Bagman,
If the above quote is true and not out of context, you either meant over a lucky short period [only], or it's time for you to go back to punting school [?]

Hi Crash,
Thanks for your input.

Staking plans like any other thing, relies on the ability to hit winners.

If they all get up in the first half & non at the end of the process , no plan will save you except maybe level stakes, in that, one may lose less money.

If one wishes to make a profit every year.
Get your first bank increase at the beginning of the year at level stakes, then stop & wait for next year to come around. There you go , thats how one can make a profit every year. (Just joking)

That is why when doing any sort of progressional, it is important to have a cut off point.
With the ladder staking plan , it's cut off is at bet No.60
That is 60 losers in a row before the bank is bust .

If one does not have a cut off point , one will be created for you .
That is , you will have run out of money.

I keep hearing the same old mantra that a progressional will not work if it cant break even at level stakes.

Well, I'm sorry, but I have to disagree .
With the right plan for the process , it can be done.

I also use a cut off rule if I have a certain No. of outs in a row, before restarting where I left off.

Every selection plan has a run of outs , no matter how good it has proved itself in the past, that is why it is important to try & stop after a certain amount of outs.
Try not to beat oneself up too much when that juicy paying winner gets up without the bet being on , if the plan is any good , there should be more to come in the future.

The idea of stopping & restarting helps to try & address the dredded run of outs issiue.
It may not feel it works for you, but it does give one the feeling that one has some contol over what is happening with their betting when in the midst of the dredded horror run of outs .

I have several staking plans that all show a profit with a level stakes loss, up to -30% LOT & they still recover to make a profit.

The Ladder Staking plan is the simplest & I surgest punters may like to give it a work out on paper first before using any real money, to see if its for them or not.
Remember to restart once in profit.

Staking plans have put me miles in front.
Including betting 2 horses a race , which many say cant be done, "you are betting against yourself" "its impossible!," "mathematically it just cant be done!," "I cant do it, so therefore no one else can."

I have to say, if I can do it , therefore, someone else must also have the same ability, if not more .

But it does require discipline, like anything else, when it comes to real money.
When the real money goes on , a different reality suddenly presents itself.
e.g. Fear
That is why it is so important to start off small & build up from there.

Cheers.

__________________
Cheers.

Sorry Bagman, I can't counter 'Special Pleading' arguments for Progressive Staking that avoids all unfavorable evidence [especially any maths]. Life's just too short!

Can a horse be made to run faster by a punter altering their staking method? With a bit of Special Pleading reasoning, well why not?

I think you might fit nicely as a betting system Votary so well described below by Epstein:-)

"The number of 'guaranteed' betting (staking) systems, the proliferation of myths and fallacies concerning such systems, and the countless people believing, propagating, venerating, protecting, and swearing by such systems are legion. Betting systems constitute one of the oldest delusions of gambling history. Betting systems votaries are spiritually akin to the proponents of perpetual motion machines, butting their heads against the second law of thermodynamics".

-- The Theory of Gambling and Statistical Logic (page 53) by Richard A. Epstein. [2nd reprint 2003]

-------------------------------------------

Hi Top Rank.
In responce to your SR of 12-13% SR av $8.00 = break even , not bad.

With a 12.5% SR , one has got to expect a run of outs of 46 in a row at some time, before the next winner gets up . It will happen , its only a question of when.
With a 1% chance of 60 outs in a row.

The median figure is 30
This means that one should strike the majority of the wins within 30 bets.

So what ever plan one wishes to introduce , it has to be framed around these figures.

It's maybe an idea to stop & restart again after 31 outs in a row.
Wait until a winner gets up before recommencing where one left off .
This is not to say that one may encounter another 31+ outs in a row, so be aware of this.
Then continue where one left off.

We are saying that there will be approx 12.5 winners in every 100 bets at approx $8.00 av div.

We double the Av Div figure in this case $8 x 2 = 16
16 is how many lots of $1 bets we make before going up to the next stage in the Ladder. If not in profit before hand.

Always start afresh once in front , no matter how small.

With a 1% chance of 60 outs in a row
With the possability of a further long run of outs in a row after that winner is struck.
I have factored all of this in.

The ladder plan maybe of interest based on the above stats.

$1 x 16 (No of bets)
$2 x 16
$3 x 16
$4 x 16
$5 x 16
$6 x 16
$7 x 16
$8 x 16
$9 x 16
$10 x 16
$11 x 16
$12 x 16

Bank $1248

192 bets, we hope to strike 24 winners here at 12.5% SR for the sequence to be successful.

$1248 Bank needed.
We have taken into account that one may have a 1% possability of
60 outs x 3 = 180

This means one will need to strike equivalent odds of approx half of what is required at level stakes to break even over the sequence of 192 bets.

Can you do it?

Now try doing that with level stakes.

Restart once in front.
We have to have large amounts like this, because of the average number of outs between wins.

The idea is to keep going up the ladder, win lose or draw, until one is in front, then start again.
We are crushing the figures into our favor.

Run the staking plan over your past results to get a feel if its for you or not , but I feel you will find that it will force it into profit.

The general feeling out there with any progression, is that it is usually best to try & find a method that has a SR of 24%+ if using any progressive type staking, otherwise, one is in for a hard grind at the wheel .
It also takes discipline because what happens , we will miss bets when we need them, especially after 25 outs, so that phone had better not ring at the wrong time because thats when they tend to get up.

