Racing and breeding in Turkey

Article by Paull Khan

The true scale of the thoroughbred industry in Turkey is surely widely underestimated. Turkey is indeed a big hitter in the racing and breeding world, but much of its activity flies under the international radar. This is perhaps not unsurprising, as Turkish racing is almost completely closed. Of the 3,159 thoroughbred races run in the country annually, all but six are closed to foreign-trained runners. All its races may be broadcast across two television channels, but pictures of Turkish racing are rarely seen abroad; and unless one has a Turkish identity number, one cannot place a bet on those races on the Turkish Jockey Club’s  platforms. There are only 10 foreign-based owners in the country, and hardly any of its racehorses were bred anywhere other than in Turkey.

But shine a light on this sunniest and most welcoming of countries, and the vibrancy of the industry is remarkable.

Let’s take breeding first. The latest figures available to the International Stud Book Committee (the 2020 foal crop) show that Turkey is one of the few major thoroughbred breeding nations whose foal numbers have actually grown over the past decade. In 2010, Turkey ranked 15th in the world, in terms of number of foals bred, with 1,500. She now ranks as high as 9th in the world, with 2,103 foals – a 40% increase, no less, at a time when global production is in marked decline. Turkey is, in fact, the fastest-growing major breeding nation in the world. Amongst the top ten, only Ireland’s and Japan’s foal crops have increased over this decade, and both have seen much more modest growth than Turkey’s (15% and 11% respectively). And this Turkish expansion continues: some 2,280 foals were registered in 2022 – a further 8% rise.

Look down a racecard in Turkey, and you would be lucky to see a foreign-bred suffix beside any of the runners’ names. With only 24 out of 3,500+ horses having been foaled outside the country, such a racecard would be something of a collector’s piece. The explanation can be found in a regulation that only allows Thoroughbreds to be imported in the year of their birth. A striking example of the closed nature of Turkish racing, this rule is in place to support local breeders. Another disincentive to buying foreign-breds is that imported horses only receive 75% of the normal prize money. 

So, it is domestic production that, almost exclusively, fuels Turkey’s racing product. But that does not mean Turkey is closed to the purchase of foreign bloodstock. Far from it. It has embraced a long-term policy of importing stallions and broodmares strategically to build up the quality of its herd over time. Ten of these stallions are currently owned by the Turkish Jockey Club (TJC) and stand at one or another of their various Stud Farms, which also hosts 47 privately owned stallions. In this way, they are able to offer world-class stallions to their mare owners at knock-down prices.

The most expensive stallion, at least of those whose fees are in the public domain, Luxor, stands at under €8,000.

Current Champion Sire, 1998 Belmont Stakes winner Victory Gallop (CAN), heads the  roster of TJC-owned stallions. By the time TJC bought him from America in 2008, he was the sire of multiple-stakes winners. His nomination fee: around €3,000.

2007 Derby hero Authorized (IRE) now stands in Turkey.

A more familiar name to many European Trainer readers among the TJC’s team is 2007 Derby hero Authorized (IRE). Having stood at Dalham Hall, Newmarket and Haras de Logis in France, this sire of six individual Gp1 winners, as well as of Grand National winner Tiger Roll, was acquired by the TJC in 2019, where he stands at some €2,500.

Daredevil (USA), dual Gr1 winner for Todd Pletcher, was purchased by the TJC in 2019.

Daredevil (USA), dual Gr1 winner for Todd Pletcher, was purchased by the TJC in 2019 and stood the 2020 season in Turkey, before returning to his native USA to stand at Lane’s End Farm. However, the TJC have retained ownership of the horse. 

Ahmet Ozbelge, General Secretary of TJC, explains the rationale behind this arrangement and the Turkish philosophy on stallion purchases. “After we bought Daredevil, his offspring Shedaresthedevil and Swiss Skydiver performed incredibly well; and we subsequently received many offers from various US stud farms to buy or to stand him. We evaluated all offers and decided not to sell him because of his young age but to stand him at Lane’s End. This is a first for the Turkish breeding sector, and we are glad to be in such a collaboration, to the benefit of the global breeding industry.

“In Turkey, we have very strict criteria for breeding stock purchases from abroad, based on performances of the stallion or the mare in question but also of his/her progeny’s performances. On top of that, we work hard to select the best-suited ones for our country’s specific conditions, including racetrack types, race dıstances, conformation and bloodlines. We also try to build up a good variety in our stallion pool in order to meet the various expectations of our breeders.”

Rising foal numbers are but one example of how Turkey is, in many ways, swimming against the tide. While many countries are seeing a slow decline in their racecourse numbers, Turkey is adding to its roll. Antalya is the latest addition, and it would take a brave punter to bet against further tracks opening their doors in the coming years.

Some €70M will be distributed across Turkey’s national race programme, creating a more than respectable average prize money of €8,200 per race, with owner’s and breeder’s Premiums boosting this to €11,300 per race. 

The TJC has no fewer than 2,300 people on its payroll and an outlook that places social engagement higher up the list of priorities than do many racing authorities – perhaps in part to win over the hearts and minds of a populace which tends to be disapproving and to conflate racing and betting. For example, the racecourses offer not only pony and horse rides for the general public but also free equine assisted therapy for the handicapped. 

Pony Rides for children and the disabled are routinely offered at Turkish racecourses.

How is an industry of this size sustained? In a word – and unsurprisingly – through betting. Horserace betting has long provided a rich seam of income for the TJC via a formula of which most racing governing bodies can only dream and which is likely to have yielded some €190M in 2022. 

By international standards, the Turkish punter gets a raw deal, indeed, with only a 50% return on his stakes. The TJC retains an eye-watering 22% of monies staked, with the remaining 28% slice going to the government. Other income streams for the TJC pale into insignificance: any money from sponsorship, for example, is heavily taxed at a rate of 74%. 

Enviable though the TJC’s position may be to many Racing Authorities, it rues the fact that sports betting enjoys yet more favourable treatment. “This is a key point, actually,” explains Ozbelge. “There is a seven-point tax gap between the two sectors in favour of sports betting, which allows them to offer higher payouts. As football is so popular and the most beloved sport in Turkey, we have so many common punters to both racing and football. As a result, they can easily be driven away from the lower payout environment to high payouts.” The paucity of the horseracing return is most evident in single bets, and least apparent in exotics such as the Pick 6 - the Turks’ favourite bet.

To support Ozbelge’s point, sports betting dwarfs horserace betting, accounting for no less than 90% –  to racing’s 10% – of legal betting activity. To what extent this is due to the payout differential is difficult to tell. There is also the underlying relative popularity of football which he alludes to; and a further factor may be that, while racing offers pool betting, sports betting is fixed odds. (Exchange betting is outlawed in the country due to integrity concerns). 

What is clear is that, with payouts so low, the temptation to bet via the illegal websites is high. “We import race meetings from different countries to prevent Turkish citizens from betting on illegal sites on these races,” continues Ahmet Ozbelge. Even so, it is estimated that the scale of illegal betting at least matches that of legitimate betting.

If European punters and bloodstock agents are likely to find the Turkish landscape somewhat alien, so too might trainers and owners, as the structure is, again, very different.

General Secretary Mr. Ahmet Ozbelge .

There are 795  trainers in the country whose licences allow them to train thoroughbreds or purebred Arabians. There are almost as many Arab races as thoroughbred races, and the prize money is similar. Between the codes, there are over 8,000 horses in training.There is no jump racing nor trotting. A quarter of the race programme is on turf: the majority of races are run on sand with around 10% on a synthetic surface.

To retain their licences, trainers must attend compulsory training sessions, which have heretofore been annual, but are about to be moved onto an ‘as required’ basis. The great majority of trainers train US-style on the racetracks, and each track has plentiful boxes for the local horses-in-training. 

But here’s the thing: for the most part, trainers do not charge a fee to their owners, in the manner of those in Western Europe. Their sole remuneration is, rather, a percentage of their horses’ earnings – 5% or 10%. (Some do strike separate agreements with their owners for a fixed salary, but this is not the norm).

