But in Lori's point how often do things work out so neatly and you can get such clearly quantifiable biased odds. Remember in a coin toss, assuming the coin is not out of balnace, you know exactly what the correct odds should be.In a sports event, is that ever the case ?
And in Kukken's case how often do punters trade out simply on a short term emotional basis.

I think it's fairly obvious that succesful traders are the ones getting good execution most of the time, so they are more likely to be on the other side of bets placed at silly prices on an emotional basis. The "most people on here" that kukken refers to are losing money.

If someone is betting at stupid prices, someone on the other side is making money. They will be getting 'quantifiably biased odds'. Do you think that the guys on the other side are just getting lucky, or do you think that the same select few are exploiting this over and over again?

Nothinf personal of course Avocado.

I haven't had to put on a suit and tie and go into some boring office building for the last 30 yyears or so and you have had to ?

I am employed by La Cosa Nostra.

I think I'll have to start clamming up on what I do or do not think Trevh.
But I'm a pre-match position taker and I let everything run to the bitter end.

Frog i also let my bets run rather than trading out. I'm a backer, football match odds only.

Are you solely on w/l/d match results.?
Or do you wager in the other side mkts etc ?

Do u do the goals markets?

What kind of bets do u do?

Where are u located?

FATH: How many people are working with the sophisticated modelling tools necessary to have all the potential trade out scenarios lined up in advance with appropriate pricing trade out analyses done in advance and are therefore able and willing to act totally rationally in the heat of the moment?

There will be a few of them, and they'll be the ones making money.

Ordinary or random betting in general loses to superior judgment or to commission. Winning takes advantage of usually fleeting price anomalies. The circumstances in which these anomalies occur is very often when markets are disrupted or unformed.

I don't think that anyone ever said that a closing-out strategy was preferable to a 'letting run' strategy in the absence of sufficiently accurate pricing. When you say in response to many posters, 'how can you be sure your pricing is so accurate?', it's a reasonable question, but doesn't really touch on your ioriginal q., wh/ had to do w/ whether it is in principle preferable in certain circs. to trade.

I think I'll have to start clamming up on what I do or do not think Trevh.

Oh come on, you're a frog not a clam. You must have an opinion on whether or not "click and win methods" are possible on betfair?

Too many long words. Can we just stick to saying things like "the" and "and" so that I can understand.

I noticed that little slip too, but considered it unworthy of mention, nit picking springs to mind. The essence of what Lori said is the important factor, I think he can be forgiven the rare miscalculation.

My kip was short and sweet.
Askari
I like a lot of what you are saying in your posts.
Can't find much, if anything , to really disagee with. ( I know that's novel in itself).
I manage my exposure by knowing, or at least thinking I know, what my maximum downturn in results is ever likely to be, as a percentage of my last capital peak.
But I am a seriously long term type of system bettor.
My aim was a few years ago to start off with x pounds of capital and by a very systematic method of betting, doing in fact the very same thing every day without fail, try turn to turn it into x * y capital at the end of 5-7 years. I reinvest all profits and gradually increase my bet size in a specific proportion to my last capital peak.
Now without going into show off mode that multiple of y is very, very high when compared to " real " world of financial investing. So logically, you would think or expect that my system must have a proportionately high degree of risk of total loss. But that is not what I'm finding. Sure it has periods of very extended losses, but not outside the parameters I projected at the outset. So far at least.
In fact, well into the pre-planned investing period of 5-7 years. I'm finding the performance generally is spot on to the modelled forecasts I made before starting out, which were based on relatively simplistic extrapolations of historical results.
Obviously my type of approach is the complete anthesis to the short term, event by event trading approach.
My betting style would not be most people's cup of tea, because it is slow, boring and most importantly provides no interim cash flow for somebody to live off, that is if they want to maximize the end return, which of course still might not eventuate. Despite some stupid comments on here to the contrary, I have never claimed to have found an infallible system. In fact even using that word makes me feel extremely nervous and uncomfortable.
So in summary I'm extremely happy and content with what I'm doing.
But it's up and running, doesn't now take up a lot of my time ( I never tinker or change anything at all ) and so hence all my never-ending questions on how and why people trade.
I'm just looking for something else to fill in my betting hours.
And again contrary to public belief, I admit quite freely that my knowledge on the trading aspects of betting is very, very limited.
But I believe that one of my strenghts is that I know what I don't know.
I think many on here, who call themselves full time gamblers, can't necessarily say the same thing.
I do not accept generalised statements from people on here I do not know as statements of fact or even  of proven knowledge.
There are clearly some exceptions, I think most of us would probably agree on who they are.
These are the people I'm trying to draw out, not to steal their secrtes or edges, but just to understand how they approach things and the underlying rationales.
To me that's the only way you can really learn anything about subjects you are not truly familiar with. If there is another way, then please someboddy let me know.
Now to anybody who has bothered to read to the bitter end of this rather long winded post, I would love to have an intelligent, cool and calm debate with you on any or all of the above.
Otherwise get outta my face.

FWIW anyone who quotes numbers to three decimal places needs pulling up on any errors!

Yep, I screwed that up. For some reason I divided the 1.1 by 2 instead of the .1 (and as I knew roughly the number I was expecting I think compounded the error)

I do hope nobody is worried about putting me right, I make many many mistakes in threads, if I notice them I'll put myself right. Not only that, but I'm the first to make a sarcastic response if others mess up!

Lori
I worry about putting you're right.
As you've probably noticed I'm very scared of upsetting anybody on here.
Completely lacking in confidence.
You're up early today .
Not a lot to bet on tady though, soccer wise at least.
But I forget, you're probably trading some US mkt.

Any comments/thoughts on those books I listed in an earlier post ?

I haven't read them, but whenever I've seen bits of maths/gambling/trading/whatever books, or posts about them, they've always been incredibly simplistic.

So my instinct is to say don't bother, but as I've not read them, that's not very fair.

That kind of book makes my stomach turn in general though, they tend to be written by people who think they're way smarter than they actually are IMO. I think it's much more important to reach conclusions on your own than read what other people think.

Frog, if you are looking for any insight from Lori then you are looking in the wrong place. The guy has admitted that he only bets three figure sums on here whereas I regularly bet five figures.

I've not mentioned it before in this thread because I don't really think it's your kind of thing mr. frog, but the book I usually recommend to people who want to gamble is "Moneyball"

I always describe it as "The best book about gambling I've ever read, and it's not about gambling"

It's the (true) story of how a baseball GM made a crap team (Oakland) consistenly competetive despite being under funded.
The reason I always end up mentioning it is that it's about someone thinking in a new way and how he came about that, so it inspires thought rather than teaches old stuff. You do need to know a little about the rules of baseball to get through it, but a simple "baseball for beginners" website would give plenty enough information I believe.

A book that I always completely hammer but that I somehow think you might enjoy is "The smart money" by konik (sp?)

It's the story of one of Billy Walter's runners (Walters is given a different name in the book) and is one of the most self-important dull pieces of rubbish I've ever read. That being said, it seems to touch on some subjects that you like to raise, so if you can wade through Konik's tedium it might give some insight into the "us vs them" mentality of the gambler.

As I've lived that life (smaller scale, no illusions here) since 1993 it didn't impress me at all, and tbh my life is entirely unimpressive, so reading stuff that is very similar was equally unimpressive and disappointing too considering he was in touch with one of the Gods of the industry.