Should Horseplayers Protest with a Pool Riot at Los Alamitos?

[andymays]

Yesterday the CHRB approved a 2% increase in takeout. They had a meeting but their minds were made up before the meeting started. I never expected them to do anything but vote for the raise in take but I am proud of the effort Jeff made in attending the meeting and speaking out on behalf of other Horseplayers.

You can't win a fight if you're afraid to lose one.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The question then becomes how do you express your dissatisfaction with what happened?

Do you let them laugh at Horseplayers with no consequences?

What if on a given day in the future Horseplayers bet a minimum of $20 win and $20 show on the horse with the least chance to win (all on the same horse) in the first race at Los Alamitos and then cancelled those bets with 2 minutes to go?

My feeling is that at least they would pay a little attention and many of their regulars would complain. It's not big deal but at least we can draw a little blood and let them know that we know.

Anyone think it's a good idea?

What's the upside?

What's the downside?

[turfnsport]

This is going to be a litmus test for further takeout increases. If HANA does not organize a boycott of Los Al, then they should just roll up the carpet and call it a day.

The CHRB drew a line in the sand, and now horseplayers need to kick sand in their faces in a big way.

[andymays]

I hope the people who vote that it's not a good idea can explain why.

[andymays]

This is going to be a litmus test for further takeout increases. If HANA does not organize a boycott of Los Al, then they should just roll up the carpet and call it a day.

The CHRB drew a line in the sand, and now horseplayers need to kick sand in their faces in a big way.


I doubt anything will stop what's about to happen but at least we can cause them a little anxiety and pain. :p

[turfnsport]

I doubt anything will stop what's about to happen but at least we can cause them a little anxiety and pain. :p

If there is an effective boycott of Los Al among horseplayers, I think it would stop a takeout increase at other SoCal tracks.

Although maybe I am giving them too much credit...lol..

And I'll add I have not really been a proponent of "boycotts" but in this case it HAS to happen.

[MakinItHappen]

Yesterday the CHRB approved a 2% increase in takeout. They had a meeting but their minds were made up before the meeting started. I never expected them to do anything but vote for the raise in take but I am proud of the effort Jeff made in attending the meeting and speaking out on behalf of other Horsplayers.

You can't win a fight if you're afraid to lose one.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The question then becomes how do you express your dissatisfaction with what happened?

Do you let them laugh at Horseplayers with no consequences?

What if on a given day in the future Horseplayers bet a minimum of $20 win and $20 show on the horse with the least chance to win (all on the same horse) in the first race at Los Alamitos and then cancelled those bets with 2 minutes to go?

My feeling is that at least they would pay a little attention and many of their regulars would complain. It's not big deal but at least we can draw a little blood and let them know that we know.

Anyone think it's a good idea?

What's the upside?

What's the downside?

I think it is a Great Idea, but why stop at $20? I say the bigger the better!

The Upside is that their action is an abject failure and they will think twice before making the same mistake at HWD, SAX, DMR, et al.

The Downside is not apparent to me... :lol:

Let's Do It!

Keep Fighting the Good Fight Andy, Jeff, HANA and Everyone!

MakinItHappen

[andymays]

There are two no votes but no explanation of why it might be a bad idea. :rolleyes:

[InsideThePylons-MW]

This is going to be a litmus test for further takeout increases. If HANA does not organize a boycott of Los Al, then they should just roll up the carpet and call it a day.

Afterward, Jeff Platt said his membership "would not take it (the takeout increase) well." He said that while he understood the reason for the action, the decreasing handle problems tracks are experiencing are their own fault.

Understood the reason for the action???????????????????????

How could he say that?

It just impossible he could say that.

It would be like the head of PETA saying....."I understand the reason they kill animals for fur coats"

[Robert Goren]

If you do this, make sure enough people are on board. If you announce something like this and it falls short, you will be the laughing stock of racing.

[tzipi]

I don't get it either why it's a bad idea :confused: So people are saying do not boycott the takeout raise to take more and more money away from us?? What,why! Ok keep giving more and more of YOUR money to them.

It would be tough to get alot of people to do. But would be a great thing to do. For bettors to stand up against what's happening.

[andymays]

If you do this, make sure enough people are on board. If you announce something like this and it falls short, you will be the laughing stock of racing.


It doesn't take much to make a 40-1 shot 1-5 at Los Alamitos in the first race.

[andymays]

Here's a possible downside.

Would it be a reach to think the ADW's might get together and not allow cancels on that race?

[Jeff P]

ITP,

That's right. The reporter from The Blood-Horse.com did not misquote me. I told him I understood the reason why the vote went the way that it did.

"Understand the reason" and "agree with the reason" are two entirely different things.

For the record I strongly oppose the takeout increase AND the reason the vote went the way that it did.

I drove 300 miles round trip on my own dime... sat and listened through almost 3 hours of debate over other CHRB meeting agenda items before the agenda item for the proposed takeout increase increase was called... and when given the chance I stood up and spoke out against it.

There's a whole lot that I could type up. But I'll keep it short.

Quick... Starting right now take your best shot at convincing a room of 80 people who are dead set in favor of raising takeout what they really need to do is lower it... You have 3 minutes... Go!

That's where I found myself yesterday morning.

I don't think what I had to say... or didn't say... or the 160 emails received by the CHRB from HANA members... or even if there had been 3,000 emails... or if there had been 500 other players lined up behind me to speak out their opposition... I honestly believe none of that would have made the least bit of difference in the board's final decision.

The economic studies that I presented to the CHRB... Cummings from the National HBPA website... Thalheimer from the University of Louisville website... and how horseplayers see takeout based on our own HANA Survey were ignored... completely.

Dr. Allred's attorney told the board how the CA State Legislature passed the bill with a unanimous vote... he made the request for a takeout increase request as provided for in the law... and the the CHRB rubber stamped it with a sunset clause the Wed after this coming labor day. There was only one vote in our favor... Brackpool... who oddly enough was named later in the meeting as the succesor to John Harris as CHRB Chairman.

Some of the commissioners simply do not belong on a board such as the CHRB. When you read the transcript it should be interesting to note that Bo Derek and I got into a brief argument where she said that even after the takeout increase, prize payouts (takeout) would still be more favorable for the player at Los Al than slots prize payouts at a local casino. I corrected her saying that WPS takeout after the increase would be 18% returning 82 cents for every dollar wagered vs. a slots return of 91-92 cents per every dollar wagered. She told me I was wrong. It was only after John Harris corrected her that she shut up.

I had time to reflect on Saturday's events during the drive home. Sometimes the truth hurts. The simple truth is that we as horseplayers... even though we have an organization named HANA with 1500 members who wager more than $65 million annually -- We are not seen by the CHRB as the will of the people.

Bills passed by the CA House and Senate and signed into law by the Governor are seen by the CHRB as the will of the people. And that is exactly what I meant when I said I understand why the vote went the way that it did.

If we horseplayers are ever to become part of the process... WE need to become the will of the people. We need to be the ones lobbying state legislatures to take action on behalf of the racing customer. We need to be the ones appearing before state racing boards like the CHRB asking them to rubber stamp items on OUR agenda that state legislatures have unaminously passed into law.

We have a VERY long road to travel before that happens.


Jeff Platt

President, HANA
http://www.horseplayersassociation.com



-jp

.

[andymays]

You don't need to explain anything Jeff.

You showed up and that's what matters.


The matter was decided long before the meeting started and they have everything stacked their way.

Now we can see why Jerry Jamgotchian constantly sues them and wins. They don't understand anything else. Hardball is the only thing they understand.

[andymays]

Nobody has explained why it's a bad idea yet.

[Tom]

Why not just boycott all the races - bet $0 on every race. Say the Hell with LA and let them die a slow death.

[andymays]

Why not just boycott all the races - bet $0 on every race. Say the Hell with LA and let them die a slow death.


I don't think too many of us bet Los Alamitos but the point would be to screw with the pool out of spite! :mad:

[proximity]

I drove 300 miles round trip on my own dime... sat and listened through almost 3 hours of debate over other CHRB meeting agenda items before the agenda item for the proposed takeout increase increase was called... and when given the chance I stood up and spoke out against it.


thank you for this jeff p.

and a question.... in the three hours was there any discussion of lobbying for unlimited full card simulcasting that would certainly help increase revenues???

[InsideThePylons-MW]

Jeff,

I understand everything you are saying.

The vote was predetermined. Nothing you presented was going to change the vote. I knew that before the meeting.

I stated my case long before the meeting......and trust me, my case was stronger than anybody could imagine.

They have no idea how flawed their idea is and the collateral damage on the CA product it will cause.

The only thing I had issue with was you telling an industry reporter that you understood their reason for the takeout raise. Their is no possible understanding of any reason for a takeout raise unless the reason is to purposely decimate handle so that every party involved in racing ends up with less money. As the leader of HANA, which is 100% against takeout raises, you should never say you understand the reason for a takeout raise. As I said, there is no understandable reason for a takeout raise.....Ever! I know you know that.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

I understand it. It is like telling a 6 year old kid that you understand why he crossed the highway to get a chocolate bar.

[Jeff P]

thank you for this jeff p.

and a question.... in the three hours was there any discussion of lobbying for unlimited full card simulcasting that would certainly help increase revenues???

Lobbying for it? No. Not as a separate agenda item at yesterday's meeting.

Brief discussion of it? Yes. During debate over the takeout increase requested by Los Al, I specifically suggested to Dr. Allred and the Commissioners of the CHRB (it should appear in the meeting transcript) that Full Card Simulcasting would give racing customers more of a reason to show up and play the races at various off site wagering outlets throughout CA... hinting that had full card simulcasting always been available, Los Al would never have had a reason to seek a takeout increase in the first place.

I can tell you that there is both support for it and considerable opposition to it.... very much like the cooks and dishwashers analogy that I posted about in the other thread.

I am very much in favor of it... both in CA and elsewhere.


-jp

.

[takeout]

It's not big deal but at least we can draw a little blood and let them know that we know.

Anyone think it's a good idea?I love the idea! I even like the bigger the better. I’d like to see those pools run up in the millions before being cancelled. Could be costly though, if it somehow backfired or was sabotaged. I still love the idea and am up for it. :ThmbUp:

[proximity]

I can tell you that there is both support for it and considerable opposition to it....


that there would be ANY opposition to this, let alone "considerable" opposition..... that just shows the uphill battle hana is fighting.

on a lighter note i bet you never thought you'd be debating with bo derek about casino takeout rates??:D

[InsideThePylons-MW]

Here's a possible downside.

Would it be a reach to think the ADW's might get together and not allow cancels on that race?

From what I understand and have heard stories about......

Los Alamitos' mutuel dept can freeze any or all of the tickets bet on their races from cancellation at their discretion.

[Jeff P]

I see not having Full Card Simulcasting as a failure on the part of the racing industry in CA to satisfy customer needs and wants.

The opposition sees things differently. They must have really wanted to make sure Full Card Simulcasting never got off the ground. Like a lot of other things related to racing in CA, tracks and horsemen successfully lobbied the state house and senate... the result being failure to have full card simulcasting or limiting the number of out of state races that can be shown each day is actually CA State Law.


-jp

.

[InsideThePylons-MW]

I see not having Full Card Simulcasting as a failure on the part of the racing industry in CA to satisfy customer needs and wants.

The opposition sees things differently. They must have really wanted to make sure Full Card Simulcasting never got off the ground. Like a lot of other things related to racing in CA, tracks and horsemen successfully lobbied the state house and senate... the result being failure to have full card simulcasting or limiting the number of out of state races that can be shown each day is actually CA State Law.


-jp

.

When they agreed to import races, they limited it to 8 or 12 races total per day statewide in an effort to keep their bettors betting their money on their product so all the money would stay in CA. Protectionism at it's finest.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Nobody has explained why it's a bad idea yet.

For the sake of being the town prick - pool manipulation isn't exactly a very ethical method of making a point and I'm fairly certain that 'pool integrity' is listed in the top three HANA ideals.

[Jeff P]

on a lighter note i bet you never thought you'd be debating with bo derek about casino takeout rates??
It's really scary to me that such an exchange even took place in the first place.

When debating takeout and its optimal pricing point with members of a state racing board you had better realize beforehand that takeout is of critical importance to the overall well being of that state's racing industry. If you realize that then you further realize if the state gets it wrong the industry they are trying to protect is going to suffer... potentially putting thousands of jobs at risk.

You would expect that members of such a state regulatory board at the very least possess basic knowledge about the prize payout levels for the other forms of gambling racing must compete with before they vote on changes in takeout.


-jp

.

[johnhannibalsmith]

...You would expect that members of such a state regulatory board at the very least possess basic knowledge about the prize payout levels for the other forms of gambling racing must compete with before they vote on changes in takeout.


Dude, I'm not sure it matters which board member of which State we talked about... but this is BO DEREK... you have very high expectations... :D

[andymays]

For the sake of being the town prick - pool manipulation isn't exactly a very ethical method of making a point and I'm fairly certain that 'pool integrity' is listed in the top three HANA ideals.


What form of protest would you suggest in order to make a statement. Most of us don't play Los Alamitos so boycotting wouldn't be an option.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Andy:

Personally - I think the best way to make a point is to let them use their ideas and fail doing it. Tell them going in that it won't work and then watch them prove you correct. In the meantime, petition other tracks to strive for reductions in take and then use the data in those cases to buoy the argument that it does work. At the end, when CA tells you that handle is down because of a litany of reasons not related to increased takeout, you can at least point to the examples of handle going up as a result of take reductions and let the facts speak for themselves.

Artificially attacking the pools not only seems like the wrong thing to do on a number of levels, with the players taking the bulk of the burden, it gives the powers that be another fraudulent excuse for tanking numbers and deteriorating handle.

[andymays]

Andy:

Personally - I think the best way to make a point is to let them use their ideas and fail doing it. Tell them going in that it won't work and then watch them prove you correct. In the meantime, petition other tracks to strive for reductions in take and then use the data in those cases to buoy the argument that it does work. At the end, when CA tells you that handle is down because of a litany of reasons not related to increased takeout, you can at least point to the examples of handle going up as a result of take reductions and let the facts speak for themselves.

Artificially attacking the pools not only seems like the wrong thing to do on a number of levels, with the players taking the bulk of the burden, it gives the powers that be another fraudulent excuse for tanking numbers and deteriorating handle.


As a former baseball player and fan (still a fan) I always liked Billy Martin. When things aren't going your way sometimes you have to start a fight. ;)

[johnhannibalsmith]

As a former baseball player and fan (still a fan) I always liked Billy Martin. When things aren't going your way sometimes you have to start a fight. ;)

I agree completely - but even Billy would agree that while many of his instigations were a worthy cause, many were just emotional overreaction that cost his team in the long run.

I'm all for a fight, but one that meets the goals of the battle.

[andymays]

I agree completely - but even Billy would agree that while many of his instigations were a worthy cause, many were just emotional overreaction that cost his team in the long run.

I'm all for a fight, but one that meets the goals of the battle.


They like it when we fight by following the Marquess of Queensberry rules.

They wrote the rules.

We need to be innovative and agressive in the fight for Horseplayer rights.

[proximity]

As a former baseball player....

did you take steroids when you played??:)

i certainly appreciate the ingenuity of your plan, but agree with hannibal that we shouldn't stoop to the level of our opponent here..

[andymays]

did you take steroids when you played??:)

i certainly appreciate the ingenuity of your plan, but agree with hannibal that we shouldn't stoop to the level of our opponent here..

That's what they're counting on. ;)

[johnhannibalsmith]

Just answer me this -

- if you go in and sabotage the pools to the detriment of more than just the CHRB and Los Al itself, and your group (HANA) proclaims to hold pool integrity as one of the most coveted tenets of its goals and ideals - why would anyone take the only Horseplayer Alliance seriously ever again? Look, I understand the why in your desires, but Jeff went and spoke at the board meeting and the group does have some increasing traction in having its voice heard -

- you want to throw all of that away utilizing hypocrisy for the sake of making a 29-1 shot 4-5 and messing with fellow horseplayers that DO play Qs at Los Al?

You can do better than that, Andy. :p

[JustRalph]

Why not just boycott all the races - bet $0 on every race. Say the Hell with LA and let them die a slow death.


until Horseplayers truly hurt them........they will never listen.

Good Show Jeff..............


But the only way to hurt them is in their wallet. End of story.

If nobody showed up at an NFL game.........do you think a fan group would then be able to get their attention? It's the same principal............

[andymays]

Just answer me this -

- if you go in and sabotage the pools to the detriment of more than just the CHRB and Los Al itself, and your group (HANA) proclaims to hold pool integrity as one of the most coveted tenets of its goals and ideals - why would anyone take the only Horseplayer Alliance seriously ever again? Look, I understand the why in your desires, but Jeff went and spoke at the board meeting and the group does have some increasing traction in having its voice heard -

- you want to throw all of that away utilizing hypocrisy for the sake of making a 29-1 shot 4-5 and messing with fellow horseplayers that DO play Qs at Los Al?

You can do better than that, Andy. :p


This is why I put the thread up. I wanted to hear the different sides.

I don't think messing with them for one race and one night is some kind of disgraceful act.

The disgraceful act is them lying to the public about why they are raising the take. For the simulcast facilities? Are they kidding? The CHRB meeting was rigged as always and they spit on us once again.

By the way I am not a HANA board member. In fact I have a major disagreement with rating Polytrack/Keenland #1 this year.

[DeanT]

Andyroo,

Ideas are a good thing. I agree with this fellow on them, good or bad. Keep swinging!

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2009/12/fear-of-bad-ideas.html

Fear of bad ideas

A few people are afraid of good ideas, ideas that make a difference or contribute in some way. Good ideas bring change, that's frightening.

But many people are petrified of bad ideas. Ideas that make us look stupid or waste time or money or create some sort of backlash.

The problem is that you can't have good ideas unless you're willing to generate a lot of bad ones.

