The Saatchi Prize Betting Guide

Thursday this week will see the biannual Saatchi & Saatchi Award for World Changing Ideas, in which the ad agency bestows on an inventor $100,000 for an idea that potentially revolutionizes how we humans live. For the uninitiated, Saatchi award entries tend to be a mix of scientific curios, seriously interesting inventions, and the plain wacky. And who better to preside than Bob Isherwood (pictured), Saatchi's worldwide creative director, whose hair is internationally recognized as a triumph of engineering in itself. We've handicapped the 2006 candidates as follows:

100-1: Jimmy Wales (Fla.) for Wikipedia. Chances have been hurt by revelations that the online encyclopedia is riddled with errors.

17-1: Roger Armour (U.K.) for Optyse, a cheap ophthalmoscope for use in the Third World. Application seems narrower than its rivals.

15-1: NASA (Calif.) for subvocal speech recognition, a system that allows the disabled to speak (and spies and admen to "talk" in silence). Another entry hurt by its narrow application.

12-1: Quantum Technology (Australia) for Jot-A-Dot, a new Braille typewriter. Chances might be hurt by another entry—a method of producing 3D photos (12-1)—also for the blind.

11-1: Splashpower (U.K.) for a wireless mat that recharges mobile devices. Judges will have to screw the disabled to give this one victory.

10-1: University of Leipzig (Germany) for the Optical Stretcher, a cancer detector that does not require biopsies. Chances hurt by silly name.

9-1: The Royal College of Art (U.K.) for Concrete Canvas, a durable alternative to tents for refugees. Chances hurt by the instruction booklet, which makes it look hard to operate.

6-1: MIT (Mass.) for bio-solar energy nano-devices that turn photosynthesis into electricity. Chances might be cancelled out by Plantic (8-1), a biodegradable plastic, which splits the fossil-fuel-worrier vote.

5-1 (favorite): Nottingham University (U.K.) for the Frozen Ark project, a DNA data bank of endangered species. Strong appeal to science geeks, and it says something vaguely political about environmental destruction.

—Jim Edwards