Computer Program Handicapping Challenge part 1

[asH]

Seems to me it would be a lot of fun to compare the handicapping results from the many software programs used by the numerous handicappers here. I was thinking both full cards (computer s'possed to do most the work) of GP, and SA on Million day (Saturday Jan. 26) 4 stakes races highlight both SA and GP cards.... Posted picks should include program used, one top pick with analysis, best money making play per race (could be combos's, exotic, or straight wager) ...have fun with it....
asH
SANTA ANITA
Sunshine Millions Classic S.
$1,000,000; 4 Year Olds And Up

1 1/8 MilesGULFSTREAM
Sunshine Million Distaff S.
$500,000; 4 Year Olds And Up

1 1/8 MilesGULFSTREAM
Sunshine Million Turf S.
$500,000; 4 Year Olds And Up

1 1/8 Miles (Turf)SANTA ANITA
Sunshine Millions Filly and Mare Turf S.
$500,000; 4 Year Olds And Up

1 1/8 Miles (Turf)GULFSTREAM
Sunshine Million Sprint S.
$300,000; 4 Year Olds And Up

6 FurlongsSANTA ANITA
Sunshine Millions Filly and Mare Sprint S.
$300,000; 4 Year Olds And Up

6 FurlongsGULFSTREAM
Sunshine Million Oaks
$250,000; 3 Year Olds

6 FurlongsSANTA ANITA
Sunshine Millions Dash S.
$250,000; 3 Year Olds
6 Furlongs

[JustRalph]

we have been down this road before...........but not for a while. There is an old thread with software picks from way back.......if my memory serves me

[DanG]

This brings up an interesting point on the basic role of software in different users hands.

During a recent trip to England I had this exact conversation in a pub with a few “punters”.



Punter-A: “What methods do you use”
Myself: “I use computer software called HTR as my base information”
Punter-B chimes in: “Oh, I could never let a machine make my selections”
2008 and there are still misconceptions as to the role of software in handicapping. The confusion between the proverbial “black box” and racing software is remarkable to me. The printed version of DRF is…software! Its information right down to the method used to format the page is all software driven.

As to the neat contest idea. Most software I’m aware of would produce different selections depending on who was using it. I’m not sure how it could be tracked accurately in real time.

[facorsig]

The other point I am tired of hearing is complaints about how one software can pick two different horses from two different users. Therefore, the value of the whole exercise is moot because the results are dependent of software, users and other variables which make comparison meaningless (e.g. I focus on low grade claimers for older horses and not stakes races, as outlined - does this mean I am a poor handicapper or my software is deficient?).

Fred

[shanta]

Seems to me it would be a lot of fun to compare the handicapping results from the many software programs

You can get many of the programs for nothing on a demo/trial basis and work the races your way. Gives you a hands on personal feel for what suits your style of play.

All it costs is a couple of data files and your time.

[njcurveball]

When my Mom found out I was taking a computer class in college, some 25 years ago, her first question to me was..

Can you get it to tell me what the winning lottery numbers will be?

Well that would have been a neat trick, but if a college kid could figure out a way to do that (without injecting the ping pong balls with lead), then most others could as well.

How do you think Mom would feel having the winning lottery numbers and seeing her ticket cashed for $5 or so?

And even giving people software to get the winner 50% of the time will not make them happy if the prices are all below $3.

Don't confuse the hammer with the carpenter using it.

Jim

[Lefty]

I take my computer to the racebook and am always being asked. "What does the computer pick?"
I always say the computer doesn't make picks, that i do based on info the computer gives me that would take hours to compute themselves. Most still don't "get it."

[Capper Al]

I think you have something here. This would be a great annual event for PA. I would suggest keeping it simple. Judge each computer program on ROI for $2.00 win bets on top choices and $2.00 exacta box of the top three picks. Also include the ML picks for comparison. 5 horses in order of preference for each race should be submitted in case of scratches, only the top three will count for the contest. A race should have 5 horses to count, or we skip the race. If you don't want to run the tallies, I would do it.

