Paulick Report Blames Horseplayers. They say we are hurting the Little Guy!

[andymays]

http://www.paulickreport.com/news/people/hana-we-don-t-want-to-harm-the-little-guy/#PageComment_45875

Excerpt:

If it is to be believed that the Players Boycott is affecting the handle during the Santa Anita, then they are hurting the little guy. That's the major problem with any boycott. Fewer people through the gates, fewer people betting on races and the first to go in any organization are those who are just trying to survive.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
My comments under the article at the Paulick Report.

I really have to take issue with your statement that we are hurting the little guy. It is totally irresponsible to print that without giving it any context.

The truth is that the people who run California Racing are hurting the little guy. Their irresponsible, incompetent, and corrupt decisions have hurt the industry in California. Instead of doing what's best for racing in California they do what's best for their inner circle. The conflicts of interest at the CHRB and the TOC are the problem. Poor leadership is the problem. They are hurting the little guy!

Horseplayers are the little guys but the leadership of the TOC and the CHRB want Horseplayers to pay more for a bet so they can maintain their lifestyles. That's the truth.

How dare you blame the Horseplayers who have taken the worst of it for decades! Your statement is totally irresponsible and I expected more from the Paulick Report.

[andymays]

We need comments over there.

The statement by the Paulick Report needs to be called out!

http://www.paulickreport.com/news/people/hana-we-don-t-want-to-harm-the-little-guy/#PageComment_45879

[toussaud]

NO in actuality, the little guy has been hurting us for decades, with the 5 horse fields 5 days a week. No one benefits more from that crap than the "little guy". The "little guy" could have prevented this by voicing their concerns about the takeout hike but they thought we would bend over and take it like always, now it's time to pay the piper.

[Tom]

This is not Andy's fault - TLG has always been our friend!

[andymays]

This is not Andy's fault - TLG has always been our friend!

It's those damn Andy's. There always causing trouble. :lol:

I knew that when I saw the title at the Paulick Report Andy Serling would be dragged into this somehow. Now all we need is Light to go nuts.

For the record Andy Serling has nothing to do with this.

[lamboguy]

i really don't understand this boycott. it really will accomplish nothing. california racing does not need a boycott to fail. by boycotting the races does the exact opposite of what the boycott is trying to accomplish. you are now giving the folks out there an excuse for their inept way of managing racing out there. as horseplayers we should be smart enough to know that the underlying fundementals are what hurts or helps this game. the fundementals stink. instead of wasting your time on california you should find the right people in racing and sit down with them and come up with a plan that encompasses the whole game.

if you want to use an analogy, look at general motors. they didn't need a boycott to go under, they did it all by themselves with the poorly run business model that they worked with for years and the rotten products they put out.

california racing is no different. if they are stupid enough to raise the takeout, let them. if people enjoy paying higher takeout and watching an inferior product, let them. don't try and get into peoples heads and bestow your opinion on them. let them think for themselves.

[DJofSD]

instead of wasting your time on california you should find the right people in racing and sit down with them and come up with a plan that encompasses the whole game.

The "right" people in racing here in CA is the CHRB and the TOC. They do not listen to the bettors and will not meet with Jeff. How exactly do you propose getting to the point where there is some level of cooperations when they barely tolerate your existance?

I've been betting horses since 1980 or '81. I've seen the growth brought on by simulcasts. With the changes to the IRS code in the 1990's (1996?) and the rise of other gambling outlets, racing in CA seem to hold it's own up until the time of AWS and the rise of the TOC.

I don't think any more time can be lost. The ship needs to be turned around sooner not later. And I don't know of any other way to insert ourselves into the process except through this boycott.

[chickenhead]

I think Cali does play a very important role in the health of the industry nationwide, they're not a terrible proxy for it. Cali and NY just by the nature of their population centers need to be healthy for this game to have a good outlook. I guess Florida and then Kentucky after that, but those 2 are the most important. Wherever we were Dec 31st as an industry, on Jan 1st one of them becoming a considerably worse place to play the races and chasing off customers long term is bad for everyone. The boycott, in my mind, is just a tool to shine on a light on this, and to maybe speed up the reversal process.

I would have probably had similiar thoughts about the OTB closing in NY, but from everything I've heard about the OTBs there maybe those going away was more of a wash. Maybe the negative there has all along been that the OTB wasn't a better institution to begin with.

[jelly]

We need comments over there.

