Bloggers Old And New

So the hens of recklessness finally came home to roost for young Alex. After a series of all-ins, and a close shave on the England – West Indies test match this week, he failed to heed the words of warning of a few people and again went all-in yesterday– this time betting that Liverpool would not win both halves of the game at Manchester United at odds of 1.05/1.06. A 44th minute Steven Gerrard penalty gave Liverpool the 2-1 first half win, and they added two more without reply in the second half to complete the upset.

Alex had the goal of turning a £100 starting bank into £100,000. An achievable goal, but not in the time-frame he was shooting for, which was just 367 days. A pity, his was one of the more interesting blogs out there, speaking of which, sadly Mark Iverson has decided to call it quits with his blog. I wish both of these gentlemen well for the future.

It would be good to have an occasional update from Mark, and if Alex can get away from thinking of 2% a day as being “… painfully slow progress and I simply don’t have the mindset to increase my bank so slowly from the outset” perhaps another similar, but more realistic, challenge and blog can be started.

Week 3 Summary

A mixed bag of results today, with a net profit of a whopping £10.70 which from 36 bets is perhaps hardly worth the effort, but a profit is a profit.

The result of the day for me was Rotherham winning away to Rochdale at 4.4, by some way the longest priced bet I had today.

Some observations are that once again the Home results were best in Leagues One and Two with 6 winners out of 8, and in Scotland with 4 from 5. The search goes on.

Here are the results in full:

Homes: Manchester United (L 1.98), Middlesbrough (D 2.38), Watford (D 2.18), Milton Keynes Dons (W 1.96), Morecambe (W 2.1), Kettering Town (L 1.85), Torquay United (W 1.49), Dundee (W 1.94), Morton (W 1.86) and East Stirling (L 1.67), Peterhead (W 2.44), Raith Rovers (L 2.44) and Stirling Albion (L 2.46), Everton (W 1.55), Hull City (D 2.8), Leeds United (W 1.55), Peterborough (W 1.60), Tranmere Rovers (W 2.2), Brentford (D 2.22), Chesterfield (D 2.24), Exeter City (W 2.42), Oxford United (W 1.64), Inverness Caledonian Thistle (W 2.3) and Forfar (W 2.16). 24 bets - Profit to a level stake of 100 = 321 (13.38%).

Aways: Hartlepool (L 2.36), Luton Town (L 3.05), Bournemouth (W 2.62), Rotherham (W 4.4), Kidderminster Harriers (W 1.5), Wrexham (D 2.48), Hearts (L 2.92), Queen of the South (L 2.66), Partick Thistle (W 2.9), St Johnstone (L 2.42), Queens Park (D 2.08) and Dumbarton (L 2.24). 12 bets – Loss to a level stake of 100 = 58 (-4.83%).
League One / Two Homes: 8 bets – Profit 383 (47.88%)

League One / Two Aways: 4 bets – Profit 302 (75.5%)

Footy Selections - Week 3 (Home AND Away)

A heady harvest of Home selections this week, which I have filtered down to 10 for investment purposes.

Manchester United (1.98), Middlesbrough (2.38), Watford (2.18), Milton Keynes Dons (1.96), Morecambe (2.1), Kettering Town (1.85), Torquay United (1.49), Dundee (1.94), Morton (1.86) and East Stirling (1.67).

There are also three Scottish League Two selections that are worthy of mention, all at good prices – Peterhead (2.44), Raith Rovers (2.44) and Stirling Albion (2.46), plus Everton (1.55), Hull City (2.8), Leeds United (1.55), Peterborough (1.60), Tranmere Rovers (2.2), Brentford (2.22), Chesterfield (2.24), Exeter City (2.42), Oxford United (1.64), Inverness Caledonian Thistle (2.3) and Forfar (2.16).

I also have a dozen away selections: Hartlepool (2.36), Luton Town (3.05), Bournemouth (2.62), Rotherham (4.4), Kidderminster Harriers (1.5), Wrexham (2.48), Hearts (2.92), Queen of the South (2.66), Partick Thistle (2.9), St Johnstone (2.42), Queens Park (2.08) and Dumbarton (2.24).

Small stakes to give me a bit of an interest. If they all win, I won’t be rich, and if they all lose, well, that would probably be something of a record.

Good luck.

