General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
If, for example, a set of criteria yields selections that return only 80% of stakes to backers, what is the best way to lay the selections?
Assuming that bankroll is not an issue and that the long term expected return is the same across all prices, is it better to lay each selection to lose a fixed liability, or to take the same stake out of each selection (thereby suffering larger setbacks when a big priced winner goes in)?
I don't think there shouldl be a difference, but I'm interested to know if anyone has any thoughts on this.
Thanks in advance
Assuming that bankroll is not an issue and that the long term expected return is the same across all prices, is it better to lay each selection to lose a fixed liability, or to take the same stake out of each selection (thereby suffering larger setbacks when a big priced winner goes in)?
I don't think there shouldl be a difference, but I'm interested to know if anyone has any thoughts on this.
Thanks in advance
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 9
|
By:
I'd go for fixed liability every time. That way, even if your strategy relies on the laying of long-priced selections, you can breathe a little more comfortably.
Which ever approach you opt for however, ensure you have a firm knowledge of what sort of strike rate you can expect, so that you can plan a bank based upon the longest conceivable losing run (and your estimation should err on the pessimistic side for safety). ;) |
|
By:
Fixed liability = level stakes when backing.
|
|
By:
Doesn't matter in the long run as long as your bets have a positive expectation
|
|
By:
Thanks guys.
|
|
By:
You will win (or lose) the same proportion of your stakes whichever method you use, so it's more a case of doing what suits your temperament. However you might want to work out the effects of commission and premium charge for each method based on your results.
|
|
By:
Doesn't matter in the long run as long as your bets have a positive expectation
Level backer's stake on long-pricers mean those have a far bigger effect on P&L than short pricers, ie their relative importance becomes exaggerated. I think this is true with both backing and laying. Maybe some compromise is optimum? |
|
By:
Shouldnt do either imho
|
|
By:
Lay to payout.
|
|
By:
Fixed liabilty has a psychologial and a practical edge over fixed stakes laying.
Psychologicaly its less steressfull cause you dont lose the lot on winning Selections. Practicaly it is easier to see if a Method of Selection has an edge,... you can spot quickly if it "does calculate" or not..... but thats subject to taste. Cheers |