could you guys rank these

[tilson]

I'de like the guys to rank these in terms of easy of use.

DRF Formulator....from what i have seen exporting files has made this pretty user UNfriendly....i also think their data with which to work is pretty limitied.

HTR...lots of data but again the exporting of files and the inability to view info from within the program itself makes it pretty user UNfriendly.

Synergism ????

All IN ONE ????

THOROVISION ????

Frankly i don't like to ask about program effectivness because i strong believe if enough data is provided the guy working the program should be able to fashion at least an angle or two that is fairly strong, provided the program is reasonably easy to work with.
Ya know asking how "effective is this program" is sorta like asking how good is this gun ? It largely depends on who's hands it is in. The user should only want that it be reliable and not require a phd to use.

[GR1@HTR]

Thats like asking which Penthouse centerfold you like best...The best one is the one you like best. Only way for you to find out which is best for you is to try them all. If you are truely interested in using SW as a tool the I would suggest tyring each program for several weeks vs a couple of days so you can get a good understanding of the systems. SW not for everybody, that is for sure...

[JimG]

tilson...tell us what you are wanting a software program to do...and I'll try to give some advice. Being a software junkie, I've tried alot of them.


Jim

[hurrikane]

That's a tough one tilson. I've used All In One Multicaps HTRF and HTR.

I stayed with HTR..more for the people than the software although the numbers Ken Massa produces are the best I've ever experienced. Not sure what you mean by exporting and not being able to view all the data. I would guess at HTR the majority of users don't export and use a db..most I 'think' (could be wrong) handicapp straight from the program.

The others I used I found too prohibitive cost wise...buying cards everyday for every track is expensive. Not that they aren't good...although they seemed a little chalky..I spent a bunch on datafiles for a few months.

HTR...lots of data but again the exporting of files and the inability to view info from within the program itself makes it pretty user UNfriendly.

I export HTR files every day. The files are very easy to download and export to a data base.

HTR only has about 11 different menus to view the data, in the main program. Plus other programs that model the data, do track profiles and provide a sheets type representation of PP data.

If you are tying to use the demo and are having trouble, just ask the quys over on the HTR board for some help.

As far as ease of use goes if you can post on this board, then you will be able to use the program. IMO The program is easy to use

[andicap]

I LOVE Thorovision!!!!
I cant really afford the $100 a month fee anymore (I don't play enough nowadays to justify it).
Actually, Tilson, I wrote the original manual for Thorovision and knew its founders. Unfortunately, one of them died and they lost interest in it after that, but
HDW sells it and upgrades the pars. There's a lot of crap they put in there, but the basic stuff is killer, easy to use.
Forget the model unless you handicap and choose pacelines each and every day. Then its great, but I hate modelers based on pacelines chosen by the computer. I just don't think they are accurate (although many here who use HTR would vehementaly disagree and might be right).

Anyway, if you want to guidance for Thorovision just email me. If I ever get the time to play regularly again, Thorovision is the program I would use in a heartbeat. It's easy and accurate (BUT NOT A BLACK BOX! DON'T USE IT FOR ITS PICKS!). And there's one feature on there I've never seen in another software that is just killer (although you have to model it yourself it doesn't take long) for identifying how a track is really playing.

[Dick Schmidt]

Andycap,

I didn't know you knew Michael Perry and Tom Hambleton. The Throvision program was far ahead of its time. It was designed for the daily player, but its feature set was excellent. Just the fact that so many players hang on to it long after its programer died is a tribute to how well it works. The folks at HDW tell me that the number of people using it is slowly dwindling, and I suppose it will someday disappear. Too bad, as Michael was a gifted programer. Somehow his way of doing things always struck me as "right." I never had to adapt my thinking to the program.

Tilson,

Of the programs you list, I would say that Synergism is the easiest to use. It throws a lot of data at you and offers many choices, but the actual using of the program is dead simple. It is free, so you can take a look without risk. Comes with lots of data to play with. BTW, Bob Purdy tells me that he may soon offer a program that prints out a "dead ringer" for a racing form using the Synergism file. The other HDW files may come later. All the data is in the files already, but some people just miss having a paper form.

[andicap]

Dick,
Didn't know you were a Thorovision user.
I didn't know Tom Hambleton so much as I knew Bill Burns a really gifted handicapper who I'm sure you must know as I think there's an acknowledgement for him in Pace Makes the Race. One of the unsung ex-Sartinites and nice low-key guy. He left the country but I believe he's back in San Diego now.
I used to model the Reserve Energy screen (after blocking out unrepresentative pacelines) and you'd be amazed what longshots would come in. The D.A. and HP index were ingenious. At most tracks you could eliminate any horse over a 5.5 in D.A. unless either
a) there was going to be a killer speed duel and everything would collapse or
b) the speed was very very weak.

I would also build contender methods using the Cramer speed figs, AP and class screens, then use my Reserve energy models and end up with 3 horses with no handicapping at all. If a 6-1 shot remained in there, I'd handicap the race to see if he had a shot and key it.

Unfortunately my handicapping skills were not quite as sharp as they have become (studying Ragozin has really helped my form cycle analysis).
If I were to spend $100 a month right now, it would be on this program. Its just so easy to use. You just have to forget about all the crap they added in the last year that did nothing.

[Dick Schmidt]

Andycap,

Sure I knew Bill, though not as well as the others. Poor guy, all he wanted to do was play the horses but they kept throwing money at him to run oil projects overseas. Last I heard he was living in luxury in the Far East with hot and cold running servants. Heck of a nice guy and a tremendous handicapper, though his betting skills were suspect at times.

I've moved on from Thorovision, though I still remember it fondly. I guess I didn't use it in the last year, as I don't know what you are talking about concerning the addons. I was in England and then lost track of Tom, who was the only one of the Thorovision bunch I really knew well. Sorry that it is no longer supported. One of these days I'll take another look at it. Is it still available in a DOS version only? I remember Michael talking about going to windows and what a pain in the butt it was, but I don't know if he ever did it or not.

Dick

[andicap]

Nope, never went to Windows.

[Butch]

I didn't like Thorovision at all, and I wasn't impressed with All In One. I haven't used Synergism, but I know a couple of guys who do. One guy loves it and the other one can't do a thing with it. Both said that it has a fairly high learning curve and that you have to work hard with it to get results.

Butch