General Betting
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
03 Jan 11
23:42
Joined:
Date Joined:
12 Mar 07
to say that over a reasonably long sequence of wagers that if you were greening up " good value " bets placed on a strong favourite " good value prices" if and when they shorten considerably, with the lay off prices also being considered to be " good Value ", that the lay off transactions would cumulatively show a loss ?
That is, you're only laying off if and when the price is shortening considerably, so wouldn't it be logical to say that if the market is generally efficient, these favourites should mostly be going on to win ?
That is, you're only laying off if and when the price is shortening considerably, so wouldn't it be logical to say that if the market is generally efficient, these favourites should mostly be going on to win ?
Show More
I'll find out for, you meet me under the clock at midnight
I would say the opposite, if you're greening at value the lays would cumulatively show a profit. Just because the favourites mostly go on to win is relative to the odds, at say 1.1 you would expect them to, but that doesn't make the lay value, it's only value if you greened at 1.1 when the true price was 1.15 etc, but that's just complicating the issue. The bottom line is the greening lays should show a profit if placed at value odds.
They might mostly be going on to win but they could still be good value to Lay
So you're both saying that if I've bet on a favourite at ( say) 1.8 and it shortens to ( say) 1.10, both prices considered to be " good value", it still makes sense to green up always ?
Any difference if this happens pre-off or IP ?
Any difference if this happens pre-off or IP ?
So you're both saying that if I've bet on a favourite at ( say) 1.8 and it shortens to ( say) 1.10, both prices considered to be " good value", it still makes sense to green up always ?
A price isn't value period. It's value either to back OR to lay, not both.
If 1.8 is good value to BACK at, and 1.1 is good value to LAY at, then lay at 1.1. If 1.1 is a value price to lay at, then it will go on to win less than 90.91% of the time.
A price isn't value period. It's value either to back OR to lay, not both.
If 1.8 is good value to BACK at, and 1.1 is good value to LAY at, then lay at 1.1. If 1.1 is a value price to lay at, then it will go on to win less than 90.91% of the time.
I sure wish I understood your point cpfc.
If something shortens to 1.10 from 1.80 ( say) during a game, it doesn't make the original bet at 1.80 any less a good value bet does it?
Probably the contrary.
So why lay it off ?
If something shortens to 1.10 from 1.80 ( say) during a game, it doesn't make the original bet at 1.80 any less a good value bet does it?
Probably the contrary.
So why lay it off ?
If you back a horse at any price because you perceive it to be good value and the price shortens you have a real bargain and would be a real woose
to green up and unlikely in the long term to make as much profit.
Three scenarios where it may be laid at the shorter price ~ 1. If you are purely trading. 2. If circumstances change and it looks like blowing in price.
3. If you have over staked and wish to reduce liability (lay part of the bet off)
to green up and unlikely in the long term to make as much profit.
Three scenarios where it may be laid at the shorter price ~ 1. If you are purely trading. 2. If circumstances change and it looks like blowing in price.
3. If you have over staked and wish to reduce liability (lay part of the bet off)
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539