Santa Anita Morning Line

[Track Phantom]

I know there have been threads on this before. I searched but couldn't find them.

Someone help me here. Isn't the job of the morning line guy to try and predict what the public will do and not his opinion on who is going to win the race?

His making #11 Congregationalist the 4-1 favorite AND SELECTING HIM ON TOP in race 3 on 1-3-15 is insane. The horse has run once in a year, beat one horse home, drops again and a low percentage rider. There is NO WAY the public was going to make that runner the favorite. Currently on the board at 9-1.

Then I listen to this clown and he selects the horse.

It really surprises me that Santa Anita has this amateur in charge of the morning line AND in the paddock with selections. Wow!

Maybe I'm being too hard on him but it bugs me.

[luisbe]

Good position jobs is for those with talent for lobby. Battaglia calling races is a joke.

[Stillriledup]

I know there have been threads on this before. I searched but couldn't find them.

Someone help me here. Isn't the job of the morning line guy to try and predict what the public will do and not his opinion on who is going to win the race?

His making #11 Congregationalist the 4-1 favorite AND SELECTING HIM ON TOP in race 3 on 1-3-15 is insane. The horse has run once in a year, beat one horse home, drops again and a low percentage rider. There is NO WAY the public was going to make that runner the favorite. Currently on the board at 9-1.

Then I listen to this clown and he selects the horse.

It really surprises me that Santa Anita has this amateur in charge of the morning line AND in the paddock with selections. Wow!

Maybe I'm being too hard on him but it bugs me.

I'm sure he would appreciate knowing that its not ok to be mediocre.

Never been a fan of that horse.

I like the 12 here, i think he turned the corner with his win 2 back he's been full of run recently, hopefully the bias won't beat him.

[Track Phantom]

#11 Congregationalist went off at 10-1 (and beat one runner home). He was just a smidge from being the SECOND LONGEST SHOT in the race.

This guy has him as the morning line favorite.

If he is doing the job the way it was intended, he assumes the public would make him the favorite. Anyone with two days of reading the racing form would know this horse was, at best, 6th choice in the race.

How does this guy get it so wrong? I'm dead serious. I just don't understand it. Wouldn't you be embarrassed by that if you were doing it? I would.

[mabred]

wish he would at least do the morning line before
3pm the day before they race.They are always the
last one to have the program done.Guess like he
would rather tout horses.

Mabred

[Stillriledup]

#11 Congregationalist went off at 10-1 (and beat one runner home). He was just a smidge from being the SECOND LONGEST SHOT in the race.

This guy has him as the morning line favorite.

If he is doing the job the way it was intended, he assumes the public would make him the favorite. Anyone with two days of reading the racing form would know this horse was, at best, 6th choice in the race.

How does this guy get it so wrong? I'm dead serious. I just don't understand it. Wouldn't you be embarrassed by that if you were doing it? I would.

Forgetting the ML, that horse has run plenty at SA, he's a cruddy hanger, sharp bettors know exactly what that horse is all about, he's not reliable, once in a while he runs a bang up race, but that win he has on April 6th is what can get you to maybe pick him or give him a short ML, but there is more to the story.

I have a specific note on that horse on April 6th that he had "funny head movement" i put "unfluid" for hot trainer. So, Cerin had a "hot streak" about that time....and now, while he's not exactly cold, he's not as hot as that time frame....and i hated this horse otherwise, so maybe i was right about the unfluid nature of his win, because he missed time after that...this was not a horse who was rounding to form, or in form or anything like that...not to mention all the local jocks bailed, if that horse was any good, Bejarano would have been riding him.

Lots of reasons to stay away from that horse, everyone knew except Mr ML guy.

[Track Phantom]

Forgetting the ML, that horse has run plenty at SA, he's a cruddy hanger, sharp bettors know exactly what that horse is all about, he's not reliable, once in a while he runs a bang up race, but that win he has on April 6th is what can get you to maybe pick him or give him a short ML, but there is more to the story.

I have a specific note on that horse on April 6th that he had "funny head movement" i put "unfluid" for hot trainer. So, Cerin had a "hot streak" about that time....and now, while he's not exactly cold, he's not as hot as that time frame....and i hated this horse otherwise, so maybe i was right about the unfluid nature of his win, because he missed time after that...this was not a horse who was rounding to form, or in form or anything like that...not to mention all the local jocks bailed, if that horse was any good, Bejarano would have been riding him.

Lots of reasons to stay away from that horse, everyone knew except Mr ML guy.

The thread really isn't about making a case for or against this horse. It's about creating a morning line the way a morning line maker is supposed to make one.

Maybe I'm dead wrong here. Maybe the morning line guy is supposed to make a morning line that mirrors his opinion on who he thinks will win the race.

Someone please correct me here.....

[proximity]

The Stronach Group is North America’s leading Thoroughbred racetrack owner/operator and inventor of the popular horse wizard machines that have taken the continent by storm..... :rolleyes:

[cj]

The thread really isn't about making a case for or against this horse. It's about creating a morning line the way a morning line maker is supposed to make one.

Maybe I'm dead wrong here. Maybe the morning line guy is supposed to make a morning line that mirrors his opinion on who he thinks will win the race.

Someone please correct me here.....

Do you think he does this often? If not, maybe he just blew one and let his handicapping influence him. The guy does what, a couple thousand morning lines a year?

[Track Phantom]

Do you think he does this often? If not, maybe he just blew one and let his handicapping influence him. The guy does what, a couple thousand morning lines a year?

Often. I'd dare say always. It is extremely perplexing to me.

Again, I'm not a morning line maker but I was always taught that the ML is supposed to reflect the public. I'm sure he knows this and he has decided to do it his way. I think it is doing a disservice but, who knows, shit like that bothers me and, on the grand scheme of things, who cares?

[Stillriledup]

Do you think he does this often? If not, maybe he just blew one and let his handicapping influence him. The guy does what, a couple thousand morning lines a year?

Depends on how much you know the game and the circuit. I have to imagine White only follows SA and the other major So Cal tracks, so he has more time than i do (for example) to "know the horses". I watch other tracks as well as SA and i knew that this horse in question is a crud, it didnt take me much time to dig for a specific note on the horse unraveling physically in his Apr 6th win and then falling off the map for 7 or 8 months.

Its easy to blow one if you are handicapping a race with a lot of unknowns...but, why would White not know that specific horse is a stinker who looked "off" in April and disappeared after the win? That horse has a ton of So Cal races and has hung badly and stunk in most of them. What's there to think about?

[Dark Horse]

White's approach is very loose. His prerace odds can add up to as much as 137%, where about 10% less is normal for the main tracks (and the closing lines add up to about 120%). I have no idea why he doesn't tighten up his lines. But I don't think that the betting public disagreeing with those lines is noticeably different than at other tracks, and those percentage swings are part of my standard interface.

[Track Phantom]

White's approach is very loose. His prerace odds can add up to as much as 137%, where about 10% less is normal for the main tracks (and the closing lines add up to about 120%). I have no idea why he doesn't tighten up his lines. But I don't think that the betting public disagreeing with those lines is noticeably different than at other tracks, and those percentage swings are part of my standard interface.

Three things bug me about how he does this:

He has too many runners between 2-1 and 6-1 normally. He basically gives everyone too much of a chance. I personally like to see more separation there.
He handicaps and places ML odds to the runners he likes and, basically, disregards what the public is likely to do. (hence this chain).
Morning line odds are way too late in getting implemented. Should be 3 days out. I've seen it still not ready 1 day out.

[Stillriledup]

Three things bug me about how he does this:

He has too many runners between 2-1 and 6-1 normally. He basically gives everyone too much of a chance. I personally like to see more separation there.
He handicaps and places ML odds to the runners he likes and, basically, disregards what the public is likely to do. (hence this chain).
Morning line odds are way too late in getting implemented. Should be 3 days out. I've seen it still not ready 1 day out.


No doubt. But, if everyone "has a chance" won't that create more perception that its a "great betting race" and there's a reason to bet the race and have more horses to actually bet?

[horses4courses]

Three things bug me about how he does this:

He has too many runners between 2-1 and 6-1 normally. He basically gives everyone too much of a chance. I personally like to see more separation there.
He handicaps and places ML odds to the runners he likes and, basically, disregards what the public is likely to do. (hence this chain).
Morning line odds are way too late in getting implemented. Should be 3 days out. I've seen it still not ready 1 day out.


#1 comes down to simple math.

Jon White has ignored sticking to any set formula
on what a M/L should add up to percentage wise.
It's very easy. Santa Anita's takeout on WPS is 15.4%
You could easily round up to 120%.
125% wouldn't even be that bad - plenty of leeway.
What does Mr. White routinely do?
He sets his line at well over 130%, maybe even 140.
It's ludicrous.

Here's an example of a line set to 120%.
Six horse field - every horse in the race is 4-1.
Now, I realize that is oversimplifying, but it's just an example.
Jon White's line would have those same horses all at 7-2,
which would come out to just over 132%. Why does he do it?
I have no idea. I'm not sure he even realizes what he is doing.

Point #2 he would probably deny, but I'm not sure.

Point #3 has been an ongoing problem with SoCal M/L for decades.
They never put the line out more than 24 hours ahead of time.
It's a joke. They draw the races as far out as anywhere else.
The morning line should be out 2-3 days in advance.
Not that it really matters, though. It's a work of fiction, anyway.

[Dark Horse]

As soon as the tote board starts flashing there's an immediate drop into the range where the public would expect the lines to be. So the tote board, i.e. the way it is programmed, instantly disregards White's lazy figures. That's the funny part.

[elhelmete]

As soon as the tote board starts flashing there's an immediate drop into the range where the public would expect the lines to be. So the tote board, i.e. the way it is programmed, instantly disregards White's lazy figures. That's the funny part.

Yes and we all know first flash odds never change in 20 minutes.

[Dark Horse]

If it bothers you, you can always do what the tote board does and use a different calibration. If you want the odds to add up to 120%, or to 100%, you can easily do so in Excel. You should probably do that anyway, if you want to see the overlays regardless of what the total odds add up to. Instead of fractions, use 300 for 3/1, 60 for 3/5, etc.

[Dark Horse]

Yes and we all know first flash odds never change in 20 minutes.

Some things change fast. Some things last a lifetime.

[Track Phantom]

Honest Question:

Is Jon White required to select the favorite as his selection to win each race? (He does both print and audio in the paddock and has his top 4 selections per race).

Also, is Jon White required to select the morning line favorite based on who he thinks will win the race?

The reason I ask is the following statistic:
Through the first 85 races of the meet, Jon White has selected the morning line favorite to win 82 times (96%). The 3 times he didn't select the favorite, he chose the 2nd favorite to win.

None of this is logical. He can't (or I hope he can't) believe the favorite is going to win every race. I would think he would have more to offer than that. However, he shouldn't be creating a morning line based on who he thinks is going to win the race.

He should be handicapping the public when creating morning lines and handicapping the race, and horses, to determine his top selection.

What am I missing here?

[Stillriledup]

Honest Question:

Is Jon White required to select the favorite as his selection to win each race? (He does both print and audio in the paddock and has his top 4 selections per race).

Also, is Jon White required to select the morning line favorite based on who he thinks will win the race?

The reason I ask is the following statistic:
Through the first 85 races of the meet, Jon White has selected the morning line favorite to win 82 times (96%). The 3 times he didn't select the favorite, he chose the 2nd favorite to win.

None of this is logical. He can't (or I hope he can't) believe the favorite is going to win every race. I would think he would have more to offer than that. However, he shouldn't be creating a morning line based on who he thinks is going to win the race.

He should be handicapping the public when creating morning lines and handicapping the race, and horses, to determine his top selection.

What am I missing here?

Maybe he feels if he doesn't pick the favorite or the 2nd choice, he's insulting the connections of those runners.

Its better off not releasing any picks at all if the picks are going to be that of either a simpleton or someone with such strong biases than he can't be objective.

Its fine to not be objective, just don't pretend to be.

[Greyfox]

Again, I'm not a morning line maker but I was always taught that the ML is supposed to reflect the public.

That's my understanding of the Morning Line maker's role too.

[Track Phantom]

Honest Question:

Is Jon White required to select the favorite as his selection to win each race? (He does both print and audio in the paddock and has his top 4 selections per race).

Also, is Jon White required to select the morning line favorite based on who he thinks will win the race?

The reason I ask is the following statistic:
Through the first 85 races of the meet, Jon White has selected the morning line favorite to win 82 times (96%). The 3 times he didn't select the favorite, he chose the 2nd favorite to win.

None of this is logical. He can't (or I hope he can't) believe the favorite is going to win every race. I would think he would have more to offer than that. However, he shouldn't be creating a morning line based on who he thinks is going to win the race.

He should be handicapping the public when creating morning lines and handicapping the race, and horses, to determine his top selection.

What am I missing here?

I honestly want to know the rationale here. I sent him a message on Twitter but he won't respond. No accountability. No drive for excellence. No need to answer to anyone. Just do whatever....

This makes me appreciate what kind of presentation and product that is put on in NY.

[Dark Horse]

With the exception of Michelle Yu, the prerace comments in Southern Cal are terrible. White is merely explaining his morning lines. Possibly the biggest joker is Quigley, who's favorite selection by far is the all-button. You're exactly right. Other than Yu, there's zero drive for excellence. It doesn't really matter to me, because I find all prerace chatter distracting. I have it on only to be informed of last minute changes or delays.

[Ocala Mike]

Time to rehash what I've posted before about the M/L, NYRA style.

What I was told by two different NYRA M/L makers back in the late 70's/early 80's (B.J. O'Neill/Donald LaPlace) when I worked in the calculating room is that the M/L is a HYBRID combining a prediction of what the public will do with a little bit of linemaker preference.

B. J., for example, was a crusty old Damon Runyon-type character who made the line with the best of them. He used to gloat when a horse he made, say, 4-1, won and paid $17.00 (kind of an "I told you so" moment-in other words, the public was WRONG and he was RIGHT!). Donald was more inclined to try to be a barometer for the public; I remember listening in on telecons he would have with trainers who thought he made their horses too low or high in the line.

One thing reains true about NYRA: the M/L guy is not some flunkie that they pulled off the mutuel line, but a knowledgable racing guy. You will, by the way, never see on a NYRA program a listing called "M/L Selections"; they've got Beyer, Blewitt, and Beer to do that.

[mountainman]

Time to rehash what I've posted before about the M/L, NYRA style.

What I was told by two different NYRA M/L makers back in the late 70's/early 80's (B.J. O'Neill/Donald LaPlace) when I worked in the calculating room is that the M/L is a HYBRID combining a prediction of what the public will do with a little bit of linemaker preference.

B. J., for example, was a crusty old Damon Runyon-type character who made the line with the best of them. He used to gloat when a horse he made, say, 4-1, won and paid $17.00 (kind of an "I told you so" moment-in other words, the public was WRONG and he was RIGHT!). Donald was more inclined to try to be a barometer for the public; I remember listening in on telecons he would have with trainers who thought he made their horses too low or high in the line.

One thing reains true about NYRA: the M/L guy is not some flunkie that they pulled off the mutuel line, but a knowledgable racing guy. You will, by the way, never see on a NYRA program a listing called "M/L Selections"; they've got Beyer, Blewitt, and Beer to do that.

In the aftermath of a given race, it's only human for a ML maker to try and have it both ways. For instance, if a 7/2 that I had pegged at 2-1 scores, I'm quick (in private conversations with Nancy or Joe) to castigate the public for it's "failure to see my wisdom." However, if a chalk I'd correctly lined at 2-1 runs up the track, I focus afterward on having accurately predicted the odds. Human ego and self-serving spin.

But make no mistake, a track odds-maker's ONLY task is to predict how the public will wager. Period.

Incidentally, it just KILLS me to have a live horse in mind for a few weeks, but then admit to myself that its attributes aren't quite as subtle as I'd prefer to believe, and then set the odds accordingly for the track program. Just KILLS me.

[davew]

As soon as the tote board starts flashing there's an immediate drop into the range where the public would expect the lines to be. So the tote board, i.e. the way it is programmed, instantly disregards White's lazy figures. That's the funny part.


The odds are calculated from the amount in the win pool as if the pool was closed and race ran.

[Robert Fischer]

Anybody that doesn't know - "Mountainman" Mark is the morning line maker and track handicapper for Mountaineer.

He's one of the best around (i'm not bullshitting or sugar coating).

He's also HONEST almost to a fault.

Trust that he sees some of those "subtle" live entries, and I've never seen him set the morning line odds higher, at the expense of the public, for his own gain. Rather the opposite.

I'm not huge into watching handicapping shows and morning lines, so i can't claim that this is all-inclusive, -but New York and Mountaineer are the only 2 I can think of off the top, where I respect the broadcast on my level of play. Both do a professional job, and are informative for both the casual public and the serious player.

In the aftermath of a given race, it's only human for a ML maker to try and have it both ways. For instance, if a 7/2 that I had pegged at 2-1 scores, I'm quick (in private conversations with Nancy or Joe) to castigate the public for it's "failure to see my wisdom." However, if a chalk I'd correctly lined at 2-1 runs up the track, I focus afterward on having accurately predicted the odds. Human ego and self-serving spin.

But make no mistake, a track odds-maker's ONLY task is to predict how the public will wager. Period.

Incidentally, it just KILLS me to have a live horse in mind for a few weeks, but then admit to myself that its attributes aren't quite as subtle as I'd prefer to believe, and then set the odds accordingly for the track program. Just KILLS me.

[Stillriledup]

Anybody that doesn't know - "Mountainman" Mark is the morning line maker and track handicapper for Mountaineer.

He's one of the best around (i'm not bullshitting or sugar coating).

He's also HONEST almost to a fault.

Trust that he sees some of those "subtle" live entries, and I've never seen him set the morning line odds higher, at the expense of the public, for his own gain. Rather the opposite.

I'm not huge into watching handicapping shows and morning lines, so i can't claim that this is all-inclusive, -but New York and Mountaineer are the only 2 I can think of off the top, where I respect the broadcast on my level of play. Both do a professional job, and are informative for both the casual public and the serious player.

Love Mark. True, if you're playing the mountain, you can't have them on mute.

[Robert Fischer]

How about today with Hoppertunity at Santa Anita?


Purely sticking with the thread's idea - I'd say "this idiot set the morning line @ 9-5, on an OBVIOUS even money shot?? ****ing terrible. Incompetent even."

I think everybody knows that was a horse with an expected off-odds at around Even Money.

However, it's also worth questioning whether a misleading morning line of "9/5" for the fan-favorite horse running in the feature race will attract more money and more public players, than an accurate morning line of "Even Money".

Commitment is certainly a strong psychological motivator, and if the track believes that by misrepresenting the probable odds of a horse like Hoppertunity, it will get more players to commit to the race, then it's a good business move for them.

[Track Phantom]

How about today with Hoppertunity at Santa Anita?


Purely sticking with the thread's idea - I'd say "this idiot set the morning line @ 9-5, on an OBVIOUS even money shot?? ****ing terrible. Incompetent even."

I think everybody knows that was a horse with an expected off-odds at around Even Money.

However, it's also worth questioning whether a misleading morning line of "9/5" for the fan-favorite horse running in the feature race will attract more money and more public players, than an accurate morning line of "Even Money".

Commitment is certainly a strong psychological motivator, and if the track believes that by misrepresenting the probable odds of a horse like Hoppertunity, it will get more players to commit to the race, then it's a good business move for them.

