I'm starting to think that this event, while clearly atypical ( i don't think they'll hit the Preakness Superfecta) represents the second most impressive thing to happen in AI this year behind Alpha Go.
Well, keep in mind they ran the predictions twice, once two weeks before the race, and then again after the lineup was determined in the middle of the week, switching one horse. I don't know what the odds were at that time.
And, if anyone else has a winning Superfecta ticket, I haven't seen it. So, it's not like this was some easy pick.
It's also worth pointing out that they were challenged to make this pic by a reporter in advance of the Derby. They weren't just throwing out a random guess, they met the gauntlet that had been thrown down once already. This is a remarkable achievement in the face of skepticism.
If you read the CEO's statement in the original article, he wasn't claiming omniscience, but that horse-racing was certainly difficult to predict.
The better question is not, "will they hit the Preakness Superfecta?" but, how do UNU's picks do against the average guy at the track?
Great game last night. Alabama is on a different level, but Watson gives Clemson a chance to beat anybody, anywhere. Odd that the "experts" didn't see that and picked Oklahoma.
I'd much rather listen to the average fan's opinion than Stephen A Smith, so I wouldn't be surprised if normal people were able to make better predictions, too.
What I'd like to see is an ESPN where the predictions have some consequence to them - you're gonna call yourself an expert? Prove it.