The Back of the Net Profit Bundle is an alert service that provides betting opportunities for a variety of football systems.
The main system is one of the most popular football betting systems used on Betfair Exchange, “Lay the Draw”, and this is what the service’s official results are based on.
At the time of writing, the betting bank for these selections has increased by 73% since results started in May 2023.
In terms of points, the profit was up to 73.58 points at the time I started my Back of the Net review. This was based on a starting bank of 100 points and using the advised Fibonacci staking plan.
The service comes from Andrew David, who is well-known in the betting industry for his successful Little Acorns system (and more recently, Little Acorns International).
As well as the Lay The Draw selections, there are also alerts sent out for other systems that have performed well during their initial testing.
These include Half Time/Full Time betting, laying current scores in the correct score market and backing or laying goals markets.
A seperate bank is advised to be set up for these, which is explained in more detail in the user manual provided after signing up.
The alerts are sent out via email and the manual explains that it is ok if you don't bet on every selection. You simply pick the ones that you want, to suit your schedule.
For my Back of the Net review, I tracked as many bets as I could using Betfair Exchange.
My main goal was to demonstrate how well the service performed and whether it's capable of generating a good profit without using traditional bookmakers.
Read on for my full Back of the Net review, or click here for a risk-free trial.
Review profit/loss | +12.51 points profit |
ROI | 11.3% |
Strike rate | 41.3% |
Stakes | Level or Fibonacci |
Starting bank | 100 points |
Average no. bets | Varies |
Time tips sent | Day & evening |
Price | From £29.87 per month |
Rating | PASS |
Back of the Net Review Results
Month One Update
My first month using the Back of the Net service was a bit rocky, mainly because I was in the process of moving house, which meant I couldn’t place as many bets as I’d planned.
On top of that, international breaks added to the disruptions, so things didn’t get off to the best start.
I only managed to place 23 bets in total. By the end of the month, I found myself stuck in a losing streak and finished with a small loss of £21.12.
The silver lining was that the very next bet after this rough patch turned out to be a winner, putting me back in profit.
I had originally planned to use the aggressive strategy, using 5% stakes and the Fibonacci sequence, with the goal of increasing my stakes as the bankroll grew.
However, in the event of a longer losing streak, I worked out that there may not have been enough of a bankroll to cover the larger stakes of the sequence.
Instead, I decided to go with a 100 point bank, so £1,000 and a starting stake of £10.00, which worked out at 1%. I would still look to increase my stakes each month as the bank grew.
Looking ahead, I planned to ramp up my betting volume and hoped to see my bankroll start to climb.
Key Stats
| Number of Bets | 23 |
| Total Stakes (pts) | £277.19 |
| Profit/Loss (pts) | -2.11 |
| Profit/Loss (£) | -£21.12 |
| Strike Rate | 26.10% |
| ROI | -7.60% |
| Overall Bank Growth | -2.1% |
| Bank (£1,000 starting) | £978.88 |
Month Two Update
The second month of my Back of the Net review went amazingly well, with 14.39 points profit added to the bank. The ROI was an eye-watering 71.2%!
Based on £10.00 stakes, I was up to £122.80 profit for the review overall.
This meant that I could increase my stakes for the next month, so based on 1% of my bank, they would rise to £11.22 per bet.
Key Stats
| Number of Bets | 26 |
| Total Stakes (pts) | £202.13 |
| Profit/Loss (pts) | 14.39 |
| Profit/Loss (£) | £143.92 |
| Strike Rate | 61.5% |
| ROI | 71.2% |
| Overall Bank Growth | 12.3% |
| Bank (£1,000 starting) | £1,122.80 |
Month Three Update
Month three of my Back of the Net review really put the modified Fibonacci staking plan to the test, as I hit eight losing bets in a row.
Reaching the 8 x multiplier in the sequence meant that my stake reached a high of £89.76. I had lost a total of £188.84 by this stage, so around 19% of my bank.
I didn't feel uncomfortable with the stakes at this point and many of the bets were well below evens, so it wasn't as if the full stake was at risk each time.
The ninth bet happened to win, but it only recovered just less than half of what I had lost during the sequence.
In the end, I wrapped up the month with a manageable loss of £35.56. The good news was that, thanks to earlier results, my overall profit still stood at £87.24, so I was still in positive territory.
Key Stats
| Number of Bets | 30 |
| Total Stakes (pts) | £496.09 |
| Profit/Loss (pts) | -3.56 |
| Profit/Loss (£) | -£35.56 |
| Strike Rate | 33.3% |
| ROI | -7.2% |
| Overall Bank Growth | 8.7% |
| Bank (£1,000 starting) | £1,087.24 |
Month Four Update
It was a quieter month for my Back of the Net review, not so much because of a lack of bets, but because of the type of bets.
For my Back of the Net review, I am only tracking bets that are available on Betfair Exchange. There were quite a few that were only available on traditional bookmakers this month, so I didn't include them.
I chose to do this because I personally don't have access to many bookmakers anymore, which would make tracking results for this particular service quite difficult.
The other factor is that I do miss some bets when life gets in the way!
