run of racing bad luck
Just as you will have
incredibly good runs with punting, so you will inevitably have bad
runs of outs. A lot of people describe this as a "run of bad
luck" which is of course total BS.
Luck, to me, plays
but a minor part in the whole equation and has nothing to do with
the mechanical approach necessary to make a profit LONG TERM from
my chosen interest. N-O-T-H-I-N-G!
For heaven's sake,
I've even seen web sites selling good luck spells and potions "guaranteed
to make you an instant winner". Are you kidding me? People
out there actually send good money for this rubbish? Okay. Different
strokes for different folks and whatever floats your boast and all
those other assorted cliches.
What a lot of people
interpret as runs of good luck or runs of bad luck are really just
statistical clumping - where the "return to mean average"
gets a healthy kick along over in a relatively short space of time.
As my red headed mate was very fond of saying in her political interviews
- please explain?
Over a long chain of
random events, there will always be an "average" result
statistically. Which is why when you have had a series of "outs"
with a long term winning proposition, it seems you inevitably get
a "clumping" of successes to even out the results to a
"mean average" over the long term. Which is why of course
3/1 winners don't necessarily happen along every 4 races. Wouldn't
it be convenient if they did?
What I look for in
any methodology I want to add to my arsenal, is LONG TERM success
strike rates hopefully beyond 35%. Why 35% they screamed? Easy as
- I know that in the LONG TERM, favourites will win between 32%
and 34% of the thousands of races run every year in Australia and
there will be times where they will win race after race after race
with seemingly endless predictability. Similarly there will be just
as many times when favourites will lose every race on any day with
monotonous regularity but long term they will average out to that
32-34% strike rate.
Now provided you are
getting better than around $3.20 for every one of them and they
average 33% you should over that 12 month period make about 6% net
on your total investment. Easy isn't it? The drama is that the runs
of outs when you are betting at the pointy end of the market, accelerate
your losses very quickly if you are "behind", and the
difference between playing catch-ups at $2 and catch-ups at $4.50
is, as Darryl Eastlake was wont to say, HUUUUUUGGGEEEE!
The other problem is
that favourites don't average $3.20 when they do win. Speaking of
statistical clumping, how do you think the unbeaten Black Caviar
has impacted on long term favourites "averages"? And at
$1.04 that it always pays for a win, how do you think that has shaped
the last couple of years? So would that be statistical clumping
if you were looking at 5 year averages?
Similarly, what if
you have a method that LONG TERM returns and average price / win
of $8.50, but only 18% of the time? In terms of annual return, what's
better? That or backing favourites?
Obviously then, the
secret to making more than that is to start with a method that LONG
TERM averages better than 35% or even 40% with a similar if not
better, average price/return. This is why if you check out our Whole
Box & Dice page, you will see why we look for ideas and methods
that can be used in conjunction with each other that have that sort
of return or average price and we periodically test them to make
sure they are still on target and that our original test period
was not long enough to eliminate the problems of statistical clumping.
If you can arrive at
a method that returns 40% and your average is still $3.20 - well,
you do the maths.
We know then that LONG
TERM you should end up in front. Note the word "should".
As we keep saying, nothing, absolutely nothing, in gambling arenas
is ever guaranteed and you would be fool to think it could be. If
you truly believe that anything in gambling will make you loss proof,
for your own sake stop immediately and find a new interest before
you do serious damage to yourself and those you care about.
What a lot of people
tend to do, and I've observed this over a lot of years, is that
when that "bad run of outs" strikes, they tend to go crazy
betting on races they wouldn't normally consider, hoping that by
having more bets they get a better chance of returning to the "average"
that has otherwise won them money. I understand why they think that
way, but it is, of course, flawed and their quality of decision
making sadly more than offsets their eagerness to return to what
they perceive to be "normal". Think about it - if you
normally don't bet on Adelaide races because of any number of reasons
that you have analysed, why would you start throwing money at them
just because your method is going through a "statistical clumping"
The answer may well
to bet less. We don't. We simply continue on in our normal way of
doing the business because LONG term, we believe the results should
return to stability and our staking plan will all but cover the
most dire run of outs. And if it doesn't? Hey, that's gambling.
So we lose a bank? You must be able to structure your gambling in
a way that losing a bank or two over the space of a year is not
a diabolical financial problem for you or your close ones - because
in all probability it will happen. If you truly believe you can
afford to lose, say $1000, this year and not go
off in to a dizzy downward spiral, don't set it all up in one account.
Break it in to 4 banks of $250 and use one until you either break
it or are able to withdraw from it and return it to your working
capital account and be free to continue on.
Another idea may be
to demand a higher than usual level of interest, ability and decision
from yourself before sitting down to gamble when you’re in
the middle of a bad run. A "bad run" will often make you
think you're going to lose even before you start the day's activities.
I strongly would argue if that is your state of mental frustration
with statistical clumping - STOP - go for walk, go fishing - plant
some roses - do anything but gamble as you are on a one way trip
to disaster, You simply must believe that you are adopting the best
strategy you can in the method that has proven successful for you
in the past or you are inevitably headed for Self Pity Street. It
is alright to occasionally visit Self Pity Street but you don't
want to live there!
If you know that you
are doing what you normally do to the best of your ability and are
not deviating from your long term strategy, it will make you far
less likely to "go the guts" when things start heading
south. And remember, even with a 40% strike rate, 60 times in a
100 you will be wrong and things will be heading south.
Losing streaks are
part of the furniture and cannot be avoided. What can be avoided
is panicking when they come along.
Even if you say, "hey
this really sucks - I'm stopping for a week", that's terrific
because with your method of selection and long term results, it
should make no difference if you don't bet the next ten selections
or twenty or one hundred selections because you should be confident
in the long term returns from that methodology, that you can drop
in and out as you need to. As we have written before, no one person
can be at their computer doing this 24 / 7. It is impossible to
do that so don't even try.
For most people, the
only certainties in life are taxes and death. If you happen to be
a gambler you can also add losing runs to that list of inevitabilities.
So don't get angry. Get over it and deal with it in a way that will
not only make you feel better about it but probably enhance you
chances of navigating your way through it successfully.
There is no such thing
as "bad luck". There is such a thing as statistical clumping
(and I have the stats to prove it!)
This article is
copyright www.RaceRate.com, August 2012 . All rights reserved. May
be copied freely for personal use and yes you can put it up on your
web page providing this copyright notice stays in tact.