Press Release: TRACK OWNERS JOIN FORCES TO DEFEAT ‘BOOKIE AMENDMENT’

[andymays]

http://www.paulickreport.com/blog/tr...kie-amendment/

Excerpt:

A coalition of racetracks call for the defeat of a bill that has been amended to create a new class of online wagering in California.

AB 2414, authored by Assembly Speaker John Perez (D-Los Angeles), was significantly altered to allow bettors to wager on a horse to lose – a practice that is currently illegal in California and every other state in the union. AB 2414 also legalizes the practice of “exchange wagering” ......

[andymays]

The leadership in California tried to sneak this bill through in order to raise the takeout. Unfortunately for them it is all screwed up now.

The best part is that now they are asking for Horseplayers help to defeat a part of their own bill.

This really takes the cake.

[Charlie D]

The only people who would want to oppose this bill are those that want the monopoly to remain intact.

[andymays]

Originally Posted by Charlie D

The only people who would want to oppose this bill are those that want the monopoly to remain in tact.

Our brilliant leaders in California really opened pandoras box with this one. They thought they were slick sneaking the takeout raise through and now they're scared to death over the bill. These guys are a joke.

[Charlie D]

These guys have no idea how to generate interest in thier sport from a wider audience that is for sure.

[lamboguy]

Originally Posted by andymays

http://www.paulickreport.com/blog/tr...kie-amendment/

Excerpt:

A coalition of racetracks call for the defeat of a bill that has been amended to create a new class of online wagering in California.

AB 2414, authored by Assembly Speaker John Perez (D-Los Angeles), was significantly altered to allow bettors to wager on a horse to lose – a practice that is currently illegal in California and every other state in the union. AB 2414 also legalizes the practice of “exchange wagering” ......

first of all the statement that you have made is not true in nevada. in nevada race and sports books are licensed to book bets.

i am not sure about any other states, but in mass. there is a provision in their laws that if there is an emergency power failure where they are unable to transfer their bets into the wagering hub, they are now allowed to book those bets, i think it s mandatory that they are responsible for those bets. years ago in rhode island, lincoln and naragansett were allowed to do something very similar. i am not sure how they would have worked out the parimutual tax on those cituations because the bets were now non- parimutual.

i just learned in saratoga that all bets taken in wyoming that originate that that are minus pools, must pay $2.20 even if the host track only pays $2.10. i would guess that they have similar laws there as well.

i have no idea if they would take a large bet on rachel alexandra running in churchill if you tried to give it to them. if they do take $100k show bets and pay $2.20, i will imediately subscribe to cj's pace figures and move my place of residence. i am going to try to find out in depth what their program is in wyoming.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by Charlie D

The only people who would want to oppose this bill are those that want the monopoly to remain intact.

The only people who would support this bill are those who don't care about racing's survival in the U.S.

I'm starting to think that the blame for racing's problems don't all lie with those within racing but also with racing's customers, the bettors, who don't seem to give a damn about the sport of racing, only their own pockets.

[andymays]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

The only people who would support this bill are those who don't care about racing's survival in the U.S.

I'm starting to think that the blame for racing's problems don't all lie with those within racing but also with racing's customers, the bettors, who don't seem to give a damn about the sport of racing, only their own pockets.

I'm not necessarily in favor of exchange betting becuase I don't know enough about it. I do believe that it has the potential to drastically alter Horse Racing in the United States and maybe for the worse. If they just kept the takeout at reasonble levels this would go away.

My point is that the Leadeship in California tried to sneak a bill through to raise the takeout and they got screwed. Now they are asking the people they tried to screw (Horseplayers) to help them defeat the bill.

Isn't that ironic?

[Charlie D]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

The only people who would support this bill are those who don't care about racing's survival in the U.S.

I'm starting to think that the blame for racing's problems don't all lie with those within racing but also with racing's customers, the bettors, who don't seem to give a damn about the sport of racing, only their own pockets.

Fager Fan, they are not closing racetracks and trainers, jockeys, stable staff are not looking for new employment in UK, Ireland etc.

[lamboguy]

Originally Posted by Charlie D

Fager Fan, they are not closing racetracks and trainers, jockeys, stable staff are not looking for new employment in UK, Ireland etc.

that is only because they run the sport better there without government intervention. in the united states the ultimate boss of a racetrack are the state that the racetrack is located in. the government is only in a racetrack to "protect their interests". there is becoming less and less to protect.
this year the state of new hampshire got rid of their whole racing commission and there is no longer any live racing in that state.

in the year 2010, there is no reason for government to run racing, racing should run racing.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by Charlie D

Fager Fan, they are not closing racetracks and trainers, jockeys, stable staff are not looking for new employment in UK, Ireland etc.

Betfair is just another bookie in their system. They have a different system over there which, incidentally, has resulted in lacking purses and extremely high admission and other fees. A normal day at the track (not special days like Royal Ascot) starts at about $30 and goes up from there.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

The only people who would support this bill are those who don't care about racing's survival in the U.S.

I'm starting to think that the blame for racing's problems don't all lie with those within racing but also with racing's customers, the bettors, who don't seem to give a damn about the sport of racing, only their own pockets.

The problem lies with the customers?

First off, exchange betting creates growth. Young players will start up who knew little about horse racing before. Many exchange players jitney into the mutuel pools and also play exotics.

Most regulars will lose more in the long term than they would lose at the track.

The most insidious part of the bill is the takeout increase. Where is the extra money going to come from to be lost by those who bet California racing?, when some will quit because of the takeout, and some will bet more elsewhere, and many will have longer breaks to replenish their bankrolls.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by andymays

I'm not necessarily in favor of exchange betting becuase I don't know enough about it. I do believe that it has the potential to drastically alter Horse Racing in the United States and maybe for the worse. If they just kept the takeout at reasonble levels this would go away.

My point is that the Leadeship in California tried to sneak a bill through to raise the takeout and they got screwed. Now they are asking the people they tried to screw (Horseplayers) to help them defeat the bill.

Isn't that ironic?

I'm not even sure if CA got screwed as I'm wondering if someone out in CA wants this. Note who's put their name out there in opposition - Santa Anita and Churchill Downs. Where is the CHRB? Where is Hollywood Park and Del Mar? How did this part of the bill get added? Who has the pull to make that happen?

[andymays]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

I'm not even sure if CA got screwed as I'm wondering if someone out in CA wants this. Note who's put their name out there in opposition - Santa Anita and Churchill Downs. Where is the CHRB? Where is Hollywood Park and Del Mar? How did this part of the bill get added? Who has the pull to make that happen?

Believe me it's the guys in California that started this. It was leaked to me (us) by one of their own who is against raising the takeout. It is another example of a "gang that can't shoot straight". Once again if they kept the takeout at reasonble levels a company like Betfair would never gain traction.

[Charlie D]

Originally Posted by Fager Fan

Betfair is just another bookie in their system. They have a different system over there which, incidentally, has resulted in lacking purses and extremely high admission and other fees. A normal day at the track (not special days like Royal Ascot) starts at about $30 and goes up from there.

Betfair is not a bookie, the low purses are a result of the bookies being far smarter than those that run racing so instead of say 50% going back to racing, only 10% does.

US racing can negotiate a better deal with BF as it's starting from scratch.


It is expensive to go racing in UK, however, Towester is Free except for certain days showing a track can survive on no entrance fee.


How much is iit into CD for BC this year FF??