PDA

View Full Version : Handi-Fast


Pages : [1] 2

grexxon
12-03-2009, 09:09 AM
Been using this program or awhile now. Today when I went to use it a window popped up saying Comdlg32.ocx is not registered or a file is missing or invalid.
Need help, what can I do

Thanks
George

togatrigger
12-03-2009, 06:31 PM
Check to see if the file exists (search the windows/WINNT directory), and if it does, go into run and type, regsvr32 then the location of the file. This will register the library file with the computer.

If it doesn't exist, you'll have to obtain the file, and then register it.

thoroughbred
12-03-2009, 07:19 PM
Been using this program or awhile now. Today when I went to use it a window popped up saying Comdlg32.ocx is not registered or a file is missing or invalid.
Need help, what can I do

Thanks
George

I invoked "Google" and entered: "Comdlg32.ocx is not registered"
Found many links that discuss this problem. Some may even suggest a fix.

headhawg
12-03-2009, 08:37 PM
Try the solution in this thread as another user had a similar problem:

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=59987&page=2&pp=15&highlight=Comdlg32.ocx

Read posts 18-22, and use the link in Post 19.

And just to clarify, the ocx error is for Doug's FAST version not Handifast. Handifast can be used as a stand-alone program and doesn't need to register anything with Windows. Doug made it easy for users to use both programs by creating an installer program and having the ability to launch Handifast from within FAST.

douglasw32
12-04-2009, 01:25 AM
If it does not work try adding these to your system....

(dot) net
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...&displaylang=en (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=0856EACB-4362-4B0D-8EDD-AAB15C5E04F5&displaylang=en)

VB runtimes
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/192461

Library files
http://www.ascentive.com/support/new/libraryfiles.exe

cloud9
12-04-2009, 03:55 PM
doug. A new update still in the works ?

douglasw32
12-04-2009, 05:04 PM
I hope so, the other two are in the midst of that as I last knew.

I would just package it up and host the install file on the new one since it would be just one program and not two different ones at that point?

headhawg
12-05-2009, 12:12 PM
I have some users email me with the update question. I have not been able to work on Handifast due to time constraints. I have a new job which keeps me very busy, and in my little amount of free time I have a couple of other projects (including my own handicapping program) that have taken priority. (And truth be told I was also kind of p.o.'d at the negative comments unleashed in the Handifast version X thread.)

The things that I would like to add to Handifast HHX require a lot of work and time which I am not able to commit to right now. One feature is an AutoScratch utility, and another is to have the ability to do batch processing -- that is, a way to create the csv files by a range of dates as opposed to doing them one at a time. Doing that would make it a lot easier to research the ratings in Handifast for those who want to see what works and what doesn't. And also adding the capability of using multiple weight files.

The last I heard is that Handi is still working on the multi-track version so maybe he will give us an update on his progress.

dartman51
12-06-2009, 01:20 AM
I have some users email me with the update question. I have not been able to work on Handifast due to time constraints. I have a new job which keeps me very busy, and in my little amount of free time I have a couple of other projects (including my own handicapping program) that have taken priority. (And truth be told I was also kind of p.o.'d at the negative comments unleashed in the Handifast version X thread.)

The things that I would like to add to Handifast HHX require a lot of work and time which I am not able to commit to right now. One feature is an AutoScratch utility, and another is to have the ability to do batch processing -- that is, a way to create the csv files by a range of dates as opposed to doing them one at a time. Doing that would make it a lot easier to research the ratings in Handifast for those who want to see what works and what doesn't. And also adding the capability of using multiple weight files.

The last I heard is that Handi is still working on the multi-track version so maybe he will give us an update on his progress.


HH, don't let the naysayers get to you. Some of them sound like they wandered over here from the OT board, with all the negativity. I, and many others appreciate the talents of people like you, Doug and Handi. What you guys have done so far is wonderful. I am sure that anything you guys add to the program, will be just as good, or better. In the meantime, enjoy your job. I've been out of work since Jan., and would love a new job, to occupy my time.
Thanks for what you guys so generously share with the rest of us. :)

raybo
12-06-2009, 02:11 PM
HH, don't let the naysayers get to you. Some of them sound like they wandered over here from the OT board, with all the negativity. I, and many others appreciate the talents of people like you, Doug and Handi. What you guys have done so far is wonderful. I am sure that anything you guys add to the program, will be just as good, or better. In the meantime, enjoy your job. I've been out of work since Jan., and would love a new job, to occupy my time.
Thanks for what you guys so generously share with the rest of us. :)

I agree! If you're doing something for free, like this program and my Excel spreadsheet, you can't let negative comments, from people who won't be using the program, deter you. Listen to active users, who appreciate the time and effort you are putting into it. If these active users' wants and needs can be produced, and they make sense to you as being a positive, regarding the program, then that is what you should concentrate on. But, do it in your own time, after all, you're not getting paid for the work and those who really appreciate your efforts will be willing to wait.

lsosa54
12-06-2009, 02:23 PM
HH, don't let the naysayers get to you. :)

H, I was going to post the same thing yesterday but I got distracted. Job comes first but I know through our communications that when you have time, you generously give it to enhance Doug and Handi's and now, your work.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion and should feel free to post, hopefully in a reasonable manner. Contrary opinions can help enhance what we've got.

I think you're pretty familiar with how I use the program playing SoCal only for the most part, but here's a couple from yesterday that are not atypical:

Race 9: Top FAST & PWR #. Asay Creek $16.20

Race 8: Top PWR # tie. Zardana $24.00

Race 7: Top PWR #. Kris Silver $12.00

Race 6: Win and place were 1st time starters.

Race 5: Top PWR #. Aquicksting $8.40 (This guy was 1-25, running at his lowest class ever, and bet down from his 6-1 ML - not a bet for me - risk vs. reward. Mel Stute and Bill Thomas must have laid a nice bet as well)

Race 4: Top FAST and 3-way tie for Top PWR #. Smokenomore $7.40

Race 3: Riviera Cocktail was too low ranked to get either in FAST or PWR. As you know, I do my points SOLELY on 4 factors: DS, FM, PC, TF with 100 points on each. Yes, the TF factor seems to work very well for Polytrack).
On that basis, Riviera and the place horse were tied for 1st with 250 points each. Guess I got lucky.

Win mutuel: $16.00 $1 exacta: $27.10

Race 2: Top PWR #. Gambling Pokerface $13.80

Race 1: 2nd PWR #. Skippy Due $13.40

Yesterday was a bit atypical maybe insofar as the # of winners contained in the top FAST and PWR numbers and their mutuels but really, for a free program that is fairly automatic, if you stick with it, it is pretty amazing.

For non poly players, I did play MNR on a lark on 11-21. I know nothing about MNR, how it plays, etc. Only change I made was to switch the 100 pts. from TF to DT.

While the FAST and PWR #'s produce nada until the 7th race, my 3rd "points" horses in Race 1 and Race 4 produced nice mutuels: Bevy $21.40 and Unsung Angels $14.40.

The 7th race was the gift where the 2nd PWR # produced a $51.80 mutuel - Loot Tooten Trudy. She was 4th ranked FAST. The place horse was 3rd ranked FAST/PWR and the show horse was 2nd ranked FAST. They were also my 2nd and 4th ranked points horses. If you play exactas and tris, some pretty nice mutuels.

Basically, to keep it simple, all I try and do is look for value in the top 4 and ties FAST and PWR ranks and in my 4 "points" horses.

The toughest thing for me has been not to disregard or talk myself off program choices because I think they may be ridiculous based on my ingrained handicapping style/knowledge.

In the last at HOL on 12-03, the 4th ranked FAST and my 3rd ranked points horse is a 30-1 ML shot. The horse is going off at 64-1, has a 74 day layoff, non winning trainer and jock, and of his 6 races, he did have a 3rd by 10.25 lengths finish at DMR. He does have a few catalysts, so to speak, but I completely dismiss him.

Well, in a MCL 25K route, the 3rd PWR rank wins @ $14.80. The 4th rank PWR shows and the 1st rank PWR finishes 4th. Our homely friend, Nubian Princess, places @ $43.20 and I still don't have the stomach to look at the exotic mutuels.

I attached the print screen so you can get sick or laugh!

All I can say is stick with a consistent approach and this little free program is strong.

SoCaGambler
12-06-2009, 04:34 PM
This is a truly amazing program these three gentlemen have produced. I’ve only been able to run old files I saved. If I had this little gem of a program in the past I would have had better results.

Many thanks for the generosity of Doug, Handi, and Headhawg’s many hours of hard work. I am really looking forward to playing with this tool as soon as I can.

I am curious as to how Isosa54 was able to change the ratings. I have HandifastHHxv16 however I am unable to change the ratings. I am not sure I really want to from what I have seen so far using my old files. But it would be fun to play around with them.

Again many thanks for sharing.

Best of luck to all.

SoCa

lsosa54
12-06-2009, 06:53 PM
I am curious as to how Isosa54 was able to change the ratings. I have HandifastHHxv16 however I am unable to change the ratings. I am not sure I really want to from what I have seen so far using my old files. But it would be fun to play around with them.

SoCa

Doug made an early attempt with his text file in early versions of the program (not sure it was Handifast then) but I don't think you can do it in v1.6. I believe HH made a version 2.0 available to those that pm'd him for it and that's what I use at the moment. I know he's working on having multiple "points" configurations available to be saved and used.

SoCaGambler
12-06-2009, 08:36 PM
Thanks for the quick reply. I will wait and see what the final options will be when completed. The product will be a wonderful addition to anyone handicapping tool box thats for sure.
:ThmbUp:

Handiman
12-06-2009, 09:55 PM
Quick note. Haven't had the energy or thought patterns available lately to get any work done. Haven't been feeling too well. Just been playing a few fun contests at one track for a few days.

Today I have been in bed all day and even skipped a contest I was suppose to play in on Woodbine closing day.

I will get back to things as soon as I get to feeling better.

Handi :)

douglasw32
12-06-2009, 10:04 PM
LROSA- Best review I have seen, Thanks...

I am working on a surprise addition also, but like everyone else have a ton to do at the day job first...

Handi, I hope you feel better soon, being sick sucks !

Handiman
12-07-2009, 01:12 AM
Just got up to check in here for a moment. I am not a spreadsheet or database guy. I know a bit but not an expert by any means.

So I have two questions. But before that, I do have Handifast where it will do 6 tracks live.

Now, can some one explain to me what you are looking to do with the csv files you want made? So I know why and how to approach making the program using Headhawg's code create a csv file. On top of that I should be able to include the ability to load up race cards from a file and auto handicap and create csv files.

2nd.....how much flexibility or what parameters should I set for changing the points for the differing categories?

Thanks, I'll read the answers tomorrow after my Dr.'s appointment.

Handi

redeye007
12-08-2009, 12:08 AM
H, I was going to post the same thing yesterday but I got distracted. Job comes first but I know through our communications that when you have time, you generously give it to enhance Doug and Handi's and now, your work.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion and should feel free to post, hopefully in a reasonable manner. Contrary opinions can help enhance what we've got.

I think you're pretty familiar with how I use the program playing SoCal only for the most part, but here's a couple from yesterday that are not atypical:

Race 9: Top FAST & PWR #. Asay Creek $16.20

Race 8: Top PWR # tie. Zardana $24.00

Race 7: Top PWR #. Kris Silver $12.00

Race 6: Win and place were 1st time starters.

Race 5: Top PWR #. Aquicksting $8.40 (This guy was 1-25, running at his lowest class ever, and bet down from his 6-1 ML - not a bet for me - risk vs. reward. Mel Stute and Bill Thomas must have laid a nice bet as well)

Race 4: Top FAST and 3-way tie for Top PWR #. Smokenomore $7.40

Race 3: Riviera Cocktail was too low ranked to get either in FAST or PWR. As you know, I do my points SOLELY on 4 factors: DS, FM, PC, TF with 100 points on each. Yes, the TF factor seems to work very well for Polytrack).
On that basis, Riviera and the place horse were tied for 1st with 250 points each. Guess I got lucky.

Win mutuel: $16.00 $1 exacta: $27.10

Race 2: Top PWR #. Gambling Pokerface $13.80

Race 1: 2nd PWR #. Skippy Due $13.40

Yesterday was a bit atypical maybe insofar as the # of winners contained in the top FAST and PWR numbers and their mutuels but really, for a free program that is fairly automatic, if you stick with it, it is pretty amazing.

For non poly players, I did play MNR on a lark on 11-21. I know nothing about MNR, how it plays, etc. Only change I made was to switch the 100 pts. from TF to DT.

While the FAST and PWR #'s produce nada until the 7th race, my 3rd "points" horses in Race 1 and Race 4 produced nice mutuels: Bevy $21.40 and Unsung Angels $14.40.

The 7th race was the gift where the 2nd PWR # produced a $51.80 mutuel - Loot Tooten Trudy. She was 4th ranked FAST. The place horse was 3rd ranked FAST/PWR and the show horse was 2nd ranked FAST. They were also my 2nd and 4th ranked points horses. If you play exactas and tris, some pretty nice mutuels.

Basically, to keep it simple, all I try and do is look for value in the top 4 and ties FAST and PWR ranks and in my 4 "points" horses.

The toughest thing for me has been not to disregard or talk myself off program choices because I think they may be ridiculous based on my ingrained handicapping style/knowledge.

In the last at HOL on 12-03, the 4th ranked FAST and my 3rd ranked points horse is a 30-1 ML shot. The horse is going off at 64-1, has a 74 day layoff, non winning trainer and jock, and of his 6 races, he did have a 3rd by 10.25 lengths finish at DMR. He does have a few catalysts, so to speak, but I completely dismiss him.

Well, in a MCL 25K route, the 3rd PWR rank wins @ $14.80. The 4th rank PWR shows and the 1st rank PWR finishes 4th. Our homely friend, Nubian Princess, places @ $43.20 and I still don't have the stomach to look at the exotic mutuels.

I attached the print screen so you can get sick or laugh!

All I can say is stick with a consistent approach and this little free program is strong.


Gee, I hadn't been using the software lately and saw the reults of the last 6 at hollywood on 12/5. using the favorite in the 6th returned $4,203 for $1 pick 4. WOW! My copy must be slightly different cause on 12/3 nubian princess was listed as the 3rd pick. appears to be doing really good at hol. nice work guys. :)

headhawg
12-08-2009, 12:36 AM
Handifast HHX v2 allows the users to change the weights for the ratings, and that may change which horses appear in the Top 4. lsosa uses his own set of weights and that likely accounts for the differences between your top 4 picks and his.

redeye007
12-08-2009, 05:39 AM
Handifast HHX v2 allows the users to change the weights for the ratings, and that may change which horses appear in the Top 4. lsosa uses his own set of weights and that likely accounts for the differences between your top 4 picks and his.

thanks headhawg. I checked and I am using version 1.0. do I need to remove 1.0 before installing 2.0?

headhawg
12-08-2009, 09:56 AM
No, redeye you don't. The Handifast HHX versions can be run separately from each other. All you need to do is unzip to a different folder and run the program from there. Version 2 has everything that v1 has plus a few more things so it would be ok to delete v1 once you are sure that v2 is what you want to use. Just keep in mind that if you are using Doug's FAST program it would be better if you didn't delete/uninstall v1 as that probably will mess things up a bit.

Handiman
12-09-2009, 02:58 AM
HeadHawg posed a question to me during a recent discussion. And I don't really have the answer.

By taking a program such as handifast which is turning out some good results for users, if giving those users the ability to change point values of categories and then the weighting affecting the top 4 horses in those categories, are we taking away from the effectiveness of the original program?

Are we in fact encouraging the users to lose themselves in the attempted fine tuning of the program?

Or is providing this ability making the program more valuable to the user? Adding this option is a fair amount of coding as Head can attest too. I'd really like to hear somebody's opinion.

Handi :)

hcap
12-09-2009, 08:04 AM
Handi, using headhawgs' csv output I was able to test over 500 races for what is working overall and in track specific categories. Your top Fair Odds horse won close to 28% of the races. From the HANDIFAST VERSION X thread...

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=61083&page=22&pp=15

Using current races at CRC, WOX, and OSA. And some old BEL files from 2006. Eliminating maidens provides 262 races. Using only the top ranked Fair Odds horse.

PLAYS
262
BET $524

WIN%
27.9%

ROI
0.2% This without ANY other filters or conditions other than no maidens. One of the best showings I have ever seen for ANY program.

The testing was done in Excel. My program took the 500 or so races in csv format and added the results for each race. Including scratches. Then tested in a database program also in Excel. The most time consuming part was doing each race individually in headhawgs' csv version of Handifast. Now, can some one explain to me what you are looking to do with the csv files you want made? So I know why and how to approach making the program using Headhawg's code create a csv file. On top of that I should be able to include the ability to load up race cards from a file and auto handicap and create csv files.
So I would think doing some sort of batch file to "auto handicap and create csv files." would be great.

As I mentioned I already have the programs to test in Excel. More people have Excel rather than Access. But of course any database would do.

ranchwest
12-09-2009, 09:07 AM
HeadHawg posed a question to me during a recent discussion. And I don't really have the answer.

By taking a program such as handifast which is turning out some good results for users, if giving those users the ability to change point values of categories and then the weighting affecting the top 4 horses in those categories, are we taking away from the effectiveness of the original program?

Are we in fact encouraging the users to lose themselves in the attempted fine tuning of the program?

Or is providing this ability making the program more valuable to the user? Adding this option is a fair amount of coding as Head can attest too. I'd really like to hear somebody's opinion.

Handi :)

There probably needs to be at least 2 weightings, original and custom. That way, if a question arises, the output from the original weightings could be determined.

Vinnie
12-09-2009, 09:45 AM
Hello Fellas:

Guys, is there a current link to Version 2.0 that includes the power rating and ability to weight factors in Handifast.

Thanks a bunch. I appreciate the help. :)

Have a great day and excellent capping to all.

Vinnie
12-09-2009, 10:10 AM
Please disregard my last message guys! HH has already contacted me.

Keep this Awesome Handifast Program up and running. What an awesome tool (software) for the handicapping arsenal.

All the BEST! :)

headhawg
12-09-2009, 10:21 AM
HeadHawg posed a question to me during a recent discussion. And I don't really have the answer.

