Morning guys,

Quick question, whats your 0ne fav/most profitable bet?

I only have one bet that I use at the moment its consistently profitable for me. Has any memebers got a simliar stratedgy? or do you guys like to try different approaches.

Look forward to your answers.

Alex

One bet i like to do sometimes, when the situation looks right in a 3 places race. Is do a 3/2/1 be. This involves finding the best odds to put 3pts on a win. Then i put 2pts on my selection to come exactly 2nd & 1pt on it to exactly 3rd using Skybet. If the selection has odds of 6/1 or more to come in exactly 3rd, then you will still make a small profit. Sometimes, when i think a high odds horse has a decent chance of winning, i actually prefer this bet to an e/w bet. As when a selection does win, you get a much better return.I do not post this type of bet though, as i think it is biased against people, who for some reason do not use Skybet bookie.

Using a 3/1/1 method i mean. So it is just the 1pt on finishing 2nd exactly.

Thanks for your reply Robin, I will have a look at this on Skybet. I make my money from E/W horses. So anything to do with places, interests me. Thanks again and good luck with your bets today.

Alex

That is cool Alex. Here is an example today of what i mean. If you thought 'Oh This Is Us' has a good chance of winning the 16:00 race at Doncaster. You could do a normal E/W bet, or alternatively, you could put on a 4pts win @7/1 & then place a 1pt win on the horse to come in exactly 2nd & also exactly 3rd. (both currently at 11/2). If it only places, then you will get a better return than just 0.5pts. But if it wins you should get around an extra +3pts profit. Also, this 'finish exactly' market seems to be somewhat resistant to rule 4 deductions. 😀

Well Robin Ive learned about the 'finish exactly' market today which I never knew existed. So thanks for that.

I tend not to be on bookmaker sites as I only use an Exchange. I think the bookmakers are always trying to give us extra ways to bet because of the threat of the exchanges.

Strangely Paddy Power own Betfair but would prefer you to bet on their sportsbook rather than their exchange. Tells you there is more profit for them via their bookmaker arm.

Thanks for your reply.

Alex

"what's your 0ne fav/most profitable bet"

Hi Alex,

To answer the question I would separate the bet from the stake. Every bet can be reduced to two variables,

- The chance the bookmaker/exchange gives the outcome (as indicated by the odds/price they offer)
- The chance you feel there is of the outcome. Or more simply, whether you think the outcome is more or less likely than the bookmaker suggests. It would be foolish to bet if this were not the case

So, my answer is, '**one where the chance I give the outcome is more than the bookmaker/exchange suggests**.'

I can write both variables (chances) down and compare the ongoing total of each to the ongoing number of winners and have an instant measure of how I'm doing compared to the bookmaker. It is not 'fudged' by other things such as stakes and profit.

Its surprising to me how many people are attracted by various 'types' of bet but don't break this down into the two variables. They will call a lucky 15 'a bet' when if fact it's 15 bets, with different probabilities attached to each of the outcomes. Understanding the likelihood of those different outcomes is critical to staking. What makes this a bad bet is the fact that the bookmaker is forcing you to have the same stake on each outcome (some of them extremely remote).

A treble is one bet. I meet loads of people who could tell me what it would pay out but very few who can tell me what the probability of winning is and how many such bets might lose before one wins. They are lured into over-staking by the big payout.

On the matter of staking, there are two key rules,

- The stake should be related to your bank (working capital)
- The stake should be proportional to the likelihood of the outcome (either odds or odds + advantage if advantage can be calculated/estimated)

These are not a matter of conjecture, they are a matter of mathematical fact if the objective is to optimise returns in the long-run. To ignore these rules exposes you to the perils of long losing runs (inevitable the longer you play), broken banks or at the very least inefficient use of capital.

I would add one other fact. The outcome of a previous or subsequent event (bet) usually has no impact on the outcome of the current event (bet) in question. Therefore it should not affect the stake other than through the bank which would have gone up or down. It makes no sense to say, 'if the first bet loses then have a bigger stake on the next bet'. Recovery staking is the sure route to the poorhouse.

I can see the attraction of an exotic bet in terms of a big pay out that you can brag about to your mates. In fact my biggest ever win was on a 6-4-1 back in the 90s.

The biggest problem is that it is unlikely you will get the best odds because you are obviously restricted to the one bookmaker and it is unlikely that they will be offering the best odds on every selection.

There are numerous bets I like depending on what I am betting on, where the event is and when it is. In the main the bets I like most are those that return some money.

Most of the Bets I post on here are for Horse Racing and are, generally, fixed Stake Win or Each Way (I have tried 20/80 bets instead of each way at times).

If the Odds are under 5-1 (6.00 Decimal) then I will bet Win and use a Price Comparison Site (normally Oddschecker but more recently attheraces.com ) to get the best odds along with a Best Odds Guaranteed bet. These are the bets I use Price Boosts from PaddyPower, UniBet, William Hill, Ladbrokes, etc on.

When the Odds are 5-1 or over (6.00+) the first thing I will look for is the number of places being paid - so, as an example, Gunmetal is generally going at around 8-1 but this morning I took 15/2 with William Hill as they are paying 6 Places. Sometimes you find some firms will pay 3 Places when there are 7 Runners (mainly seems to be BetFred). If the number of places being paid is identical I then look at the Odds Returned, particularly if only 2 places are being paid as sometimes 888 will pay 1/3rd the Odds rather than 1/4 which is standard. Again I always look for Best Odds Guaranteed when I Can.

