Boycott of SA Organized for March 23-26

[HalvOnHorseracing]

I'm somewhat surprised the boycott being organized by Andy Asaro isn't getting more coverage. I've long argued that until horseplayers flex their muscle, there is no reason for track management to care about what we think. The tracks are usually most worried about the horsemen not the gamblers who essentially fund the track and everyone who races there. This blog from Pull the Pocket details why he is supporting the boycott.

http://pullthepocket.blogspot.com/2010/12/why-i-support-california-thoroughbred.html

[elhelmete]

The link points to a 7 year old article?

[HalvOnHorseracing]

The link points to a 7 year old article?

Same issue though.

[elhelmete]

So Andy's been organizing a current one?

Purses are down here....without the boycott.

[Jeff P]

So Andy's been organizing a current one?

Purses are down here....without the boycott.

I think that's the point.

SB1072 went into effect on Jan 01 2011.

That's the bill that brought 22.68% exacta takeout to Santa Anita, Del Mar, Golden Gate Fields, and the now closed Hollywood Park.

SB1072 also changed the revenue split between tracks and horsemen from 50% track 50% horsemen to 48% track 52% horsemen.

We were promised by then CHRB Chairman Keith Brackpool that higher takeout and the change in revenue split would create bigger purses, bigger field size and bigger bottom line revenue for tracks and state coffers.

If the provisions in SB1072 were ever going to work we should have seen some clear evidence of that over the past seven years.

But that is not the case.

SB1072 has not fulfilled any of the promises made by Keith Brackpool.

Instead SB1072 has enabled the following:​

* Acceleration of California's handle decline vs. the national average.

* California Exacta pools are now badly underperforming Exacta pools in New York.

* Lower bottom line revenue for tracks.

* Loss of jobs, layoffs, and reduced hours for track employees.

* Total purse money paid out is now lower, not higher.

* Decimated budgets for California alphabet organizations like the CHRB, TOC, CTT, and the DJF (disabled jockeys fund.)


It's time for a change in direction.



-jp

.

[lamboguy]

i am not in favor of organized boycotts for anything. the way i look at it people should be smart enough to make their own decisions. if they don't like the takeout or anything else that the track is doing it is certainly their prerogative not to patronize the business.

let the market dictate.

[Jeff P]

..let the market dictate.


One large player I know put it to me like this:I've bet a grand total of maybe $500 (non-BC days) on CA races since my boycott in 2010.

Handle in CA in 2006 was $4.2B, it's now $2.9B. Inflation adjusted to this year that's $5.3B vs. $2.9B.

Meanwhile big tracks like SAR, BEL, GP are all even or slightly up since 08.


I think the market has been trying to dictate.

They just haven’t been listening.



-jp

.

[cj]

I'm all for horseplayers doing something. It will always be tough to get everyone on board for anything. We are, after all, competitors. But Santa Anita is putting out a bad enough product that they are in essence seeing a boycott already. A lot of the races are just not very appetizing.

[Jeff P]

Totally agree with you CJ.

But just imagine what the races in California will look like if they keep doing the same thing for another seven years.



-jp

.

[Cratos]

I'm somewhat surprised the boycott being organized by Andy Asaro isn't getting more coverage. I've long argued that until horseplayers flex their muscle, there is no reason for track management to care about what we think. The tracks are usually most worried about the horsemen not the gamblers who essentially fund the track and everyone who races there. This blog from Pull the Pocket details why he is supporting the boycott.

http://pullthepocket.blogspot.com/2010/12/why-i-support-california-thoroughbred.html

I don’t subscribe to boycotts. I am a die-hard independent conservative who believes in a free market that is controlled by product quality and customer demand; and the principles of labor economics supports this concept.

Horseracing in California is in a regulated market (not a free market) controlled by the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB). The CHRB governs horseracing in both the physical and virtual world.

If Santa Anita is producing an inferior product with respect to customer demand, then it is incumbent for both Santa Anita management and its customers to lobby their respective state legislators for change.

However, if it is poor management then the Santa Anita customer should demand a change; again, through their legislators. Yes, bettors (customers) can reduce/stop wagering at Santa Anita and it will eventually become a “Hollywood Park.”

[whodoyoulike]

I'm somewhat surprised the boycott being organized by Andy Asaro isn't getting more coverage. I've long argued that until horseplayers flex their muscle, there is no reason for track management to care about what we think. The tracks are usually most worried about the horsemen not the gamblers who essentially fund the track and everyone who races there. This blog from Pull the Pocket details why he is supporting the boycott.

http://pullthepocket.blogspot.com/2010/12/why-i-support-california-thoroughbred.html

It's been my opinion for quite some time now that the track mgmts have always viewed that the horsemen were their only customers. And, the trainers viewed the horsemen as their only customers.

I can only guess what all of these parties think of the betting horse players. IMO, they (and probably) just barely tolerate us. You can tell from their decisions and actions.

[SuperPickle]

Totally agree with you CJ.

But just imagine what the races in California will look like if they keep doing the same thing for another seven years.



-jp

.


I can't imagine California racing in a decade. Imagine if Doc and Frank die and Hollendorffer and Baffert retire. You're talking about 2-3 tracks going away. You're talking about the guy with the best horses combined with the guy with the most. Baffert' owners will go east. Jerry's owners will most likely leave. He has an equity stake in most of the barn. That both allows him AND requires him to run horses in cheap spots. The system can't be replicated easy. You can't easily find a guy to buy into 30-40 horses and then operate 2-3 divisions.

[EMD4ME]

http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/horse-racing/emerald-downs-makes-a-profit-by-betting-on-families-enjoying-a-day-at-the-races/




EMERALD DOWNS WELCOMES YOU ;):jump:

[Track Phantom]

What is the fix? Is it assumed there are a multitude of horses sitting in barns and not running because there are no races that meet conditions? Or is Santa Anita mismanging something?

I agree the product is borderline unwatchable, not to mention unbettable. I just don't know what the answer is to improve it. If the very best track operators ever were in charge of this track, would their product be better?

[airford1]

Totally agree with you CJ.

But just imagine what the races in California will look like if they keep doing the same thing for another seven years.



-jp

.

They will be lucky to last 7 more years.

[airford1]

Horse racing has lost the players to the local Casinos and I don't think they can ever get the stands filled again.

[Greyfox]

Why boycott Santa Anita?

The takeout percentages for various North American tracks are listed at

http://www.sportsbettingacumen.com/horse-racing/takeout-chart-north-american-racetracks

There are other tracks who are taking higher percentages than Santa Anita.

[startngate]

Horseracing in California is in a regulated market (not a free market) controlled by the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB). The CHRB governs horseracing in both the physical and virtual world.

Incorrect. The TOC governs racing in California. The CHRB just likes to think it does. Therein lies the real problem.

[olddaddy]

Why boycott Santa Anita?

The takeout percentages for various North American tracks are listed at

http://www.sportsbettingacumen.com/horse-racing/takeout-chart-north-american-racetracks

There are other tracks who are taking higher percentages than Santa Anita.

Those takeouts appear to be at least 3 years old. I know they have changed but dont know how much.

[thaskalos]

Pennsylvania Racing runs a thriving casino business...and still skims off 31% from the trifecta pools. And we are boycotting CALIFORNIA? :confused:

[Maximillion]

It seems like there is no continuity to the way most of the horses are entered there,at least on dirt.
Run/Layoff/Run/Layoff etc. is standard,and for me thats almost as bad as the short fields.

[Andy Asaro]

California is being boycotted because of the jackpot provision being paid to the jackpot with the surface change when everyone was given ALL in the last race. The 15% should be paid out when there is an all race because the chances of a single ticket are much less likely.

There have been problems with this wager going back to last year at GG, then at Del Mar, and now this. The bet should have been suspended until such time as the rule was fixed where it paid out the 15% in the event of an all race in the P6.

The CHRB and Santa Anita didn't even know why we were pissed off. They had no idea that the 15% being paid to the jackpot was the reason. They thought it was over a unique ticket and the jackpot being paid if there was one ticket with 5. I was the first person they contacted because of my email list of Gamblers and Industry Insiders that I blast just about every day several times a day. Most of the CHRB Board members are on it, so are TOC officials, and Track Execs. In recent years the CHRB spokesperson Mike Marten will hit reply to all to reply to an email containing a complaint. This guy is the only real expert at the CHRB and I don't know of any jurisdiction with someone like him answering questions sometimes withing minutes but usually within hours of an email/incident.

We have an old score to settle with California Racing which is now failing badly. They seem to care less and less about integrity as they become more desperate for revenue. Take how the fairs handle their jackpot bet. There is no particular mandatory payout for each fair meet. They carryover into the next meet. Most people don't know that and the dumb money helps the jackpot go higher with no mandatory payout. They disclose this is fine print somewhere on the website while insisting that they are informing the public. Bullshit.

As far as the boycott in 2011 goes we got the Players Pick 5 at 14% take and that has proven to be a huge success over the years. In addition the DD's are now 20% which is less than it was before the takeout hike. Additionally they were going to raise WPS to 17% if there was no pushback. They were wrong about pushback. Ca. was on pace to be down 450 million until H.P. put in the P5. That effectively stopped the boycott and handle ended up about 250 million down. I often lament the fact that if I knew then what I know now I would have never suggested and pushed for the wager. The boycott would have been devastating to the point that they would have been forced to make many more changes. But, how could anyone know that after the success of the P5 that they would do nothing since when it comes to takeout and wagering menu adjustments of any significance?

HANA has now taken the word of an employee of Santa Anita who said he had a message from Joe Morris of a promise to fix the rule. When have they ever followed through on a promise like this? How about never. The Letter to Frank Stronach was my idea because there are high level meetings being held since Monday. The hope was that Frank or Belinda would see the letter at the beginning of the meetings so they could make a more informed decision (neither one of them know much about anything that has gone on since the boycott). By not sending it Monday afternoon we lost that edge which may have prompted an immediate fix since the boycott isn't until next week from March 23rd to March 26th. It was intended to present a new boycott model to take around the country if it worked. The premise being that if a jurisdiction screws up the pay an almost immediate loss of revenue penalty. I was figuring that if it worked we would move on to Gulfstream next mainly over chronically mistiming races and extreme post dragging.

Even though HANA has backed out of the boycott some of us are going through with it on principle even though it is much less likely that we can hurt them. Most of the people being ripped off by jackpot bets are those that don't know a lot about gambling IMO. People who are being ripped off and who don't know better need HANA all the more but it seems that they are being ignored in this situation.

As far as my solution for California Racing you can click this link.

http://www.paulickreport.com/horseplayers-category/asaro-ground-zero-in-fight-for-future-of-horse-racing/

Both Jim Gagliano of the Jockey Club and Alex Waldrop of the NTRA have to help promote Ca. Racing as a test jurisdiction for selling racing as a gambling game of skill. As far as I know it would be the first time that has been done. The free publicity after the changes would be worth hundredths of thousands of dollars and help generate millions in increased revenue IMO.

BTW the link provided in the direct message on Twitter was to the old rules. When I first got it I assumed they were the new rules. They were not.

This situation should piss everyone off and everyone should want a rapid response boycott model if there is one. This would have been an experiment that may have resulted in that model.

Remember that when something happens that hurts the integrity we have to stand up together to change an injustice. Even if we aren't successful in getting change not standing up at all is much worse IMO.

A

[Andy Asaro]

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/Ante-Post/


The greatest racetrack robbery this side of The Grifters took place Sunday at Santa Anita. If you missed it, the last race was taken off wet turf. Since the decision was announced after betting had opened, it made the race an “all” in the Pick 6 and Pick 4.

According to the single ticket jackpot rules of the Pick 6, the “all” dictated there could be no jackpot winner. Nevertheless, Santa Anita carried over the 15 percent set aside for days when there isn’t a single winner. So bettors couldn’t win but they could lose. Do that in other gambling games and someone calls the cops.

