This idea started off as an argument in a pub, but I'm sober now and it still seems to make sense!

So the conversation started with a discussion about how doubles, trebles, accas etc were mugs bets and bookie benefits.

Then it moved onto examples of where a double was a solid bet because it multiplied the value and it ended with me promising to test a theory out on one of our odds on systems.

You'll remember a while back we published a system for backing odds on shots when certain jockeys were on board.

Well I've taken the results for that system back to March 2011 and compared level stakes back betting at SP with betting a rolling doubles staking plan.

The theory being that because it is a high strike rate system that there will be lots of winning runs. And more winning runs than losing runs, so it makes sense to bet the selections in doubles instead of singles!

So here's how I've calculated this…

Race 1 Horse 1
Race 2 Horse 2
Race 3 Horse 3
Race 4 Horse 4

We bet a double on Horse 1 with Horse 2, we also bet a double on Horse 2 with Horse 3 and so on.

So the next bet will be a double on Horse 3 with Horse 4.

Sometimes these horses will run on different days, in which case you bet a single and if it wins you place the whole return on the next qualifier on the day that it runs.

How did that work out?

Well level staking over the 449 bets produced a profit of 46.79 which is a 10.4 % Return on Investment (ROI).

Rolling doubles staking produced a profit of 96.26 which is a 21.4% ROI which is almost double! Spooky!