Battle Of The Nerds

John Tuohy, aka The Gambler, recently posted an old article from Cigar Aficionado magazine, which was written by Michael Kaplan back in 2004, shortly after I joined Betfair. I hadn’t seen this article before, and it was a good read. Towards the end of the article, the author talks about the “new class of professional gambler” that Betfair created.

The “old class” was typified by John, who “had always been a run-of-the-mill punter, game to bet on just about anything”, while the “new class” was represented by a young Glen Alcoe, described as a “supersharp advantage player”, and perhaps less flatteringly as a “nerdy-looking guy with a PhD in mathematics”. Glen Alcoe, we are told, makes his money “by finding opportunities that other people overlook.”

In other words, by finding value. An edge. Call it what you will.

Betfair’s problem, it seems to me, is that they are attractive to this new class of gambler, and the word ‘gambler’ here is really a misnomer. “Value investor” would be more accurate. By definition, these people will be overall winners, and if they should ever find that their edge no longer exists, and can’t find a way to adapt and make a profit, they will simply walk away. They are not gamblers in it for the thrill of the action. They are ‘nerds’ in it to make money.

People joining Betfair are either gamblers or nerds. (I’m including among their number arbers and insiders).

Gamblers will lose, perhaps a little more slowly than in the high street, but lose they surely will. Will they keep pouring money in to fund their thrill for action? Possibly, although as I have written before, being able to see their indisputable P&L might be enough to put some of these people off.

So Betfair becomes populated by nerds and a few gamblers, and as Andrew Black is quoted as saying “If somebody's smart and he works hard, he will win money on Betfair. However, there are a lot of very clever people out here, and it's not easy. But why should it be? This is survival of the fittest."

How very true.

Are You 1 in 10? 3 in 20? Me Neither

I'm a little depressed. I thought paying the Premium Charge on a regular basis (although not last week, thanks to some clever, and some not so clever, shenanigans) meant I was in the top 0.3% on Betfair. It seems I am nowhere close.

This excerpt is from the Guardian's coverage of the 2007 Kieren Fallon trial. David O'Reilly is Betfair's barrister:

"[Miles] Rodgers had nonetheless made a net profit of over £180,000 from all his activity on Betfair over the indictment period December 2002 to September 2004, the court heard, and Kelson wanted to know how many Betfair account-holders would be able to say the same."

"Probably 10-15%," said O'Reilly. "It's not a number we need to have control of. We take our commission, whoever wins and loses."

£180,000 in 21 months? From reading the Betfair Forum, I assumed EVERYONE made at least that and more. But ONLY 10-15% REALLY make that? Of course, back in the pre-Premium Charge days, it was a lot easier!

Home System Week 2 Summary

Of the 14 selections, 6 were winners, 3 were losers, and 5 were draws. As last, that’s a lot of draws, with most of them coming at the less well visited portion of the fixture list – the Scottish League and Conference Regional Leagues.

The full results were: Crewe (W 2.24), Oldham (L 2.06), Barnet (W 1.93), Bournemouth (D 1.94), Bradford (W 1.84), Darlington (L 1.9), Mansfield (W 1.34), Partick Thistle (L 1.73), St Johnstone (D 1.81) and Peterhead (D 1.75).

Nothing spectacular. The research continues. Meanwhile, in the Under / Over 2.5 goals market...

I fancied the Everton v Middlesbrough game to be a low scoring affair, and backed the Under 2.5 goals pre-game. I laid off 2/3rds of the bet after ten minutes and let the rest ride. I was going to trade-out at half-time, but Middlesborough messed that plan up by scoring in the 44th minute.

I pondered trading out at half-time for a small profit, but after my mind had started counting on a bigger win, I thought I'd be brave and again let it run, hoping the 'Boro would keep it tight. They didn't. Two goals by 50 minutes and I was in a hole. Mercifully, Everton put me out of my misery 6 minutes later (if I'm going to lose, I'd rather the loss be quick. Games where the agony drags on forever are just excruciating!).

Looking back, the mistake I made was in not trading out at the half. Certainly the profit was way down on what it could have been with a 0-0 scoreline at half-time, but the fact was that the score was now 1-0 and that a profit is a profit, however small. A case of a bad decision driven by greed.

Turning The Corner Comments And Thoughts

Thanks for the comments on my recent post Turning The Corner, about football betting. Since comments can sometimes get lost and because I know you all check back every few hours to see the latest blindingly insightful post, I thought I’d address them all in a new post.

Pete – “First I would just like to comment on your excellent blog. It is always a pleasurable and thoughtful read.” Totally agree! Just kidding. It’s a Friday, I’m in a silly mood. But the comment is appreciated.

Seriously, you mention that you avoid accumulators. Yes, and so do I. It’s hard enough finding one winner, never mind multiple winners, and when I used to play with multiples, I often found myself settling for a selection just to make up the numbers, and that can never be good.

You then say you are “laying odds-on selections where I deem the value to be poor and in truth even sticking to this is proving difficult”. How do you ‘deem the value to be poor’? Do you have a rating system, or is it just a gut feeling?

As for the Unders / Overs comment which was: “…and possibly playing the Unders/Overs markets could prove fruitful but when playing the Unders market in-play it is imperative that you stake yourself accordingly. IE: Do your analysis, if you perceive value have a straight punt and trade out if necessary.” How do I know if trading out is necessary? I’ve messed about with these stupid markets for long enough to know that when I trade out of the unders the game will finish with no more goals, but when I don’t, there will be at least three, with two of them coming in stoppage time. Perhaps an exaggeration, but that’s how it feels!

Talkbet / Paul – thanks for the web site. I’ll check it out. There would certainly appear to be some logic to the idea of including statistics that reflect superiority, and as JPG says, the number of offsides should probably be included somewhere. It would be interesting to know what correlation there is between corners and goals, or offsides and goals, or shots and goals. I’ll probably just have to start tracking these myself (or hire someone to do it for me). Maybe I’ll bribe my son! Paul – I haven’t checked out your website before today, but it looks like you have some interesting stuff there. Thanks.

JPG – I try to remove the emotion from my betting, and for outright punts, I can do this. I just look at the numbers. However, in-play, I find it very hard to turn off the emotion. I have my favourite teams, and I have teams that I always seem to do better on than others, and I teams that I can never seem to win on. When I am trading a game in-play, I do form an impression which I have no doubt is influenced by past experiences with that team and that does affect how I invest, however much I try to avoid it. For example, games involving Chelsea regularly seem to lose me money whereas West Ham are a lucky team for me. It’s a funny old game.

Other ideas I am pondering right now. How many matches should current form include? Should my Elo ratings be separated into Home and Away? The answers seems to be ‘6’ and ‘No’ (at least that’s what “Profitable Football Betting” tells me).

Finally, I see Sunderland are at 3.0 tomorrow for their home game with Spurs. 

That seems a value price to me. Sunderland are in form as, admittedly, are Spurs, but Spurs might feel a trip to one of the far outposts of the English Empire is a bit of a comedown after last weekend’s trip to Wembley. Sunderland don’t merit selection based on the numbers alone, but I’ll put them out there and see if I can get some feedback.

Good luck this weekend.

Home System (2)

10 solid gold Home value selections for this weekend: Crewe Alexandra (2.24), Oldham Athletic (2.06), Barnet (1.93), AF Bournemouth (1.94), Bradford City (1.84), Darlington (1.9), Mansfield Town (1.34), Partick Thistle (1.73), St Johnstone (1.81) and Peterhead (1.75).

After 14 unbeaten selections out of 15 last week, I am very tempted to lay the opposition, but I’ll give it one more week with simply backing the selection. Backing the draw proved profitable last week too, but 11 selections is a rather lean sample (to say the least) to start leaping to any conclusions.

I’ve also practically given up with the Blue Square North and South Leagues, mainly because the markets are extremely illiquid. The winners are Telford, Harrogate, Hampton and Richmond, and Hayes and Yeading. (A lot of ‘ands’ there, but still only four teams!) If the prices are a little closer nearer kick-off, then I may have a dabble, but right now there’s too big a gap which almost certainly means ‘no value’.

Turning The Corner

I have been researching betting on football. I've commented on a couple of blogs recently that it is becoming increasingly annoying that I cannot consistently make money from the game that I should know better than any other.

I have just finished reading a book called “Profitable Football Betting” by Paul Steele. The book was published in August 2003, and while it is packed with data and statistics which are now obsolete, there are nonetheless a few tidbits in there, even if there are no golden nuggets. I also recently read “The Football Betting Science” by Gary Christie which is one of those betting books that you think after reading “I could have written better than that”.

