PDA

View Full Version : Should every ticket be cashable?


Imriledup
03-09-2009, 10:31 PM
What about this idea. How about every ticket is a 'winner'? Find a way to give back some money to people who don't win. I know, that money would come out of the betting pools and the winning horses would pay less than they currently do, but if you give back a few pennies to every player, it will psychologically make every player think differently of this game. Some people go to the track and hardly ever cash a ticket. People find it very hard to risk money they know might see a 0 return.

But, if you give people back 6 cents (for example) on a ticket from their horse who finished 8th, that would force them to physically go to the window to cash. No one would cash a 6 cent ticket because its too embarrassing, but they can save all their tickets and when they accumulate a few bucks, than they can head to the cashiers window like the rest of us geniuses!

I think psychologically, giving money back to EVERYONE on every bet no matter what will make betting pools increase.

So, if a winning horse who was going to pay 8.80 pays 8.00 and the other 80 cents goes to the bettors who did not win, it makes everyone feel much better. It would make race betting more like the stock market, where you don't lose all your investment if you mess up.

The bottom line remains that ALL the money (sans the takeout) goes back to the players anyway, with my system, it just goes back to more people more of the time. Losing players get more money to churn. It won't hurt the winning players because, well, as winning players, they are going to find a way to win no matter what anyway, it makes no difference.

Win win situation?

Donnie
03-09-2009, 10:37 PM
<shaking his head:::::::slowly:::::::from side to side>


......socialism hits the racetrack.......

CBedo
03-09-2009, 10:49 PM
So the dictators on top keep getting richer, and at the bottom we all are poorer, but, at least we all lose at similar rates? This really is socialism.

So if you win, your'e takeout is six points higher? Great! I'm incented to lose, haha.

Imriledup
03-09-2009, 10:53 PM
So the dictators on top keep getting richer, and at the bottom we all are poorer, but, at least we all lose at similar rates? This really is socialism.

So if you win, your'e takeout is six points higher? Great! I'm incented to lose, haha.

You're not incented to lose, but you WILL lose way more than you win. Therefore, you will benefit from this system if you happen to get beat.

This is a game where we need the borderline players to hang around and not leave the game. We need to mentally 'train' players the joys of cashing.

DJofSD
03-09-2009, 10:54 PM
Let me guess, you would like to bail out all of the people that lied and committed fraud on their mortgage applications too.

Imriledup
03-09-2009, 10:55 PM
Let me guess, you would like to bail out all of the people that lied and committed fraud on their mortgage applications too.

Stick to the topic. If you want to talk about mortgage fraud, find a mortgage message board.

Tell me why this is a bad idea. I'm willing to listen. Break it down for me. Teach me the error of my ways.

Donnie
03-09-2009, 11:01 PM
Should we call the actual winner of the race the "winner"? Or should we reward every horse (trainers and owners mind you) for being a good participant? Ask this question of someone who seriously "invests" their money at the track....this would be a GREAT way to end the game.

Some things in life just need losers. Period.

Imriledup
03-09-2009, 11:04 PM
Should we call the actual winner of the race the "winner"? Or should we reward every horse (trainers and owners mind you) for being a good participant? Ask this question of someone who seriously "invests" their money at the track....this would be a GREAT way to end the game.

Some things in life just need losers. Period.

Horse owners get paid to the 5th place usually, some tracks pay ALL the owners for participating. Jockeys get paid for 1st or 12th. They make money no matter what. Why should horse bettors not get paid the same way? Owners and jockeys aren't complaining about the system and how its set up.

sandpit
03-09-2009, 11:06 PM
Not sure if this is a fair comparison, but many racetracks pay purses all the way back to last place, not unlike NASCAR or a golf tournament, so in a sense you could say they are practicing socialism since everyone earns something just for participating...should the bettors get similar consideration???

JustRalph
03-09-2009, 11:07 PM
reminds me of the little league games that don't actually keep score..........then on the way home in the mini vans.......the kids who won do nothing but talk about how they slaughtered the other team :lol:

Donnie
03-09-2009, 11:11 PM
You got me sold! Let's do it! Sounds like pure and simple equity to me. Since all other sports do it, this is discrimination to the highest degree!

Forget the fact that I have to buy feed or medicine or farrier fees or hire stable help, and hotwalkers and vets and stall space and everything else (oh for NASCAR forget about the pitcrews and the engineers who work endlessly on the engimne, or the insurance or transportation costs, etc, etc, etc.)