By taking a program such as handifast which is turning out some good results for users, if giving those users the ability to change point values of categories and then the weighting affecting the top 4 horses in those categories, are we taking away from the effectiveness of the original program?Handi,

I may have not been clear in my email. I think that giving the users the ability to change weights is a great feature. But I temper that by suggesting that I thought that they should only be able to change the main weight for each rating, not the weights for the first four positions. At that point I think that most of us would reach the point of diminishing returns -- a lot of extra effort for little or no substantial gain. Maybe I'm wrong here so perhaps the users will comment.

Plus, Hcap's study is pretty revealing even with a small sample so we should all take that into consideration when thinking about changing weights.


So I would think doing some sort of batch file to "auto handicap and create csv files." would be great.Hcap,

Yes definitely. It was on my to-do list, but perhaps Handi will add this feature before I get a chance to. Although maybe in the spirit of Christmas I might reconsider my previous position on writing more Handifast code. :)

RichieP
12-09-2009, 11:20 AM
Quick note. Haven't had the energy or thought patterns available lately to get any work done. Haven't been feeling too well. Just been playing a few fun contests at one track for a few days.

Today I have been in bed all day and even skipped a contest I was suppose to play in on Woodbine closing day.

I will get back to things as soon as I get to feeling better.

Handi :)

Stay strong and get better Handi, your work is helping so many man. Look what you have done!

:ThmbUp::ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

Handiman
12-09-2009, 12:57 PM
Thanks Richie,
I really appreciate your kind words. My concentration level is not what it use to be nor is my stamina. That's why I am being a bit verbose and maybe repetitive in my posts. Since coding has become more of a chore than ever before, I want to make sure I make best use of my time.

Head,

To clear up any misconceptions on my part, by weighting, I am talking about giving double the weight to top horse than the other three when assigning points.

So are we talking about changing point values for the categories and leaving the weighting where it is or something else? By this I mean let user assign whatever points he may want and leave top with double weight and next three get the same or do we let the points be changed and the weight distribution of those points to the top 4 horses be changed also?

Sorry for being so dense, but the ole brain is missing some neurotransmitters. Don't know if it is the result of all the medications over the last few years, or I'm just getting dumber by the day. :bang:

I.Q. use to be 137 now it's :19: :blush:

Handi :)

valueguy
12-09-2009, 05:57 PM
Hang in there partner.This is completely unselfish stuff you are doing.
You are definately hanging out with the Buddha.

headhawg
12-09-2009, 10:27 PM
Head,

To clear up any misconceptions on my part, by weighting, I am talking about giving double the weight to top horse than the other three when assigning points.

So are we talking about changing point values for the categories and leaving the weighting where it is or something else? By this I mean let user assign whatever points he may want and leave top with double weight and next three get the same or do we let the points be changed and the weight distribution of those points to the top 4 horses be changed also?Ahh....I see the misunderstanding now. I was looking at things from the highest rated horse on down but your original code doubled the weights for the top horse. The way that I have set it up in HHX v2 is that if the user sets the weight at 20 then the next three horses get 1/2 that number or 10. In your code if the weight was 15 the top horse would get 30 points. It doesn't matter which way that you do it but the users will need to know especially if they are using v2. If you use your original method it will certainly deliver vastly different results from the way that I coded mine. The users can make adjustments to the weighting process as long as they know if it's different from HHX v2.

But the main point of my previous post was whether or not you wanted to give the user the ability to set four weights per rating. As I mentioned in my email that seems like a lot of code that might unnecessarily make things more complicated without giving much of a benefit to the users. But that's your call.

Handiman
12-10-2009, 12:18 AM
Thanks Head that really helps! :)


Handi

douglasw32
12-10-2009, 01:17 AM
If it helps in my years of developing the program I found that a horse with just ONE TOP FIGURE in just ONE of the categories would often win.

So I started awarding that scenario

Any horse owning the top figure, in any of the ranks got double the point value for that specific part of the total number (FAST)

Not perfect since ones with 2 or 3 tops would trump the one with one, but it would throw them up into the top 4 when it would normally dismiss them.

I use your part of the program and look for any horse top ranked not in the top 4 and consider them a contender.

If that adds anything to your idea.

Handiman
12-10-2009, 02:33 AM
Ok here's a little update. I created a window and added a slider, so the user can right now if it was available, click the mouse on the slider and move the pointer between 0 and 30 to set points for the Class Category.

Now I am looking for a little help from some people on how to add more sliders to the window. Once I get some clarification, the window will have sliders for every category. So the user can set a point value for every category.

There will also be a default button to return to original settings. Once I get this figured out I will add it to the six track version and get it to you Doug.

We will start there. Idea down the road would be to be able to set points for use with specific distances and surfaces and maybe even tracks.

Handi :)

ranchwest
12-10-2009, 11:05 AM
Ok here's a little update. I created a window and added a slider, so the user can right now if it was available, click the mouse on the slider and move the pointer between 0 and 30 to set points for the Class Category.

Now I am looking for a little help from some people on how to add more sliders to the window. Once I get some clarification, the window will have sliders for every category. So the user can set a point value for every category.

There will also be a default button to return to original settings. Once I get this figured out I will add it to the six track version and get it to you Doug.

We will start there. Idea down the road would be to be able to set points for use with specific distances and surfaces and maybe even tracks.

Handi :)

I hope I'm not being a pain, but it would make more sense to me to have (at least) two sets of settings. This could be controlled through a drop-down. The idea would be to have the default settings and the custom settings that could be saved. I wouldn't want to have to clear the custom settings to get back to the default settings. Or am I just not understanding what you are saying?

Handiman
12-10-2009, 11:52 AM
Ranch,

The default settings will always be available. The new settings will be saved and loaded whenever the program is started. So in the beginning there will be 2 sets of settings. The default and the custom. But when user first fires up the program, custom settings will not exist until the user opens the settings window and creates them. Then they will be saved and remain until changed by user.

Hope that clears things up.

Handi :)

Vinnie
12-10-2009, 12:45 PM
Douglas, Handiman and Headhawg:

Wonderful program that you have created and are so phenomenal to share in Handifast. Yesterday, HH was so very gracious to send me Version 2.0 of Handifast. Due to the recommendations of Lsosa54 with regard to weights for Socal tracks, I essentially mirrored Lsosa54's recommended settings. Using the BEST average of PWR and FAST ratings in each race alone, I was able to hit several reasonable Pic 3's and the Pic 6 would have been hit although it wasn't anything large the P6 would have been hit for as little as $64.00 at the most. Four of the 6 selections came in first and the other two were the 2nd selections.

R1- had the 3-5 and they led for virtually most of the race and it was too hot on the front end and the #3 fell out of contention with the #5 holding on for third place.

R2- A medium range FTS won by the #3 Malibu Rum at nearly 50 to 1 paying $100.80.

R3- Had the 2, 1, but the #1 scratched. The #2 won and paid $6.20.

R4- 6-3. The #6 won and paid $5.00.

R5- 6-1. The #6 won and paid $7.00.

R6- 1-7. The #7 won and paid $11.00 (Biggest mutuel in the P6 sequence).

R7- 6-4. The #4 won and paid $5.40.

R8- 9-10. The #9 won and paid $6.40. The P6 carryover was at or around the 900k mark, and the P6 paid out $1,364.00 for 6 of 6.

I just wanted to tell you guys that you are AWESOME!! :) Thanks for sharing such a wonderful tool for handicapping as the Handifast is with all of us. "YOU GUYS TOTALLY ROCK"!!! :)

Have a great day today. All the BEST!

Light
12-10-2009, 01:31 PM
Even Mr B just missed that p6 yesterday. If a handicapping program cant do as well as Mr. B. it belongs in the trash, so I wouldn't use the results at Hol yesterday to praise any handicapping program.Every legitamate program should have had 5 of 6 at Hol in its top 2 for a grand return of $38. Congrats on that. :rolleyes: My homemade program has picked several retirement pk6's in its top 2. That also means squat. Because it doesn't do that most of the time and therefore I don't bet its selections blindly so calm down. You guys still have a tremendous flaw in your program and you think that my pointing it out was rude.You can shape it all you want,but you will never get around it. I'll shut up now.

Speed Figure
12-10-2009, 01:50 PM
Would you like to put your homemade program up for "FREE" so we all can see the flaws yours may have?

Vinnie
12-10-2009, 02:01 PM
Light:

Such Cynicism in your post.. Unbelievable!! Did I say that Handifast or any other program was a black box or a world beater? I currently work around folks with some major Mental Health issues and even they seem to possess better attitudes than you do in general.

All the BEST! :)

Light
12-10-2009, 03:54 PM
Light:

Did I say that Handifast or any other program was a black box or a world beater?

No. But you advertized it that way.

Light
12-10-2009, 04:09 PM
Would you like to put your homemade program up for "FREE" so we all can see the flaws yours may have?

Of course my program has minor flaws.But I am aware of them when I see its output. But the free one here has a major flaw and mentioning it is taboo. Good luck with that.

Handiman
12-10-2009, 07:10 PM
Light,

You can say whatever you want to about the program. It's just a tool. It's not the world's greatest hammer, but someone might be able to drive a nail with it where with several other style hammers they can't.

Can you refresh me on what the Major flaw is again. I don't remember. I suspect for most guys using this program the cost out weighs the major flaw.

Handi :)

By the way, who is Mr. B.?

douglasw32
12-10-2009, 08:05 PM
How do you use the ignore feature of this board?

No one is advertising anything since no one gains anything, if you do not like it then sorta like with public TV, change the channel.

Why follow and contribute negativity to a post, no one evr said anything you said was taboo for mentioning, they just explained that what you consider a flaw they consider a non issue with the way the program is set up to function.

Everyone got your point, no one cared, why is that so hard to understand.

Move on. I am.

headhawg
12-10-2009, 08:56 PM
I'll shut up now.Unfortunately for all of us, you won't. You're not smart enough for that.

headhawg
12-10-2009, 08:58 PM
You guys still have a tremendous flaw in your program and you think that my pointing it out was rude.You can shape it all you want,but you will never get around it.And I explained to you why I thought that your paceline method was flawed. But you didn't understand it. Should I draw you a picture?

PaceAdvantage
12-10-2009, 09:44 PM
How do you use the ignore feature of this board?Click on the UserCP link in the green menu at the top of most forum pages, then click the Buddy/Ignore List link (lower left of screeen).

Rwahi1
12-10-2009, 10:18 PM
Even Mr B just missed that p6 yesterday. If a handicapping program cant do as well as Mr. B. it belongs in the trash, so I wouldn't use the results at Hol yesterday to praise any handicapping program.Every legitamate program should have had 5 of 6 at Hol in its top 2 for a grand return of $38. Congrats on that. :rolleyes: My homemade program has picked several retirement pk6's in its top 2. That also means squat. Because it doesn't do that most of the time and therefore I don't bet its selections blindly so calm down. You guys still have a tremendous flaw in your program and you think that my pointing it out was rude.You can shape it all you want,but you will never get around it. I'll shut up now.

You call yourself 'Light'...You sound like 'Darkness' dude !

slogancg
12-10-2009, 11:42 PM
I am having trouble downloading the program. I got a new laptop and I keep getting Error,file not found. Any help would be appreciated.
slogancg

headhawg
12-10-2009, 11:49 PM
I'm not sure if any of the links in the Handifast version X thread work anymore. If you need Handifast HHX v2 then send me a PM with your email. Just know that v2 does not include Doug's version of the program, just Handifast.

Light
12-11-2009, 01:15 AM
Can you refresh me on what the Major flaw is again. I don't remember. I suspect for most guys using this program the cost out weighs the major flaw.

The flaw is that because the programmer (Doug),cannot program a user selected paceline(s) option,the user is limited to his limitation.

For example,a horse wins for fun at 10K. Goes up to $30K and gets crushed and now is back down to $12.5K today. Obviously the right race to cap this horse off is his $10k win. Instead,since Doug cannot program flexibility into the program,the program will either use his last race where he got crushed,which is not representative of what this horse will do today or will use the last X number of races which is a dilution of what this horse can do today.This has more to do with just not agreeing with my paceline selction method. It has to do with a program that is limited by its makers lack of skill.





By the way, who is Mr. B.?

A TVG analyst who basically picks chalk 90% of the time.

Light
12-11-2009, 02:44 AM
Before you get too hung up on that one example consider a more broader perspective. Alot of surface switching goes on from turf to dirt and vice versa. So if last race was on turf and todays race is on dirt you'd like to be able to use the horse's dirt race(s) or if todays race is on turf,you'd like to use a turf race to rate the horse.Instead you are programatically limited to last race which may not be the appropriate surface to rate the horse off of or the program will lump the last x number of races into an average which may involve a combination of dirt and turf races at different distances and different surfaces and different classes. THAT IS TOTALLY INSANE. This also applies to when you need to use proper paceline(s) when dealing with routers vs sprinters or class changes.

This is why my paceline selection method is NOT flawed and yours is. I have an option,you don't. Mine is user based,yours is not. You are subject to the program's inabilities and therefore the stupidity of a program with blinkers on. That's why I would never use an program like this even for free. I know it will cost me much more at the windows than its price tag. This isn't a minor ommision that Doug cant program. This a major flaw. Nobody handicaps like that because everyone knows that's stupid. Yet when this program does handicap like that you call it a useful tool. Go figure.

zgplp
12-11-2009, 02:51 AM
Frankly, I am suspicious of the posts by Light. I don't want to get into conspiracy theories but if there is a major flaw in this program, please don't fix it.

I have been a successful sheet player for years (Thorograph & Rags) and since I have been using your software along with my own handicapping methods I have increased my profits greatly....hitting some tremendous exotics including an 18K super High 5.

Each user is going to have to figure out what works for them...having the ability to sort each column and change weights based on track conditions, distance, etc has allowed me to "second look" horses I may have normally discounted.

So Doug, Handi, and Head....thank you very much for sharing this tool with everyone....


....regarding Light.....my advise is..."Never argue with an Idiot...they will only drag you down to their level and then beat you by experience"

hcap
12-11-2009, 06:02 AM
Light,

This is what I found. Sorry to invalidate your one pace line contention. This is not a case of finding one of the factors in the program out of many that did well. This is the main Fair Odds horse and nothing else. The Fair Odds horse is the composite of all the factors.

Using current races at CRC, WOX, and OSA. And some old BEL files from 2006. Eliminating maidens provides 262 races. Using only the top ranked Fair Odds horse.

PLAYS
262
BET $524

WIN%
27.9%

ROI
0.2% Almost a black box. It is reasonable to assume with some additional handicapping a good starting point. Furthermore from my testing......

Using a few more "Ifs" in addition to the top ranked Fair Odds horse

1-Play only if The jockey is ranked among the top 5 in the race.
2-Play only if the morning line is at least 80% of the actual Fair odds of the top ranked Fair Odds horse.

190 plays
WIN%
30.0%

ROI
13.1%

.................................................. ............................

Add 1 more filter.
Play only if the top ranked Fair Odds horse is among the top 5 on the morning line.

179 plays.
WIN%
31.3%

ROI
15.2%

Not bad at all

PS: I am using headhawg's CSV output and Excel to keep track.

redeye007
12-11-2009, 07:52 AM
I like to play mostly exotics. Doug, Handi, Head keep those longshots coming. :)

raybo
12-11-2009, 08:16 AM
Before you get too hung up on that one example consider a more broader perspective. Alot of surface switching goes on from turf to dirt and vice versa. So if last race was on turf and todays race is on dirt you'd like to be able to use the horse's dirt race(s) or if todays race is on turf,you'd like to use a turf race to rate the horse.Instead you are programatically limited to last race which may not be the appropriate surface to rate the horse off of or the program will lump the last x number of races into an average which may involve a combination of dirt and turf races at different distances and different surfaces and different classes. THAT IS TOTALLY INSANE. This also applies to when you need to use proper paceline(s) when dealing with routers vs sprinters or class changes.

This is why my paceline selection method is NOT flawed and yours is. I have an option,you don't. Mine is user based,yours is not. You are subject to the program's inabilities and therefore the stupidity of a program with blinkers on. That's why I would never use an program like this even for free. I know it will cost me much more at the windows than its price tag. This isn't a minor ommision that Doug cant program. This a major flaw. Nobody handicaps like that because everyone knows that's stupid. Yet when this program does handicap like that you call it a useful tool. Go figure.

The handicapping world is full of players who, like you, use multiple filters to select pacelines. The vast majority of those players are losers. Paceline selection is only one facet of handicapping/wagering, and probably not even very important, in the grand scheme. If your method were used by more players there would be even more horses, with "properly selected" pacelines, at lower odds, that still don't win. And those same players would still be losers. There's more than one way to be successful at this game, when are you going to snap-to?

headhawg
12-11-2009, 09:52 AM
Obviously the right race to cap this horse off is his $10k win. Instead,since Doug cannot program flexibility into the program,the program will either use his last race where he got crushed,which is not representative of what this horse will do today or will use the last X number of races which is a dilution of what this horse can do today.Not if its still the wrong pace scenario with a cold jockey and bad trainer. Did you even bother to read my post about the flaws in automatic paceline selection? No, probably not. Dimwit.

This is why my paceline selection method is NOT flawed and yours is. I have an option,you don't. Mine is user based,yours is not. You are subject to the program's inabilities and therefore the stupidity of a program with blinkers on. Yeah, your selection method is only subject to the stupidity of the programmer. Oh, wait. That's you, isn't it?

This has more to do with just not agreeing with my paceline selction method. It has to do with a program that is limited by its makers lack of skill. Well, it's no secret that Doug, Handi, and me are not professional programmers. But I'm sure that I can outcode you if your only claim to fame is automatic paceline selection. Gee, that's so hard. How did you ever do it? You must be a master coder. :rolleyes: Master something, anyway.

Nobody handicaps like that because everyone knows that's stupid. Yeah. And the only thing more stupid was that fact that your parents got together in the backseat of a Greyhound bus one too many times and brought some bad "light" into this world.

Now just crawl back into whatever cesspool you slithered out of before PA has to call pest control.

headhawg
12-11-2009, 10:14 AM
And so as not to let Light completely turn this into another negative thread as (s)he always does, I just want to say thanks for the comments of appreciation. There have been way more positive posts than negative, and it's always nice to hear that users are having success with Handifast.

