Why Calif. will get away with this crime

[Charlie D]

Horseplayers are stupid.

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/hor...ill&id=5551276


(Thanks go to Horseplayersbet on PA for the link to this article.)


All the best.

[Charlie D]

To go along with the good article by Bill Finley above , here http://blog.horseplayersassociation....s-retamas.html is a good blog article from the guys at HANA.


Al the best.

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by Charlie D

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/hor...ill&id=5551276


(Thanks go to Horseplayersbet on PA for the link to this article.)


All the best.

I read Bill Finley's article and generally I respect Bill Finley. Just as I also, for the record, think (like the choir) that reducing takeout is better than increasing it for the long term health of the sport. Really - I've read and subscribe to ALL the arguments,

But - think what is being suggested from an 'in the trenches' point of view: consider his example of a $81.04 Exacta in NY turning into a $76.20 Exacta in California due to increased Exacta pool takeout proposed.

Consider a 'brute-force' 3 horse Exacta box for $12. The NY Exacta is the equivalent of 5.78 - 1 odds and the California Exacta is equivalent to 5.35 - 1 odds. (Better odds each if you don't have to use 6 bets in that box).

If one possess the means to capture a fair share of such Exactas at a track (i.e. because you have good analysis and wager decision tools/skills) do I understand I'm being advised to NOT take this opportunity because of the few cents less payoff? Do you NOT bet on a horse to win because its final odds at post-time may change by half an odds point? I call that splitting hairs, or cutting off your nose to spite your face - choose your metaphor.

I understand that such takeout results in a few more Exactas of the overall total being below the line where you may not bet on them due to insufficient payoff. But then you still just have to do what you already have to do - pick and choose your wagers according to expected value, whether Win, Exacta, Tri, whatever.

I agree with Finley - not that bettors are stupid - but that they will largely continue to bet as usual. Perhaps I fancy myself in a more 'skilled' class of bettor, but I don't see why anyone using computer software or in membership at P&C or PA should not think the same of themselves. We should all join HANA, all sign petitions, all write our track presidents and congressmen if we have one - then stop threatening to hold our breath and turn purple already and resume taking the 5.35 - 1, or the possibly newly smaller equivalent for California Trifectas and Pick 3s.

Are high takeouts responsible for you not making money betting on horses? As Michael Pizzolla might say 'did the jockey stiff your horse?' In otherwords, is it someone else's responsabality? Baloney!

An educated, dedicated analyst/bettor can make money betting on horses. The solution to some of horse-racing's alleged 'woes' is to educate the existing and potential new betting public on how to do it properly. The high takeout is only 'killing you' if you are below a certain effectiveness as a horseplayer. Get above the required breakeven level and it doesn't matter so much the takeout. Then mutuel pools will rise, a smaller portion will be needed for purses, increases will not continue, and may decrease.

You have to sharpen your game to stay even with increased takeouts, all the while being an activist and may I say 'evangelist' for the game of horse-racing. How many people will Bill Finley's 'enthusiasm' attract to the sport, compared to the enthusiasm and role-model of those who are quietly or joyfully working away at their game either breaking-even or making ridiculous profit on the same Del Mar meets everyone else is 'gagging' on?

Am I wrong on this?

Ted

[noddub62]

Well said Ted. I think you are right on.

Bud

[Bill V.]

Bill V. Uses the Thank You button

California is a fair system meaning the tracks pay there own way
No casinos no checks from The Indians No "gifts" for purses
from Sacramento

To put a good product out there and to get bigger fields the answer
is to increase the rate for majority of there customers
entertainment Ted said it all. Well put
Let the powerful Hana do its thing and have fun
and focus about your on skills

[Charlie D]

Played Retama Park for fisrt time today because 12% Take was flagged up over on PA and I'll be back playing Retama Park tomorrow. Retama Park is selling an excellent product with LOW Take and i respectfully suggest to you and other bettors, do not ignore this little gem in the racing world.







All the best.

[For The Lead]

For those that are not capable of making money at horse racing/handicapping, it really doesn't matter, does it? They will lose at whatever their losing rate is, amplified by the increase in "take". They will go broke sooner, rather than later.

