Dutch Front 3 in Betting if Their IP% is Between 65%-80% Guardian Automation Bot

[makkad]

Hi Dallas,

I'd like to try/experiment with a LAY bet (Keep in-play) at a nominated price (e.g. 6.00) on all of the remaining selections which are outside of the 65%-80% range. I'm struggling to get my head round the methodology.

I'm sure this .baf can be modified to accomodate this. Alternatively, the integrated Excel sheet may be a means of achieving this?

Do you mean instead of placing the back bets or in addition to the back bets?

Instead of placing back bets

[makkad]

Hi Dallas,

I'd like to try/experiment with a LAY bet (Keep in-play) at a nominated price (e.g. 6.00) on all of the remaining selections which are outside of the 65%-80% range. I'm struggling to get my head round the methodology.

I'm sure this .baf can be modified to accomodate this. Alternatively, the integrated Excel sheet may be a means of achieving this?

Do you mean instead of placing the back bets or in addition to the back bets?

Instead of placing back bets

Dallas, any ideas on this issue "Instead of placing back bets" ......TIA

[Dallas]

Hi Dallas,

I'd like to try/experiment with a LAY bet (Keep in-play) at a nominated price (e.g. 6.00) on all of the remaining selections which are outside of the 65%-80% range. I'm struggling to get my head round the methodology.

I'm sure this .baf can be modified to accomodate this. Alternatively, the integrated Excel sheet may be a means of achieving this?

Do you mean instead of placing the back bets or in addition to the back bets?

Instead of placing back bets

Sorry never noticed your earlier replies

To switch it to lay all the other runners remove two of the three Dutch bet rules and change the remaining one to 'place a lay bet' rule
And apply it to 'Every' Selection
Then on the conditions tab add three 'Current Selection' conditions
and set the first one to test the selection is not the fav
the second to test the selection is not 2nd fav
and the third to test the selection is not 3rd fav

I'd test in PM first but that should be all thats needed

[Ruby Nirmal]

Hey folks,
This question is for Dallas,

I’ve been running a 3-horse Dutching strategy where I back the top 3 horses based on in-play IP% filters between 65–80%. It’s working well so far with strong consistency with small stakes about 10 pounds, especially when avoiding big fields and volatile markets.

Now I'm thinking about adding a 4th selection, ideally with a higher IP% (e.g. 80%+) to smooth out variance and increase strike rate.

My question is:

Has anyone tested adding a 4th runner with slightly looser IP% (like 80%) to this type of Dutch setup?

Over the long term (hundreds of markets), does this reduce variance enough to justify the smaller per-race profit?

Any tips on how best to structure the additional logic in Bet Angel for this 4th runner?

Appreciate any thoughts or if anyone’s willing to help me build the logic into the file — happy to share results once tested!

Dalla Can you help me to create a 4-selection Dutch rule strategy? same strategy but adding one more selection into this for long-term consistency with tiny profits.

[Dallas]

Hey folks,
This question is for Dallas,

I’ve been running a 3-horse Dutching strategy where I back the top 3 horses based on in-play IP% filters between 65–80%. It’s working well so far with strong consistency with small stakes about 10 pounds, especially when avoiding big fields and volatile markets.

Now I'm thinking about adding a 4th selection, ideally with a higher IP% (e.g. 80%+) to smooth out variance and increase strike rate.

My question is:

Has anyone tested adding a 4th runner with slightly looser IP% (like 80%) to this type of Dutch setup?

Over the long term (hundreds of markets), does this reduce variance enough to justify the smaller per-race profit?

Any tips on how best to structure the additional logic in Bet Angel for this 4th runner?

Appreciate any thoughts or if anyone’s willing to help me build the logic into the file — happy to share results once tested!

Dalla Can you help me to create a 4-selection Dutch rule strategy? same strategy but adding one more selection into this for long-term consistency with tiny profits.

