PDA

View Full Version : Morning Line @ The Meadows


The Inside Scoop
08-26-2014, 03:56 PM
I sit here and shook my head as I saw the 4 horse Downundermatter was 5/2 in the morning line in Nuncios race. I am not sure if someone actually makes the morning lines up at that track but if they do, they need to be replaced as they do not have a clue. That horse was so outclassed in there it was rediculous and yet they make him second choice in the morning line ahead of pretty much every horse in the race with the exception of the 1, that were 3 seconds better than him. By the way he finshed a well beaten last.

If anyone from The Meadows reads this site, please have someone who has a clue make the morning lines up. Even Nuncio at 7/5 was a joke as he should have been 1/5 or 2/5 morning line.

titans1127
08-26-2014, 04:51 PM
It could be that they are using Trackmaster's automated morning line. If so they need to get rid of it. Monticello's been using it most of the year and I have never seen so many 1/5 and 1/9 favorites at that track before. Granted the signal was unavailable to most for a good 6 months but the trend hasn't changed even as the money has come back into the pools.

mrroyboy
08-26-2014, 05:20 PM
The tracks don't let the morning line maker go too low. It discourages betting. The line maker knows Nuchio should be odds on but has to do what the track wants.

The Inside Scoop
08-26-2014, 05:34 PM
My point here is that if someone made the morning line today that was a breathing human, on the horse I mentioned, he is nowhere near qualified to make a morning line.

Furthermore if a track cannot afford to hire someone to make a real morning line and uses a Mickey Mouse system to do it for them, its a sad state of affairs.

To the average newcomer, they read into morning lines and many bet by them. If the morning line is a false one, what good does it to for those people who bet horses like the one today that finished last? Will it make them want to come back to the track? Would it not be better to have someone who has a clue set a morning line that is more realistic to what the possible win payoffs might be?

7/5 on Nuncio would have been a nice horse to bet today wouldn't he? Are you sitting here telling me the morning line maker actually thought he would pay $4.80 or $4.90? If so, I have some land for sale in Florida.

This is what a more realistic morning line should have been for that race.

1. 75-1 instead of 20-1 (off @64-1)
2. 30-1 instead of 5-1 (off @11-1)
3. 12-1 instead of 4-1 (off @28-1)
4. 99-1 instead of 5/2 (off @13-1)
5. 25-1 instead of 10-1 (off @28-1)
6. 75-1 instead of 20-1 (off @65-1)
7. 1/5 instead of 7/5 (off @1/9)

mrroyboy
08-26-2014, 06:56 PM
I agree. I'm just saying the line makers don't have the freedom to do whatever they want.

Ray2000
08-26-2014, 08:47 PM
Another dummy

NFLD R6 Morgans Majestic-10/1 ML. . . . . Won paid $3.00

Stillriledup
08-26-2014, 08:59 PM
The tracks don't let the morning line maker go too low. It discourages betting. The line maker knows Nuchio should be odds on but has to do what the track wants.

Maybe they ought to find a way to not card uncompetitive races than they won't have to worry about mismatches and discouraging betting.

The Inside Scoop
08-26-2014, 11:29 PM
It would be interesting to see the results, if someone charted the morning lines for a few days to see the comparison in opening morning line odds to final closing odds were. I would like to see it for tracks that use an automated program and tracks that actually have a live body that does it.

For myself, any track that uses an automated system for morning line odds has really dropped the ball and for them try and promote this as a way of the future is laughable in the world of real horse bettors and insults my intelligence.

David Siegel
08-27-2014, 07:04 PM
The Meadows does not use the TrackMaster automated morning line. I cannot say if they are using one from Disney or not ("Mickey Mouse line"). Only kidding. They use a human. Monticello did use it and now they are not as there were too many lower morning-line odds horses in their opinion. In fact, the line was more accurate when they used the TM line.

"Furthermore if a track cannot afford to hire someone to make a real morning line and uses a Mickey Mouse system to do it for them, its a sad state of affairs." The TrackMaster system is far from "mickey mouse". We did track how humans did against off odds for two years, about 1 million starts, and how those same off odds compared to the computer generated lines. It was not close. The machine did better, on average. There were a couple of tracks that the human did outperform the machine, but they were the rare exceptions. It is that type of research that led to a better line.

Machines doing a better job than humans is not a new concept. The computer can beat 99.9% of humans at chess. The computer can fly planes, move warships, guide doctors with microscopic surgeries, control rail systems, etc.

The bottom line is that we have very, very statistically significant proof that the TrackMaster algorithm can outperform the morning line maker the great majority of the time (but not all the time). There are other advantages as well - cost, timeliness, lack of typographical errors, balance and no possible "monkey business".

As always, happy to address well thought out questions.

With all that said, we will make bad lines, as will the humans. We will just do it with less frequency.

moneyandland
08-27-2014, 08:44 PM
The Meadows does not use the TrackMaster automated morning line. I cannot say if they are using one from Disney or not ("Mickey Mouse line"). Only kidding. They use a human. Monticello did use it and now they are not as there were too many lower morning-line odds horses in their opinion. In fact, the line was more accurate when they used the TM line.

"Furthermore if a track cannot afford to hire someone to make a real morning line and uses a Mickey Mouse system to do it for them, its a sad state of affairs." The TrackMaster system is far from "mickey mouse". We did track how humans did against off odds for two years, about 1 million starts, and how those same off odds compared to the computer generated lines. It was not close. The machine did better, on average. There were a couple of tracks that the human did outperform the machine, but they were the rare exceptions. It is that type of research that led to a better line.

Machines doing a better job than humans is not a new concept. The computer can beat 99.9% of humans at chess. The computer can fly planes, move warships, guide doctors with microscopic surgeries, control rail systems, etc.

The bottom line is that we have very, very statistically significant proof that the TrackMaster algorithm can outperform the morning line maker the great majority of the time (but not all the time). There are other advantages as well - cost, timeliness, lack of typographical errors, balance and no possible "monkey business".

As always, happy to address well thought out questions.

With all that said, we will make bad lines, as will the humans. We will just do it with less frequency.


Are these comparisons human vs computer comparing the computer vs the guys the track hires who spend all of 10 mins total for the whole card? Having watched Frank Drucker make the lines at Yonkers in the past, he'd have a horse claimed off a 3 for 150 trainer with Steve Smith driving previously go to Lou Pena with George Brennan in the same class from the rail listed at 6-1, after being only 3-1 from post 6 for the poor connections in the previous race... If were comparing computers to that effort of linesmaking we might as well compare computers to random odds drawn from a hat

This wasn't like a oh we all have bad days, this was 4-5 times a night for years, he didn't even have clear cut odds on choice at less than 5-1

RaceTrackDaddy
08-27-2014, 10:02 PM
Been a while since I have been at the Meadows (even though I live six miles from the place but that is another story).

When I was a regular the person doing the morning line was Roger Huston. He has a system or formula that he keeps close to his vest that he uses. Nobody I know has seen it or heard what it uses but Roger swears to it.

Roger has been calling races on the fair tracks the last few weeks and left the announcing up to Jeff Zidek. I assume Roger might still be making the morning lines as he is still sending in his selections for the video feed which translates to his getting the early proofs for the pp's. I am just guessing that those lines on the pp's came from Roger.

