Worst Software

[GR1@HTR]

Everyone talks about the best software...I though for fun we would talk about the worst....It's easier to b*tch, so let it roll...If I don't list your worst SW, please post.

[JustRalph]

Boy, You know how to stir it up huh?

Is there anybody who might have actually used everyone of these apps?

[Dick Schmidt]

Typical horseplayer negativity. "It's all the program's fault!"

I know people who use half a dozen of the programs listed to win, and I'm sure that most of the others have winning users as well. No completely useless piece of software survives long.

If you vote for a software program you have never used, it is no more than meaningless gossip. If you vote for a program you have used and lost with, it says much more about you as a user than the program.

So cast your vote. Tell the world you're a loser!


Dick


Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

"Life is tough, but its tougher if you're stupid." -John Wayne

[GR1@HTR]

Sooo...it's ok to post threads about things you like but not the ones thought were below par?

What kind of goofy world do you live in?

Ive used a few of the above programs and the only one I didn't really care for was the master magician. I liked the book but thought the original version was very vanilla. So I applied some of the book stuff to the current program I use.

[Tom]

Originally posted by JustRalph
Boy, You know how to stir it up huh?

Is there anybody who might have actually used everyone of these apps?


Uh, Lefty. :D



Oh, and Dick, I DIDN'T vote! :rolleyes:

[ratpack]

You should be a little more specific about the content of the program and ease of use

I would rate Zambuto's the worst because it took me weeks to get it to work right and then after 4 months it just stopped working.

I did like the program though when it worked.

[keenang]

:confused:
THIS DICK SCHMIDT IS SOME THING ELSE HE WAS NEGATIVE 20 YEARS AGO AND STILL THE SAME.

[Speed Figure]

It's crazy that HSH could be on top as the worst, but 2nd best in the software poll I ran.


Program Votes PCT%

All-Ways Pro 4 4.30%
HSH 22 23.66%
The Capper 3 3.23%
URTI 1 1.08%
Equisim 30 32.26%
All-In-One 8 8.60%
Amazing Capper 2 2.15%
Handicapping Magic 8 8.60%
Synergism 2 2.15%
HTR 13 13.98%

[Figman]

I agree!
It's shameful especially in light of all the excellent free help and advice Dave Schwartz has given to members of this board. I suppose his two wagering essays would be ranked low too. All I can say is that the naysayers don't know what they are missing!

[sq764]

Quite honestly, what I have heard is not how expensive HSH is, not the data files, but rather that there is no free trial..

I think that is why you see the big difference between HTR and HSH, as HTR gives a free trial and a nice demo..

Just a thought..

[Lefty]

Tom's right, I have used em all plus. All good, all bad. All have good and bad points. Depends on who's using it, and what the user is looking for and comfortable with. Dick's right.

[PaceAdvantage]

I'm using HSH right now....no way should it be ranked the worst.

Worse than Neurax (BRIS)....you got to be kidding me??!!!!

I also have used HTR extensively, and I would rate it right up there with HSH. They are complementary programs in my book, but you certainly don't need both.

The results of this poll are a bit farcical thus far.

(I voted for BRIS software, only because I have never used any Trackmaster SW)

[NoDayJob]

Originally posted by PaceAdvantage
I'm using HSH right now....no way should it be ranked the worst.

The results of this poll are a bit farcical thus far.

(I voted for BRIS software, only because I have never used any Trackmaster SW)


I thought you used your own software? When did you stop using your program?

NDJ

[PaceAdvantage]

I stopped using mine (mind you, I've "stopped" in the past, only to come back time and again) when I started using HTR. HTR was the most "compatible" with what I had written myself, meaning, it was more in line with the way I thought about handicapping then any commercial program I had tried before.

Plus the data costs with HTR are much more affordable than the BRIS data I was purchasing when I was using my own software...

[sq764]

HTR is most compatable with your own software, so now you are using HSH? I don't understand..

[Speed Figure]

Why not use TSN procaps for $60.

[PaceAdvantage]

SQ,

Yes, HTR was most compatible, which is why I STOPPED using my own stuff for the time being.

This does not preclude me from also seeing if the grass is greener on the other side by using HSH, correct?

I'm still learning HSH, as it is a very intricate program, full of possibilites, plus I don't have much spare time.

Dave was very kind to provide me with a complimentary copy of the program (but I am paying for data), and I am trying it out....OK with you?

[sq764]

Boy aren't we touchy nowadays (Must be the Yanks pitching getting to you :-)

I was just wondering why you chose HSH over HTR.. I didn't imagine this would be such a touchy question..

[PaceAdvantage]

Because you are implying that I have chosen one over the other. I haven't. I believe I said in another post that I am currently active with both programs (I know my bill from HDW reflects this)

And if you're watching today's game, you'd know that I should be quite the happy camper, having knocked Mr. Lowe out in the 2nd inning with a 5-0 lead and first and third with nobody out....LOL

[sq764]

I wasn't implying anything, why so argumentative?? sheesh..

