Who makes the morning line odds and what info do they use?

[ZippyChippy423]

Seems like whomever makes the m/l odds for the all the tracks has one thing in common “ tunnel vision”. I would rather have no M/L odds. Let me give you one example how almost no work goes into creating the odds. This past week Finger Lakes had a race where four of the entered horses all came out of the same race about twoweeks ago. Based on how the horses finished in that race is exactly how the odds were done for the next race. If the odds maker would have looked at trouble lines and saw that 2 of the horses had horrible breaks and one was a DNF the M/L odds should have been drastically different. Of course the betting public got it right and those m/l odds were way off.

[therussmeister]

How much does the morning line maker for a track like Finger Lakes get paid? I'm guessing essentially nothing. It's just added to other duties.

[v j stauffer]

How much does the morning line maker for a track like Finger Lakes get paid? I'm guessing essentially nothing. It's just added to other duties.

There are very few tracks these days that pay a linemakers for exclusively. Most have multiple tasks. Oaklawn uses a few people in the racing off that trade it off.

[VigorsTheGrey]

Odds data posted by Redboard
"According to the handy-dandy chart below, the "points" should add up to around 125.
Let's just say that four starters will be 90-1 or over, so that's 4 points. Another four will be 30-1, 8 points, and that 2 will be 20-1 or 8 points. This will give us a total of 20 points for the rest of the field leaving 105 points for CC and Arrogate.

In this estimate, each could be around 1-1 or slightly lower.

I don't see either being above 7-5. "
By Redboard


ODDS POINTS
90-1 1
60-1: 1.5
30-1: 2
20-1: 4
15-1: 6
12-1: 7
10-1: 9
8-1: 11
6-1: 14
5-1: 16
9-2: 18
4-1: 20
7-2: 21
3-1: 22
5-2: 28
2-1: 33
9-5: 35
8-5: 38
3-2: 40
7-5: 41
6-5: 45
1-1: 50
4-5: 55
3-5: 62
2-5: 71
1-5: 83

[bobphilo]

Seems like whomever makes the m/l odds for the all the tracks has one thing in common “ tunnel vision”. I would rather have no M/L odds. Let me give you one example how almost no work goes into creating the odds. This past week Finger Lakes had a race where four of the entered horses all came out of the same race about twoweeks ago. Based on how the horses finished in that race is exactly how the odds were done for the next race. If the odds maker would have looked at trouble lines and saw that 2 of the horses had horrible breaks and one was a DNF the M/L odds should have been drastically different. Of course the betting public got it right and those m/l odds were way off.

Contrary to popular belief the job of the ML odds maker is not to handicap the field according to what he thinks the horses' chances of winning are. His job is to try to predict what the final odds will be based on how he thinks the public will bet. I guess that makes him more of a sociologist than a handicapper.

[jay68802]

Exactly where does the ML enter into the handicapping of a race?

[ReplayRandall]

Exactly where does the ML enter into the handicapping of a race?

It doesn't.....The morning line serves no purpose that I could ever see, it's always been obsolete.

[thaskalos]

It doesn't.....The morning line serves no purpose that I could ever see, it's always been obsolete.

:ThmbUp:

If the morning line-maker were offering his own opinion on what the odds should be...then the argument could be made that the ML at least expressed the honest handicapping opinion of one supposedly "knowledgeable" person. But, as it stands right now...the morning line isn't worth a damned thing, IMO. What good is having an oddsmaker try to predict the public's betting opinion...when no one can do a good-enough job of it?

[VigorsTheGrey]

All I would like is if one of the short duration meetings, fair, Kentucky Downs, etc, would try it without any Morning Line whatsoever...gauge the effects/ interest then decide if they want to keep it or try going for longer without one...

It might even improve handle, who really knows...

[thaskalos]

All I would like is if one of the short duration meetings, fair, Kentucky Downs, etc, would try it without any Morning Line whatsoever...gauge the effects/ interest then decide if they want to keep it or try going for longer without one...

It might even improve handle, who really knows...

The argument has always been: "If you don't like the morning line...then don't look at it." And it's a tough argument to tangle with.

[ZippyChippy423]

The morning line favorites are most certainly used for handicapping. Just look at the pick 3 will pays in any final leg. The morning line favorite is ALWAYS the lowest paying one in the field.

[VigorsTheGrey]

The argument has always been: "If you don't like the morning line...then don't look at it." And it's a tough argument to tangle with.yes, I agree, but WHO are the people that make this argument...?

Do they have a direct relationship to a racetrack..? To the DRF...? There MUST be reasons other than tradition, or because “that’s the way it has always been done”..

..I guess on my part I ought to think more about why I don’t want one...I guess I believe somehow that knowledge is power and that the ML is KNOWLEGDE that influences how people wager to steer them to contenders, when they might not otherwise land there without the ML...