Seems to me it would be a lot of fun to compare the handicapping results from the many software programs used by the numerous handicappers here. I was thinking both full cards (computer s'possed to do most the work) of GP, and SA on Million day (Saturday Jan. 26) 4 stakes races highlight both SA and GP cards.... Posted picks should include program used, one top pick with analysis, best money making play per race (could be combos's, exotic, or straight wager) ...have fun with it....
asH

[DanG]

Judge each computer program on ROI for $2.00 win bets on top choices and $2.00 exacta box of the top three picks.
That’s the rub…

Just what are the “top choices” when good software is open to user interpretation? :confused:

[Donnie]

Before we begin this shindig---
Shouldn't some rules be put in place first?
Like which mode do you want the software to use to pick the pacelines? Do you want the raw data, or the data after variants are added and recalculated? Which screen should we be pulling the order of these horses from? Are we allowed to use any modeling functionalities that may be in each of our different software programs? Or are "robots" illegal to use? (so we don't want to post the "picks" based on the most recent like races results as per distance/surface/class/track....correct?) If a track is switched to "off", it is ok to switch all races to an "off surface" setting, and then rerun the races to get a more accurate feel for each horses performance?

I fear that a contest of this type of nature is not what they used to be when you received one screen, had no data input from the user, and the horses were in an order based on pre-determined variables and weightings. This isn't your father's software.

(I am not talking about HTR alone here! There are some very fine programs out there that let the "carpenter" find the right tool for them in the box. Wanna use a screwdriver to drive that nail? Go right ahead! But there is probably a better tool in the box for that job! And that's what many fine softwares are, as stated by NJ....a set of tools that a craftsman must learn to master. And not all of them. Which makes many modern software programs indispensable to their loyal users.)

[Capper Al]

It should be assumed upfront that one day's worth of races does not prove anything statistically. As for rules, I agree. They should be defined in advance.

The tracks should be fast and firm only. Ideally, if the vendor does not partake on his own behalf, there should be teams of 3 players working out the final selections. There is some variability in line selection and final choices. A team of 3 should help make this go smoother.

The simple format of $2.00 to win on the top horse, and an exacta box of the top three horses, keeps the wagering flat and comparable. If a software can also differentiate good place horses then these horses could be placed in the third slot of the exacta box allowing the top choices for the win slot in case of scratches.

These are just some ideas to get this going along. Like I said, I would be willing to run this contest.

[andicap]

I think any software company would ask its users NOT to take part in this farce.

I mean what is a computer's top pick? There are dozens of variables in HTR -- what should we use?

the K 1 factor -- a power figure with the most winners but at low odds.
the top PER 1 horse -- a velocity measure?

But which paceline should we use? HTR has seven automatic paceline alternatives.
Now I use HTR's "Impact" figure, another velocity based overall figure that is similar to AP and PER but is different enough that it often comes up with different choices. What about THAT figure?
And at some tracks in some races I use only F3 -- the final fraction rating -- to pick my top horse.

For lightly raced horses I will tend to use the horses' best rating in the last 90 days or 6 smonths.
For older horses, I'll be more selective.

What the hell would an exercise like this prove?
And unless Ken Massa gave his explicit consent - and why should he -- I would be disappointed if any HTR users took part and gave any software program the opportunity for "bragging rights" based on arbitrary and phony criteria.

[Capper Al]

I think any software company would ask its users NOT to take part in this farce.

I mean what is a computer's top pick? There are dozens of variables in HTR -- what should we use?

the K 1 factor -- a power figure with the most winners but at low odds.
the top PER 1 horse -- a velocity measure?

But which paceline should we use? HTR has seven automatic paceline alternatives.
Now I use HTR's "Impact" figure, another velocity based overall figure that is similar to AP and PER but is different enough that it often comes up with different choices. What about THAT figure?
And at some tracks in some races I use only F3 -- the final fraction rating -- to pick my top horse.

For lightly raced horses I will tend to use the horses' best rating in the last 90 days or 6 smonths.
For older horses, I'll be more selective.

What the hell would an exercise like this prove?
And unless Ken Massa gave his explicit consent - and why should he -- I would be disappointed if any HTR users took part and gave any software program the opportunity for "bragging rights" based on arbitrary and phony criteria.

That's why you have teams of 3 to clear up any issues concerning making a pick. We would use the teams unless the vendor wanted to take over to represent their product.

[Donnie]

Andi-

don't think you have too much to worry about. If a person takes that much stock in the results of one day's worth of results, then they definitely are not the type of person Ken likes to have as a client, anyway. I know of a case where he told a person years ago to "come back when you understand horseracing and handicapping a little better."

