Quite the contrary ,Dave. Its not the answer that I hoped for but it is the one that I expected. After all, questions pertinent to your product can only help to serve your customers. Right? — William Zayonce

You may choose to see it that way but, no, that's not right.

I've never been stingy with sharing ideas - even truly original stuff. I even share the research behind it.

This is about resources.
Recall that I offered you one-on-one time to address your questions.

I'm in serious development mode. Between now and Christmas, I probably have another 800+ hours I need to put in to get the program to where it should be.

If I spend that time answering your many questions, I am choosing your questions over my clients' needs. That would be the wrong priority.
_________________
Not too long ago, I had someone purchase Percentages & Probabilities, 2012. He emailed me and said that he had a few questions and that we could "probably wrap them up in about an hour."

He went on to say that he thought if we could make a standing appointment every other week he was sure I'd be able to answer all of his questions in just a FEW WEEKS.

I pointed out to him that when you purchase a book, you do not get lifetime access to the author.

It is a simple fact that I could not afford to have him as a customer.
_________________
Anyone who cannot see the folly in this man's thinking, has to be amazingly obtuse.

Respectfully, the real question is, "Can you see the similarity between your thinking and his?"

Sorry if you did not appreciate my answer.

Thank you for your honesty.

Understand that my highest priority is, and will continue to be for quite a while, to serve the current clients’ needs through continued development.

Secondary to that would be people who are seriously considering the software.

Perhaps a phone call would best serve your questions and still allow me to serve my priorities.

First a question for you.

Are you seriously considering a purchase or just curious?

That’s a shame.

It just happens.
The data comes from EqB.
Keep trying.

Not until the upgrade is available.
Still have more to do.

The next upgrade is the OUT OF BETA upgrade, so it's a big deal.

It will be a completely fresh install.

As of Sunday, July 28

Exacta Paste Works!

Next is Results.

As of Saturday, July 27.

1. Odds Paste Works
2. Scratches work.

Next is exactas.

I cut the screen down.

Very interesting, this explains a new screen that I'm seeing "Entries" when I'm looking at yesterday's races. — Jim Parker

That one isn't new.

Still writing code, but...

Imagine Scotty's voice...

A GLOSSARY is a great idea

Understanding Reports - 001 The Basics
This video is a 2.5 hour class that covers How to Create, Use, and Understand Reports.

Don't miss the 15-minute intro with our star panelists & Teaching Members.
@ponyplayer
@Jim Michalak
@john g
@Tony Kofalt
@Dave R

As they should be, yes.

The Odds are derived from the projected pool percentages, therefore they should be the same $nets and grades.

My question: How to create a report to determine if a horse is dropping in class today? Also, class in general-- a report to show which horses have the best class (maybe a ranking). — Jim Pommier

Yes.
That's what I was referring to.
We'll get to it tonight.

Any chink in the armor is a BALO. Any magnitude that is not a 1 is a BALO. — Dennis

That sounds right to me.
Exceptions for turf.

In fact, I'd leave turf out for now.
@Dennis

So, the stats were actually better.
Hmm... going to mull that.

Perhaps in the relatively near future we'll be able to capture the data and take a look at grades as well.

I wonder if, for example, a BALO w/B+ performs differently than a BALO w/D.

First, really good work on this.

A few comments to begin

• I am a little disappointed that they were ONLY -21% losers, but considering that these are the horses who are usually considered the best bet at the track, I can't complain much.
• I wonder if the Double BALO races might make a difference in that.
• Also, could take a look at the 1.21 and below BALOs to make it stronger.

As for your question about smaller tracks, yes, I have seen similar before. I think it ties to top trainers, because at the small tracks there are so few really "top" trainers.

We'll hold the horses a bit for you.