Are you a HANA member

[Jeff P]

Andy,

When you say that a lot of players are turned off by synthetic surfaces, I don't disagree with that. And yes, I have to believe handle trends on dirt vs. synthetics will play a huge role in the direction tracks go with their surfaces from this point forward. THAT will be interesting, that's for sure.

But when somebody says rating KEE the #1 track was a mistake...

To that I have to speak up and tell them just how wrong that statement is. <G>

-jp

.

[andymays]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

Andy,

When you say that a lot of players are turned off by synthetic surfaces, I don't disagree with that. And yes, I have to believe handle trends on dirt vs. synthetics will play a huge role in the direction tracks go with their surfaces from this point forward. THAT will be interesting, that's for sure.

But when somebody says rating KEE the #1 track was a mistake...

To that I have to speak up and tell them just how wrong that statement is. <G>

-jp

.

If you read my entire post above you'll see that I am not blaming you guys for rating Keenland #1. The numbers you used to rate the tracks were fine. I do think that you guys underestimated the number of Horseplayers that prefer a traditional dirt surface over a synthetic surface. I used to love Keenland but rarely play it anymore only because of the surface.

If you were to rate the Tracks in catagories rather than top to bottom, less Horseplayers would feel as though HANA was dissing their favorite Track. Even though HANA is right on the numbers in my opinion it was wrong on the strategy of attracting members, particular when it came to Track Ratings.

I know most of you that run HANA like synthetic surfaces and you don't necessarily understand the animosity that traditionalist like myself have towards synthetic surfaces.

Thanks,

Andy

[InsideThePylons-MW]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

. In fact you (all players everywhere for that matter) would be absolutely disgusted if I posted some of the utter bullshit that people with jobs in high places in the racing industry from your home state of CA have told me with a straight face.

This can't possibly be true....can it?


Now you know what I've been going through for a long time. Welcome to my world.

[andymays]

Jeff, I would believe anything that people in high places in California told you!

Most of them are off the charts pr**ks!

They look at Horseplayers like a necessary evil!

The Del Mar Fan Forum situation and how management handled it is a perfect example!

[Indulto]

Originally Posted by miesque

As Dean referenced, I have been in the process on setting up a series of committees and figuring out what is the best way to structure it and going through the entire membership list, figuring out what the best fit for those individuals who have offered assistance and then allocating volunteers among committees. The last thing I want to do is to recruit people and have them feel like they are wasting their time we are not set to properly integrate them. I have just been needing a big chunk of consecutive time to devote to it to finish it and the last two months have been much more hectic then anticipated and it seems there is always more then enough HANA day to day operating activities to absorb the spare time I have (and I know that applies to the rest of the Board of Directors as well). I have a three day weekend coming up during which I hope to some significant progress on that front before I head to Los Angeles and Vegas the end of next week.

I do want to comment that while I am sorry that there are some who are not happy with the speed of our progress and or the amount we have accomplished so far, or that we are not blowing anything up, I do feel that we have made progress in our goal of giving horseplayers a voice and helping to promote positive changes in the industry, especially considering the parameters in which we operate and we are very much in this for the long run and hope to keep moving forward. Has everything been done perfectly, no, I will be the first to admit that. However, when September rolls around and we are issue a summary of the activities and achievements from our first year of existence, I am hopeful that the majority of our members will feel we are making progress and that maybe even a handful of them will be proud to be a member of the Horseplayers Association of North America.

miesque,
What do you think Cary Fotias meant in the bolded portion of his column below?

http://www.horseraceinsider.com/blog.php/Fotias-No-Limit/comments/if-tracks-had-access/
If Tracks Had Access …
By Cary Fotias June 29, 2009

If tracks had access to the discount window or, better yet, could borrow at the Fed Funds rate, maybe they would finally lower takeout rates. Then, when they saw the dramatic increase in handle that would inevitably result, they might, and I repeat MIGHT, realize that competitive pricing will produce not only more handle but also more profits for the industry at large

… This industry needs less racing and less gimmicks. People will bet the same amount of money whether 10 tracks or 40 tracks are running on any given Saturday. I’m not saying to do away with trifectas and superfectas (I play them all the time) but rather not to offer so many of them on every card. By concentrating money in fewer pools, liquidity will increase significantly. More big players will feel comfortable getting involved, which will lead to even more money being bet, and odds swings will decrease accordingly.

