New Blog Post...GREAT Idea!

[bcgreg]

Let's do this!

bcgreg

[DeanT]

Are you speaking of the letter from Mike and Ross?

For those who did not see it, a couple of members have an open letter to horseplayers on the HANA site. I am pretty sure most know Mike Mayo and Ross Gallo.



http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/2009/03/guest-post-united-we-stand.html

[rrbauer]

This is the "Procott" model. We've already been down that road. In today's environment we will get farther, faster by withholding our money than we ever will by betting it. Being nice to Turf Paradise and Beulah Park is supposed to gain us something? Spare me.

Pick a target and launch a boycott. That will get their attention and gain horseplayers some respect (more accurately it will gain horseplayers' MONEY some respect).

[bcgreg]

This is the "Procott" model. We've already been down that road. In today's environment we will get farther, faster by withholding our money than we ever will by betting it. Being nice to Turf Paradise and Beulah Park is supposed to gain us something? Spare me.

Pick a target and launch a boycott. That will get their attention and gain horseplayers some respect (more accurately it will gain horseplayers' MONEY some respect).

Maybe, but a lot less realistic IMO.

Most ARE betting now. Harder to quit betting than to bet in unison... one day, one track, one race.

bcgreg

[rrbauer]

Maybe, but a lot less realistic IMO.

Most ARE betting now. Harder to quit betting than to bet in unison... one day, one track, one race.

bcgreg

Basically, bcgreg, it's a case of having been there, and knowing what works.

Our entire battle against racetracks' and horse-owner groups' punitive measures towards horseplayers will end the day that we publicly get in bed with them. We will never gain "standing" with those groups by continuing our kowtow posture. You can't defeat the status quo by subscribing to it. Until we make them hurt they will continue to shine us on and continue to make fun of their stupid horseplayer customers behind our backs.

[rokitman]

Procotts are weak.

We should identify a charity and, instead of betting, give 25% of your estimated handle for the day to the charity. One day a week at first, if nothing changes, 2 days, then 3....

[DeanT]

I must say this interests me. It is set up with the infrastructure to grow and be a force. Having a procott for the sake of a procott is futile, imo. Maybe you get a story written about you. Yippee! But organized properly this can grow and mushroom and build dollars. Like Mike says in his letter this goes week by week and hopefully grows; if you can bet a million, you can take away a million. If it happens, and goes as Mike and Ross envision, perhaps in a year if things do not change in this business, $1M is taken out of pool X. You better believe they will notice when $1M is taken out of a daily track pool.

Anyway, the comments from members are good to read, one way or the other. It is nice to have members with proactive ideas.

[alydar]

Are you speaking of the letter from Mike and Ross?

For those who did not see it, a couple of members have an open letter to horseplayers on the HANA site. I am pretty sure most know Mike Mayo and Ross Gallo.



http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/2009/03/guest-post-united-we-stand.html

Seema like an old idea that didn't float before. I personally have always supported the idea of procotts and boycotts but I am clearly in the minority. The previous attempts of actions like this never seemed to gain any momentum. Just becuase this idea came from Gallo amd Myers doesn't make it any better or likely to succeed. .

[DeanT]

Hey Aly,

Since being involved for awhile I find that many ideas are good ideas, whether they have been tried or not, but when tried, or when proposed there is little in the way of organization behind them. All I can say to this idea is that if it moves forward, it will be done with organization and not with short-term thinking, but longer term thinking.

What happens with it if it does move forward is anyone's guess. But I think ideas and trying things are important. If we are not moving forward, we're moving backward.

[alydar]

You make a good point. I for one would be happy to participate if it is well concived and organized, as you suggest. I didn't mean to sound cynical, I think that HANA'a progress to date has been much more than I expected, and I only wish it further success.

[Indulto]

This is the "Procott" model. We've already been down that road. In today's environment we will get farther, faster by withholding our money than we ever will by betting it. Being nice to Turf Paradise and Beulah Park is supposed to gain us something? Spare me.

Pick a target and launch a boycott. That will get their attention and gain horseplayers some respect (more accurately it will gain horseplayers' MONEY some respect).rrb,
When you're right, you're right. Not much new here. The previous procott was a tree falling in the forest in New Mexico. HANA has the mechanism and, hopefully, some name recognition. Now it needs the strength and its leadership needs the will. I believe will brings strength, but ...