The exception to these bets are my "fun bets" when I go out with some mates for a days racing or to sit in a pub and watch a festival. On these days I break out a Placepot and Lucky 15/31s so that I have something to follow in every race. On these days I will do my system bets before going out and I will make sure I pay only 1 visit to the Bookies before the racing finishes when I can go and collect my winnings with no danger of frivolous bets if I've indulged in some beverages between races.

I'm not sure Hills would necessarily be the better bet John.

Suppose the market has it right and Gunmetal is a genuine 8/1 shot. Over 9 bets you breakeven on the win side at 8/1.

At 15/2 you would be -0.5 points on the win side.

Hills were offering 1.5 for 6 places. That's 40% chance or 3.6 wins per 9 bets to breakeven.

Suppose you have a 5% advantage on the place side and win 3.78 (3.6 x 1.05) times per 9 bets. This would be (3.78 x 1.5) - (5.22 x -1) = 0.45. Not enough to make up the 0.5 shortfall on the win side. You would need at least a 5.6% advantage to make up the shortfall.

Ignoring the figures, all this is saying is, be careful with an extra place at reduced odds. You would need to be sure that the reduced odds are more than compensated for by the increased strike rate of the extra place. Extra places at best market odds are a no-brainer although it still doesn't mean you automatically have an edge on the place side. You need an under-round place book to be sure of this.

Each-way betting is really tricky and perhaps best treated as a hedging strategy for a successful win betting method. That is, to reduce bank drawdown during losing runs so larger bets can be placed and thereby improve overall profits.

In my extra place strategy I only select the horse if it has the best odds across all the bookmakers.

Some bookies often compensate for the extra place by offering lower odds.

@andrewp & @michael-clarke the main purpose I use the extra places for is to try and reduce losing sequences - I agree it can be a very fine judgement call sometimes on what is better Shorter Odds? Lower Place Payout (1/5th rather than 1/4)? Or Extra Places?

Perhaps, in this regard, the most intriguing of all is the Bet365 Enhanced E/W Market which offers Extra Places at Reduced Odds but with the same Place Terms (1/4 or 1/5).

One day I plan to sit down and spend at least a month Paper Trading these and comparing the results to Win Only, Place Betting and 20/80 - sadly I doubt I'll ever find the time to do this.

- The stake should be related to your bank (working capital)
- The stake should be proportional to the likelihood of the outcome (either odds or odds + advantage if advantage can be calculated/estimated)

Wise words.

Personally I like to de-risk my bets as I like smaller losing streaks psychologically. I tend to bet usually on 80/20 or place market bets. Dutch betting used to be my preferred method, but I find I can get more advantage on an 80/20 these days.

Its surprising to me how many people are attracted by various 'types' of bet but don't break this down into the two variables. They will call a lucky 15 'a bet' when if fact it's 15 bets, with different probabilities attached to each of the outcomes. Understanding the likelihood of those different outcomes is critical to staking. What makes this a bad bet is the fact that the bookmaker is forcing you to have the same stake on each outcome (some of them extremely remote).

This is a really interesting point. Very few people understand the maths behind exotic bets, or the chances of them winning different stages. I know that the big teams around the world love these bets for that exact reason, because when betting in tote pools the odds are usually way out and offer a huge advantage to those who know the probabilities, have the bankrolls to sustain long-term betting on them, and can fire hundreds (or thousands) of combinations into the pools seconds before they shut.

A while ago I remember someone did an analysis of bookmakers probabilities on a range of exotic bets, and found that even the bookmakers are pretty poor at pricing these markets. The best reasoning of why being that they didn't need to be good, because despite being poor at it, they were still hugely better than the majority of people. Anybody digging into them could have a good edge if they can sustain themselves through the losing streaks and/or have the bankroll to place a lot of combinations.

"I use the extra places to try and reduce losing sequences..."

Absolutley the right thing to do John. There is a old adage that says, 'the only good bet is a hedged bet' which I think is getting at the same thing, constructing a probability of winning (strike rate) that deploys your resources (bank/stakes) so as to optimise overall returns.

In addition to dutching and standard each-way betting we have so much more available to do this today, place only markets, extra place markets, exchange trading, bookmaker offers.

Most of these break the 'same stake' constraint of each-way betting. If it wasn't for the fact that the bookmakers ew formula can give under-round place books I think ew betting would have died out among serious bettors.

My issue with the 80/20 bet s that it fixes the proportions of the stakes. Why not simply stake to return the same amount, then the stakes are scaled according to the probability of winning?

Never having lived in a country with serious betting pools (US, Hong Kong, Australia) I hadn't appreciate how exotic bets could be profitable until I read Steven Crist's book, 'Exotic Betting: How to Make the Multihorse, Multirace Bets That Win Racing's Biggest Payoffs'.

It only really works with large bankrolls or syndicates playing rollovers but there are some possible applications to the UK. Eddie Lloyd's excellent blog article on this site about the correct way to play the placepot is a good starting point.

Also, I think Collosus Bets may have potential in the UK. This allows for a syndicate to play multiple targetted tickets based on probabilities. Small pools but an opportunity to gain an edge over other punters perhaps.

I can't quite get my head around Collosus. It appears to be a 'platform' for bookmakers to offer pool betting which they prime with their own prize money. Can anyone see how it works for them?