Wesmip1, a loss of 2.2% before commission on betting on the fave is quite remarkable but not too surprising with Betfair.

As to using the prices on BAT - I think I may have posted the following earlier but it might be worthwhile repeating. When BAT was introduced I compared the Final Trade price with that shown on BAT. I looked specifically at a fave which incidentally I layed at around $3. The Final Trade price was slightly over $3 yet BAT showed it's price at $2.20 which is a huge discrepancy.

I queried this with Betfair who informed me that BAT mirrors the Bet price on the betting screen immediately AFTER the start of a race. In my instance, the $3 was snapped up at the death which left $2.20 as the best available Bet price. BAT identified this price of $2.20 and automatically transferred it to its screen.

So, in some instances BAT is underpricing itself, and therefore with real betting the fave might even show an overall profit. Also, the Lay price would most likely be very flattering as I presume in the above instance the Lay price would be the next "click" of $2.22?

Just thought I'd mention it.

Michael.

Like I've already said, these claims are high on rhetoric and low on maths. In this case ZERO maths. Don't worry about running it all year, just supply the maths on how this 'magic' maths equation happens please.

It's a bit like the snake-oil loan merchants claiming the best way to get out of debt is to 'consolidate' the debt by borrowing more money [from us]!

Eventually of course you lose the house :-))

Wes

I've never used the "Retirement Plan" and have only had a very brief look at the example available on line so I'm struggling with how you can back and lay the same horse at the same price and end in profit on both sides of the ledger. That's what your suggesting isn't it? An example would be really great if you get a chance.

My reading of the method is that it's just a progression staking plan isn't it? The examples on the Granstand site are very misleading as they set-up the example with a 3/1 average SP yet display results with a 4/1, a 5/1 and a 7/1 winner!! Change all these to 3/1 and your still in the red. Depending on where you move these three winners in the sequence, you may even be further behind than if you'd used level stakes.

Can you tell I'm no fan of progression staking?

__________________
Pixie

"It's worth remembering that profit isn't profit until it's spent off the racecourse." -- Crash

It's also called chasing losses.

Just like AngryPixie I'm not really a fan of progressive betting, but keeping an open mind on the subject, Wesmip1 could easily make me reconsider.

It did very well for Maria, but I wonder how she would have fared if she had stuck to level stake betting?

There is a guy on another forum who swears that his staking system has turned a loss of level stakes on Place betting into an acceptable profit, and has been doing it successfully for quite a few years.

Michael

Wasn't Maria using a percentage of bank approach? In my mind that's a different and probably more sensible method.

__________________
Pixie

"It's worth remembering that profit isn't profit until it's spent off the racecourse." -- Crash

Very true. Even though it wasn't a loss-chasing method it was still a staking method that increased her outlay per race.

I've heard/read arguments from punters who bet (not lay) this way and have claimed it to be superior to level stakes when betting their selections, yet there are critics who don't believe them.

I have some literature by a punter who about ten years ago tried a loss-chasing method with faves only, over a period of one year. He had only two filters - 1) omit races with equal-faves, and 2) omit races in which the fave is odds-on. He applied this to Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane Saturday races and documented every selection and every amount wagered per horse. His aim was to cover existing losses and win $5 if the fave won, then he would start from scratch - aiming to profit by the nominated $5. After 52 weeks he showed a very handsome profit. Maybe he was lucky there was not a long losing streak - he admitted he used the 3 states to more-or-less nullify this happening, even though his logic might puzzle some of us.

Anyway, Wesmip1 I'm sure we'll all be interested to see how your Retirement staking plan goes using the Betfair faves.

Maria's percentage of bank betting IS a flat stake betting method [a flat stake % of bank].

'Progressive betting' is a different animal, one that increases the bet stake after a loss with various degrees of increase etc. which range from very mild to very aggressive.
It's still a loss chasing system and all promoters of them [regardless what the progressive method involves] NEVER call them a 'loss chasing'. Why? Because chasing loses is a well known big punting no no. However, that's exactly what all Progressive staking methods are .... loss chasing systems.

With you, Crash ....in this case anyway lol .

Crash, my understanding of the term "level stakes" or "flat stake betting" is betting the same amount from day 1 to whenever.

But as I'm certainly not an ************ on this, I will defer to your explanation.

As a matter of interest, do you (or anyone here) believe betting a percentage of one's bank is/can be superior to betting the same amount every race even if the latter method shows a loss? I know of astute punters who have completely opposing opinions on this.

P.S - the deleted part is the word "e x p e r t"