To emphasise the merits of my often repeated investment strategy(ie. 1 unit win/ 5 units place)I will outline a practical example of my betting activity for Sat 24.1.03.
Using my previously outlined selection method, I had five qualifiers:
MR1 No. 6 Milk 3rd NTD
MR4 No. 8 Metal Reign 2nd ($1.60)NSW
MR5 No. 5 Bust Up WON($8.00);pl($2.50)
SR6 No. 6 Eaux De Vie 3rd ($1.60)NSW
SR7 No. 14Win H Win There 3rd ($6.00)NSW
These investments resulted in an outlay of 30 units for a return of 66.5 units for a POT of 121.67%...a pretty good result I am sure you would agree. Particularly, that I achieved a win ratio of 1 in 5(20%) which is about what the average punter averages over a period of time. Sure, favourite backers can achieve 30-32% of winners but find it almost impossible to win overall due to the compressed odds.
If I had backed those five selections for a win only I would have achieved the following:
5 bets
1 winner($8.00)(NSW)
POT = outlay 5; return 8...3/5x100 = 60%
..a good result but does not match my strategy.
Now, because I treat my punting seriously and seek to manage a reasonable POT each year, I try to exploit the difference in divs offered by each mainland TAB by opening accounts in each state. Due to problems, I did not have access to Unitab yesterday so I operated on NSW TAB and Supertab. Following are the results achieved by approaching punting in a more "professional" manner:
The results above, reflect NSW divs, now refer below for Supertab divs:
MR1 No.6 Milk 3rd NTD
MR4 No.8 Metal Reign 2nd $1.50
MR5 No.5 Bust Up WON $9.20w $2.90pl
SR6 No.6 Eaux De Vie 3rd $1.70
SR7 No.14Win H Win There 3rd $7.80
Return here was 78.7 units for the same 30 units outlay, representing POT of 162.33%
Therefore I have been able to obtain a further increased profit of 40.66 units from these results. I am certain if a punter can exploit the tools available to him/her and consistently achieve overlays, then they can make racing pay in the long-term( as I am currently doing). Note the strengths of my strategy....protection of capital, achieving modest returns on investment, control of capital and ongoing research to refine methods.
Another contributor in another forum asked whether there is merit in wagering in the denomination of 1 win 5 place, well, there certainly is even when place divs are somewhat compressed.
Feel free to comment and share your strategies(that doesn't mean giving up your secrets)as this is a game where you never stop learning and flexibility and listening to other punters' approaches may assist you or me in our own betting.
Cheers.

Thanks for the informative posting, Xanadu.

I'm not sure which of your systems you are referring to in making these selections. Had a look at most of those posted via the "search" facility of the forum (which is excellent, by the way). Any clues?

My only thought is that you should not have bet on Milk, there being NTD in that race. Surely cutting out a third of your potential to pick up a place dividend is not worth the risk!?!? The POT would have increased to 177.08 and 227.92 respectively too!

The Qld Tab results were much the same as Sydney with the exception of Win H Win There. It paid $8.00 up there :cry:



[ This Message was edited by: Merriguy on 2003-01-26 16:45 ]

I believe that only three things are important in betting.

1/ A solid selection method.

2/ An even more solid staking system.

3/ The ability to combine 1 and 2 into a profitable combination.

The rest will fall into place.

G'day Merriguy,

Good to hear from you and in respect of your comment about backing Milk in a field of less than 7 starters. This can be a very successful stategy over the long term as overlays for the place are quite common as the general public steer away from what they perceive to be risky betting propositions. By this, I mean that usually to calculate place divs the ratio of 1/4 of win odds is utilised in fields of 8 or more. In fields of less than seven starters 1/3 of win odds applies. However, in an average 3 dividend race the Govt deduction is made then the place pool split three ways for calcultion of place dividends. However, in fields of 7 or less, after the Govt deduction, the pool is split only two ways and this offers the potential for obtaining an overlay for the place div. eg. a selection is paying $2.20 win, therefore the place odds should be 1/3 0f $1.20=$.40(ie. div $1.40). Quite regularly, the place div may be showing $1.60 or $1.70 and if this is maintained till race start you have a nice overlay of between 14.29% and 21.43%, which, if you can achieve on a regular basis, gives you the chance of formulating a profitable betting strategy.
To bet in fields of 7 or less starters, I quote from a punting icon, "Chicago O'Brien" a colourful racing identity from the U.S. in the 1920's: "pick 'em to win, play 'em to place." So what I am saying here is that when I bet in these small fields, I wager on the horse that I expect to win but bet 1w 5pl to give me a bit of insurance in case it gets narrowly beaten.

