And you thought offshore bet shops might not pay...

[highnote]

http://www.drf.com/news/article/82704.html

Bet shop sues NYRA for funds
By MATT HEGARTY
Lien Games, the North Dakota gambling supplier and rebate-shop operator, has filed a lawsuit against the New York Racing Association claiming that NYRA's debt to the company should be paid immediately.

NYRA filed bankruptcy late last year, and Lien Games is listed under its unsecured creditors for a debt of $1.6 million. Lien claims in its lawsuit, filed on Feb. 8 in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of New York, that the debt should be repaid immediately because the money was already distributed by Lien to winning bettors and did not constitute one of NYRA's debts because the money was part of a parimutuel pool.

I agree with Lien Games. If the money owed them by NYRA was part of the pools, then why did NYRA keep the money? NYRA should have taken their cut and sent Lien Games their cut. But to keep Lien Games cut seems just plain wrong -- bankruptcy or not.

Maybe there is more to the story. ????

[fouroneone]

I think if NYRA knows the money was "dirty" or came from an illegal source they should have every right to keep it or forward it to the proper authorities.

[Thess]

http://www.thoroughbredtimes.com/national-news/2007/February/20/Off-track-outlet-sues-NYRA-over-settlement-payout-dispute.aspx


Off-track outlet sues NYRA over settlement payout dispute


By Frank Angst (fangst@thoroughbredtimes.com)

In a lawsuit filed in New York, a North Dakota off-track betting outlet accuses the New York Racing Association of failing to pay off winning bets by illegally including owed pari-mutuel payouts in its bankruptcy creditor list.

Lien Games Racing said NYRA violated New York law by not protecting pari-mutuel funds it owed the Fargo, North Dakota, company. Lien Games is suing NYRA for $1,634,303.97 for money owed on winning wagers on NYRA races placed at the outlet.

The Thoroughbred Times did a much better job with the article about the Lien Games lawsuit. The Daily Racing Form has a conflict of interest because they are also owed money by NYRA and also in bankruptcy court. Their lawyer has opposed Lien Games getting paid, even though the money is owed from the parimutual pools.

[highnote]

I think if NYRA knows the money was "dirty" or came from an illegal source they should have every right to keep it or forward it to the proper authorities.


Do you think Lien games is an illegal source of money or are you just saying in general NYRA has the right to do as you stated above?

I have always read on this board that NYRA didn't take bets from rebate shops. Why does NYRA take bets from this rebate shop and not others?

And if they take bets from this rebate shop, why don't they pay them what they are owed?

NYRA also owes TVG over $4,000,000!

What happened to all the money?

How did the most valuable racing property in the country fall so far?

-------------

Here's a statement from a Day at the Track press release:

About Day at the Track:
With offices in Novato, CA and Denver, CO; Day At The Track provides online wagering solutions for the thoroughbred, harness and greyhound racing industry. Licensed through the State of Idaho, Day At The Track also works with all U.S. and International Race Commissions and Horseman Organizations.

[rrbauer]

This is a case where a quasi-government agency is getting away with murder. But, of course, that's what they're used to. Screwing over horseplayers has just led to screwing over private corporations. Where's the bond they posted to guarantee that they would make payments of all money held in a fiduciary capacity? Oh! They didn't post a bond because they had the mighty state of NY behind them.

Yeah, right.

[Thess]

I think if NYRA knows the money was "dirty" or came from an illegal source they should have every right to keep it or forward it to the proper authorities.

Lien Games under went an investigation by the TRPB (thoroughbred racing protective bureau) at a considerable cost to them. None of the offshore betting shops have consented to this process.

Keeneland pointed this out, in a story in the Daily Racing Form.
http://www.drf.com/drfNewsArticle.do?NID=73588&subs=0&arc=1

One rebate shop getting track's signal

By MATT HEGARTY
LEXINGTON, Ky. - Keeneland is continuing to block its signal to most offshore rebate outlets, a spokesman for Keeneland, Jim Williams, said on Thursday, although one domestic rebate site has been allowed back into the track's pools.

The site, Lien Games in North Dakota, has been allowed to take bets on Keeneland races because, Williams said, it "fulfilled the due diligence and provided the information we requested" through the Thoroughbred Racing Protective Bureau, a racetrack-owned investigative agency.

[highnote]

Lien Games under went an investigation by the TRPB (thoroughbred racing protective bureau) at a considerable cost to them. None of the offshore betting shops have consented to this process.


Maybe Lien games should have investigated NYRA? :D

[Indulto]

Maybe Lien games should have investigated NYRA? :DLean times for Lien Games. I guess they were forward-looking in naming their company. What are they doing for their customers who still want to bet the bias at AQU?

[trigger]

If I'm not mistaken, Lien is a "private" OTB with the only two bettors being the owners.

[PaceAdvantage]

Screwing over horseplayers has just led to screwing over private corporations.

NYRA screws over horseplayers? Yeah, with their fight for lower takeout and their proactive approach to policing their pari-mutuel pools, I totally understand where you have the opinion that they screw over horseplayers.

Not.

[PaceAdvantage]

I have always read on this board that NYRA didn't take bets from rebate shops. Why does NYRA take bets from this rebate shop and not others?

Off-shore rebate shops.

[Thess]

NYRA screws over horseplayers? Yeah, with their fight for lower takeout and their proactive approach to policing their pari-mutuel pools, I totally understand where you have the opinion that they screw over horseplayers.

Not.

While I applaud the actions NYRA has taken in regards to what you listed. The fact remains, they didn't pay off all the winning bettors in their parimutual pool.

[Premier Turf Club]

Off-shore rebate shops.

When we were kicking around possible sites for our venture, one of the first ones we thought about was St. Kitts. Our conversation with executives at NYRA quickly made us change our minds. They told us something to the effect of "even if we were OK with an off-shore site based upon our investigation of the principals, the NYSRWB would NEVER go for it. We couldn't even present you because they'd laugh us out of the room."

We quickly decided Fargo was a nice place for a 2nd home.

[Hosshead]

NYRA screws over horseplayers? Yeah, with their fight for lower takeout and their proactive approach to policing their pari-mutuel pools, I totally understand where you have the opinion that they screw over horseplayers.

Not.Don't forget nickel breakage. :jump:

[PaceAdvantage]

While I applaud the actions NYRA has taken in regards to what you listed. The fact remains, they didn't pay off all the winning bettors in their parimutual pool.

Actually, all the winning bettors DID get paid by Lien, according to the article you posted. Lien is having trouble collecting from NYRA, but the bettors got their money.

[Thess]

In the article that I posted from the Thoroughbred Racing Times, I can find nothing that says that all bettors were paid, I know for a fact they weren't. I criticized the article in the Daily Racing Form because they have an obvious conflict of interest, in that their lawyers opposed Lien Games motion in bankruptcy court.

[PaceAdvantage]

The t-bred times article states the following:

Off-track locations typically square the books with on-track locations about once every 30 to 35 days. The off-track locations, of course, immediately pay bettors who turn in winning tickets. Those payouts, divided between the off-track and on-track locations at an agreed upon rate, are then typically settled about a month later, though outlets often will address very large payouts in less time.

If Lien didn't pay the winning bettors immediately, it is they who are screwing the bettors....they have to pay as soon as the race is official...

[trigger]

Lien and the bettors are one in the same!!!!!

[Indulto]

If I'm not mistaken, Lien is a "private" OTB with the only two bettors being the owners.
Lien and the bettors are one in the same!!!!!How do you know this if it's "private?"

[Thess]

In 2006, Horseplayers owned 44% of LGR. These Horseplayers, their friends and their families make substantial amounts of horse wagers at N.Y.R.A. tracks. These bets are a good part of LGR's business. Going into September of 2006, the N.Y.R.A was about 3 months behind in the payments of winning wagers to LGR. At that point, even though LGR was and still is a financially solvent company, the Horseplayers agreed to not cash any winning tickets until the N.Y.R.A. caught up with their payments. The Horseplayers continued to wager the same amounts by paying for all bets out of their pocket, while not cashing any tickets that came back winners.
The players brought nearly 2 million in horse wagers during September and October of 2006, while not cashing 1.6 million in winning wagers.

[PaceAdvantage]

Lien and the bettors are one in the same!!!!!

Do you think NYRA has a reason why they withheld payment to this particular OTB? Perhaps we should wait until the facts of this case make themselves known before further speculation takes place.

[highnote]

Do you think NYRA has a reason why they withheld payment to this particular OTB? Perhaps we should wait until the facts of this case make themselves known before further speculation takes place.


This whole story makes no sense. Why would a company agree not to cash winning tickets, yet keep making bets -- especially if the company who is supposed to pay those winning tickets has not been paying.

Definately doesn't seem like the whole story is known.

[PaceAdvantage]

This whole story makes no sense. Why would a company agree not to cash winning tickets, yet keep making bets -- especially if the company who is supposed to pay those winning tickets has not been paying.

Excellent question, and since we are apparently talking about significant sums of money, I can't wait to find out the answer....

[Thess]

This whole story makes no sense. Why would a company agree not to cash winning tickets, yet keep making bets -- especially if the company who is supposed to pay those winning tickets has not been paying.

Definately doesn't seem like the whole story is known.

NYRA had owed Lien significant sums of money in the past and had paid it down. You could make the same argument with the horsemen who are still racing even though they are owed over 15 million dollars in their purse account.

http://www.drf.com/drfNewsArticle.do?NID=80998&subs=0&arc=1

Horsemen sue NYRA over purses

By DAVID GRENING
OZONE PARK, N.Y. - The New York Thoroughbred Horsemen's Association has filed a lawsuit against the New York Racing Association to stop it from using any purse money to pay operational expenses or expenses related to NYRA's financial reorganization.



There seems to be some confusion as to how the betting process works. Last year a bettor at Lien won a sizable pick 6 at Santa Anita (around $600,000). Lien didn't pay the bettor until Santa Anita paid them. Lien is a middle man between the bettor and the tracks pari mutual pool. Without the racetracks guarantee that they will pay off all winning bets that are in their co-mingled parimutual wagering pools there would be no such thing as similcast wagering. Because of this Lien Games reasonably expected (expects) to be paid in full by NYRA.

[Indulto]

http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=37763

Betting Hub Claims NYRA Should Pay Out Wagering Payoffs
by Ryan Conley

A North Dakota betting hub has broken ranks from a massive lineup of creditors jockeying for position in the complex New York Racing Association bankruptcy case, filing a federal lawsuit that demands the racetrack operator immediately fork over $1.6 million in net payoffs it claims it is owed from wagering pools.

Lien Games Racing, which operates several gambling outlets in North Dakota, claims the net funds remaining after takeout are not NYRA’s property, and that New York laws regulating pari-mutuel wagering require mandatory payouts.

…Lien Games Racing, which in 2004 was awarded North Dakota’s lone simulcasting license after the fallout of the Racing Services Inc. scandal, is believed to include as a partner the prolific horse player Ernie Dahlman, who reportedly has wagered as much as $18 million annually on races.

[Thess]

It's true that Ernie Dahlman is one of the owners, the reason I am so knowledgable on this subject is because he is my father. I work with him everyday.

[highnote]

NYRA had owed Lien significant sums of money in the past and had paid it down. You could make the same argument with the horsemen who are still racing even though they are owed over 15 million dollars in their purse account.

Good point. People are not always rational.

Without the racetracks guarantee that they will pay off all winning bets that are in their co-mingled parimutual wagering pools there would be no such thing as similcast wagering. Because of this Lien Games reasonably expected (expects) to be paid in full by NYRA.

All money that is related to winning tickets in the wagering pools should be earmarked for paying off those winning tickets, right?. How can a racetrack commandeer those funds for uses other than paying off winning tickets? Isn't that theft? Or is that allowed?

Our government does the same thing with our social security payments. Every payment that has ever been made to social security should have been kept in a separate pool, but I don't think that is the case. So maybe NYRA operates the same way -- after all they are a quasi-governmental organization. :D

Who at NYRA is responsible for making the decision not to earmark funds from winning tickets to payoff those winning tickets? And if the money was not used to payoff winning tickets, what happened to it?

So, let me see if I have this straight....

1.) NYRA is behind in their pension obligations,
2.) they've spent money that belongs to the horsemen's fund
3.) they are taking money from the betting pools that should be earmarked for paying winning tickets and spending it on something other than paying off the bettors.

Is this correct? Or am I mistaken?

If #3 is true then I have to ask:

Do they have such a great disgregard for the horseplayer that they will stoop so low as to steal money from them?

I hope not.

[Thess]

Thanks, I can see you are catching on.

[bigmack]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnJK7kvbUzw

[PaceAdvantage]

Why would NYRA withhold paying off this rather private OTB? That's the main question.

Unless some sort of negative pool situation is at play here, how is paying off this OTB any different than paying off NYCOTB, or AmericaTab or YOUBET, etc? How is it any worse for NYRA financially...these bets should not be COSTING NYRA money, so why hold back?

The more that is wagered, the more NYRA gets in terms of their percentage take....they can't lose on any particular wager, no matter how large, unless said wager creates a negative pool.

So, what gives? What is the reason? NYRA is desperate for cash....perhaps they think they could get away with delaying payment to an OTB that has only a handful of players?

Are the whales at Lien still placing wagers on NYRA races?

[highnote]

Unless some sort of negative pool situation is at play here, [...]

...they can't lose on any particular wager, no matter how large, unless said wager creates a negative pool.


NYRA can't lose on a minus pool (negative pool) from an OTB wager. I forget the exact rule, but when there is a minus pool from an OTB, the OTB collects a certain amount from the player and refunds it to the host track.

The only way a track loses on a minus pool is if the bet is made on-track.

[Thess]

Every place that takes a pari-mutual bet is responsible for any minus pool created by the bet. Lien Games is still doing business post bankruptcy with NYRA.

The bloodhorse magazine article (http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=37763) (that Indulto posted the link to) should be read by anyone interested in this subject.

[highnote]

I have read this article a couple of times.

What if the state said, OK NYRA you own the property, but we're not going to renew your racing franchise license.

Then NYRA decides to sell the land. Who gets the money from the sale of the property and buildings?

Obviously NYRA. But who is NYRA? The board of directors? The employees? The state?

The money would have to go somewhere.

[Cangamble]

If Lien is doing business with NYRA right now, are they sending NYRA funds as bets are made? Do they pay right away or transfer right away?
I'm not sure how the procedure works, and if Lien is able to work down the amount owing.

[Thess]

Why would NYRA withhold paying off this rather private OTB? That's the main question.

Unless some sort of negative pool situation is at play here, how is paying off this OTB any different than paying off NYCOTB, or AmericaTab or YOUBET, etc? How is it any worse for NYRA financially...these bets should not be COSTING NYRA money, so why hold back?

According to NYRA the only place they do pari-mutuel business with, that they owed money to was Lien Games. From my understanding every place you listed normally owes NYRA money when they settle up.

[trigger]

Thess, how many persons are allowed to bet at the specific Lien OTB that is involved in the claimed $1.6 million NYRA "owses".
Trigger

[Thess]

I don't know the answer to that, but I'll try to find out and get back to you.

[Thess]

From what I understand, anyone can open an account with Lien Games, unless it contradicts an agreement Lien has with a racetrack or state law. For example, in NY Lien Games can't take bets from NY residents on NY tracks.

[highnote]

From what I understand, anyone can open an account with Lien Games, unless it contradicts an agreement Lien has with a racetrack or state law. For example, in NY Lien Games can't take bets from NY residents on NY tracks.


I thought this law was struck down in NY as being unconstitutional because it is a restriction of trade.

If non-residents can bet on NY races using wagering companies based outside of NY, then it is a restriction of trade to force NY residents to use only NY wagering companies.

Maybe I don't understand the law? If NY allows betting on their races from wagering service providers, then what difference does it make where the wagering service provider is located?

Maybe California is this way, too?

Seems wrong to me.

[Thess]

I've been told it's in Lien's contract with NYRA not to take bets on NYRA races from NY residents.

[highnote]

That makes sense.

[Cangamble]

From what I understand, anyone can open an account with Lien Games, unless it contradicts an agreement Lien has with a racetrack or state law. For example, in NY Lien Games can't take bets from NY residents on NY tracks.

Thess, I don't know if you missed my question, so here it is again:

If Lien is doing business with NYRA right now, are they sending NYRA funds as bets are made? Do they pay right away or transfer right away?
I'm not sure how the procedure works, and if Lien is able to work down the amount owing.

[bounce]

More to the story, absolutely. NYRA has NO INTEGRITY! I hope Spitzers people realize that....

[Indulto]

More to the story, absolutely. NYRA has NO INTEGRITY! I hope Spitzers people realize that....Is that a "Bounce Theory" or would you care to share some facts and/or observations that support your unequivical statement. I mean you wouldn't want to come off as an Empire shill in your very first post here, would you? ;)

[garyoz]

There could be a bankruptcy law and accounting component to this. If a company owes you money under a bankruptcy, you become an unsecured creditor with a claim against the company that is settled in a financial reorganization. That claim will be settled in the bankruptcy proceeding--and technically all the secured creditors get paid first, then the unsecured are lumped together as a class. NYRA declared bankruptcy on a Friday, November 3, 2006. I assume that it was before the racing day and all payouts, transfers, etc. from the day before had been settled, and they effectively started doing business with a clean sheet as newco under direction of a bankruptcy judge (or process).

I don't think betting proceeds are held in escrow--but rather just treated as course of business transaction and comingled with all of the revenues/expenses (such as DRF or TVG). Hence, if the OTB knew of the risk of bankruptcy, they probably should have sought advice of a bankruptcy attorney about being a creditor of a potential bankrupt company. For example, if you have a savings account, and the bank chapters, the bank does not make you whole. The Feds do through the FDIC insurance program. Likewise if you buy a product from a company and they chapter before they send you the product, but keep your money--you are just an unsecured creditor--or maybe your credit card company will make you whole and take the write-off. It is a caveat emptor world.

