Funny how you may not appreciate somebody who is doing a good job until they are gone. Eric Donovan has really been one of the best morning line makers around for a few years. Those that play the NY circuit would likely agree.
He apparently has moved on to another role and Travis Stone is taking his place. Ugh. He has been relatively poor (albeit following a guy who was excellent).
For vertical bettors the ML has less impact, but it has an impact on horizontal wagers for races \"uncovered\" when the bet is made (e.g. 3rd race of pick-3, 3th, 4th and 5th races of the pick-5, etc.
Case in point coming up on Wednesday at Saratoga in the 10th race. There is about a 2% chance that you can get 12-1 on Chico GRande. Paired up 67 Beyers in tough Gulfstream races, before a drop where he was claimed by Jason servis. Can\'t love the layoff off the claim and I am not saying I actually like the horse best, but as well as the Servis horses have been running, Irad ORtiz the leading rider up, and big figures on the page, he isn\'t going to be 12-1.
Jim
I think you make a good point it was especially noticeable to me last Sat.
jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Funny how you may not appreciate somebody who is
> doing a good job until they are gone. Eric
> Donovan has really been one of the best morning
> line makers around for a few years. Those that
> play the NY circuit would likely agree.
>
> He apparently has moved on to another role and
> Travis Stone is taking his place. Ugh. He has
> been relatively poor (albeit following a guy who
> was excellent).
>
> For vertical bettors the ML has less impact, but
> it has an impact on horizontal wagers for races
> \"uncovered\" when the bet is made (e.g. 3rd race of
> pick-3, 3th, 4th and 5th races of the pick-5,
> etc.
>
> Case in point coming up on Wednesday at Saratoga
> in the 10th race. There is about a 2% chance that
> you can get 12-1 on Chico GRande. Paired up 67
> Beyers in tough Gulfstream races, before a drop
> where he was claimed by Jason servis. Can\'t love
> the layoff off the claim and I am not saying I
> actually like the horse best, but as well as the
> Servis horses have been running, Irad ORtiz the
> leading rider up, and big figures on the page, he
> isn\'t going to be 12-1.
>
>
> Jim
Agree.
Didn\'t realize how good the outgoing guy was until we got this guy. THis is having the effect of dramatically reducing my action. Not good for the NYRA if others act the same way as me. I do not see how anybody can bet anything except live betting (meaning close to post) for straight bets and verticals. I have given up on horizontals (except where i can take the double handicapping time to do what it takes to correct his line).
If this doesn\'t get fixed, I am probably going to have to find a different circuit to play.
Saratoga is always a hard ML to make, but there were issues late in the Belmont meet as well. Not sure if it was Donovan or not at that point.
Case in point:
You know that he will never go off @ 12/1. On Saturday when 40,000 wander aimlessly drunk through the back yard and the idiot that will bet his pay check on Frosted in the Whitney because he ran a 122 Beyer in the Met Mile guess what?
ALL their money goes into the same pool as yours and mine does. What a beautiful thing :)
One of the great things about the information age is getting DRF past performances 72 hours out and there is no ML posted for the early data or on TG figures either!
My biggest concern lies in the computer teams not being able to reach into the horizontals past their pre race data, will pays and probables. When they do and those payoffs start being cannibalized I\'ll be out of the game!
Good luck,
Frank D.
FrankD. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Case in point:
> You know that he will never go off @ 12/1. On
> Saturday when 40,000 wander aimlessly drunk
> through the back yard and the idiot that will bet
> his pay check on Frosted in the Whitney because he
> ran a 122 Beyer in the Met Mile guess what?
> ALL their money goes into the same pool as yours
> and mine does. What a beautiful thing :)
>
> One of the great things about the information age
> is getting DRF past performances 72 hours out and
> there is no ML posted for the early data or on TG
> figures either!
>
> My biggest concern lies in the computer teams not
> being able to reach into the horizontals past
> their pre race data, will pays and probables. When
> they do and those payoffs start being cannibalized
> I\'ll be out of the game!
>
> Good luck,
>
> Frank D.
Amen.
I don\'t see the horse as a huge player in the race. I really don\'t think a couple of good efforts for Mike Yates in Hallandale 16 months ago mean this horse is an auto contender in this field . In fact, the horse, off those GP efforts, showed up for low-tier trainer 5 months later and ran poorly before another long layoff off the Servis claim. If this horse was trained by Ubillo and ridden by Trujillo tomorrow, the horse would probably be 25-1. As it is, I think 12-1 is a pretty good ML.
Secondly, why do bad morning lines negatively impact your horizontal wagers? Let\'s say this line was off and this Servis horse is more like 3-1 on a real morning line. You have that information and not everyone else does. Doesn\'t that benefit you in pick 3, pick 4 etc? I\'m confused?
CA12891289,
Interesting handle....
Let\'s agree to disagree on the 12 horse (for now), I am as SURE AS I CAN BE that he won\'t be 12-1. The 67 beyer figures in Maiden special and Maiden 75 are top Beyer figures in the race and this is a maiden 25k. Jason Servis is hot and Irad is running away with the meet. It doesn\'t take a rocket scientist to see that this horse will take money.
do I think he is the most likely winner? No, at best 3rd most likely winner behind the 4 and 10. But he will take money. And having him a longer ML than the 7 and the same ML as the 5 and 8 is just doing a POOR job.
As for the impact on horizontal wagers, it will impact them. I didn\'t say it had to impact mine personally, or yours, for that matter. Yes, a smart player, who thinks they see something wrong, in theory can take advantage of it in a multi-race bet. But that is NOT WHAT THE MORNING LINE MAKER is supposed to be doing. How about he/she does his job right and let the chips fall as they may.
He has ANOTHER egregious mistake today in the 6th. No way the 12 horse, Honorable Daniel, coming out of 40k N/W2 claimers, goes off a shorter price than the 8, Ross J Dawg, coming out of starter allowance races .
Jim
Who knew Travis Stone read this board?
CA12891289 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don\'t see the horse as a huge player in the
> race. I really don\'t think a couple of good
> efforts for Mike Yates in Hallandale 16 months ago
> mean this horse is an auto contender in this field
> . In fact, the horse, off those GP efforts, showed
> up for low-tier trainer 5 months later and ran
> poorly before another long layoff off the Servis
> claim. If this horse was trained by Ubillo and
> ridden by Trujillo tomorrow, the horse would
> probably be 25-1. As it is, I think 12-1 is a
> pretty good ML.
>
> Secondly, why do bad morning lines negatively
> impact your horizontal wagers? Let\'s say this line
> was off and this Servis horse is more like 3-1 on
> a real morning line. You have that information and
> not everyone else does. Doesn\'t that benefit you
> in pick 3, pick 4 etc? I\'m confused?
If the line is bad, then you need to do extra handicapping to get that information. For example, you go through the race to determine each horse\'s chances. Then you need to do the race again and not take into consideration the horses\' chances but rather handicap the public audience and what they are going to think and do. For each race, you have to handicap two races -- one is the race on the track, the other is the public opinion.
I agree that a bad line gives an advantage to people who work harder and do the second job. For an astute handicapper, a bad line is a good thing. However, that handicapper has to do a ton more work than normal. Guys like me have limited time for handicapping, if I have to do more handicapping per race, it means i will handicap less races.
I have enough issues just picking a winner...
johnnym Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have enough issues just picking a winner...
Picking a winner is way tougher than either handicapping the race and assessing probabilities or trying to figure out what the crowd is going to do. If your plan is to pick winners, then the ML is irrelevant and you have already saddled yourself with a tougher job than any of the things I am talking about. Also, you need to be prepared for a lot more variance.
Horse in last race 12-1 ML, goes off 9-5.
5/2 favorite in 5th race goes off 4th choice.
AWFUL work.
jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Horse in last race 12-1 ML, goes off 9-5.
>
> 5/2 favorite in 5th race goes off 4th choice.
>
> AWFUL work.
8-5 now,,,,,,and shorter in the horizontals since all the scratch money will be going on that horse now.
Travis Stone making an auctioneering school in St. Louis proud apparently!
I won\'t make any assertions beyond the Fact that I wonder if some of you were at the top of your game when you did something for the first time for your job or at age 31? (EDIT: Upon re-reading I want to clarify I mean that he still has much to improve upon and understandably so at his age).
Two links here---one an article on Travis Stone and his linemaking at Saratoga. Second a link to his Twitter account which includes a self-deprecating tweet about today\'s \"performance.\"
Be sure to watch the call of the Pharaoah Derby on there. At race calling, he is precise, accurate and right on the money in that race. Give it a watch and a listen. He missed one today and others this meet but his line making will improve in time.
http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2016/aug/03/0803_maccolumn/?dgzrg
https://twitter.com/TravisStone
Fairmount1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Travis Stone making an auctioneering school in St.
> Louis proud apparently!
>
> I won\'t make any assertions beyond the Fact that I
> wonder if some of you were at the top of your game
> when you did something for the first time for your
> job or at age 31? (EDIT: Upon re-reading I want
> to clarify I mean that he still has much to
> improve upon and understandably so at his age).
>
> Two links here---one an article on Travis Stone
> and his linemaking at Saratoga. Second a link to
> his Twitter account which includes a
> self-deprecating tweet about today\'s
> \"performance.\"
>
> Be sure to watch the call of the Pharaoah Derby on
> there. At race calling, he is precise, accurate
> and right on the money in that race. Give it a
> watch and a listen. He missed one today and
> others this meet but his line making will improve
> in time.
>
> http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2016/aug/03/0803_
> maccolumn/?dgzrg
>
> https://twitter.com/TravisStone
Nobody wants to be mean to a kid. And, it is not the kid\'s fault. It is the NYRA\'s fault.
As a practical matter, the NYRA needs to understand the product IT IS PUTTING ON THE MARKETPLACE. The NYRA should be wanting to entice people to bet. It is what they are supposed to be doing. They should be making things easy for bettors to put their dollars down.
So long as the ML is being done incompetently (today\'s last race a perfect example), anybody whose time is limited is going to be analyzing a lot less races and betting a lot less races. My handle has gone down at least 50% since I realized the kid didn\'t know what he was doing.
We operate in a free country and a free marketplace. The NYRA is allowed to do whatever it wants to do. Me, I am going to bet Mountaineer on Saturday rather than the Spa. Never been tempted before to do something like this, but why not. It might be not bad. As it is, it is aggravating to have to do work that normally the track offers as a courtesy for its bettors -- If I am going to have to do this, why not do it somewhere else rather than the place that is choosing to inconvenience its own customers.
The kid seems like a nice kid. Who knows, maybe one day he will get it. However, my time is precious, and I need to make choices. The NYRA is the big leagues and it makes choices too. They should be choosing people who have already done the job elsewhere and shown they can do it rather than giving a novice a shot at the big league level. What baseball team plucks a kid out of high school and puts him on a big league roster? If such a teenager fails in the big leagues, it is not the teenager\'s fault, it is the club that put him in that spot who is to blame. The kid is a nice kid and none of this is about him.
