Handle Analysis in California. Wow.

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by GameTheory

They don't seem to even know they are in a business. It is operated like government.

Excellent point. Players treated like tax payers makes perfect sense

[EMD4ME]

I have a question...

If I bet the SA DD at NYRA, doesn't SA receive 5% (or whatever the set % is for the signal)? So if the DD vig goes down, doesn't that mean that NYRA is making less money on the wager (or the site taking the wager)?

It seems to me that any track lowering the vig is only losing money when it comes to on track handle. Am I wrong?

[fmhealth]

Interesting perspective to say the least.

http://www.barntowire.com/smf/index.php?topic=67302.0

[GameTheory]

Originally Posted by fmhealth

Interesting perspective to say the least.

http://www.barntowire.com/smf/index.php?topic=67302.0

Jeff Platt *caused* all of racing problems, that's hilarious. (Because management can't stop listening to him -- they are his puppets!) Wow.

[Hoofless_Wonder]

Originally Posted by fmhealth

Interesting perspective to say the least.

http://www.barntowire.com/smf/index.php?topic=67302.0

Surely nobody can be that ignorant? RacetrackRailboard obviously can't find his own arse with both hands.....wow.

[Seabiscuit@AR]

I have to say that Racetrack Railbird and the The Turf Monster at that website make some sense

The problem with this debate about takeout rates is this

It is simply not true that tracks are unwilling to try lower takeout. They have enthusiastically been offering lower takeout since the late 1990s. The problem is these massive takeout reductions (sometimes in the order of 40% of the takeout) have only been made available to a select few. Only about 20% of the money being bet has enjoyed them

The results of this experiment (AKA rebates) has not seen handle go up or revenue increase for the tracks long term

Can you blame the tracks for not wanting to lower takeout for all now when lowering it drastically for the select few has failed? I can't

[cj]

Originally Posted by Seabiscuit@AR

I have to say that Racetrack Railbird and the The Turf Monster at that website make some sense

The problem with this debate about takeout rates is this

It is simply not true that tracks are unwilling to try lower takeout. They have enthusiastically been offering lower takeout since the late 1990s. The problem is these massive takeout reductions (sometimes in the order of 40% of the takeout) have only been made available to a select few. Only about 20% of the money being bet has enjoyed them

The results of this experiment (AKA rebates) has not seen handle go up or revenue increase for the tracks long term

Can you blame the tracks for not wanting to lower takeout for all now when lowering it drastically for the select few has failed? I can't

Imagine where handle would be without rebates. The product is getting worse, that it's why business is declining, not rebates.

[Seabiscuit@AR]

cj

I agree racing product is getting worse all round the world. A key reason for this is the game only caters for a small group who make a killing while most people involved in racing go broke. The people going broke leave the game and are not replaced by younger people

Rebates lock in a small cartel of big rebate players as perpetual winners while everyone else betting loses

Turning a blind eye to drugs etc allows some trainers to train lots of winners which means honest trainers go broke and leave the game because they cannot train enough winners

Allowing syndicators to get rebates at yearling sales so they can claim they bought the horse for 150K when they really paid 120K and syndicating the horse for the full 150K to the new owners who will go broke in the long run paying overs

Allowing Coolmore and Godolphin to dominate in the breeding world has seen them destroy competitive racing at the top in the UK and now these 2 operations are spreading over the world and will kill top racing in other countries too. Coolmore got to where they did through tax breaks which is like rebates

Too much of the wealth in racing is flowing to a few. And if you look closely you will see it is happening because these few have some nice little rorts working for them. Rebates is just one of these rorts

In the end racing will die because it has become too expensive for the Average Joe to play whether as a bettor or an owner of racehorses

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by RXB

http://www.horseracingintfed.com/res...hang_2007E.pdf

Look, they actually used legitimate analytical techniques to determine approximately where their sweetspot might be for takeout.

I skimmed the article, but again, he seems to be focusing on "revenue" (turnover) instead of actual track profits.

The best point he made was that cutting the take closed the gap between legal and illegal betting and reduced leakage. This is the kind of thing I am talking about. There are so many moving parts when it comes to handle and track bottom line it's hard to control for everything. But if you can demonstrate that "new players" are coming to the party, you have something concrete demonstrating that the pie is actually growing instead of being shuffled around to different bet types, different circuits, different days, etc... and there is actually a chance for the bottom line to the tracks to grow.

