General Betting
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Im a man of facts and figures and cannot normally work out a concept through hypothesis alone. Especially when the human brain is involved, which to me, is very unpredictable (although countless may disagree!).
To the point. Been thinking about this for ages and was reminded about it on a thread ive just been reading.
If you consistantly are able to back losers and lay winners then it follows that reversing the situation would see a very healthy profit. This would mean making your picks as usual and then doing the opposite. Now, to me, the idea that you were going to be doing the opposite to the final decision would always be in the forefront of your mind, thus having an impact on the final decision. If one day you thought about backing team A (lets assume its going to be another losing bet due to poor selection) whilst also knowing that whatever you choose will be reversed, what are the chances of you 'tricking' yourself into pre-reversing the final decision so that you still end up with what you wanted in the first place. In this case, the losing back of team A.
It would appear that the only way in which the technique of doing the opposite to your bets will work is if you have no knowledge of it happening!
Lets look at another scenario. You know that you will be doing the opposite to your initial picks and that the awareness of this doesnt change your ability to keep picking losing bets. Hence, reversing the situation sees a long term profit. After a while you start to realise why or how you are picking the bad bets and start losing this 'ability' to pick losers. When might the crossover happen between reversing the bad bets and not needing to reverse them anymore due to working out that your judgement has changed? At a guess, i would say it would be a medium-term transition and that this period would produce very random returns whilst you ponder whether the technique of reversing the bets is still working or wether your judgement has improved so much that you are now picking winners but the technique of reversing the bets is now returning a lot more losses!
Anyone thought about this and have any comments?
To the point. Been thinking about this for ages and was reminded about it on a thread ive just been reading.
If you consistantly are able to back losers and lay winners then it follows that reversing the situation would see a very healthy profit. This would mean making your picks as usual and then doing the opposite. Now, to me, the idea that you were going to be doing the opposite to the final decision would always be in the forefront of your mind, thus having an impact on the final decision. If one day you thought about backing team A (lets assume its going to be another losing bet due to poor selection) whilst also knowing that whatever you choose will be reversed, what are the chances of you 'tricking' yourself into pre-reversing the final decision so that you still end up with what you wanted in the first place. In this case, the losing back of team A.
It would appear that the only way in which the technique of doing the opposite to your bets will work is if you have no knowledge of it happening!
Lets look at another scenario. You know that you will be doing the opposite to your initial picks and that the awareness of this doesnt change your ability to keep picking losing bets. Hence, reversing the situation sees a long term profit. After a while you start to realise why or how you are picking the bad bets and start losing this 'ability' to pick losers. When might the crossover happen between reversing the bad bets and not needing to reverse them anymore due to working out that your judgement has changed? At a guess, i would say it would be a medium-term transition and that this period would produce very random returns whilst you ponder whether the technique of reversing the bets is still working or wether your judgement has improved so much that you are now picking winners but the technique of reversing the bets is now returning a lot more losses!
Anyone thought about this and have any comments?
Show More
people have probably tried this but the same conclusion would be reached because a couple of winners/losers would still trigger the brain to chase losses. This seems to be the main downfall, and i don't mean if they had a rigid staking plan they'd win over time but the massive losses seem to be the inability to accept losing is part and parcel of the game which in turn seems to lead to massive chase bets!
It's not as true as it was some time ago, but if you were a very casual observer in NFL then doing the opposite of what seems right in the handicap markets was probably close to a breakeven strategy.
Have seen people do this, and you're right, what happens is they start forgetting what the bad reasoning was they used to use and ended up just guessing as badly as before :D
Have seen people do this, and you're right, what happens is they start forgetting what the bad reasoning was they used to use and ended up just guessing as badly as before :D
If you have no edge ....then won't matter what you do.......just down to "luck"........
Been a few threads on this topic......why not search for them on old threads etc...
Been a few threads on this topic......why not search for them on old threads etc...
Here is a link -
http://www.gubbed.com/forum-search.fcgi
http://www.gubbed.com/forum-search.fcgi
So the bottom line is that there are too many variables (luck, market efficiencies, lack of consistent thinking, commission etc) to even consider that there may be some substance to the theory of bet reversal for people who are really poor at picking winners.
What many people cant get to grips with is that it doesn't matter what you choose to back, its the price you back it at that counts.
Reversal theory might work if:
a)Results are over such a long run it cannot just be due to random chance - huge run req'd
b)Results are so bad that reversal overcomes commission
c)Punter's methods are so systematic re staking and selections, that the psychology stuff doesn't come into play.
a)Results are over such a long run it cannot just be due to random chance - huge run req'd
b)Results are so bad that reversal overcomes commission
c)Punter's methods are so systematic re staking and selections, that the psychology stuff doesn't come into play.
