Lone Star Park?

Question

How does Lone Star Park rate compared to race tracks around the U.S.?

Answer 1

Your question is rather vague so I'm not sure what you want to know. The Lone Star plant is newer and intentionally built for fewer attendees than Class 1 tracks built much longer ago such as Santa Anita or Keeneland.

The three major tracks in Texas (Lone Star, Retama Park, and Sam Houston Race Park) are all officially Class 1 tracks; however, only Lone Star Park actually has (or possibly had) the handle to truly be on a par with Class 1 tracks in other states.

It is generally considered about as good as Lousiana Downs and quite a bit better than Sam Houston or Retama Park. Although Lone Star management would argue it is, I believe it is probably not quite on a par with The Fairgrounds, Santa Anita, Keeneland, and other tracks at that level.

Many aren't aware how handle (the amount of money bet either on site or at simulcast facilities) affects the quality of racing at a racetrack. Purses were primarily funded by the breakage (partial cents left over after bettors are paid). The higher the handle the higher the purses.

Trainers with better horses stable where the purses are higher, so higher purses generally means better race quality. Better race quality usually means more consistent horses which in turn encourages higher betting.

Many tracks now supplement purses with portions of alternate forms of gambling resulting in changes in where trainers choose to run horses and therefore the quality of racing where they moved and also where they no longer race.

Answer 2

I found it to be on par with Finger Lakes. A second class track. I do not care that they hosted a Breeders Cup. Money talks.

Answer 3

Its OK, I like Sam Houston better.