Let's see how this California rebate business works out. Maybe it's an opportunity for growth since HANA was an advocate from day one.

[DeanT]

You make a good point. I for one would be happy to participate if it is well concived and organized, as you suggest. I didn't mean to sound cynical, I think that HANA'a progress to date has been much more than I expected, and I only wish it further success.
No, I did not take it that way at all. I saw you sign up awhile back and thank you for that support. We should know what goes on with this over the next two weeks. We're looking at signups and comments. If it is a go we will make this fun, and hopefully ongoing. We'll update it when we have some more due diligence done. Right now comments and new signups are extremely positive and supportive, but we'll see if that keeps up the next while.

[JustRalph]

Procotts are weak.

We should identify a charity and, instead of betting, give 25% of your estimated handle for the day to the charity. One day a week at first, if nothing changes, 2 days, then 3....

I am with rrbauer on this one.

I also like the idea above. Find a horse rescue outfit closest to the track that is targeted and get nice picture of a HANA board member or the like, handing them one of those over sized checks.......and making sure the local track realizes that this money was meant for their pools that day........

Might be a logistical nightmare.......... but some variation would be great

[RichieP]

I also like the idea above. Find a horse rescue outfit closest to the track that is targeted and get nice picture of a HANA board member or the like, handing them one of those over sized checks.......and making sure the local track realizes that this money was meant for their pools that day........

Might be a logistical nightmare.......... but some variation would be great

I like the Rokitman's idea as well and would definitely be willing to donate.:ThmbUp:

Procotts unless it is a race I am interested in are not for me.

[rokitman]

Remember, when you give your money to charity, you always get a rebate from the taxman. ;)

[miesque]

I may be missing something but as noble an idea as it is to pool together money that would be otherwise wagered and donating it to a worthy racing charity, I fail to see how such actions will prompt track managements to implement positive changes. One can argue to efficacy of potential procotts or boycotts and how those ideas can be improved (if at all) to have a more significant impact. If the point of this charity idea is to reinforce the notion that change cannot be achieved by a consistent and organized collaborative effort by horseplayers and that its a waste of everyone's time, money and effort, then just flat out say that horseplayers will never be able to effectuate any meaningful changes and that the status quo is doomed to continue.

[chickenhead]

there is no reason you can't run both a procott and a boycott at the same time, its' two sides of the same coin...or is that the same side of two different coins ...the whole purpose of the procott is that you are in effect stating how much money you are controlling.

Have a lottery, select at random one of the tracks running each week...do they have a passing grade (C or better) on HANA report card? Good on them, everybody in the pool on X race. Do they have a failing grade? Oh, too bad Assanoiba (or whoever)...this week we sit on our hands and don't bet a dime.

It's more effective than a boycott for many tracks, because the procott money you are not betting is likely larger than the normal amount your group bets at that track anyway.

If HANA et al can organize a fairly large sum that they're swinging around...they can make plenty of noise with that. It's good for a bit of street theatre if nothing else.

[rokitman]

I think maybe you just wanted to use the word "efficacy" ;) but I will simple the concept up for ya into a classic phrase from the old neighborhood...

Money talks, bullshit walks.

[JustRalph]

I may be missing something but as noble an idea as it is to pool together money that would be otherwise wagered and donating it to a worthy racing charity, I fail to see how such actions will prompt track managements to implement positive changes. One can argue to efficacy of potential procotts or boycotts and how those ideas can be improved (if at all) to have a more significant impact. If the point of this charity idea is to reinforce the notion that change cannot be achieved by a consistent and organized collaborative effort by horseplayers and that its a waste of everyone's time, money and effort, then just flat out say that horseplayers will never be able to effectuate any meaningful changes and that the status quo is doomed to continue.

I am not saying that the charity Idea becomes an ongoing thing........but a few of these covered by Bloodhorse etc and calling out certain tracks......would get huge attention if you ask me. But then again.........you didn't............. :lol:

[DeanT]

Absolutely nothing wrong with advocating money to thoroughbred retirement and so on for some PR. If HANA Day ever got big asking for $10 and making a donation would be awesome.

