Legal Rebates for California Players

[Jeff P]

California players have long been denied access to legal (100% parimutuel) rebates readily available to residents of other states.

That's about to change.

If you are playing through an ADW (or an offshore) and are interested in earning parimutuel rebates on your handle at top tier track signals - shoot me an email.

I'll be happy to help.


jeff @ jcapper .com

(remove the blank spaces first)


-jp

.

[mannyberrios]

Always good to see good news!

[twindouble]

Jeff P; Explain what you mean by 100 percent pari-mutual. From my point of view if all players don't get the same rebate there's no such thing as pari-MUTUAL! Rebates are a form of lower takeout.

[horses4courses]

Jeff P; Explain what you mean by 100 percent pari-mutual. From my point of view if all players don't get the same rebate there's no such thing as pari-MUTUAL! Rebates are a form of lower takeout.

I'm pretty sure that 100% pari-mutuel means that all bets are co-mingled into track pools, and paid at full track odds. No booking of wagers with payoff limits (as done by illegal off-shore bookmakers).
To me, it stands to reason that the more you bet, the more you will receive in rebates.

[twindouble]

I'm pretty sure that 100% pari-mutuel means that all bets are co-mingled into track pools, and paid at full track odds. No booking of wagers with payoff limits (as done by illegal off-shore bookmakers).
To me, it stands to reason that the more you bet, the more you will receive in rebates.

I wouldnt' bet through any ADW unless I get track odds and actual handle on any pool. I never bet off shore like the greater majority of players. Cal should drop the rebates and give all players lower takeout. Giving a small percentage of players a huge edge with high rebates, (lower takeout) isn't and never will be a level playing field. Simple as that! It was predictable from the time ADW's came about that track operators would have to take control of their signals and the the ADW's to survive.

[Ted Craven]

I wouldnt' bet through any ADW unless I get track odds and actual handle on any pool.

And so you shouldn't. Jeff's announcement was re California residents now being able to bet with a legal, US based ADW, where all pool monies are comingled, tracks get their cut and California residents get rebates formerly inaccessible to them.

Just write Jeff for the details. (Or write me.)

As a resident of Massachusetts, you don't have this problem (that California residents had). You can get significant rebates, track odds, 100% parimutuel, co-mingled pools on all North American tracks from dollar one - the majority of US and Canadian residents can. The track takeout is reduced - the playing field is level.

While waiting for states and tracks to get it together to reduce takeout rates, why not use use rebates as a proxy for this.

Ted

[Light]

Why is this addressed as a secret? Why can't you spell the details out in the open if it's legitimate.

[Charli125]

Why is this addressed as a secret? Why can't you spell the details out in the open if it's legitimate.

If you're not interested, don't contact him. If you are, contact him. Don't you think there's a good reason why it's addressed like this? Stop being a negative nancy.

For many years players in other states have been able to get rebates while CA residents couldn't. Now Jeff is saying that CA residents can. Why bitch about it?

We all know that we'd be better off if takeout was lowered. Takeout isn't being lowered though, so rebates are a way of lowering takeout for some players at least. It sucks for people without rebates but then again, it puts more money into the pools so it's good for all of us.

[twindouble]

If you're not interested, don't contact him. If you are, contact him. Don't you think there's a good reason why it's addressed like this? Stop being a negative nancy.

For many years players in other states have been able to get rebates while CA residents couldn't. Now Jeff is saying that CA residents can. Why bitch about it?

We all know that we'd be better off if takeout was lowered. Takeout isn't being lowered though, so rebates are a way of lowering takeout for some players at least. It sucks for people without rebates but then again, it puts more money into the pools so it's good for all of us.

I have no problem with Cal players getting rebates as long as all players get the same rebate or none at all and reduce takeout. I thought the goal was to get Cal to reduce takeout, not for just a few.

[Charli125]

I have no problem with Cal players getting rebates as long as all players get the same rebate or none at all and reduce takeout. I thought the goal was to get Cal to reduce takeout, not for just a few.

The goal is to get CA to reduce takeout. The goal is to get everyone to reduce takeout. Rebates aren't the solution but they do help in the mean time.

