What am I missing?

[Nut Brown Racing]

Don't get so hung up on semantics Bob. Whether it's called a rake or a take or an overage that isn't added to the purse doesn't matter. The point is several of these races run for 28%-34% less than they would have prior to the guaranteed purses and I'm not talking about races like the Golden Shoe but about regular allowance type races. If you run 3rd in a full field and still lose money that's not right. Look at the results. Even if you are going to adjust some that still means others won't be adjusted and we have no idea which ones you will adjust before we enter.

This is killing me at the moment. I entered a bunch to help races fill, not necessarily because the conditions were the best for my horses. I also try to think about the community. But this is not feasible anymore.

[Administrator]

Sorry i must be missing something...fixed race purses probably represent 5% of the race card I don't think 5% of the race card is killing anyone. Let me see what I can do about the payouts but first i want to go back and look and compare all these races. If i can help this I will.

[Administrator]

In a 3 horse race...what is the expected return or break down. Let's start there. Because i haven't changed any of this and even if the purse was higher than the entries 3rd place winnings is still short of entry. These posts in here are claiming this is a fixed purse issue or purse not matching entries. Some of which are not accurate or there is more to the story

Example 1
Lets look at the first race I looked at. 5-23 race #1

3 entries = 4500
fixed purse = 5000
Site loss = 500

3rd place payout 800 (only paid out because it is a fixed purse...normal purse does not pay out 3rd place in races with only 3 horses)
entry fee 1500

Anyone and everyone can respond to this. This is a perfect example of misinformation in this thread combined with facts pointed out by a couple members about 3rd place payouts. I am on and willing to work on this.

Example 2
5-23 race #2

4 entries = 6000
fixed purse = 5000
site gain = 1000

3rd place payout 800
4th place payout 200
However in this example the 4th place winning lowered the 1st place payout and did not effect 2nd place or 3rd place

Example 3
5-23 race #6

5 entries = 6250
purse = 6250
site = 0

3rd place payout 1250 (even money)
4th place = 0

[Nut Brown Racing]

Intent of my post was that 3rd being a losing proposition was killing me because I was entering races to help them fill. I have other issues I'm rather miffed about at the moment more so than the fixed vs variable.

[Administrator]

oh boy One at a time please. Yeah I get your point and If i can make an improvement with a proper payout I'd like to do it. I won't run from any of it this is for sure!

[South Jersey Stables]

Sorry i must be missing something...fixed race purses probably represent 5% of the race card I don't think 5% of the race card is killing anyone. Let me see what I can do about the payouts but first i want to go back and look and compare all these races. If i can help this I will.

My apologies if I misunderstood on my end, but I was thinking the entire card was going to be moved to fixed. It's very possible that once the numbers are looked at, some fixed purse stakes races might work very well on everyone's end.

I think a lot of your ideas for the future of the site are ambitious, exciting, and will give it a needed overhaul! I'd definitely recommend a transparent ramp up though for changing concepts, with information coming out and dates for changes, which will help avoid people's knee-jerk reactions via the forums.

[And More Racing Stable]

In a 3 horse race...what is the expected return or break down. Let's start there. Because i haven't changed any of this and even if the purse was higher than the entries 3rd place winnings is still short of entry. These posts in here are claiming this is a fixed purse issue or purse not matching entries. Some of which are not accurate or there is more to the story

Example 1
Lets look at the first race I looked at. 5-23 race #1

3 entries = 4500
fixed purse = 5000
Site loss = 500

3rd place payout 800
entry fee 1500

Anyone and everyone can respond to this. This is a perfect example of misinformation in this thread combined with facts pointed out by a couple members about 3rd place payouts. I am on and willing to work on this.

Example 2
5-23 race #2

4 entries = 6000
fixed purse = 5000
site gain = 1000

3rd place payout 800
4th place payout 200
However in this example the 4th place winning lowered the 1st place payout and did not effect 2nd place or 3rd place

Example 3
5-23 race #6

5 entries = 6250
purse = 6250
site = 0

3rd place payout 1250 (even money)
4th place = 0

Bob, let me start this response by saying please don't take my opinion on this issue as anything other than about this issue. I think that 95%+ of what you are doing will be great for the site and should accomplish gaining and retaining players. However, your examples are not what I'm talking about.

