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

[kgar311]

Taking nothing away from what was an ultra impressive performance by Connie and Micheal in the 8th at Keeneland on Saturday my question is, are there any penalties for these guys trying to hide a freak of a horse by slapping 101 and 103 works on a first time starter and then throwing 12-1ml on her?

This was a clear cut case of trying to screw the betting public to try and get a price on a horse that, by looking at the opening odds (even money) and the contingent in the winners circle after race(about 50 deep), obviously everybody(on track) knew was going to win by the length of the track.

If you didnt see the race this was a 2yr old filly, first time starter breaking from the 12 hole going 7f. She had to work for the lead a little but once clear went 22, 45, 110 and finished up 122.3 winning by over 7 lengths under a hand ride.

The reason why it makes me mad is because it was the second leg of the pick 4 and if you didnt have the inside info there's no way you could put this horse in your pik, in which I did not and it ended up costing me.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by kgar311

Taking nothing away from what was an ultra impressive performance by Connie and Micheal in the 8th at Keeneland on Saturday my question is, are there any penalties for these guys trying to hide a freak of a horse by slapping 101 and 103 works on a first time starter and then throwing 12-1ml on her?

This was a clear cut case of trying to screw the betting public to try and get a price on a horse that, by looking at the opening odds (even money) and the contingent in the winners circle after race(about 50 deep), obviously everybody(on track) knew was going to win by the length of the track.

If you didnt see the race this was a 2yr old filly, first time starter breaking from the 12 hole going 7f. She had to work for the lead a little but once clear went 22, 45, 110 and finished up 122.3 winning by over 7 lengths under a hand ride.

The reason why it makes me mad is because it was the second leg of the pick 4 and if you didnt have the inside info there's no way you could put this horse in your pik, in which I did not and it ended up costing me.

I'm not going to comment on the 12-1ML because I don't know the rest of the field that well, but why do you think there is an automatic correlation between morning works and afternoon peformances?

[kgar311]

Originally Posted by GBBob

I'm not going to comment on the 12-1ML because I don't know the rest of the field that well, but why do you think there is an automatic correlation between morning works and afternoon peformances?

The horse was an absloute freak monster and NO WAY was throwing out shitty workouts like they put down in the form. And that was made very clear by the horse opening up even money. This was a clear case of cheating on the clockers part, now the odds maker im not sure but this seems too planned out for me.

[Duvalier]

Sometimes it is the barn hiding workouts and the clocker is only reporting the actual workout time. Maybe the filly wasn't asked to do too much so as not to tip their hand in the morning with the hopes of cashing a bet.

I don't know the specifics with the horse you're talking about so I'm not insinuating this is what happened...but to blame the clocker and morning line maker isn't really justified. Really is nothing new...it has happened many times before at just about every race track in the country at one time or another.

[kgar311]

Originally Posted by Duvalier

Sometimes it is the barn hiding workouts and the clocker is only reporting the actual workout time. Maybe the filly wasn't asked to do too much so as not to tip their hand in the morning with the hopes of cashing a bet.

I don't know the specifics with the horse you're talking about so I'm not insinuating this is what happened...but to blame the clocker and morning line maker isn't really justified. Really is nothing new...it has happened many times before at just about every race track in the country at one time or another.

Im calling foul, if your horse is really working 103 and change in the mornings how do you know what you have? When every one unloaded on this horse where they simply guessing that this might be a good horse? Not one work justified that this horse open up even money especially a first time 2year old filly starter coming out of the 12 hole.

[Scav]

Originally Posted by kgar311

Im calling foul, if your horse is really working 103 and change in the mornings how do you know what you have? When every one unloaded on this horse where they simply guessing that this might be a good horse? Not one work justified that this horse open up even money especially a first time 2year old filly starter coming out of the 12 hole.

You sometimes know. It is also the other way around. They can work lights out and then throw duds in the afternoon.

Works on paper mean absolutely NOTHING. I only look at the progression if that is even there.

A perfect example is something that is happening at Keeneland. There has been a bunch of horses that have been coming off layoffs and they have had only one work on the page, it is because they have been working on the guys farm or a layup facility, and those places don't have to give times.

[parsixfarms]

I'm not going to justify some of the backstretch shenanigans that go on (this is another area where a Trackus-like system would help in terms of transparency), but if the race is the second leg of the pic-4 and the track has rolling doubles (Keeneland does), they will often provide a better clue than the morning line. Of course, if the race is the third or fourth leg of the sequence, you are really betting "on the blind."

