Win2Win UK Horse Racing Forum

Win2Win UK Horse Racing Forum - Blogs http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php Free uk horse racing advice, tips, info, staking, staking, forum, systems,betting,betfair. en Tue, 06 Jan 2009 05:40:51 GMT vBulletin 180 http://www.win2winracing.com/forum/images/misc/rss.jpg Win2Win UK Horse Racing Forum - Blogs http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php Bored this morning http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=72 Wed, 26 Nov 2008 10:48:50 GMT Normally at this time of the day (10:40) I am playing poker but today I am bored. There is so little decent action that I thught I would write up a bit of stuff on here instead of getting frustrated on Full Tilt. So, what to write. Well, I have... Normally at this time of the day (10:40) I am playing poker but today I am bored. There is so little decent action that I thught I would write up a bit of stuff on here instead of getting frustrated on Full Tilt.

So, what to write.

Well, I have just had a look at the racing for today and noticed that Christian Williams is again riding for Paul Nicholls. Now, I'm not sure whether he is taking over as 2nd jockey whilst Ruby is injured or whether he has some kind of agreement with Harry Findlay to ride his horses but I wonder what it does for the confidence of Nick Schofield and Harry Skelton if they are being overlooked for rides on what don't appear to be horses with much chance of winning.

What is for certain is that it will give a massive boost to Christian Williams' confidence. He is a very good jockey and is definitely worth a high profile job. The only problem with him is that he will never be very media friendly as he sounds as thick as the Great Wall of China. I'm Welsh myself so I know how our accent can come across quite badly but he really takes it to extremes. ]]> counterfeit http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=72 down and out http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=71 Sat, 16 Aug 2008 13:36:26 GMT this site layhorses4u.co.uk nov/dec +10.017 #07 jan/april +5.878 #08 may/june + 13.174 july/august so far -1.152 i thougt i will have a go at this cant go wrong august 1 -715 2 -87 3 -1174 4 -65 5 ... this site layhorses4u.co.uk nov/dec +10.017 #07
jan/april +5.878 #08 may/june + 13.174
july/august so far -1.152
i thougt i will have a go at this cant go wrong
august 1 -715
2 -87
3 -1174
4 -65
5 +204
6 +49
7 -91
8 -1648
9 -1916
10 -2220
11 -2114
12 -1474
13 -1249
14 -1326
15 -1152
guess when i joined
would you like to join ]]> jimbo http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=71 System stats to 31/07/08 http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=70 Sun, 03 Aug 2008 14:21:35 GMT BB stats for 31/07/2008 .*AP McCoy**Nine Or Less**Stoute 80**Lambourn Yuck**Johnston Tracks**Michael Stoute**LTO3**Bets*987993508279154212*Winners*223322159443967*SR*22.45%41.77%23.66%31.30%15.77%25.32%31.60%*+/-... BB stats for 31/07/2008

.	AP McCoy	Nine Or Less	Stoute 80	Lambourn Yuck	Johnston Tracks	Michael Stoute	LTO3
Bets	98	79	93	508	279	154	212
Winners	22	33	22	159	44	39	67
SR	22.45%	41.77%	23.66%	31.30%	15.77%	25.32%	31.60%
+/- BB	9.15	-5.27	-13.29	-5.30	98.22	36.82	18.49
Overlay	29.70%	7.15%	13.74%	10.55%	27.17%	20.69%	8.60%

.	Goodun	ABS	Flat Monthly	Run Profit	Double Top	NH Media	Jump Profit	JTS II
Bets	220	107	349	280	1174	831	320	667
Winners	52	41	96	95	421	312	122	103
SR	23.64%	38.32%	27.51%	33.93%	35.86%	37.55%	38.13%	15.44%
+/- BB	-47.99	1.73	-24.42	-13.53	115.86	9.68	-2.76	-136.46
Overlay	16.60%	12.42%	3.96%	4.82%	2.69%	0.59%	3.68%	31.75%

.	Max	Lay'em	NHPM	Ladies	CD	Easy	Pro II	Plater
Bets	506	1677	692	164	433	378	116	464
Winners	425	1456	599	140	370	342	90	388
SR	83.99%	86.82%	86.56%	85.37%	85.45%	90.48%	77.59%	83.62%
+/- BB	-1.07	13.21	14.74	1.51	2.42	10.83	-4.31	-1.56
Overlay	11.67%	13.18%	9.53%	12.97%	6.98%	7.52%	9.95%	12.56%

.	Bet Bank Alerts	Insider	Sport Stat
Bets	31	16	1
Winners	19	20	0
SR	61.29%	81.25%	.
+/- BB	6.60	0.92	-1.00
Overlay	.	.	.

]]> mathare http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=70 System stats to 30/06/08 http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=69 Sun, 03 Aug 2008 14:02:38 GMT BB stats for 30/06/2008 .*AP McCoy**Nine Or Less**Stoute 80**Lambourn Yuck**Johnston Tracks**Michael Stoute**LTO3**Bets*987890419224136185*Winners*223321126353558*SR*22.45%42.31%23.33%30.07%15.63%25.74%31.35%*+/-... BB stats for 30/06/2008

.	AP McCoy	Nine Or Less	Stoute 80	Lambourn Yuck	Johnston Tracks	Michael Stoute	LTO3
Bets	98	78	90	419	224	136	185
Winners	22	33	21	126	35	35	58
SR	22.45%	42.31%	23.33%	30.07%	15.63%	25.74%	31.35%
+/- BB	9.15	-4.27	-13.79	-14.62	41.01	44.18	10.21
Overlay	29.70%	6.31%	14.41%	10.63%	27.53%	21.80%	7.53%