The statement by the Paulick Report needs to be called out!

http://www.paulickreport.com/news/people/hana-we-don-t-want-to-harm-the-little-guy/#PageComment_45879



This guy paulick relies on hits to his web site for advertising.Do yourself a favor and stay away from his site.

[andymays]

This guy paulick relies on hits to his web site for advertising.Do yourself a favor and stay away from his site.

Jelly, we have the truth on our side. It's important to make truthful comments. They can't beat that. The only thing they can do is offer personal attacks.

[lamboguy]

I think Cali does play a very important role in the health of the industry nationwide, they're not a terrible proxy for it. Cali and NY just by the nature of their population centers need to be healthy for this game to have a good outlook. I guess Florida and then Kentucky after that, but those 2 are the most important. Wherever we were Dec 31st as an industry, on Jan 1st one of them becoming a considerably worse place to play the races and chasing off customers long term is bad for everyone. The boycott, in my mind, is just a tool to shine on a light on this, and to maybe speed up the reversal process.

I would have probably had similiar thoughts about the OTB closing in NY, but from everything I've heard about the OTBs there maybe that was more of a wash. Maybe the negative there has all along been that the OTB wasn't a better institution to begin with. No idea, really, never been to one out there.those are the same words i have been hearning for many years now. new england racing went to hell. i could never imagine places like rockingham park, naragansett, lincoln and even green mountains being gone but they are. they all went down for the same reason, mismanagement. california will go down for the same reasons whether there is an effective boycott or not. face up to it, the racing there is not like it used to be. the reason is obvious, the management does not care about it all. all they care about are their paychecks. when the racing stops, and then their paychecks stop then maybe they will make some type of an effort to resurect their high salaried positions. california has many obstacles in a state that is close to bancrupt. the workmans comp is probably the highest rates in the country. the track surface in their premier track is rubber and the other places still have it. why would they go to rubber to begin with without investigating all the negetivity to it.

personally i don't believe that california racing is worthy of a boycott. it gives them to much credibility that they don't deserve.

[cj]

personally i don't believe that california racing is worthy of a boycott. it gives them to much credibility that they don't deserve.

It is opening the eyes of track management in other jurisdictions, even if they won't admit it.

[The_Knight_Sky]

It is opening the eyes of track management in other jurisdictions, even if they won't admit it.




Truth.

A victory in California http://i54.tinypic.com/20q0yeg.gif will have major repercussions on how other racetracks will operate regarding takeouts and other issues.

In short, horse racing may have turned a corner with legitimate customer input.

[lamboguy]

It is opening the eyes of track management in other jurisdictions, even if they won't admit it.ok, for that reason you sold me on it. but you haven't changed my opinion about the happenings in claifornia racing, its a literal disgrace.

[DeanT]

The narrative change and a bunch of you working on talking about it does have an effect, like CJ says (in my opinion).

GP raised super take a point - bad move sure - but they lowered another bet to 15%. I don't think that second part even happens without the narrative change. I think they just up supers.

NYRA pushed NOT to raise take three years ago when the state told them to, but it was a non-story. If the state came back now and asked for another point you would have thousands of emails to the state house, in my opinion. NYRA would join in and we might even see a takeout decrease. I firmly believe the next time a takeout change happens in NY, it will be lower. CEO CH pretty much started lobbying for that on CNBC etc and so did Duncker in his last round table at SAR.

That's my take on it. No pun intended. But supporting a line in the sand in CA does have positive affects all around NA, imo.

If you'd like to sign up and help, or just add your name to an email list for some updates please do at playersboycott.org (http://playersboycott.org)

[OTM Al]

The fact is, whether you want to accept it or not, that jobs at the CA tracks could be lost by this action. Collateral damage to use the euphemism. I remember a few years back when there were complaints about getting free admission and parking. NYRA said ok and now those things exist at Aqueduct. However, they had a bunch of admissions and parking people they let go because there was no longer a need for them. There was shock over this but the thing is, this should have been expected as part of the outcome. You can try to turn the blame on the CHRB on this and you would not be wrong to, but all the blame will not belong to them. If you believe in this action, you have to accept all the consequences that result from it.

[DeanT]

The fact is, whether you want to accept it or not, that jobs at the CA tracks could be lost by this action. Collateral damage to use the euphemism. I remember a few years back when there were complaints about getting free admission and parking. NYRA said ok and now those things exist at Aqueduct. However, they had a bunch of admissions and parking people they let go because there was no longer a need for them. There was shock over this but the thing is, this should have been expected as part of the outcome. You can try to turn the blame on the CHRB on this and you would not be wrong to, but all the blame will not belong to them. If you believe in this action, you have to accept all the consequences that result from it.

Al,

I think that is overly sanctimonious.

There is a job loss happening in CA, and there has been the last ten years. Bettors have been leaving, horsemen have been leaving - yet they have kept the same policies.

Actions for change, to try and get more people to play, and own in CA and stop the old policies that sent them away is pro-growth, not anti-growth.

How many tellers are employed today compared to 5 years ago? How many grooms are? How many tack shop employees compared to 5 years ago.

If we keep going down this road, the number will be smaller in 5 years, not larger. It's time to try and plug the holes in the boat, or at least try to, because job losses and handle losses will, just like they have been, happen on their own.

I will ask again: What part of the four main planks for the boycotters is bad for racing, or going to hurt it:

1. A gambling board set up in CA. On that board they would like a wagering economist or two, and professionals who know wagering, to vote on wagering concepts, and not political appointees with little expertise in wagering.

2. Takeout to be lower because they believe we should lower prices to grow horse racing. Every piece of literature in both gambling and economic journals ever written supports that view.

3. They'd like to look at (the gambling board to look at) full card simulcasting (in CA you can only bet select races) and elimination the rebate cap for CA bettors, which they have long-complained about, and probably have hurt handles and CRM there.

4. A study to be commissioned to lower horse ownership costs in CA (which should help increase ownership and up field size).

[andymays]

http://www.lvrj.com/sports/eclipse-voting-guidelines-open-to-interpretation-113575864.html

[Horseplayersbet.com]

The fact is, whether you want to accept it or not, that jobs at the CA tracks could be lost by this action. Collateral damage to use the euphemism. I remember a few years back when there were complaints about getting free admission and parking. NYRA said ok and now those things exist at Aqueduct. However, they had a bunch of admissions and parking people they let go because there was no longer a need for them. There was shock over this but the thing is, this should have been expected as part of the outcome. You can try to turn the blame on the CHRB on this and you would not be wrong to, but all the blame will not belong to them. If you believe in this action, you have to accept all the consequences that result from it.
The takeout increase would create less jobs over time anyway. If the boycott is successful, and the takeout hike is reversed, not only will this help grow California, but it will stop any other tracks from doing anymore long term damage to the game and those who are employed with the game.

Do you think that without the boycott that the game would grow in California? Do you think that jobs wouldn't have been inevitably lost?

California can reverse this by going back to their old rates, and then promoting that they have close to the lowest rates in the industry, now that takeout has become such a big thing, where two years ago, it wasn't an issue in the media.

[OTM Al]

Dean, I didn't say it was all the fault of the boycott. In fact, most of the fault lies with the policies that caused the boycott. But the boycott could cause accelerated job loss. This is a fact. Just like the fact that if you start doing all your shopping at Wal-Mart, local stores are going to suffer. All I'm saying is that if you are going to take this action, you have to accept that fact.

[DeanT]

Dean, I didn't say it was all the fault of the boycott. In fact, most of the fault lies with the policies that caused the boycott. But the boycott could cause accelerated job loss. This is a fact. Just like the fact that if you start doing all your shopping at Wal-Mart, local stores are going to suffer. All I'm saying is that if you are going to take this action, you have to accept that fact.

Certainly. But no policy will ever change if we concentrate on the micro.

This month I see congress in the US is going to cut spending. Gvt employees might have their roles trimmed, but the hope is that in time they, and more people than just them gain even better work for the country as a whole. That is what public policy is about - growing the pie so everyone can benefit.

Horse racing is the greatest gambling game in the world. Horses are the greatest athletes to watch and root for. We can grow this thing. I am not going to apologize for wanting that to happen.

[chickenhead]

Of course my purchasing decisions help some people and hurt others. I'm spending my money elsewhere, which is helping those people. Net net, it has zero impact, zero net effect. Not sure why its particularly relevant here. Consumers pick winners and losers...always have, always will. Just with normal commerce, its impossible not too. Boycott really doesn't change any of that. The boycott is just vocally and collectively saying "why" that decision was made....which if anything is kind of nice...

[thaskalos]

Dean, I didn't say it was all the fault of the boycott. In fact, most of the fault lies with the policies that caused the boycott. But the boycott could cause accelerated job loss. This is a fact. Just like the fact that if you start doing all your shopping at Wal-Mart, local stores are going to suffer. All I'm saying is that if you are going to take this action, you have to accept that fact.
You are right...and I appreciate the sentiment...but let's not forget who the true victims are here.

