Software Reviews !!!!

[joeyspicks]

Ha! Just what you guys need......software reviews from a novice!:lol:

But I thought I would just put a few observations on the software I have checked out. First it must be admitted I didnt really give any of this software a fair and realistic chance. I was simply looking for a piece of software for "me"...if it existed. I have been using pen/paper and keeping records for a long time....I didnt want to lose anything in the transition. I must again THANK everyone on this board who contibuted to software conversations over the years. You really helped me out....the time you took to put your thoughts on this board really opened my eyes. My previous experience using software was

1. Sharper handicapper 2000 (which I freeking HATED)....no known reason for its picks....and the bottom choice seemed to win as much as the top!?

2. Speed Handicapper v4.5 Charles Carroll Which despite a lot of things I didnt like....really is a pretty good program.

I had no idea the advances made untill I really studied the comments on this board and tried to decide which direction to pursue.

I checked out a lot of software over the past six months or so and the following are my favorites:

1) HTR
Terrific software and easy to use (thankyou). I learned a lot just using this and reading Ken Massas articles. He's a great guy (I dont know him...just from his answers to my many questions). Anyone would benefit from the information on his site and from using this great program.

2) EquiSim
I liked a lot about his program. The way you can see the racing form and choose pacelines. The simultion is amazingly accurate for some races (non maiden) if you are good at picking pacelines. I have the distinct feeling I didnt come close to tapping this programs potential.....not even close!

3.) JCapper
A program I should not have liked ! (In fact after downloading and using for about an hour I deleted from my system:eek: ). Because of the positive comments on this board I went back and tried again. I should not have liked this program because.......no paceline control at all (that I could find). Also I wanted to use HDW data. But after using it for awhile I noticed that very often it pointed out high odds horses that ran very well even when they didnt win. More than a few times it put me onto a horse I most likely would have passed by. I LOVED the automatic scratch feature and IMHO ALL programs would benefit from having this. A really good program that Im SURE is much better in the hands of someone with more experience programing UDM's.

4.) SynergismVI
I didnt really check this out....I downloaded it but got busy with HTR and I didnt want to pay for two more months in advance. I REALLY LIKED the "feel" of the program (with the race dowloads that came with it). I may go back to this some time in the future.

5.) my choice: NetCapper
Lots of reasons but the primary ones:

a) Uses technical analysis to track a series of "spot plays" Damn I was thrilled to find this software. I have been using bollinger bands and moving averges to track my plays for years using my commodity software. This software keeps track of the plays and plots the two week moving avg alone with the take out etc.

b) Gordon Pines
Another guy that I would recomend to anyone: read his stuff! His site has lots of good articles etc.

c) a money management feature to track your bets

I would have never heard of this software if it wasnt for this board....AGAIN...THANKS! (Gordon doesnt exactly shout out the news!)

Biggest regret:
Not being able to try Horse Street software. I love everything David Schwartz has written and I know his software is most likely terrific. I most likely would not have been able to use it to its potential....oh well maybe later.

As you can tell a "black box" was the LAST thing I was looking for. A piece of software is a highly indvidualistic choice. My reasons are probably much differnt from the next guys....but you at least have to know yourself and what and why you are using a tool like software.
If you are just starting down this journey....I still would recommend reading and learning (not just about handicapping)

1. read David Schwartz money management books
2. Barry Meadows money management
3. Steve Fiero's money manaagement (see a trend?:lol: )

You can get a "university " level education reading HTR's site (Ken Massa), Gordon Pines site, and David Schwartz HSH.....all FREE! Its amazing really the information and education you can get for very liitle money (the books above are less $100 for all) and these guys have a ton of valuable information onsite that is free. Add to that all the software you can download and try. Be a student!

Thanks again guys for your contribution:ThmbUp:

Joe

[Jeff P]

Joe, just one thing I need to set straight. About JCapper, you wrote: no paceline control at all (that I could find).
The reality is this:

On the System Settings/System Definitions screen, users have the ability to define the following paramters in selecting a PaceLine:

1. The number of races back to be searched.

2. The number of days back to be searched.

3. Whether or not the selected PaceLine is taken from a race run at a distance similar to the distance of today's race.

4. Whether or not the selected PaceLine is taken from a race run on the same racing surface (dirt or turf) as the racing surface of today's race.

