great takeout article
 

Not sure why track execs cant figure this out.

http://www.troyrecord.com/site/News....id=31001&rfi=6

I'm confused.....Nick had to go to a blog to understand and/or explain churn?

The sad part is the people that can change things don't get it.

no idea, but I thought it was laid out well for people who dont really follow the take.

That was a long version of saying that higher takeouts mean less money for everybody in the longrun. (I wish that his example was correct in his assumption that the entire 10% take out for the second player went to purses, but it is far from the truth). The issue with takeout from a track management point of view is that many of them simply dont value their customers. The vast majority of players simply dont bet enough to really benefit from a lower takeout in their opinions. Like Brunetti said, "It is only a few cents here and there" or something to that effect.

Agreed, and many horsemen don't value the bettors either.

of course they dont, many of them are losing their ass. I play plenty of poker online, a deposit seems to last forever, its great entertainment for nada. I go on a losing run at the horses and yikes.

many horse "people" (lets be politically correct cmor) see bettors as a necessary evil.

yeah but most people lose at Poker too and very few ever make a real score like you can at horse racing.

The vast majority of owners that arent born with silver spoons got involved with ownership after being a bettor and most continue to do so. Based upon what I read and hear lately it is hard to say that bettors are particularly interested in the best interests of horseman either. Maybe the adult version is that this is a business and we all have our own best interests in mind first but understand the position of others in a global view. But the culprit in most of the issues with both horseman and bettors is the tracks lust for money and control and the states simple money grabbing tendancies. Maybe in cases of signals being withheld you can say that we are thinking of ourselves first but it is really the only tactic that we have. Everybody says the business model is broken. We are trying to make up for past errors that created that situation by being proactive with ADW's. No one likes this situation but the fact is in the case of KY, CDI simply is being unreasonable yet people like you want to place the blame at our feet. The situation is complex yet in the end CDI cares about racing on 2 days and is trying to squeeze the lemon dry on every other front.

what does that have to do with the "churn" that lower takeout produces?

I am not placing the blame at horsemen's feet. Horsemen and the tracks are both to blame.

no doubt, the last innovative idea a track had was the exacta.

Tracks have at least, albeit on rare occasions, asked for takeout reductions. Horsemen constantly ask for takeout increases.

That is simply not true.

Your comparison of Poker betting and horse betting. Your not able to keep your money longer in poker strictly because of the lower take but because of the different nature of the bets.

So entertainment dollar here.

I have a 1000 dollars, I lose it in a aweek at the horses, where I lose it over 6 months in poker, but I should be more inclined to entertain myself for the week because of the big score?

I just dont think that the wagering model is working with higher takeouts in horse racing, what do you think?

The influx of money comes from two sources, the owners and the fan.
In the long run, if these two entities are not satisified, its not gonna work.
Nothing goes if owners and fans dont put money in seems to me.

So who is going away to other forms of entertainment (with the chance for some money-the minority), the fans, owners, or both?

Seems to me its the fans.

I am not a businessman, but it seems that some entities that put on the entertainment do not know or care where the money comes from. Especially considering some of the horror stories I have read about treatment at tracks and online. And then the awful scam ridden treatment of owners in so many phases. Seems that the entertainers think the addicted gambler is the major player, and an endless source of money and the breeders, some horsemen, treat the owners as some host like a frkkn parasite.

Heck, maybe this sport can exist in a minor form with just owners supplying capital. Maybe the owners continue to foster the crazy buy to breed market, and the breeders just continue to supply this dead end. Maybe the situation as it exists is fun for the owners, this buy to breed is their entertainment.

And it seems incredible that with the advent of the internet things have actually become worse. I naively thought this would allow horseracing to absolutely blossom...

Dead wrong I was.

It is complex. But the driving force is the owner/fan combo. No offshore sites, data stores, HRTV, and right on down the line exist without the funds supplied by owners and fans.

Your logic is unusual. If you want to stretch your "entertainment" dollar, rent movies. As for the gambling dollar, yeah horse racing is a much better bet than poker despite the takeout. Because you lose slower at Poker it is a better bet? What difference does it make if you are assuming a loss anyway. The thing is that there is virtually no way that you can make a big score at Poker. You can do that on pretty much any card at a semi major track pretty much everyday of the week. I agree that takeouts are too high in most cases but unlike poker there are a lot of other mouths to feed from the horseracing dollar and the comparison is kind of an apples and oranges thing.

I would be in complete agreement with every word Cannon typed...

But Freddy says he makes good money playing poker. So Poker has to be the much easier game to win at.