Global T20 Canada

I was sweating at 4am in the night. Must have been CPL.

Is that when you then went missing for about a year DT?

It's the worst thing about trading - you carefully build some consistent profits and then the devil within you makes you do a stupid bet outside of normal parameters which uncannily manages to be a loser. I find this happens to me if I back odds-on from fresh in cricket, despite being based on my careful judgement of a situation, and also when I back weather bets only to find what was clear from the radar suddenly disperses within the hour and somehow the market "knew" this would happen.

Hence why I'm trying to stick to a betting methodology that is as personality-proof as possible.
If you back long odds your risk is tiny, your gearing is maximised, a small movement in your favour recovers your stake to preserve your capital and reduce erosion and the most likely way to mess things up is merely to trade out too early for a smaller profit than if you let the position run (so sometimes you benefit massively by forgetting to monitor a trade).
You need a lot of concurrent markets though, or oodles of patience.

nothing wrong with this deck

...said the card-sharp.

Yes there is a book that explains this phenomenon, your rational logical side gets overidden when under extreme stress.

I have the same issue Vardon - a good run (or frustration from missing a chance) and suddenly I’m putting mug bets on the run lines.

Oh my 1.01 out to 1.13

Aug 4, 2019 -- 11:54PM, Cardinal Scott wrote:

Is that when you then went missing for about a year DT?

I don't think I ever went missing? You may have been confused by a 3 month forum ban I had. I've had a bank of 500-1000 till 2017 and i've busted that bank more times than I can remember, but I was always back to betting again. I've been in profit for exactly a year this month, so if I were to get organised I would say I could do this full time for a living. But for now i'm just having fun with my winnings.

It took me a year to discover the exchange.
Then I mugged on Matchbook for a year.
Once I was on betfair, it started getting better but i was still winning small and losing massive to eventually bust my bank.
Then I tasted some success backing funny odds and one of them hit(a 1.01 when Zimbabwe collapsed from 150-2 to 170 all out. something like that)
From that point on I usually only lay 1.3 and below.

Lots of money to be made if you just back big numbers. They shorten for no reason. Like today I backed Eng twice, at 15 and 25. Both times for profit. Tests are a blessing.

No batting left after these two?

Forum ban that would have been it.

Yes it was during an ashes series but in all honesty I wasn't betting during that series. I had gone bust before that and hadn't regenerated my gambling powers in time.

I have a 1k win in the bag in the test now. It should have been 1.25k for my second biggest win but I layed draw at the start of Eng innings and it ate up a couple hundreds.

fancy getting out the Perera the pieman

See now my mug bet is that if I lay 1.01 I leave a back for half the amount at 1.02 - if it gets hit then I have a "free" trade but usually I wouldn't then cash any of the rest of it in at say 1.13 unless I had loads of green. I'd rather wait for 1.3, 1.5, 1.7, 2.0, etc in stages. But maybe the 1.02 is a mug bet cos if I waited for 1.10+ a few of those would pay for many free bets. Often the 1.02 gets hoovered, say if there's a wicket, so unless I'm watching too many markets I try not to automate the "out" trade - nothing worse than getting 1.01 matched then trading half at 1.02 when the market sweeps through to 1.04 or higher.

1.01 layers have done well.

can't see Yuvi batting again, his back was covered in tape

There's a brilliant book (or series, now) called "Market Wizards" about financial traders.
One of them sums it up as "It's not you against the markets - it's just you".

they should still piss this

Aug 5, 2019 -- 12:21AM, VardonVoo. wrote:

See now my mug bet is that if I lay 1.01 I leave a back for half the amount at 1.02 - if it gets hit then I have a "free" trade but usually I wouldn't then cash any of the rest of it in at say 1.13 unless I had loads of green. I'd rather wait for 1.3, 1.5, 1.7, 2.0, etc in stages. But maybe the 1.02 is a mug bet cos if I waited for 1.10+ a few of those would pay for many free bets. Often the 1.02 gets hoovered, say if there's a wicket, so unless I'm watching too many markets I try not to automate the "out" trade - nothing worse than getting 1.01 matched then trading half at 1.02 when the market sweeps through to 1.04 or higher.

I could never do it like you do. I just use my gut feeling for the stake and cash out prices.
The only thing I keep telling myself repeatedly is not to assume the final result when cashing out. This has brought me a lot of success. Other than than I just follow price movements and look for inflection points.

wow that looked prize plum ! must have edged it

inflection points

Aug 5, 2019 -- 12:23AM, VardonVoo. wrote:

There's a brilliant book (or series, now) called "Market Wizards" about financial traders.One of them sums it up as "It's not you against the markets - it's just you".

