tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4528393111359731672.post6892462701758445927..comments2024-03-24T00:19:53.054+00:00Comments on Green All Over: Sporting DataGateCassinihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05879449876804295094noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4528393111359731672.post-89002853957695563232014-01-23T04:09:19.612+00:002014-01-23T04:09:19.612+00:00@ Annonymous Matt @ punt:
No, my question was dir...@ Annonymous Matt @ punt:<br /><br />No, my question was directed at Cassini who found my earlier view laughable. Empnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4528393111359731672.post-14862128283950088672014-01-23T01:44:57.740+00:002014-01-23T01:44:57.740+00:00Not sure if that 'fair' question was direc...Not sure if that 'fair' question was directed at me emp, but to be clear, during a match I'm fine with folks playing with the fastest data - the platform rules allow it, people will do whatever it takes to take out inefficiencies and do this as quickly as possible. Adapt or die as someone else says.. it's just a fact of life (or platform).. Personally I find these guys quite useful at times as I can get a nice price when I spot that they have been able to get some action.<br /><br />Any comments I made on fairness relate solely to the same speed used once the match has finished in live time, and before betfair can suspend. That is wrong and unfair imo, there's no prospect of the other side ever winning..<br /><br />Matt @punt<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4528393111359731672.post-38435125287738977432014-01-22T21:39:04.209+00:002014-01-22T21:39:04.209+00:00You only need ultra low latency if your edge is re...You only need ultra low latency if your edge is really just about getting into the market quicker than everyone else. If you have a different type of edge that is latency tolerant then you are fine. <br /><br />Most people would say that the most successful "trader" in the financial markets is Warren Buffet. Probably as far away from the high frequency setups as it is possible to get.<br /><br />As I said before: adapt or die.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4528393111359731672.post-10511068244995411462014-01-22T19:36:03.188+00:002014-01-22T19:36:03.188+00:00Basically unless you can afford a data collection ...Basically unless you can afford a data collection infrastructure delivering light speed latency and you can ignore/tolerate any copyright breach fines on that data, then you are going to lose.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4528393111359731672.post-17017855424743865392014-01-22T18:04:44.785+00:002014-01-22T18:04:44.785+00:00I also want to point out additionally something I ...I also want to point out additionally something I missed out:<br /><br />I don't agree with your distinction of this information as being "unfair" but edges created by use of Poisson Distributions, Markov Chains and highly simulated computer models (which most big sports-betters now use and which no recreational punter would ever be able to use or recreate due to financial barriers) as being fair. <br /><br />Can you please explain a) how automated and algorithmic betting models and the like are fair but this isn't b) how it's fair for me to be watching with binoculars from a high-rise building and placing my bets (definitely possible on most cricket grounds) but not courtsiding and c) assuming courtsiding was banned, why would it be fair if my TV feed was on a 5 sec delay and yours on a 15 sec delay?Empnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4528393111359731672.post-59502906410984293942014-01-22T15:01:50.727+00:002014-01-22T15:01:50.727+00:00I'd like to address a lot of what you said sin...I'd like to address a lot of what you said since you think it's so very ridiculous. I have quite a few observations.<br /><br />1)It seems somewhat rude and is definitely incorrect to say that I don't think. <br /><br />2)Betting during a break is most emphatically not the same as betting pre-game, because in sports other than football, prices don't move in that smooth Poisson distribution based manner. Prices that are efficient pre-game can become inefficient during the game (certainly in some sports at least).<br /><br />3) On the possibility of winning methodologies, a few questions and some observations.It's obviously true that being able to bet after every point is better than only during breaks, but I'm not sure why not being able to do so would cripple all methodologies except those of the people doing this strategy (which is what you imply when you say that only those same accounts will keep winning).<br /><br />4)If your point is that no one would bet if they knew these sharks were doing this, I assure you that's not true...plenty of people just enjoy gambling and many of them are OK with it being slightly -EV or not as profitable as it would without those tactics. Being first to the info just doesn't seem all that heinous to me, given that even without court-siding, feeds would be assymetric depending on where in the world you live.