So please be aware, it will happen to the best of us. So try not to kick the ****** too hard.


Cheers.

__________________
Cheers.

Hi Novice,
I think there maybe a small clerical error with one of those figures which says av div is approx $6
Going on the other figures with it, SR 38.77% / ROI 105.78 =
I think you ment it to read read $2.72 Av Div

Expected run of outs is 14 in a row.
Median run of outs is 10, this is to say the majority of the wins will be within 10 bets
With a 1% chance of 21 outs in a row.
20 x 3 = 60 Bets to be allocated to the selection plan.

The ladder staking plan should work a treat .
Av Div $2.72 x 2 = 5.44 (lots of bets)
$1 x 5 (lots of bets)
$2 x 5
$3 x 5
ect up to $12 x 5 .
Then stop if still not in profit. Review ones selection process.

Stop at any stage one is in profit by 2+ units.

Keep going up the ladder, win lose or draw until in front. This is important.
Then start again.
What we are doing is forcing the given criteria into profit.

Bank needed $390
Allows for 60 bets within the sequence to be successfull.
One needs to strike half of the equivalent odds of level stakes betting to break even.

Try it out over your previouse results.
It should show a profit greater than what you are currently doing.
Let us know how you go.

The 5% POT is a good result at level stakes.
Well done

Cheers.

__________________
Cheers.

Well Crash , each to their own .

There is nothing wrong with level stakes betting.
But there is a lot wrong with most progressionals if the SR falls away outside the expected parameters, & there is not a contingincy in place when it happens.

Or, its a staking plan not designed for those expected parameters.
This is where all the damage is done.

One must STOP betting if it goes outside the given parameters that have been factored into the expectation.

Of course, one will loose if one keeps going outside the know factors.
Thats why we say to STOP STOP STOP STOOOOOP! if & when it raises its head.
Then start again once the anomilies have cleared.
Theres no guarantee that these anomilies wont present themselves again after a win or two.

We Stop if it goes past the Median figure of the selection plans expected SR .

That's why our learned friends have a field day with the logic used because they are right, based on the parameters they are using .
That is , betting onwards not stopping until the wheels fall off. "there you go, I told you so, nah,nah,naah na" "I proved it with my hard to understand sums"

They claim its all the same no matter how one chooses to twist it around.

Do you think you could ask him for me to devise a plan based on a expectation of say a minus -20%.?

I strongly feel they would say straight out "it cant be done" & certain people will beleive them or "one needs a million dollars , no one would take the bets."

************ scientists said that it would take the power of the Sun to split a Hydogen atom , therefore would destroy Earth if it were attempted.

Doctors around the world said that an Ulcer can not be treated as a virus, because it is not a virus. now it is, after much derision.
This was only 10 years ago.

Experts said that colour images could not be sent through copper wire via the internet ,because its mathematically impossible, now there is that, plus full Television imagry & sound..
That was less than 10 years ago.

Experts in Arthritis get paid big money & they dont know how to quire it.
Apply that same logic to a Motor Mechanic & see if he gets paid.

Mathemeticians said the TAB divs would be greater if they were combined.
How come it is'nt.

Scientists said in their day that man would need oxygen masks if one travelled faster than 60mph because logic tells them so.

What I propose , is that we invite Mr. Epstein & his thermodynamics over on a Friday night after synagog, that is if the thermodynamics say its possible , so as we can go over the figures so he can show me where I am going wrong with his theory.

Maybe if we try & bend it to his logic , I should loss & he will be right.

Then he, his thermodynamics & his theory will be happy.

Dont forget it is still only a theory , just like all the experts mentioned above & therefore still open for debate.

Thermodynamiscs is something to do with heat from friction, what if you ran the same process using possitive & negative pollarity so that there is minimal touching parts to create the same process , would you end up with different heat.
Or is that impossible.?

Cheers.

__________________
Cheers.

Bhaggy

I think you'll find that these numbers are a bit "iffy" too. Had a closer look at his/her spreadsheet and posted some updated figures earlier.

I'm wondering about the "novice" tag. I've no reason to doubt the claims but the novice thing doesn't really ring true when clearly he/she is not.

Pixie

Hey careful here!

Bagman,
Boy you do go on [and on] with such waffle.

Even a progression of 1/1.5 [STOP! Start again] is a progression. The point of [Professor] Epstein and others, is: NO [not any] progression will turn a flat stakes loss into a profit and you go so far as to say your ladder progression will turn a -30% LOT into profit!
Like I said, Special Pleading rhetoric.

How about explaining why you haven't cleaned out every Casino in the World then, or does your progression system only work with Horse racing? Well why is that [oh boy, interesting reading for sure]? :-)

Perhaps you should lighten up on whatever you drink after Friday night Sybnagog...!

Bhagwan, thanks for your replies, although if I was to tell the truth I already knew the answers, I am really just cmparing notes with you. Hope that is OK.

If it is OK can you tell your staking for the two horses in a race, I would understand, after my admission, if you say no.

There are many doubters but I for one know that Bhagwan is so close too spot on, (in his own way, because there is more than one way to skin a cat) that we may well have crossed paths.

17years of winning and grinning is proof enough.
Crash it is OK to believe what you want, but is there just the slightest possibility at the back of your mind that we could be right. I don't say I can turn around 30% loss but 10% and under, yes sirree.

Anyway best of luck to you all.