I'm not an attorney--but that is my understanding having spent many years in the world of junk bonds. I do know that bankruptcy is a game of hardball and strategies--companies want to chapter with as much working capital as they can--because they still have to operate on side of the Chapter 11 declaration. If you are doing business with a company that might chapter you have to know the rules.

[Thess]

Cangamble, Lien is doing business as usual with the NYRA with the exception that Lien and NYRA settle every 2 weeks. There was a new start on November 3. Anything Lien owes must be paid in full or NYRA WILL turn off the signal.

[alydar]

The fact is the negative settlements with OTB's are very rare. Ony a few OTB's regularly settle with NYRA on a routine basis wher NYRA actually has to send money to the OTB. Lien Games and RGS are probably the only ones, and NYRA cut off RGS.

Was NYRA robbing from Peter to pay Paul absolutely!!.

As mentioned earlier in this thread they have mishandled the horsemen's money.

If you look at the filing they owe money all over the place.

How Lien got into this mess is shameful. Racetracks have an obligation to pay winning players. That is the fundamental foundation of the game.

I would say that Lien should be asking themselves if they shouldn't have handled things differently. It wasn't news to anybody that NYRA was in trouble. Anybody that has a million plus exposure to them should have been on guard.

Nevertheless NYRA owes the money and should pay it, Period!!

I am very confident that nothing illegal is going on at this OTB.

In fact it is one of the only "rebate" shops that NYRA allowed to continue wagering with them after the Uvari and RSI scandals broke.

[highnote]

In fact it is one of the only "rebate" shops that NYRA allowed to continue wagering with them after the Uvari and RSI scandals broke.


Probably a blessing in disguise for the other rebate shops. ;)

[Thess]

Alydar, It was impossible for Lien Games to predict that NYRA would not honour their pari-mutual pool committment. In the history of pari-mutual wagering no racetrack has ever done this before. Lien fully expected (expects) to be paid in full. Thanks for your support.

[Indulto]

Alydar, It was impossible for Lien Games to predict that NYRA would not honour their pari-mutual pool committment. In the history of pari-mutual wagering no racetrack has ever done this before. Lien fully expected (expects) to be paid in full. Thanks for your support.Thess,
Since LGR still maintains a working relationship with the NYRA, could the Federal law suit be just a formality to ensure payment in the event the NYRA were to lose the franchise?

It appears as if the strapped-for-cash NYRA felt it had some leeway with LGR, possibly because they had been willing to do business with LGR despite keeping out other rebate shops.

[Thess]

Indulto, You make a very good point. I would call it a necessity instead of a formality though. Lien has to aggressively pursue it's right to get paid from the pari-mutual pool.

[highnote]

Maybe these are poison pill tactics by NYRA?

It's possible that since the managment at NYRA knows they might lose the franchise that they are trying to make it look as unappealing as possible.

Who would want the franchise if slots are not guaranteed? Who would want the franchise if there is a bunch of debt that the new owner will be obligated to pay? Who would want the franchise if there is no land and buildings?

Maybe the NYRA management is going to pillage and plunder the franchise before handing it over?

Whatever the scenario, one thing is for sure... NYRA are not going to give it up without a fight. And it does not appear that they are doing everything in their power to build up the franchise and give the new franchisees a peach of a business.

DISCLAIMER: This is all just MY HUMBLE OPINION. I have no way of really knowing any of this. I just read the news, read these posts, ask questions and try to put 2 + 2 together. The reality might be something totally different.

[Cangamble]

Cangamble, Lien is doing business as usual with the NYRA with the exception that Lien and NYRA settle every 2 weeks. There was a new start on November 3. Anything Lien owes must be paid in full or NYRA WILL turn off the signal.

Thanks for the reply, I was just curious how it works. I figure there are two separate accountings. One has to do with betting verses cashing. If $100,000 is bet at Lien for NYRA tracks and $90,000 is cashed, Lien would have to pay NYRA $10,000. I assume that Lien is paying something like 5 or 6% for the signal, so if the average bet was done with an 18% take-out, I would think that they get a rebate check for the difference, or $12,000 in the above case.

Is that how it works?

[Indulto]

... DISCLAIMER: This is all just MY HUMBLE OPINION. I have no way of really knowing any of this. I just read the news, read these posts, ask questions and try to put 2 + 2 together. The reality might be something totally different.SJ,
Isn't that what this den of uncertainty is all about -- a place for rampant speculation on all manner of topics, equine or otherwise? ;)

To actually be in possession of facts is of limited utility since each of the contrarians here -- and they are legion -– operates in his own reality. Changing of minds on this forum is an oddity that occurs by accident, not argument. Humility of opinion is a commodity less valuable than fertility of rumor. :D

[highnote]

SJ,
Isn't that what this den of uncertainty is all about -- a place for rampant speculation on all manner of topics, equine or otherwise? ;)

To actually be in possession of facts is of limited utility since each of the contrarians here -- and they are legion -– operates in his own reality. Changing of minds on this forum is an oddity that occurs by accident, not argument. Humility of opinion is a commodity less valuable than fertility of rumor. :D


LOL Very thoughtful response.

Maybe my humble opinions will generate rampant speculation and spark fertile rumors? :D

[Indulto]

http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=37995 (http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=37995)
NYRA Wants Lien Games Lawsuit Dismissed by Ryan Conley

…“No provision in the Bankruptcy Code distinguishes Lien Games from the hundreds of other pre-petition creditors, each of whom may be suffering from financial hardships as a result of NYRA’s Chapter 11 case,” the dismissal motion said.

The filing claims that Lien Games was twice denied separate consideration in previous legal overtures made to the court.

“Each frivolous attempt has … forced NYRA to expend a significant amount of valuable time and energy that would better be spend in furtherance of reorganization efforts,” it said.Speculating idly, I wonder how the amount owed compares with the amount LG rebated on wagers on NYRA tracks over that same period?

[highnote]

http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=37995 (http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=37995)
Speculating idly, I wonder how the amount owed compares with the amount LG rebated on wagers on NYRA tracks over that same period?[/color]


If this dismissal is allowed that would set a dangerous precedent, in my opinion. In the future, any track could just keep all the bettors money and in effect say, "Sorry. We're not going to pay you. We're declaring bankruptcy."

That means your hard earned money you bet with is never safe at any racetrack.

All money that is bet should bet "ringfenced". I believe that is the term used in England that means all money by bettors is set aside and is used only for paying off the winning wagers. The betting operators then take their commission from the ringfenced money.

We all know of some unscrupulous operators who have run away with their customers money.

Should NYRA now be added to this list of unscrupulous operators? Maybe NYRA figure they have nothing to lose, so they will just take the money and run?

[PaceAdvantage]

How does a not-for-profit entity "take the money and run?"

[highnote]

How does a not-for-profit entity "take the money and run?"


:D Good point. Poor choice of words.

Take the money and SPEND is what I should have written.

Maybe I'm missing something? Maybe if this goes to court I'll find the answer?

I don't understand how can racetrack management, in good conscience, can NOT payoff winning tickets when they've taken the money from bettors?

Maybe I don't know the whole story. I'm willing to give NYRA the benefit of the doubt. Innocent until proven guilty. But it seems dubious.

Imagine you're a big on-track bettor and you've got a $100,000 voucher. You decide you want to cash out. You take it to the window and the NYRA management tells you, "Sorry. We can't pay you." We've spent your money. Don't like it. So sue us."

Moral of the story. Never trust anyone with your money -- especially a racetrack on the verge of bankruptcy and on the verge of losing it's state sanctioned monopoly franchise.

How the hell does a monopoly lose money?

[PaceAdvantage]

You're right, we don't know the whole story. That's why I choose not to speculate.

However, I believe your analogy is not comparable. There are probably mitigating circumstances that we are not aware of....

I find it very hard to believe that NYRA has technology that will allow it to freeze out a certain OTB in REAL TIME. I think what we are talking here is the "settle-up" period which occurs every couple of weeks...this is what was explained earlier, correct?

Thus, bettors are not stiffed....the OTB is stiffed....of course, this isn't any more pleasant, but I don't believe bettors can be stiffed in real-time. Now, perhaps this particular (and I believe private) OTB has a unique set up where they don't actually pay their bettors until they themselves get paid off by NYRA during this "settle-up" period.

Perhaps the fella who said he was the son of Ernie Dahlman can clarify this once again.

[highnote]

My understanding is that the owners of the OTB are also bettors. Just because they own the OTB does not mean they should be treated differently.

From what I have read about Dahlman he has bet quite a bit of money into NYRA pools. His betting has helped the bottom line of the track more than most.

I would think NYRA would take care of their best players.

I know in my business my best paying customers get the most attention.

There must be more to the story. I can't see how NYRA can not pay the OTB if the amount owed to LG is money that was bet by LG.

How can a judge dismiss that claim. Or maybe NYRA intends to pay it, but is just delaying?

Will the new franchise owner pay NYRA's debts?

If the NYRA bankruptcy is successful and NYRA wins the new franchise, will they pay their old debts?

Too early to tell. However, I know what the moral obligation is.

I've had at least two clients go bankrupt, but they paid me out of their own pocket years later. They didn't have to, but it was the right thing to do.

So I'm hopeful that LG gets paid. It would be good for them and good for NYRA.

[Thess]

Perhaps the fella who said he was the son of Ernie Dahlman can clarify this once again.

My father is a bettor and he is indeed being stiffed. If anybody out there has any information that this is not the case please feel free to inform us.


-Joy

[Thess]

If someone is a partner(Ernie Dahlman) in a stationary store (lien games) and buys a lottery ticket at their store, the ticket then wins the lottery, who is the guarentor of the payoff?

Is the stationary store responsible for the payoff? If so how many stationary stores would be selling lottery tickets?


-Joy

[aaron]

Thess-
I hope your father gets his money. From, what I've read about him,he has always been an honorable man. I recall seeing him a few times when he played out of Suffolk OTB.
Good luck.

[PaceAdvantage]

If someone is a partner(Ernie Dahlman) in a stationary store (lien games) and buys a lottery ticket at their store, the ticket then wins the lottery, who is the guarentor of the payoff?

Is the stationary store responsible for the payoff? If so how many stationary stores would be selling lottery tickets?

I certainly understand your position and hope you folks get all the money that is owed to you. However, I have another question about this rather unique situation as far as OTBs are concerned:

It's obvious to me at this point that LIEN isn't your run of the mill OTB that anyone can enter and place a bet. Thus, I can only assume that it has been LIEN's policy since it originated (and before NYRA stopped settling-up) that winning bets will NOT be paid out by LIEN until NYRA settles up.

This is the opposite of every other OTB in existence, which pays immediately upon presentation of a winning ticket. Of course, these other PUBLIC OTBs are operating under the assumption that any money due to them from participating tracks will be paid during the settle-up period. That's why they pay their customers as soon as the race becomes official and as soon as a winning ticket is brought to the cashier's window. Obviously, NYRA can't pick and choose which OTB it wants to hold back on in REAL TIME.

Thus, I have to ask. Has LIEN ALWAYS operated this way (not paid off until settle-up is complete) and WHY have they operated this way. Do the few private customers at LIEN ONLY wager on NYRA tracks? If not, does LIEN also hold off paying out on winning tickets from all the other tracks from which it takes signals?

I'd also like to understand how NYRA ended up owing LIEN so much money.

Thanks your continued participation in this thread....

[K9Pup]

This is the opposite of every other OTB in existence, which pays immediately upon presentation of a winning ticket. Of course, these other PUBLIC OTBs are operating under the assumption that any money due to them from participating tracks will be paid during the settle-up period. That's why they pay their customers as soon as the race becomes official and as soon as a winning ticket is brought to the cashier's window. Obviously, NYRA can't pick and choose which OTB it wants to hold back on in REAL TIME.


Do these other OTBs payoff really large wins immediately? Someone hits a $600k pick6 at an OTB gets paid right then and there? I would be surprised if they did.

[PaceAdvantage]

Do these other OTBs payoff really large wins immediately? Someone hits a $600k pick6 at an OTB gets paid right then and there? I would be surprised if they did.

I would be shocked if they didn't get paid right away. What is the OTB going to tell them? Come back next week? I've never heard of that happening before.

They cut them a check after taking out taxes, and off they go....

[Thess]

Lien Games has an OTB that has walk up business and they also have account wagering that caters mostly to big players. All the walk up customers get paid immediately. The account players have the money credited to their account. When NYRA didn't pay most of the account players agreed not to withdraw their money until NYRA paid, believing that the money was guaranteed by the pari-mutual pool.

In the past(2005) NYRA owed Lien Games close to 2 million dollars. This had been paid down to approximately $200,000. In September of 2006, they started to slow pay again and in October, they hardly paid at all. This caused their money owed to go back up to approximately 1.6 million. Again the players knew the money was guaranteed by the pari-mutual pool.

To this day, that is our belief. Thank you for asking these questions, I'll be glad to answer anymore questions that are raised by my post. If I don't know the answers, I know where to get them.


-Joy

[Thess]

I would be shocked if they didn't get paid right away. What is the OTB going to tell them? Come back next week? I've never heard of that happening before.

They cut them a check after taking out taxes, and off they go....

Reposting what I said earlier on this thread in regards to this.

There seems to be some confusion as to how the betting process works. Last year a bettor at Lien won a sizable pick 6 at Santa Anita (around $600,000). Lien didn't pay the bettor until Santa Anita paid them. Lien is a middle man between the bettor and the tracks pari-mutuel pool. Without the racetracks guarantee that they will pay off all winning bets that are in their co-mingled parimutual wagering pools there would be no such thing as similcast wagering. Because of this Lien Games reasonably expected (expects) to be paid in full by NYRA.

With the pick 6 scandal and NYRA's refusal to pay Lien Games, an OTB operator would have to be insane to not have at least a verbal guarentee by the racetrack where the bet was won before they paid off a substantial winning player.

-Joy

[highnote]

With the pick 6 scandal and NYRA's refusal to pay Lien Games, an OTB operator would have to be insane to not have at least a verbal guarentee by the racetrack where the bet was won before they paid off a substantial winning player.

-Joy

Good point. An OTB could end up with a big liability if they get cheated.

[Pace Cap'n]

I would be shocked if they didn't get paid right away. What is the OTB going to tell them? Come back next week? I've never heard of that happening before.

They cut them a check after taking out taxes, and off they go....

You must not have seen too many backwoods OTB's. Several years ago when I was still in Oklahoma, I have personally had to wait 48 hours for $1,100 super payout from Calder. One guy hit for about $14K and it took several days for the track to make a wire transfer to the OTB. In fact, their literature states that large payoffs may take several days to settle.

[Indulto]

... Maybe my humble opinions will generate rampant speculation and spark fertile rumors? :Dhttp://www.nypost.com/seven/03152007/sports/rough_race_has_happy_ending_sports_ed_fountaine.ht m (http://www.nypost.com/seven/03152007/sports/rough_race_has_happy_ending_sports_ed_fountaine.ht m)

ROUGH RACE HAS 'HAPPY' ENDING By ED FOUNTAINE

March 15, 2007 -- Rumors have been rampant for months that Bill Nader, highly regarded chief operating officer of NYRA, was leaving bankrupt racing association for greener pastures. Latest report, which couldn't be confirmed on record but has ring of truth, has him possibly headed to Hong Kong Jockey Club. Nader, according to his office, is out of town and cannot be reached for rest of this week.I wonder how much responsibility said object of speculation bears with respect to the LGR situation? The timing corresponds to this announcement:

http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=38009 (http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=38009)
New York Franchise Bidders Get March 31 Deadline by Tom Precious

Bidders interested in obtaining the franchise to run New York’s major Thoroughbred racetracks will have to submit their plans to the state by March 31 and be prepared to face an “integrity review” by New York’s inspector general.

“It should be noted that the governor reserves his right to reject all proposals in the event that no entry demonstrates the required character, the ability to operate the tracks in a manner he deems satisfactory or provides sufficient value to the state,” Rifkin wrote.

… Costs of the “integrity review” will be paid for by the bidders. How will NYRA’s “character” be viewed in the light of the LGR issue?

[PaceAdvantage]

You must not have seen too many backwoods OTB's.

Guilty as charged. I guess I shouldn't have been so cavalier with my "I would be shocked..." comment....please excuse my ignorance.

[highnote]

You must not have seen too many backwoods OTB's.

Guilty as charged.

I'm telling you, PA, you need to get out of the city more often. Your provincialism is starting to show. :D ;)

[PaceAdvantage]

I can count the number of times I'm in Manhattan each year with one hand....but that's besides the point....

[highnote]

I can count the number of times I'm in Manhattan each year with one hand....but that's besides the point....


Shows you what I know. I was always under the impression you lived in NYC?

[GoBabyGo]

To this day, that is our belief. Thank you for asking these questions, I'll be glad to answer anymore questions that are raised by my post. If I don't know the answers, I know where to get them.


-Joy

Can the racing authorities in your state help you get the money back? Someone must regulate your OTB, right?

[Thess]

Lien Games answers to the North Dakota Racing Commission, so far NYRA answers to nobody.

[Thess]

Congratulations to Bill Nader, a good man. He no longer has to defend the indefensible.

[spilparc]

I'm confused. Someone please clarify.

Lien is an OTB. NYRA (New York Racing Association) is what exactly? Is it a repositor of bets? Do all wagered funds go into the NYRAs coffers to be redistributed to bettors and OTBs?