Painters, musicians, entrepreneurs, writers, chiropractors, accountants--we all fail far more than we succeed. We fail at closing a sale or playing a note. We fail at an idea for a series of paintings or the theme for a trade show booth.

But we succeed far more often than people who have no ideas at all.

[chickenhead]

I personally won't be playing any money in Cali thru Sept 8th when they revisit this. That goes both to wagering on Cali tracks and wagering any money ontrack or at a Cali OTB on some other track. I don't play a lot anymore, unfortunately, but they'll be losing what I would have.

I really don't know much about who bets Los Al, or the prospects for their handle being reduced quickly due to horseplayers intentional actions (long term I have no doubt it will naturally prove itself a fail, by Sept 8th, I don't know). I have my doubts whether there will be enough concern amongst horseplayers at large over this action at Los Al to be able to make a measurable impact on Calis Thoroughbred tracks, but I consider an affront, and will carry through on this.

CHRB may have considered there would be some backlash against Los Al, I doubt they would have considered there would be any backlash against Cali at large. I'd like to see them get surprised on that front.

[andymays]

Andyroo,

Ideas are a good thing. I agree with this fellow on them, good or bad. Keep swinging!

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2009/12/fear-of-bad-ideas.html


Thanks, I think! ;)

Now that some of you have been following California racing and Jeff has experienced the B.S. in person and on the phone several times can you see what you're dealing with? Those Pr**cks could give a crap about their customers and they disrespect them every chance they get. You have to find a way to give them a little pain back and mess with them for once.

[Stillriledup]

Just don't bet. Hurt them in the pocket.

[DeanT]

Now that some of you have been following California racing and Jeff has experienced the B.S. in person and on the phone several times can you see what you're dealing with? Those Pr**cks could give a crap about their customers and they disrespect them every chance they get. You have to find a way to give them a little pain back and mess with them for once.
I thought they were reasonable and thought giving them a chance would be a good thing. I was wrong.

If I walk into a Wal Mart and one of the greeters kicks me in the crotch, I ain't shopping there anymore.

California kicked me in the crotch yesterday, and I won't be playing there any longer.

[andymays]

I thought they were reasonable and thought giving them a chance would be a good thing. I was wrong.

If I walk into a Wal Mart and one of the greeters kicks me in the crotch, I ain't shopping there anymore.

California kicked me in the crotch yesterday, and I won't be playing there any longer.


We need some kind of Horseplayers version of civil disobedience.

Aside from the HANA board members running naked on the track and chaining themeselves to the starting gate something has to be done. :)

[tzipi]

I don't know if we should mess with pools but I agree with thread in the way that we should just boycott betting there.

[chickenhead]

Trying to hurt Los Al by victimizing other horseplayers (Los AL players) and having them complain to Los Al doesn't hit the mark quite right. It isn't the type of thing I'd support.

[andymays]

Trying to hurt Los Al by victimizing other horseplayers (Los AL players) and having them complain to Los Al doesn't hit the mark quite right. It isn't the type of thing I'd support.


I respect that point of view.

Other than not betting there (99.9% of us don't bet there) what would you suggest given the events on Friday knowing that the 2% move was a sign of things to come at the other California Tracks?

[miesque]

We need some kind of Horseplayers version of civil disobedience.

Aside from the HANA board members running naked on the track and chaining themeselves to the starting gate something has to be done. :)

Well you are more then welcome to do this. Have a wonderful time :)

[andymays]

Well you are more then welcome to do this yourself. Have a wonderful time :)


I strongly believe the Board Members should take the lead on this. It is non negotiable. :)

[miesque]

I strongly believe the Board Members should take the lead on this. It is non negotiable. :)


In your dreams

[andymays]

In your dreams


So now that we have you here can you tell us why you voted no in the poll?

[miesque]

So now that we have you here can you tell us why you voted no in the poll?

You are such a piece of work :lol:

[andymays]

:lol:


Cmon now you know you were the first no vote. ;)

In fact someone voted no before I could vote yes and I started it. It had to be you.

[miesque]

You amuse me :)

[miesque]

I have never bet a dollar on Los Alamitos in my life and at this point I certainly do not intend to start to do so and most importantly, I am not one who plays games. Is that a good enough explaination for you.

[andymays]

I have never bet a dollar on Los Alamitos in my life and at this point I certainly do not intend to start to do so and most importantly, I am not one who plays games. Is that a good enough explaination for you.


Did you participate in the email campaign to the CHRB?

[miesque]

Did you participate in the email campaign to the CHRB?

Now that is a flat out insulting question that I take hombrage to. Of course I did send an email to CHRB. And the only reason I am answering this insulting question is because if I did ignore you, I would have to put up with you sending a barrage of emails to everyone in the racing industry telling them that since I did not respond to you, I must not have sent an email. :rolleyes:

[chickenhead]

I respect that point of view.

Other than not betting there (99.9% of us don't bet there) what would you suggest given the events on Friday knowing that the 2% move was a sign of things to come at the other California Tracks?

You want to put pressure on Los Al, but you can't. Your only option is putting pressure on the CHRB, using the Tbred tracks to do it. They wouldn't be real pleased to see their handle fall as a result of a dipshit move by the CHRB and Los Al.

[andymays]

You want to put pressure on Los Al, but you can't. Your only option is putting pressure on the CHRB, using the Tbred tracks to do it. They wouldn't be real pleased to see their handle fall as a result of a dipshit move by the CHRB and Los Al.


The owner of Los Alamitos is one of the main guys pulling the strings on the CHRB. It's all fixed before the meeting starts.

[johnhannibalsmith]

The owner of Los Alamitos is one of the main guys pulling the strings on the CHRB. It's all fixed before the meeting starts.

But chick is still absolutely right... don't play California, period.

Let it be known that as an organization, HANA (of which I know you are not a board member) supports and condones its members and others deciding to NOT infuse their money into the pools overseen by the CHRB. If Jeff can explain the basics of takeout to a noodlebrain like Bo Derek, there's one down and a herd to go - sooner or later, when numbers speak and people explain - the populace becomes aware and there will be a backlash against such shortsightedness.

[chickenhead]

The owner of Los Alamitos is one of the main guys pulling the strings on the CHRB. It's all fixed before the meeting starts.

And, what? You need a powerful advocate, willing or not, if you're interested in fighting. Santa Anita and Hollywood are as good as you're gonna get. They do not want bad press and boycotts OF THEM over Los Al. I like the chances with them being pissed at Los Al, more than with them not caring.

[andymays]

But chick is still absolutely right... don't play California, period.

Let it be known that as an organization, HANA (of which I know you are not a board member) supports and condones its members and others deciding to NOT infuse their money into the pools overseen by the CHRB. If Jeff can explain the basics of takeout to a noodlebrain like Bo Derek, there's one down and a herd to go - sooner or later, when numbers speak and people explain - the populace becomes aware and there will be a backlash against such shortsightedness.


They don't need anything explained they know what they're doing and why they're doing it.

The egos on that board are though the roof.

Think of Al Davis of the Raiders. He was once a sharp guy but has degenerated into an egomaniacal incompetent. That describes many of the people that run California racing.

[andymays]

And, what? You need a powerful advocate, willing or not, if you're interested in fighting. Santa Anita and Hollywood are as good as you're gonna get. They do not want bad press and boycotts OF THEM over Los Al. I like the chances with them being pissed at Los Al, more than with them not caring.


This was done with their (Holly, SA, and Del Mar) approval so they can raise it next. Los Al will come out and let everyone know how well they are doing with their short term "sugar high" takeout raise. Then the others will cite Los Alamitos and do it themeselves. It's already planned.

[chickenhead]

all the more reason not to play them, anyway. I'm not sure what you're arguing against here.

It's tough to take your handle negative, I understand that's what you're looking to do with Los Al, but I haven't heard any good ideas on that front.

[andymays]

all the more reason not to play them, anyway. I'm not sure what you're arguing against here.

It's tough to take your handle negative, I understand that's what you're looking to do with Los Al, but I haven't heard any good ideas on that front.


I'm not following.

I'm looking to create a little havoc with the odds to let them know that we know their a bunch of pr**ks. When people see what happens and later find out why it was done maybe they will wake up a little. Most of them don't even know they're gonna raise the takeout.

[miesque]

I'm not following.

I'm looking to create a little havoc with the odds to let them know that we know their a bunch of pr**ks. When people see what happens and later find out why it was done maybe they will wake up a little. Most of them don't even know they're gonna raise the takeout.

I just really don't see exactly what point you are making other then trying to manipulate pools for the hell of it. I know people do it all the time but I am not one to make a large bet knowing I am going to cancel it and trying to influence odds. Its not only disingenuis and in may ways fraudulent (and has a somewhat "jailey" smell to it to use an attorney phrase), but also has immense weaknesses to it and includes capital risk for the hell of it, which would not be the smartest of pursuits to advocate.

[andymays]

I just really don't see exactly what point you are making other then trying to manipulate pools for the hell of it. I know people do it all the time but I am not one to make a large bet knowing I am going to cancel it and trying to influence odds. Its not only disingenuis and in may ways fraudulent (and has a somewhat "jailey" smell to it to use an attorney phrase), but also has immense weaknesses to it and includes capital risk for the hell of it, which would not be the smartest of pursuits to advocate.


$20 win and $20 show. They don't have big pools there. A small amount from a bunch of people will do the job.

[miesque]

$20 win and $20 show. They don't have big pools there. A small amount from a bunch of people will do the job.

Does not matter, its pari-mutuel odds manipulation.

[chickenhead]

I assumed your goal was to make the pools at Los Al unplayable, which would hurt handle there. Hence my "taking your handle below negative" comment. I'm not saying it couldn't be effective, but a group that seeks to represent horseplayers would be crazy to do it or publicly take credit for it, because you're victimizing other horseplayers. The horseplayers who get screwed and end up with 1/10 instead of the 6/1 when they bet will blame the people who orchestrated it, and rightfully so. No one cares about a point you're trying to make if you're essentially defrauding them.

[andymays]

Does not matter, its pari-mutuel odds manipulation.


Yes it is. Absolutely.

[miesque]

Yes it is. Absolutely.

And you do not see any moral, ethical or legal issues with this? :confused:

[andymays]

I assumed your goal was to make the pools at Los Al unplayable, which would hurt handle there. Hence my "taking your handle below negative" comment. I'm not saying it couldn't be effective, but a group that seeks to represent horseplayers would be crazy to do it or publicly take credit for it, because you're victimizing other horseplayers. The horseplayers who get screwed and end up with 1/10 instead of the 6/1 when they bet will blame the people who orchestrated it, and rightfully so. No one cares about a point you're trying to make if you're essentially defrauding them.


I'm not saying HANA has to sanction it. In fact they probably shouldn't sanction it. It doesn't mean it can't be done.

The bet would be made on the horse least likely to win. The horse would go from 50-1 to 1-5 and then back to 50-1. One time one race. Win and show pools. That's it.

[andymays]

And you do not see any moral, ethical or legal issues with this? :confused:


Absolutely not. Do you think the people that treated Jeff badly have any moral or ethical issues with what they did Friday?

By the way you didn't anwer the question about whether or not you participated in the email campaign to the CHRB? Just curious. ;)

[miesque]

I'm not saying HANA has to sanction it. In fact they probably shouldn't sanction it. It doesn't mean it can't be done.

The bet would be made on the horse least likely to win. The horse would go from 50-1 to 1-5 and then back to 50-1. One time one race. Win and show pools. That's it.

Not to say this is going to happen, but if it does, have fun making big rocks into little rocks.

[takeout]

I don’t see anything wrong at all with doing this. It hurts no one. It’s a statement, nothing more.

[andymays]

I don’t see anything wrong at all with doing this. It hurts no one. It’s a statement, nothing more.


:ThmbUp:

[Horseplayersbet.com]

I don’t see anything wrong at all with doing this. It hurts no one. It’s a statement, nothing more.
Being able to cancel a wager online is actually a privilege that could be taken away from horseplayers if horseplayers abuse the privilege.

Maybe it shouldn't be a privilege, but it is at this time.

And of course there is the integrity issue.

If it is done at other tracks as a way to manipulate the odds consistently, you might start seeing 2-1 go to 4-1 very late, while all the other odds drop significantly.

[tzipi]

Being able to cancel a wager online is actually a privilege that could be taken away from horseplayers if horseplayers abuse the privilege.

Well I dont know about manipulating but there should be a message sent. BUT I will say this.

Tracks being able to receive our money for their product is actually a privilege that should be taken away when tracks abuse fans and the privilege of having them.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Well I dont know about manipulating but there should be a message sent. BUT I will say this.

Tracks being able to receive our money for their product is actually a privilege that should be taken away when tracks abuse fans and the privilege of having them.
Generally what happens with takeout increases, is the betting public speaks with their pockets, some hold back or boycott on purpose, while others just simply become victims of the increased takeouts (they get back less money, and they churn less, and because they don't last as long, they go less, and some even quit).

It isn't necessary to organize this, it will happen, it has been happening for a while now.

However, HANA has now put takeout on the map, so this may cause more players to personally boycott the track, or boycott California, for the CHRB's total disregard of HANA's request, a request which was based on facts.

[tzipi]

Generally what happens with takeout increases, is the betting public speaks with their pockets, some hold back or boycott on purpose, while others just simply become victims of the increased takeouts (they get back less money, and they churn less, and because they don't last as long, they go less, and some even quit).

It isn't necessary to organize this, it will happen, it has been happening for a while now.

However, HANA has now put takeout on the map, so this may cause more players to personally boycott the track, or boycott California, for the CHRB's total disregard of HANA's request, a request which was based on facts.

I hope so. The tracks need to suffer. No matter what happens or bad decisionsvthey make they clock their fans and customers for more and more of their money.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

I hope so. The tracks need to suffer. No matter what happens or bad decisionsvthey make they clock their fans and customers for more and more of their money.
I don't know if you've been noticing, but tracks are suffering.....big time.
They can't even stay flat with handle figures, let alone keep pace with inflation.
Meanwhile total money lost gambling has skyrocketed of late.

It is real simple, the takeout rates are not competitive with other forms of gambling.

There is little reason for anyone to learn how play the horses at this time. At least 30 years ago, there was a chance to beat the takeout. Books like My $50,000 Year at the Races and Winning At The Races were actual blueprints on how to beat the game.....at that time.

But things have changed greatly since then. Collective takeout rate has risen, Beyer numbers have equaled the playing field for speed handicappers who might have had an edge before, and most importantly, the dummy money has disappeared as they now donate to casinos and lotteries.

[tzipi]

I don't know if you've been noticing, but tracks are suffering.....big time.
They can't even stay flat with handle figures, let alone keep pace with inflation.
Meanwhile total money lost gambling has skyrocketed of late.

It is real simple, the takeout rates are not competitive with other forms of gambling.

There is little reason for anyone to learn how play the horses at this time. At least 30 years ago, there was a chance to beat the takeout. Books like My $50,000 Year at the Races and Winning At The Races were actual blueprints on how to beat the game.....at that time.

But things have changed greatly since then. Collective takeout rate has risen, Beyer numbers have equaled the playing field for speed handicappers who might have had an edge before, and most importantly, the dummy money has disappeared as they now donate to casinos and lotteries.

Oh I totally agree. Tracks still think it's 40-50-60 years ago and that they are they only game in town. No,they are about 10th to 12th down on the list of gambling games now. They are one sport not getting new fans. I wonder why :rolleyes:

[Indulto]

I’m not in favor of directly manipulating any pools, but it amuses me to see defenders of rebates for whales express concern with victimizing other horseplayers.;) IMO selective rebating is indirect manipulation of the pools.

The players that should be leading the charge in taking it to LA management are the regular patrons who could then look to HANA for support.

HANA needs to be proactive about planning effective action in advance against the coming takeout increases at the thoroughbred tracks. Perhaps that would involve organizing demonstrations outside tracks to get takeout LOWERED.

[bks]

This is a good idea, andy. If this is announced in advance and well-publicized (which I would insist on if I were to participate), it fails to have the character of true manipulation. It's a strong statement if it comes off well.

In these matters, you have no power except that which you are prepared to take.

[PhantomOnTour]

To loosely quote an essay posted in another thread:

They came and raised the rake in Cali, but I dont play Cali so I didnt stand up... etc etc...then they came and raised the rake in Louisiana (where i live and play) and no one was left to stand up for me.

If I'm a non Cali player what can I do to help? Besides continuing to not play Cali? Screwing with the pools sounds nice but, like Tom said, why not boycott(gosh i hate that word) them altogether??

[proximity]

I’m not in favor of directly manipulating any pools, but it amuses me to see defenders of rebates for whales express concern with victimizing other horseplayers.;) IMO selective rebating is indirect manipulation of the pools.




you don't have to be a whale to get rebates. not even close!!

[proximity]

There is little reason for anyone to learn how play the horses at this time. At least 30 years ago, there was a chance to beat the takeout. Books like My $50,000 Year at the Races and Winning At The Races were actual blueprints on how to beat the game.....at that time.
.

there is a reason. send some $ to horseplayersbet.com , get some rewards and at least pay for your racing forms while "learning" and enjoying the game. if you play enough tracks there is a new and exciting race every few minutes.

and the more i read it, the more i see "my 50k a year" as being nothing more than a blueprint on how to discern a track bias and then blab to the track super about it (wtf??) and how to go to a fair track totally unprepared and then declare that it's corrupt when you lose. heck, maybe jonnielu is right afterall!!:eek:

[Indulto]

you don't have to be a whale to get rebates. not even close!!Are the rebates available to non-whales even close to those for whales?

Perhaps an expert like yourself could identify the tiers of rebates available and provide the percentages represented at each tier of 1) all bettors, and 2) total handle.

Maybe you could also tell us who is providing the rebates at each tier at what level of play and which states' residents can get them.

