P.O.T

[Shaun]

Can any one tell me your thoughts on turn over profit for an allup bet...eg if you started with $10 and you got your all up would you work out your TOP on your first bet of $10 or your last bet

say you bet $10 you have 3 allups and you have $150 rideing on your last bet would you count the $10 or the $150 as your turn over.

You would count all moneys bet on each race.
Ie $10 on first race - wins paying $5.
$50 on 2nd race - wins paying $3
$150 on 3rd race - hopefully wins.

Turnover is $210. Its the same as if you placed individual bets of $10, $50 and $150 on those 3 races. The only difference is with an Allup you are betting with winnings, which may or may not be the case with the other bets.

While you only risked $10 of your own to begin with, your actually turned over $210 in bets, by risking your winnings plus original $10 each race.

[Big Orange]

Shaun,

That is a really good question. My thoughts are that if it's a SINGLE BET on multiple events, your initial outlay is your turnover - $10.

When you take an all-up which AUTOMATICALLY reinvests winning dividends towards your next selection, you have no option of extracting all or part of your winnings in the middle. The compounding nature of the bet is the basis for both your total risk and your total reward. The most you can lose on your outlay is the $10.

I can also understand Freddy's view that, in effect, you've turned over the greater amount but I'm inclined to say that your turnover is restricted to the actual amounts that come out of your account (or pocket) to be bet.

Bloody good question, though!

Suppose it depends how you define an Allup bet.

If you turn $10 into $600, have you really only risked $10?

I think that you have in the above example actually risked $210. You have risked your initial $10 3 times, plus $180 in profits.

Allup betting is really just re-investing your winnings on another race, plus initial stake. Betting with profits should still count as turnover.

Think of it this way -
Let's say you place a win bet of $10 on a horse. It wins paying $5. You are feeling confident so you place $50 win on another horse - it wins paying $3. You think you're on a roll so decide to risk $150 on another race - it wins paying $4. You have turned your initial $10 into $600, but in total you placed bets of $210 (your turnover). Allup betting just automates this procedure and stops you from withdrawing winnings prior to the last race bet.

Turnover should be measured by adding up amounts bet on individual races.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: freddy on 2002-07-01 12:51 ]</font>

[Reenster]

If you have 3 separate bets, rolling the winnings over into the next bet if you win, then they are just that: 3 SEPARATE bets. You have the choice to stop at any time and collect your winnings. Turnover (and profit on turnover) is calculated on each separate bet.

An Allup bet is ONE bet and if that initial bet is $10 then turnover is $10. In the above example you are not risking $210 because you are still mid bet. There is no option to collect mid bet.

If the first bet loses then you lose $10. (LOT 100%). If the first bet wins and the second bet loses, you still lose $10 because there was never any way of collecting after the first bet won.

[becareful]

Shaun,

I would definitely include the investment on every race as per freddy's post - this is the only way to get a good idea of your strike rate and overall profitability. I would suggest you record every individual bet as well as the all-up results so that you can guage how effective your all-up betting is. Depending on your strike rate you may find that 2-race, 3-race or even 4-race allups give better results - but the only way to find out is if you have details of all your bets.

Whilst I can see BigO's point that you have only put up $10 of your own money you are really risking the full amount - you always have the option of placing the bets individually so the argument that it is a single bet is not really valid.

Just my opinion :smile:

[Hammers]

I would have thought that you would base your POT on $10 as that is what your balance sheet is going to show as the negative amaount should you lose.
An all up bet in my eyes should be treated the same way as a double.

A double or treble only has one div. Where as an allup bet has multiple divs.

With an allup bet you also have a choice of races and whether to place individual bets.

Even if you lose your $10. You have still turned over more than that if your 1st selection won.

Let's say you had 10 $10 allup bets. They all lost - so you're down $100.
But what if in all 10, 1 or 2 selections won.

You've actually turned over several hundred dollars or more. If you had 2 out of 3 right in all ten, there's nothing wrong with your selections, just need to change your betting strategy.

[becareful]

As Freddy says an all-up is really 2 or 3 or 4 different bets (depending on how many "legs") - it is just that the TAB is placing the 2nd and subsequent bets for you (if you win). The TAB certainly includes the total turnover in their figures, not just the original bet, and they take their commission off of every bet.

The problem I see with using only the first bet for POT is you are going to get a distored view of your real success depending on what order your winning bets come in.

For example lets say we make 9 place selections at the start of the day and group them into 3-allups. Now 6 of our selections win paying $2 each (just keeping it simple for the example).
On single bets, level stakes our profit is $3 and POT = 3/9 = 33%
Now with the allups we could have either no wins, 1 win or 2 wins depending on the order of the winners (eg WWL,WLW,LWW or WWW, LWW, WLW or WWW, LLL, WWW). Each allup will pay $8 if it wins (2*2*2) so we will either have a loss of $3, a profit of $5 or a profit of $13. Therefore our POT is either -100%, 166% or 433% - makes it a bit hard to judge how good your selection system is - you are either really disappointed or you think you have the best thing in the world.

As I said before you obviously need to keep records of the allup totals but you should also record every individual bet and work out your POT based on the individual bets - otherwise you have no way of knowing how good your selection strategy is and whether your allups are helping or hurting your bottom line.

[Hammers]

I see your point Freddy and I know the difference between all up and doubles betting. However, as an accountancy exercise I think the all up bet should go down as a $10 bet. Anything else would misrepresent your winnings/losses.
If you were to place the bets separately and there is a choice issue as to whether you continue to butter up or not, then I would agree with your idea.

Becareful's right, using $10 as the turnover figure is totally misleading.

If you used the $210, and the last bet lost. You'd be left with a Loss on turnover of $10/210 = roughly -5%. A much more accurate guide of your performance than -100%.

If you used $10 as turnover your record would look like this

No of selections
3
Strike rate
66%
No of bets
1
Strike rate
0%
Result
$10 loss
POT
-100%

Looks like you're betting on the wrong horse.

[Hammers]

I guess the difference between our ideas is this - do you want to know how your selections are performing or do you want to know how your bank balance is performing.

If you get the selections right and use the most appropriate betting strategy - the bank looks after itself.

In golf, you won't have any birdie putts if you keep missing greens because you're choosing the wrong club to hit.

[Reenster]

Freddy,

An allup bet can't have multiple dividends. It is one bet on multiple races. The only way multiple dividends can apply is if bets on each race are placed as separate entities.

I can't place a win bet on a horse and collect if it's in front at the 400 metre mark unless it's also in front at the finish line. You only collect on an allup if ALL selections win.

However, I take your point that the success of your underlying selection process might be hidden if you only take into account the strike rate of the allup bet as a whole, rather than the overall win strike rate of each selection.

Perhaps separate banks are the answer??

If a computer program automatically placed bets for you from winnings - what would your turnover be?
1. Initial bet.
2. Total of all monies wagered on total no of races.

Its the same thing as an Allup bet, you have the choice to place individual bets or have one automated bet that re-invests all winnings.

[becareful]

Hammers - the bank figure is exactly the same whether you record it as multiple bets or a single bet. eg. $10 on allup paying $2x$2xlose - initial bet is $10 so bank is -10, pays $20 so bank now +10, next bet $20 so bank back to -10, pays $40 so bank now +30, next bet $40 so bank back to -10, loses so bank stays at that.

Reenster - an allup is not a single bet - it is multiple bets that the TAB places for you. Each bet pays a dividend (if it wins) that is reinvested into the next race. This is the way the TAB accounts for it so why should we look at it any differently?

Of course this raises the question of would a serious punter place all-up bets automatically and lose control over the reinvestment? I certainly wouldn't because you have no way of knowing when you place the bet what the divs for 2nd and 3rd legs are going to be. Say you have an allup with $10 on first race which pays $3.00, 2nd race pays $4.00 but your last selection gets heavily backed and at jump time is only paying $1.10 the place - do you really want to risk your $120 just to get an extra $12 if you don't feel the horse deserves to be that short. Alternatively maybe the jockey for 3rd leg gets injured in 2nd race and is replaced by apprentice who has never ridden the horse before - again do you want to risk your $120? For me it makes more sense to place the bets individually so you can take your profit if something happens to change your mind about the 2nd or 3rd runners.

I think we have well and truly covered that issue.

[Shaun]

Gee i did not want to start a war...lol....i agree with Freddy...as i put my bets on indevidualy for the all up...i would take the total amout invested.....i have been thinking about this and if you take each bet as an andividual then you must take each collect as one...see if you think this works
bet$10 wim $2x$2x$2
1st outlay $10
return $20

2nd outlay $20
return $40

3rd outlay $40
return $80

total outlay $70
total returns $140
top 100%

i guess at the end of the year if you have more money than you started with then you are in front...and thats what counts

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Shaun on 2002-07-01 18:37 ]</font>

[dinodog]

hi

the only time to use an "allup" bet is when you are placing your wagers early and will not have further contact with the tab for the day. this allows you to have a small bet, while not having any control, as stated in an earlier post, and the chance to receive a large divvy. otherwise bet each race individually for better control and no different profit.

there is nothing worse than to back several early winners just to see all your profits and stake lost on one lousy short head loser

therefore a betting strategy i would recommend to rid yourself of the "guilt" of so called allup betting, is to remove my initial stake as soon as possible and also take other small profits along the way if my days bet and price total allows

regards

dinodog