Why on earth would the NYRA be facing bankruptcy? I'm assuming it is a fact that the NYRA is facing bankruptcy. If that is the case what are they doing with the money? Why are they still allowed to operate? Are criminal charges pending?

My take so far is that Lien has not done anything wrong--they just aren't getting paid by the NYRA. Right or wrong?

Also, if the NYRA is facing bankruptcy, why is Lien still doing business with them. Stiffed once, shame on you--stiffted more than once...

Any clarification appreciated.

[Thess]

As I stated before, NYRA had owed Lien Games large sums of money in the past and paid it down. Post bankruptcy dealing with NYRA is governed by the Bankruptcy Court and settled every two weeks.

Lien Games was just approved by the North Dakota racing commission to start internet wagering and hopefully that will allow them to diversify.

[PaceAdvantage]

Everyone seems to be dodging the WHY question. Why this particular OTB? It's a pari-mutuel game....NYRA simply collects the bets, removes the take and breakage, and redistributes.

It should be no sweat off their backs if the few sharpies at Lien score out each and every month, as this money is covered by all the losers who have bet into the NYRA pools.

Even in a state of bankruptcy, or near-bankruptcy, it shouldn't matter. The pari-mutuel pool is the pari-mutuel pool. It's not LIEN against NYRA when they wager, it's LIEN against everyone ELSE in the pari-mutuel pools.

So, I ask again. Why has NYRA not settled up with Lien?

[spilparc]

So, I ask again. Why has NYRA not settled up with Lien?

Why is the NYRA in bankruptcy?

[Indulto]

Everyone seems to be dodging the WHY question. Why this particular OTB? It's a pari-mutuel game....NYRA simply collects the bets, removes the take and breakage, and redistributes.

... So, I ask again. Why has NYRA not settled up with Lien?I'm with you on this one, PA. I've been waiting for something plausible that doesn't give the NYRA a black eye. Everything else can be justified, rightly or wrongly, by the State's inaction, but not this one. Welching is unforgiveable in any gambling enterprise.

[garyoz]

I think that they haven't settled with TVG either (as I recall, TVG is also owed money) or any other creditor at the time of the bankruptcy filing. They can't settle post bankruptcy except under the direction of the bankruptcy judge and other secured creditors may have senior claims to unsecured trade payables. Haven't looked at the filing or the papers, but that is my guess. Under bankruptcy, you deal with classes of creditors--and don't cut side deals with individual creditors--it is a very formal process and NYRA answers to the court. Ultimately I would guess that Lien will get 100 cents on the dollar and probably interest on the money. The successor corporation will be very solvent with slots.

[Thess]

Everyone seems to be dodging the WHY question. Why this particular OTB? It's a pari-mutuel game....NYRA simply collects the bets, removes the take and breakage, and redistributes.

It should be no sweat off their backs if the few sharpies at Lien score out each and every month, as this money is covered by all the losers who have bet into the NYRA pools.

Even in a state of bankruptcy, or near-bankruptcy, it shouldn't matter. The pari-mutuel pool is the pari-mutuel pool. It's not LIEN against NYRA when they wager, it's LIEN against everyone ELSE in the pari-mutuel pools.

So, I ask again. Why has NYRA not settled up with Lien?

In November, my father and Bob Grekorka of Lien Game's met with Bill Nader and Charlie Hayward. My father gave his position that the money was part of the pari-mutuel pool and that Lien Games was a customer and not a creditor. Both Nader and Hayward said they agreed with my father and wouldn't oppose Lien's motion to get off the creditor's list. One of them even said, "We've borrowed your money at no interest"

Needless to say my father was very surprised when the NYRA lawyers opposed Lien's motion to be removed as a creditor. Apparently the president of NYRA Charlie Hayward, and the chief operating officer Bill Nader were over ruled by someone higher than them or NYRA's bankruptcy lawyers. My father has never received an explanation and has had no communication with them since the meeting in November.

Whose decision it was to put us on the creditor's list is something we do not know. Why was Lien put on the creditor's list? I don't know.

Barry Schwartz is still one of my father's best friends and has been very supportive of my father's position.

-Joy

[PaceAdvantage]

Why is the NYRA in bankruptcy?


There are many reasons why the NYRA is in bankruptcy. Allow me to count some ways:


They wanted to force the state's hand and get the issue of land ownership into the courts.
Various powerful state politicians in Albany decided early on that when the slots came to town, those that lobby the hardest reap the most benefits.
The Federal indictment of the entire NYRA (which was subsequently DROPPED after current management addressed many of the problems facing NYRA successfully) placed a huge financial burden on the non-profit racing association. Goes hand in hand with #2.
They ran out of money.
Now, interestingly enough, former Attorney General Eliot Spitzer (now Governor Spitzer), the man behind the NYRA indictment, had some very, VERY interesting things to say about another company that was indicted AS A WHOLE. That company was Arthur Anderson, and they were indicted over their participation in the ENRON disaster, which most would agree, was a much, MUCH more serious charge than allowing some tellers to mess with their tax returns. Listen to Governor Spitzer as he dances on the head of the hypocrisy pin:


Click the following link and fast forward to the 5:30 mark:

http://release.theplatform.com/content.select?pid=1sxElY90EMNb7Z_9H1oDaBaW8_8gDoE T

[PaceAdvantage]

I think that they haven't settled with TVG either (as I recall, TVG is also owed money) or any other creditor at the time of the bankruptcy filing.

Is TVG also a pari-mutuel type debt similar to the Lien debt?

[Thess]

This is Joy's dad. TVG's debt is different than Liens. This was made very clear by Mr. Hayward and Mr. Nader. Lien Games is the ONLY one on the bankruptcy list that is owed money from pari-mutual winnings.
One of the real disgraces in this sorry story is that all the while I was betting on NYRA races in September and October I was in the position that if I lost I was paying them, if I won, I wasn't going to get paid. Nice.

[aaron]

Your father was probably,NYRA's biggest bettor over the years and look what they are putting him through.The state government works in strange ways.
Who is really running NYRA ? You have stated that Nader and Haywood were on your side in the dispute.
Some person behind the scenes is pulling the strings. It becomes apparent that we really have no clue on the inner workings between the state and those people in charge of racing.

[Thess]

Yeah, my dad has bet on NYRA races for over 25 years (probably over 300 million bet). But the truth is, from the biggest player to a $2 show bettor, anyone who wins is supposed to get paid.

It's hard to make the integrity claim that NYRA has made when they don't pay off winning bettors in their pari-mutuel pools.
-Joy

[Zaf]

It's hard to make the integrity claim that NYRA has made when they don't pay off winning bettors in their pari-mutuel pools.
-Joy

Amen Joy,

Agree 1000 %

Z

[Indulto]

In November, my father and Bob Grekorka of Lien Game's met with Bill Nader and Charlie Hayward. My father gave his position that the money was part of the pari-mutuel pool and that Lien Games was a customer and not a creditor. Both Nader and Hayward said they agreed with my father and wouldn't oppose Lien's motion to get off the creditor's list. One of them even said, "We've borrowed your money at no interest"

Needless to say my father was very surprised when the NYRA lawyers opposed Lien's motion to be removed as a creditor. Apparently the president of NYRA Charlie Hayward, and the chief operating officer Bill Nader were over ruled by someone higher than them or NYRA's bankruptcy lawyers. My father has never received an explanation and has had no communication with them since the meeting in November.

Whose decision it was to put us on the creditor's list is something we do not know. Why was Lien put on the creditor's list? I don't know.

Barry Schwartz is still one of my father's best friends and has been very supportive of my father's position.This is Joy's dad. TVG's debt is different than Liens. This was made very clear by Mr. Hayward and Mr. Nader. Lien Games is the ONLY one on the bankruptcy list that is owed money from pari-mutual winnings.
One of the real disgraces in this sorry story is that all the while I was betting on NYRA races in September and October I was in the position that if I lost I was paying them, if I won, I wasn't going to get paid. Nice.Yeah, my dad has bet on NYRA races for over 25 years (probably over 300 million bet). But the truth is, from the biggest player to a $2 show bettor, anyone who wins is supposed to get paid.

It's hard to make the integrity claim that NYRA has made when they don't pay off winning bettors in their pari-mutuel pools.Thess and “Joy’s Dad,”
Your candid contributions are appreciated, applauded, and appropriate in this forum.

In my opinion, they also describe relationships which may explain why the Governor is very unlikely to choose the NYRA, why Mr. Schwartz was succeeded by Mr. Hayward, and why Mr. Nader might not have had a future in any New York racing operation.

Just as Mr. Spitzer needs to be distanced from his political connections -- particularly his personal friends and campaign supporters -- he will have to take the stance that the new franchisee needs to be distanced from such close ties with professional bettors; especially those who APPEAR to be receiving favorable treatment through lower “effective” takeout as well as instantaneous, comprehensive, and “last-minute” access to the wagering pools.

The issue is not a legal or moral one, but one that is as practical as it is political. If racing is still a sport conducted primarily for entertainment purposes -- as opposed to an investment exchange -- the “$2 dollar bettor” needs the same opportunities to profit over time as the “biggest player.”

No one wants whales to leave the game. Like most here, I personally admire the attributes that enable individuals to beat the game without illegal assistance. I also share the belief that racing’s LONG-TERM future depends upon the participation of many more minnows with the same chances for relative success irrespective of their bankrolls. I have no doubt that both Mr. Schwartz and Mr. Nader tried to lower takeout for everyone. Unfortunately, they apparently only succeeded for a select few.

[highnote]

In my opinion, they also describe relationships which may explain why the Governor is very unlikely to choose the NYRA, why Mr. Schwartz was succeeded by Mr. Hayward, and why Mr. Nader might not have had a future in any New York racing operation.

Interesting points.

Just as Mr. Spitzer needs to be distanced from his political connections -- particularly his personal friends and campaign supporters -- he will have to take the stance that the new franchisee needs to be distanced from such close ties with professional bettors; especially those who APPEAR to be receiving favorable treatment through lower “effective” takeout as well as instantaneous, comprehensive, and “last-minute” access to the wagering pools.

Are you saying that Dahlman APPEARed to be receiving favorable treatment?

Personally, I'm not too concerned with how something appears. I'm concerned if it is a fact that someone has instantaneous, comprehensive and last-minute access that I don't have. I don't see that being the case. You'd almost have to be on-track and getting a feed of the trifecta pools directly from the tote operator to have any big advantage.

It is my understanding that no one has access offtrack to anything but the win,place,show, exacta and quinella pools and maybe the probable payoffs on some bets like Daily Double, pick-3, etc. But not trifecta or superfecta pools.

And even if someone does have access to the pools they still have to know what to do with the info.



If racing is still a sport conducted primarily for entertainment purposes -- as opposed to an investment exchange -- the “$2 dollar bettor” needs the same opportunities to profit over time as the “biggest player.”

If I want entertainment I'll go to the movies.

Everyone should have the same opportunities -- and they do -- for the most part. Some people just work harder.

Some people are disadvantaged by the fact that they may not be as gifted intellectually as the next person. I know I suffer from that disability, but I find ways to overcome it.

Pittsburgh Phil was ruled off the track in the early part of last century by August Belmont. Why? Because he was too good. He made betting his occupation and the people who ran the track didn't like the fact that he won so much.

Nothing new here. No one likes winners. Look how much Steinbrenner and the Yankees are disliked because they are winners. I would argue that winners are good for the game. Steinbrenner and the Yankees generate press and that generates interest.

I sell "Efficiency of Racetrack Betting Markets" on my website for $200. I have sold a lot of copies of that book to people who think they can build elaborate computer models to beat this game. I doubt it, but more power to them. I welcome their money into the pools. "Efficiency" is doing for racing sort of what "Beat the Dealer" did for casinos. Casinos were so worried that blackjack players would become so good that the casinos would be forced out of business because they would lose so much money. Casinos even changed the rules of blackjack because of "Beat the Dealer".

In fact, just the opposite happened from what they expected. Many new blackjack players entered the game, but only a small percentage of them won. Casino revenue increased. Of course, casinos still tried to ban winning players.

It is incredibly difficult, time consuming and expensive to create a computer model that can bet millions of dollars and win money on horse races. Most computer models are probably losing.


No one wants whales to leave the game.

You'd never know it.

Like most here, I personally admire the attributes that enable individuals to beat the game without illegal assistance.

What illegal assistance allows bettors to win?

I also share the belief that racing’s LONG-TERM future depends upon the participation of many more minnows with the same chances for relative success irrespective of their bankrolls.

I agree more minnows are needed. But those minnows need to be treated a lot better when they go to the track otherwise they're not coming back.

I know I don't go to the track anymore. Why get treated like shit at the track when big and small players can sit at home or an office and bet in relative peace and get a rebate?

Hell, take away the rebate and most people are still not going back to the track -- unless they go there to play the slots and happen to bet a race or two.

The only way I'm going back to the track is free parking, free admission, free program and past performances and a free cup of coffee and a comped meal once in awhile. It would also help if the track picked up the bridge fare -- it's about $4 each way now. That's about $27 per day plus gas to get to the track on any given day.

If a typical player with those expenses stays at home and instead bets with a rebate that is about $30 extra handle for the track. Either way, the track is probably going to get 20% of that $30 -- whether it is through the consumption of goods and services on track or through off-track betting handle. So it doesn't seem like it's a big deal whether players bet at home or at the track.

In fact, you can close down every OTB and online betting site in the world and force people to go to the track to bet and racing will still be in trouble. One, a lot of bettors wouldn't go to the track. Two, tracks would lose simulcast revenue.

So for tracks to claim that having more people on-track is going to save them is probably wrong. Tracks need to grow handle any way they can.

You get treated a helluva lot better at a $2 blackjack table with a 5 or 7% takeout than you do at a NYRA racetrack with a 15-20% takeout. Unless of course you win too much at blackjack. Then you start affecting the casino's bottom line and then you get banned. Funny, the racetrack makes the same whether you win or lose. But if you win too much you risk getting banned -- or not paid.

Obviously, being treated well or poorly is not a function of takeout.

Winning is a matter of skill not of size of bankroll. Skill is what will give minnows the same chances of success as skilled whales.

Note -- there are probably whales who lose money, too.


I have no doubt that both Mr. Schwartz and Mr. Nader tried to lower takeout for everyone. Unfortunately, they apparently only succeeded for a select few.

Could you elaborate on this point? If they got NYRA to lower takeout, how did that benefit only a select few?

[Thess]

Indulto,
This is Joy's dad. I have been a professional horse player since 1964, long before there were personal computers or rebates. I started as a $2 bettor and I have been able to make a living (so far). I have never made a bet with any technology that gives me an edge on any other bettor as pertains to odds or getting in bets. I use the brisnet supertote for my wps, exacta or doubles odds (NYRA tote as a backup). I am opposed to "bach betting" and any other thing that is not available to the general betting public. I strongly endorse (and use) the formulator product of the Racing Form, the brisnet products, and the National Turf workout report for California. My daughter, Joy, is a huge help to me when it comes to the computer and in getting replays (Youbet, and Racereplays do a great job and I highly recommend them). She's worked with me for 2 years and has become a pretty damn good handicapper and I discuss every NYRA race with her. I also use the Ragozin sheets and find them very helpful. In short I still handicap the races the same way I did as a kid but I now take advantage of all the new products that are now available.
I believe very strongly that NYRA has broken the law by not paying me for my winning pari-mutual wagers. Regards, Ernie Dahlman

[Indulto]

Indulto,
This is Joy's dad. I have been a professional horse player since 1964, long before there were personal computers or rebates. I started as a $2 bettor and I have been able to make a living (so far). I have never made a bet with any technology that gives me an edge on any other bettor as pertains to odds or getting in bets. I use the brisnet supertote for my wps, exacta or doubles odds (NYRA tote as a backup). I am opposed to "bach betting" and any other thing that is not available to the general betting public. I strongly endorse (and use) the formulator product of the Racing Form, the brisnet products, and the National Turf workout report for California. My daughter, Joy, is a huge help to me when it comes to the computer and in getting replays (Youbet, and Racereplays do a great job and I highly recommend them). She's worked with me for 2 years and has become a pretty damn good handicapper and I discuss every NYRA race with her. I also use the Ragozin sheets and find them very helpful. In short I still handicap the races the same way I did as a kid but I now take advantage of all the new products that are now available.
I believe very strongly that NYRA has broken the law by not paying me for my winning pari-mutual wagers. Regards, Ernie DahlmanMr. Dahlman,
Thank you for responding and clarifying the extent of your use of technology. I’ve also been playing horses since the days of Kelso and enjoyed a father-daughter relationship in that endeavor.

It feels a little odd to be communicating with a genuine legend, but encouraging to know that just as some training legends still do it with hay, oats, and water, you also do it with “natural” tools -- superior thinking and intestinal fortitude.

I hope it was clear that I don’t view your “favorable treatment” as an infraction of the law, or that anyone able to take advantage of what is legally offered should refuse to do so. Rather, it seems to me that the real potential for increased handle sufficient to appropriately fund operations and purses at NYRA (and elswhere) -- without subsidy from slot machines -- lies with expanded participation by individuals whose volume would not currently qualify them for the rebates. In some ways restricting the rate of return possible through lower effective takeout to the skilled professionals is to new horseplayers what beating the incumbant is to a new political office seeker.

Would you remain profitable if you were not rebated, but overall takeout were lowered? If so, what do you think the appropriate takeout should be? Do you have an opinion as to the effects of lowering exotic wager minimums that you would be willing to share with us?

Finally, do you think that as a kid you would have been as attracted to the game as strongly by a racing environment matching that which exists today? Besides getting paid when you win, what else could make this sport/game more attractive to younger people?