Thanks for taking the time to give my software a try and also taking the time to post a review.

Good Luck,

-jp

.

[joeyspicks]

I'm sorry about that Jeff. It really is a nice piece of software. I know I didnt even scratch the surface of its capabitlites. The scratch bot feature was wonderful. The Jrank and Cpace numbers and the odds line pointed to an amazing amount of non-favorites the either won or ran well. What the heck else would someone want for handicapping software?

I really think some of the features were "over my head" and I didnt give it a fair try. I had been searching for about 6 months and was ready to get on with it.
THANK YOU for the chance to use the software.

Joe

[joeyspicks]

Last note: Before I found NetCapper....which for me just happens to "fit like a glove"...(if I could write software myself......it would be like this)...my plan was to use HTR and JCapper. HTR uses HDW AT $119/month and I would use JCapper on aprox 3 tracks per day (tsn .50 files.....$1.50 a day for about 20 days per month...aprox $30/month). So for $149/month I could have used both and it would have been well worth it. JCapper gives a terrific odds line (prob line) and has unique numbers. In the limited time I used them both I noticed when a horse was in the top 3 for probabilty on the JCap and a $$ on HTR the horse ran very well at good odds.

Joe

[ryesteve]

On the System Settings/System Definitions screen, users have the ability to define the following paramters in selecting a PaceLine:

Have you done any empirical studies to determine how adjusting these parameters affects the win% and ROI distribution of the Paceline ranks? I believe JCapper will go back 45 days to select a paceline? I'd be curious to see what happens to the results if you extend this.

[JustMissed]

3.) JCapper
"More than a few times it put me onto a horse I most likely would have passed by."
Joe

Joe, Can you tell me what JCapper software picked up to put you onto a horse that you would have missed with you pen & paper method?

You did a nice job with your reviews.

Thanks,

Dan

[andicap]

RyeSteve -- yet another Prodigy refugee! Welcome! hope you'll stick around and contribute here...i know PA is probably glad to see you. I sometimes wonder what happened to the rest of the crowd --

I can vouch for Steve -- a sharp handicapper and a good guy.

Keilan, try not to insult him until he's posted at least 5 times. :D

[betchatoo]

Joe, Can you tell me what JCapper software picked up to put you onto a horse that you would have missed with you pen & paper method?

You did a nice job with your reviews.

Thanks,

Dan

JM: As a big fan of JCapper I hope you don't mind my trying to answer your question. JCapper has several numbers that are unique to the product. I have 4 in particular that point me to longshot possibilities.

1. The APN which is a realistic look at the horses probability of winning (A morning line)
2. CPace which is a strong overall pace rating
3. JRating which is an overall look at the horses speed, pace and fitness
4. Optimization points which are a combination of pace and form

If any of these numbers (or better, if 2 or more) are pointing to a longshot winner, you've got a solid play

Hope this helps

Scott

[joeyspicks]

The odds line was pretty amazing. I mean often times in the top 3 would be a horse going off at high odds. Sometimes the pace number would be 1,2, or 3 (Cpace) and often the Jrank. Many times I would be in agreement from my own methods, but I have to admit I would have missed some. I wish I had more time to learn to use the UDM function like it was designed. I used it to point out things I usually look for (like a work in the past 8 days, etc). The print out then highlights these horses. I may still go back to this software later because you can simply download and run the scratch bot and print reports. Its almost like a black box in that regard. IF you learn to interpet the numbers and keep track of your plays, and the results you get it ....it can be very very effective. Because I am so used to looking at a "racing form"....any software that didnt have that option kind of made me uncomfortable at first. I found using the Jcapper WITH HTR was very effective for me. Both programs have a method of telling you if this is a race that most likely will be won by a favorite or not. When a HTR $$ horse was also a JCapper top 3.....they usually ran very well regardless of the odds.

[keilan]

Keilan, try not to insult him until he's posted at least 5 times. :D


He's got two freebies left. ;)

[JustMissed]

Thanks for the reply.


