Penn Jockeys Refuse To Ride In Races Against Michael Gill Horses
Michael Gill owned horses are breaking down too much and jockeys at Penn National have voted to not race against his entrants. Of course, not only is the jockey who rides a Gill horse putting himself in extra danger, but other jockeys and horses are also at risk when a horse breaks down in a race.
It took Ray Paulick (Paulick Report) to break the story. Why not the DRF, Thoroughbred Times, or The Bloodhorse? Well, they are dependent on industry advertising, and a story like this could bring Eight Belles like attention to the sport; breeders and racing execs don't like this kind of stuff to get too much publicity.
"Jockeys at Penn National Race Course apparently took a vote of a different type on Saturday night, allegedly telling track management they would refuse to ride in any more races in which Mike Gill-owned horses were entered. The vote was taken following the fifth race, after third-place finisher Laughing Moon broke down past the wire.....It was the second breakdown of a Gill-owned horse at Penn National in three nights, Melodeeman having suffered a similar catastrophic injury on Thursday night. Melodeeman was trained by Anthony Adamo and Laughing Moon by Darrel Delahoussaye—Gill’s two trainers at Penn National...There was a lengthy delay between Saturday night’s fifth and sixth races as the jockeys stated their case. Eventually, a Gill horse, Justin M, was scratched from the sixth race, and the remainder of the card was completed without incident....According to Equibase charts, in just over three months, 14 other horses owned by Gill have either broken down, were pulled up, returned lame, or eased at Penn National. There were nine in October, three in November, one in December and two in January. (The count includes Saturday night’s incident involving Laughing Moon, even though the Equibase chartcaller did not report the horse broke down past the wire.)"
Here we have an industry that is trying to now guilt horseplayers into accepting artificial surfaces, yet it turns a blind eye to blocking horses, having horses treated outside of tracks just days or hours before they are entered on track, giving a slap on the wrist to many trainers who are unlucky enough to get caught violating drug laws.
We never hear about what is found when autopsies are completed. Are they testing for snake venom, snail venom, or the artificial knockoffs that are apparently being used by some trainers?
Until the industry starts getting tough, and I mean tough when it comes to these types of practices, I find it beyond hypocritical that they are making such an issue about plastic tracks for the safety of the horse and the jockey.
And one more thing. You can't blame the track vet when it comes to horses who are already blocked to feel little to no pain. Of course, most will jog fine and pass their inspection.
UDATE: DRF finally reported on the story. Gill was forced to fire trainer Darrel Delahoussaye in order to keep stalls at Penn.
Fort Erie To See Slot Reduction From Over 1,000 To Just 400 Machines
This is actually good news. Gambling on slots is almost 100% psychological. Atmosphere does play a major role to how long players play and even how often they come back. For years, the slot parlour at Fort Erie track has looked half empty at best. With the reduction, I can see the I idea of having to wait for a machine the odd time as something that will help create a false sense of enthusiasm. People think they are getting something special if other people want the same thing, and if they get something someone else wants.
If anyone has ever lined up to get into a club, the sensation of finally getting in can be an emotional high. And since slots are the crack cocaine of gambling, emotional highs are very important.
Being next to players also increases the chances that losers are next to those who make machines make all kinds of winning noises. This too is positive for the psychology of the slots player. It may get those who are losing, to stay a bit longer, because they know the machines are paying off to someone at least.
Apparently, the reduction of slots was part of the deal that saw the government guarantee over $1.5 million a year, than Fort Erie would have got from slots most likely this year and the next three as well.
Down The Stretch has its newest issue available online. Check out this article by Perry Lefko on Fort Erie: Long Live The Fort
Their headline story is 25 Ways To Save Harness Racing
I, of course, agree 1,000,000,000% with Eric Poteck: The #1 issue for horseplayers is the outrageously high takeout. It must be reduced for the game to be competitive.
Interesting that WEG Head Vizuzu in waiting, Nick Eaves, actually states that takeout on triactors need to be reduced. I guess its out of his hands or something:)
I totally disagree with Eaves that takeout should only be reduced on other bets for big players. It is the small player that isn't lasting long. Reduce the takeout, they last longer, and they are more inclined to become hooked and introduce horse racing to others in their households, their friends, neighbours, and workmates.
The biggest marketing tool horse racing has now is today's customer. Make them feel like they can win, and the game will grow.
Los Alamitos Update
In four days, Los Alamitos is down almost 20% week to week, and over 25% week to year. Check it out here. Note: They ran 8% less races this week than last week or last year. Still, this is an actual horseplayer's protest. Track takeout increase generally take months to create smaller handle just based on players having less to bet and players being turned off quicker from coming back because they find that winning harder to do (they usually don't know why though).
