POT

[NANOOK]

Hello

Can someone who's more mathmatically inclined please give me a working example on Profit on Turnover, by that I mean if Iwant to earn $1000 per week what will I need to be turning over?

I've been deep into the bowels of the archives and remember someone posting something similar but cannot seem to find it, although i did find other interesting ideas on POT.

Thanks in advance
Nanook..

[kenchar]

NANOOK,
This could turn into an interesting thread, but my own opinion, what you have asked is impossible. It depends on your strike rate, the average odds of your selections that salute etc etc.
Maybe a mathematical genius on the forum can help you.

[shoto]

Nonook,
Don't think I rate as a mathematical genius, but POT is simply the ratio of your profit compared with how much you have bet to get that profit, usually expressed as a percentage.
Example - you have wagered a total of $100 in bets and you have returned $120. Your profit is $20 on an outlay of $100. 20 divided by 100 = 0.2, multiply by 100 to get percentage = 20%. You POT is 20%

HTH.

Kenchar is correct, an answer to your specific question is not possible in the way you've asked it. If your POT was 1% you would need to turn over $100,000 /week to get your $1000 profit. If your POT was 20% you would need to turnover $5000 / week to get your $1000 profit.

[davez]

& if your pot is more than 10%, its time for a reality check :)

[NANOOK]

& if your pot is more than 10%, its time for a reality check :) Davez could you explain why you would need a reality check if pot is more than 10%, is that an accepted and realistic fiqure pros use to make a living out of this game?

Shoto your last paragraph helped join the dots for me. Thanks Kenchar as well. So if my S/rate is 25% and my average pot is 8% and my drawdown is 138 units what knowlege can one extrapolate from these fiqures if anything at all..?

Cheers
Nanook

[Tony]

Nanook,
your 1 winner in 4 gets you 108 back for every 100 outlayed. So 25 on each with one winner means you got an average bet of 83/25 about the winner, or odds of about 4.33 in the new or a bit over 13/4 in the old.

Not sure what your drawdown means, except perhaps you are using a proressive staking plan.
At a 25% hit rate, you can expect (over 10,000 trials), a 100% chance of striking a run of outs of 19, a 50% chance of 28 outs, a 10% chance of 35 outs and 0 chance of 62 outs.

Better check my maths though as I am careless with numbers.

[Bhagwan]

If one has a constant 8% POT & you would like to earn $1000 a week, your turnover would have to be $12500 a week.

This is calculated by taking $1000 divided by 8 , then push the percentage key on the calculator = $12,500

[dingoboy]

Just a bit for you.

I work my POT at the end of each day, you cant work out POT when you win, when you loose but at the end of a "session" be it day/week/month/year.

I personally wait till close of play each day, either look on the paper columns or in TAB bet column which tells you how much youve spent and how many bets youve had (the only good thing about NSW TAB), add up ALL BETS, then add ALL WINS (if any) and as the others say on reply to your question, the differance between BETS OUT AND WINS IN IS PROFIT, DIVIDE PROFIT AMOUNT$ BY BETS OUT AMOUNT IN $ and wallahhh, POT in %. At the end of each month i add up the 30 days or so and get a total then divide that by 30, average POT.

IE,
Yesterday,
BET OUT 910 units
RETURN 1137

PROFIT 227 units
Therefore 227/910=24 %POT
So as Bhagwan says, to make 1000 units POT you need to spend 10,000 units at 10 % profit, so it depends on many things !

Hope ive helped
Cheers Dingoboy

[davez]

Davez could you explain why you would need a reality check if pot is more than 10%, is that an accepted and realistic fiqure pros use to make a living out of this game?


duno about 10% being "acceptable", however for me & the very few that i know that TRY to take this game seriously, acheiving anything more than around 10% for any substantial lenght of time just doesnt/hasnt happened.

i am sure there will be a few around who swear they can & do acheive better returns, well good on them, i havent given up trying to do better but i am not going to bang my head against the proverbial trying to.

& hey, if you can return 5c for every $1.00 outlaid, bahamas here we come! well, maybe next year....

[dingoboy]

Sorry i just read my post to you nanook,

So i dont get knocked by anyone and no one in particular, and not that it matters anyway, but the figures i gave you are only an example for you to work from from my betting yesterday, just yesterday, average POT is 12 %.

See ya
Dingo

[Debug]

If you are interested in strike rates and %POT have a look at this page www.videocam.net.au/koala/strikerates.html which will be active tomorrow afternoon (Sat).

Ten different types of bets are calculated 40 seconds before scheduled race starts with the strike rates and %POT updated during the afternoon.

[NANOOK]

Thanks to everyone for your input its helped out alot. At the present time I'm researching money management through the archived posts, but if anyone has a factor they believe is important to bank/money management feel free to share your knowledge.

Cheers
Nanook

[shoto]

Nanook,
Number 1 is protection of the bank - without that you've got nothing. If you're in it for the long haul somewhere in the future you'll almsot certainly have a bad run on occasions, your money management strategies need to be able to cope with this.

If you're using some form of progressive staking, it's better IMO to try to shift the percentages in your favour to some degree, not trying to recoup every last dollar from losing bets.

There's much more to be said, it's a huge topic. Learning how to win is only half the battle ... learning how not to lose is the other half. This applies equally to selection process, betting style and money management.

[punter57]

Even though I'm interested in these musings, I'm having difficulty accepting that the horses can be so meticulously or "scientifically" assessed that winning becomes REGULAR AS CLOCKWORK, which seems to be what faith in a fixed POT amounts to. It is almost as bad as the "gambler's ruin" in roulette etc (ie the winners are DUE!!). Effectively, trust in POT (especially trying to "scientifically" increase it) seems a waste of time.....as follows: let's say you had 1000 bets in a year at $1 each and you've hit 200 winners at an average of 5-1 (ie you've got 200 x $6 back=$1200 return) which is 20% profit (or POT). Now you KNOW you're on your way to "riches" because after a long trial you've cracked THE SECRET and plough in with everything you've got. You sell the house and whatever else to make "a killing" and will now put $400 on every bet (ie your $400,000 Net Worth, divided by next years 1000 bets) and will earn $80000 (20% POT) annually. Of course,even if your POT falls to 15% you'll still be happy with $60,000!!
If your POT is 10% (consistent and regular) and you HONESTLY believe it will CONTINUE to be so, then there's no reason not to "shoot for the moon". The problem is that POT is an "after the event" concept and as even the most expert "Sharemarket Gurus" put in the fine print (after boasting in the BIG print...15% Return p.a. over the Last 5 years!!!!etc), PAST PERFORMANCE IS NO GUARANTEE OF FUTURE PERFORMANCE.
Anyway,good punting this afternoon to one and all.

[Shaun]

If you don't know what your POT is then you can't plan...thats why most punters lose....go to a TAB and ask any one there what there POT is...but you get the answer "who cares" most are lucky if they even know how much they have bet for the day.

If my POT is 10% a month i know that in 8 months i can double my bank.....knowledge is power and the more you know about your punting the more power you have over it.

[punter57]

Morning Shaun!! It's not that we shouldn't have a plan but rather that POT is NOT predictable, and very difficult to calculate UNTIL IT HAPPENS. What I mean is: say you are betting 20 times every Saturday and coming out 10% ahead each week, it will "seem" clear you can double your bank in 10 weeks (more or less) at level stakes,and then again in 10 more weeks etc and be rather wealthy in a short while, as your gains compound
This would be a relentless process IF profit on turnover rolled on forever as "it should".But,alas horseracing is not like that.Past performance is no guarantee. POT is purely an "after the event" concept (maybe a misconception ) Please see below.
I have a POT of 10% and am dreaming of doubling my bank (currently $1000) and then doubling my bets from $10 to $20 and so on. My first bet hits a 100-1 shot and I'm "over the moon" as my bank IS doubled (also a POT of 10,000% at that point,too). Now I start betting $20 and after 47 outs I'm back to $1060 (ie I've invested the original $10 plus 47x$20 = $950) but am still about 11.5% up ON TURNOVER as $1060-$950 is that percentage. Now,should I persist with $20 bets??? If I bet the next $1060 in 53 bets and ,THIS TIME, achieve a few winners and a 9% POT, my bank'll will have increased to $1160. Looking at it from the beginning I'll have an increase of 16% overall which is very good AND steady POTs of 11.5 and 9 percent, which are about my "average". However,looking at it from "afterwards' I will now be in the position where I've actually bet $10+$940+$1060 = $2010 and have a "true" POT of about 8% AND I will have suffered an actual decline from $2010(after the big win) to $1160 (a loss of $850) from bet#2 onwards, despite further (smaller) wins. At this point AM I DOING WELL?? Is my selection method "on the skids'?? Is my "scientifically" calculated POT of 10% going to save my bank?
If anyone is still reading, then the conclusions are obvious. Like every other measurement in racing POT is ARBITRARY, determined by when you actually hit the winners; what they paid; when (or if) you decide to increase your betting level AND if you suffer a longish run of outs before the compensating(?) favourable POT resumes. It is especially misleading since your results will be totally determined by WHEN you take "the snapshot" of your performance.(A bit like HIH, One Tel and all those other creative accountancy disasters) Personally, I regard it all (POT) as misleading. Not WRONG to consider it,though I prefer to bet UNENCUMBERED by any notion of WHAT SHOULD BE. After all, isn't that exactly the HOOK that most rip-off system-sellers and spivs try to con US with!!?? Cheers and good punting, and lots of POT!!

[davez]

isnt pot simply a measurement of past performance, which is then used as a guide as to the sucess or faliure of ones current performance.

far from being misleading, knowing where one is at any given time is essential, & pot is one of those essential guides.


& not to change the subject, but my other 1/2 just read this post & wants to know why we are discussing the green stuff on a gambling website?? :)

[punter57]

Hi Davez. Keep it simple. The way to know how you're doing is to COUNT the folding stuff in your wallet. If there's more there than before you started betting that day you're a winner. If that amount is still in your pocket at the beginning of the next "session" and it increases again you're STILL a winner. If it declines on day 2 but increases the next then, once again,you're STILL winning. In business this is the CASH-FLOW model and is the surest sign of any company's real financial position. All the rest is fancy accounting to disguise impending disaster. Remember the dot.com sharemarket collapse. The Rate of Cash Burn told you EXACTLY how long a business had left. It tells you the same about a punter's financial "health" and when you can expect their "System" to collapse too!!! (Or NOT!!!)Cheers.

[KennyVictor]

If you are on the punt to make money as opposed to just have some fun you must be anticipating that you will come out in front in the long term. Since none of us can see forward in time to predict our future success the only indications we can gain are from looking backwards and seeing what has happened in the past. Profit on turnover has to be the most accurate measure of whether we have made money or not and if so at what rate we have made it. If this POT is measured across sufficient races, and I am talking about going back at least a couple of years, I see it as being a very good guide to how you are going to go in the future (barring changing your betting methods or something). If you are making a POT over a period of years (or can accurately test your system against past races and guage effective POT) you can bet with confidence going into the future and after balancing a few things like your courage, resources and the regularity of your POT you can decide how much to bet.
IMHO POT is what it's all about.

KV

[moeee]

If anyone is still reading,
Got to admit I took a shortcut to get here and then stopped!
You're funny.

[moeee]

If they take out 15% of the pool and redistribute the rest,how is it possible to have a POT of what seems to me to be about -50%.
Is it possible to be that bad in ones selection process?

[davez]

Is it possible to be that bad in ones selection process?

ooo yeh!


IMHO POT is what it's all about.

spot on kenny, spot on

[punter57]

Morning Moeee! Not sure if you really stopped reading my long-winded post or not,but since you think I'm funny you MUST'VE read just a little further. Anyway, since no-one has refuted my observations on POT being purely an "after the event" calculation ( I too reflect on how much I WOULD"VE won if I'd been betting bigger once I work out MY POT), I'll assume no-one's got the counter-arguement to do so. The more I think about it ,the more it all comes down to whether you ascribe to the idea of winners (or losers) being "due" ( not called the "gambler's ruin" for nothing);that past success ensures future success
What I'm hoping is that someone can clarify for me how to actually USE this historical knowledge (your past POT) in the future. For example,assuming I "know" I make 10% POT per year on about 1000 bets, and on Dec 24 I've only made 8% what am I going to do? Will I bet HUGE because I'm "owed" 2% on my remaining week's turnover or plug away and accept that this year my POT is probably going to be less. On the other hand, if I'm 20% up after 900 races should I hold off before "the rot" sets in (thus taking me back to my normal POT of 10%) or likewise plug on and maybe end up with a much bigger POT than usual. If the answer is PLUG ON then what's the point of KNOWING your POT. This is not a putdown or puton: I'd be happy to get a reply from someone with concrete advice rather than "subtle" insults. Cheers and good luckto all.

[davez]

cant speak for anyone else here punter57, but i doubt many would be using their pot calcs to determine their next bet(s), & if they are then this would simply be part of a staking plan of some sort, would it not.

as kenny put it - "Profit on turnover has to be the most accurate measure of whether we have made money or not and if so at what rate we have made it."

i do not view my pot calc's as any sort of "crystal ball" which somehow guarantees me a profit next week/month/year. simply they are a guide to let me know how i am performing at present, & therefore i am able to compare my present performance to my past efforts, & i would suggest that this type of analysis is essential for anyone serious about making a quid, no matter the endeavour.

[punter57]

Now I'm really confused Davez. You're right (as I see it) that POT is but a tool for making comparisons between current and past performance:that it's not a crystal ball. Yet a couple of posts earlier you were praising Kennyvictor, who SPECIFICALLY says that IMHO(what's that?) POT is, INDEED, a "very good"(the only?) guide for tomorrow's success and that with it,you can "BET WITH CONFIDENCE INTO THE FUTURE"!!!! He also makes the observation that "those who want to make money" will get much closer to doing so IN FUTURE if they use historical POT. Before him, Shaun asserted (a few posts earlier)that you can even use POT to predict WHEN your bank will double. Needless to say, there have been quite a number of replies in similar vein and one or two who knocked MY scepticism.
Maybe someone from THAT side of the fence, who believes he/she CAN use POI to predict (or better manage) the future, could fill us in.Can you,maybe, let me know how your use of known/expected POT would be utilized in the two examples I posted earlier this morning. Thanks, in advance, as I'm genuinely interested.

[Shaun]

Davez summed it up perfectly on what pot is about, and as for predicting winners i don't think we do that but it is a good planning tool.
Yes i did say you could double your bank in 8 sessions if you had a pot of 10% this was just an example of what can be done with a particular amount, pot is just one of the tools of good money managment and with out that you can never hope to beat the game.

[davez]

sorry that you are really confused, but my last post makes my views on the subject as clear as i can possibly make them.

[shoto]

P57, the statements people have made about POT have not implied it is used in progressive staking or anything about winners being "due".

You are correct that it's known only after the race (same for strike-rate) but over the course of time one race isn't going to affect the figure dramatically. POT together with strike-rate gives you a sense of the type of bets you make and how profitable they are for you. This is useful knowledge when planning your betting approach and what you might expect over time, based on your past experience.

It is a far better indicator than counting the dollars in your wallet at the end of the day, where say you find yourself $20 up: if you've bet $1000 (2%POT) then you've just scraped out a profit and with that kind of margin you'd really need to know what you're doing in that risk/reward scenario. On the other hand, if you've bet $1 (2000% POT) then you'd probably consider that luck, or at least realise it's unlikely that level of profit will be sustained.

POT is simply the most appropriate measure of your profitability. Every business needs to know it's profitability, even in racing where the future holds uncertainty.

[punter57]

G'day Shoto. I fear we're getting a bit bogged down, as basicly I'm not against calculating your POT but wondering, more, how KNOWING your POT is going to HELP your actual income. I keep records and have just worked out POT for 2004, though this is not usually a concern for me. At this point in 2005 (for just over 5 months) I'm considerably ahead on THAT rate,without having modified my selection methods.
After checking the strike rate and average odds I've discovered that the SR is similar but that the higher Odds have made the difference. I am doing NOTHING DIFFERENT, yet (for now) my current POT is magnificently better. On June 30 if I decide to "close the books" and use this "financial" year as my reckoning period (instead of "calendar') thus dramatically "improving" my running 12-month POT, will this be a DELUSION?? Of course I'll recalculate the previous 12-month periods "to be consistent" The POT will remain, as is proper, over MANY races and yet be purely ARBITRARY, a simple book-keeping jiggle. Well?
Finally,a lot of people are claiming that this preoccupation with profitability/POT has nothing to do with increasing your bets (in future) but is simply about "planning". Could someone explain this; if you know you'll bet (roughly) 500 times next year (only on the most "profitable" type of horse) and will make (roughly) 10%, how can you make any more ACTUAL money except by INCREASING the amount you wager??? Cheers,and good luck from (a baffled???) punter57.

[woof43]

Hi
The POT is really just a bottom line indicator, but its components Win S/R, Loss S/R and avg odds do provide the information needed in finding your confidence level, your Optimum edge, your bankroll growth rate and longest losing sequence, which are very important tools.
The other use of the POT apart from the obvious, is in providing a roadworthy test on a system or whatever by adding one's # of bets not over a year but a shorter duration, you can get a Final indicator of that systems roadworthyness

"Could someone explain this; if you know you'll bet (roughly) 500 times next year (only on the most "profitable" type of horse) and will make (roughly) 10%, how can you make any more ACTUAL money except by INCREASING the amount you wager??? Cheers,and good luck from (a baffled???)"

If you have enough past records of your betting history, yes you could make more money without increasing the avg amount wagered within a yr, simply by knowing something called deviation from the Equipartition, overseas betting groups run massive amounts of sim's based Equipartition an Pascals Triangle to adjust the amounts wagered within a betting series, thus not increasing bet amounts overal, but by combining the above knowledge with ones Optimum edge, they reduce risk at certain times an increase reward at other times, without increasing ones avg amount invested for the set time period.

[KennyVictor]

Punter57,

I can only try to explain one way I use POT by using an example.
I use a computer based system on West Aussie races which I've bored people with on this forum before but it gives me, year by year, for the years 1999 to 2004 the following POT:
6.98%, 0.55%, 9.7%, 12.81%, 6.08%, 7.17%.
This is over a couple of thousand races a year so the figures shouldn't be too wobbly and I should feel pretty safe that I won't loose a lot of money, in fact probably gain some. Based on this and a few other figures, like longest loosing streak, how much money the missus will allow me to divert to a bank, etc I can work out how much I feel like investing and estimating a POT of four or five percent how much I might finish up with in a few year's time.

I take POT a lot further than this though breaking it down by track. At Ascot races the corresponding POTs are:
-3.81% -8.53% +11.1% -25.45% -18.2% +2.86%.
and at Belmont:
+22.82% 9.54% 1.28% 29.92% 19.49% 15.73%.

This is certainly helpful in deciding the size of my bets. They are 0 at Ascot where I've come out behind year after year and as much as my weak heart will take at Belmont where I win year after year.

Up until about April this year my POT overall for all tracks was down as far as -12% but I didn't freak out and stop betting because I was confident it would come back based on many previous years positive figures. Sure enough a bunch of better bets has now boosted it up to +5.04%.

This is only a very coarse outline of how I use POT but I'm sure you must gain some insight into its usefulness and how you might use it to decide at least whether some bets are worth making at all and maybe eve how much you might be willing to stake.
If not IMHO (In My Humble Opinion) either I don't understand what you are trying to understand or you're just being perverse.
Either way, may your POT always remain positive.

Kenny

[punter57]

G'day,KennyVictor (and others)!!! Instead of using a computer to "calculate" standard deviation etc you'd be better off working out what it is about Ascot (versus Belmont) that YOU are unable to factor in!! (Hint;Lick your finger and hold it up, at both courses,whilst trailing a tape measure along the straight).I find it difficult to believe the horses have organized some sort of conspiracy not to "perform" for you at one track but to fulfil your plans at the other. Still...if a Pentium 4 says it's so, who am I to quibble.
Your records tell you that you bet, say, $100,000 at Ascot and lose, say, $5,000 (POT=minus 5%) while at Belmont you turned over $80,000 for a profit of $20,000 (POT 25%)?? And now you won't bet at Ascot??
Hasn't everyone been vigorously telling me that POT has NOTHING to do with deciding future bet sizes, especially (Hi Shoto) "increasing" your bets? Now KV says exactly the opposite (see below) where he'll often put his heart on the line (ie bet BIGGER: hi Shoto!) at Belmont, since POT has given him enough confidence!!!. No wonder the "POT fans" are confusing me.Is it because I really HAVEN't anything between the ears (as has been rather unkindly suggested elsewhere) or because THEY (the POT crowd) can't keep their OWN story straight???

[shoto]

What on Earth's "the POT crowd"? And what is the STORY (or conspiracay perhaps?) that they need to keep straight? As far as I can tell various people gave their thoughts on POT in response to queries raised (Hi P57). No-one's trying to convince anyone of anything, just trying to be helpful. Difference of opinion is just the tapestry of Racing (and thank goodness, or we'd all be betting the same horse).

If you're hinting P57 at the wind being a possible explanation of KV's results, why would you then suggest in the same breath that KV's pentium thinks it's a conspiracy? "The POT crowd" have suggested that it can be used in planning betting strategy which is exactly what KV is doing. Betting more in a winning scenario and less in a losing scenario sounds like good sense to me.

[punter57]

Don't forget the TAPE MEASURE, Shoto!! Many of us can run against the wind for a certain time but NOT forever (even Bob Seeger admits that!!!)
I fear you're missing the point again (deliberately?? You stirrer!!).KennyVictor makes a lot of sense at times, but I was (playfully) suggesting that this time he was mistaken in only visiting Belmont (or betting it) in Perth,due to his "stats" there. As there is no mathematical "law" which makes Ascot unplayable (or is there?), why accept defeat? The ONLY excuse would be if there was a certifiable,insurmountable obstacle in your way. For example ... A Horse Conspiracy! (Sorry you didn't accept that to be a little joke,Shoto) Anyway here's a real life example.
I was betting longshots sent to Adelaide from the N.T., one summer. and was having a pretty bad time at Morphettville. My POT (as you might say)was IN THE RED there,though I only saw it as LOSING DAYS (I was oh so ill-informed mathematically). Victoria Park, conversely, was excellent. A lot of figuring left me with 2 possibilities 1) Drop Morphettville, thereby increasing my POT (stop losing, in dailyspeak) immediately, and maybe increase my bets at VP (and Cheltenham as well, since it was O.K.,just not as good as VP) using the money "saved" by avoiding the "losing track". This is essentially KVs solution in Perth,or 2) Find the cause of the problem and continue taking (the delightful) Glenelg Tram to Morphettville, AS USUAL, every few meetings. If I could find the winning way I would continue to have, at least SOME playable races (at M'ville) and consequently keep more TO to put the P in front of.
Opting for solution number 2, I eventually came to the conclusion that a great number of "rank" outsiders (20-1 up to 200-1, even) had one of two major faults: either going flat out too early or else getting well back at the jump before storming home (if!!), too late (not a surprise, since most CONTENDERS are usually "on the pace" types or "leaders but not bolters") At any track, when the leader is running TOO FAST or "pulling" (at 50-1) there is a great chance of it getting tired, regardless of track layout. But, if it's a "slowly away, come-from-behind" type it has a MUCH better chance to COME FROM BEHIND and cause a boilover if it's on the longest suburban straight in Australia (ie VP).That's all: continue betting both sorts of longshot at VP but ONLY the leaders (at 50-1) at M'ville. Not only did my winnings increase still further, but,by refusing to accept the umpire's word (the stats programme, powered by PENTIUM, in this case....that was another little jest,Shoto) to be final, I could win more and still go racing more often than poor KV now does in Perth.
Finally; what surprises me most about POT adherents is that while they all agree it exists (calculated after the fact) very few can agree on it's Practical implementation. Is it the Dog that wags the tail, or the other way round??? Cheers and good punting.

[shoto]

Me, stirring? Surely that's the pot calling the kettle black. :) :)

Ah Glenelg - the only suburb in Aus that you can spell backwards and still be right.

Your investigation of those losing races shows a very good nose for sniffing out what's going on - it's those discoveries that can give you a very profitable edge.

I'm so glad you've moved away from the "POT crowd" description, "POT adherents" is clearly a whole new view. :) To me that's like calling public companies "Annual Report adherents". I do honestly think you're trying to see too much in this discussion. For me, it's simply a measure of profitability, which could be used as a planning tool, similar to the concept of a company making some use of its previous annual report in its forward planning.

I think this whole POT thing has run its race, so I won't go on with it. May all those longshots keep romping in for you!

[NANOOK]

Thanks for a good read eveyone.....

[marcus25]

Punter57,
I take POT a lot further than this though breaking it down by track. At Ascot races the corresponding POTs are:
-3.81% -8.53% +11.1% -25.45% -18.2% +2.86%.
and at Belmont:
+22.82% 9.54% 1.28% 29.92% 19.49% 15.73%.

Kenny
Hi Kenny!
Re. Ascot v Belmont
Email me, marcus_aurelius_25@hotmail.com
Cheers

[punter57]

Morning Shoto (and everyone else, too!). Glad to see you don't hold a grudge! Kenny Victor has already rejected my application to join the "POT crowd" (on another thread--100 Pointers) so I'll soldier on in my own LONELY crowd!!
Glad to see you mention Company Annual Reports as THEY are celebrated for hiding a lot more than they clarify. In the cases of One Tel, HIH etc the historical data (including POT) was unsustainable, unreliable, misleading and fraudulent to boot.
Though I accept the need (sometimes) to agree to disagree, I'll just add one further nail to the POT coffin (please don't consider this as "stirring the POT pot") A ridiculously small, but certain POT (a la arbitrage betting) is more attractive, than an uncertain "maybe 20%" POT using even my own (fabulous!) selection methods. If I could actually find a few more true "under-round" situations, I'd literally "bet the bank" , quite happy to get a measly 1% ON THE LOT with no risk. Cheers

[KennyVictor]

Blimey P57, I just congratulated you on another thread for the flair and initiative you show betting on outsiders and I arrive here to find you slavering over a piddling 1% with no risk.
Looks like I'm going to have to look for another role model.

[punter57]

What I meant KV is that IF there was such a thing as a "certainty" the logic of POT would FORCE you to bet it BIG. In such a case( and only then) it would be correct to use the Low Risk/Low Reward (percentage -wise) model. However since punting, in reality, IS always high risk I WON'T be changing my methods, rest assured. Please see "Class!!! What is it?"