Increasing your bet in a losing streak?

[misscashalot]

:confused:
Is there a condition when you would increase the normal amount of your bet in a losing streak?

[BombsAway Bob]

:confused:
Is there a condition when you would increase the normal amount of your bet in a losing streak?
only if you want to broke faster...;)

[Robert Goren]

There could be a case for it if you had some spot play system that picked about 50% winners over a very long period of time.

[ryesteve]

:confused:
Is there a condition when you would increase the normal amount of your bet in a losing streak?That condition would be a self-destructive lack of discipline.

[lamboguy]

becaue of the parimutual system you will place yourself in law's of diminishing return's if you choose to double up after each loss.

[Grits]

One doesn't chase men, nor does one chase money.

Doing both could empty my bank accounts. :lol:

[Hanover1]

:confused:
Is there a condition when you would increase the normal amount of your bet in a losing streak?
The condition you refer to is known as desperate.......

[GameTheory]

If you do it mildly and your original bet is low (i.e. not agressive -- you normally underbet somewhat) then it can be fine, because you can raise your bet and still not be overbetting. Every time someone talks about raising a bet after a loss immediately people jump to "trying to turn a negative into a positive" or "doubling-up". If you have a positive-expectation, you're still going to have losing streaks -- you could be turning a positive into more positive. And if you normally bet $20 and you raise your bet to $22 or $24 (for example), it is hardly doubling up.

The Opponent Method (Dave Schwartz method) mentioned in the Money Management thread is a mild progressive system -- it works great.

Now if you think you're losing for some special reason that is likely to continue, rather than just normal random fluctuations, then you shouldn't bet at all until that situation is corrected.

[andymays]

:confused:
Is there a condition when you would increase the normal amount of your bet in a losing streak?


The only time you should do something like that is if you only have a few days to live!

[turfnsport]

The only time you should do something like that is if you only have a few days to live!

:lol: I would quadruple my wagers in this scenario!

[andymays]

:lol: I would quadruple my wagers in this scenario!


Absolutely! :D

[bisket]

always bet the same amount and never change. if your a good handicapper it always works out in the end. sometimes thats hard when your in a rut, but you have to have discipline. i only wager for enjoyment/

[Robert Fischer]

Now if you think you're losing for some special reason that is likely to continue, rather than just normal random fluctuations, then you shouldn't bet at all until that situation is corrected.

:ThmbUp: this is of course the answer if the condition is to be taken literally.

I actually think there is some merit to "stopping" even when in the middle of statistically "expected" losing streaks. It makes a big difference as to the details of what is happening - did you objectively make the best play and lost because of randomness, or have you been making errors or even winning with less than the best selection/play?

the popular science with statistics has been to say that for "free throw shooters don't get hot or cold" and I fully understand the math(and the sport) here but I call bullshit, in what is at best a poor use of semantics and more accurately bad science and misunderstanding of sport.

There is a lot of interesting stuff in the science and the superstition of bet sizing.

[classhandicapper]

Now if you think you're losing for some special reason that is likely to continue, rather than just normal random fluctuations, then you shouldn't bet at all until that situation is corrected.

I think this is the critical point.

I think any time you are going bad it could be a random set of events but there could also easily be set of conditions at that track that doesn't favor your specific skill set and insights, your concentration could be off, etc...

It's not that easy to tell the difference.

In the old days I was more mathematically oriented and assumed that almost everything was part of some random probability event. Now when I am going well I raise my bets and when I am going badly I back off. I think that works much better.

[GameTheory]

I think this is the critical point.

I think any time you are going bad it could be a random set of events but there could also easily be set of conditions at that track that doesn't favor your specific skill set and insights, your concentration could be off, etc...

It's not that easy to tell the difference.

In the old days I was more mathematically oriented and assumed that almost everything was part of some random probability event. Now when I am going well I raise my bets and when I am going badly I back off. I think that works much better.And sometimes you've seen it all before a million times, your last 10 picks have all come in second or been DQ'd, and you know you're gonna hit that winner soon. Might as well have a few extra bucks on him if you're still in your safe zone...

I've been on losing streaks where I still felt hot, but shit happens. Or your system is utterly mechanical, been working for years, emotions don't enter into it, and these things happen from time to time.

[Dave Schwartz]

Just yesterday I was testing a 100% systematic approach. No tote board (except for one that was artificially created). In other words, this system picks precisely the same at 60 minutes to post as it does two days later.

The category of races was non-maiden dirt (no poly) sprints, for older horses without any entries at select tracks.

The primary thrust is to play only horses that are not likely to be 1st or 2nd public choices - "best" bet of my contenders. (Some did become favorites just as one of the "favorites" paid $19.)

So, I handicaped the entire month of July. It beat every week, but had several 3-day dead spells. 375 races or so. My hit rate for July was 23% with a $Net of $2.37.

Feeling satisfied, I decided to test the 1st week in August.

Geez! The actual 1st and 2nd choices that week won 86% of all such races! Can you imagine the losing streak I faced? My hit rate for the week was 8% - actually pretty good considering what my potential pool was.

But it was like it would never end! At one point I lost 18 races in a row, then won at $9.00 and then lost another 15 or so in a row.

Needless to say, it wiped out the profits from July and put me slightly loser.

Then it all came back in the 2nd week of August, just like nothing had happened; business as usual.

Cycles... is there a real science about this somewhere?


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[thespaah]

:confused:
Is there a condition when you would increase the normal amount of your bet in a losing streak?
Naah..Discipline and money management are the names of the game.
What you discribe is gambling.
A succesful bettor does not "gamble" on horse racing. He is a handicapper/player or horse racing.
Once one steps our of his normal betting pattern/ element he is doomed to losses. May as well take the money and throw it into a flaming fireplace.

[Hanover1]

:lol: I would quadruple my wagers in this scenario!
In this scenario-I say pump until maxed out on one race, then either cash and leave, or go broke and leave. Wont take all day to figure out your percentages on the day. "Eat your bettin money, but dont bet your eatin money."

[Imriledup]

Most horseplayers don't have the ability to know if they are betting on 'tilt' during a losing streak, therefore, i'd suggest strongly, to lower your bets during a losing streak.


If you are IN a losing streak, its a combination of your handicapping being a little 'off' and you are betting too many races.

Skip more races and handicap better and the streak will work itself out.

If you are experiencing pain for losing money you can't be sure if you are raising a bet because you really love the bet, or because you feel that the larger wager size will get rid of the pain you have in your heart and brain.

Its kind of like dating on the rebound.

[DJofSD]

:confused:
Is there a condition when you would increase the normal amount of your bet in a losing streak?
Define losing streak.

[misscashalot]

Cycles... is there a real science about this somewhere? Regards, Dave Schwartz

The problem in your example is that you have not found the, for lack of another word, system that gives a steady minimum 40+% roi (average payoff must exceed about $7.00) which will have about a 7 race run of losers. Which in itself converts to a 40+% win percentage. Think of the winners produced after the 7 loser run. What the nay sayers here lack is an understanding of what can be accomplished in expanding the $ amount when betting into a 5, 6 or 7 race losing streak in high roi and high win % situations. Knowing a true and trusting a 40/40 mean makes you king. Situations of this kind do exist. There are a few who posted here that do understand.

[kenwoodallpromos]

If you toss in the variables associated with meet's tracks, weather, field size, even purse and race condition difference, changing meets (tracks) even on the same circuit could account for some of the variables. The 2 top insprints that you are avoiding is what I am using, and SAR is doing fine for me!!
I say if you are on ant kind of a losing streak you are not applying your method soundly to account for (by not playing) when the variables do not support your method.

[ryesteve]

What the nay sayers here lack is an understanding of what can be accomplished in expanding the $ amount when betting into a 5, 6 or 7 race losing streak in high roi and high win % situations.If you're betting into a high ROI/high win% situation, the results of your previous 5,6,7 bets are irrelevant... except as a signal that perhaps your "situations" may no longer be "high ROI/high win%"

[markgoldie]

Okay. Not that anyone's been waiting for it, but here's my two cents.

Whenever there's a conversation like this, the win bettors all chime in, while the gimmick players (few of us that there are) are mostly silent. I think that's because the win bettors are more 'scientific,' if that makes sense, as compared to gimmick players, who might be more inclined to spray numbers around looking for the big payout. Here, I'm specifically talking about complex gimmick players and not guys who tinker with exactas with their top pick on top or bottom.