By your reasoning we should do away with all rebates so that everything is fair, and let the ADW's make more money while we wait for takeout to be lowered. I disagree with that. I think Rebates help us get closer to optimal takeout while we work on getting takeout lowered.

[twindouble]

The goal is to get CA to reduce takeout. The goal is to get everyone to reduce takeout. Rebates aren't the solution but they do help in the mean time.

By your reasoning we should do away with all rebates so that everything is fair, and let the ADW's make more money while we wait for takeout to be lowered. I disagree with that. I think Rebates help us get closer to optimal takeout while we work on getting takeout lowered.

Charli125; If your ultimate goal is to do away with the rebates and lower takeout for all, I can support that without thinking about it. If that was expressed somewhere along the way I missed it. For now I have to eat whatever is put on my plate but I don't want hot dogs when others are getting prime rib. Here's a "for now", I want the ADW's to allow players to form PARTNERSHIPS to play the pick 6 and share in the tax burden. Of course I would like to see the withholding go away or increased to a hundred grand. That was proposed here, I also want to do away with the W2G's.

[Charli125]

Charli125; If your ultimate goal is to do away with the rebates and lower takeout for all, I can support that without thinking about it. If that was expressed somewhere along the way I missed it. For now I have to eat whatever is put on my plate but I don't want hot dogs when others are getting prime rib. Here's a "for now", I want the ADW's to allow players to form PARTNERSHIPS to play the pick 6 and share in the tax burden. Of course I would like to see the withholding go away or increased to a hundred grand. That was proposed here, I also want to do away with the W2G's.

Ok, we're on the same page. I completely understand your frustration and I should have communicated the ultimate goal earlier.

I know that HANA has pushed for a removal of the tax withholding and I do have some optimism that this will happen. Unfortunately with the chaos in congress right now, I doubt it'll happen any time soon.

W2G's are more complicated since that basically comes down to an interpretation of what the original bet amount is. We'll never do away with W2G's unless the casino lobbyists push for it. I also don't see much chance of our getting the wager amount changed to the total amount bet rather then the cost of each individual bet.

As for the partnership issue, I've actually heard that suggested before. Has anyone out there ever asked their ADW what the rules are around this? I haven't but I'll write someone today and let you know. I'm curious if anyone else has any info.

[Charli125]

Charli125; If your ultimate goal is to do away with the rebates and lower takeout for all, I can support that without thinking about it. If that was expressed somewhere along the way I missed it. For now I have to eat whatever is put on my plate but I don't want hot dogs when others are getting prime rib. Here's a "for now", I want the ADW's to allow players to form PARTNERSHIPS to play the pick 6 and share in the tax burden. Of course I would like to see the withholding go away or increased to a hundred grand. That was proposed here, I also want to do away with the W2G's.

I just received an answer from someone in the industry that partnerships are legal in some places. You would have to create an LLC or something along those lines, and it depends on where the ADW is licensed. North Dakota, for example, does allow it. Oregon, does not. If you're interested in that type of thing, I'd suggest contacting your ADW.

[twindouble]

Ok, we're on the same page. I completely understand your frustration and I should have communicated the ultimate goal earlier.

I know that HANA has pushed for a removal of the tax withholding and I do have some optimism that this will happen. Unfortunately with the chaos in congress right now, I doubt it'll happen any time soon.

W2G's are more complicated since that basically comes down to an interpretation of what the original bet amount is. We'll never do away with W2G's unless the casino lobbyists push for it. I also don't see much chance of our getting the wager amount changed to the total amount bet rather then the cost of each individual bet.

As for the partnership issue, I've actually heard that suggested before. Has anyone out there ever asked their ADW what the rules are around this? I haven't but I'll write someone today and let you know. I'm
curious if anyone else has any info.

Cal just inacted no deductions on gambling winnings. Players get taxed again like we have been here in Mass for many years, those sucking things add up. Anything we hit over 300-1 you get a W2G, it's just an added tax providing your state doesn't allow gambling deductions.

