General Betting
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Edge this edge that, pretty much, that is all anyone talks about on here when saying that is the way to win. But what is an edge?
I have made money for the last 4 years gambling on premiership footie (small stakes) with about a 12% ROI. What is my edge I have no idea, I just pick games where IN MY OPINION the odds of an event happening are not correct.
Example
City v Fulham Draw on Sunday I thought 3.8 was too high on the draw as I reckoned that game would finish a draw roughly 30% -35% of the time. So a value bet for me.
But do I have an edge or am I just lucky? Can you have an edge which is solely based on your own opinion?
So an someone define to me what an edge is and is it so subjective as your own personal opinion?
I have made money for the last 4 years gambling on premiership footie (small stakes) with about a 12% ROI. What is my edge I have no idea, I just pick games where IN MY OPINION the odds of an event happening are not correct.
Example
City v Fulham Draw on Sunday I thought 3.8 was too high on the draw as I reckoned that game would finish a draw roughly 30% -35% of the time. So a value bet for me.
But do I have an edge or am I just lucky? Can you have an edge which is solely based on your own opinion?
So an someone define to me what an edge is and is it so subjective as your own personal opinion?
Show More
Thread on this a month or so ago....have brought it back to top (How do you find an edge)
Sounds like your edge is your knowledge ie your ability to pick games where the odds are not correct and exploit this profitably over time.
Sounds like your edge is your knowledge ie your ability to pick games where the odds are not correct and exploit this profitably over time.
The funny thing about the draw in football matches is that it always looks too high. Yet it cannot be because if you backed all matches to finish as draws, you would lose about 20% of your bank.
If you can forecast the draws and show a profit over a long period of time, then you must have an edge and that edge must be your opinion.
If you can forecast the draws and show a profit over a long period of time, then you must have an edge and that edge must be your opinion.
The simple definition is that an edge is an ability to match bets whose odds do not reflect the true probability of the event occurring.
As has been pointed out many times here, you can't make money long-term here if you're not finding value. An edge is the capacity to find (and match) at value. In your case, your superior knowledge of football markets seems to be providing you with that capacity.
As has been pointed out many times here, you can't make money long-term here if you're not finding value. An edge is the capacity to find (and match) at value. In your case, your superior knowledge of football markets seems to be providing you with that capacity.
The simple definition is that an edge is an ability to match bets whose odds do not reflect the true probability of the event occurring.
. . or rather, whose odds reflect a lower than true probability . . (in the case of back bets)
. . or rather, whose odds reflect a lower than true probability . . (in the case of back bets)
Cheers I will look at that other thread. I like this comment "is the capacity to find (and match) at value" sums it up quite well but i suppose you then get the questions what is value
How many bets have you had in the four years you have shown a 12% ROI? It's an exceptional long-term return.
average of about 40 bets a year,so far this year had 23. I try to only bet when I am 100% confiedent I have everything in my favour.
the draw in the Man City v Fulham match was a bit of a certainty with hindsight
Hello there SquirrelJ. I have about quick question based on your example. You mention that you just pick games which in your opinion you think the prices are wrong.
All through the week the draw price was 4.1 or more on the Man C v Fulham game. On Saturday it was 4.3 and even on Sunday morning it was 4.1. Why didn't you back it then, why wait til it was 3.8?
Just out of interest if you had backed the draw for £100 for every single EPL game this season, then you would be between £1500-£2000 up at the moment after taking into account commission at 5%
All through the week the draw price was 4.1 or more on the Man C v Fulham game. On Saturday it was 4.3 and even on Sunday morning it was 4.1. Why didn't you back it then, why wait til it was 3.8?
Just out of interest if you had backed the draw for £100 for every single EPL game this season, then you would be between £1500-£2000 up at the moment after taking into account commission at 5%
U.A., Magician backed the draw in all EPL matches a couple of seasons ago because he thought the prices were too high, I think for 5k per match, not sure, but I don't know how he finished up, perhaps someone will come along and tell us...
Edge..You think you know me
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpRe1XDSEpw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpRe1XDSEpw
Trevh/Contrarian,
Yes he was at least £ 100k up at the end.
His reason for placing the bets was 'not that the draw prices were too high; more that there had been an unusually number of high 'no draws' in the Premiership that season. There were several articles in the RP about it with comments from Hills/Lads etc.
His bets were 'fun' bets to see if it continued. It didn't and he won a fair whack.
Yes he was at least £ 100k up at the end.
His reason for placing the bets was 'not that the draw prices were too high; more that there had been an unusually number of high 'no draws' in the Premiership that season. There were several articles in the RP about it with comments from Hills/Lads etc.
His bets were 'fun' bets to see if it continued. It didn't and he won a fair whack.
He did what is known in the stock market as "Reverting to the Mean"
He did what is known in the stock market as "Reverting to the Mean"
fancy way of saying draws were due ?
fancy way of saying draws were due ?
How can football matches revert to the mean? That's like saying 10 blacks have just come up so I'm going to back red for the next 10 spins. It's illogical to back draws just because there's been few, unless the draw prices have drifted, which I would have thought was his reasoning.
Lifted from the net.
"Risk and Reversion to the Mean
If you are not using reversion to the mean in your trading then you are a fool. In the same breath however it must be realized that risk management is even more important and that you will lose money if you do not practice proper risk management.
By using sound position sizing models you can better avoid blowing up. By knowing the odds of your strategy you can better gauge how much to risk and when to risk it.
The difference between a great trader and a bad trader is that the bad trader thinks he is right but the great trader assumes that he only has a 50/50 chance of being right or wrong. Because of this he does more to protect himself from large losses."
In a nutshell, reverting to the mean in stock market parlance refers to the % value of the dividend per share as
to its price. The theory is that on average the mean dividend of all shares is approx 2.7%. If a stock is paying a
dividend of 6% or more it becomes a good buy, if the % stays high you are getting a good return.
If on the other hand if it reverts to the mean (the % ratio dividend to share price) it means that the share price
goes up. Which is win, win for the buyer.
"Risk and Reversion to the Mean
If you are not using reversion to the mean in your trading then you are a fool. In the same breath however it must be realized that risk management is even more important and that you will lose money if you do not practice proper risk management.
By using sound position sizing models you can better avoid blowing up. By knowing the odds of your strategy you can better gauge how much to risk and when to risk it.
The difference between a great trader and a bad trader is that the bad trader thinks he is right but the great trader assumes that he only has a 50/50 chance of being right or wrong. Because of this he does more to protect himself from large losses."
In a nutshell, reverting to the mean in stock market parlance refers to the % value of the dividend per share as
to its price. The theory is that on average the mean dividend of all shares is approx 2.7%. If a stock is paying a
dividend of 6% or more it becomes a good buy, if the % stays high you are getting a good return.
If on the other hand if it reverts to the mean (the % ratio dividend to share price) it means that the share price
goes up. Which is win, win for the buyer.
Gambler's Fallacy - you are recognized as a fool if you think along these lines
Reversion to the Mean - you are recognized as a 'good trader' if you employ this
something does not add up imo
Reversion to the Mean - you are recognized as a 'good trader' if you employ this
something does not add up imo
Definition of a bad winner: someone who has won, therefore he must have have an edge, and doesn't believe luck was involved
Defintion of a good loser: someone who has lost but believes he was just unlucky (because he knows he has an edge)
Good players recognise that chance always plays a part; bad players don't.
Defintion of a good loser: someone who has lost but believes he was just unlucky (because he knows he has an edge)
Good players recognise that chance always plays a part; bad players don't.
good thread. was Magician a bit of a betfair leg end then?
U.A.
Quite simply I work as a living and so sometimes if busy at work it can be Sat morning before I get to look at a bet. This instance I think it was Sunday dinner when I started analysing that game, hence the lesser odds. In an ideal world I would be ready with my selections Thurs/Fri night.
A few years ago I realised that to be a successful gambler for 50 plus years is remarkable achievement, so concentrated on my career instead. My masterplan if you like would be to get to a stage where I could maybe pay the mortgage take the family on holiday every year with my gambling winnings. I don’t think I could ever stop gambling as it seems to be in my blood.
Maybe the draw in the EPL is overpriced, personally I think it is the top are a lot more inconsistent and their main aim seems to be the champions league. Equally a lot of other teams are only interested in staying in the league so will setup for a draw a lot of the time. This coupled with that fact that a lot of teams in the league are of a similar standard and play quite negative football.
Quite simply I work as a living and so sometimes if busy at work it can be Sat morning before I get to look at a bet. This instance I think it was Sunday dinner when I started analysing that game, hence the lesser odds. In an ideal world I would be ready with my selections Thurs/Fri night.
A few years ago I realised that to be a successful gambler for 50 plus years is remarkable achievement, so concentrated on my career instead. My masterplan if you like would be to get to a stage where I could maybe pay the mortgage take the family on holiday every year with my gambling winnings. I don’t think I could ever stop gambling as it seems to be in my blood.
Maybe the draw in the EPL is overpriced, personally I think it is the top are a lot more inconsistent and their main aim seems to be the champions league. Equally a lot of other teams are only interested in staying in the league so will setup for a draw a lot of the time. This coupled with that fact that a lot of teams in the league are of a similar standard and play quite negative football.
maybe we should all back the draw for every EPL game left
I think the law of large numbers is getting mixed up with reversion to the mean, it is not applicable to the draw in a football match people
The reason Magician piled in was because the bookies (and Betfair draw prices) had increased due to the unusually low amount of draws in the early part of last season's Premiership.
The draws, subsequently did "revert-to-mean" (note, not over compensate, just went back to the usual average) and thus the prices generally on offer were for a period of time, value.
The prices soon "reverted-to-mean" as well though ...
The draws, subsequently did "revert-to-mean" (note, not over compensate, just went back to the usual average) and thus the prices generally on offer were for a period of time, value.
The prices soon "reverted-to-mean" as well though ...