The problem under discussion has properly been noted as a "randomness" effect and no matter what your selection process may be, you will never eliminate this from the sport. My primary example is the Breeder's Cup in which great trainers point great horses for their top effort and then pray. But what happens? We've all seen it but, the point is that if these perfectly trained and pointed horses can't defeat randomness, what chance is there to eliminate it under lesser circumstances?

Unfortunately for the win bettors, randomness screws with the ROI's which keep jumping up and down, but more importantly, it screws with the player's head. So we get progressive methods of play hoping to make more money by taking advantage of bad luck. But as they say in roulette, as long as the table's fair, when red has come up ten times in a row, the odds are still fifty-fifty on the next roll.

My approach in complex gimmicks is to let randomness work for me rather than against me. I look to eliminate what I consider weak favorites. Now. Sometimes when I'm successful I might be inclined to think that my brilliant analysis led me to toss out this terrible sucker-chalk. But on the other hand, maybe I wasn't so brilliant and randomness simply handed me the bonanza. Losing streaks? Absolutely. Winning streaks? Yeah, that too sometimes. But somehow when you embrace randomness, the bad streaks don't bother you as much and you don't wonder about increasing your bets to profit from bad luck.

[CBedo]

Okay. Not that anyone's been waiting for it, but here's my two cents.

Whenever there's a conversation like this, the win bettors all chime in, while the gimmick players (few of us that there are) are mostly silent. I think that's because the win bettors are more 'scientific,' if that makes sense, as compared to gimmick players, who might be more inclined to spray numbers around looking for the big payout. Here, I'm specifically talking about complex gimmick players and not guys who tinker with exactas with their top pick on top or bottom.

The problem under discussion has properly been noted as a "randomness" effect and no matter what your selection process may be, you will never eliminate this from the sport. My primary example is the Breeder's Cup in which great trainers point great horses for their top effort and then pray. But what happens? We've all seen it but, the point is that if these perfectly trained and pointed horses can't defeat randomness, what chance is there to eliminate it under lesser circumstances?

Unfortunately for the win bettors, randomness screws with the ROI's which keep jumping up and down, but more importantly, it screws with the player's head. So we get progressive methods of play hoping to make more money by taking advantage of bad luck. But as they say in roulette, as long as the table's fair, when red has come up ten times in a row, the odds are still fifty-fifty on the next roll.

My approach in complex gimmicks is to let randomness work for me rather than against me. I look to eliminate what I consider weak favorites. Now. Sometimes when I'm successful I might be inclined to think that my brilliant analysis led me to toss out this terrible sucker-chalk. But on the other hand, maybe I wasn't so brilliant and randomness simply handed me the bonanza. Losing streaks? Absolutely. Winning streaks? Yeah, that too sometimes. But somehow when you embrace randomness, the bad streaks don't bother you as much and you don't wonder about increasing your bets to profit from bad luck.Fooled by Randomness, by NicholasTaleeb talks about this exact phenomenon and a similar methodology to what you have suggested. In my opinion, it's a good read.

[bisket]

mark when reading through the thread i was thinking you have to analyze how your picks do after every race. did racing luck beat you. or were you just off the mark. one thing you have to take into consideration is the game will have you scratching your head on may occassions after a race. you can't let this effect your judgement all the time. horses lose and handicappers lose with them. a stiff upper lip is the name of the game sometimes. things always play themselves out.

[fmolf]

mark when reading through the thread i was thinking you have to analyze how your picks do after every race. did racing luck beat you. or were you just off the mark. one thing you have to take into consideration is the game will have you scratching your head on may occassions after a race. you can't let this effect your judgement all the time. horses lose and handicappers lose with them. a stiff upper lip is the name of the game sometimes. things always play themselves out.
As mainly a win bettor i have a little trick that i picked up from Brad Free.I know he always picks the chalk but his tip for losing streaks was good one for me.Whenever i get into a losing streak it is usually because i am over analyzing...getting too cute and too smart for my own good.Free advised to step back and handicap a new unfamiliar track for awhile.This leads me back to basics because i have no preconceived notions or prejudices against trainers or jockeys and stick strictly to the basics of handicapping.I can attest that this approach does work.After a week or so i return to my home track with renewed focus on the basics of handicapping and my own method.

