How To Save Small Track Racing and Do It Where Horse Racing Is Creative?

 By Dennis Trusty, aka “Trusty Picks” on X. com

*Disclaimer this is my opinion and I’m saying it from a place of heart and helping. This is not to make anyone mad. I will not use names or point any one track out, specifically, but may point to some merely as examples. My intended goal is to make racing people  think about how can we improve things on a “smaller track level. If we all can do that? I think it will help the sport, overall, and help create more fan experiences and more fun.

I’m watching smaller tracks a lot, these days, and I’ve noticed the bigger tracks may have gotten in their head. Perhaps. Just maybe. And, as a result, the bigger tracks may have gotten in their pocketbooks, too.

Think about it.

The smaller tracks today seemingly attempt to run their tracks like they cannot compete with their larger industry friends. For example:

When they have their “big days” and feature their premier “events,” the bigger owners and trainers come to town – probably for the first and last time of the year – just to attempt to “steal” the purse money.

And, if you don’t advertise or promote your “big days” and special “events” enough,  you end up like Mountaineer and the West Virginia Derby.

The “Win-Place-Show” pool was an estimated $210,000.

The “Exacta-Trifecta-Superfecta” pools, combined, amount to about $147,000.

The pools were “up” more than a normal night, to be sure. But? There’s always a “but,” right? The track ended up losing money on the race when you consider how much the track earned from the handle versus the amount the track paid out in the purse.

Plus…

There was only one horse that was based locally that was entered and ran in the race. That horse was 60-1 odds, or thereabouts. And, the horse lost by over 16+ lengths.

The question that begs to be asked, and, answered is simply this:

Who benefitted? Who won? Did the small track earn enough?

On West Virginia Derby Day, the cheapest race of the night had a $15,000 purse associated with the race. The “WPS Pool” and “Exacta-trifecta-superfecta” pools combined for something like $94,000. On a regular night, let’s say the 6th race on Sept. 17, had a purse of $8,500 The “WPS” pool and the “Exacta-trifecta-superfecta” pools totaled an estimated $68,000.

That’s a handle difference of $27,000. Is that enough? When you pay back the bettors, and split with the horsemen, has the track made any “real” additional money for its’ efforts.

And, if anyone truly “won,” who was it? Your regular crowd who routinely puts on “the show” and the fans who make up the core of your crowd?

I was over there at Churchill Downs’ simulcast facility that night and there were only a few people left in the room. One guy at the bar said to me:

“Since when is Brad Cox having a horse at Mountaineer? Oh my, they have a 500,000 race?”

 It clicked in my head. This person is a horse racing regular, and he didn’t even know, in advance, that it was the night of the West Virginia Derby.

If he didn’t know, how many other potential fans and serious bettors didn’t know?

How much handle was lost because people simply didn’t know?

How could the event been better? How could the attendance have been better? How could the handle have been bigger.

Maybe, just maybe, instead of the purse being $500,000, the purse could have been $400,000 and both the track and the horse people could have utilized the other $100,000 to advertise and promote the “big event” and create more of a “buzz.”

Maybe then, the “big event” could have made a “bigger impact.”

            Don’t get me wrong. I do think purse money matters. Size matters, doesn’t it?

But, also, I think if smaller tracks did a better job of promoting their product – especially on its’ “big days” – then the “big day” could pump more money into the betting pools, and the betting pools can create more residual value today and tomorrow.

Get people on “ X” (formerly known as Twitter) on board at your small track. Get them to spread the news and create the “buzz.”

Get public handicappers to look at the card and promote their individual picks on all types of social media.

Get the “YouTube” handicappers to do live streams or videos of the small racetracks and give them a format to promote their picks.

Get “influencers” to do some interesting facts about the track, including statistics on certain track biases, and what post position is producing the most winners. If the info helps the bettors, the bettors are more likely to participate at the track. And, if they participate? The handle starts to go up. And, everything else will float up, as well.

Get someone on Facebook to write about the track. Where is it? How big is it? Who has won the race in the past. What time is post time? How can you watch the races? How can you bet the races? How can you learn more about the racetrack jockeys and which rider has travelled in for the race?

Why not take about $1,000 from your total purse allotment each week — that’s not much – to help build excitement. In advance.

Why not take a bit from the Stake purse and do the same?

Why not pay five to ten public handicappers to log their reports and promote their picks on the races. In advance.

 If you did? If you tried some unconventional ideas? Maybe you will increase the handle and awareness of the track; the quality of its’ facilities and races. Maybe you will attract some new fans.

If you did, you may increase your viewership and fan base by over 10,000 “hits” per week. And, if you are getting “hits,” you are getting “action.”

Just recently, Assiniboia Downs was on with “Trust the Prophets.” It’s a “YouTube” show.  The hosts are great people, and great friends of mine. I’ve been on their show, and they had over 2,000 views on a Monday night.

If some of the viewers – just some of them — post their tickets, hangout, discuss the races, and tout the races. It will equal more action at post time through the pari-mutuel windows. Guarantee it.

And, If more small tracks did that, their pools would be up substantially.  Guarantee it.

Recently, I saw an online message from a media person, whose track had a race with a purse well over $100,000. The average purse for an allowance race at that track is normally in the $18,000 range. So, this was a ‘big race.”

The media person’s online message was highly critical of the industry and its’ normal supporters for not paying attention to their “big race.”

Those messages didn’t get half of the “hits” and “comments” as I did for my picks at the track that night. I had a good night picking, too. Yet, the track media people didn’t retweet a single message I had or take the time to thank the pundits in the industry for touting their “big race,” or making selections.

Wouldn’t the track be better served promoting than complaining? Seems as if it would take the same amount of effort and would have a chance of better results.

            Let’s take a look at the Charlestown Classic. That race seemed to be marketed well. But, in my opinion, I don’t think the track did enough to promote the other races on the card, as well.

The pools, in this case, did cover the amount of purse.

The only local horse to enter and run was Coastal Mission, a legend of West Virginia Racing. He finished 4th. The “outsiders” beat him, but he did represent the local contingency of horses and horse people very well. I’m OK with that and happy for them.

But what if the purse was $750,000 instead of $1 million. And, the previous race was $500,000 rather than $750,000. Why not rework the $500,000 race and make it $300k,000.

You can then utilize those monies to promote. To “buy” time on social media with “influencers” and “handle makers.”

The “big guns” will still come to take a shot at the “big money.” And, the small track may have a big chance to increase the overall handle – which will benefit the overall crowd of people putting on “The Show.”

Where else could we put the “savings?”

There was a race that evening that was run for a $75,000 purse. The horses in that race had a total of 74 wins 213 starts. Of that total number of starts, 207 of them came right at Charlestown.

The trainers had 630 starts at the track, and that’s only 5 different trainers in the race. They love their home track. They love the home town product.

Why not reward them? Why not reward those horses. Those are the guys who will come back with better. Instead of that race being $75,000, why not make it $200,000? That may be a great use of money, too.

The “WPS” and “Exacta” pools would have covered that purse for that race, and that’s more than I could say for the CT Classic.

If that isn’t enough to think about, how about considering this:

Maybe consider that for the $300,000 dollar race, write the condition so that the only horses eligible to enter and run come with trainers who have made at least 50 starts at the track and have raced at least a minimum number of horses in the claiming ranks at the same track.

What happens if the “big guys” would attempt to ship in to win this purse, too?

Make the conditions that the horse must have made two local starts and won at least one of them previously. That would cure that. Right?

The track could go so far as to write conditions that require the trainers to utilize local riders, too. The condition could include a mandate that all riders chose to compete must have a minimum number of mounts for the meet.

And, if you are going to go that far, how about a condition that requires the owner to have made a minimum number of starts at the meet, too? And, that some of those starts had to be in the claiming ranks?

Recently, I saw that Fort Erie racetrack had a $30,000 Stakes event.  Granted that’s not a huge purse. But it was for horses who had made 2 previous starts at Fort Erie in 2024.

As a result, there were owners and trainers who normally run at Woodbine, who were claiming horses to meet the conditions of the race.

If State-bred programs were truly working, we would have more horses in each state every year. The horse population would and should be going up.

Guess what? They aren’t working. The foal crop continues to go down.

It takes more creativity. It takes more ingenuity. It takes more risk-taking. It just takes more effort.

You may think that I have been too extreme with some of my ideas and thoughts. Especially when it comes to writing the race conditions.

But you know what?

Why not give it a shot?

Why not hire some handicappers to promote the product and the “big races?

Why not utilize some promotion dollars to get online “touts” to promote the race; the horses; the track?

Why not give it a try?

You may be surprised.

There may be more people show up to bet. There may be more handle. There may be more horses. There may be more, for a change.

And, isn’t that real reason why we have “big days?”

We should be trying – something new – to get more in; not just give more out.