Thanks for the quick response, Xanadu. It will take me a little while to get my brain cells to follow all that --- but I think I understand the drift. Appreciated.

No hints about your preferred system?

G'day once again Merriguy,

In response to your question, I actually utilise several selection methods and staking strategies because I believe that with all the variables in racing a flexible approach must be maintained. As I am a form student, I spend a lot of time on form analysis to highlight potential betting opportunities and look to obtain value before placing a wager. I made those selections on Sat 24.1.03 using my Mr Magic method(outlined in a recent post). Earlier today I chose SR1 as a dead-set match in two: Umaris & She's Lovely. I utilised my dutch book plan which I highlighted in a recent post and this resulted in a modest positive percentage return. As I am a percentage punter and bet every day there are times when no value is available so I might apply one or more of my mechanical plans and try to obtain a reasonable percentage POT. Alternatively, I may utilise one of my methods which concentrate on exotics and by making multiple flexi bets seek to secure a respectable percentage return.
In respect of place betting in fields of 7 or less runners, basically an overlay may be achievable as the place pool is only split two ways, there is potential to securing a proportionately higher div as long as your selection runs 1st or 2nd and as long as a disproportionately large amount of money has not been invested on your selection. For example, how often have you seen a placegetter in a small field pay $2.30 win $1.70 place?
I realise this approach is not for everyone but I hope this has clarified things somewhat.

Cheers.

To emphasise the points i made earlier, refer to race 5 Sydney today(27.1.03 7strs):
No.1 Spillway won paid NSW $2.90win $1.90pl
This emphasises my point about betting the place in small fields. Although Spillway was the favourite it presented an opportunity for an overlay bet for the place.ie $2.90 win in a field of 7 strs, you would expect the place div to be 1/3 win odds, ie $1.90 x 1/3=$0.63, rounded down to $0.60(+ $1 investment = anticipated place div of $1.60, yet punters were able to secure $1.90, $2.00 on Supertab, representing an overlay of 18.75%, even better on Supertab, a pretty respectable overlay I'm sure you would agree?

Hi there GeneralGym,

I noted your post with interest and basically I agree with what you said.
However, I am of the opinion that ongoing success in punting does not necessarily depend on having a solid selection method.
I believe that a highly developed understanding of percentages combined with a systematic betting approach can provide long-term success.
I know of a group of professionals who have been successful for years betting on the shorteners in each race and dutch-booking them on the tote. However, their profits have been eroded by increased Govt deductions and I don't know about their long-term viability.
These professionals do not study form, they allow the market to indicate which runners should be supported and wager accordingly to allow them a reasonable return on their investment.
However, a percentge punter does not have to bet in every race. He/she can wait until a potential favourable situation presents itself and bet accordingly.
I believe that by achieving regular POT is a much more effective approach than chasing losses or other similar approaches.

Hi again Xanadu.

Have just read your last three posts and much appreciate the wisdom contained in them. Will help me -- and plenty of others, I'm sure -- to become a better punter. I guess, as has often been said on this forum, it is up to the individual to work out for him/herself the way of betting he/she is most comfortable with. This 'vibes' (if there is such a word) with me anyway.

Couple of other things: many mention Dutch Betting on the forum. I'm not sure how many realise that there is a great little 'tool' available on the net that does all this for you --- allowing you to specify what you wish to outlay; have as a return; profit; or bet in units. It is shareware and free allowing you to test it for as long a you wish (calculating on up to three runners for a limited outlay); or, for $US19.95, have those restrictions completely lifted. Just go to http://www.codeexpress.com/sbcalc4/sbc_text.html

And, lastly on a longer than usual post for me, you mentioned seeking the best price by monitoring the various TABs. As you probably know, DAS does that for you for a win (not for the place), and it can be profitable to watch their early prices if you have your selections ready. I wanted to back three yesterday. Two of their opening prices were useless; the third was $15.00 for Gazania which I took and made a very tidy profit from (the other two didn't win anyway!). It started at $7.70 in NSW :grin:

[ This Message was edited by: Merriguy on 2003-01-28 11:04 ]

Xanadu
"Quote"
However, I am of the opinion that ongoing success in punting does not necessarily depend on having a solid selection method.
I believe that a highly developed understanding of percentages combined with a systematic betting approach can provide long-term success."Unquote"

My definition of a solid selection method is one that works for you. Without it no systematic betting approach will be successful. The same for a staking method which will not reap you rewards regardless of how many winners you select if it is not used correctly.
How you select you winners is up to you and once you have a method that provides you with winners then a staking plan to profit from those selections needs to be implemented to take maximum benefit but provide some security on a losing run.
THE TWO GO TOGETHER. THE REST FALLS INTO PLACE
The rest includes
POT (Profit On Turnover)
POB (Profit On Bank)
POW (Percentage Of Winners)

"Quote"
I believe that by achieving regular POT is a much more effective approach than chasing losses or other similar approaches."Unquote"

Totally agree here but the POT is achieved by selection and staking methods not the other way around.

I have tried the 1/4 approach and used it for some time until I discovered the following.
Based on a horse paying $5 win $2 place

Horse wins horse places
1 win = $5 return = 400% POT $0 100% loss
1 e/w = $7 = 350% $2 0%
1/2 = $9 200% $4 33%POT
1/3 = $11 175% $6 50%
1/4 = $13 160% $8 60%
1/5 = $15 150% $10 66%
5 plce= $10 100% $10 100%

Based on the above versus risk on outlay the only bets that provide a decent POT are the win bet or the place bet. Any e/w bet cuts into the POT too much with the exception of the $1 e/w which provides a get out should the horse place and doesn't erode the POT too much should it win. I prefer the dutch bet for the saver rather than a $e/w.

ANY ONE WITH A METHOD DESIGNED ON AN E/W BET IS ERODING THEIR POT.

I now play 3 methods.

1/ Place only. The bet is 1/4 of the bank at all times up to my limit. Method of selection is simple. As 70% of winners pay under $12 I wait til the market is up and select the runner I feel has the best credentials of those in the market. Runner must be paying $1.70 or more.

2/ Win only. The bet is 10% of the bank. Method of selection is again simple. Wait til the market is up, see who the favourate is and if I feel he has winning credentials bet him. Must pay $3 or more. Theory is that 40% of favourites win.

3/ Dutch betting. No more than 4 runners (preferably 3) Study required here to reduce the chances and I prefer to stick to certain regions on this one. One of the selections is the main bet with the others savers. Hard to use if a selection is at odds under $3.

Comments appreciated, I await to be shot down in flames.

Hullo, GeneralGym,

I read your post with interest and I might like to say that this is what this forum is all about, ie.good, friendly, robust discussion.
In respect of your betting and selection approach, I believe that it is a solid strategy and like all punting, the end result depends on the regularity and sequence of collects.
I might say that you, too, appear to operate in a systematic way and this certainly helps in the long run.
As far as the merits of win and place betting it is all subject to the variables of racing and the importance of receiving value when betting.

Hullo, GeneralGym,

I read your post with interest and I might like to say that this is what this forum is all about, ie.good, friendly, robust discussion.
In respect of your betting and selection approach, I believe that it is a solid strategy and like all punting, the end result depends on the regularity and sequence of collects.
I might say that you, too, appear to operate in a systematic way and this certainly helps in the long run.
As far as the merits of win and place betting it is all subject to the variables of racing and the importance of receiving value when betting.