[Norm]

I have a strict policy that has rescued me from disaster on more than one occasion. If I lose three races in a row, all betting stops until I figure out what is wrong. Increasing the bet is out of the question. If you are starting to lose, something has changed and you better find out what it is before you proceed. There is no guarantee the situation will correct itself. Something you are not yet aware of may have changed. I had a recent example of that situation at this past Aqu inner track meet. I was all ready to roll as the meet opened, but by the second day of the meet there were red lights flashing all over the place. I had not only lost three consecutive races, but the manner in which I had lost was suspect. All betting stopped. I watched for awhile. No change, something was different. I later learned that there was a new track maintenance supervisor who was cutting the track differently. This situation was not going to correct itself. My procedure was not going to work this year. If I had not read the warning signs and stopped playing, it would have been a disastrous season. As it was, when I realized what the problem was, I switched venues to a track more friendly to my procedure and had a profitable meeting elsewhere. The point is, when you are losing, STOP. Something is wrong. Don't try to force winners when there aren't any. If the situation is temporary, you will see it soon enough and you can resume play, but, it may not be temporary and you will go broke cursing and losing all confidence.

[CBedo]

I have a strict policy that has rescued me from disaster on more than one occasion. If I lose three races in a row, all betting stops until I figure out what is wrong. Increasing the bet is out of the question. If you are starting to lose, something has changed and you better find out what it is before you proceed. There is no guarantee the situation will correct itself. Something you are not yet aware of may have changed. I had a recent example of that situation at this past Aqu inner track meet. I was all ready to roll as the meet opened, but by the second day of the meet there were red lights flashing all over the place. I had not only lost three consecutive races, but the manner in which I had lost was suspect. All betting stopped. I watched for awhile. No change, something was different. I later learned that there was a new track maintenance supervisor who was cutting the track differently. This situation was not going to correct itself. My procedure was not going to work this year. If I had not read the warning signs and stopped playing, it would have been a disastrous season. As it was, when I realized what the problem was, I switched venues to a track more friendly to my procedure and had a profitable meeting elsewhere. The point is, when you are losing, STOP. Something is wrong. Don't try to force winners when there aren't any. If the situation is temporary, you will see it soon enough and you can resume play, but, it may not be temporary and you will go broke cursing and losing all confidence.3 races only? Wow! Your hit rate must be alot higher than mine. If you win 40% of your races, you will still lose 3 in a row over 20% of the time. With my hit rate, I lose 3 in a row every day almost!

[Norm]

3 races only? Wow! Your hit rate must be alot higher than mine. If you win 40% of your races, you will still lose 3 in a row over 20% of the time. With my hit rate, I lose 3 in a row every day almost!
It depends on your style of play. I have a high hit rate on low priced horses. It's not something for me to brag about, the profits are modest. I can't afford long losing streaks and still maintain a profit. I seldom find more than two plays a day which also helps to account for my hit rate and my low tolerance for losing. This procedure is not making me rich by any means, but it keeps me active in the game.

[baldvin]

EVeryone here must be makingBIG bucks-becuz i don't know what winning streak or losing streak mean.

how you know one way or other?? How you know when start...how you know when finish? How you know it happening to you now???

BIG time professonal gambler tell me that win streaks {or lose streaks"} only happen in rear view mirror.,

[Norm]

EVeryone here must be makingBIG bucks-becuz i don't know what winning streak or losing streak mean.

how you know one way or other?? How you know when start...how you know when finish? How you know it happening to you now???

BIG time professonal gambler tell me that win streaks {or lose streaks"} only happen in rear view mirror.,
A "streak" may not be the right word. A "streak" implies luck and that's not what is happening here. These guys know what they're doing, there are only the laws of probability, luck is not a factor in the long term. Long-time, regular horseplayers read trends and compare them to their style of playing. A winning streak to a long-shot player is a very different thing than a winning streak to a short-priced player. Both are winning but in different ways. There is no beginning or end because so many here have been playing for decades. There is only the current trend compared to one's style and expectations.