I couldn't be more thrilled with how this is turning out.. Sox will get to play the As or Angels, both teams whom they have smoked.. Yanks get to play the Twins and face the AL Cy Young winner (possibly) 2-3 times..

And you just knocked the worst pitcher boston has right now off the field.. I might actually double my current bet for the playoffs..

[PaceAdvantage]

Actually, you didn't imply anything. You out and out put words right into my "mouth" with this direct quote:

I was just wondering why you chose HSH over HTR.

Sorry for my mistake. Damn right I'm touchy.

[sq764]

You did say "I am currently using HSH", correct?

[PaceAdvantage]

I don't get it. Am I under some sort of cross examination here?

[sq764]

No, a simple question was asked and you are being an ass about it.. That's what's happening..

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally posted by sq764
No, a simple question was asked and you are being an ass about it.. That's what's happening..


Oh ok. 'Nuff said I guess.

However, the simple question was asked by NoDayJob, and I thought I answered him well enough.

[sq764]

So.... You currently use HSH AND HTR? That is all I was asking.

I was curious what you saw as the advantage of one over the other..

[Tuffmug]

HSH has a major hidden limitation which may make it unsuitable for experienced handicappers.
There are no raw times, fractional times, split times, track variants or final times in the HSH files. All output is in speed or pace figures.

[andicap]

The reason, IMHO HSH is considered the worst AND the best is because its so complicated. Those that like it, LOVE it. Those that hate it, really hate it.

It's not a travesty or "farcial" that HSH is the worst here (or near the worst, whatever). In fact, I expected that result. Also, lots more people here may have tried HSH than Neurax.

(Now if you asked, what % of people WHO HAVE TRIED A PARTICULAR SOFTWARE LIKED IT (or HATED IT)? you would have gotten a completely different response.

How can I judge Neurax? Or Synergism? Or The Capper?
The question was flawed in the first place. Didn't anyone here take a course in statistics in their lives? Dick Schmidt is 100% correct here. (But not being a warm and fuzzy person, obviously some people think he's automatically wrong. Lack of charisma in this country of course is worse than incompetence or illiteracy.)

Besides this sort of thing
happens all the time in public opinion polls on TV shows, celebs, poiliticians. Lots of people are loved AND hated in equal measure because they elicit strong reactions.

HSH does that because
a) its complicated
b) its expensive
c) there's no demo
d) some people don't like Dave S.

on the other hand

a) Lots of people do like Dave S. -- he spends time freely with his customers.

b) Lots of people feel it works for them
c) Lots of people LIKE that its complicated
d) The extensive bulletin board support.
e) Users like that lots of people don't use it.

[Equineer]

Originally posted by Tuffmug
HSH has a major hidden limitation which may make it unsuitable for experienced handicappers.
There are no raw times, fractional times, split times, track variants or final times in the HSH files. All output is in speed or pace figures. I would interpret this as evidence HSH might be better. With software, if your are handicapping anything but a "bionic" or "synthetic" racecard, you are stuck in the 80's. Raw racing data needs a lot of autopsy/mortuary work before each race becomes "presentable" for comprehensive handicapping analysis.

[acorn54]

i was considering hsh. what i did was look on the bulletin board at hsh of people that were using it a long time ago and sent them emails on whether they would buy hsh if they had it to do over again
apparantly enthusiasm dies out for quite a few.
i'd say to potential buyers of hsh to go to the earlier threads and contact those users who are suspiciously absent in the present threads of the hsh board
acorn (guy)

[sq764]

I am a little surprised that all software programs do not have a demo..

If I was going to spend $100 or $1,000 on a piece of software, I would like to know if it is something I would like and useful to me.. I can understand why people would shy away from putting out $$ for a program that they have never really seen.

It would be like buying a car without a test drive..

[andicap]

Dave Schwartz has explained why he does not have a demo -- it's somewhere on this board but I can't recall his reasoning, but I think it wasn't very economical.

I think most software providers don't make very much money anyway.

[sq764]

I am not even talking a 'here is the program and here is the data for xx days"..

How hard would it be to give a prospective buyer a weeks worth of tracks outputs to see??

[cj]

I would think the best method is to cut a deal with the data providers and give the program away.

Here is a question I've been pondering. When someone buys a program, how long does a customer typically think the provider should have to provide customer service? I would think about 2-3 years max off the top of my head.

[Speed Figure]

Originally posted by cj
I would think the best method is to cut a deal with the data providers and give the program away.

Here is a question I've been pondering. When someone buys a program, how long does a customer typically think the provider should have to provide customer service? I would think about 2-3 years max off the top of my head. I would say as long as the provider is making money off the user using the program, they should provide customer service.

[cj]

Lets say its a one time sale, I sell you the program for XXX$, you buy your own data. How long do I have to provide service. Just curious because, as we know, the computer field is constantly changing.

[andicap]

I wonder how many people are sharing passwords -- i..e, each person has bought licenses to a single program but has access to two.

Another obstacle to profitability for software providers I suppose.

[sq764]

Isn't the way to combat that by having a program where you must have the original disk in the drive in order to use it?

[chickenhead]

Originally posted by cj
Lets say its a one time sale, I sell you the program for XXX$, you buy your own data. How long do I have to provide service. Just curious because, as we know, the computer field is constantly changing.

you could try taking a cue from the hardware field and sell extended service contracts. also tiered service becoming more common for a lot of software providers...I've got quite a lot of software at work that has free email support (could take a week to get a response), if you're willing to pony up you get phone support as well. I like the idea of making CS at least break even, if not profitable.

[cj]

Originally posted by andicap
I wonder how many people are sharing passwords -- i..e, each person has bought licenses to a single program but has access to two.

Another obstacle to profitability for software providers I suppose.

I think the way to combat this would be to make the software only work on specific computer(s). You could sell the program per computer. Could lead to a lot of headaches as people switch machines and things like that though down the line.

[Lefty]

There's a couple that do that now. The computer puts out some numbers. You send the numbers back to the seller and he sends a code. There can be probs but it's surefire protection.

[cj]

You have $500 programs all the way down to free ones. A little tough to compare. Like comparing Adidas to those ones on the rack tied together in the grocery store, right next to the light bulbs.

[hurrikane]

I work with a few vendors like that now.
It is a huge pita! esp if you use one copy on a desktop, go to the track with a laptop, have more than one laptop depending on if you flying or not, etc.

Plus, big pain for the vendor, big support issue.

You could use a dongle. Not sure of the cost but it's on of the best ways I've seen for one-seat software.

[cj]

Originally posted by Lefty
There's a couple that do that now. The computer puts out some numbers. You send the numbers back to the seller and he sends a code. There can be probs but it's surefire protection.

Probably the MAC address would be the way to go. Maybe Ralph would know something about this. Isn't this what got that Zambuto guy in trouble though?

[chickenhead]

dongles are pretty common with high end SW.

[cj]

What is a dongle?

[chickenhead]

a little authentication dingus you plug onto your parrallel port, acts like a pass through so you can still use your port, but the SW won't run without it. Probably SHA-1 algorithm....I don't think it would cost too much...

[BillW]

Originally posted by chickenhead
a little authentication dingus you plug onto your parrallel port, acts like a pass through so you can still use your port, but the SW won't run without it. Probably SHA-1 algorithm....I don't think it would cost too much...

Those things are easy to lose though and a real pain. Where distribution cannot be controlled by data (as with the HDW model) a lease model can be effective (renew a software key over the internet with a credit card). That way you can put the software on any machine you wish (or all of your friends for that matter). Copies are only good for the remaining of the lease period and can be renewed on as many machines as you (or your friends) wish.

Bill

[Lefty]

dongles are common? Only SW I know that used it was Master Handicapper. Can you tell me of any others?
Meanwhile, HSH is licensed, EQuisim is licensed as well as Contenders 10, Zambuto, Amazing Capper and prob a few others i'm overlooking.

[BillW]

Originally posted by Lefty
dongles are common? Only SW I know that used it was Master Handicapper. Can you tell me of any others?
Meanwhile, HSH is licensed, EQuisim is licensed as well as Contenders 10, Zambuto, Amazing Capper and prob a few others i'm overlooking.

AllWays

[chickenhead]

I wasn't referring to horse racing software, just software in general.

[GR1@HTR]

Some of the data providers know when you are downloading from multiple computers....I might download into two/three (work, laptop, home desktop) computers a day....But they will bust you if you share your password with someone else...

[The Skeptic]

A quick comment. One of the most "underrated" software programs is Synergism. It's simplicity yet it's complexity are incredible. It's professional level software yet a newbie can get it rather quickly. The only reason you don't hear more about it is Bob Purdy doesn't get on these BBS's and hype anything. Now why would a man invest several hundred thousand dollars developing software but doesn't tell anyone about it. He doesn't advertise, doesn't post on BBS's to hype his goods, doesn't do mass mailings, doesn't exagerate, would rather tell the truth then what you want to hear. Regretably the truth turns people away! How many winners do we know at the track? If I'm not mistaken they all do or they all almost hit the big one.

[JustRalph]

dongles used to be pretty common, when there were only two types of printer ports (and I mean the speed and translation mode of the port, not the physical part) but about 5 years back when printer ports went "smart" Dongles pretty much went tits up because the new ports wouldn't communicate with the dongle right if they were set to the fancy modes that are common nowadays. the problem was, all the new printers needed the fancy translation modes and you had to make a decision on whether to use your printer or use your dongle. so dongles are pretty rare today.

