proportional show betting negative pool = guaranteed profit??

[ribjig]

Originally Posted by castaway01

It doesn't work.

Evidence please.
Its guaranteed to work with correct proportional betting.

[Prairie Bettor]

Originally Posted by ribjig

Evidence please.
Its guaranteed to work with correct proportional betting.

Sweet. So go do it and report back. Plenty of chances this weekend.

[Dave Schwartz]

Ok, I think I understand, you're trying to take advantage of the fact that extra money is put into the pool because of the min price rule, if you try doing this with an ADW (and maybe a race track would do this too), they'll probably shut down your account since the ADW that accepts the minus pool causing bet has to pay the difference. Mark Cramer found that out when his ADW threaten to shut him out after making a bridgejump a couple of years ago.



Correct. No one will eat the minus for you more than a couple times. So even if you figure this out you won't be able to do it. Maybe shut this idea down and jump over to the thread where the guy dreams the winner. That idea has more promise.

As these learned players have explained, it simply will not be permitted by an ADW for very long.

BTW, you left something out of your equation: namely, how often will the bridge horse fall into the water?

When you are receiving those $2.10 payoffs, it does not matter who your money is on because they will all pay $2.10 (or very close).


1. $86 (or x10 or x100 etc) $2.10 = 90.30
2. $4 (or x10 or x100 etc) $2.20 = 4.40
3. $3 (or x10 or x100 etc) $2.20 = 3.30
4. $3 (or x10 or x100 etc)
5. $2 (or x10 or x100 etc)
6. $2 (or x10 or x100 etc)

So, you are in $100. Logically, you will get back $98 maximum.

So, while you are expecting a big cash day... and you will get a handful of those, it ultimately depends upon the handicapping.

That is, how often is the #1 going to run out of the money per 100 races?

If it happens:

1 time: You're down $198 going in. (99 losses x $2 each)
2 times: You're down $196 going in. (98 x $2)
3 times: You're down $194 going in. (97 x $2)

(3 is probably reasonable in a 6-horse field.)

Thus, when the big guy does run out, you will have about $9 on show bets you cash.

Your break-even point is to get back about $194 / 4.5 = $43.

The questions then, become:

1. What will the EpicFail-rate be on the big horse?
2. What will your average return be?


BTW, you have assumed a 6-horse field. As the field size expands, the potential for 3 medium-odds horses coming increases (without a proportional increase in EpicFails), resulting in a show-pay-per-horse of far less than $43.

IMHO,
This is not anywhere close to FREE LUNCH.

[ribjig]

Some are either NOT getting it
or NOT reading entire thread...
Stuck in Land of Habitual Assumptions??

It DOESN'T MATTER which entries
come in the money, ANY combination
will result in profit IF betting
proportionally correct!!!!!!!!!

Previously suggested approximate formula:
100 - (100 - % public-bet-on-entry)(NPF) = % you bet on entry
(see post #26)

Unfortunately this thread has not, thus far, brought
any authoritative mathematians or statisticians
to forefront making AUTHORITATIVE comments...


Patience pays....

[Prairie Bettor]

Originally Posted by ribjig

Some are either NOT getting it
or NOT reading entire thread...
Stuck in Land of Habitual Assumptions??

It DOESN'T MATTER which entries
come in the money, ANY combination
will result in profit IF betting
proportionally correct!!!!!!!!!

Previously suggested approximate formula:
100 - (100 - % public-bet-on-entry)(NPF) = % you bet on entry
(see post #26)

Unfortunately this thread has not, thus far, brought
any authoritative mathematians or statisticians
to forefront making AUTHORITATIVE comments...


Patience pays....

Is that a question? Or a statement, you seem to have it all figured out.

Why are you not doing it?

I kinda lost you when you said you needed 100k to make this work. Then you decided that maybe $1 million was needed. um, ok... Do you have said bankroll? In Cash? LOL... If not, who cares if this will work or not?

For some reason, you seem to be stuck on the math of the betting combos. That to the rest of us is the easiest piece of the puzzle. Rounding up $1 million sounds a little harder. Finding a place to take the bet (track or ADW that books the bet eats the loss) sounds a lot harder. Getting home with all that cash in a briefcase without getting stabbed seems harder... etc...

