The home of intelligent horse racing discussion
The home of intelligent horse racing discussion


Home Forums Tipping and Research Systems VAN DER WHEIL Reply To: VAN DER WHEIL

dave jay
  • Total Posts 3386

VDW Staking Strategy

Set up a 100 point bank and stake 10% on the first horse. If the horse wins at 2/1. 20 points profit are returned and added to the 100 point bank.<br>Next Stake = 120/10 = 12<br>And so on which is level stakes betting.

VDW Recovery Plan<br>If the first horse loses the bank drops to 90 points. The striaght level stakes bet would then be<br>90/10 = 9 points on the next horse.<br>VDW recommends that the lost stake is divide by 10 and added to the original aim. In effect the losses are to be amortized over an ensuing series of winning bets using incremental stakes.<br>Bet       Stake      Bank<br>1           10           90<br>2           11           79<br>3           12           67<br>4           13           54<br>5           14           40<br>6           15           25<br>7           16           9

The bank blows after seven bet compared to level stakes where the bank is only halved after seven bets;<br>Bet       Stake        Bank<br>1           10             90<br>2            9              81<br>3            8              73<br>4            7              66<br>5            6.5           59<br>6            6              53<br>7            5              48<br>Therefore, £48 – £9 = £39 additional monies are risked.

I would suggest that this staking plane suits the fun punter who doesn’t want to spend more than £100 in a day at the races. He would stop at a winner or continue with reduced stakes once a winner is found.

My own research into this type of staking has suggested that a different type of campaign can be waged. Where instead of starting with a base figure of 10%, 5% can be used for the initial aim and then losses amortized at 10 or 15%.<br>At 10% a series of bets would look like this:<br>Bet         Stake            Bank<br>1              5                 95<br>2              5.5              89<br>3              6                 83<br>4              6.5              77<br>5              7                 70<br>6              8                 62<br>7              8.5              53.5<br>8              9.5              44<br>9              10.5            33.5<br>10            12               27.5<br>11            13               8.50<br>This extends the series of bets available to eleven before the bank is blown, which will give the bettor an improved comfort zone.

Staking this way enhances profit margins by 2 – 3%. So any selection method showing a loss of -5% or worse can’t be used, similarly any selection method which regularly has losing runs of seven or more shouldn’t be used as recovery is incremental and relies on a reasonable strike rate.

An idea for a longer and more sustained betting campaign!<br>As with ALL staking plans safety can be enhanced by using more than one betting bank and then controlling them to level stakes as follows:<br>Set up a total bank = 10,000 points<br>Split total bank into 10 working banks of 1000.<br>Options<br>A – use the 10 banks consequetively giving a total of 110 bets before the bank is blown.<br>B – Revise Bank values if a bank blows.<br>First Bank = 10000/10 = 1000/20 = 50 first aim.<br>Bank blows and total bank value drops to 9000<br>Second bank = 9000/10 = 900/20 = 45 first aim.<br>(And on and on)<br>These types of campaigns usually come down to two or three bets in a season making the difference between showing a profit or a loss, as the overall trend will be static.

My advise to anyone going down the VDW route,<br>Use the selection method to build your own system based on trends.<br>Look for 3 to 4 bets per week.<br>Staking can be used to enhance a profitable selection method by 2 to 3%

It is worthy of note that some ‘Newspaper Tipsters’ use VDW methodology to arrive at their daily selections, I came across this purely by accident.

I would be interested in other peoples views on this subject especially those who disagree and why.<br>(Some of the numbers aren’t quite right here I copied them from a spreadsheet)

(Edited by dave jay at 9:14 am on Nov. 3, 2002)