Learning to Bet like a Pro
 

THE MAIN REASON AS TO WHY MOST PUNTERS LOSE


Ratings2Win Educational Article

Statistics will reveal that the majority of punters (somewhere between 95 - 98%) lose on a long term basis. There are a multitude of reasons that this occurs and you will hear different theory's that describe what the Number 1 major cause is.

To me it revolves around issues such as poor money management, staking, and the basic failure to understand and accept the realities in regards to betting for profit. Below we will attempt to summarise these issues.

Poor Money Management

I'm going to state the obvious:

Don't bet more than you afford to lose; and
Determine the size of your betting bank in real dollars that you have set aside, and then using a disciplined approach stake your bets intelligently and in a consistent manner.

Staking

The principle objective of betting for profit is to maximise the amount of profit in real dollars whilst protecting your bank within a predetermined risk threshold you are comfortable with.
Doing the above will help you balance the relationship between profit and risk.

Bet Size

Getting your bet size right is critical to realising the principal objective of betting for profit.
If you bet too small then you are costing yourself profit; and
If you bet too big then you expose yourself to the inevitable likelihood that your expected losing runs will result in much bigger drawdown's of your betting bank relative to your risk threshold that could in turn wipe out your betting bank.

Optimal Bet Size

This depends on three well known but key factors:

The horse's probability profile (strike rate);
Your assumed betting edge over the marketplace; and
Your personal risk threshold (the percentage of your betting bank that you are willing to lose during normal long term betting cycles.

Realities of betting to profit

Assuming you get your money management and staking right you still have to be able to learn to understand and/or overcome other key factors that will determine your betting success.

These can be summarised as knowing and having an understanding of:

Winning and losing cycles (the psychological effect these can have on you and how understanding standard deviation will provide you with the knowledge of how much your results can and will fluctuate over different sample bet ranges (e.g. 100, 500 bets);
How your strike rate determines how volatile your results will be;
Why you need to have a realistic expectation of what each of your bets winning chances are (to achieve this you need access to accurate probability assessments for example the R2W IR ratings);
That you should only bet when you are getting value (to achieve this you need access to accurate probability assessments for example the R2W IR ratings);
That you should make an effort to obtain better prices about your selections (see our article titled Obtaining better prices about your selections);
How to measure your betting success correctly by focusing on bank growth and not just simply relying on POT - profit on turnover (see our article titled How to measure your success as a punter );
Not falling into the trap of repeating your previous mistakes; and
The need to remain consistent and disciplined in your approach whilst maintaining good quality records of your bets that can be used for analytical purposes at a later stage.

We hope you enjoy our articles and more importantly through our help learn the skills to becoming a winning punter.

These 3 measures are material imho and can be achieved using a simple spreadsheet. Together, they have made a significant impact on my recent successes i.e. winning more than I loose and make for a steady = more consistent increase in the bank over a set period

Cheers LG

Excellent article Paul.
Keep them coming please.
Cheers
darky.

Great article.

Its always better to err on a smaller staking size and give up potential profit rather then wipe out your bank.

WHAT IS YOUR REAL WINNING CHANCE ?

Ratings2Win Educational Article


As a punter you need to have a realistic expectation of what each of your bets winning chances are in order to succeed in the long term and stay a winner.

This is because most punters overestimate their likelihood of winning each time they bet regardless of whether the horse is odds-on or a longshot in the betting.

Therefore being able to determine and understand your real winning chance is fundamental.

How do I do it?

The best and simplest way to determine your winning chance is to examine the price of the horse you are backing. If you back a horse at say $3.00 in theory your winning chance is 33.33% assuming that the actual price of the horse is an exact interpretation of its winning chance which it is not (more on this later). The reality though is it's more likely to be somewhere between 30% and 38%.

Previous research into the psychology of betting would suggest that your own expectation is likely to be significantly more that what reality suggests. In fact it is more likely to be at least twice the actual probability of the horses real winning chance.

This expectation of winning becomes even more of a problem the shorter the price (i.e. odds on). The reality is though that the shorter the price the more likely it is that the horse will win closer to what its market price* suggests. In terms of longer priced horses the opposite applies. This phenomena is known as the 'Favourite Long Shot Bias' (FLSB). I have personally conducted thorough research on this subject over a number of years and have found that our market in Australia exhibits and mirrors characteristics of the FLSB.

