Like it or not, whether Daily Racing Form believed it wasn’t worth covering or not, the Santa Anita boycott two winters ago got everyone’s attention. Let’s try something else, be proactive once again.
If this tack fails, and you’re still weary of rhetoric over action, then we’ll talk selective boycotts, avoiding high takeout pools in favor of supporting pools such as the P5 with 12% takeout currently available at Calder Race Course, the most player-friendly wager in the country.
That wager is also available at Thoroughbred tracks in Texas, followed closely by the 14% Pick 5s available at major tracks in Southern California, and also at Hawthorne Race Course.
Please continue reading the piece that follows, written by regular HRI contributor Indulto. It’s no accident his blog is entitled Players Up.
* * *
By Indulto
On the heels of the presidential election, the Horseplayers Association of North America (HANA) blog published a piece by one of its board members, Jerod Dinkin, entitled I'm Tired. Just Do It, whose exasperation is evident in almost every passage.
”… I'm tired of the constant inaction of industry leaders. I'm even tired of the pages upon pages of thoughtful analysis, insights, suggestions, and solutions I read from blogs and countless other sources …
… I'm tired of it because we've come to a point where the words aren't resonating and they should. No matter what we say and no matter how well it is said, few are listening. It's exhausting.
… We're at a juncture where talking and writing about all that ills are falling on deaf ears. All you can do at the grassroots level is donate your time and effort and hope for the best. HANA has done some great things with a budget of essentially nil and an all-volunteer membership and leadership, a group of people that care enough to attempt to better the game we love on our own time. For the most part, as horseplayers, our stake in the game is with discretionary income. …
… I'm tired because "We the People" cannot enact widespread change without industry involvement - We can only do our best to promote and encourage it. Note to all of the actors in the system with a chip at the table: I'm tired of hearing all the reasons why you can't do it and I'm sick of the passionate voices getting drowned out. Life is short and competition is wide. The time for talk is over. Just do it.’ ”
While I can sympathize with Mr. Dinkin's sense of futility, I can no longer support the martyrdom of HANA board members who “toil” as volunteers, but have achieved little toward getting takeout lowered which was the principle justification for the organization’s formation. I don’t deny what this group has accomplished, but the principle results of its actions on those with the ability to change the status quo have been effectively limited to lip service.
The HANA board is self-funded, self-directed, and self-perpetuating. As far as I can tell, Its non-board members don’t generally collectively participate in anything except polls which I would argue are designed more to advance existing board member’s agendas than to determine the objectives of its entire dedicated membership and fulfill them.
What HANA does have at this point is name recognition and what I would guess is somewhere between 2000-4000 non-dues-paying members. To achieve anything meaningful, it needs strength in significant numbers and funding of full-time, full-dues-paying-membership-elected positions, filled by enthusiastic and energetic individuals that pursue an agenda confirmed by a majority of regularly-scheduled-voting dues-paying members.
There must be agreement among horseplayers that every participant in every pari-mutuel pool is entitled to the lowest practical direct takeout available under the circumstances – NOT just the high-volume or other favored players.
There must be agreement that playing fields for both horseplayers and horsemen be level at each venue and between venues. A central authority needs to be created that will continually monitor, reveal, and experimentally adjust the prevailing combination of reasonable takeout rates, purse levels, and operating expenses to attain a workable balance that ensures a self-sustaining game with a quality product capable of competing with alternative forms of gambling while also fairly and consistently regulated according to uniform rules that protect horses, jockeys, and customers.
Racing’s customers need representation at that table. Since inception, HANA has shown us why that is true, but not how to get there. The status quo among bettors/customers/players needs to be altered so that we’re all on the same side and our collective strength can be harnessed.
HANA can do this if its current leadership will put their egos aside, accept direction from a membership they are committed to multiply, and delegate to dedicated and determined executives who have demonstrated the ability to organize political support.
Surely there are a few savvy horseplayers who worked in the presidential campaigns whose expertise is worth compensating to perform what needs to be done. I’ll commit to $25 for each of the next four quarters to get something off the ground. Anybody else?
* * *
I'm willing to try this proposal by pledging $25 per quarter so that the Horseplayers Association of North America can do some truly meaningful, professional lobbying for horseplayers in local statehouses.
I know ALL the reasons why this won’t work. But I, too, am worn out writing or championing the ideas of others who labor to save the racing industry from itself. My pleas and others have fallen on ears at least in need of hearing aids.
