Black Box Challenge

[Handiman]

I have a proposition I think would be interesting and fun. But before I lay it out, let me preface it with this, "I know that the real value of a software program is decided by the user and the results he gets with it."

That being said here's the proposition:

What do you think of running a Black Box Test on some software. For instance we could start on Monday and go through the following Sunday. A different track per day. A user of a particular software would post the program's top 2 selections(in case the 1st is scratched) the night before, using just the default settings.

Almost every program I have ever seen produces a default ranking. So, in my case, I would post the picks produced by Handifast. Then a user of say, HTR, Horsetreet Handicapper, Black magic, Jcapper, RDSS and any others proffered would post their particular program's picks.

We could then keep running tabs on the strike rate and the ROI or whatever we decided on for the week. Again this would not indicate value of one program over another as no one gets a software and just uses it as a black box. But I think it would be interesting to see what the outcome would be and what sort of Black Box statistics would be produced.

Love to see some feedback.

Handi :)

[Ultimate Selector!]

This would be an interesting study to see just what the results would be.
There of course be much debate on just what criteria would be implemented for each program. It would not be comparing apples to apples but interesting none the less! :ThmbUp:

[lsosa54]

Only if Light participates.

[Speed Figure]

This has been talked about for years! It's NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. You always here the excuse that "OUR PICKS ARE BASED ON THE TOTE BOARD" so, It's never going to HAPPEN!!

[Tape Reader]

This has been talked about for years! It's NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. You always here the excuse that "OUR PICKS ARE BASED ON THE TOTE BOARD" so, It's never going to HAPPEN!!

It could happen if we used the honor system. I too have a tote board system but would be unable to post before 0 MTP. I would gladly--and honestly--show my results at the end of the day.

[Handiman]

Let me be clear here. This isn't meant to be a pissing contest. Just an exercise in the most base evaluation....that of default Black Box performance.

I thought by leaving it at it's most base level, we could avoid most ego problems. It would be the most unscientific view of results possible, and as such would be meaningless to software creators, thus allowing them to feel fine seeing their babies at a craw or in a full run.

Maybe you're right and it is not possible. I believe though that it is, since as I said before no one claims to EVER use software as a Black Box. So this would be an exercise that should by it's very nature confirm everyone's contention that the 'Handicapping Holy Grail' does not reside in Black Box theory.

Just my optimistic thoughts.

Handi :)

[Speed Figure]

Let me be clear here. This isn't meant to be a pissing contest. Just an exercise in the most base evaluation....that of default Black Box performance.

I thought by leaving it at it's most base level, we could avoid most ego problems. It would be the most unscientific view of results possible, and as such would be meaningless to software creators, thus allowing them to feel fine seeing their babies at a craw or in a full run.

Maybe you're right and it is not possible. I believe though that it is, since as I said before no one claims to EVER use software as a Black Box. So this would be an exercise that should by it's very nature confirm everyone's contention that the 'Handicapping Holy Grail' does not reside in Black Box theory.

Just my optimistic thoughts.

Handi :)
The problem is that it is a contest. Those that charge over $1000 for their program can't afford to have a bad showing. Or those that lock you in for all the data each month. The only software vendor I've seen on this board put there program out there for all to see was Steve Wolson. 500 races, 1 or 2 horses per race and showed a profit!!

[permenbg]

great idea , this would be very interesting, you could run it say (3 times) to account for just a bad day.

permenbg

[levinmpa]

I would like to see this contest. However, there are so many variables, and as was stated above, some developers have more to lose than others. A week is hardly a measuring stick. Most of us have seen software go hot and cold from week to week, so I don't know what the results would mean, but it would be interesting.

[Boulder]

Light, you are no politican simple yes or no ARE YOU IN OR OUT> NO BS no short stories Just yes or no!!!!!!!! Boulder

[Dave Schwartz]

I'd like to participate but the typical HSH selection process starts at about 3 minutes to post.

Is there a way that you could accommodate that?

[ranchwest]

I'd like to see this done about once a quarter. After several times it would begin to be apparent which ones were always among the leaders.

[Handiman]

I don't know Dave. Maybe there is actually. Let me look into it. I have a couple of ideas.

Handi :)

[Handiman]

Ok...need some input. If there are enough interested parties, I might be able to put on a live daily ustream broadcast from my living room desk for a week. That way pre-posted picks could be done and for tote guys like members here could play live. And Dave you could participate live also.

