I have a hard time understanding why people get so upset when a horse fails to win as an odds-on favorite. Are they upset with the horse because the horse did not live up to its potential? Or, are they upset with themselves because they once again backed a horse at such ridiculously low odds, only to find out the horse was not worthy of that much attention?
Sports Illustrated posted the following headline at their website after the Preakness: Oxbow upsets Orb to win 138th Preakness Stakes. Notice, the headline plays to the sallied emotions of the three-out-of-four people who backed a losing horse, not to the four percent who had the foresight to bet on Oxbow. Such is the thought process of the attention hungry media.
I did not wager on either Orb or Oxbow. I bet on Departing and Mylute, not because I thought they were the best horses in the race, but because they were the best Value Plays available. I failed to cash tickets on the race, but you do not see me crying in my beer. It was just another race, and as such it does not warrant any abnormal attention.
On a similar note: Look at the published statistics for The Locksmith Smart Plays, available at Bloodhorse.com. Look at the R.O.I. (return on investment). Now, can someone please tell me why any sane person would spend money on such a poor source of information?