I realize there is a real “selfishness” and cynicism involved in this view...in viewing the betting public, in general, as less informed than adepts on this board typically are...

...I guess I must think that there is some wagering opportunity that might result if there were no ML’s...I would tend to think that real contenders might be overlooked more often...and the odds of all would tend to regress toward a mean, and that since contenders win far more of their share of races than their long shot counterparts, that this might add value to the market price of real contenders...

[thaskalos]

yes, I agree, but WHO are the people that make this argument...?

Do they have a direct relationship to a racetrack..? To the DRF...? There MUST be reasons other than tradition, or because “that’s the way it has always been done”..

..I guess on my part I ought to think more about why I don’t want one...I guess I believe somehow that knowledge is power and that the ML is KNOWLEGDE that influences how people wager to steer them to contenders, when they might not otherwise land there without the ML...

I realize there is a real “selfishness” and cynicism involved in this view...in viewing the betting public, in general, as less informed than adepts on this board typically are...

...I guess I must think that there is some wagering opportunity that might result if there were no ML’s...I would tend to think that real contenders might be overlooked more often...and the odds of all would tend to regress toward a mean, and that since contenders win far more of their share of races than their long shot counterparts, that this might add value to the market price of real contenders...

IMO...the removal of the morning line won't add even a cent of additional value to the market price of the "real contenders". The players who are swayed by the morning line have abandoned the game long ago...due to "insufficient funds".

[VigorsTheGrey]

IMO...the removal of the morning line won't add even a cent of additional value to the market price of the "real contenders". The players who are swayed by the morning line have abandoned the game long ago...due to "insufficient funds".
I agree, but that sounds like an argument for not having one at all...the sharpies today figure their own values and what they can live with before placing a wager...

..so if the ML is essentially of little use to them and the novices have left the game, then WHO IS LEFT to benefit from it to warrant the trouble to have one...?

[Fred Mertz]

..so if the ML is essentially of little use to them and the novices have left the game, then WHO IS LEFT to benefit from it to warrant the trouble to have one...?


You or I could put together the morning line, assuming we can read a race form.


Our goal is to pick winners and ignore the little stuff such as the morning line odds.

[thaskalos]

I agree, but that sounds like an argument for not having one at all...the sharpies today figure their own values and what they can live with before placing a wager...

..so if the ML is essentially of little use to them and the novices have left the game, then WHO IS LEFT to benefit from it to warrant the trouble to have one...?

Vigors...our game is deeply steeped into "tradition", and is very reluctant to change. Have you ever noticed those old-fashioned speed ratings in the DRF? Do you suppose that anyone out there is still using them? And yet...there they are. As far as our game is concerned...the tote-board needs some sort of "starting point" before the money starts pouring in. So, some guy about 150 years ago thought of a "morning line", to "kick off the betting action". And this idiocy has survived up'til now.

[VigorsTheGrey]

You or I could put together the morning line, assuming we can read a race form.


Our goal is to pick winners and ignore the little stuff such as the morning line odds.I agree...one the one hand I wish they were blacked out (might have to do that) on the form...

...then again, I think there are tons of players who blindly use the ML in multi-race horizontal wagers...I know I do (dumb, I know)...and that is probably why we still have them...

It is almost an embedded psychological draw to compose caveman multi-race wagers utilizing lower odds horses as guideposts, thinking that since they are lower in odds that they might stand a good chance...

..it is VERY POSSIBLE that without a ML poor bettors would wager less in the multi’s, I think this is the real main reason WHY they are still in use.

[thaskalos]

...then again, I think there are tons of players who blindly use the ML in multi-race horizontal wagers...I know I do (dumb, I know)...and that is probably why we still have them...


That's what the tip-sheets and the track handicappers are for.

[Dave Schwartz]

And yet, there are (surprisingly) few handicappers who will outperform the morning line statistically.

[TrackingTVG]

If a person doesnt do the work for all races, I've seen people rely on the ML to finish exotic wagers in p4 or p5.

A 5/2 that is 10/1 ML will almost always pay better in the exotics than a 5/2 with a 2/1 ML.

[Profesor]

How much does the morning line maker for a track like Finger Lakes get paid? I'm guessing essentially nothing. It's just added to other duties.


In most minor circuits the hotdog vendors and sometimes the bathroom attendant second as morning line makers:lol:::lol::lol:

[Profesor]

Exactly where does the ML enter into the handicapping of a race?


Depends who makes the line

[thaskalos]

And yet, there are (surprisingly) few handicappers who will outperform the morning line statistically.