Participants don't have to be software creators. Users could play and use the software they have purchased. It just would be nice if they would announce what software they are using, if that doesn't break any agreements, and then specify wheter they are posting from Default settings or their own settings.

If using their own settings, then those settings may remain confidential, it would just give us the knowledge of what we are playing against. If this comes off, I will use handifast and use top pick based on default settings as laid out originally by Doug Wood.

Let me know.

Handi :)

[ranchwest]

If you want a black box contest, then, IMHO, that wouldn't include user settings, tote plays or user selections.

I think there should be a black box division and, if you want, an open division.

What I would want to know is which software provides the best contender list, as measured in two ways, winning top contenders and winners from among the top 4 contenders (less for small fields).

[Handiman]

Ranch,

You have a very good point. I am just trying to generate some interest in doing it first. And by doing so, I have attempted to appease anyone who would be interested in participating.

I didn't consider any problems with a sort of cross contamination condition which is what you seem to be pointing out. But the fact is, there could be several results as you suggest......

A. Black Box settings
B. Custom settings
C. Tote Board player results
D. Whatever the hell else I can't think of right now....:bang: :lol:

It may not have ever been done before, but that doesn't mean it can't be done now. And over the years I have been a member here I have certainly seen a fair amount of chest beating and Jaw flapping.

I lay this at your communal feet and prod you to step up and take hold and come for the ride. But if egos are too fragile amongst some, then let them stay home boarded up and shy of the light.

I know one thing, and that is if I was a purveyor of a thousand dollar software program or even had the balls to charge someone a paltry sum of $50 for a creation of mine, I'd be the first to accept the challenge. And if my program couldn't stand the heat, I would not have the gumption to sell even one more copy!

Let me say one more thing. I will proudly use and post black box picks from Handifast. And this is a cheap slutty thing to say I know, but Handifast after all is Doug Wood and his wife's baby.....I am just the surrogate and HeadHawg the midwife. :blush: So easy for me to put it out there....:)

Handi :jump:

[PaceAdvantage]

Why couldn't Dave just post his picks at 3mtp? Tote guy could post at 0mtp...as long as official Equibase off time isn't breached, all is well...

Plus, who said that we needed to have the actual authors or distributors of these programs involved? I'm sure we have users of all these programs here...just have the person post a screen shot or something to verify they are indeed using the program...

I'm sure I've missed something here, but then again, it is an ungodly hour...

[Handiman]

PA,

I have no problem with your suggestion. I don't relish the thought of people staring at my kisser for several hours for 7 days. That's why I was hesitant at first when Dave asked about accommodating him to offer up the Ustream.

I just want to see this done. I think it would be very interesting for everyone and would be fun to do besides. So I am on board with your suggestion completely. And now maybe with your nudge, others will get off the dime and jump in and participate.

Thanks for wading in and being heard. Now let's see some people add their names to the list....so far there is Dave S. and Handiman. :jump::jump:

Let's see some others jump into the fray.

Handi :)

[goforgin]

Now let's see some people add their names to the list....so far there is Dave S. and Handiman. :jump::jump:
Let's see some others jump into the fray.
Handi :)[/QUOTE]

Count me in. TIPS software with my custom settings. Custom settings meaning I have turned off 54 of the 100+ TIPS and have set 54 of them to zero (0). I don't use all of the TIPS that came with the box (too much noise). Also, my own personal point values for some of the TIPS based on sprint or route; and dirt, turf or synthetic; or combination of specific TIPS.
GoForGin :6:

[ranchwest]

Why couldn't Dave just post his picks at 3mtp? Tote guy could post at 0mtp...as long as official Equibase off time isn't breached, all is well...

Plus, who said that we needed to have the actual authors or distributors of these programs involved? I'm sure we have users of all these programs here...just have the person post a screen shot or something to verify they are indeed using the program...

I'm sure I've missed something here, but then again, it is an ungodly hour...

While there is certainly a lot of merit in evaluating the value selections, I'm also interested in the contender selections. It's two completely different propositions. I don't think the two should be mixed.

[Ted Craven]

For the record, I have no problem at all if any RDSS user wants to participate in such a comparison (I myself don't have the time, right now, though I would love to later this year). It would be 'RDSS as interpreted by Joe Blow' since there are no black-box settings (yet). Since RDSS' point (as I'm sure is rather the point everywhere) is not merely to rank horses but to identify good wager opportunities, you could certainly see, say, the Top 3 ranked of some particular relevant readout (by someone's line selection and non-contender elimination strategy) but choose to not Win bet that in favour of one or more of the next 3. I don't know how that scenario would be catelogued. Ranking horses is just one more stage along the route to exploiting the opportunities - not the final stage (but I'm sure we all agree on that).

Good luck to whomever steps up - but be prepared for a parallel discussion over at Pace and Cap with friendly critiques (as well as kudos) re choices made!

Ted

[Jeff P]

I said count me in the last time this was suggested and I'll say the same thing this time:

Count me in.

One request though... Whatever format is decided on - make sure everybody has to play by the same set of rules.

It was suggested earlier that the format allow a tote system player to bet at 0 mtp... software vendor A to bet at 3 mtp... with everybody else betting prior to that.

Keep in mind something most whale computer teams put into practice: He who bets last has an advantage over he who bets first. Because the team is betting against the public, they factor the odds set by the public into their decision models. As a result the team attempts to maximize their roi by using the strategy of being the last ones to submit their wagers.

I'd suggest Mike's PA Downs Interface where cutoffs for all races played are set somewhere between 0 to 5 mtp. But whatever format you decide on is fine with me.

All I ask is that you make it a fair contest by putting ALL of us on the same level playing field.


-jp

.

[Handiman]

Ted and Jeff,

I really appreciate your attitudes and gameness regarding this subject. As a result I want to stress again, this effort at putting together this challenge is not meant to make anyone look bad. It is intended to allow for some edification in relation to the use of software.

There is no room for a top dog to emerge here in my opinion. While I have said I would post Handifast top selection with default settings, I would certainly be open to someone else using Handifast with their own settings generating a set of different posted selections.

I have an interest in Black Box theory since my analytical skills are somewhat lacking. Reason being is that I can take just about any data set you were to give me, and read it several ways, only to end up wishy washy and inevitably choose horse A when someone else would, with the same data set, choose horse B and guess who'd be wrong.....exactly ME:blush:

So I would think that there could in fact be a Black Box category and a custom settings category. And in some instances such as I have laid out for Handifast, some programs that could participate in both categories.

I am somewhat familiar with most of the programs already mentioned in this thread and I have the utmost respect for all of them and the Gentleman behind them. If I didn't, I wouldn't even be interested in seeing this through. I realize that when looking at the final figures, one program will show better than another one. But I also know something else. Anyone that would take a 7 day single track view and bestow upon any program the crown of 'Holy Grail' would be a FOOL!

I just want to see if the Handicapping stepchild, Black Box, is really as bad as he is made out to be, or is there some glimmer of hope for analytical morons such as myself, to maybe have a chance at a positive ROI.

A clear set of rules by which to operate would most definitely need to be laid out so as to eliminate any confusion. Maybe after a couple more days allowing for more people to chime in, we can set this ball to rolling or maybe I should say, this horse to running.

Handi :)

[Indulto]

... All I ask is that you make it a fair contest by putting ALL of us on the same level playing field. ... :eek: :faint: :lol:

[PaceAdvantage]

:eek: :faint: :lol:I hate replies that consist of nothing but emoticons...sometimes, I even delete them...

:lol:

[Light]

Only if Light participates.

Light, you are no politican simple yes or no ARE YOU IN OR OUT> NO BS no short stories Just yes or no!!!!!!!! Boulder

I cannot play at this time for the same reason I declined a showdown with TLG. I am preparing for the biggest contest of my horseracing career at Vegas with a $1 million dollar purse and do not want to be distracted from concentrating on that. I know. I know. Nobody believes me.

[Jeff P]

Light,

Congrats on qualifying... That in itself is no small feat. Also allow me to wish you the very best of luck shooting for some of that prize money.

Would I be out of line if I suggested we make an effort to schedule this little contest after both of the big contests?

I have a handful of customers who qualified and would be interested in following their progress on contest day... as I'm sure do some of the other vendors.


-jp

.

[Tom]

I believe you too, light.
Good luck.
I mean it. :ThmbUp:

[Dave Schwartz]

Actually, I START the handicapping process at 3 min to post. I generally make the bets (which means click the "bet" button) just as the first horse moves toward the gate.