Los Alamitos announced they have shelved Thursday racing until further notice.
Horse racing is the only business on this planet that thinks they can make money when demand is down by RAISING prices (takeout). Economics 101 begs to differ.
Things Looking Bright Again For Racing In Belleville
HORSEPLAYERSBET.COM Has An Offer That Is Hard To Refuse If You Intend To Play Dubai
Racing from Dubai begins on January 28th. There are going to be ten cards culminating with the Dubai World Cup March 27th
Showing posts with label Los Alamitos. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Los Alamitos. Show all posts
25 January 2010
22 January 2010
Los Alamitos Handle Down 25% First Night After Takeout Hike
Last night, handle at Los Alamitos was $577,000. Compared with last Thursday night, which saw $767,000 bet, handle was off by 25%. Yesterday was the first night in which the new 2% takeout hike on all wagers was implemented.
The weather may have contributed a little, but out of state wagering on Los Alamitos was off $120,000 (26%). This has nothing to do with weather, and all to do with player protests. Price sensitive players especially saw their potential profits drop, and those receiving rebates saw the net takeout rise on Los Al, which means that other tracks that don't increase track signal fees, look more attractive.
Had we seen a takeout increase that was not publicized, we would have seen very little change last night. That being said, had it not been publicized, over a few months we would see handle drop off because players would not have as much to play with.
Prior to HANA's (Horseplayers Association of North America) inception, Calder raised takeout in April 2008 with little publicity. I did pick up the news and wrote "Calder Raises Takeout: What Imbeciles."
So what has happened to Calder since?
Calder's handle 2007 $490 Million (172 Dates)
2008 $378 Million (160 Dates)
2009 $334 Million (152 Dates)
In today's climate, the takeout increase will affect the Los Al regulars the most and contribute to bettors playing less, where some may take bigger breaks from the game and again.
I stress this, when they are not playing, there is no likelihood they will bring others out with them and that they will not expose others to the game period. This hurts short term handle and long term growth as well. This is what happens when you move away from optimum takeout rate (which according to studies is 12% or lower).
I do think that HANA has made takeout a big issue to players who may have not been cognizant of it a year or two ago, so more people are getting it.
Gamblers are always looking for excuses why they don't win. They blame themselves for making wrong decisions, they blame the ride, they blame drugs, disqualification which are all valid, but all the above would be a lot easier to overcome if takeout were reduced.
Players generally don't say they are losing because of the takeout, because that would mean that they should question why they are betting horses in the first place.
Before last night's slaughter, Los Alamitos track owner, Ed Allred, was quoted as saying "This is something that's alien to my thinking," said Allred, a noted bettor and horse owner. "This is a sad thing for me to do......If this is a disaster, I'll be the first one to change it," Allred said. "The night simulcasting is hurting."
I feel sorry for Allred, however if a track is hurting to begin with, it needs to try to lower takeout. Perhaps this experiment will teach track owners and execs a lesson in Economics 101.
It should be noted that new Chairman, Keith Brackpool, of the CHRB, was the only person who voted against the takeout hike (which passed in a 6-1 vote). Unfortunately his vote was worth as much as Bo Derek's vote.
In a recent interview he said, "It's a slippery slope, I don't like it."
I think it is important to note that yesterday's protest was not a protest against the takeout rate (Los Alamitos' rate is still lower than many other tracks out there), but a protest against the hike, and it was not intended to be a one day event. Time will tell if it was a knee jerk reaction by angry players, or if they will keep it going until the takeout change is reversed.
It would be great if it is the latter. It is about time that horseplayers got together and said WE'RE NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE:
To join HANA, sign up here, it is free to do so, and the more members HANA has the more HANA will have a seat at the table going forward.
Interesting observation regarding Tracknet and their attempts to increase rates that tracks and ADWs pay for their product.
There could be a shift going on amongst price sensitive players from Tracknet tracks to non Tracknet tracks, because non Tracknet tracks allow the player's bottom line takeout rate to be much lower in many cases. They are feeling the squeeze, and other options are readily available.
I've noticed that Tracknet tracks are not doing so well of late when it comes to handle. For example, Fairgrounds all source handle was down 31% in November and 28% in December.
Much of the blame has to do with the fact that the Mid Atlantic Cooperative's refusal to sign a deal with Tracknet mainly because Tracknet wants to increase the fees it charges for its tracks.
