I doubt he can as he registered late at night, came on here to post some abuse and none of his records match anybody that has registered with us. Though we note that the alias Dr Who very well known and linked to somebody we are well aware of. We will email the poster but I seriously doubt they will allow themselves to be identified or else they would have to back up what are basically completely false claims. In the past we have deleted such comments but I think this should remain.jimrobo wrote:Sorry where did you get this from? That's a pretty serious accusation and I hope you can either back it up or retract it.
How do you make over 1k in 1 race?
I didn't mean to sound like 'only' reffered to the amount on that day, I just wanted to point out the difference between the two days. Anybody getting above zero consistantly is doing well. People who have been around longer are obviously going to have higher expectations.Zenyatta wrote:No doubt many are bemused at Peter saying he got 'only' 1000 pounds for the day. Most people like me would be thrilled to make 1/10th that amount, 100 day is fine.
So I thought I'd try upping my stakes yesterday trying to get some more profit, I ended up losing £454 
I haven't had a losing day for 4 weeks either. As soon as I started losing I lost my head and made it so much worse.
Every time I try to get more profit I end up a lot worse off
I guess I'll just have to take it easy and progress slowly as I have been. I just feel like I've got so much more in me!
I haven't had a losing day for 4 weeks either. As soon as I started losing I lost my head and made it so much worse.
Every time I try to get more profit I end up a lot worse off
I guess I'll just have to take it easy and progress slowly as I have been. I just feel like I've got so much more in me!
Sorry to hear about the losses. IMHO raising stakes suddenly is always a mistake, better to raise them gently bit by bit, slowly, slowly etc. Even if it's only 0.50% a day it will gently move you forward. I built up my stakes over many years so don't try and get to the same level quickly as it will put emotional pressure on you.
I easily remember the first time I put £1k into a market, I nearly died of heart attack but I don't feel any stress now putting in much larger amounts. But it took a long time to get there.
I easily remember the first time I put £1k into a market, I nearly died of heart attack but I don't feel any stress now putting in much larger amounts. But it took a long time to get there.
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
That market at Nottingham had the potential for a huge total if you played it right and were aware of the owners.
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
Sorry didn't have time to do an explanation in the earlier post.
First of all we had a horse being trained by Stewart Williams which should ring bells as much as Barney Curly.
The horse started to get supported in from 11's into 3's. A very well backed horse trained by Stuart Williams..... Well using a bit of speculation you can figure out it was Public Enemy Number 1, aka Patrick Vietch who owns the horse.
The course was Nottingham, the site of one of the best ever gambles done by who? Vietch, backed in from 100-1 to being the fav and winning.
Therefore Nottingham bookies are very wary of such horses as are bookmakers in general.
Add into the mix that the fav was not on his best behaviour, was calling out a lot in the pre lims, had the blindfold and rug for stalls entry and the commentators saying how they wouldn't back it given the antics it had been up to and you have the perfect mix for a great trading result.
I also had the advantage of being told that the Williams trained horse was very well thought of and to be on the look out for it being backed early on but even without this info the race was perfect for a really good result.
First of all we had a horse being trained by Stewart Williams which should ring bells as much as Barney Curly.
The horse started to get supported in from 11's into 3's. A very well backed horse trained by Stuart Williams..... Well using a bit of speculation you can figure out it was Public Enemy Number 1, aka Patrick Vietch who owns the horse.
The course was Nottingham, the site of one of the best ever gambles done by who? Vietch, backed in from 100-1 to being the fav and winning.
Therefore Nottingham bookies are very wary of such horses as are bookmakers in general.
Add into the mix that the fav was not on his best behaviour, was calling out a lot in the pre lims, had the blindfold and rug for stalls entry and the commentators saying how they wouldn't back it given the antics it had been up to and you have the perfect mix for a great trading result.
I also had the advantage of being told that the Williams trained horse was very well thought of and to be on the look out for it being backed early on but even without this info the race was perfect for a really good result.
Thanks for explaining that Andy, I wouldn't of had a clue who Stewart Williams is. I'll add him to my trainer alert list with Curly.
Must be good to have the knowledge but on the other hand I can think of benefits of having little knowledge also.
Must be good to have the knowledge but on the other hand I can think of benefits of having little knowledge also.
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
Something I discovered a while back was that actually reducing my stakes increased my profits rather bizarrely.rhysmr2 wrote:So I thought I'd try upping my stakes yesterday trying to get some more profit, I ended up losing £454
I had been fixated at upping my stakes assuming I needed to in order to win more. However, with higher stakes comes problems. Firstly the market often can't take bigger stakes so I was sitting there waiting for the time to come when I could use my stakes and not cause the market to react. I think Peter has often said that he tries to sail under the radar with his stakes.
