View Full Version : New Software Poll!
Speed Figure
05-02-2005, 05:55 PM
Let's see who's on top!
No formulator? Is that Software or a PP reader?
shanta
05-02-2005, 07:13 PM
Let's see who's on top!
Hey Speed.
Maybe you can change The "validator2" vote to say "sartin advanced" or something. Val2 is long ago unavailable and mybe the new vote would let users of val3,speculator get in the mix.
Just a thought.
Richie :)
Secretariat
05-02-2005, 07:22 PM
Where's Power-online in the poll? or some others I use?
I'd add to the poll....None of the above. Even some Sartinites use Speculator now and not Validator.
Speed Figure
05-02-2005, 07:35 PM
I hope PA will change that to POL. I was thinking that guys were still using that program.
andicap
05-02-2005, 09:43 PM
Can't vote on two programs -- makes it a bit misleading
Maxspa
05-02-2005, 09:58 PM
Can we add MaxCapper to the choices in the Poll?
Maxspa
Lefty
05-02-2005, 11:15 PM
Also be nice to add the Master Magician to the poll.
Light
05-02-2005, 11:34 PM
Would be interesting to have the various software post their selections for the same card,like K Derby day,not as a contest,but just to see how one does comparitively with the others.Realize,selections may vary with user,and one day is certainly not enough of a test for a software program,but it would be an interesting sample to see these various software in action on a very difficult card.
yep, need to add the Master Magician aka TMM
Thanks, Cato
bobhilo
05-03-2005, 12:33 AM
Light iz rite!!
let every software seller handicap derby WEEK...maybee that will help
Speed Figure
05-03-2005, 01:33 AM
The bad thing is you can only put 10. There are so many programs and only 10 spots.
Lefty
05-03-2005, 02:13 AM
speed, do 2 polls with a diff 10 ea spot.
Dan Montilion
05-03-2005, 02:46 AM
Formulator 4, a binder, a pencil and of course an eraser.
Dan Montilion
Buddha
05-04-2005, 02:00 AM
Light, you hit the nail on the coffin. Even if users the same program post their picks, they most likely wont like all the same horses. there may be quite a few that are similar, but not all would be the same. I will be posting derby day selections from my analysis of CJs prog.
Richard
05-06-2005, 01:42 PM
I would also recommend adding the Ray Taulbot Pace Calculator program to the mix.
What I find amazing is that in its short existence, CJ's program is the most widely used on this board.
ZAFONIC
Speed Figure
05-08-2005, 12:29 PM
What I find amazing is that in its short existence, CJ's program is the most widely used on this board.
ZAFONICHis program is not a true handicapping program. It's not handicapping software like the other program's on the list. It's more of a pp reader than a handicapping program.
Sorry to disagree but its more than a PP reader. The program has been in development for a few years and the code is very complex. It does not just simply read PP's. Are you expecting software to handicap the race for you (black box) no thinking, give picks ???
ZAFONIC
EQUIPACE
05-08-2005, 05:03 PM
Sorry to disagree but its more than a PP reader. The program has been in development for a few years and the code is very complex. It does not just simply read PP's. Are you expecting software to handicap the race for you (black box) no thinking, give picks ???
ZAFONIC
Z,
I don't know much about CJ's program or some of the others on the list except maybe Pizzola's program, Equisim, and a bit about what I've read here on the board. I think you'd agree with me as well.... But, I have been collecting software to handicap horses since the early 80's. About 40 or so... With almost half that use the Bris file. I just dont have the time or patience to manually input information anymore. I am a self admitted software junkie... At one point, I tried making a concensus from what I thought was the best of these programs, and not a one is any sort of black box, and worse, combined the best I can figure is they all lean towards the same horses at some point or another.
From experience, what I can contribute is that more times than not, these programs are only tools to look at contenders... At least for me... Not looking at the racing form and blindly playing a programs figure horses is like playing a guitar with only 3 strings. After viewing the racing form, and seeing a visual picture, it has pulled me off figure horses that stand out many times.
Since alot of programs come up with their own proprietary ratings & figs... It bothers me, that I would place that much confidence in a horse who owns the highest or lowest (Magic Power Fig) without knowing how it was calculated or arrived at. I would rather use my own personal ratings and figures based on my style of playing... In other words, my confidence level goes up based on my reasoning and not just another synthetic number.