[rusrious]

Hey Guys, heres my 4 cents,

Like already mentioned, if you cant hit with-in a few races, your thinking is totally off base, and you shouldn't be feeding into bets. If you believe in your system, and know, without a doubt, that your system will pick winners, why not bet more.. If your bankroll can handle a few misses, but recoup in a short period of time, it does make sense.

There must come a time, where you need to step back, go thru your races, and see what your hiting, and what your missing on.. I personally, know, I have a very high hit rate on 6 furlong races, so i stick with just 6 furlong races. I wont go higher then 7 furlongs, and that is only if I feel my choice is a blow-out with the field. Im confident, that I wont lose more then 3 in a row. If I lose, then I will progressivly bet, and can pick and choose my races by odds, which, equally makes my bets less, for a higher priced horse.

The whole point in betting, is to make profit, and not lose money. If you feel your system is fit for a double-up, then do it, but if your going on losing streaks of 5-6-7 and so on, then your system or thinking is way off base, and you need to stop and think of a differant game plan.. Dont keep feeding a losing system, cause you WILL lose your shirt of your back. There are reasons why less then 3% make consistant profit.

I tend to disagree with not raising your bets. Its like running on a treadmill, that has 1 level of height, and 1 speed. If your betting for fun, its fine, but if you need to make the money, you MUST ADJUST your bets per bankroll. If your happy making $20 bucks a day, then great, keep at it. But if you hit a losing streak, you lose all the ground it took for you to get to the current spot, and may take weeks to get back to where you were..

Handicappin can be a very generous way to make a living, and it can kill you, if you really have no idea what your doing to begin with..

If you can find a horse, everyday, that will give you 2/1 odds, you can be a millionair in a very short period of time. Believe that.

When you have over 100 races a day to choose from, and you have a definite system, make 1 bet a day, and your good to go.. Keep it simple stupid. Remember that? Dont let the system beat you, you need to beat the system, and It can be done..

If your confident in your handicappin, triple your bets, you will get your money back..

Thanks for listening,;)

[racingplanet]

Theres no easy way round streaks. If you have a solid method and sensible bankroll management you should be ok. But its very frustrating when you have had a great run and you know the losing run is imminent and theres nothing you can do about it. You cant walk away from the game can you.

http://mboard.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/frm/f/1236084792

GOOD LUCK

[LottaKash]

EVeryone here must be makingBIG bucks-becuz i don't know what winning streak or losing streak mean.

how you know one way or other?? How you know when start...how you know when finish? How you know it happening to you now???

BIG time professonal gambler tell me that win streaks {or lose streaks"} only happen in rear view mirror.,


HaHa...I'm not poking fun at you, I am poking fun at you....:jump:

best.

[Space Monkey]

Referring to the topic "Increasing your bet in a losing streak".

I had a friend back in the day who was betting baseball. After his first loss he doubled his next bet so hed get even. After 7 losses in a row and down way over his head already, with a bookie I might add, he said to me "Bob, I'm going to bet this one the same way. I can't lose 8 in a row!!" He did. He left his wife and moved to who knows where. I never saw him again.

I remember Andy Beyer admitting that hes had losing streaks of around 30. If you can withstand that kind of drought, go for it. I realize you're not talking about doubling, just increasing, but still, I'd advise against it.

[fmolf]

Referring to the topic "Increasing your bet in a losing streak".

I had a friend back in the day who was betting baseball. After his first loss he doubled his next bet so hed get even. After 7 losses in a row and down way over his head already, with a bookie I might add, he said to me "Bob, I'm going to bet this one the same way. I can't lose 8 in a row!!" He did. He left his wife and moved to who knows where. I never saw him again.

I remember Andy Beyer admitting that hes had losing streaks of around 30. If you can withstand that kind of drought, go for it. I realize you're not talking about doubling, just increasing, but still, I'd advise against it.
I might not increase but i will continue to do what i have been doing successfully.I have confidence that my methodology will work and bet accordingly thru the lean days.I also had a friend who had a baseball system.I never tracked it he told me he was making money.What he would do is pick one team,a top echelon team and bet them at home in the first game of the series.if they lose bet them again in the second game plus enough to make a modest profit eith the money line offered on baseball,ditto if they lost on the third game of a series.The premise being how often are the yankees or redsox going to be swept at home.I had to lend him 500 to pay his debt of last season after one successful season....he paid me back since.

