GP and SA

[cj]

Does anyone know if you can bet Gulfstream or Santa Anita through any of the United States based online wagering services? I'm sick of running to the OTB. Guess I have gotten spoiled these last few months!:confused:

[GR1@HTR]

www.youbet.com has them both. Brisbet and winticket had them till yesterday.

[FortuneHunter]

I like www.phonebet.com from Philly Park. You get streaming video too

[smf]

cjm,

You can use good old Frank's callabet (ladbroke's). They have an on-line product in the works right now, s/b ready in a few weeks or less. Their touch tone wagering is nice.

Btw, saw your info about "where ever the USAF sends me".-- If you're presently serving (or the spouse of someone who is) ,Thanks.

[cj]

Thanks for the help...I went with Phonebet (Philly), and it made me a few bucks today (reference selections section thread today). Just happened to find this board today, and I already love it!!!:)

[ceejay]

Fair Grounds is handling them but from OK they only accept phone wagers (on anything). I've never been on hold with the live operators.

[melman]

Glad you found the place cjm. Think you will enjoy and read over some of the "old stuff". Great call at Gulf and may you have many more like it this meet.

[smf]

Excellent hit, cjm! Hard to beat visual skills/ trip handicapping, eh?

[ranchwest]

smf,

If all of the rules are based on available data, then a program certainly can be written for trainer patterns. It might be complex, but a competent programmer might eventually end up with an even better set of rules, smart rules that can adapt to actual data.

[smf]

RW,

Trainer patterns have nothing to do with "available data". It has to do with trainer intentions, moves and tendencies that aren't necessarily tracked by stats.

[FortuneHunter]

smf,
can you give us an example??

[smf]

FH,

Not in 1,000 words or less....here's the short version.

I had one bet today (i shared w/ GR1, just so you know i'm not redboarding) that was an example (won). The "claimed by" and "claimed from" had various angles that applied but there's no way to put a "stat" on some of them. I had workout patterns (not times!) and jockey preference by trainer given the distance, etcc, etc. The claimed from angle worked over 50% of the time, the claimed by was 2 for 2 so far, given the patterns.

But according to the raw data for winning % of the claimed by trainer for claims, the bet loses $$ over time. By betting the patterns given (not the stat), it was a gift.

No way you c/ write a program for all that. You could come close, but "close" loses money in wagering horses nine times out of nine.

Remember the 'Handicapping Trainers' group that posted here 2 years ago? Haven't heard a thing from them since they posted here saying they'd create d-bases, write programs, yada, yada.

A former co-worker that joined their group said they (group) never got it going. He left after 3 months or so of their existence. I recall your pal Peopleplayer posting the group folded up.

It doesn't surprise me. It was a nice idea, but it doesn't work when real money is exchanged.

[GR1@HTR]

Yeah, the data SMF uses is something he creates on his own. It is not stuff you can get from BRIS, DRF, or HDW. And he uses other factors not available in a data file such as horse body language, how the jock warms up the horse and bunches more. The times we have been at LS together he is watching all this stuff and I'm wondering what the frock he is looking at. Me just look at the numbers and to the tote machine and insert voucher and start chugging and plugging random numbers. For SMF benefit, he has a checklist of stuff to go through before all that happens.

[smf]

RW & FH,

Please don't misunderstand me. I'm not saying you can't program data for eliminations, or for winning plays in general. I've taken look at some work GR1 has done and it has booted him home # of pricey winners (one at $100 last week I think). It can be done for some things and I'm sure you guys have stuff in place right now for winning plays.

Trainer patterns are a different story tho. Raw stats are useless there.

[smf]

GR1,

Dude, you beat me by seconds to the post!!

Also..., the days I saw you at LS, you took a lot more dough FROM the tellers at the end of the day than what you gave them earlier. Like that $4,000 pik 4 (ft erie i think) on the last week of LS.....Not bad!!

I don't recall you having a losing day when I was there. The stuff you're using works.

[ranchwest]

I know there are a lot of things that must be observed. I mistakenly thought you were referring to data that has not been massaged by the commercial vendors to provide the exact information required.

I cut my teeth on handicapping at Delta Downs, so believe me, I know that observation can reap big rewards.

[FortuneHunter]

I don't want to beat a dead horse, and do recognize as the handicapping process gets more intuitive the programming effort gets more tricky, and there is a point where the programming effort is not worth it.

Some points to leave you with:

A program can easily be made to accept "manual" input. Or in other words, "on track" observed input. For example:
In the furture, there will be "laptop / plam" PC's that you can take to the track and the batteries won't run out.
You would have a screen to enter "warmup" observations, a screen for annouced equipment changes, a screen for Paddock observations. The easiest way to program it is by entering this infomation as a rating. example: the 6 horse had a "8" warmup observation. The 3 horse had a "-3" paddock observation.
Note that these are still human judgements that need to be "weighted" by the program (more human judgement during program design). Garbage In, Garbage Out.

GR1 mentioned "check list", computers love check lists.

smf mentioned (trainer) patterns. Computers love patterns.

smf writes: "No way you c/ write a program for all that". Will stand by the statement: "If you can write down your method, I can program it". It may take a while but it can be done.

Thanks to everyone for sharing your thoughts
FH

[GR1@HTR]

FH,
Speaking of latptops/computers at the track....I read there are some racebooks now in Nevada that have laptops/computers so the user can use their favorite program w/o having to tote their own laptop.

[FortuneHunter]

GR1, I here they used to ban them, now they supply them. Maybe they realize it is not the tools, but the handicapper?

[smf]

FH,

Man did this thread ever get off topic, lol...

Later today/ tomorrow, I'll start a main thread asking how you go about your "rankings". For one, you and itm rank workouts (if I'm not mistaken). That's crazy (to me). You "rank" a workout for a 2yo the same as a 7 yr old gelding? A dropper that's been in the barn for a year vs a stablemate that was privately bought 2 weeks ago? A sprinter vs a soon to be first time turfer?

You actually put a "ranking" on all these horses, and expect a grade of some sort to be input into a program? Hmmm.

Like I said, I'll start another thread later on. Thanks for your views/ opinions. I never can get enuff from this board.