.	Goodun	ABS	Flat Monthly	Run Profit	Double Top	NH Media	Jump Profit	JTS II
Bets	122	88	349	232	1152	828	305	291
Winners	35	31	96	76	412	312	118	40
SR	28.69%	35.23%	27.51%	32.76%	35.76%	37.68%	38.69%	13.75%
+/- BB	-18.11	-2.24	-24.42	-13.89	117.12	12.68	0.72	-92.60
Overlay	18.92%	14.34%	3.96%	5.33%	2.65%	0.51%	3.10%	34.76%

.	Max	Lay'em	NHPM	Ladies	CD	Easy	Pro II	Plater
Bets	469	1592	673	153	382	290	116	172
Winners	393	1382	582	130	326	270	90	150
SR	83.80%	86.81%	86.48%	84.97%	85.34%	93.10%	77.59%	87.21%
+/- BB	-1.63	12.21	13.71	0.92	2.12	13.37	-4.31	2.24
Overlay	11.49%	13.02%	9.37%	11.98%	6.35%	6.28%	9.95%	12.18%

.	Bet Bank Alerts	Insider	Sport Stat
Bets	17	15	1
Winners	12	17	0
SR	70.59%	80.00%	.
+/- BB	8.31	0.01	-1.00
Overlay	.	.	.

]]> mathare http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=69 The education of a poker player http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=68 Sun, 03 Aug 2008 13:58:14 GMT Over the past couple of months I have been back at the online poker tables after a break of a few months when I was both too busy to play and rather disillusioned with the game. While on that break I continued my usual reading diet of poker... Over the past couple of months I have been back at the online poker tables after a break of a few months when I was both too busy to play and rather disillusioned with the game. While on that break I continued my usual reading diet of poker magazines and books and slowly but surely felt my confidence returning so in early June I decided to give the tables another chance. I then took a couple of weeks off to go on holiday and came back with a vengeance. I've been on the $5 10 pays 5 equal payout tourneys on Ladbrokes and it's been going pretty well, at least it was initially and then I hit a stinking run of form, losing 10 tournaments in a row. But it may have been a good thing...

Y'see, I decided I wasn't going to let this bad run beat me. I let the dust settle and took a week off during which time I analysed the results of the tournaments I had lost as well as some I had won. I went through around ten STTs hand by hand looking at my play and trying to view each hand as an outsider so I could objectively review my play. I think it worked - at the end of it I felt as though I had identified a few flaws in my game and ones that were easily rectifiable. I also spotted a few things I was doing well and noted that I should keep these up.

Has this helped? Yes, I think it has. I've still had a few lkosing events since that point but I have also won quite a few and I feel like I am on the up.

I have set myself bankroll targets and allocated personal rewards for getting there to help drive me forward. For example, when my tourney bankroll reaches a certain figure I will buy myself at least one new TFT monitor, if not two depending on how I decide to set things up. I have a goal and a reward for reaching it so hopefully that will help keep me motivated.

I have decided that these tournaments are the way forward for me for now but they are limited in number so are not the ultimate aim. I think I will use them to build a bankroll for a while and then drop back down to the $5 level to build up my normal STT skills as I feel that's the best way for me to make money out of poker long term. I'm not sure I am able to focus properly in cash games so I am steering clear of them for a while, perhaps permanently. ]]> mathare http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=68 <![CDATA[It's been a while...]]> http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=67 Sun, 03 Aug 2008 11:45:14 GMT Nearly two months since my last post - that's not good is it? But then I don't know that anyone is actually reading this - I certainly don't get a lot of feedback on it - so the drive to keep posting is lacking somewhat. I also keep forgetting! :splapme

Today I'm going to try and right a few wrongs and bring my gamblog up to date a little more. I'll be bring you posts on things like:

my return to the poker tables
system stats
the good, the bad and the ugly systems
anything else I feel like telling you all

]]> mathare http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=67 new boy http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=66 Tue, 08 Jul 2008 20:14:27 GMT :yikes:won about 3 grand last couple years mostly pick 3 on irish lottery but always been bit lucky just get a feeliing you know want to step up a gear works ***** i like spending money i won thanks for reading this :yikes:won about 3 grand last couple years mostly pick 3 on irish lottery but always been bit lucky just get a feeliing you know want to step up a gear works ***** i like spending money i won thanks for reading this ]]> yipee kia http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=66 UK Horse Racing Statistics - SANDOWN NH http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=65 Fri, 04 Jul 2008 11:36:52 GMT :splapme Yes I meant to do the flat!! :cuck

As with Ascot, this track is one of only a handful were the F/c betting guide is much more accurate at hitting winning Favourites than the live betting, and by a decent margin.

Over the 8 years you would have broken even, give or take the odd point, which is decent enough considering you don’t have to do anything to find a consistent supply of winners.

So what happened in 2002? No idea, certainly a bad year, although 2004 had a similar low SR and yet still done OK, so you can only put it down as a one-off quirk, and as long as it holds up over the years, that is OK.

So is it possible to squeeze some profit out of it without losing loads of qualifiers? Yes.

By simply limiting races to 3 miles or less, and discounting any horses that were beaten less than a length last time out, you get a big improvement. What does stand out in these figures though is that the last few years have seen a dramatic increase in SR & profits at the track. This will be down to the changes in racing over the last few years, and long may it continue.

Attached Thumbnails

Click image for larger version

Name: Sandown_Favs.gif
Views: 127
Size: 3.0 KB
ID: 82

Click image for larger version

Name: Sandown_Favs_Res.gif
Views: 81
Size: 3.1 KB
ID: 83

]]> Win2Win http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=65 How to Build a UK Horse Racing System – Final Results Review http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=64 Fri, 04 Jul 2008 09:41:07 GMT Well some folk may say that with ‘only’ 94 points profit after 8 years of work is no good, and would never...]]> So what are we to make of these results?

Well some folk may say that with ‘only’ 94 points profit after 8 years of work is no good, and would never make you rich, so I know from experience most folk would not even bother with it. They are usually the folk, which consist of the majority of punters, that spend years losing money chasing after that ultimate easy way of making money. The system that shows 1000 points profit a year!

