- This topic has 21 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 20 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
OK guys, time to air your thoughts, dont ignore this section cos this just might make your betting profitable…<br>We all know that level stakes are the benchmark against which we chart how good a staking method is. A good Staking Plan must be reasonably safe without being ultra safe, it is no good if it can be bettered by levels. It doesn’t matter how stupid it might sound, tell the members what method you use and just be prepared for the members to pick holes in it or even shoot it down in flames. There is nothing personal in it so don’t feel hurt but there just might be one or two out there that might have an answer to this conundrum of consistent profits…. There are only a few that I actually use and these are standing the test of time and are mainly sensible approaches to planned and managed betting and you will need this sort of dedicated approach, I know of nobody that bets in a slapdash way that consistently turn a profit….. your money and staking MUST be managed…. so c’mon, lets hear ’em all…..  <br>:biggrin: :biggrin:
MrE
Hi Mr. E.
Level stakes are the only best way to test any system, if it cant make money using level stake,it never will.<br>Increaing stakes after a loser is the road to ruin, just take a look at my second fav system on the forum and you will see that it was doing ok up until friday, but as soon as the selections icreased the staking plan got to big, all nine selections ended up losing and put the bank well into the red. doubling up is also the kiss of death, because the prices of the selection needs to be well over 2/1 to make a profit, thats if your backing favs, A odds against in your staking will not be a big enough price to recoupe you stake.
Daz.:cheesy:
Hi.
Testing a system using level stakes is great if the prices are good enough, but then the strike rate will not be so high as the shorter price systems, on the whole.  This is where most will fail because of the losing runs.
I also know of no one that uses slap dash staking habits that make a consistent profit from racing.
There are ways to increase stakes after a loser or two without breaking the bank but, you really do have to be aware of past losing runs (how long are they and how frequent).  Although nobody can account for sod’s law.  :biggrin:
A 50% SR will make a loss at level stakes if the average price of the winners are under evens, this is common sense but, by staking wisely this can be turned into a small profit.
By betting to win on one horse in each race, in lots of races each day there can only be one outcome in the end.  By applying a couple of filters system bets can nearly be always cut down to one, two or three a day.
Good luck to all systemites.  🙂
Robotica
I haven’t got time tonight to answer this at length, but Daz mate, you are so very wrong. Level stakes are for the novice or for the tipsters to proof themselves although many try to get out of it. The Robot is absolutely correct in saying that there are methods that won’t break the bank but levels aint the way to go. If you want to make profits, you must be prepared to compound when the time is right or else your just gonna stand still on the road to nowhere….. I’ll say more tomorrow but lets have a few more suggestions, thats only Daz and Robot so far, there’s gotta be more that want their betting to be profitable……<br>:cool: 😎
MrE
Hi Guys
My thoughts on staking plans…..
I agree that at the end of the day level stakes are the most accurate and manageable way of betting. For example if you are betting in thousands a staking plan of variable amounts becomes very difficult to place bets.
However that maybe true as your stakes increase, but most of us want to get to this level froma much smaller starting bank and that does require compounding.
I currently only bet on one system. I use a compound factor to increase my stakes (in this case 1/25th rachet) which is just over 4 times the longest losing run.
Although I am still using level stakes as a percentage of the bank.
There is another system I am monitoring at the moment which uses a 1 to 4 pt system, which is doing well, but if were betting at high stakes this would become difficult. Using £100 to £400 a bet though is ok.
At the end of the day logic and stats determine how good a system is. Where betting is concerned in the medium to long term with reasonably high investments, level staking is the way forward as produces simple managable process.
Let me finally put it this way – if somebody offered me a system that produced 50- pts/yr at level stakes with short losing runs on eves + horses that would be worth paying for…. (although would not in real life!), 200 pt/yr, variable stakes, high priced selections, odds on etc no thanks as this is unlikely to make me any real money long term.
Look forward to any thoughts
I think with short priced selections the only way you are going to make money is with a staking plan.
I really havent got much time today to pursue this further due to work commitments – but I will be watching with interest as they say!
Regards- Matron<br>:cool:
Morning All,<br> Anyone remember Alan Gregory?? He was one of the great systemites and used his Essex Plan on systems with 50% strike rate. The plan turned small level stake losses into healthy profits.<br> If you would like me to post the rules I will later on.<br> Keep up the good work MrE, Paul. Matron and everyone else who educates and entertains us.<br> Regards,<br> Tetley
Hello Tetley and welcome.
Please post the rules when you get a chance.
