Considering you said they are always three horse's then all you need to do is add them up, combined 48% is your chance, BJ was spot on.

Hi Duritz,

Back on the original subject, I did some further checking on the efficacy of the simulators we have made. My system at home runs through about 10 years of races testing itself against past results and giving a strike rate, profit margin and maximum drawdown figure. I thought I would test the simulator I created back at the start of this thread against those figures and without exception the maximum drawdown figure (using the system's strike rate and profit margin) was less (averaging around half) of that given in the "real world". JFC's simulator gave similar results.
I suppose we should expect this. The simulators are assuming a regular return with regular and equal dividends when the results in the real world are probably going to be more lumpy than just pure random figures (seasonal variations and who knows what else). This is using a system averaging about 14% strike rate and $8 ish divvies so the relative low strike rate may exascerbate the difference but I think (a cautious man like yourself may find) it is worth noting.

KV

i came across this thread whilst trying to work out my likely worst run of outs/ bank(s) required etc etc, & it was well worth another read so ive given it a bump

being no mathematician & after reading through it all & comprehending 65.7895% of it all, the following post stuck me as spot on as soon as i read it





i have to agree, be prepared to lose a bank or 2, as there's no use being overly protective of ones bank & therefore sacrificing profits when the going is good

I think those Banking chaps in the USA must of heeded the good advice &

took up the idea, that it really is not a bad idea to loose a few banks.

I think they must have had a different interpretation some how.

When do you think they felt that they may have a little problem on their hands.

Was it the first billion or the 100th billion?

I was reading that one of those bank chaps decided he didn't like working in a bank no more & took up his Golden Parachute payment of $98Mil & was ordered by the Senate committee to hand back 25mill of it.

Imagine what he would have said to his wife when he got back home...
"How was your day dear?"
"Oh, alright, I guess, I've had better days"

Yeah right!... and some.

So let that be a lesson for all us punters.
Know when to cut your losses & know where your at with them .
Unlike those silly boys in the States who pay themselve millions while ballsing up the entire American Empire, the largest economy in the world and allowed to walk around scott free!

Weird!

Hi Duritz
One idea is to look up what the theoretical run of outs is, then multiply that figure by say approx 3-4 this gives you the run of outs for the bank to withstand.

10% SR theoretical run of outs is 65
20% SR ................................ 31
25% .................................... 24

e.g.
10% Selections
65 x 3 = 195 units needed

20% selections
31 x 3 = 93 units needed.


Another recommended plan is to bet 1/200th of your bank for each day.
Re-adjust staking for the day based on remainder of bank.
e.g. Bank was 1000 betting 1/200th = 5 units a bet.
New day. Remaining bank 900 / 200 = $4.50 unit bets for the day.

We adjust bank up or down based on what the bank is
Sometimes referred to as , bet percentage of bank, up & down.

Cheers.

lol Bhagwan, point taken

& backup or 3 is of course essential, something that perhaps our american friends failed to provide for...but then again theres always the federal govt to bail them out

wonder what a punters equivalent of the fed gov is?

mayhap the missus!?
most likely the public trustees bankruptcy services...