2 (14:54):
I think so. I think everybody last week thought that too.
The difficulty. John Campbell brought up a lot quite often
that his experience and Dan would would would be able
to comment on it, but his experience in the industry
is that it's it's almost impossible to get everybody on
the same wavelength. And one of the things I'm hoping
(15:15):
that these shows achieve is getting people in the industry
who might listen to understand that what they're not hearing
is reality. They're not hearing from the USGA, they're not
hearing from the standard bird readers and Owners Association's chairs.
They're not hearing from people that have nice jobs today.
(15:36):
How in five to six years the industry will be
decimated with decoupling. They're not They think that they think
that the gravy train is going to continue, that the
casinos are going to have to give us money. It's
not going to happen. If gholft Stream can decoupled, anybody
can get decoupled. And harness racing has thought for a
(15:56):
long time that the argument that they're they're forty five
thousand downstream jobs, that that somehow protects us. It doesn't
because what's going to happen is that when a state
or casino wants to get rid of harness racing, they're
going to replace it with something that has an argument
about the fact that when the new industry is created,
(16:18):
it's going to have far more jobs than what harness
racing had and probably pay a higher tax base. So
it's going to happen. And the drivers, the trainers, the owners,
the people every day in this business, they have to
understand that there has to be a unity, that there
has to be a recognition that the handout from government
(16:39):
from casinos will not continue, and that we had better
get out front of it, work with them. Make it
a win win win for everybody. Let the casinos get
the objective they want, let the government get the objective
they want, as long as harness racing gets the objective
that it wants. And that means a completely new business plan,
a completely new direct But if everybody's working together, one
(17:02):
can get it done. But if nobody's on this, if
everybody's rolling in a different direction, it's hopeless.
Speaker 1 (17:09):
Yea more than Freddy here. Yeah, like you know that
is just so true. But you know one of the
other things now is not just harness rationing that's being
threat and it's throwbred racing. And I didn't see that coming.
I thought they would be a few few more years
behind us, but they're like right there now too, of
being threatened for extinction.
Speaker 3 (17:31):
And so we do we do, We do have to
work with throw breads, We have to.
Speaker 2 (17:36):
Definitely I agree with that. But but but, Freddy, the
reason that you have the problem with go Stream, the
potential problem with Santa Anita, and the problems we have
in harness racing all connect to real estate. You cannot
you cannot. You cannot expect I value real estate currently
owned by casinos to be utilized for or racing which
(18:02):
loses money. It's a complete waste of an asset and
it just cannot continue. And what you said too about
you working with the thoroughbuds, we should be the breeds
should be working with each other. You know, in a
lot of racing in Europe, you go to a Sunday
race track, they'll have three thoroughbird races, three jump races,
(18:27):
and they'll have three or four harness races, and everybody
works together and it's one tenth whether it likes it
or not.
Speaker 3 (18:36):
Danny, I saw your hand up.
Speaker 5 (18:39):
Yeah, well, I agree with trying to make this betting
program a little bit better, like having as you mentioned,
someone mentioned the other day about twelve to fourteen anties
in a racing and jargons don't want to do that, Well,
they got a man.
Speaker 3 (18:57):
Up to it.
Speaker 5 (18:58):
I think fourteen horses in one race we actually bring
in the betters would help get rid of the one
in nine shots.
Speaker 3 (19:08):
And you do it with a.
Speaker 5 (19:11):
Other tracks on a pick gate or something like that,
you're going to get a million dollar payout.
Speaker 2 (19:17):
Yeah, I think it's it's a great idea. And what
it means though, is that you have to change your racing.
They race down Under and in Europe many times with sixteen, eighteen,
twenty horses, but the races are much longer distanced, and
the racing style is different, and the persons have to
align so that the drivers and the owners can find
(19:38):
a way to make money from the situation. But those
things can all be done. They've been done in other
parts of the world, and as you said, it would
make the races much more interesting and the potential jackpots huge.
Speaker 3 (19:51):
Hey, Mark, I see you trying to jump in here.
Speaker 6 (19:58):
I also also see One thing I think one has
to address in the industry is one has to get
rid to certain extent this procislation of overdoing a bet
like we have on the card that ten trifectas superfectus.
(20:19):
The just ends up killing the betting pool. It's better,
as they try to do in Europe and maybe also
a little bit down Under, concentrate the the multi bets
on one of two events a race card.
Speaker 2 (20:38):
Yeah, Mark, the multi bet. It's new that it's new
even to Mark and I who do a lot down Under.
But I had it explained to me today in detail.
And the Moulti bet is available at any time, but
for any race if I want to take. If I
think Leap of Fame is going to win the Miracle
Mile in three weeks, I can bet that, and I
(20:58):
can bet five others. I could bet a soccer game,
I could bet another horse to come in the top three,
and I could do it for let's say ten dollars,
And it's a it's a multiplier and it can be done,
as I said, with no problem. And apparently now it
is by far the most popular and biggest bet that
there is down Under in conjunction with the sixth odds.
(21:21):
You can't have it without the sixth odds and the
sixth dogs took over eighty to ninety percent of the
wagering the perenutial system is dead down under. People want
sixed odds. They want to have the choice of they
want to know that when they make a bet, what
odds are going to get here in the States, even
at the Meadowlands, you bet with a minute left the
horse is six to one. The race starts, it's five
(21:44):
to one, and then you see it flashing when the
horse is flying by the field in the stretch and
it's one to two. It's ridiculous.
Speaker 3 (21:54):
Happy keep well be boring right now.
Speaker 5 (22:01):
I mean the favorite ly if you get a hole,
you pull it out and go to the top. Nobody pressures.
There's no pressure at all, and people are tired of that.
It's got to be warnished.
Speaker 2 (22:14):
It's it's why one has to figure figure out how
to change the product before we try to market it,
because if you market it now a little bit, it
just won't succeed. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (22:24):
Absolutely, you have to fix the product and then then
market it. But the product has to be fixed. And
we have so many avenues that is spread here by.
We have so many different areas of the sport that
we have to fix.
Speaker 3 (22:38):
It's just like you know, we're a.
Speaker 1 (22:40):
Sport that runs doing spokes in a wheel and we're
like racing on like four spokes out of fifty. I mean,
so we have to fix all those other spokes to
basically put out a good product.
Speaker 2 (22:52):
Yeah, I mean, the thing that's really frightening is that
the end our sport is doing nothing to convince casinos
or the government that they will ever be a profitable future.
There can't be. That's the problem. And what we have
to do is completely redesign the business so that we
can go to the casinos and the government and give
(23:15):
them a win win win where eight years down the road,
everybody succeeds because everybody can make more money from it.
But there has to be that trust in a business
plan that makes sense. Right now, there's no business plan
that makes sense for horse racing. It's just praying that
everything will continue.
Speaker 1 (23:32):
But hey, hey, Gordon our Fred here, I do want
to add it to this conversation here that you know,
on last week's show, we agreed to put a business
plan two Outgether and we have Clay Horner leading on
that along with Johnny Campbell or you myself, and you know,
we're looking to put a business plan together.
Speaker 2 (23:51):
We're hoping to we're hoping to. Yeah, I'm certainly willing.
I hope Clay Is and I Howard I think hopefully
can help, and Mark and others. It has to be,
it has to make sense, and it has to in
my view. First, one has to go to the casino companies,
(24:13):
the state legislatures and the government and see what their
feedback is and if one can structure something that all
of them can accept, it looks like it would be
good for harness racing. Then one has to come back
to harness racing and to our sort of split industry
and see if we can get a consensus behind that
(24:34):
or with some modifications something that would work. And that's
that's our future, and I think all of us are
willing to do what we can to help effectuate that.
So a business fan is a first step.
Speaker 4 (24:48):
Again, absolutely so, Freddie Gordon Howard again, I have to
ask you straight up, and I know this is the
first time I've had, you know, the privilege of being
able to talk with you guys, But I'm going to
just be assertive here and I'm going to ask yourself
to kind of put it out there, and the same
(25:09):
with you Mark and Dan.
Speaker 2 (25:11):
It's Dan. It's good to be speaking with you.
Speaker 4 (25:15):
May I ask may, I ask you, guys quite candidly,
where do you, guys, be the greatest resistance coming from
with the establishment?
Speaker 2 (25:28):
Who do you where do you foresee the greatest.
Speaker 4 (25:30):
Resistance coming towards a new waves business plan. I'd like
to hear your guys' opinions on that.
Speaker 6 (25:38):
I would I would tend this is march. I would
tend to say a lot of it is coming from
the grassroots, but also even higher higher up. There's nobody
that's willing to take a position of proposing something. Megan, Well,
(25:58):
I fully agree with you. If we don't get a
plan in shape for something that's starting to look like
when within the next year, we have a very short
time frame. I don't even know one year is okay?
You really want something right now when the season is
starting to swing into a full gear.
Speaker 2 (26:22):
I agree with that statement. I agree with that one
hundred percent right. You know how I can tell.
Speaker 6 (26:28):
You, I can tell you one thing from personal experience.
It is crucial, absolutely crucial that we get business people
in there. They don't have to be conossurves and lovers
of horses. That it's actually better if they're not, because
they have common businesses and can put it.
Speaker 2 (26:51):
I agree again, I totally agree with that. Yeah, I
mean when when when they want When IBM had a
disaster and they needed to get it fixed, they didn't
go to an engineer. They went to a turnaround specialist.