[cj]

Pennsylvania Racing runs a thriving casino business...and still skims off 31% from the trifecta pools. And we are boycotting CALIFORNIA? :confused:


You can't boycott a product hardly anyone buys.

[cj]

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/Ante-Post/


The greatest racetrack robbery this side of The Grifters took place Sunday at Santa Anita. If you missed it, the last race was taken off wet turf. Since the decision was announced after betting had opened, it made the race an “all” in the Pick 6 and Pick 4.

According to the single ticket jackpot rules of the Pick 6, the “all” dictated there could be no jackpot winner. Nevertheless, Santa Anita carried over the 15 percent set aside for days when there isn’t a single winner. So bettors couldn’t win but they could lose. Do that in other gambling games and someone calls the cops.

Just to be a little fair, as was pointed out in the other thread, one all race doesn't exclude the possibility of a single winner. It is extremely unlikely but is possible.

That said, even if true, Santa Anita surely could have checked and known if it were possible at the time the decision was made. If not, they shouldn't keep the 15%. The problem is the people in charge don't fully understand the complex bets they are offering.

[therussmeister]

Should I start playing Santa Anita now so I can boycott it?

[AskinHaskin]

LOL - what is that blowhard talking about?


It was only apathy that "stopped the (2011) SA boycott" before it really ever started, as was certain to be the case even before it was supposed to begin.


And what idiot would endorse not playing by the rules in place at the moment a contest began? "...boycotted because of the jackpot provision being paid to the jackpot with the surface change when everyone was given ALL in the last race."


This is somebody whose position on various industry issues you really want to listen to?


The kicker is when he offers a link to a story written at the end of 2015 in which he supposedly writes:

"A simple change to eliminate breakage on WPS bets by paying to the penny will be one of the most talked about stories of 2016."


Did anybody hear anything beyond mumbling on such a topic during the entire calendar year ???

And how did the magnitude of that story/subject compare with, say, Donald Trump ??


Don't forget this is the same fool who once forecast that Canterbury's live handle for the 2016 race meeting (would) "be up 40-50%".



Seldom before has there been a better example for the old adage:


"you can not become part of the solution until you cease to be the problem"

[ribjig]

First track offering WPS betting at break-even
takeout, say, 8% to cover costs, to attract
more exotic betting would reach $5M daily handle
& multiple $100K+ purses daily within 3 years, IMO...

Other tracks forced to lower takeouts, too... :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

Wishing a Native American tribe with deep pockets
from casino profits & proud of their horse cultural
history would realize this!!!!!!!!

[EMD4ME]

First track offering WPS betting at break-even
takeout, say, 8% to cover costs, to attract
more exotic betting would reach $5M daily handle
& multiple $100K+ purses daily within 3 years, IMO...

Other tracks forced to lower takeouts, too... :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

Wishing a Native American tribe with deep pockets
from casino profits & proud of their horse cultural
history would realize this!!!!!!!!

Did you say Emerald? :)

They just lowered their P7 and P5, so I would not be surprised if they make another move relatively soon. All good news coming out of Washington past couple of years.

To the Northwestern PA members, thoughts?

[cj]

LOL - what is that blowhard talking about?


It was only apathy that "stopped the (2011) SA boycott" before it really ever started, as was certain to be the case even before it was supposed to begin.


And what idiot would endorse not playing by the rules in place at the moment a contest began? "...boycotted because of the jackpot provision being paid to the jackpot with the surface change when everyone was given ALL in the last race."


This is somebody whose position on various industry issues you really want to listen to?


The kicker is when he offers a link to a story written at the end of 2015 in which he supposedly writes:

"A simple change to eliminate breakage on WPS bets by paying to the penny will be one of the most talked about stories of 2016."


Did anybody hear anything beyond mumbling on such a topic during the entire calendar year ???

And how did the magnitude of that story/subject compare with, say, Donald Trump ??


Don't forget this is the same fool who once forecast that Canterbury's live handle for the 2016 race meeting (would) "be up 40-50%".



Seldom before has there been a better example for the old adage:


"you can not become part of the solution until you cease to be the problem"

Calling someone names is pretty juvenile. Make your point without acting like a third grade bully please or keep them to yourself.

[ultracapper]

Did you say Emerald? :)

They just lowered their P7 and P5, so I would not be surprised if they make another move relatively soon. All good news coming out of Washington past couple of years.

To the Northwestern PA members, thoughts?

I don't have anything to add at the present, but I'm getting a little interested in the local product again. I think I may moasy on down there soon after they open. See which way the wind's blowing.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Did you say Emerald? :)

They just lowered their P7 and P5, so I would not be surprised if they make another move relatively soon. All good news coming out of Washington past couple of years.

To the Northwestern PA members, thoughts?

What kind of daily handle is EmD doing?

I've been a big fish in a small pond. There was a time when me and two friends were actually 1% of a daily handle. In essence we were either betting against each other, or killing our prices.

I've had plenty of small track experience, and I found it i possible to muscle your way to winnings. There was a superfecta on the last race that had a $1 minimum bet. Pools might be $1,400-$1,500. I estimated that 40-60% of the combinations were not covered. So as you can imagine there were a lot of payoffs to "ALL" in the fourth position, and even in the third position. So I would bet maybe 2 X 3 X ALL X (two outless horses). The idea was if I caught the exacta and the super paid to the ALL in the fourth slot, or was going to pay to all in the third slot, I'd potentially have it twice, and if one of the outless horses came in I'd probably have a pool shot. Generally I'd invest $100 and get a payoff at 10 or 12-1.

Interesting story. I'm doing this a few weeks, stealing money as it were. One day I make my bet, and the horse on top is 20-1 and one of the outless horses finishes fourth, so I have an actually winning ticket. The prices come up and I get about half of the pool. Next day same thing happens. Turns out one other guy figured out the same pari-mutuel play I did.

Anyway, the point is that there have to be enough little fish so the big fish don't start feeding on each other.

[EMD4ME]

What kind of daily handle is EmD doing?

I've been a big fish in a small pond. There was a time when me and two friends were actually 1% of a daily handle. In essence we were either betting against each other, or killing our prices.

I've had plenty of small track experience, and I found it i possible to muscle your way to winnings. There was a superfecta on the last race that had a $1 minimum bet. Pools might be $1,400-$1,500. I estimated that 40-60% of the combinations were not covered. So as you can imagine there were a lot of payoffs to "ALL" in the fourth position, and even in the third position. So I would bet maybe 2 X 3 X ALL X (two outless horses). The idea was if I caught the exacta and the super paid to the ALL in the fourth slot, or was going to pay to all in the third slot, I'd potentially have it twice, and if one of the outless horses came in I'd probably have a pool shot. Generally I'd invest $100 and get a payoff at 10 or 12-1.

Interesting story. I'm doing this a few weeks, stealing money as it were. One day I make my bet, and the horse on top is 20-1 and one of the outless horses finishes fourth, so I have an actually winning ticket. The prices come up and I get about half of the pool. Next day same thing happens. Turns out one other guy figured out the same pari-mutuel play I did.

Anyway, the point is that there have to be enough little fish so the big fish don't start feeding on each other.

It depends on the race. 1st race might handle $50-75k. Then race 5 (peak simulcast time) they can hit $150k.

Without looking , Id say they average almost $100k a race.

[Andy Asaro]

This from today on HRI. Don't necessarily agree with Tom's opinion on why HANA isn't participating in the boycott.

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/Ante-Post/comments/the-road-to-louisville-goes-through-tampa/#comments

Excerpt:

Boycott is on.

A reminder: West Coast racing activist and advocate Andy Asaro has called for a boycott of betting on Santa Anita from March 23-26. This is to protest Santa Anita taking 15 percent of the pool of Jackpot 6 bets even when a race is declared an all because of a surface switch, meaning you can't win but you can lose.

[Andy Asaro]

Just received from CHRB spokesperson:

Andy

Santa Anita management has discussed with the CHRB tweaking the jackpot Pick 6 rule, so that the 15 percent would be paid out when there is a late surface change resulting in an All Win race. If and when Santa Anita submits a proposed change to the current structure, the Board will consider it.

Someone has some splaining to do.

[JohnGalt1]

What was wrong with the old rules?

They got a good handle for the pick 6. Most tracks would kill for that $50k-100k with out a carry over. And even with all the tickets generated, they still had many days with a carry over.

They always paid 5 of 6. and that's called churn, a great thing.

I've won 10 pick sixes and I can't remember the last time I played one, since I hate sucker jackpot bets.

How much do you collect on 5 of 6 at Gulfstream?

Nada.

"Sir, you need to use new money to bet it tomorrow."

No thanks.

[Andy Asaro]

P6 handle has been declining for years. Especially since the takeout hike. They did this IMO because the biggest players want to be able to scoop the pool. Del Mar always referred to focus groups that thought this was a good idea which is hysterical.

They need to go to 50 cents. If they want a jackpot make the take 16% and put 4% or 5% to the jackpot. Or, have no jackpot at all. I'm pretty sure that at 50 cents it will handle a lot more on a daily average than it did at $2. The big players tell them they want them to keep it at $2

[ronsmac]

P6 handle has been declining for years. Especially since the takeout hike. They did this IMO because the biggest players want to be able to scoop the pool. Del Mar always referred to focus groups that thought this was a good idea which is hysterical.

They need to go to 50 cents. If they want a jackpot make the take 16% and put 4% or 5% to the jackpot. Or, have no jackpot at all. I'm pretty sure that at 50 cents it will handle a lot more on a daily average than it did at $2. The big players tell them they want them to keep it at $2Do you know why pick 3 has a dollar minimum instead of 50 cents?

[Andy Asaro]

Do you know why pick 3 has a dollar minimum instead of 50 cents?

The bigger players go nuts with lower minimums and that's who they cater to. Plus the fields are kind a short to have a 50 cent minimum IMO.

[Tom]

I've been boycotting SA and GP since the first boycott years ago.

Youse guys gave in too easy.:pound:

[Andy Asaro]

I've been boycotting SA and GP since the first boycott years ago.

Youse guys gave in too easy.:pound:

Agree, and it's partly my fault.

[elhelmete]

The thing about a very short term boycott is that it's often hard to isolate its effect. There's always some other plausible, if barely, reason that can be offered for a dip in handle on one or two days.

Accordingly, I always thought this was a better alternative to a boycott:

Pick ONE race, ideally a ham-and-eggs race that's run often. Let's say a $25K claimer one mile on the main.

Convince the same audience that's willing to boycott to instead bet their entire day's bankroll on that ONE race and ONE race only. Perhaps even all in one pool.

If it works, you should see a massive, unexpected spike in pools for that one race compared to very similar races in the recent past.

As a bonus, you could theoretically prove someone's participation by having them show their betting slips. Can't prove that someone DIDN'T bet.

THAT would get my attention.

[Andy Asaro]

The thing about a very short term boycott is that it's often hard to isolate its effect. There's always some other plausible, if barely, reason that can be offered for a dip in handle on one or two days.

Accordingly, I always thought this was a better alternative to a boycott:

Pick ONE race, ideally a ham-and-eggs race that's run often. Let's say a $25K claimer one mile on the main.

Convince the same audience that's willing to boycott to instead bet their entire day's bankroll on that ONE race and ONE race only. Perhaps even all in one pool.

If it works, you should see a massive, unexpected spike in pools for that one race compared to very similar races in the recent past.

As a bonus, you could theoretically prove someone's participation by having them show their betting slips. Can't prove that someone DIDN'T bet.

THAT would get my attention.

In a perfect world the one race thing makes sense. It is extremely difficult to get Horseplayers to agree on anything. This was supposed to be 1 or 2 weeks. Santa Anita is already hurting with handle down significantly this year. If we could knock down handle 25% or more for a week or two the P6 rule would be changed. The loss of revenue would kill them and be payback for what happened with the 15% to jackpot. With HANA's help the model would have been like a "if you do this then we do that" model that could be replicated in other jurisdictions.