So while I sat there I was missing opportunities that I could have taken had I used smaller stakes.
The other big factor was my mind struggled to handle the bigger stakes as this meant I was risking more. The other thing to consider is when you try to exit a position, if you are using big stakes the market might not be able to take them.
So what I ended up doing was halving my stakes and my profits increased. I am much more willing to enter trades, I fire in lots of small trades rather than one big trade now. If the market can take more money I might click twice or switch to a bigger amount. Using the smaller stakes 'freed' my mind and I am not worried about the risk like when using big stakes.
When I was building up my stakes I did it very gradually - to do it all of a sudden is madness imo and I am not surprised you had a big loss. Using the bigger stakes will have changed how you think about the market massively I would suspect.
So don't assume that you need to use big stakes to achieve big profits, a lot of the markets are weak and thin so lots of small trades are often the way to go but that doesn't mean you have to stick to just one small order at a time. If the market allows it use more - you have to adapted with the market.
After a period of intense soul-searching yesterday I feel I may finally have achieved the huge breakthrough I was looking for! 
I always felt that In-Play trading was an area that that had untapped potential, because most of the pros focus on the pre-race trading and In-Play was more the province of speculative punters.
I had been getting very frustrated, because althrough I had gradually discovered a few good In-Play principles based on racing-patterns (certain type of race, horses in certain price zones etc) that were possibly marginally over break even, I hadn't put it all together. Yesterday I believe I finally did - I consistently made a profit of about $10 on all but one race In-Play, this is a huge water-shed moment for me, after 2 months of trying!
I think if that you keep experimenting over a long period of time (months) and you find a lot of small things with small edges and then eventually combine them all, it can eventually add up to something signficant. But if you shoot for too much too early when you don't have the skills or knowledge, you'll cop severe beatings and rake up heavy losses like I did initially.
I always felt that In-Play trading was an area that that had untapped potential, because most of the pros focus on the pre-race trading and In-Play was more the province of speculative punters.
I had been getting very frustrated, because althrough I had gradually discovered a few good In-Play principles based on racing-patterns (certain type of race, horses in certain price zones etc) that were possibly marginally over break even, I hadn't put it all together. Yesterday I believe I finally did - I consistently made a profit of about $10 on all but one race In-Play, this is a huge water-shed moment for me, after 2 months of trying!
I think if that you keep experimenting over a long period of time (months) and you find a lot of small things with small edges and then eventually combine them all, it can eventually add up to something signficant. But if you shoot for too much too early when you don't have the skills or knowledge, you'll cop severe beatings and rake up heavy losses like I did initially.
Thanks Andy, you hit the nail on the head, it's exactly what happens to me.
Every time I have a bad run I go back to small stakes and have a great week as well, I just hope I've learned my lesson this time round
Zenyatta, glad to hear it's coming together for you.
Every time I have a bad run I go back to small stakes and have a great week as well, I just hope I've learned my lesson this time round
Zenyatta, glad to hear it's coming together for you.
Would you normally have a liability that high, or are you constantly closing your trades as well as opening new ones?Bet Angel wrote: Most markets can absorb trade volume of five figures easily
On a day with 20 races, how many would you trade on average?Bet Angel wrote: I would say I spend 99% of my time just trying to stay out of trouble and searching and prodding the market for an opportunity.
What sort of markets do you tend to avoid?
Jeff
Last edited by Iron on Sat Nov 13, 2010 3:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Hi,
interesting thread this. I suspect that it's a subject close to everybodys heart.
I note that "firing through lots of smaller trades" is a common theme in views of the pros. I suspect that this is one of the key abilities, not to mention highly impressive. It is practically miraculous if I 5 trades on a single race and even then more than one is likely to be negative. The usual pattern for me is that it takes an age to get one trade opened then a longer time to get it closed, sometimes in profit, sometimes not.
I'd be interested to know what a ball park figure for "number of trades" in a race is assuming that it's a "scalping type market"
cheers, P
interesting thread this. I suspect that it's a subject close to everybodys heart.
I note that "firing through lots of smaller trades" is a common theme in views of the pros. I suspect that this is one of the key abilities, not to mention highly impressive. It is practically miraculous if I 5 trades on a single race and even then more than one is likely to be negative. The usual pattern for me is that it takes an age to get one trade opened then a longer time to get it closed, sometimes in profit, sometimes not.
I'd be interested to know what a ball park figure for "number of trades" in a race is assuming that it's a "scalping type market"
cheers, P
I just put through 18 round trips on the 14:20. You can put through a lot of trades once you get used to it. It's safer to do that than one big trade carrying all the risk.
I tend to trade most races over a session but there are some races I wont touch, just on the basis I can't see a way in.
I tend to trade most races over a session but there are some races I wont touch, just on the basis I can't see a way in.