Can Someone explain "dutch" betting please?

[youngtag]

Can Someone explain "dutch" betting please

[presto]

dutch betting (dutching) - is selecting more than 1 selection in a particular event. eg - picking 3 horses in 1 race. and then splitting the stake so that if one of the 3 horses win's you will win on the race.

you will need a dutching calculator for this.

there was a post on this quite recently - i will see if i can dig it out.

[presto]

http://www.win2win.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=31337&highlight=dutching

[youngtag]

Thanks for that Presto, I suspected as much but wasn't sure. On a different note entirely I'm emabarking on this system where you lay favs no bigger than say 2.6, 2.7 and if it loses you double up your stake.
I know this doubling up of stake is nothing new but what do you think? As long as bank doesn't break theory seems to be sound

[presto]

to be honnest i havn't much looked into laying fav's then doubling up. but i would be very wary, i have no idea of the stat's but i think it would be safe to assume that FAV winning runs will quite often go to 6+. and a lay to recoup 6 losing lays would be quite a hefty liability (even starting with low stakes).
before starting i would look up stats for fav's and look for the longest winning run (then add a couple to be safe), then look at the odd's (add 10% - as you will be laying at higher prices on betfair), and see what the liability would be after a long winning run.
- this will give you some idea of how big a bank you will need and how low the (starting) stake will need to be.

[Win2Win]

I can remember a winning run of 14, but their have been longer....you'd need a bank of about £100,000 at £1 stakes to cover it , but you'd have to be prepared to lose that bank :)

[youngtag]

Thanks for the posts guys. I should mention that the recommendations aren't purely on the basis of price, otherwise you could make the case for either backing or laying the selections. The selections are based on the usual factors, form, ground, competition etc etc.

The theory also suggests that after doubling up for the 4th time that you should go back to your original base bet. I subscribed to the win2win service for a while and only stopped because I went away travelling, nothing to do with the quality of the service. The main reason I subscribed to being with is because I had followe the forum and free tips and was happy with the integrity of what was being offered above all else. However, I found that to do the pro losers properly was quite time consuming. I used to work for a betting exchange and spent half my day doing the pro losers which didn't go down to well with the boss! Having said that there can be no arguing with the results.

I am by my nature a bit of a kamakase merchant when it comes to gambling. The reason I like the theory outlined previously is that you can make quick money and as long as you don't blow the bank too soon you should have enough to cover the losing run.

Keith, have you ever actually tried doing this based on your knowledge of horses AND the staking plan. I would love if you did it on a test basis just to see what would happen, or are you too long in this game to even bother?

[youngtag]

I should mention that the base bet is 10% of the bank

[MarcusMel]

Quick money is a BIG GAMBLE and I'm not sure it can ever be done safly.

Laying at 2's should give you similar odds/results to that of a roulette wheel.

You are better off looking for a way of making selections with a known SR and then trying to get a false price on most of the lays during running. Just try and make sure that you are making more than you lose over 30 bets and you should be able to continue on profts alone.

[Win2Win]

I test everything I can. I usuallly have 100+ systems under automated paper test, with various staking plans.

You will break the bank at some point though unless your starting with stakes, however with Betfair minimum at £2, you'd honestly need a bank of a good few grand, and be prepared to lose it.

As Vegy pointed out something similar in the past in sarcasm, you may at some point be laying £250 @ 2.0 to win £2!!!!!!

[youngtag]

I test everything I can. I usuallly have 100+ systems under automated paper test, with various staking plans.

You will break the bank at some point though unless your starting with stakes, however with Betfair minimum at £2, you'd honestly need a bank of a good few grand, and be prepared to lose it.

As Vegy pointed out something similar in the past in sarcasm, you may at some point be laying £250 @ 2.0 to win £2!!!!!!

I don't really understand the above, I presume the last comment is just a typo or else you don't understand the general premise of what the system is all about. You will never be laying a selection to win a small amount, rather if there is a long losing run you will be laying to win a large amount. Is the above a typo?

[bigcumba]

Is the above a typo?

no, what Keith means is, say for instance your aim is to make "£2 profit, after a losing run, you will be laying £250 or more to win that £2 profit plus the amount you have already lost. It's what happens with all loss chasing systems, and usually what also happens is you lose all your money..... very dangerous type pf staking plan and not recommended!

[Win2Win]

When laying you are backing odds-on for the vast majority of the time, this means after each loser for you, in order to recover losses, and make a profit, your ROI% becomes much less than a TSB current account interest for a day!!!

[youngtag]

What about an alternative staking system. Instead of laying all the advice just stop at a winner and only double up if the first one wins?

[tophatter]

Why are people so keen to avoid losing a pound anyway? One thing I have learnt is that losing is unaviodable, much better to buld that into your system and just accept it. Once you start trying to erradicate losing short term you end up losing long term if that makes any sense?

[bigcumba]

What about an alternative staking system. Instead of laying all the advice just stop at a winner and only double up if the first one wins?

As Keith always says, why stop at a winner? You could be losing out big time if you do that.... System betting doesn't take into account each day as a separate entity - they are always ongoing - losing and winning runs can span days at a time, so using stop at a winner doesn't make sense long term.

[Win2Win]

I love 'stop-at-a-winner', especially watching their faces after they've stopped when the 1/2 fav goes in, only to see the remaining selections they didn't back come in at 50/1 each :laugh

[bigcumba]

Exactly!:D

[tophatter]

Stop at winner should be renamed stop gambling.

Take it to its logical conclusion. A day is just a measurement of time, so why not employ stop at a winner over a period of a week, month or year? You are actually just relying on luck with the price of that first winner, it spells near certain failure over a long period of time. All these things look attractive when looking at things short term but again you are trying to minimize the amount of losing bets rather than maximise the amount of winning bets with basically a lucky dip

[Win2Win]

A day is just a measurement of timeYour so intelligent :D

[tophatter]

Your so intelligent :D

I know! :laugh

Seriously though, when it comes to betting I try to stay as simple as possible. Its when you try to be clever you mess it up. There are people on here 10 times better at picking winning horses and reading form than me - they wipe the floor with me. I know my strengths and my weaknesses and all I do is play to my strengths. :wink