It appears that Santa Anita feels no sense of urgency to correct the problem and IMO doesn't give a damn. What happens boost the jackpot and creates more handle. It's revenue by any means necessary these days in California. That's why boycotting from the 23rd to the 26th is so important. We either take it (and it's getting worse year over year) of we fight and that's a no brainer to me.

This Industry has a "shut up and bet" attitude IMO and we see it all the time in most jurisdictions.

[Andy Asaro]

Just go this from Mike Marten of the CHRB:

Andy, > We received a communication from Joe Morris yesterday stating that they will be submitting a request to change the P6. No details but to me it seems obvious they will be asking to distribute the 15 percent. What else could it be?

My response was:

Ok, I’ll send it out but you ought to tell him to be specific and explain the process and the timeline.

A

I don't assume anything with these people anymore. We'll see how timely the request is and how long it will take to make the changes. The right thing to do is have a mandatory payout Sunday and suspend the jackpot portion of the wager until the rule is fixed.

[Andy Asaro]

Heard this second hand but now Santa Anita wants to put it on the agenda for the next CHRB meeting. Normally you can't add an agenda item this late but the pressure is getting to them and they can't afford a boycott even if they're only down 5%.

Half the battle is convincing them that you're serious. With HANA backing out it really hurt the effort. Hopefully this will be resolved quickly without a boycott

[HalvOnHorseracing]

If horseplayers don't speak with their money, what other options do they have to influence policies that are often either for the horsemen or the betting whales?

I don't have a real dog in the fight. I stay away from betting SA and I only play the P-6 when the pot gets huge. But whether or not you believe SA was unfair in how they managed the jackpot bet, I'm supportive of the idea that we can't continue to function in a way that de facto sends the message we'll put up with anything. You can't play the boycott card for just anything, but there are 22 American tracks running. Surely not betting one of them for a few days is not too much to ask to send an important message. Track owners think they are the lynchpin because without tracks there isn't racing. Horsemen think they are the lynchpin because without them there wouldn't be horses to run. But the real base of the pyramid is the bettors. Without us it doesn't matter if there are tracks or horses.

[Parkview_Pirate]

i am not in favor of organized boycotts for anything. the way i look at it people should be smart enough to make their own decisions. if they don't like the takeout or anything else that the track is doing it is certainly their prerogative not to patronize the business.

let the market dictate.

I would agree with you in principal, but it's not easy for the average player to keep up with all the changes going on at every track they may play. So one aspect I like about organized/attempted boycotts is that they can bring their grievances to the attention of those who aren't paying attention to all the minutia. HANA does have some good info on tracks and their friendliness to the players, but the data gets dated pretty quickly.

[Parkview_Pirate]

Did you say Emerald? :)

They just lowered their P7 and P5, so I would not be surprised if they make another move relatively soon. All good news coming out of Washington past couple of years.

To the Northwestern PA members, thoughts?

I know you love that track, and PM, but both of them would have to drop to single digit takeout before I thought about playing them. EMD is a merry go round, as bad as Maywood Park on Stakes Night. No thanks.

Personally, I'm hoping for Oaklawn to lead the charge with the single digit takeout on WPS wagers. Their onsite bonus for show wagers appears to be a real boon for those that make those wagers.

[Andy Asaro]

Sent to list this morning.

We are still boycotting until we have the steps that are being taken in writing. If it takes weeks or months to change the jackpot terms then that’s not good enough.

Where’s the press release Santa Anita?

[AndyC]

Any boycott should have happened when they changed the P-6 to a jackpot bet. The effective takeout makes the bet unplayable on just about every day except the days when the jackpot must be paid. If the boycott were to be effective and the P-6 rule for change of surface was changed then the narrative would be that the track was looking out for the horseplayers. To pick a fight to change a really lousy bet to just a horrible bet is a waste of time and energy.

[spiketoo]

Couldn't agree more with Andy C. Been boycotting every P6 that has this hellacious bet.

Andy A couldn't your time be spent on more productive endeavors?

[Andy Asaro]

Any boycott should have happened when they changed the P-6 to a jackpot bet. The effective takeout makes the bet unplayable on just about every day except the days when the jackpot must be paid. If the boycott were to be effective and the P-6 rule for change of surface was changed then the narrative would be that the track was looking out for the horseplayers. To pick a fight to change a really lousy bet to just a horrible bet is a waste of time and energy.

I'm not a HANA Board member so getting them to do anything in that regard is impossible.

Doesn't cost anyone anything to take a stand now and cost them some revenue. They took the 15% (25K to 30K) and put it in the jackpot when they should have distributed. And until yesterday had not notified the CHRB that they wanted to change the terms. Now they are trying to get it on the meeting agenda which is rare this late. They didn't even know what they did was wrong. They initially thought it was over the one unique ticket with 5 instead of 6 taking the jackpot.

The put in the bet with a flawed rule and that should have been addressed last year. We should have boycotted then. We can't do anything about water under the bridge. What we can do is stand on principle and boycott the 23rd to the 26th to cost them some revenue.

The potential boycott has already worked to a certain extent. They saw nothing wrong but now they do under pressure from a boycott. If HANA changes it's mind and puts out a press release most the news sites will run it. That's crucial to a successful boycott (20% down or more)

There are always people who split hairs or don't want to boycott for whatever reason. We deserve what we get if we aren't united and don't stand up whenever something like this happens. That was second purpose of the boycott as I stated earlier. If this model is successful it could be used as a rapid response in other jurisdiction. Looks like we'll never know.

[AndyC]

I'm not a HANA Board member so getting them to do anything in that regard is impossible.

Doesn't cost anyone anything to take a stand now and cost them some revenue. They took the 15% (25K to 30K) and put it in the jackpot when they should have distributed. And until yesterday had not notified the CHRB that they wanted to change the terms. Now they are trying to get it on the meeting agenda which is rare this late. They didn't even know what they did was wrong. They initially thought it was over the one unique ticket with 5 instead of 6 taking the jackpot.

The put in the bet with a flawed rule and that should have been addressed last year. We should have boycotted then. We can't do anything about water under the bridge. What we can do is stand on principle and boycott the 23rd to the 26th to cost them some revenue.

The potential boycott has already worked to a certain extent. They saw nothing wrong but now they do under pressure from a boycott. If HANA changes it's mind and puts out a press release most the news sites will run it. That's crucial to a successful boycott (20% down or more)

There are always people who split hairs or don't want to boycott for whatever reason. We deserve what we get if we aren't united and don't stand up whenever something like this happens. That was second purpose of the boycott as I stated earlier. If this model is successful it could be used as a rapid response in other jurisdiction. Looks like we'll never know.


My point was that the bet is lousy with or without the flaw. There are many potential good bets that should warrant the time and energy of players who bet for reasons other than pure amusement.

[spiketoo]

...There are always people who split hairs...

Well that's constructive. His point obviously is that why spend the effort to 'fix' something that's hopelessly broken? I mean c'mon - even the lottery pays their 'normal' entire carryover pool to multiple winners! Oh wait...

Honestly I hit more 5s than 6s and cutting my consols in half just to create a 'jackpot' on top of a P6 is just ludicrous. That is Marketing's idea of drawing in new fans eh?

[Andy Asaro]

My point was that the bet is lousy with or without the flaw. There are many potential good bets that should warrant the time and energy of players who bet for reasons other than pure amusement.

Of course it's not a great bet.......that is unless you really like a 3 or 4 singles at 5-1 or better and the jackpot is big enough like it is today. I haven't handicapped the races but if you think Enola Grey and Vale Dori are vulnerable it may be worth it providing you have the 3 or 4 singles at 5-1 and higher.

Point is we can make the effort to do something about it or not. I don't blame anyone who isn't into the boycott but those who aren't into it should remember that those who are will be standing up for something they believe it whether or not handle is up or down during boycott.

[Jeff P]

On March 05, 2016 the last race at Santa Anita came off the turf and was made an ALL per the rule they are using for the single jackpot P6.

CJ summed it perfectly with posts #1, #6, and #10 in this thread:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=136817

Post #1:Last race comes off turf because jockeys say it is dangerous. First, they didn't tell anyone until after the 7th even though there were no intervening turf races.

But the real problem is in the P6 rules. Santa Anita pays out 70% to those that hit all 6, 15% to consos, and carries over 15% if there isn't a single winning ticket. But they made the last race an all, so there is NO CHANCE of a single winning ticket. Yet they are just carrying over the 15% anyway, essentially stealing it from bettors.

It is published beforehand, so buyer beware. That still doesn't make it right. These jackpot bets open up way too many cans of worms for me.

Post #6:The right thing to do would be pay out all the money that was bet yesterday in this situation, not every day.

Post #10:I'd write the rule so that if any race comes off the turf, resulting in an "all", the entire amount bet that day is paid out. Of course any carryover from prior days wouldn't be included in that.

Upon reading CJ's posts in the above linked to thread - I did the unthinkable.

I picked up the phone and contacted the CHRB. I directed them to CJ's thread - and explained to them why players believe the current rule is a bad rule.

Then I asked: "What's the best way to get a bad rule changed?"

My contact at the CHRB advised me that the first step would be to get Santa Anita involved. He explained it to me like this:

"Jeff, if you can get Santa Anita on board in asking for a rules change - at that point I think the CHRB would be willing to go to bat for you."

So from there I contacted track management at Santa Anita by email. I directed them to CJ's thread and explained why I thought the current rule was a bad rule - and that I thought it could be turned into a better rule by following CJ's suggestion:

Post #10:I'd write the rule so that if any race comes off the turf, resulting in an "all", the entire amount bet that day is paid out. Of course any carryover from prior days wouldn't be included in that.

Track management at Santa Anita got back to me right away and we had a phone conversation. They told me they were open to getting the rule changed and that they would be getting in touch with the CHRB to figure out how the rule should be reworded and to discuss the path of least resistance for effecting a rules change.

On Tues march 14, 2017 the HANA Board met via conference call.

Two of the items discussed on that call were the March 05, 2017 incident at Santa Anita and Andy's proposed boycott.

Because the CHRB and Santa Anita had both already agreed in principle to work together (on behalf of horseplayers no less) to get the rule changed:

The HANA Board decided to take the CHRB and Santa Anita at their word and not to boycott at this time.

Now at least you know why the HANA Board decided not to boycott.

I've had several follow up emails and phone calls with the CHRB and Santa Anita since.

Right now as I type this I have every reason to believe they actually are working as quickly as they can to get the rule changed. Also, if I can believe what I'm being told, in addition to Santa Anita, Del Mar is apparently on board with the suggested rules change.

Look. I'm certainly not a fan when it comes to the proliferation of single jackpot bets.

But if you are a major racetrack and you are going to insist on having a single jackpot bet for your P6:

The very least you can do is get the best possible rule in place.





-jp

.

[EasyGoer89]

Of course it's not a great bet.......that is unless you really like a 3 or 4 singles at 5-1 or better and the jackpot is big enough like it is today. I haven't handicapped the races but if you think Enola Grey and Vale Dori are vulnerable it may be worth it providing you have the 3 or 4 singles at 5-1 and higher.

Point is we can make the effort to do something about it or not. I don't blame anyone who isn't into the boycott but those who aren't into it should remember that those who are will be standing up for something they believe it whether or not handle is up or down during boycott.

Jeffs post 56 says the chrb and SA are working in good faith to make changes, do you call off the boycott and give them a shot to work thru the administrative and legal wranglings?

Shouldn't boycotts be held back when tracks and racing commissions refuse to make changes that are needed?

There are only so many boycotts that can be instituted before some of them lose their effectiveness. What if something happens in near future where you really need to boycott, would you feel you 'wasted' a boycott on this, or, are there an unlimited number of boycotts that can be used?

[Andy Asaro]

Jeffs post 56 says the chrb and SA are working in good faith to make changes, do you call off the boycott and give them a shot to work thru the administrative and legal wranglings?

Shouldn't boycotts be held back when tracks and racing commissions refuse to make changes that are needed?