David Siegel
08-27-2014, 10:06 PM
To the last post, when we did our analysis, 100% of the lines were created by humans, so then the comparison was against the entire collection of men and women that create lines at every North American track. It is clear you comment is really not questioning who we compared to, but to critique a particular line maker. Yonkers was just one of the many tracks where the TrackMaster lines were superior, but we did not single out any one individual so I cannot comment on Mr. Drucker's level of expertise. What I can tell you is that Yonkers is one of the tracks that currently use the TrackMaster created lines, and consistent with all of our studies, the lines did outperform the human lines created just before they started using our lines. But this is not particular to Yonkers. Every track that has made the switch has improved their line's accuracy.

The Inside Scoop
08-27-2014, 10:51 PM
I'll stick to my Mickey Mouse theory when it comes to computer systems trying to handicap harness racing.

imofe
08-27-2014, 11:16 PM
To the last post, when we did our analysis, 100% of the lines were created by humans, so then the comparison was against the entire collection of men and women that create lines at every North American track. It is clear you comment is really not questioning who we compared to, but to critique a particular line maker. Yonkers was just one of the many tracks where the TrackMaster lines were superior, but we did not single out any one individual so I cannot comment on Mr. Drucker's level of expertise. What I can tell you is that Yonkers is one of the tracks that currently use the TrackMaster created lines, and consistent with all of our studies, the lines did outperform the human lines created just before they started using our lines. But this is not particular to Yonkers. Every track that has made the switch has improved their line's accuracy.

Can you provide a list of tracks that use the computer line David?

Sea Biscuit
08-28-2014, 05:53 AM
Machines doing a better job than humans is not a new concept. The computer can beat 99.9% of humans at chess. The computer can fly planes, move warships, guide doctors with microscopic surgeries, control rail systems, etc.



Mr Siegel: Do you want me to show you how many times planes have crashed due to computer failure?

pandy
08-28-2014, 06:32 AM
I personally would prefer the Trackmaster line in many cases, because so many tracks have someone doing the line who doesn't do a good job. Trackmaster's statistics proved that their line was better. The best case scenario is to have someone who's a good handicapper doing the line. But, unfortunately, many tracks don't care and you get 10-1 horses that go off at 3-5.

Ray2000
08-28-2014, 07:35 AM
These are the UNOFFICIAL correlation numbers that I've been tracking since I learned that some tracks are switching to TM lines and since Morning Line is a big factor in my robot's picks.

The starred tracks are the ones David Siegle has said are using TM generated lines.
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=113996
Thanks again Dave, if there are any additional ones please let us know.
And BTW...Top 3 tracks are using your lines. :ThmbUp:

A word about my numbers. I'm only interested in the top ranked 3 or 4 MoLines (ML odds <8)
So I don't care if the longshots are listed as 15/1, 50/1 or 99/1 and are not included here.

The horses morning line value is compared to the final tote odds to see how close they match.
I use Excel Correlation function to get the number. A score of 1.000 would be a perfect match
0.000 means no correlation at all.



Track Horses Correl
PHL 592 0.691*
ACES 196 0.670*
YR 725 0.635*
MAY 152 0.622
HAR 211 0.578
STGA 657 0.558
PRC 233 0.551
BTVA 464 0.541
BMLP 175 0.535
NFLD 839 0.514
SCD 497 0.506
BigM 824 0.501
MR 410 0.500*
PCD 828 0.497
LON 2656 0.486
VD 246 0.472*
NP 704 0.445
FLMD 2986 0.430
MEA 663 0.429
TGDN 367 0.425*
FRD 985 0.417
GEOD 300 0.410
GRVR 369 0.405
RIDC 1022 0.396
HOP 270 0.335
WDB 2323 0.328
MOH 785 0.328
MVR 1268 0.275

David Siegel
08-28-2014, 10:48 AM
For those that have seen my posts or replies on this forum, you know that I do my best to respond to all reasonable questions or issues. So, to that end I will address the legitimate questions/comments that some of you have.

1) Morning Lines provided by TrackMaster are not attempts at handicapping per se. They attempt to do one thing and one thing only, they try to "predict" what the public will send horses off at (win odds). The goal is to minimize the variance between the morning line and the off odds. If we have a horse at 5-1, and the public send the horse off at 5-1, and the horse wins by 25 lengths, then the automated morning line was right on the money.

2) Nine tracks have used regularly or are using the automated lines as of today (8/28). Two are fairs (Duqoin and Springfield). The seven "regular" tracks are Running Aces, Freehold, Harrah's Philadelphia, Plainridge, Tioga, Vernon and Yonkers.

mrroyboy
08-28-2014, 04:18 PM
Good, thank you David. But like I said many morning line makers are restricted by the tracks from making horses too low. Look at all the odds on favorites at Yonkers and look at their morning lines. The odds maker knows they will be odds on. He just can't make too many of them that way.

pandy
08-28-2014, 04:21 PM
On my line that I make for my Meadowlands picks (top 4) I make horses 1-9 or whatever I feel they deserve to be, but, yes, morning line makers often put the favorite way too high. I guess they're afraid that it will stop people from betting.

RaceTrackDaddy
08-28-2014, 10:53 PM
Not to rock the boat a bit but why would we, the handicappers/bettors desire a more accurate morning line?

For me, I can see through a false favorite in the program and make my plays accordingly. To have a very accurate morning line that will show the public's true liking will have a major effect on my multiple race wagers. Daily Doubles and all pick-x wagers will now be more informed of where the money will heavier and they could adjust their bets knocking my ROI numbers.

Sure from a statistical point, it seems like a great idea. From the view of my wallet, I think differently.

I recall Roger Huston making this Nw 2 trotter at 20/1. We clocked him in the warmups and fired. He won easily at 2/1. For the next two starts, Roger released him at 20/1 and the horse won both races winning three in a row all at 2/1. For me, an accurate M/L would have left us with odds on on all three races. Forget the name of the horse but was driven by Greg Wright Jr back then when Greg was close friends with Brian Sears who raced at the Meadows.

pandy
08-29-2014, 06:09 AM
I agree that for us as bettors a bad ML is good, it could mean that we get slightly better odds on some horses. But, for the sport as a whole, it's bad. It's unprofessional, it makes a track look like they don't care, and for newbies who are just trying to get into our sport, it sends the wrong message and confuses them. Racetracks in general have always done a poor job at making the parimutuel part of the sport look as up and up and professional as possible. Ideally, what you want is to legitimize it to the point where people view the parimutuel pool as something as important as the New York Stock Exchange.

LottaKash
08-29-2014, 12:38 PM
I agree that for us as bettors a bad ML is good, it could mean that we get slightly better odds on some horses. But, for the sport as a whole, it's bad. It's unprofessional, it makes a track look like they don't care, and for newbies who are just trying to get into our sport, it sends the wrong message and confuses them. Racetracks in general have always done a poor job at making the parimutuel part of the sport look as up and up and professional as possible. Ideally, what you want is to legitimize it to the point where people view the parimutuel pool as something as important as the New York Stock Exchange.

Pandy you beat me to it....I was gonna post much of the same notions that you just stated...

Well Said Bob...:jump:

When I first started out and for many years thereafter, the Morning-Line was my guide....Now 50 years later that is no longer true for me, but still, an accurate as possible ML is essential to this game of ours, imo...

