View Single Post
  #64  
Old 6th April 2006, 05:42 AM
crash crash is offline
Suspended.
 
Join Date: Jan 1970
Location: gippsland lakes/vic
Posts: 5,104
Default

I have gone over all my bets here carefully and I have actually made a small loss on place bets. Following the system [page 1] for the first half of the bets was a downer and shaping up to be a slow but growing loss. Handicapping the bets and ignoring the system has improved the return. Not good for system buffs [not the one I used here anyway].

Total Outlay on all place bets has been 89 units.
Total Return has been 83.67. A loss of 5.33 units and considering the amount of 'action' I've had and the fact I am a very inexperienced place punter, I'm happy with the result so far.
Monitoring prices over different bet sites and betting at the last minute would definitely see a decent long term return on outlay here if profit was the sole objective. Monitoring last minute prices however, is not really my cup of tea.

Out of curiosity I have checked the win bets, although I have not been specifically handicapping for the win, just a winning chance and then backing the selections for the place..

Win results have been: 2..27, 6.50, 4.50, 9.36, 2.23, 11.11, 2.79, 2.72, 3.66, 1.72, 3.42, 4.59, 3.14, 13.35, 1.95, 1.64, 3.14, 2.15, 1.96, 9.41, 10.95, 4.00.
Outlay 89 units. Return: 106.56. Profit 17.56 .

So without even specifically handicapping for the win, the win bet is proving to be a better bet overall so far.

As far as Place betting is concerned, handicapping for runners to place only in my opinion would have been a big mistake. I would be considering too many outsiders [poor place odds for their win SP] which seems to be where most place punters are betting. Not a good move as the returns in that area are mostly pitiful when win SP and place SR for these runners is taken into account. Return for the place for w$3/5 SP runners is often more than for w$7/12 SP runners. The difference in SR offers serious loss potential in the above w$7 SP for place and e/w punters [IMHO :-) ].
Reply With Quote