Saturday, 11 December 2010

Peter Webb


I imagine that most longtime Betfair traders have heard of Peter Webb, and this interview with him may be of interest to some of you out there.

Former channel man Peter Webb has become one of Betfair's leading customers and bets a quarter of a billion pounds annually on horseracing alone. He also sloshes a good amount on the X Factor market.

The ex Compaq and Medion man finally left the UK's computer distribution channel in 2003 to make a full time go of trading on the betting exchange. He says: “I doubt there's many people earning more than me on Betfair – it's substantial by any terms.”

Webb trades the exchange the way a City trader plays the financial markets. He puts around £20,000 into individual horse races (where even a snowy weekday race at Wolverhampton can attract more than £500,000 on the exchange). As there can be four race meetings in a day and seven races at each of them, it is easy to see how his turnover gets so high.

Here' how it works. Webb will back Dobbin to win (say at 5.0, which is the same as 4 to 1). If, then, the odds to back Dobbin not to win (this is called laying) fall below the back price (say 4.0, or 3 to 1) and Webb makes this bet then he has made a profit no matter what happens in the race.

The exchange keeps track of his net position so he's free to re-bet his capital immediately. If Dobbin's lay price goes up, he's stuffed. Webb makes lots of trade in this manner, on several horses, before a race starts. The odds movements don't tend to be as extreme as this example.

When there's racing in the UK, Australia and the US he'll be up at 2am working the Australian market. The UK business is usually between 2pm and 5pm, and then the US comes online at 9pm until 1pm.

Webb starts trading 10 minutes before a race starts and closes all his bets 10 seconds before the off. “Most of the money arrives five minutes before it starts,” he says. When the race starts, he no longer has any financial interest in its result, he's off to trading the next race.

“When I looked at Betfair all I could see was opportunity,” he says. “I dabbled around on several markets, and with several strategies. Horse racing stood out because of the amount of money that went through it, so I started to work really hard at understanding it.”

Webb's approach has nothing to do with knowing form or horse bloodlines. “My lack of knowledge has really helped. I'm looking at the price of a horse and estimate where the price will go. My role in the market is as an arbiter of value and whatever I do I do before the race starts – I don't believe I'm better at predicting the form than anyone else.”

This sort of thinking might be familiar to anyone who's made money not from taking a view on the absolute merits of a given technology or piece or kit - but rather on how prices are likely to move over time.

Webb will also bet major football matches, where he can put £50,000 to £70,000 through the market, and where the price changes aren't as rapid. There are also 100 dog races a day which he can trade. “Football, horse-racing and tennis are the big three markets. I've also been providing a lot of the liquidity for X Factor - people would be horrified about how much of that market was me.

These opportunities pop out of the woodwork at all times. I think the exchange is beautiful – I look at it and it speaks to me,” he says.

Webb opened an account with Betfair seven days after it first went live in 2000. He heard about it while knocking around the First Tuesday meetings of the original and glorious dotcom boom.

He deposited £1,000 and his first-ever bet (position) was placed with £5. He says he's never had to put more money in, and currently has £250,000 in his account. He doesn't need more because unlike the financial markets, Betfair settles trades immediately. A relatively small sum placed in a market can be leveraged very quickly, by closing its position then rebetting it.

Webb's last proper job was launching the Medion PC brand into the UK and managing accounts selling it such as DSG and Aldi. He builds his own PCs (and uses six monitors to trade), and upgrades them every six months. However, he says Medion is good value and he'd buy them now. “Sometimes you work for companies and think 'I wouldn't touch that',” he recalls.

He started in the distribution business straight from school working for Portsmouth distributor Softly Softly. He worked at Compaq, account managing its retail division, and had an office round the corner from legendary UK boss Joe 'Meat Packer' McNally. “I have worked with most if not all the top manufacturers of consumer technology products and their respective channel partners,” he says. “Dixons, Tesco, Wallmart, Aldi, Toys R Us, Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, Hewlett Packard, Intel, Microsoft.” He's also worked with Tech Data and Netcom Internet.

Webb won't say how much profit he makes on his Betfair trading, but stresses that each trade is only netting tenths of a per cent profit, and the line between making money and losing it is very fine. But he himself suggests £40,000 a month wouldn't be unreasonable for some top Betfair traders. Another reason to be cagey around money is that gambling profits aren't taxable in the UK – but profits from trading activity can be.

Webb is also behind a Betfair trading product called BetAngel and says he doesn't want anyone thinking that using this is route to getting rich quick. “You have to work at it,” he says.

BetAngel acts as a Bloomberg-type information screen for the betting exchange with a touch of the eBay sniping technology, says Webb. “It's a trading tool and allows you to place orders quickly. We borrowed ideas and technology from financial markets, and it allows 'fill kill', stop losses, and charting.”

Webb funds its development through subscriptions. He also runs courses in Betfair trading, which engenders the classic get-rich-quick suspicion of "Why tell anyone else, if you're making so much money?", he says.

Webb says he just enjoys meeting people and talking about his business. “I'm a social person and trading is a lonely business. When I first started doing courses, they came off the back of the software. I didn't think trading would last very long – I thought I had three or four years in it – so software and training was a bit of an insurance policy.”

Gambling and the gaming business is afforded quite a low status by many people (Reg readers among them), and at the heart of Webb talking up his business is that he wants his performance to be recognised.

“Having worked so hard and so long on this, I just want some legitimacy added to it,” he says. “Spread betting is considered normal and what we do here is exactly the same. Rather than the price of oil to go from here to there, we're looking on the price of Yojimbo [a horse racing on the day of the interview] to go from here to there."

In 2006, Webb did some financial shows with Betfair. The betting exchange's name wasn't proving a draw and Webb says he only got any attention when he started putting up financial-style market charts and explaining how he would trade the position. “The next slide would say the 14.10pm at Wolverhampton,” he says.

“I consistently get people saying what I do is not possible. I've been doing it for 10 years and still get that.”

Webb is also a financial investor and a big fan and shareholder of billionaire Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway business (a single share of which is currently priced at $120,000). The backbone of Buffett's business is insurance. At one shareholder get-together, Webb asked Buffett how he reconciled his anti-gambling views with his risk-related business.

“When I look at the insurance industry I see an industry based on probabilities and people not knowing those true probabilities. Money is being made for the house in the same way I see it being made in the gambling industry,” said Webb.

“Gambling involves creating risk that doesn't need to be created,” replied Buffett. “If you want to go out and gamble on where a little ball is going to fall on a wheel that's revolving, that's a created risk. You can watch a football game without betting on it, but you can't live in a house on the Florida coast without having a risk that your entire investment can disappear. But I hope that you're right and that the house wins in both cases.”

