Chelsea 2-0 system.

[Carl]

Before you lot start I know you dont like the martingale system but I think it can be very good for holding profit until you win. Im going for chelsea 2-0 in every match they play. They have one of the best defence in the world and also some of the best goal scorers.They dont just rely on the 2 strikers they have GS'ers in most of there postions. so here we go. 2-0 chelsea @ 5/1 10 pts staked. image host is down at the mo.

Points	teams	score	Odds	v	Odds	Stake	Result	Win/Lose	Points	Profit so far
10	Chelsea-v-Wigan	2-0	5		1	£5.00	L	15	25	-£5.00
25	Chelsea-v-Arsenal	2-0	7		1	£5.00	L	30	40	-£10.00
40	Chelsea-v-WBA	2-0	5		1	£10.00	L	50	60	-£20.00
60	Chelsea-v-Spurs	2-0	13		2	£10.00		-	-	-£45.00
-						-		-	-	-
-						-		-	-	-
-						-		-	-	-

for the game against Spurs 27thAug.

[DC]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. None of my business Herp but did you know that Chelsea won ELEVEN league games last season 1-0? Maybe you could split the stake 1-0 and 2-0?? Just a thought? Good luck Danny

[Carl]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. Gods honest truth I was going to do 1-0 because of that very stat. but Ive just got a feeling that this year they will go for 2. drogba seems to be getting the hang of scoring plus crespo is back. Ill see how it goes. might give it 1 month.

[Bruise Pristene]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. look at you herp with your fancy spreadsheet and everything!!

[Carl]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. :lol

[Hindi]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. why dont u play 2-0 for every game of chelsea with flat stake?

[Carl]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. Cus I wanna make a profit. unlucky today with just the 1 goal. like danny said 11 times last season it was 1-0 but ill keep to 2-0 till I get a win.

[Carl]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. next up Is Arsenal on the 21st. Ill keep the excel table updated in the first post:ok

[spreadman]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. HL, Mr. Herp, next Sunday it's Chelsea v Arsenal, Sky TV, should be a 2-0 'er..... :loon

[spreadman]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. Oops, cross- threaded !!! :eek

[Hodgey]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. Good luck with this Herp. I'm doing a similar thing with Bayern Munich 3-1's.

[Mercury]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. Hi, this is my first post here.:) Herp,....you said you're using the Martingale staking systerm for this? If so I thought I'd better post to warn you that last season Chelsea went through a run of 17 consecutive games in a row before they had a 2-0 win. And that they only had a 2-0 result 5 times in that season, 3 of which were bunched up closely together. If they only had a 2-0 win 5 times this season too, then you'd have to not only pray that they are spaced out every 7 or 8 games, but that you have a big enough bank to handle the Martingale over 7 or 8 times of doubling up. If the 2-0 wins are spaced out anything like last season (17 games) then you could find yourself in big trouble and your bank could end up getting wiped out. In the 2003 - 2004 season Chelsea went through a run of 25 consecutive games since the start of the season before they hit a 2-0 win. In that season they only won 2-0 twice in the entire season (In the league anyway). I Hope I don't sound too pessimistic. I just thought I'd better warn you of the stats here in case you were unaware of the potential pitfall in this instance. :)

[spreadman]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. :welcome Hi, Buzzy, just read your post...good call, but as you probably know, we are always on guard against the penalties of using Martingale. Herp, maybe you could consider a 'snail pace' Martingale, such as first 4 or 5 bets to be one point stakes, if they lose, bet 5 or 6 could be 1.5 points, etc. You'll never make a fortune, but there again, you'll hold on to your bank, ...or take longer to run it dry!!!! :\

[GaF]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. Surely if something is a "value bet", then it will make money in the long run to level stakes..... If something isn't a value bet, then surely it will lose in the long run, regardless of any staking plan....... I don't really believe in staking plans (though to be honest, haven't read a lot on them - am open to being persuaded....) - if a bet is a good bet, then it will win to level stakes (in the long run) - if something is a bad bet, then it will lose to level stakes (or any other stakes) in the long run. If you have identified a good bet, then the only thing you need to be careful of is that you get through short term fluctuations (which I can see a percentage of bank bet will help with) - but a staking plan can not turn a bad bet into a winning bet (over the long run). If you believe that Chelsea winning 2-0 is a value bet, then you should believe it will win to level stakes - if you don't believe it will win to level stakes, then it cannot win with Martingale (or any other staking plan) - in the long run.......and your "expected" value of your bets will be negative...... As I said - just my view - I'm open to persuasion otherwise (but you'll have to be bl@@dy convincing to change my mind ;) )

