Horse Racing Software for a Hobby

[Sly7449]

Greetings,

Today as I was surfing the web at some Horse Racing Sites, I ran across one that the developer envisioned that his Clientel was geared mainly to use of his Software for Horse Racing as a "Challenging Hobby" rather than "A Potential Second Income".

As I sit here after having my socks blown off with such an admission, it would be almost embrassing to even start a Poll to determine how many of you out there really do this for a Hobby rather than a way to generate Income.

Now, in all fairness to the Developer, it appears from his statement that he expected to draw an audience of cronic losers.

It is sure nice to know what the Developer of a Software has tweaked his/her Numbers to be maybe unstable, if they develop it for the recreational player with losing in mind.

I wonder how many other Developers are out there that thinks the same way of their Clients.

There is a Consumer Protection Agency that safeguards against many facets of products on the market. One of them is the USDA that moniotors food sources to ensure that their products are safe to the consumers so that they don't get Food Poisoning. Tomatoes anyone?

In Horse Racing, is there any Agency to monitor Software?

Thanks

Sly

[Dave Schwartz]

Is this a coincidence?

I made just such a post today on the HorseStreet BBS.


These are difficult times. More and more of our users are looking at racing as a potential second income rather than just a challenging hobby.
I have decided that the classes we schedule need to be better atuned to the needs of our users. Therefore, I am going to take Tuesday's workshop time and devote it to discussion of direction.

The title will be Your Direction with HSH.


I strongly suggest that you attend. The class will not be recorded, although I am sure there will be discussion in the HSH Strategy forum.

Please try to attend.

http://www.horsestreet.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/001928.html

Non-HSH users who would like to attend should sign up at this link:
http://www.practicalhandicapping.com/desktop/hsuniv/index.htm#Your_Direction_with_HSH

[Judicious Player]

Greetings,

Today as I was surfing the web at some Horse Racing Sites, I ran across one that the developer envisioned that his Clientel was geared mainly to use of his Software for Horse Racing as a "Challenging Hobby" rather than "A Potential Second Income".

As I sit here after having my socks blown off with such an admission, it would be almost embrassing to even start a Poll to determine how many of you out there really do this for a Hobby rather than a way to generate Income.

Now, in all fairness to the Developer, it appears from his statement that he expected to draw an audience of cronic losers.

It is sure nice to know what the Developer of a Software has tweaked his/her Numbers to be maybe unstable, if they develop it for the recreational player with losing in mind.

I wonder how many other Developers are out there that thinks the same way of their Clients.

There is a Consumer Protection Agency that safeguards against many facets of products on the market. One of them is the USDA that moniotors food sources to ensure that their products are safe to the consumers so that they don't get Food Poisoning. Tomatoes anyone?

In Horse Racing, is there any Agency to monitor Software?

Thanks

Sly


"Challenging Hobby". Just another example of what most people think, including, unfortunately, frequenters of this forum, "The horses races can't be beat" and it should not be viewed as anything more than a costly hobby.

[chickenhead]

I'm not sure I think I'm even close to understanding the drift of this thread.


There is something wrong with someone selling something to non-professionals?

or

Just being a non-professional in, well, anything I guess, is wrong?



I think I'm going to sue Nike. Them shoes I bought...they were comfy and they did their job...but the NBA never did get around to calling me. Damn Nike straight to hell. But then again, b-ball was only a hobby. Which is apparently a moral failing.

[DeanT]

I'm with you Chick. I like that admission. In fact, from speaking with a couple people who I have bought software from, them telling me that it can help me win but wont make me win was the reason I bought it.

There is nothing wrong with using software as a casual player like this fella's which might up your ROI a bit and make you a better player, while making your bankroll last longer.

As for making you a winner? If it was that easy then there would be a hell of a lot more than a few hundred pros betting racing.

[Maxspa]

All,
Check the comments that I just posted in the NetCapper thread! I believe they are relevant to the discussion here! I'm not doing this to encourage you to purchase NetCapper but offer it as information affecting many users of software!
Maxspa

[ryesteve]

So someone isn't allowed to enjoy something unless the goal is for that pursuit to generate a second income? That's awfully limiting...