[Indulto]

I: In my opinion, they also describe relationships which may explain why the Governor is very unlikely to choose the NYRA, why Mr. Schwartz was succeeded by Mr. Hayward, and why Mr. Nader might not have had a future in any New York racing operation.
SJ: <Interesting points.>

I: Just as Mr. Spitzer needs to be distanced from his political connections -- particularly his personal friends and campaign supporters -- he will have to take the stance that the new franchisee needs to be distanced from such close ties with professional bettors; especially those who APPEAR to be receiving favorable treatment through lower “effective” takeout as well as instantaneous, comprehensive, and “last-minute” access to the wagering pools.
SJ: <Are you saying that Dahlman APPEARed to be receiving favorable treatment?

Personally, I'm not too concerned with how something appears. I'm concerned if it is a fact that someone has instantaneous, comprehensive and last-minute access that I don't have. I don't see that being the case. You'd almost have to be on-track and getting a feed of the trifecta pools directly from the tote operator to have any big advantage.

It is my understanding that no one has access offtrack to anything but the win,place,show, exacta and quinella pools and maybe the probable payoffs on some bets like Daily Double, pick-3, etc. But not trifecta or superfecta pools.

And even if someone does have access to the pools they still have to know what to do with the info.>Do you disagree that Spitzer has to avoid the APPEARANCE of cronyism and favoritism? My intent was not to revisit our discussion on Robotic Wagering, but to show the parallel(s) between Spitzer’s situation and that of the franchise holder. Your use of the term, “understanding,” makes it APPEAR you are not certain.I: If racing is still a sport conducted primarily for entertainment purposes -- as opposed to an investment exchange -- the “$2 dollar bettor” needs the same opportunities to profit over time as the “biggest player.”
SJ: <If I want entertainment I'll go to the movies.>Are you saying you are never entertained by your participation in racing?SJ: <Everyone should have the same opportunities -- and they do -- for the most part. Some people just work harder.

Some people are disadvantaged by the fact that they may not be as gifted intellectually as the next person. I know I suffer from that disability, but I find ways to overcome it.

Pittsburgh Phil was ruled off the track in the early part of last century by August Belmont. Why? Because he was too good. He made betting his occupation and the people who ran the track didn't like the fact that he won so much.

Nothing new here. No one likes winners. Look how much Steinbrenner and the Yankees are disliked because they are winners. I would argue that winners are good for the game. Steinbrenner and the Yankees generate press and that generates interest.

I sell "Efficiency of Racetrack Betting Markets" on my website for $200. I have sold a lot of copies of that book to people who think they can build elaborate computer models to beat this game. I doubt it, but more power to them. I welcome their money into the pools. "Efficiency" is doing for racing sort of what "Beat the Dealer" did for casinos. Casinos were so worried that blackjack players would become so good that the casinos would be forced out of business because they would lose so much money. Casinos even changed the rules of blackjack because of "Beat the Dealer".

In fact, just the opposite happened from what they expected. Many new blackjack players entered the game, but only a small percentage of them won. Casino revenue increased. Of course, casinos still tried to ban winning players.

It is incredibly difficult, time consuming and expensive to create a computer model that can bet millions of dollars and win money on horse races. Most computer models are probably losing.>You’re right . Nothing new here. Everybody wants to win, but few are able to. And not everyone who receives rebates is a winner, but their potential advantage is a certain and distinct disadvantage to those who don’t. I: No one wants whales to leave the game.
SJ: <You'd never know it.>Think what you wish. I want to compete with them (you?) under circumstances where my dollar is as valuable as theirs and they contribute equally to purses. More importantly, I want more newcomers to the game. Would slots even be necessary without rebates? I: Like most here, I personally admire the attributes that enable individuals to beat the game without illegal assistance.
SJ: <What illegal assistance allows bettors to win?>Remember “Fix Six”, “A1 Rocket”, Sylvester’s Foggy Folly, the NY Ringer, the Arkansas “Buzzer” Derby, etc.I: I also share the belief that racing’s LONG-TERM future depends upon the participation of many more minnows with the same chances for relative success irrespective of their bankrolls.
SJ: <I agree more minnows are needed. But those minnows need to be treated a lot better when they go to the track otherwise they're not coming back.

I know I don't go to the track anymore. Why get treated like shit at the track when big and small players can sit at home or an office and bet in relative peace and get a rebate?

Hell, take away the rebate and most people are still not going back to the track -- unless they go there to play the slots and happen to bet a race or two.

The only way I'm going back to the track is free parking, free admission, free program and past performances and a free cup of coffee and a comped meal once in awhile. It would also help if the track picked up the bridge fare -- it's about $4 each way now. That's about $27 per day plus gas to get to the track on any given day.

If a typical player with those expenses stays at home and instead bets with a rebate that is about $30 extra handle for the track. Either way, the track is probably going to get 20% of that $30 -- whether it is through the consumption of goods and services on track or through off-track betting handle. So it doesn't seem like it's a big deal whether players bet at home or at the track.

In fact, you can close down every OTB and online betting site in the world and force people to go to the track to bet and racing will still be in trouble. One, a lot of bettors wouldn't go to the track. Two, tracks would lose simulcast revenue.

So for tracks to claim that having more people on-track is going to save them is probably wrong. Tracks need to grow handle any way they can.

You get treated a helluva lot better at a $2 blackjack table with a 5 or 7% takeout than you do at a NYRA racetrack with a 15-20% takeout. Unless of course you win too much at blackjack. Then you start affecting the casino's bottom line and then you get banned. Funny, the racetrack makes the same whether you win or lose. But if you win too much you risk getting banned -- or not paid.

Obviously, being treated well or poorly is not a function of takeout.>I didn’t intend this to be an on/off-track issue, either, but I confess I would find the whole idea of rebating (as opposed to lower overall takeout) more acceptable if on-track patrons received the maximum rebate rate without regard to volume.SJ: <Winning is a matter of skill not of size of bankroll. Skill is what will give minnows the same chances of success as skilled whales.We will have to agree to disagree here. A minnow needs skill to win, but a rebated skilled whale enjoys a sizable long-term statistical advantage over an unrebated skilled minnow.SJ: <Note -- there are probably whales who lose money, too.>For how long?I: I have no doubt that both Mr. Schwartz and Mr. Nader tried to lower takeout for everyone. Unfortunately, they apparently only succeeded for a select few.
SJ: <Could you elaborate on this point? If they got NYRA to lower takeout, how did that benefit only a select few?>It is my “understanding” that 1) overall takeout was lowered from it’s all-time oppressive high on the watch of these gentlemen, but that efforts to lower it further were frustrated by the state, 2) takeout was actually raised in Mr. Schwartz’s absence to effect cosmetic rebates to NYRA and NYS OTB account holders, and 3) significant rebates were available only to the extremely rare bettors who could establish special relationships like that which some subset of LGR bettors enjoy. If any of the preceding is inaccurate, I would appreciate being corrected by knowledgeable parties.

I wonder if NYRA could have/would lower takeout to match those on various wagers at some other tracks if they didn’t have to rebate whales.

[Premier Turf Club]

Interesting points.



Are you saying that Dahlman APPEARed to be receiving favorable treatment?

Personally, I'm not too concerned with how something appears. I'm concerned if it is a fact that someone has instantaneous, comprehensive and last-minute access that I don't have. I don't see that being the case. You'd almost have to be on-track and getting a feed of the trifecta pools directly from the tote operator to have any big advantage.

It is my understanding that no one has access offtrack to anything but the win,place,show, exacta and quinella pools and maybe the probable payoffs on some bets like Daily Double, pick-3, etc. But not trifecta or superfecta pools.

No one (to the best of my knowledge) has access to potential tri and super payoffs. They aren't in the tote feed.


It is incredibly difficult, time consuming and expensive to create a computer model that can bet millions of dollars and win money on horse races. Most computer models are probably losing.


I have an advanced degree and a great deal of background in statistics, and unlike most of the "computer players" I have 30 years experience playing horses.

I spent a year trying to build a black box model, but I could never quite get there. I got close (nearly break-even on most tracks with the rebate) but never got over the hump. The guy leading my web-site working in parallel to me, spent a year trying as well with a team of technical people. He pretty much got to where I got to. I don't think either of us would have ever solved it, no matter how much more time we devoted to it. To me, it's the equivalent of a club pro consistently being able to shoot in the low 70's. That's a great game, but not good enough for you to earn a living on the tour.

More power to those who have succeeded where nearly everyone else has failed.

[Indulto]

No one (to the best of my knowledge) has access to potential tri and super payoffs. They aren't in the tote feed.

More power to those who have succeeded where nearly everyone else has failed.But there are some who have succeeded?

[Premier Turf Club]

But there are some who have succeeded?

Yes. Peter Wagner, Bill Benter, and Alan Woods are 3 of the most noteworthy. They bet nearly every race at almost every track and turn a profit (with the rebate).

[Indulto]

Yes. Peter Wagner, Bill Benter, and Alan Woods are 3 of the most noteworthy. They bet nearly every race at almost every track and turn a profit (with the rebate).I was thinking of the Hong Kong team written up in "Wired."

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.03/betting.html?pg=2&topic=&topic_set=

I always wondered where Wagner wagered after RSI? ;)

[highnote]

[color=black][font=Verdana]Do you disagree that Spitzer has to avoid the APPEARANCE of cronyism and favoritism?

It's probably good if he can avoid certain APPEARANCES, but the facts are the most important thing.


My intent was not to revisit our discussion on Robotic Wagering, but to show the parallel(s) between Spitzer’s situation and that of the franchise holder. Your use of the term, “understanding,” makes it APPEAR you are not certain.

I may not be certain. I'm not sure what you're referring to. I have gotten a little lost in this conversation. :D



Are you saying you are never entertained by your participation in racing?

Of course, I am entertained by racing. In fact, just about everything about racing is entertainment to me because it is pleasurable to me. That's why I find it so interesting.

A newcomer may not find entertaining the same things about racing as I.

I find participating in an "investment exchange" entertaining -- competing against whales who gets rebates is even more fun because they make the pools more inefficient. When they get it wrong and I get it right I receive a huge windfall profit. I don't play every race -- only special situations.

I will make a trip to a local OTB when I see something of interest (since I can't bet online in Connecticut). Like yesterday's second race at Santa Anita. I bet "Made in California" to win and did not need a rebate to win. My belief is that is the rebate bettors who caused his price to be so high. How could the public let him go off at 4-1? He opened at 2-1 and drifted up to 4. I have waited since his last race to bet him and had made no bets in between. I have no bets planned. I'm on the lookout for the next special situation. I found everything about that race entertaining. I certainly found the betting market (investment exchange) the most entertaining thing about the situation and it was my primary motivator for participating in the race.

Watching horses run around a track is more entertaining when I have a stake in the outcome. Take away the financial aspect and I don't participate.

Try taking away all betting and purse money and see if it is all about sport. Take away betting and purse money and you will see that far fewer people will participate and find it entertaining.


And not everyone who receives rebates is a winner, but their potential advantage is a certain and distinct disadvantage to those who don’t.

I disagree. I just showed you how to beat them. The computer programs of whales can not outthink me. They have more stamina than me, but I'm smarter. Their rebates is what gives me an edge. It makes them lazy (in a funny kind of way).


Think what you wish. I want to compete with them (you?) under circumstances where my dollar is as valuable as theirs and they contribute equally to purses.

They do contribute equally to purses. Don't they? Isn't it just the case that the simulcasting/rebating OTB just chooses to share their profits with rebate bettors? Not sure of the economics here. I would argue that rebate betting whales contribute more to purses because they bet more.



More importantly, I want more newcomers to the game.

That is the most important thing. Track management should figure out ways to attract and retain new players. This is the one area where they do not seem to be doing a good job.

Would slots even be necessary without rebates?

Yes or else NYRA is totally incompetent. Which I don't think is the case. NYRA only allows one or two rebate shops (that I'm aware of). So I assume the bulk of their handle comes from non-rebate shops. They are in bankruptcy. The one organization in the biggest betting market in the country isn't solvent.

I would argue that if NYRA allowed all rebate shops to bet into their pools they would be solvent -- or at least closer to it.



Remember “Fix Six”, “A1 Rocket”, Sylvester’s Foggy Folly, the NY Ringer, the Arkansas “Buzzer” Derby, etc.

Good point. I thought you were referring to something else -- like some bettors getting illegal access to pools, Fix Six, notwithstanding.



I didn’t intend this to be an on/off-track issue, either, but I confess I would find the whole idea of rebating (as opposed to lower overall takeout) more acceptable if on-track patrons received the maximum rebate rate without regard to volume.

That would be called "reduced takeout". Write your politicians!

We will have to agree to disagree here. A minnow needs skill to win, but a rebated skilled whale enjoys a sizable long-term statistical advantage over an unrebated skilled minnow.

I agree, to a degree, but it also depends are the relative skill level of the two. On a given set of races, spaced out enough so I don't get burned-out, I can beat a computerized whale.

A rebate helps a whale stay in business and is a big advantage to a skilled whale. But I don't see that as a bad thing. It adds liquidity to the pools. I still profit when they are wrong (assuming I'm right.) And I better be right often or I won't be in the game for long -- with or without rebates.



For how long?

I suppose a losing whale will be around until losing ceases to be entertaining.



It is my “understanding” that 1) overall takeout was lowered from it’s all-time oppressive high on the watch of these gentlemen, but that efforts to lower it further were frustrated by the state, 2) takeout was actually raised in Mr. Schwartz’s absence to effect cosmetic rebates to NYRA and NYS OTB account holders, and 3) significant rebates were available only to the extremely rare bettors who could establish special relationships like that which some subset of LGR bettors enjoy. If any of the preceding is inaccurate, I would appreciate being corrected by knowledgeable parties.

This is my understanding of the situation, too.

But I would also add that the serious non-rebated bettor should find a place to get rebates if he/she thinks it puts him/her at a disadvantage.

I don't think a guy who bets $10 once every six months on-track or at an OTB gives a shit whether or not he gets a rebate. If you're betting $10 per day, every day, then maybe you can find a rebate shop that will take your action. Maybe you can even pool your money with a friend and establish an account.

The marketplace is dynamic. We can't expect the racing market to stay the same forever. Market participants must change with the times -- or perish.


I wonder if NYRA could have/would lower takeout to match those on various wagers at some other tracks if they didn’t have to rebate whales.

I doubt it. NYRA doesn't rebate whales. Rebate shops are the ones giving rebates to whales. Hell, NYRA can't even pay the rebate shops!

NYRA has a monopoly and they are in bankruptcy. I can't think of any organization that has a monopoly and still loses money. It's almost inconceivable.

Something is seriously wrong and blaming rebate shops is not going to solve the problem because it is not the problem. The problem is a lot bigger than a couple rebate shops.

Slots will put a big band-aid on the problem and make it appear that the problems have gone away because the track will be solvent and horsemen will race for bigger purses. Who knows, maybe takeout will be lowered?

Take away the slots; give the franchise to a new operator and maybe NYRA will be solvent.

Churchill Downs seems to be doing OK without slots. It might be the case that they are being subsidized by other tracks CDI owns that have slots. I don't know the particulars of their finances.

Maybe if a for-profit enterprise ran NYRA they wouldn't be in bankruptcy. Publicly traded CDI and Magna seem to be doing better than the monopoly called NYRA.

When a monopoly can't compete, maybe there is something wrong with the quasi-governmental model. Or maybe it's the politics of the state? Maybe a publicly traded company could negotiate the shark invested waters of Albany with more skill?

[Pace Cap'n]

Wow, did this get off-topic or what?

[highnote]

Wow, did this get off-topic or what?


Not totally. The thread was about Lien not getting paid by NYRA.

I think this thread has tried to explore the possible reasons.

[Indulto]

I find participating in an "investment exchange" entertaining -- competing against whales who gets rebates is even more fun because they make the pools more inefficient. When they get it wrong and I get it right I receive a huge windfall profit. I don't play every race -- only special situations.

I will make a trip to a local OTB when I see something of interest (since I can't bet online in Connecticut). Like yesterday's second race at Santa Anita. I bet "Made in California" to win and did not need a rebate to win. My belief is that is the rebate bettors who caused his price to be so high. How could the public let him go off at 4-1? He opened at 2-1 and drifted up to 4. I have waited since his last race to bet him and had made no bets in between. I have no bets planned. I'm on the lookout for the next special situation. I found everything about that race entertaining. I certainly found the betting market (investment exchange) the most entertaining thing about the situation and it was my primary motivator for participating in the race.

Watching horses run around a track is more entertaining when I have a stake in the outcome. Take away the financial aspect and I don't participate.

Try taking away all betting and purse money and see if it is all about sport. Take away betting and purse money and you will see that far fewer people will participate and find it entertaining.

… I just showed you how to beat them.Very entertaining how you got all the way from no rebating to no betting. ;)

How best to describe the above? Marginalizing minority opposition to rebates by minimizing minnows?

