Racing Chat - Monday 20th May

[MCLARKE]

25 minutes ago, The Equaliser said:

Well, my boy, it depends on one's objectives.  I was talking about the Naps Comp.  Most people love the idea of winning the outright prize of £60.  Others like to go for the most winners with a prize of £20.  I like to buy into the KO Cup.  It has a prize of £30 and a runner-up prize of £10.  One only has to get within the first 25 in the naps table to qualify for the KO cup so that is what I work towards every month.

Here endeth the lesson

Indeed we all have our own likes and dislikes.

Personally I don't like the KO cup, it almost encourages a strategy to keep losses as small as possible rather tham maximise profits.

But, as I say, we are all different.

[Systemight]

4 minutes ago, MCLARKE said:

Indeed we all have our own likes and dislikes.

Personally I don't like the KO cup, it almost encourages a strategy to keep losses as small as possible rather tham maximise profits.

But, as I say, we are all different.

Can see your point.

The outright winner often goes to the person who finds that one really big priced winner,the K.O Cup to one who keeps losses to a minimum,but my personal dislike is the most winners competition.

It's not really that hard to pick odds on shots every day,even my missus could do that.

How many will tip either Mostly Sunny or Native Warrior today i wonder? ...lol

[MCLARKE]

44 minutes ago, Systemight said:

Can see your point.

The outright winner often goes to the person who finds that one really big priced winner,the K.O Cup to one who keeps losses to a minimum,but my personal dislike is the most winners competition.

It's not really that hard to pick odds on shots every day,even my missus could do that.

How many will tip either Mostly Sunny or Native Warrior today i wonder? ...lol

It is easy to pick odds on shots each day but to pick enough winners in the month to achieve a 10 point profit is no easy task

To me the ultimate test is who wins the annual naps competition

[The Equaliser]

2 hours ago, MCLARKE said:

Indeed we all have our own likes and dislikes.

Personally I don't like the KO cup, it almost encourages a strategy to keep losses as small as possible rather tham maximise profits.

But, as I say, we are all different.

You can always change the rules.  The way it stands I would be happy to collect a £30 prize with -2.99 if my opponent had no winners.  It's just a comp with its own set of rules. 

As it is not so popular and the "Most Winners" seems to rank second in the Naps Comps you may consider scrapping the KO Cup altogether and adding the prize money to most winners.  You could also have a runner-up prize.  What could be done is to increase the minimum profit to say £20. This should cut down on the odds-on shot selections.  I think that increasing the minimum profit to £30 may be a bit harsh for a month's worth of selections.  I think anyone should be happy following a tipster that could clear 20 points a month. 

Possible food for thought

[Zilzalian]

Nothing wrong with any of the comps its all good fun (and free) but if i had to base a betting strategy around a few "fun" comps i would pack it in altogether but each to their own. With betting there are those that like to play and then there are those that like to play and win, personally i just like the idea of coming up with something that works and keeps me busy or amused just like that experiment we did for the guineas. The money is always secondary. I have said many a time on here if you are scared of losing then you wont ever win anything decent that's a bit like going fishing without any bait to save money. 🤣 Best advice i could give is be a Lee Greys and not a Beaker. 😂😂🤣😉

[ivans82]

While we were all scrambling around trying to pick winners in the UK  ,Luke Morris rides 2 winners for Archie Watson in Germany , and Silvestre De Souza rides a winner for Mr Menusier in the German Guineas . Nothing pinned up in the betting shop in the morning , will pay more attention of International racecards in future .

Edited May 21 by ivans82

[The Equaliser]

35 minutes ago, Zilzalian said:

Nothing wrong with any of the comps its all good fun (and free) but if i had to base a betting strategy around a few "fun" comps i would pack it in altogether but each to their own. With betting there are those that like to play and then there are those that like to play and win, personally i just like the idea of coming up with something that works and keeps me busy or amused just like that experiment we did for the guineas. The money is always secondary. I have said many a time on here if you are scared of losing then you wont ever win anything decent that's a bit like going fishing without any bait to save money. 🤣 Best advice i could give is be a Lee Greys and not a Beaker. 😂😂🤣😉

