I'm not sure if they have a client like poker sites do (if so it may be possible that those are still working) but I did check out of curiosity to see what a web browser would do. Neither one worked for me.

Points-spread.com is available, but LuckyPyramidCasino.com is down, and I'm in Europe

Could someone tell me how in the world this could possibly be successful?

I am not talking about the blocking of poker sites, but the other side of the equation. Even if successful, how will that help the HR industry. Nobody will come home and say “dang I can’t get on pokerstars, so I guess I’ll bet Betsy Rose in the 4th. I hear she’s going off at 5-1”. People don’t like to bet the horses, not because they can play poker instead, but because they don’t like to bet the horses.

my guess would be the thinking is: less money lost at poker = more money to gamble on horses

Both sites are down and a check of the whois shows them belonging to the Secretary of State of Kentucky.

But, again, I don't think anything like that is the reason why people don't bet horses. There is an underlying weakness to the HR industry that is just not going to be solved by eliminating competing industries. And that weakness is that people don't care about horse racing. I would rather gargle hot sauce than follow horse racing.

points-spread.com isn't one of the siezed sites. It is the site that reported the other two had been seized.

Sorry about that, they're both down from here.

I would tend to agree. However I think the logic is that the people that actually do bet on the horses may also engage in other forms of gambling. They only have so much to spend per month (as a crude example) and the less they lose at poker or online slots/whatever the more they can spend on horses.

IMHO - if I was the president of say China, I would:

A. Decide that my travel agents deserved all the business for travel to China.
B. Make a law that said all travel to Nepal would have to be booked through Chinese travel agents.
C. Declare online travel companies to be breaking the law and seize their domains with a nice court order.

What would Travelocity, Expedia or some of those others say?

Do any of those tracks have card rooms? I know in Florida, most tracks have card rooms so its not the horses that they think you're detracting from, it would their own card room business. If they don't have card rooms at the tracks in KY, then this might be a precursor to the tracks opening them up in the near future.

Maybe one day Kentucky will realize that horse racing is about as popular with the younger generation as other dying things like Gennessee Creme Ale and Boxing. Instead of fighting the younger generations and trying to force them to do the things they deem fun and appropriate (HELLO RIGHT WING!!!), they should concentrate their efforts on getting us interested in their product and spend less time pissing them off.

Maybe we should start writing to the race tracks in KY too and informing them that we won't be visiting their tracks or betting their races, even on simulcast from tracks in different states.

OK, how about this?

The sportsbetting sites targeted also already offer the same product. How about those sites offering vig-less HR until Kentucky backs off? Its not like these sites WSEX, Bodog etc. can't afford to lose this profit. They are diversified. But the US based HR sites are not. I would think they would not like losing this busines. And the hardcore HR bettor may very well take the time to get around these domain blocks.

Then they spin you around and poke you in the rear!

Oh it's time for some campaign'in, oh it's tiiiiimmeeee for some campaaaaign'innnnn....

------------

I'm so jaded. Not just about poker legislation, but politics in general.

The offshore sportsbooks already offer much better payouts than land based racetracks.

The offshore sportsbooks generally give a rebate (similar to rakeback) in the amount of 3-7% of your wager. So, if you make a wager for $100 on a race, they will give you anywhere from $3-$7 cashback.