SoCal,
You are 100 % correct. One can argue the actual validity, personal effect or impact of the ML per individual plunger.
No one can argue the longest running off Broadway show of NYRA\'s complete and total incompetence. Once again they show their disdain, ignorance and the you don\'t count as much as a picnic table attitude towards the dreaded gambler!
To put a virgin line maker in place SPECIFICALLY for the Saratoga meet is incomprehensible. Klueless (Claude Rains) Kay must have awoke from a 3 day drunk shocked to find out there was gambling going here! One would think senior vice president of racing operations Martin Panza would have known better after a mere 30 years in the business?
And the beat goes on and on,
Frank D.
Spot on guys.
It is egregious.
He isn\'t just making \"tough to read\" mistakes. He is making horrible ones that are obvious.
Nice guy or not, he is not ready for prime time.
Of course NYRA doesn\'t care. Highest takeouts of any gambling game, poor customer service, incompetence in public facing roles, any wonder why almost nobody under the age of 50 plays this game. Dying, soon to be dead game.
Race 8 today. #1 Daddy\'s Boo. Any TG user will love his figures.
20-1 morning line!!!!!??????
I don\'t love her figures, especially at high weight and at a distance where her one number was average. Other than a pace factor, having the lead down the backstretch, I don\'t see Boo as a contender for the top 2 spots. So even at 20/1, she\'d be a toss for me. Value is only value when you have a chance to cash a ticket.
To me this is a cold exacta 2-9. Although at her lone speed Daddy\'s Boo could hang on for 3rd. While I handicapped this mixing Thoro-Graph figures with other data, I\'ll start with the sheets to explain my thoughts. #9 is proven at the distance and has numbers that tower over the field for the distance. But...#2 is now a 4 year old off the layoff. Her sire\'s TGI indicates we may see a 2.5 improvement. That puts her in #9\'s league. Additionally, we often see big jumps when Euros come to NA & get Lasix.
Here\'s some non-sheet data: This filly\'s only defeat was to a grade 1 filly. Her works say she\'s ready for a big effort. Her siblings were prolific winners in Europe. Trainer Clement can get them ready first in NA. Basically, #2 towers over this field and getting back to the ML, I\'ll never see anything near 4/1 on her. I\'ll be lucky to get 2/1 on her, because she should run like a 3/5 shot.
Speaking of sheets, bad ML odds & layoffs, the 4th race is a good example. Indulgent will be the favorite as the ML suggests, but Midnight Visitor will never be 10/1. The good news is her sheets are much better than her Beyers, so her form is a little hidden, but unless Indulgent dramatically improves, or there is a future star among the 1st time starters, if Visitor has the normal progression from 2 to 3, if she\'s fit she\'ll crush this field. When I handicapped this race I found a shocking statistic on Formulator: Todd Pletcher is 0 for 16 with first time starting 3 yos in 3 & up maiden races at Saratoga over the last 5 years.
While I am no fan of Chris Kay, I have to believe there is more to this story than has been made public, perhaps something personal to Eric Donovan.
Saratoga has to be an especially tough gig for the linemaker, with all the 2yos and horses coming from everywhere.
Donovan is directing the Saratoga Live FS2 show, if NYRA had any clue they would have him checking the work before publishing.
Kurt Vonnegut warns us in Cat\'s Cradle, \"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way.\"
Anyway, for a variety of reasons I haven\'t been to a track for many years, (it\'s not the same game I fell in love with) but for twenty-five years of my life I was at one, or an OTB, every chance I got. And for most of those years, I tracked the odds of every horse in every race. Always what I was interested in was how the horses were bet in relationship to the morning line. It is my conviction that the butcher\'s thumb on the scale, if it exists in any race, is to be detected in the relationship between the morning odds and how a horse is bet. But I don\'t want to oversimplify the process. One cannot read an odds board well without having a keen understanding of past performances. And always one must distinguish between Veritas and verisimilitude. Nor can I encapsulate twenty-five years of experience into one posting. Still, this question needs to be asked, In the race under scrutiny the second place horse was listed at 15-1 and went off at 15-1. Was that a bad morning line? Or was the odds board telling you something? I mean, a 12-1 morning line got crushed in the pools, and the 15-1 never drifted? Might be a horse worth using in a horizontal. (No, I\'m not redboarding. Just illuminating the process.)
I also noticed that on each of the first two days of the meet (maybe two out of the first three) a horse listed at 20-1 won at 20-1. Were these good or bad morning lines? And, since 20-1 morning lines generally drift higher, was the density of the betting maybe telling you something?
I guess I\'ll leave with this thought: A good lines maker should definitely be able to recognize the betting favorite. No excuse not to be able to do that 80% or more of the time. But on the other hand, most discrepancies in the morning line will be self-corrected in the pools, or better yet, to the astute observer, self-revealing.
Thanks. My mistake. I had read Donovan was doing something else, but I had not read what. Guess it\'s just a career move for him.
Thehoarsehorseplayer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kurt Vonnegut warns us in Cat\'s Cradle, \"Beware of
> the man who works hard to learn something, learns
> it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is
> full of murderous resentment of people who are
> ignorant without having come by their ignorance
> the hard way.\"
>
> Anyway, for a variety of reasons I haven\'t been to
> a track for many years, (it\'s not the same game I
> fell in love with) but for twenty-five years of my
> life I was at one, or an OTB, every chance I got.
> And for most of those years, I tracked the odds of
> every horse in every race. Always what I was
> interested in was how the horses were bet in
> relationship to the morning line. It is my
> conviction that the butcher\'s thumb on the scale,
> if it exists in any race, is to be detected in the
> relationship between the morning odds and how a
> horse is bet. But I don\'t want to oversimplify the
> process. One cannot read an odds board well
> without having a keen understanding of past
> performances. And always one must distinguish
> between Veritas and verisimilitude. Nor can I
> encapsulate twenty-five years of experience into
> one posting. Still, this question needs to be
> asked, In the race under scrutiny the second place
> horse was listed at 15-1 and went off at 15-1. Was
> that a bad morning line? Or was the odds board
> telling you something? I mean, a 12-1 morning line
> got crushed in the pools, and the 15-1 never
> drifted? Might be a horse worth using in a
> horizontal. (No, I\'m not redboarding. Just
> illuminating the process.)
This point above looks interesting, but I am not sure I follow -- are you saying that since the guy rated the two horses in the same ball park and one got crushed and the other didn\'t that makes the one that didn\'t get crushed represent value? In theory, they are supposed to be the same price because of the crowd\'s opinion, not because of their ability. To be honest, I am a little lost here.
>
> I also noticed that on each of the first two days
> of the meet (maybe two out of the first three) a
> horse listed at 20-1 won at 20-1. Were these good
> or bad morning lines? And, since 20-1 morning
> lines generally drift higher, was the density of
> the betting maybe telling you something?
If the horse was listed as 20-1 and went off at 20-1, that line was good whether or not the horse won. How the horse performs has nothing to do with whether or not the line was good. The starting gate can malfunction and the race declared a no contest and you still had all the information you needed to know about whether the line was any good. 20-1 shots are supposed to win sometimes.
If the line were made by a reliable line maker, then the horse getting bet down would be valuable information. However, when the linemaker is not reliable, then you cannot judge that off his/her line and you need to make your own ML. Note, no linemaker will ever be perfect. That is by definition impossible. There is a tolerance for varying and being off (i would say even more so in 2yo maiden races). We are not talking about a line that is imperfect or off within acceptable tolerances. We are talking about lines that are missing the side of the barn. These lines are so far wide of the mark, they are not worth even bothering with.
>
> I guess I\'ll leave with this thought: A good lines
> maker should definitely be able to recognize the
> betting favorite. No excuse not to be able to do
> that 80% or more of the time. But on the other
> hand, most discrepancies in the morning line will
> be self-corrected in the pools, or better yet, to
> the astute observer, self-revealing.
a horse that drops from 20-1 to 10-1 is not providing you any valuable information if the ML for the horse should have been 8-1. You have to know what a reliable ML would have been before you can judge whether there is any unexpected action on a horse.
When Travis got the job, I sent him my condolences.
One thing lost in the translation yesterday was that the 12 horse in the last race was \"not eligible to be claimed per NYRA house rule.\" So Servis claimed him about ten months ago, ate all the costs in the meantime, and was able to bring him back for the same price without risking him for claim. He is not allowed to drop him down and is only able to do it the first start off a long claim. Horses coming off long layoffs can make their first start and not be claimed if the trainer decides to exercise that clause.
You could tell by the fact that there was no claiming price in his past peformance line and it is in the overnight.
Hoarse
All your points aren\'t valid, when the ML sucks
Who cares who drifts where off a bad ML.
When a horse takes significant action from where any reasonably knowledgeable handicapper thinks they should be, it makes sense to take notice.
Same race as yesterday as a case in point. While I correctly pointed out that Stone was clueless on the 12 at 12-1 ML, I thought he would be no worse than 3rd choice, with the 4 and 10. When he opened shortest pick-4, shortest pick-3 and shortest double, in the will pays, it represented significant action for a horse with a long layoff right after being claimed. Throw in that it is a sharp trainer whose horses often get smashed at the windows when they are \"live\" and it would have been foolish to ignore the action when looking at vertical bets. (Not saying u have to be a lemming and follow the action, but factor the action into your pre-race assessment, and if u feel it warrants a change in strategy, so be it)
Deviation from where a horse should be always worth noting. But u have to know where a horse \"should be\" to take advantage of it. Like most people that have spent way too much betting and analyzing horses, I see maybe 1 in 10 or 1 in 15 races where rhe betting is shocking or I was way off (every Kentucky derby it seems). The problem with Stone is this happens to him every 4th race at saratoga. Shameful
Jim
Dick Powell Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When Travis got the job, I sent him my
> condolences.
>
> One thing lost in the translation yesterday was
> that the 12 horse in the last race was \"not
> eligible to be claimed per NYRA house rule.\" So
> Servis claimed him about ten months ago, ate all
> the costs in the meantime, and was able to bring
> him back for the same price without risking him
> for claim. He is not allowed to drop him down and
> is only able to do it the first start off a long
> claim. Horses coming off long layoffs can make
> their first start and not be claimed if the
> trainer decides to exercise that clause.
>
> You could tell by the fact that there was no
> claiming price in his past peformance line and it
> is in the overnight.
One would think that the NYRA house linesmaker would be aware of the NYRA house rules. It all goes to the question of why on planet Earth would a sane entity hire an extremely young inexperienced guy for the toughest linemaking job there is. It makes no sense unless you just dont care what your customers think.
i didn\'t say that Travis didn\'t know the NYRA house rules. Just that it contributed to way more betting on the 12 than expected because of it.
jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But u have to know where a horse
> \"should be\" to take advantage of it.
Exactly!
I take no position on whether he sets a good ML, but in either case, it\'s still our job as gamblers to make an accurate assessment of where the horse(s) \"should be.\" (And if you are reading toteboard movement off a bad ML, and not accounting for the fact that the ML is wrong, then I wish you very good luck.)
