Yesterday, we had two "quotes of the day" and today we see another.
There is a bill in California that raises takeout and adds exchange wagering. The takeout bill seemed to be sailing through just fine, as we see all too often in racing since about 1908 when takeout was 5%, with unanimous consent. However, the exchange thingy really seemed to get some shorts in a bunch. So now, it looks like it is 50/50 to pass.
Republicans are lining up to oppose this exchange wagering concept. And thus, we have our newest quote of the day:
" In fact, according to a Republican caucus analysis opposing the bill, between 1998, when exchange wagering was first allowed, and 2008, “purse revenues” went up 54 percent. Track attendance went up 10 percent, the number of horses in competition increased 19 percent, and the number of races jumped 26 percent."
OK. Let me see if I understand. In horse racing, which has been getting its ass kicked everywhere, an introduction of an exchange coincided with, higher handle, higher purses, more attendance, more horses bought, and more races.
And they're against it?
I am getting precariously close to following a new sport.
Sinking marketing money directly into the horseplayer by seeding pools is effective, in both theory and practice In Ontario and elsewher...
Our wagering game is an incredible mental exercise for many reasons. And one of its characteristics I like best is the variety of thought wh...
There's something going on in horse racing today , but I have not really followed it. Instead, I've been thinking about two words we...
At Northlands Park Wednesday several rabbits were in the infield. This spooked one of the horses, and he took a tumble, sending driver Debbi...
Unless you are off the twitter grid (God bless you), you've no doubt witnessed the feud of the month(s) between ITP and some public raci...
I watched the U.S. Women's Open in golf this past weekend on and off. I wondered if Lexi Thompson, the front-runner with a 4 shot lead, ...