Database software better than pace-only software?

[lansdale]

I've been thinking about switching to database software after reading a number of posts on this site. I'm not unhappy with the Sartin-based program I'm using, but there's a definite limit to the number of races that be gone through in search of overlays compared to what's available with a db.

I would especially be interested in hearing from Dick Schmidt who I know used the Sartin material successfully for a number of years, but more recently seems to have switched to databse handicapping (I think he mentioned HSH). I'm curious to know whether the Sartin approach began to yield a lower ROI, or whether Dick simply wanted to be able to play more tracks. Would appreciate the views of others with similar experience.

Cheers,

lansdale

[facorsig]

I left ALL IN ONE after using for more than 10 years to use HSH last year. Frankly, I am thrilled with the change. What I like is technical sophistication of analysis which is customized by user (can be intimidating at first) and continuous user support.

ALL IN ONE was a good product, but my database started to corrupt and I was unable to get support because the focus was to support their latest version 6, while the majority of my data was in version 5.

Fred

[ranchwest]

I think databases offer some interesting possibilities if maintained. The more data you miss putting in your database, the less reliable it is.

[ryesteve]

I would especially be interested in hearing from Dick Schmidt who I know used the Sartin material successfully for a number of years, but more recently seems to have switched to databse handicapping (I think he mentioned HSH)
This isn't necessarily a switch. While HSH is built somewhat like a swiss army knife, so you'd never be able to know exactly who is using it how, using its database to do Sartin-style handicapping is one of its obvious functions.

[lansdale]

facorsig,

Thanks for the reply but it sounds like you were moving from one database to another, which wasn't really the question I posed. Another satisfied HSH user, though, which generally seems to be the case.

Cheers,

lansdale

[lansdale]

That's what I hear.

[lansdale]

This isn't necessarily a switch. While HSH is built somewhat like a swiss army knife, so you'd never be able to know exactly who is using it how, using its database to do Sartin-style handicapping is one of its obvious functions.

Appreciate your reply, and I'm aware from your posts that you're very well-versed in this game, but all I'm really asking, from anyone who has used both (as I know Dick Schmidt and Dave Schwartz have) iis what the basic differences are.

Cheers,

lansdale

[ryesteve]

Appreciate your reply, and I'm aware from your posts that you're very well-versed in this game, but all I'm really asking, from anyone who has used both (as I know Dick Schmidt and Dave Schwartz have) iis what the basic differences are.

Well, my interpretation of the basic difference would be that db software takes a much broader approach. Both attempt to fit a current race to some sort of "profile" of what's been successful in the past; the difference being that a Sartin approach typically uses a much smaller window of past races, and confines itself to specific velocity calculations. Users of db software might typically churn thousands of races trying to find situations that look profitable, and there's no particular focus on what types of factors are examined.

[njcurveball]

HTR has a program called MAXVEL which is basically Sartin with a database. I think you might like that.

They also offer an export and the best guys to ask Access questions.

Ken Massa and Dave Schwartz are the two best customer support people in the business so you can't go wrong with either HSH or HTR.

From my experience, HSH is a lil more cutting edge and HTR is a lil more "old school" Sartin.

What I do really like about HTR is their accurate adjustments and automatic pace-line selection.

Since you mentioned Sartin, I think that is more what you are looking for.


Jim

[DanG]

HTR has a program called MAXVEL which is basically Sartin with a database. I think you might like that.

They also offer an export and the best guys to ask Access questions.

Ken Massa and Dave Schwartz are the two best customer support people in the business so you can't go wrong with either HSH or HTR.

From my experience, HSH is a lil more cutting edge and HTR is a lil more "old school" Sartin.

What I do really like about HTR is their accurate adjustments and automatic pace-line selection.

Since you mentioned Sartin, I think that is more what you are looking for.

Jim
Well said Jersey!!! :ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

[spilparc]

Data based software is pure hogwash.

Many, many have tried. A couple have suceeded...or so they say.

[DanG]

Data based software is pure hogwash.

Many, many have tried. A couple have suceeded...or so they say.
OK…

It’s between races at Belmont…I’ll bite. ;)

Curious on two levels…

1st…The origins of “SpilParc” :confused:

2nd…When did you find the time to try all the applications available and talk to all of their clients to arrive at your conclusions?

I’m a big fan of blanket statements when the poster is obviously as knowledgeable as yourself. :jump:

[njcurveball]

Data based software is pure hogwash.

Many, many have tried. A couple have suceeded...or so they say.

I think I once met your Grandfather at the track. Was he the one who said,

"You can beat a race, but you cannot beat the races."

Curious you could come to a horse racing board with this attitude, what do you have to gain here?

[Tom]

If not based on data, than what, pray tell???

btw, Dan, Spilparc spelled backwards is "crap lips." Figure out that origin!