If there indeed are 2,000-to-4,000 pin-wearing HANA members who signed up for a one-time $20 fee, a $25 pledge per quarter buys, at minimum, $200,000 worth of salary, travel expenses, advertising and whatever a dedicated professional needs to reach state legislators at the bottom-line by convincing them that Thoroughbred racing is not only viable but capable of growth via greater pool liquidity.
More states are looking to raise revenue from gambling than ever before, and that trend is not likely to end anytime soon. This is racing’s opportunity, but it’s horseplayers that need to stop complaining about industry inertia and make something happen.
First, we raise money, consider what would be attainable goals then execute a plan, even if it fails. We’ve all lost bets before.
If we can convince legislators that, with respect to takeout, less is more, our pledges will be paid for by a 50-Cent Pick 4 or Pick 5 that pays roughly 10-to-12 percent more than it does in most states now. Inexpensive, low-take horizontals have worked everywhere they’ve been instituted.
Anything would be better than standing by, complaining, and doing nothing, depending on an industry--with its poor track record for making things happen legislatively--to act. As fair minded people will observe from events earlier this week, people united works.


10 Nov 2012 at 06:35 am | #
JP,
Lending HRI’s support to my call for meaningful expansion of horseplayer activism is very much appreciated.
If enough others will pick up the gauntlet, racing’s customers can get where Mr. Dinkin wants to go with enough clout to actually accomplish something once we get there.
I think your analogy to the economic middle class is spot on. The horse race betting middle class has shrunk not only because less discretionary income is available, but also because the game is grinding them down with excessive takeout, unreasonable withholding, and unfair subsidies to favored individuals.
While I’m not sure I’d like to see politicians get near any money until we can establish a functional structure that attracts and truly represents all economic classes among horseplayers, I believe that we must pursue changes in determining and distributing tax liability on gambling winnings in an era where exotic wagering pools are more popular than straight wager pools.
Very few individuals can become whales on their own. Fractional wagers are a partial booster of competitiveness among players, but player partnerships with separate, independent tax liabilities are the real answer. Also, the 600-1 payoff to ticket-price rule retreats from reality when applied to exotic wagers.
HRI readers, please don’t stay silent on this issue. Let HANA know what it will take to get your support and keep it. If you’ll respond here, there’s a good chance we can all get a better picture of what’s attainable.
Thanks for getting this far.
10 Nov 2012 at 08:13 am | #
I’m in; my money is the least I can do.
TTT
10 Nov 2012 at 04:43 pm | #
Perhaps I was unclear; no money goes TO the legislators but the the horseplayer lobbyist who would educate them to institute change. A tax cut in this instance WILL trickle down unlike the promise ofthe “job creators.”
It’s been proven in every study that, over a relatively short time, lower take results in higher volume, growing pool liquidity to attract bettors that have left the game and to create new ones.
Lowering takeout; the universal rebate.
10 Nov 2012 at 07:39 pm | #
Another fine article by Indulto.
The bottom line is that not enough people care enough to be persistent enough to get things changed. And believe me being persistent isn’t easy.
HANA has done a great job making the takeout issue a big deal. Before HANA takeout was very rarely talked about.
If HANA wants to be more effective in the future they need to make some changes to get to the next level.
Keep up the good “persistent” work Indulto because it’s important.
Best,
A
10 Nov 2012 at 07:39 pm | #
I was not an exotic player & rarely paid personal attention to the takeout. I’ve read about the problem but never shopped for tracks with lower takeouts. I have been converted to an exotic player & not too long ago hit a P/5 at Calder that resulted in a payout much higher than I expected. After speaking with friends, I realized that the low P/5 rate at Calder was the main ingredient in the higher payout. I would participate in funding a professional lobbyist who would be able to get this point across to the know nothing bureaucrats who make these decisions.
10 Nov 2012 at 09:59 pm | #
AA,
Indeed you are the embodiment of persistence.
To have played a minor role in the struggle at playersboycott.org along with you and the leaders of HANA who were active in that effort was an eye-opening experience for me. I wish I could have been a fly on the wall during those negotiating sessions you and the other player representatives were involved in.
Congratulations on your prescience as one of the minority supporters of the low-takeout “Early Pick Five” experiment at California tracks that has proven so successful in demonstrating horseplayer demand for lower takeout. I can’t help but wonder how much more effective we would have been with more numerical and financial support.
I
12 Nov 2012 at 08:56 pm | #
I’d like to help as well.
*
I think racing has things backwards. It’s good to see low takeouts on Pick 4,5’s.
