Losing Streaks When
Gambling
We have visited this fear inspiring issue
before but I think it is worthwhile revisiting as it is just a much
a part of the gambling reality as standing in the queue waiting to
get your winnings.
In fact, it is true to say that if you
are working a successful progression system of betting, you can never
really stand in the winning queue UNLESS you have had a losing streak.
Let me explain that further as I clear
the old muddled head at this very early hour. (I generally write
these articles at 4am when it is a peaceful and contemplative time
of the day - when there's no other information in the media to absorb
and analyse and accept or reject. My time of the day!)
I strongly believe that for any progression
system of betting to succeed you HAVE to have a constant "add
in" amount for every bet AS WELL AS the catch up amount to cover
past losing bets. In other words, when the losing sequence ends, which
it inevitably must, I want to know that EVERY losing bet contributed
to a greater profit. I believe that if you don't, you are treading
water and wasting your time.
Sound all double dutch?
Okay, well lets look at an example. Say
you're starting off with a $100 bank and you want to make 2% profit
on the bank. So your target win amount is $2.00. The neddy your system
indicates as the likely winner is conveniently priced at even money
so to make the two bucks you have to put $2 on it. Oh, sad days. The
poor beast loses and there goes your two bucks.
Now a lot of progression ideas would
say, no worries, add the $2 betting loss to your original profit target
and the new profit target is $4.00. Conveniently the next would be
champion is priced at $5.00 so, remarkable as I am with maths, I quickly
able to decide to invest $1 on it to end up with a $4 nett profit
- giving me my original strived for $2 plus re-gathering the $2 of
the bank I have already invested. Wow - unluckily beaten - couldn't
get a run in the straight and didn't get the bob of the head in on
the line. What a tragedy.
So now I'm really in strife. I haven't
won my $2, I've invested $3 trying to win the two and the next selection
is an even money favourite. So I need to reset the target. Let's see
- there was the original $2 target, the first $2 bet, the second $1
bet so now I'm chasing $5 and the selection is evens. Easy squeezy!
The answer is $5. Oh dear. Missed the start, didn't handle the track,
lost interest, tailed off.
Wow this is getting serious. Let me work
this out - my new target is: the original 2 plus 2 plus 1 plus 5.
Got it. The new target is $10. The system selection is showing $3.00
so invest $5 and hallelujah, the mongrel won. You beauty! I've
won my original $2 target. And it's only taken me 4 races,
2 hours, and risking $13 to
make $2.00. (Yes - it can be argued 15.38% profit on turnover)
So your betting record (you do keep
them all don't you?) would look like:
Name Target Approx
Div Invest
N/Return Bank
100.00
Octagonal 2 2 2
98.00
Phar Lap 4 5 1
97.00
Vain 5 2 5
92.00
Ziema 10
3 5 10 102.00
So what happens if you add a constant
2% target in to the mix? In other words, for every race you bet on
you want to make a minimum of 2% of your original starting bank so
that $2 gets added in after every bet, win or lose.
Your betting record (approximately)
would then look like:
Name Target Approx
Div Invest
N/Return Bank
100.00
Octagonal 2 2 2
98.00
Phar Lap 6 5 1.5
96.50
Vain 9.5 2 9.5
87.00
Ziema 21 3 10.5 21 109.00
Now what's happened? Yes, it has still
taken you the same 4 races and the same 2 hours BUT you have made
a real $9 or 9% of your bank and your profit on turnover is 38.29%
And IMPORTANTLY, every
losing bet has returned a profit.
So here's the rub. If you want to make
this worthwhile and IF
you are running a progression system of betting (which a
lot argue is financial suicide), what the hell is the
point in doing it for hour after hour to make two fifths of three
quarters of s.f.a.? (For those more delicate readers, that of
course stands for sweet faithful Australia). Your return on time
investment has got to be worthwhile or why bother starting?
Do something else. Enter magazine competitions perhaps? Play online
poker?
HERE'S THE BIG
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION
YOU SIMPLY HAVE
TO BE ABLE TO SET A REALISTIC ORIGINAL TARGET THAT MATCHES WHAT YOUR
EXPECTED LOSING STREAK "WORST RUN OF OUTS" CAN POSSIBLY
BE.
This is the "duck's guts" of
the whole conundrum. You have to have a pretty good idea of what the
successful strike rate of your system of selection will be BEFORE
you start and this can only be calculated over a large number of successful
bets. Gosh, you say - is this why people like you spend hours and
hours and months and months researching this stuff? You've got in
one Narelle.
I have published other guides to losing
sequences and pretty close is as good as you can hope for and, despite
what the super optimists will tell you, is about as good as it gets.
As a wise man once said - anyone can make predictions, as long as
it doesn't involve the future.
If your average strike rate is 5% your
maximum losing run is probably
130 to 140 bets
If your average strike rate is 10% your
maximum losing run is probably
60 to 70 bets
If your average strike rate is 15% your
maximum losing run is probably
40 to 50 bets
If your average strike rate is 20% your
maximum losing run is probably
30 to 35 bets
If your average strike rate is 25% your
maximum losing run is probably
20 to 30 bets
If your average strike rate is 30% your
maximum losing run is probably
15 to 20 bets
If your average strike rate is 35% your
maximum losing run is probably
12 to 18 bets
If your average strike rate is 40% your
maximum losing run is probably
10 to 15 bets
If your average strike rate is 45% your
maximum losing run is probably
9 to 14 bets
If your average strike rate is 50% your
maximum losing run is probably
10 bets
So knowing this is probably
the case, how can you the set a target amount based upon strike rates
and probable losing sequences?
EXAMPLE:
Say your system selection method returns 50% winners.
You can see from the info above that
the probable maximum of outs is 10.
Simply dividing the 10 in to the 50%
may well give you a good starting point of a 5% of bank allocation
for each bet.
*** You would have to work out all of
your selections and results on paper first BEFORE you try to implement
this as you may wish to raise or lower the bank allocation after you
have tried it out over a LARGE number of results.
And if you would care to pass on your
50% win strike rate method, that'd be good too!
A long of run of outs will test your
resolve and belief in what your chosen method may be. But if you are
using a progression staking plan at least you should be profiting
from every loser and it may make that all that gut wrenching uncertainty
worthwhile.
© RaceRate.com 2011
In association with: Credit
Card Debt Problems Australia, Tasmanian
horse racing and ratings,
Racing Ratings
rating service, Greyhound
Racing Systems, Staking
Plans and Staking Systems, Sunshine
Coast Things To Do, Kangaroo
Island Things To Do,
Hobart things to do, Accommodation
Las Vegas hotels,
Accommodation Launceston, Accommodation
Hobart,
Accommodation
Anaheim hotels, Accommodation
San Francisco Hotels, Accommodation
Los Angeles Hotels,
Horse Racing Australia history, Racing
systems software
