ShaunWhite wrote: ↑
Mon Jul 17, 2023 11:40 am
ajanthony wrote: ↑
Mon Jul 17, 2023 11:10 am
The one thing I do know is that top jockeys are top jockeys because they win consistently.
I would welcome any opinions.
Its not about picking winners it's about getting value. You only make money by backing or laying when the odds you get are better than the likelihood of the outcome. Staking plans don't alter that and it doesn't matter if its a favourite or an outsider.
Martingales might be attractive when you're staking $1 but you'll be averaging very low stakes. Profit is edge * opportunity * stake so you need to be turning over as much cash as possible. Eg averaging hundreds not single figures. A Martingale will restrict your earnings not improve them.
A couple of points here that I don't necessarily agree with. I also did state earlier that I was only 8 meetings in with this system so there is a lot further to go before it can be proved.
But you say that you need to be turning over hundreds rather than single figures. Staking is easily scalable, I could have started with a $5 stake and the profit would have been over $1500 or a $10 stake which would have made the profit over $3000. It is about being scalable.
The other point you mention is value and edge. I read that a lot on these forums about it but I really don't understand it. If a runner is the 4th favourite then statistically it has about a 10% chance of winning. Are you saying that if it's odds are 15 to 1 then that is good value because realistically it means nothing. That is just an opinion or a perception, it is not statistically or mathmatically proven. It is a horse race with a multitude of variables. This type of perceived value or edge is vastly different to a casinos edge which is mathmatically proven.
If I have got this wrong about my perception of value, I am happy for an explanation as to what it really means.