But to get a seat at the table something has to be done that is long term in the pools I believe. It is a step by step process, and can not be done overnight. Ideas which allow things to grow week by week and gain momentum are (imo) the best ideas for something like this at this time where horseplayer groups are fledgling and looking to grow.

JMO.

[rrbauer]

It's more effective than a boycott for many tracks, because the procott money you are not betting is likely larger than the normal amount your group bets at that track anyway.



The only thing that is effective are those actions that result in change. It escapes me how giving money to an activity that continues with practices that you are protesting will get anything changed. How effective were the procotts at Albuquerque or Yavapai, small venues that were selected because the added handle would be noticable? For that matter what was accomplished by the petition with 500 (or whatever) signatures that was presented to the Jockey Club?

Nothing that we do collectively on a one-time basis will matter in the context of causing change. It has to be continuous and sustainable; it has to be noticed; and, it has to hurt financially. If it isn't change that we are after, then why bother?

[chickenhead]

Handle is down several hundred times any boycott HANA could organize...so if falling handles is all that is required, there is no need to do anything. If tracks having financial pain is all that is required, the job is done.

We cannot force the tracks to do anything...they may well just go down, and that's the end of it. No one can change that. All we can hope to do is to show them that horseplayers will react positively to X, and negatively to Y. The rest is up to them. The best way to do that, imo, is to whatever degree it's possible to organize an effort to direct money towards tracks doing X, and away from tracks doing Y. I don't think procott or boycott is a correct description...

To me the argument about whether to do something like that isn't even the real argument. The real argument is what do we want X and Y to be. If the answer is "we won't bet anything until they fix every complaint we can think up"...then absolutely we should just stop betting completely and not plan on ever starting again...because that day is not going to come.

[rrbauer]

Handle is down several hundred times any boycott HANA could organize...so if falling handles is all that is required, there is no need to do anything. If tracks having financial pain is all that is required, the job is done.


If you really believe that then you don't understand the financial power that hundreds of horseplayers acting in concert have. And, the "pied piper" effect that can build on top of the initial effort. Until we gain "equal standing" with the other "partners" in the horseracing game there is every need to do something.


We cannot force the tracks to do anything...they may well just go down, and that's the end of it. No one can change that. All we can hope to do is to show them that horseplayers will react positively to X, and negatively to Y. The rest is up to them. The best way to do that, imo, is to whatever degree it's possible to organize an effort to direct money towards tracks doing X, and away from tracks doing Y. I don't think procott or boycott is a correct description...

You might be right that we can't change behavior regardless of what we do. And, if the majority believe that, then we might just as well rally around a few social events and let it go at that.

Keeneland is coming up and Dean has a day-at-the-races thing in the works. That can be our spring fling. Then Saratoga at the end of summer and everybody is happy.




To me the argument about whether to do something like that isn't even the real argument. The real argument is what do we want X and Y to be. If the answer is "we won't bet anything until they fix every complaint we can think up"...then absolutely we should just stop betting completely and not plan on ever starting again...because that day is not going to come.

I though we were signed-on to reducing takeout where it is abominably high; and reforming breakage. Those are reasonable positions and not "everything that we can think up".

[chickenhead]

the first part was sarcasm... but seriously, what exactly are you advocating? I'm not even sure what we disagree about.

Lets agree takeout is numero uno. I say lets try to consciously push handle to low takeout venues, and away from high takeout venues. As a group, a concerted betting effort. What is the beef with that?

[rrbauer]

the first part was sarcasm... but seriously, what exactly are you advocating? I'm not even sure what we disagree about.

Lets agree takeout is numero uno. I say lets try to consciously push handle to low takeout venues, and away from high takeout venues. As a group, a concerted betting effort. What is the beef with that?

No beef with that. Why didn't you say that before instead of all the gobbledygook?

[chickenhead]

it's probably just my crazy way....but that just exemplifies the difficulties in a nutshell...you and I agree and we nearly come to fisticuffs. Packaging and selling the idea is the difficult part, imo...because everyone thinks everyone else is talking about something else.

[DeanT]

you and I agree and we nearly come to fisticuffs.
Just don't disagree wit Miesque. She packs a punch.