General Betting
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Where would betfair be to-day if the pc tax had been in force since day one.Can just imagine ---bet against each other no middle man,we never close accounts, but if your a winner we want 23percent.it must be the biggest rip off ever by a leading gambling firm.
Show More
I don't understand why commission/winnings is any kind of barometer for paying. an amount per transaction seems far more logical.
I would imagine they have modelled such a type of charge scheme and for whatever reasons it doesn't work as well as what they have.
We don't really know all that much about what it really takes to run a sight such as BF.
After all, it is a novel approach to providing a betting platform.
There are no case histories out there to compare it with.
We don't really know all that much about what it really takes to run a sight such as BF.
After all, it is a novel approach to providing a betting platform.
There are no case histories out there to compare it with.
Yes I agree that further debate between us is pointless, but my reasons for this are quite different from yours.
You accuse me of passivity.
I would counter that by accusing you of pointless and petty activism.
I don't believe you have proved at all where the BF logic is flawed or even unfair.
You've just got it into your mind that for some reason you are being unfairly discriminated against and, in fact, logic means nothing to you.
I would suggest, for the sake of your own sanity, you should seriously consider moving on from this matter in point.
It is history, it is done with.
You're just spinning wheels, and making a lot of unnecessary noise.
You accuse me of passivity.
I would counter that by accusing you of pointless and petty activism.
I don't believe you have proved at all where the BF logic is flawed or even unfair.
You've just got it into your mind that for some reason you are being unfairly discriminated against and, in fact, logic means nothing to you.
I would suggest, for the sake of your own sanity, you should seriously consider moving on from this matter in point.
It is history, it is done with.
You're just spinning wheels, and making a lot of unnecessary noise.
I haven't read the whole thread, but I'll add a few points.
Firstly, I'll explain my personal circumstances, as it appears that a lot of what is said on here is driven by self interest. I'm a premium charge payer, but I also run position taking bots that can largely avoid it by generating commission elsewhere. The dilemma for me recently is how many resources to put into generating profit, and how many to put into avoiding PC. Naturally, if I am successful in achieving one, I am more likely to switch to the other.
I understand the rationale for Betfair introducing PC but I would question whether its sustainable. I hear some people questioning the exchange model but the fact is Betfair had revenues of 200m+ from the exchange last financial year and I'm pretty sure that PC wasn't that significant a proportion of this sum. The fact is that Betfair have been trying to sustain year on year growth and as a result have been spending a disproportionate amount of income on marketing. I think it's fairly clear now that without an expansion of the marketplace this expenditure is not justified. The business IS sustainable without PC, growth perhaps is not.
A few other points:
a flat 5% across the board would not work because a lot of the big liquidity providers are operating on wafer thin margins
higher transaction charges would kill all the derivative markets stone dead. I think Betfair have got these too high already and liquidity is too thin in many side markets (and, oh no, the losers are therefore losing quicker by betting into bigger overrounds)
I've said it before but I'll say it again. Any winner gloating about not paying PC whilst others do is missing the point completely. Anyone shrewd enough to pay PC will inevitably try to reduce their bill by increasing volume and reducing margin. By definition, this will be at the expense of other winners.
Firstly, I'll explain my personal circumstances, as it appears that a lot of what is said on here is driven by self interest. I'm a premium charge payer, but I also run position taking bots that can largely avoid it by generating commission elsewhere. The dilemma for me recently is how many resources to put into generating profit, and how many to put into avoiding PC. Naturally, if I am successful in achieving one, I am more likely to switch to the other.
I understand the rationale for Betfair introducing PC but I would question whether its sustainable. I hear some people questioning the exchange model but the fact is Betfair had revenues of 200m+ from the exchange last financial year and I'm pretty sure that PC wasn't that significant a proportion of this sum. The fact is that Betfair have been trying to sustain year on year growth and as a result have been spending a disproportionate amount of income on marketing. I think it's fairly clear now that without an expansion of the marketplace this expenditure is not justified. The business IS sustainable without PC, growth perhaps is not.
A few other points:
a flat 5% across the board would not work because a lot of the big liquidity providers are operating on wafer thin margins
higher transaction charges would kill all the derivative markets stone dead. I think Betfair have got these too high already and liquidity is too thin in many side markets (and, oh no, the losers are therefore losing quicker by betting into bigger overrounds)
I've said it before but I'll say it again. Any winner gloating about not paying PC whilst others do is missing the point completely. Anyone shrewd enough to pay PC will inevitably try to reduce their bill by increasing volume and reducing margin. By definition, this will be at the expense of other winners.
Thank you Bayes for an intelligent post, borne out of "true" experience.
Also I would like to add that the PC payers seem to regard themselves as some sorto group of elite profitable punters.
All they are really are a sub group of profitable punters, punting in a manner that is not attractively profitable for BF.
There are other groups of punters who are profitable, but are punting in a manner that is profitable for BF, and hence are not charged any PC.
The second group ( the nonPC payers) is the majority, the first group ( the PC payers) is the minority, but not an elite minority in any form or manner.
Also I would like to add that the PC payers seem to regard themselves as some sorto group of elite profitable punters.
All they are really are a sub group of profitable punters, punting in a manner that is not attractively profitable for BF.
There are other groups of punters who are profitable, but are punting in a manner that is profitable for BF, and hence are not charged any PC.
The second group ( the nonPC payers) is the majority, the first group ( the PC payers) is the minority, but not an elite minority in any form or manner.
I think the truth is, Betfair invented IR betting. Unfortunately, they made it too easy for shrewdies to win too often. Betfair couldn't 'uninvent' IR because it is every punter's dream - they punt, it goes against them - they change their mind, all at relatively decent price. Betfair chose instead to change the charging structure and the PC is the result. As I said though, I think it's unsustainable.
I agree.
BF is a work in progress.
There is no template based on case history to work from.
BF is a work in progress.
There is no template based on case history to work from.
Must be very hard for those that supported betfair from day one,when they would phone there custermers up and get help in finding out what markets they should put up.THEN ask if they would seed them,then when some made a mistake they would phone back and ask if you would call the bet off.telling you it would not be forgotten and they would look after you, as the firm got bigger..
Well the looking after was to tax them at 23 percent some looking after.
Well the looking after was to tax them at 23 percent some looking after.
I would say that they were being effectively taxed at over 20% from day one, but just didn't really focus on it.
SEEMS LIKE A VERY VERY BIG CON,ANYONE THAT JOINS AFTER LISTENING TO THE ADVERTS ARE NOT A FULL CUP OR CRACKERS.
Bayes, I agree with a lot of what you say. However, the following has to be challenged:
"a flat 5% across the board would not work because a lot of the big liquidity providers are operating on wafer thin margins"
It's common knowledge that companies like Betting Promotions, who channel huges sums here (and make big profits as shown by their results) do so commission free - maybe if they and other like them had to pay in the same way others do betfair might actually be able to not only do away with the pc, but reduce commission for everyone as well? Just an idea...
