Horse Racing Is Under Siege

[Cangamble]

http://www.globesports.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080125.wspt-wagering-25/GSStory/GlobeSportsOther/?page=rss&id=RTGAM.20080125.wspt-wagering-25

Looks like Woodbine is starting to at least realize there is a problem. What they do about it is anyone's guess.

The biggest problem I see as far as competition goes is that handicapping horses as always been a sport that attracts many special thinkers (picking horses takes a lot of thinking). It isn't like many other forms of gambling that way.

But thinkers eventually lose interest in a proposition that gives one close to a zero chance of long term success (betting without rebates).

Track takeouts will need to go down considerably, and I think that is something the true leaders of the game are starting to understand. I think we will see things change shortly.

[JustRalph]

[url]Track takeouts will need to go down considerably, and I think that is something the true leaders of the game are starting to understand. I think we will see things change shortly.

you give racing execs way too much credit.............

[ddog]

http://www.globesports.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080125.wspt-wagering-25/GSStory/GlobeSportsOther/?page=rss&id=RTGAM.20080125.wspt-wagering-25

Looks like Woodbine is starting to at least realize there is a problem. What they do about it is anyone's guess.

The biggest problem I see as far as competition goes is that handicapping horses as always been a sport that attracts many special thinkers (picking horses takes a lot of thinking). It isn't like many other forms of gambling that way.

But thinkers eventually lose interest in a proposition that gives one close to a zero chance of long term success (betting without rebates).

Track takeouts will need to go down considerably, and I think that is something the true leaders of the game are starting to understand. I think we will see things change shortly.


I think in 10-20 years that horse racing will be dead or restricted to 4-5 tracks.

Why any "deep thinker" would waste much time on this game when there are so many other easy ways for a "deep thinker" to apply that "thinking" to make money and/or entertain himself/herself?

[Pace Cap'n]

Track takeouts will need to go down considerably, and I think that is something the true leaders of the game are starting to understand. I think we will see things change shortly.

Most tracks have little or nothing to do with setting the takeout rate. State governments are about as likely to reduce takeouts as they are to lower taxes.

[DeanT]

I think that all tracks should go the way of others and reduce rakes. Kinda a broken record on that....... anyway, I always hear how tough it is to lower prices and how racing cant afford it, and yada yada yada.

I came across this tonight. In Australia the betting corp on different tracks offer out tons of good rakes on different meets, and/or different days. For example, exacta rakes are lowered to 5%, tris to 10%.

How about this one boys? Zero rake pick 4's. Yep, zero. Nothing.

Pool size reached $2 million on zero rake pick 4 days:

http://www.tab.com.au/Racing/Information/Guides/Default.aspx?State=1&postingid=%7B544833D3-81B4-4FE6-9706-4C495802F5B0%7D

If track owners and horseman groups tell us "this cant be done" and they have to charge you $110 for taking a $364 pick 4 ticket, tell them to go jump in the lake. Or even better: stop betting their racetracks.

[trying2win]

Most tracks have little or nothing to do with setting the takeout rate.

Pace Captain:

Is that a theory of yours, or a fact? I always believed it was the racetrack that determined the different takeout rates at each track. Could you provide a link to enlighten me some more? I've read about Tampa Bay Downs lowering their track takeouts here at PACE ADVANTAGE, and thought that was a decision by that track's management...so how did the Florida state government figure in that?

I realize that state governments in the U.S.A. and the provincial governments in Canada keep a portion of the track takouts, but I thought it was only a small percentage of each takeout rate. For example, I've seen our Alberta provincial government's cut of the takeout rate listed in a track program. Sorry, I don't have a program handy to list an example. Perhaps someone can take out a track program, and give us an example of what the takeout is comprised of at a particular racetrack. Would be interested to review one again.


