General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
read that it's calculated different...how?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 85
|
By:
aiui:
bf double the backer's stake and call that the amount matched. so £2 at 99/1 counts as £4 matched. the quack I think count the total liability of both parties as the total matched. so the same bet would count as £101 matched. it's something like that - and the essence is it inflates the seeming liquidity when people back at long odds. but someone'll be along with the right answer in a minute, because there's nothing brings people out on here like a wrong answer. |
|
By:
Boo.
|
|
By:
but does 1.01 matched count as £4 matched to?
|
|
By:
on here, yes.
|
|
By:
i think betduck is the right way...both liability should be total
|
|
By:
I can see arguments both ways, tbh. but it would be handy if they used the same system.
|
|
By:
What's matter which way it's done ?.
It's just a measure. Doesn't change whether you get a bet on or not ?. |
|
By:
yes it a measure....but if you bet 20k at 1.01 it come up as 40k matched on betfair
|
|
By:
Is it whiskey or wine tonight FAFH?
|
|
By:
I was under the impression that BF's was just the backers stake (not double as stated above). If you look at a Market Information table, the matched figure correspond just to the single stake, and the sum of the matched figures for each runner/team give the overall matched figure on the front odds page. Looking at Quack tables seems to be sum of liabilities.
|
|
By:
no viva is correct...
|
|
By:
Find a quiet market and place a minimum stake bet in your currency and see what happens with the total matched amount. Let us know the outcome (it will not longer be an impression)
|
|
By:
yes,that bit I'm confident about.
eg, I've just laid a £5 bet in the taylor correct score market and it's showing as £10. |
|
By:
betfair 10quid at 100 to 1 = 20 matched
purple one 10quid at 100 to =1000 matched |
|
By:
viva el presidente! 21 Jul 11 20:51
bf double the backer's stake and call that the amount matched. so £2 at 99/1 counts as £4 matched. the quack I think count the total liability of both parties as the total matched. so the same bet would count as £101 matched. it's something like that - and the essence is it inflates the seeming liquidity when people back at long odds. but someone'll be along with the right answer in a minute, because there's nothing brings people out on here like a wrong answer. I'll bite viva, as there is nothing I like responding to more than, what I perceive to be, a factually incorrect answer ;) I believe that £2 at 99/1 (price 100) on bdq would actually be displayed as £200 matched at that price in the betting history section. I believe that £2 matched at the price 99 would be displayed as £198. On bq, in the betting history section, I believe that the displayed matched amount at each price equals the price multiplied by the amount placed at that price by backers (to the nearest whole £1). This, as you stated but didn't apply correctly to your example, is in effect the total liability of both parties. |
|
By:
well done corporal jones. I was wondering who'd be the first to spot that.
 |
|
By:
but agian...$10 at 1.01 at betfair is that $20 matched?
|
|
By:
betfair is just the stake x 2....so 1.01 bet for $10 is $20 matched betduck is $11 matched
as more bets are matched on the fav in a 2 horse race, then i believe betfair matched is wrong |
|
By:
Betfair: Total Matched = 2 * Backers Stake
DaQuack: Total Matched = Backers Stake + Layers Liability this could be worked out as Backers Stake + (Stake * (Odds -1) which is also equal to Backers Stake * Backers Odds (much simpler) |
|
By:
At least you can manage to get your emoticons to work correctly Viva!
One of my concerns about the betting history on bq, using the standard web interface, is that there doesn't appear to be any way of calculating the total amount placed on each selection in popular markets. The bdq betting history section only appears to display the last 10 prices matched on each selection. Whilst, in some markets, you can obtain previous matched prices through their link to b**tbetting this doesn't appear to provide any means of calculating the amount matched at those prices. |
|
By:
Well they say that real gamblers will bet on 2 flys on a wall.
And so I suppose real forumites will debate on 2 liquidity measuring formats. At least the former has the potential to be exciting and interesting. I know, I know. Don't fckin read it, if you don't like it. |
|
By:
yes...betduq is the right way to do it Liability + Liability
|
|
By:
Ah I see jt45, it's all about trading on momentum indicators.
My apologies then. Not my bag obviously. |
|
By:
I just don't like that a two quid bet on a 499/1 no hoper creates the same impression of liquidity as 5 £100 bets at evens.
BF's method is better, imo. |
|
By:
What's your angle/interest in all this Viva.
Are you some form of momentum trader ? What do liquidity impressions even mean or matter ?. |
|
By:
not really a momentum trader. but if there's one thing that kills you it's lack of liquidity.
most of the times I lose it's when I get stuck in a market it turns out no one's interested in. exhibit a: superbikes. |
|
By:
Yeah but the real point is that liquidity to you means the ability to get matched ?.
Not some theoretical measure of what volume of trades has been done at what prices at what time. |
|
By:
but it work the other way to Viva...1.01 bet at a stake of $10 come up as a matched bet of $20 on betfair....
|
|
By:
yes, I'm talking about liquidity in two linked senses: activity in a market and availability of money on both sides of the spread at prices that aren't a joke.
|
|
By:
not sure how that's a problem nairda?
|
|
By:
Are you a civil servant nairda ?
|
|
By:
1.01 (all odds on) betfair matched total is inflated.
|
|
By:
viva el presidente!
21 Jul 11 22:45 Joined: 10 Jun 06 | Topic/replies: 8,762 | Blogger: viva el presidente!'s blog I just don't like that a two quid bet on a 499/1 no hoper creates the same impression of liquidity as 5 £100 bets at evens. BF's method is better, imo. Betfair: £2 @ 500 £100 @ 2 £100 @ 2 £100 @ 2 £100 @ 2 £100 @ 2 Total Matched = £1004 DaQuack: £2 @ 500 £100 @ 2 £100 @ 2 £100 @ 2 £100 @ 2 £100 @ 2 Total Matched = £2000 So does liability count as matched money or not? The layer that matched the backer on Betfair (£2 @ 500) would be paying out more than £4 if the backer were successful? DaQuacks method is superior IMHO. |
|
By:
I don't see that tbh.
in any case, I find it easier tomake a judgment about market activity under the bf system. |
|
By:
*£1010 Total Matched on Betfair
|
|
By:
that was @nairda.
the problem with your example, eyg, is that one 2 quid back at 500 quid is basically as near to zero market activity as you can get, the same as 2 quid at 2.0 is. but under the betquack system you end up with massively different numbers, which you can't interpret and act on with confidence. |
|
By:
the matched total that you see in a market on betfair is the sum of the layers and the backers stake
example, £10 on x price matched will then add £20 to the total matched amount figure, £10 from each opposing party. you dont have to take my word for it as people point out I have only joined recently so I wont know much. |
|
By:
but again...most bet on a 2 horse race, most of the betting is matched on the fav ....
|
|
By:
yes, nairda, but... so what?
2 quid matched at 1.01 may show 4 quid matched when only £2.02's really at stake, but that's much less misleading as a guide to market "activeness" than 2 quid showing as £2000 matched. 5 gets you 10 betquack chose that system to make their matched totals look more competitive with BF's than they really are. |