|
By:
Very short-sighted JPL. There is a finite amount of money to be won on here. We are all competing for it. Every extra penny that goes to Betfair is gone for good. Every penny that goes to fellow competitors is still in the mix.
|
|
By:
''but for 99.999% of BF users it will make no difference whatsoever?''
Every single user will be worse off in the long run. |
|
By:
"FFS your holier than thou attitude stinks"
The abuse I have had on this thread is dreadful considering I have been trying to help. It is any wonder I don't want to help anymore? |
|
By:
Feck, you should read the thread. I know that it's long, but that question was addressed.
Just because a bet request is matched does not make it correct. BetFair are matching bets in the queue ahead of submission to the site. If it is in running they are doing so within the 5 seconds. They are acting as a user, matching over rounds (not 100%, only greater than 100%) therefore playing the market as a user with ultimate technological advantage. grafec, betfair are not "matching bets in the queue ahead of submission to the site". These bets aren't skipping a queue, neither are they matched before the clock counts down for the submitter. Once they hit the queue they are being paired off with existing bets. The issue is, they are not being matched at the best price available. That is all. |
|
By:
What about the reciprocal odds option on BA, Scrip?
|
|
By:
The reason people are getting hot under the collar is because BetFair are using their technological position as operator (zero delay and view of the bet queue) to financial advantage.
As users are also not getting best price any more, but being settled at the inverse of the price they submit, they are breaking their own fundamental rule. I've not even mentioned the integrity issue of implementing a settlement change without announcement, or the fact that "operator skimming" contravenes FSA rules (would that they were regulated). |
|
By:
Of course Betfair are a bookmaker - and a good thing too, because if they weren't (and were just faciliiating bets between other people) all their laying customers would legally be bookmakers
how's that then? i thought betfair were exactly just that, a faciltator? we don't need licences because our money is up front, with the bookies there's an element of goodwill that they pay up - hence the need for a licence |
|
By:
You can't charge people a fee (and this is the best I can do when explaining the skimming process) and not inform them about it.
It is not that hard to understand because, where will it end ? Someone answer my question. I might as well hand over my balance to betfair this second. |
|
By:
Once they hit the queue they are being paired off with existing bets.
But they're not being paired off to the punters benefit, betfair are keeping the spread. Betfair should not be involved in the markets, period. They are privy to inside information regarding our bets 5 seconds before everyone else, the principal is wrong, let alone the execution of it. |
|
By:
If they are giving a better price than the one requested then I do not see a problem. As has been mentioned already that being the case the only people losing a those who wrote bots to scim overround markets.
If they are not giving the better price but sciming the difference for themselves then I think this is a very bad thing for betfair users. It would be nice for betfair to state what the new matching algorthm does. |
|
By:
my account manager is completely unaware of a Q&A, he hasn't even seen one.
im not abusing you Peter, i would just love you to post it up on the forum :) |
|
By:
Scripophilist. 07 Mar 13:16
"FFS your holier than thou attitude stinks" The abuse I have had on this thread is dreadful considering I have been trying to help. It is any wonder I don't want to help anymore? Abuse ??? , you must lead a very sheltered life scrip, I haven't seen any replies to you that could be considered abuse :) |
|
By:
"Betfair should not be involved in the markets, period. "
bolded, italicised and underlined in the memory of Adonis. |
|
By:
hmm i was sure I underlined that..
|
|
By:
Well done Scrip and everyone for pointing out the existence of the Monster. I am sure Bot would have made sure that there had been an annoucement if he had been around, but as he's clearly not good that we have been told. My guess is that Betfair haven't quite got the implementation of the Monster correct yet and that when they do it will give best execution with no profit to Betfair, but that technically it is not as easy as it appears to give best execution. I don't actually think they intended to undermine the integrity of the exchange in the way that is implicit by the current algorithms being trialled.
|
|
By:
Betfair should not be involved in the markets, period
|
|
By:
I remember when I first started betting on Betfair I made two huge errors but got away with both of them.
1. I attempted to back 'x' at 1.25 instead of laying at 1.25 but was able to cancel the bet. 2. I layed 'x' at 14.5 instead of 1.45 and cancelled just in time. I know both are stupid errors but I'm not the only novice that has/will make those errors. I was lucky but anyone who makes the same mistakes now will be burnt big time. |
|
By:
then maybe they should have fecking tested it properly.
it's not hard. My software already does it. |
|
By:
getting better,
yeah I'm sure it's just purely accidental that the new bet matching system makes a profit. |
|
By:
i once tried to back a losing team on a rugby h/c for 10k at 1.01
only bits matched now, as soon as the clock started counting down i'd just turn off and go to the pub |
|
By:
My guess is that Betfair haven't quite got the implementation of the Monster correct yet and that when they do it will give best execution with no profit to Betfair, but that technically it is not as easy as it appears to give best execution. I don't actually think they intended to undermine the integrity of the exchange in the way that is implicit by the current algorithms being trialled.
I think (and hope) you may be right but surely we don't have to endure all of this in the meantime. |
|
By:
Fork in hell, once one accepts the principle of matching equivalence and tries to maintain the principle of best execution, one realises that is not as simple as it appears.
Suppose in a two player market player A is available to back 100 at 1.63 and 100 at 1.62. The next available is 1000 at 1.54. Player B is available to lay 50 at 2.6 (equivalent to 1.625 on A), and the next available to lay is 1000 at 3.0I try to back 1000 on player A at 1.55. I match against the 1.63 for 100, then as I understand it the 100 at 1.62, and then 83.87 is matched at 1.55, which the Monster matches against the 2.6 bet, pocketing the 3.87 (because 50 at 2.6 is equivalent to 80 at 1.625). Obviously I should have had 80 matched at 1.625 if there was best execution, I think we all agree on that. However it is not as simple as that. Supposing I only try to back 200 at 1.54. Is 100 matched at 1.62? If it is then this is not best execution for man at 2.6. Really he should be matched first and I should then get the last 20 matched at 1.62. But I suspect that this is too complicated for the technology to cope with, so they match it on the same runner if they can first (as they say). However that is awkward because the 1.62 is getting priority over the 2.6 which is really a worse price. |
|
By:
getting better
why the need for betfair involvement in the first place? who has ever complained about not being matched on an in-running tennis market? aren't you just slightly perturbed by the thought of betfair, with all it's advantges, playing the markets? |
|
By:
I don't see what's complicated at all about it.
The guy whose price was in the market first gets matched at that price. The bet that then backs at say 3 gets that price and anything better on the system. It's been this way since this place started, why is there any need to change anything? |
|
By:
It appears they're playing this game in markets with up to and including 4 outcomes.
|
|
By:
A SUMMARY OF THE THREAD SO FAR
Hope this helps and saves people spending 2 hours reading the thread like I have; 1) Betfair are now instantly matching any bets in running which they can. Example; Federer trading at 1.3 to back, 1.4 to lay for 10,000 Nadal trading at 3.5 to back for 500, 6 to lay If you submit a back of Nadal at 3 for 5,000, you will hit the 500 @ 3.5. You will get that 3.5, NOT 3. Any other money between 3.5 and 3 will also be yours, at the prices on the scren HOWEVER, the new change is that Betfair will realise that your remainder asking for 3 can be matched by them instantly, because they can also match the 1.4 on the other side. They supposedly keep both punters happy Betfair keep themselves happy by making a big profit on making that trade. Whatever they may claim, they are taking that profit. They don't have a "position" as such on the market because they have equal profit whatever happens. But they get a very nice profit, make no mistake 2) As stated above, you WILL still be matched at the best available price. If Nadal had been backable for 50k at 3.5, you'd have got 3.5. There is no question about that (marcus - I'm afraid your example is the only one, and I've had a fair few bets in the last week which have been matched at better prices than I've been asking for) 3) Bot operators who could have been making as much as 5m a year from hoovering overrounds are now f*cked. Betfair are taking that money themselves 4) This isnt on all markets yet, but BF are slowly rolling it out 5) VERY IMPORTANT - If you make a mistake, you're going to get punished for it. In the market I spoke about before, if you back Nadal for 100k at 1.01, you'll get all the money going down to 1.01 at the prices on the screen and in the system. But what is unmatched will be instantly matched by BF, offset against the 1.4 lay on Federer. You will have NO CHANCE to cancel, ZERO I think thats it. If I stay interested for long enough, I'll try and update this so that people don't have to read the whole thread, most of which is the same stuff repeated while people try and work out what is going on |
|
By:
getting better, it's hardly rocket science to code a overround scraper. Even creating a best match one isn't hard but then there's no profit in that is there ?
If everything is matched on a timestamped basis as is now in a two runner event a price of 3 equates to a lay of 1.5 why not match on that basis first come first served In a three runner event back odds A) 3 B) 3 C) 4 someone tries to back C at 2 they should be matched at 3's for as much as A and B allow then best match again down the odds chain |
|
By:
The most sensible solution is for BetFair to automatically put in an inverse price as well as a back price for markets with 2 outcomes (as the purple site does). If either side matches accordingly, then both bets disappear from the screen.
For markets with 3 or 4 outcomes, they should leave the feck alone. |
|
By:
If they weren't skimming, would it not be a positive move for gamblers? Wouldn't we be getting better prices if we didn't have parasitic middlemen between our bets? Which leads me nicely into my next point.
On another forum someone claimed it was rumoured that there was around 20 bots making 500K+ a year on betfair and the poster suggested it was only a matter of time before betfair wanted that money for themselves. A while back I submitted a post discussing that and suggested that if betfair hid the queue they could make a fortune from momentum trading alone. Maybe this move by betfair suggests they've finally come to the conclusion that the majority of traders contribute zilch to betfair, in terms of real liquidity or commission, and that their bots bombarding the site are more trouble than they're worth. I think what they're trying to tell you guys is feck off to the purple if you want. |
|
By:
Surely there is a massive issue which has been highlighted by all this with regards to IR betting.
If you take BF at their word and the seek to hold no position in the market and they don't seek to profit from this. By matching one side of the transaction after the 5 sec delay then they must perform the other transaction immediately (no 5 sec delay) or they are exposed and are taking a postion in the market. The player on the second side of the arb doesn't then have the 5 sec grace period to cancel that he expects and has a right to if it where a normal user. |
|
By:
the man marcus 07 Mar 13:26
i once tried to back a losing team on a rugby h/c for 10k at 1.01 only bits matched now, as soon as the clock started counting down i'd just turn off and go to the pub Yep, as long as there is 100 asking to back the other side at prices under 100, yep, switch off, you're not going to have the chance to cancel Thts very harsh imo (Note to self - Don't EVER f*ck up again) |
|
By:
There is something reassuring about Betfair sitting there and waiting for the inexperienced user to make a mistake and then taking his money before another user can.
And the same happens if you submit a bet which part off it would cause an overround. You get matched at the 100% book level. They keep the difference. Sort of like daddy shark has decided to join the party. And he's got bigger teeth, and quicker reactions than any of you fish. |
|
By:
Troy - I don't believe there are any bots hoovering overrounds in running. Two reasons:
1) one of the prices is generally wrong, not both, and a bot trying to match both will find after the delay that only the wrong price has gone. 2) when I make a misclick to create an overbroke book it invariably doesn't get matched and I am quick enough to cancel (until now of course) |
|
By:
(Note to self - Don't EVER f*ck up again) - lol, I must remember that aswell!!
|
|
By:
The mistake issue is only an in-running issue as, on zero delay markets, the likelliehood is the mistake would be gobbled up by overround seeking bots anyway.
|
|
By:
nobody has concrete evidence that betfair are hoovering the overround. However this would appear to be the favoured outcome, and there is some evidence from Bayes' post at 07 Mar 12:35. There is still the possibility that the inverse price is getting a better deal than expected.
|
|
By:
Feck - you would have had a sporting chance of cancelling it in time. now it's matched before it hits the unmatched bet queue.
|
|
By:
Bayes - I don't think there were bots on in-running markets before. Obviously lots of them on non in-running markets
There clearly is Betfair matching software on in-running now tho. Test it out for yourself Its not on every market yet, as someone posted, they are rolling it out. BUt it won't be long |
|
By:
Feck I doubt most users overround bots are making that much as they'll be loads of them looking for pennies most will only get part matched and effectively cause the book to hover around 100% whilst they leave up offers hoping to get filled. If these user bots now have no chance who else is going to ensure books ride close to 100% it sure aint gonna be betting taking risks to get the status quo
|
|
By:
"gonna be betfair taking risks to get the status quo"
|