We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
General Betting
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Hello. After using Betfair for 5 years with no success, I have stumbled upon a successful strategy.
It is on horse each way markets, every selection below 1.66. There are strict filters/conditions applied to all the selections.
After 350 races, I turned £100 into just over £500. I was using wobbly staking, ranging from 5% of my bank to 70%.
At level stakes- £100 would have accumulated £1500.
At 10% of bank staking (starting bank £1000)- it was roughly the same.
If I had compounded every time a horse won, successfully 8 times- and then went back to £100, I would have won £4500.
Sequences so far are - 18 wins in a row has hit 3 times. 21 is the most. 3 is the longest losing run, which has hit twice. It has also lost 6 out of 10 once.
Can anyone suggest a decent staking plan which is not a loss recovery system? Not too risky, but offering good growth. I have £500 bank
It is on horse each way markets, every selection below 1.66. There are strict filters/conditions applied to all the selections.
After 350 races, I turned £100 into just over £500. I was using wobbly staking, ranging from 5% of my bank to 70%.
At level stakes- £100 would have accumulated £1500.
At 10% of bank staking (starting bank £1000)- it was roughly the same.
If I had compounded every time a horse won, successfully 8 times- and then went back to £100, I would have won £4500.
Sequences so far are - 18 wins in a row has hit 3 times. 21 is the most. 3 is the longest losing run, which has hit twice. It has also lost 6 out of 10 once.
Can anyone suggest a decent staking plan which is not a loss recovery system? Not too risky, but offering good growth. I have £500 bank
Show More
Can anyone suggest a decent staking plan which is not a loss recovery system? Not too risky, but offering good growth
Staking plans don't work, progressive or regressive IMO as you are then betting on the sequence of results, as well as the results themselves.. Stick to levels.
Staking plans don't work, progressive or regressive IMO as you are then betting on the sequence of results, as well as the results themselves.. Stick to levels.
I know the advice is to stick to levels but I sometimes wonder if this is turning into a cliche.
There are a lot of variations that could be tried once you have confidence in your longest losing run statistics.
There are a lot of variations that could be tried once you have confidence in your longest losing run statistics.
''longest losing runs'' are there to be broken, and don't
have to be consecutive to be ruinous. Beware.
have to be consecutive to be ruinous. Beware.
Uncle Ho
The optimal way (mathematically proven) to grow your bank is using the Kelly formula - or a variant. I suggest you read up on it. There are some challenges applying it. Otherwise a fixed percentage of your bank. Without analysing your numbers in detail it's hard to say what percentage, but probably in the range 2-5%.
GL
The optimal way (mathematically proven) to grow your bank is using the Kelly formula - or a variant. I suggest you read up on it. There are some challenges applying it. Otherwise a fixed percentage of your bank. Without analysing your numbers in detail it's hard to say what percentage, but probably in the range 2-5%.
GL
Kelly has to many flaws to be of any practical use in horse racing.
a) It relies on knowing the edge of each individual bet to calculate the stake for said bet.
In reality this never known to any degree of accuracy.
b) The stake size varies according to the odds.
In reality, if the odds of the selections very enough to warrant stake sizes that differ by any meaningfull ammount then you are most likely to have two or more systems within the selection process and be better off treating it as such. kelly staking will make it harder to acertain how the system is performing at certain odds bands.
The purpose of a staking plan is to manage the risk of ruin versus attaining the maximum gains.
In your case you said it lost 6 out of 10, To accertain a stake size you have to decide how many losses out of 10 ( or 12 or 20 etc ) you are going to allow it to do before it 'ruins' the bank. You then divide the bank by that number and hey presto you have a stake size and a known risk of ruin. (I.E. a staking plan.)
When ( if ) the bank doubles then I generally increase the stakes by 50-66% to less the risk of ruin abit and talke it from there.
No need for all that complicated Kelly stuff that you can't accurately calulate anyway.
a) It relies on knowing the edge of each individual bet to calculate the stake for said bet.
In reality this never known to any degree of accuracy.
b) The stake size varies according to the odds.
In reality, if the odds of the selections very enough to warrant stake sizes that differ by any meaningfull ammount then you are most likely to have two or more systems within the selection process and be better off treating it as such. kelly staking will make it harder to acertain how the system is performing at certain odds bands.
The purpose of a staking plan is to manage the risk of ruin versus attaining the maximum gains.
In your case you said it lost 6 out of 10, To accertain a stake size you have to decide how many losses out of 10 ( or 12 or 20 etc ) you are going to allow it to do before it 'ruins' the bank. You then divide the bank by that number and hey presto you have a stake size and a known risk of ruin. (I.E. a staking plan.)
When ( if ) the bank doubles then I generally increase the stakes by 50-66% to less the risk of ruin abit and talke it from there.
No need for all that complicated Kelly stuff that you can't accurately calulate anyway.
Escapee
Whilst I agree with you re Kelly on any particular bet, it is certainly possible to use Kelly with a system. I do it, and I do successfully.
I would also say that the purpose of a staking plan is to optimise maximum gain against probability of ruin.
Whilst I agree with you re Kelly on any particular bet, it is certainly possible to use Kelly with a system. I do it, and I do successfully.
I would also say that the purpose of a staking plan is to optimise maximum gain against probability of ruin.
default first choice should be Kelly or viarient, followed by level stakes, followed by getting better at picking winners.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539