G'day Merriguy,

Yesterday, there were only moderate betting opportunities available at Taree and Hamilton. However, Race 2 at Taree appeared to offer a potential good percentage return.
There were only four starters so I had a box trifecta(outlay 4x3x2 =24 units)- let's face it, I had to get the trifecta( I didn't bet the 1st four as I believed there was more opportunity in the trifecta to get value).
I suppose I gambled here that a longshot may get up and pay a decent div. and fortunately the outsider of the field did salute. This was a classic percentage bet as I invested 24units and it paid $44.60 in NSW, representing a POT of 85.83%, not bad at all.
Is the pattern of racing changing or are favs in small fields getting knocked over with alarming regularity. Ten or twenty years ago, favs had an incredible winning percentage in small fields but not now-but there I go again, thinking conspiracy theories. My research shows that it can be profitable to bet against the fav in small fields with a view to scoring a better paying trifecta or exacta(I stress, in certain races only). This does not contradict my previous post about betting for the place in small fields as I do not necessarily wager on favs in races I select.
While I have been punting OK for some time, everything does not always go to plan. A case in point was Race 8 at Murray Bridge on 27.1.03. Prophet's Dream had been racing respectfully in Class 5 races and here it dropped back to a maiden race. As the class factor is one of my most important selection criteria I believed this represented an excellent betting opportunity.
The horse travelled well, the jockey pulled him out in the straight for a clear run but he wasn't good enough and ran unplaced. I went in pretty hard on this one so it was a bit painful but I am researching what went wrong but that's racing I suppose.
The important thing is flexibility and I change my punting methods to suit the conditions on the day and what opportunities present themselves.
That's why I don't necessarily bet win/place every day - I bet in whatever method provides value, ie. exactas , trifectas, dutch book etc
By the way, thanks for that program, it should be very useful for the trial period.

Cheers.

Thanks again for the food for thought, Xanadu. Plenty to digest there!

The little "Dutching" programme does not run out in so far as there is a trial available. I must have used it for some seven or eight months before I decided to part with the $US20. Last of the big spenders --- that's me.

Xanadu

Perhaps the horse had a headache?

With reference to your comment that I bet in a "systematic way", this is correct up to a point.
I use a "system" to eliminate the worst chances and highlight the better chances and those selections that are left are thrown through a quick series of tests (by the brain not a computer) and either a bet made or the race wiped. I sat here yesterday for an hour analising race after race before I made my first bet of six for the day. (ended up 9%+ POT)
I feel that computer systems (or other systems/methods) should only be used to highlight the better chances and the human fact has to take over and make the final decision.

Hi Merriguy & GeneralGym,

Good to hear from you.
General, that 9% was very respectable and if you could maintain a 9% return even on $1 for about 20 years you would have a 7 figure amount. The point I make is that while some "gamblers" scoff at these supposedly minute returns we will survive and hopefully prosper. Others will come and go and not grasp the fact that the whole racing game utilises averages against the punter meaning that in the longterm most punters fall away. However, the astute punter(read: investor) is able to skim a reasonable return from his/her investments - an approach I apply to my stockmarket activities by the way).
You hear of people becoming millionaires only after they have been broke 2 or 3 times - it seems a bit drastic to me. Why didn't they apply a sound approach in the first place and grow gradually from profits. In respect of this, let me emphasise that the term: "unit" does not necessarily mean $1. My strategy is that after raising your betting bank by $500-$1000 you then increase the value of your basic unit by $0.50 or $1...
This is the strength of the percentage-based investment strategy - you are only betting within your means and from accumulated profits(hopefully).
Yesterday, I had a successful day and returned a reasonable profit. No, I can't give pre-race tips because, as I have outlined before, some opportunities don't present themselves until just prior to the race start time.
Today, Race 3 Kyneton, appeared to present an opportunity to invest. Yes, there were only 7 starters, meaning only two place divs.
I supported No. 3 Wal's Princess and it duly won, paying NSW $3.50win & 2.00 pl providing a very satisfying overlay(win $3.50 ie. 2.5w x1/3 pl = anticipated div of $0.83, rounded down to $0.80(ie. $1.80 place div), yet it paid $2.00 place in NSW, resulting in an overlay of .20/1.80 = 11%, you can't get that at the bank!
The whole racing game is a study in recurring averages and percentages so until the pattern of racing changes, there is still scope to "skim" a regular return from TAB turnover.
If it does change(refer to my previous comments about small fields), then we are well equipped to change our strategy to these factors, unlike the loss chasing system users.
Cheers.

I'm with you Xanadu even with regards to the sharemarket. I treat my shares as a long term investment and if they fire up early thats even better.
My place method is currently running at a 72% strike rate but I do spend hours waiting on the right race and dividend. Only one bet today for a place on City Express in the 5th at Gatton, managed to snare $3 for the place.
Place system is currently operating at 38% POT after 4 months. Don't know why I don't just bet this way but like every one else I like to have the thrill of snaring a winner.
You are right about the bank, I started small and have had to set a limit I am comfortable with so have skimmed a little off the top for the General's Ice Cream's!
Remember I put 25% of the bank up each bet and so far I've been lucky.
I think most punters lack one very essential element and that is PATIENCE. I prefer to wait for the bet to come to me, not try and force one. This comes from experiance of cursing myself for having a bet when I wasn't sure of my selection!
I would be a very rich man if I could have some of those bets back.