It is unrealistic to expect outsiders to win all of the races, especially with multiple bets like the Lucky 15.  I believe it is best to have a good mix of selections. That is my humble view

[LeMale]

6 minutes ago, The Equaliser said:

It is unrealistic to expect outsiders to win all of the races, especially with multiple bets like the Lucky 15.  I believe it is best to have a good mix of selections. That is my humble view

Like what has kind of been said, each to their own. What i will add/say is this...I still class myself as a novice who now has, what year is it now, about 4/5 or maybe 6 years worth of flat racing knowledge, nothing at all in my eyes compared to a lot of guys/girls on here, but what i'd noticed with my betting about 2 years ago was that i was now betting on horses at stupid prices, prices that i would never have entertained 3,4 or 5 years ago and by stupid i mean anything from 3-1 to 9-1. (Never will i bet, or have i ever bet, a single on anything that's odds-on up to 11-4) I had noticed that i was not having as much fun as i used to and i put that down to not getting my buzz from a long shot winner or even a place, short price winners mean nothing to me and i was having more bets on them and less on the big priced nags that i loved. Luckily for me i noticed what had happened, with the extra knowledge and help from people on this site, i was looking at certain things that i never used to and was ruling out quite a lot of the bigger priced horses and was left with the shorties. I have found that i can't un-learn what i now know so i find it more difficult to find the big price winners, but i do find them believe it or not, just always seem to pick the wrong one for the Naps comp! People will say what i do is Wrong, but what you have to understand is what i stake has hardly changed from when i started, £2 win and £1 ew and i will very rarely change that, so betting £2 on a 1-4 shot to get 50p is not for me. With some of the shorter priced horses i bet on now it's £2 win on odds up to 20-1, a judgement call on odds from 22-1 to 33-1 (depends on places/extra places and runners) and ew for any odds above that, 90% of the time, again depends. I've rambled on again, as usual, but like i started this with, it's each to their own, there are tips and advise for any one who wants it and although i have never met any one on this site, i know who to trust and i know who talk a good game, the main thing is, i believe, is that no one on here wants anyone to get into gambling debt/problems and you seem like me in that you have your amount that you can afford to play with and what will be, will be, so good luck to you and everybody else on however you bet, just keep it fun. 

[Zilzalian]

This is a nugget from @LeMale that is well worth remembering especially when listening to "noise"

" I have found that i can't un-learn what i now know so i find it more difficult to find the big price winners," I would add. Be very careful what you get fixated on, always be prepared to be flexible in your thinking and never be afraid to let go of bad or dodgy ideas.

[Zilzalian]

1 hour ago, LeMale said:

Like what has kind of been said, each to their own. What i will add/say is this...I still class myself as a novice who now has, what year is it now, about 4/5 or maybe 6 years worth of flat racing knowledge, nothing at all in my eyes compared to a lot of guys/girls on here, but what i'd noticed with my betting about 2 years ago was that i was now betting on horses at stupid prices, prices that i would never have entertained 3,4 or 5 years ago and by stupid i mean anything from 3-1 to 9-1. (Never will i bet, or have i ever bet, a single on anything that's odds-on up to 11-4) I had noticed that i was not having as much fun as i used to and i put that down to not getting my buzz from a long shot winner or even a place, short price winners mean nothing to me and i was having more bets on them and less on the big priced nags that i loved. Luckily for me i noticed what had happened, with the extra knowledge and help from people on this site, i was looking at certain things that i never used to and was ruling out quite a lot of the bigger priced horses and was left with the shorties. I have found that i can't un-learn what i now know so i find it more difficult to find the big price winners, but i do find them believe it or not, just always seem to pick the wrong one for the Naps comp! People will say what i do is Wrong, but what you have to understand is what i stake has hardly changed from when i started, £2 win and £1 ew and i will very rarely change that, so betting £2 on a 1-4 shot to get 50p is not for me. With some of the shorter priced horses i bet on now it's £2 win on odds up to 20-1, a judgement call on odds from 22-1 to 33-1 (depends on places/extra places and runners) and ew for any odds above that, 90% of the time, again depends. I've rambled on again, as usual, but like i started this with, it's each to their own, there are tips and advise for any one who wants it and although i have never met any one on this site, i know who to trust and i know who talk a good game, the main thing is, i believe, is that no one on here wants anyone to get into gambling debt/problems and you seem like me in that you have your amount that you can afford to play with and what will be, will be, so good luck to you and everybody else on however you bet, just keep it fun. 

