Who holds the clockers in the mornings and odds makers accountable?

[kgar311]

Originally Posted by GBBob

I think Battaglia blew the morning line and at most, they didn't ask the horse for much in the mornings. Someone pointed to the bullet at CD earlier so there was some indication about his talent. I just think to have this grassy knoll theory involving clockers is giving them too much credit. If anything, blame the trainer..or give him his creds for getting the horse to the race on top of his game and not wasting energy going .58 in the AM.

I think she was doing 58 in the morning

[Scav]

Originally Posted by kgar311

I think she was doing 58 in the morning

Sounds like you got smoked on the race and you are feeling the pain.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by Payson Dave

hmmmmm.... I really should just stay out of this thread... but I will say that the time of a workout is much less important than how it is accomplished... what were the splits??... slow early then fast late???... under a strangle hold or being urged to give all by the rider???... in company or working alone??.... if in company with whom???... how was the gallop out for the next furlong or two???

There is a saying about making assumptions.....

I haven't seen any other track do this, but Keeneland is offering clocker's comments:
http://ww2.keeneland.com/racing/Lists/copy/intoday.aspx

As far as this particular filly goes, they had commented on TVG that the word was out that she was a runner and McPeek is obviously having a fantastic meet this fall.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

I haven't seen any other track do this, but Keeneland is offering clocker's comments:
http://ww2.keeneland.com/racing/Lists/copy/intoday.aspx

As far as this particular filly goes, they had commented on TVG that the word was out that she was a runner and McPeek is obviously having a fantastic meet this fall.

It was a McPeek horse also??

This gets better and better.

The guy points all his horses for the Keeneland meets, specifically. Every single one of his horses has been live. And the ones that are the most dangerous are the ones that show absolutely nothing first out at another track, 20/1 ML and they open up at 10/1..

[kgar311]

Originally Posted by Scav

Sounds like you got smoked on the race and you are feeling the pain.

Everyone got smoked on the race.
And why shouldn't I be mad? Wouldn't you be mad if someone punched you in the face, stuck their hand in your pocket, took a couple hundred bucks and walked away with your money? or would you be cool with it.
I see no difference between that and what happened with this race. I along with thousands of other people were criminally robbed by what transpired.

It's called gambling for a reason.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by Scav

It was a McPeek horse also??

This gets better and better.

The guy points all his horses for the Keeneland meets, specifically. Every single one of his horses has been live. And the ones that are the most dangerous are the ones that show absolutely nothing first out at another track, 20/1 ML and they open up at 10/1..

Yup. I think he has a good chance to do well with his juvies in the BC too.

Also, I'd be more pissed if I bet on that McLaughlin hyped because of pedigree horse in this race....

[brianwspencer]

Not to mention that lots of folks see early money as "smart money" on unraced horses. So, either way, if she's owned by as gigantic a group as you say, then naturally they're going to bet her.

They bet her hard, she opens at low odds.

Others with no information at all see a firster with solid back works, breaking from the 12 for a competent conditioner, open as the heavily bet chalk and say "hey, someone knows something."

In a race like that, a horse like that taking lots of early money marked her as a contender, so she continued to get bet. Big deal.

Plus, it's not like this "post 12" thing is some giant conspiracy....considering that this Spring, from limited starters in one-turn main track races, it was the 4th most advantageous post as far as percentage of winners....and get this -- last fall? The MOST advantageous post for one-turn main track races, when runners breaking from that wild hellhole won an almost unfathomable 23% of their races.

[Bigsmc]

Originally Posted by kgar311

Everyone got smoked on the race.
And why shouldn't I be mad? Wouldn't you be mad if someone punched you in the face, stuck their hand in your pocket, took a couple hundred bucks and walked away with your money? or would you be cool with it.
I see no difference between that and what happened with this race. I along with thousands of other people were criminally robbed by what transpired.

Not everyone.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by kgar311

Everyone got smoked on the race.
And why shouldn't I be mad? Wouldn't you be mad if someone punched you in the face, stuck their hand in your pocket, took a couple hundred bucks and walked away with your money? or would you be cool with it.
I see no difference between that and what happened with this race. I along with thousands of other people were criminally robbed by what transpired.

Yeah, ok...From a trainer who never works his horses fast, points for the Keeneland meet, and all, and I mean ALL his horses are getting bet off the board, you must never score on an Assmussen first timer either.....

[Payson Dave]

FTS's ... ya gotta love em...

[Scav]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Not to mention that lots of folks see early money as "smart money" on unraced horses. So, either way, if she's owned by as gigantic a group as you say, then naturally they're going to bet her.

They bet her hard, she opens at low odds.

