Thanks Bubbles, it’s a personal thing, whatever works for the individual. Just being systematic is too dry for me, but treating action bets for what they are is important for the way I bet personally now.

It definitely does remove the emotion, which is both a good and a bad thing for me. Since thinking about this article I’ve done an action bet reset and am basically using non-system data (i.e. using reports data from this site) to pick some action bets. Data that generally isn’t strong enough to build an angle around but still indicates above average performance. I can then apply a bit of subjective filter and get the best of both. It’s working thus far! Early days though.

I’ve made a profit every year for at least 15 years now by adopting a systematic/formulaic/statistical way of betting and if I’ve multiple qualifiers in the same race, I back them all if the fit the rules of the system they’ve come from.

thanks Legsy, interesting thoughts. I’ve looked at a few things over time including the 100/1000 stated. Never hugely been comfortable about varying stakes but on the back of this article/comments I’m going to do some reading / testing over the xmas break. Although in honesty, quite happy with level(ish) for now but if I understand the mathematical reasons for changing and it’s simple then evolution may happen!

Hi, so I have qualms about backing multiple horses in the same race as long as there is some value in doing so. For example, if I had 4 qualifiers in a race all priced say 8/1 or larger I’d still back them. 2 qualifiers in a race priced 6/4 and 9/4 I’d leave alone. 2 qualifiers priced 2/1 and 12/1 I’d back both. No hard and fast rules but that’s the kind of framework I use.

Suggest you evaluate a simple but perhaps more effective staking plan.
There’s a maxim that you should have more on longer priced animals because, I think, you have found an unpopular angle.
Just as a bookmaker tries to lay every horse to “take out” a theoretical 100, back your horses to win,say, a theoretical 1000 eg 170 on 5/1, 400 on 6/4.
If you manage a random sample, it would be interesting to hear results. All the best, Legsy.

With the angles-based approach, how do you manage the situation when there are multiple selections in one race?