If you aren\'t making your own line on a given race, whether consciously or subconsciously, how are you deciding when to bet and when to pass?
Thehoarsehorseplayer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I also noticed that on each of the first two days
> of the meet (maybe two out of the first three) a
> horse listed at 20-1 won at 20-1. Were these good
> or bad morning lines?
It\'s entirely possible, any maybe even equally likely, that the answer to \"Were these good or bad morning lines?\" Is \"good,\" or \"bad,\" or \"indifferent.\"
Just wanna throw in my two cents here.
Point 1: The job of the person who makes the morning line is to set the line in accordance of how they think the public will bet the race. That\'s it. It has nothing to do, or at least it shouldn\'t, with who they think will win the race.
Point 2: The job of the handicapper is to try to figure out our own line of who will most likely hit the board so we can decide if it offers value enough to bet our money to hopefully cash a ticket. This is irrespective of whatever the morning line person says.
Points number one and two have nothing to do with each other. A lot of the discussion points on this thread have been good points, but not relevant to the topic at hand. It\'s like someone saying the track announcer isn\'t calling the races well and then someone else saying I don\'t care because she is hot and someone else saying I don\'t listen to her anyway and then we argue about whether or not she is hot or should be listened to.
The point was made that the morning line at Saratoga has been when way off. And that point is dead nuts right IMO, usually blatantly so at least once or twice per day. The guy isn\'t performing well at his job. Maybe he\'ll get it, maybe he won\'t.
I\'m not a good enough player to make horizontal bets, except for the occasional double, so the morning line doesn\'t really affect me. I can look at the actual betting.
What\'s not clear to me from this string, however, is how horizontal players determine \"value\" in races for which they cannot see betting. Do people really rely on the morning line, or do they have their own sense of who is likely to take money?
BitPlayer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I\'m not a good enough player to make horizontal
> bets, except for the occasional double, so the
> morning line doesn\'t really affect me. I can look
> at the actual betting.
>
> What\'s not clear to me from this string, however,
> is how horizontal players determine \"value\" in
> races for which they cannot see betting. Do
> people really rely on the morning line, or do they
> have their own sense of who is likely to take
> money?
Consider decision making on the margins...say I want to go a little deeper in a leg but not too deep. I have all the main contenders, but I view the race as having variance and if any logical outsider is too long a price, I want to be covered if that price horse comes in. Imagine two horses I peg as having 8% chance of winning, but who are 6-1 and 15-1 in the morning line. I will always include the 15-1 and exclude the 6-1. Now maybe the 15-1 swings from 12-1 to 18-1 and the 6-1 between 9-2 and 8-1. That sort of variance is okay and fine and I can live with choosing the longer one and letting the shorter one beat me (remember, they have equal chance of coming in). However, if the 15-1 goes off at 7-2 and the 6-1 goes off at 18-1, I am going to be furious if the 18-1 comes in and I do not have it because I was choosing the longer of the two and I ended up with a 7-2 that had the same chance of coming in as an 18-1.
Now people are right, I can do the analysis to see for myself what I think those horses will go off at. Prior to this meet, i just trusted the prior guy, saved myself a lot of time, and can\'t ever remember being disappointed. Now, I am too snakebit to make a bet. In addition to handicapping the Pick 4, I have to also redo the line for all 4 races to make sure I dont get stung as per my example. That takes me double the time my usual handicapping takes me. Okay, that is all good and fine -- when I do it, I get an advantage over other people. My problem is I do not usually have double the time, so I need to cut back and just analyze and play less races. It makes playing a lot less fun.
The NYRA is allowed to make its choices, and I am allowed to make my choices. I have chosen on this Saturday to play Mountaineer (Waterford Park) rather Saratoga. I never in a million years would have believed I would ever say such a thing, but I am psyched to give it a try. Screw em. I am sick of being treated like dog doo.
MJ, This thread indicates that most \'cappers use the morning line in their analysis, or at least in their misdirected quest for perceived value.
While no issue with your assertion that the line maker should post his opinion, numerically, of how the public will ultimately assess the field, it was not the original intent of the first morning line makers.
Churn, is how tracks increase their handle and old race track owners/executives decided, correctly, that hiring someone who would \"help\" the public lose less, was good business. Consequentially the handle increases. It\'s proven an effective marketing tool over the last two hundred years or so.
For me, the morning line is a largely irrelevant data point given the ocean of material, certainly more relevant, information. bbb
All I can say to this is the Morning Line has no impact whatsoever on how I play any horizontal wager. It really doesn\'t impact a vertical wager for me either. I will note if I think a horse is taking more money than it should, but that\'s not in comparison to the ML. It\'s in comparison to what I think it should be taking in the pools. Not trying to sound arrogant, but you probably only get to that point with any reliability by betting and watching thousands and thousands and thousands of races and situations and having some familiarity with which stables bet and which ones don\'t. And even then, it\'s still someone else\'s money and I don\'t know who\'s it is, so I\'m not necessarily going to trust their judgement better than mine or let the action make me second guess myself. Could just be the a drunk in the crowd trying to impress a girl, or an owner betting, and those types of things usually doesn\'t mean much in most situations. I\'m certainly not going to bet a Ramsey horse, regardless of trainer, that is taking more money than I think it should. But I will absolutely pay attention to a Rusty Arnold horse, regardless of owner, that is taking money. Etc.
Agree again. Most races are for non winners, in fact two/three years ago, on the Delmar backstretch, of the 1200 horses over 500 had NEVER won!
California, for instance, offers, outside of staters and youngsters two maiden classes; straight and $20K. With the plethora of firsters the morning line is worthless, as a rule.
On Ken, he bets heavily. Often Maker, and others, will serve up a free squares in a sequence, clearly giving an edge in the pools; such is racing; and many perceive drugs as a problem.
As for Rusty, I kept his books for a few years and will not comment beyond he has few clients, most of his stock are future broodmares and it would be foolish to slight their chances on the basis of odds; as history has shown. bbb
I\'m with you on the time factor. I get an hour or two on a Friday night to handicap and an hour or two on a Saturday afternoon to play. I make my own lines on the races I look at, sometimes it\'s more quick approximations, but I\'ve been taking the ML as a given for years.
Capt. Moss on Saturday was a good illustration of the problem, at least as it affects me. I was looking for a single beyond Flintshire in the P6. I didn\'t think Capt. Moss would be any part of the 10-1 ML but with the ML that high and a short-priced Brownie in there I convinced myself he\'d go 4-1. Figured beating the fave with a 4-1 shot who looked really good on paper was a good way to go. Maybe I should have, but I didn\'t see him going off 2-1, and if I\'d known he would, I wouldn\'t have singled him. Wouldn\'t have mattered in the end as I never would have had Laoban, and I know this is mostly my fault, because I shouldn\'t have, but did, let that 10-1 ML affect the way I looked at the race.
Those that play contests where all plays must be submitted prior to the first race have an added burden now.......in addition to handicapping the horses, one must handicap the ML....
jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hoarse
>
> All your points aren\'t valid, when the ML sucks
>
> Who cares who drifts where off a bad ML.
>
> When a horse takes significant action from where
> any reasonably knowledgeable handicapper thinks
> they should be, it makes sense to take notice.
>
> Same race as yesterday as a case in point. While
> I correctly pointed out that Stone was clueless on
> the 12 at 12-1 ML, I thought he would be no worse
> than 3rd choice, with the 4 and 10. When he
> opened shortest pick-4, shortest pick-3 and
> shortest double, in the will pays, it represented
> significant action for a horse with a long layoff
> right after being claimed. Throw in that it is a
> sharp trainer whose horses often get smashed at
> the windows when they are \"live\" and it would have
> been foolish to ignore the action when looking at
> vertical bets. (Not saying u have to be a lemming
> and follow the action, but factor the action into
> your pre-race assessment, and if u feel it
> warrants a change in strategy, so be it)
>
> Deviation from where a horse should be always
> worth noting. But u have to know where a horse
> \"should be\" to take advantage of it. Like most
> people that have spent way too much betting and
> analyzing horses, I see maybe 1 in 10 or 1 in 15
> races where rhe betting is shocking or I was way
> off (every Kentucky derby it seems). The problem
> with Stone is this happens to him every 4th race
> at saratoga. Shameful
>
> Jim
Doesn\'t that go against the argument you guys are making? Wouldn\'t the 12 have been more hidden because of the bad morning line with all of the casual money in play at Saratoga going elsewhere? The sharpest guys missed it but all the average Joes still played the horse in the horizontals?
IK Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Those that play contests where all plays must be
> submitted prior to the first race have an added
> burden now.......in addition to handicapping the
> horses, one must handicap the ML....
Agree. The issue is just extra work that usually you don\'t have to do. Imagine for example the work you do to figure out the race shape. I used to do it without Thorograph race shapes, after getting Thorograph race shapes, I can rely on the race shapes for part (part, but not all) of the job. If all of a sudden, the Thorograph race shapes started to stink, then the work I would need to do would go up. The unreliable ML is analogous to any other bad piece of information....you need to do the extra work you relied on somebody else for before.
I understand but yet I don\'t if that makes sense.
Do you guys handicap to pick a winner or to find what his correct odds should be which is extremely subjective.
As was mentioned the Derby is a perfect example.
As a sharp investor much like a under valued stock a ML that is way of in my favor I would pound it.
I understand some of you here have probably forgotten more than I will ever know but after reading and trying to understand the points being made I think sometimes you out smart yourselves.
I have enough of an issue picking a winner.
Good luck
John
lets get Thomas hill home in the Cap baby one more timmmmmmmme. HIT ME
johnnym Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I understand but yet I don\'t if that makes sense.
> Do you guys handicap to pick a winner or to find
> what his correct odds should be which is extremely
> subjective.
> As was mentioned the Derby is a perfect example.
> As a sharp investor much like a under valued stock
> a ML that is way of in my favor I would pound it.
> I understand some of you here have probably
> forgotten more than I will ever know but after
> reading and trying to understand the points being
> made I think sometimes you out smart yourselves.
> I have enough of an issue picking a winner.
> Good luck
> John
Imagine the following --
You want to bet on a horse to win a race, but at the time of the race going off, you are going to be blocked from the internet and you are not going to be able to see the live odds. If you are going to bet the race, you need to place your bets ahead of time.
The race is a match race -- only two horses -- one with a 2/3 chance of winning and one with a 1/3 chance of winning. In such a match race, I could bet either horse to win. The thing that will make me decide which horse to bet is what is the price I am being offered. If I am getting even money on the favorite, I will bet the favorite. If the favorite is 1-10 and the longshot is 5-1, I am going to bet the longshot.
If you cannot bet the race live, you need to make your bets based on what you believe the odds will be. Usually, you trust the linemaker. If you do not trust the linemaker, you make your own assessment of what the odds will be which is extra work.
If a good linemaker has the ML on the race at both horses being 4-5, then it is a no brainer to take the favorite.
