|
|
09-08-2001, 12:59 PM
|
#1
|
Guest
|
I am thinking of putting in the hefty $500 fee for Cynthia Publishing's Easy Capper software. Has anyone used it? Thanks very much!
Sparky
|
|
|
09-08-2001, 09:59 PM
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 228
|
Sparky,
I haven't tried any of Mitchell's programs since 1985 but if you like his stuff you might want to look at the 199.00 offer they have on All-in-One at www.betovernet.com
I don't know if there is a lot of small print involved in the offer...at a quick glance it seemed like a nice deal...I think the sticker price is usually 999.00
Good luck!
Bob
|
|
|
09-09-2001, 04:10 PM
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Northern California
Posts: 16
|
Sparky,
I too am a Bay Area boy. Haven't been doing much at Bay and Golden, mostly because of small fields and R. Baze and Hollendorfer effect.
I write some of my own software, and have looked at quite a few others:
HTR good but don't like the dos format.
Allways found myself backfitting alot of data and not being able to afford the download.
Stk nice idea, but I can do better with my program
Sartin's..products...last one I know of(The Validator), did not do well with. Alot of winners not in his top 4.
The people that appear to be in the know, are moving to databases and looking for angles or stats and their effects that the general public can't see, or looking to D. Schwartz's program (HSH), that seems to be on the cutting edge of handicapping. (what a run on sentence) Anyway, you might look into these two paths.
I have found over the years, that by the time info gets into book form, such as Mitchel's, the freshness of the process is lost....
Just my input.....By the way, I do not have any financial interest in HSH nor do I even have the program. I am not selling any software either.
Good Luck.
Milford
|
|
|
09-09-2001, 05:41 PM
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Topeka,KS
Posts: 564
|
Sparky,
I've had nothing but honorable dealings with Cynthia Publishing.I had an old copy of THE BETTING ANALYST(prepares financial progress on your wagering)I purchased back in the mid 80's and was not Y2K compliant.I informed them of this and even offered to purchase a new copy.They just sent me a new copy free of charge. Also sent me copies of 4IN1 and 5IN1 that I originally purchased back in the 80's(They obviously keep their records a long time.)A lot of horseracing vendors would do well to pattern themselves after Cynthia Publishing.
|
|
|
09-09-2001, 11:52 PM
|
#6
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 228
|
Re: Thanks, Bob!
Quote:
Originally posted by sparky
Hi Bob,
Thanks for referring me to the All in One software deal at betover.net. That is a terrific savings! I will check it out immediately.
I hope that the reason you haven't used Dick Mitchell's software since 1985 isn't that it isn't any good. I did download BRIS's All-Ways software but am deterred by the $14 download fee for data. As you can tell, I'm a newcomer to software; I hope to be ready for the season at Golden Gate Fields this November.
Regards,
sparky
|
Sparky,
Handicapping programs are kind've like cars...there are a lot of nice ones out there but certain ones will fit your personality more than others. The most important thing to keep in mind is that a good software program will speed up the handicapping process but will never be able to replace it.
My own preference is to use very simple early and late pace ratings and blend them in with form cycle analysis...not very fancy but surprisingly effective.
In November of 1990, I attended the very first "Masters Class" in Las Vegas...taught by Dick Schmidt and Michael Pizzolla who were still involved with the Sartin group at the time. Everyone came with their favorite Sartin program...Energy! was the current rage as I remember...but soon discarded them when we watched Dick and Michael make hundreds of dollars (they were both well into 4 figures by the end of the week) with very crude TPR ratings. I was stunned!! I had become convinced that only some fancy formula in some fancy program could beat the races!
The truth of the matter is that just about all of these programs will give you pretty much the same contenders...just in slightly different order at times. I really don't care if a particular contender is my first choice or my third choice...if he's 10-1 I'm betting him...if he's 3-1 he wouldn't be a bet even as my top choice.
Anyway, thus ends my advice column on handicapping software. I hope you find the program that's perfect for you!
