Hi all, here we go again, this has probably been hashed out countless times.
Since mid december when I changed my philosophy on my bets, i.e. to only back on pace runners resulting from my sectional times analysis and even with a couple of reasonably bad run of outs, this is my story:

130 bets in 118 races (sometimes I will back 2 or more horses in the same race)
42 winners for a POT of 35% with a strike rate of 32.3% from my total bets and a race strike rate of 35.6%. My average win divvie is $4.20.

This all looks ok to me. I have played around with various staking plans including the "original retirement staking plan" and my own small variations of it. They outperformed my level stakes when things were going ok, but when a couple of run of outs occurred, the level stakes come back into play and it still shows the best overall result.

I know I am answering my own question here, but does anyone have any super duper staking plans that they wish to share.

Paul

Pauls,

The age old conundrum has reared it's head.
Keep it simple, % of bank not reducing is the best staking plan you can use, UNLESS you find that there is an overlay type arrangement.

__________________
RaceCensus - powerful system testing software.
Now with over 422,000 Metropolitan, Provincial and Country races!
http://www.propun.com.au/horse_raci...ng_systems.html
*RaceCensus now updated to 31/07/2025
Video overview of RaceCensus here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W821YP_b0Pg

Hi Paul,

Every time this subject comes up, some one, pro level stakes, becomes very aggressive towards anyone who even mentions progressional staking.

I wonder who it will be this time.

Cheers.

__________________
Cheers.

Bhags, there is a definite "perception" about staking plans, and there can be a definite advantage to ones mental attitude, but the truth is that all staking plans are really just a series of level stakes sequences. If you disect say after 500 bets you will see that there has been x number of bets @ level 1, x number @ level 2 etc etc etc, now as the S/R of the selections cannot have possibly altered (i.e. the horse doesn't know that it is the 7th bet in a series)
what you are left with eg. 50 bets at level 1, 37 bets at level 2, 30 bets at level 3 etc etc etc , all with the same S/r and average divi, so in fact you ARE betting at level stakes.

To prove it as I've said many times is to just add up the total amount staked over those 500 bets, divide by the number of bets to arrive at an average bet size, then apply that average bet size to all 500 , and you will see exactly the same S/R and average divi,.......... I wish it were different but it isn't.

Very interesting and fascinating replies and thanks. Chrome for interest sake tomorrow I will run all those bets I mentioned and start with say a bank of $100 and bet to 5% of that without reducing the bets till a higher bank is reached and go from there,.........and will respond accordingly.

I must say one thing forums like this generate to a certain degree, and that is they get punters keeping records of all their bets whereas they probably wouldnt have done that so much before in the past. $20 here, $30 there, who cares.

I used to work with a bloke back in the mid 70s, boy I hope he doesnt read this,..oops, anyway, he would bet just about every day at work on every race, and he pretty much always lost. I asked him why did he have to bet on every race, why not just have his 1 or 2 bets on what he thought were his main chances for the day. He said if he did that he might miss out on a good priced winner. Needless to say he lost a lot and ended up borrowing money from the credit union in order to pay his racing debts.

Those people probably still exist but these forums gets the punters thinking a lot more smarter now as to their losses etc. Good Stuff....!!!

And Party, I agree with you there also, but what about all these so called money factories or whatever, that are advertised on "another site", do they work..???

Paul

Hi Pauls123,

I would be very careful about betting as high as 5% of your bank as it only allows you 20 losses before you destroy your bank. I use a 2% of maximum bank non reducing and have found it acceptable to my betting. At one stage I had lost about 50% of my bank but it has recovered to be now 3 times the low point. If I had been using 5% the bank would surely have been wiped out. I know Bhagwan has previously suggested 0.5% as been a very safe starting point i.e. $5 for a starting bank of $1000. but this may be too cautious for your liking. Just make sure you give yourself a comfortable buffer when things turn pear-shaped and you hit that losing run!

Try Try Again

cant recommend the 0.5% highly enough, reasons being -

still win when alls going good
still lose when the goings bad but you never wake up one day to find a massive chunk of your bank gone, & there will always be bad runs regardless of your average divy

just went thru 52 losers in a row, is a mostly longshot system after all, then within the last week had 47 bets & hit 9 winners, $57.5, $23.8, $20.4, & so on

if i had been running anything more aggressive than 0.5%, well i probably wouldnt been making this post & another seemingly promising method could have been binned

If one is going to use any progressional staking, I feel its important to know in advance what the cut off point will be .

This idea can work well .
This is from the staking machine UK

Target to win .5% of bank. + losses.
e.g. $5.00 / 1000.00

Bet to odds of the selection so as to recover losses.

Do this over 6 bets.

Start again if no winner within those 6 bets.

Min price $2.20+

Target races with 12 runners & less.
This helps with the average SR using average selections.

Cheers.

__________________
Cheers.

Thank you one and all, like I said I would run some stats on my figures with betting a % of a bank. I just updated my spreadsheet and this is now my correct figures, keeping it simple this time:

No of bets 136, (over a 3 month period usually only betting syd and mel sats)
No of wins 42 for a flat level stakes POT of 29.4%

Using a $100 bank and betting 5% of that bank I ended up with a POT of 16%, my bank was wiped out at one point so I guess I had to borrow some of the housekeeping money to top it up.

Using a $1000 bank and betting .5% of that bank I ended up with a POT of 25.8% and of course my bank was never threatened. The starting bet was $5 and after having those 136 bets was still betting $6 per bet.

Bottom line, all very interesting with level stakes still coming out on top over the 3 month period.

When your on a roll with any sort of a staking plan the POT is looking very rosey but a run of outs sure brings you back to reality quick smart.

I've been away for the last 6 weeks touring down around victoria and the great ocean road and whilst I was still able to do my sectional time analysis and black book entries I didnt have access to watch the replays like I do at home here. Watching replays I find is very helpfull as it can influence your decision as to the merits of times run.

Paul

Good results there Paul.


The original idea with 0.5% level stakes was that it adjusts downward after a losing day & upward after a winning day.

The idea is based around the fact that a punters decision making is a lot clearer when he knows the money side of things are taken care of if things don't pan out on the day.
In other words, if say we hit 30 losers in a day .
Its not the end of the world.
Come next day we bet 0.5% of remaining bank.

This 0.5% percentage is used to create a buffer between the big swings up & down , as if betting say 5%-10% of bank up & down, which is not the strongest way to bet.

No matter how good the selection plan is, the average plan will have 20+ outs plus, at some stage , so try & be prepared.

The theoretical run of outs for a 30% SR is 41 in a row, this may not happen until next year, but it will happen when we least expect it, so once again, try & be prepared because the stats will not be denied.

Remember...
The TAB & Bookies know you have their money in your pocket & they want it & some.

Cheers.

__________________
Cheers.