How much to Invest?
 

I'm okay with finding a selection.

But supposing I come up with 2 Races and in each race, the animal I wish to back, I have assessed as a $3 Chance.
I figure it as having a 33% Chance of winning.

In one of the Races all the Form is revealed and all the Factors used to compare horses are obvious and plain for eceryone to see.

In the other there is a doubt about the selection never ran over the Distance, and there is a First Starter from a leading stable
But the animal is VERY Good.

At First I figured that both selections are worth an equal amount, because of the Price I came up with, but somehow the Race with the less unknowns is worth more.

Anyone care to comment on how they go about how much to invest?

moeee,
if you are so confident about the chance of horse A, but less confident about horse B I can't see how you could have them priced equally. Clearly horse B should be at longer odds, if not maybe you need to review your pricing and/or rating methods...just my 2c

Hi Dennis.
Both horses came up at the same Odds because they did.
The Total for all runners in a Race must tally 100%, and if some of the animals are very poor conveyances, then they get rated very poorly.
So even in a Maiden Race, sometimes a poor Quality and inconsistent animal is SO Mush less poorer than the others, it is still coming up as a short Price.

If that don't help how about this.
One of the races is running at Flemington on a good Track.
The other race is at ROSEHILL, where the Track is wet and muddy.

Is a $3 Chance worth investing more, less or the same as a $3 shot on a GOOD Track?

If you're convinced that you have assessed the horses accurately but are having misgivings re: one of them, my suggestion would, at the very least, reduce your investment if not stay out completely. We all can be wise in retrospect. Not knowing your punting psyche, I can't give any more specific advice.

....or borrow Partypooper's ouija board.......;)

Just suppose you could have a P.O.T. of 15%
And you wanted to live on this Profit.
And suppose that amount was $250 a week.
That means the turnover will need to be $1667
And that would mean $238 investment per day
And supposing you had 3 selections per day.
That would mean $80 invested on each selection

$80?

NO WONDER I'm not getting anywhere!!!
I'm having trouble betting anywhere near that amount.
I'ld be lucky if I could comfortably bet $25 per selection.

So can anyone give me some advice as to how I can get the ability to Bet $80 per selection, when it is so far out of my Comfort Range.

Grail Stuff !!!
 

Evening Moeee,

I've put this up before but nobody seemed to think it was worth a mention. However mate this is the function that transformed my life. Once you've got a little system happening the trick is how to make a living off it..no?

Well I struggled with this for ferkin years until my good wife set me straight. You see until you start earning good money from the game it is so easy to lower your standards and let discipline slip. You know the story. It's so close to a qualifying bet and after all you've only got fifty on it so let's risk it!!!

Or maybe your having a golden run and you decide to put a hundred on ......what a surprise when thats the very time that your system crashes....and so on.

The only way I know to get to the serious money (not the Betfair Rubbish) is this ..... Always bet to percentage of bank. The percentage chosen depends on your strike rate. Generally 1 or 2% is about right. If your system shows a profit for the week (any profit will do, even a buck!) put another set amount into your bank. This amount depends on your current income. I deposited $100 per week for a couple of years before the snowball took on a life of it's own.

If the system doesn't show a profit for a week then don't deposit the increment for that week. Stick to this and if your system is dodgy you won't blow your life's savings, but if it's a winner you'll soon be back at the TAB's putting on proper dough... Good luck .

moeee my friend, as the lady in Allo Allo said: "I shall say this only once"

If your selections work out Ok, you only need a couple of weeks to build up your bank, and as your bank is building so will your confidence.

After that it's plain sailing, sort of, given human nature being what it is.

You will doubt your judgment from time to time, ignore the doubts.

Good luck

how much to invest depends on your anticipated pool size
 

Moeee,
you being an avid greyhound follower will understand, when betting with the TAB's, pool size counts for everything in greyhound racing.

Trifectas being a good example of how pool size effects dividends for greyhound racing.
take this example,
I divide my trifecta database into 3 equal sizes based on the size of the pools

The 3rd with the highest pool sizes the median dividend is 173.45
The middle 3rd the median dividend is 163.30
The remaining 3rd with the lowest pool sizes is 156.20

all that might not mean to much to most punters, but just knowing the pool sizes can change your profit from a slight loss to a nice return, just in the above example.

Now using your example of that even money maiden racing on a skinny pool day, as compared to an even money maiden dog running on an golden Easter egg holiday crowd bumper pool day, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to understand what is going on

Doesn't answer your question directly, but for wagering you need to know your pool sizes first an foremost. In fact that is a major requirement for any database

Try this .

Its called.
Betting to Price.

Divide bank by 20
e.g. 300.00 / 20 = 15 This is our Base Ret figure

Now divide the price of your selection into this figure.
15.00 / 3.00 = O/L5.00
15.00 / 5.00 = O/L3.00
15.00 / 10.00 = O/L 1.50
Total O/L 9.50
Bet to Ret 15.00

Profit if any one wins 5.50

All separate races or the same race.

