mhrussell
09-06-2001, 07:24 PM
As an engineer by training, I love computers. I love developing and finding great software to use to assist me in solving problems both in my day job and in my handicapping. But let's all remember that every software program is just a tool we use; it should not use us. Handicapping software is a tool used to identify which horses we feel are contenders; which ones the public will like or dislike and which one(s) (if any) will be worth a bet.
I applaud the HSH group for their pioneering efforts and think their work is worth pursuing. I've worked with GA's a little in my graduate work some years ago and loved it. I went through the "Tour" and the "Enigma" segments on their web site and found it most interesting. Will I be buying their product anytime soon? No. Not because I question the soundness of the program or the integrity of the people involved, but rather I already have a computer tool that I have developed myself that is comprehensive and meets my criteria of being "good enough". Because these are horse races we are trying to analyze which are inherently random. There is a limit to how much insight and predictive capability any computer program can provide us in regards to the outcome of a horse race. If we were talking about the latest finite element structural analysis program then fighting about all these fine points and nits and getting all hot and bothered about this program vs. that program may be worth the effort. But not here. Not in horse racing. I do not care if some latest and greatest computer program rates a given race somewhat differently, or even if it is "better". And I am certainly not interested in any computer program that will generate a more "accurate" top number or odds line that would somehow try to talk me out of betting a 3rd best number horse that is going off at 40-1. The bet value factor in this game is so dominant that all these other fine points are moot.
Handicapping software has this as its primary purpose: to take the drudgery out of information management(data entry, record keeping, etc.); employ some kind of sound rational yet unconventional means of rating horses to produce output that can be easily reviewed and evaluated in order to construct good bets or else determine the race should be passed. And that's it. It's not worth debating how many angels can fit on the head of a pin when we could be out there betting 40-1 horses that have a shot. The recent posts about HSH have become a case of the tail wagging the dog. Let's exchange and enjoy discussion points on the various software products we use but let's not fall into this trap. And by all means, relax a little. This is supposed to be fun as well as profitable.
I applaud the HSH group for their pioneering efforts and think their work is worth pursuing. I've worked with GA's a little in my graduate work some years ago and loved it. I went through the "Tour" and the "Enigma" segments on their web site and found it most interesting. Will I be buying their product anytime soon? No. Not because I question the soundness of the program or the integrity of the people involved, but rather I already have a computer tool that I have developed myself that is comprehensive and meets my criteria of being "good enough". Because these are horse races we are trying to analyze which are inherently random. There is a limit to how much insight and predictive capability any computer program can provide us in regards to the outcome of a horse race. If we were talking about the latest finite element structural analysis program then fighting about all these fine points and nits and getting all hot and bothered about this program vs. that program may be worth the effort. But not here. Not in horse racing. I do not care if some latest and greatest computer program rates a given race somewhat differently, or even if it is "better". And I am certainly not interested in any computer program that will generate a more "accurate" top number or odds line that would somehow try to talk me out of betting a 3rd best number horse that is going off at 40-1. The bet value factor in this game is so dominant that all these other fine points are moot.
Handicapping software has this as its primary purpose: to take the drudgery out of information management(data entry, record keeping, etc.); employ some kind of sound rational yet unconventional means of rating horses to produce output that can be easily reviewed and evaluated in order to construct good bets or else determine the race should be passed. And that's it. It's not worth debating how many angels can fit on the head of a pin when we could be out there betting 40-1 horses that have a shot. The recent posts about HSH have become a case of the tail wagging the dog. Let's exchange and enjoy discussion points on the various software products we use but let's not fall into this trap. And by all means, relax a little. This is supposed to be fun as well as profitable.