[Grits]

Originally Posted by fmhealth

Interesting perspective to say the least.

http://www.barntowire.com/smf/index.php?topic=67302.0

Three words for this...

TWITTER INCOMING. Expanded.

You can't present yourself, your points by any means other than namecalling? Morons, pimps, clueless fools, stupid?

You have nothing, least of all, everyone's attention. Having gone to one of the poster's blogs, I'm reminded why I have little use for many horseracing bloggers. They have poor writing skill. Some, even none. They're legendary in the cheap, cocky, one shot world of Twitter.

[DJofSD]

Originally Posted by Grits

Three words for this...

TWITTER INCOMING. Expanded.

You can't present yourself, your points by any means other than namecalling? Morons, pimps, clueless fools, stupid?

You have nothing, least of all, everyone's attention. Having gone to one of the poster's blogs, I'm reminded why I have little use for many horseracing bloggers. They have poor writing skill. Some, even none. They're legendary in the cheap, cocky, one shot world of Twitter.

There's one word at the top of the page that tells me all I need to know - Chicago.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by Seabiscuit@AR

I have to say that Racetrack Railbird and the The Turf Monster at that website make some sense

The problem with this debate about takeout rates is this

It is simply not true that tracks are unwilling to try lower takeout. They have enthusiastically been offering lower takeout since the late 1990s. The problem is these massive takeout reductions (sometimes in the order of 40% of the takeout) have only been made available to a select few. Only about 20% of the money being bet has enjoyed them

The results of this experiment (AKA rebates) has not seen handle go up or revenue increase for the tracks long term

Can you blame the tracks for not wanting to lower takeout for all now when lowering it drastically for the select few has failed? I can't

Less than 2% of the bettors know about takeout yet rebates are destroying the game? How is that possible?

If you don't know or care about the takeout you are merely betting horses for fun. Serious horseplayers are not lottery players. Lottery players are too caught up in their dream world to even understand that there is a takeout.

Tracks don't give rebates, the ADWs do. To say that rebates haven't increased handle dramatically is ridiculous. The handle hasn't gone down from the players getting rebates. The handle has dropped because the lottery type bettors have found other avenues to get their gambling endorphins flowing.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Seabiscuit@AR

cj

I agree racing product is getting worse all round the world. A key reason for this is the game only caters for a small group who make a killing while most people involved in racing go broke. The people going broke leave the game and are not replaced by younger people

Rebates lock in a small cartel of big rebate players as perpetual winners while everyone else betting loses

Turning a blind eye to drugs etc allows some trainers to train lots of winners which means honest trainers go broke and leave the game because they cannot train enough winners

Allowing syndicators to get rebates at yearling sales so they can claim they bought the horse for 150K when they really paid 120K and syndicating the horse for the full 150K to the new owners who will go broke in the long run paying overs

Allowing Coolmore and Godolphin to dominate in the breeding world has seen them destroy competitive racing at the top in the UK and now these 2 operations are spreading over the world and will kill top racing in other countries too. Coolmore got to where they did through tax breaks which is like rebates

Too much of the wealth in racing is flowing to a few. And if you look closely you will see it is happening because these few have some nice little rorts working for them. Rebates is just one of these rorts

In the end racing will die because it has become too expensive for the Average Joe to play whether as a bettor or an owner of racehorses

Rebates have nothing to do with people winning or losing. You have to be incredibly great to win, even if you are getting a massive rebate. The people who are losing are just being "outbet" and "outhandicapped" by smarter people. The game has gotten much harder to beat because the information that is now public has made the market so much tighter. There are no "select few" you have just as much of a chance as anyone to be a high roller. Thats how life works, Porsche doesn't stop making 911's because poor people can't afford them.

[GameTheory]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

Rebates have nothing to do with people winning or losing. You have to be incredibly great to win, even if you are getting a massive rebate.

I'm sorry but this makes no sense. The bigger the rebate you get, the easier it is to win. How is that not obvious? Just take it to the logical extreme and imagine you got a 90% rebate. It would basically impossible to not win -- you certainly wouldn't have to be "incredibly great". With 0% rebate, you do have to be pretty good though, yes...

[Robert Fischer]

There are at least two significant inefficiencies in racing.

1. use of the media (worst offender)

2. optimum takeout (significant losses)


I haven't had time to study Chang's process or Jeff Platt's.
I did want to add that setting optimum takeout is in fact a fairly complex task and there are a variety of factors(some of which are mentioned in this thread) that can at various times "move" the optimum takeout.