You first need to add a 4th dutch bet rule, easiest way is to select the 'Dutch 3' rule then click the two green arrows icon at the top of the rules editor to duplicate the rule and then change it to be applied to 4th fav

Then on the 'Add IP% of 3rd fav rule do the following;

1) Go onto the stored value tab and change the name from 'total' to something like 'total3'
2) Then add a new stored value to that same rule and configure it as follows
Store a value named - total
for the market
with back book % of a selection
nominated in position 4
Adjustment - plus
another stored value named - total3
for the market

That should do it
rounding to nearest whole number

[Ruby Nirmal]

Hi Dallas,

Thank you for replying to the old post; I appreciated your efforts.

I’m using a 3-horse Dutching strategy with a 4th selection added and have optimised my timing to place bets between 30 to 6 seconds before the race and also change IP values from 65% to 85%, which is promising so far. For staking, if I’ve set an initial £100 stake and plan to reduce the stake to £10 after 2 wins with complete automation without my intervention. Is that possible with Bet Angel?

My question:
Do you think this staking method (reducing after wins) provides long-term consistency, or would you suggest a different approach, such as a percentage of the bank system for more gradual adjustment? I’m aiming for steady, small profits over time.

Would appreciate any advice or improvements you’d suggest for this staking strategy!

[Ruby Nirmal]

Hey folks,
This question is for Dallas,

I’ve been running a 3-horse Dutching strategy where I back the top 3 horses based on in-play IP% filters between 65–80%. It’s working well so far with strong consistency with small stakes about 10 pounds, especially when avoiding big fields and volatile markets.

Now I'm thinking about adding a 4th selection, ideally with a higher IP% (e.g. 80%+) to smooth out variance and increase strike rate.

My question is:

Has anyone tested adding a 4th runner with slightly looser IP% (like 80%) to this type of Dutch setup?

Over the long term (hundreds of markets), does this reduce variance enough to justify the smaller per-race profit?

Any tips on how best to structure the additional logic in Bet Angel for this 4th runner?

Appreciate any thoughts or if anyone’s willing to help me build the logic into the file — happy to share results once tested!

Dalla Can you help me to create a 4-selection Dutch rule strategy? same strategy but adding one more selection into this for long-term consistency with tiny profits.

You first need to add a 4th dutch bet rule, easiest way is to select the 'Dutch 3' rule then click the two green arrows icon at the top of the rules editor to duplicate the rule and then change it to be applied to 4th fav

Then on the 'Add IP% of 3rd fav rule do the following;

1) Go onto the stored value tab and change the name from 'total' to something like 'total3'
2) Then add a new stored value to that same rule and configure it as follows
Store a value named - total
for the market
with back book % of a selection
nominated in position 4
Adjustment - plus
another stored value named - total3
for the market

That should do it
rounding to nearest whole number

Hi Dallas,

Thank you for replying to the old post; I appreciated your efforts.

I’m using a 3-horse Dutching strategy with a 4th selection added and have optimised my timing to place bets between 30 to 6 seconds before the race and also change IP values from 65% to 85%, which is promising so far. For staking, if I’ve set an initial £100 stake and plan to reduce the stake to £10 after 2 wins with complete automation without my intervention. Is that possible with Bet Angel?

My question:
Do you think this staking method (reducing after wins) provides long-term consistency, or would you suggest a different approach, such as a percentage of the bank system for more gradual adjustment? I’m aiming for steady, small profits over time.

Would appreciate any advice or improvements you’d suggest for this staking strategy!

[ShaunWhite]

My question:
Do you think this staking method (reducing after wins) provides long-term consistency, or would you suggest a different approach, such as a percentage of the bank system for more gradual adjustment? I’m aiming for steady, small profits over time.

Would appreciate any advice or improvements you’d suggest for this staking strategy!

The chance of profiting on a market isn't determined by what happened in prior races. They're all independent events. The best way to stake is to use a level stake (liability staking) for a few days or weeks and then assess how it's going. Then add a little more stake and do the same again.

