Postmortem
 

Both the FTL (Original) guidelines and a BLT/C approach made the winner a contender. It was a matter of how one applied the respective guidelines to their process. The question, as some have raised is whether or not the race was a prime betting opportunity. As Mitch and others have alluded to, there were some questions in the race that couldn't be answered until after the race was run and official. With several horses selected as "true" contenders, it clouds the race somewhat.

#5 got the lead but had to run faster to hold it, which forced it to expend more energy. #6 was able to get on top of its fractions and was fortunate enough to hold sway, as #8 and #2 were looming. While I felt that 5-1 was fair for the winner (I did not bet, I posted for demonstrative purposes), others may have felt otherwise. Would I have put a large wager on the horse? No. Too many other question marks laying in the weeds.

I agree with Ted: the contender process is simply a starting point. You have to use other tools to rationalize and finalize your decisions. Just because a horse is a "contender" does not mean that today's match-up will do it justice. Your true contenders are your match-up and once you paint the picture of said match-up, then its a question of whether or not there is value enough to make wagers, either for entertainment or serious profit.

I looked at the race and did not bet, but thought the lone E had a pretty good shot at winning with the 1 as best closer.

However, when you look at these contenders positionally, the winner was next in line to inherit the lead, which goes back to what The Hat asked us to do. The two S horses the 1 and 8 usually ran 7th-8th for the 1 and 4th and usually farther back for the 8 and the winner was often in the top 3 at the first two calls.


Attachment 45369

Sorry what are the Conditions
 

Im Fishing for answers

Sorry Im Late
 

Just read the conditions and Not Im not Interested