The only system I know that possibly has the capability of that is the Member’s JTS system, but with around a 20% SR, and losing runs that can hit 40, would the ‘Golden Goose’ punters stick with it? Of course not, they want 1000 points with a 50% SR, which exists only in the minds of those who live in the asylum!

So back to the results of our system, we get 11.75 points profit a year on average; using Betfair would probably knock it up to around 14-15.

We also hit the targeted SR at 41%, so this ensures losing runs are limited and frequent clusters of winners, 83 winners a year on average. Not bad for just one system.

Now unless you are staking £1000 a bet, this system will not make you rich, but it will make steady profits over the years, and if you are staking 3% of the bank, profits will increase year on year. So how do you get more out of it?

You don’t!

That is it, the system is finished, making any more adjustments will probably mess it up, or reduce the profits/SR. What you need to do, that the ‘Golden Goose’ muppets never will, is do some more work using the marketing ‘Rinse & Repeat’ method.

All that means is you have successfully figured out how to do one profitable system, so do another one, then another one, and so on. Never stop research and development. The more work you put into designing systems, the more you have, the more you spread the risk.

If you have 10 systems for example, each produce 10 points profit a year, that is 100 points. Now that is worth doing, as even £10 stakes will see you finish the year with £1,000 profit, something that folk who have never made a profit only dream of. ‘Rinse & Repeat’ until you have 25 systems, and you are looking at £2,500. Now of course all the systems will not make 10 points profit, some may make a little less, one may make 50 points.

Doing it this way gives you a portfolio of systems, and good risk management.

For instance, you have 25 systems, and overall at the end of the previous year they made 300 points. Now say this year one fails you miserably and hits you for -48 points, because you have a good portfolio you still make over 250 points. Imagine if the system that makes the loss was the only one you followed!!! EEK!!

That is way the majority of punters who dabble with systems fail, they only do one, and then usually jump ship during a losing run, or change the staking to try and recover the losses.

I personally have more than 300 systems live at any one time, so even if 25 failed in a year, or underachieved, then the total portfolio still does very well, and I would never expect all the systems to profit every year, racing changes over time, which is why you should review all systems at least once a year.

Now off you go, you have some work to do. ]]> Win2Win http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=64 System stats to 31/05/08 http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=63 Mon, 09 Jun 2008 20:14:33 GMT BB stats for 31/05/2008 .*AP McCoy**Nine Or Less**Stoute 80**Lambourn Yuck**Johnston Tracks**Michael Stoute**LTO3**Bets*987687389209128172*Winners*223221120323455*SR*22.45%42.11%24.14%30.85%15.31%26.56%31.98%*+/-... BB stats for 31/05/2008

.	AP McCoy	Nine Or Less	Stoute 80	Lambourn Yuck	Johnston Tracks	Michael Stoute	LTO3
Bets	98	76	87	389	209	128	172
Winners	22	32	21	120	32	34	55
SR	22.45%	42.11%	24.14%	30.85%	15.31%	26.56%	31.98%
+/- BB	9.15	-3.75	-10.79	-12.05	24.94	49.75	13.34
Overlay	29.70%	6.42%	12.65%	10.67%	27.32%	21.38%	7.58%

.	Goodun	ABS	Flat Monthly	Run Profit	Double Top	NH Media	Jump Profit	JTS II
Bets	70	74	299	216	1134	822	302	92
Winners	23	27	82	71	406	309	117	14
SR	32.86%	36.49%	27.42%	32.87%	35.80%	37.59%	38.74%	15.22%
+/- BB	-11.58	0.71	-13.28	-8.23	121.61	11.40	1.09	-27.09
Overlay	22.75%	13.12%	4.55%	5.16%	2.52%	0.40%	3.02%	24.64%

.	Max	Lay'em	NHPM	Ladies	CD	Easy	Pro II
Bets	443	1519	662	146	357	242	103
Winners	369	1314	574	124	305	222	79
SR	83.30%	86.50%	86.71%	84.93%	85.43%	91.74%	76.70%
+/- BB	-3.04	8.85	14.07	0.88	1.97	8.87	-4.68
Overlay	11.66%	13.05%	9.45%	11.43%	5.64%	4.74%	9.43%

]]> mathare http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=63 The passage of time http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=62 Mon, 09 Jun 2008 20:13:10 GMT So May is over and June has begun, and then some really. I have been incredibly busy with various things and unfortunately that has meant this monthly update is delayed. I'll post my stats shortly but I thought I'd give it a bit of chatter first.

How was May for you? It was a mixed month for me really. Not a bad month but on the other hand it wasn't a particularly good month. Then again it wasn't really an average month - who has one of those in this game? OK, it wasn't massively swingy but it still had the ups and downs you learn to associate with gambling. Your money is at the mercy of so many forces of nature but history and stats tell you you're doing the right then when you put it down.And so it proved in May as I did make a profit, not a big one but a profit nonetheless.

Unfortunately I won't be doing a full "good, bad, ugly" analysis of all the systems and banks this month - my spreadsheet has moved on too much since then to make to easy to do and we're now a third of the way through June so is it worth it? I'll bring up the salient points though...

I started following Plater's lays and that bank is around 50% already so I am, well chuffed with that. The Easy Money lays continue to go from strength to strength and I am hoping that the £200 bank I started for them at the start of the year will be £500 by the time I go on holiday on Wednesday. It was only a tenner off that mark before racing today. My Mark Johnston bank has recovered from its spell under a bank barrier and is now live again. I had been a bit worried about that one I have to admit. I have been following the new JTS system and my bank has halved, using 1% staking. I don't think it's really my sort of system as I prefer a small regular return over the occasional big win, which is why I like laying so much, but I figured I may as well give it a go. My Lambourn Yuck bank is still under a barrier and may never recover, we'll see. I also have active barriers for Good'un and Flat Monthly systems.