I would also like to wish all users the very best of luck. Now, quit posting and go hit 'em big! :D

Handiman
12-11-2009, 01:48 PM
I have to agree with Light. I am sorry. I used my latest Handifast version last night against some fairly astute handicappers, about 10 of them, in a showvivor contest. One where you string as many in the money single picks as you can, and once not in the money you start over.

While battling with the MAJOR flaw in our program, I just barely managed to win the contest with 11 straight hits playing Sam Houston and Charles Town. We played every race.

Now without the MAJOR flaw, and some dynamite paceline selection I'm sure I would have done much better than I did.

Instead of just hitting 7 winners and 3 2nds and 3 3rds I would have hit all winners. But I had to struggle with just posting 11 straight hits out of 19 races. Only 36.8% winners with those 7. I just can't be proud of that since knowing with the right paceline selection I could have had 100% winners.

A bunch of us from several different forums get together almost everyday and play a fun little contest. Sometimes it's a showvivor like last night, other nights it's a wps totaling payouts to win or like two nights ago it was a wps with points added for hits, with the total points leader winning. It's a blast and very nice and respectful handicappers.

If you care to join in, go to outside contest thread and see my post for the location. But no Paceline selectors as the rest of us would not stand a chance.

Handi :)

headhawg
12-11-2009, 02:09 PM
I just can't be proud of that since knowing with the right paceline selection I could have had 100% winners.I am really surprised to hear you say that. It is the equivalent of datamining with the belief that backfitting will be 100% successful going forward. Anyone can claim that choosing the "right" paceline will give you 100% winners. Unfortunately paceline choice has to occur before the race is run, and no software is going to produce 100% winners no matter what paceline is chosen. None.

You can certainly feel free to add that option to Handifast. Contrary to what has been posted it's not that hard to do. However, Handifast will then take a completely different direction and my feeling is that it will not have the same success as it does now in its current state.

Light
12-11-2009, 02:12 PM
Almost a black box.

hcap, I saw your findings and I have an even better ROI using my program as a black box from about the same # of starters,20%. But as you know that sample is too small and may not hold up in time for either program.


What I find strange here is the adverse reaction to a suggestion.A suggestion that was once requested for the improvement of this program. All I'm saying is that the limitation of the programmer,forces the entire program to conform to his defiency by resorting to picking pacelines in a linear, one dimensional,artificial method,rather than a dynamic 3 dimensional method. Picking the correct pacelines is the key to a profitable ROI, be it human or computer. I dont care if you believe in my paceline method or not,your program DOES have a method of picking pacelines and I have never seen or heard of any handicapper who would handicap like this because the program is clearly mixing incompatable pacelines.

headhawg
12-11-2009, 02:26 PM
hcap, I saw your findings and I have an even better ROI using my program as a black box from about the same # of starters,20%Yeah, yeah, yeah. Prove it. Let somebody like Maxspa, who is held in high regard here, test it. Otherwise, put a cork in it already. You really show a lot of interest in Handifast, a program that you think is garbage. Plus you're the kind of poster that never has anyone else's interest in mind except your own. Enough with your same-old, same-old posts.

Light
12-11-2009, 02:26 PM
I have to agree with Light. I am sorry. I used my latest Handifast version last night against some fairly astute handicappers, about 10 of them, in a showvivor contest. One where you string as many in the money single picks as you can, and once not in the money you start over.

While battling with the MAJOR flaw in our program, I just barely managed to win the contest with 11 straight hits playing Sam Houston and Charles Town. We played every race.

Now without the MAJOR flaw, and some dynamite paceline selection I'm sure I would have done much better than I did.

Instead of just hitting 7 winners and 3 2nds and 3 3rds I would have hit all winners. But I had to struggle with just posting 11 straight hits out of 19 races. Only 36.8% winners with those 7. I just can't be proud of that since knowing with the right paceline selection I could have had 100% winners.

A bunch of us from several different forums get together almost everyday and play a fun little contest. Sometimes it's a showvivor like last night, other nights it's a wps totaling payouts to win or like two nights ago it was a wps with points added for hits, with the total points leader winning. It's a blast and very nice and respectful handicappers.

If you care to join in, go to outside contest thread and see my post for the location. But no Paceline selectors as the rest of us would not stand a chance.

Handi :)



Hey Handi

Last Saturday my program picked 4 supers at FG cold and 2 supers at Hol cold. Top 4 came in. Caught them all with real money too. So yeah,yours may be good,but my way is better.

Speed Figure
12-11-2009, 04:01 PM
Hey Handi

Last Saturday my program picked 4 supers at FG cold and 2 supers at Hol cold. Top 4 came in. Caught them all with real money too. So yeah,yours may be good,but my way is better.Man, you sound like a REAL LITTLE KID!! mine is better than yours. Put the program up for all to see, if not than your talk is cheap! ACTION SPEAKS FAR LOUDER THAN WORDS!!!

Handiman
12-11-2009, 04:39 PM
Head....I was making light of Paceline Selection. I was not serious! To me Paceline Selection is like trying to figure out which of the last few games that Barry Bonds played to attempt to predict how many home runs he'd hit today.

Paceline selection is no different than us doing Category selection to predict the winner. It's just we use more info than mere Paceline selection does.

Light,

While nobody seems to care for you much in this thread, I will take a different tack. I'll make you a proposition. I will give you a copy of handifast if you will Give me a copy of your program to try out. I won't share it with anyone else. I will give it an honest try and report my results here.

What ya say?

Handi :)

raybo
12-11-2009, 04:40 PM
hcap, I saw your findings and I have an even better ROI using my program as a black box from about the same # of starters,20%. But as you know that sample is too small and may not hold up in time for either program.


What I find strange here is the adverse reaction to a suggestion.A suggestion that was once requested for the improvement of this program. All I'm saying is that the limitation of the programmer,forces the entire program to conform to his defiency by resorting to picking pacelines in a linear, one dimensional,artificial method,rather than a dynamic 3 dimensional method. Picking the correct pacelines is the key to a profitable ROI, be it human or computer. I dont care if you believe in my paceline method or not,your program DOES have a method of picking pacelines and I have never seen or heard of any handicapper who would handicap like this because the program is clearly mixing incompatable pacelines.

I suppose you've never heard of successful handicappers who don't pick pacelines at all? Check the archives.

headhawg
12-11-2009, 04:54 PM
Head....I was making light of Paceline Selection. I was not serious! To me Paceline Selection is like trying to figure out which of the last few games that Barry Bonds played to attempt to predict how many home runs he'd hit today.Ooops. As Emily Litella would say, "Never mind." :D

fast4522
12-11-2009, 07:02 PM
Using Handi Fast and ALLData for the first time the other evening, and reading some of the posts here and the ones on other threads with these programs I would like to make a few comments and post a few questions.

For starters I would like to say it is nice to use Handi Fast & ALLData, and I find the gentlemen who are working on the code and the guy’s who wrote the programs in a league of extraordinary gentlemen. Really nothing should ever distract from this, the intent of the programs and the giving quality within them is nothing less than superb.

Mention of the BBS owner / Operator included in this is appropriate because without the fine forum that serves as quintessential melting pot, none of this would happen.

I am looking to really use Handi Fast and am interested in finding out about the ability of export to CSV for the race or the card or the 5 cards. And would love the latest version with the CSV kicked up a notch as a famous chef would say. My email is fast4522@yahoo.com and would love to dig a little deeper into this.

Steve

Partsnut
12-11-2009, 07:50 PM
fast4522: For starters I would like to say it is nice to use Handi Fast & ALLData, and I find the gentlemen who are working on the code and the guy’s who wrote the programs in a league of extraordinary gentlemen. Really nothing should ever distract from this, the intent of the programs and the giving quality within them is nothing less than superb.

Steve, I'm in total agreement with you. Many of the members of this board are enjoying and using Fast and Handifast. The willingness of these talented people who created these fine works and unselfishly shared them with all, is to my mind very admirable and very much appreciated.

Light
12-11-2009, 09:37 PM
Man, you sound like a REAL LITTLE KID!! mine is better than yours.

Dude,how come you dont call them on it. They started this chest beating. First you got this guy:

since I have been using your software along with my own handicapping methods I have increased my profits greatly....hitting some tremendous exotics including an 18K super High 5.

Then you got Handi

I just barely managed to win the contest with 11 straight hits playing Sam Houston and Charles Town.

So they can boast but I can't? Frankly I prefer not to. I consider it bad form to do so. Notice they boasted first. I just played their game. However, my program really did pick 6 supers cold from just 2 tracks I played last Saturday, but that's not my point nor do I care if you believe me.

Put the program up for all to see, if not than your talk is cheap! ACTION SPEAKS FAR LOUDER THAN WORDS!!!

Why should I? It's not even for sale if you wanted to buy it. Like Trevor says,"its too good for these".

Light
12-11-2009, 09:48 PM
Head....I was making light of Paceline Selection.

I dont care what you think of paceline selection methods. Your program is picking a paceline or pacelines wether you want to acknowledge it or not. And its faulty.


While nobody seems to care for you much in this thread, I will take a different tack. I'll make you a proposition. I will give you a copy of handifast if you will Give me a copy of your program to try out. I won't share it with anyone else. I will give it an honest try and report my results here.

What ya say?

Handi :)


I thought your program was free? Why would I trade for it? And no, my program is not for anyone else's eyes.

headhawg
12-11-2009, 10:16 PM
I consider it bad form to do so. Notice they boasted first. I just played their game.Oh, you are just too much. Before you wake up in the morning you've already done three things that most would consider bad form. You may think that you're proving some kind of point but you're just embarrassing yourself. Really. And at first I thought that you were just some self-aggrandizing troll...

Oh. Wait a minute. You are. Sorry about that.

zgplp
12-11-2009, 10:36 PM
So they can boast but I can't? Frankly I prefer not to.
I consider it bad form to do so.

This is a thread about HandiFast...perhaps you should start your own thread
...also, you think it's bad form to boast, but you feel fine about trashing someone elses product on a thread that shouldn't concern you.

after all, you have a great product...that you won't share or sell...so sit home and make money all day...but don't dare brag about your software unless you're willing to put it up to test...Do you get this??? let me spell it out for you...every time time you post you embarrass yourself

However, my program really did pick 6 supers cold from just 2 tracks I played last Saturday

Suuuurrrre it did!!!...you'll be fine when the drugs wear off..you got some real issues..but at least you made me laugh...hey, don't forget your helmet when you go outside

Handiman
12-11-2009, 11:10 PM
Steve,

I am at present almost done with the latest version of handifast multitrack. I chose to go the route of allowing the user to change the points given to the different categories first. I will make that version available to Doug to send out in just a few days hopefully.

Then I will start to incorporate the csv output capability to it. Once that is done, I will release that version.

After that, on the table will be....

option to set category points based on distance, surface and maybe even track specific.

Then ability to auto handicap race cards based on single date and send results to csv file.

Then who knows what else.

Handi :)

headhawg
12-11-2009, 11:57 PM
And no, my program is not for anyone else's eyes.I've seen it, and it's the biggest piece of coding crap ever written. Your paceline selection routine might as well be using a random number generator; it's the computer algorithm version of the dart board method. And the only way your program could have picked six supers is all-all-all-all.

PaceAdvantage
12-12-2009, 01:27 AM
The name calling and the juvenile replies by all involved stop now, or I have to close the thread.

douglasw32
12-12-2009, 11:09 AM
Just put him on your IGNORE LIST

Don't get caught up in it...

BTW- Handi, giving his idea some validity even though his tone is rude, maybe it would not be too difficult to program in where your scratch screen is, the ability to click on the horse's name brings up a box listing the dates of the last 6 races (that is as far back as we go with our lame pace line averaging) and allow the user to scratch an individual line from the averages.

not a bad idea light...

It would only need the dates of the horses race, since we are all in agreement here that the program is an add on to someones other methods.

Then at least the one and only person never to use it but to always complain about it will have what he wants in the program that no one charges for to begin with.

but maybe his suggestion will help someone else who does enjoy the software you take hours to work on even in bad health.

raybo
12-12-2009, 01:36 PM
I'm in the middle of creating an automated paceline(s) selection method, for "AllData PPs", with a manual over-ride allowing the user to select his/her own preferred paceline(s) for each horse, and believe me, it is a bear to put together!!!

The program will have "default" settings that the user can change to include only those selection criteria he/she deems important, as well as, a "default" criteria ranking (by importance) that the user can change to enable the auto-select method to prioritize criteria, in cases where there are no perfect matches for all of the users default settings. The number of options involved, that must be handled by the method, are almost mind-boggling. But, if I wanted to use such a program myself, I would want these user defined options, so, I figure if I'm going to put forth the effort I might as well put a little extra into it so that I will be satisfied, in my own mind, that there is as much flexibility, built in, as possible.

However, I completely understand the reasoning for not getting too involved with paceline selection in the "HandiFast" program. Your users, as a whole, are pretty satisfied with the methods included, as is. So, just concentrate on what is meaningful for you and your program's avid users.

douglasw32
12-12-2009, 02:21 PM
I agree with Raybo, not to try and get into any complicated routines, but the simplicity of what it is doing is averages (yes they are flawed, if you are launching rockets) but with 4 legs going 30mph they seem to work out okay.

The average could be improved if like LIGHT has mentioned you were able to cut out of it the obvious bad race that was a fluke.

Pop open the scratches, scratch, pop open any individual horse that has a bad line you don't like scratch that line and bam !

headhawg
12-12-2009, 03:03 PM
For the record I am definitely not against the manual or automatic selection of pacelines. (In fact my own handicapping program has a fairly sophisticated algorithm for selecting them.) My objection was to the insulting fashion in which the "suggestion" was posted. And then repeated ad nauseam.

But as I replied to Handiman (when I wasn't aware he was being facetious) I am not sure how much there is to be gained. In fact, it's quite possible that Handifast will lose its effectiveness. I certainly can see it as an option, but I think there are features to be added that are of a higher priority. That will certainly be up to Handi to decide what he's going to code.

JimG
12-12-2009, 04:07 PM
Today is my first day looking at the program. The ability to adjust the weights is key for me(Thanks HH for ver 2). You guys have done a really nice job and I think it serves as a good handicapping tool.

I like to play exotics and would be very interested in the odds line going deeper than just 4 horses. I would appreciate you considering this.

Any plan to include PTD files as potential input? I can send you an export of their file for you to test if that might be doable.

Thanks for letting me check out the software. It is a definite keeper.

Jim

Speed Figure
12-12-2009, 04:48 PM
Headhawg, could you email me V2? the one I have is V1.0

headhawg
12-12-2009, 06:35 PM
Sure Speed. Just PM me with your email addy.

headhawg
12-12-2009, 06:48 PM
I like to play exotics and would be very interested in the odds line going deeper than just 4 horses. I would appreciate you considering this.

Any plan to include PTD files as potential input? I can send you an export of their file for you to test if that might be doable.How many horses deep would you like to see? I don't see adding more horses to the mix being a problem except for the csv output. The PTD files would be more of a challenge. I would have to see the format and the field description.

There's a slightly bigger issue overall that I have mentioned to a few people via email. With Handi's impending multi-track release I don't relish having to learn the new code to add features. I've seen the code for a not-yet-completed version and there's a lot. And I also don't want to confuse users by having the HHX version as well as Handi's multi-track one.

So what that means is that Handi will probably have to be the person to add stuff from now on. And as I have posted previously I have way less time to work on Handifast even though I would still like to add a few more things. We'll just have to see what happens as I am not one to never say never.

Handiman
12-12-2009, 07:54 PM
Right now I can't see the logic in eliminating a bad race from our program. The same would hold for eliminating a good race. The horse produces what the horse produces.

I have been using the program for the last week and a half just about, in these mini-tournaments with about 10 guys and have been doing pretty well. Two nights ago I won the contest and then won the one at Hawthorne today.

So I will continue with the planned additions and then we will see where we go from there.

Handi :)

douglasw32
12-13-2009, 05:35 AM
I agree , and I did not mean to imply that the program result change at all.

The number of races the program goes back, and the way it doubles the best in the points is all the original design.

I meant like the points being tweaked by the user, like the ability to scratch, maybe throw it ou there to the user (if and only if it is an easy add) since anyone could do as you did and grab a copy of the FREE, OPEN SOURCE CODE. then to each his own.

lsosa54
12-13-2009, 12:41 PM
Don't think there is a need to change much. I'm starting to at least look @ MNR due to the crappy HOL fields and east coast PM is a more convenient time for me. Last night's card:

r1: 2nd FM ranking tie - $71.00

r2: Top DS rating - $38.60

r4: The winner was my 4th points horse and 3rd FAST, but I would have liked better odds to make the play as her rankings in some of the columns were not strong. She paid $13.20.

r9: 2nd PC, 3rd DS, 2nd FAST, 3rd C-C - $22.60

Just to re-iterate, I look for value in the DS, FM, PC, C-C columns and then either TF if a polytrack or DT if a dirt track, and that's what my points are set to. I glance at the top 3 or so in each column for further investigation. ML minimum for me is around 5-1.

I don't use it as a black box but these mutuels can keep you in the black for awhile. I then narrow down my betting choices using my Sartin program of choice. On those $30 to $70 potential payouts, a few dollars win/place are merited no matter what.

Only other day I've ventured to MNR was 11-21-09:

r1: 2nd DS tie, 3rd C-C, 2nd PTS horse: $21.60

r4: Top FM: $14.40

r7: 2nd DT tie, 4th FAST: $51.80

The more I work with HH v2, I may need to start looking at the top 3 ranked P-S as well.

The C-C and P-S ratings were both added by HH and are defined by him as follows. They can point to some great potential win/place mutuels:

The C-C rating is a combination of EPS, Win%, and ITM%, calculated for all horses, and then standardized in a range between 60 - 100. They are then weighted in this manner: .4 * EPSscore + .3 * Win%score + .3 * ITM%score. The EPS isn't exactly a true earnings per start but rather a modified version that Bill Quirin wrote about.