Yup that was my first thought too Ralph!

BillW
03-09-2009, 11:14 PM
Lowering takeout would accomplish this without punishing the winner. :)

Donnie
03-09-2009, 11:14 PM
not unlike NASCAR or a golf tournament, so in a sense you could say they are practicing socialism since everyone earns something just for participating...should the bettors get similar consideration???

This is the way they have been setup from day one to cover the costs incurred by the active participants. Without something coming to them, you would have very few racing in either horseracing or nascar.....

Donnie
03-09-2009, 11:17 PM
Reality: this would never be able to be implemented anyway. They can't even turn the betting off on time, let alone figure out who gets 10 cents down to last place......

NEXT RACE!!!!

chickenhead
03-09-2009, 11:43 PM
I've always thought tracks should implement rebates in this way (essentially this idea minus the socialism). Forget about tracks having player cards, and tracking this that and the other.

Just rebate 5% on the bet value. Every $2 loser is worth $0.10. Every $2 winner gets an extra $0.10. Easy peasy.

Imriledup
03-10-2009, 12:22 AM
I've always thought tracks should implement rebates in this way (essentially this idea minus the socialism). Forget about tracks having player cards, and tracking this that and the other.

Just rebate 5% on the bet value. Every $2 loser is worth $0.10. Every $2 winner gets an extra $0.10. Easy peasy.

Good post.

ryesteve
03-10-2009, 12:44 AM
Tell me why this is a bad idea.Because payouts are already too low for most people to make a profit at this game. Why make it even harder? It's not as if the cashback on losing tickets is going to fill the gap you're creating. And the major beneficiary will be racetracks, because this would undoubtedly increase the amount of uncashed tickets that reverts back to them at the end of the year.

njcurveball
03-10-2009, 01:14 AM
But, if you give people back 6 cents (for example) on a ticket from their horse who finished 8th, that would force them to physically go to the window to cash. No one would cash a 6 cent ticket because its too embarrassing

I like your idea and look forward to taking all of losing 10 cent Super tickets to the window to get 6 cents each for them. :ThmbUp:

MAN if this goes through I am definitely dumping my job! I am with you man! I hope you get this one! :ThmbUp:

One more thing to all those who are behind in line when I cash out my hundreds of straight 10 cent losers for 6 cents each, sorry man! ;)

Indulto
03-10-2009, 07:01 AM
Chick is right. It should be thought of as just another form of rebating.

IRU ... or is it URme ;)?
If I didn’t know better, I’d think you were reading my posts from 2005 in the Rag Board Archives about “Second Chance Rebates.” I’m not posting the links because it’s a log-in board.

Could rebates save HollyPark?
[Date/Time=06-01-2005 - 4:06 PM][Msgid=839015] [LoginName=Indulto]… One of the “advantages” of the on-track experience as opposed to account wagering is that if you’re a loser, nobody has to know about it ...

... And, unless you win big, nobody has to know that you’re a marginal winner, either. Basically, if you’re not in the black, or close to it, rebates by themselves aren’t much help.

But suppose it were possible make rebates a win-win situation for tracks and losers as well as for winners? It occurred to me as I reviewed my losing Derby Day tickets from Hollywood Park that they would be more likely to get me back there again if those tickets had some rebated value toward the funding of another dip in the mutual pools subject to yet another round of takeout.

So here’s the idea. Pay rebates in cash ONLY on winning wagers. Rebates on losing wagers could be used ONLY toward the purchase of wagers on subsequent events AT THE SAME TRACK AS THE QUALIFYING WAGER; with exchange, but not refund privileges.

Imagine how clean wagering areas would be if there were no such thing as a worthless ticket!

Such a HollyPark promotion could be labeled:
1. Rebates Anonymous
…Re; Re; Could rebates save HollyPark?
[Date/Time=06-02-2005 - 4:57 PM][Msgid=839687] [LoginName=Indulto]… How many times have you seen someone tear up their tickets only to then hear the infamous “Ladies and gentlemen, please hold all pari-mutuel tickets” or have been aware of the “Pack Rats” among us who have kept their tickets and programs in anticipation of a subsequent IRS signing event, but then never threw them away. Obviously, this rebate idea has additional benefit as a public service preventing further infliction of psychological damage to horseplayers.

You wrote:
>There's some downside to the effort required on small wagers but
>that wouldn't be so difficult to overcome.

