Has the time come?

[Jeff P]

If you walk into a store to buy a loaf of bread, and notice that the bread is stale and overpriced, you put it down and you walk out of the store.

Thousands of racing customers have been doing just that for the better part of a decade now. If you take all sources handle as it existed in 2003 and adjust it for inflation, and you compare it to all sources handle today in 2010, you will discover that all sources handle today in 2010 is approximately one half of what it was just seven years ago in 2003.

Consider the real life case where instead of walking out of the store, a group of conscientious racing customers took the time to contact the owners of the store and explain to them in a reasonable and intelligent manner why thousands of racing customers have been buying their bread somewhere else.

Instead of listening to the customer group’s suggestions, the owners of the store decided to implement a takeout increase at one of their stores: Los Alamitos.

Oddly enough, this same group of racing customers presented data to the CHRB clearly showing that year over year on track handle at Los Alamitos was down more than 27 percent during the six month period immediately following that takeout increase.

Instead of rescinding the takeout increase (as had been promised at the time it was implemented if it caused handle to drop) the CHRB voted unanimously to keep it in force – effectively telling racing customers everywhere what they could do with their ideas about fresh bread at competitive prices.

Shortly afterwards, the owners of the store lobbied the California Legislature to amend an innocuous bill originally written to promote the Breeder’s Cup. They were able to convince John A. Perez (D) to tack on provisions mandating a takeout increase of up to 15% over previous levels for exotic wagers at California's thoroughbred tracks. Takeout on exactas and daily doubles was raised to 22.68%. Takeout on all other exotic wagers was raised to 23.68%.

The above events actually took place during 2010.

Who are the owners of the store?

Hollywood Park, Del Mar Thoroughbred Club, Santa Anita, Golden Gate Fields, Los Alamitos, the Thoroughbred Owners of California (TOC), and the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB).

Who is the customer group?

HANA.

The state law?

At the September, 2010 CHRB meeting, when it was announced that Senate Bill 1072 had been signed into law by the Governor: The owners of the store stood up and cheered.

At some point, as a consumer, you have to consider the possibility that the owners of the store no longer deserve your business.

That’s exactly where horseplayers are at right now given the recent actions of the store owners in California.

You do not raise prices in the face of economic downturn. You lower them.

The store owners in other states are watching. It’s time for players everywhere to send a clear message back to the store owners. It’s time for players to start speaking with their wallets.

To me, the fact that other states still have takeout even higher than California’s new 23.68 percent takeout on trifectas is irrelevant. California is where the store owners decided to raise takeout over the objections of the players. California is where the CHRB ignored the facts related to the Los Al takeout increase. California is where the track owners, the TOC, and the head of the CHRB lobbied the Legislature for a takeout increase. California is where the Legislature ignored the voice of the player and passed that takeout increase. California is where the Governor ignored the voice of the player and signed Senate Bill 1072 into law. California is where the owners of the store made comments like the following after they enacted the takeout increase:

CHRB Commissioner David Israel:“People often say we are competing with the casinos. I think that’s shortsighted and wrong. We’re not competing with casinos. We’re in the entertainment business. We’re competing with the Dodgers and the Giants and the Angels and the Lakers and we’re putting on a show..."

CHRB Commissioner Keith Brackpool:"We offer in California the premier racing product on a year-round basis,” he said, “but we were offering our first-class product at a discount price. We’re changing the pricing model. We left win-place-show where it is. But we came up with a solution that will produce $30 million more a year. That’s a 25-to-30% increase in overnight purses."

I hate to use the word boycott, but in my opinion the owners of the store in California clearly no longer deserve even one penny of my business.

I have to put the question out there to other players:

Has the time come for an organized national players’ boycott of California racing?

Jeff Platt
President, HANA

[Turkoman]

Perfectly said, Jeff. You're right on target. Unless the takeout goes back down, they won't get anything from me. That's for sure. We must pull together and show them that what they did was really dumb.

Turkoman

[thaskalos]

When Los Alamitos raised their takeout, it was a case of an obscure quarter horse track with small betting pools...trying to survive in turbulent times. This takeout hike is another matter altogether.

These racetracks have the biggest wagering pools in the country, and are not raising taxes for self-preservation...but because they think that their "superior" product is not priced high enough. They think that they can compete with the LA Lakers for sheer entertaiment value...and they want to price their product accordingly.

One thing is certain. Other prominent racetracks are watching this move...and if the public backlash is not strong enough in the wagering pools - where it counts - you can expect to see this tactic carried out in racetracks across the land.

Whether California is still competitive with other tracks in takeout, even after this takeout hike, is a moot point IMO.

It is the PRINCIPLE that we should be revolting against...

[JustRalph]

I will use the B word























Bout Damn Time!!!

[Mike_412]

Great post Jeff. I couldn't agree more.

[Stillriledup]

Fantastic stuff Jeff.

While i'd be in favor of a boycott, i think that boycotting might send the wrong message. The message that a boycott sends is this. A boycott says, "we love you and you deeply hurt our feelings, so we want to stay away until you say you're sorry and try and make things whole again. We will forgive you if you come to your senses"

I think something stronger than a boycott is to just ignore California racing. A boycott seems to indicate that you would go back if the takeouts were switched back to old levels. A boycott is sort of like a lover who cheats on you but then if they say they're sorry, you'll take them back. The bettors of the So Cal product have to be the lover that says, "even though i completely believe you would never cheat on me again, i still can't take you back because i won't compromise my morals"


I think the key is to just 'break up' with California racing and don't ever look back. A boycott shows that you got your feelings hurt and then you're going to 'show them'. I think instead of a boycott, just ignore them and find a new lover.

Its bad enough they're raising the levels of takeout to obscene heights, but they had two higher ups (Brackpool and Israel) come out and make comments that are nothing short of a smack in the face to all horseplayers around the country. Some of the things that Brackpool and Israel have said are so insulting to the bettors around the country, that i can't imagine anyone would even consider betting one dollar on California racing after this. The arrogance shown by Keith Brackpool and David Israel has to rank them up with some of the most arrogant people in the USA.

Those two are completely convinced that YOU, the California horse player, is a complete moron and they have actually told you so to your face. Their comments indicate that they think all the California bettors are complete idiots and will play no matter what, and i think that's why they're cheering and celebrating over this 'free money' that they just found. California horseplayers are clowns who are going to bet anyway is what they're thinking.

You know when people say that something is 'better than sex'? Well, i think if the California handle gets destroyed and Brackpool and Israel have to come back and say, "We were wrong" that would be one of those times. To see these two chopped down a peg is worth EVERYTHING. Horseplayers can make it happen by NOT betting a single dollar on this California product.

Thoroughbred horse trainers are a dime a dozen and yet Israel thinks they are 'rock stars' who should command a salary like one. I love Bob Baffert (i'm going to just use him as an example to illustrate my point), but if he decided to retire tomorrow, it wouldnt make the betting handle go down ONE RED CENT. We would say goodbye to Bob and wish him well in his new life, but if he left, the handle would stay exactly the same. On the other hand, If one big bettor decided he had enough with So Cal racing, his handle would be missed, it would affect the bottom line.That particular big player 'retiring' would be more crushing to handle than Bob Baffert retiring, yet Israel wants to give Baffert a 'raise' at the expense of the more important participant in the equasion.

I recently had an 'out of the mouths of babes' moment. A person who had never seen a horse race before was in the same room with me when i flipped on a channel showing horse racing. This young person i was with said, "i don't get this horse racing, its boring, its just anonymous horses running in a circle, why is this exciting to you?" My gut instinct was to say "wait a minute, horse racing is a great and very exciting sport" but before i answered, i thought about it and instead said, "you're totally right, its just random horses running around in a circle, if you've seen one race, you've seen them all, there's nothing exciting about it as a sport for people who are watching on a daily basis. The only exciting thing can happen if you bet on a horse and it wins. THAT is the only fun part of racing"

I know most of you will disagree and tell me about Secretariat or Zenyatta, but the bottom line is that unless you actually own these horses, its really all about how much money can you make betting on the races. This is where race track execs are a little off base, they think that 'the show' they are putting on is so good and exciting, that the customers are willing to pay top dollar to view it.

Horse racing is like ice cream in a way. Its really good on Monday and maybe on Tuesday, but when Wednesday comes up, you don't really feel like eating ice cream for the 3rd day in a row. Ice cream is fantastic, but there's only so much of it you can eat. Same with racing, there's only so far it can go as a 'spectator sport' before the main core of customers need to start profiting on the races in order to keep coming back.

[Indulto]

... You do not raise prices in the face of economic downturn. You lower them.

The store owners in other states are watching. It’s time for players everywhere to send a clear message back to the store owners. It’s time for players to start speaking with their wallets.

To me, the fact that other states still have takeout even higher than California’s new 23.68 percent takeout on trifectas is irrelevant. California is where the store owners decided to raise takeout over the objections of the players. California is where the CHRB ignored the facts related to the Los Al takeout increase. California is where the track owners, the TOC, and the head of the CHRB lobbied the Legislature for a takeout increase. California is where the Legislature ignored the voice of the player and passed that takeout increase. California is where the Governor ignored the voice of the player and signed Senate Bill 1072 into law. California is where the owners of the store made comments like the following after they enacted the takeout increase:

CHRB Commissioner David Israel:

CHRB Commissioner Keith Brackpool:

I hate to use the word boycott, but in my opinion the owners of the store in California clearly no longer deserve even one penny of my business.

I have to put the question out there to other players:

Has the time come for an organized national players’ boycott of California racing?

Jeff Platt
President, HANAJP,
The fact that you are asking for player input on this leads me to conclude that HANA has not yet decided as a group to lead a boycott. Can you confirm that?

I hope your first statement bolded above means that if we are going to mobilize, it should not be merely to negate the increase, but to make California the most bettor friendly state offering the lowest takeout in each pool of any state and to put California residents on-track and off on a par with out of state bettors.

I sincerely hope your concern and resolve is matched by all bettors who read this thread.

[andymays]

[I]The store owners in other states are watching. It’s time for players everywhere to send a clear message back to the store owners. It’s time for players to start speaking with their wallets.

To me, the fact that other states still have takeout even higher than California’s new 23.68 percent takeout on trifectas is irrelevant . California is where the store owners decided to raise takeout over the objections of the players. California is where the CHRB ignored the facts related to the Los Al takeout increase. California is where the track owners, the TOC, and the head of the CHRB lobbied the Legislature for a takeout increase. California is where the Legislature ignored the voice of the player and passed that takeout increase. California is where the Governor ignored the voice of the player and signed Senate Bill 1072 into law. California is where the owners of the store made comments like the following after they enacted the takeout increase:

CHRB Commissioner David Israel:

CHRB Commissioner Keith Brackpool:

I hate to use the word boycott, but in my opinion the owners of the store in California clearly no longer deserve even one penny of my business.

I have to put the question out there to other players:

Has the time come for an organized national players’ boycott of California racing?

Jeff Platt
President, HANA


Jeff,

I am for a "suspension of play" in some form but I have some questions and some points to make about it because I do not take it lightly and nobody else should take it lightly.

First of all you have got to know you're going to be successfull. If you're not sure ( and you know what I mean by "sure") then it might not be a good idea. You have to be 99% sure that handle will drop. A 10% drop is not enough. I would consider that a push. A 15% drop or more is significant and 30% drop would be the top that I could imagine.

Just because players say they want to stop betting in California doesn't mean they will. Getting a committment for someone who almost never plays California Racing is worthless. You have to know that people who really play California racing on a daily basis are going to stop. I also think that if someone wants to only bet WPS and that's the best they can do then they shouldn't be bashed for doing something. We want the exotic pools to drop significantly. Betting offshore is the other option.

Are you 99% sure we can get a drop of 15% or more?

What is the end game?

Is the goal to get them to rescind the raise in takeout or is the goal to get Santa Anita to not implement the raise in takeout? I think there is a difference.

If Santa Anita committed to offering a low takeout exotic wager in their menu would that be a sign of good will on their part?

Remember this isn't really a Santa Anita driven thing. The TOC and the CHRB are the primary villains.

The comments by Israel and Brackpool are asinine. They could give a flying crap about Horse Players. Maybe part of the deal is that they resign.

I am for some type of action prior to Santa Anita opening. Maybe in the next couple of weeks.

[Robert Fischer]

EDUCATE the players 1-by-1. Each Player must be EDUCATED, and empowered with the skills and the resources. The players ALL need an ADW with free or minimum fees. They need information to play (low or no-cost racing forms/programs, watch lists, etc.).

Invest time and resources into RESEARCH. = RESEARCH can not be fudged! RESEARCH is the cornerstone for credibility. A collection of facts and trends by itself is not necessarily worthy of being called research. In order to actually convince the big investors that lowering takeout is the best business practice, the RESEARCH must be professional grade. It can never be biased(It may actually help in some cases if it isn't always along "party lines"). The RESEARCH must be legit science. RESEARCH can not be stressed enough and is the difference between a special interest group and a best-practice business model that practically funds itself in consulting and business phases.

