Software Contest

[PaceAdvantage]

Derek brought this up again, and I am liking this idea more than ever. How about we set up a little competition among software vendors. The rules of the contest can be decided upon a bit later, but for now, how about inviting the CREATORS of any and all software companies under the sun to participate in this contest, held by PaceAdvantage.Com and officiated by yours truly.

If the creator of the software does NOT wish to participate, he or she is free to nomiate a user of his or her choice to fill in.

The point being, it will be a contest where only ONE man (or woman) will be posting picks for each piece of software entered. One Man, One Program. If we have five programs entered, there will only be five sets of picks posted.

This way, the creators of these programs can find their BEST or most successful user (if it's NOT the creator himself) and put them out here for all the world to see. If the most knowledgable and successful user of the program can't turn a profit, that will speak volumes, won't it?

I'm game for this contest. It will be a bit like looking down as a spectator from the old Roman Coliseum as the gladiators fight each other for the masses to enjoy.

Now all we need to do is convince some software developers to participate. We can decide on the rules of engagement and a flashy name for the contest as the ball starts rolling....

Whatcha think?

I betcha one would sell lots and lots of programs with a successful showing. Plus, I'll throw in gobs of free advertising for the programs that show a profit.....

[Tom]

Cool.
Let's rock.

[PaceAdvantage]

To keep the discussion moving, I'd like to solicit opinions from people out there on what CONTEST FORMAT they think would provide the TRUEST representation of the merits of a particular piece of software.

Is it Win only on top choice? Win, Place? Top two to win?

Feel free to chime in.

[Tom]

My $.02

Win place format.
Two horses per race.
Half the races are mandatory and half are optional.

[Jeff P]

Why not have the format be similar to one of those NTRA qualifying tournaments? One horse per race- Win/Place. Set a handful of races as mandatory and then let each contestant select the rest of their own spots wherever they think they can get the best results.

Why restrict it to just software developers who SELL their software? It might be fun to see how my own black box stuff stacks up against whatever else is out there.

[penguinfan]

This will be tough/impossible, we all know there is no black box out there (this has been beaten to death on the forums) so if you invite the programmer or annointed best user it is still his/her interpretation of the data that will be used to select the horses. My contention all along is it is how you use the software and not so much the software itself that gets the job done. I use several programs and among them is Equisim, the programmer/developer himself (Nathan) will post for you the "black box untuned" plays and show you a net loss on them without shame, it is how you use the data the program turns out is what determines success. I use his program with success, though I don't play as much as I would like to so maybe I am just getting lucky, though that does not line up with the rest of my life.

Moving on I would say I would love to see the output from several programs so I could do what I wanted with the data and decide for myself if I PERSONALY can make the program profitable with my style of playing. I think it was on the Horsestreet web-site (Ran by Dave Schwartz if I am paying attention) that I read a terriffic article about 1 style of play not working for everyone, brilliant piece. 2 people will not do the same thing with the same data, so again I say I would rather see the output of these programs rather than what 1 individual does with that data. Myself I wish more programers gave out a trial period and not the "money back" guarantee. A big reason I bought Equisim is just that, I got to try it and see if I could make it work before I spent any money, I tried it and at the very least I liked the programs it printed out and it was worth the money for that alone IMO, to another that feature may be junk.

Possibly a better idea would be to get 5 members willing to use the programs, member who do not already own the programs, and have them give them a trial run for a month and post their plays and reasoning. Of course this will require the developers to give free trial runs and in some cases free access to data, now if they were willing to put their reputation on the line like that then I would be anxious to watch or play along.

I for one would love to give Horstreet a try, but after shelling out $600+ for the software and $130 for a months worth of data files I find myself a little behind for the month wagering wise ONLY because I am not that big of a player, yet! Consider the learning curve and a bankroll to start with and you easily have over a couple grand invested before you decide if you like the software or can make it work, again this is not the fault of the programmer/developer, like I said I am just not that big of a player yet and would like to try it out before dumping $1000's on a test run, get it?

Hope at least some of that makes sense.

Penguinfan

[PaceAdvantage]

The contest is to prove what is POSSIBLE. In a public forum such as this, I want all programs to have the best chance possible to SHINE BRIGHTLY! The intent of this contest is to see what the performance is under IDEAL conditions (software being used by an EXPERT user)

That's why I say bring on the best user, or the creator himself, to show off the wares. That's all we can expect from this display of handicapping power.

