Quote:
Originally Posted by Calzone Lord
I had argued that I think picking 10 straight winners would be harder than 1,000 straight losers. People disagreed with me -- but I know there are horses everyday who I believe have a 0.00% chance of winning.
There's no such thing as a horse with a 100% chance of winning... outside of Sharp Cat in her walkover maybe. The fact that a lot of stuff can go wrong during a race is only a very small part -- it mostly boils down to the fact that race horses are very fragile animals and rarely stay in peak form for an extended number of starts.
Very few horses at all levels ever go 10 straight races without turning in "Non-efforts" -- horses with a lot of early speed and poor trainers are most likely to turn in dismal races. Horses with excellent trainers who stay off of the early pace are most likely to produce consistent results.
Long win streaks are basically about staying free of injury, in good health, and simply being better than your competition you face.
Anyway, GPK was asking about it in the other thread -- and I'd told him I'd try to see how many winners in a row I could get.
I will take one horse a day who I believe is the most likely winner of the entire day -- and see if I get to 10 winners in a row.
These will not be 'good betting situations' -- a good betting situation is when you believe your chances of winning comfortably exceed the odds you're getting when the betting closes.
Most of these horses will be pounded to a short price because of their obvious dominance. Still, it will be a good test to see how often the days most invincible looking horse fails to win.
|
Anyone who thinks picking 10 straight winners is easier than 1000 straight losers needs their head examined.
Though I suppose one could cherry pick over a long period of time, but under the constraint of having to pick one a day? Yikes.