So Called Whales need to put handed a crow-bar and they need to use their LEVERAGE. Large bettors are frankly worth more than small bettors. a Strategic approach must be made to "represent" a large portion or section of the poolmoney markets. Like RESEARCH, this is a business conflict, and has to be done in a professional manner. If done right LEVERAGE, like RESEARCH can pursuade the business men who work for the racetracks to adjust best practice. Again the key is actually proving that best-practice involves some of the things that Horseplayers want. If that isn't clearly true there is an attainable best practice with better returns for the racetrack, that involves some changes(which happen to benefit horseplayers), then very little change will be made.
If it turns out that best practice for the racetracks do not happen to involve meeting certain things for the horseplayers, there is always boycott or strikes, but these are much weaker when stand-alone leverage tools withouth the mightyness of RESEARCH and poolmoneymarketLEVERAGE.

:ThmbUp:

[andymays]

Just another thing to add to my previous post.

It is my understand that the TOC (thoroughbred owners of California) are funded in part by takeout to the tune of a million or more dollars. Why shouldn't one of our demands be that a Horseplayers of California group be funded as well so we have a level playing field?

[andymays]

Suggestion:


If we're gonna do this and be successfull then we have to create some buzz.

In my opinion HANA should put out a press release on Friday morning calling for David Israel and Keith Brackpool to resign after their recent asisne comments. Why Friday? Because someone should also work the weekend radio shows and make the case that they are out of touch they are detrimental to Horse Racing.

In other words we have to start laying the groundwork and making the case to the public who is mostly uninformed about these things.

[Robert Goren]

I think Exotic players should boycott CA racing. The win pool players are a different matter. Their takeout is among the lowest in the country. I personally am a win player and I am boycotting everyplace that has win pool take exceeding 17.0%. Whatever pool you bet in you should set a % that you will not accept and avoid those tracks. There are places a lot worse than CA. Philly rips everyone pretty good for allowing you to bet on Mondays and Tuesdays.

[lamboguy]

i don't think its going to matter that much if there is a boycott or not, since there is negetive growth is this industry the will go down anyway. this added takeout in califrornia is just a shot in the arm to keep those high-paying useless jobs going. what the game has always catered to has been either people that love the sport and degenerate gamblers. the lottery's and casino's have taken care of the degenerate gamblers and the racing industry have taken care of the people that love the game and have scared them away.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

When Los Alamitos raised their takeout, it was a case of an obscure quarter horse track with small betting pools...trying to survive in turbulent times. This takeout hike is another matter altogether.

These racetracks have the biggest wagering pools in the country, and are not raising taxes for self-preservation...but because they think that their "superior" product is not priced high enough. They think that they can compete with the LA Lakers for sheer entertaiment value...and they want to price their product accordingly.

One thing is certain. Other prominent racetracks are watching this move...and if the public backlash is not strong enough in the wagering pools - where it counts - you can expect to see this tactic carried out in racetracks across the land.

Whether California is still competitive with other tracks in takeout, even after this takeout hike, is a moot point IMO.

It is the PRINCIPLE that we should be revolting against...
I disagree that there is a difference in what Los Al did and what the A tracks are about to do.
In both cases, they actually believe that in order to increase horse population and purses they had no choice but increase takeout.

Any takeout anywhere helps kill racing as Horseplayers collectively have less money to churn with and have less value to bet on. Horseplayers slowly but surely become more disillusioned as they last less longer.

When you raise prices the opposite way of where the optimum price is, the bottom line is bound to suffer.

Again, when I am talking optimum price, I mean the takeout price that puts the most money in the hands of the track and purse accounts when the dust settles.

[cj]

The time is now.

[turfnsport]

I think Exotic players should boycott CA racing. The win pool players are a different matter.

Dead wrong..

There needs to be a COMPLETE boycott of California racing. The CHRB will spin the handle decrease any way they can. If exotic wagering is down 20% but WPS is up 20%, they will declare victory, and more importantly other racing jurisdictions are only going to be looking at OVERALL handle to come up with an excuse to raise their take.

The handle decrease needs to be at least 20% overall, or they will blame it on the weather and economy as usual.

[The_Knight_Sky]

There needs to be a COMPLETE boycott of California racing. The CHRB will spin the handle decrease any way they can. If exotic wagering is down 20% but WPS is up 20%, they will declare victory, and more importantly other racing jurisdictions are only going to be looking at OVERALL handle to come up with an excuse to raise their take.

The handle decrease needs to be at least 20% overall, or they will blame it on the weather and economy as usual.



BINGO !
Why give them a lifeline? A swift effective strike would do more
to reverse the exotics takeout rates and restore what will be reduced purses.



I think Exotic players should boycott CA racing. The win pool players are a different matter. Their takeout is among the lowest in the country



It is only a matter of time before the WPS takeout rates also are raised.
Why help delay in what needs to be done?

There should not only be a reversal of takeout rates but a plan towards a reduction to an optimal levels.

Optimal takeout rates that helps both the consumer and producer.
California must do that to be considered a nationally important region again.

[chickenhead]

Something else California players might want to think about is that playing other out of state tracks also puts money into Cali purses due to the cap on signal fees and the ADW retention cap.

What this means is that if you're in California and you're playing any out of state track, either via simulcast or ADW -- the lions share of your takeout dough is going to California.

If you're feeling a little more militant about things, curtailing your play altogether or coming up with a plan B to get around the above might be something to consider.

[BillW]

Something else California players might want to think about is that playing other out of state tracks also puts money into Cali purses due to the cap on signal fees and the ADW retention cap.

What this means is that if you're in California and you're playing any out of state track, either via simulcast or ADW -- the lions share of your takeout dough is going to California.

If you're feeling a little more militant about things, curtailing your play altogether or coming up with a plan B to get around the above might be something to consider.

This is essentially a source market fee. They are forcing you to pay the tracks for the pleasure you get out of playing the horses from your own living room. So far they haven't figured out how to take a cut out of that cold beer you keep in your refrigerator. :rolleyes:

[andymays]

Something else California players might want to think about is that playing other out of state tracks also puts money into Cali purses due to the cap on signal fees and the ADW retention cap.

What this means is that if you're in California and you're playing any out of state track, either via simulcast or ADW -- the lions share of your takeout dough is going to California.

If you're feeling a little more militant about things, curtailing your play altogether or coming up with a plan B to get around the above might be something to consider.

We have to let everyone do what they feel like they can do without bashing them.

Stop playing altogether.

Play offshore.

Play WPS only.

Every little bit will help.

[Robert Goren]

Dead wrong..

There needs to be a COMPLETE boycott of California racing. The CHRB will spin the handle decrease any way they can. If exotic wagering is down 20% but WPS is up 20%, they will declare victory, and more importantly other racing jurisdictions are only going to be looking at OVERALL handle to come up with an excuse to raise their take.

The handle decrease needs to be at least 20% overall, or they will blame it on the weather and economy as usual.I for one am not going give up a 15.4% takeout for some place that charges 17+% and that already charges more in exotic pools than CA will after the raise. Where were you this summer with your boycott when Monmouth was ripping off win pool betters and trying say what a great deal it was because they got an extra horse per race with their ridiculous purses. If you wanted to boycott someplace over high takeouts, there are a lot of places a lot worse than CA. If you are really serious about takeout rates boycotts start PA racing or one the other ripoff racinos. Show me some place where I can get as good a deal on my win bet as CA and I will join your boycott. I can't afford to give up an extra 2% to prove point about pools I never bet.

[andymays]

I for one am not going give up a 15.4% takeout for some place that charges 17+% and that already charges more in exotic pools than CA will after the raise. Where were you this summer with your boycott when Monmouth was ripping off win pool betters and trying say what a great deal it was because they got an extra horse per race with their ridiculous purses. If you wanted to boycott someplace over high takeouts, there are a lot of places a lot worse than CA. If you are really serious about takeout rates boycotts start PA racing or one the other ripoff racinos. Show me some place where I can get as good a deal on my win bet as CA and I will join your boycott. I can't afford to give up an extra 2% to prove point about pools I never bet.

You're right.

Everyone needs to make their best effort if we do this. It's not a perfect world and you're right about the WPS pools.

[riskman]

The place to attack this would be the out of state money. The handle here is higher and would be easier to to target then the on track and inter state handle. Most resident CA. players will continue to wager despite the take out increase.(I think)
The best option would be is to have some pol introduce legislation that would restrict wagering to CA residents only. There is probably some pol in CA.
crazy enough to introduce a bill. That surely would get the CHRB and track owners attention even though it will probably go nowhere.
A paid advertisement in the DRF, Bloodhorse and web sites such as Brisnet would surely cause a ruckus. Hana could sponsor the ads. I would be willing to donate something for this project. Are others willing to contribute or is this a crazy idea. If you really believe this to be a defining issue a stance must be taken that involves some risk but a I believe a boycott is not the answer but unfavorable publicity that is honest and to the point will have an effect on the egos involved and cause some embarrassment which is truly deserving.

[bigmack]

If you wanted to boycott someplace over high takeouts, there are a lot of places a lot worse than CA.
Darn shame the subject at hand is CA. If you have interest in taking your play away from MTH or points unknown, live it up. The dynamics of takeout from one state to another are not the issue. The hiked take in CA is the issue at hand and people are trying to address a leak in the dam here. The sooner folk like you grasp that concept the quicker people can focus on a state that is moving in the wrong direction_

[Indulto]

Since it is California politicians who have conspired to tax horseplayers unmercifully, perhaps Ben Franklin’s famous quote is appropriate to this thread: "We must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately."

Horseplayers throughout the nation need to look at the California situation and recognize that the arrogance displayed by politicians, track management, and horsemen toward racing’s customers is too egregious to let stand, and is an example of what is sure to follow elsewhere if not addressed collectively by those customers.

This is not a matter of where can I get the best deal, but how to start getting a GOOD DEAL EVERYWHERE. What we can accomplish now will strengthen our influence in the future.

I don’t know when the best time to begin is. Perhaps people here will offer suggestions. I was initially concerned that Oak Tree might be an inappropriate target because of the charities it feeds, but Brackpool just revealed that it was Hollywood Park management that did the “heavy lifting” on the bill. Let’s discuss it, because the outrage and passion that is running high now needs to be harnessed before it cools off.

[W2G]

An organized boycott would surely be a defining moment for HANA. If its membership has a significant number who play CA and feel equally passionate about the takeout issue and would actually follow-through with a boycott, then maybe the impact would be felt. A clear objective and expectations would have to be defined.

A well-publicized boycott that does not produce an impact on handle would be a tough thing for the organization to overcome. Horseplayers everywhere are opportunists and a boycott of CA racing would also be a public announcement that a bunch of sharp, heavy-hitting players are no longer competing in these pools.

[bigmack]

[font=Verdana]Since it is California politicians who have conspired to tax horseplayers unmercifully,
By the way, this whole political angle to the picture is one that is an exercise in futility. This issue is a blip of a blip on the screen of politicians in this state.

[Deepsix]

Before any boycott/suspension of play (who thought up that euphemism?) is contemplated HANA, as well as all horseplayers need to measure the anticipated level of participation. I'd suggest that instead of this continual moaning/whining (Groundhog Day all over again) that you use an incremental approach. In the very near future select one single race at Hollypark and ask everyone to avoid betting that single race. IF folks participate and there is measurable impact ('impact' being the operative word) on the pools in that race it will allow folks to gauge the support of fellow players. IF there is participation/impact then identify another single race within a determined short time frame and once again measure the participation. IF there is participation and the pools in those selected races are impacted it will give everyone a contemporaneous indication of whether a sufficient degree of unity exists. Enthusiasm will build. IF, on the other hand, there is an insufficient amount of participation (little impact on the identified races) then its obviously not the time to attempt some grander strategy.

It occurs to me that HANA has everything to lose IF they attempt some large scale wildcat action and it fails. Don't waste time with polls....

[riskman]

We have to let everyone do what they feel like they can do without bashing them.

Stop playing altogether.

Play offshore.

Play WPS only.

Every little bit will help.

Except for a minority or minuscule amount CA. resident horseplayers will continue to wager on exotic propositions and WPS.

Out of state players is another story.CA in many cases is an option not a first preference. Some do not wager because of synthetics. The only races I wager on in CA. are turf races as do many of the players I know in NY.I could easily give up CA. and it would not appreciably affect my situation but to be honest, I do not know if I will.

No way am I am playing off shore. Rather give up CA. altogether than to wager non pari mutual pools and restrictive payouts. I fully support U.S. based wagering pari mutual pools.

[Robert Fischer]

How many here could/would boycott Doubles,Exactas and Trifectas?

Seems like these might be a good portion of the most insulting attacks they have planned on the horseplayers

I think that if we did something and showed organization and a willingness to manipulate pools, it would instill fear and respect, even if most of the money was re-bet into other pools. Prove that we can do something simple. Realistically there would be a good chance that it would hurt their bottom line as well.

[rwwupl]

My view....


Anyone who can not see that revolution is in process right now in California, without firing a shot is blind to the facts.

Trend lines are consistently DOWN every where, fans and horsemen are locating other places. Is that not what a boycott is intended to do?

We want change, and obviously change is coming. We do not want to destroy horse racing in California, unless you have a personal vendetta.

There is no need to put a formal label on what is happening already, considering if it fails ,the leader or organization will no longer be effective at anything else in our game.

