PDA

View Full Version : HANA, where you at?


Scav
01-07-2011, 06:56 PM
Are 2% takeout increases in a location where they were already below par the only thing that HANA is concerned about?

What about the ridiculousness that happened at Gulfstream yesterday in race 5?

Sr Henry was said to be running, yet he never showed up in the paddock and people with multi race bets in that ultra low takeout got screwed with Carson Hall, who was the lesser of the entry?

Come on HANA, where you at?

BillW
01-07-2011, 07:17 PM
Are 2% takeout increases in a location where they were already below par the only thing that HANA is concerned about?

What about the ridiculousness that happened at Gulfstream yesterday in race 5?

Sr Henry was said to be running, yet he never showed up in the paddock and people with multi race bets in that ultra low takeout got screwed with Carson Hall, who was the lesser of the entry?

Come on HANA, where you at?

Please pass along documentation of any e-mails you have sent or phone calls you have made and we will be glad to follow up.

DeanT
01-07-2011, 08:24 PM
Sr Henry was said to be running, yet he never showed up in the paddock and people with multi race bets in that ultra low takeout got screwed with Carson Hall, who was the lesser of the entry?



What would you propose as a worthwhile change to the current policy?

Horseplayersbet.com
01-07-2011, 11:30 PM
The only solution to this type of problem (and it doesn't happen enough times that a change will be deemed necessary) is to either get rid of horizontal wagers or don't have coupled entries.

JohnGalt1
01-08-2011, 09:45 AM
Or in this case, have the remaining horse run for purse only.

Horseplayersbet.com
01-08-2011, 11:01 AM
Or in this case, have the remaining horse run for purse only.
But then what happens to horizontal bets? You get the fave? Or a consolation ticket if you hit the other parts?

DeanT
01-08-2011, 12:25 PM
Or in this case, have the remaining horse run for purse only.

Where I am stuck is - what if the 1A is scratched and he was the part of the entry that was 90-1, and the 1 is the 3-1 fair odds horse everyone wanted in the first place? You'd have to scratch him out of it, if the 1A is scratched. Then if the 1 won, and you got the chalk (you liked the 1 that is why you picked him but he won and you dont have him), I think we'd see a lot of players pissed about it.

If you scratch him out of the race for horizontals as well, it makes the race a bad betting race for people, because you eliminated a 3-1 shot.

I wonder if this might not be one of those weird situations that is pretty hard to account for, and make right.

I have not played a race in a week this week, so I do not know all the particulars of this situation, so I could be off anyway.

cj
01-08-2011, 01:00 PM
The fairest answer is to have the horse run for purse money only. Nobody says you have to get stuck with the favorite. There should be a refund.

chickenhead
01-08-2011, 01:10 PM
the strange thing about entries -- is I generally fail to see really any real life case where they actually protect any bettors, from anything. It seems like in the few cases we end up seeing rabbit-like entries, they are generally uncoupled.

Just do away with entries all together, imo. They cause more problems than they solve.

Then, also give refunds. Let me bet whatever combo I want, and if it doesn't exist, give me my refund.

cj
01-08-2011, 01:18 PM
I should say the obvious answer to the thread title is between the 'a' and the 't'.

DeanT
01-08-2011, 01:33 PM
the strange thing about entries -- is I generally fail to see really any real life case where they actually protect any bettors, from anything. It seems like in the few cases we end up seeing rabbit-like entries, they are generally uncoupled.

Just do away with entries all together, imo. They cause more problems than they solve.

Then, also give refunds. Let me bet whatever combo I want, and if it doesn't exist, give me my refund.

It's a concept built for another age. I agree, they should all be done away with.

When betfair asked their players if they wanted coupled or uncoupled, they spoke loud and clear in huge numbers: Uncoupled.

Stillriledup
01-08-2011, 02:46 PM
There should be no coupled entries.

The 'logic' behind coupled entries is to prevent 'shenanigans' from an owner who might 'manipulate' the race with two different betting interests. HERE'S a novel idea, why don't the 'judges' watch carefully and if any shenanigans go on, act accordingly. Why punish the bettors and put the onus on them?

Coupling horses is the lazy man's way to 'prevent' two horses acting as a 'tagteam' while being seperate betting interests. Just uncouple them and pay attention and fine/suspend anyone who appears to be 'working together'. This way, the bettors can actually pick and choose who they want to bet on, instead of being forced to accept a horse they might not want.

The Breeders Cup uncouples everything, it CAN be done.

the little guy
01-08-2011, 02:50 PM
Please pass along documentation of any e-mails you have sent or phone calls you have made and we will be glad to follow up.

This is exactly the kind of arrogant and snide response that customers have sadly received from too many racetrack executives over the years. Congratulations.

chickenhead
01-08-2011, 03:00 PM
Yeah if horseplayers are in some rough consensus about how they want this handled, from soup to nuts, then I support HANA adding it as a plank.

For whatever reason (valid or not) around this particular issue I pick up a strong undercurrent of various other things that apparently NYRA figures strongly in...nobody reasonable cares anything about the track involved.

Come up with one model policy that everyone agrees is ideal -- that is something worth talking about and spending time on.

To me, part of 1 of that is that coupled entries themselves are FAR from ideal. Eliminate them.

Part 2 for me would be refunds, but there are downsides to that as well.

DeanT
01-08-2011, 03:06 PM
Yeah if horseplayers are in some rough consensus about how they want this handled, from soup to nuts, then I support HANA adding it as a plank.

For whatever reason (valid or not) around this particular issue I pick up a strong undercurrent of various other things that apparently NYRA figures strongly in...nobody reasonable cares anything about the track involved.

Come up with one model policy that everyone agrees is ideal -- that is something worth talking about and spending time on.

To me, part of 1 of that is that coupled entries themselves are FAR from ideal. Eliminate them.

Part 2 for me would be refunds, but there are downsides to that as well.