GeneralGym wrote...
"I think most punters lack one very essential element and that is PATIENCE. I prefer to wait for the bet to come to me, not try and force one. This comes from experiance of cursing myself for having a bet when I wasn't sure of my selection!
I would be a very rich man if I could have some of those bets back."

ah yes, how very , very important.

There is something that wants to drive us to have that bet that doesnt quite fit all the criteria isnt there.
But you are correct, if you are uncertain then dont place the bet. There is always the next bet and you have to be patient, especially if you are betting the place because it might take two or three successful bets to recover the one bad bet.

And I do agree that if I hadnt had all those iffy ones I would sure be a lot better off :smile:

Patience, thats the secret.

see ya
Every Topic

Gooday fellas,

Well, no matter how diligently we all study the form and search for value bets, the one factor that will "muddy the waters" is the regular "boat races" which are happening in races with less than 7 starters.
For example, today at Werribee, 31.1.03,
Race 5, was a classic example(note, I mentioned this in a recent post). Spurious, a well-credentialled horse was well supported, as was Spontane. Well.......Spurious could not even run a place and guess what!...... the outsider of the field won.... Our Obe(ever heard of it?).
But hey!.... we have to use this to our advantage and include the longshot in our multiples in small fields. I think this is the genesis of a potential profit-making system - disregard form, class of runners etc....and concentrate on the outsider in small fields as someone is obvously benefiting from backing exotics in these races, particularly on interstate TAB's.....makes you wonder....

Xanadu
I have noticed for some time now how a longshot will bob up in a small field.
Whether it is as you say the field is stacked and sprinted home or a theory I have is that the longshot in a bigger field generally gets too far back but in the smaller field is only a few lengths from the lead at the turn. It makes up as many lengths as it would in the larger field but because it is racing handier than normal without having to be bustled or hunted up early to do this sustains its shorter than normal run to score?
Sorry longwinded but I think I got my point out.
4 place bets today, first two losers, that hurt, second two winners but because I bet the percentage of bank I lost slightly overall for the day.
Roll on tomorrow.

G'day GeneralGym,

Yes, conversely, the smaller the field should mean that a competent jockey should be able to steer clear of any interference, so theoretically, this should be to his/her advantage.
Alternatively, could it be argued that because it is a small field, the rider can't get any cover so has to either make the pace or ride his mount "upside down," meaning he/she is unable to let their mount settle properly therefore expending more energy to get into a competitive position early, leaving it with no reserves for it's finishing run.
I'll be watching this closely to see if there is any leverage which may help us turn a profit.

Cheers.

A winning day today. After 4 early bets(NB.4 placegetters only, yet I was able to extract a 42.5% return(should have stopped there). Then I fell into Thorn Park, due to the old belief that "a good colt will always beat a good filly"....I let emotion rule my judgment on this one as I should have utilised my dutch book strategy and would have backed Innovation Girl as a saver....but there you go, we all continue to fall back into bad habits.
As it is, I will finish the day 14% POT which means we live to fight another day. That is the important thing, to be a survivor, until the day comes when the odds are in our favour and we can maximise profits.
NB. Si Senor MR 7 just saluted paying NSW $5.10 & $1.90, providing another success for my Mr Magic plan.

Cheers and good luck.

I mentioned recently, my aversion to 3 kg apprentices riding horses which I gave a reasonable chance of winning or at least running a place.
Well! today 3.2.03, there was a classic case of incompetent riding displayed by the rider of Belle Stone(Terang Race4 No. 7). Talk about about a boy sent on a man's job!
This individual could not settle his mount and at the home turn it hung so badly that it lost all momentum and with further incompetent riding, it ran last. Ace trainer, Russell Cameron had only one starter at this meeting today so I am sure he would have not incurred the expense of taking the horse to this meeting without an expectation of a profit.
Yet again,these 3 kg boys continue to "butcher" horses, which on form, should have a second to none chance of winning or at worst, running a place!
To put it into context,would you let a first year apprentice do the wiring at your home, no, you would want a skilled tradesman.

