I was thinking about all this tonight....

Suppose a card counter has a 3% edge over the house! So the guy is likely to win $9 for every $100 he throws over the table.

Now let's say the guy is playing and is down about 2k after some pretty bad cards. Would this not be a great time for the casino to ban this player from ever playing BJ with them again. The guy is expected to win long-term but now the casino has him by the proverbials. This would be the ideal time in my opinion for the casino to execute their own 'hit and run' policy.

The same thing happens in sports betting. Trading decisions are made to terminate an account even if the player has had a few losing bets based on the players MO. This also strikes me as a kind of 'hit and run' policy to limit potential damage further down the line.

I am getting to my point.......

So the gambler who is playing a negative expectation game and who is up a certain sum of units may decide to execute his own 'hit and run' strategy just based on the fact that he has hit a nice positive swing and does not want to push his luck and face the inevitable 'gamblers ruin'. You could argue that the more times you do this could save you money in the long run.

(I don't think this is going to fly but thought I would share it anyway) 

Quote from: monaco on December 21, 2012, 05:51:41 PM

Also read the Betfair forum page on Laddies & 365, do you ever feel this is a hard way to make an easy living??

I don't think there is an easy way to make money at gambling. I would say the majority of the 1 or 2% who do make money from it are obsessed and would get a shock if they broke down the winnings into an hourly rate.

Here is wishing your Mother a very speedy recovery Proof.

Bubbly Bailey finished 9th. 

This one never drifted in the market and hovered around the 5/1 mark for most of the day.  I don't think it was wanted today as it was beaten after about 3 furlongs never getting in a blow!

I thought this was an interesting thread to start because it is not really just a system as such.

The markets have always been manipulated by the big players for their own ends.

Now why go to the trouble of studying form when you can let the 'experts' do it for you.

All you then need to do is learn to read the signals.

I joined a racing forum a few years ago because they had a casino section. They wanted to burn me at the stake after I tried to explain a few of my ideas 

They told me roulette was a negative expectation game! 

That I could never win at the game! 

So I went over to read what they had to offer! It was the biggest load of curve fitted nonsense that I had ever seen. I got banned after telling them that. 

I have a book on an old hard drive which was going to be published some time ago about horseracing and how to read the markets. It was actually banned from publication. The major bookmakers in the UK took out an injunction because they did not want this information made available to the general public. It did go into great detail about the relationships between different factions in racing and spelled things out pretty clear. That PC crashed but I will take the hard drive out and see if I can retrieve the data. I will put that up here if the hard drive was not damaged and the file lost.

All gambling is not really as it appears. At least that's the way I look at it now.

Casinos and bookmakers are offering you a losing proposition if you follow the herd.

It really is a case of developing your own style and playing a different kind of game to everyone else if you want to come out on top.

cheers

The lay today is 'Bubbly Bailey' in the 13.35 at Lingfield.

That's a good idea Wannawin

I was thinking something similar the other day. I had in mind something like 'system of the week' where it could be explained and then tested. It could then be given a rating by the testers. That would then build up a nice library of systems which had some research behind them. I suppose it would be easy enough to setup. Let the members who want to participate put their name down and then randomly pick one members name out of the hat each week. We can all learn something from each others ideas. 

I hope you are right AMK 

It's well into the 21st down under and they are still all there! 

I think it's fair to say that was a definate non-trier.

Drifted from 13/2 out to 10/1 a few minutes before the race and it finished nowhere. 

Laddies knew about that one. 

Hello guys

I have added Stetson's book to my dropbox account just in case any of you are wondering what the fuss is about.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/zmwixa1giyo9rsm/Stetson%20Bailey.pdf?m

Ignore the Craps title. This can be applied to most things! 

It would appear that Ertikaan is not going to be very busy in the 14.00 at Lingfield this afternoon. I will be laying it to win a few pounds.

One of my favourite gambling authors Stetson Bailey says you have to accept the fact that you are going to have more losing bets than winning bets. He then goes on to say that you will need to find a way to have more money on the winning bets to make up for the higher percentage of losing bets. So you would have to use some kind of progressive betting if old Stetson is correct.

One thing I have learned through experience is that there is never really a right or wrong way. (Or maybe a better way of putting that is that it does not pay to have too much of an extreme view one way or the other when it comes to gambling. ie.. bet selection vs progressions) The truth normally is somewhere in the middle. It would be beneficial to understand the benefits of both bet selection and good MM. They can both be used to good effect.

Welcome to the forum HoneyBooBoo. 

This is a very interesting thread regarding Ladbrokes and Bet365 trying to discourage the arbers. It is proving profitable to follow.

http://community.betfair.com/horse_racing/go/thread/view/94102/29510953/365-and-laddies-stoop-to-new-caped-crusader-low?pg=1

I will put you all out of your misery!

Number 10 is the only number on the single zero roulette wheel which has a number of both lower value and higher value on either side!

Oh well! Looks like I get to keep the prize!