Who Are You Talking To John?
 

This quote is offensive.

John Walsh, the simulcast director at Hawthorne Race Course in Cicero, Illinois, said that bettors at his track consistently request that bet minimums be lowered. But, to the chagrin of many horseplayers who maintain that takeout rates are too high, Walsh also said, “I never hear anyone say anything about a takeout rate unless I read a blog.”

http://www.drf.com/news/fractional-w...racks-and-fans

The guy is clueless. And he's saying the small-fry bettors he talks with at Hawthorne are clueless as well. So what?

How many suits in this game know anything about horse racing?

Which is why I am seriously considering no longer playing. Dead serious. Bettors are treated like they are the problem, not the solution.

There is a worse quote in there. Some of these track execs have a vision that makes very little sense to me.

Exactly.

Hawthorne is a very interesting crowd, and lets just say that it isnt for the faint of heart. If your rocking some BBQ or ketchup stains, and half your teeth, your part of the IN crowd

Ugh. It's hard to believe that consistent messaging along the lines of "takeout doesn't matter" is spontaneous. If this sport had a national chairman, I'd say that talking points to this effect were being distributed.

And the men are worse!

At the risk of getting hit with tomatoes, he's partially right.

I'm NOT saying that takeout is not an issue, but I've never heard anyone in our building say, "Your takeout is too high." It is generally an issue left to message boards, blogs and the occasional article.

Not to sound like an industry shill, but the reality is folks who believe the takeout is too high and talk about it out loud are currently receiving rebates, stout ones to boot. Sorry, but it's a fact. Also, many of them refer others to their current ADW and get a slice of their action as well.

So the whole takeout debate, in my opinion, is frustrating because on one hand are legitimate arguments for reduction and on the other are folks clamoring for them, claiming they don't bet this or that, but ultimately, their rebates reduce the takeout down to what they're clamoring for in the first place.

For what it's worth. Again, please don't take this post to mean I'm against takeout reduction, which is not true.

I'll let Doug respond to this....I would never throw tomatoes at you Travis, I am a big fan of yours.

The people that care about takeout are probably wagering a much (and I would say the majority) of the wagering dollars.

The statement completely ignores long term growth in the game.

And many of them "Not complaining" realize that it is falling on deaf ears and have moved offshore for their rebates.

Right... anyone wagering a serious amount of coin is currently receiving a rebate. I think a lot of jaws would drop if people understood how much handle truly comes from big players. 20% of national handle alone comes from five groups, and you can bet they're getting a pretty sweet rebate.

I'd be willing to bet, given the chance, that he'd make his point with softer language. That's why I said partially right.

You don't need to go offshore for rebates.

You do if you don't live in the "Right" State.

Correctumundo.

Travis, unfortunately your post kind of proves the point. The people in the game don't get it. They figure people are dumb and will continue to bet no matter what. That might be true at **** tracks like Hawthorne but it isn't true of big players....Rebates wouldn't need to exist if the track takeout was different to begin with. And 2-4% for WPS gets you down to what like 11-14% for WPS wagers. Excuse me if that doesn't blow my skirt up...If enough players like myself walk, there is no game.

I've never played a rebate shop yet. I just want to place a regular bet but not get raped on takeout. Is that so unreasonable?

And yeah - assuming people will play the same volume "no matter what" is ridiculous. The casinos here in Atlantic City make the same mistake. They won't lower table minimums and now they are starving. Casinos nearly empty most of the week for all except Borgata.

Not everyone is an addict. In fact most gamblers, even ones who play regularly, have a casual to moderate interest.

Make the takeout high enough and you are more guaranteed to lose. It's like a legitimate card game becoming "Three Card Monty"

This is false, as others have pointed out. Rebates are great, but not everyone has access to them and even in states that allow them, the threshold for getting one varies. More importantly, rebates only reward volume betting, they don't reward winning, which is what the industry should be focusing on - returning more of the pools to winning ticket holders, because that's better in the long term for players of all bankroll sizes.