Absolutely no way they are involved at this level of thinking. The guy is flat out incompetent, almost question whether he is "slow". It really is bizarre.

Imagine handicapping the entire card every day and having to give out your selections in print and in the paddock and go with the 1st fav over the 2nd fav over the 3rd fav in every race. Not in most races, EVERY race. How can someone honestly be this dull and obvious? The only way I would say he isn't mentally ret****d is if he is making the morning line based on his selections. Which is equally absurd in a different way.

Again, no one can give me a straight answer on this. I find it extremely hard to understand.

[Robert Fischer]

I don't want to make personal attacks on the guy, and I honestly haven't paid any attention to him to form an opinion.

It's unfortunate that the level of quality is so low, and that racing is so myopic in so many facets.

[Ocala Mike]

Are there any A/E's in today's 8th race at SA (Sun., 1/11). If not, the M/L maker has given us about a 150 point M/L, instead of the desired 120 or so. :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown:

[Track Phantom]

If there was any doubt that Jon White makes his top "handicapping choice" the morning line favorite, check out the 9th on Sunday, 1-11-15. He made #2 WHISKEY WILD the favorite (7-2) and made #10 PAT THE BEAR the third choice (9-2). Everyone on all radio shows had #10 PAT THE BEAR their play of the day, looked a standout on paper and was always going to be the big favorite.

(Plus he talked up his second choice, #3 Bandido Too, for 2 minutes. It was scratched 4 hours ago).

I can't let this drop. It's completely impossible to believe.

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/WWPTB_1480x478_zps25509747.png

[letswastemoney]

If there was any doubt that Jon White makes his top "handicapping choice" the morning line favorite, check out the 9th on Sunday, 1-11-15. He made #2 WHISKEY WILD the favorite (7-2) and made #10 PAT THE BEAR the third choice (9-2). Everyone on all radio shows had #10 PAT THE BEAR their play of the day, looked a standout on paper and was always going to be the big favorite.

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/WWPTB_1480x478_zps25509747.pngWhat makes Pat the Bear a standout? They look nearly the same.

[Stillriledup]

What makes Pat the Bear a standout? They look nearly the same.

First time O'neill. Big "trainer change". :D

[Tall One]

First thing that jumps out at me is the drop from 62.5 down to 30,000.

[Robert Fischer]

What makes Pat the Bear a standout? They look nearly the same.
Pat the Bear droping from 62.5 to 30. This was his 2nd lifetime start and he ran "evenly" first time for a 63 fig, and had some excuses in the comments.

Whisky Wild was dropping from 40 to 30. He lost 10 lengths from the 2nd call last time and ran a 48.

That right there is enough to make Pat the Bear look a TON better than Whiskey Wild.

However we didn't see the race. If we trusted the morning line we'd say "Hey, Whiskey Wild must have shown something amazing! in the race in order to be such an unbelievably low morning line, let's watch the replay". Then 5 minutes later we'd scratch our crotch and say "that's 5 minutes of my life, I'll never get back".

It turns out that it was simply a HORRIBLE morning line.
Then the public betting further backed that up.

I don't know if Valento is correct with this "handicapping his picks instead of the public" thing, but it sure looks like it from the example.

Pretty disappointing.


First thing that jumps out at me is the drop from 62.5 down to 30,000.
yup

[letswastemoney]

Pat the Bear droping from 62.5 to 30. This was his 2nd lifetime start and he ran "evenly" first time for a 63 fig, and had some excuses in the comments.

Whisky Wild was dropping from 40 to 30. He lost 10 lengths from the 2nd call last time and ran a 48.

That right there is enough to make Pat the Bear look a TON better than Whiskey Wild.

However we didn't see the race. If we trusted the morning line we'd say "Hey, Whiskey Wild must have shown something amazing! in the race in order to be such an unbelievably low morning line, let's watch the replay". Then 5 minutes later we'd scratch our crotch and say "that's 5 minutes of my life, I'll never get back".

It turns out that it was simply a HORRIBLE morning line.
Then the public betting further backed that up.

I don't know if Valento is correct with this "handicapping his picks instead of the public" thing, but it sure looks like it from the example.

Pretty disappointing.



yupI guess so, but I could see the argument that the oddsmaker saw they had roughly the same sprint speed figure if he was using DRF to look at this, and assume the public would notice the slight trouble Whiskey had in the route.

Then again, I may just be injecting my own opinion from what I see immediately if I were going to bet, rather than predicting what the public would think.

[Poindexter]

What makes Pat the Bear a standout? They look nearly the same.

Watch the replay of Pat the Bear's debut and see if you have the same question. Morning line handicapper should have done that.

[letswastemoney]

Watch the replay of Pat the Bear's debut and see if you have the same question. Morning line handicapper should have done that.I'm not a morning line handicapper, but I think it would be maddening to look at replays for every race for different horses each race. I think he just made an honest mistake here.

[Robert Fischer]

I guess so, but I could see the argument that the oddsmaker saw they had roughly the same sprint speed figure if he was using DRF to look at this, and assume the public would notice the slight trouble Whiskey had in the route.

Then again, I may just be injecting my own opinion from what I see immediately if I were going to bet, rather than predicting what the public would think.

You may be facing a psychological commitment bias after you posted "What makes Pat the Bear a standout? They look nearly the same." - that makes you wish to search for ways to justify the previous comment.

Or, you may have a much different way of looking at a race like this than I do.
Possibly you and the oddsmaker both saw something? However, I don't think he would have used the reasons stated and thought that the public would dismiss the poor race last time and at the same time find a reason to give the horse a 4% greater chance of winning than the O'Neal horse.

[mountainman]

Often. I'd dare say always. It is extremely perplexing to me.

Again, I'm not a morning line maker but I was always taught that the ML is supposed to reflect the public. I'm sure he knows this and he has decided to do it his way. I think it is doing a disservice but, who knows, shit like that bothers me and, on the grand scheme of things, who cares?

in some cases, you might be confusing cause and effect.

I wonder if he tries to "fix" a bad line by talking the public onto his ill-chosen favorite? That's the only explanation I can think of. (and it's pretty weak)

[mountainman]

Watch the replay of Pat the Bear's debut and see if you have the same question. Morning line handicapper should have done that.

Maybe. But only if he thinks public opinion (or inside money) will reflect whatever knowledge he gains.

[Track Phantom]

I've been pretty hard on this guy but for good reason. There are so few "good jobs" in racing and this guy doesn't deserve the one he has. I'm sure there are other qualified in the So. Cal. area that would take this job seriously.

Regarding this example, while I had the #2 (his ML fav) picked third, and moved up to 2nd after the scratch of #3, on paper, a morning line maker should recognize the likely action on the #10. With the major drop out of a key race, with fast works and all the traffic trouble, this horse was going to be no better than 7-5. EVERYONE, and I mean, EVERYONE was on this horse. Even HE said before the race, the #10 comes out of a key race and with fast works.

I could live with him making the #2 the ML favorite if he thought the public would bet it. BUT, and this is the main point of this whole thing, HE PICKED IT TO WIN. Thus, he thought it was the best horse on paper and made it the favorite and didn't give a second thought to what the public was going to do.

In addition, he goes on and on about his second choice that was scratched earlier in the day.

It just looks like he isn't taking this seriously. If he is, I'd like him to explain himself selecting the morning line favorite in 95 out of the first 100 races in the meet during his paddock show and also in print on the SA website.

He seems like a nice guy but that doesn't count. This is one of the premier tracks in the country and he cheapens it by his seeming indifference of doing the job of a morning line maker the way it supposed to be done.

Maybe he'll explain himself and I'll see the light and offer up a humble apology. But, from where I'm sitting, I'd fire this guy tomorrow and get a younger, more enthusiastic person who gives a shit.

[Stillriledup]

I'm not a morning line handicapper, but I think it would be maddening to look at replays for every race for different horses each race. I think he just made an honest mistake here.

He's live and at the track...and he appears to not follow any other circuit, so he has plenty of time to watch tapes at night as well as walking to the front side, binoculars in hand, and watching the races live.

Does he watch the races live, or does he just sit in the back by the paddock looking at his notes so he can sound smart for the race that's up in 25 minutes? I think if you are a ML guy and you're serious about your job, you ought to be on the front side, watching races live, and taking specific notes on the races and even the gallop outs. If you're doing one track/circuit and you're being PAID to make a morning line as well as being paid to be an analyst, you really don't have much of an excuse for not knowing each horse inside and out.

I would completely forgive this away as an honest mistake if White has shown otherwise that he DOES watch endless amounts of replays, watches the races live and is always on the hunt to make a ML that doesn't add up to 140 or 150.....he doesn't show any of this so for me, its hard to make this specific excuse for the guy.

Maybe he works hard and does what he can but doesn't have a talented enough eye to know what's good and what it not? Its hard to answer any of this, but the first question i would ask would be is the guy actually watching the races live and making notes on the gallop outs as well as other specific notes that live patrons can get that people on tv can't see. If he's not watching live.....i would have to ask why not.

Also, is the guy even betting? If you're not risking your money on the races, any kind of opinion you come up with has to be taken with a grain of salt. If there's a horse destined to be 1-1 and you make him 9-2, does it cost you money in anyway? If it doesn't cost you money and you don't make any extra money making an accurate ML on this or any other race, where's the incentive to be great?

[Track Phantom]

Another issue I have.....The Santa Anita past performances for Thursday, 1-15-15, have been available since early yesterday. It's been, at least, a day and a half and the morning lines are not made yet. To me, this should be done as soon as possible when the entries are taken. I have a feeling the guy has too much on his plate and can't get to it. Another reason why I would offload this to someone younger with more time and energy.

[Stillriledup]

SA Race 2 ML for Jan 23

6 horses

8-5
4-1
20-1
3-1
8-1
1-1

is this right? Im no morning line guru but it just seems like with a 1-1 and an 8-5 some of these others should be higher.

no?

