2001 All About Purses

Most economic measures improve for owners in 2001 as total purses, average purse,
and average earnings per runner again advance to record highs

by Mark Simon

The big picture for racehorse owners continued to improve in 2001. Last year, race purses in North America rose to a record $1.15-billion, a 4.8% increase over total purses distributed in 2000. The latest increase marks the eighth consecutive annual rise in total North American purses, which have grown 53.2% since 1993.

The macroeconomic picture for Thoroughbred racing also is relatively positive when looking at the averages. Average purse in 2001 increased to a record, as did average earnings per runner and median earnings per runner. When adjusted for inflation, all those barometers also increased.

The positive economic data from North American racetracks run counter to what transpired last year in the public auction arena, where average prices declined for all major categories of horses sold in the first real downturn in average auction prices since 1993.

Despite the higher average and total purses distributed, owning a racehorse remains a risky proposition; the number of racehorses actually paying their way is just a small fraction of the total number of runners.

Highlights of 2001

Highlights of the data included in this comprehensive annual review of purses and runners in North America are:

A record $1,146,337,367 in purses was distributed in 60,538 races, the second-lowest number of races held in North America since 1972.
Average purse climbed to $18,936, a one-year rise of 4.9% and an increase of 43.9% since 1996.
The total number of runners rose for the third straight year, the first such increase since the 1980s, when total runners grew every year.
Average earnings per runner increased to a record $16,159, a 34.4% rise since 1996.
Median earnings per runner in current dollars continued to increase dramatically, rising 3.7% in 2001 and 120.1% over the last decade.
Inflation-adjusted average earnings per runner remained basically unchanged from 2000, and inflation-adjusted median earnings tipped upward by a modest 1.4%.
A total of 6,703 runners-9.4% of all starters-failed to earn any part of a purse.
More than half of all starters-51.2%-failed to win one race.
Winners earned an average of $29,585, while nonwinners earned an average of $3,361.
Horses that won a stakes race earned an average of $144,643.
Winners collectively earned 89.4% of all purse money.
17.6% of all runners earned $25,000 or more and collectively won 68.5% of all purse money.
71.3% of all runners earned less than $15,000.
Races at 1 1/4 miles accounted for just 0.4% of the total number of races but distributed 2.8% of all purse money, an average of $143,765.
Stakes races constituted 4.3% of all races and offered 23% of all purses.
44% of all races offered a purse of less than $10,000.
Claiming races-straight claiming and maiden claiming-accounted for 65.5% of all races.
Almost half of all races were carded at six furlongs or less.
The average number of starts per horse continued its long decline, falling to 7.0 in 2001, the fewest ever.
Average field size moved up marginally to 8.2.
This is the 29th year that “All About Purses” has been published. The analysis was first published in The Thoroughbred Record in 1973 and has been published in Thoroughbred Times since 1990. As in the past, the data reflect all Thoroughbred purses distributed to racehorses in North America in 2001, excluding Mexico and Puerto Rico, and were provided to Thoroughbred Times based on data obtained from the Jockey Club Information Systems Inc. Steeplechase races are excluded. Errors can occur due to omissions, processing problems, and other causes. While this publication disclaims any liability for any such errors that might occur, we would appreciate readers calling them to our attention.

Averages up

From 1991 through 2000, average purse and average earnings per runner increased every year. In that period, average purse increased 86.5% and average earnings per runner 79.4%; those were large increases when total purses increased by a significantly smaller percentage, 43.6%, during that time.

Two factors generally were responsible for the increases in averages: a decline in the number of races and a decline in the number of runners. As total purses increased-due to the proliferation of whole-card simulcasting through the industry in the 1990s-average purses and earnings per runner climbed as fewer horses competed for increasingly larger purses.

In the past three years, however, the number of runners in North America has risen, the first increases in the number of runners in successive years since 1989. This has put a damper on percentage growth in the averages. While average purse increased by an annualized 8.64% from 1991 to 2000, the increase was a significantly smaller 4.98% in ‘01. Similarly, average earnings per runner increased an annualized 7.9% from 1991 to 2000, but in ‘01 the increase was a modest 2.3%.

