Quote:
|
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind
1.)regardless of outcome George Washington was a horse who's odds were significantly lower than his actual chances of winning
2.)I don't think he had a better chance in relation to odds of winning the race than a number of horses you mentioned. To me that is what really matters.
|
1.) I agree completely.
2.) I disagree completely because I think that all of the horses I listed had zero chance of winning, and zero chance of making a case for them
winning -- so they could have been 100-1 and they still would have been overbet as far as the win pool goes. That's just how I see it...I could not, before the race, envision any of those listed horses coming home first. There were some longshots that I had on my tickets that I believed had a miniscule outside chance, but none of the horses I listed.
I think it's mostly off-topic in the thread anyway, which is my fault -- but I guess I'm just legitimately interested in which horses on the list you felt had a better chance to win in relation to their odds, because I couldn't see any of them winning.