Webb does have his battles with the Betfair house and thinks he should be treated better by them than he is. He doesn't have an account manager, which he thinks strange, and the business has introduced premium charges for customers placing or editing more than 1,000 bets an hour, or making large numbers of data requests within the same second. Which is exactly what he does.

“Betfair's argument is that people like me, who make money consistently, should help fund acquisition of new customers,” says Webb. “But I'll put through millions a week, all at my own risk.”

The newly floated business has changed a lot since he first joined. “It's much more like a traditional bookmakers now. The Utopian dream has faded,” he says wistfully. A bit like the channel perhaps?®

Drifting And Villa - WBA


It's quite amazing sometimes how much a price on a football match will move in just a few hours. Yesterday's Hannover '96 v Stuttgart game is one example. The back prices early Friday morning were H: 2.44, D: 3.75, A: 3.0, yet 12 hours later the prices were H: 2.72, D: 3.65, A: 2.76, a significant drift on Hamburg. Football Elite made Hamburg a Recommended Bet so the news that the price had drifted so much was a little confusing. In the end, I put in a back at 3.0 which was fortuitously matched just a couple of minutes before Hamburg took the lead, and then got out at half-time. The drift had made me nervous. In the end, Hamburg won 2-1 after Stuttgart had levelled in the 74'.

I had a good comment from Sports Betting Universe on the Aston Villa v West Bromwich Albion game - actually it was a good comment on other things too, so here it is in full:

Always interesting to see what fellow punters are going for this weekend. Here's what I'm on (cue really bad weekend once you post up predictions!)

TOP SELECTIONS (10 points)

Hannover @ 2.50
Freiburg @ 1.95
NAC Breda @ 2.50
Mallorca @ 1.75

RECOMMENDED BETS (5 points)

Hercules @ 2.20
Udinese @ 2.20
Lorient @ 1.91
Kaiserslauten @ 2.50
Brest @ 2.50
Bologna (DOUBLE CHANCE) @ 2.38
Mechelen (DRAW NO BET) @ 2.00
Tottenham (DRAW NO BET) @ 2.10

I do think Mainz look quite tempting at 2.70 on initial viewing but Schalke are beginning to find some good form. They are coming into the match on the back of a 2-0 league win against Bayern Munich, and an impressive 2-1 victory at Benfica midweek. On paper they have one of the best sides in the league and are starting to show it, although league away form is their final hurdle to a full revival. Mainz have been stuttering after a fabulous start so I'm not sure that 2.70 isn't a fair price (but that's the beauty of sports, it's all about opinions and cue a 4-0 win for Mainz!).

I also think Villa are playing woefully at the moment and don't see much value at 2.24. West Brom are not the worst side on the road and are playing with a bit of confidence again after 2 wins on the bounce. Villa have won 1 in the last 10 which was a streaky win against Blackpool Reserves a few weeks back. They also seem to be prone to drawing a lot home so I'd probably lay Villa if anything (again cue Villa 7 West Brom 0!)

Anyway, good luck with your weekend selections. I hope it's winners all round. :-)
With regard to the Villa v WBA game, I think Villa's home form isn't as bad as it seems. Three of the last four have been against three of the Big Four, and they have won three of the other five, drawing the other two v Bolton and Birmingham. Yes, they have had two consecutive wins, but the two games before that were losses to Stoke and Wigan so form is patchy. The basic rating for this is Villa by 0.8, but with form taken into account it is down to 0.62. 2.22 just looks too big to me. Cue Villa 0 West Brom 7!

Friday, 10 December 2010

Brown Dog Day

A few weeks ago, I had an e-mail from SG asking, rather flatteringly, for some advice, and I was happy to oblige. Despite this, he has come up with a 'back-the-draw' system which has found 10 winners from 16 selections in the Premier League. Not a large sample by any means, but an impressive strike rate for such bets, and I thought it might be interesting to post his picks alongside mine as I try to surpass Pete Nordsted's Drawmaster strike rate.

My strong draws are Tottenham Hotspur v Chelsea and Newcastle United v Liverpool. (If Newcastle's new manager was a little more 'dynamic' I'd be tempted to leave this game alone, but the Pardew factor is not exactly earth-shattering). Weaker draws are Fulham v Sunderland, West Ham United v Manchester City and Wolverhampton Wanderers v Birmingham City.

In Serie A, the strong draw is Lecce v Chievo Verona with Genoa v Napoli a weaker proposition.

Ligue 1 has Valenciennes v Paris St Germain as a strong draw, while Caen v Nice and Nancy v Sochaux are weak.

La Liga just the one weak draw - Getafe v Villareal, while in the wacky Bundesliga I have more weak ones in Hannover '96 v Stuttgart, Koln v Eintracht Frankfurt, Hamburg v Bayer Leverkusen and Kaiserslautern v Wolfsburg.

Home value picks: Mainz '05 look to be value at 2.7 versus Schalke '04 as do Brest (2.48) v Montpellier; Lorient (2.0) v Lens; Udinese (2.18) v Fiorentina; Cagliari (2.16) v Catania; Aston Villa (2.24) v West Bromwich Albion; Manchester United (2.06) v Arsenal.

Still no PC back, and I have another of those IT migration weekends ahead of me with my presence in the office required and my schedule all discombobulated, so I'm not sure how much trading there will be. Can't complain though. Well, I can, but not a good idea if I want a bonus this year!

Here are SG's Picks: Draw - Bolton v Blackburn (3.45 - Strike Rate 62% / Yield 129%)

Home Lays - Stoke City (1.67 - 61% Strike rate / Yield 95%)

Away Lays - West Brom (3.65) / Liverpool (2.12)(may miss this one due to current manager situation) / Birmingham (3.3) (84% Strike rate / Yield 57%)

Thursday, 9 December 2010

I Forget – Which Day Did God Make All The Fossils?

A few days ago, I highlighted the arrogance and stupidity of athletes who credit their sporting success to a supernatural being. Apparently they think that god, fresh from his achievement of creating the universe, making man in his own image, and sending his son down to do some magic tricks (water into wine etc.), is now turning his attention to sports, and singling out individual athletes to show His greatness. Personally, I think curing cancer might be more impressive.

Unfortunately, and not for the first time when discussing the silliness of religious belief, someone misses the point suggesting that the target of my post is the 'supernatural entity' itself. It isn't.

The Wagerer said...

A guy spends a couple of seconds acknowledging a supernatural entity in which he believes.

You, not for the first time, go totally off-topic and spend far longer berating a supernatural entity that, according to you, doesn't even exist.

And he's the irrational one?
Er, yes, although irrational is probably too polite a word to use. I think 99% or readers of this blog probably agree who the irrational ones are when it comes to god.

If God wanted people to believe in him, then why did he invent logic?

