Arizona-No more ADW's? [Archive] - Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com

theiman

09-18-2007, 05:05 PM

Someone who lives in Arizona got this notice from Expressbet

Dear Valued XpressBet Customer,

NEW STATE LAW BLOCKS ARIZONA WAGERING ACCOUNTS

A new Arizona state law (House Bill 2694), which goes into effect September 19, 2007, prohibits residents of that state from opening or maintaining account wagering services.

In compliance with this legislation, XpressBet is required to close your wagering account effective immediately. Your current account balance will be refunded by check within five to seven business days via U.S. mail.

XpressBet regrets having to take this action, thanks you for your patronage, and apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause our valued account holders.

Sincerely,

XpressBet

prospector

09-18-2007, 05:27 PM

probably senator kyl at work...

stupid, if true...just takes people overseas and out of pools..

DeanT

09-18-2007, 05:48 PM

Boy this is one screwed up business.

Mil Mascaras

09-18-2007, 07:16 PM

Probably only applies to those that don't wager enough. There are different rules for everyone. No joke.

Premier Turf Club

09-18-2007, 07:31 PM

HB 2694 – Chapter 189 – racing; pari-mutuel wagering
Classifies accepting a wager or betting on a race that is placed outside an Arizona authorized wagering facility as a Class 6 felony. Wagers made by a person in this state are assumed to have occurred within this state. Authorizes the Arizona Department of Racing and the Arizona Attorney General to enforce procedures for wagering at facilities that are not licensed by the Department of Racing.

As I understand it, pushed hard by the racetracks who feel ADWs are destroying their game. I think it's just another positive for the bookmakers.

Hosshead

09-18-2007, 08:06 PM

prospector

09-18-2007, 08:09 PM

prospector

09-18-2007, 08:12 PM

That really sucks !! I wonder how many just on this (PA) board this will affect ?
There goes any horseplayer's chance of retiring to Ariz.
Snowbird Horseplayers will have to fly to some other state for the winter.
you got that right...i was 1 year away from going to bullhead city, across from laughlin,nv....now, instead of buying a home in arizona, i'll buy a new rv and park it for the winter in laughlin and keep this address...see how everything is affected by these stupid laws...

Premier Turf Club

09-18-2007, 08:47 PM

i'm still listed by xpressbet as living in arizona and didn't get a notice...Ian, i lived in paulden ariz...35 miles from prescott downs...or,no more than 200 feet from my computer...i hardly ever went to the track..

You don't have to convince me. There are just a number of horsemen's groups (more than you'd think) that believe that ADWs are the reason people stopped going to the track, and that simply eliminating account wagering will bring them all back.

I think the poll I put up about a month ago proved otherwise.

Turntime

09-18-2007, 09:19 PM

Ian, how does this affect PTC members who live in AZ?

Premier Turf Club

09-18-2007, 09:22 PM

I'm not sure yet. Please contact me privately to discuss.

prospector

09-18-2007, 09:24 PM

Tom

09-18-2007, 09:39 PM

So, are all Arizona tracks on permenant boycott now?

Steve 'StatMan'

09-18-2007, 09:44 PM

Indulto

09-18-2007, 09:47 PM

You don't have to convince me. There are just a number of horsemen's groups (more than you'd think) that believe that ADWs are the reason people stopped going to the track, and that simply eliminating account wagering will bring them all back.

I think the poll I put up about a month ago proved otherwise.They are right about the first part. Starting with NYCOTB, people stopped going to the track as soon as it was legal to bet off-track. It may have been possible to bring back many before the internet, but now -- especially with on-demand replay's -- they'll never get that genie back in the bottle. Plus the reduced handle would probably close many tracks.

The horsemen are indeed the key to the ADW solution. The currently horseman-heavy CHRB still believes attendance is salvageable which is why IMO they let TVG off the licensing hook last time after listening to Quick-Drew Magoo. :bang:

Well, now that Relato Del Gato has left the state, I guess it's OK for me to stop scanning the TUP entries. :D

Kelso

09-18-2007, 10:46 PM

There are just a number of horsemen's groups (more than you'd think) that believe that ADWs are the reason people stopped going to the track

They never heard of Atlantic City, riverboats and Indian casinos? ADWs didn't kill track attendance. Casino gambling put an end to horse racing's monopoly on legal wagering. How blind can they allow themselves to be?

nvemil

09-19-2007, 12:00 AM

In AZ it is the Indian Casinos that has hit their horse and dog tracks hard, and the tracks acknowledged this years back very publically. The voting propositions failed and now I guess they have to blame someone else......not right !

boomman

09-19-2007, 12:38 AM

Premier Turf Club

09-19-2007, 07:42 AM

Some other Class 6 felonies under Arizona law.

13-1201 Endangerment

A. A person commits endangerment by recklessly endangering another person with a substantial risk of imminent death or physical injury.

B. Endangerment involving a substantial risk of imminent death is a class 6 felony.

3-1204 Aggravated Assault A. A person commits aggravated assault if the person commits assault as defined in section 13-1203 under any of the following circumstances:
1. If the person causes serious physical injury to another.

