What makes a mug punter?

where should i move Jim?

They exist believe me.
Just like successful stock mkt. investors do.
I agree they don't grow on trees, as one might think sometimes reading posts on here.

See what I mean about last minute goals Jimmy.
Equalisers are even worse.

It can't be done Frimpong...everyone knows that.

yeah would like to meet one oneday.

i knew it!

Dec 8, 2011 -- 9:49PM, frimpong wrote:

...in essence, i'm yet to see proof of a successful gambler

There are evident proves. Why do you think Betfair created  Premium charges ? You pay PC3 from a life-time profit of 250k, that mean that some did it, no ?

Not necessarily Abolo. All it proves is that someone has made money from Betfair...

I've gotta say frimpong, your general view of gambling is highlighting you as a grade-a mug.

well there ya go. i sit and wait

The problem of frimpong is that he thinks there is some kind of magic formula you have to crack, when it's all matter of work and experience. Sports betting is like everything, you improve with practice

abolo is quite right, the existence of pc is evidence of the existence of accounts that are more than 250k in profit. 

What else do you need to prove it?

well i appreciate your point abolo. i just don't believe you make money by trying to pick winners. are you familiar with the work of a forumite called The Investor?

*pc3

You can either be better at it than the books, or you can find a few magic formulas

Yes i read some posts from The Investor and he is a pure trader, these guys don't need to watch the matches, it's all mathematical.
On the opposite, you have the ones who make straight bets, they try to pick the winner and don't trade their bet. I don't know how these ones can make a profit.
But there are many intermediary solutions

They don't try to pick the winner, they look for value bets.

spot on abolo. who The Investor thinks will win or lose is totally irrelevant to his betting style, correct?

you have the ones who make straight bets, they try to pick the winner and don't trade their bet. I don't know how these ones can make a profit.

exactly what i don't believe to be possible. this desbribes me.

But there are many intermediary solutions

example?

yes good precision, catflaqpo

example, you can bet on the match, take interest in the sport himself, but to know how to green out or red out when you have to

a trader is not interested by the sport itself, just the market and the numbers

i thinks its more precise than that.

yeah that

a "bettor" will watch the match, but he's not forced to sit his thumb up his arse waiting for the final outcome, he can act and change his positions many times, that's what i mean by intermediary solutions

i used to do that but still lost out. i can go head to head tipping with anyone on here though. i really believe that

You should set up one of those tipping service thingys then

i don't say it's easy, but it's what worked for me. I would be bad on tipping. Everybody have his own skills. The only thing i can say is that i lost for a long time before to improve. It might give hope to all losers

From what i hear about these tipping services, frimpong could probably do it . In fact, a monkey tossing a coin would probably do as good as them

Are you saying Frimpong is a monkey?

i let that one ride. truth is i can tip as good as any PC payer no doubt of that

Tipping services are run by people who can't make money gambling.

of course you have to let it ride, there was no offense, it's just the fierce mind of jimmy which turn it that way

That is a generalisation catty.

sorry jimmy, my english is too poor to be of what you mean

tbh my experience with tipping services was on football and about 5-10 years ago, never tried one of them on tennis, but some of their tips leak forums and it looks very average

* to be sure of what you mean

It was poorly worded jimmy. What I mean is anyone able to provide a successful tipping service would instead use the knowledge to gamble themselves.

That's better

ok if i forget to type half of words, it's time to take some sleep. Good luck frimpong, there is not one winning strategy, there are an infinities. If you feel comfortable with straight bets, stick to it and check your P/L at the end of season, only this will tell you if you are on the good way

FINE AS FROG HAIR     08 Dec 11 20:30 
Value for money ?
Shoot if I approached everything in life like that I'd be forever running around comparing prices.

FAFH - I can only assume you were being playful/sarcastic? Running around (compiling or) comparing prices is  precisely what the successful on here will do. I don't know how many times I have to say this - all of these threads can be summed up with the following five words:

It is all about prices

Everything has a price, it doesn't matter if you are backing 1.01's at 1.02 or backing 15.0's at 23.0 or laying at 55's when it should be 95. It doesn't matter if you let those bets run or immediately trade out once the price realigns at the correct level.  Doing any of those (i.e. getting on at favourable prices) consistently/persistently - you will win (over time).
Backing/Laying "favourable" prices you will win, backing/laying at correct prices - you will lose (to commission) over time, backing/laying at unfavourable prices - you will lose (over time).

So getting back to the thread title - a mug punter is (imo) somebody that is not price aware and not price sensitive - they just bet their "fancy" or their "pick" regardless of price. Fancying that Arsenal might beat Everton tomorrow is a mug attitude. They will probably win (they are odds-on to do so) but somebody that is price sensitive would more likely have them as a bet at 1.70+, a lay at 1.50 or less and a leave it well alone at anything in between. It's difficult to fancy Everton but if they were trading at 11.0......

