Harness: Luring drivers and trainers through incentives

Some of the most competitive racing I've seen over the years has come during driver challenges. Often with thousands in bonus money up for grabs, these tournaments, lasting from one to three days, seem to spark the competitive flame in each of the participants which leads to even more thrilling action on the track.

The question is whether we can recreate this environment on a daily basis to put forth the best product for bettors and ultimately increase the popularity of the sport.

When The Meadowlands and the Standardbred Owners Association of New Jersey recently put up $25,000 to seed the Pick 5 pool a few weeks back, it was a great way to say "thank you" to the bettors who support the racing at the East Rutherford oval. That said, it ignited the thought in my head as to what else could be done with a similar amount of money to help the racing product on a weekly, monthly or even long-term basis.

What if each weekend or month of racing offered "bonus" prize money to the top drivers and trainers?

This could certainly be put in place at any track at monetary levels that work for the region, but for the sake of this example, we'll use The Meadowlands and base it off of $25,000 in available money.

Each weekend of racing (two nights per week) the leaders in the two categories above are rewarded total prize money of $5,000 based off point earnings (50 for 1st, 25 for 2nd, 10 for 3rd and 5 for every starter). The point system is designed to award drivers and trainers more for winning but at the same time giving them participation points for being loyal to the track.

The prize money would (in theory) be distributed as follows to both the drivers and trainers who participated that weekend:

1st: $1,000; 2nd: $750; 3rd: $500; 4th: $250.

Just looking at the prizes, some may wonder whether they are enough to entice drivers who are making well into the six-figure range to alter strategy on the track or even show up for a night of racing. During the last full year of racing (2019), the top driver (Tim Tetrick) made $782K, the 10th driver on the earnings leaderboard checked in at $380K and the 50th made $139K.

The above said, when broken down to more daily numbers and removing stakes earnings, the money seems very worthwhile. For instance, Andrew McCarthy had one of the best weekends among drivers at The Meadowlands on January 22/23, posting four wins and seven second-place finishes in 25 starts for earnings of $2,385.31. On the training end, Jeff Cullipher was one of the top winners with four victories and three places from 16 starters. His industry-standard 5% commission for the night was $1,883.25.

Assuming that McCarthy and Cullipher were the top point-getters for the week (and if they weren't, they were certainly right there at the top), a $1,000 bonus check at the end of the weekend would be a 42% and 53%, respectively, increase in pay. Who would pass that up?

If $5,000 in bonuses were paid out each weekend ($20,000 for four weekends), that would leave another $5,000 available for a monthly prize to the top horsepeople. A payout schedule of $1,000, $600, $400, $300 and $200 would fit the bill and provide an extra incentive for drivers to show up each weekend and trainers to enter as much as possible.

Certainly putting up $25,000 for a month is not viable for every track and horsemen's group, but another location could do $5,000 to make it viable.

Some may argue that this plan doesn't include owners, and that is a fair point, but my logic is that owners benefit if their trainers and drivers win more races, so there is a trickle-up effect.

There are positives to this plan. The first is creating an environment where the main objective of every driver in every race is to win. That's not to say that drivers aren't doing their best to win races, but there is no doubt that they must weigh the pluses of winning a race with what is best for the connections of the horse each night. The weekly/monthly contest could also spur drivers to take chances with horses that they normally wouldn't consider. By that I mean leaving fast away from the gate with a longshot to put them into contention instead of trying to "suck along" and just settle for a small check. It is a fact that when longshots are aggressive early in the mile it creates much more action during the race as the favorites look to get into play. More action means more interesting and visually pleasing races.

A byproduct of the above could be that trainers are more likely to bring sharp horses to the track rather than ones that "need a start" before reaching their peak performance level. No trainer wants their horse raced aggressively if they aren't ready for it.

Another positive effect is a likely increase in the supply of horses. With more incentive for trainers to race at the track with a bonus system, it certainly seems like a good tiebreaker when deciding between two locations to enter a horse.

Especially in New Jersey where sports betting is permitted, the entire weekly or monthly contest could be a bet in itself. If the track created a list of the top 19 drivers and trainers (like the Kentucky Derby future wager #20 could be the field of all others), people could bet on who will lead at the end of the weekend or month. For that matter, couldn't this even be a nightly contest for on-track patrons at The Meadowlands? Assign a value to each finish position (maybe 10 points for first and 9 for second, etc.) and the only thing a newbie at the track has to do is pick a driver. They could bet $20 at the beginning of the night and have an entire evening of action.

But I digress from the original point. Often I'll say that if an ADW wants me to wager with them, they must give me a reason (rebate, bonus, or special offer) to play. If some tracks provided an extra incentive for drivers and trainers, perhaps that would result in more participation and an improved product.

Is the idea a bit outside of the box? Yes. Is it a bad investment? Not if it works.