10 % accross the board, will it work for the tracks and players

[Igeteven]

We all know the take out is huge and leaves the player crying when we hit a big one or even a mid size ticket.


If California went to a 10 % takeout, the players would break their back and play all of the tracks here, then, New York, Kentucky, & Florida would have to follow.


Then the tracks would be back at the same level that they were before.

However, critics say, this would build the fan base and get new players into the game.

I think if the take out was dropped, horse racing would come to an end. I believe it is hard as hell to get new players to come to the game and stay.

With these so called plastic tracks, the handicapping game is over.

Please remember, wheel, wheel, wheel,


What do you think ?

[elhelmete]

Create a bunch of fantasy-football style betting gimmicks (like Magna-5) and advertise the hell out of them including a 8-10% takeout.

Me? I am not a fan of these sorts of gimmicks, but I have to acknowledge what the fantasy game has done to add to the NFL fan base. These sorts of guys know gimmicks, and maybe if the whale $$ jumps in to take advantage of the low rake, hopefully, the pool sizes will attract this crowd.

[Stillriledup]

Always makes you wonder if all the big tracks are colluding together to keep takeout rates high. Why won't one of the big boys in track ownership just do this?

I think the key is that very low takeouts do not help rebate bettors or simulcast locations. What's in it for you if you own the altoona Iowa simulcast center? I mean, you don't want your customers betting santa anita at 10% because its much less money for you. More money for the customer, but less for you.

You, as simulcast owner, want your customers betting on tracks with high takeout.

If Santa Anita lowered to 10%, simulcast centers would probably ban their signal. Rebate players would cut back their wagers on santa anita because their rebate would be substantially lowered, if not cut down altogether.

[Ian Meyers]

Rebate players would cut back their wagers on santa anita because their rebate would be substantially lowered, if not cut down altogether.

Not true. Square money would migrate back into the pools and we could make do with smaller rebates. Many of us beat the games a few years ago with smaller/no rebates and more uniformed money. Right now its sharks vs. sharks in most of the pools.

Virtually every other rebate player I've spoken to feels the same way. Low rebates certainly hasn't hurt handle in Hong Kong.

[GameTheory]

Establish legal exchange-type betting with low vig ala BetFair. Allow the players to create whatever propositions they wish.

[Jeff P]

Some VERY good ideas here... 10% takeout... exchange betting, etc.

IMHO, the key to improving things (not just for players but for everybody involved in racing) is to do it by making changes that satisfy customer needs and wants. Racing, in modern times, has done an extremely poor job (if not the exact opposite) of that.

Last fall we asked 1400 HANA members to take a 50 question comprehensive survey designed by statistician Dan Needham. He told us up front that response rates exceeding 35% for a survey of this type are considered "strong." More than 500 serious horseplayers took the time (about 25 minutes) to complete the survey in full.

IMHO, the HANA survey is important because it represents recent market research targeted at racing's core customers. The results were eye opening (even to us) and only confirmed the following about racing's decision makers:

1. They have no understanding whatsoever about factors driving customer behavior.

or

2. They are aware of factors that drive customer behavior but choose to ignore them.


Note to industry decision makers... because I know you are lurking/reading this...

The NUMBER ONE FACTOR named by more than 500 core racing customers driving their betting behavior is HIGH TAKEOUT!... It's too high already... make it higher and they'll bet less... lower it a bit and they'll bet more.

IMHO, the goal isn't to lower takeout to nothing. No. Lower it to the point where revenue for track operators and purses becomes maximized.

Interestingly enough results from the HANA survey just confirms all of the recommendations found in the racing industry's own paid for studies... Thalheimer, Cummings, and others.


By the way... Here are the top 3 factors driving bettor behavior:

1. High Takeout

2. Pool Integrity

3. Drug Integrity

IMHO, industry decision makers can right the ship by making it their mission to satisfy customer needs and wants in each of the above three areas.


HANA Sign Up Link:
http://www.jcapper.com/HANA/SignUp/HANASignUpForm.asp?source=0


-jp

.

[Ejmenz]

1. High Takeout

2. Pool Integrity

3. Drug Integrity

That covers it.

[Stillriledup]

1. High Takeout

2. Pool Integrity

3. Drug Integrity

That covers it.

I was going to suggest that takeout is more important than drug integrity because even if there are drugs in racehorses, only one horse can win and that winning horse will be paying 90% of the pool and not 80.

BUT, if there's no drugs, than non handicapper types who knew inside drug information won't be adding their large bets to the pools. There are plenty of people in the game who aren't great handicappers who have the ability to put tons of money on the drugged horse. These guys will go away and more of the money will go to the people who actually know how to handicap (like it should).

When people use the word RACING (as in, "if racing gets its act together") its a word that's really misleading. There is NO 'racing'. There is just a collection of individual tracks in individual states with their own rules and very few of them (if any) really care about the long term health of 'racing'. They're just in the bookmaking business and horse racing just coincidentally happens to be the product. These people are legal bookmakers who are allowed to charge 20 or 30 percent to make a wager on whatever they can put up on their tv screens. This time, it happens to be horse racing.

"Racing" is not going to get 'their' act together because they don't exist in the same way as the major sports leagues exist. Racing doesn't have a commissioner or a league or any leadership....its just a bunch of individual 'teams' trying to get as much of the public's money as they can.