You can't do the opposite of your true selection because you came to the choice of your true selection based upon your own energy and state of mind at that point in time.
This is what so few people understand. They always refer to prices and value and whilst this is obviously very important they forget the hugely important aspect that is psychology in the moment.
You end up selecting or making a trading decision based on your state of mind in that moment, which is dictated by your energy and both what you are giving off and what you are attracting in that given moment.
This is the true reason for long winning runs, or chasing losses causing a series of "bad luck". It is because you are either in vibrational alignment or not. You attract unto you what you resonate. This is basic quantum physics and is scientific fact. Most gamblers live for the buzz of the high...and suffer emotionally during the low. These different states of energy are the root of their next "play" ...which invariably will step toward the direction they are resonating.
You pull to you, the situations and subsequent choices that you "think" are your selections. A losing mentality and mindset thus produces long term losses because that is what they align to.
Take a close look at how people post on these forums and see why some lose consistently and you will see it ties into their character far more than their knowledge of prices. They are consitently in alignment with negativty and so reap it.
When its mentioned to "take a break" when on a losing run, to avoid chasing losses, this is also because of the above reason. You change your energy during that period of relaxation...and come back in the correct state of alignment, and so can avoid that run of "bad luck".
This is what so few people understand. They always refer to prices and value and whilst this is obviously very important they forget the hugely important aspect that is psychology in the moment.
You end up selecting or making a trading decision based on your state of mind in that moment, which is dictated by your energy and both what you are giving off and what you are attracting in that given moment.
This is the true reason for long winning runs, or chasing losses causing a series of "bad luck". It is because you are either in vibrational alignment or not. You attract unto you what you resonate. This is basic quantum physics and is scientific fact. Most gamblers live for the buzz of the high...and suffer emotionally during the low. These different states of energy are the root of their next "play" ...which invariably will step toward the direction they are resonating.
You pull to you, the situations and subsequent choices that you "think" are your selections. A losing mentality and mindset thus produces long term losses because that is what they align to.
Take a close look at how people post on these forums and see why some lose consistently and you will see it ties into their character far more than their knowledge of prices. They are consitently in alignment with negativty and so reap it.
When its mentioned to "take a break" when on a losing run, to avoid chasing losses, this is also because of the above reason. You change your energy during that period of relaxation...and come back in the correct state of alignment, and so can avoid that run of "bad luck".
baldloaf 14 Jan 13:49
Im a man of facts and figures and cannot normally work out a concept through hypothesis alone
So you make the 5/4 favourite a 6/4 chance. What next ? You suggesting you back, in your opinion a 6/4 pick at 5/4 ? Not if you are a figures man you won't because price rules.
Im a man of facts and figures and cannot normally work out a concept through hypothesis alone
So you make the 5/4 favourite a 6/4 chance. What next ? You suggesting you back, in your opinion a 6/4 pick at 5/4 ? Not if you are a figures man you won't because price rules.
baldloaf
You complete fool you spend your life contemplating doing the reverse of a given selection, OMFG YOU WASTE OF SPACE
you generally back losers ( to a degree)
the 5% commission DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR on t/o not profits will destroy any variance good or bad marginal or other
this forum RIP
You complete fool you spend your life contemplating doing the reverse of a given selection, OMFG YOU WASTE OF SPACE
you generally back losers ( to a degree)
the 5% commission DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR on t/o not profits will destroy any variance good or bad marginal or other
this forum RIP
t is because you are either in vibrational alignment or not. You attract unto you what you resonate. This is basic quantum physics and is scientific fact.
I'm afraid this has nothing to do with quantum theory. It sounds like "The Secret". It is a mystical theory, not a scientific one.
Most gamblers live for the buzz of the high...and suffer emotionally during the low.
A lot of successful gamblers are highly methodical and mathematical in their approach.
They try to eliminate emotion completely from decision-making. Riding emotions while placing bets is characteristic of the recreational gambler. Only a tiny proportion of these will ever improve to the winning level, and unless they can achieve a dispassionate approach, their success is fragile. They are in constant danger of reverting to ingrained losing behaviour from the past, which is why they talk so much about discipline
What they really need is to systematise their approach so that less discipline is required.
I'm afraid this has nothing to do with quantum theory. It sounds like "The Secret". It is a mystical theory, not a scientific one.
Most gamblers live for the buzz of the high...and suffer emotionally during the low.
A lot of successful gamblers are highly methodical and mathematical in their approach.
They try to eliminate emotion completely from decision-making. Riding emotions while placing bets is characteristic of the recreational gambler. Only a tiny proportion of these will ever improve to the winning level, and unless they can achieve a dispassionate approach, their success is fragile. They are in constant danger of reverting to ingrained losing behaviour from the past, which is why they talk so much about discipline
What they really need is to systematise their approach so that less discipline is required.
Actually it is quantum physics, the "like attracts like" and "that which is like unto itself is drawn" aspects to be precise but fair point about the zero emotion angle.
As regards recreational punters, those make up the vast majority and whilst maths can and does win the game by tiny percentages, what i was describing increases the "odds" significantly in your favour for obvious reasons and involves the use of intuition and an understanding of how energy works.
As regards recreational punters, those make up the vast majority and whilst maths can and does win the game by tiny percentages, what i was describing increases the "odds" significantly in your favour for obvious reasons and involves the use of intuition and an understanding of how energy works.
I have a degree in physics, funkymonkey.
The quantum theory we studied had to do with the spin and energy states of protons, neutrons, neutrinos etc. Nothing as macroscopic as a human being featured.
Macroscopic quantum effects like superconductivity and superfluidity are found only at temperatures close to absolute zero.
The quantum theory we studied had to do with the spin and energy states of protons, neutrons, neutrinos etc. Nothing as macroscopic as a human being featured.
Macroscopic quantum effects like superconductivity and superfluidity are found only at temperatures close to absolute zero.
Fair enough, I have no desire to argue....i disagree and having a degree im afraid doesnt discount anything i wrote because I could point you towards data to support my comments as could you to support yours. I work with energy in my profession everyday and that is why I added to this topic. Off to trade the tennis now :) ...good debate though
funkymonkey, are you in profit on Betfair?
My approach is almost purely based on reasoning, logic, pattern recognition etc. Almost all of what I do would be replicable by a computer program if there was 100% accurate live data available.
On a subconscious level psychology plays a small part, but generally my approach is very formulaic.
Note for Baldloaf: In the scenario you describe there is a very plausible explanation of why it wouldn't work. I take it you have already factored in commission and had you done the opposite you would have profited after commission.
First of all, it is extremely likely that the result achieved of being good at backing losers has just occurred by pure chance and that over a long period of time you would just lose a little bit more than the commission you pay (due to the back/lay spread).
Even if this isn't the case and you have genuinely backed significantly more losers than expected, you are unlikely to be able to profit from it.
The point is, that you would almost certainly not have been able to do the opposite. There is a back and a lay price. If you take the price offered rather than putting your own price up, it means that the bet you backed at 6.2 would have been layed by you at 6.4
If you do put the prices up yourself, you are less likely to be matched. Obviously whoever took your bets got value so in the losing scenario they got matched. If you offer odds that are in your favour, they are much less likely to get matched, although some may.
My approach is almost purely based on reasoning, logic, pattern recognition etc. Almost all of what I do would be replicable by a computer program if there was 100% accurate live data available.
On a subconscious level psychology plays a small part, but generally my approach is very formulaic.
Note for Baldloaf: In the scenario you describe there is a very plausible explanation of why it wouldn't work. I take it you have already factored in commission and had you done the opposite you would have profited after commission.
First of all, it is extremely likely that the result achieved of being good at backing losers has just occurred by pure chance and that over a long period of time you would just lose a little bit more than the commission you pay (due to the back/lay spread).
Even if this isn't the case and you have genuinely backed significantly more losers than expected, you are unlikely to be able to profit from it.
The point is, that you would almost certainly not have been able to do the opposite. There is a back and a lay price. If you take the price offered rather than putting your own price up, it means that the bet you backed at 6.2 would have been layed by you at 6.4
If you do put the prices up yourself, you are less likely to be matched. Obviously whoever took your bets got value so in the losing scenario they got matched. If you offer odds that are in your favour, they are much less likely to get matched, although some may.
The Investor 15 Jan 00:06
funkymonkey, are you in profit on Betfair?
My approach is almost purely based on reasoning, logic, pattern recognition etc. Almost all of what I do would be replicable by a computer program if there was 100% accurate live data available.
On a subconscious level psychology plays a small part, but generally my approach is very formulaic.
Absolutely nothing wrong with that, I can see why it would work for you and I hope it continues to do so. To answer your question, yes i do although I must admit i use bf considerably less now than 2 years ago. I do many of the same things you outlined, the main difference i suppose for me is when i reach a point of selection from all the logic/pattern criteria, i then select from those filters only the ones in tune with my intuition as well.
I do that for the reasons i mentioned earlier and for me personally, it considerably improved my margins.
funkymonkey, are you in profit on Betfair?
My approach is almost purely based on reasoning, logic, pattern recognition etc. Almost all of what I do would be replicable by a computer program if there was 100% accurate live data available.
On a subconscious level psychology plays a small part, but generally my approach is very formulaic.
Absolutely nothing wrong with that, I can see why it would work for you and I hope it continues to do so. To answer your question, yes i do although I must admit i use bf considerably less now than 2 years ago. I do many of the same things you outlined, the main difference i suppose for me is when i reach a point of selection from all the logic/pattern criteria, i then select from those filters only the ones in tune with my intuition as well.
I do that for the reasons i mentioned earlier and for me personally, it considerably improved my margins.
FWIW In the good old days, this would work for a lot of punters in american betting because American books don't look for balanced action, they instead look to force the favourite on people and shave points where they know people will back the team anyway (new england patriots, new york yankees, whatever).
A poor casual observer who reversed would get the better of this proposition (to the extent of breaking even or so).
This no longer holds with the advent of better modelling and the internet.
A poor casual observer who reversed would get the better of this proposition (to the extent of breaking even or so).
This no longer holds with the advent of better modelling and the internet.
Just to say, that i dont personally bet outright so this analysis doesnt even apply to me. It just interested me enough to want to get a little more insight into the psychology and decision making of bets. It would appear that in real life the price, commission and other factors make this a bit of a non-starter. However i do think that the theory is still worth discussing as we never know where our next piece of inspiration or positive thinking comes from.
Forgetting about luck, if you break even long term then the theory is inapplicable. Its more directed at someone who consistantly picks losing bets and whether applying the reversal technique would actually work, remembering that our brains are fickle and sometimes we subconsciously do things we dont mean or want to. If someone became aware of why or how such a great deal of losing bets are placed, the thought process will inevitably change, skewing future decisions. Therefore, reversal theory would have a totally unknown and probable damaging affect, should the thought process change for the better. Most importantly, i think that the overcoming factor in whether you are able to reverse your losing bets into winning ones (long term positive gain of course, not just every losing bet) is whether you perceive your picks to be 'right' or simply a selection that has come about by employing a certain technique or thought process. If the latter, then it would be fairly easy to reverse bets. The former might upset the decision to reverse whilst you question your own judgement and stubbornly deny change or using reverse psychology, pretend to pick a certain bet knowing that the reversal of this would be the bet you wanted in the first place. Lets face it, we have all 'tricked' ourselves into doing something at one point, whether it be down to denial or persuasion from external influences.
I enjoyed reading moonlight's and funkymonkey's posts concerning energy flow and attraction. If i get some time soon, i would like to read more into that. Do you think it applies to trading as well? I can see why some people would discern all of it as hocus pocus but then again, we thought the world was flat once.
Kenilworth, i very rarely bet like that. If i do, its recreational (£20). The price has to be way out of line as well for me to bother. Although, each time the situation arises where my opinion is different to the market, it does attract me to the market for various reasons.
Ron pillock. I would agree to a point. Betting 2.1 on heads a hundred times should see a profit, forgetting betfair tax. However, ive never been quite convinced that taking value on something you think is going to lose (assuming a good strike rate in your bets) is not too clever. Unless your talking about huge value, in which case, eat it!
Lori. Interesting. So an american gambler looking to profit long term by 'picks' would find it very difficult due to the overround. One who was looking to eat value and class picks as unbiased, would also have a hard time knowing that what he really fancied to win was too expensive to back.
RonaldinhoRAT......I was surprised to see that you registered in 2002. With this in mind, i can only ascertain that you have held on to a disproportionate amount of immaturity and naivety. If you registered legitimately, you must be at least 26 years old now. How ironic that you call someone else a 'waste of space'.
Forgetting about luck, if you break even long term then the theory is inapplicable. Its more directed at someone who consistantly picks losing bets and whether applying the reversal technique would actually work, remembering that our brains are fickle and sometimes we subconsciously do things we dont mean or want to. If someone became aware of why or how such a great deal of losing bets are placed, the thought process will inevitably change, skewing future decisions. Therefore, reversal theory would have a totally unknown and probable damaging affect, should the thought process change for the better. Most importantly, i think that the overcoming factor in whether you are able to reverse your losing bets into winning ones (long term positive gain of course, not just every losing bet) is whether you perceive your picks to be 'right' or simply a selection that has come about by employing a certain technique or thought process. If the latter, then it would be fairly easy to reverse bets. The former might upset the decision to reverse whilst you question your own judgement and stubbornly deny change or using reverse psychology, pretend to pick a certain bet knowing that the reversal of this would be the bet you wanted in the first place. Lets face it, we have all 'tricked' ourselves into doing something at one point, whether it be down to denial or persuasion from external influences.
I enjoyed reading moonlight's and funkymonkey's posts concerning energy flow and attraction. If i get some time soon, i would like to read more into that. Do you think it applies to trading as well? I can see why some people would discern all of it as hocus pocus but then again, we thought the world was flat once.
Kenilworth, i very rarely bet like that. If i do, its recreational (£20). The price has to be way out of line as well for me to bother. Although, each time the situation arises where my opinion is different to the market, it does attract me to the market for various reasons.
Ron pillock. I would agree to a point. Betting 2.1 on heads a hundred times should see a profit, forgetting betfair tax. However, ive never been quite convinced that taking value on something you think is going to lose (assuming a good strike rate in your bets) is not too clever. Unless your talking about huge value, in which case, eat it!
Lori. Interesting. So an american gambler looking to profit long term by 'picks' would find it very difficult due to the overround. One who was looking to eat value and class picks as unbiased, would also have a hard time knowing that what he really fancied to win was too expensive to back.
RonaldinhoRAT......I was surprised to see that you registered in 2002. With this in mind, i can only ascertain that you have held on to a disproportionate amount of immaturity and naivety. If you registered legitimately, you must be at least 26 years old now. How ironic that you call someone else a 'waste of space'.
I have seriously thought about doing this as I have a system that make a 5% loss very consistently on sundays! The rest of the week it makes a profit. It doesn't seem to be liquidity related. It's most odd.
to make this work pick a tipster -who is paid to study then do the oppo - would work on tommos for sure
Interesting theory, I've thought about doing that too on the horses before where I eventually end up losing in the end. The problem is to do the opposite of what I choose to do (invariably to back a horse at 3-1 say) would involve laying say £600 instead of risking £200. And if you've just had a loser, it would take an almost insane mindset to risk a further £600 for the sake of winning £200 maybe when to win that amount would only break you even on your last losing bet.
That laws of attraction theory doesn't really apply here. If you stop to think about it, two people (and many many more on top) with completely different mindsets will inevitably be betting on the same horse/team, they can't both win/lose in the end, so what does mindset have to do with it?
What is happening (as someone else mentioned) is that your bets are probably contingent on the last bet, so you're betting in that moment.
It can be hard if not impossible to be totally impartial in your analysis.
Let's say first bet of the day you bet on a horse at 3-1 for £200. In scenario a, it wins. The next race you now have £600 to play with, and you've narrowed the race down to two horses, horse a is priced at 6-4, horse b at 4-1. If you've won your previous bet, it's very likely that you will bet on the shorter odds horse to try and consolidate your winnings.
In scenario b, your 3-1 bet loses, so you're now £200 down. It's far more likely that of the two horses you are finding it difficult to choose between if your last bet was instead a loser, you are more likely to back the longer odds 4-1 shot. In scenario a, you have won money and you want to protect it, so subconciously you gravitate towards the "safer" short price option. In scenarion b, you want your money back, and to say bet £200 on a 6-4 shot which if it wins yields just a £100 profit does not seem anywhere near as appealing as betting £200 on a 4-1 shot and then ending up £600 in profit if it wins.
That laws of attraction theory doesn't really apply here. If you stop to think about it, two people (and many many more on top) with completely different mindsets will inevitably be betting on the same horse/team, they can't both win/lose in the end, so what does mindset have to do with it?
What is happening (as someone else mentioned) is that your bets are probably contingent on the last bet, so you're betting in that moment.
It can be hard if not impossible to be totally impartial in your analysis.
Let's say first bet of the day you bet on a horse at 3-1 for £200. In scenario a, it wins. The next race you now have £600 to play with, and you've narrowed the race down to two horses, horse a is priced at 6-4, horse b at 4-1. If you've won your previous bet, it's very likely that you will bet on the shorter odds horse to try and consolidate your winnings.
In scenario b, your 3-1 bet loses, so you're now £200 down. It's far more likely that of the two horses you are finding it difficult to choose between if your last bet was instead a loser, you are more likely to back the longer odds 4-1 shot. In scenario a, you have won money and you want to protect it, so subconciously you gravitate towards the "safer" short price option. In scenarion b, you want your money back, and to say bet £200 on a 6-4 shot which if it wins yields just a £100 profit does not seem anywhere near as appealing as betting £200 on a 4-1 shot and then ending up £600 in profit if it wins.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539