Can A "Gambler" Be A "Fan" ?

[2MinsToPost]

Sure they can right? What do you guys think?

My point is this - I think the general perception of folks outside of Horse Racing see us "gamblers" of the sport not as fans but strictly as Gamblers. I would define it as this and curious as to your thoughts.

The guy or gal who bets numbers or odds strictly "my birthday", "my area code", "my numbers" is strictly a Gambler where as the guy or gal who studies the form, etc is both.

[letswastemoney]

It's okay to be a fan because a horse makes you money....I see nothing wrong with that...

The horse gives you something, and you support the horse by being a fan.

[letswastemoney]

Well now that I think of it, the guys that bet strictly by the numbers and don't even remember the horse's name, okay maybe those aren't fans....

[SniperSB23]

Of course. But you'll lose a lot of money if you don't realize you are both.

[AeWingnut]

if I don't bet the race I don't really care who wins

[2MinsToPost]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Good reading has started to pop up. Not a "Serious Thread" but rather one to spark conversation was the intent

[joeydb]

Many good points here so far.

I think that it mostly depends on how you define "gambler".

Would we define "gambler" as "horseplayer", or are we saying that the gambler is someone who wagers to excess? This makes a difference because the game's structure is centered around the wagering on the outcome. The game needs players -- they do not have to be excessive gamblers.

Compare the excessive gambler to an alcoholic: the alcoholic needs a fix, in a pinch the alcoholic doesn't care if it's beer, wine, scotch, or tequila -- he needs the alcohol, the active ingredient. Similarly someone with a gambling problem likes to wager, if possible on their favorite game, but otherwise on any speculative enterprise offering the possibility of winning and adrenaline in the playing of the game. This sort of gambler is not likely to be a fan of any particular game but more of the right to wager and the availability of legalized gambling.

I tend to disagree with the idea of not caring about races I don't wager on. I watch the Triple Crown every year, even if I don't get the chance to wager on it. Why? Because those races, along with some other Grade 1's and the Breeders Cup offer some of the best contests among the classiest horses of the breed. Young children like my nieces and nephews will appreciate a race when it's on TV and they have no desire or ability to gamble yet as they are too young. But the appeal is there. Where else can many of us in the urban east coast or west coast states actually see a horse run, except on TV? I think it's pretty cool. Anachronistic, yes, but that's part of the appeal. I think it would be stranger for many of us to mention the horsepower of a particular automobile without ever having actually seen a horse run.

[Danzig]

if i have the opportunity, i put on hrtv for the day and watch the racing-and don't have a dime bet on it....

[PeteMugg]

Originally Posted by Danzig

if i have the opportunity, i put on hrtv for the day and watch the racing-and don't have a dime bet on it....

It's my default channel, as well. Soap Channel for my wife.

As for the question ...

If by gambler you mean a pro, I'd say sure they can be a fan. Wouldn't they have interests the same as any other person?

If by gambler you mean anybody that plays the ponies, I'd say it's obvious from this bunch you can be a huge fan.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Compare the excessive gambler to an alcoholic: the alcoholic needs a fix, in a pinch the alcoholic doesn't care if it's beer, wine, scotch, or tequila -- he needs the alcohol, the active ingredient. Similarly someone with a gambling problem likes to wager, if possible on their favorite game, but otherwise on any speculative enterprise offering the possibility of winning and adrenaline in the playing of the game. This sort of gambler is not likely to be a fan of any particular game but more of the right to wager and the availability of legalized gambling.

It's a good analogy, and I'd say the horseplayer is someone who likes beer or wine or a specific type of liquor, but won't drink just anything to get smashed. I consider myself a horseplayer and a fan. I don't play poker or go to casinos much or bet harness. I play thoroughbred racing and the occasional sporting event, because I feel like it's what I know.

And I watch races all the time without wagering on them, simply because I feel like I can learn things from watching a race from an objective point of view. There are sometimes nuances that I notice while watching races with no 'action' that I can then apply to my handicapping. You can never know too much IMO.

[MaTH716]

Plain and simple I think the answer is no. Have you ever seen someone in an OTB yelling for bad things to happen to a horse so they could cash? These people are by no means fans of the game. Racing is just an opportunity for action and the chance to make a buck. They don't care about any of the players involved. They are strictly gamblers.

[westcoastinvader]

Originally Posted by 2MinsToPost

Sure they can right? What do you guys think?

My point is this - I think the general perception of folks outside of Horse Racing see us "gamblers" of the sport not as fans but strictly as Gamblers. I would define it as this and curious as to your thoughts.

The guy or gal who bets numbers or odds strictly "my birthday", "my area code", "my numbers" is strictly a Gambler where as the guy or gal who studies the form, etc is both.

Last night I tossed in my VHS recording of the 1988 Kentucky Derby....the entire 90 minute ABC telecast.....just for kicks.

I think I've mentioned before that I bought my first VCR in about 1985, and I have nearly every Triple Crown race personally recorded/captured since then. Ferdinand and Unbridled are probably two of my fave Derby's to watch....and THAT'S a tough choice.

I had not watched the 1988 Winning Colors win in the program's entirety for quite some time.

I was surprised and then delighted and then melancholy to see a very impressive and healthy Secretariat shown romping in his pasture in early 1988. I forgot that he was part of the original 1988 ABC derby telecast.

In a minute, I'm gonna toss in the 1991 Kentucky Derby. I'd lose a trivia contest to name half the horses in the race at this exact moment.

This Saturday or Sunday, I'll probably pick two or three races from Florida and/or California and wager some combo of about $100 to $150 on what I'll think in advance are good wagers for my style of betting for the day.

That's the gambler in me.

I know I'm a fan, too.