If the number of runners continues to increase, average earnings per runner will stagnate without a commensurate spike in total purses. That being said, the loss of foals from mare reproductive loss syndrome (MRLS) most likely will reduce the number of runners two years from now and several years thereafter.

The number of runners has been increasing due to larger foal crops in North America; breeders have put more mares into production as the economics on the racetrack improved over the past ten years. After the number of foals in North America declined to 34,973 in 1995, the lowest total since ‘79, the number of registered foals in North America has climbed steadily, to an estimated 36,800 for the 2001 crop. (With the effects of MRLS, the Jockey Club estimated the 2002 crop at 35,600.)

Rising purses have come from several sources, not entirely from increases in pari-mutuel handle. A significant amount of purse money now comes from slot machines or video lottery terminals at racetracks, as well as from state taxes on other forms of gambling and, in some years, state grants to purses.

Pari-mutuel handle in the United States and Canada in 2001 rose to $15.1-billion, according to Equibase. In 2000, pari-mutuel handle was $14.8-billion. While handle rose 2%, in that period total purses increased 4.8%.

Despite these lofty averages and totals, median earnings were a relatively paltry $6,010 in 2001-meaning half of all runners earned more than $6,010 and half earned less than that amount. Granted, that figure is 120.1% higher than in 1992, but an owner whose runner earns $6,010 is not covering training costs, let alone the cost of the horse. Median earnings per runner increased 3.7% from 2000, but that gain barely kept pace with inflation.

Real earnings flat

Table 2 breaks down data in Table 1 in real dollars-adjusted for inflation-over the same ten-year period. The data, based on the federal government’s gross domestic product implicit price deflator, show that in 2001 total deflated purses made some gains against inflation, rising 2.5%, or about half as much as the current-dollar increase in total purses.

Total deflated purses in 2000 exceeded $1-billion for the first time, and in ‘01 it inched up further. With the number of races declining slightly from 2000, deflated average purse also increased 2.6%, marginally more than total deflated purses.

Average deflated purse rose to $17,317, 60% higher than in 1992. That is further encouragement to owners because the average purse in the 1981-’90 decade actually declined 2.5% when adjusted for inflation.

Average deflated earnings per runner in 2001 remained flat, rising just $2 to $14,777. Still, when compared with the decade of the 1980s, when real earnings per runner declined 16.7%, that is still a small victory. Looking over a longer time continuum, deflated average earnings per runner is at an all-time high after floundering for three decades. In 1971, deflated average earnings per runner was $13,131 and it meandered, usually down, for several decades, dipping as low as $9,820 in ‘91. Since then, the real average earnings runner category has made steady upward strides.

Median deflated earnings per runner, like current-dollar median earnings per runner, continued to show nice gains, rising 84.6% in the past ten years. But real median earnings per runner of $5,496 is not much to write home about. That does not go very far in satisfying training costs for a racehorse.

Pyramid power

The first two tables in this annual review look at the macroeconomic picture of purses. Beginning with Table 3, we look at a more microeconomic view, specifically how different classes of runners fared on the racetrack.

Table 3 breaks down runners by how much they earned in 2001. While the average runner earned $16,159 last year, the distribution of earnings of the 70,942 runners varied widely. That is obvious from the median, since half of all runners earned $6,010 or less in 2001.

With so many horses earning so little, a few horses earned a lot. In racing, the spoils generally go to a relatively few runners. Of the 70,942 runners, only 1,377 earned $100,000 or more. Those 1.9% of all runners earned 24.3% of all purses. The 1,377 runners earning six figures won an average of $202,009.

At the other end of the spectrum, 6,703 runners, 9.4% of the total, earned nothing. And another 11,763 starters, 16.6% of the total, earned less than $1,000 each. That means slightly more than one-quarter of all runners earned less than $1,000.

