Thanks for the information. I'll get back to you if I have any more questions.

Interesting. So hypothetically, let's say for this race I was able to watch the race. 1-2 minutes before the gates open the odds are #1 at 5/1, #3 at 11/1 and #10 at 7/1. Closer to what I had originally estimated.
#1 $27 becomes $33 33 / 122 x 60 = $16
#3 $12 becomes $48 48 / 122 x 60 = $23
#10 $19 becomes $41 41 / 122 x 60 = $20

The amount wagered is less on the 5/1, but more on the 11/1 and 7/1 than my original Dutching numbers (hence Reversed). Still a profit if any of them wins.

Would 2 horses work like this? 7/5 and 5/1 and wager $40. I saw this on-line.
#1 1/1.4 x 100 = 71 71/91 x 40 = $31
#2 1/5 x 100 = 20 20/91 x 40 = $9

I used a Dutching calculator that's on-line. There's several out there and they seem to work the same.
I was busy and couldn't be there for the race, so I estimated the final odds using the ML and my handicapping. ML #1: 4/1. #3: 6/1. #10 15/1. I estimated 3/1, 4/1 and 8/1. I thought these 3 horses would take money.
Wagered $60.00 total. $28, $21, $10 on the #1, #3 and #10. Turns out the #4 at ML 8/1 who I tossed took quite a bit of money and went off at 7/2. The #1 went off at 6/1, #3 at 14/1 and #10 at 5/1.
Not being there for the race cost me since I would have had more money on the #10. Or if my estimated projected final odds had been better would have helped.

Finished #10/3/6. The Even money favorite #8 was 4th. Wagered $60.00 and returned $63.00. +$3.00. I wasn't able to bet the race live. The 15-1 #10 ended up going off at 5-1. I knew 15-1 wasn't reasonable, thought more like 8-1. The 6-1 #3 ended up going off at 14-1. Did not expect that. Would have had a better profit if my projected final odds were better. On the positive side I did throw out the Even money favorite and 2 of my contenders finished 1-2. But it's not always this easy.

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.