System banker software

[Win2Win]

I've had a strike rate of 24% and lost about 30% of the bank

You can't pay any attention to the stats with so few bets to pick from, as you have just started, plus we just finished a very good run last week, culminating with 5 decent priced winners in a row.

You also have not 'lost' any of the bank, unless you have done something wrong! The instructions cleary state to deduct one point from Betfair prices, as that is what you do with Betfair/exchanges anyway. You do not add 1 point to SP do you, which is what you have been doing!

[mickmd]

well 2 bets 2 wins 100% for the day so all in all a good day.

recentstrike rate still lowish so a good run of results still looks good to me

[alfazzr1100]

Well at least I predicted the 100% success rate for today right. I must say I did miss the instruction to deduct 1 from the Betfair result and unfortunately I did not connect the "DO NOT include 1 point stake" message with the odds.

However, learn from your mistakes I always say. It just shows the power of the staking plan that even at 24% SR I should have been a little bit up rather than 25-30% down on the bank.

However, what I learned was confusing too. Whilst on the train I went back and re-entered all the horses and results since last Thursday several times, with £100 starting bank using an exchange with 5% commission, £100K starrting bank using an exchange with 5% commission and £100 starting bank using a bookmaker.

On the first trial, when I got to yesterday's winner, Grand Heights at 1.09 (entered as 0.09 this time) it suggested a stake of £134.52 (just as you said Mavrick) but the bank was only £94.57 at the time. Now I quite accept that I get things wrong sometimes - that is obvious, but I have a screen dump of this and I can't see where I am going wrong.

I now know why TopHatter was saying the bank gets to a new high everytime you get a winner and hence my discussion at that time about staking plans. Including my problem return above with Grand heights for a moment, over the 33 tips I would have ended up £2.07 (rather than down £28) and I am very encouraged by this apart from the big stake. However, if I had ommitted every bet where it told me to go for the minimum of £2 and only placed those over £2, I would have been up £25.82. This is of course ironed out with the huge bank case or the bookmaker which can seet the minimum stake without being affected by the min stake and both of these also make the 2.2% return on the same 33 bets and whilst this can be increased to around 5% by omitting the lowest stakes they are not affected by anywhere near the same amount. Incidentally, the stake on Grand Heights with the £100K starting bank was a wopping £18,044.

the other bits that were of interest to me in all this retrospectivity was that I got an average 16% overbet overall, 18% on losers and 10% on winners but this was mainly placing the bets all at once (and I know this breaks the system rules before you point it out but I have no choice).

Overall I wasn't too upset with the losses as they stood which I put down to the SR which I thought would recover so the news that it would have been much better if I could read I take as a positive.

Right, I will start following it again when I can with the correct staking and see what happens - shame I missed todays successes. (but if anyone can help me over what i did wrong to get the "stake bigger than the bank" mentioned above I'd appreciate it.)

Ian

[Mavrick]

You didn't do anything wrong Ian. The software expected you to deposit more money into it using the deposit function so you could cover the bet. Looking at the results over the years, losing runs of 8+ are actually quite common, so if you only have around £100 in your bank, I think you will come unstuck quite often.

I would just use the software when you can and not place the bets in advance, unless you are using the exchange function after a winner as the stake is normally £2 for the next couple of bets unless the odds are really low. I expect this isn't the advised thing to do.
Or just run two banks which is what I do and and stake a fixed % on one of them. I use 2.5%. This way you can have a much bigger starting bank with out worrying about losing it all in a very short period of time and you can stick all the bets on at the same time like a normal system.

[alfazzr1100]

Yes, but if I had placed all bets as advised but missed the 30% of bank on bellomi at 1.86 and Grand Heights at 1.09 (only placing say £10 or 11 - 13% of the bank) I would have lost 20% over this run.

I quite accept Keiths point though that this is too short a run to make judgements over and I am not trying to do this - just trying to fully understand what I am doing. I do find it strange though to have the idea of a betting bank and then stake 142% of it! I am sure this isn't the intention.