If any get up , we are in profit, even if the 3.00 shot gets up, where at level stakes , one would have broke even.

What you will see is that we are placing more on the shorter priced horses & less on the longer priced horses.

It works the best on your own price ratings & if they are OK , one should do well.

This method usually shows better returns than just level stakes betting.

Another way of using this is in that example you gave us.
If the market says its 3.00 in a maiden race & has never run before & feel it should be priced at 4.00 then that's the price you divide into our 15.00 base ret figure.

That way , if it falls over , we didn't risk as much.

This approach keeps the Risk factor (Liability) totally under control.
Which is half of what the punt is about.

You can even do this with say 2-4 horses in the same race if prices permit.

This is the approach bookies use when they are betting with other bookies , say 3 horses in the same race.

The reason way it works is that the majority of a punters winners tend to be the shorter prices in the majority of times not the longer prices.

But if one feels they are the exception to the rule , put more on the long prices & less on the short prices .
I have a feeling you already know what will happen if one tries that long term..

Cheers.

I ended up dividing my Bank by 10 and than dividing the Rated Price into this Figure.

My Current Bank started off at $800 , so if the Rated Price for the animal was $4 , then I divided this into 80 , and therefore the Bet was $20.
Pretty much what you suggested Bhagwan.

It was fairly comfortable but I tended to bet a little less than what I shoulda by this system.
Maybe your divide by 20 is the go Bhagawan.

Anyway, the bottom line is I had about 6 bets without a collect :(
Plus dollars here and there on the Exotics.
And am now down to $700.

I'LL BE BACK!!!

And WOOFER - there ain't no danger of me and my $10 a win doing much damage to the pools, especially when I get better Odds at Betfair most times.

I agree, it depends on your strike rate.

1% or 2% and divide that by the rated price.

Now that's very small, but it will build confidence and you won't be sweating losses.

I have a method that has a 40% strike rate and 15% POT, so I use 5% of bank not reducing, but that's purely because of such a high strike rate.

mmmmm, well, I can only comment on the basis of my own POT which seems to have stabalised at 4% on T/O AND I would be the first to say that even though that is the situtaion over 5 years, there is no guarantee that it will always be the same???? I have achieved this after more than 30 years of investing!

But stil on that basis, say you need $1000 a week to "SURVIVE" so you need to be turning over $25,000 AWEEK. So obviouisly now you are down to the average no of bets per week???? YES? if it's 25 then you are at $1000 EACH BET????? x 25 times a week.

Does professional punting seem to be taking on a different tack?????????

Yes, especially if you consider that consecutive weeks may not be winning ones, even if you win for the month.
The drawdown could be scary.

Is it possible we punters can sometimes overdo the analysis and plans when it comes o staking?

As a rough guide look to stake 2% of your bank. Could it be that simple?

That's a bit like like saying that walking is simply one step after another.

There is the target, there is the reason why you is betting at all, there is when to stop, there is which direction, there is what if the weather is foul.

Nothing is simple, not even getting out of bed.

I have a selection system based on Australia wide metropolitan meets [excluding Tas] and HK.

Some days I have no selections others I have 8. Most instances something in between. At the start of the day I check my bank I and calculate 2% - that is my stake for the said bets. I put the bets on I calculate the results. Repeat process for the next metropolitan or HK meet. It's served me well over the last 2 years but who is to say it wont fail during the next year.

I don't have a 'target' nor do I have a when to stop. Some days I have selections some days I don't. That tells me when I bet.

Have I got something wrong?

Sounds fine to me because of the bet limitation.

Adjusting up & down sounds reasonable also because you are able to bet with confidence within percentage to bank exposure.

When punting its an idea to have some idea as to..
Max No. of bets.
Max no. of losers
Max No. of winners.
Max % of bank.
( personally I have found 5% profit to bank works fairly consistently any more & things change).

Not necessarily all of these, but at least some.
e.g. 8 bets max.

I think variance has to be a big consideration.
My method longterm is 40% strike rate and 15% POT.

However, this week...

22% strike rate 46.89% LOT :eek:

What you have got wrong is that you are having an equal amount on your winners as you are on your losers.

Wouldn't it make more sense to have more on your winning selections than on your losing selections?

Yesterday I Posted 4 selections.
Following my bet amounts, I would have invested $55 for a return of just over $60.

With your approach, an equal share would have invested about $15 on each animal for a return of $30.

Sure this is just one day out of History, and perhaps tomorrow things could work out in Favour of your idea.

But just to show you that things can be improved on, otherwise we'ld still be rubbing sticks together to get the barbie going.

Simple ain't always better.

Now that's a great idea that we would all like to adopt Moeee! Where do we buy our crystal balls from?

Don't need to buy them at all.
I get mine FREE downloaded from the Internet.