However, I am a bit disappointed about the lack of response from software developers thus far. I know they all want to get their name out on this board whenever possible, but it seems like when it comes time to put a little contest together, nobody is lining up to say "Bring it on baby!"

Come on, don't be afraid....step up to the plate....be the first to say "I'm game...let's go!"

Nathan, Dave, are you guys out there? Maybe the RaceCom guys can nominate Jaguar to take up their cause? We have lots of HTR guys on here....who's gonna represent them?

How about Gary Hall and AllWays....someone has to represent their Professional version, right?

There are lots of programs out there....don't disappoint me here...

[penguinfan]

Originally posted by PaceAdvantage
The contest is to prove what is POSSIBLE. In a public forum such as this, I want all programs to have the best chance possible to SHINE BRIGHTLY! The intent of this contest is to see what the performance is under IDEAL conditions (software being used by an EXPERT user)


Fair enough PA, thats more than reasonable. As far as the lack of response by programmers I would give it a few days as this post was over the weekend and the working guys may not have seen it yet, face it most of the views probably come when members are at work and pretending to be busy. If you don't get the software makers in here for the "Put up or shut up" contest then I would be pretty quick to boot the guys who use the forum for free advertising now and then ( you know who you are).

Put up or shut up time!

Penguinfan

[Hosshead]

I would be interested to see what the "homegrown" programs can do against the "for sale" programs. At least with them you Do have the creator using it. There are probably several people using a hybrid of both. And that's ok as long as you get results.

[Dave Schwartz]

Okay, I'm in.

But perhaps in a different way.

Effective the week of March 22nd I am taking a month off from anything that resembles work to play horses on a full-time basis.

I had already decided to make SOME of my picks public during that time by outputting my handicapping screens semi-automatically to a folder on our website. The details are being worked out now.

The actual decision on which approach I will use is still up in the air. It will either be the same approach I have been using for the last 15 months (and the one that I played at the PA Saratoga party last year) or something slightly new from the "Swarm Technology" we released in our last upgrade in December. (Frankly, the jury is still out on how effective the swarms are but I am encourgaed.)

Whichever approach I choose, rest assured it will be a totally systematic one and one that is reproduceable by any of our users (although it is possible that a significant database is needed to duplicate it exactly).

BTW, this business of semi-automatically posting output from HSH is a technology that will ultimately come to all of our users as we move more towards "collaboration." The issues we are working out now all have to do with organization of the files on the website so that users can find what they are looking for. (If you think about it, with the quantity of races we generally play, this is not an easy problem to overcome.)

So, again I say that SOMEHOW I will be "in," though it may not be in the actual contest you have. I think significant public exposure is actually a significant part of what you guys are trying to accomplish anyway.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[sjk]

I play a black box program (not that I am looking for a lot of abuse from disbelievers) but do not bet turf races.

There has been a lot of discussion as to how different turf handicapping is. If there is a contest, it might make sense to be dirt only if you want some of the resident black boxes to play.

[GR1@HTR]

My take:

Make it win only.

Preselect the races for all to cap.

Have multiple users (say 3 or more from each group) and take total from the group. As we all know...5 users of the same program might come up w/ 3 or more horses to pick from each race.

[PaceAdvantage]

That's awesome Dave! I'm glad you're willing to make a go of it. You're the first, and I somehow expected you to be!!

[Handle]

Call me pessimistic - I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop. Whatever happened to the last time this topic came up....?

So, call me unexcitable (or maybe yet-to-be-excitable, or maybe just moderately intoxicated...), but let me throw a couple of pennies in:

A) Irregardless of what we are shooting for (win/place, whatever), every selection should be accompanied by a rationale for making the selection that ties back into the software. If this isn't part of the rules then I already proclaim victory (oh wait, we came in second in last year's Uber Board/Whale hunt competition...).

B) See above -- no exotics, esp. pick 3s/pick 4s. Whale hunts make for great suspense, but they are not practical in a competition.

-N

[Dave Schwartz]

Handle,

My response is also about the same as last time.

