Can Sports Betting on Track and Satellite Save Racing?
 

I believe that allowing Sports Betting on Track and Satellite only (not online so we can get people to the facilities) will get people to go to the Track in droves to make a sports bet.

The thing about having a Casino at a Track is that these people like a different kind of action. A machine player needs action every 5 seconds.

A Sports Bettor has action every 3 or 4 hours so Horse Racing is a natural fit. The Sports Bettor will embrace Horse Racing because it is a game of skill where he has action every half hour. I would imagine more than a few people will stay at the Track to watch their game. They will eat, drink, and maybe play a few races!

This will attract a new group of people to the Track (young people included)!

I think this makes too much sense so they will never try it! :bang:

I am sure this will work and save Racing if they give it a try.

What do you think?

Maybe, but sports betting is a loss leader at many casinos. Bookies do well because they shade home teams, don't have to be competitive when it comes to exotic wagering, and because their clientele is often unsophisticated. Casino sports books often show losses in the short and medium terms. I see the point, and if it increased parimutuel handle, that'd be great, but a single bad loss (think 2008 Super Bowl) could wipe out a racetrack- or racetrack company- completely.

I think they would have to transmit their bets to Vegas or whoever for a small piece of the action. Remember they're trying to get people to the Track to play the Horses primarily!

People will pay admission and buy food and drink while they're at the Track. Hopefully 10% or more will stay and play the Horses while they watch their game!

I Think It will--Ur Assumption is correct--I think unless we are both wrong-In that case have a beer- or 6

I could be wrong but I believe it is coming to Delaware.

I know they're trying but it needs to happen at every Race Track and Satellite facility in the country. It's a natural fit and most of the wagering machines are equipped to take Sports bets already (I think)!

Sports Bettor has action every 3 or 4 hours? Are you serious? Do you think that Sports Betting is a one-game-at-a-time proposition? And, which tracks other than Delaware Park will this happen at?

My point is that everyone talks about Casinos saving Racing and I think that is misguided at best. Sports betting can save Racing if they give it a chance. There are currently no Indian Casinos taking Sports bets are there? Industry leaders should be pushing Sports Betting as of yesterday!

Only kinda. Delaware has legalized (actually, re-legalized) a parlay lottery game that involves NFL scores. But that's the extent of it, and it's rather limited, and it's a sucker play, although I have no doubt it will be wildly popular.

I could possibly see that (apart from the illegality thing right now, but well assume the laws get changed, which would be great), but I think a lot of Vegas books would want no part of the action. The only reason most sports books exist is to get you to do other things while you're in there. Books come close to breaking even on bets alone at most books; add in drinks, services, etc. and they often lose money. Still, they'll gladly lose $50 a head in the sports book if they regain $100 at the craps table. They don't have much interest in taking huge, potentially sharp pools over the phone where they can't recoup those losses- at least without demanding a bigger vig. Maybe a few would want the pool regardless- chances are, for any individual game, they'll make money- but once again, we have to assume that they'll be willing to cooperate with an outside source enough to trust the bets are accurate, etc. I don't think they'd do that. And for the reasons I said above, I think that tracks would be reluctant to take huge risks in sports betting.

I'd be curious to see if, some day in the future, books (or tracks) would be willing to offer a parimuteul pool for sporting events on the moneyline. For example, take an NFL game between team A and team B, where 75% of the money comes in on team A and 25% on team B. The odds could be set to offer a very, very small takeout (say, +298 on team B and -402 on team A) and the places could skim still win every time. That seems like a game the tracks could easily play... if only it were legal.

My understanding Rich is that the state of Delaware can have have sports betting see below:

The Delaware Senate voted in favor of Gov. Jack Markell's proposal to legalize sports betting in the state on Tuesday by a vote of 17-2. Markell is expected to sign the bill into law later this week.

"It's time to move forward and ensure the Delaware Sports Lottery is a success," Markell said after the vote. "This will generate critical revenue to help fund our core commitments."

Delaware is one of only four states in the country -- along with Nevada, Oregon and Montana -- that had sports betting laws on its books when Congress passed the 1992 Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, which banned states from being in the bookmaking business.

Once again, however, it's for a limited purpose. You can't just plunk down $50 bucks on Dallas at a bar in Dover. You can play their Delaware Lottery game where you pick X number of winners and get back a certain, woefully inadequate return, and that's it.

I disagree. The books, even the ones in vegas, all move their lines pretty much together. In the perfect world, the books have even money on each side, and take the vig, that's why the lines change. In the rare case that they do take a stand, they're right much more often than they're wrong(yes, the 2008 SB was a bad one, but just think how much they make during College FB season). Sure, they could have some short-term losses, but it's going to make money overall.

But like the other poster said, the money would need to be sent to vegas. They already have the neccessary software, hardware, and know-how to get it done, and they have enough capital to weather the short-term losses)

That's a myth. Very few books try to balance money in each side. Books bet on teams just like bettors do, because bettors are (over time) wrong in very predictable ways. I go back to the 2008 super bowl because it's a clear example, but there are a handful of glaring ones each week- the books were actively avoiding balancing the action. They wanted money to roll in on New York, and encouraged betting on New York throughout the week... then got reamed (something like 95% of the money bet on the moneyline was bet on New York, and they had to pay it out at 4 to 1. Ouch.) This happens every week, and Vegas wins some and loses some.

The lines move together because most lines come from a single consortium. Books don't want to be the part of a middling game played by bettors.

''Lemons has indicated Delaware plans to allow bettors to wager on the outcome of a single game''

http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/n...cc4c002e0.html

The article is misleading. You need to read between the lines:

Rephrase: the state will be the bookie. This is a lottery game.

In other words, they can't have a different system than that exempted by federal law, which was the old one, which was a state run lottery system. If you want to bet into state lottery football games, with state lottery vigs, you're going to lose your shirt.