(Not So) Super Al

As a Crystal Palace man, I have fond memories of Alan Pardew the football player (he also played briefly for my 'really' local team Whyteleafe), I have fond memories of Alan Pardew the football player, but as has been much written about elsewhere, what a bizarre decision to appoint him as manager of Newcastle United, if indeed the rumours are confirmed. Pardew is not a big name manager. Yes, he has two promotions on his record, at Reading and West Ham United. However, this was followed by ‘guiding’ West Ham to their worst run of defeats in over 70 years, before he was sacked there, moving on to Charlton Athletic where he was in charge as they were relegated from the Premier League. Then sacked, and on to Southampton where admittedly he was in charge as they won their first trophy since 1976 (the less than prestigious Football League Trophy) before being dismissed earlier this season.

What makes Mike Ashley, or anyone think that Pardew is qualified for the Newcastle United job, or in any way a better candidate than Chris Hughton? Soccernomics has a few paragraphs on the subject of football clubs making bad managerial appointments.

Some highlights: The average search process in ‘normal’ business takes five months. “In soccer, a club usually finds a coach within a couple of days of sacking his predecessor”.

The new manager “... is also almost always white, with a conservative haircut, aged between thirty-five and sixty, and a former professional player. There is no evidence that being a good player (or being white and of conservative appearance) is an advantage for a soccer manager. Arrigo Sacchi, coach of the great Milan from 1987 to 1991, who couldn’t play soccer himself, explained ‘You don’t have to have been a horse to be a jockey’".

The book later comments that “The new manager is appointed either because he is able to start work immediately (often as a result of having just been sacked)”.

Finally “A manager must above all look like a manager. Clubs would rather use traditional methods to appoint incompetents than risk doing anything that looks odd”.

Anything above sound familiar? I’m guessing Mike Ashley has yet to read Soccernomics. He should. It’s full of fascinating stuff.

Before I change this subject, I did get some amusement from Sports Trading Life's post titled A Betfair Market To Avoid At All Costs! We were in full agreement until the end, where we read:

However, I know some will not be able to resist having a punt at this market and if I could offer any advice based on my observations on these markets down the years, that is normally to lay the first favourite when the market is first announced which in this case is Alan Pardew @ 2.20.
Sorry - these markets are a minefield. If you're not the chairman, or have close ties to the chairman or board, forget it. There's no beating these markets long-term, and laying Pardew is looking like a very costly mistake. Remember that if you can lay Pardew, it's because someone else wants to back him. Do you know more than they do? Anyone who "will not be able to resist having a punt" needs help.

Another two winners for Football Elite since my last post. Deportivo won 1-0 from the short-list, while Bologna beat Chievo at 2.74 earlier today as a Recommended Bet. The hot streak continues.

My main PC crashed earlier in the week, though fortunately not in mid-trade, but my ratings data is one of the few things that are safe. Still waiting to hear what the damage is, but I’m hoping the data at least is safe. I was having a look at some free copies of some of the ‘systems’ being sold, and I’m sure most of them are written by 14 year olds who trial the ‘system’ for about two weeks. The standard procedure seems to be to write a 30 to 40 page document, of which the first 30 pages describe how Betfair works, then half a page describes the ‘system’ (with no rationale explaining why this ‘system’ should work), followed by 7 pages of screenshots showing how profitable it is. Example (can’t remember the name of it): Lay the odds-on favourite in the EPL and put a back bet in at 40% higher. Ok, I’m all-in on that one. Apparently it IS possible to lose, but very rare. Hmmm.

Sunday, 5 December 2010

Bunches


After two disappointing weeks for Football Elite, they come fighting back this weekend with three out of three on the Recommended Bets, and two winners and a draw from the short-list. It's funny how wins as well as losses seem to come in bunches.

Sunderland (1.91), Villareal (1.88) and Real Sociedad (2.38) were the three Recommended Bet winners, backed up by Freiburg (3.45) and Parma (2.6) from the short-list. The one non-winner was Birmingham City who fell short at 3.85.

I also had Sunderland as my value bet, along with Sampdoria (1.76) and Malaga (2.14) - all winners, but Almeria (2.28) let me down. There's always one. The draw came in at St Etienne though, although the games at Getafe, Lecce and Catania all ended with a winner.

Took a loss on the Tennessee Titans v Jacksonville Jaguars game earlier, but a small profit on the Chargers - Raiders game which is slipping away from the Chargers as I write. Strange - the Chargers don't lose in December but QB Rivers is having a sub-par game. Update: No bed yet - the Chargers are now within eight.

Saturday, 4 December 2010

Wacky Bundesliga


I was reading an article in When Saturday Comes where the adjective 'wacky' was used to describe the Bundesliga. I've previously highlighted the profitability of laying odds-on home favourites there, but picking a winning team there is harder than any other major league. I say 'winning team' because the hit rate on strong draws is not too much lower than on the other major leagues, although going 0 for 2 this weekend didn't help.

Strong draws in Germany are hitting this season at 35.3% while the other four combined are hitting at 37.5%.

Stuttgart and Wolfsburg both let me down today, and not one Bundesliga home team were odds-on today.

Three draws from four in France and Italy made the day very profitable, and it would have been a grand slam except for Olympique Lyonnaise's 94' winner. Still, mustn't grumble.

It would be nice to catch up with Pete Nordsted's Draw Master System though. He currently has a 44% strike rate on this system, not too shabby at all whatever you may think of his book or service. His two winners today were my top two draw prospects also, the games of Wigan Athletic v Stoke City and Birmingham City v Tottenham Hotspur. He also has tomorrow's West Bromwich Albion v Newcastle United game as the third of his weekly trio, and this would be the third strongest in my list.

Friday, 3 December 2010

Losers Welcome


There's a new exchange in town, or rather a new brand of ibetx limited, which has been operating as a betting exchange since 2003, and which is generating a little attention these days. The problem for me is that, aside from the occasional arb opportunity, it is useless.

Bettor.com say on their homepage:

We charge commission on the net profit of each bet. We do not charge commission on the net profit per market. In our opinion, this method of charging commission is more favourable for casual bettors and worse for professionals.
Note the commission is charged on each bet, not on the market, effectively ruling this company out as a trading vehicle. For "casual bettors", read "losers". It seems that a real challenger to Betfair is still some way off.

On to football now, and tonight's St Pauli v Kaiserslautern is one of two fixtures in the Bundesliga that is rated a strong draw, the other being Freiburg v Hamburg. Weaker draws are the games at Borussia Moenchengladbach v Hannover '96 and Eintracht Frankfurt v Mainz '05.

In Serie A, the strong draws, and there's a bunch of them this week, are tonight's Lazio v Internazionale plus Chievo Verona v AS Roma, Lecce v Genoa and Catania v Juventus.

Ligue 1 has the one strong draw Arles-Avignon v Nancy, with weaker draws predicted at Lens v Auxerre, Montpellier v Olympique Lyon and St Etienne v Bordeaux.

In La Liga* I have Getafe v Mallorca as a weak draw, and in the English Premier League not a sausage, as my Mum likes to say.

Speaking of old people, (it's ok, my Mum doesn't have a computer), Cubone took umbrage at my comment on one of his recent posts, where I suggested that he have someone edit his posts before posting them. He actually has some great stories, and I'm not sure if it's just me, but I do find it hard to read them with all the spelling mistakes, (yes, we all make the occasional typos), grammatical errors and poorly structured content. Even the best writers have editors, and since the content of his blog isn't time-sensitive, it seems to me that the help of a third-party would add a lot to his blog.

OK, back to footy, and if I had to bet on a draw this weekend in the EPL, it would be in the games of Birmingham City v Tottenham Hotspur or Wigan Athletic v Stoke City.

For value home teams this weekend, my top picks are Sunderland (1.91) v West Ham United, Sampdoria (1.77) v Bari and Almeria (2.28) v Real Zaragoza. I also like Wolfsburg (2.1) v Werder Bremen, Stuttgart (2.28) v Hoffenheim and Malaga (2.16) v Racing Santander.

The return of Lebron James to Cleveland last night, but the hostile reception he received didn't seem to affect him in the least. He scored 38 points! The Miami Heat comfortably covered the 5.5 point spread (1.98), winning by 28 - and the Overs came in at an underpriced (value) 2.28. 

The Phoenix Suns (+2.55 was 2.02) won in Oakland at the Golden State Warriors but the Overs fell short on this one. Both teams can score in a hurry and the last time these two teams met, the score was 133-131. Still, three wins at close to evens and one loss will work for me every day.

I just realised that the SBP's selections are no longer arriving. He must have finally realised I'd never paid him. His spammy e-mails continue though.

* Note that I originally had Levante v Atletico Madrid as a strong draw, but this was an error. It's close, but not close enough!

Thursday, 2 December 2010

Hung, Drawn, And Qatared


If I am to see another World Cup in England, I now need to stay alive until 2030. If I am to see England WIN another World Cup, I may need to start setting some records for longevity.

Not such a surprise that Russia won the rights for 2018, but a shock that England were first to be eliminated in the voting. I don't bet on these 'voting' type events, but for a while England went favourites in the betting, suggesting again that patriotism was trumping reason.

I didn't see any prices for the 2022 rights, but I doubt that many people were expecting Qatar to win it. 10 of the 12 stadiums located within 30km of each other? Population 1.3 million? Average high temperature in July 115F (46C)? Its third largest city has half the population of my home town - Purley! And since when has a 'Q' not been followed by a 'U'? Cool flag though.

Bizarre. It's all thanks to Allah.

Thanking God


One of the less endearing aspects of some athletes, most prevalent in the U.S. is the ridiculous habit of thanking (a) god for their achievement. Notice that god is never blamed for a defeat, but victories are all down to him.

Apart from showing themselves up as somewhat lacking in the intelligence department,something not uncommon among athletes it must be said, it does seem a little tacky and trvilaising of their 'faith'. Would a god worthy of our praise really be that concerned about a trivial game? The winner of the Superbowl is the team with the most devout believers? It's all very silly and while the media for the most part turn a blind eye to it, in the same way as we pretend to ignore the loony on the bus, I would like to see the reaction were a US star to say "It's all thanks to Allah" after a game.

CNN.com had a piece on this a few months ago, asking When Did God Become A Sports Fan?

More recently, a High School (American) Footballer Ronnie Hastie was penalised for his religious gesture. He said he's pointed up as a gesture to God after every touchdown he's scored in every game and never had a problem before.

"It's usually one or two seconds long," he said. "It's something I've done as a tradition."

Hastie said he asked the ref why he was penalized, and the ref responded that Hastie wasn't supposed to draw attention to himself.

"That wasn't the point (of the gesture), so I guess I was a little confused," Hastie said. "I do that to give glory to my heavenly father, Jesus. He gives me the strength. He's the one who gives me these abilities in the first place."
I guess poor simple Ronnie IS a little confused. Perhaps if Ronnie had been paying attention in biology rather than being brainwashed by his family, he would have been able to work out that his 'abilities' are the result of natural selection, and that no, however special you think you are Ronnie, god has not actually singled you out for greatness on the football field at the expense of the others around you. Do people actually realise what they are saying, when they say things like "there, but for the grace of god go I"? - which could be restated as "there, by the grace of god go they". That would be one vindictive god!

Wednesday, 1 December 2010

Genius Footballers


An interesting few pages in the aforementioned Soccernomics book I am reading concerns penalties, and the best strategies to adopt when taking them. A penalty taker who always aims for the same side will of course soon be found out, so all penalty takers have to mix it up. But how often should they stray from their natural side given that their chances of scoring are somewhat reduced by shooting to the unnatural side?

This is called a “mixed-strategy” by game theorists, and are “peculiar because they require the actor to incorporate randomness into decision making. Should I go to the pub or the cinema? A mixed strategy requires me to toss a coin, which sounds odd, since one might expect that I prefer one to the other.” *

The research showed that the optimal mixed-strategy (after taking into account the probability of the goalkeeper guessing right) is for a penalty taker to hit 61.5 percent of his kicks to his natural side, and 38.5 percent to the other. In reality, the penalty takers in the study (of 1,417 penalties) got remarkably close to this, hitting 60 percent to the natural side, versus 40% to the other. (No mention of how penalties straight down the middle were counted).
All this shows the extraordinary amount of subconscious thought that goes into playing top-level soccer. Previous studies in game theory have shown that people could construct random sequences if the problem was first explained to them in some detail. Nobody is suggesting that footballers have sat at home reading up on mixed-strategy equilibria. Rather, the best players intuitively grasp the truth of the theory and are able to execute it.
Apparently Franck Ribery would not know which way he was going to shoot even after he had started on his run-up!

* I’ve tried tossing a coin myself to help make decisions. It doesn’t work, or rather, it does, but not directly.

If I am ever torn between two choices, and elect to decide the issue on a coin toss, as soon as the coin lands, there is always a slight feeling of elation or of disappointment. It’s the revelation of that emotion that makes my decision for me, not the direct result of the coin toss. I hasten to add that I’m not usually indecisive. No, wait, actually that’s not always true. Well, sometimes it is…

Almost Genius


Brest defeated Lens last night at the second attempt, and Kidderminster Harriers v York City, a strong draw forecast, came home with a 0-0 draw, for a profitable end to the month for football.

Movember is at an end, and while any month with a four figure net profit is a good month, it was a poor month by November standards. The big winner, it will be no surprise to read, is the NBA trading, (thank you Utah Jazz) followed by NFL trading. The big loser was College Basketball, where one game cost me a fair chunk. Actually, it was my decision that cost me a fair chunk - shouldn't really blame the game. Small profits on football, cricket, and College Football and some profitable arbs and that was it for the month.

