Originally Posted by JoeG@Breezy
Some good points here, but other than being boxed in, the fastest horse barring disquailification, will git er done 99% of the time. Watch a track meet sometime. The milers and 5K guys/ladies look for a competitive start ( not quick necessarily ), then position, then wait to race. Almost all of the world's fastest times have been run this way with only a very few exceptions.
Hard part is figuring out which horse is fastest before you plunk down that moolah.
Andrew Beyer once said that if parimutual wagering were allowed on Olympic track events, there'd be a lot of $2.80 payouts. The chalk there wins most of the time.
That's not the case with horses, though, because (duh) horses aren't humans.
It's actually not that hard to determine the fastest horse before a race. It usually doesn't take me more than 5 or 10 minutes to determine A) the horse with the most early speed, and B) the horse who is the fastest from start to finish (sometimes this is the same horse, but it's usually not). The problem is that the fastest horse doesn't even with the race most of the time -- they win around a third of the time.
There are a hundred reasons why the fastest horse doesn't usually win -- I'll post some of them when I have more time. If anyone cares, that is, and wants the digression from fishing.