David Siegel
08-29-2014, 05:53 PM
The last several comments are spot on. Good morning lines are selfishly not so good for the best handicappers. Of course, Speed Ratings can be argued similarly. When Andy Beyer started publishing them in the early 90s and then in the DRF, good figure makers got hurt. But the public was better served. I feel obligated to do the best we can for things like Speed Ratings and Morning Line, and I cannot tell you how it pains me when tracks put forth reasons for not using the best possible Morning Line (even if that means using the best human if they can beat the machine), when it costs them equal to or less than they are paying now. But harness racing is about the slowest industry to adopt to changing conditions that I am familiar with, so I have to accept that change will come slowly.

moneyandland
08-29-2014, 07:54 PM
To the last post, when we did our analysis, 100% of the lines were created by humans, so then the comparison was against the entire collection of men and women that create lines at every North American track. It is clear you comment is really not questioning who we compared to, but to critique a particular line maker. Yonkers was just one of the many tracks where the TrackMaster lines were superior, but we did not single out any one individual so I cannot comment on Mr. Drucker's level of expertise. What I can tell you is that Yonkers is one of the tracks that currently use the TrackMaster created lines, and consistent with all of our studies, the lines did outperform the human lines created just before they started using our lines. But this is not particular to Yonkers. Every track that has made the switch has improved their line's accuracy.


So the answer is no, you haven't compared a human with any actual ability to the computer, I can generate a better ML than 75% of these guys by watching a track for 1-2 hrs a week and they're employed there full time, it's not really hard in harness racing to follow a track and see the patterns in the betting because harness racing only has the same small group of bettors, The main thing about human ML's is that they are always skewed to show a higher odds on the favorites and lower odds on longshots, horses that any regular knows will be 3/5 are often listed 8/5, 5/2 and horses that will be 60-1 will be listed at 10-1 or 15-1 and it's just not realistic. Every track that has made the switch has improved their accuracy is because someone took the time to generate a program to make the line based on certain factors and not just throw numbers down over a 13 race card in 30 mins. If that same time to make the computer program was generated was applied to make the line would be a lot more accurate. A computer might be more accurate but only after a human tells it what to look for, so if that same human is using those same factors and then also tweaking the ML where the computer can't factor for intangibles I'd have to believe the computer wouldn't stand a chance. A computer will see a driver like George Napolitano Jr as statistically good because of his numbers but as good as he is, he's not Pierce/Tetrick/Sears good even if his W%'s, ITM%, and UDRS are better

The Inside Scoop
08-29-2014, 08:21 PM
For those that have seen my posts or replies on this forum, you know that I do my best to respond to all reasonable questions or issues. So, to that end I will address the legitimate questions/comments that some of you have.

1) Morning Lines provided by TrackMaster are not attempts at handicapping per se. They attempt to do one thing and one thing only, they try to "predict" what the public will send horses off at (win odds). The goal is to minimize the variance between the morning line and the off odds. If we have a horse at 5-1, and the public send the horse off at 5-1, and the horse wins by 25 lengths, then the automated morning line was right on the money.

2) Nine tracks have used regularly or are using the automated lines as of today (8/28). Two are fairs (Duqoin and Springfield). The seven "regular" tracks are Running Aces, Freehold, Harrah's Philadelphia, Plainridge, Tioga, Vernon and Yonkers.

So tonight at Vernon the entry of Nuncio and Father Patrick is an accurate morning line of 5/2 from Trackmasters computer systems automated morning line maker.I rest my case.

The Inside Scoop
08-29-2014, 09:33 PM
What a surprise the entry of Father Patrick and Nuncio went off at 1/9 even though the Mickey Mouse computer systems claimed the probable odds would be 5/2.

I am sure though that Sebastian KS will go off at his morning line odds set by the computer at 5/2 to. :bang:

I will go one better when looking at the fishwrap class ratings for that race. Father Patrick was rated lower in class than both Nuncio and Sumatra, go figure. I guess the fact that he has beaten Nuncio every start he has raced against him but the first time they raced and the time he made a break in the Hambo meant the class rating should be lower. Here, I will open the trash can, please insert here. :lol:

The Inside Scoop
08-29-2014, 10:51 PM
Since I am on a roll here, heres a few more.

Mistresswithmuscle - somehow rated a morning line lower than Father Patrick, Nuncio and Sebastian K S

Well Built - rated lower morning line odds than those 3 also. So the computer told me he was a more probable winner ? Heres the best, he never even went off as the favourite.

Shake it Cerry - 5/2 morning line, off at 1/5

The point is the computer system doesn't know squat and any ham an egger who comes on here and tells me it does doesn't not deserve writing space on this forum. Sorry to tell it like it is as the truth hurts.

Take that Mickey Mouse computer system and put it out to pasture and quit trying to sell it to the ones who don't have a clue when it comes to betting horses because its a joke.

David Siegel

Feel free to rebut how Father Patricks class rating was lower than Nuncio's as well as Sumatras. Furthermore let me know about the mornign lines and whether they were accurate on what those horses would pay tonight. I know the tracks dont have a leash on how low a computer system can make a horse in the morning line so that excuse it out. :bang:

PaceAdvantage
09-01-2014, 02:38 AM
What a surprise the entry of Father Patrick and Nuncio went off at 1/9 even though the Mickey Mouse computer systems claimed the probable odds would be 5/2.

I am sure though that Sebastian KS will go off at his morning line odds set by the computer at 5/2 to. :bang:

I will go one better when looking at the fishwrap class ratings for that race. Father Patrick was rated lower in class than both Nuncio and Sumatra, go figure. I guess the fact that he has beaten Nuncio every start he has raced against him but the first time they raced and the time he made a break in the Hambo meant the class rating should be lower. Here, I will open the trash can, please insert here. :lol:There have been many if not more blown lines created by humans...and they've been pointed out here many times. I'm not getting your point.

You can cherry pick all you want, but it doesn't mean anything without a bigger picture to absorb.

RaceTrackDaddy
09-01-2014, 12:01 PM
I just handicapped Tuesdays (09.02.14) card at the Meadows and noticed that the morning lines are now in-congruency of Roger Huston's M/L system. Way too many 6/5, 7/5, 8/5 and 9/5 lines. Also the outside posts on live horses (in my opinion "live") are way out of any statistic reference.

I have to assume that either someone else is making the M/L odds for this day or could it be the Trackmaster lines are now being provided to the Meadows.

I have to ask David. Hey David, did Trackmaster pick up the Meadows Casino as a new track to your Morning Line service?

If the answer is no, then there just might be some nice cash to be found tomorrow if one likes and is correctly betting the outside horses that win at a larger price than one would have expected.

The Inside Scoop
09-01-2014, 03:42 PM
There have been many if not more blown lines created by humans...and they've been pointed out here many times. I'm not getting your point.

You can cherry pick all you want, but it doesn't mean anything without a bigger picture to absorb.

My point is that a.computer system in harness racing is useless fish wrap and anyone who buys it is a sucker. I hope I make myself clear now.

Ray2000
09-01-2014, 04:06 PM
My point is that a.computer system in harness racing is useless fish wrap and anyone who buys it is a sucker. I hope I make myself clear now.
My robot is in the corner, sulking, ...never been called a name before....

LottaKash
09-01-2014, 04:59 PM
I hope I make myself clear now.

You say you are a pro-player, and that may well be true, as I don't know you or anything about you, but so far, since you burst here on the PA-scene, all I have perceived about you is that you have a very Amateurish way about you...

So please stop talking down to us....I for one don't appreciate it..
.
There are guys on this forum who would embarrass you with what they know about this game of ours..... You haven't wowed or taught anyone, about anything, here so far....

So please quit your complaining and show us your good stuff...Fair enough ? Clear enough ?

LottaKash
09-01-2014, 05:04 PM
My robot is in the corner, sulking, ...never been called a name before....

Now, now, Ray....Sticks and Stones..........:cool:

The Inside Scoop
09-01-2014, 06:25 PM
You say you are a pro-player, and that may well be true, as I don't know you or anything about you, but so far, since you burst here on the PA-scene, all I have perceived about you is that you have a very Amateurish way about you...