I was thinking that self-service machine(s) could be reserved for the purpose of scanning and accumulating losing tickets and generating non-cashable, non-refundable vouchers whose value could be reduced by some fee if a minimum voucher value was not submitted in a single batch. (In event of malfunction, an attendant could be alerted to retrieve the accumulated batch.) The machine would reject any live or winning tickets.I had to laugh when both Donnie and Marie .. I mean, the curveball, sailed in to dump on a poster here even though they post so respectfully to others when they post at HTR.I like your idea and look forward to taking all of losing 10 cent Super tickets to the window to get 6 cents each for them. :ThmbUp:

MAN if this goes through I am definitely dumping my job! I am with you man! I hope you get this one! :ThmbUp:

One more thing to all those who are behind in line when I cash out my hundreds of straight 10 cent losers for 6 cents each, sorry man! ;)How many tickets do you think are punched as a single ten-cent combination? Not enough to even bother with any ticket whose total value was less than a dollar would be my guess, but I suppose that's the only way YOU can keep them straight.:jump: Also, more self-service machines could be used by limiting the time periods they were available to function in that capacity.

Now that California is bringing rebates out of the shadows, maybe they can use them to spur on-track attendance and wagering on LIVE races.

What's wrong with keeping casual players in the game longer and providing those who had to leave early with an incentive to come back again sooner than later.

Donnie
03-10-2009, 08:05 AM
Sorry Indulto, not dumping on the poster, dumping on the idea. Guess a cord was struck because I totally reject the idea of "spreading the wealth". After 30+ years of playing the game one way, now an idea comes along that takes money out of a winning player's pocket and puts it into the losing players pocket. THIS IS NOT A REBATE!! A rebate would come out of the TRACK's pocket. What is being postulated here is removing this money from a winning ticket, not the track take. Reread the original post and tell me I am wrong. The difference? Spreading the wealth. Socialism. This is the sleepwalk this entire country is doing right now.

I don't think that Imriledup has felt attacked. I would hope not. It was not meant personally. If taken personally, then I apologize.

Signed, with all due respect,

-a winning player.

Tom
03-10-2009, 08:25 AM
What about people who do not bet the race?
Shouldn't they get something back, too?






:rolleyes::bang:

raybo
03-10-2009, 10:30 AM
Rebate systems are an attempt to attract new customers and reward loyal ones. This is solely up to the provider of the service and should come out of their budget, not the customer's. That's basic business promotion and has nothing to do with penalties against any of a business's customers, winners or losers (or non-participants).

SMOO
03-10-2009, 11:24 AM
Lowering takeout would accomplish this without punishing the winner. :)
:ThmbUp:

Donnie
03-10-2009, 02:08 PM
BTW.....


I had to laugh when both Donnie and Marie...


What DID I do to cause this personal attack?? Maybe you agree that winners should be "punished"? Maybe you felt this idea was too close to your own from over 3 years ago? Maybe you hadn't had your second cup of coffee yet??

I actually like your idea of a non-cash rebate on losing tickets...as long as the money doesn't come from a winning player's payout. Good luck convincing the tracks and horsemen, though. Money has to come from somewhere.

Imriledup
03-10-2009, 03:58 PM
Donnie i don't feel attacked, keep doing what you are doing! I appreciate your passion on this subject.

I'm not necessarily advocating taking money from winning players and giving it to losing players. Keep in mind that even the most successful winning gamblers lose many more bets than they win. You seem to think that i'm trying to take money out of your pocket on every winning wager that you happen to have.

If the takeout rate remains the same and the same exact amount of money is given back to the players, than it shouldn't even be a blip on the radar screen of a player who is a long run winner. If you are a long run winner, it isn't going to cost you even one cent, you'll win a boatload of money regardless of how they divvy it up.

The one factor you need to think about is how this idea will possibly keep beginning players in the game. I have a deep belief that the reason a young man will stay in this game as an active participant is if he FEELS he 'knows something'. We can all remember back to the first time we cashed a ticket, we felt on top of the world and knew that we cashed that ticket because we knew what we were doing. We need to instill the feeling into young players to convince them that they too, know what they are doing.

We need young players to say to themselves, "i haven't actually won money, but its just a matter of time, i know what i'm doing, i'm still learnin the game, i'm cashing tickets, i'm really REALLY close to being a winning player"

I'm just trying to figure out SOME WAY to make this game better for the players. I know, lowering takeout is the best way, but if we can't have lower takeout, we have to figure out some way to get every player involved.

rjorio
03-10-2009, 04:31 PM
This idea would be a boon to stoopers at the track.

