‘Yu, yu, yu gamble race horse?’

THIS IS a good time for readers to meet ‘Digger’, another character from my misspent youth. During our bridge years, Autry and I met Digger (short for ‘Nose-Digger’), nicknamed because he habitually used his right index finger as an agricultural tool in both nostrils. Digger was twice our age but still lived with his parents and seemed to us to suffer ‘cognitive difficulties’. His wealthy family eventually fled Jamaica to ‘escape communism’.

Digger, who also suffered with a bad stammer, played bridge but loved horse racing. His vade mecum was a tightly folded race book secured in his back pocket and his routine greeting to new acquaintances was, “Yu, yu, yu gamble racehorse?”

We kept Digger onside because his bridge-playing relatives were friends. But Digger wasn’t bright. To our discredit, we treated him like a mascot.

But even Digger understood, based on his family experiences, that horse racing, like every industry, stood or fell on economic policy. He’d never fall into the trap of believing success or failure in horse racing was linked to how horses were categorised rather than its business model.

He knew the crucial question was,“Yu, yu, yu gamble racehorse?” and the answer depended on the attractiveness of possible returns on investment.

So, even Digger would laugh uproariously at Ainsley ‘Jimmie’ Walters’ impression of a 10-year-old whining to Mommy that “…the system of claiming and condition racing has wrecked Jamaica’s horse-racing industry”. He’s been moaning about this for years, but most tuned him out. Why? Elementary, my dear Walters! Horse racing’s decline has NOTHING to do with the claiming system.

‘HORSE-RACING ECONOMY’

To borrow shamelessly from US presidential candidate Bill Clinton’s successful campaign slogan “it’s the horse-racing economy, stupid!”

Jimmie begins: “JAMAICA’S HORSE-RACING industry…is…crippled by a parasitic system of ‘categorising’ horses for racing and betting purposes that…since 1993, continues to negatively affect every sector and professional group associated with local racing.”

Categorising? How, Jimmie?

He explains without explaining (just more complaining and wild accusations) “Started in 1993, claiming…and….condition races sparked a flight of capital, owners and breeders, in addition to professionals…. leading to a debilitated racing product, which continues to turn off seasoned punters and confuses the hell out of potential new bettors.”

Ok Jimmie, I’ll go slowly for you. Read my lips! A claiming/conditions system doesn’t “categorise” horses. That’s what a handicapping/rating system does. Unlike handicap ratings, claiming categories aren’t linked to any horse. They offer connections the opportunity to self-categorise their horses.

Jimmie insists (without supporting evidence) handicapping/rating “is successfully and profitably practised in every major racing jurisdiction…apart from North America” and its Jamaican reintroduction will miraculously make the lame walk; “capital flight” return; and betting simpler.

He’s obsessively reliant on the fact handicapping “originated in Great Britain from as far back as one can possibly go…” as did transatlantic slavery; colonization of many proud nations; and, of course, Westminsterstyle governance. So, British square pegs are what Jamaica’s round holes need. Right, Jimmie?

Racing under handicapping/rating systems isn’t profitably practised anywhere without subsidy.

Jimmie accurately reported North American racing is heavily subsidised by gaming partnerships. British racetracks are even more heavily subsidised by bookmakers (and modern, online betting) through levy schemes overseen by vigilant regulators. In Britain, totalisators are bookies’ poor cousins. Bookies dominate betting markets with independent odds and attractive incentives. English racetracks introduced modern subsidies like hospitality, partnership and media revenues.

Jamaica, although formerly reliant on similar ‘bookmaker’ subsidies, always operated a de facto tote monopoly (bookies offer bets at Tote odds). Since divestment, Jamaica’s faux bookmaking sub-industry has been asphyxiated. Jamaica hasn’t introduced regular hospitality tents or entertainment partnerships (these were specifically included in the competitor’s rejected divestment bid) and prefers to hide racing from the general public rather than negotiate revenue inflows from media rights.

British betting features tote/bookie takeouts of less than 15 per cent. Jamaica’s Tote deducts 30 per cent (win/place); 40 per cent (exotics). This was always unsustainable.

It’s the horse-racing economy, stupid!-More next Tuesday.

Peace and love!