assumption
 

is that this place is so quiet these days because most who have posted here over the years are that busy turning a quid now we have that wonderful new toy to "play" with called bf?

In my case yes, Stugots.
I no longer do form or look for winning methods that limit my betting.
I am just doing the numbers and don't have time to do anything else between four countries of racing.

For myself, I'd rather have 1,000 bets a week with 30% POT than 2 bets, it all comes down to turnover, but more importantly steady consistent returns.

Here, here!

I should add to my reply, that it's not all beer and skittles....

Getting set at a good price is very difficult with some guys offering just silly lay odds about horses. How they carve a profit out of it, I just don't know.
When you regularly offer 6/1 about a 3/1, the balance has to go backwards.

I've also made some very bad blunders along the way.

Not to mention lack of sleep!

thats the side of the market i have been having a bit of success with crome, & yes there are some (many) around that want to lay at any old price, forcing me to either offer a similar generosity or pass on the race, with the latter the usual option

frustrating but with a truck load of patience there’s still plenty of opportunities presenting themselves

stugots,

That is oh so true!
I have been taking advantage of both sides with some success also.
When these guys offer silly odds, I just reverse my strategy when the over gets to a certain level.

Chrome, your posts over the last couple of days have really got me thinking. Do you think it's possible (I certainly do) to trade, say the first 2 in the market so as to put yourself in a a postion where you've been able to lay them both at evens. A final position of as low as an even $10 on both, over 100 races per week would certainly add up. I'm thinking along the lines of 30% of favs winning, & 25% of 2nd favs winning. This would give you 55 races where you break even and 45 races where you win $19. (after commission). 45 x $19 per week is not to be sneezed at. Your thoughts would be appreciated.

Mark,

I certainly think it's able to be done on paper, but in reality it might be different. I don't know for sure because at this point I'm turning over as much as possible to get my commision down. I've just stuck to a set formula without investigating too much further.

For example: I had an absolute ripper of a method which returned phenomenal figures on spreadsheet, the only hurdle was getting set at the prices. The ones I couldn't get set on to lay, lost, and the one's I could easily get set on won!

Now over time (enough turnover) it did return positive profit, but very small compared to the paper figures.

The point is that it would need to be trialled in real time even with the minimum bet size to see if it stacks up. My feeling is that there would be lots of times where you could get the right price on one and on the other you'd have to compromise the profit.

Mathematically it would work though.

Once things settle down a little (i'm wagering on all races bar the USA everyday) I plan to run a few ideas to see if they can augment what I'm doing.

It's a real pity that Australia has no historical data to work with apart from the last price traded, as that is no indication at all. An example is in the UK I have got set on a horse to lay it at $3.25, but it closed at $6.00 as the final lay price.

It seems that most layers are targeting arbitrage methods around the favorites. Might there not be something in going a bit wider like 3rd. to 5th. favorites and seeking a higher arbitrage percentage?

No reason why not Crash. I think the key is to latch on to the runner which drifts or firms the most. Be nice to know which one that was going to be.