Thanks,

T2W

[trying2win]

Cangamble:

Thanks for the link to the interesting article. Did you send a copy of it to Daivd Willnot of WEG? If you're thinking about doing that, you might suggest if he wants to increase handle on the WOODBINE/MOHAWK harness circuit, that he do at least a few things:

1. Cut the takeout across the board.

2. Provide free live video for anyone to view in the USA or Canada without restrictions.

3. Bring back PTC as an alternative ADW at a lower signal rate than before, with no betting restrictions for Canadians.

If he did at least those three things to start with, I believe the WOODBINE/MOHAWK harness circuit handle would increase substantially. Or, are my COMMON SENSE ideas too far out in left field? :)

The universal law is that "You must GIVE in order to RECEIVE". I wonder if WEG understands that wisdom?


T2W

[joeyspicks]

But thinkers eventually lose interest in a proposition that gives one close to a zero chance of long term success (betting without rebates).

.


REALLY ? ? (zero chance ???? hmmmmm)
YOU sure about that?
IF so
WHY participate ?

[shanta]

I came across this tonight. In Australia the betting corp on different tracks offer out tons of good rakes on different meets, and/or different days. For example, exacta rakes are lowered to 5%, tris to 10%.

How about this one boys? Zero rake pick 4's. Yep, zero. Nothing.

Pool size reached $2 million on zero rake pick 4 days:


Dean
Anyway to find out how many tracks are running at the same time there?

We had 17 thoro's and 2 qhorse's yesterday. Summer brings 35-40 tracks run every Saturday.If not a bit more.
Richie

[Cangamble]

REALLY ? ? (zero chance ???? hmmmmm)
YOU sure about that?
IF so
WHY participate ?
You have a zero chance without rebates.

[cj]

You have a zero chance without rebates.

Nonsense. I agree reduced takeouts are necessary for the game to survive, but the above is not true. Maybe you have zero chance without rebates. Do you think there wasn't a single winner before rebates were available? I would imagine there are several winning now without a rebate.

[joeyspicks]

You have a zero chance without rebates.

wow!:lol:

please keep playing!

I MUST be a miracle man:jump:

[rrbauer]

Most tracks have little or nothing to do with setting the takeout rate. State governments are about as likely to reduce takeouts as they are to lower taxes.

This varies from state to state. In Florida, the takeout is up to the tracks. Period. In many states they simply list a minimum and maximum. Naturally, the tracks (read: racing associations) will take the maximum. The state's share of takeout is pretty low in most states. It's usually a small percentage and called a "license fee". Some states use a progressive scale for that percentage. In California, a few years ago, Santa Anita deliberately cut back on betting to control handle so as to not bump the license fee into the next bracket. The states' revenue from horse racing is peanuts compared to general taxation, business taxation and even state lotteries.

[Overlay]

You have a zero chance without rebates.

As long as horse racing remains a pari-mutuel game, where odds are determined by fallible human judgment (rather than by unchanging and unfavorable mathematical probabilities, as in most other forms of wagering), and where players have the option of selectively betting on situations where the probabilities are in their favor, racing will always offer the potential for consistent, long-term profit, even without rebates.

[Cangamble]

CJ, Joey, and Overlay: I'd like to see the real records of those who claim to make money without rebates. I'm as good a handicapper as anyone out there and the first nail in the coffin to winners was putting in speed ratings with daily variants in the racing form, once Beyers were put in, most advantages were chucked down the toilet.
Then another phenomenon happened. Slots. This took the sucker money out of the pools. Now it is pretty much handicapper versus handicapper and the backstretch.
Finally, the rebate bettors came along with sophisticated computer programs. Many just looking to break even on their betting while making a living on the rebates. These bettors are taking out a lot of potential profits that used to be there as well.
I used to make money betting on horses, even with ridiculously high takeouts, but that changed in the early 90's.

[DanG]

the first nail in the coffin to winners was putting in speed ratings with daily variants in the racing form, once Beyers were put in, most advantages were chucked down the toilet.

A key factor in pari-mutual wagering is to make this statement work for you.

Hand a good player a track where the majority of the pool is a slave to Beyer and I’ll show you a small group of people who will need a wheelbarrow for the cash.

http://lareassoc.com/nss-folder/pictures/Wheelbarrow%20of%20Cash.jpg

[joeyspicks]

CJ, Joey, and Overlay: I'd like to see the real records of those who claim to make money without rebates. I'm as good a handicapper as anyone out there , .

