THE TRICKY DUTCH BOOK

[crash]

How we actualy put our money on [staking], seems to be the least talked about and understood aspect of the "Punt". Eg: Anybody having an e/w on one horse to win/place versus a three horse Dutch bet to win, hasn't seriously thought about the importance of Staking.
In impotance it seems to fall into the "I'll get around to looking into it one day..." basket. The ratio of Posts on staking, vesus methods of picking winners in this forum uphold my point. In importance [next to knowing when not to bet a race and accurate handicapping], it probably ranks as the definer of winning or loosing long term.

The Dutch book staking method might just be the best long term, "grinding away at it" regular small[er] % profit versus large % return of the level bet[?].

Would like to hear fom anybody with actual long term practice of using this staking method, concerning the size of the dutch [no.of horses] in relation to the size of Fields. What would be the best Field size limit? At the moment I use a 3 to 5 horse and 70% outlay max. of expected win ratio that seems to work ok. and limit field size to 15 runners in a betable race.

Any [sane] ideas on staking methods considered better than the dutch [and why]would be most appreciated too.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-08-05 09:00 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-08-08 17:00 ]</font>

[puntz]

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: puntz on 2003-08-15 12:46 ]</font>

[TAUTO]

Why have all the hassles of working out the %'s for dutch booking, instead place the same amount on each of your selections. This way you get the "extra benefits" when the higher odds selection wins.

[crash]

And when the lower priced selection wins ?

Dutching in your head is easy : Work it out on a sought $100 win return [if you want to win $50 halve your bet amount etc.]. How much do you need to put on to win $100 when a horse is paying $10? How much for $5, $2.50? If you can work that out, you can work out [close enough] any figure. If you can't, go back to my point about the importance of understanding staking. Do that on all your horses and add your total bets. Thats what it costs to win $100 regardless which horse wins.

[Shaun]

I have to agree with TAUTO depending on how maney horses you are intending to back.
If it is 3 or less then just place the same amount on each horse unless you are constantly backing odds on favs i find this the best way to go....if you get a winner at less than $3 it can more than be made up by the winner at $6.

I use a bank percentage bet of 5% devided by three this is calculated at the begining of each day.

[crash]

Puntz,

Not sure if I get your drift. What you say about betting 12 horses [Dutch] in a 12 horse race and the bookies winning is mathematicaly true, but who would ever do that? Selective choice comes into this [I hope]and any race having more than four horses that could win, I treat as an unbackable race and move on.Don't you?

As for Bookies winning all the time,well in the days of lots of punters throwing money at them, yes, I would agree, but now they regularly loose. Not overall [but nowdays, more often than punters think, especialy at provincials where their "book" on a race isn't covered]. It's those loosing races that you should be "on" in. Take any card where a lot of favorites win and it's the pie stall and bus stop for them!

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-08-05 11:15 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-08-05 11:16 ]</font>

[puntz]

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: puntz on 2003-08-15 12:49 ]</font>

[crash]

Got your drift now Puntz,
... and would have too agree with your "statistical" point, all except for not betting Dutch at the track. If the race deserves a Dutch [hedge...God I hate those yanky terms] bet on the Computer, why not a Dutch at the track? It ain't hard to work out. Once your used to it, it's ABC...

DOS ? No thanks [I'm just a Luddite], but thanks for the offer.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-08-05 12:11 ]</font>

[puntz]

Well,lets just say, I prefer the track for some selections the PC will NEVER pick, and it seems to be those "long shots".
A "long shot", to me,comes from my own selection criteria ratings, it may equate to 3/1, but the bookies may have it at double figures. Saturday at Cheltenham Race 5. H 9
Damselic Warrior, I needed to be at the track to see what the bookies were doing.
One had it at 10/1, then accros the other side, another was fluctuating it at around 7/1 then 6/1.....fav was 4/1
I backed the 10/1, went acrros to the 6/1 bookie and back his fav at 4/1 so I get my money back incase the fav. comes in, but I got my "long shot" anyway.
The PC, my criteria would not have picked it, it was way out of line and form acording to stats. But it won! Other factors came into it, and that factor said, "go to track"
It paid 14.00 NSW !
:smile:
Nice win I may add

[becareful]

Should have used your mobile phone to bet on it with IAS/Sportingbet and collected the $14.32!

_________________
"Computers can do that????" - Homer Simpson

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: becareful on 2003-08-05 12:45 ]</font>

[Bhagwan]

If any one wants a copy of a Dutch betting program which has all 3 versions ,(bet a set outlay , bet to a fixed return of profit, bet to return a fixed amount,) just email me .

If you need to treat one of the shorter horses as a saver , simply add 1,2 or 3 points to its original price.

Its usually a good idea to keep your outlay equivalent or greater, to profit return , otherwise you are falling into the old trap of betting odds on , which is to be avoided as much as possible.

One method I find works well is to target races where there is a Fav paying $2.20-2.90

Use him as a saver with one or 2 others to win.
I`m making the assumption that there should be value for the other 2 if the Fav gets rolled , which they do ,50%+ of the time.

If the strong Fav gets up you have covered you bet.

It will take patience ,because frustration can set in when the favs sometimes get up 5 times in a row , "but that`s puntin" & if one is prone to getting upset , they should`nt be be puntin.

I prefer fields of 13 & less ,so as to try & minimise the chance of interferance & bad luck in the running.

For that Dutch Betting program
bhk@bigpond.net.au

[Bhagwan]

A selection method that has a good strike rate ,is to target races where the fav is paying $4.00+ 2 min before jump.

You then Dutch bet the 3rd,4th & 5th fav.

We are assuming that the betting field is a fairly open betting affair with value to be had.

You need to have patience with this one because some days dont have any selections , mainly where there a small fields on the day .

[Debug]

You can usually dutch all the runners in a race except the favourite on Betfair.

Just flicked over to Befair, Hawkesbury race 4 whilst reading this post.
12 horse race, dutched 11 runners, left out the favourite. Percentage profits varied from 2 to 261%. Total bet would have cost $40.

Just for interest. No idea who won by the way.

[becareful]

You would have done your money - the favourite won. Dutching all except favourite on Betfair seems pointless - why not just "lay" the favourite if you think it wont win? Personally I can't see the point of dutch betting multiple runners in most cases - you usually end up with "odds-on" returns but generally a lower winning chance than if you just backed real odds-on chances. But thats just personal preference I guess.

[crash]

I only brought up my quiry about Dutch betting as this is my first serious experiment with it involving more that two horses and was unclear about various aspects of Dutch stategy.Usualy I just bet level stakes on one or two horses for the win [depending on field size and odds], but sometimes 1 x 2 savers, so that was my interest in the Dutch. Because of it's importance, any meaningful betting statergy is worth looking into. Picking winners seems to be only the first and by no means the last step, in profitable punting. The more I learn about this game, the more I realise how little I know and that after a long time involved.

Thanks everybody for the various and interesting imput and Bhagwan for the e/m and astute advice.

Interesting...your point about odds on versus a Dutch that takes one into that area Becareful. I've fell into that hole several times now using Dutch...the "Murphy's Law" phenomen I think it's called.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-08-08 15:25 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-08-08 15:29 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-08-08 16:50 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-08-08 17:12 ]</font>

[puntz]

Bahgwan,
Yes and No to that method.
On a consistant basis, the calculation to hedge becomes rather complex. And then ya chasing, and then ya get the unders, and then ya have big problems.




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: puntz on 2003-08-22 13:33 ]</font>