Having had a run of indifferent form on recent sports bets has led me to do a bit of thinking recently about the kind of risks I like to take.

Clearly taking safe options and backing the favourites often has success to advocate it and can increase handily the pool of cash you have to play with.

But even repeatedly winning what often amounts to pennies on almost certain prospects is pretty boring and, in reality, has little to recommend it.

Similarly, taking huge flyers on very long odds is not something I find personally very appealing, although it does appeal to many.

A good recent example is the quest by Formula One fans at the beginning of this season to find a long-shot capable of winning the Drivers’ Championship.

Since this feat was performed by Jenson Button in 2009, at odds of 100-1 for those that got their bets on early enough, punters have since been assisting the bookies towards large sums of their money by vainly looking for this extremely unlikely set of circumstances to be repeated.

Three races into the season it seems almost painfully clear that it’s not going to happen. And making a bet during winter testing in January or February, only to have your stake tied up until the championship is decided in something like November, is also no fun.

So how to find the middle way? Bets risky enough to be enjoyable but realistic enough to be possible?

I’ve lost a few of these recently, including England to win the recent Test series in South Africa (the home team clawed back a draw in the final match) and David Chisnall to take an upset victory in the recent BDO darts tournament (he reached the final but couldn’t depose the mighty Martin Adams on the big night).

I was also sufficiently convinced Michael Schumacher’s neck would not stand up to the rigours of Formula One testing to venture a small sum on his dropping out before the season start – and history shows how good a call that was.

As one sports writer commented rather wittily, the reason this was never going to happen is because said neck is made of brass. Fortunately I managed to resist the temptation to throw away even more stake money reinforcing that bet at a point when a stake of £2 would have got you a £40 return.

If something ain’t gonna happen then it ain’t gonna happen and the sum total of the market’s information is usually pretty good.

But I am reminded that you could lose quite a few of these bets and yet make your money back if just one of them came off. If two come off then you’re quids in.

The satisfaction of betting in this way is not about winning big sums (although no-one exactly minds that, do they?) but about testing your knowledge and instincts and being proved right. Occasionally. Hopefully.

Also there is nothing like betting on a sporting event to add interest to a competition you might not otherwise have got all that involved in.

Recently Betfair had a tempting price on British challenger Dan Hardy to upset long-established Canadian champion Georges St-Pierre in the mixed martial arts (MMA) welterweight bout which headlined March’s Ultimate Fighting Challenge 111 event held in Newark, New Jersey.

Apart from the foolishness of betting on a sport when you’re not across the form book, I was starting to get an intimation of which way my gut was taking me – towards risky but entertaining long-shots that were pretty unlikely to come off.

And leaving it alone was a good call since, by all accounts, St-Pierre controlled the five-round contest from start to finish and won on a unanimous decision.

I was also eyeing Michael Sprott to pick off Audley Harrison when the pair met to contest the vacant and unloved European Heavyweight title. Never having been much of a fan of Harrison, I was reasonably confident that Sprott could finally dispatch him into retirement and welcome obscurity – and, had the fight gone the distance, he would have been comfortably outpointed.

But in the last round of an unedifying contest Harrison found enough of a left hook to knock Sprott to the canvas and to keep his improbable talk of a meeting with the Klitchkos, or even David Haye, alive. (Oh please.)

There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest he will take any notice of the scores written on the judges’ cards and their verdict on his boxing talent so the likelihood is that we won’t be spared future bouts of this quality featuring Harrison.

But, to return to the substantive matter, that last-minute left hook would have wiped out quite a valuable return had I bet against Harrison, and thus been the source of some annoyance.

So I’m glad in retrospect that I didn’t chance it. But, on the whole, I think I have found the approach that suits me.

I just need to get a little bit sharper at spotting where the value is.

Or is that what they all say?