Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kasept
Good points... A study actually would be very cool for review, since I think a lot of the thoughts on this are anecdotal (like the Santa Anita Super v. High 5 story). Can't argue at all with the benefits of the minimum in regards to tax (as currently structured) and participation... Don't you feel there are plenty of 'wade in' wagering minimums already available between the current crop of .10 and .50 increments?
|
The problem is that at NYRA tracks and wagering platform, the dime super is currently the only "wade in" opportunity.
I know that there have been plenty of studies showing that, to date, there has been little, if any, cross-over between the lottery/slots players and horse wagering. However, I think that is partly because the owners of the slots parlors do nothing to facilitate or encourage horse wagering. (Saratoga Harness is a perfect example in this regard.) While the gaming parlors often trumpet big scores for small denominations at their facilities, I've often wondered why racing doesn't do the same. Imagine if the lottery/slots players were informed that they could win thousands for a .50 pic-4 wager (or hundreds for a .10 super bet). Would it change their gambling habits? I don't know, but perhaps it would at least be worth a try.