Handicapper's Association

[highnote]

I posted this under general handicapping, too, but then realized it probably belongs here.
==============

Has there been any discussion on this board about creating a Handicapper's Association? Maybe the time has come? I read a lot of complaints, but there doesn't seem to be any organization that can effectively deal with them.

Perhaps there are enough handicappers who would be interested in paying a yearly membership fee. With the fee perhaps several people could be paid a small stipend to run the administrative functions of the organization.

A board could be elected by votes from paying members.

I'd be willing to put up $100 or $200 per year for a good organization that looks after my interests. There could be various membership levels. If $20,000 or $30,000 could be raised that would pay for a lot of postage and printing. The board would probably meet at least once per year and some of the money could be used to offset some of the travel costs of the board members. If each board member was given, say, just $300 to help cover the cost of attending a meeting it would be a help.

I think it would be important that members of the board are only handicappers and not in the business of selling information based on data they buy from data providers. The board members should not be employed in the racing industry. The board members should not be owners of race horses. They should not be trainers, grooms, stable hands, etc. They should not be writers or journalists employed by a racing organization, nor should they be consultants to any racing organization. The board should consist solely of individuals whose only connection to racing is handicapping and betting. Every attempt should be made to ensure that there is not conflict of interest and that the member is interested in fighting for the rights of handicappers.

The role of the association could be to tackle some of the biggest issues facing handicappers.

For example, a lot of handicappers have questions about how data from data providers can be used. A handicappers association could make it their goal to find the correct answer. Perhaps money for a legal fund or for a lobbyist could be raised. Perhaps the board could negotiate favorable rates for its members at hotels for the Del Mar or Saratoga meets? Perhaps the board could negotiate favorable takeout rates with various betting outlets? The list is endless.

I'd be willing to get the ball rolling if there are enough interested people.

Any thoughts?

js

[NoDayJob]

:D Didn't "Sprint" and Kathy Rogers do that a few years ago? :D

NDJ

[Suff]

Can I be the President?..... :cool:

[highnote]

Can I be the President?..... :cool:

Only if you can get yourself elected. :)

[GameTheory]

The NTRA recently had that committee or whatever it was called where the handicappers would complain about this and that -- I believe that was mainly in response to the P6 scandal, wasn't it?

I think such an association as you propose could definitely hold sway with wagering services if for instance members were to point their action en masse through a specfic service (i.e. BrisBet vs. Youbet). However, there are all sorts of problems with that idea as I'm sure are popping into the heads of everyone reading this.

Such an organization might also be able to negotiate discounts from data providers.

But could they change anything *fundemental*? Doubtful, at least not until they were at least large enough to bring some influence in the first two categories I mentioned. For instance, if HA (better initials might help our credibility -- AHA? NAHA?) announced they would boycott any track that doesn't use detention barns ala the new NYRA policy, would anyone care? If HA demanded electronic chart calling, would it happen quicker?

And how would you get people to sign up for such a thing anyway? Just appealing to a vague sense of self-interest for handicappers won't attract many. "We'll be giving you a voice in the industry!" type pitches would attract a dozen people at most.

Maybe handicappers should get together and own their own wagering service as sort of a non-profit co-op. Then we could give ourselves rebates from the (potential) profits of the business, meaning we could still have a form of rebate (more of a dividend) even if we pay full price for the signals. That would get someone's attention....

[Dave Schwartz]

Racing in general and tracks in particular have demonstrated that they are purely driven by profit. I question that they really care what a few hundred handicappers think unless they are convinced that it directly connects to their bottom line.

The large-handle wagerers are the most important segment of handicappers to the tracks. In my opinion, you would need a few hundred of them to have any clout.

But, feel free to test it. And it won't take any membership drive - just ask the members of PA to not wager on a given weekend and see how the national handle dips. Or, if you prefer, pick a track to boycott.

If we have no impact then, well, ... we have no impact. And nobody will listen.

Don't misunderstand. I am not against you - I am with you. But, $200 per year? Please. You won't get 5 signups. And you need 10,000 signups!



Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[GameTheory]

Yes -- the thing is the handicappers only care about their bottom-line as well. So you'd have to organize the association as a way for handicappers to make (or save) more money, with the side-effect of possibly being able to influence the industry in general...

[highnote]

I think such an association as you propose could definitely hold sway with wagering services if for instance members were to point their action en masse through a specfic service (i.e. BrisBet vs. Youbet). However, there are all sorts of problems with that idea as I'm sure are popping into the heads of everyone reading this.

This is along the lines of what I was thinking. However, it would take at least a hundred member organization to make any difference. 10 or 20 customers pointing their wagering at one service is not going to make a big difference to the service -- unless they were huge bettors. Or course, as an organization, I'd hope to attract some members who are big bettors.

Such an organization might also be able to negotiate discounts from data providers.

That's what I was thinking, too.