Others with no information at all see a firster with solid back works, breaking from the 12 for a competent conditioner, open as the heavily bet chalk and say "hey, someone knows something."

In a race like that, a horse like that taking lots of early money marked her as a contender, so she continued to get bet. Big deal.

Plus, it's not like this "post 12" thing is some giant conspiracy....considering that this Spring, from limited starters in one-turn main track races, it was the 4th most advantageous post as far as percentage of winners....and get this -- last fall? The MOST advantageous post for one-turn main track races, when runners breaking from that wild hellhole won an almost unfathomable 23% of their races.

That ownership crap has nothing to do with it now that it is out it was a McPeek horse.

And trust me, there is only a few owners out there that mess with the odds, Averil is one of them, all his horses get pounded because he is a maniac.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by kgar311

Everyone got smoked on the race.
And why shouldn't I be mad? Wouldn't you be mad if someone punched you in the face, stuck their hand in your pocket, took a couple hundred bucks and walked away with your money? or would you be cool with it.
I see no difference between that and what happened with this race. I along with thousands of other people were criminally robbed by what transpired.

This strikes me as having a little post of the year potential.

[kgar311]

Here's the point im trying to make with this thread.

I am a life long track and horse enthusiast, I was born a stones throw away from Saratoga Racecourse, i've never missed a Travers in my life. Ive owned a couple horses in my life, worked at a racetrack for 10 years, been gambling since I was 8 and prob have put damn near 6 figures through the windows. At this point in my life I dont follow racing as close as I used to in the past so I dont have the luxury to watch TVG and hear them tout this horse or know that Mcpeek points all his bombs to win at keeneland or think about watching rolling doubles to see if there are odds discrepancies . So this weekend I was in the Miami area and decided to pop in Calder for a few. I still stop at the local simulcast once and a while too. But I rely on the info provided to me in the program on that day and I expect it to be correct. When I see stuff like this it makes me want to bet the horses less and less. Now why do you think horse racing is a dieing sport? I would bet on 2 ants crossing the street but now you have someone like me that is completely fed up with betting the horses because of crap like this. What do you think its doing to new people that come to the track and see this? They are running for the hills.
Im just sick of making donations to my local betting parlor everytime I walk in.

[DaTruth]

Originally Posted by kgar311

Everyone got smoked on the race.
And why shouldn't I be mad? Wouldn't you be mad if someone punched you in the face, stuck their hand in your pocket, took a couple hundred bucks and walked away with your money? or would you be cool with it.
I see no difference between that and what happened with this race. I along with thousands of other people were criminally robbed by what transpired.

So you have never profited from these "deceptive" practices that are so prevalent in racing? If you had figured out on your own that this was a live one, you wouldn't have bet it because you wouldn't have wanted to be a party to the deception, right?

[Kasept]

kgar,

Understand the frustration missing the play, but it wasn't a tremendous stretch to include the McPeek firster on any multi-race play Saturday. You say you rely on the program info available, well there was a variety of info that was out there, including the lead DRF capper for Keeneland who picked Connie and Michael 2nd. I included her 4th in my selections and on the P4 ticket as well.

This wasn't some hidden horse that was a devious put-over.

STEVE KLEIN'S FORM ANALYSIS:

1. Star Recruit
2. Connie and Michael
3. Cactus Cadillac

STAR RECRUIT broke slowly, then rallied from 10th to finish third against maiden specials going six furlongs at Presque. She shows an impressive work tab on this track with a half-mile breeze in :47.20, and five furlongs in :59.00. Trainer Eric Reed has won with 24 percent of his maidens making their second career start, with a $2.23 ROI. This filly should like the extra furlong she'll be asked to cover today. CONNIE AND MICHAEL debuts for Ken McPeek, who has won with 16 percent of his first-time starters with a $2.00 ROI. The McPeek/Desormeaux combination has a 24 percent win rate since 2008. This filly owns a nice work tab, and should be ready to roll at first asking. CACTUS CADILLAC finished third at Ellis and a close second at Turfway, but the first-time starters in this field will probably make this a tougher task.

[kgar311]

Originally Posted by Kasept

kgar,

Understand the frustration missing the play, but it wasn't a tremendous stretch to include the McPeek firster on any multi-race play Saturday. You say you rely on the program info available, well there was a variety of info that was out there, including the lead DRF capper for Keeneland who picked Connie and Michael 2nd. I included her 4th in my selections and on the P4 ticket as well.

This wasn't some hidden horse that was a devious put-over.