I'd be very surprised if a majority of players received rebates of any size at this time. The playing field is not level; not even close!! :bang:

[proximity]

Are the rebates available to non-whales even close to those for whales?


i understand that it "depends" and do sympathize with your situation.

but "non-whales" in most civilized states are free to gravitate towards tracks without extreme "tiers" of rebates.

[Jackal]

What kind of a message can we send? CDI, MEC and OP have already blacked out every horse player from NJ to GA. That's a lot more money than HANA can dream of manipulating.

You can't talk sense to an industry that cut's it's nose off to spite it's face on a regular basis. A friend went to the Alberta, VA OTB yesterday. He said they had a crowd of less than 20 players. But CNL still refuses to pay the rates demanded by tracks that decent live racing.

[Zman179]

I voted yes only because I'm a fan of causing untold amounts of damage.

[andymays]

What kind of a message can we send? CDI, MEC and OP have already blacked out every horse player from NJ to GA. That's a lot more money than HANA can dream of manipulating.

You can't talk sense to an industry that cut's it's nose off to spite it's face on a regular basis. A friend went to the Alberta, VA OTB yesterday. He said they had a crowd of less than 20 players. But CNL still refuses to pay the rates demanded by tracks that decent live racing.


Good Points.

[rrbauer]

Being able to cancel a wager online is actually a privilege that could be taken away from horseplayers if horseplayers abuse the privilege.

Maybe it shouldn't be a privilege, but it is at this time.

And of course there is the integrity issue.

If it is done at other tracks as a way to manipulate the odds consistently, you might start seeing 2-1 go to 4-1 very late, while all the other odds drop significantly.

Can I cancel a wager at Horseplayersbet.com?

[rrbauer]

I think it is a Great Idea, but why stop at $20? I say the bigger the better!

The Upside is that their action is an abject failure and they will think twice before making the same mistake at HWD, SAX, DMR, et al.

The Downside is not apparent to me... :lol:

Let's Do It!

Keep Fighting the Good Fight Andy, Jeff, HANA and Everyone!

MakinItHappen
There may be an issue with bet size at Los Al. On track it used to be that any bet over $50 had to be cancelled by a teller.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Can I cancel a wager at Horseplayersbet.com?
We are working on it. Not yet.

[andymays]

There may be an issue with bet size at Los Al. On track it used to be that any bet over $50 had to be cancelled by a teller.


If the protest bets are done in increments of $20 win and show by a lot of people the protest will work.

When the HBO thread was started about the new show most people thought it would be good for racing. I voted that it would bring attention to the sport but may not be good for racing in that a lot of seedy stuff would be shown. Many of the people who are for that are against this and it's a little strange. They say it's unethical or sleazy to have a pool riot. :lol:

The HBO series isn't gonna be about the Race Track Chaplaincy of America is it? :rolleyes:

[rwwupl]

There may be an issue with bet size at Los Al. On track it used to be that any bet over $50 had to be cancelled by a teller.


Andy,

What is the current policy at Los Al. on cancelations?

I used to attend Los Al. and I remember a near riot years ago when the choice in an entry was scratched and leaving a 50-1 shot to run and a few tellers gave refunds and most tellers would not. The policy was confused by many.

I think it would be wise to find out the track policy and the ADW policy you are dealing with or you could create a mess and obscure the point you are trying to make.

[andymays]

Andy,

What is the current policy at Los Al. on cancelations?

I used to attend Los Al. and I remember a near riot years ago when the choice in an entry was scratched and a few tellers gave refunds and most tellers would not. The policy was confused by many.

I think it would be wise to find out the track policy and the ADW policy you are dealing with or you could create a mess and obscure the point you are trying to make.


If the amounts are small ($20) and the bets are made by many people (a few hundred or more) the protest will work because they wouldn't want to track each small bet down. Large bets would be harder to cancel and easier to track down. This only works if a lot of people are for it.

[Jeff P]

I voted no because I hate the pool manipulation aspect of this.

I'm also against a HANA sponsored boycott of Los Al or Cali racing in general.

I think there's a better way we can do this and still make a statement. Had the CHRB voted not to raise takeout we could have done a HANA sponsored Pool Party at Los Al as a way of thanking the CA racing industry for listening... which probably would have generated an additional 30k-50k in handle for the selected Pool Party race.

Here's what I suggest...

Instead of a boycott, why don't we do a Pool Party race at a track that deserves our business?...

Let's pick a track that has been doing a lot of things right...

One that has been selectively lowering takeout over the past four years...

Why don't we do a Pool Party at Tampa Bay Downs?

And once the numbers are in... Let's follow up by sending those numbers in to every member of the racing press... Let's send them in to all of the track operators in CA including Dr. Allred at Los Al... Let's send them to the TOC, and to the CHRB... along with a statement saying "We could have done this at Los Al... and might have even been willing to do it there on a regular basis... but instead decided to do it for Tampa Bay Downs... because they are at least showing us signs that they want and deserve our business.


-jp

.

[andymays]

It would have to be a really big number to make an impression.

I'm not sensing the outrage from enough Horseplayers over this issue. I know the deal was made before the meeting and the number of emails didn't matter but what does matter is that only 160 made the effort.

It goes back to APATHY. :ThmbDown:

[turfnsport]

I'm also against a HANA sponsored boycott of Los Al or Cali racing in general.

Instead of a boycott, why don't we do a Pool Party race at a track that deserves our business?...

Why don't we do a Pool Party at Tampa Bay Downs?


Yeah, that will show Bo Derek!

Unless Los Al shows a sizable decline in handle between now and Sept, all of Cal tracks will have a takeout increase before the end of the year.

And your solution is to have a pool party at Tampa Bay Downs?

Wow.

[chickenhead]

I think there's a better way we can do this and still make a statement. Had the CHRB voted not to raise takeout we could have done a HANA sponsored Pool Party at Los Al as a way of thanking the CA racing industry for listening... which probably would have generated an additional 30k-50k in handle for the selected Pool Party race.

They *think* they will make a lot more than that with their takeout increase, I don't see them viewing that as any kind of loss. The only really meaningful way to help along the process of proving a takeout increase has a negative effect on revenue to is to help revenue to be negative.

I'm somewhat ambivalent about HANA leading a boycott, because I'm not certain players really are looking for HANA to tell them where they shouldn't play. I'm a big HANA supporter, and I certainly don't. HANA was formed with idea of doing just what Jeff did at CHRB, give horseplayers a voice. Regardless of the outcome, I'm glad horseplayers were represented there, and got on the record, that is what I've personally never felt we had. I've always been able to decide how to spend my money, and, to whatever degree I can, effect a tracks bottom line.

A boycott is a sales job, and you need a narrative for it. You have to sell people on not doing something they want to do. The recent action provides plenty of narrative to boycott Los Al, but I don't know who plays Los Al. For a boycott of California, the narrative is not as strong (tho likely more meaningful).

In any case, I don't think a show of supporting Tampa can have any impact on California (or that there is really any narrative for it that makes much sense). I'm not certain a boycott would either, but it might.

[Sunday.Silence]

it seem to me, you have all tried the "nice way" with a buycott and no offense, as the effort was excellent, but the results did very little .....its time to do it the"MEAN WAY" and start disrupting , picketing , boycotting and manipulating pools......BAD NEWS ALWAYS GETS THE PRESS ATTENTION

[andymays]

it seem to me, you have all tried the "nice way" with a buycott and no offense, as the effort was excellent, but the results did very little .....its time to do it the"MEAN WAY" and start disrupting , picketing , boycotting and manipulating pools......BAD NEWS ALWAYS GETS THE PRESS ATTENTION


Agree. The pool riot is a peaceful protest and makes a statement. It won't take a ton of money to make it happen. I think the total pool for WPS last night in the first was just under 30k.

[andymays]

Yeah, that will show Bo Derek!

Unless Los Al shows a sizable decline in handle between now and Sept, all of Cal tracks will have a takeout increase before the end of the year.

And your solution is to have a pool party at Tampa Bay Downs?

Wow.


Don't you think the world is ready for one of your almost true stories about California Racing? What's the holdup?


By the way the man of the people who I liked before Friday, Mr Moss voted for the increase in takeout. Go RACHEL! :ThmbUp:

[Charli125]

I'm somewhat ambivalent about HANA leading a boycott, because I'm not certain players really are looking for HANA to tell them where they shouldn't play. I'm a big HANA supporter, and I certainly don't. HANA was formed with idea of doing just what Jeff did at CHRB, give horseplayers a voice. Regardless of the outcome, I'm glad horseplayers were represented there, and got on the record, that is what I've personally never felt we had. I've always been able to decide how to spend my money, and, to whatever degree I can, effect a tracks bottom line.


Well said, I agree completely. Many HANA members have already decided not to play in CA or at least not to play at Los Al, many have not, either way it's not up to HANA to make that decision. It's up to you, the horseplayer.

I personally haven't play at Los Al EVER, so my refusing to play there won't do anything(but for the record, I won't). I also very rarely play CA tracks at all(less than 2K last year, mostly on BC weekend), so my refusing to play there won't help much. That being said, I won't spend another dime on CA tracks, and that's my personal choice.

[Jeff P]

And your solution is to have a pool party at Tampa Bay Downs?

Wow.

Turf,

No... A Pool Party is the furthest thing from a solution in my mind.

The amount of ignorance that permeates the racing industry is simply staggering to me. The recent takeout increase at Los Al is a direct result of state government buying into the idea (hook line and sinker) of ignoring the recommendations of the racing industry's own paid for economic studies that deal with proven strategies for maximizing revenues.

The house and senate in CA were fed flawed and incomplete information by a powerful lobby funded by track operators and the TOC. It's been that way in California (and elsewhere) for decades.

That's just the way that it is. A boycott with 1500 members isn't going to change that.

Since you asked, my "solution"... my vision if you will... would be to eventually have 50k members taking an active role in getting their state legislatures to write player friendly measures into state law... the same way that track operators and horsemen have been making state legislatures write acts of willful stupidity into state law now for decades.

But instead of willful stupidity... make the racing industry maximize its revenues using the proven strategies found in the industry's own paid for studies...

Reducing takeout so that it becomes as close to the optimal pricing point as possible being just one of those strategies.



I view HANA as being in this for the long haul.

I realize we're all pissed over the recent takeout hike. Believe me when I tell you this... NOBODY is feeling more anger and frustration over this than me.

But staging a boycott now with only 1500 members isn't a solution either.

And while I believe such a boycott would make a lot of players and HANA members feel good that they did "something" and blow off some steam... I also believe such a boycott would have the negative impact of undoing much of the progress we've already made and only serve to burn many of the bridges HANA has managed to build with people in the industry who ARE in our court because of the professional way we've gone about things.

A Pool Party done in the way that I am suggesting only makes a statement...

But NO... It absolutely IS NOT a solution.


Jeff Platt

President, HANA


http://www.HorseplayersAssociation.com



.

[turfnsport]

Don't you think the world is ready for one of your almost true stories about California Racing? What's the holdup?


I'm waiting for the CHRB transcript.. :lol:

I think in my report Jeff (in a thong) and Bo (in an orthopedic bra) will be running in slow motion down the beach as they talk about takeout and slot machines.

[andymays]

I'm waiting for the CHRB transcript.. :lol:

I think in my report Jeff (in a thong) and Bo (in an orthopedic bra) will be running in slow motion down the beach as they talk about takeout and slot machines.


Your boy Richard "they key man" Shapiro didn't even show to be honored in item #2. What's up with that? Was he worried someone might key his car?

[turfnsport]

Jeff,

I'm not advocating that a HANA led boycott is the answer, and in the long run it might not be a good idea, I don't know.

What I DO know is that unless Los Al sees some serious drop off in handle, the other Cal tracks will be raising the take out shortly.

There are a lot of smart people here.

C'mon, somebody must have an idea....I sure as hell don't!

[turfnsport]

Your boy Richard "they key man" Shapiro didn't even show to be honored in item #2. What's up with that? Was he worried someone might key his car?

Were they giving him the key to the city?

[andymays]

Were they giving him the key to the city?


There you go. But a funny thing happened on the way to the meeting........................................... .................................................. .................................................. ....................

[johnhannibalsmith]

Why not go in and suggest that they raise takeout to 42.67% across the board. Use their logic to explain how much money they will make. Then when that tragic industry ends up at its final destination a lot more quickly, you can point to it for the benefit of those jurisdictions that may be interested in having a self-sustaining, lucrative, glorious product.

And if they shoot down your 42.67% proposal, ask them why...

[andymays]

Disclosure!

A good first step would be a lawsuit forcing them to print the takeout on each ticket. How's that?

Or better yet make them print "were screwing you this much"! How's that?

[BombsAway Bob]

I admit it. I've kept notes on all the races there since April 2008, & have more W2G's from LosAl than any other track. This Increase Sucks Pond Water, but once California gave tracks the wiggle room, you knew it was going to happen!
Basically I play only P3's & P4's there, since in the second half of 2009 the average field size at Los Al was 6.8. I also play the Late Pick-4 @ Delta (25% T/O),P4's @ NYRA (26% T/O)& Pick-3's @ Sam Houston (12% T/O).
I support ANY HANA tote statement that can show up ON A TOTEBOARD
(i.e., SHOW bets as a HANA 'Show of Strength').
If you want to prove that LOW TAKEOUT is the light at the end of the tunnel for racetracks, BUYCOTT a designated Pick-3 @ Sam Houston!!!!
Show some love for a track that's TRYING to help players!
Screwing with Los Al pools ONE TIME as a statement
(LosAl, "this is the handle that you are pissing away with increased takeout!") is OK by Me!

[turfnsport]

Disclosure!

A good first step would be a lawsuit forcing them to print the takeout on each ticket. How's that?

That's actually brilliant Andy.

I would have thought you would have added that in SoCal they also have to list the ingredients of the racing surface.

[andymays]

That's actually brilliant Andy.

I would have thought you would have added that in SoCal they also have to list the ingredients of the racing surface.

Now wer'e getting somwhere. Finally.

[miesque]

How many individuals who are participating in this conversation and/or reading these threads actually bet Los Alamitos and hence have the capacity to actually reduce their handle? You can't further reduce further if the level of play is zero, its impossible. Take that one step further and think about how many friends you know who play Los Al and those are the limitations we are working with here.

After I posted this I see Bob admitted to playing Los Al so we have one. Who else out there has the ability to cut their Los Al play because they actually play that particular track?

[turfnsport]

[/COLOR][/B]

Now wer'e getting somwhere. Finally.

With Jeff busy undressing Bo with his eyes, somebody has to do the heavy lifting.

[andymays]

With Jeff busy undressing Bo with his eyes, somebody has to do the heavy lifting.


I just sent an email to the only guy who would know about the merits of a lawsuit forcing them to disclose the takeout on each ticket. Guess who?

[turfnsport]

How many individuals who are participating in this conversation and/or reading these threads actually bet Los Alamitos and hence have the capacity to actually reduce their handle? You can't further reduce further if the level of play is zero, its impossible. Take that one step further and think about how many friends you know who play Los Al and those are the limitations we are working with here.

That's what's scary to me, it seems most of us don't. I bet just a few $$ rarely.

Although I am proud to say after the hockey game last night I was bored so I flipped open the laptop and actually downloaded the Los Al card before it dawned on me.

It was already the 8th race. So the takeout hike might have cost them $50 bucks from me last night...lol...It's a start.

[andymays]

The best thing about Los Alamitos is the Katella Deli nearby. :ThmbUp:

[InsideThePylons-MW]

How many individuals who are participating in this conversation and/or reading these threads actually bet Los Alamitos and hence have the capacity to actually reduce their handle?

I would make the biggest bet of my life that Los Al would be the track that a HANA boycott could have the most affect on from people on this board if they wanted to.

I was in the warehouse loading up the weapons of mass destruction to send to HANA and then I just read this thread and the no boycott tact.

[Indulto]

This thread is very entertaining. As I write this, “Good Idea” is beating “Bad Idea” 35-20. So much for “Thou shalt not victimize another horseplayer.” Big surprise!

We also learned that even at an allegedly customer-friendly ADW, the “privilege” of cancelling a bet is non-existent. What’s to prevent Los Al from cancelling that “privilege” at their ATMs if they suspect imminent “pool manipulation.”

Coming off what I regard to be his most impressive showing as a horseplayers-rights advocate/activist, JP displayed the after-effects of his 300-mile drive by promoting yet another pool party as a protest statement. Only having to make another such appearance on his own dime would demonstrate how little power and effectiveness HANA can muster, and would justify Roger Stein’s observation on his radio show Saturday that “HANA has all the power of a little girl named Hannah.”

It may be time to go back to basics. According to a prior version of the Mission Statement, the then agreed-upon primary objective was to get as many members as possible and allowed members to sign-up anonymously.

Every HANA member has to become a recruiter. HANA is now sufficiently visible to warrent a presence at racetracks and their local vicinities. HANA needs to impose a membership/operations reimbursement fee. It should be willing to accept payments from members who wish to remain anonymous. If their current operating model doesn't permit that, then find a vehicle that will. Why can't fund-raising merchandise be sold for cash?

Finally, I sincerely recommend that the HANA board recruit rrbauer as its VP of (Recruitment?) to direct a visibility enhancement program.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

This thread is very entertaining. As I write this, “Good Idea” is beating “Bad Idea” 35-20. So much for “Thou shalt not victimize another horseplayer.” Big surprise!

We also learned that even at an allegedly customer-friendly ADW, the “privilege” of cancelling a bet is non-existent. What’s to prevent Los Al from cancelling that “privilege” at their ATMs if they suspect imminent “pool manipulation.”

Coming off what I regard to be his most impressive showing as a horseplayers-rights advocate/activist, JP displayed the after-effects of his 300-mile drive by promoting yet another pool party as a protest statement. Only having to make another such appearance on his own dime would demonstrate how little power and effectiveness HANA can muster, and would justify Roger Stein’s observation on his radio show Saturday that “HANA has all the power of a little girl named Hannah.”

