New Posts For Thread: backing horses to winhttps://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/25715017/backing-horses-to-win... the way I see it, you could choose any method you like to come up with a daily list of selections to back. Over a period of time, some of them would win and some of them (the majority) would lose.With discipline to only back those selections andI think the reality of Betfair is that many short / medium term winners are using a form of martingale to varied extents. Once the inevitable happens and they lose the lot when the chase didn't work, they put it down to 'not having enough discipline'https://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/25715017/backing-horses-to-win?post_id=463775373#463775373I think the reality of Betfair is that many short / medium term winners are using a form of martingale to varied extents. Once the inevitable happens and they lose the lot when the chase didn't work, they put it down to 'not having enough discipline'Sat, 28 Aug 2010 01:17:47 -0500Yes, you're quite right. I was trying to make the point that martingale cant make a losing strategy win. I'd never really considered that it could ruin a winning one - but it could.https://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/25715017/backing-horses-to-win?post_id=463667373#463667373Yes, you're quite right. I was trying to make the point that martingale cant make a losing strategy win. I'd never really considered that it could ruin a winning one - but it could.Fri, 27 Aug 2010 08:34:58 -0500catfloppo If youhave a winning strategy it will win with martingale. ..........................................................imo this only correct if you have deep pockets. Every strategy, no matter how good, is subject to short term fluctuationhttps://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/25715017/backing-horses-to-win?post_id=463660797#463660797catfloppo If youhave a winning strategy it will win with martingale. ..........................................................imo this only correct if you have deep pockets. Every strategy, no matter how good, is subject to short term fluctuationFri, 27 Aug 2010 07:23:16 -0500Swift - you are doing well in naps comp so in theory you will win, as long as you avoid long losing run...which can happen if say you are not fully concentrating on horse racing etcLast August I was busy working and never paid much attention to selechttps://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/25715017/backing-horses-to-win?post_id=463660553#463660553Swift - you are doing well in naps comp so in theory you will win, as long as you avoid long losing run...which can happen if say you are not fully concentrating on horse racing etcLast August I was busy working and never paid much attention to selecFri, 27 Aug 2010 07:18:57 -0500If youhave a winning strategy it will win with martingale. If you have a losing strategy martingale may help you to delude yourself for a while.https://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/25715017/backing-horses-to-win?post_id=463658525#463658525If youhave a winning strategy it will win with martingale. If you have a losing strategy martingale may help you to delude yourself for a while.Fri, 27 Aug 2010 06:50:34 -0500hope you had a good night DFCWhat I'm trying to prove is that with a disciplined approach and the right staking plan, the selections from a backing point of view don't matter that much. Obviously, you want to pick horses that have some sort of chancehttps://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/25715017/backing-horses-to-win?post_id=463658437#463658437hope you had a good night DFCWhat I'm trying to prove is that with a disciplined approach and the right staking plan, the selections from a backing point of view don't matter that much. Obviously, you want to pick horses that have some sort of chanceFri, 27 Aug 2010 06:49:32 -0500Sorry ST .....my post above was after "a few" BACKING is "better" than laying, though varying bets from race to race, based on shape of race etc, is a better approach IMO. LAYING is just as useful a way to bet.......but more "expensive2 when you gethttps://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/25715017/backing-horses-to-win?post_id=463657529#463657529Sorry ST .....my post above was after "a few" BACKING is "better" than laying, though varying bets from race to race, based on shape of race etc, is a better approach IMO. LAYING is just as useful a way to bet.......but more "expensive2 when you getFri, 27 Aug 2010 06:35:45 -0500Wimpish martingale?? Is it something like adding a quarter of your previous loss to the next win target?https://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/25715017/backing-horses-to-win?post_id=463656057#463656057Wimpish martingale?? Is it something like adding a quarter of your previous loss to the next win target?Fri, 27 Aug 2010 06:16:16 -0500To be honest, I couldn't really see how you could generate interest here unless you could categorically state that you felt you had an edge of some sort and was reasonably sure you'd make a profit AND you was going to work to level stakes, perhaps rahttps://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/25715017/backing-horses-to-win?post_id=463651857#463651857To be honest, I couldn't really see how you could generate interest here unless you could categorically state that you felt you had an edge of some sort and was reasonably sure you'd make a profit AND you was going to work to level stakes, perhaps raFri, 27 Aug 2010 05:17:14 -0500you either mean that 1) results must necessarily come after the event, this being the nature of results;or2) some aftertimimg would take place and it could not be guaranteed that the results displayed would be accurate.re 1) you're absolutely right,https://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/25715017/backing-horses-to-win?post_id=463648161#463648161you either mean that 1) results must necessarily come after the event, this being the nature of results;or2) some aftertimimg would take place and it could not be guaranteed that the results displayed would be accurate.re 1) you're absolutely right,Fri, 27 Aug 2010 04:15:58 -0500