Figure 1 presents the data in Table 3 as a bar chart. As clearly illustrated, it is hard to earn substantial amounts of money with a racehorse. Just 7% of all runners earned $50,000 or more. The largest category was horses that earned $10,000 to $24,999, accounting for 21% of all runners. All the other largest earnings categories were below that, with the second largest, at $1,000 to $4,999, encompassing 20.4% of all runners.

Table 4 reorganizes the data in Table 3 to present cumulative percentages and running totals for earnings by range in a less-than/more-than format. The data are organized around the earnings levels in the middle column, with the left column showing cumulative statistics of runners earning less than stated amounts and the right column showing cumulative statistics of runners earning more than the amounts in the middle column.

To find information pertaining to horses that earned more than $20,000 in 2001, refer to data on the right side of the table. The column immediately to the right of $20,000 indicates that 15,787 runners earned more than that amount in 2001. The cumulative earnings of those runners-representing 22.3% of all runners-was $858,251,247, representing 74.9% of all earnings and average earnings per runner of $54,364.

On the left side of the table, the percentages are the obverse and the averages recalculated. In 2001, 55,155 runners-77.7% of the total-earned less than $20,000, with average earnings per runner of $5,223.

At the bottom of Table 4, it can be seen that 6,703 runners earned less than $1. The right side of the table indicates that 64,239 runners earned more than $1. The average earnings of the latter group was $17,845.

As noted in Figure 1, only 7% of all runners earned $50,000 or more last year. Table 4 indicates the total number of runners earning more than $50,000 was 4,955. The highest earnings category in Table 4, $3.35-million, belongs to 2001 Horse of the Year Point Given, who won six of seven starts, including four Grade 1 races each with a purse of $1-million or more.

Stakes winners

Table 5 looks at stakes winners, a subset of all runners in 2001. (In this study, a stakes winner is a horse that wins an added-money event of any value.) The table illustrates why everyone in racing strives for a stakes winner: They fare much, much better than average.

The 1,779 stakes winners in 2001 earned an average of $144,643, or almost nine times more than the average runner. While just 2.5% of all runners won stakes, these stakes winners collected 22.4% of all purses, earning $257.3-million.

Though average earnings of stakes winners in 2001 climbed 4.2% from 2000, stakes winners in ‘01 actually earned less on the whole than in the previous year. In 2000, 1,822, 2.6% of all runners, earned 23.1% of all purse money, an indication that more money was put into overnights than in stakes in ‘01. This conclusion is confirmed by Table 14, distribution of races by class. In 2000, 23.4% of all money was paid in stakes, while in ‘01 it dropped to 23%.

As seen in Table 5, all stakes winners are not equal, with a wide distribution of earnings among the 1,779 stakes winners. A total of 89 stakes winners, or 5% of the total, earned less than $15,000 each. At the top end, 831 stakes winners earned $100,000 or more. Those 46.7% of all stakes winners collectively won 80.3% of the total earnings of all stakes winners for the year; they earned an average of $248,553.

A number of nonstakes winners earned $100,000 or more, as can be seen when referring to Table 4. Since 1,376 runners earned more than $100,000 in 2001, and there were 831 stakes winners earning more than $100,000, 545 nonstakes winners earned $100,000 or more.

Three nonstakes winners earned $300,000 or more, as evidenced by 167 stakes winners in that category in Table 5 and 170 runners in that category in Table 4.

One of those runners was Sakhee, who was second in the Breeders’ Cup Classic (G1) in his only start in North America, earning $800,000.

Table 6 breaks down earnings of stakes winners of 2001 by age and sex. The table provides owners a good picture of the opportunities, as well as the disparities. Two-year-old stakes winners earned an average of $99,937, or 30.9% less the overall average of $144,643 for all stakes winners.

On average, female stakes winners earn less than their male counterparts. Females earned an average of $132,033, 14.7% less than the male average of $154,784.

Four-year-old and three-year-old stakes winners earned the most on average, but again there is a large disparity in earnings in this age category between males and females. Among four-year-old stakes winners, males earned an average of $198,482, while females averaged $143,961. Among three-year-olds, the disparity between the sexes was not as great, but it was still significant.

