But on a FoxPro note. My software, which I do not share or sell, is written in Harbour, another dBase offshoot that had Clipper as the in-between. Any half-way decent language can make horse race calculations. While I don't claim to be the greatest handicapper around, I do well enough to post my selections online nearly every day. The cool part is that I can make any modification I want at any time I want. — RanchWest

Indeed.
I, too, used dBase & Clipper.

They do a fine job of programming.

However, historically, they process painfully slowly because they're scripting languages.

The very idea that an organization that is betting millions of dollars would use anything but the fastest, cutting edge tools is shocking.

But my real point was that I'd never understood why all those Asian & AUS groups used FoxPro - until that time in 2002 when I got Benter's code.

He literally invented the whales' basic system by doing it first and then provided everyone else with the tools to compete! Of course, they were always behind the curve - his curve - until the big budget guys entered the picture.

BTW, any discussion of Bill Benter would be incomplete without mentioned this guy - Alan Woods (gambler).

So...someone already possessing such a winning system could conceivably syndicate it to generate startup and bankroll ... — William Zayonce

This is a common misconception.
The whales are not "syndicates."

A syndicate implies that a bunch of guys got together and decide upon picks or strategies. That is just not how they work.

The game they play is just too difficult for that type of operation.

These are businesses.
They start with a plan to figure it out, which takes experts. A "quant" (at $20-$30k per month) is usually at the core, coders to write software, analysts to test & track the output of the current system(s) in play, as well as the actual bet makers - usually called "analysts" as well.

Nobody makes any kind of decision. The software must do it all.

In order to play at that level (i.e. bet $100m per year minimum) one has to play

• play 7 days a week
• 80% of tracks on each day
• 80% of races at each track
• 80% of the pools in those races

When I was involved with a small (by comparison) operation, it took 15 people (minimum) on the schedule to fill all the shifts. Small days you can get by with 2 (one race analyst and one supervisor) but on weekends it takes a minimum of 4 and a supervisor to make it work.

In other words, it is not a trivial operation.

Minimum start up is typically $450,000 in infrastructure & development before bankroll.
Most such corporations never make their first bet because they can't build a winning system.

Nothing to forgive.
Sorry if my message was not worded properly.

The point is that these are viable business entities.
While they are small potatoes in the world of corporations, they are huge in our industry.

Seriously?
One company wagered $300m and made $27m profit.

That's a +9% ROI.

But even more amazing is that they did it out of a $3m bankroll.

Thus, that is 9x on their money for the year.

They have 100 employees.

Thanks for this interesting stat Dave! Im not so sure that the "Whales" were in action when I last played daily a decade ago.Since 2019 I've only played sporadically and selectively.Perhaps that's why I didn't recognize the pattern . — William Zayonce

They've been playing since around 2005, but their betting approaches all changed about 2014/15.

They used to feed the money in gradually, so as to not disturb things, but then changed to an "when the first horse loads."

Remember that $1.00 out of every $6.50 wagered in North America comes from SIX companies.

Be aware that this will be a PRODUCT - as opposed to something free.

& @William Zayonce,

My position is that depending upon the tote board makes me crazy.

I've adopted the practice of betting into PROJECTED ODDS.

This works so well that I only use the tote board as a last minute check for HIGH ODDS horses that SHOULD BE LOW ODDS.

Coming before Christmas is a tool that will allow all of you to let go of your dependence on the tote board.
I really need to build a sticky thread called, "What I'm working on NOW & SOON."

It goes both ways . I take the position that I can't control the odds so just accept what I get or pass. — William Zayonce

Alas, it doesn't go "both ways" very often.

We bet on what I call "Gate Odds" but get paid on "Winner Circle Odds".

If the winners odds went up even remotely close to how often they go down, then it would GO BOTH WAYS.

However, the winners' GATE ODDS actually GO DOWN 74% of the time!!!

Two examples of simple "angles" that I like are these; "1 : the only entrant to win its last race ( combined with a few "complemenary " factors) ."2 : the only entrant to finish 2nd or "good" race ( again with qualifications). — William Zayonce

Interesting approach to spot plays.
I have a project on my agenda for the spring which is called Subset Handicapping.

It begins with a subset of horses and asks the question "What makes ________ horses win?"

My concern about your current approach is that these angles you mention above are just not as exciting as you'd think.

I know you have tacked on some other conditions to your angle but the bottom line is that the difference between "Good Race Last = YES" and "Good Race Last = NO" is really negligible. Sure, the IV & hit rate is higher but it does almost nothing for the $net ($2 is break even) because the gains are destroyed by the huge downward tick in the average odds .

(from P&P, 2012)

How would you define a good race? — Steven

Standard definition is from Dr. William Quirin (found in Percentages & Probabilities.)

If these stats are already included in "Percentages and probabilities " please advise, I'll order a copy. — Zayonce William

Good races and some other stuff are in PAST 10 and a bunch of items in LAST 90 DAYS are included.
There are HUNDREDS of factors.

There are also those SAME HUNDREDS of factors (data tables) spread across 25 different kinds of races. Over 1,300 extra pages!

Buy it here.

• Allowances Sprints & Routes
• Claiming Sprints & Routes (including N2L)
• Graded Sprints, Routes, Turf
• Maidens, etc.
• Young Horses
• Marathons

@Conley
The best way to do this in the future is for you and I to create an event here (still linked to your live session), but you post the link instead of doing it via messaging.

This way, you really get it to be ALIVE as well as live.

How many attendees did you get?

Highest QES points percentage (of field total) might be interesting. — Zayonce William

Surprisingly, that is a very disappointing factor.
Check out the Early Speed series, if you haven't already.

How much of an advantage ( in percentage) is needed to produce a profitable play. — Zayonce William

You have to see it from an "out-perform the tote board" point of view.
If you've not read this book, Percentages & Probabilities, there is a lot in it like that.

Spring of 73 belonged to Secretariat and I was hooked for life! — Zayonce William

I came in later but was he not the greatest horse ever?

Your post describes a different purpose than what I use it for.

I am using it as a METRIC so that I don't have to BUILD A STORY.

That's why I can completely handicap a race in 3 minutes, giving me time to enjoy the watching of the race.

So many people see each race as a PUZZLE to be figured out.

I see RACING as the PUZZLE!

Did you use Reynolds numbers back in the old Thorobrain days? I felt that product was outstanding! At least I was getting good results. lol — Tony Kofalt

No. I discovered it around 2001 or so.

Next question "is 120 days a good half life or is there a better one, 90 days, 75 days?????". I'll get around to answering my own question when I get to sit down in front of the computer for another couple of hours. — Steven

That is the standard Benter approach.
I've tried some others a decade ago and it seemed to be better.
Might have shifted out a little further but not by much.

Is that a good thing or bad thing? — Conley

As I said, I learned a lot from him.

But I suppose the proper answer would be, "That depends upon whether or not it is working for you."

Based upon the picks you've posted it would seem that it is.
(Allowing for small sample, of course.)

Seems like your outlook is a lot like "Jimmy's" who I mentioned above.