But could they change anything *fundemental*? Doubtful, at least not until they were at least large enough to bring some influence in the first two categories I mentioned. For instance, if HA (better initials might help our credibility -- AHA? NAHA?)

HAHAHA


And how would you get people to sign up for such a thing anyway? Just appealing to a vague sense of self-interest for handicappers won't attract many. "We'll be giving you a voice in the industry!" type pitches would attract a dozen people at most.

I agree. It would take a long term commitment to growing the organization. Rome wasn't built in a day. Pardon the cliché.

Maybe handicappers should get together and own their own wagering service as sort of a non-profit co-op. Then we could give ourselves rebates from the (potential) profits of the business, meaning we could still have a form of rebate (more of a dividend) even if we pay full price for the signals. That would get someone's attention....

That is a brilliant idea -- a handicapper's cooperative wagering service. Now that's an idea with legs.

[Suff]

A course of action Business Plan may involve targeting a particular track or circuit to begin with. And using any success's as gasoline for expansion. I know rrbauer has something going out west with Respect to a MAGNA Boycott...I know he has many friends out here and on the Derby List....But I cannot attest to his progress... Perhaps he'll chime in.

[chickenhead]

Yes -- the thing is the handicappers only care about their bottom-line as well. So you'd have to organize the association as a way for handicappers to make (or save) more money, with the side-effect of possibly being able to influence the industry in general...

Brilliant as usual...this idea most certainly has merit.

[highnote]

The large-handle wagerers are the most important segment of handicappers to the tracks. In my opinion, you would need a few hundred of them to have any clout.

And even then it may not make a difference.

Don't misunderstand. I am not against you - I am with you. But, $200 per year? Please. You won't get 5 signups. And you need 10,000 signups!

I was thinking about how hard it is to start a labor union. People need to be really downtrodden before they are willing to take action. Handicappers are hardly downtrodden. To be fair, tracks have their own issues, too.

However, I read and hear so many complaints, I figure maybe there are some handicappers willing to put their money where their mouths are.

As far as boycotting a track, I don't really have any complaints that would stop me from betting a given track. As for data providers, it would actually benefit me if everyone had to pay for data. That means fewer people would have access to good information. I'm willing to pay for good information, so if my theory is correct, I should have a bigger edge. On the other hand, if people can't afford good information, then they might bet less and it could be just as difficult to win.

Hard to say.

js

[JustRalph]

I posted this on anther thread the other day.............

Dave, I disagree. What "we" need is a national horse players organization "with power" Where the officers of such an organization would dictate who, what and where to play, based on recommendations from the organization. It is a great idea. But after thinking it through....... I realized that after the first couple of times you recommended a "boycott" of a certain track for a day or two......they would find the officers of the organization in a river somewhere..........with their throats missing...........


You want to tell me how you solve this little problem? Not to mention I think Dave is right. You are going to need at least 10k members and probably 20k to last more than a year or so. How about ten thousand members who pay 10 bucks a year...??? It would support a small staff and a nice website. There would be promotion expenses and travel too.........but it is a nice idea considering you could keep the officers from getting killed..........

[kenwoodallpromos]

Is a better idea.
NTRA Players' Panel is the excuse of the racing industry to ignore everyone else. And their text says they do not read all emails.
If you have an important issue that everone agrees on, here is how to get the racing industry's attention:
Pick out a small track that you can bet online, have a lot of people bet like $5 apiece on a big favorite to show. With my show betting system we could pick high % ITM horses.
That would cause a relatively large amount of minus pools, like several per day for a couple of weeks.
Then move to another small track with small show pools and keep repeating the process in several states- maybe like Finger Lakes; Tampa Bay; etc. so State racing commissions would hear of it.
Then present your issues to the proper entities.
If that does not work, I will let you know which tracks are running the fastest and you can cause very low payouts on the early speed horses.
Can they ban a group from betting for winning too often like they do in Vegas?

[Show Me the Wire]

Kenwoodallpromos:

Like the idea of creating minus show pools with a lot of individual bets. would certainly get the track's attention losing money on a pool.

[sjk]

I don't know that we have to do anything negative to get attention. I would think that between the group of us we know the management of most of the tracks in North America.

If it is true that "Thoroughbred racing is Equibase Company's sole shareholder" (pardon the redissemination) it seems reasonable to ask track operators if they approve of its policies that are very negative towards what would seem to me to be reasonable activities carried out by their patrons.

[breakage]

How about if an effort was made to boycott one race at one track and see what the results are. I think a race at one of the slots enriched tracks that have given absolutely nothing back to their horse players would be the perfect place to start.

[NoDayJob]

:lol: How about a horseplayer's union? We become members of the Teamsters and then we would have clout. Of course, there'd be monthly dues, health and pension payments that would have to come out of track winnings. We'd have to bet a lot more to make those payments, or suffer a decline in our standard of living. Also the track payoffs would decline due to the extra amount of money bet. Nope, exit stage left! :lol:

NDJ