I guess the world of football betting is one that is well traveled. The world’s most popular sport by a mile, and probably the most gambled on team sport as well, it is hardly surprising that it is the most studied.

However, compared with other team sports, it is quite remarkably free of statistics. Not as free as it used to be mind you. In my day, the statistics were pretty much limited to counting the goals and who scored them, and that was about it. These days though, we have shots, shots on target, corners, bookings, sendings-off, the dreaded ‘assists’ and a plethora of other numbers if you care to look hard enough. In many ways football is similar to ice-hockey, but like all American sports, ice-hockey is full of statistics. Baseball, cricket, American football, basketball, even rugby I’ve noticed, all these sports are laden with statistics, but football, due mainly to its fluid nature I suspect, is relatively free of them.

Why am I waffling on about statistics? Because statistics are all that most of us have to work with when evaluating upcoming matches. Even the most dedicated of fans can only get to see a handful of games a week, and so statistics become that much more important.

Goals are obviously important, but in a way, they are overrated. There are 1-0 wins, and there are 1-0 wins. A team can totally dominate and come away with ‘just’ a 1-0 win, or conversely, a team can be totally outplayed and win by that same score, but most systems will look at the two results and treat them the same.

One of the interesting items in “Profitable Football Betting” is about the importance of looking past just the results, but looking more deeply into the statistics, in particular shots and corners.

I like this idea, although it is going to take more time to research every game. The author compares a number of systems, and this “Penetration” based system fared extremely well, placing second overall of the fifteen he analysed, and first in a number of categories. He breaks his results down by predicted home wins, draws etc.

Anyway, something to look at over the next few weeks. For the remainder of this season though, I am going with the Elo based Cassini Ratings And Performance system, and if anyone has any books or articles to recommend, please don’t be shy.

The Jury Deliberates

A few days ago, I wrote a post expressing serious doubts that a bet had been won at 100-1 as had been claimed by http://thebettingadvantage.com/100-to-1-shot/

There were a number of reasons why I came to this conclusion.

1) Why would someone post about a big win without detailing what made them consider this bet to be value?

2) Why delay posting for almost two days?

3) The money mached at 100 was less than it should have been.

4) The screenshot showing the bet looked very much a fake. Even the two zeroes on 100 clearly didn't match (looked more like 10O).

Having said that, it isn't very nice to accuse someone of something without being 100% certain of the facts, and when the respected Scott Ferguson commented that reason 3) above could be explained as a product of cross-matching, a seed of doubt was planted. I've not noticed the cross-matching in the basketball markets, (at least not in-play) but I agree this is a possibility. Betfair should probably update the Rules on markets where cross-matching is in effect, but that's for another time.

As for 1) I guess we're all different. Personally I find it slightly distasteful to post screenshots showing wins or losses. What's the point? No one is interested, and as we all know, these screesnshots can be easily faked anyway. I'll ask my psychiatrist if she has any ideas during my next session... Off topic for a moment, but for me, blogs are for opinions and ideas, reasons and suggestions, not purely for posting after the event results. We KNOW who won. We don't care if someone won 20p. Do we?

2) Why the delay in posting? Well, it could be down to a busy schedule.

4) The decidedly dodgy screenshot? Well, readers can make up their own minds about that.

I'm not totally convinced, but would the jury convict on the evidence above? Probably not. Reasonable doubt and all that.

Anyway, there's no such thing as bad publicity and with a whopping 18 comments to date, I am a little envious of the attention over there!

Marching On, Toot Toot

March is off to a good start with the best 1st day of a month since April 2007 (no fooling). A back of the under 2.5 in the Aston Villa v Stoke City game was laid off at half-time, and for once I made a good move in football trading. One swallow doesn’t make a summer and all that but it was a pleasing turn of events.

In the Accenture Matchplay tournament, I backed Geoff Ogilvy at 1.86 and laid him off too early to go Green-All-Over. I really am a nervous Nellie sometimes with these bets. I back because I KNOW the price is value (Ogilvy is a better player, and has previously played in two of these 36-hole finals), so he wins the first hole and after 4 holes I lay the bet off. Voices in my head are telling me 101 reasons why I should. Loss aversion won. Typically, by the turn, he was up by 4.