Ian

[Mavrick]

For all we know though, Bellomi may have been the only winner during a losing run of 14, so missing that one out could have caused you to completely ruin your bank.
I think a betting bank of £100 is too low, but if you had started these a couple of months ago, maybe you're betting bank would have been big enough to cope with that big bet. It all depends on when you start it. I personally didn't back Grand Heights, I couldn't bring myself to lay out that money on a 0.07/1 shot. I should have and it could of wrecked my bank because I didn't. Like Keith told me, you have to do exactly as it says or not at all. There's no point picking and choosing your stake or the selections as the software is developed from 1000s of bets.

[Street cry]

one thing i insist upon doing is if i know i aint gonna be around say on sunday i will stop on my last winner i wouldn't say stop on a losing run of 7 say i did and the next bet was a winner or there was a winner in the section i missed and then i hit 9 losers on my return i'd be stuffed .

[cantonachris]

I suggest Alfazzr that you read the thread i started in the 'software and bots' section of the hidden members area. This should shed a bit of light on your questions around staking with the banker software.

Just for the record i checked back over the last 4 weeks, my strike rate using the banker software is 42% and the bank has increased by 16%. However i did miss a couple of days where the selections for the day didn't perform well.

The beauty of the software is that it doesn't matter if you miss a day, the software picks up from where you left off previously.

[alfazzr1100]

Cantonachris, I'd love to read that thread, firstly because it may shed some light on my confusion and secondly because I am interested in learning more about bots but unfortunately at present I do not have access to that. Perhaps soon I will take that step. Do you use bots and if so how have you found it ?

To add to my confusion, by the way, the bookmaker system stake on Grand Heights was £18 and the £100k starting bank exchange stake was £18k (makes sense x1000) so why would the exchange system with a £100 bank give £134.52 stake - seems disproportionate.

Ian

[scaaty]

I personally didn't back Grand Heights, I couldn't bring myself to lay out that money on a 0.07/1 shot. I should have and it could of wrecked my bank because I didn't.

I didn't back Grand heights either and I still think that was the right decision - yes, not backing it could have wrecked the bank if it had won and then been followed by several losers, but it could have wrecked the bank a whole lot faster if it had lost and been followed by just a few losers!

There's no point picking and choosing your stake or the selections as the software is developed from 1000s of bets.

But people miss selections because they can't do weekends, or can't do evenings etc - if that's ok, then missing out one selection because the odds are insane is surely ok too ? I know the software's been developed over 1000s of bets, but how many 1000s would it take before you get odds like that ? Seemed to me that those odds were a freaky one-off thing, so I decided to skip it. Before that the lowest odds I've had were 1.28, and I didn't even think twice about that one, the software said back it so I did, but 1.05 ? ( that was the best available at the bookies) Nope, I just couldn't do it and if it happens again I still won't do it and I'll accept the consequences !


Been using the software for two weeks now, the starting bank of £250 is now a nice healthy £270.03 and my base stake has gone up from 42p to 45p - at this rate I'll reach the betfair minimum in no time !

[tophatter]

I agree that missing the odd bet dont matter and that one was very much a one off.

I think though independent of that freakish price bet it is good opportunity to make the point though that eventully, at some point, the system will hit a longish losing run and you may well be asked to place a big bet especially if its an odds on shot and the run already contains short priced losers.

That is when you have to be cold and do the bet. The way I look at it is this. If I am about and I can place the bets, then I place them. Im not going to start missing uncomfortable bets by phsycologically fooling my mind into saying "I might have been down the shops so I will pretend I was"

I agree with Scaaty when she says that horse was a one off as you dont get horses that short often but just dont get into habbit of baulking at placing bigger bets on normal odds on shots as in the spread of a strike rate these will naturally be at the higher end. Removing them methodically will make it a lower strike rate system and that will throw it all out of synch. When you miss bets on a random basis it evens out, but if you start applying a method to them it will eventully affect the Strike rate. As Scaaty says she did not flinch at placing a bet at 1/4 but some people might. 1/4 is short but is an acceptable price and it is that short for a very good reason.