And you don't need a horseman to get racing out
of this match. In fact, it's as Mark says, it's
(27:13):
pretty likely that's not the way to go. I think
that to answer your question, Howard, I think the biggest
problem is I don't like to get too personal, but
I think the USGA is the most obvious. I'm going
to suckon that. I'm going to go on record and
saying I see the.
Speaker 4 (27:32):
USTA one of the greatest resistant forces towards what we're
trying to.
Speaker 2 (27:37):
Do, because all they should be doing is documentation. Call
it for what it is. Let's call it for what
it is.
Speaker 4 (27:43):
I would even go on to say that the reason
why we're in this situation right now is because of
just the preponderance of staying with the status quo, taking
the path at least resist. Then thinking as Gordon said,
that this gravy train is going to last forever, and
(28:04):
it's clearly.
Speaker 2 (28:05):
Not and things are not okay.
Speaker 6 (28:09):
So I'm lucky that last as long as it has.
Speaker 3 (28:14):
This is spread here.
Speaker 1 (28:15):
I think on last week's show, I think we identify
what one of the major obstacles are the resistance is
coming from. Along with the USTA, it's the Horsemen's associations.
Speaker 3 (28:27):
We have to know. They're constantly in disagreement on moving
the sport forwards.
Speaker 2 (28:33):
But part of that's because you have leadership that's comfortable,
happy with the way that that things are with their job.
I mean, you have the USTA committing one and a
half million dollars to fighting Haiser. And I'm not saying
that Heia is good or HIGs as bad. That's there.
They're good people on both sides. But I really have
(28:54):
a hard time understanding how anyone in this industry is
supporting they spent the expense of one point five million
dollars to fight something that is already being fought. Whether
the USGA was involved in the lawsuit in any significant
way or not, the same lawsuit would have been brought,
the same lawsuit would have gone to the Supreme Court.
(29:16):
If the Supreme Court's going to listen to it. You
have multiple states suing you have multiple plaintiffs and race tracks.
There was absolutely nothing new that harness racing could possibly
add to the to the situation. And you have a
declining industry, you need the one point five million dollars,
and what happens. It's being spent on an issue that
(29:39):
was unnecessary. Again, not right or wrong, just it doesn't
matter whether your four heiser against it. It was just
an insane expenditure. And those are the kind of things
that are being done instead of the USJA looking at
the strategic problems that racing has and trying to coalesce
the right position, instead of actively trying to save the
(30:00):
horsemen in Florida when they were losing Pompamo, instead of
actively uh and publicly because I don't want to say
that I don't know what they did. All I know
nothing was public but haven't had no success. But instead
of instead of having some success and publicly coming up
with an intelligent response in Florida and in New Jersey,
(30:21):
they're just they're just there. They don't do anything. They're
worrying about Haisa that they that leadership is a big
block and if if the best people in this industry
put together an intelligent plan, the USTA is most likely
to try to block it, to try to protect their
(30:43):
jobs and their power base, and the heads of the
local SBO as they may, they may do the same thing.
That's a real problem, but we have to you have
to be able to overcome it. And I think one
can overcome it if one could present a package that's
accepted by everybody else. You know, there were casinos and
(31:03):
the states of the governors except a five to ten
year program that makes sense to them, and we can
present making sense to harness racing. I believe in the
in the good will of most of the people in
the industry, and I believe in the fact that the
right that the right people pushing it and supporting it
(31:24):
can get it through, even though it would be a
really tough fight.
Speaker 5 (31:27):
Right this is then, you know, years ago I wrote
an article about joining Heisher when it first came out.
It was a government approved situation, and what we should
have done was anti higher at that time, because and
got rules that would benefit harness racing. You got corn
(31:49):
of horses, you got their grade, you gots racing. They
all are different briefs. They all needed their own rules.
And if that didn't happen, then get out of it
and sue. But at that time they should have entered it.
They shouldn't us See should have gotten in Horseman, should
have gotten in there.
Speaker 2 (32:09):
That's my it's another reason that it's another reason that
they shouldn't sue, because they could have made clear their opposition.
But if they didn't sue, they would have been accepted
as a party for all the negotiations. Once they sued
the lawyers, the Hizar never would allow Harness Ration to participate.
So not only was the suit unnecessary, but it also
(32:31):
blocked us for negotiating and being in the in the
room where the where the power was, and that was
that was a very imprudent.
Speaker 3 (32:41):
Fred here Gordon.
Speaker 1 (32:42):
You were part of those early negotiations with Heiser before
it was formed, and so you know all about that
as I do. We were basically trying to keep our
sport with a lifeline too. We thought it was going
to be passed as a lawyer.
Speaker 2 (32:59):
Yeah, and the Colin was very active in that, and
and and others. And we could.
Speaker 3 (33:05):
Say there the others were John Campbell, uh, we had
just around.
Speaker 1 (33:09):
We had Ron Burke, we had Tony Ilanya, Brian Brown,
we had a lot of Linda Tuscano. Uh, we had
a lot of the top people in the sport trying
to keep that lifeline open.
Speaker 2 (33:22):
Yeah, nobody, nobody was committed to a decision, but everybody
wanted to be able to.
Speaker 3 (33:27):
Hear Steve Stewart. Can't forget Steve Stewart absolutely.
Speaker 2 (33:35):
What other ideas, Howard, do you have other ideas?
Speaker 4 (33:39):
No, I was I was just focusing in on and
I may be a little early on.
Speaker 2 (33:45):
Just trying to you know, come up with.
Speaker 4 (33:49):
Putting our products that will be able to be bet
whether it's inter race, different parts of race, you know,
things that would really attract betters that would not normally
be you know, willing to consider even betting on our product.
Speaker 2 (34:13):
And again not to be repetitive.
Speaker 4 (34:15):
The only way I could see that happening is that
if we could get our product online with a group
of maybe eight or or nine other major seasonal events
that could attract big pools, and it could be just
within America, it could be on an international basis. Again,
I think the possibilities are are really there because Gordon
(34:39):
and I told you this the other night, even and
we spoke about this. Even if we were able to
get relocated to our own property. We would still have
to be able to organically attract new blood and that's
something that has to happen. And Okay, you know, you
want to talk about ways of helping our product not
(35:01):
having short feels, not not having you know you're talking about,
you know, with the modified bikes and things of that nature,
and the leaning back and making it harder for clothes
to come in.
Speaker 2 (35:13):
What Freddie's probably thinking about.
Speaker 4 (35:15):
Back to the old Roosevelt days seventies and eighties, the
speed bias was there wasn't really that type of speed bias.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
The way it is now.
Speaker 4 (35:24):
There was, you know, you could still get those numbers
home from post six, seven and eight and come up
with big exacts and trifectas, and as you guys have noticed,
it's just few and far between. So there, I think
to make the improvements to our game, I don't think
it's that difficult with some reasonable minds. But I think
(35:45):
what could be more challenging is putting our product out
there that's going to be amenable to be included in
big ticket gambling items that could raise big pools.
Speaker 2 (35:57):
Well, I think the industry needs to attract the right
people to try to put that deal together with the
right connections. That's very much a connections game, that's right.
Speaker 5 (36:07):
I heard the other day that NASCAR is going to
get paramouchal betting.
Speaker 2 (36:12):
I don't know. I think they have it. I think
they have it because a friend of mine was telling
me that he was betting live on the Daytona five
hundred in race and that he actually bet on five drivers,
one of which was Johnson was seventy to one and
finished third and the winner was fifteen to one. But
he was telling me that he spent the whole afternoon
(36:34):
watching it and betting while the race was going on.
So I don't know how he did it, but it
may well be it already exists.
Speaker 1 (36:42):
Had I had one of my old owner sponsor or
car in the Indy five hundred years ago, and he
was pissed as hell afterwards because his car finished fourth
in the race and the car the driver drove the
car so perfectly that he never got a call in
the race, which you got zero publicity for. It cost
(37:04):
them three hundred thousand to sponsor that car back then.
Speaker 5 (37:09):
Okay, I'm not going to sponsor a car.
Speaker 3 (37:14):
How you want to drive one, but.
Speaker 2 (37:17):
They have to I mean the other thing is if
you look it down under and you look at Europe
and look at the thoroughbreds in the States, there's also
a lot you can do by just bringing in celebrities.
And harness racing has to consider its name. I mean,
I'm sure there are a lot of people who believe
in the name, and I'm not desperately against it, but
(37:38):
thoroughbred racing has one connotation. Harness racing or standardbred racing
sworda has a different connotation, and I think it's something
that harness racing people are somewhat proud of. But in
the modern world, you want to put on a show
and you want to people watch the Kentucky Derby or
go to it because they want to be part of
the scene. They want to see the celebrities, they want
(38:00):
to be immersed in it. That's not the case at
the Hambletonian. That's not the case that harness racing's big events,
not even the Jug. The Jug is fun, But why
can't harness racing get some celebrities to go. If you
have to pay them a little bit to go, that's okay,
But get celebrities in there, and and why not emulate
(38:21):
some of the things that work in the in Thurberd racing.
Look at the Breeder's Crown and Thurberd Racing. There are
a whole series of qualifying races. They don't have eliminations.
They don't have they don't do it the way we
do it, And I don't really understand why we don't
do it the same way as they do it. Have
(38:42):
points that you get in a series of lead up races.
That's how they do it. By the way in Australia too,
for the big races, and you don't need eliminations. You
have seven or eight or nine qualifying races and they're
not there's stake races, but you get points and the
most the ten most points would get into the Breeders'
(39:02):
crownd Final. And I think it makes for a better
show in Thardwood Racing. Why not try it in our racing?