First I agree that the take out is way too high
2nd: rebates make it easier

However you said : ZERO chance,
Now I do not believe I'm THAT special that I'm beating those kind of odds :)
However I AM
I also really dont "need" you to believe me. Thats not my intention.
I STRONGLY feel that its STILL possible to take out a consistent monthly amount.
I feel this because I have been doing it.
I also will make the following statement and I don't mean it to be insulting:

If you are losing money and have been for years its time to look at the real problem:

In the mirror

yup its YOU.

Its not the newest program or speed number. Its you (as a person who is habitually losing ....not personal). A person must start to examine their beliefs ( like zero chance of profit....thats a belief that will definitely limit you). Examine habits, do you keep records, do you manage your money properly. These are the things a winning player MUST do to have a chance!
If you are not doing these things AND you have a mindset that is telling you how impossible it is to win (make a profit)....then of course its a self fulfilling prophecy. And of course you get the "pay off" of being able to say I told you so !!

[Cangamble]

Dan G. I didn't say that there are tracks where the majority of the pool is filled up with Beyer player's cash. I was inferring that Beyers numbers on the form took a huge advantage that most players (who use speed numbers) had.

Joeys, I don't believe you. So I'm taking what you are saying with a grain of salt.
If you were even close to winning, I have no idea why you would even want to bet without rebates. Why would you even find it acceptable?
There were very few winners in the 60's-early 90's. It was still a tough game. Now it is impossible.
Btw, I could easily brag about big wins. I've had many, including a Win 4 in 2002 that brought me over 28k on just a $48 investment. I didn't keep records, but my guess is I might have marginally made money that year.
That is reality.
And again, the reality is, I don't believe you.

[joeyspicks]

as I said I dont care about your "beliefs"

they are obviously flawed to say the least. The most impossible thing to do in
horse racing is NOT to show a profit.......its to try and convince a confirmed
losing player that its "POSSIBLE" to win (show a profit).

I no longer try.

[joeyspicks]

. I didn't keep records, but my guess is I might have marginally made money that year.
.

again its TOO EASY

you made my point !

[DanG]

Dan G. I didn't say that there are tracks where the majority of the pool is filled up with Beyer player's cash. I was inferring that Beyers numbers on the form took a huge advantage that most players (who use speed numbers) had.

Profits are never eliminated in pari-mutual wagering…they shift.

There were very few winners in the 60's-early 90's. It was still a tough game. Now it is impossible.
You’re obviously a very intelligent man and yet you make statements such as profits are “impossible”. All I can say is you have yet to meet everyone working at this tough game.

Take care…:ThmbUp:

[jma]

Dan G. I didn't say that there are tracks where the majority of the pool is filled up with Beyer player's cash. I was inferring that Beyers numbers on the form took a huge advantage that most players (who use speed numbers) had.

Joeys, I don't believe you. So I'm taking what you are saying with a grain of salt.
If you were even close to winning, I have no idea why you would even want to bet without rebates. Why would you even find it acceptable?
There were very few winners in the 60's-early 90's. It was still a tough game. Now it is impossible.
Btw, I could easily brag about big wins. I've had many, including a Win 4 in 2002 that brought me over 28k on just a $48 investment. I didn't keep records, but my guess is I might have marginally made money that year.
That is reality.
And again, the reality is, I don't believe you.

I have to say, it makes no sense that you write a blog all about financial issues in racing, yet you don't keep a record of how you do wagering. So you don't even know how you're doing wagering (though it seems like you're losing), but you somehow know how everyone else is doing?

[banacek]

Nonsense. I agree reduced takeouts are necessary for the game to survive, but the above is not true. Maybe you have zero chance without rebates. Do you think there wasn't a single winner before rebates were available? I would imagine there are several winning now without a rebate.

