To emphasise the merits of my often repeated investment strategy(ie. 1 unit win/ 5 units place)I will outline a practical example of my betting activity for Sat 24.1.03.
Using my previously outlined selection method, I had five qualifiers:
MR1 No. 6 Milk 3rd NTD
MR4 No. 8 Metal Reign 2nd ($1.60)NSW
MR5 No. 5 Bust Up WON($8.00);pl($2.50)
SR6 No. 6 Eaux De Vie 3rd ($1.60)NSW
SR7 No. 14Win H Win There 3rd ($6.00)NSW
These investments resulted in an outlay of 30 units for a return of 66.5 units for a POT of 121.67%...a pretty good result I am sure you would agree. Particularly, that I achieved a win ratio of 1 in 5(20%) which is about what the average punter averages over a period of time. Sure, favourite backers can achieve 30-32% of winners but find it almost impossible to win overall due to the compressed odds.
If I had backed those five selections for a win only I would have achieved the following:
5 bets
1 winner($8.00)(NSW)
POT = outlay 5; return 8...3/5x100 = 60%
..a good result but does not match my strategy.
Now, because I treat my punting seriously and seek to manage a reasonable POT each year, I try to exploit the difference in divs offered by each mainland TAB by opening accounts in each state. Due to problems, I did not have access to Unitab yesterday so I operated on NSW TAB and Supertab. Following are the results achieved by approaching punting in a more "professional" manner:
The results above, reflect NSW divs, now refer below for Supertab divs:
MR1 No.6 Milk 3rd NTD
MR4 No.8 Metal Reign 2nd $1.50
MR5 No.5 Bust Up WON $9.20w $2.90pl
SR6 No.6 Eaux De Vie 3rd $1.70
SR7 No.14Win H Win There 3rd $7.80
Return here was 78.7 units for the same 30 units outlay, representing POT of 162.33%
Therefore I have been able to obtain a further increased profit of 40.66 units from these results. I am certain if a punter can exploit the tools available to him/her and consistently achieve overlays, then they can make racing pay in the long-term( as I am currently doing). Note the strengths of my strategy....protection of capital, achieving modest returns on investment, control of capital and ongoing research to refine methods.
Another contributor in another forum asked whether there is merit in wagering in the denomination of 1 win 5 place, well, there certainly is even when place divs are somewhat compressed.
Feel free to comment and share your strategies(that doesn't mean giving up your secrets)as this is a game where you never stop learning and flexibility and listening to other punters' approaches may assist you or me in our own betting.
Cheers.

Thanks for the informative posting, Xanadu.

I'm not sure which of your systems you are referring to in making these selections. Had a look at most of those posted via the "search" facility of the forum (which is excellent, by the way). Any clues?

My only thought is that you should not have bet on Milk, there being NTD in that race. Surely cutting out a third of your potential to pick up a place dividend is not worth the risk!?!? The POT would have increased to 177.08 and 227.92 respectively too!

The Qld Tab results were much the same as Sydney with the exception of Win H Win There. It paid $8.00 up there :cry:



[ This Message was edited by: Merriguy on 2003-01-26 16:45 ]

I believe that only three things are important in betting.

1/ A solid selection method.

2/ An even more solid staking system.

3/ The ability to combine 1 and 2 into a profitable combination.

The rest will fall into place.

G'day Merriguy,

Good to hear from you and in respect of your comment about backing Milk in a field of less than 7 starters. This can be a very successful stategy over the long term as overlays for the place are quite common as the general public steer away from what they perceive to be risky betting propositions. By this, I mean that usually to calculate place divs the ratio of 1/4 of win odds is utilised in fields of 8 or more. In fields of less than seven starters 1/3 of win odds applies. However, in an average 3 dividend race the Govt deduction is made then the place pool split three ways for calcultion of place dividends. However, in fields of 7 or less, after the Govt deduction, the pool is split only two ways and this offers the potential for obtaining an overlay for the place div. eg. a selection is paying $2.20 win, therefore the place odds should be 1/3 0f $1.20=$.40(ie. div $1.40). Quite regularly, the place div may be showing $1.60 or $1.70 and if this is maintained till race start you have a nice overlay of between 14.29% and 21.43%, which, if you can achieve on a regular basis, gives you the chance of formulating a profitable betting strategy.
To bet in fields of 7 or less starters, I quote from a punting icon, "Chicago O'Brien" a colourful racing identity from the U.S. in the 1920's: "pick 'em to win, play 'em to place." So what I am saying here is that when I bet in these small fields, I wager on the horse that I expect to win but bet 1w 5pl to give me a bit of insurance in case it gets narrowly beaten.

Thanks for the quick response, Xanadu. It will take me a little while to get my brain cells to follow all that --- but I think I understand the drift. Appreciated.

No hints about your preferred system?