Then later, the Los Angeles Lakers were down by 10 at half-time, and of course I had backed them pre-game and was thus looking at a four figure loss. 

I don’t like four figure losses, so I made the decision to cut my losses, go Red-All-Over and then layed the Suns for a large sum at 1.58 and 1.59 at the start of the second half. 

My reasoning was that Phoenix were under-strength, and had played about as well as they could do, and could be a little flat in the third quarter. The Lakers coach (Phil Jackson) is also good at making adjustments, and my lay paid off when the Lakers cut the lead to 6 and I went Green-All-Over. 

Arguably too early again, (the Lakers later took the lead, but I had a lot of money to offload which is not always easy to do, and I have found it prudent to lay off when the opportunity is there. Bird in the hand stuff. NBA markets can turn in a hurry. The Suns then rallied and by the end of the third quarter, were up by 10 again but by that point I was out of the game.

My summary of the Jazz / Warriors game in response to a question was this:

“Lay Utah at Golden State - Jazz are on a good run, and may win, but they will trade higher than 1.57. They played yesterday and may be a little weary (it was also the funeral for the Jazz owner yesterday which may not help). All the players were there. That, and the fact that the Warriors can explode in a hurry, followed by an equally rapid implosion! makes this a good looking game to trade. Good luck. I make no guarantee...”

Not to blow my own trumpet or anything, well, maybe a small toot, but the Jazz did indeed win, and traded as high as 2.4 during the game, (although 2.2 was the high for more than a few quid).

A pleasing day. May the month continue in this vein.

Straddle

February is usually one of my least profitable months, but yesterday saw me say goodbye to my third best month ever, behind only Januarys of 2008 and 2009, which of course makes for a promising start to this year.

As a month, February was only my 9th best (4th worst!) month before this year, but now it is up to 4th best. This is especially pleasing given that the Premium Charge was applied every week.

Speaking of which, I have been attempting to reduce this by using a modified ‘straddle’ strategy on certain Match Odds / Handicap markets. I used to use this strategy in my options trading days, and options markets and the Betfair markets do have a lot in common. One side of the transaction will expire worthless.

By picking games with a low handicap, and backing the underdogs on both markets, a profit on the overall outcome is ‘almost’ guaranteed. I say ‘almost’, because in a game where the handicap is +1.5, a one point win by the team giving the points will see a loss in both markets. Not good. I have had a couple of close shaves, but so far so good.

At least when I do take a hit (and it will happen) the irony is that this will help my Premium Charge reduction even more! There are other ways of achieving this (for example the 0-0 in football is often a different price in the Correct Score, Next Goal, Total Goals and First Goal markets, and arbitration opportunities sometimes exist).

Home System Week 1 Summary

Strange betting activity on the Queens Park v Ayr game in Scottish League Two today. I had money on Raith, and the total traded on the game was £10k. Three of the other four games had totals of £11k, £7k and £7k with the total for Queens Park – Ayr a staggering £160k. Ayr were justifiable favourites at 1.85, and the price didn’t move dramatically, but for people to be putting thousands on such a game, I suspect they knew something. Ayr ran out easy 3-0 winners.

I had all 16 bets matched, although I took lower prices on the Conference Regional league games than I initially asked for.

The full results with actual odds obtained were Everton (W 1.51), Chelsea (W 1.36), Bristol City (D 1.71), Burnley (L 1.92), Brentford (W 2.18), Chesterfield (D 1.87), Rochdale (W 1.56), Cambridge United (D 1.94), Forest Green Rovers (D 2.08), Raith Rovers (D 1.9), Cowdenbeath (W 2.04), Alfreton Town (D 1.63), Gateshead (D 1.59), Eastleigh (D 1.78), Hayes and Yeading United (W 1.72) and Team Bath (W 1.79) which netted out at a loss of £41.27. While there were ‘only’ 7 winners, just one team actually lost, with no less than 8 teams (50%!) drawing. (There’s those draws again…)

Oh yeah, and I also had £70k on Ayr to win at Queens Park. Screenshot to follow…

Football Goals

One of my ‘goals’ this year is to make my football betting profitable. Football is my favourite sport. I grew up playing the game, and played it on and off into my forties. I can remember England winning the World Cup. I have spent more hours, and more money, than I care to remember watching my favourite team from the terraces and stands of over 60 grounds in England (and Wales), but what priceless memories they are.