[DC]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. I agree with Buzzy in the fact that a long amount of games before a 2-0 "hit" will be very costly. Why not COMBINE 1-0 and 2-0 scores, this way giving more chance of REGULAR "hits". You'd be looking at around a 3-1 combination bet, much more likely. Gotafancy, I personally believe 1-0 scorelines for Chelsea will be value bets because everyone will be expecting them to win 3-0 or higher ESPECIALLY AT HOME with the players they have. Look at the amount of times it came in last season. good luck Herp Danny

[spreadman]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. Gotafancy, whilst it is true that "a staking plan can not turn a bad bet into a winning bet", a staking plan can turn a losing, (unprofitable) level staked bet into a 'winning' or profitable bet, or more accurately, series of bets. Hopefully this shows how: Betting result sequence: L L L L L L L L W with a stake per bet of one point, and a winning bet odds of 6/1, will give a betting bank level of: -1,-2,-3,-4,-5,-6,-7,-8, until the win, of+6, which still leaves a loss, of -1, (6pts. win + the 1pt. stake back, less your previous accrued losses of 8 points). A staking plan such as one where you increase the stake by +1 unit after each losing bet gives this betting bank sequence::-1,-3,-6,-10,-15,-21,-28,-36, and then the 6/1 win for the 8 points bet will return 48 points, plus stake of 6 points, total bank of 54 less the -36 points lost on the 8 previous losing bets, = + 18 points profit. In other words, a staking plan turning an otherwise unprofitable bet, or series of level stake bets, into a profitable sequence. O.K., this still doesn't justify the use of a Martingale staking plan such as 1,2,4,8,16, etc., but when your winning bet returns 6/1, after every 8 or more losing bets (which implies 'less value', and the bookie has marked the odds in his favour), you can still show a profit, all be it a small one. I know that this '+1point after a loss' staking plan works as I have adapted it for my own use in spread betting, where 'value' is more difficult to assess as a numerical or odds value, because, unlike in a fixed odds bet, the amount that you can potentially lose or win is not 'fixed' in a spread bet, or 'trade'. I hope this makes makes the case for staking plans, in certain circumstances, and you will consider maybe reviewing your recent bets record to see if a one point progressive staking plan would have improved your profits, or decreased your losses(!). :D

[slapdash]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system.

Betting result sequence: L L L L L L L L W with a stake per bet of one point, and a winning bet odds of 6/1, will give a betting bank level of: -1,-2,-3,-4,-5,-6,-7,-8, until the win, of+6, which still leaves a loss, of -1, (6pts. win + the 1pt. stake back, less your previous accrued losses of 8 points). A staking plan such as one where you increase the stake by +1 unit after each losing bet gives this betting bank sequence::-1,-3,-6,-10,-15,-21,-28,-36, and then the 6/1 win for the 8 points bet will return 48 points, plus stake of 6 points, total bank of 54 less the -36 points lost on the 8 previous losing bets, = + 18 points profit.

It's true that if you place a sequence of 6/1 bets of which one in nine win, then with your staking plan you will make a long term profit if the winners come along as regular as clockwork, once every nine bets. But that's not what will happen. You'll have some very short losing runs of 0, 1 or 2 bets, in which case you'll have a smaller profit from the losing run followed by the win (LLW will win 15 points, LW will win 11 points, and W will win 6 points). And more importantly you will have some very long losing runs of 13 or more, in which case you'll make a loss from the losing run followed by the winner (LLLLLLLLLLLLLW will lose 7 points, LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLW will lose 84 points, and LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLW ... that's 30 L's ... will lose 252 points). And about 3% of your winners will follow a losing streak of 30 or more. In the long run you'll lose money.

[GaF]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. Slapdash beat me to it........ As he said, the important thing is the distribution of winners - you can increase your chances of success in the short run, but in the long run you will lose (unless it's a value bet) - assuming a "normal" distribution, you will eventually come up against a losing sequence that will wipe out all of your profits and more - it is to be expected. From what you have said, I presume you believe that if we gamble on the toss of a coin, and I give you odds of 10/11 and allow you to work on your stake as you wish, then you could win? You may do in the short run, but you would never win in the long run, with any staking plan... I'll try and put an example together tomorrow to illustrate what I'm trying to say (because I'm not sure I'm explaining myself very well)....