The owner, for his or her part, is then responsible for all their horses’ expenses. However, what one might imagine would be a hefty part of those costs –  that of the horse’s stable at the racetrack – is again heavily subsidised by the TJC, who charge just €15 to €20 (depending on the racecourse) per annum per box. The owner’s total expenses – including the salary and insurance of the stable staff, feed, bedding, veterinary expenses, etc. – are not far in excess of €1,000 per month. But, lest this information should start a goldrush amongst European owners, salivating at the potential returns on investment, it should be explained that not everyone can become an owner in Turkey. One must have a Turkish residence permit and be able to demonstrate financial sufficiency. This explains why there are only 10 foreign-national owners on the TJC’s books.

Turkey is one of a select few European countries with internationally recognised Group races (the others being France, Germany, Great Britain, Ireland, the three Scandinavian countries and Italy). The Gp2 Bosphorus Cup (3yo+, 2,400m/12f) and Gp3 Topkapi Trophy (3yo+, 1,600m/8f) are the richest, worth north of €150,000. The Istanbul Trophy (Gr3), for fillies and mares, makes up its Group-race trio. All are run over the turf course at Istanbul’s impressive Veliefendi racetrack –  the main centre and flagship of Turkish racing. They are joined by the International Thrace Trophy (turf) and International France Galop FRBC Anatolia Trophy (dirt), both of which are international Listed Races. The only other open race takes place at the nation’s capital, Ankara, being the Queen Elizabeth II Cup for two-year-old thoroughbreds; but this has never attracted any European runners.

The start of the Gazi Derby.

Richer than all of these is the Gazi Derby, a €330,000 race run over the classic mile and a half in late June. 

Veliefendi is not, however, Turkey’s oldest racecourse. That honour goes to Izmir, at which members of the EMHF’s Executive Council spent a most enjoyable day’s racing in September, following this year’s annual meeting. 

The window into Turkish racing has for some years been its International Festival, at which all Veliefendi’s international races are run. Its wide – up to 36 metres – turf track and attractive prize money once proved highly popular with foreign trainers, who frequently made the journey to Istanbul in September. The Topkapi Trophy , for example, saw a 10-year unbroken spell of foreign-trained winners, with Michael Jarvis, Mike De Kock, William Haggas, Richard Hannon Snr., Kevin Ryan, Andrew Balding and Sascha Smrczek all making the scoresheet. However, COVID has brought about a sea-change in behaviour, and there has not been a foreign-trained winner of any Turkish Group race for the past five years. 

EMHF ExCo members at Izmir Racecourse.

Inevitably, the quality of the race fields has suffered. In 2022, the Topkapi Trophy had to be downgraded from Gp2 as a result, and the pressure on all the Turkish Group races is unlikely to ease unless and until the raiders can be enticed back.

Turkey’s governance structure is also a little unusual. The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry plays a very hands-on role when it comes to regulation – appointing the Stewards and taking responsibility for race day operations and doping control. The Jockey Club itself operates under the provisions of a triad agreement with the Ministry of Agriculture and the Turkish Wealth Fund, which is the holder of the licence for racing and betting in Turkey.

The TJC prides itself on its not-for-profit status and ethos. Ozbelge explains: “Having a centralised governing system of the racing, breeding and betting activities by a nonprofit organisation with a non commercial approach, but rather a ‘horsemen’ one, with a main goal being to develop [the] racing industry by improving the racehorse breed in the country, has many advantages. This system supports the horse owners and breeders by offering them world-class stallions for very reasonable covering fees, offering boarding and veterinary services of high quality for minimum possible costs to them. Also, supplying the industry with well-educated jockeys in its own Apprentice School and delivering live broadcasting of all races through two TV channels and so on. 

“But when one thinks about the cost of all of these investments as well as all the facilities that the Club has to operate with its staff of 2,300 experienced people, with betting revenue being its sole income, it’s easy to see that this has many challenges that come with it. But the main challenge is the unfortunate general perception of ‘gambling’ of our beloved sport, which is considered the king of sports and the sport of kings throughout the world. With a little bit of support or at least a ‘fair approach’ in comparison to betting on other sporting activities, Turkey has great potential to be a major player in the world league of horse racing.”     

So, what are the prospects of the veil over Turkish racing being lifted? 

There is hope of a new media rights deal which promises to bring pictures of Turkish races to an international audience. But those hoping to see Turkey adopt the policy of most of its European neighbours – namely that of having open races – are likely to be disappointed. Ozbelge again: “As Turkey is not in close proximity to major racing countries in Europe, horses cannot travel frequently by road as between central European countries, but only by air in order to participate in international races. As one can imagine, this is quite costly, and in order to attract some horses from abroad, the prize money is the key factor here. So, it all comes down to the economics of the industry and of the country for sure. We do plan and hope to have more international races, but we can realise it only if and when we have the right infrastructure and dynamics for it.”   

Game face – can betting pools find a new market for European racing?

By Lissa Oliver

Where there is competition, there is gambling. Punters naturally take an interest in a sporting outcome and enjoy “putting their money where their mouth is” when it comes to having an opinion on the winner, but never more so than in horseracing. Rightly or wrongly, our industry seems to be inextricably interlinked with gambling and increasingly dependent on betting options. Can betting pools be turned to our advantage and bring in new fans?

A totalisator, or pari-mutuel system, is similar to a lottery in that all the stakes on a race are pooled with a deduction to cover costs and a contribution, where obligated, to racing. The remainder of the pool is divided by the number of winning units to provide a dividend.

On-course bookmakers are struggling to compete with online betting opportunities, and on-course pari-mutuels are no exception. The Irish Tote returned a year-on-year 33% decrease in 2018 to under €70m, due to falling international turnover. Yet a sliver of silver shines in the gloom for 2019, with first-half figures showing a 5.4% increase on-course.

Speaking to a government committee in November, HRI CEO Brian Kavanagh announced a strategic review of the Tote in Ireland, saying, “There is talk of a new gambling regulator being appointed and the taxation status of the Tote has been raised as an issue. The Tote is facing the same struggle as on-course bookmakers. We are in discussions with a number of parties with regard to the future of the Tote, and we will be bringing some strategic options to the board.”

It's interesting to note that in countries such as Ireland and Britain, where horseracing is managing to retain its popularity with the general public, the simple win-only bet is by far the most popular bet, suggesting punters are following form and looking outside our sport for more adventurous fun bets. 

The most popular bet in Britain, Ireland, France, Germany, Spain and Switzerland is the win-only, in Greece the trifecta, multiples in The Netherlands, and in Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Russia, it’s the Jackpot that most captures public interest and investment. Understanding the market and what attracts customers is half the battle, but attracting new customers is the greatest challenge.

Cyril Linette

Cyril Linette is the CEO of the French PMU, the biggest betting pool in Europe and the third-largest in the world. Having turned the ailing fortunes of L’Équipe newspaper successfully around, he is now turning his attention to revitalising the PMU. Earlier in 2019, he outlined a new “operating roadmap” designed for corporate recovery and transformation strategy, reviving French racing for all stakeholders.

At a conference in April, Linette expressed confidence in PMU’s long-term prospects, despite declines across its portfolio in 2018—notably sports and poker betting down 2.3% to €9.7bn and horseracing down 2.6% to €8.8bn. This comes on the back of a 20% decrease in betting since 2011, when betting on horseracing has almost halved during that period.

In response to these declines, Linette has launched a €30m cost savings plan, sanctioning “strong actions” across PMU’s retail network, which currently generates 75% of corporate wagers. “If we do not find a solution, in five or 10 years the company puts the key under the door,” Linette warned starkly. As a result, the operator will no longer service the Brazilian horseracing market, ending its partnership with Rio de Janeiro’s Hipódromo da Gávea. 

A key proposal is the revamping of the Quinté, which celebrated its 30th anniversary in 2019, removing all bonus rounds to make it “less reliant on chance.” Linette states his aim to simplify the Quinté: “The Quinté is a rather complicated game, not in its formula, but finding five horses is complicated. There are very simple bets where you just have to find the horse that will win, to attract a younger clientele. That is the big challenge in the years to come—to try to rejuvenate our clientele.”

