Oh yeah, and I also had £70k on Ayr to win at Queens Park. Screenshot to follow…
Saturday, 28 February 2009
Oh yeah, and I also had £70k on Ayr to win at Queens Park. Screenshot to follow…
Friday, 27 February 2009
My first live game was in April 1967. My Dad wasn’t into football, but one of our neighbours in Purley was, and he had a son close to my age. He took us both to see Crystal Palace beat Birmingham City 2-1 in a Second Division game. His name was Bernard Ingham, (now Sir Bernard Ingham) who some of you may have heard of as he later became quite famous as Margaret Thatcher’s Press Secretary. Anyway, after that, I was hooked.
I have also backed the following Conference Regional League teams, but the liquidity is very poor so I doubt that I shall be matched on any of them.
Alfreton Town (1.63), Gateshead (1.97), Eastleigh (2.34), Hayes and Yeading United (2.64) and Team Bath (2.02).
Thursday, 26 February 2009
His latest post http://thebettingadvantage.com/100-to-1-shot/#comments describes how he had a $39.54 back matched at 100 on the Nets v Sixers NBA game on Monday night. Now my ‘blink’ instinct was to wonder why he would wait almost two days to post such a tale. (Actually, my ‘pre-blink’ instinct was to wonder why he felt the need to do this at all!) Then I looked at the accompanying screenshot, (see above), and noticed that the total Traded was $40.
Tuesday, 24 February 2009
Sunday, 22 February 2009
Saturday, 21 February 2009
Not that I ever like losing £10, but that was a cheap lesson and a reminder that although I suspect there is value to be found in the lower leagues, due diligence needs to be applied at all times. Quite funny really, and at least my Premium Charge will be slightly reduced next week!
The other lower league investments could hardly have fared any worse, and they didn't, with the result of the day for me being the draw between Barrow and Grays Athletic. Finding draws may be what my ratings are best at. Worcester City and AFC Wimbledon obliged in the Blue Square South, and Oxford United, Cambridge United and Altrincham all came through in the Blue Square Premier resulting in a (very) small non-league profit, which, yes, should have been £10 more.
The four Premier League DRAW NO BET selections were disappointing, with Aston Villa and West Ham United both losing, the other two matches ending as draws. (There's those draws again...)
As I have mentioned on here, I maintain Elo based ratings of the teams in my unique, not yet patented, Cassini Ratings And Performance system and at the below odds on Betfair, the following are value:
Aston Villa at 2.54; Stoke City at 1.92; West Ham United at 2.42; Wigan Atletic at 2.3.
Putting into practice my belief that there may be more value in the lower reaches of senior football, I have a few quid on Weymouth (4.0) at home to Rushden and Diamonds (this ‘appears’ to be great value, but I fear I am missing something), Altrincham (2.08) v Woking and the draw (3.55) Kettering Town v Torquay United.
The liquidity in the Blue Square regional leagues is poor. I have a few Mr. Optimistic bets out there, but I would be surprised if more than a few are matched. AFC Wimbledon might be one of them though. They are on a roll right now, and promotion beckons, and after that they are just one promotion away from the league. What a great achievement that would be.
Friday, 20 February 2009
This seems to me to be a disingenuous statement at best. Betfair is in competition with other exchanges, and is a de facto monopoly. I believe they handle approximately 90% of exchange betting, although I honestly can’t remember where I saw this figure. It certainly sounds about right to me.
They are certainly not in competition with the likes of Ladbrokes, Hills etc. These are traditional bookies who do not want winners. They want customers who, let’s be blunt here, are clueless about value and just want to have a bet. Social gamblers you might call them. As soon as someone starts winning, their business is declined. This happened to me in the early 80s when I had a credit account with Ladbrokes closed after I had won the enormous amount of something like £200.
Betfair are an exchange and shouldn’t care who wins or who loses. They take their commission regardless. Their basic business model is that for every £100 lost by Mr. Loser, they pocket £5 (or so), and Mr. Winner pockets £95. For this model to be sustainable, it obviously requires a steady supply of Mr. Losers.
How do Betfair ensure a steady supply of Mr. Losers? Not that easily apparently. With no high street presence, Betfair’s customers are by definition going to be more sophisticated. They need to be somewhat computer savvy for a start. It doesn’t take any effort to walk into Ladbrokes, pull out £20, and make a bet, but if you want to do the same on Betfair, there are rather more hurdles to overcome first. The typical Betfair customer is not the same as your typical high street bookie customer.
Perhaps at this point we should rename Mr. Loser to Mr. Optimist. (He will become Mr. Loser or Mr. Winner later). No one takes the effort to open and fund an account with Betfair expecting to be a loser. Where did Mr. Optimist come from? I would suggest that while many are recruited as a result of advertising in the media, a fair number sign up as a result of hearing from Mr. Winner about the exciting possibilities Betfair offers. I would further suggest that this source has been somewhat reduced of late, since Mr. Winner is now paying a 20% tax, and for any non-trading bets, he is now sadly better off at the bookies.