The P-S score is Doug's EP and AvgSpeed rating, also standardized as above, and then weighted .6 * EP + .4 * AvgSpeed for sprints, and weighted 50-50 for routes. It's not exactly the way that Mitchell did it, but close enough.

Hope this is helpful.

lsosa54
12-13-2009, 12:46 PM
Handi: Before I forget, if HH's C-C and P-S ratings columns are going to be part of Handifast going forward, and I would hope they are, then if you could make them selectable for points calculations, it would be much appreciated. Thanks.

headhawg
12-13-2009, 01:14 PM
Handi: Before I forget, if HH's C-C and P-S ratings columns are going to be part of Handifast going forward, and I would hope they are, then if you could make them selectable for points calculations, it would be much appreciated. Thanks.Yeah on my previous to-do list was to give users the capability of weighting those and also the S1-S3 figs as well.

douglasw32
12-13-2009, 02:33 PM
A personal note, My better half would flip if she could put a weight to S1/S2/S3

headhawg
12-13-2009, 03:06 PM
Well, if it's for your better half.... :)

Handiman
12-13-2009, 09:33 PM
Ok, before I get too far along, let's review a bit. Just a bit. Doug, Head and anybody else, as I am adding ability to change points per category, do we need to add points to the other categories? And if so, do I add the categories to the odds calculations? Do we also need the ability to mix and match categories?

How far do we want to take this in this direction?

Once I get this done I'll make it available to Doug. Then start putting in the CSV code.

Handi :)

lsosa54
12-13-2009, 10:43 PM
I think every column with the exception of LR, RT, RS should have the ability for the user to assign points. If the user assigns points, then it should flow into the odds line.

redeye007
12-14-2009, 01:04 AM
here is some interesting info using HHXV2 for any interested for hollywood park on 12/05/09. Using the following preferences produced the following:
CL25, DS10,EP30,LP25,FM20,PCR45,AW20,TF20,MY20,DT20,FAST 25,TR10,JK10,ML10

race 4 top pick winner $7.40
race 5 top pick winner $8.40
race 6 almost all first time starters, favorite won and was first timer
race 7 top pick winner $12
race 8 top pick winner $24
race 9 top pick winner $16.20

pick 6 18k, pick 4 4k

doug, HH, Handi you guys are great :ThmbUp:

JimG
12-14-2009, 08:51 AM
I think every column with the exception of LR, RT, RS should have the ability for the user to assign points. If the user assigns points, then it should flow into the odds line.

I agree. I would also like to see the oddsline go further than 4 horses. All, if feasible, but at least 6 horses deep. This could be beneficial for exotic players.

The next logical step should be to save different set-ups for different tracks.

Jim

douglasw32
12-14-2009, 05:47 PM
I think every column with the exception of LR, RT, RS should have the ability for the user to assign points. If the user assigns points, then it should flow into the odds line.

Agree

douglasw32
12-14-2009, 05:48 PM
I agree. I would also like to see the oddsline go further than 4 horses. All, if feasible, but at least 6 horses deep. This could be beneficial for exotic players.

The next logical step should be to save different set-ups for different tracks.

Jim

Again, I agree, the CSV does this and I find it very helpfull

douglasw32
12-14-2009, 05:51 PM
here is some interesting info using HHXV2 for any interested for hollywood park on 12/05/09. Using the following preferences produced the following:
CL25, DS10,EP30,LP25,FM20,PCR45,AW20,TF20,MY20,DT20,FAST 25,TR10,JK10,ML10

race 4 top pick winner $7.40
race 5 top pick winner $8.40
race 6 almost all first time starters, favorite won and was first timer
race 7 top pick winner $12
race 8 top pick winner $24
race 9 top pick winner $16.20

pick 6 18k, pick 4 4k

doug, HH, Handi you guys are great :ThmbUp:

Nice, now we just need to have a time machine, dang it !

Light
12-14-2009, 07:27 PM
And if my aunt had balls,she'd be my uncle. You guys need to stop redboarding and tweaking after the races are run

BTW, since you dont believe me when I say your paceline criteria is flawed,I have begun documenting the rank of your contenders "Fast" fig vs my selection criteria's Bris figs.

So far this last weekend at Aqu my selection criteria and Bris figs had twice as many winners ranked higher than your FAST figures did. 8 to 4. The rest were ties from 17 races. In head to head competition with your program,mine beat yours $77.30 to your $42.20.

lsosa54
12-14-2009, 07:42 PM
And if my aunt had balls,she'd be my uncle. You guys need to stop redboarding and tweaking after the races are run

BTW, since you dont believe me when I say your paceline criteria is flawed,I have begun documenting the rank of your contenders "Fast" fig vs my selection criteria's Bris figs.

So far this last weekend at Aqu my selection criteria and Bris figs had twice as many winners ranked higher than your FAST figures did. 8 to 4. The rest were ties from 17 races. In head to head competition with your program,mine beat yours $77.30 to your $42.20.

Some great results. Wish you much success.

JimG
12-14-2009, 07:59 PM
And if my aunt had balls,she'd be my uncle. You guys need to stop redboarding and tweaking after the races are run

BTW, since you dont believe me when I say your paceline criteria is flawed,I have begun documenting the rank of your contenders "Fast" fig vs my selection criteria's Bris figs.

So far this last weekend at Aqu my selection criteria and Bris figs had twice as many winners ranked higher than your FAST figures did. 8 to 4. The rest were ties from 17 races. In head to head competition with your program,mine beat yours $77.30 to your $42.20.

If your contemplating whether your aunt has balls, you probably have more important things to worry about than "redboarding" or paceline criteria.

I would suggest getting your priorities in order.

Handiman
12-14-2009, 08:45 PM
Great Job Light! Continued great success.


Handi :)

headhawg
12-14-2009, 09:02 PM
And if my aunt had balls,she'd be my uncle. You guys need to stop redboarding and tweaking after the races are run

BTW, since you dont believe me when I say your paceline criteria is flawed,I have begun documenting the rank of your contenders "Fast" fig vs my selection criteria's Bris figs.

So far this last weekend at Aqu my selection criteria and Bris figs had twice as many winners ranked higher than your FAST figures did. 8 to 4. The rest were ties from 17 races. In head to head competition with your program,mine beat yours $77.30 to your $42.20.You need to stop posting in the Handifast threads. These threads are not about your program which doesn't really exist anyway. Quit inserting your meaningless opinions here. This is your last warning or I will have to taunt you a second time.

Light
12-14-2009, 09:24 PM
This isn't really about my program,so all the compliments and derisions are irrelevant. This is about YOUR program. I am pointing something out that is basic to ANY program. Are you that close minded?

I also tried Handi's version in the same test. Why does he get a different FAST number ranking in his version which did about the same in the test.

ranchwest
12-14-2009, 10:18 PM
This isn't really about my program,so all the compliments and derisions are irrelevant. This is about YOUR program. I am pointing something out that is basic to ANY program. Are you that close minded?

I also tried Handi's version in the same test. Why does he get a different FAST number ranking in his version which did about the same in the test.

Where is the advanced announcement of this "test"? What date and track? What does 18 races reveal? I mean, I examined 61 races yesterday in a partial test of what I was doing.

I know these programs are changing directions like a mouse in a maze and they don't have a New York PR firm promoting them, but there are a lot of people who feel the programs are helpful. So, how about cutting them a little slack?

And, yes, I do think that pace line selection should be a flexible process.

PaceAdvantage
12-14-2009, 10:52 PM
This is your last warning or I will have to taunt you a second time.I laughed!

headhawg
12-14-2009, 11:26 PM
This isn't really about my program,so all the compliments and derisions are irrelevant. This is about YOUR program. I am pointing something out that is basic to ANY program. Are you that close minded? Yes. I am that close-minded. Handifast sucks. It could never, ever work. It is full of completely flawed algorithms that couldn't pick the winner of a one horse race. Anyone that is using it should just STOP because...well...because Light said so.

All users can return their copy for a full refund of the purchase price. And while you're at it, immediately return any monies gained from its use to the proper track, OTB or ADW. :lol:

headhawg
12-14-2009, 11:36 PM
I laughed!Perhaps Light is a silly English k-nig-ht!

Handiman
12-14-2009, 11:57 PM
Sorry Head, but I am collecting the monies gained by the use of this program which is to be returned. The tracks would just waste it, if they even knew what to do with it.

I must say I don't really understand why Light even comes to this thread!


Handi :)

headhawg
12-15-2009, 12:13 AM
I must say I don't really understand why Light even comes to this thread!Not for any constructive reasons, that's for sure. I used to get angry about his interjections but now I just find his posts kind of pathetic, really. I mean, why get so up-in-arms about something that one considers to be garbage?

Light
12-15-2009, 12:22 AM
I must say I don't really understand why Light even comes to this thread!
Handi :)

I give up. You win. I was only relating to what you are doing because its what I've been doing for the last 9 years with my program. You guys get more hung up on the way I express myself instead of what I am saying.

I didnt mean to put you down when I say you have a flaw. I meant in my experience with my similar program, paceline selection cannot be overemphasized. I found if that's wrong then everything will follow wrongly and if its right everything will align that way.It's crucial.

I think what you guys are doing is great. I find with my own program,it can compete with anything out there that costs alot of money. I think you guys can build a free quality program as well,except ...you're not listening. I wont interrupt anymore.

hcap
12-15-2009, 08:54 AM
Light, you included a 7th rank horse that paid $45, and a 3 rd rank horse that paid $14 in your figs.
How does that work?? Double check your totals.
3 $14.80 $14.80
7 $45.60 $45.60
Now.......
from your posted spreadsheet. Using ONLY the top ranked horse in HandiFast vs your top ranked horse.

Handi Yours
21.4 0
0 0
0 0
10.4 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 8
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
7.3 0
3.1 0
4.1 0
0 5.1
46.3 13.1
hcap, I saw your findings and I have an even better ROI using my program as a black box from about the same # of starters,20%. But as you know that sample is too small and may not hold up in time for either program.I agree, but you did just post 17 races.

You chose 17 races, so I will post 17. BTW, I use the Top Fair Odds horse

Some results taken from a study at Belmont. 17 races No maidens
Top Fair Odds horse from HandiFast. (Which is what I found profitable all by itself. Over 250 races)

17 races
Won 8/17
Total won $59.6
75% roi

0
0
0
5.8
5.3
3.8
3
0
4.1
0
0
8.4
0
11.8
17.4
0
0

.................................................. .................................................. ..........

All turf races in my sample. Provided 46 plays.
From 4 tracks. Bel, Crc Wox and Osa
Only thing I added to the top Fair Odds horse is that the horse
must be even or an overlay on the morning line

WIN%
30.4%
ROI
63.3%

headhawg
12-15-2009, 10:57 AM
The point of all of this should be to simply decide if Handifast fits into your handicapping style. As with everything 'capping, it's going to work for some people and not others. The programmers have always tried to incorporate users' suggestions in order to improve the program. It probably does more things and does them better in its current state than many programs that you could buy (or maybe that you have already purchased).

To tell the truth, I was skeptical about Handifast having value as a tool. I didn't even download the early versions of the program. When Handi needed some help I happened to know how to fix some of the problems. While I testing the code I found that some of the ratings and the Top 4 horses were leading to some nice payoffs. There are certain ratings that are real good by themselves and in combination they can work even better. And if you've been keeping up with the Handifast threads, you've read that other users have found similar things as well. And hcap has been nice enough to share his findings albeit with a small sample of races.

For those of you enjoying Handifast again I say thanks for the compliments. For others who find no use for it that's ok too. Just keep your insults and negativity out of these threads. Happy Holidays.

raybo
12-15-2009, 03:04 PM
The point of all of this should be to simply decide if Handifast fits into your handicapping style. As with everything 'capping, it's going to work for some people and not others. The programmers have always tried to incorporate users' suggestions in order to improve the program. It probably does more things and does them better in its current state than many programs that you could buy (or maybe that you have already purchased).

To tell the truth, I was skeptical about Handifast having value as a tool. I didn't even download the early versions of the program. When Handi needed some help I happened to know how to fix some of the problems. While I testing the code I found that some of the ratings and the Top 4 horses were leading to some nice payoffs. There are certain ratings that are real good by themselves and in combination they can work even better. And if you've been keeping up with the Handifast threads, you've read that other users have found similar things as well. And hcap has been nice enough to share his findings albeit with a small sample of races.

For those of you enjoying Handifast again I say thanks for the compliments. For others who find no use for it that's ok too. Just keep your insults and negativity out of these threads. Happy Holidays.

Well said!!

You guys have gone much further with your program than I intend (or ever intended) to go with AllData PPs.

My main purpose, for making AllData PPs available, is to make all the data fields, in the Bris/TSN data files, available inside the spreadsheet, for users to use as they see fit. And to offer a simple method for importing that data and using it, via macros.

Another purpose is to show "some" of the power Excel has to offer and ways the user can format the data for presentation. My auto-paceline selection method is an extra, available for those who want to use it, however, it can be over-ridden, by the user manually selecting individual pacelines. Or the user can simply modify or add to what I have done and am currently working on.

That is another purpose for the spreadsheet, to introduce users to most of the basic, as well as, some of the more advanced capabilities in Excel.

My ultimate hope is that less knowledgeable Excel users will be able to look at my formulas, macros, formatting, etc., and use them as examples for their own work.

I'm no Excel guru, by any means, but I believe there's some good stuff in the spreadsheet that might be of use to others.

permenbg
12-15-2009, 06:59 PM
great job for what you have done hope you feel better. what is the last ver. of you software and are there any instruction on line, i would like to know more about it.did i unstand right it can no do 6 tracks live .

keep up the good work
permenbg

Light
12-15-2009, 09:06 PM
hcap

The way I scored those Excel spreadsheets I posted was NOT based on top ranked horse but which program had the winner ranked higher than the other. So out of 17 races over the weekend at Aqu, my program had the winner ranked higher than Handi's or HH's 8 times and Handi's or HH's had the winner ranked higher than mine 4 times. There were 5 ties. Whoever had the higher rank got the winning muteul. In case of ties,each side got zero.

The point of this little experiment was not to elevate my ego as some think. It was to show the benefits of using my paceline selection method over the one being used. I have struggled with paceline selction methods for the 9 years I have been dealing with my program. After 7 years I found I had to change a fundemental way of picking pacelines. Today I still struggle with it.Since paceline input affects all output it's not something to take lightly.

The other advantage I was going to mention if I ever got to first base here which I didn't,was that with my method you can database your results and get an idea of what works for what class. For example a race is for OC50Kn2x. What class of race are the horses coming out of that win this condition. Very easy to find out in my method because I use a single paceline. With the method used in the program(s) presented here you'll never be able to tell because it uses as many as 6 pacelines averaged together from different distances and surfaces. I find that a bit insane and non productive for databasing. And have you ever did a test of what paceline method does better than the other? I have and I have never heard of any endorsement for the one used in this program being offered. What evidence is there for its validity?

In the other portion of your message you confused where I got the 20% ROI from my program as a black box. It was not related to anything I have presented here. My program also produces various categories,about 16. One of them is the total "points" a horse earns from these 16 categories. Using the top "point" earner in that category is what produced the 20% ROI. The top "point" horse is not necessarily the top "speed fig" horse. Sometimes,he is surprisingly the last ranked speed horse.

I was willing to share some of the ideas from my program here but this is a very close minded group who considers another point of view negatively. I haven't even scratched the surface of what I've been though with my program.But at this point, I'm done trying to explain anything further to these guys. Hey,they got users showing them how they hit $18k supers and mammouth pick 6's with this free program. This is similar to the BS I heard with TLG. When you do a study of what they are talking about,it's just not true.

Handiman
12-15-2009, 09:52 PM
Light,

Please take this in the best light. I have been programming for 20 years. Mostly horse racing for my own pleasure. But I have written programs for people all over the country also.

Many programs were based on paceline selection, doing it multiple ways. So If I was interested in adding paceline selection that would be no problem. I choose not too.

But what this reply is all about, is the fact that what we are doing here is completely in the open. There is no hidden agenda here. The program is open source...the program is free. I have spent a lot of my time working on it and doing it for nothing, nada, zip zero. And I am doing it in Ill health, with an extremely bad heart. I am 100% disabled.

So for you to come here with a crappy attitude and make me feel bad sucks. But I will buck up and tell you that you are free to have the source code and then find someone who can program in Liberty Basic and add paceline selection to the program and then post it here.

If you can improve our little program, then shut the hell up and DO IT!!!! Quit flapping your lips and wanking your jaws and get with it. We are open to anything. You really want to help then jump in and get something done!

We will show you anything....The end product....the source code...hell you can even see my underwear if you want. We have nothing to hide.

But you wrap yourself up in secrecy and blind claims. If you don't have something positive to share then you are wasting your time and ours. Once again we are open to anything, but we expect people to put their money where their mouth is and not come here, spread hot air about their super duper terrific program....and then keep it all a secret.

So please join in and get some work done or go help someone else. Because we aren't gaining anything from your pseudo help.

Respectfuly,
Handi

Dave Schwartz
12-15-2009, 10:40 PM
Handiman :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

csmith
12-15-2009, 11:03 PM
Light,

Please take this in the best light. I have been programming for 20 years. Mostly horse racing for my own pleasure. But I have written programs for people all over the country also.

Many programs were based on paceline selection, doing it multiple ways. So If I was interested in adding paceline selection that would be no problem. I choose not too.

But what this reply is all about, is the fact that what we are doing here is completely in the open. There is no hidden agenda here. The program is open source...the program is free. I have spent a lot of my time working on it and doing it for nothing, nada, zip zero. And I am doing it in Ill health, with an extremely bad heart. I am 100% disabled.

So for you to come here with a crappy attitude and make me feel bad sucks. But I will buck up and tell you that you are free to have the source code and then find someone who can program in Liberty Basic and add paceline selection to the program and then post it here.

If you can improve our little program, then shut the hell up and DO IT!!!! Quit flapping your lips and wanking your jaws and get with it. We are open to anything. You really want to help then jump in and get something done!

We will show you anything....The end product....the source code...hell you can even see my underwear if you want. We have nothing to hide.

But you wrap yourself up in secrecy and blind claims. If you don't have something positive to share then you are wasting your time and ours. Once again we are open to anything, but we expect people to put their money where their mouth is and not come here, spread hot air about their super duper terrific program....and then keep it all a secret.