I mean, but that's just one idea, but there's so many.
I think it's so frustrating that there's there's no vehicle
for Howard or myself or anybody else to really come
(39:24):
up with or suggest ideas.
Speaker 3 (39:30):
Danny, are you trying to talk.
Speaker 5 (39:33):
And talk to myself? I mean, there's there's a lot
of things that needs to be done and needs to
be done quickly, there's no question. But we need to
change what we're doing now. We can't have this single
file racing. It's boring. You go to the track and
there might be ten people watching the races.
Speaker 2 (39:55):
You know, that's it. Yeah, y, that's also why down
at the end of the day there will be decoupling.
You know, if you had a full grass then it
would be different. But when you're having nobody at racetracks,
at some point in time, they just have to cut.
They have to cut the bleed and they have to
(40:16):
put the money to the police and the firemen into
homeless people and the other other causes, and it has
to happen.
Speaker 5 (40:25):
And where it's going to be looking at that money.
Speaker 3 (40:31):
This is marked.
Speaker 6 (40:33):
What you're saying once again is you need to find
one person who can just start ram rocking through some
of the stuff, like get rid of this nonsense that
you can't come more than eight in the race, maybe
nine or ten of meadow lands.
Speaker 2 (40:51):
And it's going to be done.
Speaker 6 (40:54):
Quickly because but I know the breed has caused problems,
the drivers, cast problems, the owners. There's no God given uh,
rule that every owner should have the horses nose on
the on the front line.
Speaker 2 (41:14):
That's how we do it.
Speaker 6 (41:15):
Yeah, I mean, look, you know you have like Pretomerica
can easily have twenty five thirty horses. You have a
Grand National in England as what's forty five fifty horses?
Speaker 2 (41:30):
Right?
Speaker 6 (41:30):
Yeah, it's people chase and then and they'll get it
and and they'll get the results from it.
Speaker 2 (41:40):
People want to see a show, and people want to
see a show.
Speaker 6 (41:44):
I know, why can't Why can't somebody if everybody is
behind us, like Corral and other people, that Corral still
has the power. And so write writing twelve twelve fourteen.
Horse races may have to put in a little more
money support them, but you're definitely going to start seeing
(42:04):
the reaction because gamblers they smell an opportunity.
Speaker 2 (42:10):
Right, But the drivers will stop it and the trainers
will will will press it and and the problem is
that when if there's anything from this show and last
week's show that one really needs to impress on people
in this industry is that they need to think for themselves.
They shouldn't be led by anybody, not by not by
(42:33):
the USTA, not by an sbo A chair, not by us.
They have to think for themselves and they have to
recognize that all these new ideas have to be tried.
They if they don't work, they don't work. But what
we have doesn't work, and they need to understand that
and what the what the consequence will be.
Speaker 3 (42:53):
Right now, reread your board and I agree with you one.
Speaker 2 (42:58):
You know, I hope that we can have some impact
in trying to get movement because right now there is
no movement in Clay and John Campbell and Howard and
all of us. We're here and we're talking about these
things because we love harness racing. We care about harness racing.
Most of us have had hopefully successful careers outside of
(43:19):
harness racing and to some extent in harness racing, and
we want to see the industry succeed and come back
to what it was. And we've all seen businesses, normal
businesses that succeed and that fail, and sadly, harness racing
today exhibits all the aditia of a business that's ready
(43:43):
to completely disappear.
Speaker 1 (43:45):
And that's sad and we don't want that to happen.
We want the sport to continue forever.
Speaker 2 (43:53):
Yeah, And I don't know, I really wish that enough
people hear these shows and that they respond. You know,
they could respond to you, Freddie care of your show.
They could respond in some way and with opposing concerns
or perspectives. And I know from conversations with you, Fred
(44:17):
that over the years you've wanted to have open minded,
honest shows. The USGA management with John Simpson, with ferraldo
with people on both sides, and they've never wanted to
do that because there's never been any desire to have
(44:38):
an honest discussion and to present to the people in
the industry two sides of an issue. The USGA website
won't even publish any article that doesn't suit their purpose.
Speaker 5 (44:50):
This is an.
Speaker 2 (44:51):
Industry that's completely controlled from the top, and that leadership
has led us to a cliff. And at some point
we all don't have to say that's enough and make
a change and have the cardge to make a change.
Speaker 3 (45:06):
Yeah, and the membership needs to know what's going on exactly,
and they don't know.
Speaker 1 (45:11):
But like well, Danny, Danny, I think you could probably
say when you were trained in horses as a trainer,
you get sort of locked up into your own stable.
You don't even know what's going on around in the world.
Speaker 2 (45:24):
So that's true.
Speaker 5 (45:26):
That I might open up a public stables who can
get this thing going?
Speaker 2 (45:33):
Uh anyway.
Speaker 5 (45:36):
That you know, we need to get the ball rolling somehow,
And I don't know who we can get to step
in and step up and get this going. But if
anybody has anybody in mind and he needs, they need
to be contacted.
Speaker 3 (45:55):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (45:56):
Well, I think I think Freddie's doing everything you can,
and I think it wuires a first step of a
group of people willing to put together a business plan
that creates a new vision. And I think hopefully we
can find those people because it could even be one person,
doesn't matter. But and then you submit it in draft
(46:17):
forms you know five or six others. It will be
modified and changes will be made, but one needs a new, effective,
intelligent business plan number one.
Speaker 3 (46:26):
Yeah, I think we got the right people to do that.
Speaker 1 (46:29):
And then it's spread again and the Throwbreds have done
all the workforce, they've done, all the market research, they've
done all the surveys, and all we have to do
is take a look at what they've done.
Speaker 3 (46:40):
And they basically adjusted to the harness race and sport.
Speaker 1 (46:44):
I mean, I've read some of their stuff, and you know,
you know, they basically going back I guess about ten
years ago the McKinsey report basically a report and they
basically said, well, you guys don't have enough time on TV.
You only have like fifty goos or whatever per year. Well, now,
following the McKinsey report, they now have nine Hunt shows
(47:04):
per year that they're basically promoting. And it wasn't to
basically bring in new fans. It was for their old
fans because they found that the people over fifty were
watching more TV than the younger generation. So they basically
designed the TV to keep their to keep their pan
base going, and they found that they increased their handles
(47:25):
and it increased their attendance at the tracks in those areas.
Those are some of the things that I found out
from working with the Throwbreads.
Speaker 2 (47:34):
Was a lot to learn on both sides. What do
you say the idea? I'm sorry on what you said.
You know, with the TVs and things like that.
Speaker 4 (47:46):
Can we all agree that we live in a handheld
phone mobile sporting bet app age?
Speaker 2 (47:54):
Can we agree to that? Well?
Speaker 3 (47:56):
Unfortunately, I mean I'm just asking your.
Speaker 2 (48:01):
Objective opinion, yes or no?
Speaker 4 (48:03):
Absolutely, Okay, So I'm just saying that that needs to
be one of our concentrated platforms in which to advance
if we're going to have any shot at all, because
those days.
Speaker 3 (48:16):
Are absolutely absolutely onward.
Speaker 4 (48:23):
And and I have some ideas that In other words,
let me ask you, guys, if I mean, if you,
if one asked you, if one asked you, like the
top sporting events of the year, you would think of
let's say, and I know, the Olympic Games there once
every four years, you say, the super Bowl, Wimbledon, towards
de France, Rugby, World Cup, NBA finals.
Speaker 2 (48:45):
Yeah, I don't see why we cannot.
Speaker 4 (48:49):
Have let's say, just hypothetical a boardgade in the same
column as let's say March Madness, super Bowl, NBA Final,
and the Masters. We could we could create like pick eighths,
let's say, to occur in spring, summer, fall.
Speaker 2 (49:08):
We could come up. You know, coming up with a
seasonal format is not that difficult.
Speaker 4 (49:15):
And I just I just think if we could do
that and leverage the mobile sports app format, I think
that we could go a long way.
Speaker 1 (49:27):
Well, here's some ideas, and these are other spread against.
These are some ideas from the past uh, you know,
the Triple Crowns and Throwbreds are very big. But guess what,
we have two triple crowds. We have a triple Crown
for pacers and for tritters. We could reorganize those races
and make them into a better, a better and bigger event.
We also have the International Trot that they're doing at Yonkers.
Speaker 3 (49:50):
We have the.
Speaker 1 (49:50):
American Trident Championship followed by the International and then put
a Challenge company.
Speaker 3 (49:55):
We got a three race series there. Those are some
of the things that can be done.
Speaker 2 (50:00):
Great idea, Yeah, I think that, I think real quickly.
I'm one more thing.
Speaker 4 (50:07):
Uh, My wife Sarah just came up with a very
good idea in terms of leverage and if we could
get Fortnoy or some of his think tanks from Barstool
Sports and to help us apply that that type of format. Again,
I think it's something to just really consider.
Speaker 2 (50:29):
Yeah, yeah, I think that's a matter of connections, but uh,
you know, I think it could be done. I think
Clay was on Clay was on a I think a
similar wavelength to you, Howard. He both of you are suggesting,
which I think is right, that harness racing needs to
be able to put on a grand show. Uh. And
(50:50):
if it's a grand enough show, it can become a
significant part of what you're talking about. And part of
that was Clay thinking that you have to unify the
four major tracks like Woodbine, Meadowlands, Kentucky, maybe Ohio, and
but you have to do something along that. It's just
not easy though to you know, if you if you
(51:11):
have it, I would have said it would take an
incredibly fantastic five to ten year plan to get any
single race in harness racing to be at a level
anywhere near any of the things you talked about. But
it can be done because it's done in Europe, you know,
the major race in France, the major ration Sweden, their
(51:33):
their world events, their world events. No reason you can't
have it here.