Note

* Market price is used as the SP (starting price of the horse) in NSW and VIC betting markets and the average of the TABCORP prices for other markets such as QLD, SA and WA. This is mainly due to NSW and VIC being the most competitive and true markets whilst the other states especially QLD often have a SP that is not an accurate assessment of a horses chance (their betting market percentages are too large in comparison).

Key Points:

- Your expectation of winning should be related back to a horses market price;
- Always go into each bet knowing what your expectation of winning really is;
- Don't be scared of taking odds on because of any pre conceived ideas; and
- Remember there are no absolutes to betting except for the certainty of probabilities. Understanding this will make you a better punter.

I will get howled down by those that know better....but here goes anyway.

The 95 -98% that lose do so because they are lazy.
"I don't have the time", " I can't sit in front of a computer", blah blah blah, it's all too hard.
Most of that 95-98% would have fallen asleep halfway through the first post.
It may hold some good pointers but I switched off after a few lines.
At this point in particular...."Don't bet more than you (sic) afford to lose;"
If you go into this venture expecting to lose then I suggest you stop right now.

I write this as someone who today won on 20 of 27 races worked, and who has only had 1 losing day this month. Not bragging, just stating fact.

The first thing you need in this game is.....Discipline. If you don't have it, give up.
The second thing is a numerical ability. If you don't have, give up.
No amount of calculators or spreadsheets will help. By the time you've punched in the numbers, the price has gone.

It beats me how people go into this game thinking they will just win, without working at it. People who run successful businesses are then haphazard with their punting. It's like any other business. The harder you work the luckier you get.

Fully agree


Partially agree. There is always going to be a learning curve in the beginning. Long term you should expect to win.


Your doing really well Mark. I can't boast your numbers. I'm up considerably this month but I have had 3 losing days out of the last 30. I think what you can take out of that is with both have our methods (which are completely different) but they both have an extremely high winning rate and a good profit to go along with it. Its no good having a one without the other.

Or the ability to implement discipline with software. Software can overcome this fault but only if one holds true to the method and doesn't go changing it often.



Horse racing is associated with higher risk so people think that means they will get rich quick.

This one rings true for me like the giant bells on top of Notre Dame.

Once upon a time I would be expecting to double the bank at every opportunity. The losses that followed told me otherwise. 3.2% return on bank per day is more than ample for me these days and if I ever drift into thinking this may not be enough, the dreaded reality of the measly rates one gets on bank deposits brings me back to earth with a thud; >= 3.2% on any given day is a HUGE return in comparison.

Conversely, a running loss of say 3-5% makes it now OK for me to stop for the day. Given the speed with which this can deteriorate into a much bigger loss, a small loss taken and decision to shut shop for the day often feels like a triumph.

68% ahead on the bank over the last 13 betting days indicates that I might just be where the going is good, this time around.

Cheers LG

Hi Mark,

Don't bet more than you (can) afford to lose; is actually a very Sage advice regardless of the grammar slip.

It has nothing to do with positive expectation, that's implied.

Arriving at the track on Saturday with Mondays rent money for instance is really a bad idea regardless of how euphoric you may feel regarding the outcome of your upcoming betting activity.

We are really talking about very similar things, possibly reading the whole article might have helped to established that!

With the exception of the fact that in reality 95-98% of punters are unrealistic, are under-prepared, are ill informed, are lied to, have been feed overinflated expectations and may be time poor. All of which can be corrected, improved and taken into account. That does not mean they are lazy! And certainly does not mean that they can't enjoy success on the punt.

Michal

Hi All

Many good points raised so far in this thread discussion which was exactly what I wanted to see. It would appear that many on this forum have a diverse and unique set of skills which when employed mean that we all approach the art of form and betting differently.

I wanted to elaborate further on a few points raised this far.

UselessBettor commented
I agree totally. Whilst it is true that on face value more risk exists in betting v traditional investment mediums, it is also true that the returns that can be generated from betting eclipse those from traditional investing simply because you can invest more capital frequently punting than you can investing.