Look at same day 5/23

Race # 9 @ 00:25
8 entries @ 1200 = 9600
fixed purse = 5000 (almost half what it would be from entry fees)
horse that finishes 2nd only breaks even (1250 vs. 1200)

Race #1 @ 7:05
9 entries @ 2000 = 18000
fixed purse = 10000 (55% of what it would be from entries)
horse that finishes 2nd barely breaks even (2500 vs. 2000)

I realize that all the races aren't this way but if the intent is to move more in this direction I don't like it. When the discussion hinges on A) the site loses money on short fields in set purses versus B) The horse that runs 2nd in sizeable fields can barely break even then it seems to me there's a flaw in the concept of fixed purses. Fixed purses work if the income stream is generated from something other than entry fees i.e. gate handle, betting handle etc. as at real racetracks but it doesn't work well when generated from entry fees because one side or the other loses most of the time depending on field size.

Let me give you an example of the way guaranteed purses do work successfully. I'm a poker player and play many tournaments. Often the tournaments offer guaranteed payouts but they also add all the additional money that is generated from entries. Yes they take some risk that there won't be enough entries to cover the guarantee but they also take a fee (a rake) from each entry fee just like the site used to do and honestly should do. Example...the entry fee to the tournament is $500...$450 goes to the prize pool and $50 goes to the tournament. If the guaranteed payout is $50,000 they need 100 players to break even. If they only get 90 players they lose $5000 but if they get 110 players they add an additional $4500 to the payout (10 players x $450) and they make $5500. It's not a fixed purse it's a minimum guarantee to inspire participation. One of the tournaments I play regularly needs 116 players to break even on their guarantee. This is around the number of players they used to get before they added the guarantee. Since adding the guarantee they get over 200 players every week and had almost 300 tonight.

I know some people have a problem with a rake being taken but honestly that's the way this type of game works best. I would far rather see 10% taken from the purses to be used for site profit and added money here and there rather than purses that have 50% taken out where you only break even if you run 2nd. True maybe some of the "big race" purses won't be as big but I think it's been proven that big purses are attainable for those who want them by having large entry fees for them. Look at the races you've done like the The Golden Shoe with a $48 entry fee and a full field. People are willing to pay the entry fee if the value is there but I'm not willing to pay a large entry fee knowing that I need to win to do any better than break even.

It is your site and if you want to continue on this trend that's completely up to you but it will make me reevaluate where I run and make me wait until there are enough entries for me to see if it's a fixed purse so that I can pass on those races that just aren't worth it. If the card gets filled with more such races I think you will find more people doing that and that would be a disaster.

Just my humble opinion offered in good faith.

[Administrator]

I don't take anything posted in any way other than its a post or concern etc. There aren't that many fixed purses on the card and u may have found a few that were out of balance and thats was not intended by me....we just didnt catch them. We don't look to create an imbalance...I even checked the next 3 days out and I don't see a problem with any fixed purses You are also cherry picking for anomalies and not the norm. I found one where there was 50K in favor of the stables and many that were right where they needed to be.

However I would like information posted to be accurate when discussing only the bad. You mentioned races like The Golden Shoe that you would need to win to break even. This is false and misleading the forum.

48K entry fee
264K first place - 5.5 x entry
120k second place - 2.5 x entry
76.8K 3rd place - 1.6 x entry
19.2k 4th place - 0.4 x entry

I will remove all fixed purse races other than specific ones that I will set up and monitor. Apparently my post above with examples and %'s was completely overlooked. You are basing your argument over an oversight. To make sure I don't get bogged down explaining this I will remove fixed purses however I don't find races without a fixed purse very appealing to anyone.