I think the "live" idea is a good one. Perhaps I could just do a live play myself and some interested party could grab the picks?

BTW, what is the purpose of this contest?

The reason I ask is that the particular "black box" settings are mine and will stay private, although some things can be seen. I might actually write a little code to allow our users to turn off some critical display fields. Been meaning to do this for a long time.


Dave

[atlasaxis]

Now let's see some people add their names to the list....so far there is Dave S. and Handiman. :jump::jump:

Let's see some others jump into the fray.

Handi :)

I'm game. I use Ray Taulbot's Pace Software (no laughing! ;) )

AA

[Tape Reader]

I said count me in the last time this was suggested and I'll say the same thing this time:

Count me in.

One request though... Whatever format is decided on - make sure everybody has to play by the same set of rules.

It was suggested earlier that the format allow a tote system player to bet at 0 mtp... software vendor A to bet at 3 mtp... with everybody else betting prior to that.

Keep in mind something most whale computer teams put into practice: He who bets last has an advantage over he who bets first. Because the team is betting against the public, they factor the odds set by the public into their decision models. As a result the team attempts to maximize their roi by using the strategy of being the last ones to submit their wagers.

I'd suggest Mike's PA Downs Interface where cutoffs for all races played are set somewhere between 0 to 5 mtp. But whatever format you decide on is fine with me.

All I ask is that you make it a fair contest by putting ALL of us on the same level playing field.


-jp

.

I'm a black box tote board bettor but will not be able to participate, as I do not yet have the auto-bet, auto-post, fully automated.

Good luck to all!

[raybo]

Although AllData PPs is not setup to pick winners or contenders, as it is, it certainly could be made to do that. However, The default selection process and criteria would be rather basic. I have absolutely no idea if it would be worth a dang or not. As I've said before, I don't play WPS, so, picking winners is not my game.

Certainly some of our users could use the spreadsheet with the original defaults or with their custom settings, I suppose. The template program is available to the public, so, I guess it would qualify for the contest. I have no problem with AllData users joining the fray.

I'll think about the "black box" process and let you know.

[douglasw32]

PA,

I have no problem with your suggestion. I don't relish the thought of people staring at my kisser for several hours for 7 days. That's why I was hesitant at first when Dave asked about accommodating him to offer up the Ustream.

I just want to see this done. I think it would be very interesting for everyone and would be fun to do besides. So I am on board with your suggestion completely. And now maybe with your nudge, others will get off the dime and jump in and participate.

Thanks for wading in and being heard. Now let's see some people add their names to the list....so far there is Dave S. and Handiman. :jump::jump:

Let's see some others jump into the fray.

Handi :)

I will take on my own creation with the way I have been using it at present, I use handifast to look for the top 3 in each category it offers, then I look for anything within 10 points on the WR-A, I keep them all as contenders and remove anything not listed (usually 6-8 horses are left in).

Then I crank open the older FAST V8 and generate the full past performance sheet, not the summary (it just duplicates handifast anyhow)

I have seen the Light (pun intended) and from that full report I look for a comparative PaceLine...of the horses ranked as contenders And Average the Best 2 ratings from it's adjusted Speed Figure, EP and LP

Then I crank open the WR-P and add it into the WR for the horse from that sheet to come up with my final top 2.

Sounds crazy but I am hitting them, lots of prep work to boot, but maybe someday with the exports in CSV etc I can have excel pull it off.

It is a very mechanical way of using the free software, so it should fit the black box criteria ?

[raybo]

Well, i wrote contender selection method for AllData PPs last night (and EARLY this morning), pretty much maxed out the criteria options for auto-paceline selections and ran a short test (an old data file chosen at random). Except for having to check trouble lines manually, and manually overriding computer selected pacelines where there was obvious trouble for specific horses, I just wrote down the 4 outputted horses for each race and then checked them against the results chart.

The method worked better than I expected, for such little oversite having to be imposed on it. With the 1st pick, it produced: 5 winners, 1 place, 1 show and 1 4th, out of the 10 race card. The method picked 23 ITM horses out of the possible 33 with the 4 outputted contender picks from the method. Doesn't seem to be too bad, so far (albeit a very, very small test), to me. I didn't check to see what the final odds were, so I don't know what kind of horses it's picking, as the top selection, or what the ROI was. Maybe I ought to check that stuff, huh?

