I\'ve finally read the \"Wired\" article and would like to make two observations.  First, I remember looking at Benter\'s paper in \"Efficiency of Racetrack Betting Markets\", where he describes what he\'s doing in Hong Kong and wasn\'t all that impressed.  The kinds of data he was putting into his formulas were pretty simplistic, like \"Jockey\'s win %\", \"Lifetime earnings\", etc, etc.  Secondly, didn\'t Bill Quirin do essentially the same thing as these guys are doing with his regression equations like 25 years ago?

Did this guy make a deal with the devil, or what?  How about Medaglia D\'Oro!  Only three weeks in Frankel\'s barn and he goes from having just broken his maiden, with only two lifetime races (both  6f sprints), to winning a G2 race around two turns and taking down Siphonic (although I don\'t think he was fully cranked for this).

Congrats

Mall, now that you metion it, Nonsuch Bay is intriguing in the Bonnie Miss.  I have reservations about her distance capabilities.  Her sire (Mr. Greeley) and especially her broodmare sire (Light Idea) get better runners going short rather than long.  Alexander is OK, not great, with stretchouts and the running lines from her two races seem to indicate that she would prefer 6f.  If she could stay 9f, she\'s got a good chance, though.

Mall, you raise a very interesting issue in your last post, and especially with the line, \"The biggest difference is that the sheet players are using figs & fig handicapping concepts instead of the 130 factors of some of the HK teams.\"  The issue is one also raised by Mark Cramer (in my opinion, one of the most brilliant handicapping authors out there) in one of his books (I forget which one): is it better to focus on a few (or even a single) factor that has what Cramer calls \"wager value\" (e.g., TG fig patters) or factor every piece of information relevant (maybe even more than 130 factors) to the race outcome into the handicapping decision?  To paraphrase Cramer, \"If you find a profitable angle, don\'t mess up a good thing with \'handicapping\'.  As the number of factors that go into a handicapping decision increase, the more that decision will converge with the betting public\'s decision\".  Interesting ideas (I think).

What is the link to this \"Wired\" thing?  The idea of a perfectly \"efficient market\" (i.e., where every horse\'s odds accurately reflect its chances) where all the value is squeezed out is a scary thing.  If that were to happen we would be better off playing roulette or blackjack (lower takes).  Can it happen?  Some think it already is happening, without the help of computers, because all the people who used to throw around silly money at the track betting their lucky numbers and what-not are gone and what\'s left are sharpies like those who frequent this board .  There\'s like a Darwinian natural selection going on that can\'t sustain itself.  I.e., in order to survive in this game you have to be a good handicapper and bettor.  If you\'re not, you won\'t survive (and you have to take up stamp collecting or lawn care as a hobby instead).  So, the bad handicappers take their silly money with them, and the only ones that survive are good handicappers/bettors whose \"good\" betting creates a more and more efficient betting market, making it harder and harder to turn a profit for anybody even themselves.  And now we have to contend with computers too?!  Well, at least there\'s talk of legalizing slots at a track near me....

Good point, JimP.  It would be interesting to see the kind of \"Battle of the Sexes\" you described.

Well, of course, if your cousin is the trainer...

At this point in time I think Repent, Came Home, Siphonic, Booklet, Take Charge Lady, Johannesberg (can\'t forget about him) comprise a first tier in terms of Derby chances.  I wouldn\'t want to split hairs between them now.  In the second tier, I have Harlan\'s Holiday, Yougottawanna, Saarland, Danthebluegrassman, et al.  This weekend should clarify the picture a bit.

I must agree with Nunzio here that Repent is overrated.  I think his stablemate, the filly Take Charge Lady, is as good as he is at this point in time.  It would be poetic justice if Tony D\'Amico rode TCL and beat Repent/Bailey and Harlan\'s Holiday/Prado (or whoever).

Well, of course, you can\'t listen to the majority of what they say, especially when they are touting their horse.  The owners who employ the trainers want to hear how great their horse is, so naturally the trainers are going to say it.  But if a trainer says something negative about his horse beforehand, it might be worth listening to.  Occasionally you can pick up a valuable signal amongst all the noise.  

As far as post-race excuses go, I agree with you completely.  Dave Feldman very honestly wrote in his book something like, \"The number one rule of training is to never take the blame for a horse\'s loss.  Blame it on the jockey, the assistant starter, whoever, and if that won\'t work, use the generic excuse, \'The horse just didn\'t like the track.\'\"

One handicapping tool I\'ve found somewhat useful is trainers\' comments, as published in articles in the DRF and also on many tracks\' websites, concerning their entrants\' chances going into a race.  For example, before the Las Virgenes, Baffert said something like, \"We haven\'t been working her [Habibti] too hard because she lost weight since her last and hasn\'t been able to put any weight back on\".  These comments are most useful when trying to gage a horse\'s fitness coming off a layoff.  Often I\'ll read things like, \"We wanted to start him in a X distance or Y class race, but there was nothing available, and we had to start somewhere.\"

Monthir entered in Fla. Derby.  Should make it more interesting.

Will HH finally run down Booklet? (doubt it) Will Booklet go off at > 4-1 again? (doubt it) Who is the newcomer that can make these questions irrelevant?  Nokoma?

Can she run with the boys?  She looks as good as Repent right now.