- This topic has 759 replies, 45 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Friday 25th Jan
The first non handicap race for 9 or less runners was the 2 05 Newbury and the fav duly won Big Bucks @8/11 won £3.60
.
Profit to c/f +233.52Seagull,
Non- handicaps of 9 runners or less are going to produce a lot of short priced favourites. This will reduce the probability of the long losing run(positive) while the bank will grow much more slowly(negative).
If your average odds are evens, 9 consecutive losers will scupper the bank and you can expect that to happen once every 500 days, on average. It could happen in 9 bet’s time or it might not happen for three years or more. Nobody knows – the only inescapable fact is that every time you start a sequence, there is a 0.2% chance that you are embarking on the losing streak that will end in ruin.
Artemis and all others,
Thanks for your replies.I am going to give this a go!
I have enough in my betfair account to allow 8 losers and my betfair points are always stuck around 3%.
I will start today and bet starting with £10.00.
I will be only concentrating in non handicaps up to 9 runners.Day One
1st race Khyber Kim lost -10
2nd Oberlin lost -20
3rd Chomba Womba won
got 2.10 at 2.53p.m. won 42.68profit to c/f +£12.68
Seagull, Can I ask if you are still going to run the trial on the previous method that you were using. It seemed to be going pretty well?
Ive been looking at the favourite in each race from the principal meeting and so far it seems to be going well. I notice that you prefer to use the races in time order where as Ive been looking at the just the one card as its easier for me to have 30 minutes between races rather than the usual 10 minutes here and there.
Obviously this reduces my chances of winning but I plan on increasing the stake by the original stake each time there is a loser (rather than doubling up).I also plan on limiting my losses to 6 races. So at £5 per race I could be down by £105 by the end of each day.
Any advice or thoughts welcomed
Onefurlong
There is no logic in choosing the main meeting of the day or ideed the worst meeting of the day. The main meeting could be the one with the majority of runners with the toughest handicaps.
Since I have been trawling through past results it does not take long to find a card where not one sole fav has won.The guy who was keeping on about this is called Mark so I will list the results under Mark.
Mark
25th Jan
1ST RACE BLUE BAJAN WON 8/13
WON 3.07
PROFIT TO CF 232.9926 Jan
1st race Kyber Kim lost
2nd Oberlin lost
3rd race Argle D’or won 7/4
profit on day +20.00PROFIT TO C/F £242.99
onefurlongout
If the average price of the fav is 7/4, then your chances of losing your £105 are about 7% (once every 14 days on average).
Whichever way you work it out, your expectation of profit is going to be negative, but you should not lose very much and also have some enjoyment. Your average stake per bet should be about £20 and you can expect to lose about 10% over a long period.
I am bound to say, with all due respect, that this scenario is classic ‘mug’ punting. Just think what you are doing – chasing losses and backing favourites – like thousands of others up and down the country.
At least go with your own selections or someone else’s selections that you have some faith in. That way, you are giving yourself a chance.
Thanks for the pointers gents.
I’m currently trailing 5 systems with the aim of adopting 1 or two systems and making 30-40 quid per week.
Hopefully I’ll get the results that I need
Sunday
any fav
3rd race fav Ten Down won @4/5 so just a £1.00 profit on day
1st lost -5
2nd lost -10
20 on Ten Down won £16.00 less losses first 2 races.
Bank to c/f +233.99.
First race in Irealnd had jf so left alonerestricted to non hand and 9 or less runners
1st race to qualify was Ten Down which won @4/5 was out for Sun Lunch so had a tenner on in Betterbet.
profit to c/f £28.00.Monday 28th Jan
Betting any fav showed today first one lost but second Waterside just about won. Just £2.20 added so profit to c/f now £235.99Betting favs in non hand with less than 10 runners had Waterside as first bet.
I missed the best price on betfair as it did trade at 1.909 (10/11) for a few secs. However made £7.76 profit after comm profit to c/f £35.76Went to Folkestone today.
