Why has technology left handicapping in the dust?
 

With all due respect to the software authors who still frequent this board (Dave Schwartz, Jeff P, Ted Craven, etc.), why does it seem that nothing new has come out in YEARS...

Yes, there's been stuff like Stats Lens...but where is the breakthrough ROBUST handicapping package that lets me do essentially ANYTHING I want with the data?

As some might know, I've gotten heavily into trading equity futures...and there are lots of applications out there for this type of thing that let you do basically anything...including creating robust automated trading systems, as well as in-depth research, backtesting and optimization of trading systems...some of them also include AI options that actually will CREATE AUTOMATED TRADING SYSTEMS FOR YOU based on parameters and indicators you deem important.

Why has technology seemingly passed the handicapper by? Where is the package that EASILY allows me to create and test handicapping methods based on PP data I deem important and using betting methods I define? Then test it on years of racing data and also allow optimization of the method when and where possible...and most importantly, in a relatively user-friendly manner?

One would think racing would be the perfect place for this kind of development and innovation. There is obviously TONS of back data available (not cheaply for the most part, but that's another story).

Where endeavors exist that allow people to make money (like pari-mutuel pools...don't laugh...but it IS possible), you usually see no end to the offerings available to those willing to dive into the deep end of the pool. Not so for the handicapper.

Is the potential user base that nonexistent that nobody thinks that it would be worthwhile to pursue the development of these new generation of handicapping tools? I find that kind of hard to believe, actually, even though I know more than a few of you are going to tell me that's precisely why there is an absolute dearth of new and exciting offerings on the application front.

This has to be reason, IMO. How else do we explain not only the shortage of new hi-tech handicapping products...but also the total absence of any recent handicapping books of any consequence? Stock trading books and poker books keep rolling off the printing presses...but serious handicapping books are as rare as a hen's teeth. What other reason could there be?

Isn't it more because there are only so many way one can look at the same data and draw conclusions from same.

Dave Schwartz has the most original approach to evaluating a race I have EVER seen over the 35 years I have used computer analyses.

THE BIGGEST and BY FAR greatest deficiencies in the game are NOT on the handicapping side....We should all be better gamblers and that is rarely approached in the majority of systematic approaches to the game.

I don't beleive this for a second. Don't all the stock traders look at the same "data"? Why are there so many new stock trading products continually being offered in the marketplace?

They still have horse racing?

Then how do you explain stocks?

What is the technical analysis data for stocks?

Time and price. LOL (I know there are lots more data points, but many of them are simply derivatives of time and price).

And yet, as thaskalos says, stuff keeps rolling off the proverbial presses for those two data points.

In no way do I think it's because "there are only so many ways one can look"

There are an INFINITE number of ways, in my opinion...but some of us are CONSTRAINED by the current lack of technological innovation in our selected endeavor (handicapping horse races).

The way I see it, the opportunities are LIMITLESS when it comes to throwing stuff at artificial intelligence and seeing what comes out the other side.

And that's just for starters. There are plenty of opportunities WITHOUT using AI...but AI is the cutting edge today, and the tools for the handicapper that use cutting edge AI are basically nonexistent as far as I can tell.

I think Ralph just answered my question as succinctly as humanly possible.

Sadly.

Could it be that even the software developers and the system sellers have finally given up on this game? :)

The people with the best software aren't selling it, they are the CRWs.

IMO publishing or selling a money making system for horse racing is a self defeating project.

Yes, there are many ways to skin a cat, but there are not that many cats. Any smart person or team would pound the heck out of any published profitable system and it would not be profitable for long. Unlike the market where there are many times more people and money in play, the racing game is pretty small.

In the eighties when data was harder to accumulate, it was a lot easier to create profitable systems. With the advent of rebates and computers and data, it is much harder to find much of an edge unless you get rebates or don't bet much money. The same type of a horse that had good odds 10-15 years ago usually is a much lower paying proposition, which means the market has become more efficient.

It seems that most of the published books were never really based on much data either.

MY $50K Year at the Races" ? My friend made $100k one year (abut 20 or so years ago) and thought he had found the holy grail.....Lost it all and more then next year. Hard to know if it is just luck or the answer.


It probably isn't worth it any more to create a new software program anyways with the declining market for such things. Probably more of a hobby thing for someone good at programming.

Models and databases are to handicapping what "scientism" is to science.

Physics provides a structure, but doesn't address all or even the most significant questions of being. One might describe water as H2O, but fail to describe "wetness". One might describe the color red as 620-750 nanometres, without the knowledge that can mean "stop".

I would not disparage a data handicapper in the least. Their successes, and especially their capacity for volume, may dwarf my own. Yet theoretically, one might make a horse 5/2 from his/her data, but nothing represents this horse, this race, this one-time event. The same goes for us manual handicappers. But the flexibility, the intuitive sense, the "fuzzy logic" as Dave Schwartz formally introduced me too, accounts for much.

Essentially i do not accept computationalism-that the mind is merely a computer- and so I believe there exists interpretations of a race that cannot be programmed.

My intention totally :ThmbUp:

The all-in cost for retail data licenses from Equibase are exorbitant, especially in a declining industry where there are fewer and fewer paying customers.

If you wanted to do a simple entries and results app, Equibase feels that you should be paying thousands of dollars a month if that app is consumer facing for the data that supplies that app.

Anything customer facing that has to do with racing data in North America, Equibase feels that is their data you are developing off of. Therefore there is no development community in racing or it's extremely small. Literally a handful of people in the entire country who have intimate knowledge of how racing's data works.

I've worked for many different stakeholders in racing and the data costs are insane for everyone. There is not a lot of room to breath if you have an idea and want to develop something. Years and years of not offering machine readable licenses to developers at reasonable development prices has basically put a big fat sign up saying "Don't bother".

Meanwhile, privately there are plenty of home spun tools and others who will pay privately for exactly the tools they want.

seems simple to me.
Equibase has a monopoly on data so no one who would be a good innovator for racing.

EB stiffles competition, ergo technology.
EB is a roadblock to the industry being anything near what it could be.

How big is the market for the technology desired? I doubt that it is big enough to entice the investment necessary to produce such a product.