Santa Anita Morning Line

[Track Phantom]

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

[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.

[letswastemoney]

Originally Posted by Valento

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.

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

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by letswastemoney

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

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

[Tall One]

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

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by letswastemoney

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.

Originally Posted by Tall One

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

yup

[letswastemoney]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

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.



yup

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.

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by letswastemoney

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]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

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]

Originally Posted by letswastemoney

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]

Originally Posted by Valento

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]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

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.