(Believe me...) I have been trying to create magic figures for years... And I still do... Have I been successful? (Yes) Many times... and (No) More Times. When I least expect it... Magic figure (A) that has been working for weeks, miraculously stops working.... So Magic figures (B) & (C) from several weeks ago seem to work. Or they dont show much profit either... So I take a break, and let the world keep on turning for awhile then come back to it.
Recently Jeff P let me download his JCapper program and even though he has help information that contain some of the calculations, his CPACE fig is proprietary... No different than CJ's Figures. Why should any one who finds a magic number(s) fig that works share this calculation with everyone he is wagering against.
I will say that I have become more successful as a player by learning all I can about pace. It has not made me rich, but, surely has pulled me into the black many times. The two programs I would love to try are HSH & HTR... I just cant justify the monthly downloads since I dont want to cloud my thinking with more races than I can handle. On the other hand, Outside of the this years derby, It seems that route races (Dirt or Grass) are my strong points lately. And if I was to have unlimited downloads and look at these races only, I might do very well with a couple of my (Magic Numbers).
If I am going to choose a program from the list, It would be Equisim... The latest version allows me to create my figures based on my own logic and not strictly anothers point of view. I also like to combine it with my old reliable spreadsheets that pull info from the Bris .DRF
John
~żo
Recently Jeff P let me download his JCapper program and even though he has help information that contain some of the calculations, his CPACE fig is proprietary... No different than CJ's Figures. Why should any one who finds a magic number(s) fig that works share this calculation with everyone he is wagering against.
First, my numbers aren't really proprietary. Anyone willing to search through enough PA posts will find all the ingredients. I even wrote the whole thing out once, though that was in the very early stages and my methods have changed somewhat now.
As to why, well, that is easy. There is a lot more to this game than numbers. As I've said before, I'll put mine up against anyone...Beyer, BRIS, Thorograph, Handicapping Magic, etc...but they are still just numbers. No number is going to beat this game by itself.
I was just stating that it was not fair to call it a PP reader, thats all. I use Equisim also. I am having a lot of success lately using them both together. I know a little more than most here how the numbers are made. In fact CJ was kind enough to send me the code when the program was in its infancy. CJ has always shared many things with fellow board members and horse players. His numbers are very good and for that reason many, many horseplayers are jumping aboard.
ZAFONIC
Side note, and I'm totally serious...
England is soon to implement the really accurate timing devices. I'm learning all I can about racing here...the tracks, major and minor, the configurations of the ovals, etc. This could be a gold mine, at least temporarily. The people betting these races will have no idea how to use internal fractions. I know the races are on turf, but I use internal closing fractions quite well there, just not the early ones as often as dirt.
This could be better than a two week vacation to Birmingham Race Course when it first opened, and there was NO simulcasting!
Speed Figure
05-08-2005, 06:29 PM
I was just stating that it was not fair to call it a PP reader, thats all. I use Equisim also. I am having a lot of success lately using them both together. I know a little more than most here how the numbers are made. In fact CJ was kind enough to send me the code when the program was in its infancy. CJ has always shared many things with fellow board members and horse players. His numbers are very good and for that reason many, many horseplayers are jumping aboard.
ZAFONICI'm not trying to down his program. I think CJ does a great job. I'm only saying that I didn't put it in the same class as a true handicapping program, one like HSH or HTR or JCAPPER. That's all i'm saying.
What I find amazing is that in its
ZAFONIC
What I find interesting about this thread is that only 103 people have voted despite a viewing audience of over 2000.
Unless the Vendors are checking the "score" all day everyday....there are many people interested in who's using what.
I'm not trying to down his program. I think CJ does a great job. I'm only saying that I didn't put it in the same class as a true handicapping program, one like HSH or HTR or JCAPPER. That's all i'm saying.
Thats cool, I understand your point. HSH & HTR are very sophisticated tools. I just made my initial remark because I was suprised something so new would be ahead of other programs.
ZAFONIC
BillW
05-08-2005, 07:10 PM
What I find interesting about this thread is that only 103 people have voted despite a viewing audience of over 2000.
Unless the Vendors are checking the "score" all day everyday....there are many people interested in who's using what.
Probably a combination of the average horseplayer waaaay over estimating the value of numbers and the search for that magical black box.
PaceAdvantage
05-08-2005, 07:56 PM
What I find interesting about this thread is that only 103 people have voted despite a viewing audience of over 2000.
A thread could have been viewed by the same person 10 times.....
