On The Bridle
At the Start
Seriously good read....a must for anyone who wants to make a profit betting. I know a few here have read it already....I read it this evening. Excellent insight to the mans thinking.
Kevin Blake's Book: It can be Done
- Thread starter On The Bridle
- Start date
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
From the Irish Field :
"Kevin’s unusual mix of professional experience as both a high-level form analyst and assistant trainer has led to him having many thought-provoking theories on racing which he shares throughout the book. In particular, his controversial and informed views on the value of inside information, his rejection of each-way betting and forthright assessments of the psychological requirements to be a successful punter are sure to provoke much debate and discussion".
Ordinarily, I swerve these accounts of somebody else's betting ups-and-downs over a season, but if I find this in my Christmas stocking on the morning of Dec25th I will read it.
Kevin Blake is a sound man and always worth a listen.
"Kevin’s unusual mix of professional experience as both a high-level form analyst and assistant trainer has led to him having many thought-provoking theories on racing which he shares throughout the book. In particular, his controversial and informed views on the value of inside information, his rejection of each-way betting and forthright assessments of the psychological requirements to be a successful punter are sure to provoke much debate and discussion".
Ordinarily, I swerve these accounts of somebody else's betting ups-and-downs over a season, but if I find this in my Christmas stocking on the morning of Dec25th I will read it.
Kevin Blake is a sound man and always worth a listen.
C
CPGagie
Guest
http://www.farmersjournal.com/store/productDetail.php?c=4&p=4141
I have my doubt's he'd have said this after the inevitable run of 2nd, 3rds and losers.
"rejection of each-way betting and forthright assessments of the psychological requirements to be a successful punter"
Sounds like he had a nice and perhaps fortunate 20 weeks gambling. Will he be singing the same tune with another decade under his belt, or will he become more versatile in his betting?
I have my doubt's he'd have said this after the inevitable run of 2nd, 3rds and losers.
"rejection of each-way betting and forthright assessments of the psychological requirements to be a successful punter"
Sounds like he had a nice and perhaps fortunate 20 weeks gambling. Will he be singing the same tune with another decade under his belt, or will he become more versatile in his betting?
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
Yes, and I wouldn't be surprised if the title of his new book is a middle-finger to, and a parody of, the influx of muppets on there with their regular catchphrase -- "It can't be done".
Simpson Jersey
At the Start
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2012
- Messages
- 1,219
How many pages in this book, or chapters please, considering you read it in an evening. Would most of his bets be on Irish racing,(which i don't know much about to be honest). Thinking of ordering.
Colin Phillips
At the Start
154 pages.
EC1
On a break
what is exactly being "done"...making it pay for 20 weeks?
Irish Stamp
Forum Moderator
It's a play on an old Betfair Forum joke regarding making it pay punting on horse racing.
Not ordered it as yet but it should be an interesting read, would love to get a hundredth of what KB gets on with Ladbrokes though.
Not ordered it as yet but it should be an interesting read, would love to get a hundredth of what KB gets on with Ladbrokes though.
F
FrogTheBountyMuncher
Guest
Can it be done? I guess, 99% of bettors take in under 16000 a year, defeats the purpose when highstreet wages are 16000 upwards. It's quite a seedy profession, lazy way out of trying to achieve a career in life, most punters I know who are on it 7 days a week have no qualifications and its probably their way out in life, if you come from a middle/high class background and punt for a living then you're a fool
You can make a decent living off trading, a recognised industry an well respected living, I normally make £100 a day just trading on APPL for 10pts swing just after midday once novices have gone home, propriety trading late in the day is easy if you got the time
You can make a decent living off trading, a recognised industry an well respected living, I normally make £100 a day just trading on APPL for 10pts swing just after midday once novices have gone home, propriety trading late in the day is easy if you got the time
The blurb I read said "made A fortune in 20 weeks".
Rarely buy racing books, but I've long felt that punting psychology has more bearing on success than staking, value seeking and the host of others many pay lip service to, and I ordered it this morning.
Rarely buy racing books, but I've long felt that punting psychology has more bearing on success than staking, value seeking and the host of others many pay lip service to, and I ordered it this morning.
On The Bridle
At the Start
On The Bridle
At the Start
You will enjoy it Reet
Last edited:
EC1
On a break
I'll get a copy
just think 20 weeks isn't long..i've had runs longer than that where i can do little wrong..then the opposite ..where i am still doing similar picks
discipline & temperament are the most important aspects if you want to make a living imo.
i wonder if its ever possible to think you have a long term plan that works..doubt creeps in with me even when i'm doing well
i think one thing i have learned is that you have to wait to play..if you want to make consistent profits..use it like a tool you only use when required...if you must play everyday then use very small stakes..then the occasions when everything is aligned ..go in big
i've always been very interested in the analysing side..and never given the necessary attention to the staking/discipline side
just think 20 weeks isn't long..i've had runs longer than that where i can do little wrong..then the opposite ..where i am still doing similar picks
discipline & temperament are the most important aspects if you want to make a living imo.
i wonder if its ever possible to think you have a long term plan that works..doubt creeps in with me even when i'm doing well
i think one thing i have learned is that you have to wait to play..if you want to make consistent profits..use it like a tool you only use when required...if you must play everyday then use very small stakes..then the occasions when everything is aligned ..go in big
i've always been very interested in the analysing side..and never given the necessary attention to the staking/discipline side
On The Bridle
At the Start
He's very clear on discipline and keeping emotions in check - it's for the Irish Flat season 2013 - about 55 bets in that period mostly bets of 1k stg at a time with Ladbrokes early prices...3 wins account for 80% of his final profit...