I don't see this as a "contest." I see it as a "showcase."

This way we don't have to argue about whether it is an exacta contest or win bets, 2 horses, or 1 horse or whatever. Each vendor can post his own picks in whatever manner he wishes.

Personally, I will post my actual screens with a time stamp of minutes to post, etc. Somewhere else I will also post an instructional screen which explains what each column means, how to bet, etc.

I have no desire to just post "Aqu03 - #1, #7." That lacks depth for the user. I expect to "showcase" HOW I am handicapping with the product.

If someone wishes to chart me, fine. Let them do so. Heck, I'll chart myself. The payoof for the vendor is that this is a sales tool... it is a chance to display how our software works while the user sees the quality of the picks themselves.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[Amazin]

Dave

I think you're wasting your keyboard strokes on Handle. I'm still waiting for the day he stops making excuses for his software and has the guts to put his software picks where his mouth is.Yawn.

[Tom]

Uh, been there done that.
Handle has nothing to prove.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by Amazin
Dave
I think you're wasting your keyboard strokes on Handle. I'm still waiting for the day he stops making excuses for his software and has the guts to put his software picks where his mouth is.Yawn.

Have you ever even tried Equisim?

[Amazin]

Tom Said "Handle has nothing to prove."

That's right,because there is nothing of note in his software to prove. I did try it a couple of times(free version) and I wasn't impressed with the negative cash flow it produced. So it's no wonder to me he has had excuses for backing out of contest play in the past. And I still remember him dodging my questions about ROI and calling me an asshole without a reason. I put these Handle PP's together and get an expected poor product in theory and practice. Unless something has changed in the last year since my assessment,I would expect the same today.

[Lefty]

The last time this contest was proposed I contacted 2 prominent software creators who called it silly. Obviously, few of these guys are willing to put their reps on the line. Dave S. is a notable exception.

[cj]

Is homegrown software allowed in the contest?

[sq764]

I wish the creator of the software I have found to be the best out there was around to chime in.. But I guess Sartin is not going to be posting anytime soon..

[Tom]

Originally posted by Amazin
Tom Said "Handle has nothing to prove."

... I did try it a couple of times(free version) and I wasn't impressed with the negative cash flow it produced. So it's no wonder to me he has had excuses for backing out of contest play in the past.....

Gee, maybe it isn't the software, but the user?
Did you use the datafresh database?
Seems to me, someone used ROI effectively in the inter-board contest.
Refresh my memory, what team we you on for that one?

[Niko]

I doubt this will ever happen because of the potential pitfalls for software vendors. I give Dave Schwartz a lot of credit. I think one reason software vendors are afraid of publishing results because of shady results and unrealistic expectations by casual handicappers, and fear of a bad run so you'd want a decent sample size.
It would be great to simply see how the top 2 picks for each race do as rated by the software in different categories of races. Something simple like Mdn, Mdn Clm, Clm, Alw broken down by Sprint, Route, Turf. There isn't a perfect way to do it but this would give a nice baseline. Put a disclaimer that there are caveats to the results and individual results do vary depending on how it's used etc. The handicappers here are sophisticated enough not to expect a flat bet profit but if the returns were much better than the track take the software would display some of its intrinsic value. If it's not then we know where the airs coming from. I would leave out exacta play because it's a whole different game, or do a seperate test with that. The software vendor could also list a mechanical set of rules spot plays that might show a higher return. It would be nice to see some data before spending a couple grand on a new program and files along with the learning curve it takes to master them.

I believe homegrown software should have a seperate test/forum because they aren't available to the public. I would imagine some of the homegrown programs would have better results because they are tailored to the specific user

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by Amazin
Tom Said "Handle has nothing to prove."
That's right,because there is nothing of note in his software to prove. I did try it a couple of times(free version) and I wasn't impressed with the negative cash flow it produced. So it's no wonder to me he has had excuses for backing out of contest play in the past. And I still remember him dodging my questions about ROI and calling me an asshole without a reason. I put these Handle PP's together and get an expected poor product in theory and practice. Unless something has changed in the last year since my assessment,I would expect the same today.

this post proves what an idiot you are...........you are so off base here it is incredible. You are nothing but a F@#$ Flamer!

