People should take note of this as it's one of the few correct statements on the whole forum.

I lay long shots not on the Exchange but on S.P. which prevents a wipe-out if a selection at massive odds wins the race, and in spite of my first loss yesterday I'm well and truly in profit with my two methods.

As for an edge, I hope I've found one by the selection/filter process. However, I don't know without trying, and if I was to test it on paper-only I'd miss the buzz. I fully accept the success might only be temporary and could end in tears, but not to try would be unacceptable to me.

I think I mentioned it here quite a few, months ago that I transferred a total of $10,000, a profit made by laying outsiders, from my Betfair account to my bank account.

The long shot / fav bias which I read about on here shows that long shots are the worst bets on the tab. Betfairs long shots are "usually" longer then the tab though and counteract this bias. But this doesn't happen in every case and you can find threads on here talking about laying selections less then the tab prices and making a profit.

Its all about having the edge whether that be in the shorter end or the longer end of the market.

Hi, U.B.

The edge you are referring to is price-related. Interestingly, a few years ago someone on one of the forums (could even have been this one) said he was making good money by backing on Betfair the horses that had shorter prices than the TAB. However he didn't mention if they were in the top of the market or with all qualifying horses regardless of price. I remember a couple of times whilst I was at my computer I noticed that there were quite a few winners (and placegetters) that started under $10 where the Betfair price was less than that of the NSWTAB.

To do this one has to be at one's computer or have an automated system, and also there may not be much action.

I prefer to lay S.P. early, and I can only do this not by price but system-related that hopefully produces an edge.

Can I be as bold to suggest that there are at least 2 'elements of edge' required for a profitable strategy i.e. selection & staking.. Perhaps in that order?

e.g. what be the point of being able to consistently pick winners (or loosers) when our money management methods are flawed?

I volunteer this as I have spent the best part of 3 months exploring various successful selection strategies, only to find that various additional elements are required to advance, come out ahead on POT, ROC etc

For example...
1. Record ever bet as it is placed
2. Add results and any learning, discoveries
3. Batch (separately record) specific strategies and performance
4. Repeat what consistently works, eliminate what doesn't
5. Focus on and fine-tune methods for selection and staking

Cheers LG


PS have also found that the fastest way to do one's dough is to ignore some / most of these. Would suggest that I am on the right track here, regards my personal preferences etc Each to their own, I guess?

__________________
The trick isn't finding profitable angles, it's finding ones you will bet through the ups and downs - UB

I don't think theres such a thing as staking "edge" in the classic gaming sense of the word - advantage over the house. The amount you stake is/should be a product of the edge offered by your selection. No amount of imagined "staking edge" can compensate for negative "selection edge".

__________________
Pixie

"It's worth remembering that profit isn't profit until it's spent off the racecourse." -- Crash

michaelg,

http://www.fileconvoy.com/dfl.php?i...4ec52df6c2 2dc

Available for the next 7 days. These are the prices I have recorded for a bookie (not saying which one atm) and from betfair 5 secs before the jump.

I have only included the first 13K horses. Its a simple testing ground for others to look into to see if they can find anything useful.

If anyone does find anything i would appreciate if it was shared with the forum or me privately at betfinder@exemail.com.au

Was referring to a selection edge or positive expectancy in the first instance, which is then leveraged on or geared up by an aggressive staking strategy.

Both being part of an overall 'edge' in that the combination of the two will produce a superior outcome to Joe P's plan, or lack of etc i.e. we are not talking about an "imaginary outcome" or some kind of "fools gold" where the staking plan is expected to compensate for an inferior selection method.

Rather, both pull together in the same direction.

Cheers LG

__________________
The trick isn't finding profitable angles, it's finding ones you will bet through the ups and downs - UB

yes that's it - the key thing is that you cannot massage it on the 2nd or 3rd sets of data - if you do that you are data fitting.
data fitting IMHO never really works



probably not as i could imagine the Run of outs would be a big number in there somewhere.
also 1 in 4 means there was probably 1 -2 LS winners in y2 somewhere.

however in more detail - it would depend on the ongoing SRs, the place POT and whether in Y2 there was a few or only one LS winner that bumped up the POT.
i also like to look for winning months greater than 7/12
the higher the winning months % - the higher my confidence.

i am always looking for consistency as i feel that if that exists the results are more likely to be repeated.

4 & 5 above IMHO fall into the category of back fitting data.

using all the logic in the world you can filter out some non performing criteria - but be careful as those "non performers" in the fullness of time can become performers.

filter them out by all means - but then in the future examine them in isolation and i'll bet most of the time they will make a come-back - well that's been my experience.


cheers and good luck