Patterns In The Sand....

Chapter Nine: Winning betting strategies

The very best staking plan ever devised, by a professor with a PhD in Applied Mathematics and Statistics who has published a critically acclaimed thesis on probability in the context of sports betting, is still completely useless, if your selections do not win. Equally, a sound system of selection with a positive expectancy will still fail to make you any money unless you have a betting strategy. I have to concede that I gave up on trying to follow any one rigid staking plan long ago, but I am of the opinion you do not need to, so long as you do stick to a few simple guidelines.

#1 Keeping Records

Absolutely no excuses, keeping a record of your bets is a must. This includes your serious bets, and those you have on the side for entertainment value. All bets, without exception.

If you find you do not have the discipline to carry out this most basic of house-keeping tasks, then I would seriously suggest that you look at other ways to make money. Period. Gambling is probably not going to be for you. You might think I'm going over the top to be harsh here, but unless you can apply some business-like processes to your betting to help you focus and stay in control, then you should not be expecting any business-like returns from your efforts.

I first became involved with betting on horse racing in 1995 after I spotted an advert for a piece of software that could predict the outcome of a horse race. But even then I knew instinctively that to measure my success (or as it turned out, failure) I would have to keep records of my bets. However, after a few months when I hit a losing streak I did what we have all done, and stopped making entries in my journal for three months. I guess that subconsciously I did not want reminding of how badly I was doing. This pattern of keeping track only when I was hitting regular winners, then becoming lazy when winners were scarce, continued for a couple of years. Back then I did not realise the importance of keeping full records, and how these could help me improve my performance.

Finally, I managed to keep a whole year of records from the beginning of the National Hunt season in November 1998 through to the end of the turf season in 1999. I then spent more than two months going through each and every bet I had placed over the course of the preceding 12 months. I examined the totals I had staked, versus my returns for all my betting activities. At the time this was largely on the horses, but I did also bet to a lesser extent on greyhounds, football, tennis, golf and American football. The first statistic that came as a bit of a surprise was how much cash I was actually turning over.

If someone had asked me back in 1999 how I was doing I would have replied that I was only betting small amounts, and that in my opinion I was doing OK. My figures revealed that in fact I had turned over as near as damn it ten thousand pounds(!) and I had returned eight thousand pounds. From the two thousand pound loss I had paid 750 pounds in betting tax, which was payable back then. Jump racing and betting on American football had cost me the most money. The most costly type of bet I found were the exotic bets such as the Yankee, and its no wonder the Bookmakers love punters who place these bets. Out of 147 attempts at a Yankee I found all four winners just the once, I racked up three from four only three times, and managed a double on only 22 occasions, with the remaining 121 bets all losing.

Digging deeper also highlighted my single most expensive days, and amazingly if I had kept my money safe on Sundays and Bank Holidays I would have made a profit overall.

The following year I made myself a resolution that I would stop betting on National Hunt jumps racing and the American football. Like any human being I broke my own promises on more than one occasion, but to my credit I would always highlight losing bets in these categories with a red felt tip pen and a suitable comment (usually "YOU IDIOT").

My turnover increased in that twelve month period, but I kept my losses below the figure for the previous year. My betting career was put on hold in 2001 as I was hit hard emotionally by the death of my grandad. I took about six months off, but returned for the flat season determined my speed ratings on the all weather would take my betting accounts into profit. Another year went by and in fact I ended up with a small loss. However, I was greatly encouraged that had it not been for betting tax I would have made money overall.

I was behind for most of the year that followed, but my speed ratings on the all weather really turned up trumps during the winter months. Betting tax had been abolished in the October and at the end of the year, for the very first time I could actually raise my hand and say confidently that I was showing a profit. My final figure was £428.11 which may not seem much for applying myself over the course of a year, but to me it was a significant milestone that many times before I had convinced myself I would never reach.

Keeping a continuous record in my journal had helped me enormously to turn around a loss into a profit. Analysis of my results empowered me to attack from two angles - whilst my speed rating handicapping skills were improving to increase my returns, the disciplines that were becoming engrained in my betting strategies were helping to keep losses to a minimum.

I would have a long way to go before emulating Andrew Beyer's My $50,000 Year At The Races but I hope my experiences teach the importance of keeping records.

#2 Single Bets To Win Only - No Each Way Bets

I came across an article recently, that was suggesting that horses should never be backed each way, or to place. The particular school of thought being preached was that if you think a horse will win, why back it each way, and if you don't think it will win, then why back it at all? The article further sold this concept by suggesting that in the long run it was more profitable to place straight win bets.

As is my want, I would not be convinced either way without some evidence to back up one side of the argument against the other. After referring to my journal, I found I had backed 52 horses through the months of November and February, at prices of 8/1 and higher. Each selection had what I considered to be favourable speed ratings, and I fully expected them all to be in with a loud shout when the finish line approached. I had backed eleven of these 52 selections as single win bets, and forty one were backed each way. 12 won their race, and I managed to get 7 placed. The total amount staked was £1,805. The returns were £4,143 which meant a profit of £2,328 representing 129% of my stakes.

