Yes, very good idea!

Here's another one I call the "insurance bet"

Take your first selection and back it for a place.

Then take an all-up like this:
1)1st 2nd
2)1st 2nd 3rd
3)1st 2nd 3rd 4th
4)etc
So even if you get half way you make something good to cover your bets and still make a profit!
Mind you, you have to have more bets and split them over three or four all-ups.
But could pay dividends...nothing worse than getting 5 out of six placers and getting BANANA!

Equine Investor, if you really want to call this an insurance bet, you should cover as many risks as possible. Your staking should be:

1) 1st, 2nd, 3rd
2) 1st, 3rd, 4th
3) 2nd, 3rd, 4th
etc

The compounding effect should cover the cost of implementing the staking plan. What do you think?

Yep, it's all good.
But you have to realise by doing this insurance, you also are eating away at potential profits the more combinations of bets you have on each all-up.

Which is why it's called insurance I guess. Personally I back my ability, which is improving by the week thanks to certain participants on this forum, and just go for three in a row.

Placegetter,

I will run with your three 'all up' structure, as i agree the compound effect works. In terms of one bet per week, it really is all about discipline - nothing to do with maintaining interest as I actually have some shares in a few (Sanguinity 2nd race 3 at Flemington - actually named him). I am a strong believer that you need to select your races. No more than 12 starters (prefer lots of exposed form (generally 1400m plus). Race 4 and Race 6 at Flemington were perfect examples. My system selected Badgers Wood and Mr. Magoo $1.90 and $1.40. I would kile to know your view on race selection.
cheers Moral

G'day Moral,

I don't think my race selection process is anything out of this world. Usual stuff like no maidens, hurdles are out, I only spend about 10% of my bank on difficult areas like 2 year olds and the like.

I don't know much about your system, but keeping to less than 12 runners might limit your returns a bit? What would you consider a great result for a selection? $2.00?

Let me know how you go staking your system, don't forget that the 2nd horse can be the first horse of a new three in a row attempt!

Placegetter

Placegetter,
thanks for your feedback, it is great. Let me see, I am actually happy with $1.60+. Staking is now taking up a lot of my thought - as I have not nailed this yet. I try to keep each bet to 5% of my bank (current bank $5K). I reckon I can average $1.80 return over the long run and am targeting a 70% strike rate (above this at the moment but early days). At the moment my plan is level staking ($250/bet, growing as the bank grows).
What is your experience with strike rate, average price and what staking plan do you employ? I am particularly interested in your staking plan discipline and whether you would consider a 'saver' on the win to boost returns.
cheers

Moral

Well to be honest, I basically concentrate on staking and the horse selctions are secondary. Anyone can pick a few placegetters in a row can't they?

I'm going to get a few chortles from this, but my wife designed the basic principle in my staking plan. It's very conservative with capital and aggressive with profits. Do you understand? Someone mentioned previously that a good system should not require any more than seed capital, with which I agree entirely.

I bet 1% of capital and 100% of profits. Think about it.

Placegetter

PS. It comes down to betting pattern, but I believe my staking will outperform any level stakes approach in the long term, depending on the darn strike rate!

Re: saver on win. Forget it. My opinion.
_________________
Pick it to win, back it to place.

[ This Message was edited by: Placegetter on 2002-05-13 22:40 ]