That's enough for now I think. I've started playing poker again this month and even though I should probably be preparing to go on holiday I'd rather be at the tables so that is where I am going now... ]]> mathare http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=62 UK Horse Racing Statistics - EPSOM http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=61 Wed, 04 Jun 2008 19:54:31 GMT Home of the DERBY, and a track that has ended many a career with its quirks, especially the downhill camber. So what of the stats for this track? Well, surprisingly this is one of the easiest tracks to profit from. Not every horse can handle the... Home of the DERBY, and a track that has ended many a career with its quirks, especially the downhill camber.

So what of the stats for this track? Well, surprisingly this is one of the easiest tracks to profit from. Not every horse can handle the track, but the betting market does a very good job of finding those that will.

Simple as it seems, just backing the FAVS on Betfair will keep you in the black!

Now 24 points over 5 years is not fantastic, but it is from the point of view it is just the SP Favs, and stats like this are very easy to enhance with a filter or two.

Now most folk know that Epsom has a dramatic effect on results regarding the draw, as those wide as usually at a disadvantage, and the longer the race the worse it is. So by simply concentrating on this we can improve the above results. The bias happens wherever the track decides to put the stalls.

What I do is split the filed into 4. So if you have 20 runners, I split it into groups of 5. The first group against the rails, group 2 next, and so on. So we end up with group 4 being on the outside, and this is the group I ignore. You also need to concentrate on races of 8 or more, as the bias is very limited below that.

Now obviously is you have 9 runners you can’t split it into 4 exactly, so I would simply ignore the outside 2.

So by simply scrapping those in 8+ runner races drawn on the outside, you can improve the results (ignore all races of 7 or less).

(Note: 2007 is only half a season]

Attached Thumbnails

Click image for larger version

Name: Epsom_Favs.png
Views: 147
Size: 36.1 KB
ID: 80

Click image for larger version

Name: draw_epsom.png
Views: 92
Size: 33.5 KB
ID: 81

]]> Win2Win http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=61 How to Build a UK Horse Racing System – Adding Filters III http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=60 Wed, 04 Jun 2008 11:53:03 GMT With the results we have so far our overall ROI% is -1.74%, that is pretty easy to turn into a profit with another filter. However, splitting the results into years gives us 2004 at -5.14%, and worse still, 2007 at -8.48%. I would imagine 2007 is... With the results we have so far our overall ROI% is -1.74%, that is pretty easy to turn into a profit with another filter. However, splitting the results into years gives us 2004 at -5.14%, and worse still, 2007 at -8.48%. I would imagine 2007 is way-off the average due to the 8 weeks of rain & floods that hit the country. In fact as I like to back up things with facts, I ran the rules just for 2007, and the month of June showed -22% ROI, just when the floods wreaked havoc on us.

With a couple of years off the mark it probably means we’ll need two filters to bring everything into line, but we still must keep to the SR we are aiming at, and as many qualifiers as possible.

Now once you gain experience over the months and years ahead, certain variables will stick in your mind that work on most systems. The one we are going to look at, and I haven’t run it for this system yet, is the ‘Distance Beaten Last Time Out’.

You will usually find with this variable that horses with less than a couple of lengths are overbet, and you usually get lower than the true odds, whereas for those above you get higher odds than you should (I’ve used this as a Base Variable a few times). So I’ll run it now and publish the results below......

Voila!! As described above it shows how the odds are affected by the distance the horse was beaten last time, and it is split into 2 clear clusters at 4 Lengths.

Now I know probably 99% of people would set the rules at 4+ Lengths, however we have to remember we also want to keep as many qualifiers as possible, and those between 1-4 lengths are only showing a negative ROI% of around 2.5%, so are just about borderline for keeping in. By dumping anything negative in every step of a system you will end up with very few qualifiers. They may be profitable, but more qualifiers gives more turnover.

So if we now add the rule ‘Beaten 1L or more Last Time Out’ we get....

Looks much better now, SR is what we want, still a decent number of qualifiers, and a profit over the years. 2002 would have been profitable if using the exchanges, and 2007 around break even. 2004 is still a bit of dog, and we will have to see what happens with the next variable. I do not mind using system with one losing year, as long as I know the betting exchanges will pull it into profit.

All the SR’s a pretty even apart from 2003 which shows 47%!!! I have no idea why, I could go away and research the reason, but as the reason would not be much use anyway, I will not waste my time. However it is good practice for folk starting off to do that as you will always learn something from it.

Now for what I consider to be the last filter I’ll use we have plenty of options, we could do it by dumping any racecourses and /or trainers and/or jockeys, that do not show a profit under the rules as they are, but you will sometimes find you may be left with few qualifiers. So another variable I know can work on a number of systems is ‘Finishing Position LTO’. Usually those that won LTO are at lower odds than they should be, and horses that finished down the field are usually non-profitable (You usually have to use them as a Base Variable to get anything profitable out of them).

Horses that finished 2nd LTO can also go off shorter than they should, especially in Maidens and Novice races, as usually there is little form to go on, so punters latch on to them.

So if we take a look at the Position variable we get....

You can clearly see that our system has the effect on the 2nd placed horses I mentioned above, so we can definitely drop them. It also clearly shows that those finishing down the field show a loss overall. A small profit for 9th, but nothing worth worrying about, the general trend for the cluster for 7th+ is negative. So we are only now interested in those horses that finished 3,4,6,7 LTO, and if we add them to our overall rules and run it....

BINGO!!! A profit all round. Nothing outstanding, but a decent enough profit of 94pts over the years at a near 6% ROI, and betting exchanges will increase that.

One thing that does stand out is the increase of races from 2002 onwards, and 2008 will probably show even more qualifiers.

I will go into the final results in much more detail in my next blog post.