I agree. When I really think about it, 25 years ago I was in my twenties playing at a bush league track (now defunct) that had a 22% (I believe) takeout on win/place/show betting. I bought a racing form the night before for $3 or so I would guess (that's the earliest I could get one - if they were in.) I had to pay admission, pay for gas, usually avoided too much at the concessions. That meet (I think it was about 20 racing days), I played a $20WP bet on every race - no variation for the meet. As impossible as it may seem - and there will be those that claim I am lying - I made a minimum of $100 profit on each and every race day. I knew the track, jockeys, and trainers intimately and it paid off.

I do agree that the Beyers in the form changed the game forever. I made my own speed figures and once the Beyers went in, I had a couple of bad years. Horses that I was getting 4-1 on were now 9-5. I revamped my game, and became more of a pace/trip handicapper. If I hadn't, I would have quit or gone broke.

Today I sit down at my computer, pay nothing but a buck or less for a form, and get some rebates. Now my life has changed with more responsibilities, so I don't have the time to study like I did back then, so I don't make money like that, but I do hold my own. Sure I'd like more rebates and as cj says I think the track take must go down for the survival of the game, but I think it is just as beatable now as then as maybe more so due to the rebates and decreased costs of playing. The handicapper needs to keep adapting.

[Cangamble]

again its TOO EASY

you made my point !
I kept detailed records until around 1997. It just became too depressing after that.

[Cangamble]

Profits are never eliminated in pari-mutual wagering…they shift.


You’re obviously a very intelligent man and yet you make statements such as profits are “impossible”. All I can say is you have yet to meet everyone working at this tough game.

Take care…:ThmbUp:
Dan G. When you take all the things I mentioned: Beyer figures, slots taking away the dummies, intertrack betting which gave us the option to bet 30-100 races a day, and whales.....there can't be much profit to be had anymore without rebates.

May I ask, what is ROI without rebate? I think you will give me an honest answer. I don't think Joey can or will (he strikes me as all talk, and I know his type very well).

[joeyspicks]

Dan G. When you take all the things I mentioned: Beyer figures, slots taking away the dummies, intertrack betting which gave us the option to bet 30-100 races a day, and whales.....there can't be much profit to be had anymore without rebates.

.

utter NONSENSE

"There cant be much profit to be had anymore" ????????????

I love these sweeping statements (like ZERO chance, haha)

[joeyspicks]

answer. I don't think Joey can or will (he strikes me as all talk, and I know his type very well).

YOU obviously DO NOT know MY TYPE very well at all:lol:

[DanG]

May I ask, what is ROI without rebate?

CG,

Since posting I’ve tried very hard not to come here and scream out when we’ve made a score, (or lost significantly for that matter) just as I won’t discuss net in public.

I’d be lying if I said I didn’t get a rebate, but never on the pick-6 which many years is the most significant sum.

BTW-I: Take away all rebates and my action is severely reduced in the straight pools. I just can’t properly fund the bets with small margins and make it worth while.

BTW-II: I hear you loud and clear on the drop-off in dumb money, but there are also unprecedented tools available to players willing to work hard that must be factored in.

[DeanT]

We kinda got off topic I think :)

CG is very correct saying "virtually no chance", imo.

When 2 or 3 out of every 100 people (or maybe less) make money at your game without a rebate, I call that a game that is destined to fail, and that number gets lower and lower as dumb money, and in some cases some skill players move to other pursuits.

A rebate, or a lower takeout might make that number 5 or 6 or 7 out of 100, and now we are getting somewhere. We might actually be able to compete and draw new money when more people win.

A track where I am competing only with Dan G and CJ because everyone else has gone because they got their head kicked in; is a sport that is destined to die, imo.

[Cangamble]

I'm going have to take my statement back about zero chance of winning without rebates. I'll agree with Dean though, and say it is next to zero. I doubt if it is 2 or 3 in one hundred btw. More like 1 in 300 most likely, if that. I'm talking long term of course.

[DeanT]

Who knows what the number is, but it is a freaking hard game. :) Less takeouts makes it better. Maybe we'll get some poker players over.

I agree about the older days and hidden positives that could be hidden; those were the days. Pittsburgh Phil could go chart horses running lines and make some money in 1900. Man, I wonder how I would do with jcapper back then.

