Random post-Derby thoughts

[justindew]

Originally Posted by Bobby Fischer

POTN was a terrible bet for the Derby.
He was probably one of the top 5 contenders, and possibly worse. He was bet to 6-1. He had little potential to run a big race.

We had a very odd Derby where 2 more talented horses had nightmare trips (FF, Dunkirk).

POTN finished 2nd in slow time, and needed a foul by his jockey to hold 2nd.

The people who said that Pioneer of the Nile had no value were correct. The result doesn't change that.

Pioneerof The Nile was 6-1 in the Derby. In a manner of speaking, this represents a less-than-15% chance of winning.

Now, let's say you were planning to bet against POTN, yet you would have admitted before the race that if he DID handle the dirt, he was among the most likely winners. By betting against POTN, you are essentially saying "I think there is less than a 15% chance that POTN will handle dirt." (I know, I'm simplifying this for effect, but for the sake of argument...)

To put it another way, if you thought that POTN was a potential winner IF he handled dirt, AND if you felt the likelihood of him handling dirt was higher than 15%, then it is easily arguable that he DID offer value.