someones bot has gone a bit mad on plzen v b munich o/u 8.5

wow...

mentali !!

obviously got the two outcomes mixed up here believing he was on a good thing


scarey stuff indeed

that overs graph tells the story doesnt it

a ridiculous number of small identical sized bets machine-gunned into the system in rapid succession

LOL at the graph.

Poor chap/chapess will be desperately hoping that the game is called off tonight.

lol....or money laundering

Nov 5, 2013 -- 2:44PM, subversion wrote:

that overs graph tells the story doesnt ita ridiculous number of small identical sized bets machine-gunned into the system in rapid succession

someone could have lined up lays first and then he came in and backed 1.0x

ie one big back

so of course it will now end 0-9 to bayern

lurka - yes it could have been trap bets in place beforehand, all at 0.01 intervals and identical sizes, thats possible

but i've never, ever seen trap bets like that in these markets

suspicious looking alright, but i'd say that was the way it was done

theres always a few trap bets knocking around of course

but never the perfect coverage of every single odds increment at exactly the same bet size

if it was one single big back trapped by many small lays, then how did the trap better know to place the bets right at that exact time, and we never see trap bets like it in those markets at any other time?

the guy would have to be psychic or capable of placing invisible bets

yes, unless as someone above implied, he knew what he was doing. If so, why have a big back at 1.0x when you can spread it all the way up to 1.98 and 'wash' a lot more

Looks like a jump bot gone wrong to me with someone milking it.

yes CJ70 thats exactly what it looks like to me - a 1.01 increment jumping bot gone nuts

or some terrible programmers first attempt at a 1.01 increment jumping bot

subversion • November 5, 2013 4:41 PM GMT
if it was one single big back trapped by many small lays, then how did the trap better know to place the bets right at that exact time, and we never see trap bets like it in those markets at any other time?

maybe you and CJ are right about the bot, but to answer both of your questions they were backed and laid by the same person at the same times on different accounts

quality

lurka - if it was the same person doing both sides, they will have had to smash through a chunk of other peoples money to get to those odds

but if they were willing to pay that price, then who knows... but still doesnt explain the perfect distribution of odds increments and prices

this is ridiculous . just saw the graph.

that is about 4000 lost

Nov 5, 2013 -- 4:48PM, lurka wrote:

subversion • November 5, 2013 4:41 PM GMTif it was one single big back trapped by many small lays, then how did the trap better know to place the bets right at that exact time, and we never see trap bets like it in those markets at any other time?maybe you and CJ are right about the bot, but to answer both of your questions they were backed and laid by the same person at the same times on different accounts

Possibly. If I were doing some housekeeping I'd be looking at a much different market to do it in, it's neither hidden or in plain site there.

Subversion - how did he get matched at all then? There is relatively little money matched above 1.98, so there was no money to smash through when it was done

lurka - i wasnt watching the market in realtime i'm afraid, i only noticed an hour or so later when i noticed i had been matched for decent amounts at decent odds far earlier than expected

so i know for a fact this market was not empty when it happened

Sorry, I should have said 'little or no money', not 'no money'. There is €222 matched at 70 on o8.5 and v small sums above and below that. That is a small price to pay for the benefit of a few k here. Especially if you are on 60% PC for that few k.

But TBF there must have been some automation involved and it would be a stupidly obvious way to wash money, as BF will surely be looking at the accounts matched. But it would have been possible to do it the way i've said in this market

i agree its possible, and automation was definitely used

and yes, this would be a very weird way to 'hide' activity, doing something so obvious and turning the trading graphs into modern art masterpieces

Definitely a problematic bot for me as the unders were pushed up to 17.5, the jumps at the end of that suggest some sort of push that was moving the bot to that level.

We'll never know unless someone owns up. It's one of the main reasons I wouldn't run a bot, I reckon you could scrape at least £30 a day with a tight bot, but so easy to drop a bank in the same way.

CJ the prices matched on the unders side correspond with the equivalent prices and amounts traded on the overs side. 17.5 = 1.06 approx, 15 = 1.07, 13.5 = 1.08 etc it looks like €30 or €60 backs placed on the overs side and it's as if they are cross-matched with equivalent prices on the unders side

I'm sorry to say that it was me. I was testing a new bot today, and made a really basic programming error.

Believe it or not, I was actually relieved that the error worked out the way it did. Cost me 4.6k, but the account I was testing in has 6 figures +, so it could have been FAR worse.

*€30 or €60 lays on the overs side i meant

Ouch. We've all made similar mistakes, so glad it has worked out not so bad for you.

kudos for owning up Contrarian.

sorry about the jibe earlier in the thread about 'terrible programmer', all software has bugs and in the world of automated trading, these bugs can have severe consequences (as you know)

i cant imagine having an account with 6 figures linked to an untested bot personally. having a buggy bot is like having a highly automated, fast and efficient way of emptying your bank account.

theres only 2,760 ish matched on the market...

No problem subversion.

Yeah, when I first started running bots, I was really scared of something disastrous going wrong. I think I've become complacent, having run them for quite some time without any mishaps.

sideshowbob,

BF double count.

I'm -4.7k on Under 8.5
+10.4k on Over 8.5

So Contrarian, fair play for owning up and glad it didn't dent you too much. But how did the bot place the bets and on what side?

sorry to see your loss. can you tell us what went wrong in more detail? what it was supposed to do and what it did?

i'd like a small bet on 'single-increment jumping bot that ended up jumping its own bets'

fair play for owning up to this one contrarian - a terrible  mistake  , hope you are able  swallow that sort of damage

has it put you off bots ?

Coach,

It's not that much damage really. Standard deviation of my returns on a (Champ League) night like this are probably about 10k anyway. On the La Liga match on Monday, we came perilously close to losing about 100k.

When you run bots, you have to accept that you're almost certain to lose a bit through mistakes. But if you have a really solid strategy, then those mistakes just become insignificant. I do (normally) include double/triple checks within my bots to ensure that nothing crazy can happen (like getting score wrong).

Btw Coach, Betfair Xmas dinner is on a Thursday this year. Get yourself up to London.

all i can say is you must be dealing with massive volumes



I will check the thread  over on general betting - would love to attend if able to

Only 8 more needed

For those that didn't see it the matched has :
1.06 £3   £50
1.07      £50
..
..
..
1.91      £100
1.92      £100
1.93      £98
1.94      £50
1.95      £50
1.96      £71
1.97      £100
1.98      £22

Given it's 50's matched I'm guessing that's a UK customer.

Sorry just read it's contrarian, was in a hurry to get the data before the markets cleared, didn't read thread

damn, was kinda hoping that over 8.5 came in just for the epic jamminess it would involve

I looked at the money available at 1.01 earlier and I thought it would be just luck if the mistake landed so left it.

Was secretly hoping that Bayern had a few quick goals, so Contrarian could look at hitting some sort of decent result.