But in this case the linemaker who made both horses 4-5 suffered from temporary insanity and it turns out the line actually goes off at 1-10 and 5-1 and any normal linemaker not suffering from temporary insanity would have pegged it right.
The question is -- did I do the extra work or not. If I did the extra work, then I bet the longshot notwithstanding the 4-5 faulty ML. If I did not do the extra work, I bet the favorite because I thought the 4-5 was a good price for a horse with a 66.67% chance of winning.
Now, it doesn\'t matter who wins and who loses. I am going to be angry if I bet a 1-10 shot when I could have bet a 5-1 shot.
The actual winner is not relevant.
TY for your response..
I can\'t believe all of the consternation over the ML.
Bad MLs happen all over the country. Races everywhere, routinely, have horses drift up or down from the ML. Every day. Ever see a ML from Evangeline Downs or CharlesTown? The actual odds can be wildly different from the ML. Yes, the pools are smaller. But it happens. It happens everywhere.
Ok, so maybe the guy doing Saratoga isn\'t as accurate as other places. I get it. It still shouldn\'t warrant all of the commotion.
I agree 100% with MJellish. \"Point 2: The job of the handicapper is to try to figure out our own line of who will most likely hit the board so we can decide if it offers value enough to bet our money to hopefully cash a ticket. This is irrespective of whatever the morning line person says.\"
Its your responsibility, after handicapping the race, to figure out who offers value. You can do this by looking at the data. How many times have we seen a ROTW mention a horse with hidden form, a poor finishing position relative to the trip he got? This horse could be ML 4/1 and drift to 7/1. He could be ML 10/1 and drop to 7/2. Happens all over the country. That\'s not the fault of the ML guy. You expect the guy to have a crystal ball, and accurately predict the betting patterns of the public every stinking race? Especially with the abundance of 2YOs and FTS?
I\'ve handicapped P3/4, and have seen ML that I don\'t agree with. I construct my tickets according to how I feel the race will be bet. Enough with the complaining about it taking more time. That time is negligible. Yes, the ML should assist you. But if you see a sequence with a bad ML, then its your job to compensate for that. Some of the examples given, regarding how it affects you or hypothetical situations, are just ridiculous.
He\'s had a rough meet making the line, and it can make it challenging to construct tickets. Put your big boy pants on and work around it.
Certainly all true. Even if you think the ML is poorly done, it\'s no excuse for any failure at horseplay.
The case COULD be made that if the ML guy puts a 3-1 shot at 10-1 , then the public will think its \'smart money\' and pile in. Might hurt the price.
Can anyone give me a methodology for determining that a horse\'s chances to win a race are 8% (or any other percent)?
If you think that\'s a dumb question, please don\'t respond. Just think it. But I\'d really like to know how to go about making the actual line you speak of.
Thanks,
Mike
PS: If you want to respond but don\'t want to take up the forum\'s time with it, you can talk to me by e-mail.
P-Dub Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I can\'t believe all of the consternation over the
> ML.
>
> Bad MLs happen all over the country. Races
> everywhere, routinely, have horses drift up or
> down from the ML. Every day. Ever see a ML from
> Evangeline Downs or CharlesTown? The actual odds
> can be wildly different from the ML. Yes, the
> pools are smaller. But it happens. It happens
> everywhere.
>
> Ok, so maybe the guy doing Saratoga isn\'t as
> accurate as other places. I get it. It still
> shouldn\'t warrant all of the commotion.
>
> I agree 100% with MJellish. \"Point 2: The job of
> the handicapper is to try to figure out our own
> line of who will most likely hit the board so we
> can decide if it offers value enough to bet our
> money to hopefully cash a ticket. This is
> irrespective of whatever the morning line person
> says.\"
>
> Its your responsibility, after handicapping the
> race, to figure out who offers value. You can do
> this by looking at the data. How many times have
> we seen a ROTW mention a horse with hidden form, a
> poor finishing position relative to the trip he
> got? This horse could be ML 4/1 and drift to 7/1.
> He could be ML 10/1 and drop to 7/2. Happens all
> over the country. That\'s not the fault of the ML
> guy. You expect the guy to have a crystal ball,
> and accurately predict the betting patterns of the
> public every stinking race? Especially with the
> abundance of 2YOs and FTS?
>
> I\'ve handicapped P3/4, and have seen ML that I
> don\'t agree with. I construct my tickets
> according to how I feel the race will be bet.
> Enough with the complaining about it taking more
> time. That time is negligible. Yes, the ML should
> assist you. But if you see a sequence with a bad
> ML, then its your job to compensate for that. Some
> of the examples given, regarding how it affects
> you or hypothetical situations, are just
> ridiculous.
>
> He\'s had a rough meet making the line, and it can
> make it challenging to construct tickets. Put your
> big boy pants on and work around it.
You are such a talented handicapper that you don\'t need extra time to figure out if the ML is right or wrong. That is good for you. Some of us are not as smart as you and it takes us extra time to do that. It must not come as a surprise to you that there are handicappers less talented than you.
The ML is by definition an estimate or a projection. It will always never be right. The issue for those of us not as talented as you whether the misses are often and huge or are misses within a zone of reasonableness.
Unfortunately, telling its customers to put on their big boy pants and take it in the rear is SOP at the NYRA.
msola1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Can anyone give me a methodology for determining
> that a horse\'s chances to win a race are 8% (or
> any other percent)?
>
> If you think that\'s a dumb question, please don\'t
> respond. Just think it. But I\'d really like to
> know how to go about making the actual line you
> speak of.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
> PS: If you want to respond but don\'t want to take
> up the forum\'s time with it, you can talk to me by
> e-mail.
Here is an example -- if you have a 12 horse race, and you cannot separate them. You think every horse has an equal chance with all the other horses. Then each horse has an 8.33% chance to win. That is just an example.
Usually, when i handicap, i try to rank the horses first or put them in tiers. Then I work from there. it is not a science and your numbers are never perfect...you are just trying to get approximations.
Does that help?
Boscar Obarra Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Certainly all true. Even if you think the ML is
> poorly done, it\'s no excuse for any failure at
> horseplay.
>
> The case COULD be made that if the ML guy puts a
> 3-1 shot at 10-1 , then the public will think its
> \'smart money\' and pile in. Might hurt the price.
I am not making it an excuse. I am accusing it of requiring me to do extra work that I don\'t normally have to do.
msola1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Can anyone give me a methodology for determining
> that a horse\'s chances to win a race are 8% (or
> any other percent)?
>
> If you think that\'s a dumb question, please don\'t
> respond. Just think it. But I\'d really like to
> know how to go about making the actual line you
> speak of.
msola1 - if you\'ve never made your own line before, suggest checking out Barry Meadows\' Money Secrets at the Racetrack (pp.20-28).
There\'s also a Morning Line Tool that used to be on Del Mar\'s website but that you can now find at the link below that\'s useful if you\'re not comfortable with spreadsheets.
Ultimately, you of course have to come up with your own probability line (fair odds), whether you do it subjectively yourself (which is what most players do) or write some kind of factor-based algorithm (computer guys).
Morning Line Tool (http://www.horseracinggold.com/MorningLineTool.htm)
Rocky R.
P-Dub,
Whether it should or shouldn\'t affect a handicapper and whether a bad morning line can be exploited easily or not at all, it really doesn\'t matter.
How about like in almost all other occupations and industries, the person being paid to perform the job be close to competent.
Travis Stone isn\'t. He is showing it EVERY DAY.
For me, I am tired of second class treatment in many aspects of the game by the powers to be, to the players (aka the customers)
Stone has to go. Send him to a minor league circuit for training.
The best meet in our country doesn\'t deserve to have a hack doing the morning line, learning on the job.
Jim
SoCalMan2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> P-Dub Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I can\'t believe all of the consternation over
> the
> > ML.
> >
> > Bad MLs happen all over the country. Races
> > everywhere, routinely, have horses drift up or
> > down from the ML. Every day. Ever see a ML
> from
> > Evangeline Downs or CharlesTown? The actual
> odds
> > can be wildly different from the ML. Yes, the
> > pools are smaller. But it happens. It happens
> > everywhere.
> >
> > Ok, so maybe the guy doing Saratoga isn\'t as
> > accurate as other places. I get it. It still
> > shouldn\'t warrant all of the commotion.
> >
> > I agree 100% with MJellish. \"Point 2: The job
> of
> > the handicapper is to try to figure out our own
> > line of who will most likely hit the board so
> we
> > can decide if it offers value enough to bet our
> > money to hopefully cash a ticket. This is
> > irrespective of whatever the morning line
> person
> > says.\"
> >
> > Its your responsibility, after handicapping the
> > race, to figure out who offers value. You can
> do
> > this by looking at the data. How many times
> have
> > we seen a ROTW mention a horse with hidden form,
> a
> > poor finishing position relative to the trip he
> > got? This horse could be ML 4/1 and drift to
> 7/1.
> > He could be ML 10/1 and drop to 7/2. Happens
> all
> > over the country. That\'s not the fault of the
> ML
> > guy. You expect the guy to have a crystal ball,
> > and accurately predict the betting patterns of
> the
> > public every stinking race? Especially with the
> > abundance of 2YOs and FTS?
> >
> > I\'ve handicapped P3/4, and have seen ML that I
> > don\'t agree with. I construct my tickets
> > according to how I feel the race will be bet.
> > Enough with the complaining about it taking
> more
> > time. That time is negligible. Yes, the ML
> should
> > assist you. But if you see a sequence with a
> bad
> > ML, then its your job to compensate for that.
> Some
> > of the examples given, regarding how it affects
> > you or hypothetical situations, are just
> > ridiculous.
> >
> > He\'s had a rough meet making the line, and it
> can
> > make it challenging to construct tickets. Put
> your
> > big boy pants on and work around it.
>
> You are such a talented handicapper that you don\'t
> need extra time to figure out if the ML is right
> or wrong. That is good for you. Some of us are not
> as smart as you and it takes us extra time to do
> that. It must not come as a surprise to you that
> there are handicappers less talented than you.
>
> The ML is by definition an estimate or a
> projection. It will always never be right. The
> issue for those of us not as talented as you
> whether the misses are often and huge or are
> misses within a zone of reasonableness.
>
> Unfortunately, telling its customers to put on
> their big boy pants and take it in the rear is SOP
> at the NYRA.
Little touchy there?
It has nothing to do with me being \"better\" or \"smarter\". And yes, your sarcasm was very clear.
It has to do with me dealing with it. I don\'t waste my energy writing 50 paragraphs on a forum, and complain over and over and over about the same thing.
Again. Try to comprehend this. It happens EVERY FREAKING DAY at EVERY FREAKING TRACK. You think this is just a Saratoga issue? Horses drift up or down from their ML all the time.
Perhaps you are right about me being smarter and a better handicapper. I can figure out which horses should get action, and which ones should be longer. You desperately need help in that department. Its a piss poor excuse, blaming the ML for you having difficulties making wagers.
jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> P-Dub,
>
> Whether it should or shouldn\'t affect a
> handicapper and whether a bad morning line can be
> exploited easily or not at all, it really doesn\'t
> matter.