Mark has strong views which in the main I agree with although they are a little all or nothing.

In summing up I feel that armed with the necessary tools and knowledge, the things that bring about failure for most punters namely, fundamentally flawed strategy, mistakes associated with execution, self discipline/management etc can all be corrected through sound betting education and understanding. In other words the mindset, level of knowledge and skill required to be a long term winning punter can be learnt.

Ahhh ..... don't drink alcohol and bet, "the get out stakes" would contain a bigger percentage of booze related money than the earlier races.

Ho Ho,
Your so right Barny.

Much of your original post is relevant to poker also.
I play a lot of holdem and the moment I stray away from these principles, I lose.
Excellent post for those who take gambling seriously.

Hi Paul,
A question?

In the nature of Drawdown Would you agree that 85 - 95 % of the time the Bank would be below its Previous Peak and that 35 % of the time would be significantly lower (20 %).

Cheers
darky

Hi Darky,

Paul is off for a few days.

Essentially what you said there is in the ball park, and absolutely correct! The percentages will vary based on a method/system that one employs, but the premise is;

Most times your bank will be less then its best point, even if you are a winning punter.

The drawdown and ultimately the success of a method depends on a few things;

• The strike rate; the higher the strike rate the greater the chance that your deviation from your bank high will be smaller and easier to recover.

• Punter Risk Threshold; Our Axis program has a betting analysis module that flags the risk to the bank like max and average bank drawdown percentage and many other ways to see the risk involved with the method that one is testing. I have seen successful methods, ones that deliver profit at the end of the test have a max drawdown of over 100%, that means somewhere along the way the bank went bust! Or other times I have seen it at 80% drawdown, still something that is unacceptable to nearly all punters. Knowing the depth of the risk about your method is ESSENTIAL.

• Bet Size; Most of the times conventional software employ one-size-fits-all scenario, leaving punters unaware of the pitfalls along the punting timeline. One thing that one can do with our software is to adjust the bet size to suit the system, and re-test until the risk and reward is acceptable. This may also involve adjusting the bet size up to suit a system that under-utilises the methods performance to balance the reward vs risk scenario. Sometimes it will also mean that you discard a system because the balance is not found.

You have obviously been around a while to know all this anyway, but it is surprising the number of people with rose-colored glasses that put their failure down to bad luck or the forum curse rather then facing the realities of punting. Their misfortune is just the that, the reality of the punt, something that cannot be avoided. That doesn't mean that the drawdown can't be managed and a profit derived from the punt. It is one of the main differences between winning punters and loosing ones.

Just to illustrate some of the points I was making, here is the Favourites system breakdown.

Bets 2791 (3.5 years)
Wins 1296
strike rate 46.4%
level stake profit $137 (based on $1 bets with NSW/SP divs)

Based on this info one would just launch into it and ....
It will be OK ! As the Bet Analysis tells me that with flat bet of 1% of bank $100 ($1 bet size) has an Average draw-down of just 9% and Maximum draw-down of 24% over the sample. So that is a comfortable, no stress low risk betting scenario with nearly 5% POT.

Now lets look at some different scenarios using the same selections, divs and just changing the betting method using a Starting bank of just $100.
Note BR = Bank Risk

1. Level stakes of 1% on best bank. (variable increasing bet size) This produces double the profits $266 but the risk goes up. Avg BR is 10%, Max BR is 40%. That means along the way you are asked to trust the system while 40% of your bank dispersers. Would you continue? Its not a loaded question, if you can manage this then you can use this very profitable method.
2. Level Stakes of 1% on current bank. (variable bet size up and down) this also produces better profit of $205. Avg BR is 10% and Max BR is 42%. It looks like the dynamic of the system is not so kind to this betting method on this system.
3. Proportional constant stake to take out 1%. (variable bet size, based on the selection price) This method produces a measly $16 profit. So obviously it grossly under utilises the method! we need to increase the stake.
4. Proportional constant stake to take out 4%. (variable bet size, based on the selection price) This method produces a $200 profit. Simmilar to Bet scenario 2 but with Avg BR 11% and Max BR 33% it is far safer.
5. Proportional stake to take out 4% or current bank (variable bet size, based on bank and selection price) This produces $396 profit, the best so far BUT, with Avg BR of 13% and Max BR of 68%, would you have the determination to continue? Probably not so we need to see if a better balance can be struck with this betting method.
6. Reducing the above to 3% produces $224 profit with Max BR still at unacceptable 56%.
7. Reducing further down to 2% we make $184 with Avg BR 10% and Max BR 34%. Which is safe and sustainable, but not as profitable however it gives the flexibility of increasing bets when the profits are being made and reduces the bets in the lean period. Further tests will reveal the best take out percentage to use with this system.