It may be time to go back to basics. According to a prior version of the Mission Statement, the then agreed-upon primary objective was to get as many members as possible and allowed members to sign-up anonymously.

Every HANA member has to become a recruiter. HANA is now sufficiently visible to warrent a presence at racetracks and their local vicinities. HANA needs to impose a membership/operations reimbursement fee. It should be willing to accept payments from members who wish to remain anonymous. If their current operating model doesn't permit that, then find a vehicle that will. Why can't fund-raising merchandise be sold for cash?

Finally, I sincerely recommend that the HANA board recruit rrbauer as its VP of (Recruitment?) to direct a visibility enhancement program.
I wish you would stop being such a complete pompous moron, but you've probably had too many years of practice to change.
That being said, thanks for letting us know about the Roger Stein quote.

http://www.rogerstein.com/archives/100116.wma

Roger still doesn't get exactly why takeout increases are a bad thing. He thinks betting decreases because people make actual choices to boycott or bet less....in reality most of the decrease happens because players get tapped out quicker and come back less....they might blame drugs or the artificial surface for why they are lasting less or losing more quickly.

[andymays]

Roger Stein basically agreed with the stuff Jeff said. It was a bit of a cheap shot but his point was that there is not enough power to do anything which is true. Horseplayers are not united in large numbers and most are apathetic about anything that carries on beyond a couple of days. Racing Execs and Officials and Board members all know the heat goes away after a couple of days. And so it goes on and on and on and on........ Unless we do something.

Having said that the deal was done before the meeting so it didn't matter what Jeff said but it was impressive to me that he showed up. That's what matters. :ThmbUp:

Besides that the thread shows that some of us want to participate in some kind of protest. At least half of the no votes are anti andymays votes that happen on every poll I put up. I could say I think the sun should come out tomorrow and ask if it's a good or bad idea and the 5 usual suspects would vote no automatically. ;)

[rwwupl]

Roger Stein basically agreed with the stuff Jeff said. It was a bit of a cheap shot but his point was that there is not enough power to do anything which is true. Horseplayers are not united in large numbers and most are apathetic about anything that carries on beyond a couple of days. Racing Execs and Officials and Board members all know the heat goes away after a couple of days. And so it goes on and on and on and on........ Unless we do something.

Having said that the deal was done before the meeting so it didn't matter what Jeff said but it was impressive to me that he showed up. That's what matters. :ThmbUp:


I was there. Jeff did all anyone could do. HANA got plenty of recognition and attention. The HANA message was understood by some, but it was apparent that decisions and votes were made for reasons each member would have to explain, and perhaps in advance. This is not new at the CHRB.

Roger Stein gave a cheap shot at HANA,and that is not new.

[Indulto]

I wish you would stop being such a complete pompous moron, but you've probably had too many years of practice to change.
That being said, thanks for letting us know about the Roger Stein quote.

http://www.rogerstein.com/archives/100116.wma

Roger still doesn't get exactly why takeout increases are a bad thing. He thinks betting decreases because people make actual choices to boycott or bet less....in reality most of the decrease happens because players get tapped out quicker and come back less....they might blame drugs or the artificial surface for why they are lasting less or losing more quickly.What a pleasant surprise to be the target of your name-calling in public for a change. I wish you would explain what an ADW owner is doing on the board of directors of a horseplayer organization.

[andymays]

If you're gonna have a membership you have to let the members participate in protests or campaigns at least twice a month or there is no point in having members. The members lose interest if they can't participate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You can have a Horseplayer "Think Tank" and there is nothing wrong with that and you don't have to worry about motivating and recruiting members.

A think tank (also called a policy institute) is an organization, institute, corporation, group, or individual that conducts research and engages in advocacy in areas such as social policy, political strategy, economy, science or technology issues, industrial or business policies, or military advice.[1] Many think tanks are non-profit organizations, which some countries such as the United States and Canada provide with tax exempt status. While many think tanks are funded by governments, interest groups, or businesses, some think tanks also derive income from consulting or research work related to their mandate.[2]

There are different opinions about think tanks; supporters like the National Institute for Research Advancement, itself a think tank, hail them as "one of the main policy actors in democratic societies ..., assuring a pluralistic, open and accountable process of policy analysis, research, decision-making and evaluation".[3] Others[citation needed] consider the term to be a euphemism for lobbying groups.

A study in early 2009 found a total of 5,465 think tanks worldwide. Of that number, 1,777 were based in the United States and approximately 350 in Washington, DC alone.[4]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Or you can have a club that travels from track to track and socializes and has fun.

Right now HANA may be better off as a "think tank" than a membership.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

I was there. Jeff did all anyone could do. HANA got plenty of recognition and attention. The HANA message was understood by some, but it was apparent that decisions and votes were made for reasons each member would have to explain, and perhaps in advance. This is not new at the CHRB.

Roger Stein gave a cheap shot at HANA,and that is not new.
Stein was trying to be funny. I don't think he or most people know how many irons in the fire HANA has right now when it comes to making the game better for horseplayers.

[Indulto]

Stein was trying to be funny. I don't think he or most people know how many irons in the fire HANA has right now when it comes to making the game better for horseplayers.The problem is that "most people" includes the membership.

[Jackal]

The only way to get anything done about rising takeouts is to get horsemen involved. I know I am starting to sound like a broken record. But tracks don't care what the bettor thinks.

You get the HBPA involved and tracks jump. I don't know if CA has a HBPA but they have an organization that does the same thing.

Don't mass mail or everyone call on the same day. Simply keep a steady trickle of messages saying higher takeouts lower purses. Sooner or later the right person will get the message.

[johnhannibalsmith]

The only way to get anything done about rising takeouts is to get horsemen involved...

I've posted this precise sentiment on several occassions and I am somewhat curious as to why this doesn't appeal as a strategy. Horsemen have no alliance with racing boards and management and always assume that they are being shortchanged. Why people aren't asking to speak at HBPA meetings to educate horsemen and/or writing features for the local HBPA newsletters and building an alliance with another third of the triumvirate to influence the other remains a mystery to me.

[chickenhead]

I've posted this precise sentiment on several occassions and I am somewhat curious as to why this doesn't appeal as a strategy. Horsemen have no alliance with racing boards and management and always assume that they are being shortchanged. Why people aren't asking to speak at HBPA meetings to educate horsemen and/or writing features for the local HBPA newsletters and building an alliance with another third of the triumvirate to influence the other remains a mystery to me.

I may be wrong here, but I believe HANA had several discussions with the TOC (Thoroughbred Owners of California) under the Drew Couto regime, his opinion on these matters wasn't exactly enlightened. I'm not aware of any status since he has resigned.

Quite a few HANA members are horse owners, obviously the idea has traction with some, and there are some others that are generally very positive when it comes to experimenting with lower takeout, http://businessofracing.blogspot.com/ for example.

Generally I do not think, tho, that horse owner groups have been very receptive. I believe most see it as a strictly zero sum game.

[InsideThePylons-MW]

The only way to get anything done about rising takeouts is to get horsemen involved.

Here is that conversation which I've had many times.......

Bettor....Do you know what takeout is?

Horsemen....No. Whenever takeout is mentioned, We have to call Bo Derek to ask her what it is.

Bettor....High takeout is killing the sport and driving away customers. Handle is plummeting and will not stop unless takeout is lowered.

Horsemen....There is no way we are giving anything back.

Bettor....But if you lower takeout, I can show you how in the future you'll get back $2 for every $1 you lose in the short term.

Horsemen....If thats the case, then guarantee us the $2 now and we can deduct it from future increases.

Bettor....No, you don't understand. If you lower takeout now, you will lose a little and make a lot more in the future while saving the sport.

Horseman....I understand. We are all losing money and getting broke racing horses. We aren't giving up anything. If you want to lower takeout, guarantee us an immediate 10% purse increase and $2 for every $1 in the future...then we will agree to it.

Bettor....You can't do that right off the bat. Everybody has to take a small hit and then shortly, things will turn around for the better. If you don't do anything, tracks will close and most racing will end.

Horseman....Racing will never die. Mullins told me all bettors are morons. I've also heard from others that nothing will stop horseplayers from betting on us. I think we'd be better off raising the takeout. Nobody will quit betting and we will make more money.

Bettor.... :bang:

[johnhannibalsmith]

I may be wrong here, but I believe HANA had several discussions with the TOC (Thoroughbred Owners of California) under the Drew Couto regime, his opinion on these matters wasn't exactly enlightened. I'm not aware of any status since he has resigned.

Quite a few HANA members are horse owners, obviously the idea has traction with some, and there are some others that are generally very positive when it comes to experimenting with lower takeout, http://businessofracing.blogspot.com/ for example.

Generally I do not think, tho, that horse owner groups have been very receptive. I believe most see it as a strictly zero sum game.

Yeah... Chick, having spent most of my adult life with one license or another, primarily an owner/trainer license, I can unequivocally state that most backside folks a) don't comprehend the relationships that dictate their livelihood b) have any comprehension of takeout c) grasp that there is a very real end consumer that they need to satisfy d) have any interest in enlightening themselves on such matters.

Now is the time - particular jurisdictions notwithstandind - times are tough. I think even the most narrowminded, thick-skulled are beginning to retreat from the 'slots will save me' mantra.

Maybe utilizing the designated associations is not the ideal solution in every jurisdiction, but I do believe that educating horsemen on the reality that these shortsighted, ill-conceived 'solutions' are not in their best interest is a plausible way to expand the base and build significant leverage. If you can convince the people providing the product for packaging by those making decisions that the end consumer is pissed off and ready to shop elsewhere, I have to believe that it is an approach that is well worth the effort.

Maybe it is a lost cause - but if you can look at those folks in a decade and say that you warned them, maybe you have their respective ears when the next battle is being waged... or something like that... I don't know, I spend a lot of my time taking this task on one warm body at a time and am usually surprised by those that will at least listen and attempt to absorb the concepts - from personal experience I believe that people believe that I'm selling them the better bill than those that are writing the bills.

[DeanT]

My personal favorite, the story of why the 4% Ellis Park pick 4 was charged at 25%, or not offered in many jurisdictions.......

Ellis Park is giving a 4% pick 4 to bettors.

But we are guaranteed 9% for purses, right?

Yes, so we would like to change that deal, so we can offer the 4% pick 4. It will stimulate interest hopefully and lower takeout for bettors so they can get more cash back to bet more.

That's great, but we still get 9% if you charge 4%, right?

No, you'd get a little less than 2%, but think of it as a sale to grow racing.

But we are getting 9%, why would we take 2%?

To grow the sport, and with a hopeful increase in wagering you will still get a good hunk of money for purses.

I would rather have 9% of what I have now, so I am not going for that.

OK, we will just charge 25% then.

Ok, good. Bye.

Ok, see ya, have a nice day.

[johnhannibalsmith]

...
Bettor....No, you don't understand. If you lower takeout now, you will lose a little and make a lot more in the future while saving the sport.

Horseman....I understand. We are all losing money and getting broke racing horses. We aren't giving up anything. If you want to lower takeout, guarantee us an immediate 10% purse increase and $2 for every $1 in the future...then we will agree to it.

...

There are a lot of truths in this exchange. But I don't think that should stop anyone with the capacity to spread the message from doing so. I've posted on here before that I proposed an alternate gaming bill for our State that used slot revenue to bridge the immediate shortfall from a competitive takeout reduction that would allow for gradual and hopefully permanent growth. I detailed the merits of expansion of the core product that could stand on its own two feet in short time, without gaming revenue, and without the bubble that is created by a rapid influx of new revenue that is often followed by a gradual deterioration of that same revenue.

It was met with interest, but ultimately deemed too convoluted, I suppose. But people did find it interesting even if they didn't grasp each nuance of what was attempted to be accomplished.

Hammer, hammer, hammer... eventually if you are right, you will be exposed.

[Jackal]

johnhannibalsmith, you are correct about many horsemen not understanding betting. I am a perfect example. It took me 10 years to accept and bet a trifecta. To this day I have never bet a pick 4/6. Like most horsemen I am very slow to accept change.

Horsemen have to be educated. If we just throw up our hands and say horsemen aren't bettors nothing will change. I might not have the answers but there has to be a way to educate horsemen.

When I mention wagering to another horseman I get this response, "I thought you knew better - losers bet on horses" But I am not known for my tact. One owner told me "You're the only person I would trust with a million dollars I wouldn't invite for dinner."

Some how horsemen have to be educated that racing has changed. The average bettor is more sophisticated than in the past.

[Sunday.Silence]

the only solution i see is for an industry A BETTING EXCHANGE that replaces the very outdated pari-mutuel model....otherwise horse racing will not be around in another 20 years

[owlet]

The end is very near. Handles are down 10 percent, the marginal rate of decline is plumetting and another take out raise will just be icing on the cake. Mullins and Mitchell and Sadler can suck out the last few million in purse money, so go ahead and keep contributing to their college funds (well John doesn't...oh never mind).

All the tracks will be closed in five years or less, Del Mar the possible exception.

[letswastemoney]

Chronic gamblers will gamble on anything, even with a takeout

[Stillriledup]

I'm behind Jeff's concept of not boycotting anything and keeping it classy. HANA is not big enough to matter if they staged a boycott. Also, if you stage a boycott with small amount of members and it fails, you lose credibility and it looks really bad. Also, it isn't the culture that Jeff and the guys over there want to create. I think they should create some kind of body that members can be proud of. Who's to say that prospective members wouldnt get turned off by petty pool manipulation or standing in front of Los Al with pickit signs. I think the idea with HANA (just my opinion of course) is to get HUGE and when you get huge with thousands of members who represent hundreds of millions in handle, than you can stage a boycott and punish tracks who try and take advantage of the players. Right now, HANA isn't powerful enough to do this....its just going to have to take time, rome wasn't built in a day.

[BlueShoe]

What is the current policy at Los Al. on cancelations?
Believe that I am the only member of this forum that is a regular patron of Los Alamitos. I was there sunday and will be there monday. Darned if I can answer the question, but will find our tomorrow and then post. My interest is otb betting on tbs, but on occasion will stay late and bet a few q horses and harness races. Sunday I brought up the 2% increase with half a dozen guys that do bet the night races, and the response was not encouraging. They just gave me a blank so what look and shrugged. Do not like this idea, think that it is a bit childish and may be counterproductive. Kind of like burning down the house to roast the pig. There are some very bright guys on this forum, surely we can come up with a better idea. If this does go down, there will be some angry guys, and their wrath will be directed toward us, not our cause. And finally, those guys over at the CHRB can read, and so can Los Al management, and this forum is well known, so every post on this topic is being read by the bad guys, so assume that they are ready with some kind of counter move.

[Stillriledup]

One thing that is going to actually HELP los al is that players from simulcast outlets that are not located in California don't have their fingers on the pulse of california racing....most won't even know Los Al raised takeout because this isn't going to be announced anywhere around the country. If you didnt' happen to catch the blurb in DRF about the raised takeout, you have no idea and if LOS al is a track you play at your own local simo outlet. In fact, its a benefit for other tracks and simo outlets for you to bet on Los al because the increased on track takeout at los al means more money in the pockets of far away places who simulcast the los al. If your name is Jim and you're the manager and owner of Jim's Simulcast outlet in middle america, USA, you are going to keep it as quiet as possible. You want your patrons to bet los al, means more money for you.

[Stillriledup]

Believe that I am the only member of this forum that is a regular patron of Los Alamitos. I was there sunday and will be there monday. Darned if I can answer the question, but will find our tomorrow and then post. My interest is otb betting on tbs, but on occasion will stay late and bet a few q horses and harness races. Sunday I brought up the 2% increase with half a dozen guys that do bet the night races, and the response was not encouraging. They just gave me a blank so what look and shrugged. Do not like this idea, think that it is a bit childish and may be counterproductive. Kind of like burning down the house to roast the pig. There are some very bright guys on this forum, surely we can come up with a better idea. If this does go down, there will be some angry guys, and their wrath will be directed toward us, not our cause. And finally, those guys over at the CHRB can read, and so can Los Al management, and this forum is well known, so every post on this topic is being read by the bad guys, so assume that they are ready with some kind of counter move.


Most horseplayers are resigned to be lifelong losers anyway, what's the difference? The only people who care about takeout are people who are serious about winning and have designs on winning. People who THINK about winning, even if they don't actually win, might be more interested in saving pennies and betting other tracks with lower takeout rates.

If you are resigned to the fact that you're not going to ever win in the long run, the takeout doesnt' matter if you're just betting horses for the action.

[andymays]

Even the Chaplains are leaving California

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/horse/news/story?id=4832342

Excerpt:

"We'd wanted to relocate from California for a number of years," Dan Fick, RTCA president and former executive director of the Jockey Club, said. "Hollywood Park was a great landlord, but the cost of doing business on the West Coast was significant, and the office didn't even open until noon Eastern Time. We thought it important to be more centrally located, and it just made sense with so many national organizations based in Kentucky."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You know it's bad when the Chaplains can't take it anymore!

[andymays]

The 72 Hour Rule goes into effect at Noon PST.

The 72 Hour Rule has long been in the Racing Industry handbooks. Racing Executives and Racing Officials have used the rule to their benefit for years.

It goes something like this.......

Almost any bad decision (like a raise in the take) will be met with anger by Horseplayers but that anger will dissipate within 72 hours and then they'll learn to take it like they always do.

And the beat goes on and on and on and on................. :sleeping:

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Most horseplayers are resigned to be lifelong losers anyway, what's the difference? The only people who care about takeout are people who are serious about winning and have designs on winning. People who THINK about winning, even if they don't actually win, might be more interested in saving pennies and betting other tracks with lower takeout rates.

If you are resigned to the fact that you're not going to ever win in the long run, the takeout doesnt' matter if you're just betting horses for the action.
The reality is that takeout doesn't have to be acknowledged by the player at all, it still has an affect on them.
Unless someone has a money tree in their backyard, higher takeouts means they will last less longer. And this means they will inevitably play less, and they become less likely to handicap and watch as many races as they used to. They are less likely to call up buddies and go to the track and less likely to expose horse racing to family members.