The idea behind this trial was to follow the service as a regular person would, which means that it would not be feasible to bet on every single selection.
Anyway, you'll be pleased to know that I did add some more profit to the pot!
I finished the month with £37.86 profit, which brought my total bank growth up to a new high of 12.5%.
Key Stats
| Number of Bets | 13 |
| Total Stakes (pts) | £127.23 |
| Profit/Loss (pts) | 3.79 |
| Profit/Loss (£) | £37.86 |
| Strike Rate | 46.2% |
| ROI | 29.8% |
| Overall Bank Growth | 12.5% |
| Bank (£1,000 starting) | £1,125.10 |
Review Summary
Back of the Net is a "Lay the Draw" football tipping service, but not in the traditional sense. Instead of trading the selections, you simply place the lay bet and leave it.
The bets are sent out while the football matches are in-play, usually during the last 15-20 minutes of the game. This means you have to react fairly quickly to get bets on.
I tested the system for four months and finished with 12.51 points profit, or £125.10 to £10 stakes, at an ROI of 11.3%. My bank increased by 12.5% overall.
As the bets can arrive throughout the day and night, it was a tricky review to carry out. I placed as many bets as I could, as long as they were available on Betfair Exchange.
Including the bookmaker bets would have significantly increased the volume of bets, but I was more interested in whether the system could work using Betfair alone.
For my Back of the Net review, I used the advised Fibonacci staking plan. Andrew David often uses this across his betting systems, but it is a loss recovery style of staking and not everyone is comfortable with the higher risk.
To compare, I converted my results to level stakes (with compounding) and recorded a total of 4.44 points profit at an ROI of 7.72%.
Level stakes offers a lower risk way of using the system but it can mean that bank growth will be slower. Compounding stakes after each profitable month can speed up the process.
Overall, I felt that Back of the Net was worthy of a Pass rating, but with one caveat.
Staking is an important factor for this service and getting it right is crucial to making a long-term profit. If you opted to use level stakes, you would need to ensure your stakes were high enough to cover the membership fees.
With many of the matches being quite obscure, this could mean issues with liquidity on Betfair when trying to place larger bets. At bookmakers, it could flag your account up easier and lead to it being limited.
Using the Fibonacci staking plan, you might consider using smaller stakes since the potential profits are higher. However, there is also more risk attached with this plan.
Finding the right balance is key. Although the system has shown promising results, you'll need to bear these things in mind if you are thinking of signing up.
Laura, when you present your result, please can you deduct the cost of the subscription. You made £125 over 4 months. But the cost of the service is almost £30 per month. So, you only made £5. That’s just over £1 per month! It’s really important to deduct all your costs. Thanks
Hi Joe, Thanks for your feedback. I presented my results based on a £10 stake without membership fees to show the service’s core performance, as each person’s stake and staking plan will vary. Subscription costs can change on a reulgar basis, so a fixed deduction may not be accurate for everyone long term. This way keeps it simple, allowing you to calculate the required starting bank and stakes using current membership prices.
In this case, £159.74 would have covered six months of membership (at the quarterly rate). Calculating my points profit based on £30 stakes would have given me £375.30 profit, £215.56 minus fees, with two months membership left over. This works out much better, but it depends what level of profit you are targeting and how much of a starting bank you have available.
It’s important to note that the full stake is not at risk with this system too, as the bets are all below odds of 2.00 and usually much less than that.
I’ll aim to emphasise this more in future reviews, so everyone can factor in their own costs.
Laura, thanks very much for the response. You make a good point about the varying stake levels for users. The reason why I’d like to include the cost of membership is so it highlights that for this particular service to be profitable, you really need to consider a much higher staking plan than £10 per trade.
You placed 92 bets and this gave an average return of £1.34 per bet from £10 stakes. Yet the cost was £1.30 per bet from the subscription.
So, even if you bet £30, the subscription cost would have been 32% of your winnings and your drawdown after 8 trades would have been £566 – more than half your starting bank.
With a subscription cost of more than 30% at £30 bets, it seems too high.
This is why the cost of service is important as it really impacts the true profit of the system. For me, I’d rate it as a poor system if your stakes are below £50 per bet, but high risk if above as you need to be prepared for a very high drawdown.
Thanks
Thanks for your analysis. As you’ve pointed out, although the Fibonacci system offers higher potential returns, it does indeed come with a higher risk of drawdown.
With the level stakes approach, the service reported a profit of 52 points over 12 months, including both bookmaker and exchange bets. That is if you were able to bet on all the selections, which I was not. This averages out to 4.33 points per month. Even with £10 stakes, this would still result in a profit, albeit a smaller one.
My aim with the £10 stake (in both Fibonacci and level stakes examples) is to provide a simple baseline for comparison. It’s not intended to be the ideal stake for everyone. As you’ve highlighted, the subscription cost significantly impacts profitability and users need to carefully consider their stakes based on their own risk appetite and profit targets, especially when using a higher risk staking system like the Fibonacci one.
Ultimately, it’s a personal decision. I do understand what you are getting at though, but it can be difficult to please everyone with this sort of thing.
What a useful and well thought out comment. Thanks for taking the time to analyse the detail.