[Track Phantom]

SA Race 2 ML for Jan 23

6 horses

8-5
4-1
20-1
3-1
8-1
1-1

is this right? Im no morning line guru but it just seems like with a 1-1 and an 8-5 some of these others should be higher.

no?

Win pool takeout at Santa Anita is 18%, I believe. A balanced morning line would be, for this race, around 124%.

Jon White's morning line for this race is at a ridiculous 147%. He's got one or two runners (or all slightly) out of whack.

I would set it as follows:
1: 3-1
2: 9-2
3: 20-1
4: 7-2
5: 8-1
6: 7-5

The only significant changes would be on the two favorites. He has deflated them too much without inflating the others. Something has to give. If he were to leave the 1 at 8-5 and the 6 at even money, his line should look something like this to balance:

1: 8-5
2: 6-1
3: 30-1
4: 5-1
5: 15-1
6: 1-1

In short, he has absolutely no idea what he is doing. Don't believe me? Read this article written by a PROFESSIONAL. http://www.arlingtonpark.com/node/10222

Notice a couple of things from this article:
"...as official morning-line odds maker my job is to predict, as accurately as possible, how the betting public will wager on each race."

"Keep in mind that the morning line odds do not reflect the odds maker's selections, they are merely a prediction of how the betting public will wager on the race." (Jon White has selected his morning line favorite in 126 of the first 134 races at Santa Anita this year, 94%).

"... A racetrack loses creditability when the morning line maker does a poor job...."

"A true morning line must "balance". If there wasn't any takeout from the ‘win' pool, the base for the point system would be 100. But the line maker must factor in takeout to his formula to arrive at a mathematically correct morning line."

[jballscalls]

Also, is the guy even betting? If you're not risking your money on the races, any kind of opinion you come up with has to be taken with a grain of salt. If there's a horse destined to be 1-1 and you make him 9-2, does it cost you money in anyway? If it doesn't cost you money and you don't make any extra money making an accurate ML on this or any other race, where's the incentive to be great?

As usual with you, i feel the exact opposite. If someone is betting, that's when their opinion should be taken with a grain of salt because that's why they would possibly want to set a bad line to help inflate their odds.

Also, the incentive is to do your job as well as possible.

[Inner Dirt]

If I was playing Santa Anita I would look at a bad morning line handicapper as a blessing. I don't know about where you guys bet but I have found on the tracks I play the morning line has a lot of influence. I have noticed on pick 3's the mutuels the horses pay doesn't dictate the pay out as closely as what order the horse was in the morning line. Some people will toss in horses with low morning line odds even if they look like crap. Let's say you hit a pick 3 sequence like this 10.20\11.40\13.00 if those horse were 3-1 in the morning line that went off higher the pay out will be a lot lower than if they were all 8-1 shots that were bet down. The only drawback to the bad morning line handicapper if he puts 3-1 odds on a horse you like that should be 10-1.

A lot of people don't trust their own judgement or think insiders know something they don't. I had a group of guys who I would play the occasional large pick six ticket with. They all knew something about handicapping but they always insisted throwing in the heavy morning line favorite even if he wasn't in the right spot. So at Santa Anita I think a person could benefit from the bad morning line whenever they could beat a favorite who shouldn't be.

[cj]

Check out the two big races at Sam Houston Saturday if you want to see a dreadful morning line.

[horses4courses]

One thing I've noticed at Santa Anita that doesn't happen
at other tracks that I know of - there is usually an
updated M/L in the event of any significant late scratches.

This would be fine if the original line was any good.
The reality is, it just adds insult to injury. :ThmbDown:

[Track Phantom]

The only drawback to the bad morning line handicapper if he puts 3-1 odds on a horse you like that should be 10-1.

This is my biggest issue with it. He puts too many horses in the "win" bucket. I love it when my horse is 10-1, even if I think he looks a bit better on paper than that. Many, and I mean MANY, players have a hard time really playing a runner at 10-1 or higher on the morning line. When he makes this horse 3-1 and it drifts up to 7-1, 8-1, lots of people toss it into horizontal wagers.

It's really not worth debating. The guy makes his "own" selection the morning line favorite, rarely considers (or just doesn't know) how the public will bet, has even mentioned that he made a horse a lower morning line so as not to "upset the owners" and doesn't "balance" the morning line considering takeout.

If you could make a list and check off the boxes of what NOT to do as a morning line maker, he's got them all covered. In my opinion, he severely cheapens Santa Anita with this silly, amateurish approach. He is not right for that job. Period.

[Vince Bruun]

Wow, it's hard for me to believe the comments in this thread, especially personal attacks toward a man I have known to be nothing but a hard-working, knowledgeable and courteous professional for decades in the Thoroughbred industry. I've never met a morning line maker yet who doesn't make an occasional mistake, and perhaps a scientific study comparing line makers from each circuit would yield more concrete evidence?

[Track Phantom]

Wow, it's hard for me to believe the comments in this thread, especially personal attacks toward a man I have known to be nothing but a hard-working, knowledgeable and courteous professional for decades in the Thoroughbred industry. I've never met a morning line maker yet who doesn't make an occasional mistake, and perhaps a scientific study comparing line makers from each circuit would yield more concrete evidence?

The guy appears to be a good guy. I applaud that. That isn't the issue. I've emailed Santa Anita for an explanation and sent him two messages on Twitter. Ignored. So, if he or Santa Anita is concerned about the perception of their players, have the decency to answer a simple, tactful question. Failure to do that and you'll allow perceptions to run wild.

My perception is that he is a very nice guy, cares a lot about what he is doing and woefully incompetent. Sorry.

[Stillriledup]

Wow, it's hard for me to believe the comments in this thread, especially personal attacks toward a man I have known to be nothing but a hard-working, knowledgeable and courteous professional for decades in the Thoroughbred industry. I've never met a morning line maker yet who doesn't make an occasional mistake, and perhaps a scientific study comparing line makers from each circuit would yield more concrete evidence?

I think its not that people are criticizing the occasional mistake, its the entire philosophy in how the morning line is set.

[taxicab]

Check out the two big races at Sam Houston Saturday if you want to see a dreadful morning line.

In the Turf Cup the linemaker has Bim Bam as the 3-1 favorite......he'll go off as the 5th or 6th choice.
He has Coalport @ 5-1 for Ramsey/Maker/Javier.
Coalport has passed the wire first in 5 of his last 6 on the sticks.......obvious chalk.

In the Ladies Classic he has Cassatt @ 6-1 as the 4th choice on the line.
Cassatt is going to leave the gate as the clear favorite at around 3-2.

[Track Phantom]

In the Turf Cup the linemaker has Bim Bam as the 3-1 favorite......he'll go off as the 5th or 6th choice.
He has Coalport @ 5-1 for Ramsey/Maker/Javier.
Coalport has passed the wire first in 5 of his last 6 on the sticks.......obvious chalk.

In the Ladies Classic he has Cassatt @ 6-1 as the 4th choice on the line.
Cassatt is going to leave the gate as the clear favorite at around 3-2.

I noticed it too. Also, he has Heitai at 7-2. Might creep up to 3-5 at post time. Odd.

[Stillriledup]

In the Turf Cup the linemaker has Bim Bam as the 3-1 favorite......he'll go off as the 5th or 6th choice.
He has Coalport @ 5-1 for Ramsey/Maker/Javier.
Coalport has passed the wire first in 5 of his last 6 on the sticks.......obvious chalk.

In the Ladies Classic he has Cassatt @ 6-1 as the 4th choice on the line.
Cassatt is going to leave the gate as the clear favorite at around 3-2.

The 6th race ML is also Bizarre....how is the four horse 2-1? He looks like a 20-1 shot in there. The exodus horse is also probably not going to pay 11 dollars if he wins either.

[Dark Horse]

I'm interested in anything that brings horse racing into the modern age. And there are countless improvements within easy reach. It would be fairly simple to write a ML program, so that the process is computerized (and standardized, possibly for all tracks...). My own horse racing and sports programs are far more complex than something like this would require. It would take about a month to get the basic outline, and another two months to finetune and optimize everything.

[Redboard]

Wow, it's hard for me to believe the comments in this thread, especially personal attacks toward a man I have known to be nothing but a hard-working, knowledgeable and courteous professional for decades in the Thoroughbred industry. I've never met a morning line maker yet who doesn't make an occasional mistake, and perhaps a scientific study comparing line makers from each circuit would yield more concrete evidence?

All I asked of the MLs is that the selections are in the correct betting order and that they add up. Do you know whether Jon still does these by hand? I could write a quick computer program. All I need is the size of the field and the horses’ last three beyers. It would do a better job than what he’s doing now. At least they'd add up!

[Dark Horse]

All I asked of the MLs is that the selections are in the correct betting order and that they add up. Do you know whether Jon still does these by hand? I could write a quick computer program. All I need is the size of the field and the horses’ last three beyers. It would do a better job than what he’s doing now. At least they'd add up!

As mentioned, a good program would go a long way. But you can't be serious about something that uses no more than the last three Beyers. White may not set the best ML's in the industry, but that doesn't mean his job is as utterly simplistic as you suggest.

[cj]

As mentioned, a good program would go a long way. But you can't be serious about something that uses no more than the last three Beyers. White may not set the best ML's in the industry, but that doesn't mean his job is as utterly simplistic as you suggest.

I would say you could use three things...any decent set of speed figures, trainer stats, and jockey stats and have a good morning line made automatically.

[maliksealy210]

Several Harness tracks, including Yonkers, use a fully automated product from Trackmaster and its results are almost incredible. Most horse end up 1-2 ticks off of the preset morning line. Now, obviously, it will be tougher to come up with the right formula set (post position is such a large part of Harness handicapping/betting and is a much more minimal factor in throughbred and even quarterhorse racing).