I could go on, there are many other scenarios that I could test, however it just boils down to what risk you are willing to take on the way to making your profit. Having the ability to test and evaluate these risks BEFORE they happen will arm you with the right betting method to take the best advantage of the given system.

Looking at the system above, we know that the average risk is around 10% of your bank using any of the methods. The maximum risk to the bank varies, managing this risk in a way that is acceptable to you is THE ONLY WAY that you will actually reap the profits from this system. If you under utilise the system then you will walk away from it thinking that you can't make profits from favourites. If you over-extend your bank threshold and quit you will walk away knowing that you go broke backing faves.

The reality is that when utilised and managed correctly, there is good profits to be made here. It comes down to managing your bank draw-down risk correctly, that is after you have created a profitable system to start with.


Kind Regards

Unless you have a very good strike rate. If your strike rate is up at around 95%or higher then your mostly going to be at your best point most of the time.

A real life example . My bank has been at its highest 155 days out of the last 176 days (days so far this year). That's 88% of the time.

It all depends on your strike rate. Just think how much easier it is for me and how that effects my confidence and morale. I'm up on average almost 9 out of every 10 days.

Hi UB,

Just out of interest; Backing ? Laying ? Trading ?

Both Backing and Laying (no trading at all)

Thank you Michal.
My comfort level is 4% of original Bank of $10,000 betting to available price.

I would say to any budding Punter that if your uncomfortable with the size of your bet then pay close attention to what Michal has just outlined.

Cheers
darky

Hi Paul/Michal.

Would it be fair to say that if one wanted to make a reasonable income from betting then one would need to bet in Thousands to derive a living income.

i.e If your regular weekly income was nett $1200 weekly then allowing for the cycles in racing then the bank would need to be $80 - 100,000 thousand and probably more to even consider it.
Probably the figures quoted would be in the lower range (I would assume so)

I ask these questions of you as Full time Professionals who know what your talking about.

Cheers
darky

Hi Darky,

The quick answer is no, you don't need that much. But you would need to have a decent bank. It's more about turning the bank over, that generates the required money without having (wasting) a large sum on standby.

In fact the greater the turnover the smaller the bank reserve needs to be, if you have 75 'carefully crafted' selections per year then yes you need to bet in high thousands to make a profit providing that what you are betting on is actually profitable to begin with. If you are having 3 or so bets a day then the turn over ensures that the bets size can remain relatively small, this is then manageable in terms of actually getting on and getting through bad patches quickly.

Outside of that; proportional staking is the hallmark of a professional punter, betting to collect more on horses with a greater chance of winning makes sense and it also increases the turnover.

What most people assume is that a professional punter is someone that lays thousands on the line with each bet .... you know the usual stereotype. Sure punters like that do exist .... BUT

In reality there are many professional punters that only bet in hundreds and low thousands. Really anyone can become a professional punter. All you need is a profitable method; you also need to know the risks involved and then you just need the turnover, consistency in application, discipline, ability to obtain at least a reasonable dividend and record keeping. Also having a realistic expectation helps, if you are willing to risk a $100 then your reward will still be proportionally the same as the person that risks $100,000 but wont be the same in terms of real dollars.

You can start doing all of the above with just a $10 bet and only betting in your spare time! Then once the basics are mastered the bets go up naturally, with much less stress because you win the bank and hone your skills at the same time. Then betting with a $100,000 bank wont seem such an scary task. If you can't manage a $10 bet then you most certainly wont manage a $1000 bet. The problem is that most people don't do any of this and then wonder why they are hunting for the next grail every month!

Kind regards

I would do this as an example

if you wanted to make $1200 a week and you were able to make 10% P.O.T then you need to turnover $12,000 a week, say you were to have 25 bets in that week then each bet would meed to be $480 and if you decided that 2% of your bank was a comfortable amount to bet then you would need a bank of $24,000, this does not take in to account any compounding of the bank just basic maths.

Here is my last 7 days betting.

Turned over $3600 /Profit $290 /POT 8 %

Some times losses but over 500 bets the POT is 5.3 %.

My question is .
Is this POT sufficent to keep going?

The largest Draw Down has been $1600 or sixteen losses straight (As paul predicted in one of his posts) He was spot on.

Your advice would be very much appreciated.

The POT is based on Level stakes but have switched to 1/4 Kelly.

Cheers
darky

Your maths are correct except for 1 thing. you didn't take into account the potential drawdown. drawdown + weekly income = massive stress at a 2% bet size.

Once the bank is gone that is it ... you can't/shouldn't bet on credit.

Agree i didn't take in to account a few different things but was just showing how you don't need a 80k bank, drawdown is something i need to look in to big time.

That is exactly the right thing UB. Knowing the risk ie. draw down on the Bank over a large enough sample is imperative in order to structure the nature of ones investments.

The stress comes from ones inability to handle the loses past a certain point. Everyone has this point, it just depends on where it is. There is no shame in having a high risk threshold, it just means that the punter needs to take this into account.

Darky, one of the things that have brought many a punter down is forcing the issue. Betting with scared money is deadly. Having a target in mind is great and working towards it is excellent, forcing the issue and betting more then what is comfortable just to make the next 'income' will generaly end up with the punter in a tail spin betting on the UK dogs at 3am just to get out!

If your POT is 5% and you can maintain that, then you are way in front of most punters. If your bank isn't enough at this stage high enough to bet with a stake that corresponds to your wanted income while being in a comfort zone that you can manage, the answer isn't to bet up, its to build. Punting is a business, a long term proposition.

The only other thing I would add is that I would like to see more then just 500 bets in a sample to analyse the risk in terms of draw-down and so on. But that is just me. In regards to whether the POT is sufficient, it is, but that isnt the point, POT (results) is a product of strike rate and prices. You can't effect the divs outside of trying to get the best you can, the thing that you can controll is the performance of your selection method or the strike rate. Your performance and whether you can sustain it is what you have to ask, and no one other then you can answer that.

Kind regards

The $10,000 is loose money I can afford to lose but the main objective is to compound over 5 years.

My risk thresh hold is quite high and have mentioned previously betting Kelly to 4 % of bank which I,m comfortable with ($400)

I note your comments in a previous post of risk threshold of 2 or 3 % and as you say one can lower it if it becomes "Hairy".

I also note your comments on reasessing over a longer bet number which I shall do.

May I say that its indeed a pleasure to get quality help from someone who has been there.
Hope you dont mind me dropping a question or 2 as I go along this path.

Cheers
darky

Hi Darky,

No we don't mind, ask all you like, hopefully your questions and answers and comments in this thread will help others.

I noted that your runs of outs corresponded to Paul's 'prediction'. It isn't that hard to predict when you are working with maths. A certain strike rate will produce certain numbers in terms of runs of outs and other probabilities. These figures, no matter how unattractive, are mathematical law and those that think they don't apply to them are in for a shock.

As far as the bets sample size of your method, the greater the number the more likely you are to know its actual performance level. To give example look at our daily Recent winning highlights. Our IR rating has an over all strike rate of about 26.9% over 50,000 races (top pick), however looking at the beginning of this month we had some low days (Moee pointed out one of them) and the last few days they been in the high 30s and 40+ today. What Im saying is that the method will even out at the 26.9% given a large enough sample because that is its underlying performance point. There is no question in my mind about that and I have the confidence that the rating will do just that, and it does every time. In fact if we have a few bad days you can bet that the next few will be well above average it has to happen in order to level out at our performance point.

What you have to do is establish what your underlying performance point is, and the only way to do that is with a large enough sample. The confidence that this will give you will be invaluable when you are looking at an extended run of outs and wonder if something is broken or what the problem is. We all go through those emotions. The tendency is to tweak! Add a few filters, or more rules and change the mechanics, there by changing everything including your confidence level in the method and the risk that you are willing to endure. Usually this is followed by a further few tweaking sessions before the whole system is thrown out and a new grail is sought. That's the way most punters work.

With a large enough sample you will have the confidence to say "well that is within normal and while Im not excited about it it will return to its underlying performance eventually".

Kind regards

Yes.Tweaking, adding new filters etc etc been there.
Never improved things and after a few losses went straight into the rubbish bin.
Then the journey of buying the newest super dooper betting system from the Commercial System Sellers which were even worse than the one I threw in the bin.
All of course backfitted to the start of a big winner with POT figures of 98 % and claiming to turn $300 into $168,000 betting 3 % of the bank with a drawdown of 4 losses.

It was jolly good fun but expensive.

Cheers
darky

Hi Michal if i can pose a question here.


Your strike rate for the top rated is 26.9%,
Long term and undisputed.

Let's go in a series of 10 bets.

Say your 1st 10 bets 10=7w
Then next 10 bets 10=6w.

Knowing you have overachieved here,
And it will eventually return to the norm,
Do you keep betting the same amount on the next,
10-20 bets or do you reduce the stakes.

The same can be said when you underachieve.

Say 10=1w
Then 10=0w.

Would you increase stakes in the next set,
Of 10-20 bets.

The reason i state 10 bets is because my bets,
Are adjusted for the example above.

Guess you can use any no's if required.

I never bet level stakes as this is not a staking plan.

The only time i use level stakes is to test whether a set of rules,
Is worth pursuing based on this criteria.

If it makes a profit or even a few % loss then a staking plan can be operated.

By the way aside from this i was an interested guest only,
When you were mercilessly attacked for no reason other,
Than you ran a ratings service on a now defunct forum.

Used to watch your answer(s) and you never once degraded yourself.

So i have been reading your posts on both sites for a while now,
And you have a much better form of clientel here.

I have one question for people who may wish to join.

What happens to the service if the head honcho(s)
Get sick, die, retire, sell up,etc for those who might see it
As a real long term thing.

Cheers.
Garyf.

Hi Garyf,

You raise several interesting topics.

Varying the stake according to previous immediate results be they based on 10 bet block or otherwise.

I can offer a few things here; Firstly we wouldn't recommend that anyone tries to bet every top pick even with our IR. But your question is probably more centered around the ups and downs of A method and if there is a way of profiting from it returning to norm. In theory it seams to be possible, however the issue is that you still don't know when the up or down trend will finish. It could be today or in a weeks time. The results don't come in an orderly fashion which probably makes this impractical. However that doesn't mean that you cant use this information for something. For instance do you notice that most punters start their punting with a system on the up and then wonder why did their systems just fall over like that. In reality they probably didn't! If you have a system with what you believe to be a known performance point then starting to bet after a really good run will mean that you are more likely in for a downward adjustment then further good times. So it would be best to wait and start when you are more likely to experience a normal performance. The paradox here is who in their right mind starts to bet on a method that is loosing?

The Axis program has a feature where your bets are placed into bet blocks of your chosen size and their performance measured and even the last 5 blocks are displayed just for such a situation. Dividing your bets in blocks serves further purpose of familiarising yourself with what to expect from a system; how many 1/10 blocks do you have? how many 7/10 do you have? what is the average? Knowing all these arm you with the knowledge that what is currently happening to your method (good or bad) is probably normal.

What happens to the service if the head honcho(s) Get sick, die, retire, sell up,etc for those who might see it as a real long term thing.

Great question garyf, it is the very reason that I started to learn to program, I wanted to make sure that the hard work that I put in will continue to reap benefits. I have learned a few things since then; Nothing stays the same! The hallmark of those that are profitable punters is that they can adapt. The skills you learn never really go to waste and can be applied to the next project.