[Track Collector]

If you can find a horse, everyday, that will give you 2/1 odds, you can be a millionair in a very short period of time. Believe that.

When you have over 100 races a day to choose from, and you have a definite system, make 1 bet a day, and your good to go..

I'm a math-type guy, and general considerations and long-time experience would lead me to believe that this is not realistically possible.

Perhaps you can give us an example of how this might be done? Your scenario would need to include at least the following info:
(a) Wager Type (Win/Exacta/Tri/etc.)
(b) Base wager amount.
(c) Does the base wager amount vary from day to day?
(d) What is the success rate of each wager?

Note the above information does not give away any of one's handicapping secrets, but rather merely shows the mechanics of how the claimed success could be achieved.

[rusrious]

I'm a math-type guy, and general considerations and long-time experience would lead me to believe that this is not realistically possible.

Perhaps you can give us an example of how this might be done? Your scenario would need to include at least the following info:
(a) Wager Type (Win/Exacta/Tri/etc.)
(b) Base wager amount.
(c) Does the base wager amount vary from day to day?
(d) What is the success rate of each wager?

Note the above information does not give away any of one's handicapping secrets, but rather merely shows the mechanics of how the claimed success could be achieved.

Well, you are right about the exstream, I guess it would be hard to plop down $20,000 for a win,

BUT, in realistic math, If you start with $2 today, and can double your money everyday, for 20 days, you will amass a sum of $1,048,576...

By day 8, your bet would have to be $512, which would drown the pools, by day 14, your at $32,768.. Absolutly, you cant throw the cash down at a track, or can you, Im not sure of that, LOL, I was the type to learn to win first, then bankroll management..

Start with $2, try to find a definite lock, at 2/1 and see how many days you can go. If anything, by day 9, you can find a way to pocket $1024, just starting with a $2 bet

So yeah, it is unrealistic, on all corners, sounds good tho, lol..

(a) Wager Type (Win/Exacta/Tri/etc.)---WIN BET
(b) Base wager amount.--Start with $2
(c) Does the base wager amount vary from day to day?--roll wins to next day, or bet. If your over your target (100%) pocket, and play with needed amount
(d) What is the success rate of each wager?--needs to be 100%

I do have a very good system, but wont share it. Sometimes simple seems stupid,

[lansdale]

Just yesterday I was testing a 100% systematic approach. No tote board (except for one that was artificially created). In other words, this system picks precisely the same at 60 minutes to post as it does two days later.

The category of races was non-maiden dirt (no poly) sprints, for older horses without any entries at select tracks.

The primary thrust is to play only horses that are not likely to be 1st or 2nd public choices - "best" bet of my contenders. (Some did become favorites just as one of the "favorites" paid $19.)

So, I handicaped the entire month of July. It beat every week, but had several 3-day dead spells. 375 races or so. My hit rate for July was 23% with a $Net of $2.37.

Feeling satisfied, I decided to test the 1st week in August.

Geez! The actual 1st and 2nd choices that week won 86% of all such races! Can you imagine the losing streak I faced? My hit rate for the week was 8% - actually pretty good considering what my potential pool was.

But it was like it would never end! At one point I lost 18 races in a row, then won at $9.00 and then lost another 15 or so in a row.

Needless to say, it wiped out the profits from July and put me slightly loser.

Then it all came back in the 2nd week of August, just like nothing had happened; business as usual.

Cycles... is there a real science about this somewhere?


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

Dave,

This first thing that struck me about this streak is that the sample is too small to be significant. How has this strategy performed over say, 2,500 races? I'm far from a math guy, so maybe some others can respond to this, but given the variance you describe, it seems likely that your real edge with this technique is probably less than 18.5%. SJK, who has a long-term edge in the range of 12% has mentioned 50-race runouts as not uncommon. Another source of perspective - pro blackjack players with a 1% edge routinely experience 3-6 months losing streaks, but in the long run they still end up with the money.

Cheers,

lansdale