Floyd's Column: Greyhound Racing Opinion - Gambling with the Future

As the new Superman movie hits the cinemas, it got me thinking about superpowers. I've got at least a couple. The biggie is my staggering knowledge on just about everything after four pints of San Miguel. Don't go! Stick around and learn something. Though I will be repeating it shortly.

I have an uncanny knack of backing a football team in the sure and certain knowledge that within 90 seconds they will have a player sent off. In a supermarket, I have the ability to choose the one queue in six that won't budge for ten minutes as a batty old dear kicks off about the price of a cabbage.

Just gifted I guess.

Greyhound Racing's Twin Superpowers

On a more serious note, it did get me thinking about the industry that dominates my working life. In my view the sport has survived for 99 years on the basis of two superpowers - or in business jargon, what are more likely to be described as 'USPs', or 'unique selling points'.

The first is its ability to subtly fleece its customers. A football club can charge a decent lump at the turnstiles (am I showing my age here?). They may sell you a beer, if you want to queue for an overpriced pint in a plastic glass, another quick bevvy and pie (or prawn sandwich) at half time and possibly a match programme.

That income stream would be the same for many sports, including our traditional ground sharing partner, speedway. But the dogs have greater catering options including a restaurant, and, significantly, the totalisator.

While horseracing shares the catering and betting, it is handicapped, like the others, by lack of frequency. Even tracks that have only one evening meeting per week will be open for business more often than the seasonal sports.

Artfully dodging their way into punters' pockets has been the industry's business model since day one. Regrettably, some tracks rely almost solely on media rights cash and, given the issues of staffing and other costs, choose to never/seldom offer the traditional evening meeting.

The Unique Gambling Advantage

But this piece is primarily about our second USP – gambling. I defy anyone who has studied the industry for as long as I have not to recognise the unique gambling opportunity that we provide.

I have written many times about its natural edge. Dog racing sits in a vector that is uniquely suited to gamblers. First and foremost, it is nicely weighted between knowledge and chance. Experts might have the edge, but luck will always play its part. The sweet spot is between the two.

That is the reason that virtual has never taken off in the way that the bookies hoped it might. Virtual is more closely related to roulette or 'numbers' than live racing.

Comparing the Competition

Horse racing shares many of our advantages, and has its own niche market share, particularly based around its prestigious events. But, in my view, it does not (or should not) compete with the dogs as a betting opportunity.

The two sports share many features in terms of form - these are vital in establishing a clear difference with gambling and random chance. I am referring to draws, distances, going, trainers and different courses. In horseracing though, they appear (to someone who doesn't really engage with the sport) more varied and complex.

Dog punters don't have to consider weights (referring to the handicap system not the bodyweight), jockeys, or the most fundamental of the lot, numbers of runners.

In my view, six is the golden number. The Aussies and Septics prefer the eight, and I can be sold on the jackpot opportunities that they open up, but, on balance, six fits the vector.

Destroying Our Own Superpower

By now you can probably see where this is going. We are slowly but meticulously destroying the best gambling sport in the world.

You don't need another rant about four and five dog races. You don't need me to tell you about races being graded so badly, that but for the dubious betting practice of 'industry odds', we would see many more 7/1 shots starting at 12/1 and 12/1 shots starting at 33/1.

No wonder the bookies don't want to take serious bets from the shrewdies (or anyone who might be one). The concept of 'over racing' has been debated to death. The reality is, there are simply too few dogs and too many empty traps, being spread between too many pointless and uncompetitive races.

The Evolution of Decline

So how did that evolve? Many of us despised the bookmaker monopoly that was BAGS (Bookmaker Afternoon Greyhound Service), which lost its power when ARC became an alternative media provider. (Yes technically, BAGS/ARC became one and SIS became the outsider but that is a whole different headache).

The downside is that BAGS always insisted, on behalf of its paymasters the bookies, on the best most competitive racing possible. There were stringent checks on quality of grading, SP returns and most notably on non-runners. Tracks would literally expect a phone call from BAGS head office threatening sanctions if they had more than a couple of five-dog races. Travelling reserves were a vital part of the process.

I don't want to call out tracks individually but to see a racecard recently decimated to three and four runner races, including cancelled two-dog events, simply because a kennel had the cough, only goes to show how thin this line really is.

Another track, from the alternative media provider, ran a series of three and four runner events last week, with a series of 'withdrawn by stewards' as the only explanation.

The Category One Crisis

But it isn't just graded racing. Again, without naming names, the quality (or lack of) of some recent Category One competitions is embarrassing. There are various reasons for this in my view.

Because breeding has more than halved in the last 20 years, that 3% of the elite has halved accordingly. Secondly, and possibly more relevant, is the decline in the number of owners. How many trainers can afford to go shopping in Ireland for six figure purchases?

Our major competitions are becoming more frequently won by the same sets of connections who own and train the elite performers. Seeing at least five Irish trained entries in a Derby Final seems set to continue in my view.

Messrs Holland, Buckley, and Hennessy probably have more elite performers in their kennels than the top 30 UK trainers combined.

A Solution Framework

As for solutions, I don't have a detailed strategy – but I do have a basic theory. It is based on the philosophy of The Boss (yes, that's still Mike Davis and not Bruce). Mike preaches 'don't talk, demonstrate'.

How does that apply here? Simple really. Instead of trying to persuade the betting industry who are lethargic at best, that good quality racing is a goal worth pursuing – show them.

The Demonstration Plan

Guarantee at least one race meeting per week – on the service or not – of good quality racing. Tighten up on grading and non-runners, if necessary by re-introducing reserves. Stage more 18 runner Cat One events and lucrative invitations. Provide variety of race distances.

Back up those meetings with good social media coverage. Get potential punters engaged on a race-by-race basis instead of the blanket dross with one set of six numbers being replaced six minutes later by another.

It would need to be financed but I don't think it would be long before punters started to take note and bet accordingly. The options are then varied in terms of media rights deals, contracts with individual betting companies, and controlled tote betting with live coverage.

I think things would evolve quite quickly as gambling increased. But for us not to use our betting superpower is like asking Superman not to fly.

Floyd's Column appears regularly, offering expert opinion and industry analysis. Follow for more insights into the world of greyhound racing.