I did a little story about similar for a harness site, if anyone is interested in a little gambling story it's here. Dan might like it. Gosh the game gets in your blood. http://www.harnesslink.com/www/Article.cgi?ID=60020

[JustRalph]

Maybe we'll get some poker players over.


I think poker is much easier. I have played in a cash game every couple of months for the last year and half...........been winning for about the last year...........if I had a choice and could play poker as much and as easy as the races............. I would probably choose poker...........

[DeanT]

Hi Ralph,

That is a good point, and one I think is lost on racing. You can put $100 in a pokerstars account and play for a year. In racing you bring a $100 voucher to a simulcast center and you are a deer in the headlights and can lose it in twenty minutes. After five or ten times like that, you simply dont come back.

Vegas (and betfair) learned very early that if you send everyone home broke, you'll be broke. We send far too many people home broke in the simulcast world. It's not like twenty years ago when you'd go to the ponies and study hard, watch the PP's and play 9 races. Sharks might say that is good, let's keep taking dumb money. But dumb money is only dumb for a finite time, then it becomes "no" money.

Guys like Ian and betfair get it. You can play with $50 on racing at betfair. Bet the three at 5-2 because you think he's an underlay, then sell your stake at 2-1 later and lock in profit. Then do it again with another horse. Betfair has 1 million clients, because they keep them in play.

[DanG]

Who knows what the number is, but it is a freaking hard game. :) Less takeouts makes it better. Maybe we'll get some poker players over.

I agree about the older days and hidden positives that could be hidden; those were the days. Pittsburgh Phil could go chart horses running lines and make some money in 1900. Man, I wonder how I would do with jcapper back then.

I did a little story about similar for a harness site, if anyone is interested in a little gambling story it's here. http://www.harnesslink.com/www/Article.cgi?ID=60020
Thanks for the article Dean.

To play loose with a Beyer quote from (the over-rated book) 'Bet with the Best. “Would you like to sit at a poker table where everyone is wearing convention badges or the one where legendary poker genius Stu Unger was?” (may he RIP).

An under-rated “handicapping” factor is to evaluate your competition. Realize up front each circuit has their own ‘tell and I hope this aspect of the game stays around because it allows contrarians to carve out value when they miss…and “they” do miss.

[Cangamble]

Who knows what the number is, but it is a freaking hard game. :) Less takeouts makes it better. Maybe we'll get some poker players over.

I agree about the older days and hidden positives that could be hidden; those were the days. Pittsburgh Phil could go chart horses running lines and make some money in 1900. Man, I wonder how I would do with jcapper back then.

I did a little story about similar for a harness site, if anyone is interested in a little gambling story it's here. Dan might like it. Gosh the game gets in your blood. http://www.harnesslink.com/www/Article.cgi?ID=60020
I read your story. I have a couple like that. When I was in high school (grade 10), one of my classmates was the son of a trainer. There was a filly in a grass race that had hidden form. She was horrible on the dirt, and running for bottoms, but back around 13 starts ago she ran 5th on the grass to allowance grassers (boys too). Back then, there were grass stats or total stats on the form. I just happened to remember the race line because the horse was entered on the turf a few starts ago and I loved her in that spot but it was taken off the grass. As luck would have it, my classmates father had a horse running that day and he was going to the track. I scrounged up 4 bucks and bet it to win.
Back then too, the strech drives were broadcast on a radio station, CKFH.
My race was the last (8th or 9th). I hurried home from school and turned on the radio to hear Daryl Wells Sr. call Vignette to win by a length and a half. She paid $110 to win.
OK, one more. before intertrack wagering. It was around 1983 or 1984, I was waiting for another horse (Ossington) to hit the turf on the same basis as my Vignette selection and every time the horse was entered on the lawn, the race was taken off. I'm talking for a good year and a half.]
Finally a bright sunny day, the horse was in the second last race against a real weak field, problem was it was at Fort Erie. I was at Woodbine and trying to figure out a way to get to Fort Erie. My buddy was at the track, I told him I absolutely loved a horse and why. By the second race, I convinced him. We got in his car, and drove to the Fort.
Got there one race early, bet and lost....but I had my 200 bucks ready, to make my biggest bet of my life. Ossington went wire to wire with Richard Grubb aboard and paid $8.10 or $8.30 to win.
On the way out, I said "we gotta do it" Do what? Go to Mohawk so that we can claim to have been to three tracks in one day.
We went, and I made 900 bucks that night, despite being a horrible harness handicapper.

