You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
MULTI-PERM STRATEGY BENEFITS
StayOrGo
Member Posts: 12,181
Let me clear up some misconceptions regarding multi-perms over single banker/single perms, using a two perm/single perm example comparison.
PERM1: PERM2:
LEG 1: A (BANKER) A,B (Banker and short priced 2nd favourite)
LEG 2: A,B,C,D A,B,E
LEG 3: A,B,D A,C,E
LEG 4: A,B,C,E,F A,B,D
LEG 5: A,B,C,E,G A,B,D,F
LEG 6: A,C A,B
PERM 1 cost would be: 600 lines at 50P = £300.00
PERM 2 cost would be: 432 lines at 50P = £216.00
Total cost: £516.00
People have said to me, we should take a chance with just the banker, and just do the main perm with ALL the other selections, so we have full coverage in the other legs, thinking the cost would be similar.
THIS IS NOT TRUE: To do this the perm would be as follows:
LEG 1: A
LEG 2: A,B,C,D,E
LEG 3: A,B,C,D,E
LEG 4: A,B,C,D,E,F
LEG 5: A,B,C,D,E,F,G
LEG 6: A,B,C
3,150 lines at 50P. TOTAL COST = £1,575
So clearly the two perm option is cheaper (approx a third of the price in this scenario). It also gives us the following benefits:
1) Possibility of getting it for £1 when a lot of fancied horses come in and the dividend is low
2) The ability to cover more horses (in total)
3) Still be in if the banker loses.
4) Horses A,B and C would be towards the head of the market, D, E, F and G progressively more outsiders.
5) To SCOOP THE LOT we' probably need three or four from the A,B or C category and two or three from the D,E,F,G category. On some days we could still scoop the lot with just four from the A or B category and two from the C,D,E,F,G category.
Yes we could be unlucky and have four D,E,F,G category winners but this is less likely as it means four relative outsiders would need to win. We are looking for something like, two favourites in, a 2nd favourite, a 3rd favourite and a couple of horses priced 8/1 to 12/1. With this type of configuration it would likely mean that if we were to get it with the full banker perm we'd probably still get it with one of the two perm options.
I hope this helps to explain why, after further thought, I am beginning to favour the multi-perm options.
Statistically it is more viable, and in some ways gives us even more coverage in the other legs than we would get with the one banker, one perm option, which would need to be scaled back to meet costs.
Of course we could get unlucky and have all the selections but not in the same perm, however we still have reasonable statistical coverage at a third of the cost of the single perm and have some protection against the banker losing, and a possibility to get it for the full £1. I do feel this is the way to go, as it gives us more of a statistical "edge" imo.
Cheers,
PERM1: PERM2:
LEG 1: A (BANKER) A,B (Banker and short priced 2nd favourite)
LEG 2: A,B,C,D A,B,E
LEG 3: A,B,D A,C,E
LEG 4: A,B,C,E,F A,B,D
LEG 5: A,B,C,E,G A,B,D,F
LEG 6: A,C A,B
PERM 1 cost would be: 600 lines at 50P = £300.00
PERM 2 cost would be: 432 lines at 50P = £216.00
Total cost: £516.00
People have said to me, we should take a chance with just the banker, and just do the main perm with ALL the other selections, so we have full coverage in the other legs, thinking the cost would be similar.
THIS IS NOT TRUE: To do this the perm would be as follows:
LEG 1: A
LEG 2: A,B,C,D,E
LEG 3: A,B,C,D,E
LEG 4: A,B,C,D,E,F
LEG 5: A,B,C,D,E,F,G
LEG 6: A,B,C
3,150 lines at 50P. TOTAL COST = £1,575
So clearly the two perm option is cheaper (approx a third of the price in this scenario). It also gives us the following benefits:
1) Possibility of getting it for £1 when a lot of fancied horses come in and the dividend is low
2) The ability to cover more horses (in total)
3) Still be in if the banker loses.
4) Horses A,B and C would be towards the head of the market, D, E, F and G progressively more outsiders.