We know that no matter the numbers, the racing managers in California will twist them to make it appear a failure, just to show who is boss. Did we not learn from the Los Alamitos experience?

We know that horse players will do what is in their best interest, despite proclamations that they will sacrifice for this or that cause and restrain for what is best for all. Horseplayers are contrary by nature and will take advantage of opportunitys anywhere they they can score, today,tomorrow and in the future. The free market is doing the work for us. It is like jumping in front of the parade at the end and declaring victory...maybe.

If this effort is serious, and you think you will make a difference, why not sign up and have a list of horseplayers and how much they will with hold from California betting and for how long? Then it can be monitored. Anyone is free to do as they wish without a formal label or an organized effort,so join the many who find other places to gamble than California. You do not need a sign or a hat to demonstrate, just do your thing.

I think many who want a formal boycott are not California players, but enjoy wanting to vent and action.

I think everyone should and will do what they want anyway, and it will not be surprising if the exotic pools with a takeout increase show a steady decline in play over time.. Have we no confidence in that?

Roger Way (rwwupl)

[kid4rilla]

It has to be determined what types of player the boycott would target.

How important the guy who only plays twice per week at $500 or less per visit to handle? $100 or less?

These are the pure action/entertainment players. They bet and take what they can get. I've had no problem boycotting Ca racing, but I think there are plenty that will not get on board.

My feeling is that this kind of player is not that important to having an impact.

[Bruddah]

If enough "everyday players" withdraw from the pools in California, the pools will obviously shrink. Shrink those pools small enough and the "Whales" won't swim. They head to deeper waters.

Shouldn't this be the objective, to effect the Cali pools enough to send the Whales to other waters? (JMHO)

[chickenhead]

well, this should be easy enough. Anyone out there that plans on boycotting want to state how much they played in Cali last year, and how much they are going to play this year?

I played around $5K in Pick 6's last year, the only pools I really play there. This year will be $0.

[rwwupl]

It has to be determined what types of player the boycott would target.

How important the guy who only plays twice per week at $500 or less per visit to handle? $100 or less?

These are the pure action/entertainment players. They bet and take what they can get. I've had no problem boycotting Ca racing, but I think there are plenty that will not get on board.

My feeling is that this kind of player is not that important to having an impact.

Under the current leadership, if the "Boycott" showed true success, would they get the picture or would they raise the takeout another 2-3 % to make up for those who are missing? Then declare they are entertainment any way, and they are underpriced.

The point I make leads to leadership on the CHRB We need new blood, and we will get it after the election soon.

Bill Christine wrote about this, I think he made the point.

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/west-coast-wash/comments/09272010-get-out-the-lifeboats/

Excerpt:

"People often say we're competing with the casinos," Israel said. "I think that's shortsighted and wrong. We're not competing with casinos. We're in the entertainment business. We're competing with the Dodgers and the Giants and the Angels and the Lakers, and we're putting on a show."

[TommyCh]

Small factor: The time zone difference assures at least some California wagering from West Coast players. And doesn't Cali. restrict some signals from the East in the early part of the day out there? It's easy for those of us in the Midwest or East to end our wagering just as California is getting cranked up.

Besides all that, the California racing product holds little appeal for me what with the synthetics and short fields, etc. Golden Gate is murder. Same here at Arlington with the Poly Track.

[riskman]

By the way, this whole political angle to the picture is one that is an exercise in futility. This issue is a blip of a blip on the screen of politicians in this state.

bigmac has a valid point here. Track and horse owners, trainers, breeding and training farms, trainers, jockeys, stable and track personell ,vets and equipment suppliers, investors an ADW's all have a stake here. We are sitting here looking at horseplayers and where our interests lie ie.,cost of wager in this particular situation. Politicians and the general public really could care less about are interests. HANA is suppose to represent our concerns. Without wagering the industry does not exist, yet many look down upon us as a necessary evil when in fact the game disappears without are participation. The political angle does not appear to be viable because the pols in themselves do not look at horseracing as an issue worth their time unless perhaps the pol has a vested interest personally.

[Stillriledup]

I like Riskman's idea of taking out a full page ad/ads in the drf. Opening day's Dec 26th DRF right smack dab in the middle of the SA PP's can be a full page admonishing of anyone who's thinking of playing.

[kid4rilla]

If enough "everyday players" withdraw from the pools in California, the pools will obviously shrink. Shrink those pools small enough and the "Whales" won't swim. They head to deeper waters.

Shouldn't this be the objective, to effect the Cali pools enough to send the Whales to other waters? (JMHO)

I think so, but I'm admittedly ignorant and looking for some education on the matter.

It's all about the whales. So when the waters get shallow enough and the whales swim away, the advantage seeking player probably gets back in this pool since they no longer have to deal with the big money group.

[Robert Fischer]

Under the current leadership, if the "Boycott" showed true success, would they get the picture or would they raise the takeout another 2-3 % to make up for those who are missing?

If we organize tightly to boycott 2 or 3 of the most important wagers (exacta,dailydouble,Trifecta)
we would instill fear and respect in the current and future leadership.

They may publicly spin it a number of ways or try to "punish" horseplayers for demanding fair treatment, but in simple terms - they would lose, we would win, and we would win concessions(lowered takeout). They would be shocked that we "turned out to vote" on lowering takeout. They are simply businessmen, not bad people, and so far we have FORCED them to RAISE takeout because we SEEM to be incapable of organizing for action and showing leadership.

However, I've never seen any indication that anyone is ready to lead horseplayers on a highly organized, very simple, clean-cutting boycott. To be honest, I know we could do it, although it would take some talent and some important changes to approach. I'd guess it's unlikely that we would do a highly organized clean-cutting boycott.

[riskman]

We know that horse players will do what is in their best interest, despite proclamations that they will sacrifice for this or that cause and restrain for what is best for all. Horseplayers are contrary by nature and will take advantage of opportunitys anywhere they they can score, today,tomorrow and in the future. The free market is doing the work for us. It is like jumping in front of the parade at the end and declaring victory...maybe.
Anyone is free to do as they wish without a formal label or an organized effort,so join the many who find other places to gamble than California. You do not need a sign or a hat to demonstrate, just do your thing.

I think many who want a formal boycott are not California players, but enjoy wanting to vent and action.

I think everyone should and will do what they want anyway, and it will not be surprising if the exotic pools with a takeout increase show a steady decline in play over time.. Have we no confidence in that?

Roger Way (rwwupl)


Yep, this post makes a lot of sense. Do what you have to do and go shopping for the best deal. That"s what i have been doing the past several years .Looking out for #1 me !

[Robert Fischer]

we need to be wary of all the similes metaphors and analogies...

this stuff is just business.
if we want the whales to help us, we make deals and pitch to them just like a potential client or contributer...,]
we don't actually need to "tow them to shallows", "get a bigger boat" or sing sea shanties ;)

[Robert Fischer]

Yep, this post makes a lot of sense. Do what you have to do and go shopping for the best deal. That"s what i have been doing the past several years .Looking out for #1 me !

Agreed
and Education is huge here.
So many players have no idea that different takeouts exist or what the difference is, they have no idea that takeout is even being raised in California, and they've never been sat down for the 2 minutes it takes to run through a demonstration of how takeout affects them.

[turfnsport]

I for one am not going give up a 15.4% takeout for some place that charges 17+% and that already charges more in exotic pools than CA will after the raise.

Then you are missing the entire point, not to mention missing the big picture.

[Sericm]

All these posts about the take out in California are really getting redundant, just like the Zenyatta, Rachel posts were.

Do you really think that anybody would join your boycott even if you could organize one?

How many people do you think you could get to boycott the races anyway? The thirty or forty that respond to these posts? And you know what, the first time there's a $500,00 or $1,000,000 carry over in the pick 6 all your well meaning resolve goes down the tube.

The temptation is there and you will be chunking in money hand over fist.

Whether you agree with my post or not the bottom line is 95% OF THE BETTORS DON'T CARE AND THE 5% THAT DO CARE DON'T MATTER!

[kid4rilla]

Agreed
and Education is huge here.
So many players have no idea that different takeouts exist or what the difference is, they have no idea that takeout is even being raised in California, and they've never been sat down for the 2 minutes it takes to run through a demonstration of how takeout affects them.

But that player probably doesn't care because their exposure is so limited that they can't see the pattern. They can still bet $12 trifectas and get back 15 times their money sometimes. ("That should have paid much more").

It's the Bingo crowd. The guy who gets off at 5:00 in the east and can bet Cali, or much smaller pools, or harness. Or play video poker.

And he probably doesn't matter.

Who accounts for the majority of the pools day in and day out is the question.

All you big boys step up and make a stand. I gotta feeling that a few of you big knockers dropping out would have more of an impact than all of the bingo crowd combined.

[kid4rilla]

Whether you agree with my post or not the bottom line is 95% OF THE BETTORS DON'T CARE AND THE 5% THAT DO CARE DON'T MATTER!

Or is it the 5% that do care are responsible for 95% of the dollars voted?

[riskman]

Agreed
and Education is huge here.
So many players have no idea that different takeouts exist or what the difference is, they have no idea that takeout is even being raised in California, and they've never been sat down for the 2 minutes it takes to run through a demonstration of how takeout affects them.

Do not expect an OTB,ADW or track personnel to educate a player. It is not in their interests. They want all the action they can handle. You can walk into a track or OTB and 90% of the players would
look at you like you are crazy if you tell them what the take is on EX,TRI AND Supers. In NYCOTB there is an additional take above track take(I think 5 or 6% ) yet when I tell them to get a phone account from OTB which pays "track prices" and call their bets in rather then going to the teller on premises it has no effect. I finally convinced one guy after many years to get a phone account. Reason why?he got sick and could not come in the OTB for awhile.

[Tom]

Then you are missing the entire point, not to mention missing the big picture.

My big picture is the few races on weekends where I think I have a good bet at good odds. Nothing else matters to me.

[Robert Fischer]

i think some of us internet- savvy players would be surprised that it isn't just the the worst of the OTB, or most degenerate compulsive gambler crowd that it isn't aware of takeout or its effects. I do understand that it is "reckless" to take part in this game without looking up the "rules".
However a moderate portion of the pool monies is probably comprised of guys who know it's somewhere around 20%, who would be concerned if they learned they were getting a worse deal, and who have some self control to comparison shop if they are being abused by certain racetracks business model.

But that player probably doesn't care because their exposure is so limited that they can't see the pattern. They can still bet $12 trifectas and get back 15 times their money sometimes. ("That should have paid much more").

It's the Bingo crowd. The guy who gets off at 5:00 in the east and can bet Cali, or much smaller pools, or harness. Or play video poker.

And he probably doesn't matter.

Who accounts for the majority of the pools day in and day out is the question.

All you big boys step up and make a stand. I gotta feeling that a few of you big knockers dropping out would have more of an impact than all of the bingo crowd combined.

Do not expect an OTB,ADW or track personnel to educate a player. It is not in their interests. They want all the action they can handle. You can walk into a track or OTB and 90% of the players would
look at you like you are crazy if you tell them what the take is on EX,TRI AND Supers. In NYCOTB there is an additional take above track take(I think 5 or 6% ) yet when I tell them to get a phone account from OTB which pays "track prices" and call their bets in rather then going to the teller on premises it has no effect. I finally convinced one guy after many years to get a phone account. Reason why?he got sick and could not come in the OTB for awhile.

[Indulto]

By the way, this whole political angle to the picture is one that is an exercise in futility. This issue is a blip of a blip on the screen of politicians in this state.BgM,
My reference to to Franklin's quote was an attempt to unify horseplayers, not adrtess politicians who think they have the "devine right" to destroy the "Sport of Kings."

Sure didn't seem to have the desired effect. :bang:

[MNslappy]

I still kind of like the idea of a Buycott or Procott at a place like Retama with their Pk4. It worked once before for HANA, at the very beginning. It was a key factor early on that gave the group legitimacy as a force to be respected. Maybe we ought to show them again what we can do to move handle.

Hold another procott, then use the attention it gains to announce, "Now that we've shown we can move handle significantly, we'd like to announce we're boycotting CA starting tomorrow."

[kid4rilla]

There is that group, but most who go to the OTB are likely to be voting their dollars based on other issues....like post times related to their free time - or the racing/connections that they are more familiar with.

[Robert Fischer]

buycotts/procotts are a hard sell, unless a major track wants to give a good deal or a small track wants to give a tremendous deal

[highnote]

DJofSD wrote the following at this URL http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=75099


The same exacta that would pay $81.40 in New York and $81 in New Jersey will pay just $76.20 in California. That's a big bite to begin with and the type of thing that turns into a huge number over time.

Put this under every bettors nose. After a while it will sink in.

Maybe we can get the attorney generals office to post a warning: betting exotics on CA races after December 25, 2010, is bad for your finacial health.


I suggest handing out flyers across the street from the racetrack for whatever CA meeting is running with those payoffs above in bold typeface.

