Since I’ve been authoring the Pricci “Morning Line” Blog for more than five years, I feel eminently qualified to answer this posit with a question: “What, You Expect Me to Get a Real Job Now?”
Well, it’s too late for that, but, of course, I’m being a little facetious: After all, I have devoted my entire professional life to becoming an expert on such matters.
While it is arguable whether or not I’ve achieved such status, I can state without equivocation that I play one on TV, radio, and on a stage that cannot possibly be any bigger, the World Wide Web.
And, so, I will quote his thoughts, edited for brevity but keeping ideas in context. Statements will appear in quotes, my thoughts below in italics, which I gleaned from the seldom referenced Indulto Internet Style Book.
“At some point in your life you have (or will) come across a process [constructing morning line odds] that seems so outdated that you wonder why it still exists.”
As that great philosopher, Meatloaf, would say: stop right there! Never have I wondered why it still exists, and not because “that is the way we have always done it.”
Who is this ‘we’, anyway, Kemo Sabe? Never have I wondered, nor has anyone ever asked “what is this, and why do we need it.” So I won’t say because that’s the way it’s always been done. Instead, I’ll just call it what my gang calls it; an Is-Be.
“Just because it worked fifty years ago does not mean it works today. [The Morning Line is] not necessarily how that person would bet the race nor do [the prices] represent what that person believes are fair odds for each horse…My question is what value does the morning line provide? Honestly, none, therefore why do we need it?
]Just because it worked 50 years ago is PRECISELY why it works today. It also provides continuity, historical context, allowing the faithful to impart its wisdom to an uninformed audience or potential fan.
Why provide a pointspread or an early betting line on football games? Because the market otherwise could not set a price upon which to wager until something like a one-on-one betting exchange is created.
It works. There is no way to improve it, short of fixed odds wagering, but that doesn’t mean it should be eliminated.
To the casual racing fan or even some of the lesser sophisticated weekend warriors, the horses other than the famous ones in the day’s feature race, they would be just names on a page without context. How does eliminating the morning line accomplish anything at all?
HRI regulars will note that we eschew the term Morning Line and refer to it as an Early Line, quotes that generally appear well in advance of that day’s entries.
Technically, a Morning Line should be set after scratches and track conditions are known, the morning the races are run. Until then, the early line provides context, a sketch of which the most likely winners are, talking points for the cognoscenti.
“Imagine that you woke up tomorrow, opened your past performances and found that there was no morning line. Would you be able to handicap the races? How would it impact your selection process? Would you be able to determine the fair odds for each horse in each race? Would you be excited or scared? Chances are the race would be bet in a completely different way than you would expect. That one small change would throw the parimutuel pools into chaos.”
Of course, horseplayers would be able to handicap a race without a morning line. I know what I know, and what other serious players know, but would not have no guide as to which horse “the public” might choose.
Early bets are made as a function of the morning line and insider knowledge. Without a morning line, I’m not sure I could discern with any certitude which horses were “dead” on the board.
The technique of playing the odds board is quite nuanced, especially in the more sophisticated markets. More than I would surmise, I’m often surprised by how races are bet. The early line helps define my broad understanding of any particular race.
I want morning line odds set by competent line makers, such as New York’s Eric Donovan or Florida’s Chuck Streva, two of the best, to help define my tote-board reads. Further, they shade the hot trip horses, or live connections.
I don’t know every venue that’s not part of what is referred to as “the good horse circuit.” I want early line help when I look at entries for Laurel or Delaware, or even the major California tracks.
How could I immediately recognize a possible betting opportunity without it unless I quickly handicapped the race. Without so many hours in one betting session, I likely would pass. This doesn’t necessarily hurt me, but it’s not good industry business.
“Within the Chaos Lies Opportunity…That chaos would create opportunities for savvy horseplayers because it would result in horses being bet inefficiently. There would be ample opportunity to find overlays that might not otherwise exist…
“A horse that should be 5/1 that would be 4/1 on the morning line might be 8/1 with no morning line… Without a morning line…pools would be bet less efficiently and value would be created.”
Indeed, chaos by definition creates opportunity. But sometimes it only creates more chaos. With a morning line, races still will be bet inefficiently. And if the public over-bets favorites as a result of the morning line as guide, value would increase exponentially on non-favorites, would it not?
