Monday, 9 May 2011

Phoenix from the flames.

A couple of months ago, when we were discussing the rationale behind dropping Sports Investor from the list of services followed, someone left a comment that at the time made me raise my eyebrows a little. It was a good point, succinctly made. The poster of the comment was of the opinion that a football service shouldn't be judged on the performance - or non-performance - of just one season, the insinuation being that such a time period isn't sufficient to make a rational and sound assessment. Consequently, if we were to stop following a service that had historically performed well but which had failed to deliver for nine months or so, then we should exercise a little more patience and allow that service time to rediscover it's mojo.

I still feel that the decision to drop Sports Investor from the portfolio was the correct one. Performance levels had slipped over a time period nearer to 18 months than nine and nothing has happened subsequently to produce any regret. But there are a couple of services which I have previously subscribed to which are enjoying something of a renaissance, and are certainly making me begin to rue the day I jettisoned them from the portfolio.

The first of these is On The Oche. Since the start of this year, the official figures state that there have been 27 bets, 16 wins, 26.25 points staked and a profit of 11.57 points at an roi of 44% (you can have a look at the results here: I remember Matt, who runs the admin side of the service, pointing out that On The Oche was dropped from the SBC Hall of Fame after performance levels had dropped off significantly over a 12 month period, but that the actual number of bets in that time weren't that many. One might reasonably ask if enough bets were struck in those twelve months or so to allow proper provision for the effects of natural variance. In other words, was the decision to remove On The Oche from the Hall of Fame a little hasty?

To be fair to the SBC, I think the very fact that there were so relatively few bets was a major consideration in withdrawing Hall of Fame status, and of course if there are other, busier services out there producing the goods? Well, you can see why the decision was made. But what of OTO now? It looks like Rich is beginning to display his ability to find an edge which personally speaking, I am sure he has never lost. Here is a high strike rate service, demonstrating again an ability to hit high levels of roi, that via previous SBC monitoring we know to be ethically and professionally run. Makes you think, doesn't it?

The other service in recovery mode that I have noticed recently is Punter Profits NH. After years of producing an roi of 20%+, they suffered a dreadful time of it for over a year. But looking at the Racing Proofing website ( their last six months shows a 27.4 point profit at an roi of 13.77%. This doesn't include April's figures - anybody know how it went for them? But regardless, the ability to make a consistent profit again is being demonstrated. I appreciate that there are other factors related to PP NH that led to a decision to stop following, not least of which was that it became apparent that no real audit of the systems had been or was being carried out, even when things started to go wrong. But, like OTO, we have here a service with a strong long-term performance, which has endured a bad time of it, but looks to be making a recovery.

It will be interesting to monitor from afar just how strong the recoveries of these two services prove to be. If the recovery periods stretch so that they become less a recovery and more like the long term norm, that should cause us all to ask some fairly serious questions of ourselves when it comes to our punting.

I'm not losing sight of the fact that a line has to be drawn somewhere when a service loses over a relatively lengthy period of time. But the ongoing performance of OTO and PP NH is going to make for interesting viewing. I wonder what their attitude is to prodigal sons?

Today's Action

Only racing today.

Neither of the two PJA NH selections was a winner, although one managed a place, which was a half step better than the performance of the two Northern Monkey tips.

A good day for ProBandit today, finding the two winners of both races played in - one NQ bet (Miss Bounty - Brighton - 9/2) and the other a System bet (Piazza San Pietro - Brighton - 9/4). Each winner was dutched, but a nice profit secured nonetheless.

Finally, a small bet on an outsider from Winning Racing Tips produced no return.

PJA NH: Staked 1.5pts, -0.975pts.
Northern Monkey: Staked 2pts, -2pts.
ProBandit: Staked 2.25pts, +1.562pts.
Winning Racing Tips: Staked 0.3pts, -0.3pts.
Total financial loss on the racing of £15.

Monday 9th May: Staked £178, -£15.
Week to date: Staked £178, -£15.
Month to date: Staked £3,432, +£974.56, roi 28.39%.

There were two Racing Trends lays today, only one of which was successful but at the odds it provided a profit of 25.37% on the day. Full results: Lays (place) 9, Successful 6 (66.66%), roi 17.59%.

Might just be a results post tomorrow. Quite interested in the Spurs/City match.


  1. There's an interesting report that talks about a similar kind of thing from a traditional investment point of view:-

    Obviously I'm incredibly biased but i think people underestimate the effect luck has in the short term. You can get odds of 2.2 on heads in a coin toss but you
    still need the luck for it to actually land on heads enough times in the medium to short term to make a profit.

    Rich is really good at identifying say a 50/50 game that has been priced at
    2.2/1.8 but he still needs a bit of luck to actually get the winners especially with darts being a game decided by the width of a fly's eyelash!

    Dont want to sound like I'm just plugging my service, it's the same for any service that's got a long term proven record (equine, gregs Scottish bets, skeeve etc) they are worth sticking with over the years.

    Matt - FE (can only post a comment as anonymous)

  2. Cheers, Matt.

    I'll take a look at that article at lunchtime.

    "I still feel that the decision to drop Sports Investor from the portfolio was the correct one."

    Reading that back in this context, I'm not so confident now!

    Like you say, in darts the margins between getting a call right or wrong is incredibly thin. People say the same about football and I think that's true to an extent. The width of the post and all that. But in darts it seems that those marginal calls - whether the dart is on the right or wrong side of the wire - happen with far more frequency. I could be wrong. It's just the impression I get.