[Niko]

Why don't we just skip the software vendors and have one or two users from each program send in the softwares picks based on their automatic outputs? The software comes with instructions so that should be a good starting point

[Handle]

Niko - I think that you have a point, but its a shady area. I'm not worried about the success or failure of my selections. EquiSim has the ability to track how well its raw "selections" do built into it for everyone to see. Various personalities and chest beaters are what generally deter my most noble efforts.... That is, when I dare take time away from dreaming up ways to back peddle, misinform the general public, and come up with reasonless insults to hurl at people....

As to users posting selections alone. That could be interesting, but most products out their are not that cut and dry. That's why I mentioned that the "showcase" should mandate/allow for a "reason for the selection" that ties back into the software. Top Profiler horses in sprints at AQU are winning at a 29.63% clip for a +4.57% ROI this year. At MNR they are hitting for 26.17% with an atrocious -30.09% ROI since the 1st. Now, I wouldn't play MNR based on Profiler top picks mechanically like this - it would be suicide. But if I followed MNR closely (which I don't), I would realize that 2nd ranked profiler horses are hitting for 19.63% of the time and a -3.36% ROI and 3rd ranked are hitting 12.20% for a +15.85% ROI. This tells me a lot about MNR and where the profits lay. Mechanical (profiler) selections are frankly beyond what EquiSim can do at MNR now, but not beyond the usefulness that careful scrutiny of the information the program presents produces.

[Amazin]

Tom Said"Gee, maybe it isn't the software, but the user?"

JR said"this post proves what an idiot you are........"

Let me remind you that in the court of horseracing,you are guilty of being a loser till proven innocent. So it doesn't matter if I'm an idiot or a poor user. It is up to the software maker to make a reasonable product the average player can use effectively. With the Fact that 95% of horseplayers come out losers on any given day,and horseracing software programs in the same ballpark,my assessment doesn't even need proof. It's a given. It is up to the software maker to prove otherwise. And so far there has been no evidence to the contrary. A telltale sign of guilt.

[Red Knave]

Originally posted by Amazin
With the Fact that 95% of horseplayers come out losers on any given day,and horseracing software programs
These are NOT facts.
I've seen it postulated that 95% of horse race bettors lose over the long term, but it is a number generated from some estimates and other statistics. NOT a fact.
As to software programs, the jury is still out.

Let me remind you that in the court of horseracing,you are guilty of being a loser till proven innocent. ... my assessment doesn't even need proof. It's a given.
Even in YOUR court, proof should be required.

[sq764]

I think the 95% figure is low. I would bet 99% of all horseplayers lose over the course of the year.

[Tom]

Originally posted by Amazin
.... It is up to the software maker to make a reasonable product the average player can use effectively....

Says who? Why should a software developer dumb donw his program to make it easy for average people to use? This is not a liberal public education we are talking about here, it is a game of mano-a-mano where the best palyers and the best programs win.
Programs are a tool-the better players use them better than others do.
At the old Sartin seminars, there were people who were raking in cash whiles others could not pick a favorite in a 5 horse race.
Was that the software or the players?
Hint: it was the players. I would NEVER have come up with many of the horse that K Gen or Energy led me to.

[Amazin]

In that case,all horseracing software should come with a warning like cigarettes:"Losing players beware, no software can help you.Quit now.Go home.Just post BS on the PA board and don't waste your money"

[Tom]

No, wrong again, A.
It the losers who furnish the winers with the money.
We want them in the game.
* * * * * *
You just can't accept anything where people are rewarded for
hard work and determination can you?

[Amazin]

Losers work hard and have determination too. What's your point?

[Tom]

Amazin, you wouldn't begin to understand. I know you love to play these games with everyone, but I have to shovel snow tonight, so you will just have to play with yourself for a while.
Maybe you can come up with a reason why we can't just buy cars that drive themselves so that we don' t have to learn to drive ourselves. I'll expect a report from you later on.