Or 103 x 20....LOL
EQUIPACE
05-08-2005, 08:05 PM
I was just stating that it was not fair to call it a PP reader, thats all. I use Equisim also. I am having a lot of success lately using them both together. I know a little more than most here how the numbers are made. In fact CJ was kind enough to send me the code when the program was in its infancy. CJ has always shared many things with fellow board members and horse players. His numbers are very good and for that reason many, many horseplayers are jumping aboard.
ZAFONIC
Z,
I hope you dont think I was taking a stab at you...
Last thing on my mind..,
I have read many of your posts here and at ES, which I know you use regularly... I have much respect for your ideas...By the way I saw you are now exporting the FV in Equisim to Excel... Pretty Cool Hugh?
CJ's Quote--
"First, my numbers aren't really proprietary. Anyone willing to search through enough PA posts will find all the ingredients. I even wrote the whole thing out once, though that was in the very early stages and my methods have changed somewhat now.
As to why, well, that is easy. There is a lot more to this game than numbers. As I've said before, I'll put mine up against anyone...Beyer, BRIS, Thorograph, Handicapping Magic, etc...but they are still just numbers. No number is going to beat this game by itself."
CJ,
First, Thanks for the response... I have been to your site probably a dozen times... And actually compared your free plays with results... Though I dont own your program, It's clear to me that your figs do work... And that is the bottom line. I guess I need to do a search here and go through old posts to see how they are calculated... Since you stated that your methods have changed somewhat, It would probably do me no good... And Im not going to be accused of looking for a freebie... I really enjoy your posts here, and I'm not trying to disrespect you either... Your Performance Figure appears quite accurate, as well as your pace figs... I just hate having to run several applications along with the printed DRF to pick my plays. As I said I like Equisim, and it's possibilites. So adding your Performance figs and pace ratings would save some serious time... So go ahead and email Zafonic & I the latest formulas & calcs... We'll be the first with them at ES... Mums the word ok? <Smile>
Richards Quote-
"I would also recommend adding the Ray Taulbot Pace Calculator program to the mix."
Richard,
I completely agree... Long before I got the software version, I had the the old slide ruler... (BTW My dog ate it)... You had to pick the pacelines yourself to get more accurate... Still my feelings with the program. And I have had box car payoffs with it. More losers than winners when playing all races, unless you pick your spots... But, thats normal for any program...
If anyone has the slide ruler for sale out there... Please post or email me...
I would be interested in creating the lookup tables in Excel...
John
~żo
EQUIPACE
05-08-2005, 08:10 PM
A thread could have been viewed by the same person 10 times.....
Or 103 x 20....LOL
PA,
I am flipping through the posts and posting myself right and left today. Nothing better to do this beautiful day... I CONFESS IT WAS ME, All 2060 times... <Laughing> I did vote though!!!!
John
~żo
Equipace,
I did not think for one second that you were taking a stab. I know we have exchanged ideas both here and on the Equisim board, and I know we both like to use excel ;) A friendly debate is good once in a while ! Makes us think & learn from each other.
Anyway , if we are lucky we will soon be able to import CJ's figs into Equisim :)
That may save me a little time because I am exporting both to excel in a caveman type of way now. If I can get all that info into the Formula View it will save me a step :)
ZAFONIC
Jeff P
05-08-2005, 11:08 PM
John,
First, I really do respect and appreciate the value of using original numbers when it comes to handicapping. There's nothing else quite like it and nothing beats having success with an original approach. And like you say, having an understanding of what goes into a number can be a confidence booster.
You wrote:
Recently Jeff P let me download his JCapper program and even though he has help information that contain some of the calculations, his CPACE fig is proprietary... No different than CJ's Figures. Why should any one who finds a magic number(s) fig that works share this calculation with everyone he is wagering against.
The reason I decided to keep CPace proprietary is that in the right circumstances, it can be deadly. Once upon a time back in the mid 90's before the betting public became hip to handicapping with pace figures, CPace was profitable as a stand alone factor at the tracks that I was playing. It still is at certain distances and surfaces at certain tracks.
It's not as though I'm expecting anyone to take CPace (or any other factor in JCapper) on blind faith. My program is far more than a custom past performance report generator. It will build a database using your own data files and let you perform your own research. You're given the ability to discover how to best make Cpace (and lots of other factors) work for you. You're also given the tools to set up models based on your own research. My program will load data from from multiple past performance files, download scratches and races taken off the turf right off the web, perform number crunching, and will point out any horses that qualify as plays according to your own models.