[riskman]

i think some of us internet- savvy players would be surprised that it isn't just the the worst of the OTB, or most degenerate compulsive gambler crowd that it isn't aware of takeout or its effects. I do understand that it is "reckless" to take part in this game without looking up the "rules".
However a moderate portion of the pool monies is probably comprised of guys who know it's somewhere around 20%, who would be concerned if they learned they were getting a worse deal, and who have some self control to comparison shop if they are being abused by certain racetracks business model.

Most of my wagers are made from home on the internet. The once a week that I visit the local OTB/Pub is basically the only exposure that I have with other players.(except for this forum)
Very rarely do I attend the track anymore. In 2009 went to Mth once ,Saratoga, 3x, Belmont and Aqu once.
The players that I encounter at OTB are not handicappers in any sense of the word. They go in have a few beers and wager exactas, and TRI's for small amounts. It is entertainment and social contact for a few hours. If they win great,-- they buy you a drink --they lose-- tomorrow is another day.Reduced takeout is not an issue for them, although it would keep them in the game longer without knowing it. Just don"t know how much money is wagered on line and what type of players do it by volume. Does anyone have figures for wagers on track off track by internet or phone. For instance if you have a NYRA account is the wager considered on track volume since you have to be a NY resident to have a NYRA account. There must be other states with similar situations.
Any figures out there on who, where and how the wagers are made?

[thaskalos]

My big picture is the few races on weekends where I think I have a good bet at good odds. Nothing else matters to me.I agree Tom...but do those few plays have to be on California races? Don't we have enough betting options out there on the weekends?

IMO, there is a bigger issue here than the California takeout hike issue. This industry has always maintained that the horseplayer is either uninformed or uninterested (or both), as to the negative affects of the excessive takeout to his financial wellbeing...and that is a very troubling opinion for a business to have about its customers, especially in today's economic climate. If we don't rise in protest now...who's to say what the takeouts across the land will look like, a few years from now?

As horseplayers, we have been much maligned for too long, and it's about time we proved that we are more than the "addicted idiots" that the industry perceives us to be.

[RXB]

My big picture is the few races on weekends where I think I have a good bet at good odds. Nothing else matters to me.

I agree.

Why is California being singled out? They still have the lowest pre-breakage WPS takeout in the USA. The tri, super, pick 3/4 takeouts will still be lower than a lot of other tracks.

Personally, I've never been a huge fan of Cali racing and prefer eastern tracks. But in the same vein as someone else posted earlier in the thread, it seems more sensible to let the probable payouts determine whether or not to bet.

[rrbauer]

There has to be a boycott. Players need to commit to this and expect that it will be inconvenient for them (in many cases) to take their game elsewhere but that's the nature of the beast. It has to hurt the owners and tracks financially. And, there has to be a quid pro quo that comes back to the horseplayers in the form of formal recognition and participation in how the industry is run and how much the customers are supposed to pay for the "privilege" of being customers before the boycott ends.

The industry leadership has drawn a line in the sand with their continued offerings of stale bread and higher prices (good stuff, Jeff!). They've made a mockery of the democratic process and thumbed their noses at their benefactors whether they are in the grandstand or behind a computer terminal. I wish I could tell if the recent pronouncements at the September CHRB meeting were a reflection of ignorance or arrogance. Doesn't really matter. They deserve our scorn. Not our support.

For those of you who doubt that HANA isn't big enough or that a boycott won't work, I will remind you that our boycott of Magna in 2004 (along with their inept management) cost them over $100M in handle that year. There were about 700 horseplayers "signed up" for that boycott plus many more who chose not to make their identity public. We need to stand together. This will get results. And once it gains some traction and momentum the boycott participation will do nothing but grow.

[RXB]

But why just California? Why not NYRA with its outrageous 25% takeout on many wagers? Why not Monmouth? Woodbine? Or countless others?

Better yet, why not boycott all tracks until they reduce takeout to around the 12% WPS, 15% exotic takeouts (and nickel breakage only) that studies say are optimal? I mean, for the good of the game, right?

As far as taking one's game elsewhere, if somebody's game is win betting, where exactly is he going to take it and not be faced with an even higher takeout? Northlands Park, here we come?

[Robert Fischer]

Most of my wagers are made from home on the internet. The once a week that I visit the local OTB/Pub is basically the only exposure that I have with other players.(except for this forum)
Very rarely do I attend the track anymore. In 2009 went to Mth once ,Saratoga, 3x, Belmont and Aqu once.
The players that I encounter at OTB are not handicappers in any sense of the word. They go in have a few beers and wager exactas, and TRI's for small amounts. It is entertainment and social contact for a few hours. If they win great,-- they buy you a drink --they lose-- tomorrow is another day.Reduced takeout is not an issue for them, although it would keep them in the game longer without knowing it. Just don"t know how much money is wagered on line and what type of players do it by volume. Does anyone have figures for wagers on track off track by internet or phone. For instance if you have a NYRA account is the wager considered on track volume since you have to be a NY resident to have a NYRA account. There must be other states with similar situations.
Any figures out there on who, where and how the wagers are made?

You share a story that is not atypical. I think that there are a good amount of "entertainment players".
A couple of comments that relate = first we have 2 very different representations = A):The amount of bodies, and B):The Amount of Dollars. Just like in our economy, a small percentage of bodies or people contribute a large percentage of the $$.
and 2 the game is in an underdeveloped state partially due to the times and partially due to bad management. = People in general appreciate games of skill, and a lot of "bodies" and small time/weekendwarrior/entertainmentdollar players do enjoy things about racing like the horses, the sport etc... and do a little bit of handicapping even if it is just the Form. More than we give credit too would love to raise their knowledge and would love to get "more out of the game" if it meant more efficiency(more enjoyment without any additional costs or timeInvested)
And a lot of them would probably enjoy a computer with an ADW some well managed bookmarks and use of highspeed = and they'd still usually go to the OTB or TRack or Casino for the social aspect, but occasionally would play via the net. More than we give credit to.

There are 2 kinds of OTB Crowd - the scum(no offense!), and normal guys who happen for the OTB to be the most convienent.
and inspite of the rep there are some very nice otbs/casinos/tracks around although not everyone has one nearby:mad: :)

[Robert Fischer]

I agree.

Why is California being singled out? They still have the lowest pre-breakage WPS takeout in the USA. The tri, super, pick 3/4 takeouts will still be lower than a lot of other tracks.

Personally, I've never been a huge fan of Cali racing and prefer eastern tracks. But in the same vein as someone else posted earlier in the thread, it seems more sensible to let the probable payouts determine whether or not to bet.
I agree with going by a wagerxwager basis
but Ca. really put their foot in their mouth with some dangerous language that should be setting off warning sirens if you have one (w/batterys?)

[andymays]

But why just California? Why not NYRA with its outrageous 25% takeout on many wagers? Why not Monmouth? Woodbine? Or countless others?

Better yet, why not boycott all tracks until they reduce takeout to around the 12% WPS, 15% exotic takeouts (and nickel breakage only) that studies say are optimal? I mean, for the good of the game, right?

As far as taking one's game elsewhere, if somebody's game is win betting, where exactly is he going to take it and not be faced with an even higher takeout? Northlands Park, here we come?

You make good points all RXB!

RXB, you are a perfect example of why the people that are going to lead this need to make a better case and more public case before any action is taken. All your points are valid and most Horseplayers are going to bring up the same stuff.

I follow California very closely so I know why they're singling California out. It's because of the dishonest process and the dishonest people runnning California racing. They made a deal about the Los Alamitos raise in takeout and went back on their word. They also treated Horseplayer representatives like dirt at more than one of the meetings. In my opinion they are dishonest, corrupt, and incompetent. There are no Horseplayers on the CHRB board and there should be at least two. They've been "steamrolling" Horseplayers out here for decades.

You should also read this: http://www.horseraceinsider.com/west-coast-wash/comments/09272010-get-out-the-lifeboats/#comments

Here are recent quotes from two of the leaders of the CHRB:

CHRB Commissioner David Israel:

Quote:

“People often say we are competing with the casinos. I think that’s shortsighted and wrong. We’re not competing with casinos. We’re in the entertainment business. We’re competing with the Dodgers and the Giants and the Angels and the Lakers and we’re putting on a show..."

CHRB Commissioner Keith Brackpool:

Quote:

"We offer in California the premier racing product on a year-round basis,” he said, “but we were offering our first-class product at a discount price. We’re changing the pricing model. We left win-place-show where it is. But we came up with a solution that will produce $30 million more a year. That’s a 25-to-30% increase in overnight purses."

[Robert Fischer]

There has to be a boycott.

mannn I agree
but we have to do this right!
we have to be so organized
Every bit as organized and serious as when we beat the public and the rake to get a nice dinner.
Just as serious!

The leaders here need to step up and lead and be very wise.

we can't have everybody "just do what you can"
and then follow with a mediocre write-up about how "effective" it was.

the stuff has to be so specific
and so honest

if it was a mediocre result, we have to say "this was a mediocre result!, and we are going to go back to the blackboard and the message board, and work on strategy, and tactics, and next weekend we will take the bread out of your mouth"
and keep doing it until the takeout attack is rescinded by California!

we must have specific strategy on 2 or 3 of the affected pools that WE have the most dollars bet into. We have to announce that those are the pools we are boycotting. We need to talk to large-volume bettors.

We've got guys on this site that claim to be whales or large-volume bettors, Owners, Trainers, Horse Salesman, Figure Makers and notable Players. They enjoy the attention, they enjoy special respect and status in the industry and online. We have guys who claim to work in the industry or in the media. Time for you guys to cash-in, time to step up and serve.:ThmbUp:
This is why any boycott has to be professional and the most important(no we are not all equal and shouldn't pretend to be) Leaders have to lead and not be timid or passive. If you are who we thought you are(Herm Edwards famous words) we should enjoy some leverage if even a fair amount have real valor.

This absolutely can't be a "do what you can" event without real leadership and direction. If we say we are going to BoyCott Exactas,Trifectas,andDailyDoubles HOLLYWOOD PARK for Saturday/Sunday October the 9th and 10th - then we will PARTICIPATE! and we will NOT BE TEMPTED TO MAKE A SINGLE WAGER IN ANY OF THOSE 3 POOLS. Even if we re-distribute EVERY would-be DOLLAR into other HOLLYWOOD PARK pools for those same days, the effect will shock rock and roll management! Negotiations can soon follow and a second weekend(with discouraged pool re-distribution) will not even be necessary. This is why a specific Boycott of specific bets(pools) is the best course of action. If management fails to meet our demands(and they must be modest!) we will hit them hard. A situation they do NOT want to be in.
:eek::eek::ThmbUp::ThmbUp: YESSSS!!!!

[Bruddah]

I think so, but I'm admittedly ignorant and looking for some education on the matter.

It's all about the whales. So when the waters get shallow enough and the whales swim away, the advantage seeking player probably gets back in this pool since they no longer have to deal with the big money group.

Kid, it's about sending a message by shrinking the pools. If the small bettor takes the cream off the top of the pools for the big bettor, the big bettor moves on. Ergo, the pools shrink noticeably and an Economic message is sent. I don't believe your ignorant. Maybe a little hard headed, but not ignorant. ;)

[Mike_412]

I see this as a very clear cut issue personally. This isn't about what other racing jurisdictions charge in take. This is about California - which has one of the most popular wagering signals with SoCal - raising an already high take. If they raise the take and there isn't a dramatic decrease in wagering, what message does this send to other racing jurisdictions? Simply put, it says that horseplayers as a whole are the idiots and suckers many think us to be. It also may set the precedent for other jurisdictions to raise take. If one of the more popular signals can get away with it, what would be stopping others? This isn't a California racing issue imo. It's an issue regarding the future of the game as a whole.

You can scream about who needs to resign, who thinks this or that, I'm right, you're wrong, etc. None of it matters. At the end of the day, one thing matters. Handle needs to plummet and a message, a serious no nonsense message, needs to be sent. We're your customer and we're not going to take this sitting down. Cue Twisted Sister's We're Not Gonna Take It Anymore video. :D

I'll only speak for myself, but I played SoCal for 13 years, 7 of which were on a fairly serious level. I stopped approximately 6 months ago or so. The product (the so called premier racing product in the country) simply stated, sucked. Now, they have no chance of regaining my business until the take is lowered and the product improves.

California will not see a dime of mine. I hope the same is true of others.

[The_Knight_Sky]

We're your customer and we're not going to take this sitting down.

Cue Twisted Sister's We're Not Gonna Take It Anymore video. :D




Alright Mister, where do you get such a brilliant idea :ThmbUp: for a theme song?


WT1LXhgXPWswe've got the right to choose and
there ain't no way we'll lose it
this is our life, this is our song
we'll fight the powers that be just,
don't pick our destiny 'cause
you don't know us, you don't belong

oh we're not gonna take it
no, we ain't gonna take it
oh we're not gonna take it anymore

[rwwupl]

Can we see a list of the "whales"(Real Name not required) with estimated handle and some minnows who promise to boycott California?

If we had a list, that might scare the hell out of them. :)

To be fair it must be those who are currently playing into the pari-mutuel system in California and promise to stop to have any impact.

I presume it will not be those who have been vocal and called anyone who plays California "Stupid" for the last year on Pace. If California players had to play elsewhere...some other track would benefit...right?