[Niko]

You bring up some good points Handle but that's also one of the pitfalls for buyers of systems. You can spend a few hundred dollars before you know if you can make a system work, if it's a good fit for you and what you can expect from it. With just about every other type of software program or tangible product you can see it or use it before you buy it.
There is so much information in the good programs out there, but that makes it more difficult for the user also. It also leads to the ability of the software developer to say if you used this or that part of the program you can win which can suck a lot more money out of someone.
Horse racing programs remind me of some of the commodities program that people sell for trading future markets. They back fit data and say if you traded using these rules you would have made x amount of money. The problem is if you actually traded that way you'd lose money 99% of the time because the data IS backfitted. Similar to saying if you had played the strongest FF horse in 6f sprints at Fair Grounds your ROI would be positive over the last 100 races. Guess what usually happens in the next 100, something different. This is one of the main causes of it being so difficult for people to find winning methods, and the fact that once a lot of people catch on your edge dissapers. A perfect example is Ed Bains 4+30 stats. Is stats track trainers who win 30% of lay-offs and claims. The real time results however show a win rate of 21-22%.
Your results from the stated tracks remind of this. There's a publication called Futures Truth that has software vendors send in their programs and then they track their results. They are forced to give mechanical rules and people can and will do better or worse but you need a baseline. The great majority fail miserably but there are usaully a handful of programs that hold their own. Also I have found if people can't put rules on paper their methods tend to fall apart.
Futures Truth was started by someone because of the misleading information by software vendors.
Not implying you or anyone else here is in the category of misleadingtrying to mislead anyone but we've got to start somewhere. I've seen samples of some of the better programs mentioned on this board and they look great. But do they help you win or just spit out a lot of data?
If vendors won't make results available then users are the next best choice. If vendors want to pick the strengths of their systems and show a profit I'm all for that in that it shows that there is a win to win with the software. Just tell the tester to only play certain tracks, distances etc.
Very long winded post so I don't want to go on.

[Niko]

Quick answer Tom. I buy Consumer Reports so I can know the quality of car I am buying. I don't expect it to drive itself but if I'm spending a lot of money or taking a lot of my time I want to know I'm buying a good product.
The last thing I'm going to do is rely on the car salesperson to tell me what a great car they're selling me (unless I know them)
We have some input here with feedback from very knowledgable handicappers like yourself about the software they're using but no actual data to base our purchase decisions on.

[Red Knave]

Originally posted by Amazin
Losers work hard and have determination too.
Losers only SAY they work hard and SAY they have determination.
They don't.

You're only a loser when you give up.
Sounds to me like you've given up.

[Amazin]

Given up on what?... Handle in the contest?...Yes.

Tom has to shovel snow,and I'm in a heat wave. Actually Tom my business is in the auto industry and yes they are making "smart"cars that can navigate and brake themselves.

[Tom]

Good. when you buy one, teach it how to post for you.

[wes]

Amazin

The problem is the loose nut behind the wheel.

wes

[Amazin]

Tom Said:"Good. when you buy one, teach it how to post for you."

Cars can't write. And Wes is concurring with you that I'm the nut? I think I just hit a daily double

[Larry Hamilton]

make it a pick 3 then.

[hurrikane]

I doubt seriously if you will get anything on this from Ken Massa and HTR. Maybe Tom or someone would do it. I know Massa will be getting ready for the Orleans this month and then playing to qualify for the nationals. Then there is a seminar and tourney at the Gold Coast in June. I don't think there would be time.

Of course...everyone here could come to the Orleans.

I can tell you this...at the Orleans there are typically 10-12 HTR players. you are lucky if you see 2 people have the same horse in the same race on the same day. It all depends on how you use the software. We all can't bet the same horse now can we.

As for the 95-99% losers. I"m just guessing the world just looks that way from that side of the fence. Misery loves company I guess.

[penguinfan]

Originally posted by Larry Hamilton
make it a pick 3 then.

HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHE

[Jeff P]

Originally posted by Larry Hamilton
make it a pick 3 then.

I love this board.

[Dave Schwartz]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Larry Hamilton
make it a pick 3 then.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


LOL

[JustRalph]

we can probably make it a pick six if we want to........

Nice one Larry.......

[Larry Hamilton]

Anyone interested in how to run other applications from inside Access Macros modules?

[PaceAdvantage]

I don't smell much cookin in this thread. Oh well....

[GameTheory]

I think someone needs to come up with a concrete set of rules, set dates for the contest, etc and then send direct invitations to the developers.

i.e. Here's what we're doing, would you like to participate? If not, would like one (or several, depending on format) of your users to participate for you? Would you prefer your program wasn't represented in the contest in any form? Just seeing who says yes, who says no, and who ignores you would be telling in itself...