In the meantime, horseplayers are learning that other race tracks do exist, and their signals are available almost everywhere. Tracks like Tampa Bay Downs, which reduced takeout on a few bets this year, have been benefiting from this and the fact that it looks like the horseplayer has finally woke up.
It will be interesting to see what happens in the coming months.
UPDATE: A couple hours after I posted this, Tracknet and the Mid Atlantic Cooperative have come to an agreement. It is hush hush as to who caved.
The weather may have contributed a little, but out of state wagering on Los Alamitos was off $120,000 (26%). This has nothing to do with weather, and all to do with player protests. Price sensitive players especially saw their potential profits drop, and those receiving rebates saw the net takeout rise on Los Al, which means that other tracks that don't increase track signal fees, look more attractive.
Had we seen a takeout increase that was not publicized, we would have seen very little change last night. That being said, had it not been publicized, over a few months we would see handle drop off because players would not have as much to play with.
Prior to HANA's (Horseplayers Association of North America) inception, Calder raised takeout in April 2008 with little publicity. I did pick up the news and wrote "Calder Raises Takeout: What Imbeciles."
So what has happened to Calder since?
Calder's handle 2007 $490 Million (172 Dates)
2008 $378 Million (160 Dates)
2009 $334 Million (152 Dates)
In today's climate, the takeout increase will affect the Los Al regulars the most and contribute to bettors playing less, where some may take bigger breaks from the game and again.
I stress this, when they are not playing, there is no likelihood they will bring others out with them and that they will not expose others to the game period. This hurts short term handle and long term growth as well. This is what happens when you move away from optimum takeout rate (which according to studies is 12% or lower).
I do think that HANA has made takeout a big issue to players who may have not been cognizant of it a year or two ago, so more people are getting it.
Gamblers are always looking for excuses why they don't win. They blame themselves for making wrong decisions, they blame the ride, they blame drugs, disqualification which are all valid, but all the above would be a lot easier to overcome if takeout were reduced.
Players generally don't say they are losing because of the takeout, because that would mean that they should question why they are betting horses in the first place.
Before last night's slaughter, Los Alamitos track owner, Ed Allred, was quoted as saying "This is something that's alien to my thinking," said Allred, a noted bettor and horse owner. "This is a sad thing for me to do......If this is a disaster, I'll be the first one to change it," Allred said. "The night simulcasting is hurting."
I feel sorry for Allred, however if a track is hurting to begin with, it needs to try to lower takeout. Perhaps this experiment will teach track owners and execs a lesson in Economics 101.
It should be noted that new Chairman, Keith Brackpool, of the CHRB, was the only person who voted against the takeout hike (which passed in a 6-1 vote). Unfortunately his vote was worth as much as Bo Derek's vote.
In a recent interview he said, "It's a slippery slope, I don't like it."
I think it is important to note that yesterday's protest was not a protest against the takeout rate (Los Alamitos' rate is still lower than many other tracks out there), but a protest against the hike, and it was not intended to be a one day event. Time will tell if it was a knee jerk reaction by angry players, or if they will keep it going until the takeout change is reversed.
It would be great if it is the latter. It is about time that horseplayers got together and said WE'RE NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE:
To join HANA, sign up here, it is free to do so, and the more members HANA has the more HANA will have a seat at the table going forward.
Interesting observation regarding Tracknet and their attempts to increase rates that tracks and ADWs pay for their product.
There could be a shift going on amongst price sensitive players from Tracknet tracks to non Tracknet tracks, because non Tracknet tracks allow the player's bottom line takeout rate to be much lower in many cases. They are feeling the squeeze, and other options are readily available.
I've noticed that Tracknet tracks are not doing so well of late when it comes to handle. For example, Fairgrounds all source handle was down 31% in November and 28% in December.
Much of the blame has to do with the fact that the Mid Atlantic Cooperative's refusal to sign a deal with Tracknet mainly because Tracknet wants to increase the fees it charges for its tracks.
In the meantime, horseplayers are learning that other race tracks do exist, and their signals are available almost everywhere. Tracks like Tampa Bay Downs, which reduced takeout on a few bets this year, have been benefiting from this and the fact that it looks like the horseplayer has finally woke up.
It will be interesting to see what happens in the coming months.
UPDATE: A couple hours after I posted this, Tracknet and the Mid Atlantic Cooperative have come to an agreement. It is hush hush as to who caved.
19 January 2010
Los Alamitos Ups Takeout Rate; HANA Not Pleased
In a new world where it is more than apparent that high takeout kills growth and leads to date cuts and lower purses, the CHRB in its infinite wisdom, voted to increase track takeout on all bets by 2%. The takeout increase goes into affect on January 21st.
