Making $100 a winner

[TESTAROSSA]

I recently came across an interesting method of betting which uses the famous dutch book betting method in a different way.
Say you were in a losing streak like 5 losses in a row you would be down quite a lot however using this method if your 6th bet won you would be up the amount you set before the first bet.
Lets say you want to make $100 every winner you back despite the losses in between each winning bet that occur.
Your first bet is paying $5.00 , you would divide $100 with the price - 1 ($5-1=4) which equals $25 if the bet wins you would collect $125 , a profit of $100.
However if it lost you would be $25 down , you would then add that $25 to the set target of $100 and divide by the price of your next selection lets say $3.00 ($125 divide $3-1=2) a bet of $62.50 would be needed if it succeeds you end up with $187.50 a profit of $100 ($62.50 plus the first loss of $25 = $87.50).
If it losses you add the two losses together with $100 and divide by the price of next selection - 1 , and so on.
In theory it sounds quite profitable especially if you are a decent punter with a good bank to back you up in case of losing streaks.
another theory is to use with place bets instead although this would require a much larger bank.
I would be interested to know if anyone has come across this or even used it before.

[Bhagwan]

This is one of the oldest staking plans around.
It`s called Target Betting ,the original idea is to get a bunch of horses ,bet them accordingly , then stop betting for the day at the 1st winner struck on the day because your target had been reached .

Its based on the primise that its easier to get one winner then stop ,rather than trying to pick a bunch of winners all on the same day.

If one is going to entertain this type of punting ,try not to let your divisor drop below 3.5 ,even if it means you may not recover the total amount outstanding in one go , while recovering previous losses, because you will find your bets will skyrocket if you use divisors around the 2/1 mark.

Its an idea to set your target around the 2-3% of bank mark ,then start again once you break even or make any profit , no matter how small.(We should never over expose the bank to unnessary risk if we dont have to, we must protect it where possible from unnessary exposure to risk.)

Target betting can be fraught with danger unless you know exactly what you are doing.
The Retirement Staking Plan ,I feel would be a stronger plan to use because it can control the outgoings a lot more .(A copy of this is on the forum under "Staking Plan".)

At the end of the day ,one must have the understanding that somewhere along the line ,a winner or a series of winners has to be struck, otherwise it "aint going to happen."

It`s often suggested that level stakes betting is the safest method ,especially for the un-initiated.
When punting with real money, try not to bet on horses paying less than $3.30 for the win.
You`ll soon find out what happens when one does not heed this suggestion .

Someone suggested betting on short priced horses was like being killed slowly.
Dont torture yourself, go for a bit of value.

Try to keep in mind ,if you have the ability to make level stakes profit , there is no real need to look at these sort of plans.
The concept of staking plans is to try & make a profit where betting level stakes would make a loss or break even.

[Equine Investor]

I am of the opinion that if it doesn't win on level stakes(or close to breakeven), then staking will only increase your inevitable losses.

If you can find a "system" that at least breaks even then find a staking plan such as the target betting method by all means.

One thing to consider in any betting method is never risk more than 1% of your bank at ANY time.

Also be prepared for a run of losses.
E.G. If the maximum run of losses (outs) for your system has been say 20, then allow for a run of three times that (60) - to be safe.

I know this approach seems very conservative, however, the main consideration should always be to protect the bank at all costs, even at the expense of more handsome profits.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Equine Investor on 2002-06-17 00:16 ]</font>