If we horseplayers have enough passion to make our voices heard, we CAN make a difference. That’s why I encourage all if you to join the Horseplayers Association of North America (HANA) if you haven’t already. There is a link to the HANA homepage on the Equiform web site. I am on the HANA advisory board as I feel HANA has no other agenda except to improve our collective well being.I think the HANA “buycott” or “pool party” is a great way to enhance our bargaining power. Check it out - I think the only way we will be heard is to employ strategies that impact the tracks’ bottom lines.

By the way, he and I had an interesting discussion in the comments section which he encouraged me to post here at PA:

4.Indulto says:
30 Jun 2009 at 09:32 pm |#

Mr. Fotias,
I assume that at your level of play, you currently receive rebates on your wagers at a rate determined by (and proportional to) your wagering volume over some specified time period. To be able and willing to continue making wagers qualifying you for a large rebate, I further assume that you must be showing a profit. Do your records indicate that you would still show a profit if you weren’t being rebated?

I ask this because there has been some contention in recent debates over takeout/rebate issues that whales would leave the game if direct takeout were lowered—and rebates eliminated—in order to increase overall handle by making the game more attractive to both new players and returning players who left because higher direct takeout rendered then uncompetitive.

Do you agree that all whale handle would disappear in such a scenario? Isn’t likely that pools expanded by more participants and fewer venues would bring back any disaffected whales?

In any event, the higher return on the rebated player’s wager (including losing ones) gives him an advantage over his non-rebated competition. Whether or not one views rebating as effectively lowering takeout for a tiny minority of big bankroll bettors or as an industry subsidy to players that need it least, the practice has tilted the playing field in favor of the rebated players over unrebated players; even those of equal if not greater skill. In exotic pools this advantage translates into either a lower cost per combination, regardless of minimum, or additional combinations for the same amount wagered.

Many among the vast majority of those who bet for entertainment regard this advantage as unfair, undemocratic, and unwarranted. In your entertaining HANA blog piece, “Declaration of Horseplayer Independence,” you wrote, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all horseplayers are endowed with certain unalienable rights, that among these are market-driven takeout rates, …”

So when you advocate that takeout rates should be “significantly reduced,” how do you suggest that be accomplished? Should direct takeout be lowered at all major venues (which would benefit all players equally) or should rebating be extended to all players and, if the latter, should all players be rebated equally?

As an Advisory Board member for HANA which seeks to represent horseplayers of all bankroll sizes, how have you advised the HANA leadership team on this issue? HANA team members individually and independently post comments on both the HANA blog and the PaceAdvantage.com forum. So far, only two team members have personally endorsed what I refer to as ETFADE (Equal Takeout For All; Directly or Effectively).

I personally believe that rebating has to end, and that ROI return to being a function of skill rather than bankroll size as it was in racing’s glory days. I have read some alleged whales post that 10% direct takeout would keep them in the game without rebates. I’m sure it would, but I doubt that figure would attract the necessary support form horsemen, tracks, and ADWs; at least initially.

My understanding is that some venues outside North America are succeeding with 16% takeout overall. That should be a starting point from which all parties sharing the pari-mutuel pie can live with. Until unrebated handle is self-sustaining, however, horsemen must do their part in attracting higher pool totals by starting larger fields. IMO full purses should not be distributed to fields with fewer than 8 starters and a bonus should be added whenever fields are full.

There should also be an agreement that once pools have stabilized at an acceptable level that the industry will experiment with incrementally lower takeout to seek an optimal combination of handle, takeout, and purse levels.

