Racing would be dead if computers can figure it out

[fishorsechess]

That's what they stated about chess if computers ever
dominate the game. 30 years ago an English grandmaster
made a bet that no computer can beat him. For about
15-20 years he was right but the computers eventually
got stronger and stronger until now they are able to
beat the world champion, Garry Kasparov. What would
happen if they came out with a program that can consistently
beat the track? Man vs. Machine. Right now computers
programs and databases are aids to a handicapper.
One day maybe they will be able to pick winners consistently.
Would that be the end of racing? Maybe they will change the
rules to the game like they tried to with blackjack when
card counter came in vogue.

[sjk]

I wouldn't expect such a program to "come out". Anyone with a winning program would have a better time just using it to win as opposed to going into the business of selling it. Anyway, if enough people are using the same program, it loses its effectiveness for all.

I would think that computers at work have progressively raised the bar over the years and will continue to do so. You have to wonder if the outlook for a novice player might not be significantly more negative than in years past and this might prevent some from getting engaged in the game.

[InsideThePylons-MW]

Bill Cullen has a bunch of very successful "systems" that are as easy as 1-2-3, and racing isn't dead yet.
:rolleyes: :confused: :D

[The Hawk]

I'm by no means a chess expert (or a horse racing expert, for that matter) but I would think that since there are a finite number of moves, or variables, that would make chess "beatable", since the correct percentage move can theoretically be programmed for every single scenario that exists. Obviously, that's not the case with horse racing. Someone who knows the game better than I might refute this...

[ranchwest]

In chess, you don't have to worry about what a friend of mine calls the "whoa" factor.

[hurrikane]

I believe that somewhere between the Hawk and the 'WHOA'

(I think I'll keep that one if you don't mind ranch)

you have your answer. :D

[KingChas]

I think that the computer can figure it out now.The problem is we can't figure out the computer right now------------lol

[NoDayJob]

Get real! Any software that is, or will be "really" profitable will never be marketed to the general public. This notion is pure fantasy. You will have to write your own software if you believe a computer horse racing program will make you money.

NDJ

[OTM Al]

You are comparing apples and oranges here. Chess is what game theorists call a stage game. Each stage represents each player's turn. At each stage, there are a finite number of moves available to each player and each player can always observe what the other has done, so there is what is called perfect information in the game as well. The solution technique for such games is known as backward induction. Essentially what you do is start an all possible final game positions and work backward. Obviously this final move would be a checkmate or stalemate move for one player. Then you go back to the next to the last move and choose the optimal move for the player in that case and so on and so on back to the beginning move. The reason that computers can still be beaten is that this computation, which would give the optimal strategy, no matter what the position of the board, is still greater than today's fastest computers can calculate. Consider that when white moves first, there are 20 possible opening moves, pawns up one or 2 and 2 possible for each knight. Black has same option on the first move. Thus, after only one move each, there are already 400 possible board configurations. Of course somday computers will be fast enough to handle the backward induction problem and the dominant (read "can't lose") strategy will be found. Chances are it will be white to win, but there are games that have second mover advantage, so no one is sure which side wins in the dominant strategy, but of course at that point the game becomes a moot point and a couple thousand years of history of play is down the toilet.

Horseracing is totally different. The computer may be able to find patters and spit out stats, but it's never going to tell you for sure when Mr. Horse decides he really doesn't feel like jackassing around a track today with a little man on his back, so he cashes it in so he can get back to the barn for some chow. Ie computers can't take the random element out of the "game".

[sjk]

OTM Al,

No need to know anything for sure if you get the right odds and play enough races.

[OTM Al]

Wouldn't have it any other way

[DJofSD]

Thank you, OTM Al.

DJofSD