Minnow places bet. Minnow wins bet without rebate. Minnow’s volume and frequency don’t register on radar. Concept of return over multiple transactions doesn’t register with minnow. No harm. No foul. The game goes on. Or does it?… They do contribute equally to purses. Don't they? Isn't it just the case that the simulcasting/rebating OTB just chooses to share their profits with rebate bettors? Not sure of the economics here. I would argue that rebate betting whales contribute more to purses because they bet more.May your tongue get stuck in your cheek. :p … I would argue that if NYRA allowed all rebate shops to bet into their pools they would be solvent -- or at least closer to it. Even if signal pricing for rebate shops has gone from 3 to over 5% -- assuming it’s still 3% for other tracks -- how can a track operate with such a small share of over 80% of its handle?… On a given set of races, spaced out enough so I don't get burned-out, I can beat a computerized whale.Careful there, Capt. Ahab, Sir. It might depend on how much of the whale’s handicapping and/or wagering was computerized and whether qualifying volume was a function of frequency.… A rebate helps a whale stay in business and is a big advantage to a skilled whale. But I don't see that as a bad thing. It adds liquidity to the pools.So does reading PPs. :lol: ... The marketplace is dynamic. We can't expect the racing market to stay the same forever. Market participants must change with the times -- or perish.Note to NYRA: Getting pi$$ed off whales in your pools is a sign of the “Peter Principle.”… NYRA doesn't rebate whales. Rebate shops are the ones giving rebates to whales. Hell, NYRA can't even pay the rebate shops! Guns don’t kill people. People kill people. I pointed my finger at someone and nothing happened. :bang: … NYRA has a monopoly and they are in bankruptcy. I can't think of any organization that has a monopoly and still loses money. It's almost inconceivable. So LGR was playing for monopoly money.Something is seriously wrong and blaming rebate shops is not going to solve the problem because it is not the problem. The problem is a lot bigger than a couple rebate shops.What does it mean when a land development company wants your racetrack?

Slots will put a big band-aid on the problem and make it appear that the problems have gone away because the track will be solvent and horsemen will race for bigger purses. Who knows, maybe takeout will be lowered?

Take away the slots; give the franchise to a new operator and maybe NYRA will be solvent.

Churchill Downs seems to be doing OK without slots. It might be the case that they are being subsidized by other tracks CDI owns that have slots. I don't know the particulars of their finances.

Maybe if a for-profit enterprise ran NYRA they wouldn't be in bankruptcy. Publicly traded CDI and Magna seem to be doing better than the monopoly called NYRA.

When a monopoly can't compete, maybe there is something wrong with the quasi-governmental model. Or maybe it's the politics of the state? Maybe a publicly traded company could negotiate the shark invested waters of Albany with more skill? One thing almost everyone agrees on is that there should be no slots at Saratoga which happens to be the only meeting that pays for itself. But the local groups want to the track to continue to be operated with the others primarily, it seems, to benefit from slots revenue at Aqueduct and (shudder) Belmont. Does this make sense?

[Pace Cap'n]

Could someone give me the Cliff's Notes of how that last post relates in the slightest to the thread topic?

[highnote]

Could someone give me the Cliff's Notes of how that last post relates in the slightest to the thread topic?

I need them, too. I started to read the thread and think about a reply. But then I just didn't know what to say. Indulto, you left me speechless. :D

[Indulto]

I need them, too. I started to read the thread and think about a reply. But then I just didn't know what to say. Indulto, you left me speechless. :DSJ,
Then my work is done. Frankly, I didn't know how to respond to yours either, so I tried to find what humor I could. :jump:

[highnote]

SJ,
Then my work is done. Frankly, I didn't know how to respond to yours either, so I tried to find what humor I could. :jump:


Great minds think alike .... sort of? :D

[garyoz]

I believe very strongly that NYRA has broken the law by not paying me for my winning pari-mutual wagers. Regards, Ernie Dahlman

Technically, they have not paid Lien Games. Once again, this is different than not paying an individual playing through NYRA ONE or YouBet. A corporation (or LLP or whatever) was established to wager with NYRA. While I don't agree with NYRA stiffing anyone, it is still incumbent upon a corporation such as Lien to understand the implications of a bankruptcy of an entity they were doing business with. Lien was set up to legally capture rebates. The corporate or LLP organization carries cetain legal status with it. Certainly there were rumors of a NYRA bankruptcy and Lien should have established its status in the event of a bankruptcy or stopped doing business with NYRA before the bankruptcy.

It is a common strategy to string out your payables before you Chapter in order to maximize your cash on hand while operating under bankruptcy. This is a telltale risk sign to analysts. It is true that NYRA is using Lien's money as working capital. Lien will be in a position to recover the money and interest (probably) as NYRA tries to exit bankruptcy. Bankruptcy is a hardball business. I'm not taking sides--just trying to explain the dynamics.

(once again, I'm not an attorney--but I have bankruptcy workout experience as an analyst--so please correct any errors if I'm wrong--I'm just trying to provide some context as I understand it)

[Ernie Dahlman]

Garyoz,
Was it just Lien that should have cut off NYRA in anticipation of bankruptcy? Couldn't the players from Las Vegas have made a profit in September-October? The best gambling minds in the world run Las Vegas casinos and they didn't pull the plug on NYRA. For sake of argument let's say that the Vegas players won 2 million in September- October- and the Lien players had lost 2 million. Does anyone really believe that NYRA would not have paid Vegas?

In parimutual betting the betting pool is the ultimate guarantor of the payoff. The law is clear- the host track gets the takeout- the winning players "shall" divide the remainder of the wagering pool. Are you saying that Lien should have anticipated that for the first time in the history of NY parimutual betting winning bettors would not get paid? I think it's a disgrace.

Regards,
Ernie

[garyoz]

It is a disgrace. But, if I were doing business with a company with a high probability of reorganizing through Chapter 11, I would make sure that my cash was escrowed, or have some binding commitment of payment. NYRA may have picked Lien as a source of working capital because it is smaller and it has the fewest long term repurcussions. Strategic decisions are made in bankruptcy--an area where there is very little honor. Which I guess is my point.

What is the story on the money owed to TVG? What is the source? is it betting? or some type of of payment for video distribution?

My understanding is that they will have to pay you out in order to come out of bankruptcy or otherwise face the issue of "fradulent conveyance."

The bankruptcy/distressed security world tends to be a zero some game where no one gives away anything unless the law makes them. All parties will get away with as much as they can.

[Kelso]

it is still incumbent upon a corporation such as Lien to understand the implications of a bankruptcy of an entity they were doing business with.

<snip>

It is a common strategy to string out your payables before you Chapter in order to maximize your cash on hand while operating under bankruptcy

<snip>

It is true that NYRA is using Lien's money as working capital



Not a lawyer ... do know accounting.

I don't think a parimutual pool, gross or net, is a track's asset (capital); nor is what's owed on winning wagers a track "payable." Rather, I think the track is a trustee for someone else's money; similar to an attorney with escrow accounts.

If I'm correct, and NYRA has comingled pools with its own assets, then it has violated a fiduciary obligation, committed a theft ... and exposed one or more of its executives to some serious jail time.

But again ... not a lawer. (Not even a particularly good accountant. :blush: )

[Ernie Dahlman]

Garyoz,
I think you may have answered the one question I have had the most trouble with. Why Lien?
As for the TVG thing- it has nothing to do with wagering. I seriously doubt that TVG has ever had a "negative settlement" with any track. Ernie

[garyoz]

Not a lawyer ... do know accounting.

I don't think a parimutual pool, gross or net, is a track's asset (capital); nor is what's owed on winning wagers a track "payable." Rather, I think the track is a trustee for someone else's money; similar to an attorney with escrow accounts.
But again ... not a lawer. (Not even a particularly good accountant. :blush: )

I don't know about race tracks, and it may even vary by state, but I did work on several of the large casino bankruptcies in Atlantic City. In a casino, the cash in the cage is the majority of cash that you see on the balance sheet for the typical casino. They co-mingle the gaming assets with the corporate assets and it also part of the sources and uses statement (statement of cash flows) for the corporate entity. I'm not aware of escrowing of funds or separations accounting in the gaming industry (only in public utilities). I think the comingling is probably also true for the racetracks. I doubt NYRA would withhold Lien's money otherwise.

When the casinos chaptered they didn't miss a beat and kept using the same chips, etc. I believe that the whales or others with a credit balance were paid out. But, those were probably strategic business decisions. The casinos were insolvent because of leverage and inability to pay bond interest and principal payments. They needed a financial restructuring, Not analogous to NYRA--and fortunately for Mr. Dahlman there will be no financial restructuring. I hope he gets his cash plus accrued interest soon.

[Pace Cap'n]

I don't know about race tracks, and it may even vary by state, but I did work on several of the large casino bankruptcies in Atlantic City. In a casino, the cash in the cage is the majority of cash that you see on the balance sheet for the typical casino. They co-mingle the gaming assets with the corporate assets and it also part of the sources and uses statement (statement of cash flows) for the corporate entity. I'm not aware of escrowing of funds or separations accounting in the gaming industry (only in public utilities). I think the comingling is probably also true for the racetracks. I doubt NYRA would withhold Lien's money otherwise.

I don't know about casinos, but it is different with banks. If I walk in and make a deposit using a $100 bill, it is thrown in the cash drawer and may be handed to next customer cashing a check. The deposit itself, however, will be carried on the bank's books as a liability, not an asset, as it is due and payable to the original depositor on demand.

One would think any entity acting as a fiduciary would conduct transactions and maintain their accounts in a similar manner.

[Indulto]

… I believe very strongly that NYRA has broken the law by not paying me for my winning pari-mutual wagers.... Technically, they have not paid Lien Games. Once again, this is different than not paying an individual playing through NYRA ONE or YouBet. A corporation (or LLP or whatever) was established to wager with NYRA. Are handle minimums established for LGR and other rebate shops by the tracks as they are for individuals by ADWs? What additional tax advantages might there be for those able to wager as a corporate entity or as an/the owner of -- and primary wager source for -- an ADW? Could it be considered a vehicle for even further lowering of effective takeout, a subsidy, or just a bargain-priced convenience? Is the effect of IRS withholding alleviated in any way?… NYRA may have picked Lien as a source of working capital because it is smaller and it has the fewest long term repurcussions. Strategic decisions are made in bankruptcy--an area where there is very little honor. Which I guess is my point.Surely there is little honor and much disgrace in being forced to declare bankruptcy. I would think that fighting for financial and/or legal survival short of fraud trumps loss of status for most having to do so. Some would say there is less honor among creditors than debtors.

GO,
Your comments support the contention that NYRA really was forced to declare bankruptcy more because of financial pressure than for any perceived benefit of proving ownership for the purpose of retaining the franchise.… don't think a parimutual pool, gross or net, is a track's asset (capital); nor is what's owed on winning wagers a track "payable." Rather, I think the track is a trustee for someone else's money; similar to an attorney with escrow accounts.

If I'm correct, and NYRA has comingled pools with its own assets, then it has violated a fiduciary obligation, committed a theft ... and exposed one or more of its executives to some serious jail time.5X,
How could it be theft unless some of the money found it’s way into private pockets? It sounds like fiduciary incompetence more than malfeasance, but the death knell for the NYRA in either case, especially with the LGR suit. It will be interesting to see if the new franchise holder renews the relationship with LGR once they’re paid. I imagine the NYRA's failure to make the negative settlement together with the lawsuit it engendered will lead to changes in ADW contracts if not legislation.

[highnote]

Is this story getting much press outside of PA?

[Kelso]

How could it be theft unless some of the money found it’s way into private pockets? It sounds like fiduciary incompetence more than malfeasance



The track has, I believe, a legal obligation to segregate (in the books) all parimutual funds .. both before and after it accounts for its take. If the gross parimutual funds can be traced to any use other than takeout or paying winners, I believe that represents an act that is lot more serious than simple fiduciary failure. It is an intentional taking of someone else's money.

If "theft" is, legally, an inappropriate term to apply to a corporation, then there is, I will speculate, an analagous corporate label for the same criminal act.

Again, though ... not a lawyer.

[the little guy]

This is a fascinating thread and I regret that I came upon it this late. I have to admit I was more than a little surprised to see some of the posts contained within. While I have never met Mr. Dahlman, as a longtime player in NY I have certainly heard a great deal about him, and would have to say it was probably all positive. I loved the piece about him in the NY Times Magazine a number of years ago and have the utmost respect for his well known horseplaying talents and success.

That being said, and while I greatly appreciate hearing his side of the story, I do think it is relevent to at least include some other facts about this case. It was not, in fact, NYRA that refused to pay Lien, but the Judge in their bankrupcy case that ruled that NYRA could not pay them. This is a VERY important distinction that to my knowledge is absent from this thread. Essentially this is a prepetition claim and the Judge can't allow NYRA to pay Lien under Chapter 11. It seems to me that if NYRA were to disregard the Judge's order their entire bankrupcy claim could well fall apart.

When I refer to this as a " prepetition claim " it is my understanding that is because it was made before November 1 and thus falls under that category. Personally this feels like an unfortunate result, in Mr. Dahlman's case, of NYRA's filing Chapter 11. However, I also feel it is important to note the distinction between Mr. Dahlman's relationship with NYRA as a customer, due to his position with Lien, and the position most of us have as bettors on NYRA racetracks with whatever shop we use. Mr. Dahlman was able to receive what was essentially a substantial " rebate ", FAR greater say than the one I receive through NYRA-One, because of his Lien relationship, and VERY unfortunately this situation ended up putting him in this unfortunate predicament that most ( if not all ) of us could not be in.

Believe me, as a bettor, as well as someone who has nothing but the highest respect for Mr. Dahlman, I feel for him and personally hope he gets his money much sooner than later. However, I felt it was somewhat necessary to at least offer some other information about this case.

[highnote]

If that is the case, then are NYRA paying any other OTBs?

If NYRA are paying other OTBs, shouldn't they pay their oldest liabilities first?

How can an OTB who has money owed them from NYRA from yesterday, for example, have a more urgent claim than an OTB owed money from 2 months ago?

Or maybe that's the way bankruptcy protection works? The old creditors are put on hold. New creditors are paid first so that the bankrupt company can try to remain a going concern.

I suppose if new creditors thought they wouldn't be paid then the company would surely go out of business because they would have no suppliers.

[the little guy]

That seems to me to be a very valid and interesting question. I do not know the answer, or reason, but perhaps someone else does.

[highnote]

It might also be the case that the judge made an error.

[the little guy]

It is my understanding that Lien is NOT the only betting outlet in this predicament.

[Indulto]

... It was not, in fact, NYRA that refused to pay Lien, but the Judge in their bankrupcy case that ruled that NYRA could not pay them. This is a VERY important distinction that to my knowledge is absent from this thread. Essentially this is a prepetition claim and the Judge can't allow NYRA to pay Lien under Chapter 11. It seems to me that if NYRA were to disregard the Judge's order their entire bankrupcy claim could well fall apart.I hope it was NOT your intention to infer that the NYRA really wants to pay Mr. Dahlman immediately, but the Judge just won't let them. ;)

As a layman it appears to me that the NYRA legal and financial representatives had to have planned that the funds due LGR would fall into whatever category they did and that their plan was presented to the Judge for approval.

[garyoz]

They could have paid Lien before they chaptered. Once they chaptered TLG is correct, the Bankruptcy Judge makes the calls on asset decisions. It is a situation called Debtor in Possession. I still think that NYRA made the decision to not pay out Lien (and other OTB's?) in order to use their cash as working capital during the reorganization phase. They will ultimately get paid out--they have the power to stop any reogranization plan if they don't.

[Indulto]

They could have paid Lien before they chaptered. Once they chaptered TLG is correct, the Bankruptcy Judge makes the calls on asset decisions. It is a situation called Debtor in Possession. I still think that NYRA made the decision to not pay out Lien (and other OTB's?) in order to use their cash as working capital during the reorganization phase. They will ultimately get paid out--they have the power to stop any reogranization plan if they don't.Does the Judge make such calls without input from both the debtor and the creditor? What might have been the impact of LGR's suit on the proceedings in the Bankruptcy Court?

[Ernie Dahlman]

Andy,
I stand by every thing my daughter Joy (who posts as Thess) and I have said on this thread. The fact is that Lien Games is a customer of NYRA, not a creditor.

You really should check your facts before you post. The lawyers for NYRA opposed our motion to get off the creditors list. Bill Nader, Charley Hayward and Barry Scwartz have all told me we don't belong there. According to Charley Hayward and Bill Nader Lien IS the only wagering site owed parimutual money, contrary to your post.

[the little guy]

Ernie,

I never meant to intimate that I believed you belonged on the creditors list, and was only trying to present some pieces of the story that seemed to have been omitted, and I apologize if you felt I was defending one side or another. It may be a case where one could defend both sides and I certainly understand your side of the argument. If you are the only pari-mutual site that is in fact owed money then I was misinformed. It is certainly not hard to believe considering sites are far more likely to be debtors as opposed to creditors.

Whatever the case may be, once again, I certainly hope you get this money which is rightfully yours. I can only imagine how difficult this must be for you and wish you the best.

[bigmack]

Andy,
I stand by every thing my daughter Joy (who posts as Thess) and I have said on this thread. The fact is that Lien Games is a customer of NYRA, not a creditor.
I hope that all will be resolved to your satisfaction as it's clearly the right path.

One question: Why ceramic engineering?

[garyoz]

Does the Judge make such calls without input from both the debtor and the creditor? What might have been the impact of LGR's suit on the proceedings in the Bankruptcy Court?

Once again, I am not an attorney but worked as an analyst in High Yield/Distressed securities for more than a decade. We were always working with creditor's groups and their attorneys--so I really relied upon others to deal with the process side--my job was valuing the underlying assets.

So here's a simplistic take: Creditors are grouped according to their ranking on claims on assets--it is not like the equity market. It is driven by the capital structure of the organization and factors such as covenants in the various financial instruments (for example bank debt is almost always the senior debt because it is typically secured). What happens is you get an agreement by the various classes of creditors to a reorganization plan (typically you will have fights between the various classes of debt holders--but it won't happen in this case). Then you come out of chapter 11 reorganized as a new company(one rare alternative to Chapter 11 is Chapter 7, a liquidation of the company). Separate deals are not made until agreements are reached with all classes of creditors. Payments are made to the classes of creditors on the agreed upon scheme. The bankruptcy lawyers make a ton of fees and the company comes out as a "Newco."

