Ca. State Senate Hearing(AB2414)

[rwwupl]

Today,Wed. 8-25-10..

There will be an audio broadcast of the Ca. State Senate rules Committee concerning Ca.AB2414... increase in take out and exchange betting. We requested the audio for you who are interested.

It starts at 1:30,room 113, scheduled to appear are:Keith Brackpool ,Chairman ,Bo Derek,David Isreal,Richard Roseberg... Members,CHRB


http://www.sen.ca.gov/ftp/sen/committee/NEW_113.htm

Find "audio"


roger@hanaweb.org

[kenwoodall2]

This is the text of the original Ca bill #2414, minus ammended deletions:
"THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:" That's it!!!
This is clearly a bait-and-switch bill to raise the overall takeout 2-3% because the Trots and Qtrs were already raised.
***** Quote on the LA takeout increase bill: "TOC adds, "that adopting this subsidy for night industry
races and using increased takeout for this purpose sets a
very poor precedent for day races. Horse racing in
California is threatened by a combination of factors,




AB 246 (Price) continued
Page 7



including competition from racing in other states, other
forms of gaming within California, pressure from developers
and race track bankruptcies. We need to be extremely
thoughtful about any increase in takeout and make certain
that related funds are used to support initiatives that
improve the industry's overall health."


So the TBred owners did not want LA increase (non-TBred), but wanted thei TBred increase! Talk about selfish greed!

[DJofSD]

I get nothin'. Just a few clicks and pops when the media player launches but nothing after that.

[DJofSD]

1:46 -- they are taking roll call.

[rwwupl]

They got started late, as usual...Andy had trouble too, O.K. now

[andymays]

Thanks for putting up the link Roger. :ThmbUp:

[rwwupl]

I think I got it wrong, the committee is confirming the CHRB members, but Brackpool is sure to get Questions about AB2414, We have requested the Ab2414 to have audio also.

Will notify if possible, they are not very prompt.

http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=z31etaz62gp6wf&xid=z31ca453ek9v5x&done=.z31w02msafhlpx

[InsideThePylons-MW]

Maybe Brackpool can ask them if they pay $8000 a meeting to have it streamed over the internet.

[DJofSD]

Dagnabbit.

[andymays]

Roger, maybe you could give us a rundown of what happened. I can't listen to these people any longer.

[rwwupl]

It was not much...They went into executive session, I never heard from Brackpool, et.al

[kenwoodall2]

They ccontinued a bunch of item numbers- I have no idea what item # 2414 is!

[Indulto]

I get to media player, but then never hear anything.

rw, Are you actually in Sacramento now?

[rwwupl]

No, more later (when I find out more.)

[DeanT]

You guys missed Bruno in the 3rd at Del Mar. Paid $27.80

RONIN DAX (*L) Valenzuela, P A118 lbs.
ML:8/1Current: 12 Tr: Troeger, Robert

Poly lover....

[andymays]

Poly lover....

Wait for it......................Wait for it................................................ .................................................. ............................

It was on the turf!

He didn't want to tear up a good horse on the poly. ;)

Won for fun too. This one will move up the ladder. :ThmbUp:
-------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.nctimes.com/sports/columnists/nahill/article_52994906-5349-573a-873c-c5cd5363aec6.html

Excerpt:

Today's Racing Digest workout analyst and handicapper Bruno De Julio said he believes in the Hollywood Park track.

"Hollywood Park has been perennially a very good surface to train over and run," De Julio said. "I believe horses have gotten fitter at Hollywood to race than anywhere else. I have had much success clocking and watching horses at Hollywood run than anywhere else."

De Julio said Del Mar's Polytrack is a good surface to train on and ship out to run on dirt. That's what Blind Luck did last weekend for trainer Jerry Hollendorfer in the Alabama at Saratoga Springs, N.Y., and what trainer Bob Baffert has done many times and did again this year when Lookin At Lucky won the Haskell at Monmouth Park in Oceanport, N.Y., and what Bulldogger did in an allowance race at Saratoga.

"(Del Mar) is a great surface to train over this year," De Julio said, "but it has been horrible to run over as it takes the brilliance out of horses. In other words, a brilliant horse with a great turn of foot or speed is stymied by this surface. This surface caters to slow horses. "

[Jeff P]

re: Senate Rules Committee AB 2414...

I'm told that no action was taken today.

Possible the bill could be referred to committee Thurs or Fri.

Now you know what I know.

-jp

.

[kenwoodall2]

Bill website just says "Third floor reading". Probably has to be read to give politicos time for their officr workers to figure out what takeout is!
Another item today has question about how much thew ammended changed from the original. I predict the whole bill will be pulled prior to 8-31. I called CHRB and my senator (state). Both offices were surpeised not 1 word is now same as original!

[Jeff P]

Quick update...

No activity on the bill by the Senate again today.

-jp

.

[rrbauer]

Well, the party line is that this is forward looking and will save racing in California. The only appropriate response from horseplayers is a total boycott of betting on the California product. Anything short of that will not be effective. It's time for all horseplayers to move or get off the pot.

AB 2414 MOVES FORWARD IN CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE

SACRAMENTO , CA – An important piece of legislation designed to help stabilize the California horse racing industry by providing incentives for the Breeders’ Cup to come to California , increasing purses, and expanding wagering opportunities continues to move through the California Senate.

The bill, AB 2414. enjoys widespread support from labor, Hollywood Park , Del Mar, the Oak Tree Racing Association, the Jockeys’ Guild, the Thoroughbred Owners of California (TOC), and the California Authority of Racing Fairs (CARF). The California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) also supports the passage of AB 2414 because it conforms to the principles set forth in the Horse Racing Law requiring the CHRB to assure protection of the public, encourage agriculture and the breeding of horses in the state, support the network of California fairs, provide for maximum expansion of horse racing opportunities in the public interest, and provide uniformity of regulation for each type of horse racing.

AB 2414, a bill authored by Assembly Speaker John A. Pérez, contains three major components:

· Provides an incentive for the Breeders’ Cup Limited to run its world championship races at California racetracks by mandating that a portion of the takeout at the host track be designated for promotion of the Breeders’ Cup. The bill cites a study indicating that the last two Breeders’ Cups held at Santa Anita Racetrack generated an additional $60 million economic impact on the State of California and Los Angeles region each of those years.

· Increases purses in order to encourage horse ownership, boost field sizes, and foster increased wagering on California horse races in order to compete with other states. Due to the high cost of running horses, owners and trainers seek out races offering the highest purses. Some states enhance purses with revenue from slots and other forms of gaming. It is hoped that by enhancing purses in California through AB 2414, the larger purses will encourage horse ownership, and more horsemen will opt to run in California . Larger fields invariably result in increased handle and more revenue, giving increased stability to the horse racing industry. AB 2414 points out “the importance of the horse racing industry to this state, including the 50,000 jobs associated with the industry…” The additional purse money will be generated by increasing the amount withheld from the wagered dollar. Even with this takeout increase of 2 to 3 percent on exotic wagers, such as exactas, trifectas, and the Pick Six, California ’s takeout rates will remain lower than those in some other states with comparable, high-quality racing. Under AB 2414, the takeout rate in California on exotic wagers placed on thoroughbred races will range from 22.18 percent to 23.78 percent, depending on the wager. This compares with a takeout rate of 25 percent or higher on many exotic wagers in New York , New Jersey , and Illinois .

· Provides the legal authority for California to offer a wagering variation called Exchange Betting, subject to approval by California horsemen and racetracks. Exchange Wagering is very popular in Great Britain where promoters claim it has attracted a younger audience for wagering on horse races. It is hoped that Exchange Wagering will attract a new clientele to California horse racing and lead to increased wagering that will benefit all segments of the industry. Exchange Wagering is also being considered by the New Jersey State Legislature. AB 2414 along with rules to be developed by the CHRB will provide ongoing checks and balances. Exchange Wagering can only be implemented following financial negotiations between horsemen and Advance Deposit Wagering (ADW) companies and is subject to approval by all parties, including horsemen and the CHRB.

Exchange Wagering has been discussed at every meeting of the CHRB Legislative Committee dating back to March 4, 2010, and Exchange Wagering was specifically mentioned in the CHRB news release dated April 16, 2010, as being a significant proposal for legislation. The bill defines Exchange Wagering as “a form of pari-mutuel wagering” relating to “a given horse race or a given set of horse races” that is “submitted to an exchange wagering licensee.” The CHRB has verified that AB 2414 conforms to state and federal laws.

[DJofSD]

Thanks for posting the update, Rich.

This just confirms once again, as consumers in the state of California, we have no representation and no voice. We're expected to bend over and be thankful we at least got kissed.

[kenwoodall2]

Well, the party line is that this is forward looking and will save racing in California. The only appropriate response from horseplayers is a total boycott of betting on the California product. Anything short of that will not be effective. It's time for all horseplayers to move or get off the pot.

AB 2414 MOVES FORWARD IN CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE

SACRAMENTO , CA – An important piece of legislation designed to help stabilize the California horse racing industry by providing incentives for the Breeders’ Cup to come to California , increasing purses, and expanding wagering opportunities continues to move through the California Senate.