The worst thing this book will do is endorse your good habits and seriously question your bad ones....
He never bets in higher grade races or national hunt interestingly
The worst thing this book will do is endorse your good habits and seriously question your bad ones....
He never bets in higher grade races or national hunt interestingly
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
Really? I've heard him on a couple of podcasts talking about NH.
S
SlimChance
Guest
He's certainly on his own the way he's doing things. He's not always beating the price either. I'm not surprised Ladbrokes use him as a mark give.n his style.
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
Got it on order. It won't be as good as Alan Potts' but I hope it's better than the Nevison one I read a few years back.
S
SlimChance
Guest
He criticises Nevision and others in the book.
Harbinger
At the Start
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2004
- Messages
- 11,282
He mentions in the book that he loves NH and follows/analyses it but doesn't bet seriously on it. Too heavily analysed by others for him to find a consistent edge.
S
SlimChance
Guest
As a man that likes statistics do you feel Blake has provided enough bets to prove anything?
Harbinger
At the Start
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2004
- Messages
- 11,282
(You did ask)
I've only read the first 4 or 5 chapters so far so I don't know if he goes through it in detail later, but based on the proofed results at the back of the book:
He only had 56 bets, so normally you'd think "small sample size!" but you have to remember that he specifically chose the bets from a potentially massive number of possible bets. That's his skill; narrowing down the opportunities and rooting out the value.
He backed all but two of them for £1k, so he gave each selection the same value; we don't need to take into account the idea that he was more confident in some than others (even if that was actually the case). They all passed his threshold for what constitutes a bet.
13 of the horses won. It so happened that the 13 winners gave him a profit of £44,500.
So lets say 13 winners was his true strike rate (more on this later). That, given random chance, his skill allowed him 13 winners from his 56 selections. Where random chance comes in is *which* of the 13 winners would win.
How many different ways can you have 13 winners from 56 selections? Just short of 2 trillion.
Here's the thing - his worst case scenario, in which his shortest 13 bets win, would only have left him with a loss of £1500. So the number of ways he could have lost money with that strike rate (13/56) at the prices he was playing is vanishingly small.
Was he lucky to win as much as he did given that strike rate? I simulated 100,000 trials where 13 of the runners he backed were randomly picked as winners, and the rest were called losers. He wins at least £44,500 around 54% of the time. So actually he was a little bit unlucky in terms of which horses won, but not much. The break-even amount, i.e. the amount he should win more than 50% of the time, is around £46,000.
So the other question is, was he simply lucky to get 13 winners?
Here are the amounts (to the nearest £1k) he could have expected to win around 50% of the time for a given number of winners from the 56 bets:
13 winners: £46,000
12 winners: £38,000
11 winners: £30,000
10 winners: £22,000
9 winners: £14,000
8 winners: £6,000
7 winners: -£2,000
So for every 1 less winner he has, his profit drops by £8k. His strike rate would almost have to halve before he makes a loss.
Then again maybe he was unlucky to only win 13 of the bets...
I've only read the first 4 or 5 chapters so far so I don't know if he goes through it in detail later, but based on the proofed results at the back of the book:
He only had 56 bets, so normally you'd think "small sample size!" but you have to remember that he specifically chose the bets from a potentially massive number of possible bets. That's his skill; narrowing down the opportunities and rooting out the value.
He backed all but two of them for £1k, so he gave each selection the same value; we don't need to take into account the idea that he was more confident in some than others (even if that was actually the case). They all passed his threshold for what constitutes a bet.
13 of the horses won. It so happened that the 13 winners gave him a profit of £44,500.
So lets say 13 winners was his true strike rate (more on this later). That, given random chance, his skill allowed him 13 winners from his 56 selections. Where random chance comes in is *which* of the 13 winners would win.
How many different ways can you have 13 winners from 56 selections? Just short of 2 trillion.
Here's the thing - his worst case scenario, in which his shortest 13 bets win, would only have left him with a loss of £1500. So the number of ways he could have lost money with that strike rate (13/56) at the prices he was playing is vanishingly small.
Was he lucky to win as much as he did given that strike rate? I simulated 100,000 trials where 13 of the runners he backed were randomly picked as winners, and the rest were called losers. He wins at least £44,500 around 54% of the time. So actually he was a little bit unlucky in terms of which horses won, but not much. The break-even amount, i.e. the amount he should win more than 50% of the time, is around £46,000.
So the other question is, was he simply lucky to get 13 winners?
Here are the amounts (to the nearest £1k) he could have expected to win around 50% of the time for a given number of winners from the 56 bets:
13 winners: £46,000
12 winners: £38,000
11 winners: £30,000
10 winners: £22,000
9 winners: £14,000
8 winners: £6,000
7 winners: -£2,000
So for every 1 less winner he has, his profit drops by £8k. His strike rate would almost have to halve before he makes a loss.
Then again maybe he was unlucky to only win 13 of the bets...
S
SlimChance
Guest
Outstanding! Thanks very much Gareth.
Is there any website(s) or recommended reading I could use to get my head further around using statistics for calculating the profitability of betting records?
.
Last edited: