Re: NHC (643 Views)

Hi Marcus.

Over the last 11 years the NHC has grown exponentially, and as I indicated in my post on the Tour, participation and interest in contests is continuing to grow. As you might imagine, the individuals responsible for the success of the NHC have carefully considered, and continue to weigh the pros and cons, of just about any proposal that might improve or grow the event, including changing its format and location. Below are just a small sample of some of the cost, logistical, and other problems which would have to be solved before a wholesale change like the one you’re recommending could be made.

This a ballpark estimate, but my best guess is that hosting the NHC requires something in the vicinity of 325 rooms. One big advantage of holding the NHC in a casino is they have the capacity and are willing to accommodate everyone in the same place the event is taking place at a discounted rate.

In contrast, assuming my recent experience at Santa Anita is not atypical, even if you make the questionable assumption that you’ll be able to find that many additional rooms near the track, room rates would be something in the vicinity of three times what they are now. It’s not clear where the additional funds to pay the difference would come from, as I’m all but certain there are very few, if any, players who would be in favor of reducing the purse in order to make the move.

The white knuckle driving necessary to negotiate the LA freeway system is a challenge for anyone, and when you consider our demographic from the survey, along with the geographical diversity of the competitors, at a minimum I’d have to set a double digit over/under for the number of players who would experience significant transportation issues for a two day event. Besides, the event is supposed to be fun, and California driving is anything but.

There is no additional seating cost at a casino, while accommodating contestants at a BC venue at a reasonable cost is a major issue. Santa Anita holds a major NHC qualifying event, and is obviously a magnificent facility. However, the BC was probably their biggest day of the year, and the rooms which are large enough to accommodate the NHC were all filled to capacity with people who were willing to pay hundreds of dollars for their seats. My experience leads me to believe that BC venues would not necessarily be interested in selling one of those rooms for a handicapping contest, and would be even less interested in adding to their teller and other logistical issues associated with the BC. Even if you assume I’m wrong on both counts, coming up with a source of additional funds for seating is another important issue that would have to be addressed.

I could go on, and on, but I’m sure you get the point.

Although Thorograph players have had a great deal of well deserved and documented success at both the NHC and in qualifying contests, for some reason it seems that posts appear here shortly after every NHC claiming the format is not a “true” test of handicapping skill. As an aside, there are a wide variety of formats at qualifying contests throughout the year, and a number include exotics, such as the West Coast competitions where JB pocketed $50k last year, and Roger earned $50k this year.

NHC competitors come from every part of the country and include many different kinds of handicappers, so one way of leveling the playing field a little is to include tracks with a wide variety of different types of races from as many different parts of the country as possible. As much as I love the BC races myself, to cite just one example, I’m not sure how fair it would be to the guy or gal who specializes in dirt sprint claiming races if, instead of six tracks and approximately 120 races, the NHC contest consisted of one track and about 20 races which are very different from any other races which take place during the year. If the goal is to make the event more representative, the likely result of limiting the competition to just BC races would be just the opposite.

Rather than outline yet again why I personally believe that the current format is the best approach, and why changing something which has worked reasonably well for more than a decade would be a mistake, we know from the survey results that this is an issue where we don’t have to guess what format a sizeable majority of players want for what is after all their championship. This, I believe, is one situation where we should respect their wishes.