'Target betting' isn't it?

Hi Steve M

The 6 Point divisor plan bears no resemblance to Grandstands.

Re the CORRECT formula for TARGET betting as an example .
35 % Win % X Av dividend 3.3/1 ( $4.30) X .08 =
MAXIMUM DIVISOR 9.24( say 9) MINIMUM DIVISOR 3.3 ( equal to your av dividend odds).

Reasess every 100 bets.

CORRECT BANK for Target betting is 40 times the target you want .
i.e Target $100 /Bank Required $4000

Cheers.
darky.

I've thinking about this thread more and STUGOTS is right about DISCIPLINE, when I think about it , that's the process that changed my way of betting as well, I went through the Target betting stage, then the staking plan stage, and only when I disected the result of that thoroughly, realised that there is no point in a staking plan............ just increase the level stakes instead, and sleep much better!

Partypooper.
Couldn,t agree more re discipline.Without that we,re sunk.

Cheers.
darky.

100% correct Party but regardless, many losing punters at flat stakes will draw the conclusion that there must be some magical way to beat the bookies by tweaking their betting method. Even a Professor of mathematics won't sway them ...they are BELIEVERS [it's all a bid sad really]. All they can do with staking plans is bet more and eventually lose more. If they could come up with a betting strategy that could turn a loss into a profit, all casinos and bookies would go broke.

Seems that most of us here are starting to understand the realities of the mathematics BUT, I am now going to astound you (in true Gemini style) by advocating a small side bank to the same selections that we are betting at level stakes (or 1% of bank etc) the exact size of this side bank depends on the average SP of the horses you back. In my case most of the nags I back (for the win) are between 3-1 and 10-1)

So I have a small side bank of $50 and I bet 1/5 of the bank never decreasing, in sequence and when there isn't sufficient funds to make that 5th bet (i.e. 4 losers @ say $30 on each then we only have $26 dollars left) then we abandon that bank and start a new sequence with a $50 bank betting 1/5 again.

Why do I do this? well the main reason is to curb the boredom of level stakes, a bit of fun, and the other is to hopefully "cash in" on those amazing runs that we all have some time, you know what I mean, how the winners always seem to come in bunches, but without doing much damage when we break the bank (very often)

Eg. L,L,2-1, L, 4-1, 5-1, L, L , 8-1, L,L,L 3-1, L, 5-1,6-1,L 5-1, L, L 4-1 this sequence hit $1029 in the bank after the last bet, so I quit and started again with a $50 bank and so on.

I stress that is just run along side my normal betting activities which is :LEVEL STAKES BETTING.

And before anyone says it NO this is not a typical run ovedrall (of course) but the wins do come in similar clumps sometimes.

We'll partypooper I'm astounded .....Bank of $50 betting 1/5th -never decreasing ...sofar so good ...then there's 4 losers with $30 on each of them ...way over my head ...back to the form guide for me

Many thanks for the info Darky

Having read http://www.propun.com.au/forums/showthread.php?t=9181

So to understand, do you choose the figure of your Miximum Divisor to get your own divisor as per the Six Point Divisor Plan? Where does the Min Divisor fit into things?

Cheers

Draw a conclusion [progressive stakings wins], ignore the real maths and look for a pseudo-math that agrees with the losing punters conclusion ..money for nothing [from loss to profit]. The Casinos and bookies are about to go broke. Whahaaah!

Reded, sorry it was all too much for ya mate, but I havn't done much in the way of rocket science lately.

The EXAMPLE was: that IF after a few winners, your $50 bank had grown to $150 so your next bet is $30 ...... so after a loser or 2 then a winner or two your bank stood at $146 so your next bet is still $30 (remember NEVER decreasing) so you then have 4 losers @ $30 on each so your bank is depleted to $26 (i.e. insifficient funds for the next/last scheduled bet of $30) so you then abandon the sequence and start again with another $50 bank. and $10 bets.

If you are wondering why I do this, I can tell you that it all depends how the winners/losers fall & what price and when you started, I've had several cases where the bank stood at say $876, with bets at $250 then hit 3 losers, (not enough for another bet of $250) so I started again with $50 and pocketed the remainder of the bank which was in this case $126, so even though the bank was broken, I didn't lose the lot.

The $50 by the way is just by means of example, betting 1/5 , if you are a high roller then maybe you would start with $500 and $100 bets??