Kentucky tracks 0 MTP wager closing.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Originally Posted by jballscalls

i'll give you number 1, but 2 and 3 are contradictory, because doing things that benefit the fans and gamblers would help us Greedy SOB's!

the answer isnt shutting down at 0 mtp, that would just cause huge problems, especially with late scratches, or delays for a new jock or equipment, it would be a circus.

the answer is faster better technology in my opinion. it really shouldnt take more than a second or two or 3 for all the late money to come in and get final odds after the gates open.

Never canceled a bet due to late jockey changes or equipment changes. Still, instead of 0 MTP, how about when the first couple of horses are loaded as a compromise. Sure, there can still be late scratches, and I've made bets after late scratches were announced if my horse was scratched, but I look at it like this, when I used to bet football, the bet had to be in before 1 o'clock. Prior to the information age, I know there were many times I bet an over only to kick myself once the TV broadcast began because the field was either full of snow, rain, or kickoff ball kept blowing off the tee. But I couldn't cancel or change the bet either. I lived with it. Point: players adapt.

Yes, the answer is to invest in quicker technology. But that isn't on the agenda unfortunately.

[rrbauer]

Originally Posted by jballscalls

the answer is faster better technology in my opinion. it really shouldnt take more than a second or two or 3 for all the late money to come in and get final odds after the gates open.

This would require investments from everyone involved from the tote companies, the network hubs, the ADW's, the simulcast/OTB sites and the racetracks. Wish for this in one hand and crap in the other: You know the answer!

[raybo]

Originally Posted by rrbauer

This would require investments from everyone involved from the tote companies, the network hubs, the ADW's, the simulcast/OTB sites and the racetracks. Wish for this in one hand and crap in the other: You know the answer!

What if large numbers of patrons boycott, industry wide? You think they might look at the expenditures in a different light? You betcha they would.

They ain't afraid of us , yet!!

That's what HANA is all about, organizing the patrons to the point that we can truly hold them accountable for their stupidity and force them to change, or close the doors.

[raybo]

Here's my vote:

Wagers not accepted after 0 mtp, track time, no canceled wagers after the first horse enters the gate. ADWs, whales, everyone is included in this.

Wagerers will adjust, ADWs will adjust, in order to get as much money into the pools as possible before 0 mtp, they will have to, in order to maximize their profits.

When I was a YouBet member, several years ago, they stopped accepting wagers at 1 mtp and I never saw a problem with that. If I got shut out, it was my fault for not getting my "ducks in row" before 1 mtp.

I never have tried to cancel a wager, ever. Scratches are part of the game, might cost you money, might save you money.

[Imriledup]

Originally Posted by raybo

What if large numbers of patrons boycott, industry wide? You think they might look at the expenditures in a different light? You betcha they would.

They ain't afraid of us , yet!!

That's what HANA is all about, organizing the patrons to the point that we can truly hold them accountable for their stupidity and force them to change, or close the doors.

HANA won't boycott anything. That's not their position at this time. Its possible that their position can change somewhere down the line, but right now, they aren't starting any boycotts.

I was thinking about this on my pillow last night how can you 'reach' the masses to just stop betting. Take off a week or a month until the racing industry says "ok, we see you have some power, we will listen to your demands". Do we need Rod Serling to create an episode of Twilight Zone in order to enjoy a day/week/month where not one racing fan bets one single dollar? Think of how happy you would be if all racing fans just pulled a Nancy Reagan and said NO. That would be incredible if we all could all get along and please Mr Rodney King.

I was going to try and do my part and actually approach random racing fans at racetracks and tell them to not support higher takeout rates but then i got to thinking that the only people who really care about takeout (or even know what it is) are people who are making a serious attempt to win in the long run. Most people who are betting at the track are just paying for the gambling rush, if you approached those people they would look at you like you were crazy for suggesting they stop betting because the takeout rates are being raised 5%. They would look at you like you were from Mars if you tried to talk to them about this issue.

MOst of these people i see on the bottom levels of racetracks or simulcasting are just betting every track that's running. They have absolutely zero concept of takeout rate and i'm sure they really could care less, they're losers anyway, they know it, they would give you the 'whats the difference' speech if you tried to explain to them why they should just not bet today.

To most people, what is the difference between horse race betting and slot maching betting? Not too much. For every student of this sport who takes their handicapping and betting seriously, you have 99 out of 100 who just show up, don't buy a racing form or have done one speck of handicapping work and are betting names and numbers and not really caring that they're going to be long run losers.