Among other measures introduced is a new loyalty programme, to engage and reward regular French racing patrons.

“The PMU will place horseracing bettors back at the centre of its business, take good care of today's customers; because our PMU clients are important, they contribute to the social link, they contribute to the financing of the sector,” Linette vows. 

This goes hand-in-hand with a nationwide campaign to improve the general public’s awareness of the sport and hopefully bring in a wider audience. “I do not know if the PMU is corny, but it's a world a little closed,” Linette acknowledges. "The younger generation is not going to naturally play PMU and does not always go to racetracks. There is a real value to our public image. The PMU is known but not sufficiently considered.”

Linette explains, “One thing is certain: diversification towards gambling is over. The PMU has had years of decay; we are no longer in the 1950s, 1960s or 1970s, during the glorious Thirty Years when we used to play the trifecta to buy our new clothes, caravans or something else. There was competition, so at one time the PMU went into lottery games, games of chance, and I think we were losing our soul a little.

“Basically, it's a life-size board game—you have to find the right combination, and the one who finds the right combination deserves to be rewarded, whether in very expert games like the Quinté or in games a little simpler like finding the horse that wins.

“I think we have two ranges of customers: the turfistes (400,000 people), which represent 80% of our turnover, and those who we could call the gamers (2 to 3 million people), which are more volatile. For the first, we must go back to fundamentals by erasing the maximum references to games of chance. Return to the DNA of horse betting, sagacity and gains. For the latter, we must work on image and innovation, so new types of bets to keep them or conquer them.” The message here is clear: stop trying to diversify and instead specialise for each group of particular clients.

Harald Dorum

The issue of attracting a fresh, new and younger audience is not just a problem for France. Paull Khan spoke with former CEO of the Norwegian Betting Operator Rikstoto, Harald Dorum, who stepped down earlier in 2019 to “allow a ‘new broom’ to attract a younger audience, with whom racing is struggling to communicate.” He remains President of the European Pari-Mutuel Association, however.

Dorum places much emphasis on the benefits of the pool betting model. Primary among these is the greater susceptibility to race-fixing of fixed odds bets and, especially, exchange models.

“The pari-mutuel operator is completely independent of the result of the race. If a punter places a large stake on an unexpected result, his winnings will be correspondingly lower. Moreover, bets on losers are not allowed,” he says and even claims, “In countries with the Tote model, there has been no case of fixed races for years.”

Despite this, pool betting has not been immune to a general trend in public opinion, which is hardening against gambling and focuses not only on its links to race or match-fixing but also on its use for money laundering, the growth of illegal betting and, perhaps most notably, on the social cost of gambling addiction.

“We have to modernise. We have to find a way of bringing a new and modern product to the market, while still taking care of the integrity of the sport. And fixed odds may be a part of that mix,” Dorum concedes.

He believes that the likelihood of public support will be increased if Tote has a real and clearly explained public mission, whereby some of its profits are directed to other causes, such as financial support of broader equestrian interests. 

It is an oft-observed fact that there is no universal rule book for horseracing and the discrepancies in the interference rules significantly deter many punters. Dorum agrees that the recent progress in harmonising these rules under the so-called ‘Category 1 approach’—now uniform pretty much the world over save for North America—has “absolutely been good news.” Medication rules would be top of his list of the remaining rules to harmonise. Aside from harmonisation, Dorum believes that the sport’s rules must chime with the sensibilities of today’s population, in particular the need to limit the use of the whip to a broadly acceptable level.

Dorum concedes that progress towards a Global Bet, a single world-wide product available around the world and backed by strong marketing and branding has been very slow with neither the betting operators nor the racing authorities gripping the concept and taking ownership of it. But software developments promise an imminent technical solution, he believes. “Just like with a lottery, you have the chance for a life-changing win, but at the same time, you have a great experience.” 

In his view, success in launching a Global Bet will require a joint effort between betting operators and Racing Authorities and this, in turn, will require a commitment in terms of time and policy prioritisation, from the global Racing Authorities, both for galloping and trotting races. And there is a general feeling that the key to this must be the support of the powerhouse that is the Hong Kong Jockey Club. For Dorum, it is political issues rather than technological or legal ones, that have hindered the Global Bet. For instance, he explains, a time of day must be agreed by all the parties, and a publicity programme then to surround it to give it the marketing reach. 

Further, Dorum believes, “We need to increase our cooperation between Tote operators and find solutions and future products together.”

In this context, it has been reported that the PMU, Europe’s pre-eminent Tote operator, is considering its future within the EPMA. “I very much regret, if it will be the case, that the PMU will be leaving the EPMA in May and joining the World Lotteries Association. We and the WLA have a lot to learn from each other, and we have established a working group to determine how we might work and cooperate together.”

BUY THIS ISSUE IN PRINT OR DOWNLOAD

January - March 2020, issue 68 (PRINT)

£8.95

Quantity:

Add to Cart

January - March 2020, issue 68 (DIGITAL)

£4.95

Add to Cart

WHY NOT SUBSCRIBE?

DON'T MISS OUT AND SUBSCRIBE TO RECEIVE THE NEXT FOUR ISSUES!

EMHF - Positive EU decisions give cause for optimism

By Paull Khan

There have now been no fewer than five European Commission decisions, over the past five years, which have given the green light to member states wishing to introduce state aid in favour of their horseracing industries and which should be of great interest and encouragement to a number other European racing industries. If lessons can be learnt from these cases, this may help the racing industries in other European countries construct the arguments necessary to follow suit, thereby improving the financial health of our sport across the region.

Racing authorities the world over are engaged in conversations with their governments, seeking to establish, protect, or maximise statutory funding for horse racing as well as to safeguard the future health and stability of the industry and that of the breed. Normally, this funding takes the form of a statutory return to horseracing from betting.

So, typically, the racing authority must first provide good arguments to answer the question of why government should support such a guaranteed return to horseracing from betting (which would normally constitute special treatment for the sport). Then, in many cases, a further question has to be successfully answered: “Why should Government feel confident that objections on the grounds of state aid will be overcome?”

These five decisions – relating to France and Germany (in 2013) and to the UK, Finland, and Denmark (last year), are examples of racing authorities not only having convinced their governments to provide such assistance, but also of their governments having successfully argued before the European Commission that the measures introduced constituted ‘compatible’ (ie admissible) forms of state aid. These decisions should be of interest to those racing industries that either:

• have no current statutory support, but where their government either allows, or is contemplating allowing, betting operators independent of the sport to take bets on their racing, or

• have statutory support, but where the level of that support can be demonstrated to be insufficient to sustain the country’s racing industry, and/or the terms of that support can be shown to be in some way unfair.

TO READ MORE --

BUY THIS ISSUE IN PRINT OR DOWNLOAD -

April - June 2018, issue 61 (PRINT)

£8.95

Quantity:

Add to Cart

April - June 2018, issue 61 (DIGITAL)

£4.95

Add to Cart

Why not subscribe?

Don't miss out and subscribe to receive the next four issues!

Fair trade betting

CLICK ON IMAGE TO READ ARTICLE

(European Trainer - issue 34 - Summer 2011)

Are racecourses selling their customers?

The world has gone gambling mad, and perhaps it will hit us harder than most people anticipate in coming years. Quite how it hits us, will be crucial to the future of horseracing. Or, perhaps one should say, quite how it does not hit us will be of great importance.

There is fierce competition out there, for the betting pound, the gambling euro and the wagering dollar. Therefore, this is not a good time for horseracing to lose its share of the gambling pot. This is not the time to "sell our customers". This is the time make some shrewd business decisions and draw up some productive long term strategies. These are also days when we are heading into a global recession. Believe it or not, that will not necessarily slow down the betting market. Studies have shown that people are quite likely to bet more when times are hard. Gambling becomes the only way to put a little bit extra in the pocket. So, this is the time for racecourses, racing publications and racing communities to be competitive to promote racing as a betting product. To promote the sport as the best betting product.

Are they taking this opportunity? To a certain extent yes', but unfortunately in many cases no', and seemingly never very well. Many courses are today promoting sports betting, online poker betting and online games. Yes, sponsors and advertisers from these sectors of the betting market plough money into racing, in the short term, but it is my guess that long term, racecourse managements and racing editors will be regretting taking that carrot in the first place. Why are companies taking bets on sports, such as football, golf and tennis, eager to advertise at our racecourses, in racing publications and in our racecards in the first place?

The answer is very simple, they are trying to move gambling money across from horseracing to their own betting products. That is the only reason they promote their products at the racecourses. And, to our astonishment, the racecourses allow it. What is happening is as absurd as it would be if all McDonald's restaurants in this world had huge posters promoting Kentucky Fried Chicken. "No, hang on a bit" you might think. But that is actually quite a good comparison to what is going on in horseracing these days. Let's take a premier European racecourse as an example. Why not look at Newmarket, and their Guineas weekend last year. Stan James Bookmakers sponsored the Guineas meeting, and over the two days this company had 14 full pages of advertisements in the racecards (plus the four cover pages on both days). This is how they decided to make use of the 14 pages: 8 pages promoted online poker and online games. 4 pages promoted Stan James Bookmakers only. 2 pages promoted betting on horseracing (although as free bet competitions). To put this another way, 57% of the sponsor's advertising space was used to promote forms of betting which is in direct competition with horseracing. Only 14% of the space was devoted to horseracing alone. The two most strategically placed advertising pages, immediately preceding the 2,000 Guineas pages and immediately before the 1,000 Guineas pages, were both used to promote online poker. This is a typical example of how bookmakers use a sponsorship deal with a racecourse these days. They are clearly not going into such an agreement solely to get people to bet more on racing. They are not even primarily trying to get people to bet more on racing.

Quite the opposite. The Stan James Guineas meeting is not the only example. On Saturday August 11, the opening day of the Football Premiership season in England, Newmarket's card was sponsored by the bookmaking firm Skybet.com, and their four sponsored races on the day had the following titles: The Skybet.com for all you football betting handicap The Premiership kick off with Skybet.com handicap The Skybet.com Sweet Solera Stakes (g3) The interactive football betting with Skybet live stakes Only the feature event, the Sweet Solera Stakes, was not used to promote betting on football. Again, the bulk of the sponsor's advertising went towards attracting punters to bet on others sports not on horseracing.

There can be no doubt that racecourses need their sponsorship revenue quite badly but this is probably not an ideal way to earn it. When a racecourse with a high profile like Newmarket can be dictated to in such a way by sponsors, what about the smaller tracks? Don't forget that sponsorship deals like those described above are, in effect, a case of horseracing "selling their customers". For every pound or euro bet on other sports, casinos, or poker, there will be one pound or euro less bet on horseracing.

Why does a company sponsoring a classic horserace choose to devote nearly 60% of the advertising space included in the package to promoting non-racing betting products? It is hardly because the company sees a great future in horseracing, is it? Nor is it as a result of their care for the future of horseracing. It is simply a business decision - and it is part of a long term plan. When you go to a big football match, or watch a match on TV, do you see many adverts, banners or boards promoting horseracing and betting on horseracing? If you do, please let me know, as I believe it would be a rare sight indeed. If you decide to try your luck in online games or online poker, you enter a web site offering such products. How many ads or banners promoting horseracing will you see on these sites? Having done a quick test, looking at ten poker sites, my discovery was, to no little surprise, "0-from-10". As touched on in my piece on the Global Superbet in Trainer Issue 20 (Winter 2007), one big danger for horseracing is that these competing products are so, so much cheaper to operate, which puts horseracing at a great disadvantage. Should horseracing break loose altogether from these other forms of gambling, or should racing people work towards making these relationships closer, and hopefully healthier for racing?

The current state of affairs is not a case of horseracing in a mutually beneficial co-operation with other betting markets. It smacks more of a case of other betting markets exploiting horseracing. And the powers to be in horseracing seem to be happy to let this to continue. The installation of slot machines has generated revenue for racecourses in North America; that is a fact. It is also a fact, however, that at many of these courses, the betting turnover on the races has gone down since the slots arrived. The horse is becoming less and less important.

Take a look at this cutting, from an article published on the web site videopokerslots.co.uk last year: "Maryland racing industrialists were curious and apprehensive about the potential impact of their new nemesis: Delaware Park's slot machines. But after several weeks of operation, the apprehension between Marylanders has disappeared - now it has become an all out hysteria. The reason: slots have overtaken horse racing. Delaware's slot machines have become a hit that any business would consider phenomenal. Imagine, they're making $300 per machine, and they have a total of 715 slot machines - that's more than $200,000 a day. As stipulated, slot machines should earn $10 million as additional revenues for the Delaware's racing season, consequently grabbing the thoroughbreds from Maryland. Delaware's minor league harness track has quintupled since the installment of slots in the area and is now a major competitor with other race tracks. If this were any other industry, Maryland's tracks would also install slot machines. But slot machines are a hot political debate, while the racing tracks are so strictly regulated that minor changes needs a state-wide approval. These are troubled times for the thoroughbred industry. If racing tracks continue to lose revenue, they would have to ask for slot machines. If legislators won't approve, they'd ask to at least give them economic relief to help them commercially survive." Betting on slot machines has overtaken' betting on horseracing, but at least this North American course operates their own casino-like betting products.

Many racecourses in the USA do have the opportunity to take a "if we can't beat them, let's join them" stand. Still, while the gamblers are taking an increasing interest in betting on slots and other games, they seem to be losing interest in horseracing. US racecourses do not, unlike courses in England, allow extensive advertising from companies in direct competition with their own betting products.

In England the financial muscle of non-racing betting operators is making an all-round mark on racing, not just by ambushing the racecourses with seemingly lucrative sponsorship deals. The media is another side to this, with TV channels and publications offering advertising opportunities. This is all black and white The Racing Post, Europe's principle horseracing daily, and one of the biggest in the world, has developed in a similar way to the racecourses over the past ten years. This paper has a daily "sports betting section" at the back, typically taking up 20 to 24 pages, including the greyhound racing coverage. On Saturdays, the sports section is a separate paper in the middle, often up to 40 pages thick. Now, that may not seem too bad, as the main paper will have 100 pages. What is interesting though is to take a look at the proportion of editorial pages and advertisements. Taking a randomly chosen Saturday, I discovered that the paper had 11 editorial pages on horseracing (excluding the racecards) yet as many as 10 editorial pages on football and other sports. This balance, or imbalance if you will, is simply driven by market forces. Of course the paper needs advertising revenue, and they therefore need to cover the areas their advertisers are interested in.

This is all so easy to understand, it is all "black and white". To the accountants, that is. Examining the same Saturday issue of The Racing Post reveals the facts about how the advertising space for betting was sold. The chosen day was January 26, with the Festival Preview day at Cheltenham, and racing at six courses in all in England and Ireland: Approximately 10 advertising pages exclusively devoted to betting on horseracing Approximately 11 advertising pages exclusively devoted to betting on other sports When looking at the full-page advertisements on the same day, it is interesting to note that the paper carried four full-page ads promoting betting on racing (including one for a betting system), compared to six full-page ads promoting betting on other sports. When watching horseracing on TV, the situation is very similar. On big days, a large proportion of the commercial breaks are promoting non-racing betting products. We have all seen them, the online games commercials, the commercials promoting betting on football, or playing poker online, nicely positioned before a Group One race is due to go off. This happens also on the TV channels originally devoted to and backed by horseracing. In England, the channel At The Races last year decided for a trial period to end its North American program at 11pm GMT (when the pubs are closing), in order to make room for a poker program lasting three hours. What did this mean? It meant that the racing went off air before many of the big stakes events are run in the USA. So, lower grade racing was being shown, and competing with high profile football matches and other TV programs, before eventually making way for poker. What this also means, and this is the most interesting side effect: that horseracing has lost control over its own product.

