How did the "This-Week" predictions do for MX outdoors in Week 11 at
Budds Creek? A little problem in the 450s, in that Eli Tomac finished 4th instead of 2nd (covered
in the recap) so the podium was wrong. But, the top 5 predicted
all did finish in the top 5, including Phil Nicoletti at 5th, which I would guess was not a common prediction:
Budds Creek Predictions Review
Weston Peick was way off because of a DNF in Moto 1 (finished 8th in Moto 2, which was closer to his prediction of 6th, but not quite), as was Paul Coates, who DNF'd Moto 2 (was 17th in Moto 1, which also was closer to his prediction (14th), but not quite). The big misses in my mind are Andrew Short--who's predictions have been way off all season and that's been covered here a few times--and Heath Harrison, whose lap times have been better than the average rider, by just over 1 second, but the overall results have not matched the predictions.
Again the 250s were all over the place, with Cooper Webb having a couple crashes, Zach Osborne getting his first ever win, and Joey Savatgy looking out of sorts and finishing in 9th.
DNF's also affected the 250s, with RJ Hampshire and Jordon Smith each having mechanical problems in Moto 1. Adam Cianciarulo defied the predictions and had some of his best races ever, managing to turn two holeshots into a 4th place finish (tied for 3rd in points with Austin Forkner), and that 4th overall ties his second-best overall result for his career.
Mentioned in the predictions was that Chris Alldredge's ranking seemed a little low, and that turned out to be right, as he finished 10th (12 / 11) compared to the prediction of 18th. The only rider near the top who did what was expected was Alex Martin, who was predicted 2nd and finished tied for 1st in points, ending up 2nd on the podium due to the tiebreaker.
Why are the 450 predictions generally so much more consistent than the 250s? I certainly would like to figure that out -- maybe it's just more history to draw from with riders who are typically older and less prone to change as the season progresses from week to week. Also, it seems as though the talent is spread out more with the 250s -- there are more riders with a legitimate shot at a win or a podium each week, which makes extra variability inherent. Can these predictions get better? Should there be something different about predicting 250 vs 450? Maybe during the offseason we can investigate.