PaceAdvantage
03-10-2009, 06:52 PM
Off topic political comments have been deleted. Please read the TOS (http://www.paceadvantage.com/TOS_PrivacyStatement.html) again if you are unsure of where to post such commentary.

PaceAdvantage
03-10-2009, 06:56 PM
I had to laugh when both Donnie and Marie .. I mean, the curveball, sailed in to dump on a poster here even though they post so respectfully to others when they post at HTR.I've always wondered about this myself. As an HTR user and a lurker on that board, it amazes me how some posting personalities change depending upon location.

I guess they feel this place is less worthy of the more civilized tone they are evidently capable of producing.

But, I suppose this is another topic for another thread.

Donnie
03-10-2009, 07:36 PM
Speaking for myself, at times this board strikes a cord in me others do not. Probably because of the varied personalities about. When I felt I have been out of line, I reread my posts and change where I feel applicable. I will say this....your timeline here to change a post is MUCH shorter than at HTR. I can go back and change what I have posted over there much later than here. Trust me...I have posted things there that after personal review I think "That didn't come out right" and it has been changed. If editing time has passed, I apologize where applicable. As Imriledup pointed out, I have a passion for this sport. I may challenge your ideas, but I never mean to attack your character (although I do remember one occasion where did do just such, and have regretted my stupidity). This current post was pretty borderline to politics at first reading to me, and I do hold a very staunch political view. Again, another post, over over a drink......

Back on topic.....

I do agree with what he posted re: Should every ticket be cashable?, providing it does not diminish a winner's take. He stated in the opening post that a ticket paying the winner 8.80 should be lowered to 8.00 and the extra .80 per ticket divided up between the losers. In this example you are taking over 10% of the winner's profit to "subsidize" the losers of this race. While I believe the thought of every ticket being worth something would help work in retaining new bettors, I stand by my conviction it should not be at the expense of the guy who got the winner right.

I think we all agree the sport needs a little fresh blood. We did notice at the World Series at the Orleans a few weeks back, there seemed to be some younger people in the crowd of players. More than a couple people noted this was a good thing! I'm on board with 'Riled....we need more young players. I would hate to see this sport die!

CBedo
03-10-2009, 07:50 PM
I think this has already been implemented at a couple of offshore books, sort of. I thought I saw one that had a pretty nice rebate percentage, but when I looked at it, it was a rebate on losing tickets.

There you go! I don't remember which one.

Imriledup
03-10-2009, 10:13 PM
Speaking for myself, at times this board strikes a cord in me others do not. Probably because of the varied personalities about. When I felt I have been out of line, I reread my posts and change where I feel applicable. I will say this....your timeline here to change a post is MUCH shorter than at HTR. I can go back and change what I have posted over there much later than here. Trust me...I have posted things there that after personal review I think "That didn't come out right" and it has been changed. If editing time has passed, I apologize where applicable. As Imriledup pointed out, I have a passion for this sport. I may challenge your ideas, but I never mean to attack your character (although I do remember one occasion where did do just such, and have regretted my stupidity). This current post was pretty borderline to politics at first reading to me, and I do hold a very staunch political view. Again, another post, over over a drink......

Back on topic.....

I do agree with what he posted re: Should every ticket be cashable?, providing it does not diminish a winner's take. He stated in the opening post that a ticket paying the winner 8.80 should be lowered to 8.00 and the extra .80 per ticket divided up between the losers. In this example you are taking over 10% of the winner's profit to "subsidize" the losers of this race. While I believe the thought of every ticket being worth something would help work in retaining new bettors, I stand by my conviction it should not be at the expense of the guy who got the winner right.

I think we all agree the sport needs a little fresh blood. We did notice at the World Series at the Orleans a few weeks back, there seemed to be some younger people in the crowd of players. More than a couple people noted this was a good thing! I'm on board with 'Riled....we need more young players. I would hate to see this sport die!

I used 8.80 to 8 dollars just as a raw example. I'm sure the racing higher ups are smarter than i am and they can figure out a better way to divvy up the monies.

Maybe my original idea is crappy, who knows. I'm just trying to figure out a great way to make more customers happy and make those happy customers come back for more.

I guess with place and show betting, there is a vehicle for players to take advantage of their inability to actually select winners and with supers and pentas, you can go down to 5th place if you actually believe a horse you like is going to finish exactly 4th or 5th.