So please stop talking down to us....I for one don't appreciate it..
.
There are guys on this forum who would embarrass you with what they know about this game of ours..... You haven't wowed or taught anyone, about anything, here so far....

So please quit your complaining and show us your good stuff...Fair enough ? Clear enough ?

I am not here to educate you as I keep my handicapping to myself. I have been doing this a very long time and keep my business to myself. If I offended you or anyone else for telling it like it is, so be it.

Only a fool buys computer generated info when trying to bet horses. Computers do not take into effect many variables that can help you bet winners. Computers don't watch replays, they don't know which trainers can improve a horse. They don't know which drivers can improve a horse with an agressive steer. They cannot predict trips when trying to figure out where a horse will get away and who he will follow or if he can get a cheap half being the only speed in a paceless race.

Heres some homework for you, watch the replay on a horse named Check My Pulse at Monticello on Aug 12 in the 7th race. Would you have bet this horse her next start on Aug 18? If so after her Aug 18 race, would you have bet her back on Aug 25? You tell me if a computer would have told you she was live.

So call me whatever you wish, like me or not, but the fact is I put lots of work into what I do to be able to have done it for as long as I have.

LottaKash
09-01-2014, 07:32 PM
So call me whatever you wish, like me or not, but the fact is I put lots of work into what I do to be able to have done it for as long as I have.

Bull, you are a chronic complainer....That is all I've heard from you so far, in addition to telling us all how clueless we are...

Go fart somewhere else dude...you ain't what you pretend to be..,

RaceTrackDaddy
09-01-2014, 10:17 PM
I was hoping for a reply from David but being the holiday and such, I should of realized that the answer to the question re: The Meadows being added to the Trackmaster list of tracks of generated morning line odds would not be answered until a later time.

If the are now part of those tracks, I might refrain from betting there until I get a handle on the public's reaction to them (at the windows)... if it is someone who works at the Meadows OR Roger came up with a new system to create them, I will be firing on the live outside picks that I feel are live.

I will check back tomorrow before the first post at the Mea. I might even open a thread called MEADOWS LIVE.... if nothing else, it will be an experience nonetheless.

The Inside Scoop
09-01-2014, 11:01 PM
Bull, you are a chronic complainer....That is all I've heard from you so far, in addition to telling us all how clueless we are...

Go fart somewhere else dude...you ain't what you pretend to be..,


When I read comments about LDL like she was short, needed a race, her qua was average etc etc etc, I don't have to be a rocket scientist to form an opinion on posters here that lack true knowledge when it comes to gambling on horses. Once again I call it as I see it and if you do not like it, tough.

PaceAdvantage
09-02-2014, 01:02 AM
My point is that a.computer system in harness racing is useless fish wrap and anyone who buys it is a sucker. I hope I make myself clear now.I thought your point was a morning line that was way off, as if that somehow condemns automated lines. When, in fact, plenty of human-generated lines come across our desks equally fouled.

So I don't see the point in your point.

The Inside Scoop
09-02-2014, 01:15 AM
I thought your point was a morning line that was way off, as if that somehow condemns automated lines. When, in fact, plenty of human-generated lines come across our desks equally fouled.

So I don't see the point in your point.

My point is the automated lines or automated selections have no business in this sport if you are a real gambler. They are for the new track goers who do not know any better and thats who they prey on. Any real harness racing gambler will tell you that any paper tip sheet, numbers etc ect is better used for fishwrap.

PaceAdvantage
09-02-2014, 08:57 AM
My point is the automated lines or automated selections have no business in this sport if you are a real gambler. They are for the new track goers who do not know any better and thats who they prey on. Any real harness racing gambler will tell you that any paper tip sheet, numbers etc ect is better used for fishwrap.You're specifically talking about the morning line though, and specifically about the Trackmaster automated line.

You still haven't explained why it's inferior to the human morning line oddsmakers.

One example does not constitute proof.

RaceTrackDaddy
09-02-2014, 11:52 AM
Ok, without hearing from David. I am proceeding as if it was a human or Roger created a new system for the M/L. Will be opening a thread entitled Meadows Live if anyone is interested...

Ray2000
09-02-2014, 12:00 PM
Those 30/1's are not by the Voice, rarely does he go over 20/1

Whoever did Tuesdays line does have the probabilities adding up to 1.00 (using 17% take), in fact, almost spot-on.
Doesn't mean the individual odds are correct, only as a race taken as a whole.

Daily Double....3-5 Debi'S Sign-9/2----T T Tucker-7/2

GL

The Inside Scoop
09-02-2014, 12:21 PM
You're specifically talking about the morning line though, and specifically about the Trackmaster automated line.

You still haven't explained why it's inferior to the human morning line oddsmakers.

One example does not constitute proof.

My point is this: a computer generated morning line has no place in this industry. They fail in taking into effect many variables as I have explained before which goes into making a morning line.

The only reason tracks are doing it is to save money and with the monies they make from the slot revenue, that is pretty sad.

I hope I make myself clear.

PaceAdvantage
09-02-2014, 12:24 PM
My point is this: a computer generated morning line has no place in this industry. They fail in taking into effect many variables as I have explained before which goes into making a morning line.

The only reason tracks are doing it is to save money and with the monies they make from the slot revenue, that is pretty sad.

I hope I make myself clear.No...you still haven't proven how the automated line is inferior. You state a reason why it MIGHT be inferior, but you haven't demonstrated that, except for one or two examples that you brought up in this thread...I counter by telling you there are similar errors made by human M/L oddsmakers across the country all the time.

Did not David provide some statistical proof of the effectiveness of TM's morning line? If you have similar stats that dispute his findings, that would be useful.

RaceTrackDaddy
09-02-2014, 12:27 PM
Those 30/1's are not by the Voice, rarely does he go over 20/1

Whoever did Tuesdays line does have the probabilities adding up to 1.00 (using 17% take), in fact, almost spot-on.
Doesn't mean the individual odds are correct, only as a race taken as a whole.

Daily Double....3-5 Debi'S Sign-9/2----T T Tucker-7/2

GL

Very interesting Ray...thank you... seems whoever or whatever is creating these lines is at least mathematically proficient. I find that refreshing. Let us see how the public comes out with their money today.

This is one of the few days that I am actually excited to see the tote-board at the Meadows.

The Inside Scoop
09-02-2014, 12:41 PM
No...you still haven't proven how the automated line is inferior. You state a reason why it MIGHT be inferior, but you haven't demonstrated that, except for one or two examples that you brought up in this thread...I counter by telling you there are similar errors made by human M/L oddsmakers across the country all the time.

Did not David provide some statistical proof of the effectiveness of TM's morning line? If you have similar stats that dispute his findings, that would be useful.

Last night at Yonkers Morning Line

Pams Legacy 4/5
Diamond Said 2-1
Code Word 2-1
Rusty's Bliss 4/5
Bay Fishen Doc 3/2
Something For Doc 9/5
Cuda Sixty Six 8/5
Blue Fin 2-1
Go Jesse Go 9/5
Nowerland Firebird 2-1
No Real Surprise 3/2


Tioga Friday Night Morning Line

Father Patrick / Nuncio 5/2
Sebastian K S 5/2

Please explain to me how the horses I listed last night from Yonkers had lower morning lines generated by your computer system than the horses at Tioga.

I await your reply.