Horse racing can continue to punish the 1 fan who deeply cares as long as they have the other 99 who do not.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by Imriledup

HANA won't boycott anything. That's not their position at this time. Its possible that their position can change somewhere down the line, but right now, they aren't starting any boycotts.

I was thinking about this on my pillow last night how can you 'reach' the masses to just stop betting. Take off a week or a month until the racing industry says "ok, we see you have some power, we will listen to your demands". Do we need Rod Serling to create an episode of Twilight Zone in order to enjoy a day/week/month where not one racing fan bets one single dollar? Think of how happy you would be if all racing fans just pulled a Nancy Reagan and said NO. That would be incredible if we all could all get along and please Mr Rodney King.

I was going to try and do my part and actually approach random racing fans at racetracks and tell them to not support higher takeout rates but then i got to thinking that the only people who really care about takeout (or even know what it is) are people who are making a serious attempt to win in the long run. Most people who are betting at the track are just paying for the gambling rush, if you approached those people they would look at you like you were crazy for suggesting they stop betting because the takeout rates are being raised 5%. They would look at you like you were from Mars if you tried to talk to them about this issue.

MOst of these people i see on the bottom levels of racetracks or simulcasting are just betting every track that's running. They have absolutely zero concept of takeout rate and i'm sure they really could care less, they're losers anyway, they know it, they would give you the 'whats the difference' speech if you tried to explain to them why they should just not bet today.

To most people, what is the difference between horse race betting and slot maching betting? Not too much. For every student of this sport who takes their handicapping and betting seriously, you have 99 out of 100 who just show up, don't buy a racing form or have done one speck of handicapping work and are betting names and numbers and not really caring that they're going to be long run losers.

Horse racing can continue to punish the 1 fan who deeply cares as long as they have the other 99 who do not.

That's why we started HANA. I know HANA is not boycotting tracks as yet. We don't have the numbers yet for that method to have enough impact to make much of a difference, regarding a boycott. But, we are growing every day and it won't be too terribly long before we have sufficient numbers to not only boycott but we will have enough members that we won't have to boycott. Just the knowledge that we could meaningfully affect the industry by choosing to do that will carry a lot of weight.

[Irish Boy]

Originally Posted by Valuist

That sounds like something that would be a big hit with the MTV generation. I think you are on to something.

The MTV generation is in their mid 30s-40s now.

[Irish Boy]

Originally Posted by raybo

That's why we started HANA. I know HANA is not boycotting tracks as yet. We don't have the numbers yet for that method to have enough impact to make much of a difference, regarding a boycott. But, we are growing every day and it won't be too terribly long before we have sufficient numbers to not only boycott but we will have enough members that we won't have to boycott. Just the knowledge that we could meaningfully affect the industry by choosing to do that will carry a lot of weight.

LOL. Hana will never be able to boycott because its membership will never have the discipline to pass up races where they feel they can make money at particular tracks. Bitching about problems is a low-cost, feel good strategy. Boycotts and other forms of action that could possibly do something are the exact opposite.

The other problem with the boycott is the emperor has no clothes problem. If HANA says "everyone boycott Santa Anita" and handle doesn't go down, then the organization is sunk, right there.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by Irish Boy

LOL. Hana will never be able to boycott because its membership will never have the discipline to pass up races where they feel they can make money at particular tracks. Bitching about problems is a low-cost, feel good strategy. Boycotts and other forms of action that could possibly do something are the exact opposite.

The other problem with the boycott is the emperor has no clothes problem. If HANA says "everyone boycott Santa Anita" and handle doesn't go down, then the organization is sunk, right there.

Are you a HANA member? If so, are you saying that you would not boycott if HANA called for it?

If you're not a member then your statement is meaningless.

I have much faith in HANA membership, in mass numbers, participating in such an action. I was one of the first participants in the idea and formation of what became HANA and was privy to the comments new members made upon joining the organization. A large majority of them were extremely passionate about supporting HANA and it's goals.

I'm sorry you don't share the same faith.

[CBedo]

Originally Posted by raybo

Are you a HANA member? If so, are you saying that you would not boycott if HANA called for it?

If you're not a member then your statement is meaningless.

I have much faith in HANA membership, in mass numbers, participating in such an action. I was one of the first participants in the idea and formation of what became HANA and was privy to the comments new members made upon joining the organization. A large majority of them were extremely passionate about supporting HANA and it's goals.

I'm sorry you don't share the same faith.

I agree with Raybo. I'll be more than willing to pass up a short term small positive equity situation if I think it will make my long term substantially better, and I think most who wouldn't probably aren't HANA members anyway.

[ranchwest]

Originally Posted by jballscalls

i'll give you number 1, but 2 and 3 are contradictory, because doing things that benefit the fans and gamblers would help us Greedy SOB's!

the answer isnt shutting down at 0 mtp, that would just cause huge problems, especially with late scratches, or delays for a new jock or equipment, it would be a circus.

the answer is faster better technology in my opinion. it really shouldnt take more than a second or two or 3 for all the late money to come in and get final odds after the gates open.

So, if the horse won't load or the jock won't ride or the trainer can't figure out how to put on a saddle, scratch the horse. No circus. Just load 'em and go.

[CBedo]

Originally Posted by ranchwest

So, if the horse won't load or the jock won't ride or the trainer can't figure out how to put on a saddle, scratch the horse. No circus. Just load 'em and go.

From time to time, I watch some international racing, and am usually amazed at how fast they get the horses load in the gate and off and racing. I've often wondered why the U.S. tracks can't do it as fast.

[Irish Boy]

Originally Posted by raybo

Are you a HANA member? If so, are you saying that you would not boycott if HANA called for it?

If you're not a member then your statement is meaningless.

I have much faith in HANA membership, in mass numbers, participating in such an action. I was one of the first participants in the idea and formation of what became HANA and was privy to the comments new members made upon joining the organization. A large majority of them were extremely passionate about supporting HANA and it's goals.

I'm sorry you don't share the same faith.

Then do it. It's really not that hard. Just take the most egregious track, by whatever metric, and say "HANA participants: don't bet there any longer". You could do that today. Take a vote or whatever to figure out which track is going to be the focal point of attention.

It's really easy to link to news stories and make suggestions on how things could be better for horseplayers. It's also pointless -- everyone that is going to be reading your site "knows" about takeout. Meaningful action would involve doing something like avoiding a track, but, once again, one characteristic of boycotts is that cheating is rampant. I think cheating would be even worse here than in normal boycott situations, because most of your membership is going to take the attitude of "why should I limit my opportunities when I'd just be adding a small amount to the pool?" That they can participate in HANA and bet semi-anonymously only will add to that problem.

Every thread I read about HANA talks about how they're giving horseplayers a "voice". Big f'n deal. This website gives horseplayers a voice. How does slapping an acronym on it make you any more successful? Newsletters and e-mail lists are great for organization, but now you are organized. You've been around for a while now. If HANA plans on being anything more than a well-coordinated circlejerk, then do something.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by Irish Boy

Then do it. It's really not that hard. Just take the most egregious track, by whatever metric, and say "HANA participants: don't bet there any longer". You could do that today. Take a vote or whatever to figure out which track is going to be the focal point of attention.

It's really easy to link to news stories and make suggestions on how things could be better for horseplayers. It's also pointless -- everyone that is going to be reading your site "knows" about takeout. Meaningful action would involve doing something like avoiding a track, but, once again, one characteristic of boycotts is that cheating is rampant. I think cheating would be even worse here than in normal boycott situations, because most of your membership is going to take the attitude of "why should I limit my opportunities when I'd just be adding a small amount to the pool?" That they can participate in HANA and bet semi-anonymously only will add to that problem.

Every thread I read about HANA talks about how they're giving horseplayers a "voice". Big f'n deal. This website gives horseplayers a voice. How does slapping an acronym on it make you any more successful? Newsletters and e-mail lists are great for organization, but now you are organized. You've been around for a while now. If HANA plans on being anything more than a well-coordinated circlejerk, then do something.

This forum does give us a voice, however, only to those reading the threads here. HANA is developing a voice and a presence with the industry. There's a huge difference.

And please, don'y apply your ethics to the vast majority of HANA members, it's an insult.

[Irish Boy]

Originally Posted by raybo

This forum does give us a voice, however, only to those reading the threads here. HANA is developing a voice and a presence with the industry. There's a huge difference.

And please, don'y apply your ethics to the vast majority of HANA members, it's an insult.

This isn't about my ethics. It's about empirical research into how people behave in those types of settings. Individuals may say "yeah, if there's a boycott I'm totally down". Guess what happens when people's backs are turned? They cheat on the edges. It's classic cartel behavior, only centralized on the purchaser side rather than the seller side. This is what happens.

Unfortunately for HANA's sake, unless, at some point, the membership as a whole is willing to forgo individual detriment on behalf of the greater good (that is, willingly giving up potentially opportunities that would have otherwise existed), track behvaior has no incentive to change that it would not have otherwise had. That both assumes that HANA has a large enough influence on purse sizes that its effect will be felt by tracks, and that HANA has a large enough participation/low rate of cheating and freeriding, which besets all collective action undertakings. I'm skeptical of both prongs.