How low would it take?

[kinznk]

I read things on here about race tracks that are either dying, have low level horses, small fields, etc and players don't want to play them. My question is for players is; How low would the takeout have to be to make it your track of choice?

[cj]

I read things on here about race tracks that are either dying, have low level horses, small fields, etc and players don't want to play them. My question is for players is; How low would the takeout have to be to make it your track of choice?

Personally, the takeout is only one factor for me. Things like field size and integrity are also important. If the other things were not an issue, I'd say 10% would be fair on straight bets, 12 on two horse bets, 14 on 3, and 15 on anything above that.

[Robert Goren]

In order to completive with other bets, they would have to get it under 5%. Horse Racing is great game and I believe people would flock to it if the takeout was in the neighborhood of other types of gambling.

[greengorilla]

In my opinon its not the takeout. The reason some tracks are struggling with generating a reasonable daily handle while others are doing just fine. Is the lack of integrity of the track and it's officials, and lack of marketing the race track. When tracks run closer to form or when tracks have a significant track bias the handles always go up. When people feel cheated by riders (wrapping up before the finish line) or poor stewards decisions, or the majority of races almost never run to form. Gamblers avoid these tracks like the plague. Everyday gamblers impact the handle tremendously not once a week gamblers. There is very little dead money in our game these days, most handicappers are super sharp and have access to replays and all sorts of information at the touch of a button.

Along time ago a wise guy asked me would I rather play poker with 10 idiots with a 40%? cut or 10 pros with a 10% cut? you decide.

[JustRalph]

Personally, the takeout is only one factor for me. Things like field size and integrity are also important. If the other things were not an issue, I'd say 10% would be fair on straight bets, 12 on two horse bets, 14 on 3, and 15 on anything above that.

Took the words right out of my mouth.

I would add, "no super trainers"

They have pretty much put me out of the game.

I'm pretty sure that falls under "integrity" though

[iceknight]

I read things on here about race tracks that are either dying, have low level horses, small fields, etc and players don't want to play them. My question is for players is; How low would the takeout have to be to make it your track of choice? 1. Increase the integrity and make it uniform across all circuits/states. 2. Racing can lower the takeout by using the horses as advertising vehicles (in nascar etc companies pay megabucks for a small spot on them). Then we could have painted horses (I know I know) running the races while being thoroughbreds! [just to clarify: only being half serious here, the hedge/rail side of the horse can be left unpainted :p ]

That being said, then take out rates between 5-10% would be make me bet more. In this day, once the track payouts etc are automatically calculated using predesigned software/programs and a large amount of handle is handle electronically (so manpower is not being waste in punching tickets out for a dime super individually), it is also hard to stomach that single race exotics need to have a higher takeout than WPS wagers or multirace horizontal (exotics?). if tracks want more churn money.. would not it make sense to lower the takeout on single race wagers?

[green80]

keep in mind that a large part of the takeout goes to state taxes.

[classhandicapper]

I saw a race the other day where everyone at the track knew the entire key to the race was whether the 2 one dimensional speeds were going to hook up or whether one was going to try to rate or out-sprint the other.

A few seconds into the race, it became clear that one of them did out-break and outrun the other and was loose. A few seconds later the horse that got loose dropped sharply in odds.

People have been whining about this kind of thing for years now. It's about time it was changed. I would also be a lot easier to get done than lowering the take.

IMO, the pools have to be closed and the final odds posted BEFORE the race starts.

Otherwise, it doesn't matter whether it's all on the up and up or not. The perception is terrible given FACTUAL historical examples of past posting at some tracks. It's at the point where I am thinking of studying it manually to either alleviate my paranoia or be able to present evidence that will force a better look at the issue.

[cj]

keep in mind that a large part of the takeout goes to state taxes.

Define large? I think you'd be surprised at the breakdown in many states.

[1st time lasix]

***I already gravitate to low take out venues and low takeout pools. The 15% take on pick fives have made this my exotic play of choice. A few years ago I believe it was Ellis Park that moved the pick four to 4% on a trial basis..... and the pool exploded in growth. I won't play tris or supers in NY for example. The takeout hurdle is too onerous.

[therussmeister]

My question is for players is; How low would the takeout have to be to make it your track of choice?

I find it very difficult to identify any correlation between takeout and profitability in my results. Takeout is just one factor that determines profitability, and it is not so important that it overrides all the other factors.

[ronsmac]

keep in mind that a large part of the takeout goes to state taxes.The last time I checked Maryland took 0.5%. That was 25yrs ago, it may be nothingo now.

[JustRalph]

I find it very difficult to identify any correlation between takeout and profitability in my results. Takeout is just one factor that determines profitability, and it is not so important that it overrides all the other factors.

Really? So you don't care that you would win more on a nice exotic ?

Or to put it another way. You would return more for every wager that was a winner

A five percent difference in certain pools would be huge

[Robert Goren]

keep in mind that a large part of the takeout goes to state taxes. Just not true. I spent a couple of days googling this subject a couple years ago. You have to spend some time to get the numbers as they are pretty well buried, but they are there. Seldom does the state take more than 2 %. The average is probably less than 1 % and shrinking all the time. When I started betting 45 years ago it was 5% with total takeout of 12% in Nebraska where I live. Other states were in that ballpark. It is no longer a revenue source to do things not related to racing. Most the money, if not all of it, goes to pay for the regulation of the sport.

[Robert Goren]

I find it very difficult to identify any correlation between takeout and profitability in my results. Takeout is just one factor that determines profitability, and it is not so important that it overrides all the other factors.Actual it is. Drop the takeout by 10% points and see what it does to your bottom line.

[rastajenk]

A couple of thoughts here...I don't see how anyone can argue with theruss; he expressed his opinion that is right with himself. Now, if his regular tracks dropped their takes he would see a difference; but exporting his ways and means to a new track just because it has lower take is no guarantee at all he would have the same rate of success. If he chooses not to, who can tell him he's wrong?

How much of the regulatory/integrity burden are you as a bettor willing to bear? Is there an "optimum price point" that supports the stated desire of transparent integrity that isn't impacting your payoffs too negatively? If you want more and better testing, stiffer punishments (and quicker appeals), increased surveillance, and all that goes with it, you gotta lawyer up. Are you willing to kick in?

[Redboard]

I read things on here about race tracks that are either dying, have low level horses, small fields, etc and players don't want to play them. My question is for players is; How low would the takeout have to be to make it your track of choice?


I believe the takeout was 10% for the longest time, up until the 60s. Not sure though so maybe there's a racing historian here who can verify this.


10% would be nice.


Takeouts on multi-race bets do have a rationale for being higher, since the track takes nothing until the last leg(see Steven(sheesh) Crist's book, Exotic Betting. )


However, takoutes on vertical bets (exacta, super, tri's) should be the same as WPS, since the track gets their rake on every race.