But you need to run it for at least a couple of hundred bets before deciding, not just a handful, because variation do to the slightly random nature of markets means you need time to see the bigger picture.

Staking 'methods' won't turn a losing strategy into a winning one, and the way to long term consistency is to simply have a strategy that's profitable.

[Dallas]

My question:
Do you think this staking method (reducing after wins) provides long-term consistency, or would you suggest a different approach, such as a percentage of the bank system for more gradual adjustment? I’m aiming for steady, small profits over time.

Would appreciate any advice or improvements you’d suggest for this staking strategy!

The chance of profiting on a market isn't determined by what happened in prior races. They're all independent events. The best way to stake is to use a level stake (liability staking) for a few days or weeks and then assess how it's going. Then add a little more stake and do the same again.

But you need to run it for at least a couple of hundred bets before deciding, not just a handful, because variation do to the slightly random nature of markets means you need time to see the bigger picture.

Staking 'methods' won't turn a losing strategy into a winning one, and the way to long term consistency is to simply have a strategy that's profitable.

Just yesterday James posted a P/L chart of a recent strategy he was trying which perfectly illustrates why you need a decent sample size
viewtopic.php?t=27793&start=84

[Ruby Nirmal]

My question:
Do you think this staking method (reducing after wins) provides long-term consistency, or would you suggest a different approach, such as a percentage of the bank system for more gradual adjustment? I’m aiming for steady, small profits over time.

Would appreciate any advice or improvements you’d suggest for this staking strategy!

The chance of profiting on a market isn't determined by what happened in prior races. They're all independent events. The best way to stake is to use a level stake (liability staking) for a few days or weeks and then assess how it's going. Then add a little more stake and do the same again.

But you need to run it for at least a couple of hundred bets before deciding, not just a handful, because variation do to the slightly random nature of markets means you need time to see the bigger picture.

Staking 'methods' won't turn a losing strategy into a winning one, and the way to long term consistency is to simply have a strategy that's profitable.

Just yesterday James posted a P/L chart of a recent strategy he was trying which perfectly illustrates why you need a decent sample size
viewtopic.php?t=27793&start=84

[1/quote]

Thank you both of you Dallas and Shuan for replying to my old posts,

I came up with an idea which i find useful for this forum as well.

"Hello everyone,

I've been working with a pre-race dutching automation that backs the top 3 or 4 favourites if their combined implied probability meets a specific threshold (e.g., 65-85%).

I've observed that once the race goes in-play, the prices of these selections almost always shorten, creating a frequent opportunity to trade out for a profit well before the race ends. Conversely, if a selection gets hampered or falls behind, its price will drift, increasing the loss.

This has led me to a key question: How can I robustly add in-play trade management rules to this strategy to lock in profits or cut losses?

Specifically, I'd like to add two automatic mechanisms:

Profit-Taking (Green Up): Once the trade's potential profit reaches a specific target (e.g., +£10), the automation places a lay bet to green up across all selections, securing that profit regardless of the winner.

Stop-Loss (Exit Trade): If the combined liability of the open position hits an unacceptable loss threshold (e.g., -£20), the automation places the necessary bets to exit the trade for a fixed, known loss, preventing a larger downside.

What is the best way to structure these rules in Bet Angel?

Should the rules calculate the overall 'P&L' for the market or check the individual profit on each dutched selection?

What are the most reliable conditions to ensure these in-play rules trigger correctly without interfering with the initial bet placement?

For a stop-loss, is it better to green out for the fixed loss or simply kill the entire trade with a single 'close trade' command?

Any guidance or examples on setting up this kind of in-play trade management would be immensely valuable. Thank you for your expertise!"

"Additionally, I've noticed a specific and frustrating scenario: in some races, two of of my dutched selections hits very low odds (e.g., 1.2 , below 2.0 ) but then loses, often by a narrow margin.
Does anyone have ideas for a rule that can reliably capture profit at these extreme short prices before the opportunity vanishes?".