Like I said before, I really do believe in the value of taking an original approach. Good luck and continued success to you with yours.
-jp
Vegas711
05-30-2005, 02:09 AM
Someone must have a data base where they can do a mock run using all the programs in a black box method which would show which program outperforms the others.
shanta
05-30-2005, 11:13 AM
Someone must have a data base where they can do a mock run using all the programs in a black box method which would show which program outperforms the others.
Hi Mike,
If you were to run the programs against all the races they would ALL lose money.
I thnk it is more important to find a "comfort level" as far as using a program that fits our individual styles of play. Do we like pace, database, trainers, modeling etc.
Which program is gonna enable us to make good decisions come time to wager is big. That would probably only come from the program that we feel most comfortable with.
Regards,
Richie :)
JackS
05-31-2005, 03:10 PM
MY take on this is to run a program that you have some confidence with.
Run as many races as you can using your program
Eliminate all races with horses at 1-1 or below(you have to hit too many of these to be profitable).
Eliminate any longshot win with a payoff over $40( two or three of these in a run of 100 races can skew an unfavorable outcome to positive when in fact it may only be a abboration).
Several runs with selections of 6/5 to 19-1 should give you an idea of the value of the program your using.
If positive, no adjustments are needed.
If slightly negative, you could try one or two adjustments.
If highly negative, I think I'd try another program.
Achilles
06-01-2005, 09:16 PM
The current survey results show that fully one fifth of those responding use their own software. That tells me that the world of serious handicapping has really changed from when I started out in the '70's; it also speaks to the quality of many of the posters here at PA (excluding off-topic). There seem to be as many folks buying software as used to buy systems; but a significant portion of the posters and lurkers here are capable of creating their own. To me, that's really impressive :ThmbUp: , and creating your own handicapping software is tons harder than devising a some simplistic system.
Achilles
-----Being unable to assume an initial premise with any tolerable degree of accuracy, I am loathe to assert a conclusion, fearful lest I should err.
ryesteve
06-03-2005, 11:53 AM
Interesting poll... but I'm also curious to know *why* people have gravitated to the software they use. In other words, is it really the quality of the software? Is it because some people prefer software with no up-front costs? Is it because some people don't want to get locked into a data subscription? Is it because some people don't want software that forces them to load up data every day in order to build up a database? Is it because some people are helping someone beta-test new software? While it's good to know how many people are using these various software packages, for me, the real question is what is driving that decision.
Lefty
06-03-2005, 12:00 PM
steve, great idea. How about starting a thread with that very question. What do you use and why?
ratpack
06-03-2005, 08:29 PM
Good question, I know that I why I stopped using some of the database programs because I was scared of both backfitting and making mistakes some were so easy to make a mistake when I was building the database that I was never confident in my data.
Slohand
06-25-2005, 04:40 PM
Maxspa, do you use MAXCAPPER? If so, what kind of results are you getting?
I've been reading about it.
BIG49010
11-12-2005, 12:15 AM
It would be nice to know how many people own more than 1 of the programs listed?
Lefty
11-12-2005, 12:49 AM
I do. Have used or owned 6 of em. But right now, using my own.
I use both CJ's & Equisim. Both are excellent.
ZAFONIC
46zilzal
11-12-2005, 02:01 AM
several of the commonly used ones are there
Dan Montilion
11-12-2005, 02:54 AM
Never owned one of them.
Dan Montilion
JustRalph
11-13-2005, 12:36 AM
Equisim Here. I have used some others.......but always come back to ES.
Trysharder
11-13-2005, 12:25 PM
Despite the skeptics there is a true black box. I have been using it for quite some time. What so many handicappers don't seem to realize is that most programs are very track selective. I have Horse$ense, Master Consensus and many others. There are very few I haven't tried. Currently I have been checking Computrack. Not impressed. The one I currently use for my betting is Power-online V6. By selective betting (strictly with the computer making the selections) my win percent is 49.63% with an ROI of $1.76 per dollar bet. I get an average of 3 bets per day. This is over a data base of 900+ races at one track. I doubt if it wil work at other tracks but I am sure I could find a winning combination at almost any track. The power in POL exist in the way you can manipulate the data. For instance: Suppose you wonder how you would do if you only bet trainers with a 20% win and only their runners when they were 5/1 or more. Then you add in 10 days since raced stipulation. You could have the answer from your entire data base in seconds. You would know the number of bets, number of winners, amount bet and won, percentage won and the ROI per dollar. I have no connection with any system except to buy them and I personally have only found one which has lived up to its claims and that is POL.