The past 12 months have taught all racing reform advocates that the message stressing the importance of lowering takeout has not reached its intended audience –- industry leaders who should want to revitalize racing and casual players who should be joining a movement like HANA in droves; assuming it is to their benefit to do so.

HANA’s collective endorsement of ETFADE might go a long way toward convincing interested parties that the Sport of Kings has not become the Business of Whales.

17.Cary Fotias says:
03 Jul 2009 at 11:19 am | #

Hi Indulto -

I will try and address the issues you brought up as best I can.

Yes, I receive substantial rebates and yes, I show a healthy profit on my wagering. If I weren’t getting rebates, I would still show a nice profit and, somehwat paradoxicaly, my ROI would be much higher without rebates. However, the sizable extra volume I am able to churn with rebates, makes me more “absolute dollars”.

This goes right to the crux of how lowering takeouts would increase the “absolute dollars” for the tracks.
The tracks, horsemen and legislators are inexplicably more concerned about ROI (takeout rate) than in maximizing returns. What a fractured business model. A kid with a lemonade stand knows more about pricing than most “experts” in our industry.

I would certainly not leave the game if I didn’t get rebates, but my play would be adjusted dramatically. I would bet on much fewer races and demand a bigger “edge” on my odds line before jumping into the pools. Some whales would leave the game as they work on such a small margin/big volume paradigm that they might not be able to succeed w/o rebates.

TAKEOUT REDUCTION IS A UNIVERAL REBATE and should be pursued at all costs. The smaller bettor is at a competitive disadvantage with his larger-volume counterpart and the gap needs to be closed NOW.

From one angle, as a rebate player, one might think I would be somewhat indifferent about takeout rates since the lower rebates I would get as a result of lower takeout rates would be offset by an almost identical decrease in takeout, for a net effect of zero. But, the reason I am such a vocal proponet of lower rates is that they would keep less skilled players of all bankroll sizes in the game longer. This means more profit for the really top players and much better “entertainment value” for the weaker players.

I am not faniliar with ETFADE. Can you tell me more and how to access information concerning it? I am familiar with the paceadvantage board and think it is the best forum for horseplayers on the Internet. I have never joined as I didn’t want to make it look like I was pushing my products, but I think I will so I can post there also..

Rebating will probably never end, but its effect would be severely dampened by significant takeout reduction. Very good customers should get special tretment, but not at the expense of other players. Dramatic reductions in takeout rates would benefit everyone. If wagering centers want to reward their top customers, let them use the casino method of non-cash “comps”. How about a trip to Portofino where the top hotels run $1200 euro a night? Or seasom tickets to the Mets? ( I take that back, they are too torturous to watch). An all expense paid trp to the Derby with seats on Millionaire’s Row? A brand spankin’ new Ferrari? You get my drift. For even the ssmallest players, a free beer or Racing Form now and then would be nice.

Indulto - if we can put a man on the moon and elect a black man president, we can fix this great game! But, it will take a concerted effort by all constituencies involved to make it happen. And the constituency that has the best opportunity to make it happen is the PLAYERS themselves. SPEAK (and, vociferously) NOW or forever hold your peace.

I am also very much in favor of putting smaller players on equal “technological footing”. We often hear of computer syndicates searching the pools for pricing anomalies and having the ability to place 1000 bets in a nanosecond. Well, it wouldn’t be too difficult for the industry at large to make such a template avialable to ALL PLAYERS. How much could it cost? I’d wager there are people at HANA or paceadvantage.com who could program such an interface for the benefit of all. I notice some places are offering “conditional” wagering now, and that is a first step along these lines.

Well, I’ve run of racetrack.

I’m off for a much needed vaction on the Olympic Peninsula. I’ll still be making numbers everday and will continue this excellent discussion when I have time.

All the Best and Keep The Faith

CARY..

PS Feel free to post on HANA or paceadvantage

19.

