Fairmount-- as a retired “ creative lawyer “ several points in response to your post. Even assuming arguendo ( lawyers love that word)I agree with everything in your post, it is mostly irrelevant to the real issue posed by the CAW’s and the tracks who support them. . There is no claim those players have done anything wrong and indeed they are to be admired for their hard work in creating algorithms that are effective. And the “zero sum” argument you invoke, while perhaps true is equally irrelevant. Your seeking to analogize the high rebates received by the bots with customers in a business setting receiving a discount because they buy in bulk actually highlights the issue horseplayers face. If I go to my local supermarket to buy a gallon of milk and pay $10 it is meaningless to me that someone buying 100 gallons only pays $8 a gallon. I only have room or need for 1 gallon and I need that gallon. Horseplayers who want to bet ( mere mortals) do not have that option. Wherever I bet the CAW players will cut into my potential profits, and if they break even they make millions. Horse players have no real alternative except to stop betting on horse racing. That is the problem. I have played this game for more than 50 years, turned a lot of people onto it and made friends ( including TGJB) along the way. If someone like me walks away because my PERCEPTION is that this very difficult game to beat is not fair, and others are getting a deal not available to me, the game is in trouble. And it is! To make matters worse, the tracks are now hostage to the CAW players. They have desperately tried to keep their ownership interests in Elite Turf quiet and desperately need those numbers to boost their handle. ( When NYRA issued a press release that the Spring meet showed an 8% increase my first question was why don’t you tell me- your consumer- how much of that handle comes from bots not mere mortals.Did anyone in the New York Legislature ask that question when they approved the $450mm bond offering for NYRA?)).And if the CAW players, because of theoretical reduced rebates in the future in response to pressure from consumers,I.e. bettors, take their game to the Isle of Mann or some other overseas bookie, the tracks crater- all of them. I had an ADW account with XPRESS bet. When news started to trickle out that STRONACH had an interest in Elite Turf, I raised the issue with XPRESS bet and advised I would not fund the ADW if what ai was hearing was reading was accurate. The response from XPRESS BET was to simply lie and advise me in writing that Stronach had no such interest. When I pressed them to state unequivocally they had neither a direct or indirect interest in Elite there was no response. Some transparency! No disrespect to the racetrack owners, breeders , and politicians but there is zero game without bettors and notwithstanding that somewhat obvious fact horseplayers have historically allowed themselves to be shat upon on many levels starting in 1970 when NY OTB, shunned by NYRA and the Phipps, thought it was a good idea to impose a 5% surcharge for the right to bet off track. I could go on and on. The only way to even begin to even out the playing field ( and please don’t tell me that a player getting a 7-8% rebate does not have a huuuge advantage over us mere mortals) is for bettors to send an unequivocal message of their growing unhappiness by not betting until the game approaches some degree of being level for all bettors.