Arnold signs bill to "help" horse-racing industry

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Originally Posted by BillW

Some anecdotal evidence ... when HOU lowered the rake on their pk-3 from 25% to 12% their pool size went up by 125%. This was for the meet. I can't back this up as I received this info verbally from an employee when I inquired as to the impact of the drop.

What year was the drop? Now that we have access to Archived Charts, we can check out to see if those numbers are true.

[rrbauer]

Horseplayers are basically creatures of habit. When Laurel dropped its takeout across-the-board for TWO WEEKS a couple years ago, not much happened vis-a-vis handle. Does that really surprise anyone? Using that experiment as PROOF of anything other than the idea that leopards don't change their spots is a fallacy of the first order. Did anyone who knows anything about the human breed called horseplayer expect them to drop whatever it was they were doing and run out and bet Laurel? I sure as hell didn't and I actually looked at a couple of those cards because I do want to support tracks and associations that are willing to engage in change that benefits horseplayers. But to run off to a new circuit for ten days of benefit simply doesn't justify the effort required to get me there and make me competitive as a player in that arena.

The same can be said for tracks that drop takeout on ONE POOL. Whether its Ellis Park or Retama or San Houston or whatever, I am not going to ramp up my game for a new circuit on the basis of lowered takeout on ONE POOL. I'm not going to do it and I hope that there's enough experience with experiments of that type to validate the idea that most other horseplayers aren't going to do it either.

There needs to be an commitment to lower takeout across the board for an extended period of time. What does that mean? Consider Tampa Bay Downs. Tampa has been lowering its takeout on a variety of pools for four (4) years now. I wish I had the takeout percentages that were in play four years ago, but I don't. (Most exotics were 25% or higher) What I do know is that they have been lowering them and that they have been one of the few tracks that have been experiencing increased handle and increased business across the board. Keeneland falls into that category also. In both cases I know that there is a desire on the part of management to improve EVERYTHING associated with these tracks as far as the customer experience goes.

Any track or association that raises takeout in today's environment deserves nothing but scorn from horseplayers. It doesn't matter why. It's a stupid business proposition to raise prices in a declining market. And it's a REALLY, REALLY STUPID proposition for any of us to pay those price increases. And, of course, the tracks that are receiving purse subsidies from alternative gaming which do not lower takeout deserve our scorn as well.

About two and a half years ago, I started a website dedicated to providing information about takeout and protesting high takeouts and the breakage process. At that time there were about three (3) people posting at this board who were outspoken about takout and its effect on the game. When I scroll through the posts at this board today I'm pleased to see that we now have a lot of company. Good company, I might add!

[Imriledup]

Originally Posted by rrbauer

Horseplayers are basically creatures of habit. When Laurel dropped its takeout across-the-board for TWO WEEKS a couple years ago, not much happened vis-a-vis handle. Does that really surprise anyone? Using that experiment as PROOF of anything other than the idea that leopards don't change their spots is a fallacy of the first order. Did anyone who knows anything about the human breed called horseplayer expect them to drop whatever it was they were doing and run out and bet Laurel? I sure as hell didn't and I actually looked at a couple of those cards because I do want to support tracks and associations that are willing to engage in change that benefits horseplayers. But to run off to a new circuit for ten days of benefit simply doesn't justify the effort required to get me there and make me competitive as a player in that arena.

The same can be said for tracks that drop takeout on ONE POOL. Whether its Ellis Park or Retama or San Houston or whatever, I am not going to ramp up my game for a new circuit on the basis of lowered takeout on ONE POOL. I'm not going to do it and I hope that there's enough experience with experiments of that type to validate the idea that most other horseplayers aren't going to do it either.

There needs to be an commitment to lower takeout across the board for an extended period of time. What does that mean? Consider Tampa Bay Downs. Tampa has been lowering its takeout on a variety of pools for four (4) years now. I wish I had the takeout percentages that were in play four years ago, but I don't. (Most exotics were 25% or higher) What I do know is that they have been lowering them and that they have been one of the few tracks that have been experiencing increased handle and increased business across the board. Keeneland falls into that category also. In both cases I know that there is a desire on the part of management to improve EVERYTHING associated with these tracks as far as the customer experience goes.

Any track or association that raises takeout in today's environment deserves nothing but scorn from horseplayers. It doesn't matter why. It's a stupid business proposition to raise prices in a declining market. And it's a REALLY, REALLY STUPID proposition for any of us to pay those price increases. And, of course, the tracks that are receiving purse subsidies from alternative gaming which do not lower takeout deserve our scorn as well.

About two and a half years ago, I started a website dedicated to providing information about takeout and protesting high takeouts and the breakage process. At that time there were about three (3) people posting at this board who were outspoken about takout and its effect on the game. When I scroll through the posts at this board today I'm pleased to see that we now have a lot of company. Good company, I might add!

Great post, i've been saying that for the longest time, unless you make at least a meet long committment to players with a lower take, they're not going to drop everything to bet into one silly lower takeout pool. I'm a takeout sensitive player and would have loved to wade into a Laurel 14% pick 3.....but, i'm not going to learn an entire circuit's nuances unless every pool at the entire meet is lowered.

[BetCrazyGirl]

How does take out excatly work?

[GameTheory]

Originally Posted by BetCrazyGirl

How does take out excatly work?

Everybody bets into the pool. The track takes the takeout percentage (different for each pool) of those dollars, and then gives back the rest to the winners. So the higher the takeout rate, the less the winners get back (the odds are lowered).

[DJofSD]

The bill that Arnold signed and whatever actions the tracks take are just rearranging the chairs on the deck of the Titanic.

[rwwupl]

rrbauer wrote:

There needs to be an commitment to lower takeout across the board for an extended period of time

Count me in .

[Horseplayersbet.com]

In a nutshell:
http://cangamble.blogspot.com/2009/1...-to-allow.html

[LottaKash]

Originally Posted by andymays

. As Samuel Goldwyn said, "If the people don't want to come, you can't stop them."

I ain't coming Arnie, and you can't stop me !...

best,

[twindouble]

Originally Posted by rrbauer

Horseplayers are basically creatures of habit. When Laurel dropped its takeout across-the-board for TWO WEEKS a couple years ago, not much happened vis-a-vis handle. Does that really surprise anyone? Using that experiment as PROOF of anything other than the idea that leopards don't change their spots is a fallacy of the first order. Did anyone who knows anything about the human breed called horseplayer expect them to drop whatever it was they were doing and run out and bet Laurel? I sure as hell didn't and I actually looked at a couple of those cards because I do want to support tracks and associations that are willing to engage in change that benefits horseplayers. But to run off to a new circuit for ten days of benefit simply doesn't justify the effort required to get me there and make me competitive as a player in that arena.

The same can be said for tracks that drop takeout on ONE POOL. Whether its Ellis Park or Retama or San Houston or whatever, I am not going to ramp up my game for a new circuit on the basis of lowered takeout on ONE POOL. I'm not going to do it and I hope that there's enough experience with experiments of that type to validate the idea that most other horseplayers aren't going to do it either.

There needs to be an commitment to lower takeout across the board for an extended period of time. What does that mean? Consider Tampa Bay Downs. Tampa has been lowering its takeout on a variety of pools for four (4) years now. I wish I had the takeout percentages that were in play four years ago, but I don't. (Most exotics were 25% or higher) What I do know is that they have been lowering them and that they have been one of the few tracks that have been experiencing increased handle and increased business across the board. Keeneland falls into that category also. In both cases I know that there is a desire on the part of management to improve EVERYTHING associated with these tracks as far as the customer experience goes.

Any track or association that raises takeout in today's environment deserves nothing but scorn from horseplayers. It doesn't matter why. It's a stupid business proposition to raise prices in a declining market. And it's a REALLY, REALLY STUPID proposition for any of us to pay those price increases. And, of course, the tracks that are receiving purse subsidies from alternative gaming which do not lower takeout deserve our scorn as well.

About two and a half years ago, I started a website dedicated to providing information about takeout and protesting high takeouts and the breakage process. At that time there were about three (3) people posting at this board who were outspoken about takout and its effect on the game. When I scroll through the posts at this board today I'm pleased to see that we now have a lot of company. Good company, I might add!

Let me get this straight, you think in this environment there's a chance to get across the board reductions in takeout at all tracks? If so, good luck with that one. Sounds great but you don't mention the rebates that the whales get or how those reductions could further benefit them. Why not just let the whales wager with no takeout and be done with it? Am I getting this all wrong? I get the impression some people think the future of racing is with the whales. Please clear this up for me.

[Horseplayersbet.com]

Originally Posted by twindouble

Let me get this straight, you think in this environment there's a chance to get across the board reductions in takeout at all tracks? If so, good luck with that one. Sounds great but you don't mention the rebates that the whales get or how those reductions could further benefit them. Why not just let the whales wager with no takeout and be done with it? Am I getting this all wrong? I get the impression some people think the future of racing is with the whales. Please clear this up for me.

If takeouts go down, rebates for whales go down too. Don't you know that?

How much they would go down depends on how much signal fees are affected.

[twindouble]

Originally Posted by Horseplayersbet.com

If takeouts go down, rebates for whales go down too. Don't you know that?

How much they would go down depends on how much signal fees are affected.

Of course I know, that's my point. Read again and try this sentence. "Why not just let the whales wager with no takeout and be done with it?"

[twindouble]

Originally Posted by Horseplayersbet.com

If takeouts go down, rebates for whales go down too. Don't you know that?

How much they would go down depends on how much signal fees are affected.

Where did it say the signal fees would go up? Don't the ADW's have existing contracts? How long I don't know. I understand that if fees go up, they can't keep giving the whales what they get now. I would think ADW's can do what they want with their money.

[rrbauer]

Originally Posted by twindouble

Let me get this straight, you think in this environment there's a chance to get across the board reductions in takeout at all tracks?

Of course not. I never said that. But, I will say this: Half of the tracks HAVE to go out of business if this game is to continue. Those that are left will enjoy increased handle as a result and there will be better opportunities for them to run their businesses as businesses and not as welfare seekers.
Horseplayers could expedite this process if they would stand together and stop patronizing crap tracks with high takeouts and short fields.

Originally Posted by twindouble

Sounds great but you don't mention the rebates that the whales get or how those reductions could further benefit them. Why not just let the whales wager with no takeout and be done with it? Am I getting this all wrong? I get the impression some people think the future of racing is with the whales. Please clear this up for me.

First off, what's a whale? I never said Jack Squat about whales nor rebates. Stick with something I said and if I can sort through your sarcasm I'll try to "clear it up".

[DeanT]

Originally Posted by Horseplayersbet.com

In a nutshell:
http://cangamble.blogspot.com/2009/1...-to-allow.html

Very good.