There are only so many boycotts that can be instituted before some of them lose their effectiveness. What if something happens in near future where you really need to boycott, would you feel you 'wasted' a boycott on this, or, are there an unlimited number of boycotts that can be used?

No, since when has their word been any good. No such thing as good faith with them.

If they had good faith they would have submitted it for the CHRB meeting agenda the week after it happened. They just started the process of putting it on the agenda a couple days ago. When I asked Mike Marten earlier in the week he emailed this back:


We received a communication from Joe Morris yesterday stating that they will be submitting a request to change the P6.

My response was:

Ok, I’ll send it out but you ought to tell him to be specific and explain the process and the timeline.


I don't assume anything with these people anymore. We'll see how timely the request is and how long it will take to make the changes. The right thing to do is have a mandatory payout Sunday and suspend the jackpot portion of the wager until the rule is fixed.

Some of us never quit,

A

And by the way Santa Anita NEVER put out an official press release admitting to the problem with a timeline to fix it. Also seeding a pool with 30k would have been a sign of good faith. Bottom line is that Santa Anita is full of sh*t and the CHRB should never have approved the rule in the first place. Then after problems surfaces last year they should have suspended the wager until the rule was fixed and didn't.

[Poindexter]

No, since when has their word been any good. No such thing as good faith with them.

If they had good faith they would have submitted it for the CHRB meeting agenda the week after it happened. They just started the process of putting it on the agenda a couple days ago. When I asked Mike Marten earlier in the week he emailed this back:


We received a communication from Joe Morris yesterday stating that they will be submitting a request to change the P6.

My response was:

Ok, I’ll send it out but you ought to tell him to be specific and explain the process and the timeline.


I don't assume anything with these people anymore. We'll see how timely the request is and how long it will take to make the changes. The right thing to do is have a mandatory payout Sunday and suspend the jackpot portion of the wager until the rule is fixed.

Some of us never quit,

A

And by the way Santa Anita NEVER put out an official press release admitting to the problem with a timeline to fix it. Also seeding a pool with 30k would have been a sign of good faith. Bottom line is that Santa Anita is full of sh*t and the CHRB should never have approved the rule in the first place. Then after problems surfaces last year they should have suspended the wager until the rule was fixed and didn't.

Easy Goer is right. If they are planning to make changes, let them make the changes. Unlikely there will be a surface change anytime soon. If they tell you they are working on it, I assume it will get done before the next surface change. Why waste the boycott on something they are planning to take care of. If they go back on their word, then you boycott hard and I will even join in. If you do not give them a chance to fix there mistake, they will have little motivation to work with you and respect you in the future (JMO).

[Andy Asaro]

Easy Goer is right. If they are planning to make changes, let them make the changes. Unlikely there will be a surface change anytime soon. If they tell you they are working on it, I assume it will get done before the next surface change. Why waste the boycott on something they are planning to take care of. If they go back on their word, then you boycott hard and I will even join in. If you do not give them a chance to fix there mistake, they will have little motivation to work with you and respect you in the future (JMO).

Boycott isn't wasted for those who want to stand on principle. It will likely have no big effect without HANA following the plan.

This problem started last year and they haven't made changes. The only way this came to light is the heat on Twitter and on my email list which was immediate and several times since. HANA made no mention of the incident on the blog.

If they were serious about fixing it they wouldn't have notified the CHRB only AFTER I sent out the email saying there was no formal request.

As I outlined earlier this was supposed to be use as an experiment for a quick response model. When these things happen there is a lot of outrage but Tracks and Governing bodies know that the longer it goes the less people care. That's been a successful model for them for decades.

[EasyGoer89]

No, since when has their word been any good. No such thing as good faith with them.

If they had good faith they would have submitted it for the CHRB meeting agenda the week after it happened. They just started the process of putting it on the agenda a couple days ago. When I asked Mike Marten earlier in the week he emailed this back:


We received a communication from Joe Morris yesterday stating that they will be submitting a request to change the P6.

My response was:

Ok, I’ll send it out but you ought to tell him to be specific and explain the process and the timeline.


I don't assume anything with these people anymore. We'll see how timely the request is and how long it will take to make the changes. The right thing to do is have a mandatory payout Sunday and suspend the jackpot portion of the wager until the rule is fixed.

Some of us never quit,

A

And by the way Santa Anita NEVER put out an official press release admitting to the problem with a timeline to fix it. Also seeding a pool with 30k would have been a sign of good faith. Bottom line is that Santa Anita is full of sh*t and the CHRB should never have approved the rule in the first place. Then after problems surfaces last year they should have suspended the wager until the rule was fixed and didn't.

I appreciate the passion and all the work you do for the players, I'm just thinking out loud (like Ed sheeran might) if a boycott is appropriate now knowing what we know. Just something to consider as I do believe you don't want to be the people who boycott at the drop of a hat. Is this a serious issue? Sure, no doubt, they're all serious, there might be something more needing of a boycott down the line, if you pull back this boycott the later one might be more effective, just food for thought.

[Andy Asaro]

I appreciate the passion and all the work you do for the players, I'm just thinking out loud (like Ed sheeran might) if a boycott is appropriate now knowing what we know. Just something to consider as I do believe you don't want to be the people who boycott at the drop of a hat. Is this a serious issue? Sure, no doubt, they're all serious, there might be something more needing of a boycott down the line, if you pull back this boycott the later one might be more effective, just food for thought.

I get it.

I look at this situation as if it were stealing the 15% toward the jackpot when it should have been distributed. This isn't the first time it's about the third or fourth time. The CHRB abdicated its responsibility when it approved the bet and when it didn't have the bet suspended pending an alteration of the rule. Now, because they don't expect this to happen again they're dragging their feet. No excuse for what's gone on.

I'm standing on principle here because there hasn't been much publicity at all. When HANA refused to boycott AND didn't even write the open letter to the Stronach group the effectiveness of the boycott in terms of handle being down is not much at all. What will happen is that the people who boycott (some already are) can say that they stood up for what's right not because they knew they would win but because it was the right thing to do.

No boycott = No deterrent in the future IMO

[Andy Asaro]

Just got this a few minutes ago from CHRB Spokesperson Mike Marten.

There are have been ongoing discussions with Santa Anita about their intent. We anticipate an official request soon. We will keep you informed.

[Andy Asaro]

Don't want to start a new thread about his cuz it doen't merit it so I'll post it here.

Been invited to go on the Little Red Feather Podcast at 12:15 PM pacific time. Not sure what he's going to ask me about so that's why I'm posting it here.

For those of you who don't know Billy he is a stand up guy. During the boycott in 2011 he did a ton of work showing up at meetings and trying to bring sides together. In October of 2010 Roger Way and I were on a conference call with Billy and his good friend Frank M. They were trying to help get the P5 in to avoid that boycott. So we see Billy a lot on TVG and most of us know he's half of Little Red Feather but I doubt many people know what a stand up guy he has been trying to help California Racing. BTW Santa Anita refused to put in the P5 in late 2010 and they had the worst meet ever. Believe it was the first time Hollywood Park outhandled them in their spring meet. Later that year Scott Daruty told me that he wishes he had put it in given that disaster of a meet.

Here's a link http://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/podcast/

I don't know if you have to click on the link by his profile or not.

[elhelmete]

Don't want to start a new thread about his cuz it doen't merit it so I'll post it here.

Been invited to go on the Little Red Feather Podcast at 12:15 PM pacific time. Not sure what he's going to ask me about so that's why I'm posting it here.

For those of you who don't know Billy he is a stand up guy. During the boycott in 2011 he did a ton of work showing up at meetings and trying to bring sides together. In October of 2010 Roger Way and I were on a conference call with Billy and his good friend Frank M. They were trying to help get the P5 in to avoid that boycott. So we see Billy a lot on TVG and most of us know he's half of Little Red Feather but I doubt many people know what a stand up guy he has been trying to help California Racing. BTW Santa Anita refused to put in the P5 in late 2010 and they had the worst meet ever. Believe it was the first time Hollywood Park outhandled them in their spring meet. Later that year Scott Daruty told me that he wishes he had put it in given that disaster of a meet.

Here's a link http://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/podcast/

I don't know if you have to click on the link by his profile or not.

+1 on Billy Koch, who I'm also pleased to call a friend. His podcast (co-hosted with Michelle Yu) is called The Horse Ownership Experience, and you can get it on iTunes and also www.latalkradio.com.

[Andy Asaro]

+1 on Billy Koch, who I'm also pleased to call a friend. His podcast (co-hosted with Michelle Yu) is called The Horse Ownership Experience, and you can get it on iTunes and also www.latalkradio.com.

I'm pretty sure I was on the also eligible list for this. I drew in after a couple of vet scratches.

[ribjig]

I'm hoping for Oaklawn to lead the charge with the single digit takeout on WPS wagers.

Googled it & can't find actual drop in takeout;
From what% to what%? FOUND IT 10%
All races until further notice?
How often will this drop cause change in real returns?
A former $2.20 payout will now be what?
$3.00 will now be what?
Are there still overlays in show betting a al Dr. Ziemba,
or are big bettors jumping on all overlays causing ROI=0?
Historically, betting every favorite to show has
ROI of ?-0.10? & every odds-on of ?-0.05?, so
does drop indicate its now break-even or +ROI??? :eek: :eek: :eek:
IT WOULD SEEM SHOW BET ON ALL
ODDS-ON FAVORITES = ROI = +5%???
WHAT AM I FORGETTING BESIDES
OTHERS DOING SAME IN BIGGER
AMOUNTS & DROPPING PAYOUT BACK
DOWN TO ROI=0 OR WORSE???

[ribjig]

Keep in mind this very effective boycott method:

true event: neighborhood didn't want 7-11, it opened any way;
neighbors went there in droves, stood in cashier queue to buy
individual cheapest item, e.g., gum, one at a time, forming long
line out door, got back in line for another cheap purchase, chased
away normal customers buying bigger priced items, 7-11 closed
as $$ always limited...

racetrack equivalent???
boycotters form long lines at windows, especially $100 or above
windows, make $2 bets only, or ask question without betting,
leave window, :pout: :pout: :pout: get back in line...just sayin'...

[MonmouthParkJoe]

I cant say enough things about both Billy and Gary of LRF, they are always trying to do some good out there.

[Andy Asaro]

I'm pretty sure I was on the also eligible list for this. I drew in after a couple of vet scratches.

link to archived show. http://latalkradio.com/content/horse-032117#audio_play

I'm Learning to fly. But I ain't got wings. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5BJXwNeKsQ

[elhelmete]

Keep in mind this very effective boycott method:

true event: neighborhood didn't want 7-11, it opened any way;
neighbors went there in droves, stood in cashier queue to buy
individual cheapest item, e.g., gum, one at a time, forming long
line out door, got back in line for another cheap purchase, chased
away normal customers buying bigger priced items, 7-11 closed
as $$ always limited...

racetrack equivalent???
boycotters form long lines at windows, especially $100 or above
windows, make $2 bets only, or ask question without betting,
leave window, :pout: :pout: :pout: get back in line...just sayin'...

Neat idea, but good luck crowding ANY betting windows in 2017.

[Andy Asaro]

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/John-Pricci/comments/03212017-behind-scenes-progress-in-santa-anita-boycott-dispute/

SANTA ANITA BOYCOTT, GAME ON


http://www.horseraceinsider.com/John-Pricci/comments/03212017-behind-scenes-progress-in-santa-anita-boycott-dispute/

Behind Scenes Progress in Santa Anita Boycott Dispute
=================================

Comments for second one make you go Hmmmmmmmmmm

[Andy Asaro]

Santa Anita Boycott starts TODAY. Stand on principle against a jurisdiction that DOES NOT protect the wagering public.

This yesterday from CHRB's Mike Marten

We promised to keep you both informed, so I'm doing it with one email. The CHRB stands ready to approve the rule change administratively as soon as Santa Anita makes the request. Santa Anita informs us they are "in the process" of making this happen. This involves having AmTote change the programming. We believe this may take them a few more days but we don't know that for certain.