Attached Thumbnails

Click image for larger version

Name: LastLosingDistance.gif
Views: 96
Size: 4.3 KB
ID: 76

Click image for larger version

Name: LTO_Results.gif
Views: 97
Size: 3.1 KB
ID: 77

Click image for larger version

Name: Position_LTO.gif
Views: 97
Size: 4.3 KB
ID: 78

Click image for larger version

Name: Results_End.gif
Views: 178
Size: 3.0 KB
ID: 79

]]> Win2Win http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=60 Jumping for Profit Staking Review http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=59 Thu, 29 May 2008 19:09:44 GMT *Jumping for Profit* Bets: 486 Winners: 198 SR: 40.74% LWR: 10 LLR: 8 *Step 1: Initialise all candidate staking plans* It’s the standard set-up for this staking review with level stakes, fixed profit, standard percentage staking, ratchet... Jumping for Profit
Bets: 486
Winners: 198
SR: 40.74%
LWR: 10
LLR: 8

Step 1: Initialise all candidate staking plans

It’s the standard set-up for this staking review with level stakes, fixed profit, standard percentage staking, ratchet percentage staking and square root staking plans all under investigation. The benchmark is, as always, a 3% percentage staking plan starting with a £200 to give an initial stake of £6 for the first bet. It just so happens that the first bet on the system went off at 9/1 which means when looking at the fixed plans we use a target profit of £54 per race.

The profit, ROI and bank extremes (peak and trough) for the various plans are shown in the table below.

The fixed profit figures stands out a mile here but that’s because we have set an artificially high target profit per race. It’s not realistic to expect to win 27% of the starting bank with each winner. And indeed it doesn’t work as the bank soon busts and goes down over £600 if we let it. Standard 3% staking results in a small loss but ratcheting the stakes results in a profit. However, it is level stakes that offers the best profit and ROI here. Note that several plans share the same trough figure. This is likely to be because of an early(ish) losing run I would have thought as that way 3% ratchet stakes, the £6 initial stakes square root plan and level stakes will all still be on £6 per selection. And indeed that trough occurs at bet 64 in our sequence with the bank never having got into profit before that stage.

Step 2: Optimise with TSM

Level Stakes
As with previous reviews I have set an initial maximum stake of £1000 for optimization purposes, primarily in an attempt to eliminate the dependency on having to define a maximum stake I would ever use. However, as has happened previously TSM has suggested I use this max stake as my level stake. It would bust the bank instantly though so let’s not even go there. Experimentation in TSM shows the maximum level stake I can use without busting the bank is a little over £12.50 but let’s not worry about the exact figure, this approximate value is good enough for now. Using this stake results in a profit of £144.16 with the ROI coming out at 2.37%, obviously as it has to be the same regardless of the stakes. The bank peaks at nearly £500 but does drop below £15 so we are close to busting still.

Fixed Profits
If I now set my maximum ever stake to £1000 and optimize the fixed plan I am told to set a target profit of £71 per race. As £54 bust the bank in the extreme I am pretty sure this will do the same – and my fears are indeed borne out. Trial and error shows the most I can set as my target profit without causing the bank to go bust at some point during the betting sequence is just £10 per race. At this staking level my profit at the end of the selections is £94.33 achieved through a ROI of 2.24%. These figures are inferior to those of the level stakes plan. The bank peaks at £430.51 and reaches a trough of £51.05 so there is a little more security in the bank I guess.

Percentage Staking
Optimisation of this plan comes out with something daft if I allow TSM to use a maximum stake of anything up to £1000. In fact TSM suggests I begin with a bank of £190 and stake 35.3% of said bank on each horse selected by the system. Unsurprisingly this quickly busts the bank. In fact 8% and anything over that busts the bank, when using a £200 initial bank. If I limit the stakes to something more sensible (£50) I get another silly suggestion from TSM – use a bank of £105 initially and 20.5% of the bank to be staked on each selection. Yep, that busts the bank also, obviously. TSM sticks with this silly suggestion until the maximum permissible stake is dropped a little (below £40) at which point all maximum stakes result in a suggestion of a £200 starting bank and 1.3% stakes. However, this results in a paltry profit of £14.45 with a 1.12% ROI. As one may expect from such staking levels, the bank doesn’t move a great deal from the starting point peaking at £254.69 and reaching a very safe low of £163.45. Dull and only marginally profitable.

Ratchet Percentage Staking
The ratcheted percentage staking plans optimizes to a £200 starting bank and 3.7% staked on each selection to realize a profit of £58.26 with a return on investment of 1.04%. These figures seem to come up pretty much regardless of what I set my maximum stake at when optimizing. It certainly applies down to £20. When I tried a tenner as my largest ever stake (which seems pretty low to me as it is only 5% of the starting bank) then TSM proposes I start with a bank of £195 and stake 2.7% of the bank on each runner. That results in a profit of a tad over £50 and a better ROI (1.42%) but that’s still a long way down on what level staking offers. The bank extremes are a high of £471.58 and a low of £89.34, which is significantly greater than level stakes. If I increase the bank to my standard £200 the profit and ROI barely change but the bank peak comes down by nearly £100 and the trough goes up by £30. How weird, who’d have thought a fiver could make that much difference.

Square Root Stakes
The square root stakes plans need to provide something of interest if there is going to be much point in continuing with this staking review. If I try to take out the effect of having to specify a maximum stake by telling TSM I will never put more than £1000 on a bet it suggests I start with a stake of £856.34. Hmm. I’m sure I don’t need to spell out what that does to a £200 bank bearing in mind we don’t start our betting sequence with a winner. As square root staking reverts to level stakes when the bank is not in profit it is safe to assume that £12.50 is the maximum initial stake this system will support, and that is indeed the case. Using that initial stake we have a largest stake of £28.77 so let’s try optimizing the plan with a £30 maximum stake rather than the silly £1000. If we do that TSM tells us it can’t make the plan profitable so doesn’t optimize it. The same is true for any maximum stake up to £61 at which point an initial stake of £34 is proposed. And we know what happens at these stakes – the bank busts. Even including the whole bank, not just the profit, in the square root calculation doesn’t help matters. The simple fact is square root staking and the Jumping for Profit system just don’t mix.