[spreadman]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. :ok Totally agree, Mr. S., long losing sequences are the bane of any progressive staking plan. I personally have not hit the LLR during my spreadbetting exploits, which is neither due to stunningly accurate predictive abilities (!), nor luck. One of the reasons for this, I believe, is that with, for example spread betting on the number of match goals scored, ( a sort equivalent to the fixed odds bet of over/under 2.5 goals), you are not restricted to winning the same or similar odds for each bet, e.g. 10/11 as quoted in Mr.GotaFancy's post, for a coin tossing 'bet' where , similar to the over/unders bet, there are only two possible outcomes. To further explain: you can be more 'right', (of more 'wrong'!), and win more than you lost in a previous bet, unlike a fixed odds or coin tossing bet. So, the points loss from a long losing run can be 'neutralised' or turned around into a profit, by one win. Rather like, say, a losing run of five losses at 6/1 cancelled out by one win at 33/1. With the coin tossing, you can't be 'more right' and win higher odds than the fixed odds offered, unlike in the case of the spreadbet with varying win and loss amounts. If the odds offered on heads or tails becomes greater than evens, then, of course, this becomes a 'value' bet and you will win to level stakes, over period of time, with a large enough bank, regardless of using a staking plan, or not. Returning to the example of 2-0 scores for Chelsea matches, I totally agree with you, Mr S., you are inevitably going to hit a LLR of 13 or more, and no staking plan or 'normal' bank can turn it around to a profit. Mr. GotaFancy, I was providing an instance, or example where a staking plan could turn 'a bad bet' into a winning bet, or, more accurately, into a winning bet (limited) sequence. If you lose for 13 consecutive bets, then clearly, even if you consider you are selecting 'value' bets, in the case of a football team's score, you cannot realise a profit. Something is wrong with your assumption as to how the team itself will perform. With coin tossing, you cannot assume any more about coin 'performance', than that the coin, having two sides, and thus two event results or outcomes, will be subject to long losing runs, namely 13 or more consecutive heads or tails. It is a random result event, uninfluenced by team changes, pitch conditions, the weather,(?), ...and a goal in injury time. I look forward to your reactions, commments etc., and illustrations.....:D

[GaF]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. I think this is a really interesting discussion....

One of the reasons for this, I believe, is that with, for example spread betting on the number of match goals scored, ( a sort equivalent to the fixed odds bet of over/under 2.5 goals), you are not restricted to winning the same or similar odds for each bet, e.g. 10/11 as quoted in Mr.GotaFancy's post, for a coin tossing 'bet' where , similar to the over/unders bet, there are only two possible outcomes. To further explain: you can be more 'right', (of more 'wrong'!), and win more than you lost in a previous bet, unlike a fixed odds or coin tossing bet. So, the points loss from a long losing run can be 'neutralised' or turned around into a profit, by one win. Rather like, say, a losing run of five losses at 6/1 cancelled out by one win at 33/1.

Ok - so if I was to offer you the following bets, you can take any bets you like, for any stakes you like - odds (value or not) are known after you have placed your bet, but before the event takes place - so you will have some value bets and some bad bets - but you don't know which are which when you place the bet..... Coin toss - 2% chance odds are 10/11, 97% chance odds are 1/1 and 1% chance odds are 11/10 1 Die Roll - 2% chance odds are 9/2, 97% chance odds are 5/1 and 1% chance odds are 11/2 2 Dice Roll - 2% chance odds are 34/1, 97% chance odds are 35/1 and 1% chance odds are 36/1 Do you think you could make a profit on this? Regarding your comment on 13 consecutive losses then a win (for illustraction purposes at 6/1), at being a loss with a staking plan or level stakes - of course you're right, but the sequence, LLLLLLLLLLLLLWWWWW would provide a profit at level stakes, but a loss with a staking plan (on the assumption you've used up your bank in its entirity during the 13 run sequence......) Random events like a coin toss have a "normal bell shaped" distribution - I would be pretty confident, that in the long run - a football team winning 2-0 (or not winning two nill) would also have a "normal bell shaped" distribution - critically what that means is that you will get the same long losing sequences with both events......

[Hodgey]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. This is an interesting discussion. In the case of my Bayern 3-1 home win system I have backtested the last 3 years in which they have had 2, 2 and 4 3-1's. However I've also looked back over 8 years and in that time there were 2 seasons where they have no 3-1 home wins. Now I reckon I can get odds of at least 12.00 on each 3-1 so my staking plan is start with £10 on the first match and increase it by 10% after every loss. I.e. 10, 11, 12.10 etc. Doing this, if Bayern go the whole season without a 3-1 home win, I'm £405.45 down. If this happens I will merely carry on next season and I would regard the £405 as an 'investment' - view it in no different way as if I'd invested in the stock market. After all £405 spread over 34 weeks really only works out at £12 a week - I would spend more than that if I smoked. Let's assume Bayern don't get a 3-1 until they're last home game of the season (Game 17 in my sequence) and I get odds of 12.00, then the returns would be £551.40 giving a profit of £145.95 on the season. This equates to 36% ROI, which I doubt very much you would get on the stock exchange in one year.