Price is the only thing that matters - maybe not for your tea-bags or a pint - but if you make this game pay you do  need to be forever running around comparing prices!

Bollox. Everton won't win even if they were 16/1...

1.01 landed again Jimmy!

Paulme/Paulol/Frimpong,

I once tried to help you (many moons ago) - if you study my current forum name you might be able to work out my old one. What I told you back then was essentially what I have posted at 10.23 (above).

Stop, I repeat stop, looking for tips - there is no magic system for making winning selections - nobody can predict the future with any degree of certainty (unless they are a track player playing against an ATR watcher ). The "tip" above is back Arsenal at 1,70 or lay them at 1.50. If (as is likely) neither of those two scenarios occur - move on - there are thousands of markets. Most of them are absolutely unplayable but there are plenty that will be wrong at one point or another. Stop focussing on tips/outcomes - put some time into studying the markets, how they work, how they move, learn how to compile your own prices (soccer is a relatively easy place to start) - becoming price aware. You won't like it because you won't get to bet as often as you would like - but if you want to turn it around, I think it is the only way.

jimmy69 09 Dec 11 10:26
Bollox. Everton won't win even if they were 16/1...


Priceless!

The winner was ridden by Graham McCourt and trained by Sirrel Griffiths. The pre-race favourite Desert Orchid finished third. With a starting price of 100/1, Norton's Coin became the longest-odds winner in the race's history.
I will never get tired of watching that race - the whole of my local (in Bath) was on E.W. at 200/1 with Korals - a shame there was no BF back then, pretty sure it would have been close to 1000 BSP.

Everything has a price.

Paulme, you have to decide if you want to win or not. It is possible and furthermore possible by taking pre-event value prices.

Why not just have a go at pricing some two and three-runner events up and betting on whatever you tissue says is value? Forget about who you think will win or want to win. You haven't won by betting your opinion. What do you have to lose?

The other comment I'd make about the thread is that all the winners seem to be deceiving themselves over the main reason the mug losers lose to them i.e. that they are chasing and addicted.

Spot on Methane-Magnet, but luckily that involves work and not just sitting at the pc playing facebook games in between random bets :)

I prefer the term recreational punter because most people who gamble aren't mugs they just do it for fun.

THE `MUG PUNTER TERM`

To me is simple,   a wise man once said , WHEN YOUR IN A HOLE STOP DIGGING`

In other words,  If you have a way you select horses and you loose money day in day out
THEN YOU ARE A MUG PUNTER.you have to know in this game when to stop doing something that is hurting your betfair acc,

or you could look at it another way,If you back horse at say 6/4 or under and you are always throwing your betting slip away,saying WHY OH WAY DID I BACK THAT DONKEY THERE IS ANOTHER £40 down the drain,then you could just lay all your selections that way you would win all the time, you see ever cloud has a sliver lining lol

A question the winning punters can ask themselves is: do I give away some of my winnings to gratify some non-pecuniary interest?

This cd be spending time on big or interesting rather than more potentially profitable events or betting so you will be happy w/ the outcome outwith yr profits.

I'd guess we'd all admit to some utility value of something other than cash profits.

quite simply taking too many risks with your cash, but the biggest mistake is backing short price favorites in tricky races, this is how bookmakers have made their millions, the grand national is a wonderful example, the worlds hardest horse race and sometimes a horse with no real chance of winning like a seven year old with sketchy jumping is made 7/1 favourite, this is what bookmakers dream about.

one simply must lay the short priced favourites in the grand national, get on my son

The only good thing about Grand National day (if you are a true pro) - used to be that there was always racing at Suuuuvvall that day. Have to make do with Wolver this year. Bl00dy race planners - clueless!

who ever the guys are that do the odds compiling for the top five bookmakers must be getting an income from them as they frequently drop a clanger in at a short price and under price certain race favourites, Methane thats bad news no southwell as its well known that wolves is a terrible track but surley must be a good track to lay off certain runners?

and how often are confirmed runners that do bad on the poly tracks or a/w put it at small odds, another wealth of lays there to be had

with betfair now we are the bookmakers and the industy tissue prices can only maintain the exchange advantage in our favour, why should high street shops be the only avenue for betting when the people have choices.

someone once said you can stop a person, nation etc but you cant stop progress in its powerful march, how true.

the biggest losers in history have been the ones that stood in the way of progress or didnt take progress on.

Haven't seen anything from Feck for ages

bf_fananatic• December 10, 2011 12:21 PM GMT
one simply must lay the short priced favourites in the grand national, get on my son

Do you do your research before making these statements...I had my first bet on the GN in 1973...and have backed the fav (or jt favs) ever since...and made money would you believe.

