Bill Finley: "Horseplayers Are Stupid"

[DeanT]

Originally Posted by comet52

Why don't you tackle it yourself?

Because I would never post such a thing on a chat board where gamblers are. They would look at it and wonder if some track executive stole my logins.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Saratoga_Mike

I don't think it's feasible, but this is an interesting thought, imo.

Patron, "i'd like two dollars on the 1 horse in the first race at santa anita"

Teller, "Ok, that will be 2 dollars and 30 cents please"

Patron, "alright, now, give me a 2 dollar trifecta 1-2-3 at Belmont in the 8th"

Teller, "Ok, that will be 2 dollars and 52 cents please"

Patron, "Wow, 52 cents? I just paid 30 cents for a bet at Santa Anita, why the extra 22 cents?"

Teller, "Its called takeout bud, its the price you pay to wager"

Patron, "learn something new every day, thanks"

[turfnsport]

Originally Posted by comet52

If players show up at a track with x dollars and wager it, the takeout rate being lower means lower income for the track. You are talking about some hypothetical scenario where a business prices itself out of existence. The math of vig/income isn't dependent on how much money or knowledge of vig the players arrive at a form of gambling with. And it isn't dependent on a hypothetical pricing model either.

If I can attract a crowd of gamblers to my establishment at 25% vig, then I should. Lowering the vig to 20% only helps me if I subsequently attract an additional 25% more money to be bet. If the same group of gamblers show up at my track every day with a collective 100k to wager, I do better at 25% vig. Lower vig doesn't help me by extending "churn" or "handle", it only helps me if more customers show up with more money in their pockets.

Which brings us to, the majority of American gamblers can't tell you what the vig on any given game they play is. They simply can tell you whether they like the game or not. And often you will find them liking games with high vig.

So getting them to a horsetrack on the basis of saying, "Hey, next time you win $10.00 on a horse at our track, we will pay you $10.25 because we just lowered the takeout!" isn't likely to draw a big crowd.

Is your real name Fred Pope?

[andymays]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

Patron, "i'd like two dollars on the 1 horse in the first race at santa anita"

Teller, "Ok, that will be 2 dollars and 30 cents please"

Patron, "alright, now, give me a 2 dollar trifecta 1-2-3 at Belmont in the 8th"

Teller, "Ok, that will be 2 dollars and 52 cents please"

Patron, "Wow, 52 cents? I just paid 30 cents for a bet at Santa Anita, why the extra 22 cents?"

Teller, "Its called takeout bud, its the price you pay to wager"

Patron, "learn something new every day, thanks"

The way I remember it from my only trip to Oregon you have to bet $105 to bet $100 to win when you play at an off track facility. That's on top of the normal takeout.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

Patron, "i'd like two dollars on the 1 horse in the first race at santa anita"

Teller, "Ok, that will be 2 dollars and 30 cents please"

Patron, "alright, now, give me a 2 dollar trifecta 1-2-3 at Belmont in the 8th"

Teller, "Ok, that will be 2 dollars and 52 cents please"

Patron, "Wow, 52 cents? I just paid 30 cents for a bet at Santa Anita, why the extra 22 cents?"

Teller, "Its called takeout bud, its the price you pay to wager"

Patron, "learn something new every day, thanks"

Just a pain in the a** on lower dollar amount bets to scrounge for change. But I still think it's an interesting idea.

[JustRalph]

I have heard this idea of up front pricing before in tax argument

Next year everybody gets all of their taxes in their paychecks. No Fed Withdrawal, No state, city etc. No social security, Medicare etc. Every damn dime comes right to you.

On April 15th 2012 Every person in the Country must write a check for the amounts that would normally be taken out of their checks.

There would be a tax revolt movement the likes you have never imagined

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

I have heard this idea of up front pricing before in tax argument

Next year everybody gets all of their taxes in their paychecks. No Fed Withdrawal, No state, city etc. No social security, Medicare etc. Every damn dime comes right to you.

On April 15th 2012 Every person in the Country must write a check for the amounts that would normally be taken out of their checks.

There would be a tax revolt movement the likes you have never imagined

People would p1ss all their money away and wouldnt have a dime to pay their taxes with. Govt does them a favor and takes it in advance. Most people would gamble it away or buy drugs/alcohol with it if they had it in their greasy little palms.

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

A small percentage of us use horse racing as a means to make money, ya know, supplement our income. Most horseplayers just use it as a gambling game. They're really not 'horseplayers' they're just gamblers who happen to be driving past a racetrack when their gambling urges and need for action 'kicked in'.

These are the people who are hurting serious bettors, by not caring.

When the Vikings and Saints took the field the other night in the opening of the 2010-2011 NFL season, all the players walked to midfield and raised a finger to show solidarity. True horseplayers will show solidarity and boycott any takeout raise, but most of the people who wager on horses do not care as they know they're going to be lifetime losers anyway. No difference to them, they're just paying for 'action' and action is a pretty powerful drug, so the price can be raised without too many noticing or even caring.

True..
However it is the large dollar players that drive handle. Piss off enough of them and handle takes a nosedive.
I am a small potatoes player. I know that all things are relative. I bet wihtin my budget. With that said, the additonal takeout effects my bottom line. Therefore I will NOT be playing CA races in a show of solidarity and of a matter of pure principle.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

People would p1ss all their money away and wouldnt have a dime to pay their taxes with. Govt does them a favor and takes it in advance. Most people would gamble it away or buy drugs/alcohol with it if they had it in their greasy little palms.

This type of talk is for OFF TOPIC, not really for this thread.

Thanks.

If you and JustRalph don't agree, better have a damn good reason...

[thespaah]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

This type of talk is for OFF TOPIC, not really for this thread.

Thanks.

If you and JustRalph don't agree, better have a damn good reason...

Thank you..I don't like being lumped in with the few irresponsible people who cannot handle their finances.
BTW, is it not true that Casino sports books collect the vig up front when a wager is made?

[JustRalph]

my point was that the "takeout" is just like taxes. Mostly transparent and not even close to being visible. I would be all in favor of the takeout being charged up front. It would get the same reaction.

Damn good Idea if you ask me. Now let's get some State Legislature to mandate it......... and sit back and watch what happens.........

[Saratoga_Mike]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

my point was that the "takeout" is just like taxes. Mostly transparent and not even close to being visible. I would be all in favor of the takeout being charged up front. It would get the same reaction.

Damn good Idea if you ask me. Now let's get some State Legislature to mandate it......... and sit back and watch what happens.........

I like the idea (except the searching for 30 cents part on lower dollar amount wagers), but wouldn't you need all the tracks to participate in order for bettors to "comparison shop" more easily? Otherwise, you'd have upfront takeout being compared to the traditional model. But I'm sure all the states would come together on this issue and settle on a solution, just like they have with the universal medication rules and trainer suspension rules!

[DeanT]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

my point was that the "takeout" is just like taxes. Mostly transparent and not even close to being visible. I would be all in favor of the takeout being charged up front. It would get the same reaction.

Damn good Idea if you ask me. Now let's get some State Legislature to mandate it......... and sit back and watch what happens.........

Considering they dont even like to post the takeout on their websites it seems to be a longshot

But ya, boy would handle tank if people started having to pay 4 extra bucks to bet $20 on something to win.

[comet52]

Originally Posted by DeanT

Because I would never post such a thing on a chat board where gamblers are. They would look at it and wonder if some track executive stole my logins.

Nice job finessing your way out of having to stand up for yourself. You attack me by naming some unknowns on another message board, then can't be bothered to make your own case. I actually thought of you as one of the best posters on this board, up until today.

[WinterTriangle]

Originally Posted by kid4rilla

Even heroin addicts can appreciate when the price of their drug is cheaper down the street. They just have to KNOW it is cheaper.

If the worst action junkies knew which tracks paid better, they would at least try to play in that game.

This is a very simplistic view, but I think it also has something to do with regional loyalty. If people here thought our track in AR was "on the skids", they might feel they need to play it because it's *their* track.

I'm sure CA fans love their tracks, for better or for worse.

Yeah, they could "go down the street" but that's like leaving your team when they're on a losing streak?

Financially it makes no sense, but emotionally it might.

(junkies aren't a good analogy ...... junkies have no loyalty, even to themselves.)