STEVE KLEIN'S FORM ANALYSIS:

1. Star Recruit
2. Connie and Michael
3. Cactus Cadillac

STAR RECRUIT broke slowly, then rallied from 10th to finish third against maiden specials going six furlongs at Presque. She shows an impressive work tab on this track with a half-mile breeze in :47.20, and five furlongs in :59.00. Trainer Eric Reed has won with 24 percent of his maidens making their second career start, with a $2.23 ROI. This filly should like the extra furlong she'll be asked to cover today. CONNIE AND MICHAEL debuts for Ken McPeek, who has won with 16 percent of his first-time starters with a $2.00 ROI. The McPeek/Desormeaux combination has a 24 percent win rate since 2008. This filly owns a nice work tab, and should be ready to roll at first asking. CACTUS CADILLAC finished third at Ellis and a close second at Turfway, but the first-time starters in this field will probably make this a tougher task.

Goes back to my point, seems like everyone knew something about this horse except the odds maker. How can that be? Shouldnt Mike know that this is the case and maybe made him 6 or 8-1 or is he that oblivious to trends at his own track that he couldnt recognize this?
Im happy for all the handicappers that picked this horse and Joe blows grandma had her. I as an average horse player believe he was duped by the clocker and the odds maker by false information provided to me by the program provided to me by the track.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by kgar311

Goes back to my point, seems like everyone knew something about this horse except the odds maker. How can that be? Shouldnt Mike know that this is the case and maybe made him 6 or 8-1 or is he that oblivious to trends at his own track that he couldnt recognize this?
Im happy for all the handicappers that picked this horse and Joe blows grandma had her. I as an average horse player believe he was duped by the clocker and the odds maker by false information provided to me by the program provided to me by the track.

Seriously maybe I'm missing the point of this post, but you're saying that if Battaglia had made the horse 6-1 or 8-1 you maybe would have bet the horse?

That essentially means you're relying on the morning-line maker to do your handicapping for you, doesn't it? All the same information would have been there. Would the "slow" works have looked more appealing with an 8-1 next to them than a 12-1?

Maybe it's just me and some people around here that I know -- but a ML overlay in the middle of the sequence is a blessing for most multi-race players I know...for reasons exactly like this. If people are relying on the ML maker to help guide them in their handicapping once they cap and survive the first leg, and you can pluck a ridiculous overlay at 12-1 on the ML when you know the horse should be 5-2 or 9-2 or whatever it is, then you're almost always going to get an overlay in the multi-race payouts too.

Me? I'm perfectly happy with that happening, and as a horizontal player, am indebted to line-makers who totally blow lines on horses I like by pegging them much higher than they should be...exactly because of things like this, and the payouts are inflated because of it.

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by kgar311

Goes back to my point, seems like everyone knew something about this horse except the odds maker. How can that be? Shouldnt Mike know that this is the case and maybe made him 6 or 8-1 or is he that oblivious to trends at his own track that he couldnt recognize this?
Im happy for all the handicappers that picked this horse and Joe blows grandma had her. I as an average horse player believe he was duped by the clocker and the odds maker by false information provided to me by the program provided to me by the track.

That's fair about the ML. I take them at face value and I think Battaglia is generally thought of as a very good oddsmaker. You're well within rights to cite 12-1 as a bad line on the filly though. Personally, I thought Star Recruit, Cast Call and Elarose all 'looked' better with debuts under their belts then her, and tabbed them 1-2-3. Indeed, the first FTS I considered was McPeek's, so I guess if there was a line attached to that, 5-1/11-2 would be about right.

[kgar311]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Seriously maybe I'm missing the point of this post, but you're saying that if Battaglia had made the horse 6-1 or 8-1 you maybe would have bet the horse?

That essentially means you're relying on the morning-line maker to do your handicapping for you, doesn't it? All the same information would have been there. Would the "slow" works have looked more appealing with an 8-1 next to them than a 12-1?

Maybe it's just me and some people around here that I know -- but a ML overlay in the middle of the sequence is a blessing for most multi-race players I know...for reasons exactly like this. If people are relying on the ML maker to help guide them in their handicapping once they cap and survive the first leg, and you can pluck a ridiculous overlay at 12-1 on the ML when you know the horse should be 5-2 or 9-2 or whatever it is, then you're almost always going to get an overlay in the multi-race payouts too.

Me? I'm perfectly happy with that happening, and as a horizontal player, am indebted to line-makers who totally blow lines on horses I like by pegging them much higher than they should be...exactly because of things like this, and the payouts are inflated because of it.

Im not relying on the odds maker but 12-1 is basically dismissing the horse and it didnt warrant me to look past the 101 and 103 works that were posted in the program. A 6 or 8-1makes you think a little bit, ok good trainer, good jockey maybe there's something to this horse. But when the oddsmaker who LIVES at the track dismisses the horse its kind of hard to spend extra time looking at the horse in a large field.