Washington Post/George Will article..

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Cardus

Seriously, you're a moron if you think that Will is a pompous gasbag.

While this is far from a perfect column -- for instance, I think that he should have considered the issues that I raised above (which he might have and I am unaware) -- Will routinely presents thoughtful, well-reasoned arguments. If nothing else, I'd describe him as a mature person in a field of flamethrowers.

You can disagree with him, but calling him a pompous gasbag shows massive ignorance.

He did a piece in February about climate change where he blatantly misinterpreted data and also stated that a research group said things they'd never said (i.e., made stuff up about them). Why? Because, I'm sure, the pesky facts didn't fit in with his opinion. When these mistakes were pointed out, neither he nor the Washington Post ever did a correction. If you enjoy him great, but I think op-ed columnists should do a bit more fact-checking if they're writing for a big publication. Will just doesn't bother and then when the mistakes are pointed out, doesn't fix them.

This wasn't a well-reasoned argument (the ed on racing) as it was only tangentially connected to his main complaint, which is eminent domain. I do think there are very good arguments to be made against seizing private property to give to other private hands (and for a lot of public reasons, for that matter), but I think, as "just compensation" is required for seizing of property, it's pretty clear that revenue doesn't fall under the kind of private property eminent domain addresses. He's seriously reaching by using racing getting casino revenues as his straw man because many people have a bad opinion of gambling anyway, so he's safe. Maybe I'm misreading his argument, but I don't think so.

And any man who is going to do a piece on the trashy classlessness of blue jeans is a pompous gasbag in my book. And he doesn't check his facts. Which doesn't make him a gasbag, but does make him a lazy writer.

[freddymo]

Why anyone continues to think slots are the holy grail for racing it is beyond me... Slots destroy people, there damage costs way more to repair then the short term good.. Racing needs to fix its product based on what it can control not the alure of slot dollars.. IE Nerud message

Am I happy to race a horse at PID in a state bred Mdn Spl for 70k sure ,but I recognize that in 3 years all the bloom will be for the rose and folks will be broke and PID state breds will be racing for 27k again.. Its a shot in the arm for a few years and then you still have to deal with broke ass folks who were baited into losing they lives... Slots suck!

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by freddymo

Why anyone continues to think slots are the holy grail for racing it is beyond me... Slots destroy people, there damage costs way more to repair then the short term good.. Racing needs to fix its product based on what it can control not the alure of slot dollars.. IE Nerud message

Am I happy to race a horse at PID in a state bred Mdn Spl for 70k sure ,but I recognize that in 3 years all the bloom will be for the rose and folks will be broke and PID state breds will be racing for 27k again.. Its a shot in the arm for a few years and then you still have to deal with broke ass folks who were baited into losing they lives... Slots suck!

I agree: Slots are a stopgap measure at best. They are not a panacea. They also appeal to people who are not likely to become horseplayers no matter how much the game changes. The slot player does not want to think about their selections -- here's the extent of the experience: "-CLICK- -CLICK- -CLICK-" (repeat a couple of thousand times).

Unfortunately we are not capable of dumbing down the game enough to appeal to slot players -- and we should not try to do so. Aside from accessibility and marketing, a leadership post at the national level, and the ending of the intransigence of the state-based fiefdoms, there is not a lot that can be done about the game. A race will still take 20 minutes between starts, time that we handicappers put to good use, and it will always be difficult to figure out who's going to win, place or show, or complete exotics.

We horseplayers are in as unfortunate position as those who enjoy other intellectual pursuits -- we don't drive the market more than those who don't participate. Some of the best movies don't do well at the box office, making it less likely to see more of that caliber. Classical music stations do terrible in the ratings and advertising rates so they don't last forever.

The thing that really gets my goat is that racing (and to a similar extent, poker) need not be "negative expectation" games all the time. As we all know, sometimes the odds are higher than they should be on a horse, making him a good bet. This never happens at a casino table game, where odds are fixed to always be lower than true risk, and especially not at the slots, where the real risk numbers are often not even published!

The gambling public is actually being less well served by the casinos than the racetrack, where parimutuel betting is self equalizing over time, and provides a more interesting "market" for action, literally. Again, we all know this, but I try my best to advocate on racing's behalf to those friends of mine whom I know enjoy gambling and whom I also know are ignorant of racing's obvious advantages over casino gaming.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by joeydb

I agree: Slots are a stopgap measure at best. They are not a panacea. They also appeal to people who are not likely to become horseplayers no matter how much the game changes. The slot player does not want to think about their selections -- here's the extent of the experience: "-CLICK- -CLICK- -CLICK-" (repeat a couple of thousand times).