Speaker 5 (51:41):
That's correct. I felt one of the great great players.
I put this one of the reasons that they used
to have with the North American Series and the horses
went from track to track, the same horses, and that
brought some interesting too.
Speaker 3 (52:00):
It's fact.
Speaker 2 (52:03):
Remember Mark, we want we want it with raging Reggie Yankee.
Speaker 3 (52:07):
Yeah, Danny, was that called the can am series.
Speaker 2 (52:17):
There was a can m Yes, but I think they
followed it. It started the way Dan said, is a
North America. I think then they switched it to the
canam and it was a little changed. It was a
great series.
Speaker 3 (52:29):
Can m might have a different meaning to it today.
Speaker 2 (52:33):
For sure. You know. The other thing that I remember
from from when I was younger, I remember the excitement
that there was when Algold Vivier came here from France
and raced the Great Trotter, the Huge Drat and raced
at the Meadow Lambs. And I think that America has
lost the international aspect of everything. It's too bad that
(52:54):
the internationals the Yonkers because it doesn't get any coverage
and it's the wrong time of the year, so it's
it's sort of a lost event.
Speaker 4 (53:01):
But you have the greatest right, Gordon, Your point is
well taken. Everything you're saying is is is correct. But
with proper grouping and the collaboration of other with other
seasonal events, it could, you know, we could leverage that
with other seasonal events, just like we could leverage let's say,
(53:24):
celebrities that like Aaron Judge and Post Belone wearing the
Siegelman stable hats. We're not leveraging those types of dynamics
while while we really.
Speaker 2 (53:34):
Have the opportunity to do so absolutely and look, the
greatest pacer in the world right now is leap of
faith in Australia. Get them over here. I mean it
happens that one of the wealthiest men in the world
owns them, so it's not exactly a monetary issue. But
but get the right stars, you create that big international race,
(53:55):
do something that's that's really able to get what Howard wants,
which is significant coverage.
Speaker 5 (54:04):
Right, something like that should be I should be televised too.
Speaker 2 (54:08):
Absolutely, national and international television, international, The Australians would cover it.
Bring in the British champion. Look at all the Irish
horses that are doing well in the States now. Have
a little creativity, put together a race, and I know
Jeff could do it. I know Jeff is creative. I
know he's losing money and the Metal Ansy doesn't want
(54:29):
to put more money in. But my god, there are
events that you could put together that would be spectacular,
that would get a full crowd, that would get TV coverage,
that would get press coverage, not just here but internationally.
Speaker 1 (54:41):
I wish to thank everyone for being on the show,
and don't go away, because once I stopped the recorder,
I do want to talk to everyone afterwards.
Speaker 2 (54:48):
No problem.
Speaker 3 (54:49):
Thanks Fddy, Coward, Gorty, Dan And and Mark. Thank you
so much for joining us. That nice show, guys.
Speaker 2 (54:57):
Now let's go to Andy.
Speaker 7 (54:59):
I'm gonna go back a little bit in the next
Keeping Pace column to talk a little bit more about
that New York Times piece, a little bit more about
the USTA's reaction to it.
Speaker 2 (55:09):
Which was just posted a couple of days ago. Also
going to take a.
Speaker 7 (55:11):
Look at the sort of legal defense fund that operates
under the Federal Racing Integrity Law that's actually helping trainers
who have been.
Speaker 2 (55:21):
Accused of positives defend themselves back. You have a good weekend.
Speaker 3 (55:25):
Thanks so much, and that's a wrap for this week's show.
Thanks for joining us, and don't forget to listen again
next week The Houness Racing Alumni Show
Welcome to this week's Harness Racing Alumni Show. I'm Freddie
Hudson and I'm here today with Trade Martin, Bob Marx
and Andy Cohen. The Harness Racing Alumni Show with your
host Freddie Hudson and Trade Martin. On this week's show,
we have a continuation of last week's show with international
(00:22):
owners and breeders Gordon Banks and Mark Hanover. Also owner
breeder Howard Promuter and prosidon judge Dan Kasmyer. We are
here to discuss harness racing. Gordon, Mark, Howard, and Dan.
Thank you for joining us tonight.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Pleasure.
Speaker 3 (00:42):
Gordon, You're the lead on this, so I'm turning it
over to you.
Speaker 2 (00:46):
Well, that was definitely all in trouble, but I guess
the summary is akin to giving you a feel for
what happened last week. Maybe you may not have heard
that tape yet, but everything was revolved around a discussion
as to what can be done to try to avoid
(01:10):
the cliff that North American harness racing is right at.
We've discussed international, We've discussed a little bit of what's
going on in New Zealand and Australia. They have a
similar set of problems, although somewhat different in the specifics,
but in terms of the future of harness racing, their
problems are quite similar. I think it was the consensus
(01:32):
of John Campbell and everybody else that was involved in
the first show that there really is a major problem
of harness racing that if significant changes aren't undertaken, that
the industry in five to ten years will be drastically
cut back five or more tracks, dying purse as much lower.
(01:58):
There were some ideas that were put forth, but I
don't want to prejudice everybody's feelings here, but I think
too much about what happened last week, So I think
I'll throw it open to anything that anybody suggests that
can address the real problem that racing in North America has.
With one other point that there's so many things one
(02:21):
can say that could improve the quality of racing, and
they're important, and they certainly can be brought up. But
the really important question is, even if you do everything well,
all those small points get fixed, how does one save racing.
Because it's an industry that's owned by people that want
its death, it's an industry that makes no money. There's
(02:42):
not one profitable harness track in North America on a
standalone horse racing basis, there's no real property ownership. Horse
racing has lost control of its product. This product nowadays
is the live feet. The online betting accounts for ninety
percent or more, and the racetracks get three percent or
(03:04):
less from most of that betting, as opposed to the
twenty percent or more that they used to get in
the old days from on track attendance. So the economics
don't work anymore. The system is hard to change. You
have enemies everywhere, and the question is, with that wonderful synopsis,
(03:24):
what can we all do? What ideas are out there
that can move things forward? So with that, please everybody's thoughts.
Speaker 1 (03:33):
So, as you said the other night, okay, that's Howard,
that's Howard talking.
Speaker 4 (03:41):
Yeah, thank you guys, Gordon. You made reference to a
very many important points the other night.
Speaker 2 (03:46):
There seems to be a lot of.
Speaker 4 (03:49):
Set you know, like everybody is congratulating each other on
the three to four million dollar handle, but at the
three percent return, because nobody's going to the track, it
doesn't really mean very much. And you know, the problem, unfortunately,
is that we have a lot of medieval minds that.
Speaker 2 (04:08):
Are still functioning like it was the eighties.
Speaker 4 (04:11):
When there wasn't really nearly the type of competition that
we had back then in for today's gambling dollar. I mean,
you know, times are just so different where we are
getting crushed and I mean crushed by the every night
gambler that is really into immediate gratification and we haven't
(04:35):
even come close to addressing that. And that's something that
in my humble opinion, if that is not addressed, then
I just don't see us being able to, meaningly, you know,
move forward, whether we have the same amount of tracks,
more tracks, less tracks. We must change the platform. We
must change the model in which we are accessible to
(04:58):
that every day, every night, overnight type gambler. And I'll
stop right now. And you know, I certainly don't want to,
you know, dominate the session, but I'd like to hear
people's response to that concept.
Speaker 2 (05:14):
Adam Mark, I mean, I have comments, but I also
don't want to monopolize, so I I'd rather come in after,
uh you give your thoughts to that, because it's it's
a it's a valid point and if you, uh, we
need to fix our product on the track, and we
need to fix our product from a wagering perspective. Any
ideas or thoughts to what Howard said.
Speaker 1 (05:37):
Dan Danny, Now you've been active that as a presiding judge,
Ed Harris and Dover we and I think Rosecark. What
are your thoughts on You see the attendant, you see
the people there, But what do you think.
Speaker 5 (05:50):
Well, there's a lot of problems, of course, Uh, you know,
something that needs to be stopped somehow by maybe a
lawyer or something, because they willn't have a life, and
the consumers do not have a license without horse racing,
but they want to decouple it. But a couple of
things that really hurt harness racing and therabre end quarter
(06:11):
horses are the drug problems that needs to be stopped.
You would think that the guarrell had, uh you know
twenty nine people indicted. Do you think that the drugs
would stopped? But no, they didn't.
Speaker 6 (06:24):
Uh.
Speaker 5 (06:25):
You've got the adv fubunaka positives in Delaware. You've got
these the quarter horses and three million dollar races, four
or five horses tesses positive for a class one. I
mean that's got to stop the problem with commissions and
the commissioners are they're afraid your lawyers, the lawyer gets
(06:46):
a fetanohl positive. If the lawyer takes a technol positive
to the commission and said it's contamination, well they fold.
It's one driver with the training. We gave a ten
one thousand dollars fine and your suspension for a betting
all positive was reduced to one thousand dollars and ten days. Now,
(07:08):
you know, if you can't protect, you can't protect the
innocent unless you prosecute the guilty, and that's not happening.
That doesn't help. You know, you're won in nine shots
at Doverer Down if you were probablyshed five or six
one and nine shots every night in fifteen races, who's
(07:28):
going to bet on one and nine shots. You've got
to change the condition so there's no one in nine shots,
maybe win is over instead of nine winners of one
or two or none, winners of five or between five
and six place or whatever. One in nine shots not good.
(07:50):
The other thing is, you know, I don't know how
it can stop it, but if you don't have a tie,
if you don't promote your business, you're going to die.
And that's what's happened. The casinos don't.
Speaker 1 (08:06):
Want to do that.
Speaker 5 (08:07):
Harness racing they don't want to waste the money. Harry's
water doing it. Harry's of a Chester. They were five
years six years ago and they got a good travel
but then they stopped advertising and they stopped promotions.
Speaker 2 (08:21):
So if you.
Speaker 5 (08:23):
Don't want we've got to We've got to continue to
somehow bring back Horner reason by advertising maybe somehow.
Speaker 3 (08:32):
You know. I'm not an advertising guy, but these are the.
Speaker 2 (08:36):
Powers I think there's good. I think that advertising can
get people in the door. Advertising can get people to
wager and watch uh harness racing. But if the product
isn't good, and if it's not well presented, nobody's going
to come back a second time. And I think that
(08:56):
that Harness Racing hasn't worked on its product. Yeah, that
the races are boring. As you said, there are too
many one to nine shots. The drug issue is always there.
It's there for every breed. That's just a perennial, a
perennial problem. I had a really interesting conversation with one
of the people who was on the show last week,
Ravit Famuolara in New Zealand, because they're white years ahead
(09:21):
of us when it comes to gaming ability and they
offer what they call multi bets. So on any fixed odds,
that's another point, but they're fixed ods. Racing is necessary.
But on any fixed odds race anywhere in the world,
or any fixed fixed odds sporting event, somebody in New
(09:43):
Zealand can go online or at a track and bet
whatever combination they want. It could be two, four or
five events. You could bet five dollars and if everything
would hit, it's basically a parlay. They don't call it
a parlay. That's only through fixed odds because if it's
through the toad system, by the time you hit the
(10:05):
third leg you're getting no money back. But on the
fixed odds system it does work, and they've had people
win eight hundred thousand dollars on a ten dollars bet.
You can. You can have all sorts of things that
are done to make racing interesting and gambling interesting that
(10:25):
we're not doing and there's no talk of it. There's
there's you know, people don't know what I think. You know,
Freddy may have a show one of these days with
Robert to introduce people in this country to what's being
done there. But it's really revolutionary and it makes it
really exciting for people who don't want a better lot,
but can win a lot, which after all, is what
distinguishes potentially racing from the casinos and other places. And
(10:49):
gog this is.
Speaker 4 (10:51):
Yeah, Gordon, this is up. It's Howard again. And what
what Gordon said the other night is that a meaningful
approach as decoupling is going to become this It's it's
it's inevitable that decoupling will occur. Excellent chance three years
in Florida, you're going to have the decoupling of of
(11:11):
Gulf Stream Tampa. And if it's going to happen down there,
it's going to happen up in the Northeast corridor. Everybody
knows that. It's just it's not a matter of how,
it's a matter of when.
Speaker 2 (11:24):
So we just have to think about.
Speaker 4 (11:28):
Presenting presenting our product differently within within the dominant mobile
app format like uh and Gordon we were talking about
this last night. You know, whether it's fan duel, labrook,
you know, backfair, things of that nature. But it was
(11:49):
my idea that if we could couple, if we could
use our product and kind of form a conglomerate with
other made your seasonal events, we may be able to
derive very large global.
Speaker 2 (12:06):
Betting pools.
Speaker 4 (12:08):
Because and it may be a way of organically directing
people to kind of learn about our sport.
Speaker 2 (12:16):
Imagine being alive.
Speaker 4 (12:17):
In a pick eight or a Pick ten for twenty
five to fifty million dollars, just to be hypothetical, I
think that that could create some very meaningful possibilities.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
It would be exciting. I mean, after all, in France,
the Sunday lottery is based on the finish of a
certain race at Van sent in the French racing every
week called that you're say you have the seventy five
in Sweden, you have huge payoffs because of that. You
could do it in the States too. The difficulty is
(12:50):
that there seems no will to do it. Clay Horner
in last week's show brought up an idea similar in
that he feels that the big tracks in terms of
handle in the States have to work together in some
sort of time sequenced network so everything's organized well presented,
(13:15):
and that those major tracks have to have their own
network for video and also for gambling, so that all
the vague, all the fifteen to twenty percent income that
the tracks used to get that they gave away for online,
that they're going to get that back, taking it away
(13:36):
from the platform companies and doing it themselves. And I
think I think there's a consensus on the part of
everyone at last week's show, and I think most people
that think about it that that's really the only solution
to have an industry that can be profitable on a
standalone basis in the future.
Speaker 4 (13:55):
Gordon, I really agree with what play has to say
along that premise, and I think you guys were also
talking about in the inevitability of decoupling that maybe through
the legislation, the legislative bodies.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
Our group and.
Speaker 4 (14:18):
Casinos, maybe some type of deal could be made over
a six to eight year plan where casinos would be
able to pay us a certain amount to get the
decoupling out of the way, but we could use that
money to find a cheaper piece of land, build a
new facility, but to also invest in some of these
(14:40):
online apps so that we can always have our name there,
our product there, to be included in these big pool events.
I really think that long term it's going to be
a necessity, not a luxury.
Speaker 2 (14:54):
I think so. I think everybody last week thought that too.
The difficulty. John Campbell brought up a lot quite often
that his experience and Dan would would would be able
to comment on it, but his experience in the industry
is that it's it's almost impossible to get everybody on
the same wavelength. And one of the things I'm hoping
(15:15):
that these shows achieve is getting people in the industry
who might listen to understand that what they're not hearing
is reality. They're not hearing from the USGA, they're not
hearing from the standard bird readers and Owners Association's chairs.
They're not hearing from people that have nice jobs today.
(15:36):
How in five to six years the industry will be
decimated with decoupling. They're not They think that they think
that the gravy train is going to continue, that the
casinos are going to have to give us money. It's
not going to happen. If gholft Stream can decoupled, anybody
can get decoupled. And harness racing has thought for a
(15:56):
long time that the argument that they're they're forty five
thousand downstream jobs, that that somehow protects us. It doesn't
because what's going to happen is that when a state
or casino wants to get rid of harness racing, they're
going to replace it with something that has an argument
about the fact that when the new industry is created,
(16:18):
it's going to have far more jobs than what harness
racing had and probably pay a higher tax base. So
it's going to happen. And the drivers, the trainers, the owners,
the people every day in this business, they have to
understand that there has to be a unity, that there
has to be a recognition that the handout from government
(16:39):
from casinos will not continue, and that we had better
get out front of it, work with them. Make it
a win win win for everybody. Let the casinos get
the objective they want, let the government get the objective
they want, as long as harness racing gets the objective
that it wants. And that means a completely new business plan,
a completely new direct But if everybody's working together, one
(17:02):
can get it done. But if nobody's on this, if
everybody's rolling in a different direction, it's hopeless.
Speaker 1 (17:09):
Yea more than Freddy here. Yeah, like you know that
is just so true. But you know one of the
other things now is not just harness rationing that's being
threat and it's throwbred racing. And I didn't see that coming.
I thought they would be a few few more years
behind us, but they're like right there now too, of
being threatened for extinction.
Speaker 3 (17:31):
And so we do we do, We do have to
work with throw breads, We have to.
Speaker 2 (17:36):
Definitely I agree with that. But but but, Freddy, the
reason that you have the problem with go Stream, the
potential problem with Santa Anita, and the problems we have
in harness racing all connect to real estate. You cannot
you cannot. You cannot expect I value real estate currently
owned by casinos to be utilized for or racing which
(18:02):
loses money. It's a complete waste of an asset and
it just cannot continue. And what you said too about
you working with the thoroughbuds, we should be the breeds
should be working with each other. You know, in a
lot of racing in Europe, you go to a Sunday
race track, they'll have three thoroughbird races, three jump races,
(18:27):
and they'll have three or four harness races, and everybody
works together and it's one tenth whether it likes it
or not.
Speaker 3 (18:36):
Danny, I saw your hand up.
Speaker 5 (18:39):
Yeah, well, I agree with trying to make this betting
program a little bit better, like having as you mentioned,
someone mentioned the other day about twelve to fourteen anties
in a racing and jargons don't want to do that, Well,
they got a man.
Speaker 3 (18:57):
Up to it.
Speaker 5 (18:58):
I think fourteen horses in one race we actually bring
in the betters would help get rid of the one
in nine shots.
Speaker 3 (19:08):
And you do it with a.
Speaker 5 (19:11):
Other tracks on a pick gate or something like that,
you're going to get a million dollar payout.
Speaker 2 (19:17):
Yeah, I think it's it's a great idea. And what
it means though, is that you have to change your racing.
They race down Under and in Europe many times with sixteen, eighteen,
twenty horses, but the races are much longer distanced, and
the racing style is different, and the persons have to
align so that the drivers and the owners can find
(19:38):
a way to make money from the situation. But those
things can all be done. They've been done in other
parts of the world, and as you said, it would
make the races much more interesting and the potential jackpots huge.
Speaker 3 (19:51):
Hey, Mark, I see you trying to jump in here.
