Question for prof players

I'm not a pro so perhaps I don't qualify to answer.
But my view is don't think in time periods as in days , weeks or months.
Think in terms of the number of bets you make.
If you are a high frequency bettor then your capital downturns will generally be shorter in length, than those who bet less frequently.
But as no one system is the same, it is really impossible to answer your question as it stands.
The key thing is to know the " expected probabilities " of various downturns and be comfortable if and when they occur, that they are likely to be temporary and not cause you any liquidity problems ( that is you are not betting in too large amounts for the size of your bank ).
Once all that knowledge is in place ( ideally even before you start to bet at all) , then the rest is down to discipline and patience.

Thanks a lot FINE AS FROG HAIR for your answer. You're right the key is awareness of the expected probability of our bet and of course discipline and patience. Someone else will speak in the discussion?

2007, 2008, 2009; 1 losing month per year.

2010, 2011 3 losing months per year.

2007-2011 in profit every quarter.

Capital is generally increasing more or less continuously as I withdraw less than I make.

Investor you must be minted

Investor
Perhaps you should also reveal the frequency of your betting.
It is relevant I believe.
I think people should be encouraged NOT to think in daily, weekly or even monthly time frames.

this is why we're in recession - Investor has the country's wealth 

And he's hoarding it in readiness for the imminent collapse of the whole world monetary system.
Let's just hope that BF has well spread its deposits over the whole banking spectrum.

Dec 6, 2011 -- 6:57PM, FINE AS FROG HAIR wrote:

InvestorPerhaps you should also reveal the frequency of your betting.It is relevant I believe.I think people should be encouraged NOT to think in daily, weekly or even monthly time frames.

i agree absolutely with that. it is no helpful to just put ur capital, if u dont mention the frequency of ur bet and the stakes that are in play to earn the amount menioned.

In fact after all the dust has settled, Investor might even set up his own bank ? Last man standing and all that.

1)avg about 300 bets per day.
2)avg stake about £550
3)Trying to maintain avg net margin above 0.2% per bet.

today:
177 bets
avg stake £389
margin: 0.29% (without PC)

So to make more money, I need to increase 1,2 and/or 3 without too much of a negative effect on the others. For instance, scaling up stakes tends to lead to lower margins.

great insight over there investor. what do u mean average stake? is it the same for lay and back bets, that is the money u are standing to lose if u lost a bet. or do u have a definition implicating the odds.

stake = bet volume. Same way Betfair measure matched amount in a market.

So backing 1.01 for £5,000 adds £5,000 to turnover.
Laying 101 for £50 (same liability) adds £50 to turnover.

My average stake is the average of all matched bets as calculated above. So if you go to bet history in my account, the total staked is the sum total of "Stake(GBP)" column on the spreadsheet. It measures your stake when you back, and the backer's stake when you lay.

Investor:

Let's say you have the following 2 horse market:
90/100
1.01/1.02

Ignoring the fact that the crossmatching donkey would gobble the 100s and spit out 110s for a second.

You're saying if I stuck £1000 backing the 1.01 to win 10, I'd have a profit of £10 for a turnover of £1000

But if I laid the 100 with 10 to win 10, I'd have a profit of 10 with a turnover of 10?


That's just crazy, it's exactly the same liability and profit (same green/red marks) in each case! It's the SAME bet!

Ohhh, sorry, somehow didn't see henok's comment.

Thought you were talking about what to put into ROI calcs, I was frothing. Ignore my maths addled brain :D

Wait, you still kinda ARE saying that. How can 2 identical situations set up in different ways lead to 2 different ROIs.

Can't say I really understand the logic of treating a lay with a lliability of 50,000 as being equal to 1/100 th of a bet with the same liability.
What is the difference between a lay ( a dutch bet on few outcomes) and a straight up bet on one outcome ?

ror, I'm counting 'bet volume' which is what Betfair do.

If you looked at the 'matched' amount, this is calculated in the same way. I just do it like this to be consistent. I can see how big a part of the market I am by taking bet volume x2 as a percentage of the matched amount.