Why not suspend the Bet pending the rule change?

Santa Anita Owns Amtote. They’re stroking us

Race 1 is one mile on the turf

Race 4 is six and one half on turf

Race 7 is one mile on the turf

Sure these races will stay on turf today but last time it was a bad step during a race by one of the runners that caused the surface switch in the last race of the day. What if that happens say in the 4th race today and they take the 7th off the turf for safety reasons? It is unlikely but we’d be in the same position as when they ripped off their Customers last time with the 15% going to the jackpot.

This is exactly why they should have had a mandatory payout last Sunday and suspended the wager until the rule was changed.

[Andy Asaro]

I should add that it rained the last couple of days in Arcadia. Not real hard but point is that a repeat of the jackpot debacle is possible. Wager should have been suspended.

SAT MAR 25 PM Showers 67°49° 30% SSW 8 mph 69%

[Andy Asaro]

Boycott Handle Over/Under set at - 7% for week even with huge jackpot

[Fager Fan]

Maybe some of you feel strongly about this, but most don't, and most fans, owners, and trainers don't even really understand why this is so upsetting to be worthy of a boycott. Just sayin, for whatever it's worth.

I wish you all would boycott over something that is a really big issue in racing that everyone understands and agrees with. Now, that has the possibility for a major impact.

[Andy Asaro]

Maybe some of you feel strongly about this, but most don't, and most fans, owners, and trainers don't even really understand why this is so upsetting to be worthy of a boycott. Just sayin, for whatever it's worth.

I wish you all would boycott over something that is a really big issue in racing that everyone understands and agrees with. Now, that has the possibility for a major impact.

Most Gamblers believe that taking 15% and putting it toward a jackpot when you have an All race is stealing. Problems with the jackpot in Ca. go back to last year. They could have changed it but haven't.

Boycott ON.

[Mr. Pick 5]

Will be interesting to see what the pick 6 pool handles today at Anita....and also how the other pools overall handle has been effected.

[Andy Asaro]

I chose this week cuz there was a small p6 carryover into today along with a super hi 5 carryover. Then the P6 carried over again into Friday. On top of all that they have 3 less races this week compared to last year.

It's all about the headline.

[Mr. Pick 5]

I chose this week cuz there was a small p6 carryover into today along with a super hi 5 carryover. Then the P6 carried over again into Friday. On top of all that they have 3 less races this week compared to last year.

It's all about the headline.

Gotcha...I respect what you are trying to accomplish and hope the proper changes are made

[Andy Asaro]

Santa Anita P6 new money pool down over 45K from 2016

[chenoa]

:headbanger::headbanger::headbanger:

[Andy Asaro]

Late P4 down over 103K.

CHRIMS handle report should be out later today. If anyone wants to do the Equibase numbers at the end of the day that is welcome too.

[Andy Asaro]

Late P4 handle was actually up 30K. By bad.

[WP1981]

I don't know if it has been brought up yet, but what bugs the hell out of me is that the CHRB (or whomever) made a deal with RTN for video and no longer offer the feed on calracing or the individual track website. It is a deal breaker for me.

I have to physically go to an OTB to place my wagers early on and then I watch at home. Any track that doesn't offer a free feed I will not wager on. I already exclude Oaklawn, Turfway and a few others because of this and have now added all the cal tracks. In a dying sport, why are you making it more difficult for people to see your content? Bed shitting as per usual.

[Andy Asaro]

Friday Santa Anita P6 and late P4 handle both down over 90K

[Andy Asaro]

Thursday 2016 = $5,679,368

Thursday 2017 = $5,141,602

[Andy Asaro]

Just received from CHRB on Santa Anita submitting jackpot rule change.

“No change. We've been in communication with them and we're expecting to receive their request but nothing yet.”

[EMD4ME]

Thursday 2016 = $5,679,368

Thursday 2017 = $5,141,602

I hope your efforts had that impact :ThmbUp:

I don't play cali much but I am participating in the boycott.

[Andy Asaro]

Friday 2016 = $6,826,793 (CHRIMS verified)

Friday 2017 = $5,653,084 (this is from me counting which isn’t always accurate)

Looks like the Boycotters are kicking ass and doing the best they can.

Keep up the good fight.

[Andy Asaro]

I hope your efforts had that impact :ThmbUp:

I don't play cali much but I am participating in the boycott.

Thanks. Today really hurt them. Story is that the massive jackpot isn't drawing as much new money as a 37K carryover from last year.

[Andy Asaro]

Santa Anita Boycott exceeding expectations. Hang tough and bet elsewhere.

Today they will be down quite a bit. Still not too late for HANA. Quite a few people want to keep going and boycott next week as well.

[Andy Asaro]

Pull The Pocket Blog: California Racing's Slow but Sure Customer Drip

http://pullthepocket.blogspot.com/2017/03/california-racings-slow-but-sure.html?spref=tw

Excerpt:

Looking at the 2015-2016 CHRB annual report, there's some strong evidence that the folks who study gambling, and live each day betting the sport, were more right than wrong.

The "over $4 billion in handle" is now $2.9 billion.

The revenue to the sport in the entire state which was "almost $800 million" is now $604 million.

[whodoyoulike]

I noticed you've been making a comparison with last year.

Are your numbers total handle because yours doesn't match mine which I'm getting from the chart?

Why not compare the total handle against say the last daily handles for say the last month?

If you do this, I also would think comparisons by day of the week would provide better info e.g., Th, Fri, Sat and Sun handles varies significantly by day.

[Andy Asaro]

I noticed you've been making a comparison with last year.

Are your numbers total handle because yours doesn't match mine which I'm getting from the chart?

Why not compare the total handle against say the last daily handles for say the last month?

If you do this, I also would think comparisons by day of the week would provide better info e.g., Th, Fri, Sat and Sun handles varies significantly by day.

The previous post is from Pull The Pocket.

I usually don't do the numbers but because I'm on my own I'm doing them. If they're close that's good enough but if they'er way off let me know. THX

CHRIMS is accurate to the penny but the reports aren't final till the next afternoon. Sometimes on weekends it takes till Tuesday. For yesterday and today I've been adding up the pools on Xpresbet after each race. Pretty close for yesterday

You can run reports at this link. http://www.chrims.com/careporting/rptHandles.aspx

[whodoyoulike]

The previous post is from Pull The Pocket.

I usually don't do the numbers but because I'm on my own I'm doing them. If they're close that's good enough but if they'er way off let me know. THX

CHRIMS is accurate to the penny but the reports aren't final till the next afternoon. Sometimes on weekends it takes till Tuesday. For yesterday and today I've been adding up the pools on Xpresbet after each race. Pretty close for yesterday

You can run reports at this link. http://www.chrims.com/careporting/rptHandles.aspx

Thursday 2016 = $5,679,368

Thursday 2017 = $5,141,602

Friday 2016 = $6,826,793 (CHRIMS verified)

Friday 2017 = $5,653,084 (this is from me counting which isn’t always accurate) ...

I'm looking at the charts provided by DRF. Thursday and Friday are still available which shows handles for Thursday Mutuel $550,327, ITW $1,233,519 and ISW $4,080,384 and Friday's Mutuel $592,192, ITW $1,529,222 and ISW $4,483,165.

I ran a report for Thursday and yours matches and may be the correct numbers and as you noted Friday's didn't .

Now, I'm wondering what is DRF reporting? I do recall asking this question about DRF numbers before on here but unable to remember the answer which made sense. Maybe they've never claimed their $$ were final and just informational given your comment above.

Thanks for the link.

But, I think given the info you're attempting to provide a comparison over the last month vs last year would show a better effect of the boycott (even though it's a short period of time).

[Andy Asaro]

I'm looking at the charts provided by DRF. Thursday and Friday are still available which shows handles for Thursday Mutuel $550,327, ITW $1,233,519 and ISW $4,080,384 and Friday's Mutuel $592,192, ITW $1,529,222 and ISW $4,483,165.

I ran a report for Thursday and yours matches and may be the correct numbers and as you noted Friday's didn't .

Now, I'm wondering what is DRF reporting? I do recall asking this question about DRF numbers before on here but unable to remember the answer which made sense. Maybe they've never claimed their $$ were final and just informational given your comment above.

Thanks for the link.

But, I think given the info you're attempting to provide a comparison over the last month vs last year would show a better effect of the boycott (even though it's a short period of time).

They were down about 1.3 million today but they had 2 less races. We did way better than I expected without HANA. There is a P6 carryover tomorrow so if anyone wants to play don't feel guilty. Everyone has done enough.

It is a gallant effort by everyone who stood up on principle for this boycott. As some of you know you don’t only get in a fight when you know you’re gonna win. You stand up for what’s right so you can look yourself in the mirror.

[SuperPickle]

So now there's a huge pick 6 carryover.

I'm wondering if people will cave....

[EMD4ME]

Didn't TLG say (to give him credit) that Cali is the only state that counts wagers placed at SA on simulcasting into their handle figures?

Or am I totally dreaming about that? (Seriously)

[Andy Asaro]

Didn't TLG say (to give him credit) that Cali is the only state that counts wagers placed at SA on simulcasting into their handle figures?

Or am I totally dreaming about that? (Seriously)

It's the difference between all sources and handle on races run at your own track. Jurisdictions like to tout all sources cuz it's a bigger number. They should report both.

Attached are numbers from 2016 corresponding dates. They are only reporting handle on races run in Ca.

[Andy Asaro]

So now there's a huge pick 6 carryover.

I'm wondering if people will cave....

It's OK if they want to. If anyone has some horses they love at nice prices (enough to have a shot at being the only ticket) they'd be foolish not to put in a ticket.

[Andy Asaro]

Santa Anita up 230K from same day last year with one less race.

Right on to everyone who took a stand. We did better than expected.

[ultracapper]

Were day to day comparisons made for each day since the first of March? That would be necessary in order to tell whether handle is down this week due to the boycott, or whether it's just the continuation of a trend.

[Andy Asaro]

Were day to day comparisons made for each day since the first of March? That would be necessary in order to tell whether handle is down this week due to the boycott, or whether it's just the continuation of a trend.

I was doing this on my own. Not enough time in the day to do everything. We made a statement and it's over.

[whodoyoulike]

Were day to day comparisons made for each day since the first of March? That would be necessary in order to tell whether handle is down this week due to the boycott, or whether it's just the continuation of a trend.

This was my thinking also. I was comparing this boycott to something similar to the grocery boycotts etc., which most are familiar with in the past, where one can see a drop off in business from recent activity.

I remember the CDI boycott a couple of years ago did use the prior year's as a comparison but that boycott was started before the meet started. So, that comparison made sense to me.

Anyone recall what year that boycott was conducted because I just looked and it seems there has been a number of corporate executive changes since 2014 / 2015. Don't know what happened to the other executives.

per form 10-k as of 2/23/17:

ceo since 8/14
pres. & coo since 10/15
cfo since 10/15

Btw, I never meant to be critical of your efforts.

[Poindexter]

A little off topic, but how does what Santa Anita on these rare days differ from what Gulfstream does when they have a huge carryover like they do and they card a lot of short fields as they did today and will do all week until next Sunday. Four 8 horse fields and two 7 horse fields. Total possible combinations 200,704. $479,000 pool, or a total of 2 million 395,000 tickets played. That is 12 times the numbers of combos available. Does anybody really think there were more than a handful of live combos(more like no live combos). All because they have a mandatory payout next week and they know they will have a 7 million dollar rainbow pick 6 pool if they protect it. The whole thing reeks. To me it is sort of funny because I know what they are doing but to the masses they are just being conned.

Just want to know how many people that put $479,000 into that pick six pool (and will continue all week long) knew there was no chance of a jackpot being paid out an they were just playing a pick six taxed at an additional 30%. A little nauseating hearing the announcers telling people you have to play the rainbow six "because there is so much money in it: (with of course no chance of winning). Just a big fricking scam. If anybody actually cared about horse racing but us I would say this should make 60 minutes, but since virtually nobody really cares anymore......the racing industry can reduce itself into playing little con games to attract business.