Starts and wins

If you don’t play, you can’t win. That saying has a clear analogy in racing. If you don’t start, you can’t win. Table 7 breaks down earnings as a function of number of starts in 2001. As can be seen, the horses that start the most generally earn the most.

Horses that started fewer than six times earned less on average than the overall average for all runners, $16,159. Table 7 shows horses that started six times earned an average of $18,797, and average earnings per runner increased in lockstep with number of starts. Average earnings per start in 2001 was $2,315.

To show once more how averages are just average, Table 15 shows that the average number of starts per runner in 2001 was 7.0, an all-time low. Yet, only 6.8% of all runners made seven starts in 2001, with just 6.2% making eight starts and 7.2% making six starts. In 2001, 32,380 runners, or 45.6% of the total, made five or fewer starts.

Horses that made the most starts earned the most money. Horses that started more than ten times accounted for $426.5-million in purse earnings. Those 16,345 runners earned 37.2% of all purses.

Fragility of today’s horses can be divined from Table 7 data over the years and decades. In 2001, 23% of all horses started more than ten times, while in 1991 it was 30%; in 1981, 38%; in 1973, 42.8%; and in 1967, 47.5%.

Winning is everything

In a sport that so dramatically rewards winners more than the other competitors, winning is everything when it comes to earning purse money. That is largely due to the structure of the sport, where roughly 60% (59.9%) of each purse on average goes to the winner, while slightly less than 20% goes to second and about 11% to third. Thus, wins have a higher correlation to significant earnings than number of starts.

This can be seen in Table 8, earnings as function of number of wins in 2001. Horses that fail to win earned an average of $3,361 last year. More alarming is that 36,321 horses, or 51.2% of all starters, failed to win.

Their futility, however, enriched owners of horses that could win. Horses able to win one race earned an average of $17,350, roughly five times more than the horses that failed to win.

But that was just for starters, er, winners. Each additional win dramatically improved the bottom line for owners. Horses that won twice earned almost twice as much as those that won once, and horses that won three times earned almost three times as much as those that could win but once. Horses that won six races earned an average of $93,064, and those winning nine races (just 14 horses) earned an average of $175,838.

Winning is easier said than done, however. As can be seen in the number of runners column in Table 8, it is a pyramid going up the scale. About half as many horses won two races as one; a little less than half again were able to win three races; and a little less than half again were able to win four races.

Table 8 also shows how hard it is to win multiple races. Just 891 runners-1.3% of the total-won five or more races in 2001, and just 41 horses had eight or more wins.

In 1999, a horse failed to win 13 races for the first time since 1996. It happened again in 2000 and again in ‘01. Not only that, in 2001 a horse failed to win 11 races, with just one horse winning ten races.

Table 9 presents the data in Table 8 in the more-than/not-more-than format. The data at the bottom of the table on the left indicate that 51.2% of all runners won not more than zero races, and 78% of all runners could not win more than one race.

The figures in the table are cumulative, meaning they include all horses falling into the not-more-than category. For example, the $15,235 average earnings per runner for those horses that could not win more than four races, include data for all horses that won four, three, two, one, and zero races.

The right side of the table presents cumulative more-than information. The 48.8% of the runners that won more than zero races includes winners of all race categories, one through ten. The cumulative average for horses that won more than zero races was $29,585, which is much higher than the $17,350 average for those runners that won just one race (Table 8). In other words, winners on average earned 8.8 times more than nonwinners.

As in Table 8, horses able to win multiple victories dramatically improved their earnings. While just 9.1% of all runners won more than two races, they earned an average of $60,575. The 1.3% of runners able to win more than four races earned an average of $88,822.

To the winner ...

Tables 8 and 9 show how the sport richly rewards winners at the expense of other finishers. This point is dramatically illustrated in Table 10, which offers the best evidence that winning is everything in racing.

