|
By:
I have his dream body so he can't stop thinking about me.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Roelof van der Merwe
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Erasmus
|
|
By:
dropped 600 on this filth in 4 games.
|
|
By:
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 |
|
By:
YouTube is the best teacher I ever had by a country mile.
|
|
By:
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.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Before revealing anything on here one must bear in mind trolls are lurking in the shadows.
|
|
By:
are you saying that to me CS?
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
H
|
|
By:
I mean were you advising me or someone else?
|
|
By:
I am Samlin? Sam I amlin?
|
|
By:
Hucel69?
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
ok
![]() |
|
By:
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. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
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. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
@ 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.
|
|
By:
Link to Round 2 thread (for historical reference):-
https://community.betfair.com/cricket/go/thread/view/94046/31557831 |
|
By:
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 |
|
By:
posted in wrong thread...
|