“Let the Market Determine the Odds… What the morning line does is influence process of determining the final odds. Why not give the betting public the opportunity to determine the final odds for each horse without the influence of the morning line? There is no harm in doing so and as mentioned earlier value would be created.”
The betting public IS the market, and it already determines the final odds. But what’s the goal here; to fleece the squares, to take an edge from pools created by unsuspecting, unsophisticated bettors.
Those bettors--the unsophisticated betting public--are all gone except for major event days a short, boutique race meets. All who remain are us, cannibalizing each other, until the takeout kills us all.
Knowledge is power. Even a morning line has power in that it can be a teaching instrument that could grow the game through understanding. The game’s hard enough, even when bettors are guided by sophisticated oddsmakers.
High takeout? Now that’s the enemy everyone should be fighting.


22 Sep 2012 at 06:27 am | #
Morning line? Why not? Where’s the harm? Probably is appreciated by the novice and casual bettor. The knowledgeable, seasoned ‘capper barely looks at the morning line. Besides, once the tote board starts flashing odds, the morning line is history.
Ah, takeout; that miserable demon responsible for Thoroughbred racing’s decline. Most turf writers, when working the figures, use 20% as the takeout ‘mix’ when all types of wagers are considered. Now if the takeout were 10% for all wagers, an exacta paying $120 would pay $135; a plodder paying $4 would now pay $4.50. All payoffs would increase by 12.5%. Is the 12.5% (reducing takeout from 20% to 10%) really standing in the way of racing’s growth, of attracting newbies? For some reason, I think there are several other mitigating factors more relevant that are contributing to racing’s current decline.
Recently I asked here at HRI for turf writers to consider fixed odds; that I have given it some thought and find the idea promising, but am not quite sure if I have considered all angles. Would fixed odds be the solution, as casinos seem to thrive with fixed odds? Or, are ya’all content with grumbling about takeout, what horse will win the Classic, and what horse will be HOY?
-------
Mitt says that 47% of us are dependent on the Government. Seems to me that 85% or so of racetracks are dependent on casino dole to stay in business: for purses, salaries, medical coverage and pensions.
22 Sep 2012 at 03:46 pm | #
The morning line is my friend!
One of my favorite angles is to find what I perceive as morning line errors in my horizontal wagers. A 15-1 morning line horse that is bet down to 5-1 generally yields a 15-1 payout in a pic 3 or 4.
Another strategy I employ is to not look at the morning line and after I handicap the race set my own line and then compare it to the morning line to find value. Sadly in most cases what I see as value many others do to.
In defense of Lenny’s argument I do believe newbies or the unsophisticated get sucked in by betting morning line favorites, which gets them to the poor house quicker than most handicappers.
Mr Corrow, fixed odds do exist via Betfair. It is the single most positive innovation since I have been playing the ponies. If the USA (it is legal in Canada and most of the world) or the industry can get their act together it can revolutionize the game and help bring it back to prominence in this stock market crazed world.
22 Sep 2012 at 04:03 pm | #
I second the motion with respect to Eric Donovan; he’s a real man. To the astute, the Morning line is simply a pre-analysis indicator before you sink your teeth into the past performances, and before the first flash many times allows me to salivate, hoping that the crowd will really ignore a certain horse. I like to salivate. If you ask Nick Kling, he’ll tell you: “It’s the law.”
TTT
22 Sep 2012 at 04:21 pm | #
WMC, I mentioned fixed odds wagering in a favorably light; did you miss that sentence?
Like Romney, I don’t care that85% of racetracks are on casino dole. Ten years from now, the way it’s trending, probably none of them will be.
Finally, I totally don’t get how you under-value high takeout as a business (read bettor) killer.
Eric, you are correct about bet-down high-odds ML horses being better value in sequential wagers than final odds indicate. There’s also a method that tips hot horses in the doubles pool using ML odds.
TTT, I can think of better reasons to salivate, but whatever floats your boat.
22 Sep 2012 at 04:33 pm | #
If I may go off-topic, I observe that Parx management is still challenging Einstein’s definition of insanity by offering $3,024,000 in purses on today’s race card and expecting a different result, instead of the tsunami of red ink that will flow. I would think that the budget director for the Governor of Pennsylavnia would be apoplectic with money being so tight and Parx simplying tossing casino dole friviously into purses.
