January 4, 2003 at 16:41 #1050
Reading through the Racing pull out in the Mirror today, the Odds-Shop column which tips there claimed;
‘Odds Shop ended the year, showing an amazing 232 points profit to recommended stakes’
Yeah, Yeah…….thought I and noted their bets for Saturday, today.
2.40 Lingfield<br>Compton Commander 2 pts win (W10/1)<br>Green Ideal 2 pts e/w X
Stake 6 pts returning 16 points profit at the SP. The winner was quoted at 12/1 in the paper.
Did anyone follow this column last year? Any thoughts on this, or Tipsters in general?January 4, 2003 at 17:06 #44164
Hi Dave, I bought the Mirror for the first time today just to look at Steve’s System. Don’t tell Matron though cos he reads The Times and I cant have any of that crap…… hehehe…… I obviously have never seen that column but your question on tipsters requires answering. There are a few genuine ones out there (not many though) as DJ will tell you, but I do know of two personally, who do their utmost to ensure that their customers get a fair crack. The one will even give you your money back if you dont make a profit, the snag is, he only bets for 3 or 4 months during the Summer, so you have to be patient. The other guy was tipping dogs on another site for free and he beat off all comers. I think he may have packed it in now, too much hassle. Hope that answers your question cos they shouldn’t all be tarred with a dirty brush, just be careful and dont risk any money. If they’re straight, they’ll give you a free run, if they dont then stuff ’em……<br>:smiley:
MrEJanuary 4, 2003 at 17:28 #44167MatronParticipant
- Total Posts 5826
I have used "tipsters" in the past Dave and always come unstuck because I have probably "bailed-out"of a service too soon because they were going through a bad patch.
Rob Wright in The Times is quite good on some days – today at Lingfield he had 4/8 at 9-2, 9-4, 4-6 & 8-1. At least with the "newspaper tipsters" they are just the cost of the paper. I personally would never pay for "tips" ever again, as I gain more satisfaction from trying to pick out my own selections. But, I am not a member of the "anti-tipster brigade" though, as some people do very well – DJ & Jason come to mind – with the information they pay for.
I am much more disciplined now as well – I was in the past too greedy and increased stakes up too quickly and blew the bank many times.
Regards – Matron<br>:cool:January 4, 2003 at 21:20 #44171
Ah now Viagra, sorry, I mean Matron, now your talking my language. Staking Plans are the answer undoubtably and I would endorse that 110%, but which one. Every one of us has different ideas about what is the correct plan and what is a suicidal approach to one person may be a fortune maker to his mate. It is all down to affordability, one may be able to risk Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£5000 and yet his mate can only feel comfy going with Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£500, or even Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£50. I have been there before and helped and advised a few and all are different as chalk and cheese so its impossible to stake a claim on a message board and say that you’ve got it right. I’ve met a few good and clever people at this game who have guided me and I try to remain aloof from those who rave on about the benefits of certain staking systems, those systems only benefit them, they probably wont work with the next chap cos his wants and needs are totally alien to yours…… I think that I have probably a dozen of the most useful staking plans around that is suitable for ME, but I only bet in units of Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£5, or with my short price method using "Rolling Doubles", I might risk units of a tenner. Anybody who may be betting in Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£100’s would need balls of steel and they would indeed be better off with level stakes cos the risks are that much greater. At my level I can afford to slowly raise my stakes and when I get my winner I get a point profit for every bet I’ve made, winner or loser, but at my low level I can handle it. My total profit for 2002 was Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£2084 and that aint bad for fiver bets, I lost my working bank of Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£250 only once and replaced that with my Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£250 reserve. For you mathematicians out there, thats a betting bank of Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£500….. Staking plans are the answer, but they mean different things to each individual, so tread carefully…….. sorry to go on Matron and Dave, you’ve heard it all before, but many might not have so its worth bringing it up again……. Dont risk more than you can afford, the games not worth it……..<br>:smiley:
MrEJanuary 5, 2003 at 12:11 #44172
MrE, that’s one of the most incisive posts I’ve ever read regarding staking:clap:
I think you hit the nail on the head several times, it’s down to what the individual can cope with financially and psychologically. The problem being that the individual doesn’t know what he can cope with until he tries it, therein lies the mystery.
