|
By:
strangely enough grafec
my gut feeling is they haven't responded because they haven't worked out what to do yet the absence of bot is very surprising |
|
By:
marcus, i dont have time right now to give you a call, will call later on or more likely, monday at some time, let me know if monday is ok mate.
|
|
By:
It's a nice line to run: "We can't be bothered to create this system properly, so we'll err on the side of stealing your money". Nice.
|
|
By:
today i observed bets cancelling taking 3.3sec once.
sometimes 2seconds to cancel a bet, software shows exact time taken to canel a bet. sometimes it is taking 0.250 sec that is one-fourth of a second. It is also possible they may be holding bets to match by arbing and not allowing to cancel when we want. |
|
By:
Nothing tricky about it grafec, imagine a 2 runner event
A back of runner A at 3 equates to lay of 1.5 runner B If I back Runner B at 1.4 - I should be matched at 1.5 if the back of runner B has been placed before my bet (same situation as now first come first served) and so on for 3 4 5 ... runner events The best odds matching is not complicated to implement , it has been implemented the current way for a reason. |
|
By:
i observed this holding bets for few seconds before cancelling in tennis roddick match
|
|
By:
The fat fingered mistake is not really the problem.
The problem is not giving best execution price to customers. The only complication I can see is that sometimes a best execution price may be at a price that does not fall on a valid tick. For instance 4.05 where the valid prices that could be entered were 4.0 and 4.1. However the answer is obvious give the price improvement to the order that was entered that generated the synthetic match against the other runners in the field. If this is not possible at the moment then they should have made it possible before changing the matching algorithm. If it is ok to effectively front run a clients order then other strategies may follow. Front run orders of profitable clients, sweep up losing bets on closing a market. Showing a willingness to practically front run bets with this matching engine change puts their integrity into question. This sort of thing would be illegal on the financial markets - why is it ok here ? |
|
By:
steady
Monday fine |
|
By:
u25k 08 Mar 17:35
today i observed bets cancelling taking 3.3sec once. sometimes 2seconds to cancel a bet, software shows exact time taken to canel a bet. sometimes it is taking 0.250 sec that is one-fourth of a second. It is also possible they may be holding bets to match by arbing and not allowing to cancel when we want. I agree this is reality...I have even had the clock counting down on cancelling bets...getting to 3 seconds....I have said for a while that bets were seemingly matching delayed after an event...I put this down to the way the system refreshed...but now who knows whats going on....see you all on betquack and ffs get over there.....never happens though, people stay here no matter what...I can only move if we all move, so do it now!!!! |
|
By:
goldendeer
I did not say it was about pennies I don't play any market it effects as yet - and I am just spending hours explaining what I see as the implications to people running away with dooms day scenarious I wonder why I bother, but he I have always been a masichist |
|
By:
Ghetto, fair enough. It's the "and so on for 3 and 4 runner events" that I do think is more complicated.
If you have 2 layers against 1 backer you need to give both layers a weighted fraction of the overround according to price/liability. Anyway, I'll not dwell on it. We know this is not implemented on 5 runner events (for now). |
|
By:
"The only complication I can see is that sometimes a best execution price may be at a price that does not fall on a valid tick"
The odds increments are there for different reasons and have no bearing on this. On many of your bets you'll see the odds rounded up to odd amounts 7.83 etc due to being matched at various odds and reduction factors. The best odds given should reflect the best price available from the money available once the bet was matched |
|
By:
"The odds increments are there for different reasons and have no bearing on this. On many of your bets you'll see the odds rounded up to odd amounts 7.83 etc due to being matched at various odds and reduction factors. The best odds given should reflect the best price available from the money available once the bet was matched"
Goog point. Magician / anyone - so what is the complication about awarding best price to clients rather than betfair ? |
|
By:
grafec
3 runner event lays a) 3 (33.3%) b) 3 (33.3%) c) no prices Anyone backing c should get odds of 3 as A & B odds mean a balanced 100% book would give odds of 3 4 a) 4 (25%) b) 4 (25%) c) 4 (25%) d) ? d= 4 (25%) and so on The maths only become as complicated as betfair would have us believe |
|
By:
If you had two layers at the same price then you would match bets in timestamp order, it really wouldn't be hard for them to do I don't think but it might take alot more processing power
|
|
By:
In that Q&A sheet they claim that matching at best price might slow down the bet matching process.
|
|
By:
There is another point about this that has not so far I think been mentioned.