Wanted Misbehavoiur to get a place but Jims other one won ok so good day.Any fav in any type of race.
went to third race befor fav won but well odds on lost £10.00 on day so now down to £225.99Any fav in non hand and 9 runner max
Ist race odds on lost but 2nd type of race Ruari won 2.7 betfair on phone
£24.00 profit on day
Profit to c/f £59.76Although I don’t condone this kind of betting activity, along with many on this board, you could also try not betting in the first two or three races and seeing if a fav fails to win these. This will increase the % probability of a fav winning in any of the remaining races. In addition, the more stats and ratings you can get hold of, to isolate the strong favorites, the better.
Bon chance!
Mmm, not so sure about that GL. The previous races not won by favs has no direct impact on wether a future fav wins surely? Gambler’s Fallacy? Certainly in the fullness of time the overall %age for favs winning will find it’s level but that could take dozens or even hundreds of races.
Take a 6 race card in which no fav has won the first 5. It cannot be that the fav in the 6th has any better chance of winning than if, say, the 1st & 3rd race favs had won.
Your point regarding stats to get strong favs is an excellent one, let’s not forget however that the stronger the fav the smaller the odds.
True, but if your’e playing with percentages and probabilities, especially backing fav’s then, personally I would feel better about backing latter one’s if the first two or three fail to make the frame. Take Lingfield today, all but the last had lost. Following this original method would have seen huge, pressure, stakes going on the last as opposed to just playing from the third race onwards.
Just an alternative idea, but not something I wouldn’t get seriously involved in, if at all.
grand lodge,
I think you make a fair point that there is a strong psychological aspect to betting. It certainly feels more comfortable betting on the favourite when previous favourites have bitten the dust.
As snowman points out, it is an example of gambler’s fallacy because each race is independent of any other race as far as favs are concerned.
Casino players who wait for five successive reds before betting the black fare no better than a player who walks in and has one bet on the black and then leaves.On the secondpoint, I also agree with the astute snowman. Applying filters to increase your prospects of winning is almost exactly counterbalanced by the decrease in expected odds, nullifying any gains.
I think we have to face facts. Backing unnamed favourites is a recipe for certain failure in the long run. The only positive things about such a strategy are that it takes no thinking about and your losses will be modest if you stay with level stakes single bets within your means. You should lose about 10 per cent of your stakes, so if you bet £20 per race, one meeting a day for a week, it will cost you £100.
I wouldn’t criticise anyone who went to their local betting office every day(maybe a lonely pensioner), did the above for £2 a race, watched every race, had a natter and a cuppa, read the papers, kept nice and warm and all for £10 a week. Perfectly logical and sensible.
I think we have to face facts. Backing unnamed favourites is a recipe for certain failure in the long run. The only positive things about such a strategy are that it takes no thinking about and your losses will be modest if you stay with level stakes single bets within your means. You should lose about 10 per cent of your stakes, so if you bet £20 per race, one meeting a day for a week, it will cost you £100.
I wouldn’t criticise anyone who went to their local betting office every day(maybe a lonely pensioner), did the above for £2 a race, watched every race, had a natter and a cuppa, read the papers, kept nice and warm and all for £10 a week. Perfectly logical and sensible.
That’s OK if you’re into losing for a living!
I agree with some of the other points, Artemis. Don’t get me wrong, I am not in favour of this kind of system and don’t wish to defend it in any way.
However, I think you are both wrong in saying that stat’s/filters are a way of reducing odds value in betting. The majority of punters only have time to pick horses the short-hand way: won LTO, running within x amount of days, dropping in class, thommo-style stat’s (Joe Bloggs 25% strike, here) and this usually ends up with them heading for fav’s which, in turn, will end up being short-priced/overbet.
The stat’s I refer to using are the less obvious ones, like sire: distance, going, track-type, quick-return and trainer: time of year, age-group, race type, race class. Just a few examples to give oneself an edge over the crowd and find the true fav’s, instead of the false ones.
I wish you all the best with it, anyway.
Interesting points raised.
Wed 30 Jan
any fav in any type of race.
First 3 lost so £40 on Beshabar which won@evens.
Profit on day £5.00
Bank to c/f £225.99Any fav in non hand up to 9 runners.
First 2 lost so £40 on Cadoudalas which won @5/2
profit on day £70.00
Bank to c/f +129.76
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.