No sooner had the
dust settled on last weekend's Queensland state election than
the stories abounded about how "someone" had put $10k
on the Labor Party at 100/1 to win less than ten seats and picked
up a cool million dollars in the process.
You know that "someone"?
Probably the same "someone" whose girlfriend is best
friends with the jockey's wife who told her........or the same
"someone" who saw "this thing trial at a pre dawn
workout on how it ran 22 secs for the last 400 metres into a 40
kph headwind" - you know, those "someones"!
Is it true? Did someone
do that? Don't know. If they did, good luck to them because they
needed it. And they took unders, I reckon, for something that
had never happened before in history and is highly unlikely ever
to happen again. From the bookmakers point of view it was a good
bet and one I am sure they would be happy to accept time and time
It's exactly the
same as the big payouts you occasionally hear about where some
poor mug has walked in to a pub where there is Keno - rare to
find one without the ubiquitous animated screens playing over
and over with flashing numbers - and he's fluked a win in the
15/15 jackpot of $3 million. The old keno company is delighted
to be putting out the mandatory press release about how "a
lucky punter has won $3 million in a $1 Keno game". Cheapest
advertising they can get and it works a treat.
It neatly highlights
and demonstrates the very basic difference between bookmakers,
casinos and lotto companies and the punters they trade off. The
sports bookies and casinos KNOW that they will get a (almost)
fixed return from every million dollars they turn over - day after
day, week after week, year after year. They take the long
term perspective, confident in the knowledge that
they have "done their sums right" and can almost be
guaranteed of whatever their targeted return happens to be.
They don't care if
some dumb-lucky schmuck punter comes along once in a blue moon
and actually wins a million because they know that when they publicise
it in the all-to-eager media, there'll be another 2 million punters
adopt the same "well if he can win it so can I" attitude
and give them all that money back.
And there IS the
difference. Most punters work for a short term fix/gain/plan where
the bookmakers and casinos and can't-lose-lotto-companies ONLY
are there working for the long term profit they are guaranteed
of picking up through turning over large amounts of money in the
quest for a (what some people think of as) a small long term gain.
So if this is, really,
indisputable, why are you trying to do it differently? Why do
you believe that you can win long term using a short term approach
when so many thousands and thousands have ventured down the same
path and failed? Why would you think you are smarter than them?
Are you? Really?
If long term is the
cash game, why are you bashing your head against a wall trying
to beat those that really do know, using a short
with this over the years has proved, beyond a doubt in my mind,
that if you are trying to average more than 1% on turnover (endlessly
repeating) in the very long term, the odds are indeed
stacked against you. As I have written in other places
on this site, the faster you try to accumulate, the higher the
risk. The higher the risk the more the psychological pressure
which CANNOT be overstated. The more the pressure, the worse the
Yes it is a vicious
circle and you always have to be aware of the consequences. Some
horse win, most lose. You will undoubtedly back many more losers
than winners over the space of a year. Money management (staking)
is, in my opinion, far more important than the method that you
use to decide on which of these conveyances you choose to invest
winners at a mid week meeting at Oodnagarlarbin that pay $2.50
are worth exactly the same as the latest "peoples' champion"
who wins the "feature race of the day" at a flash metropolitan
track.That $2.50 return from
a mid week hack buys exactly the same amount of petrol (which
is of course about a glass and a half at today's prices).
Get the numbers right
and this is a good fun way to make a dollar or two. Get the figures
wrong and it is a one way street to frustration. I always aim
for a very modest return over a very long term in my dealings
and while it may well be sometimes frustrating to salute with
a double figure winner with two fifths of three quarters of nothing
on it, I 'd rather do that than lose a motza on the latest glamour
"certainty" at $1.90 and have a reduced chance of regaining
that (necessarily) larger amount lost.
Why do you think
the industry takes so much time and trouble write about and speak
about the latest "peoples' champion"? What difference
is there between that and the media release put out by the Keno
company about the latest flukey million dollar winner?
In the final analysis,
if you can't bet like the casinos and bookmakers and take the
long term view, you really are trying to swim against
the tide. And guess what? The casinos and bookmakers have a set
percentage of their assets set aside for covering any short term
losses that is in a totally different account that their fixed
daily operating and capital expenditure accounts. It is THEIR
punting bank exactly in the same way as we emphasise
the need to have your own punting bank that is totally separate
from your day to day living expenses.
Casinos don't pay
the waitresses in the restaurants or the dealers at the blackjack
tables from the same account as their "gambling operational
contingency" account or whatever it may be called by their
conservative accountants. Neither should you!
There always will
be a large percentage of half-educated punters who will always
make up the pool that the more advanced and slightly more knowledgeable
will take their profits from. I don't feel guilty writing that.
It's the way it always has been and the way it always will be.
Your biggest decision
is what side of the pool you choose to swim in.
March, 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