The partnership idea is mine, been posting that on other sites for sometime now. I had partners for many years but when they come up with the withholding that was a can a worms when it come to taxes, that killed my partnerships. Just to be clear, I've been against the withholding sense they started it and said as much on the internet. Someone here suggested the idea of increasing it to a hundred grand and I could live with that.

[Track Collector]

Why is this addressed as a secret? Why can't you spell the details out in the open if it's legitimate.

Consider some of the following POSSIBILITES:
(a) The folks with this information may get a referral fee. BTW, nothing wrong with this concept. Also for the record, and from my dealings with Jeff Platt over the past year or so, I believe Jeff's primary motivation for posting here is based on a sincere desire to help fellow horseplayers, and NOT one for purposes of getting a referral fee.
(b) If the entity does not advertise here on PA, then it is not fair to those who do to get free advertising.
(c) The entity MAY NOT want public recognition.
(d) The entity may only be seeking a specific type of player.
(e) Etc. etc.

So you see, there could be lots of legitimate reasons why is was presented the way it was. ;)

The above is pure conjecture (guesswork) on my part, as I have not spoken to Jeff to know whom he is speaking about.

[Ted Craven]

Consider some of the following POSSIBILITES:

(a) Also for the record, and from my dealings with Jeff Platt over the past year or so, I believe Jeff's primary motivation for posting here is based on a sincere desire to help fellow horseplayers, and NOT one for purposes of getting a referral fee.


I am familiar with the details of the opportunity Jeff refers to. I also dislike the perceived 'secrecy' involved in the promotion of rebates in general. But it is the ADWs or the Players Organization which request that approach.

I also believe in (a) above - Jeff introduced me to this a few years ago, and I in turn have tried to promote this to my clients. Is it an ideal situation? No, but there is no downside. Consider it another tool in the kit of a well prepared and serious parimutuel investor.

Ted

[Light]

Stop being a negative nancy.

Why bitch about it?



You don't have to go on the offensive for an honest question. I am aware of Jeff and Ted and consider them both honest and knowledgeable horse players. But this "psst" type of delivery doesn't sit right with me whatever the reasons.

[Charli125]

You don't have to go on the offensive for an honest question. I am aware of Jeff and Ted and consider them both honest and knowledgeable horse players. But this "psst" type of delivery doesn't sit right with me whatever the reasons.

If you consider them both honest and knowledgeable then I suggest you ask them in private if you have any doubts rather than publicly questioning the legitimacy of the offer. I don't get the constant negativity associated with anything new/different and I think it should stop.

[twindouble]

I am familiar with the details of the opportunity Jeff refers to. I also dislike the perceived 'secrecy' involved in the promotion of rebates in general. But it is the ADWs or the Players Organization which request that approach.

I also believe in (a) above - Jeff introduced me to this a few years ago, and I in turn have tried to promote this to my clients. Is it an ideal situation? No, but there is no downside. Consider it another tool in the kit of a well prepared and serious parimutuel investor.

Ted

Ted; Just exactly who do you consider "well prepared serious pari-mutual investors" and how many exist? Keeping in mind there's no such thing today as a pari-mutual system when other are getting high rebates because they have the money to churn giving them a much lower takeout and the ability to SKIM the pools. That's not being "well prepared", that's having one hell of an edge over the majority of players being traditional CORE handicappers that keep the game alive. Like I said, we get hot dogs and others get prime rib. We are not that dumb, we understand the difference. To top it off, your well prepared players with a lot money have a better opportunity to score on the pick 6, thanks to the tracks that pad the conditions to create carryovers. That's why I want the ADW's to allow players to form partnerships so we can compete for that big score again and share the tax burden.

[Charli125]

Twindouble,

See my post below regarding partnerships. It's probably worth the time to talk to your ADW.

I just received an answer from someone in the industry that partnerships are legal in some places. You would have to create an LLC or something along those lines, and it depends on where the ADW is licensed. North Dakota, for example, does allow it. Oregon, does not. If you're interested in that type of thing, I'd suggest contacting your ADW.

[twindouble]

Twindouble,

See my post below regarding partnerships. It's probably worth the time to talk to your ADW.

Thanks Charli; I've done some research on the subject. When it comes to the federal gambling laws, in order to set up a LLC as I understood it,qualifing to claim loses and business expenses, gambling has to be your sole source of income. Now that's not what I'm proposing. All I'm asking for is for the ADW's to divide the winnings between the partners and we are personally liable for our share of income taxes. No different than what Twinspires did when they ran their players pool. Each investor got W2G's on what the payoff was and I assume they can do the same on the Federal withholdings if it paid over five grand. I also assume the system exists now to do just that. There's no question in my mind handle would go up when partners can invest more and churn more. Win win in my opinion.

[Ted Craven]

Ted; Just exactly who do you consider "well prepared serious pari-mutual investors" and how many exist?

I'll presume you have contacted Jeff and gotten the details he opened with about Californians. Or, gotten details about what's available to everyone else (e.g. you). But possibly didn't understand what's on offer, else you would appreciate that your smaller handle and others' larger handle attract within a few % points of each other at best, and nothing to scoff at.

Who do I consider a "well prepared serious pari-mutual investor"? Well, my mother for one (some of you met her at Saratoga this Summer). She bets about $20 per race, maybe $1000 a month - but don't tell her she is not serious about her hobby! She gets about 8% average rebates and would get low double-digits based on the tracks she plays if she bet more exotics. She spends hours each day working the races, recording models, wagers, watching replays, seeking spot plays where she has an edge, reading, thinking about her game - and helping others. (Keeps her young).

Another guy I know bets about $1 million a year - he gets about the same rebate %, likely more from exotics. Surely every user of Jcapper, HSH, BLAM, HTR, RDSS to name a few public software tools, plus hundreds of others are reasonable examples of serious pari-mutuel investors falling somewhere between (and above) that range of user handle.

Some would say, effectively, "I don't need no stinkin' rebates" and ply their trade and get their 20 - 50% ROI and laugh at the 7-14% rebate chump change we're scrabbling after here. These are better handicappers than I am, and perhaps you are one.

I appreciate that most of your above comments were rhetorical, and well express the frustration many people feel about the perceived inequity in this game. But perhaps you don't understand that you can reduce your takeout today by the same amount as my mother does if all you bet is $1000 a month (or less). But my advice to anybody who asks me about how to get ahead in this game is: check your mental/emotional programs, find some good software tools, find a teacher to help you, find a good ADW with good wagering tools and rebates - dive in and enjoy yourself. Don't presume the grapes are sour.

Cheers,

Ted

[twindouble]

Ted;

I'm not presuming anything. You want me to believe the rebate system is fair when I know very well it isn't. Some people churn a hell of lot more than that million you mention and they get higher rebates than anyone that I know of. As a matter of fact right here on PA those that support lower takeout and are working to achieve that posted that some whales get up to 14 % in rebates on what they churn. Twinspires new rebate program is offering 4 % on $25,000 in churn, that's a far cry from 14 %. After 51 years of playing the horses, I don't need a "teacher". I teach players how to handicap and gamble, no cost to them. Horse racing isn't Wall Street like some make it out to be when it comes to their so-called tools to use and no I don't need trackus to do my trip handicapping or data base that's loaded with useless stats. I wouldn't think about using computer batch wagering churning and skimming the pools. I've crossed this bridge before here on PA, "with the right tools a minnow can become a whale". Show me the ones that made that transition. I don't know of any. No one can get those kinds of rebates unless they are super whales. They own the game including the pick 6 big payoffs.

[lamboguy]

have you ever played the twin double at RAYNHAM or Taunton?

did you remember there were always people trying to buy up the exchange tickets?

did you ever know why they did?

[Light]

I don't get the constant negativity associated with anything new/different and I think it should stop.

There's nothing negative about asking an obvious question. The only one being negative is you.

FYI it's not my style to private message someone about rebates. That's why I asked a simple question. But who made you the judge and jury of where I'm coming from? WTf do you think my intentions are. Good God, get a life.