Regards- Matron<br>:cool:
Afternoon All,<br> Not much happening this afternoon, so rules for Essex Plan as follows (any probs, let me know).<br> Bank req. 200 points.<br> Object…..to win 1 point per bet.<br> Stakes rise by 1 point per bet..i.e. 1,2,3,4,5<br> Make columns with headings of Stake, Result, Win, Lose, Arrears, Aim<br> Example 3 bets……..all losers, all points shown as £1<br> Stake Result Win Lose Arrears Aim (the aim is the amount required to win 1 point per bet plus amount lost)<br> Stake Result Win Lose Arrears Aim<br> £1 L 1/1 – £1 £1 £2<br> £2 L 6/4 – £2 £3 £5<br> £3 L4/6 – £3 £6 £9<br> Hope all clear so far. Let us imagine the next bet is an even money winner. This would result in a bet of £4 giving a £4 profit, which is not enough to clear the Aim column……so we now go for a double giving a stake of £8 on the next selection which is 5/4……this wins giving us a total profit on the double of £14 thus clearing the Aim column. A new coup is now started commencing with a 1 point bet.<br> If the 2nd horse (the 5/4 shot loses) the table now looks like this<br> Stake Result Win Lose Arrears Aim<br> £8 L – £4 £10 £15 next bet is<br> £5 W2/1 £10 – -<br> £15 W1/2 £7.50 – – – we have cleared the arrears column begin next coup.<br> Total profit for coup is £17.50 less £10 = £7.50 profit.<br> If the double fails to clear the aim column then simply subtract profit from double from the Aim column then add 1 pt to the Aim column and increase stake by 1 point. Example<br> Stake Result Win Lose Arrears Aim<br> £15 W1/5 £3 – +3 3<br> £6<br> Any winner over 1/2 will clear the Aim column.<br> Sounds complicated……..it is…….but it works, and the use of a double gives amazing recovery powers from a losing run. However do remember this method is only suitable with a system giving 50%+ strike rate.<br> Best of luck,<br> Tetley
Hi Tet, Jeeeez, this may suit you but it’ll murder most ordinary punters. I’ve used this one in my distant past and found it difficult to put into practice without wondering what the f*** I was doing….. hehehe….. in another nutshell, I had 6 winners on the trot followed by 8 losers, OK, not 50% I grant you, but close enough. If betting in tenners, who in there right mind could be betting at £80 a shot when they were betting at a tenner 3 days ago and after just losing £280…. Tet, if I could afford to bet at £80, I wouldnt be starting off with a tenner…. that method is suberb if you can guarantee low losing runs, but who can guarantee that….. the other members might see it differently but I can’t give you a Gold Star for that, far too volatile…..<br>:biggrin: :biggrin:
MrE
Paul… hello mate, we’ve got us a bit of a discussion going aint we. Tets just come up with a good ‘un but I dont know of any system that doesn’t get reasonable losing runs, might be worth trying it against Matrons results….. now as for your suggestion of levels being the answer, I think you are wrong. I don’t know of one pro who bets in levels, they are masters of the game and they have to adopt variables for just the reasons that you’ve stated, ie inability to get on, cant get the price required when those with lesser amounts can, yes, the difficulties are numerous and that is the reason why levels is virtually impossible at higher levels. I know a punter that had lost 5K on 2 bets x 2.5K and went to put another bet on with the same bookie he had given 5K to and was refused, his bet was taken at SP (2/1) which woulda resulted in him only breaking even. He had to raise his stakes on that horse and put a further bet on with another bookie in an attempt to make a bit. Just goes to show that levels is not the answer even at that level. You must be free to vary your stakes according to the odds you can get or you refuse to bet until you get those odds, but thats another ball game entirely……. back to the subject in hand, at our level, and I am assuming that most of us are smallish bettors, we need staking methods to grow into what we wanna be, big and strong and confident, we wont get there whimping about at levels. We must speculate to accumulate, a good friend of mine calls it "going to the edge", its no good having a bank if your not prepared to use it…… hehehe….. keep it up Paul, we’ve even got Matron hooked…. more later….