Speaker 6 (19:58):
I also also see One thing I think one has
to address in the industry is one has to get
rid to certain extent this procislation of overdoing a bet
like we have on the card that ten trifectas superfectus.
(20:19):
The just ends up killing the betting pool. It's better,
as they try to do in Europe and maybe also
a little bit down Under, concentrate the the multi bets
on one of two events a race card.
Speaker 2 (20:38):
Yeah, Mark, the multi bet. It's new that it's new
even to Mark and I who do a lot down Under.
But I had it explained to me today in detail.
And the Moulti bet is available at any time, but
for any race if I want to take. If I
think Leap of Fame is going to win the Miracle
Mile in three weeks, I can bet that, and I
(20:58):
can bet five others. I could bet a soccer game,
I could bet another horse to come in the top three,
and I could do it for let's say ten dollars,
And it's a it's a multiplier and it can be done,
as I said, with no problem. And apparently now it
is by far the most popular and biggest bet that
there is down Under in conjunction with the sixth odds.
(21:21):
You can't have it without the sixth odds and the
sixth dogs took over eighty to ninety percent of the
wagering the perenutial system is dead down under. People want
sixed odds. They want to have the choice of they
want to know that when they make a bet, what
odds are going to get here in the States, even
at the Meadowlands, you bet with a minute left the
horse is six to one. The race starts, it's five
(21:44):
to one, and then you see it flashing when the
horse is flying by the field in the stretch and
it's one to two. It's ridiculous.
Speaker 3 (21:54):
Happy keep well be boring right now.
Speaker 5 (22:01):
I mean the favorite ly if you get a hole,
you pull it out and go to the top. Nobody pressures.
There's no pressure at all, and people are tired of that.
It's got to be warnished.
Speaker 2 (22:14):
It's it's why one has to figure figure out how
to change the product before we try to market it,
because if you market it now a little bit, it
just won't succeed. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (22:24):
Absolutely, you have to fix the product and then then
market it. But the product has to be fixed. And
we have so many avenues that is spread here by.
We have so many different areas of the sport that
we have to fix.
Speaker 3 (22:38):
It's just like you know, we're a.
Speaker 1 (22:40):
Sport that runs doing spokes in a wheel and we're
like racing on like four spokes out of fifty. I mean,
so we have to fix all those other spokes to
basically put out a good product.
Speaker 2 (22:52):
Yeah, I mean, the thing that's really frightening is that
the end our sport is doing nothing to convince casinos
or the government that they will ever be a profitable future.
There can't be. That's the problem. And what we have
to do is completely redesign the business so that we
can go to the casinos and the government and give
(23:15):
them a win win win where eight years down the road,
everybody succeeds because everybody can make more money from it.
But there has to be that trust in a business
plan that makes sense. Right now, there's no business plan
that makes sense for horse racing. It's just praying that
everything will continue.
Speaker 1 (23:32):
But hey, hey, Gordon our Fred here, I do want
to add it to this conversation here that you know,
on last week's show, we agreed to put a business
plan two Outgether and we have Clay Horner leading on
that along with Johnny Campbell or you myself, and you know,
we're looking to put a business plan together.
Speaker 2 (23:51):
We're hoping to we're hoping to. Yeah, I'm certainly willing.
I hope Clay Is and I Howard I think hopefully
can help, and Mark and others. It has to be,
it has to make sense, and it has to in
my view. First, one has to go to the casino companies,
(24:13):
the state legislatures and the government and see what their
feedback is and if one can structure something that all
of them can accept, it looks like it would be
good for harness racing. Then one has to come back
to harness racing and to our sort of split industry
and see if we can get a consensus behind that
(24:34):
or with some modifications something that would work. And that's
that's our future, and I think all of us are
willing to do what we can to help effectuate that.
So a business fan is a first step.
Speaker 4 (24:48):
Again, absolutely so, Freddie Gordon Howard again, I have to
ask you straight up, and I know this is the
first time I've had, you know, the privilege of being
able to talk with you guys, But I'm going to
just be assertive here and I'm going to ask yourself
to kind of put it out there, and the same
(25:09):
with you Mark and Dan.
Speaker 2 (25:11):
It's Dan. It's good to be speaking with you.
Speaker 4 (25:15):
May I ask may, I ask you, guys quite candidly,
where do you, guys, be the greatest resistance coming from
with the establishment?
Speaker 2 (25:28):
Who do you where do you foresee the greatest.
Speaker 4 (25:30):
Resistance coming towards a new waves business plan. I'd like
to hear your guys' opinions on that.
Speaker 6 (25:38):
I would I would tend this is march. I would
tend to say a lot of it is coming from
the grassroots, but also even higher higher up. There's nobody
that's willing to take a position of proposing something. Megan, Well,
(25:58):
I fully agree with you. If we don't get a
plan in shape for something that's starting to look like
when within the next year, we have a very short
time frame. I don't even know one year is okay?
You really want something right now when the season is
starting to swing into a full gear.
Speaker 2 (26:22):
I agree with that statement. I agree with that one
hundred percent right. You know how I can tell.
Speaker 6 (26:28):
You, I can tell you one thing from personal experience.
It is crucial, absolutely crucial that we get business people
in there. They don't have to be conossurves and lovers
of horses. That it's actually better if they're not, because
they have common businesses and can put it.
Speaker 2 (26:51):
I agree again, I totally agree with that. Yeah, I
mean when when when they want When IBM had a
disaster and they needed to get it fixed, they didn't
go to an engineer. They went to a turnaround specialist.
And you don't need a horseman to get racing out
of this match. In fact, it's as Mark says, it's
(27:13):
pretty likely that's not the way to go. I think
that to answer your question, Howard, I think the biggest
problem is I don't like to get too personal, but
I think the USGA is the most obvious. I'm going
to suckon that. I'm going to go on record and
saying I see the.
Speaker 4 (27:32):
USTA one of the greatest resistant forces towards what we're
trying to.
Speaker 2 (27:37):
Do, because all they should be doing is documentation. Call
it for what it is. Let's call it for what
it is.
Speaker 4 (27:43):
I would even go on to say that the reason
why we're in this situation right now is because of
just the preponderance of staying with the status quo, taking
the path at least resist. Then thinking as Gordon said,
that this gravy train is going to last forever, and
(28:04):
it's clearly.
Speaker 2 (28:05):
Not and things are not okay.
Speaker 6 (28:09):
So I'm lucky that last as long as it has.
Speaker 3 (28:14):
This is spread here.
Speaker 1 (28:15):
I think on last week's show, I think we identify
what one of the major obstacles are the resistance is
coming from. Along with the USTA, it's the Horsemen's associations.
Speaker 3 (28:27):
We have to know. They're constantly in disagreement on moving
the sport forwards.
Speaker 2 (28:33):
But part of that's because you have leadership that's comfortable,
happy with the way that that things are with their job.
I mean, you have the USTA committing one and a
half million dollars to fighting Haiser. And I'm not saying
that Heia is good or HIGs as bad. That's there.
They're good people on both sides. But I really have
(28:54):
a hard time understanding how anyone in this industry is
supporting they spent the expense of one point five million
dollars to fight something that is already being fought. Whether
the USGA was involved in the lawsuit in any significant
way or not, the same lawsuit would have been brought,
the same lawsuit would have gone to the Supreme Court.
(29:16):
If the Supreme Court's going to listen to it. You
have multiple states suing you have multiple plaintiffs and race tracks.
There was absolutely nothing new that harness racing could possibly
add to the to the situation. And you have a
declining industry, you need the one point five million dollars,
and what happens. It's being spent on an issue that
(29:39):
was unnecessary. Again, not right or wrong, just it doesn't
matter whether your four heiser against it. It was just
an insane expenditure. And those are the kind of things
that are being done instead of the USJA looking at
the strategic problems that racing has and trying to coalesce
the right position, instead of actively trying to save the
(30:00):
horsemen in Florida when they were losing Pompamo, instead of
actively uh and publicly because I don't want to say
that I don't know what they did. All I know
nothing was public but haven't had no success. But instead
of instead of having some success and publicly coming up
with an intelligent response in Florida and in New Jersey,
(30:21):
they're just they're just there. They don't do anything. They're
worrying about Haisa that they that leadership is a big
block and if if the best people in this industry
put together an intelligent plan, the USTA is most likely
to try to block it, to try to protect their
(30:43):
jobs and their power base, and the heads of the
local SBO as they may, they may do the same thing.
That's a real problem, but we have to you have
to be able to overcome it. And I think one
can overcome it if one could present a package that's
accepted by everybody else. You know, there were casinos and
(31:03):
the states of the governors except a five to ten
year program that makes sense to them, and we can
present making sense to harness racing. I believe in the
in the good will of most of the people in
the industry, and I believe in the fact that the
right that the right people pushing it and supporting it
(31:24):
can get it through, even though it would be a
really tough fight.
Speaker 5 (31:27):
Right this is then, you know, years ago I wrote
an article about joining Heisher when it first came out.
It was a government approved situation, and what we should
have done was anti higher at that time, because and
got rules that would benefit harness racing. You got corn
(31:49):
of horses, you got their grade, you gots racing. They
all are different briefs. They all needed their own rules.
And if that didn't happen, then get out of it
and sue. But at that time they should have entered it.
They shouldn't us See should have gotten in Horseman, should
have gotten in there.
Speaker 2 (32:09):
That's my it's another reason that it's another reason that
they shouldn't sue, because they could have made clear their opposition.