2. If the person uses a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument.

3. If the person commits the assault after entering the private home of another with the intent to commit the assault.

4. If the person is eighteen years of age or more and commits the assault upon a child the age of fifteen years or under.

Aggravated assault pursuant to subsection A, paragraph 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 or 10 of this section is a class 6 felony.

3-1504 Criminal Trespass In The First Degree A. A person commits criminal trespass in the first degree by knowingly:
1. Entering or remaining unlawfully in or on a residential structure or in a fenced residential yard; or

2. Entering any residential yard and, without lawful authority, looking into the residential structure thereon in reckless disregard of infringing on the inhabitant's right of privacy.

3. Entering unlawfully on real property subject to a valid mineral claim or lease with the intent to hold, work, take or explore for minerals on such claim or lease.

4. Entering or remaining unlawfully on the property of another and burning, defacing, mutilating or otherwise desecrating a religious symbol or other religious property of another without the express permission of the owner of the property.

B. Criminal trespass in the first degree is a class 6 felony if it is committed by entering or remaining unlawfully in or on a residential structure or committed pursuant to subsection A,

So betting on horses is now the same thing as putting someone at substantial risk of imminent death.

Well, at least they didn't make the new law overly harsh.

prospector

09-19-2007, 08:54 AM

if i still lived in arizona, i'd find out which members of state llegislature voted for that and work real hard against their reelection...

shanta

09-19-2007, 08:56 AM

As I understand it, pushed hard by the racetracks who feel ADWs are destroying their game. I think it's just another positive for the bookmakers.

Welcome back Al Capone

DeanT

09-19-2007, 09:24 AM

They should have made the law even broader. They could have encompassed online stock trading. Then people would have to go back to the brokerage houses, watch the ticker, write down their trades and send them to a big pit via a pully system.

Hosshead

09-19-2007, 09:51 AM

Ariz: CCW's - Legal ..... ADW's - Not Legal

prospector

09-19-2007, 10:09 AM

it sounds like we should withdraw our support for any track in arizona till this law is gone...

rrbauer

09-19-2007, 10:26 AM

Dang. I was going to go visit family in AZ this winter. Maybe make it to TuP for a day - long trip from where they live. Don't want to drive across the greater Phoenix area every day to get to the track to place a bet on a simulcast. They may have OTB's - aren't they located in some bars and restaurants?

They do have OTB's in a variety of settings around the state. Problem with many is that they keep going out of business and then reopening in another bar or restaurant. A couple years ago I was in AZ visiting some family and betting some races at a Calif track in an OTB bar. At that time AZ had separate pools for out-of-state venues. Don't know if that condition exists now, or not.

TUP web site used to list the statewide OTB betting locations. Arizona takeout on the high end so it's a good place to avoid anyway.

09-19-2007, 10:48 AM

Is it safe to assume Arizona tracks remain on the menus for people from other states to bet? If so, that seems a bit hypocritical.

prospector

09-19-2007, 10:59 AM

BrisBET.com Announcements
http://www.brisbet.com/images/new_images/int_dith_rule.gif

Notice to Arizona Customers

The Arizona Department of Racing has informed us that House Bill 2694 which prohibits account wagering in Arizona, will go into effect on Wednesday, September 19, 2007. This is an unfortunate position for us and regrettably, we must close all accounts held by Arizona residents.

last updated 9/19/2007

theiman

09-19-2007, 03:22 PM

The bill was approved by both houses in late April and signed by the Arizona Gov. on 5/8/07.
I would gather there was a 4 month grace period, or maybe nobody works in Arizona when the temperature goes over 100?

Surprised nothing was mentioned for 4 months from anyone in the industry.

spilparc

09-19-2007, 04:34 PM

jillybeans

09-19-2007, 06:48 PM

kirk brooks goal is to muscle out ALL ADW's with the exception of Racing and gaming services. Kirk Brooks...from complete flunkie at the Imperial Palace and Boardwalk Hotel to running Churchill Downs. And you guys thought Bob Evans was in charge. Is McConnell on kirks Christmas list?

ImCashinIn

09-19-2007, 09:44 PM

Oh, it's true. I logged on to my Xpress Bet Acct. this morning and got this........

YOUR ACCOUNT HAS BEEN CLOSED

In compliance with a new Arizona state law (House Bill 2694) which prohibits Arizona residents from opening or maintaining wagering accounts your XpressBet account has, regrettably, been closed.

Thank you for your patronage.

I do have another acct. with Youbet, which still works, but I went to the State of Arizona web site, looked up this bill, and found that if i'm caught wagering from my home thru my computer, its a class 6 felony.

This is an easy fix......I'm moving out of this dump they call a state.

Kelso

09-20-2007, 02:02 AM

Ariz: CCW's - Legal ..... ADW's - Not Legal

Aw c'mon, Hoss. CCW respects 2nd Amendment. No amendment to protect us PC-savvy degenerates. (Not that there would be anything wrong with that. :D )

DeanT

09-20-2007, 10:07 AM

I do have another acct. with Youbet, which still works, but I went to the State of Arizona web site, looked up this bill, and found that if i'm caught wagering from my home thru my computer, its a class 6 felony.

