Elite Fun and Barrow Boys

Miguel Rodrigues left a long comment on my thoughts of Skeeve which were included in my National League observations at the weekend. For the record, Miguel did clarify via Twitter that he meant "subjective" in place of "fundamental" so I have taken the liberty of editing his comment for clarity, and have also made a few other grammatical changes for readability. Miguel is not a native English speaker, and I believe the intent of his comment has been maintained. The original comment is published in full should anyone prefer to read the original. Miguel writes:

Skeeve example is the perfect example for the ones with a exclusively mathematical based approach who look at subjective analysis as a primitive source of an edge.

I agree that the likelihood (and I experienced this myself in the early phase of my betting journey in La Liga) for that type of approach (subjective) working in the main European Leagues in the long haul is slim to none (insane market competition and know-how, better resources employed by the bookies in the opening lines, less average deviation between openers and closers, etc.)

However, if you understand the sport, the league and teams, particular characteristics and most importantly are willing to work harder researching for more information than anyone or the majority, you can be one of the market leaders and earners in a medium / lower level league. You just have to ensure that:

a) you have information that is not included in the line

and / or

b) you process the current information available and recognise market over /under reactions better than anyone else

Football teams are "stock prices" and although the odds efficiency in the main leagues is so strong that is difficult for the experienced bettor to see if the price is currently 5% off with subjective analysis, that is very doable in lower level leagues and I can not emphasise the example of Skeeve too much. In betting there will always exist spots for the guy who is willing to outwork and out-learn the competition, at least in the next 5 years.

The problem with subjective analysis is it's usually a low volume approach and difficult to use great staking methods like Kelly, but should not be viewed as a primitive source of an edge.

I will end this long comment with a quote from Joseph Buchdal:

There is no right or wrong approach to seeking a betting edge. Ultimately, the best one is the one that works for you, one that returns a profit. However, what each approach has in common is a shared aim of finding "value" in the odds, where the true chance of a win is greater than that estimated by the bookmaker

I would love to know your take on this opinion and if you find any particular flaw in my assumptions, please let me know.

I appreciate the comment. As I've written before, posting blog entries is so much easier when there's a comment to start the ball rolling. 

Unfortunately I have little to disagree with Miguel about regarding his thoughts. One thing I would say is that regarding the line "football teams are 'stock prices'", I think Miguel means that publicly traded companies are like football clubs (some clubs are indeed publicly traded companies) while stock prices are like betting prices in that they are the opinion of the market based on all "relevant" information. Relevant here is a combination of past public information, breaking new public information, and private (insider) information.

Knowing along with everyone else that City beat United 2:0 three years ago isn't a lot of use to you. Knowing that a star player for Barrow (assuming they have one) slipped in the shower this morning, suffered a concussion and will miss tomorrow's game is useful. Installing hidden cameras in the bathrooms of non-league stars is not practical, or legal, but plenty of people have contacts who can provide information before it becomes public.

Another proponent who believes the lower profile an event, the easier it is to find an edge here: