You wrote
"For about 95% of punter's, turnover comes from capital [any capital], not just betting banks which can and often are just topped up from capital. I take your point as meaning what it says for your situation.
Absolutely, I have never topped up my original punting bank since day 1. If it ever runs out I pack up my bags and give punting away.
You wrote
"Your total outlay and total return % [all systems combined] displays a more meaningful figure. I think you stated elsewhere your overall SR was 20 point something % ? Average price returned ?"
The average price is a little meaningless here, because of different sized stakes etc, but I can tell you that the first full year I made 6% POT, and the second I made just on 2% POT from horse racing. This year the horse racing POT is around 5%.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by crash
One advantage of handicapping we can agree on. Handicapping doesn't "fall over" [I don't mean runs of outs that both handicapping and systems have]. That is something of a major concern with systems and we should call that 'Disadvantage [I] to Systems, Advantage [I] to Handicapping so far [Score 0-1]. Handicapping [should] improves with age, systems sour.
|
Sorry, I can't agree. I think handicappers can easily fall over, and that's just as bad. People become stale and set in their ways. Racing changes, and if handicappers don't keep up with the changes then they fall behind. [Score 0-0] :-)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by crash
It is generally impossible to determine if/when a system has gone pear shaped, or is having a run of outs. All profit [and more] can be wiped out in those situations before the offending system is dumped.. That point could be debated re. money management practice, max. draw-down calculations etc., but a possible [Score 0-2] there.
|
Again, totally disagree. There are a number of statistical calculations that can be made to determine if a system is going through an expected run of outs or has gone pear shaped. Particularly if you have long term stats on the system, you can determine whether the current trend is expected or not expected. Chi-Squared testing and rolling bet sequences are two of my favorite statistical tests. [Score remains 0-0].
Furthermore, I don't believe you can do this with handicapping. There is no way to tell if a current run of outs is due to luck, or due to your handicapping method falling over. I know of two excellent "handicappers" (by your definition) that have had horrible runs recently, and I suspect that this is because what they were doing is no longer relevant to current racing trends. It will be far more difficult for them to rethink their ways than for me to determine the system has crapped out and chuck it [Score 1-0].
Lastly, the emotional thing is a very powerful factor in punting. It is easy for me to remain unemotional about my systems. A handicapper has the added problem of poring over the form for ages, and then having all of his work thrown in his face by his/her horse not winning. If this happens long enough then the vast majority of handicappers will most likely change something about the way they are going about their selections. In many cases, they may change their ways purely due to a statistically likely bad run when there was nothing wrong with what they were doing. Ouch! (score 2-0)
serve returned and driven long to the baseline
:-)
Cheers,
Chris.