3kg claimers are 3kg claimers for a reason and an experianced punter like yourself should know the risks associated with a bet on them.
In my book they rate alongside the following,

First Uppers over 1600m or more.
Second Up runners.
Horses coming sharply back in distance.
Horses rising sharply in distance.
Horses drawn outside 14
etc etc

Doesn't mean they can't win and they do but how often and at what strike rate? You take the risk when you put the loot on.

I read an article that stated unless you know that the apprentice can ride don't bet.
It justified this by stating that a senior rider was worth lengths on an apprentice. Most handicapping systems work on the weight the horse is alloted before app allowances as they feel that the allowance makes up for the app ability or lack of. Its only when you cotton to a super app that there is money to be made.

To defend the apprentice he's got to learn somewhere and unlike an electrical app he can't have a tradesman leaning over his shoulder assisting him but I bet he feels like a ************ when he views the video!!!!!

Geraldton has two 6 horse fields today one of which looks a simple 1,2,3 (R4) so will be interested to see if a longshot gets in the way?

Yes, I suppose you are right GeneralGym.
I have a no-bet policy on 3kg boys/girls but I relented on the belief that ace trainer, Russell Cameron would not waste his time on this occasion - but that's racing.
However, today presented an opportunity for a profit, which resulted in 18.33% POT, so we live to fight another day.
See ya.

XANADU

the first 6 horse affair(R2) at Geraldton went according to plan with the fav beating the 2nd and 3rd.
The second (R4) was nearly won by the outsider and the odds on pop nowhere to be seen. 3rd fav, 6th fav and 5th fav.

04 DIAB ENGINEERING
HCP
2000 Metres
6:45pm


WIN/PLACE
3 3.60 2.80
6..............11.30
5.............N.T.D.

QUINELLA (3-6) 32.80
EXACTA (3-6) 72.20
TRIFECTA
(3-6-5) 319.10

(3) ZEDAMOSS (C.HARVEY)
(6) MALWOOD (J.ROESLER)
(5) IMPAIRE (A.NG)

SCR - NIL

Unbeleivable how this happens time and time again.
Xanadu we need to come up with a way to profit on the "paper nohopers in small fields"

GeneralGym,

I believe there may be a way to profit from this apparent anomaly. Betting trifectas, include runners in your selections which qualify as "orphans."
That is, we refer to the paper journalists polls available in most city publications(or we could also include radio and television tipsters).
We look for the horse which is only selected once by the scribes. That is, it appears once in the consensus polls of all pollsters. It doesn't matter whether the pollster has selected it to win, run second or third.
Include this runner with your own selections, even if it has poor recent form as it is surprising how often they win or place at generous odds thereby returning a worthwhile div.
Look forward to your comments.

Cheers.

The merits of systematic place-betting was highlighted on Wed 19.3.03. I had four bets utilising my Brian Mayfield-Smith method:
MR4 Lord Of Lords 2nd $1.10pl
MR4 Pink Fit unp
MR6 Uffizi 2nd $5.00pl
MR6 Sweetness 'N Light unp
Betting win only we would have had a wipe-out but investing in the ratio of 1w5pl we were able to achieve a 27.08% POT which was pretty satisfying. This practical example shows that this method allows you to survive a pretty tough day and have funds to reinvest later in the week when luck may be on our side.

Cheers.

The merits of percentage betting was highlighted in the big match race at Rosehill today.
Realistically it was a match in two between Lonhro and Defier. Just prior to race start, the odds showing on NSW TAB were:
Lonhro $2.00w
Defier $2.60w
this represented percentage win odds of 88.46% in what was a dead-set match race(ie. at least one of them was reasonably expected to win).
Therefore backing both in the appropriate ratio(to return 100 units whichever horse won), I was able to secure a POT of 11.54% which is pretty respectable(certainly better than you can get at the bank). This strategy of dutch-booking two stand-outs in set weight and WFA races was set out in a previous post of mine but it has proved profitable over many years for me and should do so in the future as it concentrates on quality horses in quality races when they appear to have a class edge over their rivals, which is a pretty sound criterion.

Cheers.

The merits of investing using the percentage plan were highlighted today:
Adelaide Race2 (only two realistic chances)
No 1 Pentatonic $2.70 win
No 2 Entice $1.70 win
Pentastic won and returned a reasonable profit for my dutch-betting method. As I get a success rate of > 85% winners, this is a good winning method for those that do not wish to study form.