It takes around 3-6 months for lower takeouts to kick in.

Though, thanks to HANA, I believe many more people are cognizant about higher takeouts today, and I expect many players will boycott the track on their own immediately.

[castaway01]

The 72 Hour Rule goes into effect at Noon PST.

The 72 Hour Rule has long been in the Racing Industry handbooks. Racing Executives and Racing Officials have used the rule to their benefit for years.

It goes something like this.......

Almost any bad decision (like a raise in the take) will be met with anger by Horseplayers but that anger will dissipate within 72 hours and then they'll learn to take it like they always do.

And the beat goes on and on and on and on................. :sleeping:

My anger hasn't diminished but your idea is a poor one. Posting the same thing over and over and over doesn't change that. I think you just like to hear yourself talk. I'll sum it up your mental block on this topic in one sentence: Just because someone votes "no" to your current idea doesn't mean we're apathetic. It just means your idea is stupid.

Here it is again: Screwing horseplayers at Los Al by messing with the pools hurts no one but fellow horseplayers. If the track stops bets from being canceled, as some have speculated, it will even HELP their handle. That's why it makes no sense. I agree it would be nice to do SOMETHING, but the only power we have not is not to wager there. That's the policy I think horseplayers should employ and get the word out to their friends. However, screwing with those who do bet there is shortsighted. It won't affect handle there one bit unless you do it every day in every race. It will only make HANA be known as the group of clowns who made some bets and then canceled them. Do you really think that will change racing?

If you find a way to get people to move their wagering from high-takeout tracks to low-takeout tracks, you let me know. I think boycotting Los Al or all of Cal racing is fine---I've been doing it for years. Until then, creating a clown show at Los Al makes no sense.

[andymays]

My anger hasn't diminished but your idea is a poor one. Posting the same thing over and over and over doesn't change that. I think you just like to hear yourself talk. I'll sum it up your mental block on this topic in one sentence: Just because someone votes "no" to your current idea doesn't mean we're apathetic. It just means your idea is stupid.

Do you ever have anything to offer except personal attacks against me and the majority who think the idea has merits ? :ThmbDown:

The only stupid thing here is you and your assenine way of expressing yourself. :ThmbDown:

How about starting a thread with your solution to the problem and then defend it instead of taking the cowards way out and sniping like you normally do? :ThmbDown:

Man up punk! :ThmbUp:

Here it is again: Screwing horseplayers at Los Al by messing with the pools hurts no one but fellow horseplayers. If the track stops bets from being canceled, as some have speculated, it will even HELP their handle. That's why it makes no sense. I agree it would be nice to do SOMETHING, but the only power we have not is not to wager there. That's the policy I think horseplayers should employ and get the word out to their friends. However, screwing with those who do bet there is shortsighted. It won't affect handle there one bit unless you do it every day in every race. It will only make HANA be known as the group of clowns who made some bets and then canceled them. Do you really think that will change racing?

If you find a way to get people to move their wagering from high-takeout tracks to low-takeout tracks, you let me know. I think boycotting Los Al or all of Cal racing is fine---I've been doing it for years. Until then, creating a clown show at Los Al makes no sense.

Your solution is to bend over and maintain the status quo one more time. That's rich.

The thread was designed to be provocative and get some discussion about what to do.

If the thread upsets some people then that would be funny but it would fit the pattern. Racing Officials and Executives screw Horseplayers and Horseplayer gets mad at other Horseplayer instead of the person screwing them. Absolutely assenine! :rolleyes:


There must be some interest though because many have weighed in.

People like yourself are the ones holding back progress because of your "second guessing" nature and lack of solutions.

[rwwupl]

johnhannibalsmith, you are correct about many horsemen not understanding betting. I am a perfect example. It took me 10 years to accept and bet a trifecta. To this day I have never bet a pick 4/6. Like most horsemen I am very slow to accept change.

Horsemen have to be educated. If we just throw up our hands and say horsemen aren't bettors nothing will change. I might not have the answers but there has to be a way to educate horsemen.

When I mention wagering to another horseman I get this response, "I thought you knew better - losers bet on horses" But I am not known for my tact. One owner told me "You're the only person I would trust with a million dollars I wouldn't invite for dinner."

Some how horsemen have to be educated that racing has changed. The average bettor is more sophisticated than in the past.



The 3 legged stool

Leg 1...The State
Regulates the game through the CHRB, rules, stewards etc.

Leg2...The Producers
Includes the Racetracks,Associations and Horseman and their
representative organizations..They put on the show.

Leg3... The customers
Racing customers are different from customers of traditional
products,entertainment and so forth. It is this point that is least
understood by many,including many that are members of Leg1 and 2.

"We are a participatory sport, not a spectator sport. Our bettors are
competing against each other. This fact should be a marketing focus"
Richard Duchossois..1994

Some people in leg one and two of the 3-legged stool of horseracing fail
to grasp that fact and continue to regulate and produce the game as if
the customers did not have a stake and are equal partners. They view
customers as though they have purchased entertainment,so leave your
money for us and go home. You have been entertained have you not ?

This is a problem. It is a gambling game,and the customer must sense a
fair chance of winning, or he will not participate. And here we are!

[stuball]

I quit all Cal racing over a year ago...with no intentions
of going back. Plenty of other tracks to bet....shop around..

Stuball

[johnhannibalsmith]

I would divide leg 2 into separate legs for the purpose of functionality - there is no greater division in most jurisdictions and persistent battling than that which occurs between horsemen and management. Therein lies my impetus for believing that aligning players with horsemen is a worthwhile cause... they don't trust that management is acting in their best interest, yet have little alternative in terms of who's lead they follow. Give them a plausible alternative and you may find yourself with a staggering amount of power that everyone has assessed as presently missing.

[andymays]

I quit all Cal racing over a year ago...with no intentions
of going back. Plenty of other tracks to bet....shop around..

Stuball


In a perfect world that is the best solution of all. :ThmbUp:

The truth is that if Horseplayers were united in their efforts things would change in a months time.

The question is why aren't they united? Why is it that HANA has 1500 members and not 15000? Everthing (except Polytrack) they stand for is good for Horseplayers so what's the problem?

If someone can figure out the reason for the "apathy" things could change.

[andymays]

I would divide leg 2 into separate legs for the purpose of functionality - there is no greater division in most jurisdictions and persistent battling than that which occurs between horsemen and management. Therein lies my impetus for believing that aligning players with horsemen is a worthwhile cause... they don't trust that management is acting in their best interest, yet have little alternative in terms of who's lead they follow. Give them a plausible alternative and you may find yourself with a staggering amount of power that everyone has assessed as presently missing.


I'm for giving almost anything a try. Almost anything is better than the current state of racing.

In a perfect Horseplayer world we would:

Own our own TV station to compete with TVG and HRTV. :ThmbUp:

Have our own not for profit ADW. :ThmbUp:

Only contract with Tracks that are will to put a ceiling on takeout at 15% and 20%. If the theories on lower takeout are true then all will be well and profitable. After a year they should be able to lower the take to 12.5% and 15%. :ThmbUp:

[Stillriledup]

The reality is that takeout doesn't have to be acknowledged by the player at all, it still has an affect on them.
Unless someone has a money tree in their backyard, higher takeouts means they will last less longer. And this means they will inevitably play less, and they become less likely to handicap and watch as many races as they used to. They are less likely to call up buddies and go to the track and less likely to expose horse racing to family members.

It takes around 3-6 months for lower takeouts to kick in.

Though, thanks to HANA, I believe many more people are cognizant about higher takeouts today, and I expect many players will boycott the track on their own immediately.

I completely agree....i was just talking about players conciously staying away because of a higher takeout. You're right, they just leave sooner because they have less money.

[proximity]

People like yourself are the ones holding back progress because of your "second guessing" nature and lack of solutions.

i think that's kind of a low blow there. players like castaway are the backbone of the game. castaway probably handicaps more races in a day than you californians do in a week. and some of the tracks have races with nearly three times as many horses as california's fields do!! when you're out there supporting the game day in and day out you simply don't have as much time to post on message boards and come up with solutions to the world's problems.

hopefully someday california will get full card simulcasting and you'll be able to experience what i'm talking about. and btw, when they do i don't care if they give their own players bigger rebates than i'm getting or not. in fact, i hope they do as it would help grow the pools even more!! i either take the odds offered to me or i pass the race.

[andymays]

i think that's kind of a low blow there. players like castaway are the backbone of the game. castaway probably handicaps more races in a day than you californians do in a week. and some of the tracks have races with nearly three times as many horses as california's fields do!! when you're out there supporting the game day in and day out you simply don't have as much time to post on message boards and come up with solutions to the world's problems.

hopefully someday california will get full card simulcasting and you'll be able to experience what i'm talking about. and btw, when they do i don't care if they give their own players bigger rebates than i'm getting or not. in fact, i hope they do as it would help grow the pools even more!! i either take the odds offered to me or i pass the race.


Not that I need to explain anything and it's nothing against you but he chose to get personal like he always does with me. All I did was answer back.

He isn't the only one who handicaps a bunch of races. What does that have to do with anything?

People who knock other people for throwing out ideas have an obligation to put up some of their own and take the heat.

[fmolf]

Not that I need to explain anything and it's nothing against you but he chose to get personal like he always does with me. All I did was answer back.

He isn't the only one who handicaps a bunch of races. What does that have to do with anything?

People who knock other people for throwing out ideas have an obligation to put up some of their own and take the heat.I never bet los al and have stopped betting socal since the fake stuff arrived ....question..How many of you would continue to buy your groceries at a store where for every $100 you spent they charged you $2 extra to refurbish the store?...thats what their doing my friends!

[andymays]

I never bet los al and have stopped betting socal since the fake stuff arrived ....question..How many of you would continue to buy your groceries at a store where for every $100 you spent they charged you $2 extra to refurbish the store?...thats what their doing my friends!


The truth is that any takeout above and beyond 15% and 20% is abusive and hurts the game.

[proximity]

well i see santa anita is closed...COMPLETELY... on both tuesday and wednesday. they won't be simulcasting a single race on either day. the great race place???:rolleyes:

sa players can watch and bet races 1-3 from penn national on thursday though!! i guess it's a start!!

[Stillriledup]

well i see santa anita is closed...COMPLETELY... on both tuesday and wednesday. they won't be simulcasting a single race on either day. the great race place???:rolleyes:

sa players can watch and bet races 1-3 from penn national on thursday though!! i guess it's a start!!

Calif is abusive in that way. You have to have options. Vegas has options, California does not.

[WinterTriangle]

I don't think messing with them for one race and one night is some kind of disgraceful act.


Being somewhat spiteful and revengeful in nature, it reaks of "powerlessness".

Not to mention unethical.

I guess I don't quite grasp the concept of "rights" in some of the ways they're discussed here. When I shell out my $, I have a right to know the conditions under which I'm shelling it out, where it's going, and how much, and what I'm getting in return. If that has been made clear to me, and I don't like it, then I don't shell out my money....or I do. It is always MY CHOICE.

I've always felt that I'm a free agent, because I have options and choices.

Life really is "short", by the way. Realizing that, with age comes taking inventory of how I spend some of those moments, which has brought me to some of my most feared, but appropriate, decisions.

Fight the good fight, Andy, but don't lower yourself in the process.;)

[andymays]

First of all the thread asked a question and didn't order anyone to do anything. At least it was provocative and stimulated some good exchanges (for the most part). Horseplayers can do something or do nothing but all to often they choose the latter after the initial anger wears off.

I understand people that disagree with this kind of protest but to say we would be victimizing Horseplayers is way over the top. Inconvenienceing the Zombies playing Los Alamitos in spite of a raise in the take could make them aware of something they don't even know is happening. Raising their awareness by such a display would be doing them a favor. Characterizing the protest as somehow stealing for other Horesplayers is way over the top.

If anyone thinks that the people who pushed this takeout raise care one bit about Horseplayers they are sadly mistaken. Somehow some here would like to make me the villain when I'm offering one possible way to protest.

But again, it never fails to amaze me and reasonable people can disagree but a certain percentage of Horseplayers love to place blame on the people who offer solutions instead of the people who are really doing the damage. I don't understand the line of thinking but it reminds me of the Horseplayers who get mad when someone wins a couple of seat down from them. It doesn't make sense to me.

If someone walks up to you and steal your wallet and then spits in your face are you gonna cry and call the cops or are you gonna fight for yourself? Just sayin. ;)

I didn't raise the take did I? :eek: :D

[BlueShoe]

Darned if I can answer the question, but will find out tomorrow and then post.
The posted rules at Los Alamitos for self cancellation of wagers through the sams is up to $250 for tb wagers and $50 for q horse and harness. Believe that this policy is state wide at all California otb sites.

[castaway01]

[/COLOR][/B]

The thread was designed to be provocative and get some discussion about what to do.

If the thread upsets some people then that would be funny but it would fit the pattern. Racing Officials and Executives screw Horseplayers and Horseplayer gets mad at other Horseplayer instead of the person screwing them. Absolutely assenine! :rolleyes:


There must be some interest though because many have weighed in.

People like yourself are the ones holding back progress because of your "second guessing" nature and lack of solutions.

I offered a solution, plain as day---boycott the tracks that raise takeout. Simple as that. It's just not your solution, but it hits tracks where they hurt. I love your counterargument---"man up punk". So your counterargument to mine is "man up punk". You really show a lot of class there.

[andymays]

I love you adding things to my post that I didn't say and bolding them too. Lots of class there.

And I offered a solution, plain as day---boycott the tracks that raise takeout. Simple as that. It's just not your solution, so you threw a tantrum. What a shock.


I quoted post #151 of yours and bolded what you said. What are you talking about?

Disagreeing with me is fine and good but you seem to get personal with your insults each and every time. If you want to bury the hatchett and move on it's fine by me otherwise we can keep up. Remember you're the one following me around taking shots at me. It's not the other way around. ;)

[castaway01]

I quoted post #151 of yours and bolded what you said. What are you talking about?

Disagreeing with me is fine and good but you seem to get personal with your insults each and every time. If you want to bury the hatchett and move on it's fine by me otherwise we can keep up. Remember you're the one following me around taking shots at me. It's not the other way around. ;)

What hatchet? What shots? I disagreed with you, that was all....my problem is that you think posting the same thing 50 times makes it an intelligent argument. It doesn't. Then you wrote "man up punk" and all of the other bolded BS you added to the body of my message. What a leader you are.

And how can I "follow" you? You post 50 times a day on every thread. Sorry if I tried to post on some of the same.

[andymays]

What hatchet? What shots? I disagreed with you, that was all....my problem is that you think posting the same thing 50 times makes it an intelligent argument. It doesn't. Then you wrote "man up punk" and all of the other bolded BS you added to the body of my message. What a leader you are.

And how can I "follow" you? You post 50 times a day on every thread. Sorry if I tried to post on some of the same.


I'm not leading anything and I don't know where you got that. Start your own threads with your own opinions and take the heat. Following me around and calling me stupid and the people who voted for the idea is weak. You can continue with the same M.O. or move on. It's your choice. I have no regrets about what I posted about the protest at Los Alamitos.

There are thousands of other threads here. You have choices.

[castaway01]

I'm not leading anything and I don't know where you got that. Start your own threads with your own opinions and take the heat. Following me around and calling me stupid and the people who voted for the idea is weak. You can continue with the same M.O. or move on. It's your choice. I have no regrets about what I posted about the protest at Los Alamitos.

There are thousands of other threads here. You have choices.

I said YOUR IDEA was stupid, but I had to be that blunt because you posted 50 times that if anyone didn't like your idea it was because of "apathy". My point is that it was the idea that was dumb, not a lack of interest on my part. If anyone had a valid reason (other than "man up punk") why it was smart, then I'd debate it. And yes, you're trying organize this---does that not make you the leader?

I have no idea what M.O. you're talking about. If you can't handle anyone disagreeing with you without name calling, maybe you shouldn't post 200 times a day.

[andymays]

I said YOUR IDEA was stupid, but I had to be that blunt because you posted 50 times that if anyone didn't like your idea it was because of "apathy". My point is that it was the idea that was dumb, not a lack of interest on my part. If anyone had a valid reason (other than "man up punk") why it was smart, then I'd debate it. And yes, you're trying organize this---does that not make you the leader?

I have no idea what M.O. you're talking about. If you can't handle anyone disagreeing with you without name calling, maybe you shouldn't post 200 times a day.

I'm asking a question in the poll and offering up an idea. Then I support my idea. What the hell is posting here about anyway. Isn't that the point. If my threads or posts are that bad I would think a moderator would have banned me by now.

Maybe you should mind your own business instead of nipping at my heals with personal attacks because you can't get something going on your own. How does 200 posts a day bother you and why are you lying about how many times I post. The real number is readily available. That's what I mean by "man up". Get it? :eek: :rolleyes:

[miesque]

I said YOUR IDEA was stupid, but I had to be that blunt because you posted 50 times that if anyone didn't like your idea it was because of "apathy". My point is that it was the idea that was dumb, not a lack of interest on my part. If anyone had a valid reason (other than "man up punk") why it was smart, then I'd debate it. And yes, you're trying organize this---does that not make you the leader?

I have no idea what M.O. you're talking about. If you can't handle anyone disagreeing with you without name calling, maybe you shouldn't post 200 times a day.

You have to realize that the only version of the truth that andymays is interested in is his version of the truth, everything else is wrong, stupid, lazy or apathetic, people getting kickbacks, etc... Other then that slight oversight, your post is pretty on target.

[andymays]

You have to realize that the only version of the truth that andymays is interested in is his version of the truth, everything else is wrong, stupid, lazy or apathetic, etc... Other then that slight oversight, your post is pretty on target.


What exactly is on target? Can you explain?

