Maybe an example will help. Today, GPX R8. Using BRIS early/middle pace I narrowed the contenders down to #1, #3, #4, and #10. #8 has an overwhelming Prime Power number but in my opinion is vulnerable. Breaks between races and now in for the tag. Favorite in last 7 with 6 2nds/3rds. Just the 1 win. Irad is off.
Next, I toss the #4 based on class and question the blinkers today. Leaves the #1, #3 and #10. I like the #1, so it's the #3 or #10. #10 has a tough post, but no real speed inside so should be okay. So, my decision is to Dutch these 3 rather than tossing either the #3 or #10. Let's see how it goes.

I'm not a Dutch bettor, but I'm interested in the subject. For me it would be 2) and 3). Handicap my 3 contenders down to a single play and/or bet 2 or 3 horses in some sort of Dutch.
Another question-- when is betting 2 horses better than 3 in a Dutch wager or vice-versa? Is it the projected final odds of the contenders, my handicapping cannot separate the 2nd/3rd contenders or other factors? For example, I have 3 contenders. One I like over the other 2, but not as a single. But I can't separate the other 2. Should I even try to separate the other 2, and if yes, when?

Thanks for the update. There're several program features that I think I'll enjoy using.

Interesting, not what I had pictured. Where do the odds or actual odds come from? Is it from the software, live odds or what I think the odds should or will be? Or any of these?
It looks like I could use only the Choice column if I wanted. For example, the 1 and 2 are my contenders to win. 3 and 4 could possibly place. 5 and 6 maybe 3rd and 4th. 7 and 8 are longshots. Something like the following:
1: 1
2: 1
3: 2
4: 2
5: 3
6: 4
7: 8 (or blank)
8: 8 (or blank)

Sounds good. Thanks for the update.

Thanks, maybe for a later date. I'll always remember the look on Steve "The Kid" McQueen's face when Karl "Shooter" Malden was I think dealing bottoms. He wanted to beat "The Man" played by Edward G. Robinson so bad, and on the straight. You didn't know if The Man recognized what was going on, but I think he did. Very good movie.

Interesting story. Not sure if you can say or not, but did your friend and the mechanic run their scam? Instead of a big score, with their talent, seems that they would be able to run small scores over time. Where the friend wins and loses, but over time is up money and splits with the dealer. I would be too nervous to try something like that, especially in the '70's-- sort of like my fingers and my life as you say.

In reference to the 4-deck shoe. I'm guessing to start; each deck is new so the cards are in what I would call a "new deck order". What I've seen is the dealer then spreads the cards face down on the table and then swirls the cards around in a circular motion. Shuffles the cards and then into the shoe.
1. Did the mechanic after several hours of practice figure out how to arrange the cards into the shoe?
Not knowing exactly how you would play each hand-- hit(s), hold(s), split(s), etc-- seems impossible.
2. Was he taking 1 card from the shoe each time or was he able to slide out 2 with just the one hand? Again, watching the shoe closely seems it would be easy to see more than 1 card coming out of the shoe.

Great news! I know you've put in a lot of time and effort into the new software. Look forward to seeing the "really cool stuff".

Thanks Dave, sounds very interesting.

I did a little reading on "Agents" in AI". "Each of the 8 Agents has their own approach to the game". Is each approach somewhat predetermined by the AI programming? Will one Agent look at say Pace Shape while another looks at FTS's? Then each one builds from their experience in their particular approach? One agent may like horse #1, while another may like horses #2 and #3? Very interesting science as it relates to horse race handicapping.
For example-- "Is there a vulnerable favorite in this race? Which horses' figure to improve or digress? Will only some Agents review and respond to the question, while other Agents do not based on their AI approach to handicapping? Thanks.

Is there a vulnerable favorite? I seem to land quite often on the ML or wagering favorite. Knowing that there's a vulnerable favorite, I can then pass the race or look at other entries. Also, does the AI take into consideration the trainer/jockey win and ITM percentage, class rating, earnings per start and the actual horse's win and ITM percentage?

Yes, but only for a few days. Right now-- I like to track and review different handicapping factors and groupings. Lately-- high trainer win %, high trainer/jockey win %, high earnings per start, high class rating and high horse win and in the money percentages. Have been using Worth's (TIPS) earnings and class calculations. Horses that rank high in these categories do go off at low odds, but seem to consistently finish in the money. In the Saratoga discussion, I put picks last week for Wed, Thu and Fri. Next is trying to determine if vertical or horizontal wagers will work versus simple W/P/S.

1. I take notes by hand. I usually don't sit and wager. I simply jot down picks, wagers and notes on a piece of notebook paper. Move on to other things or fold it up and put it into my backpack. Then review the next day. But I'm a causal horse player.

Let's try again today. BEL R7 #2 Tommy Gun (ML 10-1). NY Bred ALW. Tommy was claimed back-to-back in his last two races of 2022. Returned for Maker off the long layoff and won by +8 lengths. Has consistent good early speed. Three nice workouts since the last race. Jose takes over for his brother who's on the ML second choice. Question the added furlong, but maybe Maker knows something, or he feels this 7-furlong field came up softer than any 6-furlong races that were available. Tommy should be in contention early and looks to take the lead at the head of the stretch and hold on.

Bet down to 5-1. Broke slowly and settled down near the back of the pack. Maybe because of the outside post? Thought he would be up closer on the pace. Gained ground around the turn and strong kick in the lane. Nosed out the favorite on the wire. Training double for Weaver on the day.

Let's try again today. BEL R3 #9 - Provision (ML 10-1). CLM30000nl2, no real standouts. NY bred returns to NY and drops in class. Nice string of works since return to BEL. Three 2nd's out of 5 starts on the turf. Not a fan of the post, but Pro has the tactical speed to get out and stalk on the pace. Franco won on Pro back in December, so he knows the horse. Like his chances to finish in the money and pull the upset if others don't fire their best.

Tough call for me. Bob did get cut-off at the start, but he also broke slowly where it looked like the #4 simply broke out into the open lane in front of Bob (but Bob did have to pull up some). Quite a few gate works tells me that they know that he doesn't break from the gate very well. Poor trainer win percentage (2 for 48), plus the jump in class. The trainer also has the #9 in this race. Maybe underneath 3rd or 4th in verticals. Good luck.

Confidence Game and Two Phil's-- sticking with my first two choices. Oaks/Derby Doubles with #6 / #7 / #10 / #14. Like the #6 Botanical in the Oaks. Like Two Phil's-- tapeta to dirt. On or near the front, and breeding suggests she can get the distance. Oaks/Turf/Derby PK 3 with #6 / #8 / #9 / #10 in the Turf Classic. Like the #8 Santin in the Turf Classic-- 2nd off layoff. Also, keeping with the tapeta theme. Maybe wrong, but the last race looks like a setup for this race. Did not go to FG and stayed at TP to train and the one race. Returns to CD with Tyler. Going to my local OTB Saturday and will finalize my Derby exacta's and tri's then. Everyone have fun.

Thanks Ranch. So two P's to E/P; and no E/P's to E's. Quite the conundrum.