The purpose of this step of the review process is to work out which staking plans will be taken forward, including any input parameters. We have seen that there is no point analyzing the square root plans in any detail so they will be dropped. We saw earlier that 3% staking results in a loss and that optimal staking (1.3%) results in a crappy profit that really isn’t worth it so I see no point continuing with those plans. For the ratchet staking TSM suggested 2.7% or 3.7% depending on what I set as my maximum stake. With 2.7% my maximum stake is £10.14 and at 3.7% it increases to £17.45, not massive again. But I am kinda intrigued to see what happens with these plans so I am going to take a wide range of them (2.5% to 4.0% in tenths of a percent) into the next round to see what trends appear. I will also be examining £10 fixed profit staking and level stakes plans ranging from £5.00 to £12.50 in £2.50 increments. This is a lot of plans to analyse, 22 including the 3% percentage benchmark, but I am confident that many of these will go by the wayside early on.

Incidentally, we shouldn’t expect great profits from any of the staking plans if we look at the odds of our selections. The average odds is 3.11 but the average winning odds is just 2.51, which for a 40.74% SR system is only just profitable. This means the average loser is going off at 3.52, a whole point above the winners. Compare this to the Double Top plan which had a 36.16% SR and average winning odds of 3.01. Then the total average was 3.72 giving average odds for losing bets of 4.12. With Double Top the average winning odds are a quarter of a point above the breakeven figure whereas with Jumping for Profit they are just 0.06 points above breakeven.

Step 3: Maximum stakes
I’ve carried forward a lot of staking plans to this stage which means quite a bit of work to be done but so be it. I need to find out what effect a cap on the stakes has on various plans. In a way I am reluctant to set the cap too low. Think about it this way – if I set the cap at £15 it means I wouldn’t really expect my £200 starting bank to get much beyond £500 if I were to continue in terms of the benchmark plan. That smacks of a lack of ambition and faith. But set the cap too high and it’ll never get activated.

Having run the analysis without a stake cap I don’t think I need to concern myself with the effects of such a device unless I am willing to set it so low that it becomes restrictive. For example, with 4.0% ratchet staking my maximum stake is only £20.18. It’s only the fixed profit plan that beats that, with a maximum stake of £140.00. Any cap I apply reduces the profits of the system. Now, it’s probably true that this 1/14 shot is distorting the figures somewhat and I should perhaps ignore it but is it worth it? I’m not a big fan of variable stakes/fixed profits staking anyway.

I said earlier that I expected to ditch quite a lot of the staking plans I have analysed at an early stage of the review process and I think the above table illustrates the reasoning behind that assumption pretty well. I have a range of 1.5% across my ratchet stakes plans, which makes a difference of less than nine quid to the profit. Pathetic. If I was going to go with a ratchet staking plan I would opt for a low stakes plan as the increase in profits as we increase the stakes comes with a decrease in return on investment and additional risk to the bank. But I’m not going to go with such a plan. I have the same trough at £5.00 level stakes as I have with the 2.5% ratchet plan but the level stakes plan offers a better ROI, greater profits and a lower cost of LLR so lower risk. So it looks like it’s between level stakes and fixed profit staking.

Oh that it has come to this, it feels so wrong.

At this point in the review I would normally set about reversing and randomizing the bet order to see what effect this has on the staking plans but is there any point? Level stakes is level stakes so it has no dependency on the bank figure going in to any particular bet, and the same is true of the fixed profit system. So shuffling the order of the bets is just going to be a waste of time as it’s not really going to tell me anything I don’t already know, so I’m going to skip the reversal of the order, the randomization of the bets and also the random sampling of the bets in proper chronological order.

Step 4: Switching plans

So here we are, looking at switching staking plans at various points in the data already, and with so few staking plans to consider too. We have the four level stakes plans, the £10 fixed profit system and I will hang on to the 2.5% ratchet system for this stage, just in case. All these will be compared to the standard 3% percentage staking plan that has acted as my benchmark throughout.

As with previous staking reviews this is an Excel-based exercise, and as with previous staking reviews I will be examining a change of staking plan from the benchmark to each of the candidate staking plans at the mid-point of the data, 1st January 2007 and 1st January 2008.

Mid-point (28th April 2007)

Bets: 243
Winners: 98
SR: 40.33%
LWR: 5
LLR: 8

So our SR is a little down on the overall strike rate but not by much. Will that have much of an effect on the profits I wonder…

Hmm. The profit and ROIs are definitely up. And all the banks are pretty safe, which is nice. Comapratively good profits on offer from the level stakes systems but as the stakes rise the cost of the longest losing run gets a little high for my tastes. The ratchet plans are better than the benchmark but worse than everything else. The fixed profit system gives a decent profit and the best ROI of all analysed staking plans. It has the lowest trough of all the sensible plans but that is still an acceptable figure, especially when combined with the low LLR cost.

1st January 2007

Bets: 337
Winners: 143
SR: 42.43%
LWR: 10
LLR: 8

A higher than average strike rate once more and that is reflected in the profits here. The same conclusions as above apply here really. The ratchet plans beat the benchmark but nothing else. The level stakes plans show a decent ROI but as we up the stakes to increase the turnover and thus the profits we also increase the risk to the bank. And the fixed profit plan shows the best ROI (moreso here than previously) and very acceptable risk levels. Looking good for a staking plan I don’t really like but such is life.

1st January 2008

Bets: 133
Winners: 53
SR: 39.85%
LWR: 5
LLR: 6

Did I say it was looking good for fixed profits? I may have spoken too soon. That’s the only plan that would lose me money were I to change staking plans at the start of this year. Nothing really exciting to say about the others this time round, it’s all pretty much the same as before.