So please join in and get some work done or go help someone else. Because we aren't gaining anything from your pseudo help.

Respectfuly,
Handi


I agree with Dave..Handi you are a class act :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

Warren Henry
12-15-2009, 11:08 PM
Handiman -- I second what Dave said.

While I have no interest in the approach you guys are taking, I am enjoying watching the progress of your collaboration. In the old days when IT was known as DP, we called what you are doing "egoless programming". This type of programming/development is quite rare and folks like Light will never understand it.

Keep up the good work.

hcap
12-16-2009, 07:05 AM
hcap

The way I scored those Excel spreadsheets I posted was NOT based on top ranked horse but which program had the winner ranked higher than the other. So out of 17 races over the weekend at Aqu, my program had the winner ranked higher than Handi's or HH's 8 times and Handi's or HH's had the winner ranked higher than mine 4 times. There were 5 ties. Whoever had the higher rank got the winning muteul. In case of ties,each side got zero.

The point of this little experiment was not to elevate my ego as some think. It was to show the benefits of using my paceline selection method over the one being used. I have struggled with paceline selction methods for the 9 years I have been dealing with my program. After 7 years I found I had to change a fundemental way of picking pacelines. Today I still struggle with it.Since paceline input affects all output it's not something to take lightly.

The other advantage I was going to mention if I ever got to first base here which I didn't,was that with my method you can database your results and get an idea of what works for what class. For example a race is for OC50Kn2x. What class of race are the horses coming out of that win this condition. Very easy to find out in my method because I use a single paceline. With the method used in the program(s) presented here you'll never be able to tell because it uses as many as 6 pacelines averaged together from different distances and surfaces. I find that a bit insane and non productive for databasing. And have you ever did a test of what paceline method does better than the other? I have and I have never heard of any endorsement for the one used in this program being offered. What evidence is there for its validity?

In the other portion of your message you confused where I got the 20% ROI from my program as a black box. It was not related to anything I have presented here. My program also produces various categories,about 16. One of them is the total "points" a horse earns from these 16 categories. Using the top "point" earner in that category is what produced the 20% ROI. The top "point" horse is not necessarily the top "speed fig" horse. Sometimes,he is surprisingly the last ranked speed horse.

I was willing to share some of the ideas from my program here but this is a very close minded group who considers another point of view negatively. I haven't even scratched the surface of what I've been though with my program.But at this point, I'm done trying to explain anything further to these guys. Hey,they got users showing them how they hit $18k supers and mammouth pick 6's with this free program. This is similar to the BS I heard with TLG. When you do a study of what they are talking about,it's just not true.Ok, thanks for the clarification. But I doubt going past rank 2 or 3 does much to solidify your pacer line contention. Particularly on a 17 sample test. Ranks 5 and on down from any program tend to have less and less significance and become just noise. I think going to rank 7 is really not valid at all.

But what is important is how well both performed broken down by rank.

For purposes of win betting, the top choice of a program is a pretty good gauge of how well a program is working no matter the internal method(s). Here is how ranks 1 thru 4 did for both Handi and yours

From your 17 race study

Rank 1
Handi choice won 5 races and returned $46.3.
Your choice won 4 races and returned $26.6.

Rank 2
Handi choice won 2 races and returned $20.8
Your choice won 6 races and returned $50.1

Rank 3
Handi choice won 1 races and returned $5.1
Your choice won 6 races and returned $50.1

Rank 4
Handi choice won 4 races and returned $46.3
Your choice won 3 races and returned $25.1

Totals to rank 4
Handi won 12 races and returned $118.5
Yours won 14 races and returned $116.6

So, I think your rank comparison race by race is debatable. Over hundreds and hundreds of races maybe a trend may be seen,
Looking at what I just posted, in terms of win betting, it really is a wash down to rank 4.

ranchwest
12-16-2009, 10:03 AM
hcap

The way I scored those Excel spreadsheets I posted was NOT based on top ranked horse but which program had the winner ranked higher than the other. So out of 17 races over the weekend at Aqu, my program had the winner ranked higher than Handi's or HH's 8 times and Handi's or HH's had the winner ranked higher than mine 4 times. There were 5 ties. Whoever had the higher rank got the winning muteul. In case of ties,each side got zero.

The point of this little experiment was not to elevate my ego as some think. It was to show the benefits of using my paceline selection method over the one being used. I have struggled with paceline selction methods for the 9 years I have been dealing with my program. After 7 years I found I had to change a fundemental way of picking pacelines. Today I still struggle with it.Since paceline input affects all output it's not something to take lightly.

The other advantage I was going to mention if I ever got to first base here which I didn't,was that with my method you can database your results and get an idea of what works for what class. For example a race is for OC50Kn2x. What class of race are the horses coming out of that win this condition. Very easy to find out in my method because I use a single paceline. With the method used in the program(s) presented here you'll never be able to tell because it uses as many as 6 pacelines averaged together from different distances and surfaces. I find that a bit insane and non productive for databasing. And have you ever did a test of what paceline method does better than the other? I have and I have never heard of any endorsement for the one used in this program being offered. What evidence is there for its validity?

In the other portion of your message you confused where I got the 20% ROI from my program as a black box. It was not related to anything I have presented here. My program also produces various categories,about 16. One of them is the total "points" a horse earns from these 16 categories. Using the top "point" earner in that category is what produced the 20% ROI. The top "point" horse is not necessarily the top "speed fig" horse. Sometimes,he is surprisingly the last ranked speed horse.

I was willing to share some of the ideas from my program here but this is a very close minded group who considers another point of view negatively. I haven't even scratched the surface of what I've been though with my program.But at this point, I'm done trying to explain anything further to these guys. Hey,they got users showing them how they hit $18k supers and mammouth pick 6's with this free program. This is similar to the BS I heard with TLG. When you do a study of what they are talking about,it's just not true.

Okay, I'm interested in what you're doing for paceline selection. I'm using a weighted method to auto-select one paceline. I am findiing that for what I'm doing paceline selection is pretty important.

(Note: I don't need all the he said, they said in this thread. As Joe Friday said, just the facts.)

Light
12-16-2009, 03:33 PM
You have a few math errors here:


Rank 3
Handi choice won 1 races and returned $5.1
Your choice won 6 races and returned $50.1

That should be:

Handi choice won 1 races and returned $5.1
Your choice won 1 races and returned $14.80


Rank 4
Handi choice won 4 races and returned $46.3
Your choice won 3 races and returned $25.1

That should be:

Handi choice won 4 races and returned $46.3
Your choice won 3 races and returned $46.5






Totals to rank 4 should now be:

Handi won 12 races and returned $118.5
Yours won 14 races and returned $138.00

Light
12-16-2009, 03:37 PM
Light,

Because we aren't gaining anything from your pseudo help.



Its pretty hard to help when its not welcomed.

Tom
12-16-2009, 04:18 PM
Handiman -- I second what Dave said.

While I have no interest in the approach you guys are taking, I am enjoying watching the progress of your collaboration. In the old days when IT was known as DP, we called what you are doing "egoless programming". This type of programming/development is quite rare and folks like Light will never understand it.

Keep up the good work.

AMEN!

It has been a pleasure reading these threads and following the progress. Hats off to these guys for following through on this project! :ThmbUp:

Speed Figure
12-16-2009, 04:22 PM
Its pretty hard to help when its not welcomed.
The problem is you went about it the wrong way. You kept trying to prove that the program was flawed and that yours was so great. Have you ever posted any screen shots or picks from your program before?

Jeff P
12-16-2009, 04:23 PM
Originally Posted by Warren Henry
Handiman -- I second what Dave said.

While I have no interest in the approach you guys are taking, I am enjoying watching the progress of your collaboration. In the old days when IT was known as DP, we called what you are doing "egoless programming". This type of programming/development is quite rare and folks like Light will never understand it.

I concur. Keep up the good work. :ThmbUp:

-jp

.

Light
12-16-2009, 05:49 PM
Okay, I'm interested in what you're doing for paceline selection. I'm using a weighted method to auto-select one paceline. I am findiing that for what I'm doing paceline selection is pretty important.

(Note: I don't need all the he said, they said in this thread. As Joe Friday said, just the facts.)

See my response to Jeff in his thread.

Light
12-16-2009, 05:54 PM
The problem is you went about it the wrong way. You kept trying to prove that the program was flawed and that yours was so great. Have you ever posted any screen shots or picks from your program before?

The problem is they think they know it all. I've been there done that for 9 years and I admit I'm still learning. They just start this project and think I dont know what I'm talking about. A month ago I told them they would continue expanding on what they've done because they will try to compensate for a basic flaw. Nobody listens. That's why they are now adding weight here and weight there.

Handiman
12-16-2009, 07:34 PM
You may be still learning, but you sure aren't learning anything from us. We offer you the code and ask you to help by adding paceline selection to our program and you don't even acknowledge that we made that offer in any way. How is that closed minded and think we know it all?

Light in case you haven't figured it out yet, we don't want to hear crap from you, we want to see some action!!!! And I'm willing to bet, no matter how I wrote paceline selection, you would say I was doing it completely wrong without any clarification.

Until you shut up and instead PUT UP....you are unfortunately just a turd in the punch bowl of life. And the sad fact about that is we can not flush a punch bowl, otherwise I suspect there would be many hands reaching for the handle as I type this at present.

Caps for emphasis: WE WELCOME YOUR HELP! YOU CAN, IF YOU DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THE CODE, YOU CAN EXPLAIN PRECISELY HOW WE SHOULD BE CHOOSING THE CORRECT PACELINE AND I WILL CODE IT IN THE PROGRAM! Is that plain enough to you that we don't know it all and are open to ideas?

For heaven's sake.......

Handi :)

Warren Henry
12-16-2009, 07:36 PM
If you are sure of an error, why not point it out - specifically - instead of crowing about how much smarter you are.

Just point out the flaw in their approach/logic and a few pertinent arguments to support your case. These arguments should be logical, not a few examples of your superior picks.

If you truly want to help, take them up on their offer and modify their code to do what you think is better, THEN compare selections.

fast4522
12-16-2009, 08:23 PM
Posted by Light
"The problem is they think they know it all. I've been there done that for 9 years and I admit I'm still learning. They just start this project and think I dont know what I'm talking about. A month ago I told them they would continue expanding on what they've done because they will try to compensate for a basic flaw. Nobody listens. That's why they are now adding weight here and weight there."

So what you are saying Light, is "my way is better than yours" and if you had a thread to prove it in we would all post there right? It definitely sound line a good cup of STFU is in order! Do I hear any seconds to the motion, or who else has thought of that poster here?

raybo
12-16-2009, 10:32 PM
The problem is they think they know it all. I've been there done that for 9 years and I admit I'm still learning. They just start this project and think I dont know what I'm talking about. A month ago I told them they would continue expanding on what they've done because they will try to compensate for a basic flaw. Nobody listens. That's why they are now adding weight here and weight there.

9 years? You're just a baby still. I've "been there and done that" for 32 and there are several here who have me beat in years of experience (and handicapping ability, for that matter).

Let me state some facts for you. There are successful players who use 1 paceline. There are successful players who use multiple pacelines. There are successful players who use no pacelines.

Whether or not one uses one or the other to grade, compare, rank, or whatever else you want to say, the horses in races, isn't what makes a successful player. What one does after that is what determines success or failure. One can use a "flawed" paceline selection method, as you say theirs is, and still be successful, because all paceline selection methods are "flawed". Knowing that fact forces the successful player to concentrate on the, ultimately, more important aspects of the game, and those aspects, my friend, are monumentally more complex than your "flawed" paceline selection method.

So, don't sweat the small stuff. You'll pass up the chance to make money at this game.

headhawg
12-16-2009, 10:46 PM
Light is a troll; it's simple as that. He doesn't want to help. He wants to "prove" that he's better, smarter, faster by...well...by posting meaningless drivel. He simply vying for some kind of negative attention that he desperately needs. Why? Because for him negative attention is better than no attention at all. He has at least twice in this thread alone posted that he was done posting here. Did that stop him? Nope. Let's just ignore his posts and continue with questions or suggestions about Handifast, and let Light take his magic program and make millions. :rolleyes:

lsosa54
12-16-2009, 10:59 PM
Some further typical results for this piece of junk, flawed program at MNR before the break. Track was muddy, so took the 100 pts off DT and put it on MY. 100 pts also on DS, FM, PC:

R3: Pinwinee Whiskey - Fair Odds 4.6-1. Paid $24.00. Top MY and P-S rank. $108.20 exacta within the odds line horses.

R5: Andy O. Does not make the fair odds line but top FM rank. Paid $18.40

R6: Smartthinkintony - Fair odds 1.3-1. Paid $11.60. $47.80 exacta within the odds line horses. Top DS, PC, CC ranks.

R7: Surf & Luck - Fair odds 1.3-1. Paid $12.80. $40 exacta and $337.20 tri contained within the odds line horses. Top Ds and MY ranks.

R8: Elusive Surprise - Fair odds 3-1. Paid $16.20. Top DS rank.

Doug, Handi, HH: This program stinks and I demand a refund of my full purchase price!

And yes, Light, I was home in time enough to play live.

PaceAdvantage
12-16-2009, 11:00 PM
This is similar to the BS I heard with TLG. When you do a study of what they are talking about,it's just not true.You just can't or won't let this bullshit go...injecting it into other threads where it bears no relevance.

Why don't you let everyone here know how that guy whom you labeled one of the best pickers on the internet is doing against TLG?

Maybe your opinion isn't all it's souped up to be...others here seem to agree.

And your prior study proved exactly what we were all talking about...TLG is a damn good capper, and a -7% ROI when posting picks for every race at the Saratoga meeting is very, very good, as your study proved.

Light
12-16-2009, 11:34 PM
Until you shut up and instead PUT UP....

My suggestion is to do what Doug suggested a bit back and put in an option for a drop down menu or a list to delete undesirable pacelines from the computation. Sort of what you already have for your scratches. This way you can have both options and the users can determine for themselves which is the better method.

My program has 2 options. It asks if you want to use your own pacelines or the programs default setting. Then the code branches out depending on the answer. So If I say I want to use the default settings,the program's output is immediately set. Its mindless,easy and saves time. It also pales in its results to picking my own pacelines. When I tell it I want to use my own pacelines,it displays the race number and each horses name,one at a time with a list of its last 10 races by date raced.I select the paceline and the next one pops up and I go through the entire card. Prior to running the program,I look at the pp's to determine which paceline I will want to use. Then I write down all those whose paceline I want to use who are NOT the last race. This saves excessive writing because most of the horses will be using their last paceline for computation. This option takes some skill, is much more time consuming but pays better.

Light
12-16-2009, 11:39 PM
Some further typical results for this piece of junk, flawed program at MNR before the break. Track was muddy, so took the 100 pts off DT and put it on MY. 100 pts also on DS, FM, PC:

R3: Pinwinee Whiskey - Fair Odds 4.6-1. Paid $24.00. Top MY and P-S rank. $108.20 exacta within the odds line horses.

R5: Andy O. Does not make the fair odds line but top FM rank. Paid $18.40

R6: Smartthinkintony - Fair odds 1.3-1. Paid $11.60. $47.80 exacta within the odds line horses. Top DS, PC, CC ranks.

R7: Surf & Luck - Fair odds 1.3-1. Paid $12.80. $40 exacta and $337.20 tri contained within the odds line horses. Top Ds and MY ranks.

R8: Elusive Surprise - Fair odds 3-1. Paid $16.20. Top DS rank.

Doug, Handi, HH: This program stinks and I demand a refund of my full purchase price!

And yes, Light, I was home in time enough to play live.


But how many fair odds horses were there in each of these races? This is called cherry picking. YUMMY.

Light
12-16-2009, 11:45 PM
There are successful players who use no pacelines.



I'm aware of that. A fellow player I know won thousands with no PP'S,only a program. He out did most of us. Only used owner/trainer relationships from his head,not from stats! But we are not talking about that. We are mere mortals who do use pacelines.

Light
12-17-2009, 12:26 AM
You just can't or won't let this bullshit go...injecting it into other threads where it bears no relevance.

Why don't you let everyone here know how that guy whom you labeled one of the best pickers on the internet is doing against TLG?

Maybe your opinion isn't all it's souped up to be...others here seem to agree.

And your prior study proved exactly what we were all talking about...TLG is a damn good capper, and a -7% ROI when posting picks for every race at the Saratoga meeting is very, very good, as your study proved.

Even if I agreed with you,it still proves TLG's picks were blown out of proportion.This is the case here as well. Everyday you got some person claiming the holy grail of payoffs. Cherry picking TLG hits or the free program hits here is nothing but hype.

Light
12-17-2009, 12:32 AM
let Light take his magic program and make millions. :rolleyes:

Never said it will even make you a dime. I'm only talking paceline selection right now.

headhawg
12-17-2009, 12:36 AM
Cherry picking TLG hits or the free program hits here is nothing but hype.So far you're the only one bitching about it. And you haven't even used the program so you're the least qualified person to critique it. So again I ask -- why should anything about Handifast concern you?

And not only are you not qualified to give an honest opinion about Handifast, members here are discovering that you are not qualified to talk about much of anything. So do yourself a favor and shut the hell up already. How much more embarrassment do you need to cause yourself?

ranchwest
12-17-2009, 12:43 AM
See my response to Jeff in his thread.

Okay, I saw your response to Jeff. Do you care to respond to my question?

Handiman
12-17-2009, 12:47 AM
As I said before I have written many programs over the years. And many of those were paceline selection driven. But in the programs I designed, The user just had to check a box next to a paceline he wanted and the program retained all the information in variables for that horse. Then onto the next one. I never had to write anything down, everything was done by the program. Even multiple pacelines if I wanted per horse.

Once I get the program to the point where I want it to be, if there is a demand from users to take it further into paceline selection, I will do that too, assuming I'm still alive.

Where I stand now is a program with one screen allowing user to load up to 6 different tracks. Do scratches after race selection and then display summary info. It is set up so by just one click of a radio button, you can toggle between all 6 tracks, or however many are loaded. You can also close out a track when it's done and load another in it's place without closing the program or affecting other tracks already loaded and in play.

