General Betting
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
04 Jan 10
17:32
Joined:
Date Joined:
07 Nov 09
why use bf with the 20% premium charge?
Show More
Cause you cannot get on bets large or small .. with the so called big 3 .
master why not ....... cause we win ..thats why not .....
what so other firms ban you from betting with them?
because other exchanges have virtually no liquidity by comparison.
Feck , have you started thinking that everyone paying PC are parasites now or do you consider the opinionless traders to be big players ?
Almost everyone regularly paying it are indulging in parasitic activities. If they are big they are almost certainly indulging in parasitic activities.
Nice to know that one are considered to be a parasite by such a higly respected forum contributor as Mr Eejit.
I didn't say all. I've no idea of your circumstances but what I said above is accurate.
^^ true but dont go Feck I have been living of punters like you for years long may it continue yippee
im young and only bet for fun, can someone plz explain his hostility towards people paying PC?
not your not calling it they way you see it, any1 who makes money but doesn't fit into your ideals is a parasite = bitter
Feck,
You're right in a sense, of course. Betfair is a slightly less than zero sum game, therefore all of the winners on here are parasitic upon the losers.
You seem to suggest, though, that the reasons why we win are somehow ignoble. The fact is that most consistent winners are either very clever, very hard-working, or very ballsy - all quite noble qualities. If it was easy to make money by underhand means, then everyone would be doing it.
You're right in a sense, of course. Betfair is a slightly less than zero sum game, therefore all of the winners on here are parasitic upon the losers.
You seem to suggest, though, that the reasons why we win are somehow ignoble. The fact is that most consistent winners are either very clever, very hard-working, or very ballsy - all quite noble qualities. If it was easy to make money by underhand means, then everyone would be doing it.
That is your problem Feck , you only look at things from your position.
I'll admit that I somehow agree with you on your wiev on the opinionless momentum traders , but they are probably not the ones paying most PC. Didn't you too have to pay PC at one time , if so you reaaly should be able to see that many people on here get caught without being in those categories that you seem to hate so much.
I'll admit that I somehow agree with you on your wiev on the opinionless momentum traders , but they are probably not the ones paying most PC. Didn't you too have to pay PC at one time , if so you reaaly should be able to see that many people on here get caught without being in those categories that you seem to hate so much.
Contrarian, fast pics and utilising the market maker advantage are effectively **ing and most trading requires information supplied by gamblers. Take away that information, speed advantages and insider information and there would be no need for a premium charge. It's also only a matter of time before this glut of 'professionals' brings a government tax down on all our heads. I could live with the tax but not the decimation of liquidity it will bring about.
I am able to se it Eddie but such people are few and far between particularly where regular (and I did use that word) pc paying is concerned.
contrarian, it will probably form part of the panorama expose. That's another liquidity decimator we've got to look forward to. People **ing their way to millions, issue already raised in parliament and a wined and dined gambling commission that are supposed to enforce fairness in gambling sanctioning the whole thing. With enemies of exchanges everywhere how can it not happen?
Feck, can you just explain what you mean?
I understand what a market maker advantage is in an exchange which has designated 'specialist' market makers representing the various products traded (e.g. on the LSE); but I fail to see what it is on Betfair.
I make markets all the time on here. Do I have some sort of advantage not available to others?
I understand what a market maker advantage is in an exchange which has designated 'specialist' market makers representing the various products traded (e.g. on the LSE); but I fail to see what it is on Betfair.
I make markets all the time on here. Do I have some sort of advantage not available to others?
Not only is Feck bitter.
Not only is he paranoid.
But he focuses too much on what others are up to.
And he speaks in riddles :^0
Not only is he paranoid.
But he focuses too much on what others are up to.
And he speaks in riddles :^0
Contrarian,
In an A v B situation (a tennis game e.g.) you want to be at the head of the queue to back A and the head of the queue to lay A (I'm assuming the cross matching bot takes care of the B alternatives) just as the actual play for a point starts. At any point during play, if one of those two bets looks bad value you cancel it and hope the good value bet is taken. e.g. A serves an ace. You cancel your lay of A but not your back of A. Suppose before the ace is served backer X attempts to match your lay of A and layer Y attempts to match your back of A. X is disappointed because by the time his bet reaches the queue your lay of A is long cancelled. Poor Y though. His lay of A is matched despite seeing A serve an ace 5 seconds before his bet hits the queue and is matched.
