Evolution of Election Betting Mirrors Other Betting Markets, Like Horse Racing

"Pssst, a friend of mine was at Philadelphia Park last month and this shipper was large off a no chance trip, can you go to Belmont and bet me $50?

The horse was 9-1, because the Andy Serling of the day just saw a horse moving up in class with an average running line and Beyer. Belmont Slim, who sells tip sheets outside the south entrance, has the horse nowhere. It's nice to have an edge on a $20 mutuel. 

Now, of course, everyone sees that shipper because we can call up a race replay. We know the horse, the trainer's stats, and just about everything else. David Aragona made the horse 3-1 in the morning line and picks him. The live, supposedly sneaky wise guy horse is 2-1. It's just the way the betting market evolved. 

With tonight's mid-term election upon us in the US, we see a whole lot of the same thing. 

In 2004, for example, the Andy Serling of the day was the "election person" on the TV networks. This person was telling you Florida, between John Kerry and George Bush was "too close to call" an hour into the results, when it in fact wasn't. But with not much to go on, and no professional teams betting elections, the masses bet that opinion. For people who were digging deeper, like our friends betting that long-ago Philly Park shipper, there was gold in those hills. George Bush was 4-5 in Florida, when he should've been 1-9. 

This election was quaint, not quant. Rumors of a leaked exit poll being bet by big money on one exchange, Tradesports, but not on another at Betfair. Oh, the good old days, when bookies made the Giants -7.5 in New York, and -6.5 a couple hundred miles down the road. 

Time after time, from 2000 onwards to, say, around 2018, we saw quite a bit of that in elections. The rudimentary was bet, the nuanced was not; holes were not plugged by money; efficiency was a concept, not a reality. 

Then, with markets attracting more and more money, and election predictions being a thing for the public quants, information and opinion got a whole lot smarter. 

In 2022, we're not having to beat the 2004 analyst spewing silly narratives, we have to beat the New York Times needle (which is good), or others benchmarking and modeling with infinitely more precision (and in election betting, importantly less passion or bias). 

There are certainly more flies in the ointment today compared to yesterday. Early voting, mail-in voting and how it's counted by state all have to be looked at in a deep way. This allowed us to bet Joe Biden in Pennsylvania at +400 late election night in 2020. Until the rest of the country catches up to places like Florida who built a proper system, these edges will pop up. 

But, like that Philly Park shipper who aired and paid $20, it's nothing like 15 or 20 years ago. As betting markets mature, their predictive nature gets better and better. It's that way in horse racing, and it's that way in elections, too. It's kinda that way in all betting markets. 

If you're playing tonight, enjoy the evening. Despite the top line numbers and sentiment, I am sure there are edges to be had. Hoping you're on the right side of them. 

Have a nice Tuesday everyone. 

Bye Bye Flightline & Other Notes

Another Breeders' Cup has been run, and it appears it was well received (as it usually is).  The collection of talent each year is fantastic, and deep fields (generally) keep us engaged and on our horseplaying toes. 

The star of the show was Flightline, the John Sadler trained superstar, who after six starts has headed to stud. Both the former - "he's a superstar" - and latter - "off to stud" - has generated a lot of discussion. 

Best ever talk always seems to filter its way through the chatterverse (we're fans after all), and there is a real recency bias to it. Arrogate was jaw dropping ...... and so was American Pharoah, Ghostzapper or <insert another horse here>. In terms of sheer brilliance and speed I suppose Flightline could be the fastest horse in memory, but that's a matter of opinion. I do know he would've been 1-5 in the Sprint, Mile or Classic this year, and that's certainly saying something. We should be able to judge him better at the end of 2023, as he builds his body of work. 

It does strike your average fan as curious that a horse would retire after so few races, especially when they see multiple millions to race for in Dubai, at Gulfstream in the Pegasus, next year's $6M Classic, or at the LIV Golf type event in Saudi Arabia. 

It also is somewhat perplexing that a sport who seemingly pays so much attention to breakdowns would breed horses who race so infrequently. But as we all know, there is more money in not racing than racing, and if you're a fan of this sport, you've embraced a lot of lip service and this is old hat. 

Could this horse have moved the needle if he raced for years? 