JM

[garyoz]

I've been giving Jcapper a test drive for the past month. IMHO, you get great bang for your buck. I like the output. I think that it is a case of less being more. I have not experimented much yet with the User's Defined Models--which is a key element of the program, but takes a while to get the hang of.

I've "collected" alot of software over the last 12 years. In terms of oddslines, I think that Jcapper and Synergism VI provide the best oddslines. I have not tried HSH--so I'm not including them in this opinion.

I believe that Synergism uses a method that allocates 92% probability of winning to the the top-5 selections using either the Synergism Derived Speed Rating or HDW's projected Cramer Speed Rating, then allocates probability within that framework. Not sure how Jcapper derives its oddslines.

The worst oddsline is in Allways. Really a joke and very amateurish--provides zero value added (once again IMHO).

[joeyspicks]

Yeah I agree with you Gary about Allways. I tried the free software on Brisnet site and IMHO its not worth the price!:lol:

I loved JCappers odd line. I am not sure how its figured....but again a lot of software gives you tons of favorites in the top 3 picks....when they stray away to a longer odds horse he seldom runs well. With JCapper that is not true....and thats what makes it impressive. Also the fact its a unique set of numbers. Whatever Jeff's doing it works pretty darn well. :ThmbUp:

[ryesteve]

RyeSteve -- yet another Prodigy refugee! Welcome! hope you'll stick around and contribute here...i know PA is probably glad to see you. I sometimes wonder what happened to the rest of the crowd --

I can vouch for Steve -- a sharp handicapper and a good guy.

Hi Andy... I'm kinda surprised you guys would still remember me. It's been a while... and my hiatus from the game has made it seem even longer. But it's looking like I've got the bug again... but let's see how sharp I still am :D

[ezpace]

Thx for your JCapper review. T/A is me also.

[ryesteve]

I will also chime in on JCapper.

Previously, I'd used my own software, but the demands of programming/debugging new stuff I wanted it to do, collecting, processing, and maintaining the data on the tracks I was following, and the frustrations of seeing my approach lose its ROI edge, I quit pretty much cold turkey, years ago. With my interest suddenly rekindled, over the past couple of weeks I've been looking to see what software is currently out there. I looked at the demos for a few products. JCapper was the one I felt immediately comfortable with, since its db handicapping approach is very, very similar to what my own had been. Even the interface design is similar to my old software, in the way criteria can be designated, and then used as either queries run against the database of prior results, or used to identify and tag horses in a viewed racecard.

So with this background, I've been in a better position than most to play around a lot with the UDM feature. I can honestly say that it's exactly the sort of thing I was hoping to find. You can easily evaluate the success of various factors and combinations of factors on races in your database. The only problem is that there are many, many variables you can look at, and the program isn't yet flexible enough to run several queries in one shot, or to run crosstab queries on a pair of variables; so experimentation can be slow as you run queries one at a time. But if you're a datapig who likes to wallow around in numbers (like me) you've got to love it.

The only caveat is that it is very easy to design UDMs that are profitable when applied to your database of past races; but this does not necessarily mean that they will be successful going forward, no matter how logical and intuitively correct the criteria might seem. This was my own experience years ago. However, I think part of that had to do with the fact that a lot of my criteria sets were pace-based, and over the years it seemed like the edge you'd get on horses like these evaporated.

The thing working in JCapper's favor is that it includes some proprietary modeled variables that appear to be very predictive in terms of both w% and ROI. So if there is an edge to be had, it's unlikely that the public will get directly keyed into it any time soon. Also, Jeff seems to be continually working on enhancing the set of factors and filters with new composite and modeled variables that show promise.

So, although I must admit I'm starting to experience some deja vu of the frustrations of backfitting vs. predicting, I'm hopeful that the strong and still evolving variable set in JCapper will make it possible to overcome the db handicapping pitfalls that I couldn't avoid the first time around.

[andicap]

Hi Andy... I'm kinda surprised you guys would still remember me. It's been a while... and my hiatus from the game has made it seem even longer. But it's looking like I've got the bug again... but let's see how sharp I still am :D
Steve,

I remember a lot of the old Prodigy crew. You'd recognize Formula's name -- Joe M. -- still crushing the stats like before.
Jim G is here..he was on board. Even Darrell Lerner dropped by once or twice.
Still using the Sheets. Andy Cylke was on that industry Players Panel. John Da Silva has done OK as well. So has Art Kaufman whose nom de plume you would recognize.

