Horse racing systems, racing ratings, horse racing software, horse racing staking plans and greyhound systems


Whole Box & Dice

Daily Ratings

The Grail

Speed Ratings

Par Times

Free Articles Library

Track Information

Racing Statistics

Free Staking Plans

Selfrate Software

Past Champs (A - L)

Past Champs (M - Z)

Feature Race Winners

Sport On This Day

Free Systems

Your Feedback

Speedrate 2016 software

Contact Us

Terms Of Use

Copyright Notice



Perhaps one of the most under-estimated aspects of punting is the patience needed BEFORE withdrawing your winnings to spend on such non essential stuff like food and clothes and shoes and school uniforms. This is why any punting bank should not include money for essentials under ANY circumstances. ANY circumstances.

I get tons of emails from people asking about staking plans and staking levels and "what should you start with?" etc etc and while I think 5% of your bank is a good starting point ( a lot would argue 2% is better), by far the MORE important consideration is where do you start drawing down on any winnings?

This all relates of course to simple straight out level stakes betting so it can all be done "set and forget" and not be sitting in front of a computer chasing odds all afternoon.

So why 5%? Well if I am betting on a method that I believe through research returns about 25% winners, I know the average possible losing run is about 16 to 18 so even if I start at the beginning of an "average" possible losing run, 5% gives me a minimum of 20 bets before I flame the bank entirely. Hopefully I will be starting with a "usual" strike rate based on research. It is worthwhile pointing out that even with an average 25% strike rate there is a possibility of starting with a "worst possible run of outs" scenario which, on a 25% strike rate, can vary between 48 and 55 outs. (There is a table about these potential gambling run of outs available by clicking here: Losing Streaks)

So with a strike rate of about 25%, while a 2% level stakes approach is a safer starting point, 5% works for me BUT only on the understanding that I may flame a bank or two before getting solid long term accumulation AND knowing that if I get away to a "good start" I don't have to withdraw $$$ straight away to have money to go to the supermarket with.

With any new methodology I get involved with I KNOW that my peak risk time is always going to be in the first few days and that risk is going to depreciate over the passage of time given that the "average"conditions prevail. How many banks do we flame before accepting any method doesn't have the legs to succeed long term? Three pulls me up - if I can't make it work in three attempts I pass - give up - move on.

Now bear in mind that I don't suddenly wake up on a Monday morning and think "hey, new idea - let's throw a grand at this". That's financially impossible for me to even contemplate. I always start off pre testing at a $200 level (5% is $10 - even I can work that out so it sits well) - and if I can turn that $200 in to $500 I am happy to top that up to $1000 and go from there - again at a 5% level ($50) - but in reality higher than the 5% level because my real money investment is only $700. (Again - a personal choice of risk exposure which I am very keen to reduce as quickly as possible).

But here's the rub. If I can turn that new $1000 bank into $2000 using a constant $50 level stake approach, by the time the bank gets to 2k, (less of an increase needed than the initial $200 to $500), that $50 has magically reduced to two and a half percent of the bank and my worst possible run of outs is almost "coverable" by the bank. I always work to a "worst possible scenario" bottom line.

NOTE: this is only possible IF I haven't had to pull any funds from the bank in the intervening time and exactly why your punting bank has to be funded from dollars TOTALLY divorced from your normal day to day expenses money. To illustrate further, when I started having a really good run with the OutRater methodology with the $1000 bank, (which actually grew form a $200 pre-trial bank), the initial $50 bet was 5% of the bank (to me personally it was around 7% - danger, danger!).

Fortuitously, the "average" strike rate held up from the start and at the end of 1000 bet test period, that $50 level stakes bet was just 0.4% of the total and the possible run of outs the bank was able to stand before a total flaming had gone out to nearly 250 bets.

This was ONLY possible because I did not have to draw down funds from the account to cover day to day expenses and accumulation was never threatened by a worst possible run of outs scenario happening.

As I wrote before, my major risk period is at the start of a punting venture when my % of bank risk is greater. Only because I don't HAVE to get funds out, am I able to build the safety margin needed to prevail against long runs of outs. I can't see it's possible to do it in any other way.

At some stage to succeed, you must gamble. It's impossible to gather $$$ in this game without gambling. Same as in those poker tournaments. You can play as tightly as you can, never calling from an early position unless mega strong, always playing only quality hands from a late position etc etc etc but you will never win any of those tournaments without actually gambling about half a dozen times during the play. It's just what it is. There is no getting around it.

I find that once I have "gambled" against a run of outs at the start of punting bank and won, the rest is relatively stress free. The longer it progresses the more you're covered.

The bottom line is this: you can only be a good winning punter if you master the psychological aspect of betting. That depends on not desperately needing to win to maintain your basic necessities of life or your dependants lives.

The punting bank just HAS to be divorced from any otherwise needed funds. If it isn't, your thought processes will be corrupted and you will fall back in to the old habits of making rash decisions and losing. It will not matter, one ounce, what selection methods you use. There is nothing on this site that will help you in your punting endeavours if you are not in control of your betting. If you need to constantly withdraw from your punting bank to fund life's necessities you are not in control and can't possibly ever be and consequently, you will not finish in front.

You are far better off starting with a very small bank from which you don't have to withdraw and building up from there. Apart from the psychological aspect, if you do flame a couple of banks it is not a major financial disaster.

Here's the truth - if I lost all of the separate banks I am running at the time of writing this, (five in total), yes, I would be really annoyed but it would NOT effect my life tomorrow one single bit. None of the funds I have in play at moment is required for any other purpose to maintain my family's lifestyle in any way. If they were, she who must be fed would not be happy and the enjoyment I get from doing what I do would quickly dissipate.

Sure, think big but, if you have to, start small. You'll enjoy it more. You'll make less mistakes. You won't put yourself under any pressure. The internal arguments with yourself will cease. You will like yourself more.

This article is copyright 2010 . 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.

Horse racing systems and research