It's amazing when you watch the uncoupled odds on BF, when looking at the tote. With a 1, 1A and 1B race and five entries (which happens of course), where the 1 is 5-2 on BF, the 1A is 4-1 and the 1B is 9-1, those horses are 3-5 or 1-2 on the board. The race is a total cross out and no one will look at it, but when you split them and eliminate the entry, it turns out is a very good betting race.

chickenhead
01-08-2011, 03:07 PM
This is exactly the kind of arrogant and snide response that customers have sadly received from too many racetrack executives over the years. Congratulations.

Yes, a horseplayers group offering to follow up on a horseplayers complaint is so incredibly snide and arrogant.

What you miss is that horseplayers routinely send HANA documentation of their phone calls and emails, and HANA backs their play if they don't get an answer from those snide, arrogant track execs.

That's kind of how it works.

Your welcome.

the little guy
01-08-2011, 03:46 PM
Yes, a horseplayers group offering to follow up on a horseplayers complaint is so incredibly snide and arrogant.

What you miss is that horseplayers routinely send HANA documentation of their phone calls and emails, and HANA backs their play if they don't get an answer from those snide, arrogant track execs.

That's kind of how it works.

Your welcome.


I laughed.

chickenhead
01-08-2011, 04:17 PM
I keep wanting to bring HANA and New York together, trying to think up ways for it to happen....but it just seems like such a lost cause.

The NYRA "I'm so put upon" complex is impenetrable, all they see are enemies, everywhere, and in every way. I wrote it off for awhile assuming it'd change....but it's just a brick wall.

Fat Syd
01-08-2011, 04:19 PM
Please pass along documentation of any e-mails you have sent or phone calls you have made and we will be glad to follow up.

Why wouldn't Hana be pressing the track for an explaination? Isn't Hana the alledged voice of the Horse player? Isn't it the responsibilty of Hana to address egregious behavior by tracks acting against its customers? Why should we be calling or emailing as individuals when we have the organization that is suppose to concentrate our voices as one? So you can follow up? Thanks for nothing!

the little guy
01-08-2011, 04:25 PM
I keep wanting to bring HANA and New York together, trying to think up ways for it to happen....but it just seems like such a lost cause.

The NYRA "I'm so put upon" complex is impenetrable, all they see are enemies, everywhere, and in every way. I wrote it off for awhile assuming it'd change....but it's just a brick wall.


Wait a second....your response to me wasn't a joke? Really? I just assumed you were kidding. That's too bad.

It has nothing to do with NY or NYRA. His response was unfortunate at best. But, hey, if that's what you, or HANA, feels is fair, or representative, then so be it. Good luck.

DeanT
01-08-2011, 04:27 PM
Why wouldn't Hana be pressing the track for an explaination? Isn't Hana the alledged voice of the Horse player? Isn't it the responsibilty of Hana to address egregious behavior by tracks acting against its customers? Why should we be calling or emailing as individuals when we have the organization that is suppose to concentrate our voices as one? So you can follow up? Thanks for nothing!

Hi Syd,

Because it is an organization with four people who have 6 issues they are working on, for example, CHRB, Mike Maloney going to the KY racing commission meetings, Roger way dealing with Cali issues, and elsewhere.

Paid staff handle issues in paid organizations, so running on every complaint can happen in them. In non-paid, 100% volunteer ones, the player generally emails us their concern and documents it, we discuss it (sometimes on boards like this, just like we are discussing the scratch issue right now on this thread) and then a plan to move forward is constructed, with obvious opportunity cost oriented items playing a major role.

If the issue is a large one that has inflamed the community, we have a look what people are saying, and sometimes move on it by ourselves, but it is a time issue to move on everything - we get dozens of complaints via email and generally give the complainant the tools, email addresses or phone numbers to move it forward and report back. That, by definition, is what grassroots advocacy groups are for.

Thanks and if there is anything else you need, or want someone to help you with, please email all details to horseplayersassociation@ gmail.com or info at HANAweb.org

For others: Share your thoughts on the thread about this issue if it is something that you have an opinion on - because that is how policy for change that HANA brings forward is formed: from your thoughts and comments, in the open.

chickenhead
01-08-2011, 04:29 PM
Why wouldn't Hana be pressing the track for an explaination? Isn't Hana the alledged voice of the Horse player? Isn't it the responsibilty of Hana to address egregious behavior by tracks acting against its customers? Why should we be calling or emailing as individuals when we have the organization that is suppose to concentrate our voices as one? So you can follow up? Thanks for nothing!

The point of HANA isn't so horseplayers can sit on their hands, they want them contacting tracks MORE often not less.

They're an advocacy group, advocating for policies. That's why they asked what policy the OP, and other bettors want. They need to have a policy before they can ask tracks to implement it. And it won't be Gulfstream specific, it'll be all tracks.

Why don't you talk about what you want the policy to be -- that's useful.

Horseplayers have to give HANA something to put forward, it doesn't happen in a vacuum, and it isn't cooked up by HANA in some back room.

Spiderman
01-08-2011, 04:29 PM
The only solution to this type of problem (and it doesn't happen enough times that a change will be deemed necessary) is to either get rid of horizontal wagers or don't have coupled entries.

Everybody wins with a consolation on the entry - track still rakes-in takeout and bettors get something back.

chickenhead
01-08-2011, 04:34 PM
Wait a second....your response to me wasn't a joke? Really? I just assumed you were kidding. That's too bad.

It has nothing to do with NY or NYRA. His response was unfortunate at best. But, hey, if that's what you, or HANA, feels is fair, or representative, then so be it. Good luck.

Sure it does. This entire thread came about from Byks board, with put upon NYRA-ers making fun of HANA, because of Gulfstream's scratch. Scavs posted it here specifically for that reason, to "LOL at HANA". I guess because HANA had the audacity to say a 15% pick 5 is a good thing. Somehow I guess that somehow worked out to a slight to NYRA.