[DanG]

Spilparc spelled backwards is "crap lips." Figure out that origin!
:lol::lol::lol:

Tom,

I needed that laugh after the way my first few ran at Hollywood.

Thank you!!!

[bigmack]

Spilparc spelled backwards is "crap lips." Figure out that origin!
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/Teeth-01-june.gif

[46zilzal]

There are good thing gleaned from databases, but only segmentally, i.e. data from a monthly period only to catch the nuances of NOW without "averaging out" periodic differences.

[Tom]

I suspect few here really know what it means to use a database to handicap.
Or how many ways there are.
That's a good thing.
:p

46 - you talked a lot about energy requirements for the triple crown racs, using a 9 year database. Your figures are adjusted by variants from a database.

Anyone use past performances, or as db guys call them "reports?"

DB capping is not limited to printing out spot plays every day. I have a key race report I generate - it lists every race by track, and when and where the horses raced next out, anywhere. I know if a horse who placed at Belmont in an allowance race shipped to Delware and won a stake race.
Right from my database.

[cj]

How about both together? Here is one example. I use my pace numbers in a database. I have a query I call "Bad Favorites".

In just a little over a year, there have been 6,134 that fit the criteria. They win at a rate of 25.6%, and return a lowly 69 cents per dollar wagered.

If you only look at odds on favorites, the win at 35.6% and return a miserable 61 cents on the dollar. I'd never know this without a database, and without the pace figures I wouldn't be able to find it.

[spilparc]

OK…

It’s between races at Belmont…I’ll bite. ;)

Curious on two levels…

1st…The origins of “SpilParc” :confused:

My girlfriend picked it. When I asked her what it meant, she told me it was the name of a horse. I think she lied.

2nd…When did you find the time to try all the applications available and talk to all of their clients to arrive at your conclusions?

Nice strawman.

I’m a big fan of blanket statements when the poster is obviously as knowledgeable as yourself. :jump:

I have a lot to say on this subject. I'm just waiting for the right time.

Stay tuned.

[xtb]

Data based software is pure hogwash.

Many, many have tried. A couple have suceeded...or so they say.


A comedian

[skate]

If not based on data, than what, pray tell???

btw, Dan, Spilparc spelled backwards is "crap lips." Figure out that origin!


:faint: too much...

[lansdale]

HTR has a program called MAXVEL which is basically Sartin with a database. I think you might like that.

They also offer an export and the best guys to ask Access questions.

Ken Massa and Dave Schwartz are the two best customer support people in the business so you can't go wrong with either HSH or HTR.

From my experience, HSH is a lil more cutting edge and HTR is a lil more "old school" Sartin.

What I do really like about HTR is their accurate adjustments and automatic pace-line selection.

Since you mentioned Sartin, I think that is more what you are looking for.


Jim

Jim,

The Sartin connection makes a lot sense to me re HTR, and I've heard nothing but good things about KM. Thanks for your input.

[lansdale]

Well said Jersey!!! :ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

Dan,

Clearly you're a serious and highly skilled player, and I think you've mentioned that you use HTR. One of the reasons I'm interested in a db is the possibility of being able to evaluate more races in the same/less time as I do now for two or three tracks. I understand that there's an initial learning curve period with any software, but after this period, is one generally able to sift through more tracks with HTR? Any general comments you might have on the program would also be much appreciated.

BTW, thanks for keeping the memory of Jaco alive. Had a chance to meet him briefly when I was a kid. What other bass player could play the head to 'Donna Lee' at Charlie Parker speed levels?

Cheers,

lansdale

[lansdale]

There are good thing gleaned from databases, but only segmentally, i.e. data from a monthly period only to catch the nuances of NOW without "averaging out" periodic differences.

46,

I know that you're an excellent handicapper, and since I believe the we use the same software (although perhaps different versions of Spec), maybe you can address some of the limitations of Sartin figures (and maybe the limitations of all pace programs) that Dave Schwartz raised in some of his posts on the subject. As I recall (and maybe Dave can confirm this) his research found negative ROI for such key factors as EP, SP, TPR (or CPR - same thing) and the admittedly more perpheral BL/BL. He hasn't discussed P1 or P2, so maybe the jury's still out on these. But his main point - and he mentioned being profitable with Sartin in the early 90s - is that the ROI for these figures is not what it was. I know you've been a Sartin player for a number of years, and I'd be interested in hearing your comments on the ROI issue.

Thanks for your input.

Cheers,

lansdale

[lansdale]

How about both together? Here is one example. I use my pace numbers in a database. I have a query I call "Bad Favorites".

In just a little over a year, there have been 6,134 that fit the criteria. They win at a rate of 25.6%, and return a lowly 69 cents per dollar wagered.

