STAKING TO WIN

Most punters spend 99% of their time trying to find winners. Betting smart is just as important but attracts about 1% of a punters attention. This page will help you sort good staking ideas from bad and maybe help you maximise your winnings at the races.

1. STAKING PLANS

A systematic approach to wagering is essential to long-term success but many popular staking plans are flawed and extremely dangerous.

The Martingale System is almost as old as racing itself and on face value seems sound. It is simply betting enough on each selection to win back all you have lost in a sequence of bets plus your initial target. For example if you are 20 units behind in a betting series and your profit target is 25 units and your next bet is a $5 chance, you stake $11 to profit $44. This recoups your 20 lost and just about gets your 25 target.

Clearly the problem with this method is the dreaded run of outs. A sequence of 10 losers straight if betting $5 chances is likely to happen regularly. The 11th bet would be some extraordinary amount of money that most bookies wouldn’t accept in order to win the modest target that was originally set. Obviously a dumb way to bet.

Progression betting methods of varying types are similar to the Martingale in that they expect a winner on a regular basis. Unfortunately it isn’t always so neat. Building your bet size up as a losing streak lengthens is both psychologically tough and mathematically stupid. Some selection and ratings “services” pin their hopes for success on progressive staking. They clearly have no faith in the selections and hide behind some convoluted bet placement scheme, which cannot and will not turn losing into winning

There is a mathematical formula known as the Kelly Criterion that calculates the “correct” amount to wager on each selection based on winning strike rates and average winning dividends. Originally designed for casino games, it has been adapted to the racetrack but it is also flawed.

Kelly tells us to bet a certain percentage of the bank on each selection and the figure is adjusted after each bet. The bet obviously decreases after each loser as the bank is decreasing also. When we finally crack a winner, we are staking the lowest amount since the last winner. The bet size increases after the winner but unless our very next bet also wins, we are on the downward spiral again. Kelly is typified by placing bigger bets on losers and smaller bets on winners. There seems no logic to this method.

So what's the answer Baco60?


Monkeyinjapan

.

So you don't like a staking plan where you bet more on winners than losers, and you don't like a staking plan where you bet more on losers than winners.?

I guess you just don't like staking plans....

Anyone that is getting winners does not need the staking plan, until one is in the front.
Once you made your money, only then you go for the staking plan to protect your winnings.
Cheers
baco

You don't have to use a staking plan, if you have a good system it should return a profit at level staking.

You should not consider using a staking plan until you are playing with the Bookies Money.

well for most that will be never...

there have been many plans mentioned here that are safe & just as importantly, can provide the wayward punter will a level of discipline he has been lacking, & which is essential in this game.

Hi Baco60 and all others.

Have been there done that with most staking plans and have come to the conclusion that the simpler the better.
I have been using quite succesfully the simple 2% of highest Bank plan.
Very safe if using any method that realises level stakes profit.
For example one of my methods I started with $200 bank @2% = $4 in December last year. I have since traken out my $200 and my current bank stands at $1200 plus a little. I have had 233 bets at 31% strike rate , av. div $4.77with longest run of outs = 11.
All bets can be placed at one time and recalculated at end of day if so desired.
Just my $1200 worth.
I must mention my bets are now up to $21 and today two winners at $11.71 and $1.85 helped boost things considerably.
Kearsey

Holy moly Kearsey!
You are getting 'em at nearly 4 to 1 and the are winning at the rate of about 2 to 1.
The worst staking plan in the world couldn't turn that into a loss!

Here is another plan if one wants to ride with the wild ponys.
The idea is to jag a winner at approx. 2/1 (3.00) within 6 bets.Otherwise no bet that race.
1-1-2-4-8-16=32 units.
Have about 8 banks of 32 = 256 units.
If the 16 unit bet looses , start at the beginning again.

I have tried this on the RadioTAB 1st. selections paying $3.00+ & it has managed to show a profit over 300 races supprisingly enough.
Maybe this is an anomily, but check it out on your own selections.

The important bit is , the selection has to be $3.00+ otherwise no bet that race ,there are plenty of other races to have a go at.

You will be supprised how many of those shorter priced runners get rolled.

__________________
Cheers.

I totaly agree on the above plan...i would add one thing....when you get a profit spit the profit in 3 add 1 portion to betting bank 1 portion to savings bank and a portion to your pocket.