How could that be? All one would have to do is bet on every odds-on horse. The morning lines offer between 8/5 and 8/1 on such horses. :ThmbUp:

[VigorsTheGrey]

Vigors...our game is deeply steeped into "tradition", and is very reluctant to change. Have you ever noticed those old-fashioned speed ratings in the DRF? Do you suppose that anyone out there is still using them? And yet...there they are. As far as our game is concerned...the tote-board needs some sort of "starting point" before the money starts pouring in. So, some guy about 150 years ago thought of a "morning line", to "kick off the betting action". And this idiocy has survived up'til now.

The only time I look at the " old speed ratings/ variant is when they hit 100 and above 100...I think, if I remember, if it is 100 then this horse tied the best time at this distance, I think for the last 2 years prior...

If the speed rating is over 100 it means that it was faster than that, but not necessarily a new track record, just better than any in the last 2 years....it usually is a new shipper that outperforms the regulars...

I have wondered when, after a horse has bested the best time, WHEN do they reset to the new high...maybe on Jan 1st.each year..? I guess a question for ClassHandicapper to answer....watching for the occasional over 100 mark has landed me a few winners over the years....other than that I stick with the pace and beyers...

[FakeNameChanged]

First of all, I play zero horizontals, so ML's have nothing to do which horses to include in the Pic 3’s, 4’s, DD's etc. At my two main tracks, I know that occasionally they miss the mark(Lrl), but overall are reasonably accurate. So what do I do with them?

I use a combination of handicapping and/or tote for my selections. ML's if they're reasonably accurate give us an idea on who the public “may” think are the contenders pre-race. When a 20-1 or 12-1 ML horse suddenly opens at 8/5 or 5/2, it will get me to take another look. Everyone here seems to be obsessed with all the late money knocking down their picks. I know in my case, I have almost zero chance to decipher who's getting hammered late or react to it, if I could. But early money on a 20-1 ML is easy to spot. Of course, I could also spot early money without ML's, but it gives me a rough estimate on who should be getting the money. When a 20/1 ML has the expected bad lines, and there's unusual early money bet to wps, I look to see if there's any follow through in the exotic pools. Or the reverse can be the case, early money in the exotic pools, and not much bet to win early. Sometimes it’s both.

And if you think some owners, their friends or backside workers don’t bet early, think again. At my small track where I spent a couple decades on track, I’ve witnessed owners bet early, tell their friends and backside workers borrow money to bet a horse in some cases. Of course, not all insiders follow this pattern, some bet, early, middle, late, or all three times.

So the Morning LIne to me is just a quick prism to look at before the race to see if anything is literally jumping off the page, as someone else here has said. Should the ML disappear tomorrow, it would certainly not be the end of the world, and developing a quick ML using previous odds would not be that difficult if someone really wanted to do that. How anyone else uses it or not is no matter to me. À chacun ses goûts

[Dave Schwartz]

How could that be? All one would have to do is bet on every odds-on horse. The morning lines offer between 8/5 and 8/1 on such horses. :ThmbUp:

And yet it is true. It is a very potent handicapping factor.

Pushes lots of winners to the top.

I recall Jim Cramer saying to me once that he wished he could find a pedigree factor that would get more winners in the top spot than Morning Line.


Of course, I am not advocating it because it correlates most highly with the tote board. But, guess what? So does BRIS Prime Power, PSR, etc.

[bobphilo]

The morning line favorites are most certainly used for handicapping. Just look at the pick 3 will pays in any final leg. The morning line favorite is ALWAYS the lowest paying one in the field.

That just means that the odds maker did a good job at predicting what the public would do - not necessarily that he had anything to do with making the horse the favorite. Just because a weatherman predicts rain and it rains doesn't make him a rain maker.

[bobphilo]

:ThmbUp:

If the morning line-maker were offering his own opinion on what the odds should be...then the argument could be made that the ML at least expressed the honest handicapping opinion of one supposedly "knowledgeable" person. But, as it stands right now...the morning line isn't worth a damned thing, IMO. What good is having an oddsmaker try to predict the public's betting opinion...when no one can do a good-enough job of it?

:ThmbUp:

[bobphilo]

Exactly where does the ML enter into the handicapping of a race?

The only possible reason why anyone would use the Ml in their handicapping is to see what the odds might be in searching for "value".
I make a point of ignoring the morning line. I do my handicapping first and then look at the real live odds to see if the bet is acceptable.

[Poindexter]

I think ml handicappers take a lot of unjustified heat. I believe in the tradition of racing the idea behind the morning line was to use it as sort of a guide as to what horses would go off at. As long as I can remember there was always a limit of how low or how high a horse would be. A horse that might even go off at 1/9 might be 2/5 on the morning line. Horses that might go off at 99-1 would often be capped at 30-1. I believe (and I could be wrong about this) that the philosophy was they did want any horse or race to appear too unattractive.