>
> How about like in almost all other occupations and
> industries, the person being paid to perform the
> job be close to competent.
>
> Travis Stone isn\'t. He is showing it EVERY DAY.
>
> For me, I am tired of second class treatment in
> many aspects of the game by the powers to be, to
> the players (aka the customers)
>
> Stone has to go. Send him to a minor league
> circuit for training.
>
> The best meet in our country doesn\'t deserve to
> have a hack doing the morning line, learning on
> the job.
>
> Jim
Fine Jimbo. I don\'t disagree with that at all. His performance, racing not giving its customers what they deserve, all of that. You are spot on.
Its the incessant whining and crying by people like So Cal. Wah Wah sniffle sniffle. I have to spend a bit more time handicapping a race.
So tell me So Cal, where is all of this sniveling when this happens at other tracks? Because it does, more often than you want to admit.
Its a pathetic excuse to blame the ML for all of this. As I have said already, this happens at EVERY FREAKING TRACK. EVERY DAY.
You shouldn\'t even need a ML to figure out what horses are probably going to get action. Not every horse, but enough to get a feel for the race.
Curious how do you handle a maiden race with all first time starters?
Which is common at the track in question.
P-Dub Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jimbo66 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > P-Dub,
> >
> > Whether it should or shouldn\'t affect a
> > handicapper and whether a bad morning line can
> be
> > exploited easily or not at all, it really
> doesn\'t
> > matter.
> >
> > How about like in almost all other occupations
> and
> > industries, the person being paid to perform
> the
> > job be close to competent.
> >
> > Travis Stone isn\'t. He is showing it EVERY
> DAY.
> >
> > For me, I am tired of second class treatment in
> > many aspects of the game by the powers to be,
> to
> > the players (aka the customers)
> >
> > Stone has to go. Send him to a minor league
> > circuit for training.
> >
> > The best meet in our country doesn\'t deserve to
> > have a hack doing the morning line, learning on
> > the job.
> >
> > Jim
>
> Fine Jimbo. I don\'t disagree with that at all.
> His performance, racing not giving its customers
> what they deserve, all of that. You are spot on.
>
> Its the incessant whining and crying by people
> like So Cal. Wah Wah sniffle sniffle. I have to
> spend a bit more time handicapping a race.
>
> So tell me So Cal, where is all of this sniveling
> when this happens at other tracks? Because it
> does, more often than you want to admit.
>
> Its a pathetic excuse to blame the ML for all of
> this. As I have said already, this happens at
> EVERY FREAKING TRACK. EVERY DAY.
>
> You shouldn\'t even need a ML to figure out what
> horses are probably going to get action. Not every
> horse, but enough to get a feel for the race.
I only play NYRA and SoCal. I believe you it happens at other tracks. What do you want me to do about that? I just believe that the product at the top of the market should reflect it is at the top of the market. They do not have to do that if they do not want to. It is a matter of customer service. I think they should be providing normal courtesies that facilitate betting. They do not. Fair enough. You can think I am a pathetic cry baby if you like, but if you want to chase all the pathetic crybabies out of your game, your game will decline.
In almost any other industry in the world, if a customer complains, the motto is the customer is always right. In horseracing, the customer who complains is a pussy crybaby and should buck up or leave. The just doesnt seem like a good approach to keep something going.
johnnym Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Curious how do you handle a maiden race with all
> first time starters?
> Which is common at the track in question.
If this question is directed to me, I skip those races unless I am betting live in which case I handicap them with all the live information. My expectation for a line on a 2yo race is that the line is just not going to be helpful but that is normal.
If a two year old race is in a later leg of a horizontal, I don\'t play the horizontal.
I appreciate the reply, but it doesn\'t bring me much closer.
Of course I know that a starting point might be to divide the percentages equally. Obviously no-one believes they all have an equal chance. How about a next step?
How do you define your particular tiers? And where do you go from there?
I suppose in some bottom tier you might think none had a better than 5% chance. But taken with the rest of the percentages, everything must add up to 100. It\'s all the rest that present me with the conundrum.
P-Dub Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SoCalMan2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > P-Dub Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > I can\'t believe all of the consternation over
> > the
> > > ML.
> > >
> > > Bad MLs happen all over the country. Races
> > > everywhere, routinely, have horses drift up
> or
> > > down from the ML. Every day. Ever see a ML
> > from
> > > Evangeline Downs or CharlesTown? The actual
> > odds
> > > can be wildly different from the ML. Yes, the
> > > pools are smaller. But it happens. It happens
> > > everywhere.
> > >
> > > Ok, so maybe the guy doing Saratoga isn\'t as
> > > accurate as other places. I get it. It still
> > > shouldn\'t warrant all of the commotion.
> > >
> > > I agree 100% with MJellish. \"Point 2: The job
> > of
> > > the handicapper is to try to figure out our
> own
> > > line of who will most likely hit the board so
> > we
> > > can decide if it offers value enough to bet
> our
> > > money to hopefully cash a ticket. This is
> > > irrespective of whatever the morning line
> > person
> > > says.\"
> > >
> > > Its your responsibility, after handicapping
> the
> > > race, to figure out who offers value. You
> can
> > do
> > > this by looking at the data. How many times
> > have
> > > we seen a ROTW mention a horse with hidden
> form,
> > a
> > > poor finishing position relative to the trip
> he
> > > got? This horse could be ML 4/1 and drift to
> > 7/1.
> > > He could be ML 10/1 and drop to 7/2. Happens
> > all
> > > over the country. That\'s not the fault of the
> > ML
> > > guy. You expect the guy to have a crystal
> ball,
> > > and accurately predict the betting patterns
> of
> > the
> > > public every stinking race? Especially with
> the
> > > abundance of 2YOs and FTS?
> > >
> > > I\'ve handicapped P3/4, and have seen ML that
> I
> > > don\'t agree with. I construct my tickets
> > > according to how I feel the race will be bet.
> > > Enough with the complaining about it taking
> > more
> > > time. That time is negligible. Yes, the ML
> > should
> > > assist you. But if you see a sequence with a
> > bad
> > > ML, then its your job to compensate for that.
> > Some
> > > of the examples given, regarding how it
> affects
> > > you or hypothetical situations, are just
> > > ridiculous.
> > >
> > > He\'s had a rough meet making the line, and it
> > can
> > > make it challenging to construct tickets. Put
> > your
> > > big boy pants on and work around it.
> >
> > You are such a talented handicapper that you
> don\'t
> > need extra time to figure out if the ML is
> right
> > or wrong. That is good for you. Some of us are
> not
> > as smart as you and it takes us extra time to
> do
> > that. It must not come as a surprise to you
> that
> > there are handicappers less talented than you.
> >
> > The ML is by definition an estimate or a
> > projection. It will always never be right. The
> > issue for those of us not as talented as you
> > whether the misses are often and huge or are
> > misses within a zone of reasonableness.
> >
> > Unfortunately, telling its customers to put on
> > their big boy pants and take it in the rear is
> SOP
> > at the NYRA.
>
> Little touchy there?
>
> It has nothing to do with me being \"better\" or
> \"smarter\". And yes, your sarcasm was very clear.
>
> It has to do with me dealing with it. I don\'t
> waste my energy writing 50 paragraphs on a forum,
> and complain over and over and over about the same
> thing.
>
> Again. Try to comprehend this. It happens EVERY
> FREAKING DAY at EVERY FREAKING TRACK. You think
> this is just a Saratoga issue? Horses drift up or
> down from their ML all the time.
>
> Perhaps you are right about me being smarter and a
> better handicapper. I can figure out which horses
> should get action, and which ones should be
> longer. You desperately need help in that
> department. Its a piss poor excuse, blaming the ML
> for you having difficulties making wagers.
If you think the ML is so irrelevant, then racetracks across America can save money by firing all their linemakers. Nothing requires the Track to have a linemaker. They do it because it is perceived as being a courtesy to customers and to facilitate betting. If it is truly as irrelevant as you believe it is, the industry is making a big mistake on spending money on something that nobody cares about when that money could be better spent on something else for the customers.
johnnym Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Curious how do you handle a maiden race with all
> first time starters?
> Which is common at the track in question.
Usually I pass them. If its in a P3/4 sequence, I\'ll look at the connections/workouts/stats.
SoCalMan2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> P-Dub Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > SoCalMan2 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > P-Dub Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > I can\'t believe all of the consternation
> over
> > > the
> > > > ML.
> > > >
> > > > Bad MLs happen all over the country. Races
> > > > everywhere, routinely, have horses drift up
> > or
> > > > down from the ML. Every day. Ever see a ML
> > > from
> > > > Evangeline Downs or CharlesTown? The actual
> > > odds
> > > > can be wildly different from the ML. Yes,
> the
> > > > pools are smaller. But it happens. It
> happens
> > > > everywhere.
> > > >
> > > > Ok, so maybe the guy doing Saratoga isn\'t
> as
> > > > accurate as other places. I get it. It
> still
> > > > shouldn\'t warrant all of the commotion.
> > > >
> > > > I agree 100% with MJellish. \"Point 2: The
> job
> > > of
> > > > the handicapper is to try to figure out our
> > own
> > > > line of who will most likely hit the board
> so
> > > we
> > > > can decide if it offers value enough to bet
> > our
> > > > money to hopefully cash a ticket. This is
> > > > irrespective of whatever the morning line
> > > person
> > > > says.\"
> > > >
> > > > Its your responsibility, after handicapping
> > the
> > > > race, to figure out who offers value. You
> > can
> > > do
> > > > this by looking at the data. How many times
> > > have
> > > > we seen a ROTW mention a horse with hidden
> > form,
> > > a
> > > > poor finishing position relative to the
> trip
> > he
> > > > got? This horse could be ML 4/1 and drift
> to
> > > 7/1.
> > > > He could be ML 10/1 and drop to 7/2.
> Happens
> > > all
> > > > over the country. That\'s not the fault of
> the
> > > ML
> > > > guy. You expect the guy to have a crystal
> > ball,
> > > > and accurately predict the betting patterns
> > of
> > > the
> > > > public every stinking race? Especially with
> > the
> > > > abundance of 2YOs and FTS?
> > > >
> > > > I\'ve handicapped P3/4, and have seen ML
> that
> > I
> > > > don\'t agree with. I construct my tickets
> > > > according to how I feel the race will be
> bet.
> > > > Enough with the complaining about it taking
> > > more
> > > > time. That time is negligible. Yes, the ML
> > > should
> > > > assist you. But if you see a sequence with
> a
> > > bad
> > > > ML, then its your job to compensate for
> that.
> > > Some
> > > > of the examples given, regarding how it
> > affects
> > > > you or hypothetical situations, are just
> > > > ridiculous.
> > > >
> > > > He\'s had a rough meet making the line, and
> it
> > > can
> > > > make it challenging to construct tickets.
> Put
> > > your
> > > > big boy pants on and work around it.
> > >
> > > You are such a talented handicapper that you
> > don\'t
> > > need extra time to figure out if the ML is
> > right
> > > or wrong. That is good for you. Some of us
> are
> > not
> > > as smart as you and it takes us extra time to
> > do
> > > that. It must not come as a surprise to you
> > that
> > > there are handicappers less talented than
> you.
> > >
> > > The ML is by definition an estimate or a
> > > projection. It will always never be right.
> The
> > > issue for those of us not as talented as you
> > > whether the misses are often and huge or are
> > > misses within a zone of reasonableness.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, telling its customers to put
> on
> > > their big boy pants and take it in the rear
> is
> > SOP
> > > at the NYRA.
> >
> > Little touchy there?
> >
> > It has nothing to do with me being \"better\" or
> > \"smarter\". And yes, your sarcasm was very
> clear.
> >
> > It has to do with me dealing with it. I don\'t
> > waste my energy writing 50 paragraphs on a
> forum,
> > and complain over and over and over about the
> same
> > thing.
> >
> > Again. Try to comprehend this. It happens
> EVERY
> > FREAKING DAY at EVERY FREAKING TRACK. You
> think
> > this is just a Saratoga issue? Horses drift up
> or
> > down from their ML all the time.
> >
> > Perhaps you are right about me being smarter and
> a
> > better handicapper. I can figure out which
> horses
> > should get action, and which ones should be
> > longer. You desperately need help in that
> > department. Its a piss poor excuse, blaming the
> ML
> > for you having difficulties making wagers.
>
> If you think the ML is so irrelevant, then
> racetracks across America can save money by firing
> all their linemakers. Nothing requires the Track
> to have a linemaker. They do it because it is
> perceived as being a courtesy to customers and to
> facilitate betting. If it is truly as irrelevant
> as you believe it is, the industry is making a big
> mistake on spending money on something that nobody
> cares about when that money could be better spent
> on something else for the customers.
So Cal,
They do the best they can. Its not an easy job, trying to predict what the public will do.
I didn\'t say its irrelevant. I said I deal with it.
Look, having an accurate ML helps. I get it. I\'m just saying, it isn\'t a reason for this much grief.
I understand your frustrations, I\'m just surprised it has caused this much grief. All insults aside, I know you\'re a good player and just believe you can handle it. That\'s all.
P-Dub Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SoCalMan2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > P-Dub Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > SoCalMan2 Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > P-Dub Wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > >
> > > > -----
> > > > > I can\'t believe all of the consternation
> > over
> > > > the
> > > > > ML.
> > > > >
> > > > > Bad MLs happen all over the country.
> Races
> > > > > everywhere, routinely, have horses drift
> up
> > > or
> > > > > down from the ML. Every day. Ever see a
> ML
> > > > from
> > > > > Evangeline Downs or CharlesTown? The
> actual
> > > > odds
> > > > > can be wildly different from the ML. Yes,
> > the
> > > > > pools are smaller. But it happens. It
> > happens
> > > > > everywhere.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ok, so maybe the guy doing Saratoga isn\'t
> > as
> > > > > accurate as other places. I get it. It
> > still
> > > > > shouldn\'t warrant all of the commotion.
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree 100% with MJellish. \"Point 2: The
> > job
> > > > of
> > > > > the handicapper is to try to figure out
> our
> > > own
> > > > > line of who will most likely hit the
> board
> > so
> > > > we
> > > > > can decide if it offers value enough to
> bet
> > > our
> > > > > money to hopefully cash a ticket. This is
> > > > > irrespective of whatever the morning line
> > > > person
> > > > > says.\"
> > > > >
> > > > > Its your responsibility, after
> handicapping
> > > the
> > > > > race, to figure out who offers value.
> You
> > > can
> > > > do
> > > > > this by looking at the data. How many
> times
> > > > have
> > > > > we seen a ROTW mention a horse with
> hidden
> > > form,
> > > > a
> > > > > poor finishing position relative to the
> > trip
> > > he
> > > > > got? This horse could be ML 4/1 and drift
> > to
> > > > 7/1.
> > > > > He could be ML 10/1 and drop to 7/2.
> > Happens
> > > > all
> > > > > over the country. That\'s not the fault of
> > the
> > > > ML
> > > > > guy. You expect the guy to have a crystal
> > > ball,
> > > > > and accurately predict the betting
> patterns
> > > of
> > > > the
> > > > > public every stinking race? Especially
> with
> > > the
> > > > > abundance of 2YOs and FTS?
> > > > >
> > > > > I\'ve handicapped P3/4, and have seen ML
> > that
> > > I
> > > > > don\'t agree with. I construct my tickets
> > > > > according to how I feel the race will be
> > bet.
> > > > > Enough with the complaining about it
> taking
> > > > more
> > > > > time. That time is negligible. Yes, the
> ML
> > > > should
> > > > > assist you. But if you see a sequence
> with
> > a
> > > > bad
> > > > > ML, then its your job to compensate for
> > that.
> > > > Some
> > > > > of the examples given, regarding how it
> > > affects
> > > > > you or hypothetical situations, are just
> > > > > ridiculous.
> > > > >
> > > > > He\'s had a rough meet making the line,
> and
> > it
> > > > can
> > > > > make it challenging to construct tickets.
> > Put
> > > > your
> > > > > big boy pants on and work around it.
> > > >
> > > > You are such a talented handicapper that
> you
> > > don\'t
> > > > need extra time to figure out if the ML is
> > > right
> > > > or wrong. That is good for you. Some of us
> > are
> > > not
> > > > as smart as you and it takes us extra time
> to
> > > do
> > > > that. It must not come as a surprise to you
> > > that
> > > > there are handicappers less talented than
> > you.
> > > >
> > > > The ML is by definition an estimate or a
> > > > projection. It will always never be right.
> > The
> > > > issue for those of us not as talented as
> you
> > > > whether the misses are often and huge or
> are
> > > > misses within a zone of reasonableness.
> > > >
> > > > Unfortunately, telling its customers to put
> > on
> > > > their big boy pants and take it in the rear
> > is
> > > SOP
> > > > at the NYRA.
> > >
> > > Little touchy there?
> > >
> > > It has nothing to do with me being \"better\"
> or
> > > \"smarter\". And yes, your sarcasm was very
> > clear.
> > >
> > > It has to do with me dealing with it. I
> don\'t
> > > waste my energy writing 50 paragraphs on a
> > forum,
> > > and complain over and over and over about the
> > same
> > > thing.
> > >
> > > Again. Try to comprehend this. It happens
> > EVERY
> > > FREAKING DAY at EVERY FREAKING TRACK. You
> > think
> > > this is just a Saratoga issue? Horses drift
> up
> > or
> > > down from their ML all the time.
> > >
> > > Perhaps you are right about me being smarter
> and
> > a
> > > better handicapper. I can figure out which
> > horses
> > > should get action, and which ones should be
> > > longer. You desperately need help in that
> > > department. Its a piss poor excuse, blaming
> the
> > ML
> > > for you having difficulties making wagers.
> >
> > If you think the ML is so irrelevant, then
> > racetracks across America can save money by
> firing
> > all their linemakers. Nothing requires the
> Track
> > to have a linemaker. They do it because it is
> > perceived as being a courtesy to customers and
> to
> > facilitate betting. If it is truly as
> irrelevant
> > as you believe it is, the industry is making a
> big
> > mistake on spending money on something that
> nobody
> > cares about when that money could be better
> spent
> > on something else for the customers.
>
> So Cal,
>
> They do the best they can. Its not an easy job,
> trying to predict what the public will do.
>
> I didn\'t say its irrelevant. I said I deal with
> it.
>
> Look, having an accurate ML helps. I get it. I\'m
> just saying, it isn\'t a reason for this much
> grief.
>
> I understand your frustrations, I\'m just surprised
> it has caused this much grief. All insults aside,
> I know you\'re a good player and just believe you
> can handle it. That\'s all.
No offense is taken here. Because I do not have much time these days, I handle it the best way -- I just play less races. It is fine. I just hate to see the game I love giving itself another unnecessary self-inflicted wound that contributes to all the other stuff dragging down the game.
SoCalMan2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> P-Dub Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > jimbo66 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > P-Dub,
> > >
> > > Whether it should or shouldn\'t affect a
> > > handicapper and whether a bad morning line
> can
> > be
> > > exploited easily or not at all, it really
> > doesn\'t
> > > matter.
> > >
> > > How about like in almost all other
> occupations
> > and
> > > industries, the person being paid to perform
> > the
> > > job be close to competent.
> > >
> > > Travis Stone isn\'t. He is showing it EVERY
> > DAY.
> > >
> > > For me, I am tired of second class treatment
> in
> > > many aspects of the game by the powers to be,
> > to
> > > the players (aka the customers)
> > >
> > > Stone has to go. Send him to a minor league
> > > circuit for training.
> > >
> > > The best meet in our country doesn\'t deserve
> to
> > > have a hack doing the morning line, learning
> on
> > > the job.
> > >
> > > Jim
> >
> > Fine Jimbo. I don\'t disagree with that at all.
>
> > His performance, racing not giving its
> customers
> > what they deserve, all of that. You are spot
> on.
> >
> > Its the incessant whining and crying by people
> > like So Cal. Wah Wah sniffle sniffle. I have
> to
> > spend a bit more time handicapping a race.
> >
> > So tell me So Cal, where is all of this
> sniveling
> > when this happens at other tracks? Because it
> > does, more often than you want to admit.
> >
> > Its a pathetic excuse to blame the ML for all
> of
> > this. As I have said already, this happens at
> > EVERY FREAKING TRACK. EVERY DAY.
> >
> > You shouldn\'t even need a ML to figure out what
> > horses are probably going to get action. Not
> every
> > horse, but enough to get a feel for the race.
>
> I only play NYRA and SoCal. I believe you it
> happens at other tracks. What do you want me to do
> about that? I just believe that the product at
> the top of the market should reflect it is at the
> top of the market. They do not have to do that if
> they do not want to. It is a matter of customer
> service. I think they should be providing normal
> courtesies that facilitate betting. They do not.
> Fair enough. You can think I am a pathetic cry
> baby if you like, but if you want to chase all the
> pathetic crybabies out of your game, your game
> will decline.
>
> In almost any other industry in the world, if a
> customer complains, the motto is the customer is
> always right. In horseracing, the customer who
> complains is a pussy crybaby and should buck up or
> leave. The just doesnt seem like a good approach
> to keep something going.
My last comments.
- You\'re not a pussy. I didn\'t say that.
- I do believe you\'re going a little overboard on your consternation.
- I 100% agree with what you are saying about the ML at Saratoga, and its effects on how you play
- Since it doesn\'t appear to be getting any better, I just deal with it.
- I\'ll stop with the personal comments about being whiny, etc.. My apologies. It doesn\'t help the discussion. You have every right to voice your displeasure. I just think the point has been made, and we need to move on.
I\'m going to the A\'s game, Arrieta Vs Gray. Great seats. I hope to see a competitive ballgame. At least I was given the tickets and the seats are great.
Everyone have a great Whitney Day and hope you all cash some tickets. Sounds like we as a group are overdue for a good day.
msola1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I appreciate the reply, but it doesn\'t bring me
> much closer.
>
> Of course I know that a starting point might be to
> divide the percentages equally. Obviously no-one
> believes they all have an equal chance. How about
> a next step?
>
> How do you define your particular tiers? And where
> do you go from there?
>
> I suppose in some bottom tier you might think none
> had a better than 5% chance. But taken with the
> rest of the percentages, everything must add up to
> 100. It\'s all the rest that present me with the
> conundrum.
You might find it hard to believe, but there are plenty of times where I find lots of the horses having equal chances. Remember, the races, by condition book, are designed to bring together as evenly matched horses as possible.....so there should be a cluster of horses around par in any given race. That should be the norm, but there should still usually be a set of outliers in either direction too.
Let\'s take my example a little further and exaggerate for illustration. Imagine a 12 horse race, but there are three rank outsiders with very little chance and three horses who stand above the field with the last six clustered around par. I assume the person has enough handicapping judgment to be able to suss this out.
In this example, I would first give every horse 1% chance because anything can happen. The three outsiders will be left stuck at 1% (note, these are horses whose projected figures are so far off par that race dynamics or a collapse of the race are not enough to help them. Also, they don\'t even have any back figure to run back to or a reason to think they will do something new (barn change, equipment change, surface, config, distance change)).
Okay, so now you have assigned 12% of the 100% you need to assign. You have 88% left to assign to the three good horses and the 6 par horses. The winner is fairly likely to come from the top three, but if all three are trip compromised, or dont fire, or one of the par horses jumps up big, then a par horse will get it. Let\'s say it is a 15% chance that a par horse will get it. That means you assign the top three an extra 24% chance to win, so the top three horses are at 25% each. You then split the 15% 6 ways for the par horses. So, in the end, you have three horses at 25% each chance of winning, 6 horses with 3.5% chance of winning, and then three horses with 1.0% chance of winning.
So that would be a first cut. Then I look again at my handicapping and I decide if i have over or under valued something. If I do find I have, then I adjust by moving some percentage from one horse to another until I get a solution I am happy with compared to my racing judgement. I do not sweat small differences, just looking to get order of magnitude and right relations....nothing is hard and fast or black and white....you just want to get some quantification that can match up with your judgments. In this example, maybe I decide I am undervaluing the chance that one of the par horses jumps up. So, I take some off of the top horses and redistribute to the par horses....Lets say I make the top three at 20% each and the par horses at 6% each with the rank outsiders at 1% each.
One way to do it is to write out the horses in the order you think there chances are with the percentages you assign...see how close or far away each horse is from another and see if you think that is right or wrong. A lot of this requires making a diagram and comparing the diagram to your racing judgment. Also, I like to group horses because in reality a lot of horses are pretty close (as i said, the races are designed to draw horses of comparable ability -- that is what makes them attractive for betting purposes).
There is obviously a lot more complexity to the game than this, but this is the basic architecture of how I like to go about it. Nobody has to do it this way. I do it, but there is no right or wrong way to go about doing this -- to each his or her own.
Apologies if I have misunderstood your question.
SoCalMan2,
You understood my question perfectly, and your response is really helpful. It gives me a very good procedure for developing my own odds line.
I appreciate the time you took to do this. From the days when you were in Moscow (right?) I remember you as someone who was thoughtful and responsive (and pretty smart too).
Best to you,
Mike
msola1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SoCalMan2,
>
> You understood my question perfectly, and your
> response is really helpful. It gives me a very
> good procedure for developing my own odds line.
>
> I appreciate the time you took to do this. From
> the days when you were in Moscow (right?) I
> remember you as someone who was thoughtful and
> responsive (and pretty smart too).
>
> Best to you,
>
> Mike
Thank you for the compliment -- and you do remember correctly -- I lived in Moscow from 1998 to 2010. Please note that my procedure is not for making an odds line. I think Mathcapper/Rocky gave you a link for that -- my procedure just gives you a method for changing your handicapping opinions into probabilities. An odds line will add up differently because of the takeout -- it will not add up to 100%.
Best to you....good luck!!
Hope it is permissible to retract my previous post believing that Travis Stone would improve his m/l skills. I even exchanged messages with him about his m/l making and he explained how solid he was doing with the job. Let me quote actually so as not to mis-state his high opinion: Honestly, I\'ve been more than pleased with my lines so far.
Well Mr. Stone, I\'m predicting you get an \"F\" in Race 7 tomorrow at the Spa. As readers here probably know, I follow Ingrid Mason horses very closely. She has a firster in with works of: 1:12 3/5, 59 3/5, 33 flat, 33 4/5, and 23 showing on the page. Sire is Tiz Wonderful who is 20% with firsters. Regardless of whether you believe the horse wins or not, I\'ll hereby declare it as we do at Fairmount Park---If this horse is 20-1 or higher, I\'ll walk home the 20 plus miles from Fairmount tomorrow after racing. This is an obvious miss. Further, if the 2 goes off half the price of 747 as Stone predicts, I\'ll buy richiebee\'s airfare, hotel, and and tickets to Del Mar for next year\'s Pacific Classic that pits Exaggerator against Nyquist and Songbird.
Mike Beer picks 747 on top, Kenny Peck picks him 3rd, and Chuck Kuehhas has him also on top. And I\'ve received 3 texts from friends that they are playing this one. I predict he opens as 2nd choice and drifts as high as 7-1 at most but I\'m calling 5-1 at the bell. Best of luck. For the record, I will not be playing this horse to win and not in horizontals.
Fairmount1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hope it is permissible to retract my previous post
> believing that Travis Stone would improve his m/l
> skills. I even exchanged messages with him about
> his m/l making and he explained how solid he was
> doing with the job. Let me quote actually so as
> not to mis-state his high opinion: Honestly, I\'ve
> been more than pleased with my lines so far.
>
First, why would this guy have any credibility? His lines speak volumes already. We know enough already to know that anything he says on the topic cannot be trusted. The big problem is that his employer is an even bigger idiot than he is and doesn\'t understand this.
However, I would not focus on races filled with first time starters. Those races should be hard for any linemaker and you would expect a field of first time starters to vary quite a bit from the line. You may well be right that he botched the line in the race you are talking about, but that race should be more difficult than a simple race with obvious horses with well established form.
The real problem is that he is missing the chip shots and he is not just missing them, he is not even remotely in the ballpark.....he is not even in the furthest auxiliary parking lot from the ballpark.
The only good news is that he revealed how bad he was very fast, so that astute players rapidly understood not to trust him and to adjust. Unfortunately, to get newcomers and novices into our sport, we are supposed to make it less bewildering not more bewildering. This is a problem for people who want this support to be sustainable -- it does not appear that the NYRA even considers that question.
Not that I\'m talking anyone off 20-1s but morning Line aside, I\'m curious why people would be so eager to bet this one, especially at less than 20-1.
Per the workouts, this guy looks like a big, lanky, goofy tween who wants more than 6F, especially first time out.
There is a much better option at 20-1 earlier in the card for those who did their homework and the price should hold as well.
Compare and watch the works of 747 (http://www.obssales.com/juncatalog/2016/747.mp4), Favorable Outcome (http://www.obssales.com/marcatalog/2016/246.mp4 super nice, fluid lead change), and even the Properity Mo (http://www.obssales.com/juncatalog/2016/447.mp4) out of that same OBS June (the outlet mall of 2yos sales, no disrespect) and tell me why you feel most confident betting the 9 in R7 because I\'m really curious to know if there is something I\'m not seeing. Chad\'s looks and reads as if it\'s the most likely winner here, and he even outworked that Mirai recently.
I likewise see that Ingrid\'s worked with a FTS winner (but DQed) at Arlington but that\'s a long way from SAR imho. Furthermore, even if this 9 did look like it had some precocity about it, the pedigree is sporadic and relatively unproductive, especially for 2yos on dirt. I can read a sire list like anyone else and while Tiz Wonderful is fine with FTS, they typically aren\'t as gawky as this one and he\'s not exactly tearing things up recently, hence why he was exported last Spring.
Godspeed if you decide to go all-in on Ingrid\'s (PS she hasn\'t won with a FTS on dirt in 2yrs) but I think if Chad doesn\'t win then Rudy, Ron or Steve (the 3/4 to Pyro & Longview Dr., and full to early SW War Echo) are on deck, then followed by Ingrid, DWL, and Ward.
if I\'ve totally misread this race, please school me because I was planning on singling Favorable Outcome. All of these reasons likewise make me think the 20-1 ML is legitimate. Anything less than maybe 12-1 feels like a dangerous underlay.
I think Seven Forty seven will open up the favorite & anyone betting him will be lucky to get 5/2. The owner has been touting this horse to the world. I have a friend whose cousin was at Arlington last Saturday & sat near the owner, who told him about Seven Forty Seven. I got the e-mail about Seven Forty Seven from my friend last Sunday, well before entries to this race were drawn. If the owner is a big bettor, this horse is going off the favorite.
I believe that Teletap will win this race & go on to graded stakes. The only thing that gives me pause to emptying my wallet and going all in on Teletap is the sobering thought that even greats like Secretariat and American Pharoah lost their 1st race & if Seven Forty Seven gets the jump on him, he could be get too far in front of Teletap for Teletap to catch him. No matter what happens in this race, Teletap is the best long range horse in here-he may be the best bred 2YO at Saratoga this year.
What makes this interesting is I really like the #5 Rule Yourself in the 6th race. So, I can throw DDs & Picks in using both 7 & 9 in the 7th with him.
Fairmount,
You were spot on.
Too bad the embarrassment that is Travis Stone, can\'t occasionally be \"spot on\".
Sort of felt bad for him earlier in the meet, but his comments to you that he thinks he is doing well removes all sympathy. It is one thing to be ill prepared to perform a job, do it poorly and be humble about it. It is another to be brazen about it. Shows you that he knows there is no accountability at NYRA.
Good call Minolan.
Fairmount was right about how the race was bet, but you nailed the right horse.
Now that the \'fastest horse in the world\' firster has gone down to defeat at 3/2 off a 20-1 ML, maybe he should claim there is great wisdom embedded in his numbers.
Sadly , those have been quite rare vs the too high M-L winners.
What scares me BO is that based on the tweets I\'ve read the last few weeks and his words to me, he actually might believe he correctly created the morning line on the horse rather than realizing he is actually trying to predict what the odds on each horse will actually be at post time. #incompetence
I\'d venture an easy guess that at least 15 people on this board could do a better job than Stone at making the m/l. I don\'t worry too much about the m/l being way wrong but he is way off very often. He has some formula that he told me shows me he is doing better than the national average for morning lines......guessing he doesn\'t realize he is at the premiere meet of the year where just above average doesn\'t cut it. Average fans deserve better. As for most of us here, we know most often what the odds will likely be on the races we study closely.