This to me is a lot more unethical than the 2 days a year Santa Anita take races off the turf and they kill any chance of scoing the jackpot. Also trust me I am no huge fan of SA. There cards have been so bad lately, no need to call for a boycott, just spend 15 minutes looking at the past performances and there is nothing worth betting. Awful cards day in and day out and I mean awful. The only reason I even look is because of the jackpot, yet I haven't even found a card interesting enough to take a stab at that.

[EasyGoer89]

A little off topic, but how does what Santa Anita on these rare days differ from what Gulfstream does when they have a huge carryover like they do and they card a lot of short fields as they did today and will do all week until next Sunday. Four 8 horse fields and two 7 horse fields. Total possible combinations 200,704. $479,000 pool, or a total of 2 million 395,000 tickets played. That is 12 times the numbers of combos available. Does anybody really think there were more than a handful of live combos(more like no live combos). All because they have a mandatory payout next week and they know they will have a 7 million dollar rainbow pick 6 pool if they protect it. The whole thing reeks. To me it is sort of funny because I know what they are doing but to the masses they are just being conned.

Just want to know how many people that put $479,000 into that pick six pool (and will continue all week long) knew there was no chance of a jackpot being paid out an they were just playing a pick six taxed at an additional 30%. A little nauseating hearing the announcers telling people you have to play the rainbow six "because there is so much money in it: (with of course no chance of winning). Just a big fricking scam. If anybody actually cared about horse racing but us I would say this should make 60 minutes, but since virtually nobody really cares anymore......the racing industry can reduce itself into playing little con games to attract business.

This to me is a lot more unethical than the 2 days a year Santa Anita take races off the turf and they kill any chance of scoing the jackpot. Also trust me I am no huge fan of SA. There cards have been so bad lately, no need to call for a boycott, just spend 15 minutes looking at the past performances and there is nothing worth betting. Awful cards day in and day out and I mean awful. The only reason I even look is because of the jackpot, yet I haven't even found a card interesting enough to take a stab at that.

Most of us play/handicap multiple tracks and a lot of times it's difficult to remember which pick 6s are normal and which ones are the scams.

I agree that it's 'icky' that they trumpet this 'big carryover' when it's essentially fake news, the game suffers from transparency and integrity issues, this jackpot bet with the track manipulating the carding of the races isn't going to help long term growth.

[Andy Asaro]

A little off topic, but how does what Santa Anita on these rare days differ from what Gulfstream does when they have a huge carryover like they do and they card a lot of short fields as they did today and will do all week until next Sunday. Four 8 horse fields and two 7 horse fields. Total possible combinations 200,704. $479,000 pool, or a total of 2 million 395,000 tickets played. That is 12 times the numbers of combos available. Does anybody really think there were more than a handful of live combos(more like no live combos). All because they have a mandatory payout next week and they know they will have a 7 million dollar rainbow pick 6 pool if they protect it. The whole thing reeks. To me it is sort of funny because I know what they are doing but to the masses they are just being conned.

Just want to know how many people that put $479,000 into that pick six pool (and will continue all week long) knew there was no chance of a jackpot being paid out an they were just playing a pick six taxed at an additional 30%. A little nauseating hearing the announcers telling people you have to play the rainbow six "because there is so much money in it: (with of course no chance of winning). Just a big fricking scam. If anybody actually cared about horse racing but us I would say this should make 60 minutes, but since virtually nobody really cares anymore......the racing industry can reduce itself into playing little con games to attract business.

This to me is a lot more unethical than the 2 days a year Santa Anita take races off the turf and they kill any chance of scoing the jackpot. Also trust me I am no huge fan of SA. There cards have been so bad lately, no need to call for a boycott, just spend 15 minutes looking at the past performances and there is nothing worth betting. Awful cards day in and day out and I mean awful. The only reason I even look is because of the jackpot, yet I haven't even found a card interesting enough to take a stab at that.

Some great points. Industry Leaders will tell you they want to grow the game. Wagers like this do not grow the game IMO they shrink it.

"Little Con Games to attract business" That's exactly what's been happening. Short term thinking at the expense of long term growth.

[ultracapper]

I was doing this on my own. Not enough time in the day to do everything. We made a statement and it's over.

If you looked at the boycott week in a vacuum, there's no way to know if you made a statement or not. Sorry to be a killjoy and all, but that's a fact.

[Andy Asaro]

If you looked at the boycott week in a vacuum, there's no way to know if you made a statement or not. Sorry to be a killjoy and all, but that's a fact.

The purpose of the boycott was to hurt them on Handle and we could have really hurt them if HANA had participated because of the press release getting to news outlets. Once they decided for whatever reason to back out that doesn't mean those of use who took a principled stand should quit. IMO no person who takes a principle stand is a winner whatever happens.

If these analysis help you that's great but not doing anymore research on it.

[Track Phantom]

Some great points. Industry Leaders will tell you they want to grow the game. Wagers like this do not grow the game IMO they shrink it.

"Little Con Games to attract business" That's exactly what's been happening. Short term thinking at the expense of long term growth.
Looking at this from the track management point of view, not sure I agree with you. They have to do two things: 1) market the possibility of a life-changing score. Is this any different from a casino trumpeting the possibility of hitting a "jackpot" while playing a certain slot machine? This gets semi-casual players interested in their product. 2) increase handle (which this wager does).

I don't like the wager myself but I understand the approach from a handle, excitement and marketing standpoint. I have absolutely no issues with those wanting to play it or the tracks marketing it. I choose not to participate unless it's a large pool with a mandatory payout simply because I realize it isn't a sound wager.

Having said that, I think the real problem is the built-in incentive for the track to have small fields. The small field problem is the "cancer" in this industry. Having wagers which benefit the track for having small fields is not exactly a good thing, in my opinion.

[Andy Asaro]

Looking at this from the track management point of view, not sure I agree with you. They have to do two things: 1) market the possibility of a life-changing score. Is this any different from a casino trumpeting the possibility of hitting a "jackpot" while playing a certain slot machine? This gets semi-casual players interested in their product. 2) increase handle (which this wager does).

I don't like the wager myself but I understand the approach from a handle, excitement and marketing standpoint. I have absolutely no issues with those wanting to play it or the tracks marketing it. I choose not to participate unless it's a large pool with a mandatory payout simply because I realize it isn't a sound wager.

Having said that, I think the real problem is the built-in incentive for the track to have small fields. The small field problem is the "cancer" in this industry. Having wagers which benefit the track for having small fields is not exactly a good thing, in my opinion.

I wrote this at the end of last year. This is the ONLY way I can see Ca and/or the Industry reversing the downward spiral.

http://www.paulickreport.com/horseplayers-category/asaro-ground-zero-in-fight-for-future-of-horse-racing/

[Andy Asaro]

Chrims month of March Santa Anita handle. Down abt. 5.5 million from 2016.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Looking at this from the track management point of view, not sure I agree with you. They have to do two things: 1) market the possibility of a life-changing score. Is this any different from a casino trumpeting the possibility of hitting a "jackpot" while playing a certain slot machine? This gets semi-casual players interested in their product. 2) increase handle (which this wager does).

I don't like the wager myself but I understand the approach from a handle, excitement and marketing standpoint. I have absolutely no issues with those wanting to play it or the tracks marketing it. I choose not to participate unless it's a large pool with a mandatory payout simply because I realize it isn't a sound wager.

Having said that, I think the real problem is the built-in incentive for the track to have small fields. The small field problem is the "cancer" in this industry. Having wagers which benefit the track for having small fields is not exactly a good thing, in my opinion.
When there was wagering on track only it used to be easy to tell how a track was doing by dividing the handle by the attendance. That's impossible with all the off-track play.

My question is, are people actually spending more money to get into jackpot pools, or is it the case that people just spread their betting budget around? I can see the special occasion bet when the P6 has a really big carryover, but I'd like to see some statistics on how much the jackpot bets actually increase handle overall, if at all. If you are just shifting money from one pool to the other, you've accomplished nothing.

The issue is the competition for the jackpot dollar. When you play Powerball, while the odds are 292 million to one, it's no more difficult to play than either taking the birthdays of all your relatives, your lucky numbers or just saying quick pick. Horseracing involves a lot more effort than a quick pick, and in terms of life-changing experiences, a jackpot of $342K that you might have to work hard to win, doesn't stand up very well against half a billion dollars or so, even if your odds are 300 times better at the races.

I don't think there is anything wrong with marketing, but I'm not sure there is an untapped market just waiting for the track to entice them over to their side from the lottery. While I agree with you that small fields (meaning 5 or 6 horses) are the bane of the current state of racing, I've argued in the past that 8-10 horses per race for the P6 sequence creates plenty of combinations. The 14 horse field may be better at creating carryover, but it also makes the bet seem like Everest to the average Joe. He quickly realizes his chances are slim and backs away.

I'd rather market the game the way Daily Fantasy Sports are marketed. Smart guys are going to win money, and since the odds are pari-mutuel, you only have to be smarter than the next guy. You can actually make money at the races - thats a good message. You're not going to fool anybody long with the life-changing jackpot bets - they're going to figure out that they $100 they put into a pool with a million combinations does them about as much good as PowerBall, and if they do hit it they have a good chance of sharing the pool because they can't cover the wilder combinations. I'm guessing you wouldn't capture them for long.

I've argued that the major problem for racing is too many pools per race. Stop cannabalizing the pools and perhaps you can drop the take in respective pools, which as we all know increases the handle. We give the tracks a built in excuse for excessive take by spreading the action so thinly. Second race at Belmont Park gives you 11 different bets. While this theoretically makes everyone happy - the win bettors have a pool, the quinella bettors do, the exacta bettors do, the P3 and 4 bettors do, and so on - no single pool is likely big enough to drop the take. And if you do drop the take on a respective pool without compressing the betting menu, you may not increase handle on that pool.

[whodoyoulike]

... I've argued that the major problem for racing is too many pools per race. Stop cannabalizing the pools and perhaps you can drop the take in respective pools, which as we all know increases the handle. We give the tracks a built in excuse for excessive take by spreading the action so thinly. Second race at Belmont Park gives you 11 different bets. While this theoretically makes everyone happy - the win bettors have a pool, the quinella bettors do, the exacta bettors do, the P3 and 4 bettors do, and so on - no single pool is likely big enough to drop the take. And if you do drop the take on a respective pool without compressing the betting menu, you may not increase handle on that pool.

I used to hear this point mentioned when the quinella and exacta betting were both being offered on every race in SoCal. Currently, I'm uncertain if SoCal even still offers the quinella bet.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

I used to hear this point mentioned when the quinella and exacta betting were both being offered on every race in SoCal. Currently, I'm uncertain if SoCal even still offers the quinella bet.

That was one of the most puzzling betting menu decisions. A $1 exacta box is the same as a $2 quinella, and if the longer price comes on top you probably get a premium. In the quinella, it doesn't matter which horse wins. Plus, if the favorite wins, the $1 exacta probably pays the same as the $2 quinella. The more you push the money into the pools where the average Joe has a chance, the more he has a chance of going home a winner and the more likely he is to keep coming to the track. If he loses it may not be the larger sums he'd Likely lose investing in jackpot bets.

[DeanT]

The 14 horse field may be better at creating carryover, but it also makes the bet seem like Everest to the average Joe. He quickly realizes his chances are slim and backs away.


That's a good thing, as you know. He or she should be nowhere near a pick six pool.

He should be betting win, or exactas. Well, not exactas in So Cal with 22.68% juice, because that's a bankroll killer, but easier bets.

The game's fun when you attack with your strength, and for smaller bankrolls, that's easier to hit, lower juice bets.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

That's a good thing, as you know. He or she should be nowhere near a pick six pool.

He should be betting win, or exactas. Well, not exactas in So Cal with 22.68% juice, because that's a bankroll killer, but easier bets.