"a flat 5% across the board would not work because a lot of the big liquidity providers are operating on wafer thin margins"
It's common knowledge that companies like Betting Promotions, who channel huges sums here (and make big profits as shown by their results) do so commission free - maybe if they and other like them had to pay in the same way others do betfair might actually be able to not only do away with the pc, but reduce commission for everyone as well? Just an idea...
My guess would be that companies like Betting Promotions pay commission just like everybody else.
But wafer thin surely ?
Is the thinnest wafer 2%, or are there special case commission rates lower than even that ?
Is the thinnest wafer 2%, or are there special case commission rates lower than even that ?
Bayes, that particular guess would be incorrect, believe me.
Speaking as someone who knows something about the economics of internet companies, It's obvious to me that the PC is about maximizing profitability prior to the float and hence maximizing the share price at the float.
All the talk about who should or shouldn't pay how much is neither here nor there. Bf has an effective monopoly and can do pretty much whatever it likes.
When trading stocks, the more you trade the smaller the commission you pay per share, and if you suggested that whenever someone made significant profits from trading shares they would be hit with a punitive 20% commission, you would be laughed out of the room as an idiot.
A similar model to share trading will prevail when BF has competition, which I suspect will be sooner than many think. And BF better hope they haven't permanently damaged their relationship with the liquidity providers, because without them they don't have a business.
Anyone who thinks Bf would work with casual 'high street' punters (and competition) doesn't understand the business.
All the talk about who should or shouldn't pay how much is neither here nor there. Bf has an effective monopoly and can do pretty much whatever it likes.
When trading stocks, the more you trade the smaller the commission you pay per share, and if you suggested that whenever someone made significant profits from trading shares they would be hit with a punitive 20% commission, you would be laughed out of the room as an idiot.
A similar model to share trading will prevail when BF has competition, which I suspect will be sooner than many think. And BF better hope they haven't permanently damaged their relationship with the liquidity providers, because without them they don't have a business.
Anyone who thinks Bf would work with casual 'high street' punters (and competition) doesn't understand the business.
Betting promotion pays commission on Betfair, but not on the smaller exchanges (unsure about ****).
I'm sure they do get some kind of preferential treatment though, as they have a contract in place with Betfair (confidential). Not sure what's in the contract, but it must be something favourable to them, as they could bet on the exchange without a contract in place like the rest of us otherwise.
I'm sure they do get some kind of preferential treatment though, as they have a contract in place with Betfair (confidential). Not sure what's in the contract, but it must be something favourable to them, as they could bet on the exchange without a contract in place like the rest of us otherwise.
pxb
I don't necessarily agree to the relevance of comparing stock trading commission structure to BF's structure.
BF has a group of punters utilizing the exchange apparently not to good benefit/reward to BF.
Presumably that reward has not only been assessed by BF in terms of monetary inflows to them, but also in terms of general benefit to its other customers.
They have tried to correct this inequity through the PC.
Maximizing profits per se is not necessarily good business I agree, but I am willing to give BF the benefit of doubt that this is not their prime, or at least their only, concern or motivation.
I don't necessarily agree to the relevance of comparing stock trading commission structure to BF's structure.
BF has a group of punters utilizing the exchange apparently not to good benefit/reward to BF.
Presumably that reward has not only been assessed by BF in terms of monetary inflows to them, but also in terms of general benefit to its other customers.
They have tried to correct this inequity through the PC.
Maximizing profits per se is not necessarily good business I agree, but I am willing to give BF the benefit of doubt that this is not their prime, or at least their only, concern or motivation.
On a financial exchange you pay commission every trade you do, not on profit 'per market'.
Warren buffet said of investing that profit decreases as motion increases.
On Betfair profit increases as motion increases.
If you back at value and you can then lay the same selection at fair odds, it always makes sense to do so. If there was a commission payable per bet, this might not be the case.
Warren buffet said of investing that profit decreases as motion increases.
On Betfair profit increases as motion increases.
If you back at value and you can then lay the same selection at fair odds, it always makes sense to do so. If there was a commission payable per bet, this might not be the case.
Anyone who thinks that the pc is anything other than making extra money from their monopoly status must live in cloud cuckoo world.
The Management
i think you should have said--it used to be a p2p site,more like online bookmaker now.i wonder how many take the betfair odds instead of pushing it trough the exchange.
i think you should have said--it used to be a p2p site,more like online bookmaker now.i wonder how many take the betfair odds instead of pushing it trough the exchange.
The Management
There are a group of punters who have apparently been able to win at a very, very high profitablity level.
BF, who one assumes understands exactly how they are doing this, says that these punters have been rorting the exchange to their selfish benefit.
BF is not getting sufficient revenue from them for providing them the betting platform to do their trades, and ordinary pinters are being taken extreme advantage of by them.
So BF has stepped in to try to put some drawbacks to the easy low cost run of the shop these particular punters have had to date.
I don't see anything wrong with that.
Sounds in my general interests in fact.
Turtlehead
Ease back a bit on the invective a bit and you might just get a few people to debate your points as well.
Jus a friendly suggestion.
There are a group of punters who have apparently been able to win at a very, very high profitablity level.
BF, who one assumes understands exactly how they are doing this, says that these punters have been rorting the exchange to their selfish benefit.
BF is not getting sufficient revenue from them for providing them the betting platform to do their trades, and ordinary pinters are being taken extreme advantage of by them.
So BF has stepped in to try to put some drawbacks to the easy low cost run of the shop these particular punters have had to date.
I don't see anything wrong with that.
Sounds in my general interests in fact.
Turtlehead
Ease back a bit on the invective a bit and you might just get a few people to debate your points as well.
Jus a friendly suggestion.
There are a lot of effng whingers on here..if you don't like it go elsewhere...ffs
Jimmy
You forgor ffs in your last post.
Don't go all polite on us ffs.
You forgor ffs in your last post.
Don't go all polite on us ffs.
Investor
Why does it always make sene to lay off value bets.?
Surely it's a trade off between the profit you give up and the commission you save by trading out.
I don't see that it must always be a positive, or even an overall positive long term.
Why does it always make sene to lay off value bets.?
Surely it's a trade off between the profit you give up and the commission you save by trading out.
I don't see that it must always be a positive, or even an overall positive long term.
A pc thread and no Feck ? surely only a matter of time ?
FAFH, I'm saying it makes sense if you can trade out at a fair price or better, so you're not giving up any profit.
The Investor Joined: 05 Jun 06
Replies: 2867 17 Oct 10 16:44
Betting promotion pays commission on Betfair, but not on the smaller exchanges (unsure about ****).
I'm sure they do get some kind of preferential treatment though, as they have a contract in place with Betfair (confidential). Not sure what's in the contract, but it must be something favourable to them, as they could bet on the exchange without a contract in place like the rest of us otherwise.
DO you think it was them that had Keep Bets stopped in the CS market? Or did Betfair genuinely do it out of fairness - in fact, what was the reason? You can Keep a bet in the HT score markets.
Replies: 2867 17 Oct 10 16:44
Betting promotion pays commission on Betfair, but not on the smaller exchanges (unsure about ****).
I'm sure they do get some kind of preferential treatment though, as they have a contract in place with Betfair (confidential). Not sure what's in the contract, but it must be something favourable to them, as they could bet on the exchange without a contract in place like the rest of us otherwise.
