now that santa anita has gone back to dirt
 

will you play it ?

No way. Starve the beast. They raised takeout in all of Cali. I refuse to play there again.

If we get more than a steady diet of 5 horse fields I'll play

Eventually I will, but so many of those horses out there have been running on the fake stuff for so long, that I might be inclined to watch for a month. It will be interesting to see any type of trends between the poly horses versus horses shipping in. Also those horses that reversed their form at the Fairplex and then regressed back at Hollywood might require a second look.

I'm not for egregious takeout increases but there are two valid reasons for this instance:

1.) The new levels are still extremely competitive with the nationwide average.

2.) The increased takeout will enable them to increase purses and make a last ditch effort to revitalize CA racing, which is headed down a dark and lonely path.

Contrary to what HANA may lead you to believe, takeout decreases are not the panacea of racing.

I know I know, it's a canard as always. Increasing takeout will not increase purses.

Overnight purses are going up 25% and its not because Uncle Frank is printing money in ze money room.

Let's see at the end of the meet where things are. Handle etc...

Facepalm.

Double facepalm.

impressive.......panacea & canard, in a thread without steve's input.

At the very least, the increased purses at the beginning of the meet have attracted Steve Asmussen to go out there for the first time and for trainers that left like Eric Guillot to return. Those guys have the horsepower to help a meet simply because of their numbers and the variety of horses they have. The assumption that increased handle will enable them to sustain those purse levels is hardly a crazy one.

I'm interested to know why you think decreasing takeout will lead to some great revival of racing. Exchange wagering has a significantly better chance to help turn things around. Going from 20.68% on exotics to 22.68% while leaving the WPS takeout the same is going to make a difference for CA racing. The CA racing model is completely broken. Trying to survive with meets like what they're offering at Hollywood is never going to work.

So let's make takeout 50% for WPS and then we can have really really big purses. I'm sure that will work!:zz:

People just don't get there has to be a happy medium. Unfortunately people see the industry as a pyramid instead of as a circle. The quicker they get to the circle mentality, the better off the industry will be. Problem is that people are bred to think the pyramid mentality.

How ignorant can 1 be?

:rolleyes:

Yeah, that's exactly what I said.

They have Asmussen back for one meet because of dirt (he will be gone come HP) and they get Guillot to return ... wow.


It's a long, long term process - but with the takeout rates where they are at - betting horses will always be viewed as sucker bait. The slide will continue.

I'd believe in Santa Clause, the Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny before I believe the powers that be have enough of a clue to not screw up exchange wagering.

Pretty much. Sadly the econ lesson of taxing something makes it a deterrent hasn't been learned.

Why should SA give a crap about Hollywood? We're talking about Santa Anita right now. Asmussen could to to Thailand after the meet for all SA cares.

Whether the takeout is 20%, 22%, or 30% the bettors are going to be looked at as suckers. What other group of people are willing to bet into something that's filtered so heavily? The takeout going up 2% is not going to change the way Frank Stronach, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Jeff Mullins or Joel Rosario view the bettors.

I agree with you about exchange wagering. When push comes to shove they'll f.uck it up I'm sure.

If I needed an econ lesson I would have given you a ring. I don't. You grossly exaggerated what I said, attempted to pass it off as what I said then attempted to point out the inaccuracy in what I said, when it was really your insane exaggeration that you actually mocked.

I can't help you if you don't want to help yourself.

Your taking it to a new level with this ****.

Please concern yourself with yourself.

Why dont you say something relevant?
Comment on his point, instead of making your own **** up.

Hmm.

And here I always thought I was bred because my parents were horny.

He has no point. He is wrong. Your buttboy Doug agrees with me. Get on board big boy.

So because Doug agrees its right?
Ill keep that in mind for future DT discussions.

Not at all, but since you can't think for yourself I figured you'd blindly follow whatever he has to say....That is my last response to you in this thread.

LOL. First time I have been told I cant think for myself.
Please dont respond again, it would be best for everyone.

I have no point? Have you read this thread? Your status as board douchebag is firmly in place but seriously, your "I'm smarter than you mantra" is old and tiresome.

You have done nothing but spout a tagline about takeout going up and starving the beast then tried to make a stupid comparison to taxation being a deterrent. Meanwhile, I've tried to tell you that from a business perspective the takeout increase is a viable last ditch effort for an entity that is failing slowly but surely.

So hey, if you have a second, break down where each wagering dollar in CA goes and let me know where you can trim from.

Last ditch effort, huh?

Sort of like in a 'sending pictures of your cock to a girl who isn't interested in going out with you' kind of way.

Proof is in the pudding. All I know is you don't raise taxes during a depression and you don't raise takeout during a depression. And I realize they didn't on WPS but it doesn't matter....Plus why anyone is supporting 4 and 5 horse fields is beyond me. The inner has never looked better.

Brett tried. Wrangler http://www.sportsgrid.com/nfl/snl-br...re-commercial/

So from a business perspective, you believe the takeout increase will be a detrimental move? I'll be more than happy to post the daily handle figures for SA each day compared to the same period in 2009-2010. That's basically what this boils down to, but feel free to insert any pertinent cock joke.

Nope. Nice try. There will be a bounce from going back to dirt that has nothing to do with the takeout point.

And supporting a takeout increase because you know your product is about to become more attractive to your customers is a bad business move how?

Huh, we are talking passed each other? They will get bigger fields as a result of returning to dirt. They would get bigger fields if they would cut down on the racing in general. And they wouldn't have to raise takeout to do it.

Wait, so which is it?

I would never argue that supporting a bad product is a good idea, especially when you think the price is too high. However, my point from the beginning has been that, dirt plus increased purses based on increased handle is going to lead to increased interest.

SA could have tried to run on a broken track, had a few cancellations, continued to watch their handle slide as it has at the last God knows how many synth meets. Or they could have switched to dirt, been able to bring back some barns that left or bring in some that are new and develop a better product. They chose the latter. I think they made the right call.

Why do you need both?

Yes synthetic has been a disaster from every perspective I can think of. So go back to dirt and see where you are handle wise. Maybe the boost you get in handle means you can offer bigger purses....Maybe. And then I look at California's budget conditions and I wonder what the future looks like out there. They are in store for more IOUs starting early next year. Kick the can. Racing doesn't get kicked by increasing the tax on the game IMO.

You're going from an already draconian level - to a little higher level.

Detrimental move? Maybe not in the extreme short-term - but in the long term, yes.