With a 30% win rate, one play every two cards & 20% ROI, how & what would you bet

[Inner Dirt]

Originally Posted by Bill Cullen

It takes me at least 2.5 hours to do 20 tracks (including the necessary double checking) and requires me to be brutally focused.

Because the system is for dirt only, focusing on tracks with a high percentage of dirt races helps mitigate the weekend crush.

Bill C

I spend 2.5 hours + on one track. Are you using some digital files and software? I am old school accept for the fact I download the DRF and print it out, instead of buying it at a liquor store.

[Bill Cullen]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

You sir have lost all credibility with me......On the simplest level, 30% hit rate showing a +ROI of 20% looks like this:

10 races x $2bets= $20

30% hit rate= 3 winners

+ROI of 20% of $20 is $4

(total returned is $24)÷3 is $8.00 average mutuel

Bill, do you care to revise what you've already stated?

You need not reply, as this conversation's over.....Unless you want to get stubborn with me.

I didn't dispute the $8.00 figure. I just said (or I guess meant to say since it doesn't seem that I was clear enough) that I did not first mention specifically the $8.00 figure - someone else did.

That being said, I never said that the $8.00 figure was inaccurate.

When I hear you say "Bill, do you care to revise what you've already stated?" and then say "You need not reply, as this conversation's over...."
I'm not quite frankly sure how I should respond.

I should not want to give tacit approval to one who would presume to know all points of view without being gracious enough to inquire more deeply where the apparent, in contra distinction to the real, differences may presumably lie.

All good things,

Bill C

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by Bill Cullen

Question:

With a 30% win rate, one play every two cards & a 20% positive ROI, what type of bets would you make (win, exotic, etc.) and how would you bet ( money management)?

My number one goal is to steadily increase the bankroll. I'm in no rush.

Many thanks in advance,

Bill C.

How do you not increase the bankroll with a 20% positive ROI?

Isn't the other variable the profit goal per time period?

If your ROI is 20% based on dollars bet, then isn't total collection simply a function of how much you bet? Isn't it the case that if you bet $1,000 to win, you make $200, and if you bet $1,000 in exactas you make $200? So if you want to make $200,000 a year you just have to bet a million dollars. Am I misunderstanding the riddle?

[Bill Cullen]

My only goal is permanent positive ROI, which when you think it through, means, yes "how can you avoid increasing" your positive bankroll except any given series of bets can bankrupt your initial stake.

Best,

Bill C

[oughtoh]

I want to know how you handicap 20 tracks in 2.5 hours.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by Bill Cullen

I should not want to give tacit approval to one who would presume to know all points of view without being gracious enough to inquire more deeply where the apparent, in contra distinction to the real, differences may presumably lie.

All good things,

Bill C

I've been around the block a TON more than you have, as your posts give away your acumen level. For future reference, don't boast that you have a large enough sample size to infer that you can produce a 1.20 ROI on a long-term basis, it's insulting to those that bet this game on a serious level......Trifecta Mike strung readers along, so did Capper Al with his BS, don't become one of them.

[steveb]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

How do you not increase the bankroll with a 20% positive ROI?

Isn't the other variable the profit goal per time period?

If your ROI is 20% based on dollars bet, then isn't total collection simply a function of how much you bet? Isn't it the case that if you bet $1,000 to win, you make $200, and if you bet $1,000 in exactas you make $200? So if you want to make $200,000 a year you just have to bet a million dollars. Am I misunderstanding the riddle?

the bigger his bet level becomes, then the less % he makes on turnover.
that is almost certainty.
and roi is a useless metric anyway, imho.

[Bill Cullen]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

I've been around the block a TON more than you have, as your posts give away your acumen level. For future reference, don't boast that you have a large enough sample size to infer that you can produce a 1.20 ROI on a long-term basis, it's insulting to those that bet this game on a serious level......Trifecta Mike strung readers along, so did Capper Al with his BS, don't become one of them.

"For future reference, don't boast that you have a large enough sample size to infer that you can produce a 1.20 ROI on a long-term basis"

Those are your words, not mine. I wasn't aware that i had made ANY claim AS YOU STATE IT.

YOU NEED TO QUOTE ME IN CONTEXT TO SUPPORT YOUR UNFOUNDED ASSERTIONS.

I TAKE IT YOU ARE NOT A LAWYER.

OK, you seem to be saying that a 1.2 positive ROI long term is not easily doable (if at all).

I'm saying, using an odds filter, that that goal is doable (or close enough to it).

If it's a matter of degrees, then yes, i could fall short.

But if it's a difference in kind, a quantum leap as they might say, I think i will hit the mark.

So watch the test of the GG system starting today in "My Picks" thread under the Selections forum.


So Mr. Resay Randall,a word to the wise: there is a difference between good breeding and being merely well bred.

Be well.

Bill C

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by Bill Cullen

"For future reference, don't boast that you have a large enough sample size to infer that you can produce a 1.20 ROI on a long-term basis"

Those are your words, not mine. I wasn't aware that i had made ANY claim AS YOU STATE IT.

YOU NEED TO QUOTE ME IN CONTEXT TO SUPPORT YOUR UNFOUNDED ASSERTIONS.

I TAKE IT YOU ARE NOT A LAWYER.

OK, you seem to be saying that a 1.2 positive ROI long term is not easily doable (if at all).

I'm saying, using an odds filter, that that goal is doable (or close enough to it).

If it's a matter of degrees, then yes, i could fall short.

But if it's a difference in kind, a quantum leap as they might say, I think i will hit the mark.

So watch the test of the GG system starting today in "My Picks" thread under the Selections forum.


So Mr. Resay Randall,a word to the wise: there is a difference between good breeding and being merely well bred.

Be well.

Bill C

Crushing reply there, Sport.....We're done.

[Track Collector]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

With one play every two cards (!) I would try to find something better to do.

What percentage of races do you participate in?

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by Track Collector

What percentage of races do you participate in?

I will only pass two types of races:

• Too much unknowns: For example the majority of the starters are first time outs or the race contains Europeans starting first time in NA in a rarely running distance.
• A very obvious favorite that seems like a cinch that I cannot make a significant case against.

Any other race I try to bet ( I estimate I probably bet more than 75% of the races in any card I am betting into).

Given the smallness of the betting pools, we need as many bets as possible to overcome losing streaks and maintain a valid hope for some significant profit.

[Bill Cullen]

I use the ultimate pp's with comments from brisnet.

[Bill Cullen]

Originally Posted by Track Collector

What percentage of races do you participate in?

1 every 2 cards - call it around 5%.

[green80]

Even at a 30% hit rate you can have some long run outs. At a +20% Roi it won't take long to get rich but I don't think it will hold long term. Even a +1% is good, with the rebate adw's you can add another 3-5% to that.

[Bill Cullen]

Originally Posted by green80

Even at a 30% hit rate you can have some long run outs. At a +20% Roi it won't take long to get rich but I don't think it will hold long term. Even a +1% is good, with the rebate adw's you can add another 3-5% to that.

>but I don't think it will hold long term.

I always think it won't last. The healthiest counter force against experimental bias is being skeptical.

>Even a +1% is good, with the rebate adw's you can add another 3-5% to >that

I hadn't even though about that.

Best

Bill C