Although I am never one for "saving the sport" talk, because in my view that's silly, I surmise he could have helped. 

Would boxing be more popular today if it stuck with its historical structure, where great boxers were known and fight all comers at regular intervals? Surely it would be. People get to know a certain boxer, and love him or hate him, you pay for that pay per view, or head to a nearby bar to watch. It drives eyeballs and revenue and keeps us engaged with the sport. What they did with boxing will be studied in business books for five hundred years and it won't be in a good way. 

But it's how the business works. Breed horses, get black type, make a whack of money, and invest the money into more horses. Or in Mattress Mack's case, into more horses, and sponsoring every racing event or venue known to man. 

Regardless, Flightline was introduced to a few million people for a shade over two minutes on Saturday in prime time. And then he was gone. 

Notes:

I had a very unmemorable BC at the betting windows. I usually catch something, but all I caught was a draining bankroll. This unlike Will Nefzger, who parlayed a strong opinion on Elite Power into riches. I thought that was a superior key, because not only was Jackie's Warrior the key, B tickets were including (primarily) Kimari, who was a fairly strong second choice in the betting offshore the whole week. When you pitch the top two, you get paid. 

Will threaded the needle on his other choices, but it shows the power of leveraging a strong opinion. Will didn't want back ups with Jackie's Warrior, he wanted a $10 pick 6 with a horse a lot of people weren't using. It illustrates the concept well - instead of betting $200 win on Elite Power, or a $200 double of Elite Power with Malathaat - he punched a pick 6. Just like we would not bet a defensive $200 win saver on Jackie's Warrior or Nest, there's no need to in the pick 6 either in this particular case. Well done. 

Chuck Simon has been on fire on twitter the last few days. Gotta love him. 

The BC morning lines are a tough job. I thought Nick Tammaro did some good work. Seriously, is there a more thankless job than morning line maker in this sport?

I pitched Modern Games. He couldn't cross the Atlantic twice and win. Until he did. 

The NBC feed was built for the fan at home, because damn, if you bet the exotics in the Classic you were left guessing. Coincidentally, when a horse was leading by several at the Meadowlands the last few years they'd do the same thing - zoom in on the winner. But they asked some bettors what they thought, they complained, and now we get the pan shot. NBC probably should do that, too. 

I think there's no such thing as a wise-guy horse anymore. And really, this year's wise guy horses were all no good anyway. One anti-wise guy horse - Wonder Wheel - knocked me out. They win a lot of the time, and I'll probably continue not having them. 

Thoughts with Dave Litfin. I hope he got to watch some of the races. 

Making Harness Bettable Again by Enforcing Simple Rules

There's an election going on in the States, and one of the big issues is crime. 

I wonder if the usual plays out - one party is too cold, but the other one is too hot and suddenly we see people in jail for 20 for stealing a pack of gum three times. The pendulum often swings too far, in both directions. 

Over in harness racing, we see about the same thing when it comes to enforcing the rules on the books. 

On one side of the border we have the Meadowlands, which (rightly!) worked hard on the racing rules to enforce the closing of holes. However, like the three strikes and you're out folks, it looks like this has gone too far. Holes should be allowed for the free flow of racing, and to be used for cover, or to get a horse out of the way so you can pull first over, not simply closed just because every hole has to. 

Meanwhile in Canada, Woodbine Entertainments Bagdad Bob-Sgt Shultz routine of "There is no problem, and I see nothing" is the other end of the spectrum. 

The hole giving at Mohawk has been almost comical; a Monty Python skit, with horses. 

Just this past week or so I saw a driver want to give a leading driver a hole so badly, he choked the horse down. On another occasion, a non-regular was completely screwed when another driver leaned so far back to give the leading driver (with ironically a horse who was awful and backed into him) a hole, the race looked like some sort of pig wrestling competition. 

At the Meadowlands things are too hot, at Mohawk things are too cold. That's probably too soft, things at Mohawk are positively glacial. 

People might say that Ontario has slots, so who cares. Maybe they're right. Just sign the checks and don't worry about how badly the product has degraded.  

But for those who actually want to gamble on it - I hear these strange beings are called "customers" - we might want to do something about it, no?

Have a nice Tuesday everyone.