A judge is unlikely to allow the payout of cash, except in the normal course of business as the company operating under Chapter 11 (haven't we all flown airlines in Ch. 11?) If a judge were to decide to pay Lien before coming out of Ch. 11, other creditors (especially senior lendors) would go nuts--arguing that this is fradualently conveying assets to a 3rd party while they (the other creditors) have a claim on them (the assets).

This is not a financial restructuring of NYRA due to a bad capital structure. I believe that everyone will get paid out--because the surviving entity "newco" has tremendous assets in land, goodwill, Net present Value of future cash flow (especially considering the addition of slots), etc. If they are not paid out, the existing creditors could claim that the NYRA assets were fradulently conveyed to "newco."

Once again, this is a very simplistic description of a complicated process. But the answer to the question is typically no creditors are paid out until a recorganization plan is agreed to, and if a company is defined as a non-creditor and paid out while the reorganization is underway, the other creditors could quite possibly take legal action--arguing an asset they have a claim to (cash) is being taken out of the entity. Especially if everyone is just going to get paid out anyway--why slow the process down and generate more fees for the attorneys.

[Ernie Dahlman]

Bigmack,
I chose to be a ceramic engineer because Alfred University had a program that gave free tuition for NY State residents. It didn't take away from my betting money. I knew in my first class in mechanical drawing that I would never make it, I couldn't draw a straight line. I transferred to Wagner after one semester. There I was much closer to Roosevelt and Yonkers. I was in my 40's before I learned what a ceramic engineer was.

Ernie

[bigmack]

I couldn't draw a straight line. I transferred to Wagner after one semester. There I was much closer to Roosevelt and Yonkers. I was in my 40's before I learned what a ceramic engineer was.
:lol:

I see Rutgers also has a program. I understood that my U of Chicago offered it as well though I was mistaken.

Free tuition so as not to dip into your betting pool, now that's inspired.
I read what a ceramic engineer is and I'm still a bit unclear.

It's a pleasure to have you around these parts.

All the Best

[m001001]

I hope I am not offending anyone, but without the benefit of knowing you in person, I found your opposition to batch betting perhaps self-serving.

I imagine you biggest competitors in recent years are the batch betting math-based computer teams who wager well over $100 million per year. I could be very wrong on this speculation, especially if your return has not been affected by the addition of computer teams in recent years.

Another question, if you don't mind, is how many races or tracks you can bet on per day, given what sounds like quite a labour intensive process of handicapping.

BTW does Lien offer batch betting in addition to rebate?


Indulto,
This is Joy's dad. I have been a professional horse player since 1964, long before there were personal computers or rebates. I started as a $2 bettor and I have been able to make a living (so far). I have never made a bet with any technology that gives me an edge on any other bettor as pertains to odds or getting in bets. I use the brisnet supertote for my wps, exacta or doubles odds (NYRA tote as a backup). I am opposed to "bach betting" and any other thing that is not available to the general betting public. I strongly endorse (and use) the formulator product of the Racing Form, the brisnet products, and the National Turf workout report for California. My daughter, Joy, is a huge help to me when it comes to the computer and in getting replays (Youbet, and Racereplays do a great job and I highly recommend them). She's worked with me for 2 years and has become a pretty damn good handicapper and I discuss every NYRA race with her. I also use the Ragozin sheets and find them very helpful. In short I still handicap the races the same way I did as a kid but I now take advantage of all the new products that are now available.
I believe very strongly that NYRA has broken the law by not paying me for my winning pari-mutual wagers. Regards, Ernie Dahlman

[Ernie Dahlman]

m001001,

I don't believe that I've been hurt by the people that do batch betting. Most of my bets are on NYRA races and I put a lot of value on shoe changes. I don't think that factor is used by them.

It is my understanding that the batch bettors can see the odds and make sizable wagers later than the other players, through their computers. They can see the hands of the other players before they play their own hand. I don't think this is fair.

I have no knowledge of anybody batch betting at Lien Games. Thank you for your questions.

Ernie

[cj]

While I admire your ingenuity with your situation and basically buying your own very nice rebate, many wouldn't exactly call that fair either.

[m001001]

Thank you for your answer, and sorry for second guessing your earlier comment.

I am batch betting a substantial sum, and I don't believe I can see any additional information in my datafeed that is not already available to the public. My advantage is my model's ability to quickly process the information consistently & automatically.

I do not have information not available to the public, such as tri, sup or p6 odds. But a good math based model can estimate all these with reasonable accuracy in the long term. I hope my ability to estimate is not considered as "seeing the hands of the other players." ;)

... It is my understanding that the batch bettors can see the odds and make sizable wagers later than the other players, through their computers. They can see the hands of the other players before they play their own hand. I don't think this is fair....Ernie

[Ernie Dahlman]

cj,

If you want to buy me out let me know.

Ernie

[Indulto]

cj,

If you want to buy me out let me know.

ErnieDo you already have signals for major tracks besides those for NYRA? Do you expect to retain the NYRA signal even if NYRA does not keep the franchise?

[Ernie Dahlman]

Indulto,

The answer to both questions is yes. Dealing with racetracks is the most frustrating business thing I have ever experienced.

Ernie

[Indulto]

Indulto,

The answer to both questions is yes. Dealing with racetracks is the most frustrating business thing I have ever experienced.

ErnieIs Lien officially recognized by those tracks as an on-shore rebate shop, or do the owner-bettor(s) achieve an effectively lower takeout through profits on the signals only?

[Ernie Dahlman]

Indulto,

Lien Games has 7 OTB's, 5 in North Dakota, 1 in South Dakota, and 1 in Idaho. These all pay track prices. Lien also has telephone wagering with track prices. For big bettors Lien follows the agreements with the host tracks, some of which don't allow rebates.

As an owner I can obviously profit from betting any track but with track rates being so high I do most of my betting on NY races where I have the most experience.

Ernie

[Indulto]

Indulto,

Lien Games has 7 OTB's, 5 in North Dakota, 1 in South Dakota, and 1 in Idaho. These all pay track prices. Lien also has telephone wagering with track prices. For big bettors Lien follows the agreements with the host tracks, some of which don't allow rebates.

As an owner I can obviously profit from betting any track but with track rates being so high I do most of my betting on NY races where I have the most experience.

ErnieAs NYRA-1 bettors get small rebates, certainly NYRA should not prevent other wagering sources from doing so. I just don't understand how the horsemen were convinced to support it; assuming they had to approve your contract.

Re: the "fairness" issue, I guess there are several sides to it. ADWs are businesses. Many horseplayers are subsidized by profits from their businesses or investments. If owners can run racing boards and tracks, then horseplayers should be able to own ADWs. IMO, however, there is little difference between CRW wagering by owners and insider trading in stocks.

Your advantage over the small player isn't unfair; rather it is unsporting. But then so are some owners, trainers, and the tracks. It certainly appears that even many recreational players here consider the game a market, now -- not a sport.

Your response to cj suggests there is potential for ADW-owning investment groups similar to horse-owning groups like "Team Valor." ;)

[highnote]

It certainly appears that even many recreational players here consider the game a market, now -- not a sport.

I've always viewed the actual race as a sport and the betting that takes place on the race as a market.

[Ernie Dahlman]

Indulto,

I believe the 7% that Lien Games pays for the NYRA signal is twice as much as Nevada pays. Nevada also gets paid whenever their players win, not so for Lien,

[Indulto]

Indulto,

I believe the 7% that Lien Games pays for the NYRA signal is twice as much as Nevada pays. Nevada also gets paid whenever their players win, not so for Lien,May I suggest you create a trailer using the bolded text. ;)

Your point being that the New York Horsemen get a better deal from wagers through Lien than from Nevada or even other tracks? Isn't that pricing even better for them than TVG's?

Way to go, Sport!

[trigger]

Thank you for your answer, and sorry for second guessing your earlier comment.
I am batch betting a substantial sum, and I don't believe I can see any additional information in my datafeed that is not already available to the public. My advantage is my model's ability to quickly process the information consistently & automatically.
I do not have information not available to the public, such as tri, sup or p6 odds. But a good math based model can estimate all these with reasonable accuracy in the long term. I hope my ability to estimate is not considered as "seeing the hands of the other players." ;)

m001001, Your term "datafeed" indicates to me that you are getting data electronically directly from a tote company's tote system . Also, your batch betting description indicates that you are, again, electronically directly accessing a tote system. When I say electronic direct access I mean there is no middleman involved like a teller or ADW, etc. Also I have no problem with so-called screen scraping of data(eg.,odds&pools, etc) that is shown at the same time to the public.
If this is true, putting aside the issue of you having ACCESS to tote info NOT available to the public, just the fact you presumedly have electronic ACCESS to info that is available to the public only on a TV or computer screen or a tote board and additionally have been given the capability to process numerous bets in milliseconds directlt to the tote system gives you a tremendous advantage over the public in a pari-mutuel setting.
Also, if this is the case, the fact that a tote company, to me, one of the keepers of a level playing field in a pari-mutuel system, would give someone this type of access to tote data is at best unethical and at worst illegal.

[highnote]

m001001, Your term "datafeed" indicates to me that you are getting data electronically directly from a tote company's tote system .

That's a big assumption.

I didn't get that impression. Maybe he's using BRIS or Phonebet or even his own ADWs toteboard feed.



Also, your batch betting description indicates that you are, again, electronically directly accessing a tote system. When I say electronic direct access I mean there is no middleman involved like a teller or ADW, etc.


Again, I didn't get the same impression. You can assemble some code of your own and then go onto BRISBET and send in a bunch of bets. It ain't that hard to do.

I would argue that this is possible with almost any ADW that allows betting over the internet. Hell, I think it would even be possible with Connecticut Autotote's On The Wire automated touch tone betting service. Read SKiena's book "Calculate Bets" to find out how to do it with CT Autotote.



Also I have no problem with so-called screen scraping of data(eg.,odds&pools, etc) that is shown at the same time to the public.


Maybe you don't, but BRIS does. They threatened to block my access to their site if I kept scraping data from the tote.



If this is true, putting aside the issue of you having ACCESS to tote info NOT available to the public, just the fact you presumedly have electronic ACCESS to info that is available to the public only on a TV or computer screen or a tote board and additionally have been given the capability to process numerous bets in milliseconds directlt to the tote system gives you a tremendous advantage over the public in a pari-mutuel setting.


Big assumption.

Also, if this is the case, the fact that a tote company, to me, one of the keepers of a level playing field in a pari-mutuel system, would give someone this type of access to tote data is at best unethical and at worst illegal.


That's a big if. I did not know that tote companies are in the business of dealing with individuals. I thought they only dealt with racetracks and ADWs.

Do they deal with individual accounts?

[m001001]

m001001, Your term "datafeed" indicates to me that you are getting data electronically directly from a tote company's tote system . Also, your batch betting description indicates that you are, again, electronically directly accessing a tote system. When I say electronic direct access I mean there is no middleman involved like a teller or ADW, etc. Also I have no problem with so-called screen scraping of data(eg.,odds&pools, etc) that is shown at the same time to the public.
If this is true, putting aside the issue of you having ACCESS to tote info NOT available to the public, just the fact you presumedly have electronic ACCESS to info that is available to the public only on a TV or computer screen or a tote board and additionally have been given the capability to process numerous bets in milliseconds directlt to the tote system gives you a tremendous advantage over the public in a pari-mutuel setting.
Also, if this is the case, the fact that a tote company, to me, one of the keepers of a level playing field in a pari-mutuel system, would give someone this type of access to tote data is at best unethical and at worst illegal.

You have assumed way way too much. First about direct connection to tote companies, and second about getting information not available to the public.

If you cannot accept that computer teams do not need access to special tote information to make money, then well... have a good day.

[highnote]

If you cannot accept that computer teams do not need access to special tote information to make money, then well... have a good day.


I agree.

I heard of one team that makes all their bets by phone. If internet wagering is ever outlawed they can remain in business.

[classhandicapper]

Everyone seems to be dodging the WHY question. Why this particular OTB? It's a pari-mutuel game....NYRA simply collects the bets, removes the take and breakage, and redistributes.

It should be no sweat off their backs if the few sharpies at Lien score out each and every month, as this money is covered by all the losers who have bet into the NYRA pools.

Even in a state of bankruptcy, or near-bankruptcy, it shouldn't matter. The pari-mutuel pool is the pari-mutuel pool. It's not LIEN against NYRA when they wager, it's LIEN against everyone ELSE in the pari-mutuel pools.

So, I ask again. Why has NYRA not settled up with Lien?

I know less than nothing about this story. However that won't stop my from "speculating". ;)

I've seen lots of shell games in my life and this smells like one. In my view, all betting should be settled in one account first. Then anything that is left over should go towards operations, purses etc... in a seperate account.

If I had to "guess", I would say that NYRA somehow managed to comingle its income and expenses.

If money was comingled, it was possible to use future payments to OTBs like Lien to run operations in the short term because NYRA didn't have to settle up immediately anyway. If they did that and the operations were losing a lot of money the IOUs would start piling up (like they did).

Now you have to ask yourself what happens if they don't get their operations under control and/or business does not grow as expected?

Then they no longer have the cash flow to pay places like Lien and can't generate it. That's when the gig is up.

Why they would choose Lien is a very good question, but it could be that they've had a more relaxed relationship with Lien as far as settling debts is involved. That's the way it sounded based on the fact that someone said large debts had accumulated in the past but were later settled. Perhaps this time the operatons were in worse shape and they simply can't settle.

All speculation, but not impossible given the lack of facts.

[classhandicapper]

By the way, that's why most major poker sites, Neteller etc.. were quick to to put player deposits in seperate accounts. That way player deposits could NOT be used for operating expenses. In the event a site went under, the players could be sure their money was still there. If comingling of funds was an issue here, it's a big issue. I repeat "IF"!!!!

[garyoz]

I know less than nothing about this story. However that won't stop my from "speculating". ;)


If I had to "guess", I would say that NYRA somehow managed to comingle its income and expenses.


Do you mean revenue instead of "income?" Income is what is left over after paying expenses (operating, interest, etc) and taxes. Revenues are the monies that a company receives in the sale of its goods and services.

There is a misperception in this thread that racetracks and casinos are banks--they aren't. The way I think of it is that racetracks receive revenues from wagers and ancillary sources such as Food, Beverage, admission, programs, etc. They payout about 82% (approx) of the money wagered to parimutual bettors in a predetermined manor (breakage, etc.), then have expenses of purses, maintenance, promotion, personnel, etc. and most important, payment of taxes to the State. There is no FDIC insurance on the money wagered--it is revenue to the track--and the payment of taxes is certainly a higher priority than paying out bettors. Likewise, meeting operating expenses is a top priority.

The good news, is there are plenty of assets (land, property, plant, and equipment--not to mention license to operate) that provide plenty of asset value to cover any day's racing handle probably a hundred times over. So creditors in a bankruptcy (including OTB's) have asset protection. The primary cost to creditor companies such as Lien is the opportunity cost associated with not having access to their capital during the period of reorganization.

One exception to the above paragraph would be for small tracks without signficant underlying property value that are highly leveraged (possibly Great Lakes Downs for example--although I'm certain Magna would always make all their tracks whole)

[Thess]

Under NY law NYRA has no choice, they shall payoff all winnings from pari-mutuel tickets.


The New york Pari-Mutuel Wagering and Breeding Law (the "Racing Law") provides in pertinent part as follows:

229. Disposition of pari-mutuel pools of nonprofit racing associations; percentage payable to state as a tax; authority of counties or certain cities to impose a tax

1. a. Every nonprofit racing association authorized under this chapter to conduct pari-mutuel betting at a race meeting or races run thereat shall distribute all sums deposited in any pari-mutuel pool to the holders of winning tickets therein, provided such tickets be presented for payment before April first of the year following the year of their purchase, less seventeen per centum of the total deposits in pools resulting from on-tract regular and multiple bets and twenty-five per centum of the total deposits in the pools resulting from on-tract exotic bets and thirty-six per centum of the total deposits in the pools resulting from on-tract super exotic bets, provided, however, that during the period July twenty-first, nineteen hundred ninety-five through December thirty-first, two thousand seven, fifteen per centum of total deposits in pools resulting from on-track regular bets and twenty per centum of total deposits in pools resulting from on-track multiple bets shall be retained by such nonprofit racing association plus the breaks... (emphasis added)

[trigger]

You have assumed way way too much. First about direct connection to tote companies, and second about getting information not available to the public.
If you cannot accept that computer teams do not need access to special tote information to make money, then well... have a good day.

I have no problem with computer teams that do their handicapping and betting without special access to tote systems and/or special assistance provided by tote companies..........good luck to them. Thats not what I'm talking about.

Can you be a little more detailed as to why I have assumed way to much about direct connection to tote systems and getting info not available to the public?

[trigger]

That's a big assumption.

That's a big if. I did not know that tote companies are in the business of dealing with individuals. I thought they only dealt with racetracks and ADWs.

Do they deal with individual accounts?


Yes

[Indulto]

...Do they deal with individual accounts?YesAnd you know this how?

[bigmack]

Under NY law NYRA has no choice, they shall payoff all winnings from pari-mutuel tickets.
The New york Pari-Mutuel Wagering and Breeding Law (the "Racing Law") provides in pertinent part as follows:
While the drama of your potential payout is mildly riveting, would you venture to guess that after all is said and done, Lien will be paid?

[Kelso]

The way I think of it is that racetracks receive revenues from wagers and ancillary sources such as Food, Beverage, admission, programs, etc. They payout about 82%

I think your perspective on the transactions is incorrect.