Table 10 details money earned by best finish position. Winners collectively earned 89.4% of all purse money. In the first line of the table, by best finish position, the 48.8% of the runners that were able to win a race earned 100% of first-place purses, 75.9% of second-place money, 72.8% of third-place money, 71% of fourth-place money, 68.7% of fifth-place money, and 63.2% of sixth-place money, to earn an overall average per runner of $29,585.

The 14.5% of the horses that finished no better than second earned 7.8% of the total purse money distributed, an average of $8,667. Horses that finished first and second collectively earned 97.2% of all purse money.

Table 10 also indicates that awarding token fees for minor placings does little to help an owner pay training bills. Unless a horse is able to win a race, the earnings on average are not going to amount to much.

The data in Table 10 are presented as a pie chart in Figure 2. The distribution of money to horses based on best finish position has not changed much over the past several decades. Winners earned 92.8% of all purses in 1981 and 91.5% in ‘91.

Starts by age

Winning-and therefore earning purse money-is a function of starting. This was examined in Table 7. Table 11 provides much greater detail on what starting means, providing information on starts and earnings for all age groups and presented by three major categories: winners, nonwinning earners, and nonearners.

Data in Table 11 can be summarized by stating that winners start close to twice as often as horses that fail to win but earn money, and winners start almost five times more often than horses that fail to earn any part of a purse.

Two-year-olds started just 3.5 times each on average in 2001, compared with 7.0 overall for all starters. Two-year-old winners started an average of 4.8 times, while juveniles that failed to win but earned money started an average of 3.2 times, and nonearning juveniles started 1.6 times on average.

A more dramatic difference exists between the earnings of winners, nonwinning earners, and nonearners. Two-year-olds that won earned an average of $5,745 per start, while nonwinning earners earned an average of $1,066 per start. Two-year-old winners earn the most per start, well above the $3,137 overall average for all winners of all ages.

The differences between winners and nonwinners hold true for the other age brackets. Three-year-olds that won started 9.2 times compared with 5.3 times for nonwinning earners and 2.1 times for nonearners.

Overall, winners started an average of 9.4 times in 2001 and earned an average of $3,137 per start. Nonwinning earners started an average of 5.3 times and earned an average of $785 per start. Nonearners started just 2.0 times on average.

Table 11 also shows the composition of winners by age. Of the 34,621 winners in 2001, 10.7% were two-year-olds, 30.7% were three-year-olds, 25.6% were four-year-olds, 15.4% were five-year-olds, and 17.6% were six or older.

Age, sex differences

Table 12 shows how races and purses were actually distributed in 2001 by age and sex and illustrates a significant difference in opportunity by both measures.

In terms of age, three-year-olds have the best opportunity to earn money. The average purse for races exclusively for three-year-olds is $28,905, 34.5% higher than the overall average purse of $18,936. While just 11.1% of all races are for three-year-olds, those 6,701 races distributed 16.9% of all purses for the year.

Two-year-olds have the fewest races, 7.8% of the total, and accounted for 10.7% of all purse money. Of course, opportunities for two-year-olds are concentrated in the second half of each year. The category with the most races was three-year-olds and up, with 65.4% of the races and 58.1% of the purses. The average purse of $16,828 for three-year-olds and up was less than the overall average.

In terms of sex, races open to either sex were far more abundant than races exclusively for females, with 59.1% of all races open to either sex and 40.5% restricted to females. Just 266 races, or 0.4%, were restricted to males.

Races restricted to fillies and mares featured purses higher on average than those open to either sex. Average purse for races restricted to females was $19,371, while the average for either sex was $18,505.

Table 13 examines earnings by age and sex, a better way to examine any earnings differences between the sexes because, as pointed out when looking at data in Table 12, fillies and mares have the opportunity to run in virtually every race carded. Data in Table 13 indicate that fillies and mares have less earnings potential than males.

Overall, females earned an average of $15,559, 6.4% less than the male average of $16,620. Moreover, females accounted for 43.6% of all runners but earned 42% of all purses.

