Casinos at Race Tracks?

[Grumpy]

i agree with Roadtoad. Until about five years ago I used to bet on almost nothing except KY race tracks, either at the track or by Off-track simulcasts. I mostly bet Exotics (trifectas, Superfectas, Pick 3s, Pick 4s, etc) and I like to use longshots in my bets. For the way I bet, I don't usuallly bet on any race that has LESS THAN 10 horses.

Over the last several years, the field sizes in all the KY tracks has gone down to the point that most cards will only have two or three races with 10 or more horses and many will have as few a four. By way of example, today's card at Churchill only has four races with 10 or more horses, the other eight races only have 6 or 7 each. And this is a Saturday, when field sizes are the biggest. I have seen Thursday and Fridays with only one or two races with 10 horses and several with only four or five.

The owners and trainers of the better horses are moving thier barns to tracks with bigger purses. And, that means a poorer quality of races that remain at KY tracks. I am going to Churchhill today but I will be in the Simulcast area because there are only two Churchill races I want to bet on. The rest just are worht betting on. AND I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE THAT FEELS THIS WAY!!

Without slots at the tracks, racing in KY is going to go down hill until nohting remains here.

Grumpy

[zx150]

It is true the tracks are really hurting. So much money drives across the bridge into Indiana it is not even funny. We could keep that money here. What a shame.

[know1]

I'm definitely not opposed to having Casinos at tracks....just opposed to having them ONLY at tracks. It should be open to anyone who wants to operate one.

[apb]

I'm definitely not opposed to having Casinos at tracks....just opposed to having them ONLY at tracks. It should be open to anyone who wants to operate one.

I believe that part of the issue is that to have them at other places would require a constitutional amendment. This is not the case if the slots are just at the tracks. Thats why the push for slots at race tracks.

Andrew

[RoadToad]

I believe that part of the issue is that to have them at other places would require a constitutional amendment. This is not the case if the slots are just at the tracks. Thats why the push for slots at race tracks.

Andrew

Actually, the proposed amendment would have authorized 12 casinos in Kentucky, 7 in "communities that already house racetracks," and 5 more in border counties that currently have no gambling other than the lottery. But it failed, in large part because a lot of those communities' civic and religious leaders didn't want casinos in their back yards. So now, Beshear is trying to get slots just at racetracks, where there is already gambling, and he's trying to call them "video lottery terminals," and say that it's covered under the current constitutional amendment authorizing the lottery. I don't think that's going to fly. The amendment clearly states that no other forms of gambling shall be incorporated into it. Much as I want to see slots at tracks, I think that no matter where they're located, it's going to take an amendment.

[the_donger]

Very well put Grumpy. That is the kind of statement that changes minds.

[mhall]

Very well put Grumpy. That is the kind of statement that changes minds.

I to agree with the Grumpster.

[know1]

But why do they have to designate where they go in the first place? Just make it legal and let the local communities decide if they want them in their area.

It's too restrictive and looks to be aimed at making a few of Beshear's cronies and relatives money at the exclusion of others.