Streamlining. A positive move?

I was reading the My Betting Life blog today, and some of the comments left after recent posts (see link to the right). There was some very well-meaning advice being left, suggesting a more streamlined portfolio should be the way forward.

The author of the blog is currently looking to do just that, and I can understand why he might wish to do so. Some of the services he follows are among the more expensive to subscribe to. In this day and age, with more and more services conscious of providing not only winners but also real value to their customers, there is no longer any need to pay £1k+ annual fees for the privilege of following a tipster with a long term record of success. The most expensive service I follow is Skeeve. For less than £500 per year, I have access to the advice of a chap who obviously puts in a heck of a lot of work into research and service delivery; hard work that is rewarded with a service that over the last six years has produced an roi of 14% and a return on capital of just shy of 800%, produced from a sample of over 1,000 selections.

At £75, The Football Analyst has produced a series of systems that have generated an excellent level of profit; £200 for On The Nose and a similar amount for Northern Monkey, two racing services with a long term roi that has settled at around the 20% mark. £250 for The Sportsman, a sports betting service boasting an roi of 15% but which includes free access to racing selections that have produced an roi of 19%. The list goes on and I'm sure you get the point. No longer is it necessary to pay big bucks in an attempt to secure strong returns.

Getting back to my original point though about streamlining portfolios. I think there is a natural desire, when things are not going well, to cut the size of the portfolio of services being followed. It is easy to fall into the trap of thinking that if the services that are not currently perfoming are cut out of the portfolio, profits will subsequently receive a boost. Of course it never quite works like that. The underperforming services are usually simply going through a lean spell. All services do at some point in time. The periods of profit-making that made them such attractive propositions when you first joined but which seemed to have disappeared are, more often than not, waiting for you just around the corner. In the meantime of course, the services you continue with start to go through their lean spells and before you know it, you're still not having a good time of it and the tipsters you dropped are now the ones making money! Nightmare, and this is why I always dread dropping a service. Having said that - and this is where this is such a challenging game we're playing - there are occasions when those services that you really do think you should drop but don't, never regain their form. Sports Investor and ProBandit would be two examples where I have come a cropper in this respect.

The bigger issue around streamlining portfolios though, the principle that it is wise to pay heed to, is that a portfolio with few services lacks diversity. I believe that diversity is absolutely paramount for any investment strategy to be successful in the long term. An investment strategy that lacks diversity is ultimately doomed to fail. It is inevitable. And this counts for all manner of investments, not just gambling.

The chap at My Betting Life is, I believe, looking to reduce the number of services he follows to six or so. I think you can attain a strong level of diversity within that number. I get the impression that he is looking at other aspects to his portfolio, such as value for money, as opposed to making a reduction based on a recent lack of positive performance. That to me, is legitimate planning.

Personal circumstances too can justify a reduction in the number of services followed - I'm in this position myself, as you know, and other practical issues may mean that downsizing is a positive step to take (such as protecting bookmaker accounts, for example). But, downsizing just because things are not going so well? Nope, not for me.

*Diversity is a topic worth further exploration, and I plan to do just that in the not too distant future.


Today's Betting

As was the case yesterday, just the two services in action. Chasemaster found a winner (Bruslini - Catterick - 4/1). Now I don't know if this will be corrected or not, but Ladbrokes seem to have overpaid me. I split the bet between Ladbrokes and Paddy Power. The return from Paddy Power is less and having worked it out myself, I agree with the Irish bookmaker. Let's see if Laddies realise their error and reclaim some of the money credited to my account. Chasemaster also played two horses in another race but unfortunately neither quite made the frame. Bruslini was a pleasure to watch though (I record the racing and watch it when I get home). Fast and fluent over the obstacles on what I believe was it's chasing debut, it was given a peach of a front running ride by Tom O'Brien that was a joy to see. As it happens Bruslini was the only horse to finish, but winning was never really in any doubt.

The other service to play was Winning Racing Tips whose selection (Rosairlie - Catterick - 12/1) finished a distant third, never threatening to win but producing a small return nonetheless.

Winning Racing Tips: Staked 0.4pts, +0.28pts.
Chasemaster: Staked 0.75pts, +0.312pts.


Now, there may well soon be news of something a little different that involves The Market Examiner. It's an idea that I believe holds significant merit and potentially solves a lot of problems that all serious punters face. Let's see if it develops, and as/if/when it does, trust me, you'll be the first to know.

And with that tantalising little titbit, I bid you goodnight.