Tracks deduct their wager-related revenues (18%, in your example) from pools ... the gross amount of which they received, and the balance ("82%") of which they hold, in trust for those in possession of winning tickets. They distribute that balance on demand ... not at will. (Remember, tracks don't lose the money that winners win. That's because no track money is ever in the pools.)




There is no FDIC insurance on the money wagered--it is revenue to the track--and the payment of taxes is certainly a higher priority than paying out bettors.

Wagers are not revenue to tracks. Only takeout is revenue. (Note, from Thess' post, that New York's "Racing Law" refers to wagers as "deposits." Deposits are liabilities, not revenues.)

Taxes holding a superior position to other track obligations applies against only the assets of the track, not against the assets of winners. Each entity is responsible for paying its own taxes - from its own funds.




The good news, is there are plenty of assets (land, property, plant, and equipment--not to mention license to operate) that provide plenty of asset value to cover any day's racing handle probably a hundred times over.
This helps Lien only if NYRA wins the lawsuit in which it claims ownership of such assets. The State of New York claims otherwise.

As to that license ... understanding whatever you do about Spitzer's Circus, would you accept it as collateral on over a milliaon bucks?

[highnote]

Originally Posted by swetyejohn
...Do they deal with individual accounts?
Yes

Can you let us know some of the tote companies that offer accounts to individuals?

[john del riccio]

Under NY law NYRA has no choice, they shall payoff all winnings from pari-mutuel tickets.


The New york Pari-Mutuel Wagering and Breeding Law (the "Racing Law") provides in pertinent part as follows:

Thess,

If my daughter grows up be as interested in horseracing as you are with your POP, I'll be a happy man.....

JOhn

[garyoz]

[QUOTE=Thess]Under NY law NYRA has no choice, they shall payoff all winnings from pari-mutuel tickets.
/QUOTE]


Sure, they "shall pay"--and if they don't pay you can take legal action against them and in bankruptcy have a claim on the assets. Does the law say anything about escrowing monies wagered or securing them or the priority of payouts? Sounds like a trade payable to me, but I may be wrong. What contracts don't say (especially about structure and process) is as important as what they do say.

Once again, I am not an attorney so please correct me, but here's an example: you are GE and you ship 10,000 light bulbs to Kmart. Kmart puts them on their store shelves. Kmart declares bankruptcy. GE does not have the right to take the light bulbs back or demand their delivery. They do have the bill from Kmart for the shipment--and that bill becomes an unsecured credit claim in bankruptcy reorganization.

Also, let's say that you go to a casino and buy some chips to go play blackjack. If the casino declares bankruptcy while you are playing, it is my understanding that they do not have to honor those chips (although as Newco under bankruptcy reorganization they always do). An old company issued the chips and a new company exists when you try to cash the chips. The chips represent a liability of the company that chaptered.

Chapter 11 freezes all transactions for the old company, and newco doing business under reorganization starts with a clean sheet with all companies it begins to do business with and starts with a clean balance sheet while in reorganization. I am not sure, possibly my revenue analysis is wrong, and maybe the inventory analogy is better? Please weigh-in.

NYRA's lawyers must think that they are on solid footing for what they did. I don't disagree that it is sleazy. I am morally on Mr. Dahlman's side. Gamblers have far more honor than Corporations, and Bankruptcy Lawyers probably have a special place in Dante's Rings of Hell. I have just been trying to provide analytical context to try to understand this issue--please correct any false assertations.

[Pace Cap'n]

Can you let us know some of the tote companies that offer accounts to individuals?

No, I can't, but...

The Peter Wagner-RSI affair conveyed the distinct impression (impression, as I certainly don't have the facts) that at least one individual (Mr. Wagner) had a direct tote connection, and if one person does, then.....

[classhandicapper]

Do you mean revenue instead of "income?"

Yes I did mean revenue.

[highnote]

No, I can't, but...

The Peter Wagner-RSI affair conveyed the distinct impression (impression, as I certainly don't have the facts) that at least one individual (Mr. Wagner) had a direct tote connection, and if one person does, then.....

I don't think that is a direct tote connection. Wagner probably connected to RSIs servers. RSI probably then transmitted the bets to a wagering hub. The wagering hub then probably transmitted the bets to the host track.

In reverse -- the host track transmits the wagering pools. Some organization receives them. RSI or someone else -- and then Wagner accesses those.

I'm not sure what Wagner was doing is any different than being able to place a bet online with BRISBET.

Or maybe there is more to Wagner/RSI than I am aware?

[trigger]

Some interesting reading about direct access to a tote system with assistance from the tote company.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15719268
Couple of quotes from above referenced article:

........."after a glitch in a robotic wagering system used by one of IRG's customers"
............."Robotic wagering systems like those used by some high-rolling customers of rebate shops have over the past six years changed the nature of parimutuel wagering because the sophisticated arbitrage systems, coupled with large rebates, are designed to send hundreds of large bet combinations into the pools just prior to post, sometimes resulting in odd payouts and dramatic odds changes after a race has started."
........"IRG is based in Curacao and is owned by Youbet.com, the online horse race wagering operation. Youbet.com also owns United Tote, the bet-processing company that designed and services the interface between the robotic wagering program and commingled pools on behalf of IRG's high-rolling customers."
IRG has a CRW customer (the only one I think) that bets massive amounts of money(IMHO, $200 million a year).

[highnote]

Some interesting reading about direct access to a tote system with assistance from the tote company.

Interesting. I wonder who runs the tote system on-premises for Calder. Autotote or United Tote or some other tote system.

In any event, I doubt that the bettor in the article had direct access to Calder's pools. Calder probably transmitted the pools to various disseminators. Youbet or IRG then probably received the pools. The CRW then looked at the Youbet or IRG data, figured out it's bet then placed the bet with IRG. IRG then probably sent the bet to a disseminator or wagering hub and then the hub probably sent the wager data to Calder.

I seriously doubt the CRW had direct access to the Calder on-track pools and wagering system. The CRW almost certainly used the data networks of second and third party companies.

I don't think what this CRW did is any different than any of us here could do using BRISBET's wagering interface.

I could be wrong and would like to know more about how the process works. It's an interesting aspect of the industry.



IRG has a CRW customer (the only one I think) that bets massive amounts of money(IMHO, $200 million a year).


Any idea who this person or organization is that bets 200 mil. Or is this just a rumor?

[Premier Turf Club]

Interesting. I wonder who runs the tote system on-premises for Calder. Autotote or United Tote or some other tote system.

Amtote (see link) http://www.chrims.com/eventcode/eventcode.asp



In any event, I doubt that the bettor in the article had direct access to Calder's pools. Calder probably transmitted the pools to various disseminators. Youbet or IRG then probably received the pools. The CRW then looked at the Youbet or IRG data, figured out it's bet then placed the bet with IRG. IRG then probably sent the bet to a disseminator or wagering hub and then the hub probably sent the wager data to Calder.

That is correct. No one (at least to my knowledge) has direct access. The wagers are routed through an ADW into a wagering hub, in this case United Tote's Portland, Oregon hub.


Any idea who this person or organization is that bets 200 mil. Or is this just a rumor?

Yes, I know who he is, or at least know of him. That handle figure sounds right but I don't think it's all IRG as I understand he splits his play.

[highnote]

Amtote (see link) http://www.chrims.com/eventcode/eventcode.asp

Thanks for clarifying that. I figured that's how it was done, but wasn't sure.

Great link, by the way. Thanks!


Yes, I know who he is, or at least know of him. That handle figure sounds right but I don't think it's all IRG as I understand he splits his play.


Is his name a secret?

[Premier Turf Club]

Thanks for clarifying that. I figured that's how it was done, but wasn't sure.

Great link, by the way. Thanks!


Is his name a secret?

To be honest with you, I only have a first name (which I don't want to post and which may not be his real name either). He is not an American (or so I'm told) and he plays in both the pools and the bookmaking markets.

[highnote]

To be honest with you, I only have a first name (which I don't want to post and which may not be his real name either). He is not an American (or so I'm told) and he plays in both the pools and the bookmaking markets.


One thing for sure, there can't be too many people who bet 200 million per year.

[arkansasman]

Is his name a secret?

This is purely speculation on my part, but could it be Zeljko Ranogajec?

John

[Indulto]

http://www.drf.com/news/article/83711.html (http://www.drf.com/news/article/83711.html)
Panel proposes new OTB split By MATT HEGARTY

New York City Off-Track Betting Corporation should be allowed to retain a larger share of its revenue at the expense of the racing industry in order to improve its poor financial performance, according to the recommendations of a study commissioned by the city-owned OTB company released on Monday.

… New York City OTB Corp., which owns and operates all the offtrack betting parlors in New York's five boroughs, pays approximately 9 percent of its handle to the state's racing industry and its regulation, according to the study. The study said that the current percentage is roughly double that of what OTB paid from 1974 to 1981.Is comparing that 9% figure with Lien's stated 7% signal price apples to oranges? If not, our hero must be at least as formidable a negotiator as he is a bettor. ;)

[trigger]

I don't think that is a direct tote connection. Wagner probably connected to RSIs servers. RSI probably then transmitted the bets to a wagering hub. The wagering hub then probably transmitted the bets to the host track.
In reverse -- the host track transmits the wagering pools. Some organization receives them. RSI or someone else -- and then Wagner accesses those.
I'm not sure what Wagner was doing is any different than being able to place a bet online with BRISBET.
Or maybe there is more to Wagner/RSI than I am aware?

My take on the way the wagering info is processed is different from yours.
I believe that the tote company working for the given host track collects all the betting info from the various wagering sites (including the bets made at the host track and other totes) and this tote company(not the host track) transmits the pool and odds data to the wagering sites (i.e. host track, "guest" tracks, otb's, adw's,etc). I don't know if all bets are processed through a "hub" or not. But, to me, it doesn't matter because whoever is given special electronic access to the information within the tote system by the tote company either directly or via an special interface(probably restricted to read only) to configure bets and/or is given special assistance by the tote company to transmit bets via a special interface program as is done in the United Tote/IRG/Mystery CRW-Arbitrage Operator situation clearly creates ,in my view, an unfair system in a parimutuel setting.

[highnote]

My take on the way the wagering info is processed is different from yours.

I don't know the exact mechanics of how this is done, so you could very well be correct.

I don't know if all bets are processed through a "hub" or not. But, to me, it doesn't matter because whoever is given special electronic access to the information within the tote system by the tote company either directly or via an special interface(probably restricted to read only) to configure bets and/or is given special assistance by the tote company to transmit bets via a special interface program as is done in the United Tote/IRG/Mystery CRW-Arbitrage Operator situation clearly creates ,in my view, an unfair system in a parimutuel setting.

My only counter to your argument is that any bettor is free to do the same thing using several of the online toteboards and several of the online wagering companies like BRISBET.

Given this fact, it is not clear to me how anyone can get an unfair advantage.

And furthermore, this seems like a big opportunity for an ADW -- to provide a wagering interface for bettors.

Maybe this is what CDI and MEC are going to roll out with their Twinspires website? If they don't, they are missing a big opportunity. This is what the marketplace wants.

However, racetrack managements have never been known for the their desire and ability to provide anything more than the bare necessities for their customers.

[Indulto]

... Maybe this is what CDI and MEC are going to roll out with their Twinspires website? If they don't, they are missing a big opportunity. This is what the marketplace wants.

However, racetrack managements have never been known for the their desire and ability to provide anything more than the bare necessities for their customers.http://drf.com/news/article/83721.html (http://drf.com/news/article/83721.html)
Racing advised to get with the times By STAN BERGSTEIN
… Racing’s problems, Shanklin believes, stem from its outdated business models, not from the product.

… He would bring in contemporary young thinking and change the corporate culture, as General Electric did to save its day. If you don’t do it, he says, the innovators in the world will do it for you.

… Shanklin says racing needs an Internet model rather than a get-people-to-the-track model.

…Christiansen says racing is married to its old business model, trying to make new fans with parimutuel machines, which at the end of the day means racing is product-oriented, not consumer-oriented.

… Not enough people care about high-quality racing, Gene Christiansen believes, and if that isn’t addressed and racing does not as an industry find out what the recorded music folks found out, if we do not find a new business model that can create fans, create an interest in racing, nothing else is going to save the industry.

[highnote]

http://drf.com/news/article/83721.html (http://drf.com/news/article/83721.html)
Racing advised to get with the times By STAN BERGSTEIN


To borrow a teenager's phrase:

"Well, DUH."

Let me translate that for those of us who haven't heard that one...

"No shit, Sherlock."

[garyoz]

Its called "listen to your customers." Do you think racing execs think of bettors as customers? Perhaps they think of whales as their customers.

[Indulto]

To borrow a teenager's phrase:

"Well, DUH."

Let me translate that for those of us who haven't heard that one...

"No shit, Sherlock."Just thought you'd like to know that Bergstein and others agree with you.

You're welcome, Watson. ;)

[cees with dees]

This is Joy's dad. TVG's debt is different than Liens. This was made very clear by Mr. Hayward and Mr. Nader. Lien Games is the ONLY one on the bankruptcy list that is owed money from pari-mutual winnings.
One of the real disgraces in this sorry story is that all the while I was betting on NYRA races in September and October I was in the position that if I lost I was paying them, if I won, I wasn't going to get paid. Nice.

It seems to me, though NYRA is absolutely responsible for payment, your bets were made through a "middle man" and not directly with NYRA.
Shouldn't LIEN be paying and then collecting from NYRA??? Why should you have to worry about where the money comes from if you're wagering with a reliable source???
Another solution is, if you didn't win so much, this wouldn't be an issue. LOL
Regards,
Ben
By the way, mud calks on Whenlovecomestotown tomorrow????
Pellegrino did the same exact thing with Roxanes Dancer and Ed Miracle months back.
Upped them both in class out of jail and calked them both. Food for thought....

[highnote]

Just thought you'd like to know that Bergstein and others agree with you.

You're welcome, Watson. ;)


I know that and I agree with him.

My sarcasm was directed at racetrack execs and not at Bergstein.

[Indulto]

... My sarcasm was directed at racetrack execs and not at Bergstein.Is this politician deserving of a place on your list?

http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=38292 (http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=38292)
Report Suggests New York Racing Needs Reform by Tom LaMarra

The chairman of the New York Senate Committee on Racing, Gaming, and Wagering has released an annual report that lists the top 10 problems faced by horse racing in New York and offers solutions to each one.

... “The industry needs to immediately refocus its marketing strategies to attract patrons,” Larkin said in a release that accompanied the report. “To remain profitable and continue contributing to the state’s economy, we should implement my top 10 list of ways to revitalize the horse racing industry in New York.”

[trigger]

To borrow a teenager's phrase:

"Well, DUH."

Let me translate that for those of us who haven't heard that one...

"No shit, Sherlock."

Of course, the racing industry should improve it's use of modern technology to serve its customers better.
However, to maintain a level playing field regarding access to tote information and processing of wagers for bettors, technology implemented by the race tracks/tote companies should not provide an advantage to one type of bettor over another. The tracks/tote companies are supposedly in the process of developing a new protocol to process wagers that will probably resolve many possible problems in this area....however, they have been working at this project for 3 or 4 years and seem to be still be a few years away from implementation(typical!).

[highnote]

However, to maintain a level playing field regarding access to tote information and processing of wagers for bettors, technology implemented by the race tracks/tote companies should not provide an advantage to one type of bettor over another.

I agree. I believe that the playing field should be level with regard to access to tote information. And I believe it is.

As I have said countless times before on this board; anyone can set up software to do automated betting use BRISBET's betting service -- or some other betting services.

Hell, I did it myself and I'm not even that good of a programmer. The only reason I am not betting online now is because I am a Connecticut resident and we're not allowed to bet over the internet. It's not worth it to me to risk fines or jail time when I've got a family to support.

If an individual bettor doesn't know how to do connect to an online toteboard, all they have to do is start a thread on this board asking how to do it. I'm sure they will get plenty of responses.

If they still can't figure out how to do it, then there are plenty of people on this board who would probably be glad to be hired to do the job.

I spent several years trying to figure out how to do it, and finally did it. I had the desire and was motivated to go out and gain the expertise. So it really annoys me when people say it's unfair or the playing field is tilted. It isn't. I am living proof.

If you have the desire, the door is open. Simple as that.

I am certain there are no tote companies who are writing the software for any bettors. It's up to the bettors to figure out how to connect and what bets to make. The tote companies may give the bettors some specifications, but the bettor still has to bring some expertise to the table. No one is being spoon fed.

So I will say it again... when it comes to accessing tote information, I do not believe the tote companies tilt the table to favor any players.

I do believe that certain skilled players tilt the table in their own favor because they have knowledge of how to program systems to integrate with the tote companies' systems. But this is no different than a talented handicapper tilting his game in his favor by only betting when he knows he has an edge.

[DanG]

Big thanks to Joy and Ernie for participating here. Really appreciate the forum that PA provides. :ThmbUp:


Just one man’s opinion but how anyone could defend NYRA’s position here just boggles my mind. I could see a law student admiring how clever it was to classify this shop as a “creditor” and not as a “client” prior to bankruptcy ….but…As Ernie and Joy said…His “losing” wagers were never refused and similar large players at other hubs were paid simultaneously.

This is really sad that this could and / did take place. :mad:

[chickenhead]

Is his name a secret?

Kaiser Soze

[bigmack]

Who is Keyser Soze? He is supposed to be Turkish. Some say his father was German. Nobody believed he was real. Nobody ever saw him or knew anybody that ever worked directly for him, but to hear Kobayashi tell it, anybody could have worked for Soze. You never knew. That was his power. The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist. And poof. Just like that, he's gone.

