Continuation Bet... errr - Post on the Kentucky Derby

Well, numbers have been crunched... field sorted through, so here we are with my Continuation Bet, I mean post on the Kentucky Derby. I must have poker on the brain (surprise surprise).

Anyways, I did my pseudo-scientific number crunching and analysis and have assigned the following odds to the field (note: I'm basing my odds on as near 100% as possible, as opposed to the 137.61% handicappers are using for this race):

Here's how my analysis breaks down:

Group one horses - Win contenders (horses I believe have a very strong chance of winning the race, of which I assigned 5-1 or greater odds --- official morning line odds are in parantheses) - roughly 61% chance on my scale of moneying from this group:

4 Sinister Minister 3-1 (12-1)
11 Sweetnorthernsaint 4-1 (10-1)
3 Keyed Entry 5-1 (30-1)


Group two horses - Money Contenders (horses I believe have a chance of finishing top three, of which assigned odds between group one and group three odds --- official morning line odds are in parantheses) As a group, these horses combined get roughly 29% chance of winning, however, the only potential value plays I'd make are with Sharp Humor... Brother Derek gets just better than "random odds of winning" on my scorecard.:

9 Sharp Humor 8-1 (20-1)
18 Brother Derek 9-1 (3-1)

17 Lawyer Ron less than "random odds" of winning (4-1)
6 Showing Up less than "random odds" of winning (20-1)
8 Barbaro less than "random odds" of winning (4-1)
7 Bob and John less than "random odds" of winning (12-1)


Group three horses - Non Contenders (horses I believe have very little chance of finishing in the top three, of which I assigned roughly a ten percent total chance of any one of them finishing in the top three and did not bother to statistically represent my odds, as they're insignificant to me for my predictions --- official morning line odds are in parantheses) These horses have "significantly less than random odds of winning" based on my calculations:

16 Cause to Believe (50-1)
2 Steppenwolfer (30-1)
12 Private Vow (50-1)

14 Deputy Glitters (50-1)
20 Flashy Bull (50-1)
5 Point Determined (12-1)
10 A.P. Warrior (15-1)

13 Bluegrass Cat (30-1)
19 Storm Treasure (50-1)
1 Jazil (30-1)

15 Seaside Retreat (50-1)


That being said, providing the "perfect race" is run (see 2004 Kentucky Derby) I have the finish going down Sinister Minister, Sweetnorthernsaint, Keyed Entry. All three horses, in addition to being my favorites have significant value based on my card vs. the morning line (4-11-3 boxed). It should be noted, I've first turned this into a nine horse race, then I narrowed it down to five horses who I have assigned "better than random odds" of winning/finishing in the money. For these reasons, I only stated my personal odds on the horses who I assigned better than random odds of winning the race. Consequently, any bets I place will only contain those horses who I give better than a random chance of winning/finishing in the money.

Here we go, tieing this into poker now. It stands to reason that if I play only hands that have a better than "random" chance of winning, I'm only playing those hands in which I expect to win. Additionally, if I play them "well," I'm maximizing my profitibilty over the long term. In the short run though, the hands are not guaranteed to be profitable, especially considering the "perfect flop" does not always come down each and every hand. That being said, I don't necessarily expect the "perfect race" to be run. However, just like playing +EV hands, I've given myself the best chance of capitalizing on my winnings in the event a perfect or near perfect board appears... In terms of racing, I'm only betting on horses that are +EV in my mind.

These, however, are just my thoughts... I'm not a professional pony picker I just play one on the PP (Poker Pub). Feel free to discuss, ask questions, leave comments, request I be deemed insane, etc.

Mike