Forums

General Betting

There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Stevie Strikes
27 Mar 10 12:58
Joined:
Date Joined: 27 Apr 04
| Topic/replies: 1,279 | Blogger: Stevie Strikes's blog
...do you find there is an optimum percentage spread of the market to dutch?

i.e. the number of runners (from fav through 2nd fav downwards) who's combined prices total over 50%, or 60%, or n% of the market?

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 1 of 2  •  Previous 1 | 2 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 42
By:
Relentless
When: 27 Mar 10 13:02
Personally I aim for between 20% and 50% profit. If I can't achieve this by covering the most likely winners (imo) then I'll leave it.
By:
Stevie Strikes
When: 27 Mar 10 13:13
Not having time to study form the likely winners (imo) are the top ones of the betting, plus the odd steamer and minus the odd drifter.

Speaking VERY generally, I 'm finding that somewhere around 60% to 80% of the market will get the 20% to 50% profit per stake you're talking about. Just wondered if anyone else works on this basis, or do most do it on a profit basis like yourself.
By:
Stevie Strikes
When: 27 Mar 10 13:21
Newbury 1:15

52.51% of the market nets 81.11% profit

It can only go downhill from here!
By:
Relentless
When: 27 Mar 10 13:25
I recall some advice from years ago. I was told that in the majority of race only a third of the field were actually capable of winning (that paricular race), and of those only half would be trying.

Add to that the stat that says 86% of winners (I've not checked this for some time) come from the first five in the betting, then you could certainly start to narrow the field down.

Add your own judgement and if it's any good you should be able to generate profit. There's definitely no formula that will work without without judgement though - and a little luck.
By:
top2rated
When: 27 Mar 10 13:37
Stevie Strikes

Newbury 1:15

52.51% of the market nets 81.11% profit


Please explain the figures above - I don't understand them.
By:
Stevie Strikes
When: 27 Mar 10 13:37
I'm doing this to claw back my account that I stupidly lost most of on footy.

After I copy and paste the changing market into my spreadsheet a few times approaching the off, I seem to get a 'feel' from looking at it whether the race is any good to dutch or not...and I've been mostly right and done really well over the last 2 days. If it's luck - and it may well be - perhaps it's best not to analysie it.
By:
Relentless
When: 27 Mar 10 13:39
I'll withdraw the 'little luck' comment. I agree it's more intuition than luck and not to be underestimated.
By:
Stevie Strikes
When: 27 Mar 10 13:41
top 2

THe fav and 2nd fav were 3.85 and 4, which is 25.97% and 25% making 50.97% of the market.

The the return was 17.65 which is 86.57% of a stake of 10.39 on the fav and 10 on the 2nd
By:
Stevie Strikes
When: 27 Mar 10 13:52
Thanks for the advice relentless
By:
gstreetblue
When: 29 Mar 10 09:55
I have been doing this recently and def avoid handicap races as there will always be one laid out for a said race. I dutch to win a point and wont use more than 2 points to achieve this seems to work so far.
By:
Stevie Strikes
When: 29 Mar 10 18:01
Relentless - you have no idea how much that tiny snippet has helped with what I was working on - the last three days racing I've been on a roll the likes of which I haven't seen for a couple of years.

Thanks!
By:
Relentless
When: 29 Mar 10 20:54
No problem Stevie, you're more than welcome.

With reference to the 'intuition' comment, search 'thin slicing' on G00gle if you're interested in how it manifests itself.
By:
Relentless
When: 29 Mar 10 21:06
This is the book I read. It makes sense to me.

http://www.gladwell.com/blink/index.html

Ever thought...'I had a feeling that would win'?
By:
YOULITTLEBOTTY
When: 29 Mar 10 21:54
Just always remember Steve, you're always just dutching below value odds which, in turn, will just give you below value odds for no matter what limited section of the field you are dutching.
In the long run that cannot win for you mathematically.
You still always have to find value somewhere, somehow.
Your approach is still resulting in a greater than 100 % overall book, no matter how you dress it up.
By:
Relentless
When: 29 Mar 10 22:35
YLB, the disciples of 'value' always seem to forget that there is value in not betting; the bookmaker doesn't (generally) have this option.