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.

So why is it that I find football so hard to make money from on the exchanges, when other sports are much easier? Essentially, the problem is that to make money from investing on sports, you have to be getting value.

Football is such a popular sport that it is almost impossible to find an edge. This is especially true for the Premier League and Championship teams, although as I have said before, I suspect that less coverage of the lower leagues means more opportunity, but against this (as illustrated in dramatic fashion just last week) is that the lower in the leagues you go, the more likely it is that insider information will put you at a disadvantage.

In-play is different from other team sports too. Key is that a goal in football is such a dramatic price changing event, and yet they happen all the time. (Well, not ALL the time, as anyone trying to make money laying the 0-0 will attest to.) After gently trending in a predictable direction from the kick-off, a goal is scored and the price resets after a brief suspension of the market. For sure, other sports have their ‘dramatic events’ e.g. an eagle in golf on the final day of a close tournament, a buzzer-beating three point shot in basketball, a six hit off the last ball etc. but they don’t come along as often as goals do.

How do we find value in football? Pre-game, I am of the opinion that it IS possible to find value, although it is definitely not easy. There are a lot of people trying to do the same thing as you are.

In-play, I am of the opinion that it is very difficult to find value. The market is very efficient, and if the price on a market is 1.5 with 30 minutes to go, then I think this is almost always very close to the true price. One exception is immediately after a goal has been scored, when there are value bets available sometimes before the market has stabilised. Fear and greed in evidence. Another thing to watch out for is that the market often overreacts to a sending off. Approximately one in ten games has a sending off, but not all sendings-off are the same. The timing is key, and also important are the score of the game at the time and whether the player is from the home team or the away team. But as a general rule, for me it is not easy finding value in-play.

Back to pre-game punting then. As I have written before, I rate all the English and Scottish League (and top non-league) teams using a simple Elo based system. It’s fun, but can I make money with them? The selections I posted earlier are those that my ratings consider to be value.

It is a very time consuming exercise to go through every fixture but I shall try it through the end of March, and see where we are with it. After March, we start getting towards silly-season for a number of teams. Mid-table teams start experimenting with new players etc. and form can become unreliable. I shall be posting the results.

Home System (1)

11 solid gold Home value selections for this weekend: Everton (1.51), Chelsea (1.36), Bristol City (1.71), Burnley (1.92), Brentford (2.18), Chesterfield (1.87), Rochdale (1.56), Cambridge United (1.94), Forest Green Rovers (2.1), Raith Rovers (1.9) and Cowdenbeath (2.04).

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).

Walter Mitty

The mind of a gambler must make a fascinating case study for a psychiatrist. It’s human nature to remember the good things that happen in life, whereas the not so good things are consigned to the dustbins of our minds.

For gamblers, the wins are readily recalled and related to others, the losses, not so much. Certainly not many gamblers will admit that they regularly lose overall, although some social gamblers I know are quite happy regularly losing a few quid, and winning on rare occasions, but for them it is entertainment. Personally, I don’t find the offices of my local Stanley Betting shop too much fun, but give me a casino and I’m quite happy to lose (a little) money playing craps – it’s the cost of entertainment.

The Betfair forum is (by definition) full of gamblers, some of whom seem genuine, but many of whom seem anything but. Often there are dubious claims of fantastic wins and sometimes incredible losses, accompanied by supposed profit and losses. “1.01 smashed! (Yawn) £20,000 traded!”

Sadly, the blogosphere seems to be no different. One of the blogs listed on the right, whose blogger (Walter Mitty) recently had me exchange links with them, frequently posts tales and screenshots of his wins and losses. I was already a little suspicious since there never seems to be any reasoning to explain the outcome, (just a “Last night, Team A beat Team B - here’s how I much I won/lost”), but I’m a nice guy – benefit of the doubt and all that. He even wrote one curious post a while back claiming that a couple of people had contacted him asking him how to open a Betfair account, a tale that I recounted here after my comment to that post was deleted:

His latest post 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.

Since Betfair count the traded total as the Back amount PLUS the Lay amount (e.g. a bet of $39.54 will show in the Traded column as $79), this bet clearly was never struck.