I guess the moral of the story is that in order to get that edge back again today, we need substantial rebates or a substantial drop in takeout rates.

As you can see, edges create winners, and that leads to friends going to the track and most importantly, a heck of lot more churn.

[betchatoo]

Cangamble:

In a moment of near stupidity I was going to show my statements from BrisBet for the last 3 years (a site with no rebates), to show how a profit can certainly be made in this game. Then my saner self prevailed and I realized it is nobody's business but mine (and the damn IRS) what I've made gambling. I agree with your points in that I believe the takeout should be lowered and that rebates are a great idea. I now use PTC at every opportunity (best wagering site out there). But, if you are willing to do the work, you can still beat the public and the takeout without rebates.

[joeyspicks]

Cangamble:

In a moment of near stupidity I was going to show my statements from BrisBet for the last 3 years (a site with no rebates), to show how a profit can certainly be made in this game. Then my saner self prevailed and I realized it is nobody's business but mine (and the damn IRS) what I've made gambling. I agree with your points in that I believe the takeout should be lowered and that rebates are a great idea. I now use PTC at every opportunity (best wagering site out there). But, if you are willing to do the work, you can still beat the public and the takeout without rebates.

:ThmbUp: thank you
the ONLY point I was trying to make!

[Cangamble]

Cangamble:

In a moment of near stupidity I was going to show my statements from BrisBet for the last 3 years (a site with no rebates), to show how a profit can certainly be made in this game. Then my saner self prevailed and I realized it is nobody's business but mine (and the damn IRS) what I've made gambling. I agree with your points in that I believe the takeout should be lowered and that rebates are a great idea. I now use PTC at every opportunity (best wagering site out there). But, if you are willing to do the work, you can still beat the public and the takeout without rebates.

I find 3 years to be too small of window, but I'm curious what your ROI was Bris broken down year by year. Have you won every year?

[ryesteve]

I find 3 years to be too small of window
I completely agree with your argument that the game has gotten progressively tougher, but the statement above is making this sound like another Formula2002 debate.

[DeanT]

Thanks for the article Dean.

To play loose with a Beyer quote from (the over-rated book) 'Bet with the Best. “Would you like to sit at a poker table where everyone is wearing convention badges or the one where legendary poker genius Stu Unger was?” (may he RIP).

An under-rated “handicapping” factor is to evaluate your competition. Realize up front each circuit has their own ‘tell and I hope this aspect of the game stays around because it allows contrarians to carve out value when they miss…and “they” do miss.

HI Dan,

You are preaching to the choir :)

My point rests on the fact that racings high prices have crowded out more and more players. You don't have to go sit at a table with Stu Unger, you can play a $1/$2 table and have some fun. It was much easier to go to the track on a sunny day in 1989 and bet your nine race card, and come out a winner. If you up sample size, you as an amateur will get crushed sooner or later. As a young player, or someone who might be a long term player trying the game, simulcasting has done nothing but given them more chances to get crushed and never come back.

This to me is why we bet $15B in 1990, and 17 years later with perhaps the most salient and potent technology to hit the wagering earth, we still bet $15B. People want to blame that on everything else but themselves in racing. I think racing is at fault because people who might have grown this game have been tired of getting their head kicked in and have said no mas.

As for today's game of hidden positives, and scratching out a living like many do, you still can for sure. But you really have to be good. I think there are tons of players (alot on this board) who are in the 0.92 to 0.97 ROI range - which I think you agree is a very, very good player. With a boost by lowering prices, their strategies would all work and they would be in the rarified air of 1.01 or 1.02, and I think their handle would explode, and it would encourage more and more players to your platform. We'd all win. We need to send more people home with money in their pocket, and slowly get rid of the "racing is for losers and you can never win" mind set.