[Indulto]

http://www.albanylaw.edu/media/user/glc/franchise_op_lost.pdf (http://www.albanylaw.edu/media/user/glc/franchise_op_lost.pdf)
Opportunity Lost - Questions for the New York Racing Franchise Applicants

... NYRA Questions
The questions specifically for NYRA are far more numerous than for both Empire and Excelsior. That is largely because, as NYRA stated in its presentation, its competitors are largely startups with no record at all.

… Why didn’t Lien Games get paid before bankruptcy? There are other rebating outfits with which NYRA does business (Bettor Racing in SD). Why weren’t they treated in the same manner as Lien? Was Ernie Dahlman of Lien Games correct when he posted on the Pace Advantage board that Bill Nader, Charley Hayward and Barry Schwartz have all told me we don't belong there. According to Charley Hayward and Bill Nader, Lien IS the only wagering site owed parimutual money, …

[Ernie Dahlman]

Indulto,

Thanks for the link. I believe it was written by Bennett Liebman who is the "Coordinator of the Racing and Gaming Law Program" at Albany Law School. He used to be a member of the NY State Racing and Wagering Board. He is probably the most knowledgeable person on this subject and he should be a member or consultant to any board making a decision as to who controls thoroughbred horse racing in NY.

Ernie

[highnote]

Indulto,

Thanks for the link. I believe it was written by Bennett Liebman who is the "Coordinator of the Racing and Gaming Law Program" at Albany Law School. He used to be a member of the NY State Racing and Wagering Board. He is probably the most knowledgeable person on this subject and he should be a member or consultant to any board making a decision as to who controls thoroughbred horse racing in NY.

Ernie


I read some other articles at the albany link. This is one screwed up industry. No wonder it is in decline. No one even knows whether it is legal to make a bet or not!

Lots of opinions, some arrests, some lawsuits, but still no good, concrete policy by the U.S. gov. Everything is vague.

[howardjim]

Everything is supposed to be vague, the legal and political systems are predicated on maintaining quarrels, are they not.

The trick seems to be balancing your expectation of fairness and it's nonexistence. My condolences to Mr. Dahlman, the industry seems intent on self-destruction, the convergence of greed, arrogance and ignorance.

[Indulto]

Indulto,

Thanks for the link. I believe it was written by Bennett Liebman who is the "Coordinator of the Racing and Gaming Law Program" at Albany Law School. He used to be a member of the NY State Racing and Wagering Board. He is probably the most knowledgeable person on this subject and he should be a member or consultant to any board making a decision as to who controls thoroughbred horse racing in NY.

ErnieMrD,
You’re welcome. I was pretty sure that it was Mr. Liebman that wrote it, but I didn’t want to direct any light away from someone less well known if, in fact, such an individual was responsible for the insightful effort.

I noticed that Lien Games was listed on the following page on the Churchill Downs website:

http://www.churchilldowns.com/news/racing_news/racing_news_05012007b.html (http://www.churchilldowns.com/news/racing_news/racing_news_05012007b.html)
Racing News

Kentucky Derby and Oaks 133 Wagering Outlets

by: Julie Koenig Loignon

Louisville, Ky. (May 1, 2007) --

Want to know where to place your bets on this year's Kentucky Derby and Kentucky Oaks? The following racetracks, off-track betting facilities, casinos and account-wagering providers have been authorized to accept wagers on the Grade I Kentucky Derby Presented by Yum! Brands on Saturday, May 5, as well as the Kentucky Oaks (GI) on Friday, May 4.

Authorized wagering outlets are listed in alphabetical order by host site, with all affiliated sites listed below. This list will be updated as new sites are added leading up to Kentucky Derby Day. NOTE: Churchill Downs Incorporated's new account-wagering service, TwinSpires (www. ... .com) will be accepting wagers on the Kentucky Derby and Oaks.

Race fans are encouraged to call in advance to confirm when the outlets below open for business on May 4 and 5.

… Lien Games (ND)
North Dakota Horse Park
Rumors
El Rancho Motor Hotel
Chips Lounge & Casino
Skydancer Casino
Eagles ClubDoes this mean that LG accepts wagers from the general public as well as “private” professionals? If so, does LG rebate the former group as well?

I noticed that none of your locations was designated as providing account wagering.

[Ernie Dahlman]

Indulto,

Lien Games has 7 OTB's that pay track prices.

Ernie

[Indulto]

Indulto,

Lien Games has 7 OTB's that pay track prices.

ErnieNo offense intended. I assumed that the document’s description as “rebating outfit” was accurate. I stand corrected. Another anomaly may be the name “Bettor Racing:”

http://www.bettorracingotb.com/ (http://www.bettorracingotb.com/)
… We have now moved to our new location in Flandreau South Dakota. Our new name is Royal River Racing and we are located in the Royal River Casino. …Neither name appears in the CDI list referenced previously.

Perhaps another question for the NYRA should be "Why did one of the businesses who enjoyed a preferred relationship with you now doing business under a new name?

[trigger]

I agree. I believe that the playing field should be level with regard to access to tote information. And I believe it is................................................ ................................................
I am certain there are no tote companies who are writing the software for any bettors. It's up to the bettors to figure out how to connect and what bets to make. The tote companies may give the bettors some specifications, but the bettor still has to bring some expertise to the table. No one is being spoon fed.
So I will say it again... when it comes to accessing tote information, I do not believe the tote companies tilt the table to favor any players.
I do believe that certain skilled players tilt the table in their own favor because they have knowledge of how to program systems to integrate with the tote companies' systems. But this is no different than a talented handicapper tilting his game in his favor by only betting when he knows he has an edge.

Swetyejohn, What would you call this?
"IRG is based in Curacao and is owned by Youbet.com, the online horse race wagering operation. Youbet.com also owns United Tote, the bet-processing company that designed and services the interface between the robotic wagering program and commingled pools on behalf of IRG's high-rolling customers."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15719268/

[highnote]

Swetyejohn, What would you call this?
"IRG is based in Curacao and is owned by Youbet.com, the online horse race wagering operation. Youbet.com also owns United Tote, the bet-processing company that designed and services the interface between the robotic wagering program and commingled pools on behalf of IRG's high-rolling customers."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15719268/


That's correct. There are three things involved. 1. The commingled pools.
2. The robotic wagering program. 3. The interface.

The interface is what sends in the bets, I presume.

The robotic software is written by the bettor, not by IRG or Youbet or United Tote.

IRG et al, may provide the specifications on how to place the bet and provide the interface for doing so, but they don't write the robotic software.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I wouldn't want someone writing my betting software for me. I would want to know exactly what is going on inside my code.

Think of it this way. I can write software that connects to the BRISBET interface and is able to place a bet . BRISBET didn't write my betting software. I wrote it and followed their specifications. However, in the case of BRISBET, I would have to figure out what those specs are by looking at the HTML of their site. It's pretty straightforward.

I would highly recommended the BRISBET site for anyone wanting to try this. Some of the other sites use JAVA. I think that might be a more difficult language to program for.

[trigger]

That's correct. There are three things involved. 1. The commingled pools.
2. The robotic wagering program. 3. The interface.
The interface is what sends in the bets, I presume.
The robotic software is written by the bettor, not by IRG or Youbet or United Tote.
IRG et al, may provide the specifications on how to place the bet and provide the interface for doing so, but they don't write the robotic software.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I wouldn't want someone writing my betting software for me. I would want to know exactly what is going on inside my code.
Think of it this way. I can write software that connects to the BRISBET interface and is able to place a bet . BRISBET didn't write my betting software. I wrote it and followed their specifications. However, in the case of BRISBET, I would have to figure out what those specs are by looking at the HTML of their site. It's pretty straightforward.
I would highly recommended the BRISBET site for anyone wanting to try this. Some of the other sites use JAVA. I think that might be a more difficult language to program for.

Swetyjohn, The article states that United Tote wrote some SPECIAL software specifically to facilitate the processing of wagers via the CRW programs of IRG's high rolling CRW customers!!!!!
Quote:
"Youbet.com also owns United Tote, the bet-processing company that designed and services the interface between the robotic wagering program and commingled pools on behalf of IRG's high-rolling customers."

There is no doubt that this kind of "assistance" by a Tote company for certain bettors creates an unfair advantage for these bettors (probably no more than 4 or 5 individuals). An advantage they are exploiting mightily by betting $200+ million a year in the first year of this program's operation.
Please note I have no problem with computer assisted handicapping.

[highnote]

Swetyjohn, The article states that United Tote wrote some SPECIAL software specifically to facilitate the processing of wagers via the CRW programs of IRG's high rolling CRW customers!!!!!

I don't remember reading the software was specifically written for high rolling CRW customers. How do you know only specific customers can use it? Maybe all their customers can use it?

You might be right. From the information in the article, I can't jump to that conclusion.



There is no doubt that this kind of "assistance" by a Tote company for certain bettors creates an unfair advantage for these bettors (probably no more than 4 or 5 individuals).

Again, that's an assumption I am not willing to make. It might be true. But there is no way of me knowing for sure. But even if it is true, I don't care. I'm happy to have all this liquidity. Computer bettors don't always get it right. When they are wrong, others can make a killing. You just gotta pick your spots.


An advantage they are exploiting mightily by betting $200+ million a year in the first year of this program's operation.

Good. I hope they bet a billion per year. The more the better as far as I'm concerned.


Please note I have no problem with computer assisted handicapping.

Noted.

[trigger]

Swetyjohn, :bang:Would you be interested in playing some poker(Texas Hold'em)....I'll deal all the time so you can concentrate on playing your cards. Trigger

[Indulto]

... Again, that's an assumption I am not willing to make. It might be true. But there is no way of me knowing for sure. But even if it is true, I don't care. I'm happy to have all this liquidity. Computer bettors don't always get it right. When they are wrong, others can make a killing. You just gotta pick your spots.SJ,
You might be right, but how would you know if it were whale money you were winning, especially before making your bet?

As I understand it, those using tote company robots can always wait until your money is already in the pools before performining the analysis that allows them to optimize their wager distribution.

Is there any source of data that would tells us when robots are successful and when they're not?

[highnote]

Swetyjohn, :bang:Would you be interested in playing some poker(Texas Hold'em)....I'll deal all the time so you can concentrate on playing your cards. Trigger


I'm not big into poker, but how about single deck blackjack?

[highnote]

SJ,
You might be right, but how would you know if it were whale money you were winning, especially before making your bet?

How do you know if it isn't whale money you're winning?

As I understand it, those using tote company robots can always wait until your money is already in the pools before performining the analysis that allows them to optimize their wager distribution.

I can wait until the whale money is into the pool, too. It's not inconceivable that you could sit at the racetrack with a wireless laptop and wait until the last horse is almost in the gate and then place your bet using BRISBET or some other online service -- or even at a self-service betting terminal.

It's simply a question of how badly do you want to win and to what lengths are you willing to go. If you're will to go the extra mile you can make money.

It's a poor craftsman that blames his tools (or lack of them).

[Indulto]

I can wait until the whale money is into the pool, too. It's not inconceivable that you could sit at the racetrack with a wireless laptop and wait until the last horse is almost in the gate and then place your bet using BRISBET or some other online service -- or even at a self-service betting terminal.Talk about contrived examples. I invite you to try getting to a self-service terminal at HOL close to post, or even riskier, holding one up while you waited for the final odds. :lol: It's simply a question of how badly do you want to win and to what lengths are you willing to go. If you're will to go the extra mile you can make money.No argument there, but some might question whether the time investment combined with the return rate warranted the effort required for the non-automated exercise you propose.It's a poor craftsman that blames his tools (or lack of them).I thought this discussion centered on the appropriateness of CRW rather than any individual's results.

As far as “craftsmanship” goes, your response reminded me of a programming seminar I once attended prior to the PC era. Some attendees would not be reimbursed for the class without receiving a grade. The instructor’s solution was to hold a tournament of hearts-playing programs developed by four teams of students. Grades A through D would be awarded by order of team finish in the tournament. Not fielding a functioning program would earn an F.

The team to which I was assigned had several members for whom reimbursement was critical and some whose ego demanded an A. The latter rejected a simplistic "strategy string" approach which would simply search a static pre-sequenced "to play" array of 51 cards associated with each of 52 "played" cards for the first entry matching a dynamic "dealt hand remainder" array element.

Apparently a similar variance in levels of competitiveness permeated at least one other team. Those of us willing to accept a D formed a team to implement the "strategy strings" and let the other newly-comprised three mix it up until the instructor-imposed deadline. I suppose I could have contacted the instructor, but I decided I didn’t really care why I received an A in the mail. I think I was in Jr. High School when I became convinced that it’s better to be lucky than good. ;)

[highnote]

[color=black]Talk about contrived examples.

I thought Trigger's poker example was more contrived than mine. :D

I invite you to try getting to a self-service terminal at HOL close to post, or even riskier, holding one up while you waited for the final odds. :lol:

Don't they have tables in the restaurant that have self-service terminals right at the table? I'm pretty sure they have them at lowly Aqueduct.

I only go to Saratoga and I can bet right at the last second at many of the machines near the Carousel restaurant.

But all that aside, for crissakes, I can get friggin' video on my cell phone. Anyone who complains about being shut out at a betting machine needs to realize that this ain't 1983 anymore.

Plus, my example does not seem contrived to me. It's reality. Ask Dave Schwartz, et al. They bring a ton of hi-tech gear to the tent at Saratoga and bet online from their picnic table.

If there's a will there's a way. Problem is, people without the will would rather complain than improve their own situation.

One of my favorite quotes: "Righteous indignation can be traced to envy." -- H.G. Wells.

Or from George Harrison: "It's easier to see somebody else's wealth than to see yourself."



No argument there, but some might question whether the time investment combined with the return rate warranted the effort required for the non-automated exercise you propose.

For some reason this reminds me of a quote made by a football coach from one of the top southern programs after his team beat another team something like 80 to nothing. The losing coach complained about having the score run up on his team. The winning coach said something like, "If you don't like getting beat so bad then get better players."

If you don't put in the time and effort to do whatever it takes to be competitive then don't complain.

The big time winning gamblers and betting teams are successful because they have spent a lot of resources to become successful. It's not easy at the top. Everybody wants to bring you down.

Madonna, Jessica Simpson, Bob Dylan, etc. have worked long, hard hours to get to the top and they have to endure endless criticism.

While some are busy criticising, others are busy making money.

I thought this discussion centered on the appropriateness of CRW rather than any individual's results.

Yeah, me too. However, the only reason anyone is complaining is because they are probably getting crappy results. :D

Which reminds me of another quote from Mark Burnett. He's the producer of "Survivor", "The Apprentice" and "The Contender". He was a paratrooper in the British military and fought in the Falklands.

One of the rules they had in the military: Never complain.

I'd expand on that: Never complain -- just get the f---ing job done.

That said, please realize I'm not trying to insult anyone. I'd love to buy you or Trigger a beer and discuss this in person. I like to tease. I like a battle of wits. I like to push and prod. For me, I love the discussion. I think it helps get to the heart of the matter and helps to find a solution that benefits everyone.

I'm going soft. Sorry.

I also like to raise issues about the racing industry. The industry is deficient in so many ways. Wireless betting should be available from anywhere at the racetrack. They should give away handheld betting devices. Don't get me started on what a bad job the industry is doing in this area.

[Indulto]

... Wireless betting should be available from anywhere at the racetrack. They should give away handheld betting devices.Now you’re talking. And they don’t even have to GIVE them away; just let patrons use them at no cost, returning them when they cash out and/or reclaim a deposit.

They could take the place of vouchers. One would get a receipt for the pre-load with a temporary acct# including device ID. One could key in (or upload from a flash card?) the wagers ahead of time and then submit them as close to post as one liked. Would it be reasonable to assume that no such wagers would be valid unless received and then verified back on the device prior to post?

Surely one would be able to automatically delete/substitute based on scratches and/or current odds. Possibly, one could also query desired vertical exotic payoff subsets and horizontal exotic will-pays. Reducing shut-outs might increase handle, and fewer and smaller lines should improve customer satisfaction (and disposition). Perhaps as with paper tickets, no SSN would be involved unless and until one is required to sign.… One of the rules they had in the military: Never complain.

I'd expand on that: Never complain -- just get the f---ing job done.I’m enjoying the dialogue as well, but I would differentiate between complaints as excuses and complaints as protest. One doesn’t necessarily have to bend over to get the job done. That said, my biggest complaint is neither CRW nor rebating, but rather exotic wager minimums that are too high. And, yes, it's an excuse as well as a protest. ;)

[trigger]

I'm not big into poker, but how about single deck blackjack?

Ok, standard Vegas casino rules except I'll deal all the time and you can only double on 10 an 11 and I shuffle after every hand.

[highnote]

Ok, standard Vegas casino rules except I'll deal all the time and you can only double on 10 an 11 and I shuffle after every hand.


OK, except you have to deal down to the last card.

[trigger]

OK, except you have to deal down to the last card.

You aren't complaining about the rules of my game, are you?

[highnote]

You aren't complaining about the rules of my game, are you?

I never complain. ;)

However, if I did have a complaint to make it, which I don't, but if I did, it would be that this thread has gone off-topic. :D

[Indulto]

I never complain. ;)

However, if I did have a complaint to make it, which I don't, but if I did, it would be that this thread has gone off-topic. :DAh yes, the old "off-topic" defense.

Is this latest interaction what they call internet gambiting and will the Conn. AG have a complaint? ;)

[davew]

what happened? did Lien get its money? is NYRA still around?

I understand the part of running a negative cash flow business and juggling cash from all sources to pay currents.

The poker co-mingled funds problem has shown itself this last year- as well as phantom deposits, all made worse by DOJ seizing and closing processors and bank accounts.

I find it fascinating that with all OTBs taking New Yorks feed, only 1 routinely got money from them and everyone else owed money to them when accounts were settled on a monthly basis.