As long as you don't name check Trading In The Zone all good.  Once I put it down I couldn't pick it back up.

I only know the Wizard of Gore

Its a movie not a book

well i couldn't resist. Layed 1.09

That's why I was staying out till now. Goes straight to 1.03 lol

That has killed it. GSM

no the fix is about to hit.

Perera is absolute dogshìt

damn

They were just waiting for me to get involved ffs

I do that in Test - local minima/maxima. Like today when Aus were building up a lead - for a while the draw was racing to the bottom and Aus became the pivot price while England see-sawed the other way (in this case a lay of Aus had fairly limited and slow downside but a lot of upside if Smith got out).

I don't see that kind of dynamic in two-horse markets, so I'd rather use the gearing of low odds.
I do base my trades mostly on the odds rather than the situation. I've learned to my cost not to "judge" the most likely outcome and then back it at short odds cos there's no real obvious exit.I do back odds-on to partially cash out of a short lay. Often those odds carry on rising too, so maybe I should just run all my lays until evens or higher and see how my results look after a few months. I just feel that maintaining your bank is the first step. Gains are great but if you halve your bank then you have to sake back your bet size so everything takes twice as long, cos you have to get back to your original level again before "starting" your bank-build.

OK, I did take some of the 1.15, as the tail looked fragile. "Owt is better than nowt".

no fix today

oder doch

I don't necessarily agree that 'owt is better than nowt'
I think you can have a good red and a bad green

layed 1.01 5 bucks there.

There's that too - the "fix factor". No-one is ever likely to need to fix it for the stronger team to win, cos they'll probably win anyway. But a team that's ahead suddenly floundering is going to massively help the layer of short odds and completely mess you up if you backed normal" odds for a judged edge of a few percent.

what a pu$$y Mitch is, he's got a chest guard on

Chris Green and mitch Mcleneghan. Not the kind of names I would want to see when hoping for a fix. More like Gulpinder Singh and a Pakistani sounding name would be my choice.

need back to back wickets now.

Aug 5, 2019 -- 12:44AM, detraveller wrote:

Chris Green and mitch Mcleneghan. Not the kind of names I would want to see when hoping for a fix. More like Gulpinder Singh and a Pakistani sounding name would be my choice.

REPORTED

casting aspersions on pakis is a punishable offence!

Aug 5, 2019 -- 12:41AM, jucel69 wrote:

I don't necessarily agree that 'owt is better than nowt'I think you can have a good red and a bad green

Yeah if you can execute your edge while losing money and be at ease with that knowing that over time you'll win doing the same thing.  Sign of a GUN trader. No charlies/reverses

aspersions

@ jucel - I'm in two minds about whether lots of small losses verses the odd big win is better or worse than accumulating lots of tiny wins and only a few medium wins. Compound growth can get quite impressive over time. A gig win definitely "feels" better, but after many small losses it's easy to end up cashing out too early to replenish the bank. I find I tend to risk more immediately after a modest win, but so far this has often gone against me.

Cast aspersion
If you cast aspersion,you try to blacken someone's name and make people think badly of them.

Aug 5, 2019 -- 12:47AM, VardonVoo. wrote:

@ jucel - I'm in two minds about whether lots of small losses verses the odd big win is better or worse than accumulating lots of tiny wins and only a few medium wins. Compound growth can get quite impressive over time. A gig win definitely "feels" better, but after many small losses it's easy to end up cashing out too early to replenish the bank. I find I tend to risk more immediately after a modest win, but so far this has often gone against me.

No I mean if you have a game where you come back from the dead . That can start a good run.
Chainsawing a massive green with crap decisions to leave a small green can be devastating and start a bad run

You can sometimes be happier with a loss compared to a win. It just depends how you get there!
I've had some comebacks from the dead that have been more satisfying than big wins

Yuvraj uneasy

GET IN NOW YUVRAJ!!!

is the fix on

this poor kid needs some money

surely

I would have gone big on the fix if yuvraj had walked out to the batsmen in a time out earlier in the game.
This is [robably too late now.

This guy is skinny

doesnt look strong enough to hit it off the crease, looks like a young DETRAVELLER at the crease!

im still young you mug

get this white man out.

Grant told me you were in your 50s

Aug 5, 2019 -- 12:56AM, tomtimtum wrote:

Grant told me you were in your 50s

just turned 30. im still in university lol

haha this guy definitely on the fic but just 4 runs to play with

damn it

young DT smokes it !

There's often talk in Poker circles about pushing all-in on coin flips if the edge is even only slightly in your favour but psychologically that doesn't appeal. I mean losing the first is bad enough, but winning the first coin-flip then losing it all on the second would feel like total muggishness to me. Besides when you include the rake you need enough dead money in the pot to make the bet +EV even if you are exactly matched. A 5% rake will eat the whole of one stack if two equally skilled players go all-in on coin-flips twenty times and swap the same money back and fourth.

I heard that expression recently - "Gun Trader" - where does it come from? I think I've heard of "CUP" meaning "Cool Under Pressure" but it sounds sh!t compared to "GUN".

Aug 5, 2019 -- 12:56AM, tomtimtum wrote:

Grant told me you were in your 50s

Why were you two talking about me?

Aug 5, 2019 -- 12:59AM, detraveller wrote:

Aug  5, 2019 -- 12:56AM, tomtimtum wrote:Grant told me you were in your 50sWhy were you two talking about me?

grant always talks about you for some reason

He still thinks im indian?

are you back to being a Pakistani now??

I have his dream body so he can't stop thinking about me.

Aug 5, 2019 -- 1:00AM, tomtimtum wrote:

are you back to being a Pakistani now??

no im still half dutch half south african

Roelof van der Merwe

Aug 5, 2019 -- 12:58AM, VardonVoo. wrote:

There's often talk in Poker circles about pushing all-in on coin flips if the edge is even only slightly in your favour but psychologically that doesn't appeal. I mean losing the first is bad enough, but winning the first coin-flip then losing it all on the second would feel like total muggishness to me. Besides when you include the rake you need enough dead money in the pot to make the bet +EV even if you are exactly matched. A 5% rake will eat the whole of one stack if two equally skilled players go all-in on coin-flips twenty times and swap the same money back and fourth.I heard that expression recently - "Gun Trader" - where does it come from? I think I've heard of "CUP" meaning "Cool Under Pressure" but it sounds sh!t compared to "GUN".

GUN attaches to anything......Gun Flower Arranger, Gun T20 bat....to excel is to be a Gun!

Erasmus

dropped 600 on this filth in 4 games.

Some Food For Thought VV

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dO1BakI8238

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4PAoWcCbO4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5_hKUKoL7s

YouTube is the best teacher I ever had by a country mile.

My professor asked our class to produce that experiment. I never did. Just went home and was doing test trading again. SO whatever the moral of that story is I didn't bother with it.

Aug 5, 2019 -- 12:50AM, jucel69 wrote:

You can sometimes be happier with a loss compared to a win. It just depends how you get there!I've had some comebacks from the dead that have been more satisfying than big wins

I was really unnerved by your recent catastrophic and rapid fall from £150k to nearly zilch.
I really felt bad for you. It was quite strong of you to admit it to every one.
It reminded me of times in my life when I've just thrown good money after bad and ended up
really digging myself into a hole from what had been a reasonable position.
Yet other times I've started small and built steadily and patiently.
So much of this is psychology and I don't trust mine so I'm learning to insulate against it.

Aug 5, 2019 -- 1:10AM, detraveller wrote:

My professor asked our class to produce that experiment. I never did. Just went home and was doing test trading again. SO whatever the moral of that story is I didn't bother with it.

That's why im still in University at 30.
Free education for the win.

Before revealing anything on here one must bear in mind trolls are lurking in the shadows.

are you saying that to me CS?

Aug 5, 2019 -- 1:14AM, detraveller wrote:

are you saying that to me CS?

No of course not.  You know who that is very well.

H

I mean were you advising me or someone else?

I am Samlin? Sam I amlin?

Hucel69?

Aug 5, 2019 -- 1:16AM, detraveller wrote:

I mean were you advising me or someone else?

Just making a general point, don't reveal on here any weakneses of which we all have as trolls can be lying in wait in the shadows.

ok

Thanks CS - that Exel guy - I've seen stuff on YouTube about Kelly too - possibly the same guy.

The thing I don't like about coin-flips with a slight edge is Kelly says you should
put nearly half your bank on but a few losses in a row will cripple you even if long
term you'll come out ahead. I really much prefer long-odds situations.

I'm also of the opinion that gambling simulations don't account for exchange-trading.

If you have a slight edge you simply run your bets, scaled accordingly, until the money
rolls in over time. BUT it assumes you can scale your bets by accurately by knowing your edge
on each scenario, which you rarely do.

On the other hand if you have a trading method that you know from past experience and
results is profitable then that defines your edge and you can scale your initial position
size based on that historic edge. I haven't seen a simulator work that way.
I know I do well in Tests so I risk more initially, expecting to trade down my outcome
risk over the five days.

I haven't yet seen a simulation that accounts for the "free" green you are trading with.
If you trade a position you have a split green. At least one of those greens will go to waste,
so it is virtual money in a sense, or at least on temporary loan. So let's say you lay 1.01 for £100 and
the market moves to 1.22. If you back that for £50 you now have a likely win of a tenner and
a less likely £50 win. If the market rises to evens you can level up for a £30 win either side.
If the market kept flipping back and forth you could trade in and out and swell this green
magically as if from nothing. It's a bit like how banks can lend several times the money they
really have on deposit - that means the profit on a 3% loan could be 8 times that amount
if they only have to match 12.5% of loaned funds to actual deposits.
The deposits could even pay the same 3% and the banks would still make a gross trading profit.

Aug 5, 2019 -- 12:50AM, jucel69 wrote:

You can sometimes be happier with a loss compared to a win. It just depends how you get there!I've had some comebacks from the dead that have been more satisfying than big wins

I know what you mean here - the dissatisfaction of a smallish win that should have been a lot bigger, compared to the relief and sense of heroism from reducing a near-disaster by frantic raw gut-feel trading down to a mere manageable loss. that keeps enough of your powder dry to let you stay in the game.

Aug 5, 2019 -- 2:42AM, VardonVoo. wrote:

Aug  5, 2019 -- 12:50AM, jucel69 wrote:You can sometimes be happier with a loss compared to a win. It just depends how you get there!I've had some comebacks from the dead that have been more satisfying than big winsI know what you mean here - the dissatisfaction of a smallish win that should have been a lot bigger, compared to the relief and sense of heroism from reducing a near-disaster by frantic raw gut-feel trading down to a mere manageable loss. that keeps enough of your powder dry to let you stay in the game.

also big losses hurt more than the joy of big wins

thinking about it, the next 3 games are prone to upsets/fixing. There is no home advantage in this league so all that matters is finishing in top 2 and then the top 4. The top 2 are effectively locked in Vancouver have a massive 2 run lead in run rate and the head to head was washed out so Montreal can't catch them. So that rules the first 2 games as possible upsets only the bottom ranked teams have the incentive to win. Then the 3rd game is Montreal vs Toronto this is interesting as if the bottom two actually lose then its a no game - both have already qualified barring a massive lose in run rate. However if Winnipeg have won then its a knock out game.

Will have to wait for the lineups after the toss.

Aug 5, 2019 -- 8:39AM, Puzzman wrote:

thinking about it, the next 3 games are prone to upsets/fixing. There is no home advantage in this league so all that matters is finishing in top 2 and then the top 4. The top 2 are effectively locked in Vancouver have a massive 2 run lead in run rate and the head to head was washed out so Montreal can't catch them. So that rules the first 2 games as possible upsets only the bottom ranked teams have the incentive to win. Then the 3rd game is Montreal vs Toronto this is interesting as if the bottom two actually lose then its a no game - both have already qualified barring a massive lose in run rate. However if Winnipeg have won then its a knock out game.Will have to wait for the lineups after the toss.

Yes fair comment.

@ jucel "also big losses hurt more than the joy of big wins" - that's probably how it should be. Assuming most people exist on a "barely making do" basis a biggish win will not fundamentally change your lifestyle beyond treating yourself more often or splashing out on a luxury item or wasting it on an expensive holiday that 'er indoors convinces you is suddenly necessary, whereas the same dollar amount as a loss seriously impacts your ability to eat or pay the rent/mortgage and the first thing your lady wife would demand as a cost-saving measure would be to cut off your Sky feed that only encourages you to "gamble" anyway.

Link to Round 2 thread (for historical reference):-

https://community.betfair.com/cricket/go/thread/view/94046/31557831

Gubbing in progress

Nelson Mandela Bay Giants v Tshwane Spartans

Spartans were

1.04    $73,884        $599
1.05    $14,920        $1,240,715
1.06    $14,985        $1,061,822
1.07    $14,630        $544,191

now 2.30

posted in wrong thread...