The Menches of software

[andicap]

We have so many negative things to say about software builders so often (or just about anything), I'd like to mention the good people who are offering
quality software that I have dealt with.

I use software to crunch numbers for me so I can make my own decisions -- it's a huge time-saver since I'm a working guy and a father.

I'm not commenting here about the quality of the software, but of the
PEOPLE behind them that I know and trust and would deal with again.

1. Ken Massa of HTR -- very smart, knowledgable horse player who stands behind his product and is as good as his word. He put together a nice
custom-built version of HTR --it created a special page that fit my style of play -- for me at a very reasonable price and it was an
excellent, quality job.

2. Nathan at Thorotech/EquiSim-- also created a custom job for me although he
was incredibly busy. I switched to HTR not because EquSim doesn't
work, but because I believe the HDW data is a bit more reliable and accurate than the BRIS stuff Nathan draws from. I also don't use the profiling methods that are at the heart of his software, but that's just personal style.

3. Gordon Pine at NetCapper -- never used the software but have known Gordon for more than 10 years since he was with Cynthia Publishing and he is one of the real good guys in this business.

I also want to give props to the late Michael Perry, one of the two brains behind the best piece of software I ever used, ThoroVision, which unfortunately is now defunct.

I have never really dealt much with Dave Schwartz on a business basis, but personally I like him and felt bad I couldn't stay at Saratoga longer to talk horses with him. (Just be sure you have A LOT of time to spare). A very original thinker who -- to his credit -- doesn't talk in slogans and facile sound bites. I wish HE would write a book.

HSH has too much of a steep learning curve for me to try in my limited time.

[betovernetcapper]

maga ditos

[sq764]

I think there are 2 reasons that people complain about software..

1) The software truely is of no use to anyone, it stinks.. (probably comprises about 90% of the market)

2) The software is good and useful, but it either doesn't agree with the style of play of the handicapper or they don't understand how to use it to win.

[Dave Schwartz]

SQ,

Well said.

Often the software is not flexible enough to be adaptable to the user's style of play. (And I contend that every user must be able to make SOME changes to make it work.)

Other times the user's style may need adjustment in order for winning to be a possibility. Frankly, I fell into this category for a long time myself!


Dave Schwartz

[JimG]

I think most people that talk bad about good commercial software do so because they expect to automatically profit on the program "picks". They may do so in the short term, but long term it does not happen. Many conclude, therefore, that the software is just another loser.

When one changes their mindset to view software as a tool to manage information or provide unique numbers for use in their handicapping, then it is easier to see the benefit of good programs. Software is not a replacement for handicapping but a supplement to handicapping.

I think many on this board realize that and have gone so far as to create home-grown software to supplement their handicapping process. My hat is off to such creative people.

Jim

[kitts]

andicap-

Michael Perry was a straightforward and honest man. I got to meet him and work with him while I was at HDW.

And I would not be the player I am today without the help and ideas of Dick Mitchell.

[CapperLou]

kitts:

I have read Dick Mitchell's wonderful books on handicapping and money management over the years and have been rewarded very much from his research and insight.

What I cannot understand is why he has "given up" playing or lost interest in it all. I heard recently that he divorced & moved to Arizona & either went back to teaching or retired.

Someone mentioned he had "lost interest". I do not believe that for a minute--I think what may have happened is that some of his methods of play have become unprofitable because of simulcasting and prices being beaten down.

He and his buddy who went to the track with him all the time--they were winners---something obviously happened--there is no way Mitchell would lose his love of playing unless he became unprofitable--Just my Honest Opinion!!!

All the best,

CapperLou

[sq764]

Shouldn't certain methods of play be profitable no matter what changes in the simulcasting environment?

I understand that people who focused on speed handicapping may have had life become tougher over the past 10-20 years, but for a time-tested and successfulmethod to become unprofitable would be odd, I would think.