I could not do the bet, but for the record I would have skipped it too but I would have "fined myself" by recording it as if I had done it and depositing the amount I would have won if I had bet on it into the bank manually and then restarting back at the base bet. As I was out, I could not do it so I dont need to fine myself. Its just something I have always done when I make mistakes or have situations like that as It keeps me disciplined - I must be a masochist! :)

[Mavrick]

Some refreshing comments. I'm glad I'm not the only that couldn't back Grand Heights. I've been thinking about it and I have decided I will back anything 1/5 or bigger. I can mentally handle that.
When I said that we shouldn't pick and choose bets I was referring to what Ian said about if he had only placed £10 or 11%-13% and not the advised stake on "Grand Heights" and about only backing the horses that required stakes over £2 and not below it. I probably got the wrong end of the stick.

The reason why the staking was different Ian between the bookmaker and the exchange function was simply because there was more money to recover as you'd had to stake more for all the losing exchange bets. At 1/10 you need to stake £10 just to recover £1 of your lost stakes so it's going to make a huge difference if you've had to start with betfairs min. bet instead of the bookmakers bets. If you've only lost 5 bets at £2 each then you'll need to stake £100 at 1/10! The bookmakers stakes would have been much less.

[tophatter]

yep, I would always advise you to use the bookmakers stakes if possible if you have a bank under a grand. What I sometimes do is use the exchange stake for the first bet and then go back to the bookmaker stakes. The second, third and even fourth bets can sometimes be lower than that initail first bet if they happen to be longer priced horses.

Using a bookmaker means you can place much less on the longer priced horses which is ideally what you want to be doing, rather than the same stake. That measn that during a losing run if a short odds on horse appears the cumulative effect means the bet you would have to place on that could be quite a bit less than if you were using a min bet.

Its like I said a couple of weeks back, it seems you are sometimes betting very small in comparision to your bank but there is good reason behind it. There will come a point when you see exactly why its telling you to stake the way it is and you will be grateful for the software.

I love this system banker stuff - and im fully expecting the software to make it one of my fastest growing win banks this year as I wont have to worry about when to raise and lower stakes as I do on my conventional staking banks.

[Win2Win]

Horses of 1/16 do not come along very often these days, lucky if you get 2-3 a year now, and then most wouldn't qualify, and very, very few horses of those prices lose, they are profitable to follow long-term on their own.

With regard to actually putting the bet on, your bank would only be broke if it lost, and only around a 4% chance of it doing so on that horse. You couldn't ask for better odds to break a losing run.

[Win2Win]

Some refreshing comments. I'm glad I'm not the only that couldn't back Grand Heights. I've been thinking about it and I have decided I will back anything 1/5 or bigger. I can mentally handle that.

But it is longer priced horses that are more likely to break losing runs.....what if.....you have 7 losers.....then the next 3 win at 1/8 ........you then have 9 losers.....then a 1/6 wins.......eveyone is happy......whereas your rule has just broke the bank, as you are physically adjusting the average SR yourself over the long term, and the software is not built for that SR so WILL break.

[alfazzr1100]

Hi,

Thast's the beauty of discussing things on here, its not just the answers but the clarity of thought you get from the discipline of writing it down. After I finished last night and went and sat in the bath - Eureka - I realised that using the exchange with such a small bank was the problem because of having to cover the minimum £3 for every loser.

But you've already come to that conclusion. I did back it for £6 so made 50p

But that was because I'd entered 1.09 not 0.09 as I've said before.

Just backed them all today :splapme now back to work ! Just can't follow rules me

Thanks

Ian

[Win2Win]

Well you should be doing all the qualifiers to 3% then, adjusted daily, and forget the software.

[mickmd]

Another dissapointing day for the system banker for the second day running a short priced winner followed by a string of losers.a very slow week for the system and recent strike rate well down again.
Heres hoping for a change of luck tomoz

[Win2Win]

How can it be dissapointing? You are going to get 60 losers every 100 bets, so you have to fit them in some where!!

