Hi

I am trying to learn more about staking plans.

Is there anything inherently wrong by using a plan that bets to win a certain amount?

For example, I want to try and win $1000 on every bet I make.
Therefore on a 6.00 chance I bet $200, on an even money chance I bet a $1000, etc

Thanks.

The way to do this properly, is to divide the price , not the odds into the takeout amount.
It increases the POT over a series of bets.
It also keeps the outlays down, especially on really short priced runners.

Example.No.1
Over 2 races. Betting to Price (Decimal Odds).
R1. $2.50 / 1000 = O/L $400 loses . Ret $00
R2. $6.00 / 1000 = O/L $167 win . Ret $1000.00
Profit +$433 (567-1000)
POT 76.36% (433/567)

Example No.2
Over 2 races Betting to Odds (Fractional Odds).
R1. 1.5/1 (2.50) / 1000 = O/L 667 loses. Ret $00
R2. 5/1 (6.00) / 1000 = O/L 200 wins . Ret $1200
Profit +333 (867-1200)
POT 38.40% (333/867)

One can see the difference.
The thing to focus on is the POT%.


One can bet to price using 2 or more horses a race also.

When doing this comparative exercise, its best to run it over 2+ races to get a proper comparative feel for the difference, because one is usually betting more than just 1 race & it's at the end of the day, when all the percentages come together.

This is the way bookies do their figures & is considered to be the best way to place ones bets rather than level stakes betting, according to book makers.

It keeps the figures to a comparative balance to one another & it's this comparative nature that allows the Bookmaker to create a book percentage against us, because he has to book the field and we don't .
That's the difference between us & them.

Cheers.

__________________
Cheers.

Panna,
Could I suggest that your approach has an in-built flaw....?
By taking what the market offers you are always "betting to bad prices" and accordingly.....sorry mate but you will lose.....in the long term!
To alleviate this problem could I suggest that you avail yourself of your own ratings or follow those which are freely available on this website.
Thereby, you will not always be backing the general public "popular elect" which over the years has been found to be erroneous in up to 20-30% of all races.
That way you may regularly secure $6.0w or similar for some starters which are showing < $2.0win on the bookies' boards.
Hope that helps.

Havagoodun.

I don't understand. We can only take what the market offers us. If we think its not value, we don't take it. I believe I have the abilty to determine whether a horse is value or not.

I punt a little differently than most people here. I don't use stats, databases, etc . I am an avid follower of the sport and never tire of watching races, listening to interviews, reading about the sport, etc My ratings are what's in my head. ie. I have an intimate knowledge of particular horses, trainers, jockeys, tracks and the game in general. I have no interest in following other people's ratings.
This approach has stood me well for a number of years.

What I am looking for is to 'better' capitalise on my ability to source winners; hence my question on staking.


Again I don't understand. Who said I always go for the "popular elect"? Sure when I do bet, it is often a horse well in the market. But I feel I know the difference between a true favourite and a false favourite.
By the way, if a bookie is showing <$2 on their boards, I'd love to know where I could get $6.
Obviously I am not following your argument but thankyou for responding.

not if im following xanadu either,

but for example yesterday pr7 - 3, unitab paid me $4.0 & top fluc paid me $7.0 even, result = one happy camper

many here keep on stressing the importance of obtaining best price & of course, they are right

Thanks for the detailed response Bhagwan.

I did a comparison doing the opposite. ie. R1. being the winner and R.2 being the loser.
The results were 92% POT (betting to fractions) vs. 76% POT (betting to decimals).

I sort of see what you're saying, but how can you be sure that betting to decimals increases POT over a series of bets?
Isn't it dependent on which particular selections win, as shown by my example where I reversed which race was the winner and which race was the loser?

Yes I noticed this while manually running through some examples and I am now trying to determine what this would mean for my results?
Would it result in me making less money (in absolute dollare terms) but achieving a higher POT?

cheers for your info

Hi Panna,
I know you said you are trying to work out which creates the stronger POT over time.
The answer is... the Fav , if it wins all the time, based on your example.

But we know that is not the Ying & Yang reality of punting.
One has to try & work within the balance of The Book.
That's why betting to price is the more balanced & mathematical option.

Betting to fractional odds is what the Bookmaker wants you to do , that's why they invented odds in the first place, before switching over to decimal odds & that was not exactly their choice either, it was made for them , so why play into their hands.
No one wants to be an old school fool, so don't start now.

Example. Betting to $1000 ,Bank 10,000
$1.40 shot (cant possible lose) bet to Fract Odds = O/L $2500 = 40% POT
$1.40 shot bet to price = O/L $714 = 40% POT
So why give yourself a heart attack to make the same POT?

The $2500 to 10,000 bank = 25% of you whole bank on 1 'cant lose' horse.
Or
$714 to $10,00 bank = 7.14% of whole bank.

Which 2 options would one feel more comfortable with to gain the same 40% POT?

The dollars take care of themselves but first the percentages have to be in suitable to bank size.

The general idea in punting is to try & bet within proportion to ones bank.
That's exactly what Professional punters & Bookies do all the time, that's why they refuse certain bets, because it is outside the percentage of perceived risk to their known book value threshold , they have currently created.

As clearly stated in our original posting , betting to price is what the Bookies do to set their book percentage & to make a profit .
So,
That's exactly what we should do except we don't have to bet the field.

That's of course one feels they are smarter than a barrage of Professional bookmakers & numbers men, betting every race for a living, who know their way around a set of figures faster than we can blink.

Here is another example for you to play around with.
Target 3 horses per race betting to fract odds.
Then.
The the same 3 horses betting to price.

Apply this over say 4 races where the Fav wins only one of these.

There will be a massive difference in the results once converted to percentage.

Cheers.

__________________
Cheers.

hi panna
i'm like you and vary from many thoughts here, have my own system and have the same question as you.... do i back a horse to win $1000, or do i put $100 on every one of my selections, whether they be 2-1 or 6-1 what would work out better. If you get an answer can you pass it onto me please..
My thinking would be that it would work out the same but am not sure and am worried that when i pick a hi priced winner i'm not maximising the profits
Cheers lb

So do I mate!