The bill, AB 2414. enjoys widespread support from labor, Hollywood Park , Del Mar, the Oak Tree Racing Association, the Jockeys’ Guild, the Thoroughbred Owners of California (TOC), and the California Authority of Racing Fairs (CARF). The California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) also supports the passage of AB 2414 because it conforms to the principles set forth in the Horse Racing Law requiring the CHRB to assure protection of the public, encourage agriculture and the breeding of horses in the state, support the network of California fairs, provide for maximum expansion of horse racing opportunities in the public interest, and provide uniformity of regulation for each type of horse racing.

AB 2414, a bill authored by Assembly Speaker John A. Pérez, contains three major components:

· Provides an incentive for the Breeders’ Cup Limited to run its world championship races at California racetracks by mandating that a portion of the takeout at the host track be designated for promotion of the Breeders’ Cup. The bill cites a study indicating that the last two Breeders’ Cups held at Santa Anita Racetrack generated an additional $60 million economic impact on the State of California and Los Angeles region each of those years.

· Increases purses in order to encourage horse ownership, boost field sizes, and foster increased wagering on California horse races in order to compete with other states. Due to the high cost of running horses, owners and trainers seek out races offering the highest purses. Some states enhance purses with revenue from slots and other forms of gaming. It is hoped that by enhancing purses in California through AB 2414, the larger purses will encourage horse ownership, and more horsemen will opt to run in California . Larger fields invariably result in increased handle and more revenue, giving increased stability to the horse racing industry. AB 2414 points out “the importance of the horse racing industry to this state, including the 50,000 jobs associated with the industry…” The additional purse money will be generated by increasing the amount withheld from the wagered dollar. Even with this takeout increase of 2 to 3 percent on exotic wagers, such as exactas, trifectas, and the Pick Six, California ’s takeout rates will remain lower than those in some other states with comparable, high-quality racing. Under AB 2414, the takeout rate in California on exotic wagers placed on thoroughbred races will range from 22.18 percent to 23.78 percent, depending on the wager. This compares with a takeout rate of 25 percent or higher on many exotic wagers in New York , New Jersey , and Illinois .

· Provides the legal authority for California to offer a wagering variation called Exchange Betting, subject to approval by California horsemen and racetracks. Exchange Wagering is very popular in Great Britain where promoters claim it has attracted a younger audience for wagering on horse races. It is hoped that Exchange Wagering will attract a new clientele to California horse racing and lead to increased wagering that will benefit all segments of the industry. Exchange Wagering is also being considered by the New Jersey State Legislature. AB 2414 along with rules to be developed by the CHRB will provide ongoing checks and balances. Exchange Wagering can only be implemented following financial negotiations between horsemen and Advance Deposit Wagering (ADW) companies and is subject to approval by all parties, including horsemen and the CHRB.

Exchange Wagering has been discussed at every meeting of the CHRB Legislative Committee dating back to March 4, 2010, and Exchange Wagering was specifically mentioned in the CHRB news release dated April 16, 2010, as being a significant proposal for legislation. The bill defines Exchange Wagering as “a form of pari-mutuel wagering” relating to “a given horse race or a given set of horse races” that is “submitted to an exchange wagering licensee.” The CHRB has verified that AB 2414 conforms to state and federal laws.
_____
"http://www.aroundthecapitol.com/Bills/AB_2414" Shows no new action. Jost waiting in the Ca Senate.

[Charlie D]

Exchange Wagering was specifically mentioned in the CHRB news release dated April 16, 2010

http://www.chrb.ca.gov/press_releases/2010_04_16_press_release.pdf
Chairman Brackpool and Commissioner Choper reported on the previous day’s meeting of the Legislative Committee, Chairman Brackpool reiterated that the purpose of these continuing meetings with the industry and the public is to agree on "one piece of major legislation that could promote the industry." He said he had conversations as recently as that morning with the offices of the Governor and the Speaker of the Assembly, who are supportive of horse racing and "are expecting a piece of legislation to come out of this group." He suggested pursuing legislation that would have a reasonable chance of approval by the full Legislature and he cautioned against anything that would encounter fierce opposition, such as slots at racetracks. Commissioner Choper said the goal is to achieve "a substantial increase in the handle," and that some proposals have "a greater chance of making it through the Legislature than others." He said one of the more significant proposals is for the introduction of exchange betting in California. "We’re going to get some new data on that," said Commissioner Choper, including demographics on exchange bettors in Great Britain, to provide assurances that exchange betting typically involves "a different class of people (and) would not cannibalize existing betting all that much."

[Jeff P]

George Wiley is a staff consultant who works for The Speaker of The California Assembly John A. Perez

I received the following email this morning:

Subject: change of plans...
From : "Wiley, George"
To : "'jeff@jcapper.com'"
Cc :
Bcc :
Organization :
Received : 08-30-2010 11:04 AM

Hi Jeff...because the Senate refused to grant us a hearing on the Speaker's AB 2414, a decision was made over the weekend to instead utilize a Senate bill (SB 1072) that is in the Assembly to incorporate the current contents on AB 2414. That bill will be heard today in the Assembly GO and Appropriations Committee. Additionally, the exchange wagering authorization is going to be delayed until May 2012. That, and some other minor changes appears to have prompted Magna going neutral on the bill (still trying to confirm this). Please give me a call if you have any other questions...George Wiley

If they enact a takeout increase without a mitigating offset such as exchange wagering, I say the California product does not deserve one single penny of player business.


-jp

.

[DJofSD]

Jeff,

Are you stating that as a personal opinion or as an offical HANA position?

[andymays]

Jeff,

Are you stating that as a personal opinion or as an offical HANA position?
Pool Riot? :D

[Jeff P]

DJ, right now it's my personal opinion only. However, I did not make that statement lightly - I will not retract it - and will seek the backing of the other HANA Board Members on this.

This past year I have been involved in the process of attending meetings and providing input to the CHRB related to the Los Al takeout increase. Seeing the CHRB lobby for a thoroughbred takeout increase while ignoring the facts (Los Al's brick and mortar handle fell 27% during the six month period immediately following their takeout increase) is (in my opinion) not only deplorable but contrary to the mission statement of the CHRB which calls for them to promote horse racing and regulate parimutuel wagering for the protection of the wagering public.

The actions of the TOC, CHRB, and Tracks in this matter provide clear insight into exactly how they see the importance of the customer.


-jp

.

[DJofSD]

Jeff,

Thanks for the reply and the claification along with the additional thoughts.

My opinion: the CHRB is just a tool of the TOC and the other vested interests. They certainly do not appear to me to be doing anything in my interest as both a tax payer and as a bettor. As far as I am concerned, the take out from the pools that I will bet into is a tax, and, I have no representation when it comes to that tax.

[Indulto]

,,, If they enact a takeout increase without a mitigating offset such as exchange wagering, I say the California product does not deserve one single penny of player business. ...jp,
How is this takeout increase expected to affect rebated players? Would you be of the same mind if the bill also removed the ADW cap and permitted access by all ADWs?

Why have you so far only taken a stand against further increases to direct takeout rather than for lowering them from existing exorbitant levels? Does an optimum pricing point for rebates already exist? ;)

[Jeff P]

Why have you so far only taken a stand against further increases to direct takeout rather than for lowering them from existing exorbitant levels? Does an optimum pricing point for rebates already exist? ;)
Call me naive if you want. Last January I thought that because the CHRB was considering a takeout increase for Los Al they must not be using all of the information available to them such as case history from other forms of gambling, racing industry funded economic studies, etc. as part of their decision making process.

I thought that by getting actively involved and giving them input they would open their eyes and start to realize racing is a customer driven business. I thought that given access to relevant information they would start making decisions based on the same criteria that successful businesses with a profit motive do... such as identifying customer needs and wants and then making an effort to satisfy those needs and wants.

Looking back I couldn't have been more wrong. Not only were they aware of racing's paid for economic studies and case history from other forms of gambling - but they were purposely choosing to ignore it.

jp,
How is this takeout increase expected to affect rebated players? Would you be of the same mind if the bill also removed the ADW cap and permitted access by all ADWs?
The problem is that racing has S O O O - - M A N Y things wrong. Where do you start?

In my opinion the ADW cap is one of the worst things the TOC has ever had enacted. Instead of the intended effect: supplementing purses - The adw cap has driven a significant amount of money offshore where it does nothing to supplement purses.

If you walk into a store to buy a loaf of bread and see that the bread is stale and that it is overpriced you walk out and buy it somewhere else.

If you contact the owner of the store and let him know in a reasonable and intelligent manner the reasons you and others are not buying his bread - The next time you walk into the store you should have at least some expectation things will have improved. If not and you recontact the owner, and he tells you what you can do with your ideas about fresh loaves of bread at competitive prices...

At some point you HAVE to consider the possibility the owner of that store no longer deserve your business.

That's as accurate a description of the problem in California as I can present using an anology.

And it's exactly where horseplayers find themselves right now.

Indy, if the bill contained a measure to do away with the adw cap as well as a measure to increase the takeout it would still be a bad piece of legislation and HANA would still be against it.

It's crystal clear to me now that a different approach is needed.