I am coding right now the ability for the user to create a custom setting for each of the 6 tracks, and storing that setting and ability to reload that setting next time program is used. Or the User may just click a button and use the default settings.

What may be done by the user in regards to the custom setting is, using a slider, select point value for any category they choose and then to select which categories to include in the setting by checking box next to the chosen category. So a mix and match ability will be available.

I've got a fair amount of the coding done already but still quite a bit to do before it's ready to go.

Handi :)

headhawg
12-17-2009, 12:54 AM
Doug, Handi, HH: This program stinks and I demand a refund of my full purchase price!Ok. The check's in the mail. :)

hcap
12-17-2009, 06:50 AM
You have a few math errors here:




That should be:

Handi choice won 1 races and returned $5.1
Your choice won 1 races and returned $14.80




That should be:

Handi choice won 4 races and returned $46.3
Your choice won 3 races and returned $46.5


Totals to rank 4 should now be:

Handi won 12 races and returned $118.5
Yours won 14 races and returned $138.00

Yes I did screw up the sumif formulas.
I still think both had respectable showings. But we all agree17 races are pretty meaningless.
And we would need many hundreds to come to any conclusions.

Attached corrected spreadsheet. To rank 4

lsosa54
12-17-2009, 07:16 AM
But how many fair odds horses were there in each of these races? This is called cherry picking. YUMMY.

If you bothered to take a quick look at the program, you'd know it produces 4 per race. Cherry picking what? - take a look at the 4 on the line, check the overlays, decided whether to bet. Are there losses? Of course.

I'm a 19 year veteran of paceline selection analysis and there are those here with 2x that experience - who made you the expert?

You have brain I assume - use it. If a horse comes up a strong contender but you feel it's based on wacked pacelines for today's race or whatever, throw it out. It's NOT a black box.

douglasw32
12-17-2009, 01:16 PM
My suggestion is to do what Doug suggested a bit back and put in an option for a drop down menu or a list to delete undesirable pacelines from the computation. Sort of what you already have for your scratches. This way you can have both options and the users can determine for themselves which is the better method.


Okay we could all be in agreement and let this die....

PLEASE !!!! Code in a way to exclude something from the automatic averages.

It is actually a grand idea, although it may heve been presented wrongly.

Lets make it happen that was the point, to let this baby grow up.

Lets finish up the pissing match and get on to better talk =)

Light
12-17-2009, 01:26 PM
And you haven't even used the program so you're the least qualified person to critique it.

Ummm. You're not paying attention. I ran 2 of the programs here against mine for a tiny sample study that I uploaded and hcap has responded to. How could I have done that without using the program? :rolleyes:

Light
12-17-2009, 01:44 PM
Look,there's only 1 thing that bothers me about this whole thing. I dont care what you call me. I find that amusing. All of you are experienced and I respect that. And its not really about which paceline method you use,single or averaging. But its about including pacelines that have no business being used and will lower your ROI. My little sample from my program that hcap has responded to did not blow your program away but it did better with nothing but a different paceline approach,not due to me or my program. We know that if you make 10% ROI in this game, its huge. So we need every little edge we can to do that. We are practically proffessionals at this. But to keep a mistake a rookie would make is totally inexcusable, and self defeating. Otherwise,why make a program at all.

Light
12-17-2009, 01:53 PM
Okay, I saw your response to Jeff. Do you care to respond to my question?

Well,do you agree with what I said so far? If not what do you disagree with? Respond in the Jeff thread. Ill discuss it there.

Light
12-17-2009, 01:59 PM
Yes I did screw up the sumif formulas.
I still think both had respectable showings. But we all agree17 races are pretty meaningless.
And we would need many hundreds to come to any conclusions.

Attached corrected spreadsheet. To rank 4

Thanks hcap. Generally I agree with your top 4 criteria except in certain situations.I know you have a homemade program. What do you think of all this? How would you improve it?

Vinnie
12-17-2009, 02:21 PM
As I said before I have written many programs over the years. And many of those were paceline selection driven. But in the programs I designed, The user just had to check a box next to a paceline he wanted and the program retained all the information in variables for that horse. Then onto the next one. I never had to write anything down, everything was done by the program. Even multiple pacelines if I wanted per horse.

Once I get the program to the point where I want it to be, if there is a demand from users to take it further into paceline selection, I will do that too, assuming I'm still alive.

Where I stand now is a program with one screen allowing user to load up to 6 different tracks. Do scratches after race selection and then display summary info. It is set up so by just one click of a radio button, you can toggle between all 6 tracks, or however many are loaded. You can also close out a track when it's done and load another in it's place without closing the program or affecting other tracks already loaded and in play.

I am coding right now the ability for the user to create a custom setting for each of the 6 tracks, and storing that setting and ability to reload that setting next time program is used. Or the User may just click a button and use the default settings.

What may be done by the user in regards to the custom setting is, using a slider, select point value for any category they choose and then to select which categories to include in the setting by checking box next to the chosen category. So a mix and match ability will be available.

I've got a fair amount of the coding done already but still quite a bit to do before it's ready to go.

Handi :)

Handi:

Take Good care of yourself first and foremost. What you Doug and Headhawg have already done in making Handifast what it has become is "UNBELIEVABLE"!
You are in my prayers and I know that you will only continue to recover until you are back to feeling 100% or darned near everyday going forward. A Big salute goes out to you and your continued improving health Handi. Thank you so much for all the work that you guys have done and continue to do with your excellent handicapping program. :)

Handiman
12-17-2009, 02:49 PM
Vinnie and all the others that have shown their appreciation for our little program. I say ours, but in all reality, the kudos should go to Doug and for the most part, his lovely wife for bringing forth their baby allowing Head and I a chance to get in and tickle it a bit.

I am very thankful, for the main reason that it has given me some direction and meaning back to a life which before heart trouble set in, was jam packed with work, Youth football coaching, hours of Harley riding and Golf. But now all of that is gone, and I'm a bit large to be a jockey. Once I flew past 200 pounds I figured that dream was over...:lol:

Having a project to tinker with almost daily, like Doug's F.A.S.T. program, makes getting out of bed everyday much easier and rewarding. And I am making some wonderful friends.

Thanks again to everyone who has sent well wishes. It means the world to me to have such caring people express their concern for my well being.

Handi :)

jk3521
12-17-2009, 08:21 PM
I have never bet any horses using any software as a "Black Box". I take what the programs spit out for their top four selections and take a closer look at those horses. Handifast is one of the better tools that I have had the opportunity to try out using that method....and the price just can't be beat! Thank you Doug, Handi, and Hawg for my new toy.

headhawg
12-17-2009, 08:43 PM
Ummm. You're not paying attention. I ran 2 of the programs here against mine for a tiny sample study that I uploaded and hcap has responded to. How could I have done that without using the program? :rolleyes:Umm...you fired it up. You didn't use it. So...still not qualified to critique it. Having trouble understanding -- again?

douglasw32
12-18-2009, 12:13 AM
It is hard to make criticism sound friendly in print so let me begin this with that fact.

now the "test" of the two programs itself has a flaw, light's program works with pacelines, this one does not, we will never know if it improves or not until it is available and someone excludes pacelines compared to letting it average.

The whole idea of the average came from watching an inexperienced, noob that could only read speed figures because they were BOLD print (lol)

I watched in amazement as someone with a week of experience would toast my 20 years on a weekly basis, I started making her tell me what she saw in the pick that beat me and it defied handicapping logic, she was looking at the speed figures and dismissing the fastest and slowest (averaging them) never going past 6 races.

I programmed her brain into the program and I started picking horses that if I looked at in the form would have been dismissed immediately based on turf records on dirt, sprinters going long, poor jocks, poor trainers or both, etc etc etc

I say we throw it in when possible then compare until then the way it works out IMHO is that the averages are just that averages, knowing that allows you to dismiss one that looks like it is based on crap lines, however, trust me it will bite back.

I will be the first to admit it seems like nonsense, but it works and many times at a good price, i think because it picks horses that based on common handicapping look ugly but on a good day have the raw ability to jump up and win, most likely for no real good reason other than on average they run fast enough and the others fail to do to form or bad placement.

it is what it is, it picks winners often enough to be worthwhile, can it be improved ? of course, that is the whole reason it is free.

the added fact that it has given handi some joy makes it worthwhile no matter what criticism it gets.;)

headhawg
12-18-2009, 12:41 AM
There shouldn't have to be a comparison test, Doug. The only test that counts for me is if Handifast users are doing things like jk3521 or lsosa are doing -- looking at the Top4 (or the top 3 FAST or PWR figs or whatever) and taking a second or third look at those horses that they might not have normally considered. And many users seem to be doing just that and that makes Handifast a useful tool.

As Handi has said adding a paceline selection option is not hard to do; a fair amount of coding, yes, but not difficult. But I have not seen posts by regular users clamoring for that option. Personally, it would be low on my to-do list. I would make the argument that finding a good set of weights is tantamount to selecting the "proper" paceline anyway so why bother? The "there's more than one way to skin a cat" adage applies here which is the major point that I have been trying to make with a certain someone who just can't see past his own narrowmindedness.

Light
12-18-2009, 12:41 AM
The whole idea of the average came from watching an inexperienced, noob that could only read speed figures because they were BOLD print (lol)

I watched in amazement as someone with a week of experience would toast my 20 years on a weekly basis, I started making her tell me what she saw in the pick that beat me and it defied handicapping logic, she was looking at the speed figures and dismissing the fastest and slowest (averaging them) never going past 6 races.



Wow.So I wasn't losing my mind. I knew your method was weird and unheard of.Yet everyone was acting like it was perfectly normal. Thanks for finally making it's source clear. And it does probably pick some nice prices simply because nobody else would use something like this.

At this point I dont really care what you do with your program. I was only making a suggestion I would think was pretty common knowledge. It was bizzarre to me how they thought my way was bozo and yours was mainstream.

Well, looks like I will be co playing with a partner for 1/2 million in the DRF tournament this January,and my partner wants the output from my program for the drf contest. At least one person thinks my way has merit.

headhawg
12-18-2009, 12:50 AM
Light,

You clearly don't read anyone's posts. And you continue to twist things into some kind of weird "you against everybody else" whining session.

Good luck to you and your partner (Is it your big ego?) in the contest.

Handiman
12-18-2009, 02:26 AM
Light,

You have been handed the torch and now either you run with it or get burned. I have read your posts and understand exactly what you have been trying to say, albeit in the most unfortunate way.

You are an ass kicking handicapping machine, with the key to the vault, which apparently is desperately needed by your handicapping partner. And as you have eluded to many times here, picking the right paceline to you is as easy and natural to you as breathing is to me.

So let's be made aware of your contest moniker when the DRF contest starts, so we can all, while perched on the edge of our handicapping chairs, keep track of your journey as you knock over winner after winner and climb that ladder to handicapping immortality.

And when you reach the pinnacle of the handicapping world, we mere mortals can cheer and all rise up and carry you about on our shoulders, at least in the ether world!

Handi :)

Speed Figure
12-18-2009, 02:34 AM
He's not going to do anything! action speaks louder than words. He's got all the words, but NO ACTION!!

lsosa54
12-18-2009, 07:19 AM
The whole idea of the average came from watching an inexperienced, noob that could only read speed figures because they were BOLD print (lol)

I watched in amazement as someone with a week of experience would toast my 20 years on a weekly basis, I started making her tell me what she saw in the pick that beat me and it defied handicapping logic, she was looking at the speed figures and dismissing the fastest and slowest (averaging them) never going past 6 races.



Doug: I don't even look at the speed figures and only take a cursory glance at the FAST # and don't include it in my points. Don't underestimate the power of the FM and PC ratings and the CC and PS HH came up with to point out contenders not really gettable unless you're using the best paceline in 10 for everyone, and even then they may not come up.

lsosa54
12-18-2009, 07:21 AM
He's not going to do anything! action speaks louder than words. He's got all the words, but NO ACTION!!

Well said in 2 sentences. While I hate to put anyone with dissenting opinions on "ignore", Darkness contributes nothing in a positive manner.

fight
12-18-2009, 04:52 PM
i notice if you leave all zeros in youget 4 horses with no points. where are those 4 horses selected from or how? ty

douglasw32
12-18-2009, 05:16 PM
Well I could not base the whole thing on the noob, the form points are just what I filter when looking at pp, the PC is based on WIlliam Scott's PCR the c-c is all hh's based on someones published work, sorry forgot who?

And the speed figures are just last 3 bris figs, the pace averaging, the non ability to select a paceline, what started all of this, only shows up in the FAST number.

No where else.

And light, long ago I mentioned many times what all of this was based on, never claimed it was anything short of a tool to be used to find winners.

fight
12-18-2009, 05:28 PM
my question is if i leave all the weights zero what is happing to give me 4 horses with 0pts and and 98.8 fair odds? is something working internally with no weights? maybe i didnot understand you answer in last posy ty love your work.

redeye007
12-18-2009, 10:17 PM
Here's another plug for the handifast team. I previously posted results for 12/05/09 using HHXV2 combined with the preference settings I used. I hope I'm not redboarding and I did not tweak anything after the races. Here are todays results for Hollywood Park 12/18/09 using those settings. I only use top power selection and top overall selection:

race 3 top power 7 streets of heaven $30.40 winner

race 4 top power,top over all 2 gilded gem $5.80 winner

race 5 top power universal peace $4.60 winner

race 6 top overall 7 midwesterner $12 winner

race 7 top power,top overall 4 red sun $5.20

race 8 top overall 8 warrens rock art $19.40

it was interesting to note that after the late scratch of #7 in the 8th race the 10 horse that was picked was tossed and the 8 horse was picked as the overall winner.

pick 6 $16,858, pick 4 $515 plus all doubles and pick 3's :jump:

Doug, HH, Handi I want my purchase price back , this program stinks :D :lol:
Great work guys :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

headhawg
12-18-2009, 10:34 PM
my question is if i leave all the weights zero what is happing to give me 4 horses with 0pts and and 98.8 fair odds? is something working internally with no weights?I would totally disregard any horses picked with all weights set to zero. I have to closely examine what's happening but the program is geared to provide a Top 4 regardless of weights. These are essentially random picks. Remember that the original program by Doug and then Handi did not allow for the changing of weights. So this never was an issue before. Handi has programmed in multiple sort routines which where the Top 4 horses get stored internally. Perhaps he can provide the answer more quickly than I can so that I don't have to trace the code. :) I'll provide a fix for this soon; probably just a notice that forces the user to set some weights. Or, if I'm feeling really creative, a default Top 4 selection routine independent of weights.

As an aside, this is exactly why software is beta-tested. Programmers rarely do the unexpected with their own programs. Users, however, push software to the limits as far as bugs are concerned. I never expected any user to set all weights to zero so I didn't have a routine in HHX to catch that. Thanks for pointing this out.

Handiman
12-18-2009, 11:14 PM
Need some help from anyone who might be able too. I have one track coded so I can change points assigned to the categories and then also select which categories I want to use.

Does anybody have settings that are kicking butt or at least doing well I can test with tomorrow? I am going to play a wps contest with a group of guys at the link posted in 'fun contest thread' in off site contests. I would like to put the new ability to change points and categories to a tough test...we will be playing Delta downs....All are welcome it's free and there's even $25 to the winner.

So let me know if you can help. :ThmbUp:

Thanks,
Handi :)

lsosa54
12-19-2009, 10:24 AM
Handi: I think it depends on the circuit. For SoCal, I use 100 points each on DS, FM, PC, and TF but it's all polytrack. When I played MNR a couple of nights, I turned off TF and added the 100 pts. either to DT or MY, depending on track condition. I'd like to test including HH's C-C and possibly P-S ratings, but they are not programmable right now. Maybe you should just use it as is, as HCP's reported stats are pretty solid.

My approach pulls in some nice longshot possibilities I wouldn't normally see but the default settings may get a horse that my settings don't at a nice price - so who knows. I think it would have to be tested by track or circuit over a large sample size, like HCP is doing, just over a longer period.

lsosa54
12-19-2009, 10:28 AM
1-HH: are P-S and C-C the only things in PWR or is PWR actually the FAST # adjusted by those 2 ratings?

2-Doug: should we give some thought to HOW the fair odds horses are calculated and to what might be the optimal approach, keeping in mind it's a free program. I remember you said something about giving top ranked horses in a category double the points within the line or something like that? How exactly is the fair odds line calculated?

headhawg
12-19-2009, 11:03 AM
1-HH: are P-S and C-C the only things in PWR or is PWR actually the FAST # adjusted by those 2 ratings?Yes, PWR is only based on C-C and P-S. However, when I coded V1 of HHX (which seems like years ago already :) ) I adjusted the FAST number with an equal part of C-C to the factors that were all ready there. The original FAST was quite pace/speed based and I wanted to see if I could improve the rating. Adding the C-C seemed to move the underneath horses into the Top 4 although it did not seem to improve the top selection.

I'm guessing that you're asking because you're finding a significant correlation between PWR and FAST? Probably so because they are both based on pace/speed and now in HHX Class-Consistency as well.

As far as the double-points method goes, let me reiterate my response to Handi regarding that. When I read the original code I looked at the weights from the top down. That is, I thought that the highest-rated horse got the full weight (all of the points) and the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th ranked horses got 1/2 that amount. (20,10,10,10) As it turns out Doug designed it from the bottom up -- the weights assigned went to the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th ranked horses and the top ranked horse got double that amount (10,10,10,20). Functionally it works the same as long as the user knows what the process is. So to be clear, in HHXv2 when the user assigns a 20 weight to a rating the top-rated horse gets that weight and the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th ranked horses get 1/2 that amount. When Handi's new version is released I'm sure he will post how the weights are assigned.

lsosa54
12-19-2009, 11:54 AM
Got you HH - thanks for clarifying. Actually, I'm finding winners high in either PS or CC that are not high in FAST or the fair odds line, so it gives another look. I do try to logically reason when the class-consistency piece or the early speed-avg speed pieces may be more relevant depending on the type of race, but you know how that goes.

With the FAST, PWR, and the Fair Odds Line, there are plenty of contenders with ML's between 5-1 and 12-1 to evaluate for a potential bet. Depending on the race, you could extend out to 15-1. Some signs of life (visual form) within the last 3-4 or so races is also fairly critical. By that I mean early speed, moves within a race (1st call to 2nd call, 2nd call to stretch call), etc.

lsosa54
12-19-2009, 12:05 PM
So to be clear, in HHXv2 when the user assigns a 20 weight to a rating the top-rated horse gets that weight and the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th ranked horses get 1/2 that amount. When Handi's new version is released I'm sure he will post how the weights are assigned.

Always keeping in mind ease of programming, is there a more optimal way to do it? Should the 3rd and 4th get the same as the 2nd and should the 1st be double? What happens if we expand the odds line to a couple of more horses per Jim G's suggestion? Does it all become gibberish?

I remember reading something, maybe Mitchell, that once the win odds line got over I think 5-1 on a contender, overlays didn't mean much because the odds line probably didn't represent that contender's probability of winning, or it didn't make the horse a true contender or something to that effect.

JimG
12-19-2009, 12:48 PM
What happens if we expand the odds line to a couple of more horses per Jim G's suggestion? Does it all become gibberish?

It shouldn't if each horse is being rated properly. Exotic players need to being able to distinguish between non-contenders and marginal contenders. A real good odds line does that.


I remember reading something, maybe Mitchell, that once the win odds line got over I think 5-1 on a contender, overlays didn't mean much because the odds line probably didn't represent that contender's probability of winning, or it didn't make the horse a true contender or something to that effect.

That kind of thinking leads me to believe Mitchell likely never cashed on a winner paying more than $30. In order to hit long shots either to win and/or in exotics, you must be able to distinguish if the horse that is currently 30-1 on the odds board is a true overlay that deserves to be about 8-1 or is a non contender that should not be bet at 100-1.

Jim

headhawg
12-19-2009, 01:09 PM
Truthfully I don't know exactly what would be optimal. From a coding point of view assigning one weight value to the top ranked horse and having the underneath horses get a percentage of that value is no big deal. It gets a little bit more unwieldy if you have the user assign a weight value for each rank position.

Handi asked me about this same thing recently and I told him that I thought that the users would probably like the ability to do it, but the coding for that would be a little more challenging, at least for me. And I am not sure that there would be any clear benefit for users. What I mean is the way things are now there are a lot of possible combinations for weights. Imagine if you had to assign a weight value for the top 4 or 5 or 6 horses for each rating. In my mind there might be more effort expended in doing that for very little -- if any -- change in results.

Doug would have to explain why he chose to only assign points to the top four ranked horses. Maybe he was thinking that he only wanted to display the overall top 4 horses, so it made sense to assign points for only the top four ranked horses in each category. You bring up a great point however -- if we choose to display the top 6 do we have to assign points for the top six ranked horses as well? I really don't know the answer.

And yes that might have been Mitchell or maybe even Mark Cramer. It gets harder to be accurate in assigning fair odds as the estimated chance of winning decreases. So in effect, is that 11-1 shot really an overlay or not? The odds templates that Steve Fierro put in his book were very revealing as well, especially if you find it easier to think in odds rather than percentages.

JimG
12-19-2009, 01:25 PM
Doug would have to explain why he chose to only assign points to the top four ranked horses. Maybe he was thinking that he only wanted to display the overall top 4 horses, so it made sense to assign points for only the top four ranked horses in each category. You bring up a great point however -- if we choose to display the top 6 do we have to assign points for the top six ranked horses as well? I really don't know the answer.


The odds for all horses are currently in the csv output, which I have been manipulating for my purposes. The line is pretty darn good now compared to many I have seen once I set up the factors and weighted them for what I wanted in the line. I do not recommend changing the current engine for calculation.

It would just be nice to see those odds displayed within the program for all horses sorted in order since they are already being calculated.

Jim

douglasw32
12-19-2009, 11:29 PM
Actually that was just one of HANDI's many added features =)

I would imagine it was 4 at the time, because there were no scroll bars and it fit on the screen...

I would also imagine in his newest program more will be shown but I do not know for sure ?

lsosa54
12-21-2009, 11:15 PM
How difficult would it be to give the user the choice of:

1-How many races are used by the program - say last 4 as opposed to last 6. which I believe it uses now?

OR

2-Use races within a certain # of days - say within the last 30d or 90d?

I'm not talking selecting individual pacelines, just what races are used.

Handiman
12-21-2009, 11:37 PM
Not sure what you mean. In relation to what? What are you looking to do?

I will be sending out my present version to HeadHawg probably tomorrow for him to look at some code. I am having trouble with his 3 categories not showing up every race. I know I must be doing something wrong and maybe he can straighten me out. And once he's done it will basically be ready to go to Doug and then to everyone else.

Then I will start putting in the csv code. I will also add all the horses with their odds showing below the summary.

Handi :)

lsosa54
12-22-2009, 06:56 AM
Not sure what you mean. In relation to what? What are you looking to do?

Handi :)


How many pace lines does the program use/average to come up with its figures - the last 6? I'd like the option of usiung the last x - up to 10 - to come up with those figs/calculations.

JimG
12-22-2009, 05:09 PM
I will also add all the horses with their odds showing below the summary.

Handi :)

That is great. Thanks. Hopefully you or Mr. Headhawg will send me a pm when this is ready for download. I do appreciate it.

Jim

lsosa54
12-25-2009, 05:14 PM
I attached my summaries from HH V2 sorted by PTS., which determine the fair odds in the next column. The +/- column is simply the ML - Fair Odds. A red (#) is a theoretical underlay based on the program.

The text file shows what I use for points. Yes, I do use 100 turf pts. for the SAX poly.

Use at your own risk. You can look at the fair odds to determine value. Anything ranked top 2-3 in DS, FM, PC, TF, CC, and PS is worth a 2nd review and look if there are generous post time odds.

Keep in mind this is obviously before scratches tomorrow BUT I have excluded horses I feel have no shot to win, although I'm never too harsh on my initial contender pool.Some logical handicapping can narrow the contention down as well.

SAX R#10 not included as most are 1st timers.

douglasw32
12-25-2009, 06:51 PM
I love how your using it.

lsosa54
12-26-2009, 09:17 PM
Not too shabby on the 1st points choice at SAX without much thought. Of course, I couldn't bet because of the moronic 4NJBETS ADW which is part of the dispute with Tracknet and they are not taking SAX, GP, and OAK.

Of the 9 races, 5 top points choices won (56%), with an ROI of 126%, even with that measly $2.80 mutuel on The Usual QT. $18 bet with a return of $40.60.

So far in the 1st 3 at MNR, we are 3-3. $6 bet, $12.60 returned, ROI 110%.

I'll continue my cherry picking. At least I can still bet MNR.


I attached my summaries from HH V2 sorted by PTS., which determine the fair odds in the next column. The +/- column is simply the ML - Fair Odds. A red (#) is a theoretical underlay based on the program.

The text file shows what I use for points. Yes, I do use 100 turf pts. for the SAX poly.

Use at your own risk. You can look at the fair odds to determine value. Anything ranked top 2-3 in DS, FM, PC, TF, CC, and PS is worth a 2nd review and look if there are generous post time odds.

Keep in mind this is obviously before scratches tomorrow BUT I have excluded horses I feel have no shot to win, although I'm never too harsh on my initial contender pool.Some logical handicapping can narrow the contention down as well.

SAX R#10 not included as most are 1st timers.

headhawg
12-26-2009, 11:04 PM
Keep it going, lsosa. Great stuff!

lsosa54
12-26-2009, 11:51 PM
Not too shabby on the 1st points choice at SAX without much thought. Of course, I couldn't bet because of the moronic 4NJBETS ADW which is part of the dispute with Tracknet and they are not taking SAX, GP, and OAK.

Of the 9 races, 5 top points choices won (56%), with an ROI of 126%, even with that measly $2.80 mutuel on The Usual QT. $18 bet with a return of $40.60.

So far in the 1st 3 at MNR, we are 3-3. $6 bet, $12.60 returned, ROI 110%.

I'll continue my cherry picking. At least I can still bet MNR.

Well, MNR ended up non productive as the 1st 3 winners is all we got. $18 bet with a $12.60 return gives us a loss of 30%.

douglasw32
12-27-2009, 12:24 AM
Adjust for the off track ?

lsosa54
12-27-2009, 10:39 AM
Adjust for the off track ?

Tells you how casually I was doing it, Doug, and how ticked off I was about the SA signal, I didn't even look to see that it was muddy, as I wasn't watching any live video! Thank goodness it was a $2 bet test.

lsosa54
12-29-2009, 09:47 PM
Checked out results for all the double digit winners at MNR during a few days I was handicapping it as a new track for me. 11-21, 12-12, 12-13, 12-14, 12-26, and 12-27. Some fast, some good, some muddy tracks.

Of the 24 $10+ winners, 14 were in the top 4 and ties in the CL column. Another 5 came from the top 4 and ties DS, 4 from LP, and 1 from EP. The one from EP was Quaker Ridge Road who was showing early speed with dismal finishes.

I checked SAX on the 26th, and all the double digit winners except for Noblety (didn't cap race 10) came from the top 4 and ties CL column. Noblety was the 5th in the CL column, 1 point behind the 4th.

I always dismissed the CL column looking for prices, preferring to look at DS, FM, PC, and TF (poly only). Maybe I need to rethink that assumption as it looks like I may be capping MNR as SAX, GG, OAK, and GP are not available to 4NJBets right now.

redeye007
12-29-2009, 10:41 PM
Checked out results for all the double digit winners at MNR during a few days I was handicapping it as a new track for me. 11-21, 12-12, 12-13, 12-14, 12-26, and 12-27. Some fast, some good, some muddy tracks.

Of the 24 $10+ winners, 14 were in the top 4 and ties in the CL column. Another 5 came from the top 4 and ties DS, 4 from LP, and 1 from EP. The one from EP was Quaker Ridge Road who was showing early speed with dismal finishes.

I checked SAX on the 26th, and all the double digit winners except for Noblety (didn't cap race 10) came from the top 4 and ties CL column. Noblety was the 5th in the CL column, 1 point behind the 4th.

I always dismissed the CL column looking for prices, preferring to look at DS, FM, PC, and TF (poly only). Maybe I need to rethink that assumption as it looks like I may be capping MNR as SAX, GG, OAK, and GP are not available to 4NJBets right now.

I'm seeing good results from the previous SAX meet and 7 OF 10 TOP winners on opening day with these preferences:
CL 58, DS 10, EP 30, LP 55, FM 20, PCR 40, AW 20, TF 20, MY 20, DT 20, FAST 25, TR 10, JK 10, ML 10. I believe that on any given day a pick 6 could be hit on a small ticket with these settings. Anyway, I'll hope.

lsosa54
12-29-2009, 10:46 PM
I'm seeing good results from the previous SAX meet and 7 OF 10 TOP winners on opening day with these preferences:
CL 58, DS 10, EP 30, LP 55, FM 20, PCR 40, AW 20, TF 20, MY 20, DT 20, FAST 25, TR 10, JK 10, ML 10. I believe that on any given day a pick 6 could be hit on a small ticket with these settings. Anyway, I'll hope.

Thanks for sharing your approach and results.

douglasw32
12-29-2009, 11:00 PM
If it helps CL is a average of the last 3 WINNERS speed ratings.

(sort of)

redeye007
12-30-2009, 04:45 AM
thanks doug. that is good to know. it's always a good idea to review the horses' records and look for horses in trouble in their last race. :ThmbUp:

Vinnie
12-30-2009, 09:18 AM
Hello redeye007:

I hope that you are doing well? Thanks for sharing your results and settings. I must strongly agree with what you stated in an earlier post. I truly believe that Handifast when it is clicking right along is capable of some incredible results. When you have locked on to the most suitable settings, I have seen the results at Hollywood and Santa Anita to be nothing short of stunning. :)

Keep up the good work.

All the BEST!

fight
12-30-2009, 10:48 AM
redeye i see only 6 top wins with your weights the 1st 2nd 6th 7th 8th 9th.whats the 7th winner? whatever a nice job.

redeye007
12-30-2009, 05:57 PM
redeye i see only 6 top wins with your weights the 1st 2nd 6th 7th 8th 9th.whats the 7th winner? whatever a nice job.

I stand corrected. you're right. I need to check my math better next time. :blush: :blush: :blush:

fight
12-31-2009, 01:17 PM
i notice you weight all surfaces 20 . now my question is do you for example if mud surface leave all 4 surfaces in at20 or just mud only 20 ? ty

Houndog
12-31-2009, 07:23 PM
Attached is a word document of the more informative posts on this board which I have found gave me a better understanding on how to effectively use this program.

AAcoolguy
01-01-2010, 05:00 AM
Good job Hounddog.

Vinnie
01-01-2010, 09:38 AM
Houndog:

Greetings:

Happy New Year to you and your family. :)

Thank you very much for taking the time to post such an excellent and informative document on Handifast. I have printed and saved it for future use and I am sure that I will read it over and over many times going forward in using Handifast.

All the BEST to you and your family. I hope that you have a wonderful 2010 and beyond.

douglasw32
01-01-2010, 01:41 PM
THANKS HOUNDOG, I will include this with the newest release...

dartman51
01-02-2010, 03:37 PM
For anyone interested. Yesterday @ SA, Handifast Top Fair Odds Pick, won the 2nd,3rd, 5th and 10th races. Paid, $9.40, $2.80, $29.40 and $5.20. Not bad, $46.80 return on $20 bet. This is using lsosa54's settings for Cal AW tracks. :ThmbUp:

dartman51
01-02-2010, 03:47 PM
I'll put these up in advance. SA 1/2/10
1> #5
2> #1
3> #4
4> #5
5> #3
6> #1
7> #8
8> #2
9> #7

Same settings as yesterday.

dartman51
01-02-2010, 03:55 PM
For anyone interested. Yesterday @ SA, Handifast Top Fair Odds Pick, won the 2nd,3rd, 5th and 10th races. Paid, $9.40, $2.80, $29.40 and $5.20. Not bad, $46.80 return on $20 bet. This is using lsosa54's settings for Cal AW tracks. :ThmbUp:

CORRECTION!! This was not done totally with lsosa54's settings. A missunderstanding on my part. I went back and looked at the text file he posted. Actually, the settings I used was, 100 pts for DS, FM, PCR,TF, AND 0'S for the rest.:blush:

shoelessjoe
01-02-2010, 06:05 PM
Houndog is one the nicest guys you would ever hope to meet

redeye007
01-03-2010, 06:57 AM
i notice you weight all surfaces 20 . now my question is do you for example if mud surface leave all 4 surfaces in at20 or just mud only 20 ? ty

here is my method using the software: in my experience with handicapping software, any software seems to yield the best results at the height of the meet and winding down to closing day. the fact that many entrants have already raced at the target track may contribute to the better results but I'm not sure. I attempt to analyze the races after the results are in and then try to improve the predicted picks by tweaking the factors that support the winners. some of the factors have no impact on the outcome while other significantly change things. once I achieve 60 percent plus winners on a given day I'll stick with those factors hoping for a repeat. If leaving all 4 surfaces at 20 is producing the best results I'll leave it there but I experiment with certain settings and keep trying to improve things. right now my settings for sax are at cl 58, ds 10, ep 30, lp 55, fm 20, pcr 40, aw 60, tf 20, my 20, dt 20, tr 10, jk 10, ml 10. as the meet progesses I'll keep tweaking. I only use top power and top overall picks. a good example of the settings I use was yesterday in the 9th top power and top overall was the 4 which won and paid $20.20. it also hit the double cold in races 8 and 9 for $87.20.when I get a match on the top pick for overall and power that's a single in the exotics.

lsosa54
01-03-2010, 10:30 AM
I only use top power and top overall picks. a good example of the settings I use was yesterday in the 9th top power and top overall was the 4 which won and paid $20.20. it also hit the double cold in races 8 and 9 for $87.20.when I get a match on the top pick for overall and power that's a single in the exotics.

Red: What version of Handifast are you using - anything later than the 2.0 HH has made available? I can't bet SA because of the ADW/Tracknet idiocy, but I was playing the last 2 at SA yesterday in a contest.

While I did use both winners in the contest, Rockin Rose was the 2nd PWR behind Love To Fish Kona and 2nd FAST behind Slew's Copy. Cat By The Tale was 2nd in both as well behind Diamondrella.

headhawg
01-03-2010, 10:54 AM
There's no new version that I am aware of. :) I checked and the winner was only 2nd in PWR (tied for 1st in C-C). Not that it matters (2nd is pretty good) as it was the top choice at fair odds of 3.3.

Thanks for the reports about weights and how Handifast is being used. I believe that this is what Doug intended when he started this whole thing.

Vinnie
01-03-2010, 10:54 AM
Hello Lsosa54:

Happy New Year to you and your family. While I shouldn't assume that these are exactly Redeye's ratings, I believe that I followed along with what he has been using currently. I have kept the rest of my settings where Redeye suggested. I have kept the FAST at 25, but, I changed the AW(Poly) to 60 where I believe that he has his set. The result is on Fair Odds, Cat by the Tale is on top of Diamondrella in Race 8, however, she still remains underneath Diamondrella on both the FAST and PWR ratings overall. Also, on the ninth race these settings put Rockin Rose on Top of the Fair odds, while he remains tied with Love to Fish Kona with each having a PWR rating of 87 points. This is using Handifast V 2.0...

Have a Great day today Lsosa65.. :)

headhawg
01-03-2010, 12:00 PM
The discrepancy between the PWR numbers caused me to look at things more closely. There is a bug in the routine that calculates the PWR number that causes it to change when races are switched and then recalculated. It might also happen elsewhere so I will check into that as well. It doesn't appear to have any effect on the Top 4 or the ratings that can be weighted but I will look into that as well. I will post here when the fix is available.

GKaywood
01-03-2010, 12:25 PM
From one George to Another:

A friend suggested that I look at the forum, particularly the thread on handifast, so I signed up (yep, that makes me a newbie) and so I did.

Where is it available for download? I'd like to take a look at it.

George Kaywood
www.handicapping.com

douglasw32
01-03-2010, 05:58 PM
There's no new version that I am aware of. :) I checked and the winner was only 2nd in PWR (tied for 1st in C-C). Not that it matters (2nd is pretty good) as it was the top choice at fair odds of 3.3.