Tipsters, I would say break down into two categories, there’s the Speed Rating Merchants who I would say are scientific and then there’s Spotlight type Tipster who I would call non-scientific. I wouldn’t pay for bets from either camp because I reckon I’m better than than any of them, not in a concieted way, but if I didn’t think like that then I wouldn’t bother betting at all. Picking winners is what punting is all about and staking plans are only there to manage your resources and enhance profits. I think people who use Tipsters for their selections are off-loading the selection responsibility, which is a good thing. But when you look back over a period of time, Tipsters advertise their profits in years a point which could be overlooked.
I know that alot of people look to factor their staking looking for a return on investment, of say 10%, and it seems all of the rage at the moment to quote your profit like that. This seems to come from the scientific Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â camp and I would suggest that it doesn’t work, unless your betting 1000’s of pounds a week. For example, if you are factoring your stakes and you get 10% profit and you want to make Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£600 a week profit, then you have to stake Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£6000 a week, or Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£1000 a day. Just to stand still, I don’t think so!
On the other hand the non-scientific camp quote their profits in points and bet in points, this I believe is more realistic. Mel Collier, Nick Fox, Henry Rix and the like are all points. Even ‘Odds Shop’ as above is points. The problem with these services of course is that they don’t tell you before hand how many points you are going to need, to get into profit over a year, or if you’ll get a profit at all.
I know alot of you lot will think I’m talking out the back of my head, pulease feel free to say so and why:biggrin:January 5, 2003 at 12:36 #44173
Hi Dave, we’ll probably bore the arse outa anybody reading this, but what the hell…. Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â :biggrin: Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â I’m gonna watch the footy on telly now (‘pool v Man C), but in the words of Arnie…. I’ll be back….<br>:smiley:
MrEJanuary 5, 2003 at 17:14 #44174
Okey Dokey, lets have a crack at this then. we’ll drop the subject of Tipsters for the moment cos on that subject we may differ, but staking, well, your talking my language…… you are correct IMO on the % of bank against the points profit, the points profit wins every time. I care not about return on investment either, I am aware that, to most punters, ROI is ultra important, but it isn’t to me. This could be because my level of staking is low and my betting bank is at a small level, but you can quote % until they come out of your ears, all that matters is profit and loss, that is the final anaysis. I start the year with a bank of Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£500 and at the end its returned 300%, so what, thats not a target I’ve strived for, all I wanted was to earn myself enough for me and the missus to have a holiday, which I’ve done successfully for the last 10 years. Percentages mean sod all, profits mean everything and I would stake (risk) accordingly to achieve that goal. I would not attempt to plan a target to reach cos that leads to doubt and lack of discipline. I think that this game is a steady plod and taking the knocks go with the territory but careful and planned betting go hand in glove with getting a profit. If the punter bets loosely or just sticks at levels, he’s just making it hard work for himself, obviously we are talking MY level of wagers. If I wanted to increase my profit I would adopt a staking plan to suit, I would NOT increase the level of my betting bank. Now this is important to re-iterate, my betting bank would remain as is, that is the amount that I am prepared to risk and no more. If that doesn’t return me a profit within a given period, I will adapt the staking plan to suit the balance left. There is absolutely no way that I would throw money away chasing losses no matter how many years or how much I have been winning. All a losing year means to me is a year without a holiday, I have not gone into debt or spent more than I could afford. A staking system ensures this, it gives me discipline and more than that Dave….. its FUN. Sheeesh, this has gone on a bit aint it, and I’ve probably wandered off topic…… mmmm, I’ll post this and then re- read your post again in case I’ve missed anything…… TRF Rocks dunnit…<br>:smiley:
MrEJanuary 5, 2003 at 18:06 #44175GrimesParticipant
- Total Posts 1891
Dave, I’m as sick as a pig to be reminded that Odds-Shop gave Compton Commander 2pts win, as I remember last week he went an absolute bundle, i.e. 6pts on a nag he really fancied, and it duly obliged, again at a good price – maybe 6s. I think it was Beef and Salmon.
He said they (presumably the Irish) hadn’t had such a good horse for years, and normally when I read something like that, I’m in like Flynn. But the mind of the unprofessional punter must be truly one of life’s greatest of all mysteries. I even remembered looking keenly to see what he pointed to this week! I expect the bookies will take due note. Hope not.January 5, 2003 at 18:41 #44176
Hello, smee again…. Sorry to rabbit on but systems and staking plans are a bit of a no go area for a lot of punters but they’re a pot of gold for me. Take Kersly’s system selection on Saturday, Coppington Flyer, I would never have given that a second thought if the system hadn’t selected it. I took it a 9/1 which was a bit of a bonus but without my selecting it on the behalf of Kers, I woulda missed it and been Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£90 worse off. Systems should never be sniggered at and neither should SOME tipsters, they are a short cut to sorting out a small list of horses for you to concentrate on. Because a horse has been selected by Mr Wonderful, doesn’t mean that you should bet it without a second thought. It means that you must look at that horse for a second, third and fourth time to confirm your agreement, if you dont agree with it, dont bet it, nobody is twisting your arm. I use them as a guide only, much the same as paying Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£30+ per month for the Racing Post. I must say here that tipsters that I would place this much confidence in are few and far between……. now the other hot potato, staking plans. These are very individual but I see anomalies in some plans that just dont sit right with me. A very basic plan is the 5% of bank scenario, to me a total waste of space and a road to nowhere fast, it works of course, but what a long drawn out method and not a very sound basis unless you have a selection method that just rolls out reams of winners. With a starting bank of Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£1000 and selections of summat like L… L… L… 3/1…… you will lose money using that method cos the stakes woulda been 50… 47… 45… 43.. and you would have lost money betting that way…. BUT…. if the staking had been REVERSED, you would have made a profit, with levels, you would only break even…… Staking Plans are an absolute essential if you wanna get in front, it just a matter of picking the plan thats suits you………. so thats it, if I’ve trod on any toes, sorry…. hehehehe…..<br>:smiley:
MrEJanuary 5, 2003 at 19:59 #44177
Well ,what an interesting series of posts. It’s only here that you can get such a good debate….TRF…Truely Rocks Fellas…!
I generally agree with everything that you have said MrE and I think a good toe-stepping on, doesn’t do anybody any harm every now and then.
Personally, I bet at a similar level as yourself MrE. But working as a Consultant I get laid off quite regularly, normally every couple of years. The lay offs can be quite long because my job is specialised, it’s during these times that I ramp my stakes up and earn my wages punting. I try not to stay in this situation for too long as it can be quite stressful, when your depending on the money to keep your family afloat. A couple of people in my family suppliment their incomes in the same way as you and I. I believe that this is the way to make money at punting, doing it in this way, you keep yourself and racing in perspective.
I hope that the point of how the Tipsters stakes wasn’t lost on you, I studied their methods for quite a while and came up with…..
Divide the selection F-SP by 3 and round down to nearest whole number, lower limit 1 upper limit 4.
For example;<br>December just gone, my best system returned:<br>Bets: 33 Win: 12 LSP: +27.55 ROI: 83% (Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£137.75 @ Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£5)
With the above staking method:<br>VSP: +76.55 Points: 45 ROI: 170% (Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£382.75 @ Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£5)
Stakes were increased from 33 points to 45 points, stakes were increased by 36% but profits by 177%.
You should seriously consider running this against any results you have MrE. Using a Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£500 bank, 1 pt = Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£5 or 2% of your first half bank. If your selection method doesn’t rely on picking favourites I think you may be suprised at the returns you get, you’ll have to let me know what you think!
The 5% bank is a waste of time:o agreed.
Grimes, I’ll be loading up next week.January 5, 2003 at 20:31 #44178
Let you know what I think, mmmmmm….. I would if I could understand it. I’ll have to read it again in an hour or so, by that time I woulda got over the euphoria of Liverpool AND Wolves both winning today….. Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â :biggrin:
MrEJanuary 6, 2003 at 18:35 #44179
Quite so MrE, reading back through my posts here I haven’t given you alot to go on have I? A bit unfair me thinking you might be a psychic, sorry mate!
I’ll try again;<br>Tipster Staking vs. %Staking
The % staking philosophy goes something like this; the shorter the price on offer the larger the stake, because the shorter priced selections have a higher probability of winning. Thus the bank is protected by not wasting money on longer priced selections, well, that’s the idea.
The Tipsters referred to earlier, however, seem to have a different philosophy. They bet bigger when the odds are longer, I assume by doing this they try to exploit the odds on offer in their favour, thereby extending their profits. Using shorter priced horse to pay for the longer priced bets.
For example, say there are 3 selections;<br>Horse A….F-SP…11/4<br>Horse B….F-SP….7/1<br>Horse C….F-SP….9/1<br>The % staking punter would bet bigger on horse A and shorter on horse C.<br>It appears that the Tipster would stake the opposite.
This is a little staking method that I came up with;
A…11/4 (2.75)..divided by 3 = 0.8….stake 1 point<br>B..7/1 (7)….divided by 3 = 2.1….stake 2 points<br>C….9/1 (9)….divided by 3 = 3….stake 3 points
This is more of a staking method than a staking plan as such and so long as you aren’t selecting a disproportionate amount of outsiders or slaving away with near favourites, profits can be increased dramatically with one or two winners a month. And you only sustain minor damage if they don’t oblige.
I assume from your previous posts MrE that you ignore the selection price, so long as it’s longer than 2/1 and you incrementally increase your stakes in a VDW style? Your betting strategy is to be admired MrE and alot of punters would be wise to take note of what you have written there. You control the greed factor and still manage to turn a handsome profit, not easy.January 6, 2003 at 21:03 #44180snowmanParticipant
- Total Posts 554
Mr E regarding your post re profit & loss being the bottom line as opposed to ROI.
It is very difficult to disagree with you – the ultimate result has to be "how much?" and not "how?". As you rightly say it’s no good having a great ROI if you and the missus don’t get that free holiday. BUT
you still have to be structured. I would rather follow a punter that has a dozen bets a week staking 20 quid on each that returns Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£320 ( Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£80 profit) than the other sort who throws bets around willy nilly and ends up staking Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£900 to return Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£990 ( Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£90 profit).
To be sure the second guy or gal has shown 10 quid more profit on the week but the whole point of ROI shows that if the first had staked anything like the 2nd he would have shown dramatically more profit than him.
The other VERY important point is that it is much more likely to be the 2nd guy that comes a cropper on a bad week/month. The problem with a tipster saying I won Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£50,000 last year is you don’t know (a) what stakes he was using and(b) just as importantly what his turnover was.
ROI in my honest opinion makes a useful comparison and the bottom line of actual pounds profit should reflect the amount of money staked and not the success of the punter.
If anybody disagrees just ask yourself which punter would you rather be in my third paragraph?January 6, 2003 at 23:57 #44181
Hi Snow, very pleased to meet you….. I am entirely in agreement with you as regards using ROI to weigh up the unknown, to iron out which method or which tipster is the most beneficial. This is the only way to set your stall and prepare yourself for the period ahead. What I was trying to say was that once I was happy with that selection process (and its ROI), it was no longer an important factor in my future betting. I had made my bed and the decision on how to proceed was already set in stone so it made any further reference to ROI, irrelevant…… I started all my studying of systems Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â over 40 years ago, and tipsters also, but the ROI NEVER says static enough to give absolute guidance, you can only look at the here and now to make your decision and you will live or die by that decision. Systems/Tipsters can go through bad spells immediately after they’ve turned in a fabulous ROI, if that happens, then what a waste of time the ROI is, and it happens. I take my guidance from a pro’ that I hold great respect for, he says that after a considerable time proofing or paper trading a system/tipster, you then forget the ROI, you just risk one bank. No matter how bad a run the system is having, you continue until that particular bank is blown. Now were outa the realms of ROI now, were into putting your money where your mouth is….. if YOU consider that the system/ tipster is worthy of your investment, give it every chance and follow it to the death (of the bank)……. Phewwww!!!! …. I’ve had a couple of scotches, does it show……… hehehehe….. I get a dose of verbal diaree… diorae….. diarhea…… awww, the sh*ts…….. I’ll read this back and if it doesn’t make sense, sod ya, I wont post it……<br>:smiley: :smiley:
MrEJanuary 7, 2003 at 00:26 #44182
Hi Dave, this staking lark is a very difficult one aint it. I think a lot of us are able to select a good share of winners at decent prices, but staking, there’s the rub. Its so emotive that whatever one writes, it’ll be cried down. From my experience, the pro places a larger bet on the higher priced GG because of the "value". It doesn’t matter if its 2/1 or 10/1, he still is expecting a winner, the only thing is that he is able to take out "insurance" by covering for a place and still come out with a profit. I don’t think any serious bettor would go for a win only on the larger price selections, they will sensibly cover their arse and chuck the place bet on. When alls said and done, the big boys BELIEVE they’ve found the winner, surely a time to "make hay". I’m not saying that I agree with this or even follow it, at my level it doesn’t matter one jot, it’s just the way that I know a few of the biggies think……. that staking method looks reasonable enough mate, I’ll find time tomorrow to have a deeper look. As for my staking, I use a number of methods and although I’m not sure, I believe that one of them may be VDW, I can’t be sure cos I’ve had this ‘un for 40 years and I dunno if VDW was around then…… bugger, makes me sound like Methusala…… hehehe……… good thread you started here Dave, we’ll get to Page 2 soon…..:biggrin:
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.