More of the same in December I guess, with the NBA still in full-swing, and the NFL reaching the end of its short regular season. College Football reaches the end with a lot of meaningless Bowl Games, and a handful of important ones. The Ashes continues, football reaches the mid-point of the season, SPOTY takes place another year is consigned to the past and it all starts over again in January.

The poll I posted a few days ago has served it's purpose. Even with the knowledge that more than 80 per cent of people answer the question incorrectly, more than 60% of you got it wrong. I'll let the comment from Sports Bet Universe speak for me:

I love that question and it's intriguing to see that most people have fallen into the trap of answering that it cannot be determined. It shows that very clearly that the human mind is easily tricked. It is almost a genius type of question to be posing on a trading blog as it highlights the fact that to do well in this business you do need to think outside the box and not follow the herd. I would say that a majority of traders/punters are herd creatures who get sucked into prices that are driving down (say after a goal in football or a break of serve in tennis) when as you have mentioned a majority of the time the real value is to oppose.

The answer is simple when you look at Anne. If she’s married, then the answer is YES because Anne is looking at George. If Anne is not married, then the answer is YES because Jack is looking at her.

Simples!

I do have a blog myself but I'm rubbish at updating it and wish I could have more time to dedicate. Congratulations on maintaining such dedication to blogging every day and keeping it interesting.
A genius type of question! Almost. Anyway, it did show that even sharp minds can be fooled very easily.

Since polls are so much fun, there's another one today. The picture in this post shows two squares marked A and B. Simple question - which square is darkest, A or B or are they both the same. I'll keep it up there for a few days.

Good luck in December.

Tuesday, 30 November 2010

Andreasnacht


As I suspected, and was confirmed by Talkie and my old NFL friend from Germany expekter, I had my Hoffs twisted up with my Kaisers. It sounds worse than it is - my doctor assures me that no permanent damage has been done.

The abandoned Brest v Lens game gets replayed tonight, with the price on Brest a little longer than on Saturday - 2.16 v 2.10. My investment stays on, courtesy of Betfair's rules, and a little top up is in order.

A strong draw is the pick in the Paris St Germain v Sevilla game this week. Valenciennes look value at 2.32 v St Etienne. I have Valenciennes at 2.15 for this, and Olympique Marseille are available at 1.7. while I have them at 1.58.

I didn't predict the 5-0 win for Barcelona last night, (I had them to win by 0.7) but then I don't suppose too many of us did. Barcelona will be happy to have extended their lead in the Cassini ratings.

'My' Utah Jazz made it six in a row, easily covering the 9.5 point spread v the Milwaukee Bucks. They play again on Wednesday night.

Sunday, 28 November 2010

Adrenaline Rush


Other than the draw selections, this weekend has been very poor for football investing. I wrote on Friday morning that "Home value picks are a little harder to find this week" and should have just left it at that. Just two winners - Cagliari beat Lecce, Tottenham Hotspur scored late to beat Liverpool. The Brest game was abandoned, and the lay of Bayer Leverkusen came in but aside from that it was all bad news.

I guess it's not just me. Football Elite also appeared to have trouble finding value, with just two Recommended Bets - Auxerre, as I had also identified as value,(lost), and Bologna, whose game was postponed. The appropriately named 'short-list' had just two selections this weekend, and neither of these won either - Stoke City (drew) and Gijon (lost).

Talkbet very generously also puts his predictions up for our consideration, and while his practice of suggesting "back Selection at odds in excess of " is questionable (e.g. Back Kaiserslautern at odds in excess of 3.25 is all very well, but the price on Friday morning was 2.12 - unless I wasn't properly awake which is always possible), I like to compare my picks with his. [In fairness, the opposite is also sometimes true, in that the odds suggested are way shorter than those available - for example Hoffenheim recommended at 2.55 or more were available at 3.5].

He did relatively well with selections including Toulouse at 4.1, Hamburg at 2.38 and Hannover at 2.68.

The highlight this weekend, at least for football, was the return to success (after a couple of sub .33 weeks) for the draw selections. Of the eight mentioned here on Friday, four came in at prices of 3.6, 3.3, 3.45 and 3.25 for a very healthy profit.

I now track seven grades of draws, and the top two grades - the 'strong' and the 'weaker' that I share here are now hitting at 36.84% (2.71) and 36.61% (2.73) in the 'major' leagues.

Some drama for me in the NFL today with the Chicago Bears holding off the Philadelphia Eagles by 31-26. I got into a bit of difficulty (a four figure mess accompanied by some four letter words I might add) on this one, expecting the Eagles to do a little better in the second half than they did in the first, but Chicago scored on the first possession of the half and I was in trouble. With the price dropping too low in my opinion, I put in a £25,000+ lay at 1.04 on the Bears, most of which was taken. The downside of a 1.04 lay is clearly minimal, but it then became a race between the Eagles closing the gap (with me riding their momentum by backing at 1.05 or more), and the clock running down (or worse, the Bears scoring again).

The Bears didn't score again (a good thing) and the Eagles actually got within one score while I was still about £5,000 short (it actually takes time to unload this sort of money on games) but some kind person layed it all at the end, and I somehow emerged from the fray with a three figure profit. I suspect that the shot of adrenaline to my body means that my life expectancy has shortened by a few weeks, but for now, all is good. Seeing a five figure green total next to one of the selections is always a rush, even if they're losing!

I picked up another three figures on the earlier Atlanta Falcons v Green Bay Packers game, but that was relatively painless, and in the NBA, 'my' Utah Jazz easily covered the 5.5 point spread against the improving Los Angeles Clippers. I didn't trade this game though - it was early, and clashed with the above-mentioned NFL games. although I did keep an eye on it to see if they spotted the Clippers a 19 point lead.

One more game to come in the NFL, the San Diego Chargers at the Indianapolis Colts, featuring two of the top QBs of this season. Philip Rivers second in passing yards, and Peyton Manning third. Antonio Gates is back for the Chargers after his suspension and while I shall hold my fire until the game starts, I have the Chargers at 2.26 in my sights as the value here. The Over 51.5 total looks tempting too, at 2.22.

Snow Good


Saturday's football saw three of the draw predictions hit from seven games to ensure a profit from the weekend, with a 'free bet' to come on Koln v Wolfsburg. When the best result of the day was the abandoned Brest v Lens game (heavy snow in Brittany) that tells you all you need to know about the home value picks. Bolton could only draw with Blackpool, and Everton were soundly beaten by West Bromwich Albion. Monaco could only draw with Nice, but the lay of Bayer Leverkusen generated a little cash. Plenty of Sunday games still to come. Manchester United now top the Cassini ratings, and it'll take a two goal win by Chelsea at Newcastle for them to reclaim top spot. For the record, they are rated -0.82 v Newcastle.

The draw for the Third Round of the FA Cup tonight as well, which always seems to throw up some interesting games.

The Arkansas Razorbacks beat the LSU Tigers last night, but missed the Over by 1/2 point. I had an unmatched bet at 2.0, so that was a little fortunate. The liquidity wasn't great, but I was able to work a small profit.

The late shift had a disappointing NBA session, where some biggish lays failed to pay dividends, but my ship isn't going to be coming in every night. Had another break on the punts where I had the Charlotte Bobcats +3.5, and they lost by three!

Saturday, 27 November 2010

New Jersey


Another sign that some (Democrats of course) in the United States, are becoming a little more enlightened in their thinking when it comes to gambling, is seen in this article.

In America, the eastern state of New Jersey could soon become the first to legalise online gambling after legislators passed a measure that would permit casinos in the jurisdiction to operate websites offering games including poker and roulette.

Known as S490 and sponsored by State Senator Raymond Lesniak, the proposed legislation made it through the state’s Assembly on Monday by a vote of 29 to five and has now moved on for committee consideration.

In a separate measure, a Senate committee also overwhelmingly approved a resolution earlier this week that would ask voters next year to decide whether sportsbetting should be legalised in the state.

If passed as is, S490 would see residents of New Jersey and other countries permitted to gamble over the Internet via proposed online gaming portals hosted on servers based exclusively in Atlantic City while inhabitants of other states would be banned. These sites would be run by land-based casinos operating in the state, which would be required to apply for one-year renewable licenses initially costing $200,000, and permitted to offer most existing table games.

New Jersey is currently suffering from a budget shortfall and the state would collect a 15 percent tax on all gross revenues from Internet gaming and use these funds to support winners’ purses at horseracing tracks.

“That’s a no-brainer and the whole bill is a no-brainer,” said Lesniak, a Democrat that represents the state’s 20th legislative district.

“We need to be bold and tell the Federal government that it has no Constitutional authority to prevent online gaming here in our state.”

In addition, the proposed legislation would see the state’s Department of Human Services tasked with running compulsive gambling treatment and prevention programmes. Funded by licensees this would cost $100,000 per year.

“Though there is still a little way to go, we’re very happy with the result of today’s vote”, said Joe Brennan Jr., chairman of the Interactive Media Entertainment and Gaming Association “Senator (Raymond J.) Lesniak (the sponsor of S-490) has been a thoughtful champion of his bill, and it’s nice to see him get the win today.”

“New Jersey has really taken the lead on these issues nationally,” Brennan added. “With Missouri, Rhode Island and California all passing measures in their own legislatures for state-related sports betting, it’s only a matter of when, not if, that this underground economy will be normalized for players in the US.”
"When, not if". Progress might be slow, but at least it's in the right direction.

Jazz Comeback (Repeat)


Something of a stellar night on the NBA with my favourite trading team the Utah Jazz once again doing the business coming back from 19 points down to win by six. The Lakers traded as low as around 1.17 I believe, and I had a four figure lay matched at 1.26 - good enough for a healthy four figure profit.

On the punting side, I did well too, with some lucky breaks having being on the Orlando Magic -10.5 (they won by 11), Toronto Raptors +9.5 (they lost by 9), and the Oklahoma City Thunder -1.5 (they won in OT). All in all a nice boost to the balance, which has been treading water pretty much since August.

I also made a nice profit on College Football when the Auburn Tigers came back from 0-24 down to beat the Alabama Crimson Tide 28-27. I put in a cheeky lay of Alabama at 1.09, (downside = v. low) but on this occasion backed back too early - one of the problems with a slow moving game like American Football, and who trusts college students with their money for more than a few minutes? (Excepting my son of course).

The Arkansas Razorbacks are ranked 12th currently, and host the 6th ranked LSU Tigers (there are a lot of Tigers in the SEC) tonight at 8:30pm in the 'Battle of the Boot'. The Razorbacks are favourites giving 3.5, and as much as I hope they will win, my head says to take LSU with the 3.5. Arkansas have a habit of messing up when they're well placed for a decent Bowl game, but if they win out, and get some help from other teams, they still have a shot at a BCS at-large place. Trust me - that's exciting stuff. This game has gone over in each of the last four contests.

While we're talking about Tigers, it's hard to believe that it's now one year since the golfing Tiger's now famous car accident. How time flies. Like Tiger, I used to be quite good at Golf (well, trading it), but these days I seldom bother with it. In 2006 it was my most profitable sport, but that title has since gone to baseball and basketball.

Framing And Anchoring


The brain works in mysterious ways.

In one experiment, a researcher offered subjects a dollar if, in a blind draw, they picked a red jelly bean out of a bowl of mostly white jelly beans. The subjects could choose between two bowls. One bowl contained nine white jelly beans and one red one. The other contained 92 white and eight red ones. Thirty to 40 per cent of the test subjects chose to draw from the larger bowl, even though most understood that an eight per cent chance of winning was worse than a 10 per cent chance. The visual allure of the extra red jelly beans overcame their understanding of the odds.

Or consider this problem. There’s a disease outbreak expected to kill 600 people if no action is taken. There are two treatment options. Option A will save 200 people. Option B gives a one-third probability that 600 people will be saved, and a two-thirds probability that no one will be saved. Most people choose A. It’s better to guarantee that 200 people be saved than to risk everyone dying.

But ask the question this way – Option A means 400 people will die. Option B gives a one-third probability that no one will die and two-thirds probability that 600 will die – and most people choose B. They’ll risk killing everyone on the lesser chance of saving everyone.

The trouble, from a rational standpoint, is that the two scenarios are identical. All that’s different is that the question is restated to emphasize the 400 certain deaths from Option A, rather than the 200 lives saved. This is called the “framing effect.” It shows that how a question is asked dramatically affects the answer, and can even lead to a contradictory answer.

Then there’s the “anchoring effect.” In one experiment, researchers spun a wheel that was rigged to stop at either number 10 or 65. When the wheel stopped, the researchers asked their subjects if the percentage of African countries in the United Nations is higher or lower than that number. Then the researchers asked the subjects to estimate the actual percentage of African countries in the UN. The people who saw the larger number guessed significantly higher than those who saw the lower number. The number “anchored” their answers, even though they thought the number was completely arbitrary and meaningless.
Finally, try this quiz. Apparently more than 80 per cent of people answer this question incorrectly.

Jack is looking at Anne, but Anne is looking at George. Jack is married but George is not. Is a married person looking at an unmarried person?

A) Yes

B) No

C) Cannot be determined

Vote in the poll. Answer in 10 days.

Friday, 26 November 2010

Toulose To Lose

A cool post from Trading Times yesterday, taking a trip down memory lane with his radio and the Ashes. Reminded me of hiding under the blankets with my first transistor radio, although listening to music or football rather than cricket. 


The football match that I remember most vividly was the 1968 European Cup Final – Manchester United v Benfica at Wembley, and I had a 6d bet on Benfica with a Fulham supporting friend from school, which of course was a loser. And 6d at that time was a lot of money – a week’s pocket money in fact. 

I did get my own back less than a year later when Crystal Palace beat his Fulham 3-2 to reach the Promised Land of the First Division for the first time in their history and help condemn Fulham to a second successive relegation.

So moving on 40 years, and we have another full weekend of football ahead, all building up to the highlight on Monday night, and I don’t mean Tottenham Hotspur v Liverpool, but El Clásico.

There are a few ‘strong’ draws, which are Kaiserslautern v Schalke ’04, Koln v Wolfsburg, Sampdoria v AC Milan and Real Zaragoza v Villareal. Weaker draws are Aston Villa v Arsenal, Stoke City v Manchester City, Wolves v Sunderland and Bordeaux v Lille.

Home value picks are a little harder to find this week. The odds and my ratings are remarkably close this week, but the following offer an edge per my ratings.

EPL: Bolton Wanderers (1.61) v Blackpool, Everton (1.65) v West Bromwich Albion and Tottenham Hotspur (2.12) v Liverpool.

France: Auxerre (2.12) v Toulouse. Brest again show up on the radar, this time at 2.1 v Lens, but after being bitten twice by them, I won’t be betting the farm on this one. Monaco (2.06) v Nice and Olympique Lyonnais (2.12) v Paris Saint-Germain are two more from Le Ligue.

Germany: Hoffenheim look value at 3.5 v Bayer Leverkusen, who can be layed at 2.24.

Italy: Bari (2.02) v Cesena, Juventus (1.71) v Fiorentina and Cagliari (1.7) v Lecce.

Spain: Mallorca (1.78) v Malaga and Gijon (2.18) v Real Santander. For the big game, I have Barcelona a little short at the current 2.16, while the draw looks value at 3.75.

Thursday, 25 November 2010

Nonsense And Noise


Mark confirmed my suspicions yesterday that his assessment of form is not based solely on the final score, and that the weighting factors I use probably account for some of the difference between our opinions of Everton.

In Mark's comment, he gives an example of

"If WBA were to beat Chelsea 1-0 it doesn't necessarily mean they were the better side".
Long-time readers with sharp memories will be aware that this is a topic I've touched on many times in the past, going back to at least 5th March 2009, when I wrote:
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.
Perhaps I put a higher emphasis on the quality of the opposition or on some of the other factors, but certainly for Everton, it still seems a big difference of opinion.

Back to the WBA 1 Chelsea 0 scenario, the beauty of an Elo based ratings system is that WBA do not suddenly leap ahead of Chelsea, which would clearly be nonsense, but a factor such as 'shots-on-goal' can become very subjective. A shot-on-goal could be an effort that tamely rolls up to the goalie, or a shot to the top corner requiring the keeper to make a world-class save. Is a penalty only worth half-a-goal for ratings purposes? and as I wrote realtive recently, is a goal against 10 men worth less than a goal against a full-strength side? As I wrote just a few days ago:
If a team wins, but a star player is injured and likely to miss several games, this should impact the ratings.

If a team loses, but had two players sent-off in the first five minutes of the match, this result should impact the ratings differently to the same result achieved in a match where the opposing team had two players sent off in the first five minutes!

If a team loses but had more shots on goal and more corners than the winning team who won the game on a dubious penalty, this should be factored in.
If I had all the time in the world, every game could be analysed, but I live in the real world with a regular job with football ratings just a small part of my betting / trading life.

I'll let you guess who the commenter is who wrote this:
I've been waiting for ages to see if Cassini would ever twig that a quality ratings system is not based purely on results.
"Waiting for ages!" Classic! It's been out there for at least 21 months! That really is one of the more stupid comments he's made, and he's certainly made a few!
It's not as if the best brains in the business - the guys who both set and move the markets - simply input final scores into a spreadsheet and then put their feet up. But thousands of wannabee pros do just that and expect to have a magic answer. And will come up with nonsense like in the latest post where Spurs were expected to win by nearly 3 goals at home to Bremen.
Yes, complete nonsense - but profitable nonsense. Lucky for me, I don't simply enter final scores into a spreadsheet and that I have no aspirations of becoming a pro. And finally this comment, that could have been taken directly from previous posts of mine:
How you move it on from simply pure results is the tricky bit. There's no single right answer but there is, or should be, a single aim, and that aim is key.
Brilliant! His comments are superfluous noise, but in a way it's amusing that he misses so much.

There's a guy at work who told me yesterday that he had seen Person A on the phone, and then added 'talking to someone about something'. Well I suppose Person A could have been texting, but the additional comment really added nothing of value.

Oh well - the poll clearly suggests most people would like to see an end to his negativity and I have decided to block his tedious and often offensive remarks, comments such as this will not be missed:
Cassini is just some dullard blogger taking thru his arse with his own perceived air of authority. Most of his value bets lose, I read quite a few blogs and like Cassini all the losing ones avoid talking about the real aim of gambling their pnl.
He won't be missed. It's much more pleasant having a reasoned debate with someone like Mark, who puts his own ideas out there for constructive criticism and has some real-world trading / betting experience to draw upon.

Now to enter some final scores into the spreadsheet and come up with the value bets for the weekend.

Form Fitting


Perhaps SAF doesn't read this blog, or if he does, he forgot to mention in his team-talk that Manchester United needed a three goal win to move ahead of Chelsea, but the ratings only predicted a 0.68 goal win, so they inch slightly closer with their 1-0 win.

In the other games where I have ratings for both teams, Schalke '04 were rated .84 better than Olympique Lyonnais and won 3-0, and Tottenham Hotspur were rated 2.74 goals better than Werder Bremen and won by 3-0 for a good evening of results.

Speaking of Lyon, if anyone is looking for a book to add to their list for Santa this Xmas, you could do a lot worse than ask for Soccernomics, by Simon Kuper and Stefan Szymanski. Among a number of fascinating topics, it details the reasons between the rise of Lyon in the past few years from a nothing provincial club in France, to a major European power (last night's result notwithstanding). Bloomberg News describes it as "a blend of Freakonomics and Fever Pitch, bringing surprising economic analysis to bear o the world's most popular sport". If you enjoyed Moneyball, by Michael Lewis, then you will certainly enjoy this one. It's not betting related, but it's a very well written book on a subject that I suspect most readers of this blog would enjoy.

I recently linked to Mark Iverson's post on his football system, and found myself in the role of Anonymous by questioning Mark on some of the details. Some of my questions, and Marks's answers are:

Why 4 matches? My system only takes into account Premier League matches (not cup games etc.) so if you go back more than 4 games then you could be talking about 5-6 weeks ago. That's too long ago for me.

Do you weight the most recent game heavier? Not in the rating, but it's something I consider when looking at the overall trend of the 4 games.

Do you account for the games being at home or away? Yes. I use different scorecards for each but a 20 rating at home should represent a similar 20 rating away so you wouldn't know the difference.

Do you account for the strength of opposition? Yes.

Why 4 to 34 and not 0 through 30? There's some free points on offer. Maybe I should change this to 0-30! lol! Won't do it for this season but maybe next year.
Mark also posted up his teams ranked by form, and I compared them with my form figures. The results were a surprise, in that there was very little correlation at all. As Mark says in his post "Some unexpected teams are towards the top" and I agree. Everton third on form? Well, I have Everton third too, only I have them third from bottom! Mark goes back four games, and I go back six, with the more recent games given more weight, but Everton's last six games are, most recent first:
A Sunderland D 2-2; H Arsenal L 1-2; H Bolton D 1-1; A Blackpool D 2-2; H Stoke City W 1-0; A Tottenham D 1-1
I have Everton underforming expectations in all but the Sunderland and Tottenham games, and the Tottenham game is about to drop off. How are Everton ranked third on form? For the record, Everton are ranked seventh in my overall ratings, having started the season in fifth place. We do agree on West Bromwich Albion being ranked 19th though, and we have Bolton at the top or second, but for the most part we have some big differences. But if we all had the same opinion, we would never find value.

Wednesday, 24 November 2010

A Win Is What You Make It


For someone who a few hours earlier had dropped four figures on a basketball game, I felt remarkably chipper yesterday. It's not from some deep-rooted psychological desire to lose, but simply because I made about half of the loss back in the next game I traded, and finishing a session on a high, even with an overall loss, almost seems preferable to finishing up overall but finishing with a big loss. It's human nature to put a greater emphasis on the most recent experience, and studies have been done to prove this.

From the American Psychological Association:

The effect of life events on subjective well-being (SWB) was explored in a 2-year longitudinal study of 115 participants. It was found that only life events during the previous 3 months influenced life satisfaction and positive and negative affect. Although recent life events influenced SWB even when personality at Time 1 was controlled, distal life events did not correlate with SWB. SWB and life events both showed a substantial degree of temporal stability. It was also found that good and bad life events tend to co-vary, both between individuals and across periods of the lives of individuals.

Also, when events of the opposite valence were controlled, events correlated more strongly with SWB. The counterintuitive finding that good and bad events co-occur suggests an exciting avenue for explorations of the structure of life events.
One exciting avenue for me is trading, and when it comes to trading, it pays to have a short memory. In the second game, while the balance of my mind could be said to have been 'disturbed', a value opportunity presented itself, yet I found myself hesitating, solely due to the negative outcome I'd experienced in the fist game. Ultimately I 'forced' myself to enter the market, and as happens more often than not, it paid off. The point I am trying to make is that one needs to look at the big picture, rather than just recent events when it comes to trading and gambling. It's the nature of the game that winners and losers do not come evenly spaced.

Sunday, 21 November 2010

Think High, Lay Low


The NFL game just completed between the New York Jets and the Houston Texans was yet another example of (twice) of teams being backed in to way too short a price. The Jets had a 16 point lead, (two possessions), and traded as low at 1.03. When the Texans came back to take the lead late on, they too traded at 1.03, before the Jets won the game in the last few seconds.

Then in the later game between the Indianapolis Colts and the New England Patriots, the Patriots traded at 1.01 before a Peyton Manning led final drive looked likely to win the game for the Colts and the market flip-flopped. In the end, Manning threw an interception and the Patriots held on, but these games both provide evidence of how the price on whoever is leading is frequently driven too low.

Ian Erskine mentioned this subject on his blog yesterday in regard to football, specifically the 1.07 price at which Arsenal could be layed at half-time in the North London derby yesterday.

The picture was even rosier for me because the only solace I could find at half-time was to lay Arsenal for £200 at 1.07, not because I thought Spurs would come back at all but just it was too low a price and if Spurs nicked one then who knows, I greened up nicely with a back at 2.05 when it was 2-2, the 3rd was beyond my wildest dreams. Some of you on Twitter got confused when I mentioned my lay at 1.07, I think you thought I was backing Arsenal, I can assure you I would not back anyone or anything at 1.07, I purely did it for a chance of a trade at a risk of £14, which is a tactic I adopt quite often.
Now clearly there are times when 1.07 is value, and I would not agree with Ian that 1.07 or any short price should be avoided simply because it is short (as his comment implies), but in the in-running events that I mainly follow, the value is more often on opposing the market than on chasing the price down.

It's actually quite comical at times. A team is say 1.7 and tip-off, and they open up strongly. Two minutes into the game as they open up a lead, and the price drops through 1.6 and panic sets in. Money appears to back at 1.59, but the price drops and the same money comes in again at 1.5. It's clear that someone wants in without regard to the value. A lay at this point is often rewarded.

I have written before, more than once, about how the strategy of laying the NFL team that has just scored a touchdown (in many game situations) pays off time and again. The market wants to get on, the price is driven too low, and the market realises it and the price moves back. Put a lay in before the touchdown a few points below where it will rebound to, and if you watch enough games and price it right, you will get matched almost every time. There's also the occasional bonus of an apparent touchdown being called back due to a penalty being called, and when that happens it's a nice bonus.

But back to the NBA. A team has a run, and the market goes into free-fall, but runs don't go on for ever. One time-out, a score, a stop and another score, and the lead can suddenly be down by six. Depending on the game situation, this can result in an enormous swing in price.

I actually find these swings much easier to trade in basketball than in football, American Football, or baseball, in big part because the swing is so fast. Too much time to think can be a handicap in trading. It takes time before you can oppose the leader and hold your nerve, and it can be hard to do. The thing is though, that it's precisely because it's hard to do, that the opportunity exists in the first place. Most people feel happier to be on a leader, and will buy in at (seemingly) any price.

Mixed results in the football today. Blackburn Rovers and Deportivo came in, as did Espanyol (Football Elite) plus the strong draw at St Pauli, but only the slimmest of profits in the day. I had the strong draw in the Real Sociedad v Atletico Madrid game, but FE went for the home team. In the end, neither of us won. At 80' the draw was looking good, but no less than four goals in the last 10 minutes saw Atletico Madrid win 4-2. It was a poor weekend for FE with just one winner from four Recommended Bets, and one winner in the Short-List selections. The Bundeslayga selection was a loser (winner for us) as Stuttgart (1.56) lost 0-1 to Koln.

Manchester City move into fourth spot in the ratings, and the gap between Chelsea and Manchester United closes up. A win by two or more for United in Glasgow on Wednesday will see them go top, a fact that SAF will no doubt mention during his pre-game talk. Or perhaps not.