One can’t help but wonder if the business model here is flawed. It’s one thing to have customers wander into a bookie week after week throwing their money away, deluding themselves that the occasional win means they are slightly ahead overall, but it is quite another to get a customer to keep transferring funds from his/her bank account when the true (losing) record of their betting history is readily apparent.
Tuesday, 17 February 2009
Fore-warned is fore-armed they say, and the great thing about bad losses is that they are so much easier to improve on. Simply staying out of the play-offs will work in fact!
Thursday, 12 February 2009
We all know from our physics lessons that time is relative, and that time slows down the faster we approach the speed of light. (Indeed, it has been suggested that my youthful appearance today is proof of this, since in my younger days I was quite the sprinter…), but I also suspect that time speeds up when I find myself in a high-stress situation.
I need to make a decision fast, but often don’t make it quite fast enough when under stress. I decide to cut my losses on a trade and close my position, but by the time I place the bet, the price has moved. I hesitate to close out at the new price, but decide it is the best decision. So I enter the new bet, and again the price has moved against me.
If my theory is correct, then it explains why people in stressful situations age so quickly.
Incidentally, how frustrating is it that whilst time-travel into the future is theoretically possible, there is no way back to the past to place that guaranteed bet!
Wednesday, 11 February 2009
Now, whilst I am getting better at avoiding the big losses, (learning from mistakes of the past), every now and again I still do something that makes me question my sanity.
And as professional as I try to be in my approach, I am still subject to those emotions that drive the market, fear and greed, however much I try to control them. I back teams at too low a price, or I lay teams too high. Losses are part of the business, but there are ‘good’ losses, and there are ‘bad’ losses.
An example of a ‘good’ loss is where I have layed a selection at a price I consider too short, but it goes on to lose. Fair enough. If I’m laying at 1.1, I can expect to lose a fair number of these bets, and I cope with these very positively, even if I do say so myself.
Bad losses I don’t handle quite so well. An example of a ‘bad’ loss is where momentum is heading one way, seemingly irreversibly, and I jump on the bandwagon just as it shudders to a screeching halt and there is that sickening realization that ‘this is not a good move’. Essentially, good and bad losses are defined by whether or not the bet was value at the time it was struck.
So how do I react physically to these different scenarios? Good losses, I’m calm. I don’t mind those (too much).
Bad losses? Well, here it gets a little complicated. As my girlfriend pointed out, sometimes I am banging my desk, shouting out expletives and basically being loud and obnoxious, whereas other times I go very quiet. My worst ever loss, £5,000 on a football match, resulted in my being overwhelmed with tiredness. I literally had to go and take a long nap.
Thinking about this, I’ve realized that I am loud when the setback is sudden (an interception in American Football for example), but where the setback is slow and drawn out, this is where I go quiet (e.g. I’ve backed a team with a good lead, and slowly but surely the other team comes back).
Wins are handled similarly. A win snatched from the jaws of defeat is greeted with loud yelling (is there any other kind?) and on occasion some crazy dancing and gesturing around the living room, whereas a win that I am expecting is treated rather more demurely. Although if the amount is substantial enough, the stupid dancing and arm-waving still happens!
Where? I want some.
The Academy Awards are one of the few non-sporting events that I get involved in. They can be quite lucrative, but I recommend closing out before the event goes in-play. Liquidity thereafter is very poor, and if you are left holding a position, it can be tough on the old ticker.
The article in full:Indian punters bet big on 'Slumdog' Oscar success: report 21 hours ago
MUMBAI (AFP) — Indian gamblers are staking big money on "Slumdog Millionaire" winning the best picture, best director and best music awards at this year's Oscars, a report said Tuesday.
The Economic Times said that an estimated one billion rupees (20.5 million dollars) was riding on the outcome of the Academy Awards, for which the hit British film with an Indian cast and crew has 10 nominations.
With the exception of casinos and lottery games in some states and despite Indians being among the world's most enthusiastic gamblers, organised betting is illegal in India and largely an underground activity.
"We are accepting bets for three things -- A.R. Rahman (best music category), the movie (best picture category) and Danny Boyle (best director category)," one unnamed Mumbai-based bookmaker was quoted as saying.
Another in the city of Ahmedabad, in neighbouring Gujarat state, said betting on "Slumdog" has been gaining momentum since the end of a recent cricket match between India and Sri Lanka.
"Bets worth (200-300 million rupees) have been accepted in my circle in the past few days."
Odds for "Slumdog" winning best picture are being offered at 1.53/1, in line with international betting websites. Indian bookmakers put Boyle as 1.55/1 to win; and Rahman at 1.25/1, the business daily said.
The Oscars take place on February 22.
Tuesday, 10 February 2009
Some people just can't believe the money to be made on Betfair. With discipline, it is possible to make serious money. Late goals can be worth a fortune, and although I have often been the victim of these, sometimes they can work in my favour. The NBA can be lucrative too...
If you want to be able to generate results similar to those shown above, visit http://www.juicestorm.com/betfairgen/ and fill your boots.