More importantly, as I\'ve told FrankD off board, Chicago horses are the last horses to bet shipping just about anywhere for almost a year now. Almost all of them are tossouts for the win.
SoCalMan2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> First, why would this guy have any credibility?
> His lines speak volumes already. We know enough
> already to know that anything he says on the topic
> cannot be trusted. The big problem is that his
> employer is an even bigger idiot than he is and
> doesn\'t understand this.
>
> However, I would not focus on races filled with
> first time starters. Those races should be hard
> for any linemaker and you would expect a field of
> first time starters to vary quite a bit from the
> line. You may well be right that he botched the
> line in the race you are talking about, but that
> race should be more difficult than a simple race
> with obvious horses with well established form.
>
> The real problem is that he is missing the chip
> shots and he is not just missing them, he is not
> even remotely in the ballpark.....he is not even
> in the furthest auxiliary parking lot from the
> ballpark.
>
> The only good news is that he revealed how bad he
> was very fast, so that astute players rapidly
> understood not to trust him and to adjust.
> Unfortunately, to get newcomers and novices into
> our sport, we are supposed to make it less
> bewildering not more bewildering. This is a
> problem for people who want this support to be
> sustainable -- it does not appear that the NYRA
> even considers that question.
I grow rather weary of Travis Stone\'s bad morning lines -- and there have been
some rather inexplicable ones -- being blamed for everything from global
warming to the Palestinian problem.
SoCalMan, I will concede the following:
(1)Some horseplayers/handicappers rely on an accurate morning line;
2) Chris Kay is not a horseplayer/handicapper, so he is probably not aware of
(1);
3) NYRA (and race tracks and administrators all over the U.S) marginalize the
importance of horseplayers to the industry;
4) Travis Stone is already on the payroll as a backup race caller (he is a
very good race caller, by the way) as insurance for when Larry \"the Screamer\"
Collmus1 finally blows out a lung or tears a vocal chord. NYRA, in
an attempt to balance the legit (no slot revenue) books, got one of their
employees to multi-task. The timing (Saratoga) was bad; the training of Mr.
Stone was probably non existent.
These are all problems, and yes, representative of larger problems in the
racing industry,
HOWEVER, this is one of the longest threads of the Saratoga meet, and while
there is some anecdotal evidence (specific races with bad morning lines), some
name calling, some hand wringing, threats to play elsewhere, etc, what I
suggest is the following:
1) For a day, a week, the entire meet, or even ONE race, someone take Travis
Stone\'s morning line for a particular race (available in many places) and
then, after the race is run, get the chart for that race and compare Stone\'s
ML to the off odds. You might even end up with some empirical evidence which
could be presented to NYRA to drive home the point that Stone\'s MLs are not
accurate (might be a harder sell convincing someone at NYRA that this bad
morning line making is hurting business).
2)Anyone feel free to answer this, although I suspect Rocky is going to hit me
with 10 or 12 articles to read: How can a crafty horseplayer take ADVANTAGE of
a consistently bad morning line?
------------
Best and worse of Larry at the Spa this summer: Best: His call that Songbird
was \"whistling past the graveyard of champions\" in the CCA Oaks was very
inventive. Worst: when Flintshire dropped to last in the four horse field, LC
got a little overwrought, as if he were covering a natural disaster (I almost
expected him to utter \"Oh, the humanity!\"). The truth was that Flintshire was
never in danger of losing this race, and LC went for drama over an accurate
race call.
As far as I know it\'s the graveyard of favorites, not champions.
Not this year...
richiebee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SoCalMan2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
>
> > First, why would this guy have any credibility?
>
> > His lines speak volumes already. We know
> enough
> > already to know that anything he says on the
> topic
> > cannot be trusted. The big problem is that his
> > employer is an even bigger idiot than he is and
> > doesn\'t understand this.
> >
> > However, I would not focus on races filled with
> > first time starters. Those races should be
> hard
> > for any linemaker and you would expect a field
> of
> > first time starters to vary quite a bit from
> the
> > line. You may well be right that he botched
> the
> > line in the race you are talking about, but
> that
> > race should be more difficult than a simple
> race
> > with obvious horses with well established form.
> >
> > The real problem is that he is missing the chip
> > shots and he is not just missing them, he is
> not
> > even remotely in the ballpark.....he is not
> even
> > in the furthest auxiliary parking lot from the
> > ballpark.
> >
> > The only good news is that he revealed how bad
> he
> > was very fast, so that astute players rapidly
> > understood not to trust him and to adjust.
> > Unfortunately, to get newcomers and novices
> into
> > our sport, we are supposed to make it less
> > bewildering not more bewildering. This is a
> > problem for people who want this support to be
> > sustainable -- it does not appear that the NYRA
> > even considers that question.
>
> I grow rather weary of Travis Stone\'s bad morning
> lines -- and there have been
> some rather inexplicable ones -- being blamed for
> everything from global
> warming to the Palestinian problem.
>
> SoCalMan, I will concede the following:
>
> (1)Some horseplayers/handicappers rely on an
> accurate morning line;
> 2) Chris Kay is not a horseplayer/handicapper, so
> he is probably not aware of
> (1);
> 3) NYRA (and race tracks and administrators all
> over the U.S) marginalize the
> importance of horseplayers to the industry;
> 4) Travis Stone is already on the payroll as a
> backup race caller (he is a
> very good race caller, by the way) as insurance
> for when Larry \"the Screamer\"
> Collmus1 finally blows out a lung or tears a vocal
> chord. NYRA, in
> an attempt to balance the legit (no slot revenue)
> books, got one of their
> employees to multi-task. The timing (Saratoga) was
> bad; the training of Mr.
> Stone was probably non existent.
>
> These are all problems, and yes, representative of
> larger problems in the
> racing industry,
>
> HOWEVER, this is one of the longest threads of the
> Saratoga meet, and while
> there is some anecdotal evidence (specific races
> with bad morning lines), some
> name calling, some hand wringing, threats to play
> elsewhere, etc, what I
> suggest is the following:
>
> 1) For a day, a week, the entire meet, or even ONE
> race, someone take Travis
> Stone\'s morning line for a particular race
> (available in many places) and
> then, after the race is run, get the chart for
> that race and compare Stone\'s
> ML to the off odds. You might even end up with
> some empirical evidence which
> could be presented to NYRA to drive home the point
> that Stone\'s MLs are not
> accurate (might be a harder sell convincing
> someone at NYRA that this bad
> morning line making is hurting business).
>
> 2)Anyone feel free to answer this, although I
> suspect Rocky is going to hit me
> with 10 or 12 articles to read: How can a crafty
> horseplayer take ADVANTAGE of
> a consistently bad morning line?
>
> ------------
> Best and worse of Larry at the Spa this summer:
> Best: His call that Songbird
> was \"whistling past the graveyard of champions\" in
> the CCA Oaks was very
> inventive. Worst: when Flintshire dropped to last
> in the four horse field, LC
> got a little overwrought, as if he were covering a
> natural disaster (I almost
> expected him to utter \"Oh, the humanity!\"). The
> truth was that Flintshire was
> never in danger of losing this race, and LC went
> for drama over an accurate
> race call.
RichieBee,
All fair and good.
I am still feeling the sting of yesterday\'s non-DQ (leaving a favorite up in the supposed graveyard of favorites I will point out). I need to go sit in a good steam at the best shvitz I can find (in even more short supply in the USA than diligent racing officials), and then I will revisit this question.
For sure a bad ML is a good thing for advanced players. It is a bad thing for the hoi polloi. This is the dilemma that was faced in the online poker world....You need to be able to juice the fish, but you dont want to juice them so well that no more show up. It is the same balancing act that El Gran Senor faced in trying not to squeeze the lemon dry. My view is that the advanced player already has enough edge over the less advanced, we are in an era where we need to expand the pool.
747 was favored in both horizontal wagers closing out in that race (and it wasn\'t close), seems the masses had little trouble finding the 20-1.
They did however have trouble cashing any winning tickets on this \'steam\' horse.........
I am curious how the Saratoga morning line is affecting the analysis product. I notice, for example, that the analysis put up winners of 4 of the first 5 races on Saturday, but all of them went off at below the bettable odds listed in the analysis. There were also several non-bets on Sunday. Is this unusual for NYRA tracks?
I don\'t know about you guys but some of these Travers odds have my juices flowing.
Even though I don\'t believe Destin,GM or Creator go of at those odds.
The beauty of a large field. Was not planning on playing My Man Sam, but 20-1? Double digits on all of those you mention, and Gift Box? If those are even close to right, the exotics are going to be crazy.
Was curious about the equipment change on American Freedom.
My take, Travers is the Mid-Summer Derby, no? Not the time to be making equipment changes if you are confident in your horse. Blinkers on or off do much for you in the KY Derby on a short priced horse?
Not saying AF can\'t win or run well. But i have to look elsewhere. It would be one thing if it equip change was last race and the horse acted like a new horse and then worked really well with blinkers off again. But Baffert is bringing another horse here for this too. That doesnt bring me confidence reading between the lines.
mjellish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My take, Travers is the Mid-Summer Derby, no? Not
> the time to be making equipment changes if you are
> confident in your horse. Blinkers on or off do
> much for you in the KY Derby on a short priced
> horse?
>
> Not saying AF can\'t win or run well. But i have
> to look elsewhere. It would be one thing if it
> equip change was last race and the horse acted
> like a new horse and then worked really well with
> blinkers off again. But Baffert is bringing
> another horse here for this too. That doesnt
> bring me confidence reading between the lines.
I agree. Baffert had him pretty cranked for the Haskell on a wet track in which he has now performed well over twice. Perhaps he\'s looking to get him to relax early. Going back to Jimbo\'s comment on the Haskell to the Travers and the long list of failures. Baffert no stranger to that list with speed types that dominated at MP only to crash and burn 3 weeks later. Point Given the exception however we\'re talking a 12 length Belmont winner.
As I mentioned previously, besides my willingness to forgive Gun Runner, I like the Belmont Stakes angle in this race.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
One of the handicapping angles I look for is speed horses taking blinkers off first time in there life.
I find that a speed horse will get brave on the front end with blinkers off but only when it is the first time without blinkers.
Of course it does not work all the time but it does work more than you would think and the horse should have some sort of chance looking at the numbers.
I have to think that Baffert knows what he is doing and they will be sending American Freedom right to the front.
FWIW
last 6 months blinkers on
start 4540
win 528
win % 12%
roi .78
speed horses 1st or 2nd
start 1063
win 16%
roi .85
still need to pick your spots
blinkers on above, b off coming
blinkers off last 6 months
starts 2287
wins 273
win 12%
roi .85
b off with speed 1st/2nd qtr pole
start 716
wins 17%
roi 1.03
Thanks for the stats.
You still have to use the sheets for the race. The horse has to have a fighting chance. Some horses are rats and nothing you do can get them to win.
Back to American Freedom he is a good horse with a fighting chance in the Travers.I look at the blinkers off as good move for this horse. In a 14 horse field the front is not a bad place to be.