I think the analysis should go firmly in one direction or another.

There's nothing wrong with a general analysis of the horses' figures and their likely direction going forward. That leaves the betting and value decisions in the hands of the reader.

There's nothing wrong with an analysis that includes an oddsline estimate other than the problems with making an accurate oddsline long before post time.

The ROTW has the obvious disadvantage of being done before late scratches and being able to see the track condition. For some people (like myself) that would be an enormous disadvantage because I place more weight on things like bias and race development.

If I were doing it I would refrain from using an oddsline and simply categorize the horses in some fashion.

1. Standout
2. Major contender
3. Similar in ability to "X"
4. Live second string contender
5. Non-contender
6. Other

Then I would add general comments about potential race development issues/biases that could impact my order of preference.

That way you could get the gist of how I was ranking the contenders and how closely matched they were WITHOUT spelling out the exact oddsline.

If you are going to do an oddline, then someone should actually track the results.