The Mac Address is popular too and seems to be the standard for high end stuff lately. You register certain Mac addresses with the vendor and Voila' the software works with the machine that uses that address. It is pretty sound technology that will be around for years to come. If you have a router you can spoof the Mac address and use the software downstream if it is really crappy stuff. But the good stuff does a resident check on the computer itself........so you end up having to register all of your machines. There is one problem that occurs if you have a network card that dies or you change it out.........then you are re-registering your Mac Id again with the vendor......but Net cards never die, right?

[cj]

So that's easy, just mail me your broken network card when you swap them out, I send you a newly coded program for the new one! :D

[chickenhead]

haven't seen USB dongles yet, but that would be a logical evolution I'd think.

[betchatoo]

Always now has USB dongles

[CapperLou]

The Skeptic:

I looked into Synergism about a year ago and found it intriguing--BUT--the message board literally died almost two years ago and that scared me away. I've heard some good things about Bob Purdy; however when I learned that Dick Schmidt had gotten away from it and was pursuing other ventures--it further chased me away!!!
I would have to presume no one was "really" doing much with it--in other words--making any money.

All the best,

CapperLou

[Buckeye]

Picking Pacelines is not easy. It may not even be possible!

[Misteranthropic]

I'm using HSH right now....no way should it be ranked the worst.

Worse than Neurax (BRIS)....you got to be kidding me??!!!!

I also have used HTR extensively, and I would rate it right up there with HSH. They are complementary programs in my book, but you certainly don't need both.

The results of this poll are a bit farcical thus far.

(I voted for BRIS software, only because I have never used any Trackmaster SW)


PA,

The very first thing I thought when I saw the poll was, "WHAT!? No Neurax Pro!?"

That piece of Sh......er, software has got to be the worst ever written, and to not have it listed makes the entire poll meaningless IMO.

[Buckeye]

Let's face it, they're all bad unless they help you to win money.

[cj]

Worst software? Any that didn't have Afleet Alex and Lost In The Fog rated on top! :lol:

[JimG]

Worst software? Any that didn't have Afleet Alex and Lost In The Fog rated on top! :lol:

Don't tell PA but his software didn't have AA on top. :lol: Of course it did have the 1 horse in the top 6 to complete the tri. :jump:

Jim

[JimG]

The Skeptic:

however when I learned that Dick Schmidt had gotten away from it and was pursuing other ventures--it further chased me away!!!

CapperLou

First I've heard of that. What did you hear?

Jim

[JimG]

Picking Pacelines is not easy. It may not even be possible!

Care to elaborate on why it my not be possible to pick a paceline?

Jim

[Lefty]

I've not heard that about Dick, either. Last I heard he recommended both HSH and Synergism V1.

[CapperLou]

Jim & Lefty:

On another thread in the past year Dick mentioned that he did not have much time to spend on Synergism any more--that is not to say that he does not like it.

As I mentioned earlier, the message board on Synergism appears to have died over a year ago. When I saw that--and no marketing being done or input from users on their experience with it--I decided to stop right there--so I do not know what the program is capable of doing for those that use it.

All the best,

CapperLou

[Lefty]

Capper, agree with you. Nobody contributes to the messages. So I too, lost interest. Plus the dl fee over a $140 one of the highest i;'ve see, even for HDW data.

[midnight]

Following is for software I've actually used or actively observed others using over an extended period of time:

Worst Software, with worst listed first:

Stealth by Winner's Circle. Two guys I know paid the $795 for this plus $140 a month for data. Each used it a few months, and neither came close to break-even. This from software that automatically picks the pacelines (and allows no user paceline selection). They both noted (and what I saw confirmed it) that a high percentage of horses run out of the money, including many short-priced ones. One of them got most of his money back (I'm not joking) by taking anything it picked that was less then 2-1 odds and booking it (offering the other side) at Betfair and EHorseX.

Anything by Murray Kram. I've actually tried using his bottom-level one when he offered it for $20. It was hard to understand, clunky to use, and anything it picked that was over 3-1 at post time ran up the track.

Sprint Rogers' program (don't remember the name). I tried to make heads or tails out of this. The GUI was horrible, and the results weren't much better than picking horses at random.

Synergism 2 (the 1988 version by PIRCO, not the original Synergism or Bob Purdy's Synergism). This was totally unrelated to the first version of Synergism, and it just didn't work, at least for me. Is anybody out there still using PIRCO's Syergism 2 (Not the first version)?

[Buckeye]

Care to elaborate on why it may not be possible to pick a paceline?
Because logic is involved and that may just "do you in" because, 'logic' will fail to get the BIG prices. If your version of logic can get the big prices and the small ones too, then you may have something. I've found that I can break-even (no lie!) using Buckeye logic, big deal.

