Below is the udpdated output of the Derby Computer Model. I have shown each horse followed by the estimated percent \"edge\" for a win bet on the horse based on the morning line (a good value is one with a high positive edge) followed by the estimated odds of the horse winning followed by the estimated win pct, place pct, show pct, and 4th/super pct.
According to the model, Perfect Drift looks like a great value play. Saarland also looks good and RFP and War Emblem look like the best long shot value plays. HH and D\'Oro are not great value but look like they may need to be used in exotics. The other favorites look like good plays against. Easy Grades, Blue Burner, and EOD and possibly a few others look like they could klunk up for a minor share if you are playing tris or supers.
Good luck to all in this year’s Derby. It looks like a great betting race.
Chris
P.S. To TGJB: great job on the seminar. Very slick production and excellent analysis.
****************
Horse Edge Est Odds Win% Place% Show% Super%
Perfect Drift 358% 2.5 29% 43% 54% 63%
Harlan\'s Holiday -43% 8.7 10% 20% 28% 36%
Saarland 60% 9.0 10% 21% 31% 40%
Request For Parole 97% 9.7 9% 20% 29% 38%
War Emblem 75% 11.0 8% 16% 24% 31%
Medaglio D\'oro -44% 11.5 8% 17% 26% 34%
Buddah -70% 18.8 5% 11% 18% 24%
Easy Grades -30% 29.2 3% 8% 13% 19%
Blue Burner 1% 29.7 3% 8% 13% 18%
Essence of Dubai -49% 30.3 3% 7% 12% 19%
Private Emblem -40% 33.7 3% 7% 12% 17%
Came Home -84% 36.0 3% 8% 15% 22%
Johannesburg -89% 63.9 2% 4% 6% 10%
Ocean Sound -27% 68.4 1% 4% 8% 12%
Lusty Latin 0% NA 1% 3% 5% 8%
Proud Citizen 0% NA 1% 3% 5% 7%
Danthebluegrassman 0% NA 1% 2% 4% 6%
Wild Horses 0% NA 1% 2% 3% 5%
It\'sallinthechase 0% NA 0% 1% 3% 5%
Castle Gandolfo 0% NA 0% 1% 2% 4%
Forgive my ignorance but I am having a difficult time following your numbers...I was hoping that you would single out one horse and give me a thorough example. I believe this information to be valuable and I would appreciate your help. Thanks in advance!
John,
I don\'t know if I follow your question but if you are looking to play one horse to win, then the computer model says that your horse should be Perfect Drift. It says he has a 29% chance to win the race, which translates into \"break even\" odds of just under 3-1 so at anything near his morning line of 15-1 he is a great play.
I am not sure what you mean by a thorough example but if you clarify what you are looking for, I will try to respond.
Chris
P.S.
Chris,
I\'ve got it now! I was not following the break even odds. I appreciate your follow up.
John
Chris,
Very nice of you to share such significant detail, and I know you do interesting stuff like this fequently.
I also like Perfect Drift, along with the 4 Wood colts. Haven\'t made a decision yet on how to play the race.
Curious as to how you arrived at 29% win chance for PD (A computer will respond to the information supplied to it).
Thanks!
RXP
Rick,
The model uses TG figs and looks at patterns. It also looks for horses that most closely meet the profile of a Derby winner (the TG seminar covers this very well) with a fast (but not too fast) race late in the 2yo year followed by steady development at 3. It also looks at running style (front-runners are up against it in the Derby) post position(accounts for expected ground loss) and breeding as well as some other factors such as number, spacing and distance of 3yo preps. The factors are statistically weighted based on analysis of past Derbies and then the Derby is \"simulated\" thousands of times to see how often each horse would win (referred to as Monte Carlo modeling). According to the computer, Perfect Drift would win 29% of the time (and lose 71% of the time). So at his 15-1 morning line, the computer says he is a good value play.
As you said, the computer is only as good as the programmer and the data. The key source of data is the TG figures (so you can blame TG if the data is bad) and I am probably not capable of offering an unbiased opinion of the programmer.
I Hope that helps and good luck in the Derby.
\"Computers are fantastic: in a few minutes they can make a mistake so great that it would take many men many months to equal it.\" Unknown.
Chris
Where did you come up with the pace-front runner bias? If the average Derby field has 16 horses, the front runner should win once every 16 years. I cashed both Bold Forbes and Spend A Buck, both in less than 32 years.
Incidentally, todays Daily News has a PP study for the Derby and posts 17 to 20 are historically 2 for 82. In general, 1-10 are about twice the win% of 11-20.
Jerry,
I don\'t understand the last sentence in relation to the first, Please explain.
Thanks
Of the last 59 horses to enter the Derby (I don\'t have any earier data - Bold Forbes is reaching way back...at least you did not mention War Admiral) that I subjectively classified as front-runners (loosely defined as those that are within about 1 length of lead or closer at first call in every route race in which they performed well), only 2 have even hit the board: Spend A Buck (nice play, I didn\'t have him) and Winning Colors (although she was borderline and technically you could argue that she had shown the ability to lay off the pace in races prior to the Derby).
Of those two, I would say that Spend A Buck was simply brilliant and \"freaked\" in the Derby and that Winning Colors was pretty good and very lucky (allowed to set relatively slow fractions in an unusually slow-paced, slowly-ran Derby thanks to some questionable riding tactics).
The computer says that this is a statistically significant factor (for the Derby - not in general) and the performance of the Derby model suffers if you don\'t include it.
Then again, who trusts computers...I think I am going to bet it all on War Admiral, whoops, I mean War Emblem...:-)
As Thoreau once said, \"Men have become the tools of their tools.\"
Chris
Richie wrote:
>
> Jerry,
>
> I don\'t understand the last sentence in relation to the
> first, Please explain.
>
> Thanks
The front runner comment and the post comment are not related to each other, but to separate comments in Chris\' post.
I would also add that the chances Chris projects for Proud Citizen don\'t reflect the jump-ups he has been getting in Ky. Tough to fit that one into the computer model.
I guess I will have to add a \"Lukas in Kentucky\" factor...and a \"Frankel anywhere (except the BC)\" factor...
This year\'s \"Adventures In Modern Chemistry\" Derby exacta box: PC with MO....
Chris
derby1592 wrote:
>
> I guess I will have to add a \"Lukas in Kentucky\" factor...and
> a \"Frankel anywhere (except the BC)\" factor...
>
> This year\'s \"Adventures In Modern Chemistry\" Derby exacta
> box: PC with MO....
>
> Chris
Hopefully you won\'t regret saying that. Talk about \"may I be struck by lightning.\"
Incidentally, a little birdie told me War Emblem won\'t be on the lead, whatever that\'s worth.
Jerry, I wouldn\'t listen to that little birdie anymore if I were you.
Now that was some bad info.
Jerry, just out of curiosity, who would tell you that War Emblem wouldn\'t be on the lead?
Was he/she friend or foe?
From the Bloodhorse:
\"Baffert said he considered altering War Emblem\'s front-running style on the morning of the Derby, but then instructed Victor Espinoza to just let the horse run the way he normally does.\"
You should fry that little birdie of your\'s up for dinner.
Chris,
I had Spend a Buck. He was my first Derby winner. But I think he won every race he ran in after the Derby. I don\'t think he freaked in the Derby. Speed unchallanged invariably wins.
MO