Anybody trying to implement a bot to synthetically get best execution for themselves runs the risk of missing one leg of the multiple bets that need to be placed. Betfair are doing this atomically in the matching engine with absolutely no risk to themselves. If they keep the best execution price for themselves this is plain wrong. |
|
By:
it has been mentioned before Judge but its worth mentioning again. These profits are not available to any customer because they have the 5 second delay to get around. If Betfair also had the 5 second delay they would find that a lot of these risk free arbs they are executing werent still in the market.
|
|
By:
Magician you are adding good value to this forum, i just wanted to highlight what's going on in the soccer InPlay market. I was providing 2-3% of market volume (and putting up best available odds a lot of time) every match i was able to trade manually.
Now i have to put up less size and worse price otherwise i will have no chance to level my book or trade out. |
|
By:
There have been three occasions in the last month when I've entered a back at, e.g., 3,5, and found the whole bet matched on another competitor at e.g. 6.0, 6.2 and 6.4.
This had only ever happened once before in the three years I've been here, but each time I put it down to fat fingers or the way the screen shifts so badly since the SP "upgrade". After all, there was no incentive whatsoever for Betfair to place my bet on the wrong selection. Now I am not so sure. Yes, it's almost certainly an innocent error, but now there is an incentive for Betfair to place your bet on the wrong selection if it creates an overbroke book for them to arb. Just another integrity issue arising from this secret skimming. |
|
By:
goldendeer, have you noticed it working on the football markets for a while ?
Seems to be live on this barnsley chelsea game. I've been monitoring the matchs odds and i hasn't gone overround once in the first 30 minutes where usually for a BBC1 televised game it'd be jumping all over the place. |
|
By:
its been on the football markets since Feb, been very obvious on the overs/unders markets but until this thread I was unsure if it was betfair or another user managing to beat the clock.
|
|
By:
Fair enough, may as well switch off my overround bots :(
|
|
By:
How would it appear that someone is beating the clock??....every bet would still have a 5 second delay...Betfair are not placing any bets as far as I know :0
|
|
By:
..and if they are in this way, they are very stupid as there are far better ways for them to make millions and millions without the delay!!
|
|
By:
over 4.5 market
1.07 trying to back under nothing whatsoever trying to back over laid over at 18, came back matched completely...at 18 so it's definitely happening on football as well |
|
By:
betfair are matching the amounts bet but not the odds, if neither side of the bet is getting bets odds its hard to see how you could consider this 'matching' at all...
its certainly a violation of betfairs supposed position as merely a service for matching bets between customers... also this system wont make them level green, they will have different greens on different runners...so how can they claim to 'not have a position'? |
|
By:
Ghetto Joe
I have noticed this bot two or more weeks ago but as others confirmed it was put into operation on 17 or 18 of feb. From that time my P&L statement shows a drop to the 1/3 what previously was avarage (ok. three weeks is not much for making statistics how it will affect me). I'm not playing Bar-Che, I was on Manu-Pompey and now on Inter-Reg. On both market i have experienced this superbot working and i expect it for the near future. The only place where it wasn't turned on was Porto-Schalke extended time To Qualify market. |
|
By:
guess their next great idea will be to open accounts with all the bookies and then when an arb appears there they can snap it up !!! hmmmm wonder how long before they get their account's restricted lol.
|
|
By:
JUst tried to get it to take my bets on the Odds Evens chelsea market, didn't bite me once. I guess they've decided they're happy to turn the bet bot on but only markets where there's liquiidty enough to benefit them.
I emailed them asking for details of the markets it's running on but still waiting for a reply. You can be pretty sure they won't risk it on the markets running on the Aussie servers or horseracing |
|
By:
"
Judge Berry 08 Mar 17:52 There is another point about this that has not so far I think been mentioned. Anybody trying to implement a bot to synthetically get best execution for themselves runs the risk of missing one leg of the multiple bets that need to be placed. Betfair are doing this atomically in the matching engine with absolutely no risk to themselves. If they keep the best execution price for themselves this is plain wrong." This post expresses something that crystalised in my mind this afternoon. The only way betfair can execute this is instantly - ie. they are the only one who can do this completely risk free. everyone else either has processing time (in the case of bots) or reaction time in the case of manual operators, in each case there is a risk you will miss a leg of the transaction. this makes it impossible to do without then beating their leg of the delay in running, thus they should just drop the idea completely in running in my opinion. since the matching of best prices after a delay is also not something that is true to the way a delay works in a market.. the way this works right now is fine. i think the bookies might have a say here. here's an xchange, supposedly transparent, laying and backing it's users bets WITHOUT RISK. amazing jackpot for betfair, wow they must wonder why they never did this before ?! lol really, how did this get through the net ? unbelievable. |
|
By:
I think the paranoier and wild guesswork is reaching new heights......sure time will tell but I think the**being posted on here and by some very wise punters is shocking.
|
|
By:
Ghetto Joe:
"3 runner event lays a) 3 (33.3%) b) 3 (33.3%) c) no prices Anyone backing c should get odds of 3 as A & B odds mean a balanced 100% book would give odds of 3" Ok, try this: If I was to submit a bet on option c at 2.0, why should I get 3.0? Should not each layer get a better price than 3.0? Surely each layer has the right to best price available as well as the new arrival in the market ie. everyone should get the weighted value between 2.0 and 3.0 which achieves a 100% book. Happy to be contradicted. |
|
By:
i think the bookies might have a say here. here's an xchange, supposedly transparent, laying and backing it's users bets WITHOUT RISK. amazing jackpot for betfair, wow they must wonder why they never did this before ?! lol really, how did this get through the net ? unbelievable.
Thats why I don't think its happening as some are saying..... ;) |
|
By:
what's not happening lukeybabe ?
|
|
By:
I don't think betfair are skimming the market...they are matching bets!!!
Happy to be proved wrong...or rather unhappy...Marcibaby ;) |
|
By:
luckylucas. i urge you to TRY IT and prove us wrong.
honestly, this is not something i would waste my time with, and neither would anyone else if it were not true. i cannot believe there is a single person on this thread not willing to believe the sheer weight of experienced people who believe this is immoral. i've done it 5 times now, every time my bet swallowed at the worst price, whilst a better one is available. and swallowed instantly at that. |
|
By:
lucas - they are matching bets but only when they can profit from the process. That sounds bad i know but that is precisely what is happening.
|
|
By:
lucas, it is happening, it has been clearly shown numerous times!!
|
|
By:
grafec 08 Mar 18:22
Ghetto Joe: "3 runner event lays a) 3 (33.3%) b) 3 (33.3%) c) no prices Anyone backing c should get odds of 3 as A & B odds mean a balanced 100% book would give odds of 3" Ok, try this: If I was to submit a bet on option c at 2.0, why should I get 3.0? Should not each layer get a better price than 3.0? Surely each layer has the right to best price available as well as the new arrival in the market ie. everyone should get the weighted value between 2.0 and 3.0 which achieves a 100% book. Because they've posted up their bets first and set the odds, the exchange is based on that premise you can't now go and start splitting any difference. That'd be like a lay of 5 is on the exchange but you backed at 4, would you expect to get matched at 5 or be kind and split the difference with the layer ? |