Its called a Form Guide.
All the information is in there.

But you guys with your mechanical systems will have to make do with a mechanical crystal ball.
Try BUNNINGS.
Or an ADULT TOY SHOP.

I guess the simplicity of my staking does come from the fact that I don't know whether it's a winner or loser until after the result...so I guess your statement/offer is probably a bit simplistic...so are you talking about a stake which is based around a target which is re-adjusted after each result [as in increases with every loser?]

If you don't want to go into the full explanation can you post a link? I'm always open to offers.

I'm assuming [maybe wrongly] that your plan will win more on the winning days but lose more on the losing days?

Most betting plans come to about the same ROI, %wise just ran an old spread sheet that I have with three different betting methods.
1. 2% of highest bank
2. level stakes
3. betting to price to return set amount on each bet.

all where within 1% of each other in the end.
So what ever you think works bets for you should be the rule.

Thats strange.
You are just like me.
I don't know whether my selection will be a winner or a LOSER until after the race either :)

But what I do know, is that I am more confident about some of my selections than of some of my selections.

If the selection system is via a dartboard, then each selection will have similar confidence in there winning.
But I select by looking at whatever information I need to assess which animal has the best Chance of winning a Race.
I do this for all Races.
Some Races I have no interest in for various reasons.
But some races have more doubts that haven't been solved than others, and these are the Race selections that I will invest less on, on invest more on the animals where studies indicate much closer certainty of the animal beating the rest home in the race.

The investment has no relation to the previous Race or any Race in the Future.
It could vary depending on your Current Bank Balance , but only every day, not every bet.
Tha amount won or lost per day has no bearing on winning days or losing days.
It has bearing on how confident I am with my selections.

So if I'm not REAL confident one day about say 4 Races at a Meeting, then I might invest say $5 on each of those selections, and if they win I win little, and if they lose, I lose little.
But if I come up with 4 Best Bets, then I woud have say $20 on each selection.

Its just you bet on how confident you are on each selection relative to the other selections.

Nice Work.
Its been stated millions and zillions of times that you can ONLY win if the Odds are in your Favour.
YOU MUST GET OVER THE ODDS TO WIN.
Somehow this rule is difficult to comprehend.
You have proven it with your delving into your database.

But what you haven't noticed is the length and size of the losing runs.
This part of betting is VERY important because a Large loss in a short space of time can mean loss of your sanity.

I wonder if it is possible to run your program again and perhaps look at a graph of the UPS and DOWNS on the way to that 1% similarity at the end of the ride.

If you do, I'ld figure that the 3rd method would result in the less bumpy ride.

Not what you would think 3rd method was the wildest ride because the turnover was much higher (2 1/2 times higher than the 2%)

1. 2% bank high 10.9% low -26.1%
2. level stakes bank high 8.15% low -12.7%
3. betting to price bank high 27.2% low -67.6%

I don't understand your figures.
Are you saying at one stage, the Bank , lets say started off at $1000, managed to hit a LOW of $330?

I would find that hard to believe, and even worse, there would be massive bleeding in my bathroom if that were the case :(

What is your strike rate with your spreadsheet?
I'm working around a strike rate of Favourites which is 33% or so, maybe a little worse.

Edit : Just realized that you are probably betting to STARTING PRICES in the 3rd system, yet my idea is to bet to MY evaluated Prices.
So I could in fact have heaps on a 12 to 1 shot, rather than the 8% called for by the Public Market.

Did a summary page for you to look at.

Thanks for that Crackone.

Looks scary :(

The thing with it is like I said in my previous post.
Because MY wager will be based on MY Odds rather than the Publics Odds, there is a better Chance of my having more on the Rougher selections than on the Favoured runners, and also many of the selections were at Odds On, and I may well decide that they are UNDER the Odds and not bet on them at all, hence saving a considerable amount on Total Turnover.

New sheet had prices wrong for 3rd method:confused: looks better now. (might adopt this method ) the bets where based on a method that has a 38% SR and 112% return at Uni tab prices. (so a little down)

As for odds on pops they broke even

As with all betting if you have the SR and the DIVS to match then your laughing.

Again I'm confused CRACKONE.
Every Column in the second sheet is the same as the earlier sheet except for the one that I am concerned with.

Originally the result suggested I should give the Punting Game away, yet the new sheet suggests I should go and consult my Bank Manager regarding a substantial Personal Loan.

Can you explain again how there is such a marked improvement in the new figures.
Was there an error in the original sheet and what was it?
Were you applying the investments of the third Plan on different horses than the first 2 Plans?

The New Plan had a Big Loss on one horse that failed at $1.40, so perhaps it might be safer to eliminate animals below a certain starting Price.
That could perhaps lessen any Profit, but not necessarily, but would certainly improve the nerves of the Punter.A small Price to pay.

the difference was I didn't have the wright div's for the losing bets, so I got them and put them in.

I wouldn't back anything under $1.70.