-jp

.

[InsideThePylons-MW]

Call me naive if you want.

Naive ;)

Looking back I couldn't have been more wrong.


It's crystal clear to me now that a different approach is needed.


Finally! :jump:

[andymays]

No California exchange betting till 2012, bill says

http://www.drf.com/news/no-california-exchange-betting-till-2012-bill-says

[DeanT]

No California exchange betting till 2012, bill says

http://www.drf.com/news/no-california-exchange-betting-till-2012-bill-says

Killing the low takeout part of the bill and saying yes to the high takeout part of the bill?

Shocking.

:rolleyes:

[andymays]

Killing the low takeout part of the bill and saying yes to the high takeout part of the bill?

Shocking.

:rolleyes:

I started a thread about it in general racing. http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=74728

It was always going to go down this way.

[DeanT]

It was always going to go down this way.

You must be kidding :p

[Charlie D]

At some point you HAVE to consider the possibility the owner of that store no longer deserve your business.






:ThmbUp:

[rwwupl]

JeffP wrote:

Looking back I couldn't have been more wrong. Not only were they aware of racing's paid for economic studies and case history from other forms of gambling - but they were purposely choosing to ignore it.

The CHRB has a history of domination by licensed horsemen,they have been in the majority for as long as I can remember. They do what they see as best for the horsemen and the racetracks and customers (gamblers)are the outsiders. I have experienced this attitude for a long time. In other words "it is their game" Their lopsided actions have caught up to them and it is time for them reap what they sow. The financial model was unsustainable before this latest ill advised takeout increase. The CHRB has not honored their mission statement to protect the betting public. They have caused most of their own problems. No other State allows a majority of horsemen on the Board for this very reason. They can not be removed by the Governor,except for certain cause.

It starts at the top, with the CHRB, we need some "Sportsmen" who do not have ties to the industry in the majority on the Board.

Jeff... You did the right thing and you did a fine job of it, but you got what many customer advocates received before you in California.. not much so far.

The trend lines will continue to go down with the latest grab for more purse money by legislative means,instead of growth by customer popularity. Racing will survive, but the racing managers will not and they will be joined by ex-CHRB members.


rwwupl

[Indulto]

... I thought that by getting actively involved and giving them input they would open their eyes and start to realize racing is a customer driven business. I thought that given access to relevant information they would start making decisions based on the same criteria that successful businesses with a profit motive do... such as identifying customer needs and wants and then making an effort to satisfy those needs and wants.

Looking back I couldn't have been more wrong. Not only were they aware of racing's paid for economic studies and case history from other forms of gambling - but they were purposely choosing to ignore it.

... At some point you HAVE to consider the possibility the owner of that store no longer deserve your business.

... And it's exactly where horseplayers find themselves right now.

... It's crystal clear to me now that a different approach is needed. ...jp,
Two years ago, you wrote words well worth remembering regarding the lack of respect with which racing treats its customers. You articulately advocated influencing change through a collective voice with strength in numbers.

IMO we will get neither numbers nor respect until horseplayers of every stripe can come together in mutual respect and common purpose. It will take standing up for fairness and equal opportunity for economic benefit to all horseplayers as well as horsemen to unite us in sufficient numbers to actually accomplish something.

Perhaps it was also worth the wait for this skullduggery in Sacramento to present us all with the motivation necessary to succeed.

[Jeff P]

Link to SB 1072 as amended yesterday:
http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/sen/sb_1051-1100/sb_1072_bill_20100830_amended_asm_v95.pdf


-jp

.

[rwwupl]

From Scott Lay of:

http://www.aroundthecapitol.com/billtrack/billstatus.php

http://www.aroundthecapitol.com/billtrack/billstatus.php




Thank you for using aroundthecapitol.com to track legislative bills during the 2009-10 legislative session. I plan to bring the free bill tracking back for the 2011-12 session, and hope to have some time to improve it. The governor now has until September 30 to act on bills that are on his desk. As he is planning to go on a six-day Asian trade mission beginning September 9, most Capitol insiders believe that most bills won't be acted on until close to September 30. Unlike 2008, he has not threatened to veto bills unless a budget is adopted.

[rwwupl]

Suggestion:

If California players(loyalists) would convert to W-P-S(15.43%) wagering only, and forget the exotics, it would make a statement that could be seen in black and white, without any "Boycott" ,Adds or arguments and the least amount of inconvenience.They do not think we have the will or courage to do that, do we?

Racetrack "Beancounters" understand that logic and would get the message soon enough... if enough of us took a stand to be noticed.

rwwupl


By the way, DRF,Jay Hovdey has a good article on point that you might enjoy..


http://www.drf.com/news/exchange-concept-seems-foreign
excerpt:
Quote:
For the most part, those committee meetings were undercovered by media and therefore not part of the mainstream conversation in California racing circles. The concept of legalizing betting exchanges was broached only a couple of times at the regular monthly meetings of the state racing board held this year, and then never as an agenda item for formal discussion.

And now it is law. Is this a great country or what?

Do not think for a moment the California legislature sat around, sipping espressos, just waiting for the horse racing bill to hit the floor. As is their barely functional lawmaking custom, assembly members and state senators engaged in a flurry of votes on a bottlenecked pile of bills into the wee hours Tuesday night as the clock ticked down on the legislative session.

Along with the passage of the takeout/betting exchange bill, California’s finest passed a bill raising the minimum age for admission to kindergarten to five, by Sept. 1 (I started the Big K at four years, 10 months, which certainly explains a lot). They defeated one bill that would have banned plastic bags in retail stores (some 19 billion are used by Californians each year — got a problem with that?), and another that would have banned the open toting of unloaded firearms. But at least they passed a bill that would increase penalties on paparazzi who break the rules of the road while chasing targets like Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan, or any child accompanying Angelina Jolie.

Horse racing should be so lucky, that paparazzi would care. Instead, as a response to downward purse trends, the takeout on exotic wagers will increase by either 2 or 3 percent, depending upon the type of wager. Horseplayers should be rightly peeved – charging more for a bet when customer cash is tight is as nuts as cutting taxes in wartime – but at least the money goes right to purses, which might keep an owner or two in the game for a little while longer. Still, the dike will need more thumbs.

[DJofSD]

Thanks, Roger.

BTW, at the end of the excerpt from Jay, I would have said something more crude about what the legislatures could do with their thumbs.

[rrbauer]

Suggestion:

If California players(loyalists) would convert to W-P-S(15.43%) wagering only, and forget the exotics, it would make a statement that could be seen in black and white, without any "Boycott" ,Adds or arguments and the least amount of inconvenience.They do not think we have the will or courage to do that, do we?


rwwupl




This kind of argument escapes me. Why would you want to be a California loyalist when all they do is make fun of you, belittle you and snicker while they take your money? Why would you give them ANY money in ANY pool. What kind of COURAGE is that? If this issue is not enought to get HANA to become more activist and more confrontational then HANA should just packup its bags and call it quits. The time to stop being "nice" with owners' groups and racetrack owners was 2 years ago when HANA started.

And, if the people in charge at HANA think that I'm out of line, kindly delete my name from the members list.

[Jeff P]

Richard,

I agree with you 100%.

-jp

.

[andymays]

Richard,

I agree with you 100%.

-jp

.


I haven't bet offshore in quite a while but I will probably do that instead of betting into the pools.

Anybody know anything about www.allhorseracing.com or www.gohorsebetting.com

I think they're the same outfit.


8% Horse Betting Rebate
A rebate of 8% will be paid on all wagers on a daily basis. 8% Horse Rebate - It doesn't matter if you win or lose, here at Go Horse Betting we will credit you a 8% rebate on Exotics every day based on how much you wager. What are you waiting for, play today and also receive your 3% rebate for all Win, Place and show wagers; after all, there is nothing better than a sure thing!

[rwwupl]

This kind of argument escapes me. Why would you want to be a California loyalist when all they do is make fun of you, belittle you and snicker while they take your money? Why would you give them ANY money in ANY pool. What kind of COURAGE is that? If this issue is not enought to get HANA to become more activist and more confrontational then HANA should just packup its bags and call it quits. The time to stop being "nice" with owners' groups and racetrack owners was 2 years ago when HANA started.

And, if the people in charge at HANA think that I'm out of line, kindly delete my name from the members list.

rrbauer,

Note at the top it is a suggestion.

It would make the point that raising the takeout does not increase business, and customers shy away. Complete "Boycotts" do not work. Can you cite anywhere that a horse racing boycott has forced the regulators,racing managers or state legislators to reverse themselves?

I am personally against empty threats,breaking arms and thug tactics, as I am sure you are too.

Telling people to just stop betting is like telling a fat person that he can solve his problem if he would just stop eating,true but impractable.We are all gamblers,enjoy it, and some are Californians, who do not want to hurt the industry or State, just make it better.

We are looking for a proper solution,that does not cost an arm or a leg, to show the racing managers that they are heading in the wrong direction and we need a consensus of opinion if anything is to be effective. Bomb throwing may do more harm to HANA and California racing than good. What do you mean by "Activists and Confrontational"? I do not think that is the Goal. There are enough problems now.