Here's a nice summary from Trackmaster on the Harness program

http://www.trackmaster.com/racetrack/morningline.pdf

[Redboard]

Another thing that annoys me is he frequently gives three or more the same odds. You rarely see Donavan do this, at least he takes a stand.
In yesterday’s 5th SA race all three of these(9,5,7) were 4-1 on the ML. Here’s there final odds:
#9: 2.2
#5: 4.2
#7: 7.8

This was a claiming race for 4+, so there was plenty of history to look at. No scratches. I’m Ok with two horses being the same value, but more than that is just lazy handicapping IMO.

[Dark Horse]

I would say you could use three things...any decent set of speed figures, trainer stats, and jockey stats and have a good morning line made automatically.

It's a fascinating problem once you start thinking about it. These lines, and their movement, are quite different than in sports. The house is not at risk by offering lines that are off, so there is some playing room. And there may be a purpose to that playing room. A linesmaker may know that a 3/2 horse will go off at 4/5, a huge difference in percentage, but he will still set the line at 3/2. So very early on in the project an underlying philosophy would have to be clearly defined. If the linesmaker is so accurate that there is zero line movement in the half hour before the race, that would probably not be an ideal situation. The goal is betting action. So what kind of margins attract the most action?

[mountainman]

wish he would at least do the morning line before
3pm the day before they race.They are always the
last one to have the program done.Guess like he
would rather tout horses.

Mabred

The culprit might be whoever builds and types in the program. And the delay may well be beyond that person's control. The task no doubt falls to a racing official, and, customarily, racing officials put individual tasks on the backburner if entries are light and the crew is hustling.

I'm sure Santa Anita is more fully staffed than Mnr, but the guy who does our program is also one of our better race-hustlers, so I don't even let him read proof until a closing time is set, and entries are filled to my satisfaction.

[Dark Horse]

FWIW, race 5 at SA right now. Ten minutes to go, not one line has moved more than 5% from the ML.

[Stillriledup]

FWIW, race 5 at SA right now. Ten minutes to go, not one line has moved more than 5% from the ML.

JW nailed this one pretty good, kudos when its due.

(not to mention the odd show bet on the 8 :D )

[bets]

http://www.arlingtonpark.com/node/10222

as official morning-line odds maker my job is to predict, as accurately as possible, how the betting public will wager on each race.

Also remember that the betting public can be wrong. I take a lot of pride in the accuracy of my morning line. If I've installed a horse at 8-1 in the program, and they're on the board at 25-1, chances are that horse is an "overlay" and may be worth a bet. On the flip side if I've pegged a horse a 5-1, there are no significant scratches, and that horse is sitting on the board at 5-2, that horse is probably an "underlay" and isn't offering the value you should be looking for.

What he is saying in the first does not match with the second

[mountainman]

Pertaining to morning-line point totals, I'm a stickler and stay within narrow parameters, but my thinking on odds-makers that overshoot the number (even drastically) has evolved a bit.

Before just such an odds-maker stepped up and gave a sharply critical Steven Crist a surprisingly credible debate on this topic, I was dismissive, even contemptuous of soaring point totals. Being a traditionalist in at least one regard- the guy's personal template did not include 7-1, 9-1, 11-1 (etc..etc..) price points- he had reasoned that rounding each, or at least numerous horses down to his next lower price point could logically result in staggering point totals.

And his argument was not without merit. Imagine an actual field with the real-time tote rounding each horse down nearly a full point (even as opposed to said odds-maker's near 2 point round-downs), and the board totals surprisingly high. Check out an actual tote board, and you will see that this DOES happen. Not often, but on occasion.

Even Crist was somewhat receptive to the guy's explanation.

[mountainman]

What he is saying in the first does not match with the second

He's trying to have it both ways. Believe me, as track-odds-makers and prideful human beings, we all do. I posted that earlier.

[Stillriledup]

THe ML in the 1st at Sam Houston...there was a horse 3-1 ML in there that was horrible on paper. Anyone see this?

[bets]

Even Crist was somewhat receptive to the guy's explanation.


Was this debated on this board?

[LottaKash]

I'm interested in anything that brings horse racing into the modern age. And there are countless improvements within easy reach. It would be fairly simple to write a ML program, so that the process is computerized (and standardized, possibly for all tracks...). My own horse racing and sports programs are far more complex than something like this would require. It would take about a month to get the basic outline, and another two months to finetune and optimize everything.

TRACKMASTER, is already doing just that, using a computer algorithm for making a Morning-Line for 12 different HARNESS tracks that have adopted them so far....They supply them for free for any Harness track that would ask for them...

From my own personal experience, I find them to be quite formful....Of course nothing is perfect, and occasionally there are some discrepancies, and sometimes a few funny ones too, but for the most part, I think they are very solid, accurate and consistent overall... A great guide for the novice and intermediate players, I'd say.. :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

[Dark Horse]

Pertaining to morning-line point totals, I'm a stickler and stay within narrow parameters, but my thinking on odds-makers that overshoot the number (even drastically) has evolved a bit.

Before just such an odds-maker stepped up and gave a sharply critical Steven Crist a surprisingly credible debate on this topic, I was dismissive, even contemptuous of soaring point totals. Being a traditionalist in at least one regard- the guy's personal template did not include 7-1, 9-1, 11-1 (etc..etc..) price points- he had reasoned that rounding each, or at least numerous horses down to his next lower price point could logically result in staggering point totals.

And his argument was not without merit. Imagine an actual field with the real-time tote rounding each horse down nearly a full point (even as opposed to said odds-maker's near 2 point round-downs), and the board totals surprisingly high. Check out an actual tote board, and you will see that this DOES happen. Not often, but on occasion.

Even Crist was somewhat receptive to the guy's explanation.

I agree that the tote board does not necessarily show the accurate odds. This is another reason why digital numbers would be much preferable, as it would lower the possibility that the bettor is presented with value that's not there.

The easiest example is a big favorite who is about to go from, say, 4/5 to 1/1.
Before this movement, even when it is already in the books (as measured by the total odds), the odds of all the others are adjusted first. In other words, the total for the field will be greatly inflated with the horse still at 4/5, and drop to 120% when the player, in his own program, enters that horse at the 1/1 price. The 4/5 horse, in reality already at 1/1, may sit at the 4/5 price for several minutes.

Why are they doing this? Could it be because the horse in the 4/5 to 1/1 range (not including 1/1) has far greater value to the track? If the horse is a true 1/1, and shown as such, the track gets nothing extra. But if the horse is 0.89 or 0.98, the track gets a nice added bonus, because the payout is rounded down to the lowest dime.

I've seen instances of a lot of money coming in on a lower odds horse, with all the other horses adjusted accordingly (by the same percentage), except the one favorite with odds lower than the horse receiving that big bet. Miraculously, that one horse was unaffected by the big money on the other horse. In all likelihood it's dishonest business practice, but it would take someone filming the tote board to have a record of it. Without such a record, this type of stuff comes and goes too fast, and the bettor, the person in the best position to observe it, doesn't focus on it, because it sidetracks from what he's trying to accomplish.

[mountainman]

A lines-maker should take pains in his work, but, ironically, the public shouldn't always take track-program odds TOO literally. In some races it's feasible to aggressively guesstimate each horse with precision. In other races, with favorites likely to get pounded 1/9, or 1/5, and other entrants be held at outlandishly high odds, it's not possible, or even desirable to strive for minute precision. No lines-maker, for instance, is going to set price points at 40-1, 60-1..or 85-1 etc-which a real-time tote might well look like in such instances. For one reason, it implies a precision no lines-maker can achieve. And for another (to be blunt), such a line would simply look like crap.

Making a morning-line that conforms, roughly, at least, to any traditional template, but still comes up accurate, thus requires a certain "feel." I have, over the years, dispensed somewhat with aesthetics and become more practical. I don't hesitate, for instance, to set two horses at 5-1-an odd-numbered price point customarily used no more than once per-race by some old-school pros I was taught by. The theory there, once again, was that repeating an odd-numbered or "tweener" price point-5/2, 7/2, etc...implies a precision no morning line can deliver. Conversely, I now sometimes employ generic, even-numbered-6-1, 8-1 10-1 price points as many as three (or, very occasionally four) times in a single race.

I know it appears in such instances that the odds-maker is slapdash, lazy, or unwilling to commit. But in some races, I've come to believe that a repetitive, or even slightly obtuse morning line, at least pertaining to secondary contenders, sends the correct message that not only is exact precision impossible, but that a morning line is merely a guesstimate.

On a closing note, while I'm not an apologist for Jon White, nor particularly a fan of his commentary, I do think setting track odds is a thankless and more difficult task than even exceptional handicappers realize. You're only noticed when you error, and we all error, sometimes badly.

I've set the odds on nearly 50,000 races , and in this era of cancelled bets, cat and mouse factions that buffet the board, quirky 'mad bombers,' whales, and very fallible whale wannabes, I occasionally miss so badly that I simply cringe and hope nobody notices.

A t-bred win pool may well be the most accurate market known to man, but the public's legendary accuracy is still somewhat mysterious, and a bit unknowable in advance. No matter how skilled the lines-maker.

[Dark Horse]

Very insightful. Thanks.

A t-bred win pool may well be the most accurate market known to man, but the public's legendary accuracy is still somewhat mysterious, and a bit unknowable in advance. No matter how skilled the lines-maker.

Wouldn't NFL closing lines, that have a week to sit and attract much more action than a horse race, be a lot more accurate? A market that lasts for a half hour may lack the time to become highly accurate, which, if true, could offer more value (for overlay hunters) than for instance a NFL game.

[maliksealy210]

TRACKMASTER, is already doing just that, using a computer algorithm for making a Morning-Line for 12 different HARNESS tracks that have adopted them so far....They supply them for free for any Harness track that would ask for them...

From my own personal experience, I find them to be quite formful....Of course nothing is perfect, and occasionally there are some discrepancies, and sometimes a few funny ones too, but for the most part, I think they are very solid, accurate and consistent overall... A great guide for the novice and intermediate players, I'd say.. :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:


I posted a link to their formulation and all of their research a few posts back. It's a facinating paper if you have not read it.

[Dark Horse]

Thanks for that link. Just the kind of read for a lazy Sunday morning. Love that kind of research.

[zico20]

A lines-maker should take pains in his work, but, ironically, the public shouldn't always take track-program odds TOO literally. In some races it's feasible to aggressively guesstimate each horse with precision. In other races, with favorites likely to get pounded 1/9, or 1/5, and other entrants be held at outlandishly high odds, it's not possible, or even desirable to strive for minute precision. No lines-maker, for instance, is going to set price points at 40-1, 60-1..or 85-1 etc-which a real-time tote might well look like in such instances. For one reason, it implies a precision no lines-maker can achieve. And for another (to be blunt), such a line would simply look like crap.

Making a morning-line that conforms, roughly, at least, to any traditional template, but still comes up accurate, thus requires a certain "feel." I have, over the years, dispensed somewhat with aesthetics and become more practical. I don't hesitate, for instance, to set two horses at 5-1-an odd-numbered price point customarily used no more than once per-race by some old-school pros I was taught by. The theory there, once again, was that repeating an odd-numbered or "tweener" price point-5/2, 7/2, etc...implies a precision no morning line can deliver. Conversely, I now sometimes employ generic, even-numbered-6-1, 8-1 10-1 price points as many as three (or, very occasionally four) times in a single race.

I know it appears in such instances that the odds-maker is slapdash, lazy, or unwilling to commit. But in some races, I've come to believe that a repetitive, or even slightly obtuse morning line, at least pertaining to secondary contenders, sends the correct message that not only is exact precision impossible, but that a morning line is merely a guesstimate.

On a closing note, while I'm not an apologist for Jon White, nor particularly a fan of his commentary, I do think setting track odds is a thankless and more difficult task than even exceptional handicappers realize. You're only noticed when you error, and we all error, sometimes badly.

I've set the odds on nearly 50,000 races , and in this era of cancelled bets, cat and mouse factions that buffet the board, quirky 'mad bombers,' whales, and very fallible whale wannabes, I occasionally miss so badly that I simply cringe and hope nobody notices.

A t-bred win pool may well be the most accurate market known to man, but the public's legendary accuracy is still somewhat mysterious, and a bit unknowable in advance. No matter how skilled the lines-maker.

I am sorry but I have to disagree with you. If the favorite is going to be 1-5 with 3 horses at 99-1 then that is what you put as the ML. The idea is to have the ML accurately reflect what the betting public is going to do. So what if it looks like crap. Are you trying to be honest or are you trying to bring in the most money to the track. If track management gives you direct orders to inflate the ML, then nothing you can do about it. But if you have free reign and you distort the ML then you are dishonest and not trust worthy on anything, including your picks.

That ML on Sam Houston pick 4 was a total and purposeful disgrace. There is no way track management didn't intervene. Nobody is that bad. And I mean nobody.

I should be making the ML at any track. Posters here can confirm how many times I said a horse listed at 2-1 or higher on the ML would go off at 4-5. I have called a whole bunch of them. And I haven't been wrong compared to the guy who does it yet.

Lastly, when I say "you" I am not referring to you personally, I mean all the ML makers. Just want to be clear about that.

[Dark Horse]

I posted a link to their formulation and all of their research a few posts back. It's a facinating paper if you have not read it.

I read it and it looks like they solved the puzzle. It's more of a summary than a paper, but their research was deep and their results are impressive.

ML problem solved. Now we can sit back and wait half a century before the industry makes the transition to superior lines.

[LottaKash]

I posted a link to their formulation and all of their research a few posts back. It's a facinating paper if you have not read it.

Sorry, I missed that Maliksealy...I just got in late to this thread...Being a Santa Anita title and all, and me being mostly a harness guy..

Good read on that paper too...

[mountainman]

I am sorry but I have to disagree with you. If the favorite is going to be 1-5 with 3 horses at 99-1 then that is what you put as the ML. The idea is to have the ML accurately reflect what the betting public is going to do. So what if it looks like crap. Are you trying to be honest or are you trying to bring in the most money to the track. If track management gives you direct orders to inflate the ML, then nothing you can do about it. But if you have free reign and you distort the ML then you are dishonest and not trust worthy on anything, including your picks.

That ML on Sam Houston pick 4 was a total and purposeful disgrace. There is no way track management didn't intervene. Nobody is that bad. And I mean nobody.

I should be making the ML at any track. Posters here can confirm how many times I said a horse listed at 2-1 or higher on the ML would go off at 4-5. I have called a whole bunch of them. And I haven't been wrong compared to the guy who does it yet.

Lastly, when I say "you" I am not referring to you personally, I mean all the ML makers. Just want to be clear about that.

It's extremely hard to make the numbers fit when you make a horse1/9. Believe me. And if you do that and miss, it's a HUGE miss. I've done the line on about 50,000 races ranging from nickel claimers to 750k stakes, and was rated 12th most accurate in America by a study once posted here. My hunch is that last year I ranked higher. In addition, the accuracy of my work was noted in a recent edition of hana's handicapping magazine.

That said, you seem like a really sharp guy, and I'm sure you would make an excellent linesmaker. But believe me, on occasion you would shoot an air ball-just like the rest of us. With all respect sir, detached theorizing is very different from actually putting the numbers together-and putting them out there in front of the public on a daily basis. Incidentally, boosting handle is beyond the abilities of any linesmaker and would never cross my mind. And I've never heard from management in about 25 years of doing mnr's line.

Where are you from, pal? And what's your line of work?

[cj]

It's extremely hard to make the numbers fit when you make a horse1/9. Believe me. And if you do that and miss, it's a HUGE miss. I've done the line on about 50,000 races ranging from nickel claimers to 750k stakes, and was rated 12th most accurate in America by a study once posted here. My hunch is that last year I ranked higher. In addition, the accuracy of my work was noted in a recent edition of hana's handicapping magazine.

That said, you seem like a really sharp guy, and I'm sure you would make an excellent linesmaker. But believe me, on occasion you would shoot an air ball-just like the rest of us. With all respect sir, detached theorizing is very different from actually putting the numbers together-and putting them out there in front of the public on a daily basis.

Where are you from, pal? And what's your line of work?

I agree, you can't go too low on the favorites. But you should get the favorite right, particularly in your track's signature race. At Sam Houston last night, anyone with a pulse knew which horses would be favored in the stakes races, and that all would be odds on. The linesmaker could have made each 7 to 5 or 8 to 5 and been fine. This was an embarrassment.

[mountainman]

I agree, you can't go too low on the favorites. But you should get the favorite right, particularly in your track's signature race.

Absolutely, sir. And two particular misses on our wv derby still haunt me.

[Dark Horse]

Absolutely, sir. And two particular misses on our wv derby still haunt me.

A horse with a blue tail, by any chance?

[cj]

Absolutely, sir. And two particular misses on our wv derby still haunt me.

I don't remember those, and some races are tough. I don't expect perfect morning lines or all of them to be right. But these at Hou were clearly done by a person that either doesn't care or doesn't know horse racing, or both.

Now to be fair, I don't play Sam Houston enough to know if this is the norm there.

[Maximillion]

of the tracks i play, i think most of them have decent MLs for the most part.

The exception seems to be the Texas tracks,not just yesterday but seemingly year round,at least for the last 2 years or so.

[mountainman]

A horse with a blue tail, by any chance?

lol--that was actually one of my favorite derbies...recruiting Hansen to run here was gratifying, but outing him on the show as an underlay who didn't fit my profile of past winners makes that day a special memory....but you're right , my morning line for that race is something i'd rather forget.....

[Track Phantom]

On a closing note, while I'm not an apologist for Jon White, nor particularly a fan of his commentary, I do think setting track odds is a thankless and more difficult task than even exceptional handicappers realize. You're only noticed when you error, and we all error, sometimes badly.

Mark - I think you're combining getting morning lines incorrectly on occasion (very acceptable) vs consistently building a morning line that doesn't balance and is based on the ML makers handicapping, not the public betting. To me, I could care less if a ML guy makes a horse 5-1 and it goes off at 9-1, 10-1 or 3-1. As long as it doesn't happen all the time, we would forgive that.

By the way, if you listen to Racedaylasvegas, Ralph Siraco said the Sam Houston ML maker should be canned...and he is right. There isn't a seasoned player that would make even one mistake like he did last night, much less in so many of those races last night. I'd love to hear his rationale for making certain horses what he did. Problem is, like everything in this industry, no accountability.

[Stillriledup]

Mark - I think you're combining getting morning lines incorrectly on occasion (very acceptable) vs consistently building a morning line that doesn't balance and is based on the ML makers handicapping, not the public betting. To me, I could care less if a ML guy makes a horse 5-1 and it goes off at 9-1, 10-1 or 3-1. As long as it doesn't happen all the time, we would forgive that.

By the way, if you listen to Racedaylasvegas, Ralph Siraco said the Sam Houston ML maker should be canned...and he is right. There isn't a seasoned player that would make even one mistake like he did last night, much less in so many of those races last night. I'd love to hear his rationale for making certain horses what he did. Problem is, like everything in this industry, no accountability.

The Sam Houston ML from last night is a case of not even caring. Its far beyond "making a mistake" its just indifference and borderline fraud.

[horses4courses]

The Sam Houston ML from last night is a case of not even caring. Its far beyond "making a mistake" its just indifference and borderline fraud.

I've never seen worse.
Obvious odds-on choices with 5, or 6-1, quotes.
Total fiction.

[Stillriledup]

I've never seen worse.
Obvious odds-on choices with 5, or 6-1, quotes.
Total fiction.

And 3-1 shots with no chance. There were at least 3 horses that were 3-1 ML that went off 10-1 or higher.

[mountainman]

Mark - I think you're combining getting morning lines incorrectly on occasion (very acceptable) vs consistently building a morning line that doesn't balance and is based on the ML makers handicapping, not the public betting. To me, I could care less if a ML guy makes a horse 5-1 and it goes off at 9-1, 10-1 or 3-1. As long as it doesn't happen all the time, we would forgive that.

By the way, if you listen to Racedaylasvegas, Ralph Siraco said the Sam Houston ML maker should be canned...and he is right. There isn't a seasoned player that would make even one mistake like he did last night, much less in so many of those races last night. I'd love to hear his rationale for making certain horses what he did. Problem is, like everything in this industry, no accountability.

yeah...I get what you're saying, pal....and i'm certainly not vouching for the guy..nor trying to hijack your thread...I just like to discuss the process and finer points of making a line....and as far as i'm concerned, you deserve a good job in the industry...so I get your frustration here...

[zico20]

It's extremely hard to make the numbers fit when you make a horse1/9. Believe me. And if you do that and miss, it's a HUGE miss. I've done the line on about 50,000 races ranging from nickel claimers to 750k stakes, and was rated 12th most accurate in America by a study once posted here. My hunch is that last year I ranked higher. In addition, the accuracy of my work was noted in a recent edition of hana's handicapping magazine.

That said, you seem like a really sharp guy, and I'm sure you would make an excellent linesmaker. But believe me, on occasion you would shoot an air ball-just like the rest of us. With all respect sir, detached theorizing is very different from actually putting the numbers together-and putting them out there in front of the public on a daily basis. Incidentally, boosting handle is beyond the abilities of any linesmaker and would never cross my mind. And I've never heard from management in about 25 years of doing mnr's line.

Where are you from, pal? And what's your line of work?

I live in st. Louis and I do outside sales. I can't sit behind a desk for 8 hours. I would go crazy.

I understand your point, however, if you miss the other way, that is just as bad. A 4-1 ML favorite going off 1-5 destroys the odds on all others. Then your 8-1 shot is 25-1 or higher. That is not good also. My biggest concern is this. In a 10 horse field the ML should be accurate on the first 2 or 3 favorites and the 2 or 3 long shots. The horses in the middle I don't give a damn about. The 4 horses listed between 8 and 15 to 1 can be in any order. That is a crap shoot IMO. Yesterday at GP in the 4th race Overcontrol was 9-5 on the ML and went off even money. That should have been an easy one to make as the heavy favorite. 9-5 was a fantasy on a Pletcher/Velazquez horse.

Mark, and I mean this in all sincerity, you are by far my favorite handicapper to listen to before a race. There are a couple, who shall remain nameless, if they were to post here, I would call them out on numerous things I don't like. Have you ever been offered a job at TVG or HRTV. They could use a pro like yourself. I will be watching the ML a little closer this year at Mountaineer. ;) I honestly didn't know you did it.

[Track Phantom]

yeah...I get what you're saying, pal....and i'm certainly not vouching for the guy..nor trying to hijack your thread...I just like to discuss the process and finer points of making a line....and as far as i'm concerned, you deserve a good job in the industry...so I get your frustration here...

Mark - thanks for saying that but let me clarify something. I am not clamoring for anyone's job. I have a job outside the industry and am not at all looking to change that.

I felt the need to clarify that in case anyone thought I had selfish reasons for posting in this thread. Couldn't be farther from the truth.

[mountainman]

I live in st. Louis and I do outside sales. I can't sit behind a desk for 8 hours. I would go crazy.

I understand your point, however, if you miss the other way, that is just as bad. A 4-1 ML favorite going off 1-5 destroys the odds on all others. Then your 8-1 shot is 25-1 or higher. That is not good also. My biggest concern is this. In a 10 horse field the ML should be accurate on the first 2 or 3 favorites and the 2 or 3 long shots. The horses in the middle I don't give a damn about. The 4 horses listed between 8 and 15 to 1 can be in any order. That is a crap shoot IMO. Yesterday at GP in the 4th race Overcontrol was 9-5 on the ML and went off even money. That should have been an easy one to make as the heavy favorite. 9-5 was a fantasy on a Pletcher/Velazquez horse.

Mark, and I mean this in all sincerity, you are by far my favorite handicapper to listen to before a race. There are a couple, who shall remain nameless, if they were to post here, I would call them out on numerous things I don't like. Have you ever been offered a job at TVG or HRTV. They could use a pro like yourself. I will be watching the ML a little closer this year at Mountaineer. ;) I honestly didn't know you did it.

tx, zic...yes, I was once asked by hrtv to fill a 40 or 50 min block by remote over the phone while the regular host rushed home to fight wildfires threatening his home. they must have liked my riff, because afterwards, they asked if i would be interested in an anchor spot and even went so far as to offer to setup daycare for my son...but i love mnr, am beholden to my bosses, and declined hrtv's tentative offer...

[Ocala Mike]

.

My biggest concern is this. In a 10 horse field the ML should be accurate on the first 2 or 3 favorites and the 2 or 3 long shots. The horses in the middle I don't give a damn about. The 4 horses listed between 8 and 15 to 1 can be in any order. That is a crap shoot IMO.



Have to say I disagree here. The middle-odds horses are very often where the analysis of DD and P/3 will-pays strike paydirt with "live horses." I totally want my M/L maker to not have a cavalier attitude in grouping these guys all together with the same M/L odds or otherwise making no attempt to "rank" them. Just sayin'; different strokes and all that.

[Stillriledup]

Have to say I disagree here. The middle-odds horses are very often where the analysis of DD and P/3 will-pays strike paydirt with "live horses." I totally want my M/L maker to not have a cavalier attitude in grouping these guys all together with the same M/L odds or otherwise making no attempt to "rank" them. Just sayin'; different strokes and all that.

I think what Z is saying is that its easier to make a ML on the favorite and the longest shots....so at least don't screw THAT up. Sure, in a perfect world the entire ML would be strong, but if there's a horse who is destined to be 3-5, don't make him 3-1 ML and if there's a horse who's destined to be 99-1 don't make him 12-1.

[Dark Horse]

ML's add up to 145 percent for today's Las Virgines Grade 1 Stakes. That's a little embarrassing, if you ask me.

[horses4courses]

ML's add up to 145 percent for today's Las Virgines Grade 1 Stakes. That's a little embarrassing, if you ask me.

That's being tactful and diplomatic.
I would leave out the phrase "a little" ;)

[cj]

This seems to be a new thing with him, no? Maybe he is doing so under orders...just a thought. I doubt he suddenly forgot how to make a morning line.

[horses4courses]

This seems to be a new thing with him, no? Maybe he is doing so under orders...just a thought. I doubt he suddenly forgot how to make a morning line.

I'm not sure that he ever knew in the first place, cj.
The math pertaining to odds percentages, that is.
This type of thing is the norm at Santa Anita.

[cj]

I'm not sure that he ever knew in the first place, cj.
The math pertaining to odds percentages, that is.
This type of thing is the norm at Santa Anita.

Is he new on the job? Because it hasn't been that long (a few years) since the Santa Anita morning line was hailed as the standard. I really don't follow so I'm asking, I don't know if this is a new gig.

Has anyone contacted Santa Anita and asked about this? Most tracks are actually pretty open to constructive criticism on things that are within their control.

[horses4courses]

Is he new on the job? Because it hasn't been that long (a few years) since the Santa Anita morning line was hailed as the standard. I really don't follow so I'm asking, I don't know if this is a new gig.

Has anyone contacted Santa Anita and asked about this? Most tracks are actually pretty open to constructive criticism on things that are within their control.

Jon White (HRTV host) took over morning line duties a while back.
I want to say it's been 4 years, but it could be more.

[cj]

Jon White (HRTV host) took over morning line duties a while back.
I want to say it's been 4 years, but it could be more.

That is what is puzzling. Maybe it was longer ago that the SA morning line was considered so good.

Has anyone asked him about it on Twitter (@HRTVJon)?

I'm just curious why those complaining here don't go to the source when so readily available. I understand the thread, but if people really care or want change, why not ask?

[ReplayRandall]

Jon White (HRTV host) took over morning line duties a while back.
I want to say it's been 4 years, but it could be more.

The revered Jeff Tufts retired in mid 2009, with Jon White taking over at Oak Tree’s opening on Sept. 30, 2009.

[horses4courses]

The revered Jeff Tufts retired in mid 2009, with Jon White taking over at Oak Tree’s opening on Sept. 30, 2009.

That makes sense.
I wish Mr. Tufts had passed on some of his skills
to his successor. Personally, though, it doesn't
affect my handicapping, or play, there at all.
It's just frustrating to watch.

[Stillriledup]

That is what is puzzling. Maybe it was longer ago that the SA morning line was considered so good.

Has anyone asked him about it on Twitter (@HRTVJon)?

I'm just curious why those complaining here don't go to the source when so readily available. I understand the thread, but if people really care or want change, why not ask?

See post 56 of this thread.

[cj]

See post 56 of this thread.

Ok, so I would guess phone is the next option. I've had my best success dealing with people via telephone.

[Stillriledup]

Ok, so I would guess phone is the next option. I've had my best success dealing with people via telephone.

Kudos to valento for even trying.....it seems like their lack of action to his messages speaks volumes about how they view the customer. Customers are A necessary evil at Santa Anita. Unfortunate, i thought they were better than that.

[cj]

Kudos to valento for even trying.....it seems like their lack of action to his messages speaks volumes about how they view the customer. Customers are A necessary evil at Santa Anita. Unfortunate, i thought they were better than that.

I checked his Twitter. It doesn't look like he ever responds to anyone. I'm sure it is just part of his job to Tweet revised morning lines and other track info. It isn't very professional in my opinion to ignore honest questions.