Indulto says:
03 Jul 2009 at 06:13 pm

Hi CF.
Thank you for taking the time to respond. You’ve eloquently addressed the issues of primary concern to me with unprecedented clarity, and a sense of urgency that hopefully others at HANA will adopt in support of your position. I wholeheartedly agree with your following statements:

“TAKEOUT REDUCTION IS A UNIVERSAL REBATE and should be pursued at all costs. The smaller bettor is at a competitive disadvantage with his larger-volume counterpart and the gap needs to be closed NOW.”

“But, the reason I am such a vocal proponent of lower rates is that they would keep less skilled players of all bankroll sizes in the game longer. This means more profit for the really top players and much better “entertainment value” for the weaker players.”

“Rebating will probably never end, but its effect would be severely dampened by significant takeout reduction. Very good customers should get special treatment, but not at the expense of other players. Dramatic reductions in takeout rates would benefit everyone.”

“But, it will take a concerted effort by all constituencies involved to make it happen. And the constituency that has the best opportunity to make it happen is the PLAYERS themselves. SPEAK (and, vociferously) NOW or forever hold your peace.”

It occurred to me that Cangamble should be credited for having at various times voiced portions of a subset of the points you made above.

In my opinion, HANA needs to articulate the essence of the above message in order to convert some existing holdouts and to convince the unconcerned to be less cavalier about their own circumstances and those of racing.

I’ll take you up on your offer to continue this discussion when you return. Meanwhile, enjoy your vacation and I’ll post at least a link to this column at PA. I’m sure Dean will reference it on the HANA blog.

[Indulto]

Well, the poll seems to have stabilzed at 70 HANA members who are PA posters. Too bad 13 of the 15 posters who aren't HANA members didn't say why they aren't. That would really have been helpful.

Would it surprise anyone if all 15 had different reasons? If they'll come forward, maybe their responses could form the basis for another poll, "Why won't you join HANA?".

[DeanT]

Indy,

Are you starting to realize that what we have been saying all along is the truth, i.e. that whale types want lower takeout for all?

I hope this ends the discussion along that line and we can start moving forward on achieving what Cary speaks about for everyone.

[Indulto]

Originally Posted by DeanT

Indy,

Are you starting to realize that what we have been saying all along is the truth, i.e. that whale types want lower takeout for all?

I hope this ends the discussion along that line and we can start moving forward on achieving what Cary speaks about for everyone.

Dean,
The bolded portion of your post did not say "equally lower takeout for all."

I acknowledge your preference for rebates, and that's OK with me as long as everyone gets them at equal rates. I noticed that you haven't joined CG and Miesque in personally endorsing the concept of "Equal Takeout For All; Directly or Effectively."

Yes there are some whales who want lower takout for all. Now we know that some whales will accept equal takeout for all -- provided it's extremely low. Some whales of both persuasions may well be HANA members.

Mr. Fotias's four statements are as close as HANA has gotten so far to bringing your viewpoint and mine together. By themselves, they might simplify HANA's existing plank which some have suggested may be too far reaching at this particular stage.

I would also like to see this discussion end, but with all due respect, the issue is much too important for imprecision or word games.

[DeanT]

Originally Posted by Indulto

the issue is much too important for imprecision or word games.

Then dont use word games. Lower takeout for all, equal takeout for all, takeout for all equally............ sheesh. It all means the same thing.

The point I make is that there are only a few ways to get this done (believe me I have explored all these issues with people in this business for years now). Players have been crying for lower takeout for generations (they were right and now the business is starting to see that), however with jurisdictions, fiefdoms, politicos and old time thinkers the way in which we get there is more important than the message. Yelling and screaming from players, boycott threats and all the rest since the year 2000 has resulted in takeouts actually being raised from 20% to 21.8%. We can scream and complain about high takeout and I am sure it will make us feel good, but that does not solve the problem. We have to get past that and offer solutions.

Will there be a blanket reduction with three big tracks doing it like California, Woodbine and NYRA with all their politicos? Or will it be done by ADW's offering lower takeout for those who choose to participate in lower takeouts? I think, barring something completely bizarre, the latter is more realistic, therefore that, imo, is something worth pursuing. I have been banging my head against the wall (as has Cary and others) for a long long time and we have gotten nowhere.

If case 2 occurs and it shows that this is a profit maximizing principle, then I believe case 1 can occur and it can hopefully snowball from there.

Hong Kong in 2007 experimented with lower takeouts for higher volume players. It worked. They have expanded the principles to include more players. Lower take in Australia worked the same way. the UK worked their lower takes in stages. This is not a one and you're out proposition. North America is FAR behind the rest of the world, and they will not catch up in one day, or one year. It will take time and making sure workable solutions are offered, rather than complaints is the only way it will get done, imo.

[andymays]

Everyone talks about Whales. What constitutes a Whale? What is the amount of churn for one year to qualify someone as a Whale?

[DeanT]

Who knows Andy. All I know is this guy might be considered a whale, but only when he got lower takes - that is what we have to get this industry to understand. This person was a friend of Rich Bauers and is the best example that smaller players can be whales if we can ever get something passed. Hell even Indy could be a whale. That would be too cool. He'd have to argue with himself (jk Indy)

I was using pinnacle offshore until the debacle. Because of the rebate I found a way to make place bets profitable. I wound up with a 3.2% loss, but a rebate of 7%. It actually was a rebate of 6.2% as they did not give a rebate on 2.20 horses.

Now the kicker is, I went from betting about 30 to 50k to 1.3 million that year.It made the churn factor possible. If takeout is lowered it may have the same affect. I now have changed my play where place betting is profitable, but it is so small that I have stopped. I would definitely go back if takeout is lowered significantly.

[BillW]

Originally Posted by DeanT

Who knows Andy. All I know is this guy might be considered a whale, but only when he got lower takes - that is what we have to get this industry to understand. This person was a friend of Rich Bauers and is the best example that smaller players can be whales if we can ever get something passed. Hell even Indy could be a whale. That would be too cool. He'd have to argue with himself (jk Indy)

One thing for sure, some "old school" track management are out there wringing their hands and laughing their asses off seeing horseplayers getting hung up in such minutiae while takeouts slowly drift upward.

[jonnielu]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

Andy,

I respectfully could not disagree more strongly with the above.

Afterwards it was obvious that Keeneland was head and shoulders above the rest - at least from the numbers.

And after spending a week there in April, meeting with Keeneland track management who literally rolled out the red carpet for us and listened to what we had to say... all of those crazy ideas we have about reducing takeout, increasing field sizes, making all track signals available to all licensed ADWs, the need for a national drug policy, and the importance of pool integrity...

It became crystal clear that we made the right choice.

Surface or no, without question Keeneland IS the top track in North America.


-jp

You could take the algorithms and the number crunching out, and Keeneland still comes up #1. Then, if you could refrain from handicapping it long enough to analyze the big picture, you might see how Keeneland got here.

The history of the game says that a renaissance occured in 1936 because of pari-mutual wagering, and I agree that was certainly part of it. But, only the part that enabled all people to adopt horse racing as a sport, with an understanding that anyone could play, and anyone could win.

With that single idea in mind, and a commitment to promote horse racing as a sport for all, people put shovel to dirt and mortar to rock, and built Keeneland. 63 years later, a horsetrack where it still rings true that anyone can play, and anyone can win. It is amazing what can happen, if just a few people can sign on to what could be.

Without regard to personal opinions, Keeneland has always put the promotion of the sport, as a sport for all, up front as the #1 task. It has embraced it's detractors with enthusiasm as well as it's most ardent fans.

Why? Because in Lexington, the truth is known through experience. Horse racing will grow and flourish as long as anyone can play, and anyone can win.

The dream is alive and well in Lexington, KY. But, who will grab the baton to run it out across the whole country? HANA could. Will it?

Renaissance II is waiting to be started, and there is a race track in south florida that needs to be re-opened. People could do that, they only need a conduit, and that could be HANA.

jdl

[DeanT]

I completely respect Andy's opine (and it is shared by many as we have seen from comments on the blog re-synthetics and KEE). It is a tough one. But as Jonnie and so many others have stated, KEE tries their ass off and is a part of racings fabric, as witnessed time and again. Even with their installing of synth it was done to make betting better (the inside speedway there was complained about by bettors for years) and for the good of the horses (yes, the jury is still out on that, but in the UK with their AW surfaces studies showed it helped when they first went ahead here and that was all they could go on at the time). Whether it turns out to be a bad thing or a good thing KEE at least tried to make things better and their motives were pure. If it becomes bad for bettors (beyond a reasonable doubt), or if it is not proven to help horses I will bet you a beer they will tear it up and install something new. That's what top tracks do.

Jonnie,

We have been, and continue to be, a foot soldier in the fabric of Kentucky racing through our VP Mike Maloney. He is invited to meetings representing horseplayers in KY and is passionate about racing there, as we all are. We are constantly looking for reps in other jurisdictions to help. One at NYRA, one at Cali and so on. Racings fabric is important to protect for horseplayers and the game of racing overall, that goes without saying, and we need all the help we can get to make sure it is continued. We are only 9 months old. We hope in a year or two to have several Mike Maloney's all over the US and Canada who are willing to be heard and take up the challenge.

Regards,

D

[andymays]

Just making a point and a suggestion for what it’s worth.

As someone who’s played the Horses for many years both as a “guppy” and a “whale” (currently guppy status and I blame it on synthetic surfaces) I feel the need to throw my two cents in as usual. So here it goes.


I first noticed HANA and eventually joined HANA after being on the Del Mar Fan Forum for a few months. The reason I joined was not only because I agree with most of what HANA represents but because Jeff was on that Forum day after day fighting it out with the naysayers and smart asses that infested that Forum. Always an intelligent well thought out response to whatever smart ass comments were thrown his way. As a self described rebel, contrarian, loner, or whatever you want to call me I could not understand the attacks that went HANA’s way because they were totally unwarranted, yet Jeff kept responding in a dignified, thoughtful, and intelligent manner. Jeff’s representation of HANA caused me to join as much as anything.


My point is that having a presence in a hostile environment like the Del Mar Forum and all the other Forums is important. Getting 10 new members a day by setting an example on the various Forums is one way to go. HANA is about truth and fairness in a game that doesn’t exactly embody these virtues. And as we have all seen the last several years, the industry and those that run it can be hostile to anyone trying to shine light on dubious aspects of the Sport.


One thing that is important to remember is that the majority of people you are trying to recruit as members are not as educated, thoughtful, or articulate as you. They respond to impulse and emotion as much as they respond to anything. There was an old rule in direct mail that once a person opened a letter the sender had three seconds to grab the attention of the person opening the letter. If that person didn’t recognize or appreciate the contents in 3 seconds it went in the trash. Most consumers have ADD when it comes to marketing material. My point here is that you need to simplify your message so the rank and file Horseplayer can glance at HANA and say “I’m for that” and then join. The more they get into the details the greater the chance they will find a reason not to join. Once again the 3 second rule applies here to attract new members in my opinion. There is no good reason for people not to join whether they make a bet once a month or once every 10 minutes.


One of the objections to joining is that they will say that HANA caters to the Whales. In my opinion it is a mistake to put these guys up on a pedestal. Whales are like anyone else when it comes to playing Horses. Most lose and have another source of income to support their habit. Some people like myself are Whales one year and guppies the next. That’s how it goes when you gamble all the time. Getting rebates is a plus for sure though.


HANA does a great job but needs to attract the rank and file Horseplayer that feels underserved and overtaxed. Avoiding the trenches is a strategy that gets you where the Racetrack Executives are today. Disconnected from the customer!

Thanks,

Andy