PaceAdvantage
09-02-2014, 01:10 PM
Last night at Yonkers Morning Line

Pams Legacy 4/5
Diamond Said 2-1
Code Word 2-1
Rusty's Bliss 4/5
Bay Fishen Doc 3/2
Something For Doc 9/5
Cuda Sixty Six 8/5
Blue Fin 2-1
Go Jesse Go 9/5
Nowerland Firebird 2-1
No Real Surprise 3/2


Tioga Friday Night Morning Line

Father Patrick / Nuncio 5/2
Sebastian K S 5/2

Please explain to me how the horses I listed last night from Yonkers had lower morning lines generated by your computer system than the horses at Tioga.

I await your reply.My computer system? It's not my system. I'm not even a harness player. However, I do know morning lines and morning line oddsmakers, and I know they're all susceptible to errors every now and then.

Maybe we can agree on that point.

The Inside Scoop
09-02-2014, 01:16 PM
Agreed

David Siegel
09-02-2014, 01:27 PM
All - I needed to do the research about some FACTUAL things mentioned over the last couple of days. Here are some FACTS:

1) Tioga and Vernon Downs, unbeknownst to me, ceased using our lines on August 9th and 8th respectively. I will be contacting Jason Settlemoir to understand why. While I never make too much of any one line or one entire card, I did "run" the 8/29 card (Father Patrick) at Vernon, and indeed, the human lines were way, way off to what we would have created that day (we can run any future or historic card). Our line on the Father Patrick entry was 1-1, so I fully agree that 5/2 was way, way off. On that card, using our standard system of measurement, we were far more accurate (but that is what happens most of the time).

2) Meadows. Also unknown to me, I see that the Meadows downloaded our lines for 9/2, 3 and 4 and for 9/2 and 9/3, 100% used our lines. So for better or worse (likely better), they for the time being are using ours. Tracks don't have to inform us if they use it or not. I can only tell if they accessed them, them compare the final program to what we produced to see if they actually USED them. So those that observed a difference in the lines for the live program starting today (9/2), good catch!

OK, that ends the factual observations. As others have mentioned, pointing out a number of lines that are way off by humans or computer really does not prove all that much. It is no different than showing how stupid baseball pundits were picking the Red Sox to win this year when they are in last place in the AL East. What matters is looking at massive amounts of data as that is the true indication of better lines. Anyone espousing to be able to do better should really prove it by taking pre-program information (so they don't see any Morning Line) and publishing or otherwise authenticating those lines to see if they are better or worse than the alternative.

One last point on this. There are about 5000 race days in North America. Assuming a decent line maker spends only 1 hour, and is "worth" $25 per hour, this is still a cost of $125,000 annually in time or money to the tracks. Using a reasonable present value discount rate, if a machine could replace this even doing the same job, it would be worth around $1 million in a one time expenditure to do it (leaving out the other benefits).

As it turns out, the TrackMaster lines ARE more accurate. They are delivered on a timely basis nearly 24/7. Sickness, lines out of balance, playing games, typos, etc are all additional benefits. TrackMaster invested far, far less than $1 million to do this, and it is being offered at no cost to the tracks - so the economics "pencil out" on a different number of levels.

Hope that addresses some of the recent points and questions and as long as people on this forum act in a professional manner, I am happy to address things that pertain to us.

RaceTrackDaddy
09-02-2014, 01:39 PM
All - I needed to do the research about some FACTUAL things mentioned over the last couple of days. Here are some FACTS:

1) Tioga and Vernon Downs, unbeknownst to me, ceased using our lines on August 9th and 8th respectively. I will be contacting Jason Settlemoir to understand why. While I never make too much of any one line or one entire card, I did "run" the 8/29 card (Father Patrick) at Vernon, and indeed, the human lines were way, way off to what we would have created that day (we can run any future or historic card). Our line on the Father Patrick entry was 1-1, so I fully agree that 5/2 was way, way off. On that card, using our standard system of measurement, we were far more accurate (but that is what happens most of the time).

2) Meadows. Also unknown to me, I see that the Meadows downloaded our lines for 9/2, 3 and 4 and for 9/2 and 9/3, 100% used our lines. So for better or worse (likely better), they for the time being are using ours. Tracks don't have to inform us if they use it or not. I can only tell if they accessed them, them compare the final program to what we produced to see if they actually USED them. So those that observed a difference in the lines for the live program starting today (9/2), good catch!

OK, that ends the factual observations. As others have mentioned, pointing out a number of lines that are way off by humans or computer really does not prove all that much. It is no different than showing how stupid baseball pundits were picking the Red Sox to win this year when they are in last place in the AL East. What matters is looking at massive amounts of data as that is the true indication of better lines. Anyone espousing to be able to do better should really prove it by taking pre-program information (so they don't see any Morning Line) and publishing or otherwise authenticating those lines to see if they are better or worse than the alternative.

One last point on this. There are about 5000 race days in North America. Assuming a decent line maker spends only 1 hour, and is "worth" $25 per hour, this is still a cost of $125,000 annually in time or money to the tracks. Using a reasonable present value discount rate, if a machine could replace this even doing the same job, it would be worth around $1 million in a one time expenditure to do it (leaving out the other benefits).

As it turns out, the TrackMaster lines ARE more accurate. They are delivered on a timely basis nearly 24/7. Sickness, lines out of balance, playing games, typos, etc are all additional benefits. TrackMaster invested far, far less than $1 million to do this, and it is being offered at no cost to the tracks - so the economics "pencil out" on a different number of levels.

Hope that addresses some of the recent points and questions and as long as people on this forum act in a professional manner, I am happy to address things that pertain to us.

Thank you David.... for those interested, a 7/2 morning line coupled with a 4/1 morning line hit the Meadows DD for $117.20. This is going to be a very interesting day at the Meadows. I just hope they will continue on using your product as the public has not caught on to it yet.

David Siegel
09-02-2014, 07:06 PM
To Mr Scoop's question in a few posts back, I explained the Father Patick situation - that the track DID NOT use our data, but rather decided to use a human (all the way back since 8/9). Why he or she was so far off, is not for me to say, but does underscore the value of using the computer.

I do want to thank you though for asking me about the Yonkers horses, which of course you could look up yourselves. But to save time, here are the off odds (using standard tote board odds) that the horses Mr Scoop inquired about. It was nice of him to make the case for the computer after all as you will see we did a pretty nice job on these particular horses that he asked about.

Pams Legacy 4/5 OFF ODDS 2/5
Diamond Said 2-1 OFF ODDS 6/5
Code Word 2-1 OFF ODDS 4/5
Rusty's Bliss 4/5 OFF ODDS 1/2
Bay Fishen Doc 3/2 OFF ODDS 1/1
Something For Doc 9/5 OFF ODDS 9/5
Cuda Sixty Six 8/5 OFF ODDS 1/2
Blue Fin 2-1 OFF ODDS 9/5
Go Jesse Go 9/5 OFF ODDS 2/5
Nowerland Firebird 2-1 OFF ODDS 4/1
No Real Surprise 3/2 OFF ODDS 1/1

The Inside Scoop
09-02-2014, 10:25 PM
To Mr Scoop's question in a few posts back, I explained the Father Patick situation - that the track DID NOT use our data, but rather decided to use a human (all the way back since 8/9). Why he or she was so far off, is not for me to say, but does underscore the value of using the computer.

I do want to thank you though for asking me about the Yonkers horses, which of course you could look up yourselves. But to save time, here are the off odds (using standard tote board odds) that the horses Mr Scoop inquired about. It was nice of him to make the case for the computer after all as you will see we did a pretty nice job on these particular horses that he asked about.