With their oppressive takeouts, and questionable business practices, the racetracks and the horsemen have been responsible for the financial demise of more people than can be counted...and not only do they not acknowledge that fact - they go to great lenghts to deny being in the gambling business at all. They consider themselves to be entertainers!

This is the first time in the 30 years I have been involved in this game, when I have felt pride in being a horseplayer...and I think our boycott effort should continue to full fruition.

It's about time the horseplayer was seen as a force to be reckoned with in this game!

[Stillriledup]

WAIT!

STOP RIGHT THERE!

I must be missing something, Ric Hammerle said the Boycott is nonsense, now all of a sudden its NOT nonsense?

I'm confused.

[DeanT]

Give the new Wilson piece a look.

http://blog.horseplayersassociation.org/2011/01/wilson-commentary-its-time-to-give.html

He calls for immediate change in CA.

[Stillriledup]

I know that HANA and other organizations who care will say "YAY" when the takeout is lowered back to previous levels and they will tell all their constituents that they can go back to wagering on California. I have a different message. My message is to tell people to never go back.

Find another track to bet, there are plenty out there. California needs to be punished, hopefully they drag their feet a little more, that way, the further that horseplayers get away from their signal, the tougher it will be to get them back.

They don't realize the work that some players put into this game. We're not interested in playing kiddie games of musical chairs, we're not going to drop Cali from our minds and start learning another circuit only to go back to Cali once the suits decide to price their product accordingly. They have already lost enough customers that are never going back, and as every day goes by, and i'm speaking to YOU mr and mrs california horsemen, you lose those people forever.

California has what, 30 million residents? And they handle 5 million? And, get this, most of that 5 million is coming from out of state. What do the Cali residents actually contribute to the pools, 1 million? 2 million? they have THIRTY million redsidents or more and they can barely get a million bucks from the entire state as the only game in town? I know there's golden gate, but SA is really the 'only game in town' in Calif and they can't handle any kind of money. Its amazing to me how badly they're underachieving.

[Dave Schwartz]

I submitted a post:

This is a good piece of writing. Makes good sense.

Now for the bad news: THEY AREN'T LISTENING!

You said it very well with "At this point, ANYTHING would be worth a shot." However, I think you missed the point which is:

When a business is in a position where "anything is worth a shot" that business is all but done. History has taught us that as companies begin to spiral downward, the spiral goes faster and faster until it is out of control.

What a novel idea for giving something a shot: consider the customer.

[Stillriledup]

I submitted a post:

Consider the customer?

:lol:

Why would they do that?

[horses721]

Truth.

A victory in California http://i54.tinypic.com/20q0yeg.gif will have major repercussions on how other racetracks will operate regarding takeouts and other issues.

In short, horse racing may have turned a corner with legitimate customer input.

We can only hope!

[thaskalos]

I also submitted a post:

"We would like to shed a tear for "the little guy", Mr. Paulick...but, unfortunately - given how we horseplayers have been treated by this industry all these years - we haven't any tears left."

[andymays]

I also submitted a post:

"We would like to shed a tear for "the little guy", Mr. Paulick...but, unfortunately - given how we horseplayers have been treated by this industry all these years - we haven't any tears left."
Welcome to the Battle for California Racing! :ThmbUp: :)

We definitely have a shot.

[Dave Schwartz]

You know, people, this is OUR game, too. This appears to be contrary to the popular belief of track owners, trainers and horse owners. The only way to get this message across is to keep repeating it.

If "we" have to sacrifice Santa Anita, once known as "The Great Race Place," so be it. The goal is not to save SA but to save all of racing. If the world can see that SA went down because of their choice to ignore the customer it furthers our cause.


Might I suggest that EVERYONE who posts HERE should have an opinion THERE and EVERYWHERE this is discussed?

Many of us here - myself included at times - have said that H.A.N.A. was ineffective. Ultimately, we are H.A.N.A. and H.A.N.A. is us.

I strongly suggest that we leave the nastiness at home when posting on these blogs. The emphasis should be on constructive commentary.

Post early, post often.

Post early because that is when the thread gets exposure.
Post often because not everyone is reading those posts every day.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[andymays]

It's time to give horseplayers a chance to speak - Inside Horse Racing#comments

http://www.insidesocal.com/horseracing/2011/01/excuse-me-if-youve-heard.html#comments

Excerpt:

“We could solve these problems if we could just get face to face and convince those dummies they're not the only people to be concerned with," Way said. "This game is like a triangle. You have the state's interest, and then you have the people who put on the show's interest -- the race tracks and the horsemen -- and then you have the customers. And the customers are just having the door slammed in their face, and then (management) wonders where the customers go. I mean, how stupid can people be?