For a serious handicapper, I am not sure what difference it makes. You have your opinion, the morning line make has his, the public is going to do the right thing anyhow(most of the time). I do tend to see that in the pick 4's, pick 5's horses that are too high on their morning line to tend to pay better than they would if there morning line is correct (especially when you can get a couple in the sequence). In other words imo one day I can have a pick 4 with an 8/5 with a 3-1, with a 6-1 with a 6-1 only the 2 6-1's are 9/2 and 5-1 on the morning line, while on the the next day the exact same circumstance except that the two 6-1's are 12-1 and 15-1 on the morning line, I believe I will be paid a lot more on the 2nd pick 4 then I will on the first pick 4 even though the final odds on both are identical. I do think a lot of the public is dependent on morning lines as a guide to including horses in their multi leg exotics. So in this regard poor morning lines can work in your favor.

However, I am first to admit I have had plenty of horses I may have made 7/2 on my line who were 8-1 on the morning line that ended up at 8-1 or thereabouts. So while I am thinking the morning line capper is off, he was dead on, whether the horse wins or loses. I have also played a lot of pick 4's, pick 5's at tracks I wasn't familiar with, saw the morning line on a horse like 6/5 (I thought the ml capper was nuts) horse might go off at 2-1 or so (indicating I was right to some degree) but then the horse goes on the win by 5. Bottom line it is really easy to ridicule the morning line capper, especially when they are wrong, but often they are right too. Bottom line is compared to the final line, any morning line capper will look bad.

[castaway01]

Some people find the morning line a helpful guide as to whether a race is playable. That is why it's still around. That and tradition. If racetracks thought dropping the morning line would raise handle they'd have done so 50 years ago.

However, for all the people saying it's inaccurate and meaningless---if your gambling competition is using something inaccurate and meaningless to influence their wagers, why in the world would you want to get rid of it? I've yet to see a logical counterargument to that, in this thread or anywhere else.

[v j stauffer]

IMO the morning line and deviations from it could be the single most important handicapping factor of all. A sure fire way to point to very reliable betting opportunities. An accurate morning line could be the single most powerful road to riches.

However, that line MUST be produced by only one person. YOU.

If you have a circuit you feel comfortable enough to accurately predict, and are consistently correct about what prices horses should honestly be. If that accuracy stands the test of time. On the rare occasions you're way off. THOSE are true under or overlays. The real McCoy not something perceived because one guy phoned it in because he had many others things to do. Or just doesn't know what he's doing.

Don't try it at multiple tracks. Nobody is that smart or tuned in to the degree that's needed.

But if you have one track you are totally in sync with. Put in the work. Make your line and wait. The opportunities will jump off the page.

[toddbowker]

I have served as both a morning line oddsmaker and as a program handicapper. If you're doing it right, it's two different mindsets.

A good oddsmaker will adjust for things like trainers and jockeys who are typically overbet, and in the case of races like the BC Turf, Dubai World Cup etc, where the horses are from makes a difference.

In my case, I was a much better program handicapper than morning line oddsmaker ... :D

Main reason for the morning line still stands. In most cases, the track doesn't want wild early odds swings, so the morning line will stay up until a certain amount of money hits the win pool. Especially needed at smaller tracks where even $100 bet to win on a horse in the first couple of flashes could move the odds significantly.

The formula for the morning line should be 100+takeout %, and yes, most morning line oddsmakers will compress the highs and lows so as to either more easily make the line balance, or not to embarrass anyone (especially if you are doing it while working in the racing office and hustled that should be 99-1 shot into the race).

I actually kept a chart with 5-6 pre-defined lines that balanced for each number of starters. One of them usually worked, but there were still plenty of races where they had to be tweaked.

[v j stauffer]

I have served as both a morning line oddsmaker and as a program handicapper. If you're doing it right, it's two different mindsets.

A good oddsmaker will adjust for things like trainers and jockeys who are typically overbet, and in the case of races like the BC Turf, Dubai World Cup etc, where the horses are from makes a difference.

In my case, I was a much better program handicapper than morning line oddsmaker ... :D

Main reason for the morning line still stands. In most cases, the track doesn't want wild early odds swings, so the morning line will stay up until a certain amount of money hits the win pool. Especially needed at smaller tracks where even $100 bet to win on a horse in the first couple of flashes could move the odds significantly.

The formula for the morning line should be 100+takeout %, and yes, most morning line oddsmakers will compress the highs and lows so as to either more easily make the line balance, or not to embarrass anyone (especially if you are doing it while working in the racing office and hustled that should be 99-1 shot into the race).

I actually kept a chart with 5-6 pre-defined lines that balanced for each number of starters. One of them usually worked, but there were still plenty of races where they had to be tweaked.

Your contributions to this forum are terrific. PA brethren you'd be well advised to take close heed to whatever this man shares.

[thaskalos]

IMO the morning line and deviations from it could be the single most important handicapping factor of all. A sure fire way to point to very reliable betting opportunities. An accurate morning line could be the single most powerful road to riches.

However, that line MUST be produced by only one person. YOU.

If you have a circuit you feel comfortable enough to accurately predict, and are consistently correct about what prices horses should honestly be. If that accuracy stands the test of time. On the rare occasions you're way off. THOSE are true under or overlays. The real McCoy not something perceived because one guy phoned it in because he had many others things to do. Or just doesn't know what he's doing.

Don't try it at multiple tracks. Nobody is that smart or tuned in to the degree that's needed.

But if you have one track you are totally in sync with. Put in the work. Make your line and wait. The opportunities will jump off the page.

Vic, I think what you are describing here is a BETTING line, rather than a "morning line". When a handicapper crafts an oddsline to use for the identification of the overlays and the underlays...that's called a "betting line", or a "value line". "The morning line" is some weird concoction whereby the line-maker tries to predict the final betting opinion of the betting public as a whole...and usually does a horrible job of it.

As a serious horseplayer, my main preoccupation is to form my OWN opinion about the horses that I handicap...and then compare my opinion to that of the odds-board. I ask myself: "what should the price of these horses BE?"...and I couldn't care less about what the PUBLIC AT LARGE thinks the price should be. Having said that...I don't want the morning line to be discontinued. If even ONE person out there finds it useful...then, IMO, that's a good enough reason to still keep it around.

[VigorsTheGrey]

I have served as both a morning line oddsmaker and as a program handicapper. If you're doing it right, it's two different mindsets.

A good oddsmaker will adjust for things like trainers and jockeys who are typically overbet, and in the case of races like the BC Turf, Dubai World Cup etc, where the horses are from makes a difference.

In my case, I was a much better program handicapper than morning line oddsmaker ... :D

Main reason for the morning line still stands. In most cases, the track doesn't want wild early odds swings, so the morning line will stay up until a certain amount of money hits the win pool. Especially needed at smaller tracks where even $100 bet to win on a horse in the first couple of flashes could move the odds significantly.

The formula for the morning line should be 100+takeout %, and yes, most morning line oddsmakers will compress the highs and lows so as to either more easily make the line balance, or not to embarrass anyone (especially if you are doing it while working in the racing office and hustled that should be 99-1 shot into the race).

I actually kept a chart with 5-6 pre-defined lines that balanced for each number of starters. One of them usually worked, but there were still plenty of races where they had to be tweaked.

Thank you for the input here...great to get info from those who actually do the ML...was wondering if you could expand on the bold portion above...why doesn’t the track want wild early odds swings..?

oh, and yes, i’ve often thought that pre-arranged ML’s based on number of starters are commonly employed by ML makers...I can’t imagine them going through the thinking process of “what the public will wager on” for most of the races...maybe the feature and big events, but for the mundane 6-7 horse fields, how can anyone consistently and reasonably expect to know what the public will do...?

And beside, doesn’t the public employ handicapping for their selections, generally, so that what the public is thinking is generally what most handicappers are thinking anyway, including the ML maker’s own handicapping...they often jive, no..?

[v j stauffer]

Vic, I think what you are describing here is a BETTING line, rather than a "morning line". When a handicapper crafts an oddsline to use for the identification of the overlays and the underlays...that's called a "betting line", or a "value line". "The morning line" is some weird concoction whereby the line-maker tries to predict the final betting opinion of the betting public as a whole...and usually does a horrible job of it.

As a serious horseplayer, my main preoccupation is to form my OWN opinion about the horses that I handicap...and then compare my opinion to that of the odds-board. I ask myself: "what should the price of these horses BE?"...and I couldn't care less about what the PUBLIC thinks the price should be. Having said that...I don't want the morning line to be discontinued. If even ONE person out there finds it useful...then, IMO, that's a good enough reason to still keep it around.

Sounds good.

[Nitro]

First of all, when talking about the Morning Line you have to consider the level of player that might have an interest in this aspect of the game. Not everyone is sophisticated enough or has the desire to build their own line for any particular type of race. The Morning Line is basically a simple reference tool and as others have already pointed out; only as good as the person who develops it. Things to also consider which affect its accuracy at any given time are scratches and track conditions.

I agree with much of Whosonfirst’s viewpoint mentioned (above) particularly about the variety of timing of bets being made by those on the inside. I personally feel that anyone who has knowledge of a potentially live horse is NOT going to wait until the last minute to bet it. I mean why risk getting shut out?

I would not however jump to any immediate conclusions about entries that have a 20/1 M/L and open up at much lower odds. I’ve found that at the smaller tracks in particular (where the betting pools are much smaller) that very often these are simply decoys to lure unknowing players into thinking that these are “live” entries.

[VigorsTheGrey]

Some people find the morning line a helpful guide as to whether a race is playable. That is why it's still around. That and tradition. If racetracks thought dropping the morning line would raise handle they'd have done so 50 years ago.

However, for all the people saying it's inaccurate and meaningless---if your gambling competition is using something inaccurate and meaningless to influence their wagers, why in the world would you want to get rid of it? I've yet to see a logical counterargument to that, in this thread or anywhere else.
I’m making the opposite argument: The ML is accurate (for contenders, mainly) and meaningful. That is why I don’t want my competitors to have it...KNOWLEDGE IS POWER...let every come to their own conclusions...don’t give them any help...I want more value on my contender, please don’t point out my horse to all the nuckleheads...:bang:

[thaskalos]

And yet it is true. It is a very potent handicapping factor.

Pushes lots of winners to the top.

I recall Jim Cramer saying to me once that he wished he could find a pedigree factor that would get more winners in the top spot than Morning Line.


Of course, I am not advocating it because it correlates most highly with the tote board. But, guess what? So does BRIS Prime Power, PSR, etc.

IMO, it all depends on the morning-line MAKER. There are some morning lines out there that are BEYOND laughable...and they are obviously doing more harm that any "good" that they are intended for. But, as Castaway01 has so astutely observed, gambling is a competitive matketplace...and, let the bettor beware.

[ReplayRandall]

Some people find the morning line a helpful guide as to whether a race is playable. That is why it's still around. That and tradition. If racetracks thought dropping the morning line would raise handle they'd have done so 50 years ago.

However, for all the people saying it's inaccurate and meaningless---if your gambling competition is using something inaccurate and meaningless to influence their wagers, why in the world would you want to get rid of it? I've yet to see a logical counterargument to that, in this thread or anywhere else.

The fish are long gone Casty, and they're not coming back. As for the miniscule $ that are swayed by the M/L in today's game, it makes little to no difference what horses TRULY are in play, via medium to large betting sharp rebate players/bots.....M/L has been long obsolete, to think otherwise is foolishness....But let the archaic traditions continue, if they must.

[ReplayRandall]

Morning line a factor in today's game?....You've got to be joking, pure madness...:faint:

https://youtu.be/zpl4wkWMJtE

[AskinHaskin]

The only time I look at the " old speed ratings/ variant is when they hit 100 and above 100

... so you mean it's just coincidence that you spot them??


(nice try)

[BCOURTNEY]

I actually kept a chart with 5-6 pre-defined lines that balanced for each number of starters. One of them usually worked, but there were still plenty of races where they had to be tweaked.


Can you share these 5-6 stock issue starting lines minus the tweaks?

[Augenj]

Here's what the morning-line odds maker at Arlington Park says about his job.

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

[toddbowker]

Thank you for the input here...great to get info from those who actually do the ML...was wondering if you could expand on the bold portion above...why doesn’t the track want wild early odds swings..?
If that bet is an aberration (the horse shouldn't be 1/9 and won't be that way at close) it hurts the casual fan. If someone bets a horse down to 1/9 with an early big bet, the casual fans migrate to playing that horse. Can also get regular players to start looking at a horse thinking they've missed something, and can move lines on a betting exchange. Not that big a deal for sophisticated players who would probably mostly ignore it.

oh, and yes, i’ve often thought that pre-arranged ML’s based on number of starters are commonly employed by ML makers...I can’t imagine them going through the thinking process of “what the public will wager on” for most of the races...maybe the feature and big events, but for the mundane 6-7 horse fields, how can anyone consistently and reasonably expect to know what the public will do...?
I had several for each field size (more the larger the field size). Just made it easier to make sure my line calculated properly. Still had to go through the thought process on how I thought the public would bet. One size didn't fit all. I did have to create them on the fly too, but it definitely helped as normally I was on a tight deadline after scratch time to get the info to the print shop.

Can you share these 5-6 stock issue starting lines minus the tweaks?Unfortunately, those got tossed a long time ago ... :)

[PaceAdvantage]

There are many ways to use the M/L as one tool in the arsenal. I know I have done so, and recently.

People here bashing M/Ls are like the people who bash speed figures. Neither knows what to do with the thing, so they toss it aside and declare it useless.

Funny stuff.

Dave Schwartz actually knows what he's talking about. That about says it all for me.

[thaskalos]

There are many ways to use the M/L as one tool in the arsenal. I know I have done so, and recently.

People here bashing M/Ls are like the people who bash speed figures. Neither knows what to do with the thing, so they toss it aside and declare it useless.