In every age bracket, males earned more than females. In the three-year-old category, males earned an average of $19,939 per runner compared with $18,277 for fillies. Largest difference was in the five-year-old category, with males earning an average of $2,619 per runner more than females.

Three-year-olds made up the largest group by age, with 28.8% of all runners, followed by four-year-olds with 22.8%. Three-year-olds also earned the largest share of purses, taking 34% of all purse money. The overall highest average earnings per runner among three-year-olds are due in part to the fact that purses for three-year-olds (Table 12) are higher on average than for any other age bracket, plus three-year-olds have the opportunity to compete outside their age division, especially in the fall.

Two-year-olds earned on average less than all other age groups, $10,695. This is largely because two-year-olds start fewer times than older horses (Table 11), and fewer races are carded for juveniles. While two-year-olds composed 16.2% of all runners in 2001, just 7.8% of all races were for juveniles, distributing 10.7% of total purses.

Claiming most prevalent

Claiming races are the staple of any race card, and Table 14 clearly illustrates their dominance on the American scene. In 2001, claiming races accounted for nearly two-thirds of all races, 65.5% to be exact. Of that amount, 15.8% were maiden claiming.

The percentage of claiming races today has declined markedly in the last decade. In 1991, before whole-card simulcasting took off across this country, claiming races composed 74.3% of all races. In 1981, it was 69.1%, an indication that the increased number of runners in the decade of the 1980s yielded an abundance of cheaper stock.

In 2001, claiming races actually increased as a percentage of all races, climbing from 64.5% in 2000 to 65.5%. The 64.5% figure had been the lowest percentage of claiming races since this series began in 1973.

While claiming races were plentiful, the category total of 65.5% of all races in 2001 distributed just 37.4% of all purse money.

The decline in the percentage of claiming races is being filled by maiden races, stakes races, starter allowance, optional claiming races, and allowance races. In 1991, straight maiden races accounted for 7.9% of all races; in 2001, it was 10.4%. In 1991, stakes races accounted for 3.5% of all races; in 2001, it was 4.3%. In 1991, starter allowance and optional claiming races composed 0.5% of all races; in 2001, it was 3.1%. In 1991, allowance races accounted for 12% of all races; in 2001, it was 14.1%.

Allowance races are the second-most common races and featured an average purse of $26,234, distributing 19.6% of all purses. Third-most common race was straight maiden races, amounting to 10.4% of all races and distributing 12.5% of all purses.

Stakes races distributed the largest percentage of money-23% of all purses. North America’s 2,622 stakes races in 2001 distributed an average purse of $100,350. In the past ten years, the average stakes purse has climbed 34.7%, from $74,499 in 1991, when 27% of total purse money went into stakes.

Despite the rich purses offered in stakes events, average field size in stakes in 2001 was 7.7. Largest fields on average came in maiden races. Straight maiden races featured average fields of 8.9 starters, while maiden claiming events averaged 8.8 starters per race. That makes sense when you consider that more than half of all starters in 2001 failed to win a race.

Figure 3 presents the data in Table 14 as a pie chart. The nonclaiming category includes optional claiming, starter allowances, starter handicaps, and overnight handicaps. At 5.7% of the total, those races constitute the fastest-growing group of races. In 2000, they accounted for 5.2% of all races; in 1999, 3.9%; and in 1991, just 2.2%.

Starts down

Table 15 examines the average number of starts per runner and average field size. As has been the case for the past three decades, average number of starts per horse per year is still declining. In 2001, the number dropped to an all-time low of 7.0. In 1960, horses were averaging slightly more than 11 starts per year.

The decline in number of starts comes at a time when it should be easier for owners and trainers to get their horses into the starting gate. The number of runners-and therefore competition for starts-has declined over the past two decades.

The decline in competition in the starting gate has not helped horses to start more often, and average field size also has steadily declined over the years. In 2001, however, there was a slight uptick in average field size, to 8.2 starters per race.

