1. So called big money "professonal punters" really are not. They are men propped up by money from their buisnesses, inheritence or high incomes, or from stake money hits from horses they own.
In essence they are big money gamblers, not pro punters.
They all have one major thing in common.....they did not get their money from the punt, and if they had to start from scratch and punt up a liveable betting bank they would soon starve!
Agreed. Usually they started with big money and know how to handle it.
So, although they are now pro, started with a big bank behind them.
2. It is a falacy that a massive turnover is needed to show profit over time.
This is for men who have that poor of a selection and staking method, that a very large turnover of money is needed to capitalize on a very skinny profit margin. In reality these type of punters last only as long as other money (or imagination) is proping it up.
Agreed. In fact there are many different strategies to pro punting. Some have very high turnover (volume of bets), but the most common is very few targetted bets. It's very hard to have a high volume of bets in a negative market and come out in front. Exotic punters are the only real exception, but then they must have a massive bank behind them to endure the losses.
3. It's quite false that a very high starting bank of $10,000 to $30,000 or more is needed to start a betting bank off. And false also is the thinking that the bank must be turned over and over like it was inside a washing machine.
The fact is a betting bank must be protected from heavy turnover!
This is where I disagree to a certain extent. One can start small and build it up, but if one wants to start making a steady income to cover the bills etc, there's no way a $4,000 bank will cut the mustard to provide a liveable income. Even if one was lucky enough to get 20% POT per month, and it's not going to happen every month, that's only $800 per month utilizing the full $4,000, one bad month and bang! One must be able to cater for long runs of outs and that run depends on strike rate. I agree with your point on turnover in relation to straight out betting, exotics are a little different.
Here is another fact, if the average man clears $30,000 a year in his regular employment, then to match that in punting earnings, he can start off with a bank as little as $4000. And still keep his job. Nirvana for the average bloke on the punt would be around $50,000 a year.....roughly $4000 to $5000 a month. A $6000 starting bank for that is plenty.
What sort of POT are you basing that on, I strongly disagree.
4. It goes against any real common sense that an ** School Teacher, Mathematition, Engineer, Accountant or any highly educated induvidual, can come up with a numerical/class/time rating system that leads to first a steady income, then on to great wealth.
It simply cannot be done.
Are you saying an uneducated person stands a better chance or experience and research has more weight?
why you should never except odds on any bet unless it can return you over $7 to the dollar.
Again, strongly disagree. The weight of bias against longer prices means you have to be far better than the market suggests. Backing the shorter end of the market has less bias against the punter and is far easier to overcome.
Not picking on you, and a lot of what you have written is excellent, I just disagree with some points.
Look forward to your response and further parts to your article.
|