If you only look at odds on favorites, the win at 35.6% and return a miserable 61 cents on the dollar. I'd never know this without a database, and without the pace figures I wouldn't be able to find it.

CJ,

Sounds right to me. One question I'd like to ask you, off-topic - do you accept investors? I understand that you're in the service and only do this on the side, but since your figures are no longer available, I was wondering whether this is something you would consider. Thanks for the many, many, valuable posts you've made here.

Cheers,

lansdale

[46zilzal]

Most of the negative ROI factors come from using single lines to represent horses. I rarely evaluate any individual (unless limited by only a few lifetime starts) from less than three lines. Also, I always look for the trend in their last several lines to see where their form cycle is heading: rising % median with dropping total energy vs the same pace is a sign of form decay.

Ultimately you have to understand that a turf race is evaluated differently than a sprint, than a route, than a marathon. NO ONE or even TWO factors, by themselves are demonstrable to be the end all in evaluation. THEN, on top of all that, SOME TRACKS require a different reading of the data since one size does not fit all. Polar opposites would be inner Aqu (early bias) and new Keeneland (late bias).

Once you establish energy profiles for each distance, each surface, each course, then it is easier to "fit" the horses into a pace scenario that both suggests what will happen in a race as well as what is required (energy wise) at the track you follow. I love Woodbine because it has very characteristic energy requirements that are different from the standards. Also, when a strong bias occurs within a program, you have numbers to tell you it is there well before the crowd picks up on it.

Ultimately, each user has to find out how this program works best for them at the courses they follow. There is no single road in mastery of it.

[DanG]

BTW, thanks for keeping the memory of Jaco alive. Had a chance to meet him briefly when I was a kid. What other bass player could play the head to 'Donna Lee' at Charlie Parker speed levels?

Cheers,

lansdale
Always good to hear from a member of Jaco’s army! :ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

Check your PM when you get a chance Lansdale…

[socantra]

..........As I recall (and maybe Dave can confirm this) his research found negative ROI for such key factors as EP, SP, TPR (or CPR - same thing) and the admittedly more perpheral BL/BL...............


I would be very curious as to what individual factors he found a positive ROI for......

[Dave Schwartz]

Since I have a hard time ignoring an opportunity to speak (a often-fatal flaw for a married man), I will answer.

I have never found a single "factor" that was profitable across all tracks, surfaces, distances, etc. The closest I have come is finding that "best first fraction ever" shows a small flat-bet profit in (surprisingly) route races for older horses on the dirt. (This is from meory - there might have been another qualifier.)

I have found many "angles" that have shown profit in significantly-sized subsets.


Dave

[lansdale]

I Most of the negative ROI factors come from using single lines to represent horses. I rarely evaluate any individual (unless limited by only a few lifetime starts) from less than three lines. Also, I always look for the trend in their last several lines to see where their form cycle is heading: rising % median with dropping total energy vs the same pace is a sign of form decay.

Ultimately you have to understand that a turf race is evaluated differently than a sprint, than a route, than a marathon. NO ONE or even TWO factors, by themselves are demonstrable to be the end all in evaluation. THEN, on top of all that, SOME TRACKS require a different reading of the data since one size does not fit all. Polar opposites would be inner Aqu (early bias) and new Keeneland (late bias).

Once you establish energy profiles for each distance, each surface, each course, then it is easier to "fit" the horses into a pace scenario that both suggests what will happen in a race as well as what is required (energy wise) at the track you follow. I love Woodbine because it has very characteristic energy requirements that are different from the standards. Also, when a strong bias occurs within a program, you have numbers to tell you it is there well before the crowd picks up on it.

Ultimately, each user has to find out how this program works best for them at the courses they follow. There is no single road in mastery of it.

46,

I don't disagree with anything you say, and in fact follow a similar regimen. From my complaining, it may seem that I have negative ROI, but in fact I do around 10% (I don't keep records). However, I'm looking for a broader, less time-intensive approach, which will also hopefully achieve an ROI approaching 25%. Everything I see tells me that this is no longer possible with Sartin (for me it was in the early 90s).

Why does Dick Schmidt, a former exponent of the Sartin material (who I'm sure still uses it in part) now favor HSH, and claim that he has a lower ROI than when he was playing as a professional? Dick is not a dumb guy.

I respect your dedication and appreciate your input.

Cheers,

lansdale

[46zilzal]

Handicapping wise, the programs are even better. Wagering is a personal exercise, not covered buy ANY program. I found a wider, shot-gun coverage of races I understand results in a much better ROI.

[xtb]

I have a lot to say on this subject. I'm just waiting for the right time.

Stay tuned.

Steve, how's that report coming about databases and hogwash? I'm just curious, thanks.