Becareful,

Wouldn't stepped bets often produce the bigger bets hitting loosers and smaller bets hitting winners producing no advantage other than allowing more bets for your $ [perhaps] but not necessarily a greater chance of winning due to ever smaller collects ?

Cheers.


Crash,

In my case I am currently getting ever bigger collects as the bank is going up not down. Obviously with this system you first need a selection system that is showing a profit not a loss! (But in my opinion that is a basic requirement to make a profit anyway - I don't believe chasing losses with a staking plan will work in the long run). For example in the last 3 months of betting I have gone up 3 "steps" but have yet to have to step backwards.

To illustrate lets say I start with a bank of $1000 with a bet size of $50. In this case I would step "up" to a $60 bet if the bank gets to $1200 or "down" to a $40 bet if the bank falls to $800. Once I get above $1200 (so bet size = $60) then I will step "up" to $70 if I get to $1400 or back "down" to $50 only if the bank falls back below $1000. In this way I am not constantly changing bet sizes each time I get a loss so I have a very good chance of hitting a winner with my higher bet size before I have to drop back down.

Now the system I am using with this 5% approach has a strike rate of around 60% so I am fairly confident of getting a winner within 4 bets each time - with a lower strike rate system you need to use a lower % of bank otherwise you would constantly be changing bet sizes (not to mention the risk of going broke).

Just for the interest I compared my POT for the last 3 months using this stepped system v's a pure level stakes method (with the same starting bet size). At level stakes I would have had a POT of 30% and a profit of 33.8 "units". With my stepped bets the POT was 28% but the profit was 35.5 "units".

[ This Message was edited by: becareful on 2003-10-20 21:55 ]