Pams Legacy 4/5 OFF ODDS 2/5
Diamond Said 2-1 OFF ODDS 6/5
Code Word 2-1 OFF ODDS 4/5
Rusty's Bliss 4/5 OFF ODDS 1/2
Bay Fishen Doc 3/2 OFF ODDS 1/1
Something For Doc 9/5 OFF ODDS 9/5
Cuda Sixty Six 8/5 OFF ODDS 1/2
Blue Fin 2-1 OFF ODDS 9/5
Go Jesse Go 9/5 OFF ODDS 2/5
Nowerland Firebird 2-1 OFF ODDS 4/1
No Real Surprise 3/2 OFF ODDS 1/1

Your input is appreciated.

Stillriledup
09-23-2014, 04:09 AM
On my line that I make for my Meadowlands picks (top 4) I make horses 1-9 or whatever I feel they deserve to be, but, yes, morning line makers often put the favorite way too high. I guess they're afraid that it will stop people from betting.

Lets say there's a big carryover in the pick 5 at the meadowlands and i'm a person who doesn't have any clue about the product, but knows that a carryover is a 'good thing' and wants to play it.

So, i slap together a ticket going 4 deep in leg 3, because, the ML favorite is 3-1 and that makes it a "wide open" race. So, i get to leg 3 and one of the contenders goes off 2-5 and walks to the front and is essentially boated home in single file......and i'm sitting there feeling like an idiot going 4 deep in a race that was essentially a walk over.

If that horse was 2-5 ML like it was supposed to be, i would have been able to put together a ticket that didnt need to be 4 deep in a "one horse race".

So, what does a player do instead? He skips the bet because the ML is absolutely no help and can actually hurt by giving off the feeling that a race is wide open when its anything but.

So, here's an example of how a bad ML will actually hurt the handle.

David Siegel
09-23-2014, 09:18 AM
All of the points made have been good. The question is what a morning line should be. I have believed it should be the best indication possible of what the public would send a horse off at, whether it is 1/5 or 5/1. For many tracks, I am discovering it is a combination of this and, at the extremes, trying to get more people to wager on the race. Or put bluntly, I think some think the morning line should be lines that result in maximizing handle so long as the lines are not too outrageously out of whack.

I think if I track "inflates" morning lines too much, the public catches on and actually skips races they may have otherwise wagered, particularly in multi-race wagers like a pick-4. Furthermore, I think that if a race has a 2/5 morning line horse, and it is viewed as a "bad" or "non-competitive race", then what should be registered with management is that the race was poorly constructed and attention needs to be paid to the conditions of that race on a go-forward basis (when possible) and not attempting to somewhat "mask" the less than ideal competitive level of the race with inflated or otherwise-altered morning line.

There is no right and wrong here, but this is my opinion for the best interest of the game over the long run.

I had a conversation with a track that blamed lower morning lines on lower handle (unverified with real data, by the way). This was the mind set rather than blaming the lower handle (if it was even actually lower) on races that were simply not all that competitive.

Just my 2 cents.

Stillriledup
09-23-2014, 05:09 PM
All of the points made have been good. The question is what a morning line should be. I have believed it should be the best indication possible of what the public would send a horse off at, whether it is 1/5 or 5/1. For many tracks, I am discovering it is a combination of this and, at the extremes, trying to get more people to wager on the race. Or put bluntly, I think some think the morning line should be lines that result in maximizing handle so long as the lines are not too outrageously out of whack.

I think if I track "inflates" morning lines too much, the public catches on and actually skips races they may have otherwise wagered, particularly in multi-race wagers like a pick-4. Furthermore, I think that if a race has a 2/5 morning line horse, and it is viewed as a "bad" or "non-competitive race", then what should be registered with management is that the race was poorly constructed and attention needs to be paid to the conditions of that race on a go-forward basis (when possible) and not attempting to somewhat "mask" the less than ideal competitive level of the race with inflated or otherwise-altered morning line.

There is no right and wrong here, but this is my opinion for the best interest of the game over the long run.

I had a conversation with a track that blamed lower morning lines on lower handle (unverified with real data, by the way). This was the mind set rather than blaming the lower handle (if it was even actually lower) on races that were simply not all that competitive.

Just my 2 cents.

Its bad perception. 10-1s going off at 3-5 makes it looks like the races are fixed. Now, we both know that's not the case, but there are a lot of people who believe this to be true.

To purposely inflate the ML to increase betting action is just false advertising, there's no place for that in the game.

Your conversation with the track that blamed "accurate" morning lines on lower handle needs to card more competitive races, and not "horsemens' races" and the problem will be solved.

Tracks need to accept the blame for carding uncompetitive races to begin with, that's on them.

pandy
09-23-2014, 05:21 PM
I agree. When a horse is high on the line, such as 10-1, and goes off at 6-5, and wins, some bettors do think that the horse is some sort of "hot horse" or that the race is fixed. A line that is way off is not good for the sport.

Of course, most of these suspicious racing fans are simply ignorant, that's why we get stuck with dumb things like entries. Every time a trainer has two horses entered and the higher odds horse wins, you get these people who say, "see, the trainer used his low odds to set up a winning bet," which is nonsense. You can't satisfy people who don't understand racing.

A horse gets heavily bet below the ML and wins, the race is fixed, a heavy favorite loses and a big longshot wins the race, the race is fixed. You're never going to please an idiot no matter how hard you try.

Stillriledup
09-23-2014, 07:57 PM
I agree. When a horse is high on the line, such as 10-1, and goes off at 6-5, and wins, some bettors do think that the horse is some sort of "hot horse" or that the race is fixed. A line that is way off is not good for the sport.

Of course, most of these suspicious racing fans are simply ignorant, that's why we get stuck with dumb things like entries. Every time a trainer has two horses entered and the higher odds horse wins, you get these people who say, "see, the trainer used his low odds to set up a winning bet," which is nonsense. You can't satisfy people who don't understand racing.

A horse gets heavily bet below the ML and wins, the race is fixed, a heavy favorite loses and a big longshot wins the race, the race is fixed. You're never going to please an idiot no matter how hard you try.

lol i know what you mean about the people who complain about uncoupleds and the funny thing about it is that if they truly believed this, they have every opportunity to bet on the "longer priced runner" before the race goes off.

Those bettors want to be "protected" with entries, but if they were better handicappers, they could sniff out the opportunities in which the longer priced runner is actually the correct play.

RaceTrackDaddy
09-23-2014, 11:40 PM
Of course, most of these suspicious racing fans are simply ignorant, that's why we get stuck with dumb things like entries. Every time a trainer has two horses entered and the higher odds horse wins, you get these people who say, "see, the trainer used his low odds to set up a winning bet," which is nonsense. You can't satisfy people who don't understand racing.

If you think its nonsense, guess you have not bet too many races with uncoupled entries. There is one that got into my crawl and it was not in harness.

I had Marriedtothemusice (a Linda Rice trained) sprinter in my virtual stable. He won four out of five but was a perfect four for four with Cornelio up for the wins and was listed to go this time. The horse was doubled entered into two different graded stakes at Belmont that weekend. Stablemate Palace came into the race having not raced since February when he missed the place spot in his race. Linda trained them both and raced uncoupled. Baken was also in my virtual stable. I was hoping to see Marriedtothemusic on the grass but ended up going against one of the top sprinters in 2013 in his stablemate Palace and the front end speedster and pre-race favorite Baken.

Seems Linda was setting up Palace (closer) and using Marriedtothemusice as the rabbit to burn up Baken. The race was the True North Handicap back on June 7th. I had to dig up the charts just to make sure my memory of the race was correct and it was. Attached is the chart to the race. Baken did well to get what he got after being pushed that hard by Marriedtothemusice (who has had two more off the board placings since that race leaving him at 7- 4-1-0-0 for the year).

I don't think it was done to cash a ticket; rather to ensure a wicked pace so that Palace had the shot to win. Marriedtothemusic paid the price then and is still paying that price for burning up the track that day. For that reason alone, trainer entries should be coupled as they do race as a team in flat racing and harness racing.

pandy
09-24-2014, 06:19 AM
I realize that there are people who like entries, although studies have shown that the majority of bettors don't.

I've heard this argument before and I don't understand it. If they had been coupled it would not have changed the race. This was a GR2 sprint, of course there is going to be a fast pace. She did not enter Marriedtothemusic with the intention of sacrificing him to set up Palace. Just because a horse sets the pace doesn't mean that they are not trying to win, it was a 6 furlong sprint. If he didn't leave, neither of her horses would have had a chance because Bakken would have had an easy lead. This is the typical pace for a GR2 turf sprint at that distance in New York. This is good racing. You want a fast pace in a race like this and that's what you normally get.

pandy
09-24-2014, 07:28 AM
lol i know what you mean about the people who complain about uncoupleds and the funny thing about it is that if they truly believed this, they have every opportunity to bet on the "longer priced runner" before the race goes off.

Those bettors want to be "protected" with entries, but if they were better handicappers, they could sniff out the opportunities in which the longer priced runner is actually the correct play.


Correct. All this stuff about being protected is nonsense. You want protection? Don't bet, then your money will be protected. Or, as you say, if the higher odds of the uncoupled entry keeps beating you, bet the higher odds.

RaceTrackDaddy
09-24-2014, 02:10 PM
I realize that there are people who like entries, although studies have shown that the majority of bettors don't.

I've heard this argument before and I don't understand it. If they had been coupled it would not have changed the race. This was a GR2 sprint, of course there is going to be a fast pace. She did not enter Marriedtothemusic with the intention of sacrificing him to set up Palace. Just because a horse sets the pace doesn't mean that they are not trying to win, it was a 6 furlong sprint. If he didn't leave, neither of her horses would have had a chance because Bakken would have had an easy lead. This is the typical pace for a GR2 turf sprint at that distance in New York. This is good racing. You want a fast pace in a race like this and that's what you normally get.

The two major problems I see in racing today is lack of a standardized drug program (detection and list of drugs illegal). The other I see is the migration of major horses going into way too few barns. Add the uncoupling into the mix one should see that most of the purse money is going into few barns. In fact, Yonkers had to add a rule that limited a trainer to getting only two horses into the final. Harrington had three trainers for eight horses in the final of the Bobby Quillen. Harrington will be addressing that issue for next year's final with something similar to what Yonkers did in the Levy.

I really don't know if anyone has ever checked their rulebook of their jurisdiction but most have a rule that applies to coupled entries. No one has mentioned it but in a way when I stated that uncoupled entries race as a team in some way is reflective of that.

In the event that part of the coupled entry is disqualified for a rule infraction during the running of the race, All parts of that couple entry will be disqualified. These jurisdictions do not place rules in the books without reason. Something in the past history of coupled entries necessitated the need for such rule.

If the powers that be would address those two conditions (1. limiting the number of a trainer's entries into a final of a series) and (2. Uncoupled entries of the same trainer will be penalized for an ontrack infraction during the running of the race) I would love to see them uncoupled. Till that day comes, I am against them.

pandy
09-24-2014, 10:40 PM
Entries ultimately hurt the game more than they help. I have hit scores of longshots that would have been 3-5 or so if they had been coupled. This year I waited patiently for the Hambo so I could bet Trixton against his entrymate Father Patrick and I got 4-1 odds and a nice exacta with Nuncio. If these horses had been an entry, they would have been 1-9 and that not only would have cost me money, but it would have made the race so boring I probably would have just taped it and watched it when I got a chance.

As a horseplayer, I deserve to be treated like an adult and I should be able to get the odds I deserve on every horse I bet. Harness racing has enough odds on favorites winning. Entries just mean more winning odds on favorites and less overlays and longshot winners, a good way to put the finishing touches on shutting down the sport.

Stillriledup
09-24-2014, 10:48 PM
Entries ultimately hurt the game more than they help. I have hit scores of longshots that would have been 3-5 or so if they had been coupled. This year I waited patiently for the Hambo so I could bet Trixton against his entrymate Father Patrick and I got 4-1 odds and a nice exacta with Nuncio. If these horses had been an entry, they would have been 1-9 and that not only would have cost me money, but it would have made the race so boring I probably would have just taped it and watched it when I got a chance.

As a horseplayer, I deserve to be treated like an adult and I should be able to get the odds I deserve on every horse I bet. Harness racing has enough odds on favorites winning. Entries just mean more winning odds on favorites and less overlays and longshot winners, a good way to put the finishing touches on shutting down the sport.

Entries are coupled so the racing commission doesn't have to do their jobs and fine/suspend the humans from collusion. Why not just uncouple everything and watch carefully and dole out punishments for improprieties instead of putting the burden on the horseplayer?

I agree wholeheartedly about being treated like adults, the idea that they're protecting the public is balderdash.

Stillriledup
09-24-2014, 10:51 PM
The two major problems I see in racing today is lack of a standardized drug program (detection and list of drugs illegal). The other I see is the migration of major horses going into way too few barns. Add the uncoupling into the mix one should see that most of the purse money is going into few barns. In fact, Yonkers had to add a rule that limited a trainer to getting only two horses into the final. Harrington had three trainers for eight horses in the final of the Bobby Quillen. Harrington will be addressing that issue for next year's final with something similar to what Yonkers did in the Levy.

I really don't know if anyone has ever checked their rulebook of their jurisdiction but most have a rule that applies to coupled entries. No one has mentioned it but in a way when I stated that uncoupled entries race as a team in some way is reflective of that.

In the event that part of the coupled entry is disqualified for a rule infraction during the running of the race, All parts of that couple entry will be disqualified. These jurisdictions do not place rules in the books without reason. Something in the past history of coupled entries necessitated the need for such rule.

If the powers that be would address those two conditions (1. limiting the number of a trainer's entries into a final of a series) and (2. Uncoupled entries of the same trainer will be penalized for an ontrack infraction during the running of the race) I would love to see them uncoupled. Till that day comes, I am against them.

Harrington and other big tracks need to make rules for big races that every horse has to be trained by a different trainer. Not only that, but the horse has to be in that trainer's barn for his 5 previous starts...none of this switching barns at the last second jazz to skirt around the rule.

RaceTrackDaddy
09-25-2014, 12:40 AM
Entries ultimately hurt the game more than they help. I have hit scores of longshots that would have been 3-5 or so if they had been coupled. This year I waited patiently for the Hambo so I could bet Trixton against his entrymate Father Patrick and I got 4-1 odds and a nice exacta with Nuncio. If these horses had been an entry, they would have been 1-9 and that not only would have cost me money, but it would have made the race so boring I probably would have just taped it and watched it when I got a chance.

As a horseplayer, I deserve to be treated like an adult and I should be able to get the odds I deserve on every horse I bet. Harness racing has enough odds on favorites winning. Entries just mean more winning odds on favorites and less overlays and longshot winners, a good way to put the finishing touches on shutting down the sport.

If you think the uncoupled or coupled entries can make or break this sport, I lost all faith in you. It is not that important an issue in the grand scheme of things.