I would suggest researching "Dutch Betting" as that is what you are trying to do.

[Dave Schwartz]

I am not saying it won't WORK. I am saying it is too much WORK.

Since your so-called "proportional wagering" is done before the tote is finalized, your wagers on the other horses will not be as accurate as you think. Because of the rule of this age that says, "The greater the edge, the greater the likelihood that a pool edge diminishes after the gate is open," your wagers will most often be proportionately incorrect.

You will see in the end that your show dutch is similar to what the rest of us face in the win pool: inaccurate to the point of winding up with short payoffs.

Go make a couple of hundred of these wagers over (say) the next 3 years, because that is what it will take, you having to be at a live betting facility and all (after your ADW bounces you), and at the end of the day (sorry decade) tell us that you made more than Walmart money.


Go forth with peace and understanding.

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by ribjig

Some are either NOT getting it
or NOT reading entire thread...
Stuck in Land of Habitual Assumptions??

It DOESN'T MATTER which entries
come in the money, ANY combination
will result in profit IF betting
proportionally correct!!!!!!!!!

Previously suggested approximate formula:
100 - (100 - % public-bet-on-entry)(NPF) = % you bet on entry
(see post #26)

Unfortunately this thread has not, thus far, brought
any authoritative mathematians or statisticians
to forefront making AUTHORITATIVE comments...


Patience pays....

All I can say is I hope your money is actually in the pools someday...

[Some_One]

Originally Posted by castaway01

All I can say is I hope your money is actually in the pools someday...

ditto, please let us know so we can take it, lol

[therussmeister]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

As these learned players have explained, it simply will not be permitted by an ADW for very long.

BTW, you left something out of your equation: namely, how often will the bridge horse fall into the water?

When you are receiving those $2.10 payoffs, it does not matter who your money is on because they will all pay $2.10 (or very close).


1. $86 (or x10 or x100 etc) $2.10 = 90.30
2. $4 (or x10 or x100 etc) $2.20 = 4.40
3. $3 (or x10 or x100 etc) $2.20 = 3.30
4. $3 (or x10 or x100 etc)
5. $2 (or x10 or x100 etc)
6. $2 (or x10 or x100 etc)

So, you are in $100. Logically, you will get back $98 maximum.

So, while you are expecting a big cash day... and you will get a handful of those, it ultimately depends upon the handicapping.

That is, how often is the #1 going to run out of the money per 100 races?

If it happens:

1 time: You're down $198 going in. (99 losses x $2 each)
2 times: You're down $196 going in. (98 x $2)
3 times: You're down $194 going in. (97 x $2)

(3 is probably reasonable in a 6-horse field.)

Thus, when the big guy does run out, you will have about $9 on show bets you cash.

Your break-even point is to get back about $194 / 4.5 = $43.

The questions then, become:

1. What will the EpicFail-rate be on the big horse?
2. What will your average return be?


BTW, you have assumed a 6-horse field. As the field size expands, the potential for 3 medium-odds horses coming increases (without a proportional increase in EpicFails), resulting in a show-pay-per-horse of far less than $43.

IMHO,
This is not anywhere close to FREE LUNCH.

In the era of net-pool pricing when a bridge jumper wins the other horses do not pay $2.10 I would guess they average about $2.50.

Also there is almost never a bridge jumper in fields larger than six being interests.

[ribjig]

> I am not saying it won't WORK.

Ah, at least a twisted admission it works, by cracky!!

> I am saying it is too much WORK.

~$6K gross profit per day at track "too much work"???!!!!!!