CG, great story. I love those stories. Nothing better than heading to the track as a youngster and making a little score. Hold it, nothing like heading to the track now and making a score. How little times change :)

[DeanT]

PS: Just a little illustration of a small player at least having a chance to get hooked, I got sent this the other day. We have to help these people win, or we never grow, imo. This guy would have been dead after day one without lower prices.

I registered for a premium turf club account and I must say I am impressed. All they need now is free video and programs. I like the smaller tracks like Monticello and Northville... I even tried a place ticket on a 3-1 greyhound...... best yet.... I started with 100........ betting frivilously and stupid, I blew it all... but next day I had 23 dollars in my account.... and then last night.... I got the 23 all the way back up to 100 (I work n a different scale then you) and then blew it all again (I got to start reading your handicapping advice, especially on longshot betting... longshots can put a person in a tailspin).... but anyway I managed to bet about $700.... So now they throw 35 back in my account....... Thanks for playing!!......... Back to the slow grind...... Any, I really liked Premier Turf Club

[betchatoo]

I find 3 years to be too small of window, but I'm curious what your ROI was Bris broken down year by year. Have you won every year?
Because I opened the window I will answer these questions and then close off on this thread. If you feel 3 years is too small a window there is no point in my continuing. 2005 R.O.I. = 1.18 2006 (by far my best year ever) R.O.I = 1.49
2007 R.O.I = 1.06

[Cangamble]

Because I opened the window I will answer these questions and then close off on this thread. If you feel 3 years is too small a window there is no point in my continuing. 2005 R.O.I. = 1.18 2006 (by far my best year ever) R.O.I = 1.49
2007 R.O.I = 1.06

2005 and especially 2006 were great. I'm assuming your ROI is before rebate.

I didn't mean to pry, I hope you aren't offended.

But yeah, 3 years is too small a window. I could use 1990 and 1991 and 1992. I won all three years. Outside of 2002 which was probably a marginal winning year thanks to the 28k Win 4 hit, they were probably my last winning years.

[betchatoo]

I'm starting to feel like some of the posters I make fun of. Here I am posting after saying I was done. 3 years might have been too small a window if I had chosen them at random. I purposely chose the last 3 for 2 reasons. 1. They were the only 3 years I had an account with Brisbet, therefore the only 3 I could offer objective proof of winning (but then decided not to). 2. They were the last 3 years, years you indicted where it was too difficult to beat the take.

[DeanT]

I'm starting to feel like some of the posters I make fun of.

:D

[jma]

I'm starting to feel like some of the posters I make fun of. Here I am posting after saying I was done. 3 years might have been too small a window if I had chosen them at random. I purposely chose the last 3 for 2 reasons. 1. They were the only 3 years I had an account with Brisbet, therefore the only 3 I could offer objective proof of winning (but then decided not to). 2. They were the last 3 years, years you indicted where it was too difficult to beat the take.

Don't worry---even if it's a small window, you don't have to give the money back. Nice job on three winning years. :)

[DeanT]

Nice article on equidaily about making people winners, and not shutting people out of the pools who are winners.

http://racing.scmp.com/freeservice/news/news20080130e.asp

This part goes to my rant on previous pages:

The US could save itself some pain and embrace the lessons Hong Kong learned the hard way. Or is American racing to become cynical like casino gambling, where losing heavily makes you a valued customer but using your intellect to win is considered an offence?

[DanG]

Nice article on equidaily about making people winners, and not shutting people out of the pools who are winners.

http://racing.scmp.com/freeservice/news/news20080130e.asp

This part goes to my rant on previous pages:
Thanks for the article Dean;

Serious lesson to be learned by our industry. I’ve never understood the fear of letting ANYONE bet before the bell. Bless the gamblers who swing while the dice is still in the air or the horses approach the gate. We need massive dollars in the pools…period.