We are grown ups and Horse players and all of us have been beat up many times, and most of us know how to turn the page. When we get beat up we make a new plan...here we are.

This is a time to bring on ideas, and thrash them around to see if they are practical or just rhetoric and we are counting on senior members such as yourself to contribute. If you have something to say ,please be specific and offer what you have in mind.

Lets not disparage the ideas of others, lets just forward a better idea, and see what has traction. A reasonable and doable solution will appear with your and others help. In California, we have until the Santa Anita meet to decide.

Thanks,

rwwupl

[InsideThePylons-MW]

We are grown ups and Horse players and all of us have been beat up many times, and most of us know how to turn the page. When we get beat up we make a new plan...here we are.

Not all of us have your tolerance level of being shiit on and coming back for more.

Jeff seems to have had enough and some of us have been at this years and years longer than he has.

I don't think our way of thinking makes us non-grown ups.

I hope you understand and can accept that.

[Charlie D]

Don't know the reason, but the Betfair Live feed for US racing is gone.


My suspicion is, just like the Take Out rises , this is racing leaders saying bollox to the fans/ customers. Well, i think it's time the fans/customers started saying bollox to you racing leaders we have had enough of this BS.

That's my $2 worth.

[DeanT]

Don't know the reason, but the Betfair Live feed for US racing is gone.


My suspicion is, just like the Take Out rises , this is racing leaders saying bollox to the fans/ customers. Well, i think it's time the fans/customers started saying bollox to you racing leaders we have had enough of this BS.

That's my $2 worth.

The first wave will be takeout hikes and hiking signal fees to squeeze whatever part of the lemon is left.

The second wave will be protectionism - control everything, including the feeds. Another part of that will be more signal restriction - i.e. you bet with us at high take, or you bet nowhere.

JMO on that, but from having watched this industry for a long time, I think it might happen like that. They exhaust every option first, before choosing competing.

[Indulto]

rrbauer,

Note at the top it is a suggestion.

It would make the point that raising the takeout does not increase business, and customers shy away. Complete "Boycotts" do not work. Can you cite anywhere that a horse racing boycott has forced the regulators,racing managers or state legislators to reverse themselves?

I am personally against empty threats,breaking arms and thug tactics, as I am sure you are too.

Telling people to just stop betting is like telling a fat person that he can solve his problem if he would just stop eating,true but impractable.We are all gamblers,enjoy it, and some are Californians, who do not want to hurt the industry or State, just make it better.

We are looking for a proper solution,that does not cost an arm or a leg, to show the racing managers that they are heading in the wrong direction and we need a consensus of opinion if anything is to be effective. Bomb throwing may do more harm to HANA and California racing than good. What do you mean by "Activists and Confrontational"? I do not think that is the Goal. There are enough problems now.

We are grown ups and Horse players and all of us have been beat up many times, and most of us know how to turn the page. When we get beat up we make a new plan...here we are.

This is a time to bring on ideas, and thrash them around to see if they are practical or just rhetoric and we are counting on senior members such as yourself to contribute. If you have something to say ,please be specific and offer what you have in mind.

Lets not disparage the ideas of others, lets just forward a better idea, and see what has traction. A reasonable and doable solution will appear with your and others help. In California, we have until the Santa Anita meet to decide.
...rw,
Let's be clear from the onset that no-one is advocating violence of any sort. To equate passion which is what we desperately need to win this battle with irresponsible behavior is not appropriate.

As far as California racing's survival is concerned, we'll have to come to terms with what is worth surviving to whom. Racing at the highest level of the SPORT will continue even if year round, lower-level racing does not. Santa Anita will survive as a Triple Crown prep venue as long as owners capable of buying or breeding such competitors exist. They don't depend solely on horseplayers to fund their competition. Whatever else survives at this point should be required to do so on its own merits by offering a worthwhile product.

I agree with your underlined statements above, but mutual respect is not possible when some are questioning the maturity levels of others.

[rrbauer]

rrbauer,

Note at the top it is a suggestion.

rwwupl

Fine. It is a BAD suggestion.

[highnote]

There is nothing to stop us from betting amongst ourselves. Just like a private poker game. I'm sure some enterprising programmers can figure out how to write some software for this. Actually, all you need is skype or a chat room.

The racetracks need customers, but customers don't need racetracks.

[rwwupl]

Fine. It is a BAD suggestion.



I have made bad suggestions before,...I can handle it. Anything more? :)

[andymays]

There is nothing to stop us from betting amongst ourselves. Just like a private poker game. I'm sure some enterprising programmers can figure out how to write some software for this. Actually, all you need is skype or a chat room.

The racetracks need customers, but customers don't need racetracks.

Can anyone tell me why betting offshore wouldn't be as good as a boycott or "suspension of play"?

If you have to play then play offshore out of the pools. And get a decent rebate. ;)

[rwwupl]

Can anyone tell me why betting offshore wouldn't be as good as a boycott or "suspension of play"?

If you have to play then play offshore out of the pools. And get a decent rebate. ;)



Andy,

Do you have experience with them? Could you recommend some with links?

All ideas should be explored. Any other opinions?

[andymays]

Andy,

Do you have experience with them? Could you recommend some with links?

All ideas should be explored. Any other opinions?


Post #45.

I played with them a while back and never had a problem. I'm thinking of going back. They used to only pay 300-1 on exotics. Now they pay 5000-1 on P4's. Most of the other limits have been raises since I played with them.

http://www.allhorseracing.com/racebook

[rwwupl]

There is nothing to stop us from betting amongst ourselves. Just like a private poker game. I'm sure some enterprising programmers can figure out how to write some software for this. Actually, all you need is skype or a chat room.

The racetracks need customers, but customers don't need racetracks.

Swetyjohn,

We understand that they need us ,more than we need them.

How can we prove that to them,without throwing out the baby with the bathwater?

Starting a new ADW is one answer, what if we all decided to place our wagers with a designated ADW one week, and another next week and so on, would that demonstrate they should make accomodations for the customers?

[Charli125]

Starting a new ADW is one answer, what if we all decided to place our wagers with a designated ADW one week, and another next week and so on, would that demonstrate they should make accomodations for the customers?

I had to laugh when I read this. I've always thought that starting a non-profit ADW would be the way to go; it just makes sense to me. Rebate everything over the signal fee(and overhead of course) to the players. Handle would go through the roof. Unfortunately, the only tracks you would be able to get would be Tioga and Arapahoe or something like that. You would immediately be boycotted by every track for "stealing" all of their on-track players.

[rwwupl]

I had to laugh when I read this. I've always thought that starting a non-profit ADW would be the way to go; it just makes sense to me. Rebate everything over the signal fee(and overhead of course) to the players. Handle would go through the roof. Unfortunately, the only tracks you would be able to get would be Tioga and Arapahoe or something like that. You would immediately be boycotted by every track for "stealing" all of their on-track players.

I think we have some laws about "restraint of trade"...So if HorseplayersBet. com(Example only) decided to handle our business exclusive,and gave us all a large rebate, and charged a "Membership Fee" he would be boycotted by the horsemen and tracks restricting his signal and access?

Any lawyers out there?

[andymays]

I think we have some laws about "restraint of trade"...So if HorseplayersBet. com decided to handle our business exclusive,and gave us all a large rebate, and charged a "Membership Fee" he would be boycotted by the horsemen and tracks restricting his signal and access?

Any lawyers out there?


What was that old Willie Nelson song?

"Momas don't let your babies grow up to be Horseplayers."

[Indulto]

I had to laugh when I read this. I've always thought that starting a non-profit ADW would be the way to go; it just makes sense to me. Rebate everything over the signal fee(and overhead of course) to the players. Handle would go through the roof. Unfortunately, the only tracks you would be able to get would be Tioga and Arapahoe or something like that. You would immediately be boycotted by every track for "stealing" all of their on-track players.It does to me also, but logic will not overcome the crisis in California, only passion, determination, and the willingness to talk up takeout at every opportunity. If we can't talk to players at racetracks and OTBs, then maybe we have to be avaiable to them at supermarkets. gas stations,fast food places, etc.

There is no easy way to make this happen. Demonstrations are vital. Since Inglewood wants to get rid of Hollywood Park, perhaps it won't be as hard to get permits there, especially if we weren't boycitting therer, but rather informing. Maybe nearby out-of-staters like yourself would participate?

Perhaps a HANA headquarters outside Hollywood Park would make sense during Oak Tree.

[rwwupl]

I think we have some laws about "restraint of trade"...So if HorseplayersBet. com(Example only) decided to handle our business exclusive,and gave us all a large rebate, and charged a "Membership Fee" he would be boycotted by the horsemen and tracks restricting his signal and access?

Any lawyers out there?



Just thinking out loud...

What if...A major ADW supplier for California and the CHRB were approached to allow group memberships (Like HANA) play at a reduced rate, (Rebates or special rate) for California tracks? Good for California,Good for the chosen ADW, and good for the core player. The CHRB can do anything they want, and they want more business.

It would avoid confrontation and be good for P.R between California and HANA

Is this a pipe dream or ?

No one would be denied access...just join HANA!

rwwupl

[Charli125]

Just thinking out loud...

What if...A major ADW supplier for California and the CHRB were approached to allow group memberships (Like HANA) play at a reduced rate, (Rebates or special rate) for California tracks? Good for California,Good for the chosen ADW, and good for the core player. The CHRB can do anything they want, and they want more business.

It would avoid confrontation and be good for P.R between California and HANA

Is this a pipe dream or ?

No one would be denied access...just join HANA!

rwwupl

I'm just thinking out loud as well. I know that there are many hurdles for ADW's to get access to various signals, and I assume these can be pretty selective depending on who you are. If HANA did that type of thing, I doubt it would get approved because the CHRB would say that it gave HANA members an unfair advantage over ontrack, and other ADW players.

It would make perfect sense to do that, and handle would explode, but I bet there is a way they could stop it. Like I said, I don't know this as fact, but that's my guess. I'd be interested to hear what HPB has to say.

[andymays]

We have to either not bet or bet offshore when the word comes down.

If it's effective then we might be able to get them to put in one super low takeout wager like the Horseplayers Early pick 4 with a 10% take. Once that's in it will prove our point over the course of a year. Handle on that bet will skyrocket over previous years and they will have to admit they were wrong.

That might be something that could be accomplished with a 3 day suspension of play. Not only will we see how effective we can be they might be willing to negotiate a truce. Everyone should be able to stay away for 3 days.

[DeanT]

they will have to admit they were wrong.

But they don't care Andy. They could pass a law that the sky is blue on a day that it is raining.

[andymays]

But they don't care Andy. They could pass a law that the sky is blue on a day that it is raining.

If you make a statement for three days and handle drops anywhere from 15% to 30% they will have to play ball or we do it again. Three days is easy. We will also get plenty of headlines making it much easier the next time we might need to do it. Once people see that it can be done more people will participate.

[DeanT]

I'm not talking about that Andy; I am speaking about the "10% players pick 4" or whatever it is. They could offer me a 0% pick 4 and I would not spend a dime on it.

[andymays]

I'm not talking about that Andy; I am speaking about the "10% players pick 4" or whatever it is. They could offer me a 0% pick 4 and I would not spend a dime on it.

I don't know why you don't get this.

It's a vehicle to prove that lowering takeout works. It's similar to Monmouth but because of short fields in Calfornia it has to be 10%. It's not on track only it's national.

It helps the tracks as well because more people are likely to get involved in the rest of the card. It also gets more people on track to play the first race instead of showing up for the third race like most do at Del Mar.

They're not going to lower takeout across the board are they?

This is something they might go for.

[DeanT]

I don't know why you don't get this.


I get it just fine.

Takeout goes up by 15% for 80% of the pools. That means that 8 out of ten dollars bet at the track get taxed at a higher rate.

So now they put a pick 4 for about 10-15% of the pools down to 10% takeout.

The weighted average takeout is still higher.

California racing is like dating a heroin addict. Sometimes you just have to cut her loose.

[andymays]

I get it just fine.

Takeout goes up by 15% for 80% of the pools. That means that 8 out of ten dollars bet at the track get taxed at a higher rate.

So now they put a pick 4 for about 10-15% of the pools down to 10% takeout.

The weighted average takeout is still higher.

California racing is like dating a heroin addict. Sometimes you just have to cut her loose.


Are you trying to do something that can be accomplished or just talk for the next 10 years?

Why aren't you going after New York?

[DeanT]

Are you trying to do something that can be accomplished

By rejecting things where they somehow throw us a bone and we come crawling back to them, I am accomplishing something.

[andymays]

By rejecting things where they somehow throw us a bone and we come crawling back to them, I am accomplishing something.

You're in a leadership position. What's your plan? What are you going to tell members to do?

If not betting California races was so obvious then why hasn't handle plummeted if things are so bad?

[DeanT]

You're in a leadership position. What's your plan? What are you going to tell members to do?

If not betting California races was so obvious then why hasn't handle plummeted if things are so bad?

I am a horseplayer. If there is one thing I have learned since I started playing the races in grade 7 : NEVER tell horseplayers what to do.

Handle has plummeted in CA. That is why they are raising takeout. Bettors have long left the golden state for the greener pastures of 4% rake poker, Vegas, craps, sports betting and other value games.

[andymays]

I am a horseplayer. If there is one thing I have learned since I started playing the races in grade 7 : NEVER tell horseplayers what to do.

Handle has plummeted in CA. That is why they are raising takeout. Bettors have long left the golden state for the greener pastures of 4% rake poker, Vegas, craps, sports betting and other value games.

The handle has plummeted everywhere. Why pick on California then? Why aren't you calling for everyone to stop playing at every track that has parimutuel wagering?

HANA is a membership organization. People join to be part of the fight. They're looking for leadership.

[DeanT]

The handle has plummeted everywhere. Why pick on California then? Why aren't you calling for everyone to stop playing at every track that has parimutuel wagering?

Ok, one more time dude. This is California. This is what we've been watching.

Recap:

They call for a takeout hike at Los Al. They tell horseplayers if handle goes down they can change it back.

Jeff spends 300 hours on it on behalf of horseplayers, showing handle went down.

They put together spreadsheets where it kinda went down, but it kinda didnt go down, and it really mighta went up, kinda. If the handle did actually go down, kinda, well "we think that it is because of the Olympics. " After all, I guess there are some studies done that show the people who watch short track speed skating, are big horse bettors. We have just never got to see it.

So, it looks like the takeout increase will be extended to September.

Nope, guess again: it is working "so well" (and I am thinking since the Olympics are over) they dont even do that - they extend it to the end of the year.

Having a rational conversation is impossible in CA, and it always has been.

You are welcome to ask them for a 10% pick 4, or a 10% coupon for hot dogs, or whatever else. It is a free country.

But I have seen the past few years what has happened in CA, and I am done with them.

The HANA members will decide, through dialogue like this and through ideas like yours what they want to do. The organization is not worth 2 cents if it does not solicit feedback and work on that feedback. People have not spent hundreds upon hundreds of hours in 2010 to suddenly make unilateral decisions for horseplayers, and they wont start now.

All I am saying is that for me personally: The heroin addict girlfriend has stolen the last hundred from my dresser.

[andymays]

Ok, one more time dude. This is California. This is what we've been watching.

Recap:

They call for a takeout hike at Los Al. They tell horseplayers if handle goes down they can change it back.

Jeff spends 300 hours on it on behalf of horseplayers, showing handle went down.

They put together spreadsheets where it kinda went down, but it kinda didnt go down, and it really mighta went up, kinda. If the handle did actually go down, kinda, well "we think that it is because of the Olympics. " After all, I guess there are some studies done that show the people who watch short track speed skating, are big horse bettors. We have just never got to see it.

So, it looks like the takeout increase will be extended to September.

Nope, guess again: it is working "so well" (and I am thinking since the Olympics are over) they dont even do that - they extend it to the end of the year.

Having a rational conversation is impossible in CA, and it always has been.

You are welcome to ask them for a 10% pick 4, or a 10% coupon for hot dogs, or whatever else. It is a free country.

But I have seen the past few years what has happened in CA, and I am done with them.

The HANA members will decide, through dialogue like this and through ideas like yours what they want to do. The organization is not worth 2 cents if it does not solicit feedback and work on that feedback. People have not spent hundreds upon hundreds of hours in 2010 to suddenly make unilateral decisions for horseplayers, and they wont start now.
All I am saying is that for me personally: The heroin addict girlfriend has stolen the last hundred from my dresser.

I'm not getting the statement in red. Unless I've been on another planet members and non members are looking for something to get behind. What are you saying you guys are there for if not to provide some direction for members looking to change things?

[DeanT]

Andy, last post.

Takeout went up at Los Al. People were mad about that, they, along with us, told people that Thoroughbred racing was next. They were mobilized and we did pretty well. That action taken was the result of horseplayers upset about takeout. We fired a shot and did some work on it. It obviously failed.

Now takeout has gone up in CA for tbred tracks, as we all knew it would.

It's going to be signed into law now and it will go up prolly Dec 26th.

What do players want to do about it, is the question that is out there. We'll advise and work on what the players want to do, if anything. If they choose to do nothing, we will move on and try and work on issues in states that might want to change things for the better.

[Charlie D]

If you contact the owner of the store and let him know in a reasonable and intelligent manner the reasons you and others are not buying his bread - The next time you walk into the store you should have at least some expectation things will have improved. If not and you recontact the owner, and he tells you what you can do with your ideas about fresh loaves of bread at competitive prices...

At some point you HAVE to consider the possibility the owner of that store no longer deserve your business.





THE store no longer deserves YOUR business ladies and gentlemen. THEY are just taking the pee out of the US bettor.

[andymays]

Andy, last post.

Takeout went up at Los Al. People were mad about that, they, along with us, told people that Thoroughbred racing was next. They were mobilized and we did pretty well. That action taken was the result of horseplayers upset about takeout. We fired a shot and did some work on it. It obviously failed.

Now takeout has gone up in CA for tbred tracks, as we all knew it would.

It's going to be signed into law now and it will go up prolly Dec 26th.

What do players want to do about it, is the question that is out there. We'll advise and work on what the players want to do, if anything. If they choose to do nothing, we will move on and try and work on issues in states that might want to change things for the better.

Not getting this at all.

You might as well open up an online Wellness Center. Good luck with that.

[cj]

Not getting this at all.

You might as well open up an online Wellness Center. Good luck with that.

Who cares? California racing is dead to me.

[Charlie D]

Agree with CJ

Who Cares. It's DEAD.

[InsideThePylons-MW]

I'm thinking that to help the bettor and offset the cost of the bet due to the takeout increase, every time you bet $100 you get a $2 or $3 off coupon on either a $13 margarita or $11 beer.

[pandy]

Good blog on takeout increase at trackmaster.com


The Vicious Cycle of Raising Takeout

http://blog.trackmaster.com/?p=2354

[rwwupl]

You can shout slogans to the wind,but if you would like to participate, the next step is to try to gain a VETO. After that,yes or no, there will be more surprises....

rwwupl






Push for VETO of Ca. horse racing bill

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More surprises, and I think there will be more yet...



http://www.latimes.com/business/la-...0,6421284.story


Group pledges push for veto of California horse racing bill
Opponents of gambling are targeting legislation that would allow bets on horses to lose.

Excerpt:


Quote:
By Hugo Martín, Los Angeles Times

September 3, 2010


Gambling opponents vowed Thursday to lobby Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to veto a bill to revive the state's slumping horse racing industry and allow betting on horses to lose starting in 2012.

The bill, originally proposed by Assembly Speaker John Perez (D-Los Angeles), hopes to lure the nation's top horses by taking a greater share from the bets to increase the purse for winning horse owners. The Legislature took final action on the bill Tuesday.

A spokesman for the governor said he has not taken a position on the bill.




Quote:
Near the end of the legislative session, Perez added language to allow the new betting scheme to begin in 2012 and continue until 2016. The delay would give firms that now accept horse racing bets time to prepare to the new exchange betting system.

A nonprofit group based in Sacramento promised to send mailers to nearly 10,000 churches and individuals in the next few days, urging them to call or write the governor to voice opposition to the bill.Rev. James Butler, executive director of the California Coalition Against Gambling Expansion, complained that the bill was significantly rewritten and passed in the final days of the legislative session, giving critics little opportunity to testify against it. If you want to participate....

The Bill AB2414 or SB1072 ..Horse racing

CONTACT THE GOVERNOR Governor's Office:

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-445-2841
Fax: 916-558-3160 ( new number)


It does not matter if you go to church or not.. A VETO kills the whole bill.

[chickenhead]

I'm not getting the statement in red. Unless I've been on another planet members and non members are looking for something to get behind. What are you saying you guys are there for if not to provide some direction for members looking to change things?

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.

If we want change, we must systematically and consciously move our wagers to those venues that offer us more of the things we want. We must vote with our dollars, they are and always will be the most potent form of clout we have in this industry.

If you choose to wager at tracks that charge outrageous prices for a below average product – don’t be surprised if they don’t give you a lot of respect. You prove to them, with every wager you make – that they don’t have to.

HANA can't make any horseplayer follow the above advice. It's not a weekend thing, it's not something that should be expected to change anything. You need to stop betting at tracks that shit on you not to "show them" or "to fix things" but because you realize you simply can't stand giving them your money anymore. Once you reach that point -- the point you need to be at to make a meaningful withdrawal of play -- no one needs to tell you or attempt to organize you. You are DONE, and you don't care who's coming with you.

[andymays]

HANA can't make any horseplayer follow the above advice. It's not a weekend thing, it's not something that should be expected to change anything. You need to stop betting at tracks that shit on you not to "show them" or "to fix things" but because you realize you simply can't stand giving them your money anymore. Once you reach that point -- the point you need to be at to make a meaningful withdrawal of play -- no one needs to tell you or attempt to organize you. You are DONE, and you don't care who's coming with you.

No kidding. :eek: HANA needs to lead and I believe they will this time.

Which tracks don't shit on "you"? You're giving me advice without offering a direction or solution. If you're saying that you don't think anyone should bet anywhere then say it.

What separates California from the rest in your opinion?

Is HANA a membership organization or not? People join because the want to fight back against an industry that doesn't respect them. They're looking for leaders to organize a proper response. That's what I believe they will do in the coming months.

[rrbauer]

If you make a statement for three days and handle drops anywhere from 15% to 30% they will have to play ball or we do it again. Three days is easy. We will also get plenty of headlines making it much easier the next time we might need to do it. Once people see that it can be done more people will participate.

Three days? In your dreams. If you are going to take actions to elicit change then prepare to be engaged for the next year. This is not an easy road to travel because in most cases it involves giving up something that has become ingrained in a horseplayer's behavior due to habit or compulsion or just something to do. With a few exceptions, the racing product in California is so putrid that it deserves no money. There are plenty of good alternatives available for bettors that include a better product and lower costs.

If you want something that is "easy" then this is not the fight to sign up for. Look at what's happened here: The TOC and racing associations with the blessing of the CHRB have proven that they have the political clout to get whatever piece of our money they want. Were we consulted? Were our emails to elected representatives considered? Of couse not. Hell, they just took it! Yet their actions prove that our money is very important to them. And, because of that, we must recognize that our money is the only bargaining chip that we have. We must make our money the issue. On our terms. And, giving them NONE of it for any of their pools and showing complete disregard for their product is the only way we have a chance to gain a seat at the industry table that is equal in stature to the seats held by the TOC, racing associations and the CHRB.

If we do this maybe California will come to their senses, overhaul their product, reform their attitudes about takeout and stop reverting to their model of protecting the status quo. And, maybe the next time that Jeff Platt goes before the CHRB to make an intelligent presentation on horseplayers' behalf, that he will be received with respect instead of being subjected to ridicule and insult.

[chickenhead]

Which tracks don't shit on "you"? You're giving me advice without offering a direction or solution. If you're saying that you don't think anyone should bet anywhere then say it.

I'm saying I don't really care -- its up to you. HANA isn't going to convince anyone of anything they don't already believe. Do YOU feel Cali is shitting on YOU? Then stop playing there! I don't care where else you play, if anywhere. Either YOU decide to stop playing Cali, or YOU don't. Multiply that by a thousand or so and you have HANA. Who is this person that is waiting for HANA to issue a press release to tell them how to bet? I haven't met them.

I don't have a direction or a solution, neither does HANA. Either keep getting shit on, or don't. It's your call.

What separates California from the rest in your opinion?

They are my home circuit, the primary tracks I follow, and the tracks I go to. CHRB and TOC control both my on track and off track experience. My life as a horseplayer is directly controlled by them -- and they have ruined it. So I care more about what happens in Cali. They are able to shit more directly right onto my back if I let them.

Is HANA a membership organization or not? People join because the want to fight back against an industry that doesn't respect them. They're looking for leaders to organize a proper response. That's what I believe they will do shortly.

By all means, HANA should call for it. My point is if you think that call would change anything, you're dreaming. Because that call will reach the ears of individuals. Individuals who are either already fed up and have already stopped playing Cali, or individuals who maybe care, maybe don't care, but will continue playing either way.

People like to punt their own personal responsibility onto HANA. If you play $100K a year into Cali pools, your own personal choice about how to respond has more bang than any HANA press release. HANA doesn't bet any money directly into the pools.

The strongest argument for HANA calling for a boycott isn't that it will do anything, it's merely so HANA (and their members) could garner credit and go "na-na na-na-na if handle goes down drastically. But it's not really HANA's credit, it's all the individual horseplayers out there. By all means HANA, go for the gold, grab any credit you can for your members. I have my doubts there will be much credit to pass around, however, based on what I've seen.

[andymays]

Three days? In your dreams. If you are going to take actions to elicit change then prepare to be engaged for the next year. This is not an easy road to travel because in most cases it involves giving up something that has become ingrained in a horseplayer's behavior due to habit or compulsion or just something to do. With a few exceptions, the racing product in California is so putrid that it deserves no money. There are plenty of good alternatives available for bettors that include a better product and lower costs.

If you want something that is "easy" then this is not the fight to sign up for . Look at what's happened here: The TOC and racing associations with the blessing of the CHRB have proven that they have the political clout to get whatever piece of our money they want. Were we consulted? Were our emails to elected representatives considered? Of couse not. Hell, they just took it! Yet their actions prove that our money is very important to them. And, because of that, we must recognize that our money is the only bargaining chip that we have. We must make our money the issue. On our terms. And, giving them NONE of it for any of their pools and showing complete disregard for their product is the only way we have a chance to gain a seat at the industry table that is equal in stature to the seats held by the TOC, racing associations and the CHRB.

If we do this maybe California will come to their senses, overhaul their product, reform their attitudes about takeout and stop reverting to their model of protecting the status quo. And, maybe the next time that Jeff Platt goes before the CHRB to make an intelligent presentation on horseplayers' behalf, that he will be received with respect instead of being subjected to ridicule and insult.

All due respect, you don't know what you're talking about. If something is called for it will most likely be for a short period at first.

As far as what is easy and what is not easy I doubt that anyone other than rwwupl has made a stronger effort than myself to change things in California over the last couple of years. I don't expect you to know that but that's a fact.

I'm very aware of what happened to Jeff. I sent this out to Brackpool and several other notables in California on July 23rd in response to what happened. Did you send anything out?

Regarding this thing with Jeff Platt and Barry Meadow of the Horseplayers Association I'd like to know who the hell Brackpool thinks he is?

The CHRB went back on their word regarding the takeout hike at Los Alamitos. They are a dishonest bunch who fixes the outcome of the meetings before they happen. Brackpool ought to apologize for treating Jeff that way.

Brackpool blew it on this one and ought to get the hell out if he's going to treat Horseplayers/the people of California this way. If you can't stand the heat Mr. Brackpool then take a hike and hand the CHRB over to Stronach.

What a group here in California. Disgrace after disgrace. And the hits keep coming.

Thanks for nothing again,

Andy

[andymays]

On another positive note. :rolleyes:


Indicators: Handle Off $100 Million in August | BloodHorse.com

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/58712/indicators-handle-off-100-million-in-august

[andymays]

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/horse/columns/story?columnist=plonk_jeremy&id=5527789

Excerpt:

But don't insult me with another tax hike that makes the game even less attractive.

[thaskalos]

I wonder if the industry even realizes, that the player might eventually get tired of losing money, and might start playing the game less often...or even stop altogether.

[andymays]

I wonder if the industry even realizes, that the player might eventually get tired of losing money, and might start playing the game less often...or even stop altogether.


I know most people don't believe this but I know it to be true in a lot of cases.

When you get some of these guys (Racing Executives) in a room and someone mentions Horseplayers the over/under is about 10 seconds before you hear the words "degenerate" and "losers". For some of them it's a class thing. They basically think they're better than everyone else.

[DeanT]

I wonder if the industry even realizes, that the player might eventually get tired of losing money, and might start playing the game less often...or even stop altogether.

Our industries tagline is "you can beat a race, but you can't beat the races"

That's like a restaurant having a tagline of "our food sucks and it is expensive"

Instead of attacking that one line - fixing your food and prices, or in racings case, lowering takeout to help people win more - they make the takeout higher, so that more people cant win.

And then they wonder why people are not playing anymore.

[andymays]

I'm saying I don't really care -- its up to you. HANA isn't going to convince anyone of anything they don't already believe. Do YOU feel Cali is shitting on YOU? Then stop playing there! I don't care where else you play, if anywhere. Either YOU decide to stop playing Cali, or YOU don't. Multiply that by a thousand or so and you have HANA. Who is this person that is waiting for HANA to issue a press release to tell them how to bet? I haven't met them.

I don't have a direction or a solution, neither does HANA. Either keep getting shit on, or don't. It's your call.



They are my home circuit, the primary tracks I follow, and the tracks I go to. CHRB and TOC control both my on track and off track experience. My life as a horseplayer is directly controlled by them -- and they have ruined it. So I care more about what happens in Cali. They are able to shit more directly right onto my back if I let them.



By all means, HANA should call for it. My point is if you think that call would change anything, you're dreaming. Because that call will reach the ears of individuals. Individuals who are either already fed up and have already stopped playing Cali, or individuals who maybe care, maybe don't care, but will continue playing either way.

People like to punt their own personal responsibility onto HANA. If you play $100K a year into Cali pools, your own personal choice about how to respond has more bang than any HANA press release. HANA doesn't bet any money directly into the pools.

The strongest argument for HANA calling for a boycott isn't that it will do anything, it's merely so HANA (and their members) could garner credit and go "na-na na-na-na if handle goes down drastically. But it's not really HANA's credit, it's all the individual horseplayers out there. By all means HANA, go for the gold, grab any credit you can for your members. I have my doubts there will be much credit to pass around, however, based on what I've seen.

I guess we are on opposite ends of the universe. I think thousands of Players out there are looking to HANA to be more aggressive and "throw a punch". It's about leadership and I think people will be surprised if this is done right and I think it will be. I think membership which is now stangnant will grow by leaps and bounds.

People want to participate in the fight. They need leadership from HANA to get started. If they didn't then things would have changed already.

[Indulto]

I guess we are on opposite ends of the universe. I think thousands of Players out there are looking to HANA to be more aggressive and "throw a punch". It's about leadership and I think people will be surprised if this is done right and I think it will be. I think membership which is now stangnant will grow by leaps and bounds.

People want to participate in the fight. They need leadership from HANA to get started. If they didn't then things would have changed already.AM,
If not HANA, then WHO? If not CALIFORNIA then WHERE? If not NOW then WHEN?

It seems as if some HANA leadership wants to do this, but not others, I doubt any of them wants to sacrifice whatever influence in the industry the organization may have achieved so far.

A leader with positive name recognition for horseplayers is needed to get action started and make it SUCCEED. jp is already well-known in a positive sense, and his reputation has been enhanced by his encounters with the CHRB. Currently he seems the most logical choice. Whether he would be willing to lead independently of HANA is something someone should ask, so I am. ;)

To be successful, people like rw and yourself have to also be prominent. That’s a triumvirate that I could follow with confidence, and I’d bet a lot of other California residents here could as well.

Anybody ready to second my nominations? Only mindreaders know what people want if they don't ask.

[andymays]

AM,
If not HANA, then WHO? If not CALIFORNIA then WHERE? If not NOW then WHEN?

It seems as if some HANA leadership wants to do this, but not others, I doubt any of them wants to sacrifice whatever influence in the industry the organization may have achieved so far.

A leader with positive name recognition for horseplayers is needed to get action started and make it SUCCEED. jp already well-known in a positive sense, and his reputation has been enhanced by his encounters with the CHRB. Currently he seems the most logical choice. Whether he would be willing to lead independently of HANA is something someone should ask, so I am. ;)

To be successful, people like rw and yourself have to also be prominent. That’s a triumvirate that I could follow with confidence, and I’d bet a lot of other California residents here could as well.

Anybody ready to second my nominations? Only mindreaders know what people want if they don't ask.

I'm confident Jeff will lead the way on this one. He will drag the HANA board with him.

[Indulto]

I'm confident Jeff will lead the way on this one. He will drag the HANA board with him.Nobody should be dragged into this. Nagged, maybe.:cool:

[highnote]

I nominate Indulto to lead the boycott! All in favor post "I".

[Indulto]

I nominate Indulto to lead the boycott! All in favor post "I".Your insincerity is showing, as we both know what’s needed is a messiah, not a pariah.

In the interest of partial disclosure, I confess to having nominated sj for co-leader of HANA over two years ago. I assume each of us has his own evaluation of how well that worked out.

[andymays]

I nominate Indulto to lead the boycott! All in favor post "I".

I'm pretty sure Indulto will contribute to the fight.

I'm pretty sure Jeff will lead and do a great job of it.

[highnote]

Your insincerity is showing, as we both know what’s needed is a messiah, not a pariah.



I'm sorry you feel that way. I am being sincere. You seem like a person who cares a lot about the game.

[Indulto]

I'm sorry you feel that way. I am being sincere. You seem like a person who cares a lot about the game.I'm sorry I feel that way too. You can be a very convincing fellow on this board. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

I doubt you have any real interest in this or any other potential collective confrontation other than to needle and distract those who are. And there’s nothing wrong with that. I just hope I can avoid your wasting any more of my time.

[highnote]

I'm sorry I feel that way too. You can be a very convincing fellow on this board. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

I doubt you have any real interest in this or any other potential collective confrontation other than to needle and distract those who are. And there’s nothing wrong with that. I just hope I can avoid your wasting any more of my time.

In an effort to try to help you save your time this is the only reply I'll make to your post.


Now, let's get back on topic...

[rrbauer]

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/horse/columns/story?columnist=plonk_jeremy&id=5527789

Excerpt:

But don't insult me with another tax hike that makes the game even less attractive.

Outstanding article. Required reading for any horseplayer that gives a damn. And, required reading for all horse owners who feel that they are entitled to be supported by the game.

[andymays]

Outstanding article. Required reading for any horseplayer that gives a damn. And, required reading for all horse owners who feel that they are entitled to be supported by the game.

Not all owners and trainers and Racing Executives and Racing Officials think that raising the take is a good idea.

Why alienate them with a long term boycott? Three days during Oak Tree is the way to go. If it's successful it can be done again and again.

[Indulto]

Not all owners and trainers and Racing Executives and Racing Officials think that raising the take is a good idea.

Why alienate them with a long term boycott? Three days during Oak Tree is the way to go. If it's successful it can be done again and again.Are you suggesting three consecutive days? I assume they would not be days with BC preps.

Will it be all pools or only specific ones?

How would sufficient support be determined beforehand?

[Indulto]

Another thing that occurred to me is whether Oak Tree management supports the increase as well as Hollywood Park’s. Oak Tree is known for raising funds for backstretch worker assistance (charities?). We might look kind of callous if we were impact that activity.

[andymays]

Are you suggesting three consecutive days? I assume they would not be days with BC preps.

Will it be all pools or only specific ones?

How would sufficient support be determined beforehand?

Three weekdays.

At some point it will have to be on the "good days" if they don't throw us a bone.

