The points that both Maurice and Truncheon make above are entirely valid in terms of the overall cost.
I've been to Wembley Finals, and I travelled. There is always sufficient accommodation within travelling distance at pretty normal prices if I'd wanted to do that instead. the same is true with Cheltenham.
Cheltenham is indeed 4 Wembley finals in four days, but we can all decide how many days to attend if any. We also decide what our betting bank is, and stake accordingly. I'm not a small stakes punter, but in years gone by I was. I just did what I could afford, and if I couldn't I didn't do it.
The overriding point though is that those costs have always been there. It's getting close to 40 years I've been going now, and having a bet, and paying for accommodation has been part of that. I rent a house with a couple of close friends. The same house each year and we pay eighty pounds each a night. We walk to the course every day. In leaner times I travelled in each day to save the cost, I had a bet far more selectively, and to much smaller stakes than I do now. I adjusted. I still do. Going to Cheltenham is the highlight of my year. I love it. Cheltenham is my equivalent of some paying for their season ticket at the Rugby or the Football. Something that I'd suggest over the year costs at least as much and probably more.
But I also realise that Cheltenham is not the same for everyone. So I'm not trying to make a one-sided case. I just don't think the level of criticism aimed at the Racecourse itself is entirely fair. They're certainly capable of shooting themselves in the foot. I'm one of the first jumping up and down when they do, to the extent that I contact them directly and have a full vent, but other than the cost of entry, anything else is entirely up to us. And it is absolutely the case that by comparison to other sporting events they are at the lower end of the cost spectrum.