Thanks for the reports about weights and how Handifast is being used. I believe that this is what Doug intended when he started this whole thing.

IT HAS SURPASSED WHAT I INTENDED and then Some !!!!!

douglasw32
01-03-2010, 06:00 PM
Headhawg just sent me the fixed version, I thought it was the one handi was working on but nope, not yet... still his fixed version would be the newest one to use for everyone asking and he will let you know how to get it, I am sure.

headhawg
01-03-2010, 07:25 PM
Yes I think that the bug is squashed. Still doing a bit of testing but it looks good. As there are a lot of current users, Doug will provide a download link to this latest version (named HHX v2.1) a little later to make it easier for everyone who wants it to get it.

As far as Handi's multitrack version I am still helping him find a very elusive bug in that as well before it can be released. I've narrowed it down but haven't found it quite yet. We will keep everyone informed.

judd
01-03-2010, 09:14 PM
do you guys really believe in software handicapping programs?
believe they help ?

lsosa54
01-03-2010, 10:10 PM
do you guys really believe in software handicapping programs?
believe they help ?

As a black box, no. As a tool to help you get to the pass or play decision, yes.

lsosa54
01-03-2010, 10:12 PM
Hello Lsosa54:
Have a Great day today Lsosa65.. :)

Thanks Vinny. Looks like HH found a small bug, however, the bigger problem is you added 11 years to my moniker! I feel old enough!

Vinnie
01-03-2010, 11:03 PM
I am sorry Lsosa54. I can't believe that I did that, and believe me, it was not intentional by any means. :)

Sorry about that. I guess that I got in a bit of a hurry and believed that I was typing the right thing. My fault..


Have a great evening.

lsosa54
01-03-2010, 11:15 PM
I am sorry Lsosa54. I can't believe that I did that, and believe me, it was not intentional by any means. :)

Sorry about that. I guess that I got in a bit of a hurry and believed that I was typing the right thing. My fault..


Have a great evening.

Just kidding, dude. Not to worry!

redeye007
01-04-2010, 02:44 AM
I'll have to start combining some of these factors for superfectas and see what happens. on 01/02/10 in the 9th the top handifast pick won #4 followed by the top LP #6 horse followed by the top FM horses #13 and #7 and paid 39k for 1 dollar.there was actually a 3 way tie in the FM column between 13,7,and 2 :eek:

redeye007
01-04-2010, 05:27 AM
I'll have to start combining some of these factors for superfectas and see what happens. on 01/02/10 in the 9th the top handifast pick won #4 followed by the top LP #6 horse followed by the top FM horses #13 and #7 and paid 39k for 1 dollar.there was actually a 3 way tie in the FM column between 13,7,and 2 :eek:

forgot to include the track name. SAX

judd
01-04-2010, 06:50 AM
I'll have to start combining some of these factors for superfectas and see what happens. on 01/02/10 in the 9th the top handifast pick won #4 followed by the top LP #6 horse followed by the top FM horses #13 and #7 and paid 39k for 1 dollar.there was actually a 3 way tie in the FM column between 13,7,and 2 :eek:
wish you would have posted 39k !! :confused:

douglasw32
01-04-2010, 08:36 AM
Posted this link under a new thread also.

This is the home of the newest version.

http://hitechslocal.com/handifast/ (http://hitechslocal.com/handifast/)

An open directory, where the newest version(s) can be shared.

headhawg
01-04-2010, 10:27 AM
Thanks, Doug. And just to be clear -- v2.1 just fixes the PWR rating (and P-S) bug mentioned above. There are no new features added, sorry to say. If there are any problems just post them here.

Zaf
01-04-2010, 11:29 PM
Good Work Guys ! The new version looks very good :jump: Thanks for sharing !

Z

Handiman
01-05-2010, 12:16 AM
Time to make a great big shout out of THANKS to HeadHawg who has been helping me debug my multi track version of Handifast. I had a a miserable bug I could not find.

HH put his nose to the grindstone, and I believe he has ferreted out the problem, and I think I may have fixed it. Will know in a day or two. Then the multi track version should ready to go.

Handi :jump::jump::jump:

Vinnie
01-05-2010, 09:04 AM
You guys totally ROCK!!! :)

Handi:

It is my sincere hope that you are feeling much better these days and that your health is steadily improving. HAPPY NEW YEAR to you and your family. I hope that you have a tremendous 2010.. :p

Thanks for all of the hard work that you guys continue to put into Handifast.

davesnew
01-05-2010, 09:44 AM
A very sincere thanks to all involved with handifast program. I use the program faithfully to check out my final contender lists. Happy New Year to all.
davesnew

lsosa54
01-05-2010, 08:11 PM
Then the multi track version should ready to go.
Handi :jump::jump::jump:

Look forward to it Handi. Here's an example of what one could have identified for further inspection. We know that on the average, the 1st 3 morning line choices win approx. 2/3 of all races. Why not start with those 3 contenders to inspect and then throw in what Handifast might identify as a potential price play to make one's final pass/play decision?

Keep in mind what I identified here were ranked FIRST or SECOND in a particular column, sometimes multiple columns. FO means the horse was part of the Top 4 fair odds horses using the default settings. In many cases, one of the top 3 ML favorites finished 2nd. In most cases, these horses had signs of good or improving form. Handifast continues to identify fantastic mutuels - win, place, and exotics.


AQU 01-02:

r2 Ezzy Top DS, FM FO $47.60

r6 Hudson Heights Top LP $223.00

r7 Gold Vendetta 2nd LP tie, 2nd FM tie $60.00

r8 Laus Deo Top LP, FM FO $22.60

SAX 01-02:

r2 Soul Candy Top FM $10.20

r7 Job Boss 2nd TF $32.20

r9 Rockin Rose Top CL, DS, CC FO $20.20

Slews Rose Top LP $37.00 to Place

GP 01-03:

r4 Never Quicker Top CL, CC FO $12.40

r5 Dr. Carina Top FM, 2nd LP $23.40

r6 Inkado Top FM, 2nd DS FO $62.00, $20.60 to Place

SA 01-03:

r5 Mr. Bossy Pants Top AW $16.00

r6 Saint's Crown Top FM tie, Top PS, 2nd EP $40.40

Light
01-05-2010, 10:09 PM
Handifast continues to identify fantastic mutuels - win, place, and exotics.


AQU 01-02:

r2 Ezzy Top DS, FM FO $47.60

r6 Hudson Heights Top LP $223.00

r7 Gold Vendetta 2nd LP tie, 2nd FM tie $60.00

r8 Laus Deo Top LP, FM FO $22.60



Dude,I've been seeing stuff like this for years in my program which has a page similar to Handi/Fast. Once, if I bet its top 2 LP's @ Aqu in the late pk4, I would have had a $20K pk4. Another time if I bet its top 2 Bris Speed figs @ SA I would have had a $300K pk6.And it goes on and on.

Neither your program nor mine can tell us WHEN to bet the top two E2,LP or speed rated horse. When you figure that part out,let me know.

BTW,the reason the Handi program did not have the last race winner rated with a high LP is because of what I have been saying all along about its PL averaging.

This 6/5 winner (Golden Boychick) had 3 lifetime starts prior to Saturday. Three back he has a Bris LP of 61 in his initial start on a sloppy track. Two back breaks his maiden with an 86 LP on a fast track and last race has an 89 LP on a fast track. Saturday also was a fast track. So what does your program do? Averages his 3 lifetime race LP's and gives him a lousy 78 LP,7th ranked because of one bad outing. The 3 back race was an obvious toss so anyone who averaged his last 2 or just took his last race like my program did,an 89,had a much more realistic assesment of his LP ability. This is how your own program can mislead you. This should be an obvious flaw to remedy for anyone using this program. But instead,you will probably knock me for pointing it out.

lsosa54
01-05-2010, 10:26 PM
Dude, I thought you went away but I guess not. If Handifast points it out, I will evaluate it. If I choose to include it as a contender in my final handicapping software of choice, and that software points it out as a potential bet, then I make the pass/play decision.

If I'm messing around like I am now as I'm unable to bet my circuit of choice, I may put $2 on any long price Handifast puts in a column in the top 2, if it shows a smidgen of form.

Your way is one way - get over it. Any flaws Handifast has in it's averaging are fairly obvious in the 5th at SA on 01-02. Cherokee Heaven had as good a race down the hill as everyone but Noble Court, who was or was going off form. The program did not pick the horse up because of the averaging and because of the very specific distance/surface.

Most users use their noggin' a bit when evaluating but Handifast flags down many potential bombs for further evaluation. No one said Handifast was the be all and end all. I'm sure your software is far from that as well.

You do your thing and let others do theirs. Life is too short, don't you think?

Viruss
01-05-2010, 10:33 PM
This is how your own program can mislead you. This should be an obvious flaw to remedy for anyone using this program. But instead,you will probably knock me for pointing it out.


Light

You did just knock him and everyone who uses the program!

You have your own handicapping method and that works for you, thats great congrats.but don't keep kicking other because their not using it.


Earl J

jk3521
01-05-2010, 10:57 PM
Is there a possibility of Handifast choosing not just the last 3 races to average but average the last 3 on fast surfaces? Then you might be able to silence Mr. Light, dude. :D

douglasw32
01-05-2010, 11:32 PM
Is there a possibility of Handifast choosing not just the last 3 races to average but average the last 3 on fast surfaces? Then you might be able to silence Mr. Light, dude.

Short Answer: No

Long Answer is that it could but when you do it gets rid of all of the nice price bombs that are hard to pick up and pretty muc mimicks the morning line at most tracks.

The win % goes up the ROI goes down.

It is a no win situation for me.

The solution has been pointed out over and over =) for Mr. Light

it is not, and never has been intended to function as a black box but a tool for other handicapping.

Any flaws Handifast has in it's averaging are fairly obvious in the 5th at SA on 01-02. Cherokee Heaven had as good a race down the hill as everyone but Noble Court, who was or was going off form. The program did not pick the horse up because of the averaging and because of the very specific distance/surface.

Most users use their noggin' a bit when evaluating but Handifast flags down many potential bombs for further evaluation. No one said Handifast was the be all and end all. I'm sure your software is far from that as well.

Actually this is what I do, I run handifast, take note of "Potential" horses. not just the top 4 listed at the bottom.

Then I run another version that actually outperforms the current one the guys have developed into a sortable "tool"

I Move some of those up or down based on the columns in handifast.

Then, and I think this is important as hell (and agree with Light)

I open up the Bris PP generator, take a look at the ones NOT floated to the top with the 2 programs I use, and decide if maybe the software missed something obvious and jump those up the list a bit.

When I am done I have a very good feel of who will be around at the end and I toss the programs out. Focus on who will be where and if it puts any at a disadvantage (lots of early etc) and helps another.

Now I have a much shorter list, have looked at everyone in the race one way or another and can decide if I take the obvious favo for $2.00 or play a larger amount because I can find Value and Opportunity.

This is just MY WAY, but it works more than it does not ROI wise and my hobby pays for itself =)

Just my 2 cents.

douglasw32
01-06-2010, 12:03 AM
http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=65316

Light
01-06-2010, 01:06 AM
No one said Handifast was the be all and end all.



You certainly imply that when you cherry pick all those price horses after the races. Things you say like best LP paid $200,2nd best this paid that,etc is what system sellers do.It's a very cheap form of advertising even if the product is free. Its misleading and dishonest.

Handiman
01-06-2010, 02:20 AM
Light,

I understand your steadfastness in your approach and I admire your resolve in staying with and promoting of it. I really feel bad.

So as a result, and this goes for everyone, due to Light being spot on and the misleading way I have promoted this program and have others, If you will give me your Paypal address, I will Return your purchase price.

In fact I will double it, since you apparently are brainless and easily led astray. But you must promise to give up Horse Racing and not attempt to beat this game. And I mean it!

I know there are many players out there that have lost their rent money and food money due to my promoting this program as 'THE PERFECT' handicapping program.

So let me know within the next 5 years that you are dissatisfied with this program and I will actually return double your purchase price. But you must have purchased it before Jan 1, 2010.

I don't know what more I can do. :bang::bang::bang:

sincerely,
Handiman

Dave Schwartz
01-06-2010, 04:27 AM
Handi,


:lol: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

Sincerely,
Dave

PS: It's only fair.

PaceAdvantage
01-06-2010, 06:03 AM
You certainly imply that when you cherry pick all those price horses after the races. Things you say like best LP paid $200,2nd best this paid that,etc is what system sellers do.It's a very cheap form of advertising even if the product is free. Its misleading and dishonest.You simply live to cause trouble in this thread...why? Because it didn't work out for your proxy in that other thread?

lsosa54
01-06-2010, 07:10 AM
You certainly imply that when you cherry pick all those price horses after the races. Things you say like best LP paid $200,2nd best this paid that,etc is what system sellers do.It's a very cheap form of advertising even if the product is free. Its misleading and dishonest.

Darkness, for the 1000th time, get it through that thick skull, I use it to add contenders to my selection process before the races - I start by evaluating the 3 ml favorites, which I may keep or discard in the final process, and then whatever Handifast may point to near the top of its columns, BEFORE the races, when I have time to handicap. I then use a Sartin based program to make the final pass/play decision. Since you keep arguing the same point without adding any value to the discussion, you're going back on ignore. There is no system to follow so there is no system to sell and if there were, it would be free.

When I have time, I'll handicap a race before its run, which is something you should try with your software if it exists and has any value. Show us why your paceline selection method is so important to the process as opposed to what Jeff P. and some of the others have tested.

Bring us into the Light, Darkness. If not, ask Handi for rush processing on that refund, and start your own thread so we can post in it repetitively and incessantly.

headhawg
01-06-2010, 10:52 AM
Oh, I see from some posts that Mr. Know-It-All is back at it again. I thought maybe we lost him to a stampede of roving buffalo. Wishful thinking, I guess...

Anyway, everyone do yourself a favor and try to see the light..ur...rather, NOT see the Light -- use the Ignore feature. Not only does he contribute nothing to any discussion, he is like a black hole of idiocy, trying to suck you into his self-absorbed negativity. Ignore, ignore, ignore -- that's the ticket. You'll be glad you did. :)

Light
01-06-2010, 01:15 PM
You simply live to cause trouble in this thread...why? Because it didn't work out for your proxy in that other thread?

No. Because this is the same hype. With TLG you had people saying "look, he picked a $50 horse,or look he had that pk4. All I said there was "let's take a closer look", and it wasn't so pretty was it.

Here you got a guy cherry picking every longshot he can find that you would toss for b-essing if it wasn't that his product is free. I've taken a closer look here as well and the claims here don't hold water either. So excuse me,but I think that outrageous claims need to be addressed.

That is the only reason I resurfaced in this thread. I've exhausted the other point of their caveman style of paceline selections and computations. But please,if you are going to parade $100 and $200 winners that your program could have caught,that anyone who has any type of program can say as well,send us some barf bags,because you are living in a fantasy.

Tom
01-06-2010, 01:47 PM
Hey light, ever see people high 5 when someone bowls a strike?
Or do you just go over and pee on his bowling shoes and "expose" this 160 bowler for what he is - a fraud?

Get a life dude - EVERYONE here knows what everyone is talking about except you. Let me make the observation that you claim to have see this sort of thing hundreds of times on your own program, but then you do not ever share or show your stuff - I call that fraud and outright lying. No walkie, no talkie.

Vinnie
01-06-2010, 02:12 PM
Brand New State of the Art Handicapping Software:

Try the brilliantly amazing “Light-Brite” software handicapping program created by none other than Unreal Technologies, LTD.. All that you have to do is simply power up your computer, and Vuolah, like Magic this incredible cutting edge software will with two easy clicks of your computer mouse create previously unheard of profits at virtually any racetrack in America. It renders any other software that has ever been created prior to its inception virtually obsolete. :)

It will be the last handicapping software that you will ever need to pursue an all out assault on profits at any track in North America or overseas. Nothing like this has ever before been available to the general public at any price.

This software is currently undergoing a bit of debugging, but, as soon as all of the known issues (Bugs) have been ironed out and known issues fixed, I will place a direct link on the PA site with PA’s permission of course so all interested parties can try it out for as long as they may like at no charge whatsoever to the user.

Stay Tuned Gentleman! This baby will knock your socks off! :lol:

fast4522
01-06-2010, 07:29 PM
Hey I have a program too, I got stuff I like and I too and don't show it. But I in no way want to detract from the hard work or countless hours of effort these gents have spent working on, something that the next man can learn from. Anyone like Raybo, Doug, or handy should never hear a peep because when someone puts such works on display its a teaching thing that it is nice to see the different ways they code. You can start your very own thread on this BBS knocking how they did something but its sure as shit I will not post to that thread when the guys bulb is obviously burnt out knocking it.

Tom
01-06-2010, 08:02 PM
We have a few generous people here who are willing to share their hard work with us all, and I think we should show some gratitude to them for it....and I'll throw hcap in there, too, who has shared in the background. Kudos to to theses guys who hel;p make this place the great site it is! :ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

jk3521
01-06-2010, 10:31 PM
:ThmbUp: DITTO! , Tom

lsosa54
01-06-2010, 10:56 PM
OK, so I don't get accused of cherry picking columns, touting horses after the fact, etc., assume you knew nothing about horse racing and you were given just the fair odds horses from these 2 races at SAX today by Handifast. Assume all the fair odds horses had a true chance to win. Could you have made a profit?

SAX 1/6/2010 Race# 1


Clm 50000 3 Year Olds 6.5F Dirt
Program # Horse M/L Fair Odds Points

6 GAMBLING POKERFACE 12 3 130
3 RIGHT TO WORK 8 3.2 125
5 YANKEE ROMANCE 1.2 3.4 120
2 SIBERIAN HEART 10 4.1 105 ==========================================
SAX 1/6/2010 Race# 7


OClm 40000n$y 4 Year Olds And Up 12F Turf


Program # Horse M/L Fair Odds Points

10 DON PEDRO MENDOZA 6 2.6 140
8 IMCO SPIRIT 12 4.5 100
5 EL INDY 12 5.2 90
7 BOURBON BAY 4 8 65


BTW, these are the default point settings. Sorry about the formatting.