I could, in theory, back the maths, secure in the knowledge that the edge against me is 1.5% but knowing that I will opt out out of 1 in 20 bets. This changes the odds against to, potentially, odds on.
By:
YOULITTLEBOTTY
When: 29 Mar 10 22:44
I wish I could say that I understand what you are saying.
How does "opting out " change anything at all ?.
Are you saying that because I can chose if and when I want to bet, and the bookie can't, that it somehow changes things ?
If so, I don't understand the maths of that argument at all, I'm afraid to say.
How does that effect the odds if and when I do bet, which is the only thing that really matters after all?.
By:
Stevie Strikes
When: 29 Mar 10 23:02
Relentless - sorry only just seen this, will check out the references you gave later.

YLB, I take your point, but if Relentless is saying what I think he's saying about not betting, then the following example bears him out:

Today there were were 19 UK races.

I considered 8 of them were worth dutching. All 8 won, for a total profit of around 34% on my stakes after commission.

Of the 11 that I didn't do, I'd have lost on 6, and I've had made a loss overall.

Can I stress I don't think I've found the holy grail (done that too many times) and I'm well aware that there will be periods of losses due to, well, all the things that cause losing runs plus good old fashioned bad luck. That's why I'm going to town on the banking and staking plans too.

If it goes t1ts up it goes t1ts up - in the meantime I'll enjoy it.
By:
YOULITTLEBOTTY
When: 30 Mar 10 00:23
Steve
All you did really was successfully selectively chose your races.
You didn't change the "value " of your bets in any form or manner by being so selective, unless your race selection criteria are based on " value " inputs which are objective and consistently correct ( and more important seemingly unknwn to the market makers ). That is, in essence your selection criteria are apparently giving you an " edge ".
The " dutching " per se is not why you are profiting, it is the " race selection " that is generating the profits.
I hope you can sustain your " edge " forever.
By:
Stevie Strikes
When: 30 Mar 10 00:37
Not as much as I do!
By:
Trevh
When: 30 Mar 10 00:52
Perhaps there was a freak run of faves winning today, assuming the fave is one of your selections?
Some days the first or second fave win every non-hcap race between them, I wouldn't be holding my breath for long term success if I was you Steve, but GL.
By:
Gallivanter
When: 30 Mar 10 11:06
I agree with YLB, you do need an edge. You can never be sure of your edge on any individual runner, of course.

The advantage of dutching is that if you select, say, three runners where you think you have an edge on each of them, you might get an edge overall even though there is no value in one of the bets.

That's why bookies can sometimes overprice a winning horse but still make a profit on the race.
By:
gstreetblue
When: 30 Mar 10 11:20
Just to say stevie the greyhound market offers good oppurtunities small fiels decent odds but only problem not much liquidty
By:
Relentless
When: 30 Mar 10 20:43
YLB, I understand your point but I don't necessarily agree. I know the example I provide will upset some but here we go anyway.

We know that if we toss a coin it's even money heads or tails. We also know that the more we toss the coin, the closer we get to 50% heads - 50% tails. If we tossed the coin 1,000 times, how many times would it have to come up heads before you considered even money tails to be value? 600? 700? 800?
By:
Relentless
When: 30 Mar 10 20:44
By the way - good days work Stevie. Wish I could do that.
By:
YOULITTLEBOTTY
When: 30 Mar 10 20:58
Relentless
I think you already know what my answer is, so I won't even say it.
I think the essence of your question is where we basically differ on these types of matters.
By:
Relentless
When: 30 Mar 10 22:28
I don't know your answer...how could I? But if you have one I'd be interested to read it.
By:
Stevie Strikes
When: 30 Mar 10 22:32
I did stress that it may have been very good luck the first three days - and today would point to that...2 losses from 4 selected races out of the first three at Fontwell and at M Rasen. After that I "retired from the action" as Clive Holt memorably put it in that book - you know when it's not going to be a good day...

... or so I thought, until I caught up with this thread and saw gstreetblue's post about the dogs, and you know what - he's right! With a bit of tweaking of the spreadsheet - I got back the racing losses, hit my target and tomorrow's target too.

Nice one, gstreet!
By:
top2rated
When: 31 Mar 10 03:41
Stevie Strikes

You must have had to bump up the stakes to get those horse racing losses back so did you encounter any problems with liquidity on the dogs that gstreetblues referred to in an earlier post?
By:
YOULITTLEBOTTY
When: 31 Mar 10 04:20
Relentless
Ever heard of gambler's fallacy ?
If not , google it.
Then you will know my answer.
By:
Relentless
When: 31 Mar 10 08:01
YLB, ever heard of chaos theory? If not then that's probably why you don't wish to answer.