It'd be an interesting conversation in the slammer: "What are you in for?"; "Betting $25 to win on Scott Lake off the claim in the seventh at Laurel".

I am sure glad that bricks and mortar book companies don't have a powerful lobby. I have purchased about $1000 of books via the internet on amazon.com. To think I could have ended up like the guy in Midnight Express.

09-20-2007, 11:21 AM

Noone has answered yet, so I'll ask again. Are the ADW's still going to carry the Arizona tracks? Why would they?

ceejay

09-20-2007, 12:11 PM

Are the ADW's still going to carry the Arizona tracks? Why would they?
I'd say probably yes. Why? Because suppliers are more important than customers to them in their broken business model.

betovernetcapper

09-20-2007, 01:37 PM

This doesn't mean anything but in a show of solidarity with the Arizona players, I've just changed my profile to list my location as Arizona.

If you are in Arizona copy down this number

Robin Herren
928-230-3031

She's a bail bondsman.

highnote

09-20-2007, 01:39 PM

09-20-2007, 01:51 PM

According to a statistic I heard at the TRA simulcast conference, 87% of all money wagered now comes from off-track sources.

So I assume that if AZ bettors can't bet with an ADW that AZ tracks will not take money from out-of-state ADW sites?

If AZ tracks are allowed to receive money from out of state, then isn't the state of AZ guilty of restricting trade?

It's not a one-way street.

This is exactly what I was getting at with my question. Why in the world would an ADC take the signal from these shit tracks after this move? How quick do you think they would change their mind if everyone dropped TuP and Yav?

NoCal Boy

09-20-2007, 01:51 PM

I am not sure if it is legal to allow interstate simulcasting for AZ residents on out of state races and not allow AZ residents to have the same access via ADW as long as the requisite out of state approvals are made with the tracks.

Perhaps I am mistaken, but I do not believe the issue of ADW in AZ is dead simply because of this Bill. The ability of AZ residents to wager on AZ races is not permissible as that is an intrastate issue not governed by the IHA, but not so sure on AZ residents wagering on out of state races which then involves interstate commerce and the IHA.

Somehow I think this gets resolved quickly in the next legislative session as the lack of ADW will significantly hurt the AZ tracks.

highnote

09-20-2007, 01:59 PM

Somehow I think this gets resolved quickly in the next legislative session as the lack of ADW will significantly hurt the AZ tracks.

If 87% of handle comes from off-track it will probably get resolved.

09-20-2007, 02:05 PM

If 87% of handle comes from off-track it will probably get resolved.

Except that others will still bet on AZ tracks. This won't bother the tracks unless they are in turn dropped from the menu by the ADWs.

highnote

09-20-2007, 02:18 PM

Except that others will still bet on AZ tracks. This won't bother the tracks unless they are in turn dropped from the menu by the ADWs.

Good point. The in-state handle on AZ tracks is probably insignificant. And the amount of money bet by in-state AZ residents on out-of-state tracks is probably fairly small, too.

So the only people being hurt on AZ residents. But that's what rulers like to do -- use their power on their subjects.

betovernetcapper

09-20-2007, 03:26 PM

This is exactly what I was getting at with my question. Why in the world would an ADC take the signal from these shit tracks after this move? How quick do you think they would change their mind if everyone dropped TuP and Yav?

An efective way of doing this would be for 50-100 people to sign a petition requesting their ADWs to drop Arizona tracks by such and such a date. Then if they continued to carry them, these people could simply cancel their accounts. I mean all ADWs-BrisBet-YouBet-Xpressbet-and even PTC. This would really send a message.

NoCal Boy

09-20-2007, 04:15 PM

I do not live in AZ so no confirmation e-mail, but Youbet is now showing AZ as a state that is restricted from wagering access.

theiman

09-20-2007, 04:18 PM

A youbet account holder from Arizona just got an e-mail:

Wagering Suspended for Arizona Residents

Dear Xxxxx,

A new Arizona state law (House Bill 2694 amending A.R.S. 5-112), allegedly prohibits residents of Arizona from wagering on races outside of an approved racing enclosure in Arizona.

While Youbet views this law as clearly unlawful, unconstitutional and protectionist, and is reviewing the situation with its attorneys, for the time being, Youbet is suspending your ability to wager.

As a courtesy, you may continue to use the Youbet.com website to follow your favorite horses, tracks, and features and Youbet will be suspending your subscr iption fee until further notice. If you want to withdraw the funds in your account, please access the "Withdrawal Feature" under the "Account" menu or contact Player Services 1-888-YOUBET-8 (1-888-968-2388).

Thank you for your understanding and support. If you have any questions about why you, a resident of the state of Arizona, are being deprived of your right to participate in pari-mutuel wagering when and where you choose feel free to voice your dissatisfaction with

Arizona Department of Racing Phone: (602) 364-1700
Office of the Attorney General Phone: (800) 352-8431

Youbet.com regrets having to take this action and thanks you for your patronage and support. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause you, our valued account holder.

Sincerely,

Youbet.com Team

You can flood the phone 800# with calls

NoCal Boy

09-20-2007, 04:26 PM

It gets complicated, but I do believe the law is unconstitutional as applied to interstate parimutuel wagering. I doubt it means much lost handle as AZ likely has few larger players, but it simply is not right.

