L O
R U O K
S, I M O K
C U

Is that Mancherian?

Mancunian, take a little more water with it ..............

EH?

A lot here have used UB's system tester to run some ideas and the slightest of tweaks to settings can produce different POT's and qualifying races.

One system might produce a POT of 24% but find 400 races that qualify.
The next system might produce a POT of 8% but find 1200 races that qualify.

So what is better? Do I sit on my bank and go with the 24% system or do I go for turnover and get the bank into the action for the 8%?

I think Chrome once said turnover is very important because you roll your POT over many more times even with a smaller bank.

Would it make a difference if my staking plan was, say, a percentage of bank?

Hi rails run,

It's an interesting question you pose.

If the two systems above are related, it may be that the 400 out of 1200 qualifiers are where all the goodness is and the other 800 actually lose or break even?

Personally, I'd go the 400 at 24% POT, however that's without knowing your selection system and strike rate. My go would be to triple your stake on the most profitable 400 selections. I'm sure others would disagree, that's merely my view.

The Schmile

__________________
The Schmile

"I buy when other people are selling.”
― J. Paul Getty

Thanks for your reply TheSchmile. So the answer may be more about ones own preference rather than some set of maths. I wasn't thinking in terms of the systems being related... it was more about the relationship the POT % has on betting activity. I'll have to tinker with this a bit on paper.

If I was betting to a percentage of bank I think it would be better to run with the 8% system so as the bank grows it compounds more rapidly. Hmmmm, I wish I'd payed more attention in school!