If it is enough handle to influence the racetrack...what is holding you up? Why do you not proceed? What is the argument? Do you want a membership card?

Some of the vocal ones on this Forum have quit California long ago,per previous posts.

You can claim victory if the exacta and p-3 handle in California suffers over time, which will happen, aided, by a natural market process.

[fmolf]

Can we see a list of the "whales"(Real Name not required) with estimated handle and some minnows who promise to boycott California?

If we had a list, that might scare the hell out of them. :)

To be fair it must be those who are currently playing into the pari-mutuel system in California and promise to stop to have any impact.

I presume it will not be those who have been vocal and called anyone who plays California "Stupid" for the last year on Pace. If California players had to play elsewhere...some other track would benefit...right?

If it is enough handle to influence the racetrack...what is holding you up? Why do you not proceed? What is the argument? Do you want a membership card?

Some of the vocal ones on this Forum have quit California long ago,per previous posts.

You can claim victory if the exacta and p-3 handle in California suffers over time, which will happen, aided, by a natural market process.
Dahlman left NY when they raised takeout...what will he do now?hope he boycotts calif....I have not wagered a nickel on cal. races since poly came in(this was very difficult on the last 2 breeders cup days!)and i definetely will not wager there now after this!...Come on men and woman unite and send a message!

[rwwupl]

Dahlman left NY when they raised takeout...what will he do now?hope he boycotts calif....I have not wagered a nickel on cal. races since poly came in(this was very difficult on the last 2 breeders cup days!)and i definetely will not wager there now after this!...Come on men and woman unite and send a message!


I think you have made my point.

[alydar]

blah blah blah..there will probably be another five pages written here.

Just don't bet CA tracks.

That"s it. Nothing more needs to be said.

Just don"t bet CA tracks!!!!!!

[Stillriledup]

I agree.

Why is California being singled out? They still have the lowest pre-breakage WPS takeout in the USA. The tri, super, pick 3/4 takeouts will still be lower than a lot of other tracks.

Personally, I've never been a huge fan of Cali racing and prefer eastern tracks. But in the same vein as someone else posted earlier in the thread, it seems more sensible to let the probable payouts determine whether or not to bet.

Cali is being singled out because someone has to be the fall guy. Also, the arrogance of Israel and Brackpool is adding fuel to the fire. They can't leave well enough alone, they could just raise the takeout with all the fanfare, but no, they have to spit in the face of the player and talk to the bettors like they're idiots. There's really no need for that. Its like if a cop pulls you over for speeding and not only gives you a ticket, but gives you a speech also. Most people are thinking, " ok, give me the ticket and spare me the speech". Same thing here.

Andy makes good points here in this thread about treating players like dirt. Cali is not only raising take substantially, but they're kicking sand in the players faces also.

[Deepsix]

QUOTE Jeff P // (snip)

I hate to use the word boycott, but in my opinion the owners of the store
in California clearly no longer deserve even one penny of my business.

I have to put the question out there to other players:

Has the time come for an organized national players’ boycott of California
racing? UNQUOTE

Its been interesting reading all the posts since Jeff posed the question and I must admit that I'm unsure of just what Jeff meant by "an organized national player's boycott... " RW's recent post seems to suggest more of an individual ad hoc approach instead of an "organized national boycott". Jeff, could you more clearly define your vision of an organized effort?

Thanks

[turfnsport]

Andy makes good points here in this thread about treating players like dirt. Cali is not only raising take substantially, but they're kicking sand in the players faces also.

Andy, are they kicking Polytrack, Cushion Track, Pro Ride, or Tapeta in your face?

[andymays]

Andy, are they kicking Polytrack, Cushion Track, Pro Ride, or Tapeta in your face?

I can't breathe. ;)

[backinzona]

Quote from Bob Baffert on the Bill Christine website showing some of the logic behind the takeout increase. Bob is a TOC board member.

Quote:
Bob Baffert says:
29 Sep 2010 at 12:46 am | # (http://www.horseraceinsider.com/west-coast-wash/comments/09272010-get-out-the-lifeboats/#c88308) I strongly disagree. The new CHRB is doing a fine job of jump starting Ca. racing. The new increase in take out goes solely to purses. We need those purses to keep owners in the game and trainers and jockeys from leaving the state. No horses, no racing. Works both ways. Sure, you can bet football but to make $100, you have to bet a $100. The opportunity to turn a little money into a lot of money only exists in racing. I don’t believe we don’t need casinos to survive. If we have quality horses running in Ca. we will survive. Better purses brings better horses, brings better racing… A return to dirt at Santa Anita is a huge plus, too. Brackpool and Israel are getting things done quickly. Racing IS entertainment AND a gamble. Why do thousands of fans show up to watch great horses like Zenyatta? They want to be entertained. By nature, people want to see greatness in competition. The new TOC and CTT boards also have very strong leadership. Things are starting to come together now in Ca. Finally, we have some positive momentum and solid leadership.





http://www.horseraceinsider.com/west-coast-wash/comments/09272010-get-out-the-lifeboats/

[GatetoWire]

Great Post Jeff.

I will not give California one nickel after this takeout increase happens.

We really need a grassroots effort to get a boycott going.

We need to get the word out to everyone across the country to support this.

If everyone gets together and the handle really dips then these boneheads running other tracks might take notice and decrease their takeouts.

We need a this to go viral to all horseplayers across the country.

[JustRalph]

It's Crunch time............

[GatetoWire]

Of course Baffert is for this....He wants larger purses to attract more horses.

All of these numbers are based on handle staying the same.....if the handle stayed the same and I was a trainer then of course I would want it to go through.

All of a sudden my owners and more importantly me...are now making more money than before.

Reality is that handle is going to drop big time.....purses are not going up like they think and California racing is going to suffer big time

[Robert Fischer]

Can we see a list of the "whales"(Real Name not required) with estimated handle and some minnows who promise to boycott California?

If we had a list, that might scare the hell out of them. :)

Listen Hoss, they should be scared. Compared to us, their management is comprised of weak businessman(compared to any of the more successful horseplayers, especially whales that treat this game as a business operation!!) If they knew how organized, talented, and ready we are, they would never have painted themselves in the corner that they are now in. You are 100% correct in sensing that the Whales are very important here. I will outline their role in this post.

I like your suggestion, but I add caution that names, and dollars handle, even just going public is very personal. For some it's not going to be their best business practice. We as horseplayers are LUCKY because we happen to be in THE RIGHT! (amen to that:jump:), and one of the Great Rewards of being in the right is that provided we have some leverage - (which we are very fortunate have in bunches), simply following "best practice" will put us in position for big success.


BIG PLAYERS or "Whales" are an important part of our strategic position. Once again Whales are encouraged to simply execute "best business practice". While it is possible that "Whales" could sit down in a preemptive strategy in attempt to prevent a boycott from having to take place at all, it seems that the market(and California's brutal takeout attack) will in fact dictate a boycott, and - extremely important- that a boycott should actually BENEFIT the BIG PLAYER as well as the common horseplayer! In other words by practicing reckless and bad strategy, management in California has unintentionally brought us to the brink of boycott, with little to no alternative.

In fact let's quickly look over our strategic position:

In the boycott, the common horseplayers will not bet into the EX,DB,TRI pools. While Whales are by all means free to immediately help ALL horseplayers by showing solidarity and participating in the boycott, what I actually recommend and predict for most "Whale" enterprises is simply FREE MARKET STRATEGY.

Because of the gross underestimating of the horseplayer by management(particularly recently in California), we actually enjoy a huge strategic advantage on many fronts.
Let me quickly outline the market conditions in a boycott, and why I recommend a Free-Market approach for whales not wishing to sign-up and speak out directly in a boycott situation. -

AGAIN, Whales should and must operate in their OWN best interest in a boycott situation. We as the "common" horseplayer just need to remember two facts:





bigPLAYERS or "Whales" are first and foremost "Horseplayers"
and in this case what benefits Whales, Benefits US!
The Whales are ON OUR SIDE. These market changes encourage play in the "GOOD POOLS" NATURALLY BY MEANS OF THE FREE MARKET!!! As the Boycott sets in, a number of market situations begin to play out. The Ex,TRI, and DailyDouble pools decrease in size. The ratio of Whale play in those boycotted pools increase. This causes Competitive Convergence, and will lead to a mutually destructive path of attrition if the Whales continue to "feed off each other" within the EX,DB,TRI pools. Now it should be crystal clear that no pledge or public listing of name or income is necessary. The Whales are excellent businessmen in tune with the market. Where will the market indicate a reward?? read on-> At the same time WIN POOL(and other non-boycott including WPS etc..) increase in total size and decrease in ratio of Whale Money. THUS the FREE MARKET indicates best business practice for WHALES WILL be TO ATTACK THE WIN POOL(AND non-boycott POOLS) AT INCREASED PROFIT AND CHURN!!! Whales therefore have the luxury of increasing their optimum maximum wager size in a traditionally secure pool like the WIN POOL. For the common horseplayer, if it isn't already clear; This has an obvious effect CHURN BABY CHURN! you know- the reason whales got into this game in the first place?:cool:? Then there are the more subtle Whale-advantages that fit well with the WIN pool that start to occur more frequently like their edge in information(information-"gap"). Yes, Whales have "unfair" edges that go beyond rebates.

FINALLY A SHORT N SWEET SUMMARY

Whales will actually benefit from a boycott. In fact leaders of the boycott should cater to whales by discussing mutually beneficial strategies and being on the same page especially with specifics and times so that Whales may play the Free Market to their best advantages.
The Free market rather than a "pledge" or going public may be best for most SUPERSIZE Players.
we need Big Players to really crush the management's unfair practices - So we NEED(its a must) to sit down/email some of the Bigger players and draw up a gameplan that benefits them. Yes Benefiting whales directly is a STRONG winning strategy here.
Man your slings David!, And lets put a couple GIANTS on Goliath!!! for the good of us ALL :ThmbUp::ThmbUp::ThmbUp:







- Bobby Fischer

[Stillriledup]

One more bad thing for the horse racing industry that's relying on not publicizing takeout rates and keeping customers in the dark is the internet age. There is still probably a large core of players in their 50s and older who don't know internet from schminternet. This means that if they don't participate in message boards and keep up to date on the doings around the racing world, they might still show up and bet into California's large takeout rates.

Everyday that goes by, an old horseplayer dies and is replaced (hopefully) by a younger player who is internet and tech savvy and does read message boards like this and can educate himself on the pitfalls of betting into a large takeout. Before you know it, almost everyone who is betting horses will have access to the internet and access to message boards like Pace Advantage and many great blogs around cyberspace. How then, will racetracks hide their takeout rates from the public then?

Bob Baffert says that David Israel and Keith Brackpool are part of 'positive momentum and strong leadership'.

I'd be willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that two random horseplayers won't be sitting around an Inglewood, Ca starbucks in the year 2020 drinking a 9 dollar latte and talking about how Israel and Brackpool saved California horse racing ten years earlier.

[DeanT]

Fairplex joins Los Al with handle declines. Reason : "slow economy"

http://www.drf.com/news/handle-declines-817-meeting

OMONA, Calif. – The 2010 Los Angeles County Fair meet finished a 15-day run of predictability Monday at Fairplex Park. There were few surprises. Favorites won nearly 45 percent of Thoroughbred races (71 for 158), Martin Pedroza won his 12th consecutive riding title, and high-volume Doug O’Neill topped the trainer standings for seventh time in nine years.

Faced with a slow economy and benefitting from only three pick-six carryovers during a 15-day meet, overall Fairplex handle slipped 8.17 percent to $75.4 million. Average daily handle was $5.02 million, the lowest since 1994.


More at link

[Sericm]

It amazes me the attacks on California race tracks by the majority of the posters on this site. First its the surfaces, now its the take-out. The average horse player either doesn't know about it or like I said doesn't care.

The arrogance of the big so called bettors that they would have any effect on the handle is astounding to me. If you don't like the surfaces then obviously your not playing the California tracks anyway! And if you are playing the California tracks then your a bunch of hypocrites.

And all this talk of Whales, what's that 1% or 2% of the betting population, and I really doubt that they are just playing California anyway so even if they did stop betting them it wouldn't make any difference.

To blame the drop in handle on a few bettors not playing is ludicrous. IT'S THE ECONOMY! People don't have the money to bet, go to any Casino on a friday or saturday night and they aren't as crowded as they used to be a few years ago.

Get over yourselve's people, if you don't like the surface or the take out then don't make the bet! It's as simple as that!

[Mike_412]

If it's the economy, shouldn't all tracks be down in handle then? How would you explain certain tracks that have seen an increase in handle? Did they break out their handy, dandy economic shield?

I should have used the quote feature. My question was for the response immediately prior to my post.

[highnote]

Fairplex joins Los Al with handle declines. Reason : "slow economy"

Slow economy is probably part of the reason. Smaller field size is probably part of the reason. Smaller field size is probably due to the slow economy.

Still, they did 5 million per day. That's not bad.

I look at the HANA Track Ratings and see they averaged about 370,000 per race last year. So they must have done around 330,000 this year.

Compared to a small market track like Canterbury, 60,000 per race, Fairplex is doing well -- if total handle is the only factor you look at.