Ken has a great attitude towards test driving his program and I think his personal results speak for themselves. Anyone who takes the time to read his newsletters knows that he hides behind nothing and he encourages subscribers to challenge the program and it's operation. He wants them to test the results he gets when he reports on angles and approaches as he tests new numbers or screens.

He does not mind a user who points out a bug to him, even after extensive testing by a number of his clients before he rolls public with any of his updates. It is what it is. With all the different machines and OS's and configurations, he considers this a plus. I would as well.

My handle here is actually the result of just such a "competition" that was held here about 3 or 4 years ago. Never bothered to change it. Same premise...3 or 4 of us would collaborate on the races and post our picks. Don't remember who won, but I am sure a search would uncover it in the archives here.

Your point is exactly what I was getting at, as well as NJ....it's the user a lot of the times, not necessarily the program. And the way you outlined your approach as per the race type/style is how I would expect a person to approach racing.... there is not a "one size fits all" approach.

But the original post said "have fun with it". In that spirit, and considering it's one day focusing on Stakes races only, I would think there would be some interest from a number of different users....but I don't know that it should be limited to software users only...?? Just open it up to EVERYONE!

[Capper Al]

The focus should be on the software. That's the whole point here. And again, one racing card doesn't prove anything. It just gives us a peek at what's available.

Andi-

don't think you have too much to worry about. If a person takes that much stock in the results of one day's worth of results, then they definitely are not the type of person Ken likes to have as a client, anyway. I know of a case where he told a person years ago to "come back when you understand horseracing and handicapping a little better."

Ken has a great attitude towards test driving his program and I think his personal results speak for themselves. Anyone who takes the time to read his newsletters knows that he hides behind nothing and he encourages subscribers to challenge the program and it's operation. He wants them to test the results he gets when he reports on angles and approaches as he tests new numbers or screens.

He does not mind a user who points out a bug to him, even after extensive testing by a number of his clients before he rolls public with any of his updates. It is what it is. With all the different machines and OS's and configurations, he considers this a plus. I would as well.

My handle here is actually the result of just such a "competition" that was held here about 3 or 4 years ago. Never bothered to change it. Same premise...3 or 4 of us would collaborate on the races and post our picks. Don't remember who won, but I am sure a search would uncover it in the archives here.

Your point is exactly what I was getting at, as well as NJ....it's the user a lot of the times, not necessarily the program. And the way you outlined your approach as per the race type/style is how I would expect a person to approach racing.... there is not a "one size fits all" approach.

But the original post said "have fun with it". In that spirit, and considering it's one day focusing on Stakes races only, I would think there would be some interest from a number of different users....but I don't know that it should be limited to software users only...?? Just open it up to EVERYONE!

[kamekameka]

How bout a 3 person contest with Jeff P., Dave S., and Ken Massa? The developers of the three elite programs on the market in a fun contest?

[Capper Al]

How bout a 3 person contest with Jeff P., Dave S., and Ken Massa? The developers of the three elite programs on the market in a fun contest?
Would you identify their products and list any other products that you might be interested in?

[Toss_DeLoser]

It's not the arrow, it's the Indian.

[njcurveball]

How bout a 3 person contest with Jeff P., Dave S., and Ken Massa? The developers of the three elite programs on the market in a fun contest?


I bet if you put up $100,000 winner take all, you probably could get these three guys to take a weekend out of their busy lives. :ThmbUp:

[Tom]

That's why you have teams of 3 to clear up any issues concerning making a pick. We would use the teams unless the vendor wanted to take over to represent their product.

Handicapping/betting is not a team sport. You want to look at software, have one person use each program on the same races and see hat happens.

[kamekameka]

I bet if you put up $100,000 winner take all, you probably could get these three guys to take a weekend out of their busy lives. :ThmbUp:

Oh please. They are all proud of their creations and should welcome a friendly contest to show off the use of their respective software. Just pick the winner of each Sunshine Million race in advance. Give another pick in advance in case of scratches. Judge by number of winners picked and total payoffs of winners. Keep it simple and lets see how the creators do.

[Greyfox]

How can anyone make computer picks until they have an idea how a track is playing for a particular day?

[Jeff P]

I bet if you put up $100,000 winner take all, you probably could get these three guys to take a weekend out of their busy lives. I'm not 100 pct sure... but you guys might be able to get at least one of us to enter for half of that. <G>

Seriously though...

