Exchange Games
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
31 Mar 10
18:47
Joined:
Date Joined:
31 Jan 09
Hey folks!
I have been tinkering and come to the conclusion, that one absolutely needs staking (as some users here have already rightly suggested). The real problem here is that the minimum bet size is much too high (i.e. 4 for us non-islanders).
Is there a way one could bet below the minimum bet size? I know that X-Feeder once supported it but had to drop it due to complaints by Betfair.
What about the "amoeba" bot or any other ones, is it possible with them?
I thank you very much for your answers in advance!
I have been tinkering and come to the conclusion, that one absolutely needs staking (as some users here have already rightly suggested). The real problem here is that the minimum bet size is much too high (i.e. 4 for us non-islanders).
Is there a way one could bet below the minimum bet size? I know that X-Feeder once supported it but had to drop it due to complaints by Betfair.
What about the "amoeba" bot or any other ones, is it possible with them?
I thank you very much for your answers in advance!
Show More
I've thought about this recently.
Firstly, if you submit single bets below the min. BF will close your account, so you need to stay within the rules.
It can be done easily on the Sports Exchange - I don't want to describe the method here, but if you google- Betfair place bet below minimum- you should find the link.
In principle this method could be applied to X-games, but using the browser interface you would run out of time. So you would need to program an API-based bot to do this and although x-feeder does have actions and trigger variables in the area of cancelling unmatched bets, I have no idea whether these can fulfil your objective.
Firstly, if you submit single bets below the min. BF will close your account, so you need to stay within the rules.
It can be done easily on the Sports Exchange - I don't want to describe the method here, but if you google- Betfair place bet below minimum- you should find the link.
In principle this method could be applied to X-games, but using the browser interface you would run out of time. So you would need to program an API-based bot to do this and although x-feeder does have actions and trigger variables in the area of cancelling unmatched bets, I have no idea whether these can fulfil your objective.
Grunweld, it can't be done via API, that I can tell you for sure.
There is a block inside the API that prevents this happening.
There is a block inside the API that prevents this happening.
Fluctuating stakes only makes sense if and when you are betting based on a perceived value edge. Which is what one does, or tries to do, in sports betting.
In Xgames, there is no "value " to be had and so the staking you must be referring to must really just be a variation of "chasing ", no matter how you dress it up.
In Xgames, there is no "value " to be had and so the staking you must be referring to must really just be a variation of "chasing ", no matter how you dress it up.
Little botty, I don't know you at all, but even to me it looks as if this whole X-Games thing is something personal to you. :)
If so, why do you stay on this forum? Just curious...
If so, why do you stay on this forum? Just curious...
Incidentally if your "system " is making a high volume of bets, many below the minimum and many way above the minimum, then you will probably find that most if not all of your eventual rofit will come from the larger bets.
So to solve your problem, you just run your system to record the below minimum bets as if you had made them ( but you don't actually make them just paper trade them ) and then only actually make the larger, above minimum bets, when called for.
You will probably find your profits are virtually the same doing this, if not larger, due to less commission being paid.
But imo, despite this solution I offer, I would expect your system will fail inevitably as it is flawed because it is effectively chasing.
So to solve your problem, you just run your system to record the below minimum bets as if you had made them ( but you don't actually make them just paper trade them ) and then only actually make the larger, above minimum bets, when called for.
You will probably find your profits are virtually the same doing this, if not larger, due to less commission being paid.
But imo, despite this solution I offer, I would expect your system will fail inevitably as it is flawed because it is effectively chasing.
No Feeder, I'm actually trying to help and guide people to "save " money, not like some others who are trying to profit from other person's weaknesses and lack of gambling nous.
Feeder, I think you misunderstood my post.
The method described on the internet can be used by API bots. I know that Grey Horse Bot employs it and since MFPro from your stable also enables bets below minimum, I presume it will use the same method.
The method described on the internet can be used by API bots. I know that Grey Horse Bot employs it and since MFPro from your stable also enables bets below minimum, I presume it will use the same method.
If you mean it is blocked on the games API, then I would accept that, since I have never tried and don't intend to.
Grunweld, I hear you.
If you try to apply the same method to the Games, it won't work because of the error message that it will return.
It is different with Sports, that's what I'm saying.
If you try to apply the same method to the Games, it won't work because of the error message that it will return.
It is different with Sports, that's what I'm saying.
So the answer to the opening question is:
The only method is to place your back bet for £2 + desired stake and immediately place a lay bet for £2, or vice versa, for lay bets.
Just ensure that your back bet is matched before placing the lay bet.
Conditions for Lay:
Seconds Since round start is equal or greater then 8
AND (Fitting) Selections Matched Back is greater than 0
You do, however, lose the spread between back & lay prices, which further erodes any profit.
The only method is to place your back bet for £2 + desired stake and immediately place a lay bet for £2, or vice versa, for lay bets.
Just ensure that your back bet is matched before placing the lay bet.
Conditions for Lay:
Seconds Since round start is equal or greater then 8
AND (Fitting) Selections Matched Back is greater than 0
You do, however, lose the spread between back & lay prices, which further erodes any profit.
Grunweld
Ignoring my basic remarks about the fallacy of staking on Xgmes, let me, however, ask you and others the following.
Can you seriously believe that betting and laying continuously to achieve a required below minimum staking amount will not result in overall losses simply by the "spread " factor alone which is involved.
You would be making " below value " odds even lower and lower by any such method.
What's even the theoretical point of it all, let alone the practical ?
Ignoring my basic remarks about the fallacy of staking on Xgmes, let me, however, ask you and others the following.
Can you seriously believe that betting and laying continuously to achieve a required below minimum staking amount will not result in overall losses simply by the "spread " factor alone which is involved.
You would be making " below value " odds even lower and lower by any such method.
What's even the theoretical point of it all, let alone the practical ?
Sorry Grunweld, I missed your closing sentence above , where you correctly address this exact point.
My apologies. I should have known that you, at least, would be fully cognizant of this "little" important point.
My apologies. I should have known that you, at least, would be fully cognizant of this "little" important point.
Erm' that's just what I said re: the spread.
I was just replying to the OP's question.
And there is no point in trying it.
I was just replying to the OP's question.
And there is no point in trying it.
Erm' and that's what I apologised for.
Anyway we agree whatever.
A pity Feeder just didn't say that it is not worth designing a bot to have features to lay below the minimum.
Anyway we agree whatever.
A pity Feeder just didn't say that it is not worth designing a bot to have features to lay below the minimum.
I don't understand you guys' problems with "chasing"!
Yes, you're right about my so-called "staking" being in fact a chasing system. But one has to absolutely use one if one wants to gain some! (Nice, eh? ;)
Anyway, because the odds are always mathematically perfect, only using the channel_trend variable doesn't help, one has to also stake in one way or another, and also stop potential losing runs which would wipe one out.
And by the way, the more money one has, the easier it becomes to win: If i had 100,000 , think about how easy it would be to just make 100 a day using a chasing system!
Any thoughts on my ideas?
Yes, you're right about my so-called "staking" being in fact a chasing system. But one has to absolutely use one if one wants to gain some! (Nice, eh? ;)
Anyway, because the odds are always mathematically perfect, only using the channel_trend variable doesn't help, one has to also stake in one way or another, and also stop potential losing runs which would wipe one out.
And by the way, the more money one has, the easier it becomes to win: If i had 100,000 , think about how easy it would be to just make 100 a day using a chasing system!
Any thoughts on my ideas?
What's to say ?.
You think you can chase successfully.
Nobody has ever done it before, but what has that got to do with it ?
Best of luck in your endeavours. You're going to need it.
You think you can chase successfully.
Nobody has ever done it before, but what has that got to do with it ?
Best of luck in your endeavours. You're going to need it.
100,000 to make 100....yeah simples
BUT.. would you be happy?
somehow i think not
BUT.. would you be happy?
somehow i think not
Been suspiciously quiet round here lately, ain't it?
What should I know, but perhaps someone could prove the games are fixed when they upload an internal paper to wikileaks.org? ;-) Nah, just kidding!
Anyway(s) [sic] (man, I'm a genius *lawl* [sic]), what about the TimeMachine(R) feature everybody was anticipating for so long? Now, suddenly no one's talking about it anymore?! What are your new insights into the other games (i.e. blackjack, hi lo)? Why isn't Jazza around any more, by the way?
Ah, questions over questions, and nobody around to give them any sense!
And yes, participating in this forum really does pay its toll...
Anyway(s) [sic] (man, I'm a genius *lawl* [sic]), what about the TimeMachine(R) feature everybody was anticipating for so long? Now, suddenly no one's talking about it anymore?! What are your new insights into the other games (i.e. blackjack, hi lo)? Why isn't Jazza around any more, by the way?
Ah, questions over questions, and nobody around to give them any sense!
And yes, participating in this forum really does pay its toll...
Grunweld, in what way are you "ar..ed" when using Time Machine??
Don't know feeder, I just like using that word in a sentence, much better than the f word.
And what about NZBOT?
He at least is able to make a consistent profit from these supposedly unprofitable games, because the laws of mathematic say so.
Anyway, the reason why I don't stop is because I can't let those games win. I mean, I'm down about 6000 , but have already more than made it up thanks to the real(!) Forex market.
By the way, I bet NZBOT would be even more profitable if he would trade there, since he also is a programmer.
So, just 6000 , that's what I'm after. Probably will just play manually and stop after I have gambled(!) a few .
Thanks for reading...
He at least is able to make a consistent profit from these supposedly unprofitable games, because the laws of mathematic say so.
Anyway, the reason why I don't stop is because I can't let those games win. I mean, I'm down about 6000 , but have already more than made it up thanks to the real(!) Forex market.
By the way, I bet NZBOT would be even more profitable if he would trade there, since he also is a programmer.
So, just 6000 , that's what I'm after. Probably will just play manually and stop after I have gambled(!) a few .
Thanks for reading...
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539