Unfortunately we are not capable of dumbing down the game enough to appeal to slot players -- and we should not try to do so. Aside from accessibility and marketing, a leadership post at the national level, and the ending of the intransigence of the state-based fiefdoms, there is not a lot that can be done about the game. A race will still take 20 minutes between starts, time that we handicappers put to good use, and it will always be difficult to figure out who's going to win, place or show, or complete exotics.

We horseplayers are in as unfortunate position as those who enjoy other intellectual pursuits -- we don't drive the market more than those who don't participate. Some of the best movies don't do well at the box office, making it less likely to see more of that caliber. Classical music stations do terrible in the ratings and advertising rates so they don't last forever.

The thing that really gets my goat is that racing (and to a similar extent, poker) need not be "negative expectation" games all the time. As we all know, sometimes the odds are higher than they should be on a horse, making him a good bet. This never happens at a casino table game, where odds are fixed to always be lower than true risk, and especially not at the slots, where the real risk numbers are often not even published!

The gambling public is actually being less well served by the casinos than the racetrack, where parimutuel betting is self equalizing over time, and provides a more interesting "market" for action, literally. Again, we all know this, but I try my best to advocate on racing's behalf to those friends of mine whom I know enjoy gambling and whom I also know are ignorant of racing's obvious advantages over casino gaming.

Circling back to the article and the situation here, all the Illinois Horseman, Tracks and Bettors are asking for is a level playing field with the "competition"...The tax laws and other incentives in Illinois greatly favor the riverboats and this was a measure to tip the scales back a bit.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by GBBob

Circling back to the article and the situation here, all the Illinois Horseman, Tracks and Bettors are asking for is a level playing field with the "competition"...The tax laws and other incentives in Illinois greatly favor the riverboats and this was a measure to tip the scales back a bit.

Ok Bob so basically its F'd up and we know it so now let's just make it fair and f'd up.. BTW the action on the boat in Elgin is fantastic...100x's odds and 100 to 10k on the BJ tables is awesome..

Remember once you suck tit it's hard to break the habit

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by freddymo

Ok Bob so basically its F'd up and we know it so now let's just make it fair and f'd up.. BTW the action on the boat in Elgin is fantastic...100x's odds and 100 to 10k on the BJ tables is awesome..

Remember once you suck tit it's hard to break the habit

I hate that freakin boat..never win there..but that's a different story..

Band aids serve a purpose too Freddy....although this is more like a full body cast

[freddymo]

Less dates, less horses, less folks in the business.. There are too many horses and to little money to fund the industry.. Shouldn't the lottery kick to racing as well?

[Scav]

Originally Posted by GBBob

I hate that freakin boat..never win there..but that's a different story..

Band aids serve a purpose too Freddy....although this is more like a full body cast

Nobody ever wins there, nobody.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by joeydb

I agree: Slots are a stopgap measure at best. They are not a panacea. They also appeal to people who are not likely to become horseplayers no matter how much the game changes. The slot player does not want to think about their selections -- here's the extent of the experience: "-CLICK- -CLICK- -CLICK-" (repeat a couple of thousand times).

Unfortunately we are not capable of dumbing down the game enough to appeal to slot players -- and we should not try to do so. Aside from accessibility and marketing, a leadership post at the national level, and the ending of the intransigence of the state-based fiefdoms, there is not a lot that can be done about the game. A race will still take 20 minutes between starts, time that we handicappers put to good use, and it will always be difficult to figure out who's going to win, place or show, or complete exotics.

We horseplayers are in as unfortunate position as those who enjoy other intellectual pursuits -- we don't drive the market more than those who don't participate. Some of the best movies don't do well at the box office, making it less likely to see more of that caliber. Classical music stations do terrible in the ratings and advertising rates so they don't last forever.

The thing that really gets my goat is that racing (and to a similar extent, poker) need not be "negative expectation" games all the time. As we all know, sometimes the odds are higher than they should be on a horse, making him a good bet. This never happens at a casino table game, where odds are fixed to always be lower than true risk, and especially not at the slots, where the real risk numbers are often not even published!

The gambling public is actually being less well served by the casinos than the racetrack, where parimutuel betting is self equalizing over time, and provides a more interesting "market" for action, literally. Again, we all know this, but I try my best to advocate on racing's behalf to those friends of mine whom I know enjoy gambling and whom I also know are ignorant of racing's obvious advantages over casino gaming.

good word, i had to look it up

intransigence - 3 dictionary results Jump to: Synonyms | News | Nearby Words

in⋅tran⋅si⋅gent   /ɪnˈtrænsɪdʒənt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [in-tran-si-juhnt] Show IPA
–adjective 1. refusing to agree or compromise; uncompromising; inflexible.

–noun 2. a person who refuses to agree or compromise, as in politics.

[freddymo]

Yeah I know but they don't serve and promote Crack in 10th grade Home Eck...Crack doesn't destroy lives either..