"We need to expand the fan base, and you can't expand the fan base by raising the price, treating customers the way they are and making decisions with a conflict of interest."

It's time the CHRB and TOC sat down with representatives of HANA, and I don't mean teleconferences or symbolic meetings that just pay lip service, but for a full-fledged, face-to-face meeting. Heck, make it a weekend at a resort and hash out these problems and try to make the game good again.

Heaven knows, HANA representatives are willing and able, and it's a sure bet that CHRB and TOC officials should be chomping at the bit to hear some new ideas from a group that has far too long been deprived a voice in the industry.

The ball's been in the CHRB's and TOC's court long enough. Time to let somebody else offer some solutions that might help before it's too late.

[DeanT]

Ultimately, we are H.A.N.A. and H.A.N.A. is us.


Thanks for that David. :ThmbUp:

And yes, please on Dave's plea. Follow on twitter and comment with #playersboycott tags here. Really important for PB to have followers engaging and giving out ideas.

http://twitter.com/playersboycott

Facebook at HANA here, with a link to a playersboycott FB site a young guy volunteering created a couple of days ago here. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Horseplayers-Association-of-North-America/44663680571

Please consider sending those links around.

And for everyone else who does not use FB or twitter, Dave's advice is wonderful. If everyone gets involved and posts some thoughts on Paulick etc etc, on some of these items we can hopefully do some good. Be good about it, too, because you represent all horseplayers when you do.

Thanks again David for the advice, and everyone for helping.

[DeanT]

There is a good example folks about how we're up against it.

http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/boycott-day-1-santa-anita-handle-up-5-not-down-15/

"Boycott First Day up 5% Not Down 15%" says pro-takeout increase Ray P.

What he has done is take a blog post that compared last Thursday's handle to yesterday's Thursday's handle, where he rightly said handle was off 15%.

You can see his post here, clear as day.http://theknightskyracing.blogspot.com/2011/01/boycott-day-1-handle-drops-152.html

http://i54.tinypic.com/1z6ux68.jpg

That was correct for what that blogger was comparing.

Now, the above is somehow slighted as "wrong" but Daruty is looking at yesterday's numbers (with 60 horses) versus a year ago Thursday (with 49 horses) , where there was very little difference in the Equibase numbers.

It is reported with a spin that horseplayers are telling a lie. When in fact, the media is comparing apples to oranges to forward their bias.

We have always said there is much to handle comparisons. And there is little point in looking at things other than the aggregate.

However, it is what we're up against with media spin. It is why Dave's point is exactly what we need: Go post on chat boards like that, but post facts. If they are spinning like that, call them on it. Letting them get away with it, tells them they can walk all over us, because we are too weak to fight back.

If you ever wondered about taking a stand, the time is now. It's time to stand up and say "we've had enough of being taken for fools"

[Charli125]

If anyone wants the raw numbers, here you go.

Let's take all of the spin out of it. Forget day to day, week to week, etc. We'll use official Equibase numbers. On-Track, Intra-State, Inter-State, and total through the 1st 12 days this season, opposed to the 1st 12 days last season, are as follows. (Remember, anyone can go to the equibase site and check these numbers, they're not secret)

On Track: This Year, 17,408,018 - Last Year, 19,716,473 - Difference of -2,308,455 or -12%.

Intra-State: This Year, 22,285,569 - Last Year, 24,996,606 - Difference of -2,711,037 or -11%

Inter-State: This Year, 39,391,445 - Last Year, 50,477,939 - Difference of -11,086,494 or -22%

Total: This Year, 79,085,032 - Last Year, 95,191,018 - Difference of -16,105,986 or -17%

Handle per Race: This year, 103 races average handle of 767,815 - Last year, 104 races average handle of 915,298. Difference of -147,482 or -16%.

[Charli125]

For those breeders and owners who have to pay their bills each day every day and who are not worried about "per race" or "Thursday to Thursday", here are the total handle numbers for SA this season. December 26-January 13.

On Track: This Year, 17,408,018 - Last Year, 21,989,200 - Difference of -4,581,182 or -21%.

