Corrections And Objections

A change at the top of the table as Jamie A reported an error in his numbers. 

A Lay of Monaco was recorded as a loss, but the bet was winner after a 1:1 draw and the numbers are now updated.

I also had a sensible email from JG who pointed out that:

When ROI is calcuated by betting syndicates it is normal practice to exclude void bets so online trader for example would be -4.38/16 -27.38%

Indeed it is, and while I'm not sure how much importance anyone is putting on the ROI, if I am publishing it, it needs to be correct, so I have revised those numbers too. Thanks JG for pointing that out.

While that change doesn't affect the positions, the extra 2.00 points for Jamie do. He moves up from 7th to 4th, and here is the top of the table after the correction:

JG had couple of other comments on the FTL:

It is great to see that Draw Picks is doing so well this season ( had a great season last season as well ) and pleasing to see that Pete is having a good season.

I am delighted you have onlinetrader on your team and it is a great pleasure to see that they are -24.33%.

I understand they are part of the OLBG team . ( Value Bank Foot) = OLBG = -34% .

You have something in common with Online Trader as he spent most of last season "attacking me".

Perhaps if you get a chance you can send an email to Online Trader and send my regards?

Keep up the good work.

Kind Regards

JG

footnote : I think I may sign up for FTL next season .

Draw Picks is certainly off to a solid start, as is Pete's Drawmaster. Online Trader isn't on my 'team' though, and nor do I know much about OLBG. 

Betting doesn't lend itself too well to being a 'team' activity. As for Online Trader and myself "attacking" Jonny for most of last season, JG would be better served by looking at the common denominator rather than playing the 'persecution' card.

I read Steve M's latest post over at Daily 25, and as his his wont, Steve went on something on a rant about tipsters and the problem of getting decent bets on at the recommended prices or lines. Read the post in full here, but here's an excerpt:

I’ll first start with the usual moan. One big issue I had this week was with the PCG (Pro computer gambler) service. Tom advised some bets on college football. These were big bets too, 2 units on three separate games. Now only 1 bookmaker had the lines up for this game and the max bet they take is to win $250. 2 units for me means $1,000 on these picks. By the time I woke up these lines has moved from -8,-9 and -4 to -13, -19 and -9.5. These are massive moves and not unexpected if there is only 1 bookmaker offering the lines with a $250 limit. The same issue happened when I tried to follow college bets with Sportpunter, the lines move quickly and unless you could get on first, then it was a pointless exercise. I emailed Tom asking if he still thought I should bet as the lines had blown out. He replied with “In my opinion, the books shouldn’t even offer betting on these games. I don’t think the line matters that much.”. So I decided to bet them. You can already guess what happened. One game won, one game lost and one game won for the service while losing for me. So while the official return will state close to 2 units profit, the reality for most people is a 2 unit loss. A 4 unit turnaround. These games should not be sent out as official plays, when only 1 person can get a tiny amount on it, it just isn’t fair. It leaves me seriously questioning whether to continue with the service.

What jumped out at me from that section, and would make me ditch the service immediately, was the comment:

In my opinion, the books shouldn’t even offer betting on these games. I don’t think the line matters that much.”

The second sentence there should have a full stop after the word 'think'. The line matters very much, it's crucial, and for a tipster to suggest otherwise shows a distinct lack of understanding of what profitable betting is all about. So the bet was value with the line at -8. That's good, and the bet may still have been value at -13, but at some point it is no longer value.

If you understand that -100 is not value, then you understand that the line matters. I've written before that rather than tell tipsters to bet on a selection at a price, they should include the price that they have for the selection and in the all too common scenario that the price suggested is no longer available, the subscriber can make their own decision on whether or not to bet at the price available to them at the time.

This is less of an issue with some bets than others of course. College football is something of a niche sport with relatively soft opening lines, and as Steve ranted, the line indeed moved significantly. To simply email subscribers and say "bet on this selection at as best a price as you can get" is not acceptable.

And yes, I do exactly this myself with my XX Draws but the selections are from the top five leagues in Europe, and the price has historically been robust enough that there was plenty of wiggle room. The EPL strike rate implies a price of 3.11, and there are not many matches that you can't beat that price for the draw.

Having said that, as I touched on yesterday, the declining draw price in Ligue 1 has meant that anything priced under 3.15 with Pinnacle Sports is no longer an official selection. The downside of recording results against one sportsbook, is that the results are lower than should be achievable with a small amount of effort, but they are the same for everyone in the FTL which is the main purpose.  

For the Value Selections, I email the price that I have the selection priced at, along with Pinnacle Sports' price at the time of writing, and it is up to the subscriber to decide whether or not to bet. Based on results so far, they may well be deciding not to bet!