Around 30% of favs win which also means 70% don't win. I take my chances with searching through the 70% remaining.

[Systemight]

7 hours ago, MCLARKE said:

It is easy to pick odds on shots each day but to pick enough winners in the month to achieve a 10 point profit is no easy task

To me the ultimate test is who wins the annual naps competition

Totally agree,that if you were to pick an odds on winner everyday, making a 10 point profit would be difficult,though not impossible.

But what if you started the first day/days of the monthly competition well and found a 7/1 winner or two 7/2 winners for example,putting you 7 points in profit.

One could argue that picking a long odds on shot everyday for the rest of the month after then to make a profit of 10 points is not really that daunting.

You may have noticed that a post of mine on this thread earlier today predicted two long odds on chances....and both won!

So if i can do it..:)

[Systemight]

1 hour ago, LeMale said:

Like what has kind of been said, each to their own. What i will add/say is this...I still class myself as a novice who now has, what year is it now, about 4/5 or maybe 6 years worth of flat racing knowledge, nothing at all in my eyes compared to a lot of guys/girls on here, but what i'd noticed with my betting about 2 years ago was that i was now betting on horses at stupid prices, prices that i would never have entertained 3,4 or 5 years ago and by stupid i mean anything from 3-1 to 9-1. (Never will i bet, or have i ever bet, a single on anything that's odds-on up to 11-4) I had noticed that i was not having as much fun as i used to and i put that down to not getting my buzz from a long shot winner or even a place, short price winners mean nothing to me and i was having more bets on them and less on the big priced nags that i loved. Luckily for me i noticed what had happened, with the extra knowledge and help from people on this site, i was looking at certain things that i never used to and was ruling out quite a lot of the bigger priced horses and was left with the shorties. I have found that i can't un-learn what i now know so i find it more difficult to find the big price winners, but i do find them believe it or not, just always seem to pick the wrong one for the Naps comp! People will say what i do is Wrong, but what you have to understand is what i stake has hardly changed from when i started, £2 win and £1 ew and i will very rarely change that, so betting £2 on a 1-4 shot to get 50p is not for me. With some of the shorter priced horses i bet on now it's £2 win on odds up to 20-1, a judgement call on odds from 22-1 to 33-1 (depends on places/extra places and runners) and ew for any odds above that, 90% of the time, again depends. I've rambled on again, as usual, but like i started this with, it's each to their own, there are tips and advise for any one who wants it and although i have never met any one on this site, i know who to trust and i know who talk a good game, the main thing is, i believe, is that no one on here wants anyone to get into gambling debt/problems and you seem like me in that you have your amount that you can afford to play with and what will be, will be, so good luck to you and everybody else on however you bet, just keep it fun. 

A great post,well done!

Everyone has the same goal even if we go about it in different ways.

As a young man i tried everything-speed ratings,forms ratings,systems,horses to follow lists,trends,scalping,dobbing,match betting,in play,exotics- the list was endless and the results were mixed.Like most though,as soon as i hit a losing streak i was off trying something else-only to find the strategy i had just left,had started to win again.

If anyone was stupid enough to ask my advice,i would suggest they do exactly what you do..and that's to stick with what you like and how you like to do it.Yes of course listen to everyone's views,process those idea's and discard the ones you think are irrelevant,and then move on.  

Stick to your chosen method and just try little tweeks every now and again to see if you can improve your results.

When you have tweeked as much as you possibly can,(and you are still losing),then, and only then, will it be the time to consider trying something else.

[MCLARKE]

2 hours ago, Systemight said:

Totally agree,that if you were to pick an odds on winner everyday, making a 10 point profit would be difficult,though not impossible.

But what if you started the first day/days of the monthly competition well and found a 7/1 winner or two 7/2 winners for example,putting you 7 points in profit.

