Where are all the horse bettors?

[Overlay]

Originally Posted by JeffH

True but all I've ever heard regarding horseracing is "it's too much work". To me it's like golf- you have to work at it to be any good. People, for the most part, don't want to do that. After all, if it was easy, everybody would be doing it.

You do have to work at golf to be good, but I think that you'll still regularly find plenty of duffers out on the course who will never break 100, just doing it for the exercise or the association with other players (for either personal pleasure or business reasons), neither of which are benefits offered by handicapping. For such people, I think that serious handicapping would indeed be "too much work".

[Overlay]

Originally Posted by tanner12oz

if a handicapper wins in racing the house doesn't lose....key difference with other non parimutual wagers

I agree with you. Rather than using the beatability of the game as an excuse for mistreatment of the player base (if that's in fact how racing views it), the industry should be saying, "We're assured of getting our cut no matter how the outcomes of races, or of betting on those races, affect our player base. Therefore, we should be using our proceeds to increase of the size of that player base, and the amount of money that those players will wager."

[JohnGalt1]

I have to disagree with those who say Vegas "gets it."

I bet horses and play blackjack.

Casino gambling in Vegas has been down and hurting because some casinos have increased take out on many tables by changing rules like changing the payouts on black jacks from 3-2 to 6-5, turning a $15 win on a ten dollar bet into a $12 win.

It adds up.

Only suckers play at a 6-5 table.

But there are only so many suckers.

I haven't been to Vegas since 2003. The games are better in Minnesota and Wisconsin. And of course Canterbury has live racing and a smoke free card club.

[Hajck Hillstrom]

Some have traded in their "horse-player" shingle for one that reads "poker-player."

The take is closer to what it should be.

[jahura2]

Just an observation here. I just got back from vegas, played craps for about 30 minutes then moved to the racebook and stayed there the rest of my vacation. I was far more comfortable there. Funny....at 57 I was actually the youngest horseplayer at Bellaggio and Paris.
Really made me stop and worry, while the mindless slots were chirping away constantly, there were only about 5 of us horseplayers actually thinking and making informed decisions on our gambling. Made me shudder. Not sure if I am the foolish one or all of the others hoping the bells and wistles go off or the dice falls on their number.
The plus side, free drinks and forms and programs the entire time.
I feel like the Dodo bird rapidly becoming extinct!

[Robert Goren]

Where have all the bettors gone, long time passing?
Where have all the bettors gone, long time ago?
Where have all the bettors gone?
Gone to graveyards, everyone.
Oh, when will they ever learn?
Oh, when will they ever learn?



With apologies to Pete Seeger

[cj]

Do tracks really want winners? I tend to doubt it. Winners take money out of circulation, which means less churn. Isn't this the original reason for having higher takeout on exotic bets, or at least one of the reasons?

[jballscalls]

Originally Posted by cj

Do tracks really want winners? I tend to doubt it. Winners take money out of circulation, which means less churn. Isn't this the original reason for having higher takeout on exotic bets, or at least one of the reasons?

most of our local players who have had big Pick 6 scores and Pick 5's etc have actually bet more and more often afterwards. However like you said, instead of 30 people betting the money, it's now one person, with said person obviously putting a nice chunk of that money away.

[melman]

Originally Posted by cj

Do tracks really want winners? I tend to doubt it. Winners take money out of circulation, which means less churn. Isn't this the original reason for having higher takeout on exotic bets, or at least one of the reasons?

That's a good question you raise cj. I think I could understand both sides on that. The track executive that I knew at the old Liberty Bell Park really wanted poeple to win. If you were a regular he was free with the comps and tried his best. But winning is so much more that just good figs or good software. Don't you find it funny (in a sad sort of way) that whenever a thread is started concerning winning players on this web site a much larger % of people are "winners" than you would think? Regarding takeout on exotic's over that last few years my own betting has really moved to pic3, pic4, pic5 plays because of the many tracks that offer greatly reduced takeout on those bets. I.E. Pocono pic3 bets are at 14% take. That's better that almost every tracks win takeout. Many tracks have the 15% take on pic4,s which also beats the win bet takeouts of most tracks. Let's face it no matter how hard we work or the methods we use winning is a tough deal.

[davew]

CA is a BIG state geographically speaking

why not ask how many people live within an hours drive of DelMar?

[Seabiscuit@AR]

The argument raised by CJ about tracks not wanting winners as they take money out if circulation is an interesting one. Sure enough the Hong Kong Jockey Club did ban the accounts of the big winning syndicates back about 10 to 15 years ago. And Betfair does have its premium charge which limits how much winners can extract from the system

In the end the Hong Kong Jockey Club lifted its ban on big winners as the pools fell and even went in the opposite direction down the rebate path. Banning winners outright is not likely to be a good move as the big winners do add liquidity to the pools which attracts more money from other players. Only winners or the very rich are able to consistently bet in large amounts into the pools

But all the racinos are probably not too fussed if racing ends at their venue as turning the racetrack into a bigger casino will make them more money. In the end most racetracks will probably just become casinos