HorseRun

09-20-2007, 04:27 PM

with YOUBET the time being, means forever...i got the same letter in NJ about 5 years ago and youbet still doesnt allow NJ members....these guys are worthless and overpaid

highnote

09-20-2007, 04:46 PM

I called the 800 number for the AZ AG and it was not a valid number.

Can you check the number and repost it?

theiman

09-20-2007, 05:16 PM

I copied and pasted it from another forum.

Sorry.

speedking

09-20-2007, 05:27 PM

AZ Attorney General Terry Goddard

602-542- 5025

800-352-8431 is for AZ calls only it seems.

betovernetcapper

09-20-2007, 05:29 PM

There are 2 basic types of 800 #s-intrastate and interstate. State officials have to talk to the residents so they may pay for an intrastate 800#. Given that most people calling a state official from out of state are complaining about something they'd rather not pay for the call. My guess is it's an intrastate 800#.

azbacks

09-20-2007, 09:57 PM

I did a little digging and was not suprised to find that information was slim. This House Resolution went through with the minimum amount of public exposure. It was endorsed by Turf Paradise, but opposed by the AZ Dept of Racing. I understand the vote was near to unaminous. Only 9 against.

The law allows state residents to wager only at the state approved locations. Horse and dog tracks and their associated OTB's. This HR only applies to pari-mutual wagering. It is a class 6 felony. Several years ago this same type resolution, with misdemeanor penalties, did not make it to the GOV..

This information is available to the public, but I am sure Boomer knows more than what is in the legal records.

I also felt this is a little hypocritical to accept out of state wagering, but not allow locals to wager on tracks other than what they are offering at the OTB..

azbacks

I feel the above info is correct, but don't go suing anyone over it!!;)

NateBracey

09-20-2007, 11:42 PM

I live in Scottsdale and had my Brisbet account
closed as of last night. The ABSOLUTE way to
get this overturned would be for Brisbet, Youbet, etc...
to stop taking wagers in Turf Paradise. All of this
dump of a track's income comes from off track monies.
You cut that out and I guarantee something will change.

So here is what I heard "somebody" do. They had a relative open an account for them out of Arizona - a relative that is trustworthy enough to send them their checks when they make a withdrawl. :)

Indulto

09-21-2007, 12:01 AM

TomC

09-21-2007, 12:18 AM

Has anyone ever seen another industry that seems to despise its clients as much as the horse racing industry?

What sizes would the purses be if we all stopped wagering? Maybe we can all go to the track just to cheer the nice horsey on, and have a hot dog. Forget the wagering. Extra mustard please....oh and dont forget to tax me on it.

NateBracey

09-21-2007, 12:21 AM

you could be right...don't have an answer for that one!

Kelso

09-21-2007, 12:50 AM

Has anyone ever seen another industry that seems to despise its clients as much as the horse racing industry?

What sizes would the purses be if we all stopped wagering?

I think Arizona is a prime target to provide an answer. Relatively small and, therefor, weak. Absolutely inconsquential to the industry. Ignore 'em until they cave ... then identify the next weak target.

BOYCOTT AZ TRACKS!

Hosshead

09-21-2007, 12:59 AM

The ABSOLUTE way to
get this overturned would be for Brisbet, Youbet, etc...
to stop taking wagers on Turf Paradise.

That's exactly what ALL the ADW's should do. There's only one thing stopping them.
Greed.
Do you think that little Aruba might have a chance to solve this problem ?

prospector

09-21-2007, 01:04 AM

Obviously (working at Yavapai Downs since their inception) I am TOTALLY aware of what is going on ADW wise in Arizona, and would be happy to answer any questions CONFIDENTIALLY via pm.........

Boomer
boomer,
did you know this was coming and still let us procott Yavapai Downs ?
i sure hope not...i always like to think the best of people..

TomC

09-21-2007, 01:14 AM

My thinking is this.
1) Make a deal where YOUBET, BRISBET, etc, MUST carry TUP.
2) They must accept wagers for TUP from AZ residents (as well as all states)
3) Any wager they accept from AZ, the ADW gets NO commission. 100% of the "take" goes to TUP, as if we placed the bet at TUP.

What would this do? Make everyone a winner....
1) The fans win, obviously.
2) TUP gets a new income stream doing nothing on their part.
3) THE ADW does not lose on TUP, because before all this, AZ residents were not allowed to bet on TUP anyway. However, they (ADW) do get to keep their customers.
4) The state wins, collecting extra taxes from the increased TUP handle

Oh wait a second....everyone would be happy and it would make good sense. Forget I said this. They would never go for it. Maybe instead they can look into charging us with a Class 6 Felony if our shoe laces are untied.

Can you imagine this. You fill out a mortgage application. You get to the part where it asks "Have you ever been convicted of a felony?" You answer Yes...$20 to win on the 7.

NateBracey

09-21-2007, 01:42 AM

Can you imagine this. You fill out a mortgage application. You get to the part where it asks "Have you ever been convicted of a felony?" You answer Yes...$20 to win on the 7.

I'm in jail for betting the double and O.J. walks
the streets

09-21-2007, 04:50 AM

Wouldn't the relative have to submit the wagers as well? Don't some ADW/Totes look at URLs as well?

I would say no. They don't really care. What if someone is a resident of New Jersey and on vacation in AZ? They could still legally bet.

Tom

09-21-2007, 07:26 AM

Now maybe this IS a case where the Feds should get involved, using the interstate nature of it. If Arizona residents are not allowed to make wagers over the internet, it is only fair that Arizona tracks be prohibited from accepting out of state wagers - limit thier action to on-track only.

But that was good question raised - was this action known when the procott for an Arizona track presented as a great idea?

john del riccio

09-21-2007, 08:13 AM

I would say no. They don't really care. What if someone is a resident of New Jersey and on vacation in AZ? They could still legally bet.

CJ,

NJ is not ADW friendly, so my guess is no.

John

09-21-2007, 08:23 AM

CJ,

NJ is not ADW friendly, so my guess is no.

John

Maybe NJ wasn't the best example. But any state that doesn't allow residents to bet online should not be allowed to accept bets from out of state customers on their races, period.

DeanT

09-21-2007, 08:31 AM

Has anyone ever seen another industry that seems to despise its clients as much as the horse racing industry?

If we parallel the restaurant business with the track it would be interesting, wouldnt it?

You walk into the restaurant, and you have to pay to look at the menu. Then you order. Give a 30% tip on each course. Finish the meal. If you feel satisfied with the meal you are taxed on that before you can leave. Then grab a takeout menu, then when you call to order via the phone it is a class six felony.

I don't think people would go out to eat very often.

john del riccio

09-21-2007, 08:40 AM

Maybe NJ wasn't the best example. But any state that doesn't allow residents to bet online should not be allowed to accept bets from out of state customers on their races, period.

CJ,

Run for office, you got my vote.:)

John

ezrabrooks

09-21-2007, 08:45 AM

So, AZ is the only State in the Union that doesn't allow account wagering? Sounds like a problem for the citizens of AZ, and can't see why non residents are getting so bent out of shape.

Ez

Tom

09-21-2007, 09:21 AM

Because we need to stick together - our state could be next.
And becasue it is high time the whole damn racing industry realized who pays the bills. If not for betting, there would not be an idustry. We can do without most of the tracks, trainers, jockeys, horses, and have a good industry. Every bettor lost is a concern.

09-21-2007, 09:35 AM

Exactly Tom. What is to stop every state from doing this and then you can't bet from home anywhere? The industry is FUBAR.

Turntime

09-21-2007, 09:41 AM

Quite correct,Tom. It would be a disaster if revenue were to increase in AZ as a result of this law, which might embolden other States to follow suit. Maybe the ADW's could be convinced that it's in their best interest to drop AZ tracks, sacrificing a smaller amount of short term dollars for a larger amount of long term dollars (my opinion is that ADW handle would be little affected as the AZ dollars would likely be redirected to another track). Anyway, as an AZ resident I was glad to see the outrage expressed by members of this board, most of whom are not directly affected by this.

njcurveball

09-21-2007, 09:41 AM

Maybe NJ wasn't the best example. But any state that doesn't allow residents to bet online should not be allowed to accept bets from out of state customers on their races, period.

When I am in Las Vegas, I can log into 4NJBETS and bet to my hearts content. Probably the same thing if I take a trip to the Nazi state too!

09-21-2007, 09:44 AM

When I am in Las Vegas, I can log into 4NJBETS and bet to my hearts content. Probably the same thing if I take a trip to the Nazi state too!

So they are creating a monopoly. Bet with us, or don't bet. That will really help the customers of NJ. :faint:

DeanT

09-21-2007, 09:56 AM

It ain't a tough question for me.

1. Freedom to bet - The Gvt has made millions off of racing for 100 years. They can't now say that betting is bad, which is what they seem to be doing in this case.

2. Smaller pools by restricting how/what you can bet- that hurts us all. Breeders, horseman, bettors..... the business.

3. Stifling Innovation and Invention - Internet betting is something that can grow. With laws restricting wagering on other events, racing/g'vts can/should get off their butts and offer their product to everyone and anyone who wants it. New innovations like PTC's conditional betting, allowing us to dutch and see our profit and loss are just a few things that can evolve. it is the tip of the iceberg. my world is better because I can ship UPS over the web, bank over the web, buy things over the web, and mail over the web. I want to bet over the web, and I want everyone else to, as well.

Here is a neat article about a debate that was going on in the UK. There were factions of the betting industry that wanted exchange betting to be stifled and taxed more. The first part is interesting if you play exchanges, but scroll down to the area on "Horseless Carraiges". This law, and those like them, whether in one state or many stifles innovation and growth of an industry. And that to me is not welcomed. No one should be forced to use a "pen and paper" to bet in 2007. And that is what this does.

http://www.probabilitytheory.info/topics/efficiency_betting_market.htm

njcurveball

09-21-2007, 10:08 AM

So they are creating a monopoly. Bet with us, or don't bet. That will really help the customers of NJ. :faint:

That is absolutely correct! :ThmbUp:

TomC

09-21-2007, 10:11 AM

I dont see any chance of the handle INCREASING at TUP because of this.
I think the fact that they built a WalMart in the parking lot says it all. The only hope for TUP is off track and out of state wagering. Residents that live here are way to busy to visit the facility. Not to mention the fact that it is in deperate need of a remodel. Not quite the place I want to spend my days. Sitting outside in the grandstands is enjoyable, but inside...I can do without. Letting the people of AZ bet on their computer?...hmm that would be an interesting way to get more local money filtering in!

