Fav betting with a twist
 

All,

We all know the stats .. 30% of favs win. Well thats not a bad strike rate, too bad about the average dividends price.

I am going to trial a "system" which bets the fav just before jump at each meeting where the course has over the last 12 meetings (approx 100 Races) had a strike rate of 40% or greater. I will use a progression betting so that I always return a profit if the fav wins. The Bets will start at $10.

I will monitor 2 systems. One at 40% strike rate and one at 35% strike rate.

The only Course I am betting tommorrow which has a 40% strike rate is

- Ascot

Courses with 35% or higher include :

- Ascot
- Bathurst
- Kambla Grange
- Randwick
- Toowoomba

Wish me Luck....

Good Luck Wes!!!
 

I'm a favorite only punter so I keep my head pretty low on this forum, but............................................... ..........................there are ways to make the favs pay. I hope this is another one. Bon chance.

Perhaps I can't see the woods for the trees here[?], but those courses have correspondingly lower odds [terrible] due to on average fewer runners to counteract the higher fav. SR to make them no better a fav. bet than anywhere else.

Two Bets ( and others ),

Just ran this over the last 3 days (16 Meetings) and the stats are as follows :
Initial Bet is $10 with progression bet to always end in profit.

35% Course favs or higher
Meetings : 13
Profit : $112
Highest Bet : $220

40% Course Favs or Higher
Meetings : 5
Profit : $39
Highest Bet : $10

I was amazed to see those which had 40% strike rate all hit within the first or second race.

If we bet on the place instead of the win every meeting, it hit within the 2nd race everytime.

NOt many meetings yet though .. Oh and all prices are unitab prices.

Good Luck

Crash,

Using a progression system for betting so more interested in Strike Rate than average dividend.

Using a progression system usually works better with a higher strike rate then a higher dividend.

We will see how it goes....

Thanks for your observation though.

Never mind the woods Crash.
I can't see how a level betting loss on the favs, can produce a profit when betting progressively on the same!?
Someone "Please explain"
Good luck to all.

Gday Iomaca

that is one of the most argued topics around.. turning fs into profit by staking,, I think it is possible (but hard work) if you are close to break even at FS.. I ran a set of races about 2000 from memory where the fs return was about 98%, but staked turned into about 104 - 105 % from memory... ( i used the 924 staking plan, that is available on this site somewhere) that file is on my old computer, if I can ever get to it again..

I think if you are more than a couple of points from making a profit at FS then forget it (just my opinion) it is pretty damn hard...and the return isn't that great..

Now for betting favs .. well I am running something that is in it's infancy but is showing promise... 10 bets 8 winners and 10 places.. I will see how it goes in 12 months time before popping the corks...

Iomaca,

Progression betting works after you get to a certain percentage strike rate. There is nothing to say that this method will or will not return a profit. I am just playing around with numbers and selections.

To tell the truth I am not a progression betting fan either but I thought in this instance it might actually have a chance of working.

Good Luck.

The maths have been here before [and everywhere else], even from a professor of maths proof here [mathematically], if you can't make a profit level stakes, no progression [regardless] will save you.

Still, punters will believe they can turn level stakes loss into progressive stakes profit with the 'right' progression in the 'right' circumstances, regardless of the maths or mathematical proof and that's a well known truism: We believe what we desperately want to believe regardless. Our minds come up with the 'logic' and 'evidence' required to custom fit our belief [but never ever mathamatical proof as 'evidence'].

Try it with real money for 6 months and see how far you get:-)

Geez,

Looks like this topic hit the nerve of some people .....

If you don't like betting on favs or progression betting then don't follow the topic.

Enough said.

Gday Crash..

dont wanna have a blue with you... but if what you say is true, why then can staking improve on fs when fs is in profit... but not if it sin the red? seems logical to me that if you can improve on 101%, with staking, otherwise why would you bother, why cant you improve on 99%? I need convincing that it cant be done when you are close to break even at fs.

Gday wes

it's an old chestnut... there are clearly defined opinions on the matter and ya cant persuade pple to shift their opinion.. Maths are a strange thing.. you can get pretty well whatever you want from em.... ask an accountant.. :)

I dont mind betting favs, provided they are fair dinkum favs and what i consider a good risk... some favs as ya know shouldnt be, now if we can avaoid them we are halfway home

Hi! xptdriver
"MATHS" I think you meant "statistics" one cannot manipulate mathematics.
2 + 2 = 4 no matter how much we would like to prove otherwise.

As to wesmips' comment, not to read posts we disagree with, Sorry, this forum supposed to put up ideas for discussion and evaluation, not religious doctrines, that one either belives in or not.
And why a losing system cannot be turned around by progression is simple, at least to me.
Progression accentuates the win part as well as the LOSS part, therefore if you are losing on level stakes you are back to square one, all you achieve is win bigger on a roll and lose even bigger when not.
But if you win on level stakes, it stands to reason that, your losses will always be less then your wins, ergo, you WIN.
If you are saying that, "BUT I will only select certain races or horses and I am betting more on the winners" then that's an other matter altogether, you may no longer be talking about a level stakes losing system.
That's my two cents worths anyway.
Good luck.