This table shows that had all my bets been placed as straight win only bets, my stakes would have remained the same, but the returns would have increased to £5,000 to give a profit of £3,195 (176% of stakes). I was happy to be surprised that I could be making more money, and from that day forward I resolved to stick to WIN ONLY bets.

#3 The Minimum 3/1 Rule

In Andrew Beyer's original work he recommends a minimum price of 2/1 to place a final bet. He bases this upon a strike rate of between one-in-three and one-in-four and it all but guaranteed a profit. It is my belief this should now be revised to 5/2 or even as high as 3/1. The reasons I believe this benchmark should be raised are as follows. Before the advent of the internet and then betting exchanges, the rails bookmakers on course would frame their opening prices based upon the tissue prices published in the Racing Post. Top rated horses were often readily available at big prices when markets opened on course. The rails bookmakers were quick to embrace the new internet technology and today they monitor prices closely on the betting exchanges long before they produce their opening shows. Any horse attracting money will be spotted immediately and they will open up short on course.

In the past four years I have noticed the average price of top rated horses decrease to a small degree. The strike rates typically remain the same, but horses backed down to 2/1 and shorter (in my opinion) have lost most of their value. Which is why I will generally keep my money safe in my pocket unless I can get on at 3/1 or better.

#4 Focus Entirely On The All Weather

This does not mean that you should forego all betting activity outside of all weather racing. Rather, that when using speed ratings as the foundation of your selection process, it is more profitable to stick with all weather racing. I still bet upon turf racing, and jumps racing to some extent.... I am not a betting monk. But I use different angles in those markets.

Speed ratings are more accurate when applied to a limited pool of horses running against each other on a relatively small number of tracks.

#5 Races You Might Wish To Avoid

You would be wise to scratch races where a significant number of horses are switching to the all weather from the turf, or where the majority of the field have no all weather form at all. Personally I only apply my speed ratings in races up to and including one mile, and I would definitely suggest giving races further than 1m4f a wide berth. Longer races are far more likely to be run at a false pace, as they are often tactical, starting slower then winding up to a finish. This can give rise to misleading speed figures, and sectional timing gives more clues than overall winning times.

#6 Be Aware Of The Different Surfaces

My rule of thumb is never back a horse that has as yet failed to prove himself over course and distance. The going published in the Racing Post may say STANDARD for all four of the all weather courses, but believe me when I say that times do not translate from track to track. You would also be wrong to assume that a horse winning around the galloping course at Southwell will be equally at home around the tighter corners and undulating track at Lingfield, or going right-handed around Kempton. On the face of it they are all similar artificial tracks, which is why speed ratings can be so powerful in locating winners, but they are none-the-less all subtly different in their own ways.

#7 Never Pledge Allegiance To Horses, Stables, Or Jockeys

We've heard it all before.... "This stable is enjoying a purple patch at the moment... the trainer can do no wrong.... every horse seems to be coming in and they have scored six winners already this week." The pundits on the telly and in the Press cannot help themselves with the cliches.... "the success is proving contagious, the stable is full of confidence". I will be the first to admit I have been taken in by the hype on more occasions than I care to mention.

But please.... what a load of rubbish! Who tells the horse? Because he sure can't read the Racing Post and I'm guessing he doesn't have The Morning Line on a 37inch flat screen television in his stable.

A horse is either in form or out of form. Admittedly an inform horse can throw in a bad race, as we have discussed earlier with the topic of the bounce. But an out of form horse with limited ability will always be just that, no matter how well the horse in the next box in the yard performed yesterday at Newmarket. Following a stable or a horse blind will invariably lead to ruin. If you have a favourite stable and you respect the skills of the trainer, then that is that is fine. Just look for the horses from that yard who are showing improving speed figures.

Do not be seduced into backing every horse from a particular stable just because they have been sending out a good few winners of late. If you like a particular horse then again, that is fine, but only back it when its figures indicate it has an outstanding chance of winning.

Following jockeys blindly is another piece of advice that comes with a severe wealth warning. For sure, the best jockeys tend to find themselves riding the best horses. But a champion jockey will not conjure a win in a Listed race from a class 4 horse. He may well give you the edge and make all the difference in a tight finish between two horses of similar ability, but remember "The best jockey on the worst horse will always get beat by an average jockey on the better horse".

#8 Taking Options

You will regularly find yourself with two stand out horses in the same race. If the price is right then there is no shame in backing both of them. If one of your choices falls short of the 3/1 rule discussed earlier, then the better priced horse should be backed every time. You may also consider putting both horses in a reverse forecast. Alternatively, and unlike the bookmakers, as a punter you always have the choice to simply walk away. Easier said than done I know, but you can always choose to leave the race alone. There will be other races, and other bets.

<< Previous Page   |   Next Page  >>