Just having the likes of Luis Pena still racing in this sport when it was testimony in a NY Court that his vet treated over 1,700 horses at various jurisdictions with drugs that were not permitted at the time of the treatment prior to race day. The judge did not render his decision in the prescribed time and Luis walks away and is welcomed at Pocono with opened arms. Just that one guy, Luis Pena has done more to destroy this sport than any uncoupled or coupled entries. It is really not that much of a detriment on the sport.

Having 5 horses out of 8 in a final with two others by a second trainer leaving the third trainer to enter the 8th horse is a bigger problem than uncoupled as these large stables are acting like corporations similar to Walmart and when they move into your track, the small stables tend to disappear with people leaving the business. I have seen too many of these grass roots horsemen have their lives changed as they cannot make a buck with these guys getting away with what they do. They are like BackAmerica in that they have so many of the horse population at the track that if they leave, the race secretary will be hard pressed to fill a card.

This one is not about Burke's but another trainer got five (5) positive tests on one day after he got two the day previous. That is 7 positive tests in two days and did not get a suspension. This happened early last year or late in 2012 at the Meadows. The judge wrote something about extenuating circumstances. They never informed the public afterwards too.

I can give you more like catering to an owner who at one time was banished for supposed lifetime as the horse he owned was the heavy favorite at 1/9. That horse failed to hit the board. Two live trifecta or might have been Superfecta tickets were cashed by this owner. As a result, the driver, Bill Fahy, the trainer Denis Ethier and the owner, James Shamming were all thrown off the track with lifetime suspensions. What the track doesn't tell you is that lifetime means until the track thinks the public forgot about it. By the way, that race had two tickets pay over $7,900 each. The purse of the race was $4k.

How about the The Pandorosa incident. Seems that horse turned up positive for morphine from the post race blood drawn after the first stake race of the season. Rumors about it was spread fast but that test never appeared in the publications until the Meadowlands was completed. Why so long from late April to July before fining the connections?

Drugs and cheats are found at every track and pose a much serious problem than coupling or uncoupling of entries. To think it does and will be the last nail in this sport is hog wash and you know it. It might self serving for your longshots but I am not sold that it is good for the sport.

Just on its face, this sport needs to at least appear as it cares what goes on the track. To leave it up the judges to do their jobs is hopeful but with my past experiences I have little faith in these guys. Case in point was the biggest race fix at the Meadows (or as it appeared to be a race fix) that saw then Federal Atty General Tom Corbett (now currently the Governor of PA) call a Federal Grand Jury to investigate a race that paid less than what it should have paid, but by today's standards, it is common practice. That is what is killing this sport and not coupling or uncoupling entries. That race the winners were 25/1, 10/1 and 9/1. The trifecta paid $583 for the winning tickets. A federal grand jury was called. Today, it is just another day at the races.

That is just some of the things that are causing the demise of the sport a lot more. Let me dig out that link... http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1144&dat=19810201&id=ksUdAAAAIBAJ&sjid=51wEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5136,72806 think this is the link and the story begins on page 1 but I saved the larger part of it.

RaceTrackDaddy
09-25-2014, 12:47 AM
Forgive me for not linking the judges to that story about the Meadows race being investigated, I forgot to say that the driver of the 25/1, won wire to wire at 25/1. I was in the 2 minute room when he cashed his ticket at the window after he was done racing that day.

He, the driver of the winner would later become the Presiding Judge at the Meadows. Hence not having the faith in the judges to enforce the rules.

pandy
09-25-2014, 08:41 AM
I don't think entries can make or break the sport, but I do think they cause more harm than good. The main problem, bettors who follow a horse that should be a longshot but then it shows up in an entry and is odds on, and wins.

Stillriledup
09-25-2014, 06:49 PM
If you think the uncoupled or coupled entries can make or break this sport, I lost all faith in you. It is not that important an issue in the grand scheme of things.

Just having the likes of Luis Pena still racing in this sport when it was testimony in a NY Court that his vet treated over 1,700 horses at various jurisdictions with drugs that were not permitted at the time of the treatment prior to race day. The judge did not render his decision in the prescribed time and Luis walks away and is welcomed at Pocono with opened arms. Just that one guy, Luis Pena has done more to destroy this sport than any uncoupled or coupled entries. It is really not that much of a detriment on the sport.

Having 5 horses out of 8 in a final with two others by a second trainer leaving the third trainer to enter the 8th horse is a bigger problem than uncoupled as these large stables are acting like corporations similar to Walmart and when they move into your track, the small stables tend to disappear with people leaving the business. I have seen too many of these grass roots horsemen have their lives changed as they cannot make a buck with these guys getting away with what they do. They are like BackAmerica in that they have so many of the horse population at the track that if they leave, the race secretary will be hard pressed to fill a card.

This one is not about Burke's but another trainer got five (5) positive tests on one day after he got two the day previous. That is 7 positive tests in two days and did not get a suspension. This happened early last year or late in 2012 at the Meadows. The judge wrote something about extenuating circumstances. They never informed the public afterwards too.

I can give you more like catering to an owner who at one time was banished for supposed lifetime as the horse he owned was the heavy favorite at 1/9. That horse failed to hit the board. Two live trifecta or might have been Superfecta tickets were cashed by this owner. As a result, the driver, Bill Fahy, the trainer Denis Ethier and the owner, James Shamming were all thrown off the track with lifetime suspensions. What the track doesn't tell you is that lifetime means until the track thinks the public forgot about it. By the way, that race had two tickets pay over $7,900 each. The purse of the race was $4k.

How about the The Pandorosa incident. Seems that horse turned up positive for morphine from the post race blood drawn after the first stake race of the season. Rumors about it was spread fast but that test never appeared in the publications until the Meadowlands was completed. Why so long from late April to July before fining the connections?

Drugs and cheats are found at every track and pose a much serious problem than coupling or uncoupling of entries. To think it does and will be the last nail in this sport is hog wash and you know it. It might self serving for your longshots but I am not sold that it is good for the sport.

Just on its face, this sport needs to at least appear as it cares what goes on the track. To leave it up the judges to do their jobs is hopeful but with my past experiences I have little faith in these guys. Case in point was the biggest race fix at the Meadows (or as it appeared to be a race fix) that saw then Federal Atty General Tom Corbett (now currently the Governor of PA) call a Federal Grand Jury to investigate a race that paid less than what it should have paid, but by today's standards, it is common practice. That is what is killing this sport and not coupling or uncoupling entries. That race the winners were 25/1, 10/1 and 9/1. The trifecta paid $583 for the winning tickets. A federal grand jury was called. Today, it is just another day at the races.

That is just some of the things that are causing the demise of the sport a lot more. Let me dig out that link... http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1144&dat=19810201&id=ksUdAAAAIBAJ&sjid=51wEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5136,72806 think this is the link and the story begins on page 1 but I saved the larger part of it.


Fantastic post. Great read.

It comes down to this with the horse betting. Tracks can sweep all the shady stuff under the rug, but bettors know its going on, nobody is fooled, people aren't stupid. They would be better off outing the crooks, tossing them out and prosecuting them to the fullest extent of the law instead of trying to hide the dirt in the bushes. Fans and bettors wouldn't hold it against tracks for outing crooks, but the under the rug stuff is because tracks feel that bad publicity would drive bettors away.....when the sweeping rug stuff is even worse, people know.

mrroyboy
09-25-2014, 07:19 PM
Just out of curiosity wouldn't morphine slow a horse way down? More likely to fall asleep in the middle of the race than to win.LOL
Drugs are a big problem. Don't mean to make light of it.