I'll ask a different question: would you rather take 2.01 tails on a single toss of the coin or 2.0 tails 5,000 times (+/-5%) out of 10,000 tosses?
By:
Stevie Strikes
When: 31 Mar 10 18:16
top2rated 31 Mar 03:41
Stevie Strikes

You must have had to bump up the stakes to get those horse racing losses back so did you encounter any problems with liquidity on the dogs that gstreetblues referred to in an earlier post?


No, but then I might be embarrassed to tell you of the total stake I'm betting at. I mean it ain't quite 3 figures.
By:
Bung It On
When: 31 Mar 10 19:16
Posted by Relentless

YLB, the disciples of 'value' always seem to forget that there is value in not betting; the bookmaker doesn't (generally) have this option.

Is this a typo or deliberate mistake?

Bookmakers always have this option! You have been here since 2002. How have you missed this I wonder!
By:
Relentless
When: 31 Mar 10 21:41
If operating conventionally - obviously.
By:
Relentless
When: 31 Mar 10 21:43
Stevie, I had three dutches to c20% all won - two place backs both lost - one football multiple won.....lost on the day.

How are you getting on?
By:
Stevie Strikes
When: 06 Apr 10 08:56
Hi Relentless,

In figures, I'm getting on like this:

Dutching Dog and Horse Races, from 26th March to 5th APril incl.

...........Stakes........Returns....Profit on stakes (after comm.)
Horses...£4,722.45.....£238.32....5.05%
Dogs.....£2,693.84.....£187.27....6.95%

...........Bets..........Wins.......Win Rate
Horses...133...........98.........73.68%
Dogs.....119...........98.........82.35%

The betting bank started at £86.66 on 26/3 and I'm keeping at around £300.00 now, withdrawing any profits until I'm more sure about what I'm doing.

(I'm not doing any other betting - need to get back confidence to touch football again)


As has been mentioned above, this is all about being selective in what you bet on. I haven't got figures for my selection rate (should keep them really) - but I reckon it's about 50% of horse races I look at, and a bit more for dogs.

I've found aiming for 20% to 50% profit in horse races is about right, and I'm working on 10% to 50% on dog races.


Other factors I use for selecting a race to bet on (for anyone looking at this - I'll say again that I don't study form, so the only guide I have is the market. You'll understand if I don't give away the tolerances I've been playing with.) In no particular order...

1. Health of Market (amount traded, over-round) - particularly with dogs.

2. Share of total market to dutch.

3. Price movements.

There's no "BET/DON'T BET" flag on the spreadsheet - but there's a lot of conditional formatting so I can get a 'feel' by looking at the pretty colours!

I also set a daily target and have a stop loss figure on the bank.

If anyone's interested enough for updates, shout here.
By:
Reyes
When: 06 Apr 10 09:05
gl with this Stevie, are you using some software to place the bets/work the stakes out or doing it via the main interface? cheers
By:
Stevie Strikes
When: 06 Apr 10 09:20
Hello reyes,

No, no software. I highlight the market in Betfair, [Ctrl]+C to copy, then press a button I've put on the spreadsheet, which runs macros to put in the new information and store the last paste, so a picture of the market builds up.

In excel, I have a tab for jumps, a tab for flat and a tab for dogs. I just copy and delete them as I need so there's one for each current race; and I have a tab open for each current race in betfair.

The good thing is you only have to highlight the Betfair market once. Refresh follwed by copy copies all the changes.

When it's time to bet, I franticly enter the figures in manually (chasing any shortening odds down if I have to). It might bew worth trying to automate that bit.
By:
Reyes
When: 06 Apr 10 10:14
It might bew worth trying to automate that bit.

sounds like it! Haven't used it but think gruss (or prob most of the other api apps) can do this donkey work for you?

gl
By:
Stevie Strikes
When: 06 Apr 10 12:39
Thanks Reyes,

(Today's target hit. 13 dog races, 10 selected, 9 won, 5.38% profit on stakes after comm.) :)
Page 1 of 2  •  Previous 1 | 2 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com