tanda
05-02-2002, 04:04 PM
I have lost all respect for Steve Crist. For the second time this week, his Derby diary contains gross errors.
Today's entry criticizes the Churchill Downs Derby morning line because it adds of to 117+%. He believes it should add up to 105.5%. He writes that the morning line indicates that the take would have to be raised to 25% for it to be accurate.
With a 0.84 payout (16% take), the morning line should add up to 119% (1.00/0.84). With breakage included, maybe 122%. So, Mike Battaglia's line is close to that figure. It should be higher than 117%, but Crist argues it should add up to a lower total. Crist asserts that it should add up to 100%. However, we all know (or I thought we did) that the morning line is not a true probability line but an estimate of the final odds based on anticipated public action and adjusted for take and breakage. Thus, most morning lines add up to 121-125%. Crist does not realize this. He seems to think that morning lines should add up to 100%.
Next, he says that a line should add 5-6% because a 12:1 horse will pay anywhere from 12:1 - 12.90:1. He suggests adding points to compensate for this. A 12:1 horse may also go off at 1:5. So do we "compensate" for this as well? When a horse is made 12:1, the linesmaker is estimating that he will go at 12.00:1. Yes, he may go 12.90:1, but the error could go the other way (11.10:1). A true oddsline must always equal 100%. There cannot be a 105.5% true oddsline unless there are 1.055 winners of each race. A morning line designed to predict off odds must add up to 120-125%. In no case should the line equal 106%.
Earlier this week, he mentioned that 4 horse may get 10% of the action even though they each have a 1.5% chance of winning. He then says that thie is akin to having a 10% bonus on winning wagers. He seemed to consider the 10% action on those horses dead money. What the hell is he thinking?
If the horse have a combined 6% of winning, then only 4% of the money is dead. The horse should have 6% bet on them. He treats the entire 10% as if it is incorrectly bet.
Next, 10% dead money does not create a 10% bonus. Assume a 10 horse field with each horse having a 10% chance to win and 10% bet on each. With Churchill take and breakage, each horse would pay 7.40:1. Now, let's imagine that one horse actually has a 0% chance to win. The others each have an 11.1% chance. With proper betting action (11.1% bet on the nine and 0% on the other), the 9 should each pay 6.50:1. If the public bets 10% on each (10% dead money on the horse with no chance), then each horse will again pay 7.40:1. 7.40/6.50 is 13.8%. The bonus is not 10%, but 13.8%.
I guess Mr. Pick Six does not understand the basic mathematics of the game.
Today's entry criticizes the Churchill Downs Derby morning line because it adds of to 117+%. He believes it should add up to 105.5%. He writes that the morning line indicates that the take would have to be raised to 25% for it to be accurate.
With a 0.84 payout (16% take), the morning line should add up to 119% (1.00/0.84). With breakage included, maybe 122%. So, Mike Battaglia's line is close to that figure. It should be higher than 117%, but Crist argues it should add up to a lower total. Crist asserts that it should add up to 100%. However, we all know (or I thought we did) that the morning line is not a true probability line but an estimate of the final odds based on anticipated public action and adjusted for take and breakage. Thus, most morning lines add up to 121-125%. Crist does not realize this. He seems to think that morning lines should add up to 100%.
Next, he says that a line should add 5-6% because a 12:1 horse will pay anywhere from 12:1 - 12.90:1. He suggests adding points to compensate for this. A 12:1 horse may also go off at 1:5. So do we "compensate" for this as well? When a horse is made 12:1, the linesmaker is estimating that he will go at 12.00:1. Yes, he may go 12.90:1, but the error could go the other way (11.10:1). A true oddsline must always equal 100%. There cannot be a 105.5% true oddsline unless there are 1.055 winners of each race. A morning line designed to predict off odds must add up to 120-125%. In no case should the line equal 106%.
Earlier this week, he mentioned that 4 horse may get 10% of the action even though they each have a 1.5% chance of winning. He then says that thie is akin to having a 10% bonus on winning wagers. He seemed to consider the 10% action on those horses dead money. What the hell is he thinking?
If the horse have a combined 6% of winning, then only 4% of the money is dead. The horse should have 6% bet on them. He treats the entire 10% as if it is incorrectly bet.
Next, 10% dead money does not create a 10% bonus. Assume a 10 horse field with each horse having a 10% chance to win and 10% bet on each. With Churchill take and breakage, each horse would pay 7.40:1. Now, let's imagine that one horse actually has a 0% chance to win. The others each have an 11.1% chance. With proper betting action (11.1% bet on the nine and 0% on the other), the 9 should each pay 6.50:1. If the public bets 10% on each (10% dead money on the horse with no chance), then each horse will again pay 7.40:1. 7.40/6.50 is 13.8%. The bonus is not 10%, but 13.8%.
I guess Mr. Pick Six does not understand the basic mathematics of the game.