How can I stop resisiting fun bets

[Oasisdreamer]

G Tipster & C Hill – thanks for your responses.

I think one of the posters hit the nail on the head – when does a fun bet become a serious bet? I guess the professional would state there should be no fun bets. If you’re betting for fun then keep your money in your pocket until you really fancy something. That’s hard for an amateur like me!

As for staking I agree confidence counts for a lot. GT I can understand your point about assessing the actual odds vs your own odds and staking accordingly. I would find it difficult to go big on long odds shots, I put them in the 1 or 2 point band.

I also look at the market to try and find bets in the 3/1 to 12/1 range. Anything shorter and there’s potential for horses to be overbet. Anything longer and maybe the market has got it right. I’ll still back the longer odds shot but maybe as a saver or split my stake between 2/3 horses in one race. I see nothing wrong with that. It’s all about making a profit on the race.

I like nothing better than betting a young improver in the 7/1 to 10/1 range vs the old timer who’s at shorter odds. Imp Commander in the Ryanair and Gold Cup being a classic example. I’m going to try to base my betting and staking on finding more of those IC types bets! In the long run I’m sure they’ll be profitable.

[Gingertipster]

I don’t think fun bets have any part in anyone’s betting, if they want to make an over all profit; professional or not. A good punter can realistically hope to make 10% on stakes. Anything more is a bonus. That 10% could easily be mopped up by "fun bets".

Punters should not think of any bet on outsiders as fun bets. If you believe it to be "true value", then it is a good bet, even at 66/1.

I’ve found over the years I am not good at evaluating odds-on value. Evaluating whether a horse is a true 60% or 75% is very difficult for me (respect to them that can). So I tend not to leave races alone as soon as I know there will be an odds-on favourite.

Value Is Everything

[Drone]

In response to the question about staking, I think Ginger is wrong and I’ve been trying to convince him of this for years!
To me it is logical to stake most on what you consider are the best value bets regardless of price. I try to have the same or more on my 20/1 shots as I do on my 4/1s- not easy, but it’s the few of these big priced ones that go in every so often that make the big difference to the bottom line at the end of a year.
Alan Potts in his seminal work "Against The Crowd" some years ago said that he always thought of profits from the shorter odds bets as paying the stakes for the longshot bets, any return from which was then pure profit- I still love that line of reasoning.

Yep, Ginger’s staking plan while superficially impressive as it involves a lot of decimal points derived from value-added-or-negated supposition is essentially a ‘safe’ strategy geared towards non-breakage of bank: the long-odds bets when perceived as ‘value’ tend to be minimum or ‘few point’ bets.

Safe ‘cover to win’ betting of this type is in some ways admirable as it means bread will always be on the table for breakfast the morning after, but is in my view basically the betting strategy of the conservative coward, cocksure that his estimation of odds ‘n’ chance is accurate

Been there, done that and wore the hair shirt when the big winning one was bet for peanuts

So…level stakes on all bets it is. Boring maybe, and it goes against the ‘serious’ bettors’ grain, given that ‘serious’ seems to mean dogmatic, definitive assigning of chance resulting in a stake dependent on perceived ‘edge’

I’ve asked this of Gingertips several times in the past and have yet to receive an answer: so once again

Ginger: do you compare the returns of your variable staking with level staking? If not why not?

‘never bet more than you can afford to lose’ yeah, yeah wise words blah, blah

Bet what you can just about afford to lose on all bets, so each bet staked worries you slightly and hurts a bit should it lose – fun bets soon cease to be fun

Assuming of course your intention is not to bet for fun or entertainment, but to make money

[Adrian]

Two things I’ve done to avoid "fun bets":

1. Write every bet in a booklet so that you can keep track of how you are doing and which type of bets have been successful for you. This will become a drag if you place too many bets so should discourage you from putting them on.

2. If you are at the races you’d probably like an interest in all the races. I put on a small stakes Placepot with quite a generous perm. Only put proper bets on the few horses you’ve actually selected as good betting mediums.

[Gingertipster]

Yep, Ginger’s staking plan while superficially impressive as it involves a lot of decimal points derived from value-added-or-negated supposition is essentially a ‘safe’ strategy geared towards non-breakage of bank: the long-odds bets when perceived as ‘value’ tend to be minimum or ‘few point’ bets.

Safe ‘cover to win’ betting of this type is in some ways admirable as it means bread will always be on the table for breakfast the morning after, but is in my view basically the betting strategy of the conservative coward, cocksure that his estimation of odds ‘n’ chance is accurate

Been there, done that and wore the hair shirt when the big winning one was bet for peanuts

So…level stakes on all bets it is. Boring maybe, and it goes against the ‘serious’ bettors’ grain, given that ‘serious’ seems to mean dogmatic, definitive assigning of chance resulting in a stake dependent on perceived ‘edge’

I’ve asked this of Gingertips several times in the past and have yet to receive an answer: so once again

Ginger: do you compare the returns of your variable staking with level staking? If not why not?

‘never bet more than you can afford to lose’ yeah, yeah wise words blah, blah

Bet what you can just about afford to lose on all bets, so each bet staked worries you slightly and hurts a bit should it lose – fun bets soon cease to be fun

Assuming of course your intention is not to bet for fun or entertainment, but to make money

"Superficially impressive" eh Dron, thanks for the faint praise.

I’d like to point out, I do win more (sometimes considerably more) when outsiders win, than when shorties win. Could be 2, 3 or 4 times as much. I would not count many as "minimum" or "few point". There is a need to separate main bets from saver bets when looking at my stakes. Saver bets are just to win what I have put on my other bets in the race so may well be minimum / few point.

I’d say I am confident of my value estimation, if you want to call it "cock sure" that is up to you. I remember one pro punter once telling me "all pro gamblers have a degree of arrogance".

I can’t remember you asking me that question before Drone. Apologies if I have missed it before, do try to answer any question that is asked. I have not compared my returns with level staking, probably because I am so cock sure of my betting. Seriously, you are right, I should have done so. Have now done so:

This season my thread has made over 30% profit on stakes.
Splitting that over all stake in to viable amounts for "level staking", counting:
22 point win for a main bet (bet to win a significant amount).
11 point win bet (for a bet I would have on one to win half of a main bet).
And 11 points each way for an each way bet.
Would show just over 10% profit.
Counting every each way bet as 22 points each way like some punters do (not halfing) would result in under 1% profit.

Compared to over 30% in my own staking plan.

It seems being a "conservative coward"ly cowardly custard, is paying off for me.

You seem to suggest Drone, that I am being too cautious when backing outsiders. Of course I could say that level stakes punters are not maximising profits of the shorter priced winners, by being too cowardly cautious. But I would not dare suggest such a thing.

What I would suggest is: After every winner, punters can always look at the profit and ask "why didn’t I put more money on it?"

Hope I have answered all your points Dron, but if not then please repeat it and I will answer. (Thumbs up)

Ginge / Gingertipster / Mark

Value Is Everything

[Maxilon 5]

I’ve slowed my betting right down(until a certain event in March), because all betting should be fun. It should be a laugh. Betting should also be, to paraphrase Gordon Gekko, about the "capture of the evolutionary spirit". When it becomes a chore – and worse – then it’s time to take a good break.

The problem with non-serious bets, as Drone points out in his post, is that you can back fantastically priced winners to peanuts and that feels worse than a loser. Because unless a bet changes your day, your week or your month, or maybe your life, then it isn’t really worth making.

[Drone]

Intimidation brings out the best in you Ginger, so in that respect my somewhat unpleasant post had the desired effect

Nothing personal old chap

Haven’t followed your betting diaries with any regularity so please forgive the (false) conclusions I made on no more than assumptions.

You’re doing very well it would seem. Given that your staking plan is performing better than your definition of level stakes means your assessment of chance is good and your sub-Kelly Criterion methods working well.

I would recommend however that you compare what % profit-on-turnover that a strict 1pt level win stake on all bets returns compared to the % your current staking returns. Over as many bets as possible

I have no wish to know, that is not my nor anyone else’s business, so no need to post it here. ‘For your eyes only’ it may reveal something of interest. Suffice it to say that if your staking still outperforms bare 1pt level staking then keep on keeping on what you’re doing

In my opinion all punters should maintain a record of level stakes versus their actual stakes. ‘Twas an eye-opener for me, and

may be

for you and others

[Gingertipster]

I do come out fighting.
No problem Drone.
Your "intimidation" is taken as an attempt to help.
I know you are usually one of the most friendly of forum members. (Thumbs up)

Do think you make some good points about checking which staking plan to use over as many bets as possible. Though it is difficult when I sometimes have as many as 6 bets in one race, main bets, half bets and savers. Also, one win at a massive price can give a false impression of a staking plan.

As I have said: Trouble with betting level stakes is it relies on getting big priced winners. With my way you stake more on the shorties, but win more on the outsiders. Which to me seems fairer, considering the chance of them winning.

There are a lot of punters who look forward (you could say dream) to an enormous win, if a 50/1 winner comes in, winning 50 or more times what he /she would win on an Even money shot. Obviously with my staking plan I won’t be doing that, possibly winning 7 times as much. But don’t forget, the amount won on the Evens shot is infinately greater with my way, so may be around 7 times compared to 50 is not as big a gap as it sounds.

Value Is Everything

[Author]

Posts