Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Racing Discussion


View Poll Results: Will Brick and Mortar only sports betting help horse racing?
If Brick and Mortar Only for 2 years it will help horse racing. 12 52.17%
If NOT Brick and mortar only it will hurt horse racing. 11 47.83%
Voters: 23. This poll is closed

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 05-14-2018, 06:48 PM   #31
Andy Asaro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 5,789
These Gaming Stocks Are The Big Winners


https://www.investors.com/research/i...tting-casinos/


Excerpt:

The Supreme Court on Monday struck down a law largely banning sports betting as unconstitutional, a ruling that will likely spur many states to legalize it.
However analysts have said the difference between expectations and reality means it may not be the revenue bonanza for casino stocks such as of Las Vegas Sands (LVS), Wynn Resorts (WYNN) and MGM Resorts (MGM) than it first appears.

In fact the biggest winners should actually be the strong regional players, such as Caesars Entertainment (CZR), Boyd Gaming (BYD) and Penn National Gaming (PENN). With their vast network of properties, they are the best poised to open sports books around the U.S., especially if states opt to limit the locations were such betting is allowed, rather than following the more laissez-faire approach of the United Kingdom, where bookmakers are an established part of the high street.

Caesars Entertainment shot up 5.5% on the stock market today. Boyd Gaming climbed 3.1%, Penn National Gaming 4.7% and Churchill Downs (CHDN) 4.9%. Penn National and Churchill Downs cleared buy points.
Las Vegas Sands and Wynn Resorts, which get most of their revenue from Chinese gaming mecca Macau, fell 0.8% and 2%, respectively. MGM Resorts, which has a big Macau exposure but is more Vegas-centric than Sands and Wynn, rose 1.6%.
Andy Asaro is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-14-2018, 06:52 PM   #32
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Asaro View Post
https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-rac...ide-for-racing

Excerpt:

REVISITING THE CASE FOR FIXED ODDS
The key difference between pari-mutuel and fixed-odds betting is when the odds are set: for fixed-odds, the player locks in the odds at the time the bet is placed; while in pari-mutuel, the odds are set when the race begins. In the U.S., legal sports books will operate with fixed odds and possibly exchange wagering, which enables player-to-player fixed-odds betting. We need to reconsider whether a shift to fixed-odds betting would maximize the appeal of race betting to sports bettors.

In the UK, exchange betting for sports has appealed to younger players and arguably has expanded the universe of bettors. Fixed-odds or exchange betting would also address the concerns many current racing fans have with past-post odds changes (which would be expensive to address through changes to the tote systems) and lack of visibility to odds for exotic bets.

In jurisdictions, such as Australia and the UK that offer pari-mutuel betting in parallel with fixed-odds betting, handle has shifted steadily to fixed-odds. For example, in Australia, fixed-odds now represents 39% of Tabcorp's racing revenues vs. only 14% in 2013. Fixed-odds revenue in Australia has grown at 25% per year since 2013 while pari-mutuel revenue has decreased at 5%.

Although the UK commission on exchange betting is only 2%-5%, there is no barrier to U.S. states setting commissions at 10% or higher, allowing for host fees to tracks that are comparable to those under current pari-mutuel structures. For fixed-odds wagers, the same level of takeout could be accomplished through a royalty or similar fee levied on handle.

In a fixed-odds system the bookmaker takes the financial risk of underwriting bets, which is why sports books set limits on wagers and have sophisticated systems and staff to analyze and manage risk. For U.S. racing, operators would need either to develop those skills or outsource the trading/risk management function.

Operators could offer fixed odds for single-race bets while using pari-mutuel pools for multi-race bets (which have the potential for multi-million-dollar payoffs).

Fixed-odds systems make it easier to bet against a horse and therefore could elevate the risk to competitive integrity. Therefore, a shift to fixed-odds would heighten the need to elevate and standardize testing, monitoring, and enforcement of racing rules.
I don't have the time to type it out, but I have grave reservations about fixed odds betting on horse races in the US. Essentially, I think it could have the potential of making the sport a lot more corrupt than it is already.

I know it frustrates people when odds shift at post time. And I can think of things the sport could potentially do to address that issue. But allowing what is essentially extensive legal bookmaking on horse races would open a much bigger can of worms.
dilanesp is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-14-2018, 07:21 PM   #33
biggestal99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 4,520
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp View Post
I don't have the time to type it out, but I have grave reservations about fixed odds betting on horse races in the US. Essentially, I think it could have the potential of making the sport a lot more corrupt than it is already.