[Zaf]

Tracksim.com :D :eek: :mad: :( :lol: :sleeping: :bang:

ZAFONIC

[hurrikane]

Zaf,

I wondered why that wasn't posted. The only thing that may keep it from the worst of all time is......it didn't cost me anything.

[mainardi]

I read most of this thread, and it's good to see the exchange. I write and sell Hor$ense software, and I thought I'd offer some insights into the some of the issues being discussed...

Way back during my DOS days, I provided a free "30 day demo", based on the system clock date. Well, that wasn't very good, because people kept removing it and reinstalling it (my bad, but I didn't know how to prevent it at the time). I no longer provide demos/freeware because I offer a pretty good money back policy. Enough said on that...

As for protecting my investment -- and NO, we developers don't make enough money to do much more than buy the computer equipment, supplies and services that are required to keep the business barely in the black (in most years) -- I have had to insert anti-piracy measures into the latest version. Dongles are not cost effective for lower priced programs, so that's out. What I have done is integrate special copy-protection files, where the legitimate customer has to contact me DIRECTLY to get their "pass code". Pirates can easily be identified, as soon as one of their buyers requests a pass code. I realize that it's not fool-proof, but I believe that only the professional pirates will be able to figure out what I've done.

So, I realize that some developers are just out there to rip you off, while others force you to use their way (or no way), but I do know that many of us are busting our hump to put out a product that actually works. But, until you've spent time writing something for others to use, be careful how harshly you judge them.

[jk3521]

I hereby nominate Mass Fear for "Worst Software" !

[NoDayJob]

:lol: All of the above. :lol:

NDJ

[NoDayJob]

I hereby nominate Mass Fear for "Worst Software" !

:lol: Now you've got me really scared. :lol:

NDJ

[orlando]

name one software that makes a profit gents?

[Lefty]

No magic software even though junkies like me keep looking. Dick Mitchell once said(and I paraphrase)that software is a contract b'teen player and computer. There are people that can make profits with software that i cannot. Software really is a TOOL.

[GaryG]

I do well with Allways, but there are many differences of opinion around here. Depends on how you handicap.....pace, speed, etc. Read some of the threads under this heading. There are plenty of winning players here using all sorts of software.

[orlando]

no names yet gents?

[Lefty]

No magic software, Orlando. What about that statement don't you get?
There is a passel and a slew of good software out there. To paraphrase Shakespeare: The fault is not in your software, the fault is in you.

[orlando]

thanks lefty you are a great man.

[orlando]

oh by the way lefty i had no idea that shakespeare was a horse player.

[Buckeye]

No magic software
What about Handicapping Magic? :bang:

[keenang]

I like Lefty and many others admit to being a software jukie,but if I had to pick one software that I thought was bad it would be Joe Zambuto's.But I am sure there are those who love it.

Good Racing Luck
Gene

[rmania]

name one software that makes a profit gents?
I would but I can't.... :rolleyes:

[GaryG]

The have been a lot of Twilight Zone posts lately....what ever happened to Santa Claus?

[Lefty]

gary asks; The have been a lot of Twilight Zone posts lately....what ever happened to Santa Claus?
__________________
Dead. He was sleighed.

[gurulj]

Love your answer Dick. How true Haaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!! :D

Jerry

[gurulj]

ProPace makes a profit with $2 flat bets over a months time. Others can and do much better. Someone made the statement that software is just a tool. Truer words were never spoken. Learn how all your tools work best and use them properly and you will make money; more than some; many times less than others.

Jerry

[gurulj]

Jim the problem with trying to pick a paceline is two or three fold. You need to know what the trainer was up to in a given paceline. That's why we don't have you pick a paceline in Propace. If one studies the book, then puts the software to work as a tool, and uses the Vodds line; you learn not to depend too much on a given pace line but look at what the software gives you and use that tool with the one on top of your shoulders. The two in combo can be very good :p

Jerry

[Tom]

Got to add Formulator 4.1 now - new program offers nothing new and usefull and only makes it harder on users to use. DRF's perception of continual improvment I guess? :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown:

[cj]

I think it is pretty easy to use, but maybe I'm biased since I tested it. What did you find hard?

[Tom]

I think it is pretty easy to use, but maybe I'm biased since I tested it. What did you find hard?

Hard in the way you have to use the files on only one coumputer, not the program itself. An update that offers noting is pretty pathetic, yet somehow expected from DRF.

[traynor]

Dick Schmidt wrote: <If you vote for a software program you have never used, it is no more than meaningless gossip. If you vote for a program you have used and lost with, it says much more about you as a user than the program.

So cast your vote. Tell the world you're a loser!>

Admitting you are a loser is the first step in learning how to win. If you delude yourself into believing that you are using a "winning approach"--despite the fact that you are losing--all you can do is to continue losing. Worse still is the position of being afraid to admit you are losing, because you have been snowed into believing that "everyone else is a winner" (except you).

That said, I mostly agree with you. I think the app is irrelevant. Some of the best handicappers I know think "computer handicapping" is silly, and some others use TI-83 graphing calculators as their "software of choice." All win fairly impressive amounts of money.
Good Luck

[Dave Schwartz]

I always have to laugh when I see this thread come back to the top because HSH is (apparently) about the worst software you can use, yet is probably used by more players making a six-figure profit from racing than any other.

I recall having a telephone conversation with one of our former users who told me that he had actually voted for HSH in this thread. When I asked him, "why?" he said that it was because HSH took too much commitment to use.

Winning is like that.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[traynor]

Dave Schwartz wrote: <HSH is (apparently) about the worst software you can use, yet is probably used by more players making a six-figure profit from racing than any other.>

If I was using a software app that actually generated a six-figure profit, the LAST thing I would do is brag about it. In fact, I would be inclined to declare it the "worst ever" to discourage other users. And if I were the developer of that software, I would certainly not offer it to anyone with a few bucks and a download subscription. That would be counter-productive in the extreme.

In short, two conditions should be met for "high value software"; let me pick five tracks, then show me the results for handicapping a week of races at those tracks. Not 17 different ratings, but the one entry in each race that the software has "selected" as the most likely winner. Not top five, top four, top whatever--the one winner. The second condition is that the value is maintained, by severely restricting distribution.

If it is necessary to "interpret the ratings," or select one of numerous possible readouts that "indicate" the potential winner, I am doing the work, not the software. All the software is doing is crunching numbers, keeping records, and presenting the same data in a new format. It does not produce information--only more data.

This is not a criticism of HSH, which from all I have heard, is one of the better apps available. It is a criticism of a voting process that motivates people like me to consider voting against my favorite application to painlessly and effortlessly undercut the self-confidence and capability of the opposition.
Good Luck

[Tom]

And I'm the enigma??? Sheeez.

[traynor]

Tom wrote: <And I'm the enigma??? Sheeez.>

Surveys are a fascinating process in business. The answers produced are often dictated by the crafting of the questionnaire. It is not restricted to horse racing. Everyone who attempts to research opinion should be aware of the dozens of "effects" that are generated, from social acceptability of the responses to halo effect to the bandwagon effect. Responses are rarely, if ever, given in isolation.

The very existence of a survey carries baggage, as well as the fact that your opinion is being solicited, directly or indirectly. Because surveys are widely used in both academia and business, I have been exposed to them from a design perspective for a number of years. Critically evaluating a survey is different from simply responding, or accepting the results at face value.

In this case, the intention seems informational--essentially, "Hey, what do you guys think about ...?" As far as it goes, the results may provide an insight into the current likes and dislikes of responders. The results may also provide a view biased by recent events; an example might be the response about HSH from the user in Canada who claimed around a quarter million profit in 18 months, and $30,000 plus in the last month.

How would exposure to that posting affect someone voting either for or against HSH? Would they be--like many of the old time Sartin Methodologists--inclined to vote in favor of it, in the belief that fame and fortune was right around the corner and they wanted to jump on the bandwagon to that fame or fortune? Or would they think--by the time the "supporter" came out of the woodwork to "testify" to the veracity of the first person's claims--that it was "too good to be true"?

The issue is not the veracity of the various claims, nor the relative merits of the software applications involved. It is simply to suggest that responses to surveys may not be exactly what they seem to be on the surface. And finally, that responses are a factor of, and influenced by, the surrounding environment and various "priming effects."
Good Luck

[Tom]

And I'm an enigma? Sheez!


:rolleyes:

[Koko]

And I'm an enigma? Sheez!


:rolleyes:

Bad News Tom. Your status has been downgraded. Previously you were THE enigma, currently you're simply AN enigma. And we're also out of Sheez, unless you call this Kraft American stuff sheez.

[JackS]

With software that has adjustable parimeters, toss the overused data and experiment with what you have left.
Get rid of the leading trainer, jockey and best final time.
Now that the "meat" has been eliminated, the only thing left is the gravy.
I haven't used software in years but I do own some that I might retry.
Peculiar data elimination i.e- leading jock, and peculiar data inclusion-i.e-the female apprentice, the 5% PP thats right next door to the 15%er (reverse) ect. might drop your ITM and at the same time raise your ROI.
I'm not advising anyone to do this with real money, but it seems (until proven a loser) a worthwhile experiment.

[luckyguy]

gotta laugh when you see schwartzie squealing like a stuck pig, here's a software that all these millionaires use but it was on sale for $59 lastr year.

wouldn't it make more sense for the big users to keep it off the market?

[Dave Schwartz]

It is funny, isn't it?

Kind makes you wonder, huh?