[PaceAdvantage]

That would be the next step GT. I was just putting out a feeler here to see what kind of interest was still left in this idea. I know more than a few program developers stop in here, so I was hoping more than Dave S and Nathan would respond initially...

[Derek2U]

i still think that a software challenge is so cool and how bout
keeping it Very simple, likes Irish's KOTH ....... pick 2 horses to
win & an alternate (in caseof scratch). Score % winners and
Money Won. One hundred races. Beyond that, I dunno.

[jackad]

How would any software contest deal with the issue of value? When using any system, many if not most bettors would not bet the systems top choice(s) if track odds did not meet some minimum criterion. While this would not affect the % won, it does have a bearing on ROI.

[Larry Hamilton]

The purpose of this "contest" is to allow the producers to show of the strengths of their wares to us (the potential consumer). Since every program is different, a single test would never be completely fair to all. So, here's a thought--why not make a folder for the tests. In that folder give each producer a thread, and let the producer design their own test. This will allow each to show off their stuff and give us area to comment and question. It would also give PA some control as he would have to create the folder and the threads. The test duration could be semi-permanent with no final score other than what the consumer derives from comparing them.

[shanta]

Originally posted by Larry Hamilton
The purpose of this "contest" is to allow the producers to show of the strengths of their wares to us (the potential consumer). Since every program is different, a single test would never be completely fair to all. So, here's a thought--why not make a folder for the tests. In that folder give each producer a thread, and let the producer design their own test. This will allow each to show off their stuff and give us area to comment and question. It would also give PA some control as he would have to create the folder and the threads. The test duration could be semi-permanent with no final score other than what the consumer derives from comparing them.

excellent idea larry!!!
Richie

[BillW]

I like Larry's suggestion also. It is impossible to evaluate any handicapping (human or machine) in the short run based on results, but by evaluating the logic behind the picks a better picture can be formed much more quickly.

Bill

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by Amazin
Dave

I think you're wasting your keyboard strokes on Handle. I'm still waiting for the day he stops making excuses for his software and has the guts to put his software picks where his mouth is.Yawn.


Handle wouldn't come over here and post this....but I will......Amazin....some reading for you (http://thorotech.com/eve/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=451608406&f=532608406&m=492108454&r=769109454#769109454)


Scroll up to read it all. Notice Amazin.....that the new user here made a paceline adjustment to help tweak the program a little. It's a beauty thing..........and apparently you just don't get it..........

[cj]

PA,

You haven't answered my earlier post. Is homegrown stuff allowed in the contest?

Craig

[Suff]

Originally posted by cjmilkowski
PA,
. Is homegrown stuff allowed in the contest?

Craig

Of Course not CJ. That'd be like allowing Gay Marriage. your not an "official " handicapping software seller.

To be in this contest you need to be sanctioned and approved by the HSSA. Handicapping Software Sellers Association.

And to meet thier stringent standards is hard. They have one.

You must have created a product or service designed to aid in handicapping. Sold it and did'nt deliver.

Thats the barrier to entry.

[PaceAdvantage]

There's been no hard or fast rules set for the contest...still mulling....

[raybo]

I don't know about the rest of you, but if I were in the market to buy handicapping software, I would want to know what kind of ROI I could expect and in which wagering scenarios and how much of the success of the program is dependent on my own handicapping abilities or output data analysis ablilities. I like the idea of letting each vendor do their own thing. Give them a set bankroll, assign race cards without making any of the races mandatory. Let them play all or one if they choose. Let them post their plays and an explanation of how the software/the user arrived at the selection decisions. Let them play any type wager they feel best suits their software.

[Niko]

After reading posts here and on HSH I nominate Dick Schmidt for HSH because of his incredicble success.
I know you wait until you see the odds for your plays which will make a big difference in ROI but you know which races to play.
Awaiting your candid reply..

[BiiG]

Hi guys... I was here a while back talking about a program I created by myself. I would be interested in competing against other software.

What is the status of the contest?

Thanks and have a GREAT DAY!!!