conv_28.xls

[GaF]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. Ah, but what is the chance of Bayern going 2 seasons without a 3-1 win? It certainly isn't zero, and if it happens then you are £2454 down. What if they go 10 seasons without winning 3-1 at home? yes it's unlikely, but it's certainly possible - then you're over £1 billion (yes £1,000,000,000) down - how long would you stick with it? How high before your stakes are so high you can't get a bet on? I know I'm taking it to a ridiculous extreme there, but if the odds are against you, you WILL eventually have a run that will take the stakes over what you can afford.... (and the same would apply to Roman Abramovich!!). What's the biggest bet you'd be prepared to place/you could get accepted on Bayern winning 3-1? That limit could occur surprisingly quickly. In my view, in the long run, if it is a "bad bet", then you will lose....if it is a "good bet", then you will win, but you would also win to level stakes (without risking an exponential growth in what you need to stake). 3-1 at home to Bayern MAY look a good bet, but by definition, you are only looking at a small sample (they only play at home 17 times a year!) - so any trends you see can not be statistically significant - i.e. you cannot believe that they will occur again.......

[GaF]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. Just been having a look at some History - In 1995/96 Bayern didn't win any of their home league games 3-1. They then followed this up in 1996/97 by again not winning any of their home league games 3-1. So in the last 10 years, they have gone two consecutive seasons without any home leaue 3-1 wins - and it could easily happen again......After 34 games, you would have lost £2454 - and your next stake would have to be £232 - would you be prepared to do that? Imagine you are, the fact that two seasons have already passed without a home league win of 3-1 in no way diminishes the chance of another two seasons passing without a home league 3-1 win - if this happens, then at the end of 4 seasons your losses are £65,168 (that's the nature of increasing stakes - your losses increase exponentially) and your next stake needs to be just under £6000......are you ready for that? Do you have the bank for that? Could you get a £6000 bet on? (needing someone to risk £72,000 at 12-1) - and even if the answer is yes - can you be sure that this is the end of your bad run?

[GaF]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system.

Doing this' date= if Bayern go the whole season without a 3-1 home win, I'm £405.45 down. If this happens I will merely carry on next season and I would regard the £405 as an 'investment' - view it in no different way as if I'd invested in the stock market. After all £405 spread over 34 weeks really only works out at £12 a week - I would spend more than that if I smoked.

Ah - did I misunderstand - When you say "I will merely carry on next season" - do you mean by resetting the stake back to £10 and writing off the £405 loss, rather than carrying on with the stakes were where you were at?

[GaF]

[Hodgey]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. I have taken your comments on board. Sorry herp for hi-jacking your thread!

[GaF]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system.

Sorry herp for hi-jacking your thread!

Yeah - Sorry mate..... Your first comment was "Before you lot start I know you dont like the martingale system but I think it can be very good for holding profit until you win." - I think you knew what was coming ;)

[slapdash]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system.

Now I'm in no way suggesting that level stakes are more profitable than increasing stakes, this could just as easily have gone the other way and your staking plan could have shown a higher profit - it is 50/50 which is more profitable -

Actually, a staking plan like this can be more likely to be profitable than level staking. What it can't do is take bad bets (bets with negative expected yield) and make them profitable on average, or take good bets (bets with positive expected yield) and make them unprofitable on average. So if a staking plan makes you very likely to be profitable, it will do this at the expense of making your losses bigger when you do make a loss. For example, if you have the opportunity to make a sequence of 10 bets at odds of 1/1 and if they are fair odds, so each bet will win 50% of the time, then you could: Bet on each at level stakes. Then you'll be in profit after the 10 bets exactly as often as you make a loss. You'll make a loss about 37.7% of the time, make a profit about 37.7% of the time, and break even about 24.6% of the time. On average you'll break even. Martingale, starting with a bet of one unit and doubling your stake after every loss, stopping after a win. Then 1023 times out of 1024 (about 99.9% of the time) you will make a profit of one unit, and one time out of 1024 you will make a loss of 1023 points. So on average you will break even. Start with a bet of one unit, and keep putting all your returns on the next bet, stopping after a loss. Then one time out of 1024 you will make a profit of 1023 points, and 1023 times out of 1024 you will make a loss of one point. So on average you will break even. Whatever staking plan you choose, if you do this calculation you will find that on average you will exactly break even. This is for fair odds. If the odds are generous you will do better than break even on average, and if the odds are ungenerous you will do worse than break even on average. Whatever staking plan you use.

[GaF]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. Cheers for the correction Slapdash - I agree with everything you say and you've explained it well as well :ok Only thing I would add - is the probability of showing a higher profit with a staking plan compared to level stakes is significantly reduced in the case where you are backing a 12-1 shot and resetting the stakes after 17 bets - however I accept your argument and you would expect, even in this scenario, for the staking plan to show the bigger profit more than 50% of the time (though as you correctly say, this will be negated by the larger losses you would have when losing.......)

[GaF]

Re: Chelsea 2-0 system. Talking of averages, if I put my head in the oven and my feet in the freezer, then on average the temperature is ideal........;)