Forums

General Betting

Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Steve Voltage
05 Dec 09 16:47
Joined:
Date Joined: 23 May 09
| Topic/replies: 3,798 | Blogger: Steve Voltage's blog
averaging about £1200 a day. It's not bad considering the laid back approach

dear o dear.
Pause Switch to Standard View Heathcote the latest
Show More
Loading...
Report cruki December 5, 2009 4:49 PM GMT
Heathcote = "Bet Angel Advert"
Report chuck6969696969 December 5, 2009 6:39 PM GMT
why cant it be that he is actualy that good at trading, am sure if u had a top end pc fast broadband and router and a 10k start bank over time it could be possible
Report Zola's Back Heel December 5, 2009 6:45 PM GMT
Faster only makes it more profitable. If you can't do it with an average set up unlikely you'll do it with fast kit.
Report chuck6969696969 December 5, 2009 6:52 PM GMT
that cant be true surely,if u have an average set up u miss all the best prices available
Report Zola's Back Heel December 5, 2009 6:56 PM GMT
neeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrroooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwww
Report tinkyvinky December 5, 2009 7:24 PM GMT
Surely it is possible and I bet, here are bigger players/earners than him.
Footie gives you the oportunity to play with 50k and more( one tick gives you 250-500 profit, depends on odds). From that kind of money no need to be unreal to get 1200 per day.
Report Okuma December 5, 2009 7:30 PM GMT
I've only glanced at a few of his posts but I imagine he lost all credibility with that subscription service.
Report Feck N. Eejit December 5, 2009 7:31 PM GMT
Betfair say his claims are true so either they are true or it's an advert for betfair.
Report GoodLife December 5, 2009 9:04 PM GMT
I think his profits are genuine, I just don't buy into his "If someone stoopid like me can do it, anyone can using bet angel" angle.

The claims of him not being involved with bet angel were blown apart when he set up a subscription service with someone who does home trading courses for bet angel.
Report GoodLife December 5, 2009 9:09 PM GMT
Posts being moderated in this thread?

Someone does have friends in high places.
Report The Investor December 5, 2009 9:27 PM GMT
Feck N. Eejit 05 Dec 20:31
Betfair say his claims are true so either they are true or it's an advert for betfair.


Betfair also says:

"There are very few people who are consistently profitable and none of those people are in the UK"

Both statements cannot be true :D
Report cruki December 5, 2009 9:59 PM GMT
This is how easy it is to make a fake Betfair statement:-
http://www.juicestorm.com/betfairgen/

He has shifted away from the Bet Angel advertisement and made his own tipping service which i'm sure is a complete waste of £70 a month cause he will be hoovering up all the value.
Report Feck N. Eejit December 6, 2009 11:33 AM GMT
Mark Davies was misquoted by the newspaper on that one investor. You cannot believe anything you read in a newspaper.
Report The Investor December 6, 2009 2:08 PM GMT
Feck, how do you know that? Do you know what he actually said?
Report Eldrick December 6, 2009 2:10 PM GMT
you can't believe anything in a newspaper? anything?
Report Feck N. Eejit December 6, 2009 2:22 PM GMT
Someone in betfair told me investor. As soon as I seen the quote I suspected he was talking about the fact that the biggest winners on betfair (mainly horses I think) come from outwith the UK. When you think about it, why would he say there were no winners in the UK when they're letting people ** others rotten to give the impression it's a place where fortunes can be made.
Report The Investor December 6, 2009 2:36 PM GMT
I was asking myself a similar question Feck. I would have thought that mentioning that people have made large profits would be good publicity...
It's obvious that the statement is untrue, unless "consistent" means winning every single bet :D

I wonder what he actually said though.

The 76p profit example does give the article a sense of deliberate downplaying of profit that some people make, as does the sentence about "computer geeks" when most of the people that make big money have automated at least some of what they do.

I really don't see what benefit betfair will gain from articles like this. If I had never heard of Betfair and read that article, I would have thought it would be a complete waste of time.
Report JPG December 6, 2009 2:49 PM GMT
Id go along with that Investor.

I wouldnt be at all surprised to find out MD was mis-quoted (out of context etc) in that article but theres definitely a tone of deliberately trying to downplay things in it too.

As for Adam H, I have no reason to doubt the integrity of the claimed results although I cant imagine the subscription service was the best move in the context of "perceived integrity."
Report not_drwho December 7, 2009 8:10 AM GMT
Betfair also says:

"There are very few people who are consistently profitable and none of those people are in the UK"



Where do Betfair say that ? As we all know that is complete**
Report Feck N. Eejit December 7, 2009 8:25 AM GMT
If you read the thread you'll see that betfair didn't say it.
Report Moon Light December 7, 2009 10:06 AM GMT
Or they now deny it.
Report Feck N. Eejit December 7, 2009 10:58 AM GMT
Can anyone think of a logical reason why he would say it?
Report ante December 7, 2009 11:56 AM GMT
New tax?
Report ante December 7, 2009 11:58 AM GMT
*To reduce the possibility of...
Report Feck N. Eejit December 7, 2009 12:06 PM GMT
Why would he then say he was misquoted?
Report ante December 7, 2009 12:28 PM GMT
Maybe he realized it was pointless once dozens of 'sharp minds' started flashing their P/L's. Or maybe he was indeed misquoted.
Report not_drwho December 7, 2009 12:43 PM GMT
Betfair need to take a leaf from the Las Vegas scrapbook at some stage and realise that marketing the exploits of your winners can bring in lots more users.

But for some reason Betfair seem to think that their winners are somehow their competitors too.
Report Moon Light December 7, 2009 1:03 PM GMT
See current thread on Horse Racing forum re BF and winners.

As to why MD would say something foolish, who hasn't? Denying it afterward, we all do this, our memory is subconsciously self-edited to shore up the ego, a phenomenon well-studied by psychologists.

The interview has the smack of a well-lubricated discussion, imo, esp the bit about imaginary wine-bottles. Did the journo record it? Or was he too p1ssed?
Report Feck N. Eejit December 7, 2009 1:13 PM GMT
Can't see that thread ML.
Report Moon Light December 7, 2009 1:19 PM GMT
It's called SHARP MINDS or MUGS.
I've bumped it.
Report Moon Light December 7, 2009 1:32 PM GMT
To me the central point about that thread, and other similar ones over months, is the extent of disillusion and mistrust that has grown.
As BF increase charges and commissions, this is inevitable imo.
The existence of the Malta-based BF hedging team doesn't help.
It is deeply undesirable imo.
Report Feck N. Eejit December 7, 2009 1:50 PM GMT
Thanks ML. I doubt they want rid of winners full stop as liquidity would plummet if the position taking winners left. Middlemen and **s are a different story but, given betfair are willing to risk their integrity for the latter, I wouldn't have thought they'd have much to worry about while financial sector morals rule.
Report Moon Light December 7, 2009 1:57 PM GMT
If the fast pic boys left, liquidity would improve imo. but they will be the last to leave, and will only do so if someone intervenes to level the playing field.

We'll have to agree to disagree re middlemen, I think they are essential and you don't.
Recreational punters don't like to see a big gap betweeen the back and lay prices, and they're not wrong. They may head off to oddschecker if they see that.
Report Feck N. Eejit December 7, 2009 2:31 PM GMT
Recreational punters don't like to see a big gap betweeen the back and lay prices, and they're not wrong

I agree. The aim should be to guide both backers and layers towards mutually acceptable odds but why do it in a way that deters large offers as happens now. The early horse markets are the perfect example. £2 leap frog because of an interface which some within betfair insist is required to protect recreational customers from sharks. Seemingly this protection does not extend to ir where the most vulnerable of recreational customers are being **ed rotten by people betfair think are harmful to their business. There is absolutely no logic to betfair's long term thinking.
Report buzzer December 7, 2009 2:36 PM GMT
Betfair don't appear to think long term
Report Moon Light December 7, 2009 3:44 PM GMT
Betfair don't appear to think long term

They want to sell the business to Stock Exchange mugs.
The worry is that they may know something we don't.
Report Moon Light December 7, 2009 3:52 PM GMT
There is absolutely no logic to betfair's long term thinking.

There is certainly an inconsistency. The subsidisation of exchange shops is bizarre.

Re large offers, I think the serious big player needs a drip-feeder bot.
Report Feck N. Eejit December 7, 2009 7:04 PM GMT
It's not the serious big players we want ML. Requiring a drip feeding bot is just another deterrent to high rolling mugs who can get on with the bookmakers.
Report The Betfairy December 7, 2009 7:05 PM GMT
If a single bet can spoof the market, then there isn't enough liquidity.
Report Moon Light December 7, 2009 7:28 PM GMT
Feck, I wasn't talking about the mugs, I was suggesting it was what guys like you and millhouse need to avoid spooking the market.
Report billy row December 7, 2009 8:10 PM GMT
The exchange shops are only getting subsidised until March 2010 after that it stops.
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com