The quote is offensive, but it's just the latest in a long line of offensive rhetoric about horseplayers by the people in charge of the sport. The notion of sophisticated horseplayers who treat the game with the seriousness of any other investment is completely lost on most of the decision-makers in horse racing. Yet these are the people who are supposed to be looking out for our game when dealing with regressive government officials. It makes me appreciate all the more what NYRA has done in the past year, making an effort to listen to all of its customers and rolling out tangible improvements like the 15% Pick 5 as a result.

It's going to take a lot more than that to reform things though, and as long as people like Walsh are making business decisions based on what a few jadrools in the grandstand say, the battle remains a steeply uphill one.

:tro:

Had to look jadrool up. Thank you, as I'm always looking to improve my vocabulary.

Joey, anyone betting serious money is getting a rebate. It's not a discussion.

K. I don't know how you can say that, but it wasn't the point of my post, so I'll move on.

http://www.drf.com/news/steven-crist...-sparks-handle

Crist piece today on this very issue as it relates to Belmont Pick 5.

I say it because it's true....and you stated the opposite.

I'm a horseplayer, I am all for lower takeouts, but it's not a simple discussion, just as Steve suggests. Regardless, don't fall under the illusion that serious players aren't getting rebates. They are.

It's dependent on an arbitrary definition of "serious player" and jurisdictional factors should be considered when making that kind of blanket statement. But OK.

From the Crist article:

"First, in most cases track operators are powerless to set takeout rates, their hands tied by government regulators and budget officials who are unwilling to experiment with accepting short-term revenue losses in exchange for long-term growth."

Their hands never seem tied when it comes to getting increases.

If you wanted to sign-up today with an outlet that provides rebates, you could, regardless of how much you play.

Probably, but it all seems so dirty. Why the secrecy and the jumping through hoops just be able to bet at a reasonable price? That gets pretty old, and it smells bad too. It does nothing to help the troubled reputation of horse racing.

Exactly.

I can't speak for other states, but I'm very dubious about that in Pennsylvania.

When I first went to the powers that be who reside in the building at PID... that was always the crutch they'd reply with. The State. Politics. Not entirely in our control. Blah, blah, blah.

Suddenly, a column appears in the newspaper arguing for takeout reductions and explaining how handicapping and betting on horses isn't something "mindless, like pushing a button or pulling a lever on a slot machine"

Suddenly, they're willing to jump through all of these supposed hoops with politicians.

PID has had two sharp takeout reductions. Perhaps coincidentally, but both came right after slots players were shamed in the front page of the Sports section in articles about takeout.

This is absolutely false. I know of three NJ residents that legally can not get an acct threw a respectable onshore shop. Its no different for IL residents

Yup, when the kids are in bed I will correct the rampant misinformation in this thread.

This is a key point and so well written by Crist:


If people go back and really study the betting end of the game from the late 1800's and early to mid 1900's.

They'll have a great idea of how much room for growth horse racing has if it can get away from the unbelievably draconian treatment it subjects to, or at least the bettors who don't know how to go about jumping through the hoops they need to jump through in order to get rebates.

Horse Racing is a game that should be greatly moved up by advancements in modern technology. It also still has the laws very much in it's favor.

Do we count the TVG rebates?

it almost seems as tho racing execs don't want to concede they are in the gambling business. that they wish to ignore the thing that fuels the sport. not sure why, since casinos and poker are booming businesses.
they need to quit ignoring the bettors, and find a way to make them feel wanted and appreciated.
take out is like sales tax. the city where i work has raised the sales tax too much, and has run people out of town to shop. they figured as they continued to raise the %, the revenue would continue apace. it's dropped, because they went too far and killed the golden goose. and it's easier to send them away then it is to re-gain them, and their money.

They think the answer is to create a bunch more "customers" (bettors) out of thin air.

They're looking for some ingenious marketing gimmick that doesn't exist.

The only way you create a lot more bettors out of thin air is through sustained takeout reductions and betting exchanges.

Not only will those two thing create a massive amount of new customers, but they'll also spark existing horse players to bet a whole lot more money.

Ironically, the marketing gimmick they need... it's very successful winning horse players that people can relate to.

Men like Plunger Walton and Pittsburgh Phil were the two greatest marketing inventions horse racing ever had.

A guy who works in a factory in Pittsburgh for $5 a week and becomes a multi-millionaire by doing nothing else but betting horses...that's marketable. Dies at age 42 with a fortune worth over $84 million today, adjusted for inflation.