But, before racing secretaries get excited about that development, they need to wait a few years to see if the trend actually has reversed or if the 2001 number is just a blip on the steady downward path. Average field size has declined from 9.1 in 1985, when we first started tracking this number.

In those 17 years, average field size occasionally has risen from the previous year-like the huge jump in 1998 to 8.5 from 8.2-but the trend is down. For owners, this trend means fewer competitors in the starting gate, but for racetracks, which want larger fields for more betting interests, it is a situation that hurts handle.

Money is going long

Most owners want a horse that can become a stakes winner, or, short of that, one that can still be a top earner. One way to help make the latter happen is to get a horse that can run a route of ground.

Table 16 examines races and purses by distance (excluding two-year-old races, which are primarily sprints for most of the year). As can be seen in the data, there is a clear demarcation of opportunity at one mile. Overall average purse in 2001 for three-year-olds and up was $18,333, with the average purse at one mile just above average, $18,995. Races at less than one mile featured average purses of $14,410, while the average purse at more than one mile was $29,565, more than double the average of less than one mile.

Almost exactly half of all purse money, 50.5% to be exact, was distributed in races at less than one mile, but almost three times as many races were carded at less than one mile than at more than one mile. In 2001, 35,841 races were run at less than one mile and 12,062 at more than one mile.

The most common distance of races in 2001 was six furlongs, with 18,118 races, approaching one in every three races held in North America for horses older than age two. Though six-furlong races were the most common, they offered below-average purses of $15,032.

Most lucrative race distance was 1 1/2 miles, featuring an average purse of $150,863, though there were just 90 races at that distance. Second- highest average was for the American classic distance of 1 1/4 miles, which featured an average purse of $143,765. In that category are rich races like the Breeders’ Cup Classic and Kentucky Derby (G1).

Figure 4 illustrates graphically the relationship between distance and purses. For all distances of less than one mile, the percentage of races exceeds the percentage of purses. At all distances of one mile or more except for races between one mile and 1 1/16 miles, the percentage of purses exceeds the percentage of races. It also shows that running really short distances is not very lucrative. While 17.3% of all races were less than six furlongs, those races distributed only 9.9% of all purses.

Table 17 presents the distribution of races by purse in North America and helps to explain why such a small percentage of horses earn six-figure or more sums in any one year.

In 2001, just 76 races, or 0.01% of the total, offered a purse of $500,000 or more. Another 779 races, or 1.3% of the total, offered purses of $100,000 to $499,999. Those 855 races distributed $182.6-million, or 15.9% of all purse money.

At the other end of the spectrum, 1.1% of all races featured purses of less than $1,000. And 12,484 races, or 20.6% of the total, offered purses of less than $6,000.

Figure 5 illustrates purse distribution by value as a bar chart, showing that 62.5% of all North American races had a purse value of less than $15,000 in 2001.

Summary

The big picture of racing, as seen through the prism of purses in North America, shows a relatively good state of affairs for owners. Total purses, average purse, and average earnings per runner are at all-time highs. That is good for owners, especially as prices for bloodstock have turned down on average in all major categories over the last year. The cost of buying a horse has generally decreased.

That said, much of the healthier state of purses that the industry has seen in the last decade has been the result of whole-card simulcasting and the spread of interstate wagering. Most likely, those sources of handle and purses are maturing and thus will yield smaller gains in subsequent years. Thus, to increase purses in coming years, the Thoroughbred industry will need new sources of handle, such as the spread of simulcast signals internationally or growth from Internet wagering. Some past growth in purses has come through slot machines or VLTs at tracks, and further expansion of alternative gaming at tracks may produce further purse increases in coming years.

While owners are waiting for those things to happen, the good news is that purses on the track are pretty good today by almost every historical measure, making the prospects of racehorse ownership today relatively good. Besides having fun with a racehorse, some owners can actually make some money.

 Mark Simon is president and editor of Thoroughbred Times.

All About Purses 2005
All About Purses 2004 
All About Purses 2003 
All About Purses 2002 
All About Purses 2001
All About Purses 2000