Level Stakes - Surely not!
mischief
detailed his recent research and findings concerning staking plans.
I found Bill's results very interesting but I personaly was
shocked to see that the results did seem to suggest that a level
staking system was as good as any, if not better.
With the data Bill used a level stake system was the best one
to use with a 28% strike rate.
Does anyone else find this suprising? Has anyone else done any
similar research? Does anyone have any good staking plans?
I guess what I really want to know is 'Do staking plans work?'
Thanks
Mike
Fraser Paterson
from Clive Holt, the founder of Fineform. His advice was that staking plans
generally do not work, and that betting to level stakes was pretty much the
best way to play as it were. However, he also stated that betting to win
one point (one point could be £10 for example) on every bet, regardless of
the odds (eg £1 win at 10/1, £2 win at 5/1), was marginally more profitable.
mischief wrote in message <35f675b1...@news.u-net.com>...
Steve High
and it only has a 25% chance of winning then you will lose more than you win
in the long term and no staking plan is going to change that. The standard
'increasing stakes as you lose' plan, much discussed in this newsgroup,
would only prove more profitable than level stakes if a successive run of
losing stakes made the next bet a more likely winner. This is of course is
not the case.
Basically, a staking plan will only make your betting more profitable if it
means you stake more on winners than losers. As there is no way you can tell
merely from the order of the bets which are the more likely winners, staking
plans are not likely to be profitable. Personally, I vary my stakes in
accordance with my confidence in a horse, although this can be dangerous if
a losing run dampens your confidence or if a winning run boosts it unduly.
Level stakes is unquestionably the safest and simplest method to find out
whether you are selecting correctly or not.
Steve
Edmund Swain
mischief wrote:
> In a reply to a recent Post 'Money Management' Bill Willoughby
> detailed his recent research and findings concerning staking plans.
> I found Bill's results very interesting but I personaly was
> shocked to see that the results did seem to suggest that a level
> staking system was as good as any, if not better.
> With the data Bill used a level stake system was the best one
> to use with a 28% strike rate.
> Does anyone else find this suprising? Has anyone else done any
> similar research? Does anyone have any good staking plans?
> I guess what I really want to know is 'Do staking plans work?'
>
> Thanks
>
> Mike
Dear Members
I do not pretend to know a lot about staking plans but I would asssume
probably wrongly that it depends on the strike rate!
If you can increase the rate to 33% or a wildly optimistic 50% then I
would have thought one could double the stakes after a loss with
confidence and therefore recoup any losses.
regards
Emund Swain
Bill Willoughby
Fraser Paterson wrote in message
<6t6ei7$dim$1...@nclient1-gui.server.virgin.net>...
>I did some research on this about a month ago, and managed to get a reply
>from Clive Holt, the founder of Fineform. His advice was that staking
plans
>generally do not work, and that betting to level stakes was pretty much the
>best way to play as it were. However, he also stated that betting to win
>one point (one point could be £10 for example) on every bet, regardless of
>the odds (eg £1 win at 10/1, £2 win at 5/1), was marginally more
profitable.
>
is the staking plan described above). In all the (winning) systems I've
researched using RSB Level Stakes consistently show better % profits on
turnover than Variable Stakes - often quite significantly better. I'm loathe
to doubt the word of the founder of Fineform but I'd be interested to see
some actual results that support his opinion.
Regards - Bill
Hugh Tebbett
"Bill Willoughby" <bill...@easynet.co.uk> wrote:
>RSB outputs results for Level Stake Profit and Variable Stake Profit (which
>is the staking plan described above). In all the (winning) systems I've
>researched using RSB Level Stakes consistently show better % profits on
>turnover than Variable Stakes - often quite significantly better. I'm loathe
>to doubt the word of the founder of Fineform but I'd be interested to see
>some actual results that support his opinion.
>
>Regards - Bill
>
>
Hi Bill
I am grateful (and amazed that RSB could do such an analysis?) for your comments regarding Clive
Holt's observations on "a point a bet profit" staking plan. This is very similar to the staking
plan advocated by Che Van der Wheil (The "Flying Dutchman") upon which I agonised for many hours
before coming to the conclusion that an inevitable losing run would defeat the plan.
I, personally, have level stakes on most of my selections - but, for the hell of it, include a
10% multiple cover bet to add a bit of zest to my selections (nice feeling when they all come
home which paid for my Florida holiday, this year) - but, many, many, days of frustration!
Regards
Hugh Tebbett
Long Eaton, Nottingham
hteb...@netcomuk.co.uk