General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 427 comments are related to the topic:
I'm struggling with
I'm struggling with
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 427
|
By:
What price most of us on here immediately google Turing Test before exposing ourselves publicly as ignoramuses.?
Maybe we should perhaps respect Avocado for his honesty and modesty. Just a thought. You know me. Always trying to see the good in people. |
|
By:
Thanks frog. You're right, people should respect me, I'm a great man.
|
|
By:
or maybe he's a bot that asks random questions and insults people.
|
|
By:
lori when have i ever insulted you?
|
|
By:
I thought that was me Lori ?
|
|
By:
Never A. You've asked me some weird questions though
 |
|
By:
what did i ask?
|
|
By:
Stuff like that.
|
|
By:
Stop hijacking the thread with all this highbrow chit chat.
|
|
By:
I'm off out to marks and spencer to get some food
|
|
By:
Don't forget to get some guacamole.
|
|
By:
I think a significant number of people here would know what a Turing Test is, although it doesn't surprise me a bean counter wouldn't know.
|
|
By:
Of course, trading on football is a lot simpler when you see the Spanish football 9 seconds ahead of an 8 second delay.
|
|
By:
How do u get the fast pictures?
|
|
By:
The 1985 winner of the Turing Award probably sums up much of this thread.
|
|
By:
"theft" is a strong word. It's within the rules. Personally I think it is theft and the perpetrators should be castrated. It seems a lot better this season, though is still apparent sometimes. I've not been able to deduce any pattern, other than Real Madrid home games which seem to stick out.
The point I am making, tongue in cheek, is that there are so many other facts more important than "value". However, the market will trend towards "value" as an underlying driving force. But that driving force is a consensus of opinion, not a consensus of fact. |
|
By:
jimmy69, don't be coy. Tell us what he said.
|
|
By:
Look him up...
|
|
By:
No
|
|
By:
Jimmy
|
|
By:
I will own up that before coming on this forum, I didn't know what either a Turing Test of an Ass Candle was. So I have educated myself, to some extent.
However, I can't really see how the Turing Test would be useful to me. |
|
By:
FINE AS FROG HAIR Joined: 12 Mar 07
Replies: 1054 27 Oct 10 07:46 Re-reading Investor's reply at 4.21 on my question about the different views of the value of a price to each counterparty, is his example of when it may be good for both parties actually correct. For sure Player A has totally eliminated his liability on the original lay by trading out at the poor value price, but only in his own books. In the books of BF, that is his account with them, they will still require him to have the required capital sitting in his account to cover the original lay, right up to the time till the event is over and the result is known. They treat the opposing lays and bets as separate wagers up until then and only offset them account wise on the final settlement date. Thus he cannot use the theoretically "freed up " capital in his books until then. So he has gained nothing opportunity cost wise, has he ? Am I correct in this? I'm not a trader remember. He has gained. He gets to utilze his £1k stake. It's true that he does still have to wait for his £1k profit, so he gets to use half of the total. Betfair allow you to use the money you have freed up by trading out, but not any profit, as the whole thing could theoretically be voided, so in a strict sense, when you green up you haven't guaranteed a profit, but you have guaranteed that you can't lose (provided you don't place further trades in the market). |
|
By:
OK I get it now.
I guess I was confused in the original post where you said that he got to use 2000 pounds of capital earlier than the settlement date. All is clear. Thanks again. |
|
By:
Betfairy
I really do like that last closing sentence of yours. " But that driving force will be a consensus of opinion, not a consensus of fact ". Excellently put imo. |
|
By:
Shiraz
I'm clear on your posts now. Once again sorry for my confusions. Thanks to you also. |
|
By:
All good FAFH.
|
|
By:
Regarding earlier argument relating to Market Maker advantage, in a two- possible-outcome event ( example given by Feck N Eejit with tennis,same principal as NFL, snooker etc)i still cannot see how this could beat commission( say the 5% for the average site user with losing account).
EXAMPLE: player A serving at score of 15-15 in game, "correct" price 1.33 to back 1.34 to lay, you put up a lay at 1.28 just before point begins, player A wins the point as anticipated and "correct" price is now 1.30 to back and 1.31 to lay. Even if your lay at 1.28 got taken in an overreaction immediately after the point, surely the 5% commission would negate this, and you are unlikely to lay, lets say, 1.24 in a dramatic overreaction (bar a very volatile moment of play in a womens game more than likely, when odds are close to evens for both players). Am i missing the point?. Or is the poster saying back player A as he wins the point scooping up all the 1.33, 1.32 and 1.31? (still not overcoming commission, and something available surely to just a single big player (or "courtsider" as the tennis folk might say). For arguments sake lets say "correct" price is indeed correct. Surely the typical overreaction that can be layed (just taking tennis as that was the original sport being discussed) is not enough in the long run to beat commission, even if it is a bet at value. Perhaps for those paying 2% this is a percentage that is surmountable this way. What am i missing? (no username puns necessary!). Any explanation? |
|
By:
Should also point out that due to nature of above, laying or backing a couple of ticks better off than "correct" price, if you were then to try to immediately lock in profit at the "correct" price when market has reverted to it, that would mean submitting bet at that exact point that YOU then become the fall guy betting as the next point begins putting yourself at the mercy of whatever happens during the next point!. Should have mentioned that in above post.
|