A novel idea to speed things up
by John Berry
Many of our sport’s most worthy observers, who are enamored with the breed known as the standardbred, like I, have offered some very viable ideas to further our industry.
The vast majority of the ideas have fallen on deaf ears, as they say, but that doesn’t stop us from continuing our crusade — knowing that little will be changed.
Look what the breeders have accomplished.
From the vaunted 2:10 2-year-old list and 2:05 3-year-old that was so prominent when I first was really introduced to harness racing — Aug. 22, 1959 — to this very day, the breeders have transformed harness racing the same way that speed had become the enamoring feature of auto racing.
From the winner of the first Indy 500 with an average speed of a whisker over 74 miles per hour to the average speed approaching 200 mph these days, it has propelled auto racing to previously unreached heights of popularity.
In fact, qualifying speeds for the last Indy 500 were over 240 miles per hour.
Well, from our sport’s first pacing mile in 2:30 — Aggie Down (2:29) in 1844 — and Lady Suffolk’s 2:29 1/2 trotting mile in 1845, look at what has happened to our breed. “Bulldog’s” pacing record that is more than 225 lengths faster than Aggie Down’s record and Homicide Hunter’s 1:48.4 record a bit over 215 lengths faster than the world champion and iconic Lady Suffolk.
The difference, of course, is that the stands are packed for most auto racing events and our fan base has been smothered to death by competition, including that from auto racing, along with casinos, prop betting, the numbers racket (pardon, the now legalized lottery) and just about everything else.
While the action on track could not be faster, the complaints from our dwindling fan base are universal that the action between races couldn’t be slower.
Our sport needs to step up — just like the breeders — and modernize things just like pushing a button on a slot machine every three or four seconds, well, not quite that fast!
Here’s a suggestion — yes, another one — that, also, I am sure, will go into a waste basket and be on its way to a waste fill: Instead of tracks trying not to step on each other’s toes, harness racing should regionalize itself with one program, similar to our four time zones.
Here’s an example: Taking a recent busy Friday night, New York had three harness racing tracks in action — Vernon Downs (15 races) at 5:05 p.m., Batavia Downs (13 races) at 6 p.m. and Yonkers (12 races) at 6:45 p.m.
Instead of three separate programs featuring their 35 to 40 races, adjust their post times just a bit, say, Vernon at 5:10, Batavia at 5:20, and Yonkers at 5:30.
One program could be used for all with the races numbered, for example, 1 through, say 35, with their post times nine to 10 minutes apart, i.e., Vernon (race 1), Batavia (race 2), Yonkers (race 3), Vernon (race 4), Batavia (race 5), Yonkers (race 6), with scheduled intervals nine or 10 minutes between races, maybe adjusted by a minute or two for inquiries, objections, etc.
Each track would still have their regular time intervals between races for track maintenance and wagering, and, for the few on track, getting a hot dog and a beer.
In this day of computerized wagering and artificial intelligence, tracks could have the same types of wagers intermingled with each track in the regionalized area.
With action beginning at Vernon at 5:10, a 35-race program would be complete between 10:25 and 11, certainly no worse than today’s drag-outs to near midnight.
Wagering numbers mean little in today’s harness racing picture as many tracks are governed by a casino that have been granted the luxury to open providing the perks of having a casino in the first place.
If there are a few more races added to each program, slight adjustments could easily be made as they all would be in the same jurisdiction and time-zone.
Specialty wagers could be added between tracks to make things even more interesting with lottery like roll-overs attracting some well-deserved wagering dollars with guaranteed pools, hosted by a different track in each “zone” each night.
One such wager that this column has suggested is a Super-Lotto 8 wager — similar to the lotto requiring the selection of six numbers and a mega-ball number — which has generated prizes in the hundreds of millions of dollars and even over one billion.
The harness racing version could be a Super-8 with the player’s attempting to select seven winners on the program with our version of the mega-ball being the selection of an exacta or trifecta in the eighth and final event.
Prizes could be awarded beginning with four winners plus the eighth race exacta or trifecta with the same scenario for five or six winners, with or without the final exacta or trifecta.
Takeout could be substantially less than the takeout for the lotteries of today — estimated at 35 per cent to 40 per cent — with beneficiaries including enhanced purses, protection for retired horses, training for standardbreds for second careers as show horses or therapeutic horses, and other charitable endeavors of benefit.
There also could be other circuits such as Ohio-Indiana, Ohio-Kentucky or Kentucky-Indiana with a nine-to-10-minute structure between all tracks involved guaranteeing no more agonizing 25-30-minute intervals for actions.
Ohio-Pennsylvania is also a probability, so is Pennsylvania-Indiana or Pennsylvania-Kentucky.
On a typical Monday, Saratoga-Monticello might be a possibility with 24 races intermingled nine or 10 or 11 minutes apart, in one New York regional program.
Judging by the ones that really matter in this proposition — our fans — they are, mostly one track, some, two track, players and this would cure their need for faster action, just like in other gaming venues like slots, poker, craps, roulette, blackjack, all with continuous action.
Change is inevitable; one either rejects it, or accepts it.
Harness racing has a choice, and it better be the right choice.
MAY THE HORSE BE WITH YOU!