GMB@BP

09-21-2007, 02:53 PM

This just sucks, I have effectively been removed from the game. I have no interest in being in an otb for any amount of real time.

09-21-2007, 03:05 PM

This just sucks, I have effectively been removed from the game. I have no interest in being in an otb for any amount of real time.

What, lung cancer and muggings don't interest you?

boomman

09-21-2007, 04:31 PM

boomer,
did you know this was coming and still let us procott Yavapai Downs ?
i sure hope not...i always like to think the best of people..

Prospector: Your question is a valid one. Not only did I not know about this, the new law was shown to me about a week later. Yavapai upper management supported me in the ADW endeavor and had an ADW contract with Ian as well as YouBet (which I suppose is now null and void). The part I was referring to as far as pm'ing me is where we go from here, (after I was shown the bill) as I hope some middle ground can be found in Arizona and have made my thoughts known on that....

Boomer

Indulto

09-21-2007, 05:13 PM

Maybe NJ wasn't the best example. But any state that doesn't allow residents to bet online should not be allowed to accept bets from out of state customers on their races, period.Very well put, cj. I hope you'll expand on this issue at trackthieves.com.

IRISHLADSTABLE

09-21-2007, 05:48 PM

Pace Cap'n

09-21-2007, 06:02 PM

So, AZ is the only State in the Union that doesn't allow account wagering? Sounds like a problem for the citizens of AZ, and can't see why non residents are getting so bent out of shape.

Ez

Not hardly. Missouri doesn't. And I believe quite a few more prohibit it as well.

BillW

09-21-2007, 06:03 PM

Not hardly. Missouri doesn't. And I believe quite a few more prohibit it as well.

Nevada?

ezrabrooks

09-21-2007, 06:07 PM

Not hardly. Missouri doesn't. And I believe quite a few more prohibit it as well.

The statement was meant tongue in cheek. My home state, Texas doesn't allow account wagering.

Ex

Indulto

09-21-2007, 07:23 PM

When I am in Las Vegas, I can log into 4NJBETS and bet to my hearts content. Probably the same thing if I take a trip to the Nazi state too!While this is indeed another state-sponsored restriction on internet gambling, actual offenses tend to be trivialized when charges are inflated by hype. Perhaps Third Reich references are bettOR reserved for inhuman political actions. This is merely one of greed, corruption, and self-righteousness. What could be more human than that! ;)

I agree this is a serious matter for residents of all states. When faced with this restriction on a national scale, the poker players organized. We may have to consider joining forces.

Hosshead

09-21-2007, 07:41 PM

Not hardly. Missouri doesn't. And I believe quite a few more prohibit it as well.
So basically the actions of ADW's to NOT take bets on states that prohibit online wagering, will only be able to change the laws on the states with racetracks.
That could still help alot.

I think we do need to support our Ariz. horseplayer brothers.
We could start by just not playing AZ. tracks, and petition the ADW's to not take the AZ. action.
The less we bet on those tracks, the less the ADW's will be losing by not taking their action.
And get the fact across to the ADW's that (as someone already said), a lot of that money will just be bet on other tracks anyway.
The hell with Az. tracks !

azbacks

09-22-2007, 01:09 AM

In the Phoenix area, some OTB's are in some pretty decent places.

Smoking ban for restuarants and bars went into effect earlier this year, so the bars shouldn't be as smoke filled. The residue will be on everything and in the carpet.

There is an OTB about three miles from home. It reeked of smoke, no food (except chili), but everyone was friendly. Went ther a couple of times, but now drive about 15 miles to a much nicer place.

Anyone planning a visit to Phoenix this winter? Don't forget the Super Bowl is here in 2008. Unless you are visiting friends or family, bring your tent!

Pete

09-22-2007, 01:50 AM

It was meant tongue in cheek. I did go to one in AZ years ago while in town for a NASCAR race. It was 45 minutes away, Black Canyon City or something like that, and it was a dive.

Froggy

09-22-2007, 10:04 AM

Acorrding to this any bet made on a race if not placed with the monopoly is a felony.

My house is now up for sale.

House of Representatives
HB 2694

racing; pari-mutuel wagering

Sponsors: Representative Mason, Representative Reagan, Senator O'Halleran et al

X

Committee on Water and Agriculture

Caucus and COW

House Engrossed

HB 2694 modifies laws relating to dog, horse and harness racing and wagering.

History

In Arizona there are three commercial live horse racing permittees – Rillito Park, Turf Paradise and Yavapai Downs and two commercial live dog racing permittees – Phoenix Greyhound Park and Tucson Greyhound Park.