Ratings2win is a combination of 2 racing enthusiasts, both of whom are committed to the business. Our information is duplicated on 2 different sites and we have offsite back up contingencies and security at each location. In terms of the ratings and data both of us can perform the function. Internet or power outages, computer crashes, holidays, being sick and other issues are not a show stopper. It may be inconvenient but it wont stop one of us doing the calculations. We are both in our 40s so hopefully we have some 20 years in front of us and we have plenty of new ideas and improvements to implement along the way.

Lastly, thank you for your kind words regarding the Punting Ace forum. This forum is far better moderated and while debate is encouraged personal attracts are not. What we went through, even here, is nothing new. Remember we have to compete in a market that is known for its shady characters and exaggerated and unproven claims (darkys post below yours is just one example). This makes people rather bitter and suspicious to new comers. People wonder what our gimmick is and try to expose it. All the hostility goes away when people eventually find out what we stand for and what we have to offer. Regardless if they use it or not.

I suppose our gimmick is consistent and transparent results, something that isn't known in the industry! What we say can be verified with a simple test by anyone using our software and even those that are in the 14 day money back guarantee period. I don't think that we can do any more then that.

Kind regards

Good answer(s).

All the best for R2W present and future.

Cheers.
Garyf.

Hi Michel/Paul,
In relation to Dead/Slow /Heavy TC do you bet to a Minimum Price.?

At $3 In the small study I,ve done it appears to lift the Profit quite well but your opinion is very welcome.

Cheers and thanks
darky

Ps.I consider Dead to be a combination Trackwise of all 3 TC on various parts of the Track.

Hi darkydog2002

Back from a short holiday and ready to attack the bookies again.

In respect of your question, "In relation to Dead/Slow /Heavy TC do you bet to a Minimum Price.?"
No. In terms of my own betting, I bet proportionally to collect 4% of my betting bank based on my own assessment of probability regardless of track condition. Even in terms of my pre-determined bets (those that clients of the SRA Selection Service receive which is all of them save for exotics), When an actual price is below my assessment I still generally bet in accordance with the recommendation. If for example I assess a horse $2.00 and the best available is $1.90 I still bet as this is within 2.63% in terms of probability of my assessment. If it was $1.80 then I would most likely pass. Another example if I assess a horse at $4.00 then I would bet at $3.60 but would pass at $3.20.

Yes Dead is a tricky track condition. I make my own assessment during the course of a day based on what the official track condition is reported at plus my own observations which are based on qualitative and quantitative data. Many times the official TC is incorrect based on our own assessment. That is supported by the fact that after the races are run, that many official track conditions are changed historically to reflect our previous assessment.

Thank you.
The standard in the old days as to asessing Dead to Good was the time ran in the 1200M race.
In those days it was 1.10.4 - 1.10.8 for Good TC.
Not being a Times man I have no idea what it would be now.

As for wet tracks I use a different Bank.
For me its that extra piece of mind Psychologically speaking.

Cheers
darky

I cant get my head around this notion of only betting horses than shorten in the betting rather than get the best available price.

Whats your take on it.?

Cheers
darky

Hi darky

I'm not exactly sure what you are asking?

Probably better addressed to other posters but basically the idea is to "Follow the horse that is the biggest FIRMER in the betting" .

What I,m basically asking is = Is there any statistical evidence for this being a good idea.?

Is there any particular Price range where this might actually work.?

I ask a Pro because this idea has been bandied about for more years than I care to remember.

Cheers
darky

Hi darky

Overall betting markets that are very close to or at post time (when the biggest firmer in the betting is known) are very efficient. That is the SP of a horse is the best indication of its chances providing it is adjusted for price bias.

So to answer your question, whilst backing these types of horses may provide an increase in strike rate, doing so after the best prices have been bet is a sure fire way of ensuring that you finish behind.

I'm sure that making the following statement will stimulate a lot of discussion. The only way to profit from betting on a consistent basis is to not only arm yourself with data that is not in the possession of the general betting public but also possess the computer/software power to do things with the data that the majority don't. We believe that in that context Ratings2Win is lengths ahead of the opposition. Whilst this is a sales pitch it is also factual.

You may or may not be aware that we provide a 14 day risk free guarantee on the entire Axis product range. That way potentials clients can avail themselves with the benefits that Axis provides and ascertain for themselves whether the results claims that we make in respect of our products and services are genuine, which I can assure you they are.