Bob
|
|
|
09-10-2001, 08:20 AM
|
#7
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: White Plains, NY
Posts: 5,315
|
Jeez Bob, you couldn't have summed up my handicapping philosophy better than if you were looking over my printouts.
I had my first winning year in 1992 using PA's original software whose pace figures were pretty rough estimates in my mind. If I had avoided turf races my ROI would have been about 20%.
I'm convinced this is the road to go. Using Beyer and crude pace figures, I isolate 3-4 contenders and put a very rough estimate of their chances to win on them that depends on the contentious of the race.
If I have 4 contenders and I'm convinced the others are crap I'll give them 95% of the odds and make them all about 4-1 or 9-2 or so. Then I'll make adjustments based on my estimates and figures which ones have a better chance. So a horse that's barely a contender might get 6-1 in my mind which means I want about 10 or 12-1 before I bet him.
But I recognize my odds line is an incredibly rough guess. No one can really say whether a horse should be 5-1 or 4-1. That's the most ridiculous part of all these "experts" who say you need to construct an odds line. It doesn't matter. You don't have to be precise at all.
If a horse that's a solid contender in my mind goes off a 8-1, I don't need a accurate odds line to tell me it's a bet.
Of course there are gray areas. What if my solid contender is 5-1?
Well, those tough calls are what seperates profitable handicappers from losing ones. That and discarding false overlays (which we've talked about here -- Michael's theories). I've passed many a horse that went on to win, but I'm sure a lot have lost too.
Keeping records of course will tell you if you're passing too many 5-1 horses.
__________________
andicap
|
|
|
09-10-2001, 11:58 AM
|
#8
|
Guest
|
Hi Milford, Richard, Bob, and Andicap,
I hope this message gets to all of you. I am new to this kind of bulletin board as well as to handicapping software. Anyway, I am happy to have received so many responses and have printed out all your words of advice. I'm not a Bay Area "boy," I'm a girl. I will check out the sources you advise while I prepare for Golden Gate Fields. I've been using Dick Mitchell's adjusted turn times but am ready to tackle the databases you suggest.
Regards,
Sparky
|
|
|
09-10-2001, 01:32 PM
|
#9
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 228
|
Quote:
Originally posted by andicap
Jeez Bob, you couldn't have summed up my handicapping philosophy better than if you were looking over my printouts.
I had my first winning year in 1992 using PA's original software whose pace figures were pretty rough estimates in my mind. If I had avoided turf races my ROI would have been about 20%.
I'm convinced this is the road to go. Using Beyer and crude pace figures, I isolate 3-4 contenders and put a very rough estimate of their chances to win on them that depends on the contentious of the race.
If I have 4 contenders and I'm convinced the others are crap I'll give them 95% of the odds and make them all about 4-1 or 9-2 or so. Then I'll make adjustments based on my estimates and figures which ones have a better chance. So a horse that's barely a contender might get 6-1 in my mind which means I want about 10 or 12-1 before I bet him.
But I recognize my odds line is an incredibly rough guess. No one can really say whether a horse should be 5-1 or 4-1. That's the most ridiculous part of all these "experts" who say you need to construct an odds line. It doesn't matter. You don't have to be precise at all.
If a horse that's a solid contender in my mind goes off a 8-1, I don't need a accurate odds line to tell me it's a bet.
Of course there are gray areas. What if my solid contender is 5-1?
Well, those tough calls are what seperates profitable handicappers from losing ones. That and discarding false overlays (which we've talked about here -- Michael's theories). I've passed many a horse that went on to win, but I'm sure a lot have lost too.
Keeping records of course will tell you if you're passing too many 5-1 horses.
|
Andicap,
I agree...making an oddsline and saying horse A has a 33% chance and horse B has a 20% chance is silly...it's an attempt to assign gaming absolutes to flesh and blood creatures. This in no way, as you mentioned, negates the importance of getting an acceptable return relative to the risk involved.
The biggest problem that people have with handicapping software is that the programs tend to make certain horses look alike on the betting oddsline.