The Arizona Department of Racing (Department) regulates and supervises pari-mutuel horse and greyhound racing and wagering conducted in Arizona. The Department has the authority to issue general racing permits and off-track betting permits. The Department also licenses off-track betting sites and monitors their compliance with operational requirements. Current law places conditions and restrictions on simulcasting and wagers placed on simulcast races.

Provisions

· Eliminates a current step in the transmission of wagers and allows wagers to be transmitted directly to the track that conducts the live race.

· Allows a permittee to offer wagering on simulcast races at their racetrack enclosure and their off-track betting sites, whether or not the simulcasts are televised at the off-track betting sites.

· Clarifies that a minimum number of live races are required in order for a permittee to offer pari-mutuel wagering on simulcast races.

· Establishes penalties and enforcement procedures for wagers that are placed at facilities that are not licensed by the Arizona Department of Racing as follows:

<LI class=MsoNormal>Classifies accepting a wager or betting on a race that is placed outside an Arizona authorized wagering facility as a class 6 felony. A class 6 felony carries a presumptive sentence of one year in prison plus fines and penalties. <LI class=MsoNormal>States that wagers made by a person in this state are assumed to have occurred within this state.
Authorizes the Department and the Arizona Attorney General to enforce these procedures.

· Requires an annual report that summarizes enforcement activities to be submitted to the Governor, President of the Senate, Speaker of the House of Representatives, Secretary of State and the Arizona State Library, Archives and Public Records.

Turntime

09-23-2007, 12:09 PM

I was looking for existing laws that challenge HB-2694 and came upon the "Coercive Monopoly". The overly harsh penalty of a Class 6 Felony for wagering on a horse race can only be interpreted as a Government sanctioned "Coercive Threat" that stifles any unwanted competition. Any lawyers out there care to comment?

TomC

09-23-2007, 12:12 PM

I hope YOUBETS lawyers know that. If they really do have anyone on the case.

highnote

09-23-2007, 12:14 PM

[/color]

Not only did they organize, they recruited Senator Alfonse D'Amato!!!

Indulto

09-23-2007, 01:51 PM

Not only did they organize, they recruited Senator Alfonse D'Amato!!!I take it back. ;)

I read he's a card player and advocated protesting the ban, but I thought he was too busy lobbying for the OTBs and one of the NY racing franchise bidders. Thanks for the heads up. Maybe that's why they haven't yet achieved their objective. :eek:

ALostTexan

09-23-2007, 05:37 PM

I am an Arizona resident, and really, really pissed off about all of this.

The problem is only doubled in Tucson, where I have really been shut out of the game. Tucson has a overly beechy Greyhound park, which has worked some deals in the legislature that do not allow any wagering in the county on horses while live dog races are being ran. That is nightly, and starts early enough that the handfull of horse tracks that are running get cut off. I say handfull because they only allow the OTB's to carry a couple of tracks, usually around 5 per day.

None of this has been too much of an issue, because we have been able to wager on the horses via internet on non-TVG tracks, cutting out NYRA tracks and Del Mar and the others that are dominated by TVG.

I am 100% behind a boycott against the AZ tracks, because the only ones that I care to support are the Fair Circuit, which is not affected by this new law as they are not simulcast. If that doesn't get some immediate reaction, I say move it further to contact the individual tracks, such as NYRA and Magna, and convince them to cut off TUP and YAV from their onsite OTB's to further squeeze this bill out.

I have vested interests in the industry, especially here in AZ, but I believe that this is a bad move for the horsemen in the state. This law needs to be overturned immediately, and hopefully some of the lawyer-types can figure out a way to overturn it simply based on the monopoly issues this presents, and that we won't have to rely on the legislature in the state.

ALostTexan
Tucson, AZ

TomC

09-23-2007, 06:10 PM

You are correct. I can only hope the ADW's cut TUP from their list of tracks. Lets let TUP see for themselves how well they can do on their own. Or maybe they have an ace in the hole...like building a Target in the parking lot next to the new WalMart.
I hope some of you other Az residents have friends in other states that you can e-mail your picks to, and maybe they can bet them for you too. But please do whatever it takes to not put $1 through an AZ parimutuel window!

trying2win

09-23-2007, 07:03 PM

I'm willing to boycott Turf Paradise for their upcoming meet to help out the PA member Arizona residents, or any other resident living there that can't make their bets through an ADW. This latest block against ADW's taking bets from Arizona residents is ridiculous. Is anyone starting an online petition against the upcoming Turf Paradise races? I'll sign it gladly.

Even if I want to make a bet on the Turf Paradise races, I'll make it at an offshore racebook, then that track will still get nothing or next-nothing in the way of revenues. If I bet on Turf Paradise races via this method...the Turf Paradise track management lose...the horsemen at that track lose...and American-based ADWS lose... (sorry about that PTC).

However...please allow me to still send some bets in on the greyhound races at Phoenix or Tucson through PTC. Shouldn't affect things too badly by doing that will I? :)

By the way MICHIKEN (if you read this post) ...can you create a 'BOYCOTT TURF PARADISE' avatar for me? Thanks.

T2W

~“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”
- Edmund Burke

TomC

09-23-2007, 10:50 PM

Sign me up on that boycott!

