Optimum Win Percentage w/Software?

[JustMissed]

A long time player told me over the weekend that an experienced player who was at the track everyday and was selective in what races he played, could win between 50 & 60% of his win bets.

This seems high to me based on what I have read here and elsewhere but it got me to thinking what would be a reasonable win percentage for commercial handicapping software assuming no human decision to be made after the computer picks the winner.

I don't know for sure but I don't think a person would play the computer selection without some further conderation but my guess is a raw pick win percentage would be less than the win percentage of the favorite.

Just an aside; I was thinking that if you could hit 2 out of 4 races that paid 5-2 with a $200 flat win bet, you could net average $600 profit a day. Probably unrealistic but nice to daydream.

Please don't go to much trouble but if you know off hand what a reasonable computer pick percentage is, I would like to know.

JustMissed


:)

[kitts]

Her's my opinion based on many years in this game:

No human decision after the computer makes the pick? I cannot give you a percentage of wins or any ROI but I can absolutely guarantee that it will lose money. Computers don't pick winners, handicappers do that.

[ljb]

Hello,
The data i have collected so far on the software i currently use shows.:
1820 selections
539 wins
29.6 % winners.
And yes you must use more then just the computer selections to make your play.

[hurrikane]

Kitts..
absolutely guarentee? Cool. So,if my db spot plays make money what do I get from your guarentee? :D

[JustMissed]

Originally posted by ljb
Hello,
The data i have collected so far on the software i currently use shows.:
1820 selections
539 wins
29.6 % winners.
And yes you must use more then just the computer selections to make your play.

LJB:

Is the 29.6 with or without human intervention? If if is without, that seems pretty good to me and would be a great basis to build a 3 or 4 horse contender list that would be in the money 85% plus.

Would you guys tell me if you think a comprehensive on track handicapper who plays selective races can hit 50% or more?

Thanks,

JustMissed

[kitts]

Hurrikane-
Sorry, I jumped to a conclusion (this is how I get my exercise)that the term "computer software" used in the original post referred to a handicapping software program and not a self managed database program. Guess I'll have to change that to absolutle guarantee except for Hurrikane. <g>

[ljb]

Just missed,
The results are without human intervention. That is, these are the results of the softwares top pick. 29.6% winners. This does not show a positive roi as many of the winners pay less then 2 to 1.

[hurrikane]

thank you Kitt. you are much to kind.

[JustMissed]

Originally posted by ljb
Just missed,
The results are without human intervention. That is, these are the results of the softwares top pick. 29.6% winners. This does not show a positive roi as many of the winners pay less then 2 to 1.

I think that percentage is pretty darn good for a raw pick. If you think about the favorite winning 34%(or whatever) and this is after the best cappers on the grounds have looked everything over.

I am trying to come up with something that will give me the top 3 or 4 contenders with 85% win. I have been using with some success the the four top power rated horses but it was a little too spotty. Some days 80%, some days 40%. I have gone back to thowing out horses and my contender selection has gotten much better but it sure takes a long time to go through a card. I guess I'm looking for a lazy man's way to pick the winners but that may be the "impossible dream". The key may be to use a particuliar profile for each type race that generates the best winning contender percentage. For example, top power ratings may work much better for mid level open claimers and fail miserably for Maiden 2yo. I suspect that is why certain old grey headed men always seem to have a big wad of cash in their pocket-they only play the races that they know how to beat and they pass the races they usually can't beat.

Thanks,

JustMissed
:)

[ljb]

Yes and that is why I said this needs human intervention. I am going to be taking a hiatus from racing for a bit but, I have begun to break these selections down by type race, conditions, track etc. and will hopefully come up with some filters.

[midnight]

hurrikane: I never saw a black box that picked over 50% winners and showed a profit, though if any program could do it, Massa's HTR could. It might be able to if it were only playing about 1 race out of 100.

I know a guy who wrote his own program and has a 7 year database of 250,000 races that has a query that plays about 1 race out of 50, hits around 57% winners, and has broken dead-even over the 7 years. He's complaining that the ROI goes down a bit less than 1% every year. When it started it was making about 3.5%, and now it's losing 2%. He was playing at Phonebet because of their 3% rebate, and now he plays at EHorse, which gives (in his case) 5% and makes it profitable again.

[hurrikane]

midnight...I guess I wouldn't call it black box though all I do these days is click a button. It's data mined in access from the HTR export.
And you are correct. If anyone could do it Massa could. For a few years there he had a flat bet profit from Fr1s until the odds started dropping.

[HTRFGuy]

Perhaps slightly of the topic of picking winners per se, I play exotics for the most part using my HTRF software.

I started handicapping Gulfstream and posting the output on my website at HTRF (http://www.htrf.com) and then returnined and annotated the output with the results.

You can look for yourself. There are six race cards posted. Ignore turf races, and look at the results for a 4-horse triple box using the top four picks in all races that I considered playable and posted.

Summary - 51 races
Outlay - $48 x 51 races = $2,448

Winning triples - 11 Pd $3,395.50

Net $947.50

Will this keep up? Would be nice.

The single largest payoff was $1108. The second largest was $691.

I do not consider HTRF to be a black box by any means.

[CapperLou]

ljm:

You indicated you think the software is called Dark Horse handicapping software in answer to my PM to you.

Does anyone on board know anything or have any experience with "Dark Horse" software?

Thanks for help!!!

CapperLou

[CapperLou]

The website for them is:

www.darkhorsenet.com


CapperLou

[BMeadow]

As the win percentage increases, down go the prices.

Assuming you want a selection in every race, here are two percentages that have been attained, with no human input.
* Projected Cramer Speed Ratings from Handicappers Data Warehouse wins 31%.
* Top BRIS Power Rating wins 31%.

In neither case can you simply bet the top number to win and expect a net profit, since the top power rating in one race might be 1-5 (probable winner) and 4-1 in the next (probable loser).

Being more selective (e.g., waiting for a large spread between #1 and #2) increases the win percentages, though the ROI does not approach profitability.

[Myhorse1]

It has been my experience that any program worth its salt should give the user about 27-28% winners on top, and about 48% top two.
Both of these will probably have a negative ROI, but I have found that if either one of these horses are below 5/2 I pass the race.

If you are selective on the races you play (ie: don't play 2yr olds, 3yr olds, Maiden Claiming races, large fields) you can get your win percentage up and still make a decent ROI.

The program I use does the above but I still take the top 3 horses and narrow it down to 2 before betting. I try to single a horse, but I have been betting 2 horses for quite a while and found it satisfies my profit margin.

It is mainly discipline that will make you money in the long run. Know which races to play and which ones not to play.

(I am old and grey haired)

MyHorse1