But if they didn't sue, they would have been accepted
as a party for all the negotiations. Once they sued
the lawyers, the Hizar never would allow Harness Ration to participate.
So not only was the suit unnecessary, but it also
(32:31):
blocked us for negotiating and being in the in the
room where the where the power was, and that was
that was a very imprudent.
Speaker 3 (32:41):
Fred here Gordon.
Speaker 1 (32:42):
You were part of those early negotiations with Heiser before
it was formed, and so you know all about that
as I do. We were basically trying to keep our
sport with a lifeline too. We thought it was going
to be passed as a lawyer.
Speaker 2 (32:59):
Yeah, and the Colin was very active in that, and
and and others. And we could.
Speaker 3 (33:05):
Say there the others were John Campbell, uh, we had
just around.
Speaker 1 (33:09):
We had Ron Burke, we had Tony Ilanya, Brian Brown,
we had a lot of Linda Tuscano. Uh, we had
a lot of the top people in the sport trying
to keep that lifeline open.
Speaker 2 (33:22):
Yeah, nobody, nobody was committed to a decision, but everybody
wanted to be able to.
Speaker 3 (33:27):
Hear Steve Stewart. Can't forget Steve Stewart absolutely.
Speaker 2 (33:35):
What other ideas, Howard, do you have other ideas?
Speaker 4 (33:39):
No, I was I was just focusing in on and
I may be a little early on.
Speaker 2 (33:45):
Just trying to you know, come up with.
Speaker 4 (33:49):
Putting our products that will be able to be bet
whether it's inter race, different parts of race, you know,
things that would really attract betters that would not normally
be you know, willing to consider even betting on our product.
Speaker 2 (34:13):
And again not to be repetitive.
Speaker 4 (34:15):
The only way I could see that happening is that
if we could get our product online with a group
of maybe eight or or nine other major seasonal events
that could attract big pools, and it could be just
within America, it could be on an international basis. Again,
I think the possibilities are are really there because Gordon
(34:39):
and I told you this the other night, even and
we spoke about this. Even if we were able to
get relocated to our own property. We would still have
to be able to organically attract new blood and that's
something that has to happen. And Okay, you know, you
want to talk about ways of helping our product not
(35:01):
having short feels, not not having you know you're talking about,
you know, with the modified bikes and things of that nature,
and the leaning back and making it harder for clothes
to come in.
Speaker 2 (35:13):
What Freddie's probably thinking about.
Speaker 4 (35:15):
Back to the old Roosevelt days seventies and eighties, the
speed bias was there wasn't really that type of speed bias.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
The way it is now.
Speaker 4 (35:24):
There was, you know, you could still get those numbers
home from post six, seven and eight and come up
with big exacts and trifectas, and as you guys have noticed,
it's just few and far between. So there, I think
to make the improvements to our game, I don't think
it's that difficult with some reasonable minds. But I think
(35:45):
what could be more challenging is putting our product out
there that's going to be amenable to be included in
big ticket gambling items that could raise big pools.
Speaker 2 (35:57):
Well, I think the industry needs to attract the right
people to try to put that deal together with the
right connections. That's very much a connections game, that's right.
Speaker 5 (36:07):
I heard the other day that NASCAR is going to
get paramouchal betting.
Speaker 2 (36:12):
I don't know. I think they have it. I think
they have it because a friend of mine was telling
me that he was betting live on the Daytona five
hundred in race and that he actually bet on five drivers,
one of which was Johnson was seventy to one and
finished third and the winner was fifteen to one. But
he was telling me that he spent the whole afternoon
(36:34):
watching it and betting while the race was going on.
So I don't know how he did it, but it
may well be it already exists.
Speaker 1 (36:42):
Had I had one of my old owner sponsor or
car in the Indy five hundred years ago, and he
was pissed as hell afterwards because his car finished fourth
in the race and the car the driver drove the
car so perfectly that he never got a call in
the race, which you got zero publicity for. It cost
(37:04):
them three hundred thousand to sponsor that car back then.
Speaker 5 (37:09):
Okay, I'm not going to sponsor a car.
Speaker 3 (37:14):
How you want to drive one, but.
Speaker 2 (37:17):
They have to I mean the other thing is if
you look it down under and you look at Europe
and look at the thoroughbreds in the States, there's also
a lot you can do by just bringing in celebrities.
And harness racing has to consider its name. I mean,
I'm sure there are a lot of people who believe
in the name, and I'm not desperately against it, but
(37:38):
thoroughbred racing has one connotation. Harness racing or standardbred racing
sworda has a different connotation, and I think it's something
that harness racing people are somewhat proud of. But in
the modern world, you want to put on a show
and you want to people watch the Kentucky Derby or
go to it because they want to be part of
the scene. They want to see the celebrities, they want
(38:00):
to be immersed in it. That's not the case at
the Hambletonian. That's not the case that harness racing's big events,
not even the Jug. The Jug is fun, But why
can't harness racing get some celebrities to go. If you
have to pay them a little bit to go, that's okay,
But get celebrities in there, and and why not emulate
(38:21):
some of the things that work in the in Thurberd racing.
Look at the Breeder's Crown and Thurberd Racing. There are
a whole series of qualifying races. They don't have eliminations.
They don't have they don't do it the way we
do it, And I don't really understand why we don't
do it the same way as they do it. Have
(38:42):
points that you get in a series of lead up races.
That's how they do it. By the way in Australia too,
for the big races, and you don't need eliminations. You
have seven or eight or nine qualifying races and they're
not there's stake races, but you get points and the
most the ten most points would get into the Breeders'
(39:02):
crownd Final. And I think it makes for a better
show in Thardwood Racing. Why not try it in our racing?
I mean, but that's just one idea, but there's so many.
I think it's so frustrating that there's there's no vehicle
for Howard or myself or anybody else to really come
(39:24):
up with or suggest ideas.
Speaker 3 (39:30):
Danny, are you trying to talk.
Speaker 5 (39:33):
And talk to myself? I mean, there's there's a lot
of things that needs to be done and needs to
be done quickly, there's no question. But we need to
change what we're doing now. We can't have this single
file racing. It's boring. You go to the track and
there might be ten people watching the races.
Speaker 2 (39:55):
You know, that's it. Yeah, y, that's also why down
at the end of the day there will be decoupling.
You know, if you had a full grass then it
would be different. But when you're having nobody at racetracks,
at some point in time, they just have to cut.
They have to cut the bleed and they have to
(40:16):
put the money to the police and the firemen into
homeless people and the other other causes, and it has
to happen.
Speaker 5 (40:25):
And where it's going to be looking at that money.
Speaker 3 (40:31):
This is marked.
Speaker 6 (40:33):
What you're saying once again is you need to find
one person who can just start ram rocking through some
of the stuff, like get rid of this nonsense that
you can't come more than eight in the race, maybe
nine or ten of meadow lands.
Speaker 2 (40:51):
And it's going to be done.
Speaker 6 (40:54):
Quickly because but I know the breed has caused problems,
the drivers, cast problems, the owners. There's no God given uh,
rule that every owner should have the horses nose on
the on the front line.
Speaker 2 (41:14):
That's how we do it.
Speaker 6 (41:15):
Yeah, I mean, look, you know you have like Pretomerica
can easily have twenty five thirty horses. You have a
Grand National in England as what's forty five fifty horses?
Speaker 2 (41:30):
Right?
Speaker 6 (41:30):
Yeah, it's people chase and then and they'll get it
and and they'll get the results from it.
Speaker 2 (41:40):
People want to see a show, and people want to
see a show.
Speaker 6 (41:44):
I know, why can't Why can't somebody if everybody is
behind us, like Corral and other people, that Corral still
has the power. And so write writing twelve twelve fourteen.
Horse races may have to put in a little more
money support them, but you're definitely going to start seeing
(42:04):
the reaction because gamblers they smell an opportunity.
Speaker 2 (42:10):
Right, But the drivers will stop it and the trainers
will will will press it and and the problem is
that when if there's anything from this show and last
week's show that one really needs to impress on people
in this industry is that they need to think for themselves.
They shouldn't be led by anybody, not by not by
(42:33):
the USTA, not by an sbo A chair, not by us.
They have to think for themselves and they have to
recognize that all these new ideas have to be tried.
They if they don't work, they don't work. But what
we have doesn't work, and they need to understand that
and what the what the consequence will be.
Speaker 3 (42:53):
Right now, reread your board and I agree with you one.
Speaker 2 (42:58):
You know, I hope that we can have some impact
in trying to get movement because right now there is
no movement in Clay and John Campbell and Howard and
all of us. We're here and we're talking about these
things because we love harness racing. We care about harness racing.
Most of us have had hopefully successful careers outside of
(43:19):
harness racing and to some extent in harness racing, and
we want to see the industry succeed and come back
to what it was. And we've all seen businesses, normal
businesses that succeed and that fail, and sadly, harness racing
today exhibits all the aditia of a business that's ready
(43:43):
to completely disappear.
Speaker 1 (43:45):
And that's sad and we don't want that to happen.
We want the sport to continue forever.
Speaker 2 (43:53):
Yeah, And I don't know, I really wish that enough
people hear these shows and that they respond. You know,
they could respond to you, Freddie care of your show.
They could respond in some way and with opposing concerns
or perspectives. And I know from conversations with you, Fred
(44:17):
that over the years you've wanted to have open minded,
honest shows. The USGA management with John Simpson, with ferraldo
with people on both sides, and they've never wanted to
do that because there's never been any desire to have
(44:38):
an honest discussion and to present to the people in
the industry two sides of an issue. The USGA website
won't even publish any article that doesn't suit their purpose.