Everything you do has something to do with some weird NYRA complex that I honestly don't understand. It may make sense to someone that actually has some complementary negative NYRA bias -- but to the rest of the world -- it makes you guys look fairly insane.

Fat Syd
01-08-2011, 04:38 PM
The point of HANA isn't so horseplayers can sit on their hands, they want them contacting tracks MORE often not less.

They're an advocacy group, advocating for policies. That's why they asked what policy the OP, and other bettors want. They need to have a policy before they can ask tracks to implement it. And it won't be Gulfstream specific, it'll be all tracks.

Why don't you talk about what you want the policy to be -- that's useful.

Horseplayers have to give HANA something to put forward, it doesn't happen in a vacuum, and it isn't cooked up by HANA in some back room.

Oh so you only advocate after players contact the offensive environments. So the fact that the track stole from horse players with wild wild west chicanery doesn't invoke the organization to act on behalf of player. Hana is the players friend but only if the player calls or emails tracks? This is brilliant?
You need me to call the track that just hosed me so that you have a reason to call the police? I would have thought witnessing a robbery would be justification enough but that is just me

DeanT
01-08-2011, 04:41 PM
Sure it does. This entire thread came about from Byks board, with put upon NYRA-ers making fun of HANA, because of Gulfstream's scratch. Scavs posted it here specifically for that reason, to "LOL at HANA".

I had no idea I am answering troll bait. I thought it was someone who wanted to honestly talk about forming some policy on coupled entries.

I hope others discuss the issue, because I am starting to think uncoupling might be a good idea that we might want to make a 2011 plank.

Sewing silk from a sows ear?

FYI: For those who are honestly following the thread - changes to things like this in FL take 12 months +, through gvt red tape. Last year on the turf scratches, we complained and GP put forth a request to the commission to change the rules. It is 10 months later and we have heard back from GP that the issue is still in committee. So this is nothing that can be changed overnight.

the little guy
01-08-2011, 04:44 PM
Sure it does. This entire thread came about from Byks board, with put upon NYRA-ers making fun of HANA, because of Gulfstream's scratch. Scavs posted it here specifically for that reason, to "LOL at HANA". I guess because HANA had the audacity to say a 15% pick 5 is a good thing. Somehow I guess that somehow worked out to a slight to NYRA.

Everything you do has something to do with some weird NYRA complex that I honestly don't understand. It may make sense to someone that actually has some complementary negative NYRA bias -- but to the rest of the world -- it makes you guys look fairly insane.


Wow, you're really paranoid. I barely read Derby Trail but they sure don't speak for NYRA. Your comments are way off base and cannot be backed up by my posts. You seem to have an issue and I am glad you have aired it. You are wrong, dead wrong, but at least you came clean. At least now I know exactly how to take your misguided responses to me.

I feel better....and can only assume you do.

chickenhead
01-08-2011, 05:36 PM
Wow, you're really paranoid. I barely read Derby Trail but they sure don't speak for NYRA. Your comments are way off base and cannot be backed up by my posts. You seem to have an issue and I am glad you have aired it. You are wrong, dead wrong, but at least you came clean. At least now I know exactly how to take your misguided responses to me.

I feel better....and can only assume you do.

Yeah, you've correctly doped me out, I'm out to get you. And NYRA. Just like everyone else.

Dahoss9698
01-08-2011, 06:53 PM
Not sure why Scav is being called a troll or was responded to in the way he was. He brought up an issue that should be of concern to any horseplayer. I don't see it as a "LOL at HANA" at all. But a genuine question about what they think about what happened and if there are any plans to do anything about it.

I wonder if the response might have been different if it had happened at Santa Anita instead of Gulfstream.

the little guy
01-08-2011, 06:58 PM
Yeah, you've correctly doped me out, I'm out to get you. And NYRA. Just like everyone else.

You are? I didn't realize that....but then again, I'm not the one with paranoid delusions in this thread.

I tell you what, instead of taking cheap shots at me from behind a keyboard, stop by and say hi some time. Or even meet me for a drink in Saratoga. I'm easy to find.

chickenhead
01-08-2011, 09:23 PM
Not sure why Scav is being called a troll or was responded to in the way he was. He brought up an issue that should be of concern to any horseplayer. I don't see it as a "LOL at HANA" at all. But a genuine question about what they think about what happened and if there are any plans to do anything about it.

He's the one that said it was an "LOL @ HANA". Which you know, as you posted in the thread. You can't troll people AND play victim, it just doesn't work. One or the other.


You are? I didn't realize that....but then again, I'm not the one with paranoid delusions in this thread.

I tell you what, instead of taking cheap shots at me from behind a keyboard, stop by and say hi some time. Or even meet me for a drink in Saratoga. I'm easy to find.

Ah, the other old favorite "I'm public and you're not -- therefore you're likely a troll if you are arguing with me."

If I disagree with you, it's because I think you're wrong about something -- not because of who you are, and not because we're on the internet. I've also agreed with you, when I thought you were right.

It's funny you're accusing me of cheap shots in this thread after your grand entrance.

I often find a mind set from people in NY, particularly people close to NYRA, that NYRA is unfairly put upon. A siege mentality. It's pervasive. And I find it to be a serious hindrance for being able to talk to them, often, about anything. Because it is always there, under the surface, coloring things. It's like a magnetic pole, something taken for granted by them, even if they don't realize it.

For people for whom NYRA is just another set of tracks, just like any other -- it can be a bit much after awhile. The entire spirit behind that Byk thread is just strange. Apparently Cali has now been adopted, like an orphan child, and now they're unfairly put upon, too.

Obviously, this is not specific to you. I've witnessed you have this chip on your shoulder, yes. I'm baffled you can't admit it, it's fairly strong part of the persona you project. But I've also noticed it with many perfectly anonymous people, people I know nothing about. It has zero with you being a public persona, so please don't throw that back at me. It's a years long thread of behavior, clearly established well before you showed up here.

Never been to Saratoga, but if I make the trip some time I'll look you up. I certainly have no embarrassment over anything I've ever said to you. Somehow I imagine your personality would change more in person than mine would.

Dahoss9698
01-08-2011, 09:47 PM
He's the one that said it was an "LOL @ HANA". Which you know, as you posted in the thread. You can't troll people AND play victim, it just doesn't work. One or the other.


What are you talking about? Where did he "LOL at HANA" in this thread? Here's a thought, instead of having a temper tantrum because in some paranoid rage think people are laughing at you, address the issue.

chickenhead
01-08-2011, 10:04 PM
What are you talking about? Where did he "LOL at HANA" in this thread? Here's a thought, instead of having a temper tantrum because in some paranoid rage think people are laughing at you, address the issue.

Don't play dumb.

Pointing out the origin of your friends question, and his comment on this subject on your normal board isn't a "temper tantrum". It's called "providing context".

Nothing paranoid or angry about it, it's pretty weird you and Andy seem to keep throwing those words around. Like I said, strange under currents always abound.

If you want to address the topic, I've addressed it multiple times in this thread, given my thoughts on what I think a good policy would be. You've never addressed the topic -- you've trolled me instead. Why don't you take your own advice? You want to talk about scratches and horizontals, scavs wants to talk about scratches and horizontals, Andy wants to talk about scratches and horizontals -- DO SO -- let's talk about them.

But no, just with the trolling.

Tom
01-08-2011, 10:25 PM
Scav seems to have achieved his goal here. :rolleyes:

Dahoss9698
01-08-2011, 11:28 PM
Don't play dumb.

Pointing out the origin of your friends question, and his comment on this subject on your normal board isn't a "temper tantrum". It's called "providing context".

Nothing paranoid or angry about it, it's pretty weird you and Andy seem to keep throwing those words around. Like I said, strange under currents always abound.

If you want to address the topic, I've addressed it multiple times in this thread, given my thoughts on what I think a good policy would be. You've never addressed the topic -- you've trolled me instead. Why don't you take your own advice? You want to talk about scratches and horizontals, scavs wants to talk about scratches and horizontals, Andy wants to talk about scratches and horizontals -- DO SO -- let's talk about them.

But no, just with the trolling.

I've never addressed the topic? Yesterday I was accused of beating it to death and today you're telling me I've never addressed the topic. Weird how that works. I addressed the topic in two different threads yesterday. I seem to be one of a handful of people that seem to be put off by the whole thing. Does anyone bet here? The friends thing is a nice touch here. Hopefully gains you some important brownie points.

And I'm not playing dumb. I had to go back and read the thread on DT to see what you were talking about. Why not address it there if it bothered you so much? Why derail this thread with your hero act? Frankly, considering what happened and the fact there has been no response I can see why it's pretty laughable.

There's one person trolling here and it's not Scav, me or TLG. It's the guy trying to be a hero. I'm sure your friends would be very proud.

highnote
01-08-2011, 11:48 PM
Fortunately, HANA seems to get mostly positive feedback, but I am still struck by how often they are criticized.

HANA is a volunteer organization. They can not possibly deal with every racing ill. They have to pick their spots.

Individual bettors have to learn to use their own personal power and advocate for themselves. Of course, it never hurts to bring up an issue on a racing forum and try to get some feedback or ask for help.

Bettors should not be afraid write letters to the editor of Daily Racing Form. DRF needs content. They will probably publish most letters. They've always published mine - even the poorly written ones. LOL

If a bettor is not comfortable writing a letter they should ask for help from someone here at PA. I'm sure someone here would be willing to assist with grammar and spelling and presenting the argument clearly and concisely.

The HANA board members are all volunteers. Volunteering is perhaps the greatest contribution that individuals can make to society.

chickenhead
01-09-2011, 12:04 AM
Yes, Florida needs to change their rules re this. What the rules would best be, maybe you and I would agree or not, I have no idea. It's not a Gulfstream specific thing.Possibly other states too, to be honest I've rarely bet horizontal in many states, I personally don't know what the rules are everywhere. No, Hana does not currently have any policy on this that I've seen, on specifically this one issue of handling entry scratches in mre. Yes, I'd like to see them develop one and work with the tracks and legislatures to implement it. The first part of that is getting horseplayers to agree on what the rules should be. "different" isn't a policy.

There are a million things racing needs to change. This is one of them.
I'm certain its been noted, again, as something Hana can try to work on.

JustRalph
01-09-2011, 12:28 AM
Scav seems to have achieved his goal here. :rolleyes:

Bingo! Tom cuts through the nonsense ............

chickenhead
01-09-2011, 12:34 AM
And I would have added, sincerely, for people that seriously have this as a major issue...become its champion and put in work on it...get a consensus from players, figure out the laws, put together a proposal. The reason so much activity took place around California is some energetic horseplayers came together and put in work on it. Andymays, rww, others more privately, many hours of work. It doesn't just happen.

I don't want anyone to accuse Hana of being rude again by asking for help, but I was being honest about that part. It's a volunteer org. If you feel strongly about something, volunteer. Pretty much any lack of attention on something cut and dry has to do with resources.

That's all been said before...but I guess it bears repeating. Yes, I stick up for Hana. Unapologetically. They work their asses off and I appreciate it.

DeanT
01-09-2011, 12:40 AM
Scav seems to have achieved his goal here. :rolleyes:

Nice work. I feel foolish for trying to answer honestly earlier in the thread.

Dahoss9698
01-09-2011, 01:12 AM
Nice work. I feel foolish for trying to answer honestly earlier in the thread.

Such a victim. Poor guy.

Scav
01-09-2011, 03:17 AM
Fortunately, HANA seems to get mostly positive feedback, but I am still struck by how often they are criticized.

HANA is a volunteer organization. They can not possibly deal with every racing ill. They have to pick their spots.

Individual bettors have to learn to use their own personal power and advocate for themselves. Of course, it never hurts to bring up an issue on a racing forum and try to get some feedback or ask for help.

Bettors should not be afraid write letters to the editor of Daily Racing Form. DRF needs content. They will probably publish most letters. They've always published mine - even the poorly written ones. LOL

If a bettor is not comfortable writing a letter they should ask for help from someone here at PA. I'm sure someone here would be willing to assist with grammar and spelling and presenting the argument clearly and concisely.

The HANA board members are all volunteers. Volunteering is perhaps the greatest contribution that individuals can make to society.

The idea of HANA is a good one, but the issue is that they are now part of the problem because, like racetracks and to a lesser extent horseman, they think they are the most important thing. HANA portrays that takeout is bad, but without takeout, there would be no racing. Especially since everyone bets from home now, takeout is even more important and we are lucky are not paying 30% on WPS. California is still one of the lowest in WPS and exotic takeouts in the nation, why not attack other tracks? Wait, is it because the 4 volunteers liked betting Santa Anita, and now they won't because they aren't getting 2$ less on every $100

What I find hilarious is that HANA is secretly taking credit for this 18% drop in handle and it is absolute BS. Any serious handicapper/gambler is gonna be taking the cautious approach to a brand new surface in the first 3-4 weeks. OF COURSE they were gonna be down on handle. I would be willing to bet that come February once the surface has set in and people become comfortable handicapping it, they will improve their handle to be better then last year, barring weather or things out of their control.

bigmack
01-09-2011, 03:51 AM
What I find hilarious is that HANA is secretly taking credit for this 18% drop in handle and it is absolute BS.
Secretly? Do tell.

highnote
01-09-2011, 04:40 AM
... the issue is that they are now part of the problem because, like racetracks and to a lesser extent horseman, they think they are the most important thing.

Really? What is it about HANA that makes you think that they think they are the most important thing?


HANA portrays that takeout is bad, but without takeout, there would be no racing.

Really? My impression is that HANA does not think takeout is bad, they think that Santa Anita raising takeout instead of lowering it is a bad thing. Everyone knows it costs the tracks money to put on the show and purses need funded. My impression is that HANA thinks that handle will grow if takeout is lowered to reasonable and optimal levels.

California is still one of the lowest in WPS and exotic takeouts in the nation

Really? I bet that if you take a minute and do a little research you can name a dozen tracks with lower exacta takeouts than Santa Anita.


What I find hilarious is that HANA is secretly taking credit for this 18% drop in handle and it is absolute BS.

Really? Secretly taking credit? If it's a secret then how do you know?

Any serious handicapper/gambler is gonna be taking the cautious approach to a brand new surface in the first 3-4 weeks. OF COURSE they were gonna be down on handle.

Really? How do you know that a serious handicapper/gambler is gonna be cautious? There must be a lot more serious handicapper/gamblers than I thought! I guess that's a good thing.


I would be willing to bet that come February once the surface has set in and people become comfortable handicapping it, they will improve their handle to be better then last year, barring weather or things out of their control.

Really? How much are you willing to bet?

Horseplayersbet.com
01-09-2011, 09:30 AM
John, great counter points.
The answer to the question "why California?" has been answered many times. But it keeps being asked by those who aren't listening. The reasons are at PlayersBoycott.org.

Aside from that, anyone with a clue would realize that California handle will drop relative to the industry because blended takeout rate has now gone up at least 8%.

It doesn't matter that their supers and tris are lower than many other tracks, the fact is that any track that increases blended rates from the optimal takeout rates (which studies have shown to be 14% or less) will suffer. Doesn't matter if it is Churchill Downs or Philly Park. Raise handle and a relative decline will happen.
Sure, there are other factors, but takeout is the most important.
One of the biggest factors is field size, but I don't see it changing much in California. First off, field size is not as elastic as takeout when it comes to betting. Secondly, I don't see a major influx of horses to California, and now with handle way off, any outfit thinking about going to California has to be realistically believing a purse cut is looming on the horizon. And the third thing that will kill field size is the injuries due to the paved highway horses are running on in Santa Anita right now. Not only while racing but in trainer, a hard track causes a lot more injuries, which will hurt starts per horses.

Value has been decimated, and it will only get worse, as the below average bettors get wiped out quicker.

Anyone who "thinks" that things will be better in February, is completely out of touch with reality. From what I've read, there is a pretty big bias right now, and bettors are on that (at least those who aren't boycotting). Nobody who is betting Santa Anita right now is holding back. No one is on the sidelines.

I agree, this thread has been derailed by trollish behavior by a couple of posters.

One has an obvious agenda to bash HANA with rhetorical nonsense.

Back to the topic at hand. I vote for elimination of entries. But what exactly could HANA do about this, since every jurisdiction is different...even on non entry scratches....some pay consolations, and some substitute the favorite.

Personally, though I'd rather be able substitute my own selection, subbing in the fave isn't horrible, and most bettors find it acceptable. I don't think any Horseplayer holds back from betting horizontals because of the fear of a scratch being replaced by the fave.

The scratched entry part after bets were made doesn't happen enough to make it a priority item either, and it doesn't curb Horseplayers from betting horizontals either. When it happens to me, probably once a year tops, I just look at it as being left at the post, I hope for the other entry mate to surprise, and then I turn the page, win or lose.

DeanT
01-09-2011, 12:04 PM
The idea of HANA is a good one, but the issue is that they are now part of the problem because, like racetracks and to a lesser extent horseman, they think they are the most important thing. HANA portrays that takeout is bad, but without takeout, there would be no racing. Especially since everyone bets from home now, takeout is even more important and we are lucky are not paying 30% on WPS. California is still one of the lowest in WPS and exotic takeouts in the nation, why not attack other tracks? Wait, is it because the 4 volunteers liked betting Santa Anita, and now they won't because they aren't getting 2$ less on every $100

What I find hilarious is that HANA is secretly taking credit for this 18% drop in handle and it is absolute BS. Any serious handicapper/gambler is gonna be taking the cautious approach to a brand new surface in the first 3-4 weeks. OF COURSE they were gonna be down on handle. I would be willing to bet that come February once the surface has set in and people become comfortable handicapping it, they will improve their handle to be better then last year, barring weather or things out of their control.

Thanks for your opinion on CA, but what about the reason you started the thread: GP scratches?

What would you think is an equitable policy change for this, or does it happen too infrequently for it to be tackled?

We'll prolly write something up this week, so the more input/ideas the better.

highnote
01-09-2011, 01:53 PM
Wait, is it because the 4 volunteers liked betting Santa Anita, and now they won't because they aren't getting 2$ less on every $100.

I think what you meant to say was "... because they ARE getting $2 less."

So let me give you an example of why getting $2 less per $100 matters:

If you include all the board members of HANA (there are more than 4), let's say they average $1,000 in bets between them per race. It may be more.

(btw... Professional handicappers probably bet $2,000 per race on races where the pools are big enough. And on KY Derby day, maybe $10,000 per race.)

So HANA board members are now getting $20 less per race (that's $40 per race for a professional). Let's say they collectively can bet 50 races per day since some of them probably have software that points out potential horses to bet. Now you're talking $1,000 less per day.

That means a professional is probably losing out even more per day -- maybe $2,000 per day. That's less money to pay their staff. Less money to churn back into the pools. Less money for everyone in the long term -- including tracks, trainers, jocks and grooms, etc.

All this because they are making $2 less per $100.

So yes. Takeout matters.

Scav
01-09-2011, 02:20 PM
I think what you meant to say was "... because they ARE getting $2 less."

So let me give you an example of why getting $2 less per $100 matters:

If you include all the board members of HANA (there are more than 4), let's say they average $1,000 in bets between them per race. It may be more.

(btw... Professional handicappers probably bet $2,000 per race on races where the pools are big enough. And on KY Derby day, maybe $10,000 per race.)

So HANA board members are now getting $20 less per race (that's $40 per race for a professional). Let's say they collectively can bet 50 races per day since some of them probably have software that points out potential horses to bet. Now you're talking $1,000 less per day.

That means a professional is probably losing out even more per day -- maybe $2,000 per day. That's less money to pay their staff. Less money to churn back into the pools. Less money for everyone in the long term -- including tracks, trainers, jocks and grooms, etc.

All this because they are making $2 less per $100.

So yes. Takeout matters.

I don't need a lecture on takeout comedy guy. I understand it completely. I am a california bettor, close to 75% of my action is in California and I welcomed this takeout increase with open arms because I am sick of 5 horse fields and daily doubles that are paying $3.40. 100% of this takeout increase goes into the purses. If they lowered takeout you think people would unload on 5 horse fields, very very unlikely.

I am also a fringe horseman, and I understand the need to make money to pay the bills on these nags. Speaking from a horseman perspective, the purse increase will give the people that sit on the sidelines and wait for the perfect spot to run. I manage horses that at Philly Park and when I run 3rd there, I pay the bills for the whole month.

Saratoga_Mike
01-09-2011, 02:45 PM
I don't need a lecture on takeout comedy guy. I understand it completely. I am a california bettor, close to 75% of my action is in California and I welcomed this takeout increase with open arms because I am sick of 5 horse fields and daily doubles that are paying $3.40. 100% of this takeout increase goes into the purses. If they lowered takeout you think people would unload on 5 horse fields, very very unlikely.

I am also a fringe horseman, and I understand the need to make money to pay the bills on these nags. Speaking from a horseman perspective, the purse increase will give the people that sit on the sidelines and wait for the perfect spot to run. I manage horses that at Philly Park and when I run 3rd there, I pay the bills for the whole month.

Have field sizes increased? If not, when will that happen?

thaskalos
01-09-2011, 02:48 PM
I don't need a lecture on takeout comedy guy. I understand it completely. I am a california bettor, close to 75% of my action is in California and I welcomed this takeout increase with open arms because I am sick of 5 horse fields and daily doubles that are paying $3.40. 100% of this takeout increase goes into the purses. If they lowered takeout you think people would unload on 5 horse fields, very very unlikely.

I am also a fringe horseman, and I understand the need to make money to pay the bills on these nags. Speaking from a horseman perspective, the purse increase will give the people that sit on the sidelines and wait for the perfect spot to run. I manage horses that at Philly Park and when I run 3rd there, I pay the bills for the whole month.
It's one thing to say that you believe the takeout increase to be justified...and it's something altogether different to declare that you have "welcomed this takeout increase with open arms".

Does this mean, that we should welcome the takeout increases that are sure to follow in other states, "with open arms" as well?

Relwob Owner
01-09-2011, 02:51 PM
Have field sizes increased? If not, when will that happen?


I believe the average field size so far is just under 8, down slightly from last year so the goal of getting field sizes doesnt appear to have been reached yet. Looks like today, the average size will be pretty low. There is a stakes race today that will start 3 horses after two have scratched.....

Saratoga_Mike
01-09-2011, 02:52 PM
I believe the average field size so far is just under 8, down slightly from last year so the goal of getting field sizes doesnt appear to have been reached yet. Looks like today, the average size will be pretty low. There is a stakes race today that will start 3 horses after two have scratched.....

That's horrible.

Relwob Owner
01-09-2011, 02:56 PM
That's horrible.


It is....the owners and trainers of the remaining three horses welcomed the scratches and subsequent 3 horse field "with open arms".......

thaskalos
01-09-2011, 02:59 PM
It is....the owners and trainers of the remaining three horses welcomed the scratches and subsequent 3 horse field "with open arms".......
Yes indeed! :ThmbUp:

DeanT
01-09-2011, 03:37 PM
If only it was so easy to give a few more bucks to purses and fix field size in CA; but it is not.

If it was, the purse increase in 06 with the same policy would have worked.

Anywhere there is an increase, there is a resulting increase in costs of horse ownership which eats the increase. This has happened in many jurisdictions. There is a fundamental problem in horse ownership costs there that needs to be addressed, imo.

Like a CA horse owner said here: "They could up the purses for MSW to 100k and all that will happen will be an increase in everything that goes into the horse, inflation will occur in bloodstock prices, and owners will be tapped out asking for more purses." We have heard that from others too that own in CA.

The worst part with this is that doing something they have already tried that did not work is one thing, but squeezing players to do the same thing over again makes little sense. It is not an opinion that handle will go down, and you will break more customers, it's simple mathematics. It's not like our customer base in racing is growing or anything. We've lost half our handles in the last ten years.

It's putting a bandaid on a gaping wound. It does not fix the problem, just like it did not fix the problem in 2006 when they tried it. The patient does not need more band-aids, he needs surgery.

highnote
01-09-2011, 04:00 PM
I don't need a lecture on takeout comedy guy.

"comedy guy"? Why do you resort to namecalling?


I understand it completely.

Apparantly not. Otherwise, you would understand that bettors don't like losing money. $2 per $100 is not trivial -- it compounds rapidly.

100% of this takeout increase goes into the purses.

I don't think your statement is correct. I believe I read that the extra takeout increase is split with ADWs. If so, then only 1/2 of it goes to purses.

Scav
01-09-2011, 04:04 PM
"comedy guy"? Why do you resort to namecalling?




Apparantly not. Otherwise, you would understand that bettors don't like losing money. $2 per $100 is not trivial -- it compounds rapidly.



I don't think your statement is correct. I believe I read that the extra takeout increase is split with ADWs. If so, then only 1/2 of it goes to purses.

My statement is correct. And I use 'Comedy guy' alot, sometimes I forget this is the internet.

Scav
01-09-2011, 04:11 PM
It's one thing to say that you believe the takeout increase to be justified...and it's something altogether different to declare that you have "welcomed this takeout increase with open arms".

Does this mean, that we should welcome the takeout increases that are sure to follow in other states, "with open arms" as well?

Not at all. I understand the your thought that "if california can do, others can" but other states have already gone down that path. I don't think they are going to because most other states are already at the breaking point, they have already done this.

http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/static.cgi?page=trktkout&header=off

The above is from 2008 so it is out of date, but on this list, Cali was the 2nd lowest to New York. I don't know what the updated numbers are.

I can accept 2nd on the list for them to try something to stimulate racing.

Horseplayersbet.com
01-09-2011, 04:20 PM
California should have said that the takeout increase will not only lead to bigger field size but also end world hunger.
They would be dead wrong on both counts.

Is this Scarv guy for real? Seriously. I'm :bang: :bang: on his every word.
A gambler welcoming a takeout increase????
For the possibility of bigger field sizes?

Horseplayersbet.com
01-09-2011, 04:23 PM
Not at all. I understand the your thought that "if california can do, others can" but other states have already gone down that path. I don't think they are going to because most other states are already at the breaking point, they have already done this.

http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/static.cgi?page=trktkout&header=off

The above is from 2008 so it is out of date, but on this list, Cali was the 2nd lowest to New York. I don't know what the updated numbers are.

I can accept 2nd on the list for them to try something to stimulate racing.
It didn't stimulate racing last time they upped the takeout, and it won't stimulate racing now.
Oh, and here is an up to date takeout map:
http://maps.google.ca/maps/ms?hl=en&gl=ca&ptab=2&ie=UTF8&view=map&msa=0&msid=105431952953964702152.00047fd83f45cb6beac52&ll=34.741612,-93.867187&spn=66.947093,112.5&t=p&z=3&source=embed

Scav
01-09-2011, 04:52 PM
California should have said that the takeout increase will not only lead to bigger field size but also end world hunger.
They would be dead wrong on both counts.

Is this Scarv guy for real? Seriously. I'm :bang: :bang: on his every word.
A gambler welcoming a takeout increase????
For the possibility of bigger field sizes?

You do understand that bigger field sizes means more money in the pool, thus more opportunties to make even more money right?

So according to your map, they are still one of the lowest in the nation.

Yeah, lets go after them, way intelligent

highnote
01-09-2011, 05:09 PM
My statement is correct.


Your statement can not be correct.

Government, racetracks and ADWs retain a portion of takeout as their commission. So 100% of takeout can not go to purses. If it did, racetracks and ADWs would be out of business because they would have virtually no income.

I tried locating the article about how ADWs get 50% of the increase, but haven't found it, yet. Maybe it was on Paulick's or Pricci's site.

Horseplayersbet.com
01-09-2011, 05:11 PM
You do understand that bigger field sizes means more money in the pool, thus more opportunties to make even more money right?

So according to your map, they are still one of the lowest in the nation.

Yeah, lets go after them, way intelligent
Lowest in the nation? Nope. They now rank around 60th out of 70 tracks in doubles and exactors.

No, bigger fields do not mean more opportunities to win money. They can up certain value plays, but when the takeout is over 20%, value in the long run is non existent.

And how exactly is this leading to bigger field sizes? Increases in takeout leads to smaller handle for one thing, and when it comes to California, the big problem is the cost to own horses there. There is no influx of horses there now on the promise of purse increases from this really stupid move to up takeout.

The reason there was value in California was because of the lower relative takeouts, they've increased it now, and the dummy money is going to dry up faster. There won't be value. If 75% of your action is in California right now, you are going to lose a lot quicker than ever before. Even you will start feeling it over time.


What California did was attempt to get a larger piece of a shrinking pie. And you know what? They just made the pie shrink some more with the takeout increase. Handle is dropping, and as blended takeout rates increase, it will shrink further. California just made blended takeout rates for the entire industry increase.

DeanT
01-09-2011, 05:16 PM
I tried locating the article about how ADWs get 50% of the increase, but haven't found it, yet. Maybe it was on Paulick's or Pricci's site.

Paulick and drf had it.

Daruty said his goal was to evenly divide the increase between California and the receiving site. Rather than charge a different rate for different bet types, the various takeouts were blended at the new rates, and the price of the signal was increased accordingly. For example, if the blended takeout of various bets (win/place/show, exacta, trifecta, pick 6, etc.) increased by 2.5%, the cost of the host fee paid to Santa Anita and the horsemen would go up by one-half, or 1.25%. The receiving site would get the other 1.25%.

“I’ve been pleased with the reception we’ve received,” Daruty told the Paulick Report. “Every group we’ve dealt with has been very cooperative. I recognize there’s a whole question about raising the price to the consumer, but we’ve said to all of our simulcast partners, we’ll split that with you 50/50. So half (of the increase on out-of-state wagers) comes back to purses, and half stays (with the receiving site).”

Scav
01-09-2011, 05:50 PM
That is in regards to the source fee, I think

DeanT
01-09-2011, 06:22 PM
That is in regards to the source fee, I think

Correct, so as John noted, half the takeout increase goes to purses, and the other half is kept by the host. Only ontrack (and I think CA simo players) are paying full boat for purses, the rest of the country (I think about 60 or 70% of wagering, I am not certain) is paying only half to purses.

highnote
01-09-2011, 09:47 PM
That is in regards to the source fee, I think


Correct. So 100% of the takeout increase at Santa Anita, etc., does not go to purses as you previously stated.

100% of this takeout increase goes into the purses.

Dahoss9698
01-26-2011, 08:53 PM
Another scratch fiasco today at Gulfstream. :ThmbUp:

cj
01-26-2011, 09:37 PM
Another scratch fiasco today at Gulfstream. :ThmbUp:

Apparently nobody was betting today.

chickenhead
01-26-2011, 09:41 PM
I wasn't. I see the scratch...what happened?

cj
01-26-2011, 09:44 PM
Late scratch that everybody knew about much earlier except bettors.

Spiderman
01-27-2011, 06:45 AM
Late scratch that everybody knew about much earlier except bettors.

Scratch was in 7th race, announced after 6th race, first leg of P4, was completed. In this incident, I used the scratched horse in P4 ticket. Turns-out that it was the only segment of P4 that I missed. Given that I was going 3-deep in race 8 and 4-deep in the last leg, I limited race 7 selections to 2-deep and used the post- time favorite and the aforementioned scratched horse. Turning for home, the favorite looked to be likely winner, but was beat by horse flying on the inside.

Not saying that I would have picked the winner, but it was on my contenders list of 4-selections, including scratched horse. Knowing that scratched horse was out, would have provided the opportunity to use winner and net $2,200 payout.

Who is responsible for the late scratch? Dale Romans, trainer of horse; track personnel who relates scratch information; a Magna executive to get more money into pool? It makes no sense to withhold scratch/change information to public.

Someone should be held responsible for late scratch information: trainer fined; track executive fired.

Horseplayersbet.com
01-27-2011, 08:43 AM
There are a few legit reasons for late scratches like this. A horse could get loose on its way out of the stall, it could flip, and maybe the horse looked like Life At Ten before the Breeders race (maybe it tied up). None of these situations should lead to firings.
It is a different situation if the track or trainer was sitting on a scratch.

chickenhead
01-27-2011, 10:26 AM
I sent Gulfstream an email thru the website last night on the Florida late scratch rules, explaining to them why bettors don't like it and why it is potentially costing them handle, and suggesting they standardize on NYRA rules. Received this email back from MID's VP:

"You are right and we are having meetings to try to change the rule. We understand your frustration and will continue to work on these rules with the state to make you and everyone else feel comfortable betting our product.

Thank you and good luck with your wagers."

Not holding my breath, but hopefully we will see some improvement.

Dahoss9698
01-27-2011, 11:05 AM
Not holding my breath, but hopefully we will see some improvement.

I sent them an email also. Just like I sent them an email earlier in the meet when it happened. I also sent them numerous emails last year when this sort of thing happened.

Every response has been pretty much the same as you got. "We are working on it." I know it's not an easy thing to get state laws changed, but we are going on 4 years of this being brought to their attention and every year they are "working on it."

cj
01-27-2011, 11:05 AM
There are a few legit reasons for late scratches like this. A horse could get loose on its way out of the stall, it could flip, and maybe the horse looked like Life At Ten before the Breeders race (maybe it tied up). None of these situations should lead to firings.
It is a different situation if the track or trainer was sitting on a scratch.

Totally, completely irrelevant. I'm not sure why you even bring this up since I thought I made it pretty clear it was known much earlier. Here is some proof from Mike Welsch at DRF:

"Not sure what took so long to scratch Claire's Song as there were reports earlier in the afternoon that the filly was going to come out of the seventh race. Unfortunately those who hooked her up with losers in earlier multiple wagers had to suffer the consequences and tear up those tickets since the official announcements that Claire's Song would not start did not come until shortly after wagering opened for the seventh."

cj
01-27-2011, 11:08 AM
I just have trouble with Gulfstream being some champion of bettors. They are not. They still can't time races, and they do things like this often enough that any gains via a very minor takeout reduction can be wiped out many times over with these shenanigans.

DeanT
01-27-2011, 11:10 AM
Although he might have to check with Paulick first, Jeff is planning on ringing them today about some issues. Pretty sure he'll jot something down on the thread if he gets some news.

Dahoss9698
01-29-2011, 05:17 PM
Although he might have to check with Paulick first, Jeff is planning on ringing them today about some issues. Pretty sure he'll jot something down on the thread if he gets some news.

Should we assume no response means no news?

DeanT
02-04-2011, 11:45 AM
Quick update on GP:

The scratch issue is well known there and it appears to be a simple breakdown of communication. The VP has been in touch with parties and thinks he has it nipped in the bud. If anyone sees this again please let the thread know. It was not a horsemen issue, but a communication one between the stewards and the track, with "later than usual" scratches.

There is some other chatter on takeout and timing issues which there is another meeting planned, hopefully within a week or two, with all parties.

That's it from here.