I’ve posted a comment, but I’m sure it will be removed. I guess it took almost two days to come up with the screenshot.

And The Award Goes To

One of the rare times when I have a dabble on something I know nothing about, (other than football, which I do on a frequent basis), is the Academy Awards. Going to the cinema a few times a year does not mean I know anything about Sound Mixing!

Of the 18 markets that I got involved in, 13 were won by the favourite - a trend I have noticed in the three previous years I have invested in this event. I use the Golden Globes as a reliable guide, the exception being the Leading Actor market where, according to the 'experts', the favourite (Mickey Rourke) was apparently not to the Academy's liking whereas Sean Penn was. They were right.

As mentioned a few posts ago, I rather fancied Slumdog Millionaire to win the Best Picture (which goes hand in hand with Best Director) and having backed it at 1.24 (the 1.59 reported in the press was nowhere to be found) and was able to lay it off (just in case) at 1.06. Anyway, the biggest disaster was in the aforementioned Sound Mixing market where I dropped a not too cool £1,250, but winners exceeded losers leaving me overall up by just £350.

Was I getting value on these bets? Probably, as it turned out, and it's only once a year I go wild and crazy. I was happy with a profit, and whilst it could have been much more, it could have been much less. The advantages of a few big winners and a few big losers is obviously that the Premium Charge will be mitigated next week.

Mardi Gras Comes Early, Thanks To New Orleans

The sadness and despair of not having done my homework on Weymouth's situation and losing a tenner has been erased by the joy and delight of my best day so far this month, in fact my best February day EVER! Well, maybe 'best' is not the right word, as Valentine's Day has been very special for the past three years, but what I mean is that it was my most profitable February day ever. (My girlfriend sometimes reads this, so I have to word these things carefully).

Anyway, I don't suppose this 'system' is a huge secret or even original, but I like to oppose NBA road teams when they are coming off an overtime loss the previous day, and though I seldom do handicap betting, this scenario is one exception. I do have other criteria that have to be met, and the basic theory is that the team is not only physically tired (both from the longer game and the travel) but also somewhat emotionally deflated, and with a decent sum available at evens opposing the New Orleans Hornets, I felt this was value. The Golden State Warriors duly obliged beating the -8.5 handicap by 4 points, and February is now my 6th best month since records began, and we still have a week to go.

Now if only football was this simple. The nearest equivalent would be teams returning from an away game in Europe (preferably Eastern Europe) after an extra-time defeat I suppose.

My Draw No Bet selection for today is Everton (away to Newcastle United). I have them priced at 1.81 but have backed them at 1.92. And before anyone gets too excited, this is not a tip. As with all my football bets right now, this is just an interest bet for a very modest sum. After all, you never know if Newcastle are going to field their Under-18 side!

Very In Terra Sting

An interesting afternoon, with the highlight being Weymouth's 0-9 defeat at home to Rushden and Diamonds. (I'm a Palace fan - what do I know about 9-0 defeats!) I wrote that Weymouth 'appeared' to be good value, and certainly based on the ratings that was true. However, as I suspected, (and as Curly pointed out later), I was certainly missing something - the something being the Weymouth first team! The lesson to be learned is that these ratings can very soon be rendered obsolete by off-field events. A transfer deal can certainly have this effect, but losing the entire team is taking this to an extreme.

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...)

Draw No Bet

It’s disappointing that the DRAW NO BET market on Barclay's Premier League games is so illiquid. For example, a paltry £84 as I write traded on Stoke City v Portsmouth.

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.

2:56pm Update: I have also been matched on AFC Wimbledon (1.5), Worcester City (1.73), Cambridge United (1.48), Chelmsford (1.45), Altrincham (2.08), Fleetwood (2.48), Crawley Town (1.61), Histon (1.77), Oxford United (2.04) plus the draw at 3.45 in Barrow v Grays Athletic.

Mr. Optimist

Recent postings on the Betfair forum suggest that changes to the Premium Charge could be on the way. No details on that, but during the discussion, a Betfair employee commented in all seriousness that Betfair is not a monopoly and is in competition with the high street bookies.

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.

Mr. Winner, Mr. Loser and Mr. Optimist are made up names. Any similarity to real people, living or dead, is strictly coincidence. No such persons were harmed in the making of this blog entry.