5) To SCOOP THE LOT we' probably need three or four from the A,B or C category and two or three from the D,E,F,G category. On some days we could still scoop the lot with just four from the A or B category and two from the C,D,E,F,G category.
Yes we could be unlucky and have four D,E,F,G category winners but this is less likely as it means four relative outsiders would need to win. We are looking for something like, two favourites in, a 2nd favourite, a 3rd favourite and a couple of horses priced 8/1 to 12/1. With this type of configuration it would likely mean that if we were to get it with the full banker perm we'd probably still get it with one of the two perm options.
I hope this helps to explain why, after further thought, I am beginning to favour the multi-perm options.
Statistically it is more viable, and in some ways gives us even more coverage in the other legs than we would get with the one banker, one perm option, which would need to be scaled back to meet costs.
Of course we could get unlucky and have all the selections but not in the same perm, however we still have reasonable statistical coverage at a third of the cost of the single perm and have some protection against the banker losing, and a possibility to get it for the full £1. I do feel this is the way to go, as it gives us more of a statistical "edge" imo.
Cheers,
Comments
Cheers,
G
Let me know if you still want your share. If not stop the Standing Order.
Clearly, your share is valid for tomorrow. Your disruptiveness to the process has pushed me too far.
Cheers,
G
I copy paste your post below, which strongly suggests you want a single perm with a banker.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"But oh dear are we going blind here.
First we were going for one banker but following on from my concerns re Dihat we went for 3 semi bankers. IT WORKED.
Could see the reason for having semi banker at Ludlow if Venetia's 5-2 second fav running against Azzurri but then when that taken out we put in a horse which was on a few removers list.
Now it seems we are going semi bankers whatever.
What I was trying to intimate with my post is that happy with DENAAR as banker but not the others for the sake of it."
but what if two of your suggested bankers are late non runners tomorrow. do you make the decision of the horses to replace them with BEcause you wont get that info from removers and certainly not Naps as with naps people go for value and not necessarily dead certs . Which was exactly your point on the Pick Seven and why you went for the naps table because "people who get bigger winners" should benefit more than just selecting winners. If you are at the bottom of a naps table you don't select odds on shots/certainties you select horse to get further Up the table.
You are a control freak and brilliant on stats but on horse racing and how it works you are an amateur.
GOOD LUCK TO YOU ALL , I HOPE YOU WIN REALLY BIG AND NOTE THE TIMINGS OF THE POSTS IF YOU THINK I AM THE GUILTY PARTY HERE . HE GOES OFF ON ONE BEFORE ACTUALLY READING WHAT PEOPLE say.
Have a feeling it will happen again or perhaps he only wants people in the syndicate who doe exactly as he says.
colon here , colon there in this way in that way. cause its MY WAY
Graham all the best and ok I was a bit harsh after you chucked me out but I repeat all I was trying to do with my comment that started all this off.
"Denaar 1 , I don't fancy the other two"
was to flag up I didn't think the other two were worthy of bankers
I will probably be proved wrong tomorrow
After you asked me to put them in right order I did.
Was still not enough for you
You need true bankers and true semi bankers and I just hope going forward you find a way to get them because if you don't your brilliant statistical work will amount to nothing.
As to my share keep it in the pot , I will cancel payment for June
Typically I will use a 3 perm strategy if there is no real strong odds-on shot in the card but where there are a few "shortish" priced favourites in three of the legs.
The benefits of this is similar to the two perm strategy.
In this instance, lets say we were to go for a one perm strategy with Denaar as a banker in the 5th leg and we wanted to include all the other horses in the perm, it would have to look like this:
LEG 1: A,B,C,D,E
LEG 2: A,B,C,D,E
LEG 3: A,B,C,D,E,F,G
LEG 4: A,B,C,D,E
LEG 5: A
LEG 6: A,B,C,D
This equals 5*5*7*5*1*4 = 3,500 lines at 50p = £1,750, which is out of our bankroll.
So doing it with three perms, the way shown below has similar benefits to the two perm strategy that I previously explained, not least that the cost is reduced to slightly over £600 and we are also not completely reliant on the main "banker" winning.
G