Funny stuff.

Dave Schwartz actually knows what he's talking about. That about says it all for me.

No one suggested that you and Dave Schwartz don't "know what you are talking about". But some of the rest of us like to think that we know what we are talking about too.

[Big Peps]

A few years ago, I started getting in a rut trying to play too much value all the time and leaving chalk out of horizontal wagers just because I was trying to hit home runs, also trying to hit 20-1 ML horses in pick and pray contests. That said, I started handicapping and using DRF form prior to ML being posted on them. I have had much more success since then. Obviously, it's pretty easy to tell when there will be heavy chalk given prior performances and connections but one would be surprised how things go here. Like I said, I am mostly a win and horizontal wager type player.

There was something in my mental chemistry where I was just trying to cash 5 figure pick 4 and 5 tickets as opposed to making solid scores. Just the way I do things but it has helped me personally. Also you may find yourself singled to a 12-1 to 15-1 once in a while with a nicw win bet there as well but that's the game.

[castaway01]

I’m making the opposite argument: The ML is accurate (for contenders, mainly) and meaningful. That is why I don’t want my competitors to have it...KNOWLEDGE IS POWER...let every come to their own conclusions...don’t give them any help...I want more value on my contender, please don’t point out my horse to all the nuckleheads...:bang:

If you really think anyone is finding your secret horse because of the morning line and that they wouldn't have found it anyway, I don't know what to tell you. It's just fantasyland.

[Nitro]

Here's what the morning-line odds maker at Arlington Park says about his job.

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

Good article! Covers everything about the M/L.

[Augenj]

Good article! Covers everything about the M/L.
Thanks. I thought so too.

[Tom]

Small snapshot, just September through Sunday.
ML Favs all races = 38% winners, .83 roi
They are in over half of all exactas.

By comparison, top speed fig last race same sampel hits 28% and has roi of .84

Betting blind races - horizontals - you would get more winners using ML than top SR.

[ReplayRandall]

No one suggested that you and Dave Schwartz don't "know what you are talking about". But some of the rest of us like to think that we know what we are talking about too.
^THIS^….:ThmbUp:

[FakeNameChanged]

Here's what the morning-line odds maker at Arlington Park says about his job.

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

The author's understanding of how take works is wrong. See his quote below.

"The takeout in the win pool in Illinois is 17 percent. Therefore, by adding 17 to a base of 100, we arrive at 117 points. Then, by designating an additional point per horse, the morning line will generally balance between 125 and 129 points for fields consisting of eight to 12 horses.

Once each race is assigned a point value, the oddsmaker must now balance the field of horses to add up to the designated total (give or take a point or two). In an eight-horse field in Illinois the point value is 117 + 8 = 125."

If he adds AP's 17% take to 100 and gets 117%, he's doing it wrong. To calculate it correctly, you want to divide 100/(1.00-.17), or 100/.83=120 points, not 117. He then reasons that by adding 1 to every horse's odds, you should get somewhere between 125-129 in an 8-12 horse field. So occasionally he accidently comes up with 120; if he has 12 horses in a race he comes up with 129% until he tweaks the odds.

Here's an example showing a 17% take and the respective win pools.
True------------- Pool
odds--Pct----$ 100,000.00----17% take---- Adj. pool ---Pay odds---adj. %
2.5----29%----28,571.43-----4,857.14-----23,714.29----1.90-------34%
4.5----18%----18,181.8------ 3,090.91-----15,090.91----3.56-------22%
5------17%----16,666.67------2,833.33-----13,833.33----3.98-------20%
6------14%-----14,285.71-----2,428.57-----11,857.14----4.81-------17%
11------8%------8,333.33-----1,416.67-------6,916.67----8.96-------10%
12------8%------7,692.31-----1,307.69-------6,384.62----9.79--------9%
15------6%------6,250.00-----1,062.50-------5,187.50---12.28--------8%
----100.0%-----99,981.27---16,996.82------82,984.45---------------120%

He may be a good ML setter based on his "18 years of handicapping" but his understanding basic math is not so good. Otherwise it was a decent article.

[Augenj]

The author's understanding of how take works is wrong. See his quote below.

He may be a good ML setter based on his "18 years of handicapping" but his understanding basic math is not so good. Otherwise it was a decent article.
Yes, I didn't understand that part of his math either.

[Poindexter]

One other point about the morning line, the better it is the more likely it is you can see "live" horses. If you have a line like the following


morning line/actual
1) 6/12
2) 8/9
3) 4/7
4) 2/1
5) 4/4
6) 8/4.5
7) 10/8

Obviously the 4 is the expected chalk and winner. But the question is why are the 1 and 3 dramatically higher and the 6 and 7 are actually bet down despite the money on the chalk. It could be a bad morning line or it could be the smart money telling you that the 6 is live and the 7 is sneaky live(still bet down despite the 4 and 6 receiving heavy action).