[Duvalier]

Looking at the horse and it's prior workouts...back to back bullets going 4 furlongs at Churchill in September would give somewhat of a hint of talent.

[King Glorious]

I totally understand where kgar is coming from. There was simply nothing to indicate that horse should have been even money to open up. She was the co-sixth choice on the m/l (with three other horses) yet she opened at even money and ended up as the 5/2 favorite. Your first thought was that someone has come and put some money on her. Maybe they've been tipped that she's better than her m/l and is really live. When she ran away and hid from them, I was surprised but not really questioning it. These things happen, especially with firsters when nobody really knows what to expect. Then you see that winner's circle and think about those odds and you realize that everyone and their mother knew what to expect. I don't know that the clockers did their job incorrectly because those might have been actual work times. But, IMO, the odds maker did not do their job properly. Whether it was on purpose or an honest mistake, I couldn't say but there clearly was a strange feeling, and I'd even say it was a negative feeling, about the whole thing.

[dellinger63]

If they were trying to 'hide' something they didn't do a good job as the filly opened at even money. And Battaglia ( think he makes the ML ) can't be responsible for knowing every horse on the grounds.

[phystech]

Originally Posted by kgar311

.... by looking at the opening odds (even money) and the contingent in the winners circle after race(about 50 deep), obviously everybody(on track) knew was going to win by the length of the track.

How many times have we seen a DT horse open up at real short odds off of a high M/L? Lots.

So, given your mention of 50 people in the photo, you kind of solved your own conspiracy - large groups bet their horses, and they usually make most of their bets before the horse even enters the paddock.

Sometimes betting is not just about the horses but also about knowing the owners.....

[kgar311]

The funny part about the whole thing was all the people in the winners circle just made the win bet. They were obviously there to make a win bet on a sure thing and get their picture taken.

Check out the Pick4 payoff

5/2 5/2 8-1 3-1
$2 ticket paid $4624.40

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by kgar311

The funny part about the whole thing was all the people in the winners circle just made the win bet. They were obviously there to make a win bet on a sure thing and get their picture taken.

Check out the Pick4 payoff

5/2 5/2 8-1 3-1
$2 ticket paid $4624.40

I'm trying to folow your logic, but you can't mean that because they had a large group of people, they expected to win? Obviously there was some knowledge of this horse based on what it opened at, but you have too many slipperly slopes about this, IMO.

[NTamm1215]

As far as the Pick 4 payoff, it was high without question based on a win parlay but remember that two huge favorites were beaten in the sequence and I don't think Hot Cha Cha played like 8-1 in the multi-race plays.

There were certainly not a great deal of Pick 4 players who chose to beat both Warrior's Reward and Gozzip Girl.

NT

[kgar311]

Originally Posted by GBBob

I'm trying to folow your logic, but you can't mean that because they had a large group of people, they expected to win? Obviously there was some knowledge of this horse based on what it opened at, but you have too many slipperly slopes about this, IMO.

Im glad that you think everything is on the up and up here Bob. Lets just chalk this up to good handicapping by the betting public and not letting those 103 workouts by a 2yr old filly staring for the first time out of the 12 hole get by them.
I will never underestimate the smarts of the betting public again and never ever will I bet against a favorite as long as I live.

[kgar311]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

As far as the Pick 4 payoff, it was high without question based on a win parlay but remember that two huge favorites were beaten in the sequence and I don't think Hot Cha Cha played like 8-1 in the multi-race plays.

There were certainly not a great deal of Pick 4 players who chose to beat both Warrior's Reward and Gozzip Girl.

NT

The filly made the ticket PERIOD, Warriors Reward is a rat and I thought GG was huge bet against. I bet Hot Cha Cha to win but needed GG for second for a large ex ticket.

[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.....

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by kgar311

Im glad that you think everything is on the up and up here Bob. Lets just chalk this up to good handicapping by the betting public and not letting those 103 workouts by a 2yr old filly staring for the first time out of the 12 hole get by them.
I will never underestimate the smarts of the betting public again and never ever will I bet against a favorite as long as I live.

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.

[brianwspencer]

Wait, a first-time starter took unexpected early money (while being owned by a huge group of people) and then ran well?

I don't think that has ever happened before!

[randallscott35]

Easy way to avoid this problem, don't bet firsters or races involved with them....Tough to make a line on baby races.