The game's fun when you attack with your strength, and for smaller bankrolls, that's easier to hit, lower juice bets.

He shouldn't be playing PowerBall either, but the allure to the gambling type is irresistible. I've suggested 10 is the perfect number of starters for most races. Not so many you have elevated chances of chaos, not so few you can't get some decent prices. I'd be fine if the P6 was just the whales and the syndicates fighting it out.

If you've read any of my stuff, I've been saying for years that small/average players should divide their bankroll 50-25-25, win-exacta-any other bet. That gives you the best chance to win, or at least minimize losses, but still gives you the chance to get into bigger paying combination bets.

[Andy Asaro]

Del Mar has quinellas because a handful of connected big shots who don't know squat about the gambling game want them.

[Andy Asaro]

Just to add some perspective to the thread the boycott wasn't just about the 15% that went to the jackpot with an all race. It was about a lot of stuff that's gone on in California since SB1072 passed and touted as a bill that would save California Racing. We were all right about what would happen and we see it playing out before our eyes.


Put the Fun Back in Racing, Brackpool Urges

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/140248/put-the-fun-back-in-racing-brackpool-urges

[turfnsport]

Looking at this from the track management point of view, not sure I agree with you. They have to do two things: 1) market the possibility of a life-changing score. Is this any different from a casino trumpeting the possibility of hitting a "jackpot" while playing a certain slot machine? This gets semi-casual players interested in their product. 2) increase handle (which this wager does).


I disagree. On these jackpot bets the takeout is too high and it's a churn killer. It might help handle on guaranteed payout days but overall it is hurting handle not helping.

I'm not even sure some horseplayers know how the damn wager even works.

How is tying up a few million of horseplayers money for a month or two and then paying it out to one person a good thing?

The tracks don't even know how to market and promote when one player does hit it big.

Can you name one person that has won a big jackpot by name? Neither can I.

On Friday GP put a 5-horse field in the sequence. They don't want it hit.

Overall, It's the worst wager in the gambling universe.

[Andy Asaro]

As of this morning the CHRB has received nothing from Santa Anita about the rule change.

Maybe it’s me but isn’t it reasonable to expect a press release from Santa Anita identifying the problem and the steps that need to be taken to fix it (like 2 weeks ago)?

What we have here is the “SHUT UP AND BET” mentality that permeates this Industry. They have absolutely no respect for their Customers and apparently could care less about integrity.

[Andy Asaro]

Click the link to read the Meeting Package.

http://www.chrb.ca.gov/Board/board_packages/Apr-2017.pdf


Nothing about the P6 Jackpot rule change.

[Andy Asaro]

Live meeting at 9:30 AM PST. You are guaranteed to hear something that will blow your mind.

Click the link to listen live

http://www.selectstreaming.com/live/chrb/audio.php

Click this link to listen to archived meeting (usually up by late afternoon)

http://www.selectstreaming.com/live/chrb/archives.php

[ultracapper]

Andy Asaro, you're setting a very good example as to how horse players can get involved in attempting to influence the future of horse racing in a chosen jurisdiction. I know it must be a lot of hard work, attention, focus, and commitment, leading to a great deal of frustrations a great deal of the time, yet always leaving open the hope for concrete results.

Thanks for your efforts and hopefully they lead to rewards we can all appreciate. I hope that there have been times you've been able to celebrate hard earned accomplishments, and I hope you have received other expressions of gratitude and appreciation.

Sincerely, Good Luck, and keep up the Good Fight.

[Andy Asaro]

Santa Anita alters pick six rules when late surface switch occurs

http://www.drf.com/news/santa-anita-alters-pick-six-rules-when-late-surface-switch-occurs

[airford1]

All Santa Anita needs is more FOOD TRUCKS and complain how "In this economy" we are doing pretty good. Santa Anita is in a Death Spiral and management is looking to keep it alive long enough for them to make it to retirement.

[Jeff P]

Santa Anita alters pick six rules when late surface switch occurs:
http://www.drf.com/news/santa-anita-alters-pick-six-rules-when-late-surface-switch-occurs

ARCADIA, Calif.- Santa Anita recently received approval from the California Horse Racing Board to change the rules regarding pick six distributions in the event of a surface switch after the bet is underway.

The new rule takes effect on Thursday. In the event of a late surface switch, the 15 percent portion of the net pool typically dedicated to the single ticket jackpot provision of the pool will be redirected to the portion of the pool distributed to ticketholders with six winners, or into a carryover.

In that scenario, 85 percent of the net pool would be paid to tickets with all six winners, or into a conventional carryover, and 15 percent to the consolation pool.

On a day with a late surface switch, it will still be possible for the single ticket payoff provision to be paid out, if there is a single winning ticket. That is less likely to occur on a day with a late surface switch, since any races affected by a change in surface are considered a winning leg for all bettors, regardless of selections, essentially making the pick six a pick five.

The rule change was requested following a situation on March 5 in which the day’s final race was moved from turf to dirt because of excessive early afternoon rain.

I guarantee you they are reading the threads here at Paceadvantage:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=2138985&postcount=56

This rules change wouldn't have happened this quickly otherwise.


-jp

.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Good job Andy and others. I'd have acted outraged, but I gave up on that jurisdiction the last time. They encouraged me to leave and gave me zero reason to return since, but I am genuinely happy to see that some people still care enough to help them not slit their own throats any more viciously than comes naturally to them.

[Poindexter]

Santa Anita alters pick six rules when late surface switch occurs:
http://www.drf.com/news/santa-anita-alters-pick-six-rules-when-late-surface-switch-occurs



I guarantee you they are reading the threads here at Paceadvantage:
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=2138985&postcount=56

This rules change wouldn't have happened this quickly otherwise.


-jp

.


Good to see them respond so quickly and take care of business. Just curious if they are considering this jackpot thing a success. They are over half a million dollars in their pick six jackpot pool, and the handle isn't rising much. Gulfstream was having $400,000 pools the final week on a jackpot that there was absolutley no chance of hitting the jackpot (people were just diving into a 30% higher taxed bet). Santa Anita's pick six handled $250,000 yesterday and the jackpot easily could have been brought down (that was $720,000 if someone was able to hit it with a 4/5 in the sequence). The point is that this is an incredible opportunity but the betting public does not seem to see it that way.

I think the message is that people have learned through playing 50 cent pick 4's and pick 5's how ridiculously expensive and taxing on a bankroll a $2 pick six can be. I think they need to bring it down to a buck(I think Andy mentioned 50 cents, which I would prefer, but I know they want to keep it as close to the original as possible). I play buck pick sixes at Turf Paradise on occassion and the difference between a buck and 2 bucks is often the difference betweeen being able to make a play or not.

Right now it is just ripe for a syndicate to pull down all this free money (jackpot keeps rising but pools are not really rising with it). I am actually surpised they haven't already. But given the pool sizes, it doesn't seem like they have gotten involved yet. I am sure they will be out on Thursday with the added incentive of the carryover.

[spiketoo]

Really this is much ado about nothing:

Before jackpot:

P6 - 70% Consols - 30%

With jackpot assuming not a single ticket winner:

P6 - 70% Consols - 15% Jackpot CO - 15%

New rule assuming not a single ticket with surface switch:

P6 - 85% Consols - 15%

Andy, why not spend your time on the cosols that really are affected by this bet. It's a gimmick bet that just removes daily churn and penalizes the consols with a 'pie in the sky' jackpot that is truly inane.

[AndyC]

Good to see them respond so quickly and take care of business. Just curious if they are considering this jackpot thing a success. They are over half a million dollars in their pick six jackpot pool, and the handle isn't rising much. Gulfstream was having $400,000 pools the final week on a jackpot that there was absolutley no chance of hitting the jackpot (people were just diving into a 30% higher taxed bet). Santa Anita's pick six handled $250,000 yesterday and the jackpot easily could have been brought down (that was $720,000 if someone was able to hit it with a 4/5 in the sequence). The point is that this is an incredible opportunity but the betting public does not seem to see it that way.

I think the message is that people have learned through playing 50 cent pick 4's and pick 5's how ridiculously expensive and taxing on a bankroll a $2 pick six can be. I think they need to bring it down to a buck(I think Andy mentioned 50 cents, which I would prefer, but I know they want to keep it as close to the original as possible). I play buck pick sixes at Turf Paradise on occassion and the difference between a buck and 2 bucks is often the difference betweeen being able to make a play or not.

Right now it is just ripe for a syndicate to pull down all this free money (jackpot keeps rising but pools are not really rising with it). I am actually surpised they haven't already. But given the pool sizes, it doesn't seem like they have gotten involved yet. I am sure they will be out on Thursday with the added incentive of the carryover.

Changing the P-6 to a $.50 or $1.00 bet may make a P-6 playable (from a bankroll standpoint) for a lot more players but it would reduce regular carryovers greatly. It is the regular carryover that made the So Cal P-6 such a great bet.

You are absolutely correct that a $2 P-6 in a jackpot format is basically made-to-order for big players.

[Andy Asaro]

Live meeting at 9:30 AM PST. You are guaranteed to hear something that will blow your mind.

Click the link to listen live

http://www.selectstreaming.com/live/chrb/audio.php

Click this link to listen to archived meeting (usually up by late afternoon)

http://www.selectstreaming.com/live/chrb/archives.php

Make that 10:30 PST today.

[Andy Asaro]

TOC withdraws consent for Twin Spires to collect wagers from Ca. according to Greg Avioli at the CHRB meeting. Seems to be over geo location requirements.

[Andy Asaro]

So Santa Anita puts a 10 horse field in the second race with only 6 starters in the 3rd (first leg of P6) and only 5 in the 4th race. Ya think they're saying they'd rather have a jackpot increase instead of a carryover (of course they would like both)

[Andy Asaro]

How is Alex Solis’ vote in favor of increasing jockey fees on losing mounts NOT a conflict of interest?

[Andy Asaro]

CHRB Again Approves Third-Party Lasix Administration

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/220853/chrb-again-approves-third-party-lasix-administration

[Andy Asaro]

P6 to #'s 3 and 4 at Santa Anita pay $1,199,286.40 and $1,599,048.60 Both are single tickets plus jackpot I assume. Why so different?

[Mr. Pick 5]

P6 to #'s 3 and 4 at Santa Anita pay $1,199,286.40 and $1,599,048.60 Both are single tickets plus jackpot I assume. Why so different?

I was confused by this also...almost feels like there has to be some kind of error

[Andy Asaro]

I was confused by this also...almost feels like there has to be some kind of error

Some are saying one was probably bet in Canada. Different takeout plus the exchange rate???

[Andy Asaro]

So, Santa Anita decides to put the 10 horse field in the second race instead of the 3rd or 4th where they had a 6 and a 5 horse field. May have cost them a really big pool tomorrow or on Saturday. Not too smart.

[Andy Asaro]

P6 to #'s 3 and 4 at Santa Anita pay $1,199,286.40 and $1,599,048.60 Both are single tickets plus jackpot I assume. Why so different?

According to Santa Anita publicity, the ticket was purchased for $14,400 at Sammy’s satellite wagering location in Lake Forest, Calif.,

[Andy Asaro]

Less races run this year but a loss of revenue is a loss of revenue. Gonna be purse cuts sooner or later.

They use all sources (of course) in the article.



http://www.drf.com/news/attendance-slightly-handle-down-winter-spring-meet

ARCADIA, Calif. – Santa Anita concluded the winter-spring portion of its six-month meeting Sunday with mixed results in attendance and handle figures.
Track officials said Sunday that attendance increased 1 percent over a similar period in the 2015-16 meeting, but all-sources handle, including ontrack, satellite, and account-wagering sources, was down 4 percent. The track did not release extensive business figures for the winter-spring dates.

[EasyGoer89]

So Santa Anita puts a 10 horse field in the second race with only 6 starters in the 3rd (first leg of P6) and only 5 in the 4th race. Ya think they're saying they'd rather have a jackpot increase instead of a carryover (of course they would like both)

I know for a long time I would look at the 'way' they carded races and always wonder why 'great betting races' were kept OUT of the pick 5, funny and odd how now, they show up OUT of the jackpot wager.

