First you need to google to find this in a readable form.


Now, how verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry convenient that in the 2nd example the 3 wins miraculously happened on bets of $215, $185 and $195 the highest, 2nd highest and equal 3rd highest stakes.

And in the 1st example the winners came up on the last, 2nd last and 5th last bets.

Got out on the last both times. That's handy too.

I'm a bit with you I think JFC. I like the way the average SP was set at 3-1 yet much larger prices were used in the example. I've never used the plan so will not offer any comment other than by the looks of things if you substitute 3-1 for the prices used in the example, you'd still be behind. Only worked it in my head though.

__________________
Pixie

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

All these loss chasing plans are garbage. The examples always look GREAT and are ALWAYS conveniently profitable in the nick of time!

I've presented the maths equation here recently from a mathematician that no progressive staking plan can ever work long term. That most punters can't understand the maths [neither can I] is irrelevant. The fact that no mathematician has disagreed with or challenged the proof presented on such a well known maths. site should mean something to anyone with half a brain.

lol, lol.

Crash do you think a lose chacing plan will work if you have a system that brakes evan?

No it won't. Here is something else to really spin a few heads: A progressive staking plan will not improve the winnings of a PROFITABLE flat staking system [let alone a non-profitable one]! Long term you will win no more than % of bank flat stakes.

I'd suggest punters visit a few advanced maths sites like 'Dr Maths' etc. OK you won't understand the maths [me neither] unless you majored in maths for a degree, but you will understand the conclusions and the one I've just mentioned above is another one of them.

crash,

If you use a loss chasing plan on a system that is returning a POT it will always have a better result on the original bank but not on turnover.

Your result on profit on turnover will be roughly the same. This is true. But your profit on the initial bank will be drastically improved due to the higher turnover.

It all depends on what you are comparing.

Good Luck.

Apples and Apples I hope. LOT or POT profits and losses are both magnified by progressions. ...tilt.

Crash is definitly right on this one in the sense, that say you have a progresssion (just for exampe) 1,3,5,7,10,14, 18, 25, having a ave SP of 3-1, (and a pot of say 20% at level stakes) so over a long, long period you would have bet 1 unit 500 times, 3 units maybe 450 times, 5 units say 400 times, etc etc, in every case the ave. SP still remains at 3-1, and the POT 20%.

But there is another aspect here, it's how it sit's with the individual, I mean it regulates your betting and keeps your attention.

Many punters including myself b4) tend to back according to what they have in their pocket at that moment, $10, $30, $100 $10 $20, etc etc disaster, inevitably you end up with $10 on the winners and $50 on the losers.

A good way to have a 'sort of' staking progression that isn't loss chasing, is to bet regarding overlay value [a value chasing progression]. You must however be familiar with working out your own priceline on say the first five favorites. From your top 2 or 3 winning chances work out if any of them are an overlay. If more than 3 chances or no overlays [value], forget the race.

If there is an overlay winning selection, you use a flat bet standard [whatever % of bank/pocket you use]. Lets say its $10. You apply to your staking an overlay value progression of say +1, +2, +3 [more if you like]. You could also use A,B,C etc.

Each unit is say $5 [+1], $10 [+2], $15 [+3]. If you think 1 of the runners is an overlay you decide by how much [set a % scale]. If you think the horse is a 20% overlay you add $5 [+1] to your $10 flat bet, 50% would be +$10 [+2] to your $10 flat bet and 70% or more would add $15 [+3], a $25 bet.

If you decide 2 out of the 3 winning possibles are overlays, always back the one you consider the bigger overlay, not the one you 'like' or 'think' might win. 50% of the time you will be wrong, so go with the bigger overlay runner!

The above is pretty much how I often stake my bets. The bigger the overlay[value] the bigger the bet. The idea is that when you win your 1 out of 4 or 5 or whatever your SR is, your staking money is winning [when it wins] on your best overlays at the best outlay. Your getting the best value for your punting $$$.

exactly partyp, a fact seemingly lost on or overlooked by those with other agendas

the retirement plan is very tame as far as these plans go, but lo & behold, YES you still need to pick a regular winner to make it work...amazing but true!