If you had backed all the favs or jt favs since WW2 you would be breaking even...

fair comment jimmy but how many that won were iffy jumpers or 7 year old, research my posts better
and you will understand that not all favorites are the same, you cant tell me that some favorites are plants because thats what the bookies thrive off and how mugs are made.

for example, how many winners have won the race the year before in the last fifty years, and yet you can get some of them at small odds, dont need radar to spot that bookie move, the horses are backed heavily because punters think its easy to pick last years winners when its the only horse they can remember running, the price refects the move of money but not the percieved chance of the runner up 10 pounds and running like a kipper since.

bookmaking was once the sole practice of the bookmakers but now its better understood by exchange players and betting volumes prove this case.

you only get a red rum once every hundred years and yet bookmakers prices reckon its much more like
every 12-16 years, the bookies aim to make 50% profit on the national and there crafty bookmaking ensures this is the case plus the race is so bloody hard to win.

I don't have time to research all your posts. Just be careful making sweeping statements in future before making assumptions

Most horse races more than 50% of the money is placed on the favourite in LBO,s so there is a desire to shorten the RSP favourite and misguide the real favourite to win via tissue markets, they make 10% on favourites but rely on bad days wiping out the average high risk bettor in there shops along with a constant drip feed of poor favourite performing simulated racing.

Jimmy dont back every favourite in the national, try using betfair and laying the bad ones

I can't change the habit of a lifetime

Methane - good summary. so it's a case of who can identify the so-called correct prices and those that are "wrong". nothing more, nothing less.

go on, what was your previous username?

I dont bet in horse racing that much but it must be relativly easy to create your own tissue prices based on form, jockey,  stable and breeding research and make a pretty penny

Most horses lifetime and seasons stats are only a click away on the net.

Trading again a brillaint practice on here,
gee "this time next year rodney we will all be millionaires"

If only this was true

anyone wishing to become a millionaire on betfair must pay over a million to the betfair gods first in charges

mind you delboy never adds "after charges and taxes" when he says his famous cathphrase.

probably because hes never paid any lol

Paul - rearrange the letters of my current name

Fulham trading very short for a side that only win away from home in the EPL when there is a Q in the month!

1) Almost all multiples betting, especially the "fantastic five to win" or whatever nonsense the High Street bookies run every match day. My cousin is always moaning on Facebook about how Big Four Team Whatever let him down. When I told him he was a mug he replied by saying that he'd won x amount the previous month but overall he's surely down a fair bit.

2) Chasing. Better to take a couple of weeks off after a few losses.

3) Betting with your heart rather than your head. Last year my friends husband backed Spurs to beat Real Madrid on aggregate after a 4-0 defeat in the first leg because he had to "have faith in my team." He'd have been better off helping his team by buying some crap from the club shop than give it to a bookie.

4) Betting on the England football team to win a tournament. Similar to above but not only do they always fall short, their prices are usually rubbishas even people who know nothing about footy dash to back them.

5) Most of all, not learning from your mistakes. I've known people persist with the same failed systems which won them a few quid at first but is now costing them a packet, saying that their luck will change soon.

Personally for me, I make most of my profit straight betting on politics. A 1/20 shot will never lose there but so many of them always fail in footy.

frimpong

anyone wishing to become a millionaire on betfair must pay over a million to the betfair gods first in charges


That's not true

ffs....is bf_fananatic not checking his facts again?

1) Almost all multiples betting, especially the "fantastic five to win" or whatever nonsense the High Street bookies run every match day. My cousin is always moaning on Facebook about how Big Four Team Whatever let him down. When I told him he was a mug he replied by saying that he'd won x amount the previous month but overall he's surely down a fair bit.

I assume you are referring to big football accumulators which are certainly not a way to profit. They seem recreational. The fact you have to take all the odds from one bookmaker should make that obvious enough.

2) Chasing. Better to take a couple of weeks off after a few losses.

I don't see how taking a few weeks off after a few losses is a good idea. Unless you don't have the emotional stability to hand it. You could miss out on the next selection that will rectify your loss by taking weeks off. You have to turn over a lot of selections to keep your averages up.

3) Betting with your heart rather than your head. Last year my friends husband backed Spurs to beat Real Madrid on aggregate after a 4-0 defeat in the first leg because he had to "have faith in my team." He'd have been better off helping his team by buying some crap from the club shop than give it to a bookie.

I don't see a problem with this, he clearly wasn't trying to make a profit. There are professionals (of some degree) or recreationals, each are completely valid. When they start conflicting is the real issue.