HANA (Horseplayers Association Of North America) President Jeff Platt was at the meeting and offered this gem:
"Bo Derek and I got into a brief argument where she said that even after the takeout increase, prize payouts (takeout) would still be more favorable for the player at Los Al than slots or blackjack prize payouts at a local casino. I corrected her saying that WPS takeout after the increase would be 18% returning 82 cents for every dollar wagered vs a slots return of 91-92 cents per every dollar wagered. She told me I was wrong. It was only after John Harris corrected her that she shut up."
.jpg)
Jeff, of course is correct. Shouldn't those who vote on such issues as takeout hikes at least have basic knowledge of competitive takeout rates?
Looks like the gloves are off. HANA has circulated a letter written for Jeff Platt by another HANA member to its membership (which is at around 1500):
An Open Letter to Los Alamitos Horseplayers
Last week HANA Pres Jeff Platt spoke at a CHRB meeting in opposition to a proposed 2% takeout increase at Los Alamitos. The CHRB Board, despite the evidence presented that an increase in takeout rates would have a negative impact on handle and revenues, decided to institute the raise. They also included a review process, where by the CHRB would from time to time review Los Alamitos handle numbers between now and Sept 8th, 2010, in order to monitor the effect of this takeout increase on handle.
If the handle numbers come back weak, and show that horseplayers are reacting negatively to this takeout increase, there is a high likelihood it will be rescinded. If the handle numbers come back unchanged, there is a high likelihood the takeout increase will be made permanent. It is also likely, in our opinion, that if Los Alamitos handle is strong, that other California tracks will follow suit with takeout raises of their own. We know this would have a very negative effect on you, as a horseplayer, and in return on California Racing as a whole.
You, as a Los Alamitos bettor, have a very big say in all of this. Each dollar bet at Los Alamitos is a vote for making the takeout increase permanent, and a vote towards seeing higher takeouts across California. Each dollar withheld from Los Alamitos is a vote towards rescinding this takeout increase, and discrediting the notion that racing's revenue problems can be solved by simply raising the price of an already overpriced product. You are in the enviable position to have a direct and measurable impact on the future of California racing, and to make a statement on behalf of horseplayers everywhere.
We ask you to consider these facts, and we trust that your actions and decisions will help to bring about a better and brighter future for this game.
Please pass this message on to fellow horseplayers everywhere.
Jeff Platt
President, HANA
To join HANA (it is free), click here.
Woodbine Entertainment Shuns Flamboro Downs For Louisiana Downs.
Business over long term growth has been Woodbine's MO for quite some time. In order to grow the game in Ontario, Ontario content is a must. It gets owners, co-owners, families of owners and other horsemen involved. If you show local racing, you might plant a seed in someone who will eventually either become a medium to big bettor and/or a new owner.
But the reality is that Woodbine has bigger and better handle on some American tracks, so they are now getting preference on HPITV.
I wonder if home market comes into play too. I'm pretty sure that Woodbine doesn't make as much from someone betting in Flamboro's home market no matter what track they bet on versus someone betting from the Woodbine home market. And they probably make more money if their home market player bets on a US track over another track in Canada that they have to pay a bigger split to.
If this is true, we might be seeing less and less Canadian content, with the exception of Woodbine and Mohawk.
I wonder if Fort Erie is a candidate to get bumped in the summer. Time will tell.
Woodbine would love Woodbine and Mohawk to be the only tracks in Ontario. Slot revenues are standing in their way though. But they might do everything in their power to make it happen just the same.
I wonder how many Youbet customers got this notice
I meant to post this awhile ago. Keeneland Library has a project going on to try to save the Daily Racing Form archives. Watch this:
They still have a ways to go but they do have quite a few Racing Forms archived already. Check it out.
Oh yeah, if you watch sports new on TV you may have missed it, Rachel Alexandra beat Zenyatta out as horse of the year. I was wrong again. This means the odds are with me next time? See what happens when you read too much Bo Derek.
A quote from a friend of mine regarding the coverage of HOY:
"I watch Sports Center two times a day. An hour in the morning when I am on my treadmill or stationary bike and an hour at night when I go bed.
Yesterday was one of the racing industries biggest days as far as the press is concerned. It was horse racing's Oscars, its Golden Globe, horse racing's awards night. In the 60 minutes this morning it received 8 seconds of time when they announced in passing the Horse of the year. That was it – less than 10 seconds. A snowboarder who was scheduled to be in the Olympics had more air time because he crashed his three wheeler and was now out of the games."
HANA (Horseplayers Association Of North America) President Jeff Platt was at the meeting and offered this gem:
"Bo Derek and I got into a brief argument where she said that even after the takeout increase, prize payouts (takeout) would still be more favorable for the player at Los Al than slots or blackjack prize payouts at a local casino. I corrected her saying that WPS takeout after the increase would be 18% returning 82 cents for every dollar wagered vs a slots return of 91-92 cents per every dollar wagered. She told me I was wrong. It was only after John Harris corrected her that she shut up."
.jpg)
Jeff, of course is correct. Shouldn't those who vote on such issues as takeout hikes at least have basic knowledge of competitive takeout rates?
Looks like the gloves are off. HANA has circulated a letter written for Jeff Platt by another HANA member to its membership (which is at around 1500):
An Open Letter to Los Alamitos Horseplayers
Last week HANA Pres Jeff Platt spoke at a CHRB meeting in opposition to a proposed 2% takeout increase at Los Alamitos. The CHRB Board, despite the evidence presented that an increase in takeout rates would have a negative impact on handle and revenues, decided to institute the raise. They also included a review process, where by the CHRB would from time to time review Los Alamitos handle numbers between now and Sept 8th, 2010, in order to monitor the effect of this takeout increase on handle.
If the handle numbers come back weak, and show that horseplayers are reacting negatively to this takeout increase, there is a high likelihood it will be rescinded. If the handle numbers come back unchanged, there is a high likelihood the takeout increase will be made permanent. It is also likely, in our opinion, that if Los Alamitos handle is strong, that other California tracks will follow suit with takeout raises of their own. We know this would have a very negative effect on you, as a horseplayer, and in return on California Racing as a whole.
You, as a Los Alamitos bettor, have a very big say in all of this. Each dollar bet at Los Alamitos is a vote for making the takeout increase permanent, and a vote towards seeing higher takeouts across California. Each dollar withheld from Los Alamitos is a vote towards rescinding this takeout increase, and discrediting the notion that racing's revenue problems can be solved by simply raising the price of an already overpriced product. You are in the enviable position to have a direct and measurable impact on the future of California racing, and to make a statement on behalf of horseplayers everywhere.
We ask you to consider these facts, and we trust that your actions and decisions will help to bring about a better and brighter future for this game.
Please pass this message on to fellow horseplayers everywhere.
Jeff Platt
President, HANA
To join HANA (it is free), click here.
Woodbine Entertainment Shuns Flamboro Downs For Louisiana Downs.
Business over long term growth has been Woodbine's MO for quite some time. In order to grow the game in Ontario, Ontario content is a must. It gets owners, co-owners, families of owners and other horsemen involved. If you show local racing, you might plant a seed in someone who will eventually either become a medium to big bettor and/or a new owner.
But the reality is that Woodbine has bigger and better handle on some American tracks, so they are now getting preference on HPITV.
I wonder if home market comes into play too. I'm pretty sure that Woodbine doesn't make as much from someone betting in Flamboro's home market no matter what track they bet on versus someone betting from the Woodbine home market. And they probably make more money if their home market player bets on a US track over another track in Canada that they have to pay a bigger split to.
If this is true, we might be seeing less and less Canadian content, with the exception of Woodbine and Mohawk.
I wonder if Fort Erie is a candidate to get bumped in the summer. Time will tell.
Woodbine would love Woodbine and Mohawk to be the only tracks in Ontario. Slot revenues are standing in their way though. But they might do everything in their power to make it happen just the same.
I wonder how many Youbet customers got this notice
I meant to post this awhile ago. Keeneland Library has a project going on to try to save the Daily Racing Form archives. Watch this:
They still have a ways to go but they do have quite a few Racing Forms archived already. Check it out.
Oh yeah, if you watch sports new on TV you may have missed it, Rachel Alexandra beat Zenyatta out as horse of the year. I was wrong again. This means the odds are with me next time? See what happens when you read too much Bo Derek.
A quote from a friend of mine regarding the coverage of HOY:
"I watch Sports Center two times a day. An hour in the morning when I am on my treadmill or stationary bike and an hour at night when I go bed.
Yesterday was one of the racing industries biggest days as far as the press is concerned. It was horse racing's Oscars, its Golden Globe, horse racing's awards night. In the 60 minutes this morning it received 8 seconds of time when they announced in passing the Horse of the year. That was it – less than 10 seconds. A snowboarder who was scheduled to be in the Olympics had more air time because he crashed his three wheeler and was now out of the games."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)