[AusRace] Risk avoiders

[philip jackson]

Terry,

   For Kelly C the limit is the bets chance of winning. For a 50% chance at 1000/1 the bet size is
49.95% of your betting bank, you can see why intelligent guessers go broke. 



--- terry styles  wrote:

> Hi Len and all,
> 
> In your reply you touched upon an area of interest to myself and I suspect 
> many others. That is the order of magnitude of a mistake, or mistakes, in a 
> betting market and how the degree of the mistake relates to long term 
> profitability.
> 
> Kelly betting suggests that the bigger the mistake the more to bet but I am 
> not so sure that there is a straight line, or even logarythmic relationship 
> ocurring. While I do think the most profit occurs from the most extreme 
> mistakes ( eg my example of the older second up street fighter, Willoughby, 
> at 35/1 plus up against the picket fence form young pretender ) these occur 
> but afew times a year andsample size is too small.
> 
> Putting aside the extreme cases what do people  see as being best in terms 
> of overall profitability - are the 5% mistakes the best, the 10%, the 20% 
> the 100% etc ( I put the Willoughby mistake at more than a 1000% mistake ).
> 
> I suspect those that back only favs will say the 5% to 10% mistakes as will 
> the arbs but to have a proper view one needs to have kept records on the 
> whole probability curve.
> 
> Terry


Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com