4) Betting on the England football team to win a tournament. Similar to above but not only do they always fall short, their prices are usually rubbishas even people who know nothing about footy dash to back them.

This is pure opinion.

5) Most of all, not learning from your mistakes. I've known people persist with the same failed systems which won them a few quid at first but is now costing them a packet, saying that their luck will change soon.

Depends how long the losing run is and if it's a proven edge and if they can figure out why their edge seems to be failing.

Personally for me, I make most of my profit straight betting on politics. A 1/20 shot will never lose there but so many of them always fail in footy.

Something I have looked at and considered in the past. These really short special bets like oscar winners etc, hardly get turned over. It's like they almost seem obliged to offer a price but they so rarely lose. Might be on to something here.

Wicked Whisper
When: 10 Dec 11 22:58

[...]
4) Betting on the England football team to win a tournament. Similar to above but not only do they always fall short, their prices are usually rubbishas even people who know nothing about footy dash to back them.

This is pure opinion.

[...]


That's not opinion, that's right on the button.

So it's guaranteed profit to lay England in every tournament they participate in?

Since 1966 yes

That's not opinion, that's right on the button.

if everyone backed England - they'd always be favourites.

Well only if everyone backed them, otherwise the layers would be out in force.

THat's what I'm saying.

A few replies... England very often are favourites or second favourites in most tournaments. In 2010 England were second favourites after Spain, the current European champions, despite England not having won a trophy or reached a final in nearly half a century. That does suggest that people are backing with their heart and also that laying England is a smart move.

Backing Spurs to overturn a 4 goal deficit against Real Madrid for "recreational" reasons. Recreation for me is for fun and I don't see anything fun about handing my hard earned cash to a bookie. I don't bet to have fun, I bet to win money.

Regarding the specials. I copy pasted all the election odds from ladbrokes the day before the last UK election for subsequent study. 650 constituencies and the worst odds that got turned over were 1/12 in Montgomery, followed by 1/7 in Belfast East. (My friend actually had the winner in Belfast East backed for £100 @ 100/1.) Every other 1/5 or lower won. These included huge bankers like "the BNP not to win a seat" @1/5. That's out of 650 results. (The Irish election this year was fairly similar.) In contrast, there are 380 results every year in Spain's La Liga for example. Barca or Real both get turned over at least three or four times every season at 1/6 or even 1/8. Hell, even my own team, Valencia were beating Betis 1-0 after 89 minutes and lost 2-1 last weekend. I'll guarantee the odds for a Betis to win were 60/1 or 1.02 to lay yet stuff like that gets turned over a few times every season.

The problem with specials bets... low liquidity, often pitiful sums like £250 max winnings and secondly if you bet them consistently and bet nothing else, you will make a profit but will consequently be shut down very quickly.

England were not 2nd favs for the 2010 WC . They were 4th at about 10/1, which was too short tbf

Think it was...

Spain 7/2
Brazil 11/2
Argentina 6/1

They were second favourites after the draw was made behind Spain. A month before the tournament they'd drifted to third on here behind Spain and Brazil.

^^ lol probably in England only - across Europe I doubt we were near favourites.

For World cup 2010, the implied chance of either Holland or Germany winning was lower than the implied chance of England winning a few months before the tournament.

The price for England was almost certainly multiple percentage points out. I didn't bet on it, simply due to the fact that it would have been a long term bet, and tying up capital like that would have a very big opportunity cost. I did have my biggest ever win in the match where England failed to beat Algeria though...


acquiesce12
11 Dec 11 01:16 Joined: 27 Jul 11 | Topic/replies: 1,423 | Blogger: acquiesce12's blog
That's not opinion, that's right on the button.

if everyone backed England - they'd always be favourites.

Not sure if you're just being facetious, but obviously there are different forces at work. I wouldn't lay England to win the World Cup at odds that are say 5% out for a market that settles in a year, but I would put a big chunk up if they were 20% out. When England play, the ratio of leisure punters to 'pros' becomes very favourable.

In summer, during the time that there is no decent football, it becomes doubly difficult to profit, because 1)liquidity is poor 2) the ratio of pros/bots to leisure punters is unfavourable.

acquiesce12     15 Dec 11 03:38 
^^ lol probably in England only - across Europe I doubt we were near favourites.
_______________

are you fishing with that one?

If you want to help in becoming the next super-mug punter then read that chaps book on how he gambled
all of berings banks revenues, over a billion on dodgy trades, its a wealth of information on making
big bets on losely based edges and then over-staking to flush your capital away, it should put you on the desired path.

Anybody who has consistently bet on England in football since Sir Alf Ramsey retired could probably be called a "mug " ?

@ TheInvestor2 - me facetious? never.

@Coachbuster - me fishing? never.