House Subcommittee Hearings

[justindew]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Are you even remotely aware of the work that is being done by a host of people throughout the industry on EVERY SINGLE TOPIC that was brought up today?

It's irresponsible to be unaware of what is actually being attempted and accomplished.

Maybe years of being in the industry and seeing firsthand how f'ing stupid the decision makers are, by and large, has dampened the panel members' faith in the "host of people" you mention.

The NTRA has been around for 10 years with the goal of essentially making the sport more popular. What have they come up with? Go Baby Go!, and Win and You're In.

Brilliant.

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by justindew

Maybe years of being in the industry and seeing firsthand how f'ing stupid the decision makers are, by and large, has dampened the panel members' faith in the "host of people" you mention.

The NTRA has been around for 10 years with the goal of essentially making the sport more popular. What have they come up with? Go Baby Go!, and Win and You're In.

Brilliant.

As bad a job as they've done, they and the American Horse Council did keep racing out of the clean sweep of gambling on the internet. If NOTHING else, that counts for a great deal. It's easier to fight from here on the defensive than to try to re-establish the positioning.

[justindew]

Originally Posted by Kasept

As bad a job as they've done, they and the American Horse Council did keep racing out of the clean sweep of gambling on the internet. If NOTHING else, that counts for a great deal. It's easier to fight from here on the defensive than to try to re-establish the positioning.

In ten years of existence, the NTRA's only accomplishment is temporarily preventing the total elimination of the sport. Fan-friggen-tastic.

My point is that I can hardly fault someone who is tired of trusting other industry insiders to fix the problems the industry is facing.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by justindew

In ten years of existence, the NTRA's only accomplishment is temporarily preventing the total elimination of the sport. Fan-friggen-tastic.

My point is that I can hardly fault someone who is tired of trusting other industry insiders to fix the problems the industry is facing.

Who is tired on that panel? jess jackson? he has been in the game 5 years and has managed to sue half the people in it. Arthur hancock? He took the same position 20 years ago. I believe he is living in the past (which wasnt nearly as nice as he remembers) but his stance is older than the NTRA by 10 years. Jack Van Berg? He is a bitter old trainer that cant pay his bills. I may just as bitter as he is but the game moved on without him and he is mad. Randy Moss? I loved his line about being a trainer. When exactly was that? What is he tired of? The fact that the game which sucks so bad has allowed him to be on national tv? Or that the DRF has adapted his pace figures? He thrives yet calls for others to suffer (including bettors)because he is Mr. politically correct. Funny that the people with their agenda's on display pubically were allowed yet many others who asked to be on the panel were denied.

[justindew]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Who is tired on that panel? jess jackson? he has been in the game 5 years and has managed to sue half the people in it. Arthur hancock? He took the same position 20 years ago. I believe he is living in the past (which wasnt nearly as nice as he remembers) but his stance is older than the NTRA by 10 years. Jack Van Berg? He is a bitter old trainer that cant pay his bills. I may just as bitter as he is but the game moved on without him and he is mad. Randy Moss? I loved his line about being a trainer. When exactly was that? What is he tired of? The fact that the game which sucks so bad has allowed him to be on national tv? Or that the DRF has adapted his pace figures? He thrives yet calls for others to suffer (including bettors)because he is Mr. politically correct. Funny that the people with their agenda's on display pubically were allowed yet many others who asked to be on the panel were denied.

Then let's all come up with an alternative solution to the following problems:

1) Drugs have weakened the breed, which in turn makes the sport less interesting and fun, which in turn means fewer new fans discover the sport.

2) Drugs produce wasky results sometimes, which in turn drives new gamblers to poker or elsewhere where they THINK they have an edge, as opposed to driving them towards horse racing, where they KNOW FOR A FACT that unless they spend 70 hours a week watching replays and taking notes, they have no edge and are at a disadvantage unless they know who is cheating with drugs. (That's one unique thing about horse racing. It may be the one gambling activity where people correctly realize that they are at such a disadvantage that they actually won't bet, as opposed to every other gambling activity where they bet anyway, or they mistakenly think they have an advantage becasue they're just that good.)

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by justindew

Then let's all come up with an alternative solution to the following problems:

1) Drugs have weakened the breed, which in turn makes the sport less interesting and fun, which in turn means fewer new fans discover the sport.

2) Drugs produce wasky results sometimes, which in turn drives new gamblers to poker or elsewhere where they THINK they have an edge, as opposed to driving them towards horse racing, where they KNOW FOR A FACT that unless they spend 70 hours a week watching replays and taking notes, they have no edge and are at a disadvantage unless they know who is cheating with drugs. (That's one unique thing about horse racing. It may be the one gambling activity where people correctly realize that they are at such a disadvantage that they actually won't bet, as opposed to every other gambling activity where they bet anyway, or they mistakenly think they have an advantage becasue they're just that good.)

Drugs have not weakened the breed. There is zero scientific evidence that this is so.

People are not at a disadvantage betting because of drugs. This is a silly agrument. It is a variable that cant be quantified. Unless you had some inside information that some undetectable drug was going to be used in a particular race you have no advantage either. I love it when i hear that a guy can tell who's horses are drugged and whose arent.

The betting angle should be to lower takeout and stop worrying about drugs. then you will have a better chance of winning.

[justindew]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Drugs have not weakened the breed. There is zero scientific evidence that this is so.

People are not at a disadvantage betting because of drugs. This is a silly agrument. It is a variable that cant be quantified. Unless you had some inside information that some undetectable drug was going to be used in a particular race you have no advantage either. I love it when i hear that a guy can tell who's horses are drugged and whose arent.

The betting angle should be to lower takeout and stop worrying about drugs. then you will have a better chance of winning.

1) So you do not buy the argument that the administration of legal and illegal drugs allows horses with genetic infirmities to prosper on the track, and then go on to careers at stud where they pass on those genetic infirmities to their offspring, who pass them on to their offspring, and so on?

2) Whether or not people are at a disadvantage because of drugs is 100% irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that the sport has such an awful image because of the cheating that goes on that people are hesitant to gamble on it. I know this for a fact, and I have numerous complusively gambling friends who wouldn't set foot in a racetrack because they believe they can't win. Maybe it is a variable that can't be quantified, but that doesn't make it a non-problem.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by justindew

Maybe years of being in the industry and seeing firsthand how f'ing stupid the decision makers are, by and large, has dampened the panel members' faith in the "host of people" you mention.

The NTRA has been around for 10 years with the goal of essentially making the sport more popular. What have they come up with? Go Baby Go!, and Win and You're In.

Brilliant.

The NTRA was designed as a marketing tool. Why anyone thought that it would or could serve as a league office is beyond me.

[justindew]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The NTRA was designed as a marketing tool. Why anyone thought that it would or could serve as a league office is beyond me.

I'm not implying that it was supposed to serve as a league office. My point is that it was set up by industry insiders to make the sport more poplular, and instead the sport has become less popular. This is but one example of why people like those on today's congressional panel may not be all that fired up to let the same industry insiders work towards solutions to racing's problems.