H.A.N.A.

[flatstats]

I am interested in if HANA http://www.horseplayersassociation.org/ is an essential requirement for racing fans / handicappers.

[flatstats]

As a follow up I am particularly interested in:

1. Are handicappers better off with HANA or do they make no difference?
2. Is the racing industry (tracks, bookmakers, racing rulers) attentive of HANA and do they listen (but may not respond as required) to HANA?
3. Would you support HANA financially?
4. How could HANA be improved?

[Some_One]

1. No Difference
2. Aware, but for the most part, don't listen as they don't need to listen to them
3. No
4. Not possible

[Stillriledup]

I'm a fan of HANA, Jeff and Dean and those guys are great friends to the game and are always looking out for the player. Unfortunately, i don't know if the industry itself has embraced them, this is a 'horsemens game' and owners view HANA and player advocates like Andy Asaro as the 'enemy' so its hard to get much traction. Track execs think they know it all, so they probably snicker (and then toss it in the trash) when a HANA suggestion comes their way.

[DJofSD]

Yep, it's a horseman's game and they believe in the mushroom theory. HANA provides some illumination.

[Robert Fischer]

I voted 'Very'. I believe they do a great job.
I am not crazy about voting in polls that reveal the voter's name and selection to the public.
However, I feel that 'Very' was my honest answer in the context of this thread.

I feel there is room for improvement and room to grow, but I am Very happy with what they do for the most part.

[raybo]

Originally Posted by flatstats

As a follow up I am particularly interested in:

1. Are handicappers better off with HANA or do they make no difference?
2. Is the racing industry (tracks, bookmakers, racing rulers) attentive of HANA and do they listen (but may not respond as required) to HANA?
3. Would you support HANA financially?
4. How could HANA be improved?

I voted "Very", and as one of the 5 or 6 original proponents and organizers, I think they have given the handicapper a national voice that we didn't have before.

1. Yes, HANA is the one place where the serious handicapper can go to get information one needs in order to make informed decisions regarding which tracks to support and which ones under-perform, in an industry that by and large disregards their customers wants and needs.

2. Some tracks take HANA seriously, and have improved their facilities and its operations, making them more customer focused.

3. Absolutely!

4. I have lobbied for a long time to have each track's average win payouts displayed in the HANA spreadsheet. I believe that this single piece of data could allow any handicapper a better chance of becoming profitable, simply by choosing to play those tacks with higher average win payouts. So far this data is not available by HANA, but I still hold hope that someday it will be!!

[Ray2000]

Total handle at Churchill last year went down 11.5%

Churchill says that due to fewer races (94%, 372 vs 396) than the year before.

I don't buy it.

HANA's boycott had an effect so I voted "very"


http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...cted-churchill

[Dave Schwartz]

1. Are handicappers better off with HANA or do they make no difference?
To date, no difference. But certainly not for lack of trying. The industry is just too resistant to change at this point in time.


2. Is the racing industry (tracks, bookmakers, racing rulers) attentive of HANA and do they listen (but may not respond as required) to HANA?

No on all counts. They may invite people to meetings as a courtesy but there is no impact.


3. Would you support HANA financially?
Beyond a small, Wikipedia-type-per-year donation? No.


4. How could HANA be improved?
Get the membership to 50,000, take a stance (i.e. boycott) and knock down the handle for a week by (say) $50m.

Anything short of that is simply ignored by the industry. Alternatively, HANA could pick one track at a time and knock their handle down by say $3 million for a weekend.

If you cannot influence the handle substantially - which is akin to holding a gun to the head of track management - then there is no power. These people will simply not change because the slimeballs known as customers want things changed.


How many members does HANA have now?

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

1. Are handicappers better off with HANA or do they make no difference?
To date, no difference. But certainly not for lack of trying. The industry is just too resistant to change at this point in time.


2. Is the racing industry (tracks, bookmakers, racing rulers) attentive of HANA and do they listen (but may not respond as required) to HANA?

No on all counts. They may invite people to meetings as a courtesy but there is no impact.


3. Would you support HANA financially?
Beyond a small, Wikipedia-type-per-year donation? No.


4. How could HANA be improved?
Get the membership to 50,000, take a stance (i.e. boycott) and knock down the handle for a week by (say) $50m.

Anything short of that is simply ignored by the industry. Alternatively, HANA could pick one track at a time and knock their handle down by say $3 million for a weekend.

If you cannot influence the handle substantially - which is akin to holding a gun to the head of track management - then there is no power. These people will simply not change because the slimeballs known as customers want things changed.


How many members does HANA have now?

If HANA can get as big as PETA (and as ruthless), they can do some damage.

[Augenj]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

Anything short of that is simply ignored by the industry. Alternatively, HANA could pick one track at a time and knock their handle down by say $3 million for a weekend.

How about being selective and pick a major track that has a high takeout and is financially weak (not CD of course) and pound on them in a boycott frenzy everywhere... here, racing media, Facebook, Twitter, blogs, etc. Boycott until they drop their takeout and breakage. Not likely to work but "You never know." from Let It Ride.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Augenj

How about being selective and pick a major track that has a high takeout and is financially weak (not CD of course) and pound on them in a boycott frenzy everywhere... here, racing media, Facebook, Twitter, blogs, etc. Boycott until they drop their takeout and breakage. Not likely to work but "You never know." from Let It Ride.

I like it. Single out someone and pound them mercilessly. Organize protests in front of the track, send "moles" inside the stable area to "find" violations, etc. #Be relentless.

[Augenj]

Originally Posted by Stillriledup

I like it. Single out someone and pound them mercilessly. Organize protests in front of the track, send "moles" inside the stable area to "find" violations, etc. #Be relentless.

Yes, add all that to the list also. The odd thing about all of this is if they reduced the takeout, they MIGHT just generate more profit from the increased handle. Shall we shoot for 10 per cent for all bets?

[Dave Schwartz]

How about being selective and pick a major track that has a high takeout and is financially weak (not CD of course) and pound on them in a boycott frenzy everywhere... here, racing media, Facebook, Twitter, blogs, etc. Boycott until they drop their takeout and breakage. Not likely to work but "You never know." from Let It Ride.

That is a plan. Doubt that "we" have the clout to pull it off.

[horses4courses]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

4. How could HANA be improved?
Get the membership to 50,000, take a stance (i.e. boycott) and knock down the handle for a week by (say) $50m.

Anything short of that is simply ignored by the industry. Alternatively, HANA could pick one track at a time and knock their handle down by say $3 million for a weekend.

If you cannot influence the handle substantially - which is akin to holding a gun to the head of track management - then there is no power. These people will simply not change because the slimeballs known as customers want things changed.

I didn't vote in this poll.
I like HANA, and what they stand for, but wish they could accomplish more.

DS hits the nail on the head here for me.
Increasing membership would give them so much more clout.
Then, and only then, could they make a real difference.

I appreciate their efforts in identifying tracks that have
unreasonably high takeout rates.
Beyond that, there really isn't much else they can do.
As things stand right now, at least.

In an ideal world, US horse racing would have a central governing body.
HANA should be included within any such group.
Yet, if such a group were formed this week,
I doubt that HANA would be invited to the table.