[John]

I have used software that on any giving day/week it would pick winners like I was fishing them out of a barrel. Next day /week I could not get the same software to pick a winner in a two horse race. So I don't know what contest/ showcase will prove unless the software user is willing to give his selections every Saturday for the next six months..... IMHO

[Lefty]

Whether the contest goes or not, what's to prevent any of you from posting your sel's? You can have your own little contest in this manner.

[Amazin]

Lefty

IMO,if someone had a good product,they would be more than willing to post it's selections and woo potential customers. By not posting,the question of the products worth,has been answered. In other words,it's so bad it's not even worth posting its selections.

[BiiG]

Hi,
It's amazin that some people see it as half empty....

Maybe selections aren't posted cause they are that good.

Or maybe some don't want to sell it at all. It's for personal use.

[Amazin]

In that case there's no reason to be an egomanianical tease about it. Either put up or shut up.

[BiiG]

Um............Tease????? Ok.......






























I'll shut and have a NICE DAY!!!

[Tom]

How do you factor out the person using the program?
HTR doesn't make selctions. The human interface is mandatory in some programs.
Wedid have contest where indiviual HTR users went head to head on a race a day picking our own pacelines against the program's mode 5 of paceline selction.
No too many beat the roi of the automatic selection method.
But how do you match up varying programs with different race strategies? I can't come up with a fair way to do it.

[BillW]

Originally posted by Tom
How do you factor out the person using the program?
HTR doesn't make selctions. The human interface is mandatory in some programs.
Wedid have contest where indiviual HTR users went head to head on a race a day picking our own pacelines against the program's mode 5 of paceline selction.
No too many beat the roi of the automatic selection method.
But how do you match up varying programs with different race strategies? I can't come up with a fair way to do it.

Yep Tom, hence the hesitation of the developers to dive right in. It usually comes down to the talent and work ethic of the user anyway. I do like DS's idea of a showcase though. That should be instructive for those in the market for off the shelf software. They can see the technoiques and effort involved in at least one method of using each subject software package. Possibly a "who wins the most" contest can be run for the black boxes available, or those having a blackbox mode.

Bill

[Amazin]

BiiG

I wasn't speaking to you. I was responding to your point. Frankly,I haven't seen you before.

Tom asked"But how do you match up varying programs with different race strategies?"

The bottom line for any program or system is to make money. Who wants to buy a program that turns your hard earned dollars into toilet paper while selling you hope.

[schweitz]

I got to get me one of those programs where I don't have any responsibility if it can't win!

[BiiG]

Amazin,
Sorry. It is hard to see who is talking to whom here.

Have a GREAT DAY!!!

[Tom]

Point I was making is that you take 5 people from this boards, give them the same program to use, and you could get 5 different horses in any given race. Unless the program specifically picks the #1 ranked horse per race. Most programs I am familiar with do not do this.

[TRM]

After reading through this thread, it seems making this thing work is like trying to get the Dems and Reps to agree with each other.....Oops!! wrong thread...LOL

Seriously, it seems the only fair way would be to set-up a sep. section for each software group and let it roll. But someone would need to keep some sort of score sheet. For instance, each section would be for %top pick wins....%wins top4...%exactas top2 and 3......%tri's top 3 and 4 etc.... %wps in the top5 ...etc...
I think most people would like to see something similiar. This could be separated by software and user. This would seem to give enough of a cross section of users that the stat guys could extrapolate the High Avg and Low end scores for each group or user.

Just a thought......

One BIG undertaking no doubt!!

[raybo]

RE:<Point I was making is that you take 5 people from this boards, give them the same program to use, and you could get 5 different horses in any given race. Unless the program specifically picks the #1 ranked horse per race. Most programs I am familiar with do not do this.>

I agree completely. My program makes computer generated selections, but I would never bet them without checking the validity of the past running line selected by the computer to use for the grading processes and also, looking at condition for every horse in each race. Someone could just bet top speed or post time favorites or best class or some other decent factor and probably do better than my program's raw generated selections.

[GR1@HTR]

Yeah, mabye it would be best to have a one day "Showcase".

Perhaps you can have each willing vendor do a commentary on the Kentucky Derby and maybe a couple other races on the card they like.

And also perhaps have free printouts available for download for the card.

Kinda of a Mini "Trade Show" for horse data providers...