[JustRalph]

So someone isn't allowed to enjoy something unless the goal is for that pursuit to generate a second income? That's awfully limiting...

Steve's right............ ever own a boat or plane?

[DJofSD]

In memory of Doc Sartin I am going to attempt to make a point using a lesson he taught via seminars and articles in the Follow Up. Whether or not the lesson was learned by others is another discussion altogether.

Why does the development and use of software have to be either amatuer or professional? Why can it not be both amateur and professional?

I use software to aid in my handicapping. This is both software I have purchased and programs I have written myself. I don't profess to be a professional handicapper -- perhaps an advanced amateur is closer to the truth -- but I do use the same data and the same tools.

Then there is the software I develop "for fun". This is mainly programs I will write to investigate a question about handicapping, or, software used as an adjunct to the programs I use when I make a bet. And then there are the programs I write and rewrite because of a new tool or capability in my choosen development arsenal. As my understanding of OOP and .NET along with sockets programming increases, I find that I like to go back and rework old programs. I do it to save time in the handicapping process and I do it because it is it's own challenge.

So in summary, I write and use software for both fun and profit. And when I stop having fun that's when I will move on to some other activity to keep the little gray cells busy. Both/and not either/or.

[Sly7449]

Greetings,


Thanks for all your replies.

My Drift pertains to a software designed for Horse Racing. If the Developer of such does not initially intend for this to be a product that could produce a Profit for both the Developer and its Clients, then this is a Hobby for all.

Jockeys don't ride for Fun. Trainers are not in this bussiness for Fun.

Now, Data Integrity accompanies those Developers that attempt to design thier Product as an Investment Tool.

Basically, Data Integerity is the Core of each Software. When situations emerge admist the cloak of Properiety Information, I think that there is a problem. When that is accompanied with a statement that the Clientel is using the Software for Fun, it leads me to think that there is lack of accountability.

No Software could really say that all users will be able to make a Profit but at least we should be able to apply trust of the Data provided. As compluicated as this issue is, we do acknowledge the risk involved.

Could it be really the Software, or is it Equibase, HDW, BRIS, or ATR or who so ever.

The bottom line really lies on the User to verify what they are looking at. Could you imagine the occasional Auto Scratching of Four Horses in a Race that you can see them actually running in the race?

Could you imagine seeing the Worst of three horses in a Tandem Race getting Better Numbers than another?

Yes, that's the risk we do take but a nonchelant attutude that Users should be using the Software for fun really prompted my query.

Make me wonder which is a more reliabe source. Could it be a bigger company or Independent Developers that have to rely on many other companies to provide various Bits and Pieces of Data?

Thanks

Sly

[raybo]

IMO, as long as a piece of handicapping software recreates the raw data accurately, the user is ahead. How they use the data is a personal choice.

Many "professional" handicappers entered the game because of reasons other than producing a profit. Handicapping is a huge challenge and many people are driven by challenges. In short, it's enjoyable, like playing poker online, most who play online don't play to make money, they just enjoy the challenge or the distraction from the, sometime, drudgery of daily life.

I am probably in the small minority of handicappers who entered the arena with profits as my goal and kept that goal foremost in my mind and efforts throughout the past 30+ years as a player.

I have just as much respect for those players who have no such lofty goal but simply enjoy the game and the challenges it presents

[ryesteve]

... If the Developer of such does not initially intend for this to be a product that could produce a Profit...
I'm not getting this from your original post. Just because someone isn't generating a "second income" from horse racing, doesn't mean they're not profitable. Maybe it's just semantics, but I see it as a matter of scale and perspective. I could be wrong, but I would've assumed you'd find many folks here who are winning players, but don't look at racing as a source of an extra income.

Perhaps the software seller you quoted IS a charlatan, but the only thing I came away with is that he's looking at it as an intellectual endeavor, rather than a job. But that doesn't automatically diminish his credentials.

[green80]

sly,

No one addressed your last question. Is there an agency to monitor software? I would like to see an unbiased rating or result comparison of different software.