[blindasabat]

I believe it for $599.00 Dave's program

[ozpunter]

Does anyone here know the end result of the so called Pizzolla and Dan Serra super racing software ,did it go ahead did anyone buy it, I am returning to live back in Vegas and used his USR now I am not a believer in them (because @ best most sires figures are about 16% winners) great site to verify my figures go to www.racent.com.au (http://www.racent.com.au); check out the race form ,the tracks re down the right hand side and go look they give wettrack % of all the sires in the particular race ( hope I make myself clear).
I know Dan was always short of buck so if he made any money with Pizzolla good luck to him.
Hey I'm of to Honkers Tomorrow for 12 days and will take in some great racing from Happy Valley and Sha Tin at the moment HK has the best jockey colony bar none in the world.
Australian racing channells SKY and TVN will have 24 live racing from around the world which we can punt on of course you have to an internet account look forward to going weeks with out sleep lol.

[hcap]

Your right, most win % are low, but you have to look at ROI.
My TSN files track specific at AQU. From 11/4/2005 to
1/18 2007

Sire ADONIS
81 starts
16.0% win
113.6% Roi

Sire-Dam combo ADONIS-FINELY DECORATED

25.0% win
360.3% Roi


Sire-Breeder combo TOUCH GOLD-ADENA SPRINGS

20 starts
47.4% win
42.4% Roi

[jk3521]

Speaking of "worst software" , what happened to our old friends at RPM? I noticed that their website has closed down. Are they still in business?Anybody still getting their mailings?

[Lefty]

Got a mailing last week or so from RPM. Thorocap software.

[raybo]

Jim the problem with trying to pick a paceline is two or three fold. You need to know what the trainer was up to in a given paceline. That's why we don't have you pick a paceline in Propace. If one studies the book, then puts the software to work as a tool, and uses the Vodds line; you learn not to depend too much on a given pace line but look at what the software gives you and use that tool with the one on top of your shoulders. The two in combo can be very good :p

Jerry

Many times there isn't a pace line listed that is representative of ones opinion of the horse's capabilities or form.

[Dave Schwartz]

LOL - I am always thrilled to see that the gap between TrackMaster and HSH is being widened.


Just so anyone who might be interested knows:

HSH will be going up $100 in price on February 1st.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[PriceAnProbability]

gotta laugh when you see schwartzie squealing like a stuck pig, here's a software that all these millionaires use but it was on sale for $59 lastr year.

wouldn't it make more sense for the big users to keep it off the market?

Of course, just as it would make sense that if even a dozen players had a profitable method/program, that the value would be long gone from the pools as they accumulated money. Even one player here has written about how his profitable angles get price-killed when he alone tries to bet them.

Then of course one has to ask why anyone winning a ton of money on their bets would need to sell the method, or at the very least, wouldn't give out a consistent stream of profitable free picks that don't give away the method, but which gives the customer base enough money to purchase it.

[raybo]

Of course, just as it would make sense that if even a dozen players had a profitable method/program, that the value would be long gone from the pools as they accumulated money. Even one player here has written about how his profitable angles get price-killed when he alone tries to bet them.

Then of course one has to ask why anyone winning a ton of money on their bets would need to sell the method, or at the very least, wouldn't give out a consistent stream of profitable free picks that don't give away the method, but which gives the customer base enough money to purchase it.

Not taking sides with the sellers of handicapping software, but publishing a list of selections for a few days really wouldn't do the software justice. Nobody's software is infallible, not even whatever you use, in the shortterm. Everyone has ups and downs, that's racing. The bottom line, over time, IMO, is how does the software or method do regarding ROI. And, of course what is the learning curve?

[raybo]

Polls of this type, IMO, serve very little purpose, as everyone seems to be biased towards whatever they are using.

[Dave Schwartz]

Then of course one has to ask why anyone winning a ton of money on their bets would need to sell the method, or at the very least, wouldn't give out a consistent stream of profitable free picks that don't give away the method, but which gives the customer base enough money to purchase it.

Or maybe a particular piece of software gets different picks for different users because they use different approaches.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[PlanB]

I feel that ploy excuse is over-used. Deliver the goods does not imply an outline for success; deliver the winning ticket. Lately I'm in more agreement with Formula.

[Dave Schwartz]

I feel that ploy excuse is over-used.

What do you mean by that?

[PlanB]

What do you mean by that?

The handicapping game still rocks for me; I just love the whole crazy thing. But Formula is right in thinking 2 ways: (1) It's the TAKE; (2) Other Factors. Yes, how you bet is important, of course, and like a coupon shopper, you can save a lot being frugal & thoughtful; but ahhhh, that seems so usefully boring. What about the systems' views?

[Dave Schwartz]

I look forward to changing your outlook when I get the Basics of Winning video and manuscript going. It really will make the game more fun (as well as potentially profitable).

April.