<br /><br />5) As some have mentioned, info isn't as a matter of fact symmetrical in financial markets either, and leaving aside stocks, in currencies and commodities,(where insider trading is perfectly legal) there is wild information asymmetry and this doesn't seem to have dried up markets or killed non-shark participation.<br /><br />6) In the market I really know- cricket, court-siding can be profitable if one did it, but it doesn't hurt market viability at all. To begin with, if one's looking at Betfair, it's pretty easy to tell what a sudden change in odds represents in terms of the action that happened. You'd have to be utterly stupid to see the price change from 2.24 to 1.75 and not realize a wicket has fallen. Recognizing inaccuracies in the adjusted price is more than sufficient to be massively profitable.<br /><br />I think this is significant because cricket is the best sport for in-play betting and court-siding doesn't even begin to affect the functioning of the market (which isn't even primarily on Betfair).<br /><br />I would disclaim though that the best approach to cricket-betting is based on hugely in-depth knowledge of the players and not mechanical trading type approaches. In other words, in-play value betting.<br />Empnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4528393111359731672.post-2618108263384792412014-01-22T14:12:06.521+00:002014-01-22T14:12:06.521+00:00You would appear to have ruffled a few feathers wi...You would appear to have ruffled a few feathers with your cynicism Cassini. <br /><br />Sultan has got a right paddy on and won't publish my comments <i>(very polite and very fair questions)</i> which is hardly in the interests of fair-play, I'm sure you will agree.<br /><br />With no right to respond with a contrary opinion on his blog, I figured I'd little option but to raise the question here where readers will hopefully follow his link.<br /><br />I hope I haven't overstepped.Hejikhttp://www.hejik.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4528393111359731672.post-41963303420153057542014-01-22T12:47:06.078+00:002014-01-22T12:47:06.078+00:00I appreciate there's a big intersection on the...I appreciate there's a big intersection on the Venn diagram of Betfair punters and people who wear foil hats, but what would lead someone to believe that just because someone once worked for Betfair that they get any sort of special arrangement?<br /><br />The people at Sportingdata left Betfair in 2009, since when Betfair's entire management team, every single solitary one of them, has been replaced. Why would Betfair's current management want to give away money to people they've never even worked with?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4528393111359731672.post-24222507260539163462014-01-22T12:40:02.868+00:002014-01-22T12:40:02.868+00:00@tyttetrading,
The statement is almost right. If ...@tyttetrading,<br /><br />The statement is almost right. If I correct it I imagine that would answer your question. It should really be:<br /><br />"It is illegal for Australian operators to offer micro-betting. In-play betting is allowed on the outcome of a match, but not via online platforms FOR AUSTRALIAN PUNTERS. AUSTRALIAN Punters have to telephone a wagering company instead. Many international jurisdictions allow online in-play betting"<br /><br />So the answer to your question is "from punters not in Australia"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4528393111359731672.post-16210122617486348132014-01-22T10:00:46.980+00:002014-01-22T10:00:46.980+00:00Emp is completely right in his statement. If you w...Emp is completely right in his statement. If you want to trade in the markets (financial, sporting, name your arena) then it is beholden on you to ensure that you know what you are doing. That means knowing what the latest state of play is as much as it means being able to work out what the correct value is given that state of play. <br /><br />I am not sure if you have been following the finance markets recently (i.e. over the past decade!) but there has been an exponential growth in High Frequency Trading. This is where the big banks spend ever more money to get over lower latency feed and market access. Market access used to be measured in hundreds of milliseconds. It has now got to the point where if you are not working to nano second response times you are history. In the light of that then I guess the multi second sporting data latency we are talking about here is an outright joke.<br /><br />Sporting Data obviously have an edge you don't have. I think the forums need to either work out how to regain that edge or stop complaining.<br /><br />It seems to me that a lot of the punters who are complaining now are people who have historically done well out of their (value) edge but are now concerned that they are losing it to the low latency players. I don't recall these historically succesful people complaining about the money they were taking off the mug punters who didn't have their value edge in the past.<br /><br />Adapt or die.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4528393111359731672.post-89696382480097907292014-01-22T08:20:11.344+00:002014-01-22T08:20:11.344+00:00...continued..
