HANA, where you at?

[Scav]

Originally Posted by Horseplayersbet.com

California should have said that the takeout increase will not only lead to bigger field size but also end world hunger.
They would be dead wrong on both counts.

Is this Scarv guy for real? Seriously. I'm on his every word.
A gambler welcoming a takeout increase????
For the possibility of bigger field sizes?

You do understand that bigger field sizes means more money in the pool, thus more opportunties to make even more money right?

So according to your map, they are still one of the lowest in the nation.

Yeah, lets go after them, way intelligent

[highnote]

Originally Posted by Scav

My statement is correct.

Your statement can not be correct.

Government, racetracks and ADWs retain a portion of takeout as their commission. So 100% of takeout can not go to purses. If it did, racetracks and ADWs would be out of business because they would have virtually no income.

I tried locating the article about how ADWs get 50% of the increase, but haven't found it, yet. Maybe it was on Paulick's or Pricci's site.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Originally Posted by Scav

You do understand that bigger field sizes means more money in the pool, thus more opportunties to make even more money right?

So according to your map, they are still one of the lowest in the nation.

Yeah, lets go after them, way intelligent

Lowest in the nation? Nope. They now rank around 60th out of 70 tracks in doubles and exactors.

No, bigger fields do not mean more opportunities to win money. They can up certain value plays, but when the takeout is over 20%, value in the long run is non existent.

And how exactly is this leading to bigger field sizes? Increases in takeout leads to smaller handle for one thing, and when it comes to California, the big problem is the cost to own horses there. There is no influx of horses there now on the promise of purse increases from this really stupid move to up takeout.

The reason there was value in California was because of the lower relative takeouts, they've increased it now, and the dummy money is going to dry up faster. There won't be value. If 75% of your action is in California right now, you are going to lose a lot quicker than ever before. Even you will start feeling it over time.


What California did was attempt to get a larger piece of a shrinking pie. And you know what? They just made the pie shrink some more with the takeout increase. Handle is dropping, and as blended takeout rates increase, it will shrink further. California just made blended takeout rates for the entire industry increase.

[DeanT]

Originally Posted by swetyejohn

I tried locating the article about how ADWs get 50% of the increase, but haven't found it, yet. Maybe it was on Paulick's or Pricci's site.

Paulick and drf had it.

Daruty said his goal was to evenly divide the increase between California and the receiving site. Rather than charge a different rate for different bet types, the various takeouts were blended at the new rates, and the price of the signal was increased accordingly. For example, if the blended takeout of various bets (win/place/show, exacta, trifecta, pick 6, etc.) increased by 2.5%, the cost of the host fee paid to Santa Anita and the horsemen would go up by one-half, or 1.25%. The receiving site would get the other 1.25%.

“I’ve been pleased with the reception we’ve received,” Daruty told the Paulick Report. “Every group we’ve dealt with has been very cooperative. I recognize there’s a whole question about raising the price to the consumer, but we’ve said to all of our simulcast partners, we’ll split that with you 50/50. So half (of the increase on out-of-state wagers) comes back to purses, and half stays (with the receiving site).”

[Scav]

That is in regards to the source fee, I think

[DeanT]

Originally Posted by Scav

That is in regards to the source fee, I think

Correct, so as John noted, half the takeout increase goes to purses, and the other half is kept by the host. Only ontrack (and I think CA simo players) are paying full boat for purses, the rest of the country (I think about 60 or 70% of wagering, I am not certain) is paying only half to purses.

[highnote]

Originally Posted by Scav

That is in regards to the source fee, I think

Correct. So 100% of the takeout increase at Santa Anita, etc., does not go to purses as you previously stated.

Originally Posted by Scav

100% of this takeout increase goes into the purses.

[Dahoss9698]

Another scratch fiasco today at Gulfstream.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

Another scratch fiasco today at Gulfstream.

Apparently nobody was betting today.

[chickenhead]

I wasn't. I see the scratch...what happened?

[cj]

Late scratch that everybody knew about much earlier except bettors.

[Spiderman]

Originally Posted by cj

Late scratch that everybody knew about much earlier except bettors.

Scratch was in 7th race, announced after 6th race, first leg of P4, was completed. In this incident, I used the scratched horse in P4 ticket. Turns-out that it was the only segment of P4 that I missed. Given that I was going 3-deep in race 8 and 4-deep in the last leg, I limited race 7 selections to 2-deep and used the post- time favorite and the aforementioned scratched horse. Turning for home, the favorite looked to be likely winner, but was beat by horse flying on the inside.

Not saying that I would have picked the winner, but it was on my contenders list of 4-selections, including scratched horse. Knowing that scratched horse was out, would have provided the opportunity to use winner and net $2,200 payout.

Who is responsible for the late scratch? Dale Romans, trainer of horse; track personnel who relates scratch information; a Magna executive to get more money into pool? It makes no sense to withhold scratch/change information to public.

Someone should be held responsible for late scratch information: trainer fined; track executive fired.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

There are a few legit reasons for late scratches like this. A horse could get loose on its way out of the stall, it could flip, and maybe the horse looked like Life At Ten before the Breeders race (maybe it tied up). None of these situations should lead to firings.
It is a different situation if the track or trainer was sitting on a scratch.

[chickenhead]

I sent Gulfstream an email thru the website last night on the Florida late scratch rules, explaining to them why bettors don't like it and why it is potentially costing them handle, and suggesting they standardize on NYRA rules. Received this email back from MID's VP:

"You are right and we are having meetings to try to change the rule. We understand your frustration and will continue to work on these rules with the state to make you and everyone else feel comfortable betting our product.

Thank you and good luck with your wagers."

Not holding my breath, but hopefully we will see some improvement.

[Dahoss9698]

Originally Posted by chickenhead

Not holding my breath, but hopefully we will see some improvement.

I sent them an email also. Just like I sent them an email earlier in the meet when it happened. I also sent them numerous emails last year when this sort of thing happened.

Every response has been pretty much the same as you got. "We are working on it." I know it's not an easy thing to get state laws changed, but we are going on 4 years of this being brought to their attention and every year they are "working on it."