Indulto
03-11-2009, 04:17 AM
Sorry Indulto, not dumping on the poster, dumping on the idea. Guess a cord was struck because I totally reject the idea of "spreading the wealth". After 30+ years of playing the game one way, now an idea comes along that takes money out of a winning player's pocket and puts it into the losing players pocket. THIS IS NOT A REBATE!! A rebate would come out of the TRACK's pocket. What is being postulated here is removing this money from a winning ticket, not the track take. Reread the original post and tell me I am wrong. The difference? Spreading the wealth. Socialism. This is the sleepwalk this entire country is doing right now.

I don't think that Imriledup has felt attacked. I would hope not. It was not meant personally. If taken personally, then I apologize.

Signed, with all due respect,

-a winning player.BTW.....

What DID I do to cause this personal attack?? Maybe you agree that winners should be "punished"? Maybe you felt this idea was too close to your own from over 3 years ago? Maybe you hadn't had your second cup of coffee yet??

I actually like your idea of a non-cash rebate on losing tickets...as long as the money doesn't come from a winning player's payout. Good luck convincing the tracks and horsemen, though. Money has to come from somewhere.Donnie,
Sorry you belatedly felt attacked by my observation. Was that second post a coffee-inspired reaction? ;)

Indeed I was about to challenge IRU’s consistency before the curveball piled on.:jump: IRU has frequently taken the position here that there is no inequity in selective rebating; adopting a “screw the unrebated player” attitude if you will, so his new-found concern for non-winners came as quite a surprise..

In re-reading his first post, I can see where his non-specific offering could have been interpreted as suggesting funding like a NY OTB-like surcharge, but the main thrust seemed to focus on incentives for casual players. That hardly warranted the label of socialism that is now deployed at the drop of a hat (enlightened capitalism seems a more appropriate term to me :D). Like you, I don’t have much hope for the idea, either, but I appreciate what sounded like your genuine support for that kind of incentive.

You profess to be a winning player. If your profits are achieved only when you receive high rebates, then maybe it would take something out of your pockets. How likely is it that tracks and other bet takers would give everyone rebates wothout lowering them for some of those who are currently receiving them?

Nitro
03-11-2009, 05:18 AM
What about this idea. How about every ticket is a 'winner'? Find a way to give back some money to people who don't win. I know, that money would come out of the betting pools and the winning horses would pay less than they currently do, but if you give back a few pennies to every player, it will psychologically make every player think differently of this game. Some people go to the track and hardly ever cash a ticket. People find it very hard to risk money they know might see a 0 return.

But, if you give people back 6 cents (for example) on a ticket from their horse who finished 8th, that would force them to physically go to the window to cash. No one would cash a 6 cent ticket because its too embarrassing, but they can save all their tickets and when they accumulate a few bucks, than they can head to the cashiers window like the rest of us geniuses!

I think psychologically, giving money back to EVERYONE on every bet no matter what will make betting pools increase.

So, if a winning horse who was going to pay 8.80 pays 8.00 and the other 80 cents goes to the bettors who did not win, it makes everyone feel much better. It would make race betting more like the stock market, where you don't lose all your investment if you mess up.

The bottom line remains that ALL the money (sans the takeout) goes back to the players anyway, with my system, it just goes back to more people more of the time. Losing players get more money to churn. It won't hurt the winning players because, well, as winning players, they are going to find a way to win no matter what anyway, it makes no difference.

Win win situation?So basically you would like to reward the incompetence of losers by penalizing those who are smarter and can make winning plays? By the way, they already have Place and Show pools in place for those who like to hedge their bets or are unsure of themselves. The exotics offer a multitude of ways to hedge your bets too, and a Dutch Win bet is also available for those who like more then one entry to Win.

The only fair way to redistribute the losers money is to create betting pools for those who don’t know what they’re doing. Want to make pennies on the dollar then how about a runner-up pool for the 4th place finisher and so on and so on.

Maybe the reality is to learn how to make winning wagers before promoting a nonsensical attempt to lower the standards into a game for “losers”.
"Gee Hun I had a great day at the track today! I hit all 10 races and made a profit of 10 cents in each one. Wow that’s wonderful! You spent 4 hours there and made 25 cents per hour. Yeah, isn’t that great! I didn’t lose a dime! It only cost me $5 for the form, $3 for parking, a $1 for the program, $3 to get in, $10 for lunch, and $10 for gas. Boy this game is great! I’m going to tell all my friends about it too! I’m sure they’ll appreciate that I came home a winner too!" :jump: