I still think this Paretto has got legs. Now, its evolved a bit from my first post after mr Privateer's old threads became the focus.

I have noted all the inputs from forum members trying to remember his old threads and have come to this opinion at this time.

Correct me if I am wrong but for future research I am going to make a few assumption and trat each as a starting point. For now, I would like to base his plan around what I suppose I can call assumption no1. This may give us a starting point and allow a more methodical approach instead of being all over the place.

Others on here may have a different idea of where to start, feel free to change or alter but bear in mind that I guess their are a few assumptions to go after No 1 and they mcould be followed up to.

Now these assumptions are not in any order, and maybe one is no more important then the other but we have to start somewhere so the beginning is a very good place to start.

ASSUMPTION NO 1

I summed up Privateer's thread based on the information supplied by those who were around at that time. If I have not understood it correctly pleas chime in.

Others had said that Privateer was heavy into place betting and it may be possible his staking of 1 win x 3 place was because his Paretto plan was based on Place betting with an edge ( the $1 ) win part rather then a win system with a ( $3 ) place saver.

This is my Assumption No 1. It is said that he had a bet of $600 win $1800 place on at least one bet. Also it is stated that he had a P.O.T of 25%

I think the above paragraph might have a key part to play in our research plus their is that little thing about what the missing mystery 92% factor was all about. Our Privateer did talk in riddles. For our little exercise we may have to assume a few things as truth ? That the P.O.T. was actually 25% then we can querry it to see if their is any justification and if Mr Privateer actually threw in a few red herrings just to complicate the natter.

I have difficulty with a 25% P.O.T on a 1 x3 staking especially on the price of horse being aimed at. The killer for me is the win bet side, enough non winners and you are going to struggle plus a few runs of out on the place side leaves a big hole.

To consistently have a 25% P.O.T taking into account these losses is mighty effort that I struggle with.
The figures men on here are much better than me but on a 1x3 to break even on a placgetter but non winner you need a dividend of at least $1.33.

A few unplaced runs and it is going uphill to recover. I was thinking that it might be worth investigating a different staking approach that is in line with what Privateers theory is but mor in line with what mr Paretto migh investigate.

If we are still assuming that this is a Place System with a slight win edge maybe using the Paretto principal might be looked at. So, instead of 1 x 3 let's do what paretto might consider. Privateer staked a total of $4 if we used 20% for the win and 80% for the place then the bet would be $1 win $4 place.

This 1 x4 still gives us a win edge built in but the emhasis changes a bit to favor the place. It appears to me that if we are going to use the Paretto Principal it should be considered acrooss the board rather the selective cherry picks, at least for a Paretto thread, otherwise it becomes a Privateer thread which is great.

Maybe we have come to the fork in the road.

Star