|
Quote:
Correct Michael. Also the systems are often based on "hazard results", one or two bolters, which is the reason they will always fail! |
If you have a system where the selections appear from a formula, if the formula is any good, the only thing that makes sense is win only.
Plausibly such a system doesn't exist. Crash, whoever you is, you say it right about ratios keeping you stable when using race day judgement. I used 1 to 5 today (one bet it came second) but could not work out what differentiation you were making between 1 - 5 and 1 - 6. Quote:
1 to 5 is 1.20 the place to break even. 1 to 6 is 1.16. When you get down to that level, you aren't talking value and probably aren't betting. What you are trying to do with ratio betting is keeping your self happy when they run second or third. The higher the ratio though, (if you are betting a percenatge of a bank) the more you cut into your profit when you jag a winner. |
Quote:
I think that the ratio Crash is referring to is 1 unit the win & 5 or 6 units the place - it has little to do with taking $1.16 or $1.20 the place. There are many place bettors, ones you never hear of, that make a nice little earner out of what they do & that's why it is still the second most popular way of betting. |
Quote:
Mannygeese, What I should have done with this previous post was to demonstrate the effects of 1x6 ratio betting [say $10 to win x $60 for the place]. So I have added to the above the results of both straight place bet for $70 and also $10 x $60 ew bet. As you can see I was better off with the 1x6 ratio ew bet on all days except one, when Partridge got up for $$4.10p [if it have won, I would certainly have been glad of the the win component!]. A 1x5 or 1x4 ratio is better only for a high win rate, which generally would not be expected in place betting. I haven't worked out the returns for 1x5 or 1x4 ratios for the above week, but the win rate was higher than expected [Murphy's law :-)]. Conversely, if I had a very low win rate [say half the above winners], a 1x5 or 1x4 ratio would be eating too much of the place return. I have messed around with other ratios, but for me personally, I find the 1x6 ratio as mentioned in the article I read, pretty spot on. Cheers. |
Guess the preferred ratio depends on what price and strike rate is being acheived but the point is win betting is where the money is.
Betting 70 dollars the win on your figures 14/05 +189 v 159 or 154 Mon. 15th +119 v -91 or -126 Wed.. 17th. + 196 v +279 / +294 Thurs.18th. + 126 v +42 / +28 Fri.19th. + 357 v +65 / +21 10X60 ew +709 from 70pl. only +610 Profit from 70 the win = 987 If you can pick and bet horses that are showing a profit when the winning post is arrived at, from what I can see you are always better off on the nose without any place component at all. And as your place ratio goes up, down comes your profit. Where a place component comes into its own is keeping the interior of your head smooth in between winners as I think you well pointed out before. That's the way I see and would think any difference between 6 to 1 and 5 to 1 would be marginal. Anyway I'm just starting up as a will I or wont I punter and have decided upon 1 to 5 and am pretty much looking for, dunno, above $1.50 a place and see if I can lose the lot from there. |
Another advantage with ew ratio betting for 'percentage of pocket' punters is that they can usually afford to bet larger amounts per bet. If a punter only has say $100 in their pocket betting money for a Sat. of punting, it is very unlikely that punter will have $20 win bets. 5 'outs' and their finished, so the punter would probably be having $10 win bets [or even $5 bets, if they like a lot of action].
A punter is more likely to risk [say] $3x18 ew bets than $20 win bets because the potential SR for a return is a lot higher with the former. That is probably the reason straight ew bets are still so popular, even though they are a very bad bet [50/50% ew] When a horse places, which mostly is what happens, there is no profit and often a loss [place paying less than $2], but there is a better SR for this bet than a straight win bet and that is all that seems to matter. The fact that their is usually no profit either when a straight ew bet places, seems to slip their minds. They are basically waiting on a win to make any profit from a bet. They may as well have straight win bets for half the cost of the 50/50% ew bet [they would get twice as many bets for starters]. It's the lower SR for the straight win bet they don't like. Logic [or maths] doesn't get a look in, because for a straight ew bet there isn't any ! Realistically, $3 x $18 ew [for convenience, $5 X 25, $5X20 or even $5X15] bets for most punters gives them a significantly better chance of being in front at the end of day than straight win bets or 50/50% ew bets. If their average win SR for 50/50% ew bets was high enough to turn a profit [very doubtful], it's high enough to have straight out win bets for a far better result. |
So let me try to paraphrase what you've written crash, correct me if I'm wrong (you know you want to :-).
1. If you're in the punt to win money take win bets. 2. If you're trying to cut your losses take a place component. 3. The more nervous (less confident) you are the higher the proportion of the place bet. To me, and I'm sure I and others have said it before, win bets and place bets are two entirely different animals. You make your selections to place win bets or you make them to make place bets, and you make the selections differently depending whether you are targeting win or place bets. Each way bets in any proportion are for people who are just playing or who would like to bet to win but either lack the ability, confidence or bottle to go for broke. KV |
Well no Kenny, there is nothing really to correct there in those 3 points, as it's your point of view of the mosh pit. Your point 3 is particularly useful for 'jaded' win punters who need a break after enduring a bad run and since my initial post was the reasoning I [initially] had a go at place betting only some time ago as a first effort at it in my life [had a thread on the other forum page going for over 100 races and came out about square for the place but profit for the win only if I had been having win bets, which I wasn't]. It bored me to death.
This time around I added a win component to the place bet [1X6] and have found it profitable, anxiety free and a good rest from win only betting. As for your [brilliant] insight into the obvious: 'win bets and place bets are two entirely different animals' [there is a difference between a win bet and a place bet], yes OK I agree:-) Your last assertion, well there might be a few full time place bettors here who have no interest in win betting who might strongly disagree, but who am I to stand in the way of letting you shoot your mouth off and put them down as pretend punters or win bet wannabees with no bottle!!?? |
I thought I was going to go through a whole crash reply without some form of abuse or misinterpretation of what I said. But thank the lord for the last paragraph.
I'm not dissing the place betters if you read my post carefully, it's the each way betters I was pouring scorn on (or shooting my mouth off about if you prefer). Place betting is a perfectly valid strategy (So is each way for fun I suppose). Dissapointingly though it seems we agree on most points here. I remember the days when a passionate discussion with your good self was easy to start. :) KV |
Yes, I miss those days too Kenny. But the joint has become far more ......hmmmm..,....'politicaly correct'[?] for a couple of old ************s to go toe to toe nowadays. I've already had a couple of 'holidays' and would rather choose when and where I go too myself .
Still, your point 1 is a bit 'rough' around the edges. Actually most punters are on the punt because they are punting tragics, to 'win money' for most punters, is at best a bit of 'convenient' junkie logic. |
| All times are GMT +10. The time now is 01:46 PM. |
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.