Dave

[PlanB]

If my job doesn't kill me by then, I'll be 1st in line to purchase both.

[banacek]

I look forward to changing your outlook when I get the Basics of Winning video and manuscript going. It really will make the game more fun (as well as potentially profitable).

April.


I'm looking forward to this too. But it keeps getting shifted further and further into the future. Was November, then seminar in January, then seminar in February, manuscript and video in March, now April.

Hey, no sweat, I know how things can pile up.

I take January and February off to recharge my handicapping batteries - do research, read books and regain focus. (In reality it is because my handicapping has always sucked in those months!). So, I'm a sponge looking for handicapping wisdom. I enjoyed Match Up II, but I need more. Don't delay any more or I'll be signing up for the Sprint and Cathy Rogers webinars!:lol:

Really, I was just hoping for the manuscript sooner - hey do they have beta-testers for manuscripts?

[Dave Schwartz]

Banacek,

Tell me about it!

Such is the life of a one-man show. I have got to add an assistant this year! I hired one last year and it just did not work out.



Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[Buckeye]

They're ALL bad or good depending upon you.

So why you need them?

Obviously, you don't.

Why would a software person want to "help you"

Think about it.

Next question, even if they don't want to help you, can they?

Again, it's totally doubtful but that about answers the question.

Why would they want to help you make money? I'm waiting . . .

[Buckeye]

Pay me $100 and I'll make you 2000.

Ok, why?

Help me with this people.

These guys like you so that could be the reason. :cool:

[Buckeye]

Not really, they want your money and really don't want to help you because number one, they don't know or like you and number two, why are they even approaching you in the first place?

Clowns clowns clowns. Do you seriously beleive they are trying to help you make money? Wow!

I think these clowns are trying to make themselves money. Call me stupid if you dare! They don't have a clue and they are only inferor to you.

Not only that, they are looking to make a buck out of a failed system of screw the player and we will screw them more.

Get a grip and realize that this game is not playable.

[Tom]

Britney has something like 90 days of paid rehab not being used......you should call her.

[highnote]

It's a poor craftsman who blames his tools.

[Richard]

Ditto,sweteyjohn.
I've been using AIOv6 all last year in total manual mode(maintaining track profiles,manually entering PP's,betting records)and made an overall ROI of $1.24.
This program,as I'm sure is also the case with several if not all of the other programs listed,works.All to often it's just the user(such as myself) that needs constant improvement.

[banacek]

Ditto,sweteyjohn.
I've been using AIOv6 all last year in total manual mode(maintaining track profiles,manually entering PP's,betting records)and made an overall ROI of $1.24.
This program,as I'm sure is also the case with several if not all of the other programs listed,works.All to often it's just the user(such as myself) that needs constant improvement.

Just curious Richard, how long does it take to enter a race manually with All-in-One. And do you just do a handful of tracks or are you typing at 200wpm?:)

Thanks

[Richard]

To the first part of your question,it depends on how big the field is.I use DRF PP's(but also have used BRIS/TSN PP's).To the second part of your question,I currently maintain profiles for four tracks(AQU,GP,BM,SA).I also update the track pars every year.

[raybo]

Worst software? After looking at the poll one more time, it is a little puzzling that the free software isn't at the top of the worst list. Surely more people have tried it, because it's free. If that is the case and, according to what most here are saying, they are so bad, there should be many more people putting the free software in the bad column. Data costs may have something to do with the results of the poll, but the poll was for software, not data costs.

I use Bris data so I have tried all the free software Bris offers. The software results can be interpretted and used many different ways, so the end result, regarding good or bad, must be put upon the shoulders of the user, not the software.

Personally, I just want track data, that's why I got into computer capping in the first place, too many mistakes using pen and paper. Once I started using a computer, because it doesn't make mistakes, I didn't like having to manually enter the data into a spreadsheet, actually my first attempts weren't spreadsheet based but "Basic" programming apps. Once I found Excel and Infotran, I was a happy camper.

Now, if I can just get this database project working ---------- :(

[Lefty]

banacek, bk in "old" days when i entered data manually, i remember it took me about 10 min a race to enter data, but this was after i pared the field down to 5-6 horses.

[banacek]

banacek, bk in "old" days when i entered data manually, i remember it took me about 10 min a race to enter data, but this was after i pared the field down to 5-6 horses.

Thanks. I was thinking of manually putting in the old data in for a couple of tracks - about 100 cards. Might take a bit long!

[DanG]

Britney has something like 90 days of paid rehab not being used......you should call her.

:lol::lol::lol:

[karlskorner]

The worst software I have ever seen is my own, which I put together 25 years ago. It just can't pick the "winner " in EVERY RACE.

[cj]

The worst software I have ever seen is my own, which I put together 25 years ago. It just can't pick the "winner " in EVERY RACE.


Karl's soft wear:

http://www.geocities.com/redrobot31/depends.jpg