Intra-State: This Year, 22,285,569 - Last Year, 28,482,687 - Difference of -6,197,118 or -22%

Inter-State: This Year, 39,391,445 - Last Year, 56,349,215 - Difference of -16,957,770 or -30%

Total: This Year, 79,085,032 - Last Year, 106,821,102 - Difference of -27,736,070 or -26%

Handle per Race: This year, 103 races average handle of 767,815 - Last year, 121 races average handle of 882,819. Difference of -115,003 or -13%.

[Bruddah]

Unless, I have missed it, why is any handicapper supporting the Paulick Report. I just cancelled and I won't be back. I suppose I'm a little guy hurting other little guys. Paulick is full of crap and I will no longer support anything he does. :ThmbDown:

[The_Knight_Sky]

There is a good example folks about how we're up against it.

http://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray-s-paddock/boycott-day-1-santa-anita-handle-up-5-not-down-15/

"Boycott First Day up 5% Not Down 15%" says pro-takeout increase Ray P.




Q: Why do I see "29 comments" (at this time) for that new post?

While I can read the new post....
I am unable to view the comments or post my own comment?

Mighty strange. What's going on :confused:

[DeanT]

Q: Why do I see "29 comments" (at this time) for that new post?

While I can read the new post....
I am unable to view the comments or post my own comment?

Mighty strange. What's going on :confused:

Not sure. Maybe Scott Daruty has this shift for comment moderation?

:)

[The_Knight_Sky]

Not sure. Maybe Scott Daruty has this shift for comment moderation?

:)


LOL. :D
I just wanted to post that if Mr. Daruty is going to spin the numbers
at least play by the same rules....

Use the Equibase numbers that are printed in the .pdf charts of DRF.
Not some private CHRIMS database the public has no access to.

[thaskalos]

Not sure. Maybe Scott Daruty has this shift for comment moderation?

:)This happened just as I wrote and submitted a reply to a poster named "California Breeder".

I typed my reply and pressed the submit button...and my post is loading for about 3 hours now.

I can't even see the rest of the posts of that segment anymore...

[andymays]

This happened just as I wrote and submitted a reply to a poster named "California Breeder".

I typed my reply and pressed the submit button...and my post is loading for about 3 hours now.

I can't even see the rest of the posts of that segment anymore...

Their site excludes some browsers but then it changes from time to time. Try another browser.

[The_Knight_Sky]

Their site excludes some browsers but then it changes from time to time.
Try another browser.



That's really weird. It has never happened to me until just now.

I cracked the code for one comment
but I'm not sure how long that "window" is going to last.

But fight the good fight. And keep your wallets tight. :ThmbUp:

[cj]

That's really weird. It has never happened to me until just now.

I cracked the code for one comment
but I'm not sure how long that "window" is going to last.

But fight the good fight. And keep your wallets tight. :ThmbUp:

I find this comment from "California Breeder" particularly funny:

these gamblers just don't understand that these are real investments breeders and owners are making not discretionary money that you can spend at the mall, the card club, the theater or the track. we may need gamblers more than they need us since they can go bet on a slot machine and get their jollies but that doesn't mean we should let them run our business.

It pretty much tells us what we already know about how we are perceived in the industry. Honestly, if most owners/breeders consider horses "real investments, they are bigger idiots than even the dumbest bettors.

[toussaud]

I find this comment from "California Breeder" particularly funny:



It pretty much tells us what we already know about how we are perceived in the industry. Honestly, if most owners/breeders consider horses "real investments, they are bigger idiots than even the dumbest bettors.


Horse racing uses to be a game only for the rich. People, did not expect to make money by owning a race horse, I mean it would be nice lol, but that was not the reason you got into the game.

It all started going down hill when people started to think, they are entitled, to turn a profit when they make that type of "investment". When people started paying extremely stupid amounts of money for yearlings, we were told to foot the bill at the window for their screw ups. Not once have I heard anyone ask for a reduction in stud fees, or day rates, or some type of regulation when it comes to vet expenses, something... everyone is basically trying to get fat off our backs, instead of cutting fat, they just fatten up the chicken.

What baffles me is that, clearly, after we have taken a stand, they think they can insult us back into gambling again lol. They are flat out, incapable of showing a morsel of respect. That is what I find more appalling than anything else.

[thaskalos]

I find this comment from "California Breeder" particularly funny:



It pretty much tells us what we already know about how we are perceived in the industry. Honestly, if most owners/breeders consider horses "real investments, they are bigger idiots than even the dumbest bettors.That's the comment that I tried replying to, but I got locked out of the site.

[jelly]

Santa Anita down big again.


last year $5,779,308


Today $4,605,141

[toussaud]

This


To float the idea that the customers are culpable when a business chases them away is nonsense.

Is the best quote I have read all week. Perfect.

[andymays]

Santa Anita down big again.


last year $5,779,308


Today $4,605,141

Was there a carryover into last years day?

[cj]

Santa Anita down big again.


last year $5,779,308


Today $4,605,141

It is ok, Daruty said to expect that. He is a regular Nostradamus. With the way the meet is going, who else could have seen this coming?

What is sad is the outright lie about the numbers being wrong from Equibase. Daruty has been enemy #1 of bettors for a while now.

[jelly]

Was there a carryover into last years day?



No.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Was there a carryover into last years day?
No carryover going into the card last year.
http://www.equibase.com/premium/eqbPDFChartPlus.cfm?RACE=A&BorP=P&TID=SA&CTRY=USA&DT=01/15/2010&DAY=D&STYLE=EQB

They did have 58 horses run though, I didn't look at today's results but didn't they just have something like 35 horses run today?

[jelly]

No carryover going into the card last year.
http://www.equibase.com/premium/eqbPDFChartPlus.cfm?RACE=A&BorP=P&TID=SA&CTRY=USA&DT=01/15/2010&DAY=D&STYLE=EQB

They did have 58 horses run though, I didn't look at today's results but didn't they just have something like 35 horses run today?



54 today.

[cj]

No carryover going into the card last year.
http://www.equibase.com/premium/eqbPDFChartPlus.cfm?RACE=A&BorP=P&TID=SA&CTRY=USA&DT=01/15/2010&DAY=D&STYLE=EQB

They did have 58 horses run though, I didn't look at today's results but didn't they just have something like 35 horses run today?

54 ran today.

[Kelso]

I find this comment from "California Breeder" particularly funny:

<snip>

"we may need gamblers more than they need us since they can go bet on a slot machine and get their jollies but that doesn't mean we should let them run our business."


It's long past time for these financial morons to understand that their "business" is horses ... not pari-mutuel gambling.


They can breed and race to their little hearts' content, but if they want to reap gambling-fueled purses for doing so, it is then OUR (i.e., gamblers) "business."


(And while we're at it, producing pari-mutuel races is the "business" of licensed race tracks ... not owners, trainers or breeders.)

[andymays]

54 ran today.

CJ what was your famous line?

If there was no gambling then...........................??????

[mountainman]

If decreased handle results in firings, that blood is on the hands of those who raised takeout. Not the boycotters.

[Dave Schwartz]

Instead of being concerned about how many "little guys" will get hurt by a boycott, I suggest that track management be concerned about the hundreds of people who will lose their jobs when Santa Anita closes due to their mismanagement.

[Tom]

54 horses this early in the meet, on a Friday.....what happens when they run out of enough horses to fill certain classes? Match races?

[cj]

CJ what was your famous line?

If there was no gambling then...........................??????

I wouldn't say famous, just obvious. If there is no betting, gamblers lose less. If there is no betting, owners lose more.

What is sad is this guy is typical, but wrong. Most horseplayers I know won't touch a slot machine or play the lottery.

[DeanT]

Match races?

Probably with quinella wagering at 22.68%.

[highnote]

I submitted a post:

I submitted a post, too, but it wouldn't go through. Must have been too long. I'll try to pare it down. Here is my unedited version:

Ray,
Thanks for providing a forum for these difficult issues to be discussed. I must admit I do not agree with you. If the little guy is hurting then CHRB is more to blame than alleged boycotters. CHRB should have known what was going to happen if they raised rates. They should have known there would be a backlash. But they GAMBLED and raised rates anyway. It was a bad bet, in my opinion.

Now, in the case of the small bettors (who are also little guys), they may actually benefit. There is no way every grandstand bettor is going to boycott and most of them have never even heard of HANA, let alone knowing about a boycott called by HANA. If the large professional bettors have heard about a boycott called by HANA (and I doubt they have and there is no guarantee they will boycott even if they do know) then the little bettor should be betting into less efficient pools, which means they will receive more value on their bets despite the higher takeouts. The problem for the horsemen and racetrack is that the $2 bettors alone can not sustain the business.

In the case of large bettors, many are probably betting with rebates. If you lower the takeout, they will still get a rebate, so the net takeout for them is probably the same. And those large bettors who do not get rebates will be on more equal footing and should bet more, also. The big benefit is that bettors on balance will last longer and the pools will be larger. Larger pools means that large bettors can make larger wagers and everyone would benefit. There should be an upward spiral in betting and therefore commissions. I think this is a likely scenario and certainly a better GAMBLE then raising takeouts.

So the blame for the boycott really does deserve to be aimed at the CHRB who is GAMBLING that higher takeouts will grow the game in California.

Takeout increases might have worked in the old days when racing had a monopoly on legalized gambling. Rates could be raised and the resulting revenue increases were probably more predicatable. Nowadays, there are too many other gambling options -- many with lower costs. Lottery is an exception. It has a higher cost, but the payoffs are enormous. An occasional $1 bet for a chance to win hundreds of millions is cheap entertainment. But I digress.

Bottom line, in the long run, increased takeout is probably going to hurt everyone and CHRB surely must have known about this risk, but decided to take it anyway. And if they did not consider the downside risk then they are poor managers and should not be the ones setting rates.

But maybe it is too early to tell? Maybe the boycott will have no effect? Maybe the increase in takeouts will grow revenue?

Look, I have nothing against CHRB -- no axe to grind. I think Bo Derek is a terrific actor. I want the game to grow and CHRB to be successful, but in the meantime, I am skeptical that increasing takeouts is the way to do it and I would not bet on it.

John

[CincyHorseplayer]

I wouldn't say famous, just obvious. If there is no betting, gamblers lose less. If there is no betting, owners lose more.

What is sad is this guy is typical, but wrong. Most horseplayers I know won't touch a slot machine or play the lottery.

You make a good point here.Us Horseplayers are not the degenerate,froth at the mouth,rabid bettors that we are perceived to be.Drilling that simple idea into these MF's heads though is,well near impossible.

[Stillriledup]

Good post John, i just want to add a few comments about what you wrote.

About the less efficient pools because of the takeout raise. This is just my personal opinion, i have no proof or facts to back it up, but i believe there is a lot of 'insider' money in California that just hammers the right horse and right pools too often and sucks any value out of the equasion. In theory, the point you make is valid that there are less 'smart' bettors in the pools (because smart bettors won't bet into higher takeouts) but it doesn't seem to work out that way. With a combination of high takeout, lower betting pools and short fields, even with the collective IQ of the betting public being lower, its still now low enough, to see any real difference.

As far as the takeout raise goes, you're right, that was a dumb idea on their part. But, i think that this goes deeper than just a simple takeout raise. I feel that California higher ups did absolutely NOTHING to improve the state of the game over there on the left coast. They ruined racing for a few years with plastic track experiments only to find out that dirt was what they needed all along, they never do anything to deter these trainers from taking a big 'edge', the punishments are a joke out there. These guys train from the cellphone while laying on Manhattan Beach laughing at the idiot bettors from afar. I found it hilarious (sad) that Simon Bray on TVG made a comment that Mike Mitchell was on a 'little vacation' recently. He made it seem that Mitchell was just taking some time off for R and R and he will be back soon. No mention that Mitchell was suspended for breaking the rules.

Do you think an NFL commentator on ESPN would ever say, "so and so is going to miss the next 4 games for his team, he's taking a little break" Of course not, he would say exactly why the guy was not going to play for 4 games, that would be responsible journalism, i know, a novel concept.

[CBedo]

these gamblers just don't understand that these are real investments breeders and owners are making not discretionary money that you can spend at the mall, the card club, the theater or the track. we may need gamblers more than they need us since they can go bet on a slot machine and get their jollies but that doesn't mean we should let them run our business.Herein lies the big problem. The breeders think that they should run the tracks (and they do for the most part). The tracks should be independent with the breeders & horsemen seen as suppliers, and the bettors as the customers.

Vertical integration isn't working in this industry... :rolleyes:

[lamboguy]

if this boycott does have any effect on racing in california the windup will probably be that the chrb is going to claim that they have listened to the complaints of the horseplayers and have decided to trim back the increase in half so to say that they understand the needs of the horseplayer. this will look like a victory for the horseplayers but does nothing for the stability of the game

[JohnGalt1]

54 horses this early in the meet, on a Friday.....what happens when they run out of enough horses to fill certain classes? Match races?

They already have run 2 races with 3 horses.

The last one paid $1.50 for the trifecta.

Betters at Evangeline, Tampa and Hoosier for example are :lol:


----------------------------------

Whatever a better's weekly bankroll is, in the past they maybe bet 40% or so in California and spread the rest at their favorite tracks around the country.

Now, those boycotting are betting 100% around the country.

It's capitalism at work.

[DJofSD]

The last one paid $1.50 for the trifecta.

Chances are the state made more money than was returned to the bettors.