Whether it's teams or just us program authors posting our own selections for that one day... pick a format and I'm game.

But why limit this thing to just Dave, Ken, and myself? How about CJ, Nathan, Gordon Pine, Rich Rosa, John Del Riccio, Ted Craven, Len C, Steve Wolson, Tim (Overlay), Murph, Boomer, Ian... I'm sure I'm leaving somebody out...

How about opening this thing up to anybody who's ever been an authorized advertiser or posted extensively about a product for sale at PA?


-jp

.

[ryesteve]

How about opening this thing up to anybody who's ever been an authorized advertiser or posted extensively about a product for sale at PA?

These conditions sound especially written for Whobet :D

[asH]

Hey guys, the spirit behind the challenge is ultimately for the benefit of the players. The intent is not to disparage a software program or anyone and their usage of a particular program. ..
It is true that one sampling will not reveal anything but time over time a trend may develop. I myself don’t expect anything but a draw, over time (competition is good), even the best chess programs draw more times than not...so not to fear. I believe this should be open to everyone, which should give a good sampling of expert program users....as long as one user of a particular program is successful then the program is successful , boils down to interpretation of the data (the human factor). I think it would be interesting to see whether a program points users in the same direction (that's the important stuff). Adjustments will be made and we can do this again (once a month).


Unlike the racing industry let us help each other…factor X

besides no program can beat my (big blue)trusty- rusty excel spreadsheet lol (have fun with it and learn)
asH

seems I've written to the wrong board (LOL)...if this is the way it evolves then so be it...

[Jeff P]

These conditions sound especially written for Whobet :D I think he thinks more than I think he thinks...

Which has me a little nervous about taking him on...

Just please don't put me in the ring with Anderon or the Ultimate Selector. <G>


Seriously though... If you guys can decide on a format, I'm game.


-jp

.

[Dave Schwartz]

How bout a 3 person contest with Jeff P., Dave S., and Ken Massa? The developers of the three elite programs on the market in a fun contest?

The last time this came up I decided to do a "live play" session instead of participating.

My wagering decisions are literally made as the horses are at the gate. That is the design of the software.

If you guys want to do something like this I will particiapte myself... as long as someone can chart my plays based upon the selection being made as the horses are about to load and we just play every race.

[wes]

THis whole thing is like asking three people to jump from an airplane. Only one will be equiped with a parachute. What's left for the other two?


wes

[Tom Barrister]

Oh please. They are all proud of their creations and should welcome a friendly contest to show off the use of their respective software. Just pick the winner of each Sunshine Million race in advance. Give another pick in advance in case of scratches. Judge by number of winners picked and total payoffs of winners. Keep it simple and lets see how the creators do.

And the free picks will be nice, too, eh? :rolleyes:

[njcurveball]

Just pick the winner of each Sunshine Million race in advance. Give another pick in advance in case of scratches. Judge by number of winners picked and total payoffs of winners.

Interesting concept since most people buying programs are playing a full menu of exotics.

Let's say "hypthetically" there are 5 races and Jcapper picks 3 winners for a total of $21 (they all pay $7). A profit of well over 100%

Dave decides to dutch 2 and 3 horses in the 5 races and has 4 winners (including a $20 horse) thus making money for the day equal in profit to Jcapper.

HTR (Ken or proxy) gets shutout the first 4 and then hits a $35 winner in the last race.

Who do you declare the winner?

[Capper Al]

What I am suggesting keeps it simple. $2.00 win bets on each race. $2.00 exacta box on the top 3 picks. All picks in by 15 minutes prior to first post. (This is also for those who would like free selections.) Races only count on fast and firm tracks. The teams of 3 are for only products that the vendor is not handicapping with.

[njcurveball]

What I am suggesting keeps it simple. $2.00 win bets on each race. $2.00 exacta box on the top 3 picks..

Most money wins?

So someone can hit all 5 winners and still lose if someone else has a BIG exacta in their top 3?

Sounds like a true test of skill to me! :ThmbUp:

[Kelso]

Who do you declare the winner?



How about ROI x Win%? A guy who goes 10 for 10 with chalk (all pay 2.10) winds up at 1.05 ... as does a guy who loses 9 of 10 and hits one at 14-1.

Risking $20 ... is it reasonable, and realistic, to consider a $1 profit with a 100% hit rate roughly equivilent to a $10 profit at 10%?

