PDA

View Full Version : Charles Town cuts takeout on some wagers


takeout
09-09-2011, 04:18 PM
http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/64943/charles-town-cuts-takeout-12-on-some-wagers

[snip]
Takeout for trifectas, superfectas, pick threes, and pick fours will shift from 25% to 22% effective Sept. 17.
[snip]

Comment: So 3&4 horse bets at CT will soon be cheaper than 2 horse bets in California. That pretty much says it all.

Saratoga_Mike
09-09-2011, 04:21 PM
http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/64943/charles-town-cuts-takeout-12-on-some-wagers

[snip]
Takeout for trifectas, superfectas, pick threes, and pick fours will shift from 25% to 22% effective Sept. 17.
[snip]

Comment: So 3&4 horse bets at CT will soon be cheaper than 2 horse bets in California. That pretty much says it all.

And the racing's better too! Go Chucktown!!!

jelly
09-09-2011, 05:07 PM
Charles Town Cuts Takeout 12% on Some Wagers

Interesting Headline on Bloodhorse when the takeout is decreased 3% points


"Takeout for trifectas, superfectas, pick threes, and pick fours will shift from 25% to 22% effective Sept. 17. The drop of three percentage points reflects an overall takeout reduction of 12% for the four bets."



Now here is the Headline when California in creased the takeout by 2% and 3% ponts.

Schwarzenegger Signs Calif. Takeout Increase

"Races involving two betting interests (such as an exacta or double) would be subject to a 2% increase to 22.68%. A 3% hike would be tacked onto exotic wagers involving three or more wagering interests (trifecta, superfecta, pick three, pick four, pick six, etc.), bringing the deduction for those types of wagers to 23.68%. "


It doesn't mention anything about a 10% and 15% increase. :eek:






Read more: http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/articles/59026/schwarzenegger-signs-calif-takeout-increase#ixzz1XUWuJtqd

takeout
09-09-2011, 05:31 PM
Interesting Headline on Bloodhorse when the takeout is decreased 3% pointsAgree. That’s why I left the “12%” out of the thread title. Tracks and tote companies seem to be very fond of using some kind of “new math” when reporting certain things.

cj
09-09-2011, 06:53 PM
Agree. That’s why I left the “12%” out of the thread title. Tracks and tote companies seem to be very fond of using some kind of “new math” when reporting certain things.

The very same type of math was used to describe the California increases, so I don't see a big problem with it.

Stillriledup
09-09-2011, 08:11 PM
If you read it fast, you might think to yourself, "WOW 12% takeout" that's pretty low.

They're probably hoping you read it fast and not really pay attention to fine print.

Relwob Owner
09-09-2011, 10:23 PM
The article(and the headline) is extremely clear about the fact that it is a 12 percent decrease from the previous level to the current one, not a decrease down to 12.

Kudos to CT for this.

Robert Fischer
09-09-2011, 11:14 PM
I wish I was comprehensive enough to include Charles Town in my system.

The cut is great, but not dramatic enough to attract me to "work overtime".

takeout
09-10-2011, 04:17 AM
If you read it fast, you might think to yourself, "WOW 12% takeout" that's pretty low.I didn’t think that but I did think that some bets had been lowered by 12%. Of course it’s quickly explained in the article but the Bloodhorse headline is misleading. Should’ve said 3% instead of 12.

Canarsie
09-10-2011, 07:03 AM
Any track that reduces takeout even minimally is helping the player it has to start somewhere. If these dummies from California only looked at threads like this and how many responses there are. Unless I'm blind there are a decent amount of people giving accolades.One would think it would change their head in the sand mentality.

mannyberrios
09-10-2011, 07:25 AM
Any track that reduces takeout even minimally is helping the player it has to start somewhere. If these dummies from California only looked at threads like this and how many responses there are. Unless I'm blind there are a decent amount of people giving accolades.One would think it would change their head in the sand mentality.
We have to show Cali. By playing this track, and upping the handle there . Count me in

OTM Al
09-10-2011, 08:58 AM
I didn’t think that but I did think that some bets had been lowered by 12%. Of course it’s quickly explained in the article but the Bloodhorse headline is misleading. Should’ve said 3% instead of 12.