Always wondered where are: John Main, Leslie Johnson, Bill Benet, Cliff Cook, Charlie Mone, Dave Cullather, Romy Faversham, Tony Kelzenberg (sp) to name a few. Saw Melissa Pappas on Derby List a few years back, but she never answered my email. Plugged PA's board on the DL but didn't get much feedback from that.
I haven't been on that list for about 5 years. Pretty boring -- insular, same people, no handicapping, lot of geeky math I never understood.

That was a great board especially in the early years before a lot of the crap began and then Prodigy ruined it by making it a pay board. And people wonder why Prodigy lost out to AOL.

[JimG]

Welcome Steve. Leslie hangs out at the fan forum on the del mar site. She has been here a couple of times I know of. In fact I touted her on a horse in the chat room one day and it actually won:jump:

Andy, you brought up some names from the past. Great memory you have. Art Kaufman used to post a bunch.

I just thought about it and guess this does not have much to do with software. Sorry to everyone. I'll stop the memory lane stuff there.

Jim

[Jeff P]

Hi Steve,

You wrote: Have you done any empirical studies to determine how adjusting these parameters affects the win% and ROI distribution of the Paceline ranks? I believe JCapper will go back 45 days to select a paceline? I'd be curious to see what happens to the results if you extend this. I have. I didn't go looking for that one magical way of picking paceLines. Most of the UDMs I use are a little contrarian in nature. A PaceLine that towers over the field will tend to - but not always - attract an excess of money to the horse with the stickout PaceLine. So I tend to look for PaceLines that are competitive which often get overlooked. For my own paceLine selection rules, I adopted the following settings: Go back 10 starts, Go back 120 days, use a similar distance, and use a similar surface. This didn't produce results substantially better or worse than other paceLine selection methods that I looked at. But it did produce one advantage for me. When I look at the program's report I see at a glance the horse's best figure taken from a race at similar distance on a similar surface in the past 120 days. This gives me a mental picture of each horse's capabilities. If the horse has a zero I'll know that the horse hasn't gone the distance or hasn't been on this surface recently. I also like to look at the PaceLine numbers of both the ML Favorite and the Post Time Favorite. Sometimes you'll see horses way overbet that haven't gone today's distance or haven't been on today's surface recently. Good stuff to be aware of for sure.


and: and the program isn't yet flexible enough to run several queries in one shot, or to run crosstab queries on a pair of variables This is an EZ one to overcome. Use what I call a "Test UDM" - that is create a UDM using the factor mix you'd like to see tested - can be a pair of variables - or any and all possible combinations of variables supported in the program. This approach kind of opens things up when it comes to testing out new ideas. Then, just deactivate or delete any Test UDMs before calculating today's races.


-jp

.

[46zilzal]

software vendors seem NEVER to wager...what does that tell one?

[ryesteve]

Hi Steve,
When I look at the program's report I see at a glance the horse's best figure taken from a race at similar distance on a similar surface in the past 120 days.

"Best figure"? I'm curious now... is the "Paceline Fig" the BEST fig within the time/distance/surface parameters? I was under the assumption that it was selecting the most representative fig (either by recency, or some other methodology) that fell under those parameters, but it sounds now like I was wrong.


and: This is an EZ one to overcome. Use what I call a "Test UDM" - that is create a UDM using the factor mix you'd like to see tested - can be a pair of variables - or any and all possible combinations of variables supported in the program.
I'm not sure if this will do exactly what I meant. Here's an example: let's say you wanted to look at how jockey w% and trainer w% interacted with each other (and let's also assume that the jockeys have letter grades like the trainers do, just to make this example easier). What I'd like to see is the performance of each combination of these two factor designations. Like so:

Wins Starters w% ROI Jockey Trainer
..x....... xx.... x% x.xx... A........ A
..x....... xx.... x% x.xx... A........ B
..x....... xx.... x% x.xx... A........ C
..x....... xx.... x% x.xx... A........ D
..x....... xx.... x% x.xx... A........ E
..x....... xx.... x% x.xx... A........ F
..x....... xx.... x% x.xx... B........ A
..x....... xx.... x% x.xx... B........ B
..x....... xx.... x% x.xx... B........ C

etc.

As best as I can tell, in order to get these results, you'd first have to set up a UDM restricting it to Jockey w%=A, and then run it with Trainer w% selected from the factor dropdown. And then you'd have to run it again, editing the UDM restriction to Jockey w%=B, etc. Is there really a less painful way to get the sort of output I mocked up above?

[Jeff P]

Posted by Ryesteve- "Best figure"? I'm curious now... is the "Paceline Fig" the BEST fig within the time/distance/surface parameters? I was under the assumption that it was selecting the most representative fig (either by recency, or some other methodology) that fell under those parameters, but it sounds now like I was wrong.
Yes. The PaceLine fig is the best fig found within the user defined time/distance/surface parameters. The representative aspect would come from the selection parameters defined by the user.


and:
As best as I can tell, in order to get these results, you'd first have to set up a UDM restricting it to Jockey w%=A, and then run it with Trainer w% selected from the factor dropdown. And then you'd have to run it again, editing the UDM restriction to Jockey w%=B, etc. Is there really a less painful way to get the sort of output I mocked up above? That's exactly what you have to do to get the info. No less painful way than that exists. The one thing you CAN do to minimize the pain - if you're not already doing it - is to run both the Data Window and the UDM Wizard at the same time and toggle back and forth between the two.

-jp

.

[Jeff P]

posted by 46zilzal - software vendors seem NEVER to wager...what does that tell one? I can't speak for other vendors. Some wager and some undoubtedly don't. Myself - I usually play 5 or 6 days out of the week. Every week. No matter what. Limited free time prevents me from following live odds and payoffs as the day progresses. Instead, I have to be content with handicapping and pre-betting in the morning those spots that get my interest and then follow up at the end of the day to see how I did.

-jp

.

[ryesteve]

Yes. The PaceLine fig is the best fig found within the user defined time/distance/surface parameters.

and:
That's exactly what you have to do to get the info. No less painful way than that exists.

Thanks for the clarifications, Jeff. On point B, perhaps at some future point in the software's development, those kinds of 2-dimensional queries mght be possible?

[Jeff P]

It looks like a very interesting idea. At some future point - who knows?

-jp

.

[PaceAdvantage]

Always wondered where are: Tony Kelzenberg (sp) to name a few.

Could TonyK@HSH be TK from Prodigy?

[Dave Schwartz]

I cannot tell you who the other guy is but I can tell you that Tony K is not the same guy.

PA, TonyK and his wife were at the first Toga party. I believe I introduced you to him then.


Dave

[PaceAdvantage]

Yeah, but Dave, that was two years ago! How am I supposed to remember that TODAY??!!

[Dave Schwartz]

PA<

I guess that is why I am here to remind you.<G>



Dave

[Tom]

software vendors seem NEVER to wager...what does that tell one?

Tells me you don't what you are talking about.

[46zilzal]

Tells me you don't what you are talking about.
don't type so fast

[Tom]

don't type so fast

Nice spin! (KNOW)

[andicap]

software vendors seem NEVER to wager...what does that tell one?
That's an unfair generalization, the type of thing PA patrols for me pretty regularly.
Do you have any proof for your statement? How can you just throw out a criticism against a whole group of people without anything to back it up.

I know from first-hand a bunch of software vendors who DO bet --

Ken Massa at HTR
Dave Schwartz
(Jeff on this board already responded)
Gordon Pine -- Netcapper)
Aodds was lousy software but Bradshaw certainly bet.

I'm sure others do, but I can't say for sure.

For all my criticism of Dick Mitchell over the years I know he did bet

I would often these vendors often lack the time to bet a lot or every day because they are servicing or upgrading their program. Or they have other jobs and the software program might be a hobby.

[PaceAdvantage]

Good reply Andy (as usual).

If people think software vendors don't bet, they haven't known too many software vendors....

And come to think of it, how many people out there actually KNOW a whole bunch of software vendors, where they can come to that sort of conclusion?

It's a bit mind boggling what some folks will throw out here and think will stick....