Pace Cap'n

09-26-2007, 10:42 PM

Prospector: Your question is a valid one. Not only did I not know about this, the new law was shown to me about a week later. Yavapai upper management supported me in the ADW endeavor and had an ADW contract with Ian as well as YouBet (which I suppose is now null and void). The part I was referring to as far as pm'ing me is where we go from here, (after I was shown the bill) as I hope some middle ground can be found in Arizona and have made my thoughts known on that....

Boomer

It stretches credulity to believe you were that far outside the loop at your place of employment.

Many representatives of the Arizona horse racing industry offered their support for HB2694 during a Feb. 15 state Committee on Water and Agriculture meeting. Among the supporters were representatives of Turf Paradise, Yavapai Downs, the Yavapai Downs County Fair Association, the Arizona Horsemen’s Benevolent and Protective Association, and the Arizona Thoroughbred Breeders Association.

news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=40980 (http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=40980)

boomman

09-27-2007, 04:51 AM

It stretches credulity to believe you were that far outside the loop at your place of employment.

news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=40980 (http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=40980)

[/color][/size][/font]

It may. but know this: I am NOT involved in managerial decisions, I do not live in Arizona in the winter time, so I basically show up and do my job. It was mentioned to me that Arizona had attempted to get ADW's and failed, and when I asked upper management to sign a contract with Ian over the winter, they readily agreed! Get off the "Boomer knew about this train" guys...For those of you that know me get in here and back this up that I don't do business this way. Arizona lawmakers passed this bill, I found out about it on Sep 11, (7 days AFTER the procott) and CASE CLOSED!!

:mad: Boomer

csmith

09-27-2007, 05:43 AM

It may. but know this: I am NOT involved in managerial decisions, I do not live in Arizona in the winter time, so I basically show up and do my job. It was mentioned to me that Arizona had attempted to get ADW's and failed, and when I asked upper management to sign a contract with Ian over the winter, they readily agreed! Get off the "Boomer knew about this train" guys...For those of you that know me get in here and back this up that I don't do business this way. Arizona lawmakers passed this bill, I found out about it on Sep 11, (7 days AFTER the procott) and CASE CLOSED!!

:mad: Boomer

For what it is worth. I believe Boomer when he says he knew nothing about this. Most or you don't know this but I write the Tip Sheet for THE MAJOR Greyhound track in the country. I am an outside vendor probably much the same as Boomer probably is
. I show up with my Tip Sheets put them at the program stands and I am on my way until the next day. I don't learn things about the inner working of the track until they happen or I hear a rumor that something is going to happen. So I'm with you Boomer. I understand how things work with the tracks..

ezrabrooks

09-27-2007, 07:15 AM

I am sure it will be posted as soon as any ADW, licensed to do business in Az, cuts off the Az tracks from their menus in support of the Az residents plight. I just can't see that happening.

Ez

highnote

09-27-2007, 09:59 AM

I am sure it will be posted as soon as any ADW, licensed to do business in Az, cuts off the Az tracks from their menus in support of the Az residents plight. I just can't see that happening.

Ez

I'm with you -- I don't see it happening. It takes a lot for one business not to do business with another business.

Look how long it took U.S. companies to stop doing business with apartied S. Africa. And even though U.S. businesss stopped, that didn't stop other businesses in other countries from doing business there.

Another example is automobile parts manufacturers. Not all of them are going to stop doing business with GM just because the GM employees are striking.

It's tricky. Do ADWs have a moral obligation not to do business in AZ tracks? Probably not.

A national horseplayers organization might be able to have some influence.

RaceGoer

09-27-2007, 12:31 PM

I wrote to the 9 legistlators that supported this bill. Two wrote back after my second e-mail I send to all 9. This is what they said:

Internet gambling was hurting our race tracks and not allowing for state revenue controls... (taxes)...

Internet gambling in Arizona has many people concerned...

I feel there could be a way to negotiate an internet system that could help but you should work on that with the race track groups...

Andy Tobin
State Representative
District 1
================================================== =======

Thanks for your email.

There are no discussion on this matter.

I am not sure I can answer your questions. Have you email the prime sponsor of the bill?

Bill Konopnicki

highnote

09-27-2007, 12:44 PM

Internet gambling was hurting our race tracks and not allowing for state revenue controls... (taxes)...

This is probably a valid point given that internet horse race betting was never properly legislated in the first place. But the solution is to fix it not to ban it!

Internet gambling in Arizona has many people concerned...

That's a safe political answer. But just because people are concerned does that mean it should be banned?

I'm not concerned about internet gambling in Arizona. I'm concerned about the banning of it, though.

I feel there could be a way to negotiate an internet system that could help but you should work on that with the race track groups...

God forbid this guy would have to do any kind of work himself besides going around banning things that people are concerned about.

================================================== =======

There are no discussion on this matter.

There will be soon!

I am not sure I can answer your questions. Have you email the prime sponsor of the bill?

Bill Konopnicki

How do you support a bill you can't answer questions about?

If you don't understand it then abstain from voting on it.

How do these people get elected? I guess somebody has to win the election.