[Robert Goren]

Another thing that occurred to me is whether Oak Tree management supports the increase as well as Hollywood Park’s. Oak Tree is known for raising funds for backstretch worker assistance (charities?). We might look kind of callous if we were impact that activity. So ripping us off for a good cause is ok?

[rrbauer]

Not all owners and trainers and Racing Executives and Racing Officials think that raising the take is a good idea.



You know this because.....? It's a certainty that none of "them" are speaking their minds in public and after the romping win by the takeout bill in the legislature they don't appear to be speaking their minds to the CA legislators either.


Why alienate them with a long term boycott? Three days during Oak Tree is the way to go. If it's successful it can be done again and again.

You beg the question, since "them" is hardly definitive. If you think a 3-day boycott will do the job then go for it. Arrange it. Lead it. Put your money where your mouth is.

[andymays]

You know this because.....? It's a certainty that none of "them" are speaking their minds in public and after the romping win by the takeout bill in the legislature they don't appear to be speaking their minds to the CA legislators either.



You beg the question, since "them" is hardly definitive. If you think a 3-day boycott will do the job then go for it. Arrange it. Lead it. Put your money where your mouth is.

Money?

Are you saying you'll donate only if it's long term?

We go through this stuff at the CHRB. All the guys with a lot of money and high social standing want to pull the strings. This is what got us here.

It's about doing the right thing. It's a lot easier for the people that don't normally play California and don't live here to say "let's do this" and "let's do that". ;)

The California Players deserve extra consideration here.

[Indulto]

So ripping us off for a good cause is ok?If it were OK, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

We need support. Not, just from horseplayers, but from both sides of the track. If, in fact, Oak Tree Board members are on record against the takeout hike AND the Governor has not yet signed the bill THEN it might appear we are pursuing our agenda at the expense of the backstretch worker. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Now I don't know what the position of the OT board members are or when the Governor will sign the bill assuming that is a forgone conclusion. I'm just saying we have to be prepared to deal with all manner of criticism and ploys intended to undermine what we are trying to accomplish.

[chickenhead]

maybe as part of the boycott we could all pool our money that we would have played in California, and bet it into any California Pick 6 carryovers that pop up. Then we could still bet our normal handle at SoCal, but most days we'd technically be boycotting.

Kind of a win-win.

/s

[highnote]

thoughts...

This thread is like rubber necking while driving past a car accident -- for some reason it is hard not to look.

So as long as I'm looking I may as well share my thoughts.

CA racing powers felt they had to put more money into horseman's pockets in order to keep up the racing population (among other reasons). They figured the easiest way is to tax the horseplayer. And they're right that they will get more money -- in the short term. Racetracks are in crisis and need some serious intervention. Rate hikes are only a short term solution. Increasing business takes hard work and some seriously creative solutions. It's much easier just to take more money from current bettors than it is to come up with innovative ways to find new bettors.

In the short term the horsemen and tracks and maybe even the state of CA will put more money in their pockets. In the longer term there will be less money because horseplayers will wash out quicker. So those marginal players will lose their betting wealth at the expense of horseman et al increasing their wealth.

My second thought is that anyone who is talking about boycotting or is trying to organize a boycott is wasting their time because not enough people are going to boycott. I'd would love it if horseplayers prove me wrong! And I'll be the first to admit I was wrong!!

On the other hand, if people enjoy talking about boycotting here on PA, but are not really serious about it, then it is not a waste of time. It's entertainment.

Try this... go to the racetrack and look around at all the people. Now, try to figure out a strategy to get all those people to NOT bet. The probability of getting enough of them to NOT bet so as to pressure CA tracks to lower takeout is so small as to be zero. Again, I hope I'm wrong, but my money is on an effective boycott by the betting masses never happening.

Third, a boycott probably isn't necessary because so many horseplayers will be washing out due to the takeout increase. They probably won't come back. If you really want a boycott then just be patient. It's slowly happening at this very moment.

Fourth, the one strategy that might work is to get some whales to stop betting. If a whale is presented with a good enough sales pitch they might boycott. It might be a hard sell, but it might depend on the whale. This could go either way.

Fifth, my favorite idea (my favorite pipe dream?) is to get a bunch of horseplayers together to start their own racing association, sell stock to raise money and buy or start their own track and then run it any way they see fit. It can be non-profit with the profits going to pay back investors. I believe non-profits are allowed to borrow money? However, even though it is a pipe dream, it sure would be fun if it could happen.

A man like Ron Geary bought Ellis Park. So it can be done. I don't see any reason that a group of determined horseplayers couldn't join forces and purchase a racetrack.

My handicapping says it is more likely that a group of horseplayers could buy their own track than it is that a group of horseplayers could convince a large number of bettors to boycott.

Just my two cents. As usual, probably not worth half that. In fact, if you read this far, I may owe you money! :D

[Indulto]

maybe as part of the boycott we could all pool our money that we would have played in California, and bet it into any California Pick 6 carryovers that pop up. Then we could still bet our normal handle at SoCal, but most days we'd technically be boycotting.

Kind of a win-win.

/sTo me that seems like just giving the track the handle we were working to withhold from them, only now at an even higher takeout rate.:confused:

Pooling the money to attack a P6 carryover outside CA might mske sense if we needed to prove how much was being kept out CA pools, but how could you seriously handle the funds and guarantee their safety as well as a full proportionate, legal payout ro each contributor? Wouldn't we would need a collectvely owned ADW to do something like that?

Until you figure out how to make that work, I'll just keep betting Monmouth P4s and P5s on my own.:cool:

[rwwupl]

thoughts...

This thread is like rubber necking while driving past a car accident -- for some reason it is hard not to look.

So as long as I'm looking I may as well share my thoughts.

CA racing powers felt they had to put more money into horseman's pockets in order to keep up the racing population (among other reasons). They figured the easiest way is to tax the horseplayer. And they're right that they will get more money -- in the short term. Racetracks are in crisis and need some serious intervention. Rate hikes are only a short term solution. Increasing business takes hard work and some seriously creative solutions. It's much easier just to take more money from current bettors than it is to come up with innovative ways to find new bettors.

In the short term the horsemen and tracks and maybe even the state of CA will put more money in their pockets. In the longer term there will be less money because horseplayers will wash out quicker. So those marginal players will lose their betting wealth at the expense of horseman et al increasing their wealth.

My second thought is that anyone who is talking about boycotting or is trying to organize a boycott is wasting their time because not enough people are going to boycott. I'd would love it if horseplayers prove me wrong! And I'll be the first to admit I was wrong!!

On the other hand, if people enjoy talking about boycotting here on PA, but are not really serious about it, then it is not a waste of time. It's entertainment.

Try this... go to the racetrack and look around at all the people. Now, try to figure out a strategy to get all those people to NOT bet. The probability of getting enough of them to NOT bet so as to pressure CA tracks to lower takeout is so small as to be zero. Again, I hope I'm wrong, but my money is on an effective boycott by the betting masses never happening.

Third, a boycott probably isn't necessary because so many horseplayers will be washing out due to the takeout increase. They probably won't come back. If you really want a boycott then just be patient. It's slowly happening at this very moment.
Fourth, the one strategy that might work is to get some whales to stop betting. If a whale is presented with a good enough sales pitch they might boycott. It might be a hard sell, but it might depend on the whale. This could go either way. Fifth, my favorite idea (my favorite pipe dream?) is to get a bunch of horseplayers together to start their own racing association, sell stock to raise money and buy or start their own track and then run it any way they see fit. It can be non-profit with the profits going to pay back investors. I believe non-profits are allowed to borrow money? However, even though it is a pipe dream, it sure would be fun if it could happen.

A man like Ron Geary bought Ellis Park. So it can be done. I don't see any reason that a group of determined horseplayers couldn't join forces and purchase a racetrack.

My handicapping says it is more likely that a group of horseplayers could buy their own track than it is that a group of horseplayers could convince a large number of bettors to boycott.

Just my two cents. As usual, probably not worth half that. In fact, if you read this far, I may owe you money! :D



Swetyejohn,

Very sharp Post.

Consider that many of the "Whales" have already left California for rebates off shore so they could not make much impact.

There are many things going on in California, there may be more surprises, so do not put the cart before the horse.

I expect I may be asked more on this issue Saturday on Sirius XM by Bill Finley and Dave Johnson.

[chickenhead]

To me that seems like just giving the track the handle we were working to withhold from them, only now at an even higher takeout rate.:confused:


there may have been some sarcasm in my post.

Most horseplayers talking boycott remind me of the Seinfeld characters in the episode "The Contest (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Contest) ".

One must be Master of thy own Domain.

[highnote]

Swetyejohn,

Very sharp Post.

I expect I may be asked more on this issue Saturday on Sirius XM by Bill Finley and Dave Johnson.

Thank you and good luck with the interview!

[Indulto]

there may have been some sarcasm in my post.

Most horseplayers talking boycott remind me of the Seinfeld characters in the episode "The Contest (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Contest) ".

One must be Master of thy own Domain.I suspected as much, but as I respect most of what you post, I decided to be optimistic.

I suppose being considered a Seinfeld character is a step up for me these days.