Exchange Games
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
18 Mar 10
13:04
Joined:
Date Joined:
16 May 06
in Exchange Games, Hold'em prior to the "Deal"
The Back and Lay money in the six boxes of Market Depth are always the
same ..check it out
This has to be Betfair money not punters money, as it in instant when a new game comes on screen.
I just saw some guy loose £1800 on a bet that I fear only Betfair would have laid.
Do you have a view
The Back and Lay money in the six boxes of Market Depth are always the
same ..check it out
This has to be Betfair money not punters money, as it in instant when a new game comes on screen.
I just saw some guy loose £1800 on a bet that I fear only Betfair would have laid.
Do you have a view
Show More
What if it is ?
What does it matter ?
The point is that the odds are those that any other intelligent market maker would offer. NO better no worse.
If the odds were incorrect then other mkt. makers would step in and offer better and correct ones, and knock BF off the front of the mkt. making queue.
What does it matter ?
The point is that the odds are those that any other intelligent market maker would offer. NO better no worse.
If the odds were incorrect then other mkt. makers would step in and offer better and correct ones, and knock BF off the front of the mkt. making queue.
I agree that odds are just undervalue, but the problem with this so called 'exchange' is that it's impossible for any non-Betfair MM's to get a look in, as they will always be near the end of the queue. These games would be much better and fairer if they operated like the sports exchange.
Are you saying that you would like the opportunity to make money as a market maker by offering under value odds like BF does ?
You can you know do that already by undercutting BF if you want to.
Or are you saying that you just want to be able to offer the same odds as BF?
That is bet at the offer side and lay at the bid side ?
How would that be fairer to all us regular punters in any way ?
You can you know do that already by undercutting BF if you want to.
Or are you saying that you just want to be able to offer the same odds as BF?
That is bet at the offer side and lay at the bid side ?
How would that be fairer to all us regular punters in any way ?
Although I would probably never do it, to qualify as a fan vs fan exchange, one should be able to lay the market at the back price and vice versa and hope that either all of your money is matched or equal amounts are matched. This is not possible on 'exchange' games, so they are not really an exchange at all.
I don't even think a super fast bot written in machine code would allow you to do this and Betfair bots would always be at the front of the queue. I suppose the only way would be to place money at the poorer prices and hope that some was matched in the high turnover games.
I don't even think a super fast bot written in machine code would allow you to do this and Betfair bots would always be at the front of the queue. I suppose the only way would be to place money at the poorer prices and hope that some was matched in the high turnover games.
The point is Grunweld is that Xgames is and never has been an exchange type product, like sports betting.
This is because there is no difference of opinion, or exchange of ideas, on what the odds should be. Or at least there shouldn't be.
The odds are mathematically calculable and not subject to vagaries such as climate, injuries, form, inside knowledge as in much of sports betting.
I agree that BF does have the inside track on mkt making, but only because they are prepared to take on any and all bet amounts on any and all games, thus providing the required liquidity for the games to have any meaning at the speed they are played. Are you or anybody else prepared to provide that continuous form of liquidity at the quite fine spreads they operate on ?
As you have said many times over Xgames are not normal card games where skill and bluff can and do play a major role.
I think therefore they are perfectly fair for everybody, given what they are. Random games of chance.
This is because there is no difference of opinion, or exchange of ideas, on what the odds should be. Or at least there shouldn't be.
The odds are mathematically calculable and not subject to vagaries such as climate, injuries, form, inside knowledge as in much of sports betting.
I agree that BF does have the inside track on mkt making, but only because they are prepared to take on any and all bet amounts on any and all games, thus providing the required liquidity for the games to have any meaning at the speed they are played. Are you or anybody else prepared to provide that continuous form of liquidity at the quite fine spreads they operate on ?
As you have said many times over Xgames are not normal card games where skill and bluff can and do play a major role.
I think therefore they are perfectly fair for everybody, given what they are. Random games of chance.
And no, before some idiot comments ( not you Grunweld), I do not work for BF.
I am just a sane, intelligent, objective observer and commentator on how the games work.
I have no axe to grind in any form or manner in these debates.
I am just a sane, intelligent, objective observer and commentator on how the games work.
I have no axe to grind in any form or manner in these debates.
Guys you are missing my point.
If BF write software to accommodate the same money staked at the deal stage.
the software could be adapted so they are not loser's.
The guy who lost the £1800 had backed pocket ace's against J9 J9 and45
The flop produced 9 9 5 this was followed by a 7 and 8 river
When you consider they write the software........they lay a £1800 bet and the last two 9's show up.
I am not making the accusation I am just posing the question.
Stink's a bit to me.
If BF write software to accommodate the same money staked at the deal stage.
the software could be adapted so they are not loser's.
The guy who lost the £1800 had backed pocket ace's against J9 J9 and45
The flop produced 9 9 5 this was followed by a 7 and 8 river
When you consider they write the software........they lay a £1800 bet and the last two 9's show up.
I am not making the accusation I am just posing the question.
Stink's a bit to me.
Guys you are missing my point.
If BF write software to accommodate the same money staked at the deal stage.
the software could be adapted so they are not loser's.
The guy who lost the £1800 had backed pocket ace's against Jack nine, Jack nine and five four
The flop produced nine nine fiive, this was followed by a seven and eightriver
When you consider they write the software........they lay a £1800 bet and the last two 9's show up.
I am not making the accusation I am just posing the question.
If BF write software to accommodate the same money staked at the deal stage.
the software could be adapted so they are not loser's.
The guy who lost the £1800 had backed pocket ace's against Jack nine, Jack nine and five four
The flop produced nine nine fiive, this was followed by a seven and eightriver
When you consider they write the software........they lay a £1800 bet and the last two 9's show up.
I am not making the accusation I am just posing the question.
everything is possible.. BUT should be a totally random thing, due to the HIGH risk - controls, Malta commission (?) etc
Oh, I see - this is really another "fixed" thread then?
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539