Personally I find point to point f......continued..<br /><br />Personally I find point to point fluctuation sniping to have some minor shades of grey, I'd rather them do 'something' to make sure it didn't happen, it would be lovely to be able to relax trading these markets, solutions are not readily forthcoming though. The problem with point to point stuff is, there is still room for opinion on price, did you intend to leave you money up? did you fat finger it? did you get carried away or suddenly form a strong opinion on who would win..? You could legitimately place some of these snipey looking bets.<br /><br />A very large issue for me, was the period of time when courtsiders could grab the entire depth of market after the match point had ended and before even Betfair could suspend the market - that is totally wrong on every level. They have become much better on this in recent times. Betfair response to this was to again suggest that they must allow for people guessing, for chance and opinion.. why could this not be someone guessing that player B was going to win the point? ....The issue is, previous point odds can easily be 1.1 or higher (Wawrinka last night was 1.67 on match point).. they are never going to bet at 1.01 unless they 'know'. Saying that there was an example last week with MP odds of 1.2, courtsiders swiped everything down to 1.01 only for there to be a late call from the umpire, they ended up with 20k at 1.01 and 02 on their books. I'm sure this wasn't enough discouragement though.<br /><br />Could they use the incoming bet feed to suspend? Could they display it for users perhaps? Their issue with this (besides whether it is technologically possible) is probably that traders might well just cancel everything when unknown quantities are coming in taking their bets.. even on tight spread action. Matched volumes could go through the floor. It would certainly be fair though..? and they are called, BetFair. <br /><br />puntdotcomAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4528393111359731672.post-15166091138369824392014-01-22T08:19:20.604+00:002014-01-22T08:19:20.604+00:00Good articles Cass..
I believe SD are probably se...Good articles Cass..<br /><br />I believe SD are probably set up as a company so that they can employ people, pay them properly and the relevant tax etc. The data is then sold to themselves basically, acting as a betting syndicate, buying the data from SD the company. Betting syndicates not needing to pay tax.. or depending on how they have it set up, they might be betting on their own individual accounts, risking own cash.<br /><br />The liquidity in the Aus Open is still being provided by remaining courtsiders (imo not many, maybe one or two) and internet feed users (bet365 etc).. net feeds are fast enough to allow you to cancel before you get 'sniped' by courtsiders. Net feeds are still going to be preferable to enetpulse anyway as their info, although it is probably quicker, will have mistakes and also delays around hawkeye challenges.. Though I guess if folks like SD have an automated strategy, they could put safety measures in place. The human eye is superior.<br /><br />Is it possible for the ordinary punter to win on tennis in play ? Yes. In play more so than pre off.. there's plenty of value, most of the bigger market makers and value bettors use staking calculations which end up playing around the current sentiment... sentiment is emotional, and so there are plenty of emotional cul de sacs the market goes down you can find to exploit if you are patient. At other times, the market is very 'mathematically correct' with tight spreads...maths lacks reality and judgement, if you are good at reading body language or you know particular player attributes then a bet at market price can still have an edge, or at least, a temporary one. Liquidity is really good in this respect.<br /><br />Regarding courtsiding in general.. It has cost me a very very large amount of money over the years - I have been sniped 100s (maybe more) times by these guys... It's my mistake, and for the most part, the platform's fault for making it possible, and not the guys exploiting it (moral / ethics aside).. just my opinion, however I accept, I am well informed of the situation, ordinary punters will not know the effect this has to any edge you thought you had over time. I think many moons ago I wrote a blog post saying that when you run a platform, you have platform running responsibilities that bookmakers do not have. That is the ensure there is a level playing field for all your users, and total transparency and best execution in the markets (cross matching is horrific). Betfair have flunked these responsibilities, instead, choosing to play their bookmakers license card when it suits them. Platforms have specific regulation to prevent conflicts of interest (stock exchange?)...Betfair does not need to play by those rules. <br /><br />puntdotcom ...continued..Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4528393111359731672.post-37573952230649871812014-01-21T12:56:20.127+00:002014-01-21T12:56:20.127+00:00I'm sure that my television feed is different ...I'm sure that my television feed is different being in Canada. <br /><br />You bet on the NBA. Are you implying that your feed is more than 5 seconds delayed but place bets during the action anyway?John Walshnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4528393111359731672.post-63437249766158077292014-01-21T10:08:27.824+00:002014-01-21T10:08:27.824+00:00Great post, and great topic. Not sure I understand...Great post, and great topic. Not sure I understand this part:<br /><br />" It is illegal for Australian operators to offer micro-betting. In-play betting is allowed on the outcome of a match, but not via online platforms. Punters have to telephone a wagering company instead. Many international jurisdictions allow online in-play betting" <br />If thats the case, where does the in-play liquidity on Betfair during the AO come from?<br /><br />Best regards<br />TytteboevsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4528393111359731672.post-67294704237035397702014-01-21T09:42:15.146+00:002014-01-21T09:42:15.146+00:00This courtsiding isn't fair to the casual Betf...This courtsiding isn't fair to the casual Betfair traders but it's within all legal rules. If you think the financial markets are better, forget it. The series of cheating spottet last year by the Nanex team should open the eyes of all financial traders. A good entry point starts in this post: http://www.nanex.net/aqck2/4436.html<br />It's only the tip of the iceberg i belive.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com