Then the article would have been misleading to those of us that understand the difference between "percentage" and "percentage points".

takeout
09-10-2011, 11:20 AM
Then the article would have been misleading to those of us that understand the difference between "percentage" and "percentage points".I hear you. Maybe I was the only one mislead by the headline. I had visions of 13% tris but 22 is a step in the right direction.

Charli125
09-10-2011, 01:15 PM
Any track that reduces takeout even minimally is helping the player it has to start somewhere.

I think it's great what CT's done, and I definitely hope they show some good gains and continue their efforts. This is one of those situations where the takeout still isn't good, but it's moving in the right direction. I can get behind that as long as they stick to their word and continue lowering takeout if the pools increase.

Well done to the folks at CT!

ronsmac
09-10-2011, 05:40 PM
It's sinful that tracks with slots like CT and Philly have such high takeouts when they are making millions off of the slot machines. Especially when a lot of people don't think they deserved slots in the first place.

Horseplayersbet.com
09-10-2011, 05:58 PM
It's sinful that tracks with slots like CT and Philly have such high takeouts when they are making millions off of the slot machines. Especially when a lot of people don't think they deserved slots in the first place.
CT's takeout wasn't relatively horrible to begin with. They were 19th ranked in HANA's 2011 track ratings when it came to takeout score. This drop probably puts them in the top five now:
http://www.horseplayersassociation.org/hanatrackratingsbytakeoutscore2011.html

ronsmac
09-10-2011, 07:57 PM
[QUOTE=Horseplayersbet.com]CT's takeout wasn't relatively horrible to begin with. They were 19th ranked in HANA's 2011 track ratings when it came to takeout score. This drop probably puts them in the top five now:
http://www.horseplayersassociation.org/hanatrackratingsbytakeoutscore2011.html[/QUOTEWith all due respect. A track with slots should have much lower takeout rates. Not just CT, but all those with slots.

OTM Al
09-10-2011, 08:02 PM
[QUOTE=Horseplayersbet.com]CT's takeout wasn't relatively horrible to begin with. They were 19th ranked in HANA's 2011 track ratings when it came to takeout score. This drop probably puts them in the top five now:
http://www.horseplayersassociation.org/hanatrackratingsbytakeoutscore2011.html[/QUOTEWith all due respect. A track with slots should have much lower takeout rates. Not just CT, but all those with slots.

No they shouldn't. They should have the rates that maximize their profits. They are a business.

takeout
09-11-2011, 03:14 AM
A business that was out of business until slot welfare.

Canarsie
09-11-2011, 07:11 AM
[QUOTE=ronsmac]

No they shouldn't. They should have the rates that maximize their profits. They are a business.

I agree with this except the business model for most racinos isn't to maximize profits. Just my opinion but to me their argument is that racing should be eliminated and they will pay the state more. Otherwise the high takeout makes no sense it has been proven time and time again that lower takeout drives handle.

OTM Al
09-11-2011, 07:52 AM
A business that was out of business until slot welfare.

And the poster's proposal is exactly the same slots welfare. He would just like it better as it benefits him more, but the effect on the industry would be exactly the same as takeout too high.

Charli125
09-11-2011, 11:55 AM
No they shouldn't. They should have the rates that maximize their profits. They are a business.

Agreed. Optimal takeout is optimal takeout no matter what the purse structure. I think this is something a lot of people are confused about. If you reach optimal takeout, but can't fund purses to a sustainable level for the horsemen, then you need to look at other issues like costs.

I do think that tracks with supplemented purses should be the first to lower takeout though since they don't have as much to lose. A track like CT really isn't that reliant on takeout for their purses, so they can afford to "take the chance" on lower takeout.