I can't be bothered going into all the possibilities involved with that strategy. Suffice to say that, provided you cancel any bet as soon as they become bad value the strategy is a winning one. There will be cases where the value bet is already matched before you can cancel but overall you'll end up with more positive value bets than negative value bets (if both are taken you've got a winning trade). At the next point you adapt your stakes to take into account what happened at the previous point to effectively close out the previous point bets.
X & Y are the fall guys in this. Never bet in tennis except at neutral points.
If you use the above strategy while watching for overreactions (e.g. only laying the one that's being overbet) then you'll be getting free money.
In an A v B situation (a tennis game e.g.) you want to be at the head of the queue to back A and the head of the queue to lay A (I'm assuming the cross matching bot takes care of the B alternatives) just as the actual play for a point starts. At any point during play, if one of those two bets looks bad value you cancel it and hope the good value bet is taken. e.g. A serves an ace. You cancel your lay of A but not your back of A. Suppose before the ace is served backer X attempts to match your lay of A and layer Y attempts to match your back of A. X is disappointed because by the time his bet reaches the queue your lay of A is long cancelled. Poor Y though. His lay of A is matched despite seeing A serve an ace 5 seconds before his bet hits the queue and is matched.
I can't be bothered going into all the possibilities involved with that strategy. Suffice to say that, provided you cancel any bet as soon as they become bad value the strategy is a winning one. There will be cases where the value bet is already matched before you can cancel but overall you'll end up with more positive value bets than negative value bets (if both are taken you've got a winning trade). At the next point you adapt your stakes to take into account what happened at the previous point to effectively close out the previous point bets.
X & Y are the fall guys in this. Never bet in tennis except at neutral points.
If you use the above strategy while watching for overreactions (e.g. only laying the one that's being overbet) then you'll be getting free money.
It's all about putting up bets at neutral points and hoping someone attempts to take them during play. You've then got 8 secs (or whatever the bet placement delay is) to cancel while anyone attempting to take your bet is unable to cancel until the countdown is finished. It's akin to them phoning a bookie an ir bet knowing the bookie has 8 secs to decide whether he wants the bet or not.
And of course hoping that no-one is better at pricing than you and takes out the whole side of your bet that is value.
feck n eejit by name feck n eejit by nature.......................... sorry couldnt resist :(
Ok, fair enough Feck, but this is, of course, a perfectly legitimate way of operating open to anyone. (Although, admittedly, unless your pictures are reasonably fast, you'll never get to the front of the queue).
Also, to some extent it misrepresents the way that almost all sports are actually traded. In tennis, for example, unless the point is a particularly irrelevant one (e.g. server is 4-0 up in the set and 40-0 up in the game), there is more of a difference between what the true odds should be if A wins the point and what they should be if B wins the point, than there is between the bid and offer on the exchange at the time the point is taking place. So, for example, it might be that the odds if A wins should move to 1.3 and if B wins to 1.37, and that the market during the point is 1.34/1.35. This means that the market maker you described can easily lose out (if someone correctly guesses that A wins the point, say, backs 1.34, and the market then moves to 1.3).
As I said before, if it was that easy, everyone would be doing it.
Also, to some extent it misrepresents the way that almost all sports are actually traded. In tennis, for example, unless the point is a particularly irrelevant one (e.g. server is 4-0 up in the set and 40-0 up in the game), there is more of a difference between what the true odds should be if A wins the point and what they should be if B wins the point, than there is between the bid and offer on the exchange at the time the point is taking place. So, for example, it might be that the odds if A wins should move to 1.3 and if B wins to 1.37, and that the market during the point is 1.34/1.35. This means that the market maker you described can easily lose out (if someone correctly guesses that A wins the point, say, backs 1.34, and the market then moves to 1.3).
As I said before, if it was that easy, everyone would be doing it.
Tennis game betting Contrarian. Flies-round-sh1te.
In fact any sport where there are many odds changing definitive events that don't cause suspensions - flies-round-sh1te. The often huge liquidity on such events is based around the house **.
There again, maybe blue eyes and the master are right. I'm just a nut job and this country was truly awash with sleeping odds experts (ir only of course) on obscore sports awaiting the arrival of betfair.
Ok, fair enough Feck, but this is, of course, a perfectly legitimate way of operating open to anyone.
As (supposedly) are course trading shops. Is it OK to steal your neighbour's hub caps because he also has the opportunity to steal someone else's.
As (supposedly) are course trading shops. Is it OK to steal your neighbour's hub caps because he also has the opportunity to steal someone else's.
Feck,
My point applies just as much to tennis game betting. To the extent that the markets are liquid, the bid/offer prices will tend to be between the fair price for A winning the point and the fair price for B winning the point.
As I said (twice), if it were that easy, everyone (including you!) would be doing it.
My point applies just as much to tennis game betting. To the extent that the markets are liquid, the bid/offer prices will tend to be between the fair price for A winning the point and the fair price for B winning the point.
As I said (twice), if it were that easy, everyone (including you!) would be doing it.
I've no idea what your point is contrarian. My point is you'll get a lot more of your profitable bets matched than you will of your unprofitable bets matched as many of them will be cancelled before taken.
Do you really think I'm saying you'll never have a losing bet?
As I said (twice), if it were that easy, everyone (including you!) would be doing it.
Read some of the threads on the pc. Some of these people are incredibly thick.
Believe me, I've more to do with my tiime.
Read some of the threads on the pc. Some of these people are incredibly thick.
Believe me, I've more to do with my tiime.
Feck - you are absolutely correct about the existence of the MM advantage, but you have the extent completely wrong. The advantage gained from the buttons matched mid point by the unfortunate X and Y souls can easily be outweighed by the shrewd match reader steaming in pre point. Ultimately, a tennis MM has to be correct on price or is doomed.
Feck,
"You've then got 8 secs (or whatever the bet placement delay is) to cancel"
Is it possible to cancel one's bet during those 8 secs? I have thought that it is possible only AFTER that (if it was not instantly matched), and also then it is difficult to cancel only one of one´s bets.
Do you have a bot which helps in these situations?
"You've then got 8 secs (or whatever the bet placement delay is) to cancel"
Is it possible to cancel one's bet during those 8 secs? I have thought that it is possible only AFTER that (if it was not instantly matched), and also then it is difficult to cancel only one of one´s bets.
Do you have a bot which helps in these situations?
Correct Blue Eyes but working out odds for a tennis game given the latest score can't be hard.
Is it possible to cancel one's bet during those 8 secs? I have thought that it is possible only AFTER that (if it was not instantly matched), and also then it is difficult to cancel only one of one´s bets.
Edison, you can't cancel during the countdown, that's the point. Those utilising the market maker advantage get their bets up between points so that nothing's happening while they're stuck behind the clock. It's the fools who try to match their bets during play that are the fall guys. They'll be stuck behind the clock while the guy that went through the countdown during the neutral period can now cancel his offer instantly.
Do you have a bot which helps in these situations?
They will have yes. It will be a simple case of clicking one of two buttons to inform the bot which offers to cancel and which to leave up.
Edison, you can't cancel during the countdown, that's the point. Those utilising the market maker advantage get their bets up between points so that nothing's happening while they're stuck behind the clock. It's the fools who try to match their bets during play that are the fall guys. They'll be stuck behind the clock while the guy that went through the countdown during the neutral period can now cancel his offer instantly.
Do you have a bot which helps in these situations?
They will have yes. It will be a simple case of clicking one of two buttons to inform the bot which offers to cancel and which to leave up.
Correct Blue Eyes but working out odds for a tennis game given the latest score can't be hard.
Working out the odds pre-off in racing "can't be hard"
Working out the odds pre-off in racing "can't be hard"
Sports odds compilers are the sh1te under the shoes of horse racing odds compilers (NAP). Tennis game betting = wee diddy odds compiling.
Most of you will just be playing follow the leader anyway.
The only sport worthy of betting is the one that isn't really a sport at all.
Feck , I usually don't insult people on this forum , but to me you are coming more and more forward as a nut case. Strange really , because you also seem to be a intelligent person , but as they say - There is only a thin line between genius and insanity.
No. The harder it is to work out the odds, the more value there will be. I'm talking about legit gambling here, not interface cluedo which is where most are making their money.
beware of mom...he hates special needs schools and talks only about c ocks
No worries Ed, although I fail to see what I've done to deserve that. Have I exposed your edge or do you feel I'm not giving these people the respect they deserve? As far as I'm concerned I've went to considerable lengths to do those not in the know a favour with my latest block of posts. If you don't like it then up yours.
The big players don't pay the PC. Only the low commission payers do that.
kenilworth , as usual you don't have a clue , but still speaks as if you know everything.
But it's only harder cos it's more** surely?
That makes it harder in a bad way but even if it was straight you would have fierce variations between compilers. Such variations are rare in any sports for which there are plenty of stats available.
That makes it harder in a bad way but even if it was straight you would have fierce variations between compilers. Such variations are rare in any sports for which there are plenty of stats available.
Good night all. The nurse has come to put me to bed.
If you bet big/ biggish & win regularly you will rarely pay the PC as your profit will be over 20%
conchords 04 Jan 22:29
If you bet big/ biggish & win regularly you will rarely pay the PC as your profit will be over 20%
That doesn't make sense , can you please explain what you mean ?
If you bet big/ biggish & win regularly you will rarely pay the PC as your profit will be over 20%
That doesn't make sense , can you please explain what you mean ?
If you bet big, unless you're stupid/rich, you're a regular winner. If you back in the traditional sense to any degree of profit then the commission paid will invariably be over 20%. Mine is currently just under 39% & has never dipped below 30%. Don't forget its based on profit not winnings.
OK , you are obviously doing very well , but why do you assume that others can't be doing even better ?
Eddie, what is your commission percentage / winnings ?
conchords 04 Jan 22:44
If you bet big, unless you're stupid/rich, you're a regular winner.
There's buckets of those that you refer to on here though. How do you think the skimmers, traders, and winners all survive, with betfair taking a huge cut? Its not just from minnows. IMO over 50% of profits to the shrewd comes from big stupid/rich players.
If you back in the traditional sense to any degree of profit then the commission paid will invariably be over 20%. Mine is currently just under 39% & has never dipped below 30%. Don't forget its based on profit not winnings.
Absolute rubbish. All you need is a 5% ROI (or indeed under the old system a 5% ROI over a comparatively short period, 60 weeks). I was at 20.09% after an good run before I figured a way to crack the charge, and I'm a traditional backer and a 2% player. Justify what you say above. I know traditional backers who play big (big enough to be on the lowest rate of commission) and they pay PC.
If you said "no-one who backs in the sorts of volume that HF does" or something, i'd take your point. One man's big player is another mans small fish, for sure. But on its own, your post is nonsensical.
If you bet big, unless you're stupid/rich, you're a regular winner.
There's buckets of those that you refer to on here though. How do you think the skimmers, traders, and winners all survive, with betfair taking a huge cut? Its not just from minnows. IMO over 50% of profits to the shrewd comes from big stupid/rich players.
If you back in the traditional sense to any degree of profit then the commission paid will invariably be over 20%. Mine is currently just under 39% & has never dipped below 30%. Don't forget its based on profit not winnings.
Absolute rubbish. All you need is a 5% ROI (or indeed under the old system a 5% ROI over a comparatively short period, 60 weeks). I was at 20.09% after an good run before I figured a way to crack the charge, and I'm a traditional backer and a 2% player. Justify what you say above. I know traditional backers who play big (big enough to be on the lowest rate of commission) and they pay PC.
If you said "no-one who backs in the sorts of volume that HF does" or something, i'd take your point. One man's big player is another mans small fish, for sure. But on its own, your post is nonsensical.
kenilworth , I had a very good year last year and have therefore increased stakes heavily.
I've been on 2 % commission or for roughly the last 6 months. Because of the generated commission thing , I don't know exactly how much I paid in commission last year but I'm estimating the normal commission I paid last year to be something like 50 - 55 k. Sadly that isn't enough for Betfair so I've had to pay an additional 117 k in PC.
I've been on 2 % commission or for roughly the last 6 months. Because of the generated commission thing , I don't know exactly how much I paid in commission last year but I'm estimating the normal commission I paid last year to be something like 50 - 55 k. Sadly that isn't enough for Betfair so I've had to pay an additional 117 k in PC.
blimey
if you are paying that you are making big £
depends on your angle and markets you are on/manipulating
but anyway surely you would be better off asking betfair
do they want £117k pc charge or normal comm or nothing at all
try withdrawing all your funds and then asking for all your account details to be deleted username card details forum name user name etc etc
and then wait one month and reapply but ask for 'special comm ' rates
if you are paying that you are making big £
depends on your angle and markets you are on/manipulating
but anyway surely you would be better off asking betfair
do they want £117k pc charge or normal comm or nothing at all
try withdrawing all your funds and then asking for all your account details to be deleted username card details forum name user name etc etc
and then wait one month and reapply but ask for 'special comm ' rates
[i]
Feck N. Eejit 04 Jan 18:47
Almost everyone regularly paying it are indulging in parasitic activities. If they are big they are almost certainly indulging in parasitic activities.
Is this guesswork, or do you have evidence to back this up?
In 2009 I paid PC in 36 weeks.
Inside information: none (I don't research football games)
Speed advantages: none (don't watch most of the games)
Although I do 'gamble' most of what I do involves trading when prices are out of line.
99% of my bets are on football.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'big' and 'regularly' though. But I would think 36 out of 52 is pretty regular.
"Take away that information, speed advantages and insider information and there would be no need for a premium charge."
I don't think it's so much a question of a 'need', simply a way for Betfair to make more money.
I would like to see a more honest and open approach from Betfair regarding PC and cross matching. Rather than coming up with statements like "we are improving the way unmatched bets are displayed", they should actually be open with what they're really doing.
Feck N. Eejit 04 Jan 18:47
Almost everyone regularly paying it are indulging in parasitic activities. If they are big they are almost certainly indulging in parasitic activities.
Is this guesswork, or do you have evidence to back this up?
In 2009 I paid PC in 36 weeks.
Inside information: none (I don't research football games)
Speed advantages: none (don't watch most of the games)
Although I do 'gamble' most of what I do involves trading when prices are out of line.
99% of my bets are on football.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'big' and 'regularly' though. But I would think 36 out of 52 is pretty regular.
"Take away that information, speed advantages and insider information and there would be no need for a premium charge."
I don't think it's so much a question of a 'need', simply a way for Betfair to make more money.
I would like to see a more honest and open approach from Betfair regarding PC and cross matching. Rather than coming up with statements like "we are improving the way unmatched bets are displayed", they should actually be open with what they're really doing.
Feck N. Eejit 04 Jan 18:47
Almost everyone regularly paying it are indulging in parasitic activities. If they are big they are almost certainly indulging in parasitic activities.
Is this guesswork, or do you have evidence to back this up?
In 2009 I paid PC in 36 weeks.
Inside information: none (I don't research football games)
Speed advantages: none (don't watch most of the games)
Although I do 'gamble' most of what I do involves trading when prices are out of line.
99% of my bets are on football.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'big' and 'regularly' though. But I would think 36 out of 52 is pretty regular.
Take away that information, speed advantages and insider information and there would be no need for a premium charge.
I don't think it's so much a question of a 'need', simply a way for Betfair to make more money.
I would like to see a more honest and open approach from Betfair regarding PC and cross matching. Rather than coming up with statements like "we are improving the way unmatched bets are displayed", they should actually be open with what they're really doing.
Almost everyone regularly paying it are indulging in parasitic activities. If they are big they are almost certainly indulging in parasitic activities.
Is this guesswork, or do you have evidence to back this up?
In 2009 I paid PC in 36 weeks.
Inside information: none (I don't research football games)
Speed advantages: none (don't watch most of the games)
Although I do 'gamble' most of what I do involves trading when prices are out of line.
99% of my bets are on football.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'big' and 'regularly' though. But I would think 36 out of 52 is pretty regular.
Take away that information, speed advantages and insider information and there would be no need for a premium charge.
I don't think it's so much a question of a 'need', simply a way for Betfair to make more money.
I would like to see a more honest and open approach from Betfair regarding PC and cross matching. Rather than coming up with statements like "we are improving the way unmatched bets are displayed", they should actually be open with what they're really doing.
Although the PC is obviously a big cost for me, Betfair's cross matching has actually allowed me to make more money.
It's the people laying at 1.02, when they could be backing the inverse selection at 95 that are losing out. They've always been losing out, the difference is that now it's directly to Betfair rather than other exchange users. When Betfair made a statement about 'improving the display of unmatched bets', they should have informed everyone of this change.
It's the people laying at 1.02, when they could be backing the inverse selection at 95 that are losing out. They've always been losing out, the difference is that now it's directly to Betfair rather than other exchange users. When Betfair made a statement about 'improving the display of unmatched bets', they should have informed everyone of this change.
Investor, are your trades ir? It's unfair that people can place a multitude of ping pong bets on one outcome and pay commission on the overall profit while others placing the same number of bets in different markets pay commission on everyone of those bets seperately. The pc partially addresses this injustice.
Why does the cross matching not work in asian (-0) handicaps? I placed a bet to back Celtc on Sunday and was p1ssed off to find it wasn't also offered as a lay of Rangers.
Treble Underscore - I obviously don't understand it well enough.
I can only talk from a personal perspective & I've never come close to paying the charge. I've won regularly for 3 years now, almost 100% backing horses, no trading & no laying off etc. My average stake is £100 - which is small compared to a few contributors but big compared to many.
Am i right in thinking that the lower the commission the higher the chance of paying the PC.
My very basic understanding is that if you are paying under 20% of your net winnings in commision you pay it. If you rate is lower then doesn't that make it more likely to be under the 20%
i have made around 20% ROI long term & my commission rate is around the 4% mark . I've bounced around the 30-45% rate in the premium portal but have no idea what implied commission is though!
I can only talk from a personal perspective & I've never come close to paying the charge. I've won regularly for 3 years now, almost 100% backing horses, no trading & no laying off etc. My average stake is £100 - which is small compared to a few contributors but big compared to many.
Am i right in thinking that the lower the commission the higher the chance of paying the PC.
My very basic understanding is that if you are paying under 20% of your net winnings in commision you pay it. If you rate is lower then doesn't that make it more likely to be under the 20%
i have made around 20% ROI long term & my commission rate is around the 4% mark . I've bounced around the 30-45% rate in the premium portal but have no idea what implied commission is though!
Eddie the eagle
kenilworth , as usual you don't have a clue , but still speaks as if you know everything.
Note to self; eddie the eagle is worth reading.
kenilworth , as usual you don't have a clue , but still speaks as if you know everything.
Note to self; eddie the eagle is worth reading.
Feck N. Eejit 05 Jan 17:04
Investor, are your trades ir? It's unfair that people can place a multitude of ping pong bets on one outcome and pay commission on the overall profit while others placing the same number of bets in different markets pay commission on everyone of those bets seperately. The pc partially addresses this injustice.
Yes, mainly in-running. I used to bet mainly before kick-off, but that's no longer very profitable for me. I wouldn't call them ping-pong bets, because I don't trade based on price movement, trend, momentum etc. I'll have my money at risk for some time in most cases. If the bet goes in my favour, I may not trade out at all.
If you find a value bet it will always make sense to trade out at a fair price (or better) at a later stage if you can. This reduces volatility of returns as well as commission costs. Even with the PC this still applies. I only gamble when there is not enough liquidity to trade out, or when I think the market is still out of line and I can't get a decent price.
I don't understand how gambling can ever be favourable to trading if you can trade out at a fair price. If you find a value bet and the market doesn't correct itself, I can understand that you keep the bet. If it does correct itself and you are able to trade out, it seems to me there are only advantages to doing this, no disadvantages at all???
When I say 'trading' I mean any market in which you bet both ways. I'm not necessarily referring to placing hundreds of bets making a tick here and there.
I'm sure you'll agree that the PC wasn't introduced in the interest of fairness though. If Betfair wanted to get rid of traders, all they would need to do is charge commission per bet matched (transaction), rather than per market, creating a pricing structure like a stock exchange.
Investor, are your trades ir? It's unfair that people can place a multitude of ping pong bets on one outcome and pay commission on the overall profit while others placing the same number of bets in different markets pay commission on everyone of those bets seperately. The pc partially addresses this injustice.
Yes, mainly in-running. I used to bet mainly before kick-off, but that's no longer very profitable for me. I wouldn't call them ping-pong bets, because I don't trade based on price movement, trend, momentum etc. I'll have my money at risk for some time in most cases. If the bet goes in my favour, I may not trade out at all.
If you find a value bet it will always make sense to trade out at a fair price (or better) at a later stage if you can. This reduces volatility of returns as well as commission costs. Even with the PC this still applies. I only gamble when there is not enough liquidity to trade out, or when I think the market is still out of line and I can't get a decent price.
I don't understand how gambling can ever be favourable to trading if you can trade out at a fair price. If you find a value bet and the market doesn't correct itself, I can understand that you keep the bet. If it does correct itself and you are able to trade out, it seems to me there are only advantages to doing this, no disadvantages at all???
When I say 'trading' I mean any market in which you bet both ways. I'm not necessarily referring to placing hundreds of bets making a tick here and there.
I'm sure you'll agree that the PC wasn't introduced in the interest of fairness though. If Betfair wanted to get rid of traders, all they would need to do is charge commission per bet matched (transaction), rather than per market, creating a pricing structure like a stock exchange.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539