[CapperLou]

sq764:

What I am referring to in certain methods not being profitable anymore has to do with so many more smarter handicappers having the opportunity to play at every track thru simulcasting that the prices on old time methods do not yield the ROI or pay the prices they did previously.

With the prices being beaten down this way--and the take outs being increased in the last ten years--you have a major problem in trying to show a profit on a method or on everything you do.

It has gotten a lot harder to be profitable because of the above. For example; the old maiden dropping into a claimer for the 1st time does not yield the ROI that it did for many years--everyone and his brother knows about this one for years now.

Also, the whole game has changed with the widespread use of "medications" from state to state.

IMO; there are very few tracks and only certain times of the year when some of these old methods that Dick Mitchell and his sidekicks wrote about in the last 20 years will still hold up. For a professional player--that is not good!!

That is why the software programs that are very sophisticated are the only ones that will point out nice priced horses today or if you handicap the form--you have to look for "new" things--not the same stuff that people have been doing for decades.

Hope this helps you!!

All the best,

CapperLou

P.S. An example would be Sufferindowns on this board--he handicaps from the form and finds horses that pay big prices that other folks cannot see.

[kitts]

Capper Lou-

Mitchell has not given up in my opinion. He is not as visible as he once was perhaps but I hear that he is still involved in Cynthia Publishing and does come to California. I'd be willing to bet that he still makes a bet of his own now and then. He always enjoyed teaching math and I am glad for him that he can do so these days.

[CapperLou]

Kitts:

Teaching was always Dick's first love from what I know and I'm glad to hear that he is well and doing what he likes best!

All the best,

CapperLou

[mikejlb]

This thread seems to be recognizing people that have earned respect because of their contributions to this sport and their integrity. There have been many through the years. The ones that survive in this business have some similarities. The survivors are honest, offer support for their products, and accept responsibility when they screw up. I do agree that Dick Mitchell has always been a straight shooter. Ken Massa and Barry Meadows have earned respect too. I hate to mention names that should be included in this group because someone will always be overlooked. Horse players have a short memory with some things, only the big scores are always remembered and I am part of this group. :)

[navrah]

I think most people that talk bad about good commercial software do so because they expect to automatically profit on the program "picks". They may do so in the short term, but long term it does not happen. Many conclude, therefore, that the software is just another loser.[FONT=courier new][SIZE=3]

My goodness I would hope "most people" have moved beyond this kind of thinking? But then again, there are always newbies. Anyone notice the recent re:proliferation of "System Sellers". I hadn't gotten a mailing in yrs and suddenly it's become reasonably regular. It seems they're back. I never talk bad about software but I'm always disappointed because none have all the tools I'm looking for. My software is a great tool. I rarely wager on it's top pick. Nor do I wager the 2nd or 3rd. In fact I don't know which pick I normally wager on. I simply look at the various bits of data, compare it my model/profile, see how the race sets up..damn it I could go on and on. I look at everything then make a decision to play or pass - almost always I pass. The point is there is always something missing that it's in that software - it's in my computer, it's in the download but the deveoloper has chosen to not display the information so I can't get at it. So back to one of my earlier comments....none are perfect fits. I just find the one with most of the information I need and take the good with the bad. I use mine as more of a database then a selection tool.

[Richard]

I remember back in the '80's when Dick Mitchell personally took my order over the phone for his book THOROUGHBRED HANDICAPPING AS AN INVESTMENT.Good to hear Dick is still around.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by andicap
2. Nathan at Thorotech/EquiSim-- also created a custom job for me although he was incredibly busy. I switched to HTR not because EquSim doesn't work, but because I believe the HDW data is a bit more reliable and accurate than the BRIS stuff Nathan draws from. I also don't use the profiling methods that are at the heart of his software, but that's just personal style.


Wait to you see the animal Nathan is getting ready to release very soon.....version 4 is something........... The guy is downright good. Tireless is a good word for his work ethic........ it is going to be fun..............