I kept the extremes of the ratchet staking plans in for this stage of the analysis just to see how they compared, with one another as much as the other staking plan types. The same trends observed earlier are apparent here too. Increasing the percentage staked decreases the ROI, often markedly. The trough values for the 4.0% plan are much lower than those for the 2.5% ratchet plan, and the LLR costs are much greater, indicating that the bank is at much greater risk with a higher percentage staked. As I say, so real surprises here but confirmation of earlier trends is useful all the same. At least I now know I can safely dump the 4.0% staking plan and analyse the 2.5% ratchet plan if desired.

Step 5: Real staking conditions

This is the ultimate test of a staking plan as far as I am concerned when conducting these staking reviews. It shows how each of the plans being studied holds up to the actual manner in which I apply these plans, i.e. a £200 starting bank with stakes adjusted daily. It’s here that I get to see whether a staking plan would work for me as I get to see the minimum and maximum percentages of the bank the stakes represent as well as things like profit and ROI.

The above table shows I need to change staking plan certainly, I don’t want to continue with a losing plan even if the system selections themselves are profitable. I’m going to ignore the profit column for a second and focus on the staking percentages as they are what really interests me at this stage as they are a decent measure of bank security. Obviously the £12.50 level stakes plan and the £10 fixed stake plan show massively unacceptable maximum stake percentages – I really don’t fancy putting virtually all of the remaining bank on a single selection at any point in time. So those two plans are right out the window on that basis alone, but if further reason were required then look at the trough figures and compare them to the other plans under investigation. That trough-max stake % combination does for the £10.00 level stakes plan also – nearly 20% of the bank going on one bet which is really not my style at all. Three down and three left then.

Now let’s look at the profits. The benchmark figure is a loss of just over thirty quid whereas everything else is positive at least. The ROI for the two remaining level stakes plans (£5.00 and £7.50) are the same, obviously, and greater than that of the 2.5% ratchet plan. So should we be trying to maximize the profits, making the £7.50 fixed stakes plan the obvious choice? Not necessarily, as I think 8.5% is still quite high as the maximum stake, especially when the £5.00 fixed stake plan has a maximum of under 4%, and that’s very much in my comfort zone. Is the extra twenty quid or so in profits (between the £5.00 and £7.50 level stakes plans) worth the extra risk to the bank? The higher stakes plan has a forty quid lower trough and double the maximum stake percentage so to my mind the extra profit is NOT worth the additional risk. I am happy with the risk levels associated with the 2.5% ratchet plan so it comes down to a straight fight between the £5.00 level stakes plan and the 2.5% ratchet percentage staking plan.

Or does it?

Out of interest, I would like to introduce a couple of other plans back in to the mix just to see how they perform. These are plans I dismissed earlier but I want to confirm that that was the right thing to do. Instinct tells me that my staking plan should factor in the current bank balance which means I should be steering away from the level stakes and fixed profit plans. I want to quickly look at a few percentage and square root staking plans to see if they offer anything worth having even though I dropped them earlier for various reasons.

Well that certainly sets my mind at ease. The low stakes percentage plans offer an improvement on the benchmark but 1% staking on a 40% or so strike rate system isn’t going to very profitable and so it proves. The square root plans all show a loss so they are not worth bothering with either. I’m glad I did that, I feel much happier for knowing these things.

I just want to go back to the fixed profit plan for a brief moment as I wish to look at a couple of things that may improve it. The bet of 99.66% of the bank obviously represents a massive odds-on shot as we are only trying to win a tenner a race and the bank doesn’t drop much below £50. And indeed, it seems to be a 1/14 shot that is doing the damage (£140 staked from a bank of £140.48). So what happens if we eliminate all the odds-on shots? Now the profit jumps to £156.97 with a ROI of 8.70%. Aha!

Let’s have a look at a few stats on these odds-on shots shall we? There are 124 such bets with 73 winners for a strike rate of 58.87%. The average odds is 1.63 with the average winning odds being 1.59. The breakeven odds required for that SR are 1.69 so the odds-on bets are losers overall. It therefore makes a fair amount of sense to get rid of them. That leaves 125 winners from 362 bets (34.53% SR) and in effect a completely different data set to the one that we had at the start of this staking review so we should really start again. But we won’t. Instead we’ll skip straight to the analysis of the plans under real staking conditions and reinstate a few plans to get an idea of potential trends to see if we need to examine certain plan types more closely. I’ll set the stake to 0 for odds-on runners to the Min Stake % figures now won’t mean a great deal…

So taking out the odds-on runners has had a massive overall improvement, good. The square root plans are definitely out though as they show an overall loss and that’s not at all what I am after. Sure, they’ve improved but they still show a loss. The percentage plans offer a very small profit so can be safely ditched I feel. The peak seems to lie somewhere between 2% and 3% but even at the peak I doubt the profit is more than £40 so why bother then other plans offer far greater rewards. The ratchet plan is better than it was before but the profit and ROI are lower than any of the level stakes or fixed profit plans so that one too can be safely disregarded.

That leaves the level stakes and fixed profit staking plans. For bank security reasons I will immediately ditch the £12.50 and £10.00 level stakes plans; those max stake percentages are just too high for me. The profit offered up by the £5 level stakes plan is poor compared to other plans although it is a safe and steady approach to staking for this system. So only the £7.50 of the level stakes plans is worth considering I reckon. For the fixed profit plans I have included the standard £10 per race target profit plan and also a few that depend on the bank as I feel my staking should be intricately linked to the current state of the bank. So I have looked at target profits of 5.0%, 7.5% and 10.0% of the bank per race. The latter plan goes straight out the window on the grounds of the high max stake percentage and pretty low trough figure. The higher the target profit the lower the ROI it seems. I don’t fancy a ROI of 7.5% when I can get over 1% better than that, especially when the max stake percentage for the 7.5% fixed profit plan is 7.86% as that’s quite high. So it’s between the £10 fixed profit, 5% fixed profit and £7.50 level stakes plans. Put them three side-by-side and the £7.50 level stakes plan looks quite sorry, with a smaller profit, smaller ROI, higher max stake %, lower peak and lower trough than the fixed profit plans. So let’s ditch that one too. We’re going with a fixed profit plan then. And as I feel the profit/stake should depend on the bank it has to be the 5.0% fixed profit plan.