The number that I would find interesting is the amount of money they kept for themselves this year compared to last.

A comparison of Average daily attendance for this year and last would also be interesting.

[Robert Fischer]

The arrogance of the big so called bettors that they would have any effect on the handle is astounding to me.

http://www.achievement.org/achievers/ber0/large/ber0-007.jpg

[Stillriledup]

It amazes me the attacks on California race tracks by the majority of the posters on this site. First its the surfaces, now its the take-out. The average horse player either doesn't know about it or like I said doesn't care.

The arrogance of the big so called bettors that they would have any effect on the handle is astounding to me. If you don't like the surfaces then obviously your not playing the California tracks anyway! And if you are playing the California tracks then your a bunch of hypocrites.

And all this talk of Whales, what's that 1% or 2% of the betting population, and I really doubt that they are just playing California anyway so even if they did stop betting them it wouldn't make any difference.

To blame the drop in handle on a few bettors not playing is ludicrous. IT'S THE ECONOMY! People don't have the money to bet, go to any Casino on a friday or saturday night and they aren't as crowded as they used to be a few years ago.

Get over yourselve's people, if you don't like the surface or the take out then don't make the bet! It's as simple as that!


Believe you me, tracks notice if ONE large bettor leaves. Every dollar is accounted for, these higher ups at tracks have sophisticated printouts of every dollar and where it comes from. If a guy who bets 20 grand per day just decides to stop betting, they see it in their bottom line.

As far as your comments about the average horseplayer not knowing or caring, that might be true, they might not actually know what takeout is or how it affects them. But, what they DO know is how much money they have in their pocket. THey know when they are broke even if they don't know that takeout raises was a factor in their tapping out.

As far as an 'economy' argument goes, if the economy was the reason and only reason for racing's drop off, than every other business in america would have a dropoff too. This is not the case, not every business is suffering.

[Stillriledup]

Fairplex joins Los Al with handle declines. Reason : "slow economy"

http://www.drf.com/news/handle-declines-817-meeting


More at link

Lets say that hypothetically, the economy was the reason. You're still supposed to come out and say, "even though the economy might have been a factor, we still have to do a better job getting people to bet our races. We are taking responsibility and we will try and do better next time"

Shirking responsibility is typical with racing execs, its never their fault.

[jelly]

Get over yourselve's people, if you don't like the surface or the take out then don't make the bet! It's as simple as that![/QUOTE]


overall Fairplex handle slipped 8.17 percent to $75.4 million. Average daily handle was $5.02 million, the lowest since 1994.


It looks like people are doing exactly that.

[DeanT]

Lets say that hypothetically, the economy was the reason. You're still supposed to come out and say, "even though the economy might have been a factor, we still have to do a better job getting people to bet our races. We are taking responsibility and we will try and do better next time"

Shirking responsibility is typical with racing execs, its never their fault.

It could be worse; they did not pull out the ol' Olympics excuse.

I wouldn't have thought of it myself but the sharp as a tack Los Alamitos Quarter Horse Racing Association said it on their packet presented to the CHRB for it's takeout increase debate.......

"The post takeout increase period includes competition from the Olympics and more bad weather"

images/UBGX/E19.gif

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=878090&postcount=4

Lucky the Dodgers are out of the race. It could have been carnage.

[Stillriledup]

It could be worse; they did not pull out the ol' Olympics excuse.



http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=878090&postcount=4

Wow, great memory, that's hilarious. Never their fault, always outside forces seems to be the reason people are forgetting to bet.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Presque Isle was up over 6%. Big reason was dumping Sunday for Tuesdays.
Overall average: $407,288
2009 average: $383,407

Imagine if not for "the economy" they might have been up over 20%.

[Indulto]

Presque Isle was up over 6%. Big reason was dumping Sunday for Tuesdays.
Overall average: $407,288
2009 average: $383,407

Imagine if not for "the economy" they might have been up over 20%.Assuming that casual bettors are more likely to play on weekends than weekdays, how would you explain that increase?

[Tom]

Presque Isle was up over 6%. Big reason was dumping Sunday for Tuesdays.
Overall average: $407,288
2009 average: $383,407

Imagine if not for "the economy" they might have been up over 20%.

Wow, a synthetic track in a bad economy does well. Whoda thunk it?
Obviously, they better raise the takeout.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Assuming that casual bettors are more likely to play on weekends than weekdays, how would you explain that increase?
Most ADW players can only play a certain amount of tracks at once before they blow a mind fuse.
Many smaller to medium tracks have learned to stay away from Sundays, and that Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays are much bigger handle days when there is less A track competition. For example, Suffolk and Delaware and Finger Lakes don't race on Sundays (not sure if the official reason is state law for at least one them)
Live handle may suffer a little, but overall, they get a chance to have more eyes on them by racing on weekdays.

[Indulto]

Most ADW players can only play a certain amount of tracks at once before they blow a mind fuse.
Many smaller to medium tracks have learned to stay away from Sundays, and that Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays are much bigger handle days when there is less A track competition. For example, Suffolk and Delaware and Finger Lakes don't race on Sundays (not sure if the official reason is state law for at least one them)
Live handle may suffer a little, but overall, they get a chance to have more eyes on them by racing on weekdays.Thank you for responding. What would you estimate the percentages of professional/recreational bettors and their respective handles to be on weekdays vs weekends/holidays?

The reason I'm asking is to determine whether there's even any point in targeting weekdays. Of course the problem of targeting only weekends is that the remnants of the sport takes place on those days making it harder for such bettors to resist if they aren't committed. I doubt CA handle could be affected on BC prep weekends, but perhaps it would not be as hard to redirect handle between then and the BC.

Is it possible to determine how much revenue from California resident wagers on non-CA tracks is generated both on and off-track for CA tracks?

[bigmack]

Is it possible to determine how much revenue from California resident wagers on non-CA tracks is generated both on and off-track for CA tracks?
No it ain't. How did you get to be the 'Columbo' on this caper, Indulto?

This is one tough nut to crack.

[Indulto]

No it ain't. How did you get to be the 'Columbo' on this caper, Indulto?I once rented a Peugot convertible from a guy with a glass eye.;) This is one tough nut to crack.Do you happen to know where that revenue goes, BgM?

[castaway01]

Most ADW players can only play a certain amount of tracks at once before they blow a mind fuse.
Many smaller to medium tracks have learned to stay away from Sundays, and that Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays are much bigger handle days when there is less A track competition. For example, Suffolk and Delaware and Finger Lakes don't race on Sundays (not sure if the official reason is state law for at least one them)
Live handle may suffer a little, but overall, they get a chance to have more eyes on them by racing on weekdays.

Delaware ran on Sundays until very recently. It's all done to try to increase the simulcast dollar. While I don't know where to find all-sources handle for Delaware these days (DRF and BRIS have on-track wagering only listed), at one time a few years ago Delaware handled more than $2 million on the average nice-weather Monday and Tuesday and less than $1 million on Saturdays and Sundays (same goes for Philly Park). After last year, when the state of Delaware cut the percentage of VLT revenue earmarked for purses from 10% to 9% and the track was having trouble filling races as it was, they decided to keep daily purses the same but cut the number of racing days. Based on handle, it only made sense to cut some weekend racing.

[Lasix67]

I'm done with wagering on California tracks until I see some changes such as surface and takeout, so yes I am boycotting.

[Robert Fischer]

I'm done with wagering on California tracks until I see some changes such as surface and takeout, so yes I am boycotting.

you sure u want to group surface with takeout??
that could be divisive for the cause, and a lowering in takeout is inevitable. We are incredibly strong on the takeout issue.

we ALL want takeout to be set to the best amount to benefit the game. -Opinions vary when it comes to surface preference.

I happen to enjoy the current surface situation. However, I support you 100% with your decision to VOTE WITH YOUR BANKROLL:ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

that is "grown man" stuff! If you have the willpower and toughness to vote with your bankroll, you deserve the respect of all horseplayers regardless of each others individual opinions.

[thaskalos]

If you have the willpower and toughness to vote with your bankroll, you deserve the respect of all horseplayers regardless of each others individual opinions. How much willpower and toughness do we need, in order to refrain from betting on California racing? There are so many places out there to still wager on...

If we were talking "nationwide" boycott...then there would be a need for willpower and toughness...:)

[Robert Fischer]

speaking of VOTING WITH YOUR BANKROLL

I just spoke with DeanT about HANA (JoinHANA! (http://www.jcapper.com/HANA/SignUp/HANASignUpForm.asp?source=1) BLOG (http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/))

and they are working with a couple economics professors about business side of TAKEOUT!

IMO this is major.
apparently track management doesn't believe that lowering takeout will improve handle. The only way to PROVE otherwise is by a speakin' their language" $$



Once they make it crystal clear to the industry that the MANAGER'S BOTTOM LINE can be improved by LOWERING TAKEOUT,
guess what will happen?? :cool: yesssssss u r correct sirrrr!!!

[Robert Fischer]

How much willpower and toughness do we need, in order to refrain from betting on California racing? There are so many places out there to still wager on...

If we were talking "nationwide" boycott...then there would be a need for willpower and toughness...:)
#:1: SECOND TO NONE
ANY TIME A HORSEPLAYER VOTES WITH HIS OR HER $$
THEY HAVE EARNED RESPECT. WHETHER IT'S FAIRPLEX OR FAIRGROUNDS, HOLLYWOOD CHARLESTOWN OR OAKTREE HOLLYWOOD PARK, ALBUQUERQUE OR AQUEDUCT:eek:.
personally i don't play California racing everyday, but some play A LOT OF CALI. some are CALIFORNIA DREAMIN'
SOME WHO PLAY 1or2 EAST COAST TRACKS and then they're
GOING GOING BACK2 CALI CALI...
WE'VE GOT GUYS ON THIS BOARD WHO WISH THEY ALL COULD BE CALIFORNIA GIRLS...
(ok getting carried away)

[andymays]

How much willpower and toughness do we need, in order to refrain from betting on California racing? There are so many places out there to still wager on...

If we were talking "nationwide" boycott...then there would be a need for willpower and toughness...:)


When considering a boycott Jeff has to find out who the regular California players are and ask them to boycott. He has to get a firm committment. Yes, everyone should participate but the people who seem to be most vocal about it are the ones who rarely if ever play California races. People who never play California or occasionally play California will not make any significant impact if they stop playing.

From my own personal standpoint the Santa Anita meet prior to synthetic surfaces has always been my best and most profitable meet. I can't remember the last losing meet I had there. All of my biggest scores have been at Santa Anita. The other California meets not so much. Asking people like me from California to boycott Santa Anita is a very big deal and that's why I want to make sure Jeff gets it right and is holding a winning hand before a boycott is called. I'm also hoping one is called in the next few weeks so Santa Anita has time to make adjustments to do something for Horseplayers in response to a boycott.

Right now I'm not seeing HANA board members on the California Radio shows or in any articles about California racing. Preaching to the choir here and on a the blog doesn't get it done.

Let's get it right if we're going to do it.

[Show Me the Wire]

Oh Boy. If I were Fab Frank, I would be worried about investing large amounts of money to install a dirt surface with all this talk of a national boycott of the product. I would not blame Santa Anita for taking a wait and see attitude regarding this boycott, before making large expenditures to change its product.

[turfnsport]

Oh Boy. If I were Fab Frank, I would be worried about investing large amounts of money to install a dirt surface with all this talk of a national boycott of the product. I would not blame Santa Anita for taking a wait and see attitude regarding this boycott, before making large expenditures to change its product.

Frank has his head buried so far in the sand, er Pro Ride, that he will not even give a boycott a second thought.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Oh Boy. If I were Fab Frank, I would be worried about investing large amounts of money to install a dirt surface with all this talk of a national boycott of the product. I would not blame Santa Anita for taking a wait and see attitude regarding this boycott, before making large expenditures to change its product.
I don't think most horseplayers who are for the boycott really care if they were running on dirt, poly, Tapeta, Tapioca, or moon rocks. I could be wrong. But I think this is all about track takeout, and being fed up.

Regardless of the boycott, handle will drop for all the reasons stated in this thread. If I were Frank, I'd be worried that he will end up with a lot less money bottom line thanks to the takeout increase.

According to my number crunching, if handle drops off around 12%, the horsemen will still have the same as last year. But the 12% drop will be completely absorbed completely by the track owner.

If handle drops more than that, purse accounts will start taking a hit as well.

[andymays]

I don't think most horseplayers who are for the boycott really care if they were running on dirt, poly, Tapeta, Tapioca, or moon rocks. I could be wrong. But I think this is all about track takeout, and being fed up .

Some care but most don't about the surface. The Fed Up part is right on.

The people getting back to me when I do my email thing don't really get it yet but they will. Horseplayers have reached a boiling point where talk on the part of the peole running racing means nothing.

Give us something or go to hell. ;)

[Deepsix]

In my view HANA helped create the environment for California raising their takeout on certain wagers. HANA's national ranking of tracks, which placed tracks with higher takeout at/near the top of the list, was surely misguided IF takeout was such an important factor. California is now bumping up the takeout to a level that is close to those 'other tracks' and this supposed OUTRAGE ("being fed up") generates a call to arms. Fine.