I know it frustrates people when odds shift at post time. And I can think of things the sport could potentially do to address that issue. But allowing what is essentially extensive legal bookmaking on horse races would open a much bigger can of worms.
How does it work in oh let’s say the uk. Where fixed odds betting is the norm and has been for many years.

What do you think the specific problem is with fixed odds betting?

Allan
biggestal99 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-14-2018, 07:32 PM   #34
clocker7
Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 692
Universal sports betting eventually will gravitate to states taking out the maximum rake, and computer algorithms soaking it for more, too.

So horse racing might not suffer as much as people expect.
clocker7 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-14-2018, 07:32 PM   #35
Valuist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 16,487
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Asaro View Post
These Gaming Stocks Are The Big Winners


https://www.investors.com/research/i...tting-casinos/


Excerpt:

The Supreme Court on Monday struck down a law largely banning sports betting as unconstitutional, a ruling that will likely spur many states to legalize it.
However analysts have said the difference between expectations and reality means it may not be the revenue bonanza for casino stocks such as of Las Vegas Sands (LVS), Wynn Resorts (WYNN) and MGM Resorts (MGM) than it first appears.

In fact the biggest winners should actually be the strong regional players, such as Caesars Entertainment (CZR), Boyd Gaming (BYD) and Penn National Gaming (PENN). With their vast network of properties, they are the best poised to open sports books around the U.S., especially if states opt to limit the locations were such betting is allowed, rather than following the more laissez-faire approach of the United Kingdom, where bookmakers are an established part of the high street.

Caesars Entertainment shot up 5.5% on the stock market today. Boyd Gaming climbed 3.1%, Penn National Gaming 4.7% and Churchill Downs (CHDN) 4.9%. Penn National and Churchill Downs cleared buy points.
Las Vegas Sands and Wynn Resorts, which get most of their revenue from Chinese gaming mecca Macau, fell 0.8% and 2%, respectively. MGM Resorts, which has a big Macau exposure but is more Vegas-centric than Sands and Wynn, rose 1.6%.
I disagree with them re: MGM. MGM already has the license for New Jersey. They are the first mover and, barring a catastrophe, should use that to their benefit to add on additional states. How many sports books has PENN owned? I don't see this as good news at all for CHDN, as racing figures to be hurt by the expansion of sports betting.
Valuist is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-14-2018, 07:33 PM   #36
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by biggestal99 View Post
How does it work in oh let’s say the uk. Where fixed odds betting is the norm and has been for many years.

What do you think the specific problem is with fixed odds betting?

Allan
Again, I don't have the time to type out a detailed response, but let's just say that the UK has both a lot less horse racing and a lot different regulatory structure than we do.

And further, the historical reason why the US has pari-mutuel betting in the first place was partly in response to specific, extensive corruption problems that existed when the sport had on-track bookies.

Additionally, Nevada switched from bookmaking to simulcasting as soon as they could, again, because of specific, extensive corruption problems that existed when they made book.
dilanesp is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-14-2018, 08:44 PM   #37
horses4courses
Registered User
 
horses4courses's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 14,529
Phone Apps

In order for sports betting to maximize handle and revenue,
phone and online wagering have to be on board soon.
People can already bet that way offshore, albeit illegally.

Strictly bricks and mortar operations would be like legalizing
alcohol, but only allowing sales in bars. Liquor sales could not
happen in stores and restaurants. Basically, that won't work.

This is not a panacea for horse racing.
There is still much work to be done to improve,
and ultimately save, the sport. Under current conditions,
young people (under 40s) aren't interested. That is not
likely to change, either. Racing is pretty much an acquired
taste - by and large among the over-60 brigade.
horses4courses is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-14-2018, 09:04 PM   #38
Parkview_Pirate
Registered User
 
Parkview_Pirate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,951
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp View Post
I don't have the time to type it out, but I have grave reservations about fixed odds betting on horse races in the US. Essentially, I think it could have the potential of making the sport a lot more corrupt than it is already.

I know it frustrates people when odds shift at post time. And I can think of things the sport could potentially do to address that issue. But allowing what is essentially extensive legal bookmaking on horse races would open a much bigger can of worms.
Many moons ago I had an account at IASBET, which allowed fixed odds wagering for Australia and Hong Kong. At the time, I found it hard to find value in it, and rarely made a bet at fixed odds. The horses I thought were live, and whose odds I thought would drop by post time, almost always offered odds far under the current tote. The horses I thought were live and wanted to bet would sometimes offer at slight premium at post time, possibly as the book was trying to balance things out. After a few months, the novelty of fixed odds wagering sort of wore off, but that was with limited wagering.

It's interesting that in Australia they've had so much growth in fixed odds betting during the last four to five years. Perhaps their punters are as unhappy as Americans when it comes to late odds changes.

As for corruption, it's hard for me to imagine things getting worse here in North America, but I agree that if fixed odds were introduced, and with the current level of oversight, there'd be inclination on the part of unsavory parties to exploit it...
Parkview_Pirate is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-14-2018, 09:11 PM   #39
Tom
The Voice of Reason!
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,470
I can't see any good reasons to even involve the track in this.
They bring nothing to the table and will want a cut.
You don't really need ANY buildings - phone or internet betting - cheaper to run, set up, and maintain and you will get far more bets from home than any scenario that makes one go to a place to bet.

Do we only sell lottery tickets at a track?
Hard to sell them over the net, but we sell them everywhere else convenient.

NO race track is convenient.

Do this thing right - leave racing out of it.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
Tom is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-15-2018, 06:55 AM   #40
Andy Asaro
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 5,789
“The ball is in our court,” he said. “The voters of California will now have to make a decision whether or not to authorize sports wagering.”

With its vast amount of space, Santa Anita could physically accommodate sports betting better than any other prospective site in California. "We have a million square feet," Ritvo pointed out. Referring to the Vegas sports books, he said, "That's the kind of rooms we'd want to build."


http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sport...514-story.html
Andy Asaro is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-15-2018, 08:02 AM   #41
biggestal99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 4,520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Asaro View Post
“The ball is in our court,” he said. “The voters of California will now have to make a decision whether or not to authorize sports wagering.”

With its vast amount of space, Santa Anita could physically accommodate sports betting better than any other prospective site in California. "We have a million square feet," Ritvo pointed out. Referring to the Vegas sports books, he said, "That's the kind of rooms we'd want to build."


http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sport...514-story.html
I heard 2020 for callie if at all. There are major roadblocks.

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2018/...ports-betting/

Needs 2/3 of callie legislators approval than the voters need to approve.


LOOOOONG process for callie

Allan
biggestal99 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-15-2018, 11:13 AM   #42
dilanesp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by biggestal99 View Post
I heard 2020 for callie if at all. There are major roadblocks.

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2018/...ports-betting/

Needs 2/3 of callie legislators approval than the voters need to approve.


LOOOOONG process for callie

Allan
We could do it by initiative.That is how we did the lottery and indian casinos.
dilanesp is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-15-2018, 11:19 AM   #43
RunForTheRoses
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom View Post
I can't see any good reasons to even involve the track in this.
They bring nothing to the table and will want a cut.
You don't really need ANY buildings - phone or internet betting - cheaper to run, set up, and maintain and you will get far more bets from home than any scenario that makes one go to a place to bet.

Do we only sell lottery tickets at a track?
Hard to sell them over the net, but we sell them everywhere else convenient.

NO race track is convenient.

Do this thing right - leave racing out of it.
You are right. For horse racing to survive they have to pull themselves up by the bootstraps.
RunForTheRoses is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-15-2018, 12:02 PM   #44
Dave Schwartz
 
Dave Schwartz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 16,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by biggestal99 View Post
Its just a matter of time when Monmouth has locked up the brick and mortar business along with the internet money.

Its just a matter of time.

Allan
It seems logical to me that Las Vegas becomes the big player in the game.

1. They've already got the pieces on the chessboard and most potential players don't even have a chessboard yet.

2. They've got gigantic resources.

3. They've got the connections in place to professional sports teams.

4. They damn-well BETTER get to the front of the line in a hurry.
Dave Schwartz is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 05-15-2018, 12:04 PM   #45
Dave Schwartz
 
Dave Schwartz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 16,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkview_Pirate View Post
Many moons ago I had an account at IASBET, which allowed fixed odds wagering for Australia and Hong Kong. At the time, I found it hard to find value in it, and rarely made a bet at fixed odds. The horses I thought were live, and whose odds I thought would drop by post time, almost always offered odds far under the current tote. The horses I thought were live and wanted to bet would sometimes offer at slight premium at post time, possibly as the book was trying to balance things out. After a few months, the novelty of fixed odds wagering sort of wore off, but that was with limited wagering.

It's interesting that in Australia they've had so much growth in fixed odds betting during the last four to five years. Perhaps their punters are as unhappy as Americans when it comes to late odds changes.

As for corruption, it's hard for me to imagine things getting worse here in North America, but I agree that if fixed odds were introduced, and with the current level of oversight, there'd be inclination on the part of unsavory parties to exploit it...
Another very insightful post.
Dave Schwartz is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.