One could argue that picking a long odds on shot everyday for the rest of the month after then to make a profit of 10 points is not really that daunting.

You may have noticed that a post of mine on this thread earlier today predicted two long odds on chances....and both won!

So if i can do it..:)

You are right, I think some people pick the obvious long odds on shots and on a day when there aren't any then they may go for a selection that gets them above 10 points and then for the rest of the month stick to the odds on selections.

I don't set out to win the KO cup, the month I won it previously I realised with a few days to go that I was the only one in the top few that had achieved the 10 points so for the last few days I went for the odds on shots.

This month I was fortunate enough to start the with 3 7/2 winners so was above the 10 points mark after 3 days. I then decided to go for the most winners comp.

It will be very rare this happens at the start of the month so it's not very often I will go for the most winners.

I'm not sure what the logic was for the comp, it was created before I started the admin, I vaguely remember the discussions but not the full justification for it.

[MCLARKE]

5 hours ago, The Equaliser said:

It is unrealistic to expect outsiders to win all of the races, especially with multiple bets like the Lucky 15.  I believe it is best to have a good mix of selections. That is my humble view

I think the wisest advice I have heard is not to look for winners but to look for value.

A 1/10 shot is good value if the true odds are 1/20 whereas a 100/1 shot is not value if it's true odds are 200/1.

 

[MCLARKE]

On Sunday @black rabbit picked ZIGGYS PHOENIX at 66/ 1winner

On Monday @luckypants picked EVELYN'S PHOENIX at 33/1 winner

 

Perhaps we are over complicating matters, just pick a horse with PHOENIX in it's name !

[The Equaliser]

52 minutes ago, MCLARKE said:

I think the wisest advice I have heard is not to look for winners but to look for value.

A 1/10 shot is good value if the true odds are 1/20 whereas a 100/1 shot is not value if it's true odds are 200/1.

 

I believe that the master of Lucky 15's @Zilzalian once said something along the lines of if you add the odds up and it is less than 28 then it is best just to have a win bet instead of each way.

Anyway, I thought that I would check to see if the probabilities change using various odds for selections when you select a total of say 28 to 1 for all four.

I tried to even out the odds thinking that I would have a better chance of getting all four in if I did so. I put the odds of 7/1 = 28 total in my calculator = 0.125 x 0.125 x 0.125 x 0.125 the answer came back 2.44140625 x10 negative 4 which I believe = 0.0000244140625.

I then put in the odds of 10/1, 2/1, 12/1 and 4/1 = 28/1 total = 0.91 x 0.333 x 0.077 x 0.2 the answer came back 4.666662 x 10 negative 3 which I believe = 0.0004666662

So, it looks like the old geezer's right that we should mix up some of the larger odds with the smaller odds to have a better chance of getting a winning return on all four.

At this point I fully expect @Valiant Thor to appear from the clouds and tell me that I have got it all wrong again.

However, this seems to be an interesting thought to sleep on

[ivans82]

Cannot believe  Vadream is 7=1 for the Temple Stakes at Haydock Saturday  .Weather warnings issued for today and tomorrow . This confirmed mudlark must be an ew steal .

[harry_rag]

11 hours ago, The Equaliser said:

Anyway, I thought that I would check to see if the probabilities change using various odds for selections when you select a total of say 28 to 1 for all four.

You've gone an extraordinarily long way around the houses to arrive at a fairly basic mathematical conclusion here! 

6 x 6 = 36, 8 x 4 = 32, 2 x 10 = 20

3 pairs of numbers that all add up to 12, the ones that are closest together have the greatest product. That's how multiplication works.

11 hours ago, The Equaliser said:

I tried to even out the odds thinking that I would have a better chance of getting all four in if I did so. I put the odds of 7/1 = 28 total in my calculator = 0.125 x 0.125 x 0.125 x 0.125 the answer came back 2.44140625 x10 negative 4 which I believe = 0.0000244140625.