[EasyGoer89]

How is Alex Solis’ vote in favor of increasing jockey fees on losing mounts NOT a conflict of interest?

His whole presence is a conflict, they can do what they want because they know that fans have no real voice.

[Andy Asaro]

If the Santa Anita meet ended why wasn't there a mandatory payout Sunday?

http://www.drf.com/news/opening-day-has-pick-six-carryover-117784 …

[MonmouthParkJoe]

I know for a long time I would look at the 'way' they carded races and always wonder why 'great betting races' were kept OUT of the pick 5, funny and odd how now, they show up OUT of the jackpot wager.


Pick 5 has helped out alot of tracks with their handle early on the card. Early races always handle the least and really picks up steam towards the middle part of the card.

I would imagine that depending on which pool you want to prop up, you schedule them accordingly.

[Andy Asaro]

CAHorse Racing Board‏ @caCHRB 1h1 hour ago
More
Notice of Meeting - April 27, 2017

Click the link for the Agenda

http://www.chrb.ca.gov/Board/board_meeting_agendas/2017_04_apr_agenda2.pdf

[Andy Asaro]

Latest available Stewards minutes.

http://www.chrb.ca.gov/Stewards/Minutes/Minutes_Santa_Anita/Minutes_SA_17_04_02.pdf

[Andy Asaro]

CHRB Executive Director Baedecker at it again. Little did we know back then that this guy would become CHRB Commissioner


https://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video?fr=yfp-t&p=rick+baedecker+family+feud#id=1&vid=4cd45c262ff79fc8286fc1cb39409837&action=click

Spirited debate over whip use at panel discussion

http://www.drf.com/news/spirited-debate-over-whip-use-panel-discussion

[cj]

CHRB Executive Director Baedecker at it again. Little did we know back then that this guy would become CHRB Commissioner


https://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video?fr=yfp-t&p=rick+baedecker+family+feud#id=1&vid=4cd45c262ff79fc8286fc1cb39409837&action=click

Spirited debate over whip use at panel discussion

http://www.drf.com/news/spirited-debate-over-whip-use-panel-discussion

Of all the things that need addressing in racing this probably falls on about page 27.

[Andy Asaro]

Of all the things that need addressing in racing this probably falls on about page 27.

That's what drives me nuts. These people keep putting all their energy into painting the ship while it's sinking.

Frank Angst‏ @BH_FAngst 3h3 hours ago
More
Baedeker said @EspinozasVictor use of the riding crop in his Derby win on American Pharoah was in line with the California rule. :confused: :lol:

[EasyGoer89]

CHRB Executive Director Baedecker at it again. Little did we know back then that this guy would become CHRB Commissioner


https://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video?fr=yfp-t&p=rick+baedecker+family+feud#id=1&vid=4cd45c262ff79fc8286fc1cb39409837&action=click

Spirited debate over whip use at panel discussion

http://www.drf.com/news/spirited-debate-over-whip-use-panel-discussion

This stuff is insulting to serious players, the emphasis on this essentially says 'we think you're stupid so we are going to work feverishly on the PERCEPTION because we know that will distract you from the real issues that we keep avoiding'

[Andy Asaro]

Jon Lindo‏ @JonLindo60

Santa Anita will try to draw entries today for Thursday and Friday after not being able to fill Thursday card at entry time yesterday.

[Mr. Pick 5]

Jon Lindo‏ @JonLindo60

Santa Anita will try to draw entries today for Thursday and Friday after not being able to fill Thursday card at entry time yesterday.


California Racing :rip:

Theyve actually been pretty dead for a while imho.

[olddaddy]

No racing at Santa Anita on this thursday because of lack of entries.

[JohnGalt1]

I handicapped SA's 4/23 card for the first time in along while.

I saved paper and ink printing the pp's.

I made a pick 5 bet of 3 singles and hit the all button on the other two races.

And two win bets, which might get canceled if the odds are too low.

So I saved $'s too.

I now prefer Midwest racing because of larger pools, and because I don't feel like I'm wasting my time just to find 2 playable races.

[Andy Asaro]

No racing at Santa Anita on this thursday because of lack of entries.

Sent to email list this morning.

Has the silent majority had enough yet? Next time you see Brackpool and Pegram shake their hands and thank them for accelerating the decline of California Racing.

I hear Baedecker is working on creating chalk lanes like the Olympics but a little wider so horses have to stay in on path the whole way around. Hey Rick, gotta get new gates for each horse. LOL

Link to article about cancelling Thursday Card. http://www.drf.com/news/santa-anita-no-racing-thursday-due-insufficient-entries

[HalvOnHorseracing]

The important sentence in that article was

In addition, he contended that horses were maintaining straighter paths in the stretch as a result of not being whipped as often, and he said that [B]attacks by animal-welfare advocates over the use of the whip had declined.

I'm sure Baedecker has more proof on horses running straighter than, "I watched a couple of races yesterday," and some more mathematical calculation to verify the correlation. I also wonder if the animal rights people simply said, ok, let's go back to focusing on drugging-gone-wild.

In the movie Payback, crime lord Kris Kristoferson is getting ready to torture Mel Gibson for information about the son Gibson had kidnapped. Kristoferson tells Gibson that if he gives up the information, he'll kill him quickly, but if he holds out he'll torture him for three weeks before he kills him.

That is analogous to dealing with the animal rights people. If you give into them they'll be happy to kill racing quickly, and if you don't, they'll torture racing over time until they kill it.

Anyone who believes the animal rights people have the slightest desire to see racing thrive is at the least naive and more likely desperate. I'd have a hard time believing serious racing fans left the sport over the jockey whipping the horse more than three times without pausing.

The jockeys and their supporters talked about educating the racing public. The effort is unnecessary for the people who have ardently supported the sport. We weren't the ones complaining to begin with. But the effort would be useful for the animal rights people, despite the fact it would make almost no difference.

I had always heard that the reason whipping the hindquarters worked was for two reasons. One, the sound was startling, and two, it simulated where the attack might come from in the wild (not quite a mountain lion, but the horse gets the point). I think the jockeys are right - technology can develop a crop that accomplishes those two purposes without creating cuts or welts, or in any way hurting the horse.

[Andy Asaro]

The important sentence in that article was

In addition, he contended that horses were maintaining straighter paths in the stretch as a result of not being whipped as often, and he said that [B]attacks by animal-welfare advocates over the use of the whip had declined.

I'm sure Baedecker has more proof on horses running straighter than, "I watched a couple of races yesterday," and some more mathematical calculation to verify the correlation. I also wonder if the animal rights people simply said, ok, let's go back to focusing on drugging-gone-wild.

In the movie Payback, crime lord Kris Kristoferson is getting ready to torture Mel Gibson for information about the son Gibson had kidnapped. Kristoferson tells Gibson that if he gives up the information, he'll kill him quickly, but if he holds out he'll torture him for three weeks before he kills him.

That is analogous to dealing with the animal rights people. If you give into them they'll be happy to kill racing quickly, and if you don't, they'll torture racing over time until they kill it.

Anyone who believes the animal rights people have the slightest desire to see racing thrive is at the least naive and more likely desperate. I'd have a hard time believing serious racing fans left the sport over the jockey whipping the horse more than three times without pausing.

The jockeys and their supporters talked about educating the racing public. The effort is unnecessary for the people who have ardently supported the sport. We weren't the ones complaining to begin with. But the effort would be useful for the animal rights people, despite the fact it would make almost no difference.

I had always heard that the reason whipping the hindquarters worked was for two reasons. One, the sound was startling, and two, it simulated where the attack might come from in the wild (not quite a mountain lion, but the horse gets the point). I think the jockeys are right - technology can develop a crop that accomplishes those two purposes without creating cuts or welts, or in any way hurting the horse.

They don't want any whipping but the truth is they don't want any racing period. The 3 whip thing doesn't matter because it's three more than they want.

Baedeker isn't too bright. At first I thought this was an anomaly but watching him over the last few years I think it say a lot about him. Gotta watch it to believe it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YO52wHS1i1I

[airford1]

The Great Race place has a Fork in it and the only way it can be saved is with huge tax write offs for the Breeders and Owners along with Huge taxes on the California Casinos. Benjamin Warren and Barry Abrams kept California in horses for the last 15 years. The current management at Santa Anita is just spraying perfume on the Pig in hopes that they make it to retirement before it closes.Does California horse racing have a lobbyist working for them?

[Andy Asaro]

Notice is hereby given that a meeting of the California Horse Racing Board will be held on
Thursday, April 27, 2017, commencing at 9:30 a.m., in the Baldwin Terrace Room at the
Santa Anita Park Race Track, 285 West Huntington Drive, Arcadia, California. The audio
portion only of the California Horse Racing Board regular meeting will be available online
through a link at the CHRB website (www.chrb.ca.gov) under "Webcasts."

Meeting Agenda attached.

[Andy Asaro]

Jeremy Balan‏ @BH_JBalan 16m16 minutes ago
More
Following up on last night, let's unpack the last 5-6 months or so for @BetAmerica, which involves the CHRB, Stronach Group, and TOC..

Jeremy Balan‏ @BH_JBalan 12m12 minutes ago

So @BetAmerica is out in CA bc of geolocation, but the approved ADWs (@TwinSpires, @NYRABets, @Xpressbet & @TVG) operate w/o geo for months

Jeremy Balan‏ @BH_JBalan 12m12 minutes ago
More
Cut out of the California market, @BetAmerica sells to Churchill Downs, Inc. in April.

Jeremy Balan‏ @BH_JBalan 14m14 minutes ago
More
Later in December, TOC cut out @BetAmerica and @watchandwager in California and cited their unwillingness to use geolocation.

Jeremy Balan‏ @BH_JBalan 15m15 minutes ago
More
In Dec. The Stronach Group's Scott Daruty told CHRB Santa Anita & GGF wanted to "limit" ADWs, cutting out @BetAmerica & @watchandwager.

[JohnGalt1]

[QUOTE In Dec. The Stronach Group's Scott Daruty told CHRB Santa Anita & GGF wanted to "limit" ADWs, cutting out @BetAmerica & @watchandwager.[/QUOTE]

That would be like Amazon cutting out and refusing orders from Iowa and New York.

They must have more business than they can handle.

[EasyGoer89]

[QUOTE In Dec. The Stronach Group's Scott Daruty told CHRB Santa Anita & GGF wanted to "limit" ADWs, cutting out @BetAmerica & @watchandwager.

That would be like Amazon cutting out and refusing orders from Iowa and New York.

They must have more business than they can handle.[/QUOTE]

They've also left millions on the table by not approving exchange wagering.

[Andy Asaro]

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/Ante-Post/comments/always-dreaming-makes-it-6-straight-8-of-10-for-unbeaten-3yos/#comments

Excerpt:

The only major jurisdiction with a sad story is Southern California and this can be attributed to inept management and horsemen who repeatedly demonstrate they view fans as suckers to be fleeced.

[Andy Asaro]

Clown show continues today. Five entered in the first race with four going. two scratches on way to gate leaving a match race. Nice.

[Andy Asaro]

http://live.drf.com/nuggets/36641

A track employee working on the turf course timing system during the running of a race was fortunate to avoid serious injury at Golden Gate Fields on Friday.

https://twitter.com/3coltshandicap/status/863151221518909444

[Andy Asaro]

https://twitter.com/caCHRB/status/863170251172663296

https://twitter.com/caCHRB/status/863170027029118976



https://twitter.com/dicemanyo/status/863173295717220352

[cj]

http://live.drf.com/nuggets/36641

A track employee working on the turf course timing system during the running of a race was fortunate to avoid serious injury at Golden Gate Fields on Friday.


As is, all bets stand.

[JustRalph]

As is, all bets stand.

You need to be more careful. You don't have to measure the run up yourself