Several of the races were "baby" routes (1m70) on the dirt at Houston. I suppose this approach would fall under the custom category, having to override computer generated pacelines. However, most programs I've seen discussed on the forum would be subject to the "trouble line" problem, and any user who didn't at least check them, whether the program is designed as a black box or not, would, IMO, be pretty stupid.

[raybo]

Well, i wrote contender selection method for AllData PPs last night (and EARLY this morning), pretty much maxed out the criteria options for auto-paceline selections and ran a short test (an old data file chosen at random). Except for having to check trouble lines manually, and manually overriding computer selected pacelines where there was obvious trouble for specific horses, I just wrote down the 4 outputted horses for each race and then checked them against the results chart.

The method worked better than I expected, for such little oversite having to be imposed on it. With the 1st pick, it produced: 5 winners, 1 place, 1 show and 1 4th, out of the 10 race card. The method picked 23 ITM horses out of the possible 33 with the 4 outputted contender picks from the method. Doesn't seem to be too bad, so far (albeit a very, very small test), to me. I didn't check to see what the final odds were, so I don't know what kind of horses it's picking, as the top selection, or what the ROI was. Maybe I ought to check that stuff, huh?

Several of the races were "baby" routes (1m70) on the dirt at Houston. I suppose this approach would fall under the custom category, having to override computer generated pacelines. However, most programs I've seen discussed on the forum would be subject to the "trouble line" problem, and any user who didn't at least check them, whether the program is designed as a black box or not, would, IMO, be pretty stupid.

Ran a recap on the wagers, all wager types in the .xrd file were for $2 WPS wagers and $2 tickets on Exactas and Trifectas. The Win plays were with top selection only @$2 each, the Exacta plays were figured as: 1 with 2,3 (for a ticket cost of $4 each) and the Trifecta plays were figured as: 1 with 2,3 with 2,3 4 (for a ticket cost of $8 each).

Race# - 1st pick ----2nd pick ----3rd pick -----4th pick---Exacta---Trifecta

Race 1- 2nd ($2.10)--3rd ($2.10)--1st ($20.00)--out
Race 2- 1st ($3.20)--2nd ($6.00)--3rd ($2.10)---out-----$46.20----$191.60
Race 3- 1st ($31.20)--3rd ($5.80)--2nd ($8.40)--out-----$228.40--$1425.60
Race 4- 1st ($10.00)--out----------out----------out
Race 5- out-----------out----------out--------2nd ($2.40)
Race 6- 4th----------1st ($5.20)---out---------3rd ($3.80)
Race 7- 1st ($2.80)---out----------out----------out
Race 8- 1st ($5.80)---2nd ($3.80)--3rd ($2.80)---out----$$23.80----$51.80
Race 9- out-----------out---------1st ($7.80)--2nd ($5.60)
Race10- 3rd ($2.20)---out---------2nd ($6.00)--4th

10 - $2 win tickets = $20
10 - $2 exacta tickets = $40
10 - $2 trifecta tickets = $80
Total cost of all tickets = $140.00

5 Wins paid $53
3 Exactas paid $$298.40
3 Trifectas paid $1669.90

Total Costs = $140
Total Paid = $2021.30
Net Profit = $1881.30

In my previous post I said I had 23 ITM horses of 33 possible, but, actually I only had 21.

I know this is like redboarding but for first time out of the gate - WOW!!!

And I'm a superfecta player, don't know if I had any hits with a standard 1 w 23 w 234 w 2345. Afraid to look!!

Field sizes were: 8,7,12,12,9,8,12,12,7,11 respectively.

Fast track, all on dirt

[Handiman]

Ray,


That is awesome!!

Thanks for letting us see that. I would love for you to run more through and see what kind of figs turn out with larger sample size.

Handi :)

[raybo]

Ray,


That is awesome!!

Thanks for letting us see that. I would love for you to run more through and see what kind of figs turn out with larger sample size.

Handi :)

I've been thinking about creating a databasing method in the spreadsheet to combine the data file outputs with the .xrd results files so some analysis/record keeping could be done, but, that will take some time. It took me about an hour or so to handicap the racecard and another hour to compare the output with the .xrd file, so, it will be a slow process to complete a meaningful number of races/cards.