For those who are capable of winning money from horse racing/handicapping, you will continue to win, albeit less, based on the increase in "take".

Like any person in business, you must take whatever actions you deem necessary in order to make up the difference if that difference significantly impacts your income. Each individual must pursue whatever remedy they feel is best for them.

[Charlie D]

Jeff

Might be wrong, but i think you may be misinterpreting Ted's reply. I don't think he is calling YOU a loser.

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by Charlie D

Jeff

Might be wrong, but i think you may be misinterpreting Ted's reply. I don't think he is calling YOU a loser.

Indeed, Jeff, I was not calling you a loser and I will accept your statement and PDF that you are winner.

I was responding to the complaining (and IMO somewhat irrational) tone of your post that somehow an admission/parking fee at Hollywood Park (what to speak of the price of a DRF which has nothing to do with either Hollywood or California) plus the threatened new increases in some pools (and not even counting annoying announcers) is somehow a reason to abandon California polytrack racing for small Texas or Boston dirt tracks, as your post seems to advise as an antidote.

There are always things to complain about and we know that many horseplayers love to blame their lack of success on anyone or anything other than themselves (present company apparently excepted), and whining and complaining plus $1.50 gets you a cup of coffee.

Advising folks to abandon California racing for small tracks gets us nowhere (except interesting small tracks). If you were in the HANA delegation to the California Racing Commission, charged with attempting to convince them to make change in their overall policy and direction (you are a member of HANA, aren't you?), what would you tell them? Fire Trevor and Vic, eliminate parking fees, send their customers out of state? If the 'Governator' were in attendance, he'd ZAP you (or Bo Derek would, which might be more pleasant, I'll admit).

As an alternate strategy to holding our breath and threatening to turn purple, how about the following: Doc Sartin's motto was 'The cure for Losing is Winning." I respectfully suggest that 'the cure for high takeouts and resulting decline of handle and thus the industry - is Winning!'

If you're a long-term winning bettor (which you say you are), higher takeouts affect you not moreso than unpredictable and unavoidable last minute odds fluctuations. So you get $200 for your Pick 3 instead of $210 due to increased takeout. Or you get the $200 because some whale dropped $30,000 into the Pick 3 pool using the 8/5 winner of the first leg. What's the difference - and who cares!? If one is not a long-term winner it's all a moot point, semantics for the debating team.

If you're a long-term winning bettor, and you show it to others, others see they can become winners too, especially if you help teach them and coach them. Feel free to do more of this in the Selections or Matchers Forums, please! We need you.

Aside from lending their weight to the numbers of a consumer advocacy group like HANA, educating others in how to successfully bet on horse racing, whether on track or off track, is the number one thing an individual successful race analyst/investor can do to help the sport. Not co-incidentally, success starts at home and radiates outward from there, hence my earlier reference to 'look in the mirror to see who is responsible for one's own success or failure'.

If a younger generation (at least those inclined towards a thinking-person's game) thought they stood a real chance of making a profit by having access to and mentoring in good analysis and wagering tools AND guidance in mental preparedness - whether at the track, at cool off-track facilities, in Friday night betting parties (e.g. as an alternative to Friday night guys poker parties, or weekly 'ladies' investment clubs) - then they would bet more, handle would rise, takeout increases would be halted or decreased, media would cover the sport more, more people would become interested= a virtuous cycle. Founded on education and winners as positive energy role models, rather than eccentric Howard Beale "I'm-mad-as-hell-and-not-going-to-take-it-anymore!" types.

For example, when I was at Del Mar last month, Bud Jones and I met with Tim Reid, Director of Operations to discuss an education seminar series for the 2011 Del Mar meet. We also reminded him that takeout was bizarre (I think he agreed). We didn't suggest a boycott - we suggested engagement, education! Who knows what will come of that, but no seeds planted = no future growth...

As for your kind invitation to a handicapping Contest, thank you very much, perhaps another time And congratulations on your success (and in Southern California, no less!)

cheers,

Ted

[Charlie D]

BTW Ted

There are two guys selling similar handicapping software. Guy A charges $120, Guy B charges $100.


Do you think guy A is going to lower his price if costomers keep buying product at $120 or is he more likely to lower his prices when he sees all customers are at guy B's shop paying £100??