What you can do of course, is convert all lays to backs  and calculate it from there.

I think it all evens out though, however you do it you tend to run into some kind of trouble I think.

The best way to calculate is max liability at any time in the market, but then cross market hedging complicates things. Lots of stuff to consider, this is a simple metric, and even though the way things are counted is idiosyncratic, it does give meaningful results when comparing bet volume and profit over bet volume for various periods.

2007, 2008, 2009; 1 losing month per year.

2010, 2011 3 losing months per year.

WTF difference does that make?  Totally totally irrelevant. Giving yourself a slap on the back because your in profit over certain time perdiods is completely moronic.  When you make comments like that it's as if your after adoration from a fan club.  Look at Investor.  He's in profit for 11 MONTHS OF THE YEAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The only stat of interest in the one at the bottom of your P&L sheet - ie. the page.

Deary deary me.  And I used to think the GB forum was more intelligent than the football forum.  Clearly not.

Well you're certainly living up to your chat name.
But that apart, you are correct to say that time periods as an absolute matter are quite irrelevant ( except that at the end of the day if you are a pro you have to start drawing a wage and start eating).
But I think Investor is more using the time periods for comparison trends, that is to see if he is on an improving or deteriorating performance curve.
Also whilst I agree tnat it does all sound a bit self-laudatory, he was in fairness just responding to a query posed for other people's experiences.
Otherwise have a good day ,

How can I have a good now after reading this drivel?
FFS.

It's tough I know, but think of your blood pressure.
Peace brother.
May the birds of paradise ----- etc "
Anyway you may be upsetting Investor, and that is not allowed on here.
So get back in your box Mr A.

And he can't answer now for himself, as he must be really busy on the CL games just kicking off.

Mr Angry is very Angry

Positively incandescent...

ffs - and I thought that I was angry, you is livid

livid I tell ya.

It happens every year after the XMas drinks.

Having spent the day patting themselves for being superior to the mugs, the self-proclaimed Master of the Betting Universe come to the forum to show us they're Big Swinging D1cks.

Maybe better to keep your mouth shut under those circumstances Mr.A

Oh just lovely MM.
You really have the gift sometimes.

Roll up, roll up, come and get some BSD in yer mouth.
Spittoons over here for free.

And I meant Masters (plural) not Master (singular).
And I meant "they're".

Yeah yeah whatever.
Oh sorry that is an apparently the chat name of a female poster on here.
Perhaps not an appropriate phrase in the current context therefore.

Thanks for putting a smile on my face at the end of a losing day betfairy.
Always getting wound up over nothing

You really missed your calling Investor.
You should have been a diplomat, not a degenerate gambler.

It's rational to switch between high- and low-variance strategies based on circumstances extrinsic to the expected results of bets e.g. commission, pc or similar charges and the amount of capital it's poss. to deploy at value prices.

The last consideration isn't just about liquidity; it's about having the relationships w/ placers and shop workers to get on at standout, arb and near-arb prices in the shops.

When I can deploy all of my capital expecting steady growth from low-variance strategies, and have a cushion of ample bf losses, I am v. happy doing that.

When I hit a ceiling on the amount of money I can get on in the shops to cover here, I am more inclined to hold onto Kelly-calculated pure gambles.

I just wonder exactly how many clients of BF have ever, or do ever, go into a betting shop, whatever that is.

I've never been in a betting shop.

1.01 landed

Eddie
Then you haven't lived.
A truly enlightening experience, trust me.

Not had a losing month for the the last 5 and half years.  Slow and steady progress, and try to reinvest as much as possible to build up my bank.

I wd have radically to change my strategy if betting shops didn't exist. For early price horses they are better 80% of the time for anything I'm interested in the volume I want it.

This is whether I'm backing, trading or arbing (in fact, the diff. between these modes is significantly less than being able to take the bookie price and not being able).

even Investor calls Mr Angry, betfairy