They are, however, difficult bets to play, and win, for all but the most serious players.
Start by lowering takeouts on the easier bets if you want to give people a chance to be winners on a regular basis.
I would start with the lowest takeouts on straight WPS wagers - no more than 10% takeout - and you must eliminate breakage.
The next lowest take should be on exactas - which are the highest handle bet on most individual races.
Keep the most money in play as much as possible and you might have a chance to succeed.
DM
13 Nov 2012 at 03:56 am | #
Hi Indulto -
Nice to see you are still fighting the good fight.
I agree with almost all of your ideas. I have been recommending a Players Union for the last decade. But, the problem with a lobbyist is that you would need one for every state that conducts racing (or a few lobbyists that would deal with several state racing boards simultaneously).
We definitely nedd a central authority but, until we get one, we will be stuck negotiating with short-sighted, politically biased racing boards on a state-by state basis.
I think the right way to allocate resoureces would be to focus on change in one major state (NY or Cal). If the new model proved siccessful, it would be easier to sell it to other states.
Where do I send my dues?
Cary Fotias
Equiform
13 Nov 2012 at 01:44 pm | #
CF,
Your input is always appreciated.
You make the fifth person here willing to pay dues, but there still has been no response here from HANA leadership despite my having emailed a link to the board member/author.
As you are still listed as an advisory board member of HANA, perhaps you have enough influence to get their attention.
Or is the door open now for a different, properly funded organization to represent horseplayers? It seems to me that would require credible and charismatic leadership including currently rebated professionals willing to support equally low takeout for everyone in affected pari-mutuel pools.
Could that include you?
CA and NY represent extremes in that the former seems to be controlled by a state-mandated, horseplayer-funded horsemen’s group and a horsemen-dominated regulatory agency while the latter appears controlled by the tax-payer-funded state government with minimal official influence from the applicable horsemen’s group.
My impression is that private racetrack operators enjoy more control in other states, and that an independent model from either would be unacceptable to the remainder without Federal intervention. Thus, a model created with input from multiple states might have a better chance both with and without Federal participation.
Since each track’s handle is sourced nationwide, what else besides funding is preventing horseplayers from being organized across the country to collectively demonstrate support for changes that all venues need to accommodate?
16 Nov 2012 at 03:34 am | #
I, Preach,
Didn’t know a middle class of horseplayers existed since 97% lose playing this game in the long run due to outrageously high takeout rates. The only thing I could pledge is a boycott or strike of the NYRA tracks that I attend on a weekend basis. I would pledge my time standing on a picket line outside the track for this would be the only way a horseplayers voice shall be heard IMHO in regard to the takeout rates.
I aint gonna work on Maggies farm no more…
I’m not willing to play the high takeout game no more…
16 Nov 2012 at 09:49 am | #
Cat,
How can we get 100,000 players like you to build a grass roots movement capable of bringing horseplayers a seat at the table? Your money is not as important as your willingness to stop betting when it counts and to volunteer productively, which to me is not only physically demonstrating once the numbers have been reached, but also recruiting to reach those numbers.
Going one–on-one is important, but funding for ads and operating expenses is also necessary. In 2008, I thought annual dues should be $25 for an organization expected to reach 100,000 players nationwide. Now I’m willing to contribute more IF and WHEN I’m convinced leadership exists that represents my interests, and that I have those interests in common with a majority of the members.
Even if it’s true that 97% of horseplayers don’t show a profit overall, does that mean we don’t enjoy trying? And what drives us to keep trying more effectively than staying within striking distance of coming out ahead? Accepting the game’s inherent difficulty as recreational bettors doesn’t mean we have to lie down and take it while excessive direct takeout not only lowers pari-mutuel payouts, but also enables a very few favored players to receive part of the excess back on every wager—win or lose.
16 Nov 2012 at 04:37 pm | #
Excellent dialogue, gents. If only a horseplaying background and common sense prevailed among track execuives, there’d be no need for a movement. Just can’t save people from themselves I suppose.
19 Nov 2012 at 08:20 am | #
I’m with DennyM. I’d be in in a minute, but I’ve seen no love for us vertical players since HANA’s inception. We were also promised the NYRA ban on internet video would be addressed. I don’t think I have to explain to anyone on this forum how much more is bet on vertical bets than horizontal ones in North America, yet the takeout rates on them are never even mentioned when fighting the takeout battle. Show me a lobbyist who will fight for the majority instead of a select few niche bettors and I’m in. Until then, I’ll sit on my wallet.