[First_Place]

“Would you like to sit at a poker table where everyone is wearing convention badges or the one where legendary poker genius Stu Unger was?”

Was he any relation to Felix (Unger)? :)

On a more serious note, I agree, the takeout HAS TO and I truly believe it CAN BE reduced. How much? I don't know but I'd love to see it reduced to 10% for straight and exotic wagers--AND NOT HIGHER! (Greedy bastards.)

FP

[Cratos]

CJ, Joey, and Overlay: I'd like to see the real records of those who claim to make money without rebates. I'm as good a handicapper as anyone out there ..........

I won’t dispute your assertion about your quality as a handicapper, but winning at horseracing is more than being a good handicapper, you have to be a good bettor. I will not talk about my winnings, but you would be amazed.

Also you can make a profit with small wagers if you manage your costs well, but to make large profits you have to bet large and be patience.

[JustRalph]

I will not talk about my winnings, but you would be amazed.



Well, good thing you didn't talk about them........... :lol:

[JustRalph]

It's over............yesterday on PTI, Tony Kornheiser pronounced Horse Racing " A Dead Sport"

[cj]

Also you can make a profit with small wagers if you manage your costs well, but to make large profits you have to bet large and be patience.

You paint with too broad a brush. You don't have to bet large if you bet lots of tracks and races with an edge.

[Cratos]

Well, good thing you didn't talk about them........... :lol:

Winning and losing should be kept personal.

[Cratos]

You paint with too broad a brush. You don't have to bet large if you bet lots of tracks and races with an edge.

No I didn't, because inherent in my post was that one could win at the races by making small wagers and your post essentially buffers that assertion.

[DeanT]

It's over............yesterday on PTI, Tony Kornheiser pronounced Horse Racing " A Dead Sport"

Missed it. What was the topic? What did he say?

[BombsAway Bob]

It's over............yesterday on PTI, Tony Kornheiser pronounced Horse Racing " A Dead Sport"
Tony Cornholio, who has lowered the bar so far as a "Monday Night Football" Talking Bag'O Wind that I long for Howard Cosell ;) , has spoken!
Give someone a TV show to rant & suddenly they're the Next Coming of KRESKIN! I enjoyed "PTI" in it's early years, but the two of them just got so full of themselves, I thought I was watching Fox News!:lol:

[JustRalph]

Missed it. What was the topic? What did he say?

Sorry, deleted it off the DVR already........but I think he was talking about Hockey Tv Ratings and said that it was a dead sport. They he said "Hockey and Horse racing, both dead sports" or something like that...........don't hold me to it..........

[cj]

No I didn't, because inherent in my post was that one could win at the races by making small wagers and your post essentially buffers that assertion.

I was talking about the "to make large profits you have to bet large and be patience" comment. This means you can't make large profits without betting big, which may be true for you but not necessarily for others.

[kingfin66]

It's over............yesterday on PTI, Tony Kornheiser pronounced Horse Racing " A Dead Sport"

You have to think that there is at least some truth to what he says given the commentary and realities of the game and how it is run. Tony K. is definitely a blowhard, but he is not always off base. Although I don't pronounce horse racing dead, it is severely injured and definitely needs to be rehabilitated.

[kenwoodallpromos]

You have to think that there is at least some truth to what he says given the commentary and realities of the game and how it is run. Tony K. is definitely a blowhard, but he is not always off base. Although I don't pronounce horse racing dead, it is severely injured and definitely needs to be rehabilitated.
74,000+ races in 1990; 51,000+ in 2006; only 2 of those years the number did not decline.

[JustRalph]

http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003703679

This guy fills in on PTI sometimes. I really like him. Apparently his kid was killed serving the country overseas. Suspicious death that has recently been changed to a homicide and not a suicide.........


http://news.bostonherald.com/news/regional/general/view.bg?articleid=1069899&srvc=home&position=recent

http://www.haleybooksellers.com/bob-ryan-with-book.jpg

[kingfin66]

I've seen Bob Ryan on Around the Horn. He has been known to make some very controversial statements...has even been suspended by his paper.

That is some very sad news.