In the mean time I will increase 3rd place's pull by 4% which will be 20% of purse instead of 16% which should allow for break even points in majority if not all races. This will also drop the 1st place horse to 50% The two issues on this thread are not related at all. Fixed purse size matching entries and the payout of the purse are 2 separate things. However when picking a race out of the lot that has an imbalance and using payout as the theme it becomes muddy water.

[Nut Brown Racing]

There is still something fundamental to be decided IMO. I tried posting this once long ago, and flames shot out of the ears of half a dozen barns. I'll try again, gently. Every penny won on this site ultimately comes from another stable, another player. If the site is set up so that stables think they are businesses, and have a profit motive, then this will be a smaller site. The reason is that many players will quickly get bored with being the constant depositors that fund the winnings of everyone else, and will drop off. If this is a game, not a business, and the objective is to win but mostly to be entertained, we can keep more players but at the cost of some excitement to those that prefer playing for profit.

The type of races that are available, the entry fees for these races, the rate at which a horse becomes useless, and YES, the purse disposition all communicate what kind of site this is. And there really isn't a split down the middle option that truly works so please don't go there frothing unless you are also willing to post a link to a paper with all the of analysis and math that shows how such a structure could exist.

Which kind of site does Admin want to create? Either answer is valid, wholesome, full of goodness and light, etc. but they are also very different answers. And, they will attract different numbers of players, and different sorts.

[And More Racing Stable]

You need to reread my post Bob because your response is full of mis-characterization of what I said.

I even said "I realize that all the races aren't this way". You are correct it is a small percentage of them at this time however it is my perception from things you've said that you would like to eventually go this way with most or all races. Maybe I'm wrong and you don't intend that but that is my perception from what you have said.

I also never said anything about needing to win The Golden Shoe to break even. All I did was use The Golden Shoe as an example of how people are willing to pay bigger entry fees and that's all I said about it.

I know you are really busy with all this and you don't really like dissenting opinions but you need to slow down a little when you read someones post and read more carefully before responding that they said things that they didn't say.

As I said this is my opinion that the concept is flawed but whatever you decide to do I will adjust to it.

[Administrator]

People are willing to pay the entry fee if the value is there but I'm not willing to pay a large entry fee knowing that I need to win to do any better than break even.

The very next sentence about the Golden Shoe. It's literally made up or a hypothetical because you have no example of a large entry fee with no value but added it as a continuation of the Golden Shoe. That is what I have a problem with...people will read that and some may think that statement is based on fact which it's not. The thread has lost its way and has made a very minor event seem to be this huge problem which it's not. Besides a few hiccups I thought the fixed purse races ran well. As I have posted before....we will remove fixed purses except for races that I will personally create and monitor the purse. I think this solves your initial concern. I have said that fixed purses will be the future and it will be programmed in a way that is automatic where a purse will increase once the starting purse its matched by entries. Sorry we can't connect on this and I will move on from this thread.

Thank you!

[And More Racing Stable]

you have no example of a large entry fee with no value
Thank you!

My examples above where the 2nd place finisher can only break even are examples of an entry fee that is excessive in relation to the purse. All races and reasonable purses don't revolve around the big purses. That was why my original comment about not forgetting about the middle class of the community.

You are right we aren't going to connect on this one but everyone can read both sides and make their own decisions.

[Cold Dog Soup]

I hate to bring up a political reference but much like the affordable care act. We gotta pass it before we know whats in it. lol. Have some patience everyone. Let Bob get things he is envisioning then if there are issues maybe we can adjust. There's still going to be some growing pains and short term issues. Slow down if you need to but dont give up at least until the product is finished and you see how its going to be on a permanent basis. Some things you dont like may change drastically by the time all is said and done. A lot of potential in what Bob has in mind.

[And More Racing Stable]

That was a foolish statement then and it makes no sense here either. Nothing should be passed before it's explained as to what the intentions and ramifications are.

[Cold Dog Soup]

Yes I digress. Poor attempt at adding some humor to the situation but my intentions were good. Just to have some patience until things are more to the end goal. I know its frustrating with changes especially if they spring on you without warning. But the intent is good as well trying to improve the site.