It's complicated, but I can't help thinking that people are overlooking the fact that the big bettor needs the little guy desperately! It's parimutuel betting. The money the big player wins has to come from somewhere. Sharks don't eat other sharks, they eat fish. Ergo, racing needs fish. All this attention being paid to the sharks turns me off.

Racing has to devote ALL of its energy to getting people to the track and getting NEW fans. They need to sell the sport, and they are doing an awful job of it.

Giving rebates to the big players is a classic case of Preaching To The Converted. Those guys are already there and they're already betting heavy, so why do you have to give them a break? What purpose does it serve? If they didn't have rebates would they stop playing? Rebates help rebate-oriented businesses and big players. The effect on the sport overall needs to be studied a little more carefully.

They should do something like luxury boxes at racetracks. You want to give the big players something? Give them free seats and food in a luxury box AT THE TRACK. That's what casinos do. They give comps to get the sharks to stay in the tank. It works, and racing should take a lesson.

How about rebates where you can't withdraw the rebate as CASH, but you can use the rebates as credit towards betting. That makes some amount of sense to me.

Plus, if the states allow this, they are allowing the poor to subsidize the rich, but what else is new?

I say the best thing for racing is an absolutely level playing field. If racing was thriving like casinos are thriving it might be a different story. Racetracks are empty, and there is a debate over...rebates for big players? In terms of public relations, I would say, "not good."

I would say Jerry is right in terms of the likely evolution of this, but if I was calling the shots I would do things differently... HP