Anybody did a check on Berts strike rate on his past spreadsheets? Not just the $4+ ones...

I know we are all side tracked by the results of the 10th where he only picked 6 winners from 40 races with 8 2nds and 2 3rds- 44 selections made for 16 hits- but take a look at other spreadsheets.

11th: 71 selections from 50 races for 17 winners ie 34% strike rate, ave price $3.78... and 15 places at 1.90 ave.

Supersoul,

If he had 71 selections then the strike rate is 17/71 which is roughly 24% strike rate. If average div is $3.78 then at level stakes you are losing about 10%.

Rats! No wonder I don't make a profit- my maths suck!

No really, my mistake- 17 winners out of 71 selections. The rest are not really better either...

I only have a few minutes
All these stats about strike rates you lot are quoting is going away from the ultimate aim .
To MAKE A PROFIT>
Now I don't care how good your strike rate is , if your dividend is too small , you are not going to show a profit on level stakes.
And the only ones who actually keep pushing thsi level stakes and strike rates are you lot who I thought would be in the know that for the last two hundred odd years there has been plenty of so called experts to test this theory out and yet there are very few who have actually been succesful making a regular profit.
Now if you call making a profit for 9 Months straight a fluke and it shouldn't and couldn't happen this long and it will break down in the long run.
OK all you selfimposed experts , tell me how long do I have to keep winning before you approve or disapprove.
THE fact remains I am WINNING and no strike rates analysis will change that.
I know why this happening , but I am certainly not going to tell anyone here.
All you lot want to do is shoot it down , just becasue you don't understand it, I have stuck my neck out willing to answer any questions and all you lot come up with is ways why it shouldn't work.
WHO CARES, it works , that is what is important.

regards bert

hi all

i really don't understand , or seem to be missing something. this thread has gone on for ages and yet there looks to me to be one hell of a hole in the system.

let me show you

i believe it costs $33.00/week, to bert, for the spreadsheet etc is that right? well if that is so, read on. if not forget i spoke.

why would anyone fork out $33.00 /week to win $5.00/day or in laymens terms $2.00 /week. that is $33 out and 7 by $5 in, total $35 minus $33 equals the princely sum of $2 profit

what have i missed?

regards

mal

Dinodog - You can include the cost of the system in your "expenses" on Berts system so you will actually get $5 a day profit after paying for the system (don't spend it all at once!). The real hole in the system is that the upside is $5 per day but the downside is $1000+

Bert - Maybe you can enlighten all us experts as to how you have bypassed the laws of chance and probability and guaranteed that you will never have a day when none of your selections win? As I said on another post I could play roulette with a $5 daily goal for 9 months and there is a 25% chance that I would win every day - that does not mean that the system is foolproof and will keep winning - it simply means I was lucky. If I keep playing for another 9 months there is a 75% chance that I will lose. Now without analysing all your data for strike rate, bets per day, etc I can't tell you what your expected win rate per day is but at a guess it is probably between 97 and 99% (obviously days with fewer bets will have a lower win chance) - so 97 to 99 days out of 100 you will win your $5 but 1, 2 or 3 days you will lose everything. Now with those odds it is conceivable you could go for 9 months with no losses but you are living on borrowed time - sooner or later (and probably sooner) the winning streak will end and you will lose money.

Now I wish you all the luck in the world but it concerns me that you do not warn your subscribers anywhere on the site what their potential daily losses are if your system fails to find a single daily winner.

hi becareful

you can invest to return greater than $5 too, but the fact still remains, no matter how you look at it, according to the plan, as has been described, that you invest $33 each week for no return and then invest further to regain the $33 plus whatever investment just to make $2, FOR THE WEEK???

i don't know about you, but my time , even thou it costs me naught, is still slightly more valuable than $2/week or if you want to look at it your way, $35/week.

the other posters to this thread, with a negative critique such as mine, have all expressed similar concerns re the value of such a course of action as suggested by bert. given that any other number of ways to lose your hard earned, might not be quite as dangerous as this loss chasing action.

for what it's worth, i don't know how this topic has aired so long

regards

dinodog





[ This Message was edited by: dinodog on 2002-07-13 12:24 ]

Here's a challenge for Becareful or anyone who likes working with spreadsheets:

What are the odds of going bust based on the following assumptions?

1. $10 profit target, assuming every dividend is $5.

2. $20 profit target, assuming every dividend is $5

3. $50 profit target, assuming every dividend is $5.

I would think the chance of going bust if aiming for $20 or more would be quiet high. Even going for $10 (enough to cover Bert's charges) would be high enough.

Here are the answers:

I assumed that each horse had a 20% chance of winning, based on a dividend of $5. The spreadsheet didn't automatically round bets to whole numbers, but the figures below are fairly accurate.

$5 target = need a win within 23 bets. 0.6% chance of going bust or once every 169 days. So a bust is over due!

$10 target = need a win within 20 bets. 1.15% chance of going bust or once every 87 days.

$20 target = 18 bets. 1.8% chance of going bust or once every 55 days

$30 target = 16 bets. 2.8% chance of going bust or once every 36 days.

$50 target = 14 bets. 4.4% chance of going bust or once every 23 days.

I think those figures may be a little low, as not all horses had a 20% chance of being winners. I.E. poor value / bad selections.

The fact remains, the system falls down at level stakes, in which case it must lose in the end, no matter if it's one day or one year; it's still the same result.

The probability of winning longterm is 0%.

If anyone is considering using Bert's system, I would suggest taking all profits out of the bank weekly, and so when you go bust, you may just be in front. MAYBE!

__________________
Treat your selection and staking methods not with optimism, nor with pessimism, but with realism.