DO you think it was them that had Keep Bets stopped in the CS market? Or did Betfair genuinely do it out of fairness - in fact, what was the reason? You can Keep a bet in the HT score markets.
Not sure Rocket. I don't use that feature either.
FATH, you minimise commission by laying off just above the expectation (assuming your estimates of 'value' and 'fair value' are on average correct).
It was Treble_Underscore who implied that it worked out better to do that, and it hugely helped my betting. I try to offer prices on 40-70% of the book in horse races throughout the day.
It was Treble_Underscore who implied that it worked out better to do that, and it hugely helped my betting. I try to offer prices on 40-70% of the book in horse races throughout the day.
Maybe you have a point.
But I'm damned if I get it.
To me, if you analyse a long list of trades in and out, you will find that staying in ends almost the same net profit wise.
People on here talk about trading in sports betting as if they are doing it in ( say) commodity or currency markets.
That is, in commodity trading there is essentially no time frame in which you HAVE to get out or you will be faced with the certainty of a final positive or negative outcome.
In betting, you do have a limited time frame, in that the match or race will finish within a certain fixed time frame and you will be faced with the certainty of a positive or negative outcome.
They are not comparable for that major reason.
In the former you are never forced to trade out any position or else, in the latter you essentially are, as you run out of time.
But I'm damned if I get it.
To me, if you analyse a long list of trades in and out, you will find that staying in ends almost the same net profit wise.
People on here talk about trading in sports betting as if they are doing it in ( say) commodity or currency markets.
That is, in commodity trading there is essentially no time frame in which you HAVE to get out or you will be faced with the certainty of a final positive or negative outcome.
In betting, you do have a limited time frame, in that the match or race will finish within a certain fixed time frame and you will be faced with the certainty of a positive or negative outcome.
They are not comparable for that major reason.
In the former you are never forced to trade out any position or else, in the latter you essentially are, as you run out of time.
THE anser to luloo,
BUST OUT THE GAME GONE --PC IS A DISGRACE
BUST OUT THE GAME GONE --PC IS A DISGRACE
I would like to see some competition set up on the Matchbook model with a more friendly user interface - much like here or purple. Backers pay say 0.8%-1.0% of stake/bet on losers and the same % of winnings on winners. Layers are PAID 0.15%-0.35% of backers stake or the liability, dependent on the result.
It's something I think the purple site should look to introducing. They alrady have the infrastructure in place so I'd think a change of commission structure would be fairly simple to initiate.
We'd be back to proper P2P betting, the operator would make between 0.45%-0.85% for every matched bet, traders could stay here and provide 'liquidity' for each other ([;)])and I'd be happy to just pay 1% for every bet I had[:D]
Let's face purple it are never going to break Betfair's monopoly unless they offer something different. This could be the way to do it?
It's something I think the purple site should look to introducing. They alrady have the infrastructure in place so I'd think a change of commission structure would be fairly simple to initiate.
We'd be back to proper P2P betting, the operator would make between 0.45%-0.85% for every matched bet, traders could stay here and provide 'liquidity' for each other ([;)])and I'd be happy to just pay 1% for every bet I had[:D]
Let's face purple it are never going to break Betfair's monopoly unless they offer something different. This could be the way to do it?
Fine as Frog Hair, you have clearly never traded commodities or currencies. Almost everyone who trades them does so through futures contracts or derivatives thereof. Most of the futures contracts I have traded had shorter expiries than my current Ashes bets (of which I have $KS).
The economics of the internet are such that the cost of the n+1 transaction is effectively zero. In practice this means a rational charging structure would encourage people to make as many transactions as possible. That is, a sliding reducing scale capped at some level (say $50 per month).
When BF has competition, I expect to see such a model prevail.
Much as people seem to dislike Arbers/Traders/Liquidity Providers, the commision based on net winnings was a master stroke in attracting them and they are BF (make it work). Commision based on net winning isn't going to be replaced, except by a flat subscription charge (which is the same as capped commision).
The economics of the internet are such that the cost of the n+1 transaction is effectively zero. In practice this means a rational charging structure would encourage people to make as many transactions as possible. That is, a sliding reducing scale capped at some level (say $50 per month).
When BF has competition, I expect to see such a model prevail.
Much as people seem to dislike Arbers/Traders/Liquidity Providers, the commision based on net winnings was a master stroke in attracting them and they are BF (make it work). Commision based on net winning isn't going to be replaced, except by a flat subscription charge (which is the same as capped commision).
pxb
When futures contracts expire , one simply rolls over into later maturity dates.
Can't roll over a football match trading position as and when the match finishes.
When futures contracts expire , one simply rolls over into later maturity dates.
Can't roll over a football match trading position as and when the match finishes.
BF bets are more like options in that they expire with a fixed value which is commonly zero.
Commision structures for options are the same as for futures contracts, ie per contract commision declines with increasing number of options traded.
BTW, I traded financial futures for years and never once rolled over a contract. I always traded out before expiry.
Commision structures for options are the same as for futures contracts, ie per contract commision declines with increasing number of options traded.
BTW, I traded financial futures for years and never once rolled over a contract. I always traded out before expiry.
FROG, rolling over futures or option contracts includes trading out of your initial contract( unless it's valueless) and making another contract/bet for the next month, two month, three moinths or whatever timeframe you want to have.
If you want to compare rolling over future/options contracts with sportsbetting, the closest I can think of is if you bet on a team to win a match and trade out of the position(wheater it's in profit or not) in the dying minutes and put another bet on the same team to win in their next match.
If you want to compare rolling over future/options contracts with sportsbetting, the closest I can think of is if you bet on a team to win a match and trade out of the position(wheater it's in profit or not) in the dying minutes and put another bet on the same team to win in their next match.
It's a measure of how far this forum has fallen that the "liquidity providing, we made betfair what they are today, we're so important we should be charged less than everyone else (but much less than the less we're already getting) and as soon as a viable alternative comes along we'll be offski" ferengi, pc calimero, trading sc.um are making a comeback.
Why are the other 2 exchanges not viable alternatives? Oh, I forgot, there's not enough liquidity there because you providers of all of betfair's liquidity prefer to provide it on the exchange that charges you all up to 5 times more than what the other two would. It would appear that the only "viable alternative" that would suit you thick cnuts is one that will pay you for putting up offers even if they're not matched. Get it through your dense skulls, the only threat to betfair will be a gambler friendly, anti-trader exchange. You plums are stuck here and will still be here even after they bring your charges into line with your average gambler using the all new liquidity providing premium charge.
Why are the other 2 exchanges not viable alternatives? Oh, I forgot, there's not enough liquidity there because you providers of all of betfair's liquidity prefer to provide it on the exchange that charges you all up to 5 times more than what the other two would. It would appear that the only "viable alternative" that would suit you thick cnuts is one that will pay you for putting up offers even if they're not matched. Get it through your dense skulls, the only threat to betfair will be a gambler friendly, anti-trader exchange. You plums are stuck here and will still be here even after they bring your charges into line with your average gambler using the all new liquidity providing premium charge.