:confused:

[njcurveball]

ROI * WIN%

That is interesting.

Handicapper A has 3 winners out of 5, they pay enough to double his money.
(2.00 roi * 60%) = 1.20

Handicapper B has 1 winner, but triples his money
(3.00 * 20%) = 0.60

So much for picking longshots. :bang:

[ryesteve]

The whole idea of haggling over what decides "who wins" when this is all based on one day's worth of picks seems a little pointless. Just give each participant a fixed bankroll, let them do with it whatever they want, and then let the folks who are watching the results decide for themselves which play style and which set of results they liked the most.

[njcurveball]

Just give each participant a fixed bankroll, let them do with it whatever they want, and then let the folks who are watching the results decide for themselves which play style and which set of results they liked the most.

I think this is a good idea. No need to post selections, just post tickets before the race begins. :ThmbUp:

[hdcper]

Yes give them a nice size bankroll, the races to be played, and let them use any bet that is available in said races.

Further, they should be able to wager right up until the bell rings, giving them the opportunity to monitor payoffs, late scratches and such.

Looking forward to seeing each of their approaches,

Hdcper

[Capper Al]

Most money wins?

So someone can hit all 5 winners and still lose if someone else has a BIG exacta in their top 3?

Sounds like a true test of skill to me! :ThmbUp:
Actually, I'm not looking to crown a winner. The fans can just see the results and note for themselves what system they would prefer.

[Lefty]

Wow, guess we'll have to have a PLAYOFF!

[Tom]

By the time you get down with all the rules, you are not looking at the software anymore.

My suggestion - buy a copy or get a demo and play with it yourself - see if it is for you. Anything else is not going to tell you anything anyways. What the hell good is one day? It is not how someone else uses it, it how YOU use that counts.

Especially when you tell the developers how to use the program/bet. Your arbitrary rules already put Dave in a positon not representative of how he uses his program.

[Capper Al]

ROI * WIN%

That is interesting.

Handicapper A has 3 winners out of 5, they pay enough to double his money.
(2.00 roi * 60%) = 1.20

Handicapper B has 1 winner, but triples his money
(3.00 * 20%) = 0.60

So much for picking longshots. :bang:

I do like it. But it won't win propular favor.

[Capper Al]

I ain't going to happen. There is too much at stake here for the vendors.

[DanG]

I ain't going to happen. There is too much at stake here for the vendors.
Curious;

What conclusions would one draw from this other than the entertainment value?

The best player I personally know lost a small fortune the last ¼ of 2007. If you judged him on a day, weekend, week or those three months you wouldn’t have a clue this was a great gambler and long term winner.

Just my opinion…

[Capper Al]

Curious;

What conclusions would one draw from this other than the entertainment value?

The best player I personally know lost a small fortune the last ¼ of 2007. If you judged him on a day, weekend, week or those three months you wouldn’t have a clue this was a great gambler and long term winner.

Just my opinion…

Hopefully, not much more than entertainment value. It would give us a peek at the different products. The conclusion is based on too much smoke being sent out. It isn't complex, but it was made out to be complex.

[DanG]

The conclusion is based on too much smoke being sent out. It isn't complex, but it was made out to be complex.
You lost me here Al… :confused:

[njcurveball]

It was basically a thread fishing for selections from what I can see Dan. You probably are reading too much into it.

[Tom]

What insights would one get from seeing the selections from a program?
Noting about the program.

Here is an inside look at HTR

R1 3,1
R2 4,7
R3 5,2


:rolleyes::D

[Dave Schwartz]

As far as I am concerned, I like the idea of a "product showcase" where one can see my software in action.

Just posting picks does not achieve that.

That is why I prefer to do "live play" where people actually see my screens, hear my voice discussing the race and what I am doing. They can consider my advise but do what they will with the picks. Of course, I post my picks as I go and anyone interested can chart them if that is important. (Even I chart them as I go.)


This has a potential huge benefit to me as a vendor in terms of exposure but there is always the risk that my picks are just off that day.

The biggest stumbling block to this for me has been getting people to listen to the telephone call. I recall doing a two-hour live play one day where there were 15 people watching and only about 3 or 4 on the telephone. (Of course, nobody ever said they actually enjoyed listening to my voice - think of it as a price to pay.)

I have looked into video streaming but with a 25-30 second latency and the last minute shift in tote action having such a big impact on the wagers, it is almost impossible.