MrE
I hope this aint boring anybody but I am as certain as God made little apples, that its the staking that will make or break you. Everybody has their own pet methods that they swear by (I’ve got half a dozen), and they’re all much of a muchness. Most of ’em have been around for years but have been modified to suit todays standards or a punter that is now more aware of the pitfalls. A couple of the methods that I’ve just read and commented on are in fact methods that I use at present but in a different and more sensible (to me) format. I’ll put acouple of mine on the board tonight with an explanation of how and why and you lot can have a go at me…. 🙂 <br>Now I’ve probably said this before but you’ll have to let me ramble on cos we’ve got new members too, but in place of using levels, use a raising stakes over a short burst. If you take a 6 bet block, you would be staking 6pts at levels, but you could stake the same amount of points over the same block of 6 by betting…  half pt… half pt… 1pt… 1pt… 1.5pts… 1.5pts….. stopping at a winner and then start the process over again, its still a total of 6 points but if you look closer you will see that a 4/1 winner anywhere in that lot will return a profit as would a 3/1 winner. If it were the last bet of the 6, the 4/1 winner would return you 7.5pts, a profit of 1.5pts, using levels you would be minus a point, so this way makes you 2.5 pts BETTER than levels at the same cost. If the 3/1 winner was to come up in the last spot that would return you 6pts so you break even, no loss, but to levels you would be minus 2pts so your still beter of with the variable staking…. I hope that I’m explaining this OK…. even if the winners come in the 3rd or 4th spot where you have a whole 1pt on ’em, your still better off because you are only debitting 2 x half pts off the total, ie if the 3/1 came in on your 3rd bet you would return 4pts, using the method above you would deduct 2 pts staked and your left with a profit of 2pts but on levels, once again you are worse off with a return of 4pts but a deduction of 3pts already staked leaves you with only a 1 pt profit, so once again your worse off with Levels. The only times your gonna be better off with levels is if all your winners are consecutive, and how often does that happen, and even then you dont lose much…. work it out my friends, far better than levels and costs the same over 6 bets, costs less if you get an earlier winner…… Jeeeez, don’t I rabbit on…..<br>:biggrin: :biggrin:
Hi MrE,<br> What do you have to do for a Gold Medal??? Try this with your current selections……….First five selections 1 point each…..stop as soon as a profit shown. If no winner after first 5 bets increase stake by 1 point for next 5 bets i.e. 6-10……. 2 points each. Once again stop as soon as a profit (no matter how small) is made and back to 1 point. Increasing by 1 point every 5 bets.<br> Works very well with a system giving 25% strike rate.<br> Cheers 4 now,<br> Tetley
Here I am, rambling again…. Nick made comment about the 2% of bank type of staking, it was on the "Mysteries" thread. I said that it wasn’t suitable for me, well, I told a porky. I would, have, and do use it but not in that strict format. I cannot see the point of putting less on when your losing, the losses are hard enough to recoup anyway without the added hardship of smaller stakes the longer the losing run. What does work however, is exactly the same method but with a ratchet style staking, ie you can ratchet your stakes upward but NEVER downwards. The way I use it is like this….<br>Firstly I take my bank and split it in half, lets say £1000. so now we have a "working" bank and a "reserve" bank of equal amounts of £500, the reason is obvious. Now by betting 2% of your "working" bank would give you 50 losing bets before that bank is exhausted and if your selection method is any good, you shouldn’t get 50 losers on the trot. But in saying that, you might just get a losing run of 30, 15, and 7 split by two even money shots and your down the swanee, but thats what our reserve is for, to give us a second bite at the same cherry….. OK, using 2% of the £500 bank we start betting at a tenner a throw, if it loses, tuff titty, we put a tenner on the next one and the next and the next. When we reach a profit of £200 we stop and chuck it in the kitty together with the reserve bank, we now have a total of £1200 and we split the bank into two again, leaving us with a working bank of £600 and a 2% stake of £12…. and so it goes on, NEVER dropping your stakes only going forever upwards. This is the reason we raise our "reserve" bank from the winnings, its so that we never have to start again lower than the level at which we exhausted the first bank……. OK, all shout STOP if you’ve had enough……<br>:cheesy: :cheesy:
MrE
:biggrin:  @ Tet…. nice one Tet, you’ve almost sussed out the Staking Plan that I’m using at the moment, the main difference at present is that I raise after 5 losers to 1.5pts, a further 4 losses I then shift up to two points. Its from that point I tend to differ, but I’ll go into that later, I’ve just gotta be careful I aint hogging the thread cos that bleeding Urby fella will give me a bollocking…..  hehehe…… I think though Tet, that the single and most important part of any staking plan or managed betting, is to protect your bank, we all say "don’t bet more than you can afford to lose", but thats all sh** really, I for one can’t afford or don’t want to lose any. Who the hell is betting with the intention of losing, I aint, so it is imperative to protect what you’ve got whilst at the same time, try to improve on it, thats why, as Daz said, doubling up is the road to ruin, the same goes for a lot of plans, but there are a few good ‘uns out there and thats what we wanna winkle out……  <br>:biggrin: :biggrin:
MrE
I know you rubbished the fixed 2% of current bank theory AND I understand the apparant illogic of reducing stakes after a loser, but given a genuinely profitable source of selections this method narrowly beats level stakes. The upside of the staking plan is that you are having more on than with level stakes following a winner. I’m not saying that there aren’t better ways though, but IMO if level stakes don’t work then there is something drastically wrong with the selection process.
Your system sounds pretty useful Mr E, but what happens when you hit a serious losing run ? Not looking for a fight just curious ! 🙂
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.