The other issue that I have witnessed (been following these issues since the Workers Comp takeout increases) is that a few California players have worked non-stop to force change in track surface at SA, AND this takeout issue just gives them more fuel to pressure Calif. racing WHILE the other parts of the country (with equal or higher takeout) get a pass. Fine.

I'm a left Coaster, and since the late '90s I have played only a very small fraction of my action on California tracks.... small fields and poor value as compared to other jurisdictions. My reduced play predated the track surface issues.

So, you may notice that I've not participated in the non-stop complaining that goes on here concerning Calif. I quietly made my choice. All this effort to foment emotional reaction/support is not my thing. I follow Calif. racing daily... have since the late '70s. We'll see where it goes from here.

[andymays]

In my view HANA helped create the environment for California raising their takeout on certain wagers. HANA's national ranking of tracks, which placed tracks with higher takeout at/near the top of the list, was surely misguided IF takeout was such an important factor. California is now bumping up the takeout to a level that is close to those 'other tracks' and this supposed OUTRAGE ("being fed up") generates a call to arms. Fine.

The other issue that I have witnessed (been following these issues since the Workers Comp takeout increases) is that a few California players have worked non-stop to force change in track surface at SA, AND this takeout issue just gives them more fuel to pressure Calif. racing WHILE the other parts of the country (with equal or higher takeout) get a pass. Fine.

I'm a left Coaster, and since the late '90s I have played only a very small fraction of my action on California tracks.... small fields and poor value as compared to other jurisdictions. My reduced play predated the track surface issues.

So, you may notice that I've not participated in the non-stop complaining that goes on here concerning Calif. I quietly made my choice. All this effort to foment emotional reaction/support is not my thing. I follow Calif. racing daily... have since the late '70s. We'll see where it goes from here.

I have been a vocal critic of HANA in the past on certain issues but I believe they have done a lot of good things as well. The track rating are a sore spot for me because they promoted Polytrack/Keenland. It was a huge mistake and alientated quite a few Horseplayers. When they did it again for 2009 it made things worse in my opinion. I'll let someone on the HANA board address your points about your assertion that they are to blame for the takeout increase. Your point doesn't make sense to me.

The sport is dying. Is it Horseplayers fault? If not who is at fault? Who is to blame for Horse Racings hostility to the interests of Horseplayers?

You can call it non stop complaining but I look at as people sticking up for what they believe is right. I don't see what's wrong with that. Even the guy most responsible for synthetic surfaces came out and said the mandate was a mistake. Many people in charge think the takeout hike is a mistake as well but there aren't enough of them to make a difference. For some reason some people resent Horseplayers fighting back. They would rather Horseplayers just shut up and bet.

The truth be told the non stop complaining and lobbying comes from the TOC. It's just that they have the system fixed so they can get what they want whenever they want it.

[DeanT]

I'll let someone on the HANA board address your points about your assertion that they are to blame for the takeout increase. Your point doesn't make sense to me.



It should not make sense - it is DMTC troll bait. If horseplayers can pick up on a trainer move in a MCL non-winners of a race this century packed with negative beyers at CBD, we dont have much of a problem picking up on the DMTC crew ;)

[Show Me the Wire]

Some care but most don't about the surface. The Fed Up part is right on.

The people getting back to me when I do my email thing don't really get it yet but they will. Horseplayers have reached a boiling point where talk on the part of the peole running racing means nothing.

Give us something or go to hell. ;)

I am confused. I thought AWs were the bane of So.Cal. racing. It is my understanding the WPS pools have one of the lowest take-out rates in the nation. Why all the outrage?

Pertend you are shopping in any store, and the store raises its prices on some of the products. Do you boycott the store for raising prices on some products or do you still patronize the store and avoid purchasing the higher priced items?

[Deepsix]

When I first started posting here I identified myself as someone who used to follow/participate at DMTC forum. So, it shouldn't be too hard to figure that out. <smile>

[andymays]

I am confused. I thought AWs were the bane of So.Cal. racing. It is my understanding the WPS pools have one of the lowest take-out rates in the nation. Why all the outrage?

Pertend you are shopping in any store, and the store raises its prices on some of the products. Do you boycott the store for raising prices on some products or do you still patronaize the store and avoid purchasing the higher priced items?

Good points and I'd like someone from HANA to answer you. As someone who follows things closely I know why but most people don't know why. Unless someone from HANA makes a better and more public case a boycott may not work.

Your questions will be asked by 90% of Horseplayers.

[andymays]

When I first started posting here I identified myself as someone who used to follow/participate at DMTC forum. So, it shouldn't be too hard to figure that out. <smile>

It takes a lot to piss Dean off. ;)

Other than that at least you're beginning to state your case in a less sarcastic way so I don't mind responding to some of the stuff.

[Show Me the Wire]

Good points and I'd like someone from HANA to answer you. As someone who follows things closely I know why but most people don't know why. Unless someone from HANA makes a better and more public case a boycott may not work.

Your questions will be asked by 90% of Horseplayers.

I always make "good" points.

Here is another item for you to consider. The racing boards in most jurisdictions have the same mode of operation as California. California is not as unique as you make it sound.

[andymays]

I always make "good" points.

Here is another item for you to consider. The racing boards in most jurisdictions have the same mode of operation as California. California is not as unique as you make it sound.

You're right and I'm sure most of them have similar problems. I am a California guy and follow this closely. They also happened to give Jeff, Barry, and rwwupl and hard time at more than one CHRB meeting. They were lied to and disrespected. Again, I'm not the one that should be making the case on why the boycott should center on California. They should and they need to if they want it to work.

[DeanT]

I am confused. I thought AWs were the bane of So.Cal. racing. It is my understanding the WPS pools have one of the lowest take-out rates in the nation. Why all the outrage?

Pertend you are shopping in any store, and the store raises its prices on some of the products. Do you boycott the store for raising prices on some products or do you still patronize the store and avoid purchasing the higher priced items?

Because the blended takeout rate goes up, and when it does handle goes down.

It's like going to Mcd's for a happy meal. If the price of the burgers stay the same, but the fries go up, you are still getting hit.

Not to mention the dichotomous logic used by those in racing - "we left WPS where it is, and only raised exotics". This means, they are saying that takeout matters (or else they would not even mention the WPS take) while then saying the higher prices in exotics wont make a difference.

It will, it has, and will continue to, because when bankrolls are shrunk, players have less money to bet. And with less money to bet, less money is bet.

[Show Me the Wire]

Because the blended takeout rate goes up, and when it does handle goes down.

It's like going to Mcd's for a happy meal. If the price of the burgers stay the same, but the fries go up, you are still getting hit...................................
It will, it has, and will continue to, because when bankrolls are shrunk, players have less money to bet. And with less money to bet, less money is bet.

So don't buy the blended product. Buy the hamburger.

However, if I like Mc Donalds french fries, I will pay until I hit my personal "too much" point.

I don't need anyone to tell me how much a product is personally worth to me.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Anyone who understands growth in gambling realizes that high takeouts prevent growth more than anything else out there.
When a track raises prices above the optimum amount, they are in fact helping to kill the game, though it isn't their intentions. More players will go home with less, have less to churn, and eventually many will turn to other games and/or quite horse racing altogether.
Also, boycotts are generally done for principle and are emotional. In this case, it is the act of raising takeouts and destroying value even more, and/or killing growth overall. These are two very good reasons. A third is for Horseplayers to show other tracks not to think about it, in fact, think about lowering takeout instead.

That being said. A boycott isn't needed. It is simple Economics 101 which will fly in the face of California racing.

[Show Me the Wire]

Apparently, I am not making myself understood. I am a win bettor and I rarely play the vertical exotics. The higher price on the product I don't use or very rarely use has no effect on my pricing.

I guess you can make the argument that the exacta players will have less to bet, but it has been my personal experience that the exacta, tri and super bettors generally stay out of the win pool.

The raise in take-out on some but not all products should be viewed as selective shopping and not boycott material

[DeanT]

Apparently, I am not making myself understood. I am a win bettor and I rarely play the vertical exotics. The higher price on the product I don't use or very rarely use has no effect on my pricing.

I guess you can make the argument that the exacta players will have less to bet, but it has been my personal experience that the exacta, tri and super bettors generally stay out of the win pool.

The raise in take-out on some but not all products should be viewed as selective shopping and not boycott material

That's great. Selective shopping is good in the broadest sense of the word. You are doing what players seem to be asking others to do - vote with your wallet. If more people did what you did, takeout would be lower.

A couple of things - some people feel we are not in this alone, but together and want to do something to help the game long term. As well, Cali had exchange wagering on the table which would have helped you as a win bettor, but the TOC, CDI and Magna blocked it, keeping you in the higher take win pools.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Apparently, I am not making myself understood. I am a win bettor and I rarely play the vertical exotics. The higher price on the product I don't use or very rarely use has no effect on my pricing.

I guess you can make the argument that the exacta players will have less to bet, but it has been my personal experience that the exacta, tri and super bettors generally stay out of the win pool.

The raise in take-out on some but not all products should be viewed as selective shopping and not boycott material
When all bettors in total have less to bet back (churn) it hurts all racing. Even win bettors, because most horseplayers bet both exotics and WPS. Again, we are back to principle.

[turfnsport]

The raise in take-out on some but not all products should be viewed as selective shopping and not boycott material

Are you serious?

What do you think will happen to the takeout of WPS if there is not a decline in the handle in the exotic pools?

Selective shopping? Holy shit.

[jelly]

Boycott,Boycott,Boycott.


You have absolutely nothing to lose with a boycott.


Put it this way,If your In charge of california racing do you want to hear that their is an on going Boycott of your product.I don't think california would be happy with a boycott.They don't want to keep answering question that their customers are unhappy.Remember this is BAD publicity for them.

Also,It would be interesting to see how the Horseracing media covers it

[andymays]

Boycott,Boycott,Boycott.


You have absolutely nothing to lose with a boycott.


Put it this way,If your In charge of california racing do you want to hear that their is an on going Boycott of your product.I don't think california would be happy with a boycott.They don't want to keep answering question that their customers are unhappy.Remember this is BAD publicity for them.

Also,It would be interesting to see how the Horseracing media covers it

If it's not successfull then there is a lot to lose.

[Show Me the Wire]

........ A couple of things - some people feel we are not in this alone, but together and want to do something to help the game long term. As well, Cali had exchange wagering on the table which would have helped you as a win bettor, but the TOC, CDI and Magna blocked it, keeping you in the higher take win pools.


There is always protectionism (look at cab companies), but that should be properly resolved through the legislature.

Yes, I am asking people to vote with their wallets on a sensible scale. Avoid buying the more expensive product and the proprietor will get the message.

[turfnsport]

Yes, I am asking people to vote with their wallets on a sensible scale. Avoid buying the more expensive product and the proprietor will get the message.

Not in the case of these nitwits from the CHRB. If exotic handle is down 15% and WPS is up 15%, and overall handle is not down dramatically, guess what happens next year?

The WPS take will be raised.

You are dealing with people like Israel, Derek and Brackpool, who really have NO understanding of the effects of takeout.

[jelly]

If it's not successfull then there is a lot to lose.



Of course It will be successful,We're In a bad economy the numbers are going down It's just a matter of how much.

[bettheoverlay]

I'm for boycotting because it would be interesting to see if such a concept would work in an enviroment of essentially independent contractors. Hopefully, Jeff and the leaders line up many big time California bettors before they announce a date. Would any P6 syndicates cease operating? It would be great to see the showcase bet take a deep decline, but that might be a tough nut to crack especially on carryover days.

I would like to see some clearly defined goals. I'm assuming that the main one would be to rescind the takeout increase, and then call off the boycott? How long might that be expected to take, how long can you keep the big bettors away, especially if California is their bread and butter?

In talking to a couple of my racing buddies, average bettors, they are a bit confused. They look for wagers they think they can win at, they never consider the take. If they find a bet they love at a California track, I'm telling them don't make the bet in consideration of the future of the sport. Go play the P3s at Retama with the low takes. We all laughed as none of us could ever remember cashing a ticket at Retama. Its better to lose with a low take, then win with a higher take I'm telling them.

One thing to consider is that internet forums appear to have been invented for people with a high dosage of the outrage gene. Others may not see things so clearly and with such certainty. Still if the big bettors are lining up, (it does effect them the most doesn't it?), then it still might work.

[andymays]

Of course It will be successful,We're In a bad economy the numbers are going down It's just a matter of how much.

It has to go down an additonal 15% more than the natural trend or it will be spinned as a failure. There can be no doubt in anyones mind as to what caused the decrease in handle.

[jelly]

It has to be advertised,It should be on every Website and Blog that supports a boycott.

How would you like to be in charge of CHRB and see customers boycotting your product.It's not a good feeling.

[andymays]

It has to be advertised,It should be on every Website and Blog that supports a boycott.

How would you like to be in charge of CHRB and see customers boycotting your product. It's not a good feeling .

I email them stuff to give them hearburn a few times a week. I'm quite sure that most of them would like myself and a couple of others dissapear so I have a little more on the line than the average guy;)

What you need to understand is that these guys get off on their power trips and they really do look down on Horseplayers in the worst of ways. If you take them on and lose there will never be another chance.