Monday, 9 February 2009
Of course, it is possible that this is just a coincidence, but was Chelsea’s decision to act so ruthlessly driven by Portsmouth’s not so unexpected sacking of Tony Adams? (Portsmouth are ranked above only West Bromwich Albion, Stoke City and Bolton Wanderers).
I’ve written before that these markets are a minefield to anyone who doesn’t have insider knowledge. I stand by that, although I could be tempted to lay Tony Adams at a very generous price. Wait, that doesn’t sound right…
Sunday, 8 February 2009
Having given my Elo based ratings a few months to settle down, they are still a work in progress, but I am starting to use them with a little more confidence. Early results seem to suggest that the value is when my ratings predict a lay of the home team. Aston Villa, Newcastle United and Fulham all obliged.
For the record, Arsenal and Manchester United are not surprisingly rated to follow suit this afternoon.
As for the ratings, Manchester United (2456) are far and away the top rated team in the Premier League, ahead of Liverpool (1966), Aston Villa (1788), Arsenal (1721) and Chelsea (1581).
The other top ranked teams in the leagues I track are currently Cardiff City, Leicester City, Darlington, Burton Albion, and AFCs Telford and Wimbledon. In Scotland I have Rangers, St. Johnstone, Raith Rovers and Cowdenbeath.
From table-toppers to table-proppers I have West Bromwich Albion, Charlton Athletic, Cheltenham Town, Chester City (not a good time to be a team starting with ‘Ch’ apparently), Lewes, Solihull Moors, Fisher Athletic, Inverness Caledonian Thistle, Queen of the South, Stranraer and Elgin City.
From now to the end of the season will give me four months to see whether the effort is worthwhile. If it is, then I may start rating some of the overseas leagues as well.
It may be more profitable to use these ratings for promotion / relegation markets – it’s something I’ll be tracking.
Thursday, 5 February 2009
In the original method, this block would be another bet on Betfair, one that meant that insufficient funds were available for the new bet to be placed. If the desired event occurred during the five seconds, the original (blocker) bet would simply be cancelled (cancellations being instantaneous) and the new bet allowed to hit the market a second or two later, thus beating bets that are submitted after seeing the event.
The newly revealed strategy was illustrated using a tennis match as an example. Player A is serving at 4-5, 30-40. Obviously this is a key point, and just for demonstration purposes, the ‘true’ price on Player B is 1.8. If Player B should win the point, the price will drop to 1.4, so the strategy is to put in a lay at the front of the queue, say 10k at 1.8.
Then while the point is being played you submit 1k bets every second or two at 1.5 using an API. If the bet reaches the market before the point is decided, you will be self-matched.
If the point is won by Player B, the lay is cancelled and some of the bets submitted at 1.5 will hopefully be matched at close to 1.8.
If the point is won by Player A, the lay is not cancelled, as 1.8 is now good value to lay.
And that’s it. Personally, I would be very wary about employing this strategy. Unlike the first strategy where the bet effectively bounced, this system allows bets you submit to hit the market so you are therefore at risk of getting matched at poor value. (You cancel the 1.8 lay and could get matched at your requested 1.5). This risk is probably small in a liquid market, but there is also the problem of trying this in a market where others are doing the same thing and your lay is not that easy to place at the front of the queue. Not to mention that a court-sider could quite feasibly match your 1.8 on seeing Player B win the point before you can cancel it.
Tuesday, 3 February 2009
To anyone interested in trading in-play, I strongly recommend this book. The message is to trust that first instinct, because it is usually right. If you watch markets moving day after day, you subconsciously get a feel for what is normal, and when a price is outside of those norms, your subconscious recognizes this before your conscious side has time to analayse it. Don’t sit there thinking about it. Grab it.
Monday, 2 February 2009
For example a bet would be submitted just as a bowler made his delivery, and if a wicket fell, the bet would not be cancelled. Betfair closed this loophole, but it is being reported that, by using an API, this same method still works on the BETDAQ site.
Also, on Betfair, it appears that the 8 second delay on Spanish games is no longer enough. From the Betfair forum are a number of stories of bets being hovered and large sums of money appearing just prior to the Suspension in several games.
Sunday, 1 February 2009
I’m not sure why January has proven to be such a good month for the past two years, although in the interest of full disclosure I should add that January 2007 was my worst ever month. I don’t consciously do anything different (except in 2007, but I learned my lesson from that), but January certainly seems to be a month of extremes.
February is at the other end of the scale, ranking 9th with a daily average just 26% of January. Why so much lower? Only one NFL game, and the NBA All-Star break means less matches could be two reasons. Valentine’s Day means a forced break in investing (although how fortuitous that this year it falls on the same weekend as the All-Star break.) My February luck is changing already.
As for today’s Superbowl, it’s hard to see the Cardinals amazing run continuing. I fancy their luck to run out against a hard-hitting, experienced Steelers team who have a lot of players who won it all as recently as 2006. If you’re punting on the game, take the Steelers -6.5.