There was a reasoning behind the fewer draws that year.
Ave goals per game were up a fair bit from the previous year. More goals =less draws.
Was probably just a blip looking back though.
Ave goals per game were up a fair bit from the previous year. More goals =less draws.
Was probably just a blip looking back though.
That's fair enough SquirrelJ just a shame you missed out on a higher price. With regards to your opening post I have a situation and a question for you.
A few years ago 2007/08 i decided to try and predict what the EPL game prices should be for as many games as I could before I looked at the prices on BF. I used an overall percentage of 107-108 (similar to bookmakers). My basis for game pricing was sitting there and just thinking of the prices from the top of my head. Just what I thought they should be. No research or analysis just what I thought I would price them at.
If all my prices (home, draw and away) were lower than those on BF (last recorded price before game kick-off) then I assumed that i had priced it correctly, if not then I had priced it incorrectly.
I did the same in 2008/09 and for this year as well, (don't know why I didn't 2009/10).
I recently looked back at all of my records and what would have happened if I had layed every outcome for a stake of £100 where I had priced it higher than BF. If I had then I would be around £2k up after taking into account 5% commission.
My question back to you is do you think I have an edge or do you think I am just lucky? Whatever answer you give for me is the answer for you as well. I would be interested as to what you think.
By the way does anyone else do anything vaguely similar to this?
A few years ago 2007/08 i decided to try and predict what the EPL game prices should be for as many games as I could before I looked at the prices on BF. I used an overall percentage of 107-108 (similar to bookmakers). My basis for game pricing was sitting there and just thinking of the prices from the top of my head. Just what I thought they should be. No research or analysis just what I thought I would price them at.
If all my prices (home, draw and away) were lower than those on BF (last recorded price before game kick-off) then I assumed that i had priced it correctly, if not then I had priced it incorrectly.
I did the same in 2008/09 and for this year as well, (don't know why I didn't 2009/10).
I recently looked back at all of my records and what would have happened if I had layed every outcome for a stake of £100 where I had priced it higher than BF. If I had then I would be around £2k up after taking into account 5% commission.
My question back to you is do you think I have an edge or do you think I am just lucky? Whatever answer you give for me is the answer for you as well. I would be interested as to what you think.
By the way does anyone else do anything vaguely similar to this?
Yes UA, i expect plenty do, but why price to 107% 
, surely better to do it at 100%
I have a ratings table that converts to prices at 100%, some people may even do it to 95% just to be careful
, surely better to do it at 100%I have a ratings table that converts to prices at 100%, some people may even do it to 95% just to be careful
Depends how many games you did i suppose. If there are a lot of games in that sample then maybe you do have an edge over the bookies. it also depends how well you know your football. Someone who knows little about football I would say was lucky, someone with some knowledge i would say was possibly (dependent on sample size) onto something.
I think a lot of people read too much into the bookies always win. I imagine by shopping around with your bets you can average 5% - 10% better prices than available with some bookies. This to some people could be enough to give them an edge. The internet as in my opinion made it easier to beat the bookies, far more data and options available. This coupled with the ability to be more selective could easily translate into a 6% - 8% edge over a long period of time.
With me at the moment I think I have an edge will this last maybe not as it’s all very subjective, it’s not a system based on facts and figures. If I have too much to drink tonight will my bets tomorrow be more reckless than if I wasn’t hungover?
I think a lot of people read too much into the bookies always win. I imagine by shopping around with your bets you can average 5% - 10% better prices than available with some bookies. This to some people could be enough to give them an edge. The internet as in my opinion made it easier to beat the bookies, far more data and options available. This coupled with the ability to be more selective could easily translate into a 6% - 8% edge over a long period of time.
With me at the moment I think I have an edge will this last maybe not as it’s all very subjective, it’s not a system based on facts and figures. If I have too much to drink tonight will my bets tomorrow be more reckless than if I wasn’t hungover?
Hello Tobermory, the reason for 107-108% is that I am pricing it as a bookie, as exchanges don't need to worry about pricing up markets (I know there are exceptions).
When i do it at that price it is then easier for me to say that i have done it incorrectly just by virtue of whether there are any arbitrage opportunities between myself and BF. If I did it at 100% it would be a little more difficult for me to say "yep i priced that one up ok" or "no i got it wrong". It also helps me highlight where my opinion is significantly different to what the actual market opinion is.
Anyway it's only a bit of fun, i don't bet from it.
SquirrelJ - my sample size so far is just over 300 games. For what it's worth i believe my results are down to luck but it does get me thinking...
When i do it at that price it is then easier for me to say that i have done it incorrectly just by virtue of whether there are any arbitrage opportunities between myself and BF. If I did it at 100% it would be a little more difficult for me to say "yep i priced that one up ok" or "no i got it wrong". It also helps me highlight where my opinion is significantly different to what the actual market opinion is.
Anyway it's only a bit of fun, i don't bet from it.
SquirrelJ - my sample size so far is just over 300 games. For what it's worth i believe my results are down to luck but it does get me thinking...
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539