Derek27 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2018 1:53 pm
Anna List wrote: ↑Thu Jan 18, 2018 7:05 pm
I don't know the first thing about trading ..... AND THAT'S WHY I DON'T TRADE
With respect Anna, if you don't know the first thing about trading you should not be advising traders about how much to stake!!!
I don't know how or where you got the impression that I let trades go in-play? Are you confusing me with the OP?
What you don't understand, because you are not a trader, is that exposure isn't anywhere near as important as your level of risk - they are not the same!
For example, if you back Brain Power in the Clarence House Chase for £50 @ 4.0, you have an exposure of £50 and a risk of £50. If you put your order in at 12.0, your exposure is £50 but your risk is almost zero, because there's virtually no chance of getting that bet matched. So your risk depends on where you choose to enter the market and the nature / stability of the market. It cannot easily be calculated but experienced traders will have good judgement of it.
Anna List wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2018 7:44 am
'If you win all the time .....' IF ONLY. If you won all of the time, there wouldn't be a problem and we wouldn't be discussing the issue. I'm basing my staking plan on reality. You are basing your comments on what?
Sorry, but if I won all the time it would not solve all the worlds problems, other people would still have problems so we would still be discussing this. I was simply saying that numbers can't be divided by zero.
Anna List wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2018 7:44 am
If you let your unmatched trades go in play with an exposure of £28.50, you won't have lost £2 during your losing run, will you?
I haven't a clue what you're talking about here. We are not talking about letting trades go in-play but how much liability you should expose yourself to. It's perfectly possible to have a trading strategy with long losing runs where you only lose a few quid but has good results on your winning markets (such as free bet strategies), but that's something you wouldn't understand because you have no experience of trading. Your staking plan would only restrict profits because it considers losing runs without considering how much they actually cost.
To illustrate the point, albeit artificially, imagine a trader who greens up for £9.95, and then puts £10 on the favourite. A losing run could cost 5 pence a time but a winner could net £50.
Anna List wrote: ↑Fri Jan 19, 2018 7:44 am
Anyways, be a trader, let your unmatched trades go in play with an overly exposed bank. Knock yourself out. It ain't my money. Why should I care?
Thank you for the advice but I'll stick to what I'm doing.
When I was gambling I used the Kelly criterium as a framework to my staking. If your stake is proportional to your bank it doen't matter how long your losing runs are. It will reduce losses for losers and increase profits for winners.
Derek, next time, BEFORE you comment, at least have the decency to READ my post.
If a trader allows a trade to go in play, then that isn't trading, is it? It's backing or laying, unless, of course you intend to complete the trade in-running. But then, that's gambling.
It's this type of bettor that my post was aimed at AND, I made that perfectly clear. I didn't suggest that the comments were aimed at you. If you can't read properly or understand, that's not my fault.
My comments weren't aimed at anyone in particular. Nor were they aimed at genuine TRADERS. They were aimed at anyone who trades but allows their unmatched bets to go in play in order to avoid a loss because the trade goes against you.
Why, if you aren't trading, aren't you closing out trades pre-off and taking the relatively small loss? Is it because your bank is overly exposed and therefore your loss isn't going to be relatively small? In which case, there's the real problem - an overly exposed bank.
To such people, all I would say is, if you are prepared to allow an unmatched bet to go in play, then do not over-expose your bank and, for goodness sake, learn something about horses and racing. Don't take the risk. It's this kind of activity that leads to loss-recovery and catastrophic losses.
Derek, if this upsets you - fine. Be upset. You have that right. Don't expect me to care though because, quite frankly, I don't.
Have a nice day.
I won't be back.