Speaker 5 (44:50):
This is an.
Speaker 2 (44:51):
Industry that's completely controlled from the top, and that leadership
has led us to a cliff. And at some point
we all don't have to say that's enough and make
a change and have the cardge to make a change.
Speaker 3 (45:06):
Yeah, and the membership needs to know what's going on exactly,
and they don't know.
Speaker 1 (45:11):
But like well, Danny, Danny, I think you could probably
say when you were trained in horses as a trainer,
you get sort of locked up into your own stable.
You don't even know what's going on around in the world.
Speaker 2 (45:24):
So that's true.
Speaker 5 (45:26):
That I might open up a public stables who can
get this thing going?
Speaker 2 (45:33):
Uh anyway.
Speaker 5 (45:36):
That you know, we need to get the ball rolling somehow,
And I don't know who we can get to step
in and step up and get this going. But if
anybody has anybody in mind and he needs, they need
to be contacted.
Speaker 3 (45:55):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (45:56):
Well, I think I think Freddie's doing everything you can,
and I think it wuires a first step of a
group of people willing to put together a business plan
that creates a new vision. And I think hopefully we
can find those people because it could even be one person,
doesn't matter. But and then you submit it in draft
(46:17):
forms you know five or six others. It will be
modified and changes will be made, but one needs a new, effective,
intelligent business plan number one.
Speaker 3 (46:26):
Yeah, I think we got the right people to do that.
Speaker 1 (46:29):
And then it's spread again and the Throwbreds have done
all the workforce, they've done, all the market research, they've
done all the surveys, and all we have to do
is take a look at what they've done.
Speaker 3 (46:40):
And they basically adjusted to the harness race and sport.
Speaker 1 (46:44):
I mean, I've read some of their stuff, and you know,
you know, they basically going back I guess about ten
years ago the McKinsey report basically a report and they
basically said, well, you guys don't have enough time on TV.
You only have like fifty goos or whatever per year. Well, now,
following the McKinsey report, they now have nine Hunt shows
(47:04):
per year that they're basically promoting. And it wasn't to
basically bring in new fans. It was for their old
fans because they found that the people over fifty were
watching more TV than the younger generation. So they basically
designed the TV to keep their to keep their pan
base going, and they found that they increased their handles
(47:25):
and it increased their attendance at the tracks in those areas.
Those are some of the things that I found out
from working with the Throwbreads.
Speaker 2 (47:34):
Was a lot to learn on both sides. What do
you say the idea? I'm sorry on what you said.
You know, with the TVs and things like that.
Speaker 4 (47:46):
Can we all agree that we live in a handheld
phone mobile sporting bet app age?
Speaker 2 (47:54):
Can we agree to that? Well?
Speaker 3 (47:56):
Unfortunately, I mean I'm just asking your.
Speaker 2 (48:01):
Objective opinion, yes or no?
Speaker 4 (48:03):
Absolutely, Okay, So I'm just saying that that needs to
be one of our concentrated platforms in which to advance
if we're going to have any shot at all, because
those days.
Speaker 3 (48:16):
Are absolutely absolutely onward.
Speaker 4 (48:23):
And and I have some ideas that In other words,
let me ask you, guys, if I mean, if you,
if one asked you, if one asked you, like the
top sporting events of the year, you would think of
let's say, and I know, the Olympic Games there once
every four years, you say, the super Bowl, Wimbledon, towards
de France, Rugby, World Cup, NBA finals.
Speaker 2 (48:45):
Yeah, I don't see why we cannot.
Speaker 4 (48:49):
Have let's say, just hypothetical a boardgade in the same
column as let's say March Madness, super Bowl, NBA Final,
and the Masters. We could we could create like pick eighths,
let's say, to occur in spring, summer, fall.
Speaker 2 (49:08):
We could come up. You know, coming up with a
seasonal format is not that difficult.
Speaker 4 (49:15):
And I just I just think if we could do
that and leverage the mobile sports app format, I think
that we could go a long way.
Speaker 1 (49:27):
Well, here's some ideas, and these are other spread against.
These are some ideas from the past uh, you know,
the Triple Crowns and Throwbreds are very big. But guess what,
we have two triple crowds. We have a triple Crown
for pacers and for tritters. We could reorganize those races
and make them into a better, a better and bigger event.
We also have the International Trot that they're doing at Yonkers.
Speaker 3 (49:50):
We have the.
Speaker 1 (49:50):
American Trident Championship followed by the International and then put
a Challenge company.
Speaker 3 (49:55):
We got a three race series there. Those are some
of the things that can be done.
Speaker 2 (50:00):
Great idea, Yeah, I think that, I think real quickly.
I'm one more thing.
Speaker 4 (50:07):
Uh, My wife Sarah just came up with a very
good idea in terms of leverage and if we could
get Fortnoy or some of his think tanks from Barstool
Sports and to help us apply that that type of format. Again,
I think it's something to just really consider.
Speaker 2 (50:29):
Yeah, yeah, I think that's a matter of connections, but uh,
you know, I think it could be done. I think
Clay was on Clay was on a I think a
similar wavelength to you, Howard. He both of you are suggesting,
which I think is right, that harness racing needs to
be able to put on a grand show. Uh. And
(50:50):
if it's a grand enough show, it can become a
significant part of what you're talking about. And part of
that was Clay thinking that you have to unify the
four major tracks like Woodbine, Meadowlands, Kentucky, maybe Ohio, and
but you have to do something along that. It's just
not easy though to you know, if you if you
(51:11):
have it, I would have said it would take an
incredibly fantastic five to ten year plan to get any
single race in harness racing to be at a level
anywhere near any of the things you talked about. But
it can be done because it's done in Europe, you know,
the major race in France, the major ration Sweden, their
(51:33):
their world events, their world events. No reason you can't
have it here.
Speaker 5 (51:41):
That's correct. I felt one of the great great players.
I put this one of the reasons that they used
to have with the North American Series and the horses
went from track to track, the same horses, and that
brought some interesting too.
Speaker 3 (52:00):
It's fact.
Speaker 2 (52:03):
Remember Mark, we want we want it with raging Reggie Yankee.
Speaker 3 (52:07):
Yeah, Danny, was that called the can am series.
Speaker 2 (52:17):
There was a can m Yes, but I think they
followed it. It started the way Dan said, is a
North America. I think then they switched it to the
canam and it was a little changed. It was a
great series.
Speaker 3 (52:29):
Can m might have a different meaning to it today.
Speaker 2 (52:33):
For sure. You know. The other thing that I remember
from from when I was younger, I remember the excitement
that there was when Algold Vivier came here from France
and raced the Great Trotter, the Huge Drat and raced
at the Meadow Lambs. And I think that America has
lost the international aspect of everything. It's too bad that
(52:54):
the internationals the Yonkers because it doesn't get any coverage
and it's the wrong time of the year, so it's
it's sort of a lost event.
Speaker 4 (53:01):
But you have the greatest right, Gordon, Your point is
well taken. Everything you're saying is is is correct. But
with proper grouping and the collaboration of other with other
seasonal events, it could, you know, we could leverage that
with other seasonal events, just like we could leverage let's say,
(53:24):
celebrities that like Aaron Judge and Post Belone wearing the
Siegelman stable hats. We're not leveraging those types of dynamics
while while we really.
Speaker 2 (53:34):
Have the opportunity to do so absolutely and look, the
greatest pacer in the world right now is leap of
faith in Australia. Get them over here. I mean it
happens that one of the wealthiest men in the world
owns them, so it's not exactly a monetary issue. But
but get the right stars, you create that big international race,
(53:55):
do something that's that's really able to get what Howard wants,
which is significant coverage.
Speaker 5 (54:04):
Right, something like that should be I should be televised too.
Speaker 2 (54:08):
Absolutely, national and international television, international, The Australians would cover it.
Bring in the British champion. Look at all the Irish
horses that are doing well in the States now. Have
a little creativity, put together a race, and I know
Jeff could do it. I know Jeff is creative. I
know he's losing money and the Metal Ansy doesn't want
(54:29):
to put more money in. But my god, there are
events that you could put together that would be spectacular,
that would get a full crowd, that would get TV coverage,
that would get press coverage, not just here but internationally.
Speaker 1 (54:41):
I wish to thank everyone for being on the show,
and don't go away, because once I stopped the recorder,
I do want to talk to everyone afterwards.
Speaker 2 (54:48):
No problem.
Speaker 3 (54:49):
Thanks Fddy, Coward, Gorty, Dan And and Mark. Thank you
so much for joining us. That nice show, guys.
Speaker 2 (54:57):
Now let's go to Andy.
Speaker 7 (54:59):
I'm gonna go back a little bit in the next
Keeping Pace column to talk a little bit more about
that New York Times piece, a little bit more about
the USTA's reaction to it.
Speaker 2 (55:09):
Which was just posted a couple of days ago. Also
going to take a.
Speaker 7 (55:11):
Look at the sort of legal defense fund that operates
under the Federal Racing Integrity Law that's actually helping trainers
who have been.
Speaker 2 (55:21):
Accused of positives defend themselves back. You have a good weekend.
Speaker 3 (55:25):
Thanks so much, and that's a wrap for this week's show.
Thanks for joining us, and don't forget to listen again
next week The Houness Racing Alumni Show
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.