Tom Console's URTI software

[MartyZee]

Anyone out there use Tom Console's Ultimate Race Track Investment software? If so, I would appreciate any feedback as to how good or how bad this software is? Thanks for your time.

[midnight]

I take it that you haven't fared well with Zambuto's program (which one of your seven posts dealt with) or Equisim (which two of your seven posts dealt with).

I haven't used Console's URTI, but like any other software, there will be people who win with it and people who lose with it. What I DID do was put two of Mr. Console's highly touted methods through a multi-year database. The results are documented in this thread:

Test of Console's Q and FG methods (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4637)

The results were very pedestrian.

If I were you, I'd stick with Equisim or possibly move to HTR. Each has several people who swear by it. Another possibility is Dave Schwarz's HSH, which also has a lot of satisfied uers.

[MartyZee]

Quite to the contrary I've done pretty well with both Zambuto's program and Equism; it's just that I'm always looking for other avenues to explore; Thanks for your imput

[timtam]

Very interesting Midnight,

I used to use FG from the gate and always figured I was doing something wrong when I didn't get the same results he did. I have lots of RPM stuff and most of it leaves me scratching my head when I seem to fail where they suceeded. I also have dealt with Clint Tracy and his wife Karen and they are super fine people.I pointed out a few errors in some of their systems and they were very fair with refunds. It upsets me to no end when the examples in a system don't even follow the systems rules on the previous page. But I guess thats hoss racing. I enjoyed that thread on FG but I do confess in some sprints I still take a look at the FG high scorer. Anyway thanks again !!!

[andicap]

I liked TomC's answer.

He didn't address the results of the DB survey. He attacked Midnight's charactor and insisted that HE, Tom Console was winning with it, so it must be HIS -- Midnight's --- fault that he couldn't get it to work.

That's the refrain of every nefarious software provider. If it doesn't work, it's YOUR fault. While that technically is true, it's unfair to blame the user when you market the product as a sure winner a la Cynthia Publishing. Its only AFTER you buy the software that the seller says, "Well there are no black boxes. You have to spend time with it and learn how to use it and pick the right pacelines."

Of course, anyone who believes those claims in RPM probably gets what they deserve.

As W.C. Fields said, "You Can't Cheat an Honest Man." And
"Never Give a Sucker an Even Break."

[MitchS]

Ohhh.. I was not going to admit it, but I have URTI. I made money with it,..its not what you use but really how you use it, if you know racing... Of course I am on to bigger and better things as of late soooo.. URTI is just one of those programs as many I have that might to ready for that big bond fire, better yet maybe I can make fireworks out of them for New Years..what ya' think.lol

Actually the FG rating was the strongest in the program but you needed to look at other factors in conjuction and take into account the kind of race and track. I still use and look at a modified FG rating in my daily computations and at certain races and tracks you can score some nice price..

Mitch

[andicap]

Right.

My point wasn't that you couldn't make money witih URTI or any software, but that the system sellers market them with blatant dishonesty and hype that they are basically lying.

[MitchS]

Andicap,

Your absolutely right and RPM in one of the worst in that department...

Mitch

[Tom]

Is there a post missing here?

[MitchS]

Tom... Did you steal my banana, I need it for my cerial in the morn'in..Geezzz..

... Merry Christmas Everyone...

Mitch

[Richard]

Andicap,
I was under the impression that it was P.T. Barnum who first uttered"Never give a sucker an even Break."

[takeout]

I think Barnum said there's a sucker born every minute.

[Dave Schwartz]

Richard,

I believe that was from a 1950's movie, "The Flim-Flam Man" with George C. Scott. (I could be wrong.)


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[timtam]

WC Fields said," Never give a sucker an even break or smarten up a chump"

[mikeb]

Mitch
I too own a copy,and i agree with you on the fg figure,space fig. not bad either.
But i was hoping for the modeling part to be a little more automatic.
It's ok if you have the time to tinker with all the possibilties,but in my case i don't. What size model do you use,30 days seems to be ok.
I don't know if you had any of his earlier programs, but his "winergy" is the same as "kspeed" just a new name.Also if you ever used "procaps" you probably already know that "tf" is the same as "snap 1", and "pr" is exactly the same as "snap 4".Do you have any special correlations you use?

thanks
md.

[hurrikane]

I always thought it was Barnum too.

here's one theory...if you can believe everything you read.

http://www.historybuff.com/library/refbarnum.html

[takeout]

VERY interesting! Thanks. I stand corrected.

[mikeb]

Ohhh.. I was not going to admit it, but I have URTI. I made money with it,..its not what you use but really how you use it, if you know racing... Of course I am on to bigger and better things as of late soooo.. URTI is just one of those programs as many I have that might to ready for that big bond fire, better yet maybe I can make fireworks out of them for New Years..what ya' think.lol

Actually the FG rating was the strongest in the program but you needed to look at other factors in conjuction and take into account the kind of race and track. I still use and look at a modified FG rating in my daily computations and at certain races and tracks you can score some nice price..

Mitch

Mitch, were there any special correlations that you used
with fg, or any others?
just started using it,and it seems like it has possiblities.

thanks
m.d.

[HEY DUDE]

I have been playing around with URTI for over a year now. I have come to the conclusion that no matter what program you have you still have to handicap the race. I have found that URTI works well when using the model screen and checking the correlations. In my opinion thats were the money is. The only problem I have with the correlation is you cant check a horse who is top in only one category. It can also be time consuming. The other problem is when you get to the track or OTB and your horse is scratched. Now everything changes in the race. This is not a problem though when betting on the internet. You can go back and rework the race. As far as URTI's technical side, it sucks. It is a very slow database. They claim that it is a 32bit database. Well, I use URTI data in other programs that I have created for myself. When I open the database by itself in a 32bit version of Access I am told that the database was created in an earlier version of Access. (Access is the database used for URTI) What I am working on now is trying to write code and model every possible correlation. The end result I'm looking for is when I print the URTI card for the race I want to see what the correlation percentages are for the horses on the card thus eliminating the need to correlate every horse on the card through the modeling screen. Overall I guess I would have to say that I'm pleased with URTI. It did pay for itself. Just remember, you only get out what you put in. Spend the time in the modeling screen and good luck. :cool:

[headhawg]

Here we go again...... :bang:

[MAD SUCKER]

I've read this board for a long time and I feel that I must step forward and address this issue.

I'm retired, and I like to tinker with horse racing systems and software. So I buy everything that comes out and test it, including just about everything from RPM. That's a lot of money spent, but I can afford it and it's what I like to do.

I bought Tom Console URTI, Snap Capper, Snap Capper Pro, Thoroughbred Investor, True Tenders, Q, K-Speed, K-Speed Pro, and Instapicks. I haven't gotten around to buying Instapicks Ultimate yet. I tested all of those on months of data. None of them do better than the track take out would do. Maybe one of the 20 ratings in one program will show a 2 cent profit but doing another three months will show a 15 cent loss.

In other words, they all suck bananas.

[cj]

TomC obviously just wants his program name out there, good or bad. This is getting ridiculous!

Let's assume for one second that it isn't TomC posting (:lol:), I mean, what idiot can be a "mad sucker" if you've been screwed over 9 times. You might be mad, but you aren't a sucker. You are an idiot.

[andicap]

TomC obviously just wants his program name out there, good or bad. This is getting ridiculous!

Let's assume for one second that it isn't TomC posting (:lol:), I mean, what idiot can be a "mad sucker" if you've been screwed over 9 times. You might be mad, but you aren't a sucker. You are an idiot.
:lol:
:lol:

guerrilla marketing. You gotta love it. I'm writing for a marketing newsletter now (among others). I should do a story on Tom because, no matter what you think about the program you have to admit he's getting his product's name out there.

Hey, TomC, if you're interested, e-mail me. Promise I wont write anything subjective about the program in the story. It's about marketing, not handicapping. The audience is chief marketers.

Hell, I'd write a story about the Dot System if it came out again -- what a marketing job THAT was.