You think that's marketable? It is. It was. And it was for a long time after he was dead.

I'll tell you what isn't marketable. The perception the public has of people who bet on horses in 2013.

Why is the perception of people, now, who bet on horses, what it is?

How do you make horse racing marketable? Put an end to making your core customer so unmarketable.

I was not looking to get into some grand debate on takeout last night until I read the article in the initial post. And then it struck me yet again. The player continues to not mean dick to this industry on a regular basis:

1. Travis and his lovely voice are far far away from the swamps of Jersey. He simply couldn't know that we have few rights if any in this lovely state.

2. Andy, on the other hand, is right across the bridge and surely can see our beautiful shoreline from his penthouse apartment on the river. So it hardens my heart to hear him say that any "serious player" gets a rebate. As if that settles it.

Here in NJ we have one option legally online and that is NJbets which was taken over by TVG. That's it. And Jms, you must be a comedian with your take on TVGs rewards, that whole 2 tenths of 1% is surely not going to cover the formula for my baby girl. Did I mention her name is Andie? This is because Trips and Traps made no sense for a girl. But I digress.

Oh yes, we also have the Big M Club! But please don't think of it like Satin Dolls in the Sopranos. If you bet 20k a month, these are the juicy numbers you have waiting for you in your account. http://www.meadowlandsracetrack.com/...files/gold.pdf
But wait there's more! You know why? B/c you only get the rewards, which are dogsh.it, if you are on track or at 1 of 2 count them 2 simulcast facilities in this state. So please don't think you can have a life and or job and try and bet on track on a regular basis... Good stuff right?

So what to do...Well, I can break the law of course. Here are my options. I can set up an address in another state in order to bet with a better legal operator who won't **** me as bad as TVG. I've reached out to numerous members of the DT family and inquired about these juicy onshore rebate shops. All of them say Jersey is a disaster area. Oh ok....I could go offshore. If I do that I will be helping the game exactly 0 with each bet I make. I won't affect my odds, especially at smaller tracks, which is nice but I want to put a little scratch into Maggie's pocket as well you know. The paddock can be a dangerous place.....

I think Joe and Doug have summed it up quite nicely in other posts. The fact is there is an old guard typified by many of the aged posters on this website who want us youngens to STFU and be happy with whatever we get. They will play till they leave this earth b/c they love the game and think of it strictly as entertainment. I love this game as well. Except I will not bet it if I think I can't beat it. Incidentally I've stunk this year because of my own piss poor handicapping. All the rebates in the world wouldn't have helped me this year. But that isn't the point. I understand what value is and isn't. It's bad enough that we have to put up with questionable trainers and confirmed, though infrequent past posting, the last thing I want to hear is that takeout doesn't matter....The under 35 crowd in here will make a determination as to what this game will be or won't be in the future. They aren't looking to make a donation to the track. Either the parties that be listen, or they will rightfully find something else to do with their money....Here's hoping they listen.

As for certain states... well yeah, Arizona, Texas... there are a bunch of states who can't bet period, much less with a rebate shop. I'm speaking in general terms. The fact folks in NJ can't bet is an issue that comes before takeout, because the takeout doesn't matter on a bet you can't or will never make.

Yea, actually getting all the racing players to be able to bet would be a first step for racing, they cant do that, why would they even care to try and make takeout changes!

This is a good point and 100% true in my experience.

Crist: There have been some stunningly disappointing takeout reductions. When Ellis Park introduced a 4% Pick-4 in 2007, the response was extremely underwhelming. Pools rose briefly to a "whopping" $60K, but then settled into the $25-$40K range. My own modest bets represented 0.5% of the entire Ellis Pick-4 bets that summer.

Here's something I wrote in this thread on 8/1/07: http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15567

About the same time, Laurel ran a 10-day meet with reduced takeout. 10% for WPS. A drf article said there was no increase in handle:
http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16373

--Dunbar

Ellis and Laurel. 2 D+ racetracks. And also these were temporary situations. That's not how you create buzz.

These points are valid but I'm not going to just start playing a track I haven't been following and jump into multi-race sequences.