[gopony]

sly,

No one addressed your last question. Is there an agency to monitor software? I would like to see an unbiased rating or result comparison of different software.

The only way to find out currently, is to figure out who is doing this for a living and go back to the poll on who is using what software.

After working with some of the people here, I have found there are actually some that could be doing this for a living but are not.

And then there are some who have posted on this board for a long time and most never knew that they were doing this for a living.

[Jeff P]

You'd be surprised sometimes...

The late Alan Woods posted here under the handle of Entropy. He was someone I respected greatly and was without question one of the most successful players of our age. Until someone told me it was him I had absolutely no idea.


-jp

.

[eqitec]

It seems silly to me to even think about certifying handicapping software when the source data everyone has to use is uncertifiable as accurate.

Some of the most important measurements used in handicapping such as lengths behind and workout times are are estimated by humans and subject to high error margins.

If quality control and certification is the goal, then the first step toward that goal would be to demand accuracy from the collectors and publishers of the data handicappers have to use, whether it be within handicapping software or on paper-based past performance programs.

Trakus or a similar technology can provide the accuracy we need. Was that included as one of HANA's criteria for a track to be considered one of the top ten?

[raybo]

It seems silly to me to even think about certifying handicapping software when the source data everyone has to use is uncertifiable as accurate.

Some of the most important measurements used in handicapping such as lengths behind and workout times are are estimated by humans and subject to high error margins.

If quality control and certification is the goal, then the first step toward that goal would be to demand accuracy from the collectors and publishers of the data handicappers have to use, whether it be within handicapping software or on paper-based past performance programs.

Trakus or a similar technology can provide the accuracy we need. Was that included as one of HANA's criteria for a track to be considered one of the top ten?

Good points. No, timing technology was not used for the track rankings but probably should be in the future.

[Dave Schwartz]

The issue of this thread, IMHO, is misguided to begin with.

Software is not aimed at hobbyists. Players are aimed at hobbyism. (nice word?)

Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[Lefty]

sly, there are amateur jockeys and i assume they do it for fun. There are those that handicap for fun too.

[gopony]

The late Alan Woods posted here under the handle of Entropy. He was someone I respected greatly and was without question one of the most successful players of our age. Until someone told me it was him I had absolutely no idea.
-jp

.

That's exactly one of the ones I was thinking about.

There are also a couple more on this board, but I don't think they are betting the kind of money Alan Woods was.

[JustRalph]

Trakus or a similar technology can provide the accuracy we need. Was that included as one of HANA's criteria for a track to be considered one of the top ten?

Trakus is not all it is cracked up to be........... I have seen races where it was plain wrong .......... at least one race where the finish was in doubt. I have seen a few others where Trakus said a horse was beaten by a big margin, but was closer, much closer than trakus showed......... but then again I am watching on a TV.....who knows........... When Trakus shows a horse winning and the photo shows him lose by a head............. I start to wonder

It may have improved in the last couple years........???

[BillW]

Trakus is not all it is cracked up to be........... I have seen races where it was plain wrong .......... at least one race where the finish was in doubt. I have seen a few others where Trakus said a horse was beaten by a big margin, but was closer, much closer than trakus showed......... but then again I am watching on a TV.....who knows........... When Trakus shows a horse winning and the photo shows him lose by a head............. I start to wonder

It may have improved in the last couple years........???

Trakus is accurate to +/- 1 foot at a sample rate of 30/sec. per one of their techs. Without interpolation to smooth the sample rate error you can be off by a few feet (a horse at the finish line is traveling about 1.67 feet/sample). This is assuming there are no glitches in the system.

Trakus is much better for the internal fractions, but doesn't come close to the photo finish camera for accurate finish calls.

[chickenhead]

maybe HANA can put up a blog post and settle once and for all how many feet 1 chart caller length is. Sure to generate some onsite debate :D

Seriously tho, I wonder if HANA has the clout (I know I didn't) to get the photo companies to divulge exactly what time constants are used to convert "time" to "lengths" in the photo finish operations, whether it's variable based on distance, etc....a real thorough expose piece covering the entire process from start to finish.

That would be nice. :ThmbUp: