VDW + Staking for Billion

[Formath]

Beware – This is not a Van der Wheil thread, but just for Bill to see the staking plan in operation. The tank is 200, £’s if you like. Late today so I am only left with the Wol 7.25 as today’s example.
Possibles derived from the first 6 in the D. Mail betting forecast first 3 starred in each case for £’s class, consistency last 3 runs, top 3 Formcast, top 3 RPR.

Wolverhampton 7.25

2. 2*
3. 2*
4. 2*
5.
6.
9. 3* Loyalty – stake £1 (Won 3/1 so the tank is now £203)[/color:45ucx0sy]

Instinct tells me I should opt for Thunderstruck (Nicholls/Catlin)along with the rest of the crowd so may not be a good start

NB: The staking plan is detailed on ‘destroy this staking strategy’ thread[/color:45ucx0sy]

[billion]

LOYALTY is my final bet of the day

Formath

so we shall sink or swim together.

So, Sir, explain please, what is the staking plan

Billy's Outback Shack

[billion]

Aha!

Formath

sorry I have just seen your post

. . and you say that the staking plan which I posted is complicated

The point this chappie was trying to make is more in line with a day at the races when most of us have a bet (sometimes interest only) on each race.

With a limited amount in our pockets which becomes smaller with each losing bet the punter is more inclined to reduce the stakes and it is sods law the winner(s) come along when the least is bet.

The theory is not to decrease below the average of previous stakes.

Therefore it is not a staking plan as such or in the manor of what we perhaps think of as a staking plan.

However, having read it after deciding on my own modest staking strategy (careful use of wording here, not wishing to become embroiled into debate of some of the lairy ones) I quite like the idea and feel it can have a part to play.

I have been giving much thought for a while now to your very good advice regarding the improvement of the selections and concur wholeheartedly there can be nothing better than an improved strike rate but one thing at a time, this old brain can only cope with problems one at a time.

Billy's Outback Shack

[Formath]

Bill,

I see that you have caught up to me with regard to the VDW staking plan .
Today’s race is the biggy The Racing Post Chase:

Kempton 3.00

1. 3* Nacarat £1 win

6. 2*
10. 2*
12. 1*
13. 2*

[billion]

Aagh! You can’t win them all

Formath

but it was a hard race and caught one or two of us out I guess.

Why did you pick or even better how do you select the races?

Billy's Outback Shack

[Formath]

Bill,

Remember this thread wants losers to be able to show the VDW staking plan in operation , mind you I should have used the Kem 3.35 Sire de Grugy yesterday (bit of VDW backfitting there for you ).
As this is VDW I select the races as he advised ‘consider the two top prize money events at the principal meeting together with the top prize money race at any other meeting’. I swerved Chepstow and Newcastle owing to the heavy ground forecast and the Lingfield polytrack. I am looking for races with a high percentage of winning form in the field from the last three outings. In the end I opted for the Racing Post Chase as it was the ‘big’ race of the day.

Back to Fontwell today where I have gone for the 2.40 but I am not wildly excited by it for betting purposes with the defection of As De Fer

Fontwell 2.40

1. non-runner
2. 4* Fruity O’Rooney stake £2

3. 2*
4. 4*
5. 3*
6. 0*

(It’s my birthday today and I am 75 years young – keep going you fool!)

[billion]

Fancy that – you want losers, I can give you lots of them

Formath

Thanks for explaining race selection.

I guess this VDW chappie does not like each way betting then otherwise you would not have gone with 2.40.

Now here is a another question for you: –

Should 2 runners (and it could be more) have 3 stars would you

a) avoid the race

b) back them both

c) select the one with the better form (add last three race figs. and pick the lowest score)

d) choose the lowest FcSp

Billy's Outback Shack

[Pompete]

Oh no, not the VDW Staking Plan

Bill, when I’m back at work I’ll let you know how I ended up in hospital because of this

[billion]

Now we don’t want to upset poor

Formath

do we

Pompete

.

For me I do not understand it but am always interested in a selection method which requires losers

Billy's Outback Shack

[Formath]

Bill,
I ever meant that losers were a good idea when betting just that they are better to illustrate the mechanics of the VDW staking plan, as you well know

Re. your questions d) would be the nearest solution as far as I am concerned, but would rather go for the shortest in the actual betting market. After all the VDW ‘elementary mechanical procedure’ was to narrown the field to be considered to the 3 most consistent runners at the short end of the betting forecast.

I see that Pete has managed to get out of rehab early and poke his nose in again . Him and his dogs cojones computer woudl probably eat this. Just ask him what the most logical staking plan is and then we will know

[billion]

Thanks once more for your answers

Formath

, in truth I thought you may have indicated the actual market though I did not put it up.

Now there will always be exceptions but if I may, perhaps I can make a suggestion.

First of all without the D Mail (not out on Sunday’s but I get depressed enough without reading it) I used The Red Rag (perhaps just as bad) to find a selection or two where I could beat the FcSp.

3.10 Fontwell Quel Bruere which lost but of no concern, these things happen.

3.45 Fontwell – 2 runners, both 3 starred: –
CELESTIAL HALO & KARABAK – too short to back both and Celestial Halo went on to win and I was unable to better the forecast with either

Karabak went off the shorter price – VDW got it wrong (again no big deal because we are only talking).

Where I can dispute VDW as such, is blind faith is put into the market and it can get it wrong – although in this case the prices were very close.

Now, with the betting forecast (Mirror), CELESTIAL HALO was clear favourite at 7/4 and KARABAK 2F at 3/1 depicting a clear advantage towards Celestial Halo.

There is a very wise man around this forum who has educated me into the belief that a good price forecast compiler can in fact can have better judgement than the market.

Billy's Outback Shack

[Formath]

Catterick 3.10

1. 4* Folk Tune stake £1

2. 4*
3. 2*
4. 3*
5. 2*
6. 3*
7. 3*

[billion]

Formath

.

Is it fair to rate 6 in the betting forecast when there are only 7 declared as per your selected race?

Could there be a better way? Say 12 runners then check 6 in the forecast, 10 becomes 5, 8 becomes 4 etc.

Billy's Outback Shack

[Formath]

Bill,
It may not be ‘fair’ to rate 5 runners when the field is only 6 altogether but it is part of the VDW ‘methodology’ which is how I am making the selections.

For myself I usually eliminate all those longer than the true mathematical odds in a race that is one less than the number of runners i.e., 6 runners it would be 5/1. Except that once the field numbers 11 or more I stick at 10/1 i.e,. 16 runners I eliminate all those longer than 10/1.

I do this because if nobody, including myself, can make a case out for a runner to be shorter than the true mathematical odds on the information available it seems illogical to risk betting. Also when prices are longer than 10/1 nobody in general has got much of a clue about the chance of a runner.

[billion]

Formath

.

VDW had his own ideas regarding racing and who am I to question the man but it is all in the manor of understanding even if I do think there is an imbalance of the logic –

sometimes

.

Billy's Outback Shack

[Formath]

Ffos Las 4.30

1. 4* Youngstown stake £2

2. 3*
3. 1*
4. 4*
5. 2*

[billion]

Have I missed something here

Formath

?

Your intro posting suggests 3* and now I have just noticed a few 4* have crept in whilst I was not paying attention.

Where did the extra star come from please?

Billy's Outback Shack

[Author]

Posts