How much is it worth to NOT have robotic wagerers in the pools?
 

I said this a number of times in the various threads around here, that if you want to fight for something important, it seems to me that it's harpooning the whales.

From what I understand from reading hear at PaceAdvantage, Whales as a whole lose a small percentage of their bankrolls, but make a profit because of large rebates on the takeout.

Why would I be against people that are putting large amounts of money into the pools for me to win?

You can be a losing player and still be contributing to making the pools more efficient than they would be otherwise.

The other day CJ mentioned free handle. What it comes down to is not how much more they handle cuz of the robotic wagering but how much more revenue they make. Gotta believe that the right thing to do is bend the curve the other way by lowering takeout for all and cutting massive rebates.

By allowing rebating, tracks are admitting that lower takeout works. The unfair situation most bettors face now is unfortunate, between rebating and CRW. But are tracks going to turn off their biggest customers now when business isn't exactly booming as it is? That is a big ask. If it wasn't for those things (and gaming subsidies) the bottom would have fallen out years ago IMO at most places.

Not recommending cold turkey solution. Gotta bend the curve the other way over the next few years.

This is the point about GP that players don't understand. GP is giving out the farm for free to computer teams because in turn they feast on the little guys.

This is a scam that will unravel because they're driving the little guys away from the game.

The P5 payoff at OP clearly shows how computer players effect play: 4-5 paid $1,500. If this was at GP, 5-5 would pay far less because all the combinations would be covered by computer players who would've then scooped the whole pool. NOTE: OP does not allow robotic players access to their pools.

The most important thing to understand about GP pools is that they're designed to screw novice, small or casual handicappers to the BENEFIT of computer players. They're paying for all of this through high take-out rates: the whales get rebates---GET IT!!!!

Just heard from someone saying the Robotic wagerers can play Oaklawn but only up to 5% of the pools??????

I agree it is bad, just think the hole has been dug so deep sometimes you can't get out.

Oaklawn gets it, that's why their handle is up. Not many tracks show and increase in handle and attendance for last year as did OP.

I don't see how that could possibly be regulated. 5% of an unknown number? Doesn't make sense.

With these robotic wagers in play does it make sense to play at smaller tracks with smaller pools? I would have to believe that pool size has to go a long way in their ability to generate money.

Pretty sure it's just a guideline thing that they monitor. Pool yesterday was 50K

And not positive that this 5% is in stone. We need to hear from someone who knows for sure what can and can't be done.

Is this collective selective myopia??

Why on earth is the one percent gathered here complaining about the computerized set-ups which know far greater advantages than they do while simultaneously (you) are unable or unwilling to understand in the slightest the huge number you and your ilk have done to the 98% which you have largely driven from racing??


Takeout percentage still has exactly nothing to do with any of the changes which must be made in order to reverse your own collective disastrous effect upon the whole of racing.


Every sensible move done in the interest of reversing the extreme imbalance in today's mutuel pools must be done with the little guy/novice/beginner in mind first and foremost.

The little guy doesn't give a sh*t about the $1.56 you might give him each day through your own, self-centered reduced takeout. (that little guy would be more interested in your offer if you held $1.56 in a small plastic bag with his name on it, visible from the turnstiles beneath the sign which says: "Admission: $6.50")


People bet billions of dollars on lotteries, with each aware going in that their own dollar has just as much chance as do any individual dollars spent by the fabulously wealthy on the same lottery. THAT is the mentality which drives the successes of lotteries. Racing won't even offer that comfort to its masses, and thus racing is circling the drain.

Just who believes that lottery revenue would remain stable or increase if its takeout were suddenly reduced to 40%. Do you believe that the guy who wins $386 Million (instead of $320 million) is now going to wager $66 million more on the lottery?



Begin by assisting the smallest of the small fries in attendance at each racing venue, and that, better than reducing takeout or (eliminating the computer-connections to the mutuel pools known to select few)... will begin the long road ahead toward bringing back the relative balance known to mutuel pools in the 1970's and before. (and who basically demanded over time the one-by-one disasters which have eroded the precious 'balance' in the mutuel pools? - it was you!!... all of you! ) (no racing newcomer ever wandered into Santa Anita guest services and exclaimed: "I'd love to wager here, but only if you add a 2nd pick-5 that overlaps the first one!" ) (no racing newcomer ever responded to a Keeneland BETologist with: "eh, I dunno, I think I'm gonna focus exclusively on rolling pick-3's today, can you help me establish my position?")




Lets call it Trickle-up economics.

Go watch the video (posted here at PA recently) of those guys standing around and screaming at the TV at Los Al and understand that those, along with people brand new to racing, are the people that racing needs to help first! Additionally, it is relatively easy to help those people for the mere fact that they could use any assistance most of anyone.


As for the rest of you... it should have been widely understood by each of you decades ago that you can not be any part of the solution until such time as when you cease to be the problem.