[tophatter]

Another winner means you banked another bit of profit. Thats the whole point of it. The losers dont matter because all it means is when the next winner comes you win more on it. In effect you took another step forward today because you had that winner, when you get the next one you wont be any worse off than you are now even if you have to stake 8 or 9 more losers - you will be better off.

[tophatter]

20/09/07

Managed to do the two late ones today which both lost. Missed a winner and three losers earlier on.

Bank down on the day by 0.31%

Strike rate is 39% from 171 bets with a profit of 19.90%

[Mavrick]

Just out of interest. Does anyone else run these to a fix % or level stakes with a side bank?

[Win2Win]

Just out of interest. Does anyone else run these to a fix % or level stakes with a side bank?

Yes. Up over 5 figures this year.

[Mavrick]

Ta Keith.

[alfazzr1100]

I make it 26% Sr over the last 46 tips (thats every one since last Thursday).

That would give a loss of 31.23% on a 2% stake or just 19.02% on a level stake but I managed to convert that into a 52% loss by judicious use of the wrong stake and the only two tips I missed were both winners giving me an effective SR of 21%.

Its a shame because when I paper traded it I got 45% over 40 bets and a 14% increase in the paper bank. Oh well I suppose it should come round but I'll need to top up the almost broken bank.

I look forward to the day when I can share TopHatters rosie outlook and celebrate the losers.

However I have just cheered myself up (I think) by looking at the history download for System Banker and the longest run of bets with a rolling SR (over 40 bets) of under 28% was a run of 58 tips until it has recovered to 32% but the average recovery over this range is 24 tips. The quickest recovery from below 28% SR to say 45% was only 30 tips or less than a week (although the longest recovery over this range was 209). Let's hope I haven't cursed it.

Ian

[MattR]

Just out of interest. Does anyone else run these to a fix % or level stakes with a side bank?

Yes I'm doing it to 3% stakes. Started with a 200 bank towards end of last month. Had a high of 300 and currently at a low of 152

[tophatter]

Ian, my post was not a "Rosey outlook celebrating losers", read it again and hopefully you will see all I was trying to explain was that each winner in effect earns you a fee if you use the software properly.

It just shows you are not reading what I am saying if you come to the conclusion that I was celebrating losers in that previous post. How anyone can draw that conclusion is beyond me. As far as I can see if you have bet everyone since last Thursday and have a 26% strike rate from 46 system selections (note they are selections not tips) that means you have 12 winners and so your bank should have increased 12 times and you are on a losing run of 4, next winner will make it increase number 13 if you were doing things right and so render the previous losers irrelevant.

Mind you how anyone could near break a bank using this software after just 46 bets and a 26% strike rate or 21% or whatever percentage you want to use as an example is also beyond me. Even to level stakes you would not be in a precarious position with a strike rate like that over so few bets. Even if you were doing this to level stakes at 1% of starting bank and the average winning price of each horse was a meagre 1/2 you would only be 28% down on the figures you have given. I reckon a more realistic average winning price is more like at least 2/1, and on my figures it is more, and that would mean you would be about 10% down max.

[mickmd]

maybe because the last few weeks on this system have produced better results that i am bit dissapointed, not so many consecutive winners this week hence a slower build up on the profit front.
Dont get me wrong overall i am very impressed with the system and staking plan.Todays losing bets were all at longer prices than usual and to be fair the races were not easy to pick .
yesterday was disappointing more in the fact that some horses didnt run anywhere near their reflected market prices.hey but thats racing i guess a profit is still a profit and i am infront still by some way even after todays losing run.

[Mavrick]

Thanks Matt. My figures are about the same as yours.

Looking at everyones figures and Mats in his blog, the SR was running above normal anyway so this recent run isn't really surprising. I wish I knew how to use Excel as well as everyone else here so I could interrogate results better. I'll try and find a free ebook like a dummies guide or something.

[Win2Win]

Just because a system/method produces a 40% SR over a year, it does not mean that is consistent. You could have 60% for 3 months, followed by 15% for the next 3 months, but at the end of the year it will be around 40%.