I think you could do with getting a better calculator. Nothing too fancy, a £7 Casio job from Sainsburys would be fine. As it is, both your answers are wrong as you've got 1 too many zeroes after the decimal point. That said, why on earth did you do that calculation rather than just work out the accumulative odds? Four 7/1 shots gives you 4096 while your "mixed bag" gives you 2145. Surely comparing those numbers is easier and more relevant than the figures you've arrived at to multiple decimal places?

 

11 hours ago, The Equaliser said:

I believe that the master of Lucky 15's @Zilzalian once said something along the lines of if you add the odds up and it is less than 28 then it is best just to have a win bet instead of each way.

You may be right, it rings a bell. Similar to saying you'd want average odds of around 7/1. Perfectly sound as a rule of thumb. Personally I'd probably still be leaning towards the win only approach for 4 7/1 shots but each way would be more viable than for the mixed odds. I wouldn't be going e/w where the selections included a 2/1 shot but then I probably wouldn't bother with anything that short in a L15 full stop.

11 hours ago, The Equaliser said:

So, it looks like the old geezer's right that we should mix up some of the larger odds with the smaller odds to have a better chance of getting a winning return on all four.

I genuinely can't see any logical connection between the conclusion you've drawn here and some guidance on when to favour win only over each way! If you compare two L15s the one with the lowest acca odds is the one that's most likely to see all 4 come in; the one with the lowest priced selection is the one that's most likely to give you at least a single. If you're going to do a couple of L15s there may be some logic to having a mixture of odds in both rather than all the shorties in one and all the longshots in the other. If you just fancy 4 7/1 shots then stick them in a L15. Don't go off looking for other selections for the sake of varying the odds. That would be letting the tail wag the dog.

I think you've gone down a bit of a rabbit hole here (something I'm prone to do myself at times). If you're going to do a couple of L15s then by all means mix the odds up a bit but worry about the selections first and don't worry if you're fancied selections all come in at similar odds sometimes.

And get a calculator that didn't come out of a Christmas cracker! 

[The Equaliser]

45 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

You've gone an extraordinarily long way around the houses to arrive at a fairly basic mathematical conclusion here! 

6 x 6 = 36, 8 x 4 = 32, 2 x 10 = 20

3 pairs of numbers that all add up to 12, the ones that are closest together have the greatest product. That's how multiplication works.

I think you could do with getting a better calculator. Nothing too fancy, a £7 Casio job from Sainsburys would be fine. As it is, both your answers are wrong as you've got 1 too many zeroes after the decimal point. That said, why on earth did you do that calculation rather than just work out the accumulative odds? Four 7/1 shots gives you 4096 while your "mixed bag" gives you 2145. Surely comparing those numbers is easier and more relevant than the figures you've arrived at to multiple decimal places?

 

You may be right, it rings a bell. Similar to saying you'd want average odds of around 7/1. Perfectly sound as a rule of thumb. Personally I'd probably still be leaning towards the win only approach for 4 7/1 shots but each way would be more viable than for the mixed odds. I wouldn't be going e/w where the selections included a 2/1 shot but then I probably wouldn't bother with anything that short in a L15 full stop.

I genuinely can't see any logical connection between the conclusion you've drawn here and some guidance on when to favour win only over each way! If you compare two L15s the one with the lowest acca odds is the one that's most likely to see all 4 come in; the one with the lowest priced selection is the one that's most likely to give you at least a single. If you're going to do a couple of L15s there may be some logic to having a mixture of odds in both rather than all the shorties in one and all the longshots in the other. If you just fancy 4 7/1 shots then stick them in a L15. Don't go off looking for other selections for the sake of varying the odds. That would be letting the tail wag the dog.

I think you've gone down a bit of a rabbit hole here (something I'm prone to do myself at times). If you're going to do a couple of L15s then by all means mix the odds up a bit but worry about the selections first and don't worry if you're fancied selections all come in at similar odds sometimes.

And get a calculator that didn't come out of a Christmas cracker! 

Haha many thanks for your detailed analysis.  My calculator is a Casio FC -100v Financial Consultant  so I don't know why it should give out wrong results.  BTW it shows 7x7x7x7 = 2401 not 4096 as your one does.

The point I was trying to make was whether mixing up the odds from a total number of odds of 28 in different combinations altered the chances of success.  One would think that they would be the same.

I didn't mean to confuse the issue over when it is a good time to only do a win L15 or an ew L15.  I had just lost @Zilzalian's notes that's all.  Sorry about that.

I don't have much time this week but I am all about fun with the L15 bets these days.  I like to do four of them when there are a number of meetings at 1.50 a pop is only risking 6 points for 16 selections.  I am trying to avoid favourite selections that are less than 3/1 with a view to getting on at 7/2 or above if the prices change.  I generally work through the shortest price selections upwards from A- D so I have a mixed bag of prices for each L15.  When looking at a race my idea is to select a horse at the biggest price that has the best chance of winning

Many thanks for your thoughts

 

 

 

 

 

[MCLARKE]

I only back each way if there are extra places available or it is a 16+ runner handicaps. Whether the price is 4/1 5/1 or 100/1 is irrelevant

[harry_rag]

25 minutes ago, The Equaliser said:

BTW it shows 7x7x7x7 = 2401 not 4096 as your one does.

 That's because you should be doing 8x8x8x8 for 4 7/1 shots!

29 minutes ago, The Equaliser said:

The point I was trying to make was whether mixing up the odds from a total number of odds of 28 in different combinations altered the chances of success.  One would think that they would be the same.

One most definitely would not! That was the point of the simple 6x6 etc. comparison. Adding numbers together has very different outcomes to multiplying them! Let's say you had the 8 selections in your 2 L15s one day, if you put all the 7/1 shots together you'd get a better return from that one if all 4 came in but it would be less likely to happen. If you want to have 2 L15s with similar prospects of a full house then you need to mix the prices up accordingly (which it sound like you generally do).

I'd say carry on as you are in terms of mixing up the odds but try and get your head round the concept of why two sets of numbers aren't the same when multiplied out just because they add up to the same. 

 

[Zilzalian]

28 minutes ago, The Equaliser said:

Haha many thanks for your detailed analysis.  My calculator is a Casio FC -100v Financial Consultant  so I don't know why it should give out wrong results.  BTW it shows 7x7x7x7 = 2401 not 4096 as your one does.

The point I was trying to make was whether mixing up the odds from a total number of odds of 28 in different combinations altered the chances of success.  One would think that they would be the same.

I didn't mean to confuse the issue over when it is a good time to only do a win L15 or an ew L15.  I had just lost @Zilzalian's notes that's all.  Sorry about that.

I don't have much time this week but I am all about fun with the L15 bets these days.  I like to do four of them when there are a number of meetings at 1.50 a pop is only risking 6 points for 16 selections.  I am trying to avoid favourite selections that are less than 3/1 with a view to getting on at 7/2 or above if the prices change.  I generally work through the shortest price selections upwards from A- D so I have a mixed bag of prices for each L15.  When looking at a race my idea is to select a horse at the biggest price that has the best chance of winning

Many thanks for your thoughts

 

 

 

 

 

7x7x7x7 = 2,401. 7/1x7/1x7/1x7/1 =4,096 all 4 7/1 winners on a lucky 15 is 9x9x9x9 =6,561 ((knock the 1 off if it is a £1.00 for accuracy))

I have gone to great pains in the past to produce many explanations and a how to calculate a L15/31/63 post and posted them on this site it is a great pity that some people who are involved in the Lucky 15 thread didn't bother to read them properly because i specifically did them for the beginner. I tried searching for the table i posted but its like looking for a virgin girl in a brothel. Forget the odds, pick 4 horses that you think might win and as a rough guide if the odds add up to about 50 (in a discussion with the equaliser i dropped that to 30 to suit his fear of losing)  so at around 40-50 think about ew, any less down to 30 consider just adding an ew acca. below 30 forget the ew altogether Dead f'in simple.

[The Equaliser]

16 minutes ago, Zilzalian said:

7x7x7x7 = 2,401. 7/1x7/1x7/1x7/1 =4,096 all 4 7/1 winners on a lucky 15 is 9x9x9x9 =6,561 ((knock the 1 off if it is a £1.00 for accuracy))

I have gone to great pains in the past to produce many explanations and a how to calculate a L15/31/63 post and posted them on this site it is a great pity that some people who are involved in the Lucky 15 thread didn't bother to read them properly because i specifically did them for the beginner. I tried searching for the table i posted but its like looking for a virgin girl in a brothel. Forget the odds, pick 4 horses that you think might win and as a rough guide if the odds add up to about 50 (in a discussion with the equaliser i dropped that to 30 to suit his fear of losing)  so at around 40-50 think about ew, any less down to 30 consider just adding an ew acca. below 30 forget the ew altogether Dead f'in simple.

Many thanks; I have added this to my notes.  I shouldn't lose it this time

[Zilzalian]

10 minutes ago, The Equaliser said:

Many thanks; I have added this to my notes.  I shouldn't lose it this time

I think you might like to change the quote under your post it might give the impression to the novices on this site that you know what your talking about.

[The Equaliser]

2 hours ago, Zilzalian said:

I think you might like to change the quote under your post it might give the impression to the novices on this site that you know what your talking about.

I have cracked it.  If you use smaller odds you can prove that the sum total of odds is affected by a variation in the odds.

3/1 + 3/1 + 3/1 + 3/1 = 12  Implied probability = 0.25 x 0.25 x 0.25 x 0.25 = 0.000390625 or in terms of returns = 4 x 4 x 4x 4 = 256

2/1 + 3/1 +4/1 +3/1 = 12  Implied probability = 0.333 x 0.25 x 0.20 x 0.25 = 0.000416625 or in terms of returns = 3 x 4 x 5 x 4 = 240

Thus although the sum of the odds = 12 in both instances the second variant has a greater implied probability of winning but the return is less which is what one might expect.

I won't be changing my quote under my post as this is good advice even for someone like you 🙂

[Zilzalian]

1 hour ago, The Equaliser said:

I have cracked it.  If you use smaller odds you can prove that the sum total of odds is affected by a variation in the odds.

3/1 + 3/1 + 3/1 + 3/1 = 12  Implied probability = 0.25 x 0.25 x 0.25 x 0.25 = 0.000390625 or in terms of returns = 4 x 4 x 4x 4 = 256

2/1 + 3/1 +4/1 +3/1 = 12  Implied probability = 0.333 x 0.25 x 0.20 x 0.25 = 0.000416625 or in terms of returns = 3 x 4 x 5 x 4 = 240

Thus although the sum of the odds = 12 in both instances the second variant has a greater implied probability of winning but the return is less which is what one might expect.

I won't be changing my quote under my post as this is good advice even for someone like you 🙂

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  You need to stay off ChatGPT and go back to your abacus. As for "cracking it" stick to eggs. Btw it took you 2 years of denials and similar arguments to move from trixies to Lucky 15's and now all of a sudden your an expert? Go on Beaker tell us how much profit you have made from betting over the last 3 years excluding those KO cup 2/1 ew selections that is. For the record, The first part of your quote is for the most part plagiarised from my posts, the last line is plagiarised from MCLARKE.

[The Equaliser]

3 minutes ago, Zilzalian said:

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣  You need to stay off ChatGPT and go back to your abacus. As for "cracking it" stick to eggs. Btw it took you 2 years of denials and similar arguments to move from trixies to Lucky 15's and now all of a sudden your an expert? Go on Beaker tell us how much profit you have made from betting over the last 3 years excluding those KO cup 2/1 ew selections that is. For the record, The first part of your quote is for the most part plagiarised from my posts, the last line is plagiarised from MCLARKE.

You continue to be nasty; you need help.  I think it is interesting that a mix of the odds can change the probability of getting four winners with the same total number.  Your loss if you don't want to accept it.  The main reason I came off Trixies was to take advantage of a triple payout from Betfred for a single winner if the other three fail. I have an equal winning record of winning the KO cup and failed in my bid to have won it the most times since 2016.  I have time on my side to do just that.  I can give you tips on how to win it since you have not won it before, I believe.  I haven't plagiarised anything from you or Michael @mclarke intentionally.  Please detail the quotes.  Stop calling me Beaker, I am not a mug for you or anybody else.