Summary

A quick overview of the staking plans showed the benchmark plan was a losing prospect and needed to be changed. Fixed profits offered great profits but bust the bank big style along the way. In the end it was level stakes that looked most promising. TSM was then used to optimize the plans and find out the extremes of staking that each could support. Level stakes seemed to offer the best ROI, closely followed by the fixed profit plan. Percentage staking was barely profitable, although ratcheting helped somewhat, and square root plans were right out.

I then looked at staking caps, the maximum I would ever allow myself to bet on a selection. They made little difference to all plans except the fixed profit plan, which had the profit reduced when I imposed a £25 ceiling on stakes. I ditched a lot of the ratchet plans at this point as the range of percentages I was looking at was quite wide but the effects of increasing the percentage was minimal. With the staking plans under real scrutiny down to basically level stakes and fixed profits I decided to skip the reordering and random sampling of the selections as the application of these plans wouldn’t be affected by such activities.

Next came switching plans at certain points in the data. When looking at changing from 3% staking to the candidate staking plans at the midway point in the data it was the £10 fixed profit plan that shone out with a good ROI and a low LLR cost. Changing at the start of 2007 was another clear victory for the fixed profit plan with a much greater ROI than the other plans under test, and once more a lower loss experienced during the losing runs. When it came to changing staking at the start of this year the fixed profit plan showed a loss and it was level stakes that looked best.

And so on to the real meaty step of examining the various plans under what I regard as real conditions with stakes adjusted daily. It looked like this was the end of the road for fixed profit staking plans and it was all boiling down to a straight fight between £5.00 level stakes and 2.5% ratchet staking, even though the ratchet plans had been poor up till this point. Then I realized the fixed profit stakes were being distorted by some heavy odds-on selections, with odds going as low as 1/14, so I looked at stripping these out. And when I removed all the odds-on shots, as I demonstrated they are a losing proposition, things suddenly looked up. Some plans were instantly dismissed either because of lousy profits or concerns about the staking levels and it all boiled down to a battle between £7.50 level stakes and 5.0% fixed profit, a new plan I had introduced at this stage of proceedings.

At the end of the day the fixed profit plans had done pretty well throughout and my gut tells me that the staking should be connected to the bank in some respect so I have to go with the 5.0% fixed profit plan.

New Plan: 5.0% fixed profit (variable stakes)

Attached Thumbnails

Click image for larger version

Name: jump profit 1.JPG
Views: 62
Size: 16.7 KB
ID: 66

Click image for larger version

Name: jump profit 2.JPG
Views: 64
Size: 98.5 KB
ID: 67

Click image for larger version

Name: jump profit 3.JPG
Views: 70
Size: 32.8 KB
ID: 68

Click image for larger version

Name: jump profit 4.JPG
Views: 64
Size: 32.7 KB
ID: 69

Click image for larger version

Name: jump profit 5.JPG
Views: 62
Size: 32.7 KB
ID: 70

Click image for larger version

Name: jump profit 6.JPG
Views: 59
Size: 33.5 KB
ID: 71

Click image for larger version

Name: jump profit 7.JPG
Views: 63
Size: 30.0 KB
ID: 72

Click image for larger version

Name: jump profit 8.JPG
Views: 63
Size: 69.3 KB
ID: 73

]]> mathare http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=59 UK Horse Racing Stats – Best Odds for Profiting http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=58 Mon, 26 May 2008 08:46:37 GMT Just a quick stat here that is very useful for pointing you in the direction of finding the best price range for profit on the flat. Below are the 10 years results for favourites, split into ranges based on odds (SP). You can clearly see that the... Just a quick stat here that is very useful for pointing you in the direction of finding the best price range for profit on the flat.

Below are the 10 years results for favourites, split into ranges based on odds (SP). You can clearly see that the lower the price, the higher the SR%, and this can help you pick a range to aim for if developing a system.

But, if you look at the results from the LSP%/ROI% you get a completely different picture. The ROI% is around the -6% mark up to 11/8, and then for the 6/4-15/8 range drops to 4.56%. The ROI% on the shorter priced horses has actually got worse over the last few years as the bookies squeeze more profits out, and with the new SP system in place since 2007, I imagine it will not be improving any time soon.

So why is this data useful? Well it is much harder to make good profits from shorter priced horses, than the longer one, and the fact that the shorter you go under 11/8 the ROI% does not actually improve, therefore makes it more of a struggle to squeeze profit out of.

Now remember I said it was SP? Well you should be using the betting exchanges more often than the bookies, and with experience getting better prices than average. The problem is that with commission, horses that are under 1/1 can mean in some races you are backing worse than SP. So keep an eye out, you want the best odds where ever you get them.

If you are using the exchanges, the overbet (difference in price between what you get and SP) increases in line with the price. You may get 5% better on a 6/4 shot, but you may get 100% better on a 33/1 shot. So for the 2/1+ prices ranges the betting exchange ROI% will be lower than the SP one, and in many circumstances, over 4/1, you should be able to cancel it out altogether and gain a profit where others are losing.

So put simply, the higher the odds, if you are using the exchanges, in theory the less you will lose. The shorter the odds, it is pretty much impossible to turn it into a profit.

Why would this information help a beginner? Well if you are looking at starting a method, or a system, and using the betting exchanges, and using the Fav as a qualifier, you need to concentrate on races where the prices are 2/1+, work on getting your commission down (even from 5% to 4.8% is a great help), and over months, work on improving your overbet.

Attached Thumbnails

Click image for larger version

Name: BestOdds.gif
Views: 93
Size: 4.0 KB
ID: 57

]]> Win2Win http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/blog.php?b=58