For example, 2 horses who are given identical pace ratings will both show up as having the same chance in the race. The truth of the matter however, is that one horse may have been given his last paceline... a race run 10 days ago...and the other horse was given a rating from 2 races before he went into the barn for 45 days.
The second horse is a riskier proposition and therefore the handicapper should insist on an acceptable price which reflects the greater risk. It's a "touchy-feely" thing which certainly gets easier the more one does it.
Anyway, as usual I like the way you think! Gotta hit the shower and head off to the racebook...have a great day!
Bob
|
|
|
09-10-2001, 01:32 PM
|
#10
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 1,502
|
Sparky,
First of all, welcome to the nest. Before you drop some heavy corn on the program, I thought I'd share the following with you.
1) I had heard a month ago (do not know for a fact) that Mitchell had disappeared from Cyn Pub and has not been heard from in a while. Like I said this was second hand info and I don't know if it is true. Perhaps someone closer to the situation can comment. Not tyring to start nasty rumors. Just relaying info...Hopefully it is not true.
2) The guy who wrote (did the programming) All in One.. .well his father is a very good handicapper and he doesn?t use Mitchell?s program but a fellow competitors program.
3) Ask why it is on sale/discounted? Is there a meaner tougher better program coming out?
Just food for thought and best of luck with your capping! BTW, most users I hear are pretty happy with the basic program.
Last edited by GR1@HTR; 09-10-2001 at 01:33 PM.
|
|
|
09-10-2001, 03:24 PM
|
#11
|
Guest
|
Hi GR1,
Thanks for the welcome! Dick Mitchell's disappearance does sound strange. I tried to access betovernet.com as Bob suggested and cannot get through, which is stranger still. I agree about questioning the sudden sale price. I'm glad you say most users are happy with the basic program.
Milfredo,
Yes, I agree about the Baze-Hollendorfer effect. I invariably bet against Baze. That's great that you are writing your own software. When you mention Schwartz's program, "HSH," can you spell that out for me please? What is the name of the program?
Richard,
Thanks for the positive opinion of Cynthia Publishing. I find it very helpful.
Everyone,
I'm intimidated by your knowledge!
Regards,
Sparky
|
|
|
09-10-2001, 03:43 PM
|
#12
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,965
|
Be sure when you are considering the cost of the software to include the cost of the race files...that, in the long run..will be much more costly than the software.
|
|
|
09-10-2001, 03:59 PM
|
#13
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 265
|
Re:Software shopping for Sparky
Sparky-
Make sure you check out the Handicapping Magician software at www.itsdata.com. In fact, you sound like you are a beginner (aren't we all!) and you may also be interested in the book that the software is based upon (Handicapping Magic). You can purchase both the book and the software together for $170. The race files are $1.50 per track and can be used with their Handicappers Daily (a very good electronic racing form with a bunch of good filtering features..) in addition to the Magician.
I use a "home grown" version of this that I developed in Microsoft Excel (see my other posts if you are interested..) but I highly recommend the Handicapping Magician.
Good Luck and watch out for those tiny field sizes in No. Cal.
Regards,
|
|
|
09-10-2001, 04:46 PM
|
#14
|
Guest
|
Hi MHRussell,
Thanks for the tip on Handicapping Magic. I've gone to the site you suggested (itsdata.com) and checked out the info. Yes, I'm a rank beginner. I've been going to the track for about ten years and am only now exploring new handicapping avenues. I'm very interested in the software and will look up your posts about it.
My question: When you say the "race files" are $1.50 per track, do you mean the data downloads needed to run the Handicapping Magician software? Can they really be that inexpensive? "hurrikane" left a helpful post about watching this cost because it will end up exceeding the cost of the software (thanks, hurrikane).
Regards,
sparky
|
|
|
09-10-2001, 04:50 PM
|
#15
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 1,502
|
Spanky,
You may want to try posting a question about cyn pub sw at
http://www.netcapper.com/TheGrandstand1_frm.htm
as I think a lot of former/current cyn pub players post there.
|
|
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Rate This Thread |
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|