The cost to me is also a huge difference... the webinar approach (i.e. telphone call) is $100 per month and the video streaming starts at around $500 per month.

I have never really understood the reistance to participating in the conference call - the only charge is for normal long distance. Are people really that cheap?

So, in lieu of me entering a contest to post picks I think I will just start up an occasional "live play."


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[Kelso]

Handicapper A has 3 winners out of 5, they pay enough to double his money.
(2.00 roi * 60%) = 1.20

Handicapper B has 1 winner, but triples his money
(3.00 * 20%) = 0.60

So much for picking longshots. :bang:


Which goes directly to my question about equivilence.

Is there a common understanding ... perhaps among professional players ... about what constitutes a 'better' system? At equal ROI (unlike your example), is it generally accepted as 'preferable' to have a system with a higher win rate or one with a lower rate but a higher average score (accomodating your preference for longshots)?

If such a common understanding exists, then that would seem to be the best basis for comparing systems in a contest.

For contest purposes, I suggest that blending ROI and Win% in some manner would lessen the impact of the "nothing to lose," end-of-contest longshot selections by players who are trailing.

[betchatoo]

Which goes directly to my question about equivilence.

Is there a common understanding ... perhaps among professional players ... about what constitutes a 'better' system? At equal ROI (unlike your example), is it generally accepted as 'preferable' to have a system with a higher win rate or one with a lower rate but a higher average score (accomodating your preference for longshots)?

If such a common understanding exists, then that would seem to be the best basis for comparing systems in a contest.

.
Kelso:
I truly believe what works best is entirely based on your own personality. For many, hitting at a high rate is a confidence booster and makes them comfortable. For others (and that would include me) it is worthwhile to suffer a losing streak and know that when your payoffs hit it will be worth the wait. I dont think there is one correct or generally accepted answer. It is another reason that this is such a great pastime.

[njcurveball]

For contest purposes, I suggest that blending ROI and Win% in some manner would lessen the impact of the "nothing to lose," end-of-contest longshot selections by players who are trailing.


This would either eliminate ANY chance a player would have if there was a CAP, or make a player go for even longer shots if there were no CAP.

If the player from the example above had 60% winners and simply BROKE even. Another player would have to hit at least 10% at an average price of $60.

In that case, the entire tournament strategy would be based on picking favorites. Which actually might be kind of interesting.

[Tom]

Some people use thier programs to find live longshots. It's not fair to tell the guy how he as to use his own program.

[JustRalph]

As far as I am concerned, I like the idea of a "product showcase" where one can see my software in action.

Just posting picks does not achieve that.

That is why I prefer to do "live play" where people actually see my screens, hear my voice discussing the race and what I am doing. They can consider my advise but do what they will with the picks. Of course, I post my picks as I go and anyone interested can chart them if that is important. (Even I chart them as I go.)


This has a potential huge benefit to me as a vendor in terms of exposure but there is always the risk that my picks are just off that day.

The biggest stumbling block to this for me has been getting people to listen to the telephone call. I recall doing a two-hour live play one day where there were 15 people watching and only about 3 or 4 on the telephone. (Of course, nobody ever said they actually enjoyed listening to my voice - think of it as a price to pay.)

I have looked into video streaming but with a 25-30 second latency and the last minute shift in tote action having such a big impact on the wagers, it is almost impossible.

The cost to me is also a huge difference... the webinar approach (i.e. telphone call) is $100 per month and the video streaming starts at around $500 per month.

I have never really understood the reistance to participating in the conference call - the only charge is for normal long distance. Are people really that cheap?

So, in lieu of me entering a contest to post picks I think I will just start up an occasional "live play."


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

I participated in one of these and Dave is right.........this is much more revealing and much more informative about the software. It was great and Dave was great................I suggest anybody who is interested.........jump in with Dave

[JustRalph]

As far as I am concerned, I like the idea of a "product showcase" where one can see my software in action.


This is why there needs to be a PA get together somewhere. There could be an entire day dedicated to Software etc...........I say a three day get together would be a fun time. Somewhere warm........and horseplayer friendly........

[Lefty]

JR, Vegas in the Spring sounds good to me. I say that because I am Chea...er
Frugal.

[Dave Schwartz]

Lefty,

... and you live in Las Vegas. <G>


Dave

[BillW]

This is why there needs to be a PA get together somewhere. There could be an entire day dedicated to Software etc...........I say a three day get together would be a fun time. Somewhere warm........and horseplayer friendly........