[castaway01]

It has to go down an additonal 15% more than the natural trend or it will be spinned as a failure. There can be no doubt in anyones mind as to what caused the decrease in handle.

Andy, you made a good point earlier---the boycott HAS to work, especially if HANA endorses/supports/organizes it. If they do and handle does not drop or only drops slightly, that kills HANA and the power of future boycotts. Any boycott would have to be very well-organized (as much as is possible with people spread out all over the country with very different interests). One thing I know you would be good at would be getting the word out. And I know Jeff will be very careful and wise about what kind of move he endorses.

You have my support, but it's all hypothetical because I don't play California. Good luck to the rest of you in your efforts.

Edit: I actually see you made your point again right above my post---this is the only shot at a boycott, and it must be successful or we're back to being "idiots" and everything else.

[andymays]

Andy, you made a good point earlier--- the boycott HAS to work, especially if HANA endorses/supports/organizes it. If they do and handle does not drop or only drops slightly, that kills HANA and the power of future boycotts. Any boycott would have to be very well-organized (as much as is possible with people spread out all over the country with very different interests). One thing I know you would be good at would be getting the word out. And I know Jeff will be very careful and wise about what kind of move he endorses.

You have my support, but it's all hypothetical because I don't play California. Good luck to the rest of you in your efforts.

Smart comments! :ThmbUp:

[jelly]

I email them stuff to give them hearburn a few times a week. I'm quite sure that most of them would like myself and a couple of others dissapear so I have a little more on the line than the average guy;)


I know you do and you do a great job and we all appreciate It. :ThmbUp:



What you need to understand is that these guys get off on their power trips and they really do look down on Horseplayers in the worst of ways. If you take them on and lose there will never be another chance.



Let me say this,If you don't make any noise they can't hear you.

[andymays]

Let me say this,If you don't make any noise they can't hear you.

I agree with that. There has actually been quite a bit of noise out here lately. When Bill Christine did the article asking for Brackpool and Israel to resign it hit them right between the eyes. I made sure they all got a copy. I'm sure they were grateful. ;)

[rwwupl]

Andy, you made a good point earlier---the boycott HAS to work, especially if HANA endorses/supports/organizes it. If they do and handle does not drop or only drops slightly, future bthat kills HANA and the power of oycotts. Any boycott would have to be very well-organized (as much as is possible with people spread out all over the country with very different interests). One thing I know you would be good at would be getting the word out. And I know Jeff will be very careful and wise about what kind of move he endorses.

You have my support, but it's all hypothetical because I don't play California. Good luck to the rest of you in your efforts.Edit: I actually see you made your point again right above my post---this is the only shot at a boycott, and it must be successful or we're back to being "idiots" and everything else.

After all this jabber, Can any one put together a viable list of what can be expected from a boycott? Who are the "Whales" that will put this over"...Real names not required... but an estimate of dollars withheld?


Can anyone define the goal? Information is vague. Handle is going down anyway. Do we want an apology from the CHRB? Do we want the Chairman and Vice Chairman to resign? Do we want California to close the doors on horse racing?
Do we want to claim the exotics would not have gone down as much if it was not for us? Do we want more power for HANA? Do we just want to vent?

Goals have not been established, and how and why we will be successful has not been spelled out.

The consequences of failure have not been explored.

Most of the "support " has been from those who do not play California or have quit already Verbal support is fine, but who or where is the bulk of dollar support?

[rwwupl]

I agree with that. There has actually been quite a bit of noise out here lately. When Bill Christine did the article asking for Brackpool and Israel to resign it hit them right between the eyes. I made sure they all got a copy. I'm sure they were grateful. ;)


Yes, Andy, Lots of noise and more.

That article was the biggest blow landed for the fans so far in California. Every racing manager(everyone) who got it took notice.

Nearing 80 comments from core people. and the racing managers have been pushing back.

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/west-coast-wash/comments/09272010-get-out-the-lifeboats/

[castaway01]

After all this jabber, Can any one put together a viable list of what can be expected from a boycott? Who are the "Whales" that will put this over"...Real names not required... but an estimate of dollars withheld?


Can anyone define the goal? Information is vague. Handle is going down anyway. Do we want an apology from the CHRB? Do we want the Chairman and Vice Chairman to resign? Do we want California to close the doors on horse racing?
Do we want to claim the exotics would not have gone down as much if it was not for us? Do we want more power for HANA? Do we just want to vent?

Goals have not been established, and how and why we will be successful has not been spelled out.

The consequences of failure have not been explored.

Most of the "support " has been from those who do not play California or have quit already Verbal support is fine, but who or where is the bulk of dollar support?

The goal would be to drop handle to the point that is beyond the rest of the industry---not 5 percent but 25 percent. Isn't that obviously the goal of a betting boycott?

Ummm, the dollar support would start WHEN THE BOYCOTT STARTS. I'm pretty sure that's the definition of a boycott. Forgive my rudeness, but maybe a dictionary should be your first stop. "boycott" is the word

To spell it out for the less bright, the boycott would be designed to show California racetracks that bettors won't put up with handle increases and will stop wagering at those tracks. If a track ever cut takeout way down, then that track would be SUPPORTED. Tracks that increase takeout will lose business. Get it now?

[Deepsix]

That last sentence I believe you said "handle increases" when you may have meant "takeout increases".... no?

[Horseplayersbet.com]

That last sentence I believe you said "handle increases" when you may have meant "takeout increases".... no?
I think that is pretty much the second most obvious thing on this thread. :)

[Lasix67]

I'm done with wagering on California tracks until I see some changes such as surface and takeout, so yes I am boycotting.

To clarify my position. I have reduced my wagering dramatically if not completely ever since the changeover to synthetic surfaces. My boycott is in regards to the takeout.

[Deepsix]

<grin> I actually meant "paragraph" vice "sentence" BUT I'm not all that bright.

[rwwupl]

The goal would be to drop handle to the point that is beyond the rest of the industry---not 5 percent but 25 percent. Isn't that obviously the goal of a betting boycott?

Ummm, the dollar support would start WHEN THE BOYCOTT STARTS. I'm pretty sure that's the definition of a boycott. Forgive my rudeness, but maybe a dictionary should be your first stop. "boycott" is the word

To spell it out for the less bright, the boycott would be designed to show California racetracks that bettors won't put up with handle increases and will stop wagering at those tracks. If a track ever cut takeout way down, then that track would be SUPPORTED. Tracks that increase takeout will lose business. Get it now?


Sorry that I am not as bright as you. I thought my questions were legitimate.
Thank you for defining victory and providing a roadmap and I suppose you have the rest of the answers too. Could you share more detail with us? May I ask how much you play at a California track on a daily basis? I think the dictionary leaves a lot of questions unanswered for me that I stated before.
I really think you missed my point, but we will leave it at that. Thanks for the instruction.


Main Entry:boycott
Pronunciation:*b*i-*k*t
Function:transitive verb
Etymology:Charles C. Boycott *1897 English land agent in Ireland who was ostracized for refusing to reduce rents
Date:1880

: to engage in a concerted refusal to have dealings with (as a person, store, or organization) usually to express disapproval or to force acceptance of certain conditions

[rwwupl]

Comment from Eddie D....(Via E-Mail)

I can hear the soundbytes now: Raise in takeout goes into effect on December 26. End of meet comes around that April and handle is way down.


"Clearly fans did not respond to the change in track surface."


Yeah, that must be it.


EdD

[Stillriledup]

Comment from Eddie D....(Via E-Mail)

I can hear the soundbytes now: Raise in takeout goes into effect on December 26. End of meet comes around that April and handle is way down.


"Clearly fans did not respond to the change in track surface."


Yeah, that must be it.


EdD

Then, you will have a statement from the suits at DMR saying "See, look what happened"

[jelly]

Comment from Eddie D....(Via E-Mail)

I can hear the soundbytes now: Raise in takeout goes into effect on December 26. End of meet comes around that April and handle is way down.


"Clearly fans did not respond to the change in track surface."


Yeah, that must be it.


EdD




That's why we need the boycott.

[The_Knight_Sky]

Unfortunately not everyone will be aware of such a boycott. I think it is up to us to spread the word to our fellow players any which way but how.

I think I can explain the situation to at least one regular California player at The Big M. Not only is this important for HANA but important for the sport and business of horse racing. This is the chance for the customers to finally call for better pricing not only in California but nationally.

HANA must also offer up other racetracks worthy of supporting during the boycott.

If the a boycott fails to add punch to the inevitable erosion of handle, you may very well see other racetracks applying such band aids to last a "few of more years" in the business. That in lieu of what is best for the long-term health of horse racing.

A self-sustained business plan for racetrack has yet to be implemented, it starts with utilizing the takeout rates from the eras when horse racing was the #1 spectator sport, specifically 10 WPS and 12% exotics.

If you are running a fledgling racetrack and you did not try lowering your takeouts across the board, and did not allow enough time for the handle to grow over many seasons, you deserve to be out of the horse racing business.

[PaceAdvantage]

<grin> I actually meant "paragraph" vice "sentence" BUT I'm not all that bright.Plus you're really, really old school with those <grin> and <smile> thingys.

:) <----see how it works these days?

[Tom]

:) <----see how it works these days?

I love this new technology! <wink>

[highnote]

So it's October 6th. No posts in 3 days. Does this mean the time for an organized boycott has not come?

Or maybe an unorganized boycott is already here?

My contention is that informed horseplayers are boycotting in an unorganized fashion. They just refuse to bet if they don't get the best rates -- whether it be a low takeout in general or a rebate.

[lsosa54]

Today's field sizes alone are an automatic boycott for me. This is from someone that attended his first race at Santa Anita in April 1988 and has been handicapping the SoCal circuit almost exclusively until recently. I'm now finding a ton more opportunity at Penn National, the LA circuit, TP, and Remington.

[andymays]

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/59227/hialeah-cuts-takeout-rate-to-12-for-all-bets

Excerpt:

A racetrack traditionally known for its high pari-mutuel takeout has greatly reduced it to 12% across the board.

Hialeah Park, which only offers Quarter Horse racing at this time, made the announcement Oct. 6, touting its takeout rate as the “industry low.”

[The_Knight_Sky]

WOW !

That's great. What a complete 180 degree turnabout from what Mr. Brunetti charged in Hialeah's waning days. Now I count the days for an extended Thoroughbred Meet.

This should put some pressure on Gulfstream Park - Tampa Bay Downs and Calder to rethink their current rates and keep their audience.

I am hoping that this is not an "introductory price" the way credit cards scam consumers and then locking them in.

[rwwupl]

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/59227/hialeah-cuts-takeout-rate-to-12-for-all-bets

Excerpt:

A racetrack traditionally known for its high pari-mutuel takeout has greatly reduced it to 12% across the board.

Hialeah Park, which only offers Quarter Horse racing at this time, made the announcement Oct. 6, touting its takeout rate as the “industry low.”



Well, well, one by one racetracks are experimenting with lower takeout.. it is just a matter of time and conditions that a major thoroughbred track sees the handwriting on the wall and they start competing for our business in a serious way.

A natural boycott is on now,aided by the economy,choice and competition.

rwwupl

[Horseplayersbet.com]

I smell a buycott. :)

[DeanT]

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

Wow! Hialeah Quarterhorses go 12% Across the Board Takeout (http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/2010/10/wow-hialeah-quarterhorses-go-12-across.html)


http://www.hialeahparkracing.com/images/top_features/banner_racing.png (http://www.hialeahparkracing.com/images/top_features/banner_racing.png)According to the Bloodhorse (http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/59227/hialeah-cuts-takeout-rate-to-12-for-all-bets), Hialeah for their quarterhorse meet will go 12% takeout, across the board.

For the players of that sport, you have a pretty clear choice: Los Alamitos who raised their takeout this year to about 22% blended, or Hialeah at an almost 50% discount.

This is in sharp contrast to 17 years ago where we looked at old time racing, being, well, old time racing in a story on HANAblog. (http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/2009/12/walk-through-takeouts-past.html) Bill Finely was analyzing the Hialeah thoroughbred takeout situation at that time.

From 1993.

"Only this year will be different. Hialeah owner John Brunetti will do the unimaginable; he will make Hialeah the worst place on earth to play horses. Hialeah opens April 1, April Fools' Day for South Florida bettors. Brunetti plans to institute what is believed to be the highest takeout structure in the history of U.S. thoroughbred racing. The take on win, place and show bets will be 23.1 percent and there will be a 28 percent take on all other wagers. Winning money -- never easy at the track -- will be impossible at Hialeah."

17 years......

Moving from "the worst place on earth to play the horses" to "the best place on earth to play the horses"

We are witnessing a full circle development in the state of this game. Losing over 50% of your yearly handle and half your customers tends to do that.

[the little guy]

12% of $10 is better than 20% of zero....at least from the track's perspective.

[rwwupl]

Andymays sent out this good news to interested people in California,like the CHRB and Los Alamitos which have recently gone the other way on the takeout issue.

Even stubborn people will see the light .. when they compete for our business.

[andymays]

Oak Tree: Small pools today | Daily Racing Form

http://www.drf.com/blogs/oak-tree-small-pools-today