|
By:
![]() |
|
By:
why would anyone want to back at shorter odds
![]() |
|
By:
You need to use triggered betting, i.e. if the price hits 1.3 fire in a bet at 1.28, but whether you can instruct Geeks Toy to do that I don't know, but on some software it's easy.
|
|
By:
gruss is good for triggered betting, I hear.
|
|
By:
Thanks, I'll take a look at Gruss in that case.
|
|
By:
Yes Gruss will do it but be careful and just play around with small stakes as you are almost certain to not be winning money this way.
|
|
By:
The joy of the exchanges !
|
|
By:
tobermory
17 Apr 11 21:16 why would anyone want to back at shorter odds I would think that he is following a trending theory that assumes no reversal in sufficient instances. More effective I would have thought than backing drifters. |
|
By:
Plenty of examples of where you would rather back at shorter odds than longer odds.
E.g. Would you rather back a horse trained by Barney Curley at 20/1 or evens? |
|
By:
http://racingtraders.co.uk/manual/tools/tools%E2%80%94stop-entry/
|
|
By:
Gruss does have this feature - under their 'conditional betting' section.
I have tried it but wwe suffer very slow internet speeds - wish we hadn't switched to Orange - so as others have said, be very careful. |
|
By:
The problem is this - you set it up to back a horse when the price hits 1.30 as you assume that horse will be the winner. So you fire in a bet and chose 1.20 so you will get matched, but as everybody else is piling on and the one second delay the horse is 1.10 by the time your bet hits the market. It goes on to win and you never got matched.
Ah, but hang on, sometimes the beast gets pipped on the line .......you get matched every time then. |
|
By:
Good summary of the pitfalls, thanks.
|