[douglasw32]

Amazing, I only need this to happen once a week =) and I would be appy

[raybo]

BTW, the test used 1 formula, sort of an overall capability figure with a lean toward average pace (Sartin AP), lots of averaging of about 8 or 10 existing figures in the spreadsheet. The formula was the first one I came up with, just messing around, trying to get as much varied pace data into it as possible so that it was more versatile for use in different race types. The formula is really just something I threw together in about 10 minutes or so.

[Handiman]

Dave S. ...you asked what's this challenge for....or something similar. This is why, at least for me.

I'm sure I must not be the only guy with this syndrome. "Analytus Dorkness"

I played the ponies with some people today and Gulfstream was the track of choice. I have heard several cappers say Gulf was not an easy track to play.
So I take Handifast with it's 20 sortable categories and I 'handicap' the race card. One horse to win only is how we played. (please no comments about the way we played as we were having fun as a group and it was a challenge among the players)

I jumped right in, but since I have a severe case of "Analytus Dorkness" I had several 2nds and 3rds and only one winner for $4.40. What a stud..Huh? Had I just used the Black Box top pick here's how things went.

4 winners out of 10 40% Strike rate
$20 bet $41.20 returned 106% ROI

I want to see what other software program Black Box picks do. This is not an unusual day. Other posters here have posted similar results with Handifast. I certainly don't expect everyday to be like this or near this. But I don't know if Handifast is kicking out days like this as part of a lucky run or is it unusual and next week 2 winners a day will be norm.

I don't have a giant database to run thorugh with Handifast and it's not built that way anyway. So that's basically it for me. But I would enjoy seeing how custom settings for other programs do as well as their Black Box picks.

Handi :)

[Handiman]

If everybody ready we will start the Black Box/Custom Trials on Monday and run through Saturday. Leave Sunday open for everyone to enjoy the Super Bowl.

I will start a thread so all can post their picks. We will have 2 categories. One strictly Black Box. The other one will be for custom settings and live tote board play. Any live players must get their picks posted before the race off time or they won't be counted.

Shall we stick with one track or do different tracks from one day to the next?

Handi :)

[sjk]

Sorry for jumping in so late in the thread but it seems to me the essence of a black box is that it should be able to do lots of races at lots of tracks with limited effort.

At the same time my program and I am sure others does not even bother with certain races with lots of first timers or long layoff horses. I also skip turf races. I don't think it is reasonable to demand that a program assign picks to a race when in real life the user would simply ignore and focus on a race at another track.

I would think the best test would be to ask the participants to pick any 200 races during the week. I guess this might be trying for whoever is trying to tally the results so maybe provide a list of 6-8 tracks from which to select races.

It is not clear to me what metric is being used to measure success, win pct or ROI but that may because I have not read carefully enough.

[raybo]

If everybody ready we will start the Black Box/Custom Trials on Monday and run through Saturday. Leave Sunday open for everyone to enjoy the Super Bowl.

I will start a thread so all can post their picks. We will have 2 categories. One strictly Black Box. The other one will be for custom settings and live tote board play. Any live players must get their picks posted before the race off time or they won't be counted.

Shall we stick with one track or do different tracks from one day to the next?

Handi :)

I, personally, think that 1 track per day, is plenty. Doesn't matter if it's the same track each day or not. Might be better to choose a different track each day because some of the software, in default mode, may do better at some tracks than others so, to be fair, test everyone's software at several different tracks.

What about the problem with non-starters? Most software doesn't do a very good job when there are no pacelines, if it even handles this scenario at all. I know my software will not pick any horse that has no pacelines. That is a manual selection thing for me.

I, like Doug, will be posting my top 4 picks, so that those interested in how well a program selects contenders can get an idea, as well as how it picks winners with it's top pick.

[Handiman]

Fairgrounds will be the track for Monday the 1st. Since there is quite a few differing opinions as to what should be done, this is what will happen. If you choose to post picks, then go ahead and do so. If there are races that you don't play then put skip in the place of the posted picks.

And when it comes to comparison, there will be no official rankings. Each participant will be tracked and their results chronicled, in no particular order. If you are using custom setting just state so, and if you are black boxing, then state that also.

I will start a new thread for posting.

Handi :)

[keenang]

Handi

When you say Black Boxing does that mean useing the default figures on the two programs Handi6 and Dougs program) ?
Thanks Gene :)

[Handiman]

Yes it does. I just put up the results for today at Fairgrounds. A note sits by each poster's name with what they are using. It's default unless otherwise stated by the poster.

Handi :)