tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4684463172854959042.post2849286026477916390..comments2024-02-27T17:43:37.207-05:00Comments on View From the Racetrack Grandstand: Should Racing be Picking the Public's Pockets? [UPDATED]That Blog Guyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15487597769210721585noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4684463172854959042.post-39594823614214045082012-07-05T08:59:22.179-04:002012-07-05T08:59:22.179-04:00Anon, there is no value or very little value occas...Anon, there is no value or very little value occasionally if the takeout is too high, and that is horse racing's problem.<br />Sports betting is contrived so that the line will produce equal losers on either side, or more losers on the losing side (when oddsmakers really earn their keep). But bottom line, historically, players lose between 4-5% of what they bet collectively on a straight game. That is around 4 times the takeout on WPS. So in sports, you are really betting against the public to be successful, and the same is true with poker, as the house either gets a straight fee per hand or a percentage of the pot, or a combo of both. To win long term, you have to be better than the other players and beat the rake. Because the rake is low enough, there is the odd long term winner.<br /><br />No chance horse racing provides better value than slots, or blackjack, when it comes to bang for your buck, with its 21% average takeout. I think you need to look up the word "value." <br />The reason the racing industry doesn't publicize they have better value is because they don't. They need visible long term winners, and to do that they have to admit that getting rebates gives you a chance, or they have to drastically reduce takeout...and so far they are just going down with the ship instead.Cangamblehttp://cangamble.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4684463172854959042.post-44673870711063222772012-07-04T11:30:09.691-04:002012-07-04T11:30:09.691-04:00Are you kidding? Parimutuel racing take-outs are ...Are you kidding? Parimutuel racing take-outs are akin to the vig in sports betting or the commission in table games like baccarat or pai gow poker and tiles.<br /><br />In parimutuel racing when you wager you are wagering against the other rubes in the pool. The takeout is because the house has nothing, no stake in that pool so they take their commission for facilitating the bet. <br /><br />In the casino the player is playing against the house. That is true on all games except the "vig" games. On those games you are wagering in a pool, against the other players, and the house has little to no advantage. So they have to take the "vig" off the wager. In the casinos every game statistically is unfavorable to the player. <br /><br />Name one game played in a casino where the house advantage is percentage-wise lower than the percentage of a wager the takeout is. There is none. <br /><br />That is the problem with racing versus other forms of gambling. It provides a good value for a little work (handicapping). Better value than any casino game even if you play perfect strategy (i.e., poker and blackjack). Yet no one knows this fact or publicizes the comparison. That is the problem with racing and why they have lost fan base. It is too "hard" most people want to sit mindlessly and count to 21 or spin reels, no effort necessary. It isn't the PM takeout.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4684463172854959042.post-82807721725096931622012-07-04T09:00:49.864-04:002012-07-04T09:00:49.864-04:00Cangamble,
I may not have clearly expressed mysel...Cangamble,<br /><br />I may not have clearly expressed myself, but when I was talking about limiting the number of tracks to wager on, I meant there should be no more than X number of tracks racing at any one time; not dropping signals. <br /><br />Race meets should be shorter so the money wagered is not spread over those many tracks. By having less tracks operating on a given day, the pools should be bigger.That Blog Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15487597769210721585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4684463172854959042.post-34975113776426600052012-07-04T08:01:50.246-04:002012-07-04T08:01:50.246-04:00NJ's not allowing wagers on NJ teams is the sa...NJ's not allowing wagers on NJ teams is the same as Nevada's law. No wagers on Nevada teams or games in Vegas for years. As for the idea that racing wagering will suffer because of sports wagering, I don't agree at all. People are already betting billions of dollars on sports illegally, tapping into that market will be a benefit for the tracks as there are very few people out there who have a desire to bet sports that arent already doing so.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4684463172854959042.post-22548597529790064462012-07-04T07:59:57.646-04:002012-07-04T07:59:57.646-04:00There is a problem with limiting content at ADWs o...There is a problem with limiting content at ADWs or racetracks, as the most popular tracks will be the ones on the menu. The result will be 15 tracks (mostly thoroughbred) left in North America.<br />I understand the concept of limiting betting opportunities by limiting tracks, but it is really unworkable. Vegas doesn't limit sporting events one can wager on, so I think fix the takeout, and no one has to go down that route.Cangamblehttp://cangamble.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4684463172854959042.post-58150354700572173712012-07-03T20:33:29.148-04:002012-07-03T20:33:29.148-04:00You make an excellent point about the wisdom of lo...You make an excellent point about the wisdom of lowering takeouts on the exotics to match that of WPS betting. But there simply exist very few racetrack managers, much less state legislators, who will push for this. You are correct that casinos manage the gambling experience properly, and I agree that the contraction in harness racing (and thoroughbred) will continue.JLBnoreply@blogger.com