See what a million dollar purse can achieve? Four entrants!
Do you readers know that for Parx to receive enough money from takeout and signal fees they need for example 79,000 people on-track to wager $70 each, and 405,000 people off-track to wager $100 each just to cover the purses, forget the day’s operating expenses. Or on-track handle to total almost $6,000,000 and off-track handle to total $40,000,000.
Last Saturday total all-source handle was $1,407,244, or only 47% of today’s purses!!!
I wouldn’t go on the Pennsylvana Turnpike today, as it is very close to the racetrack, and a sinkhole will probably occur the size of a crater.
22 Sep 2012 at 04:39 pm | #
Mr. Pricci: If you think that fixed odds has merit, then why isn’t it pushed by you and your fellow turf writers? From what I conclude, fixed odds would be very favorable to the bettor, would put the racetrack ‘at risk’ to take a huge hit, but would also allow the racetrack to make some serious money - works for casinos.
23 Sep 2012 at 01:31 am | #
The track needs ML more than the race fan. This is how they come up with aprox 20% commission right off the top. ML odds are only a frame work the track uses in trying to guess how the public might wager. ML odds are not made to 100%, but rather approx 120%. They figure in what profit they will make right off the top.
23 Sep 2012 at 01:48 am | #
WMC, I have written, albeit not extensively, on the merits of fixed-odds wagering. Unfortuantely, I’d probably have to agree that the parimutuel system is not one of the game’s glaring problems: I know you’re attitude vis a vis high takeout but, with due respect, you’re wrong. For another day…
Nearly $4.4 million was bet off-track alone on Saturday’s terrific Parx card, and it was those million-dollar races that attracted those kind of betting dollars...and please, I don’t want to read about what this means to the racetrack. My interest is in whether good racing is popular and, once again, it was proven at the windows.
Yes, the $1M Cotillion attracted only four fillies, but fter watching those two fillies put on a one-for-the-ages show, those horsemen who showed some discretion were probably doing the right thing by their horses.
But you woud think Penn management would have enough money to buy a damn water truck. That surface was extremely dry for no reason. Dirt surfaces are living, breathing things and need to be watered appropriately. Go watch the replays and note that the surface was a light tan, not a rich darker tan or brown. My only is question: Why?
23 Sep 2012 at 07:37 am | #
Mr. Pricci: I must conclude that you are not a person that gives much credence to the need for a company (Parx) to operate profitably. If you care to do the math, Parx managed to generate a mere $331,000 (generously computed) income from the race card Saturday, while putting up $3,024,000 in purse money - think there is something wrong here?
Parx incurred a financial loss of $2,693,000 without even considering the day’s operating expenses; a total financial bloodbath simply beyond imagination; that management can be so stupid and carefree with the gift from the casino is mind-boggling.
You are impressed with the off-track handle being $4,361,459 that required $3,024,000 in purses to achieve. So, I gather, it was worth it? Your joking right?
And, you believe that the two fillies ‘put on a one-for-the-ages show’ worth a million dollar purse? You can find twenty or more claiming races Saturday on the east coast that were just as exciting and paid a hell of a lot more than $8 for the exacta, and the purses were 97% lower.
If the governor of Pennsylvania allows this flaunting of casino dole to happen again next year, he should be run out of office.
Governor Cuomo is on the right track thinking of doing precisely what the Ontario government did to Woodbine - no more casino dole. Earn your own way or go out of business as it should be for all businesses.
25 Sep 2012 at 05:29 am | #
Seriously guys! With all of the monumental challenges facing racing why is anyone trying to fix or get rid of one of the very few things that is not broke! As a partnership manager, the morning line is one of the things my partners enjoy most alongside the line up of entries. It is one of the very few fun little novelties that comes the way of the owner ---no matter what the odds.
25 Sep 2012 at 12:29 pm | #
John,
You make some good points. I was merely suggesting a slight shakeup to see what the effects would be on wagering and wagering handle. This change could be implemented quickly and changed back just as quickly. What’s the harm in trying something new once in a while? We will never know if the effect would be positive or negative without trying it out and the way the sport is trending right now race tracks should be open to experimentation of any kind.
Lenny