G'day once again Merriguy,

In response to your question, I actually utilise several selection methods and staking strategies because I believe that with all the variables in racing a flexible approach must be maintained. As I am a form student, I spend a lot of time on form analysis to highlight potential betting opportunities and look to obtain value before placing a wager. I made those selections on Sat 24.1.03 using my Mr Magic method(outlined in a recent post). Earlier today I chose SR1 as a dead-set match in two: Umaris & She's Lovely. I utilised my dutch book plan which I highlighted in a recent post and this resulted in a modest positive percentage return. As I am a percentage punter and bet every day there are times when no value is available so I might apply one or more of my mechanical plans and try to obtain a reasonable percentage POT. Alternatively, I may utilise one of my methods which concentrate on exotics and by making multiple flexi bets seek to secure a respectable percentage return.
In respect of place betting in fields of 7 or less runners, basically an overlay may be achievable as the place pool is only split two ways, there is potential to securing a proportionately higher div as long as your selection runs 1st or 2nd and as long as a disproportionately large amount of money has not been invested on your selection. For example, how often have you seen a placegetter in a small field pay $2.30 win $1.70 place?
I realise this approach is not for everyone but I hope this has clarified things somewhat.

Cheers.

To emphasise the points i made earlier, refer to race 5 Sydney today(27.1.03 7strs):
No.1 Spillway won paid NSW $2.90win $1.90pl
This emphasises my point about betting the place in small fields. Although Spillway was the favourite it presented an opportunity for an overlay bet for the place.ie $2.90 win in a field of 7 strs, you would expect the place div to be 1/3 win odds, ie $1.90 x 1/3=$0.63, rounded down to $0.60(+ $1 investment = anticipated place div of $1.60, yet punters were able to secure $1.90, $2.00 on Supertab, representing an overlay of 18.75%, even better on Supertab, a pretty respectable overlay I'm sure you would agree?

Hi there GeneralGym,

I noted your post with interest and basically I agree with what you said.
However, I am of the opinion that ongoing success in punting does not necessarily depend on having a solid selection method.
I believe that a highly developed understanding of percentages combined with a systematic betting approach can provide long-term success.
I know of a group of professionals who have been successful for years betting on the shorteners in each race and dutch-booking them on the tote. However, their profits have been eroded by increased Govt deductions and I don't know about their long-term viability.
These professionals do not study form, they allow the market to indicate which runners should be supported and wager accordingly to allow them a reasonable return on their investment.
However, a percentge punter does not have to bet in every race. He/she can wait until a potential favourable situation presents itself and bet accordingly.
I believe that by achieving regular POT is a much more effective approach than chasing losses or other similar approaches.

Hi again Xanadu.

Have just read your last three posts and much appreciate the wisdom contained in them. Will help me -- and plenty of others, I'm sure -- to become a better punter. I guess, as has often been said on this forum, it is up to the individual to work out for him/herself the way of betting he/she is most comfortable with. This 'vibes' (if there is such a word) with me anyway.

Couple of other things: many mention Dutch Betting on the forum. I'm not sure how many realise that there is a great little 'tool' available on the net that does all this for you --- allowing you to specify what you wish to outlay; have as a return; profit; or bet in units. It is shareware and free allowing you to test it for as long a you wish (calculating on up to three runners for a limited outlay); or, for $US19.95, have those restrictions completely lifted. Just go to http://www.codeexpress.com/sbcalc4/sbc_text.html

And, lastly on a longer than usual post for me, you mentioned seeking the best price by monitoring the various TABs. As you probably know, DAS does that for you for a win (not for the place), and it can be profitable to watch their early prices if you have your selections ready. I wanted to back three yesterday. Two of their opening prices were useless; the third was $15.00 for Gazania which I took and made a very tidy profit from (the other two didn't win anyway!). It started at $7.70 in NSW :grin:

[ This Message was edited by: Merriguy on 2003-01-28 11:04 ]

Xanadu
"Quote"
However, I am of the opinion that ongoing success in punting does not necessarily depend on having a solid selection method.
I believe that a highly developed understanding of percentages combined with a systematic betting approach can provide long-term success."Unquote"

My definition of a solid selection method is one that works for you. Without it no systematic betting approach will be successful. The same for a staking method which will not reap you rewards regardless of how many winners you select if it is not used correctly.
How you select you winners is up to you and once you have a method that provides you with winners then a staking plan to profit from those selections needs to be implemented to take maximum benefit but provide some security on a losing run.
THE TWO GO TOGETHER. THE REST FALLS INTO PLACE
The rest includes
POT (Profit On Turnover)
POB (Profit On Bank)
POW (Percentage Of Winners)

"Quote"
I believe that by achieving regular POT is a much more effective approach than chasing losses or other similar approaches."Unquote"

Totally agree here but the POT is achieved by selection and staking methods not the other way around.