most likely winner

[congaree1]

horse hasn\'t raced in 5 months, but he is the most likely winner. what is the logic. Handicapping is more then a single numbers. the race of the week is a tool to help players understand sheet reading. making a horse the most likely winner that hasn\'t raced in 5 months is not a way to look at sheets. All it tells me who ever did the analysis is over influenced in single numbers.

[cubfan0316]

great point. cant win em all.

[shanahan]

you could not be more correct...insane analysis.  the analysis product is a complete throwout, but the # are usually quite good.  I still am an advocat dfor an \"author \" to be included in the analysis - so far, TGJB won\'t include.

[P.Eckhart]

Yes, spoken with the wisdom that only five months and one day can bestow upon one.

[JJP]

I interpret \"most likely winner\" to mean they/he felt that the horse would be the favorite but probably wouldn\'t be value.  The horse certainly could win the race but there really wasn\'t a compelling reason to bet it at the given price.

[miff]

The overused term \"most likely winner\" has nothing to do with value or odds and generally represents an opinion. All opinions are not equally informed.

Mike

[Uncle Buck]

My original reaction is to also get a little hot when the \"Most Likely Winner\" runs out but in all fairness, the analysis did give a favorable view of the eventual winner saying he is a late developer and is \"solid for a check.\"

On top of that, Art Sherman is firing at a rediculous 29%. He lives about 3 blocks from me, I know how good he is and I didn\'t use his horse in the pick 6.

Nobody to blame on that but lil\' ol\' me

[TGJB]

Shanahan-- one of the problems here is that when I point out good results from the analysis I am accused of cherry picking. I\'m not going to claim we beat the takeout, but I think we do about as well as anyone could making plays that far ahead of time.

Are you guys seriously claiming that a horse off a layoff can\'t be the most likely winner of a race?

The \"bottom line\" (ex-\"overview\") was Jimbo\'s idea, and a good one, to sum up the analysis. But \"most likely\" does not mean \"will win\". Unless we take the time to work out a % chance for every horse, it\'s about the best we can do-- it\'s important to make clear that one horse might be 30% to win but a worse bet than one that is 15% to win. And both are UNLIKELY to win. This ain\'t sports against the spread, where blind stabs will win 50% of the time.

And when we did use percentages for the Derby, it was a sure thing that unless the horse we had most likely (at only 15-20%, no less) was the right one out of 20 horses, some putz who had the winner was going to say we underestimated his chances. If Barbaro hadn\'t won, it would have been someone else-- and he would always be right, after the race. Percentages get higher then, and the reasons they won are always obvious. It\'s called redboarding.

[shanahan]

TGJB:

thanks, I would like to make 2 points for your response:

1.  the author of the analysis - will you consider it?

2.  Alan loves that 1st time  4yr old angle, and I have enjoyed much success with it - so I definitely back your \"can win off layoff\" angle...it\'s quite good with particular trainers, no doubt.

TG # are worth the price - if you can afford it regularly it makes a differene.