If you are being selective, it isn't a black box.
If I had the same program, would I get the same results as you?
Trysharder
11-13-2005, 12:43 PM
If you used the same track I am using and looked for the same indication you would be betting the same horse. When I say selecting, I mean I only bet when the runner selected by the computer shows a certain value which is part of the rating.
But I would not know that just using the program out of the box. I would need some supplemental information - hence, it is not a black box.
Trysharder
11-13-2005, 01:09 PM
That depends on your definition of "Black Box". To me, a black box is a program I can set up with the instructions provided and it will give me then information I want. Yes, you do have to build a data base. Yes, you do have to run Queries to determine what works at the track or tracks you want to use. Dozens of programs claim to do this but I have yet to find one lives up to its claims. POL allows you to develop a winning system with no knowledge of handicapping or programming. POL was including a 35000 race data base to get you started. I don't know if it is still part of their offer. I have it but never used it as I wanted to make my own. You can use the TSN 50 cent files so it is cheap to do so.
skate
11-13-2005, 01:59 PM
trysharder;
can you give a little more info on pol.
cost, where and how long in use?
and ya, when you used the word "suppose", i've gotta think , that i would be subject to "putting in my own datta adjustments".
sounds good to me.
thanks.
Trysharder
11-13-2005, 02:45 PM
Here is the site: http://www.poweronlinesoftware.com/ You can download the manual free and if you decide to buy there is a 30 day money back guarantee. I have been using th software for several years but with minor success until V6. Lot of changes from V5 and they really made a difference. It is a bit difficult to explain when I talk about data adjustments. You download the data ( I use TSN 50 cent files) and the computer checks it with numerous systems and makes a consensus. You can check each individual system , the consensus, longshots, exotics, etc.. You could bring up an individual system, and then ask the computer "what happens if I only bet this system when the jockey had a 20% win ratio ?" or "what heppens if I only bet when system A and system F pick a runner and he has a morning line of 5/1 but is going off at 3/1 ?". There are numerous combinations and you look for what wins at your track. I found a good one quite awhile ago. You can also use several methods of calculation which are explained in the manual.Again, all are automatic once they are selected. You are welcome to email me at cwagley@sbcglobal.net if I haven't answered your questions here.
46zilzal
11-13-2005, 03:08 PM
I challenge people all the time with a simple test: On a card that has been completed, and in races with over 8 runners, I give them the top five finishers of each race in ALPHABETICAL order and ask them to make theoretical bets KNOWING the odds on those...MOST lose money at the end of the experiment.
This was MY problem for a long time: got lots of winners and broke even. Went back and reviewed my betting patterns and corrected it.
Trysharder
11-13-2005, 03:29 PM
It depends on your temperament. I was betting longshots for awhile . Had an ROI of over $2 per dollar bet but 20 losers or more in row was not unusual. I was always worried the next winner might never happen. Now I bet regardless of the odds, usually get low prices, under 6/1, but show a profit most days and have never had a losing week. Make less money but I enjoy it as I never could with longshots. As for your test, I would probably fail. Give me a data base for the track and I could probably show a nice profit. I am convinced there is no system, method or handicapper which can show a profit at all tracks.
Trys...I define black box as out of the box, everyone gets the same horse every race. No user interface requried.
HTR has a K rating - out of the box, it hits 30% long term. And losses money. But beat the take. There are countless methods out there using the K to make money, but by itself, K can't beat the races.
Equisim used ( I assume it still does) have an out of the box simulation - everyone gets the same horses out of the box. I used to have ways to use that info, but it was private stuff-like batteries, not included! :D
But I see what you are talking about. Sounds like you have found a good thing.:ThmbUp:
Trysharder
11-13-2005, 08:21 PM
Think I understand what you are saying. POL has a "Black Box " function in which you download the race and hit the key for that function. It will pick the horse with the highest ROI and win percent. Here are three weeks of betting every selection it picked which had a positive ROI:
Week of 10/26 +$93.20
" 11/2 + $20.20
" 11-9 - $29.60
This is without anything but selecting the function. It also shows a nice profit if you bet the exacta when there are 2 selections.
This is my last post on this as I am not trying to sell anyone on anything but simply telling you there are winning systems "right out of the box".
Dave Schwartz
11-13-2005, 11:09 PM
46,
I challenge people all the time with a simple test: On a card that has been completed, and in races with over 8 runners, I give them the top five finishers of each race in ALPHABETICAL order and ask them to make theoretical bets KNOWING the odds on those...MOST lose money at the end of the experiment.
That is the most intelligent thing you have ever posted; A truly great idea.
Thank you.
Regards,
Dave Schwartz
BIG49010
11-14-2005, 11:13 AM
As a homemade program guy, nice to see I am not the only guy out there doing this.
Sometimes you feel like :bang:
rmania
11-15-2005, 10:39 AM
Hey Trysharder do you remember these words:
"At 68 years old I do find it hard to believe any handicapping software could excite me but I sure would like to see." 12/14/02
"I would have to admit it excited me more than any horse program I have ever seen. I even called my wife in to see it. The amazement came from the amount of work and knowledge that went into the programming. If you can program like that I can't picture anything you couldn't do in computer programming." 12/15/02
Trysharder
11-15-2005, 08:14 PM
Don't remember the post as that was at least 3 years ago but it had to be an earlier version of POL. You should see the new V6.
rmania
11-15-2005, 10:06 PM
Don't remember the post as that was at least 3 years ago but it had to be an earlier version of POL.
NOPE!
I'll reply to your e-mail from 3 years ago and maybe it will refresh your memory.
Maxspa
11-15-2005, 10:09 PM
R Mania,
At one point you mentioned that you were working on an Eastern version of your software! Any updates????
Maxspa
Trysharder
11-15-2005, 10:45 PM
Thanks for refreshing my memory. Racemaker was fantastic , as a game, and the programming was remarkable ,but I didn't think it would ever show a profit as a handicapping tool. Hope you worked it out where it picks 100 % winners and have retired on the proceeds.
46zilzal
11-16-2005, 12:46 AM
What I find interesting about this thread is that only 103 people have voted despite a viewing audience of over 2000.
Unless the Vendors are checking the "score" all day everyday....there are many people interested in who's using what.
if the SLOT to put your vote is NOT there , how does one vote??
Jeff P
11-16-2005, 12:59 AM
I think VBulletin allows only one vote per user. If you've already voted it should say so just beneath the results scoreboard.
-jp
.
exactaplayer
11-16-2005, 01:05 PM
I challenge people all the time with a simple test: On a card that has been completed, and in races with over 8 runners, I give them the top five finishers of each race in ALPHABETICAL order and ask them to make theoretical bets KNOWING the odds on those...MOST lose money at the end of the experiment.
This was MY problem for a long time: got lots of winners and broke even. Went back and reviewed my betting patterns and corrected it.
As a player who does no handicapping, i just play off the tote action. This statement fascinates me. Could I make dutch bets in your test ? Also do I have to play all races ? And in your analysis did you find you were playing too much chalk or to many longshots ? Probably too much chalk based on "got lots of winners and broke even."
midnight
11-29-2005, 03:29 PM
The view count is simply the number of visits to the thread. One person could, over time, make several visits to a thread, each of which would count as a view. The forum software may have some kind of mechanism in place that doesn't allow repeated viewing by one person to drive up the view count in a short time, but I doubt that would hold over multiple sessions.
I just came in and out of this thread 10 times in a row - never changed the number of views. Maybe I am on PA's Ignore list! :eek:
PaceAdvantage
12-13-2005, 05:51 PM
The views don't update in real time. I believe they update once every couple of minutes....saves a tad on server overhead....
toetoe
01-10-2006, 08:41 PM
Any way to give a test or three on the board here?
traynor
03-29-2006, 02:13 PM
exactaplayer wrote: <As a player who does no handicapping, i just play off the tote action. This statement fascinates me. Could I make dutch bets in your test ? Also do I have to play all races ? And in your analysis did you find you were playing too much chalk or to many longshots ? Probably too much chalk based on "got lots of winners and broke even.">
I think a LOT of people of this forum might be able to benefit from an explanation of your approach. The concept of dutching exactas is complex in application, and requires a great deal of very fast decision making. It is also one of the easiest ways to gain a competitive advantage, if someone is willing to take the time and effort necessary to master it.
Good Luck
vBulletin® v3.8.9, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.