[andymays]

I wasn't planning to post in this thread because this argument has played out time and time again. If rebates are available to you then you're crazy not to take advantage of them. Rebates are such a big advantage that a break even player can make enormous profits with the right strategy and skill. The problem is that the current rebating system is helping destroy the game and nobody can deny that the "newby" has a much harder time making it through the learning curve and the overwhelming majority of people who give horse racing a try don't come back for more. Do you want to grow the game or not?

The problem I see for the HANA hierarchy is that if California does not lower the takeout how do they handle the boycott thing? It doesn't look good and you're going to have to either get rid of the boycott or make some adjustments as to what HANA stands for. This is fundamental.

The "pure" position here is to stop betting until rebates are given to everyone which also means that the takeout is lowered for everyone. This is fundamental and you can't run away from it. Again it looks bad when you try to have it both ways.

The word from the insiders out here is that many powerful people look at the hugely successful low takeout (14%) P5 and say it was a huge mistake. That's hard to believe but that's the mentality we're dealing with. Because the P5 is low takeout there will not be rebates on the bet. That's the problem. The tracks have an incentive to raise the takeout on low takeout wagers in order for the rebated players to get rebates.

You can rationalize all you want but this is a huge problem.

[lamboguy]

i think that hana figured out how to solve the high takeout rate in californina by getting them to rebate. from what i can see after the rebate, the takeout will be alot less than prior to the recent rise in takeout. on top of that, i would imagine that the way the rebate is structured, the net takeout rate will be less than takeout rates 39 years ago. this seems to me to be a much better idea than boycotting the game which i was apposed to from the start.

with every one that says high takeout is the problem with this game, you now have nothing to be worried about, that problem has now been solved by this brand new california rebate program for california residents.

[twindouble]

have you ever played the twin double at RAYNHAM or Taunton?

did you remember there were always people trying to buy up the exchange tickets?

did you ever know why they did?

lamboguy. My handle is "twindouble", that was a great wager. The exchange tickets were a very important part for more than one reason, including the potential for consolation payoffs. We would buy exchange tickets based on the parlay or more if we wanted them bad enough. As a matter of fact, when Green Mountain did away with the twindouble, myself and two others started a petition to bring it back, we got over 2,700 signatures in the parking lot. They wouldn't allow us on track and we succeeded. Never played it at Raynham but we played Suffolk, Narragansett park and Lyncoln Downs right up until it was gone. Then the pick 6 became our major play.

[lamboguy]

the 2 major differences between yesterday's twindouble and today's pick 4 are the takeout back then was 18% for the twindouble, today its 25% for the pick 4. and the twin double had to be exchanged to complete, today you bet it all at once. the thing about the exchange back then was unless you were on the inside of things, you didn't know right away how much was in the pools, and how many live tickets were outstanding. often times when i got live, i had offers that were bigger than the parlay odds and i usually sold them. i never knew that the guy that bought them from me knew how many tickets were live. sometimes when there were only 8 live tickets the guy could backwheel the last race and guarantee that he takes down the whole pool. if i had the only 8 tickets live, which happened once, the guy payed me $2500 per ticket where the parlay was only 400-1. he just bought the winning ticket and i didn't know it!

[twindouble]

the 2 major differences between yesterday's twindouble and today's pick 4 are the takeout back then was 18% for the twindouble, today its 25% for the pick 4. and the twin double had to be exchanged to complete, today you bet it all at once. the thing about the exchange back then was unless you were on the inside of things, you didn't know right away how much was in the pools, and how many live tickets were outstanding. often times when i got live, i had offers that were bigger than the parlay odds and i usually sold them. i never knew that the guy that bought them from me knew how many tickets were live. sometimes when there were only 8 live tickets the guy could backwheel the last race and guarantee that he takes down the whole pool. if i had the only 8 tickets live, which happened once, the guy payed me $2500 per ticket where the parlay was only 400-1. he just bought the winning ticket and i didn't know it!

Here's the thing Lamboguy, we took care of the tellers and managers when we made a good score. We always knew how many tickets were alive that was a must. Plus we knew what the average handle was during the week, weekends and holiday long weekends. Your exchange strategy was based on those factors and like I said potential consulation payoffs. It feels good when you have all of them, that's happened for us more than once. Keying one horse in the last leg and covering the third leg is a good move when there's just a few live tickets.

[Charli125]

I
There's nothing negative about asking an obvious question. The only one being negative is you.

FYI it's not my style to private message someone about rebates. That's why I asked a simple question. But who made you the judge and jury of where I'm coming from? WTf do you think my intentions are. Good God, get a life.

I think your purpose was to question the legitimacy of the offer, which is exactly what you said. I'm not judge and jury at all. It's my opinion that you should take that kind of question private if you actually want an answer. It's also my opinion that you don't really want an answer, you just want to stir things up.

Also, one thing to clarify to Andy's points. The rebates are for ca players, not only ca tracks.

[andymays]

Also, one thing to clarify to Andy's points. The rebates are for ca players, not only ca tracks.

You're right Charlie.

They could have just lowered the take for everyone and got some good publicity from it and grown handle that way which is the best way. For reasons that I can only guess they chose to follow instead of lead and I attribute it to incompetence and Ego.

The decision makers don't want to be seen as giving in to "a bunch of angry Horseplayers". :lol:

They're so proud of what they're doing that they aren't letting people know about it. No press release, no nothing. :eek:

[lamboguy]

it cost the race tracks money to have people in attendance. if a guy bets $20 for the day and doesn't buy a beer, hot dog and a stale doughnut, they lose money on that person.while there are some that go to the track that might bet $2000 on a full card of wagering, those people are few and far between these days.

adw'w have the cost broken down in the same way. it cost them so much to run their business. the website's are expensive to build and maintain, bandwidth for video cost money, money transfer's cost money. they can't afford to operate solely on the the guy that might bet $20 in a day, they flat out lose.

i don't really see what the problem is for smaller players not getting big rebates. they get something from most adw's. they also get a shot at the guys that are the bigger players that risk big money and get the rebates..

the new rebate program that california is allowing now is good for the game, but they still need to do a lot more

[Light]

you just want to stir things up.



That's your interpretation. Everyone else just answered my question without a value judgement of the purpose of my question. Your only purpose in responding to my question was to knock me down.For someone so concerned with ethics I find you offensive.

[cj]

I agree with Light. I think most of us are tired of rebates being some big secret.

[lamboguy]

i agree with CJ on the secrecy deal. when i worked as an agent they told me not to post the name of the company. i don't do anything with those company's any longer. the racing game is scaring enough people away from it these days. the rebate system is just prolonging the agony until a later date.

[Charli125]

I agree with Light. I think most of us are tired of rebates being some big secret.
Come on cj and lamboguy, you know how it works. If adw's come out in public and push their rebates then they will suddenly have a very difficult time getting signals. It's not right but it's how things work. Would you rather there were no rebates?

As for light, let's drop it. If you think questioning the legitimacy of what jeff and Ted have to say is appropriate then continue on. If you have an issue with adw's not wanting to be publicized then you could've said that. I stand by what I said and I think you're off base. If you find that offensive, so be it.

If you look at my posting history you'll see that I don't pick fights. I didn't appreciate your tone and that's that.

[andymays]

Come on cj and lamboguy, you know how it works. If adw's come out in public and push their rebates then they will suddenly have a very difficult time getting signals. It's not right but it's how things work. Would you rather there were no rebates?

As for light, let's drop it. If you think questioning the legitimacy of what jeff and Ted have to say is appropriate then continue on. If you have an issue with adw's not wanting to be publicized then you could've said that. I stand by what I said and I think you're off base. If you find that offensive, so be it.

If you look at my posting history you'll see that I don't pick fights. I didn't appreciate your tone and that's that.

Are you betting from Iceland?

[Charli125]

Are you betting from Iceland?

Not betting, just responding to this thread from my phone. Free wifi is awesome!

[cj]

Come on cj and lamboguy, you know how it works. If adw's come out in public and push their rebates then they will suddenly have a very difficult time getting signals. It's not right but it's how things work. Would you rather there were no rebates?



Honestly, I probably would rather there were no rebates than for it to be some big insider's secret. It may be how things work, but it should go away.