[takeout]

I am really surprised by the reactions to this thread. I still think it’s a GREAT idea. I may do it alone! :D It hurts no one, and requires no heavy lifting.

Pool manipulation? Po-leeze. Anyone that plays a track with small pools sees all kinds of wild tote swings daily. In a lot of races more than half the win pool is still coming in as the race is being run.

[castaway01]

You have to realize that the only version of the truth that andymays is interested in is his version of the truth, everything else is wrong, stupid, lazy or apathetic, people getting kickbacks, etc... Other then that slight oversight, your post is pretty on target.

Thanks miesque...I'm clued into his gimmick now. My mistake was trying to add actual insight to the thread. I've learned my lesson.

[castaway01]

I am really surprised by the reactions to this thread. I still think it’s a GREAT idea. I may do it alone! :D It hurts no one, and requires no heavy lifting.

Pool manipulation? Po-leeze. Anyone that plays a track with small pools sees all kinds of wild tote swings daily. In a lot of races more than half the win pool is still coming in as the race is being run.

So you think running some sort of scam on the pools that you think will not even be noticeable will have some effect on racing? Again, tell me why that is better than simply not betting the track.

[takeout]

Because I'm already not betting the track. :)

[castaway01]

Because I'm already not betting the track. :)

Ha, okay, I grant that, but someday the day will come when Santa Anita or Hollywood raise their takeout and you have to boycott them---that's when you'll need to get tough. Los Al would just be practice.

[WinterTriangle]

If someone walks up to you and steal your wallet and then spits in your face are you gonna cry and call the cops or are you gonna fight for yourself?


Last time I looked, unlike paying taxes to the IRS, horse betting is voluntary and optional.

Having your wallet stolen is not a logical comparison here.

The situation you're describing is more like: "I gave the crooks my wallet, and they spit in my face."

[andymays]

Last time I looked, unlike paying taxes to the IRS, horse betting is voluntary and optional.

Having your wallet stolen is not a logical comparison here.

The situation you're describing is more like: "I gave the crooks my wallet, and they spit in my face."


Ok!

[Indulto]

Last time I looked, unlike paying taxes to the IRS, horse betting is voluntary and optional.

Having your wallet stolen is not a logical comparison here.

The situation you're describing is more like: "I gave the crooks my wallet, and they spit in my face."These “crooks” are licensed by the state to conduct operations for the “benefit” of its residents, some of whom are also customers.

Was paying the tax on tea optional? ;)

[proximity]

Was paying the tax on tea optional? ;)

i'll have to do a search, but i think jonnielu said there was some kind of box we could check to get out of that!!:D

[takeout]

Ha, okay, I grant that, but someday the day will come when Santa Anita or Hollywood raise their takeout and you have to boycott them---that's when you'll need to get tough. Los Al would just be practice.I’ve been practicing on Maryland since ’92. :)

[Indulto]

Originally Posted by castaway01
I said YOUR IDEA was stupid, but I had to be that blunt because you posted 50 times that if anyone didn't like your idea it was because of "apathy". My point is that it was the idea that was dumb, not a lack of interest on my part. If anyone had a valid reason (other than "man up punk") why it was smart, then I'd debate it. And yes, you're trying organize this---does that not make you the leader?

I have no idea what M.O. you're talking about. If you can't handle anyone disagreeing with you without name calling, maybe you shouldn't post 200 times a day.You have to realize that the only version of the truth that andymays is interested in is his version of the truth, everything else is wrong, stupid, lazy or apathetic, people getting kickbacks, etc... Other then that slight oversight, your post is pretty on target.This post was quite a disappointment following your excellent post on the multiple problems the industry has to address, but it answers a few questions previously posed by AM:It would have to be a really big number to make an impression.

I'm not sensing the outrage from enough Horseplayers over this issue. I know the deal was made before the meeting and the number of emails didn't matter but what does matter is that only 160 made the effort.

It goes back to APATHY. If you're gonna have a membership you have to let the members participate in protests or campaigns at least twice a month or there is no point in having members. The members lose interest if they can't participate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You can have a Horseplayer "Think Tank" and there is nothing wrong with that and you don't have to worry about motivating and recruiting members.

A think tank (also called a policy institute) is an organization, institute, corporation, group, or individual that conducts research and engages in advocacy in areas such as social policy, political strategy, economy, science or technology issues, industrial or business policies, or military advice.[1] Many think tanks are non-profit organizations, which some countries such as the United States and Canada provide with tax exempt status. While many think tanks are funded by governments, interest groups, or businesses, some think tanks also derive income from consulting or research work related to their mandate.[2]

There are different opinions about think tanks; supporters like the National Institute for Research Advancement, itself a think tank, hail them as "one of the main policy actors in democratic societies ..., assuring a pluralistic, open and accountable process of policy analysis, research, decision-making and evaluation".[3] Others[citation needed] consider the term to be a euphemism for lobbying groups.

A study in early 2009 found a total of 5,465 think tanks worldwide. Of that number, 1,777 were based in the United States and approximately 350 in Washington, DC alone.[4]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Or you can have a club that travels from track to track and socializes and has fun.

Right now HANA may be better off as a "think tank" than a membership. In a perfect world that is the best solution of all.

The truth is that if Horseplayers were united in their efforts things would change in a months time.

The question is why aren't they united? Why is it that HANA has 1500 members and not 15000? Everthing (except Polytrack) they stand for is good for Horseplayers so what's the problem?

If someone can figure out the reason for the "apathy" things could change. Question: “What’s the difference between ignorance and apathy?”
Answer: “I don’t know and I don’t care!”

AM,
I submit that most HANA members don’t know what’s going on because they aren’t told AND they don’t care. And why should they when most are neither engaged nor informed?

You care. Don’t stop punching because you’re more effective than your critics. The poll (which doesn’t include my opinion) shows that more people are interested in what you have to say than not. Some might consider miesque’s response above to be conduct unbecoming a HANA board member -- and right on the heels of HANA’s finest moment [at the CHRB meeting]!

My take on the 1,500 vs 15,000 -- The elitist factor is turning people off.

Is there a better term to describe those who would continue to enable the status quo and/or support the concept that some people deserve lower takeout than others, and then demean their opposition for HOW they express their disagreement rather than deal with WHAT it is they disagree with?

Frankly, I don't know whether as an idea it's any worse than "pool parties" or any better than a picket line, but I wouldn't be surprised if, as a result of this thread, the TRPB starts monitoring potentially coordinated cancellations by ADW accounts. What do you suppose that might lead to?

[chickenhead]

If I can give my opinion here -- the topic is Los Al takeout raise, and that leading to other Cali tracks raising takeout. It's a gift wrapped little package horseplayers have been handed here, as tidy as can be.

Revenue is sideways or up at Los Al -- horseplayers lose.
Revenue is down at Los Al -- horseplayers win.

Getting Jeff's Open Letter to Los Alamitos Horseplayers IN FRONT OF Los Alamitos horseplayers starting now, and continually thru Sept 8th, and helping them to see the logic of it IS IT. We really can't ask for a more clearly defined, contained, and explicit set of circumstances than this.

Nobody chose Los Al as the battleground for this, but THAT IS THE BATTLEGROUND.

[DJofSD]

Let's cut to the chase. Those against the idea Andy floated are more interested in protecting the status quo, political correctness is their credo. In another era, you'd be Tory's.

Screw the conventional wisdom. It's shake up time.

[andymays]

This post was quite a disappointment following your excellent post on the multiple problems the industry has to address, but it answers a few questions previously posed by AM:Question: “What’s the difference between ignorance and apathy?”
Answer: “I don’t know and I don’t care!”

Ignorance is better because it can be fixed.

AM,
I submit that most HANA members don’t know what’s going on because they aren’t told AND they don’t care. And why should they when most are neither engaged nor informed?

When you have a membership you have a responsibility to keep them engaged and it isn't an easy task. You constantly have to touch base with the members, inform them, and yes call them to action over certain issues. The CHRB takeout action was a good first step even though it never had a chance. We did learn something though. HANA might be more effective as a "Think Tank" for the Horse Racing Industry especially in the area of takeout. Failing to recognize the fraudulent nature of synthetic surfaces and their unwavering support for Polytrack is their biggest shortcoming and a huge mistake.


You care. Don’t stop punching because you’re more effective than your critics. The poll (which doesn’t include my opinion) shows that more people are interested in what you have to say than not. Some might consider miesque’s response above to be conduct unbecoming a HANA board member -- and right on the heels of HANA’s finest moment [at the CHRB meeting]!

My take on the 1,500 vs 15,000 -- The elitist factor is turning people off.

The thread was designed to be provocative and play on Horseplayers short term anger over the takeout issue. It was meant to keep the fires burning but unfortunately the 72 hour rule is winning out. The fact that there are over 4,000 views in 4 days is proof of an interest in doing something and the votes speak for themeselves.

It's unfortunate that Miesque dislikes me to the point of following me around and taking personal shots whenever she sees an opening. She is one of about five posters who love to do that. I think I proved that I am willing to tow the line and advance HANAs most important issue. I am told she did not participate in the effort and I wonder why. What she doesn't realize is that her time would be better spent coming up with solutions of her own and advancing them instead of bashing me. As far as the eliteist thing goes yes, constantly posting about how she travels and what kind of wine she drinks plays into that perception of eliteism but I doubt she realizes it.

Is there a better term to describe those who would continue to enable the status quo and/or support the concept that some people deserve lower takeout than others, and then demean their opposition for HOW they express their disagreement rather than deal with WHAT it is they disagree with?

You are the wordsmith so I will leave the description up to you. Whatever it is it hurts all of us.

Frankly, I don't know whether as an idea it's any worse than "pool parties" or any better than a picket line, but I wouldn't be surprised if, as a result of this thread, the TRPB starts monitoring potentially coordinated cancellations by ADW accounts. What do you suppose that might lead to?

There is no doubt that the powers that be read this stuff and if it gives them a sleepless night or two then that's a good thing.

As far as the idea being a good idea I don't know but at least the majority of voters are ready and willing to do something more than talk. :ThmbUp:

Sorry for the color scheme but its the only way I know how to do it.

[andymays]

If I can give my opinion here -- the topic is Los Al takeout raise, and that leading to other Cali tracks raising takeout. It's a gift wrapped little package horseplayers have been handed here, as tidy as can be.

Revenue is sideways or up at Los Al -- horseplayers lose.
Revenue is down at Los Al -- horseplayers win.

Getting Jeff's Open Letter to Los Alamitos Horseplayers IN FRONT OF Los Alamitos horseplayers starting now, and continually thru Sept 8th, and helping them to see the logic of it IS IT. We really can't ask for a more clearly defined, contained, and explicit set of circumstances than this.

Nobody chose Los Al as the battleground for this, but THAT IS THE BATTLEGROUND.


If you were the one that wrote the letter then hats off to you. It is a good letter and makes it's point. I hope it works for everyones sake.

[andymays]

Let's cut to the chase. Those against the idea Andy floated are more interested in protecting the status quo, political correctness is their credo. In another era, you'd be Tory's.

Screw the conventional wisdom. It's shake up time.


Thanks DJ! :ThmbUp:

[chickenhead]

If you were the one that wrote the letter then hats off to you. It is a good letter and makes it's point. I hope it works for everyones sake.

My point was that that message needs to get to people that bet at Los Al, who wrote it is totally irrelevant, and if the right people don't see it, the message itself is irrelevant.

Anything anyone can do to get that message to people that bet at Los Al is infinitely more valuable than spending time doing anything else, on this topic, imo.

[andymays]

My point was that that message needs to get to people that bet at Los Al, who wrote it is totally irrelevant, and if the right people don't see it, the message itself is irrelevant.

Anything anyone can do to get that message to people that bet at Los Al is infinitely more valuable than spending time doing anything else, on this topic, imo.


You'll have to find someone in the area if you want them passed out but remember Los Al has cameras in the parking lot and getting caught could prove embarrassing.

Whoever wrote the letter did a good job then.

[chickenhead]

I can only think of a few uber-activist horseplayers in the LA area that might be game for some direct participatory action, we'll see if any volunteer.

is there a Quarter Horse message board somewhere in existence? They must have at least the fan base for that? Or a Les Onaka fan club?

I guess I should look up their on vs off track handle...

[andymays]

I can only think of a few uber-activist horseplayers in the LA area that might be game for some direct participatory action, we'll see if any volunteer.

is there a Quarter Horse message board somewhere in existence? They must have at least the fan base for that? Or a Les Onaka fan club?

I guess I should look up their on vs off track handle...


You can post it on the TVG community but they will probably kick you out if they read it. Los Al is one of their babies. On top of that when I posted 3 threads on the takeout increase there was very little response.

Good Luck!

[johnhannibalsmith]

...Or a Les Onaka fan club?...

Please post a link immediately if you uncover that this exists.

Thank you.




:D

[proximity]

Frankly, I don't know whether as an idea it's any worse than "pool parties" or any better than a picket line, but I wouldn't be surprised if, as a result of this thread, the TRPB starts monitoring potentially coordinated cancellations by ADW accounts. What do you suppose that might lead to?

not to throw gas on the fire, but the trpb's record on monitoring cancellations is less than stellar. hell, lamboguy notices more pool manipulations just sitting at home and watching the pools on tv than these people do.

and i'm still against the idea, but potential protesters could get off their sofas and head to a track/otb that offers los al (if they can find one) and cancel any bet up to $100 through a united tote machine. and/or while they're out and about they could also educate fellow players about the takeout raise and/or pass out copies of the letter. just some thoughts.

[Indulto]

... As far as the eliteist thing goes yes, constantly posting about how she travels and what kind of wine she drinks plays into that perception of eliteism but I doubt she realizes it. ...AM,
I have to disagree here because what a person spends to attend the races or bet on them isn’t really anybody else’s concern. If a person desires and is able to pay more for better service and/or higher quality, then that’s their prerogative. To me elitism is displayed by tilting the playing field in favor of those who can obtain discounts on wagering costs that are not available to all game participants -- whether it is based on wagering volume or where one resides. IMO so does enabling, supporting, and/or continuing that practice.

Chick’s points on Los Al were well-made. Getting that letter in front of Los Al players without getting arrested is the key to winning. I’d like to see funding raised for at least one billboard near Los Al, media ads, and organizing call-ins to radio shows.

[andymays]

AM,
I have to disagree here because what a person spends to attend the races or bet on them isn’t really anybody else’s concern. If a person desires and is able to pay more for better service and/or higher quality, then that’s their prerogative. To me elitism is displayed by tilting the playing field in favor of those who can obtain discounts on wagering costs that are not available to all game participants -- whether it is based on wagering volume or where one resides. IMO so does enabling, supporting, and/or continuing that practice.

Chick’s points on Los Al were well-made. Getting that letter in front of Los Al players without getting arrested is the key to winning. I’d like to see funding raised for at least one billboard near Los Al, media ads, and organizing call-ins to radio shows.

I am aware that your point was about rebates but I chose to get a shot in to respond to her personal dig.

As long as people are trying and making an effort it is commendable. Those that only knock others ideas and solutions without offering one of their own are the ones who are weak.

Maybe one of the stones David throws will hit Goliath between the eyes and change the trend but it aint gonna be easy.

[proximity]

AM,
I have to disagree here because what a person spends to attend the races or bet on them isn’t really anybody else’s concern. If a person desires and is able to pay more for better service and/or higher quality, then that’s their prerogative. To me elitism is displayed by tilting the playing field in favor of those who can obtain discounts on wagering costs that are not available to all game participants -- whether it is based on wagering volume or where one resides. IMO so does enabling, supporting, and/or continuing that practice.

Chick’s points on Los Al were well-made. Getting that letter in front of Los Al players without getting arrested is the key to winning. I’d like to see funding raised for at least one billboard near Los Al, media ads, and organizing call-ins to radio shows.

you would have been proud of me on sunday indulto as almost all of my handle went to a track on which i basically get zero rebates!! (EVERYBODY at my home track gets at least 0.3% by swiping their account cards and i'm definitely not giving up this convenience and carrying 5k of cash into the racino to bet with tellers....sorry)

why did i bet this track??

simple. it's where i got acceptable odds on the horses i was interested in playing. whether the other players who seeded this track's pools got rebates is of no consequence to me. hopefully they didn't get rebates, but will start to and the pools will get even bigger!!

sorry you don't like me.

[Indulto]

you would have been proud of me on sunday indulto as almost all of my handle went to a track on which i basically get zero rebates!! (EVERYBODY at my home track gets at least 0.3% by swiping their account cards and i'm definitely not giving up this convenience and carrying 5k of cash into the racino to bet with tellers....sorry)

why did i bet this track??

simple. it's where i got acceptable odds on the horses i was interested in playing. whether the other players who seeded this track's pools got rebates is of no consequence to me. hopefully they didn't get rebates, but will start to and the pools will get even bigger!!

sorry you don't like me.prx,
I'm not against equal rebates for everyone as a tool to increase churn. I am against selective rebating at selective rates, a practice which basically divides horseplayers and makes the game less beatable for the majority and almost impossible for the new players necessary to keep the game going. IMO they create an unjustifiable advantage for the minority who receive them, and prevent the game from being restored to its former popularity and stability.

I don't worry about people disliking me and I don't dislike you, yet ...:D

[proximity]

As long as people are trying and making an effort it is commendable. Those that only knock others ideas and solutions without offering one of their own are the ones who are weak.
.

if you're trying to imply that miesque is in the latter category and not the former, you couldn't be more wrong.

sure she's a jet-setter, but she's going to these tracks and getting the word out. not long ago she came to my humble home racino and was quite gracious.
(ironically, i do recall disagreeing with her about whether indulto should have to reveal his identity to be at hana's forefront....:rolleyes: )

not everyone is going to have an idea or solution about every single issue in racing. not having a solution to every problem doesn't make somebody weak.

