Who Are You Talking To John?

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

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.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

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.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

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.

[cmorioles]

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.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

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.

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

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

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.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

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.

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.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

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

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

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by Scav

This is absolutely false. I know of three NJ residents that legally can not get an acct threw a respectable onshore shop.

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

[Calzone Lord]

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

On the contrary, every single long-term experiment with takeout reduction has shown that it increases handle, participation, and customer satisfaction – not necessarily because players are consciously aware of higher returns, but because they find themselves with a bit more money on hand that they reinvest over and over. They stay in action longer, and they receive more positive reinforcement to keep playing the game because their money seems to last longer and go farther.

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.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Scav

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

Do we count the TVG rebates?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Calzone Lord

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.

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.

[Calzone Lord]

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.

[randallscott35]

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.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by Scav

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

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.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

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!

[Scurlogue Champ]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

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.

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

[Dunbar]

Crist:

On the contrary, every single long-term experiment with takeout reduction has shown that it increases handle, participation, and customer satisfaction – not necessarily because players are consciously aware of higher returns, but because they find themselves with a bit more money on hand that they reinvest over and over. They stay in action longer, and they receive more positive reinforcement to keep playing the game because their money seems to last longer and go farther.

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

...today's pool was an embarrassing $25,000. I say "embarrassing", because I find it embarrassing that the best bet in horseracing can only attract $25,053 worth of bets. Hell, my bet was 1/70th of the entire pool! Aren't there at least a couple hundred horseplayers in the entire country willing to pump some money into this pool?

Is any track going to think about lowering take when Ellis draws a whopping 25,000 with it's 4%?

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

[randallscott35]

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

[3kings]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

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

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.