*the all new liquidity generating premium charge
Feck I'm not sure if you are including my idea in your rant or not. I see it as anti-trader, and postion taker (backer or layer) friendly?
Catford Lad, betfair must be mighty relieved that the people running the other exchanges are as lacking in innovation as themselves. I agree they should try a totally different, gambler friendly commission model. I'm not in favour of the offer maker being paid though. Suppose the back and lay prices are hard up against each other e.g. you've put up a back of 1K @ 2.0 and I've put up a lay @1.98 for 1K. Wouldn't that develop into a staring contest? Why should whichever one of us decides to take a shorter price be penalised while the one who stands firm rewarded? I realise you've stipulated layer (rather than offer maker) but, as laying's just the reverse of backing everything else, why should layers be rewarded and backers penalised?
pxb
Never rolled over a futures contract eh?
You sure must be one of a kind type trader. I hope you've got some money left to make a few sports bets on here.
You're all over the shop with your arguments I'm afraid.
Pretty hard to counter intelligently.
My point remains that trading on the price of the result of a 90 minute football match is not trading in the sense of any type of financial trading I'm aware of, be it futures or options on futures or anything else for that matter.
Eddie
Don't think what you're saying really makes any sense does it?
Different matches are totally independent events.
My point is that you can't compare sports bet trading with any other types of trading, not that you can compare it.
I'm saying that what people on here call trading is really nothing of the sort.
It's chopping and changing your short term views on a match as things evolve, usually things you've never even considered could happen.
Never rolled over a futures contract eh?
You sure must be one of a kind type trader. I hope you've got some money left to make a few sports bets on here.
You're all over the shop with your arguments I'm afraid.
Pretty hard to counter intelligently.
My point remains that trading on the price of the result of a 90 minute football match is not trading in the sense of any type of financial trading I'm aware of, be it futures or options on futures or anything else for that matter.
Eddie
Don't think what you're saying really makes any sense does it?
Different matches are totally independent events.
My point is that you can't compare sports bet trading with any other types of trading, not that you can compare it.
I'm saying that what people on here call trading is really nothing of the sort.
It's chopping and changing your short term views on a match as things evolve, usually things you've never even considered could happen.
Feck, i agree with your sentiments. problem with the "liquidity providers" is that for liquidity to happen, you need punters and betfair has the monopoly on them. The problem what betfair has failed to do or indeed any of the other exchanges is to allow the punters to provide the liquidty for each other, thus eliminating the need for the so-called "liquidity" providers and getting back to being a P2P site.
one mechanism is to bring the lays over to the back side as BF do in some 2-way markets already, but for 3+ outcomes. This is possible without betfair needing to take a position.
Another initive which the purple site has done is market link between markets, to increase liquidity.
There is also a possibility of linking up multiple sportsbook as the other site has done to bring extra liquidity.
one mechanism is to bring the lays over to the back side as BF do in some 2-way markets already, but for 3+ outcomes. This is possible without betfair needing to take a position.
Another initive which the purple site has done is market link between markets, to increase liquidity.
There is also a possibility of linking up multiple sportsbook as the other site has done to bring extra liquidity.
betting_quant, AFAIK they already have the cross matching bot working in some 3+ outcome events although horse racing isn't one of them because they fear being on the wrong end of the reduction factor cheat.
The Mgt
As far I can see all you contribute to this forum, currently at least, is to rant and rave about the evolving inequities of the BF betting platform, as you perceive them.
As far as not liking ( or disagreeing with ) my posts, why don't you try answering or deconstructing them point by point.
If by " a guesser looking for clues " you mean am I willing to listen nad learn from others, you bet I am.
Why don't you try it sometimes.? It doesn't really hurt at all that much, and you might even gain if you're fortunate enough.
I sometimes forget to preface all my posts with imo, but that is only what they are.
They're not gospel, merely points of view.
All you have to do is try to explain exactly why I've got the wrong end of the stick, if and when I have.
Too much to ask of you.
If so, why would you bother to come on here at all ?
As far I can see all you contribute to this forum, currently at least, is to rant and rave about the evolving inequities of the BF betting platform, as you perceive them.
As far as not liking ( or disagreeing with ) my posts, why don't you try answering or deconstructing them point by point.
If by " a guesser looking for clues " you mean am I willing to listen nad learn from others, you bet I am.
Why don't you try it sometimes.? It doesn't really hurt at all that much, and you might even gain if you're fortunate enough.
I sometimes forget to preface all my posts with imo, but that is only what they are.
They're not gospel, merely points of view.
All you have to do is try to explain exactly why I've got the wrong end of the stick, if and when I have.
Too much to ask of you.
If so, why would you bother to come on here at all ?
FROG, at least I can tell for sure that you don't know much about option trading. I've spent almost 15 years as a stock and even more option/futures trader and most of the trading in options is the different index around the world and that isn't to different from trading on sporting events apart from the timeframe.
I'd say that it's not very common to roll over positions for thoise trading on index options.
I'll give you one thing though and that is that it's common for long term investors to roll over options/futures on different stocks when they have a long term view on that particular stock.
I'd say that it's not very common to roll over positions for thoise trading on index options.
I'll give you one thing though and that is that it's common for long term investors to roll over options/futures on different stocks when they have a long term view on that particular stock.
OK Eddie.
Run me through how trading on index options is like trading on the vagaries of a 90 minute football match.
Obviously not the whole set and match, just one small example.
The Mgt
I might as well start to ignore you. You clearly have no answers ( of any use to me) to anything I post.
Run me through how trading on index options is like trading on the vagaries of a 90 minute football match.
Obviously not the whole set and match, just one small example.
The Mgt
I might as well start to ignore you. You clearly have no answers ( of any use to me) to anything I post.
On reflection I think the best way to describe the posting style of The Mgt and a few others on here is to use the phrase " the Roy Keane style of posting".
That is , play the man and not the ball.
Apologies to any RK fans on here who might be offended by such a turn of phrase.
That is , play the man and not the ball.
Apologies to any RK fans on here who might be offended by such a turn of phrase.
Well in response to your first sentence I suppose, in your particular case, I will just have to be satisfied with doing something right.
No but seriously why don't you just try to respond to my postings in a specific manner, pointing out exactly where and why you think I'm off the mark.
Go on. Just give it a go.
You can do it if you try.
PS why do I have this unfortunate mental picture of you as the archetypal frustrated,angry person, steaming at how unfair life is to him and really letting it get to him ?
Me ? I'm pretty happy go lucky, just taking things in stride, good or bad.
No but seriously why don't you just try to respond to my postings in a specific manner, pointing out exactly where and why you think I'm off the mark.
Go on. Just give it a go.
You can do it if you try.
PS why do I have this unfortunate mental picture of you as the archetypal frustrated,angry person, steaming at how unfair life is to him and really letting it get to him ?
Me ? I'm pretty happy go lucky, just taking things in stride, good or bad.
betting_quant, imv splitting up backs into lays wd not work for markets like horse racing where 1) there is a preponderance of backers over layers, and 2) bettors are accustomed to taking specific price-points or increments. That is, it wd not work w/out bf exposing themselves to a liability.
I think that bf are going to overhaul the rf and apply the cross-matcher to horse markets. Whatever gains it provides in speedier market-clearing will for me be negated by the (moral, as much as anything) effect of being skimmed.
I think that bf are going to overhaul the rf and apply the cross-matcher to horse markets. Whatever gains it provides in speedier market-clearing will for me be negated by the (moral, as much as anything) effect of being skimmed.
Btw if you want arrogant, patronising and condescending, I think perhaps you ought to look in a mirror more often.
Feck, Askari, I dont understand how BF would open themselves up to a liability by matching backers against backers.
e.g. heres a hyperthetical example (actually its not, its from a football match a few weeks ago, but hyperthetical in that I'm going to pretend its a horse races)
The backs what people wanted which wern't matched and hence went up in the lay column where.
3.7 £1,252.00
2.28 £3,082.00
3.45 £1,625.00
A simple calculation shows that I could construct the following lays from these bets and hence populate the back column with the follwing figures
£339.98 3.68
£550.72 2.27
£364.50 3.43
take the middle price, if someone wanted to come along and back the middle selection, they could be matched upto £550.72, by matching them up with the unmatched backs in the lay column. Also in this example, there was only £12 to back on the 2.27, so we have massively increased the amount of money available.
Also some of these prices are not on the odds ladder, so betfair could earn some revenue (i.e. skim) by offering the next price down.
But most importantly, people would be matched here without anyone needing to offer any lays.i.e. no need for these so-called "liquidity providers" who reckon they are the lifeblood of betfair
OK, so what am I missing ? e.g.if someone backs A, BF constructs that persons bet from the Lay on B & C and puts those bets in the backers account when he places it. only messy thing I can see is that the backer would have 2 lay bets instead of 1 simple back bet in their account. But if the person is a backer and not trader, he's not going to care aslong as hes been matched. If theres an RF to be applied, that would be done on an individual bet basis without BF incurring any liability.
e.g. heres a hyperthetical example (actually its not, its from a football match a few weeks ago, but hyperthetical in that I'm going to pretend its a horse races)
The backs what people wanted which wern't matched and hence went up in the lay column where.
3.7 £1,252.00
2.28 £3,082.00
3.45 £1,625.00
A simple calculation shows that I could construct the following lays from these bets and hence populate the back column with the follwing figures
£339.98 3.68
£550.72 2.27
£364.50 3.43
take the middle price, if someone wanted to come along and back the middle selection, they could be matched upto £550.72, by matching them up with the unmatched backs in the lay column. Also in this example, there was only £12 to back on the 2.27, so we have massively increased the amount of money available.
Also some of these prices are not on the odds ladder, so betfair could earn some revenue (i.e. skim) by offering the next price down.
But most importantly, people would be matched here without anyone needing to offer any lays.i.e. no need for these so-called "liquidity providers" who reckon they are the lifeblood of betfair
OK, so what am I missing ? e.g.if someone backs A, BF constructs that persons bet from the Lay on B & C and puts those bets in the backers account when he places it. only messy thing I can see is that the backer would have 2 lay bets instead of 1 simple back bet in their account. But if the person is a backer and not trader, he's not going to care aslong as hes been matched. If theres an RF to be applied, that would be done on an individual bet basis without BF incurring any liability.
FaFH, I don't trade in play cos it's illegal (online) here in Oz. Trading pre-inplay on BF is very much like day trading stocks, options, etc. The main difference is you can act as market maker here on BF.
And, Shifting a pre-in play position in the 1st Ashes test to the 2nd Ashes test is the same as rolling over a futures contract.
BTW, a lot of people here confuse trading and arbitraging on BF. I do both and make good money on both.
Suggesting I don't make money isn't an argument.
Anyway, my argument is that BF's current pricing model won't survive genuine competition.
In a couple years time, we will refer to a commision of 5% as an outrageous ripoff, never mind the PC.
And, Shifting a pre-in play position in the 1st Ashes test to the 2nd Ashes test is the same as rolling over a futures contract.
BTW, a lot of people here confuse trading and arbitraging on BF. I do both and make good money on both.
Suggesting I don't make money isn't an argument.
Anyway, my argument is that BF's current pricing model won't survive genuine competition.
In a couple years time, we will refer to a commision of 5% as an outrageous ripoff, never mind the PC.
pxb
You say that trading in and out of pre-match betting odds is just like day trading in stocks and options.
Except that such financial trading is done based on sophisticated pricing formulae for such stocks and options.
How is the price of a sports event outcome comparable in terms of pricing mechanisms.?
That's what I don't get.
I'm not saying that there is no good maths underlying such sports bet trading, I'm just saying I have never, ever seen anyone on here explain it satisfactorily, or even close to satisfactorily.
I'm glad that we now agree that rolling over futures contracts is not an abnormal operation.
I'm also glad that you are making money both here and elsewhere.
But your apparent modus operandi in all areas leaves me befuddled to say the least.
You say that trading in and out of pre-match betting odds is just like day trading in stocks and options.
Except that such financial trading is done based on sophisticated pricing formulae for such stocks and options.
How is the price of a sports event outcome comparable in terms of pricing mechanisms.?
That's what I don't get.
I'm not saying that there is no good maths underlying such sports bet trading, I'm just saying I have never, ever seen anyone on here explain it satisfactorily, or even close to satisfactorily.
I'm glad that we now agree that rolling over futures contracts is not an abnormal operation.
I'm also glad that you are making money both here and elsewhere.
But your apparent modus operandi in all areas leaves me befuddled to say the least.
How is the price of a sports event outcome comparable in terms of pricing mechanisms.?
Shares are presumably a case of supply and demand underpinned by the fundamental probability of the performance of a company.
Soccer betting is a case of supply and demand underpinned by the probability of the performance of a soccer team.
Shares are presumably a case of supply and demand underpinned by the fundamental probability of the performance of a company.
Soccer betting is a case of supply and demand underpinned by the probability of the performance of a soccer team.
Btw I haven't read any of the offer documentation for the proposed BF float9 is it even available publicly ?).
But is BF actually making such an outrageous return on capital from its virtual current monopoly position.?
I don't know at all.
If not, how is going into the public arena going to change things ?
But is BF actually making such an outrageous return on capital from its virtual current monopoly position.?
I don't know at all.
If not, how is going into the public arena going to change things ?
phew!! read this thread and i'm tired
but there are a lot of good points made
Bayes 12 Oct 10 22:38, excellent points made
also
pxb 17 Oct 10 16:26
my question,
dont casinos run with a theoretical house advantage of 5.xx% on the games and with that generate the huge profits they have?...whats the difference between them and Betfair other than their operating costs are huge comparatively with running a site?
but there are a lot of good points made
Bayes 12 Oct 10 22:38, excellent points made
also
pxb 17 Oct 10 16:26
my question,
dont casinos run with a theoretical house advantage of 5.xx% on the games and with that generate the huge profits they have?...whats the difference between them and Betfair other than their operating costs are huge comparatively with running a site?
Lori
Fair enough.
But shares are priced on P/E mutiples etc,general industry factors, general economic conditions etc etc. Also ther are literally thousands and thousands of " expert" analysts publishing their opinions daily. Options are praced on volatility measures etc etc.
So football match prices are based on what ? Some historical averages.
A few of their last matches ?
Is it really all that comparable.
Fair enough.
But shares are priced on P/E mutiples etc,general industry factors, general economic conditions etc etc. Also ther are literally thousands and thousands of " expert" analysts publishing their opinions daily. Options are praced on volatility measures etc etc.
So football match prices are based on what ? Some historical averages.
A few of their last matches ?
Is it really all that comparable.
There's a reason Walters and co needed computers and several experts in different fields to beat the crudest of Vegas lines as consistently as they did.
I'm sure you know this and are simply trying to cause a debate. There a are plenty of glaring similarities between assessing the price of both. That's all I'm willing to be drawn into on the matter though.
I'm sure you know this and are simply trying to cause a debate. There a are plenty of glaring similarities between assessing the price of both. That's all I'm willing to be drawn into on the matter though.
BettingQuant, I'm not sure you're missing anything.
My suggestion was that bf wd be opening themselves up to a liability if they were standing more as a conventional bm offering 1) prices that people were accustomed to i.e. the usual odds table increments and 2) in quantities that bettors wd also be happy w/ across all runners.
The reason why I was not delighted at the poss. of the operator offering a sliced-and-diced book at less than reciprocal prices was summed up by this comment of yrs:
Also some of these prices are not on the odds ladder, so betfair could earn some revenue (i.e. skim) by offering the next price down.
To me this is money that layers/bettors don't win, but I think that feck for one might be sympathetic to yr proposal for swelling liquidity. Imv, though, the numbers will get harder to wrok to show backing odds improvements in 16-runner horse races where only 5 trade in single figures and liquidity is thin on the outsiders.
My suggestion was that bf wd be opening themselves up to a liability if they were standing more as a conventional bm offering 1) prices that people were accustomed to i.e. the usual odds table increments and 2) in quantities that bettors wd also be happy w/ across all runners.
The reason why I was not delighted at the poss. of the operator offering a sliced-and-diced book at less than reciprocal prices was summed up by this comment of yrs:
Also some of these prices are not on the odds ladder, so betfair could earn some revenue (i.e. skim) by offering the next price down.
To me this is money that layers/bettors don't win, but I think that feck for one might be sympathetic to yr proposal for swelling liquidity. Imv, though, the numbers will get harder to wrok to show backing odds improvements in 16-runner horse races where only 5 trade in single figures and liquidity is thin on the outsiders.
No I don't know anything about Walters.
But thanks for the tip. It's the first one anyone has provided on this matter ( to me at least).
I'll research into it.
But thanks for the tip. It's the first one anyone has provided on this matter ( to me at least).
I'll research into it.
dont casinos run with a theoretical house advantage of 5.xx% on the games and with that generate the huge profits they have?...whats the difference between them and Betfair other than their operating costs are huge comparatively with running a site?
Which brings us to the question, is BF an exchange or is it a book/market maker?
Part of BF's problem is they want to be an exchange, but operate with the financial model of a bookmaker because its a lot more profitable. The proverbial 'having their cake and eating it'.
I'll also point out to those who fuss about BF taking positions on the exchange. It won't happen to any significant degree, because its fraught with risks, opens them up to insider fraud and will be punished by the stock market because of the risks.
Which brings us to the question, is BF an exchange or is it a book/market maker?
Part of BF's problem is they want to be an exchange, but operate with the financial model of a bookmaker because its a lot more profitable. The proverbial 'having their cake and eating it'.
I'll also point out to those who fuss about BF taking positions on the exchange. It won't happen to any significant degree, because its fraught with risks, opens them up to insider fraud and will be punished by the stock market because of the risks.
Lori
Having now done some cursory research on Billy Walters and the Computer Group, I can't say that there would appear to be any large relevance to the questions I have raised on the whole theory of comparing sports betting trading to stock or commodity mkt. trading.
For sure, they used computers to analyse stats to try to come up with " value " bets. Which apparently they did spectacularly successfully, but probably mostly in the early days when the mkt. makers were not as sophisticated as they are now.
I see no references to them trading in and out of pre-match lines, which is effectively what traders on here claim to do successfully.
They were just position takers when they saw they thought they had more than a 1.5 point advantage.
I still remain to be convinced that people who claim they are successful currency/commodity/option/stock day traders can translate these skills into sports betting scenarios.
I just don't see the parallels.
But I suppose you could thus say that just because of this prime admittance of my apparent blindness to the obvious, I am highly unlikely to become one of these types of punters.
Having now done some cursory research on Billy Walters and the Computer Group, I can't say that there would appear to be any large relevance to the questions I have raised on the whole theory of comparing sports betting trading to stock or commodity mkt. trading.
For sure, they used computers to analyse stats to try to come up with " value " bets. Which apparently they did spectacularly successfully, but probably mostly in the early days when the mkt. makers were not as sophisticated as they are now.
I see no references to them trading in and out of pre-match lines, which is effectively what traders on here claim to do successfully.
They were just position takers when they saw they thought they had more than a 1.5 point advantage.
I still remain to be convinced that people who claim they are successful currency/commodity/option/stock day traders can translate these skills into sports betting scenarios.
I just don't see the parallels.
But I suppose you could thus say that just because of this prime admittance of my apparent blindness to the obvious, I am highly unlikely to become one of these types of punters.
I still remain to be convinced that people who claim they are successful currency/commodity/option/stock day traders can translate these skills into sports betting scenarios.
It would be a similar skillset, I'm not sure success in one would instantly translate to success in the other. I can understand the ins and outs of many different NFL factors in the line, but I don't know crap about the economic factors that are involved in the future of the BP share price or something.
If someone wanted to move from one to the other it would involve a lot of work, and I'm not sure why they would. That doesn't mean there aren't a lot of paralells, but just because I can trade NFL successfully doesn't mean I can trade horses, let alone oil futures.
It does mean that if I tried to learn to trade coffee futures, and some random maths guy who had never left the classroom tried the same, I'd have an advantage though, but I don't think it means success is guaranteed.
It would be a similar skillset, I'm not sure success in one would instantly translate to success in the other. I can understand the ins and outs of many different NFL factors in the line, but I don't know crap about the economic factors that are involved in the future of the BP share price or something.
If someone wanted to move from one to the other it would involve a lot of work, and I'm not sure why they would. That doesn't mean there aren't a lot of paralells, but just because I can trade NFL successfully doesn't mean I can trade horses, let alone oil futures.
It does mean that if I tried to learn to trade coffee futures, and some random maths guy who had never left the classroom tried the same, I'd have an advantage though, but I don't think it means success is guaranteed.
If the Walters stuff doesn't show you how they're comparable in terms of pricing mechanisms though, I'm at a loss to try any harder.
Lori
People on here talk about trading in and out of the betting prices based on some sort of analysis of what the correct " absolute value" should or should not be.
Trading on financial mkts. usually has nothing to do with the "absolute value" of the financial instrument being traded. It is usually to do with momentary arbitrage opportunities caused by certain stock or commodity prices getting out of comparative alignment with each other or other general market indicators.
However there is no general market per se in betting prices. Each event is its own independent mkt. You can't arbitrage between a match price on one event and another match or general market indicators. ( And of course I'm not talking here about abitraging between bookies and BF, because that is not the sort of trading people on here claim to be doing successfully).
So what are people doing then.?
They're just guessing on absolute price movements. Nothing more, nothing less.
Some are presumably more skilled I suppose at this guessing game.
But the skill set has nothing to do with financial trading strategies or techniques elsewhere, that's for sure.
Again I repeat if I'm wrong, just tell me where I'm wrong.
Don't just say ad nauseam that I'm arguing for argument's sake.
I genuinely do not understand the succesful trading claims made by most on here.
Btw it looks like you sleep at even odder hours than me perhaps.
People on here talk about trading in and out of the betting prices based on some sort of analysis of what the correct " absolute value" should or should not be.
Trading on financial mkts. usually has nothing to do with the "absolute value" of the financial instrument being traded. It is usually to do with momentary arbitrage opportunities caused by certain stock or commodity prices getting out of comparative alignment with each other or other general market indicators.
However there is no general market per se in betting prices. Each event is its own independent mkt. You can't arbitrage between a match price on one event and another match or general market indicators. ( And of course I'm not talking here about abitraging between bookies and BF, because that is not the sort of trading people on here claim to be doing successfully).
So what are people doing then.?
They're just guessing on absolute price movements. Nothing more, nothing less.
Some are presumably more skilled I suppose at this guessing game.
But the skill set has nothing to do with financial trading strategies or techniques elsewhere, that's for sure.
Again I repeat if I'm wrong, just tell me where I'm wrong.
Don't just say ad nauseam that I'm arguing for argument's sake.
I genuinely do not understand the succesful trading claims made by most on here.
Btw it looks like you sleep at even odder hours than me perhaps.
Trading on football mkts. usually has nothing to do with the "absolute value" of the selection being traded. It is usually to do with momentary arbitrage opportunities caused by certain market or selection prices getting out of comparative alignment with each other or other general market indicators.
p.s. As has been pointed out a gazillion times, anyone that trades successfully is getting value.
Investor
The Walter/Computer Group got value in the early days because they were pretty much the only people seriously using computer power to analyse all inputs.
Those days are far gone.
Now it's just one man's guess against another's.
Don't kid yourself otherwise.
Your thrd to last post is absolute rubbish imo.
The Walter/Computer Group got value in the early days because they were pretty much the only people seriously using computer power to analyse all inputs.
Those days are far gone.
Now it's just one man's guess against another's.
Don't kid yourself otherwise.
Your thrd to last post is absolute rubbish imo.
Anyway Investor, if nothing else I'm gonna get you on plagiarism.
FINE AS FROG HAIR Joined: 12 Mar 07
Replies: 819 19 Oct 10 07:18
I genuinely do not understand the succesful trading claims made by most on here.
FINE AS FROG HAIR
Joined: 12 Mar 07
Replies: 819 19 Oct 10 09:42
Your thrd to last post is absolute rubbish imo.
IN some of your posts you don't understand much and in some you're suddenly an expert.
Replies: 819 19 Oct 10 07:18
I genuinely do not understand the succesful trading claims made by most on here.
FINE AS FROG HAIR
Joined: 12 Mar 07
Replies: 819 19 Oct 10 09:42
Your thrd to last post is absolute rubbish imo.
IN some of your posts you don't understand much and in some you're suddenly an expert.
Still the usual replies from the usual suspects.
I'm beginning to believe that none of you out there really understands what you are saying you're doing, when you "trade" in sports betting prices.
And I thought it was just me who didn't understand.
I'm beginning to believe that none of you out there really understands what you are saying you're doing, when you "trade" in sports betting prices.
And I thought it was just me who didn't understand.
And btw I don't regard closing out a position trade at some totally unpredictable profit or loss as "trading" in the remotest sense of the word.
look FROG HAIR i don't know whats your problem but you need to put your ego aside and be a bit more mature in your replies (because by now im quite sure you're pretty young)
this thread could be quite an interesting read but you're turning it into a personal stuff and its really not helping
my point is, i dont know you or "The Management" but for you to say that a guy that only posted 135 times here and has been here since 2000 (i say you were probably 12 by then maybe even less) doesnt know what is talking about just because he is firmely against the PC, is to me typical of our current youth arrogant stance, which is, we've never done anything but we read about it so consider it DONE AND DUSTED
by having this attitude people wont be very keen on starting an argument with you, simple
this thread could be quite an interesting read but you're turning it into a personal stuff and its really not helping
my point is, i dont know you or "The Management" but for you to say that a guy that only posted 135 times here and has been here since 2000 (i say you were probably 12 by then maybe even less) doesnt know what is talking about just because he is firmely against the PC, is to me typical of our current youth arrogant stance, which is, we've never done anything but we read about it so consider it DONE AND DUSTED
by having this attitude people wont be very keen on starting an argument with you, simple
OK folks I give up on the " trading" questions.
I'm obviously not going to elicit any useful, constructive replies from any of you.
I will give the benefit of the doubt to a few of you( but a very very small few) that you probably do have some good answers as to why you are doing what you call " trading", but you are sitting on such answers tighter than a rat's arse, inorder not to give your game away. Understandable. But why not just come out and say so.
To the rest of you ( which will be most of you) you have no real earthly idea about what you are trying to do in your "trading" activities. And to be brutally honest you're all just slowly but surely eroding your capital eventually down to zero, due to the commission you're paying and the negative buy/sell spreads.
So end of.
Phew. Groans of relief everywhere, including here.
Now on the original subject matter of the PC.
I have stated my beliefs quite clearly on this and see no reason to repeat it for the nth time. Or do you really? No I didn't think so.
Again groans of relief.
I'm obviously not going to elicit any useful, constructive replies from any of you.
I will give the benefit of the doubt to a few of you( but a very very small few) that you probably do have some good answers as to why you are doing what you call " trading", but you are sitting on such answers tighter than a rat's arse, inorder not to give your game away. Understandable. But why not just come out and say so.
To the rest of you ( which will be most of you) you have no real earthly idea about what you are trying to do in your "trading" activities. And to be brutally honest you're all just slowly but surely eroding your capital eventually down to zero, due to the commission you're paying and the negative buy/sell spreads.
So end of.
Phew. Groans of relief everywhere, including here.
Now on the original subject matter of the PC.
I have stated my beliefs quite clearly on this and see no reason to repeat it for the nth time. Or do you really? No I didn't think so.
Again groans of relief.
Lusitano
Your keen observation certainly makes me feel young if nothing else.
So thank you for that.
Your keen observation certainly makes me feel young if nothing else.
So thank you for that.
You were given an answer which was as accurate as you're going to get and your reply was that it was absolute rubbish.
FAFH, Ask them to give you an example of a profitable short term trade that a) doesn't involve taking advantage of the market maker cheat in one of the flies-round-sh1te markets, b) doesn't involve some gambler rushing to the toilet with diarrhea and c) supplies liquidity to gamblers. That usually strikes them dumb. If it doesn't they usually end up claiming that ticket touts create extra seating at sell-out concerts.
Ah the good old ticket tout.The old ones are the best Feck and boy don`t you repeat them enough.Still no luck having that chip removed I see.
And, just like those who went before him, in steps frames with his striped blazer playing the man because he's unable to play the point.
Now it's just one man's guess against another's.
Don't kid yourself otherwise.
At that point, the conversation becomes pointless. It's been fun though.
Don't kid yourself otherwise.
At that point, the conversation becomes pointless. It's been fun though.
The Management, I was aware from an earlier post you weren't pro-trader but you do seem to have thrown your hat into the ring with them since then. As I said in another thread, if you've been wrongly convicted of murder joining a campaign by murderers to make the max sentence for the crime a 2s/6d fine is not the best way to deal with it.
The pre-pc situation certainly encouraged trading as it virtually gave them a free lunch but I agree they're still in pole position. They can even take as long out as they want and return on almost identical terms whereas a gambleron 2% who takes a lengthy period off is expected to return on 250% worse terms. Incredulously, the bf boffin who come up with the pc wanted to let tote bets count towards pc (meaning pc payers would get up to 15% cashback on tote bets while big losers and winners paying up to 100% of their profits in commission would get nothing). He was eventually overruled, a decision that probably cost certain other bookmakers a lot of money.
FINE AS FROG HAIR Joined: 12 Mar 07
Replies: 823 19 Oct 10 09:42
Investor
[...]
Now it's just one man's guess against another's.
Don't kid yourself otherwise.
Your thrd to last post is absolute rubbish imo.
You're not really qualified to say that. It's a case of "I don't know how it works so it's rubbish". Despite being a little facetious I actually do make money doing exactly that!
I'm not even sure if you actually believe what you say, or that you are simply making these provocative statements to encourage people to give you information.
I agree with you that trading on betting exchanges is nothing like trading on financial exchanges, but I think the reasons for this have nothing to do with those that you mentioned.
Replies: 823 19 Oct 10 09:42
Investor
[...]
Now it's just one man's guess against another's.
Don't kid yourself otherwise.
Your thrd to last post is absolute rubbish imo.
You're not really qualified to say that. It's a case of "I don't know how it works so it's rubbish". Despite being a little facetious I actually do make money doing exactly that!
I'm not even sure if you actually believe what you say, or that you are simply making these provocative statements to encourage people to give you information.
I agree with you that trading on betting exchanges is nothing like trading on financial exchanges, but I think the reasons for this have nothing to do with those that you mentioned.
Investor
In case you missed my last post, I've moved on resigned to learning nothing of real import on the matter of "trading".
But rest assured, I do believe in everything I post.
Now that is not the same as saying that I believe that absolutely everything I post is correct. Despite accusations of intellectual arrogance, I'm not at all that way inclined .
But I believe in my statements up to the point to when I am clearly and unambiguously proven wrong.
Imo that did not occur in any form or manner on here on this particular topic.
As I said in my last closing, this could be well be because those in the know are keeping their secrets close to their chests.
You could well be one of them.
I just do not know for sure, that's all.
In case you missed my last post, I've moved on resigned to learning nothing of real import on the matter of "trading".
But rest assured, I do believe in everything I post.
Now that is not the same as saying that I believe that absolutely everything I post is correct. Despite accusations of intellectual arrogance, I'm not at all that way inclined .
But I believe in my statements up to the point to when I am clearly and unambiguously proven wrong.
Imo that did not occur in any form or manner on here on this particular topic.
As I said in my last closing, this could be well be because those in the know are keeping their secrets close to their chests.
You could well be one of them.
I just do not know for sure, that's all.
im going to use your approach FAFH
my statement "ITS IMPOSSIBLE TO MAKE MONEY HERE!"
now using FAFH approach "But I believe in my statements up to the point to when I am clearly and unambiguously proven wrong"
and then if nothing happens i finish in style, again FAFH earlier statement "To the rest of you ( which will be most of you) you have no real earthly idea about what you are trying to do in your "trading" activities. And to be brutally honest you're all just slowly but surely eroding your capital eventually down to zero, due to the commission you're paying and the negative buy/sell spreads"
LOL
my statement "ITS IMPOSSIBLE TO MAKE MONEY HERE!"
now using FAFH approach "But I believe in my statements up to the point to when I am clearly and unambiguously proven wrong"
and then if nothing happens i finish in style, again FAFH earlier statement "To the rest of you ( which will be most of you) you have no real earthly idea about what you are trying to do in your "trading" activities. And to be brutally honest you're all just slowly but surely eroding your capital eventually down to zero, due to the commission you're paying and the negative buy/sell spreads"
LOL
That's fair FAFH. It is not in my interests to help show whether you are clearly and unambiguously wrong, as that would require me going into to much detail regarding what exactly I'm doing.
One final thing I'll say: Imagine you have found a way to identify value selections in the football correct score market.
There are two bettors, each finds 6 value selections every 50 matches, with an equal expected value.
Bettor one finds these six value selections in six different markets.
Bettor two finds prices out of line accross one correct score market and finds all six value selections there.
If you understand why bettor two's approach has a clear advantage over that of better one, you can understand the benefit of trading over betting, even though strictly speaking there is no trading involved in the above example.
One final thing I'll say: Imagine you have found a way to identify value selections in the football correct score market.
There are two bettors, each finds 6 value selections every 50 matches, with an equal expected value.
Bettor one finds these six value selections in six different markets.
Bettor two finds prices out of line accross one correct score market and finds all six value selections there.
If you understand why bettor two's approach has a clear advantage over that of better one, you can understand the benefit of trading over betting, even though strictly speaking there is no trading involved in the above example.
I understand that Investor.
Let's just leave it there.
If I can't make the leap then so be it.
A fair attempt at my style Lusitano, but not quite there I'm afraid to say.
Anyway to quote you " It's all done and dusted".
Time to move on to another day another subject.
Let's just leave it there.
If I can't make the leap then so be it.
A fair attempt at my style Lusitano, but not quite there I'm afraid to say.
Anyway to quote you " It's all done and dusted".
Time to move on to another day another subject.
You know Investor it's quite pertinent that you should have posted the example you just did.
Recently I started another thread asking if there was some agreed mathematical formula for working out the changes in correct score prices while a game was in progress.
I essentially got no meaningful responses.
In retrospect maybe the really smart people were just deliberately clamming up on answering that question as well, for exactly the same reasons I've come to on here.?
And also most punters probably have no idea and just approach it all on a seat of the pants basis, that is educated guesses at the best, and pure guesses at the worst.
Recently I started another thread asking if there was some agreed mathematical formula for working out the changes in correct score prices while a game was in progress.
I essentially got no meaningful responses.
In retrospect maybe the really smart people were just deliberately clamming up on answering that question as well, for exactly the same reasons I've come to on here.?
And also most punters probably have no idea and just approach it all on a seat of the pants basis, that is educated guesses at the best, and pure guesses at the worst.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539