[proximity]

I don't dislike you, yet ...:D


that's good..... i guess!!:)

[andymays]

if you're trying to imply that miesque is in the latter category and not the former, you couldn't be more wrong.

sure she's a jet-setter, but she's going to these tracks and getting the word out. not long ago she came to my humble home racino and was quite gracious.
(ironically, i do recall disagreeing with her about whether indulto should have to reveal his identity to be at hana's forefront....:rolleyes: )

not everyone is going to have an idea or solution about every single issue in racing. not having a solution to every problem doesn't make somebody weak.

Read the thread and you can see where the cheapshot started. Make up your own mind if it suites you. All I'm doing is answering back on another one of her cheapshots. She couldn't help it one more time when she jumped in earlier in the thread. For whatever reason she has done the same thing over and over again for the last several months and I answer back. Is there some reason I should accept the insults?

If you can point to an instance where I've jumped in a thread they've started where I'v jumped in and attacked them it would be magic becasue it hasn't happened.

[Steve 'StatMan']

AndyMays, you can have ideas all you want, that's fine, but I think the problem comes when you present them and immediately try to put HANA's name on them-not sure that you're one of the board members of the group, I'm not and I know of some. I'm sure you're free to try what you want, but if you want a named group to support it you reallly should get the concensus agreement from the leaders of the group to use their name.

Life circumstances have prevented me from wagering the last few months and might for the near future as well. I don't follow nor bet California racing so I'll just keep on not doing that. I'm not going to go out of my way to fund my wagering account just to try tinkering with the pools in California.

Most of my friends don't bet it either, although maybe I should circulate the letter by email to my horseplaying friends just to keep them diligent about the concerns of higher/rising takout.

[proximity]

. Is there some reason I should accept the insults?

no and feel free to personally insult the girl all you want. what do i care? that's between the two of you. but the implication that she is "weak" and not making an effort.... that is way incorrect and misleading to p.a. readers....

[andymays]

AndyMays, you can have ideas all you want, that's fine, but I think the problem comes when you present them and immediately try to put HANA's name on them-not sure that you're one of the board members of the group, I'm not and I know of some. I'm sure you're free to try what you want, but if you want a named group to support it you reallly should get the concensus agreement from the leaders of the group to use their name.

Life circumstances have prevented me from wagering the last few months and might for the near future as well. I don't follow nor bet California racing so I'll just keep on not doing that. I'm not going to go out of my way to fund my wagering account just to try tinkering with the pools in California.

Most of my friends don't bet it either, although maybe I should circulate the letter by email to my horseplaying friends just to keep them diligent about the concerns of higher/rising takout.

What is the title of the thread and what is the question I asked?

Was it should HANA? or Should Horseplayers?


I have never represented myself as a Board Member so I don't know where you got that from and your assertion that I have is false and misleading. Please get your facts straight.

By the way I was asked to get involved in the email campaign as a member. Again you ought to get your facts straight before you accuse me of misrepresenting my relationship with HANA. What's up with that?

[andymays]

no and feel free to personally insult the girl all you want. what do i care? that's between the two of you. but the implication that she is "weak" and not making an effort.... that is way incorrect and misleading to p.a. readers....


Thank you for playing the gender card on her behalf.

Your attempt at being a moderator has been a failure but feel free to carry on as you wish.

[proximity]

Thank you for playing the gender card on her behalf.

Your attempt at being a moderator has been a failure but feel free to carry on as you wish.

this post makes no sense to me andy......

[andymays]

this post makes no sense to me andy......


You seem to be taking sides when all you have to do is work your way back in the thread to see where things started and what was said. If you want to weigh in on the disagreements between us then at least go back to the source. What does the girl thing have to do with anything? In my opinion it is weak for a HANA board member to go after another member with an opinion or an idea and attack him personally yet she has chosen to do it over and over again. What's not to understand?

[DeanT]

Andy's topic generated 14 pages of comments, and a ton of them were good. I have learned a lot on this thread so far on how players feel.

[andymays]

Andy's topic generated 14 pages of comments, and a ton of them were good. I have learned a lot on this thread so far on how players feel.


I appreciate the comments Dean but some of this shit is really revealing.

When Horseplayers wonder why nobody sticks their neck out to improve things the last couple of pages are a textbook example.

It's exactly like being at the track and seeing someone get pissed when another Horseplayer makes a score. I'll never understand the negative vibe.

[Steve 'StatMan']

I actually didn't think you were a HANA board member, but didn't want to insult you if you were. Had to reread much of the early thread, where I see your not concerned if this is a HANA sponsored event or not. Very good then. Not sure, seems we get a few posts now and then from people saying HANA ought to do this and that, or horse players should do this and that, not sure what people are expecting sometimes. But since there is a group of people working hard at begining and running an organization on this board (HANA), one could easily make the mistaken assumption that all or many suggestions of horseplayer actions could somehow be realted - maybe not among the posters, but among industry observers, poobahs, those in favor of raising the take, etc, so ideas get looked at by many, and some get scoffed at by those executives and just fuels their disdain for t"hose complaining horseplayers, why don't they just shut up and just bet', or "those goofy horsplayer organizations never last and never amount to much"

It was this type of concern that I was thinking of when you're getting into arguments with people over the ideas, and whether or not you want or will want their support for this or other ideas.

Well, 49 votes in favor so far from horseplayers, you're welcome to start any group or effort you please. Just seems to me the general public has done a much better job protesting horse racing and/or high takeouts by the declines in attendance and betting. So many reasons for it though, not sure anything other than an awareness campaign on the takeout raise will gain the respect of the people needed to make the changes, though it might help some bettors find more self-respect or awareness of the costs of the game.

[proximity]

You seem to be taking sides when all you have to do is work your way back in the thread to see where things started and what was said. If you want to weigh in on the disagreements between us then at least go back to the source. What does the girl thing have to do with anything? In my opinion it is weak for a HANA board member to go after another member with an opinion or an idea and attack him personally yet she has chosen to do it over and over again. What's not to understand?

i quoted the part of your statement that i didn't agree with and that didn't have anything to do with the personal problems between you and miesque.

and if i'm "taking sides" then it's with your position on the issue. although if you read the whole thread (ahem) i did comment that i admired your ingenuity. it's certainly nothing personal against you.....

[andymays]

Thanks for going back over the thread Steve. :ThmbUp:

It's been a long day.

[andymays]

i quoted the part of your statement that i didn't agree with and that didn't have anything to do with the personal problems between you and miesque.

and if i'm "taking sides" then it's with your position on the issue. although if you read the whole thread (ahem) i did comment that i admired your ingenuity. it's certainly nothing personal against you.....

Let's forget about it and move on. This thread lost it's luster about 6 hours ago and is going nowhere fast.

Good Night and Good Luck to all,

Andy

[DeanT]

Hey, we're players Andy....... handicapping all day and getting paid, or dusted on our opinion. No surprise (in my opinion) there were a ton of opinions here (and some of them heated).

I found the responses fascinating at times. There are some posters here who I thought would not side with your idea who did. Eye-opening thread in a lot of ways.

[andymays]

Hey, we're players Andy....... handicapping all day and getting paid, or dusted on our opinion. No surprise (in my opinion) there were a ton of opinions here (and some of them heated).

I found the responses fascinating at times. There are some posters here who I thought would not side with your idea who did. Eye-opening thread in a lot of ways.


Most Horseplayers want to fight back and all they want to know is how?

[proximity]

It's exactly like being at the track and seeing someone get pissed when another Horseplayer makes a score. I'll never understand the negative vibe.

ok, you've actually got me here.

indeed i do get pissed when one of those ZOMBIES "beats" my horse!!:)

[Steve 'StatMan']

I'd have to review all the posts and pages, many good posts, yes, though not sure how many involved pool maniplulation as a good and effective tool.

I tried writing up a long post the other night but hit the wrong key and lost it all. Basically, besides what others have said, the major problem in takeout reduction is that the game/show costs too much to produce. It would be easier to cut the average take from 20% to 10% if the costs of producing live horse racing could be cut in half. But what costs could be cut by 50%, with the 'promise' that overall handle would double and makeup for the lost money. Hard to sell the horsemen on 50% less purses by taking 50% less for their half of the take. 50% less for the jockeys, at least for those paid on the purses earned in the race, 50% less for the winning trainers, etc. 50% less for the tracks - but will the employees, executives, etc. take 50% less in pay, or base their pay on the handle? How can backstretch costs to the track be cut by 50% (we know dumping the tons of horse feces in the local rivers/creeks are flat out illegal.)

Ideally, the casinos were to bring in reveune for the track, it was shared with the horsemen in some cases, but they didn't use it cost-accounting wise to reduce the price of the horse racing product to the racing customers, which, if they had done by reduction of takeout, would hopefully have proven or not its affect on the horse betting handle.

What I've mentioned would really be needed before significant takeout reduction could be achieved, IMO. Frankly, it should be another topic, but I'm not sure how much time I have to join in the discussion. And of course, there are no guarantees that savings from cut expenses would be passed along to the horse bettors. But lets face it, slot machines don't poop by the pound multiple times per day, they roulette balls and dice get thrown out and replaced if they get chipped instead of surguries to horses knees, etc, and all workers need to make a living, not always easy in many positions at the track, esp. with seasonal meets.

Okay, enough outa me - I'm off topic, and need to get off to bed.

[Stillriledup]

I'd have to review all the posts and pages, many good posts, yes, though not sure how many involved pool maniplulation as a good and effective tool.

I tried writing up a long post the other night but hit the wrong key and lost it all. Basically, besides what others have said, the major problem in takeout reduction is that the game/show costs too much to produce. It would be easier to cut the average take from 20% to 10% if the costs of producing live horse racing could be cut in half. But what costs could be cut by 50%, with the 'promise' that overall handle would double and makeup for the lost money. Hard to sell the horsemen on 50% less purses by taking 50% less for their half of the take. 50% less for the jockeys, at least for those paid on the purses earned in the race, 50% less for the winning trainers, etc. 50% less for the tracks - but will the employees, executives, etc. take 50% less in pay, or base their pay on the handle? How can backstretch costs to the track be cut by 50% (we know dumping the tons of horse feces in the local rivers/creeks are flat out illegal.)

Ideally, the casinos were to bring in reveune for the track, it was shared with the horsemen in some cases, but they didn't use it cost-accounting wise to reduce the price of the horse racing product to the racing customers, which, if they had done by reduction of takeout, would hopefully have proven or not its affect on the horse betting handle.

What I've mentioned would really be needed before significant takeout reduction could be achieved, IMO. Frankly, it should be another topic, but I'm not sure how much time I have to join in the discussion. And of course, there are no guarantees that savings from cut expenses would be passed along to the horse bettors. But lets face it, slot machines don't poop by the pound multiple times per day, they roulette balls and dice get thrown out and replaced if they get chipped instead of surguries to horses knees, etc, and all workers need to make a living, not always easy in many positions at the track, esp. with seasonal meets.



Okay, enough outa me - I'm off topic, and need to get off to bed.

When you say that the major problem with takeout reduction is that the game costs too much to produce, this assumes that the higher the takeout, the more money. By assuming that, its also assuming that handle is stationary and doesn't change. For the life of me, i can't understand why tracks don't realize they'll make more money in the long run by lowering takeout to very competitive levels. They all assume that lower takeout means more revenue, but with the lower take, you sell many more bets to people.

Places like Nordstroms and Macys can have sales, why can't racetracks have sales on bets? Have you ever seen a 'exactas for sale' sign in front of a racetrack? Half off exactas, this weekend only. There's NEVER a sale on horse racing bets regardless of anything.

I know what racetracks should do. They should hire someone who can do a study on the effect of takeout and what it will do to their business.

Oh wait, they did that already. Nevermind.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

The track takeout is at arms length to the cost of running the show. Think of it like this. Lets say a race track was 100% reliant on slots with no parimutuel betting (many Ontario harness tracks are close to this).
It appears that the optimum payback for slots is around 92% because this is a takeout that has been toyed with throughout the years, and I will assume that since Vegas and most other jurisdictions has a takeout of 8%, it must be close enough.

What this means is that at 16% or 20%, slots would not produce as much bottom line money for the operation than they do at 8%, or lets face it, the take would be 16% or 20%.

But lets say that it has been 16% for years, and nobody experimented with lower takeouts for slots.

The statement that we can't cut slot takeout in half because of the cost of running the show is completely wrong.

This would be true if horse racing was not getting a cut or getting a cut. And it does cost money to run slots 24 hours a day as well. So it does cost money to put on that show as well.

[Seabiscuit@AR]

Betting turnover vs prizemoney (or purses as they are called in the USA) in various countries

USA 19.8 billion betting turnover 1.4 billion prizemoney
Great Britain 22.4 billion betting turnover 0.23 billion prizemoney
France 19.2 billion betting turnover 0.34 billion prizemoney
Ireland 7.9 billion betting turnover 0.12 billion prizemoney
Australia 12.6 billion betting turnover 0.35 billion prizemoney
Hong Kong 12.4 billion betting turnover 0.14 billion prizemoney
Japan 50 billion betting turnover 1.36 billion prizemoney

All these figures are in Australian dollars based on the exchange rate on a certain date as they are sourced from the 2009 Australian Racing Fact Book

I just present the figures here to show that on a comparative basis horsemen in the USA are currently getting a far greater share of betting turnover than in any other major horse racing country

If paying massive chunks of betting turnover to horsemen is the path to happiness in the world of racing then USA should have the healthiest racing industry in the world. But it does not seem to so I don't think big prizemoney is a key to success. I wonder even if the opposite is true (ie paying too much betting turnover into prizemoney has negative effects)

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Betting turnover vs prizemoney (or purses as they are called in the USA) in various countries

USA 19.8 billion betting turnover 1.4 billion prizemoney
Great Britain 22.4 billion betting turnover 0.23 billion prizemoney
France 19.2 billion betting turnover 0.34 billion prizemoney
Ireland 7.9 billion betting turnover 0.12 billion prizemoney
Australia 12.6 billion betting turnover 0.35 billion prizemoney
Hong Kong 12.4 billion betting turnover 0.14 billion prizemoney
Japan 50 billion betting turnover 1.36 billion prizemoney

All these figures are in Australian dollars based on the exchange rate on a certain date as they are sourced from the 2009 Australian Racing Fact Book

I just present the figures here to show that on a comparative basis horsemen in the USA are currently getting a far greater share of betting turnover than in any other major horse racing country

If paying massive chunks of betting turnover to horsemen is the path to happiness in the world of racing then USA should have the healthiest racing industry in the world. But it does not seem to so I don't think big prizemoney is a key to success. I wonder even if the opposite is true (ie paying too much betting turnover into prizemoney has negative effects)
What year is that from? The total handle for last year in the USA was around 12 billion.

The one thing that this misses is the fact that betting per head is much higher almost everywhere else (Great Britain has 1/5th the population the USA has but has more money bet on their product). Lots of this has to do with lower takeouts in most other countries (not sure if they include exchange betting in the Aussie Fact Book), but the fact that players can play with low commissions leads to bigger interest amongst its population.

Again, it is the idea of players lasting longer getting more players involved, and the fact that winners exist who bet on exchanges and this carrot arouses the interest of others.

To be fair, it is probably best to look at total prize money versus total bet by person in the population.

[proximity]

yep, 8% will maximize slots revenues.

4.55% will maximize football revenues.

and what's a typical poker rake?? 5% or so??

but there's just something special about horseracing that it needs to have a 20% plus blended takeout to maximize revenues.

i'm glad that makes sense to bo derek!!

[miesque]

Well I certainly learned something in this thread. I am willing to admit when I am wrong and will do so now. First and foremost, I admit that I play rough, always have since I was a youngster playing Fort and War on the playground. And for those of you worrying your pretty little heads that I am frittering away too much of my thoughts/capacity on Mr. AndyMays, you can relax. By the time I hit college I was able to go for the jugular in my sleep and now that I have long since graduated bitch school with the highest honors and am well on my way to full fledged Battle-axe, it’s really no effort. I have not even put my glass down yet, let alone get out of my chair, take off my coat and finally drop my gloves. I had previously been operating under the assumption that an individual who has made a name for themselves berating, insulting and harassing public officials and others both on Forum and privately via e-mail barrages and widely circulating them could at least weather a mere weak wristed slap or two (Despite my perpetual disagreements with Indulto, I have to comment him for at least he has the fortitude to weather a swing). It turns out I was incorrect and will take that into consideration in the future. While we are on the conversation of insults, while there are those that consider Mr. AndyMays a hero for pissing off and alienating so many officials, I consider it to be counterproductive and making our job more difficult because I know if I had been in their shoes, I would not be inclined to be supportive of ideas being espoused regardless of their merit and I may be alone in that regard, but somehow I don’t think I am. I do not appreciate being guilty by association before I even walk into a room for actions I do not approve of.

Getting back to the brilliant idea of AndyMays for a Pool Riot, I think it’s a dumbass idea for several reasons, the biggest being (1) what the hell does this actually accomplish other ****ing with other horseplayers and (2) Pool Integrity is something important enough to be one of the main planks of an organization I am on the Board of Directors for so I am not sure why on earth someone would think I would be supporting it. This does not even get into the more practical issues of the fact that cancellations have restrictions and take time and effort and if you don’t time it right or run into red tape issues you have wasted both your time and money. Lastly, there is the legal side of it and while some things are ok being done by themselves or as separate instances when one starts organizing them, they are being held to a whole different set of standards and legal enforcement (conspiracy to commit wire fraud, tote manipulation, etc) and even worse can trigger more restrictive rules for horseplayers taking away to be implemented. So you hopefully you can see my perspective why I think its a cockamamie idea. Now ideas are good and energy is good and Mr. AndyMays has done some good things, but at the burden of significant collateral damage in the process (throwing Molotov cocktails like they are going out of style has that effect).

Lastly, I would like to thank proximity, who is not only an astute handicapper but also great guy and wonderful company at the track, for his kind comments on my behalf.



That is all for now from this small, weak little girl. :cool:

[DJofSD]

Behold the turtle. He makes no progress unless he sticks his head out.