[Maximillion]

Count me as one of the idiots who likes having the morning line in there.
If the horse im considering is the actual ML favorite my interest pretty much stops there....even though I know the ML can be often meaningless.

[PaceAdvantage]

No one suggested that you and Dave Schwartz don't "know what you are talking about".I agree. With that said, what was wrong with me saying that?

[Thomas Roulston]

Of course only certain numerical values are used in morning lines. A common list of such numerical values is the following: 1-5, 2-5, 3-5, 4-5, 1-1, 6-5, 7-5, 8-5, 9-5, 2-1, 5-2, 3-1, 7-2, 4-1, 9-2, 5-1, 6-1, 8-1, 10-1, 12-1, 15-1, 20-1, 30-1, and 50-1.

[Tom]

I think the best thing to do is track the ML at your track. I have been doing a lot of research since this thread started, and some tracks are amazingly HORRIBLE. Others, pretty good.

I have found some spot plays that focus on the ML fav with a couple of simple other factors and I have seen 60%+winners, with roi's in the low .90s.

Now, win betting aside, many people play horizontals, so these could easily be singles.

[Thomas Roulston]

It is fascinating to see what happens to morning lines when there are a lot of late scratches, such as when a race originally scheduled to be run on the turf course is taken off the turf.

[Tom]

HTR has an adjusted ML that is also revised for scratches. Very powerful factor.

[Robert Fischer]

the morning line is an 'anchor' for the public.

A good morning line takes the superficial public opinion and offers a reasonable reflection of that opinion to use as an anchor.

You never want to see a morning line maker use esoteric handicapping to make 'selections'. You never want the morning line to be a reflection of the line maker's handicapping whatsoever.

It serves as a resource for the public, and as a psychological anchor. It sets the table for players who put in the work and occasionally find an esoteric insight to have some value.

The guy in NY started to do a much better job of this recently.

[mikekk]

[QUOTE=Robert Fischer;2370837]the morning line is an 'anchor' for the public.

I agree with this, and its value is precisely in the anchoring.

Hastings Park had a situation years ago where someone screwed up (either the publisher was incompetent, or whomever from Hastings responsible for getting them the line) and for one whole weekend( Friday, Saturday and Sunday) the program showed every horse entered with a 10-1 line.

Consternation!

It killed action for all the horizontal bets, and led to most bettors waiting until the line resolved itself before getting in line. Loong lines! The handle was down @40% for the weekend.

It might not be a resource for some people, but it IS a resource for the general betting public (if such a thing still exists!).

Mike

[clocker7]

Morning lines go way back. And I am not referring to the bookies.

In the parimutuel era, racetracks first used "hand" or "rack" tickets that were printed unevenly in quantity, with horses expected to have the most volume assigned a code number ending in "zero," the second favorite ending in "1" etc, etc up to "9."

Track officials assigned those numbers in their programs, and the public generally bet them as the officials estimated.

It was an efficient way to keep ticket-printing prices down. And the guys were pretty adept.

[ZippyChippy423]

There is one useful piece of info in regards to the m/l and pick three betting. Looking at the will pays of a pick 3 nearly 100% of the time the lowest payoff is the m/l favorite. What this tells me is that a lot of the bettors are lazy and don’t handicapp ahead. Most of the time the will pays are far greater on all the other horses then the m/l fav. Now if I like the m/l fav of course I’m not throwing that horse out but if I don’t like then this sets up a great advantage in pic 3 price.

[Redboard]

There is one useful piece of info in regards to the m/l and pick three betting. Looking at the will pays of a pick 3 nearly 100% of the time the lowest payoff is the m/l favorite. What this tells me is that a lot of the bettors are lazy and don’t handicapp ahead. Most of the time the will pays are far greater on all the other horses then the m/l fav. Now if I like the m/l fav of course I’m not throwing that horse out but if I don’t like then this sets up a great advantage in pic 3 price.

That would be an interesting analysis Chippy. Tracks do not publish "probables" for the pick three, only the daily double. At least I don't know any who do.

On those situations where the ML favorite is not the win betting favorite, how many times does the Pick3 "will Pay" be lower for the ML fav?

[Redboard]

Speaking of ML odds, I notice that the 6th race(Woodford S G2) at Keenland tomorrow (Saturday) does not have a morning line favorite, which I don't believe I have saw before. Both the 5 (Holding Gold) and the 10(Will Call) are both 4/1. I guess he didn't want to go out on a limb and make one 7/2.

It will be interesting to see what they go off at.

http://www.equibase.com/static/entry/KEE100618USA6-EQB.html