Also, multiple posts wrt ADW not allowing big negative-pool place-show bets:
WHAT MORE EVIDENCE DOES ONE BLOODY NEED THAT
PROPORTIONAL SHOW BETTING WORKS!!!!!?
WHY ELSE WOULDN'T ADWs ALLOW IT -- THEY
KNOW ALLOWING IT WILL RUIN THEM, GAWBLIMEY!!!!
common sense common sense common sense

As to advice from I'm-not-smart-enough-so-you're-not-smart-enough on proceeding...
IMO, a smart way to proceed:

a. determine a PRECISE proportionality formula;
my 100 - (100 - % public-bet-on-entry)(NPF) = % you bet on entry
is a guess; NPF = 1 doesn't work, NPF = 2 worked for (1) real-world result;
am hoping AUTHORITATIVE post will advise as to exact formula!!!

b. practice with small bankroll determined by largest place-show bet
ADWs do allow, letting others be the bridgejump-market-maker; one need
only do this 10-30 times, including a couple of favorite-out-of-mondy to see that ALL result in 2-3% profit & that formula is proportionally correct

c. go to parimutuel tracks will smaller pools on days where there will be 3 very heavy favorites (say, 3/5 or heavier), where only a $10K-20K bankroll is needed to make oneself the "Negative Place-or-Show Pool Market Maker" & in final seconds before start, bet proportionally to create negative pool; have access to live toteboard AND online toteboard, & be prepared to fine-tune
proportions with follow-up last second betting, if needed, e.g., if race delayed...

d. repeat (c) at next-step-up larger tracks with larger bankrolls until
eventually one is comfortable attending any size track where one's
bankroll will MAKE negative place-show pool on heavy favorites three
times per visit (or 2 times, if willing)...

[baconswitchfarm]

Originally Posted by ribjig

> I am not saying it won't WORK.

Ah, at least a twisted admission it works, by cracky!!

> I am saying it is too much WORK.

~$6K gross profit per day at track "too much work"???!!!!!!

Also, multiple posts wrt ADW not allowing big negative-pool place-show bets:
WHAT MORE EVIDENCE DOES ONE BLOODY NEED THAT
PROPORTIONAL SHOW BETTING WORKS!!!!!?
WHY ELSE WOULDN'T ADWs ALLOW IT -- THEY
KNOW ALLOWING IT WILL RUIN THEM, GAWBLIMEY!!!!
common sense common sense common sense

As to advice from I'm-not-smart-enough-so-you're-not-smart-enough on proceeding...
IMO, a smart way to proceed:

a. determine a PRECISE proportionality formula;
my 100 - (100 - % public-bet-on-entry)(NPF) = % you bet on entry
is a guess; NPF = 1 doesn't work, NPF = 2 worked for (1) real-world result;
am hoping AUTHORITATIVE post will advise as to exact formula!!!

b. practice with small bankroll determined by largest place-show bet
ADWs do allow, letting others be the bridgejump-market-maker; one need
only do this 10-30 times, including a couple of favorite-out-of-mondy to see that ALL result in 2-3% profit & that formula is proportionally correct

c. go to parimutuel tracks will smaller pools on days where there will be 3 very heavy favorites (say, 3/5 or heavier), where only a $10K-20K bankroll is needed to make oneself the "Negative Place-or-Show Pool Market Maker" & in final seconds before start, bet proportionally to create negative pool; have access to live toteboard AND online toteboard, & be prepared to fine-tune
proportions with follow-up last second betting, if needed, e.g., if race delayed...

d. repeat (c) at next-step-up larger tracks with larger bankrolls until
eventually one is comfortable attending any size track where one's
bankroll will MAKE negative place-show pool on heavy favorites three
times per visit (or 2 times, if willing)...

It seems you have it figured out. Go do it and enjoy your riches. Come back in a year and tell us how it worked out. We will still be here because we have all been around a long time and moved past things that don't work already. People are trying to help you , just let them.

[therussmeister]

Originally Posted by ribjig

> I am not saying it won't WORK.

Ah, at least a twisted admission it works, by cracky!!

> I am saying it is too much WORK.

~$6K gross profit per day at track "too much work"???!!!!!!

Also, multiple posts wrt ADW not allowing big negative-pool place-show bets:
WHAT MORE EVIDENCE DOES ONE BLOODY NEED THAT
PROPORTIONAL SHOW BETTING WORKS!!!!!?
WHY ELSE WOULDN'T ADWs ALLOW IT -- THEY
KNOW ALLOWING IT WILL RUIN THEM, GAWBLIMEY!!!!
common sense common sense common sense

As to advice from I'm-not-smart-enough-so-you're-not-smart-enough on proceeding...
IMO, a smart way to proceed:

a. determine a PRECISE proportionality formula;
my 100 - (100 - % public-bet-on-entry)(NPF) = % you bet on entry
is a guess; NPF = 1 doesn't work, NPF = 2 worked for (1) real-world result;
am hoping AUTHORITATIVE post will advise as to exact formula!!!

b. practice with small bankroll determined by largest place-show bet
ADWs do allow, letting others be the bridgejump-market-maker; one need
only do this 10-30 times, including a couple of favorite-out-of-mondy to see that ALL result in 2-3% profit & that formula is proportionally correct

c. go to parimutuel tracks will smaller pools on days where there will be 3 very heavy favorites (say, 3/5 or heavier), where only a $10K-20K bankroll is needed to make oneself the "Negative Place-or-Show Pool Market Maker" & in final seconds before start, bet proportionally to create negative pool; have access to live toteboard AND online toteboard, & be prepared to fine-tune
proportions with follow-up last second betting, if needed, e.g., if race delayed...

d. repeat (c) at next-step-up larger tracks with larger bankrolls until
eventually one is comfortable attending any size track where one's
bankroll will MAKE negative place-show pool on heavy favorites three
times per visit (or 2 times, if willing)...

ADWs Don't allow repeated betting into negative show pools because they lose money regardless of whether it is a winning strategy for the bettor. In this country the bet takers expect to turn a profit on every single pool in every single race, and anything else is not acceptable to them.

[Prairie Bettor]

Originally Posted by ribjig

> I am not saying it won't WORK.

Ah, at least a twisted admission it works, by cracky!!

> I am saying it is too much WORK.

~$6K gross profit per day at track "too much work"???!!!!!!

Also, multiple posts wrt ADW not allowing big negative-pool place-show bets:
WHAT MORE EVIDENCE DOES ONE BLOODY NEED THAT
PROPORTIONAL SHOW BETTING WORKS!!!!!?
WHY ELSE WOULDN'T ADWs ALLOW IT -- THEY
KNOW ALLOWING IT WILL RUIN THEM, GAWBLIMEY!!!!
common sense common sense common sense

As to advice from I'm-not-smart-enough-so-you're-not-smart-enough on proceeding...

You do realize this is not the kiddie pool, right? The posters on this forum and in this thread make REAL MONEY betting horses. They have seen it all and done a lot of it.

Go back and re-read your posts and the replies you've gotten. All of the advice you've received has been rock solid. Honestly, you are coming off quite rude.

The answers are all right here in this thread already.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by Prairie Bettor

You do realize this is not the kiddie pool, right? The posters on this forum and in this thread make REAL MONEY betting horses. They have seen it all and done a lot of it.

Go back and re-read your posts and the replies you've gotten. All of the advice you've received has been rock solid. Honestly, you are coming off quite rude.

The answers are all right here in this thread already.

Not so. What is being sought is an exact formula from some "stat whiz" (or, failing that, from someone who fancies himself or herself a "stat whiz.")

Always analyze what seem superficially to be demeaning comments, but are in fact veiled requests for the keys to the candy store--from someone who can't pick the lock. A little way from "I demand proof of how you are doing this (what I think is an) impossible thing (so I can do it,too)." Only a little way, though.

"a. determine a PRECISE proportionality formula;
my 100 - (100 - % public-bet-on-entry)(NPF) = % you bet on entry
is a guess; NPF = 1 doesn't work, NPF = 2 worked for (1) real-world result;
am hoping AUTHORITATIVE post will advise as to exact formula!!!"

[castaway01]

Originally Posted by traynor

Not so. What is being sought is an exact formula from some "stat whiz" (or, failing that, from someone who fancies himself or herself a "stat whiz.")

Always analyze what seem superficially to be demeaning comments, but are in fact veiled requests for the keys to the candy store--from someone who can't pick the lock. A little way from "I demand proof of how you are doing this (what I think is an) impossible thing (so I can do it,too)." Only a little way, though.

The pompous following the blind....