It seems bizarre that while horseracing authorities and racecourse managements have been fighting long and hard for their control over the rights of live pictures from the racecourses, they have accepted broadcasting schedules that include loads of commercials promoting betting products that are in direct competition with horseracing. They may believe that they have indeed protected the rights to live pictures, and technically they have, but they have absolutely no control over the end product being offered to the viewer. In the TV world, it is sometimes a bit difficult to say who makes the crucial decisions, but it is fair to say that in many cases it is the sponsors. Perhaps you will now be saying, yes, this article is interesting but there is precious little here that we did not already know'. Well, that may be. But don't forget, sometimes stating the obvious is the best way of saying why is nobody doing something about this?'

The further you drive down a narrow dead end street before realising your mistake, the more troublesome it will be to reverse all the way back out again and the longer it will take. And, in the fierce competition for the betting pound, euro and dollar, time is of the essence. Do not let it run out. If someone is going to instigate serious changes in this muddle, that someone will certainly have to come from within the horseracing industry. It is all in our own hands. For the time being.

Global Superbet -can it take horseracing to a bigger stage?

By Geir Stabell

Twenty-five years ago John R. Gaines in Kentucky came up with an idea: the Breeders' Cup series. Gaines felt that Thoroughbred racing needed a high profile day, which would make it possible for the sport to compete with NFL, NHL and NBA in the media picture. Everyone involved in racing agreed, just as much as they agreed that Thoroughbred breeding and racing needed new innovations, offering opportunities for more international competition with chances of winning bigger purses. Has it worked? Partly, and the Breeders' Cup has most certainly been more a star actor than just another face to the stage.

Last year, the International Federation of Horseracing has been working on another new idea, of a totally different nature. Again, the reason for exploring new products for the sport is that we are badly in need of legs to stand on in the increasingly competitive betting market. While turnover on horseracing, according to figures released by the bookmaking industry, has levelled out, it has increased markedly in other sports. In Europe, football is the sport attracting the biggest betting figures. One big difference between the two sports, as far as betting is concerned, is how international football has become. The Champions League, the UEFA Cup, World Cup Finals, European Cup Finals and their qualifying rounds, and the Copa America, combine for a huge, huge betting market – just in Europe. Add in markets like Hong Kong and Australia and the total figures are truly staggering

With football fans from all over the world logging on to bet on and tuning in to watch these big international matches on a weekly basis, it is almost unbelievable that no betting firm has come up with a weekly "Football Superbet." For instance, a multi-leg wager where you need to predict home win, draw or away win in, say, ten or twelve high profile games. With a global, massive pool, it would become a lottery for the thinking fan. Strange as it may seem, quite a few in this world still prefer to use their brain, their own knowledge, when betting. They do not want to bet on numbers games where the odds are stacked heavily against them. Without products to stimulate them, these brains will soon no longer be potential players, not when it comes to horseracing betting, that's for sure. They will either turn their backs on betting altogether or they will look for other challenges. There is no longer a shortage of alternatives. Poker and bridge, to name but two card games, are tailor made for internet wagering involving thinking players. And these products are considerably cheaper to produce, and run, than horseracing. There is no comparison. 

Let's get back to the idea of a superbet. While other sports do not seem to have grasped such an idea, horseracing is, for a change, a couple of lengths ahead. Last year, the International Federation of Horseracing began developing and testing a new bet, called the  "Global Trifecta." This wager is very much in its infancy, and it has been a complicated baby to conceive, but it is an excellent idea that ought to be given all the backing it can get. It has already been tested with international pools on a small number of flat races this season, but with a "soft launch approach," according to Totesport's PR manager Damian Walker.  If it can be refined, and marketed, in the right way, it has every chance of becoming a big success. Not just as a betting product, but also as a tool to promote the sport of horseracing worldwide. 

"Mauritz Burggink, at the IFH in Paris, is the man behind the idea of a superbet," Damian Walker explains, "it is all quite simple. With bigger liquidity in the pool, there will be bigger dividends, and a bet like this can compete with all the lotteries. A lot of work has been done already, and the ultimate aim is to have a Global Superbet every week. We have tested it, but I must stress that the betting on a few races in 2007 has been nothing more than ‘dipping a toe in the water' as there are various complications to overcome. Not least the fact that different countries have different IT-systems, and local laws also affect what we can and cannot do."

Walker explains how punters in big markets like Australia, Hong Hong, USA, South Africa, Singapore and Europe were last year given the opportunity of betting into a global trifecta pool on some Group One events. 

"The product cannot be properly tested without real bets, though testing such a product must begin on a relatively small scale," he says, "and that is why we have given this a quiet launch. I am convinced that this will be a big success, and it can change the world of betting on horseracing dramatically. The progress of this project will be high on the agenda when representatives meet in Tucson, Arizona." 

The global trifecta – where one has to select the first three home in the exact order – was opened for betting on the Prix de Diane at Chantilly in June, 2007. This is not a high profile race internationally, my guess is that a large proportion of racing fans in Australia, Hong Kong and USA have never heard of the race. Walker agrees, but a guinea pig is a guinea pig, and he has some interesting figures from this race. "The turnover was 60,000 euros," he tells us, "and the dividend was 1,767-1. If the bet had been settled on the UK pool alone, the dividend would have been just 929-1. This shows what a difference a bigger pool can make."

That may be, but the pool was nowhere near what it will, hopefully, be one day, and it was too small to provide the operators any sort of hard conclusions. To the customers, however – the punters – a 60,000-euro pool is big enough to enable them to assess the value of the product. Did this trifecta pay over the odds, under the odds, or just about normal? Well, UK punters probably would not have a clue, as they are absolute beginners when it comes to trifecta betting, most of them not even that. Most gamblers in the USA, on the other hand, would have been able to take a quick glance at the result, the odds for the first three home, the number of runners, and say whether a 1,768-1 return was good or bad value. 

The Diane had 14 runners and was won by West Wind, who returned 9-2. She beat Mrs Lindsay (14-1), with Diyakalanie (40-1) third. Almost as a rule of thumb, a North American exacta, on a race like this, will return at least the product of multiplying the tote win odds on the two horses involved. Plus some if the shortest priced horse is second, minus some if the shortest priced horse in the winner. In this case that would be 5.50 (9-2) multiplied by 15 (14-1), which is 82.50. So, with a 40-1 shot finishing third, was 1,767-1 good value?  Finding a race to compare this to in the USA is not at all difficult. The Breeders' Cup Mile has a habit of returning trifectas that include both a winner at a fair price and a real longshot, and also excludes the favorite. And it is a race with a pool made up of punters from all kinds of corners of the world. The 2003 edition of the BC Mile produced an almost identical trifecta to the one seen in the 2007 Diane. Six Perfections (5-1) beat Touch of The Blues (12-1) and Century City (39-1). The race had 13 runners. The trifecta returned 2,627-1. 

 Which is a whopping 48% higher than the global trifecta on the Diane. Although interesting enough, this is not at all a fair comparison, as the trifectas on the Breeders' Cup races nearly always pay well over the odds, simply because the majority of the pool is made up of punters with little or no knowledge of racing. The pool on the Diane was almost certainly made up of punters who knew racing well, and also knew enough about the sport to know that the bet existed. 1,767-1 was therefore a very good return, indicating that it could easily have paid 2,600-1 with a bigger pool. For the record; the trifecta pool on the 2003 BC Mile was $2.3 million. A whole different ballgame, and also where one is aiming to take the global superbet.

 "The global superbet does not necessarily have to be a trifecta," Walker continues. "There is a good chance that it will be a carbon copy of the Triple Trio, a highly successful bet in Hong Kong." 

The Triple Trio is a multi leg bet where one has to select the first three finishers, in any order, in three consecutive races. At last year's Hong Kong International day, when the bet was made up of two handicaps and the Hong Kong Sprint, the dividend was 301,707-1. No space here to take an analytical look at the combined odds of all the nine horses involved, but it makes sense to mention that the three winners paid 14-1, 5-1 and 3-1. A win treble at these odds would return 359-1. It may be a pure coincidence but it is interesting to note that the Triple Trio returned 840 times the win treble, which is not at all 840 times easier to predict. We can understand why a bet like this is a real alternative to playing the lotteries. On the other hand, offering a global triple trio may have its disadvantages, as one is then asking punters to analyse three races, possibly staged in three different countries. Nobody, nowhere, will be confidently familiar with the form of all the horses. Thus, perhaps a trifecta on one race is a better way to go. 
 
