|
By:
Sorry NZ
But without knowing what exactly you are doing, it's not really much of a useful exercise to post all this apparent gibberish. I know your motives are pure, but they're a bit pointless tbh. |
|
By:
That's indeed very impressive NZBOT!
However, I noticed that you were on the brink of a complete loss but managed to recover amazingly with the whole of your money that was left. To be more precise, I'm talking about these two hands: 8235034769 2010-03-0500:00 2010-03-0423:59 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26595056 Back Hand 3 30.00 @ 19.90 Won 567.00 597.00 8235021371 2010-03-0423:57 2010-03-0423:56 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26595008 Back Hand 4 15.00 @ 6.75 Lost 15.00 30.00 How could you just be so sure? Are you really betting on possible straights/flushes only? I'm eagerly waiting for your response. Thank you very much in advance! |
|
By:
Alright, I have a question I want to ask you guys:
I usually do win when I play the games manually, like last night, where I made 200 profit out of a hand of 50 in matter of just 10 minutes! Well, the way I did it was to back very possible outcomes (e.g. 1.10 and below) with all the money I got in that particular session. Do you think it is possible to make a profit this way if one doesn't get too greedy? I do know that even these hands do lose, but not that often! Or how about just gambling a few quids with backing favourites with a small amount of money and then leaving while still in profit? Or is NZBOT's tactic really the only one that seems profitable, in that one backs outsiders? Thank you for your constructive answers in advance! PS: NZBOT, did you ever had a losing day yet? |
|
By:
You won't win long term just blindly backing short-odds favourites. This will not work in x-games any better than in other forms of gambling.
IMO the only was to secure long-term profits is to follow the cycles that exist in all games, (with some bets much better than others in this regard- but you will need to do your own research to discover these). Get yourself a copy of x-feeder (lite version is free) and look at the graphing/trend function that has recently been added. |
|
By:
Grun, are you profiting from xgames on a consistent basis because of p/l trend now?
|
|
By:
It depends what you mean by consistent, I am having more good days and fewer bad days, with the bad days not as bad as they were before.
But we are still dealing with a RNG and this could just be a temporary blip in my favour. I think it needs to be a bit more sophisticated than simply setting an action based on the value of the channel_trend variable. But the new feature is definitely a help in our quest. |
|
By:
Interesting, sounds pretty consistent too me i.e more winning days than losing ones. Good luck, hope it carries on and isnt tempoary as you say. You are one of the few on here that I would believe if they claimed consistent earnings.
|
|
By:
I would too.
Grunweld is not into bs that's for sure. Just keep remembering you're never going to eliminate the extended losing streaks. The best you can hope for is the minimize them so they don't, in the long term, cumulatively exceed your winning streaks. Sounds basic and obvious I know. BUt short term results ( winning or losing ) mean absolutely nothing in the long term, but they do tend to distort one's immediate views on whether a specific systematic technique is looking like a winner or a loser. I think that too often perhaps many people give up on systems that may erm in fact prove to be marginally profitable over the long term. They don't gie them enough time to prove themselves, one way or the other. If and when you can reasonably establish how marginally profitable a system is looking to be, and what are the max worst case capital drawdowns required, then it is just a matter of scaling up appropriately. Patience is, without doubt, a major virtue in cracking these games. |
|
By:
A short live test session this evening, the downswing problem of my strategy still obvious.
(but still, a nice profit for 20 min of playing) Ref. No. Settled Placed Description Amount Balance 8277849268 2010-03-1321:01 2010-03-1321:01 Transfer to Betfair 150.00 0.00 8277837365 2010-03-1320:58 2010-03-1320:57 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832977 Back Hand 1 5.00 @ 13.20 Lost 5.00 150.00 8277835719 2010-03-1320:58 2010-03-1320:57 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832977 Back Hand 1 5.00 @ 8.10 Lost 5.00 155.00 8277829928 2010-03-1320:55 2010-03-1320:55 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832941 Back Hand 3 6.15 @ 3.98 Lost 6.15 160.00 8277821976 2010-03-1320:53 2010-03-1320:53 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832868 Back Hand 2 4.00 @ 19.90 Lost 4.00 166.15 8277813400 2010-03-1320:51 2010-03-1320:50 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832822 Commission Charged 2.51% On Net winnings of 20.3 0.51 170.15 8277813400 2010-03-1320:51 2010-03-1320:50 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832822 Back Hand 3 4.00 @ 5.68 Lost 4.00 170.66 8277811759 2010-03-1320:51 2010-03-1320:50 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832822 Lay Hand 1 10.00 @ 1.53 Lost 5.30 174.66 8277808104 2010-03-1320:51 2010-03-1320:49 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832822 Back Hand 1 10.00 @ 3.96 Won 29.60 179.96 8277805199 2010-03-1320:48 2010-03-1320:48 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832763 Commission Charged 2.49% On Net winnings of 49.73 1.24 150.36 8277800509 2010-03-1320:48 2010-03-1320:46 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832763 Back Hand 4 11.87 @ 5.00 Lost 11.87 151.60 8277805199 2010-03-1320:48 2010-03-1320:48 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832763 Back Hand 3 4.00 @ 13.20 Lost 4.00 163.47 8277803310 2010-03-1320:48 2010-03-1320:47 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832763 Back Hand 3 4.00 @ 6.20 Lost 4.00 167.47 8277803311 2010-03-1320:48 2010-03-1320:47 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832763 Back Hand 2 4.00 @ 19.40 Won 73.60 171.47 8277803312 2010-03-1320:48 2010-03-1320:47 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832763 Back Hand 1 4.00 @ 12.50 Lost 4.00 97.87 8277795684 2010-03-1320:46 2010-03-1320:45 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832741 Commission Charged 2.51% On Net winnings of 7.56 0.19 101.87 8277795684 2010-03-1320:46 2010-03-1320:45 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832741 Back Hand 4 4.00 @ 12.10 Lost 4.00 102.06 8277794630 2010-03-1320:46 2010-03-1320:45 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832741 Lay Hand 2 5.00 @ 1.10 Lost 0.50 106.06 8277793044 2010-03-1320:46 2010-03-1320:44 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832741 Back Hand 2 4.50 @ 3.68 Won 12.06 106.56 8277789082 2010-03-1320:43 2010-03-1320:43 Turbo Texas Hold'Em / Game ID: 26832693 Back Hand 4 4.00 @ 3.98 Lost 4.00 94.50 8277784369 2010-03-1320:42 2010-03-1320:42 Transfer from Betfair 98.50 98.50 Cheers! |
|
By:
Hello guys,
sorry for delay, had no time to answer. YOULITTLEBOTTY Sorry NZ But without knowing what exactly you are doing, it's not really much of a useful exercise to post all this apparent gibberish. I know your motives are pure, but they're a bit pointless tbh. Sry YLB, but I choose to keep details of my strategy secret! Deus Ex Machina How could you just be so sure? I couldn't. I just do what my calculator "says" to me. Are you really betting on possible straights/flushes only? As I said above, I choose to keep detail of my strategy secret. But what I can tell you is that my strategy is built around backing or laying possible straights and flushes. Or is NZBOT's tactic really the only one that seems profitable, in that one backs outsiders? PS: NZBOT, did you ever had a losing day yet? Backing outsiders without a clear hand selection strategy is not a path to success. I tried this several times (backing everything 7.95), clearly ignoring the rules of my "cross-game value" strategy, and every time I lost money. So yes, I had losing days. Luckily, it was money I previously made by strictly following the rules of my strategy. So all in all, exchange games are profitable for me. Cheers! |
|
By:
... (backing everything greater than 7.95) ...
|
|
By:
I'm OK with that NZ.
I'm just saying that your results, good or bad, are meaningless to us all. But keep posting by all means, if it soothes you in some form or manner. |
|
By:
It's been one of the bad days today, won £40 first thing, but it then frittered away £60. Friday it was up £140. This is all at min level stakes.
|
|
By:
Grun, YLB described a strategy that someone he knew used that he run 24/7/365 (profitably) although it experienced flat periods and down periods whilst waiting for a strong 'up'. He also only played 10% of games. My point is, at what period of time do you consider your trig successful? Your trig sounds not dissimilar to YLB's (friends) trig, only playing certain games, flat stakes and not nessasarily a short term winner every time but certainly a viable longterm winner. Thanks for sharing to all of you, it has given me a bit of diection now as to what might work and what wont and perhaps more importantly why. Of everyone that posts results on here, there does seem to be a common underlying theme behind the more successful ones. Cheers.
|
|
By:
I honestly don't know when I will consider my current approach to be successful. The graphing function certainly shows that mean reversion occurs, but, of course, it doesn't occur in a perfect sine wave. The trigger can start live betting, but then almost immediately hit another downturn and this pattern could repeat several times, during which you are losing hand over fist. If it waits until a trend is well established, you can end up missing out on most of the profit.
I have used trend following in the past by graphing the x-feeder statement file in excel, but it was not possible to incorporate this into any trigger actions, so the decision when to live bet had to be taken by my human brain. I don't think that any fancy betting strategy is required, just single bets at not too high odds, however, although I believe that I use the best bets for this, you must do your own research. |
|
By:
Grunweld
Whilst there is obviously no problem in tracking things on a daily basis, there is, in my opinion, a big problem if you are reacting to things on a daily basis. There is no way that a series of random numbers can be expected, or projected, to any degree of bettable confidence, to revert to any sort of norms in such a reduced time frame. At least not when you are talking about the incidence of the numbers being revealed at approx 25 per hour. That is the average speed of the games. If on the other hand you were talkinig about thousands per hour, then maybe so, but otherwise no imo. I strongly believe that most players take too short a time view of thei results. You can bet the mkt. making bots don't and, after all, the bootom line is that they are the people ( the things ? ) you have to beat in the long run. |
|
By:
Bootom line. Cute eh ?
|