[QUOTE=wesmip1]Everyone needs to stop arguing and start looking for different angles

For instance ...
Taking this exact system and STOP after you are up 1 unit. If you did this you would be up 8.5 units in 8 days. End QUOTE]


We are not arguing here. We ARE looking at different angles. My Maths logic being only one of them. A valid angle I think when it comes to risking money [?].

Stopping after 1 unit ahead is a 'sounds good' angle. Problem is you can spend a hell of a lot of $ trying to get ahead 1 unit in 48 meetings over many weeks let alone 8.5 units ahead in 8 days! Maths reality says 61 units behind after all those meetings and a very large amount of turn -over [risk capital] to get there.

"[Morphettville - LOST NO WINNERS = -$370 (Largest bet $110 total = $370)" No 1 unit ahead anywhere here to stop at. Due to the progression factor, Morphetville at $10 a race became a $370 loss instead of an $80 flat stakes loss.

Overall due to progressions, you have turned over a large amount of money on 48 meetings and you are still not 1 unit ahead, but 61 units behind. Flat stakes you would still be losing too [less than 61 units because progressions magnify loses too, not just profit], but the amount of money involved and risked for turn-over would have been a hell of a lot less.

The only sensible progression I would ever recommend to anyone is after a win, not a loss. Then the progression is from profit [the Bookies money not your own]. If it wins progress bet again. If not, go back to the original flat stake.

Manygeese has yet another idea. doubling up after each bet until a winner is stuck[?] ....well I think is at this point I am going to bail out of this thread. As JFC has already said, 'life is too short' to try and replace belief systems of winning money with the basic maths that are actually involved instead. Bookies love belief systems and every punter is entitled too them.

Sincerely, good luck with it.