[andymays]

Well I certainly learned something in this thread. I am willing to admit when I am wrong and will do so now. First and foremost, I admit that I play rough, always have since I was a youngster playing Fort and War on the playground. And for those of you worrying your pretty little heads that I am frittering away too much of my thoughts/capacity on Mr. AndyMays, you can relax. By the time I hit college I was able to go for the jugular in my sleep and now that I have long since graduated bitch school with the highest honors and am well on my way to full fledged Battle-axe, it’s really no effort. I have not even put my glass down yet, let alone get out of my chair, take off my coat and finally drop my gloves. I had previously been operating under the assumption that an individual who has made a name for themselves berating, insulting and harassing public officials and others both on Forum and privately via e-mail barrages and widely circulating them could at least weather a mere weak wristed slap or two (Despite my perpetual disagreements with Indulto, I have to comment him for at least he has the fortitude to weather a swing). It turns out I was incorrect and will take that into consideration in the future. While we are on the conversation of insults, while there are those that consider Mr. AndyMays a hero for pissing off and alienating so many officials, I consider it to be counterproductive and making our job more difficult because I know if I had been in their shoes, I would not be inclined to be supportive of ideas being espoused regardless of their merit and I may be alone in that regard, but somehow I don’t think I am. I do not appreciate being guilty by association before I even walk into a room for actions I do not approve of.

Getting back to the brilliant idea of AndyMays for a Pool Riot, I think it’s a dumbass idea for several reasons, the biggest being (1) what the hell does this actually accomplish other ****ing with other horseplayers and (2) Pool Integrity is something important enough to be one of the main planks of an organization I am on the Board of Directors for so I am not sure why on earth someone would think I would be supporting it. This does not even get into the more practical issues of the fact that cancellations have restrictions and take time and effort and if you don’t time it right or run into red tape issues you have wasted both your time and money. Lastly, there is the legal side of it and while some things are ok being done by themselves or as separate instances when one starts organizing them, they are being held to a whole different set of standards and legal enforcement (conspiracy to commit wire fraud, tote manipulation, etc) and even worse can trigger more restrictive rules for horseplayers taking away to be implemented. So you hopefully you can see my perspective why I think its a cockamamie idea. Now ideas are good and energy is good and Mr. AndyMays has done some good things, but at the burden of significant collateral damage in the process (throwing Molotov cocktails like they are going out of style has that effect).

Lastly, I would like to thank proximity, who is not only an astute handicapper but also great guy and wonderful company at the track, for his kind comments on my behalf.



That is all for now from this small, weak little girl. :cool:


YES LADIES AND GENTLEMEN THAT'S A HANA BOARD MEMBER MAKING THOSE COMMENTS!

Thanks for the love and rock on,

Your pal Andy :lol:

[Indulto]

Well I certainly learned something in this thread. I am willing to admit when I am wrong and will do so now. First and foremost, I admit that I play rough, always have since I was a youngster playing Fort and War on the playground. And for those of you worrying your pretty little heads that I am frittering away too much of my thoughts/capacity on Mr. AndyMays, you can relax. By the time I hit college I was able to go for the jugular in my sleep and now that I have long since graduated bitch school with the highest honors and am well on my way to full fledged Battle-axe, it’s really no effort. I have not even put my glass down yet, let alone get out of my chair, take off my coat and finally drop my gloves. I had previously been operating under the assumption that an individual who has made a name for themselves berating, insulting and harassing public officials and others both on Forum and privately via e-mail barrages and widely circulating them could at least weather a mere weak wristed slap or two (Despite my perpetual disagreements with Indulto, I have to comment him for at least he has the fortitude to weather a swing). It turns out I was incorrect and will take that into consideration in the future. While we are on the conversation of insults, while there are those that consider Mr. AndyMays a hero for pissing off and alienating so many officials, I consider it to be counterproductive and making our job more difficult because I know if I had been in their shoes, I would not be inclined to be supportive of ideas being espoused regardless of their merit and I may be alone in that regard, but somehow I don’t think I am. I do not appreciate being guilty by association before I even walk into a room for actions I do not approve of.

Getting back to the brilliant idea of AndyMays for a Pool Riot, I think it’s a dumbass idea for several reasons, the biggest being (1) what the hell does this actually accomplish other ****ing with other horseplayers and (2) Pool Integrity is something important enough to be one of the main planks of an organization I am on the Board of Directors for so I am not sure why on earth someone would think I would be supporting it. This does not even get into the more practical issues of the fact that cancellations have restrictions and take time and effort and if you don’t time it right or run into red tape issues you have wasted both your time and money. Lastly, there is the legal side of it and while some things are ok being done by themselves or as separate instances when one starts organizing them, they are being held to a whole different set of standards and legal enforcement (conspiracy to commit wire fraud, tote manipulation, etc) and even worse can trigger more restrictive rules for horseplayers taking away to be implemented. So you hopefully you can see my perspective why I think its a cockamamie idea. Now ideas are good and energy is good and Mr. AndyMays has done some good things, but at the burden of significant collateral damage in the process (throwing Molotov cocktails like they are going out of style has that effect).

Lastly, I would like to thank proximity, who is not only an astute handicapper but also great guy and wonderful company at the track, for his kind comments on my behalf.

That is all for now from this small, weak little girl. :cool: miesque,
What a great audio that would make for your dating video! ;)

As I read your post I was reminded of the Jerry Jam interview on the Byk show where JJ was hailed as a conquering hero for essentially making a pest of himself. Hopefully you would never be in the shoes of those with whom you appear to sympathize because, you would making better decisions than these destroyers of the game we love.

It’s OUR game too! And if getting it back means taking it back, that’s what’s got to happen. I hope your alleged “ability to go for the jugular in your sleep” is an accurate assessment, because that’s what will be required – but against those you seem to enjoy hob nobbing with; NOT your fellow horseplayers.

You’re missing the point by ignoring and minimizing AM’s effect. Posters here so far have only been considering the proposal as introduced without offering any new twists that might convert it into a workable action. Let’s stop thinking about bet cancellations for a while (AND those brilliant pool parties) and come up with something else that will get the enemy’s attention.

JP just demonstrated the leadership HANA was intended to provide. Apparently, he hasn’t inspired other board members to the extent he has the rank and file.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Allred calls need to raise takeout a sad thing
http://www.drf.com/news/article/110250.html

The higher takeout was approved only through Sept. 8. In the interim, Los Alamitos has been instructed to present information on how the higher takeout affects handle.

"If this is a disaster, I'll be the first one to change it," Allred said.

[Seabiscuit@AR]

Well an interesting DRF article the Allred one. Basically business is being lost due to increased competition so they are responding by raising prices to try to get more out of the customers who have not left yet

[Grits]

This morning I took a lot of time reading the 16 + pages of this thread. And in doing so, I felt there was a tremendous amount of drama. To a great degree, as we all know, drama can be motivating, but it also can go too far, becoming detrimental.

I hope all of the HANA members come back to the same page, though, that is difficult as temprements and personalities, interests, focus, and priorities can all be different--at different times. This can be true in spite of your organization's mission statement, goals, etc.

Only observing, but after reading the thread, you guys may want to redirect some of your anger at each other because it reads like juvenile quibbling, snipping and infighting, and it can take all the work you've done completely down the toilet. And that would be grossly unfortunate because several of you have worked extremely hard.

One shouldn't want this thread to continue on this path, some postings probably could be deleted even. IT IS being read by industry folk, COUNT ON IT. As we know, PA is read far more than any other forum of its kind by not only fans, but all involved in the sport. Those in the industry are able to see the volatility, and will make judgement on the obvious turmoil. So, with calmer heads working towards a solution, wrapping up the anger--might be a good thing.

You need your president, he remains cool as a cucumber. He never lets anyone see him sweat. Ever. Taking his cue would be advantageous.

As I read later today, at least Allred has left the door ajar. Your president may well have had a hand in that. Allred could've done worse. Many have.

These are simply observations, and meant in no way, whatsoever, to offend any members, so please, please, don't be upset with me for commenting.

I'm rarely a joiner of organizations or clubs these days, still, all that you all do is appreciated.

[WinterTriangle]

there are those that consider Mr. AndyMays a hero for pissing off and alienating so many officials, I consider it to be counterproductive and making our job more difficult because I know if I had been in their shoes, I would not be inclined to be supportive of ideas being espoused regardless of their merit and I may be alone in that regard, but somehow I don’t think I am.

Miesque, I agree about counterproductive.

There's a woman in my town who has that same style. The very last person that the sheriff, deputy's, judges, and just about any "board" member in the county would do anything for.... is her.

She has alienated everyone important, and for those of us who don't sit on any boards, or hold decision-making offices, we also avoid her because she's so darn ........ *negative*. She is not only unwilling, but completely incapable, of working within the system.


Oh, I forgot to mention: She's a staunch member of PETA. :lol:

perfect! The end justifies the means, in every sense, for her. And that is the pathway to actions which are never well-balanced.


Behold the turtle. He makes no progress unless he sticks his head out.

Sticking head out is one thing. Sticking it out, biting and flinging dung is antoher. :)

[TiznowfaninNY]

If Los Al will in fact be the test by which they gauge any subsequent raises in takeout, then to me...

a simple boycott will do.

Do your talking with your money...specifically with your refusal to part with it.

Just like changing the channel when you don't want to watch something...

or changing the radio dial when you don't want to listen...

or going to another store to make a purchase.



Personally, I do play Los Al, but with a smallish bankroll and mostly just for entertainment while TVG's "The Quarters" is on in the background. I stopped once I heard about the takeout, and have no plans to resume playing if things remain as they are.

[thaskalos]

Horseplayers' bark is worse then their bite. We like to talk alot about the injustices that plague this sport but we never do anything about it. That is the reason racetracks and OTBs treat us with contempt - they know that, no matter what happens, we will always be back the next day. Let me offer an example: If ever a track deserves a boycott it is Philadelphia Park. Even with a thriving slot business that has pushed their purses to the stratosphere, they refuse to share the spoils with the horseplayer and continue to take an obsene 30% from the trifecta pools. And yet, there are $75,000+ bet into the tri pools race after race, even on mondays and tuesdays. What a sad testament that is to our conviction, and what a horrible message it send to racetracks in general.

[tzipi]

Horseplayers' bark is worse then their bite. We like to talk alot about the injustices that plague this sport but we never do anything about it. That is the reason racetracks and OTBs treat us with contempt - they know that, no matter what happens, we will always be back the next day. Let me offer an example: If ever a track deserves a boycott it is Philadelphia Park. Even with a thriving slot business that has pushed their purses to the stratosphere, they refuse to share the spoils with the horseplayer and continue to take an obsene 30% from the trifecta pools. And yet, there are $75,000+ bet into the tri pools race after race, even on mondays and tuesdays. What a sad testament that is to our conviction, and what a horrible message it send to racetracks in general.

:ThmbUp:

[proximity]

miesque,
What a great audio that would make for your dating video! ;)


perhaps we could get miesque and andymays booked on an episode of roger lodge's blind date!!

paintball or kickboxing in the morning followed by lunch at santa anita in the afternoon. (you could run a couple commercials for frank's energy drink during the breaks)

morning line 1-9 that the post date interviews would be first ballot entries in the blind date hall of shame!!:D

[andymays]

Horseplayers' bark is worse then their bite. We like to talk alot about the injustices that plague this sport but we never do anything about it. That is the reason racetracks and OTBs treat us with contempt - they know that, no matter what happens, we will always be back the next day. Let me offer an example: If ever a track deserves a boycott it is Philadelphia Park. Even with a thriving slot business that has pushed their purses to the stratosphere, they refuse to share the spoils with the horseplayer and continue to take an obsene 30% from the trifecta pools. And yet, there are $75,000+ bet into the tri pools race after race, even on mondays and tuesdays. What a sad testament that is to our conviction, and what a horrible message it send to racetracks in general.


:ThmbUp:

[andymays]

The thead is textbook stuff on why nothing gets done and takeout is approching 30%.

A third of the people don't know who the enemy is. :rolleyes:

Amazing stuff. :eek:

[johnhannibalsmith]

Horseplayers' bark is worse then their bite. We like to talk alot about the injustices that plague this sport but we never do anything about it. That is the reason racetracks and OTBs treat us with contempt - they know that, no matter what happens, we will always be back the next day. Let me offer an example: If ever a track deserves a boycott it is Philadelphia Park. Even with a thriving slot business that has pushed their purses to the stratosphere, they refuse to share the spoils with the horseplayer and continue to take an obsene 30% from the trifecta pools. And yet, there are $75,000+ bet into the tri pools race after race, even on mondays and tuesdays. What a sad testament that is to our conviction, and what a horrible message it send to racetracks in general.

Good post.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Horseplayers' bark is worse then their bite. We like to talk alot about the injustices that plague this sport but we never do anything about it. That is the reason racetracks and OTBs treat us with contempt - they know that, no matter what happens, we will always be back the next day. Let me offer an example: If ever a track deserves a boycott it is Philadelphia Park. Even with a thriving slot business that has pushed their purses to the stratosphere, they refuse to share the spoils with the horseplayer and continue to take an obsene 30% from the trifecta pools. And yet, there are $75,000+ bet into the tri pools race after race, even on mondays and tuesdays. What a sad testament that is to our conviction, and what a horrible message it send to racetracks in general.
Not sure what percentage it is these days, but lots of that $75,000 bet on tri pools comes from rebate shops where the real takeout is much less than the 30%.
There are many people who play without rebate who have knowledge that the takeout is that high but don't care....except for the fact that their bankrolls erode very quickly and it does have a huge affect on them in the long run.
In today's climate, any bet with a takeout of over 25% is obscene. I'd like to be saying anything over 20% is obscene as well, but it would be good to at least get the industry to bring down the over 25%ers first.

[andymays]

Not sure what percentage it is these days, but lots of that $75,000 bet on tri pools comes from rebate shops where the real takeout is much less than the 30%.
There are many people who play without rebate who have knowledge that the takeout is that high but don't care....except for the fact that their bankrolls erode very quickly and it does have a huge affect on them in the long run.
In today's climate, any bet with a takeout of over 25% is obscene. I'd like to be saying anything over 20% is obscene as well, but it would be good to at least get the industry to bring down the over 25%ers first.


Good Points. Anything over 20% is obscene.

How about the Eclipse awards the other night? Good for all the people there and all the winners. How many Horseplayers were there? One? Why isn't there a table with Horseplayers there? I can tell you why. For the most part we are looked upon as a necessary evil. When they want to thank us it's a dollar hot dog and a dollar beer. Then they raise the take on us. Thanks a lot!

[chickenhead]

Horseplayers' bark is worse then their bite. We like to talk alot about the injustices that plague this sport but we never do anything about it. That is the reason racetracks and OTBs treat us with contempt - they know that, no matter what happens, we will always be back the next day. Let me offer an example: If ever a track deserves a boycott it is Philadelphia Park. Even with a thriving slot business that has pushed their purses to the stratosphere, they refuse to share the spoils with the horseplayer and continue to take an obsene 30% from the trifecta pools. And yet, there are $75,000+ bet into the tri pools race after race, even on mondays and tuesdays. What a sad testament that is to our conviction, and what a horrible message it send to racetracks in general.

couldn't agree more:
http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/2009/03/talk-with-horseplayers.html

Let’s take Philadelphia as an example. They have one of the most onerous takeouts in the country at 26-30% on all exotics. There are lotteries available that pay out at higher rates. And yet, depressingly, they pull in over $110,000 per race in exotic bets. As the customers to the industry we must come to grips with the fact that we vote with our dollars. And there is no question that every dollar bet into a 30% rake undercuts the message we are trying to send to the tracks.

If we want the respect of the industry, if we want them to treat us as anything other than degenerates (which, let’s be honest with ourselves, is by and large how we are perceived) – then we must be conscious of how and with whom we wager. We must remember that every dollar we bet sends a message. Every time a track takes in a wager they see that as an “Atta boy. See -- we’re doing a good job. Another happy customer”.

So before you make your next bet at one of these tracks, think long and hard if that is precisely the message you wish to send them – because that is how they take it.

[Robert Goren]

I just don't screwing with the show pool at a QH track is going get anyone's attention. You can present all the surveys and stage all the protests that you want, but they don't want to listen, they won't. People here are always talking about the free market place. Well, racing is the one place it is working. The handles are getting smaller and tracks are beginning to close. The ones who wise up will survive. If none do, then none will. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. JMO

[andymays]

The only reasonable solution right now would be to pressure tracks to print the takeout on each ticket. This would raise awareness through the roof.

If high takeout is no big deal and is good for racing then they should have no objections right? ;)

[Horseplayersbet.com]

The only reasonable solution right now would be to pressure tracks to print the takeout on each ticket. This would raise awareness through the roof.

If high takeout is no big deal and is good for racing then they should have no objections right? ;)
They would have to raise the takeout to pay for the extra ink. :)

[andymays]

They would have to raise the takeout to pay for the extra ink. :)


At least another 2%! :D

[rwwupl]

They would have to raise the takeout to pay for the extra ink. :)


Good one. :D

[andymays]

Allred calls need to raise takeout 'sad thing'

http://www.drf.com/news/article/110250.html

Excerpt:

The higher takeout will reduce the amount of money being returned to winning bettors, but track officials said it is a necessary option to keep satellite locations operating.

"This is something that's alien to my thinking," said Allred, a noted bettor and horse owner. "This is a sad thing for me to do."

The takeout will increase from 15.63 percent for win, place, and show bets to 17.63 percent, and from 20.88 percent to 22.88 percent for all exotic wagers.

The higher takeout was approved only through Sept. 8. In the interim, Los Alamitos has been instructed to present information on how the higher takeout affects handle.

"If this is a disaster, I'll be the first one to change it," Allred said. "The night simulcasting is hurting."

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Los Alamitos handle tonight less than $580,000
Last Thursday they did a little less than $780,000

What happened?