I'm in your corner lomaca.

Like you, I was just expressed my opinion based on the maths evidence I have seen over the years and 2+2=4 will always be correct to me too. If someone wants to believe otherwise, that's fine by me as long as I have the right to disagree, especially when basic maths is being replaced by 'belief'.

The only progression that can work mathematically is when you are winning at level stakes. Then you are financing the progression from the bookies capital not your own. I'm not going to argue that a progression can turn a level stakes loss into profit though by re-inventing the wheel [there is still a Flat Earth Society with a very large membership].

Results for today :

35% Course Favs
Ascot - WIN $2.30 first race = $13 ( Largest bet $10 total = $10)
Bathurst - LOST $180 ( No favs won all day Largest Bet $70 total $180)
Kembla Grange - WIN $3.30 fifth race = $9 ( Largest bet $30 total = $90)
Randwick - WIN $2.80 first race = $18 ( Largest bet $10 total = $10)
Toowoomba - WIN $1.80 Second Race = $6 ( Largest bet $20 total = $30)

40%+ Course Favs
Ascot - WIN $2.30 first race = $13 ( Largest bet $10 total = $10)

Overall Results:

35% Course favs or higher
Meetings : 18
Loss : $22
Highest Bet : $220

40% Course Favs or Higher
Meetings : 6
Profit : $52
Highest Bet : $10

Good Luck.

One might like to try the 50 point plan .
Its safer than most progressive staking plans & can handle a lot of outs in a row.

Set Target at $100 using a divisor of 50. Using a bank of $200
Keep divisor at 50 until a winner is struck.

After each win , deduct profit off target & then reduce the divisor by the price of the previous winner e.g. $3.00 deduct this off the divisor of 50 , new divisor is now 47 until another winner is struck..

Keep doing this until one gets to divisor of 3 , one should be in profit at this stage so rule off & start again.

The individual Crash was referring to was Edward o Thorp. This former hardly-well-off maths professor is now obscenely rich, not from his blackjack pioneering exploits but from the stockmarket. Others using his techniques have made individual fortunes > $100 million.

Life is just too short to again try and convince anyone that is is mathematically impossible for a staking plan to turn a negative expectation game profitable.

Courses to use today :

35% Course favs or Higher

- Canberra
- Cranbourne
- Devonport
- Port Lincoln

40% Course Favs or Higher

- Canberra

Good Luck

That's the guy JFC. 'Dr Maths' and many other web based maths sites do the maths. proof too for anyone who wants to look. No need to argue it here.

Results today :

35% Course favs or Higher

Canberra - WIN $1.40 first race = $4 ( Largest bet $10 total = $10)
Cranbourne - WIN $2.90 first race = $19 ( Largest bet $10 total = $10)
Devonport - WIN $1.70 first race = $7 ( Largest bet $10 total = $10)
Port Lincoln - WIN $3.30 first race = $23 ( Largest bet $10 total = $10)

40% Course Favs or Higher

Canberra - WIN $1.40 first race = $4 ( Largest bet $10 total = $10)

Results Overall :

35% Course favs or higher
Meetings : 22
Profit : $31
Highest Bet : $220

40% Course Favs or Higher
Meetings : 7
Profit : $56
Highest Bet : $10

Well done wesmip1.

It looks like you are onto a profitable flat stakes system anyway [positive expectation] , so your progression overall is being paid for by the bookies. Good going so far anyway. Keep it up mate.

crash,

Its positive at the moment. Give it another 100 meetings though.

Courses to use Monday :

35% Course favs or Higher

- Narromine

40% Course Favs or Higher

- None

Good Luck

35% Course favs or Higher
Narromine - WIN $3.40 third race = $4 ( Largest bet $10 total = $30)

Results Overall :

35% Course favs or higher
Meetings : 23
Profit : $35
Highest Bet : $220

40% Course Favs or Higher
Meetings : 7
Profit : $56
Highest Bet : $10

Courses to use Tuesday :

35% Course favs or Higher

- Warrick Farm (39.1%)

40% Course Favs or Higher

- None

Good Luck.

Another winner today in the first race. So far there has only been 1 meeting which had no fav (in the 35% favs). This has easily been offset by the other 23 meetings which all produced a fav winner (most within the first two races).

Also I am doing this on Unitab prices ... Best Flucuation or Best Tote would be higher. Today unitab had the winner at 1.60 but it was available for 1.70 on other totes.

35% Course favs or Higher
Warrick Farm - WIN $1.60 first race = $6 ( Largest bet $10 total = $10)

Results Overall :

35% Course favs or higher
Meetings : 24
Profit : $41
Highest Bet : $220

40% Course Favs or Higher
Meetings : 7
Profit : $56
Highest Bet : $10

Good Luck

Wednesdays courses to follow :

35% Course favs or Higher

• Albany (36%)
• Newcastle (39.39%)
• Sandown (37%)

40% Course Favs or Higher

• None

Finding courses with 40% winners is suprisingly difficult mid week.

Wesmip1,

I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed (Ok, ok.... enuff of the applause everyone...), so here is a dumb question (expected, I know :p).... are you betting to target a certain profit figure? i.e 15%, 25%return? or just a return greater than your outlay ?

Stix,

Just to return my outlay + $0.10.
Not much really. But just testing out a theory here.

Thanks

Todays Results :

35% Course favs or Higher
Albany - WIN $3.30 first race = $13 ( Largest bet $10 total = $10)
Newcastle - WIN $3.60 fifth race = $28 ( Largest bet $30 total = $80)
Sandown - WIN $2.10 fourth race = $14 ( Largest bet $40 total = $70)

40% Course favs or Higher
No Races

Results Overall :

35% Course favs or higher
Meetings : 27
Profitable Meetings : 26
Unprofitable Meetings: 1
Profit : $96
Highest Bet : $220

40% Course Favs or Higher
Meetings : 7
Profitable Meetings : 7
Profit : $56
Highest Bet : $10

Good Luck.

Thursdays courses to follow :

35% Course favs or Higher

• Hawksberry (38%)
• Ipswich (37%)

40% Course Favs or Higher

• None

Good Luck.

35% Course favs or Higher
Hawksberry - WIN $1.60 first race = $6 ( Largest bet $10 total = $10)
Ipswich - WIN $1.70 fourth Race = $2 ( Largest bet $60 total = $100)

40% Course favs or Higher
No Races

Results Overall :

35% Course favs or higher
Meetings : 29
Profitable Meetings : 27
Unprofitable Meetings: 1
Profit : $104
Highest Bet : $220

40% Course Favs or Higher
Meetings : 7
Profitable Meetings : 7
Profit : $56
Highest Bet : $10

This keeps ticking along nicely....

Good Luck.

Fridays courses to follow :

35% Course favs or Higher

• Rockhampton (36%)
• Sale (36%)

40% Course Favs or Higher

• None

Good Luck.

Wouldn't it make more sense to look at tracks that have a low strike rate.
They have a probability potential if you get what I mean.
We know that they will approach the statistical average of 30%
Just my 2 cents worth

Brownie,

I would have thought that too. But it doesn't work that way. For some reason some tracks have a higher winning percentage of favs always. And others perform badly. It mighjt be the types of races being run, or some sort of course bias.

I ran over those that were under 25% favs winning and there were at least 6 meetings in the last 2 weeks that failed to produce a fav winner on the first 4 races.

Good Luck.

Well if it is working, then good.
Maybe long term might tell a different story

Question
 

Hi wesmip!
How many years of back data did you use to arrive at the favs win percentage on the different tracks?
Thank's
Cheers

marcus,

Its based on the last 12 meetings. And changes as times progresses.
It is roughly the last 100 races.

Godd Luck.

Only the one Fav winner at Rockhampton. Wish it had come a bit earlier in the day. Still a winner keeps us in front.

35% Course favs or Higher
Rockhampton - WIN $1.90 sixth race = $1 ( Largest bet $90 total = $170)
Sale - WIN $1.40 first Race = $4 ( Largest bet $10 total = $10)

40% Course favs or Higher
No Races

Results Overall :

35% Course favs or higher
Meetings : 31
Profitable Meetings : 30
Unprofitable Meetings: 1
Profit : $109
Highest Bet : $220

40% Course Favs or Higher
Meetings : 7
Profitable Meetings : 7
Profit : $56
Highest Bet : $10

wesmip1, could I ask if you are winning at level stakes..

I presume it is losing. Very interesting anyway. Has got me thinking.

If you want my 2 cents as to why mathematics may not apply is the human element in what makes a favourite.

If you back black everytime at roulette you may encounter a run of outs that doubling up simply breaks your bank no matter what casino rules are. There is no law to say that red couldn't suck up a billion dollars.

With favourites though, its not chance deciding. It is human beings deciding what makes a good bet and the run of outs or ins for favourites comes down to intellect, not chance.

Dunno if that makes sense but I know what I mean.

Manygeese,

I would think on Level Stakes it is down if you class each bet as a bet.

But if you class each Meeting as a bet then it is doing well. I assume you need a bank of approx $500-$1000 to cover $10 bets for a meeting if the run of outs start to pile up.

I will see hoe it goes. Maybe it is worth stopping at the 4th Race thus the maximum bet won't be too high.

I am just trying it to see how it goes. I am aiming to make $1000 or a month of posting before retiring the system.

Good Luck.