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 420,000 Metropolitan, Provincial and Country races!
http://www.propun.com.au/horse_raci...ng_systems.html
*RaceCensus now updated to 30/06/2025
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