Ohh, ohh ,ohh, I know, I know :jump: :jump: How about Saratoga :p

[ryesteve]

Ohh, ohh ,ohh, I know, I know :jump: :jump: How about Saratoga :p
I'd have liked that idea, except these guys are going to need an internet connection throughout the day.

[BillW]

I'd have liked that idea, except these guys are going to need an internet connection throughout the day.

Everybody should be able to get by without it. We use computers all the time at Saratoga. BTW - an internet connection would be problematic in Vegas also, the casinos won't allow them.

[asH]

Just give each participant a fixed bankroll, let them do with it whatever they want, and then let the folks who are watching the results decide for themselves which play style and which set of results they liked the most.[/QUOTE]

excellent Idea ryesteve , work out the details as this thing plays out...let it evolve.

We all know a winner (Secretariat) when we see one...I hope

lol
asH
Its OK with me if you guys exclude my (trusty-rusty) hand rolled computer program.

[asH]

Tom,

choose a track...any track
asH

Here is an inside look at HTR

R1 3,1
R2 4,7
R3 5,2

[Capper Al]

Count me in if you ever do another one.

As far as I am concerned, I like the idea of a "product showcase" where one can see my software in action.

Just posting picks does not achieve that.

That is why I prefer to do "live play" where people actually see my screens, hear my voice discussing the race and what I am doing. They can consider my advise but do what they will with the picks. Of course, I post my picks as I go and anyone interested can chart them if that is important. (Even I chart them as I go.)


This has a potential huge benefit to me as a vendor in terms of exposure but there is always the risk that my picks are just off that day.

The biggest stumbling block to this for me has been getting people to listen to the telephone call. I recall doing a two-hour live play one day where there were 15 people watching and only about 3 or 4 on the telephone. (Of course, nobody ever said they actually enjoyed listening to my voice - think of it as a price to pay.)

I have looked into video streaming but with a 25-30 second latency and the last minute shift in tote action having such a big impact on the wagers, it is almost impossible.

The cost to me is also a huge difference... the webinar approach (i.e. telphone call) is $100 per month and the video streaming starts at around $500 per month.

I have never really understood the reistance to participating in the conference call - the only charge is for normal long distance. Are people really that cheap?

So, in lieu of me entering a contest to post picks I think I will just start up an occasional "live play."


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[Tom]

Tom,

choose a track...any track
asH

Here is an inside look at HTR

R1 3,1
R2 4,7
R3 5,2

Don't need a track - this what HTR shows. They wanted to see how it worked! :rolleyes::D

[Tom]

Ohh, ohh ,ohh, I know, I know :jump: :jump: How about Saratoga :p


Hmmmmm. Can you rent a house or cabin there?
Maybe they have table at the track - we could all sit together, maybe in a tent..........:rolleyes:

[ryesteve]

Everybody should be able to get by without it. We use computers all the time at Saratoga. BTW - an internet connection would be problematic in Vegas also, the casinos won't allow them.
Yes, they could "get by", but if the idea is for people to see how the programs work and how they're used, the lack of internet would be a major shortcoming, for some more than others.

[asH]

Don't need a track - this what HTR shows. They wanted to see how it worked! :rolleyes::D


What does it all mean ; are these coordinates on a 3 dimensional map? a strand of DNA code? ...did they ever find out how it worked? What does it all mean?? :bang:

lol
asH:D

[njcurveball]

Yes, they could "get by", but if the idea is for people to see how the programs work and how they're used, the lack of internet would be a major shortcoming, for some more than others.

An excellent point and also a very good thing to do research on before selecting a program.

If the program is "hands on" with late odds changes being a deciding factor, than it is probably not a good fit for someone who puts their bets in at lunch or on the weekends before doing other things.

Always good to see a "live" demo before purchasing. :ThmbUp:

[BillW]

Yes, they could "get by", but if the idea is for people to see how the programs work and how they're used, the lack of internet would be a major shortcoming, for some more than others.

Steve,

I was (kind of sarcastically) answering Ralph's post about having a "PA get-together" for a few days worth of demonstration (I assumed he was talking about everyone being there live). We already have one planned and do so every year for a week at the Spa. It's not specifically for software demonstration, but plenty of handicapping demonstration surely goes on :ThmbUp: .