Established in 2008, this blog is an independent, common sense, look at challenges and opportunities in sports and financial investing, with occasional diversions as my mood takes me. I am not a tipster, nor is this a Profit and Loss report either. They are boring.
Thursday, 1 December 2011
By George
George had a comment on the XX Draws 'prospectus' to which I typed a detailed reply only to find that the address was "noreply-comment@blogger.com" so I'll write it here instead since it's not too personal, and might be of interest to others. George wrote:
Hi. I looked at your XX Draws prospectus. Very well written. Good idea with the partial fee refund! I got a bit confused b/n your all-time projected historical and your 2011 actual historical results, but having reread it is sort of clear now. If I understand your mechanics correctly, you are using the lay side of the market and are factoring no commission. Correct me if I am wrong, please. A more conservative estimate of this well performing strategy would based on the back side of the odds (0.05 lower) and will be adjusting for commission. Adjusting your avg odds to 3.43 and assuming 5% commission on your winnings (using your 35% strike rate), I arrive at ROI of 15.8%=0.35*0.95*(3.43-1)+0.65*(-1). I am not saying that this is what should be in the prospectus, but it just helps describe the range of historical outcomes better, depending on how conservative one wants to be with the assumptions.
My reply is:
Hi George - Thanks for your e-mail. With regard to the price I use, when I send out the e-mail a few days ahead, I put in the price from the back side simply because more often than not, this price is matched if you have your bet up for long enough. It's not a target price that you should not take less than, it is just an idea of what you should reasonably expect to get matched at. If I do not get matched at this price, then I record the price that I do actually get matched at, so all the prices you see are matched prices. There was a game about three weeks ago (Novara v Roma) where I quoted 3.65, yet the price then dropped to 3.35, but on the day of the match, 3.65 was matched minutes before kick-off. The draw price doesn't usually move that much but this was a Serie A game, so who knows what was going on! (Roma won 1-0 in the 73' in a game that had the proverbial 0-0 written all over it!) As for commission, I don't include this simply because many people pay less than 5% commission, but you're right - I should update the prospectus to state this, and I will do so this weekend. Sorry if the all-time v 2011 results are confusing. Basically, it's only since 2011 that I have been recording the draw price. Previous to that I recorded the match result, but I'm a cautious man and it was only after the returns looked solid after a good number of matches that I was confident that it was more than a blip in the statistics. Thank you for your input.
I have had a life-long interest in sports and after studying Pure Mathematics with Statistics at secondary school, have been fascinated by odds and probability.
The first system I came up with was a simple one - back the favourite and double up after a loss until a winner. Simple enough in theory, and I told my Dad about it. Not being a betting man himself, he ran it by some of his colleagues, and came home to tell me that it wouldn’t work because a long losing run would mean that the bank would be empty. Then there was always the possibility that the winner would be returned at odds-on, meaning that the total returns would not match the outlay. Not what a ten year old wants to hear! Only slightly daunted, I then went on a search for the Holy Grail, the secret to riches that I knew was out there somewhere. Finally in 2004 I stumbled across an article about Betting Exchanges and four years later I was able to make a steady profit.
Just added a link to your excellent blog. Not expecting you to link back, it's entirely up to you.
ReplyDeleteLove the sense of humor you have and I do hope that I don't get on the receiving end of your scathing wit :).
BubblesBrian