"Another issue we need to address is the cases when the bet is not won, and creates a rollover, or jackpot if you will," Walker comments. "Punters in one country may not be too happy about their money moving on to a different jurisdiction, where they will be at a disadvantage when getting involved."  
 
When betting on horseracing, local knowledge does count for a lot, but these are changing times, and he or she who can find the right angles on and the right understanding of international racing will stand the best chance of collecting on a global superbet. Nevertheless, without the local customers - the two-pound, two-euro or two-dollar punters joining in - the pool will never be massive enough to compete with the lotteries. 
 
Perhaps there is a simple solution to this problem. The weekly races will probably have to be scheduled in advance, but "reserve races" could be assigned the following week in the country where the race or races take place, meaning that, when there is a rollover, the global bet stays in one place until it is won. Of course, this could take weeks, especially if the bet is a triple trio, though perhaps not if it isa one-race trifecta. Has an American style superfecta been discussed at all?

"Yes, it has," Walker replies. "The global trifectas we have had have mainly been like lab testing, and various models will be discussed and analysed before we land on one model. We are testing technical solutions just as much as we are testing the nature of the bet."

I love the idea of a global superbet, but wonder, will it really happen?  Will it be a success? This is early days, but, please, make sure that those two words are not too easily swallowed too often within horseracing, in particular when it comes to creating and promoting new products. We have heard them so many times before. Sometimes those ‘early days' become ‘all time.' Horseracing authorities and regulators, in Europe in particular, so often come across as so incredibly conservative and as such a stubborn bunch, that the one word that springs to mind is ‘immature.' Racing still seems to be run from offices that are, if not totally then at least seriously partly, lagging behind the rest of the world.
 
I would be delighted to be convinced that I am wrong about this, as I also fear that this state of affairs will be one of the biggest stumbling blocks for a new global superbet. Things are simply moving way, way too slowly.
 
Take the lack of European racing rules, a topic that came to the fore after the 2007 Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe. Of course, this has been discussed before, but nothing seems to happen. Why not make a couple of quick moves, why not just do it? Make those changes. Toss a couple of coins if need be to settle a couple of disagreements between the English and the French, and get on with it. 
 
Bookmakers taking more and more and more bets on football, and fewer and fewer on racing, do not care about the lack of a sensible set of international racing rules. They are busy making money, and giving the gambling market new, lucrative products, which is precisely why the development of a new global bet must be speeded up. 
 
Why? I'll tell you why. Because as soon as this concept becomes more high profile, through proper marketing and media coverage, bookmakers will grab the idea, adapt it to some other sport, maybe even other sports, and create a new product within a matter of weeks. All of a sudden, racing will be behind, again. The International Federation of Horseracing may be a couple of lengths ahead with their development of a global pool bet at the moment. A couple of lengths, however, is not exactly a comfortable and commanding lead on a playing ground which is changing so fast, and is so volatile, as the betting market.  

Not when you are involved in the race for the betting dollar, euro, or pound.  Unless you are by far the biggest, financially strongest player, it can actually be a disadvantage to lead the way. It is only an advantage if you are smarter, considerably smarter. Let's hope we are.

The European gambling scene – which way for horseracing?

The war is over: so said France Galop director general Louis Romanet a year ago, after he had put his name to a ground-breaking deal with British bookmakers Ladbrokes. For the first time, live pictures of all French races – Flat, jumps and trotting – were being made available to show in UK betting shops, via a new broadcasting service known as Ladbrokes Xtra. A unique, dedicated channel, Xtra is now in all Ladbrokes’ 2,140 shops in Britain and Ireland, and is there to provide extra – hence the name – opportunities for punters, over and above the traditional daily mix of horse and greyhound racing, virtual reality racing and numbers’ betting. Xtra needed product to make up its programme, and French racing was an obvious target, provided the old enmity between the parties could be overcome. The French racing and betting authorities have generally abhorred fixed-odds bookmakers for a century, ever since their like were driven out of the country by legislation that strengthened the national pool-betting monopoly. For their turn, Ladbrokes, which has a well established business in neighbouring Belgium, had engaged in court battles against the French for at least the past 20 years, seeking to break the mould so that it could take its product into fresh areas. Suddenly, peace had broken out between the two old adversaries. More specifically, pragmatism had prevailed. Ladbrokes needed betting opportunities to fill the gaps in its new service, and the French had them in abundance, even if the idea of putting money on the outcome of a trotting race still seemed slightly alien to UK viewers. On the other side of the counter, the French could see an opportunity to enhance its betting take, because as well as allowing for the delivery of live pictures, the deal enabled Ladbrokes to put bets straight into the PMU pools, for a fee, of course, which generally works out at three per cent of turnover to the host provider. One year on, the two sides are more than happy with the arrangement. Ladbrokes has a guaranteed product to put before its customers, and the French PMU has another source of income, as well as a useful driver for increased pools. Romanet says: “The arrangement is progressing well, better than we expected, and we have very good relations with Ladbrokes, which will grow. The more people that are part of the pool, the more interesting it becomes. “French racing is benefiting, and it is good for Ladbrokes, because with pool betting the bookmaker doesn’t mind which horse wins.This is a proper deal, worked out between the racing authority and the bookmaker on proper terms, which is very different from what other betting operators, such as the exchanges, have suggested. They came to us and said they would give us 0.25 per cent of turnover. We said No. We are not beggars.” So there we have it; the new enemy is revealed. The betting exchanges, with their low-margin operation that cuts into the traditional market, have taken the place of the British bookmaker as the bad guys. But the exchanges are not the only target, and nor is France – the Ladbrokes deal aside – the only European country taking a stand, though its policy towards private betting and gambling operators is considered among the most restrictive in Europe. The real storm has been whipped up by the pervasive phenomenon of the internet, which has turned the European gambling scene into a maelstrom. On one side are the state-controlled monopolies, generally making their money from lotteries and hanging on to their status for dear life under national law. On the other is the European Commission, steeling itself to intervene under EU legislation. And in the middle are the private betting operators, prodding governments into short-term legal action with the long-term aim of getting to the European Court of Justice, where they anticipate a wider, more liberal ruling. For betting operators, it may prove to be a case of taking two or more steps back before they can make a half-step forward, but if the mood among European Commissioners is any guide, they will get there, some day. In September, the internal market minister Charlie McCreevy took to nine – Austria, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Holland, Hungary, Italy and Sweden - the number of national governments against which the EC is opening infringement proceedings for restricting the provision of sports betting (including horseracing) and gambling services. The EC is following the line that under EU law countries can curb private gambling operators but only on grounds that are “non-discriminatory, proportionate and consistent”. A country cannot justify restrictions simply to protect its gambling or lottery monopoly, it says. Fellow commissioner Malcolm Harbour, who represents Britain, adds: “Member states cannot, on the one hand, incite and encourage people to participate in national lotteries, while at the same time invoking customer protection as a reason to suppress sports (and horserace) betting.” The testing ground for these views is being laid out even as some national governments continue to bear down on unwelcome betting operators, and as is the way with such issues, the workings of the law will grind away slowly, and expensively. Meanwhile, and perhaps ironically, two countries on McCreevy’s hit list – Germany and Italy – are moving towards deregulating their betting landscape from inside. Spain, too, is gently opening its arms to fresh possibilities, and emerging areas of eastern Europe will not be far behind. Major British-based bookmakers have worked out the angles, and, inevitably in view of their vast experience at putting on a fixed-odds show for their customers, they have made strategic alliances or are looking for individual representation. Stanley International, based in Liverpool, has been operating through agents in Italy for around five years. Its legal challenges have been an irritant for much of that time, but they have produced important legal decisions. Now Stanley is looking to advance through being awarded some of the 17,000 licences – 7,000 for sports betting shops and 10,000 for horserace betting – that are being opened up to commercial competition in Italy. In September, Ladbrokes paid €1.3m for a joint venture with local betting company Pianeta Scommesse and is promising to spend €100m over the next five years on a betting-shop project. “There is clearly unsatisfied demand in Italy,” says Ladbrokes chief executive Chris Bell. Gala Coral already operates in Italy through Eurobet and is bidding to expand, while William Hill can hardly afford to be left out, though its main thrust into Europe will be through Spain, which is moving towards a degree of sports-betting deregulation, and then Greece once it treads softly into liberalisation. Spain, which has new legislation on the stocks in three of the country’s 17 autonomous regions, is also the target for Betbull, a polyglot of an organisation, since it grew out of Austria, is based in Gibraltar and run by Simon Bold, who first made his name as a bookmaker in Liverpool. Bold says: “The Spanish retail market is immense, and will embrace the concept of sports betting in comfortable outlets that combine high-level technology with leisure and catering facilities”. So, where does all this to-and-fro activity leave horseracing? That’s the million-euro question for authorities running the business and individuals practicising within the pursuit, who see their rewards diminishing and wonder if, or how, they can hang on to the tail feathers of the golden goose of betting. Steve Fisher, British co-founder and director of Stan James Bookmakers, is as close as anyone to the central attractions. He was among the first to spot the potential of online betting, and has known days when his firm will offer nearly 400 separate markets on a multitude of sports, but he also supports horseracing to the hilt, including sponsoring both the Guineas on the Flat and the King George VI Chase over jumps. “Aside from lotteries, the gambling market in Europe is dominated by gaming – casinos and slot machines – and fixed odds can never compete for profitably per square metre,” he explains. “Britain, Ireland, France, Germany and Italy may be the dominant horseracing countries, but betting has to compete strongly with other sports, and horseracing is a minority activity even in such as Germany and Italy. Spain is a worry for any operator because it does not have a history of betting. Its gambling is based on lotteries, numbers, bingo and slot machines, so expansion will not happen overnight. In central and eastern Europe they predominantly bet on football and other sports, from basketball and cycling to darts and ice hockey, so these are also markets that do not instantly lend themselves to horserace betting. The point about sports betting is that most European countries bet on events in other countries, as well as their own. Taking horseracing into another country is not easy. It would be no good the UK, or anyone else for that matter, simply saying, ‘Here is our wonderful horseracing, you must have it.’ To betting people in most other countries it’s just another horserace, and there is a huge barrier if the commentary is in a foreign language and the odds are not up to date.” Gloomy for horseracing, or what? Fisher sees the picture as it is. “I have a betting shop in Moscow, using the latest Finsoft software to provide a Russian translation, and we show virtual horse and greyhound racing every five minutes,” he says. “No live racing, because I cannot get the pictures. But even if I could get live racing, I’m not sure how much interest there would be. If I was marketing a betting product to eastern Europe, for example, I would have more success with a virtual greyhound race than a live horse race. It’s easier for customers to understand. Of course, I want to be enterprising, and am keen to promote horseracing. But you would need a lot of co-operation from everybody, and that includes pricing. Horseracing should not think there is lots of money to be made out of its product, because that is not the case. And that’s not pessimism. It’s realism.”

Who is Controlling Racing's TV signals?

For all the differences between the horseracing and betting landscapes in Britain and North America - size, history, administration and race and bet types, - one similarity of principle has emerged over the last five years. The live televised racing scene has crystallised into two entities, and the impact on both the foundation and prosperity of the sport and the availability of its betting facilities has been thrown into the blender.

In Britain, the 60 racecourses have lined up equally between the two cable and satellite broadcasters - Racing UK (RUK), with 30 tracks on board, and At The Races (ATR), with 29, but soon to become 30 when the new venue of Great Leighs attains its long-awaited completion. In North America, the dominance and extensive exclusivity of TVG has been challenged by the major corporate racetrack owners Magna Entertainment Corp. (MEC) and Churchill Downs Inc., which have jointly formed the cable and satellite broadcaster Horseracing TV (HRTV), shutting out TVG from coverage of their many high-quality courses.

Into the mix have been catapulted bookmaking, advance deposit wagering and online betting facilities, the biggest attraction for the public and the most significant cash provider for racing outside the deep pockets of racehorse owners. What will come out at the other end, and when, is impossible to say with any certainty. Interested parties have their own views, based on which side of the divide they sit, but it would take someone akin to a soothsayer, let alone an experienced industry observer, to imagine where the path will lead. The road-makers are still at work, using different maps to plot their separate ways, and sometimes giving the impression they are making up the journey as they go along.

Two examples of intricacies that can only ripen confusion and spread uncertainty are worth recording, before attempting to untangle the web spun by rights-holders seeking to manage content to best advantage. Ascot, Britain’s best-known international venue, lined up with At The Races when the second coming of that daily satellite broadcaster emerged from the ashes of a failed venture known as Attheraces in June 2004. At the time, as Ascot negotiated with its bankers over loans to service a £200 million redevelopment scheme, huge uncertainty surrounded previous rights, which may have meant Ascot having to repay a significant sum. Partly to allay the fears of financial institutions, Ascot fell in with ATR, and was given a five per cent stake in the company for its allegiance.

However, the contract, which runs until 2012, did not include pictures supplied to betting shops, and when these came up for renegotiation earlier this year, Ascot decided to jump on to the back of another media rights horse. It sided with Amalgamated Racing - Amrac for short - which had set up a joint venture with the stock market-quoted betting-shop services provider Alphameric to introduce a new channel, Turf TV, offering pictures from aligned courses to off-track bookmakers. Until then, for 20 years the betting industry had had only one company to deal with, Satellite Information Services (SIS), which took pictures from Racing UK courses under contract, and by sub-contract from At The Races’ courses through an organisation called Bookmaker Afternoon Greyhound Service (Bags). Bags has outgrown its title by owning horseracing rights and covering evening racing, while ATR controls no betting-shop picture rights in Britain, but it does use SIS to produce its programmes on a daily basis, and has a contract with it to distribute pictures into betting shops in overseas territories such as Sri Lanka.

Confused? You soon will be… Explaining the decision to go with Amrac, Ascot’s finance director Janet Walker says: “We believe Amrac is the best vehicle for racing’s commercial relationship with the betting industry. And the decision has no impact on our separate satellite media rights arrangement with ATR, and should in no way be interpreted as a negative reflection on our relationship with that company.”

In North America, the picture began to get decidedly murkier in March this year, when Churchill Downs bought a 50 per cent stake in HorseRacing TV, which had previously been owned wholly by Magna. It was the biggest in a series of deals that the two sides concluded at the time, and out of the arrangement came the formation of another joint venture called TrackNet Media Group, through which one partner’s horseracing content would become available to the other’s various distribution platforms - Magna’s advance deposit wagering (ADW) site XpressBet, Churchill’s similar newcomer TwinSpires.com. TrackNet would also deal with providing content, from pictures to betting availability, for third parties, it emerged. These were to include racetracks, OTBs, casinos and other ADW operators - but not TVG, it seemed; well, not without a groundbreaking change of heart. HRTV immediately took over coverage of Churchill Downs, and as contracts run their course, it picked up exclusive rights to Arlington Park on August 6, Fair Grounds in November and Calder on January 3, 2008. It was not long before the consequences became clear. The 2007 Kentucky Derby was shown exclusively on HRTV and bet on through TwinSpires and winticket.com (whom Churchill Downs subsequently purchased). TVG and its wagering partner Youbet did not get a look-in. The same applied to the second races in the US Triple Crown, the Preakness, run at Magna-owned Pimlico, but come the last leg, the Belmont, exclusivity returned to TVG, under its contract with the New York courses. Just before the Kentucky Derby, a contributor to the Turf’n’Sport website was moved to remark: “At the best possible time of the year for generating positive horseracing buzz, the industry has succeeded in turning on itself and creating negative headlines.

At a time when online racebooks that offer betting on all major Thoroughbred tracks continue to make inroads, and at a time when the World Trade Organisation has ruled America must open up horse betting to offshore racebooks, the existing companies are bitching at each other.” The punchline summed up: “How long will it take horseplayers to catch on and simply move their accounts offshore?” He clearly is not the soothsayer identified earlier, who might supply the answer to what will come out of the mix. But he does have a point.

A similar observation holds good in Britain, though with a different emphasis. At times the two sets of particular circumstances in Britain and North America do run along parallel lines, but at others they are subtly interlinked and completely separate. The differences, and some of the connections, can be seen in the betting arena, where HRTV and TVG have their own direct outlets, but Racing UK has a joint venture and At The Races remains corporately aloof while relying on bookmaker partners to provide one of 30 income streams. The key in Britain is Turf TV, the betting-shop channel set up in part by the Racing UK courses, which flickered into life with six exclusive members (including Ascot) and a small percentage of betting-shop supporters, mainly small independents until the Tote joined up, but none of the four majors, which account for 80 per cent of the UK estate.

On January 1, Turf TV will be bolstered by 25 other RUK courses. The split will be equal - just as it is in the choice facing satellite viewers, who need two TV accounts to cover the field - and the dominant bookmakers, who have lined up solidly behind SIS and the status quo, will have to decide whether they can survive on half rations for their horseracing coverage. On that decision could depend a large slice of British racing’s future prosperity. The situation in North America depends on whether racecourse and betting operators choose TrackNet or TVG. It seems they cannot have both. In each case, the participants have made their positions clear.

Robert Evans, president and CEO of Churchill Downs, told a shareholders’ meeting: “I understand our objectives on occasion may ruffle a few feathers. That is one of the things about competition. It is not really our intent just to go out and be disruptive. Our intent is to compete aggressively and to attract more customers to our business. There are always a few potential consequences when you challenge the status quo.” In response to the Kentucky Derby impasse, TVG general manager David Nathanson said: “We attempted to negotiate with TrackNet Media and its owners in good faith, but thus far have not seen any terms from them indicating a strong desire to reach a mutually beneficial long-term agreement. We remain open to negotiating an agreement that is in the best interest of the racing industry, the respective parties and, ultimately, the racing fan.”

In Britain, Turf TV has become the dividing line between broadcasters and rights-holders Racing UK and At The Races. RUK executive chairman Simon Bazalgette reflects: “Historically British racing has not been good at being commercial about negotiating its media rights, and has allowed third parties, such as BSkyB (the satellite provider) and the bookmakers, to get a lot of the economic benefit. Now racecourses can manage the business themselves, keeping more of the commercial benefit in racing and having greater control over the presentation of the sport. Turf TV is a great deal for the racecourses.” ATR chief executive Matthew Imi takes a dispassionate view of Turf TV, since betting-shop rights do not figure in his company’s portfolio. “It will be interesting to see how it works out, but we’re not threatened by Turf TV,” he says. “The most fascinating aspect is not whether Turf TV gains any material traction among the big bookmakers, but what the net effect will be on British racing. For us, though, it’s a valuable opportunity to concentrate on our core business, which is to exploit our partners’ rights. Getting together in the UK with Racing UK is not on our radar.” It might not be war, but for the moment, and maybe for the foreseeable future, it clearly is every man for himself.

HOW THE TELEVISION BROADCASTERS LINE UP NORTH AMERICA HORSERACING TV (HRTV)

Owned by: Joint venture of Nasdaq-listed Magna Entertainment Corp. (MEC) and Churchill Downs Inc. Operates: Subscription national cable and satellite TV horseracing network. Live racing content is acquired by sister company TrackNet Media Group. Estimated coverage 11 million homes. Racetracks covered: 70-plus Thoroughbred, harness and Quarter Horse tracks, including Santa Anita Park (California); Churchill Downs (Kentucky); Gulfstream Park, *Calder (Florida); Lone Star Park (Texas); Arlington Park (Illinois); Pimlico (Maryland). International: UK tracks on Racing UK. MEC operates off-track betting network, and national account wagering business XpressBet. Churchill Downs recently opened online national account wagering service, TwinSpires, and more recently acquired account wagering operator AmericaTAB and affiliates. Overseas coverage: Racing World channel in Britain, joint venture with Racing UK. *effective January 3, 2008 TVG Owned by: Gemstar-TV Guide International Inc., global multi-media and technology company, including loss-making TV Guide magazine, in which Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation has 41 per cent stake. Operates: Subscription national cable and satellite TV horseracing channel, and online betting network. Estimated coverage 50 million homes. Racetracks covered: Turf Paradise (Arizona); Del Mar, Fairplex Park, Hollywood Park, Los Alamitos, Oak Tree (California); **Calder (Florida); Prairie Meadows (Iowa); Ellis Park, Keeneland, Kentucky Downs, Turfway Park (Kentucky); Meadowlands, Monmouth Park (New Jersey); Ruidoso Downs, Zia Park (New Mexico); Aqueduct, Belmont Park, Saratoga, Yonkers Raceway (New York); Emerald Downs (Washington). International: Japan, UK tracks on At The Races. Some contracts with tracks owned by HRTV partners due to expire over next year. Has arrangement with online account wagering operators Youbet and The Racing Channel. Overseas coverage: At The Races in Britain, through arrangement with TRNi and the Dubai Sports Channel in the UAE. **through January 2, 2008 BRITAIN RACING UK (RUK) Owned by: 30 British racecourses, split Jockey Club Racecourses (50%), Chester, Goodwood, Newbury, York (sharing 25%), 11 smaller courses (sharing 25%). Owns all rights, including terrestrial TV, except for licensed betting offices (belong to Amrac, see below and facing). Operates: Subscription national cable and satellite (via BSkyB service, part of Setanta Sports package) TV horseracing channel, with links to small number of bookmaker partners; international channel, Racing World, in partnership with MEC and Churchill Downs; licensed betting-office channel, Turf TV, set up by Amalgamated Racing (Amrac), joint venture between Racecourse Media Services (separate company owned by RUK courses and Ascot) and betting-office provider Alphameric; overseas delivery of pictures and data from RUK courses in association with South Africa-based racetrack and betting operator Phumelela. About 200,000 subscribers (including Setanta, forecast to grow to 1 million when Premiership football comes on stream in Autumn 2007). Racetracks covered: Aintree, Ayr, Bangor, Beverley, Carlisle, Cartmel, Catterick, Cheltenham, Chester, Epsom, Goodwood, Hamilton, Haydock, Huntingdon, Kempton, Ludlow, Market Rasen, Musselburgh, Newbury, Newmarket, Nottingham, Pontefract, Redcar, Salisbury, Sandown, Thirsk, Warwick, Wetherby, Wincanton, York. International: France, Dubai, occasional other major races; HRTV (see above) coverage of North America on separate channel, Racing World. Overseas coverage: North America, joint venture with HRTV; Australia, jointly with At The Races; other territories, partnership with Phumelela (South Africa). AT THE RACES (ATR) Owned by: broadcaster British Sky Broadcasting (46%), racetrack owners Arena Leisure (46%) and Northern Racing (2%), and racecourses Ascot (5%), Newton Abbot, Plumpton and Ripon. Owns all media rights of participating courses except licensed betting office and terrestrial TV rights. Operates: National cable and satellite (part of Sky Sports package) TV horseracing channel, with links to bookmaker partners. ATR courses shown in betting shops through agreement with Satellite Information Services (SIS), which sub-contracts rights from Bookmaker Afternoon Greyhound Service (Bags). BSkyB subscription platform covers 8.5 million homes in UK. Racetracks covered: Ascot, Bath, Brighton, Chepstow, Doncaster, Exeter, Fakenham, Folkestone, Fontwell, Hereford, Hexham, Kelso, Leicester, Lingfield, Newcastle, Newton Abbot, Perth, Plumpton, Ripon, Sedgefield, Southwell, Stratford, Taunton, Towcester, Uttoxeter, Windsor, Wolverhampton, Worcester, Yarmouth. (Great Leighs will become 30th on opening). Plus all 27 Irish courses. International: France, Dubai, Germany, occasional other major races; TVG (see facing) coverage of North America. Overseas coverage: North America, arrangement with TRNi, through to TVG; Australia, jointly with RUK; other territories, distribution by SIS.