Not so sure this would work.

Lets say we lay selections in the $50 - $100 range and have a 99% strike rate.

5000/SR = 52 which would fail on 1 loss.

Perhaps if your laying to lose an amount it would work ok.

For example

5000/SR = 52 per 1 unit. So to lay to lose $100 you would need at least 5200 bank.

If each selection was staked to price say to take $100 50-1 $2 9-1 $10 4-1 $20 and so on and if it still made a profit I could not see why it should fail in the future if back tested for any length of time I would give it a good chance of success.

Am I missing the point.

yes that's fair enough if you lost on the first bet - but with you laying 50 to 100 - it would be expected that you should have very few occurrences of losses - big drama when they did come up - but not too many times hopefully.

however don't forget the old rule - unless you have an edge it will end in tears - all yours.

by laying long shots you can put it off for while - but thats where it ends up - and that's a certainty..


any how each to their own -
cheers and good luck
aussie

only if rigorously back tested on fresh data - bookmakers love people with data bases, computers and back testing.

a nip here a tuck there and lo and behold you have discovered the path to eternal riches - until you do it in real time with your hard earned.

"but it all looked so logical - what could have happened" you say and then

I have filing cabinets of "good" logical sensible systems that won for 2-3 years and then started a slide and never came back.

And i mean never came back as in over 10 years of later testing.

Giday Aussielongboat.

What if all successful systems have bright patches or clear winning runs now and then (timing being variable and unpredictable) and no amount of back testing can change this.. what then?

If this were the case, could we allow for this via 3 step process...

1. continue to rigorously search for successful systems (rather than test them ad finitum to see if they will run hot until eternity?)
2. track them and understand / detect when they are 'on' and when they are 'off', coming on and coming off etc
3. create a portfolio of these and run them together eg some on, some off, others warming up or cooling down etc to increase activity and decrease likelihood of giving it all back to the bookie, tote, corporate, tom etc etc

Just my thoughts.

LG

__________________
The trick isn't finding profitable angles, it's finding ones you will bet through the ups and downs - UB

my view is that if it back tested over a couple of sets of fresh data and it looks OK then it is probabaly OK - i mean what else could you do



probably do both -search and monitor - main edge here is to build an approach where you can data gather, test and monitor efficiently. i run 180 concurrent on every horse race covered by tattsbet and tabulate the results automatically. 1 button macro.

If you could do that regularly you would be set for life and would avoid the gamblers curse - run of outs.
If you avoid the run of outs - you don't destroy your bank, your POT and/or your sanity.

Probably the most difficult pursuit of all
IMHO


that's pretty similia to what I do now - run about 10 different approaches concurrently - hoping that on average i will be in front.
as far as warming up or cooling down etc. i have no idea - they either win or they lose - doesn't seem to be, as far as i can detect so far, that it is that logical or organised.

It just happens or it doesn't happen.

The only thing i have noticed is that if i am going a bit average i usually get some long priced place getters - i.e $8+ for place dividend before i get some recovery winners. i got 3 yesterday so i am a bit chirpy for today.
LOL

what i have also learned so far is that it is "darkest before the dawn" meaning that just when you give up you are on the eve of a recovery - with one BIG proviso - that you are using a tested and proven approach - otherwise it is just down , down and down again and you can end up in debtors prison or the asylum or both.




no sweat all good

Lots to chew over here Aussie... some brilliant input, thanks.

You being a 'macro maestro' .. to track when systems are on / off / coming good / turning down etc, could it be a simple ss to auto-track SR and watch / learn from the patterns to detect high / low / turning points etc? Could this assist with avoiding the holy crap of punting = a long series of outs??

You seem to already have an idea of one such turning point eg long price place getters which seems to lead / indicate that recovery winners are close by.

Also, have been meaning to ask regards your 1 button macro that churns and crunches thru 180 concurrent variables - why so many??

Cheers LG

__________________
The trick isn't finding profitable angles, it's finding ones you will bet through the ups and downs - UB

Come on LG it's only one button! LOL

re why so many:
these are separate approaches or systems that I monitor. e.g 1 such systems is choosing last start winners when there is only 1 LSW in the race.
in isolation it does not work but with some tweaking it may improve- so I might try 5 or 6 tweaks or combinations of tweaks - they will become 5 or 6 systems/approaches with their own POT and SR that i will monitor and so on it goes to where no i have about 180 such combination or filters etc.
they have to be easy to monitor and easy to develop.
Trust me day in day out all this stuff can get terribly boring - winning helps -but the work still has to be done.

re your first point - yes i have been thinking about that. i feel there must be some sort of lead indicator that will predict good/bad times to come. i have a feeling that it might be looking at trend POT or trend SR's. so that when i have been above or below trend thats the time to do something.

For me its peculiar about writing code for these type of things. i have to be 100% clear in my mind what i want to do and i can do it quickly - but until i get to that point i cant write the code.

At this time i am not at that point so i am just gathering data in such a fashion that when I am ready it will be there for me.

hopefully I will get fired up soon and get back into it.

[QUOTE=aussielongboat]re why so many:
these are separate approaches or systems that I monitor. e.g 1 such systems is choosing last start winners when there is only 1 LSW in the race.
in isolation it does not work but with some tweaking it may improve- so I might try 5 or 6 tweaks or combinations of tweaks - they will become 5 or 6 systems/approaches with their own POT and SR that i will monitor and so on it goes to where no i have about 180 such combination or filters etc.
they have to be easy to monitor and easy to develop.


Hi Aussieboat - When you pick an approach like above where you take LS Winners with only one LSW and test against various other variables. I understand your testing into three batches. Do you start by testing over the 1st batch of years. If the POT shows promise, run the same system for the next period of years and so on.....

Also lets say your period 2 of testing shows a POT of 25% in the 4 years of testing. A loss of 8% in year one, 56% POT in year two, loss of 18% in year three and a lost of 5% in the fourth year. Are you happy with a system producing a profit in 1 out of 4 years?

Sorry for all the questions