With email, you have no idea who is checking a track's email. A lot of people don't even use "official" work emails. That is why the phone is usually the best option. It is more personal and people are less likely to try to blow you off, particularly if you are sincere and cordial.

[Track Phantom]

As we mentioned the guy at Sam Houston with his silly morning line's the other night on their big night of stakes, I just looked at the last at Sam Houston today, a MSW (10th race).

I haven't really 'capped it and have no opinion. But, how could the ML guy make the #1 12-1 in the morning line? 8 minutes to post and the horse is 5-2. Distorted Humor, 250,000 first timer and the public is going to overlook it at 12-1?

Maybe I'm wrong and he'll go off near those odds but it would surprise me.

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/SH10th_1900x182_zpse4d5b5aa.jpg

[Stillriledup]

As we mentioned the guy at Sam Houston with his silly morning line's the other night on their big night of stakes, I just looked at the last at Sam Houston today, a MSW (10th race).

I haven't really 'capped it and have no opinion. But, how could the ML guy make the #1 12-1 in the morning line? 8 minutes to post and the horse is 5-2. Distorted Humor, 250,000 first timer and the public is going to overlook it at 12-1?

Maybe I'm wrong and he'll go off near those odds but it would surprise me.

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/SH10th_1900x182_zpse4d5b5aa.jpg

There's only 4 horses who can realistically win on paper, the firsters who are the 1 and the Asmussen and the 2 contenders who have raced, the 2 and the 9.

Be interesting to see if this Asmussen takes any more real money seems liek a horse won't be able to win off 2 slow works, you have to imagine she has plenty more works that are just not listed. I can't imagine her Jan 14th work was her first lifetime work but i guess anything is possible.

[Stillriledup]

As we mentioned the guy at Sam Houston with his silly morning line's the other night on their big night of stakes, I just looked at the last at Sam Houston today, a MSW (10th race).

I haven't really 'capped it and have no opinion. But, how could the ML guy make the #1 12-1 in the morning line? 8 minutes to post and the horse is 5-2. Distorted Humor, 250,000 first timer and the public is going to overlook it at 12-1?

Maybe I'm wrong and he'll go off near those odds but it would surprise me.

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/SH10th_1900x182_zpse4d5b5aa.jpg

I think the difference between White's ML at SA and the SH ML is that the SH guy isnt even trying to get it right. At least White is trying.....and White's ML is bad because he either doesn't know how to make a ML, or he's being told to make the ML equal out to 150% or something like that. SH guy is just mailing it in.

[Track Phantom]

As we mentioned the guy at Sam Houston with his silly morning line's the other night on their big night of stakes, I just looked at the last at Sam Houston today, a MSW (10th race).

I haven't really 'capped it and have no opinion. But, how could the ML guy make the #1 12-1 in the morning line? 8 minutes to post and the horse is 5-2. Distorted Humor, 250,000 first timer and the public is going to overlook it at 12-1?

Maybe I'm wrong and he'll go off near those odds but it would surprise me.

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/SH10th_1900x182_zpse4d5b5aa.jpg

By the way, in the same race, the morning line guy felt the runner listed below should be 6-1 (half of the 250k first timer). 40-1 on the board right now (going into the gate).

Is this a joke?

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/SH10th2_1889x282_zps664ecd85.jpg

[jballscalls]

As we mentioned the guy at Sam Houston with his silly morning line's the other night on their big night of stakes, I just looked at the last at Sam Houston today, a MSW (10th race).

I haven't really 'capped it and have no opinion. But, how could the ML guy make the #1 12-1 in the morning line? 8 minutes to post and the horse is 5-2. Distorted Humor, 250,000 first timer and the public is going to overlook it at 12-1?

Maybe I'm wrong and he'll go off near those odds but it would surprise me.

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/SH10th_1900x182_zpse4d5b5aa.jpg

random ?? Do morning line guys get access to pps that show the sales prices? I seem to remember them using the pps on incompass/equibase and wasn't sure if those had that info on it.

[zico20]

Something is definitely wrong here. I made up my own ML for the two big dirt races at SA Saturday. Guess what, Jon White and I had the exact same morning line for almost all 15 horses.

The only minor disagreement was with Alfa Bird. I would have had him at 20-1 instead of 30-1. Other than that, he nailed it right on the head. For all the criticizing I do of the ML guys, I must give credit where credit is due.

Nice job!

[horses4courses]

Something is definitely wrong here. I made up my own ML for the two big dirt races at SA Saturday. Guess what, Jon White and I had the exact same morning line for almost all 15 horses.

The only minor disagreement was with Alfa Bird. I would have had him at 20-1 instead of 30-1. Other than that, he nailed it right on the head. For all the criticizing I do of the ML guys, I must give credit where credit is due.

Nice job!

Each to their own, I guess.

The Bob Lewis equates to 129%, the San Antonio 135%.
Those percentages were added up quickly in my head,
so they could be wrong, but should be close to right.

If that's how you like your morning lines,
then enjoy. I'm glad we don't have to bet
into that much takeout, though.

These two races shed light on Mr. White's
poor math. It stands to reason that the shorter
field will have a lower percentage total - at
least the way he assembles his lines.
Someone compiling to a set formula will
always finish within a few percentage points,
regardless of the field size.

[zico20]

Each to their own, I guess.

The Bob Lewis equates to 129%, the San Antonio 135%.
Those percentages were added up quickly in my head,
so they could be wrong, but should be close to right.

If that's how you like your morning lines,
then enjoy. I'm glad we don't have to bet
into that much takeout, though.

These two races shed light on Mr. White's
poor math. It stands to reason that the shorter
field will have a lower percentage total - at
least the way he assembles his lines.
Someone compiling to a set formula will
always finish within a few percentage points,
regardless of the field size.

I could care less how the numbers add up. All I care about when looking at a ML is that the horses are in the right order AND the favorites are where they suppose to be odds wise. Also, that big long shots are listed appropriately. He did a great job.

[zico20]

One more thing. What is worse? A line that adds up percentage wise with a 5-2 ML favorite that goes off at 4-5 or what he did. I know which one I want to see.

[taxicab]

Mike Battaglia nailed the Derby Future Wager Pool ML.
He balanced out 24 betting interests.
His line came back around 120%.
I don't know why Jon White can't balance a ML.
BTW....
Sharp multi-race bettors cringe at JW's Santa Anita morning lines.
The unskilled bettor will often carry the low priced ML horses on their tickets because they just want to "stay alive" on the ticket(they have no confidence in their ability).
Aka.....they will often throw a 3-1/7-2/4-1 ML horse on their ticket,but if the same horse was 5-1/6-1/8-1 they wouldn't put that horse on their ticket.
So a horse that accurately pays $18.00 can play like $8.00 horse on a P-3/P-4 payout because the ML maker had too many horses at a low ML.

[taxicab]

I could care less how the numbers add up. All I care about when looking at a ML is that the horses are in the right order AND the favorites are where they suppose to be odds wise. Also, that big long shots are listed appropriately. He did a great job.


http://www.aqha.com/Racing/Content-Pages/Racing-and-Wagering/Q-Racing-Aces-and-Handicapping-Information/The-Morning-Line.aspx

[zico20]

Mike Battaglia nailed the Derby Future Wager Pool ML.
He balanced out 24 betting interests.
His line came back around 120%.
I don't know why Jon White can't balance a ML.
BTW....
Sharp multi-race bettors cringe at JW's Santa Anita morning lines.
The unskilled bettor will often carry the low priced ML horses on their tickets because they just want to "stay alive" on the ticket(they have no confidence in their ability).
Aka.....they will often throw a 3-1/7-2/4-1 ML horse on their ticket,but if the same horse was 5-1/6-1/8-1 they wouldn't put that horse on their ticket.
So a horse that accurately pays $18.00 can play like $8.00 horse on a P-3/P-4 payout because the ML maker had too many horses at a low ML.

Thanks Taxicab for the info. i never knew how it balanced until you showed me that article. As for the Lewis Stakes, had Jon White made Rock Shandy 8-1 instead of 6-1 he would have come up with 126 points, one off the 125 Burgart tries to follow.

Still looks better than some ML guy who comes up with 125 and has Dortmund at 2-1 and Firing Line at 3-1.

[Track Phantom]

Is Jon White no longer doing the pre-race discussion? I haven't heard him for quite some time.

[Poindexter]

Mike Battaglia nailed the Derby Future Wager Pool ML.
He balanced out 24 betting interests.
His line came back around 120%.
I don't know why Jon White can't balance a ML.
BTW....
Sharp multi-race bettors cringe at JW's Santa Anita morning lines.
The unskilled bettor will often carry the low priced ML horses on their tickets because they just want to "stay alive" on the ticket(they have no confidence in their ability).
Aka.....they will often throw a 3-1/7-2/4-1 ML horse on their ticket,but if the same horse was 5-1/6-1/8-1 they wouldn't put that horse on their ticket.
So a horse that accurately pays $18.00 can play like $8.00 horse on a P-3/P-4 payout because the ML maker had too many horses at a low ML.

On the other hand, if you like one of the other horses you get better value on it because the same undistinguished bettors are over-betting horses with a small chance of winning. For instance if I am singling a 9/5 shot, it helps me if a bad morning line is causing people to throw in a 9/2 and 6-1 morning line that they would not have used if they were at 6-1 and 8-1. So ultimately, it is just the bettor adapting to what is going on. But I do agree he should do it right.

[Poindexter]

Personally, I prefer the broadcast with his absence. Millie does a tremendous job(including a lot of input from trainers she talks about the horses with) and it gives the other lady(don't know her name-more chance to chime in-). They tend to focus on information far more pertinent to the bettor. John White is all about I made so and so my top choice(morning line favorite) because he ran an 83 Beyer for 12,500 and now he is in for 10 for 20% trainer and get Bejerano Yawn!