NBA Half-Time

I was comparing the first half of this NBA season with last year, (I do love my stats), and I am slightly up (2.22%), but one thing I hadn’t realized before today was that I actually lost money after the All-Star break last season. The remainder of the regular season was profitable, but it appears my strategies don’t work so well in the play-offs (where I lost 12.57% of my profits) for some reason.

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!

I've noticed this trend in other sports as well. As a general rule, it is easier for me to make money in lower profile games than in 'big' games.

A Brief History Of Time

Continuing on the subject of physical reactions to wins / losses, and something else I’ve noticed proof of is that time is not a constant.

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!

Let's Get Physical

My incredibly patient, understanding and quite beautiful girlfriend has to put up with a lot from me, including knowing how to deal with me when my investments don’t go quite according to plan. I hadn’t really given it much thought before, but she commented yesterday that I have different emotional states when losing.

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!

Betfair India

So Slumdog Millionaire is available at 1.53/1, "in line with international betting websites"!

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.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jQ3H2ijmvTJaDN6rqijQ_OBaZoqA

Is It Really This Easy?

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.

Nice one!

Singing The Blues

It appears that Roman Abramovich reads this blog. As a result of seeing that Chelsea’s failure to beat Hull City on Saturday was the only blemish on my Saturday Premier League investments, he has decided to fire Luiz Felipe Scolari after less than 8 months in the job. Apparently fifth place in the Cassini Ratings And Performace (CRAP) standings is not good enough.

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).

Possibly Chelsea are so keen to snap up Adams that they realized they had to act fast and get rid of Scolari, but I will not be putting too much on Adams in the Next Chelsea Manager market. In fact, I won’t be putting ANY money on ANYONE in this market, unless my son gives me some inside information as to who they might have in mind.

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…

February Football

February football is off to a profitable start, with my ratings producing six winners from seven games in the Premier League yesterday. The only loser was Chelsea who were expected to beat Hull, but at 1.31, I didn’t back them anyway.

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.

I am still researching the best way to use the ratings. For example, I picked the Wigan - Fulham game as a draw based simply on the fact that the two teams were rated so closely (1168 and 1161 respectively), and the draw 'seemed' to be a value bet. I'm looking for something a little more scientific.

Anorak Section

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.

Tick-Tock

A respected member of the Betfair Forum (there’s not too many, but this guy is one of them) has suggested another way in which the clock can be ‘beaten’. In essence, the idea is the same as the one I mentioned a couple of posts back, whereby a bet would be submitted but would not reach the market after 5 seconds because of a block.

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.

Blink, Or You'll Miss It

In his latest post over at http://talkbet.typepad.com/talkbet/ Jon reminded me of one of my earliest ventures into the world of gambling.

He wrote “Yesterday I sent out an email at work as a bit of fun with a list of last nights 6 premier league games. You needed to choose home/draw/away for each one. I spent all of 10 seconds on it yet managed to predict 5 of the 6 outcomes correctly with only Blackburn letting me down at home to Bolton. It makes you wonder if its really worth all the time and effort researching stats and analysing games when you might be better off just going with your first hunch.”

Back in the late 60s at school in Croydon, I used to write out the fixtures from the 22 Division One and Two games (as they were then) each Saturday (as it was then) and anyone interested would put their name at the top of a column and predict the result, home, draw or away. Each line would cost an (old) penny, and the top three winners would receive a payout of 60%-30%-10% after I had deducted my operating cost of 2d. (Since my pocket money at this time was an old 6d, this was quite a tidy sum). Those were the days.

As for Jon’s comment about following your first hunch, he may have a point. A commenter recently asked me if I had read Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking by Malcolm Gladwell. I have indeed.

In the author’s own words “It's a book about rapid cognition, about the kind of thinking that happens in a blink of an eye. When you meet someone for the first time, or walk into a house you are thinking of buying, or read the first few sentences of a book, your mind takes about two seconds to jump to a series of conclusions. Well, "Blink" is a book about those two seconds, because I think those instant conclusions that we reach are really powerful and really important and, occasionally, really good.”

I think he could have included something along the lines of "…when you see a price displayed on a betting exchange during an in-play event, that your mind immediately recognizes as one that should be matched as it represents (for you) value”.

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 analyse it. Don’t sit there thinking about it. Grab it.